A bullet in the head will kill you no matter what sort of gun it was fired from. You're the one who's reaching.
554 children under the age of 12 killed by gun violence
- Thread starter lucas80
- Start date
A bullet in the head will kill you no matter what sort of gun it was fired from. You're the one who's reaching.
I'm guessing you never took biology. Viruses are wholly dependent on their host to use their own cells to replicate the virus.
Why limit this to HIV? The flu virus certainly flies around in the air and infects people.
Obama Has Killed More People with Drones than Died On 9/11
Posted on January 6, 2015 by WashingtonsBlog
Many Civilians Are Being Killed By Drones
Law school teacher Marjorie Cohn – president of the National Lawyers Guild – writes:
Obama has killed more people with drones than died on 9/11. Many of those killed were civilians, and only a tiny percentage of the dead were al-Qaeda or Taliban leaders.
She may be right …
The Council on Foreign Relations estimates that U.S. drone strikes outside of Iraq and Afghanistan have killed 3,674 people.
The Bureau of Investigative Journalism reports that up to 4,404 people have been killed – just in Pakistan and Yemen alone – between 2004 and 2014.
While it’s hard to estimate how many additional people have been killed by drone in Iraq and Afghanistan, a December 2012 report by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism found that US and UK forces had carried out over 1,000 drone strikes in Afghanistan over the previous five years. Given that numerous people are often killed by each drone strike, it is reasonable to assume that several thousand people have been killed by drone in that country.
And many Iraqis have also been killed by drones … long before ISIS even appeared on the scene. So – altogether – the number of people killed by drone is probably well above five thousand.
In contrast, under 3,000 people were killed on 9/11.
But aren’t drone strikes targeted attacks on terrorists … unlike 9/11, which was an attack on civilians?
Unfortunately, no …
The West is intentionally targeting farmers, small-time drug dealers and very low-level Taliban memberswith drone assassination.
And the process for deciding who to put on the “kill list” is flawed. People are often targeted by the metadata on their phones, a process which a former top NSA official called the drone assassination program “undisciplined slaughter.”
And people are targeted for insanely loose reasons. As the New York Times reported in 2012:
Mr. Obama had approved not only “personality” strikes aimed at named, high-value terrorists, but “signature” strikes that targeted training camps and suspicious compounds in areas controlled by militants.
But some State Department officials have complained to the White House that the criteria used by the C.I.A. for identifying a terrorist “signature” were too lax. The joke was that when the C.I.A. sees “three guys doing jumping jacks,” the agency thinks it is a terrorist training camp, said one senior official. Men loading a truck with fertilizer could be bombmakers — but they might also be farmers, skeptics argued.
And then there are “double taps” … where the family members, friends or neighbors who try to rescue someone hit by a drone missile are themselves targeted for assassination.
And – even when the West is actually targeting high-level terrorists – there is massive slaughter of innocent civilians as “collateral damage”. For example, American University Professor Jeff Bachman reports:
Strikes focused on the Kill List “killed on average 28 other people before they actually succeeded in killing their target.”
The Brookings Institution also noted the high proportion of civilian deaths in 2009:
Critics correctly find many problems with this program, most of all the number of civilian casualties the strikes have incurred. Sourcing on civilian deaths is weak and the numbers are often exaggerated, but more than 600 civilians are likely to have died from the attacks. That number suggests that for every militant killed, 10 or so civilians also died.
The Costs of War Project – a nonpartisan, nonprofit, scholarly initiative based at Brown University’s Watson Institute for International Studies – notes:
In Iraq, over 70 percent of those who died of direct war violence have been civilians.
(Civilians usually suffer the most casualties.)
No wonder people all over the world are overwhelmingly opposed to drone strikes.
Indeed, even the CIA admits that the drone program might be counter-productive in fighting terrorism.
And the architect of America’s drone assassination program says it’s gone too far … creating terrorists rather than eliminating them.
