Today's mass shooting in the US

Israel did have a problem with school shootings so they did something about it.

Evidence please. I went looking for school shootings in Israel, and could only find 4 in the last 80 years, two of which were terrorist attacks.

As for arming teachers, from here:

Note point 2.

Point 2 does not say teachers.
 
Israel did have a problem with school shootings so they did something about it. But that was all in pre-internet days. Like 1974 - the Ma'a lot massacre.

As for arming teachers, from here:





Note point 2.

Where does that say teachers? Ministry personel includes the guards that they employ.

"The guard must possess a valid license to carry guns issued by the Ministry of Public Security and the Israel Police."

It's actually quite dificult to get a gun license in Israel and self defense isn't considered a valid reason, private gun ownership in Israel is actually slightly lower than Ireland.

That means less than 7.3% of their population own a gun, including 40,000+ guards that also require the license.

 
For some context on how low that number is -

US Deaths in 2020:

42,000 killed by falls

40,500 killed in vehicle accidents

87,000 killed accidental poisioning

So gun deaths have a way to go yet before they get high enough to be called a "problem" in the US, irrespective of our feelings about it.

Figures from the National Centre for Health Statistics which is part of the CDC - https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/accidental-injury.htm
Except that the US, like most countries spends an absolute fortune on trying to prevent all of the above...Vehicles are heavily regulated and have an ever increasing number of safety features whilst the drivers have to prove they're able to operate at a minimum level of competency (with checks every few years), falls are investigated and things like building regulations changed to try and reduce them, poisonings lead to things like improved safety features on their containers, education about the risks and where possible alternatives found and the dangerous chemicals either withdrawn completely or heavily regulated to for example people with a licence and need for them.

The only one they don't seem to take any logical steps to prevent is gun deaths.


It took from memory one person tampering with medicine packaging as part of a blackmail attempt that killed a handful of people for the entire pharmaceutical industry to change it's packaging, it took a handful of cases of food being tampered with for the baby food and several other food industries to change all the packaging they used (in both instances to anti tamper/tamper evident designs)...
The reason you have those often awkward "press in and squeeze as you turn" type lids on bottles of tablets and cleaning products was because of an attempt to reduce the number of accidental poisonings by children.
 
Because those suicides would be suicides by other means.

As usual, unqualified rubbish...

In the real world, guns increase the risk of suicide.

 
Because those suicides would be suicides by other means.
Not all, and possibly not even most of them.

Gun suicides are from what i've read more likely to be spur of the moment and far less likely to be survivable than most other methods of suicide (but if you do survive it's usually with horrific injuries/damage).
 
As usual, unqualified rubbish...

No. I've known too many people who have committed suicide - one a childhood friend - and not one of them used a gun.

far less likely to be survivable than most other methods of suicide

Jumping off high bridges works far better than guns; hitting water from a sufficient height is much like hitting concrete. Your chances of surviving stepping out in front of a tube train depend not on luck but on which end of the platform you choose. Etc.
 
No. I've known too many people who have committed suicide - one a childhood friend - and not one of them used a gun.



Jumping off high bridges works far better than guns; hitting water from a sufficient height is much like hitting concrete. Your chances of surviving stepping out in front of a tube train depend not on luck but on which end of the platform you choose. Etc.
All of which require far more effort than picking up the gun you, or a family member own...

There is also a fair bit of effort put into limiting access to most high places to prevent suicides (locks on roof doors, windows that only open so far without special tools), you can't easily gain access to many rail lines and with all the ones you mention you are basically somewhere that requires travel to reach and will likely have people around who will try and stop you. So again nowhere near as likely to be something you can do on the spur of the moment.
 
No. I've known too many people who have committed suicide - one a childhood friend - and not one of them used a gun.



Jumping off high bridges works far better than guns; hitting water from a sufficient height is much like hitting concrete. Your chances of surviving stepping out in front of a tube train depend not on luck but on which end of the platform you choose. Etc.

Anecdotal evidence that people still commit suicide even without access to guns is not a counter point to the fact that people with guns are more likely to commit suicide.
 
That doesn't pass the 'So what?' test. You're not convincing anyone with 'X is smaller than Y, therefore X is not a real problem.'

Good, I never intended to. I simply pointed out that 36,000 deaths is nothing in the US, and gave some "death by accident" figures to show that.

I think it's a real problem (never said I didn't, again) but I did say that the US doesn't seem to treat it as a problem yet and seems to accept that level of deaths.
 
Back
Top Bottom