Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #301  
Old 05-15-2019, 02:43 PM
JXJohns's Avatar
JXJohns is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Middle of the Midwest
Posts: 2,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak View Post
That's the problem I want to solve. I have observed that there are countries who have solved this particular problem. The answer for them, the answer that worked, is that you have to give up something.
Sorry to keep repeating myself, but they solved THEIR problem. Not ours. If you want to find a country that solved it's gun violence issues that held in private possession just short of 400 million firearms where less than .25% annually were ever used in homicides, justified or otherwise, and everything that makes the US unique, I'm all ears.

Or you can continue similar to how an earlier poster did, proudly telling us how the UK solved their school shooting problem by banning all handguns and not experiencing a school shooting since the laws were enacted.

Of course there had never been a school shooting before the ban, but who's counting?
  #302  
Old 05-15-2019, 02:54 PM
Cheesesteak's Avatar
Cheesesteak is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lovely Montclair, NJ
Posts: 13,272
So, the UK has their first mass school shooting... does something to stop them from happening... and has no more.

The US has their first mass school shooting... does nothing... has another... does nothing... has another... does nothing... has another... does nothing... has another... does nothing... has another... does nothing... has another... does nothing... has another... does nothing... has another... we can't fix our school shooting problem because we're totally different than the UK, they only had one and we had dozens of them!

But you're right, I can't find another country that's so outrageously dysfunctional over guns as we are, so I can't find another country in exactly our situation who fixed the problem.... so it's unfixable!

That's the American Spirit in action.
  #303  
Old 05-15-2019, 02:54 PM
Kearsen1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak View Post
Nothing is going to happen unless we agree collectively.

Really, when you get down to brass tacks, I don't want to take away your guns, I can't take your guns even if I wanted to.

I want you to give up your guns.

I want you to realize that the last 50 years of our history, with 10-20 thousand gun murders a year (and twice that many suicides), is not going to change unless the guns themselves go away.
Agreed, by why is it that all the propositions revolve around the taking away of guns then? Not politically possible so why is it even a platform item? Start small, work up. Fix the mental health issues, Start fixing the hyperbolic press. Start fixing the poverty stricken areas (which is largely where the Lion's share of gun violence originates)
You are agreeing it won't happen, there have been a multitude of things in this thread alone expressed to curb the violence, but it has fallen on deaf ears?
  #304  
Old 05-15-2019, 03:06 PM
JXJohns's Avatar
JXJohns is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Middle of the Midwest
Posts: 2,449

The Education of Kamala Harris


I hate to jump on one candidate in particular but here she goes again showing the complete lack of knowledge coming from folks who want to ban and confiscate otherwise legal items:

Quote:
Harris' new proposal "would ban AR-15-style assault weapon imports because they are not 'suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes.' Additionally, the Harris proposal would have the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives suspend all assault weapons imports until the agency studies and determines admissibility under the "sporting purpose" test, said the Harris official.
Here's the reality of the situation, most AR's and I mean by a wide margin like 99% are produced domestically and not imported. I am finding it hard to even find an imported AR anywhere BTW. This candidate really needs to get her handlers up to speed. Assault weapons were banned from import in 1989 due to the "sporting purposes" definition and said ban was upheld again in 1998. Perhaps she wants to double secret ban the imports that don't exist? I'm not sure. This is what makes this so difficult when one side wears their ignorance of the current situation as a badge of honor and goes on to suggest policy.

So far she wants to take away dealer licenses that don't exist. Now she wants to ban imports that don't exist. I hope she doesn't go after the 3 megawatt rail guns next... I bring this up only to highlight how hard it is to find compromise when one side is perfectly content to stay ignorant of the reality of current legislation.
  #305  
Old 05-15-2019, 03:10 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 10,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen1 View Post
Agreed, by why is it that all the propositions revolve around the taking away of guns then? Not politically possible so why is it even a platform item?
It's a platform item because meaningful gun control (not necessarily "taking away" guns) is the essential and most important part of the solution and very likely the only part that is actually feasible (my cite here is that dreaded resource, the real experience of all other countries, not armchair theorizing). It seems to me that "not politically possible" is just code for "I don't like that option so I'm not going to think about it".

