Gun 'style' in the media

[az_max]

Your 3rd example doesn't cite the method, but even if it was a knife that's like 60 people worldwide in 4 years with a 1 year interval on average.

Are you really comparing that favorably with shooting death stats from this country alone?

At around 21:20, a group of eight knife-wielding men and women attacked passengers at the city's railway station.[2] Both male and female attackers pulled out long-bladed knives and stabbed and slashed passengers.


I'm pointing out that alternate methods of attacking people occur in countries where guns are banned. I'm sure that a gun ban would lead to a lot more deaths by another method. Knife, Vehicle (purposely ramming crowds, not vehicle accident deaths) IEDs, etc.

 

[pinkytoe69]

I'm sure that a gun ban would lead to a lot more deaths by another method. Knife, Vehicle (purposely ramming crowds, not vehicle accident deaths) IEDs, etc.

Note: I am not advocating a "gun ban"

I'm sure it would too.

The question is, would those cumulative rates be dramatically lower than the current rate by gun?

 

[coop74]

Try jumping one in from 800' at 0230

The SMJP made the Dragon look like you were jumping in with a twizzler.

ahhh the lovely rigging of the DMJP. On my hands on test at Jump Master school... back in the day

 

[coop74]

AR is a tactical firearm meaning it is easy to accessorize. Assault is an action. Moreover, they are not weapons, they are firearms.

If someone beats a person with a golf club does it become an assault golf club? If someone flies a plane into a building does it become an assault plane?

The left are masters of re-branding. For example, global warming became climate change, and now it's basically been downgraded to extreme weather but the myth lives on for many people so it's a win for the progressives. Another example is how they identify themselves as liberals. Look up the definition of liberal? It doesn't fit, not even close. Who is controlling the argument? Billionaires, millionares, politicians, celebrities, etc... that live in excess surrounded by armed gaurds, nothing like they want for the rest of us vermin.

Has anyone here shot an AR? They are incredibly fun to shoot. What's the harm in that?

Not so much if you are a left hand shooter till they changed the design so the spent casings no longer hit you on the cheek... but that was an M-16 not the AR.

 

[coop74]

Your 3rd example doesn't cite the method, but even if it was a knife that's like 60 people worldwide in 4 years with a 1 year interval on average.

Are you really comparing that favorably with shooting death stats from this country alone?

you realize in the US the Knife/sharp object deaths each year are about 4 x the deaths for all classes of rifles correct?

 

[pinkytoe69]

you realize in the US the Knife/sharp object deaths each year are about 4 x the deaths for all classes of rifles correct?

I did not realize that. Source?

 

[kk88rrc]

At least 19 people were killed and 26 injured in a stabbing spree at a facility for disabled people west of Tokyo (Jul 25, 2016)

The 2014 Taipei Metro attack was a mass stabbing spree that took place on 21 May 2014, directed at random civilians on a Taipei Metro (aka Taipei MRT) train near Jiangzicui Station, resulting in four deaths and 24 injuries.

.. a terrorist attack occurred inside the Kunming Railway Station in Kunming, Yunnan, China....The incident, targeted against civilians, left 31 civilians and 4 perpetrators[1] dead with more than 140 others injured

A woman was killed and 12 other people injured after a man carried out a knife attack in a mall in a busy shopping district in the Chinese capital (Feb 11, 2018)


Sharp stick attacks happen too.

All three of those countries have very strict gun laws.
Unfortunately if there is a will to kill, there will always be a way to kill.

 

[1920SF]

I did not realize that. Source?

An interesting excursion: https://www.statista.com/statistics/195325/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used/'

Personally I think it is far more interesting to start with the CDC's causes of death and then start to consider banning spoons

 

[AbnMike]

I did not realize that. Source?

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/four-times-more-stabbed-than-rifles-any-kind/

Snopes wants to be wishy washy on it because they're decidedly liberally bent, though not as lefty bent as some of my righty friends state.

Regardless of their "unproven" finding, the FBI stats don't lie:

374 people shot and killed with any rifle of any kind
1604 killed with knives or cutting instruments.

Now Snopes does correctly state there is a large category of deaths by firearms where the type of firearm was not reported, but it would be folly to think that there would be an almost additional 1300 deaths attributed to "rifles of any kind" and much more likely that the 1300 +/- of deaths due to unknown firearm is going to be a handgun, since handguns are known for being the vast majority of deaths by firearm.

