Anyone who says that easy access to firearms is not the primary
problem, is just telling fairy tales.


A new report affirms what we already know: Easier access to guns means
more violent deaths


LA Times http://tinyurl.com/y7uxcm75


"...So who led the pack in gun-suicide rates, according to the Violence
Policy Center? Montana, where two-thirds of households have firearms
and where the gun-suicide rate was 15.54 per 100,000 residents, more
than twice the national rate of 7.1. The lowest gun-suicide rate was in
New Jersey, at 1.97 per 100,000, and where only 17.4% of households
owned firearms..."

On 6/5/2018 10:17 AM, Dove Tail wrote:
Anyone who says that easy access to firearms is not the primary
problem, is just telling fairy tales.


A new report affirms what we already know: Easier access to guns means
more violent deaths


LA Times http://tinyurl.com/y7uxcm75


"...So who led the pack in gun-suicide rates, according to the Violence
Policy Center? Montana, where two-thirds of households have firearms
and where the gun-suicide rate was 15.54 per 100,000 residents, more
than twice the national rate of 7.1. The lowest gun-suicide rate was in
New Jersey, at 1.97 per 100,000, and where only 17.4% of households
owned firearms..."


What is the total suicide rates? That would give a more true picture.
People use what is available to them be it a gun or pills.

Note that the rate in MT is double, but the ownership is almost 4X.
Would that not translate to a better rate? Seems that when guns are
available they are used less.

N

On 6/5/2018 at 7:33:57 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


On 6/5/2018 10:17 AM, Dove Tail wrote:
Anyone who says that easy access to firearms is not the primary
problem, is just telling fairy tales.


A new report affirms what we already know: Easier access to guns
means more violent deaths


LA Times http://tinyurl.com/y7uxcm75


"...So who led the pack in gun-suicide rates, according to the
Violence Policy Center? Montana, where two-thirds of households
have firearms and where the gun-suicide rate was 15.54 per 100,000
residents, more than twice the national rate of 7.1. The lowest
gun-suicide rate was in New Jersey, at 1.97 per 100,000, and where
only 17.4% of households owned firearms..."


What is the total suicide rates? That would give a more true
picture. People use what is available to them be it a gun or pills.

Note that the rate in MT is double, but the ownership is almost 4X.
Would that not translate to a better rate? Seems that when guns are
available they are used less.


The article clearly displayed a link to the actual study which
contained detailed stats.

http://www.vpc.org/press/states-with...-gun-suicides/

As for your third sentence, that was pretty funny.

On 6/5/2018 10:44 AM, Dove Tail wrote:
On 6/5/2018 at 7:33:57 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


On 6/5/2018 10:17 AM, Dove Tail wrote:
Anyone who says that easy access to firearms is not the primary
problem, is just telling fairy tales.


A new report affirms what we already know: Easier access to guns
means more violent deaths


LA Times http://tinyurl.com/y7uxcm75


"...So who led the pack in gun-suicide rates, according to the
Violence Policy Center? Montana, where two-thirds of households
have firearms and where the gun-suicide rate was 15.54 per 100,000
residents, more than twice the national rate of 7.1. The lowest
gun-suicide rate was in New Jersey, at 1.97 per 100,000, and where
only 17.4% of households owned firearms..."


What is the total suicide rates? That would give a more true
picture. People use what is available to them be it a gun or pills.

Note that the rate in MT is double, but the ownership is almost 4X.
Would that not translate to a better rate? Seems that when guns are
available they are used less.


The article clearly displayed a link to the actual study which
contained detailed stats.

http://www.vpc.org/press/states-with...-gun-suicides/

As for your third sentence, that was pretty funny.


But they did not give the overall suicide rate. People use the tools
thy have handy and are familiar with. I'm not sure what they are trying
to prove. If there is a loose screw and a butter knife is two feet
away, you may use that rather than run out to the garage tool box for a
screwdriver.

Show me that many more people commit suicide because they have guns and
that would be meaningful. NJ has higher bridges to jump off and readily
available drugs to OD on.

On 6/5/2018 at 8:04:03 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


On 6/5/2018 10:44 AM, Dove Tail wrote:
On 6/5/2018 at 7:33:57 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


On 6/5/2018 10:17 AM, Dove Tail wrote:
Anyone who says that easy access to firearms is not the primary
problem, is just telling fairy tales.


A new report affirms what we already know: Easier access to guns
means more violent deaths


LA Times http://tinyurl.com/y7uxcm75


"...So who led the pack in gun-suicide rates, according to the
Violence Policy Center? Montana, where two-thirds of households
have firearms and where the gun-suicide rate was 15.54 per
100,000 residents, more than twice the national rate of 7.1.
The lowest gun-suicide rate was in New Jersey, at 1.97 per
100,000, and where only 17.4% of households owned firearms..."


What is the total suicide rates? That would give a more true
picture. People use what is available to them be it a gun or
pills.

Note that the rate in MT is double, but the ownership is almost
4X. Would that not translate to a better rate? Seems that when
guns are available they are used less.


The article clearly displayed a link to the actual study which
contained detailed stats.


http://www.vpc.org/press/states-with...-gun-suicides/

As for your third sentence, that was pretty funny.


