So if you are out walking your kids who is responsible for their protection?
I know that I'm okay and there aren't people out to get me or my family.
Unfortunately it happens, even to those that think it can't happen to them.
So again, you are out walking your kids, your four year old looks up to who to protect her?
Having a gun increases odds that either myself or my family is injured or killed by a gun. Also the odds are low and responsibility and pain in the ass of having a gun loaded and on me at all times in event that I may be able to use it aren't worth it. Guy walks behind me and sticks me up. Let's say I was with child would I get into gun battle. Hell no. They can have my stuff. No they aren't going to kidnap or some paranoid stuff.
So if you are out walking your kids who is responsible for their protection?
I know that I'm okay and there aren't people out to get me or my family.
Unfortunately it happens, even to those that think it can't happen to them.
So again, you are out walking your kids, your four year old looks up to who to protect her?
Having a gun increases odds that either myself or my family is injured or killed by a gun. Also the odds are low and responsibility and pain in the ass of having a gun loaded and on me at all times in event that I may be able to use it aren't worth it. Guy walks behind me and sticks me up. Let's say I was with child would I get into gun battle. Hell no. They can have my stuff. No they aren't going to kidnap or some paranoid stuff.
So if you are out walking your kids who is responsible for their protection?
I know that I'm okay and there aren't people out to get me or my family.
Unfortunately it happens, even to those that think it can't happen to them.
So again, you are out walking your kids, your four year old looks up to who to protect her?
Having a gun increases odds that either myself or my family is injured or killed by a gun. Also the odds are low and responsibility and pain in the ass of having a gun loaded and on me at all times in event that I may be able to use it aren't worth it. Guy walks behind me and sticks me up. Let's say I was with child would I get into gun battle. Hell no. They can have my stuff. No they aren't going to kidnap or some paranoid stuff.
Fire extinguishers put out more fires than they create. Guns do not 'save' more people than they 'kill'.
There were 365,000 home fires in 2012. There were 8,855 firearm-related homicides in 2012 and 19,990 suicides in 2011.
I would argue you're the one that's paranoid. But this isn't a debate about your perception of reality, this is reality. If you're going to banter; then at least research, cite references, do the math, and show your work. That is to say, everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts,
I feel a lot safer with a fire extinguisher in my house to combat unlikely fires than I suspect I would with a gun in my house to combat the unlikely event of thieves or malicious-intended persons entering my house without my prior consent.
Maybe it has something to do with the primary purposes of the two: not too many stories of fire extinguishers being utilized as weapons. I think I've heard of one or two relating to guns. I could also opt to keep a bat, ninja stars, nunchucks, an axe, set of bow and arrows, or a knife under my bed, but for what ever reason I don't.
I assume you're trying to use the logical notion that unpleasant, rare, and unforeseeable events (such as fires or robberies) should be pre-empted by keeping possession of tools to diminish or eliminate the risk of said events (such as fire extinguishers and guns).
There are a few different ways to tackle this: 1) Whereas a fire extinguisher is a unique tool to combat fires (within an affordable range), a gun is one of many tools which can combat a robber (including numerous non-lethal options such as the purchase of security features like alarm systems or better locks).
2) Whereas a fire extinguisher poses minimal risk during non-critical event periods (with the exception of someone hitting another person over the head with it), a gun poses many (i.e. nosy children, irresponsible or paranoid users, etc.)
3) Whereas a fire extinguisher poses minimal risk during critical event periods (see above), a gun poses much (i.e. impulsive and pre-emptive attacking when adrenaline takes over)
4) Whereas a fire extinguisher is not historically linked with personal abuse (i.e. the person hitting another over the head with it is quite a rarity), a gun has a precedent attached to it due to any number of variables which can include poor profiling prior to granting eligibility for training, poor training, attainment of said weapon from illegitimate channels which negate those two prerequisites for acquisition, sudden mental developments or relapses of moments of reason leading to murderous rampages, or neglect of humanity in favour of personal/monetary/romantic gains.
These are four ways I can think of in which comparing fire extinguishers' presence in our lives to guns' is (from my perspective) fallacious. If anyone can rebut any of these or add to the list, I look forward to reading about it.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
You'll notice no one died during this fire-extinguisher related robbery. Now, I know what you're thinking, if only the gas station clerk had a bigger, fully automatic fire-extinguisher with which to protect himself; then perhaps he wouldn't have been robbed!
Fire extinguishers put out more fires than they create. Guns do not 'save' more people than they 'kill'.
