Poll

What is your opinion on the United States' gun laws at present?

They are far too restrictive.
8 (44.4%)
They are a little restrictive.
1 (5.6%)
They are fine as it is.
2 (11.1%)
They are a little relaxed.
1 (5.6%)
They are far too relaxed.
5 (27.8%)
None of the above (please specify)
1 (5.6%)

Total Members Voted: 18

Gun Violence in the United States

  • 407 Replies
  • 28949 Views
*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Gun Violence in the United States
« on: October 03, 2015, 01:10:15 AM »
Hi everyone,
I recently watched the president's address at the white house in the aftermath of the shooting in oregon.
I wondered what the opinion of the users of this forum was.
Please share what you think about this contentious issue.
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

*

Misero

  • 1261
  • Of course it's flat. It looks that way up close.
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #1 on: October 03, 2015, 07:13:47 AM »
Here's my solution: Have pistols in locked metal cabinets in public buildings such as schools, colleges, etc.
Now, depending on the budget, they could add a fingerprint detector a keyhole. Not that a fingerprint detector is expensive, really. It's a "small" feature in a $200 phone.
I am the worst moderator ever.

Sometimes I wonder: "Why am  I on this site?"
Then I look at threads about clouds not existing and I go back to posting and lurking. Lurk moar.

*

hoppy

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 11541
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #2 on: October 03, 2015, 09:59:54 AM »
Oregon shooting is a hoax like most school shootings. How can you keep falling for the same story over and over again?
God is real.                                         
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9665708/Flat-Earth-Bible-02-of-10-The-Flat-Earth

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #3 on: October 04, 2015, 05:26:47 PM »
Oregon shooting is a hoax like most school shootings. How can you keep falling for the same story over and over again?
But you don't deny that shootings happen a lot more regularly in America then any other first-world country?
And that the rather lax gun laws are a direct cause of this?

I live in Australia, where there was a pretty nasty massacre at Port Arthur in Tasmania.
I think that 35 people were killed or something.
The government of the time then passed extreme gun legislation that basically stopped gun violence in Australia.

And about all this being hoaxes.
Admittedly, this could be true.
But who faked it, and for what benefit?
And it is also possible that the figures are not exaggerated, that these massacres are happening.
And if thats the case, then something must be done to stop this problem.
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #4 on: October 05, 2015, 08:34:56 AM »
I strongly oppose gun control.  Banning guns will just fight a symptom, not the disease.  Back when the United States banned alcohol that also seemed like a good idea at first glance but all it did was made people get alcohol illegally and increased the crime rates overall.  Banning guns would just take them away from law abiding citizens who would have used them only for self defense, and criminals could still get their hands on them.
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #5 on: October 05, 2015, 03:35:27 PM »
I strongly oppose gun control.  Banning guns will just fight a symptom, not the disease.  Back when the United States banned alcohol that also seemed like a good idea at first glance but all it did was made people get alcohol illegally and increased the crime rates overall.  Banning guns would just take them away from law abiding citizens who would have used them only for self defense, and criminals could still get their hands on them.
Agree 100%. 

Plus, the Second Amendment is pretty clear.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #6 on: October 05, 2015, 07:45:30 PM »
I strongly oppose gun control.  Banning guns will just fight a symptom, not the disease.  Back when the United States banned alcohol that also seemed like a good idea at first glance but all it did was made people get alcohol illegally and increased the crime rates overall.  Banning guns would just take them away from law abiding citizens who would have used them only for self defense, and criminals could still get their hands on them.
But people only have guns for self defence because they are scared of criminals, who probably also have guns.
Americans often bring up points like this, the point that guns fill a societal niche, that they help maintain social order.
That there are benefits to having guns, like self defence etc.

But to disprove this, all we have to do is look at other countries.
Countries that have more guns, also tend to be more violent.
Countries that have less guns, tend to be less violent.
This doesn't mean that the average person is more violent in these countries.
What it does mean is that having easy access to firearms makes it easier for people to kill each other.

I live in Australia.
Our gun laws are tight as hell.
I live on a rural property, and I am still restricted to a bolt-action rifle.
Barely anyone I know who lies in the suburbs has ever shot a gun.
People who live on farms dozens of kilometres away from the nearest one only have bolt action rifles for foxes and roos.
Australians are no less violent than Americans.
There are still murders in Australia.
But the murder rate is no where near that of America's.
In total, and per head.

And maybe criminals could still get their hands on firearms.
Australian criminals can and do get automatic weapons.
But a lot of the murders in the US aren't done by criminals, they're done by 'law abiding citizens'
I don't think that the Columbine killers were criminals when they got their guns.
They were bloody kids.
Kids in high school.
Like the people they killed.

Most of the mass shootings aren't done by 'criminals'.
Most mass shootings are done by people with mental disorders.
Who, thanks to your stupid 18th century second amendment, have access to guns.

