What do we do to prevent another Las Vegas?

[Obliquinaut]

Keep in mind there are two sort of levels of guns saving lives. One is directly in other words I shoot someone because they are at the moment threatening me or others around me.

So there's no statistics to back up the contention that guns save more lives than not? That they truly do protect us more often than not?

The other I consider to be indirectly that is to say that the criminal never tries because they know there is a good chance that someone else is armed. This second one really cannot be shown through stats.

If this reasoning were sound you would think the crime rate in the USA would be lower than any other nation on earth (at least in the Developed World) because we have about the highest per capita gun ownership rate of any developed nation.

Yet we have among the HIGHEST prison populations, we have one of the HIGHEST RATES OF GUN HOMICIDES.

Where is the disconnect? (Or are we simply to accept the statements of the NRA who has actively lobbied to ensure NO GUN STATISTICS CAN EVEN BE COLLECTED?)

 

[dgiharris]

It would be nice if more Americans studied the actual historical facts of that bit of their history, instead of the "plucky minutemen fighting tyranny with nothing more than determination" myth.

Yes, yes, I know that countries need their founding mythologies and all, but it gets frustrating when trying to talk to someone about real world facts who thinks The Patriot was a documentary and Red Dawn is an instructional video.

I know, I was talking to someone several months ago about France and he says, "What has France ever done for us?" And then I said, "You know, they were instrumental in the founding of this country, without them, we could have never won the Revolutionary War."

He scratched his head and said, "France didn't do nothin in the Revolutionary War..."

I then explained to him about France sending us arms and allying with us...

yeah... I'm constantly amazed how so many of us Americans are clueless about so much of our own history...

it's embarrassing

 

[LoAmmi]

I do not understand.

The ability to express hasn't changed all that much. We can post on the Internet quicker, sure, but we could have written a letter to the editor or published our own newsletter or whatever in the past. It isn't fundamentally different.

 

[PeachyKeane]

That culture plays a role instead of banning certain guns changing the CULTURE would do much.

Change the culture how?

 

[Armoured]

Yet, as was pointed out human nature has not change. The weapons have, but so have the tools used to express the first amendment and I do not see as many people up in arms about that.

You also have a standing army now. Kinda relevant.

 

[dogs4thewin]

So there's no statistics to back up the contention that guns save more lives than not? That they truly do protect us more often than not?



If this reasoning were sound you would think the crime rate in the USA would be lower than any other nation on earth (at least in the Developed World) because we have about the highest per capita gun ownership rate of any developed nation.

Yet we have among the HIGHEST prison populations, we have one of the HIGHEST RATES OF GUN HOMICIDES.

Where is the disconnect? (Or are we simply to accept the statements of the NRA who has actively lobbied to ensure NO GUN STATISTICS CAN EVEN BE COLLECTED?)

Much not all, but a LOT more of our prison population than need be are in for NON-VIOLENT offenses if it is non-violent then by definition a gun was neither used nor threatened.

 

[dogs4thewin]

Change the culture how?

By for example, having a focus more on resolving conflict in a non-violent way, as to how to do that I am not completely sure.

 

[jardiniere]

But you only need bond money if you have loss your freedom because of something you supposedly did.

Supposedly so. Indeed.

 

[dgiharris]

....While the rest of the world has said that climate change is a major problem and we should work together to solve it, America has said...nah.

There is a difference in the basic psychology/sociology of America which is why we need guns.

I agree with a lot of what you said however i would replace the word "need" with the word "want".

i've come full circle on this argument and am now thinking we need to ban guns or at the very least impose much more stricter gun control laws because....

the data. Data doesn't lie.

and the data consistently shows that guns cause more problems than they solve.

Show me data (not anecdotes) about how guns lower crime rate and save lives and I'll be on your side. But the more I study this issue and the more i look at the data of not just our country, but other countries... the more the data "screams" that guns cause more problems than they solve.

I know, I grew up on all the "Founding Fathers..." and "2nd Amendment" and "protect against tyranny" arguments. However, the data does not lie.

