Two weeks ago, a decorated American soldier, husband and father of young children slaughtered 17 Afghan wives, fathers and young children in their homes. In doing so, he killed the people he was supposed to protect with the gun he was supposed to use to protect them, something I am certain he once could never have imagined himself doing. If the news did not make you want to curl up with your blankie and cry, your heart is missing its strings.
What made a temporary monster out of a decent man, we may never know. What made these deaths statistically inevitable, however, is the math of people and guns, which goes like this: The more guns we have in a population of people, the more often innocent people will be killed with those guns.
In America, this math points to a paradox: More and more of us are buying guns because we think having them around makes us safer when, in fact, the opposite is true. Those guns are more likely to be used against us than to be used to protect us, and their addition to our homes make us more likely to be victims, not less.
A 1998 study of 626 shootings in three American cities showed that, for every time a gun in the home was used for self-defense, there were 11 attempted or completed suicides, four unintentional shootings and seven homicides or criminal assaults.
On a larger scale, numerous studies have shown that the higher a population’s rate of gun ownership is, the higher its rate of gun deaths is. That’s why Alaska, where 60 percent of homes have guns in them, has a gun death rate six times higher than Hawaii, where about 10 percent of homes have guns.
That’s why there were more than 31,000 gun deaths in America in 2010, of which 19,308 were suicides and 11,015 were homicides. We have a rate of gun deaths in America that makes us look more like Afghanistan than any other western country because we have the highest rate of gun ownership in the western world.
And because the closer you are to a gun the more likely that gun is to be used on you or someone you love, most of those deaths are killings of someone else in the home where the gun is or suicides of home inhabitants who got hold of the guns.
That means if you put enough guns where enough American children might get their hands on them, sooner or later the math of probability will produce tragedy. In a recent incident in Seattle, Wash., a three-year-old accidentally shot and killed himself with the handgun his father left in the car while gassing it up. A police officer’s son brought the officer’s handgun to school in a backpack; when he accidentally dropped the backpack the gun fired a bullet that struck and seriously injured a classmate. Add up hundreds of such tragedies each year and what do you get? This: Our rate of firearm deaths for children under the age of 15 is about three times higher than in any European country.
This all means the second a gun is added to our home, our odds of being shot with it have increased. The second we allow more students to carry them on college campuses or employees to bring them to work in cars, the second we have made college campuses and those workplaces less safe. The more neighborhood watch members we have patrolling with guns on their hips the more deadly confrontations there will be with teenagers.
These deadly facts must be considered as more states change laws to make it easier to buy guns, and especially to carry guns with us everywhere we go. As more of us own them, walk around with pistols on our hips or drive with them our cars, we are not making ourselves safer. We are, in fact, inexorably making ourselves more and more likely to be shot by our own guns, the ones we bought never imagining in a million years they would never be turned against our own husbands, wives and children.
Erik Steele, a physician in Bangor, is chief medical officer of Eastern Maine Healthcare Systems.
eric steele, softer then a sneaker full of you know what.
I can completely understand your research Erick. It ties in well with my view that alcohol is a dangerous and vile substance not to be trusted.
Isn’t it also true that alcohol and direct
access to alcohol leads to more violence and alcohol related deaths? Don’t
individuals who drive while intoxicated cause more death and mayhem in their
wakes than sober drivers?
Shouldn’t we
consider these deadly facts as more states change laws to make it easier to
access alcohol, and especially to allow us to carry alcohol with us everywhere
we go. As more of us consume alcohol, and brazenly walk around with a capped whiskey
bottles in our hands or drive with closed beer containers in our cars, aren’t we creating
a dangerous environment? We are, in fact, inexorably making ourselves more and
more likely to drink ALCOHOL! Unfortunately, as human beings we always seem to fail
to consider that our consumption of alcohol can turn us against humanity and
even our own husbands, wives and children.
I say we ban
alcohol . . . hey wait a minute didn’t we try this once already and it fail miserably?
Your research = Epic Fail.
While I get what you’re saying, it’s not an apt comparison. Every state has very strict laws regarding the consumption of alcohol; how much before it’s illegal, drinking ages, laws that require those who serve alcohol to not serve someone who is intoxicated or be liable, laws that charge OUI drivers with homicide, public intoxication, etc. There currently is a movement throughout the US that is loosening controls on guns. There is even a proposal to force states to honor laws passed by other states, meaning that if someone can carry concealed in one state, all other states must honor it. States rights, anyone? All the doctor is saying is that more guns = more people being shot and killed. That’s just basic math.
It wasn’t my intent to make a direct comparison, my intent was to point out that more of any dangerous substance in the wrong hands will cause more death. If I hand out a billion knives across the US, more people will get cut. I don’t disagree with the basic math, I just think someone could tie to the same argument a thousand other comparisons and come to the same conclusions. People write articles like this to put pressure on gun ownership in the wake of personal tragedy and that I don’t like.
You don’t think there aren’t strict laws on guns now? There are and many are antiquated and ill conceived. If there is a movement across the US to loosen gun control, I am guess it is being driven by a MAJORITY of our population that feels the same way I do.
Also to be considered with Mr Steeles research. What about crime rates where there is more gun control or even bans on guns! Lets look overseas at Australia’s history and when they started banning firearms, there crime rates ( especially violent ) went ski high! Now let’s look within ours own country better yet New York city. There are NO handguns allowed in New York,New York violent firearm related crime there is alot higher than it should be! Also to consider in New York city ( where handguns are banned) who has handguns?
Before doing your kind of research Mr Steele you need to include ALL the facts and numbers into your equation. NOT just your Liberal gun hating views and facts that help them!
Steeles statistics are heavily skewed by careful picking of terms and data to support the anti gun viewpoint.
No need to generalize….
I’m more liberal than I am conservative, but I also understand and love guns.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx
Only about 11% of Americans want less strict gun laws.
25% want more strict, btw.
Until very recently it was almost impossible to legally own a firearm in Washington DC. Washington DC was/is the murder capitol of the US. Please explain to me how this could be possible if having fewer guns makes one safer.
Thanks in advance.
You fail to mention that Louisiana is second to DC for firearm murders, per 100,000. And their gun laws are as loose as…well, something quite loose ;)
Tennessee and South Carolina are the top two for firearm assaults.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AonYZs4MzlZbdGhycDRPQlN1dTBoMzJWOTk0Uk9DRVE&hl=en#gid=9
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state#data
Just throwing some statistics your way!
Hitler’s Germany had strict gun laws , how did that work out ?
Niiiice, comparing our country’s Capitol to Nazi Germany..
With the assault on basic freedoms with the Patriot Act (We don’t know everything that’s in it that law because it is a matter of national security). The assassination of American citizens. The new counter terrorism guidelines which allows the government to hold data on YOU for 5 years. http://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpid1201.pdf
Identification is required for just about everything. Physical pat downs are required of incontinent old ladies at Airports. Plans to expand that to trains stations and bus stops.
Your web browsing activity is not private and the government can get your browsing history without a warrant….
Tell me how do you tell the difference?
The problem with your statistics and the Dr’s is that if a man sticks a gun in my face and says he’s about to kill me, I am now justified in killing him by whatever means possible. If I do that with my hands, it’s simply self defense. If I do it with a gun, that is counted as “gun violence,” a homicide etc.. When it was nothing more than defending myself. How much of these statistics were people defending themselves? How much was people defending others? How much was from the cops shooting people in defense of others?
It seems to me the “Doc” is trying to capitalize of the current media hysteria to advance a movement. No one wants crazy people or criminals to have guns and far as that goes, I support requirements of competence and safety standards for those who are going to have guns. But if we ban everyone from having them, only the crazy and the criminals will have them.
For every accidental death (802), suicide (16,869) or homicide (11,348) with a firearm (29,019), 13 lives (390,000) are preserved through defensive use.
Most firearm accidents are caused by people with various forms of poor selfcontrol. These include alcoholics, people with previous criminal records, people with multiple driving accidents, and people who engage in other risky behaviors.
[45-65 million Americans have a criminal record and over half of Americans are regular drinkers.]
Project Exile in Richmond, Virginia prosecutes felons caught with guns, and prosecutes them using Federal laws that require mandatory imprisonment. The first year result was a 33% drop in homicides for the Richmond Metro area in a year where the national murder rate was climbing. This shows that enforcement works. And according to Andrew McBride of the Richmond Justice Department Office, these cases are as easy to prosecute as “picking change up off the street.”
Half of all murders are committed by people on “conditional release” (i.e., parole or probation). 81% of all homicide defendants had an arrest record; 67% had a felony arrest record; 70% had a conviction record; and 54% had a felony conviction.
Most violent crime is caused by a small minority of repeat offenders. One California study found that 3.8% of a group of males born in 1956 were responsible for 55.5% of all serious felonies. 75-80% of murder arrestees have prior arrests for a violent (including non-fatal) felony or burglary. On average they have about four felony arrests and one felony conviction.
http://gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.0/Gun-Facts-v6.0-screen.pdf
I never actually voiced my opinion on the matter of gun control, just tossed some stats out there.
No, I don’t think they should be banned and no one can have guns. But, if they were banned for everyone, wouldn’t you still keep one? You calling yourself a crazy criminal? ;)
IMO, the problem lies in letting criminals out of jail too soon. It only makes sense that that isn’t helping our country out. Like if you put a kid in time-out for one minute, it won’t prevent him from doing that bad thing. He’ll keep doing it and spending the minute. If you put him in time-out for 10 or 15 minutes, that’ll work. Know what I mean?
Violent Crime is the lowest it has been in over 20 years while firearms ownership is becoming more popular every day and continues to reach record levels.
Have you tried to buy a gun lately, they do a background check on you if you buy one new. Have you tried to buy alcohol lately, they just have to see my ID, and in some cases they don’t ask.
