Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Aehl]

The "gun violence" figures are actually misleading and deceptive..which of course suits their narrative.

I am yet to see one person go into those figures..and remove all the deaths from suicide which ISNT "gun violence" at all. All of a sudden those "shocking statistics" are a lot smaller in number.

Suicide isnt a crime.

[RaoBurning]

The "gun violence" figures are actially misleading and deceptive..which of course suits their narrative.

I am yet to see one person go into those figures..and remove all the deaths from suicide which ISNT "gun violence" at all. All of a sudden those "shocking statistics" are a lot smaller in number.

Suicide isnt a crime.

Why shouldn't we work to prevent suicides? Most people who fail their attempts at suicide are very glad they didn't succeed. Lowering the number of sure-fire kill methods can only help improve the number of survivors. And while I might agree that suicide isn't a crime, putting a bullet in your mouth sure as hell is violent.

[Aehl]

Why shouldn't we work to prevent suicides?

Mate, Ill be blunt. If you think that gun control acts in any way to prevent suicide youre insane..

Most people who fail their attempts at suicide are very glad they didn't succeed.

And you know this..how?

Lowering the number of sure-fire kill methods can only help improve the number of survivors.

The facts dont support your narrative..in fact just the opposite. the suicide rates here with gun control are three times the national average in certain areas and its been that way for DECADES.

And while I might agree that suicide isn't a crime, putting a bullet in your mouth sure as hell is violent.

But it isnt a crime, is it? Nope. The figures are skewed and my facts remain: take suicide out of that data and all of a sudden those "shocking figures" take a nosedive.

BTW Ill give you an example: in Aust the car deaths 18-25 are some of the highest in the nation yet no one has ever asked in light of the suicide figures..how many of them were accidents?

- - - Updated - - -

Why has this gone for 2k+ pages when this debate is an almost perfect mirror of what happened in Australia in the late 90s (early 00s?).

Oh?

The exact same arguments were thrown around, guns don't kill peo.... , criminals will still get weap.... bla bla bla.

Which is 100% accurate. The crims have all the guns they want, and that includes the day a bikie gang had a running gun battle in the middle of a shopping centre

When all was said and done, before the Aussie gun ban you had a lot of gun violence/mass shootings and after you have very little.

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/rise-in-dr...417-1x4o5.html

Five Sydney shootings in four hours as police probe bikie gang turf war link

In 2002, there were about 30 drive-by shootings every month. That number dropped off significantly in following years, but by the end of 2011, was back up to about 20 shootings per month.

I will be clear on this.

Gun. laws. do. not. and. never.will. stop. a. criminal from getting their hands on a gun.

Now, then, ever.

http://www.news.com.au/national/crim...9c36979245d50c

There were 207 firearms deaths in Australia in 2013, a rate of 0.93 per 100,000 people, higher than in 19 other countries, including the UK, Bolivia and Zimbabwe.

Since then, there have been an average of 20 drive-by shootings every month in the state.

The law abiding are disarmed, the criminals well armed up to and including rocket launchers which they stole from the Army.

Criminals dont obey gun laws.

[Dystemper]

http://www.beingfactual.com/us-3rd-in-murders/

[Mormolyce]

Average time between initial purchase at retail and use in a crime is over 6 years. Waiting periods are pointless and have been done plenty of times and used in plenty of jurisdictions.

As I said, I doubt it will have much effect in the US where gun saturation is already extreme. Nothing gets solved unless that problem is tackled first.

However I will point out that you're talking averages there. So one guy shoots someone with a gun his dad had in the attic for 12 years, and another shoots someone with a gun he bought that afternoon - average is 6 years. As an example.

- - - Updated - - -

l. A survey of data on private gun ownership shows it does not have a clear net positive or net negative effect on things like crime

Will have to stop you on point 1.

Also the presumption that gun ownership is a right.

So essentially you begged the entire question.

[Ghostpanther]

I’m starting to progress towards the idea everyone should be allowed a firearm.

