Can anyone explain to me...

[zsdersw]

... how all the gun restriction laws being proposed or passed in various states and at the national level are going to make any difference, at all, in preventing the tragedies out of which they spawned?

I just cannot fathom how they're going to at all be effective. In many ways, imposing round limits on guns is as stupid as NYC's ban on huge soft-drinks; you can still get the same amount by buying two or more smaller drinks... and with guns you can bring more clips. Of course, drinking large amounts of soda isn't illegal (yet, if the nanny-staters get their way), so the large soda ban is merely to get you to think twice about consuming so much... but why would that work with crazy unstable people and guns? Do you seriously think they're going to care how many clips or rounds they have to bring to accomplish whatever they want to accomplish?

Rather than treating the symptoms, if any further government action is to be done it should be focused on treating the disease: mental health and the economy.

 

[SaurusX]

You know the answer. It won't make any difference at all. These are feel-good measures to let people know that politicians care and to show that they did something. When these steps don't work, pols won't realize it's because they were completely misdirected in the first place, they'll think they simply didn't go far enough. Then they'll do something even stupider like ban something else or reduce everything to single shot flint lock muzzle loaded muskets.

You see, the liberal endgame has always been the complete banning and confiscation of guns using incremental steps to get there. Those that say otherwise are simply being dishonest and then attempt to make gun rights supporters look "crazy" or "paranoid". I can already see the witty retorts being queued up to that last statement, but tell me... what else would be the ultimate goal of the liberal agenda if not that?

 

[zsdersw]

Yes, I already know that it won't make any difference.. which is why I asked if anyone can explain how it will make a difference.

 

[Genx87]

I found it amusing yet sad that on the day NY's gun ban went into affect a mass shooting happened. And the guns that were involved werent even covered by the stupid ban. I dont know why the voters let this type of shit fly on election day.

 

[airdata]

No... none of the gun control laws will directly prevent any of these tragedies we've seen in the past year or so.

The people who commit these crimes would find a way to commit them.

All of these gun control measures are being pushed and yet I don't think I've ever seen anything to indicate these people should have been barred from owning a gun in the first place.

That's the thing really. It's like drunk driving... Drunk drivers are impaired so you can use that to put them at fault.... but statistically, most traffic deaths and accidents are caused by your average dumb ass who drives recklessly because they're an asshole and nothing else.

Unless you can outlaw stupid, these regulations are meaningless.

 

[bshole]

I don't think it can be argued that guns laws are ineffective.

Japan has the most draconian gun laws around and their murder rate is at 0.4 while we here in America have a murder rate of 4.8. 10 times higher. If you look at the gun homicide rates, Japan's gun homicide rate is 0.02 compared to our 3.2. 150 times higher. So extremely strict gun laws ARE efffective. The question is are you willing to trade some freedom for safety?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

 

[xanis]

I don't think it can be argued that guns laws are ineffective.

Japan has the most draconian gun laws around and their murder rate is at 0.4 while we here in America have a murder rate of 4.8. 10 times higher. If you look at the gun homicide rates, Japan's gun homicide rate is 0.02 compared to our 3.2. 150 times higher. So extremely strict gun laws ARE efffective. The question is are you willing to trade some freedom for safety?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

I would argue that in Japan, the low gun crime rate is more of a result of the culture and less a result of the laws.

 

[Genx87]

I don't think it can be argued that guns laws are ineffective.

Japan has the most draconian gun laws around and their murder rate is at 0.4 while we here in America have a murder rate of 4.8. 10 times higher. If you look at the gun homicide rates, Japan's gun homicide rate is 0.02 compared to our 3.2. 150 times higher. So extremely strict gun laws ARE efffective. The question is are you willing to trade some freedom for safety?

Culture, demographics, and geography also has a lot to play in Japan. Japan is a nation that is 98.5% japanese. It is like people looking at the nordic countries socialized systems as something great and copy. Those countries are like 95% of one demographic. Of course everything is cheery when everybody looks and acts the same.

I'd venture to guess if Japan had our gun laws their rate of homicide wouldnt be much higher.

 

[Mursilis]

I dont know why the voters let this type of shit fly on election day.

Voters are dumb?

 

[soulcougher73]

They wont. Criminals gonna do criminal things.

 

[cubby1223]

It's a psychological campaign by the politicians proving they care about us all by doing something, thus winning over the hearts and minds of the baddies.

Isn't this obvious to everyone?

 

[sm625]

... how all the gun restriction laws being proposed or passed in various states and at the national level are going to make any difference, at all, in preventing the tragedies out of which they spawned?

It isnt meant to prevent. It is theater of the absurd. We wouldnt even have school shootings and similar over-the-top absurd tragedies like this if our entire culture wasnt sick and possibly even mortally wounded convulsing on the floor. That's what these events are, convulsions. Have you seen the V tv series remake? End of season 2, that's basically where this country and most 1st world countries are right now... totally "blissed out" and under control of some ungodly (satanic/saturnic) force. Most people cannot see it, because reality isnt so melodramatic as it is on a tv show. Most will just go right on ignoring this until it gets so big that they are forced to respond. That day will come. But for now expect more and more headless chicken behavior.