Notes: Obama has used drone strikes much more than Bush:
Obama has increased the number of drone attacks in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere. Indeed, most people who have looked at the numbers believe that Obama has killed many more civilians with drone attacks than Bush did using the same method.
The former constitutional law teacher may or may not know that drone attacks are a war crime (more here and here).
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015...ns-bombing-cambodia-vietnam-war-died-911.html
I'm guessing you never opened a dictionary. That's not the meaning of the word, "manipulate."
Dude, you're pretending that criminals will replace semi-automatics with pipes and that the two are equally as good. Clearly, you're the one reaching
Top U.S. Warfighting Experts: Drones INCREASE Terrorism
Posted on July 19, 2015 by WashingtonsBlog
The former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency and director of Intelligence for the Joint Special Operations Command (3-Star General Mike Flynn) says in an interview set to air later this month:
When you drop a bomb from a drone … you are going to cause more damage than you are going to cause good.
Pressed by the interviewer about whether drone strikes create more terrorists than they kill, the general responded:
I don’t disagree with that.
Clinton and Bush’s counter-terror czar (Richard Clarke) – the guy who created the drone assassination program – says that Obama’s drone assassination program is “creating terrorists rather than eliminating them.”
Top CIA officers say that drone strikes increase terrorism (and see this). Indeed, the CIA warned Obama that drone strikes might be counter-productive from a national security standpoint.
4-star general Stanley McChrystal – former Commander of the International Security Assistance Force, Commander of all U.S. Forces Afghanistan, Director, Joint Staff, and Commander, Joint Special Operations Command – said:
What scares me about drone strikes is how they are perceived around the world. The resentment created by American use of unmanned strikes…is much greater than the average American appreciates. They are hated on a visceral level, even by people who’ve never seen one or seen the effects of one.
McChrystal explained:
For every innocent person you kill, you create 10 new enemies.
Michael Boyle – a member of Obama’s counter-terrorism advisory group in the run-up to the 2008 election – conducted a study which found:
[Most Americans remained] unaware of the scale of the drone programme…and the destruction it has caused in their name.[Drones are having] adverse strategic effects [by causing hatred among the local populations where US bombs falland also by] encouraging a new arms race that will empower current and future rivals and lay the foundations for an international system that is increasingly violent.
A report by researchers at the Stanford and NYU schools of law found that the drone program is “terrorizing” the people of Pakistan and that it is having “counterproductive” effects. T]e report finds … the drone war has helped recruitment efforts of extremist groups like al-Qaeda.
And see this and this.
Of course, the failure of drone strikes in Yemen to curb radicals – and the rise of ISIS – show that the entire policy is an abject failure.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/07/top-u-s-warfighting-experts-drones-increase-terrorism.html
Posted on July 19, 2015 by WashingtonsBlog
The former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency and director of Intelligence for the Joint Special Operations Command (3-Star General Mike Flynn) says in an interview set to air later this month:
When you drop a bomb from a drone … you are going to cause more damage than you are going to cause good.
Pressed by the interviewer about whether drone strikes create more terrorists than they kill, the general responded:
I don’t disagree with that.
Clinton and Bush’s counter-terror czar (Richard Clarke) – the guy who created the drone assassination program – says that Obama’s drone assassination program is “creating terrorists rather than eliminating them.”
Top CIA officers say that drone strikes increase terrorism (and see this). Indeed, the CIA warned Obama that drone strikes might be counter-productive from a national security standpoint.
4-star general Stanley McChrystal – former Commander of the International Security Assistance Force, Commander of all U.S. Forces Afghanistan, Director, Joint Staff, and Commander, Joint Special Operations Command – said:
What scares me about drone strikes is how they are perceived around the world. The resentment created by American use of unmanned strikes…is much greater than the average American appreciates. They are hated on a visceral level, even by people who’ve never seen one or seen the effects of one.
