Whats your stance on gun control ?

[Azure]

Where did I say nothing can be done? All I'm saying is that your ridiculous notion that an outright ban will suddenly keep the 87 people that are killed each day by a firearm not be killed.

It is stupid and naive to think like that.

Why don't we explore the reasons why someone is shooting someone else? Maybe there is an underlying problem that exists that causes people to go murder someone else. Oh right, there have been studies done, and they all concluded that there is a direct link from poverty to crime, and from how effective your welfare system is to how people will not resort to 'crime' to get by.

You want to ban guns because you think the amount of guns is leading to all these shootings. I'm saying they are being caused by other issues, and those issues need to be looked at.

The study on gun violence will be extremely interesting. My guess is they conclude that social conditions more often than not lead to gun crime. Shocking.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by Azure

Its not stupid at all. The US has a huge problem with poverty. A huge problem with drug crime. A huge problem with people not being able to climb the class ladder.

If there is no 'way out', a lot of those people resort to crime. And studies have shown that a lot people who commit murder have a prior conviction.

In 2009, 43 million were living in poverty in the US. That is more than the entire population of Canada. And studies have also shown that increased poverty rates can lead to increased crime rates.

To think that a simplistic solution like gun control can solve a colossal nationwide problem is extremely naive IMO.

And the US simply does not have the manpower to remove the amount of weapons floating around throughout the country. There is a reason local police departments have said they won't enforce any kind of ban. They simply can't.

Oh please!
Every country has poverty including about 11% of Canadians which is close to the Amercans 13% so that is total crap in a hat.

The biggest problem in the USA isn't premeditated gun crimes it's the knee-jerk got pissed off,snapped and shoot the person,the bad day suicides and the accidental shootings. If people didn't have these things laying around like paperweights a lot of families wouldn't have to bury their loved ones.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by Azure

Where did I say nothing can be done? All I'm saying is that your ridiculous notion that an outright ban will suddenly keep the 87 people that are killed each day by a firearm not be killed.

It is stupid and naive to think like that.

Why don't we explore the reasons why someone is shooting someone else? Maybe there is an underlying problem that exists that causes people to go murder someone else. Oh right, there have been studies done, and they all concluded that there is a direct link from poverty to crime, and from how effective your welfare system is to how people will not resort to 'crime' to get by.

You want to ban guns because you think the amount of guns is leading to all these shootings. I'm saying they are being caused by other issues, and those issues need to be looked at.

The study on gun violence will be extremely interesting. My guess is they conclude that social conditions more often than not lead to gun crime. Shocking.

You completely prove my point about you.

You're saying look at anything other than guns to come up with a solution to gun violence.

[missdpuck]

I've often thought of getting a gun because I live alone. And yes, I get lots of encouragement to do just that.
I look at it this way. I live in the suburbs and our houses are close together. I have an alarm system. If the intruder has a gun, I'm most likely screwed no matter what. If he doen't have one, he is the one with the criminal mindset. I'd just freak out and have the gun turned against me most likely. No matter what happens the odds are that help would arrive more quickly than I could figure out what to do with the damned gun.
However, if I lived in a remote area, I would probably have a gun. I would use it enough to feel comfortable with it (shooting coffee cans, clay pigeons, whatever) and it would serve as somewhat of a psychological crutch. Yes, I could still have it turned against me, and I could still freak out. But the odds of getting help in that situation would not be in my favor most likely so in an oddball way it would make some sense in that setting.

Oh wow, grey foxes in my yard! Sorry, this is so cool--my back yard is tiny, and there they are gekkering by the French doors!

As for gun control I've been brainwashed by the saying "If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns". I often think we are too far along for that. I'm not saying things should stay as they are, I just dont know how to get back the guns that are out there already. There would have to be this huge shift in thinking and I don't think that will happen.

Sorry I can't think straight about this post--those foxes are just too cool. How could anyone hunt them????

[jayswin]

Azure is the worst kind of gun apologist. The worst.

