Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Srbphoto
Trad climber
Kennewick wa
|
|
|
Feb 23, 2010 - 09:52pm PT
|
If you are going to quote statistics, you need to use a very critical eye. Who commissioned the study and (more importantly) why? It is very easy to data mine to support your position.
Another problem with gun statistics was mentioned earlier. People don't always call the police when the threat of a gun (real or imagined) saved them. I have three family members who, on separate occasions, scared someone off with a gun. None were reported to the police. How many others? Who knows?
|
|
jogill
climber
Colorado
|
|
|
Feb 23, 2010 - 09:54pm PT
|
WTF is up with you supertopo drama queens?
Guys have been packing the heat for years in the park and nothing has happened.
I agree. Ditto for the Tetons during the 1960s and before.
|
|
Srbphoto
Trad climber
Kennewick wa
|
|
|
Feb 23, 2010 - 09:56pm PT
|
someone also mentioned gangs. Wasn't there a big ordeal around 1990 (help me, Werner or anyone else) where the rangers had to go in and kick out one of the big LA gangs from a campground?
|
|
Matt M
Trad climber
SA, TX
|
|
|
Feb 23, 2010 - 10:03pm PT
|
Franky,
Unlike certain cause and effect studies (smoking for example) other studies have a lot more "intangibles" in them regarding participation vs risk. This is because the PARTICIPANT can adversely effect the outcome. Take climbing or driving for example. Statistics say they're risky endeavors (particularly climbing according to insurance companies) yet I choose to both regularly. Why is that? Because I evaluate how I personally can effect the risks involved. I'm an excellent driver with a safe car and great defensive driving skills. I pretty much assume most on the road are idiots out to get me. I think that my record, along with my style of driving IMPROVES my chances of "damage" while driving. Interestingly enough so does my insurance company. Same goes with my climbing. I'm a damn good and safe climber. I'm confident in my skills and believe my risk of injury is LOWER than the average participant because of my skills and how I choose to use them. Incidentally, so does my insurance company AGAIN. (I was able to talk with a HEAD adjuster and discuss why I thought my risk level, while elevated was NOT as high as their generic questionnaire indicated. Even offered to help them create a better one to save them hassle as well as clients. They declined but I cut my rate in HALF by putting in the effort)
The same goes for choosing to carry a gun for self protection. Regardless of what your study shows I choose to carry. (and with all gun studies, both pro and con I take them with a MASSIVE MASSIVE grain of salt. It's such a hot topic that it's rare that the study doesn't have SOME agenda behind it one way or the other) Here again, I think risk is related to the participant and not the tool to a sizable degree (just as in driving). I'm no "bubba cowboy", limited education, dimwit let alone someone with domestic issues or worse. Hell, you want to break the stereotype - I'm NY raised, Ivy Educated, prefer German cars, Soccer and F1. My wife swears I'm half "European" sometimes. So, given all those things that would suggest otherwise, I still CHOOSE to own a gun specifically to protect myself and family from harm. I consider my self to be on the right side of the bell curve, gun owner wise and thusly any risks you might cite, I consider to be much less.
I'll agree that there many(?) gun owners out there that make me wince just as there are many drivers who make me do the same (DUIs anyone?) Many would be surprised to learn however, WHO owns a gun. It's not just the stereotypes BY A LONG SHOT. They're the ones that give anti-gun people fodder but there are many, many people that don't fit this mold. Given, my social circles, guns typically didn't come up in conversation but one time they did and all of a sudden, half the group turned out to be owners! Criminals, idiots and tragedies get the headlines. Responsible owners don't.
I take issue with you (and others) throwing out this "FEAR" moniker. The word itself has a large negative connotation the way you choose to use it that I don't think is applicable to the case of one (or me) carrying a gun to protect oneself. Used here, FEAR implies that gun owners walk around with constant dread that "something" is out to get them. You imply irrational concern over the simple act of walking around. I'll concede that there are "crazies" that do walk around in "FEAR" all the time however, this is simply not the case for me, Ksolem or others. It's simply a rational choice to BE PREPARED for a possible hazard to life, limb and loved ones.
