The Gun Control Debate Thread

[PokerPacker]

I hate the "if only everyone had a gun" argument. It's so absurdly stupid I can't even begin to reason with people who buy into it. The more guns there are, the more people will shoot each other. Sure, you'd take away the mass casualty situations. But you'd end up with thousands more individual shootings. The net result would be more fatalities. Significantly more.

Who, exactly, is proposing everyone should carry a gun?

[PeterMP]

If not notoriety,  what then? What's driving the uptick in this type of violence.  It isn't easy access to guns. They've always been easy to obtain in this country.  There has never been a period when they were difficult to get.   Heck,  locking up guns in your own home is a fairly recent concept.  The mass shooters may often be going after some perceived wrong, but they are going at it in a big way and there's a reason.   They want to go out in a blaze of glory and our perpetual, media frenzied state provides an easy avenue. 

 

Not all things have a single explanation.

 

Clearly, the San Bernardino case is different than the Excel case.

 

It also isn't all clear that there is a significant increase.  This might just be random variation.

[BornaSkinsFan83]

The one about everyone on a college campus carrying kills me (probably literally eventually). You got a bunch of stupid kids packing, they're not well trained (newsflash, shooting is easy, shooting what you want isn't), someone makes a loud noise, two people think it's a shooter and pull out their weapons, they see each other, jump to conclusions, **** gets out of hand fast, everyone is pulling out their weapons with no clue what they're doing or what's going on, yeah. Brilliant ****ing idea there.

I swear the people that come up with this **** have some sort of firearm fetish as a result of them trying to overcompensate...for something. Shame people are going to pay the ultimate price for someone else's tiny **** (<---self censor).

Some of these proposed solutions are almost as bad as the problem. It's beyond depressing.

Edited March 1, 2016 by BornaSkinsFan83

[Burgold]

Not all things have a single explanation.

 

Clearly, the San Bernardino case is different than the Excel case.

 

It also isn't all clear that there is a significant increase.  This might just be random variation.

Well, there certainly seems to be an increase in mass shootings over the past few years. Overall gun violence seems steady-ish, but it's also hard to tell as different counties/states have different reporting rules. Someone can be shot five times, but cause of death can be ruled organ failure and not count as a gun death. It happens. Largely based on what the coroner, hospital decides to put down on the death certificate. There's a ton of shady accounting.

 

I do agree that the reason for the occurrence is likely multi-variate. Notoriety may be a component. NRA winning a whole bunch of legal cases loosening gun laws and making access easier is probably another. I suspect there has been a change in parenting which has an effect. People's conflict resolution skills and social skills may not be as strong as they once were. A whole bunch of other things.

 

The one universal in all gun related deaths though is the gun. In most of these cases, it's the fact that the perpetrator of the mass shooting acquired many guns and guns not designed for hunting or self defense really, but those definitions get into my own personal bias.

[Bang]

Wow, did not see this coming.  That the NRA is so blatantly one sided, regardless if they achieve good or not or ensure correct registration.   Their entire being is to preserve the 2nd Amendment and ensure the right to bear arms.  Agree or disagree with that, does not change their purpose.

 

Now, I am not going to bore with a long and drawn out post because what I said above is pretty much fact.  And, two other minor points.

 

totally disagree.

They maybe USED to be about the 2nd and safe gun use when they began, and Joe Regularguy probably still believes they are.

But the NRA higher ups and the gun lobby as a whole exist for one reason.

 

To sell guns.

Period.

 

Your above questions.. what age should children be allowed to carry? As soon as they can pick it up. Buy one.

What age do we cut off for dementia, etc...? never, demented people have as much right as a suspected terrorist to protect themselves from demented people with a gun. Buy one.

The only person who stops a bad demented person with a gun is a good demented person with a gun.  watch us slide the scales of what is considered "competent" so that every person alive has the right to buy a gun. watch the blood and mayhem fuel even more sales. (oh and if that doesn't work.. the gub'mint! They's comin' fer ya!  ooga booga booga!)

