Two of four felons plead no contest to handling guns in music video

Nice to see this. Thanks, Almanac for this important reporting.

Remember: Every time a gun injures or kills in self-defense, it is used:

11 times for completed and attempted suicides.
7 times in criminal assaults and homicides.
4 times in unintentional shooting deaths or injuries.


Having a gun in your home makes your home MORE dangerous to you and your loved ones.

Me and many of my neighbors own guns and firearms for protection, hunting, and other uses. Here in Portola Valley it is considered normal as a part of the country lifestyle. I get that many guns are used for crime and other shady purposes, but that is only in cities like SF, Chicago, Detroit, etc. Here in PV that would never be the case—it is an extremely wealthy and safe environment. Let’s differentiate between the types of communities where gun crimes occur before jumping to conclusions based off of generalized facts.

If one does not reach "conclusions" from facts, does one just reach "conclusions" from one's emotions? Or just conclusions from wishful thinking?

Every time a gun injures or kills in self-defense, it is used:

11 times for completed and attempted suicides.
7 times in criminal assaults and homicides.
4 times in unintentional shooting deaths or injuries.


///


The poster claims her gun is for protection - how many times has a gun been used in self defense in PV?

And if PV is "an extremely wealthy and safe environment" why do you need a gun in the house when the dangers are so apparent?

Posting of facts early deter the ramblings of emotional gun supprters. Well done.

"Posting of facts early deter the ramblings of emotional gun supprters (sic)."

Actually, no. There's no point in conversing with people that know nothing about the subject, have never owned or handled guns and are frightened by them.

I'm 'frightened' by so called responsible gun owners who won't acknowledge facts: a home with a gun is a more dangerous place.

Acknowledge facts and move forward.

PV homeowners do not need a gun for personal safety, just for emotional support. Even the poster @resident all but admitted that.

I get that. Look at the other emotional response about "fright." Guns are too emotional for rational conversation.

2nd amendment:

apparently guns are too emotional for logical and thoughtful conversation by you. Do you have ANY experience with fire arms? Anything upon which to argue other than sterile statistics totally lacking in context?

The logic seems one sided here. How many deaths and injuries by guns in this country?

How often are they used in self defense?

While difficult, try and take the emotion of owning a gun out of it.

center:

How many people are killed by automobiles every year?

How many people are killed by drug overdose every year?

How many people die of smoking related diseases every year?

Look up the statistics. Hint: all three of those things kill more people every year, separately, than firearms.

Whataboutism.
Besides, seems to me that auto use and ownership is well regulated.

Back to the questions: 13000 gun deaths? 15000 every year?

How many times used in Self Defense? Hundreds?

How many tens of thousands gun related injuries?

Is there too much emotion with your guns to even discuss changes you can accept? Other than the "more mental health" canard? (gun lovers emotionally voting for pols who vote to cut mental health care)

" seems to me that auto use and ownership is well regulated."

So is gun ownership. At least in this state. Look it up.

Every user licensed and tested? Tested several times over their lifetime? Including vision?

Every gun registered annually with (smog like) check every couple years?

Proof of insurance? Every year?

Seems like one's emotional attachment is clouding one's judgement. Having guns in the home is dangerous. If guns magically made a home safer, the NRA would be yelling about statistics.

center:

the difference between auto licenses and gun ownership is that one is a right. Given that one has a right to own a gun and has a privileged to drive says it all. ANY controls on gun ownership are de facto "well regulated".

There are worse things in this country causing far more deaths than firearms. That's not "yah but" it's facts. I don't hear anyone like you complaining about the things that cause FAR more deaths in this country than guns. How about we concentrate on the things that kill people that aren't a right defined in the constitution. When you've solved those and reduced the death rates equivalent to those caused by guns, let's talk. Good luck.

"That's not "yah but" it's facts."

Quite the statement considering the facts about gun ownership and the increased chance of deaths and injuries to self and loved ones, all to satisfy an emotional, irrational need.

Facts.

"all to satisfy an emotional, irrational need."

That's your opinion as to why people own guns. Probably based upon a total lack of exposure to guns and gun owners. I know many people that don't own guns for self defense. They, like me own them for sport. I, like many gun owners, shoot competitively. It's quite challenging. Others use firearms to put food on the table. And, yes, some own them for self defense.