McChrystal explained:
For every innocent person you kill, you create 10 new enemies.
Michael Boyle – a member of Obama’s counter-terrorism advisory group in the run-up to the 2008 election – conducted a study which found:
[Most Americans remained] unaware of the scale of the drone programme…and the destruction it has caused in their name.[Drones are having] adverse strategic effects [by causing hatred among the local populations where US bombs falland also by] encouraging a new arms race that will empower current and future rivals and lay the foundations for an international system that is increasingly violent.
A report by researchers at the Stanford and NYU schools of law found that the drone program is “terrorizing” the people of Pakistan and that it is having “counterproductive” effects. T]e report finds … the drone war has helped recruitment efforts of extremist groups like al-Qaeda.
And see this and this.
Of course, the failure of drone strikes in Yemen to curb radicals – and the rise of ISIS – show that the entire policy is an abject failure.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/07/top-u-s-warfighting-experts-drones-increase-terrorism.html
If guns are banned you'd better believe people would be making homemade guns. Will they be as good as a gun produced in a factory? No, but they will still be effective enough to kill people.
So basically crime will rise up because of this. Most of us know this already of course, but what do you say.
When will you people ever start to realize that the real issue is with the mental state of Americans and a culture that is too PC to point that out.
I have no idea. But allowing them to get even more sure isn't the solution. Why are you acting like it is?
You see Huey, while I find the G.O.P. repulsive, you can't keep pointing your little finger at them all the time and blame "gun nuts". Our leaders make it a violent world and you allow them to re-direct your little brain at a red herring when it should be directed at them.
No one REALLY cares how anything is paid for.
Hint: You really think we ever intended on paying off the country's trillions of dollars debt?
The point, Red, is the problem isn't too many guns, the problem is too many bad people, or at the very least, irresponsible people in the case of accidental shootings. A person can kill another person over a 1000 different ways if they want to. Mass killings, yes, guns allow bad people to commit mass killings easier than someone with a knife.
But don't forget bombs.
The other point is you speak of pricing the bad guys and the ordinary Joe out of the gun market. As I've asked before, what are you going to do with the millions of guns that already exist and are in the hands of the bad guys and ordinary Joe's?
My solution for this is to make gun manufacturers liable for the use of their guns. The tobacco industry had to pay out, what, $30 billion in their settlement? Do the same for the gun industry.
Why do people on your side of the debate seem to think this is an either-or situation?
Why can't we take deliberate measures to improve both factors?
Actually even good guys with guns are a problem. Where do you think criminals are getting all these guns? Many are obtained by stealing them from "good" guys. As for how we reduce the overall number, I've already said I have no idea. I just know that it has to be done. Other countries have been successful in reducing their overall number. I'm imagining adopting what worked for them would be a good start.
No it is a narrative with you guys and it always is a narrative with you guys. You guys read from a script and don't even realize that you do it. It's obvious to anyone outside of the left vs right paradigm.
U.S. and Its Coalition of Mid-East Dictators Kill 13 Times More Yemeni Civilians than Al Qaeda
Posted on September 23, 2015 by WashingtonsBlog
Armed U.S. Drones Alone Killed Twice As Many As Al Qaeda …
A new report from the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights (UNCHR) documents the number of civilian deaths in Yemen over the year-long period between July 1, 2014 to June 30 of this year.
The UNCHR report states:
At least 24 civilians were killed and 65 injured in attacks claimed by Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, mainly in Sana’a, Aden and Taizz. [all cities in Yemen.]
We all know that Al Qaeda are bad guys … but let’s compare that with civilian deaths caused by the U.S. and the “coalition” partners of Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States and various other Mid-East dictatorships .
The U.N. report documents:
Allegations of violations committed by coalition and joint government forces
Adding up the numbers, approximately 304 civilians were killed by the U.S. and other coalition members in the past year … 13 times more than killed by Al Qaeda during the same period.
