What Are A Student's Chances Of Being Shot?

[CLAX1911]

Do you want a fully automatic assault rifle? How about a bazooka? Surface to air missiles? Predator drones? Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles with a nuclear payload? These are all considered "arms." Yet, they are all illegal and incredibly difficult to come by.

If I wanted to, I can own a machine gun I own a rocket launcher (bazooka) I bought it at an army surplus store a few years ago for 35 bucks.

Explosives and radioactive material is highly controlled because they can pose a massive danger to anybody just by sitting on a shelf. Guns do not.

You can be pulled over and ticketed for driving a car without a working tail light, and you don't think you need to justify your purchase of a weapon designed to make killing a lot of people at a distance really easy?

No. I've bought many fire arms and never once had to justify a need. Some I bought just because they looked cool.

 

[DebateChallenge]

In order to kill people with a sports car, you'd generally have to be inside of it yourself in which case you're as likely to kill yourself as someone else.

You're right that you generally have to be inside a sports car or any car to use it to kill somebody, but you're not as likely to kill yourself if you hit a pedestrian.

I should also point out that many sports cars can't be purchased in the United States because they're not street legal.

They can be purchased they just can't be driven on the street.

We already have restrictions on the purchasing of other weapons. Those restrictions have in fact been quite successful in preventing their proliferation so far.

Not necessarily. Restrictions on knives have not been successful in stopping their proliferation.

 

[Rucker61]

Do you want a fully automatic assault rifle? How about a bazooka? Surface to air missiles? Predator drones? Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles with a nuclear payload? These are all considered "arms." Yet, they are all illegal and incredibly difficult to come by.

You can be pulled over and ticketed for driving a car without a working tail light, and you don't think you need to justify your purchase of a weapon designed to make killing a lot of people at a distance really easy?

No, because I'm not buying it to kill a lot of people at a distance really easy. I've got a bolt action rifle that takes 10 round magazines, and I'm accurate with it out to 1000 yards. If a shooter with similar rifle and skill were to set up with a view of a high school sports stadium during a game, with say 10 magazines how many people could he kill? Should we outlaw bolt action rifles?

"Assault weapons" have been used to murder an average of 17 people per year in a mass shooting since 2004, and three of those 29 shootings took place outside of handgun range. Handguns are used to murder over 8000 people every year. You should be working on ways to keep felons from possessing handguns.

 

[CLAX1911]

Really? What about all the other arms they can't legally purchase?

Like what?

Yes, they are.

No.

Killing someone or something is the only valid use of a gun outside of pure recreation.

Sure, but killing a deer or killing someone for threatening your life isn't murder.

Recreation is not a valid use case for something that is also used for mass murder.

Sure it is.

 

[Rucker61]

Yes, they are. Killing someone or something is the only valid use of a gun outside of pure recreation. Recreation is not a valid use case for something that is also used for mass murder.

What bull****. Congress declared in the Gun Control Act of 1968 that "it is not the purpose of this title to place any undue or unnecessary Federal restrictions or burdens on law-abiding citizens with respect to the acquisition, possession, or use of firearms appropriate to the purpose of hunting, trapshooting, target shooting, personal protection, or any other lawful activity, and that this title is not intended to discourage or eliminate the private ownership or use of firearms by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes". Recreation is a perfectly valid use. You do know that knives, hammers, gasoline and trucks have all been used for mass murder, too, right?

 

[jimbo]

Yes, they do. You see a sports car and jewelry aren't primarily used for the purposes of murder. In order to kill people with a sports car, you'd generally have to be inside of it yourself in which case you're as likely to kill yourself as someone else. I should also point out that many sports cars can't be purchased in the United States because they're not street legal.

We already have restrictions on the purchasing of other weapons. Those restrictions have in fact been quite successful in preventing their proliferation so far.

Where do you get the idea that the primary purpose of guns is murder? Far more deer and ducks are hunted each year than people.

That's just one example. Murder is the last purpose of nearly all the guns in the US. Many people own guns to prevent murder.

