The four gun-problems, on two levels.

[Phoenix86]

What is the desired end result of gun control or even the complete ban of firearms? If the desired result is to to lower the amount of deaths and injuries in America aren't there other options to will save many more lives without infringing on anyone's constitutional rights or requiring a constitutional amendment?

This is a large problem with many (not all) gun control advocates. Their ultimate goal is 0 guns, which is why they gladly support any and all gun control laws. This leads to ineffective restrictions such as "assault" rifle bans where things like fore grips, or "high" capacity magazines and such are banned.

 

[sm625]

Right now I see four distinct manifestations of gun ownership.

1) Guns used in gang violence

2) Guns used for mass shootings

3) Guns used for domestic violence

4) Guns used for suicide

1) Gangs are primarily a result of bad parenting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1xf78EltKM One of the points he makes is that fathers are responsible for far more vocabulary development than mothers. The video provides facts on this. People who cannot express their grievances through words ultimately end up in gangs. This is the mechanism or conduit that leads children from single mother households into gang life.

2) Mass shootings are primarily a result of big pharma.

3) Domestic violence is part bad parenting (the link above also talks about this), and part society. Bad mate choices provoked by broken and bad media stereotypes, culture, feminism, marxism, and all things Left. Basically this is a result of our culture promoting and glorifying the alpha male bad boy type who is statistically more likely to sleep around and bring in more conflict and destabilize a relationship and beat his partner when she objects to his choices. Our culture does NOT glorify the types of characteristics that lead to stable long term relationships.

4) Result of injustice and a broken culture.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

1) Gangs are primarily a result of bad parenting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1xf78EltKM One of the points he makes is that fathers are responsible for far more vocabulary development than mothers. The video provides facts on this. People who cannot express their grievances through words ultimately end up in gangs. This is the mechanism or conduit that leads children from single mother households into gang life.

2) Mass shootings are primarily a result of big pharma.

3) Domestic violence is part bad parenting (the link above also talks about this), and part society. Bad mate choices provoked by broken and bad media stereotypes, culture, feminism, marxism, and all things Left. Basically this is a result of our culture promoting and glorifying the alpha male bad boy type who is statistically more likely to sleep around and bring in more conflict and destabilize a relationship and beat his partner when she objects to his choices. Our culture does NOT glorify the types of characteristics that lead to stable long term relationships.

4) Result of injustice and a broken culture.

So the problems are systematic and tied up in how we educate our people (widely defined).

Yet the solution is not to create basic systematic-change as I and my socialist friends suggest?

 

[Caravaggio]

What is the desired end result of gun control or even the complete ban of firearms?

1) To reduce mass homicide.

2) To restrict the ownership of lethal firearms to those who need them for legitimate purposes. (Hunting and pest control would be examples).

3) To stop young mothers being shot accidentally by their children who discharge Mom's weapon found in her hand bag, whilst shopping in the mall.

4) To stop psychotic and clinically depressed adolescents shooting all their classmates because they felt "unloved and alienated".

5) To reduce the number of cops killing young children.

6) To reduce the number of angry psychopaths killing cops.

To restore the USA to being a place of safety, honour and decency, rather than a gun range for the pissed-off and disenfranchised.

 

[Phoenix86]

1) To reduce mass homicide.

2) To restrict the ownership of lethal firearms to those who need them for legitimate purposes. (Hunting and pest control would be examples).

3) To stop young mothers being shot accidentally by their children who discharge Mom's weapon found in her hand bag, whilst shopping in the mall.

4) To stop psychotic and clinically depressed adolescents shooting all their classmates because they felt "unloved and alienated".

5) To reduce the number of cops killing young children.

6) To reduce the number of angry psychopaths killing cops.

To restore the USA to being a place of safety, honour and decency, rather than a gun range for the pissed-off and disenfranchised.

Most of those things are mental health issues not gun control.

That being said, and I thought I linked this in here before, but gun violence is WAY down in the US (still room for improvement). Just don't tell the media that.

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-since-1993-peak-public-unaware/

 

[TuSpockShakur]

Gun violence is down because of concealed carry laws, plain and simple.

 

[sm625]

So the problems are systematic and tied up in how we educate our people (widely defined).

Yet the solution is not to create basic systematic-change as I and my socialist friends suggest?

If socialists were really about creating positive change that would be one thing. But the reality is quite the opposite. The breakup of the family is the #1 core issue behind our social decay. And the driver for that is the subsidizing of irresponsible behavior and the taxing of responsible behavior. Married families are taxed significantly more than single family (single mother) households. The socialist government literally at gunpoint takes money from responsible married families and gives it to irresponsible single mothers so they can keep spreading their legs and getting knocked up by more and more of the wrong guys. The kids grow up in that environment, where without a father they do not learn how to communicate, they lose interest in their own education, they make it more difficult for their peers to obtain an education, they reach puberty faster, they are more likely to knock someone up and continue the vicious cycle. This is all brought to you by the socialist state. If the state is not stopped then expect all the social indicators to continue to trend downwards.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

SM: Thanks for thinking through a response. I respect where you are coming from and getting at.