 

[Moonbeam]

zsdersw: ... how all the gun restriction laws being proposed or passed in various states and at the national level are going to make any difference, at all, in preventing the tragedies out of which they spawned?

M: So true. Those could only be prevented if the past could be changed say by time travel.

z: I just cannot fathom how they're going to at all be effective. In many ways, imposing round limits on guns is as stupid as NYC's ban on huge soft-drinks; you can still get the same amount by buying two or more smaller drinks... and with guns you can bring more clips.

M: Maybe one wants to carry a hamburger in the other hand and so only one smaller drink becomes possible or some folk get away while the gunman changes clips or he drops it or it jams because he is hyper and lacks calm physical control, but if a pea of change is thrown into the time stream there could be a tsunami in Japan. One little gun law success today could maybe lead to the destruction some day of all guns.I saw that on TV. Maybe the gunman wants to eat a burger too while he shoots people.


z: Of course, drinking large amounts of soda isn't illegal (yet, if the nanny-staters get their way), so the large soda ban is merely to get you to think twice about consuming so much... but why would that work with crazy unstable people and guns? Do you seriously think they're going to care how many clips or rounds they have to bring to accomplish whatever they want to accomplish?

M: I tend not to worry too much if I am being serious until I can establish with some reliability that the person I am talking to is first. You can probably guess what I've concluded here. I also try never to assume what may appeal to the logic of the insane. You have already told us you think these gun regulation efforts are crazy. They why wouldn't they make sense to crazy people? You are presuming you are crazy enough to know.

z: Rather than treating the symptoms, if any further government action is to be done it should be focused on treating the disease: mental health and the economy.

M: It appears for all the world to me that any sane solution to our economic problems will be blocked by Republicans so that is out, and as far as doing something about mental health, you must really be kidding or more likely profoundly ignorant. For us to do something about mental health we would have first to see that the craziness we need to fix is in ourselves. I can assure you from years and years of living with deep wisdom, that the number of people who understand this is vanishingly small and that also, you are not one of them.

A thought experiment I would consider would be one of a river that has been blocked by the NRA. In order to clear the river bed of such blockage requires a lake to form behind the dam. When enough water backs up behind the dam it will be washed away. The size of the flood that results and the things that will be swept away will depend on the level of resistance supplied by the dam. Right now, I should say, we can anticipate quite a flood. Evolution will accept quite a restriction in personal freedoms if it means the survival of kids.

PS, never build your house on what will become an alluvial fan.

 

[Genx87]

Would it kill you to enter the 21st century and use the quote function Moonbeam?

 

[zsdersw]

zsdersw: ... how all the gun restriction laws being proposed or passed in various states and at the national level are going to make any difference, at all, in preventing the tragedies out of which they spawned?

M: So true. Those could only be prevented if the past could be changed say by time travel.

z: I just cannot fathom how they're going to at all be effective. In many ways, imposing round limits on guns is as stupid as NYC's ban on huge soft-drinks; you can still get the same amount by buying two or more smaller drinks... and with guns you can bring more clips.

M: Maybe one wants to carry a hamburger in the other hand and so only one smaller drink becomes possible or some folk get away while the gunman changes clips or he drops it or it jams because he is hyper and lacks calm physical control, but if a pea of change is thrown into the time stream there could be a tsunami in Japan. One little gun law success today could maybe lead to the destruction some day of all guns.I saw that on TV. Maybe the gunman wants to eat a burger too while he shoots people.


z: Of course, drinking large amounts of soda isn't illegal (yet, if the nanny-staters get their way), so the large soda ban is merely to get you to think twice about consuming so much... but why would that work with crazy unstable people and guns? Do you seriously think they're going to care how many clips or rounds they have to bring to accomplish whatever they want to accomplish?

M: I tend not to worry too much if I am being serious until I can establish with some reliability that the person I am talking to is first. You can probably guess what I've concluded here. I also try never to assume what may appeal to the logic of the insane. You have already told us you think these gun regulation efforts are crazy. They why wouldn't they make sense to crazy people? You are presuming you are crazy enough to know.

z: Rather than treating the symptoms, if any further government action is to be done it should be focused on treating the disease: mental health and the economy.

M: It appears for all the world to me that any sane solution to our economic problems will be blocked by Republicans so that is out, and as far as doing something about mental health, you must really be kidding or more likely profoundly ignorant. For us to do something about mental health we would have first to see that the craziness we need to fix is in ourselves. I can assure you from years and years of living with deep wisdom, that the number of people who understand this is vanishingly small and that also, you are not one of them.

A thought experiment I would consider would be one of a river that has been blocked by the NRA. In order to clear the river bed of such blockage requires a lake to form behind the dam. When enough water backs up behind the dam it will be washed away. The size of the flood that results and the things that will be swept away will depend on the level of resistance supplied by the dam. Right now, I should say, we can anticipate quite a flood. Evolution will accept quite a restriction in personal freedoms if it means the survival of kids.

PS, never build your house on what will become an alluvial fan.

