Independent Study Proves Guns Don’t Kill People *Shocking Evidence

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

True in this instance you did prove that under those circumstances guns don’t kill people, unless someone was to pick it up and shoot you in the face your hypothesis was always going to be correct.

No, that would be a human being that killed….not a gun. Guns are inanimate objects and are completely safe when left alone or when in the hands of law abiding citizens.

Next time try replicating those results by leaving a loaded gun in the cafeteria of a supermax prison and tell my if the results are replicated.

Who would do such a thing? That’s against current law!

reply to post by neo96


Yup i agree with you if you ban guns then people will take to using knifes to kill each other like what we have in the UK.

However my point does still stand, don’t misinterpret my disagreement with the argument that “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” with me being Anti-gun. I am a realist I can accept that guns kill people, so do knifes and baseball bats but ultimately it is the individual who is responsible yet as these implement provide the means they are also to blame.

This is a bit of a silly premise. Guns don’t kill people if they are sitting about doing nothing, unless you trip over it and fall down the stairs. However, guns do kill people, whether the firearm is discharged in anger or accidentally.

Leaving guns around may be a clever experiment, but c. 200 children a year die in the US through firearm accidents – 606 accidental deaths for all ages in 2010.

Furthermore there are c. 10,000 homicides per year in the US caused by firearms, versus c. 40 on the UK.

Guns therefore do kill people when the trigger is squeezed.

Regards

Originally posted by gigaherc
Stating the obvious in funny (mainly to yourself) way and delivering your statement in hammy convoluted way does not change the fact that people having less guns equals less people killed with guns.

Well there is some circular logic.
Remove cars and there wouldn't be car crashes.

The problem there is it's just not going happen. Cars or guns. It takes somebody to actually do something with them in order for something to happen.


An object at rest stays at rest.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

I am a realist I can accept that guns kill people, so do knifes and baseball bats but ultimately it is the individual who is responsible yet as these implement provide the means they are also to blame.

I knew someone would claim that knives, swords and other inanimate objects also kill people so I had a side experiment running concurrently.



I left all of these weapons on the drive way during the gun experiment…

Nobody was killed!

reply to post by SLAYER69


I really don’t understand some on this site, I agree that Americans should have the rights of the Second amendment protected but the way they argue for it is just absurd.

The argument as i have said that guns don’t kill people, people kill people is flawed if the trigger is pulled then guns kill. Likewise this annoying argument that “well if you ban guns what about knifes and cars” is equally flawed they are separate arguments. If you are pro-gun then argue the benefits of owning guns such as self-defence, reduced crime, the preservation of culture and freedoms. Not these stupid arguments that just deflect form the real and very strong arguments to maintain the status quo of the law.

Originally posted by paraphi
This is a bit of a silly premise. Guns don’t kill people if they are sitting about doing nothing, unless you trip over it and fall down the stairs. However, guns do kill people, whether the firearm is discharged in anger or accidentally.

A butter knife could be just as deadly if fallen on while tripping down those very same stairs...

Ban those as well?

reply to post by paraphi

Guns therefore do kill people when the trigger is squeezed.

Ahhhhh!

Can the trigger squeeze itself or does that require human interaction?

We're going to get there eventually, friend, even though you resist my logic!

Originally posted by neo96
That cat sure looked scared!

Fact is a gun can sit on a shelf for years, and never kill anyone as with any tool it requires an operator.

Government pundits say you should be scared of guns, and they need government to protect them so ask them who is going to protect them from government?

Silence.

Well the cat felt that he was safe.

After all, Dad was a armed American.

Guns don't kill people. Insanity and mental health issues do.
So don't legislate away everyones right to self protection via a fire arm.
Instead ... figure out how to legislate mental illness.
(good luck with that).

Originally posted by gigaherc
Stating the obvious in funny (mainly to yourself) way and delivering your statement in hammy convoluted way does not change the fact that people having less guns equals less people killed with guns.

Not true. Chicago has the toughest gun laws in the country.
It also has some of the highest gun violence crimes.

If you take away guns, then law abiding citizens can't protect themselves ..
and the criminals will ALWAYS find a way to get an illegal firearm.

reply to post by TDawgRex

Well the cat felt that he was safe.

After all, Dad was a armed American.

The cat wasn’t scared of the guns…I wonder why so many adult human beings are?

I know I sleep better knowing that my gun is only inches away.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


Here is something a "realist" should accept then:

Criminals will never give up theirs and take a good hard long look at NY,California, and Chicago they all have the nations strictest gun laws in this country.

People are still dying what's more you can not legislate human behavior sure you can use the nuclear option as per government that creates far too much collateral damage.

Take away the right of the Average citizen to own firearms and that would leave them exposed and defenseless against criminals and law enforcement.


Think about it...

reply to post by neo96


Did you not read my reply, I understand that, I think you should keep your guns because of the benefits they have in regards to crime reduction my issue is with the silly arguments used to defend guns when there are much stronger arguments.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


From my perspective they are using "silly" arguments to take them of course those arguments have been heard since 1934.

1934,1968,1986,1994,2013 rinse and repeat.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

Did you not read my reply, I understand that, I think you should keep your guns because of the benefits they have in regards to crime reduction

Excellent! I’m certainly glad to read that.

My issue is with the silly arguments used to defend guns when there are much stronger arguments.

I don’t think it’s silly at all. Guns DON’T kill people. People kill people. You already admit that guns are effectively used to prevent crime. It’s a FACT that the fewer guns owned by law abiding citizens the higher the crime rate is in that area.

IMO, any argument that grabs people’s attention and makes them reexamine the gun issue is a good argument.

To be fair, cars don't kill anyone either. Nor do knives, bows and arrows or poisons

Originally posted by AndyMayhew
To be fair, cars don't kill anyone either. Nor do knives, bows and arrows or poisons

Well, that's not entirely true, friend.

Have you heard of the new ASSAULT VEHICLES??

reply to post by seabag


You are correct Guns dont kill people idiots do...

Just wow...

You are the reason guns should be banned. It is the hight of irresponsibility to leave such powerful weapons in open view.....