God bless America.
You guys need it.
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #7 on: October 05, 2015, 08:31:54 PM »
So much fail in one post, where do I start?

That there are benefits to having guns, like self defence etc.
Self defense, entertainment, hunting, prevention of tyranny...

Quote
But a lot of the murders in the US aren't done by criminals, they're done by 'law abiding citizens'
I'm pretty sure murder is classified as a crime.  Therefore, a murderer by default, is not a law abiding citizen.

Quote
I don't think that the Columbine killers were criminals when they got their guns.
They illegally obtained their guns, making them criminals.  So that's what you get for not thinking.

Quote
Most of the mass shootings aren't done by 'criminals'.
By definition, every mass shooting is done by a criminal.  Did you even think when you wrote this sentence?

Quote
Most mass shootings are done by people with mental disorders.
Right.  So why exactly should my firearms be taken away?

Quote
thanks to your stupid 18th century second amendment
I on the other hand, think it is a brilliant amendment.

Oh, and by the way, the US doesn't even break the top 100 countries in intentional homicide rate.



"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #8 on: October 05, 2015, 09:39:35 PM »
So much fail in one post, where do I start?

That there are benefits to having guns, like self defence etc.
Self defense, entertainment, hunting, prevention of tyranny...
You seriously need weapons for entertainment? And to what tyranny are you referring to in the US.

Quote
Quote
But a lot of the murders in the US aren't done by criminals, they're done by 'law abiding citizens'
I'm pretty sure murder is classified as a crime.  Therefore, a murderer by default, is not a law abiding citizen.
I realise that was poorly phrased. I meant pre existing criminals, before the time of the murder.

Quote
Quote
I don't think that the Columbine killers were criminals when they got their guns.
They illegally obtained their guns, making them criminals.  So that's what you get for not thinking.
But if guns were more restricted, then they wouldn't have been able to aquire them so easily, no?

Quote
Quote
Most of the mass shootings aren't done by 'criminals'.
By definition, every mass shooting is done by a criminal.  Did you even think when you wrote this sentence?
As said before, pre-existing criminals, people with a criminal record.

Quote
Quote
Most mass shootings are done by people with mental disorders.
Right.  So why exactly should my firearms be taken away?
see end of post

Quote
Quote
thanks to your stupid 18th century second amendment
I on the other hand, think it is a brilliant amendment.
Because you have the right to bear arms, does that make you a happier person?

Quote
Oh, and by the way, the US doesn't even break the top 100 countries in intentional homicide rate.
Yes, admittedly, yes.
However, when we compare the US to other first-word countries, like I said we should, then the US is pretty bad.
Not as bad as Rwanda, but thats hardly something to boast about.

The murder rate in the US is three times higher than that of France and Canada, four times higher then that of the UK and Australia, five times higher than that of Germany and Italy.

Does this not bother you?

That four times as many people are killed in your country than in mine?

To what will you attribute this discrepancy?

Ethnic makeup perhaps?
More violent history?

Maybe being the world's policeman has made America violent at heart?

Or maybe, just maybe, the discrepancy in murder rates is because guns are not restricted enough.
Maybe the fact that four times as many Americans are murdered is because of your Second Amendment.

We don't have a second amendment.
Are our lives terrible?
Is our freedom compromised?
Are we subjects of an tyrannical despot?

No, we aren't.

Our lives and our society are both very similar to that of America.

Except we don't have the Second Amendment.
We don't have as much access to guns.
And we don't kill each other as much.
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #9 on: October 05, 2015, 11:58:23 PM »
You seriously need weapons for entertainment?
Need them for entertainment?  No, we have movies here.  And TV.  Sports also.  Lots of entertainment.  I however, also enjoy skeet shooting and target shooting.

Quote
And to what tyranny are you referring to in the US.
The same tyranny the Founding Fathers were referring to when they gave us the Second Amendment.

Quote
I realise that was poorly phrased. I meant pre existing criminals, before the time of the murder.
Oh, so first time offenders are not criminals.  So every first offender gets their first murder for free?  Seeing as you don't see them as criminals.

Quote
But if guns were more restricted, then they wouldn't have been able to aquire them so easily, no?
But you just said they were not criminals before the shootings...

Quote
As said before, pre-existing criminals, people with a criminal record.
Oh, so now 'pre-existing' criminals are only those that have been convicted of committing a crime.  Can you please be a little more consistent in your arguments?

Quote

Quote
Quote
Most mass shootings are done by people with mental disorders.
Right.  So why exactly should my firearms be taken away?
see end of post
I read the end.  I didn't see the part where someone else's mental disorder should allow for my personal property to be forcibly seized.  We also have this thing called the Fourth Amendment.

