The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: Tucker on December 14, 2013, 08:13:52 PM
-
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024178388
Sat Dec 14, 2013, 07:37 PM
Star Member BainsBane (21,293 posts)
At Least 194 Children Have Been Shot to Death Since Newtown
This is your country on guns
A youtube vid to install guilt (fail)
You've heard this story before, the one that played out again the week of Thanksgiving—this time in Lakeland, Florida—where 2-year-old Taj Ayesh got his little hands on his father's loaded pistol, pulled the trigger, and crumpled to the ground. You may have heard about 9-year-old Daniel Wiley, who was playing outside his house in Harrisburg, Texas, when a 13-year-old mishandled an unsecured shotgun, blasting Wiley in the face. You may also have heard about 2-year-old Camryn Shultz of Forty Fort, Pennsylvania, whose embittered father put a bullet in her head before turning the gun on himself. Maybe you didn't hear about the case in which a child shot others and then committed suicide, but that also happened this year. Twice.
A year after the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, Mother Jones has analyzed the subsequent deaths of 194 children ages 12 and under who were reported in news accounts to have died in gun accidents, homicides, and suicides. They are spread across 43 states, from inner cities to tiny rural towns.
Following Sandy Hook, the National Rifle Association and its allies argued that arming more adults is the solution to protecting children, be it from deranged mass shooters or from home invaders. But the data we collected stands as a stark rejoinder to that view:
127 of the children died from gunshots in their own homes, while dozens more died in the homes of friends, neighbors, and relatives.
72 of the young victims either pulled the trigger themselves or were shot dead by another kid.
In those 72 cases, only 4 adults have been held criminally liable.
At least 52 deaths involved a child handling a gun left unsecured.
Additional findings include:
60 children died at the hands of their own parents, 50 of them in homicides.
The average age of the victims was 6 years old.
More than two-thirds of the victims were boys, as were more than three-quarters of the kids who pulled the trigger.
The problem was worst over the past year in the South, which saw at least 92 child gun deaths, followed by the Midwest (44), the West (38), and the East (20).
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/12/children-killed-guns-newtown-anniversary
Some equally mundane piechart
It's the price we pay for freedom.
Response to freshwest (Reply #1)
Sat Dec 14, 2013, 08:07 PM
Star Member BainsBane (21,293 posts)
2. Actually it's gotten worse
At will concealed carry has been expanded, as has Stand your Ground. It seems the gun lobby sees national tragedies like Newtown as an opportunity to expand their influence and of course increase profits for gun
And gun-grabbers use national tragedies like Newtown as an opportunity to expand their attempt to regulate guns with useless laws that will only affect the law abiding.
Response to BainsBane (Original post)
Sat Dec 14, 2013, 08:43 PM
seveneyes (646 posts)
5. About a third of them murdered by their parents
"60 children died at the hands of their own parents, 50 of them in homicides."
Not long for this world.
How did jugs manage to post about guns in GD?
-
Has :jugs: :yahoo: ever said anything about all the black children murdered by black hoodlums in the big blue cities?
-
How many of those children were 16-year-old crack dealers shot by 17-year-old dealers?
How many of those children were South Side hoodlums shot for wearing the wrong gang colors?
No matter how you analyze murder statistics, you have to conclude that the vast majority were a service to society.
The murder of a decent person is a terrible, tragic crime. Most murders don't fall into that category.
-
Has :jugs: :yahoo: ever said anything about all the black children murdered by black hoodlums in the big blue cities?
Yes.
It's whitey's fault.
-
How many of those children were in their twenties?
-
Okay, BainsBane, you claim to be so educated and intelligent. Put that alleged education and intelligence to work and think about some things.
Guns have been part of life in this country pretty much ever since Europeans first started colonizing the place. Back in those days, since you not only needed a gun to protect yourself but to also feed yourself, almost every single household had at least one gun. That would mean that the percentage of households owning guns were much, much higher in the past as compared to the percentage of households today.