Many of the major advances of recent years -- health care reform, gay marriage, cannabis legalization at the state level -- would equally have been regarded as "not politically possible" a few decades ago. For a while it seemed that Medicare itself was not politically possible, because conservatives were telling everyone it would be "the end of American as we know it", the end of freedom, and the inevitable rise of socialist oppression (check out "Operation Coffee Cup" and Reagan's involvement in it). Politics changes, people become more informed, public opinion changes with time. You're not going to achieve much if your first step is to give up. The first step is to start to drive those changes.
  #306  
Old 05-15-2019, 03:11 PM
Cheesesteak's Avatar
Cheesesteak is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lovely Montclair, NJ
Posts: 13,272
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen1 View Post
Agreed, by why is it that all the propositions revolve around the taking away of guns then?
Yeah, why is it?

Why aren't all the gun loving Republicans proposing non-gun fixes to this problem? Where are their proposals to provide mental health support and reduce poverty?


I'll give you a guarantee, if a Republican proposes something that will make a significant dent in the number of these deaths, I'll support it and shut the fuck up if it works.
  #307  
Old 05-15-2019, 03:17 PM
JXJohns's Avatar
JXJohns is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Middle of the Midwest
Posts: 2,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak View Post
But you're right, I can't find another country that's so outrageously dysfunctional over guns as we are, so I can't find another country in exactly our situation who fixed the problem.... so it's unfixable!

That's the American Spirit in action.
How about you take a look at Canada's attempt to simply get all of their privately owned guns registered, not banned. See how that worked out for them.
  #308  
Old 05-15-2019, 03:29 PM
JXJohns's Avatar
JXJohns is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Middle of the Midwest
Posts: 2,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak View Post
Yeah, why is it?

Why aren't all the gun loving Republicans proposing non-gun fixes to this problem? Where are their proposals to provide mental health support and reduce poverty?


I'll give you a guarantee, if a Republican proposes something that will make a significant dent in the number of these deaths, I'll support it and shut the fuck up if it works.
I'm not a Republican, but my first move would be to end the war on drugs. Considering that a significant subset of gun violence is gang related, taking the profit of being in a gang is a good start and doesn't run afoul of the Constitution.

Second, apply a Project Exile type program at the Federal level. Mandatory minimums for firearm crimes may not stop the violence upfront, but if the offender lands in jail, he's not causing any problems.
  #309  
Old 05-15-2019, 03:40 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 10,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by JXJohns View Post
How about you take a look at Canada's attempt to simply get all of their privately owned guns registered, not banned. See how that worked out for them.
How about you look at Canada's overall gun control regime and its success in controlling gun violence instead of posting incorrect information. The "gun registry" that was proposed, debated, opposed by gun groups, and eventually abandoned was a long gun registry, affecting only ordinary rifles and shotguns, with some exceptions that were restricted. Everything else -- all handguns, all semi-automatics, everything else -- is either restricted or prohibited and has always required registration if it's allowed at all. In addition to that, every firearm owner must be licensed for the type of firearm he owns, including ordinary hunting rifles and shotguns.

This seems like a good example of how incredibly badly informed Americans are about gun laws in other countries.

Last edited by wolfpup; 05-15-2019 at 03:41 PM.
  #310  
Old 05-15-2019, 03:53 PM
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
This seems like a good example of how incredibly badly informed Americans are about gun laws in other countries.
But don't you dare mistake an Assault Weapon for an Assault Rifle. And you best know it's made right here in 'Merica! There is something patriotic about being killed by an American using American made guns and ammo.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #311  
Old 05-15-2019, 05:03 PM
JXJohns's Avatar
JXJohns is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Middle of the Midwest
Posts: 2,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
How about you look at Canada's overall gun control regime and its success in controlling gun violence instead of posting incorrect information. The "gun registry" that was proposed, debated, opposed by gun groups, and eventually abandoned was a long gun registry, affecting only ordinary rifles and shotguns, with some exceptions that were restricted. Everything else -- all handguns, all semi-automatics, everything else -- is either restricted or prohibited and has always required registration if it's allowed at all. In addition to that, every firearm owner must be licensed for the type of firearm he owns, including ordinary hunting rifles and shotguns.

