# hammers kill more then rifles



## boatnut (Nov 22, 2006)

According to the FBI annual crime statistics, the number of murders committed annually with hammers and clubs far outnumbers the number of murders committed with a rifle.

Think about it: In 2005, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 445, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 605. In 2006, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 438, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 618.

I own at least six hammers and one whopper of a sledge hammer not to mention a few spud bars that are extremely lethal. If the gov't wants them though, they will have to pry them from my cold dead hand.


----------



## ironman172 (Apr 12, 2009)

that nut in the elementary school could have taken out just as many with a razor sharp machete....anything that is used..... is an assault weapon....this is just....never loose the chance to capitalize on a tragity  a few teachers and helpless children
a true deterrent..... is one of the unknown....placing a armed guard(police or otherwise) just becomes the first target to take out....but eliminating the gun free zones would add the unknown.... who may be a real threat to a crazy nut case


----------



## jq642 (Dec 30, 2012)

Going after rifles is truly a joke. According to FBI crime statistics 6,220 murders were committed in 2011 in this country with a handgun. 72% of all murders committed in this country with a firearm in 2011 were committed with a handgun. 49% of all murders were committed with a handgun.


----------



## Fishingisfun (Jul 19, 2012)

I just received this link about the AR that never left the car at Sandy Hook. The truth seem to be different and MSN is telling it. 

http://webmail.roadrunner.com/do/re...y.msnbc.msn.com%2Ftoday%2F50208495%2350208495


----------



## MassillonBuckeye (May 3, 2010)

No way you can tell me that some nut with a hammer in a crowd is going to kill as many people as a nut with an AK. That's ridiculous.

I'm sure they counted any blunt object as a "club". The numbers were pretty close though.. So compared to some of the easiest things to acquire(any blunt object??), rifles aren't far behind. Not saying I support any type of ban, just pointing out the absurdity of the comparison. Whats also more absurd is the head of the NRA calling to place armed police officers in each of our schools.. 4500 schools in Ohio alone.. At an average of $50,000(low end?) a year thats $225,000,000 just on salary alone.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

MassillonBuckeye said:


> Whats also more absurd is the head of the NRA calling to place armed police officers in each of our schools.. 4500 schools in Ohio alone...


Or we could pass an assault weapons ban that does nothing to keep anyone safe.

Or we could train and arm the pilots that fly commercial airliners and permit them to carry on planes....oh wait, that has already been done successfully.

There has to be a means to meet the goal. Whatever is enacted needs to actually create a safer environment. A feel good solution does no one any good.


----------



## sam kegg (Jun 23, 2007)

NO BANN NONE AT ALL! JUST LEAVE IT BE! make it easier for good people to protect themselfs in my eyes every one should carry a gun like they carry there wallet or purse! . give the federal goverment one inch and they will take a mile!


----------



## PapawSmith (Feb 13, 2007)

MassillonBuckeye said:


> Whats also more absurd is the head of the NRA calling to place armed police officers in each of our schools.. 4500 schools in Ohio alone.. At an average of $50,000(low end?) a year thats $225,000,000 just on salary alone.


Same cost as adding just one teacher, something you would probably not find absurd. But I would rather add just one officer as I think it would have a much greater positive impact on the kids future. 
What I think is absurd is that just about anywhere I go where there are crowds, football-baseball-basketball games, malls, concerts, theme parks, and even some places not so crowded like banks and such I find armed guards to no ones displeasure, but that you find it absurd that someone might want to protect, with an armed guard, a building crowded all day with CHILDREN. I find your absurdity to be a bit absurd, sorry.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

PapawSmith said:


> Same cost as adding just one teacher


The gaurd could also TEACH gun safety courses at the school


----------



## jlami (Jan 28, 2011)

PapawSmith said:


> Same cost as adding just one teacher, something you would probably not find absurd. But I would rather add just one officer as I think it would have a much greater positive impact on the kids future.
> What I think is absurd is that just about anywhere I go where there are crowds, football-baseball-basketball games, malls, concerts, theme parks, and even some places not so crowded like banks and such I find armed guards to no ones displeasure, but that you find it absurd that someone might want to protect, with an armed guard, a building crowded all day with CHILDREN. I find your absurdity to be a bit absurd, sorry.


