cdc


                    
                    
                
And Still
And Still

And Still

Lawn
Lawn

Lawn

kim kardashians
 kim kardashians

kim kardashians

suicides
 suicides

suicides

annuale
 annuale

annuale

ike
 ike

ike

ben
 ben

ben

so much
 so much

so much

others
 others

others

say
 say

say

🔥 | Latest

Children, Global Warming, and Iphone: THE HILL The Hill V @thehill CDC: Americans not having enough babies to sustain population hill.cm/w43uHJh 5:36 AM- Jan 12, 2019 SocialFlow 230 Retweets 416 Likes Esthetician/Skin Specialist @LaBeautyologist Forgive this trillion dollar student loan debt then. Or put a cap on rental prices. Or give us universal health care. Something. Damn. The Hill @thehill CDC: Americans not having enough babies to sustain population hill.cm/w43uHJh 9:19 PM Jan 12, 2019 Twitter for iPhone 4.8K Retweets 12K Likes BROWN $KIN @yagirlselie Replying to@LaBeautyologist and @markusssc These bills adding up ! Ain't no babies no time soon! 11:55 PM Jan 12, 2019 Twitter for iPhone Jewel @Jewel Evette Replying to @LaBeautyologist And affordable quality childcare 10:04 PM Jan 12, 2019 Twitter for iPhone xandrachantal: weasowl: niggazinmoscow: Everything older people say millennials aren’t doing–shopping, golfing, buying houses, getting married, having kids, dining out–is related to an entire generation having less money than their parents. I work 60 hours a week so I can afford to live in my car. Like, what is even happening further up the economy that they think these are choices. who can afford a 2 bedroom apartment to raise these kids in? who paying for daycare? these public schools are trash and the education budget is constantly being defunded to build prisons. it’s still legal for cops to kill Black children. oh and no one is taking global warming seriously so we’re all gonna die in another 20 years
Children, Global Warming, and Iphone: THE
 HILL
 The Hill V
 @thehill
 CDC: Americans not having enough babies
 to sustain population hill.cm/w43uHJh
 5:36 AM- Jan 12, 2019 SocialFlow
 230 Retweets
 416 Likes

 Esthetician/Skin Specialist
 @LaBeautyologist
 Forgive this trillion dollar student loan
 debt then. Or put a cap on rental prices.
 Or give us universal health care.
 Something. Damn.
 The Hill @thehill
 CDC: Americans not having enough babies to sustain
 population hill.cm/w43uHJh
 9:19 PM Jan 12, 2019 Twitter for iPhone
 4.8K Retweets
 12K Likes

 BROWN $KIN
 @yagirlselie
 Replying to@LaBeautyologist and @markusssc
 These bills adding up ! Ain't no babies no
 time soon!
 11:55 PM Jan 12, 2019 Twitter for iPhone

 Jewel
 @Jewel Evette
 Replying to @LaBeautyologist
 And affordable quality childcare
 10:04 PM Jan 12, 2019 Twitter for iPhone
xandrachantal:

weasowl:

niggazinmoscow:

Everything older people say millennials aren’t doing–shopping, golfing,
 buying houses, getting married, having kids, dining out–is related to 
an entire generation having less money than their parents.


I work 60 hours a week so I can afford to live in my car. Like, what is even happening further up the economy that they think these are choices.


who can afford a 2 bedroom apartment to raise these kids in? who paying for daycare? these public schools are trash and the education budget is constantly being defunded to build prisons. it’s still legal for cops to kill Black children. oh and no one is taking global warming seriously so we’re all gonna die in another 20 years

xandrachantal: weasowl: niggazinmoscow: Everything older people say millennials aren’t doing–shopping, golfing, buying houses, getting m...

Bodies , Children, and Climbing: Drowning in real life looks nothing like in the movies, and in fact many parents actually watch their children drown, having no idea that it's happening Ultrafacts.tumblr.com faikitty: mermaibee: ultrafacts: According to the CDC, in 10 percent of those drownings, the adult will actually watch the child do it, having no idea it is happening. Drowning does not look like drowning—Dr. Pia, in an article in the Coast Guard’s On Scene magazine, described the Instinctive Drowning Response like this: “Except in rare circumstances, drowning people are physiologically unable to call out for help. The respiratory system was designed for breathing. Speech is the secondary or overlaid function. Breathing must be fulfilled before speech occurs. Drowning people’s mouths alternately sink below and reappear above the surface of the water. The mouths of drowning people are not above the surface of the water long enough for them to exhale, inhale, and call out for help. When the drowning people’s mouths are above the surface, they exhale and inhale quickly as their mouths start to sink below the surface of the water. Drowning people cannot wave for help. Nature instinctively forces them to extend their arms laterally and press down on the water’s surface. Pressing down on the surface of the water permits drowning people to leverage their bodies so they can lift their mouths out of the water to breathe. Throughout the Instinctive Drowning Response, drowning people cannot voluntarily control their arm movements. Physiologically, drowning people who are struggling on the surface of the water cannot stop drowning and perform voluntary movements such as waving for help, moving toward a rescuer, or reaching out for a piece of rescue equipment. From beginning to end of the Instinctive Drowning Response people’s bodies remain upright in the water, with no evidence of a supporting kick. Unless rescued by a trained lifeguard, these drowning people can only struggle on the surface of the water from 20 to 60 seconds before submersion occurs.” This doesn’t mean that a person that is yelling for help and thrashing isn’t in real trouble—they are experiencing aquatic distress. Not always present before the Instinctive Drowning Response, aquatic distress doesn’t last long—but unlike true drowning, these victims can still assist in their own rescue. They can grab lifelines, throw rings, etc. Look for these other signs of drowning when persons are in the water: Head low in the water, mouth at water level Head tilted back with mouth open Eyes glassy and empty, unable to focus Eyes closed Hair over forehead or eyes Not using legs—vertical Hyperventilating or gasping Trying to swim in a particular direction but not making headway Trying to roll over on the back Appear to be climbing an invisible ladder So if a crew member falls overboard and everything looks OK—don’t be too sure. Sometimes the most common indication that someone is drowning is that they don’t look like they’re drowning. They may just look like they are treading water and looking up at the deck. One way to be sure? Ask them, “Are you all right?” If they can answer at all—they probably are. If they return a blank stare, you may have less than 30 seconds to get to them. And parents—children playing in the water make noise. When they get quiet, you get to them and find out why. Source/article: [x] Follow Ultrafacts for more facts! BOOST FOR THE SUMMER. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE. Can I just say thank you to OP for putting such a detailed description on this? I’ve been a lifeguard for 6 years now and of all the saves I’ve done, maybe two or three had people drowning in the stereotypical thrashing style. And even those, like the save I made last weekend, it was exactly like OP describes where the person’s head is going in and out of the water but it isn’t long enough to get any air. Mostly you recognize drowning by the look on someone’s face. If someone looks wide eyed and terrified or confused, chances are they’re drowning. That look of “oh shit” is pretty easily recognizable. And even if you can’t tell for sure: GO AFTER THEM ANYWAY. I’ve done “saves” where a kid was pretending to drown and I mistook it for real drowning, but that’s preferable to a kid ACTUALLY drowning. Also please remember that even strong swimmers can drown if they have a medical emergency, get cramps, or get too tired. If your friend knows how to swim but they’re acting funny get them to land. And even if someone can respond when you ask them if they need help, if they say they do need help? GO HELP THEM. However . If the victim is a stranger, I can’t recommend trying to get them. Lifeguards literally train to escape “attacks,” because people who are drowning can freak the fuck out and grab you and make YOU drown as well. If you do go in after someone, take hold of them from the back and talk to them the whole time. IF YOU ARE GRABBED: duck down into the water as low as you can get. The person is panicking and won’t want to go under water and should release you. Shove up at their hands and push them away from you as you duck under. Don’t die trying to save someone else. Please guys, read and memorize this post. Not all places have lifeguards. Being able to recognize drowning is such an important skill to have and you can save someone’s life.
Bodies , Children, and Climbing: Drowning in real life looks nothing like in the
 movies, and in fact many parents actually
 watch their children drown, having no idea
 that it's happening
 Ultrafacts.tumblr.com
faikitty:
mermaibee:

ultrafacts:

According to the CDC, in 10 percent of those drownings, the adult will actually watch the child do it, having no idea it is happening. Drowning does not look like drowning—Dr. Pia, in an article in the Coast Guard’s On Scene magazine, described the Instinctive Drowning Response like this:
“Except in rare circumstances, drowning people are physiologically unable to call out for help. The respiratory system was designed for breathing. Speech is the secondary or overlaid function. Breathing must be fulfilled before speech occurs.
Drowning people’s mouths alternately sink below and reappear above the surface of the water. The mouths of drowning people are not above the surface of the water long enough for them to exhale, inhale, and call out for help. When the drowning people’s mouths are above the surface, they exhale and inhale quickly as their mouths start to sink below the surface of the water.
Drowning people cannot wave for help. Nature instinctively forces them to extend their arms laterally and press down on the water’s surface. Pressing down on the surface of the water permits drowning people to leverage their bodies so they can lift their mouths out of the water to breathe.
Throughout the Instinctive Drowning Response, drowning people cannot voluntarily control their arm movements. Physiologically, drowning people who are struggling on the surface of the water cannot stop drowning and perform voluntary movements such as waving for help, moving toward a rescuer, or reaching out for a piece of rescue equipment.
From beginning to end of the Instinctive Drowning Response people’s bodies remain upright in the water, with no evidence of a supporting kick. Unless rescued by a trained lifeguard, these drowning people can only struggle on the surface of the water from 20 to 60 seconds before submersion occurs.”
This doesn’t mean that a person that is yelling for help and thrashing isn’t in real trouble—they are experiencing aquatic distress. Not always present before the Instinctive Drowning Response, aquatic distress doesn’t last long—but unlike true drowning, these victims can still assist in their own rescue. They can grab lifelines, throw rings, etc.
Look for these other signs of drowning when persons are in the water:
Head low in the water, mouth at water level
Head tilted back with mouth open
Eyes glassy and empty, unable to focus
Eyes closed
Hair over forehead or eyes
Not using legs—vertical
Hyperventilating or gasping
Trying to swim in a particular direction but not making headway
Trying to roll over on the back
Appear to be climbing an invisible ladder
So if a crew member falls overboard and everything looks OK—don’t be too sure. Sometimes the most common indication that someone is drowning is that they don’t look like they’re drowning. They may just look like they are treading water and looking up at the deck. One way to be sure? Ask them, “Are you all right?” If they can answer at all—they probably are. If they return a blank stare, you may have less than 30 seconds to get to them. And parents—children playing in the water make noise. When they get quiet, you get to them and find out why.
Source/article: [x] 
Follow Ultrafacts for more facts!


BOOST FOR THE SUMMER. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE.

Can I just say thank you to OP for putting such a detailed description on this?
I’ve been a lifeguard for 6 years now and of all the saves I’ve done, maybe two or three had people drowning in the stereotypical thrashing style. And even those, like the save I made last weekend, it was exactly like OP describes where the person’s head is going in and out of the water but it isn’t long enough to get any air. Mostly you recognize drowning by the look on someone’s face. If someone looks wide eyed and terrified or confused, chances are they’re drowning. That look of “oh shit” is pretty easily recognizable. And even if you can’t tell for sure: GO AFTER THEM ANYWAY. I’ve done “saves” where a kid was pretending to drown and I mistook it for real drowning, but that’s preferable to a kid ACTUALLY drowning.
Also please remember that even strong swimmers can drown if they have a medical emergency, get cramps, or get too tired. If your friend knows how to swim but they’re acting funny get them to land. And even if someone can respond when you ask them if they need help, if they say they do need help? GO HELP THEM.

However . If the victim is a stranger, I can’t recommend trying to get  them. Lifeguards literally train to escape “attacks,” because people who are drowning can freak the fuck out and grab you and make YOU drown as well. If you do go in after someone, take hold of them from the back and talk to them the whole time. IF YOU ARE GRABBED: duck down into the water as low as you can get. The person is panicking and won’t want to go under water and should release you. Shove up at their hands and push them away from you as you duck under. Don’t die trying to save someone else.
Please guys, read and memorize this post. Not all places have lifeguards. Being able to recognize drowning is such an important skill to have and you can save someone’s life.

faikitty: mermaibee: ultrafacts: According to the CDC, in 10 percent of those drownings, the adult will actually watch the child do it, ha...