This seems like a good example of how incredibly badly informed Americans are about gun laws in other countries.
I especially liked how sodering guns and the like were registered. The long gun registry was an abject failure. Live up to it.
  #312  
Old 05-15-2019, 05:06 PM
JXJohns's Avatar
JXJohns is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Middle of the Midwest
Posts: 2,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
But don't you dare mistake an Assault Weapon for an Assault Rifle. And you best know it's made right here in 'Merica! There is something patriotic about being killed by an American using American made guns and ammo.
There is a huge difference both in case law and history between the two. I tried to explain it earlier and I all I got was shit from you and others. Your willful and purposeful ignorance to the facts speaks volumes. See my post about Kamala Harris as a perfect example of the clueless suggesting policy change based upon nothing but BS.
  #313  
Old 05-15-2019, 05:39 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 10,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by JXJohns View Post
I especially liked how sodering guns and the like were registered. The long gun registry was an abject failure. Live up to it.
You appear to be living in a fantasy world where you just pick and choose and distort your own facts, to the extent that I'm doubting you have any interest in a good-faith discussion.

Your statement was about "Canada's attempt to simply get all of their privately owned guns registered". This is manifestly false and completely misleading. Everything except hunting rifles and shotguns has always been registered. The registries are working fine, thanks very much for asking. There was debate about whether it should be extended to hunting rifles and shotguns, and ultimately it was not. That's all. I can't even imagine what you think that proves. And I doubt you even looked at my link. Canada has comprehensive and restrictive gun laws and even getting an ordinary hunting rifle requires a Possession and Acquisition License (PAL) with a background check, references, and a guarantor, among other things. Handguns are restricted to the point that almost no one has them outside of police and the likes of Brink's guards, not even ordinary security guards. A suitably vetted individual could, in fact, manage to possess handguns. I once worked with a gun nut who had several, but for any normal individual the trouble is not even remotely worth it, nor is it seen in a non-gun culture as conferring any real benefit.

Your comment about gun registration in Canada was wrong and hugely misleading. Live up to it.

Oh, and LOL to "I especially liked how sodering [sic] guns and the like were registered". Why do you spout bullshit like this? It does nothing to advance a productive discussion.
  #314  
Old 05-15-2019, 05:53 PM
JXJohns's Avatar
JXJohns is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Middle of the Midwest
Posts: 2,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post

Oh, and LOL to "I especially liked how sodering [sic] guns and the like were registered". Why do you spout bullshit like this? It does nothing to advance a productive discussion.
The productive discussion bit went out the window a while ago in case you haven't noticed. There are about 5-6 people involved in a circle jerk with no intentions of having an open mind. Typical for a GC thread that has reached this far.
  #315  
Old 05-15-2019, 06:32 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 10,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by JXJohns View Post
The productive discussion bit went out the window a while ago in case you haven't noticed. There are about 5-6 people involved in a circle jerk with no intentions of having an open mind. Typical for a GC thread that has reached this far.
I'm open to facts, I just don't see any from your side. You just posted a statement about gun laws in Canada that is so absurdly wrong that it's totally laughable. And your response to my correction was a one-liner about soldering guns, which didn't even make the remotest amount of sense. But here's a real fact: the US has the most appalling rate of gun violence in the civilized world, and I haven't seen a single thing from the gun side that is a credible or viable solution to it that has been proven to work in any other country. Whereas the thing that has been proven to work in ALL other comparable countries is being rejected out of hand by the gun side. That's what I see from my perspective.
  #316  
Old 05-15-2019, 07:05 PM
Superdude is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Fortress of Solidude
Posts: 10,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
But don't you dare mistake an Assault Weapon for an Assault Rifle. And you best know it's made right here in 'Merica! There is something patriotic about being killed by an American using American made guns and ammo.
[Tango & Cash]
 You wanna cut my throat, go ahead. You wanna cut my fuckin' head off and use it for a fuckin' basketball? You can *bowl* with the motherfucker for all I care! Just don't let HIM do it! I don't wanna get killed by this limey, immigrant JERKOFF! I wanna get killed by an AMERICAN jerkoff!
[/Tango & Cash]
__________________
I can't help being a gorgeous fiend. It's just the card I drew.
  #317  
Old 05-15-2019, 07:39 PM
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by JXJohns View Post
There is a huge difference both in case law and history between the two. I tried to explain it earlier and I all I got was shit from you and others. Your willful and purposeful ignorance to the facts speaks volumes. See my post about Kamala Harris as a perfect example of the clueless suggesting policy change based upon nothing but BS.
You got shit because it sounds callous and trite to split hairs about the type, model, make, caliber and origin of manufacture of guns used to kill children. That is the entire point of this thread, not law and history of fire arms. It makes no fucking difference to a dead kid or his parents whether it was an "assault weapon" or "assault style rifle" that was used in the murder of their loved one(s). Do you get that? Tell me you understand at least that much.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.

