cool stuff

[I_hate_platies]

i wouldnt argue with something if i knew it wouldnt change anything

but iam going to and walk away, cuz i dont want you arguing with me lol

you're talking about an entirely different type of argument.. you're talking about changing opinions.
I'm not out to change anyone's opinion, just prove that the numbers michael moore gives in his movie about gun-related deaths in america are false. I have proof, so really... I guess that doesn't make this much of an argument at all.


also, while I'm at it, I figured I'd try to talk some sense into the poor guy (which doesn't seem to be working) about his idol. I can't stand seeing someone so faithfully quoting a proven liar.

when I first saw bowling for columbine, I was freaked out. I had no idea all of this bad stuff went on in my country. I even recommended it to some friends telling them it's a real eye-opener.
then I watched it a second time, and things didn't seem to add up. I looked into some of the claims he made and found they were partially true at best. once I stumbled upon the above site I linked, I was really pissed off that Moore would blatantly lie and misrepresent the truth on such a grand scale.

anyone that believes what moore says obviously doesn't like to think for themselves, otherwise they'd discover that they're being lied to.

 

[Whiskerz]

ohh lol, ok..sorry )

 

[xXMrBonesXx]

don't try to tell me all gun owners do it to get a hard-on.

where did i say all gun owners do it to get a hard-on?


The U.S. rate for gun deaths in 1994 was 14.24 per 100,000 people.


In 1996 (the most recent year for which data are available),
34,040 people died from gunfire in the United States.
In addition, for every fatal shooting, there are roughly three nonfatal shootings

Gun control is a perennial hot political issue in the United States,
which reported 28,663 gun-related deaths in 2000, the latest year for
which complete data are available. Firearms were the second leading
cause of injury-related death that year.

out of the 1996 (approximately 54 percent resulted from suicide) and 2000 (16,586, 58% was suicide)

population in 1994 was 258,104,000

that would be 258,104,000/100,000 = 2581.04 x 14.24 = 36,754 gun deaths in 94

those are the only years i could find gun death info on, i dont remember the sites but i found the info googling, look yourself

 

[Opcn]

Are you counting suicides and police shootings and killing in self defense because those arent really a problem for me. If your hurting someone or trying to kill them and they stop you in the act its tuff luck charly and a great deterent for hurting ppl, If your doing something to make the police want to shoot you its nearly as bad and would be worse if not for raceism (something that takeing away guns wont fix), and finally if your killing yourself a gun doesnt make it any easyer People have been killing themselves for thoushands of years all you ned is 13 feet of ropeand were not talking about outlawing rope are wejesus 54% of gun deaths suicide And Michael Moore included those in his Why do americans murder movie. :roleeyes: If youv acctually watched Michael moores movie even with the out right lies and deception and guilt by assosciation He doesnt ever make a case for guns being a problem the movie is about how america is broken not about how guns are bad.

 

[xXMrBonesXx]

well they just gave it in 3 catagories ... suicide, homicide, and accidental but accidental was around 2-3% for all of them

even with the high suicide rate with guns there still leaves a lot of non-suicidal gun deaths each year

 

[Opcn]

were do the non-homicidal non-sucidal non-accidental shootings go though?

 

[a1wonder]

Wow... This topic sure strayed off hand quite a bit. But I have a couple of comments of my own to add.

Firstly the comment about Canadian military was uncalled for (if you want figures to compare the Canadian economy in direct comparison with other nations national growth an expenditures that can be provided but I warn you to have some background knowledge of economics before you attempt to venture into this one) as were the racial comments directly aimed at imposing a stereotypical norm about "All" Americans.

Guns, weaponry and military are closely linked with cultural history of all nations throughout the world some embrace this closer than others. As do I believe guns make also be used for sporting purposes, my family takes part in a traditional gooses hunt each year. As well controlled recreation, firing ranges and my personal favorite paintball. is where things get tricky, many people justify weapons as a form of self protections, an unloaded gun when faced at a robber is a nice deterrent. Here is my question to gun enthusiast a shot gun protection, yes, a hand held, yes, a machine gun for protection (ie tommy?), or a fully automatic hand gun, ???.

The last two items I listed are illegal for hunting uses, are illegal at most firing ranges, so please what use are these things besides instruments of killing? Why should these be in homes?

I can tell that many people here are very responsible gun owners and to you I take off my hat (cootoes), but I can tell some people here think of them as Toys to be played with (and I don’t mean in a controlled fashion). And to you I ask to Grow up, and give people that own firearms a bad name. They are NOT toys and should be treated with respect and care.

Opcn made this comment
Also cattle feed lots would be increased because of the need to provide meat to everyone who would be eating venison.

I find this to be a very weak statement; the percentage it would rise would be exceptional small minute and minuscule I challenge you to find me a statistic that would prove otherwise. The number of deer killed each year would hardly hold a card towards the operational yearly capacity of single commercial farm in the United States.