Despite this discrepancy in gun ownership, the gun murders of children as we are seeing these days are a very recent development. Murders of children as are now occurring was rare, to nonexistent, in the 18th and 19th centuries. It was rarely heard of even in the early 20th.
The above would lead a rational, thinking person to come to the conclusion that there is something more going on than just guns. In an attempt to see what else may be going on I think we should compare the past to the present.
In the past (pre-early 20th century)
1. Children learned about guns early in life. They were taught to respect guns. They were taught to use guns as a tool for obtaining food or protecting themselves.
2. There were morals taught in the home and the school.
3. The penalty for violating the law was stiff. Often times, if you committed a murder and the law didn’t execute you, the citizens would because everyone knew that life was tough enough without a user/abuser/killer in their midst.
4. God and His Ten Commandments, including Thou shalt not murder and Love your neighbor as yourself, was commonly and freely talked about in both private and public places.
5. People were taught to cherish family and friends, but to rely on themselves.
Since then (mid-to-late 20th century)
1. Children are taught, usually by liberals, that guns are evil weapons only good for bringing death and should be restricted into non-existence.
2. The left has taught that morals are something that changes with the times. Now in many houses the children run the household as those old, outdated morals are discarded. The schools begin the leftist indoctrination of students as they are more concerned with creating leftist voters instead of educated, productive citizens.
3. The penalty for violating the law can still be sometimes stiff. You can even still sometimes be executed for murder if you don’t die during all of the appeals.
4. God and His Ten Commandments, especially Thou shalt not murder and Love your neighbor as yourself, has been essentiallly banned from any appearance in public.
5. People are taught to cherish and rely on the government.
Since guns are actually inanimate objects that can NOT act of their own accord and since the actual percentage of households owning guns has diminished should not the amount of murders by guns be decreasing? And since they are not decreasing, would it not make sense that one or more of the above difference between past and present is the cause?
-
Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel could not be reached for comment. :bird:
-
194 children, aged 12 and under, is a stiff toll. Tragic even. But more laws restricting ownership of guns won't change that.
What is really tragic, and makes :Jugs: :yahoo: stats pale in comparison is the number of unborn children who were terminated by abortion before getting a chance to live.
-
How many of those children were in their twenties?
Funny you should ask.
BJ Billy Boy used those aged 26 and under that were killed when he was using children's death as a means to push his gun control agenda.
obama used 26 as an age where people can stay on their parents health insurance.
What is it with those aged 26 to make democrats think that they are still children?
-
Funny you should ask.
BJ Billy Boy used those aged 26 and under that were killed when he was using children's death as a means to push his gun control agenda.
obama used 26 as an age where people can stay on their parents health insurance.
What is it with those aged 26 to make democrats think that they are still children?
They've seen the way that 26 year old democrats at the DUmp and elsewhere act?
-
They've seen the way that 26 year old democrats at the DUmp and elsewhere act?
It was rhetorical. O-)
-
It was rhetorical. O-)
:-) I figured as much. I posted that mostly for lurking DUers as I figure they are too stupid to understand rhetorical. I've found it best to never underestimate the stupid of a DUer.
-
It was rhetorical. O-)
Yeah, but Chuck probably did supply the factual explanation.
-
Funny you should ask.
BJ Billy Boy used those aged 26 and under that were killed when he was using children's death as a means to push his gun control agenda.
obama used 26 as an age where people can stay on their parents health insurance.
What is it with those aged 26 to make democrats think that they are still children?
That's the age when democratic raised offspring go from a twelve year old mentality to fifteen.
Some seem to never make that transition.
-
194 children, aged 12 and under, is a stiff toll. Tragic even. But more laws restricting ownership of guns won't change that.
What is really tragic, and makes :Jugs: :yahoo: stats pale in comparison is the number of unborn children who were terminated by abortion before getting a chance to live.
^That
And at the hand of their own parents.
-
What is it with those aged 26 to make democrats think that they are still children?
LocoNuts is in his 30s.
-
LocoNuts is in his 30s.
But he's retarded.
-
A new low. :mental: :loser:
-
But he's retarded.
And Canadian.