NationStates Jolt Archive

I know it's anecdotal, not statistical, but doesn't it seem like a lot of men are shooting their estranged s/o's, kids, coworkers? Maybe just men shouldn't be allowed to have guns?

Sexism, much?

Sexism, much?

Well, if it's not women doing the killing, why should they have their rights abridged?

GUNS DONT KILL PEOPLE, PHYSICS DOES!

A chocolate cookie for anyone that knows where this one came from.

Well, if it's not women doing the killing, why should they have their rights abridged?

There are plenty of men not doing any killing, so why should they have their rights abridged?

There are plenty of men not doing any killing, so why should they have their rights abridged?

How do we know, a priori, which men will kill and which will not?

Think before you open your mouth.

Meh. Until there's proof of this, I'll say no.

Think before you open your mouth.

I did think. I thought, "I'm tired of reading about 2 people dead, man shoots woman, then himself. Restraining orders are meaningless! What can we do?"

How sickeningly sexist.

How do we know, a priori, which men will kill and which will not?

We don't, what's your point?

We don't, what's your point?

How do we keep guns out of the hands of killers, without abridging everyone's rights?

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/oars.gif

In the US in 2004, 15,991 males comitted homicide compared to 1,674 females.

Maybe males should be outlawed? :)

Well, if it's not women doing the killing

Ah, but it is.

Ah, but it is.

Blaming the victim?

How do we keep guns out of the hands of killers, without abridging everyone's rights?

We can't. Even if we did outright ban all guns, criminals would still get guns.

I know it's anecdotal, not statistical, but doesn't it seem like a lot of men are shooting their estranged s/o's, kids, coworkers? Maybe just men shouldn't be allowed to have guns?

You undermine it to begin with, by stating it is anecdotal, not statistical...
Furthermore, there are women out there that shoot people using firearms, same with men.
Maybe just irrational individuals should not have guns?

Blaming the victim?

Claiming that no women commit murder?

You undermine it to begin with, by stating it is anecdotal, not statistical...
Furthermore, there are women out there that shoot people using firearms, same with men.
Maybe just irrational individuals should not have guns?

Gravlen has kindly provided the stats. Looks like 10-1 male. Hmmm . . . maybe more men are irrational?

Nokay, but your gender has to make some concessions too.

Keep guns out of the hands of men, as long as you keep women from driving men into homicidal rages.

Claiming that no women commit murder?

Oh, sorry. I was confused what you meant. Well, according to Gravlen's stats, it's 10-1 men doing the killing. Not definitive, but still, quite the discrepancy. Maybe we need to encourage women more?

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/oars.gif
Maybe males should be outlawed? :)

I think it more sort of shows the black should be outlawed.

Or maybe all black and white males. Oh, or at least black males, that's for sure. They also rape white women, you know, most rapers are black too.

Nokay, but your gender has to make some concessions too.

Keep guns out of the hands of men, as long as you keep women from driving men into homicidal rages.

Ah, now that's blaming the victim!

Gravlen has kindly provided the stats. Looks like 10-1 male. Hmmm . . . maybe more men are irrational?

I was moreso referring to you as irrational.

You feel that all men should be banned from owning firearms because more men than women shoot people with them. You are comparing the wrong things. You should compare the amount of men that kill people with a gun, as opposed to the amount that do not. Taking rights from the majority because of the minority is, in my opinion, irrational.

Can I get a "Hurrah!" For chauvinism?

Gravlen has kindly provided the stats. Looks like 10-1 male. Hmmm . . . maybe more men are irrational?

I'm curious to see stats of homicides with firearms vs. homicides with knives/swords/chainsaw etc.

I'm curious to see stats of homicides with firearms vs. homicides with knives/swords/chainsaw etc.

.. and bare hands, bathtubs, leaving the car on whilst in garage, abuse..

No, just answering a silly question with a silly answer.

Oh, sorry. I was confused what you meant. Well, according to Gravlen's stats, it's 10-1 men doing the killing. Not definitive, but still, quite the discrepancy. Maybe we need to encourage women more?

