Sorry, another gun control thread

[mikeymikec]

I do think it's rather stupid to compare two countries' crime statistics and assume that by altering a major factor in one would logically result in the other's even though that factor in the other country wasn't ever vaguely comparable.

Those two examples (what you said and what I said) are not even vaguely comparable. Please note that I did not say anything like "banning guns in the US will make school shootings drop to zero", because that would be the kind of thing I was just criticising. It would be completely absurd to suggest that the US's school shooting stats would behave exactly like the UK's because of the level of firearms ownership is radically different.

 

[Jhhnn]

So you wont post empirical research? I didn't expect so. John Lott's More Guns Less Crime is my source, great read. If you buy it right now, i'll paypal you the cost. $6.49 shipped.

Lott told you what you wanted to hear & you believed it-

The committee found that answers to some of the most pressing questions cannot be addressed with existing data and research methods, however well designed. Indeed, the committee was unable to find any of the laws that it examined had any effect on crime or suicide rates. In the case of right-to-carry laws, despite a large body of research, the committee found no credible evidence that the passage of right-to-carry laws decreases or increases violent crime, and there is almost no empirical evidence that the more than 80 prevention programs focused on gun-related violence have had any effect on children's behavior, knowledge, attitudes, or beliefs about firearms. The committee found that the data available on these questions are too weak to support unambiguous conclusions or strong policy statements.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/More_Guns,_Less_Crime#Reception

 

[pmv]

And yet your aggravated robbery and rape cases double ours.. hmm

When people start making that kind of crude comparison of things that are very difficult to compare across national boundaries, I suspect I'm dealing with an idealogue. Is this the same old zombie stat that keeps coming up on the right, based largely on Daily Mail articles in turn based on farcically-bad stats from Tory think tanks*? It sounds very much like the same guff that's been posted regularly since at least the mid-90s (when it came up on usenet, iirc).

But in case it's a different, and more valid, source from the previous four or five times it's come up over the last couple of decades - can you say what's your source for this claim, and explain exactly how you define those crimes for the purposes of international comparison.

* at least it was when it came up during a Labour government - doubtless those Tory think tanks would not bother producing such garbage-stats when there's a Tory government.

The homicide rate is the least difficult crime-stat to compare, by the way. Something like 'aggravated robbery' is going to be _vastly_ dependent on definitions and reporting rates.

 

[fskimospy]

So you're not going to read the defining research that changed handgun laws across the nation? I guess that's one way to make sure that you're right.

It’s not the defining research, it’s widely discredited nonsense that anyone who actually spent time reading the empirical research on gun violence would know. It’s not like it was discredited recently either, no one had taken it seriously for a very long time. This is what I meant when I said you approach this emotionally. You found a book that tells you what you want to hear so you take that to be correct while ignoring the far larger body of research that shows precisely the opposite. Increased gun ownership in an area is associated with increased crime, increased homicide, and increased suicide.

I had you pegged from the very first post, haha. Gun rights people have little knowledge of the effects of gun ownership. Not sure why you had to waste so much time when you could have just acknowledged that from the start.

 

[fskimospy]

Lott told you what you wanted to hear & you believed it-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/More_Guns,_Less_Crime#Reception

The work you cite says they were unable to determine causation but more recent research has helped with this issue. Instead of being unable to determine causation the evidence shows that RTC laws are associated with increased crime.

http://www.nber.org/papers/w23510

RTC laws are associated with higher aggregate violent crime rates, and the size of the deleterious effects that are associated with the passage of RTC laws climbs over time. Ten years after the adoption of RTC laws, violent crime is estimated to be 13-15 percent higher than it would have been without the RTC law. Unlike the panel data setting, these results are not sensitive to the covariates included as predictors. The magnitude of the estimated increase in violent crime from RTC laws is substantial in that, using a consensus estimate for the elasticity of crime with respect to incarceration of .15, the average RTC state would have to double its prison population to counteract the RTC-induced increase in violent crime.

 

[Paladin3]

You guys are debating a dead topic. You will never get a significant gun ban in America. If you have the votes then go do it. Talk to a senator and have a bill drafted. See if it passes. Even if you are successful it would be impossible to get many folks to turn in their guns. If you only ban a particular class of guns then your ban will be worthless due to the mountain of guns that would still be in civilian hands, not to mention those who would refuse to give up the banned guns. The last assault weapons ban didn't do a thing to reduce gun violence. Didn't that teach you anything?