As with being responsible to do the correct(right) thing for our having freedoms which almost no other country has until recently, having a firearm(s) requires restraint because we need to not use guns improperly. Except for recent shootings(gang or personal), many in Maine have 5 or more guns but the next to lowest amount of deaths in the country. Over 2.5 million confrontations per year have been stopped because of someone who had access to a gun and used it properly making more than maybe double that amount saved. I feel sorry for those needlessly killed, but 2.5-over 5 million people are still fulfilling their dreams because they have more time to live. I feel sorry for the 11-12,000 people in this country who can’t follow their dreams anymore,but your analysis is for the total loss of guns to the American citizen. All we need is for OhOhbama or the UN to take away our legal use of guns. Great philosophy for us to lose our freedoms and to have where
burglars break into our homes and steal or even worse,kill the occupants who are in their homes during broad daylight. Fiction? No, because it happens in England all the time. Let’s get rid of baseball bats and knives because these are used to kill more people than guns.
I completely agree with you (and own far more than the average of 5 firearms), but I think your fear of Pres Obama is misplaced. Under his presidency gun laws across the country have relaxed considerably, the aussalt weapons ban expiredand CC laws are springing up everwhere. The fear of Pres Obama’s potential “gun control” laws have made him personally responsible for the sale of more guns than any other president in history, yet the laws never materialized.
I would be more concerned about Mitt Romney presidency if I were you. During his tenure as Gov of Mass he enacted a Permanent assault weapons ban in Mass, and he fully supports the Brady Bill. Mitt Romney presided over one of the strictest gun control states in the union, you have to have a special license to buy ammunition in Mass, and ALL fireams must be registered and licensed. Do you want that for the country? I certainly don’t.
The “assult weapon” ban expired under Bush. Obama and many other Democrats supported reauthorization, and still do.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30389664/ns/politics-white_house/t/first-days-assault-weapons-ban/
So doesn’t the Reublican candidate Mitt Romney. Mass has a permanent ban on Assault weapons that Romney signed.
Which doesn’t make Obama any less dangerous.
Dear Dr. Steele,
Thank you for your well-reasoned, intelligent piece. Unfortunately, as you no doubt know, you are facing a wall of Republicans who are creatures of faith, not logic. And many Americans are addicted to weapons, and will raise the same kind of arguments, tricks, denials, and deceits that any addict who refuses to face their downward slide.
Thanks for your efforts. It is perhaps all a well-meaning open-minded person can do.
Dear Mr steele. You are an 1diot
So what you are saying is that if we make guns illegal then people will no longer commit illegal crimes with guns? Or do you suppose it will simply be another law that the criminal will be breaking? If you make guns illegal it will only stop law abiding citizens from owning guns.
Many drugs are illegal, does that stop people from using them? Does it stop people from committing crimes as a result of drugs? No.
This isn’t an issue of Republicans and their faith, and blah blah, I am not a Republican, I am not religious, and I do not own a gun. But this is America and we have a natural right to own, and posses a gun. Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.
All your arguments are cliches, trotted out countless times by the NRA. You sound like an automaton. Look at all the gun deaths, look at the school shootings, and the rogue military shootings. Recently Sarah Palin but a target on a Democratic legislator, and she was shot in the head.
Travel to Canada. Travel to other democracies. The arguments given to promote gun ownership are the arguments of addicts in complete denial of the extreme violence every which way in our sick empire, with its sick Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and its sad decline into violence and hate.
Faith vs. reason. It’s that simple. That’s what separates us.
Cliche or not, guns do not kill people. They are incapable
Same with heroin. Same with alcohol. Same with rage. Same with depression. Same with hate.
And? With the exception of heroin, none of those are illegal. I’m not sure your point.
Don’t mean to speak for Spruce, but…
Guns aren’t illegal either. The point was that “things” do kill people.
Saying guns don’t kill people is the same as saying heroin doesn’t kill people.
They most certainly do kill people when put in the hands of any cretin walking the streets of America.
Actually neither firearms nor heroin kill people unless they are used and both take a physical action to accomplish that.
Isn’t that what gun proponents aim to do? Use guns…?
There are many ways to use firearms that don’t involve breaking the law
One doesn’t have to be breaking the law for a firearm accident to occur.
Concern yourself with vehicle accidents or as pointed out, medical field related accidents that kill 7 times as many people as both firearms borne murders and suicides combined each year.
“Isn’t that what gun proponents aim to do? Use guns…?”
To do what? Kill people? No, I have never had a reason to use the firearms I own to kill anyone (or anything for the matter). And I think I can safely say that 99.9% of firearm owners never have to use their firearms to kill anyone either.
For target shooting? Yes
For clay? Yes
But to take a life? No, I have never had and pray that I never have to but if necessary I would not hesitate to do so.
Id support a ban on tree hugging hippies.
Gee, another angry irrational person who hates liberals, and who owns a lot of guns.
Hate and guns. Great combination.
Yet, as much as I hate tree hugging hippies, and own alot of guns, I have never killed anyone, and hope I never have to. Strange thing to take responsibility for my own actions huh?
“Same with heroin.” How many home invasions has heroin stopped?
“Same with alcohol.” How many home invasions has alcohol stopped?
The balance are emotions and are present with or without firearms, cars, etc…
Spruce Dweller I’m not understanding your faith vs reason argument. According to the Brady Campaign for gun violence California should be the safest state in the nation due to stringent gun laws but we all know that is not the case. The V.T shooting were committed in an area that banned firearms. The Columbine shootings were committed after the girl friend of one of the shooters violated the law to buy guns for the two teens. Do accidents happen with firearms, yes they do and it’s absolutely regrettable and anyone who owns firearms wish it did happen. But accidents happen on the operating tables of hospitals, in the air with planes, on the ground with automobiles, and in houses that catch on fire. Nothing in this world is perfect and it’s never going to be. We can’t live in a bubble and we can’t stick out head in the sand and ignore what’s happening in the world around us. People are becoming more violent, serious drug use in our communities is a concern for everyone, and more and more people are fearful for their safety. I carry for protection and keep guns in my home and hope that I’ll never have to use any of them in a means other than procuring some game meat for my freezer. My and my families safety means more to me than the person trying to inflict harm on me/us.
California is flooded with guns. When I lived there I easily bought handguns, shotguns, semiautomatic rifles.
The VT shooting involved an island surrounded by guns.
The Columbine shooting was clearly aided by gun culture and lots of guns everywhere.
You can keep throwing up the kinds of arguments that people in denial use to hide from their addiction. They sound good on the surface.
Gun violence is out of control in this country, and is going to get worse and worse as gun ownership expands, and we continue to glorify shooting, gunfighting, ‘natural born killers’ and all that.
A majority of gun crimes in this country are committed by people who illegally obtained their gun because they could not legally obtain them. That means that, for those people, guns are already illegal, yet the crimes are still committed.
And it’s easy to get a gun illegally because?
Well there are many scenarios but a popular way for a felon to get a gun in these parts is to “befriend” a woman with perhaps a confidence or drug problem, give her the cash to buy it, she fills out the form and she comes back clear, then she purchases the weapon and hands it to the felon for some kind of favor. It’s a very common practice. It gets worse after that.
That scenario is filled with many felonies as it is, why would adding a few more charges prevent anything?
And counties that ban private ownership of firearms should have zero firearm related deaths right?
I’m not sure what denial you’re referring too? I’ll admit to anyone that I like guns for a variety of reasons. Anyone who knows me knows that. But while you claim everyone that is pro gun is using the same tired arguments, anti-gunners are using arguments that simply don’t hold up. I will agree with you that gun violence is out of control in this country but that’s for a variety of reasons not the least of which violent offenders often times aren’t punished enough for their actions. It may seem like an old statement but taking away firearms from those who follow the rules doesn’t solve anything. I’m not sure where you’re getting your information but as gun ownership has increased in this country the rate of violent crime has dropped. Every non gunner proclaims the sky is falling when laws are passed or removed but as of yet the statistics don’t add up.
The Alaskan suicide rate is high in general and they are currently working on trying to solve the why. Dr. Steel failed to mention that Alaska has a high rate of child abuse, alcoholism, and that a disproportionately high percentage of those committing suicide are Natives, especially the teens and young adults. Why are we blaming firearms for that? I won’t disagree that it gives those people a faster mode of ending their life but if someone is determined they’re going to do it sadly. What we need is more awareness, education, and to lessen to stigma of depression so people are willing to receive help if they need it.
One your last point I couldn’t agree more. Kids today see much more violent imagery than ever before and it’s my belief it’s having an impact. Between what’s on tv, dvds, the computer, and video games it’s as if we’re training them to be more violent (especially the video games). For this I have to blame parents. Kids are going to get into things they’re not supposed, its the nature of being a kid but far too many parents are allowing young and very young children to play games where the goal is to shoot and kill, stab, batter, ect the other person on the screen. The line between what’s socially acceptable and not is so blurred that there is no way for them to differentiate. (And this is coming from a 29 year old male with those games in the house. Kids that visit are not allowed to play them however) You can blame guns if you like, but our violent culture is not going to simply go away because the firearms do. There are many more problems and a one run, simple solution isn’t going to solve them.
I never thought I’d live to see the day, but you’ve finally said something intelligent yourself:
…and we continue to glorify shooting, gunfighting, ‘natural born killers’ and all that.
It’s NOT the presence of guns in the hands of law abiding citizens that are the primary problem. A much bigger part of the problem is the cheapening of the value of human life and the glorifying of gun misuse in Hollywood and on TV which, by the way, is controlled by your fellow lefties. Dr Steele obviously has his own political axe to grind so he deliberately tells only one side of the story, a bit disappointing but pretty standard for libs who can always seem to rationalize that the end justifies the means. I could understand his perspective if he lived in California or NY or DC, but he deliberately ignores what goes on here in his own back yard. Unless his head is so far up in the clouds that he’s completely out of touch with our local area, he surely must know that Maine has among the very highest gun ownership rates, but is among the lowest when it comes to violent crime rates, yet he chooses to ignore this fact to make his politically motivated point.
And let’s not forget the ‘shoot ’em up” video games that have become so popular.
California aye, Now I know where you come up with some of this stuff.
Your argument is based on the premise that the US is awash in firearms, and to a large degree you are correct. You must agreee that the majority of firearm owners are law abididng citizens, correct? I agree that the prevalence of firearms makes it easier for criminals to access them (violating current laws, they are after all criminals). So the only option I see you pointing toward is the complete removal of firearms from our society. Now you and I can both agree that will probably not happen right? So that leaves the question, are YOU going to own a firearm to protect your loved ones and yourself, or are you going to be a victim?