Truth is, government just doesn't care whether we have arms or not. They still kill the citizenry at a ridiculous rate compared to other industralized nations. Similarly, we have the worst incarceration rate...

So if guns were so great why isn't it reflected in any data or statistics?

All we can do is cherry pick an anecdote but the reality is anecdotes do NOT equal data.

and the data doesn't lie...

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I also know that many Americans don't care. The only thing we all really care about is the sanctity of the almighty gun from whom all bullets flow.

It's even more sad how many "good samaritans" there AREN'T..... --- how many are religious, but walk buy on the other side of the road to avoid seeing the needy, homeless and sick ones. Instead, they think the government cares for them ... and so they just go to 'church' lolly-lolly-la-da......

 

[dogs4thewin]

The ability to express hasn't changed all that much. We can post on the Internet quicker, sure, but we could have written a letter to the editor or published our own newsletter or whatever in the past. It isn't fundamentally different.

Not only quicker but also more effectively. Back in the day there was no way; at least not without taking DAYS on end ( after it was printed which in and of itself took days, but even after it was printed to reach NEARLY as many people as it can now literally with the press of a button. It was much harder to say something you did not mean ( in print) in the heat of the moment, and once it was out it was out forever.

 

[LoAmmi]

Not only quicker but also more effectively. Back in the day there was no way; at least not without taking DAYS on end ( after it was printed which in and of itself took days, but even after it was printed to reach NEARLY as many people as it can now literally with the press of a button. It was much harder to say something you did not mean ( in print) in the heat of the moment, and once it was out it was out forever.

It still isn't what I'd consider a fundamental change.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Or Orlando? Or San Bernardino? Or Columbine? Or Newtown?

Political action? Legal action? Social action? Personal action?

Or should we even bother? Do we simply resign ourselves to going through these motions again in another 6 months or so? Or are we counting on these kinds of incidents to just go away?

Thoughts?

Nothing to be done. The only thing that ever stops us mourning the last bloodbath is the inevitable next one.

 

[Obliquinaut]

Much not all, but a LOT more of our prison population than need be are in for NON-VIOLENT offenses if it is non-violent then by definition a gun was neither used nor threatened.

Good point.

Doesn't really address my overall point though: if more guns means more security, why do we have among the highest per capita rate of gun homicides in the developed world?

 

[dogs4thewin]

Good point.

Doesn't really address my overall point though: if more guns means more security, why do we have among the highest per capita rate of gun homicides in the developed world?

because people are violent and use guns instead of words. I know that the places that have more LEGAL guns tend to have less crime. This applies both on the state and city level. Also poverty is linked to violence as well and poor people have guns and richer people have guns as was the case here.

 

[dogs4thewin]

I am taking a break from this thread it may last a few hours may last a day or two, but right now I am feeling guilt over my late father ( of almost three years (do not know what is with that), and as such would like to take a break (probably short) from "heavy" threads.

 

[Hank77]

Alrighty. If every form of weapon is just as dangerous as a gun, why advocate for guns? If they were banned, you could just pick up a knife, ball bat, rock, brick, hand tool, bicycle lock, or even just use your fists and be just as effective.

None of those items would work for what I use a gun for.

 

[SolomonVII]

I also know that many Americans don't care. The only thing we all really care about is the sanctity of the almighty gun from whom all bullets flow.

Argument from emotion.

You have a heart that bleed and those who do not agree with your solutions are obviously lacking in a heart.

Everybody hurts. Everybody cries. Everybody has emotions too.
But there is a place for a brain in decision making too. Hearts lack in the gray matter.

 

[Uncle Siggy]

I think the overarching problem is we as a Western society have failed in general to police ourselves and others and expect government to all things for us.

 

[Hank77]

Gun Violence Archive
Home Invasions | Gun Violence Archive
Defensive Use | Gun Violence Archive

Which is large part of why "I need a gun for self defence" is a flawed argument. Having a gun might be a reassuring security blanket for some, but I just have great difficulty imagining them being more likely to help than harm most situations.