Quote
Because you have the right to bear arms, does that make you a happier person?
Absolutely!  My family's safety is my primary concern.  The fact that I have a firearm to be able to protect them should the need arise, makes me a happy person, indeed.

Quote
The murder rate in the US is three times higher than that of France and Canada, four times higher then that of the UK and Australia, five times higher than that of Germany and Italy.

Does this not bother you?
Yes it does.  We should make murder a crime.  Oh, wait...

Quote
That four times as many people are killed in your country than in mine?
Your country should outlaw murder, too.  Oh, wait...

Quote
To what will you attribute this discrepancy?
Urban densities.

Quote
Ethnic makeup perhaps?
Are you trying to claim that any one particular race is more violent than another?

Quote
More violent history?
Than...what?

Quote
Maybe being the world's policeman has made America violent at heart?
Being freedom loving people makes us violent? 

Quote
Or maybe, just maybe, the discrepancy in murder rates is because guns are not restricted enough.
Nope.  Here in the states, when concealed carry numbers go up, murder rates go down. 

Quote
Maybe the fact that four times as many Americans are murdered is because of your Second Amendment.
Words on a piece of paper kill people?  I'm pretty sure that does not fit the definition of murder.

Quote
We don't have a second amendment.
Sucks to be you.

Quote
Is our freedom compromised?

You said it yourself:

Quote
We don't have as much access to guns.
So yes, your freedom was compromised when they decided to make very restrictive firearm laws.

As an aside, after the Australian gun laws were enacted, the murder rate did not decrease.  I guess your fellow violent Aussies kept right on killing each other, just using more barbaric means.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #10 on: October 06, 2015, 01:55:36 AM »
Engineer, I have a few questions for you:

1. Have you ever used your firearm(s) to protect yourself or your family?

2. Can you explain why urban density can affect murder rates?

3. Do you accept the murder rate discrepancy?

4. What solution to this would you propose?

5. Why would gun restriction not decrease murder rate, in your opinion?

BTW- some stats from the Australian Institute of Criminology's Homicide Statistics

Murder rate in 1993- 1.9 per 100 000
Port Arthur Massacre- new gun laws (1996)
Murder rate in 2006- 1.3 per 100 000

Thanks, undoubtedly in part, to our strict gun laws, there has only been one massacre in Australia in twenty years.
Our murder rate has dropped. Thanks to our strict gun laws.
And Australians are no worse off than we were before Port Arthur.
We are happy (kinda).
We are healthy (kinda).
We have a good government (finally).

How many mass killings has there been in the US in twenty years?
How many school shootings?
Surely restricting guns would help this problem.

You would still be able to target shoot in Australia.
We have rifle ranges. We hunt.
Friends of mine often pile into their pickup and cruise around their farms, shooting roos (kangaroos are pests here).
But because Australians can't get military, semi-automatic or automatic weaponry, we don't have a high murder rate.
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #12 on: October 06, 2015, 05:54:36 AM »
Even if you magically removed all the guns from the United States and could somehow guarantee that other crimes that would have been committed with firearms would not be committed through another means, you would reduce the murder rate in the United States by a whopping 3% +\-.

Now I'm all for gun control.  The average citizen doesn't need access to a bazooka.  But that control should be put in place by people who actually know something about firearms.  There should be intelligent laws based around safety, not blind fear like the laughable assault weapons ban.

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #13 on: October 06, 2015, 06:11:54 AM »
Even if you magically removed all the guns from the United States and could somehow guarantee that other crimes that would have been committed with firearms would not be committed through another means, you would reduce the murder rate in the United States by a whopping 3% +\-.

Now I'm all for gun control.  The average citizen doesn't need access to a bazooka.  But that control should be put in place by people who actually know something about firearms.  There should be intelligent laws based around safety, not blind fear like the laughable assault weapons ban.
True, laws motivated on blind fear are not wise.
But isn't banning assault weapons for civilians wise?
If one wants to use military equipment, one should join the military.

Yes, the laws put in place should be reasonable. No question there.
But isn't it also perfectly reasonable to not have any guns?

The changes that need to be made shouldn't just come from the government.
There should be social change as well.
Guns are still seen as necessary, when they are not.

But, yes, there shouldn't really be a full restriction.
That would be over-involvement on the government's part.
But the gun laws in the US are still rather lax, and this needs to be changed.

Fun fact- Flamethrowers are not banned in most US states
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #14 on: October 06, 2015, 07:29:32 AM »
Even if you magically removed all the guns from the United States and could somehow guarantee that other crimes that would have been committed with firearms would not be committed through another means, you would reduce the murder rate in the United States by a whopping 3% +\-.

Now I'm all for gun control.  The average citizen doesn't need access to a bazooka.  But that control should be put in place by people who actually know something about firearms.  There should be intelligent laws based around safety, not blind fear like the laughable assault weapons ban.
True, laws motivated on blind fear are not wise.
But isn't banning assault weapons for civilians wise?
If one wants to use military equipment, one should join the military.