So keep railing on about owning a gun making you statistically less safe. Don't you think we understand and accept that? Don't you think we know there are idiots who misuse guns and you folks judge us all for their bad actions? You folks foam at the mouth every time a gun is misused, and ignore that 99.9%+ of guns in civilian hands are never used in a crime or to hurt anyone.

I understand I am statistically one butt-hair less safe by simply owning a gun. If I didn't own a gun there would be zero chance of me accidentally hurting myself with it. That's still no reason for me to want to give up my guns. I understand and have worked hard to negate that safety issue via training and common sense safety practices. So, I use my guns for recreation, hunting and self-defense should the improbable ever occur.

I don't need you telling me riding my motorcycle is a less safe form of transportation, or that lying out in the sun could give me skin cancer, or that the cheeseburger I had for lunch was less healthy than a salad. And I certainly don't need you trying to convince me that guns have no purpose other than to kill, or I'm too stupid to own one because a tiny fraction gun owners are a problem. Or that a few more laws are going to stop the sick or evil folks who use guns to kill. They don't obey laws to begin with. But thanks for your concern.

 

[ivwshane]

You guys are debating a dead topic. You will never get a significant gun ban in America. If you have the votes then go do it. Talk to a senator and have a bill drafted. See if it passes. Even if you are successful it would be impossible to get many folks to turn in their guns. If you only ban a particular class of guns then your ban will be worthless due to the mountain of guns that would still be in civilian hands, not to mention those who would refuse to give up the banned guns. The last assault weapons ban didn't do a thing to reduce gun violence. Didn't that teach you anything?

So keep railing on about owning a gun making you statistically less safe. Don't you think we understand and accept that? Don't you think we know there are idiots who misuse guns and you folks judge us all for their bad actions? You folks foam at the mouth every time a gun is misused, and ignore that 99.9%+ of guns in civilian hands are never used in a crime or to hurt anyone.

I understand I am statistically one butt-hair less safe by simply owning a gun. If I didn't own a gun there would be zero chance of me accidentally hurting myself with it. That's still no reason for me to want to give up my guns. I understand and have worked hard to negate that safety issue via training and common sense safety practices. So, I use my guns for recreation, hunting and self-defense should the improbable ever occur.

I don't need you telling me riding my motorcycle is a less safe form of transportation, or that lying out in the sun could give me skin cancer, or that the cheeseburger I had for lunch was less healthy than a salad. And I certainly don't need you trying to convince me that guns have no purpose other than to kill, or I'm too stupid to own one because a tiny fraction gun owners are a problem. Or that a few more laws are going to stop the sick or evil folks who use guns to kill. They don't obey laws to begin with. But thanks for your concern.

Hey, I'm sure we can all agree that YOU are a responsible gun owner.








That is, until you AREN'T.

 

[fskimospy]

You guys are debating a dead topic. You will never get a significant gun ban in America. If you have the votes then go do it. Talk to a senator and have a bill drafted. See if it passes. Even if you are successful it would be impossible to get many folks to turn in their guns. If you only ban a particular class of guns then your ban will be worthless due to the mountain of guns that would still be in civilian hands, not to mention those who would refuse to give up the banned guns. The last assault weapons ban didn't do a thing to reduce gun violence. Didn't that teach you anything?

Meh, banning guns would be a good thing for America so the important thing is to keep pushing for it. Just because something is difficult to do doesn’t mean it’s not worth doing.

So keep railing on about owning a gun making you statistically less safe. Don't you think we understand and accept that? Don't you think we know there are idiots who misuse guns and you folks judge us all for their bad actions? You folks foam at the mouth every time a gun is misused, and ignore that 99.9%+ of guns in civilian hands are never used in a crime or to hurt anyone.

I understand I am statistically one butt-hair less safe by simply owning a gun. If I didn't own a gun there would be zero chance of me accidentally hurting myself with it. That's still no reason for me to want to give up my guns. I understand and have worked hard to negate that safety issue via training and common sense safety practices. So, I use my guns for recreation, hunting and self-defense should the improbable ever occur.

Considering about 2/3rds of gun owners list self protection as their primary purpose in owning a firearm it would appear that most do not realize it makes them less safe. The more we can educate people about this the more we can likely undermine support for gun ownership.