But they did not give the overall suicide rate. People use the tools
thy have handy and are familiar with. I'm not sure what they are
trying to prove. If there is a loose screw and a butter knife is two
feet away, you may use that rather than run out to the garage tool
box for a screwdriver.

Show me that many more people commit suicide because they have guns
and that would be meaningful. NJ has higher bridges to jump off and
readily available drugs to OD on.


This was a study about gun violence, not suicide. I am sure you could
find suicide stats if that is what you are interested in.

On 6/5/2018 11:07 AM, Dove Tail wrote:
On 6/5/2018 at 8:04:03 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


On 6/5/2018 10:44 AM, Dove Tail wrote:
On 6/5/2018 at 7:33:57 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


On 6/5/2018 10:17 AM, Dove Tail wrote:
Anyone who says that easy access to firearms is not the primary
problem, is just telling fairy tales.


A new report affirms what we already know: Easier access to guns
means more violent deaths


LA Times http://tinyurl.com/y7uxcm75


"...So who led the pack in gun-suicide rates, according to the
Violence Policy Center? Montana, where two-thirds of households
have firearms and where the gun-suicide rate was 15.54 per
100,000 residents, more than twice the national rate of 7.1.
The lowest gun-suicide rate was in New Jersey, at 1.97 per
100,000, and where only 17.4% of households owned firearms..."


What is the total suicide rates? That would give a more true
picture. People use what is available to them be it a gun or
pills.

Note that the rate in MT is double, but the ownership is almost
4X. Would that not translate to a better rate? Seems that when
guns are available they are used less.


The article clearly displayed a link to the actual study which
contained detailed stats.


http://www.vpc.org/press/states-with...-gun-suicides/

As for your third sentence, that was pretty funny.


But they did not give the overall suicide rate. People use the tools
thy have handy and are familiar with. I'm not sure what they are
trying to prove. If there is a loose screw and a butter knife is two
feet away, you may use that rather than run out to the garage tool
box for a screwdriver.

Show me that many more people commit suicide because they have guns
and that would be meaningful. NJ has higher bridges to jump off and
readily available drugs to OD on.


This was a study about gun violence, not suicide. I am sure you could
find suicide stats if that is what you are interested in.


They gave stat with no real meaning though. A quick glance may have
people thinking more guns = more suicide, but that is not the case.

On 6/5/2018 at 9:15:03 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


On 6/5/2018 11:07 AM, Dove Tail wrote:

This was a study about gun violence, not suicide. I am sure you
could find suicide stats if that is what you are interested in.


They gave stat with no real meaning though. A quick glance may have
people thinking more guns = more suicide, but that is not the case.

You keep wanting the study to be something it is not, a study of
suicide.

The stats clearly show that the more guns in a state, the higher the
rate of suicide "by gun." IOW, when guns are readily available, they
are used more frequently for suicide.

The fewer guns, the lower the amount gun violence.

On 6/5/2018 at 9:34:18 AM, Wayne Boatwright wrote:


On Tue 05 Jun 2018 09:15:03a, Ed Pawlowski told us...

On 6/5/2018 11:07 AM, Dove Tail wrote:
On 6/5/2018 at 8:04:03 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


On 6/5/2018 10:44 AM, Dove Tail wrote:
On 6/5/2018 at 7:33:57 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


On 6/5/2018 10:17 AM, Dove Tail wrote:
Anyone who says that easy access to firearms is not the
primary problem, is just telling fairy tales.


A new report affirms what we already know: Easier access to
guns means more violent deaths


LA Times http://tinyurl.com/y7uxcm75


"...So who led the pack in gun-suicide rates, according to
the Violence Policy Center? Montana, where two-thirds of
households have firearms and where the gun-suicide rate was
15.54 per 100,000 residents, more than twice the national
rate of 7.1. The lowest gun-suicide rate was in New Jersey,
at 1.97 per 100,000, and where only 17.4% of households owned
firearms..."


What is the total suicide rates? That would give a more true
picture. People use what is available to them be it a gun or
pills.

Note that the rate in MT is double, but the ownership is
almost 4X. Would that not translate to a better rate? Seems
that when guns are available they are used less.


The article clearly displayed a link to the actual study which
contained detailed stats.


http://www.vpc.org/press/states-with...nd-higher-gun-
ownership-lead-nation-in-gun-suicides/

As for your third sentence, that was pretty funny.


But they did not give the overall suicide rate. People use the
tools thy have handy and are familiar with. I'm not sure what
they are trying to prove. If there is a loose screw and a
butter knife is two feet away, you may use that rather than run
out to the garage tool box for a screwdriver.

Show me that many more people commit suicide because they have
guns and that would be meaningful. NJ has higher bridges to
jump off and readily available drugs to OD on.


This was a study about gun violence, not suicide. I am sure you
could find suicide stats if that is what you are interested in.


They gave stat with no real meaning though. A quick glance may
have people thinking more guns = more suicide, but that is not the
case.


No, more likely more murders and/or robberies. I have not seen any
statistics, but I would guess that there are also more ODs than
suicides by firearms.

Here are suicide stats for Montana and NJ.

https://dphhs.mt.gov/Portals/85/suic...einMontana.pdf

http://www.chathamtownship-nj.gov/im...Facts-2017.pdf

I am not saying that you have more suicides where you have more guns,
there are far too many other factors to consider but, a superficial
examination of the data suggests that might be true.