Your characterization of people exercising a right given them by the Constitution as "emotional" and "irrational" is insulting. Do you drive a car? If you do, given the chances you could be killed in a car crash are higher than being shot, I could say your choice to drive is "irrational".

By the way, if you are hoping to change peoples' minds or opinions, calling them irrational and emotional isn't going to get it done. If you are trying to paint yourself as knowing better than everyone else how they should live their lives, you've succeeded.

Fair enough. If looking at the real world about death and injury in households with guns is irrational, paint me so. Painted with fact - who knew? (I will avoid the obvious question about how many of the 7 million area residents put meals on the table with guns...)

You've many posts, so it took awhile to sort through those with your name in gun related topics. I would say you've been consistent, but the posts themselves show you refusing to acknowledge the safety risks not that long ago. So one shall hope you continue to evolve as you see data.

Was unaware of your competition shooting from the posts I saw. That gives you the best of both worlds - personal enjoyment and enrichment, and you can keep your guns locked up at the range, thus keeping your home as safe as possible, ie. gun-free.

From a previous poster:

"Every time a gun injures or kills in self-defense, it is used:

11 times for completed and attempted suicides.
7 times in criminal assaults and homicides.
4 times in unintentional shooting deaths or injuries."

Good luck in your next competition.

center:

My guns are locked up at home. So I guess I'm at terrible risk, right? No.

Numbers don't lie.

"Numbers don't lie."

Of course they lie. They lie all the time. You've never heard the expression "there's lies, damn lies and statistics"? Numbers can be manipulated to show whatever you want.

"numbers don't lie"

And these ones don't. If the NRA could, they would lie and instantly attempt to refute the most basic fact: guns make homes more dangerous to those that live there.


"Every time a gun injures or kills in self-defense, it is used:

11 times for completed and attempted suicides.
7 times in criminal assaults and homicides.
4 times in unintentional shooting deaths or injuries."

Why risk the safety of your loved ones?

You should remove the suicides from that. If someone is going to commit suicide they will find a way to do it. Those who use guns for suicide are usually quite intent on committing suicide and if they don't have a gun they will find an equally effective method, like jumping off a bridge.

Finally down to arguing the validity of hard facts?

Where are your numbers? Show us the number of gun suicides in the Bay Area vs bridgejumpers in the Bay Area.

That's a rough one to prove. Try again.

Fact: Guns make a home a more dangerous place.

Fact:

guns can make SOME homes less safe. If one is responsible in how they store and handle their guns along with having training and staying up to date I would posit those homes are no less safe than any other. My guns are locked up. According to your position my home is less safe. Problem with that argument is, mine are locked up, I'm the only one with access, they are not stored loaded and they are not kept for personal protection. I can assure you I won't be committing suicide. According to your belief I'm in imminent danger. I'm not. And neither is my family.

That's the problem with statistics. Especially firearm use statistics. The congress in its' infinite wisdom passed laws that don't allow the CDC to collect information on the victims or perpetrators of gun violence. We don't know if the statistics you quote are more common in gang banger's houses or everyone's. We don't know because the CDC can't collect that info. That info offers context which is totally lacking here.

Again, you keep implying the gun is the problem. A gun is a tool. A tool when handled properly, stored properly and used responsibly is not a danger any more than a hammer or a knife. It is a people problem.

The GOP... congress in its' infinite wisdom passed laws that don't allow the CDC to collect information on the victims or perpetrators of gun violence.

Shall we be honest about the NRA controlled GOP?

Where ARE the gun vs bridge suicide stats?

"gun stats are problematic, use emotions instead"

K, got it.

safe harbor:

it is my understanding that the laws stopping the CDC from collecting that data was done by democrat, anti gun congress people. They don't want people to know the fact that most guns used in crimes are used on other criminals. Of course, that's only my ten years law enforcement experience observation. You can't find that data, because.....

"it is my understanding that the laws stopping the CDC from collecting that data was done by...”

Awww, c'mon now, really?

Lying, 3x cheating, Newt and the GOP in the 90's? They didn't teach you that in your 10 years?

