The End of Gun Control

[RestoreTheJoy]

Would you still think that if it were your partner, parent or child that was killed?

And why is it that societies try to restrict bomb making materials or chemical weapons if bombs themselves are not the problem?

The programmed numbness of society to gun deaths - and rationalisations such as above - or shifting the blame elsewhere- in my view is the problem.

Gun deaths need putting into context.
Gun deaths are similar order to breast cancer deaths .So should congress stop research into cancer since it costs a huge sum of money and the fatality rates are low enough to be just one of those things?


Should research stop into vehicle safety - since that death rate is similar too?
Clearly not. The death rate is too high.

Of course I would still think that guns are inanimate objects that require someone with an agenda to pick them up. Truth doesn't change because my circumstances did, in your scenario.

There is nothing wrong with restricting dangerous chemicals, especially if the same kind of nut jobs who are suddenly killing people decide to use them in that way, and it has happened. That has always been the case. And the 2nd Amendment does not protect the right of a person to retain dangerous chemicals. This is an inappropriate comparison.

The blame rests squarely on the ones who are increasingly perpetrating damage with guns, cars, bombs, knives whatever they can use. We have to figure out as a society how we have failed the kids. Was it adultery, divorce, families failing etc, so kids were raised basically without parental figures and in daycare by paid caregivers? Was it a society that got away from God and His commandments? Is it the poisoned food, water, or massive chemicals in everything that altered them? All of them? What the heck is going on? We need to find out.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

Another problem with guns is they just tend to make things worse.

Whatever situation you are facing, guns escalate things. One of the problems with having a gun is that it emboldens people to actually seek conflict so that they can then justifiably pull out their guns. There was a case in Texas where a bunch of young adults were partying outside down the street at 10pm or so. A firefighter that lived in the neighborhood got tired of the noise and decided to intervene. He took his gun with him. The confrontation started with a debate that turned into an argument. He escalated the conflict by talking smack and egging them on and when a physical altercation becomes imminent THEN he whips out his gun and says, "I fear for my life". He then calls the police while the people he is arguing with likewise call the police. The firefighter has the gun trained on one guy, the other guy's brother (or friend) tries to sneak up on the firefighter and the firefighter "fearing for his life" shoots and kills one of them. Firefighter was found guilty btw.

Had the firefigher "not" have had a gun the entire situation would have played out differently. For starters, he wouldn't have been emboldened to pick a fight with a group of people while outnumbered 6 to one. He would have been more inclined to be more civil and if that failed to simply call the police.

Yes, there are stories of people saving their lives or livelihood because they were armed. But those stories are few and far between compared to the stories in which innocent people are hurt or killed.

Sometimes possession deescalates a situation. If you know everyone on the block is unarmed by law, but you, being a criminal who does not follow the law, are packing, then you've got some easy targets there for whatever you wish to perpetrate. If you have no idea who else may be armed, that may be enough to deter you, the criminal with bad intentions.

 

[Mayzoo]

I think that someone should have to get as much training to buy a gun as he has to buy a car.

Sadly, many people think this as completely unreasonable.

In the US all you need to buy a car (when I last bought) was money and/or credit. One does not have to have a driver's license to buy a car.

 

[Nithavela]

In the US all you need to buy a car (when I last bought) was money and/or credit. One does not have to have a driver's license to buy a car.

https://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/07/health/us-highest-crash-death-rate/index.html

Figures.

 

[CitizenD]

I know! They could never be used for something useful like defending one's self or family. Leave that to the police who are only minutes away when seconds count.

A person is far more likely to kill themselves with a gun than to ever shoot someone else in self defense.

 

[συνείδησις]

A person is far more likely to kill themselves with a gun than to ever shoot someone else in self defense.

Some people are far more likely. Statistics don't mean anything. I bet a lot of those people in those statistics commit suicide.

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." - Mark Twain's Own Autobiography: The Chapters from the North American Review ​

 

[συνείδησις]

Sometimes possession deescalates a situation. If you know everyone on the block is unarmed by law, but you, being a criminal who does not follow the law, are packing, then you've got some easy targets there for whatever you wish to perpetrate. If you have no idea who else may be armed, that may be enough to deter you, the criminal with bad intentions.

