Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: 1,000,000

Posted 7 years ago on March 22, 2013, 8:09 p.m. EST by bensdad (8977)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

A few years after John Lennon was murdered in America by a gun wielding nut,
George Harrison was attacked in his bed in England by a knife wielding nut.
One lived. One died.
Can you figure it out ?



Read the Rules
[-] 5 points by engineer4 (331) 7 years ago

I find it strange how you write the above post. You state Lennon was murdered by a gun, yet Harrison was attacked by a knife wielding nut. Were not both attacked by "nuts" ? I doubt that a gun attacked Lennon. If so, then the knife must have attacked harrison. Let's have some honesty. I support most gun laws and certain restrictions, but this type of slanted writing is just typical propaganda blaming guns and not the person. Can you figure that out?

[-] 5 points by bensdad (8977) 7 years ago

I can figure out that you are part of wayne's wonders

[-] -2 points by engineer4 (331) 7 years ago

You figure wrongly as usual. Have never been a NRA member. So Why do you slant the post in the manner you do.? It's dishonest writing, shows lack of integrity, especially with wrong statistics that are just for headlines. Try "figuring" again.

[-] 3 points by bensdad (8977) 7 years ago

wanna argue with the FBI numbers? http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/crimestats

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

[-] -1 points by engineer4 (331) 7 years ago

The numbers have been already discussed by others below. How about figuring the part that you did not address: how did the "gun" attack Lennon, but a " nut with a knife" attack harrison?

PS. I see the Twinkle Team has been busy up voting and downvoting this morning.

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 7 years ago

GUNS – Facts & numbers & opinion & solution

FACTS: There is little difference between a gun owner and a gun buyer
There is no difference between a gun owned and a gun bought
The constitution does give some people the right to “bear some arms”
More Americans ( in absolute numbers & per capita ) are killed by guns than in almost any other country ( USA 11,000+; England 35 )
Almost no hunters hunt with semi-automatic weapons

“Assault weapon” is a term well defined in law but not well understood
Legislatures & courts ( including SCOTUS ) have set numerous limits on the 2nd amendment’s right to “bear arms”
Just like legislatures & courts ( including SCOTUS ) have set numerous limits on the 1st amendment’s right to “free speech” [ no “fire in a crowded theatre” ]

You can buy a revolver arm but not a grenade launcher arm
A 9 year old cannot buy a shotgun
Australia & England both passed strict new gun control laws –
………and drastically cut their gun deaths
The nra uses its members to sell guns for the gun manufacturers
It is illegal to drive an un-registered car
It is illegal to drive if you are un-licensed
It is illegal to drive an un-insured car

The 1994 “assault weapons ban” did not work because it did NOT ban assault weapons – it only banned their sale or manufacture.

The real problem never discussed:
It is not the gun sellers or the gun buyers – or even the guns - it is the gun OWNERS

I would divide most gun deaths into five categories:
the Sandy Hook mass murderers,
drug related street crime,
non-drug related street crime,
“personal” crimes of anger,
Consider each one - all would be reduced if we reduced the number of guns ( and legalized drugs ). The complex, conflicting state laws and the huge number of guns owned by Americans makes confiscation ( that no one is advocating ) totally unfeasible

We need a uniform federal gun law
The “mental health” issue is an nra stall – unless they agree that everyone who OWNS a gun must be psychoanalyzed and certified “safe to own guns”.
The nra’s “American culture is different” is another stall – most countries have hunters, violent movies, citizen owned guns, violent video games, drugs.

Background checks & closing the gun show loophole will help –
but ONLY with new sales –
it does nothing about OWNERS – and there are 100,000,000 of them. If just 1/10 of 1% of them are crazy, that’s 10,000 crazy gun OWNERS!

SOLUTION: Based on reducing guns, not confiscation

learn as much as you can about the numbers that prove what the solutions are

demand a plan:


alex jones – without his straight jacket!

multi-millionaire gun manufacturer wayne lapierre who works for koch brothers & gets paid over $1,000,000 / year
to get his army of lemmings to keep buying guns.


find your congresspeople

VP Joe Biden, Gun Panel, 1600 Pennsylvania Av, Washington DC 20006


Dear ............................:

[ Y.O.U.R...I.N.T.R.O...H.E.R.E ]

While some people may want to confiscate guns, I don’t.
Here is a much more feasible approach.
It will not solve all gun problems, but it will
reduce the number of guns
and that will reduce the number of dangerous people who have access to guns -
and isn't THAT our real goal?

