How is the gun ban in Chicago doing?

[sandorski]

Theres borders all over the place meant to stop drugs but they don't. Apparently you are incapable of understanding this basic truth as I have repeated myself several times and you have yet to retain this basic information. You will not be able to stop guns from being obtained. The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that a border of any kind will be effective gun control even though all of history sides against you.

...and you fail to understand the monumental difference between Drugs and Guns

 

[NoStateofMind]

...and you fail to understand the monumental difference between Drugs and Guns

Yeah you are missing the point of the discussion. Go back and read so you have a full understanding. Otherwise I have to assume its just leftist drivel

 

[sandorski]

Yeah you are missing the point of the discussion. Go back and read so you have a full understanding. Otherwise I have to assume its just leftist drivel

Nope, I am not missing the point.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Nope, I am not missing the point.

Well then if you cannot follow along I guess the conversation will just have to move on without you.

 

[chucky2]

Thats what charleswhatshisface doesn't seem to grasp. I have run out of ways to explain it short of drawing him a picture. :hmm:

It somewhat is disturbing to think anyone would actually make the argument that the borders are what is preventing Chicago gun control policy from actually reducing the murder rate. It's just...stunningly insanely stupid. It's like these fools actually think that if they got their ultimate wish, total Fed gun ban, that Poof!, gun murders will fall to zero and utopia would reign in the streets.

200M guns or whatnot in the US, tens of millions that would never be turned in, plus the massive black/gray market that would spring up (I can already do this now if I wanted, and I'm not even connected really), but these insane people point to Chicago and it not having borders as the problem. Like, if they got what they really wanted, that the US itself wouldn't be a big border with internally shittons of firearms in it = just a much bigger and even more impossible to control version of Chicago.

These are supposed to be the super smart <x> guys?!?!? If so, our country is even more beyond F'd that I ever imagined...

Chuck

 

[Charles Kozierok]

It somewhat is disturbing to think anyone would actually make the argument that the borders are what is preventing Chicago gun control policy from actually reducing the murder rate. It's just...stunningly insanely stupid.

This is a strawman. Eskimospy and I are not making the argument that a lack of borders is the only reason that Chicago's gun control doesn't work. We're making the argument that it is part of why it doesn't work, and that it is invalid to generalize from a ban that includes no borders to say that because it doesn't work, that this proves a ban WITH borders also doesn't work.

Let's try it a different way.

Suppose the earth has only two continents, called AB and YZ, each of which has two countries. AB is split between A and B, and YZ between Y and Z. There is no way for goods to move between the two continents.

A has strict gun control laws, but B has none. There is a border between A and B, enforced at the same level as the US-Mexico border.

On the other continent, Y has strict gun control laws like A's and Z has none, like B. But there's no border between Y and Z -- people and goods can flow freely between them.

Now, the simple question: which country will have more guns in it, A or Y? Answering that with anything other than "Y" would be, in your words, "stunningly insanely stupid".

And anyone who can't understand this simple analogy needs to go back to high school for remedial logic classes.

As an aside, I find it absolutely hilarious to see a bunch of right-wingers using "borders don't matter!" arguments. Aren't you the same folks that want to build a wall along the Rio Grande and deploy troops along all of our borders? Why bother if "borders don't matter"?

Gee, maybe it's because the truth is that borders are imperfect but do make a difference? Which is exactly the point that eskimospy was making: borders don't stop all gun flow, but they stop it a lot more than no borders, so saying that because Chicago's gun ban doesn't work that a nationwide one wouldn't work is "stunningly insanely stupid". There are valid arguments against nationwide gun bans, but "look at Chicago!" is not one of them.

 

[klinc]

Will be comforting to know I can rob and kill people like I want cause I don't have to fear getting shot every time I am trying to commit a crime. After all its a illegal gun hard to trace it back to me.

 

[waggy]

Why would borders matter again? Criminals care about laws when again?

good point. chicago needs to build a huge wall to keep people from coming or going. IF you wan't to enter chicago you need to be strip searched for guns.

that is the only way to keep chicago safe from the evil gun owners.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

good point. chicago needs to build a huge wall to keep people from coming or going. IF you wan't to enter chicago you need to be strip searched for guns.

that is the only way to keep chicago safe from the evil gun owners.

This (sarcastic) argument is the entire point. Gun bans without borders simply make law-abiding citizens into potential victims. They are impossible to enforce.

Does that mean gun bans with borders will always work? No.

 

[OrByte]

And you would be not only wrong but dishonestly presenting the facts at hand. There is no border good enough to keep guns or anything people want for that matter (which has been proven time and time again throughout history) out of their hands. Therefore you basing your premise that a "good enough" border exists when it doesn't. This shows the inability of the leftist mind to reason on gun control.

you are applying an impossible standard to gun control laws. (Law should abolish all desired behavior)

yet you don't bother applying the same standard to border control. (Borders should control all desired areas)

and there is no middle ground to establish that neither laws nor borders are 100% effective...and this is where most reasonable people with critical thinking skills live.

talk about an inability to reason on gun control...


you USED to be a reasonable poster on these forums...I don't know what happened.

edit: borders are not built with giant cement walls and barbed wire on top. Gun laws are not built the same way...

 

[PokerGuy]

It's reasonable to think that without an effective border, gun bans won't be effective, and in fact they probably make things worse because law abiding citizens are unarmed while criminals are armed. That much I agree with eskimo on.

Given the reality of hundreds of millions of weapons in the US, and that they are easy to manufacture for anyone with some basic equipment, there is no conceivable way that the war on guns would be any more effective as the war on drugs. It would in fact be much less effective.

Given that reality, anyone pushing for gun bans is a delusional idiot.