I agree. If women want to be truly treated as equals, they need to kill more people and thus earn respect!

I was moreso referring to you as irrational.

You feel that all men should be banned from owning firearms because more men than women shoot people with them. You are comparing the wrong things. You should compare the amount of men that kill people with a gun, as opposed to the amount that do not. Taking rights from the majority because of the minority is, in my opinion, irrational.

If you read the OP, I ask if men should not have guns. I personally voted option 3. But, I am also tired of people shooting people and then shooting themselves. Most of them are men. So, what can we do?

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/oars.gif

In the US in 2004, 15,991 males comitted homicide compared to 1,674 females.

Maybe males should be outlawed? :)

Look at them graphs; you'll notice that, in most cases, the "25+" line is the lowest. I think that clearly demonstrates what needs to be done...

Ban children!

Oh, and the "black male" graph does seem to be bigger than the others by a factor of ten (a hundred, compared to "white female"), but I probably shouldn't say it.

I'm curious to see stats of homicides with firearms vs. homicides with knives/swords/chainsaw etc.

Would the stats include video games? I've killed lots of zombies with chainsaws ;)

If you read the OP, I ask if men should not have guns. I personally voted option 3. But, I am also tired of people shooting people and then shooting themselves. Most of them are men. So, what can we do?

I say we give anyone who attempts suicide the death penalty.

If you read the OP, I ask if men should not have guns. I personally voted option 3. But, I am also tired of people shooting people and then shooting themselves. Most of them are men. So, what can we do?

I did read the OP, I just generally assume when a person makes a topic and has a specific question (as opposed to "Who should not be allowed to own guns?"), that they are in the affirmative on the subject.
So, my apologies.

There is nothing we can do really. At best, any strict regulations would be only partially effective and leave people who want to own guns legally by the wayside, while criminals keep aquiring guns as they always do.

Actually I think the comedian Chris Rock had the best solution.

Raise the price of ammunition to 5000$ a bullet for civilians.

"I'd cap yo ass mofo, but it ain't worth it!"

I say we give anyone who attempts suicide the death penalty.

I wouldn't mind if they were just killing themselves. I object to the twobit "take someone with you" mentality :eek:

Well sure. As long as lightsabers can be added, too. :D

I was actually thinking of Pulp Fiction when I made the previous post, when Butch is selecting his weapon of choice...

I've only seen Pulp Fiction once. Now, that's a crime . . .

Would the stats include video games? I've killed lots of zombies with chainsaws ;)

Well sure. As long as lightsabers can be added, too. :D

I was actually thinking of Pulp Fiction when I made the previous post, when Butch is selecting his weapon of choice...

I'm curious to see stats of homicides with firearms vs. homicides with knives/swords/chainsaw etc.

Here we go (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/violent_crime/murder.html)! For the US and everything :)
66% committed with firearms, apparently.

For the UK it's 6.6%, according to this Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_Kingdom) that I got the link to the above stats from.

I know it's anecdotal, not statistical, but doesn't it seem like a lot of men are shooting their estranged s/o's, kids, coworkers? Maybe just men shouldn't be allowed to have guns?

Quoted for lolz. (May Neesika forgive me)

I know it's anecdotal, not statistical, but doesn't it seem like a lot of men are shooting their estranged s/o's, kids, coworkers? Maybe just men shouldn't be allowed to have guns?

Maybe some folks need shooting and men are the only ones with the balls to get the job done.

Maybe just irrational individuals should not have guns?You are assuming that only irrational individuals would go on a homicidal rampage and/or kill themselves. Not strictly true.

All that's needed is the ability and motivation to do it.

I did read the OP, I just generally assume when a person makes a topic and has a specific question (as opposed to "Who should not be allowed to own guns?"), that they are in the affirmative on the subject.
So, my apologies.

There is nothing we can do really. At best, any strict regulations would be only partially effective and leave people who want to own guns legally by the wayside, while criminals keep aquiring guns as they always do.
You're probably right, but it seems a steep price for freedom :(
These aren't criminals, in the sense of making a career of it, though. They're criminals for one act. They suck.

