Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old 05-13-2019, 05:30 PM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is online now
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,329
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
You said I was "Characterizing people who think differently than [me] in such a negative way". I still don't understand who these people are. I didn't critique gun owners, or gun-rights advocates, or conservatives, or any group that was based on an issue or way of thinking -- I critiqued American culture. How is that "characterizing people who think differently than [me] in a negative way"? Which group of people who think differently than me did I criticize?
People who don't think American culture is a gun culture -- a culture that celebrates and mythologizes violence, and in particular gun violence.

Quote:
And you really think talking about violence in American culture is "baseless criticisms"?
I think the celebration of violence is baseless.



Quote:
This just makes me sad. I'm trying to make a good faith effort at discussion, and I'm pointing out why I think gun control is mostly a fool's errand at this time. Do you really think American culture has nothing to do with mass shootings in America, or gun violence in America in general? Is it not reasonable to talk about culture at all?

It makes me sad that you focus on a tiny phrase "celebrated and mythologize" and ignore the detailed and (attempting to be) thoughtful critique of the culture, as well as incorrectly characterize my statements as above. Reasonable discussion is possible on this, and I think I made a good faith effort at it. I know that you have in the past, but I don't think you're giving it much effort here, which is a shame.
Other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln? Lots of folks make comments like you have, and mostly I just pass on responding because there's no point. But if you as you say want to engage in discussion, this is my effort to assist you in not coming across in a way that no one wants to engage.
  #202  
Old 05-13-2019, 05:30 PM
Magiver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isamu View Post
No, there is no good short term solution that is acceptable to the American public or possible under the present constitution.
Sure there is. Teach kids not to kill people.
  #203  
Old 05-13-2019, 05:32 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
Sure there is. Teach kids not to kill people.
Ah, the "abstinence-only" approach to gun violence. About as successful as "abstinence-only" approaches in other areas of education.
  #204  
Old 05-13-2019, 05:37 PM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is online now
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,329
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Yes, it does. It was the Court's interpretation of the 2nd (with respect to the 14th) in McDonald that overrode the gun control laws in California and elsewhere.
First, I don't know what point you're trying to make - when you say that the 2nd was still in the constitution my point is that it didn't matter because CA could literally ban all the guns pre-McDonald and there was no recourse. CA does not have a right to arms in its constitution, so without McDonald, the fact that the 2nd is part of the constitution is irrelevant.

Second, Heller and McDonald didn't override gun control laws in CA. Not even close. Each individual law in CA needed to be and still needs to be litigated. The gun laws in CA are very similar to what they were pre-McDonald, and in some cases more restrictive. So when you say that the 2nd should be repealed, it can only mean advocating for increased restrictions. The feigned play at reasonableness or honest discussion about tradeoffs seems like merely a fig leaf for increased restrictions.
  #205  
Old 05-13-2019, 05:38 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 34,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
I think it's undeniably true that American popular culture has romanticized violence and particularly gun violence, in many different forms. But that existed in the 1960s, the 1970s, and the 1980s, especially the latter which saw a profusion of action movies featuring violence at a level that had been unprecedented before. But there weren't constant mass shootings then as there are now.
Right -- it's not just guns and shooting people in movies and media. It's something more than that -- somehow, perhaps like a cultural sort of virus, the idea that broad grievances can be resolved with mass shootings has taken hold of some significant number of young people. But I don't think that would even be possible without the substrate of a gun-loving, violence-loving culture.

I don't think this is unique, by any means, to America, looking at history at large. Humans are incredibly violent, and only very recently (if at all) has violence not ruled large parts of most humans' lives. But violence of this sort varies so incredibly widely between cultures and communities that it's reasonable to wonder about whether and how the differences in culture could be related to these variations. We have no chance of combating potentially toxic elements of our culture if we aren't even able to discuss this possibility.
  #206  
Old 05-13-2019, 05:39 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 10,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
Because other countries histories and culture are sufficiently different that I don't find comparisons especially useful or meaningful. It usually devolves into the nuanced ways that differences exist and an exercise of squaring round peg. Combine that with the fact that the US has 50 states that are each their own sovereign and it's much more useful to get contrasting data points within the US than to look outside of it. Even then the square peg round hole problem exists, but it's not as stark.
On the first point, I guess we'll have to disagree, but I see Canada (for instance) as a close enough culture to the US for valid comparisons. It's been jokingly said that Canada is the US without the guns and with free health care, and there's considerable truth to that, certainly enough truth that there are learnings to be had and not summarily dismissed as being of no interest whatsoever. And I'm not even sure that Canada is the best place to look to for solutions to either problem, but it's definitely culturally the most similar, even to the extent of being exposed to exactly the same US movie and television content, should one be inclined to blame that for gun violence.

