Ted Nugent on Gun Control

I don't think anyone denies that smoking and smoking related illness/deaths is a major issue, but that shouldn't downplay the gun issue. They are two different issues.

I don't think anyone denies that smoking and smoking related illness/deaths is a major issue, but that shouldn't downplay the gun issue. They are two different issues.

Point is, why bother going after a constitutional right, and notably something that can SAVE / PROTECT someone's life, when there is something FAR more dangerous to go after?
Gun related issues are a fraction of a fraction of the problem that tobacco related issues are. Maybe it's time to focus on real important issues.

LOL!

I also don't think gun related suicides should be included in gun related deaths because the would find a way to kill themselves another way if they had no gun. I understand the medium was a gun, but terminally suicidal people will jump off a bridge or slit their wrists or whatever if a gun wasn't the quick and easiest fix to their "problem"

I think the article noted, however, that people who try to commit suicide with guns are far more likely to succeed than those who jump off buildings, bridges, etc.

I think the article noted, however, that people who try to commit suicide with guns are far more likely to succeed than those who jump off buildings, bridges, etc.

I didn't read that part apparently, but I find it hard to believe that a person that jumps off a building is less likely to die from it than a person that shoots themselves. Keep in mind plenty of people shoot themselves in places other than the head. (even shooting the head is not a guarentee of death)
I never did understand jumping off bridges. You are more likely to break bones then die. (not that death isn't a significant risk) But unless you're jumping off a tiny building, it seems that a leap would be 99.9% effective.

Oh, and as I have mentioned, using a gun is far easier and quicker, and "should be" less painful. Point is, even without a gun, suicidal people will find a way to kill themselves regardless.

That's a good link.

But do you know what strikes me more than anything?
There was 31,000 gun related deaths, yet there are approx. 4.9 million tobacco related deaths in the world a year. In the US, there are 438,000 tobacco related deaths (approximately 1 in 5 deaths overall are tobacco related), and even MORE important, 38,000 (that's right 7k MORE deaths than guns) are directly related to SECOND HAND smoke. And people are up in arms about being able to defend yourself while cigarettes provide no defense. :doh:
Interesting that second hand smoke is statistically MORE deadly than guns themselves. WOW.

Tobacco-Related Mortality | OSH | CDC (http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/Factsheets/tobacco_related_mortality.htm)

With the utmost respect for your opinion, I must disagree with the analysis.

Second hand smoke is not "more dangerous" than guns because it results in more deaths. Second hand smoke is way more prevalent in society, that's why it causes more deaths. Way more people are exposed to second hand smoke than are exposed to guns.

Now, there are plenty of guns in the US, legal or not. But a good portion of them stay locked away or otherwise secured safely. Many more people are exposed to smoking, hence the higher death numbers.

This anaylsis is akin to saying that the flu is more dangerous than small pox because more people die from the flu than small pox. It may be mathematically true, but only because nobody gets exposed to small pox.

With the utmost respect for your opinion, I must disagree with the analysis.

Second hand smoke is not "more dangerous" than guns because it results in more deaths. Second hand smoke is way more prevalent in society, that's why it causes more deaths. Way more people are exposed to second hand smoke than are exposed to guns.

Now, there are plenty of guns in the US, legal or not. But a good portion of them stay locked away or otherwise secured safely. Many more people are exposed to smoking, hence the higher death numbers.

This anaylsis is akin to saying that the flu is more dangerous than small pox because more people die from the flu than small pox. It may be mathematically true, but only because nobody gets exposed to small pox.

I have been exposed to small pox. Of coarse it was the preventative type of exposure.

Point is, why bother going after a constitutional right, and notably something that can SAVE / PROTECT someone's life, when there is something FAR more dangerous to go after?
Gun related issues are a fraction of a fraction of the problem that tobacco related issues are. Maybe it's time to focus on real important issues.

Point is they are still apples and oranges.

Gun control isn't an important issue??

With the utmost respect for your opinion, I must disagree with the analysis.

Second hand smoke is not "more dangerous" than guns because it results in more deaths. Second hand smoke is way more prevalent in society, that's why it causes more deaths. Way more people are exposed to second hand smoke than are exposed to guns.

Now, there are plenty of guns in the US, legal or not. But a good portion of them stay locked away or otherwise secured safely. Many more people are exposed to smoking, hence the higher death numbers.

This anaylsis is akin to saying that the flu is more dangerous than small pox because more people die from the flu than small pox. It may be mathematically true, but only because nobody gets exposed to small pox.

That's a good valid argument.
However, the second hand smoke argument was only part of the argument (and the 2nd part at that, I just ran with it cause I wasn't expecting to see those numbers), what about the 4.9 mil that die from tobacco related deaths world wide?

Also, your argument helps my point that it's more important to stop tobacco than it is to stop guns since we are much more likely to be exposed to smoke. Let's also keep in mind the MASSIVE amount of medical assistance required by tobacco related issues that we pay for with our insurances.

ps- the guns that are locked away aren't the ones causing the problems, but they are the ones that will be taken away.


On a side note, I appreciate your candor.

Gun control isn't an important issue??

I really don't think it's as important as people here think it is.

It's a matter of geographics I think. You guys see murders and such on the news or in the paper. I go to the gun range, or see (guessing) 75% of the people out here that own guns with no problems. The majority of the south and midwest and hunting states (minus large cities like Chicago) would not see this as a large issue either. The major players in the gun control issues are places like DC, New York, Boston, Chicago, and L.A., you see the negative side of gun ownership more than anything cause you are bombarded by it. WHile it does happen in other areas of the country, there are far more pressing issues.
I think a more pressing issue is the punishment for people that use weapons such as guns. If the punishment is weak, then it becomes more prevailant. But that's a whole nother can o' worms.

FYI - Tonight 7/1 on FX Thirty Days explores gun control. those shows are are usually well done. I think it comes on at 10pm.