In the 334 days of 2015, America has seen 351 mass shootings (and counting)

[Read the post]

1 Like

Remind me, how many deaths are caused by automobiles each year?

2013 saw 32,719. 2012 saw 33,561. 2015 saw 12,217 gun deaths (and that includes death-by-cop). Those auto deaths generally weren’t even on purpose.

Until I hear people pushing to do something about auto deaths as loudly as I see people pushing to do something about gun deaths, I don’t see any reason to believe the people clamoring for change actually care about the death rate. They just hate or are scared of guns.


Actually the numbers were almost even last year.

Which says a lot, considering that most city dwellers encounter many thousands of people actively using their cars on a daily basis. Depending on your commute you might share the road with tens or even hundreds of thousands of other motorists before you finish your morning coffee. You’d probably have to go back to the Battle of Gettysburg to find an example of that many Americans actively using firearms at the same place and time.

So yeah, I’d say that makes a gun statistically more dangerous than a car.

Even so we carefully regulate the manufacture, sale, ownership and use of cars because we recognize that they are inherently dangerous objects. If only we applied the same approach to firearms.


[quote=“RagingRoosevelt, post:2, topic:70138”]Remind me, how many deaths are caused by automobiles each year?

Guns are not cars, and cars are not guns. Hope that helps!


I don’t hate or fear guns. I HATE that firearms are so easy to acquire, to the point where anyone in a murderous rage can go to Walmart and pick one up while fuming and irrational and legitimately out to kill someone.

I also FEAR that the government has been co-opted by the NRA, so it’s banned the CDC from getting better statistics and handling this like the public health issue that it is.


Cars kill as a tragic side-effect of being machines for getting people from place-to-place in order to conduct the business of living.

Guns kill as a direct effect of being machines created expressly to make things dead.

I don’t see a real case for comparison.


Also, whenever someone invents a way to make cars less lethal it’s usually not long before that innovation becomes legally mandated for all new models.

Nobody seems particularly interested in manufacturing, purchasing or mandating less-lethal guns.


Yup. NRA types like to say “Killing isn’t the only thing guns can do”. To which I usually reply “then you’re misusing guns”.

If all you wanted to use them for was target shooting, then pick up an Airsoft, or a tournament bench rig. (actually don’t pick up that bench rig. It’s been sighted perfectly, and if you so much as look at it funny it’ll miss the shot.)


[quote=“RagingRoosevelt, post:2, topic:70138, full:true”]They just hate or are scared of guns.

If that were true, I’d want to ban guns outright. I don’t, I just think they shouldn’t be too easy to get, and should be regulated as heavily as any other dangerous machine or substance- maybe moreso, since they’re specifically designed to kill. While individual gun owners may still be responsible and careful, America as a society has made it abundantly clear that it no longer can be trusted with easy access to firearms, and it’s long past time to treat them as being, you know, actually dangerous and not toys.

This is a decision we have to make as a society if we want to see any change, which is why it gets so frustrating to see the pro-gun folks fighting tooth and claw against any regulation, no matter how reasonable, while offering absolutely no solutions of their own. To us, it looks like they’re willing to accept any number of shootings rather than mildly inconvenience themselves in regard to their shooting range hobby.


Yeah, you have to have a license to drive a car and if you fuck it up, they take away your license.


Jesus Fuck, are you kidding me with this bullshit? Do you know how big the death rate used to be for automobiles? Do you know why it’s a now a small fraction of what it used to be? Because people have continuously fought for ways to make them safer in every way, and as a result they are safer because they’re incredibly heavily regulated in terms of the design, construction, sale, licensing, and operation - they’re tracked, owners are tracked, and operators can have their right to drive revoked by any number of issues. Is all of that true for guns? The fuck it is. Firearm deaths are going up and automobile deaths are decreasing to the point that in some states, gun deaths are exceeding car deaths now. Despite the fact that automobile ownership is widespread and are driven frequently, and gun ownership rates have been declining for years to the point where only a minority even owns guns and uses them relatively rarely.

And for a whole lot of other reasons, too, if a doctor thinks your mental or physical state doesn’t lend itself to safe driving. (Someone I know was recently feeling depressed, went to see a doctor; the doctor asked if she was feeling suicidal, she said, “no.” Apparently the doctor didn’t believe her, because the next thing she knows, her license is revoked. I can’t even begin to imagine something equivalent happening with gun ownership.)


Of course not! That guy might come back to the doctor’s office with his guns and kill the doctor!


Frankly I do not care.

What you see reason to believe, that is.


But pursuit of happiness… but intestate commerce, BUT BUT BUT MAI FREEDOM


Not to mention you have to carry liability insurance if you own a car…


Churches also carry liability insurance.


Afterlife Insurance?


What? Seriously? Have a little faith man.


For that there are Fidelity Bonds


You’re totally correct. Now, if we could only get someone to recognize the inherent danger of letting anyone operate a car and buying and selling cars with no records at all, that’s be great.

Perhaps if there was some sort of mandated test to get a driving license? Maybe standards for general health and capability? Of course, basic identity and background checks would be part of that, the government would have your name, address, and photo. but since it’s for the greater good, few would complain. Maybe there could be safety requirements, too? Limits of some sort on how fast the things can operate?

Yes, some of this stuff would seem onerous at first, but I’d hate to see a world where we continue to let car ownership flourish with no substantial regulation.

Most people look at the vocal minority who call for the complete banning of cars as crazy; the rest of us would be happy with some reasonable laws, keep things well regulated, if you will. I mean, sure, some bad people would probably flout these car laws, but even if it decreased car deaths by 10%, wouldn’t that be something?