[missdpuck]

I think the "issues" come before acquiring the guns.

[craig.caulks]

Originally Posted by Muta

Japan is a great example of what happens when you don't have guns in society. I believe in a population of 120M, they had 2 gun deaths last year.

But far more ninja related killings.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

You completely prove my point about you.

You're saying look at anything other than guns to come up with a solution to gun violence.

There are like 300 million guns in this country. Hard to imagine a way to cut that number down significantly enough to combat gun violence.

Personally, I have no use for guns. I am uncomfortable that I know my kids play at houses with guns, but there's not a lot I can do about that except not let my kids have any friends. Gun deaths in the suburbs are really not that common of a thing. Until the stats say I am more likely to get shot than get killed in a car accident, I see no reason to be very fearful of guns.

If it was up to me, I'd completely ban all guns and remove them from everyone's house. I don't even see the need to hunt as something that would trump public safety, even though I am not particularly morally against hunting.

However, all things considered, I'd actually rather the democrats weren't picking this fight. I don't think it is an important enough issue. I think that if it causes democrats to not get re-elected, it will do more to harm more people's lives than leaving gun laws as they are. Purely selfishly speaking, the average white suburbanite in the US is not going to see a significant movement in life expectancy from any increased gun control. Although I would appreciate a law that prevents people from walking around the grocery store with assault rifles on their back.

If you live in an urban area of the US, especially around the parts I live, it is pretty obvious where the main issue of violence lies. A white suburban area is not signifcantly more violent than a white suburban area in Canada. What the US has that Canada doesn't, is very poor, very violent, predominantly black neighborhoods. Black people shooting black people is so common place that it gets no coverage in the news. Black on black violence stats are as high as many third world countries, while white on white/black on white/white on black are all pretty much in line with countries like Canada.

The multiple shootings are sad, but they are not the problem in this country. If people want to save lives, they have to figure out how to break the cycle of violence in the poor black communities. I just am not seeing how any of the proposed laws will accomplish that. Unless they can figure out a way to get a couple hundred million guns out of this country, I say why bother.

[BigBrodieFan]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

There are like 300 million guns in this country. Hard to imagine a way to cut that number down significantly enough to combat gun violence.

Personally, I have no use for guns. I am uncomfortable that I know my kids play at houses with guns, but there's not a lot I can do about that except not let my kids have any friends. Gun deaths in the suburbs are really not that common of a thing. Until the stats say I am more likely to get shot than get killed in a car accident, I see no reason to be very fearful of guns.

If it was up to me, I'd completely ban all guns and remove them from everyone's house. I don't even see the need to hunt as something that would trump public safety, even though I am not particularly morally against hunting.

However, all things considered, I'd actually rather the democrats weren't picking this fight. I don't think it is an important enough issue. I think that if it causes democrats to not get re-elected, it will do more to harm more people's lives than leaving gun laws as they are. Purely selfishly speaking, the average white suburbanite in the US is not going to see a significant movement in life expectancy from any increased gun control. Although I would appreciate a law that prevents people from walking around the grocery store with assault rifles on their back.

If you live in an urban area of the US, especially around the parts I live, it is pretty obvious where the main issue of violence lies. A white suburban area is not signifcantly more violent than a white suburban area in Canada. What the US has that Canada doesn't, is very poor, very violent, predominantly black neighborhoods. Black people shooting black people is so common place that it gets no coverage in the news. Black on black violence stats are as high as many third world countries, while white on white/black on white/white on black are all pretty much in line with countries like Canada.

The multiple shootings are sad, but they are not the problem in this country. If people want to save lives, they have to figure out how to break the cycle of violence in the poor black communities. I just am not seeing how any of the proposed laws will accomplish that. Unless they can figure out a way to get a couple hundred million guns out of this country, I say why bother.

That's the exact attitude the NRA wants you to have. My 'why bother' reason is that the next time some crazy whackjob wants to shoot up a school, it could be MY kid's school. And hey- EVEN if they have to stop to re-load due to an assault weapon ban.. it might save a few lives. Doing nothing is just effing lazy, and quite frankly, there is no excuse for it. I applaud the democrats for doing what's RIGHT and not what might be 'politically popular.'

