The Gun Control Debate Thread

[Larry]

17 minutes ago, thegreaterbuzzette said:

I could see an argument for limiting extended magazines, but one could still have multiple magazines - so may have slowed it down, perhaps?

 

That's been my suggestion.  Some attempt to limit the ability to fire a lot of bullets, and then reload quickly.  

 

Although I'll also point out, that might help with the mass shootings, but they're really a drop in the bucket compared to the number of people who get killed by gunshot every year.  If we could completely eliminate all mass shootings, our gun death rate wouldn't even notice the change.  

 

Still, see the next point I'm going to make.  

 

[Larry]

22 minutes ago, thegreaterbuzzette said:

Or are people suggesting we just somehow collect all the guns from everyone, everywhere? (Which is impossible)

 

This is one of the arguments in that debate that really triggers me.  (No pun intended.)  

 

As far as I'm aware, in no other debate about a proposed law is the argument that "well, it won't instantly be 100% effective, therefore we cannot even consider it" considered a rational argument.  

 

Somehow, I'm pretty sure that not one person ever suggested that well, people will still rob banks if we make it illegal, so we shouldn't bother.  (And if someone did, they likely would have been committed.)  

 

(Although I will admit that I do, from time to time, hear an argument that's pretty similar to that one get used, when the topic is illegal immigration.)

 

. . . 

 

Now, this is not to suggest that I support banning all guns.  (Although I could get behind banning certain types of them.  Or maybe not banning, but treating them the way we treat full-auto weapons.)  

 

I just have a problem with that particular argument.  

 

[thegreaterbuzzette]

33 minutes ago, Chew said:

The magazine bans make no sense to me.  As Buzzette said, if anything, it may slow somebody down by a few seconds.  Anyone that's trained to use a weapon, it takes maybe 2 seconds to reload a pistol, 4-5 seconds to reload a rifle. Not to mention, you can get a high-capacity mag or drum pretty easily if you really wanted one, illegal or 
But even then, the whole "mental illness" thing won't catch everyone either.  Sure, that Stoneman shooter kid showed some signs for years and the system failed.  But this guy in VA yesterday, he was probably a normal dude his entire life.  Sometimes things happen to people that cause them to snap, which I imagine is what happened to this dude after he was fired.  It ignited a rage in  him.  I'm sure we will get more info about Craddock's background this weekend, but I doubt he had any red flags that would've popped up in an "extensive" background check, one that includes checking for mental illness issues and possibly even a psych eval.  

You can count me as a gun owner that wants reform.

 

Not sure if you saw my recent post in the mass shooting thread, but workplace violence is nothing new.

 

I am interesting to see what we lean about this person and if this was truly out of character. Keep in mind when I say mental health, I don't mean as it relates to background checks. I mean the stigma, lack of resources, lack of support, lack of understanding. It's a systematic issue. Gun violence is a symptom of this, not a cause/effect. 

[thegreaterbuzzette]

31 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

This is one of the arguments in that debate that really triggers me.  (No pun intended.)  

 

As far as I'm aware, in no other debate about a proposed law is the argument that "well, it won't instantly be 100% effective, therefore we cannot even consider it" considered a rational argument.  

 

Somehow, I'm pretty sure that not one person ever suggested that well, people will still rob banks if we make it illegal, so we shouldn't bother.  (And if someone did, they likely would have been committed.)  

 

Here's the big difference, GUN VIOLENCE is already illegal. I think one would be hard pressed to find someone who disagreed that killing someone in an act of malice is ok. You are equating GUN OWNERSHIP with bank robbery. That is a false comparison.

 

31 minutes ago, Larry said:

(Although I will admit that I do, from time to time, hear an argument that's pretty similar to that one get used, when the topic is illegal immigration.)

 

 

Let's stay on topic. My immigration/gun control/abortion/womens right/social views make no sense to people that try to paint me in a box.

 

31 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

Now, this is not to suggest that I support banning all guns.  (Although I could get behind banning certain types of them.  Or maybe not banning, but treating them the way we treat full-auto weapons.)  

So what gun is worse than others? I've noticed most people that make this arguement do not have a firm grasp on types of guns/ammo functionality.

Fully autos are essentially banned outside of specific permits. "Semi auto" opinions only seem to apply when the gun is black and scary looking....the same gun in pink or camo used for hunting seems acceptable.

[TheGreatBuzz]

On 5/23/2019 at 7:18 PM, TheGreatBuzz said:

New gun porn.

 

 

Curious who here thinks this gun should be banned.......

[twa]

What did the gun do?

 

[CousinsCowgirl84]

1 hour ago, thegreaterbuzzette said:

 

Or are people suggesting we just somehow collect all the guns from everyone, everywhere? (Which is impossible)

 

I’m sure 100 years ago most people thought communication with someone who doesn’t speak your language and is simultaneously half way around the world was impossible.