You are assuming that only irrational individuals would go on a homicidal rampage and/or kill themselves.

No. :)


Edit: But I would consider such individuals to be irrational.

I know it's anecdotal, not statistical, but doesn't it seem like a lot of men are shooting their estranged s/o's, kids, coworkers? Maybe just men shouldn't be allowed to have guns?

If it's anecdotal, than there's no logical basis for it.

I know it's anecdotal, not statistical, but doesn't it seem like a lot of women are getting into car accidents while they're fixing their makeup? Maybe women just shouldn't be allowed to drive cars?

See my point?

Actually I think the comedian Chris Rock had the best solution.

Raise the price of ammunition to 5000$ a bullet for civilians.

"I'd cap yo ass mofo, but it ain't worth it!"


It wouldn't work. Ammunition can be made at home, if the need arises.

Maybe some folks need shooting and men are the only ones with the balls to get the job done.

Great, now we need stats on who gets shot. Is it close to even, or do more women "need shooting"?

This thread is exactly why women should be kept in the kitchen and never educated!

It wouldn't work. Ammunition can be made at home, if the need arises.

Oh, man! You know your thread's in trouble when Gun Manufacturers posts in it :eek:

I wouldn't mind if they were just killing themselves. I object to the twobit "take someone with you" mentality :eek:

I was joking about that...

I was joking about that...

I wasn't :(

This thread is exactly why women should be kept in the kitchen and never educated!

You get your own damn sandwiches from now on. :p

Maybe if we men were able to beat our wives when they got out of line then it wouldn't come to murder. It's scary when sarcasm sounds more sane than what is being proposed.

You get your own damn sandwiches from now on. :p

This reminds me of a joke:

How do you fix your dishwasher when it breaks?

You slap that bitch and tell her to get back to work :p

Oh, man! You know your thread's in trouble when Gun Manufacturers posts in it :eek:

No, it's in trouble when you are backing sexism and, using the same logic, racism.

Maybe if we men were able to beat our wives when they got out of line then it wouldn't come to murder. It's scary when sarcasm sounds more sane than what is being proposed.

It does? Sound more sane?

And beating your wife would probably be more likely to cause murder... just not the one you would suspect. And then women would need to be stripped of gun rights. :p

This thread makes about as much sense as socks for ducks.

This thread makes about as much sense as socks for ducks.

So I shouldn't get that patent?

Great, now we need stats on who gets shot. Is it close to even, or do more women "need shooting"?

I don't know. I guess it should be on a case by case basis paying no attention to sex or race in order to keep things fair.

So I shouldn't get that patent?

Well I have heard that the market for pet ducks has risen over the years

Great, now we need stats on who gets shot. Is it close to even, or do more women "need shooting"?

You know that you can hunt for statistics yourself, right?

Most victims and perpetrators in homicides are male
Male offender/Male victim 65.2%
Male offender/Female victim 22.6%
Female offender/Male victim 9.7%
Female offender/Female victim 2.4%

Both male and female offenders are more likely to target male victims than female victims.

Murder by Relationship
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/images/content_images/2.4.gif

Homicide Type by Gender, 1976-2004
Victims Offenders
Male Female Male Female
All homicides 76.5% 23.5% 88.7% 11.3%
Victim/offender relationship
Intimate 36.5% 63.5% 65.3% 34.7%
Family 51.7% 48.3% 70.6% 29.4%
Infanticide 54.5% 45.5% 61.8% 38.2%
Eldercide 58.3% 41.7% 85.3% 14.7%
Circumstances
Felony murder 78.2% 21.8% 93.3% 6.7%
Sex related 18.8% 81.2% 93.6% 6.4%
Drug related 90.1% 9.9% 95.6% 4.4%
Gang related 94.6% 5.4% 98.3% 1.7%
Argument 77.9% 22.1% 85.5% 14.5%
Workplace 78.3% 21.7% 91.1% 8.9%
Weapon
Gun homicide 82.7% 17.3% 91.2% 8.8%
Arson 56.3% 43.7% 79.1% 20.9%
Poison 55.6% 44.4% 63.3% 36.7%
Multiple victims or offenders
Multiple victims 63.1% 36.9% 93.5% 6.5%

Multiple offenders 85.6% 14.4% 91.7% 8.3%

(I can't be bothered to fix this...)

