The Binary Mindedness Of Bipolar Personas And Guns That Kill Dreams And Futures...
I was thinking how (sadly) ironic it was that the latest shooting tragedy took place in a center for logic and reason. When you
venture out into the cyber-thoughts of Americans, you realize that there are many people out there who lack basic thinking skills. It is as if education passed them right on by, and left them with nothing but a need to group up and clamor, reminiscent of Oakland Raider fans or those 2001 Space Odyssey monkeys who beat rocks with bones and howled...
The monolithic moment comes at us at regular intervals...
Here is a diagram worth thinking about. It is logically constructed. 'A' represents us humans- the lot of us, in all of our strengths and weaknesses.
'B' represents the density of guns in our society. Not the total number of guns. But the dispersion of guns per capita.
The final 'C' represents th
e percentage of we humans capable of committing a homicidal act with a gun, and its overlap with gun density.
"The direct link between firearm availability and gun death was confirmed last month in a Harvard School of Public Health study published in The Journal of Trauma analyzing gun death among American children. That study showed that children living in the five states with the highest levels of gun ownership were 16 times more likely to die from unintentional firearm injury, seven times more likely to die from firearm suicide, and three times more likely to die from firearm homicide than children in the five states with the lowest levels of gun ownership. Additionally, children in the top five gun ownership states were twice as likely to die from homicide and suicide overall as children in the five lowest gun ownership states."
If this needs explaining, I'd suggest going back to about ninth grade- you missed quite a bit, apparently...
On a lighter note, I got my Canon Sureshot delivered by UPS over the weekend. Well, Friday late, to be exact. We had one good day of weather and I managed to take a few pictures in the yard while learning how to use this camera.
For three hundred bucks, I think it's awesome. It zooms (SLR equivalents) from 38mm to 438mm or something like that.
It took me awhile, but I actually learned all of its functions and think I made the right choice.
I could have gone for the $1,000 camera bodies and bought expensive lenses, but I am too rough on stuff and besides, I have to reduce the quality of everything I shoot just to handle it on the computer.
It has a quick setting for high speed shutter, the zoom is great, and as far as I can tell, the optics are good enough for my sorry eyes.
The battery life is its main weakness but I will simply rotate two sets of four AA rechargeables.
I LOVE how it renders landscapes in the 'SNOW' function.
You put that button on SNOW and it produces great peaks and valleys and nuanced subtleties and makes snow fantasy photographs a breeze.
My dog Tuti thinks Im crazy to be on my knees and whistling, but you wouldn't know it here.
My pond is now melted and the fish are happy, and I have a small solar fountain that spits up water...
22 comments:
Is that your dog Tuti in the pink bikini? Wow! You're right, your camera does do wonderful things on the snow function.
Awesome! I'm a little suspicious of the snow function...
You're driftwood looks like the Venus di Milo
Oh, and I liked your diagram of the gun density/population and loony tune subset
Awesome Hummer shot...very clear.
and yes - that driftwood has a very feminine form.
Love the camera and the photos - well, the snow one didn't do much for me, but I don't think I have enough testosterone running around in my veins to do it justice.
Have fun playing with it and keep sharing the shots you get!!
Beautiful photos.
And I'm going to get flamed for this, but if one sane student had had a gun, some kids might have been saved.
ditto what Nancy said...
You seem to have mastered the camera.
Not flamed, Nancy. You are correct. If one sane student in the vicinity had a gun, some kids might have been saved.
The problem is in the math, reality and probabilities. What was the probability that this was to occur at this school and not one down the road? Do you arm sane kids everywhere to make sure you stop this one incident? And then, how do you know you are arming sane kids and not kids who may just pull the gun in anger and shoot somebody? Or twenty people?
So what you are doing is creating a problem with an infinite amount of possibilities for "shootings" in order to hypothetically reduce the casualty level in one shooting you already know about.
It isn't logical. It isn't practical. And it is nonsensical.
Basic fact-- increase gun availability, increase death.
You can't argue with that basic fact, unless you want to argue against the numbers that are in evidence all over the world...
If you arm a populace, a percentage of that populace will shoot and kill people, and there is no control over who those people actually are.
>>The problem is in the math, reality and probabilities.
No, human beings are not binary things that have only 0s and 1s.
>>What was the probability that this was to occur at this school and not one down the road? Do you arm sane kids everywhere to make sure you stop this one incident?
You're missing the point entirely. A person who chooses to take personal responsibility for their own safety, goes through the proper licensing procedure, and is granted a license to carry a conceiled firearm is an asset to society, not a liability. One such person could have made the difference between 33 dead and significantly less.