You’re right, my arguments are based on faith, as your as based on reason. I am providing you with reason, with actual facts, yet you refuse to at the very least acknowledge them as such. You simply brush them off as some sort of propagandized piece of information from my nonexistent NRA handbook.
To me it seems evident that we do have a problem with gun crimes in this country. But I do not believe that it is related to the fact that guns are legal. My main reason is that a majority of gun crimes are committed by people who are ineligible to own a gun, and thus obtain them illegally. Had guns been illegal, these people would have still been able to get ahold of their guns.
Besides it doesn’t matter, it is our constitutional right to own guns, so I guess you will just have to accept it.
Children shoot themselves or others with guns all the time.
Ask a law enforcement officer why it is so easy to get an illegal gun.
“Children shoot themselves or others with guns all the time.” Sorry Spruce but you are wrong. Children do shoot themselves A) not “all the time” and B) because they were loaded and not properly secured. And if my memory serves me correctly we already have legislation on the books here in Maine holding the owner of the firearm responsible for the improperly secured firearm and the death. So, if “Children shoot themselves or others with guns all the time” you should have no problem providing newspaper articles and court cases of all the people for their deaths here in Maine.
I agree, without guns our military would be incapable of “rogue military shootings” … that is some AMAZING logic, let’s take their guns away!
School shootings? Weren’t all of those “gun free zones”?
SpruceDweller YOU are the one in complete denial! Look at the violent crime rates in areas and countries where guns are banned! I know what you are going to say typical NRA excuses, WELL WE hear the same typical excuses from your side too! Get your head out of the clouds and look at ALL the facts and research with an open mind, STOP looking at just the facts and research YOU want to see! I agree with you there is to much gun violence but look at all the facts and history behind it. What were the crime rates back when there was an actual true punishment for it? How often were there murders back when everyone owned guns? Why do YOU think these rates were lower? I’ll give you my opinion people were scared of getting punished for there crimes! Now all people have to worry about is getting rehab for there crimes, rehab DOES NOT teach criminals not to do something, rehab DOES NOT give a criminal a reason to not do the crime again! All rehab does is teach people that if they committ the crime they are gonna get spoken to treated nicely and have an easy road back out with 3 squares and a cot! If I didn’t have better moral standards I’d take the 3 free square meals and a cot instead of busting my butt everyday to support everyone that is lazy and on welfare!
“People kill people” implies that fatal shooting is necessarily an act of human intention. The article points to the fact that such intention is not always present, that accidents happen frequently, and sometimes with young children. The negligence of one adult can lead to the death of child who just happens to be near the discharge. Gun ownership is constitutional, protected in the Bill of Rights, and Maine shows that this can be managed in a reasonable way. But the extremest position opposing any and all legislation of handguns is a disservice to public safety.
Where does it end? Regulate the sharpness of scissors because a kid ran with them?
You could ban guns, bows and arrows etc, but people will still hurt themselves and each other, either by accident or intent.
This is a different issue. I am correcting the implication concerning intent. Regulation should be applied where there is cause. Scissors and bows do not seem to be a major problem. Handguns are responsible for many unintended fatalities.
No, people and their actions are responsible for many unintended fatalities.
Maybe scissors and bows are not a major problem, but the preferred weapon of most of the pharmacy robberies that we have now is knives or bats. I haven’t noticed that anyone’s cause is to ban those.
What the liberals seem to push for above anything else is no personal responsibility. They want to have children for the novelty of it, and then pay someone else to raise them. Then the parents are not responsible when their child turns into a punk. The liberal response to the pharmacy robberies and home invasions by the drug addicts is “Well, it’s not their fault, they need rehab not jail”.
There are many factors causing the current generation to be punks and gangsters, many of which could be prevented with parental responsibility and supervision. Why shouldn’t the parents be held responsible for what they unleash on society until that child is 18? We can’t print the name of a minor who commits an armed robbery or any crime, so why not put a picture and name of the parent on the news?
Could you please explain how “Handguns are responsible for many unintended fatalities” as they do nothing until a force is applied to a trigger.
So are cars. Im willing to bet that deaths involving car accidents outnumbers gun related accidents
Yes, this is why there are traffic laws.
Again, my original post seeks simply to show that intention is not behind every gun fatality, a point that you recognize. But as you can see from many other comments here, this does not always sink in (see jd2008jd, just above).
I am opposed to extremist positions on both sides. Arguments to prohibit any regulations of handguns lose my support, and at the same time I am committed to upholding the constitution.
There are gun ownership laws also
Using Steele’s own statistics there are less than 1000 unintended fatalities per year. Compare that to other accidental causes of death.
anesi.com/accdeath.htm
More children die in pools than guns. Ban pools!
Actually, more children die in bathtubs than are killed by guns. Ban bathtubs!
Texting while driving has begun killing lots of young people as well
Please tell me how many crimes are committed with legally owned guns? I don’t know the official stats, so I am asking. I would bet, however that the percentage is very low.
Republicans, clinging to our guns and religion. I’m glad I have both.
Why is that you assume that it is just Republicans that are pro-gun?
I have many people I know that are Independents and Democrats that are very pro-gun.
It is my opinion that it is the far left liberals that are anti-gun and push
the agenda that if you are pro-gun, you must be some stark raving ultra
conservative maniac. I think you should come to the conclusion that guns are a
part of our American heritage and always will be. As I have said for many
years, A good citizen is an armed citizen.
Independents, Democrats and Liberterians don’t own guns?
You’re from California. Now there’s the land of solid thinking!!!!
Well smoking drive up healthcare Not. It dose not when you factor in people who smoke die sooner. They will not deplete as much SS as the pay in Not be in nursing homes till they are in thier 90s Almost a net again for society . I say this now with a smoke in my had.
It’s true that they die sooner but I’m pretty sure that I’ve seen statistics that show smokers still manage to use more healthcare before they manage to remove themselves from the gene pool.
I’m amazed that smokers manage to live as long as they generally do when you consider all the poisons they are burdening themselves with. I recently toured a display of about 30 actual human bodies that had been plasticized to show various part of the human anatomy. Probably the most striking thing about the whole show was the difference between healthy lungs and smokers lungs. Smokers lungs are actually gray instead of pink and they have black deposits in them and void spaces where the cells have been killed. Then, even without cutting them open as was done for this display, anyone can see the gray hue to older smokers skin and smell their bad breath and hear their respiratory issues and see that they look older than their chronological age. It’s quite disgusting and hard to imagine why any intelligent being would choose to do this to the only pair of lungs they’ll ever own.
THE DAY SOMEONE COMES TO MY HOME AND SAYS GIVE ME ALL YOUR GUNS IS THE DAY THEY ARE GOING TO FIND OUT EXACTLY WHY I OWN THEM.
Wow Rabid! Did you read the article?
Bring a gun into your home: almost no chance of it saving you and an extremely higher chance that it will cause harm to you or to someone you care about.
No talk of bans, just saying that if your purpose for bringing a gun into your home is for the safety of you and the ones you love, you are actually doing the opposite.
And looking at the rest of the posts and the likes, you are not the only person for whom rabies has caused the inability to reason/think.
Steele has revealed his stupidity and lack of authority on this subject. Really? This is a false argument and faulty reasoning. He really stepped in it on this one. Sounds like someone called him and needed a quick filler for the paper.
What I surprise that the good, liberal, “progressive” doctor is against gun ownership and digs up some self serving “facts” to back up his argument. Seems to me that Maine has one of the highest rates of gun ownership and is also the safest state in the nation. Must be a fluke.
What do whale’s appendages have to do with this?
They serve their porpoises.
Must be a ” fin and feather ” club member !
Anyone who is hell bent on murder & mayhem will find a weapon. If guns are not available, then a knife will be used, or poison, or a hammer, or a vehicle, etc. etc.
One of the worst school massacres in American history involved the use of home made explosives, not guns.
How soon people forget. I don’t think any guns were used on that warm September day back in 2001 either. The air marshalls are packing today though. (sarcastic) Now why would that be? Can guns make a scenario less violent?
HEY DR….. You should have included in this statement “allegedly”. Two weeks ago, a decorated American soldier, husband and father of young
children slaughtered 17 Afghan wives, fathers and young children in
their homes
Sound like one is almost twice as likely to shoot themself with their own gun as someone else. The argument could be made that one is safer if the other person has the gun. I’m not sure, but it would seem likely that there have been studies done more recently than 13 years ago. I also disagree with the premise that one can extract meaningful civilian data from a military event. As regretable as the 17 ‘civilian’ deaths were in Afganistan, it is a war zone; the streets of Bangor, as wild as they may sometimes be, are not a war zone. The word ‘never’ in the last sentence of the article was probably intended to be ‘ever’. Throughout the world about 2000 people commit suicide every ‘day’. In 2001 there were 16869 suicides by firearm and 6198 by hanging or suffocation. Of course rope is not a very effective home defense device but one could say it shouldn’t be kept in the home due to the possibility of one hanging themself. The same goes for plastic bags which can be used to suffocate one’s self. Hold it right there or I’ll put this wicked bag over your head!
If you count Iraq and Afganistan I think you will find the civian death toll in the 10s or 100s of thousands. Yes this guy lost it. But to say only 17 civilians have died is so disrespectful . I can not right that off as just a mistake of he had WMDs Are the people of Iraq really better off now? I have great respect to people in the military just have my doubt about my government sometimes
It is a simple but often ignored rule of reasoning; just because one event follows another, it does not mean that the second is caused by the first.
Note how the author begins with a posit that the presence of a gun in a home makes you LESS safe than without it. He than immediately shifts from the implied justification of self defense as the reason for gun ownership to gross numbers of “gun deaths”. Suddenly suicides, the single highest form of gun death, is attributed to gun ownership. I don’t think so. Suicide is not caused by gun ownership. The gun merely a means to a chosen end, literally. The corruption of the original thesis with the statistical slight of hand condemns the rest of the argument to irrelevance.