 

Zero restrictions, and constant fear driven by escalating gun violence fueled by flooding weapons into an increasingly angry society... this is gun sales paradise, and that is the goal.

 

lol.. gun safety, preserving the right,, ridiculous. the only reason they are concerned about your right is that it allows them to sell you a gun. 

No laws to restrict or even slow down the sale of a gun to anyone who wants one will be considered. 

Criminals and terrorists included. (recently determined when it was argued that just because the US considers you a suspected terrorist and puts you on a no-fly list, you can still buy a gun.)

Best buy yourself a gun, cause we're selling them to everyone who will kill you and rape your family!

Oh did we say that? I mean,, your rights must be preserved!

Your right to be terrified, mistrustful, hair triggered and stressed to the maximum.

Buy one. 

 

~Bang

Edited March 1, 2016 by Bang

[TheGoodBits]

Who, exactly, is proposing everyone should carry a gun?

Actually what sparked my post was misreading an earlier post in this thread. So in this thread right now, nobody.

It's a very common (and absurd) argument that the hardcore gun crowd loves to make, that more guns make us all safer.

[Chew]

New thread title is gold.

 

LOL @ More guns would make us all safer.  The super weird, 2% of hardcore gun nuts give the rest of us firearm owners a bad rap.

[tshile]

i don't trust majority of the people that have drivers licenses with driving a car

 

can't imagine i'd find many of them i'd trust with a gun

[Jumbo]

[Chew]

i don't trust majority of the people that have drivers licenses with driving a car

 

can't imagine i'd find many of them i'd trust with a gun

 

Real question is, which license makes them more deadly?

[tshile]

Real question is, which license makes them more deadly?

 

according to The Atlantic the numbers are actually pretty close (~33k for cars in 2012 ~32k for guns in 2011, which were the most recent stats when the article was written in january 2015)

 

but for me? i interact with people driving cars way more than people carrying guns. it's not even close

[Bang]

Imagine everyone in those cars with a gun.

 

road rage gets real.

sorry folks,, nine mile rolling backup after our fourth shootout of the day on the Beltway..

 

Cut ME off, willya..   

 

~BANG! BANGBANGBANG!

[tshile]

probably have less traffic in the long run

[visionary]

http://www.freep.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/03/01/teen-shoots-family-tennessee/81155086/?hootPostID=14b40a8451b7cabcd4c908b66f1a588d

Teen, peeved at getting up for school, shoots family

Edited March 2, 2016 by visionary

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Why couldn't we just go around and collect guns? I understand why people who want guns wouldn't like it, but don't records show us exactly where to go and from whom to collect how many weapons? 

 

Yes, we are then only punishing the people who have them legally. But that combined with no longer selling them would get us much closer to a society that doesn't shoot people. This solution combined with other legislation could ultimately start to weed out illegal guns as well. 

[DogofWar1]

Well, playing NRA's advocate, that would wildly violate the 2nd Amendment. Not to mention, it would be tremendously bloody.

Personally, I think there are a number of common sense reforms that could be done before we even contemplated that kind of solution, if such a solution as that ever came into serious contemplation.

[tshile]

Why couldn't we just go around and collect guns? I understand why people who want guns wouldn't like it, but don't records show us exactly where to go and from whom to collect how many weapons? 

 

 

This is why efforts to keep records are fought so hard (and successfully)

 

Because there are people who honestly think the government should use those records to go collect guns.

[Burgold]

There are three reasons why gun collections won't or can't happen

Legislatures won't pass that kind of law

Courts would overturn it

It'd be a logistical nightmare to go house to house coolect guns and then catalog, warehouse or destroy them.

[TheGreatBuzz]

There are three reasons why gun collections won't or can't happen

Legislatures won't pass that kind of law

Courts would overturn it

It'd be a logistical nightmare to go house to house coolect guns and then catalog, warehouse or destroy them.