The claim in the context of gun violence that the US has 50 sovereign states is just completely objectively false. They may be sovereign in some ways, but there is absolutely no sovereign border enforcement, so there is a tremendous amount of gun mobility between the states. Effective gun policy absolutely has to be national in scope for precisely that reason. That fact also makes comparisons of gun violence between states completely useless.
  #207  
Old 05-13-2019, 05:40 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 34,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
People who don't think American culture is a gun culture -- a culture that celebrates and mythologizes violence, and in particular gun violence.
How did I negatively characterize such people? Looking back, I couldn't find a single word I said about such folks.

Quote:
I think the celebration of violence is baseless.
Do you think there is zero celebration (or mythologizing) of violence in our culture? If not zero, then any significant amount? Is it possible that cultural elements of this kind might have something to do with relatively high rates of violence in American society?

Quote:
Other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln? Lots of folks make comments like you have, and mostly I just pass on responding because there's no point. But if you as you say want to engage in discussion, this is my effort to assist you in not coming across in a way that no one wants to engage.
Okay. If you want others to engage, then I'll kindly recommend that you be careful not to mischaracterize their arguments.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 05-13-2019 at 05:42 PM.
  #208  
Old 05-13-2019, 05:40 PM
Magiver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Ah, the "abstinence-only" approach to gun violence. About as successful as "abstinence-only" approaches in other areas of education.
you think NOT killing someone is abstinence?
  #209  
Old 05-13-2019, 05:42 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
So when you say that the 2nd should be repealed, it can only mean advocating for increased restrictions. The feigned play at reasonableness or honest discussion about tradeoffs seems like merely a fig leaf for increased restrictions.
Repealing the 2nd Amendment very well may lead to increased restrictions, which I said up front I think is not a bad idea. But the true reason to support repealing it is not for the sake of increased restrictions---which would be extremely inefficient, given that there are far less unlikely and distant possible ways to increase legal restrictions on guns---but simply because it's an anachronistic provision that serves no modern purpose except the promotion of gun-rights culture.
  #210  
Old 05-13-2019, 05:43 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
you think NOT killing someone is abstinence?
Uh, yes, of course: it's when you abstain from killing someone. Do you disagree with this interpretation?
  #211  
Old 05-13-2019, 05:44 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 34,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
Sure there is. Teach kids not to kill people.
Wow! I think we just solved it! Pack up everyone, we can go home. No need to expend precious brain cells or worry that this might be a very complicated problem... it's really that simple, and with this plan I'm sure we can solve this in no time at all!
  #212  
Old 05-13-2019, 05:50 PM
MEBuckner's Avatar
MEBuckner is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Posts: 12,049

"Repealing the Second Amendment"


If the Second Amendment were repealed by a subsequent amendment, that would pretty much have to reflect a broad consensus about the (lack of) value of the right to keep and bear arms. Which is pretty much how the amendment process is supposed to work. Of course, a large majority of the states also have provisions in their state constitutions protecting a right to keep and bear arms--many of which are much more clearly worded as protecting both a collective and an individual right of the people to keep and bear arms, both for the general defense and for individual self-defense. But, if we get to the point where we're on the verge of passing a new amendment to the U.S. Constitution to repeal (or effectively repeal) the Second Amendment, then I suppose a lot of those state constitutional provisions would have already fallen by the wayside using the amendment provisions of the various state constitutions.

The thing is, the anti-RKBA side has often been pretty disingenuous about "repealing the Second Amendment". Right here in this thread, statements about the desirability (or even inevitability) of "repealing the Second Amendment" alternate with sniping at the Heller decision and talk of "a particular interpretation of the Second Amendment" (meaning "an interpretation of the Second Amendment as anything other than a meaningless inkblot").