There were 365,000 home fires in 2012. There were 8,855 firearm-related homicides in 2012 and 19,990 suicides in 2011.
I would argue you're the one that's paranoid. But this isn't a debate about your perception of reality, this is reality. If you're going to banter; then at least research, cite references, do the math, and show your work. That is to say, everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts,
I'll just leave this here...
We're #1! We're #1! We're #1! USA! USA! USA!
While I agree with you, this is not a good chart proving correlation in my opinion.
I've added a 1:1 trendline on the chart below.
For a graph with guns per 100 people along X and gun deaths per 100,000 people along Y, the trend line I've added represents gun deaths per 1,000 guns within the population. Any statistician would look at this line and see that the data points don't deviate much from the line (implying it's a reasonable average of all countries) with the exception of Mexico who is truly horrifically off the charts with gun deaths so I will call it an outlier. Note how many countries lay just along the trend line, implying they are close to the global average in terms of a typical ratio of gun deaths per 1,000 guns. The further away a data point is from the trend line (if we're assuming it's close enough to a global average, which it appears to be to me), the more a trend is perceived to deviate from the norm. In this case, the US's (for all intents and purposes) does not. Mexico's, Canada's, and Switzerland's, however, are significantly greater gun deaths per 1,000 guns. So, to reiterate, this chart does not actually imply any unusual trends for America, but surprisingly does for Canada and Switzerland. Mexico, with heavily publicized drug trade related atrocities occurring far too regularly, does not surprise me at this point in time.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Fire extinguishers put out more fires than they create. Guns do not 'save' more people than they 'kill'.
There were 365,000 home fires in 2012. There were 8,855 firearm-related homicides in 2012 and 19,990 suicides in 2011.
I would argue you're the one that's paranoid. But this isn't a debate about your perception of reality, this is reality. If you're going to banter; then at least research, cite references, do the math, and show your work. That is to say, everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts,
I'll just leave this here...
We're #1! We're #1! We're #1! USA! USA! USA!
While I agree with you, this is not a good chart proving correlation in my opinion.
I've added a 1:1 trendline on the chart below.
For a graph with guns per 100 people along X and gun deaths per 100,000 people along Y, the trend line I've added represents gun deaths per 1,000 guns within the population. Any statistician would look at this line and see that the data points don't deviate much from the line (implying it's a reasonable average of all countries) with the exception of Mexico who is truly horrifically off the charts with gun deaths so I will call it an outlier. Note how many countries lay just along the trend line, implying they are close to the global average in terms of a typical ratio of gun deaths per 1,000 guns. The further away a data point is from the trend line (if we're assuming it's close enough to a global average, which it appears to be to me), the more a trend is perceived to deviate from the norm. In this case, the US's (for all intents and purposes) does not. Mexico's, Canada's, and Switzerland's, however, are significantly greater gun deaths per 1,000 guns. So, to reiterate, this chart does not actually imply any unusual trends for America, but surprisingly does for Canada and Switzerland. Mexico, with heavily publicized drug trade related atrocities occurring far too regularly, does not surprise me at this point in time.
You're interpreting the data wrong. x & y axis are both per capita.
More guns per capita = more gun deaths per capita.
Fire extinguishers put out more fires than they create. Guns do not 'save' more people than they 'kill'.
There were 365,000 home fires in 2012. There were 8,855 firearm-related homicides in 2012 and 19,990 suicides in 2011.
I would argue you're the one that's paranoid. But this isn't a debate about your perception of reality, this is reality. If you're going to banter; then at least research, cite references, do the math, and show your work. That is to say, everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts,
I'll just leave this here...
We're #1! We're #1! We're #1! USA! USA! USA!
While I agree with you, this is not a good chart proving correlation in my opinion.
I've added a 1:1 trendline on the chart below.
For a graph with guns per 100 people along X and gun deaths per 100,000 people along Y, the trend line I've added represents gun deaths per 1,000 guns within the population. Any statistician would look at this line and see that the data points don't deviate much from the line (implying it's a reasonable average of all countries) with the exception of Mexico who is truly horrifically off the charts with gun deaths so I will call it an outlier. Note how many countries lay just along the trend line, implying they are close to the global average in terms of a typical ratio of gun deaths per 1,000 guns. The further away a data point is from the trend line (if we're assuming it's close enough to a global average, which it appears to be to me), the more a trend is perceived to deviate from the norm. In this case, the US's (for all intents and purposes) does not. Mexico's, Canada's, and Switzerland's, however, are significantly greater gun deaths per 1,000 guns. So, to reiterate, this chart does not actually imply any unusual trends for America, but surprisingly does for Canada and Switzerland. Mexico, with heavily publicized drug trade related atrocities occurring far too regularly, does not surprise me at this point in time.