And there were twice as many civilians killed by armed U.S. drones alone than by Al Qaeda during this period.
Whew! Good thing we’re the good guys.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015...imes-more-yemeni-civilians-than-al-qaeda.html
Posted on September 23, 2015 by WashingtonsBlog
Armed U.S. Drones Alone Killed Twice As Many As Al Qaeda …
A new report from the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights (UNCHR) documents the number of civilian deaths in Yemen over the year-long period between July 1, 2014 to June 30 of this year.
The UNCHR report states:
At least 24 civilians were killed and 65 injured in attacks claimed by Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, mainly in Sana’a, Aden and Taizz. [all cities in Yemen.]
We all know that Al Qaeda are bad guys … but let’s compare that with civilian deaths caused by the U.S. and the “coalition” partners of Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States and various other Mid-East dictatorships .
The U.N. report documents:
Allegations of violations committed by coalition and joint government forces
- Information gathered by OHCHR indicated that, on 30 March 2015, the coalition forces launched a number of air strikes that hit the al-Mazraq camp for internally displaced persons in Harad. At least 19 civilians were reportedly killed and 35 others injured, including 11 children. The camp, which shelters some 4,000 people, was established by the United Nations in 2009 and, at the time of the attack, hosted at least 300 families recently displaced from Sa’ada. Information provided to OHCHR did not identify the presence of any military objectives in the area.
- At least 20 civilians were killed and 59 others injured when a dairy factory was directly hit in four air strikes in Hudaydah city (Al Hudaydah Governorate), on 31 March 2015. The people killed inside the factory were personnel. On 12 May, at least 43 civilians, including eight women and 12 children, were killed, while an additional 135 were injured as a result of four air strikes that directly hit the Al-Wajeeh building located in a busy commercial hub in Zabeed (Al-Hudaydah Governorate). The majority of the casualties belonged to Al-Muhamasheen community. The information received by OHCHR did not clarify whether the building was deliberately targeted.
- On 20 April 2015, at least 87 civilians were killed, including six children and two women, and at least 647 others injured as a result of airstrikes that appeared to be directed at the Faj Attan military base in Sana’a. Hundreds of homes and private businesses in the vicinity of the base (as far as Al-Tahrir Square) were damaged.
- On 21 April 2015, 40 civilians were killed, including seven children, and 70 civilians were injured as a result of air strikes that hit the Al-Dhaleel bridge (Ibb Governorate). Reports indicated that the connection bridge between Ibb and the main route to Sana’a Governorate was hit twice by air strikes, causing a large number of civilian casualties. People were arriving to assist those injured by the first explosion when missiles were launched in a second round of air strikes.
- OHCHR received reports alleging that, in late April 2015 in Sa’ada Governorate, cluster munitions were used by the coalition forces in several air strikes, which resulted in at least six civilian casualties, including children. Owing to the continuing airstrikes, OHCHR was unable to collect any further information.
- … Although OHCHR was unable to obtain detailed information on affected cities and resulting casualties, it was informed that coalition air strikes hit at least six residential homes and five markets in Sa’ada, reportedly with no evidence of Houthi military deployment.
- On 6 May 2015, 15 civilians were killed, including four children and three women from the same family, when two homes collapsed while the families were inside. The homes were hit by two air strikes in Al-Dhaid, Sa’ada.
- OHCHR gathered information indicating that, on 7 June 2015, coalition forces conducted air strikes against an area hosting a high concentration of internally displaced persons in Duaij village (Hajjah Governorate), allegedly killing four civilians, including three women, and injuring 41 civilians, including 12 women and 16 children. Four makeshift homes for displaced persons were allegedly destroyed in that incident. On 14 June, a family of 10, including four women and two children, were allegedly killed in Al-Hamza as a result of an air strike by coalition forces that struck their vehicle travelling from Al-Jawf to Sana’a.