>>And then, how do you know you are arming sane kids and not kids who may just pull the gun in anger and shoot somebody? Or twenty people?
That's the same tired old argument gun control proponents always offer, but it's simply not true. Right now there are over 30 SHALL ISSUE states and every one had the doom and gloom "blood will run in the streets" warnings if gun licenses are shall issue. Didn't come true.
>>So what you are doing is creating a problem with an infinite amount of possibilities for "shootings" in order to hypothetically reduce the casualty level in one shooting you already know about.
Incorrect analysis, by your reasoning, I can also argue that what you are doing is creating an infinate amount of possibilities for "stopping" a shooting. People who obey the law, the ones who get the licenses, are not the ones you have to worry about. Why are there no mass shootings at gun shows, police stations, shooting competitions, or other places where there are a large number (or to use your term "density") of people and guns?
>>It isn't logical. It isn't practical. And it is nonsensical.
Your argument you mean. . .
>>Basic fact-- increase gun availability, increase death.
Noooooooooo. What's your source? Increased gun availability like say Texas, vs. no guns like say D.C. Look up the murder rates, gun or otherwise.
>>You can't argue with that basic fact, unless you want to argue against the numbers that are in evidence all over the world...
Like England, that saw a dramatic increase in physical assaults, including gun assaults, after banning guns. Like Australia, that saw the same.
>>If you arm a populace, a percentage of that populace will shoot and kill people, and there is no control over who those people actually are.
Missed the point AGAIN. We're talking about allowing law abiding citizens to carry a defensive weapon they choose to protect themselves. Criminals are always going to have guns. That's the reality.
Good points and I will address them, michael--
No, humans aren't binary. But they are trendy suckers and follow basic behavioral patterns which are measurable. One striking pattern is gun availability equals more death by guns. Source, the Harvard study quoted above.
Haven't missed the point entirely. A licensed, thoughtful, gun owner CAN be an asset to society. He can also be a liability. Depends on his friends, his wife's brother, his drunk uncle. You can't predict the behavior of ancilliary people to a registered gun owner. Case in point, someone I hired to do backhoe work was shot by his own gun by his son, yet he was a thoughtful, registered gun owner...
Actually, I haven't predicted blood running in the streets. I've just observed much loss of life by fire arms. The question is one of value and balance-- do you, as a society, accept the losses in order to maintain percieved gains? We do it all the time with automobiles. The question is the same-- is it worth it? The families of those dead students may argue against you.
Dramatic increase in assaults? Your source is the NRA? Ask an Australian what differences they see anecdotally... Talk to people in the ER... ask people on the street if they feel safer at night... I don't buy that assertion one iota.
Haven't missed the point again. You can't predict which of your newly armed citizens will behave with malice. Humans aren't binary. You make the assumption that a person who can pass through and get a license is automatically excused from being part of the human pool of possible loonies. I ain't buying it.
And for the record, I believe in simple and effective gun ownership management, but do not think banning guns is either feasable or possible in the US.
A few Headlines in the world according to michael--
Sane gun owner becomes insane, shoots 15.
Insane student over-powers sane gun toting student, shoots 9.
Student shot by girlfriend when more than gun found under dorm room bed.
Student gun accidentally discharges, killing fellow student.
Father takes gun from sane gun stufent, shoots family and then himself.
Sane good guy gun student shoots nine, becomes insane criminal gun student...
Student with gun robbed by own gun and then shot to death...
Yaddy yaddy yaddy...
The following Statistics have been extracted from GUN AVAILABILITY AND VIOLENT CRIME: RESEARCH EVIDENCE Note by the Crime and Criminal Justice Unit, Research and Statistics Directorate of the Home Office available online at http://www.dvc.org.uk/johnny/dunblane/homemain.html.
They ar eprovided for informational purposes you are free to draw to draw your own conclusions.
Gun ownership Homicide Gun homicide Suicide Gun suicide
rate per 100k rate per lm rate per lm rate per I m rate per lm
USA 85,000 9.3 6.40 12.0 7.1
Switzerland 43,000 1.5 1.40 20.4 5.8
New Zealand 29,000 2.6 0.49 14.5 2.5
Canada 24,000 2.2 0.67 12.8 3.