You're interpreting the data wrong. x & y axis are both per capita.
More guns per capita = more gun deaths per capita.
I had a thorough analysis written up, then came to the conclusion that I was wrong. My apologies, CM! You're correct.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
So if you are out walking your kids who is responsible for their protection?
I know that I'm okay and there aren't people out to get me or my family.
Unfortunately it happens, even to those that think it can't happen to them.
So again, you are out walking your kids, your four year old looks up to who to protect her?
Really? How many times have you been assaulted/robbed/etc while out on a walk around the block?
Because I go for walks all the time and that shiat has never happened to me...
I agree. I'm sixty three years old, have lived in many different towns and cities in four states, and have walked the streets of many towns, small cities and large cities (including Hunter's Point, and other rough neighborhoods in San Francisco in the early 70's before gentrification and Harlem in the early 80's before Clintonification). I've lived in good neighborhoods and I've lived in really run down neighborhoods. In all that time the only people I personally know who have been assaulted are as follows:
-A cousin in law was stabbed and killed after getting in a fight in a very rough neck bar. -A friend who was a bouncer was shot to death while trying to break up a fight.
(both of those obviously not your everyday walking around town scenarios)
-Me in a gas station off I-80 late on a Saturday night (stupid move on my part). As I've explained previously, if I'd tried to take a gun out against the punk and his three gang member buddies instead of backing the guy off long enough to get my wife and step daughter and me in the car the the hell out of there, someone might have died. No one died. I was punched in the head but no one went to the hospital.
Vigilance, good, smart trip planning, staying out of bad ass bars and not working as a bouncer (or similar dangerous occupation) are probably your best means of protection.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
So if you are out walking your kids who is responsible for their protection?
I know that I'm okay and there aren't people out to get me or my family.
Unfortunately it happens, even to those that think it can't happen to them.
So again, you are out walking your kids, your four year old looks up to who to protect her?
Having a gun increases odds that either myself or my family is injured or killed by a gun. Also the odds are low and responsibility and pain in the ass of having a gun loaded and on me at all times in event that I may be able to use it aren't worth it. Guy walks behind me and sticks me up. Let's say I was with child would I get into gun battle. Hell no. They can have my stuff. No they aren't going to kidnap or some paranoid stuff.
Guns don't make you safer. They are a liability.
Do you have a fire extinguisher?
I don't walk around carrying a fire extinguisher. No Do I have in in my shop, boat and kitchen sure. They just sit there. They aren't a liability. Guns are.
For me guns are a liability and not worth it. And again a pain in the butt.
So if you are out walking your kids who is responsible for their protection?
I know that I'm okay and there aren't people out to get me or my family.
Unfortunately it happens, even to those that think it can't happen to them.
So again, you are out walking your kids, your four year old looks up to who to protect her?
It seems like you view a scenario where he would be challenged to a duel or something. If my intent is to rob someone I certainly won't let them know that until I'm in a position to be successful at it.
Let's say you are walking your 4 year old and have a large pistol strapped/holstered somewhere on your body. If I want to rob you the first thing I'll do is point my gun at you and demand that you drop the weapon.
How does having the weapon put you in a different position in that case? You will cooperate or you will get shot. Your weapon is useless.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Even if it's hidden. Will I try to surprise perp. Try to shoot him? With my kid next to me? For an I phone and 20 bucks? Guns are a liability and a risk. They offer false comfort in my opinion. And heavy. What a pain to carry it at the ready all the time.
Even if it's hidden. Will I try to surprise perp. Try to shoot him? With my kid next to me? For an I phone and 20 bucks? Guns are a liability and a risk. They offer false comfort in my opinion. And heavy. What a pain to carry it at the ready all the time.
Exactly....it just escalates the stress of the crime
I can see if you have a gun and you come upon a crime being committed and are able to be the hero and save the day but that's going to be rare. More guns = more innocent deaths.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
I'm just glad the perpetrator only had a knife and not a gun. If he had a gun, most assured the two victims would be dead, and maybe more. I gotta say I'm a little surprised by the amount of deaths by guns per 100k in Canada.
"Feel the path of everyday....which road you taking?"