Yes, the laws put in place should be reasonable. No question there.
But isn't it also perfectly reasonable to not have any guns?

The changes that need to be made shouldn't just come from the government.
There should be social change as well.
Guns are still seen as necessary, when they are not.

But, yes, there shouldn't really be a full restriction.
That would be over-involvement on the government's part.
But the gun laws in the US are still rather lax, and this needs to be changed.

Fun fact- Flamethrowers are not banned in most US states

There is in force an Assault Rifle ban in force that prevents folks from buying full auto assault rifles.  So a huge chunk of military hardware is banned to the average citizen.  That's been in place since the 70s I believe and I don't think any rational gun advocates are calling for a repeal.

The assault weapons ban that was proposed some time ago had extremely loose and vague definition of what describes an "assault weapon."  A vague definition that had nothing to do with the actual deadliness of the firearm itself.  I don't have the wording in front of me, but I believe it included a line like "if it looks sufficiently intimidating." Which opened up a can of mutant worms.  It made a M14 with a wood stock and no attachments perfectly legal, but a polycarb stock M14 with tactical rails and a flashlight totally illegal.  Same exact gun firing the same exact round but one was made illegal because it was black and had a flashlight on the barrel.

It also limited magazine size, but if a mass shooter really wants to kill some folk he'll just bring more magazines like the columbine kids did.

It's laws like that, proposed by politicians who are basing their knowledge on rhetoric and fear rather than facts and statistics which are the true gun control problem.

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #15 on: October 06, 2015, 08:01:21 AM »
Look at the crime rates between the individual states and you will find that places like Utah where guns are everywhere have less then 1/2 of the murders per 1,000 people the places like California where guns are controlled.  I could cite my source if you wish.  Murder rates in Utah are 1.8 and dropping while California's crime rate is well over 3.
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #16 on: October 06, 2015, 08:20:49 AM »
Look at the crime rates between the individual states and you will find that places like Utah where guns are everywhere have less then 1/2 of the murders per 1,000 people the places like California where guns are controlled.  I could cite my source if you wish.  Murder rates in Utah are 1.8 and dropping while California's crime rate is well over 3.

There are also a lot of other vast differences between Utah and Cali.  Correlation does not mean causation.

Still, it's an interesting statistic. 

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #17 on: October 06, 2015, 08:53:18 AM »
I did a bit of research and it turns out that the list of states with the most strict gun control and the list of states with the highest murder rates look very simelar.  There are a few outliers like Hawaii but there is a definite correlation going on with gun controlling states having homicide rates between 3 and 5 while states with tons of guns generally have homicide rates between 1.5 and 3.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2015, 09:19:24 AM by mikeman7918 »
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #18 on: October 06, 2015, 10:44:43 AM »
1. Have you ever used your firearm(s) to protect yourself or your family?
I use a firearm to protect them every day.  Have I ever had to pull out a weapon in the face of a threat?  Thankfully, no.

Quote
2. Can you explain why urban density can affect murder rates?
If you look at cities with the highest homicide rates, they are all dense urban areas:
Buffalo
Detroit
New Orleans
St. Louis
Baltimore
Newark
Oakland

Quote
3. Do you accept the murder rate discrepancy?
Obviously.

Quote
4. What solution to this would you propose?
Ease firearm restrictions to allow any law abiding citizen to have the opportunity to own/carry a firearm if they so choose.  I like freedom.

Quote
5. Why would gun restriction not decrease murder rate, in your opinion?
It didn't work in Australia, why would it work in the US?
Quote
But because Australians can't get military, semi-automatic or automatic weaponry, we don't have a high murder rate.
Not true.  Because Australians can't get firearms, you may have a lower death by firearm rate.

Quote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gun_deaths_over_time_in_the_US_and_Australia.png

Speaks for itself.

Since you like the wiki page so much:
Quote from: Wiki
In 2005 the head of the New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, Don Weatherburn,[44] noted that the level of legal gun ownership in NSW increased in recent years, and that the 1996 legislation had had little to no effect on violence. Professor Simon Chapman, former coconvenor of the Coalition for Gun Control, complained that his words "will henceforth be cited by every gun-lusting lobby group throughout the world in their perverse efforts to stall reforms that could save thousands of lives".[45] Weatherburn responded, "The fact is that the introduction of those laws did not result in any acceleration of the downward trend in gun homicide. They may have reduced the risk of mass shootings but we cannot be sure because no one has done the rigorous statistical work required to verify this possibility. It is always unpleasant to acknowledge facts that are inconsistent with your own point of view. But I thought that was what distinguished science from popular prejudice."[46]

Quote from: Wiki
In 2006, the lack of a measurable effect from the 1996 firearms legislation was reported in the British Journal of Criminology. Using ARIMA analysis, Dr Jeanine Baker and Dr Samara McPhedran found no evidence for an impact of the laws on homicide.[47]

Weatherburn described the Baker and McPhedran article as "reputable" and "well-conducted" and stated that the available data are insufficient to draw stronger conclusions.[48] Weatherburn noted the importance of actively policing illegal firearm trafficking and argued that there was little evidence that the new laws had helped in this regard.