Actually repealing the Second Amendment wouldn't necessarily destroy the rest of the Bill of Rights, no. Just interpreting it away, because you don't like it (but can't actually gain the consent of a broad majority of the American people) would be very dangerous to the whole constitutional order. But rather than actually doing the hard work of "repealing the Second Amendment"--passing new constitutional language about the right to keep and bear arms--it seems the anti-RKBA side just wants to get to get rid of a provision of the Bill of Rights by judicial fiat.
__________________
"In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves." -- Carl Sagan

Ceterum censeo imperium Trumpi esse delendam
  #213  
Old 05-13-2019, 07:17 PM
Magiver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Uh, yes, of course: it's when you abstain from killing someone. Do you disagree with this interpretation?
last chance to walk it back.
  #214  
Old 05-13-2019, 07:18 PM
Magiver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Wow! I think we just solved it! Pack up everyone, we can go home. No need to expend precious brain cells or worry that this might be a very complicated problem... it's really that simple, and with this plan I'm sure we can solve this in no time at all!
Worked for the schools I went to.
  #215  
Old 05-13-2019, 07:37 PM
glee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Obama country
Posts: 15,380
I posted previously that here in the UK, the beat police do not carry guns.

In addition, after a gunman killed schoolchildren and a teacher in Scotland in 1996, the UK banned handguns; no school shootings have taken place there since.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
How many took place before? None

So the Uk had exactly one mass school shooting in the last century.

So altho technically you are right- that no mass school shooting have taken place after the Dunblane massacre, which started the push to ban handguns, none took place before that.

It's like the man who runs the noses of the lion outside the British Library- by doing so he keep lions out of the UK. Have there been any recent wild lion attacks in the UK? See? Ipso facto.

of course the Cumbria shootings took place afterwards, the guns bans didnt stop a dozen people from being gunned down. But they werent in a school.

And of course all the Killings in Ireland, even tho part of it is part of GB- aren't counted, you know.
You're just grabbing at random incidents to support your case.

Yes, Dunblane was the UK's only school shooting. This was due to gun control laws passed here in 1903, 1920, 1937, 1968, 1988 and (following Dunblane) 1997 and finally 2006.
These measures have meant the UK has only had one school shooting. Sadly the US leads the World in such disasters.

As for other shootings, instead of just quoting a single incident, let's look at total gun homicides. The US has about 75 times as many such deaths as the UK.

You didn't address my point that due to gun control, our beat police don't need guns. This obviously dramatically cuts down deaths by police shooting (a real problem in the US.)

Finally we did have a serious terrorist problem in Ireland. There were about 3,500 killed in about 30 years. Most of these were killed by bombs. I presume you don't mind bombs being banned.
Why you think these terrorist atrocities have anything to do with civilian gun control is beyond me.
__________________
Arnold Winkelried:
'glee, I take my hat off to you.... at first I thought you were kidding with your cite but I looked it up and it was indeed accurate. (Still in awe at the magnificent answer)'
  #216  
Old 05-13-2019, 07:38 PM
QuickSilver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 18,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
Worked for the schools I went to.
So schools where it hasn't worked is because teachers failed to teach kids not to kill their fellow students?
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #217  
Old 05-13-2019, 07:41 PM
glee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Obama country
Posts: 15,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
Teach kids not to kill people.
We've done that in the UK. Only one 'school shooting' in our history - and the perpetrator was 43 (i.e. not a kid.)
Or perhaps it was down to a combination of teaching and gun control.
  #218  
Old 05-13-2019, 08:22 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 2,599
Look, I'm glad that there haven't been any more school shootings in the UK. I'm glad that the gun control laws worked effectively in the UK. But I can scarcely think of a country less like America than the UK, despite the shared language. Different countries have different cultures, different laws, and different ideas about whether firearms should be allowed to individuals or whether the ability to use them should be delegated to government authority.

What was politically viable in the United Kingdom is not going to be politically viable in the United States, not at the current time anyway. As I think everyone in this thread is aware, guns aren't the only factor that cause school shootings. And this thread, from its inception, has never been strictly limited to discussion of guns and gun laws.

If that's what people want to primarily talk about, though, fine. It's worth talking about. But since there are in fact other issues pertinent to the admittedly very serious problem of school shootings in America, I'll just go ahead and bring up one POSSIBLE solution which might be able to help lessen this crisis, and is unrelated to guns: making an effort to increase participation in extracurricular activities like sports and clubs.