Would the 374 rifle deaths likely skew a bit higher from the "unknown" pile? Sure. Would it skew north by another 1300 to meet the numbers for knife deaths?

No fucking way.

 

[pinkytoe69]

The numbers are interesting, but still don't give a complete picture.

First, as you mentioned, is the "unspecified" category.

I think a more important factor, however, is access.

Everyone who has a kitchen has a sharp pointy knife. Even if that is hyperbole, anyone can easily acquire one with no ID and about $2 at Walmart.

So even with that accessibility, their stats are well below the total gun stats.

Hell, there are probably 1,000,000X more stabby-capable knives than rifles here, yet the murder use is only 4X higher.

 

[Ballah06]

All this talk of guns, knives, etc. are we talking about active shooter style scenarios? If so, just look at the most recent FBI studies/reports. NYPD report on AS a few years back was pretty good as well and pretty much mirrored the FBI stats. Knife attacks are not just quite there as opposed to handguns, then rifles and shotguns. Been studying those for a few years (since I was teaching the active shooter classes) and the pattern is pretty much the same. Sure, someone can grab a knife and stab somebody else, but these weapon style attacks usually do not rise to the 'mass killing' category. Just stating the facts. Of course someone who is more determined and skilled can inflict more damage but when we look at overall attacks of this type, the knife, pointy stick, etc attacks are extremely low. Not talking about gang related crimes, muggins, etc here.

 

[AbnMike]

The numbers are interesting, but still don't give a complete picture.

First, as you mentioned, is the "unspecified" category.

I think a more important factor, however, is access.

Everyone who has a kitchen has a sharp pointy knife. Even if that is hyperbole, anyone can easily acquire one with no ID and about $2 at Walmart.

So even with that accessibility, their stats are well below the total gun stats.

Hell, there are probably 1,000,000X more stabby-capable knives than rifles here, yet the murder use is only 4X higher.

Because it's easier to kill people with a gun. Just is. No one denies that.

If we banned all guns there'd still be millions of them out there, easily accessible. We'd likely see some accidental deaths go bye bye but the homicides would pretty much stay the same, since most of those hand gun homicides are with illegal guns illegally obtained anyway.

Politifact verified that only about 3% of murders committed with guns are committed with legal guns. Those are mostly crimes of passion. We'd likely see them occur with about as much frequency with a gun ban, just with knives or hammers instead.

But see where we are going? At first you didn't realize it, so asked for the source. Then the source was given and now the target is moving again...to the presence of knives v. guns....and then it will move again and again and again because you really think that gun control is going to make a big difference in crime rates.

I think it will too. It will make them increase because criminals fucking love knowing that people are unarmed.

 

[kennith]

People are spearing each other to death here on a comparatively large scale?

You've got to decide which direction you're coming from.

Do you want to regulate guns more strictly or prevent and better understand violence?

One puts the discussion right back into it's little locker in Washington, and the other gives you an answer.

Cheers,

Kennith

 

[SGaynor]

The numbers are interesting, but still don't give a complete picture.

First, as you mentioned, is the "unspecified" category.

According to the DOJ, 73% of homicides involving a gun used a handgun, the other 27% is other (rifle, shotgun, unknown). So even based on that (assuming all unknowns are rifles/shotguns), 27% of the 3077 unknowns is 830. Add that to the 374 known rifle killings and you get 1100. Still less than the knives.

Fact is, long guns are rarely used in killings.

And in the DOJ data (see link) the number of "more than 1 killing" hasn't changed in the last 15 years. The media just covers it more breathlessly.

But, honestly, since we are talking about banning guns based on looks, data and facts are secondary to the anti-gunners - they just don't care.

 

[Rob371]

Dude...intentional irony?

The whole point of a firearm is to put holes in living things.

I think calling them weapons suggests intent.

The AR was originally produced as a hunting and sporting rifle. Military and Law enforcement took it up because of it's tactical aspects.

