If you can stand just one more comment on guns:

[hedgehog]

Here in New York State last week, Travis Trim, a man who has been described by his family and friends as increasingly paranoid, stole a friend's car. He was already on parole violation for not reporting in , having previously been convicted of misdemeanor drug charges. When stopped by a fully armed New York State trooper, he shot the trooper but did not cause him serious injury since the trooper was wearing boidy armor. The suspect fled the scene but was tracked down after breaking into an empty farm house. The house was stormed by a (Swat?) team of armed troopers wearing body armor and Kevlar helmets. One trooper was shot in the arm. A second trooper was knocked to one knee when he was hit on his body armor. The three following troopers opened fire and got off 60 some rounds. Unfortunately, the trooper who had been knocked down stood up and was killed instantly when one of those rounds hit him in the head.

The troopers retreated. After a day long stand-off, they tossed in tear gas grenades, accidentally setting fire to the house and burning it to the ground. It turned out that the suspect had been dead already, probably killed instantly after being shot twice in the head by troopers.

I have seen no stories indicating how Trim obtained his weapon.


Now, about that theory that we'd all be safer if everyone was armed......

[BOSSHOG]

1. But its what our founding fathers intended

Every student on every campus should have at least two automatic weapons and at least four hand grenades on their person at all times FOR SAFETY' SAKE. If a person has some mental problems all the more reason that they be armed. How else do conservatives get gun permits? Through their support of the NRA!

[jody]

2. What tools would you allow law-abiding citizens to use to exercise their natural, inherent,

inalienable right to self-defense?

[Marie26]

3. Blunderbusses

If it was good enough for the Founding Fathers, it's good enough for us.

[jody]

5. And you would use quill pens and forgo all modern conveniences like the Internet. n/t

[Marie26]

7. Well, if you're into "strict construction"

of the 2nd Amendment, you'd have to agree that the 2nd Amendment was written to guarantee Americans' right to bear blunderbusses. And join militias. And I'd support that right! The AK-47's - not so much.

[jody]

9. SCOTUS in UNITED STATES v. MILLER, 307 U.S. 174 (1939) said

The signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. 'A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.' And further, that ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.

The kind of arms in common use today by the organized militia are the M16 rifle and M9 pistol.

[Marie26]

14. Oh, you thought I was serious?

Thanks for the cite. If you're actually following that argument, then it seems like those two guns in use by "organized militias" should be the only legal forms of arms, right? If you're actually buying into the argument that people need guns to be part of a "well-organized militia". Where do semi-automatic weapons fit into that scheme? But the whole milita argument is BS anyway. Personally, I think it was BS at the time. The Founding Fathers liked guns as much as most Americans.

[jody]

18. What part of the militia argument is BS. I assume you know most states have laws authorizing

governors to activate the state's "unorganized militia", see 10 USC 311.

In addition, some states have parts of its "unorganized militia" actually organized, partially equipped, and partially trained.

[Marie26]

21. Pretty much all of it.

We already have an organized militia - it's called the National Guard. We also have a huge military - bigger than the rest of the world combined. Both are more than capable of supplying weapons to their troops. The militia argument envisions something like Switzerland - where there isn't a real standing army, and all male citizens are given a gun, trained & expected to serve in a "militia" when needed. That's not at all applicable to the US, where we've got the biggest standing army in the world, and billions of dollars of high-tech equipment & weapons. US soldiers don't bring their gun to service; they're provided w/the weaponry they need. So there's NO NEED for individual people to have guns in order to serve in an "well-regulated militia". You couldn't bring your own gun even if you wanted too. So the militia argument is BS. It's an anachronism. People have guns for a variety of reasons - self-defense, criminal activity, hunting, etc. Serving in a citizen's militia is really not one of them. People like guns, that's fine. Just be honest about the reasons you like them.