Imagine that the rate of gun ownership, and the "gun culture" of America, however that may be defined, remains exactly the same as it is now over the next 10 years. But imagine that during those 10 years, more of these boys - and let's face it, it's almost always boys - instead of sitting at home in their rooms on their computers or other devices, when they're not at school, are, even just two or three days a week, spending time involved in some kind of productive activity. Whether it's a sports team, an engineering club where they can work on machines, an outdoorsmanship class of some kind where they do some activity relating to nature, or virtually any other kind of activity you can imagine. Here's something that I think is crucial not only to the mental state that motivates these shootings but to depressive and maladaptive personality disorders in general: when you're DOING something, that is time that's NOT being spent on just sitting around drowning in your own thoughts.

I've read enough backstory on enough of these school shooters to know that their lives are typically lacking in camaraderie and productivity. A focused effort to study kids with emotional problems, figure out how they can be targeted with opportunities to alleviate these problems by offering them some meaning in their lives, and allocate funds for some kind of nationwide mentorship program, could seriously reduce the number of potential school shooters. And, unlike gun control, there aren't going to be millions of people shouting down this proposal. It's something that anyone with any common sense should be able to agree on.
  #219  
Old 05-13-2019, 08:37 PM
QuickSilver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 18,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
Look, I'm glad that there haven't been any more school shootings in the UK. I'm glad that the gun control laws worked effectively in the UK. But I can scarcely think of a country less like America than the UK, despite the shared language. Different countries have different cultures, different laws, and different ideas about whether firearms should be allowed to individuals or whether the ability to use them should be delegated to government authority.

What was politically viable in the United Kingdom is not going to be politically viable in the United States, not at the current time anyway. As I think everyone in this thread is aware, guns aren't the only factor that cause school shootings. And this thread, from its inception, has never been strictly limited to discussion of guns and gun laws.

If that's what people want to primarily talk about, though, fine. It's worth talking about. But since there are in fact other issues pertinent to the admittedly very serious problem of school shootings in America, I'll just go ahead and bring up one POSSIBLE solution which might be able to help lessen this crisis, and is unrelated to guns: making an effort to increase participation in extracurricular activities like sports and clubs.

Imagine that the rate of gun ownership, and the "gun culture" of America, however that may be defined, remains exactly the same as it is now over the next 10 years. But imagine that during those 10 years, more of these boys - and let's face it, it's almost always boys - instead of sitting at home in their rooms on their computers or other devices, when they're not at school, are, even just two or three days a week, spending time involved in some kind of productive activity. Whether it's a sports team, an engineering club where they can work on machines, an outdoorsmanship class of some kind where they do some activity relating to nature, or virtually any other kind of activity you can imagine. Here's something that I think is crucial not only to the mental state that motivates these shootings but to depressive and maladaptive personality disorders in general: when you're DOING something, that is time that's NOT being spent on just sitting around drowning in your own thoughts.

I've read enough backstory on enough of these school shooters to know that their lives are typically lacking in camaraderie and productivity. A focused effort to study kids with emotional problems, figure out how they can be targeted with opportunities to alleviate these problems by offering them some meaning in their lives, and allocate funds for some kind of nationwide mentorship program, could seriously reduce the number of potential school shooters. And, unlike gun control, there aren't going to be millions of people shouting down this proposal. It's something that anyone with any common sense should be able to agree on.
Pretty sure they have computers and the internet in the UK too.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #220  
Old 05-13-2019, 10:31 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
Repealing the 2nd Amendment very well may lead to increased restrictions, which I said up front I think is not a bad idea. But the true reason to support repealing it is not for the sake of increased restrictions---which would be extremely inefficient, given that there are far less unlikely and distant possible ways to increase legal restrictions on guns---but simply because it's an anachronistic provision that serves no modern purpose except the promotion of gun-rights culture.
It gives us the right to defend our homes with a weapon. It allows people to hunt for food.
  #221  
Old 05-14-2019, 04:59 AM
Nava is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hey! I'm located! WOOOOW!
Posts: 41,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
86 people were killed in a truck attack in France in 2016.
14 killed (13 on the spot) and over 130 wounded in Barcelona in 2017; no truck, just one of those white vans which require the same kind of driver's license as a car.
__________________
Evidence gathered through the use of science is easily dismissed through the use of idiocy. - Czarcasm.
  #222  
Old 05-14-2019, 06:54 AM
QuickSilver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 18,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
It gives us the right to defend our homes with a weapon.
Defend them from what?... Ze Germans?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
It allows people to hunt for food.
There are no actual lions at your local Food Lion.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #223  
Old 05-14-2019, 08:34 AM
Kearsen1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Austin
Posts: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Defend them from what?... Ze Germans?



