Re: Media Myth - Guns Are Always Bad for Us
Nick Lidster wrote: Currently there are really 2 camps that are slugging it out on this issue, the liberals who want more laws and to create a new gun task force within the RCMP who are in a huge manpower shortage. Then there is the Conservatives who are taking a stance on increasing funding to the provinces and increasing the funding to the RCMP to enforce the current laws, as well as increasing sentence lengths and giving mandatory min sentences for all firearm related crimes. The main problem with the RCMP shortage is that after a decade of budget cuts the RCMP cannot cover all its duties properly so officers are tasked from major crime division to fill gaps in local districts. Right now I believe that the RCMP staffing is at 80% of needed positions and the ONE training school for them can only put through 1500 cadets a year. Sounds like the conservatives have the more practical solution in this case. -- Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Media Myth - Guns Are Always Bad for Us
At 03:09 AM Sunday 1/1/2006, Doug Pensinger wrote: Nick Lidster wrote: Currently there are really 2 camps that are slugging it out on this issue, the liberals who want more laws and to create a new gun task force within the RCMP who are in a huge manpower shortage. Then there is the Conservatives who are taking a stance on increasing funding to the provinces and increasing the funding to the RCMP to enforce the current laws, as well as increasing sentence lengths and giving mandatory min sentences for all firearm related crimes. The main problem with the RCMP shortage is that after a decade of budget cuts the RCMP cannot cover all its duties properly so officers are tasked from major crime division to fill gaps in local districts. Right now I believe that the RCMP staffing is at 80% of needed positions and the ONE training school for them can only put through 1500 cadets a year. Sounds like the conservatives have the more practical solution in this case. I doubt it seems that way to those who believe that all guns are eeeeeevil . . . --Ronn! :) Since I was a small boy, two states have been added to our country and two words have been added to the pledge of Allegiance... UNDER GOD. Wouldn't it be a pity if someone said that is a prayer and that would be eliminated from schools too? -- Red Skelton (Someone asked me to change my .sig quote back, so I did.) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: platforms in canada (was :Media Myth - Guns Are Always Bad for Us)
Sounds like the conservatives have the more practical solution in this case. I doubt it seems that way to those who believe that all guns are e—ee—eee—vil . . . --Ronn! :) Since I was a small boy, two states have been added to our country and two words have been added to the pledge of Allegiance... UNDER GOD. Wouldn't it be a pity if someone said that is a prayer and that would be eliminated from schools too? -- Red Skelton (Someone asked me to change my .sig quote back, so I did.) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l I agree the Cons def have the more practical solution in this case and in most cases their platform does seem more piratical then that of the fiberals and the NDP (new democratic party). Here are the liberal and conservative platforms for the upcoming election: Liberal: http://www.liberal.ca/issues_e.aspx Our economy: Following a strategy of balanced tax cuts, social spending and debt repayment, the Liberal government has invested in our social foundations and moved us towards a green economy and sustainable communities while enabling us to overcome a challenging deficit. More.. http://www.liberal.ca/issue_e.aspx?itype=64 Cities and communities: Canada’s cities and communities are where we truly experience what it means to be Canadian. Paul Martin and the Liberal government understand this and have committed a great deal to improving where we live and raise our children. We also know that cities propel economic growth, employment and innovation. They are at the center of our country’s success. More... http://www.liberal.ca/issue_e.aspx?itype=60 Our families: Giving families a helping hand, at all stages of life, is an important part of creating a society of which we can all be proud. Paul Martin and the Liberal government strive to treat every Canadian family with dignity and respect. From our children to our seniors, we are committed to promoting initiatives that reflect everyone’s needs. More... http://www.liberal.ca/issue_e.aspx?itype=61 Canada in the world: Whether it is through international aid, peacekeeping, trade or security, the Liberal government is committed to ensuring Canada's continued role of pride and influence in the world. More... http://www.liberal.ca/issue_e.aspx?itype=62 Our environment: Like the majority of Canadians, Prime Minister Paul Martin and the Liberal government believe that a smart environmental policy is vital to our continued success as a nation. We recognize the importance of continuing to make investments to protect and preserve our rich inheritance of land, water and wildlife. More... http://www.liberal.ca/issue_e.aspx?itype=63 Universal health care: The Liberal government is committed to upholding the Canada Health Act and protecting our national, universal health care system. We will ensure that our health care system will continue to be there when Canadians need it, no matter where they live, and