That's a pathetic falsehood, and to throw your credibility behind that falsehood?

Please, don't let your emotions prevent you from doing a simple Google search.


'''''''

The N.R.A. pushed Congress in 1995 to stop the C.D.C. from spending taxpayer money on research that advocated gun control. Congress then passed the Dickey Amendment in 1996, and cut funding that effectively ended the C.D.C.’s study of gun violence as a public health issue.

The result is that 22 years and more than 600,000 gunshot victims later, much of the federal government has largely abandoned efforts to learn why people shoot one another, or themselves, and what can be done to prevent gun violence.


'''''''


600,000 gunshot victims later.........

Please keep telling us how guns make us safer.

600,000 gunshot victims later.

And you put out that falsehood?

600,000 gunshot victims later.

center:

and how many automobile deaths later?

how many drug overdose deaths later?

You act as if firearms are the only things killing people in this country, when the facts are they kill fewer people annually than either of the other two. Where's your call for banning automobiles?

Cars and drivers are well regulated - physical testing, written testing, checked, insured, re-tested, annual proof, registered, etc, and have a legitimate use.

Shall we apply the same standards to the emotional attachment to firearms? Firearms that have demonstrably been shown to cause more harm to a home?

Just a note to keep track of all the noise you keep slinging - are you done with the previous falsehoods? Or once another one is slain, you'll reach back for another canard?

Isn't this your third attempt at the auto canard? Somehow it makes the GOP denial of funds to research safety acceptable?

Hard to keep up with this gun-fueled emotional back and forth, with all this reaching...

Center:

you're convinced you are "right". I'll stop wasting my time.

Thus the last unanswered question:

Shall we apply the same standards to the emotional attachment of firearms?

Good day.

It's not an "emotional attachment". It's a Constitutional right. Good day.

Oh my, now, just own it.

If guns demonstrably make a home less safe, only emotions can overcome factual evidence of safety, to put ones family and loved ones at greater risk.

Your denials of your emotional attachment to firearms, above, ring hollow. The falsehoods about Democrats, the auto canard, etc. belittle your position.

The NRA, a lobbyist for gun manufacturers, preys on your attachment and ignorance of facts about home safety. Just own it, and stop with the falsehoods, fables and canards.

Since we're done here, a reminder of evidence for those that scroll to the end of comments:


Every time a gun injures or kills in self-defense, it is used:

11 times for completed and attempted suicides.
7 times in criminal assaults and homicides.
4 times in unintentional shooting deaths or injuries.

And of course, from today's headlines, more about the falsehoods above:

"(CNN) — Republican members of the House Appropriations Committee blocked a proposal to designate funding specifically for gun violence research on Wednesday, leaving public health researchers disappointed. The vote against the proposal was 32-20, along party lines."

Disgraceful. Something, at last, we can all agree upon.

600,000 gunshot victims since Newt and the GOP started this nakedly political, morally reprehensible policy.

600,000 gunshot victims.

@Center

The only person not "safe" in my house because I have a gun is a criminal.

Violent Crime (read deaths) is WAY WAY down everywhere (NYC went from 2000 murders per year in 1990 to 234 last year).

on the other hand Drug Overdoses have gone from 21,000 in 2002 to over 65,000 last year, and we are talking a HEAVILY regulated industry that the Government has spent Billions or Trillions to control. So how has that Government oversight worked so far????

not sure having the Government meddling in my ownership of weapons is a positive thing....if you know what I mean.

sleeping soundly....

Sleeping soundly: nice whataboutism, with zero relevance to gun related safety FACTS. Fact and history are not on the side of your clear emotional attachment to your gun. What about:


Every time a gun injures or kills in self-defense, it is used:

11 times for completed and attempted suicides.
7 times in criminal assaults and homicides.
4 times in unintentional shooting deaths or injuries.


I sincerely hope, for the sake of your loved ones, that your emotional, illogical (based on safety facts) attachment to guns does not threaten their safety, as has been unfortunately shown in 600,000 instances in the last couple decades.

Ownage by facts.

No risk here. No need for the additional safety risk of weaponry not needed.

Web Link

The safety stats are legit. Thanks.