The relationship between the victim and the offender differs for female and male victims

* Female victims are more likely than male victims to be killed by an intimate or family member.

* Male victims are more likely than female victims to be killed by acquaintances or strangers.


Etc etc.

Knock yourself out (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/homtrnd.htm)

Actually I think the comedian Chris Rock had the best solution.

Raise the price of ammunition to 5000$ a bullet for civilians.

"I'd cap yo ass mofo, but it ain't worth it!"

Cause that worked with drugs .... oh wait

You just managed to make a new funding source for thoes willing to peddle more illegal products

even if you take away everything a person has thay will still have a minimum of one way to kill someone else.

even if you take away everything a person has thay will still have a minimum of one way to kill someone else.

That is true but the number of people killed with firearms is FAR FAR more than with any other weapon.

Number of people buying food in shops is far greater than of people who grow it themselves or buy from the farmer. Does it mean people would stop eating if shops were banned?

What if the angry/vengeful woman just don't have very accurate firearms?

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/oars.gif
Well, according to this graph, the only people who have shown any real sign of improvement since the 70's are black women, so maybe it is time to hand over the reigns of power to them? They are the only group that has never had a serious chance at ruling a large area.

Well, according to this graph, the only people who have shown any real sign of improvement since the 70's are black women, so maybe it is time to hand over the reigns of power to them? They are the only group that has never had a serious chance at ruling a large area.

Woah! Please tell me your kidding. Why would you ever want to give a woman control over anything other than a kitchen or a baby?

Well, according to this graph, the only people who have shown any real sign of improvement since the 70's are black women, so maybe it is time to hand over the reigns of power to them? They are the only group that has never had a serious chance at ruling a large area.

Oooo! Stealth candidate: Oprah in '08!

Woah! Please tell me your kidding. Why would you ever want to give a woman control over anything other than a kitchen or a baby?
I didn't say just any women, I said "black women." For while it is well-known that white women are untrustworthy and of feebler wit, their darker sisters possess sharp minds that are equally capable in both sass and homey wisdom.

even if you take away everything a person has thay will still have a minimum of one way to kill someone else.

Though, it would be very difficult for them to accomplish... being dead however they would not need to worry about legal reprisal.

I didn't say just any women, I said "black women." For while it is well-known that white women are untrustworthy and of feebler wit, their darker sisters possess sharp minds that are equally capable in both sass and homey wisdom.

Sass, yeah thats all they are. All they want to do is eat cornbread and yell at crackas.

Oh no he didn't! :eek:

Am I the only one who notices there's a spike in homicides in almost all groups in '80? What's up with that?

Am I the only one who notices there's a spike in homicides in almost all groups in '80? What's up with that?Because Guns don't kill people, rappers do. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jweszKwpBFw)

Or possibly because of all the social problems created by rightwinged scum in that decade. Nah, it's just rap.

What is it with all this authoritarian community-punishment shit flying around this forum? Are people here really so damn egocentric they can't grasp it's a world of individuals?

Ironic lectures aside, this topic's pathetic. Most illegal shootings are crimes of passion. They still would be, if the gun was removed from the equation. It's just that guns are far better tools for killing people than teaspoons and table legs are, so obviously people tend to be more severely injured when some pissed off bloke comes at them with a gun, rather than with a wooden ladle.

