President Biden blasts guns again. But loves the not much deadlier cars-trucks

Walt

Back To Reality
Biden blasts guns again. But loves the much deadlier cars-trucks

45,222 in 2020 died from guns, while 36,096 died from cars. And there are a lot more cars used than guns. The vast majority of people use cars on a daily basis. Most Americans do not even own a gun, much less use it.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/03/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/
https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/state-by-state
 
Cars and guns are both risky things. The difference is that cars, unlike guns, provide a benefit to society.

Another difference is there has been a lot of effort put into making cars more safe. A few years ago, car deaths were higher than gun deaths. That changed with intensive car safety.
 
Guns feed people

There are very few, if any, people in America who feed themselves exclusively through guns. I would question whether a diet of only meat would be good for you. You cannot use guns to get corn.

The vast majority of Americans feed themselves with food transported by motorized vehicle. Motorized vehicles are essential to all modern farming. You may not like reality, but that is reality.

And no one is talking about taking away cars and trucks.

There is a lot of talk, and even some action, to take away cars from dangerous drivers. We continue to tighten the rules for driving, and cars continue to become safer... Maybe we should start doing the same with guns?
 
45,222 in 2020 died from guns, while 36,096 died from cars. And there are a lot more cars used than guns. The vast majority of people use cars on a daily basis. Most Americans do not even own a gun, much less use it.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/03/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/
https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/state-by-state

How many cars are used to murder people intentionally?

How many guns are used to murder people intentionally?

How many gun accidents that result in death occur?

How many car accidents that result in death occur?

How often is a car used by the average owner, and for what purpose?

How often is a gun used by the average owner, and for what purpose?


And now the big questions

.... DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ACCIDENT AND MURDER?

.... DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN IMPROVISING WITH ANY OBJECT TO COMMIT MURDER IS DIFFERENT FROM A MECHANICAL DEVICE DESIGNED TO KILL?
 
How many cars are used to murder people intentionally?

How many guns are used to murder people intentionally?

How many gun accidents that result in death occur?

How many car accidents that result in death occur?

How often is a car used by the average owner, and for what purpose?

How often is a gun used by the average owner, and for what purpose?


And now the big questions

.... DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ACCIDENT AND MURDER?

.... DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN IMPROVISING WITH ANY OBJECT TO COMMIT MURDER IS DIFFERENT FROM A MECHANICAL DEVICE DESIGNED TO KILL?


Very true.

"very true" what? Please clarify.

YOU tried to draw a comparison between gun deaths and car deaths....a moronic attempt by LaPierre type gunners to minimize the threat to Americans brought on by 20 years of mass shootings using a weapon(s) formally banned in 1994, thus justifying NOT re-instating the AWB 1994. My questions (which I fully re-instated from Post #4) are towards you telling the reading audience exactly how you can logically and rationally attempt your comparison. Please honestly respond.
 
YOU tried to draw a comparison between gun deaths and car deaths.

Texting While Driving compared the two. I corrected his wrong comparison. I agree with you that comparing apples to oranges does not work, but Texting While Driving insisted we do that. I merely pointed out that there are far more apples than oranges, and then agreed with you that comparing apples and oranges is not really correct.

Let me point out another issue. The NRA will tell you there are about as many guns as cars. But no one uses more than one car at a time, nor usually more than one gun at a time. Most guns are owned by a few percent of the people. So gun owners are far more dangerous than car owners. And gun users are far more dangerous than car users.

But again, it would be impossible to come up with a very good comparison, because they are such different uses.

...a moronic attempt by LaPierre type gunners to minimize the threat to Americans brought on by 20 years of mass shootings using a weapon(s) formally banned in 1994, thus justifying NOT re-instating the AWB 1994. My questions (which I fully re-instated from Post #4) are towards you telling the reading audience exactly how you can logically and rationally attempt your comparison. Please honestly respond.

I agree. Is that honest enough for you?
 
"very true" what? Please clarify.

YOU tried to draw a comparison between gun deaths and car deaths....a moronic attempt by LaPierre type gunners to minimize the threat to Americans brought on by 20 years of mass shootings using a weapon(s) formally banned in 1994, thus justifying NOT re-instating the AWB 1994. My questions (which I fully re-instated from Post #4) are towards you telling the reading audience exactly how you can logically and rationally attempt your comparison. Please honestly respond.

Muslims used trucks, IEDs, and illegal automatic weapons to murder the "infidels" in UK and France.

Guns put food on American tables. Do you have a problem with guns?
 
Texting While Driving compared the two. I corrected his wrong comparison. I agree with you that comparing apples to oranges does not work, but Texting While Driving insisted we do that. I merely pointed out that there are far more apples than oranges, and then agreed with you that comparing apples and oranges is not really correct.

Let me point out another issue. The NRA will tell you there are about as many guns as cars. But no one uses more than one car at a time, nor usually more than one gun at a time. Most guns are owned by a few percent of the people. So gun owners are far more dangerous than car owners. And gun users are far more dangerous than car users.

But again, it would be impossible to come up with a very good comparison, because they are such different uses.



I agree. Is that honest enough for you?

I stand corrected and apologize on this point.
 
Muslims used trucks, IEDs, and illegal automatic weapons to murder the "infidels" in UK and France.

Muslim terrorists in France have trouble getting their hands on many guns, so are forced to try to use other weapons. A knife is a much less effective weapon than a gun.

I will point out one major problem with your post. Muslims do not use the word infidel, or even a word that translates to infidel. They use Arabic words, because Arabic is the language of their religion. Infidel is a word of Latin origin, with a concept given us by the Christians.

354b1f185e8288fcbac76e6b68c78e5806f9f3c35b6791ea332170c0fb3f6727.png

https://www.google.com/search?q=inf...AF0iAGkApIBAzIuMZgBAKABAcABAQ&sclient=gws-wiz

Guns put food on American tables. Do you have a problem with guns?

Canada has reasonable gun control, and yet also has far more hunting per capita than the USA.
 
45,222 in 2020 died from guns, while 36,096 died from cars. And there are a lot more cars used than guns. The vast majority of people use cars on a daily basis. Most Americans do not even own a gun, much less use it.

Yes, so many truck school massacre's :) This is a stupid post!
 
The statistics have really been screwed up by the NRA. They consider accidents only when the shooter did not expect a bullet to be fired from the gun. So lets take two cases that the NRA would not consider accidents.

A 12 year old girl comes home unexpectedly from a slumber party. She enters the house with her key at 11:30pm, and is shot by her father thinking she is an intruder. At best a normal person would consider this an accident, though in most countries shooting a possible intruder instead of retreating to safety is considered manslaughter. The NRA considers this a life saved. Because the father intended to shoot an intruder, they consider it not an accident. Because the father thought he was acting in self defense, they consider him to have been acting in self defense, and the also consider that he would have died had he not killed his daughter. So they count the whole thing as no loss of life, and a life saved.

Or consider the drunk man who tries to shoot something that sounds like a deer, but turned out to be his friend Roy. Again, at best a normal person would consider this an accident. Again, most countries would look at him shooting a gun while drunk, and shooting at something he could not see, and call it manslaughter. The NRA points out that the drunk hunter intended to shoot the gun, so to them no accident. They do not consider this a gun related death.
 
Yes, so many truck school massacre's :) This is a stupid post!

I agree with the first statement. I agree there can not be an apples and oranges comparison. But the post is not stupid, though I clearly could have phrased it better... So I agree it is kind of stupid.
 
Back
Top