Although I would certianly agree with your conclusions about the media (media drawing as much mileage as possible from tragedy, and all but ignoring good news), I'm not sure I agree with your assertion that the incidence of child gun accidents is so rare, while the the succesful use of guns for justified self-defense is so common.

"The overall firearm-related death rate among U.S. children aged less than 15 years was nearly 12 times higher than among children in 25 other industrialized countries combined.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, "Rates of Homicide, Suicide, and Firearm-Related Death Among Children -- 26 Industrialized Countries," Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 46(05): 101-105, February 07, 1997."




"Injuries and Deaths Due to Firearms in the Home.
Journal of Trauma-Injury Infection & Critical Care. 45(2):263-267, August 1998.
Kellermann, Arthur L. MD, MPH; Somes, Grant PhD; Rivara, Frederick P. MD, MPH; Lee, Roberta K. RN, PhD; Banton, Joyce G. MS
Abstract:
Objectives: Determine the relative frequency with which guns in the home are used to injure or kill in self-defense, compared with the number of times these weapons are involved in an unintentional injury, suicide attempt, or criminal assault or homicide.

Methods: We reviewed the police, medical examiner, emergency medical service, emergency department, and hospital records of all fatal and nonfatal shootings in three U.S. cities: Memphis, Tennessee; Seattle, Washington; and Galveston, Texas.

Results: During the study interval (12 months in Memphis, 18 months in Seattle, and Galveston) 626 shootings occurred in or around a residence. This total included 54 unintentional shootings, 118 attempted or completed suicides, and 438 assaults/homicides. Thirteen shootings were legally justifiable or an act of self-defense, including three that involved law enforcement officers acting in the line of duty. For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.

Conclusions: Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense."
http://www.jtrauma.com/pt/re/jtrauma/abstract.00005373-199808000-00010.htm;jsessionid=CohS2VKAO2S2X2mu8hpJ4igofbN1b EWxLCMUmaXAsuSEy73uHwL6!872722892!-949856032!9001!-1

Terry
I was only questioning your assertion that anti-gunners have a conspiracy in plan. You have no facts for that.

They do have a conspiracy---to get rid of firearm ownership.

If you want to quote the Center For Disease Control (CDC) one should include their latest report. First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Firearms Laws

In summary, the Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence.
Strange that of the 51 different studies they reviewed, none of them were sufficient to determine the effectiveness of firearms laws.

-Chris

Assault weapons, and handguns are the issue. Those firearms resulting in deaths of innocent people, mostly children

I do not want your rifle or shotgun.

But you can certainly continue to throw up the red herring that anti-handgun people want to eliminate all firearms. I do not see much legitimacy in such a claim, but it certainly is useful to scare people away from rational discussions.

Yhea but ubiquity0 are you not just totally sick of the if it bleeds it leads crap. I cant even watch the news anymore. Just last night I tried to watch the news the stories were, a raped 3 year old, a 13 year old kidnapped from her bus stop, a dead 18 year old boy, a clerk shot to death................ It's just gotten F&^%$ ridiculous!

To paraphrase Ted Nugent, "If guns kill people, mine must be defective"

If you are fine with my having rifles and shotguns, why not handguns? My loaded pistol with it's triggerlock is more secure than my empty longuns.

No red herrings here--banning one type of gun makes it too easy to apply the justification for that ban to another type then another. Look at the UK, and more recently Australia.

I know it is cliched, but alot of gun owners in the US are of the "from my cold dead fingers" variety.

Totally agree- I can't watch the TV news any more either. With the ridiculous sensationalist tabloid style stories & the guffawing morons that are selected as presenters I don't see why anyone would.

If the facts show that less children die of gun accidents than swimming pools accidents would that matter?
If the facts showed that more guns results in less crime, would that matter?
Probably not because it isn't really about logic usually. (I don't mean that as a criticism, it's only human. If you proved I'd be safer if you repealed parts of the Bill of Rights I'd still be against it.)
Mix in emotion, some politics and the law of unintended )consequences and you get unexpected results like:
- More deaths (children and adult) after passing the "child proof cap" law for medicines. Adults were lax because they thought the bottles were safe.
- More child deaths due mandating air bags.

-Chris

Chris and Eric

thanks. Yeah I could accept triggerlocks as a means of solving the problem with handguns. I would still like to have local ability to ban assault weapons.

Is there data that you mentioned? Yes, it would matter. There is always a balance to be looked at, and to learn from previous well meanaing restrictions.

The reason I own a gun is so the King of England can't come in my home and start pushing me around. :) ....a little credit to Homer Simpson.