And on mass shootings:

Quote from: Wiki
Subsequently, a study by McPhedran and Baker compared the incidence of mass shootings in Australia and New Zealand. Data were standardised to a rate per 100,000 people, to control for differences in population size between the countries and mass shootings before and after 1996/1997 were compared between countries. That study found that in the period 19801996, both countries experienced mass shootings. The rate did not differ significantly between countries. Since 1996-1997, neither country has experienced a mass shooting event despite the continued availability of semi-automatic longarms in New Zealand. The authors conclude that "the hypothesis that Australia's prohibition of certain types of firearms explains the absence of mass shootings in that country since 1996 does not appear to be supported... if civilian access to certain types of firearms explained the occurrence of mass shootings in Australia (and conversely, if prohibiting such firearms explains the absence of mass shootings), then New Zealand (a country that still allows the ownership of such firearms) would have continued to experience mass shooting events."


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #19 on: October 07, 2015, 05:54:55 AM »
Engineer, what do you think would happen if, hypothetically, all guns were banned, and the mere possession of a gun would land someone in jail?

There are approximately 300 million weapons in America. There are about the same number of people.
The number of privately owned firearms in the United States for every hundred citizens is 113.
NBC tells us that one in three Americans is a gun owner.
Which means that for every thirty three (approx.) gun owners, there are 113 guns.
A bit of maths leads to the conclusion that each gun owner owns 3.5 guns.

You don't need that many guns.
If you live in a neighbourhood where you fear for your safety, leave the neighbourhood.
If you, as a society, feel so threatened by your fellow Americans, that you need 3.5 guns to defend yourself, then there is something wrong with your society.

I found an article: Crazy gun laws in the US

1. Colorado, Wisconsin, Mississippi, Utah and Oregon all allow, or prohibit the banning of, students to carry guns on college campuses.

2. Michigan allows concealed weapons in schools, churches, hospitals and sports stadiums.

3. 16 year olds are allowed to buy handguns in Vermont. Vermont has a pretty low crime rate doesn't it?

4. In several states, there has been expansions to the definition of 'self defence' to no longer make it the duty of a person being confronted to back away, meaning that a threatened person could pull a weapon on someone without any hesitation.

To those of us living in our totalitarian fascist repressed societies like the UK and Australia, these laws seem ridiculous.
Why do you need guns at a university? In a church? A hospital?
Why would a sixteen year old need a handgun?
Why would shooting a threat without assessing the situation be a better idea?

In our relatively gun free society, we don't have shootings at universities. The students aren't allowed to have guns.
We don't have shootings in churches like that of Charleston.
We don't have sixteen year olds legally having concealable handguns.
If we feel threatened, we go through the alternatives to violence first.
We ask questions, then call the police if that is needed.

If your society is so acceptant of weaponry, then violence is sure to be inevitable.
It damages global perception of your people and your society.
This, coupled with the reputation gained in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, make America seem like a nation of gun-toting, self-righteous, violent, ignorant and selfish people.

Guns don't make anything better.
Guns can't make anything better.
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #20 on: October 07, 2015, 08:01:53 AM »
Watch this and tell me with a strait face that more gun control is what we need:
https://www.facebook.com/IsThisFreeDumb/videos/508741059157993/
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #21 on: October 07, 2015, 09:29:11 AM »
mikeman actually makes sense for a change.  I hope he keeps this up.  Good job, mikeman. 

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #22 on: October 07, 2015, 10:23:17 AM »
Engineer, what do you think would happen if, hypothetically, all guns were banned, and the mere possession of a gun would land someone in jail?
People would still kill each other, much like they continue to do in Australia.

Quote
A bit of maths leads to the conclusion that each gun owner owns 3.5 guns.

You don't need that many guns.
Says who?  You?  How many guns do I need?  Who are you, or anyone else, to tell me how many of a legal object I can buy, with the money I have earned?  Doesn't sound like freedom to me.

Quote
If you live in a neighbourhood where you fear for your safety, leave the neighbourhood.
If you, as a society, feel so threatened by your fellow Americans, that you need 3.5 guns to defend yourself, then there is something wrong with your society.
I just told you there were other reasons to own a gun besides defense.