#4 -It would more than likely start a no **** civil war.

[Burgold]

#4 -It would more than likely start a no **** civil war.

See, this right here is a major part of the problem. People love their guns more than they love the United States of America.

 

Case in point, when we made significant changes to privacy laws and our fundamental right to privacy. There was no threat of civil war. In fact, a lot of people in fact cheered who threaten Civil War cheered. When voting laws were changed to try to make it harder for people exercise their rights to vote and easier still to toss legal votes... no one threatened Civil War. In fact, many of the gun rights people cheered. When George W. Bush began imposing "free speech zones" or when Donald Trump threatens to restrict and go after freedom of the press... Is there any threat of civil War?

 

Guns should not be above speech, privacy, voting, or even the right to life. Guns should not be more important than America.

[TheGreatBuzz]

See, this right here is a major part of the problem. People love their guns more than they love the United States of America.

 

Case in point, when we made significant changes to privacy laws and our fundamental right to privacy. There was no threat of civil war. In fact, a lot of people in fact cheered who threaten Civil War cheered. When voting laws were changed to try to make it harder for people exercise their rights to vote and easier still to toss legal votes... no one threatened Civil War. In fact, many of the gun rights people cheered. When George W. Bush began imposing "free speech zones" or when Donald Trump threatens to restrict and go after freedom of the press... Is there any threat of civil War?

 

Guns should not be above speech, privacy, voting, or even the right to life. Guns should not be more important than America.

True.  But the person didn't just suggest limiting access to guns.  Or even major legislation making guns much harder to get.  He talked about going door to door and taking ALL guns.  I would imagine if ALL privacy laws went away, the right to vote were completely taken away from 100% of the people, or freedom of speech were 100% repealed, you'd see a lot of talk of civil war.

 

And to be clear, I'm not advocating for civil war.  Just making a point.

[Burgold]

And to be clear, I'm not advocating for civil war.  Just making a point.

I figured, but every so often I like to get on my high horse and trot him about a bit. He needs the exercise.

[PleaseBlitz]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/03/02/he-wanted-to-stay-in-bed-his-family-wanted-him-at-school-so-he-shot-them-police-say/?tid=pm_national_pop_b

 

 

But one Tennessee teenager had an extreme reaction to his family’s request on Tuesday morning that he get up and get ready for school: He shot them, according to Nashville police.

 

The teen, who has not been publicly identified, became angry when his grandmother Earline Hill and mother, Sheryl Williams, told him to get his day going, police said in a statement. He threatened the pair and then retrieved a handgun no one knew he had before firing multiple shots in the family apartment, police said.

 

“There was a quarrel about getting up and getting ready for the day when [at some point] the 16-year-old ran to a closet, got a 9mm handgun and started firing,” Nashville police spokeswoman Kris Mumford said, according to the Tennessean newspaper.

 

Hill, 67, was struck at least twice, while the teen’s 12-year-old sister and 6-year-old nephew received graze wounds, according to the police statement. The teen’s 42-year-old mother, Williams, and the teen’s 2-year-old sister were not injured. None of the wounds are life-threatening, police said.

 

 

#DontTreadOnMeGrandma

Edited March 2, 2016 by PleaseBlitz

[Burgold]

Yep, more responsible gun sales and gun owners. If this didn't happen (kids shooting parents, brothers, sisters, etc. in the household) a hundred times a year... I would say it was unfair to bring up.

Sadly, we've heard variations of this story way, way, way too often.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

There are three reasons why gun collections won't or can't happen

Legislatures won't pass that kind of law

Courts would overturn it

It'd be a logistical nightmare to go house to house coolect guns and then catalog, warehouse or destroy them.

 

But you are giving reasons why people would not want it to happen. I guess what I'm talking about is only your final point. Logistically it would be challenging...but possibly worth it?