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by BigBrodieFan

That's the exact attitude the NRA wants you to have. My 'why bother' reason is that the next time some crazy whackjob wants to shoot up a school, it could be MY kid's school. And hey- EVEN if they have to stop to re-load due to an assault weapon ban.. it might save a few lives. Doing nothing is just effing lazy, and quite frankly, there is no excuse for it. I applaud the democrats for doing what's RIGHT and not what might be 'politically popular.'

There were something like 300 deaths by all kinds of rifles including assault rifles in the US last year. While I agree that assault rifles should be banned, as I see no good reason they shouldn't. Politically popular does matter though. In a best case scenario, an assault rifle ban trimmed the number down from 300 to 150. That is just not a significant savings of lives. It seems to be more about letting people feel like they've done something good to protect kids (when really they've done nothing). If your kid is 1000 times more likely to die in some kind of vehicular accident on the way to school, than he is to get shot while at school, then it is irrational to be okay putting him on the school bus, but have some kind of fear they'll be shot while at school.

And political popularity does matter. I despise most of what the republicans believe in, but I want the democrats to pick their battles, and to pick those battles in areas where they can actually make a difference.

[jayswin]

Yep, the people that say "why bother" because it seems like such a daunting issue and any action won't solve the problem 100% are frustrating as hell.

What if we did that for every social issue?

There's no solution to get 100% of homeless people off the streets? Then we will not try to get any homeless people off the streets.

There will still be people who drink and drive no matter what policies we put in place? Let's not put any policies in place then.

A gun ban in The US will reduce gun crimes, but people will still get guns and commit gun crimes? Let's not even look into it then.

[BigBrodieFan]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

There were something like 300 deaths by all kinds of rifles including assault rifles in the US last year. While I agree that assault rifles should be banned, as I see no good reason they shouldn't. Politically popular does matter though. In a best case scenario, an assault rifle ban trimmed the number down from 300 to 150. That is just not a significant savings of lives. It seems to be more about letting people feel like they've done something good to protect kids (when really they've done nothing). If your kid is 1000 times more likely to die in some kind of vehicular accident on the way to school, than he is to get shot while at school, then it is irrational to be okay putting him on the school bus, but have some kind of fear they'll be shot while at school.

And political popularity does matter. I despise most of what the republicans believe in, but I want the democrats to pick their battles, and to pick those battles in areas where they can actually make a difference.

The health care reform act sure as hell wasn't very popular and no one thought it could be done- but hey- it passed and miraculously, after 7 years without insurance, I could buy affordable health care insurance.. It's not going to happen overnight, but doing nothing is simply stating that you don't care if it gets worse. And, it has, and.. it will.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

There were something like 300 deaths by all kinds of rifles including assault rifles in the US last year. While I agree that assault rifles should be banned, as I see no good reason they shouldn't. Politically popular does matter though. In a best case scenario, an assault rifle ban trimmed the number down from 300 to 150. That is just not a significant savings of lives.

Wait, so you're saying if the number of deaths was cut in HALF it would not be a significant saving of lives?

It seems to be more about letting people feel like they've done something good to protect kids (when really they've done nothing). If your kid is 1000 times more likely to die in some kind of vehicular accident on the way to school, than he is to get shot while at school, then it is irrational to be okay putting him on the school bus, but have some kind of fear they'll be shot while at school

I ****ing hate these types of arguments. "You are also at risk from problem B, so therefore why fix problem A?"

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by BigBrodieFan

The health care reform act sure as hell wasn't very popular and no one thought it could be done- but hey- it passed and miraculously, after 7 years without insurance, I could buy affordable health care insurance.. It's not going to happen overnight, but doing nothing is simply stating that you don't care if it gets worse. And, it has, and.. it will.