However, there are many more suicides by guns in areas where there are
many more guns available, eg MT vs. NJ, that is painfully obvious.

On Tue, 5 Jun 2018 14:17:34 -0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

Anyone who says that easy access to firearms is not the primary
problem, is just telling fairy tales.


A new report affirms what we already know: Easier access to guns means
more violent deaths


LA Times http://tinyurl.com/y7uxcm75


"...So who led the pack in gun-suicide rates, according to the Violence
Policy Center? Montana, where two-thirds of households have firearms
and where the gun-suicide rate was 15.54 per 100,000 residents, more
than twice the national rate of 7.1. The lowest gun-suicide rate was in
New Jersey, at 1.97 per 100,000, and where only 17.4% of households
owned firearms..."

How is suicide a violent death? Seems pretty calm to me.
Murder is a violent death and the murder rate has gone down in spite
of millions of new guns being sold every year.

On 6/5/2018 at 10:09:46 AM, wrote:


On Tue, 5 Jun 2018 14:17:34 -0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

Anyone who says that easy access to firearms is not the primary
problem, is just telling fairy tales.


A new report affirms what we already know: Easier access to guns
means more violent deaths


LA Times http://tinyurl.com/y7uxcm75


"...So who led the pack in gun-suicide rates, according to the
Violence Policy Center? Montana, where two-thirds of households
have firearms and where the gun-suicide rate was 15.54 per 100,000
residents, more than twice the national rate of 7.1. The lowest
gun-suicide rate was in New Jersey, at 1.97 per 100,000, and where
only 17.4% of households owned firearms..."

How is suicide a violent death? Seems pretty calm to me.
Murder is a violent death and the murder rate has gone down in spite
of millions of new guns being sold every year.


Ahhh, a slightly more sophisticated variation of Uncle Menstrual's
definition ploy. Can you distract attention away from the issue of
easier access to guns equating to greater gun violence?


How is it "violent" to blow off the top of one's head with a shotgun?


Here are a couple of definitions of "violent", hope you learn something.

Adjective: violent

1. Acting with or marked by or resulting from great force or energy or
emotional intensity

2. Effected by force or injury rather than natural causes

On Tuesday, June 5, 2018 at 12:19:08 PM UTC-5, Dove Tail wrote:
On 6/5/2018 at 10:09:46 AM, wrote:


On Tue, 5 Jun 2018 14:17:34 -0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

Anyone who says that easy access to firearms is not the primary
problem, is just telling fairy tales.


A new report affirms what we already know: Easier access to guns
means more violent deaths


LA Times http://tinyurl.com/y7uxcm75


"...So who led the pack in gun-suicide rates, according to the
Violence Policy Center? Montana, where two-thirds of households
have firearms and where the gun-suicide rate was 15.54 per 100,000
residents, more than twice the national rate of 7.1. The lowest
gun-suicide rate was in New Jersey, at 1.97 per 100,000, and where
only 17.4% of households owned firearms..."

How is suicide a violent death? Seems pretty calm to me.
Murder is a violent death and the murder rate has gone down in spite
of millions of new guns being sold every year.


Ahhh, a slightly more sophisticated variation of Uncle Menstrual's
definition ploy. Can you distract attention away from the issue of
easier access to guns equating to greater gun violence?


How is it "violent" to blow off the top of one's head with a shotgun?


Here are a couple of definitions of "violent", hope you learn something.

Adjective: violent

1. Acting with or marked by or resulting from great force or energy or
emotional intensity

2. Effected by force or injury rather than natural causes

So Dove Anus, when are you going to kill yourself? Perhaps you can borrow a gun? I'd gladly loan you mine. I've never fired it myself but my friend Stinky took it out to the woods and did some shooting with it. He said it jammed a lot so it might not go off when you stick it in your mouth and pull the trigger. If you kill yourself with a gun, that would be the best demonstration of how dangerous guns are. Do it live(no pun) on the Internet and make a YouTube video that other anti-Second Amendment freaks can use to get their anti-gun point across. Just think Dove Anus, you could be a sainted martyr for the anti-gun nut crowd. Just do it! ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Hopeful Monster

On Tue, 5 Jun 2018 15:07:03 -0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

On 6/5/2018 at 8:04:03 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


On 6/5/2018 10:44 AM, Dove Tail wrote:
On 6/5/2018 at 7:33:57 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


On 6/5/2018 10:17 AM, Dove Tail wrote:
Anyone who says that easy access to firearms is not the primary
problem, is just telling fairy tales.


A new report affirms what we already know: Easier access to guns
means more violent deaths


LA Times http://tinyurl.com/y7uxcm75


"...So who led the pack in gun-suicide rates, according to the
Violence Policy Center? Montana, where two-thirds of households
have firearms and where the gun-suicide rate was 15.54 per
100,000 residents, more than twice the national rate of 7.1.
The lowest gun-suicide rate was in New Jersey, at 1.97 per
100,000, and where only 17.4% of households owned firearms..."


What is the total suicide rates? That would give a more true
picture. People use what is available to them be it a gun or
pills.

Note that the rate in MT is double, but the ownership is almost
4X. Would that not translate to a better rate? Seems that when
guns are available they are used less.


The article clearly displayed a link to the actual study which
contained detailed stats.


http://www.vpc.org/press/states-with...-gun-suicides/

As for your third sentence, that was pretty funny.


