Community > Posts By > msharmony

 
msharmony's photo
Fri 03/02/12 11:34 AM

can someone find flaw with the deduction that if you have a gun you are more likely to be shot by it than someone who doesnt have a gun?


Sad . . . the statistics for accident discharge causing injury are miniscule. Its not even a number important in the death rate by firearm in the US.

This is an apples to oranges red herring having nothing to do with the discussion. We are talking about someone, not yourself, killing you with a firearm and your rebuttal is that if guns didn't exist people wouldn't have firearm accidents . . . . sigh.


Approximately 6,500 homicides were committed using handguns in 1999; since there were roughly 70 million handguns, the chance of any particular gun being used in a homicide is very low.[40]


msharmony your lack of knowledge on this topic is epic. Its clear you have spent very little time doing anything but reinforcing your own bias.






what I posted wasnt about 'accidental discharge', neither was the portion of the article I posted afterwards to support it,,,,

but , perhaps I shouldnt bother with my 'bias' (as you clearly have none ,huh?)

msharmony's photo
Fri 03/02/12 11:32 AM


If love was unconditional; why are there divorces or break ups? If someone cheats on you; then why leave them if your love is unconditional? The condition is you love them and they don't cheat on you. How about when someone abuses you, neglects you, or doesn't spend time with you? Are you still going to love then unconditionally? If so, then why break it off with them? How about kids? An example is your loving teenager or even adult kids murders the love of your life. But what the heck; you still love the that child. After all its just a murder. Sorry, I am having a hard time digesting that. I love my brother and the condition I set is he talks to me on the phone once in a while or we have coffee. Yes, small conditions but conditions none the less. I would not love anyone without some conditions in place as I am not a fool. The conditions don't have to be materialistic; the person doesn't even have to say they love me but I do expect them to acknowledge the existence of me; that is my condition. I may not be romantic but I am practical.


Love is a feeling, not a condemnation, or a contract, or a prison sentence. You can leave a bad person you love.



yours was so much simpler than mine,,,,lol

exactly

msharmony's photo
Fri 03/02/12 11:32 AM

If love was unconditional; why are there divorces or break ups? If someone cheats on you; then why leave them if your love is unconditional? The condition is you love them and they don't cheat on you. How about when someone abuses you, neglects you, or doesn't spend time with you? Are you still going to love then unconditionally? If so, then why break it off with them? How about kids? An example is your loving teenager or even adult kids murders the love of your life. But what the heck; you still love the that child. After all its just a murder. Sorry, I am having a hard time digesting that. I love my brother and the condition I set is he talks to me on the phone once in a while or we have coffee. Yes, small conditions but conditions none the less. I would not love anyone without some conditions in place as I am not a fool. The conditions don't have to be materialistic; the person doesn't even have to say they love me but I do expect them to acknowledge the existence of me; that is my condition. I may not be romantic but I am practical.


again, love is how we feel for someone

feeling love for someone does not require us to remain in unhealthy relationships, we can love without sharing a life

that is why things 'break up', because even though we may love someone unconditionally, that doesnt negate our unconditional love for ourself and unwillingness to be unsafe or unhappy to 'prove' love to someone,,,

and , as a mother, I can tell you that even if my child murdered someone, I wouldnt stop loving them

we dont have to approve of or even like what someone does to love them, I would be disgusted, hurt, dissapointed, but none of that would keep me from LOVING my child

msharmony's photo
Fri 03/02/12 11:17 AM


such a discussion would be futile, because Im sure I can post information stating gun ownership correlates with HIGHER victimization,, and others could find things to post stating gun ownership correlates with lower victimization
Honestly looking at facts is never futile unless your bias is so severe as to disregard any facts that do not support your conclusions.

Get your study that shows that legal gun ownership has a direct correlation to murder rate and we can talk about it.

Till then your just making stuff up.

The vast majority of gun owners are never involved in a violent crime of any kind, so your work is cut out for you.

I dont think its relevant in a gun discussion to talk about ALL Crime
Actually it is, becuase defensive use of a firearm involves all crime.

When you try to compare the murder rate against the totality of crime against the ability of a person to defend themselves you then get a picture of the positive and negative aspects of gun ownership. A complete view is the only objective view.