There are no actual lions at your local Food Lion.
So due to your ignorance of hunting, or the fact that you do none. You assign those same values to everyone else and wonder why so many people disagree with you?

I have 6 types of meat in my freezer. 2 of which you can buy at a grocer. On top of those two, I have elk, white tail, axis, and dove.

Hint: All 4 of those I got using my evil ass guns
  #224  
Old 05-14-2019, 08:55 AM
Isamu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Osaka
Posts: 6,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
It gives us the right to defend our homes with a weapon. It allows people to hunt for food.
No, that's all wrong.
  #225  
Old 05-14-2019, 09:49 AM
QuickSilver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 18,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen1 View Post
So due to your ignorance of hunting, or the fact that you do none. You assign those same values to everyone else and wonder why so many people disagree with you?

I have 6 types of meat in my freezer. 2 of which you can buy at a grocer. On top of those two, I have elk, white tail, axis, and dove.

Hint: All 4 of those I got using my evil ass guns
I don't wonder at all. I get it. You like to kill things. It's a matter of survival.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #226  
Old 05-14-2019, 09:58 AM
Cheesesteak's Avatar
Cheesesteak is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lovely Montclair, NJ
Posts: 13,366
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
It gives us the right to defend our homes with a weapon. It allows people to hunt for food.
Is that all you need? We can both have what we want.

You get to defend your home with a powerful weapon, you get to hunt for all the food you want, I get to have a blanket ban on handguns and semi-automatic weapons. You get to do all the good stuff that guns do, I get to ban the weapons used in 95% of gun crimes.

It's win-win.
  #227  
Old 05-14-2019, 10:41 AM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 10,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen1 View Post
I have 6 types of meat in my freezer. 2 of which you can buy at a grocer. On top of those two, I have elk, white tail, axis, and dove.

Hint: All 4 of those I got using my evil ass guns
I live in a country with strong gun controls, relatively low gun violence, and no epidemic of school shootings. It's also a country where, if you are so inclined, you can go out in the woods and kill things for food if your are so inclined. Hint: with a big-ass gun.

So comments like yours in a thread about gun control have exactly zero value.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak View Post
Is that all you need? We can both have what we want.

You get to defend your home with a powerful weapon, you get to hunt for all the food you want, I get to have a blanket ban on handguns and semi-automatic weapons. You get to do all the good stuff that guns do, I get to ban the weapons used in 95% of gun crimes.

It's win-win.
Yes, but gun advocates fear any such ban because the kinds of guns that are the most "fun" have the least justification and are thus most likely to be restricted. But since any argument with the word "fun" in it would be unpersuasive, it's much better to substitute words like "freedom" and "constitution" and phrases alluding to slippery slopes and government oppression. Bonus points for working in a quote from Martin Niemöller or anything about Nazis.

Here, let me summarize this thread, which has evolved from its original posting about the millionth or whatever mass shooting in the US to a fairly comprehensive discussion about gun control. I'll do it with the simplest possible Q&A:

Q: Is there any hope of any meaningful reform at all to stem the flood of gun violence in the USA in any foreseeable future?

A: No.
  #228  
Old 05-14-2019, 12:04 PM
QuickSilver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 18,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
Here, let me summarize this thread, which has evolved from its original posting about the millionth or whatever mass shooting in the US to a fairly comprehensive discussion about gun control. I'll do it with the simplest possible Q&A:

Q: Is there any hope of any meaningful reform at all to stem the flood of gun violence in the USA in any foreseeable future?

A: No.
Especially not when the prevailing attitude continues to be: "You'll take my gun out of my cold dead hand."