The difference is that the guards at the events you described are on someone elses payroll... Guards at school will be on the govt payroll. Of course that is an absurd idea!

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## timjr (Jul 23, 2009)

Looks like some teachers are looking to become proactive. 

Gun training idea draws Ohio educators

Associated PressJan 2, 2013 11:47 p.m.&#160;COLUMBUS, Ohio -&#160;A gun rights group says more than 650 Ohio educators have expressed interest in a firearms training program announced after 20 children and six educators were killed at a Connecticut school.The Buckeye Firearms Association was accepting applications for 24 spots in a free, three-day class to train teachers to use firearms. It said costs for the Armed Teacher Training Program would be covered by its educational foundation and outside donations.The foundation's president tells the Dayton Daily News ( http://bit.ly/Vwg9eW) the response from hundreds of educators has been overwhelming.Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine has said he would support allowing trained school officials access to a gun during classes if he were a school board member, but also said such decisions should be up to each district.Associated Press 2012 

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## Lungbuster (Apr 8, 2012)

What if we brought home our already trained soldiers and already paid for soldiers and had them work shifts at schools???????


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## Snakecharmer (Apr 9, 2008)

Or as part of getting a CCW, you get to provide 200 hours of free school monitoring...


----------



## boatnut (Nov 22, 2006)

MassillonBuckeye said:


> No way you can tell me that some nut with a hammer in a crowd is going to kill as many people as a nut with an AK. That's ridiculous.
> 
> I'm sure they counted any blunt object as a "club". The numbers were pretty close though.. So compared to some of the easiest things to acquire(any blunt object??), rifles aren't far behind. Not saying I support any type of ban, just pointing out the absurdity of the comparison. Whats also more absurd is the head of the NRA calling to place armed police officers in each of our schools.. 4500 schools in Ohio alone.. At an average of $50,000(low end?) a year thats $225,000,000 just on salary alone.


so what is your answer Massilon? c'mon, give it up. " not saying I support any type of ban". I call BULL PUCKY! You dance all around calling for a ban but continue to spew nonsense. I don't want armed police/ex-soldiers in the school either. I want freedom to carry anywhere, not gun free zones. I'm calling you out! LOL


----------



## IGbullshark (Aug 10, 2012)

jlami said:


> The difference is that the guards at the events you described are on someone elses payroll... Guards at school will be on the govt payroll. Of course that is an absurd idea!
> 
> posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


actually thats not true. Miamisburg has several police officers at such events and that is paid for by the government.


----------



## Fishingisfun (Jul 19, 2012)

Here is the link for the MSN new report that Sandy Hook shooter did not have an AR rifle in the school. The weapons recovered were 4 pistols. I'm told the first new confrence had the police chief saying the AR was in the trunk of the shooters car. Later all reports focused on the AR and the large cap mags. Now this news clip below is saying something different. Looks like news people heard AR and that was all they talked about. I have noticed if something is repeated enough people think is must be factual. Because enough people repeat something does not make it true. I'm unable to find that first police chief news confrence online but this report seems to confirm the AR was not the weapon used. Sounds like the man had a history at the school.
http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495#50208495


----------



## MassillonBuckeye (May 3, 2010)

PapawSmith said:


> Same cost as adding just one teacher, something you would probably not find absurd. But I would rather add just one officer as I think it would have a much greater positive impact on the kids future.
> What I think is absurd is that just about anywhere I go where there are crowds, football-baseball-basketball games, malls, concerts, theme parks, and even some places not so crowded like banks and such I find armed guards to no ones displeasure, but that you find it absurd that someone might want to protect, with an armed guard, a building crowded all day with CHILDREN. I find your absurdity to be a bit absurd, sorry.


Who's paying for that mall to have an armed security guard?
How would you recommend Ohio financing an additional $225 million dollars a year? How many school shootings have we had in Ohio? I don't think all schools need an armed police officer and I think the notion that they do is absurd.