Alive, Cars, and Children: THIS CHANGES THE GAME FOREVER halduron-brightwang: immortalismortem: liquidglue: b just wear the seatbelt Mmmmmmm I gotta naysay here. Seatbelts do a LOT of harm. Not everyone can wear one  and not everyone wants to risk it. Just among my own friends and people I know in general; 4 females had a breast cut completely or partially off due to a seat belt. 6 people had their throats cut, to an obviously non-lethal degree. 2 had their stomach’s cut open to a horrifying degree that I won’t elaborate on. Not even counting the uncomfortably awkward belt locations for particularly large, small, fat, skinny people. Females with large breasts get the joy of holding the belt in place or adjusting it every couple seconds. They’re awkward, uncomfortable, painful, and can often cause the injuries in an accident. Sometimes it’s just better to forgo the belt. Those injuries caused by seat belts more than very likely would have been deadly had they not been wearing them. To have enough force to cut skin or cut off a breast in an accident is far more than enough to cause someone to go flying through the windshield of a car, to slam them into the steering column, or through a window resulting in deadly injuries or causing an even bigger accident for other drivers now that your body is in the road along with your crashed car. Are you really going to risk being a smear of ground meat on the pavement because your seat belt was a little uncomfortable or it might cut you? Then I got good news for you, there’s a wide variety of devices made specifically to make seat belts more comfortable and reduce that risk. These make it so that your seat belt won’t cut your neck, a simple sleeve of padded fabric that velcros around it, meaning you can put it anywhere on the belt.  This one does something similar, by readjusting the positioning of the seat belt to move it farther away from your neck and hey, helps a bit with having boobs in the way. They even make ones for children too. Boobs still in the way? While it’s pretty silly looking, this helps keep the seat belt in place so you don’t have to keep adjusting it. And if you’re overweight, they make seat belt extenders so you can still be safe.  But maybe you’re still unsure, then listen to the CDC and all of their sources.  “More than half of the people killed in car crashes were not restrained at the time of the crash.1 Wearing a seat belt is the most effective way to prevent death and serious injury in a crash.Seat belt use is on the rise. Laws, education, and technology have increased seat belt use from 11% in 19812 to nearly 85% in 20103, saving hundreds of thousands of lives. “ “Most drivers and passengers killed in crashes are unrestrained. 53% of drivers and passengers killed in car crashes in 2009 were not wearing restraints.1Seat belts dramatically reduce risk of death and serious injury. Among drivers and front-seat passengers, seat belts reduce the risk of death by 45%, and cut the risk of serious injury by 50%.4Seat belts prevent drivers and passengers from being ejected during a crash. People not wearing a seat belt are 30 times more likely to be ejected from a vehicle during a crash. More than 3 out of 4 people who are ejected during a fatal crash die from their injuries.5Seat belts save thousands of lives each year, and increasing use would save thousands more. Seat belts saved almost 13,000 lives in 2009. If all drivers and passengers had worn seat belts that year, almost 4,000 more people would be alive today” Or this one “ The number of those who escaped injury [by wearing a seat belt] increased by 40% and those with mild and moderate injuries decreased by 35% after seatbelt legislation. There was a significant reduction in soft tissue injuries to the head. Only whiplash injuries to the neck showed a significant increase.” Or this “ Fifty-five percent of those killed in passenger vehicle occupant crashes in 2008 were not wearing a seat belt…” “Wearing a seat belt reduces the risk of fatal injury by almost 50%. For children, the risk of fatal injury is reduced by 71% with the use of child safety seats.“ “Of those thrown completely out of a vehicle in a car crash, 75% died. Only one percent of people totally ejected from their cars had on a seat belt during the crash. Over 30% were not wearing seat belts.“ Conclusion? Wear your fucking seat belt. Tell your kids to wear their fucking seat belt. Tell your friends and family to wear their fucking seat belts. Time and time again it’s been proven that you are significantly more likely to survive a crash if you’re wearing one. Most people think they’re uncomfortable, but when you’re in a crash it can save your life. I’d rather be mildly injured than dead. Wear your seat belt.
Alive, Cars, and Children: THIS CHANGES THE GAME FOREVER
halduron-brightwang:

immortalismortem:

liquidglue:


b just wear the seatbelt


Mmmmmmm
I gotta naysay here. Seatbelts do a LOT of harm. Not everyone can wear one  and not everyone wants to risk it. Just among my own friends and people I know in general; 4 females had a breast cut completely or partially off due to a seat belt. 6 people had their throats cut, to an obviously non-lethal degree. 2 had their stomach’s cut open to a horrifying degree that I won’t elaborate on.
Not even counting the uncomfortably awkward belt locations for particularly large, small, fat, skinny people. Females with large breasts get the joy of holding the belt in place or adjusting it every couple seconds.
They’re awkward, uncomfortable, painful, and can often cause the injuries in an accident. Sometimes it’s just better to forgo the belt.

Those injuries caused by seat belts more than very likely would have been deadly had they not been wearing them. To have enough force to cut skin or cut off a breast in an accident is far more than enough to cause someone to go flying through the windshield of a car, to slam them into the steering column, or through a window resulting in deadly injuries or causing an even bigger accident for other drivers now that your body is in the road along with your crashed car. Are you really going to risk being a smear of ground meat on the pavement because your seat belt was a little uncomfortable or it might cut you? Then I got good news for you, there’s a wide variety of devices made specifically to make seat belts more comfortable and reduce that risk.
These make it so that your seat belt won’t cut your neck, a simple sleeve of padded fabric that velcros around it, meaning you can put it anywhere on the belt. 
This one does something similar, by readjusting the positioning of the seat belt to move it farther away from your neck and hey, helps a bit with having boobs in the way.
They even make ones for children too.
Boobs still in the way? While it’s pretty silly looking, this helps keep the seat belt in place so you don’t have to keep adjusting it.
And if you’re overweight, they make seat belt extenders so you can still be safe. 
But maybe you’re still unsure, then listen to the CDC and all of their sources. 
“More than half of the people killed in car crashes were not restrained at the time of the crash.1 Wearing a seat belt is the most effective way to prevent death and serious injury in a crash.Seat belt use is on the rise. Laws, education, and technology have increased seat belt use from 11% in 19812 to nearly 85% in 20103, saving hundreds of thousands of lives. “
“Most drivers and passengers killed in crashes are unrestrained. 53% of drivers and passengers killed in car crashes in 2009 were not wearing restraints.1Seat belts dramatically reduce risk of death and serious injury. Among drivers and front-seat passengers, seat belts reduce the risk of death by 45%, and cut the risk of serious injury by 50%.4Seat belts prevent drivers and passengers from being ejected during a crash. People not wearing a seat belt are 30 times more likely to be ejected from a vehicle during a crash. More than 3 out of 4 people who are ejected during a fatal crash die from their injuries.5Seat belts save thousands of lives each year, and increasing use would save thousands more. Seat belts saved almost 13,000 lives in 2009. If all drivers and passengers had worn seat belts that year, almost 4,000 more people would be alive today”
Or this one
“

 The number of those who escaped injury [by wearing a seat belt] increased by 40% and those with mild and moderate injuries decreased by 35% after seatbelt legislation. There was a significant reduction in soft tissue injuries to the head. Only whiplash injuries to the neck showed a significant increase.”
Or this
“

Fifty-five percent of those killed in passenger vehicle occupant crashes in 2008 were not wearing a seat belt…”
“Wearing a seat belt reduces the risk of fatal injury by almost 50%. For children, the risk of fatal injury is reduced by 71% with the use of child safety seats.“
“Of those thrown completely out of a vehicle in a car crash, 75% died. Only one percent of people totally ejected from their cars had on a seat belt during the crash. Over 30% were not wearing seat belts.“
Conclusion? Wear your fucking seat belt. Tell your kids to wear their fucking seat belt. Tell your friends and family to wear their fucking seat belts. Time and time again it’s been proven that you are significantly more likely to survive a crash if you’re wearing one. Most people think they’re uncomfortable, but when you’re in a crash it can save your life. I’d rather be mildly injured than dead.
Wear your seat belt.

halduron-brightwang: immortalismortem: liquidglue: b just wear the seatbelt Mmmmmmm I gotta naysay here. Seatbelts do a LOT of harm. N...

Gif, Tumblr, and Blog: GOA @GunOwners CDC research shows there have been up to 2.5 million defensive gun uses a year; however, this study was never released to the public. Unpublished CDC Study Confirms over 2 Million Annual Defensive Gun Uses breitbart.com <p><a href="https://libertybill.tumblr.com/post/173203773332/inked-up-nomad-whiskey-gunpowder-strange-i" class="tumblr_blog">libertybill</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a href="https://inked-up-nomad.tumblr.com/post/173203381382/whiskey-gunpowder-strange-i-never-heard-about" class="tumblr_blog">inked-up-nomad</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a href="https://whiskey-gunpowder.tumblr.com/post/173202363116/strange-i-never-heard-about-this-on-far-left-npr" class="tumblr_blog">whiskey-gunpowder</a>:</p> <blockquote><p>strange…. i never heard about this on far left NPR</p></blockquote> <figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="480" data-orig-width="480" data-tumblr-attribution="idolos-frases:7IHjW5Ql0rLTCC8Xb5W7tg:ZWlCLn2LDKXMz"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/0b123122a29aff656adf6ea554da33ba/tumblr_opaw9q7acN1tdymm0o1_500.gif" data-orig-height="480" data-orig-width="480"/></figure></blockquote> <p>Here’s an actual link.</p><p><a href="https://reason.com/blog/2018/04/20/cdc-provides-more-evidence-that-plenty-o">https://reason.com/blog/2018/04/20/cdc-provides-more-evidence-that-plenty-o</a></p></blockquote>
Gif, Tumblr, and Blog: GOA
 @GunOwners
 CDC research shows there have been
 up to 2.5 million defensive gun uses a
 year; however, this study was never
 released to the public.
 Unpublished CDC Study Confirms over 2
 Million Annual Defensive Gun Uses
 breitbart.com
<p><a href="https://libertybill.tumblr.com/post/173203773332/inked-up-nomad-whiskey-gunpowder-strange-i" class="tumblr_blog">libertybill</a>:</p>

<blockquote><p><a href="https://inked-up-nomad.tumblr.com/post/173203381382/whiskey-gunpowder-strange-i-never-heard-about" class="tumblr_blog">inked-up-nomad</a>:</p>

<blockquote><p><a href="https://whiskey-gunpowder.tumblr.com/post/173202363116/strange-i-never-heard-about-this-on-far-left-npr" class="tumblr_blog">whiskey-gunpowder</a>:</p>

<blockquote><p>strange…. i never heard about this on far left NPR</p></blockquote>

<figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="480" data-orig-width="480" data-tumblr-attribution="idolos-frases:7IHjW5Ql0rLTCC8Xb5W7tg:ZWlCLn2LDKXMz"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/0b123122a29aff656adf6ea554da33ba/tumblr_opaw9q7acN1tdymm0o1_500.gif" data-orig-height="480" data-orig-width="480"/></figure></blockquote>

<p>Here’s an actual link.</p><p><a href="https://reason.com/blog/2018/04/20/cdc-provides-more-evidence-that-plenty-o">https://reason.com/blog/2018/04/20/cdc-provides-more-evidence-that-plenty-o</a></p></blockquote>

libertybill: inked-up-nomad: whiskey-gunpowder: strange…. i never heard about this on far left NPR Here’s an actual link.https://reaso...

Alive, Cars, and Children: THIS CHANGES THE GAME FOREVER notthatjaded: kittydesade: squirtle-daddy: hunter-rodrigez: hebangshebangs: badgengar: halduron-brightwang: immortalismortem: liquidglue: b just wear the seatbelt Mmmmmmm I gotta naysay here. Seatbelts do a LOT of harm. Not everyone can wear one  and not everyone wants to risk it. Just among my own friends and people I know in general; 4 females had a breast cut completely or partially off due to a seat belt. 6 people had their throats cut, to an obviously non-lethal degree. 2 had their stomach’s cut open to a horrifying degree that I won’t elaborate on. Not even counting the uncomfortably awkward belt locations for particularly large, small, fat, skinny people. Females with large breasts get the joy of holding the belt in place or adjusting it every couple seconds. They’re awkward, uncomfortable, painful, and can often cause the injuries in an accident. Sometimes it’s just better to forgo the belt. Those injuries caused by seat belts more than very likely would have been deadly had they not been wearing them. To have enough force to cut skin or cut off a breast in an accident is far more than enough to cause someone to go flying through the windshield of a car, to slam them into the steering column, or through a window resulting in deadly injuries or causing an even bigger accident for other drivers now that your body is in the road along with your crashed car. Are you really going to risk being a smear of ground meat on the pavement because your seat belt was a little uncomfortable or it might cut you? Then I got good news for you, there’s a wide variety of devices made specifically to make seat belts more comfortable and reduce that risk. These make it so that your seat belt won’t cut your neck, a simple sleeve of padded fabric that velcros around it, meaning you can put it anywhere on the belt.  This one does something similar, by readjusting the positioning of the seat belt to move it farther away from your neck and hey, helps a bit with having boobs in the way. They even make ones for children too. Boobs still in the way? While it’s pretty silly looking, this helps keep the seat belt in place so you don’t have to keep adjusting it. And if you’re overweight, they make seat belt extenders so you can still be safe.  But maybe you’re still unsure, then listen to the CDC and all of their sources.  “More than half of the people killed in car crashes were not restrained at the time of the crash.1 Wearing a seat belt is the most effective way to prevent death and serious injury in a crash.Seat belt use is on the rise. Laws, education, and technology have increased seat belt use from 11% in 19812 to nearly 85% in 20103, saving hundreds of thousands of lives. “ “Most drivers and passengers killed in crashes are unrestrained. 53% of drivers and passengers killed in car crashes in 2009 were not wearing restraints.1Seat belts dramatically reduce risk of death and serious injury. Among drivers and front-seat passengers, seat belts reduce the risk of death by 45%, and cut the risk of serious injury by 50%.4Seat belts prevent drivers and passengers from being ejected during a crash. People not wearing a seat belt are 30 times more likely to be ejected from a vehicle during a crash. More than 3 out of 4 people who are ejected during a fatal crash die from their injuries.5Seat belts save thousands of lives each year, and increasing use would save thousands more. Seat belts saved almost 13,000 lives in 2009. If all drivers and passengers had worn seat belts that year, almost 4,000 more people would be alive today” Or this one “ The number of those who escaped injury [by wearing a seat belt] increased by 40% and those with mild and moderate injuries decreased by 35% after seatbelt legislation. There was a significant reduction in soft tissue injuries to the head. Only whiplash injuries to the neck showed a significant increase.” Or this “ Fifty-five percent of those killed in passenger vehicle occupant crashes in 2008 were not wearing a seat belt…” “Wearing a seat belt reduces the risk of fatal injury by almost 50%. For children, the risk of fatal injury is reduced by 71% with the use of child safety seats.“ “Of those thrown completely out of a vehicle in a car crash, 75% died. Only one percent of people totally ejected from their cars had on a seat belt during the crash. Over 30% were not wearing seat belts.“ Conclusion? Wear your fucking seat belt. Tell your kids to wear their fucking seat belt. Tell your friends and family to wear their fucking seat belts. Time and time again it’s been proven that you are significantly more likely to survive a crash if you’re wearing one. Most people think they’re uncomfortable, but when you’re in a crash it can save your life. I’d rather be mildly injured than dead. Wear your seat belt. 2017 and people are still trying to spread the myth that you don’t need to wear a seatbelt. People really don’t wear a seatbelt???? This reminds me of a story from WW1  When they first introduced Helmets to the troops fighting in trenches the number of head injuries suddenly skyrocketed and people wanted to take the helmets away again. Until they realized that the reason for this was the fact that most of these head injuries would have been fatal if it wasn’t for the Helmets. You always need to look at the bigger picture.   Lmfao ya rather save ya tiddies than go flying through the fucking windshield some of you guys are crazy Flying through windshields will also disembowel you and cut off your tits. I’m just saying. I was in a single car accident years back in my first car. If it weren’t for a tree ‘catching’ me I probably would’ve gone rolling. I was wearing a seatbelt. I climbed out of the car (out of the sunroof, actually, because the doors were jammed). The police that stopped and helped me basically said they’d seen people NOT climb out of accidents like that (and lesser ones!) because they’d not been wearing their seatbelts when it happened. Wear your damn seatbelts, people.
Alive, Cars, and Children: THIS CHANGES THE GAME FOREVER
notthatjaded:
kittydesade:

