Something Interesting To Ponder

DS1119

Sorry another gun topic but I feel this is an important statistic for all to ponder and not get lost in a thread somewhere. In my mind it really puts things into perspective about US citizen's rights. I really don't understand why people discount comparisons made between gun ownership and vehicle ownership in the United States as being irrelevant. In my mind it's very relevant. I hear and read people talking about if the number of guns are reduced the number of deaths would be reduced. I don't believe that, but let's assume it's true. Can't the same be said about reducing the number of vehicles in the country as well. If a person's justification for being anti-guns is to save lives , shouldn't they also be anti-car? I found these numbers to be an eye opener for me actually.


These are 2009 numbers as they were the easiest to find. If someone wants to search out 2010 or 2011 feel free but I would assume they are pretty close.

2009 Estimated US population was 305,529,237

254,212,610 registered vehicles in the US including passenger cars, commercial vehicles, government vehicles, etc. All of them.

Estimated that there are 270,000,000 guns in the US both legal and registered, legal and unregistered and illegal.

33,308 fatalities in the US by motor vehicle.

9,146 homocides by gun (legal and illegal homicides so that's a legal citizen doing it, police doing it, and criminals committing a crime).

So there's less vehicles and more 3 times more fatalities by vehicle as compared to guns.

mickeyrat

for fucks sake, go buy a 30 pack and

Smellyman

that argurement is so logical, not to mention backed up with bullet proof stats.


good luck arguing that commie pinkos

DS1119

mickeyrat wrote:

for fucks sake, go buy a 30 pack and

I already did.

DS1119

Smellyman wrote:

that argurement is so logical, not to mention backed up with bullet proof stats.


good luck arguing that commie pinkos

I can post the links if you'd like? Took me all of 5 minutes to find them and compile them.

g under p

Guns are made to kill, cars are not...they are made to transport people. Assault weapons are made to kill people many MORE people in a short period of time that to me is the difference.

I've driven many kinds of vehicles and I've shot all sorts of assault weapons from m16-m60's and all in between.

Peace

mickeyrat

g under p wrote:

Guns are made to kill, cars are not...they are made to transport people. Assault weapons are made to kill people many MORE people in a short period of time that to me is the difference.

I've driven many kinds of vehicles and I've shot all sorts of assault weapons from m16-m60's and all in between.

Peace

this.

Used as designed what is their purpose?

comebackgirl

DS1119 wrote:

mickeyrat wrote:

for fucks sake, go buy a 30 pack and

I already did.

That explains the thread :think:

push me and i will resist

Guns. Guns, and more guns. The United States should have a look at the gun laws In Canada, then have a look at how many senseless mass killings happen in Canada. Then compare the 2 countries, the answer is quite obvious. Canada does not have these horrible shootings....I wonder why?

U.S. just needs to say no more guns, forget ruling the whole world, clean up the gun violence in your country.

These multiple yearly shootings make me sick.

DS1119

I'm just pointing out the legitimate numbers. People can take them for what they want. Don't jump on me. They are what they are. I personally would like to see both numbers reduced to zero.

catefrances

DS1119 wrote:

I'm just pointing out the legitimate numbers. People can take them for what they want. Don't jump on me. They are what they are. I personally would like to see both numbers reduced to zero.

in order to reduce to zero the number of both vehicle fatalities and gun fatalities, both the number of guns and cars would have to be reduced to zero. how do you stand on that?

push me and i will resist

DS1119 wrote:

I'm just pointing out the legitimate numbers. People can take them for what they want. Don't jump on me. They are what they are. I personally would like to see both numbers reduced to zero.

I'm not jumping on you man, I was just thinking out loud.

DS1119

catefrances wrote:

DS1119 wrote:

I'm just pointing out the legitimate numbers. People can take them for what they want. Don't jump on me. They are what they are. I personally would like to see both numbers reduced to zero.

in order to reduce to zero the number of both vehicle fatalities and gun fatalities, both the number of guns and cars would have to be reduced to zero. how do you stand on that?

Since I sell cars and I believe it's a US citizen's right to bear arms I'd be against reducing both to zero.

catefrances

DS1119 wrote:

catefrances wrote:

DS1119 wrote:

I'm just pointing out the legitimate numbers. People can take them for what they want. Don't jump on me. They are what they are. I personally would like to see both numbers reduced to zero.

in order to reduce to zero the number of both vehicle fatalities and gun fatalities, both the number of guns and cars would have to be reduced to zero. how do you stand on that?

Since I sell cars and I believe it's a US citizen's right to bear arms I'd be against reducing both to zero.

so how do you suggest both statistics be reduced to zero then?

DS1119

catefrances wrote:

so how do you suggest both statistics be reduced to zero then?

I guess a bigger police presence would be one way.

Smellyman

DS1119 wrote:

I'm just pointing out the legitimate numbers. People can take them for what they want. Don't jump on me. They are what they are. I personally would like to see both numbers reduced to zero.

people use cars everyday. almost every American. Guns are not used everyday. I really hope I didn't have to point this out to you.

It's a crap arguement even for the simplest of minds.

