# A new record! U.S.A.! U.S.A.! U.S.A.! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 2, 2017, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804 "2017-10-02T13:09:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 20
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2017, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804/381 "2017-10-03T18:46:59Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > About the same number of people die from alcohol related accidents as die from firearm related homicide. We can save 10k lives a year by reinstating Prohibition, right? We could, maybe. But rather than banning alcohol, we regulate it. We do not allow people to have open containers in their cars. We do not allow them to be over .08% BAL in most states, where, honestly, .08 BAL still means that you will _probably_ make it home just fine. We sue and fire bartenders who served drinks to people who then drove home drunk. We require purveyors of alcohol to take classes on how to tell when someone should be cut off. We work to improve the situation, and decrease the deaths, and it has worked. Can you make any similar suggestions on how to approach guns to decrease the violence done with them? It was your idea to analogies it with drunk driving, so I assume that you would be willing to do the same types of things we have done, and hope to get the same sorts of results. > [@running\_coach](#): > > In certain situations, that’s true. That’s assuming you’ve drawn your gun in response to an actual threat. > > At a bar when you’ve been insulted, no. Home intruder, yes. You would flash your gun at a bar if someone insults you? > [@madsircool](#): > > I agree with the questions he asks (save for suicide which I believe should be a personal choice). But I don’t think he asked enough questions. > > If I were a woman living alone I would feel safer owning a gun. Safer with a dog. > [@](#): > > If I were parents raising kids in a rough neighborhood I would feel safer owning guns. Safer with a dog. > [@](#): > > It comes down to responsibility, imo. Adults should be able to responsibly and legally own tools to protect themselves under reasonable limiting conditions. Even if those tools actually make them less safe. Would you also, since you brought up drunk driving as an example that you feel is analogous to the gun problem, say that adults should be able to responsibly and legally drink and drive under reasonable limiting conditions? > [@madsircool](#): > > Most women have no defense against an aggressive intruder. A gun gives them a chance to protect themselves. I prefer that the woman make that choice for herself. And if a gun is a bit harder to get, when instead of just going down to the corner and picking one up at the gun store there, and instead, she has to go to a few classes on how to actually use her gun before she is allowed to take it home and use it for their “defense” do you think that will make her less safe? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2017, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804/382 "2017-10-03T19:08:47Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > But this is a matter of opinion. The questions/hypotheticals we ask are very important. Appeal to authority is unconvincing, imo. What appeal to authority? This is how it is supposed to work. When you go to your doctor you probably trust their professional opinion because he/she is an expert. When you are building your house you probably listen to the architect and builder’s expert opinions. If you do not like their opinions you can hire someone else to render an opinion. At some point if you keep getting the same answer it is best to pay attention to what you are being told. So too here. You just don’t like the answer the same way an anti-vaccer doesn’t like being told vaccine are a health benefit. You simply choose to ignore the clear evidence because…I dunno…reasons. If I cited one study done by a deeply liberal think tank you’d be right to question it. But I didn’t. I cited over a hundred researchers in this field whose consensus opinion leans strongly towards guns in the home make the home a less safe, more dangerous place for everyone in it. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2017, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804/383 "2017-10-03T19:26:07Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > And if a gun is a bit harder to get, when instead of just going down to the corner and picking one up at the gun store there, and instead, she has to go to a few classes on how to actually use her gun before she is allowed to take it home and use it for their “defense” do you think that will make her less safe? What if she was a victim of one of the thousands of home invasions that occur every day during the period she was taking her class? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2017, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804/384 "2017-10-03T19:41:22Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > Yes. And, for the sake of honest debate, please break that 300% stat down into real numbers. To be clear, I have no numbers. It’s just a hypothetical I threw out there to understand your point of view better. > [@](#): > > Not to sidetrack this, but rape is a horrible crime that violates the soul as well as the body. If a woman wants protection against rapists, I say hell yes. I would add that suicide also has devastating effects on the people left behind. The families of those killed in gun crime also have a terrible burden. Believe me, you don’t have to convince me that we shouldn’t look at crimes and death as merely statistics. > [@](#): > > So, yes, as adults we should be allowed to make that decision. So another hypothetical here. Is there any development that could occur that would cause you to re-think your principled position on gun ownership and self-defense? Like, let’s say that these Las Vegas-type massacres become a weekly occurrence, or Chicago levels of violence permeate locales not only with strict gun control (like Chicago and DC), but also places with very little gun control. Would that change your mind on your position? Otherwise, what would have to happen to the U.S. to make you think, “Hmmm… maybe I’ve been wrong about this?” For my part, if the U.S. had homicide rates that were in line with the most developed countries (e.g., more in the 1.0-1.9 per 100,000 people, as opposed to the roughly 5 per 100,000); I don’t think gun policy would be something I ever thought about. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2017, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804/385 "2017-10-03T20:29:00Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > And I think we can safely dispense with the idea that more firearms, open carry laws, and vigilantes can prevent these kinds of massacres. The entire audience of 23,000 could have been armed with automatic weapons and the death toll would have been the same, and probably higher with people in darkness shooting at each other. Not a single solitary life would have been saved. In fact a society in which everyone is armed would simply allow armed lunatics to blend into the landscape more easily. Do we want to live in a society in which everyone has to wear body armor before we leave the house and go to work in the morning? What does civilized society look like in the 21st Century – everyone looking like UN peacekeepers? Serious question: in the next decade or two, advances in 3D printing technology mean that anyone with ~$5000.00 dollars can buy a machine that will turn out fully functional automatic rifles. Making guns becomes as simple and easy for unskilled people as making bathtub gin. Laws banning guns then become as futile as the Vatican’s list of banned books became after Gutenberg. What then? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2017, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804/386 "2017-10-03T20:43:32Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > …or Chicago levels of violence permeate locales not only with strict gun control (like Chicago and DC)… Chicago does not have particularly strict gun control laws as compared to other major cities. It used to years ago but supreme court decisions put an end to them. Not that it really matters since local gun laws are near worthless. > [@](#): > > Critics have repeatedly charged Chicago with having the country’s strictest gun laws with little effect. > > \ > > But Chicago Police have disputed those criticisms, saying it is a common misconception that Chicago has the country’s strictest gun control, and the department’s officials have contended that gang members face worse sanctions from their gangs for losing a gun than they do by the courts for illegally possessing one. > > SOURCE: [Does Chicago Have The Strictest Gun Laws in the Country? - Downtown - Chicago - DNAinfo](https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20151027/downtown/does-chicago-have-strictest-gun-laws-country-its-complicated) ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2017, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804/387 "2017-10-03T20:45:26Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > **In a modern militarized nation-state, gun ownership does not make citizens “the masters, not the subjects, of government” in any realistically meaningful way.** It is too late to dream about citizen militias providing any kind of effective bulwark against government tyranny. That ship has sailed, that train has left the station: against modern military weaponry, that “bulwark” is a paper plate. Are you _ **happy** _ about that? Does the idea that any “It Can’t Happen Here” dictatorship could crush popular resistance like insects meet with your approval? ---
**Author:** ![Evan\_Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b487fb/32.png) [@Evan\_Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evan_Drake)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2017, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804/388 "2017-10-03T20:47:29Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > Serious question: in the next decade or two, advances in 3D printing technology mean that anyone with ~$5000.00 dollars can buy a machine that will turn out fully functional automatic rifles. Making guns becomes as simple and easy for unskilled people as making bathtub gin. Laws banning guns then become as futile as the Vatican’s list of banned books became after Gutenberg. What then? I’m pretty sure a skilled machinist can make an automatic rifle, and many other weapons, by hand already. Ammo not so easily, but that can be bought in bulk. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2017, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804/389 "2017-10-03T20:49:27Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > Are you _ **happy** _ about that? Does the idea that any “It Can’t Happen Here” dictatorship could crush popular resistance like insects meet with your approval? It means that we have other ways to control our government other then holding guns to their heads and threatening violent revolution, dipshit. ---
**Author:** ![Evan\_Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b487fb/32.png) [@Evan\_Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evan_Drake)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2017, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804/390 "2017-10-03T20:49:50Z")
In fact I see there’s a popular and legal website called, oddly enough: [http://www.bulkammo.com/](http://www.bulkammo.com/) ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2017, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804/391 "2017-10-03T21:03:17Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > Are you _ **happy** _ about that? Does the idea that any “It Can’t Happen Here” dictatorship could crush popular resistance like insects meet with your approval? The best medicine for an unjust government is reform, not revolt. JFK said something about, governments that make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. If voters want to prioritize its people, what’s the need for revolution? Unfortunately, it seems that American society is increasingly cleaved into factions, one rather powerful one seeming to prefer armaments over civil justice. Or, more ominously, some may think that armaments ARE a form of civil justice. In any case, the idea that people in general are going to vote for the establishment of a dictatorship in this country, then suddenly wake up one day and defeat the U.S. armed forces to re-establish a peaceful democratic nation, is a fairy tale. It has nothing to do with whether I’m happy that the fairy tale is true or not; no more than it matters whether I think prayer can defeat cancer. We need to live in the realm of reality. ---
**Author:** ![gigi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a587f6/32.png) [@gigi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gigi)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2017, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804/392 "2017-10-03T21:03:59Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > Do these “some advocates” also approach you when mowing your lawn with an electric mower, and shout at you? These hypothetical people are such a pain! Hey, if they’re going to mow my lawn for me, I’ll put up with a lot! ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2017, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804/393 "2017-10-03T21:18:41Z")
Self-driving cars will eventually “solve” drunk driving. To that end, start building ethical guns. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2017, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804/394 "2017-10-03T22:33:44Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > It means that we have other ways to control our government other then holding guns to their heads and threatening violent revolution, dipshit. Such as? Petitions? Protest marches? Condemnation by Hollywood celebrities? That’s fine as long as the system isn’t broken. Frankly, I think the USA is still a democracy only on inertia; in the cycle of history we’re approximately where the Roman Republic was just before the Gracchus brothers were assassinated. But you doubtless disagree- after all, It Can’t Happen Here. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2017, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804/395 "2017-10-04T00:53:47Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > Serious question: in the next decade or two, advances in 3D printing technology mean that anyone with ~$5000.00 dollars can buy a machine that will turn out fully functional automatic rifles. Making guns becomes as simple and easy for unskilled people as making bathtub gin. Laws banning guns then become as futile as the Vatican’s list of banned books became after Gutenberg. What then? If that’s the case, then from your perspective, there’s no problem. You can confidently await the future, knowing your gun rights will soon be far more secure and expansive than they are already. And presumably your 3D printer can just as easily make grenades and howitzers and so forth, so you will have armaments to fight the Extremely Hypothetical Left-Wing Military Dictatorship In A Nation Where The Police And Military Rather Heavily Lean Right. Sure, that may be a problem for us libruls, but we’ll worry about our own side of things, thanks. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![OttoDaFe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ottodafe/32/356_2.png) [@OttoDaFe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OttoDaFe)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2017, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804/396 "2017-10-04T02:48:45Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > > [@asahi](#): > > > > And I think we can safely dispense with the idea that more firearms, open carry laws, and vigilantes can prevent these kinds of massacres. The entire audience of 23,000 could have been armed with automatic weapons and the death toll would have been the same, and probably higher with people in darkness shooting at each other. Not a single solitary life would have been saved. In fact a society in which everyone is armed would simply allow armed lunatics to blend into the landscape more easily. Do we want to live in a society in which everyone has to wear body armor before we leave the house and go to work in the morning? What does civilized society look like in the 21st Century – everyone looking like UN peacekeepers? > > This brings up an interesting logical/philosophical dilemma: suppose, say, a dark movie theater shooting, with 75 moviegoers and 1 carbine-armed shooter. What is the ideal number of CCWs for the moviegoers to minimize the death toll, supposing a range of competence and coolness-under-fire from experienced professional to anxious idiot. At some number of CCW armed moviegoers, there would be no way to identify which is the “enemy” shooter and which are “friendly” shooters, and I think it’s reasonable to believe the death toll would increase. Perhaps the ideal is a single CCW holder, with experience and a cool head, and everyone else can stay on the ground. But with every additional CCW holder I think an element of chaos is added that could greatly increase the chance of more death, especially since some of those holders may not be cool-headed or experienced. And thus there’s no way to know how many CCW holders are in the audience, and therefore