Usually said without an ounce of sense for irony.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #229  
Old 05-14-2019, 12:42 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 2,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
Here, let me summarize this thread, which has evolved from its original posting about the millionth or whatever mass shooting in the US to a fairly comprehensive discussion about gun control. I'll do it with the simplest possible Q&A:

Q: Is there any hope of any meaningful reform at all to stem the flood of gun violence in the USA in any foreseeable future?

A: No.
There's probably no hope of meaningful gun restrictions. That doesn't mean there's no hope of reducing the violence. The motivations behind the violence can still be addressed.
  #230  
Old 05-14-2019, 01:06 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 61,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
There's probably no hope of meaningful gun restrictions. That doesn't mean there's no hope of reducing the violence. The motivations behind the violence can still be addressed.
Like video games, violent movies, comic books, commie agitators, left-wing professors etc.?
  #231  
Old 05-14-2019, 01:19 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 2,599
I just suggested one possibility upthread. Look, I get that many people's preference is to increase gun control. And I'm not even denying that it would lessen these shootings. Of course it would. But it's goddamn hard to achieve gun control politically, so I see no reason why it needs to be the ONLY path to decreasing the shootings.
  #232  
Old 05-14-2019, 01:21 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 61,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
I just suggested one possibility upthread. Look, I get that many people's preference is to increase gun control. And I'm not even denying that it would lessen these shootings. Of course it would. But it's goddamn hard to achieve gun control politically, so I see no reason why it needs to be the ONLY path to decreasing the shootings.
Perhaps I was a bit brash with my answer...and maybe such a topic deserves its own thread, which I think I'll create.
  #233  
Old 05-14-2019, 01:28 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 61,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Perhaps I was a bit brash with my answer...and maybe such a topic deserves its own thread, which I think I'll create.
New thread here on addressing the issue of gun violence without the use of gun restrictions and/or elimination.
  #234  
Old 05-14-2019, 01:43 PM
JXJohns's Avatar
JXJohns is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Middle of the Midwest
Posts: 2,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post

Q: Is there any hope of any meaningful reform at all to stem the flood of gun violence in the USA in any foreseeable future?

A: No.
There is always hope that violence can be reduced, it has fallen significantly since 1993 without any real legislation in the US. It will take compromise by both sides however to continue this trend. I simply don't see anything that the control side is willing to give up in order to get what they want.

ETA: Fixed a typo...

Last edited by JXJohns; 05-14-2019 at 01:46 PM.
  #235  
Old 05-14-2019, 01:54 PM
Kearsen1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Austin
Posts: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by JXJohns View Post
There is always hope that violence can be reduced, it has fallen significantly since 1993 without any real legislation in the US. It will take compromise by both sides however to continue this trend. I simply don't see anything that the control side is willing to give up in order to get what they want.

ETA: Fixed a typo...
The control side will first need to understand. And the last few pages of this thread firmly demonstrate, that they simply don't.

Between wolfpup, Cheese, and Quicksilver, there is no debate, they are simply right, you are wrong and thus it shall continue.

It's a good thing to be on the side winning the court cases.
  #236  
Old 05-14-2019, 02:14 PM
Cheesesteak's Avatar
Cheesesteak is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lovely Montclair, NJ
Posts: 13,366
Quote:
Originally Posted by JXJohns View Post
I simply don't see anything that the control side is willing to give up in order to get what they want.
So, if I want a ban on handguns and semi-automatic long guns, I should be willing to give up... something... to get that? I've already stated, just a couple of posts upthread that you can have guns for home defense and you can have guns for hunting.

What could I possibly give up besides that that's going to make gun owners accept the ban? Name anything that isn't "not banning guns".


On top of that, my goal here isn't for some sort of personal benefit, my goal is to save over 10,000 lives a year, and your asking for some sort of kickback to make the deal worth your while. I want to save 10,000 lives and you're asking "what's in it for me?" The answer is "nothing", there's nothing in this deal for you, unless you're one of the 10,000 who are going to be shot and killed over the next 12 months. The deal is for them, not you, and not me.
  #237  
Old 05-14-2019, 02:20 PM
JXJohns's Avatar
JXJohns is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Middle of the Midwest
Posts: 2,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen1 View Post
The control side will first need to understand. And the last few pages of this thread firmly demonstrate, that they simply don't.