no matter what their income. More... http://www.liberal.ca/issue_e.aspx?itype=66 Conservatives: http://www.conservative.ca/EN/2326/ The Choice: http://www.conservative.ca/EN/2326/32981?PHPSESSID=29e57798aab7c8f14b477e43a 5886639 The time for accountability has arrived. On January 23rd, Canadians will finally be able to hold the Liberals accountable. Accountable for the stolen money; accountable for the broken trust; accountable for all that did not get done because this government has been totally preoccupied with damage control; lurching from one scandal to another; always trying to avoid the people’s verdict. Stand Up for Accountability: http://www.conservative.ca/EN/2326/31885?PHPSESSID=29e57798aab7c8f14b477e43a 5886639 Let’s clean up government Canadians have been let down by 12 years of Liberal scandal. We need a change in government to restore accountability and end the culture of entitlement. Canadians must be able to trust our government and know that our tax dollars are well spent. Stand Up for Opportunity: http://www.conservative.ca/EN/2326/31896?PHPSESSID=29e57798aab7c8f14b477e43a 5886639 Let’s cut taxes Canadians are working longer and longer hours but finding it harder and harder to get ahead. A new government must create more opportunity for individuals, families, and small businesses to get ahead. Under the Liberals, high taxes and red tape have held back growth and prosperity. A new government must reduce taxes on middle-class families starting with the GST, lower taxes on small business, and help our farmers and resource industries to compete in the world. Stand Up for Security: http://www.conservative.ca/EN/2326/31900?PHPSESSID=29e57798aab7c8f14b477e43a 5886639 Let’s crack down on crime Under the Liberals, gun, drug, and gang crime has increased and border, port, and airport security has been soft. A new government must toughen criminal justice, impose mandatory minimum sentences for serious crimes, and strengthen
Media Myth - Guns Are Always Bad for Us
I apologize in advance, because I know this topic can get a bit heated on this list. The reason I'm posting this, is because this is the first media article that I've seen, from a major media outlet, that makes an attempt to be fair and accurate. (link to complete list of myths at the bottom) Myths, Lies and Straight Talk A List of 10 Media-Fed Myths MYTH # 5 - Guns Are Always Bad for Us America is notorious for its culture of gun violence. Guns sometimes do cause terrible harm, and many kids are killed every year in gun accidents. But public service announcements and news stories make it seem as if the accidents kill thousands of kids every year. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, however, fewer than 100 kids 15 and under are killed in gun accidents every year. Of course that's horrible, and I understand why demonstrators say we need more gun control. But guess what? The Centers for Disease Control recently completed a review of studies of various types of gun control: background checks, waiting periods, bans on certain guns and ammunition. It could not document that these rules have reduced violent crime. The government wants to say regulations and laws like the Brady Gun Control Law are making a difference, but they aren't. Some maximum security felons I spoke to in New Jersey scoffed at measures like the Brady law. They said they'll have no trouble getting guns if they want them. A Justice Department study confirmed what the prisoners said. But get this: the felons say that the thing they fear the most is not the police, not time in prison, but, you, another American who might be armed. It's a reason many states are passing gun un-control. They're allowing citizens to carry guns with them, it's called concealed carry or right to carry. Some women say they're comforted by these laws. But many people, including Rev. Al Sharpton, are horrified at the idea of concealed carry laws, and predict mayhem if all states adopt these laws. But surprise, 36 states already have concealed carry laws; and not one reported an upsurge in gun crime. http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=123606 __ ...speak your mind, even if your voice shakes... - Maggie Kuhn ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Media Myth - Guns Are Always Bad for Us
On 31 Dec 2005, at 3:24 pm, Gary Nunn wrote: I apologize in advance, because I know this topic can get a bit heated on this list. The reason I'm posting this, is because this is the first media article that I've seen, from a major media outlet, that makes an attempt to be fair and accurate. If the difference in violent crime or murder rates or whatever was really obviously significantly different between gun-control/non-gun- control areas then one side or the other of the debate would be trumpeting that fact loudly. So whatever difference guns make it isn't enough for either side to have proved it after years of argument. Given that we have strict controls over the sale of alcohol, tobacco, fireworks and other possibly harmful materials it seems entirely sensible and in line with other regulation to control firearms sales especially since there is no compelling evidence that they significantly improve (or harm) personal safety *in general* but are obviously dangerous items individually. Most comparisons of gun ownership/crime rates are apples/oranges comparisons. Anomalies like Switzerland crop up. I'd be interested in a comparison of the USA with places that are similar such as Canada or Australia. That might be more enlightening than comparisons with Europe or South America. -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ If you listen to a UNIX shell, can you hear the C? ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Media Myth - Guns Are Always Bad for Us