Let me put this another way. Do people buckle up in their car when they drive? Certainly, most people do. Are they doing this because they FEAR being in an accident? Absolutely not. They're not driving down the road in FEAR. Far from it. What they are doing is acknowledging that there are risks on the road and choosing to do something to increase their chances of a good outcome if something bad were to happen. Since this is a climbing site, we can use a climbing analogy as well. Because I choose to "carry" more gear than might be necessary for a climb, am I fearful of that climb? No, certainly not. But I DO know that climbing can be risky and if I happen to have an extra piece with me that might reduce said risk, then I am prepared. I don't climb in fear (unless there's a huge RUNOUT!) I climb knowing I've done do diligence to be prepared.
I don't walk around in fear. Far Far from it, but having experienced first hand that there ARE bad people out there (however unlikely it is) I choose to be more prepared. You choose another path based on your beliefs and experiences.
People want to debate there is a lack of regulation keeping dumb-asses and thugs from killing themselves. Fine, I'm all for it as I do think "bubba" and "banger" are poor "owners" just as DUI people are poor drivers. When you start saying I can't take precautions to protect my own, then we've got differences of opinion.
|
|
franky
Trad climber
Bishop, CA
|
|
|
Feb 23, 2010 - 10:55pm PT
|
holy cow, all of you guys keep saying the same thing. You all think you are making the situation safer by having a gun. You think you are in control. I don't think you are, the statistics are on my side.
You don't think it is possible that you could pull out your gun and instigate a simple robber into shooting you? You think you are going to win a gun fight no matter what?
Matt, i don't even know what the heck you are talking about, something about being euro???
You all think that having a gun makes you safer, and you keep explaining that to me over and over and over. I'm saying that I think you are wrong, that in some select situations it could help, but much more commonly it is going to hurt the situation.
|
|
blahblah
Gym climber
Boulder
|
|
|
Feb 23, 2010 - 11:16pm PT
|
franky,
Here's a study for you. I guess you already know about it since you talk about "every study," but you must have forgot some of the details.
http://www.pulpless.com/gunclock/kleck1.html
In case you're too lazy to read it (even though you spout off about what "every study" shows, like you have any freaking idea):
"Since as many as 400,000 people a year use guns in situations where the defenders claim that they "almost certainly" saved a life by doing so, this result cannot be dismissed as trivial. If even one-tenth of these people are accurate in their stated perceptions, the number of lives saved by victim use of guns would still exceed the total number of lives taken with guns. It is not possible to know how many lives are actually saved this way, for the simple reason that no one can be certain how crime incidents would have turned out had the participants acted differently than they actually did. But surely this is too serious a matter to simply assume that practically everyone who says he believes he saved a life by using a gun was wrong."
So I don't want to hear anything more from you about what "every study" shows.
|
|
franky
Trad climber
Bishop, CA
|
|
|
Feb 23, 2010 - 11:20pm PT
|
In a national park, not only do I not think you are increasing the risk of hurting yourself with that gun, I think you are increasing the risk of me getting hurt in a park. I can't imagine a single instance where i would think it wasn't dangerous to shoot a gun in a park.
Shooting at a bear on a trail or in a campground, incredibly dangerous. Shooting at some robber/criminal dude in a park, insanely dangerous. It is absolutely insane to allow anyone to shoot a gun in a park, and if they can't shoot it, then they shouldn't be allowed to have it in the park at all because someone just might do it.
|
|
Shack
Big Wall climber
Reno NV
|
|
|
Feb 23, 2010 - 11:29pm PT
|
Wow! This is one hilarious thread....
This one cracked me up...
"That is despite the fact that statistics say you are more likely to get killed by your own gun than save your wife with it"
Because the guys who slanted the stats, their wives didn't own their own guns! Duh!
If they did they would have been killed by their wives guns!
Hahahaha!!!
Or this gem...
"If that person is specifically trained in the use of deadly force, then they are a cop, and that is ok (or at least the best we can do)."
Hahahaha!! That don"t mean squat.
I know a lot of people that can out-shoot 99% of cops!
Cops are generally only required to "qualify" at 7 1/2 yards!
Why do all the gun haters always claim that gun owners are "scared"?
They are the ones who are scared. Scared of guns!
Like the song says "Teach your children well..."
|
|
bvb
Social climber
flagstaff arizona
|
|
|
Feb 23, 2010 - 11:34pm PT
|
|
|
blahblah
Gym climber
Boulder
|
|
|
Feb 23, 2010 - 11:39pm PT
|
If it's a robber/criminal, you probably don't need to actually shoot. Once you confront him with the gun (assuming you have the drop on him and it's not a "Mexican Standoff"), you can just hold him until law enforcement arrives.