 

Turns out though, all you had to do was try.

 

 

Quote

 

Yet again, the main issue with this one...mental illness. 

 

Anyone who kills has a mental illness. I think you have a better chance of rounding up all of the guns then identifying the moment someone goes from kinda weird to bat**** crazy.

 

 

But in the end your assumption that “all” the weapons would need to be collected in order to prevent most shootings is false. Most shootings are carried out by people who are currently legally allowed to carry.

 

 

 

Edited June 1, 2019 by CousinsCowgirl84

[Chew]

21 minutes ago, thegreaterbuzzette said:

You can count me as a gun owner that wants reform.

That makes two of us.   

 

21 minutes ago, thegreaterbuzzette said:

I am interesting to see what we lean about this person and if this was truly out of character. Keep in mind when I say mental health, I don't mean as it relates to background checks. I mean the stigma, lack of resources, lack of support, lack of understanding. It's a systematic issue. Gun violence is a symptom of this, not a cause/effect. 

 

Gotcha. I agree it's an issue.  Whether it's mental illness or somebody just having a really bad day, so many folks are going to the nuclear option of killing as many people as they can.  That's a problem, and one that only the United States seems to have.   

[thegreaterbuzzette]

3 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

But in the end your assumption that “all” the weapons would need to be collected in order to prevent most shootings is false. Most shootings are carried out by people who are currently legally allowed to carry.

So which guns need to be collected and which people need to be banned from owning them?

 

Also, can you provide the statistic of your last point? I would really be interested to know how many criminal shootings happen by people legally owning/possessing and using a firearm....

[Larry]

3 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

Most shootings are carried out by people who are currently legally allowed to carry.

 

 

6 minutes ago, thegreaterbuzzette said:

 

Also, can you provide the statistic of your last point? I would really be interested to know how many criminal shootings happen by people legally owning/possessing and using a firearm....

 

Just pointing out one of the problems with trying to use statistics in this debate:. Precise wording is important. You two have already moved from "most shootings" to "most criminal shootings". 

 

Should suicides count in your stats?  I'm pretty sure they account for well over half of gun deaths in the US. How about people shot by law enforcement?  (Not sure how big that category is.)  Accidental discharges?  Cases not prosecuted? (For example, due to self defense?)

 

. . . 

 

On the more-discussed topic of mass shootings, I confess I do have the completely unscientific impression that most of the recent mass shootings, the source of the weapons has been either that the shooter purchased them himself, or in many cases, had a friend(s) who had a large number of weapons unsecured. 

 

I'd love to come up with some "low impact" way to get legal gun owners to store their weapons more responsibly. 

[CousinsCowgirl84]

33 minutes ago, thegreaterbuzzette said:

So which guns need to be collected and which people need to be banned from owning them?

 

This is seems to suggest everyone:

 

 

I don’t see a good reason to exclude suicide and other deaths when taking about gun violence.

 

[thegreaterbuzzette]

48 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

 

Just pointing out one of the problems with trying to use statistics in this debate:. Precise wording is important. You two have already moved from "most shootings" to "most criminal shootings". 

 

Should suicides count in your stats?  I'm pretty sure they account for well over half of gun deaths in the US. How about people shot by law enforcement?  (Not sure how big that category is.)  Accidental discharges?  Cases not prosecuted? (For example, due to self defense?)

I do not believe suicides should count. While I can see a case for it, my experience/education has caused me to believe that once someone has made that decision.....it’s any means available. Would we outlaw bridges or needed medicines right Niagara Falls (witnesses a suicide there)?

 

justified police or self defense shootings should not count either (and I completely agree there are LEO shootings that are NOT justified all too often. But the thing with stats....you need a hard line on what does and doesn’t count.

 

accidental discharges, children finding and using - those should count (I also believe manslaughter charges should be pressed again owner for insufficient safety measures)

 

 

48 minutes ago, Larry said:

. . . 

 

On the more-discussed topic of mass shootings, I confess I do have the completely unscientific impression that most of the recent mass shootings, the source of the weapons has been either that the shooter purchased them himself, or in many cases, had a friend(s) who had a large number of weapons unsecured. 

 

I'd love to come up with some "low impact" way to get legal gun owners to store their weapons more responsibly. 

100%, see above. Believe the rightful owner should at a minimum be charged with manslaughter. I think having an unsecured gun (or any weapon) in a home with minors is child endangerment/abuse. 

 

 

 

40 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

This is seems to suggest everyone:

 

 

So how do you propose that is done? I don’t believe it is fair to propose a fictitious solution without even having a basic game plan. 