My proposal - for a NATIONAL gun law for all guns & owners:
My four points are SIMPLY based on seeing a logical parallel between cars & guns.

Please consider advocating these four steps below to help America with our 11,000+ gun disasters:

all gun owners must be licensed & tested with all guns they own and pass a written test.

If you own a motor cycle, a dump truck, and a car - you are tested in each.
Require a written gun test - to guarantee the owner's understanding of gun laws
thus being forced to know the law - via the test – also means the police know who you are -
and you may be less likely to commit a crime or be careless when storing your guns

every year, you must prove that you have gun liability insurance &
be background checked and prove that your gun is properly locked when not used.

Insurance should be at least as high as car insurance [ I would like at least $1,000,000 ]
You must prove your car insurance.
Require an annual back ground check ( with fee ) to verify your suitability to own guns.
Every gun must be locked in a gun case or have a trigger lock.

as the owner of a gun, you are legally responsible for what is done with it.

You are required to report if your gun is missing within 48 hours,
The owner will be much less likely to leave a gun accessible to a family member or thief.

every gun must be registered and tested & a sample fired bullet stored by the police

Knowing that your gun & its bullets are so easily traced will make you think before using it.

additionally -

Over ten bullet magazines are illegal to own { 2nd amendment has no relevance }

Gun fees [ licenses fees & registration fees & fines ] should be
high enough to create a very substantial gun buy-back program ($100-$500 / year)

Penalties must be very high in money ( equal to ten years fees ) & jail time -
especially after the first offense

No citizens ( except dealers & collectors ) need more than a small number of guns

Gun fees should be higher for more guns & for bigger guns.

But the nra may be in favor of this when the gun companies understand that gun owners
can get paid to turn in their old gun and will be able to buy a new gun -
with an INTEGRATED lock .

If we legalize drugs, we will clear out jail cells to fill with gun law breakers and
free up police "time" for real crime investigation

We WILL get higher compliance and lower opposition if we use high fees & buyback.

Take a position of reducing guns, like assault weapons such as semi-automatic rifles -
rather than punishing a gun nut who spent $10,000 on an armory.

LBJ proposed a gun plan similar to the above 4 point plan

Some real 2011 / 2012 gun statistics:

Americans own almost half of all civilian owned guns in the world.
Per 100,000: America: 88,880 guns owned ; 2.97 homicides Per 100,000
Per 100,000: England.…: 6,200 guns owned ; 0.07 homicides Per 100,000
Per 100,000: Austrailia: 15,000 guns owned ; 0.14 homicides Per 100,000
Per 100,000: Canada…: 30,800 guns owned ; 0.51 homicides Per 100,000
Per 100,000: France….: 31,000 guns owned ; 0.06 homicides Per 100,000
Per 100,000: Japan……..: 1,000 guns owned ; 0.08 homicides Per 100,000
Per 100,000: Israel……..: 7,300 guns owned ; 0.90 homicides Per 100,000

The above link is to England police statistics - see table D19

The nra & its trolls are claiming that we will fail, where England & Australia succeeded in reducing gun deaths substantially by legislation.

Statistics clearly prove that the number of guns in a state or in a country adds to the risk of homicides.

More complex is the effect of gun laws and restrictions.

When Australia had a massacre in 1996 when 35 people were killed, gun laws were substantially strengthened and a major buy-back was instituted.
There has not been an incident in Australia since then.
Of course, they did not have the benefit of the nra.

In 2011, there were 11,000+ gun homicides in America
In 2011, there were 35 gun deaths in England

For 2011, the average Murder Rate in Death Penalty States was 4.7,
while the average Murder Rate of States without the Death Penalty was 3.1

For 2011, the murder rates were highest in red state regions:
Per 100,000: South 5.5 Midwest 4.5 West 4.2 Northeast 3.9

▬► The 1994 gun "ban" did NOT ban assault weapons.
▬►It banned the MANUFACTURE of assault weapons.
▬►For $300 you can buy a legal accessory to make an AR15 fully automatic (800rpm)

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said that there are "undoubtedly" limits to a person's right to bear arms under the Second Amendment, but that future court cases will have to decide where to draw the line. That line could be between you and an AR15.

And of course if we stopped money going from advocacy groups & corporations to buy politicians, this would be a very big step in the right direction
Watch our videos: Hedges, Kucinich, Warren, Chomsky , Sanders ,
Romney, Reich, Hartmann, Maddow, Nader, Feingold, Jefferson
And read our analysis of Corporate Personhood & Citizens United & evaluate the national polls that prove the truth. See the new HJR29


[-] 0 points by Narley (272) 7 years ago

You’ve posted this several times on different threads. I’m burnt out trying to get anti-gunners on site see the error of their thinking. Now, for the most part, I just ignore the anti-gun posts. Just beating a dead horse.