This does not explain anything I asked to be explained. Instead, it is more of an exposé on your idiosyncrasies... which is neither interesting nor desired.

 

[Agent11]

I don't think it can be argued that guns laws are ineffective.

Japan has the most draconian gun laws around and their murder rate is at 0.4 while we here in America have a murder rate of 4.8. 10 times higher. If you look at the gun homicide rates, Japan's gun homicide rate is 0.02 compared to our 3.2. 150 times higher. So extremely strict gun laws ARE efffective. The question is are you willing to trade some freedom for safety?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

Japan is an island full of Japanese people. Their government culture and geography is completely different from ours.

 

[Lithium381]

It won't. The simple answer that you're looking for. . . it doesn't do anything. . . well not what they're intending anyway.

 

[Moonbeam]

Would it kill you to enter the 21st century and use the quote function Moonbeam?

Not as long as it shows people the superficiality of how they judge people, how chained they are to normalcy and group think, how easily freaked out they are by the odd and different, ho hopelessly inadequate they are to deal with things, how much they need to control the behavior of others. Any more questions?

 

[Moonbeam]

This does not explain anything I asked to be explained. Instead, it is more of an exposé on your idiosyncrasies... which is neither interesting nor desired.

And yet your post was childishly stupid and you had no problem exposing that. You really think I as equally stupid to think you were asking a real question? You were looking to say how superior your point of view is and how stupid the gun grabbers are and you are as juvenile as that. You even threw in 'big gulp' Good grief. If you want to show how superior you are do it with something that might amount so some kind of real victory. 'Look Mommy, I'm better than dog turds.

 

[zsdersw]

And yet your post was childishly stupid and you had no problem exposing that. You really think I as equally stupid to think you were asking a real question? You were looking to say how superior your point of view is and how stupid the gun grabbers are and you are as juvenile as that. You even threw in 'big gulp' Good grief. If you want to show how superior you are do it with something that might amount so some kind of real victory. 'Look Mommy, I'm better than dog turds.

The opinion of someone so foolish (you) couldn't matter less to me.

 

[Genx87]

Not as long as it shows people the superficiality of how they judge people, how chained they are to normalcy and group think, how easily freaked out they are by the odd and different, ho hopelessly inadequate they are to deal with things, how much they need to control the behavior of others. Any more questions?

It doesnt show anybody much of anything because they gloss over it.

 

[Moonbeam]

The opinion of someone so foolish (you) couldn't matter less to me.

Whenever that is true for me I say nothing so once again, you reveal to me your childishness.

But, come, come!!! Don't you agree that the points you made in the OP were so mind numbingly obvious that the proposition that you sought confirmation defies credibility? I mean, come on. Why not start one on 'how could anybody think it's a good idea to drink potty water'.

But tell me how much sympathy do you have for the dumb fucks whose children were blown away. Any suggestions about how to improve the mental health of the nation or are they just stepping stones to build on for your forum prestige?

 

[Moonbeam]

It doesnt show anybody much of anything because they gloss over it.

If you have been paying any attention at all you will know that nothing does. One of the chief features of being blind is the lack of ability to see anything. It's like telling the brain dear they are brain dead. They always react, not with what can I do to reboot my brain, but with, Geez that hurts my feelings. It is probably why back in the day when people cared more for what is real they used to put people in a dunce chair and make them write on the black board a hundred times. It's just a fact that I am brain dead and I promise I will try to reboot. Repetition, repetition, repetition. Perfect practice makes perfect, I once heard. I am a dunce so I never give up on them X 100.

 

[Theb]

I don't think it can be argued that guns laws are ineffective.

Japan has the most draconian gun laws around and their murder rate is at 0.4 while we here in America have a murder rate of 4.8. 10 times higher. If you look at the gun homicide rates, Japan's gun homicide rate is 0.02 compared to our 3.2. 150 times higher. So extremely strict gun laws ARE efffective. The question is are you willing to trade some freedom for safety?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

The US murder rate is dropping it was dropping before the assault weapon ban in the 90s, it dropped during the ban, and it has continued to drop since the ban's expiration. If gun laws effected murder in the US wouldn't the ban's enactment or expiration have effected the murder rate in some way?

Japan has a very different culture. I would guess their overall crime rates are much lower than in the US.

 

[OverVolt]

I would argue that in Japan, the low gun crime rate is more of a result of the culture and less a result of the laws.

And the fact that America has like 200 million guns which will last for ~100 years with minimal maintenance and Japan got demilitarized and mostly disarmed from WWII. They probably have like ~100,000 illegal guns if I had to guess.

Although there is totally samurai sword rampages, as you would expect. They aren't as deadly as the gun rampages, sure. But try explaining that to someone who died/got injured in a samurai sword rampage, I'm sure they would understand (not). The whole thing is pointless since mass murders are a small portion of overall crime anyway. Resources are better spent on regular murder, burglary, etc.

If you want to prevent mass murder you go after psychological health. That much is obvious. Apparently not to the politicians though. They should be ashamed that they play shenanigans with peoples lives like this instead of actually trying to solve the problem.