 

[jimbo]

Liberals and gun haters love to say all this phoney baloney about how in this day and age being in school is more dangerous than being in a war zone. Well its exactly that, phoney baloney. One of the worst school shootings in recent history is the Sandy Hook shooting in which 27 people were killed not including the shooter. Every year over 56 million students attend school grades K-12 so exactly what are your chances of you being shot if you go to school or your children's chances of being shot if they go to school? Very very very small. The thing is, when school shootings do happen it becomes a headline, a top story in the news, so it makes it seem that its much more common and much more likely to happen than it does. You have a much better chance dying in a school bus crash being driven to or from school.

Some 1700 school age children die as a result of domestic violence each year. You can easily make an argument that children are less likely to die violently in school than at home.

Phony baloney it is.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Where do you get the idea that the primary purpose of guns is murder? Far more deer and ducks are hunted each year than people.

That's just one example. Murder is the last purpose of nearly all the guns in the US. Many people own guns to prevent murder.

Handguns are anti-people weapons.

 

[Rucker61]

Handguns are anti-people weapons.

Yet they are used many times more often in lawful uses than in illegal uses. They are both legal and protected in the United States.

 

[jimbo]

Handguns are anti-people weapons.

They can be, but 99.99%of the time, they aren't.

 

[DebateChallenge]

Handguns are anti-people weapons.

Nope, it depends how they're used.

 

[MrWonka]

Where do you get the idea that the primary purpose of guns is murder?

Well, you see there are these little metal things that come flying out of one end when you pull the trigger. They move incredibly fast and they're designed to hit things with the type of force necessary to cause the death of any living creature in their path. Generally the hope is that they kill things that are in need of killing and deserve killing, but either way, it's readily apparent that is what they're purpose is. All the cool armies have them.

Far more deer and ducks are hunted each year than people.

Sure, but either way you are using it to murder an innocent thing. Even though a lot of that murder is legal it does not change the fact that the guns are designed to make killing things easier.

Many people own guns to prevent murder.

By murdering the person who was trying to murder them usually also with a gun. So if we successfully eliminated most of the best guns to use if you want to illegally murder someone then the remaining guns would balance the terms of almost any engagement.

 

[Lursa]

So if it's not acceptable, what do we do ?

Arm the teachers as has been suggested ?

Extend the TSA's role to screen all people entering a school ?

or ban guns ?

Shouldnt we be addressing the cause of the higher death rates first?

Vehicular deaths? If not, why not?

 

[MrWonka]

They can be, but 99.99%of the time, they aren't.

hmmm...no, I would say that 99.9% of the time a handgun is used it is used for on people. At the very least I would say that in the situations where it is not used for people there are other better weapons that would be more appropriate. I mean I realize some people like to use their Glock as a bottle opener, but you know there are actual bottle openers for that. They even make some that are built into the bottom of your flip-flops.

 

[Lursa]

Yes, they do. You see a sports car and jewelry aren't primarily used for the purposes of murder. In order to kill people with a sports car, you'd generally have to be inside of it yourself in which case you're as likely to kill yourself as someone else. I should also point out that many sports cars can't be purchased in the United States because they're not street legal.

We already have restrictions on the purchasing of other weapons. Those restrictions have in fact been quite successful in preventing their proliferation so far.

Why does purpose matter? Dead is dead.

And self-defense is not murder.

Why not address...and suggest the same things you want for gun control...more restrictions and safety measures for kids in vehicles on their way to and from school?

It's a much bigger killer, so why is your focus on guns? Or guns primarily?

 

[MrWonka]

Shouldnt we be addressing the cause of the higher death rates first?

If you'd like to discuss Toxic Masculinity I would be happy to do that in another thread, but unfortunately, almost all of the same people who are gun crazy are also guilty of Toxic Masculinity on top of it, and almost all of the same people who are trying to limit access to guns are also help eliminate Toxic Masculinity as well so...

 

[Lursa]

hmmm...no, I would say that 99.9% of the time a handgun is used it is used for on people.

What you might look at more closely...is how many times even having that handgun, drawing but not firing...SAVES lives. And then please tell me why our lives (those carrying/keeping) are less valuable than those not with firearms?

 

[Lursa]

Handguns are anti-people weapons.