However, I do get irritated when someone says they’re not anti-gun, then proceed to demonize guns and gun owners. You and I have discussed guns before of other forums. Doubtful either of us will change our mind.

I read your post line by line. It seems your objective is to make it harder, more expensive and cumbersome for people to own guns. Thus reducing the number of guns. I saw nothing in your post that would reduce gun crime, remove guns from gangs or street thugs. Your ideas only target honest, law abiding gun owners.

So, I have to ask, what does it accomplish by making it more difficult for honest people to own guns. Remember, that’s a estimated 80+ million gun owners in the US; and 99.9% have never committed a crime. Gun ownership should not be a crime because someone wants to set up a bureaucracy specifically as a roadblock to legal gun ownership.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

Guns really are not the problem - they are a symptom. ( IMO )

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 7 years ago

Why do we force drivers to register? insure? license?

[-] 2 points by Narley (272) 7 years ago

A Washington Post article from a few days ago. For informational purposes only. Interpret however you see fit. Race is a sensitive issue, probably more so when you mix it with the gun debate. But I’m glad the article was published.


[-] 1 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 7 years ago

Register? Because the state wants their cut.

License? Because if a 15 year old can do it, it must then be ok.

Insurance? Because insurance companies run this joint, and want their cut.

Stop begging people who dont care about you to protect you.

[-] -2 points by justiceforzim (-17) 7 years ago

Because they kill 10's of thousands annually. Many more than criminals with guns, In fact, we don;t allow criminal drivers to continue to drive....just like criminals can;t own guns.

[-] -2 points by engineer4 (331) 7 years ago

Though a bit long, I actually agree with most items in your 4pt proposal. There are some I would change (hard to comment on everything in your response):

Too high of fees as that would possibly discriminate somewhat against lower economic groups.

Written tests might be substituted with an alternative, but everyone should be required to attend some type of class / range instruction on handling, cleaning, storing, etc.

Gun ownership should not be demonized by having a police list ("police know who you are"). We should be careful how such information is secured. One could apply that type of thinking to any ownership or political belief, etc.

The jail penalty seems bit extreme, but not sure of what type of offense would receive what length time for what penalty (?).

I am not a fan of assault weapons, etc, but maybe these weapons (and others) should be classified in such a way that special rules (and fees, etc) apply for them.

There are likely some privacy issues with bullet and gun samples. I prefer the mandatory gun lock, trigger lock or similar technology.

I am not a fan of the NRA. I believe they have too much influence on government activity, but by today's rules, every lobbying group has this power, rather than the actual people themselves. But that's a whole different subject (lobbying and their influence).

I can not support a blanket legalizing of drugs. Seen too many lives destroyed and others hurt. Too me it is immature behavior to need drugs to get through the day. We have enough issues with alcohol already.

IMO, I believe that most gun owners are normal, law abiding people and not "gun nutters". Now should or can they improve their storage and handling of firearms? Sure. But I believe it's the minority that creates most of the problems. And there are a lot of people that should not qualify for gun ownership. But that is another can of worms. How does one actually decide who is mentally capable or responsible? It is not the obvious mental health cases, but the marginal ones that are the most difficult to determine and then classify ( another privacy issue, along with societal stigmatisms).

So it was not that I really disagree with you, Rather i had issues with your post in the slanted written style and wanted to point that out to you. Think about that. Instead of headline rhetoric, just state the plain fact. Both attackers were nutty people, both used weapons. The tragic end results were different but not necessarily because of the weapons used.

As for money in politics, i believe it is the primary and priority goal of everyone to fix, and I support the removal of, but it will be very dificult to do in a fair manner. Solve this and many other issues become much easier to find that middle ground. That really is the magic bullet (apologies but could not resist).