Between wolfpup, Cheese, and Quicksilver, there is no debate, they are simply right, you are wrong and thus it shall continue.

It's a good thing to be on the side winning the court cases.
You are absolutely correct. Not calling out anyone in this thread but the interest to learn is never shown.
  #238  
Old 05-14-2019, 02:33 PM
JXJohns's Avatar
JXJohns is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Middle of the Midwest
Posts: 2,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak View Post
So, if I want a ban on handguns and semi-automatic long guns, I should be willing to give up... something... to get that? I've already stated, just a couple of posts upthread that you can have guns for home defense and you can have guns for hunting.
The court has already decided that a blanket ban isn't going to happen. If you can't get past that, my point is proven.

Quote:
On top of that, my goal here isn't for some sort of personal benefit, my goal is to save over 10,000 lives a year, and your asking for some sort of kickback to make the deal worth your while. I want to save 10,000 lives and you're asking "what's in it for me?" The answer is "nothing", there's nothing in this deal for you, unless you're one of the 10,000 who are going to be shot and killed over the next 12 months. The deal is for them, not you, and not me.
So I guess if that's the way you feel, why not bark up the anti smoking tree? There are no constitutional protections at play, no pesky amendments in the way. The science is proven as well. The number of deaths are exponentially higher and there is really no argument for anything beneficial when it comes to smoking?

It's clear that the US is fine with almost 500,000 deaths annually from smoking. It seems like there should be some low hanging fruit there to harvest.
  #239  
Old 05-14-2019, 02:35 PM
QuickSilver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 18,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by JXJohns View Post
You are absolutely correct. Not calling out anyone in this thread but the interest to learn is never shown.
What is it that you're teaching that isn't being learned?
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #240  
Old 05-14-2019, 02:44 PM
JXJohns's Avatar
JXJohns is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Middle of the Midwest
Posts: 2,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
What is it that you're teaching that isn't being learned?
How about the difference between an assault rifle and and assault weapon to start with? Without looking it up, I bet you and most others don't know the difference either yet are all too happy to champion a ban on both.

Last edited by JXJohns; 05-14-2019 at 02:46 PM.
  #241  
Old 05-14-2019, 02:45 PM
Cheesesteak's Avatar
Cheesesteak is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lovely Montclair, NJ
Posts: 13,366
Quote:
Originally Posted by JXJohns View Post
There is always hope that violence can be reduced, it has fallen significantly since 1993 without any real legislation in the US. It will take compromise by both sides however to continue this trend. I simply don't see anything that the control side is willing to give up in order to get what they want.

ETA: Fixed a typo...
Quote:
Originally Posted by JXJohns View Post
The court has already decided that a blanket ban isn't going to happen. If you can't get past that, my point is proven.
Can you please explain what your first post here was about? You said my side isn't willing to give anything up to get what we want, and when asked to elaborate, you said that I can't have what I want at all. So, there's really nothing that I can give up in order to get what I want, because you have what you want, and I can go fuck myself.

But, I'm the one who doesn't want to debate, right?
  #242  
Old 05-14-2019, 02:46 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Defend them from what?... Ze Germans?



There are no actual lions at your local Food Lion.
Violent criminals. Home invasion robberies.


  #243  
Old 05-14-2019, 02:47 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isamu View Post
No, that's all wrong.

So, you can't defend your home? You can't hunt either?
  #244  
Old 05-14-2019, 02:54 PM
JXJohns's Avatar
JXJohns is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Middle of the Midwest
Posts: 2,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak View Post
Can you please explain what your first post here was about? You said my side isn't willing to give anything up to get what we want, and when asked to elaborate, you said that I can't have what I want at all. So, there's really nothing that I can give up in order to get what I want, because you have what you want, and I can go fuck myself.

But, I'm the one who doesn't want to debate, right?
Give up on the blanket ban. It's not going to happen. See, whenever these "debates" come up everyone on the control side here tells us how nobody wants to take our guns. I'll make sure to bookmark this page to prove that yes, an actual SDMB member wants to take away guns.

When I think of compromise, I think win-win. Before I tell you to go fuck yourself, how about you tell me where my win is by turning in my handguns and rifles because you say so.
  #245  
Old 05-14-2019, 03:01 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak View Post
Is that all you need? We can both have what we want.