Last edited by QuickSilver; 05-15-2019 at 07:41 PM.
  #318  
Old 05-15-2019, 07:58 PM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is offline
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,209
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
You got shit because it sounds callous and trite to split hairs about the type, model, make, caliber and origin of manufacture of guns used to kill children. That is the entire point of this thread, not law and history of fire arms. It makes no fucking difference to a dead kid or his parents whether it was an "assault weapon" or "assault style rifle" that was used in the murder of their loved one(s). Do you get that? Tell me you understand at least that much.
That may be so as an appeal to emotion, but from a public policy standpoint it's pretty worthless. It's like, being attacked by 19 Saudis that trained in Afghanistan and deciding to bomb Iraq.
  #319  
Old 05-15-2019, 08:04 PM
Gray Ghost is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
You got shit because it sounds callous and trite to split hairs about the type, model, make, caliber and origin of manufacture of guns used to kill children. That is the entire point of this thread, not law and history of fire arms. It makes no fucking difference to a dead kid or his parents whether it was an "assault weapon" or "assault style rifle" that was used in the murder of their loved one(s). Do you get that? Tell me you understand at least that much.
Unfortunately, this is an area of debate where details matter. Regardless of the human toll when sick individuals decide to commit mass murder. It isn't mere pedantry (contra the whole magazine vs clip brouhaha) to point out that many firearms are technically identical to those that lawmakers misguidedly decide to ban. Nor is it pedantry to point out that functionally equivalent firearms such as were used in the massacre du jour, have been around since at least the end of WW2, and yet the school shooting as we all think of it, is largely a modern phenomenon. Moreover, that the Canadian long gun registry was a failure---with noncompliance rates in the estimated 75-90 percent range---I don't think is questioned by most outside observers.

It is an area where, despite the policy of this discussion board being to fight ignorance, in many debates here, ignorance as to the nature of violence in modern society, jurisprudence concerning the violent, and yes, details concerning firearm construction and controlling legislation: all seem to be treasured by many here.
  #320  
Old 05-15-2019, 08:07 PM
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
That may be so as an appeal to emotion, but from a public policy standpoint it's pretty worthless. It's like, being attacked by 19 Saudis that trained in Afghanistan and deciding to bomb Iraq.
No. It's an appeal to reason. As demonstrated by myriad examples of societies that don't idolize RKBA rights but instead choose to protect all its citizens from those who would abuse those rights given abundant opportunity to do so.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #321  
Old 05-15-2019, 08:26 PM
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost View Post
Unfortunately, this is an area of debate where details matter. Regardless of the human toll when sick individuals decide to commit mass murder. It isn't mere pedantry (contra the whole magazine vs clip brouhaha) to point out that many firearms are technically identical to those that lawmakers misguidedly decide to ban. Nor is it pedantry to point out that functionally equivalent firearms such as were used in the massacre du jour, have been around since at least the end of WW2, and yet the school shooting as we all think of it, is largely a modern phenomenon.
Not if your position, as I have expressed my own to be, that ALL guns should be banned with my (grudging) exception of small caliber, low capacity hunting rifles - for those who absolutely must kill an animal in the wild.

Politicians who try to thread the needle, and fail more often than not, either lack the courage of their convictions or are fools to think they can find the magic sweet spot that will please any side of this argument. They are welcome to try though and I will cast my support for the one that is the closest to my position, stopping short of becoming a single issue voter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost View Post
Moreover, that the Canadian long gun registry was a failure---with noncompliance rates in the estimated 75-90 percent range---I don't think is questioned by most outside observers.
Canada does not have - nor, I hope, will have - an issue with gun violence such as the one in the US. So if the registry failed, the country does not seem to have suffered any real consequence. I hope it remains so. If it does not and it results in tragedy, I suspect Canadians will demand action and the gov't will respond accordingly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost View Post
It is an area where, despite the policy of this discussion board being to fight ignorance, in many debates here, ignorance as to the nature of violence in modern society, jurisprudence concerning the violent, and yes, details concerning firearm construction and controlling legislation: all seem to be treasured by many here.
Yes, it's a familiar, well worn path.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #322  
Old 05-15-2019, 08:32 PM
DrDeth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,173
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
You got shit because it sounds callous and trite to split hairs about the type, model, make, caliber and origin of manufacture of guns used to kill children. That is the entire point of this thread, not law and history of fire arms. It makes no fucking difference to a dead kid or his parents whether it was an "assault weapon" or "assault style rifle" that was used in the murder of their loved one(s). Do you get that? Tell me you understand at least that much.
No, it doesnt, nor would it make a difference if it was a .22 single shot rifle, a machete, a bomb, or a large rock- dead is dead . But it does make a difference to the law abiding citizen whom you are about to put in prison for years because you dont know the difference. It's like putting a man in prison because he possessed pictures of kitties having sex, not kiddies.