William wrote: Gary wrote: I apologize in advance, because I know this topic can get a bit heated on this list. The reason I'm posting this, is because this is the first media article that I've seen, from a major media outlet, that makes an attempt to be fair and accurate. If the difference in violent crime or murder rates or whatever was really obviously significantly different between gun-control/non-gun- control areas then one side or the other of the debate would be trumpeting that fact loudly. So whatever difference guns make it isn't enough for either side to have proved it after years of argument. Given that we have strict controls over the sale of alcohol, tobacco, fireworks and other possibly harmful materials it seems entirely sensible and in line with other regulation to control firearms sales especially since there is no compelling evidence that they significantly improve (or harm) personal safety *in general* but are obviously dangerous items individually. Most comparisons of gun ownership/crime rates are apples/oranges comparisons. Anomalies like Switzerland crop up. I'd be interested in a comparison of the USA with places that are similar such as Canada or Australia. That might be more enlightening than comparisons with Europe or South America. A few points. First, its very disturbing to me that people feel the need to carry deadly force with them in order to feel safe. Second, how fair is it that the article doesn't mention that the reason the gun laws don't work might be that they are not enforced? http://w3.agsfoundation.com/enf2nationalpr.html Third, the article points out that fewer than 100 kids died in gun accidents last year, but fails to point out how many were killed in all firearm incidents. I'd be surprised if that number was lower than 2,500. Fourth, the fact is that no matter how poorly gun laws are working at present, gun violence is a plague. I'm a realist when it comes to firearms in this country; we'd sooner ban pizza than guns. But that doesn't negate the fact that they're a serious problem. -- Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Media Myth - Guns Are Always Bad for Us
Doug Pensinger wrote: I'm a realist when it comes to firearms in this country; we'd sooner ban pizza than guns. But that doesn't negate the fact that they're a serious problem. I'd sooner ban guns than pizza. Not sure how my next-door neighbor who owns a pizza joint and a gun feels about it. :) I think he gets a lot more out of the pizza joint than the gun, for the most part. But where I am, you'd have a much easier time banning pizza than guns. The pizza wouldn't be easy, though. (Especially the stuff our neighbor makes -- it's really good.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Media Myth - Guns Are Always Bad for Us
At 02:04 PM Saturday 12/31/2005, Doug Pensinger wrote: William wrote: Gary wrote: I apologize in advance, because I know this topic can get a bit heated on this list. The reason I'm posting this, is because this is the first media article that I've seen, from a major media outlet, that makes an attempt to be fair and accurate. If the difference in violent crime or murder rates or whatever was really obviously significantly different between gun-control/non-gun- control areas then one side or the other of the debate would be trumpeting that fact loudly. So whatever difference guns make it isn't enough for either side to have proved it after years of argument. Given that we have strict controls over the sale of alcohol, tobacco, fireworks and other possibly harmful materials it seems entirely sensible and in line with other regulation to control firearms sales especially since there is no compelling evidence that they significantly improve (or harm) personal safety *in general* but are obviously dangerous items individually. Most comparisons of gun ownership/crime rates are apples/oranges comparisons. Anomalies like Switzerland crop up. I'd be interested in a comparison of the USA with places that are similar such as Canada or Australia. That might be more enlightening than comparisons with Europe or South America. A few points. First, its very disturbing to me that people feel the need to carry deadly force with them in order to feel safe. Second, how fair is it that the article doesn't mention that the reason the gun laws don't work might be that they are not enforced? http://w3.agsfoundation.com/enf2nationalpr.html Third, the article points out that fewer than 100 kids died in gun accidents last year, but fails to point out how many were killed in all firearm incidents. I'd be surprised if that number was lower than 2,500. Fourth, the fact is that no matter how poorly gun laws are working at present, gun violence is a plague. I'm a realist when it comes to firearms in this country; we'd sooner ban pizza than guns. But that doesn't negate the fact that they're a serious problem. Even if you count the number of suicides as well as homicides and accidents in the total of deaths due to firearms, IIRC about as many or more people die in the US each year due to AIDS, and IIRC about twice as many die in automobile accidents, of which about half (according to those who collect the statistics) are due to alcohol use. What do you suggest might be banned to prevent those deaths? Or is the one thing common to all three personal responsibility? --Ronn! :) Since I was a small boy, two states have been added to our country and two words have been added to the pledge of Allegiance... UNDER GOD. Wouldn't it be a pity if someone said that is a prayer and that would be eliminated from schools too? -- Red Skelton (Someone asked me to change my .sig quote back, so I did.) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Media Myth - Guns Are Always Bad for Us