A more relevant statistical analysis would be a correlation between gun ownership and the occurrence of personal attack and harm in the home by intruders. But then, that might well require a different conclusion. One supported by defensible logic.
The gun is a means to an end–suicide, as you note. Suicide by gun is an action that happens almost instantly–action follows impulse and BANG.
By contrast, an overdose on pills leaves a chance to change one’s mind and call for help. Slitting one’s wrist involves a few lucid moments in which to cry out or call 911. Many people who jump off bridges get rescued. Even with suicide by hanging, it takes time to get the rope just right…
But if your teenager or spouse or parent is depressed and has a gun at hand, it’s over an instant after it began. The second-thoughts that could have saved your loved one simply didn’t have a chance to happen.
You know I made an argument very similar to this about another very controversial and different topic, and people lashed out at me over it.
Suicide by hanging, jumping off bridges, slitting wrists, etc. Still happens. Do we ban, rope? Bridges? Sharp objects?
How about “rice rockets”? How many idiots kill themselves on those every year?
Liz believe what you want. I could list multiple medications that result in death from minutes to hours and they have no medication to reverse them. I will not list them for obvious reasons but these medications are easily obtainable and many are over the counter medications.
One popular over the counter pain medication is very lethal and has no antidote. Once the person takes a lethal does and the medication is metabolized, death follows with organ failure starting with the liver. Fairly painful way to go but suicide is suicide regardless of the method.
As far as hanging, carbon monoxide, etc…If the person is serious enough they will do find a way to make it happen. In my town, I can think of two hangings, two self inflicted gun shots and one carbon monoxide suicide over the past 5 or so years.
Catching the attempt and preventing a successful suicide means you missed all of the warning signs leading up to the attempt.
More than one person has taken that over the counter medication thinking they could be “saved”. Those are the ones who really don’t want to commit suicide, just want attention. They are the same ones who would not use a gun in the first place because they really aren’t trying to commit suicide.
And I always wonder about some of these single person automobile accidents on perfectly good and dry roads.
How does this instantaneous thought process ending in a fatal gunshot wound account for suicide notes? Giving away possessions? Leaving clues for days or more? It’s rare to find people close to a person who committed suicide that is totally shocked and says it was out of the blue? Sure, it likely happens, but I’m convinced that’s the rarest of occurrences. Let’s not forget the new suicide cocktail available on line (pretty damn effective), CO poisoning in cars, some are fairly elaborate to guarantee the job, even suicide by cop. In every single case the weapon used did not commit the act, the distraught human did. How about focusing on fixing the actual problem?
I can show them how to make a proper hangman’s noose. Less suffering that way.
Not amusing. I speak as one who long ago lost a family member to suicide.
Especially that a gun is a mechanical device. IT doesn’t do anything.
Doctors and hospitals are much deadlier than guns:
NEW YORK, August 9, 2009 — An estimated 200,000
Americans will die needlessly from preventable medical mistakes and
hospital infections this year, according to “Dead By Mistake,” a
wide-ranging Hearst national investigation, which began reporting the
findings today
http://www.hearst.com/press-room/pr-20090809b.php
This is not patients they weren’t able to save. This is 100,000 dead each year from preventable infections and 100,000 killed by errors.
We should ban Hospitals!
When one of these “Bath Salts Idiots” comes crashing through my door I’ll switch on the reading lamp and show him the good doctor’s story. In the mean time I’ll keep my 12 gauge pump right next to the bed stand. Dr. Steele is an excellent physician with a good heart-I’m just not prepared to face someone jacked up on drugs with with the strenghth of fork lift with my 1954 edition fists.
Well said. The only thing I have to think about if one of those idiots break into my home, is which caliber they are going to eat.
Amen to that!
That’s why Alaska, where 60 percent of homes have guns in them, has a
gun death rate six times higher than Hawaii, where about 10 percent of
homes have guns.- Dr. Steele
Nice math, I figure if a state has 60% of all homes with a fireplace, it would have a chimney fire rate six times higher than another state where 10% of the homes have a fireplace. Did you consider seasonal affective disorder as well and that Dog the Bounty Hunter keeps things in line down on the islands? Just wondering…
Yet, to follow the line of reasoning I keep reading in the comments, a state that has a 60% rate of gun ownership should have close to zero gun deaths, since (supposedly) the more guns there are the less often people get killed by guns.
Oh but you forget that means 40% of people don’t have guns, and thus can’t protect them selves against someone with a gun.
Depends, I highly doubt every person killed with a gun was accidental or murdered. Mayb self defense involved also
” What made a temporary monster out of a decent man, we may never know.
What made these deaths statistically inevitable, however, is the math of
people and guns, which goes like this: The more guns we have in a
population of people, the more often innocent people will be killed with
those guns.-Good Doc, This incident took place in Afghanistan during an “Armed Conflict” which is just one of the reasons that this sentence-” The more guns we have in a
population of people, the more often innocent people will be killed with
those guns.” is ridiculous.
Maybe next time you look for an excuse to grandstand, at least make an attempt to do so with a relevant incident to open with.
Oh by the way, the word “alleged” some where in the first paragraph next time..
Just stay focused on saving lives at the hospital Erik. When it comes to your attempts to comment upon public policy, you have proven over the years to be deficient in your mental faculties.
For a more in depth study than some data cherrypicking by some gun control progressive read “More Guns, Less Crime” by John Lott.
i think this guy is from mass oh no
My home has several guns in it and we are perfectly safe, always have been, always will be.
Your proof that you and your loved ones will ALWAYS be safe = ?
I grew up in a home with multiple firearms. From a 1856 Harpers Ferry Rifle-Musket (complete with bayonet) to a Ruger Security Six .357 Magnum. Never shot anyone including my parents or grandparents, friends, neighbors, etc…
My daughter grew up in a home with multiple firearms including those identified above with the addition of a Mossberg 12g pump shotgun, a Ruger Mini-14 .227 and a Ruger P85 9mm. And guess what? She never shot anyone including her parents, grandparents, friends, neighbors, etc…
My family and her family will always be safe from an accidental discharge because I was taught proper firearm safety by my father and I taught her. I know proper target identification and so does my daughter. I was taught and she was taught to always know what is behind your intended target. If anyone were to ever break into my house with the intent of doing physical harm to myself or my wife it would likely be the last act they would ever do because I have zero hesitation in protecting my family. I cannot speak for my daughter to this end but she is now researching semi-automatic handguns for personal protection.
Great post.
My dad taught me gun safety as well and I taught my children. They enjoy target practicing now and we do it often at our camp. We bring a bunch of bricks which give a nice puff of red dust when they get hit. They like the .22 best as do I for target shooting. I always felt safer knowing me and my siblings were safe and protected with dads firearm and that was way before the doctors started pushing heavy narcotics for headaches and muscle aches and the bath salts. My children told me when they got older that they always felt safer on our excursions when they knew I was carrying which is basically all the time, unless I have to go to court or the federal building.
Our closest call was on a Sunday afternoon after church. My dad had to shoot a dog that kept coming around the house that was a threat to others as well as some of our livestock. The dog chased my brother into the house while dad was in his study. The dog wouldn’t leave the front door and acted very threatening so dad killed it. Come to find out, we learned the dog was a stray and it had bitten a kid about a week earlier and the kid had to swim across a portion of the lake to get away from it.
It’s interesting that we take after our parents the way we do as a scoiety. That is what concerns me about the children today. Many parents have no business raising children.
Jd If I remember right and I may not have all the facts but was it not a man that taught boyscouts to shoot the same man that made an awful mistake hunting?
Not sure who you are referring to David so I cannot directly respond to your post.
Yeah, you do – he was out shooting white tails OOPS those are mittens! My bad! Which is JUST WHAT STEELE IS SAYING! If you have guns to increase safety of you and yours (and for that matter, others) then you are working against your aim.
lib if I had know what was being referred to I would have responded but I didn’t and now I do. I am not clarivoinet but it seems that you.
I am going to say this very slowly. I am trained. I know what I would be shooting at. I know what is behind and beyond my intended target. But here is the bottom line. I doubt highly that a white tailed deer would be in my home at 2:00 AM in the morning after breaking down a door or smashing a window.
I don’t depend on the MSP or the PCSO to protect me. I live in the “country” and the MSP/PCSO may only be minutes way or they could be at the opposite end of the county in another zone and 30-40+ mintues away.
I have a gun, given to me. I am not trained. Steele is saying “if you are getting a gun for safety, then you are working cross-purpose”.
I’m not going to get rid of my gun – but as Steele noted, I/mine/others are less safe because I have one.
And, although you think by your having guns all but the “bad guys” are MORE safe, statistics show that you and the other “good guys” are NOT MORE safe, but LESS safe. That’s all the article says.
The hunter probably didn’t buy his gun for personal safety, but the young mother is still dead. as are the estranged wife and children in Dexter. Even if the Dexter dad bought the guns for the safety of his family – it was just as Steele noted – when he got them, they became LESS safe.
The “conserve” part of my name hopes that a few of those out to make our lives less safe do come crashing through your window at 2am and their quest is ended. But you are fooling yourself if you think the general populace is served by having their own guns for protection.
Stay safe!
“I have a gun, given to me. I am not trained. Steele is saying “if you
are getting a gun for safety, then you are working cross-purpose”.
I’m not going to get rid of my gun…”
Well there in lies the difference between a responsible gun owner and a irresponsible gun owner. You sir are a irresponsible gun owner. You have a gun, have never received any training in gun safety, etc…but you are not going to “get rid of my gun”. Why? You feel it makes you less safe so why keep it?
The hunter violated one of the cardinal rules of hunting…properly identifying your target before pulling the trigger. IMHO he should have been convicted on manslaughter but that is just my opinion.
The Dexter case is not as clear cut. There was at least one protection from abuse order out. He “was scheduled to be tried in Piscataquis County Superior Court in July
on four charges, including criminal threatening with a dangerous weapon
and domestic violence criminal threatening” and if I recall correctly his firearms were confiscated and he stole the firearm used in this domestic murder. Someone that wants to kill his family will kill his family regardless of the presence or absence of firearms. He was going to kill his family. No was going to stop him from killing his family.