squirtle-daddy:

hunter-rodrigez:

hebangshebangs:

badgengar:

halduron-brightwang:

immortalismortem:

liquidglue:


b just wear the seatbelt


Mmmmmmm
I gotta naysay here. Seatbelts do a LOT of harm. Not everyone can wear one  and not everyone wants to risk it. Just among my own friends and people I know in general; 4 females had a breast cut completely or partially off due to a seat belt. 6 people had their throats cut, to an obviously non-lethal degree. 2 had their stomach’s cut open to a horrifying degree that I won’t elaborate on.
Not even counting the uncomfortably awkward belt locations for particularly large, small, fat, skinny people. Females with large breasts get the joy of holding the belt in place or adjusting it every couple seconds.
They’re awkward, uncomfortable, painful, and can often cause the injuries in an accident. Sometimes it’s just better to forgo the belt.

Those injuries caused by seat belts more than very likely would have been deadly had they not been wearing them. To have enough force to cut skin or cut off a breast in an accident is far more than enough to cause someone to go flying through the windshield of a car, to slam them into the steering column, or through a window resulting in deadly injuries or causing an even bigger accident for other drivers now that your body is in the road along with your crashed car. Are you really going to risk being a smear of ground meat on the pavement because your seat belt was a little uncomfortable or it might cut you? Then I got good news for you, there’s a wide variety of devices made specifically to make seat belts more comfortable and reduce that risk.
These make it so that your seat belt won’t cut your neck, a simple sleeve of padded fabric that velcros around it, meaning you can put it anywhere on the belt. 
This one does something similar, by readjusting the positioning of the seat belt to move it farther away from your neck and hey, helps a bit with having boobs in the way.
They even make ones for children too.
Boobs still in the way? While it’s pretty silly looking, this helps keep the seat belt in place so you don’t have to keep adjusting it.
And if you’re overweight, they make seat belt extenders so you can still be safe. 
But maybe you’re still unsure, then listen to the CDC and all of their sources. 
“More than half of the people killed in car crashes were not restrained at the time of the crash.1 Wearing a seat belt is the most effective way to prevent death and serious injury in a crash.Seat belt use is on the rise. Laws, education, and technology have increased seat belt use from 11% in 19812 to nearly 85% in 20103, saving hundreds of thousands of lives. “
“Most drivers and passengers killed in crashes are unrestrained. 53% of drivers and passengers killed in car crashes in 2009 were not wearing restraints.1Seat belts dramatically reduce risk of death and serious injury. Among drivers and front-seat passengers, seat belts reduce the risk of death by 45%, and cut the risk of serious injury by 50%.4Seat belts prevent drivers and passengers from being ejected during a crash. People not wearing a seat belt are 30 times more likely to be ejected from a vehicle during a crash. More than 3 out of 4 people who are ejected during a fatal crash die from their injuries.5Seat belts save thousands of lives each year, and increasing use would save thousands more. Seat belts saved almost 13,000 lives in 2009. If all drivers and passengers had worn seat belts that year, almost 4,000 more people would be alive today”
Or this one
“

 The number of those who escaped injury [by wearing a seat belt] increased by 40% and those with mild and moderate injuries decreased by 35% after seatbelt legislation. There was a significant reduction in soft tissue injuries to the head. Only whiplash injuries to the neck showed a significant increase.”
Or this
“

Fifty-five percent of those killed in passenger vehicle occupant crashes in 2008 were not wearing a seat belt…”
“Wearing a seat belt reduces the risk of fatal injury by almost 50%. For children, the risk of fatal injury is reduced by 71% with the use of child safety seats.“
“Of those thrown completely out of a vehicle in a car crash, 75% died. Only one percent of people totally ejected from their cars had on a seat belt during the crash. Over 30% were not wearing seat belts.“
Conclusion? Wear your fucking seat belt. Tell your kids to wear their fucking seat belt. Tell your friends and family to wear their fucking seat belts. Time and time again it’s been proven that you are significantly more likely to survive a crash if you’re wearing one. Most people think they’re uncomfortable, but when you’re in a crash it can save your life. I’d rather be mildly injured than dead.
Wear your seat belt.

2017 and people are still trying to spread the myth that you don’t need to wear a seatbelt.


People really don’t wear a seatbelt????

This reminds me of a story from WW1 
When they first introduced Helmets to the troops fighting in trenches the number of head injuries suddenly skyrocketed and people wanted to take the helmets away again.
Until they realized that the reason for this was the fact that most of these head injuries would have been fatal if it wasn’t for the Helmets.
You always need to look at the bigger picture.  


Lmfao ya rather save ya tiddies than go flying through the fucking windshield some of you guys are crazy 

Flying through windshields will also disembowel you and cut off your tits. I’m just saying.

I was in a single car accident years back in my first car. If it weren’t for a tree ‘catching’ me I probably would’ve gone rolling.
I was wearing a seatbelt. I climbed out of the car (out of the sunroof, actually, because the doors were jammed).
The police that stopped and helped me basically said they’d seen people NOT climb out of accidents like that (and lesser ones!) because they’d not been wearing their seatbelts when it happened.
Wear your damn seatbelts, people.

notthatjaded: kittydesade: squirtle-daddy: hunter-rodrigez: hebangshebangs: badgengar: halduron-brightwang: immortalismortem: liquidg...