Because

1. Being trained long enough now, I don’t fear everyone with a gun because many can’t aim.
2. Maybe if all you Charles Bronson’s had to deal with others armed their smug bullshit would end.

I am glad you have come to your senses.

Well, I do not have a death wish. So that leaves me out.

[Roxinius]

"Do you Support Assault Weapons Ban?"

I see no reason whatsoever that this shouldn't be 99% "Yes" in the poll. Weirdly enough it is not.. I keep reading people stating it is people who kill people, not guns.. or that criminals don't follow laws anyway. I never heard anyone make a convincing statement on why there are so many more gun fatalities in the US compared to civilized western Europe countries where guns are banned completely. Every time a accident does occur they jump on it and state "see, it happens there as well and if they had a gun they could defend themselves" yet never look at the real numbers of accidents each year.

Guns kill people. You don't want them near you or anyone you love unless you are in a shooting gallery, an authorized hunt or in law enforcement.

yeah cause banning something because it looks scary is always the answer seeing as there is no such thing as an "assault weapon" im sorry my diamond back ar-15 scares you but then again i dont give a fuck about your or anyone else feelings on the matter

[Mormolyce]

Violent crimes such as rape, home invasions , assaults etc etc went up as much as 50% or more in areas where guns were banned. It is not a little , it is a lot

You can of course provide us with the link you got this from, right?

[Ghostpanther]

If you are shooting at another person, regardless of him shooting at you first, you are still attacking that person.

Kevlar chest is a defensive product, a gun isn't.

Calling a gun a defensive product is just blatantly dishonest and wrong.

No it is not. Even the Supreme Court of the US said we could use the Second Amendment right to keep and bare arms ( firearms ) as a right to self defense. Maybe in your country it is or you feel that way.

[Doctor Amadeus]

I am glad you have come to your senses.

Well, I do not have a death wish. So that leaves me out.

Yeah been a while. Always loved the set up the bad guy had to be the perfect bad guy. Drank smoked kicked puppies rape. So no matter what Mr Bronson did he could never be worse. Lol

[Ghostpanther]

It doesn't matter if you use a gun offensive or defensive for the gun to be made to attack and kill someone. They simply are made to attack and kill someone.

Not all guns. Some are made and designed specifically for target competition shooting. If I was going to pick a firearm for self defense, it certainly would not be one of those. :P

- - - Updated - - -

Exactly, so harsher gun laws = less guns in circulation = less gun deaths.. not sure how anyone can be against that.

I am. If it means I can not have one to use for self defense. It would depend on what you mean by harsher.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh I agree a dog is better then nothing...But you do not want to just have a dog as a sole means of protection.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, absolutely not. I like ours because they can be little alarmists. But I would not want to depend on one saving me , while I did nothing. hehe.

- - - Updated - - -

Are you telling me 33% of the world population lives in the USA, or in case of rape, about half earth's population?

Quote:
The United States of America is the top country by assault in the world. As of 2014, assault in the United States of America was 731,089 number that accounts for 33.20 % of the world's assault.

The United States of America is the top country by rape in the world. As of 2014, rape in the United States of America was 118,027 number that accounts for 49.06 % of the world's rape.

Now I am pretty sure there are error margins on all statistics used but trends are trends.

Some good statistics to justify wanting a firearm for self defense. lol! Actually violent crimes over all in the US has been in a steady decline for decades. Some sections of some cities have seen a rise , but if you look at the overall rate say in the 1960- 70's, compared to now, you will see it has dropped a lot since then.

- - - Updated - - -

As I said, I doubt it will have much effect in the US where gun saturation is already extreme. Nothing gets solved unless that problem is tackled first.

However I will point out that you're talking averages there. So one guy shoots someone with a gun his dad had in the attic for 12 years, and another shoots someone with a gun he bought that afternoon - average is 6 years. As an example.

- - - Updated - - -



Will have to stop you on point 1.

Also the presumption that gun ownership is a right.

So essentially you begged the entire question.