By the way, please do not read into my post. I am speaking about MY home, MY family, NOT yours, NOT my neighbor, but MY family.
Same here, in my home, m family will be safe.
My son grows up with a 30-30 around, a mossberg 12 ga, a remington 12 ga, an ar-15, a s&w .40, a s&w .45, and a beretta 9mm
I won’t even list the guns… Plus swords, mace, flail, bows and arrows, and a nice ironwood staff.
(Ever seen what a good staff can do to someone? Break bones like sticks, smash skull like an egg.)
Some people are educated beyond their intelligence.
And some people are very educated but lack any intelligence at all.
My uncle used to call ’em “educated fools” :-/
Dr. Steele, statistically doctors kill more Americans than guns, maybe we should regulate them far more?
ding – ding – ding!!!! we have a winner. nice post bright, that pretty much puts it all is perspective. anyone of us can spin facts to fit our own agenda.
Bright – you are not! Dr. Steele is saying that if the purpose for bringing a gun into your possession is safety, then you are defeating your own purpose.
I admire your wisdom in coming forth with this at a time when so many Mainers are proudly talking about their rights to “protect” their homes with guns. I hope some of them get the message. I think you have a typo in your concluding line, though. Last “never” should read “ever”.
Why is the word protect in quotes?
You would have had more fatally wounded persons to add to your statistical analysis last week, had an armed man not stopped another from entering a church with a shotgun. Guns don’t kill, people do, maybe we should regulate them better, instead of trying to place the blame anywhere but on the individuals.
In your clearly expert opinion, how many suicidal persons would not have found an alternative had a gun not been present? Using suicides as part of the statistics is stupid and shows you truly will say anything to push your agenda. If the truth speaks for itself, let it. No doubt the number of tragic accidental deaths by firearms is too high, and homicides are likely higher than they’d be if we could keep guns out of the hands of criminals. But why for a milli-second would an educated person think a criminal intent on murder care about the legality of carrying a firearm?
Statistics are for people who live in a Bubble.
They don’t stop a madman from breaking down your door and butchering the inhabitants to get to your prescription drugs.
Statistics are for nerds. Guns are for real men.
Why did I get more insight from the comments than the editorial? The doctor should work on making doctors and hospitals more accountable on preventable accidents. How many people die because of not being able to pay the high cost of medical care? Does Dr. Steele support universal health care? After reading his first paragraph I knew that I would not agree with the author. I was mad about U.S. military policy when I read about the incident in Afghanistan.
He may be right that the odds of someome getting shot goes up if you have a gun in the house.
What he doesn’t say is that the odds of it being YOU go down.
Right. It might be your son or daughter.
Some of us crazy conservative types believe in this insane concept of being responsible, and teaching our children. I know, its crazy!!
The problem is it dose not always work. We would like to believe it dose it gives us comfort.
I disagree, it does work, the problem is that less and less parents teach their children accountability. Its not PC to correct your children, and therefor they have little understanding of consequence of their actions.
Generations grew up with guns and less gun control and crimes related to guns were extremely low. How is that possible?
Crime is up because there is no accountability, people commit violent crimes and are out in week, or in some cases, on $60 bail the same day. Thus they think they can do what they want and get away with it. Why shouldnt they? They DO get away with it most of the time, the worst they get is a slap on the wrist.
This is what happens when everyone gets a trophy.
Dr. Steele while I respect your opinion I would kindly suggest that a better focus for “avoidable” deaths would be to reduce the number of medication errors that occur in hospitals each year that result in the unnecessary death of the patient.
“In Hospital Deaths from Medical Errors at 195,000 per Year USA”
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/11856.php
vs. 11k murders. Excellent point.
Jd this man is smart he may not be right on with the numbers but is right on with the Idea. The point is we are not ready as a society to accept that. We need to have the perception or opinions of being safe. Guns give that to some. Most people think with different parts of thier Brains . We need to feel free. Piece . The few guns I have left I do not keep bullets at my house except the kids bebe gun. Please MR. Steele do not take all are guns away. Never know when we will need to for a militia to protect us from are own government lol.
David I know many “smart” people that lack all kinds of common sense.
A relative of mine almost died from a medication error only a month ago. Luckily his mother caught it. The nurse about to administer the drug went white when she realized what had almost happened. She was about to administer 10 times the proper dose, would have killed in minutes.
Has anyone else had their messages with held from this comment page. I typed one a while ago and it was intercepted by Disqus which stated the message had to be reviewed first. My message did not contain any distasteful words or threats. Just curious of the BDN is in the censuring business now?
I think it’s random. Just my opinion. Luck of the draw you might say.
Happened to me the other day on another discussion about firearms. Interesting…
You have to think about every word you write. One of them got flagged. Maybe because in another context it could be considered “offensive” to a liberal.
But at least the gun manufacturers are making money hand over fist–their PR arm (the NRA) will continue to order its members to oppose ANY restrictions on weapons, and to make sure that, eventually, every home will contain dozens of guns. Hey, it’s good for business.
Meanwhile Americans keep getting killed by guns at ridiculous rates.
And cars, dont forge to ban cars.
Water kills a lot of people, we should probably ban that too. You realize that making guns illegal wont accomplish anything? Banning guns will not reduce, or eliminate criminal activity. Banning guns will only affect otherwise law abiding citizens, a criminal who is going to commit an act of violence with a gun is not going to let one more law stop them.
How about we deal with criminals? Besides it doesn’t really matter, it is our constitutional right to own a gun, so I guess you’ll just have to get over it.
Correct Toy
Before there were guns there were knives and before there were knives there were clubs and before clubs there were rocks .. My point ? all those can kill in the wrong hands,, what did Kane kill Abel with ?? his hands?? If somebody wants to do harm to another all of these “tools” are still available today and always will be :-/ Teaching respect and honesty is what’s needed not another dam rule that won’t be enforced !!!
No, nobody has ever been killed BY a gun. Guns are inanimate objects that do nothing by their own accord. Name one gun law that has definitively had an impact on violent crime.
Let’s just enforce the existing laws and throw the book at criminals who use a firearm while committing a crime.
By the way…..what “new” restriction to firearm ownership will deter crime?
Nice manipulation of statistics. The number of gun deaths is minimal when compared to total population. The population of Alaska is small when compared approx 750,000 in comparison to Hawaii’s 1.39 million citizens. Also to be factored in is education (not just pertaining to firearms), environment, law enforcement legal applications overall, and psychological states determined by geographical location.
Has Dr. Steele considered that 100% of his patients will die before the next 100 years is over.
typical liberal thought process…. your advocating for gun control over the scary widdle guns we keep in our homes?? twice as likely to use the gun on ourselves…. if you removed the guns only the bad guys would use them on the flocks of silly lemmings who chose to be unarmed. teach your kids to be responsible.. thats what is lacking here . you might rather advocate for gun safety classes…
hey cars kill ! and you know what your car is likely to be the one you die in so get rid of all cars !
I think the driver safety classes were the solution to this conundrum.
Fun with numbers , eh Dr. Steele ??
Until you and the medical community get the prescription narcotics
over prescribing whirlpool under control , please direct your energies
in that direction , instead of on a subject beyond your grasp.
Perfect.
Well said!!!!
Not one of you has provided a valid argument with objective science to back it up. No doubt alcohol does lead to death, but that doesn’t change the facts about guns. We believe what we want to believe and use emotion rather than reason. Good book on the tendency of people to do just that:
The Believing Brain: From Ghosts and Gods to Politics and Conspiracies—How We Construct Beliefs and Reinforce Them as Truths
Dr. Steele presented no facts…. If you want some real facts and are up for a read:
Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, “Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence
and Nature of Self-Defense With a Gun,” 86 The Journal of Criminal Law
and Criminology, Northwestern University School of Law, 1 (Fall
1995):164.
http://www.guncite.com/gcdgklec.html
“Since as many as 400,000 people a year use guns in situations where the
defenders claim that they “almost certainly” saved a life by doing so,
this result cannot be dismissed as trivial. If even one-tenth of these
people are accurate in their stated perceptions, the number of lives
saved by victim use of guns would still exceed the total number of lives
taken with guns.”
Prof Kleck, Address to the National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council Panel on the
Understanding and Prevention of Violence (Apr. 3, 1990)
“When I began my research on guns in 1976, like
most academics, I was a believer in the “anti-gun” thesis…..
[Subsequent research] has caused me to move beyond even the
skeptic position. I now believe that the best currently available
evidence, imperfect though it is (and must always be), indicates that
general gun availability has no measurable net positive effect on
rates of homicide, suicide, robbery, assault, rape, or burglary in the
U[nited] S[tates].”
In other words, his research directly contravenes Dr. Steele’s assertions.
Surely, a right-wing Koch-funded lifetime NRA member, you might think. From Dr. Kleck’s disclosure statement:
“The author is a member of the American Civil Liberties Union, Amnesty
International USA, Independent Action, Democrats 2000, and Common Cause,
among other politically liberal organizations He is a lifelong
registered Democrat, as well as a contributor to liberal Democratic
candidates. He is not now, nor has he ever been, a member of, or
contributor to, the National Rifle Association, Handgun Control, Inc.
nor any other advocacy organization, nor has he received funding for
research from any such organization.”
State Pop. murder Rape Robbery assualt burglary
Wy 563,626 8 164 76 856 2149
Ak 710,231 31 533 594 3379 3105
ME 1,328,361 24 389 414 794 7359
NH 1,316,470 13 412 451 1322 5441
TX 25,145,561 1249 7622 32843 71517 228597
AZ 6,392,017 409 2165 6937 16574 50771
NY 19,378,102 866 2771 28473 43867 64973
CA 37,253,956 1809 8331 58116 95877 228857
HI 1,360,361 24 365 1054 2131 8663
DC 601,723 132 187 4325 3360 4231
Stats from 2010 from http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/
Wy is the most gun per cap. and Ak is number 2. DC is the least gun per cap. and HI is number 2. Although I may be more like to die in WY from a gun I am less likely to be murdered, raped, robbed, assualted or have my home broken into.
http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2012/jan/27/jim-moran/rep-jim-moran-says-us-gun-homicide-rate-20-times-h/
Stick to research in the lab. Right now the criminals have the guns and they use them on innocent people. What percentage of homocides in the USA was committed by a felon? Felons can not legally posess a firearm but they do. When a citizen abides by the law, goes through the process of carrying a concealed firearm and makes an investment in the purchase of a firearm they are exercising their 2nd amendment right. If that makes them more comfortable then great. That is their choice.
