# A proposal for gun control **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [December 18, 2012, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419 "2012-12-18T13:07:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![This\_Just\_In\_2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@This\_Just\_In\_2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/This_Just_In_2)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2012, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419/141 "2012-12-19T22:29:59Z")
> [@artemis](#): > > Yes, I did read the article, in its entirety. The problem is, most guns accidents aren’t malfunctions. The gun did precisely what it was supposed to do - go off when the trigger was pulled. Most gun accidents are a result of poor safety practices on the part of the user, such as that father whose toddler son died - he clearly didn’t know how to unload a semiautomatic pistol. That’s a HUGE user error, not a small mistake. (In car terms, he did the equivalent of leaving his car in neutral with the parking break off while on a steep hill.) Dad didn’t need a biometric gun, Dad needed to have no firearms until he learned both the essential rules of gun safety and how to properly unload a pistol. > > When it comes to firearms, the most important safety feature is the one installed between the user’s ears. And the more safety features you try to build into a weapon, the more potential points of failure you’re introducing, and the more likely it is that the gun will fail at a critical moment. For a defensive gun, the #1 most important feature is that it MUST always fire when the trigger is pulled. But why the resistance? Why not consider that having a consumer protection agency simply evaluate the guns for any possible faults wouldn’t be such a bad thing? I agree that the most important safety feature with guns is the brain, but that would also apply to cars and most any other consumer product. It doesn’t make all of the regulations on cars and any other product less relevant. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2012, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419/142 "2012-12-19T22:48:14Z")
> [@jasg](#): > > Are there any figures on mis-fire or jam rates in ‘dumb’ weapons? Very rare. I’ve put about 5,000 rounds through my Glock, no mis-fires or jams. Chuck taylor9gunwriter0 was doing a long term test of a Glock 17, last I heard it was up to 175,000 rounds with minimal cleaning and some deliberate abuse and it was something like 2 failure-to-feed(traced to a bad mgazine0, no jams or mis-fires. ---
**Author:** ![jasg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f0a364/32.png) [@jasg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jasg)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2012, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419/143 "2012-12-19T22:59:01Z")
> [@runner pat](#): > > Very rare. I’ve put about 5,000 rounds through my Glock, no mis-fires or jams. Chuck taylor9gunwriter0 was doing a long term test of a Glock 17, last I heard it was up to 175,000 rounds with minimal cleaning and some deliberate abuse and it was something like 2 failure-to-feed(traced to a bad mgazine0, no jams or mis-fires. They should have had Glock make the M16… ---
**Author:** ![Hbns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hbns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hbns)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2012, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419/144 "2012-12-19T23:22:35Z")
> [@This\_Just\_In\_2](#): > > That is a great and eyeopening article. I seriously can’t understand why gun users wouldn’t want some consumer protection oversight on their tools. It sounds like many of the problems could be solved by using technology like this, and mandating that guns need to be built as safe to their users as any other equipment. My firearms so far have a slightly better track record than my pneumatic nail gun in this regard. In otherwords I have been injured by the nail gun. :smack: As for the tech. I would welcome it. I suspect we are a ways off. The electronics will have to be perfected, ruggedized for the much higher shock loads of rifles and shotguns, and commercialized for volume production. But safe to say that my interest is piqued after[reading](http://www.livescience.com/1449-shot-stopper-smart-guns-smarter.html) that system seems to designed with real life use in mind. Off hand shooting as well as strong hand shooting. And that the researchers aren’t trying to rush it to market. > [@](#): > > Meanwhile, the NJIT smart gun is now 98 to 99 percent accurate at recognizing authorized shooters, up from 90 percent a couple years ago. The goal is 99.99 percent accuracy before the gun would be manufactured and sold commercially, Sebastian said. > > The gun is tested weekly by a group of university police at a local firing range and put through its paces under different firing conditions such as right-hand versus left-hand shooting, shooting from a kneeled position and shooting from behind a partition at a target. [PDF here](http://www.njit.edu/news/spotlight/2005/jan/smartgunphotos.pdf), with some pictures of the hardware. Quite interesting. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2012, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419/145 "2012-12-19T23:52:39Z")