Seems like a week doesn't go by without a video or something demonstrating this. I just saw one of a big man walking behind the counter of a fast food restaurant and start pummeling a woman cook. The female manager next to her pulled her CCW and immediately ended the assault.

 

[CitizenD]

Some people are far more likely. Statistics don't mean anything. I bet a lot of those people in those statistics commit suicide.

Yes.

And that is not important?

 

[συνείδησις]

Yes.

And that is not important?

Not to this discussion. People who want to harm themselves will find a way.

 

[Mayzoo]

https://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/07/health/us-highest-crash-death-rate/index.html

Figures.

What training is in place in Germany prior to buying a vehicle?

 

[Nithavela]

What training is in place in Germany prior to buying a vehicle?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driving_licence_in_Germany

 

[Mayzoo]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driving_licence_in_Germany

That is for obtaining a license. Of course, we have training prior to obtaining a license here as well.

You mentioned training prior to buying a gun should be just like training to buy a car. What is the training prior to buying a vehicle? Must you have a license to purchase a vehicle in Germany? Can an unlicensed individual purchase a vehicle for a licensed individual?

Hubby lived there for 3 years, and he stated that decades ago all one had to have in Germany to purchase a vehicle was funds, just like here in the states.

 

[Mayzoo]

Wonderfull, semantic games. Thanks for wasting my time. On the ignore list you go.

Requesting clarity is semantics? I guess I should have just assumed you meant what you said and went on a bender? So much for treating someone with respect enough to request clarity rather than jump on what you said.

On ignore I go . Which is fine since I do not ignore people, but I am quite content to be ignored by those who do not adhere to treating others with respect.

 

[dgiharris]

Sometimes possession deescalates a situation. If you know everyone on the block is unarmed by law, but you, being a criminal who does not follow the law, are packing, then you've got some easy targets there for whatever you wish to perpetrate. If you have no idea who else may be armed, that may be enough to deter you, the criminal with bad intentions.

This is really a theoretical argument with no real basis in reality. You are assuming criminals think rationally which they more often than not do not.

Are there situations in which owning a gun results in positive outcomes and lives saved? Absolutely. I can easily go online and find several feel good stories about someone having a gun in the right place and right time and they save the day.

But the smarter and harder question to ask is: If you look at the ENTIRE LANDSCAPE of guns and gun ownership and use in this country, if you were to add up all the negatives and all the positives what is the net result?

And the data shows that the net result is negative.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/more-guns-do-not-stop-more-crimes-evidence-shows/

There is a quote from the Movie "Men in Black" that sticks with me... "A person is smart, people are stupid..."

When looking at the whole of the US, we are a bunch of stupid people. This notion that increasing the amount of guns will lead to a safer America is just not true. Think about every stupid testosterone fueled situation and then ask yourself "Would the people involved possessing a gun help the situation?"

Then there is the matter of simple everyday accidents, a kid finds a gun and then we have another sad headline, like clockwork, at least once a week in this country...

Then throw in suicide, owning a gun DRAMATICALLY impacts the success rates of suicides.

So am I saying we should ban guns? No. But what I am saying is that we need to take a hard and honest look at all of our preconceived notions about guns and be honest with ourselves...

 

[dgiharris]

Seems like a week doesn't go by without a video or something demonstrating this. I just saw one of a big man walking behind the counter of a fast food restaurant and start pummeling a woman cook. The female manager next to her pulled her CCW and immediately ended the assault.

the numbers are not in your favor.

Gun related crimes, accidents, and stupidity far outweigh gun related hero-saves by law abiding gun toting citizens.

 

[συνείδησις]

the numbers are not in your favor.

Gun related crimes, accidents, and stupidity far outweigh gun related hero-saves by law abiding gun toting citizens.

It's not a numbers game.

 

[Mountainmike]

The fact that the gun lobby tries to suppress injury research , indeed CDC are barred from conducting research on guns says it all. NRA knows the figures say ownership makes life much more dangerous. The good guy vs bad guy dichotomy is false.