BTW, your statistics are one sided and very biased leaning left. Like I said, stick to something that you know. Accoring to the fine people at the Blue Hill hospital, you should be continuing your education on how to manage people.
Doctors writing scripts for narcotics and pushing that garbage out like candy is tunring our country into a bunch of addicted junkies. There are more drug overdoses from prescription drugs, drugs prescribed by the Doctors, then gun deaths in this country by far. Many doctors are destroying lives and families by writing out this trash. Just curious, Oxycontin and oxycodone has been around for 15 or so years. How on earth did people survive without that for thousands of years. Was there an advil, tylenol, heck even a morphine epedemic like the one that exists today with OXY’s. That issue that the doctors have been instrumental in creating is a major reason why many Americans decide to arm themselves today, to protect themselves from junkies. I mean Rite Aid gets robbed what now, once a week.
I suggest doctors start practicing responsible medicine and we will see a lot less robberies, violence and gun associated crime and death in our world.
Dr Steele,
It’s a shame that your apparent attempt at a logical, data driven argument in favor of domestic gun control was ruined by the cheap and inflammatory shot taken in the very first paragraph. Since the issue is math, statistics and gun control let’s take a look at the Afghanistan issue you raised.
Since 2001, more than 2 million different American men and women have deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. As we all know many individuals have deployed more than once. The 2 million number comes from DOD data from 2009 so the 2012 number is obviously higher – but let’s use the 2009 data.
Each and every one of those 2 million individuals has been armed 24/7 – with the exception of chaplains but including your peer group of doctors, nurses and ancillary medical personnel. Indeed a terrible tragedy took place several weeks ago. In your words, one decent man became a temporary monster. As I see it the remaining 1,999,999 individuals did not become temporary monsters – not that particular day or any other during their deployment. One in approximately 2 million American service members used his issued weapon to commit an unspeakable tragic act – not quite the statistical trend you were looking for I suspect.
Have there been other tragedies such as the on you describe? Certainly. But I can guarantee you from the personal experience of 4 combat deployments that the number of innocent people protected from harm by US military issued weapons far exceeds those that have been “slaughtered.”
I don’t really have any beef with the substance of your argument – I don’t agree but I respect some of the points you make. But using the case of SSG Boles and the horrible killing of 17 Afghan civilians to lead off your argument about US domestic gun laws was uncalled for. Leave the US military, law enforcement, et al out of your argument.
When you feel compelled to write about situational stress reactions, PTSD, acute psychosis, etc SSG Boles may be a reasonable figure to include. But when it comes time to do the math, please don’t forget that big denominator of 2+ million – 99+% percent of whom didn’t slaughter innocent civilians in Afghanistan, didn’t kill their spouse upon redeployment, didn’t torture prisoners at Abu Graib, etc.
People never think that statistics apply to them, which is why people continue to play the lottery, and do all sorts of other things that statistics say will probably make them into a big loser.
It’s what America is all about. We promote it and celebrate it.
A comment about guns in Switzerland vanished while I was replying to it… Anyhow, you must have a permit to have a gun in Switzerland. There are conditions for getting a Carrying Permit. Among them are the following–
The sale of automatic firearms, selective fire weapons and certain accessories such as sound suppressors (“silencers”) is forbidden (as is the sale of certain disabled automatic firearms which have been identified as easily restored to fully automatic capability). The purchase of such items is legal only with a special permit issued by cantonal police. The issuance of such a permit requires additional requirements to be met, e.g. the possession of a specific gun locker. Hollow point rounds are only permitted for hunters. Ammunition sales are registered at the point of sale by recording the buyer’s name in a bound book.
Stating plausibly the need to carry firearms to protect oneself, other people, or real property from a specified danger
Passing an examination proving both weapon handling skills and knowledge regarding lawful use of the weapon.
The carrying permit remains valid for a term of five years (unless otherwise surrendered or revoked), and applies only to the type of firearm for which the permit was issued.
Its funny that gun sales are way up and crime is way down isnt it? Perhaps the doc needs to stop pilfering the Oxycontins outta the med room before he writes this crap.
So, if we make guns illegal then people wont commit illegal crimes with guns? Or, will it simply be one more law that a criminal is breaking? If you make guns illegal it will only stop law abiding citizens from owning guns.
I cant help but use the words of the libs in regards to a different issue.
Dont supprt guns? dont get one.
If you don’t like guns then don’t buy one, and mind your own business doc.
I love one sided arguments, here’s perhaps my favorite:
Dihydrogen monoxide is colorless, odorless, tasteless, and kills uncounted thousands of people every year. Most of these deaths are caused by accidental inhalation of DHMO, but the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide do not end there. Prolonged exposure to its solid form causes severe tissue damage. Symptoms of DHMO ingestion can include excessive sweating and urination, and possibly a bloated feeling, nausea, vomiting and body electrolyte imbalance. For those who have become dependent, DHMO withdrawal means certain death.
Among some of the startling uses are:
-as an additive to food products, including jarred baby food and baby formula, and even in many soups, carbonated beverages and supposedly “all-natural” fruit juices
-in cough medicines and other liquid pharmaceuticals
-in shampoos, shaving creams, deodorants and numerous other bathroom products, in bathtub bubble products marketed to children.
Yet surprisingly, despite overwhelming evidence, there is opposition to the overal ban of the use of Dihydrogen Monoxide in the United States.
For anyone who doubts this find some MSDS sheets and look up Dihydrogen monoxide
Most of the liberals on here couldn’t figure out how to look up Dihydrogen Monoxide and figure out what it is.
My Liberal Viewpoint:
Don’t tell me what a liberal is. I will tell you.
I believe in freedom and with that comes a belief in the 2nd amendment whether I like it or not. You can have an M-16 semi auto, a Desert eagle .50, one dozen, two dozen fire arms, but I can’t smoke pot, or love and marry a same sex partner.
We, liberals and you NRA members have to support each other because we are supporting freedom. First comes gun registration, then comes confiscation. It happened in England, again in Australia, in WW II Germany with the excuse of keeping us safe from the Jews, they crushed the unions too.
How can I demand freedom to marry, to engage in victimless crime, if I don’t support your right to have a gun? I can’t be a hypocrite as with freedom comes danger. My neighbor may have a gun, your neighbor might smoke pot with a gay partner.
Support freedom for all of us or risk losing it for all of us. No government has ever found any amount of control or repression that is too much and they get it by making us blame each other instead of those in power.
Now, next time you call me a liberal, remember that I will fight for your rights whether you like me or not. I won’t trade your freedom for mine. Your freedom is worth fighting for whether you agree with mine or not. I will vote for your rights. Can you do the same for me?”
I have to say that was very well written. I support the 2nd Amendment and I also support your right to marry your same sex partner. I voted against the repeal in 2009 and will vote to approve the ballot question this November.
Extremely well said.
Edit: Let me say again….well said. Being that I was undecided and saw two points of view, I was not going to vote on the issue of same sex marriage.
What you just said persuaded me to vote in favor of same sex marriage. Well said again.
Worth commenting on again. You really should send this as a letter to the editor. It is something everyone should read. I am a stubborn old man, and this comment really moved me.
Thank you again for posting it. Pass it along.
Thank you, the saddest thing is that while there are so many “liberal haters” that would rather defend their right to hate than engage in a discussion. The best thing is that no one has come out calling names, being sarcastic, etc. I will take your suggestion, expand my comments a little and send a letter to the editor.
Well truth be told, that can be said both ways. The fact is, you made the point, and very well. I dont hate liberals. I hate liberals, especially in this thread, that completely ignore common sense. You did not do that.
I’m not exactly brought to tears by your comment/op-ed piece like some of the others. Do you support the legalization of heroin or the right to murder someone? Who decides what is right or wrong? Anything could be considered a liberty. The Second Amendment was written in the time of muskets when the people had a very valid fear of government tyranny, etc. The Amendment is outdated now and is doing more harm than good. For every 1 “defense of property shooting” or “justifiable shooting” there are hundreds more cold-blooded murders and accidents by LICENSED gun owners. NO ONE is more safe owning a gun. The research data is overwhelmingly at odds with the illusion of safety that guns owners have.
Actually according to crime statistics put together by the federal government as firearms purchases have risen the rate of violent crime has decreased. I’m not sure where you’re getting your research data but it’s against nearly every other piece of data available. Just because you don’t like something doesn’t mean it should be illegal. I know exactly when the Second Amendment was written and it’s holds as valid today as it did then. People today have just as much right today as they did when this country was formed to protect themselves and for anyone reading the news they have just as much reason to be suspicious of their government.
The argument “for every 1 ‘defense of property shooting’ or ‘justifiable shooting’ there are hundreds more cold-blooded murders and accidents by LICENSED gun owners” is absolutely outrageous. I have no idea how you came to this conclusion but it’s so far from the truth you could run for office. Show us one bit of data to verify the ‘facts’ you spewing. It’s one thing no not believe it something, it’s another throw around false data to try and make your point.
Rachel no one gets to post something like “For every 1 “defense of property shooting” or “justifiable shooting” there are hundreds more cold-blooded murders and accidents by LICENSED gun owners.” and “The research data is overwhelmingly at odds with the illusion of safety that guns owners have” without providing the proof.
So provide the proof to back up your claims. And I don’t mean “research” from Handgun Control, Inc or The Brady Campaign and the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.
This was one of the best statements I’ve ever read on these message boards as you basically echo my thoughts on all these issues. Thank you for making a post that’s both concise in it’s reasoning and straight to the point. Bravo Nortel, Bravo!!
Logical thinking, but,
Your thinking violates the Redneck Doctrine!
LOL
your politics are not liberal. Shed the confining and stifling cloak of liberalism and embrace your true self openly. You’re a closet…. Libertarian.
Great post,
I am a firearm owning independent, and will be voting in favor of same sex marraige.