> [@This\_Just\_In\_2](#): > > I had been at the mall - but left about an hour before the shooter arrived. However what really cuts even deeper is hearing about the 20 children being shot in their classroom. How does any parent not register fear at that thought. > Talk to me about the statistics and logic all you want, but people and parents have emotions man. Now isn’t the best time to be salivating at how cool the AR-15 is, or stating how this only affects those that are actually shot. Why did this monster chose to kill his mother? Why did this monster chose to go to a gun-free zone to kill more people? How do you solve a problem if you don’t know why it started? ---
**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:** [December 19, 2012, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419/146 "2012-12-19T23:56:47Z")
> [@Stealth\_Potato](#): > > An exaggeration, I’m sure, or else you’re not thinking through the likely consequences of condemning to death a very large group of well-armed people. :dubious: When the law changes, you can be law-abiding and surrender your guns, or you can keep them and be an outlaw. Your choice. I don’t think we should normalize Koreshian behavior. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419/147 "2012-12-20T00:00:23Z")
> [@foolsguinea](#): > > When the law changes, you can be law-abiding and surrender your guns, or you can keep them and be an outlaw. Your choice. > . \*When the law changes, you can be law-abiding and surrender your \*books, _or you can keep them and be an outlaw. Your choice._ ---
**Author:** ![Scumpup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce73a5/32.png) [@Scumpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scumpup)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419/148 "2012-12-20T00:02:11Z")
> [@foolsguinea](#): > > When the law changes, you can be law-abiding and surrender your guns, or you can keep them and be an outlaw. Your choice. > > I don’t think we should normalize Koreshian behavior. Scratch an anti and under the superficial layer of “compassion” you will very often find the most ruthless of authoritarians. You aren’t against killing. As you’ve made abundantly clear in this thread, there is no upper limit on the body count you find unacceptable. How many of those outlaws would you be willing to look in the face and kill personally? ---
**Author:** ![BrotherCadfael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@BrotherCadfael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrotherCadfael)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419/149 "2012-12-20T00:26:16Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > There were 4 million slaves in the US in 1860. Ten years later there were none. Slavery was constitutionally protected. Then we got the will to change it. Guns, too, can change. You might recall that it took fighting a war to bring about the change. If you really want to fight a war over _this_ issue, just remember – the other side has all the guns. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![This\_Just\_In\_2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@This\_Just\_In\_2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/This_Just_In_2)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419/150 "2012-12-20T00:36:04Z")
> [@BrotherCadfael](#): > > You might recall that it took fighting a war to bring about the change. > > If you really want to fight a war over _this_ issue, just remember – the other side has all the guns. 😃 All it takes is political will. If this tragedy is enough to move popular opinion enough to sway some Republican congressmen - we will have change. ---
**Author:** ![eztarget](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a698b9/32.png) [@eztarget](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eztarget)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419/151 "2012-12-20T00:40:16Z")
Got tired head trying to catch up on all the posts here. Here is an interesting read. All sources are listed although I did not verify them. Document is a few years old but check some of the stats out on countries that implemented bans, gun controls, and how that is working out for them. > **[Gun Facts | Gun Control Policy Insights](http://www.gunfacts.info/)** > > Gun Facts is an ongoing project to bring honesty into the debate about guns, violence and control. ---
**Author:** ![This\_Just\_In\_2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@This\_Just\_In\_2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/This_Just_In_2)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419/152 "2012-12-20T00:45:48Z")
> [@eztarget](#): > > Got tired head trying to catch up on all the posts here. Here is an interesting read. All sources are listed although I did not verify them. Document is a few years old but check some of the stats out on countries that implemented bans, gun controls, and how that is working out for them. > > [http://gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.1/gun\_facts\_6\_1\_screen.pdf](http://gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.1/gun_facts_6_1_screen.pdf) Your contribution to this thread is to state you can’t be bothered to read it but ask that we read a 100+ page document from a pro-gun website? gunfacts.info - yeah they are very objective in their material I’m sure. ---