All the big lobbies from tobacco to corn have followed the same path. First try to produce bogus statistics supporting the cause, then when that fails, try to suppress real data collection , try to dismiss adverse studies as pseudoscience, and buy politicians to prevent studies or votes against them : claiming they are misrepresented by hidden agendas.

Notice the similarities?
The corn lobby on obesity saying sugar is not bad for you it is the way some abuse it that leads to obesity! So net result - most of America got fat, with enough politicians bribed ( sorry I mean campaign funded) to stop vital legislation harming corn lobby interests

Ultimately it takes time, but truth is unstoppable. Vested interests can slow it for decades but ultimately truth wins,

And the truth is obviuous. Guns make the world a much more dangerous place no matter who owns them. And whilst gun deaths rank in similar order to Breast cancer and vehicle fatalities the status quo is just not acceptable.

At some point there will be a tipping point. A black swan. It will start a spiral that will marginalise the gun lobby, as it did the tobacco and corn lobby before them

Hard to know from where it will come. But as I suggested, one possibility is the ability to print replica guns may have the opposite effect to the freedom the gun lobby craves : it might flood the market with dangerous fakes that blow up when used , injuring blinding and maiming thousands in increasing numbers , and with so many injuries nobody might trusts guns any more. Congress will be forced to act.

This is really a theoretical argument with no real basis in reality. You are assuming criminals think rationally which they more often than not do not.

Are there situations in which owning a gun results in positive outcomes and lives saved? Absolutely. I can easily go online and find several feel good stories about someone having a gun in the right place and right time and they save the day.

But the smarter and harder question to ask is: If you look at the ENTIRE LANDSCAPE of guns and gun ownership and use in this country, if you were to add up all the negatives and all the positives what is the net result?

And the data shows that the net result is negative.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/more-guns-do-not-stop-more-crimes-evidence-shows/

There is a quote from the Movie "Men in Black" that sticks with me... "A person is smart, people are stupid..."

When looking at the whole of the US, we are a bunch of stupid people. This notion that increasing the amount of guns will lead to a safer America is just not true. Think about every stupid testosterone fueled situation and then ask yourself "Would the people involved possessing a gun help the situation?"

Then there is the matter of simple everyday accidents, a kid finds a gun and then we have another sad headline, like clockwork, at least once a week in this country...

Then throw in suicide, owning a gun DRAMATICALLY impacts the success rates of suicides.

So am I saying we should ban guns? No. But what I am saying is that we need to take a hard and honest look at all of our preconceived notions about guns and be honest with ourselves...

 

[dgiharris]

It's not a numbers game.

that is exactly what it is, it is a numbers game.

When the numbers and data is on your side, then you are right.

When the numbers and data is not on your side, then you are wrong.

It is as simple as that.

Again, I'm not calling for the ban of guns. What I am calling for is the acknowledgement of data, evidence and facts in our arguments. And if we do that, then we come to the conclusion that reasonable gun control methods and laws would result in fewer deaths per year. Now, will it erase all gun crimes and accidents? No. but it will prevent some and bring the numbers down.

So yes, it is a numbers game.

 

[Landon Caeli]

No how is it freedom? The design has largely been taken up by people in nations with tight gun control and successfully low murder rates . The person uploading it is only doing it to circumvent their own law. So while a smug American has allowed distribution, and while he may think himself clever, he has facilitated the breaking of laws in other countries. If Americans want to go shooting people with guns then fine - knock yourselves out if that's what you think freedom is.

Really, the only part of your response that I understood was the last sentence. But I don't even own any guns, so I won't be shooting any people.

...I just don't need the hassle of worrying about guns in my house, but I'm all for other people who choose to own weapons. Good for them.

 

[Zoii]

Really, the only part of your response that I understood was the last sentence. But I don't even own any guns, so I won't be shooting any people.

...I just don't need the hassle of worrying about guns in my house, but I'm all for other people who choose to own weapons. Good for them.

What I was pointing out is that, particularly for a society that has successfully implemented gun control and has a resultant very low death toll; this type of bypass of law isnt freedom; its a gross injustice.

You have to understand that most countries abhor what the USA does in relation to guns - so to foster something that causes a break down in the controls that other nations have is disgraceful