20/20 about Guns vs Pools

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied
males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of
title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration
of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female
citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

This offends my wife. She wants to be a member of the militia without joining the National Guard.
 
This study (swimming pools vs. firearms) is discussed at length in Freakonomics. One of the authors, Stephen J. Dubner, appeared on Stossel's 20/20 special last night.
 
I am pleased that a major network is willing to air a show which points out the fallacy of the relationship between gun control and crime control.
 
No honest man needs more than 8 glasses of water per day...there needs to be limits on this nonsense. Are you aware that the car driving next to you may contain more than enough liquid to drown several children ...gasp?
 
If you have a stockpile of water, you must be using it for some evil purpose like water torture. Congress frowned on that practice. No man needs that much water..... lets regulate it, put a big tax on it, and make everyone go through a NICs check prior to allowing their access to water. Oh, and for you California and Maryland folks, make sure you have to wait 7-days or whatever before you can get that water. It's for the children.
 
I don't have a source for this other than a friend of mine, who said at breakfast this morning, that more people die in the bathroom each year from a variety of causes than from gunshot wounds.

Imagine if we had to have a waiting period before you could go to the bathroom.:eek: :uhoh: :what: :D
 
The ban on pools does not address the root problem of child safety. It's not pools that is murdering our kids, it is water. Our child deserve to live in a safe world, we must ban water--for the children, of course!

Ban Dihydrogen Monoxide
http://www.dhmo.org/

How about the need for a permit to carry water.


http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html

National Center for Injury Prevention and Control/CDC

2004, United States
Unintentional Firearm Deaths and Rates per 100,000
All Races, Both Sexes, Ages 1 to 18
Number of Deaths Population Crude
120 73,297,755 0.16


2004, United States
Unintentional Drowning Deaths and Rates per 100,000
All Races, Both Sexes, Ages 1 to 18
Number of Deaths Population Crude
931 73,297,755 1.27


2004, United States
Transport Deaths and Rates per 100,000
All Races, Both Sexes, Ages 1 to 18

Number of Deaths Population Crude
6,452 73,297,755 8.80
 
As a Pool Operator certified by the National Swimming Foundation, I can tell you that there are a bunch of dangerous things around a pool, not counting the chemicals that can be used...
 
Drac: Anyone who "declares an intention" belongs to the militia.

Able bodied males are required.

Fortunately, most antis are web-potato slush and not "able bodied," so we don't have to take them;)

If she has a center fire rifle, or volunteers, she's part of the militia. I'm still trying to relocate the relevant DoD reg.
 
gun accidents vs other accidental deaths

Automobiles are the leading cause of accidental deaths in this nation. Accidental gun deaths are approximately 1% comparitavely. So why aren't the brady bunch and other similar orgs. going after the pools and the cars. :p They are far more dangerous. Quick, fill in all the pools...no more swimming!:neener:
 
UMMM...

Because guns are used more than twice as often defensively as criminally.

That can't be true, can it? I mean, it sounds nice, but I can't see how it's mathematically possible. Badguy pulls a gun on you, you draw your gun or guns and scare him off or shoot him. That's one for the criminal side, and one for the defensive side.

Maybe the badguy pulls a knife, and you defend with a gun? That's illegal where I live, and so would still count as one defensive and one criminal use of a gun. Even if it weren't illegal, does this scenario happen so much more often than gun/gun confrontations to make up for the statistic?

This reminds me of a statistic I often saw repeated when I was in college, to the effect that the average straight guy has 20 partners in his life and the average straight woman has only 5. Sorry, it can't happen that way, it takes two to tango. Or gunfight. (No need to post your personal numbers, please).

Anyway, I'm not trying to sound anti-gun, but how can this statistic be true?
 
I wonder....

Do you suppose that it's illegal to possess a pool within 1000' of a public school?

Or, are felons allowed to own pools?

There's just so much to ponder...... :confused:
 
Anyway, I'm not trying to sound anti-gun, but how can this statistic be true?

Because criminal usage of a gun is only recorded when someone is injured/killed, or when something is stolen or otherwise taken. In a standard street encounter between BG with a gun and GG with a gun, and the BG runs away, statistics will record that as one incident of a firearm used legally and defensively, and discard the incidental use of a firearm by the BG.
 
Maybe the badguy pulls a knife, and you defend with a gun? That's illegal where I live,

It shouldn't be. You may defend yourself with deadly force under circumstances in which a reasonable person would fear for their life, in almost all jurisdictions. A knife is certainly a deadly weapon.

This reminds me of a statistic I often saw repeated when I was in college, to the effect that the average straight guy has 20 partners in his life and the average straight woman has only 5. Sorry, it can't happen that way, it takes two to tango.

You're assuming a 1:1 ratio. That's average. A few people will have far higher than average numbers of partners and skew the graph.

Consider that if you have 30 people in a room, odds are even that two of them have the same birthday, even though there are 365.25 possible birthdays per person.
 
Bix said:
This study (swimming pools vs. firearms) is discussed at length in Freakonomics. One of the authors, Stephen J. Dubner, appeared on Stossel's 20/20 special last night.

I haven't had any luck finding the guns vs. swimming pools study. You wouldn't happen to have a link, would you?
 
I really enjoy the way John Stossel writes and thinks. The man has his head screwed on straight.

He is a syndicated columnist as well as being on 20/20. His articles appear in a local NH paper, The Weirs Times, along with Oliver North, Michelle Malkin, and one other right-thinking individual who's name escapes me.

I think 20/20 should get rid of everyone except Mr. Stossel.
 
Now we need the number of houses with firearms against the number of houses with pools. If there are less houses with pools that firearms wouldn't this make pools more dangerous?
 
Gettin' me a Pool for HD, they sound dangerous!

John Stossel is a great reporter. Instead of following the Times, he has an actuall curiosity that a reporter should have and he's not affraid to report something if it's not main stream. Big time libertarian.

From my wet, wrinkled fingers
molon labe!
 
Well I have far more tubs toilets and 5 gallon pails than I do firearms, I have a virtual arsenal of drowning implements.


I didn't even register them with the Bureau of Plumbing Devices & Liquid Storage.. you know the BPDLS :neener:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top