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 7 years ago

Thank you for your very reasoned reply
Addressing your issues-
High fees should be low for 1-2 guns
Classes are good - like driver ed
DMV for cars & DGuns - obviously protected data
Penalties - my idea would be very subjective - I would say 1st offence = 10 years of gun fees so if a pistol licence is $100 the fine is $1000. After that, I would add jail time.
I do not want to ban assault weapons but I do want high license fees - maybe $500/year

Some of my spiel may be a bit over the top, but I am so infuriated by people like wayne & other liars about SO MANY issues

All lobbying for everything should be stopped - except direct voter to politician

MY ISSUE: check out HR29 & NYC OWS group site http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com

now - if only reasonable people like you & I could get elected into congress - we could work this out

[-] 1 points by engineer4 (331) 7 years ago

Amen to that. Apologies if it seems like it was an attack, but I have issues with polarizing rhetoric whether it's from left or right. It pushes people apart before they even have a chance to come together. I am sure we will continue to agree on some issues and disagree on others, but that's okay. At least we are talking and trying to find that common area.
PS. I would put Wayne (and a few others) on that same boat full of all the lawyers that is scheduled to get sunk out in the ocean someday (just dreaming).

[-] -3 points by freakzilla (-161) from Detroit, MI 7 years ago

Statement of Reid campaign manager Brandon Hall on NRA endorsement in Nevada US Senate race

"The NRA’s relationship with Sen. Reid has been long-standing and productive and – unlike for Sharron Angle – they’ve put their money where their mouth is this cycle. Along with their financial support, the declaration of NRA head Wayne LaPierre that Sen. Reid is 'a true champion of the Second Amendment' and that 'no one has been a stronger advocate for responsible gun ownership than him' shows beyond a doubt that the NRA believes Sen. Reid to be a strong advocate for Nevadans’ Second Amendment rights in the US Senate."

[-] 3 points by bensdad (8977) 7 years ago

Did I ever say I endorse everythinh Reid does? NO
I want him to get rid of the filibuster

[-] -2 points by freakzilla (-161) from Detroit, MI 7 years ago

Good luck with that filibuster thing. In the meantime:

Proud Time To Be A Cowering Sack Of Shit As Democrats Back Off Assault Weapons Ban


[-] 2 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 7 years ago

And there you are in real life, endorsing war criminals.


Keep posting. Things will take care of themselves.

[-] 2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 7 years ago

Still no source for the statistic.

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 7 years ago

Here is the sourcehttp://news.yahoo.com/yoko-ono-tweets-against-guns-showing-lennons-bloody-154310167.html

do the math - over 30,000 gun deaths reported last year
no - I did not count the bodies

[-] 0 points by Nader (74) 7 years ago

Do you own a gun for the protection of your family? I am not talking about some crazy assault rifle but any kind of firearm that is kept solely for protecting your family?

Why or why not?

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 7 years ago

That statistic is bullshit. There have been approximately 403,997 gun homicides in the US from 1980-2011.

Guess how I know. I just did the math. According to the justice department about 65% of all homicides are by firearm. I did a year by year calculation, using population and homicide rate statistics then multiplied by .65 to get total homicides by gun.

[-] 3 points by bensdad (8977) 7 years ago

I did NOT quote "homicides" - your statistic
I did quote "deaths" - a different statistic

The original wording "killed by guns"

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 7 years ago

Yes, I caught that. See my reply below justiceforzim. I guess I should have deleted it but I was too lazy. ;-)

[-] -1 points by justiceforzim (-17) 7 years ago

Of particular interest is the oft-repeated 30,000 figure for gun-related deaths. Approximately 18,000 were suicides using a firearm. Also included are people accidentally killed in police action, or through accidental discharge of a firearm. According to the FBI and state agency sources, the actual number of people murdered by a firearm in 2010 was 11,533 (0.0000381). The total number of murders (including knifes, blunt objects, person’s hands/feet, etc.) is 14,504.

[-] -2 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 7 years ago

Yes, I was only counting homicides, so Yoko's numbers could be accurate if you count suicides and accidental shootings. For the record, according to the CDC, there were 11,493 gun homicides last year.

[-] 1 points by justiceforzim (-17) 7 years ago

That many people DEFEND THEMSELVES ANNUALLY with a gun. SO, in your time frame, somewhere between 35-50 MILLION people have used a gun for self
http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdguse.html Lots of interesting facts and figures defense. http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp#ownership



[-] 0 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 7 years ago

Lennon was shot in 1980.

Harrison was attacked in 1999.

I wouldn't consider that "around the same time."

[-] -1 points by Narley (272) 7 years ago

You have at least three recent anti-gun threads going right now. I understand you don't like guns. But the fact is guns arn't going away. The feds arn't passing the assualt weapons ban or magazine capicity restrictions. The jury is still out of whether they will do anything on background checks.

Some States have given up on the feds and are passing their own gun restrictions. I suggest you put your efforts at State level wher it might make a difference.

[-] -2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 7 years ago

How many people have been killed in Afghanistan by the Nobel peace prize winner Obama? Do drones count?