Being Alone, America, and Anaconda: asic KOSHER DILL SPEARS 2924 8 924 1 <p><a href="http://therevenantrising.tumblr.com/post/135827422115/garregret-therevenantrising-garregret" class="tumblr_blog">therevenantrising</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://garregret.tumblr.com/post/135810589826">garregret</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://therevenantrising.tumblr.com/post/135540905500">therevenantrising</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://garregret.tumblr.com/post/135517237536">garregret</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://therevenantrising.tumblr.com/post/135479826270">therevenantrising</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://pushingpin.tumblr.com/post/135479128813">pushingpin</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://jingle-brrrrt.tumblr.com/post/135448815816">jingle-brrrrt</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://metal-queer-solid.tumblr.com/post/134386190976">metal-queer-solid</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://0122358.tumblr.com/post/134383153016">0122358</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://therevenantrising.tumblr.com/post/134381412470">therevenantrising</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://shelovespiano.tumblr.com/post/134380537619">shelovespiano</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://kaisernighthawk1996.tumblr.com/post/134342240504">kaisernighthawk1996</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://feels-by-the-foot.tumblr.com/post/134299613814">feels-by-the-foot</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://therevenantrising.tumblr.com/post/134299542770">therevenantrising</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://neuroxin.tumblr.com/post/134298026257">neuroxin</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://pizzaotter.tumblr.com/post/134294057737">pizzaotter</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://madmints.tumblr.com/post/134293259422">madmints</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://pizzaotter.tumblr.com/post/134280963537">pizzaotter</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://bolt-carrier-assembly.tumblr.com/post/133694853738">bolt-carrier-assembly</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://therevenantrising.tumblr.com/post/133689796940">therevenantrising</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://therevenantrising.tumblr.com/post/133689234535">therevenantrising</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p>Mak N Cheese<br/></p> </blockquote> <p>Not to be confused with Mac N Cheese.</p> <figure data-orig-width="3264" data-orig-height="1840" class="tmblr-full"><img data-orig-width="3264" data-orig-height="1840" src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/49bb53d1810cdc4a6c5f1fa9e40355ae/tumblr_inline_ny6xsoZgNT1sh8jq3_540.jpg"/></figure></blockquote> <p><figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="1802" data-orig-width="3246"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/e723085af378cad726af085c2220068f/tumblr_inline_ny72aotJ7s1r4zl7m_540.jpg" data-orig-height="1802" data-orig-width="3246"/></figure></p> <p>Also in the Big Mac variety</p> </blockquote> <p>WhY do you people have automatic weapons</p> </blockquote> <p>Even if they are automatic (which they most likely aren’t), why does it matter to you?</p> </blockquote> <p>Look at all these gun nuts coming out the woodwork cause I asked why people randomly have automatic weapons on cheese</p> </blockquote> <p>Gun obsession is so fucking gross. There is no valid logical rational reason why any normal US citizen should own a machine literally designed for no other purpose than to kill human beings. Do not try to give some weak ass justification when “because I like them” is all it actually fucking boils down to. A disgustingly huge amount of people are DYING to these things every month, just trying to go about their normal lives. That trumps your ill-chosen hobby. </p> <p>There is no solution better than the one that several European countries and the Australians have proven works, anything else is a less-effective compromise so that you, again, can get off on owning a literal killing machine.</p> </blockquote> <p>This was supposed to be a light-hearted and fun joke post, but fine.  Let’s do this.<br/></p> <h2><b>There is no valid logical rational reason why any normal US citizen should own a machine literally designed for no other purpose than to kill human beings.</b></h2> <p>I own several guns and have shot literally thousands of rounds over the last couple of years, yet I haven’t killed or even harmed a single living creature.  Huh…  I guess my guns must be broken since they can’t even fulfill their “only purpose”.</p> <h2> <b>A disgustingly huge amount of people are DYING to these things every month, just trying to go about their normal lives.  That trumps your ill-chosen hobby.</b><br/></h2> <p>Many anti-gun advocates will point out that there were 33,000 people killed by guns in 2013.  While this is a terrible number, we must also put this number into perspective against the grand scheme of things.  There are an estimated 340-370+ MILLION legally owned guns in America, not even including illegal black markets that we cannot effectively track.  This means that, even if we use conservative estimations, literally over 99.99% of the guns in America didn’t kill a single person in 2013.</p> <p>When we look at the big picture, your chances of being harmed by a gun are actually very low.<br/></p> <p><b>Chances of being shot or killed based on firearm deaths and population count:</b></p> <p><b>Death by gun, suicide excluded:</b><br/>0.0032%</p> <p><b>Death by gun, suicide included:</b><br/>0.0095%</p> <p><b>Death in a mass shooting alone:</b><br/>0.000032%</p> <p><b>Injury by gun, no death:</b><br/>0.024%</p> <p><b>Death of injury by gun including suicide:</b><br/>0.033%</p> <p>Gun deaths and injuries etc based off general stats used by anti gun people, rather than exact numbers from each year because its faster and easier to do. Going by exact yearly figures would result in very little change to the average numbers used above.</p> <p><b>Guns compared to other ways you can die:</b></p> <p><b> Unintentional fall deaths:</b></p> <ul><li>Number of deaths: 26,009</li> <li>Deaths per 100,000 population: 8.4</li> </ul><p><b>Motor vehicle traffic deaths:</b></p> <ul><li>Number of deaths: 33,687</li> <li>Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.9</li> </ul><p><b>Unintentional poisoning deaths: </b></p> <ul><li>Number of deaths: 33,041</li> <li>Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.7</li> </ul><p><b>All poisoning deaths:</b></p> <ul><li>Number of deaths: 42,917</li> <li>Deaths per 100,000 population: 13.9</li> </ul><p><b>All Drug poisoning deaths:</b></p> <ul><li>Deaths per 100,000 population: 12.4 (2010)</li></ul><p><b>All firearm deaths (suicide included):</b></p> <ul><li>Number of deaths: 31,672</li> <li>Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.3</li> </ul><p><b>All firearms deaths (suicide excluded):</b></p> <ul><li>Number of deaths: 12,664 <br/></li> <li>Deaths per 100,000 population: 3.6</li> </ul><p><b>Firearm deaths broken down completely:</b></p> <p>3.6 for homicide <br/>6.3 for suicide<br/>0.30 for unintentional <br/>0.10 undetermined</p> <p> 10.3 for deaths total in general of 3.6 for homicide only. You are more likely to trip and die than be killed by a gun. Cars kill more than guns but are not even protected by the constitution and isn’t a right, and are less regulated than guns! </p> <p> <i>[Sources are <a href="https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8">FBI</a> and <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdf">CDC</a>]</i></p> <p>Many people will also cite mass shootings as a reason that guns are evil and should be banned, but this assertion also falls flat and looks ridiculous when put into perspective.  While these stories draw media attention and are absolutely horrible, you seem to have casually and conveniently left out the part where these attacks account for less than even one quarter of 1% of America’s overall murder rate.  About 0.2% to be more exact.</p> <figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="317" data-orig-width="500"><img data-orig-height="317" data-orig-width="500" src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/bc45a6b149582a24ee012977c76ca402/tumblr_inline_nynm1mUXyB1sh8jq3_540.jpg"/></figure><p>Now, let’s compare this, how often guns are used to harm innocent lives, to how often guns are used to protect innocent lives.</p> <p>Guns help protect innocent lives FAR MORE OFTEN than they help to harm innocent lives.   There are literally hundreds of thousands of defensive gun uses in this country alone every single year.</p> <p><a href="http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/category/defensivegunuseoftheday/">http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/category/defensivegunuseoftheday/</a></p> <p><a href="http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cdc-study-use-firearms-self-defense-important-crime-deterrent">http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cdc-study-use-firearms-self-defense-important-crime-deterrent</a></p> <p><a href="http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cdc-study-use-firearms-self-defense-important-crime-deterrent">http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cdc-study-use-firearms-self-defense-important-crime-deterrent</a></p> <p><a href="http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/02/defensive-gun-ownership-gary-kleck-response-115082.html#.VcYed_lRK1w">http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/02/defensive-gun-ownership-gary-kleck-response-115082.html#.VcYed_lRK1w</a></p> <p>Quite simply put, guns save innocent lives.  And they do so far more often than they hurt them.  When guns are harming more innocent lives than they are protecting, it could be argued that it might make sense to further limit guns.</p> <p>But for now, it’s not even close.  Moving on…<br/></p> <h2><b>There is no solution better than the one that several European countries and the Australians have proven works, anything else is a less-effective compromise so that you, again, can get off on owning a literal killing machine.</b></h2> <p>Sorry, but strict gun control has been an absolute failure in both Australia, The UK, and everywhere else it has tried.  It has done nothing to effectively reduce murder, violent crime, suicide, or even gun violence rates.  It has done nothing to achieve its desired goal of creating a safer society.  It is, and always will be, a complete failure.</p> <p><b>Australia:</b></p> <p><i>[this segment brought to you by <a href="http://lee-enfeel.tumblr.com">lee-enfeel</a>]</i><br/></p> <p><a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/is-australia-staring-down-the-barrel-of-a-gun-crisis/story-fncynjr2-1226690018325">People die Australia as a result of firearms violence at almost the same rate they did prior to the firearms act</a>, and some sources state that more than a quarter million illicit firearms exist in Australia currently.</p> <p>The <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/productsbytitle/9C85BD1298C075EACA2568A900139342?OpenDocument">total firearms death rate in 1995 </a>- the year before the massacre and the laws introduced - was 2.6 per 100,000 people. The total firearms murder rate that year was 0.3/100,000. From 1980-1995, Australian firearms deaths dropped from 4.9/100,000-2.6/100,000 without the implementation of firearms laws. This is a rate of decline that has remained fairly constant; Looking at 1996-2014, in which the rate has dropped from 2.6-0.86, it shows that the decline has been slower in a longer period of time since the law’s passing. Likewise, homicides declined more quickly in the 15 years prior to the firearms laws (0.8-0.3) than in the 18 years since it (0.3-0.1). This just indicates that firearms deaths haven’t been noticeably affected by the legislation you’ve claimed has done so much to decrease gun crime. <br/></p> <p>It should also be noted that around the same time, New Zealand experienced a similar mass shooting, but did not change their existing firearms laws, which remain fairly lax; even moreso than some American states like California, New York, or Connecticut. Despite this, their firearms crime rate has declined fairly steadily as well, and they haven’t experienced a mass shooting since.</p> <p>The <i>“australia banned guns and now they’re fine”</i> argument is really old and really poorly put together. Gun control is little more than a pink band-aid on the sucking chest wound that is America’s social and economic problems. It’s a ‘quick fix’ issue used by politicians to skirt around solving the roots of the violence problem in the United States, which are primarily poverty, lack of opportunities, and lack of education.</p> <p>You could ban guns tomorrow nationwide and gun violence and overall violent crime would not be reduced at all.</p> <p><i>[this segment brought to you by <a href="http://tmblr.co/m9F_132GzodNt-UaipnK67g">cerebralzero</a>]</i></p> <p>In 2005 the head of the New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, Don Weatherburn,<sup><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia#cite_note-37">[37]</a></sup> noted that the level of legal gun ownership in NSW increased in recent years, and that the 1996 legislation had had little to no effect on violence</p> <p>In 2006, the lack of a measurable effect from the 1996 firearms legislation was reported in the British Journal of Criminology. Using ARIMA analysis, Dr Jeanine Baker and Dr Samara McPhedran found no evidence for an impact of the laws on homicide.<sup><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia#cite_note-40">[40]</a></sup></p> <p>A study coauthored by Simon Chapman <b>found declines in firearm‐related deaths before the law reforms</b> accelerated after the reforms for total firearm deaths (p=0.04), firearm suicides (p=0.007) and firearm homicides (p=0.15), but not for the smallest category of unintentional firearm deaths, which increased.<sup><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia#cite_note-43">[43]</a></sup></p> <p>Subsequently, a study by McPhedran and Baker compared the incidence of mass shootings in <b>Australia and New Zealand</b>. Data were standardised to a rate per 100,000 people, to control for differences in population size between the countries and mass shootings before and after 1996/1997 were compared between countries. <b>That study found that in the period 1980–1996, both countries experienced mass shootings. The rate did not differ significantly between countries. Since 1996-1997, neither country has experienced a mass shooting event despite the continued availability of semi-automatic longarms in New Zealand</b>. The authors conclude that “the hypothesis that Australia’s prohibition of certain types of firearms explains the absence of mass shootings in that country since 1996 does not appear to be supported… if civilian access to certain types of firearms explained the occurrence of mass shootings in Australia (and conversely, if prohibiting such firearms explains the absence of mass shootings), then New Zealand (a country that still allows the ownership of such firearms) would have continued to experience mass shooting events.”<sup><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia#cite_note-44">[44]</a></sup></p> <figure data-orig-width="500" data-orig-height="261" class="tmblr-full"><img data-orig-width="500" data-orig-height="261" src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/cdc45e76a09651676eab1f058341110c/tumblr_inline_nynm84pBjF1sh8jq3_500.gif"/></figure><p>We see the same trend in The UK.</p> <figure data-orig-width="500" data-orig-height="373" class="tmblr-full"><img data-orig-width="500" data-orig-height="373" src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/bf599e784e9963b91a4e4f245fed90f5/tumblr_inline_nynm9wKrKT1sh8jq3_540.png"/></figure><figure data-orig-width="458" data-orig-height="366" class="tmblr-full"><img data-orig-width="458" data-orig-height="366" src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/279f61b9c596b97badd4bc465cc46b60/tumblr_inline_nynm9zWkxr1sh8jq3_540.png"/></figure><p>And Ireland and Jamaica…</p> <figure data-orig-width="453" data-orig-height="714" class="tmblr-full"><img data-orig-width="453" data-orig-height="714" src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/4914c912d5690b40a382b90cf18c646f/tumblr_inline_nynmakqIup1sh8jq3_540.jpg"/></figure><p>And on and on and on…  Gun control simply does not create a safer society and often times actually has the opposite effect.</p> <p>At this point I should also probably point out that Australia’s gun laws have not even reduced gun ownership in Australia.  <a href="http://louderwithcrowder.com/australian-gun-ownership-rises-gun-crime-remains-low-america-still-at-fault/">In fact, gun ownership in Australia is actually higher now than in 1996.</a></p> <p>All of these inconvenient facts aside, we haven’t even touched on the cost of implementing Australian style gun control in America.</p> <p>I keep hearing people say that the US should adopt Australia’s gun control policy and I don’t think they have really thought about the big picture of that plan.</p> <p>Australia had far less guns per person and people in their country did not live in a society that was brought up respecting The 2nd Amendment.  The culture of Australia is very different than that of the culture of America when it comes to gun ownership and self defense.</p> <p>Because of this, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_buyback_program#Australia">the Australian government was able to buy back 631,000 guns at the estimated price of about <b>$500,000,000.</b></a>  You read that correctly, <b>500 MILLION</b>.</p> <p><a href="http://cerebralzero.tumblr.com/tagged/australia">And even after all of that, it still did nothing to prevent violent crime and criminals in Australia still have access to illegal guns, </a>despite being an island country that isn’t bordered by other countries with high violent crime rates and rampant with illegal drug cartels.<br/></p> <p>There are over 360,000,000 legally owned firearms in America.  If we go by Australia’s numbers (<b>$792.39 per gun</b>), these guns would cost our government <b>$285,261,489,698.89</b> to buy back.  Almost <b>300 BILLION dollars</b>, assuming that every gun owner voluntarily turns in their guns…  Which is a very slim to nothing chance.</p> <p>Who’s going to pay for that?  Anti-gunners?  I think not.</p> <p>So, in closing, you want America to put in place gun legislation that will cost the country hundreds of billions of dollars <b>AND </b>has already been proven time and time again to be completely ineffective at protecting innocent lives or creating a safer society?</p> <p>Seems pretty silly.</p> <h2>Get dunked on, nerd.</h2> <figure data-orig-width="250" data-orig-height="188"><img data-orig-width="250" data-orig-height="188" src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/36a75ffd7a3ce392092201d3769d443e/tumblr_inline_nynmeusS661sh8jq3_500.gif"/></figure></blockquote> <p><figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="281" data-orig-width="500" data-tumblr-attribution="eonline:S4A57ljapSvQXLPM7Jsomg:ZCTZKx1sDpydf"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/5b521c18948099c6594a510905c6dfe9/tumblr_nt8sq3NZGm1qlgbzbo1_500.gif" data-orig-height="281" data-orig-width="500"/></figure></p> </blockquote> <p>Teehee, Mac ‘n’ cheese</p> </blockquote> <p>Would make it clear that a gv’t buyback has never been on the table. Also, cars are registered, which is reasonable. Gun shows have too many loopholes. America has a specific culture that is unique when it comes to guns. Not sure anything we do will make people feel truly safe, but reasonable measures are worth a try. Thorough background checks are reasonable. Taking away all guns? Not so much. Good thing is, very few advocate for that.</p> </blockquote> <h2><b>Would make it clear that a gv’t buyback has never been on the table.</b></h2> <p>Maybe not a mandatory federal one, no.  But government gun buybacks are most certainly a thing here in America.</p> <h2><b>Also, cars are registered, which is reasonable.</b></h2> <p>You know that guns are not cars, right?</p> <h2><b>Gun shows have too many loopholes.</b></h2> <p>What loopholes would those be?  Please enlighten us.</p> <h2><b>Not sure anything we do will make people feel truly safe, but reasonable measures are worth a try.<br/></b></h2> <p>The fact is, WE HAVE TRIED STRICT NATIONAL GUN CONTROL.</p> <p>Does the year 1994 or the name Clinton ring a bell to anyone?  Anyone?</p> <p>From 1994 - 2004, there were strict national gun control laws in place in America.  They included most of the laws that are being proposed now.   An “assault weapons” ban.  Magazine capacity limits.  All of that.</p> <p><a href="https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/204431.pdf">Guess what?</a></p> <p><a href="https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/204431.pdf">IT WAS A COMPLETE FAILURE.</a></p> <h2><b>Thorough background checks are reasonable.</b></h2> <p>We already have mandatory federal NICS background checks, where the buyer’s criminal and mental healthy history are reviewed and have to be approved by the FBI, for every FFL purchase.</p> <h2><b>Taking away all guns? Not so much. Good thing is, very few advocate for that.</b></h2> <p>Except for people in politics, the media, and every social media platform I can think advocate for just that every single day.<br/></p> </blockquote> <p>Rekt</p> </blockquote> <p><figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="500" data-orig-width="500"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/06dc5d6fb9a872f66494555df3d8e68d/tumblr_inline_nyq063shKC1qmqn62_540.jpg" data-orig-height="500" data-orig-width="500"/></figure></p> </blockquote> <p><figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-width="300" data-orig-height="152" data-tumblr-attribution="sweetnighttheorist:iC3ZUAaLREBo5eAyAtwOWw:Z_9d1l1pDjh9p" data-orig-src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/68abc0e9798bcb3c43bc230a5ab9e9e0/tumblr_nr9gyqXCqt1uqa8bho1_400.gif"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/68abc0e9798bcb3c43bc230a5ab9e9e0/tumblr_inline_nzkb0efWgQ1t5zudu_500.gif" data-orig-width="300" data-orig-height="152" data-orig-src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/68abc0e9798bcb3c43bc230a5ab9e9e0/tumblr_nr9gyqXCqt1uqa8bho1_400.gif"/></figure></p> </blockquote> <p>but like if you could save 33000 peoples lives a year, by giving up a hobby would you?</p> </blockquote> <p>A hobby?  Sure.  No problem.</p> <p>However, me owning a gun is not merely a hobby.  It is the most effective tool at protecting my life, the lives of my family, and the lives of innocent lives around me.  I’m sorry, but self defense and self preservation are not “hobbies”.</p> <p>Furthermore, it’s a bit of pipe dream anyway considering that we have decades of evidence from all over the world that proves that gun control and even gun bans do not effectively reduce murder or violent crime rates.  They do not create safer societies.  Sure, it might look good on paper and feel good to think about, but reality just doesn’t align with those dreams.<br/></p> </blockquote> <p>hey I’m glad for all the sources because this is changing my perspective but you gotta admit that at the very least requiring extensive background checks, mandatory waiting periods, and registering guns would help at least reduce gun violence a little bit and would help solve cases b/c registers guns</p> </blockquote> <p>No, I do not have to admit that at all because all of these measures are in place in states like California, New York, and Washington DC, yet they have not made these societies any safer from murder, violent crime, or even gun violence.</p> <p>So, no I do not have to nor will I be admitting that at all because it simply isn’t true.</p> </blockquote> <p>oh? is that so? so if buying an automatic weapon is as easy as picking up a prescription that’s <i>not</i> going to make it easier for anyone who’s upset to get a gun and then fire it on people??? o k</p> </blockquote> <p>Automatic weapons are extremely regulated for civilian ownership in America.  They cost tens of thousands of dollars on the low end all the way up to hundreds of thousands of dollars on the high end, they are registered with the federal government, the owner must apply for a special NFA license which requires a thorough background check that takes months or even years to get approved, paper work must be kept with the weapon at all time, the weapon cannot have been manufactured after 1986, they require a federal tax stamp to own which also can takes months to over a year to get processed, the owner must also designate a licensed gun dealer who will take possession of the weapon in the event of their death, and on and on and on…</p><p>If you truly believe that acquiring an automatic weapon in America is as easy as “picking up a prescription”, then you are simply ignorant to the subject of automatic weapons and just do not know what you are talking about.<br/></p><p><a href="https://www.atf.gov/qa-category/national-firearms-act-nfa">https://www.atf.gov/qa-category/national-firearms-act-nfa</a></p><p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act</a></p><p><a href="http://m.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/17/1171047/-There-are-240-000-fully-automatic-guns-in-the-US-and-only-2-deaths-in-80-years">http://m.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/17/1171047/-There-are-240-000-fully-automatic-guns-in-the-US-and-only-2-deaths-in-80-years</a><br/></p></blockquote> <p>Pretty sure I’ve shares this before but it’s never a bad time.</p>
Being Alone, America, and Anaconda: asic
 KOSHER DILL
 SPEARS
 2924
 8
 924 1
<p><a href="http://therevenantrising.tumblr.com/post/135827422115/garregret-therevenantrising-garregret" class="tumblr_blog">therevenantrising</a>:</p>