But they did not give the overall suicide rate. People use the tools
thy have handy and are familiar with. I'm not sure what they are
trying to prove. If there is a loose screw and a butter knife is two
feet away, you may use that rather than run out to the garage tool
box for a screwdriver.

Show me that many more people commit suicide because they have guns
and that would be meaningful. NJ has higher bridges to jump off and
readily available drugs to OD on.


This was a study about gun violence, not suicide. I am sure you could
find suicide stats if that is what you are interested in.

Funny how so many people like Ed resort to posting chaff when they
can't directly address the issue at hand.

On Tue, 5 Jun 2018 16:50:46 -0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

On 6/5/2018 at 9:34:18 AM, Wayne Boatwright wrote:


On Tue 05 Jun 2018 09:15:03a, Ed Pawlowski told us...

On 6/5/2018 11:07 AM, Dove Tail wrote:
On 6/5/2018 at 8:04:03 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


On 6/5/2018 10:44 AM, Dove Tail wrote:
On 6/5/2018 at 7:33:57 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


On 6/5/2018 10:17 AM, Dove Tail wrote:
Anyone who says that easy access to firearms is not the
primary problem, is just telling fairy tales.


A new report affirms what we already know: Easier access to
guns means more violent deaths


LA Times http://tinyurl.com/y7uxcm75


"...So who led the pack in gun-suicide rates, according to
the Violence Policy Center? Montana, where two-thirds of
households have firearms and where the gun-suicide rate was
15.54 per 100,000 residents, more than twice the national
rate of 7.1. The lowest gun-suicide rate was in New Jersey,
at 1.97 per 100,000, and where only 17.4% of households owned
firearms..."


What is the total suicide rates? That would give a more true
picture. People use what is available to them be it a gun or
pills.

Note that the rate in MT is double, but the ownership is
almost 4X. Would that not translate to a better rate? Seems
that when guns are available they are used less.


The article clearly displayed a link to the actual study which
contained detailed stats.


http://www.vpc.org/press/states-with...nd-higher-gun-
ownership-lead-nation-in-gun-suicides/

As for your third sentence, that was pretty funny.


But they did not give the overall suicide rate. People use the
tools thy have handy and are familiar with. I'm not sure what
they are trying to prove. If there is a loose screw and a
butter knife is two feet away, you may use that rather than run
out to the garage tool box for a screwdriver.

Show me that many more people commit suicide because they have
guns and that would be meaningful. NJ has higher bridges to
jump off and readily available drugs to OD on.


This was a study about gun violence, not suicide. I am sure you
could find suicide stats if that is what you are interested in.


They gave stat with no real meaning though. A quick glance may
have people thinking more guns = more suicide, but that is not the
case.


No, more likely more murders and/or robberies. I have not seen any
statistics, but I would guess that there are also more ODs than
suicides by firearms.

Here are suicide stats for Montana and NJ.

https://dphhs.mt.gov/Portals/85/suic...einMontana.pdf

http://www.chathamtownship-nj.gov/im...Facts-2017.pdf

I am not saying that you have more suicides where you have more guns,
there are far too many other factors to consider but, a superficial
examination of the data suggests that might be true.

Surely looks like it is trending in that direction.



However, there are many more suicides by guns in areas where there are
many more guns available, eg MT vs. NJ, that is painfully obvious.

On 6/5/2018 12:27 PM, Dove Tail wrote:
On 6/5/2018 at 9:15:03 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


On 6/5/2018 11:07 AM, Dove Tail wrote:

This was a study about gun violence, not suicide. I am sure you
could find suicide stats if that is what you are interested in.


They gave stat with no real meaning though. A quick glance may have
people thinking more guns = more suicide, but that is not the case.

You keep wanting the study to be something it is not, a study of
suicide.

The stats clearly show that the more guns in a state, the higher the
rate of suicide "by gun." IOW, when guns are readily available, they
are used more frequently for suicide.

The fewer guns, the lower the amount gun violence.


In a report for 2014 in the National Vital Statistics Report, Montana
has the highest rate of suicide in the nation (251 suicides for a crude
rate of 24.5)

The New Jersey rate is 8.27

So, Montana has 4X the guns but only 3X the suicide rate.
The rate of male suicide in NJ is 29.7, very high compared to the
overall rate in MT though 63% were firearm. American Indians account
for 35% of suicide but are only 6.6% of the population

http://www.state.nj.us/health/chs/do...j1999-2014.pdf
While firearms are responsible for 55.4% of male suicides and nearly a
third of female suicides
nationally in 2014, in New Jersey they account for 29.7% of male
suicides and just under 10% of
female suicides (Figure 4).Â*Â*The percentages of suicides carried out
with firearms decreased in
New Jersey from 1999 to 2014 among both females (46% decrease) and males
(24% decrease).

Conclusion: American Indians need better access to mental health help.