[jody]

24. Please browse the DU thread "Militias, martial law, and the Second Amendment" at the link below.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x139903

[Recursion]

47. Speaking personally

I know you didn't ask me this, but I'll answer

If you're actually following that argument, then it seems like those two guns in use by "organized militias" should be the only legal forms of arms, right?

Personally I think that's reasonable; Congress and the states can limit or even forbid weapons that are not commonly in use by an infantryman. Personally I also see some mileage to be had in the implicit Constitutional distinction between "arms" (which I read to mean personal weapons) and "ordnance" (under which I would include crew-served weapon systems).

I'm even (barely) open to the idea of handgun limitations and restrictions since generally only officers and NCOs get those.

Where do semi-automatic weapons fit into that scheme?

The two weapons mentioned above, the M16 and M9, are semi-automatic (well, the M16 is capable of firing a 3-round burst automatically, which is just a way of insuring that you fire at least two rounds that won't hit anything). Most popular and useful civilian rifles are semi-automatic.

But the whole milita argument is BS anyway. Personally, I think it was BS at the time. The Founding Fathers liked guns as much as most Americans.

I'm not sure the founders were of one mind about the question any more than we are. Plenty of them were very nervous about the idea of us plebs having weapons. But at least if you take their Federalist essays at face value (which admittedly you can't always do), Madison and Hamilton both considered an armed populace chiefly useful for two things:

1. Reducing the need for a standing army
2. Keeping the federal government from getting any ideas about becoming a tyranny

[SteveM]

51. Actually, blunderbusses were/are extremely rare in U.S.A.

[slackmaster]

55. Blunderbi?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

56. Gun control ordinances.

Gun control ordinances are the best form of self defence. Also, "a police force", and whatever comes to hand at the time the crime is committed.

People should have the right to defend themselves from crime using reasonable force, but *not* an absolute right to take whatever steps they choose to prepare to do so. You should *not* be allowed to set potentially-lethal booby traps in your driveway, even as "self defence".

Restricting guns will somewhat increase the number of times people suffer as a result of not being able to defend themselves in situations where they would have been able to had they had a gun (although to nowhere near the extent that the statistics gathered by the gun lobby by asking people how often they think a gun has prevented a crime would suggest), but not to nearly the extent it will reduce the number of shootings.



Incidentally, there is no such thing as a natural or inalienable right; that's great rhetoric but a meaningless claim. A right has to be bestowed *by* something or someone.

[Fresh_Start]

4. gun in a household, 2x as likely suicide

love your guns more than you love your family.

People can attempt suicide in other ways, but guns make it almost certain that they succeed (90% success in suicide) versus drug overdose (3% success rate in suicides)

[jody]

6. Why does Japan with its gun ban have higher suicide rates than the U.S. ? n/t

[Marie26]

8. Link? nt

[jody]

10. See below for World Health Organization selected stats and link.

Suicide rates per 100 000 by country, year and sex, Most recent year available: December 2005

Country                    Males  Females
RUSSIAN FEDERATION          69.3   11.9
JAPAN                       35.2   12.8
SWITZERLAND                 26.5   10.6
GERMANY                     20.4    7.0
AUSTRALIA                   20.1    5.3
SWEDEN                      18.9    8.1
CANADA                      18.7    5.2
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA    17.6    4.1
UNITED KINGDOM              10.8    3.1
MEXICO                       5.4    1.0
GREECE                       4.7    1.2
PHILIPPINES                  2.5    1.7

[Sanctified]

12. It's legal to commit suicide.

In all of the countries that are listed above the US.

If they would legalize suicide in the US I think more people would be doing it through doctor assisted.

[slackmaster]

23. What's the penalty for committing suicide in the USA?

:dunce:

[Sanctified]

46. There is no Penalty.

But individuals who would like to end their lives peacefully because of age, sickness or other physical issues are prevented from doing it easily in the US. While in other countries individuals have an easy option to die peacefully with the help from medical professionals.

