The Gun Control Debate Thread

[TheGreatBuzz]

Last time Congress addressed it was July 6, 2012 and they passed a law making it more restrictive to drink and drive.  http://uscode.house.gov/statviewer.htm?volume=126&page=556.  When was the last time Congress passed a law doing the same for guns? 1994?

 

So the point is, there IS a focus, and it is creating positive change, so people are content with that.  There is a focus on guns, and will continue to be, until there is some positive change.  

 

 

You should be doing your own leg work. But if you just googles congress and drunk driving legislation. You'd see both the last two Congress' took up the matter in one way or another. H.R.3759. 

 

There isn't an uproar because those deaths are going down. The other is going up. No?

There is a reason why no politicians or pundits would use this reasoning. 1. Because it would actually hurt any pro-gun rights arguement. 2. It would make them look like they aren't doing their jobs.

 

So, Congressman. Why aren't you doing more to fight drunk driving? 

 

Thanks.  It isn't about leg work.  Maybe I should have clarified more but I thought I was clear.  I'm not just talking about a bill that is passed, I'm talking about the amount of press and fanfare.  What if the politician, etc spent half their time talking on FOX/MSNBC about guns and half about DD?  DD should be a much easier battle to win.

There's no agenda to have, man.  It's not a political issue because no one agrees with it. 

Things like abortion and gun control are divided issues.  Centralized gov't vs. decentralized.  I think everyone in this thread, regardless of political affiliation, doesn't want people driving drunk.  Every President is willing to fight that battle. 

Exactly.  No one agrees with drunk driving so why is it still an issue?  Imagine if even a quarter of the time and effort that was put into guns was instead put into drunk driving what could be accomplished.  Why are we choosing the nearly impossible task of gun laws (it's depressing that it is nearly impossible) but not doing as much to address an issue that EVERYONE AGREES IS BAD!  I get it's getting better but 10k deaths a year is still mind boggling.  It's a number that is trotted out at gun debates as sucha horrible number.  And it is.  So use that same number for an issue you have better luck fixing. 

 

EDIT: Also do some research and see what a joke DD penalties are.  Even in the "new legislation" cited above.  Pathetic.

 

Sorry for derailing this thread.  I'll let it go now unless those in here want to keep addressing it.  I just don't want the MODS to jump on me.

Edited January 8, 2016 by TheGreatBuzz

[TheGoodBits]

I'd be thrilled with any legislation or action that led to a 50% reduction in gun deaths. Please propose one.

Copy/paste Australia's laws from the 90s.

Or were you talking about a proposal that has a chance in hell of passing?

Edited January 8, 2016 by skinsfan_1215

[SkinssRvA]

Thanks.  It isn't about leg work.  Maybe I should have clarified more but I thought I was clear.  I'm not just talking about a bill that is passed, I'm talking about the amount of press and fanfare.  What if the politician, etc spent half their time talking on FOX/MSNBC about guns and half about DD?  DD should be a much easier battle to win.

Exactly.  No one agrees with drunk driving so why is it still an issue?  Imagine if even a quarter of the time and effort that was put into guns was instead put into drunk driving what could be accomplished.  Why are we choosing the nearly impossible task of gun laws (it's depressing that it is nearly impossible) but not doing as much to address an issue that EVERYONE AGREES IS BAD!  I get it's getting better but 10k deaths a year is still mind boggling.  It's a number that is trotted out at gun debates as sucha horrible number.  And it is.  So use that same number for an issue you have better luck fixing. 

 

Sorry for derailing this thread.  I'll let it go now unless those in here want to keep addressing it.  I just don't want the MODS to jump on me.

There's got to be a level of acceptability for every risk. You can't say 0 is what we want, and that's what we will get.  Even if the most strict laws were in place (i.e. death penalty for drunk drivers), people would still do it and there would still be deaths.  

[PleaseBlitz]

Why are we choosing the nearly impossible task of gun laws (it's depressing that it is nearly impossible) but not doing as much to address an issue that EVERYONE AGREES IS BAD!  

