Black teen shot and killed by neighborhood watch in Orlando gated community

[mikey_the_redneck]

"In 2007, there were 613 fatal firearm accidents in the United States, constituting 0.5% of 123,706 fatal accidents that year."

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

But the elephant in the room for the US is how do you actually decrease the total number of guns out there? Producing less is nice, but that just prevents new guns from getting to market. What about the existing guns out there? I'm guessing but its not unrealistic to believe gun owners in the US have somewhere around 35-40 million guns. How exactly do you get rid of all those? This is where this discussion gets tricky, because as has been mentioned, people who have guns will not give them up unless they are of course "Out of their cold dead hands"

There are a lot more guns in the US than 35-40 million. The real number is closer to 270 million:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/...34893820070828

You make a very valid point though. The only option would be to encourage people to turn the guns in and require by law that they do. You'd probably get a sizeable amount turned in. Giving law enforcement the right to seize any gun they come across would go a long way too.

As for the rest, the life of a gun is not unlimited. You'd have to strongly control the parts and repair of guns. Guns require regular maintenance to remain useable. Even then the parts like the barrel and firing pins will eventually wear out.

It could take 50 years, but eventually you'd see considerably less guns.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

"In 2007, there were 613 fatal firearm accidents in the United States, constituting 0.5% of 123,706 fatal accidents that year."

The issue really isn't accidental deaths. It's homicides.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ite_note-CDC-3

Wikipedia has the US at 4.14 gun homicides per 100,000 people vs. .23/100,000 "accidental" deahts.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

"In 2007, there were 613 fatal firearm accidents in the United States, constituting 0.5% of 123,706 fatal accidents that year."

Firearm related death rates for children under 15

[Senator Clay Davis]

Wow I guess I was hopeful it'd be a lowish number of 35-40 million. 270 million?!?!? There aren't that many adults in America!

[Senator Clay Davis]

Getting kinda back on track, the judge in the case has offered to recuse herself because her husband has some ties to CNN. Seems like a stretch of an excuse. Makes me wonder if any judges want any part of this case

[firebug]

Originally Posted by tussery

Shows how much you know about military bases.

Edit:
http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=56558
http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-fo...ll.story<br />

Anyone else find it ironic that one of the only places in the US that you can't carry a weapon is on a military base, a place where it is likely that nearly everyone around is properly trained on safe use and handling.

I wonder why guns are banned... by most of the reasoning on here, bases must be some of the most dangerous places in the country since only the police have them.

[Vulcan]

All I know is that I wouldn't want to live in a place that I had to carry a hand gun to feel safe. Yes, that is a shot at American society.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Getting kinda back on track, the judge in the case has offered to recuse herself because her husband has some ties to CNN. Seems like a stretch of an excuse. Makes me wonder if any judges want any part of this case

It has nothing to do with making an excuse, it's done in order to avoid any potential perception of bias or any grounds upon which an appeal could be based due to bias.

[Senator Clay Davis]

I'm aware of that fact. But its not the strongest excuse I've heard for a recusion. Also shes the one offering, she wasn't asked to recuse herself.

A Florida judge on Friday offered to recuse herself from the George Zimmerman case in a surprise hearing because of her husband's ties to a CNN legal analyst and commentator.

The Orlando Sentinel reports that Judge Jessica Recksiedler disclosed that her husband works for the law firm of Mark NeJame, a prominent Orlando attorney, in the five-minute hearing Friday afternoon. In addition to working for his law firm, NeJame has been sounding off on the Zimmerman case for CNN. It's unclear if either attorney will take Recksiedler up on her offer and ask her to step aside.

NeJame said on CNN Friday that Recksiedler wants to avoid "the appearance of impropriety" with this disclosure.

Zimmerman has spent two nights in jail on charges of second-degree murder, and will ask for bond in a hearing on April 20. He's charged with second-degree murder in the Feb. 26 shooting of unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman says he shot Martin in self-defense.

Again maybe it technically is a valid reason, but I don't think its a good one.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by blankall

There are a lot more guns in the US than 35-40 million. The real number is closer to 270 million:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/...34893820070828

You make a very valid point though. The only option would be to encourage people to turn the guns in and require by law that they do. You'd probably get a sizeable amount turned in. Giving law enforcement the right to seize any gun they come across would go a long way too.