Another Doctor with a ‘License’ to Practice Medicine.
“If you give a Doctor enough chances they will kill You”
Guns have never killed anyone. It always has taken a Human to provide the ‘charge’. Wonder how many have been under the spell of your kinds medicine.
Please don’t fall for this type of Liberal Rhetoric. Just look at the Mess this Once Fine Country is In Now.
Oh and Doc, would you like to go Hunting or Shooting with me? It is apparent with your published outtake that you have taken too much of your Pharmaceutical Cool Aid and are not properly informed.
But then I just bet your prescription pad is still hot with the Rx mandates.
Shalom.
May God Bless US All!!
Guns dont kill people, people with guns kill people with smaller guns
Once again, for shame, for shame, for shame. These “factual” op eds ALWAYS omit the tens of thousand of times annually when firearms, their use or display result in the prevention of a death or other serious crime. Only episodes resulting in death are considered. Despite any other discussion, the omission of this important component skews any point of view into the realm of fallacy and misrepresentation. One would hope that an educated individual would have the moral fiber and desire for truthful discussion to present a factual picture before presenting a series of flawed conclusions. Sadly, this continues to be the norm for those functioning within mass media outlets. Ken
so, other than in your military service(if any), how many times has your gun saved you and others’ lives?
I have a gun and the only thing it “saves” me from is some wildlife who actually are not trying to kill me.
I passed a guy once (seemed like a normal pass to me and no different than the guy in front of me had just done), and he developed a severe case of road rage, tailgating me down the highway until I pulled over to let him pass. He pulled in right behind me and jumped out of his truck with a tire iron, running toward my car. If I had my gun, he’d be dead. If he had his gun, I’d be dead. Instead, I put the car in gear and left him running with his tire iron. Other than that, I haven’t come close to being threatened and I’m an old guy (just like you).
I’ve read the claims of “prevention of death”, and they seem like nonsense to me – how does anyone know whether they prevented a death unless you shot the gun out of the hand of the bad guy (love those old westerns) trying to kill you. Sounds more like a child-like fantasy of a gun toter.
Bottom line, you know as well as I that those statistics he cited are neither “lies” nor concocted.
Get a gun, most likely become LESS safe, not MORE.
You know Steele is right.
I just hope that my gun gets the bad guy instead of a good guy.
If you had taken a course in firearm safety and actually learned when to use deadly force you would know that you did the right thing with the road rage incident. You used a way out to remove you and your family from a potentially dangerous situation.
But because you would rather rant about being less safe than more safe and refuse to be a responsible gun owner, you only reinforce why safety training should be mandatory with the purchase of a firearm.
Do society a favor. Either take an NRA safety course or sell/give the gun to someone that is a responsible owner.
Dear libconserve,
Thanks for the response – much appreciated! Some points in answer to your observations:
1. I’m not an “old guy” but an individual with experience and perspective which contributes to a concerted opinion on this topic. I have been an NRA Safety Instructor in the use of handguns, rifles, shotguns, and home safety for many years and have had the privilege of training many individuals in the safe use of firearms.
2. An individual knows that a death or serious crime is prevented when the display of a firearm dissipates the existing attack and prevents its completion.
3. Having access to a firearm for a peaceful minded person is makes that person and his/her family safer and able to resist an attack from others of nefarious intent.
4. Dr. Steele is NOT correct and the increasing numbers of individuals becoming trained in firearm use and the increasing number of states removing draconian restrictions is testament to the universal belief of self defense and the role played by firearm possession.
Again, thanks for your input. It’s always great to address other points of view, dubious as they might sound. Ken
Owning a gun increases your chances of being injured or killed with your own gun. Thank you, Dr. Obvious.
My guns have killed fewer people than Ted Kennedy’s car, Joe Biden’s motorcade, and Hillary Clinton’s botched land deal. In the 20th Century governments around the world killed hundreds of millions of unarmed people. Rebels in Syria have asked for (1) guns and (2) money. And should law-abiding citizens give up their guns the criminals still have them. I’m sure the writer is familiar with John Lott’s research that shows more guns = less crime. Hawaii and Alaska are different cultures. How about compare Maine and Maryland: Maine has a very high firearm ownership rate, “shall issue” CCW permits, and a very low firearm homicide rate. Maryland has a low firearm ownership rate, “may issue” CCW that rarely gets issued, and a high firearm homicide rate.
Don’t forget Laura Bush’s car!
The more negative stories about guns, the more many of us want them… keep up the good work!
The media loves to throw out the negative stories because it grabs people’s attention, once in a while you’ll get a positive story about them, how an old lady protected themselves and family, an outdoor event, a sporting show, but there are certainly more stories that portray firearms in a negative light.
Maybe the media is only reporting the stories? Haa Most people do not want to here or accept the facts. It gives us comfort. Look at ww2 oh the jews are being taking away on trains but they are being treated well. Germans were and still are a decent people . People just took a blind eye to the truth . You will never convince me they could have kept a secrete that big without people not wanting to see the truth. People who spoke the truth were not to popular. I do not support taking guns away . I just think a bit differently. Please do not try to hide the truth that is the biggest mistake mankind ever made. If you own guns be careful and respect them .
“Maybe the media is only reporting the stories?”
Not really, the media has a saying “If it bleeds it leads”. Not counting the Hermon “home invasion” several weeks ago there have been several people who have successfully defended their selves and their property with firearms from people intent on harming them or taking their property here in Maine.
Those stories quickly disappear from the headlines.
The balance of your post, well let’s just leave that for another day.
In Houston the incident of rape decreased rapidly after the city instituted firearms training for its female citizens. What is needed is more education regarding firearms. Start with bringing ROTC back into the schools.
Here is some math about guns and a fact to go with it:
If 1 or more people enter my house uninvited intending to do harm, then 1 or more people will be shot until they cease to be a threat any longer.
The world is a dangerous place. If my life or my family’s is threatened I would prefer to be able to offer some motivation for the other person to leave quickly rather than need to ask pretty please don’t hurt me or my family.
Look on the bright side, if I do shoot an intruder and they aren’t a white male, the President will call their family and apologize.
I think his numbers may be off a bit. That being said it is a free country. I do agree with part of what he said. Most people to not think objectively . They think more with emotions. The perception that you will be safer with a gun is worth something to people sense of sercurity. Many kids are killed by gun accidents . Lets give the man the benefit of the doubt and say he is right. We need to at least think we are free and have the right to chose what we feel is right. Society is not ready for people who think abstractly with thier brains they will always looked down on for the views they have. Keep your guns with it makes you feel safe because that is more important than being safer statisticly . Sorry the majority of people think will feelings and sences rather than facts and abstract reasoning.
What I don’t get is how reasonable thinking people cannot wrap their brains around the concept that criminals that are intent on doing harm or inflicting fear with firearms have no fear of carrying illegal firearms? If someone has no fear of committing murder why would they worry about buying a gun illegally? Let’s not even think for a minute we’ll make the US gun free, right? We need to be rational in our arguments.
So if we take most the murders out of the statistics as they’re committed by people who fear not the laws of our country; then we take out suicides as these distraught people will find a way if that’s their true goal; we’re left with accidental discharges. OK, I agree these are far too common, owning to irresponsible owners or handlers. But this number pales in comparison to the accidental deaths from vehicles, drugs, and yes, our healthcare providers.
One thing we could do to make firearms safer is to educate children instead sheltering them. Be realistic, firearms on TV isn’t going away anytime soon and that’s the worst educational tool going when it comes to guns, cars and relationships. Maybe you should treat the first one like the latter two and talk to your children, just remember to remove your head from the sand when doing so.
What do you know, Doctor? You’re using facts and data from empirical research. We are Mainers! We think with our guts, not our brains.
Rachel the problem is there are far worse problems he could be focused on that could save far more unnecessary deaths each and every year. Like the 195,000 deaths caused by medication errors in hospitals each and every year.
And bring a notepad, there are many.
http://feed.li/f9c944
So true, good post. I don’t think it’s that they “can not wrap their brains around” the subject. I have to believe some of the anti gun crowd must have some basic intelligence. What I am more likely to believe is that common sense get’s in the way of their agenda. Their agenda is what is really twisted.
Us Americans that actually love our country and freedom that elect to have firearms do it for a variety of reasons. The first reason, and why our founding fathers made it priority #2 on their “list of things to do”, is so that THE DAY SOMEONE COMES TO MY HOME AND SAYS GIVE ME ALL YOUR GUNS IS THE DAY THEY ARE GOING TO FIND OUT EXACTLY WHY I OWN THEM.
blahhhhhhhh.
How many times have you seen a gun walk into a room and cause harm? This entire article is intellectually dishonest.
I wonder… employing the same logic — does it stand to reason that an increase in surgical knives and suction tubes in the hands of ruthless iconoclasts mean that a proportional increase in infant murders will be realized?
Mr. Steele obviously is not aware that he lives in a nation of hunters, gun collectors, and shooting enthusiasts that are protected by the 2nd Amendment. Does he plan on re-writing the constitution or moving to a place with strict gun laws? Get over it Mr. Steele. Gun ownership is here to stay and will never change.
Repeal the 2nd amendment; private weapon ownership is obsolete in a civilized society.
Since when did we become a “civilized” society?
We almost are, but because people keep clinging to archaic and obsolete beliefs prevent our society from reaching its true potential, this can only be achieved by socialism and humanistic progress, but is within our means if we have the courage to come out of the dark ages.
Never in the history of the world has socialism ever worked in any country. In other words, I should split all of my assets that I have earned with the people who refuse to budge?
Never in the history of the world has capitalism ever worked in any country. In other words, I should split all of my assets that I have earned with the people who refuse to budge?
Intersting isn’t it?
Socialism doesn’t work? Works in a lot of places, like China – you know, the country you ‘re really working for now?
If you decide to attempt to confiscate mine, be forewarned they will not leave my hand easily.
It will happen one day…….
Not in the lifetime of anyone living it won’t.
You don’t actually believe that myth do you? Prove it if you can.
“Mr. Steele obviously is not aware that he lives in a nation of hunters, gun collectors, and shooting enthusiasts that are protected by the 2nd Amendment.”
and that’s the reason the Japs didn’t attack the USA during WWII,, they knew it would be futile !!