<blockquote><p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://garregret.tumblr.com/post/135810589826">garregret</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://therevenantrising.tumblr.com/post/135540905500">therevenantrising</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://garregret.tumblr.com/post/135517237536">garregret</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://therevenantrising.tumblr.com/post/135479826270">therevenantrising</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://pushingpin.tumblr.com/post/135479128813">pushingpin</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://jingle-brrrrt.tumblr.com/post/135448815816">jingle-brrrrt</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://metal-queer-solid.tumblr.com/post/134386190976">metal-queer-solid</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://0122358.tumblr.com/post/134383153016">0122358</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://therevenantrising.tumblr.com/post/134381412470">therevenantrising</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://shelovespiano.tumblr.com/post/134380537619">shelovespiano</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://kaisernighthawk1996.tumblr.com/post/134342240504">kaisernighthawk1996</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://feels-by-the-foot.tumblr.com/post/134299613814">feels-by-the-foot</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://therevenantrising.tumblr.com/post/134299542770">therevenantrising</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://neuroxin.tumblr.com/post/134298026257">neuroxin</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://pizzaotter.tumblr.com/post/134294057737">pizzaotter</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://madmints.tumblr.com/post/134293259422">madmints</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://pizzaotter.tumblr.com/post/134280963537">pizzaotter</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://bolt-carrier-assembly.tumblr.com/post/133694853738">bolt-carrier-assembly</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://therevenantrising.tumblr.com/post/133689796940">therevenantrising</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="tumblr_blog" href="http://therevenantrising.tumblr.com/post/133689234535">therevenantrising</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Mak N Cheese<br/></p>
</blockquote>

<p>Not to be confused with Mac N Cheese.</p>
<figure data-orig-width="3264" data-orig-height="1840" class="tmblr-full"><img data-orig-width="3264" data-orig-height="1840" src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/49bb53d1810cdc4a6c5f1fa9e40355ae/tumblr_inline_ny6xsoZgNT1sh8jq3_540.jpg"/></figure></blockquote>
<p><figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="1802" data-orig-width="3246"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/e723085af378cad726af085c2220068f/tumblr_inline_ny72aotJ7s1r4zl7m_540.jpg" data-orig-height="1802" data-orig-width="3246"/></figure></p>
<p>Also in the Big Mac variety</p>
</blockquote>
<p>WhY do you people have automatic weapons</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Even if they are automatic (which they most likely aren’t), why does it matter to you?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Look at all these gun nuts coming out the woodwork cause I asked why people randomly have automatic weapons on cheese</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Gun obsession is so fucking gross.  There is no valid logical rational reason why any normal US citizen should own a machine literally designed for no other purpose than to kill human beings.  Do not try to give some weak ass justification when “because I like them” is all it actually fucking boils down to.  A disgustingly huge amount of people are DYING to these things every month, just trying to go about their normal lives.  That trumps your ill-chosen hobby.  </p>
<p>There is no solution better than the one that several European countries and the Australians have proven works, anything else is a less-effective compromise so that you, again, can get off on owning a literal killing machine.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>This was supposed to be a light-hearted and fun joke post, but fine.  Let’s do this.<br/></p>
<h2><b>There is no valid logical rational reason why any normal US citizen 
should own a machine literally designed for no other purpose than to 
kill human beings.</b></h2>
<p>I own several guns and have shot literally thousands of rounds over the last couple of years, yet I haven’t killed or even harmed a single living creature.  Huh…  I guess my guns must be broken since they can’t even fulfill their “only purpose”.</p>
<h2>
<b>A disgustingly huge amount of people are DYING to these things every 
month, just trying to go about their normal lives.  That trumps your 
ill-chosen hobby.</b><br/></h2>
<p>Many anti-gun advocates will point out that there were 33,000 people killed by guns in 2013.  While this is a terrible number, we must also put this number into perspective against the grand scheme of things.  There are an estimated 340-370+ MILLION legally owned guns in 
America, not even including illegal black markets that we cannot 
effectively track.  This means that, even if we use conservative 
estimations, literally over 99.99% of the guns in America didn’t kill a 
single person in 2013.</p>
<p>When we look at the big picture, your chances of being harmed by a gun are actually very low.<br/></p>
<p><b>Chances of being shot or killed based on firearm deaths and population count:</b></p>
<p><b>Death by gun, suicide excluded:</b><br/>0.0032%</p>
<p><b>Death by gun, suicide included:</b><br/>0.0095%</p>
<p><b>Death in a mass shooting alone:</b><br/>0.000032%</p>
<p><b>Injury by gun, no death:</b><br/>0.024%</p>
<p><b>Death of injury by gun including suicide:</b><br/>0.033%</p>
<p>Gun
 deaths and injuries etc based off general stats used by anti gun 
people, rather than exact numbers from each year because its faster and 
easier to do. Going by exact yearly figures would result in very little 
change to the average numbers used above.</p>
<p><b>Guns compared to other ways you can die:</b></p>
<p><b>

Unintentional fall deaths:</b></p>
<ul><li>Number of deaths: 26,009</li>
<li>Deaths per 100,000 population: 8.4</li>
</ul><p><b>Motor vehicle traffic deaths:</b></p>
<ul><li>Number of deaths: 33,687</li>
<li>Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.9</li>
</ul><p><b>Unintentional poisoning deaths:

</b></p>
<ul><li>Number of deaths: 33,041</li>
<li>Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.7</li>
</ul><p><b>All poisoning deaths:</b></p>
<ul><li>Number of deaths: 42,917</li>
<li>Deaths per 100,000 population: 13.9</li>
</ul><p><b>All Drug poisoning deaths:</b></p>
<ul><li>Deaths per 100,000 population: 12.4 (2010)</li></ul><p><b>All firearm deaths (suicide included):</b></p>
<ul><li>Number of deaths: 31,672</li>
<li>Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.3</li>
</ul><p><b>All firearms deaths (suicide excluded):</b></p>
<ul><li>Number of deaths: 12,664 <br/></li>
<li>Deaths per 100,000 population: 3.6</li>
</ul><p><b>Firearm deaths broken down completely:</b></p>
<p>3.6 for homicide <br/>6.3 for suicide<br/>0.30 for unintentional <br/>0.10 undetermined</p>
<p>

10.3 for deaths total in general of 3.6 for homicide only. You are more 
likely to trip and die than be killed by a gun. Cars kill more than guns
 but are not even protected by the constitution and isn’t a right, and 
are less regulated than guns! 

</p>
<p>

<i>[Sources are <a href="https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8">FBI</a> and <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdf">CDC</a>]</i></p>
<p>Many people will also cite mass shootings as a reason that guns are evil and should be banned, but this assertion also falls flat and looks ridiculous when put into perspective.  While these stories draw media attention and are absolutely horrible, 
you seem to have casually and conveniently left out the part where these
 attacks account for less than even one quarter of 1% of America’s 
overall murder rate.  About 0.2% to be more exact.</p>
<figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="317" data-orig-width="500"><img data-orig-height="317" data-orig-width="500" src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/bc45a6b149582a24ee012977c76ca402/tumblr_inline_nynm1mUXyB1sh8jq3_540.jpg"/></figure><p>Now, let’s compare this, how often guns are used to harm innocent lives, to how often guns are used to protect innocent lives.</p>
<p>Guns help protect 
innocent lives FAR MORE OFTEN than they help to harm innocent lives.  
There are literally hundreds of thousands of defensive gun uses in this 
country alone every single year.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/category/defensivegunuseoftheday/">http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/category/defensivegunuseoftheday/</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cdc-study-use-firearms-self-defense-important-crime-deterrent">http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cdc-study-use-firearms-self-defense-important-crime-deterrent</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cdc-study-use-firearms-self-defense-important-crime-deterrent">http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cdc-study-use-firearms-self-defense-important-crime-deterrent</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/02/defensive-gun-ownership-gary-kleck-response-115082.html#.VcYed_lRK1w">http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/02/defensive-gun-ownership-gary-kleck-response-115082.html#.VcYed_lRK1w</a></p>
<p>Quite
 simply put, guns save innocent lives.  And they do so far more often 
than they hurt them.  When guns are harming more innocent lives than 
they are protecting, it could be argued that it might make sense to 
further limit guns.</p>
<p>But for now, it’s not even close.  Moving on…<br/></p>
<h2><b>There is no solution better than the one that several European countries
 and the Australians have proven works, anything else is a 
less-effective compromise so that you, again, can get off on owning a 
literal killing machine.</b></h2>
<p>Sorry, but strict gun control has been an absolute failure in both Australia, The UK, and everywhere else it has tried.  It has done nothing to effectively reduce murder, violent crime, suicide, or even gun violence rates.  It has done nothing to achieve its desired goal of creating a safer society.  It is, and always will be, a complete failure.</p>
<p><b>Australia:</b></p>
<p><i>[this segment brought to you by <a href="http://lee-enfeel.tumblr.com">lee-enfeel</a>]</i><br/></p>
<p><a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/is-australia-staring-down-the-barrel-of-a-gun-crisis/story-fncynjr2-1226690018325">People die Australia as a result of firearms violence at almost the same rate they did prior to the firearms act</a>, and some sources state that more than a quarter million illicit firearms exist in Australia currently.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/productsbytitle/9C85BD1298C075EACA2568A900139342?OpenDocument">total firearms death rate in 1995 </a>-
 the year before the massacre and the laws introduced - was 2.6 per 
100,000 people. The total firearms murder rate that year was 
0.3/100,000. From 1980-1995, Australian firearms deaths dropped from 
4.9/100,000-2.6/100,000 without the implementation of firearms laws. 
This is a rate of decline that has remained fairly constant; Looking at 
1996-2014, in which the rate has dropped from 2.6-0.86, it shows that 
the decline has been slower in a longer period of time since the law’s 
passing. Likewise, homicides declined more quickly in the 15 years prior
 to the firearms laws (0.8-0.3) than in the 18 years since it (0.3-0.1).
 This just indicates that firearms deaths haven’t been noticeably 
affected by the legislation you’ve claimed has done so much to decrease 
gun crime. <br/></p>
<p>It should also be noted that around the same time,
 New Zealand experienced a similar mass shooting, but did not change 
their existing firearms laws, which remain fairly lax; even moreso than 
some American states like California, New York, or Connecticut. Despite 
this, their firearms crime rate has declined fairly steadily as well, 
and they haven’t experienced a mass shooting since.</p>
<p>The <i>“australia banned guns and now they’re fine”</i>
 argument is really old and really poorly put together. Gun control is 
little more than a pink band-aid on the sucking chest wound that is 
America’s social and economic problems. It’s a ‘quick fix’ issue used by
 politicians to skirt around solving the roots of the violence problem 
in the United States, which are primarily poverty, lack of 
opportunities, and lack of education.</p>
<p>You could ban guns tomorrow nationwide and gun violence and overall violent crime would not be reduced at all.</p>
<p><i>[this segment brought to you by <a href="http://tmblr.co/m9F_132GzodNt-UaipnK67g">cerebralzero</a>]</i></p>
<p>In 2005 the head of the New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, Don Weatherburn,<sup><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia#cite_note-37">[37]</a></sup>
 noted that the level of legal gun ownership in NSW increased in recent 
years, and that the 1996 legislation had had little to no effect on 
violence</p>
<p>In 2006, the lack of a measurable effect from the 1996 
firearms legislation was reported in the British Journal of Criminology.
 Using ARIMA analysis, Dr Jeanine Baker and Dr Samara McPhedran found no
 evidence for an impact of the laws on homicide.<sup><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia#cite_note-40">[40]</a></sup></p>
<p>A study coauthored by Simon Chapman <b>found declines in firearm‐related 
deaths before the law reforms</b> accelerated after the reforms for total 
firearm deaths (p=0.04), firearm suicides (p=0.007) and firearm 
homicides (p=0.15), but not for the smallest category of unintentional 
firearm deaths, which increased.<sup><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia#cite_note-43">[43]</a></sup></p>
<p>Subsequently, a study by McPhedran and Baker compared the incidence of 
mass shootings in <b>Australia and New Zealand</b>. Data were standardised to a
 rate per 100,000 people, to control for differences in population size 
between the countries and mass shootings before and after 1996/1997 were
 compared between countries. <b>That study found that in the period 
1980–1996, both countries experienced mass shootings. The rate did not 
differ significantly between countries. Since 1996-1997, neither country
 has experienced a mass shooting event despite the continued 
availability of semi-automatic longarms in New Zealand</b>. The authors 
conclude that “the hypothesis that Australia’s prohibition of certain 
types of firearms explains the absence of mass shootings in that country
 since 1996 does not appear to be supported… if civilian access to 
certain types of firearms explained the occurrence of mass shootings in 
Australia (and conversely, if prohibiting such firearms explains the 
absence of mass shootings), then New Zealand (a country that still 
allows the ownership of such firearms) would have continued to 
experience mass shooting events.”<sup><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia#cite_note-44">[44]</a></sup></p>
<figure data-orig-width="500" data-orig-height="261" class="tmblr-full"><img data-orig-width="500" data-orig-height="261" src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/cdc45e76a09651676eab1f058341110c/tumblr_inline_nynm84pBjF1sh8jq3_500.gif"/></figure><p>We see the same trend in The UK.</p>
<figure data-orig-width="500" data-orig-height="373" class="tmblr-full"><img data-orig-width="500" data-orig-height="373" src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/bf599e784e9963b91a4e4f245fed90f5/tumblr_inline_nynm9wKrKT1sh8jq3_540.png"/></figure><figure data-orig-width="458" data-orig-height="366" class="tmblr-full"><img data-orig-width="458" data-orig-height="366" src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/279f61b9c596b97badd4bc465cc46b60/tumblr_inline_nynm9zWkxr1sh8jq3_540.png"/></figure><p>And Ireland and Jamaica…</p>
<figure data-orig-width="453" data-orig-height="714" class="tmblr-full"><img data-orig-width="453" data-orig-height="714" src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/4914c912d5690b40a382b90cf18c646f/tumblr_inline_nynmakqIup1sh8jq3_540.jpg"/></figure><p>And on and on and on…  Gun control simply does not create a safer society and often times actually has the opposite effect.</p>
<p>At this point I should also probably point out that Australia’s gun laws have not even reduced gun ownership in Australia.  <a href="http://louderwithcrowder.com/australian-gun-ownership-rises-gun-crime-remains-low-america-still-at-fault/">In fact, gun ownership in Australia is actually higher now than in 1996.</a></p>
<p>All
 of these inconvenient facts aside, we haven’t even touched on the cost 
of implementing Australian style gun control in America.</p>
<p>I keep hearing people say that the US should adopt Australia’s gun 
control policy and I don’t think they have really thought about the big 
picture of that plan.</p>
<p>Australia had far less guns per person and 
people in their country did not live in a society that was brought up 
respecting The 2nd Amendment.  The culture of Australia is very 
different than that of the culture of America when it comes to gun 
ownership and self defense.</p>
<p>Because of this, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_buyback_program#Australia">the Australian government was able to buy back 631,000 guns at the estimated price of about <b>$500,000,000.</b></a>  You read that correctly, <b>500 MILLION</b>.</p>
<p><a href="http://cerebralzero.tumblr.com/tagged/australia">And
 even after all of that, it still did nothing to prevent violent crime 
and criminals in Australia still have access to illegal guns, </a>despite
 being an island country that isn’t bordered by other countries with 
high violent crime rates and rampant with illegal drug cartels.<br/></p>
<p>There are over 360,000,000 legally owned firearms in America.  If we go by Australia’s numbers (<b>$792.39 per gun</b>), these guns would cost our government <b>$285,261,489,698.89</b> to buy back.  Almost <b>300 BILLION dollars</b>, assuming that every gun owner voluntarily turns in their guns…  Which is a very slim to nothing chance.</p>
<p>Who’s going to pay for that?  Anti-gunners?  I think not.</p>
<p>So, in closing, you want America to put in place gun legislation that will cost the country hundreds of billions of dollars <b>AND </b>has
 already been proven time and time again to be completely ineffective at
 protecting innocent lives or creating a safer society?</p>
<p>Seems pretty silly.</p>
<h2>Get dunked on, nerd.</h2>
<figure data-orig-width="250" data-orig-height="188"><img data-orig-width="250" data-orig-height="188" src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/36a75ffd7a3ce392092201d3769d443e/tumblr_inline_nynmeusS661sh8jq3_500.gif"/></figure></blockquote>
<p><figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="281" data-orig-width="500" data-tumblr-attribution="eonline:S4A57ljapSvQXLPM7Jsomg:ZCTZKx1sDpydf"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/5b521c18948099c6594a510905c6dfe9/tumblr_nt8sq3NZGm1qlgbzbo1_500.gif" data-orig-height="281" data-orig-width="500"/></figure></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Teehee, Mac ‘n’ cheese</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Would make it clear that a gv’t buyback has never been on the table. Also, cars are registered, which is reasonable. Gun shows have too many loopholes. America has a specific culture that is unique when it comes to guns. Not sure anything we do will make people feel truly safe, but reasonable measures are worth a try. Thorough background checks are reasonable. Taking away all guns? Not so much. Good thing is, very few advocate for that.</p>
</blockquote>