 

Also, please consider this scenario and answer honestly - 

Yo are 20, in a college town in a lackluster part of town that one would expect a college kid to be able to afford. There’s been 8 violent rapes reported in a 15 mile radius in just as many weeks.... All of them approached at gun point, multiple attackers. A friend offers to meet you at your bus stop after night classes to escort you to your apartment a 10 block walk) they own a gun. Do you turn them down?

 

The above isn’t to say you are right or wrong, but will be very insightful to your dedication to your opinion. 

[CousinsCowgirl84]

33 minutes ago, thegreaterbuzzette said:

I do not believe suicides should count. While I can see a case for it, my experience/education has caused me to believe that once someone has made that decision.....it’s any means available. Would we outlaw bridges or needed medicines right Niagara Falls (witnesses a suicide there)?

 

Your experience doesn’t meld well with actual studies on the subject though.

 

Twelve or more U.S. case control studies have compared individuals who died by suicide with those who did not and found those dying by suicide were more likely to live in homes with guns.

For example, Brent and colleagues studied three groups of adolescents: 47 suicide decedents, 47 inpatient attempters, and 47 psychiatric inpatients who had never attempted suicide. Those who died by suicide were twice as likely to have a gun at home than either of the other two groups...

 

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/means-matter/means-matter/risk/

 

 

33 minutes ago, thegreaterbuzzette said:

 

So how do you propose that is done? I don’t believe it is fair to propose a fictitious solution without even having a basic game plan. 

 

1)Stop selling guns and ammunition

2)Make it illegal to own a gun

3)Simple possession of the gun similar to a dui. First offense, loose your drivers liscense for a year, ect.

4)possession of a gun while commuting a crime same as the laws are now.

 

Its easy. Except for getting the law to change which would obviously require a repeal of the second ammendment.

 

33 minutes ago, thegreaterbuzzette said:

 

Also, please consider this scenario and answer honestly - 

Yo are 20, in a college town in a lackluster part of town that one would expect a college kid to be able to afford. There’s been 8 violent rapes reported in a 15 mile radius in just as many weeks.... All of them approached at gun point, multiple attackers. A friend offers to meet you at your bus stop after night classes to escort you to your apartment a 10 block walk) they own a gun. Do you turn them down?

 

Considering that most sexual assaults are commited by someone you know, your friend with the gun is more likely to assault you than some stranger in the dark. No thanks.

 

[thegreaterbuzzette]

13 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

Your experience doesn’t meld well with actual studies on the subject though.

 

 

 

 

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/means-matter/means-matter/risk/

 

 

 

1)Stop selling guns and ammunition

2)Make it illegal to own a gun

3)Simple possession of the gun similar to a dui. First offense, loose your drivers liscense for a year, ect.

4)possession of a gun while commuting a crime same as the laws are now.

 

Its easy. Except for getting the law to change which would obviously require a repeal of the second ammendment.

 

 

Considering that most sexual assaults are commited by someone you know, your friend with the gun is more likely to assault you than some stranger in the dark. No thanks.

 

Thanks this entire response tells me you have no interest in a true conversation or problem solving. I’m done engaging.

[CousinsCowgirl84]

Ok, I mean, don’t get mad at me because your reality is different than reality... there’s nothing in my post that is untrue or factually incorrect.

 

 

@thegreaterbuzzette 

 

I do wonder what sort of response I could have made would make you feel like I have a interest in true conversation or problem solving. I am fine conversing, but I’m not going to change my mind about something based on a string of false premises.

 

Im not sure how making guns illegal wouldn’t help solve the problem of gun violence.

Edited June 1, 2019 by CousinsCowgirl84

[Larry]

7 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

there’s nothing in my post that isn’t untrue or factually incorrect.

 

Might want to edit the double negative.  

[CousinsCowgirl84]

1 minute ago, Larry said:

 

Might want to edit the double negative.  

 

I never accused myself of being the brightest machine gun in the arsenal.

[Larry]

On the broader subject if suicides and statistics and guns and things 

 

Remember during my LPN classes, doing a few shifts at a local psych unit's drug rehab wing. 

 

Most of the patients were "frequent fliers", who checked in and out of rehab when they wanted. (Supposedly, their motive isn't to get sober, but to keep their addiction at a level where they could barely afford the drugs.)  and they knew what the rules were, to get admitted when they wanted to. 

 

And one way to get admitted was "attempted suicide". 

 

So there were a whole whole lot of people in there who "attempted suicide", by doing things like taking 40 aspirin and then calling 911 on themselves. 

 

They didn't really try to kill themselves. They just wanted to cut back on their drug habit without withdrawal symptoms. 