On 6/5/2018 at 1:40:49 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


In a report for 2014 in the National Vital Statistics Report, Montana
has the highest rate of suicide in the nation (251 suicides for a
crude rate of 24.5)

The New Jersey rate is 8.27

So, Montana has 4X the guns but only 3X the suicide rate.
The rate of male suicide in NJ is 29.7, very high compared to the
overall rate in MT though 63% were firearm. American Indians account
for 35% of suicide but are only 6.6% of the population

http://www.state.nj.us/health/chs/do...j1999-2014.pdf
While firearms are responsible for 55.4% of male suicides and nearly
a third of female suicides nationally in 2014, in New Jersey they
account for 29.7% of male suicides and just under 10% of female
suicides (Figure 4).Â*Â*The percentages of suicides carried out with
firearms decreased in New Jersey from 1999 to 2014 among both females
(46% decrease) and males (24% decrease).

Conclusion: American Indians need better access to mental health
help.


You are a living illustration of Mark Twain's wisdom:

There are three kinds of lies; lies, damned lies and statistics.

On Tue, 5 Jun 2018 17:19:04 -0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

On 6/5/2018 at 10:09:46 AM, wrote:


On Tue, 5 Jun 2018 14:17:34 -0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

Anyone who says that easy access to firearms is not the primary
problem, is just telling fairy tales.


A new report affirms what we already know: Easier access to guns
means more violent deaths


LA Times http://tinyurl.com/y7uxcm75


"...So who led the pack in gun-suicide rates, according to the
Violence Policy Center? Montana, where two-thirds of households
have firearms and where the gun-suicide rate was 15.54 per 100,000
residents, more than twice the national rate of 7.1. The lowest
gun-suicide rate was in New Jersey, at 1.97 per 100,000, and where
only 17.4% of households owned firearms..."

How is suicide a violent death? Seems pretty calm to me.
Murder is a violent death and the murder rate has gone down in spite
of millions of new guns being sold every year.


Ahhh, a slightly more sophisticated variation of Uncle Menstrual's
definition ploy. Can you distract attention away from the issue of
easier access to guns equating to greater gun violence?


How is it "violent" to blow off the top of one's head with a shotgun?


Here are a couple of definitions of "violent", hope you learn something.

Adjective: violent

1. Acting with or marked by or resulting from great force or energy or
emotional intensity

2. Effected by force or injury rather than natural causes

Certainly not any more violent than jumping off a building hanging
yourself and no where near as violent as intentionally hitting a dump
truck head on.
The fact remains Japan has a higher suicide rate than the US and they
have no guns.

You also glaze over the fact that violent crime is declining and gun
ownership is rising.

On Wed, 6 Jun 2018 00:50:34 -0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

On 6/5/2018 at 1:40:49 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


In a report for 2014 in the National Vital Statistics Report, Montana
has the highest rate of suicide in the nation (251 suicides for a
crude rate of 24.5)

The New Jersey rate is 8.27

So, Montana has 4X the guns but only 3X the suicide rate.
The rate of male suicide in NJ is 29.7, very high compared to the
overall rate in MT though 63% were firearm. American Indians account
for 35% of suicide but are only 6.6% of the population

http://www.state.nj.us/health/chs/do...j1999-2014.pdf
While firearms are responsible for 55.4% of male suicides and nearly
a third of female suicides nationally in 2014, in New Jersey they
account for 29.7% of male suicides and just under 10% of female
suicides (Figure 4).Â*Â*The percentages of suicides carried out with
firearms decreased in New Jersey from 1999 to 2014 among both females
(46% decrease) and males (24% decrease).

Conclusion: American Indians need better access to mental health
help.


You are a living illustration of Mark Twain's wisdom:

There are three kinds of lies; lies, damned lies and statistics.

Yeah don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant.

BTW how is that cite coming on the NYC trash dumping bull**** you
threw out the other day? (and ran away)

On 6/5/2018 at 8:38:17 PM, wrote:


How is suicide a violent death? Seems pretty calm to me.
Murder is a violent death and the murder rate has gone down in
spite of millions of new guns being sold every year.


Ahhh, a slightly more sophisticated variation of Uncle Menstrual's
definition ploy. Can you distract attention away from the issue of
easier access to guns equating to greater gun violence?


How is it "violent" to blow off the top of one's head with a
shotgun?


Here are a couple of definitions of "violent", hope you learn
something.

Adjective: violent

1. Acting with or marked by or resulting from great force or energy
or emotional intensity

2. Effected by force or injury rather than natural causes

Certainly not any more violent than jumping off a building hanging
yourself and no where near as violent as intentionally hitting a dump
truck head on.

Changing your story and acting as if you didn't. You asked "How is
suicide a violent death? Seems pretty calm to me." Now you are
admitting it is violent, but no more violent then blah, blah, blah.


The fact remains Japan has a higher suicide rate than the US and they
have no guns.

You also glaze over the fact that violent crime is declining and gun
ownership is rising.

Your points are completely irrelevant to the study referenced above,
which statistically demonstrates that easier access to guns results in
more deaths due to gun violence.

Once again, you did not read the article, or the study and are simply
jumping in with bull**** to obfuscate and distract. Yawn.

On Tuesday, June 5, 2018 at 11:41:02 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jun 2018 00:50:34 -0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

On 6/5/2018 at 1:40:49 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


In a report for 2014 in the National Vital Statistics Report, Montana
has the highest rate of suicide in the nation (251 suicides for a
crude rate of 24.5)

The New Jersey rate is 8.27

So, Montana has 4X the guns but only 3X the suicide rate.
The rate of male suicide in NJ is 29.7, very high compared to the
overall rate in MT though 63% were firearm. American Indians account
for 35% of suicide but are only 6.6% of the population

http://www.state.nj.us/health/chs/do...j1999-2014.pdf
While firearms are responsible for 55.4% of male suicides and nearly
a third of female suicides nationally in 2014, in New Jersey they
account for 29.7% of male suicides and just under 10% of female
suicides (Figure 4).Â*Â*The percentages of suicides carried out with
firearms decreased in New Jersey from 1999 to 2014 among both females
(46% decrease) and males (24% decrease).

