Guns & Gun Violence

[neosapien]

Give me all your guns. I'll protect you. Scouts honor.
Love,
USA

 

[see4]

Give me all your guns. I'll protect you. Scouts honor.
Love,
USA

 

[undercovergrow]

But you seem to be making some iffy assumptions, if I may say so without offending. You're assuming that modern gun control legislation would mean few people carrying concealed guns. Couldn't laws be done in a way to allow good gun owners to carry all they want, but at the same time making it more difficult for crazies to get guns?

Can't the gun loving crowd seem concerned enough to make some compromise? That's what turns so many young people off the NRA. Unwillingness to at least compromise. And young people vote.

this is the problem: the left has made it impossible for "good" gun owners to be able to carry, they keep adding "gun free zones" like it's really going to make a difference. the shooter for the batman movies purposefully bypassed other movie theaters to go to the one he attacked specifically because it was a "gun free zone." what is so hard to understand that there are people out there in society that want to hurt other people, and will do it with whatever means necessary...like driving a car through a crowd of people. the People have guns to keep the government in check. every time you hear a politician say "we have to do something" they really mean "we are really trying hard to get you all to give up your weapons"

 

[ZaraBeth420]

Excellent! That is the fighting spirit.

Ok phase 2 of the training: bring it; how am I wrong? Weaken my knees with your arrestingly pungent reason and proudly cantilevered dialectic.

Ephedra. Wiring coyotes sideways since ten million BC.

You're wrong because you're hanging on to a dated view of gun rights, at least in the view of the young generation. They don't get why people want guns that can kill lots of people in a short time. They may be wrong, but they are not in doubt. And they vote. And they raise children who vote. So the gun loving crowd has to contend with them, and they want tighter restrictions on guns getting into the hands of crazy people. Not to keep good people from getting guns.

And the nra openly fights that. And it makes an impression.

 

[pnwmystery]

There were mass murders before there were guns. They were not pleasant affairs.

That's a bit misleading. Without a gun you can't pile up the body count as quickly and suddenly as without one. Moreover, more people are likely to be killed rather than injured using one.

 

[pnwmystery]

this is the problem: the left has made it impossible for "good" gun owners to be able to carry, they keep adding "gun free zones"

Gun free zones were enacted by the Bush Administration via the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 (I'll give you it was a Democratic Congress).

 

[undercovergrow]

Gun free zones were enacted by the Bush Administration via the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 (I'll give you it was a Democratic Congress).

you must have me confused for a fan of Bush...i'm not.

 

[undercovergrow]

Gun free zones were enacted by the Bush Administration via the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 (I'll give you it was a Democratic Congress).

Patriot Act.

 

[pnwmystery]

you must have me confused for a fan of Bush...i'm not.

No, I'm saying you're mislaying the blame.

 

[neosapien]

Whenever people start arguments with "the left" or "the right" my brain automatically stops listening to them.

 

[undercovergrow]

Whenever people start arguments with "the left" or "the right" my brain automatically stops listening to them.

i'm not arguing left or right. i just misunderstood you that you thought i was a fan. now you've just given me another reason to dislike him.

 

[Flaming Pie]

We have to accept that not all outcomes can be controlled.

We can only try to be as prepared as possible for the worst case scenario.

Out response time to this last violent attack was very swift and effective. We need to make sure that our police in all areas are equipped to respond swiftly to mass homicides.

You can't identify every crazy before they commit a crime. It is simply not possible.

 

[neosapien]

i'm not arguing left or right. i just misunderstood you that you thought i was a fan. now you've just given me another reason to dislike him.

You're confusung me with someone who gives a fuck. And someone else entirely.

 

[cannabineer]

Agreed. How? (Do we disempower the crazies) Surely not by making it easier for everyone to get guns.

The only way to disempower the crazies is to refuse to let them drive the agenda. Stop pointing at mass shootings like they are possessed of special enormity. They are ordinary human ugliness taken to a logical limit. Take the hit, risk the crazies and don't be held their hostage.