Quote
I found an article: Crazy gun laws in the US

1. Colorado, Wisconsin, Mississippi, Utah and Oregon all allow, or prohibit the banning of, students to carry guns on college campuses.
I absolutely agree with this.  Students should be allowed to carry guns on campus.

Quote
2. Michigan allows concealed weapons in schools, churches, hospitals and sports stadiums.
Again, 100% agree with this.

Quote
3. 16 year olds are allowed to buy handguns in Vermont. Vermont has a pretty low crime rate doesn't it?
Thanks for making the point for me.

Quote
4. In several states, there has been expansions to the definition of 'self defence' to no longer make it the duty of a person being confronted to back away, meaning that a threatened person could pull a weapon on someone without any hesitation.
No, you don't have to run away.  You can stand your ground.  Seems pretty common sense to me.

Quote
To those of us living in our totalitarian fascist repressed societies like the UK and Australia, these laws seem ridiculous.
Good, then stay in your totalitarian fascist repressed societies and plead with the local authorities to keep you safe at night.

Quote
Why do you need guns at a university?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_School_of_Law_shooting

Quote
In a church?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Colorado_YWAM_and_New_Life_shootings

Quote
A hospital?
http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Mercy-Fitzgerald-Hospital-on-Lockdown-268489642.html

Quote
Why would a sixteen year old need a handgun?
The people of Vermont have decided to afford 16 year olds the right to own a handgun.  That is what we call freedom on this side of the world.  The people of our country are the government, and they can decide how their state should be run.

Quote
Why would shooting a threat without assessing the situation be a better idea?
If you have determined that a person is a threat, you have already assessed the situation.

Quote
If we feel threatened, we go through the alternatives to violence first.
Apparently not, as the homicide rate did not decrease after the gun ban was instituted.  So you guys just became more barbaric.

Quote
We ask questions, then call the police if that is needed.
You mean if you are still alive.

Quote
This, coupled with the reputation gained in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, make America seem like a nation of gun-toting, self-righteous, violent, ignorant and selfish people.
What reputation?  We like freedom and help to spread that to other places.  How terrible of us.

Quote
Guns don't make anything better.
Looks like removing guns from society sure didn't make Australia any better.  Why did you forget to address the evidence that the gun ban in Australia has not decreased homicides or even prevented mass shootings?  It didn't fit your nice little theory?  Maybe you should do a little free thinking, instead of digesting in whole and then regurgitating all of the talking points, when you obviously have no idea what you are talking about.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #23 on: October 07, 2015, 04:26:39 PM »
Engineer, what do you think would happen if, hypothetically, all guns were banned, and the mere possession of a gun would land someone in jail?
People would still kill each other, much like they continue to do in Australia.
I pulled statistics from the Australian Institute of criminology that says that the murder rate has decreased from 1.9 before the Port Arthur Massacre to 1.3 after the Port Arthur Massacre.

Quote
Quote
A bit of maths leads to the conclusion that each gun owner owns 3.5 guns.

You don't need that many guns.
Says who?  You?  How many guns do I need?  Who are you, or anyone else, to tell me how many of a legal object I can buy, with the money I have earned?  Doesn't sound like freedom to me.
Well, if you are being reasonable, say, and instead of 3.5 guns the average gun owner had 27 guns, then I think it is a fair call that that is too many.
You keep on bringing up freedom as one of your points.
Say if we had an umpteenth amendment which said that male citizens have the right to rape women if they don't consent.
We could claim that we were more free than you, because rape is illegal in the US.

Quote
Quote
If you live in a neighbourhood where you fear for your safety, leave the neighbourhood.
If you, as a society, feel so threatened by your fellow Americans, that you need 3.5 guns to defend yourself, then there is something wrong with your society.
I just told you there were other reasons to own a gun besides defense.
You said self-defence, entertainment, hunting and prevention of tyranny.
The middle two are not truly needed in modern society, except maybe hunting if you live in a remote area.
Prevention of tyranny. What tyranny?
When has the US in its modern form ever had do deal with domestic tyranny that would require armed citizenry?

Quote
Quote
I found an article: Crazy gun laws in the US

1. Colorado, Wisconsin, Mississippi, Utah and Oregon all allow, or prohibit the banning of, students to carry guns on college campuses.
I absolutely agree with this.  Students should be allowed to carry guns on campus.
And if a student wants to go on a rampage?
If this happens, then a gun battle will probably ensue. The assailant will probably get killed, but the problem won't be solved.

Quote
Quote
2. Michigan allows concealed weapons in schools, churches, hospitals and sports stadiums.
Again, 100% agree with this.

Quote
3. 16 year olds are allowed to buy handguns in Vermont. Vermont has a pretty low crime rate doesn't it?
Thanks for making the point for me.
The murder rate of one state doesn't equal the murder rate of a nation.
My point was that they (Vermont's 16 year olds) don't need handguns.