Conclusion: American Indians need better access to mental health
help.


You are a living illustration of Mark Twain's wisdom:

There are three kinds of lies; lies, damned lies and statistics.

Yeah don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant.

BTW how is that cite coming on the NYC trash dumping bull**** you
threw out the other day? (and ran away)

Yes, another example of where SwallowBeak has been caught and then
instead of manning up and admitting he's wrong, he runs and hides.
He claimed that up until 1992 NYC was dumping it's trash in the ocean.
He won't respond to me directly anymore because I've caught him too
many times like the above and exposed his lib hypocrisy, where he can only find
fault with Republicans, never a Democrat. Maybe he's a paid shill?

On Tue, 05 Jun 2018 23:41:05 -0400, wrote:

BTW how is that cite coming on the NYC trash dumping bull**** you
threw out the other day? (and ran away)

A good reminder. You were the one who claimed your Florida
incinerator was burning plastic to produce power. I read the publicly
available information about that system and discovered they don't burn
the plastic, but rather they recycle it. I pointed this out to you,
but you ran away and never admitted the "error".

Why did you refuse to admit the "misstatement", (being polite)? Let
me guess, you never saw the comment because (insert excuse here).

On Wed, 6 Jun 2018 13:16:57 -0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

On 6/5/2018 at 8:38:17 PM, wrote:


How is suicide a violent death? Seems pretty calm to me.
Murder is a violent death and the murder rate has gone down in
spite of millions of new guns being sold every year.


Ahhh, a slightly more sophisticated variation of Uncle Menstrual's
definition ploy. Can you distract attention away from the issue of
easier access to guns equating to greater gun violence?


How is it "violent" to blow off the top of one's head with a
shotgun?


Here are a couple of definitions of "violent", hope you learn
something.

Adjective: violent

1. Acting with or marked by or resulting from great force or energy
or emotional intensity

2. Effected by force or injury rather than natural causes

Certainly not any more violent than jumping off a building hanging
yourself and no where near as violent as intentionally hitting a dump
truck head on.

Changing your story and acting as if you didn't. You asked "How is
suicide a violent death? Seems pretty calm to me." Now you are
admitting it is violent, but no more violent then blah, blah, blah.


The fact remains Japan has a higher suicide rate than the US and they
have no guns.

You also glaze over the fact that violent crime is declining and gun
ownership is rising.

Your points are completely irrelevant to the study referenced above,
which statistically demonstrates that easier access to guns results in
more deaths due to gun violence.

Once again, you did not read the article, or the study and are simply
jumping in with bull**** to obfuscate and distract. Yawn.

VPC does not release "studies" they cherry pick statistics to reach
the conclusion they support and you gobble it up and treat it as fact.
Weren't you the one who just said statistics were lies?

On Wed, 06 Jun 2018 14:33:15 +0000, None wrote:

On Tue, 05 Jun 2018 23:41:05 -0400, wrote:

BTW how is that cite coming on the NYC trash dumping bull**** you
threw out the other day? (and ran away)

A good reminder. You were the one who claimed your Florida
incinerator was burning plastic to produce power. I read the publicly
available information about that system and discovered they don't burn
the plastic, but rather they recycle it. I pointed this out to you,
but you ran away and never admitted the "error".

Why did you refuse to admit the "misstatement", (being polite)? Let
me guess, you never saw the comment because (insert excuse here).

What did you read that said that? They burn the whole waste stream
including plastic. They recover the ferrous metal before it goes into
the incinerator.
The fraction of the "recycle" that actually gets recycled is pretty
small. They try to get as much aluminum and steel out of the recycle
as they can but if they think the load has too much trash in it they
send the whole thing to the incinerator.
If you actually read what they say, that will be apparent to you. I am
sure some environmentalists want to believe we are actually trucking
plastic and paper 1500 miles to virtually give it away but that is a
small fraction of what gets collected.

On 6/6/2018 at 8:01:59 AM, wrote:


On Wed, 6 Jun 2018 13:16:57 -0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

On 6/5/2018 at 8:38:17 PM, wrote:


How is suicide a violent death? Seems pretty calm to me.
Murder is a violent death and the murder rate has gone down in
spite of millions of new guns being sold every year.


Ahhh, a slightly more sophisticated variation of Uncle
Menstrual's definition ploy. Can you distract attention away
from the issue of easier access to guns equating to greater gun
violence?

How is it "violent" to blow off the top of one's head with a
shotgun?


Here are a couple of definitions of "violent", hope you learn
something.

Adjective: violent

1. Acting with or marked by or resulting from great force or
energy or emotional intensity

2. Effected by force or injury rather than natural causes

Certainly not any more violent than jumping off a building hanging
yourself and no where near as violent as intentionally hitting a
dump truck head on.