If you are gonna ban something, you need to define it and you should say why.

Why ban assault weapons? They cause significantly less that 4% of the murders here in the USA. if you magic wanded them out of existence, you would not detect s significant reduction in the violent crime rate.
  #323  
Old 05-15-2019, 08:36 PM
DrDeth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,173
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Not if your position, as I have expressed my own to be, that ALL guns should be banned with my (grudging) exception of small caliber, low capacity hunting rifles - for those who absolutely must kill an animal in the wild.
.....



Canada does not have - nor, I hope, will have - an issue with gun violence such as the one in the US. So if the registry failed, the country does not seem to have suffered any real consequence. .....
You like animals to suffer? You wish to outlaw duck hunting?


Yes, indeed "Canada does not have .... an issue with gun violence such as the one in the US"... nor did they before the registration.

None of those euro nations you like to compare to the USA had much of a gun crime rate before they banned the guns. Sure, they have a lower murder rate now, but they had a lower murder rate before. In fact, their gun bans didnt actually seem to do anything.
  #324  
Old 05-15-2019, 08:37 PM
nightshadea is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: a condo in hell 10th lvl
Posts: 5,120
I've said this before but its finally happened as I feared ... were so used to violent public shootings that we treat them like the middle east treats terrorism/bombings .... barely blinking and saying "well that's sad but what can you do? "

There wasn't a news story of this posted on the MSN home page until the next day and a lot of people didn't know about it and probably wouldn't of if it hadn't been posted here .... 3 or so years ago? the front page would of been all about it for a week or more not to mention tv and the like .....

Last edited by nightshadea; 05-15-2019 at 08:41 PM.
  #325  
Old 05-15-2019, 08:40 PM
Gray Ghost is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Not if your position, as I have expressed my own to be, that ALL guns should be banned with my (grudging) exception of small caliber, low capacity hunting rifles - for those who absolutely must kill an animal in the wild....
That position is complete anathema to mine, and a majority of Americans, at least, the last time I looked at Pew Research's polls on the subject.

Attempting to force that upon the US in a top-down manner will lead to widespread sectarian violence. Which will not stop at politicians, nor the people asked to execute their policies.

I suspect our positions are far enough apart to make further debate futile.
  #326  
Old 05-15-2019, 08:44 PM
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
No, it doesnt, nor would it make a difference if it was a .22 single shot rifle, a machete, a bomb, or a large rock- dead is dead . But it does make a difference to the law abiding citizen whom you are about to put in prison for years because you dont know the difference. It's like putting a man in prison because he possessed pictures of kitties having sex, not kiddies.

If you are gonna ban something, you need to define it and you should say why.

Why ban assault weapons? They cause significantly less that 4% of the murders here in the USA. if you magic wanded them out of existence, you would not detect s significant reduction in the violent crime rate.
Where did I say that an innocent man should go to prison? What the hell are you even talking about?

I was very explicit about what I think should be banned. I'm not repeating myself because you refuse to read for comprehension.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #327  
Old 05-15-2019, 08:47 PM
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
You like animals to suffer? You wish to outlaw duck hunting?


Yes, indeed "Canada does not have .... an issue with gun violence such as the one in the US"... nor did they before the registration.

None of those euro nations you like to compare to the USA had much of a gun crime rate before they banned the guns. Sure, they have a lower murder rate now, but they had a lower murder rate before. In fact, their gun bans didnt actually seem to do anything.
What.... I don't even.... what???
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #328  
Old 05-15-2019, 08:48 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 2,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightshadea View Post
I've said this before but its finally happened as I feared ... were so used to violent public shootings that we treat them like the middle east treats terrorism/bombings .... barely blinking and saying "well that's sad but what can you do? "
Except this is not how "the middle east" treats terrorism and bombings. There are massive political, military, and humanitarian efforts underway to deal with those things, in the various countries that comprise the region known as "the middle east." I just today donated money to the Nineveh Plain Protection Units which are Assyrian militia currently fighting against the Islamic State.