whether bringing your own CCW will add to the danger or reduce the danger. Shortly after the [Long Island Railroad shooting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_Long_Island_Rail_Road_shooting) I saw a letter to the editor of the local fishwrap\* to the effect that if everyone in the car had been armed, of course the incident wouldn’t have happened — the idea apparently being that the moment Mr Ferguson started acting suspicious the whole carload would have drawn, aimed precisely, and blown him away. I thought at the time that the reality would probably have resembled a demonstration of nuclear fission created by Disney (or perhaps AT&T):[ul] [li]Fill a room with mousetraps (the type with a squared-off wire loop that snaps shut)[/li][li]Place two ping-pong balls on the loop of every mousetrap[/li][li]Throw one ping-pong ball into the room to trigger a single trap[/li][/ul]Result: a room full of ping-pong balls flying in random directions, as each one released has a good chance of triggering another trap. Except that in this case, the objects flying in random directions would be bullets … and a death toll beyond Mr Ferguson’s (and perhaps Mr Pollard’s) wildest dreams. \*There was a time when people actually wrote down their thoughts and sent them via “snail mail” to be printed in the newspaper. That’s right, _on paper!_ Believe it or not! ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2017, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804/397 "2017-10-04T03:07:43Z")
**Lumpy** in one post: _The consequences of social and technological change have to be faced and evaluated realistically, without clinging to outmoded legislation about gun control for a feeling of emotional security._ > [@Lumpy](#): > > Serious question: in the next decade or two, advances in 3D printing technology mean that anyone with ~$5000.00 dollars can buy a machine that will turn out fully functional automatic rifles. […] Laws banning guns then become as futile as the Vatican’s list of banned books became after Gutenberg. What then? **Lumpy** in his **very next post** : _The consequences of social and technological change are a matter for emotional response instead of rational evaluation. Outmoded legislation about gun rights must be clung to because it **symbolizes** security and makes us feel happier, even if it doesn’t realistically accomplish jack-shit!_ > [@Lumpy](#): > > > [@Kimstu](#): > > > > **In a modern militarized nation-state, gun ownership does not make citizens “the masters, not the subjects, of government” in any realistically meaningful way.** It is too late to dream about citizen militias providing any kind of effective bulwark against government tyranny. That ship has sailed, that train has left the station: against modern military weaponry, that “bulwark” is a paper plate. > > Are you _ **happy** _ about that? Does the idea that any “It Can’t Happen Here” dictatorship could crush popular resistance like insects meet with your approval? :rolleyes: We often see posters contradict themselves from one post to another, but seldom quite so quickly and dramatically. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2017, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804/398 "2017-10-04T05:12:43Z")
> [@foolsguinea](#): > > I agree with\*\* Alessan\*\*. > [@Kimstu](#): > > I repeat my response to **Alessan** : This whole massacre took place in four or five minutes, with a sniper-style shooter firing rapidly from a high-rise hotel room window (from behind a locked door) into a crowd, with no warning of any kind. By the time your hypothesized security officer managed to figure out what was happening and “intervene quickly”, hundreds of people would already be dead or wounded. OK, clearly this case just demolishes any argument where a mass shooting can generally be stopped by some version of “armed response.” Once the shooter got to a room on a high floor with his satchel (?) of weapons, it was too late. > [@](#): > > I’m not dissing the good intentions or (at least in many cases) the courage and skill of “good guys with guns” willing to confront bad guys with guns. But in the vast majority of these crimes, the bad guy with a gun has a huge tactical advantage over his potential adversary, in that he knows what he’s going to do and the adversary does not. Agreed. > [@](#): > > 😕 No it isn’t. Unless you’re trying to argue that the security officer would be able to “control” the shooter’s gun(s) by quick action before any casualties occurred. To which I respond: See above. It’s a nice idea but not bloody likely. I meant more that using armed personnel in the interest of security means hiring them for the purpose rather than just loosening gun laws and hoping someone shows up. The “control” is that a weapon commissioned to purpose is in the hands of someone vetted and deputized. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2017, 5:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804/399 "2017-10-04T05:20:47Z")
Lumpy’s not contradicting himself. He’s saving up to 3D-print a robot army. ---
**Author:** ![jtur88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e9c0ed/32.png) [@jtur88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jtur88)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2017, 6:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804/400 "2017-10-04T06:24:21Z")
Just to make sure we don’t lose perspective, the US police have killed 737 people so far this year. > **[Police shootings 2017 database](https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings-2017/)** > > Since 2015, The Post has created a database cataloging every fatal shooting nationwide by a police officer in the line of duty. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804.md?page=19) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-record-u-s-a-u-s-a-u-s-a/797804.md?page=21)