I have several firearms. I don't consider them weapons. They are locked in a cabinet 98% of the time, maybe even 99%. Would you consider a fishing pole a weapon? Neither would I. It's a ridiculous argument isn't it, but a firearm used for putting food on the dinner table does not equate to a weapon in my view. Occasionally I just enjoy a little target shooting or even some skeet with a few friends. There's nothing malicious about it.

If I lived in a high crime area then I might have a different view and I would probably have more firearms for self defense and for a deterrent.

As suggested here previously by another, some dip shit goes on a rampage and the rest of us law abiding citizens get punished.

That's not intended to trivialize lives lost. As a parent a dread to consider the possibility.

Intentional irony? Yes, you caught me. I think enthusiasts, sportsmen, and groups like the NRA could and should do better at playing the game of re branding.

 

[pinkytoe69]

I think calling them weapons suggests intent.

A gun that is not designed specifically for target shooting (I.e. those funky things in the biathlon) is a weapon.

It's like a butcher knife vs. a sword.

A sword is manufactured with the purpose of making things maimed or dead. It's a weapon that you can use as a kitchen tool or to cut down trees and shit if you really needed to.

A butcher knife is made to made to dismember stuff that's already dead. It's a tool you can use as a weapon if you really need to.

A gun is in sword category.

 

[pinkytoe69]

But see where we are going? At first you didn't realize it, so asked for the source. Then the source was given and now the target is moving again...to the presence of knives v. guns....and then it will move again and again and again because you really think that gun control is going to make a big difference in crime rates.

I don't think I moved the target?

Someone said "what about knives vs. Rifles?".

I looked at the stats he gave and replied "I don't think that's as clear cut as you think, and here is why..."

 

[mjbrox]

Come to think of it, wtf is an assault weapon anyway? You can assault someone with just about anything, i.e. knife, piece of pipe, fork, hatchet, etc. let's just 'outlaw' all sharp and projectile emitting tools and stick with hugs and plasticware.

Yall want to get all technical with names. I have seen people go on and on about Clip vs magazine.

The point is most rational people would like to keep hunting rifles, shotguns and handguns all legal with a background check. What people want to ban is guns that are designed to fire off rounds a rate that make the mass murder possible. They call these types of guns Assault Rifles. what else should they be called? there needs to be a common term. An AR-15 sure as fuck is not a hunting rifle.

You can debate back and forth all you want, but these types of events are made possible with guns like the AR-15.


..... Now, yall will probably call me a gun grabbing snowflake for pointing all this out

 

[Ballah06]

Yall want to get all technical with names. I have seen people go on and on about Clip vs magazine.

The point is most rational people would like to keep hunting rifles, shotguns and handguns all legal with a background check. What people want to ban is guns that are designed to fire off rounds a rate that make the mass murder possible. They call these types of guns Assault Rifles. what else should they be called? there needs to be a common term. An AR-15 sure as fuck is not a hunting rifle.

You can debate back and forth all you want, but these types of events are made possible with guns like the AR-15.


..... Now, yall will probably call me a gun grabbing snowflake for pointing all this out

Not trying to get technical at all; just pointing put the terms consistently used in the media. I like my ARs and have some just because I can and these are the platforms I was trained on/used in the past. I do not hunt but do like to have the ARs as part of the arsenal. That's really it.

 

[AbnMike]

The point is most rational people would like to keep hunting rifles, shotguns and handguns all legal with a background check. What people want to ban is guns that are designed to fire off rounds a rate that make the mass murder possible.

I'm confused, what about the design of these other guns that make mass murder possible is different from the hunting rifle?

They shoot the same caliber bullet. They are fed from the same kind of magazine. And they fire one bullet per trigger pull. Everything's the same.

So what's different about their design? Because they do not fire off rounds at a rate that is any different from the traditional looking hunting equivalent.

Why isn't an AR a hunting rifle? Millions ofpeople hunt with an AR. Again, as said earlier, people seem to make some illogical leap that because an AR can have a 30 round magazine that anyone hunting with it must want to shoot of 30 rounds. That's the same leap of logic that would be required for someone to say "your car has a top speed of 160 mph? You must drive 160 mph every time you get in the car!"

But they never think that the hunter fires off 5 rounds from the "hunting rifle magazine" everytime he or she shoots it.

There's all kinds of Field and Stream or other type hunting magazines and blogs devoted to the AR as a hunting rifle.