 

You keep saying this, despite multiple people explaining to you the answer.  1) a LOT has been done and is being done to address this issue; 2) people are content with the results.  What else do you want to have done?

[TheGreatBuzz]

You keep saying this, despite multiple people explaining to you the answer.  1) a LOT has been done and is being done to address this issue; 2) people are content with the results.  What else do you want to have done?

I'm sorry put the explainations aren't making any sense.  So since DD deaths are down by 50% that means a lot has been done and people are content with the results.  So the fact that handgun related deaths are down ~50% from 1995-2008 means we should be content with those results?  It doesn't need the amount of press?  Handguns are under control so just let it keep working? 

 

What else do I want done?  I'd say a breathalyzer in every car is quite similar to some of the proposed gun regulations.  I'd be fine with that.

 

EDIT:  I've gotta go now but please don't think I'm running from the argument.  I'm about to get off work and go out for my birthday with my wife.  I'll come back to address what needs addressing.

Edited January 8, 2016 by TheGreatBuzz

[PleaseBlitz]

I'm sorry put the explainations aren't making any sense.  So since DD deaths are down by 50% that means a lot has been done and people are content with the results.  So the fact that handgun related deaths are down ~50% from 1995-2008 means we should be content with those results?  It doesn't need the amount of press?  Handguns are under control so just let it keep working? 

 

What else do I want done?  I'd say a breathalyzer in every car is quite similar to some of the proposed gun regulations.  I'd be fine with that.

 

#1, why are you all of a sudden cherry picking handguns, #2, where are you getting your statistics from and #3, its 2016 not 2008.

 

Also, you think putting a breathalyzer in every car is similar to what specific proposed regulation?  The one where Obama personally comes to confiscate your guns?

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

Abe Lincoln said- "Don't believe everything you see on the internet just because it has a picture"

That'd be a really good quote if the picture wasn't accurate. I confirmed it with a 3 second Google search. You maybe should have tried the same.

[Larry]

Due in large part to legislation, the instances of drunk driving deaths have been dramatically reduced in the past 20 years because there HAS been a huge push in this area.  So the question is, why can't we do the same for gun-related deaths, and the answer is, because Congress won't do anything.

I was going to phrase my response along the lines of "Because the AAA hasn't successfully passed legislation making it illegal for police officers to ask people if they're drunk".

Your way was less sarcastic.

[Tweedr01]

Of course not.  There are reasonable solutions and efforts moving forward, but imposing your (not actually YOUR, more Obama's/hard left) antiquated views on big gov't regulating certain aspects of free-trade when they are proven not to work is just not the right approach.  I consider myself right-center, but I find myself slipping more and more into the far right simply because im finding less liberals who can be centric.  

 

I bet if you look very closely and hard you can find an answer to this question without having to ask it.  

 

I feel you on the bolded part.  Personally I've had more conversations with liberals that say some crazy things, but I've seen publically some of the morons on both sides.  I find myself not saying anything at all anymore, and just making sure I take care of me and mine.

[TheGreatBuzz]

#1, why are you all of a sudden cherry picking handguns, #2, where are you getting your statistics from and #3, its 2016 not 2008.

 

Also, you think putting a breathalyzer in every car is similar to what specific proposed regulation?  The one where Obama personally comes to confiscate your guns?

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf#page=27  It's what I got from a quick search.  I used it because it was a .gov site so I hoped it wasn't twisted statistics meant to drive an agenda.  But it only goes to 2008.  I used handguns because it was what the chart addressed specifically.  the other lines were for "other guns" and I felt that wasn't specific enough. 

 

I'm not one of these idiots that thinks Obama and the government in general is coming to get my guns.  Please don't lump me in with them.

[AsburySkinsFan]

You keep saying this, despite multiple people explaining to you the answer.  1) a LOT has been done and is being done to address this issue; 2) people are content with the results.  What else do you want to have done?

1) A lot has been done to address the issue and a lot has been done to make what was done useless and uninforceable, thank you NRA.

