Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[NineSpine]

Saying your source is solid doesn't prove your claim, champ.

You linked an article that says suicides is mostly impulsive. You claimed that properly storing a firearm "can actively prevent suicides amongst gun owners" and the article you linked doesn't address that claim.

That's right. You have to actively apply your brain and use logic to reach the conclusion. I'm sorry I expected you to be able to accomplish this on your own.

The British government banned coal gas ovens, which were the preferred method of suicide at that time. The suicide rate dropped by a third. Why? People could still find another way to kill themselves quickly. No, that isn't how it works, no matter how insanely dense you want to be about it.

In Washington state, putting a barrier on the Ellington bridge resulted in a 50% drop in the suicide rate. There was another bridge nearby, and according to your logic they would have just went there instead.

You are wrong. Just accept it and be a goddamn adult about it for once.

[Tinykong]

That's right. You have to actively apply your brain and use logic to reach the conclusion. I'm sorry I expected you to be able to accomplish this on your own.

The British government banned coal gas ovens, which were the preferred method of suicide at that time. The suicide rate dropped by a third. Why? People could still find another way to kill themselves quickly. No, that isn't how it works, no matter how insanely dense you want to be about it.

In Washington state, putting a barrier on the Ellington bridge resulted in a 50% drop in the suicide rate. There was another bridge nearby, and according to your logic they would have just went there instead.

You are wrong. Just accept it and be a goddamn adult about it for once.

Are you drunk? I haven't made the argument that "they will just use another method" in this discussion.

I asked you to prove that locking up a firearm prevents suicide, and you provided an article that says suicide is impulsive. If anything, the article actually proves you are wrong, since it says that suicides happen within 5 minutes.

Unless you are mentally handicapped or physically disabled, it doesn't take 5 minutes to open a locked storage container.

[NineSpine]

Are you drunk? I haven't made the argument that "they will just use another method" in this discussion.

I asked you to prove that locking up a firearm prevents suicide, and you provided an article that says suicide is impulsive. If anything, the article actually proves you are wrong, since it says that suicides happen within 5 minutes.

Unless you are mentally handicapped or physically disabled, it doesn't take 5 minutes to open a locked storage container.

And a railing that a grown man could climb over, a few minutes away from a bridge without a railing at all, caused a 50% drop in suicide rates.

[TZucchini]

Are you drunk? I haven't made the argument that "they will just use another method" in this discussion.

I asked you to prove that locking up a firearm prevents suicide, and you provided an article that says suicide is impulsive. If anything, the article actually proves you are wrong, since it says that suicides happen within 5 minutes.

Unless you are mentally handicapped or physically disabled, it doesn't take 5 minutes to open a locked storage container.

I think he's saying that even putting a minor barrier in place (the safe) is enough to cause the individual to change course.

Here is an interesting article that seems to agree.

[Tinykong]

And a railing that a grown man could climb over, a few minutes away from a bridge without a railing at all, caused a 50% drop in suicide rates.

Which has nothing to do with the claim you made that I asked you to prove. A locked box takes seconds to open. If you want to claim that those seconds will actively prevent suicides, lets see the proof.

A faulty comparison to railings and bridges is not proof.

- - - Updated - - -

I think he's saying that even putting a minor barrier in place (the safe) is enough to cause the individual to change course.

Here is an interesting article that seems to agree.

I don't disagree with the claim that barriers can give people time to reconsider.

Opening a locked storage container takes a couple of seconds. Both his article and yours don't address that specific barrier. There is a big difference between putting up a wall someone has to climb over that takes both physical exertion and time, and retrieving a firearm from a locked container in 5 seconds.

[NineSpine]

Which has nothing to do with the claim you made that I asked you to prove. A locked box takes seconds to open. If you want to claim that those seconds will actively prevent suicides, lets see the proof.

A faulty comparison to railings and bridges is not proof.

- - - Updated - - -



I don't disagree with the claim that barriers can give people time to reconsider.

Opening a locked storage container takes a couple of seconds. Both his article and yours don't address that specific barrier. There is a big difference between putting up a wall someone has to climb over that takes both physical exertion and time, and retrieving a firearm from a locked container in 5 seconds.

Climbing over a barrier takes a couple of seconds. Cutting your wrists instead of sticking your head in an oven takes a couple of seconds. Going to the OTHER BRIDGE WITHOUT THE BARRIER doesn't even change the timeframe.

Retrieving a gun from a locked container and loading it does actually take longer than five seconds.

[TZucchini]

I don't disagree with the claim that barriers can give people time to reconsider.

Opening a locked storage container takes a couple of seconds. Both his article and yours don't address that specific barrier. There is a big difference between putting up a wall someone has to climb over that takes both physical exertion and time, and retrieving a firearm from a locked container in 5 seconds.

The article I linked did address it briefly:

"Experts have long known, and good research shows, that barriers are highly effective at halting suicides, the 10th-leading cause of death in the United States at 38,364 fatalities in 2010. This is true not just of bridges or other high places: locking up firearms and individually bubble-wrapping pills both limit suicides by those methods, said Jill Harkavy-Friedman, vice president of research for the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention."

[Tinykong]

Climbing over a barrier takes a couple of seconds. Cutting your wrists instead of sticking your head in an oven takes a couple of seconds. Going to the OTHER BRIDGE WITHOUT THE BARRIER doesn't even change the timeframe.

Retrieving a gun from a locked container and loading it does actually take longer than five seconds.

