In article <16BB8B194.R1328@vmcms.csuohio.edu> R1328@vmcms.csuohio.edu writes: > In article <1993Apr22.134330.9761@rti.rti.org> > jbs@rti.rti.org writes: >   > > > >In article <16BB7BA6A.R1328@vmcms.csuohio.edu> R1328@vmcms.csuohio.edu   writes: > >>...Gun buyback programs will hopefully > >>have an impact on accidental shootings (especially youths), domestic > >>disputes where a gun is available in the heat of emotion and anger, and > >>maybe keep a few guns from being stolen and later used in street-level > >>crime. > > > >What gives you the idea that gun "buyback" programs will have an impact on > >any of these things?  Evidence, please? > > > > Please don't misinterret  what I was saying Joe.  I was making the point   tha > there is NO evidence of effect of gun buyback programs but hopefully if > there is any effect it may prevent injuries or deaths in one of these types > of common incidents. >   > >If you're a "Research Associate" in "Urban Child Research," then perhaps > >you can comment for us on the ratio of the accidental gun death rate to the > >rate of accidental death from other single causes?  Follow that perhaps > >with some sort of justification for the amount of effort that anti-gunners > >spend trying to convince the country that accidental gun-related death > >among children in the U.S. is a serious problem. > > >  Firearms are the fifth-leading cause of unintentional deaths among children > ages 14 and under.  I don't understand how the ratio to other accidental > deaths is important.  So guns don't kill as many children as car accidents. > What is the difference in severity between 1,000 deaths and 10,000 deaths? > I am not trying to use accidental gun-related deaths among children as a > justification for gun control.  Who needs to be convinced that accidental > gun deaths of children is a serious problem?  I assumed that any humane > person would be concerned when any 10 year old got hold of their parents > gun from their bedroom drawer and accidently blew away one of their friends. >    Any death is serious.  Wanna discuss match control?  Firearms related   unintentional deaths among children ages 14 and under are the fault of one or   more negligent persons, not the gun.  > >>More than anything, gun buyback programs are symbolic offerings to the > >>community.  In that sense, I think they might do a little good. > > > >Please explain why you think "symbolic offerings" do good. > > >  My point was, gun buyback programs which are almost always run by police > departments MIGHT (I stress might) do a LITTLE (I stress little) good by > giving people the impression that the police are attempting to respond > to interpersonal gun violence in a unique way.  Overall, I thought that I > had made it clear that I did not think that gun buyback programs were > useful. >    Providing false hope, then, is the intent?  >   > >>I do know that the vast majority of guns that are used by youths or > >>brought to school by youths on a daily basis (about 135,000 youths) are > >>obtained easily and quickly, through a personal friend, or more often > >>"borrowed" from a parent without their knowledge. > > > >I suggest you go back and look at wherever you saw these "statistics" - I > >suspect you'll find if you look carefully that 135,000 is the number of > >students *estimated* to have carried *a weapon* (not necessarily a gun) > >to school at least once in the past year, and not the number of students > >who carry a gun to school daily. > > >  Well Joe, I suggest that you talk to the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence > or the Centers for Disease Control.  If YOU look carefully you will see > that YOU greatly underestimate the presence of guns in the lives of youths. > The CPHV reports that 135,000 youth bring GUNS to school DAILY and that > 400,000 bring GUNS to school at least once a year.  The CDC estimates > that 1 out 0f 25 high school students carried a gun to school at least once > in 1990.  The CDC also says that 1.2 million elementary-aged, latch-key > children (kids who come home from school to an empty house), have access > to guns in their home.  California schools reported a 200% increase in > student gun confiscations between 1986 and 1990, and a 40% increase between > 1988 and 1990.  Florida reported a 61% percent increase in gun incidents in > schools between 1986/87 amd 1987/88.  These are the "statistics". >    200% increase in California schools, eh?  Gun control is working fine, there! >   >   > >>thus willing to follow a man who claimed to be the Messiah (Got news > >>for you folks, if the Big Cheese was on this crazy planet of ours > >>presently, he would NOT be carrying a gun or holding children when they > >>were in danger). > > > >"Holding kids?"  Time for a reality check, son.  These kids were the > >children of the people inside who believed that the forces of evil were > >outside waiting to kill them.  Would you send *your* children out the door > >if you believed as they did? > > >  Okay, maybe I worded it wrong...DAD.  I meant that to put children in a > situation (fortified compound) where harm could come to them is not the > act of a Messiah in my opinion.  I'm not saying that Koresh had control over > these children directly, but I would hope that whatever Messiah there is > would not let innocent children die. > If as he claimed he was the Messiah and people followed him as such, why > did he not tell their parents to free the children instead of letting them > burn alive?  Thanks for the reality check Joe, its been real. >  So your religion is different.  Does that make it his wrong?  Even assuming   Koresh actually made that decision, and the verdict is still out on that.    > Rodney  Jim -- jmd@handheld.com