Personally, I don't think the gun bans are the problem in Chicago (though they definitely don't help). The real problems are societal and much harder to tackle, so idiots and political opportunists focus on trying to ban guns instead of solving the problem.

 

[Jaskalas]

These are supposed to be the super smart <x> guys?!?!? If so, our country is even more beyond F'd that I ever imagined...

Chuck

What does intelligence have to do with politics? It's American Idol with feel good shows. It's a whole opera of lies and deceit in order to seize and maintain power.

It's corruption, not smarts.

 

[sigurros81]

Yes. I think you are attempting to say that the US has border control for drugs but since drugs come in that border control doesn't matter. That is not a good argument.

The cost to produce drugs is extremely low, their quality is not dependent on large scale, established facilities, they are easily hidden in transport, etc. To try and compare the two is silliness.

You really are not good at debating logically. There are more guns than Americans in this country.

 

[hal2kilo]

these half-mesures do little more than perpetuate the fear/power conservatives.

:thumbsup:

 

[sm625]

What does intelligence have to do with politics? It's American Idol with feel good shows. It's a whole opera of lies and deceit in order to seize and maintain power.

It's corruption, not smarts.

The smarts come in when you have to convince a population to willingly choose actions that lead to a desired outcome. Many people can explain how and why gun control has failed. But relatively few can explain why so many still believe in gun control even though it has failed. Ayn Rand explains perfectly why it has failed. And ironically, these same people who still believe in gun control will almost unanimously dismiss Ayn Rand as some sort of kook and not even process the tiny quote from her on this thread.

So what is the simple answer which explains why so many drooling idiots believe in gun control? They are trained to do so. Read Charlotte Iserbyt.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

You really are not good at debating logically. There are more guns than Americans in this country.

And another ironymeter goes to the shop.

He was talking about whether it is easier to fight the smuggling of guns than the smuggling of drugs. That has nothing to do with the number of guns already in the country.

 

[sigurros81]

And another ironymeter goes to the shop.

He was talking about whether it is easier to fight the smuggling of guns than the smuggling of drugs. That has nothing to do with the number of guns already in the country.

Yeah, he was saying you cannot compare drugs to guns when talking about gun control in regards to borders. His point was that it's easier to have access to drugs than guns. I disagree, and I say there's no need to talk about smuggling at all when there are plenty of guns in this country already.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

His point was that it's easier to have access to drugs than guns.

No, his point was exactly what he said, that he believes guns are harder to smuggle than drugs.

I disagree, and I say there's no need to talk about smuggling at all when there are plenty of guns in this country already.

And that's a valid argument to make. But don't mischaracterize his argument -- and falsely accuse of him of being illogical on top of it.

 

[fskimospy]

Yeah, he was saying you cannot compare drugs to guns when talking about gun control in regards to borders. His point was that it's easier to have access to drugs than guns. I disagree, and I say there's no need to talk about smuggling at all when there are plenty of guns in this country already.

Actually ease of access was never my point. Furthermore your argument presupposes that we can't reduce the quantity of guns in America, which reject.

Regardless, saying gun control is a failure because there are still guns in an area where importing them is for all intents and purposes unrestricted is obviously dumb.

 

[sigurros81]

No, his point was exactly what he said, that he believes guns are harder to smuggle than drugs.



And that's a valid argument to make. But don't mischaracterize his argument -- and falsely accuse of him of being illogical on top of it.

Again, how are guns harder to smuggle than drugs, and on what credible basis is he or you making that argument?

 

[fskimospy]

Again, how are guns harder to smuggle than drugs, and on what credible basis is he or you making that argument?

Guns have a higher cost to the producer than most drugs, making seizures more costly, guns are not as easily smuggled on one's person as drugs are, etc.

I make that argument based on conversations with a friend of mine who has worked in ICE at the San Ysidro border crossing for 5 years, the busiest border crossing on planet earth.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Again, how are guns harder to smuggle than drugs, and on what credible basis is he or you making that argument?

Well, you can take that up with him, it wasn't my argument.

But off the top of my head:

1. Drugs are smaller, and so more easily concealed.
2. Drugs can be hidden within the human body.
3. Drugs can't be detected by metal detectors.

 

[sigurros81]

Well, you can take that up with him, it wasn't my argument.

But off the top of my head:

1. Drugs are smaller, and so more easily concealed.
2. Drugs can be hidden within the human body.
3. Drugs can't be detected by metal detectors.

You make it sound like the only way to smuggle illegal shit around is to stuff it in someone's body. Again, this is a pointless argument because for one, we have not had to resort to smuggling guns because guns are still legal in this country, and there are plenty of it.

 

[monovillage]

* How is the gun ban in Chicago doing? *

It's a miserable fucking failure because it keeps the honest and law abiding citizens from having guns while it does nothing of practical value to keep the murderers, rapists, muggers and thieves from getting a firearm. The criminals still have easy access to firearms and the honest citizens can't protect or defend themselves or know if they do they'll be subject to targeted prosecution.

 

[rudder]

Silliness. Gun control in small areas without border control works quite poorly because there is basically nothing stopping people from neighboring areas from bringing in weapons.

That of course makes no statement as to if gun control works in a larger sense. Come on guys, if you are going to complain about liberal minded people being illogical about guns you can't turn around and make these ridiculous arguments.

For the sake of argument... lets say Chicago had some way to remove 100% of the guns at the city limits and within the city itself. How many murders would think would have occurred

Probably the same number. Instead of guns in would have been knives or other projectile. You can remove the guns but you won't remove the violent tendencies or reasons why these murders are being committed. Drugs users won't just stop using drugs. Gangs won't suddenly be without a reason to defend their turf against rival gangs. Uneducated youth without any semblance of a family structure won't suddenly buckle down and see the errors of their ways. There are reasons for Chicago's murder rate... and it is not simply because people have a gun in their hands.