The net result of privately owned firearms in the US is less dead people

The logic of this piece of vermin and her ilk is that that no "law" could have stopped Paddock from carrying out his grisly attack, so in their logic its only reasonable to ban firearms completely, or take steps in that direction. There is a cost / benefit ratio to having guns in a free and open society. These hideous attacks are one of the costs that the media loves to trumpet on, but the benefits you never hear a fucking dicky bird on from the jewish owned mass media.


Citizens using their privately owned firearms (whether concealed carry or in their own homes) to defend themselves or their family, or prevent themselves or somebody else from being a victim of a crime. If guns were banned, what would the total death toll be of citizens who have no means to defend themselves?


The net result of privately owned firearms in the US is less dead people, less people deprived of their property by thugs, fewer raped and victimized women and fewer victims of crime. Thereis a sickness in US culture, and it has nothing to do with ownership of weapons. Mass shootings and other crime is a symptom, not a cuase. One must deal with the cuase to treat the patient and restore to full health.


Joe Chiang Added May 13, 2018 - 9:59pm
Teacher, all of your points are valid.  I might point out however, that your rhetorical question about "the total death toll be of citizens who have no means to defend themselves" has a measurable answer.  7 million Jews were herded onto boxcars to be executed AFTER they were disarmed.  Stalin murdered millions AFTER he disarmed his citizens.  Castro murdered millions AFTER he disarmed his citizens, etc.  The result of US citizens disarming, will be multi-millions of Christians, Conservatives, and others who are not politically correct will be rounded up and murdered so the USA can live as peacefully a Germany after the Jews were murdered and Stalin's citizens and Castro's citizens.
Morgoth Added May 13, 2018 - 10:15pm
"hear a fucking dicky bird on from the jewish owned mass media."
 Yeah, I see something like that I go into tune-out mode.
Boy, we can't get something in the middle on Writer Beat anymore.  
Thomas Sutrina Added May 13, 2018 - 10:29pm
So Jeffrey Kelly please tell me how WB and the web is 'jewish owned mass media'.  If you believe WB is 'jewish' owned and influenced that Good Bye.  
I see WB as an open forum with supporters for many view points some I disagree with and some I agree with.  That is the point.  We can send out word spears on occasion but generally I do not see that.
Pardero Added May 13, 2018 - 10:57pm
The Grim Teacher,
I won't argue against your characterization of MSM ownership, but you should consider that no group defends gun ownership and the Second Amendment more zealously than Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership. 
JPFO makes other organizations look like compromisers, collaborators, and quislings. Their strict interpretation of the Second Amendment is unparalleled, and rightfully attributes the right to natural law, as well.
All ethnic groups and faiths contain individuals with differing opinions. I believe that it is unwise to alienate those that may share a common cause.
Your article would be stronger if you removed any ethnic/religion reference and corrected 'cause' with the 'a' and 'u' reversed in the last paragraph.
Thomas Sutrina Added May 13, 2018 - 10:57pm
The Grim Teacher,  your talking about defensive gun use in a school and self-protection in other locations.  This is a totally different activity with guns from justice system uses.   Defensive gun use in most cases is a person acting alone.  For a school a teacher in a room with children and with a gun is a alone.  This is the likely situation.  However a few gun wheedling people may be guarding the retreat of students.  
Schools that want a plan for arming some teachers will have to have lock boxes in any room that will be use as a fortress, basically every room in a school.  So the lock box will have to be accessed by any approved teacher or employee only.  And some procedure to manage them will be needed. 
Defensive gun use is a largely passive.  Your not looking for a reason to use a gun, it comes to you.  The vast majority of policemen do not use their gun and they are active players.  So defensive gun are even more less likely to be used, but available should the need arise.
"The National Self-Defense Survey was the first survey specifically designed to estimate the frequency of defensive gun uses. It asked all respondents about both their own uses and those of other household members, inquired about all gun types, excluded uses against animals or connected with occupational duties, and limited recall periods to one and five years. Equally importantly, it established, with detailed questioning, whether persons claiming a defensive gun use had actually confronted an adversary (as distinct from, say, merely investigating a suspicious noise in the backyard), actually used their guns in some way, such as, at minimum, threatening their adversaries (as distinct from merely owning or carrying a gun for defensive reasons), and had done so in connection with what they regarded as a specific crime being committed against them.
The National Self-Defense Survey indicated that there were 2.5 million incidents of defensive gun use per year in the U.S. during the 1988-1993 period. This is probably a conservative estimate, for two reasons. First, cases of respondents intentionally withholding reports of genuine defensive-gun uses were probably more common than cases of respondents reporting incidents that did not occur or that were not genuinely defensive. Second, the survey covered only adults age 18 and older, thereby excluding all defensive gun uses involving adolescents, the age group most likely to suffer a violent victimization.
The authors concluded that defensive uses of guns are about three to four times as common as criminal uses of guns. The National Self-Defense Survey confirmed the picture of frequent defensive gun use implied by the results of earlier, less sophisticated surveys.

