[ExI] question not being asked in Alec Baldwin shooting

Dan TheBookMan danust2012 at gmail.com
Sun Oct 24 21:43:01 UTC 2021

On Oct 24, 2021, at 9:40 AM, spike jones via extropy-chat <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
> …> On Behalf Of Dan TheBookMan via extropy-chat
> >>…In 2021, actor Baldwin killed more people than all 5 million dues-paying NRA
> members combined.
> >… Having a gun around at all — whether you’re a member of the NRA or not — is just makes it a lot more likely (as in possible at all) someone will be accidentally killed by said gun, no?
> By using the term “someone” equates the good guy with the bad guy with the suicide. 

I was responding to your post. See the phrasing you used above. In your attempt to sloganeer, you didn’t make any difference between accidental and intentional killing or add in any other distinctions. So that’s on you. 

For the record, Baldwin accidentally killed on person and injured another on the set. NRA members have killed far more than one person accidentally or intentionally — and that’s not including suicides. Yeah, this doesn’t tell us much as we’d have to compare things like the base raid of accidental gun shootings (as well as intentional ones, both suicides and others) by NRA members and by the general population to make any sense here. Even then, what is the point?

> Those are three different things, and two of those terms are opposites.  If the good guy kills the bad guy, it prevents her from ever killing someone else, so that saves lives.  Suicide with one’s own gun, well… my personal belief is that my life is mine and I have the right to do with it as I will.  So that too is different and not comparable.  Often statistics are distorted by mixing those three things.

People have broken down the stats. Not all NRA members have used guns wisely. In other words, they have NOT all avoided accidental or intentional killings that aren’t justified. So, your original slogan doesn’t hold.

Anyhow, common sense and tiny knowledge of statistics — both of which you have but seem to have not used here — should have lead you not to repeat the slogan above (yeah, others online made the same claim almost before the gun stopped smoking). Five million people are likely, despite gun safety training and whatever else goes on with their membership contained it’s share of folks who either mishandled a firearm or who used one in a malicious way with resulting injury or death. In fact, if their membership didn’t have its share of those, I’d seriously there was something weird about NRA members — over and above the ‘normal’ stuff I’d expect from any Right wing group.

> >…I recall a report of an NRA accidentally shooting himself (though not to death) from a few years ago:
> https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article143476929.html
> Ja, accidental self-shootings occasionally happen.  They are rare.  Far more rare if the self-victim has taken the excellent NRA safety course, which they offer free.

Read the article. The victim was involved in a gun safety course when it happened. 

> >…And here’s an NRA member convicted of killing someone:
> >…Dan
> https://vpc.org/press/vpc-identifies-over-500-concealed-carry-killers-including-an-nra-lifetime-member/
> Ja road rage happens. 

Again, your original comment was about killings — about NRA members killing less people than (the 1) Baldwin killed. Well, that’s simply not so.

> I don’t think actor Baldwin did that however, even given his reputation for everything-rage not just the common road variety.  I think the tragedy was an accident probably, although I am still at a loss to understand why there were live (non-blank) rounds on the set at all.  That sounds to me like either an astonishing violation of safety protocol (most likely) or possibly an act of criminal malice, but the latter really stretches the imagination. 
> I heard they had three accidental discharges of real ammo on that one movie project alone.  That just boggles my mind they were still making that film after the first two incidents or even after the first one.  I could vaguely imagine some disgruntled miscreant loading prop pistols with live rounds in an attempt to wreck the project because of personal disputes with management, but not to intentionally kill someone.  In this particular case, there was known severe animosity between management and labor.
> Dan regarding the safety of having a personal gun or the safety value of legal concealed carry, the factor that messes up the statistics is that there is no good way to quantize the condition of the neighborhood in which one lives.  In some areas, it really is a lot safer to be (legally) armed than to not be, but there are not many places like that and I would speculate that no one here is likely to live in any of them.  If so, I do urge you to move out, forthwith.  Most places are plenty safe, you don’t need to pack around that extra weight.

I agree about the safety issues on the set. It seems like it was lax — and the mainstream media hasn’t been lax in reporting that. If anything, they’ve piled on Baldwin, even dredging his past problems — ones that have little to do, IMO, with the set or the incident. (A close friend opines that this is because Baldwin isn’t well liked for his support of Woody Allen in the later’s sex scandal. I dunno. I think it’s more the usual thing the media do when an incident happens like this, especially with a non-cop.)


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20211024/0a142219/attachment.htm>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list