But it doesn't mean the gun's the problem. Or the gender. It's the temper that's the problem. I know plenty of guys whom I'm absolutely certain would never attack anyone in anger, for any reason. I've also realized over the years that I'm not one of them. So while it'd probably be a terrible idea for me to run around with a gun in my pocket (if nothing else, it'd totally kill the "Are you just happy to see me" routine), why shouldn't other people?
And incidentally, while I doubt the wisdom of me walking around armed, I don't exactly have a history of going around blasting holes in annoying people, so why shouldn't I be allowed to? Somehow, I just can't shake the feeling I'm a far better judge of me than some random git on a message board. And I'm just one of the billions of vastly different individuals getting curbed by wiseasses here.

Prejudging people for no reason is a fucked up thing to do.

Am I the only one who notices there's a spike in homicides in almost all groups in '80? What's up with that?
Ban the 80s to be safe. Whatever songs, movies or books these 80s monsters created, they must be locked away from public.

=3 I like this thread. *very amused*
I voted for men to lose their guns... wait, that sounds wrong somehow. >_>

I think there's too much testosterone and chauvinism in the military. It might be nice to give an all female military a try- well, all right, men could be medics and nurses for the military, since they wouldn't have to carry guns. =P

It's fun to think about. But it's also not entirely a joke. The fact that men are so much more violent than women is a serious problem. Women's lib is still happening, but men's lib is going to need to happen- and the violence of the male gender is something we're going to have to seriously try and fix.

How do we keep guns out of the hands of killers, without abridging everyone's rights?
hmm theres a lil thing called death penalty

Am I the only one who notices there's a spike in homicides in almost all groups in '80? What's up with that?
Well, I don't mean to brag, but that was the decade I was born.

Option 3, please.

Option 3, please.Is naive. The state has the monopoly on violence. Having a gun won't help you challenge that, unless you're utterly indestructable and have years to systematically execute the individuals in control of the state.

Numbers will help you. Guns won't.

Because Guns don't kill people, rappers do. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jweszKwpBFw)

Or possibly because of all the social problems created by rightwinged scum in that decade. Nah, it's just rap.

What is it with all this authoritarian community-punishment shit flying around this forum? Are people here really so damn egocentric they can't grasp it's a world of individuals?

(snip)

Prejudging people for no reason is a fucked up thing to do.

I agree, we're all individuals, and prejudging is crap. I'm also opposed to gun control legislation. But, at the same time, I'm fed up with men killing women when relationships go south. How do we deal with it?

hmm theres a lil thing called death penalty

That's reactive. I want proactive. If the guy is gonna shoot himself, too, where's the penalty?

=3 I like this thread. *very amused*
I voted for men to lose their guns... wait, that sounds wrong somehow. >_>

I think there's too much testosterone and chauvinism in the military. It might be nice to give an all female military a try- well, all right, men could be medics and nurses for the military, since they wouldn't have to carry guns. =P

It's fun to think about. But it's also not entirely a joke. The fact that men are so much more violent than women is a serious problem. Women's lib is still happening, but men's lib is going to need to happen- and the violence of the male gender is something we're going to have to seriously try and fix.

Wow, page 6 before someone brought up the military implications! Thanks! :fluffle:

That's reactive. I want proactive. If the guy is gonna shoot himself, too, where's the penalty?

...

...

Do you realize how insane it is to say that we should give the death penalty to murderers, and then complain about criminals killing themselves?

And can we stop only using male pronouns? I hate how people do that whenever they refer to criminals in general.

Is naive. The state has the monopoly on violence. Having a gun won't help you challenge that, unless you're utterly indestructable and have years to systematically execute the individuals in control of the state.

Numbers will help you. Guns won't.

No, no, no. I'm saying that guns + numbers > numbers alone.

I'm NOT saying that one man can destroy the government with a shotgun (theoretically, it's POSSIBLE, but come on now...). However, a wall of people armed with broomsticks doesn't stand well against a couple machine gunners. Or a tank.

...

...

Do you realize how insane it is to say that we should give the death penalty to murderers, and then complain about criminals killing themselves?

And can we stop only using male pronouns? I hate how people do that whenever they refer to criminals in general.

