Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Ghostpanther]

so i've been thinking real long and hard about my next gun purchase and the conclusion i've come to is im gonna go with this bad boy

https://www.shopalexanderarms.com/AR...ete_Rifle.html

Nice! Which color?..the one linked I assume? Would be a lot of fun to shoot. I shot the .50 cal turret mounted machine guns on the tanks we had back when I was in the Army.

[Roxinius]

Nice! Which color?..the one linked I assume? Would be a lot of fun to shoot. I shot the .50 cal turret mounted machine guns on the tanks we had back when I was in the Army.

im thinking either black or titanium i've been watching vids and it looks like pure joy to shoot and the defense rounds are nasty

[Ghostpanther]

im thinking either black or titanium i've been watching vids and it looks like pure joy to shoot and the defense rounds are nasty

Ether choice would look cool I think. Myself, I prefer black in weapons. Or the gun blue black my .357 mag revolver has.

[PhaelixWW]

No, but you do in using the 250k number.

Yes, but I'm not using it as the foundation for any other argument. If you go back through any of my older posts on the subject, you'll probably note that I only reference the 250k as my personal feeling, but any arguments I make tend to assume (for the argument's sake) the much more pessimistic number. I'll say something like: "Even the most pessimistic estimates for defensive gun use are around 55-80k a year, which is far in excess of the 15k homicides committed with a firearm per year."

It would also be helpful if you'd link those studies so everyone can use or dismiss them as you do.

Again, I don't typically bother linking them, because their conclusions are largely useless in and of themselves, but they are:

• 2.5 million per year - Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun (Gary Kleck & Marc Gertz, 1995)
• 65 thousand per year - Survey Research and Self-Defense Gun Use: An Explanation of Extreme Overestimates (David Hemenway, 1997)
• 4.7 million per year - Guns in America: Results of a Comprehensive National Survey on Firearms Ownership and Use (Phillip J. Cook& Jens Ludwig, 1999)

These studies have been discussed plenty of times in this thread already, though.

[Mayhem]

I've linked this information many times. Wikipedia has explanations and links to study information. Phaelix's high end estimation is actually not the highest. The highest is 4.7 million.

Post #53802

But thanks for the link.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, but I'm not using it as the foundation for any other argument. If you go back through any of my older posts on the subject, you'll probably note that I only reference the 250k as my personal feeling, but any arguments I make tend to assume (for the argument's sake) the much more pessimistic number. I'll say something like: "Even the most pessimistic estimates for defensive gun use are around 55-80k a year, which is far in excess of the 15k homicides committed with a firearm per year."



Again, I don't typically bother linking them, because their conclusions are largely useless in and of themselves, but they are:

• 2.5 million per year - Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun (Gary Kleck & Marc Gertz, 1995)
• 65 thousand per year - Survey Research and Self-Defense Gun Use: An Explanation of Extreme Overestimates (David Hemenway, 1997)
• 4.7 million per year - Guns in America: Results of a Comprehensive National Survey on Firearms Ownership and Use (Phillip J. Cook& Jens Ludwig, 1999)

These studies have been discussed plenty of times in this thread already, though.

It is amazing that the most recent "study" about this topic is already 20 years old. Considering the prevalence of gun usage in the US someone would think maybe we should know what's what.

Apparently no, everyone seems to be fine with just imagining stuff.

[PhaelixWW]

It is amazing that the most recent "study" about this topic is already 20 years old. Considering the prevalence of gun usage in the US someone would think maybe we should know what's what.

Apparently no, everyone seems to be fine with just imagining stuff.

Firearm violence in the early 90s was twice the problem it is now. The public misperception otherwise is more akin to just "imagining stuff". And why revisit a study when the methodology is inherently flawed? I mean, literally every argument or study since has been about the methodologies used. It's pointless to even think about conducting a new survey study until/unless you can find a way to limit or account for the confounding variables.

[Mayhem]

Firearm violence in the early 90s was twice the problem it is now. The public misperception otherwise is more akin to just "imagining stuff". And why revisit a study when the methodology is inherently flawed? I mean, literally every argument or study since has been about the methodologies used. It's pointless to even think about conducting a new survey study until/unless you can find a way to limit or account for the confounding variables.

Did I somehow imply that those flawed methods should be used again?

Also, what is the problem with producing facts? I mean, what is the argument against knowing what is going on?

[Svifnymr]

Did I somehow imply that those flawed methods should be used again?

Also, what is the problem with producing facts? I mean, what is the argument against knowing what is going on?

Out of curiosity, how would you arrive at a number of self-defense uses of a firearm?

[PhaelixWW]

Did I somehow imply that those flawed methods should be used again?

What part of "inherently flawed" is unclear? It's not like they just got a question or formula wrong. There are unavoidable problems with conducting a non-anonymous survey, asking people to recall and explain events of a specific timeframe of the past, and on a subject that is extremely politically divisive. I most definitely put the "unless" in my statement for a reason, too, as I'm not sure what method could be used to account even remotely successfully for the many confounding variables.

Also, what is the problem with producing facts? I mean, what is the argument against knowing what is going on?

That's just it, though; surveys don't "produce facts". They generate estimates, which is an entirely different thing. Depending on the nature of the survey/question, those estimates might come close to approximating facts, but not always.

[Mayhem]

Out of curiosity, how would you arrive at a number of self-defense uses of a firearm?

Make it a requirement to report them? Sure, it will not get you every actual use, but it should get you closer than a questionnaire does.