A national survey conducted in 1994 by the Police Foundation and sponsored by the National Institute of Justice almost exactly confirmed the estimates from the National Self-Defense Survey. This survey's person-based estimate was that 1.44% of the adult population had used a gun for protection against a person in the previous year, implying 2.73 million defensive gun users. These results were well within sampling error of the corresponding 1.33% and 2.55 million estimates produced by the National Self-Defense Survey.

Most uses of guns for either criminal or defensive purposes are less dramatic or consequential than one might think. Only 3% of criminal gun assaults involves anyone actually being wounded, even nonfatally, and the same is true of defensive gun uses. More commonly, guns are merely pointed at another person, or perhaps only referred to ("I've got a gun") or displayed, and this is sufficient to accomplish the ends of the user, whether criminal or non- criminal.

If gun possession among prospective victims tends to reduce violence, then reducing such gun possession is not, in and of itself, a social good. To disarm noncriminals in the hope that this might indirectly help reduce access to guns among criminals is a very high-stakes gamble, and the risks will not be reduced by pretending that crime victims rarely use guns for self-defense."  
Thomas Sutrina Added May 13, 2018 - 10:58pm
Jeff Jackson Added May 14, 2018 - 4:18am
Am armed society is a polite society.
Morgoth Added May 14, 2018 - 7:08am
@Thomas Sutrina:
”So Jeffrey Kelly please tell me how WB and the web is 'jewish owned mass media'.  If you believe WB is 'jewish' owned and influenced that Good Bye.”
I didn’t say it, Thomas.  The Grim Teacher did.  Read the top of the article.
Doug Plumb Added May 14, 2018 - 7:46am
re "The net result of privately owned firearms in the US is less dead people, less people deprived of their property by thugs, fewer raped and victimized women and fewer victims of crime. Thereis a sickness in US culture, and it has nothing to do with ownership of weapons."
You are 100% right - violent crime is stopped very often in the US by citizens with firearms. The Jewish press doesn't cover it. I wish people could fully internalize the meaning of "Chutzpa" because it is not a rational idea.
re " I might point out however, that your rhetorical question about "the total death toll be of citizens who have no means to defend themselves" has a measurable answer.  7 million Jews were herded onto boxcars to be executed AFTER they were disarmed."
See? Now its 7 million. In the 70's it was nearly 6 million Jews, Gypsies, Blacks. Fortunately this kind of nonsense doesn't have to fly here. Other places it can't be called out.
Doug Plumb Added May 14, 2018 - 7:50am
In my little fiction book, Dr Treekenstein, the figure becomes 666 trillion Jews, (after 3.5 billion years - its a science fiction book)
Thomas Sutrina Added May 14, 2018 - 7:38pm
Jeffrey I have no disagreement that we have authors on WB that promote almost everything you or I can imagine.   But for them to post on WB does not say anything about who is sponsoring WB or the web except that they believe in freedom of speech.
Joe Chiang Added May 14, 2018 - 7:45pm
BTW, is Al Gore Jewish?  He said he invented the Internet.  But then he also said NY City would be underwater by maybe 2006, not that anyone actually paid attention to that idiot.  LOL 