Seriously.....yesterday here in a small county just outside of Nashville, a boy pulled a .45 out and shot his bus driver multiple times because she busted him for having and dipping snuff. They boy was 14 years old. I'm sure that since this happened some politicians will want to ban handguns. It is already illegal for the boy to have a .45 but he got it anyway. Even if we were in a "gun free utopia" the boy probably still would have used a knife, tree trunk, or large jaw bone. Fact of the matter is, we'll always find something to defend ourselves or harm others with.

HORSE ***** STEVE...Plain and simple...for years I listened to the NRA cry about how the anti-gunners wanted to get rid of all guns....and I said yeah, yeah, yeah....then the Brady Bill passed and the VERY NEXT DAY an Editorial Appeared by the Editorial Staff of the LA Times...that said ..."That the Brady Bill was a GOOD FIRST STEP and the ALL GUNS SHOULD BE BANNED."

WOW the NRA was right, the Liberal do gooders wanting to protect society from the indivdual do want to get rid of all guns...because they ultimately believe that man is capricious at best and society must be protected from him...THank You thats socialism at best and fascism at worst...

So when the NRA defends your right to an Assualt Weapon, they are defending agianst the slippery slope of give em an inch and they will take a mile...

I say THANK GOD for the progun lobby and the political power they have.... I'm NRA all the way....

This liberal does not support gun control law proposals. Period. For the record.

I have a motor to build but here's what I got Googling:

Pools and kids: Loaded Guns Can Be Good for Kids

More guns, less crime: NATIONAL CENTER FOR POLICY ANALYSIS: No Smoking Guns: Answering Objections to Right-to-Carry Laws

Child proof caps: Rational Risk Policy by W. Kip Viscusi

AIRBAG STATISTICS Deaths in frontal crashes are reduced about 14 percent among right front passengers using their belts and about 23 percent among passengers without belts. However, deaths are about 34 percent higher than expected among child passengers younger than 10.


-Chris

According to your signature you live in CA -- you already have a state wide ban on assault weapons. (Along with some of the most restrictive laws on other firearms too.)

The only difference between an "assault weapon" and a hunting rifle is that the hunting rifle is better built, more powerful and more accurate then the assault rifle. An AK-47 max range is 300 meters. The .308 is still holding a 6" group at a 1000 meters.

The fastest firing pistol is STILL a revolver. Watch a fast draw contest and half the time you never see the man draw, fire and holster the revolver. It takes a slow motion camera to see it.

So, what you are really afraid of is some "bad boy" on the street with a bad looking gun, that has to fire 15 rounds in order to hit something from 5' away. Of course, thats when you hope a trained civilian armed with an 7 rd Colt .45, who only needs 1 rd at 15 meters it hit his target, walks by. Thats what carry permits do. The bad guy never has to worry about the person he is robbing because he already has the drop on him. Its that armed, law abiding citizen, that sees him robbing you, that he has to worry about.

So, stop trying to use the Constitution to solve the crime problem and start supporting longer cell time for the criminals. I've never heard of a bad guy robbing a civilan, while he was in jail.

Terry

The Uniform Crime Report, published annually by the FBI, has never listed "assault weapons" as statistcally significant as used to commit crimes. The anti-gun folks raising a hoopla over these weapons know that. They hope the public does not. Why would this be? Why do they feel they have to resort to deception to achieve their goals? If they are so willing to lie to the public about their current poster child of an "evil" weapon, what else are they willing to lie about?

I support longer jail time, but that does nothing for the the victims of his first offense.

So what is your answer to the bus driver's family? Do nothing?

I say blame it on something you can demonize, say demon tobacco ("wacked out on dip, nicotine fiends") or a minority that doesn't vote. Everyone will feel better (well most everyone) and I'll look like I'm doing something about the problem and get re-elected.
Joe Pol

My favorite part about liberals is that they are so out spoken about guns, the war in Iraqi, poverty, etc........ BUT I HAVE NEVER HEARD A DAMN ONE OF THEM PUT UP A GOOD IDEA ON HOW TO FIX SOMETHING. It is like they think this is supposed to be a perfect world. They just want to be heard that is why so many actors and Celebes are blazing liberal...LOOK AT ME ...LISTEN TO ME.... Why isn't it safe in Iraq yet.....b/c it never will be that safe..... Why would you introduce your kids to shooting sports......b/c it is good to respect something whether it is inanimate or animate.......by is there poverty....b/c that freaking life..... If I could ever meet one liberal who had a really SOLID idea on how to fix something I would shake their hand so quickly......just like John Kerry.......man that guy didn't have a solid idea about anything