There are plenty of people that intentionally harm other people. Why should I be at a disadvantage to them for protecting myself and family?

And there are plenty of other reasons to own handguns. That have nothing to do with EVER pointing them at people. Do you so easily dismiss valued recreation that others are involved in?

Hey, here's me with my 'anti-balloon' handguns:

 

[MrWonka]

Why does purpose matter? Dead is dead.

Well, you see if the main purpose of something has nothing to do with murder then there are many valid reasons why a non-murderer would benefit from their existence. The benefits clearly outweigh the costs in those cases. But if the only valid use case for something is to that a bunch of stupid hicks can get their rocks off by blowing up pumpkins it's okay to say maybe they could find other ways of letting off some steam.

Why not address...and suggest the same things you want for gun control...more restrictions and safety measures for kids in vehicles on their way to and from school?

Umm... we do that all the time. What the **** are you talking about? Just yesterday on facebook I saw a post about how instead of extending a stop sign and hoping people follow it school bus drivers have taken the approach of crossing the center line and blocking off traffic entirely so nobody could get by while kids are unloading. It was interesting.

It's a much bigger killer, so why is your focus on guns? Or guns primarily?

Because there's no such thing as a National T-Bone a School Bus Association. You see when we offer suggestions to help prevent school bus accidents nobody really fights back so most of the things we need to do in order to mitigate them get implemented without much pushback. Guns are the one thing in this country that just keeps on killing people and yet nothing ever gets done to try and stop it or limit it thanks to people like yourself.

 

[Lursa]

If you'd like to discuss Toxic Masculinity I would be happy to do that in another thread, but unfortunately, almost all of the same people who are gun crazy are also guilty of Toxic Masculinity on top of it, and almost all of the same people who are trying to limit access to guns are also help eliminate Toxic Masculinity as well so...

Since I am heavily involved in a shooting sport and know many men and women who not only compete but carry for protection, I can say that you are greatly uninformed.

As in VASTLY uninformed. As in, have swallowed whole what the media feeds you.

 

[jimbo]

hmmm...no, I would say that 99.9% of the time a handgun is used it is used for on people. At the very least I would say that in the situations where it is not used for people there are other better weapons that would be more appropriate. I mean I realize some people like to use their Glock as a bottle opener, but you know there are actual bottle openers for that. They even make some that are built into the bottom of your flip-flops.

You might say that, but you would be wrong.

 

[Lursa]

Well, you see if the main purpose of something has nothing to do with murder then there are many valid reasons why a non-murderer would benefit from their existence. The benefits clearly outweigh the costs in those cases.

This is strictly your opinion and I see you only weigh the costs for 'other' people, and not those that choose to keep and bear firearms. As if our lives are less valuable.

I dont accept either premise...that purpose matters when one 'thing' kills at a MUCH higher rate...and that armed citizens and their families' lives are less valuable.

 

[Lursa]

hmmm...no, I would say that 99.9% of the time a handgun is used it is used for on people. At the very least I would say that in the situations where it is not used for people there are other better weapons that would be more appropriate. I mean I realize some people like to use their Glock as a bottle opener, but you know there are actual bottle openers for that. They even make some that are built into the bottom of your flip-flops.

Then you are factually wrong. 99.9% of the time a handgun is used it's at non-human targets.

Well, that was easy.

 

[Rucker61]

hmmm...no, I would say that 99.9% of the time a handgun is used it is used for on people. At the very least I would say that in the situations where it is not used for people there are other better weapons that would be more appropriate. I mean I realize some people like to use their Glock as a bottle opener, but you know there are actual bottle openers for that. They even make some that are built into the bottom of your flip-flops.

I've used handguns multiple times per month for years in competition and practice. I've never had to use one on people.

There are about 110 million handguns in the US according to gunpolicy.org. Evidently we don't have 100 million people getting shot every year in the US.

 

[Rucker61]

If you'd like to discuss Toxic Masculinity I would be happy to do that in another thread, but unfortunately, almost all of the same people who are gun crazy are also guilty of Toxic Masculinity on top of it, and almost all of the same people who are trying to limit access to guns are also help eliminate Toxic Masculinity as well so...

You can't possibly prove this.