I am a legal gun owner, my loaded 9mm is in my bed-stand at all times, it is my right to do so, my family feel safer, I have the legal right. Dr. Steele you have the right to free speech and can use any numbers you want to make your point,/opinion, but remember. When guns become outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.
“On a larger scale, numerous studies have shown that the higher a population’s rate of gun ownership is, the higher its rate of gun deaths is.”Wow, this guy is amazing!
It is a fact that if there would be no guns there could be no gun deaths. There are no guns but that does not mean people would just stop killing themselves and each other. In a similar fashion you wish to use study numbers that lump attacks drug dealers do on other drug dealers and other criminal acts, with the statistics from home owners who use guns to protect themselves from the criminals you liberals let out on the street to somehow show us that we are now less protected by protecting ourselves?
Playing games with words and math numbers in an attempt to make your case does not make the case.
The right to bear arms is a woefully outdated right; only law enforcement and the military should be allowed weapons; the general population does not need them; think of how many lives would be saved if the only guns in our society were maintained by the government; we simply do not need private weapons in our modern society.
Exactly like say in China! No thanks. Wake up from your dream!
Wake up from yours – besides China now “owns” the USA (they own our debt) and out competes the USA at every turn economically; you might consider this is the 21st century…….We simply don’t need millions of weapons in circulation; the argument that we require an armed citizenry is archaic and obsolete.
And if we weren’t an armed citizen nation, China wouldn’t just own our debt, they would be camped in your back yard. I am wide awake, totally aware of my surroundings and not asking for our government to take care/protect me.
OK – use common sense, China is a nuclear nation – your little .357 isn’t going to stop a ballistic missile; nor is it going to stop a platoon of soldiers with modern weaponry – what a lame and ignorant statement, that is the purpose of our military.
And the British thought the same thing about the rebel’s which founded our country.
The Brits didn’t understand how to do it from within, and by the way; the Brits burnt most major cities on the east coast as well as occuppied them in the War of 1812 – they only agreed to end the war so they could fight Napolean in Europe. The only battle the US won was the Battle of New Orleans signed three days after the peace treaty was signed – JD2008jd – the Brits won the war and had better things to do than waste their time on us; research your references please.
Wow I never knew the War of 1812 was the War of Independence. Your reference to the War of 1812 only demonstrates your limited knowledge of the founding of this nation. It was not founded in 1812 but in 1776 and with the help of the Baron Steuben and the French we defeated Lord Cornwallis at Yorktown in 1781.
I might also suggest that you read some first hand accounts of the British retreat from Lexington and Concord and what the British thought about the rebels on April 19, 1775.
So please, follow your own advice before posting references to American History.
You missed a point – the Brits tired of us – the War of 1812 was a continuation of British holstilities from the War of Independence; but think our language and prevalent culture is “English”; what does that imply?
Three causes for the U.S. Deceleration of War on Great Britian
1. A series of trade restrictions introduced by Britain to impede American trade with France,
2. The impressment of U.S. seamen into the Royal Navy, and
3. British military support for American Indians who were offering armed resistance to the expansion of the American frontier to the Northwest.
We shared a common language and similar culture in 1776. Why would that change?
Again, please read the history of the time period before you post.
Common scenes tells me to be armed, take care of myself, your common scene thinking tells you the Govt and military will take care of you, I like my chances.
Too bad for your chances in that case.
It’s frightening to know that there are people out there that really think like this, Weneed. I will repeat myself and pray that you are just stirring the pot to get people riled… I surely hope so.
There are several people who are so politically inclined as I am – we are the future and we will reshape our society.
“Several” of you? Several of you are going to change society?
Without guns….noless?
You’re entertainment value is priceless. Thank you.
Your welcome; but it is happening – one doesn’t need guns in a democratic society; the voters will willingly provide the power; unknowingly…
“Several” LOL I really need to stop feeding the troll
Please tell me you’re kidding… please!!
FREEDOM OF SPEECH “is a woefully outdated right; only” the state”should be allowed” FREEDOM OF SPEECH; “the general population does not need” it; :”think of” ALL THE HATE AND DISCONTENT AND “lives” that “would be saved if FREEDOM OF SPEECH “were maintained by the government; we simply do not need” FREEDOM OF SPEECH “in our modern society.”
Do you really want to start limiting the rights of our citizens? Or maybe you do. Which right do you want to limit or eliminate next?
In response to your question – yes; our citizens prove on a daily basis they are incapable of making decisions that are in the best interest of society. I do not equate free speech with gun ownership; speech in itself does not kill…….
Funny when it comes to cause and effect, religion is responsible for more death than any other cause, and I beleive it’s spread by word of mouth…
And I agree with that statement 100%!
Speech doesn’t kill? Really. How very interesting.
“I do not equate free speech with gun ownership; speech in itself does not kill…….” and neither does owning a gun
You should really learn how to debate a specific point – the point being; our society doesn’t need an armed citizenry. Besides – a gun is designed only to maim and kill, therefore, they kill.
Freedom of Speech is guaranteed in the Bill of Rights as is my right to own firearms. That is a specific as I need to be.
A firearm will not harm or kill anyone until it is aimed at a person, pressure is applied to a trigger, pulled and the hammer or striker is released hitting a firing pin. It all begins with a conscious choice and action.
The inanimate object has no more ability to cause a death than a car does that is not running, has no battery, engine or wheels.
“On a larger scale, numerous studies have shown that the higher a population’s rate of gun ownership is, the higher its rate of gun deaths is.”
The more knives we have, the more people will die with knives!The more baseball bats we have, the more people will die with baseball bats!
We can ban almost anything with those silly numbers.
As a matter of fact let’s try to take a sport like baseball and compare the baseball bat killings in the US to a country without baseball (if there is one anymore). We could compare sales of baseball bats in each country and then compare murder rates in each. Then we can ban the things. You liberals need to get a new spiel.
Doctors kill more people per year than guns.
My first thought after reading this story was Mr. Steele is a transplant,not a true Mainer. He has to explain to me why us Mainers that own and tot guns with us aren’t all dead. Maine has more guns than anywhere in the US, I myself have 36 guns, hunting rifles, handguns, shotguns, 22’s to 7mm mag. By is story I’m lucky to be living. Why would BDN put this out for news?
You just start collecting or what? Hey gun show in Newport coming up.
It is too bad that the NRA has strayed so far from their mission of promoting firearm safety and educating people about the realities associated with improper handling, storage and use of firearms.
Really? The NRA sponsors firearm safety programs all over the state of Maine.
There are approximately 40,000 deaths on our highways each year. Should we outlaw cars and trucks?
Maybe the writer can’t trust himself with a gun, but I know that I am completly trustworthy with my guns and will never murder anybody or kill myself with them.
I am safe with my guns.
If you are afraid to have a gun because of what you may do with it, then I suggest you not own one.
Inhaling second-hand smoke is linked to nearly 50,000 deaths annually. I think breathing should be banned because the air is bad. Gonna go get my Magic Markers and poster board now.
My only problem with the stats that are in this article is, are what are the numbers behind all of the violent crime with guns and how many of those guns were LEGALLY obtained. Most people that obtain a weapon legally do not use them to commit suicide or crime. It would be interesting to see what these numbers are.
Yes, it would be so much neater if all suicides were done with drugs.
If a person wants to commit suicide and they have no access to a firearm they will figure out a way to accomplish their goal.
It is regrettable that Dr. Steele did not determine the facts before he put fingers to keyboard. In the last twenty years, the the FBI reports the United States homicide rate has fallen by half, the number of violent crimes the Violent Crime Survey has found has dropped by two thirds, and the CDC reports the number of accidental gun deaths has declined by 75%. And those numbers continue to decline at record setting rates.
At the same time, Americans have purchased almost 150 million new guns. There were more than sixteen million “instant background check” for gun purchases in 2011. Without exception, and on the record, every relaxed gun law has resulted in less violence and fewer crimes.
What Dr. Steele perceives as a threat is actually an opportunity to cut violent crime by another 75%. An opportunity to get America’s violent crime and homicide rates back to where they were in 1904, before the first regularly enforced American gun laws were put in place. So while Dr. Steele evidently thinks that would be a bad thing, a great many informed Americans think it would be a very good thing.
“‘ approximately 400 pedestrians are hurt by vehicles every year in Maine, typically 19 Maine pedestrians are killed every year'”
Owning a pair of legs is more dangerous than owning a gun in Maine.
Get gun, become less safe.
I have a gun, now I, my family and others are less safe than before.
Steele is not saying he is going to take my gun, he is just saying, that if I got that gun to create safety, I am working against my purpose, because I, and those around me, got less safe.
Put another way: with gun = LESS SAFE.
without gun = MORE SAFE.
When the guy in Dexter got his guns, he probably thought: “my family is now MORE safe”
But he became deranged and the truth (which always existed) became evident (they were LESS SAFE, just as soon as he got the guns).
All of you negative posters (and I will say, many of you seem on the border of deranged). If you and I did not have our guns, we would be MORE SAFE. That’s all Steele is saying.
That said, I’m keeping my gun, at least for awhile, and hoping for the best.
If you are going to keep your gun you need to be a responsible gun owner and receive training in the safe and proper handling of the gun. If you choose not to then you are making a very poor choice and should sell or give the firearm to someone that will be responsible.
Oh no, libconserve thinks im dumb…however will i go on?
Talk about inability to make a point!
Feel free to try
I could go into numbers or statistics but I will leave that out. The fact is this country was founded on the the rights of the PEOPLE. The people have the right to KEEP AND BEAR ARMS. The only the the founders thought was more important was the right to free speech.
Are there stupid people? Are there criminals? YES!!! This does not in any way negate the rights of those who are not stupid or those who choose to obey the law.
The premise that more firearms means more accidents is stupid as best. I own a few on them specific numbers are not the point here. Needless to say No firearm I own has hurt anyone. I have all kinds of evil black guns handguns and the lost goes on. I obey the laws I buy the stamps when required I do things by the book.
Punishing those who obey the law because some do not is ludicrous as best.