 

I would assume that all those people get counted in the stats as "attempted suicide, didn't use a gun, didn't succeed". 

[CousinsCowgirl84]

I mean, a gun to the head usually ends it. You still have a chance if you take a lot of pills, slice your wrists, or jump off a bridge.

 

 

 

[TheGreatBuzz]

2 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

1)Stop selling guns and ammunition

2)Make it illegal to own a gun

3)Simple possession of the gun similar to a dui. First offense, loose your drivers liscense for a year, ect.

4)possession of a gun while commuting a crime same as the laws are now.

 

Its easy. Except for getting the law to change which would obviously require a repeal of the second ammendment.

What is the weather like in you magical land of unicorns and fairy dust?

 

 

[CousinsCowgirl84]

5 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

What is the weather like in you magical land of unicorns and fairy dust?

 

 

 

 

What does that mean?  Anyway, I’ll go back to my original statement. 100 years ago people would have thought it was of the marginal lands of unicorns and fairy dust to communicate with someone who speaks a different language half a world away on an instantaneous basis. 

 

It it turns out all you had to do was try.

[thegreaterbuzzette]

2 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

Ok, I mean, don’t get mad at me because your reality is different than reality... there’s nothing in my post that is untrue or factually incorrect.

 

 

@thegreaterbuzzette 

 

I do wonder what sort of response I could have made would make you feel like I have a interest in true conversation or problem solving. I am fine conversing, but I’m not going to change my mind about something based on a string of false premises.

 

Im not sure how making guns illegal wouldn’t help solve the problem of gun violence.

 

 

Its raining, so I guess I’ll engage.

 

my reality is not different then reality. Reality is reality is reality. Everyone’s can be uniquely distinct.

 

did you read your article? More importantly did you understand it? There was no causation sited, a risk factor is a linked occurrence, nothing more or less. 

The article also only counts a suicide when it is “successful”. 

 

“About 85% of attempts with a firearm are fatal: that’s a much higher case fatality rate than for nearly every other method. Many of the most widely used suicide attempt methods have case fatality rates below 5%. (See Case Fatality Ratio by Method of Self-Harm.)”

 

 

but all all of this is really off topic. 

 

Now back to your our question about your response to my scenario....pretty much anything besides stating you would be more concerned with your friend sexually assaulting you, would have shown me you were thinking in a way with eyes and ears open. 

 

But you've made made it very clear you live in fantasy land. 

Edited June 1, 2019 by thegreaterbuzzette

[Captain Wiggles]

14 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

What is the weather like in you magical land of unicorns and fairy dust?

 

 

 

75 degrees and partly cloudy year round. The unicorns farts are cotton candy taboot.

 

As far as guns go just get rid of the ****ing things already. Unfortunately we all know that'll never happen. Plenty of non lethal alternatives to pretect ones self, family, and property these days. 

[CousinsCowgirl84]

 

Quote

 

Now back to your our question about your response to my scenario....pretty much anything besides stating you would be more concerned with your friend sexually assaulting you, would have shown me you were thinking in a way with eyes and ears open. 

 

 

It’s a fact you are more likely to be sexually assaulted by a friend than a stranger.  Having a friend who has a gun doesn’t make you safer.  You’d likely be just as safe with a friend without a gun than a friend with a gun.  Possibly safer because there isn’t a chance of accidental discharge.

 

How many sexual assaults are prevented by a friend with a gun each year? VS just a friend with no gun that the would be assailant thought better than to take two on at a time?

Edited June 1, 2019 by CousinsCowgirl84

[thegreaterbuzzette]

30 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

 

What does that mean?  Anyway, I’ll go back to my original statement. 100 years ago people would have thought it was of the marginal lands of unicorns and fairy dust to communicate with someone who speaks a different language half a world away on an instantaneous basis. 

 

It it turns out all you had to do was try.

The telephones was invented well over 100 years ago, so there were many smart people who already had a plan in mind and were working to make it happen.

 

your example doesn’t really work....comparing creating something new with removing something already in existence are completely different concepts.

 

criminalizing gun ownership I believe was your suggestion? Where you housing all these people you are arresting? And the government is seizing our guns some worth well over $1000 just for free? 

 

 

18 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

It’s a fact you are more likely to be sexually assaulted by a friend than a stranger.  Having a friend who has a gun doesn’t make you safer.  You’d likely be just as safe with a friend without a gun than a friend with a gun.  Possibly safer because there isn’t a chance of accidental discharge.

 

How many sexual assaults are prevented by a friend with a gun each year? VS just a friend with no gun that the would be assailant thought better than to take two on at a time?

You dance around with facts, stats, and real world fallacies a lot to avoid having a real conversation about what can be done. 

Edited June 1, 2019 by thegreaterbuzzette