Gun Legislation

[Seth Milner]

That doesn't address this though: If someone is going to commit suicide, they don't need a gun; guns just happen to be the quickest. . . maybe. . . there's pills, carbon monoxide, cars, knives, razor blades, the neighbor's dog, and so on.

Gotta go, the boat's ready.

The neighbor's dog? Do tell.
My guy is keyed to protect me, but he'll simply take you down, maybe draw a bit of blood, and give me the opportunity to dial 911.

He's probably referring to this, extraordinary enough that it made national news:

Death of Port Huron woman mauled by dogs ruled suicide

Yep, that's the story that inspired what I wrote.

Otherwise, Seth Milner doesn't have a clue what he's talking about when it comes to suicide and did not take the time to educate himself before posting.
Of course not; good thing we've got you to keep us straight, huh. If I were an expert on suicide, I wouldn't be here.

It's not a matter of "might". Suicide is mostly a spontaneous act, not an inevitable one. Other forms of successful suicide require significantly more effort than reaching for a gun and pulling the trigger. Access to firearms is one of the first questions asked of depressed/suicidal patients and the risk of suicide is the reason that Israel stopped letting most soldiers take their guns home with them on weekends.
So how does your highly-informational squawking differ from "If someone is going to commit suicide, they don't need a gun"?

Anyone with a gun in their home is accepting the greatly increased risk that they or a family member will intentionally kill themselves.
Anyone with a bottle of pills, an automobile, a bad dog, kitchen knives, razors, and electric wall plugs in their home is accepting the greatly increased risk that they or a family member will intentionally kill themselves.

Gunhuggers detest research and facts.
Habitual whiners detest reality.

[O Really]

Seth asks, "Who would that be? :-0?> Not seen any posts by anyone with that attitude.

Well, it might not be you personally; however, anyone who includes me in the "anti-gun" broad brush might very well have tendencies to be a bit extreme in their opinion. Consider:

Nobody, including the NRA, has mounted a serious legal claim that it is unconstitutional to restrict purchase/ownership of firearms based on age or criminal record - or, if they have, they've lost.

Nobody, including the NRA, has ever won on any higher court claim that restricting ownership/purchase of specific types of firearms is unconstitutional.

Nobody, including the NRA, has made a legal claim that it is unconstitutional to set licensing requirements for carrying concealed weapons.

Nobody, including the NRA has won on a legal claim that it is unconstitutional to limit the places where carrying a firearm is allowed.

And while the Supreme Court has nullified some specific restrictions in some cities, it has never found that the right to possess/use firearms as provided in the Second Amendment is absolute, or that those rights cannot be limited or restricted.

So generally, there is no Constitutional issue in limiting sale/possession of certain types of firearms and accessories. The "assault rifle" ban was passed and although allowed to expire, was never found unconstitutional. There is no Constitutional issue in requiring training for a concealed carry permit/license - or raising the training requirements. There is no Constitutional issue in making a record of purchases and keeping a database of those records. There is no Constitutional issue in requiring/allowing the CDC to conduct detailed studies of firearm deaths/injuries.

And yet, the NRA, and some of its members, rabidly oppose any of this, taking the position that any restriction or limitation whatsoever is a step toward "confiscation," which, ironically is the only thing on the list that actually is unconstitutional.

So a person such as myself, who owns firearms and is trained in their use, who supports restrictions on sale/possession of certain specific types of firearms and accessories, supports restrictions on who can purchase and where, supports licensing for use and records of purchase and scientific study of deaths/injuries is not anti-gun nor anti-Second Amendment.

[Seth Milner]

:violent:

[O Really]

I'm not sure you've provided any evidence that anybody regular here is "anti-gun." You'll need more than their (our) posts to do that since they don't support "anti-gun."

[Vrede too]

I'm not sure you've provided any evidence ...

Ah, the start of so, so many posts to Seth Milner.

[Seth Milner]

"As I said, whether it's suicide, murder, or accident. . .there are many, many other ways to kill besides using a gun.
Shit happens."

Point Proven

[Seth Milner]

I'm not sure you've provided any evidence that anybody regular here is "anti-gun." You'll need more than their (our) posts to do that since they don't support "anti-gun."

Ah, the start of so, so many posts to Seth Milner.

You're absolutely correct. I made up the phrases "gun-hugger, ammosexual, gun-fetish etc. all by myself.

[Seth Milner]

Well, it might not be you personally; however, anyone who includes me in the "anti-gun" broad brush might very well have tendencies to be a bit extreme in their opinion...

You were included pretty much in a broad brush because there are only a half dozen or so of you anti-gunners posting as opposed to this one (so far) "gun-hugger, ammosexual", etc." I have stated that I have no use for any gun larger, or more deadly, than a hand-gun. I don't see the need for "assault" weapon ownership, but as long as the law says they can be owned, I'm not going to get on a soapbox cursing and screaming out my displeasure at those who own or will own such weapons. As I said, whether it's suicide, murder, or accident. . .there are many, many other ways to kill besides using a gun. Shit happens.

