Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[TZucchini]

We're not that far off, considering the $170B number that is often cited won't be reduced to zero by gun control.

And gun control will not reduce production, manufacturing, sport, and hunting, to zero either. So indeed, you are very far off. By several factors.

[Mayhem]

Common sense and analysis should dictate that already.

Let's just get on the same page for the first time. Banning guns would prevent some gun crime. Equally, banning guns could also increase other gun crime. This is deduced via mass shootings. Mass shootings statistically occur at high populace locations where the perceived threat of counter-attacks is at a minimum or perceived to be initially zero, ie schools, theaters, or generally "gun free" zones. So it is reasonable to infer that banning guns would potentially promote other incidents to occur given the lowering of the reasonable expectation of resistance.

None of that is specifically pro-gun or anti-gun. That's just logical inference and sourcing from historical events.

A note to make about the lapsed AWB of the 90's and perhaps more specifically California's AWB. One of the things most argued but highly supported via modern statistics is that population density along with area economics plays an unknown multiplier. That is to say, in modern population areas of over 50,0000 we see a non-uniform increase in violent crime. Under these studies the per capita rate does not apply uniformly. Equally, many studies have shown that if the poverty sectional lines are removed from large metropolitan areas, the crime stats per capita plummet. So in essence we have two things working against us, population density and poor economics.

I'm sure you're wondering what this has to do with the AWB. Well, it turns out that during the 90's we saw a dramatic shift in the US Economy. In fact, it was a stupidly good upswing. If you follow the US Economic trends, you will also see a similar trend in crime. (This is true anywhere.) While the AWB didn't have any real effect on booming the Economy, the Economy certainly has an effect on crime. That skews any attempt to use the data as it isn't singular.

The whole debate is far too often missing the big picture.

It's easy to say "ban X" when the alternative is "paying for y."

Side note...

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2014...lled.html?_r=0

Crazy shit happens evey-where. At the end of the day, kids are just easy victims.

i don´t want to ban guns...

also, for the millionth time saying the economy has an impact doesn´t mean there shouldn´t be any gun control, it also doesn´t mean further gun control can´t have an significant impact, that´s just denialism for no real reason

[Ghostpanther]

talking about offensive and defensive firearm usage, yes

i don´t think millions of gun owners out there use their guns either defensive nor offensive, but the ones that do the offensive usage outnumbers the defensive usage

Lol! What? How the hell do you know that? You have spy drones flying all over the place checking to see when people use a gun to target shoot or if they have one for defensive use? Do you even have a clue how many use firearms to hunt over here in the US? Or do you think hunting is using a gun in a bad way?

[lockedout]

Lol! What? How the hell do you know that? You have spy drones flying all over the place checking to see when people use a gun to target shoot or if they have one for defensive use?

No way to prove one way or the other. Just goes to show how biased some people are.

[Mayhem]

Lol! What? How the hell do you know that? You have spy drones flying all over the place checking to see when people use a gun to target shoot or if they have one for defensive use? Do you even have a clue how many use firearms to hunt over here in the US? Or do you think hunting is using a gun in a bad way?

because it would be reported? or do you think that the majority of defensive gun uses are without consequences for anyone?

i wasn´t talking about hunting or anything like that because the topic was offensive and defensive gun usage, i wrote that in the quote, you probably should read what you´re responding to

[TZucchini]

Lol! What? How the hell do you know that?

How does he know that offensive uses are greater than defensive uses? Because that's what the evidence tells us.

[Rukentuts]

Lol! What? How the hell do you know that? You have spy drones flying all over the place checking to see when people use a gun to target shoot or if they have one for defensive use? Do you even have a clue how many use firearms to hunt over here in the US? Or do you think hunting is using a gun in a bad way?

Got anything but an appeal to ignorance?

[Ghostpanther]

because it would be reported? or do you think that the majority of defensive gun uses are without consequences for anyone?

i wasn´t talking about hunting or anything like that because the topic was offensive and defensive gun usage, i wrote that in the quote, you probably should read what you´re responding to

Why would a gun being kept for defensive use be reported? Last time I checked you do not have to put down the reason you want to buy one when you do. Using a gun for shooting a animal is not using it offensively? And I read exactly what you posted dude, which was bullshit.

[lockedout]

How does he know that offensive uses are greater than defensive uses? Because that's what the evidence tells us.

Show evidence on DGU please.

[TZucchini]

Show evidence on DGU please.

I've done this before:

The Gun Violence Archive puts the number of defensive uses each year at extremely low numbers. These are verified and reported incidents. Klecks survey and the NCVS reports both indicate that over 50% of respondents report their DGU's to the police. So even doubling that number results in a pathetically low amount of DGU's.

There's other studies that also examine reported cases of DGU to police officers, and compare it the number that should have been reported during that same time frame, again based on Klecks and NCVS findings. The DGU numbers come out incredibly low.

Other studies show that defensive uses are vastly overshadowed by offensive uses.

We also have Kleck own admission that 35-64% of DGU's are illegal.

[Mayhem]

Why would a gun being kept for defensive use be reported? Last time I checked you do not have to put down the reason you want to buy one when you do. Using a gun for shooting a animal is not using it offensively? And I read exactly what you posted dude, which was bullshit.

is the word use void to you? you obviously missing everything i wrote

[lockedout]

I've done this before:

What if the DGU was done by someone who wasn't a legal owner?

[TZucchini]

What if the DGU was done by someone who wasn't a legal owner?

Are you even going to read through the evidence? Or just ask meaningless questions?

[lockedout]

Are you even going to read through the evidence? Or just ask meaningless questions?

"We use random-digit-dial telephone survey data" I don't take these seriously sorry.

[TZucchini]

"We use random-digit-dial telephone survey data" I don't take these seriously sorry.

Then why do you link Pew polls stating that support for gun control is declining? They use the same method.

[Tinykong]

And gun control will not reduce production, manufacturing, sport, and hunting, to zero either. So indeed, you are very far off. By several factors.

It certainly will, as you haven't shown that all current legal owners will remain legal owners, nor have you shown that demand will continue to grow despite the de facto ban you want to implement.

[TZucchini]

It certainly will, as you haven't shown that all current legal owners will remain legal owners, nor have you shown that demand will continue to grow despite the de facto ban you want to implement.

It certainly will?

The economic effect of firearm production, manufacturing, sport, and hunting, will drop to zero if more gun control laws are passed?

[Mayhem]

It certainly will, as you haven't shown that all current legal owners will remain legal owners, nor have you shown that demand will continue to grow despite the de facto ban you want to implement.

uhm, but just for arguments sake if firearm violence is reduced to zero, it already would be 5 times better than what manufacturers contribute to society

[Tinykong]

It certainly will?

The economic effect of firearm production, manufacturing, sport, and hunting, will drop to zero if more gun control laws are passed?

It will certainly drop some.

- - - Updated - - -

uhm, but just for arguments sake if firearm violence is reduced to zero, it already would be 5 times better than what manufacturers contribute to society

There we go again conflating gun makers and criminal culpability.

[Mayhem]

There we go again conflating gun makers and criminal culpability.

there we go again, moving from firearm violence to all crimes