I dont think thats quite so true

defensive use of a firearm is probably rarely reported and is most likely not involved in MANY Crimes

such as pickpocketing, or jaywalking, or burglaries,,,etc,,,

crimes involving MATERIAL Possessions in the absence of a physical victim would not be relevant to a discussion of 'defensive use' of a firearm


as to the information regarding violence and guns, I gave a common sense example of such information

can someone find flaw with the deduction that if you have a gun you are more likely to be shot by it than someone who doesnt have a gun?


as to information elsewhere,,,

"The issue of "home defense" or protection against intruders or assailants may well be misrepresented. A study of 626 shootings in or around a residence in three U.S. cities revealed that, 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 (Kellermann et al, 1998). Over 50% of all households in the U.S. admit to having firearms (Nelson et al, 1987). In another study, regardless of storage practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home, having a gun in the home was associated with an increased risk of firearm homicide and suicide in the home (Dahlberg, Ikeda and Kresnow, 2004). Persons who own a gun and who engage in abuse of intimate partners such as a spouse are more likely to use a gun to threaten their intimate partner. (Rothman et al, 2005). Individuals in possession of a gun at the time of an assault are 4.46 times more likely to be shot in the assault than persons not in possession (Branas et al, 2009). It would appear that, rather than beign used for defense, most of these weapons inflict injuries on the owners and their families.
"


this is but one example, Im sure I could find several others

and others could rebuttal with dozens of examples of other 'studies' which seem to suggest the opposite,,,,,

msharmony's photo
Fri 03/02/12 11:12 AM



I don't believe those stats mean much Spider.

How about the stats on just violence? People in China probably carry knives and swords and clubs. They probably can't afford guns.

Canada... he he he... less people = less violence.





not just that, but in western culture

less guns equals less GUN death


When those statistics separate out victim vs criminal deaths, it will mean something; until then, it's absolutely useless. There is a world of difference between a young woman being shot while jogging and a young woman killing her would-be rapist.



maybe not to the rapists family

Ive been the victim, and I wouldnt want that person dead for it,,,

msharmony's photo
Fri 03/02/12 11:07 AM
I Agree it was in poor taste

and more of a personal insult than a joke,, in my opinion

jokes are usually general or about a specific person BASED upon something they did or said themself,,,

msharmony's photo
Fri 03/02/12 11:04 AM
Edited by msharmony on Fri 03/02/12 11:05 AM




Gun Violence.

United States - 11,127 (3.601/100,000)
Germany – 381 (0.466/100,000)
France – 255 (0.389/100,000)
Canada – 165 (0.484/100,000)
United Kingdom – 68 (0.109/100,000)
Australia – 65 (0.292/100,000)
Japan – 39 (0.030/100,000)




Why only look at a tiny sliver of the statistics? We know guns are more common in the USA than in those countries, but what about total crime?


Crime in the UK versus Crime in the US

New York has a population of 8 million, London 7 million
London's crime rate is about 7 times that of New York
Police budgets are comparable
New York has 40% more cops on the beat




I dont think its relevant in a gun discussion to talk about ALL Crime

crime can be anything from pick pocketing to jay walking TO violent crime


I think in the discussion about guns, violence is the concern


Guns in a society serve to reduce the likelihood of all crimes, any discussion about crime should include the effects of gun ownership.


such a discussion would be futile, because Im sure I can post information stating gun ownership correlates with HIGHER victimization,, and others could find things to post stating gun ownership correlates with lower victimization


one logical deduction, however, is that if you are possession of a gun, you are more likely to be shot by it than someone who doesnt have one,,,,

msharmony's photo
Fri 03/02/12 11:00 AM

I don't believe those stats mean much Spider.

How about the stats on just violence? People in China probably carry knives and swords and clubs. They probably can't afford guns.

Canada... he he he... less people = less violence.





not just that, but in western culture

less guns equals less GUN death

msharmony's photo
Fri 03/02/12 10:52 AM


Gun Violence.

United States - 11,127 (3.601/100,000)
Germany – 381 (0.466/100,000)
France – 255 (0.389/100,000)
Canada – 165 (0.484/100,000)
United Kingdom – 68 (0.109/100,000)
Australia – 65 (0.292/100,000)
Japan – 39 (0.030/100,000)




Why only look at a tiny sliver of the statistics? We know guns are more common in the USA than in those countries, but what about total crime?