<h2><b>Would make it clear that a gv’t buyback has never been on the table.</b></h2>
<p>Maybe not a mandatory federal one, no.  But government gun buybacks are most certainly a thing here in America.</p>
<h2><b>Also, cars are registered, which is reasonable.</b></h2>
<p>You know that guns are not cars, right?</p>
<h2><b>Gun shows have too many loopholes.</b></h2>
<p>What loopholes would those be?  Please enlighten us.</p>
<h2><b>Not sure anything we do will make people feel truly safe, but reasonable
 measures are worth a try.<br/></b></h2>
<p>The fact is, WE HAVE TRIED STRICT NATIONAL GUN CONTROL.</p>
<p>Does the year 1994 or the name Clinton ring a bell to anyone?  Anyone?</p>
<p>From
 1994 - 2004, there were strict national gun control laws in place in 
America.  They included most of the laws that are being proposed now.  
An “assault weapons” ban.  Magazine capacity limits.  All of that.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/204431.pdf">Guess what?</a></p>
<p><a href="https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/204431.pdf">IT WAS A COMPLETE FAILURE.</a></p>
<h2><b>Thorough background checks are reasonable.</b></h2>
<p>We already have mandatory federal NICS background checks, where the buyer’s criminal and mental healthy history are reviewed and have to be approved by the FBI, for every FFL purchase.</p>
<h2><b>Taking away all guns? Not so much. Good thing is, very few advocate for that.</b></h2>
<p>Except for people in politics, the media, and every social media platform I can think advocate for just that every single day.<br/></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Rekt</p>
</blockquote>
<p><figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="500" data-orig-width="500"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/06dc5d6fb9a872f66494555df3d8e68d/tumblr_inline_nyq063shKC1qmqn62_540.jpg" data-orig-height="500" data-orig-width="500"/></figure></p>
</blockquote>
<p><figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-width="300" data-orig-height="152" data-tumblr-attribution="sweetnighttheorist:iC3ZUAaLREBo5eAyAtwOWw:Z_9d1l1pDjh9p" data-orig-src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/68abc0e9798bcb3c43bc230a5ab9e9e0/tumblr_nr9gyqXCqt1uqa8bho1_400.gif"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/68abc0e9798bcb3c43bc230a5ab9e9e0/tumblr_inline_nzkb0efWgQ1t5zudu_500.gif" data-orig-width="300" data-orig-height="152" data-orig-src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/68abc0e9798bcb3c43bc230a5ab9e9e0/tumblr_nr9gyqXCqt1uqa8bho1_400.gif"/></figure></p>
</blockquote>
<p>but like if you could save 33000 peoples lives a year, by giving up a hobby would you?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>A hobby?  Sure.  No problem.</p>
<p>However, me owning a gun is not merely a hobby.  It is the most effective tool at protecting my life, the lives of my family, and the lives of innocent lives around me.  I’m sorry, but self defense and self preservation are not “hobbies”.</p>
<p>Furthermore, it’s a bit of pipe dream anyway considering that we have decades of evidence from all over the world that proves that gun control and even gun bans do not effectively reduce murder or violent crime rates.  They do not create safer societies.  Sure, it might look good on paper and feel good to think about, but reality just doesn’t align with those dreams.<br/></p>
</blockquote>
<p>hey I’m glad for all the sources because this is changing my perspective but you gotta admit that at the very least requiring extensive background checks, mandatory waiting periods, and registering guns would help at least reduce gun violence a little bit and would help solve cases b/c registers guns</p>
</blockquote>
<p>No, I do not have to admit that at all because all of these measures are in place in states like California, New York, and Washington DC, yet they have not made these societies any safer from murder, violent crime, or even gun violence.</p>
<p>So, no I do not have to nor will I be admitting that at all because it simply isn’t true.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>oh? is that so? so if buying an automatic weapon is as easy as picking up a prescription that’s <i>not</i> going to make it easier for anyone who’s upset to get a gun and then fire it on people??? o k</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Automatic weapons are extremely regulated for civilian ownership in America.  They cost tens of thousands of dollars on the low end all the way up to hundreds of thousands of dollars on the high end, they are registered with the federal government, the owner must apply for a special NFA license which requires a thorough background check that takes months or even years to get approved, paper work must be kept with the weapon at all time, the weapon cannot have been manufactured after 1986, they require a federal tax stamp to own which also can takes months to over a year to get processed, the owner must also designate a licensed gun dealer who will take possession of the weapon in the event of their death, and on and on and on…</p><p>If you truly believe that acquiring an automatic weapon in America is as easy as “picking up a prescription”, then you are simply ignorant to the subject of automatic weapons and just do not know what you are talking about.<br/></p><p><a href="https://www.atf.gov/qa-category/national-firearms-act-nfa">https://www.atf.gov/qa-category/national-firearms-act-nfa</a></p><p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act</a></p><p><a href="http://m.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/17/1171047/-There-are-240-000-fully-automatic-guns-in-the-US-and-only-2-deaths-in-80-years">http://m.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/17/1171047/-There-are-240-000-fully-automatic-guns-in-the-US-and-only-2-deaths-in-80-years</a><br/></p></blockquote>

<p>Pretty sure I’ve shares this before but it’s never a bad time.</p>

therevenantrising: garregret: therevenantrising: garregret: therevenantrising: pushingpin: jingle-brrrrt: metal-queer-solid: 0122358...

Alive, Cars, and Children: THIS CHANGES THE GAME FOREVER theconqueerstador: neurodivergent-crow: halduron-brightwang: immortalismortem: liquidglue: b just wear the seatbelt Mmmmmmm I gotta naysay here. Seatbelts do a LOT of harm. Not everyone can wear one  and not everyone wants to risk it. Just among my own friends and people I know in general; 4 females had a breast cut completely or partially off due to a seat belt. 6 people had their throats cut, to an obviously non-lethal degree. 2 had their stomach’s cut open to a horrifying degree that I won’t elaborate on. Not even counting the uncomfortably awkward belt locations for particularly large, small, fat, skinny people. Females with large breasts get the joy of holding the belt in place or adjusting it every couple seconds. They’re awkward, uncomfortable, painful, and can often cause the injuries in an accident. Sometimes it’s just better to forgo the belt. Those injuries caused by seat belts more than very likely would have been deadly had they not been wearing them. To have enough force to cut skin or cut off a breast in an accident is far more than enough to cause someone to go flying through the windshield of a car, to slam them into the steering column, or through a window resulting in deadly injuries or causing an even bigger accident for other drivers now that your body is in the road along with your crashed car. Are you really going to risk being a smear of ground meat on the pavement because your seat belt was a little uncomfortable or it might cut you? Then I got good news for you, there’s a wide variety of devices made specifically to make seat belts more comfortable and reduce that risk. These make it so that your seat belt won’t cut your neck, a simple sleeve of padded fabric that velcros around it, meaning you can put it anywhere on the belt.  This one does something similar, by readjusting the positioning of the seat belt to move it farther away from your neck and hey, helps a bit with having boobs in the way. They even make ones for children too. Boobs still in the way? While it’s pretty silly looking, this helps keep the seat belt in place so you don’t have to keep adjusting it. And if you’re overweight, they make seat belt extenders so you can still be safe.  But maybe you’re still unsure, then listen to the CDC and all of their sources.  “More than half of the people killed in car crashes were not restrained at the time of the crash.1 Wearing a seat belt is the most effective way to prevent death and serious injury in a crash.Seat belt use is on the rise. Laws, education, and technology have increased seat belt use from 11% in 19812 to nearly 85% in 20103, saving hundreds of thousands of lives. “ “Most drivers and passengers killed in crashes are unrestrained. 53% of drivers and passengers killed in car crashes in 2009 were not wearing restraints.1Seat belts dramatically reduce risk of death and serious injury. Among drivers and front-seat passengers, seat belts reduce the risk of death by 45%, and cut the risk of serious injury by 50%.4Seat belts prevent drivers and passengers from being ejected during a crash. People not wearing a seat belt are 30 times more likely to be ejected from a vehicle during a crash. More than 3 out of 4 people who are ejected during a fatal crash die from their injuries.5Seat belts save thousands of lives each year, and increasing use would save thousands more. Seat belts saved almost 13,000 lives in 2009. If all drivers and passengers had worn seat belts that year, almost 4,000 more people would be alive today” Or this one “ The number of those who escaped injury [by wearing a seat belt] increased by 40% and those with mild and moderate injuries decreased by 35% after seatbelt legislation. There was a significant reduction in soft tissue injuries to the head. Only whiplash injuries to the neck showed a significant increase.” Or this “ Fifty-five percent of those killed in passenger vehicle occupant crashes in 2008 were not wearing a seat belt…” “Wearing a seat belt reduces the risk of fatal injury by almost 50%. For children, the risk of fatal injury is reduced by 71% with the use of child safety seats.“ “Of those thrown completely out of a vehicle in a car crash, 75% died. Only one percent of people totally ejected from their cars had on a seat belt during the crash. Over 30% were not wearing seat belts.“ Conclusion? Wear your fucking seat belt. Tell your kids to wear their fucking seat belt. Tell your friends and family to wear their fucking seat belts. Time and time again it’s been proven that you are significantly more likely to survive a crash if you’re wearing one. Most people think they’re uncomfortable, but when you’re in a crash it can save your life. I’d rather be mildly injured than dead. Wear your seat belt. “uwu dont wear seatbelts bc some people got injured by them” THEY SURVIVED. which is much better than dying bc you flew through the damn windshield!! fucking dumbass. My mom worked as an ICU nurse for 20 years and counting. She came home once a month telling me about the DOA people she saw launched through a windshield because they weren’t wearing a seatbelt. I use the same rule she did when we were kids: my car doesn’t move until everyone in it is buckled in.
Alive, Cars, and Children: THIS CHANGES THE GAME FOREVER
theconqueerstador:

neurodivergent-crow:

halduron-brightwang:

immortalismortem:

liquidglue:


b just wear the seatbelt


Mmmmmmm
I gotta naysay here. Seatbelts do a LOT of harm. Not everyone can wear one  and not everyone wants to risk it. Just among my own friends and people I know in general; 4 females had a breast cut completely or partially off due to a seat belt. 6 people had their throats cut, to an obviously non-lethal degree. 2 had their stomach’s cut open to a horrifying degree that I won’t elaborate on.
Not even counting the uncomfortably awkward belt locations for particularly large, small, fat, skinny people. Females with large breasts get the joy of holding the belt in place or adjusting it every couple seconds.
They’re awkward, uncomfortable, painful, and can often cause the injuries in an accident. Sometimes it’s just better to forgo the belt.