As for the rest, the life of a gun is not unlimited. You'd have to strongly control the parts and repair of guns. Guns require regular maintenance to remain useable. Even then the parts like the barrel and firing pins will eventually wear out.

It could take 50 years, but eventually you'd see considerably less guns.

My wacky solution would be to outlaw concealed firearms, and institute a tasers for guns trade-in-program (combined with a taser education program). While we'll still hear the occasional case where it still results in a fatality, it would probably decrease accidental deaths, suicides, and homicides by a massive amount if all (or even a majority) of concealed weapons in the US were replaced with tasers.

Won't happen for several reasons, ranging from gun rights advocates, to suspicion of the devices by users, to the sheer cost of making available tens of millions of tasers to the public. There's also the potential of a tasering epidemic, where the non-lethal aspect of the weapon means that people use it much more readily than they would use a firearm.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

I'm aware of that fact. But its not the strongest excuse I've heard for a recusion. Also shes the one offering, she wasn't asked to recuse herself.



Again maybe it technically is a valid reason, but I don't think its a good one.

Judges aren't supposed to wait to ask to be recused, they are supposed to offer to recuse if they have a relationship that would make their presiding over the case improper. I can't think of a more clear cut situation for a judge to offer recusal than where their husband has been publicly expressing views on the case over which they preside for a national media outlet.

[CaptainCrunch]

Let people buy as many builets as possible, but every box of rounds has one round that will self destruct on firing destroying the weapon and blasting the users hand off.

[Senator Clay Davis]

But the husband isn't expressing the views. Another lawyer from his firm is. Its a somewhat indirect conflict of interest, but I'm guessing if this wasn't the new "Trial of the Century" she probably wouldn't have offered to recuse herself.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by valo403

Firearm related death rates for children under 15

To be fair to the debate, a major contributor to these stats is not just the gun laws but also the legacy of disenfranchisement and racism brought about by slavery. This in combination with the relative lack of social infrasture (public education/health care) creates desperate situations for many in the USA.

Even if you were to institute extremely strict gun laws, that wouldn't stop young kids from being attracted to drug dealing gangs. This is where much of the gun violence in the USA comes from. Banning personal gun use isn't going to stop your local gang from having them.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by blankall

To be fair to the debate, a major contributor to these stats is not just the gun laws but also the legacy of disenfranchisement and racism brought about by slavery. This in combination with the relative lack of social infrasture (public education/health care) creates desperate situations for many in the USA.

Even if you were to institute extremely strict gun laws, that wouldn't stop young kids from being attracted to drug dealing gangs. This is where much of the gun violence in the USA comes from. Banning personal gun use isn't going to stop your local gang from having them.

I agree with those points. I posted this chart in direct response to mikey's chart about the number of accidental gun deaths. He seems to think it's an incredibly insignificant number, and yet relative to the rest of the world it's an outrageous figure.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

But the husband isn't expressing the views. Another lawyer from his firm is. Its a somewhat indirect conflict of interest, but I'm guessing if this wasn't the new "Trial of the Century" she probably wouldn't have offered to recuse herself.

She may have. The point of an offer to recuse is to put everything on the table, it's not excuse making or ducking out of a trial because you don't want to handle it. You're painting it as if she did this out of some sort of self interest when that is simply not how recusals work.

[Senator Clay Davis]

You're right, I'm just guessing there aren't a lot of people who want to be involved in this case. If hes found not guilty, imagine the kind of chaos that could come from that. I know if I was a judge I'd want no part of that mess. You can do your job to the letter of the law and still be subjected to death threats or who knows what else.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

You're right, I'm just guessing there aren't a lot of people who want to be involved in this case. If hes found not guilty, imagine the kind of chaos that could come from that. I know if I was a judge I'd want no part of that mess. You can do your job to the letter of the law and still be subjected to death threats or who knows what else.

You probably shouldn't look into becoming a judge then. It's part of the position, and if you've risen to the level she's at in the judicial ranks you've done so well aware of the potential downside.

I agree though, not an ideal occupational hazard.

[Senator Clay Davis]

But it may ultimately all be a moot point. As I've said before I gotta imagine both sides, prosecutor and defense both, probably do not want this circus going to trial. Do we really want or need Al and Jesse stroking the flames forever? A deal with some jail time still seems the likely outcome to me.