Ted Nugent on Gun Control

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by jsarno

That's a good valid argument.
However, the second hand smoke argument was only part of the argument (and the 2nd part at that, I just ran with it cause I wasn't expecting to see those numbers), what about the 4.9 mil that die from tobacco related deaths world wide?

Also, your argument helps my point that it's more important to stop tobacco than it is to stop guns since we are much more likely to be exposed to smoke. Let's also keep in mind the MASSIVE amount of medical assistance required by tobacco related issues that we pay for with our insurances.

ps- the guns that are locked away aren't the ones causing the problems, but they are the ones that will be taken away.


On a side note, I appreciate your candor.

I would agree with the general notion that smoking is a bigger threat to public health than guns are. If I were going through the exercise of setting the federal budget, I'd invest significantly more in stop smoking programs than I would gun control.

But as for the 4.9 million tobacco deaths worldwide, again, that's due to the massive exposure to cigarrette smoke and other forms of tobacco. Approximately 20% of Americans smoke, and the % is higher worldwide. Nowhere near that % are exposed to guns.

All this is to say that increasing exposure to guns by allowing more on the street raises the acute risk of accidental death, suicide, and homicide.

In the end, I would rather see 1000 armed muggers escape Scott-free with the wallet of an unarmed victim than see one child killed by a stray bullet resulting from a gunfire exchange between said armed mugger and an armed victim.

[724Skinsfan]

Originally Posted by jsarno

That's a good link.

But do you know what strikes me more than anything?
There was 31,000 gun related deaths, yet there are approx. 4.9 million tobacco related deaths in the world a year. In the US, there are 438,000 tobacco related deaths (approximately 1 in 5 deaths overall are tobacco related), and even MORE important, 38,000 (that's right 7k MORE deaths than guns) are directly related to SECOND HAND smoke. And people are up in arms about being able to defend yourself while cigarettes provide no defense.
Interesting that second hand smoke is statistically MORE deadly than guns themselves. WOW.

Tobacco-Related Mortality | OSH | CDC

I think you've just solved both issues with one post. I wonder how many tobacco farmer's own guns in which the purpose is to protect their property? I'll bet 98%. If we restrict their ability to protect their property by taking away their guns then we'd see much, much less tobacco being produced. By ensuring that tobacco farmer's have no way of defending themselves from a home invasion we can assume that their deaths will in fact save nearly 5 million lives.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

I think you've just solved both issues with one post. I wonder how many tobacco farmer's own guns in which the purpose is to protect their property? I'll bet 98%. If we restrict their ability to protect their property by taking away their guns then we'd see much, much less tobacco being produced. By ensuring that tobacco farmer's have no way of defending themselves from a home invasion we can assume that their deaths will in fact save nearly 5 million lives.

Yea, there's a big demand for raw tobaco and these farmers have to fight of theives everyday. I bet that maybe 98% probably own guns but they are for hunting not tobaco theives. Now yes they would use them for protection but I don't think thats why they really own guns.

[724Skinsfan]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Yea, there's a big demand for raw tobaco and these farmers have to fight of theives everyday. I bet that maybe 98% probably own guns but they are for hunting not tobaco theives. Now yes they would use them for protection but I don't think thats why they really own guns.

firstdown just fell victim to another of 724Skinsfan nonsensical posts.

The 724Skinsfan family has been growing and/or leasing land for tobacco crops for about 180 years. The guns are indeed used to hunt and, to a lesser extent, protect their moonshine stills.

[Hog1]

STOP Already with the fact-based logic!!

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Hog1

STOP Already with the fact-based logic!!

LOL!

I also don't think gun related suicides should be included in gun related deaths because the would find a way to kill themselves another way if they had no gun. I understand the medium was a gun, but terminally suicidal people will jump off a bridge or slit their wrists or whatever if a gun wasn't the quick and easiest fix to their "problem". So really, only approx. 14k deaths are gun related. Since there are 38k second hand smoke deaths (about 2.5 times more deaths than gun related deaths if you subtract suicides), maybe we should all yell at smokers to "put down the cigarette, and step away"! LOL.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by jsarno

LOL!