- OHCHR documented allegations that, on 17 June 2015, two buses transporting displaced families were hit by air strikes conducted by coalition forces in Al-Alam (Abyan Governorate). It found that 17 civilians had been killed in the incident, including five women and five children, while 10 others, including two women and three children, had been injured. The victims were reportedly fleeing the violence from Al-Mansoura district (Aden Governorate), and were on their way to Hadramout.
- OHCHR was informed of reports of drone strikes in parts of the country with allegations of civilian casualties. The attacks are believed to have been conducted by joint forces of the United States of America and Yemen as part of a campaign against Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula. OHCHR received reliable information indicating that as many as 40 civilians, including a child, may have been killed during the period under review as a result of drone attacks in Al-Baida, Al-Jawf, Marib and Shabwah. According to a Yemeni non-governmental organization, a one-year-old boy and two adults were killed on 26 January 2015 after a Yemeni Air Force drone struck a vehicle at Huraib (in Marib Governorate).
Adding up the numbers, approximately 304 civilians were killed by the U.S. and other coalition members in the past year … 13 times more than killed by Al Qaeda during the same period.
And there were twice as many civilians killed by armed U.S. drones alone than by Al Qaeda during this period.
Whew! Good thing we’re the good guys.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015...imes-more-yemeni-civilians-than-al-qaeda.html
Lock up violent criminals and stop letting them back out on the street. Every day I read about some scumbag doing something awful, and more times than not, the perp has a long list of priors and shouldn't have been allowed in society to victimize anybody in the first place.
No you need to reduce the anger, hate, and frustration in Americans. You are contributing to that by constantly nipping, accusing and bitching at anyone who doesn't fit your liberal narrative.
I've said start with background checks at gun shows, online, & private sales. That's not a solution, but it will help.
While I agree with your main point, I object to the use of the term "do gooders." This is a term that the right has worked very hard and quite successfully to morph into a disparaging synonym for "liberal." But liberals (along with libertarians) have been the most outspoken critics of the War on Drugs and almost the lone voice against the prison privatization movement whose profits are fed by this disastrous policy.
40 year old college student, worked as a line cooks for 15 years, and is a known acquaintance of a couple of felons. I see why people don't take your gun control or any opinion of yours for that matter seriously. Good reason too.
There are plenty of "do gooders" on the right. Not sure why you think it's code for liberals.
Again with piss poor comparisons. People were unaware of the dangers of smoking and the Tobacco industry hid those facts when they found them out.
You don't think people could figure out guns were dangerous from the start?
Good luck getting them convicted.
The United States already has the highest incarceration rate in the world. How will locking up even more people make things better?
As compared with the pro-gun crazies who think more children dead by guns means we should have more guns and less control over who gets them?
There are so many conservative memes that make little sense, it's hard to identify which makes the least sense. But this argument against gun control has to be in the running.
Why do you continue to confuse me with someone on the other side of the debate? I've consistently said that expanded background checks should be put in place for gun shows, online & private sales.
The other side is against that. I'm not. Kind of puts me in the middle where most people with common sense reside.
And you? Where do you stand?
Violent criminals can't shoot me if they're in prison.
The non-violent people shouldn't be in prison.
And your opinions on gun control? What are they? Hell, you've done your drive-by hit, why not stay for some substance?
The gun lobby has successfully blocked the study of gun violence, trying to hide facts from the public and has tried to minimize the danger of guns that people like you seem to buy into. Seems the two are more relatable than you think.
Our gun problem is worse than countries who don't lock up as many people. If locking up people was the answer we should have low gun violence rates, not the other way around.
How many of those 554 were gang members? I need to know so I can deduct it from 554 so I can determine how much I care.
In all seriousness though, blaming gun manufacturers is asinine-- unless the guns start shooting by themselves-- then you have a case.
In all seriousness though, blaming gun manufacturers is asinine-- unless the guns start shooting by themselves-- then you have a case.
