BF2S Forums Respond To This One And Only Question, STAY ON TOPIC!!!

jonsimon wrote:

phnxfrhwk wrote:

The_Shipbuilder wrote:

If your point is that a gun is an inanimate object, then you are preaching to the choir here, friend.

Was there another point you were trying to prove as well?

How does an inanimate object kill people?

By piercing the skin, leading to profuse bleeding and eventual oxygen depravation to the brain. A task bullets are commonly found purpetrating.

Last edited by AlbertWesker[RE] (2006-09-06 21:50:14)

ts-pulsar wrote:

OK, I'l admit I'm a little drunk at the moment (ok really drunk) but I can honestly say I would rather be shot by a 9mm than be stabbed.


I really have no idea why this is relavent.

jonsimon wrote:

phnxfrhwk wrote:

The_Shipbuilder wrote:

If your point is that a gun is an inanimate object, then you are preaching to the choir here, friend.

Was there another point you were trying to prove as well?

How does an inanimate object kill people?

By piercing the skin, leading to profuse bleeding and eventual oxygen depravation to the brain. A task bullets are commonly found purpetrating.

AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

phnxfrhwk wrote:

How does an inanimate object kill people?

By piercing the skin, leading to profuse bleeding and eventual oxygen depravation to the brain. A task bullets are commonly found purpetrating.

Yes but it is someone's behavior that controls that jonsi, it doesn't do it by itself, try proving that wrong.  Pfffft.  Most deaths from bullet wounds are not from eventual oxygen depravation to the brain unless the entry is near the neck or head.  More often than not it is because of a severed or damaged major artery, or other arterial systems and loss of blood from heart, or a hit to the CNS (spine, brain, etc).  Once again, you're talking about something you know little about.

Last edited by jonsimon (2006-09-07 12:33:58)

AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

Sorry wesker, but when you bleed to death, the cause of death is actually oxygen depravation of the brain..

Sure sure, ok fine whatever, I still don't think it is to the brain though, that doesn't sound right....maybe long term bleeding sure.....but cardiac arrest sounds a lot more common, or what I've read.  But I'm interested why you completely dodged your assault rifle claim and that they are just straight banned....I'll admit to not knowing about the oxygen deprivation if you admit that you haven't the damndest clue what you were talking about when you said that. 

jonsimon wrote:

AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

Sorry wesker, but when you bleed to death, the cause of death is actually oxygen depravation of the brain..

Sure sure, ok fine whatever, I still don't think it is to the brain though, that doesn't sound right....maybe long term bleeding sure.....but cardiac arrest sounds a lot more common, or what I've read.  But I'm interested why you completely dodged your assault rifle claim and that they are just straight banned....I'll admit to not knowing about the oxygen deprivation if you admit that you haven't the damndest clue what you were talking about when you said that. 

To clarify, death is the cessation of neural activity, the brain has to lose function before you can truely be 'dead'. This is why any disruption in the circulatory system is actually an indirect cause of death.

As for the assault rifles, I was pretty sure any and all automatic weapons were banned in the US, and that bans were in place on many qualities of weapons like silencers and certain types of stocks. I know that truely not all assault rifles are banned, but they must all be modified to remove their capability for automatic fire. Plus they're really difficult to come by. And I do know that at events on military firing ranges a medly of automatic weapons are allowed, by I'm not aware who provides them or under what conditions. Effectively, however, assault rifles are banned, and if all firearms were as difficult to procure as assault rifles, hammers would kill more people than pistols too.

AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:

The_Shipbuilder wrote:

moron/psycho who can't be trusted with a keyboard and an internet connection let alone a weapon.

Can anyone find any gun ownership statistics? Maybe registered American gun owners?

First of all unless your talking about Class III, CCW(CPL,CHL,CWL,etc),etc, than there is no such thing as "registered" gun owners.  Thats a myth. 

Edit: By taking the number of guns and the rough estimate that 1/11 Americans is a gun owner, which is an official estimate, don't remember from where, that puts approximately 24-25 million gun owners in the U.S. + or - 1-2 million (adjusted for error).

Guns.

The number of privately owned guns in the U.S. is at an all-time high. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) estimates that there were about 215 million guns in 1999,1 when the number of new guns was averaging about 4.5 million (about 2%) annually.2 A report for the National Academy of Sciences put the 1999 figure at 258 million.3 According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, there were 60.4 million approved (new and used) NICS firearm transactions between 1994 2004.4 The number of NICS checks for firearm purchases or permits increased 3.2% between 2003-2004.