----------



## IGbullshark (Aug 10, 2012)

Fishingisfun said:


> Here is the link for the MSN new report that Sandy Hook shooter did not have an AR rifle in the school. The weapons recovered were 4 pistols. I'm told the first new confrence had the police chief saying the AR was in the trunk of the shooters car. Later all reports focused on the AR and the large cap mags. Now this news clip below is saying something different. Looks like news people heard AR and that was all they talked about. I have noticed if something is repeated enough people think is must be factual. Because enough people repeat something does not make it true. I'm unable to find that first police chief news confrence online but this report seems to confirm the AR was not the weapon used. Sounds like the man had a history at the school.
> http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495#50208495


nothing about it on CNN...go figure.


----------



## ironman172 (Apr 12, 2009)

Snakecharmer said:


> Or as part of getting a CCW, you get to provide 200 hours of free school monitoring...


I would be glad to volunteer at my grand kids school....being retired it would give me something to do....I say let the teachers that want to..... carry there
I bet that principle wish she had a gun instead of just her body....and died trying to do something to stop him


----------



## leeabu (Apr 10, 2004)

boatnut said:


> According to the FBI annual crime statistics, the number of murders committed annually with hammers and clubs far outnumbers the number of murders committed with a rifle.
> 
> Think about it: In 2005, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 445, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 605. In 2006, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 438, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 618.
> 
> I own at least six hammers and one whopper of a sledge hammer not to mention a few spud bars that are extremely lethal. If the gov't wants them though, they will have to pry them from my cold dead hand.


Can you please list your source for this statistic? When I search "US murders by weapon type" I get a considerably different statisic from every source than what you have listed. Thanks!


----------



## boatnut (Nov 22, 2006)

leeabu said:


> Can you please list your source for this statistic? When I search "US murders by weapon type" I get a considerably different statisic from every source than what you have listed. Thanks!


sure, here ya go

http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_08.html


----------



## streamstalker (Jul 8, 2005)

leeabu said:


> Can you please list your source for this statistic? When I search "US murders by weapon type" I get a considerably different statisic from every source than what you have listed. Thanks!


http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/uc.../crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl08.xls

Weapons 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 
Total 15,087 14,916 14,224 13,752 12,996 
Total firearms: 10,225 10,129 9,528 9,199 8,775 
Handguns 7,836 7,398 6,800 6,501 6,009 
*Rifles* 438 453 380 351 358 
Shotguns 490 457 442 423 373 
Other guns 107 116 81 96 96 
Firearms, type not stated 1,354 1,705 1,825 1,828 1,939 
Knives or cutting instruments 1,830 1,817 1,888 1,836 1,704 
*Blunt objects* ( hammers, etc.) 618 647 603 623 540 
Personal weapons (hands, fists,etc.) 841 869 875 817 745 
Poison 12 10 9 7 11 
Explosives 1 1 11 2 4 
Fire 117 131 85 98 74 
Narcotics 48 52 34 52 39 
Drowning 12 12 16 8 10 
Strangulation 137 134 89 122 122 
Asphyxiation 106 109 87 84 98 
Other 1,140 1,005 999 904 874


----------



## MassillonBuckeye (May 3, 2010)

boatnut said:


> so what is your answer Massilon? c'mon, give it up. " not saying I support any type of ban". I call BULL PUCKY! You dance all around calling for a ban but continue to spew nonsense. I don't want armed police/ex-soldiers in the school either. I want freedom to carry anywhere, not gun free zones. I'm calling you out! LOL


What of anything I've said is nonsense? I think it makes perfectly good sense that it makes no sense at all to put armed police officers in every school. The NRA said that not me. I haven't hinted at changing anything now have I? No need to get insulting.


----------



## MassillonBuckeye (May 3, 2010)

About the only thing that makes sense to me right now is allowing teachers and administrators CCW on school property. I don't like how vulnerable they are. That should be the last thing a kid has to worry about in the middle of english class.