2) Which people are content with the results? The NRA who's job is to advocate for the firearm industry? (i.e. influence legislation that promotes sales) Or are there others that you're saying are content with 15,000 gun deaths per year?

 

BTW, Republicans sure have gone 180 degrees on this issue since the time when the greatest President who ever lived Ronald Reagan pushed for the passage of the Brady bill and assualt weapon bans. Now the Right loves to praise Reagan while at the same time working to undo every piece of gun legislation that he worked to pass.

[Larry]

Of course not.  There are reasonable solutions and efforts moving forward, but imposing your (not actually YOUR, more Obama's/hard left) antiquated views on big gov't regulating certain aspects of free-trade when they are proven not to work is just not the right approach.  I consider myself right-center, but I find myself slipping more and more into the far right simply because im finding less liberals who can be centric.  

 

I bet if you look very closely and hard you can find an answer to this question without having to ask it.

 

 

Well I'd have really liked to hear the Presidents answer to this but I'll bite, what do you think the answer is?

Just offhand, I suspect that your answer is going to involve Obama's antiquated hard left position on big government restrictions of free trade that have been proven not to work.

And maybe something about him being Muslim and hating America.

[PleaseBlitz]

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf#page=27  It's what I got from a quick search.  I used it because it was a .gov site so I hoped it wasn't twisted statistics meant to drive an agenda.  But it only goes to 2008.  I used handguns because it was what the chart addressed specifically.  the other lines were for "other guns" and I felt that wasn't specific enough. 

 

I'm not one of these idiots that thinks Obama and the government in general is coming to get my guns.  Please don't lump me in with them.

 

 

Ok, so using the exact same chart, handgun homicides from 1985 until 2008 are unchanged.  There was a spike right around 1995, which you used to make it sound like handgun deaths were trending dramatically downward.

 

Anyways, its 2016, not 2008.  

 

Finally, then what proposed regulations do you feel are the same as putting a breathalyzer in every vehicle?

Edited January 8, 2016 by PleaseBlitz

[mcsluggo]

When was the last time Congress addressed it?  It's the same number of deaths as violent gun crime so why not the huge uproar?  I get there will never be perfection but why not a bigger focus?  It seems to me that guns are the "sexy" topic and it is just ignored that the same number of people die from DD.  I'm really not trying to turn this into some type of political debate.  I'm not trying to push some anti-Obama agenda.  Until last night I didn't even know these numbers.  And when I learned them it really bothered me.  Maybe some of it comes from my history with DD's.

 

I don't think yo uare being particularly political in your discussion here... but equating guns to drunk driving is such a tired comparison.   Why not look at medical malpractice deaths?   malaria deaths?  child abuse deaths... ?   there is no equivalency in ANY of those.  Saying that we cant talk about X without also having solved the price of tea in china is ... nothing but a distraction. 

 

 

(and for the record the reason that auto deaths and drunk driving deaths are relatively high in absolute terms is because just about every single person in the country uses an automobile every single day.   Without even adding adding alcohol, cars would be the most "dangerous" tools in our society... except for maybe beds?    Why is nobody looking at how many people are dying in beds!!??  has nobody noticed this????   

Edited January 8, 2016 by mcsluggo

[PleaseBlitz]

1) A lot has been done to address the issue and a lot has been done to make what was done useless and uninforceable, thank you NRA.

2) Which people are content with the results? The NRA who's job is to advocate for the firearm industry? (i.e. influence legislation that promotes sales) Or are there others that you're saying are content with 15,000 gun deaths per year?

 

BTW, Republicans sure have gone 180 degrees on this issue since the time when the greatest President who ever lived Ronald Reagan pushed for the passage of the Brady bill and assualt weapon bans. Now the Right loves to praise Reagan while at the same time working to undo every piece of gun legislation that he worked to pass.

 

 

"Content with the results" (and the entire portion that you quoted) was referring to legislature aimed at curbing drinking and driving deaths (again, down 50%), not gun deaths.  