I don't need you telling me riding my motorcycle is a less safe form of transportation, or that lying out in the sun could give me skin cancer, or that the cheeseburger I had for lunch was less healthy than a salad. And I certainly don't need you trying to convince me that guns have no purpose other than to kill, or I'm too stupid to own one because a tiny fraction gun owners are a problem.

None of those examples are analogous to owning a gun for protection.

Or that a few more laws are going to stop the sick or evil folks who use guns to kill. They don't obey laws to begin with. But thanks for your concern.

Since criminals don’t obey laws why have any laws?

 

[mikeymikec]

You guys are debating a dead topic.

I agree, which is why I don't normally participate in gun control discussions because I'm pretty sure "I've seen everything" when it comes to denialist arguments from pro-gunners. The fact that you're adopting the opposite approach in agreeing that gun ownership does not make you safer just adds a unusually honest and overtly callous twist to the usual theme.

Maybe with some more activism (despite denialists' attempts to claim that activists are "crisis actors" etc) the US will reach the stage of acceptance that general firearms ownership does not make a society civilised or free or safer, then a whole different discussion starts once the participants are genuinely at that table to have an honest discussion about what to do about it (because you're right on one point, laws on their own will achieve little unless the populace supports those laws and acts in the spirit of them).

Then you skipped back to the usual theme of comparing guns to things that aren't designed to kill people, rendering any discussion as virtually pointless as discussing an alcoholic's recovery with them when they have no interest in changing their habits.

The only reason I started this thread was to challenge a point that @TallBill made in the P&N humour thread (about improving gun control laws is complicated and why bother doing it for an outlier statistic) without further de-railing that thread, because I think stupid points should be challenged, but as expected he has not taken me up on it, instead opting for the double-down and liking anecdotes that agree with his position and disliking ones that don't.

 

[IJTSSG]

You guys are debating a dead topic. You will never get a significant gun ban in America. If you have the votes then go do it. Talk to a senator and have a bill drafted. See if it passes. Even if you are successful it would be impossible to get many folks to turn in their guns. If you only ban a particular class of guns then your ban will be worthless due to the mountain of guns that would still be in civilian hands, not to mention those who would refuse to give up the banned guns. The last assault weapons ban didn't do a thing to reduce gun violence. Didn't that teach you anything?

So keep railing on about owning a gun making you statistically less safe. Don't you think we understand and accept that? Don't you think we know there are idiots who misuse guns and you folks judge us all for their bad actions? You folks foam at the mouth every time a gun is misused, and ignore that 99.9%+ of guns in civilian hands are never used in a crime or to hurt anyone.

I understand I am statistically one butt-hair less safe by simply owning a gun. If I didn't own a gun there would be zero chance of me accidentally hurting myself with it. That's still no reason for me to want to give up my guns. I understand and have worked hard to negate that safety issue via training and common sense safety practices. So, I use my guns for recreation, hunting and self-defense should the improbable ever occur.

I don't need you telling me riding my motorcycle is a less safe form of transportation, or that lying out in the sun could give me skin cancer, or that the cheeseburger I had for lunch was less healthy than a salad. And I certainly don't need you trying to convince me that guns have no purpose other than to kill, or I'm too stupid to own one because a tiny fraction gun owners are a problem. Or that a few more laws are going to stop the sick or evil folks who use guns to kill. They don't obey laws to begin with. But thanks for your concern.

Very well said. You get it, ignore the gun grabbers.

 

[compuwiz1]

Very well said. You get it, ignore the gun grabbers.

Also, stop giving any of these people who are not USA residents, any time. Pay them no mind. I'm a bad example. I should have never engaged the dick head. They have zero effect on our policy, cannot vote here and should STFU about how we run our country. It's none of their business.

 

[Thebobo]

Looks likes I'm just in time for......

NEW rules 4.20

● Ban all guns except registered pistols and real* hunting rifles.
● No large clips/magazines for pistols or rifles.*
● One registered pistol and two registered hunting rifles per person. You get a title for each gun. The exact numbers can be negotiated.
● Limit amount of ammunition you can purchase per month.*
● Buy back programs, after 2 years be a felony to own an unregistered gun without title.
● No gun show selling
● Private sales illegal without transfer of gun title.
● No silencers
● No gun modifications "adapters" that increase amount of ammo or fire rate.
● No open carry on our streets at all period.
● No concealed carry unless you have a damn good reason.
● No immediate gun purchases.
● Complete background check.
● 10 day waiting list.
● I don't care if your McGruff before you purchase a gun you first have to take a firearm safety class.