Barrie, ON '98
Toronto, ON '00/'03/'06/'09/'11/'16(x2)
Hamilton, ON '05/'11
Newark, NJ '10
London, ON '13
Buffalo, NY '13
Detroit, MI '14
Ottawa, ON '16
Fire extinguishers put out more fires than they create. Guns do not 'save' more people than they 'kill'.
There were 365,000 home fires in 2012. There were 8,855 firearm-related homicides in 2012 and 19,990 suicides in 2011.
I would argue you're the one that's paranoid. But this isn't a debate about your perception of reality, this is reality. If you're going to banter; then at least research, cite references, do the math, and show your work. That is to say, everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts,
I'll just leave this here...
We're #1! We're #1! We're #1! USA! USA! USA!
While I agree with you, this is not a good chart proving correlation in my opinion.
I've added a 1:1 trendline on the chart below.
For a graph with guns per 100 people along X and gun deaths per 100,000 people along Y, the trend line I've added represents gun deaths per 1,000 guns within the population. Any statistician would look at this line and see that the data points don't deviate much from the line (implying it's a reasonable average of all countries) with the exception of Mexico who is truly horrifically off the charts with gun deaths so I will call it an outlier. Note how many countries lay just along the trend line, implying they are close to the global average in terms of a typical ratio of gun deaths per 1,000 guns. The further away a data point is from the trend line (if we're assuming it's close enough to a global average, which it appears to be to me), the more a trend is perceived to deviate from the norm. In this case, the US's (for all intents and purposes) does not. Mexico's, Canada's, and Switzerland's, however, are significantly greater gun deaths per 1,000 guns. So, to reiterate, this chart does not actually imply any unusual trends for America, but surprisingly does for Canada and Switzerland. Mexico, with heavily publicized drug trade related atrocities occurring far too regularly, does not surprise me at this point in time.
I think a fun and educational thing to do would be to make the graph/chart an 'interactive' game.
Perhaps if we numbered all the countries and had the gun enthusiasts connect the dots... a small handgun would emerge and they could clap after they completed the task.
Of course, you'd have to exclude the USA from this exercise though because it's waaay too far away from all the other countries in terms of gun ownership and gun deaths and would distort the drawing. Those gun guys probably wouldn't like that because they would feel slighted the USA was excluded and think they were being picked on.
Yah. Now that I think about it... it wouldn't be that great after all.
good guy vs bad guy??!!......I'm sorry but if that is the level of commentary with which you wish to put across your point I'm out.......time would be better spent watching Rambo or any number of Chuck Norris flicks, as this seems to compliment your apparent world view.
How many people innocently ran over,hit someone in this country with a car yesterday? I bet it trumps accidental shootings by 20x How about power tool ER visits.I bet there are hundreds a day. How about stabbings? How about assault with club,bat,pipe? All outnumber accidental shootings by a lot everyday. Just sayin
How many people innocently ran over,hit someone in this country with a car yesterday? I bet it trumps accidental shootings by 20x How about power tool ER visits.I bet there are hundreds a day. How about stabbings? How about assault with club,bat,pipe? All outnumber accidental shootings by a lot everyday. Just sayin
yeah your absolute right, America has no problems when it comes to the almighty gun. It's all a massive bias perpetuated by the global media.
Comments
Unfortunately it happens, even to those that think it can't happen to them.
So again, you are out walking your kids, your four year old looks up to who to protect her?
Guns don't make you safer. They are a liability.
Because I go for walks all the time and that shiat has never happened to me...
Do you have a point?
There were 365,000 home fires in 2012. There were 8,855 firearm-related homicides in 2012 and 19,990 suicides in 2011.
I would argue you're the one that's paranoid. But this isn't a debate about your perception of reality, this is reality. If you're going to banter; then at least research, cite references, do the math, and show your work. That is to say, everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts,
I'll just leave this here...
We're #1! We're #1! We're #1! USA! USA! USA!
Maybe it has something to do with the primary purposes of the two: not too many stories of fire extinguishers being utilized as weapons. I think I've heard of one or two relating to guns.
I could also opt to keep a bat, ninja stars, nunchucks, an axe, set of bow and arrows, or a knife under my bed, but for what ever reason I don't.
I assume you're trying to use the logical notion that unpleasant, rare, and unforeseeable events (such as fires or robberies) should be pre-empted by keeping possession of tools to diminish or eliminate the risk of said events (such as fire extinguishers and guns).
There are a few different ways to tackle this:
1) Whereas a fire extinguisher is a unique tool to combat fires (within an affordable range), a gun is one of many tools which can combat a robber (including numerous non-lethal options such as the purchase of security features like alarm systems or better locks).