Quote
Quote
4. In several states, there has been expansions to the definition of 'self defence' to no longer make it the duty of a person being confronted to back away, meaning that a threatened person could pull a weapon on someone without any hesitation.
No, you don't have to run away.  You can stand your ground.  Seems pretty common sense to me.
What if your first impressions are wrong and you murder someone?

Quote
Quote
To those of us living in our totalitarian fascist repressed societies like the UK and Australia, these laws seem ridiculous.
Good, then stay in your totalitarian fascist repressed societies and plead with the local authorities to keep you safe at night.
We don't need to plead, we already are safe at night.
If someone breaks into my house with the intent to murder me and mine, then I accept that.
If someone is murdered in Australia, the whole community rallies together.
Positive change comes out of this.
I would let myself die if it would bring about social good.
If it is my fate to be murdered, then that is what will happen.

Quote
Quote
Why do you need guns at a university?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_School_of_Law_shooting
Quote
In a church?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Colorado_YWAM_and_New_Life_shootings

Quote
A hospital?
http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Mercy-Fitzgerald-Hospital-on-Lockdown-268489642.html
[/quote]
All these are tragedies. No denying that.
But these wouldn't have happened if guns were out of the equation.
I applaud the efforts of those who fought back.
However, people still died in these incidences.
Killing the assailant doesn't bring back the victims or stop this from happening again.

Quote
Quote
Why would a sixteen year old need a handgun?
The people of Vermont have decided to afford 16 year olds the right to own a handgun.  That is what we call freedom on this side of the world.  The people of our country are the government, and they can decide how their state should be run.
Funnily enough, other countries have democracy as well.
Just because a law was passed does not mean that the law is justified.

Quote
Quote
Why would shooting a threat without assessing the situation be a better idea?
If you have determined that a person is a threat, you have already assessed the situation.
Because we don't have handguns in our pockets as we walk down the street, we have to look for non-violent ways out.
This is why in my town of 40 000 people, there has been one murder in the last three years.
This shocked the community.
The fact that it was a dispute between two drug dealers, and not someone on the sidewalk, means that our streets are pretty safe.
If someone is drunk, or high, and we feel threatened by them, we extricate ourselves.
Thats why there was one murder in the last three years.

Quote
Quote
If we feel threatened, we go through the alternatives to violence first.
Apparently not, as the homicide rate did not decrease after the gun ban was instituted.  So you guys just became more barbaric.
Umm. The murder rate has decreased.
I gave you stats of the entire country.
You gave me a personal statement that said that the homicide rate in New South Wales had stayed the same.
One state.

Quote
Quote
We ask questions, then call the police if that is needed.
You mean if you are still alive.
Which we nearly always are, as evidenced by our low murder rate.

Quote
Quote
This, coupled with the reputation gained in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, make America seem like a nation of gun-toting, self-righteous, violent, ignorant and selfish people.
What reputation?  We like freedom and help to spread that to other places.  How terrible of us.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_Massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisoner_abuse
America has not spread freedom.
Vietnam is now communist.
You backed out of Iraq and Afghanistan, leaving them to fend for themselves.

Quote
Quote
Guns don't make anything better.
Looks like removing guns from society sure didn't make Australia any better.  Why did you forget to address the evidence that the gun ban in Australia has not decreased homicides or even prevented mass shootings?  It didn't fit your nice little theory?  Maybe you should do a little free thinking, instead of digesting in whole and then regurgitating all of the talking points, when you obviously have no idea what you are talking about.
Well, we don't have school shootings. We haven't had any theatres being shot up.
The Sandy Hook shooter used a XM15 Bushmaster assault rifle,
He killed school children.
You think that the solution is to give more people more guns.
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #24 on: October 07, 2015, 04:33:21 PM »
Watch this and tell me with a strait face that more gun control is what we need:
https://www.facebook.com/IsThisFreeDumb/videos/508741059157993/
That is fixing the severity of individual attacks. Not the problem itself.
If no one has guns at all, then she wouldn't need to defend herself.
So, yes, with a straight face, you need more gun control.
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #25 on: October 08, 2015, 02:50:42 AM »
I realise that three posts in a row is somewhat poor form, but I found some interesting statistics and articles.

So, the US has the highest amount of guns per person in the world. Nearly twice as much as the next most.
If the argument posited by Mikeman, Engineer et al. is to hold any water, then there should be a correlation between high levels of armed citizenry and less crime eg. homicide
However, this isn't the case.

The US ranks most criminal of the first world countries.
The US ranks 111th for intentional homicide, however, for ease of comparison, lets compare only, again, to first world countries.
The next first world country in line, Finland, is 170th in the same list.
Canada- 173rd
Australia- 185th
UK- 190th
Germany- 200th

As we can see, having more guns doesn't decrease homicide rates, doesn't decrease general crime rates.
But, especially where I live, suicide is a bigger killer than homicide.
Suicide, if attempted with blades or poisons, are only fatal 6-7 percent of the time.
If attempted with a firearm, there is a 95 percent chance of death.
So while the firearms restriction admittedly didn't have much of an effect on homicides (1.9 to 1.3) suicide rates plummeted by 74 percent.