*To be determined

 

[IJTSSG]

Looks likes I'm just in time for......

NEW rules 4.20

● Ban all guns except registered pistols and real* hunting rifles.
● No large clips/magazines for pistols or rifles.*
● One registered pistol and two registered hunting rifles per person. You get a title for each gun.
● Limit amount of ammunition you can purchase per month.*
● Buy back programs, after 2 years be a felony to own an unregistered gun without title.
● No gun show selling
● Private sales illegal without transfer of gun title.
● No silencers
● No gun modifications "adapters" that increase amount of ammo or fire rate.
● No open carry on our streets at all period.
● No concealed carry unless you have a damn good reason.
● No immediate gun purchases.
● Complete background check.
● 10 day waiting list.
● I don't care if your McGruff before you purchase a gun you first have to take a firearm safety class.


*To be determined

Nope.

 

[compuwiz1]

Looks likes I'm just in time for......

NEW rules 4.20

● Ban all guns except registered pistols and real* hunting rifles.
● No large clips/magazines for pistols or rifles.*
● One registered pistol and two registered hunting rifles per person. You get a title for each gun.
● Limit amount of ammunition you can purchase per month.*
● Buy back programs, after 2 years be a felony to own an unregistered gun without title.
● No gun show selling
● Private sales illegal without transfer of gun title.
● No silencers
● No gun modifications "adapters" that increase amount of ammo or fire rate.
● No open carry on our streets at all period.
● No concealed carry unless you have a damn good reason.
● No immediate gun purchases.
● Complete background check.
● 10 day waiting list.
● I don't care if your McGruff before you purchase a gun you first have to take a firearm safety class.


*To be determined

Anyone got a catapult I can borrow?
None of the shit you mentioned applies to the crazy democrat shooters, who were NOT NRA members. Not happening!
And are those limits in quantity because all those guns wake up and start killing people?
You are really a dumbfuck.
Keep this shit up and you'll continue to lose elections.

 

[fskimospy]

Anyone got a catapult I can borrow?
None of the shit you mentioned applies to the crazy democrat shooters, who were NOT NRA members. Not happening!
And are those limits in quantity because all those guns wake up and start killing people?
You are really a dumbfuck.
Keep this shit up and you'll continue to lose elections.

Most of the positions he cited there are overwhelmingly popular, haha. Not sure why having popular opinions would mean losing elections.

 

[compuwiz1]

Most of the positions he cited there are overwhelmingly popular, haha. Not sure why having popular opinions would mean losing elections.

Those positions are popular here, in a liberal echo chamber. These positions do not represent the entirety of America. If you think they do, you have some serious delusions going on.

 

[fskimospy]

Those positions are popular here, in a liberal echo chamber. These positions do not represent the entirety of America. If you think they do, you have some serious delusions going on.

No, those positions are popular in the entirety of America.You probably don’t believe this because you live in an extreme right wing echo chamber.

Things like universal background checks, magazine size limits, bans on certain types of rifles, etc, all enjoy strong majority support in America. The only place they don’t is among the extreme right.

 

[Thebobo]

Those positions are popular here, in a liberal echo chamber. These positions do not represent the entirety of America. If you think they do, you have some serious delusions going on.

No they are popular with all americans I think you're afraid to look into the real world

Poll: Majority backs assault weapons ban
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...y-of-americans-support-ban-on-assault-weapons

Gallup
https://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx

 

[Paladin3]

Hey, I'm sure we can all agree that YOU are a responsible gun owner.








That is, until you AREN'T.

The funny thing is, I don't need you to agree to a damn thing. This is a country where due process under the law is a fundamental right of all. That means you can't take away my constitutional rights to make yourself feel like you are accomplishing something. Deal with it, or vote and change it.

Or just continue with the same, lame talking points that we've all heard a thousand times.

 

[ivwshane]

The funny thing is, I don't need you to agree to a damn thing. This is a country where due process under the law is a fundamental right of all. That means you can't take away my constitutional rights to make yourself feel like you are accomplishing something. Deal with it, or vote and change it.

Or just continue with the same, lame talking points that we've all heard a thousand times.

I'll be voting, thanks. But I do appreciate your honesty in admitting that reasoning and logic doesn't work on you. Lol

 

[Paladin3]

Meh, banning guns would be a good thing for America so the important thing is to keep pushing for it. Just because something is difficult to do doesn’t mean it’s not worth doing.