Australia 19,000 1.8 0.36 11.6 2.5
Britain 3,000 1.3 0.14 8.6 0.4
Japan 400 1.2 0.06 19.3 0.14
France (23,000) 4.9 2.32 20.0 4.9
Notes
The gun homicide rate includes attempts for Switzerland and France. The French homicide rate also includes attempts. Based on a figures of 23% of households owning a gun
from Review of Firearm Statistics and Regulations in Selected Countries, Canadian Department of Justice, 1995. cited in Gun Availability and Violent Crime, Op. Cit
Rate per million
Homicide Suicide % households
Overall With gun Overall With gun with guns
USA 75.9 44.6 124.0 72.8 48.0
Norway 12.1 3.6 142.7 38.7 32.0
Canada 26.0 8.4 139.4 44.4 29.1
Switzerland 11.7 4.6 244.5 57.4 27.2
Finland 29.6 7.4 253.5 54.3 23.2
France 12.5 5.5 223.0 49.3 22.6
New Zealand 20.2 4.7 137.7 24.1 22.3
Australia 19.5 6.6 115.8 43.2 19.4
Belgium 18.5 8.7 231.5 24.5 16.6
Italy 17.4 13.1 78.1 10.9 16.0
Sweden 13.3 2.0 182.4 21.2 15.1
Spain 13.7 3.8 64.5 4.5 13.1
W.Germany 12.1 2.0 203.7 13.8 8.9
N. Ireland 43.3 21.3 82.7 11.8 8.4
CSSR 13.5 2.6 117.8 9.5 5.2
Scotland 16.3 1.1 105.1 6.9 4.7
England 6.7 0.8 86.1 3.8 4.7
and Wales
Netherlands 11.8 2.7 117.2 2.8 1.9
Notes:
The Swiss gun ownership figure excluding military guns is 12.2%
From:
Killias, M. (1993). 'Gun ownership, suicide and homicide: an international perspective'. In, Understanding Crime and Experiences of Crime and Crime Control, del Frate, A., Zvekic, U. and van Dijk, J.J.M. (Eds.). UNICRI Publication No. 49. Rome: UNICRI. Cited in Gun Availability and Violent Crime, Op. Cit
Negative data. Lacks context.
No comparative analysis of cases where possession saved lives.
Have fun with your cam Scott...Is it a dig SLR? I'm so happy mine doesn't have the snow function. I'd never get it away from my sons.
Might I suggest the Sony rechargable batts? I found them to be the longest lasting and you can get them and a good charger at Fred Meyers. I've have one of my sets for about 4-5 years and altho after all that time the older set doesn't hold a charge quite as long, they are little troopers! I have 3 sets and it does well for my camera.
Hug that sweet Tuti for me!
Great photos! I especially like the hummingbird. You're going to have a lot of fun with that new camera...
Thanks for your thoughtful discourse on the subject of gun ownership, Scott and Michael. I will tell you, from the perspective of a mother with two young, precocious, curious children, one of the first questions I ask of parents who invite my kids to play at their house is: Do you have any guns at home? If the answer is yes, I invite their kids to play at my house instead. For this reason, I also will not allow my kids to go to their grandparents' house unsupervised by either myself or my husband. Sad, but true. It only takes one mistake, one bullet to change the fabric of my family forever. I'm not willing to take that chance. Period.
Ummm.......
I just came by to say that you made me laugh out loud twice today with your comments on blogs. Thank you for that.
bernita-- Actually, that data can be inferred, simply by taking the over-all view of a country. The inference being, if lives were being saved, the homocide rate would lower. The US still soars both in gun qavailability and homocide deaths comparatively.
You can also argue that seatbelt laws are wrong because it doesn't count the lives that were saved by NOT wearing a seatbelt.
Pull back far enough, and the emperical evidence is demonstrative in both cases.
Thanks, Meno!
bernita-- And one final thought before I go back to my tale...
The great majority of cases where it can be said that a gun saved a life is when one is confronted with a gun. This just adds to the availability argument, suggesting that the availability of guns increases the odds of one being confronted with a gun, requiring the use of a gun to save one's life from the gun...
Taken to the extreme, you would have to arm everybody to save them from everybody else, thus increasing the likelihood of loonies shooting people. So no, I don't agree with you at all...
nice hummingbird, nice Venn.
Is there a NAGROSOMO website? Can I put that image on my sites?
You are 2 cool for school I tell ya. Love the camera...
Thank you thank you thank you for creating that diagram. I just came across your response on The LawDog Files blog regarding Virginia Tech shooting. I completely agree with you. I was outraged by the comments that some people made online saying that they're "shocked" that something like this could happen. They shouldn't be surprised because people (including the insane ones) can obtain firearms easily over there. And then CNN stated that US got the highest rate of firearm related deaths among youth. And yet people still "surprised / shocked".
Post a Comment