So gun restrictions made people less likely to kill themselves.
Two thirds of gun deaths in the US are suicides. If the rate were to drop 74 percent, then 15 000 Americans wouldn't be dead each year.
Australia's restrictions took 20 percent of our guns out of the public.
And saved lives.

The second amendment is a product of a time when your frontier was still wilderness, Britain and Spain were threats, and the only arms available were single shot muskets and rifles.
At a time when it took twenty seconds to reload after each shot, the right to bear arms was reasonable.
If one can buy an AK47 assault rifle, then it stops being reasonable.

The argument that if guns were restricted, that crime rates would rise, due to "Bad guys having guns" is ludicrous.
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

?

guv

  • 1132
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #26 on: October 08, 2015, 03:58:37 AM »
Don't blame the gun, boots, knives, bottles and iron bars work great. Humans with bad shit in their head are dangerous, fix that. smart man don't take a knife to a gun fight, we just have fewer gun fights in Aus. At least one murder a week in WA, most of them die hard, like not a head shot. Dead is dead!.

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #27 on: October 08, 2015, 04:24:22 AM »
Don't blame the gun, boots, knives, bottles and iron bars work great. Humans with bad shit in their head are dangerous, fix that. smart man don't take a knife to a gun fight, we just have fewer gun fights in Aus. At least one murder a week in WA, most of them die hard, like not a head shot. Dead is dead!.
Twenty people are murdered a year in WA. About one a fortnight.
But the stats clearly show that gun restrictions are correlated with fewer homicides. And suicides. And less crime.

And yes, humans are dangerous, so they should be restricted access to powerful weapons.
One cannot kill elementary students in such numbers as easily as we see in the US all the time.
Sandy Hook was committed with an assault rifle. Not a knife. Or a bottle.
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

?

guv

  • 1132
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #28 on: October 08, 2015, 05:38:47 AM »
Don't blame the gun, boots, knives, bottles and iron bars work great. Humans with bad shit in their head are dangerous, fix that. smart man don't take a knife to a gun fight, we just have fewer gun fights in Aus. At least one murder a week in WA, most of them die hard, like not a head shot. Dead is dead!.
Twenty people are murdered a year in WA. About one a fortnight.
But the stats clearly show that gun restrictions are correlated with fewer homicides. And suicides. And less crime.

And yes, humans are dangerous, so they should be restricted access to powerful weapons.
One cannot kill elementary students in such numbers as easily as we see in the US all the time.
Sandy Hook was committed with an assault rifle. Not a knife. Or a bottle.


The most powerful weapon is the human mind. Check the stats for the partition of India, no fancy guns needed. People who get  it in their head that violence is cool and will fix their problems scare shit out of me. The place I live in has a shit load of guns but I feel in more danger down in the city with all the stressed out nutters. I would like to build a 50 mm smooth bore muzzle loader for blowing holes in dead cars, but nanny state Aus would have a fit. Someone has to figure out how to take the guns of the nutters, good luck.

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #29 on: October 08, 2015, 05:53:29 AM »
Don't blame the gun, boots, knives, bottles and iron bars work great. Humans with bad shit in their head are dangerous, fix that. smart man don't take a knife to a gun fight, we just have fewer gun fights in Aus. At least one murder a week in WA, most of them die hard, like not a head shot. Dead is dead!.
Twenty people are murdered a year in WA. About one a fortnight.
But the stats clearly show that gun restrictions are correlated with fewer homicides. And suicides. And less crime.

And yes, humans are dangerous, so they should be restricted access to powerful weapons.
One cannot kill elementary students in such numbers as easily as we see in the US all the time.
Sandy Hook was committed with an assault rifle. Not a knife. Or a bottle.


The most powerful weapon is the human mind. Check the stats for the partition of India, no fancy guns needed. People who get  it in their head that violence is cool and will fix their problems scare shit out of me. The place I live in has a shit load of guns but I feel in more danger down in the city with all the stressed out nutters. I would like to build a 50 mm smooth bore muzzle loader for blowing holes in dead cars, but nanny state Aus would have a fit. Someone has to figure out how to take the guns of the nutters, good luck.

Of course violence can happen without guns, check the battle of Cannae.
But the stats don't lie.
When Connecticut introduced firearm restrictions, the homicide rate dropped by 30 percent.
When Missouri repealed a similar law, the homicide rate rose by 20 percent.

It's logical that a society with less weapons would have less violence.
We might not like it, but if people are being murdered less, then something is going right.
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.