If you meant that most people in America barely blink and say "well that's sad but what can you do", well, that's essentially true. It doesn't need to be, though.
  #329  
Old 05-15-2019, 08:56 PM
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost View Post
That position is complete anathema to mine, and a majority of Americans, at least, the last time I looked at Pew Research's polls on the subject.

Attempting to force that upon the US in a top-down manner will lead to widespread sectarian violence. Which will not stop at politicians, nor the people asked to execute their policies.

I suspect our positions are far enough apart to make further debate futile.
I don't expect things to change overnight. It will take years. A generation, maybe more. But we have to start changing things and we have to introduce these ideas of social change and public attitudes about guns. Thoughts and prayers haven't worked... as if. Shrugging it away or kicking the can down the road saying nothing can be done is just resigning ourselves to more of the same and worse.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #330  
Old 05-15-2019, 08:58 PM
nightshadea is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: a condo in hell 10th lvl
Posts: 5,120
yeah i meant to say the "news of public shootings " but ive had isreali friends that moved here and they said unless you have a relative that died most people are unemotional about them since the late 90s i guess theres a spiritual numbness about it you could say
  #331  
Old 05-15-2019, 08:58 PM
DrDeth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,173
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Where did I say that an innocent man should go to prison? What the hell are you even talking about?

I was very explicit about what I think should be banned. I'm not repeating myself because you refuse to read for comprehension.
You don't know the difference between a assault rifle and a assault weapon. The difference could send a innocent man to prison. Hell, to be honest, you don't know jack shit about what you want to ban. And that's the problem. Like the Politicians that made Marijuana a Schedule I drug, because they didnt know jack shit about it. Because of their ignorance 8.2 million men (mostly black men, because of course) were arrested between 2001 and 2010. EIGHT MILLION. Due to ignorance about drugs. And since there are like 75 Million gun owners in the USA, I expect that if we let politicians who know jack shit about guns write stupid laws, a higher amount would go to prison due to bad laws caused by ignorance.
  #332  
Old 05-15-2019, 09:01 PM
DrDeth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,173
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
What.... I don't even.... what???
Small caliber rifles would only wound large game like deer, moose, elk, wild boar, causing them to die slowly and suffer.

And just FYI- all those nasty assault weapons you want to ban are small caliber. See, you know jack shit about guns. In fact they are .22 caliber. More ignorance.

And you can't hunt duck and game birds with rifles, you need a shotgun. More ignorance.


Ignorance strikes.
  #333  
Old 05-15-2019, 09:04 PM
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,653
I suspect it's different when the enemy can be identified and compartmentalized. Hamas and Hezbollah are Israel's enemies and Israeli citizens have accepted the risk from an identifiable source of danger. School shootings are quite something else when your own classmate without prior history of conflict can suddenly and unpredictably become your killer.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #334  
Old 05-15-2019, 09:17 PM
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
You don't know the difference between a assault rifle and a assault weapon. The difference could send a innocent man to prison. Hell, to be honest, you don't know jack shit about what you want to ban. And that's the problem. Like the Politicians that made Marijuana a Schedule I drug, because they didnt know jack shit about it. Because of their ignorance 8.2 million men (mostly black men, because of course) were arrested between 2001 and 2010. EIGHT MILLION. Due to ignorance about drugs. And since there are like 75 Million gun owners in the USA, I expect that if we let politicians who know jack shit about guns write stupid laws, a higher amount would go to prison due to bad laws caused by ignorance.
Ban both. I don't care. Don't send people to jail if they have not used it to commit a crime. Encourage people to voluntarily bring them to the nearest cop shop. Give people a tax credit in the amount that would motivate them to do so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Small caliber rifles would only wound large game like deer, moose, elk, wild boar, causing them to die slowly and suffer.

And just FYI- all those nasty assault weapons you want to ban are small caliber. See, you know jack shit about guns. In fact they are .22 caliber. More ignorance.

And you can't hunt duck and game birds with rifles, you need a shotgun. More ignorance.


Ignorance strikes.
Oh, you got me. Clever, you are. Fine, have whatever caliber hunting rifle it is you need to kill moose and squirrel. Do you need more than 5 rounds, or are you planning on taking out an entire species?
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #335  
Old 05-15-2019, 09:30 PM
DrDeth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,173
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Ban both. I don't care. Don't send people to jail if they have not used it to commit a crime. Encourage people to voluntarily bring them to the nearest cop shop. Give people a tax credit in the amount that would motivate them to do so.