Crime in the UK versus Crime in the US

New York has a population of 8 million, London 7 million
London's crime rate is about 7 times that of New York
Police budgets are comparable
New York has 40% more cops on the beat




I dont think its relevant in a gun discussion to talk about ALL Crime

crime can be anything from pick pocketing to jay walking TO violent crime


I think in the discussion about guns, violence is the concern

msharmony's photo
Fri 03/02/12 10:49 AM

Human love can never be unconditional.Our love is as imperfect as we humans ourselves r.No woman can love a man who does not provide her food n shelter n no man loves a woman who can not provide sexual pleasure.Only parents love is mostly unconditional but in their old age even they have the expectation to be looked after.Only Gods love for humans is completely onconditional.



love can be and is unconditional

having expectations doesnt have an absolute connection to loving someone

I expected fidelity in my first marriage, because I didnt get that I left that SITUATION, but I still love and always will love my ex husband,,,,thats unconditional

msharmony's photo
Fri 03/02/12 10:47 AM

I don't see the racism in the joke.
And as far as calling the judge a bigot, does that mean I'm a bigot for forwarding blonde jokes?
Gimme a break it was a JOKE!!!!



a racist is ONE type of bigot, all bigots are not racist

I said he was a BIGOT,,,,

: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices;


Obstinate: perversely adhering to an opinion



he made a rather PERVERSE statement with that joke about a SPECIFIC person (with no personal knowledge about them),,,,that was bigoted,,,,,

msharmony's photo
Thu 03/01/12 07:07 PM
Pain is the most common symptom of injury and disease, and descriptions can range in intensity from a mere ache to unbearable agony. Nociceptors have the ability to convey information to the brain that indicates the location, nature, and intensity of the pain. For example, stepping on a nail sends an information-packed message to the brain: the foot has experienced a puncture wound that hurts a lot.

msharmony's photo
Thu 03/01/12 06:57 PM
Is it better to be needed or wanted

at this point in life, I have had enough people needing me and am responsible for the needs of enough that being 'needed' is not something I particularly look for in a relationship

ID prefer someone be there because it was their desire to be , not their NEED to be,,,its a big responsibility to be someones need,,,,

msharmony's photo
Thu 03/01/12 06:55 PM






That is kinda funnylaugh


To bad we have a vengeful and vendictive man in the White House.



did the joke try to imply how vengeful or vendictive someone was,,,because I didnt get that part?





No but we all know Osama err Obama now has this judge in his cross hairs.



well, maybe only those delusionally clairvoyant folks,,,,


msharmony's photo
Thu 03/01/12 05:32 PM




that is probably as relevant to the job as the politician overheard at a get together here actually ADVISING a non resident guest to go on and cast a vote on our ballots in support of said candidate,,,,


it sets bad form, but is it as relevant as their actual 'job history'......probably not...

this wouldnt be the first bigot to be able to seperate their personal quirks from their professional decisions,,although its probably not the norm

And your callig this man a bigot because he forwarded a joke?
Jump to conclusions much?



no, because he forwarded a joke implying a SPECIFIC woman would have been willing to sleep with a dog,,,,


She probably did.



whoa

msharmony's photo
Thu 03/01/12 05:31 PM

At least you are not blaming video games or Marilyn Manson like the idiots in the media do.



well, media is part of our culture, but it cant simply be media because those other countries have similar media available,,,

its how we REACT to the media,,,,

in essence, the difference is in the ATTITUDE of the person/people

msharmony's photo
Thu 03/01/12 05:29 PM




That is kinda funnylaugh


To bad we have a vengeful and vendictive man in the White House.



did the joke try to imply how vengeful or vendictive someone was,,,because I didnt get that part?



msharmony's photo
Thu 03/01/12 05:28 PM


that is probably as relevant to the job as the politician overheard at a get together here actually ADVISING a non resident guest to go on and cast a vote on our ballots in support of said candidate,,,,


it sets bad form, but is it as relevant as their actual 'job history'......probably not...

this wouldnt be the first bigot to be able to seperate their personal quirks from their professional decisions,,although its probably not the norm

And your callig this man a bigot because he forwarded a joke?
Jump to conclusions much?



no, because he forwarded a joke implying a SPECIFIC woman would have been willing to sleep with a dog,,,,

msharmony's photo
Thu 03/01/12 04:12 PM

Gun Violence.

United States - 11,127 (3.601/100,000)
Germany – 381 (0.466/100,000)
France – 255 (0.389/100,000)
Canada – 165 (0.484/100,000)
United Kingdom – 68 (0.109/100,000)
Australia – 65 (0.292/100,000)
Japan – 39 (0.030/100,000)





I think several of those have a 'social' type structure where the masses have a culture where taking care of the weakest is not a burden = less desperation and less ego



msharmony's photo
Thu 03/01/12 04:08 PM
laugh laugh


ego, greed, and desperation are pretty much the driving forces for most violence

and we have and promote plenty of the first two in our culture

and we create plenty of the third with some of our policies,,,

1 2 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next