**Author:** ![artemis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/91b2a8/32.png) [@artemis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/artemis)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419/153 "2012-12-20T00:50:56Z")
> [@jasg](#): > > Are there any figures on mis-fire or jam rates in ‘dumb’ weapons? With revolvers it’s essentially a non-issue; they don’t jam. (One of the revolver’s biggest advantages!) With semiautomatics it’s harder to say because there’s a user element involved. If a shooter doesn’t hold the gun tightly enough (called “limp-wristing”), a failure to feed or failure to eject jam may occur because some of the energy which should have gone into cycling the slide was diverted into shaking the gun around in the too-loose hands. And semiautomatics can be picky about ammo: you may see jams with Ammo Brand A but no jams with Ammo Brand B. Most folks I know won’t trust a semiauto for carry purposes until they have fired several hundred consecutive rounds of the ammunition brand they intend to use when carrying without experiencing a single jam of any sort. So one jam per 100 shots fired would disqualify that firearm as a reliable carry gun. ---
**Author:** ![eztarget](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a698b9/32.png) [@eztarget](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eztarget)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419/154 "2012-12-20T00:56:20Z")
> [@This\_Just\_In\_2](#): > > Your contribution to this thread is to state you can’t be bothered to read it but ask that we read a 100+ page document from a pro-gun website? gunfacts.info - yeah they are very objective in their material I’m sure. lol, good point. but their document is well layed out, and they actually put some effort into it rather than stating something like “lets put an RFID chip in a freaking firing pin”. sure, they are slanted - i don’t doubt that. read it and see for yourself. if you are pro gun control you won’t buy it but at least they list all their sources. ---
**Author:** ![eztarget](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a698b9/32.png) [@eztarget](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eztarget)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419/155 "2012-12-20T00:59:33Z")
did the new proposed gun ban mention suppressors? i was getting ready to buy one. ---
**Author:** ![artemis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/91b2a8/32.png) [@artemis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/artemis)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419/156 "2012-12-20T01:03:00Z")
> [@This\_Just\_In\_2](#): > > But why the resistance? Why not consider that having a consumer protection agency simply evaluate the guns for any possible faults wouldn’t be such a bad thing? There already are some safety standards in place. New handguns have to be drop-safe if they are going to be sold in the US, and the gun can’t explode under normal use, or slip into full automatic mode (just two examples). So truly faulty guns can’t be sold. And most pistols now have either a peephole or a loaded chamber indicator to make checking the status of gun easier (theoretically - you’re a dangerous fool if you actually rely on those things!), and some guns have a magazine safety which prevents the gun from being fired when the magazine is removed. (The magazine safety isn’t required in very state, though, and there’s some controversy in the gun world about how ell it works and if it causes as many problems as it solves.) ---
**Author:** ![Turble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8dc957/32.png) [@Turble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Turble)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419/157 "2012-12-20T02:02:20Z")
> [@This\_Just\_In\_2](#): > > Your contribution to this thread is to state you can’t be bothered to read it but ask that we read a 100+ page document from a pro-gun website? gunfacts.info - yeah they are very objective in their material I’m sure. I have read that document a few times and checked at least of a few dozen of their hundreds of cites – every one I checked was exactly as stated. The author frequently updates the document and actively solicits readers to notify him of anything they find that is incorrect. The document is indeed objective and very thoroughly cited. [http://gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.1/gun\_facts\_6\_1\_screen.pdf](http://gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.1/gun_facts_6_1_screen.pdf) ---
**Author:** ![eztarget](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a698b9/32.png) [@eztarget](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eztarget)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419/158 "2012-12-20T02:09:35Z")
> [@Turble](#): > > I have read that document a few times and checked at least of a few dozen of their hundreds of cites – every one I checked was exactly as stated. > > The author frequently updates the document and actively solicits readers to notify him of anything they find that is incorrect. > > The document is indeed objective and very thoroughly cited. > > [http://gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.1/gun\_facts\_6\_1\_screen.pdf](http://gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.1/gun_facts_6_1_screen.pdf) i challenge any of these gun control advocates to read it. it is eye opening. of course they don’t want to open their eyes. ---