I also don't think gun related suicides should be included in gun related deaths because the would find a way to kill themselves another way if they had no gun. I understand the medium was a gun, but terminally suicidal people will jump off a bridge or slit their wrists or whatever if a gun wasn't the quick and easiest fix to their "problem"

I think the article noted, however, that people who try to commit suicide with guns are far more likely to succeed than those who jump off buildings, bridges, etc.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I think the article noted, however, that people who try to commit suicide with guns are far more likely to succeed than those who jump off buildings, bridges, etc.

I didn't read that part apparently, but I find it hard to believe that a person that jumps off a building is less likely to die from it than a person that shoots themselves. Keep in mind plenty of people shoot themselves in places other than the head. (even shooting the head is not a guarentee of death)
I never did understand jumping off bridges. You are more likely to break bones then die. (not that death isn't a significant risk) But unless you're jumping off a tiny building, it seems that a leap would be 99.9% effective.

Oh, and as I have mentioned, using a gun is far easier and quicker, and "should be" less painful. Point is, even without a gun, suicidal people will find a way to kill themselves regardless.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by jsarno

I didn't read that part apparently, but I find it hard to believe that a person that jumps off a building is less likely to die from it than a person that shoots themselves. Keep in mind plenty of people shoot themselves in places other than the head. (even shooting the head is not a guarentee of death)
I never did understand jumping off bridges. You are more likely to break bones then die. (not that death isn't a significant risk) But unless you're jumping off a tiny building, it seems that a leap would be 99.9% effective.

Oh, and as I have mentioned, using a gun is far easier and quicker, and "should be" less painful. Point is, even without a gun, suicidal people will find a way to kill themselves regardless.

MY take on the article is that people who jump from stuff or try to OD are not very successful. I could see how letting go of a ledge would be harder then pulling a trigger and I guess people who try to OD just don't take enough stuff, puke, or are found.

[MTK]

I don't think anyone denies that smoking and smoking related illness/deaths is a major issue, but that shouldn't downplay the gun issue. They are two different issues.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I don't think anyone denies that smoking and smoking related illness/deaths is a major issue, but that shouldn't downplay the gun issue. They are two different issues.

Point is, why bother going after a constitutional right, and notably something that can SAVE / PROTECT someone's life, when there is something FAR more dangerous to go after?
Gun related issues are a fraction of a fraction of the problem that tobacco related issues are. Maybe it's time to focus on real important issues.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by jsarno

Point is, why bother going after a constitutional right, and notably something that can SAVE / PROTECT someone's life, when there is something FAR more dangerous to go after?
Gun related issues are a fraction of a fraction of the problem that tobacco related issues are. Maybe it's time to focus on real important issues.

Point is they are still apples and oranges.

Gun control isn't an important issue??

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Gun control isn't an important issue??

I really don't think it's as important as people here think it is.

It's a matter of geographics I think. You guys see murders and such on the news or in the paper. I go to the gun range, or see (guessing) 75% of the people out here that own guns with no problems. The majority of the south and midwest and hunting states (minus large cities like Chicago) would not see this as a large issue either. The major players in the gun control issues are places like DC, New York, Boston, Chicago, and L.A., you see the negative side of gun ownership more than anything cause you are bombarded by it. WHile it does happen in other areas of the country, there are far more pressing issues.
I think a more pressing issue is the punishment for people that use weapons such as guns. If the punishment is weak, then it becomes more prevailant. But that's a whole nother can o' worms.

[mredskins]

FYI - Tonight 7/1 on FX Thirty Days explores gun control. those shows are are usually well done. I think it comes on at 10pm.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by mredskins

FYI - Tonight 7/1 on FX Thirty Days explores gun control. those shows are are usually well done. I think it comes on at 10pm.

Definitely a great show. Should be interesting.