The attitudes of some people are baffling. Things will never get better, so let's not try.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by BigBrodieFan

The health care reform act sure as hell wasn't very popular and no one thought it could be done- but hey- it passed and miraculously, after 7 years without insurance, I could buy affordable health care insurance.. It's not going to happen overnight, but doing nothing is simply stating that you don't care if it gets worse. And, it has, and.. it will.

Health care reform helps a great deal more people in a more significant way than some gun control laws that may reduce the number of guns in the country from 300 million to 290 million. If a tough stance on gun control means shifting enough people to republicans that the health bill gets repealed, would it be worth it? Nothing happens in isolation, a great many people like their guns in this country for whatever reason.

[Yakbutter]

For the most part I think guns should be illegal and very difficult to obtain Specifically I think handguns and assault rifles should be outright banned. If people want a gun to go hunting (shotgun, hunting rifle) they should be allowed but they should be difficult to obtain.

So I'm happy with canada's gun policy as it is.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by flameswin

Wait, so you're saying if the number of deaths was cut in HALF it would not be a significant saving of lives?



I ****ing hate these types of arguments. "You are also at risk from problem B, so therefore why fix problem A?"

Because nothing happens in a vacuum, and if you save 150 lives, but the cost is electing more republicans, which in turn takes away access for health care for many, and makes poorer people poorer, then is saving 150 lives worth it? I saw a story where 45,000 people died from lack of health insurance in the US in 2009. Which is the more important issue? Priorities matter in public policy.

Too much decision making is being based on what happens to be sensationalized on the news. My making mandatory a few key safety features on cars, you could save 10,000 lives in a year. Why are we getting all worked up about saving 150 lives. No one seems to care about vehicle deaths, because they don't make the news. But I for one would love it if we could make the highways safer, because that is something that could statistically improve my kids chances of seeing their 18th birthday, and to me that is what matters.

[theinfinitejar]

Originally Posted by Yakbutter

For the most part I think guns should be illegal and very difficult to obtain Specifically I think handguns and assault rifles should be outright banned. If people want a gun to go hunting (shotgun, hunting rifle) they should be allowed but they should be difficult to obtain.

So I'm happy with canada's gun policy as it is.

You know neither handguns or AR-15s are banned in Canada right?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by flameswin

Azure is the worst kind of gun apologist. The worst.

I'm far from a gun apologist.

I just hate it when people like Duffman troll their hatred for guns in every SINGLE thread that has something to do with firearms.

Ban this, ban that. Must be nice living in a black and white world.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by BigBrodieFan

That's the exact attitude the NRA wants you to have. My 'why bother' reason is that the next time some crazy whackjob wants to shoot up a school, it could be MY kid's school. And hey- EVEN if they have to stop to re-load due to an assault weapon ban.. it might save a few lives. Doing nothing is just effing lazy, and quite frankly, there is no excuse for it. I applaud the democrats for doing what's RIGHT and not what might be 'politically popular.'

And it is equally lame to claim it being the right thing, when focusing on keeping black kids from getting into the cycle of violence is the far more important issue. But of course 'gun control' is the major topic these days.

The problem is extremely simple to understand. War on drugs has led to destruction among lower class citizens. This has led to a extreme cycle of constant crime that has torn apart generations of kids. Now black kids are growing up with absolutely no chance of having a life outside of the life in a gang or being involved in some kind of crime.

Studies have shown that these kids are starting out with minor convictions, and slowly moving up the crime ladder. At some point they are more likely to kill someone.

I'm not a gun apologist. I agree with effective gun control. But there is no way in hell any kind of ban is going to be effective enough to actually solve the problem. Gun crime AND gun ownership has been in decline since the start of the 90s. The AWB didn't had any affect on that. Nor did it have any affect on the rate when it was not signed back into law.

It is a matter of resources. Do you want to spend billions on trying to round up all the guns in America, or do you want to spend those billions on social programs that can help lower class kids move up the status ladder, and maybe in 30 years you have effectively stemmed part of the vicious cycle.