Jason P

theory has already been debunked and shown to actually support gun regulation increases.

:fp:

unsung

g under p wrote:

Guns are made to kill, cars are not...they are made to transport people.

A true statement, although guns are also made to defend.


Here's another statistic...I too found it with an easy Google search.

87 people have their life ended each day in the US by a gun.
3500 abortions are performed each day in the US.

Lost potential at this grade school? 3500 is a lot of lost potential too. But that seems to be ok here.

catefrances

unsung wrote:

g under p wrote:

Guns are made to kill, cars are not...they are made to transport people.

A true statement, although guns are also made to defend.


Here's another statistic...I too found it with an easy Google search.

87 people have their life ended each day in the US by a gun.
3500 abortions are performed each day in the US.

Lost potential at this grade school? 3500 is a lot of lost potential too. But that seems to be ok here.

embryos are not people.

DS1119

Jason P wrote:

theory has already been debunked and shown to actually support gun regulation increases.

:fp:

I personally don't see how a theory can debunked when it's not a theory. Just plain and simple facts and figures.

DS1119

catefrances wrote:

embryos are not people.

There are many that would disagree with you on that.


BTW, I am prochoice.

catefrances

DS1119 wrote:

catefrances wrote:

embryos are not people.

There are many that would disagree with you on that.


BTW, I am prochoice.

ive no doubt there are.

but just cause embryos have the potentiality to become people does mean they are people. just like caterpillars have the potentiality to become butterfies and moths, theyre not, theyre caterpillars.

unsung

Would you say that potential exists in the embryo?

catefrances

unsung wrote:

Would you say that potential exists in the embryo?

the potential to grow into a foetus and then if/when born, into a person, yes. there is also the potential that it could self abort at any stage of gestation... which is always a possibility with any pregnancy.

Cosmo

DS1119 wrote:

Sorry another gun topic but I feel this is an important statistic for all to ponder and not get lost in a thread somewhere. In my mind it really puts things into perspective about US citizen's rights. I really don't understand why people discount comparisons made between gun ownership and vehicle ownership in the United States as being irrelevant. In my mind it's very relevant. I hear and read people talking about if the number of guns are reduced the number of deaths would be reduced. I don't believe that, but let's assume it's true. Can't the same be said about reducing the number of vehicles in the country as well. If a person's justification for being anti-guns is to save lives , shouldn't they also be anti-car? I found these numbers to be an eye opener for me actually.

These are 2009 numbers as they were the easiest to find. If someone wants to search out 2010 or 2011 feel free but I would assume they are pretty close.

2009 Estimated US population was 305,529,237

254,212,610 registered vehicles in the US including passenger cars, commercial vehicles, government vehicles, etc. All of them.

Estimated that there are 270,000,000 guns in the US both legal and registered, legal and unregistered and illegal.

33,308 fatalities in the US by motor vehicle.

9,146 homocides by gun (legal and illegal homicides so that's a legal citizen doing it, police doing it, and criminals committing a crime).

So there's less vehicles and more 3 times more fatalities by vehicle as compared to guns.

...
Not that I don't believe you... but, being the skeptic that I am...
Can you please provide the referenced sources of your data so I can verify them?
Thanx.

unsung

catefrances wrote:

unsung wrote:

Would you say that potential exists in the embryo?

the potential to grow into a foetus and then if/when born, into a person, yes. there is also the potential that it could self abort at any stage of gestation... which is always a possibility with any pregnancy.

And a three year old could get terminal cancer. Life potential exists, I'm good with that, thank you.

catefrances

unsung wrote:

catefrances wrote:

unsung wrote:

Would you say that potential exists in the embryo?

the potential to grow into a foetus and then if/when born, into a person, yes. there is also the potential that it could self abort at any stage of gestation... which is always a possibility with any pregnancy.

And a three year old could get terminal cancer. Life potential exists, I'm good with that, thank you.

no one is doubting life potential exists.... im saying its not a done deal.

comebackgirl

catefrances wrote:

unsung wrote:

Would you say that potential exists in the embryo?

the potential to grow into a foetus and then if/when born, into a person, yes. there is also the potential that it could self abort at any stage of gestation... which is always a possibility with any pregnancy.

10-25% of pregnancies will result in miscarriage...so about 75-90% of embryos have the potential to become a person. About 20% of them will be sexually abused at some point. Many more will experience physical and emotional abuse and neglect. I wish every child got a say in the quality of their life.

unsung

So 87 potential lives is worth more than 3500? I only ask because I was just asked to weigh 200 vs 10000.

unsung

comebackgirl wrote:

catefrances wrote:

unsung wrote:

Would you say that potential exists in the embryo?

the potential to grow into a foetus and then if/when born, into a person, yes. there is also the potential that it could self abort at any stage of gestation... which is always a possibility with any pregnancy.

10-25% of pregnancies will result in miscarriage...so about 75-90% of embryos have the potential to become a person. About 20% of them will be sexually abused at some point. Many more will experience physical and emotional abuse and neglect. I wish every child got a say in the quality of their life.

So do I.

mickeyrat

so we've gone from gun control to abortion, next page lets tackle that pesky religion question.