Oh, you got me. Clever, you are. Fine, have whatever caliber hunting rifle it is you need to kill moose and squirrel. Do you need more than 5 rounds, or are you planning on taking out an entire species?
Assault rifles are already banned. But Ok, voluntary buy backs for assault weapons, I can accept that. Say a tax credit and a gift card. Sure.

Five rounds is OK, and more is not legal for hunting in several states. But some lever action rifles dont have a detachable magazine, and instead use a removable plug. You know that Winchester rifle you see on all the old cowboy movies? Still a fine deer rifle (well, modern smokeless versions, of course).
  #336  
Old 05-16-2019, 08:33 AM
Kearsen1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak View Post
Yeah, why is it?

Why aren't all the gun loving Republicans proposing non-gun fixes to this problem? Where are their proposals to provide mental health support and reduce poverty?


I'll give you a guarantee, if a Republican proposes something that will make a significant dent in the number of these deaths, I'll support it and shut the fuck up if it works.

You asked that in post #296 and I answered that question in post #297. If you are just going to keep asking without being bothered to read the response, well, I can't help you.

In case, you missed it. It is not the responsibility of the lawfully, constitutionally protected side to offer up suggestions as to how to go about changing a miniscule problem that only your side sees.
Resolved: People getting killed is a problem.
A long ways down the "importance list" is gun deaths, especially to gun owners. Why? Because there are a whole host of things that kill people in much greater numbers.

Where are your proposals for those?
Smoking, driving a car, drowning, etc etc
  #337  
Old 05-16-2019, 09:15 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,452
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen1 View Post
Where are your proposals for those?
Smoking, driving a car, drowning, etc etc
Probably in threads about those topics, I would guess.
  #338  
Old 05-16-2019, 09:35 AM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 38,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak View Post
Yeah, why is it?

Why aren't all the gun loving Republicans proposing non-gun fixes to this problem?
Maybe you missed puddleglum's post. Violent crime has dropped significantly. Whatever we are doing is working.

Quote:
Where are their proposals to provide mental health support and reduce poverty?
Poverty is down, and unemployment is at near-record low levels. Again, whatever we are doing is working. As for mental health, first you would need to supply hard figures on how much mental health support will reduce the problem. Then we can talk about proposals.
Quote:
I'll give you a guarantee, if a Republican proposes something that will make a significant dent in the number of these deaths, I'll support it and shut the fuck up if it works.
It has worked, so...

Regards,
Shodan
  #339  
Old 05-16-2019, 10:28 AM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 10,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
Maybe you missed puddleglum's post. Violent crime has dropped significantly. Whatever we are doing is working.
That's amazing, since it's not apparent that "we" are actually doing anything. Changing demographics is doing most of the heavy lifting, since most other western democracies have experienced a similar fall in violent crime.

You also forgot to mention that despite falling crime rates, gun homicide rates in the US have increased by nearly 50% since 1999, and gun suicide rates by even more than that. So whatever you're doing, it's about time to stop, and start doing something that actually works. Cite.
  #340  
Old 05-16-2019, 10:30 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,452
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
Maybe you missed puddleglum's post. Violent crime has dropped significantly.
And maybe you missed the fact that this thread isn't about violent crime.

Last edited by Czarcasm; 05-16-2019 at 10:30 AM.
  #341  
Old 05-16-2019, 10:34 AM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 10,318
On the theme that "nothing can be done, because Constitution, so go ahead and figure out how to repeal the second Amendment -- ha ha!" the Constitution was not a major obstacle to gun control until the Heller ruling put their own lunatic spin on what the second Amendment "really" meant to say, but for some reason didn't actually say it.

This article by John Paul Stevens, adapted from his book and published in the Atlantic, is a very good read:
The Supreme Courtís Worst Decision of My Tenure
  #342  
Old 05-16-2019, 10:41 AM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is offline
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,209
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Not if your position, as I have expressed my own to be, that ALL guns should be banned with my (grudging) exception of small caliber, low capacity hunting rifles - for those who absolutely must kill an animal in the wild.
Pretend for a moment that there is political and societal will sufficient to enact your proposal. What do you do with the 300M+ extant firearms?

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
This article by John Paul Stevens, adapted from his book and published in the Atlantic, is a very good read:
The Supreme Court’s Worst Decision of My Tenure
Stevens still sucking on sour grapes it seems. I'm not so much a fan of Chevron, but Kelo was an abomination and that case was what originally sparked my interest in SCOTUS. Pretty much fuck everyone who voted for that turd.