Rusty Smith Added May 15, 2018 - 9:44am
Joe Chiang I was rewatching one of Gore's "documentaries" yesterday and had to laugh at his predictions and shocking scare tactics.  
It's easy to do now that we can see none of what he predicted actually happened, (except perhaps how he got rich), but back then he had everyone scared to death and willing to do anything to avoid the bleak future he was predicting.
Joe Chiang Added May 15, 2018 - 2:47pm
So true Rusty.  But disarming the public is all just scare tactics, too.  As I recall, it was Switzerland and Honduras that were compared.  Both have about 8.2 million population.  Honduras will not let any citizen be armed.  Switzerland requires all citizens to be armed.  Honduras has a VERY high murder rate and Switzerland has almost no deaths.  LOL  Another inconvenient fact for the gun control people.  In addition, historically, after Hitler disarmed his citizens millions died.  Are there deaths counted in the numbers of deaths AFTER disarmament?  The same is true for Stalin, Castro, etc.  These death tolls make a dozen or so here in the USA a minor number.
Flying Junior Added May 18, 2018 - 4:29pm
School shooting in Texas.  Ten dead.  Ten injured including a police officer.
Just another fucking day in the good ole U.S.A.
Flying Junior Added May 18, 2018 - 4:31pm
Why doesn't this happen anywhere else in the world?
Joe Chiang Added May 18, 2018 - 5:26pm
Flying, it does happen in the rest of the world.  It is just not reported in the USA.  Kind of like if a tree falls and no one is there, does it still make a noise?  If the US media does not think it "newsworthy", then did it even happen?
Whole encyclopedias could be written on what is NOT published by the US media.  There was also a school shooting in the USA where the shooter was shot before they could kill anyone.  Guess what, this was NOT published in the media, the only coverage, as I understand, is Internet and Fox News.
Flying Junior Added May 18, 2018 - 6:38pm
Well I can hope for the sake of the rest of the world you are wrong.  There is no point in us throwing up various articles from differing sources.  I was just reading about the Erfurt school shooting in Germany in 2002.  In response the German began to require psychological testing for gun ownership and raised the age of joining a shooting club from eighteen to twenty-one.  In 2009 after another mass shooting in a school, gun laws were tightened further.
If you can think of another civilized nation that is plagued with dozens of mass shootings at schools year after year as well as hundreds of accidental discharges and non-fatal shootings every year, I'd be happy to learn about it.
Have you noticed that the violence only keeps going up?  It's natural for the media only to report on our own national news.  But if any other country was catching up to us, I think we would definitely hear about it.
Flying Junior Added May 18, 2018 - 6:44pm
I guess you were talking about the Arapahoe school shooting in 2013?
I guess one girl, Claire Esther Davis, died later in the hospital.
I applaud the quick actions of the School Resource Officer.  Ugly business.
Flying Junior Added May 19, 2018 - 3:44am
So I documented my exchange with Joe on a normal blog.
May the Goddess bless you, Field.  It's so everyday it is easy just to give in and not care anymore.