----------



## leeabu (Apr 10, 2004)

boatnut said:


> sure, here ya go
> 
> http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_08.html


Thank you!


----------



## Agitation Free (Jul 11, 2010)

It was reported on Fox News today that more people are killed with hands, (yes bare hands) then by all type of rifles combined every year.


----------



## MassillonBuckeye (May 3, 2010)

Agitation Free said:


> It was reported on Fox News today that more people are killed with hands, (yes bare hands) then by all type of rifles combined every year.


How about all firearms? If all we want to do is spew statistics, firearms deaths are on target to surpass traffic deaths by 2015. That mean anything to anyone?

Fox News is pretty late to the table I'd say as that data has been available since 2010 along with the "more killed by hammers" numbers. Which confused me when people cite that statistic... Wouldn't fists be an even more stark contrast than citing the blunt objects data? I don't get it.


----------



## jq642 (Dec 30, 2012)

I'm sure more people are focused on rifles because of the tragedy in CT, but hand guns by far are the most deadliest firearm in this country.


----------



## boatnut (Nov 22, 2006)

MassillonBuckeye said:


> How about all firearms? If all we want to do is spew statistics, firearms deaths are on target to surpass traffic deaths by 2015. That mean anything to anyone?


That statistic regarding firearms deaths surpassing traffic deaths is from the Center for Disease control. It INCLUDES suicides by firearms. Firearms were used in 19,392 suicides in the U.S. in 2010, constituting almost 62% of all gun deaths. Over 50% of all suicides are committed with a firearm.

If people wanna kill themselves , they'll probably find some way to do it even if guns are banned. So subtract that number from the total firearms death rate and we are a long way off from surpassing traffic deaths.

If you look at the data here- http://www.ucrdatatool.gov/Search/Crime/State/RunCrimeStatebyState.cfm
you will see murder rates decreasing from about early to mid 90's. Sort of coincides with concealed carry laws being passed.

So answer me this. Do you own a gun?


----------



## MassillonBuckeye (May 3, 2010)

jq642 said:


> I'm sure more people are focused on rifles because of the tragedy in CT, but hand guns by far are the most deadliest firearm in this country.


Were rifles used in CT? I know there was one reported etc. I don't remember ever seeing confirmation of what he actually used though. Bah


----------



## MassillonBuckeye (May 3, 2010)

boatnut said:


> That statistic regarding firearms deaths surpassing traffic deaths is from the Center for Disease control. It INCLUDES suicides by firearms. Firearms were used in 19,392 suicides in the U.S. in 2010, constituting almost 62% of all gun deaths. Over 50% of all suicides are committed with a firearm.
> 
> If people wanna kill themselves , they'll probably find some way to do it even if guns are banned. So subtract that number from the total firearms death rate and we are a long way off from surpassing traffic deaths.
> 
> ...


My point was anyone can quote a bunch of numbers that don't really mean anything. Or actually mean much more than meets the eye. I don't like over simplification in any aspect of a debate. It doesn't do the cause justice.

Not sure why my owning a gun or not matters? I don't think it's anyones business whether I own a gun or not.


----------



## Fishingisfun (Jul 19, 2012)

Check the link I posted from MSN it explains the rifle was not used it was in the car driven to the school.


----------



## MassillonBuckeye (May 3, 2010)

I guess I should have just asked why are we talking about hammers killing more people than rifles?


----------



## PapawSmith (Feb 13, 2007)

MassillonBuckeye said:


> I guess I should have just asked why are we talking about hammers killing more people than rifles?


Because Congress is considering legislation that will violate the 2nd Amendment based based on the fabricated notion that there is a rampant use of assault rifles being utilized to murder our nations citizens and, to make this a safe place for us all to live, they, the rifles, must all go away. The comparison of rifle deaths to hammer deaths proves this notion to be baseless. Far more folks are killed with hammers than ALL rifles combined, only a fraction of rifle deaths are "assault rifle" deaths. And even more, almost twice, are killed in fistfights. Very simple and sensible comparison.
You don't want to understand the truth, no matter how many ways you read, see, or hear it.


----------