Those injuries caused by seat belts more than very likely would have been deadly had they not been wearing them. To have enough force to cut skin or cut off a breast in an accident is far more than enough to cause someone to go flying through the windshield of a car, to slam them into the steering column, or through a window resulting in deadly injuries or causing an even bigger accident for other drivers now that your body is in the road along with your crashed car. Are you really going to risk being a smear of ground meat on the pavement because your seat belt was a little uncomfortable or it might cut you? Then I got good news for you, there’s a wide variety of devices made specifically to make seat belts more comfortable and reduce that risk.
These make it so that your seat belt won’t cut your neck, a simple sleeve of padded fabric that velcros around it, meaning you can put it anywhere on the belt. 
This one does something similar, by readjusting the positioning of the seat belt to move it farther away from your neck and hey, helps a bit with having boobs in the way.
They even make ones for children too.
Boobs still in the way? While it’s pretty silly looking, this helps keep the seat belt in place so you don’t have to keep adjusting it.
And if you’re overweight, they make seat belt extenders so you can still be safe. 
But maybe you’re still unsure, then listen to the CDC and all of their sources. 
“More than half of the people killed in car crashes were not restrained at the time of the crash.1 Wearing a seat belt is the most effective way to prevent death and serious injury in a crash.Seat belt use is on the rise. Laws, education, and technology have increased seat belt use from 11% in 19812 to nearly 85% in 20103, saving hundreds of thousands of lives. “
“Most drivers and passengers killed in crashes are unrestrained. 53% of drivers and passengers killed in car crashes in 2009 were not wearing restraints.1Seat belts dramatically reduce risk of death and serious injury. Among drivers and front-seat passengers, seat belts reduce the risk of death by 45%, and cut the risk of serious injury by 50%.4Seat belts prevent drivers and passengers from being ejected during a crash. People not wearing a seat belt are 30 times more likely to be ejected from a vehicle during a crash. More than 3 out of 4 people who are ejected during a fatal crash die from their injuries.5Seat belts save thousands of lives each year, and increasing use would save thousands more. Seat belts saved almost 13,000 lives in 2009. If all drivers and passengers had worn seat belts that year, almost 4,000 more people would be alive today”
Or this one
“

 The number of those who escaped injury [by wearing a seat belt] increased by 40% and those with mild and moderate injuries decreased by 35% after seatbelt legislation. There was a significant reduction in soft tissue injuries to the head. Only whiplash injuries to the neck showed a significant increase.”
Or this
“

Fifty-five percent of those killed in passenger vehicle occupant crashes in 2008 were not wearing a seat belt…”
“Wearing a seat belt reduces the risk of fatal injury by almost 50%. For children, the risk of fatal injury is reduced by 71% with the use of child safety seats.“
“Of those thrown completely out of a vehicle in a car crash, 75% died. Only one percent of people totally ejected from their cars had on a seat belt during the crash. Over 30% were not wearing seat belts.“
Conclusion? Wear your fucking seat belt. Tell your kids to wear their fucking seat belt. Tell your friends and family to wear their fucking seat belts. Time and time again it’s been proven that you are significantly more likely to survive a crash if you’re wearing one. Most people think they’re uncomfortable, but when you’re in a crash it can save your life. I’d rather be mildly injured than dead.
Wear your seat belt.


“uwu dont wear seatbelts bc some people got injured by them”
THEY SURVIVED. which is much better than dying bc you flew through the damn windshield!! fucking dumbass.


My mom worked as an ICU nurse for 20 years and counting. She came home once a month telling me about the DOA people she saw launched through a windshield because they weren’t wearing a seatbelt. I use the same rule she did when we were kids: my car doesn’t move until everyone in it is buckled in.

theconqueerstador: neurodivergent-crow: halduron-brightwang: immortalismortem: liquidglue: b just wear the seatbelt Mmmmmmm I gotta ...

Bad, Community, and Head: X From washingtonpost.com Che lWashington post Democracy Dies in Darkness Health Science CDC gets list of forbidden words: fetus, transgender diversity By Lena H. Sun, Juliet Eilperin December 15, 2017 at 6:53 PM The Trump administration is prohibiting officials at the nation's top public health agency from using a list of seven words or phrases including ''fetus'' and 'transgender"-In any official documents being prepared for next year's budget Policy analysts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta were told of the list of forbidden words at a meeting Thursday with senior CDC officials who oversee the budget, according to an analyst who took part in the 90-minute briefing. The forbidden words are "vulnerable," "entitlement," "diversity," "transgender," "fetus," "evidence- based"and Science-based. T1 freewillandphysics: serenika: doomy: is this a joke what the fuck edit: okay here’s the article, it’s pretty bad “Policy analysts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta were told of the list of forbidden words at a meeting Thursday with senior CDC officials who oversee the budget, according to an analyst who took part in the 90-minute briefing. The forbidden words are “vulnerable,” “entitlement,” “diversity,” “transgender,” “fetus,” “evidence-based” and “science-based.” “In some instances, the analysts were given alternative phrases. Instead of “science-based” or ­“evidence-based,” the suggested phrase is “CDC bases its recommendations on science in consideration with community standards and wishes,” the person said. In other cases, no replacement words were immediately offered.” This may seem like it’s not a big deal but it really really is.The CDC is not allowed to study gun violence as an epidemic (despite the fact that most physicians/epidemiologists view it as such) or do prevention research because of some NRA funded gag-rule bullshit.It might seem like it’s just a few word changes, but those changes literally going to kill people.
Bad, Community, and Head: X From washingtonpost.com
 Che lWashington post
 Democracy Dies in Darkness
 Health Science
 CDC gets list of forbidden
 words: fetus, transgender
 diversity
 By Lena H. Sun, Juliet Eilperin
 December 15, 2017 at 6:53 PM
 The Trump administration is prohibiting
 officials at the nation's top public health agency
 from using a list of seven words or phrases
 including ''fetus'' and 'transgender"-In any
 official documents being prepared for next
 year's budget
 Policy analysts at the Centers for Disease
 Control and Prevention in Atlanta were told of
 the list of forbidden words at a meeting
 Thursday with senior CDC officials who oversee
 the budget, according to an analyst who took
 part in the 90-minute briefing. The forbidden
 words are "vulnerable," "entitlement,"
 "diversity," "transgender," "fetus," "evidence-
 based"and Science-based.
 T1
freewillandphysics:
serenika:

doomy:
is this a joke
what the fuck
edit: okay here’s the article, it’s pretty bad

“Policy analysts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta were told of the list of forbidden words at a meeting Thursday with senior CDC officials who oversee the budget, according to an analyst who took part in the 90-minute briefing. The forbidden words are “vulnerable,” “entitlement,” “diversity,” “transgender,” “fetus,” “evidence-based” and “science-based.”
“In some instances, the analysts were given alternative phrases. Instead of “science-based” or ­“evidence-based,” the suggested phrase is “CDC bases its recommendations on science in consideration with community standards and wishes,” the person said. In other cases, no replacement words were immediately offered.”

This may seem like it’s not a big deal but it really really is.The
 CDC is not allowed to study gun violence as an epidemic (despite the 
fact that most physicians/epidemiologists view it as such) or do prevention research because of 
some NRA funded gag-rule bullshit.It might seem like it’s just a few word changes, but those changes literally going to kill people.

freewillandphysics: serenika: doomy: is this a joke what the fuck edit: okay here’s the article, it’s pretty bad “Policy analysts at the C...

Anaconda, Bad, and Books: REMEMBER Turn your computer off before midnight orn 12/31/99. BUY theangrymunchkin: musicalluna: cumaeansibyl: all-things-olicity: forloveofreason: shananaomi: jaybushman: spytap: ralfmaximus: faisdm: the-most-calamitous: jibini: top-lotad-breeder: chocogoat: what. why? someone pls explain to me pls i wasnt born yet in 1999 why turn computer off before midnight? what happen if u dont? y2k lol everyone was like “the supervirus is gonna take over the world and ruin everything and end the world!!!” This is the oldest I’ve ever felt. Right now. WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU MEAN YOU WEREN’T BORN YET IN 1999. Ahh the Millenium bug. It wasn’t a virus, it was an issue with how some old computers at the time were programmed to deal with dates. Basically some computers with older operating systems didn’t have anything in place to deal with the year reaching 99 and looping around to 00. It was believed that this inability to sync with the correct date would cause issues, and even crash entire systems the moment the date changed. People flipped out about it, convinced that the date discrepancy between netwoked systems would bring down computers everywhere and shut down the internet and so all systems relying on computers, including plane navigation etc. would go down causing worldwide chaos. It was genuinely believed that people should all switch off computers to avoid this. One or two smart people spoke up and said “um hey, this actually will only effect a few very outdated computers and they’ll just display the wrong date, so it probably won’t be harmful” but were largely ignored because people selling books about the end of the world were talking louder. In the end, absolutely nothing happened. Oh gosh. I’ve been a programmer working for various government agencies since the early 1990s and I can say with some confidence: NOTHING HAPPENED BECAUSE WE WORKED VERY HARD FIXING SHIT THAT MOST DEFINITELY WOULD HAVE BROKEN ON 1-JAN-2000. One example I personally worked on: vaccination databases. My contract was with the CDC to coordinate immunization registries — you know, kids’ vaccine histories. What they got, when they got it, and (most importantly) which vaccines they were due to get next and when. These were state-wide registries, containing millions of records each. Most of these systems were designed in the 1970s and 1980s, and stored the child’s DOB year as only two digits. This means that — had we not fixed it — just about every child in all the databases I worked on would have SUDDENLY AGED OUT OF THE PROGRAM 1-JAN-2000. In other words: these kids would suddenly be “too old” to receive critical vaccines. Okay, so that’s not a nuke plant exploding or airplanes dropping from the sky. In fact, nothing obvious would have occurred come Jan 1st. BUT Without the software advising doctors when to give vaccinations, an entire generation’s immunity to things like measles, mumps, smallpox (etc) would have been compromised. And nobody would even know there was a problem for months — possibly years — after. You think the fun games caused by a few anti-vaxers is bad? Imagine whole populations going unvaccinated by accident… one case of measles and the death toll might be measured in millions. This is one example I KNOW to be true, because I was there. I also know that in the years leading up to 2000 there were ad-hoc discussion groups (particularly alt.risk) of amazed programmers and project managers that uncovered year-2000 traps… and fixed them. Quietly, without fanfare.  In many cases because admitting there was a problem would have resulted in a lawsuit by angry customers. But mostly because it was our job to fix those design flaws before anyone was inconvenienced or hurt. So, yeah… all that Y2K hysteria was for nothing, because programmers worked their asses off to make sure it was for nothing. Bolding mine. Absolutely true.  My Mom worked like crazy all throughout 1998 and 1999 on dozens of systems to avoid Y2K crashes. Nothing major happened because people worked to made sure it didn’t. Now if we could just harness that concept for some of the other major issues facing us today.   this meme came so far since i saw it this morning. god i love tumblr teaching tumblr about history. As a young Sys Admin during Y2K, I can confirm that it was SRS BZNS.  I worked for a major pharmaceutical company at the time.  They spent millions of dollars on consultant and programmer hours, not to mention their own employees’ time, to fix all their in-house software as well as replace it with new systems.  Sys Admins like myself were continually deploying patches, updating firmware, and deploying new systems in the months leading up to Y2K.  Once that was done, though, the programmers went home and cashed their checks. When the FATEFUL HOUR came along, it wasn’t just one hour.  For a global company with offices in dozens of countries, it was 24 hours of being alert and on-call.  I imagine that other large organizations had similar setups with entire IT departments working in shifts to monitor everything.  Everyone was on a hair trigger, too, so the slightest problem caused ALL HANDS ON DECK pages to go out. Yes, we had pagers. For hard numbers IDC’s 2006 calculation put the total US cost of remediation, before and after, at $147 billion - that’s in 1999 dollars.  That paid for an army of programmers, including calling up retired grandparents from the senior center because COBOL and FORTRAN apps from the ‘60s needed fixing. Also note that there were some problems, including $13 billion in remediation included in the figure above.  Some of these involved nuclear power plants, medical equipment, and “a customer at a New York State video rental store had a bill for $91,250, the cost of renting the movie ‘The General’s Daughter’ for 100 years.” Y2K was anything but nothing. @figure-forever tfw you do your job so fucking well that everyone thinks you weren’t necessary in the first place :( salute our COBOL cowpokes and other Y2K wranglers, they saved all our asses another important lesson we learned: a shitload of stuff in the ‘90s was still running programs from the ‘60s and ‘70s. it’s hard to justify the expense and trouble of a massive upgrade when things are working “fine” – easier to say “well, I suppose we’ll need to change at some point, but not now” and if things really are working “fine” you can let them go on for a while but every so often you run into something like Y2K where the software simply wasn’t designed to handle certain eventualities. can’t really blame the programmers, either. if you were writing shit in the ‘60s, would you expect people to still be using it in the science-fiction year of 2000? that’s not a real year! you might be dead by then! so, y’know, you don’t always need the latest and greatest for everything you’re doing – how much power do you really need for an inventory system? – but regular upgrades are a Good Idea nerds quietly saving the world. this is superhero nonsense i love it Y2K is a large reason behind the tech boom of the 2000’s. Think about it, tons of programmers and such suddenly in demand? That “oh it’s ok for now, we don’t need to update” attitude thrown out the window? You get a turn from the let’s keep updating what we have to let’s get something new we have to update less, except that doesn’t stop with a single new thing. It becomes a trend, oh you’re having that issue well buy this new one it will never have that issue, oh you’re having issue x buy this new version we fixed issue x as well as that issue, and so on. Not saying it’s a bad thing at all, just saying it really kick-started the hastened technological path we’re on now.
Anaconda, Bad, and Books: REMEMBER
 Turn your computer off
 before midnight orn
 12/31/99.
 BUY
theangrymunchkin:

musicalluna:

cumaeansibyl:

all-things-olicity:

forloveofreason:

shananaomi:

jaybushman:

spytap:

ralfmaximus:

faisdm:

the-most-calamitous:

jibini:

top-lotad-breeder:

chocogoat:

what. why? someone pls explain to me pls i wasnt born yet in 1999 why turn computer off before midnight? what happen if u dont?

y2k lol everyone was like “the supervirus is gonna take over the world and ruin everything and end the world!!!”

