Having laid low, the N.R.A. is fully prepped and rehearsed to control legislation. As usual.

[elucidator]

Absitively, posolutely! Guns help protect us from crazy ass mofos armed with baseball bats! Not so great against C.A.M.s armed with military style weapons, sure, but up against a baseball bat, a cudgel, stick or shillelagh, nothing better than a good old fashioned equalizer! Or some guy coming up at you with a strangling cord, bang! no more threat! Shoot him, take the cord and use it to tag a toe.

Or a knife, same thing, shoot twice in that instance because of the threat level, remove the knife from the cooling dead hand, problem solved. Or a banana, once should do it, take the banana, eat the banana, and you have not only neutralized the perp, but disarmed him as well! Badda-boom, badda bang bang bang bang!

Clearly, if the problem is people, a gun is the best solution.

[MsWhatsit]

@Bricker

But that’s simply how you would class them. I disagree. Guns are also useful items that contribute to the public good, in my view.

A train provides transportation. A building provides shelter.

A gun provides entertainment value and perhaps a feeling of safety to hobbyists and enthusiasts. This is no more in the interest of the public good than baseball bats or fishing rods are.

[Absolute]

@MsWhatsit

A train provides transportation. A building provides shelter.

A gun provides entertainment value and perhaps a feeling of safety to hobbyists and enthusiasts. This is no more in the interest of the public good than baseball bats or fishing rods are.

You know, you’re absolutely right, we should ban baseball bats then, since they’re only useful for recreation, and they’re dangerous in the wrong hands.

[Fear_Itself]

@Absolute

You know, you’re absolutely right, we should ban baseball bats then, since they’re only useful for recreation, and they’re dangerous in the wrong hands.

So why do you need a gun if you have a baseball bat?

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Bricker

Why is their dissimilarity so important? In this matter, why aren’t we focusing on their similarity: to wit, their role in making suicides easy?

In other words, you appear to advance the argument that because guns facilitate suicide, we should accept some sort of regulation of them. I point out trains (and now add tall buildings) as equally atttractive to would-be suiciders. You dismiss them because they aren’t guns. True, they aren’t – but since the rationale you advance is their role in suicides, why is their difference from guns so dispositive?

This is demonstrably incorrect, since there are between 300 and 500 train suicides per year in the US, versus approximately 15,000 firearms suicides per year in the US.

Clearly, in the US guns are more attractive as a method of suicide than trains.

[VinylTurnip]

@Fear_Itself

So why do you need a gun if you have a baseball bat?

And what if the pitcher intentionally beans you? Are you saying baseball players don’t have a right to defend themselves?

[Fear_Itself]

@VinylTurnip

And what if the pitcher intentionally beans you? Are you saying baseball players don’t have a right to defend themselves?

I oppose the sale of semi-automatic baseball bats.

[Hamlet]

@Bricker

And by the way – does a person have a right to commit suicide, or not?

I don’t see that right listed in the Constitution, so I’ll go with no. Am I right?

[MsWhatsit]

@Absolute

You know, you’re absolutely right, we should ban baseball bats then, since they’re only useful for recreation, and they’re dangerous in the wrong hands.

When baseball bat violence becomes the cause of thousands of deaths and the not-that-occasional mass murder of Americans, let’s get a proposal on the table.

[MsWhatsit]

@Hentor_the_Barbarian

This is demonstrably incorrect, since there are between 300 and 500 train suicides per year in the US, versus approximately 15,000 firearms suicides per year in the US.

Clearly, in the US guns are more attractive as a method of suicide than trains.

Guns are sure as hell more accessible than trains. Do you even KNOW how hard it is to get light rail built in a city these days?

[elucidator]

Got one right here. I might avail myself, someday, but the results of leaping in front of an oncoming train can be kinda…messy. At my funeral, I would much prefer flocks of women crying and weeping, rather than dashing outside to puke behind a tree. Solemn dignity, you understand.

I mean, what the heck, I’m halfway there already! Put me down for suicide by extreme old age!

[Czarcasm]

@MsWhatsit

When baseball bat violence becomes the cause of thousands of deaths and the not-that-occasional mass murder of Americans, let’s get a proposal on the table.

Are you kidding? Face off against Major League Baseball?

[Bricker]

@MsWhatsit

A train provides transportation. A building provides shelter.

A gun provides entertainment value and perhaps a feeling of safety to hobbyists and enthusiasts. This is no more in the interest of the public good than baseball bats or fishing rods are.

Not a complete statement. A gun also provides actual safety, rather than just a “feeling” of safety.

[Bricker]

@Hamlet

I don’t see that right listed in the Constitution, so I’ll go with no. Am I right?

Me, too, but many on the Left seem to disagree.

[Bricker]

@Hentor_the_Barbarian

This is demonstrably incorrect, since there are between 300 and 500 train suicides per year in the US, versus approximately 15,000 firearms suicides per year in the US.

Clearly, in the US guns are more attractive as a method of suicide than trains.

No – we just don’t have many trains.

[Czarcasm]

@Bricker

No – we just don’t have many trains.

Which is cheaper, easier and faster-finding a train track, or buying a gun?

[Bricker]

@Czarcasm

Which is cheaper, easier and faster-finding a train track, or buying a gun?

Depends on where you are.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Bricker

No – we just don’t have many trains.

Then please clarify what you mean by asserting that trains are equally attractive to would be suicides. How do you determine this? Why does a 30 fold greater rate of one method over another not demonstrate “attractiveness”?

Isn’t easy accessibility a quality that makes something attractive?

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

Why bother with a train? Jump in front of a car.

[Czarcasm]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

Why bother with a train? Jump in front of a car.

Perhaps the media is to blame for that. I’ve seen numerous incidents on television and in the movies where people get hit by cars and survive(some even keep on running), but not too many where someone survives getting hit by a train.