- - - Updated - - -

What part of "inherently flawed" is unclear? It's not like they just got a question or formula wrong. There are unavoidable problems with conducting a non-anonymous survey, asking people to recall and explain events of a specific timeframe of the past, and on a subject that is extremely politically divisive. I most definitely put the "unless" in my statement for a reason, too, as I'm not sure what method could be used to account even remotely successfully for the many confounding variables.

What part of "where did I imply those flawed methods should be used" is unclear?

That's just it, though; surveys don't "produce facts". They generate estimates, which is an entirely different thing. Depending on the nature of the survey/question, those estimates might come close to approximating facts, but not always.

No seriously, did I somewhere imply that surveys should be conducted? Apparently, no one is interested in actually producing reliable numbers when the best someone can bring up are surveys.

I know, I know, USA #1 and all, ignore how gun control works in other countries, maybe start with how reporting works in other countries because without arguments based on real numbers nothing will ever get solved considering gun violence, or anything.

[Ghostpanther]

Interesting correlation to consider....https://www.foxnews.com/health/ohio-...s-26-hour-span

In 2017, Ohio had the second-highest opioid overdose rate in the country, with a reported 4,293 deaths, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse. The midwestern state saw a rate of 39.2 deaths per 100,000 people, while the average national rate was 14.6 deaths per that same number.

In 2017, Ohio had 1,589 death's from firearms, of which 918 where from suicides. So which do you think is the largest concern in my State?

[zenkai]

Interesting correlation to consider....https://www.foxnews.com/health/ohio-...s-26-hour-span

In 2017, Ohio had the second-highest opioid overdose rate in the country, with a reported 4,293 deaths, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse. The midwestern state saw a rate of 39.2 deaths per 100,000 people, while the average national rate was 14.6 deaths per that same number.

In 2017, Ohio had 1,589 death's from firearms, of which 918 where from suicides. So which do you think is the largest concern in my State?

That's a safe bet on what it is

[PhaelixWW]

Make it a requirement to report them?

This... I don't even....

You'd make it a crime not to report being a victim of an attempted crime? And all for the sake of data collection? Are you shitting me?

What part of "where did I imply those flawed methods should be used" is unclear?

The part where you imply that there are other, unflawed methods. That's, you know, the whole point of stating that those flaws are inherent, and unavoidable. It's also why I spelled out that all the papers released in the past 20 years or so have done nothing except argue about just how flawed those methodologies are.

No seriously, did I somewhere imply that surveys should be conducted? Apparently, no one is interested in actually producing reliable numbers when the best someone can bring up are surveys.

Because any reasonable, rational person can tell you that that's the only possible method of data collection on this subject.

I know, I know, USA #1 and all, ignore how gun control works in other countries, maybe start with how reporting works in other countries because without arguments based on real numbers nothing will ever get solved considering gun violence, or anything.

Go ahead, show me a country that makes it a crime not to report each and every defensive use of a firearm, even ones in which the firearm is not discharged (which is most of them). Show me such a law being enforced. Show me the 100% accurate data collection about the subject because of said law.

I'll wait.

[Ghostpanther]

That's a safe bet on what it is

Pretty clear. What irks me is, the state government ( mostly Republicans ), inc. the Governor, get all worked up over 9 people being killed in Dayton and call for more restrictive gun and red flag laws. Yet I have not heard much from the media or politicians here on the drug death's, other than the token remarks of "it's a problem and we need to find solutions."

If there was a Interstate highway pile up which killed 9 people and it was caused by one human's negligence, they would not say much, other the same old rhetoric. Never blaming the vehicle or roads.

[Naiattavain]

the left can't do anything to the criminals that break the gun laws. maybe the left should start with gun law breaking criminals for a start. criminals are always gonna have guns. why hurt law abiding citizens? the left should be focusing on criminals that have guns for start.

[Zan15]

Interesting correlation to consider....https://www.foxnews.com/health/ohio-...s-26-hour-span

In 2017, Ohio had the second-highest opioid overdose rate in the country, with a reported 4,293 deaths, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse. The midwestern state saw a rate of 39.2 deaths per 100,000 people, while the average national rate was 14.6 deaths per that same number.

In 2017, Ohio had 1,589 death's from firearms, of which 918 where from suicides. So which do you think is the largest concern in my State?

its almost like you don't understand that a state can handle more than one concern at a time?

by the way 25,647 people died of Malignant neoplasm.....and there is 11 others that are more than 4293 deaths...…

[zenkai]

its almost like you don't understand that a state can handle more than one concern at a time?

by the way 25,647 people died of Malignant neoplasm.....and there is 11 others that are more than 4293 deaths...…

Concerned aka priority is not the same thing as "unable to handle 2 problems at once" I can give you an explanation if you have trouble with the difference.

[Zan15]

Concerned aka priority is not the same thing as "unable to handle 2 problems at once" I can give you an explanation if you have trouble with the difference.

oh please he is implying that nothing should be done because its not the largest concern in his state. Would not be the first time or last he has either directly implied it or indirectly.

You can't be this dense to not see his intent.

[zenkai]

oh please he is implying that nothing should be done because its not the largest concern in his state. Would not be the first time or last he has either directly implied it or indirectly.

You can't be this dense to not see his intent.

I think you read more into what his words are saying and all the speculation you're conjecturing is solely based on your biased opinion.

[Zan15]

I think you read more into what his words are saying and all the speculation you're conjecturing is solely based on your biased opinion.

whelp we will have to wait for him to respond, since what you think is also that of "biased opinion"....