This is the oldest I’ve ever felt. Right now.

WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU MEAN YOU WEREN’T BORN YET IN 1999.

Ahh the Millenium bug.
It wasn’t a virus, it was an issue with how some old computers at the time were programmed to deal with dates. Basically some computers with older operating systems didn’t have anything in place to deal with the year reaching 99 and looping around to 00. It was believed that this inability to sync with the correct date would cause issues, and even crash entire systems the moment the date changed.
People flipped out about it, convinced that the date discrepancy between netwoked systems would bring down computers everywhere and shut down the internet and so all systems relying on computers, including plane navigation etc. would go down causing worldwide chaos. It was genuinely believed that people should all switch off computers to avoid this. One or two smart people spoke up and said “um hey, this actually will only effect a few very outdated computers and they’ll just display the wrong date, so it probably won’t be harmful” but were largely ignored because people selling books about the end of the world were talking louder.
In the end, absolutely nothing happened.

Oh gosh.
I’ve been a programmer working for various government agencies since the early 1990s and I can say with some confidence:
NOTHING HAPPENED BECAUSE WE WORKED VERY HARD FIXING SHIT THAT MOST DEFINITELY WOULD HAVE BROKEN ON 1-JAN-2000.
One example I personally worked on: vaccination databases.
My contract was with the CDC to coordinate immunization registries — you know, kids’ vaccine histories. What they got, when they got it, and (most importantly) which vaccines they were due to get next and when. These were state-wide registries, containing millions of records each.
Most of these systems were designed in the 1970s and 1980s, and stored the child’s DOB year as only two digits. This means that — had we not fixed it — just about every child in all the databases I worked on would have SUDDENLY AGED OUT OF THE PROGRAM 1-JAN-2000.
In other words: these kids would suddenly be “too old” to receive critical vaccines.
Okay, so that’s not a nuke plant exploding or airplanes dropping from the sky. In fact, nothing obvious would have occurred come Jan 1st.
BUT
Without the software advising doctors when to give vaccinations, an entire generation’s immunity to things like measles, mumps, smallpox (etc) would have been compromised. And nobody would even know there was a problem for months — possibly years — after.
You think the fun  games caused by a few anti-vaxers is bad?
Imagine whole populations going unvaccinated by accident… one case of measles and the death toll might be measured in millions.
This is one example I KNOW to be true, because I was there.
I also know that in the years leading up to 2000 there were ad-hoc discussion groups (particularly alt.risk) of amazed programmers and project managers that uncovered year-2000 traps… and fixed them.
Quietly, without fanfare. 
In many cases because admitting there was a problem would have resulted in a lawsuit by angry customers. But mostly because it was our job to fix those design flaws before anyone was inconvenienced or hurt.
So, yeah… all that Y2K hysteria was for nothing, because programmers worked their asses off to make sure it was for nothing.

Bolding mine.

Absolutely true.  My Mom worked like crazy all throughout 1998 and 1999 on dozens of systems to avoid Y2K crashes. Nothing major happened because people worked to made sure it didn’t.
Now if we could just harness that concept for some of the other major issues facing us today.  

this meme came so far since i saw it this morning. god i love tumblr teaching tumblr about history.


As a young Sys Admin during Y2K, I can confirm that it was SRS BZNS.  I worked for a major pharmaceutical company at the time.  They spent millions of dollars on consultant and programmer hours, not to mention their own employees’ time, to fix all their in-house software as well as replace it with new systems.  Sys Admins like myself were continually deploying patches, updating firmware, and deploying new systems in the months leading up to Y2K.  Once that was done, though, the programmers went home and cashed their checks.
When the FATEFUL HOUR came along, it wasn’t just one hour.  For a global company with offices in dozens of countries, it was 24 hours of being alert and on-call.  I imagine that other large organizations had similar setups with entire IT departments working in shifts to monitor everything.  Everyone was on a hair trigger, too, so the slightest problem caused ALL HANDS ON DECK pages to go out.
Yes, we had pagers.
For hard numbers IDC’s 2006 calculation put the total US cost of remediation, before and after, at $147 billion - that’s in 1999 dollars.  That paid for an army of programmers, including calling up retired grandparents from the senior center because COBOL and FORTRAN apps from the ‘60s needed fixing.
Also note that there were some problems, including $13 billion in remediation included in the figure above.  Some of these involved nuclear power plants, medical equipment, and “a customer at a New York State video rental store had a bill for $91,250, the cost of renting the movie ‘The General’s Daughter’ for 100 years.”


Y2K was anything but nothing.


@figure-forever

tfw you do your job so fucking well that everyone thinks you weren’t necessary in the first place :(
salute our COBOL cowpokes and other Y2K wranglers, they saved all our asses
another important lesson we learned: a shitload of stuff in the ‘90s was still running programs from the ‘60s and ‘70s. it’s hard to justify the expense and trouble of a massive upgrade when things are working “fine” – easier to say “well, I suppose we’ll need to change at some point, but not now”
and if things really are working “fine” you can let them go on for a while but every so often you run into something like Y2K where the software simply wasn’t designed to handle certain eventualities. can’t really blame the programmers, either. if you were writing shit in the ‘60s, would you expect people to still be using it in the science-fiction year of 2000? that’s not a real year! you might be dead by then!
so, y’know, you don’t always need the latest and greatest for everything you’re doing – how much power do you really need for an inventory system? – but regular upgrades are a Good Idea

nerds quietly saving the world. this is superhero nonsense i love it


Y2K is a large reason behind the tech boom of the 2000’s. Think about it, tons of programmers and such suddenly in demand? That “oh it’s ok for now, we don’t need to update” attitude thrown out the window? You get a turn from the let’s keep updating what we have to let’s get something new we have to update less, except that doesn’t stop with a single new thing. It becomes a trend, oh you’re having that issue well buy this new one it will never have that issue, oh you’re having issue x buy this new version we fixed issue x as well as that issue, and so on. Not saying it’s a bad thing at all, just saying it really kick-started the hastened technological path we’re on now.

theangrymunchkin: musicalluna: cumaeansibyl: all-things-olicity: forloveofreason: shananaomi: jaybushman: spytap: ralfmaximus: fais...

Bodies , Children, and Climbing: Drowning in real life looks nothing like in the movies, and in fact many parents actually watch their children drown, having no idea that it's happening Ultrafacts.tumblr.com mermaibee: ultrafacts: According to the CDC, in 10 percent of those drownings, the adult will actually watch the child do it, having no idea it is happening. Drowning does not look like drowning—Dr. Pia, in an article in the Coast Guard’s On Scene magazine, described the Instinctive Drowning Response like this: “Except in rare circumstances, drowning people are physiologically unable to call out for help. The respiratory system was designed for breathing. Speech is the secondary or overlaid function. Breathing must be fulfilled before speech occurs. Drowning people’s mouths alternately sink below and reappear above the surface of the water. The mouths of drowning people are not above the surface of the water long enough for them to exhale, inhale, and call out for help. When the drowning people’s mouths are above the surface, they exhale and inhale quickly as their mouths start to sink below the surface of the water. Drowning people cannot wave for help. Nature instinctively forces them to extend their arms laterally and press down on the water’s surface. Pressing down on the surface of the water permits drowning people to leverage their bodies so they can lift their mouths out of the water to breathe. Throughout the Instinctive Drowning Response, drowning people cannot voluntarily control their arm movements. Physiologically, drowning people who are struggling on the surface of the water cannot stop drowning and perform voluntary movements such as waving for help, moving toward a rescuer, or reaching out for a piece of rescue equipment. From beginning to end of the Instinctive Drowning Response people’s bodies remain upright in the water, with no evidence of a supporting kick. Unless rescued by a trained lifeguard, these drowning people can only struggle on the surface of the water from 20 to 60 seconds before submersion occurs.” This doesn’t mean that a person that is yelling for help and thrashing isn’t in real trouble—they are experiencing aquatic distress. Not always present before the Instinctive Drowning Response, aquatic distress doesn’t last long—but unlike true drowning, these victims can still assist in their own rescue. They can grab lifelines, throw rings, etc. Look for these other signs of drowning when persons are in the water: Head low in the water, mouth at water level Head tilted back with mouth open Eyes glassy and empty, unable to focus Eyes closed Hair over forehead or eyes Not using legs—vertical Hyperventilating or gasping Trying to swim in a particular direction but not making headway Trying to roll over on the back Appear to be climbing an invisible ladder So if a crew member falls overboard and everything looks OK—don’t be too sure. Sometimes the most common indication that someone is drowning is that they don’t look like they’re drowning. They may just look like they are treading water and looking up at the deck. One way to be sure? Ask them, “Are you all right?” If they can answer at all—they probably are. If they return a blank stare, you may have less than 30 seconds to get to them. And parents—children playing in the water make noise. When they get quiet, you get to them and find out why. Source/article: [x] Follow Ultrafacts for more facts! BOOST FOR THE SUMMER. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE.
Bodies , Children, and Climbing: Drowning in real life looks nothing like in the
 movies, and in fact many parents actually
 watch their children drown, having no idea
 that it's happening
 Ultrafacts.tumblr.com
mermaibee:
ultrafacts:

According to the CDC, in 10 percent of those drownings, the adult will actually watch the child do it, having no idea it is happening. Drowning does not look like drowning—Dr. Pia, in an article in the Coast Guard’s On Scene magazine, described the Instinctive Drowning Response like this:
“Except in rare circumstances, drowning people are physiologically unable to call out for help. The respiratory system was designed for breathing. Speech is the secondary or overlaid function. Breathing must be fulfilled before speech occurs.
Drowning people’s mouths alternately sink below and reappear above the surface of the water. The mouths of drowning people are not above the surface of the water long enough for them to exhale, inhale, and call out for help. When the drowning people’s mouths are above the surface, they exhale and inhale quickly as their mouths start to sink below the surface of the water.
Drowning people cannot wave for help. Nature instinctively forces them to extend their arms laterally and press down on the water’s surface. Pressing down on the surface of the water permits drowning people to leverage their bodies so they can lift their mouths out of the water to breathe.
Throughout the Instinctive Drowning Response, drowning people cannot voluntarily control their arm movements. Physiologically, drowning people who are struggling on the surface of the water cannot stop drowning and perform voluntary movements such as waving for help, moving toward a rescuer, or reaching out for a piece of rescue equipment.
From beginning to end of the Instinctive Drowning Response people’s bodies remain upright in the water, with no evidence of a supporting kick. Unless rescued by a trained lifeguard, these drowning people can only struggle on the surface of the water from 20 to 60 seconds before submersion occurs.”
This doesn’t mean that a person that is yelling for help and thrashing isn’t in real trouble—they are experiencing aquatic distress. Not always present before the Instinctive Drowning Response, aquatic distress doesn’t last long—but unlike true drowning, these victims can still assist in their own rescue. They can grab lifelines, throw rings, etc.
Look for these other signs of drowning when persons are in the water:
Head low in the water, mouth at water level
Head tilted back with mouth open
Eyes glassy and empty, unable to focus
Eyes closed
Hair over forehead or eyes
Not using legs—vertical
Hyperventilating or gasping
Trying to swim in a particular direction but not making headway
Trying to roll over on the back
Appear to be climbing an invisible ladder
So if a crew member falls overboard and everything looks OK—don’t be too sure. Sometimes the most common indication that someone is drowning is that they don’t look like they’re drowning. They may just look like they are treading water and looking up at the deck. One way to be sure? Ask them, “Are you all right?” If they can answer at all—they probably are. If they return a blank stare, you may have less than 30 seconds to get to them. And parents—children playing in the water make noise. When they get quiet, you get to them and find out why.
Source/article: [x] 
Follow Ultrafacts for more facts!


BOOST FOR THE SUMMER. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE.

mermaibee: ultrafacts: According to the CDC, in 10 percent of those drownings, the adult will actually watch the child do it, having no ide...