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William T Goodall Sent: December 31, 2005 3:28 PM To: Killer Bs Discussion Subject: Re: Media Myth - Guns Are Always Bad for Us On 31 Dec 2005, at 3:24 pm, Gary Nunn wrote: I apologize in advance, because I know this topic can get a bit heated on this list. The reason I'm posting this, is because this is the first media article that I've seen, from a major media outlet, that makes an attempt to be fair and accurate. If the difference in violent crime or murder rates or whatever was really obviously significantly different between gun-control/non-gun- control areas then one side or the other of the debate would be trumpeting that fact loudly. So whatever difference guns make it isn't enough for either side to have proved it after years of argument. Given that we have strict controls over the sale of alcohol, tobacco, fireworks and other possibly harmful materials it seems entirely sensible and in line with other regulation to control firearms sales especially since there is no compelling evidence that they significantly improve (or harm) personal safety *in general* but are obviously dangerous items individually. Most comparisons of gun ownership/crime rates are apples/oranges comparisons. Anomalies like Switzerland crop up. I'd be interested in a comparison of the USA with places that are similar such as Canada or Australia. That might be more enlightening than comparisons with Europe or South America. -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ If you listen to a UNIX shell, can you hear the C? ___ http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/050628/d050628a.htm Health Reports: Deaths involving firearms 2002: The rate of deaths involving firearms declined by more than one-half between 1979 and 2002, according to a new report based on the most recent data available from the Canadian Mortality Data Base. The report in the latest edition of Health Reports showed that 816 individuals — 767 males and 49 females — died from injuries related to firearms in 2002. Among males, this represented a rate of 4.9 deaths for every 100,000 population, down from 10.6 in 1979. The rate for females fell from 1.2 deaths for every 100,000 population to 0.3. In each year during this period, about four-fifths of firearms-related deaths were suicides. Homicides accounted for around 15% of such deaths, and about 4% were unintentional. In 1979, the rate of deaths related to firearms was highest among young people aged 15 to 24. By 2002, the differences between age groups had largely disappeared for people aged 15 or older. The risk of death from an injury related to firearms was a fraction of that in the United States. In 2000, the rate of homicide involving a gun in the United States was 3.8 for every 100,000 population, nearly eight times Canada's rate of 0.5. In Canada, homicides accounted for 18% of deaths involving firearms in 2000, compared with 38% in the United States. Decline in homicide rates involving firearms: Canada's rate of homicide involving firearms declined since 1979, mirroring a decrease in the overall homicide rate. However, the proportion of homicides in which a firearm was used remained fairly stable over the entire period at just under one-third. A report based on police records indicates that handguns accounted for two-thirds of homicides involving firearms in 2002, up from about one-half during the 1990s. Rifles and shotguns accounted for one-quarter of all homicides involving firearms. In 2002, 31 people were unintentionally killed by firearms, less than one-half of the total of 71 in 1979. Three of the victims in 2002 were younger than 15, compared with 16 in 1979. Another 3 were between 15 and 24 compared with 27 in 1979. Declines in death rates in these two age groups accounted for much of the drop in the overall rate of unintentional firearms-related deaths between 1979 and 2002. Among all suicides committed throughout the 1980s, around one in three involved firearms. By 2002, this proportion had declined to only about one in six. Ok with the US being roughly 10x the pop of Canada were at about 32.5 million right now that would put us scaled up at about 8200 persons having firearm related deaths. With direct homicide that would be about 2500 at us pop. Our rate hold true to about one third of firearm related deaths being homicides. Keep in mind that this is all 2002 stats well '77 through'02 and this year in Ontario alone the total fire arm deaths are @ 71 up 30 from previous years that’s a 73% jump. The latest was a boxing day shooting in Toronto that claimed the life of a 15 year old girl and injured 6 others. Its now looking like there will be a near total ban on all hand guns if the Liberals are elected to power on Jan