Gun Owners.

The number of gun owners is also at an all-time high. The U.S. population is at an all-time high (294 million), and rises about 1% annually.5 Numerous surveys over the last 40+ years have found that almost half of all households have at least one gun owner.6 Some surveys since the late 1990s have indicated a smaller incidence of gun ownership,7 probably because of some respondents` concerns about "gun control," residually due, perhaps, to the anti-gun policies of the Clinton Administration.

Right-to-Carry.

The number of RTC states is at an all-time high, up from 10 in 1987 to 38 today.8 In 2004, states with RTC laws, compared to other states, had lower violent crime rates on average. Total violent crime was lower by 21%, murder by 28%, robbery by 43%, and aggravated assault by 13%.9

"Less Gun Control."

Violent crime has declined while many "gun control" laws have been eliminated or made less restrictive. Many states have eliminated prohibitory or restrictive carry laws, in favor of Right-to-Carry laws. The federal Brady Act`s waiting period on handgun sales ended in 1998, in favor of the NRA-supported National Instant Check, and some states thereafter eliminated waiting periods, purchase permit requirements, or other laws delaying gun sales. The federal "assault weapon" ban expired in 2004. All states now have hunter protection laws, 46 have range protection laws, 46 prohibit local jurisdictions from imposing gun laws more restrictive than state law, 44 protect the right to arms in their constitutions, and 33 prohibit frivolous lawsuits against the firearm industry.10

Studies by and for Congress, the Congressional Research Service, the Library of Congress, the National Institute of Justice, the National Academy of Sciences, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and even researchers who support "gun control," have found no evidence that "gun control" reduces crime.11

Crime.

The FBI reports that the nation`s total violent crime rate declined every year between 1991 2004.12 In 2004, the violent crime rate fell to a 30-year low, lower than any time since 1974. The murder rate fell to a 39-year low, lower than any time since 1965. The 2004 robbery and aggravated assault rates were lower than any time since 1968 and 1984, respectively. Since 1991, total violent crime has decreased 39%; murder and non-negligent manslaughter, 44%; rape, 24%; robbery, 50%; and aggravated assault, 33%.13 Between 2003-2004, the violent crime rate declined 2.2%.14 Concurrently, the most recent Bureau of Justice Statistics crime victimization survey found that violent crime is lower than anytime since 1973, when the first such survey was conducted.15

Notes

1. BATF, "Crime Gun Trace Reports (1999) National Report," Nov. 2000, p. ix (www.atf.gov/firearms/ycgii/1999/index.htm).
2. BATF, "Firearms Commerce in the United States 2001/2002" (www.atf.gov/pub/index.htm#Firearms).
3. National Research Council, Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review, National Academies Press, 2005.
4. BJS, "Background Checks for Firearm Transfers, 2004" (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov./bjs/pub/pdf/bcft04.pdf).
5. Bureau of the Census (http://www.census.gov/popest/states/NST-ann-est.html).
6. Gary Kleck, Targeting Firearms, Aldine de Gruyter, 1997, pp. 94, 98-100.
7. E.g., BJS Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics 2002, Table 2.58, (www.albany.edu/sourcebook/).
8. See NRA RTC fact sheet (within www.nraila.org/Issues/Filter.aspx?ID=003).
9. See FBI, Crime in the United States 2004 (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm#cius) for state crime statistics.
10. See NRA-ILA Compendium of State Firearms Laws (www.nraila.org/media/misc/compendium.htm). Also, note that in October 2005, federal legislation prohibiting such lawsuits was signed into law.
11. Federal "assault weapon" ban: Roth, Koper, et al., Impact Evaluation of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994, March 13, 1997 (www.urban.org/url.cfm?ID=406797); Reedy and Koper, "Impact of handgun types on gun assault outcomes: a comparison of gun assaults involving semiautomatic pistols and revolvers," Injury Prevention 2003, (http://ip.bmjjournals.com/cgi/reprint/9/2/151); Koper et al., Report to the National Institute of Justice, An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994-2003, June 2004 (www.sas.upenn.edu/jerrylee/jlc-new/Rese … _final.pdf); Wm. J. Krouse, Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, "Semiautomatic Assault Weapons Ban," Dec. 16, 2004. "Gun control," generally: Library of Congress, Report for Congress: Firearms Regulations in Various Foreign Countries, May 1998, LL98-3, 97-2010; Task Force on Community Preventive Service, "First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Firearms Laws," Morbidity and Mortaility Weekly Report, Oct. 3, 2003 (www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm); National Research Council, Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review, National Academies Press, 2005 (http://books.nap.edu/books/0309091241/html/index.html).
12. Note 9 and BJS (http://bjsdata.ojp.usdoj.gov/dataonline/). See also FBI (http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel05/ … 101705.htm).
13. Note 10. Condensed at www.nraila.org, click on "Research," then "Crime Statistics."
14. Note 12.
15. BJS (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov./bjs/pub/press/cv04pr.htm).

AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:

Sure sure, ok fine whatever, I still don't think it is to the brain though, that doesn't sound right....maybe long term bleeding sure.....but cardiac arrest sounds a lot more common, or what I've read.  But I'm interested why you completely dodged your assault rifle claim and that they are just straight banned....I'll admit to not knowing about the oxygen deprivation if you admit that you haven't the damndest clue what you were talking about when you said that. 

To clarify, death is the cessation of neural activity, the brain has to lose function before you can truely be 'dead'. This is why any disruption in the circulatory system is actually an indirect cause of death.

As for the assault rifles, I was pretty sure any and all automatic weapons were banned in the US, and that bans were in place on many qualities of weapons like silencers and certain types of stocks. I know that truely not all assault rifles are banned, but they must all be modified to remove their capability for automatic fire. Plus they're really difficult to come by. And I do know that at events on military firing ranges a medly of automatic weapons are allowed, by I'm not aware who provides them or under what conditions. Effectively, however, assault rifles are banned, and if all firearms were as difficult to procure as assault rifles, hammers would kill more people than pistols too.

Ok sounds pretty good, semantically speaking I agree with you on the death point, and no automatic weapons ARE NOT banned but they are HEAVILY restricted.....suppresors (no such thing as silencers) are legal in many states, certain type of stocks do not make any rifle an assault rifle.  An assault rifle is ONLY a weapon capable of full auto fire or has a shorter than 16" barrel on a rifle.  You are a little confused on your facts here, so I will lay it out as politely as possible, "they must all be modified to remove their capability for automatic fire" not true, once again, you obviously don't know.  Yes yes the firing events, thats not what I'm talking about.  Assault rifles are not banned friend, you are confusing the Clinton Gun Ban of 94 with other legislation.  The Clinton gun ban did nothing but increase gun related crime and the likes.  Jonsi there is a difference between Clinton's definition of an "assault WEAPON" and true assault rifles.  The former is a term used by the media and those ignorant of actual gun workings.  Assault rifles are only fully automatic weapons and SBR and the like and they are NOT banned.

phnxfrhwk wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:

Yes but it is someone's behavior that controls that jonsi, it doesn't do it by itself, try proving that wrong.  Pfffft.  Most deaths from bullet wounds are not from eventual oxygen depravation to the brain unless the entry is near the neck or head.  More often than not it is because of a severed or damaged major artery, or other arterial systems and loss of blood from heart, or a hit to the CNS (spine, brain, etc).  Once again, you're talking about something you know little about.

Sorry wesker, but when you bleed to death, the cause of death is actually oxygen depravation of the brain. Think about it. The brain relies more heavily on oxygen than any other chemical resource. Blood is the only means of transport for oxygen as a resource to tissues of the body. Therefore, when the brain loses its blood supply, it loses its oxygen supply and dies. Apparantly I know more about the subject than you do.

Yes, it requires mutual cooperation between the weapon and the user and while the weapon alone does not kill, the user alone cannot kill either. Thus, guns enable people to kill, and can be found as a direct cause for the killing.

So your saying that a human alone can not kill. How about strangulation, pushing someone down the stairs, or beating someone with enough severity that the body ceases to function. A human is fully capable of killing another without the use of a gun. I will agree that guns enable people to kill with better efficiency, and I will agree that guns are a contributing factor in the death. But it is the person who pulls the trigger. It is the conscious effort of a person to kill. Oddly enough you wont find guns on trial for murder. instead you will find the person who killed.

jonsimon "By piercing the skin, leading to profuse bleeding and eventual oxygen depravation to the brain. A task bullets are commonly found purpetrating" So what your saying is that bullets are the cause of death. Not the gun. So whats to blame the delivery method or the object that deals the final blow?

Would you blame the needle and syringe, or the poison for killing a person. Or would you blame the person who administers the poison for the killing?

jonsimon wrote:

Yeah I looked it up now, that's a wierd bill. Anyway, please call me jon or jonsimon. You guys coming up with wierd shorthand for my name are annoying.

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

lowlife gang bangers piss their pants and run to momma when they see a flash of steel in their direction.