If socialists were really about creating positive change that would be one thing. But the reality is quite the opposite.

1) I'm a socialist
2) I'm about creating positive change
3) Some socialists are about creating positive change

The breakup of the family is the #1 core issue behind our social decay.

1) The family is not breaking up (divorce rates are at a 30 year low)
2) Society is not decaying (on most metrics society is getting better)
3) Your quote lacks evidence.

And the driver for that is the subsidizing of irresponsible behavior and the taxing of responsible behavior.

1) People behave for economically irrational reasons often
2) People want to do those "societal decay" things for non economic reasons
3) Economic subsidization is not the only reason why society has problems.

Married families are taxed significantly more than single family (single mother) households.

1) In some tax situations there is a benefit to being married
2) Tax research shows that this does not affect divorce significantly (.005 correlation)
3) Taxes are unrelated to single families.

The socialist government literally at gunpoint takes money from responsible married families

see above

and gives it to irresponsible single mothers so they can keep spreading their legs and getting knocked

Would you prefer they have an abortion?

I'm radically pro life.

up by more and more of the wrong guys.

1) 65% of poor people do NOT stay in the bottom quintile
2) More poor children does not mean more poor adults
3) A good, productive, citizen did not have the 'wrong' dad

The kids grow up in that environment, where without a father they do not learn how to communicate, they lose interest in their own education, they make it more difficult for their peers to obtain an education, they reach puberty faster, they are more likely to knock someone up and continue the vicious cycle.

1) Poverty is the problem, not the father
2) Being born into poverty doesn't have to be a life sentence
3) Helping people in poverty is the only rational conclusion from your argument

This is all brought to you by the socialist state. If the state is not stopped then expect all the social indicators to continue to trend downwards.

We need to expand social systems to help people escape the problems of poverty.

I am happy to provide a citations for anything i've said you think is controvertible.

 

[Charlie98]

1) The family is not breaking up (divorce rates are at a 30 year low)

Because no one is going through the trouble to get married anymore...

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Because no one is going through the trouble to get married anymore...

1) 78% of never married women over 25 say it's because they need a man with a stable job.
2) Socialist systems can increase employment stability.
3) Socialist systems that increase employment stability will increase the marriage rate.


A) Now we work a 60 hour a week 'salaried' positions after 5+ years of additional education.
B) Or we work two 20 hour a week 'wage' positions in which we are trapped for life.
C) No one works a 40 hour a week union job that pays for beer and bills.

With other major indicators improving, perhaps marriage doesn't matter as much as a good marriage?

 

[Rebel_L]

"If I had 1hour to save the earth, I would spend 59min specifying the problem and 1 min solving it" - some smart person

Right now I see four distinct manifestations of gun ownership.

I also see this working on two levels of loss: Respect and Love (Ethos and Pathos).

1) Guns used in gang violence
-Need to gain or maintain respect
-Lack of love for the 'other' gang

2) Guns used for mass shootings
-Loss of love form others
-Desire for respect for one's world-view

3) Guns used for domestic violence
- Disrespect for the feelings of another
- Loss of love for the person to be harmed

4) Guns used for suicide
- Loss of love for self
- Loss of respect for others impacted

Thoughts?

While I would likely use a little more mental health related terminology to express what your saying I agree with your initial thoughts.

The tricky part though comes with trying to address the problem. I think you would agree with me that loss of love or loss of respect are not situations that can ever be controlled. (we can never make the world so that people do not ever experience loss of love or respect, we can at best attempt to increase the available love/respect surrounding someone so the impact of individual losses are less likely to have a catastrophic impact).

So if the base problem can never be completely solved, then gun control is all about risk management. The amount of risk different people are willing to accept of course varies (real and perceived) and this is where I think the not agreeing on what level of control is acceptable comes from.

Something that I think we are generally speaking lacking to actually come to some sort of consensus on what agreeable controls might be is actual risk information. Now I know there are many stats out there, but statistics are generally very poorly understood by people. The way the media reports anything with risk related statistics also doesn't help as all the reporting I ever seem to see is trying to sensationalize things rather than do a good job of explaining what's going on.

In a problem where human irrationality is part of the equation there is never an absolute answer and things start having a lot more relevance in terms of risk. I believe that if good risk assessments were done on all the activities that people do on a routine basis people would be shocked by how they misplace their sense of risk with where it actually lies.(never having seen something of the sort, I cannot say for sure, but considering the things some people worry about I would guess most of us would find a few surprises) It always seems like no one is interested in that, and that the ones who are end up being screamed down with chanting about how one accident is one too many.