I mentioned this on a right-leaning blog.  Got a bite when I said, "Why doesn't this happen anywhere else in the world?"

RW friend informed me that it happens all over the world, only MSM doesn't see fit to report on mass school shootings in other countries.

So just out of my noodle, I pick Germany.  The first shocking mass school shooting occurred in Erfurt in 2002.  The German government responded by raising the minimum age to join a shooting club to twenty-one instead of eighteen.  They also instituted psychological evaluations before gun ownership.  A second incident in 2009 brought about even stricter gun controls.

My RW buddy asked me if I had heard of a school shooting wherein an alert officer had actually killed the school shooter before he killed anyone?  He claimed that it was not reported by MSM, but only by FOX News.  He was talking about the Arapahoe school shooting.

So I again asked my friend, why does the U.S. have dozens of mass school shootings every year and hundreds of instances of accidental discharges and non-fatal shootings every year as well?  Have you noticed that the level of violence is only going up?

IMNHO, the main reason is the psychotic relationship that wingnuts have with guns.  This unhealthy relationship is only amplified and aggravated by their tribal politics.
Dino Manalis Added May 19, 2018 - 8:04am
We have to secure our schools inside out with adequate security and protect our children from such incidents, while gun owners need to secure their firearms so nobody else takes the gun.  Guns aren't toys, they have to be used responsibly, but schools must be as safe as being at home!
John Minehan Added May 19, 2018 - 10:50am
'[H]ear a fucking dicky bird on from the jewish owned mass media."
 Yeah, I see something like that I go into tune-out mode.
Boy, we can't get something in the middle on Writer Beat anymore."  
What he said!
That might give, say, Rupert Murdoch, a Scots-Australian American Catholic, a shock.   
Bill H. Added May 19, 2018 - 11:50am
Yet another WB ERW Hit and Run Rant.
Logical discussion can't take place when someone simply stops by to unload their pet peeves and go to the next blog never to return.
I own 3 firearms, but have always believed that our gun laws have required updating. We no longer all live in rural settings and people's attitudes, along with crime rates have gone south. Firearms have changed considerably from when our gun laws were written (flintlocks to SLR's). Seems that school shootings are becoming as common as car chases on the news.
I am all for tight background checking, mandatory training, and licensing.
Rusty Smith Added May 19, 2018 - 12:28pm
The Grim Teacher The best way to measure the impact of guns is to find places where the numbers changed significantly over a short period of time and then look at suicide, and homicide statistical trends starting years before the change and to the years after the change.
When that's been done in places like the UK and Australia it became evident that removing the guns did not make things better.
However the statistical charts all contain shorter periods where the numbers cycle up and down, so advocates on both sides of the gun arguments can easily cherry pick a smaller part of the statistical evidence that does appear to support their claim.
Lastly, I strongly suggest you quit adding rants about things like, "you never hear a fucking dicky bird on from the jewish owned mass media" to your forums, because they make you look less credible.  
If you want to take on "the jewish owned mass media", I think you should do it in another forum.  Personally I know lots of countries where guns were removed and the statistics are very relevant to your forum, have tiny very few Jews, even in the US Jews are only about 1.4% of the population and I doubt they are all in the mass media business.  I think almost half are in California and New York and some states have hardly any, Wyoming doesn't even have 200.  I can believe that where they live they control lots of things, but remember they aren't 10% of any state's population.  If they have somehow managed to pass everyone else by, that's AMAZING.
Joe Chiang Added May 19, 2018 - 3:12pm
The problem with gun control is not the concept, but who decides.  Hitler had gun control.  The SS, Brown Shirts, and "Aryans", were permitted to have guns.  Jews, Gypsies, Slaves, etc. were not.  Millions of those who were determined to NOT qualify for gun possession were exterminated.
The "science" of psychology does not exist.  Here in the US, the FBI notified local and state police that Christians, Conservatives, and Veterans needed to be watched as possible terrorists.  If this is the psychological determination criteria for gun ownership, then the "reeducation" camps and death camps will not be long in following.
He who has position of the loaded gun is the "Master" and he who is disarmed is the slave.  Any doubts, just watch the videos and pictures of the disarmed Jews being loaded into boxcars for transport to the death camps.  If that is not enough, then watch the videos and look at the pictures of disarmed Christians being beheaded by Peaceful and loving Muslims.
Flying Junior Added May 19, 2018 - 11:31pm
It's a play on words.  Grim Reaper.
Good to talk to everyone as always.
Mike Haluska Added May 20, 2018 - 1:21pm
Bill H - What will do more to save school children's lives in the immediate future:

1) More and stricter gun legislation
2) Armed, trained guards at every school
3) Trying to identify potential individuals who may conduct mass shootings
Which is simpler and faster to implement and requires NO LEGISLATION OR ANYONE'S "PERMISSION"?
So when the Democrats vehemently oppose the only solution that is simple, cheap, effective and quickly implementable by any school system, what they're really proving is that the Democrats WANT kids getting shot because they think it is politicial ammunition against President Trump!!!
If the Democrats cared more about kids than getting political power, they would do what's best for the safety and protection of ALL CHILDREN!  
Joe Chiang Added May 20, 2018 - 2:09pm
Mike, you miss #4, the most inexpensive and surest solution.  That is to permit teachers already trained and experienced in firearm use to gain specific training for issues involving being in a school building.  These teachers are already on the school payroll and are or would be trained.  A teacher stepping out of their door to stop a school invasion is the FASTEST and surest response and since these terrorists are actually cowards, the strongest deterrent to an attack.
1.  Said armed teachers may receive a small stipend, thus lowest cost.
2.  Stricter gun legislation = gun free zone, the only legislative solution short of throwing away the US Constitution, has proven unsuccessful in preventing school shootings.  All schools are "Gun Free Zones", yet ALL school shootings have taken place in or at school. 
3.  Armed guards are already available.  However this is not possible in small schools unless they have a lot of extra funds.  The first purpose for schools is to educate children.  The schools have and are NOT successful in education now.  In ND, which I believe is typical of the USA, test results are well below 50% "proficiency" in English and Math.  This is down from 80% literacy (a much higher standard than "proficiency").  In addition, there is NO evidence of children being successful on ANY teaching utilizing new methodology introduced in the last 75 years.
4.  Although it may be possible to identify some shooters before they have begun shooting, having an inclination toward an activity does not guarantee participation in that activity.  We could use Basketball as an example.  How would you identify a future NBA player BEFORE they have started playing basketball?
In addition, I believe there was a movie staring Tom Cruise where people were arrested and incarcerated for "possible future crimes" that they may or may not actually commit.  This was done through psychics in the movie and even that was not 100% accurate.  
Also, I have mentioned on other posts, the criteria for who is a potential threat may be defined as Christians, Conservatives, Veterans, as the FBI has ALREADY done or in a backlash, liberals and Muslims, who have a history of ACTUALLY committing violence may be defined as possible shooters and therefore be disarmed, unconstitutionally and no court could convict based on just an opinion of possibly becoming a shooter.  If this was possible, then why not incarcerate potential robbers, murderers, and rapists.  Or even possible unsuccessful marriages.  Are we going to check DNA for possible "sociopathic" genes before birth?
Ward Tipton Added May 21, 2018 - 12:50am
When I was a kid back in the ancient times, we had a rifle rack behind the driver's seat on the school bus so we could hunt for dinner on the way home. We carried our pistols into class as a rule, though we would not have been suffered to "play" around with them in school. We had massive numbers of vehicles in the parking lot with rifles and shotguns in rifle racks on rear windows ... We had couples breaking up, bullies, victims, fights, arguments ... yet not once did anyone ever go out and try to settle things with a firearm. 
Look at the violent crime rates in Australia and the UK in comparison to the US. 
Look at the violent crime rates in Kennesaw, Georgia and Chicago, Illinois. 
Gun control is knowing not to put your finger on the trigger until you are ready to give it a little squeeze. 
Mike Haluska Added May 21, 2018 - 10:50am
Joe - excellent points made!  The main reason I advocate armed security as the primary defense is because they are at the point of entry and can stop an assailant before he can even get inside the building.  Armed and trained teachers is a good idea, but should not be forced upon the faculty.
As far as cost goes, think of it this way.  Say the average high school has 800 students.  The monthly pay for an armed guard is about $4,000/month.  That comes to $5/student per month on a pro rata basis.  Ask any victim of a school shooting if they would not be willing to pay $5/month for their child to be protected - I think you know the answer.  Spread the cost over the entire community and its pennies, not dollars.
Joe Chiang Added May 21, 2018 - 7:45pm
Mike:  Thank you.  As I said we have schools with less than a dozen k-8 students in "One Room School House" (think Little House") here in ND.  The budget cannot cover the cost of armed guards.  My HS has less than 400 and it is a BIG school up here.  Schools with 100-200 students are common.
Permitting teachers to be armed is NOT the same thing as teachers being armed.  As I pointed out, terrorists are basically cowards.  They will not attack if there is a chance they will face real resistance.  They will not know IF a teacher is armed or not.  So they will pick a target where they are SURE no one else will be armed.  Currently the sure location that i unarmed is a public school.  That is why public schools are targets.
If a student learned the lesson of the liberal teaches, they would not be the shooters, but be compliant slaves.
Jeff Michka Added May 28, 2018 - 4:46pm
Raving Joe chimes in with his rightist "lesson of the liberal teaches,"  Ol' Joe advocates arming teachers, and "paying them a stipend" for "low cost" solutions.  Now, let's get this straight, Joe want to add soldier/armed guard to teacher's job description, and they are already poorly paid.  Now, of course, teachers in a paid charter school will willingly become soldiers and armed security guards because they're "private sector."  More anti-public school/teacher hatreds mouthed by a rightist like ol Joe and most of his ilk demanding we turn schools into day prisons nobody will want to be in because they can't get it together to pass meaningful gun control legislation.
Thomas Sutrina Added May 28, 2018 - 6:59pm
An armed teacher is practicing defense.  Defensive gun use is a largely passive.  They not looking for a reason to use a gun, it comes to them.  To disarm noncriminals in a school, the employees and then post a sign, "GUN FREE ZONE," in the hope that this might indirectly help reduce access to guns among those disturbed enough to kill multiple people in a school is a very high-stakes gamble, and the risks will not be reduced by pretending that victims rarely use guns for self-defense."  
Joe Chiang Added May 29, 2018 - 12:37am
Don't waste your time Thomas.  Jeff doesn't need facts or logic, he is a liberal.  He is a fool.