Where I live I cannot get many good ordinary guns. I resent the crazies' publicists for arranging this state of affairs. So I am not at peace with your premise there. It is un-Constitutionally difficult for me to get and keep ordinary guns. e.g. a SIG p210. (I want one. With the target package.) Until that is rectified I think the "making it easier to get guns" implies that it is already easy. This I hold up for mutual inspection.

 

[desert dude]

No desert dude. I am not trying to be confrontational with you, so please don't immediately become defensive.

The chart, only the chart, lets focus solely on that for a moment. ok?

That chart, does not in any way show us, as a matter of fact, that a direct correlation can be drawn between more guns equals less crimes. It shows two disparate points on one line graph, attempting to illustrate a correlation. Do you agree? If not, please explain.


View attachment 3557532

Anyone can make a line chart about two disparate things and attempt to correlate them.

What the chart shows, unambiguously, is that more guns DOES NOT lead to more gun violence. Wasn't that your original point?

"Gun violence" is down by about 50% since 1992, while gun ownership in the US is up by quite a lot, hence it is either ignorant or malicious to claim that "more guns equals more violence".

I suppose you might claim that violence committed by people using guns would be down even more if only we had "common sense gun laws". That would be a proposition that would be more difficult to argue against, except from a civil rights perspective. In places that have outlawed guns, violence by other means has increased. To me, it makes little difference if a guy kills me by sticking a knife through my liver, or shoots a hole through it. In the UK, you are much more likely to violently assaulted than you are in the US, for example. To point to the UK as something to emulate seems a self defeating argument.

Final point, let's not forget that we live in a constitutional republic, at least that is my naive fantasy, and the government is constrained from treading on civil rights. Two A is a fundamental right in the US.

 

[cannabineer]

You're wrong because you're hanging on to a dated view of gun rights,

Dated does not mean wrong. I asked you to show how I was wrong, not how i was unpopular.

at least in the view of the young generation.

So now you are the spokesperson for the entire generation of Millennials. I am an arrogant taskmaster but I will admit to it.

They don't get why people want guns that can kill lots of people

Because they are the only useful sort.

in a short time. They may be wrong, but they are not in doubt.

That is the moment in which being wrong steps from an error to an act of hubris.

And they vote.

Imagine how that impresses me, who is old enough to know when Ameroca was in the glorious ascendant. O tempora.

And they raise children who vote. So the gun loving crowd has to contend with them, and they want tighter restrictions on guns getting into the hands of crazy people. Not to keep good people from getting guns.

And the nra openly fights that. And it makes an impression.

I am glad it does. I hold the dying hope that some of your execrably coddled generation will wake the (very bad word) UP and start (even worse word) THINKING. Only they who reject the soothing lie of the utopians (and the social engineers operating them) stand a chance of propagating humanity.

 

[pnwmystery]

To me, it makes little difference if a guy kills me by sticking a knife through my liver, or shoots a hole through it. In the UK, you are much more likely to violently assaulted than you are in the US, for example. To point to the UK as something to emulate seems a self defeating argument.

The UK actually has a stricter view on what's considered assault. This is why looking at purely numbers does not tell a full story.

 

[cannabineer]

That's a bit misleading. Without a gun you can't pile up the body count as quickly and suddenly as without one. Moreover, more people are likely to be killed rather than injured using one.

Try a chariot, or a firebrand in winter.

 

[pnwmystery]

Try a chariot, or a firebrand in winter.

That'd be a headline: Man rides chariot with wheel spikes through crowded mall while yelling, "Rome is an affront to God."

 

[ZaraBeth420]

Dated does not mean wrong. I asked you to show how I was wrong, not how i was unpopular. So now you are the spokesperson for the entire generation of Millennials. I am an arrogant taskmaster but I will admit to it. Because they are the only useful sort. That is the moment in which being wrong steps from an error to an act of hubris. Imagine how that impresses me, who is old enough to know when Ameroca was in the glorious ascendant. O tempora.

I am glad it does. I hold the dying hope that some of your execrably coddled generation will wake the (very bad word) UP and start (even worse word) THINKING. Only they who reject the soothing lie of the utopians (and the social engineers operating them) stand a chance of propagating humanity.

I do think. So just because I see it different, I don't think? Come on canna...