Edited January 8, 2016 by PleaseBlitz

[Larry]

Abe Lincoln said- "Don't believe everything you see on the internet just because it has a picture"

ES says "Don't quote pictures"

Larry says "If you want to claim that somebody's statistics are wrong, you'll probably convince people better if you actually reference better statistics, than if you try to claim that anything involving a picture is untrue."

[TheGreatBuzz]

 

 

Just offhand, I suspect that your answer is going to involve Obama's antiquated hard left position on big government restrictions of free trade that have been proven not to work.

And maybe something about him being Muslim and hating America.

You obviously don't pay much attention to what I post.  I think the "Obama is muslim, hates America, taking out guns, etc" crowd are retarded.  I'm one of the usually quiet sane Republicans.  I'm Pro-choice when it doesn't involve me.  I'm for immigration reform and against a big wall.  Please don't lump me in with the yahoo's.  It's insulting.

 

I don't think yo uare being particularly political in your discussion here... but equating guns to drunk driving is such a tired comparison.   Why not look at medical malpractice deaths?   malaria deaths?  child abuse deaths... ?   there is no equivalency in ANY of those.  Saying that we cant talk about X without also having solves the price of tea in china is ... nothing but a distraction. 

 

 

(and for the record the reason that auto deaths and drunk driving deaths are relatively high in absolute terms is because just about every single person in the country uses an automobile every single day.   Without even adding adding alcohol, cars would be the most "dangerous" tools in our society... except for maybe beds?    Why is nobody looking at how many people are dying in beds!!??  has nobody noticed this????   

I didn't look at all those other deaths because I just found this out last night.  Just seems like adding $200 to the price of every car and installing a breathalyzer would probably drop DD down a pretty large amount.  And I'm not saying we can't address guns because of the DD deaths.  I'm actually for common sense gun reform.  I think EVERY firearm transaction should require a background check.  But I know it's going to take a lot more work to put a dent in the 10k gun deaths than it would to put a dent in the 10k DD deaths.  I just want to see more done about DD. 

 

Okay now I'm really leaving.  I'm late for my own birthday party.

[SkinssRvA]

 

 

Just offhand, I suspect that your answer is going to involve Obama's antiquated hard left position on big government restrictions of free trade that have been proven not to work.

And maybe something about him being Muslim and hating America.

Don't appreciate it.  That's all.  

[Larry]

Obama is especially emotional (see, tears) and insistent on Gun Control at the moment because he fears for his party.  It is a rallying cry.  He's essentially building up a huge strawman argument, with no basis or facts, that says "if you are republican you are pro mass shootings."

Yeah. The folks complaining about all of the dead people are just doing it because they're part of a conspiracy to try to stem the overwhelming Republican tide at the polls, that is threatening to spell the very end of the Democratic Party. 

[mcsluggo]

....

 

Okay now I'm really leaving.  I'm late for my own birthday party.

 

that is bad...   but i'm frightened by my own birthday suit, which is probably worse.    

[Larry]

You obviously don't pay much attention to what I post.

Edit. Apologies. Thought I was responding to somebody else.

(And I have no clue what kind of problem you have with my post.)

Edited January 8, 2016 by Larry

[PleaseBlitz]

 

 

Okay now I'm really leaving.  I'm late for my own birthday party.

 

Happy birthday.  

[SkinssRvA]

Yeah. The folks complaining about all of the dead people are just doing it because they're part of a conspiracy to try to stem the overwhelming Republican tide at the polls, that is threatening to spell the very end of the Democratic Party. 

Your sarcasm is not as impressive as you think it is, I assure you.  

[Larry]

Your sarcasm is not as impressive as you think it is, I assure you.

Your posts, however, I suspect are considerably funnier than you think they are.

[SkinssRvA]

Your posts, however, I suspect are considerably funnier than you think they are.

I'm all for logical discussions. You don't seem to be into it.  You don't agree with me, that's fine.  I have yet to see any arguments, facts, studies, opinions from you, other than the fact that you think I am anti-american/anti-muslim/a racist?  I think I got them all down.  

 

Like I said, I am a centric-republican who is forced farther to the right because of hard left people like you.  No compromise, no debate, just sarcasm and deflection.