Climbing over this barrier will take longer than 5 seconds.



When all else fails, engage is deliberate dishonesty, right?

- - - Updated - - -

The article I linked did address it briefly:

"Experts have long known, and good research shows, that barriers are highly effective at halting suicides, the 10th-leading cause of death in the United States at 38,364 fatalities in 2010. This is true not just of bridges or other high places: locking up firearms and individually bubble-wrapping pills both limit suicides by those methods, said Jill Harkavy-Friedman, vice president of research for the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention."

Without a citation for the claim, it's essentially the same thing NineSpine said, but with an appeal to authority attached.

[Stormdash]

Having a firearm that can only be fired by its owner mitigates any chances of a teen using their fathers firearm to kill themselves with. I would think that technology would be invaluable.

It also renders it absolutely useless as a firearm in the event the owner is disabled or killed during a robbery or home invasion or a trip round the local kosher deli. Hence, most smart gun concepts are not actually all that smart if one still considers the gun being able to successfully discharge when needed a goal of designing them.

[NineSpine]

Climbing over this barrier will take longer than 5 seconds.



When all else fails, engage is deliberate dishonesty, right?

That's the golden gate bridge. I never brought up the golden gate bridge. When all else fails, engage is deliberate dishonesty, right?

[Tinykong]

That's the golden gate bridge. I never brought up the golden gate bridge. When all else fails, engage is deliberate dishonesty, right?

It's a suicide barrier.

You said:

Climbing over a barrier takes a couple of seconds.

I think you need to step away from the computer and take a break, you're just flailing around at this point.

[NineSpine]

It's a suicide barrier.

You said:



I think you need to step away from the computer and take a break, you're just flailing around at this point.

And I was referring obviously to the specific barrier I brought up, which is why two sentences later I brought up driving to the other bridge. Keep playing games.

[Tinykong]

And I was referring obviously to the specific barrier I brought up, which is why two sentences later I brought up driving to the other bridge. Keep playing games.

The Golden Gate bridge was the subject of the article you linked. Derp.

You were referring to it obviously by speaking generically? Derp.

[TZucchini]

Without a citation for the claim, it's essentially the same thing NineSpine said, but with an appeal to authority attached.

Appeal to Authority doesn't automatically mean you can disregard to claims of experts in the field. The statements is certainly evidence, though not proof, of the claim.

[NineSpine]

The Golden Gate bridge was the subject of the article you linked. Derp.

You were referring to it obviously by speaking generically? Derp.

No, it was not. The Ellington Bridge is the one in the article. These are the barriers: http://www.mccullagh.org/db9/950-19/...n-bridge-4.jpg

[TZucchini]

It also renders it absolutely useless as a firearm in the event the owner is disabled or killed during a robbery or home invasion or a trip round the local kosher deli. Hence, most smart gun concepts are not actually all that smart if one still considers the gun being able to successfully discharge when needed a goal of designing them.

When no argument exists, make up fantasy situations to argue against.

[Tinykong]

No, it was not. The Ellington Bridge is the one in the article. These are the barriers: http://www.mccullagh.org/db9/950-19/...n-bridge-4.jpg

Really?

http://www.businessinsider.com/many-...ecision-2014-8

The Golden Gate bridge is the first words in the article. The Ellington Bridge isn't even mentioned in the article.

Ignoring this epic Derp, it would take more than 5 seconds to climb over that barrier as well as a lot of physical exertion. Let's not forget, despite your funny little red herring, this was originally you comparing opening a locked container to being as significant as climbing over a wall.

[NineSpine]

Really?



The Golden Gate bridge is the first words in the article. The Ellington Bridge isn't even mentioned in the article.

Ignoring this epic Derp, it would take more than 5 seconds to climb over that barrier as well as a lot of physical exertion. Let's not forget, despite your funny little red herring, this was originally you comparing opening a locked container to being as significant as climbing over a wall.

You are right, I only brought up the Ellington Bridge by name in a post. Look, another opportunity to fucking repeat myself to you:

"In Washington state, putting a barrier on the Ellington bridge resulted in a 50% drop in the suicide rate. There was another bridge nearby, and according to your logic they would have just went there instead."

[Tinykong]

You are right, I only brought up the Ellington Bridge by name in a post. Look, another opportunity to fucking repeat myself to you:

"In Washington state, putting a barrier on the Ellington bridge resulted in a 50% drop in the suicide rate. There was another bridge nearby, and according to your logic they would have just went there instead."

So, you admit were wrong when you said this:

No, it was not. The Ellington Bridge is the one in the article.

These barriers will still take more than 5 seconds to climb over and require a lot of physical exertion. Which is the intention. Opening a locked container requires no exertion or significant amount of time.

You've been thoroughly proven wrong. Until you've got a citation for your claim that is both credible and pertinent, I'm satisfied that you can't prove it.

[Stormdash]

When no argument exists, make up fantasy situations to argue against.

What fantasy? You think there have never been more could be scenarios that the person who needs to use a firearm to save their life is someone in the family or business that isn't the single electronically approved person? Husband gets shot at the door in a push-in robbery, wife or teenage child retreats to master bedroom, operates the safe, only to discover that they are holding a thirty ounce paperweight because only dad can use it. How is that better than wife and child just being trained in the safe and proper use of a "dumb" gun that may "only" have trigger safeties, grip safeties, firing pin safeties, manual switch safeties in all or some combination?
L