**Author:** ![Bibliovore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7ba0ec/32.png) [@Bibliovore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bibliovore)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419/159 "2012-12-20T13:27:56Z")
> [@Absolute](#): > > As I have posted in other threads, the number of alcohol-related deaths in the US is actually somewhat higher than the number of gun-related deaths, despite broadly similar rates of alcohol consumption and gun ownership. Now, I know the two are not exactly analogous, so no need to derail this thread explaining that my analogy is totally wrong. I am simply bringing this up to make a point. > > For whatever reason you tolerate alcohol consumption, despite the fact that it is a purely recreational activity and causes untold harm, suffering, deaths, chronic diseases, ruined lives at the hands of drunk drivers, etc., that is the same reason we support guns. Because you can’t make life perfectly safe, and some freedoms are worth protecting. We could save thousands of lives each year in the US by passing laws that further restrict availability and consumption of alcohol. We choose not to, for the same reason we choose not to pass laws that further restrict the availability and ownership of guns. > > Now, I actually wouldn’t mind stricter laws on both gun ownership and alcohol. But I am simply trying to point out that the “pro-gun” position is not as psychopathic as you make it seem. > > If someone proposed laws that severely limited alcohol consumption, many people would likely say “Screw that, I’m a responsible alcohol user and I’ve never harmed anyone and never will, why should I give up my freedoms because of the actions of a bunch of irresponsible assholes?” That is exactly the gun owner’s reaction. > > The above is all related to gun deaths in general. On the topic of these rampages in particular, and my comments along the lines of “these things happen”: > > There are 300,000,000 guns in a country of 320,000,000 people. Yes, 500 deaths per year due to psychopaths going on killing rampages is terrible. It is also a very, very small number compared to the total number of people, and total number of guns. You are asking 100,000,000 (give or take) law-abiding people to sacrifice their rights, freedoms, and enjoyment because of the actions of maybe 10-20 people per year. > > Even considering all gun crime, this comes out to maybe 10,000 people per year, and many of these people are low-life scum and criminals anyway. Put the fuckers in jail, throw away the key, and regulate guns more strongly if you want (I am not opposed to stricter licensing, etc.), but why should I give up my right and my property because of a bunch of criminals? I personally don’t drink and I think the world would be a better place if others didn’t. However none of these massacres were committed by someone wielding a can of beer. Yes, alcohol-related deaths are a problem that should be tackled. Does that mean that gun-related deaths shouldn’t be tackled as well? Should we just say “Booze killed more people than guns, so I guess we shouldn’t do anything about the guns?” If not, then it’s utterly pointless to bring the subject of alcohol deaths or car deaths into this. The problem under discussion is deaths by firearms and how to reduce them. No, you can’t “make life perfectly safe” - when has anyone ever proposed that? How about we try to make it a little safer though? Yes, “some freedoms are worth protecting”, but at what point does the price get too high before you’re prepared to voluntarily curtail SOME of those freedoms in order to make your country a safer place? And no, I’m not saying that the “pro-gun” position is psychopathic - I absolutely believe guns should be allowed, just not all guns, and not by everyone. Let me make that point clear again - I’m not “asking law-abiding people to _sacrifice_ their rights, freedoms, and enjoyment” - I’m saying that if the status quo is so clearly fucked up, then it’s time to ask those law-abiding people to voluntarily limit SOME of their gun-related rights for the benefit of ALL. ---
**Author:** ![artemis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/91b2a8/32.png) [@artemis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/artemis)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2012, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419/160 "2012-12-20T13:38:04Z")
> [@Bibliovore](#): > > Let me make that point clear again - I’m not “asking law-abiding people to _sacrifice_ their rights, freedoms, and enjoyment” - I’m saying that if the status quo is so clearly fucked up, then it’s time to ask those law-abiding people to voluntarily limit SOME of their gun-related rights for the benefit of ALL. But will there in fact be any benefit? The type of crime people want to curtail (mass shootings) can be carried out by someone armed with pretty much any weapon more advanced than a muzzle-loader. I’m not sure banning particular types of guns will do much (as opposed to tighter screen of those wishing to purchase firearms, which might). But right now, some sort of gun ban seems to be all that anyone’s talking about. I’m not willing to curtail rights to no useful purpose. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-proposal-for-gun-control/644419.md?page=9)