 

[Opcn]

Not I think it would deffinitly tally up not only in venison but in lost corn as well also shipping the meat up to alaska and out to the natives who eat moose would be a bear. Althought I will contest that it does make a rathe weak point. Also most ranges will allow machine guns its just that the gun owner needs permitation. Ive shot a machine gun before Its quite fun!

 

[Aquascaper]

I've shot a machine gun and to be honest it scared the s**t out of me. Before i started there was a bush in front of me and some wooden targets, when i'd finished there was a pile of splinters and twigs.

What is the point of firing a machine gun on a range anyway? These weapons are designed to obliterate targets not for precision shooting.

You may as well try painting your house with a hose while you're at it

 

[a1wonder]

as well also shipping the meat up to alaska and out to the natives who eat moose would be a bear.

Alright lets discus the north, I'd like to note how little of the population in North American is actually located there.
The majority of the food consumed by people in the north i.e. Alaska, Yukon, north west territories is shipped in extensively from more southern provinces or states (whatever may have you). In more resent years due to changes in migration patterns (some may say due to heated pipelines for oil as well as many other issues) have already converted a large population of peoples native to the region to make a change from strictly traditional foods to meals extremely subsidized with pork, eggs, milk and bread products.


As for ranges that allow for machine guns, there are not such ranges available in my province and at least two others. The only way these to be purchases it by taking a trip down to the states because that are views as illegal weapons (the factor of risk associated with that firearms is deemed to great to be held in the hands of someone other than a person with military training and military supervision). A large number of other countries also view machine guns to be illegal for private collection and private use.

 

[Opcn]

The Only way to get out to most of the small villages is but small plane but well your right that is a small number as far as cattle are concerned however I think that the deer consumeing the crops would be a big number alot like blackbirds consumeing crops.

Edit: Compleatly forgot about machine guns. A) the Laws in Canada are different dont use them to argue about americas laws please it can get a bit confuseing if you do.

Aquascaper You have just made my point for me experience with guns is vital to good warfare. While you may only be able to oblitereate randomly with a machine gun I can fire one okay because I have more practice with guns. In a war zone I would be more likely to hit an enemy troup before they shot anyone else and less likely to hit a civilian bystander than someone like yourself w/ very little experince. Granted the armed forces do there best to train recruits but its better if recruits can be trained faster and be sent out to the battlefield to aid in combat. Guns are very accuracy dependant wepons were as say an atom bomb or a rocket launcher is not there for my argument does not apply to heavy artilarry or explosives like some seem to think it does but it applies fully to all forms of fire arms.

 

[a1wonder]

The Only way to get out to most of the small villages is but small plane but well your right that is a small number as far as cattle are concerned however I think that the deer consumeing the crops would be a big number alot like blackbirds consumeing crops.

Are you referring to deer eating crops in the north? Because that is how it reads. And if you’re suggesting such a silly notion of crop harvesting in a permafrost location I'm not sure if you fully understand the climate in northern North America.
Also I should not the deer prefer to graze on wild grasses and not grain products. So the only people that should be concerned by wild deer herd are ranchers or cattle farmers (what have you).


As for machine guns, I was not aware that the laws differed so greatly and for that I apologies, the few people that I have spoken that live in the united states had assured me otherwise.

 

[Opcn]

sorry it should have read

"The Only way to get out to most of the small villages is by small plane but well your right that is a small number as far as cattle are concerned. However I think that the deer consumeing the crops would be a big number alot like blackbirds consumeing crops."

And dear do consume corn not wheat so much but Corn and vegitables moose are the same way and elk. I was not suggesting that crops are grown in the far north however much of the permafrost is melting yielding somevery fertile but wet ground in 20 years or so it might be okay farming.

And the only restrictions on owning a machine gun once you purchase it are on where you can take it. the BATF must be notified each time it crosses a state line.

 

[Aquascaper]

Aquascaper You have just made my point for me experience with guns is vital to good warfare. While you may only be able to oblitereate randomly with a machine gun I can fire one okay because I have more practice with guns

One of the biggest mistakes people make on forums...........thinking they know someone when they don't.

These weapons are designed to obliterate targets not for precision shooting.

I fail to see where you picked up that i can only 'obliterate randomly' with a machine gun from the above quote. I was talking about the design aspect of the firearm, ie. what it is intended for, not my marksmanship but since you want to comment on it, i used to shoot at county level and have won plenty of trophies & awards so i think that qualifies me as being able to do slightly more than just 'fire one okay' for any firearm, be it a handgun, rifle, shotgun or machine gun.

 

[pacuman]

I LOVE MY GUNS!!

There is not enough room in this fourm to show all my guns,knives,swords and bows. couse i love the right to bare firearms ...even though im uder age lol
i use my guns for hunting i am an advid sportman i love to hunt and fish