Considering about 2/3rds of gun owners list self protection as their primary purpose in owning a firearm it would appear that most do not realize it makes them less safe. The more we can educate people about this the more we can likely undermine support for gun ownership.

None of those examples are analogous to owning a gun for protection.

Since criminals don’t obey laws why have any laws?

A whole bunch of stupid arguments.

Just because something is hard doesn't mean automatically the right or effective thing to do.

Self defense is absolute not the only reason to own a gun but probably the most important one. The consequences for failure if you happen to need to defend your life or that of your family are simply too great. Your stupid fucking statistical increase in the chance of an accident is not the defining reason to own or not own a gun. Just like you will never cut yourself if you don't own a knife, you could make the same dumb argument about a ton of household items that can potentially harm you.

You attempt to educate gun owners to the dangers of owning a gun like we don't already know. The vast majority of us take reasonable precautions, just like you do when you seatbelt up in your car to mitigate the chance of injury. It's called be a responsible adult. I know you think everyone is just a idiot you need to rescue, but get over yourself.

Most people do obey laws and that's why we have them. When we already have a multitude of laws making shootings and murder illegal, why do you want gun ban laws that will only serve to strip the constitutional and basic self-defense rights of the many and not do a damn thing to stop the few who are the problem. And, PLEASE, work within the real world and understand a complete gun ban isn't possible.

Again, if you have the votes then go do something about it and change the law. Or just continue to masturbate to the fiction that you are doing something by "educating" the world to how correct your way of thinking is for all of us. It's right up there with "Think about the children!"

 

[Paladin3]

Looks likes I'm just in time for......

NEW rules 4.20

● Ban all guns except registered pistols and real* hunting rifles.
● No large clips/magazines for pistols or rifles.*
● One registered pistol and two registered hunting rifles per person. You get a title for each gun. The exact numbers can be negotiated.
● Limit amount of ammunition you can purchase per month.*
● Buy back programs, after 2 years be a felony to own an unregistered gun without title.
● No gun show selling
● Private sales illegal without transfer of gun title.
● No silencers
● No gun modifications "adapters" that increase amount of ammo or fire rate.
● No open carry on our streets at all period.
● No concealed carry unless you have a damn good reason.
● No immediate gun purchases.
● Complete background check.
● 10 day waiting list.
● I don't care if your McGruff before you purchase a gun you first have to take a firearm safety class.


*To be determined

Get it voted into law or STFU.

 

[Paladin3]

I'll be voting, thanks. But I do appreciate your honesty in admitting that reasoning and logic doesn't work on you. Lol

Yuk, yuk! Nice retort. Reason and logic are subjective and every asshole thinks theirs is the only one that is correct.

If you are every in a situation where you need to defend your life or that of your family and you will want a gun. Everything we hold dear in this world is protected by armed individuals, why not me and my family (other than you don't personally hold us dear.) Force is the defining factor that settles arguments when negotiations fail. Until we can excise the lingering barbarism from within the human race, we need to be ready to use violence as a last resort to protect ourselves and end threats if necessary. Those willing to lay down arms for perceived safety are fools who will be looking to those who did not if the shit ever hits the fan. No mater how statistically unlikely it is that the said shit will hit said fan, I'm not willing to bet my life or my family on it not happening. Lastly, it's a ton of fun to put holes in paper targets at 100 yards, not to mention deer meat tastes good.

Is that enough reason and logic for you? Wrong flavor, huh?

 

[Thebobo]

Yuk, yuk! Nice retort. Reason and logic are subjective and every asshole thinks theirs is the only one that is correct.

If you are every in a situation where you need to defend your life or that of your family and you will want a gun. Everything we hold dear in this world is protected by armed individuals, why not me and my family (other than you don't personally hold us dear.) Force is the defining factor that settles arguments when negotiations fail. Until we can excise the lingering barbarism from within the human race, we need to be ready to use violence as a last resort to protect ourselves and end threats if necessary. Those willing to lay down arms for perceived safety are fools who will be looking to those who did not if the shit ever hits the fan. No mater how statistically unlikely it is that the said shit will hit said fan, I'm not willing to bet my life or my family on it not happening. Lastly, it's a ton of fun to put holes in paper targets at 100 yards, not to mention deer meat tastes good.

Is that enough reason and logic for you? Wrong flavor, huh?

Lol what a load of tripe.

 

[Thebobo]

Get it voted into law or STFU.

Working on it and no.