If it's a bear, you may need to shoot but you can probably fire some warning shots first.
|
|
adam d
climber
|
|
|
Feb 23, 2010 - 11:43pm PT
|
LEB, the scenario you propose was already legal in many (if not all) National Parks provided the gun was stored properly.
|
|
bvb
Social climber
flagstaff arizona
|
|
|
Feb 23, 2010 - 11:54pm PT
|
I have missed you.
yeah, rox. she's missed you.
|
|
franky
Trad climber
Bishop, CA
|
|
|
Feb 23, 2010 - 11:59pm PT
|
blahblah, you have misunderstood the significance of that survey.
It is saying that all other accepted surveys are under-reporting the instances of personal defensive gun use. That is all. What else were those studies under reporting? What does he have to say about instances were the gun made the situation worse? Nothing.
You've got more complete studies, asking about defense, and other gun circumstances coming to much more significant conclusions, that in their surveys the gun does more harm then good. Then you have this survey that says defensive use of guns is under-reported. That is not the same thing, the surveys are not contradictory. The other surveys also use much larger sample sets, and aren't conducted by people who have expresed their personal biases about gun use.
your name is appropriate. Gun friendly sight posts a scientific study, cut and paste it. Great reasoning there buddy.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Feb 24, 2010 - 12:19am PT
|
Yeah, but that doesn't mean you have to try to cap every single black skwirrrrl out the kitchen window. Now I'm not saying that there's any, you know, skin colour aspect to it or suchlike, but what do you have against birds and bambies, anyway? Yeah, sure, it's all some sort of target practice - if you can take out a skwirrrl at 75 m, you can fer sher plug a liberal or Mormon at the door. And I heerd that a whole shitlode of them that Morons votes reliably red, even iffn they dasn't bleef in the Raptooor. But it really conflicts with your assumed image.
|
|
corniss chopper
Mountain climber
san jose, ca
|
|
|
Feb 24, 2010 - 12:22am PT
|
Survival of the fittest
|
|
blahblah
Gym climber
Boulder
|
|
|
Feb 24, 2010 - 12:22am PT
|
franky,
the authors of the study concluded that, based on their research and certain reasonable extrapolations, defensive use of guns saves lives over and above the number of lives taken by guns.
If that doesn't disprove your point, care to explain what your point IS?
\
Sounds like you're sore because I called you out when you acted like you know what "all studies" show, but I'm going to keep calling you out if you keep spouting BS.
By the way, unless you're under about 13 years old, I don't think you're in a position to make fun of other people's names.
|
|
Captain...or Skully
Social climber
Last clip of Lichen Lunch
|
|
|
Feb 24, 2010 - 12:29am PT
|
Possum's are known throughout the animal Kingdom as cowards.
Easily dispatched, they are.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Feb 24, 2010 - 12:35am PT
|
LEB, wallop it with a baseball bat. Or a hockey stick, if you want a bit more reach but less weight. Sheesh, don't you know anything about varmint control? I thought you were descended from Davy Crockett or something.
|
|
10b4me
Ice climber
Ice Caves at the Sads
|
|
|
Feb 24, 2010 - 12:41am PT
|
Donini,
couldn't agree more.
|
|
Srbphoto
Trad climber
Kennewick wa
|
|
|
Feb 24, 2010 - 01:23am PT
|
A visiting LEB at Lake Tahoe shot and killed a 600-pound black bear that rushed her after wildlife officials tried to flush the hibernating animal out from under a condominium.
Nevada wildlife biologist Carl Lackey says they found the 10-year-old male bear Tuesday under the home in the Bitterbrush development in Incline Village. It made the surprise attack on LEB after it emerged from its makeshift den and wildlife officials shot it with a tranquilizer dart.
Lackey said LEB fired the fatal gunshot just in the nick of time.
"One more step and the bear would have been on her," he said.
He said the bear had been captured and collared in the past because it was breaking into homes but it was not the 700-pound one that broke into as many as 50 homes around the Incline area over the past year.
Ok, I may have taken liberties on the edit. The actual link below
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2010/02/23/state/n175618S36.DTL&tsp=1
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!