Changing your story and acting as if you didn't. You asked "How is
suicide a violent death? Seems pretty calm to me." Now you are
admitting it is violent, but no more violent then blah, blah, blah.


The fact remains Japan has a higher suicide rate than the US and
they have no guns.

You also glaze over the fact that violent crime is declining and
gun ownership is rising.

Your points are completely irrelevant to the study referenced above,
which statistically demonstrates that easier access to guns results
in more deaths due to gun violence.

Once again, you did not read the article, or the study and are
simply jumping in with bull**** to obfuscate and distract. Yawn.

VPC does not release "studies" they cherry pick statistics to reach
the conclusion they support and you gobble it up and treat it as fact.

The classic "Genetic Logical Fallacy", judging something good or bad on
the basis of where or whom it comes from. Very sloppy Fretwell.

A disingenuous way to avoid holistically discussing the actual
information presented in the article.

Are you capable of having discussions without using logical fallacies?
Asking for a friend. ;-)

On Wed, 06 Jun 2018 11:18:40 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 06 Jun 2018 14:33:15 +0000, None wrote:

On Tue, 05 Jun 2018 23:41:05 -0400, wrote:

BTW how is that cite coming on the NYC trash dumping bull**** you
threw out the other day? (and ran away)

A good reminder. You were the one who claimed your Florida
incinerator was burning plastic to produce power. I read the publicly
available information about that system and discovered they don't burn
the plastic, but rather they recycle it. I pointed this out to you,
but you ran away and never admitted the "error".

Why did you refuse to admit the "misstatement", (being polite)? Let
me guess, you never saw the comment because (insert excuse here).

What did you read that said that? They burn the whole waste stream
including plastic. They recover the ferrous metal before it goes into
the incinerator.


Here you go, the same site which you posted.

http://www.leegov.com/solidwaste/recycling/yes


Now it is your turn, how about a citation that verifies your assertion
that they burn the "entire waste stream" except ferrous metals?



The fraction of the "recycle" that actually gets recycled is pretty
small. They try to get as much aluminum and steel out of the recycle
as they can but if they think the load has too much trash in it they
send the whole thing to the incinerator.
If you actually read what they say, that will be apparent to you. I am
sure some environmentalists want to believe we are actually trucking
plastic and paper 1500 miles to virtually give it away but that is a
small fraction of what gets collected.

On 6/6/2018 11:01 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jun 2018 13:16:57 -0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

On 6/5/2018 at 8:38:17 PM, wrote:


How is suicide a violent death? Seems pretty calm to me.
Murder is a violent death and the murder rate has gone down in
spite of millions of new guns being sold every year.


Ahhh, a slightly more sophisticated variation of Uncle Menstrual's
definition ploy. Can you distract attention away from the issue of
easier access to guns equating to greater gun violence?


How is it "violent" to blow off the top of one's head with a
shotgun?


Here are a couple of definitions of "violent", hope you learn
something.

Adjective: violent

1. Acting with or marked by or resulting from great force or energy
or emotional intensity

2. Effected by force or injury rather than natural causes

Certainly not any more violent than jumping off a building hanging
yourself and no where near as violent as intentionally hitting a dump
truck head on.

Changing your story and acting as if you didn't. You asked "How is
suicide a violent death? Seems pretty calm to me." Now you are
admitting it is violent, but no more violent then blah, blah, blah.


The fact remains Japan has a higher suicide rate than the US and they
have no guns.

You also glaze over the fact that violent crime is declining and gun
ownership is rising.

Your points are completely irrelevant to the study referenced above,
which statistically demonstrates that easier access to guns results in
more deaths due to gun violence.

Once again, you did not read the article, or the study and are simply
jumping in with bull**** to obfuscate and distract. Yawn.

VPC does not release "studies" they cherry pick statistics to reach
the conclusion they support and you gobble it up and treat it as fact.
Weren't you the one who just said statistics were lies?

When Dovey decides to remove his carbon footprint, I hope he goes to
Japan to do it and does not become a US gun statistic.

On Wed, 06 Jun 2018 15:57:38 +0000, None wrote:

On Wed, 06 Jun 2018 11:18:40 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 06 Jun 2018 14:33:15 +0000, None wrote:

On Tue, 05 Jun 2018 23:41:05 -0400, wrote:

BTW how is that cite coming on the NYC trash dumping bull**** you
threw out the other day? (and ran away)

A good reminder. You were the one who claimed your Florida
incinerator was burning plastic to produce power. I read the publicly
available information about that system and discovered they don't burn
the plastic, but rather they recycle it. I pointed this out to you,
but you ran away and never admitted the "error".

Why did you refuse to admit the "misstatement", (being polite)? Let
me guess, you never saw the comment because (insert excuse here).

What did you read that said that? They burn the whole waste stream
including plastic. They recover the ferrous metal before it goes into
the incinerator.


Here you go, the same site which you posted.

http://www.leegov.com/solidwaste/recycling/yes


http://www.leegov.com/solidwaste/facilities/rrf/wte

"All of the household garbage collected in Lee and Hendry counties
eventually ends up at the Lee County Resource Recovery Facility, where
it is sorted for reusable and recyclable materials. The lowest value
waste is brought to the Waste-To-Energy Plant where, for the last 20
years, it has been converted to electricity through combustion. "

This is the puff piece from our government. When the news people
actually investigated it, most of it gets called "low value" pretty
much defined by any load that has just about anything they don't want
to screw with. If they see "plastic bags, hoses, styrofoam (and a
number of other things)" the whole load goes to the incinerator. They
even have ads on TV saying as much. The reality is the sorting center
can't handle more than a fraction of the waste so they only cherry
pick the cleanest stuff. Most of it does not come from curbside
collection. Look at little deeper than the site from the people who
collect the taxes.