[Sanctified]

11. Here is some info.

http://www.who.int/mental_health/prevention/suicide/suiciderates/en/

One also has to remember that in Japan suicide is legal, so it makes sense that more people will be offing themselves there.

I don't really buy into the whole if you have a gun your twice as likely to kill yourself thing, guns do not give you the idea to kill yourself, if someone wants to die they figure out a way to accomplish it.

[Fresh_Start]

16. the study didn't say the rate of suicide attempts is higher.

in gun households. It says the rate of actual suicides is higher BECAUSE guns are an effective form of offing yourself.
90% success for gun suicides, 3% success for drug suicides

[slackmaster]

25. Do you seriously think someone who has decided to commit suicide...

...would be deterred by a law making suicide illegal?

[Sanctified]

45. How about the Elderly.

I am pretty sure that if someone is to weak to kill them self would be deterred by the law.

[Fresh_Start]

15. because the Japanese are in Japanese culture

why do US households with guns have 2x the rate of suicides as those without guns (clue: it has nothing to do with Japanese culture)

[jody]

17. Now it's your turn, please provide a citation for your 2x statistic. n/t

[Fresh_Start]

20. harvard school of public health

Journal of Trauma Volume 52 No 2

[jody]

28. Please provide a link. n/t

[Fresh_Start]

30. I'm sorry it doesn't appear to be free you'll have to buy

a subscription or go to a university library

[jody]

31. What is the title of the article you cited? Thanks. n/t

[Fresh_Start]

32. Journal of Trauma has a whole series of related analysis

that one was for children, there's another for women, and another for all household members.

They're consistent in higher suicide and homicide rates.
I'll look for the title, but its not on my copy since I don't have the whole article.

[jody]

33. I wish to read the specific source article about the 2x statistic you used. Thanks, n/t

[Fresh_Start]

34. I gave you the specific issue, you'll have to visit the library

to see the article

[jody]

39. While searching for the article I discovered “Country Music and Suicide”.

Country Music and Suicide

I wonder if the joint effects of guns and country music would really drive suicide rates high?

[Marie26]

35. Here you go:

Suicide Rates Significantly Higher in States with the Most Gun Owners"

New research has found that suicide rates are significantly higher in states with high rates of household gun ownership. The study's results appear in the April issue of the Journal of Trauma.

Researchers from the Harvard School of Public Health examined nationwide statistics on suicide rates and gun ownership. They found that in the 15 states with the highest numbers of household gun owners, the suicide rate was double that of the 6 states with the lowest numbers of household gun owners. Population sizes among the states were similar.

The study authors stated that while only 5 percent of all suicide attempts involve guns, over 90 percent of all suicide attempts involving guns are fatal. By contrast, 75 percent of suicide attempts involve drug overdoses, but only 3 percent of these are fatal.

"Removing all firearms from one's home is one of the most effective and straightforward steps that household decision-makers can take to reduce the risk of suicide," Matthew Miller, assistant professor of health policy and management, said in a prepared statement. Miller led the research team.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/211982/suicide_rates_significantly_higher.html

[jody]

37. Thanks, now if I can locate the article. n/t

[Marie26]

38. That just told you the article

But here's the abstract of the article and how to order it online if you want to read it so badly. Are you disputing the findings?

http://www.jtrauma.com/pt/re/jtrauma/abstract.00005373-200202000-00011.htm;jsessionid=G2jKGcn1q1m1TGsP4cHfDJFgfStPYxYvX1zK6Fwp1Ls6lRkWKTT2!3145886!-949856145!8091!-1

[jody]

40. Thanks, I found the abstract as you were posting. I'll log on to the J. of Trauma and read it. n/t

[Fresh_Start]

42. Thank you, I hadn't seen the April article yet

mine was a few years older.

[Fresh_Start]

43. more statistics

http://www.ajph.org/cgi/content/full/92/12/1988/T3

3x as likely to die from homicide in states with high gun ownership than in low gun ownership.