Because in the US it is.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah been a while. Always loved the set up the bad guy had to be the perfect bad guy. Drank smoked kicked puppies rape. So no matter what Mr Bronson did he could never be worse. Lol

It was a dumb movie series. Charles Bronson was really good in " Once Upon a Time in the West " But that was about it.

[Mormolyce]

Because in the US it is.

Silly rabbit, confusing natural and legal rights again.

[Ghostpanther]

Silly rabbit, confusing natural and legal rights again.

I think self defense is a natural right for all humans. Just so happens, in the US we are allowed to use a very effective tool for it. Which is even just as much a right as the right to defend yourself.

[Mormolyce]

I think self defense is a natural right for all humans. Just so happens, in the US we are allowed to use a very effective tool for it. Which is even just as much a right as the right to defend yourself.

You just conceded that gun ownership isn't a natural right.

[TITAN308]

I think self defense is a natural right for all humans. Just so happens, in the US we are allowed to use a very effective tool for it. Which is even just as much a right as the right to defend yourself.

Careful, Mormolyce is on one of this "Ha! Gotcha!" missions with you.

I'm pretty sure he would split a hair not once, but twice, maybe three times, if required.

Keep in mind this is the same guy who calls you racist (yea one of those types) if you give him info from the Department of Justice regarding guns and crime.

[Deleted]

Not all guns. Some are made and designed specifically for target competition shooting. If I was going to pick a firearm for self defense, it certainly would not be one of those. :P

- - - Updated - - -



I am. If it means I can not have one to use for self defense. It would depend on what you mean by harsher.

- - - Updated - - -



Oh, absolutely not. I like ours because they can be little alarmists. But I would not want to depend on one saving me , while I did nothing. hehe.

- - - Updated - - -



Some good statistics to justify wanting a firearm for self defense. lol! Actually violent crimes over all in the US has been in a steady decline for decades. Some sections of some cities have seen a rise , but if you look at the overall rate say in the 1960- 70's, compared to now, you will see it has dropped a lot since then.

- - - Updated - - -



Because in the US it is.

- - - Updated - - -



It was a dumb movie series. Charles Bronson was really good in " Once Upon a Time in the West " But that was about it.

Oh stop being intentionally obtuse.

[lockedout]

Careful, Mormolyce is on one of this "Ha! Gotcha!" missions with you.

I'm pretty sure he would split a hair not once, but twice, maybe three times, if required.

Keep in mind this is the same guy who calls you racist (yea one of those types) if you give him info from the Department of Justice regarding guns and crime.

Well he isn't wrong.

[Aehl]

Also the presumption that gun ownership is a right.

USSC Heller Vs US - it is a right.

[Deletedaccount1]

Will have to stop you on point 1.

Also the presumption that gun ownership is a right.

So essentially you begged the entire question.

For point 1, Huemer specifically refers to a non-partisan study by the National Research Council which concluded that from all the existing data on gun ownership, it is extremely difficult to draw a conclusion on the efficacy of gun control laws before enacting them.

As for the right to own a gun, another poster pointed out that from a legal perspective the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to own a gun independent of a militia as of District of Columbia v. Heller. Huemer outlines why he thinks it is a right in philosophical terms in this paper.

[Mormolyce]

For point 1, Huemer specifically refers to a non-partisan study by the National Research Council which concluded that from all the existing data on gun ownership, it is extremely difficult to draw a conclusion on the efficacy of gun control laws before enacting them.

And if you actually read it, you'll realise that you are wildly generalising from what their actual conclusions were:

For example, despite a large body of research, the committee found no credible evidence that the passage of right-to-carry laws decreases or increases violent crime, and there is almost no empirical evidence that the more than 80 prevention programs focused on gun-related violence have had any effect on children’s behavior, knowledge, attitudes, or beliefs about firearms. The committee found that the data available on these questions are too weak to support unambiguous conclusions or strong policy statements.

https://www.nap.edu/read/10881/chapter/2#2

It's merely talking about right to carry, not gun control. In a country that already has no meaningful gun control to boot.

USSC Heller Vs US - it is a right.

Again you're confusing a legal right with a natural right.