Once again, Seth Milner makes a childish moronic ass out of himself by deleting part of my post

(Please forgive me for failing to quote your entire post O Really; I'm aware that there are specific rules and regulations in place that require strict adherence to posting etiquette and each word must be commented on, whether it's relevant or not. Your understanding is appreciated.)[/size][/i]

[Seth Milner]

anti-gun-sheriff-shoots-himself-in-the-hand

[O Really]

Here's a real-life example of what happens when the law makes it easier to get guns...
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/in-mis ... &ocid=iehp

n the past decade, Missouri has been a natural experiment in what happens when a state relaxes its gun control laws. For decades, it had one of the nation’s strongest measures to keep guns from dangerous people: a requirement that all handgun buyers get a gun permit by undergoing a background check in person at a sheriff’s office.

But the legislature repealed that in 2007 and approved a flurry of other changes, including, last year, lowering the legal age to carry a concealed gun to 19. What has followed may help answer a central question of the gun control debate: Does allowing people to more easily obtain guns make society safer or more dangerous?

... in the first six years after the state repealed the requirement for comprehensive background checks and purchase permits, the gun homicide rate rose by 16 percent, compared with the six years before. In contrast, the national rate declined by 11 percent over the same period. After Professor Webster controlled for poverty and other factors that could influence the homicide rate, and took into account homicide rates in other states, the result was slightly higher, rising by 18 percent in Missouri.

...New federal death data released this month for 2014 showed a continuation of the trend, he said. Before the repeal, from 1999 to 2006, Missouri’s gun homicide rate was 13.8 percent higher than the national rate. After, from 2008 to 2014, it was 47 percent higher. (The new data also showed that the national death rate from guns is now equal to that of motor vehicle crashes for the first time since the government began systematically tracking it.)

[Seth Milner]

It appears that no one has considered WHY gun and concealed carry laws were dramatically relaxed. I wonder if an increase in crime had anything to do with it.

[O Really]

It appears that no one has considered WHY gun and concealed carry laws were dramatically relaxed. I wonder if an increase in crime had anything to do with it.

Nope. Just Republicans doing what they do. Easy to find out why with a cursory look. But even if that were the reason, the result shows it to be a wrong decision.

[Seth Milner]

It appears that no one has considered WHY gun and concealed carry laws were dramatically relaxed. I wonder if an increase in crime had anything to do with it.

Nope. Just Republicans doing what they do. Easy to find out why with a cursory look. But even if that were the reason, the result shows it to be a wrong decision.

That's funny. No matter the issue; it's the fault of the Republicans.

[O Really]

That's funny. No matter the issue; it's the fault of the Republicans.

Not everything in life, but in politics - at least for the past few decades, that has objectively been the case. Look for example at Kansas, Wisconsin, NC.
Look at the voter repression effort. Look at the state surpluses that became deficits not through excess spending but through cutting of taxes. Look at the roads, bridges, infrastructure not getting paid for. Look at what Republicans express as their goals.

But in the instant case in Missouri, It was indeed Republicans that did it, and they did the wrong thing.

F'rinstance... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/rea ... 92&ref=yfp

[Vrede too]

It appears that no one has considered WHY gun and concealed carry laws were dramatically relaxed. I wonder if an increase in crime had anything to do with it.

Nope. Just Republicans doing what they do. Easy to find out why with a cursory look. But even if that were the reason, the result shows it to be a wrong decision.

Once again, "investigative journalist" Seth Milner fails uber-easy investigation and current events. National crime rates have been dropping for awhile and Missouri crime has been decreasing since 1994, except for murder which was decreasing then plateaued consistent with the relaxed gun laws.

Missouri Crime Rates 1960 - 2014

Plus, it's an indication of Seth Milner's ammosexual desperation that he fancies himself able to come up with a relevant factor that the researchers at Johns Hopkins wouldn't have considered. It's pitiful the depths he'll sink to every time he's confronted with facts like O Really's post.

[Vrede too]

That's funny. No matter the issue; it's the fault of the Republicans.

Once again, "investigative journalist" Seth Milner fails uber-easy investigation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_Jetton
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_R._Gibbons
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Blunt

All GOP.

[Seth Milner]

Mr. Perfect, the compassionate enamatologist has spoken. All bow down and show reverence.

[billy.pilgrim]

Looks like little seth lost again

poor boy has to resort to attacking the people who offered him facts

[Seth Milner]

Looks like little seth lost again

poor boy has to resort to attacking the people who offered him facts

Pitiful ain't it. Memorial services to be announced.

[Vrede too]

Looks like little seth lost again

poor boy has to resort to attacking the people who offered him facts

Ah, the answer to so, so many posts by Seth Milner.