[Sanctified]

48. So you are not 2x likely to commit suicide if you own a gun.

You are just 2x as likely to commit suicide in states where gun ownership is high. I would be willing to bet in those same states there is a lot of poverty and a general lack of social support. Also in those states with High Gun ownership only 5% were done by a firearm but I think the national Average is around 10% which seems odd since you would think that with twice the number of suicides you would have 2x the national average.

[Fresh_Start]

49. I only know of one study specifically looking at hh ownership

in a household with guns the guns were 40x more likely to kill a member of the household than to kill an intruder.
40 times more likely to kill a member of the household between suicide, homicide, and accidental death.

The gun lovers say, yea but.... its the deterence factor on other crimes not the actual kill rate which matters.
So I guess protecting their electronics is VERY important to them more important then their wives, children or their own ratty selves.

[Fresh_Start]

50. numbers from the 2x suicide study

high gun low gun
gun suicides 153 22
non-gun suicide 69 82
total suicide 222 104

gun homicides 298 86
non-gun homici..143 110
total homocides 441 196

accidental
firearm deaths 253 15

total deaths from guns
704 123

total non-gun suicide plus homicide
212 192

suicide statistic 2x, homicide statistic 3x, accidental death statistic 16x
guns make your family safer - NOT

[uppityperson]

26. More people are trying overall?

[Fresh_Start]

44. the study didn't specifically say that

it doesn't appear that firearms displace other forms of suicide to a great degree so I guess it must mean that there are net higher rates of suicide attempts.

here's some homicide stats. 3x as likely to die from homicide in states with high gun ownership.
http://www.ajph.org/cgi/content/full/92/12/1988/T3

[SmokingJacket]

52. My guess is because it's so damned crowded, for one.

Plus strong cultural pressures to conform. You can't really compare the US with Japan because it's so different in so many ways.

[spoony]

13. Sounds more like it refutes the notion

that paramilitary police groups are a good idea, or that cops know what they're doing with guns so they're the only people we should trust with them.

[karlrschneider]

19. Whether or not anybody other than the cops and this guy was armed has no bearing

on the story as reported. No mention of him interacting with much less threatening any civilians. It's a non-argument about a non-problem.

edit: clarified...I think
;-)

[uppityperson]

27. exactly, thank you karl.

[karlrschneider]

29. I just noticed I didn't phrase it quite right...fixed on edit

I should always proofread to make sure I don't any words out.

;-)

[slackmaster]

22. The great Arm Everybody Straw Man raises its head once again

Now, about that theory that we'd all be safer if everyone was armed......

[merh]

36. Your thread is right on point.

thank you

Bookmarked & K&R :hi:

[SteveM]

53. So what do you advocate? (nt)

[merh]

54. I'm confused by your question.

please explain

[applegrove]

41. Well said. n/t

[benEzra]

57. To obtain an NC carry license, you have to pass

a Federal and state background check, an FBI fingerprint check, a mental health records check, take a class on NC self-defense law using a state-issued curriculum, pass a written test on NC self-defense law, pay lots of $$$ in fees, and demonstrate competence with a firearm on a shooting range.

WTF does that have to do with a convicted criminal, probably illegally in possession of a gun, who flouts the law at every turn and shoots some officers while on parole?

A quarter to a third of registered Dems and indies personally own guns, lawfully and responsibly, and we're keeping them. You obviously don't like that fact, but you may as well accept it.


------------
Dems and the Gun Issue - Now What? (written in '04, largely vindicated in '06, IMO)

[hedgehog]

58. Maybe we don't need new laws but merely to enforce the laws now on the books.

To quote Mayor Bloomberg

"Most gun dealers follow the law and run honest businesses. But the statistics show that 1 percent of dealers sell more than half of all illegal guns. Why isn't the federal government going after them?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18248547/site/newsweek/