Now You Know How We Feel Congressman
by Big Dog on Jan 14, 2010 at 05:35 Political
A New York Congressman is complaining about the secret negotiations going on between the House and the Senate over the health care bill. The faux reconciliation process has both chambers on edge as members of the House are upset with members of the Senate and vice versa. The House does not want to strip items such as the public option that it passed and the Senate cannot get votes with the public option. House members are tired of hearing the Senate leaders whine about how tough it was to get 60 votes:
Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) issued a blunt, angry statement on Wednesday, accusing the Senate of conducting negotiations with the House while holding “a gun to our head.” The Hill
Well welcome to our world Congressman. The American public feels like it has a gun to its head. The majority of us do not want this particular piece of legislation to pass but you insist on doing it so that you can hold a gun to our heads.
Don’t get insurance, pay a fine. Have a good employer provided plan, pay 40% in taxes on it (unless you are a union member). Need a medical procedure, wait for a government bean counter to decide if you are worthy.
These items represent only a fraction of the things that will allow YOU to hold a gun to our heads.
You are complaining that you do not like a gun held to your head.
Now you know how we feel.
Jackass.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: anthony weiner, Congress, guns, house, Senate
I thought you right wingers loved your guns. If you don’t like guns to your head maybe it’s time to try some gun control.
I like my SUV but I don’t want anyone to run over me with it.
The best thing that will keep people from putting a gun to your head is to carry a gun. An armed society is a polite one. And the only gun control I believe in is hitting that at which you aim.
Now there’s some right-wing pro-gun mythology if I’ve ever heard it. Here’s reality. Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed:
This is, of course, bogus. If this were true how would they account for the shooting of people in England or Australia where guns are banned?
There are millions of gun owners in this country but not a number of gun deaths that equal what the study found.
Let me tell you what they undoubtedly did. They counted all the people who carry guns illegally and use them illegally. Yes, inner city drug dealers and criminals are going to carry guns and will have a greater chance of being shot because they engage in criminal behavior.
There are vastly more people who carry guns in PA and Florida than in Illinois. These are people who have permits to carry firearms. The number of people who get shot in PA and FL is far less than who get shot in Illinois. In PA it would be lower but Philly has not allowed people to carry like the rest of the state so there are lots of people who get shot there.
And since this study looked at Philly then there is no doubt the overwhelming number of people who were shot carrying a gun were carrying them illegally.
I challenge these folks to conduct this study in a place where carrying is LEGAL and the people who carry are not criminals. Hell, they could compare Philly to the rest of the state.
Another liberal biased report that is not based in reality. Small sample, incorrect demographics, biased toward finding people carrying illegally.
Bigd: “If this were true how would they account for the shooting of people in England or Australia where guns are banned?”>>
DAR
That one definitely goes in the dumb column, with some lazy on top.
“The United States has by far the highest rate of gun deaths — murders, suicides and accidents — among the world’s 36 richest nations,…”
It’s not even close.
“The U.S. rate for gun deaths in 1994 was 14.24 per 100,000 people. Japan had the lowest rate, at .05 per 100,000.”
Guns are banned in Japan. We have a gun death rate 284x greater than them.
The rate in England and Wales is: 0.41
That’s 1/34th our rate.
Australia’s is 2.65, that 1/5th our rate.
Oxford Journal, PDF.
Bigd: “There are vastly more people who carry guns in PA and Florida than in Illinois.”>>
DAR
Irrelevant since state borders are completely porous. Anyone can drive to Arkansas and load up their pickup with handguns, whatever, no background check, no receipt, no trace, no record of the sale. Zero gun control and with predictable results.
With gun show loopholes, private sales and the internet the US effectively has very little if any gun control compared to any other advanced nation. And it pays an immense price for this in death and destruction.
Adam is exactly right.
D.
—————
“…the five states with the highest per capita gun death rates were Louisiana, Alaska, Montana, Tennessee, and Alabama. Each of these states had a per capita gun death rate far exceeding the national per capita gun death rate of 10.32 per 100,000 [2005 stats].
By contrast, states with strong gun laws and low rates of gun ownership had far lower rates of firearm-related death.”
Reuters.
I notice that Texas is not in your list- perhaps because we have better aim, (and fewer liberals- is there a connection?)
I carry a gun, because when I go outside, I take ALL of my rights with me.
It’s really very simple, which is why you will never understand- logic is beyond you, as is apparently, the fundamentals of the Constitution, Darrel. Perhaps you should read for comprehension.
“The majority of us do not want this particular piece of legislation…”
DAR
Good point. A majority want this legislation or something to the left of it.
Darrel is, of course, wrong. First of all it is not impossible to load up a truck with guns but it is not very likely. There are not that many gun shows and people are restricted as to number of firearms they may buy. If they take them across state lines they are breaking the law which is my point in refuting Adam, Philly’s number almost exclusively involve illegal use.
I also know that states report gun deaths differently. When Democrat Martin O’Malley was the mayor of Baltimore gun deaths were not reported as gun deaths to keep the murder rate down.
What is the uniform reporting procedure and how many of the deaths were accidental or suicide? And yes, the UK and any other place that bans guns is a valid argument. How are there ANY gun deaths if gun bans work?
I also point out that DC is higher than what you have listed and it is the most stringent.
Other countries listed have higher violent crime and murder rates than the US despite not having guns. The US does not have a gun problem, no law abiding citizen should be deprived of a right to carry based on criminals. We need to lock people up when they use guns in a crime.
I suspect that the US has a higher murder rate than Japan with all other weapons (excluding firearms). It is safe to assume that all homes in the US and Japan have at least one knife in them. The rate of murder with knives is undoubtedly higher here. The same probably holds true for about any weapon you could think of.