On Wed, 06 Jun 2018 16:23:19 -0700, Stormin' Norman
wrote:

On Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:20:00 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 06 Jun 2018 15:57:38 +0000, None wrote:

On Wed, 06 Jun 2018 11:18:40 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 06 Jun 2018 14:33:15 +0000, None wrote:

On Tue, 05 Jun 2018 23:41:05 -0400, wrote:

BTW how is that cite coming on the NYC trash dumping bull**** you
threw out the other day? (and ran away)

A good reminder. You were the one who claimed your Florida
incinerator was burning plastic to produce power. I read the publicly
available information about that system and discovered they don't burn
the plastic, but rather they recycle it. I pointed this out to you,
but you ran away and never admitted the "error".

Why did you refuse to admit the "misstatement", (being polite)? Let
me guess, you never saw the comment because (insert excuse here).

What did you read that said that? They burn the whole waste stream
including plastic. They recover the ferrous metal before it goes into
the incinerator.


Here you go, the same site which you posted.

http://www.leegov.com/solidwaste/recycling/yes


http://www.leegov.com/solidwaste/facilities/rrf/wte

"All of the household garbage collected in Lee and Hendry counties
eventually ends up at the Lee County Resource Recovery Facility, where
it is sorted for reusable and recyclable materials. The lowest value
waste is brought to the Waste-To-Energy Plant where, for the last 20
years, it has been converted to electricity through combustion. "

This is the puff piece from our government. When the news people
actually investigated it, most of it gets called "low value" pretty
much defined by any load that has just about anything they don't want
to screw with. If they see "plastic bags, hoses, styrofoam (and a
number of other things)" the whole load goes to the incinerator. They
even have ads on TV saying as much. The reality is the sorting center
can't handle more than a fraction of the waste so they only cherry
pick the cleanest stuff. Most of it does not come from curbside
collection. Look at little deeper than the site from the people who
collect the taxes.

In other words, I should just take your word for it, even though the
site clearly states they recycle plastics numbered 1 - 7. Heh!

Like I said it is a puff piece by the government. They are "capable"
of recycling that plastic but they also reject whole truckloads of
material if it does not look economically feasible to sort (AKA "low
value"). That does not take much. A little trash in a truckload of
"recyclables" and into the incinerator it goes.
That is actually a good thing because trucking that paper and plastic
1500 miles to a place that will actually take it is too expensive to
make sense economically or environmentally. A wiser use would be to
burn it all but that is not politically viable and it would eliminate
dozens of really ****ty government jobs sorting that trash.

On Wednesday, June 6, 2018 at 6:23:27 PM UTC-5, Stormin' Norman wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:20:00 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 06 Jun 2018 15:57:38 +0000, None wrote:

On Wed, 06 Jun 2018 11:18:40 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 06 Jun 2018 14:33:15 +0000, None wrote:

On Tue, 05 Jun 2018 23:41:05 -0400, wrote:

BTW how is that cite coming on the NYC trash dumping bull**** you
threw out the other day? (and ran away)

A good reminder. You were the one who claimed your Florida
incinerator was burning plastic to produce power. I read the publicly
available information about that system and discovered they don't burn
the plastic, but rather they recycle it. I pointed this out to you,
but you ran away and never admitted the "error".

Why did you refuse to admit the "misstatement", (being polite)? Let
me guess, you never saw the comment because (insert excuse here).

What did you read that said that? They burn the whole waste stream
including plastic. They recover the ferrous metal before it goes into
the incinerator.

Here you go, the same site which you posted.

http://www.leegov.com/solidwaste/recycling/yes

http://www.leegov.com/solidwaste/facilities/rrf/wte

"All of the household garbage collected in Lee and Hendry counties
eventually ends up at the Lee County Resource Recovery Facility, where
it is sorted for reusable and recyclable materials. The lowest value
waste is brought to the Waste-To-Energy Plant where, for the last 20
years, it has been converted to electricity through combustion. "

This is the puff piece from our government. When the news people
actually investigated it, most of it gets called "low value" pretty
much defined by any load that has just about anything they don't want
to screw with. If they see "plastic bags, hoses, styrofoam (and a
number of other things)" the whole load goes to the incinerator. They
even have ads on TV saying as much. The reality is the sorting center
can't handle more than a fraction of the waste so they only cherry
pick the cleanest stuff. Most of it does not come from curbside
collection. Look at little deeper than the site from the people who
collect the taxes.

In other words, I should just take your word for it, even though the
site clearly states they recycle plastics numbered 1 - 7. Heh!
--


Stormin' Norman! Where have you been? I was worried we lost another person posting to the group. I hope you're OK. I've seen too many guys I've argued with pass away. Just because I disagree with someone doesn't mean I wish any harm to come to them. Did you have any health problems or did you go on vacation and eschewed reading and posting to Usenet? O_o

[8~{} Uncle Concerned Monster