Last edited by Bone; 05-16-2019 at 10:43 AM.
  #343  
Old 05-16-2019, 10:51 AM
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
Pretend for a moment that there is political and societal will sufficient to enact your proposal. What do you do with the 300M+ extant firearms?
'...and they shall beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning hooks.'

Offer tax credits for their surrender.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.

Last edited by QuickSilver; 05-16-2019 at 10:54 AM.
  #344  
Old 05-16-2019, 10:53 AM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is offline
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,209
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
'...and they shall beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning hooks.'
What I'm asking is, there will certainly be a non-insignificant amount of people who own firearms and disagree, even if there is a sufficient majority to enact your plan. Then what? These firearms will be functional for hundreds of years, and they are just about everywhere.
  #345  
Old 05-16-2019, 11:00 AM
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
What I'm asking is, there will certainly be a non-insignificant amount of people who own firearms and disagree, even if there is a sufficient majority to enact your plan. Then what? These firearms will be functional for hundreds of years, and they are just about everywhere.
Social change is slow. I don't expect to achieve 100% compliance overnight. But 25% in first 10 years would be nice. 50% in 20. So on.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #346  
Old 05-16-2019, 11:08 AM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is offline
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,209
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Social change is slow. I don't expect to achieve 100% compliance overnight. But 25% in first 10 years would be nice. 50% in 20. So on.
Let's say any amount of time you wish has passed and you've achieved as much compliance as you're going to get. You will still have some non-insignificant amount of people who refuse to comply. Then what? Would you kill these people? Imprison them? Raid their houses? Seize their assets? You're willing to propose ban them all, so I'm trying to understand what you are willing to condone in order to enforce that decree.

Last edited by Bone; 05-16-2019 at 11:08 AM.
  #347  
Old 05-16-2019, 11:40 AM
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
Let's say any amount of time you wish has passed and you've achieved as much compliance as you're going to get. You will still have some non-insignificant amount of people who refuse to comply. Then what? Would you kill these people? Imprison them? Raid their houses? Seize their assets? You're willing to propose ban them all, so I'm trying to understand what you are willing to condone in order to enforce that decree.
I am not advocating for jailing people who do not commit crimes with their guns.

I'm primarily advocating for banning all sales of guns, public and private. Also no gifting because no licensing of most firearms (with the exception of aforementioned hunting rifles.) A national campaign to encourage "mandatory" surrender of guns with a motive of tax credites, making it worth people's while. By "mandatory" I mean confiscation if a gun is found in the course of a traffic violation or some other circumstance under which the police may reasonably find a weapon on your person or in your home.

Depending on the rate of decline of gun violence, adjust strategy that does not include jailing or search and seizure without just cause (imminent threat). Perhaps fines if your weapon is stolen and then used for a crime.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #348  
Old 05-16-2019, 11:50 AM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 38,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
You also forgot to mention that despite falling crime rates, gun homicide rates in the US have increased by nearly 50% since 1999, and gun suicide rates by even more than that. So whatever you're doing, it's about time to stop, and start doing something that actually works. Cite.
Actually the murder and non-negligent homicide rate per 100,000 in 1999 was 5.7, and in 2014 was 4.5. I for one would rather not see that stop. Unless you think whether or not someone is murdered is less important than how they were murdered. Which I don't think is a well-thought out position.

Regards,
Shodan

Last edited by Shodan; 05-16-2019 at 11:51 AM.
  #349  
Old 05-16-2019, 11:55 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,452
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
Actually the murder and non-negligent homicide rate per 100,000 in 1999 was 5.7, and in 2014 was 4.5. I for one would rather not see that stop. Unless you think whether or not someone is murdered is less important than how they were murdered. Which I don't think is a well-thought out position.

Regards,
Shodan
Two points do not a graph make, so let's look at those points you skipped over:

1999 5.7
2000 5.5
2001 5.6
2002 5.6
2003 5.7
2004 5.5
2005 5.9
2006 6.1
2007 5.9
2008 5.4
2009 5.0
2010 4.8
2011 4.7
2012 4.7
2013 4.5
2014 4.5
  #350  
Old 05-16-2019, 12:21 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,452
Here is a proper graph that goes all the way to 2016...that might explain why you stopped at 2014.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:06 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017