We do not have a gun problem, we have a criminal problem.
Interestingly, instead of looking at states you should look at cities. The cities with the highest gun murder rates in the US are ones with tough gun control laws.
Your numbers include all deaths, suicide, accidental, whatever. Remove suicides and accidents, people die from accidents all the time and in states where folks can’t get guns they find another way to kill themselves.
Bigd: “…it is not impossible to load up a truck with guns but it is not very likely.”
DAR
Not very likely? How dumb do you have to be to not know how to load up a pickup truck?
Bigd: There are not that many gun shows>>
DAR
What a load. Here’s the list for just little old Arkansas: http://www.gunshows-usa.com/arkansas.htm
Bigd: “if they take them across state lines they are breaking the law”
DAR
That’s nice. Not really enforced as people fly across the state line at 70mph now is it?
Bigd: “Baltimore gun deaths were not reported as gun deaths”>>
DAR
Baloney.
Bigd: “how many of the deaths were accidental or suicide?”
DAR
Dealt with in my stats. The US exceeds in all of them whether they are considered all together or separately.
Bigd: “How are there ANY gun deaths if gun bans work?”>>
DAR
How are there any murders if laws against murder work? Just because our law against murder doesn’t work perfectly, 100% of the time, doesn’t mean we throw it away.
Gun control works, consider one example:
“In Canada, where new gun laws were introduced in 1991 and 1995, the number of gun deaths has reached a 30-year low.”
Link
Or look at any one of our peer countries. You tried England and Australia. It’s the same story with any other comparable countries.
Bigd: “Other countries listed have higher violent crime and murder rates than the US despite not having guns.”>>
DAR
Typically the US is high in the those categories when compared with our peer countries. Guns make it worse, as my Reuters reference shows. More guns, more gun death.
Bigd: “The cities with the highest gun murder rates in the US are ones with tough gun control laws.”>>
DAR
Such “control” is completely and utterly negated by the ability to cross state lines.
Bigd: “The US does not have a gun problem,”
DAR
If this isn’t a problem, what exactly would a “problem” look like?
“…the rate of firearm deaths among children under age 15 is almost 12 times higher in the United States than in 25 other industrialized countries COMBINED. American children are 16 times more likely to be murdered with a gun, 11 times more likely to commit suicide with a gun, and nine times more likely to die in a firearm accident than children in these other countries.”
–Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Rates of homicide, suicide, and firearm-related deaths among children in 26 industrialized countries. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 1997; 46 :101 –105
CDC
Once again, Philly illegal to carry a gun. Highest problem. Other parts of PA without such restrictions, low…
“This is, of course, bogus.”
First of all maybe you should read the study. Here is a copy just in case
“If this were true how would they account for the shooting of people in England or Australia where guns are banned?”
I’m not sure how that’s relevant. The study did not say you are 100% safe if you don’t have a gun, just that in comparable situations they found a person more likely to be shot when they had a gun than not.
“There are millions of gun owners in this country but not a number of gun deaths that equal what the study found.”
I’m not sure what you’re talking about there.
“Let me tell you what they undoubtedly did. They counted all the people who carry guns illegally and use them illegally.”
It’s hard to say. They do not differentiate in the study about whether those involved were legally in possession of fire arms.
“And since this study looked at Philly then there is no doubt the overwhelming number of people who were shot carrying a gun were carrying them illegally.”
How you draw that conclusion?
“In PA it would be lower but Philly has not allowed people to carry like the rest of the state so there are lots of people who get shot there.”
This is not true according to the PA Uniform Uniform Firearms Act. While you only need a permit to conceal in PA, you can legally carry and conceal in Philly with a permit. Does that count as being illegal to carry a gun?
“Another liberal biased report that is not based in reality. Small sample, incorrect demographics, biased toward finding people carrying illegally.”
Sample size is fine. What demographics? There is no bias toward carrying illegally.
The researchers are perfectly willing to outline possible flaws in their conclusions in the paper if you read it. Unfortunately it is your list of complaints that are not really based in reality.
26% involved the use of alcohol and 83% being outdoors. Better ban alcohol and going outside.
Philly has its own procedure for issuing permits and it is very difficult to get one. I would be willing to bet that many of the people involved were illegally carrying.
I have never shot anyone and I have owned guns longer than you have been alive or as they say, Ted Kennedy’s care killed more people than my guns have.
“Philly has its own procedure for issuing permits and it is very difficult to get one.”
Nothing I have seen backs up that idea. The only difference I have seen is that you need a PA License To Carry Firearms for any type of weapon in public areas in Philly while you only need the license for concealed carry in the rest of the state. It’s the same license.
I’m not really getting the concern about illegally carrying in the study. You can bet all you want but you can’t back that up with any information since they do not to my knowledge differentiate in such a manner. They do factor in higher risk occupations and things of that manner. They also note steps to exclude people under 21 which are not able to legally carry.
The murder rates are still high and Canada is number two without the guns.
Gun bans do not work. The only people who do not get guns when they are banned are law abiding people.
The crime data in Baltimore, including the murders, have been manipulated. Same in Detroit.
I went to the PA site on permit issuing and it said that Philly had a different procedure.
I like to see that link. Philly Police instruct you through their site to fill out form SP 4-127. The only additional part I can see is 2 forms for references. If this is what you refer to then you are correct. Otherwise I’m not seeing much difference.
My point is that it is not illegal to carry a firearm in Philly unless you are un-licensed. The PA Uniform Uniform Firearms Act for the most part appears to prevent any drastic difference in gun laws in a city like Philly.