2) Whereas a fire extinguisher poses minimal risk during non-critical event periods (with the exception of someone hitting another person over the head with it), a gun poses many (i.e. nosy children, irresponsible or paranoid users, etc.)
3) Whereas a fire extinguisher poses minimal risk during critical event periods (see above), a gun poses much (i.e. impulsive and pre-emptive attacking when adrenaline takes over)
4) Whereas a fire extinguisher is not historically linked with personal abuse (i.e. the person hitting another over the head with it is quite a rarity), a gun has a precedent attached to it due to any number of variables which can include poor profiling prior to granting eligibility for training, poor training, attainment of said weapon from illegitimate channels which negate those two prerequisites for acquisition, sudden mental developments or relapses of moments of reason leading to murderous rampages, or neglect of humanity in favour of personal/monetary/romantic gains.
These are four ways I can think of in which comparing fire extinguishers' presence in our lives to guns' is (from my perspective) fallacious. If anyone can rebut any of these or add to the list, I look forward to reading about it.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
http://catchwmw.com/2014/09/12/violent-female-robber-shes-a-wmw-first-caught-on-camera-assaulting-gas-station-clerk-with-a-fire-extinguisher/
I've added a 1:1 trendline on the chart below.
For a graph with guns per 100 people along X and gun deaths per 100,000 people along Y, the trend line I've added represents gun deaths per 1,000 guns within the population. Any statistician would look at this line and see that the data points don't deviate much from the line (implying it's a reasonable average of all countries) with the exception of Mexico who is truly horrifically off the charts with gun deaths so I will call it an outlier. Note how many countries lay just along the trend line, implying they are close to the global average in terms of a typical ratio of gun deaths per 1,000 guns. The further away a data point is from the trend line (if we're assuming it's close enough to a global average, which it appears to be to me), the more a trend is perceived to deviate from the norm. In this case, the US's (for all intents and purposes) does not. Mexico's, Canada's, and Switzerland's, however, are significantly greater gun deaths per 1,000 guns. So, to reiterate, this chart does not actually imply any unusual trends for America, but surprisingly does for Canada and Switzerland. Mexico, with heavily publicized drug trade related atrocities occurring far too regularly, does not surprise me at this point in time.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
More guns per capita = more gun deaths per capita.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
-A cousin in law was stabbed and killed after getting in a fight in a very rough neck bar.
-A friend who was a bouncer was shot to death while trying to break up a fight.
(both of those obviously not your everyday walking around town scenarios)
-Me in a gas station off I-80 late on a Saturday night (stupid move on my part). As I've explained previously, if I'd tried to take a gun out against the punk and his three gang member buddies instead of backing the guy off long enough to get my wife and step daughter and me in the car the the hell out of there, someone might have died. No one died. I was punched in the head but no one went to the hospital.
Vigilance, good, smart trip planning, staying out of bad ass bars and not working as a bouncer (or similar dangerous occupation) are probably your best means of protection.
For me guns are a liability and not worth it. And again a pain in the butt.
Let's say you are walking your 4 year old and have a large pistol strapped/holstered somewhere on your body. If I want to rob you the first thing I'll do is point my gun at you and demand that you drop the weapon.
How does having the weapon put you in a different position in that case? You will cooperate or you will get shot. Your weapon is useless.
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
I can see if you have a gun and you come upon a crime being committed and are able to be the hero and save the day but that's going to be rare. More guns = more innocent deaths.
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Barrie, ON '98
Toronto, ON '00/'03/'06/'09/'11/'16(x2)
Hamilton, ON '05/'11
Newark, NJ '10
London, ON '13
Buffalo, NY '13
Detroit, MI '14
Ottawa, ON '16
Perhaps if we numbered all the countries and had the gun enthusiasts connect the dots... a small handgun would emerge and they could clap after they completed the task.
Of course, you'd have to exclude the USA from this exercise though because it's waaay too far away from all the other countries in terms of gun ownership and gun deaths and would distort the drawing. Those gun guys probably wouldn't like that because they would feel slighted the USA was excluded and think they were being picked on.
Yah. Now that I think about it... it wouldn't be that great after all.
Another great example
but hey...at least he THOUGHT he was a good guy stopping an attack
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Clicks link....Yup, it's Florida!
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
How about power tool ER visits.I bet there are hundreds a day.
How about stabbings?
How about assault with club,bat,pipe?
All outnumber accidental shootings by a lot everyday.
Just sayin
nothing to see here.....move on