You get to defend your home with a powerful weapon, you get to hunt for all the food you want, I get to have a blanket ban on handguns and semi-automatic weapons. You get to do all the good stuff that guns do, I get to ban the weapons used in 95% of gun crimes.

It's win-win.
And see, posters have claimed that no one is suggesting a widespread gun ban. But here it is.
  #246  
Old 05-14-2019, 03:06 PM
QuickSilver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 18,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by JXJohns View Post
The court has already decided that a blanket ban isn't going to happen. If you can't get past that, my point is proven.
Courts enforce laws. If we change laws, courts will enforce those laws.

I know, it's a reach to expect laws to change with respect to RKBA. Certainly not in the case of a full on blanket ban. But I feel it's important to keep reaching. All sorts of human rights and social justice reforms were achieved through reaching. Statistics show that when it comes to gun control issues, these aspirational hopes are no longer the minority.

But you go right on ahead and feel satisfied with the courts ruling in your favor right now. I'm going to go right on ahead and continue to insist that laws and court decisions be changed.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.

Last edited by QuickSilver; 05-14-2019 at 03:08 PM.
  #247  
Old 05-14-2019, 03:12 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 61,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
And see, posters have claimed that no one is suggesting a widespread gun ban. But here it is.
Yes, there it is. Don't forget to reference that one post and use it as a shield whenever someone wants to discuss the issue, emphasizing the point that you have proof that "they" all really want guns to be banned.

Last edited by Czarcasm; 05-14-2019 at 03:12 PM.
  #248  
Old 05-14-2019, 03:15 PM
JXJohns's Avatar
JXJohns is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Middle of the Midwest
Posts: 2,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Courts enforce laws. If we change laws, courts will enforce those laws.

I know, it's a reach to expect laws to change with respect to RKBA. Certainly not in the case of a full on blanket ban. But I feel it's important to keep reaching. All sorts of human rights and social justice reforms were achieved through reaching. Statistics show that when it comes to gun control issues, these aspirational hopes are no longer the minority.

But you go right on ahead and feel satisfied with the courts ruling in your favor right now. I'm going to go right on ahead and continue to insist that laws and court decisions be changed.
Sounds good. Let me ask you this however, do you know the difference between the two types of firearms I mentioned earlier? I noticed you never answered me. See, when people threaten to take away my stuff, I would like to know that they have a f'ing clue what it is they are talking about first. I'm strange that way I guess.
  #249  
Old 05-14-2019, 03:23 PM
QuickSilver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 18,040
Quote:
Originally Posted by JXJohns View Post
How about the difference between an assault rifle and and assault weapon to start with? Without looking it up, I bet you and most others don't know the difference either yet are all too happy to champion a ban on both.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JXJohns View Post
Sounds good. Let me ask you this however, do you know the difference between the two types of firearms I mentioned earlier? I noticed you never answered me. See, when people threaten to take away my stuff, I would like to know that they have a f'ing clue what it is they are talking about first. I'm strange that way I guess.
Sorry, I missed that.

Without looking it up?... Nope.

Without looking it up... still don't care.

I'm an equal opportunity gun grabber. I've made the exception in the case of hunting rifles and target pistols. If I'm pressed to specify which type, I'll say the type with a capacity of 5 or 6 rounds in case you happen to miss the first 4 times. Don't ask me about caliber. Big enough to bring down a rabbit or a deer, if you must. Personally, I'm against killing animals in the wild for sport, but I am willing to offer this as a compromise for those who feel they must.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.

Last edited by QuickSilver; 05-14-2019 at 03:24 PM.
  #250  
Old 05-14-2019, 03:28 PM
JXJohns's Avatar
JXJohns is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Middle of the Midwest
Posts: 2,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Sorry, I missed that.

Without looking it up?... Nope.

Without looking it up... still don't care.

I'm an equal opportunity gun grabber. I've made the exception in the case of hunting rifles and target pistols. If I'm pressed to specify which type, I'll say the type with a capacity of 5 or 6 rounds in case you happen to miss the first 4 times. Don't ask me about caliber. Big enough to bring down a rabbit or a deer, if you must. Personally, I'm against killing animals in the wild for sport, but I am willing to offer this as a compromise for those who feel they must.
Thanks. I'll bookmark this post too.
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 09:41 PM.

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