I have no problem with criminals (or anyone, for that matter) killing themselves. DON"T KILL SOMEONE ELSE TOO! And as long as stuff like this (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17932423/) and this (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17914681/) keeps happening, it's men. I gotta live with it too. Why do you think this pisses me off so much?

I agree, we're all individuals, and prejudging is crap. I'm also opposed to gun control legislation. But, at the same time, I'm fed up with men killing women when relationships go south. How do we deal with it?Good question, but probably not one with nice, simple answers.

In my opinion, virtually all criminal violence against individuals, can be attributed to social problems, cultures idealizing male violence, or a combination of both.

The Social Democratic approach to society-building, would seem to be the most efficient and functional of the already established systems dealing with social problems, but do note that I in no way suggest it's the best approach under any circumstances, and since it doesn't even come close to eradicating social problems, I don't believe it (or any other established system) can be called a solution. Anarchism might be a solution under the right circumstances, but short of trying there's no telling, I think.

Our idealization of male violence is probably easier to deal with, as it's 'just' a social value. Social values are always in a state of change, but in the past changes have mostly been based around either increasing personal or economic liberty, or submitting to authority. None of that has any direct relation to idealizing male violence, so manufacturing a shift in this social value will require some innovative thinking on our part.
The positive thing is that we already know shifts in social values can successfully be manufactured, even by otherwise socially insignificant minorities. It's been done numerous times in the past with great success, and the entire advertising industry, and to a lesser extent, governments and mass media, relies on it today to perpetuate themselves/their investors.

Unfortunately, while I on a purely intellectual level recognise that idealizing male violence is a fucked up idea, emotionally I ate the concept raw. Still do, though it's gotten me far more trouble than sex & prestige. Regrettably, I have no idea how to go about manufacturing such a change.No, no, no. I'm saying that guns + numbers > numbers alone.

I'm NOT saying that one man can destroy the government with a shotgun (theoretically, it's POSSIBLE, but come on now...). However, a wall of people armed with broomsticks doesn't stand well against a couple machine gunners. Or a tank.Assuming you're living in what passes for a first world country these days, you'll never be able to even begin contesting the state's monopoly on violence. You'll simply get creamed. Thus numbers alone is far better than numbers with useless weaponry.

Because when you have the useless weaponry, the state can gleefully proclaim that you're not contesting it, but rather it's monopoly on force, and can thus justify employing as much violence against you as it wants to. After all, if you have two factions in the same society claiming to define what force is and who can apply it, you have chaos. Much like Iraq. So a state can put you down for being a threat to the population, rather than look in sane and cease to be able to justify itself, for putting you down for being a threat to the state itself.

Being militant is counterproductive unless you have a fighting chance.

In the immortal words of Robin Williams: "As Charleton Heston once said, 'Guns don't kill people, Apes with guns kill people!"

GUNS DONT KILL PEOPLE, PHYSICS DOES!

A chocolate cookie for anyone that knows where this one came from.

3rd Rock from the Sun.

Let the people have guns. Take them away from the government.

Lets just kill all the people. Then there will not be any murders. Or crime.

Problem solved simply and painlessly.

The best way to stop violence in men?
Cut off their balls. Stop the testosterone flow, kill the violence.

You know, really, the problem is not that males are too violent, or really that there is too much violence in general, the problem is that the violence is improperly channeled.

Just play Halo when you get pissed. That's what I do.
Or, play football, or wrestle, or do karate, and use that anger, drain it away into something productive.

OP. You're wrong. Majority of the crimes commited with guns are by illegal gun owners. Every once in a while you'll hear of a legal gun owner killing someone.. but it's rare. People buy hot guns everyday.. and those people are the ones that commit the most violent crimes by firearms. Yes, most are men.. but it doesn't mean women are incapable of it.. contrary. What are you going to do? Magically wave a wand that gets rid of all firearms.. from legal owners and illegal owners.. keep any freakin firearms from coming in to this country ever? Good luck with that. It's definitely worked with drugs. :rolleyes:

OP. You're wrong. Majority of the crimes commited with guns are by illegal gun owners. Every once in a while you'll hear of a legal gun owner killing someone.. but it's rare. People buy hot guns everyday.. and those people are the ones that commit the most violent crimes by firearms. Yes, most are men.. but it doesn't mean women are incapable of it.. contrary. What are you going to do? Magically wave a wand that gets rid of all firearms.. from legal owners and illegal owners.. keep any freakin firearms from coming in to this country ever? Good luck with that. It's definitely worked with drugs. :rolleyes:

Yeah, I can't be arsed to read a thread if it's over 5 pages, either ;)

Oh, man! You know your thread's in trouble when Gun Manufacturers posts in it :eek:

Huh? :confused:

What are you implying? I post in a lot of threads.

ETA: 1,000 posts!! WHEEEEEEEE!!

Huh? :confused:

What are you implying? I post in a lot of threads.

ETA: 1,000 posts!! WHEEEEEEEE!!

Woot! Grats! I just thought it was funny that a nation called "Gun Manufacturers" was posting in a gun control thread :fluffle:

Woot! Grats! I just thought it was funny that a nation called "Gun Manufacturers" was posting in a gun control thread :fluffle:

Ah. I post on a lot of firearms threads. It's a topic that affects me greatly, since I do own a firearm.

Majority of the crimes commited with guns are by illegal gun owners.
Great!

...

*Waits for link or source*

I believe you, but what can I say? We're mad about statistics in this thread. Please?

Yeah, I can't be arsed to read a thread if it's over 5 pages, either ;)
:D

I know it's anecdotal, not statistical, but doesn't it seem like a lot of men are shooting their estranged s/o's, kids, coworkers? Maybe just men shouldn't be allowed to have guns?

Most men who do this sort of thing would kill their estranged with their bare hands if guns were not available.

Recently, a man killed his four kids with his bare hands, and then hung himself with a cheap plastic rope.

Going to ban bare hands and cheap plastic rope now?

has this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xv-2XYOtgCg) been posted yet?

has this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xv-2XYOtgCg) been posted yet?

I don't think so, but shame on you for being the first to spread that disease.

Women just talk men to death.

Also, they prefer drowning and chopping up... their kids.

GUNS DONT KILL PEOPLE, PHYSICS DOES!

A chocolate cookie for anyone that knows where this one came from.

Third rock from the sun.

Thats silly. And sexist.

What a stupid idea, whats to stop men from using their girlfreinds/wifes gun.

What a stupid idea, whats to stop men from using their girlfreinds/wifes gun.

Common curtesy?

I agree, we're all individuals, and prejudging is crap. I'm also opposed to gun control legislation. But, at the same time, I'm fed up with men killing women when relationships go south. How do we deal with it?

Um, analyze the problem and avoid making stupid suggestions that accomplish nothing.

I see it would be wrong in your mind to keep 150 million innocent women from owning a gun, but keeping just slightly less men from owning a gun makes more sense.

If preventive punishment works, let's just put everyone in prison and then there will be no crime. Oh, wait, there is tons of crime in prison. Hmmmm... I guess it's death penalty across the board.

You wanna stop murder? Kill everyone. Any other solution isn't going to work.

Now if you want to slow down murder address the reasons people do it instead of trying to take away means. If I really wanted to kill my wife, do you think making handguns illegal would stop me?

Thats silly. And sexist.

HA! More sexist than claiming that only men can be reliable witnesses or saying that if a woman is along with a man that is not her spouse she should be punished? Now, if that ain't the pot...

I think it's because

a. women don't kill, they only maim
b. women might break a nail or get messy killing someone
c. women are generally weaker than men, so they don't kill as efficiently
d. men kill women because sometimes, pmsing women are just too much, or the women is having an affair


yes, this is quite sexist ( and I don't believe it, although I thought it up)
but anyways
I think one this to consider is that
men can have a condittion where they have an extra male chromosome, which leads to extra high levels of testosterone and that sorta thing

I think 85% of imprisoned men have it
this is also a disorder women can have sooo....

it's not men, it's super manly men
O_o maybe....