"If I only had a gun": 20/20 on ABC Fri

Great Debates
221

Okay

I’ll play this retarded usage game.

Lets assume 80 million people who own one or more guns. They fire an average of a hundred shots a year. 800 people a year die accidentaly from gunshots. The probability of death per bullet is therefore 0.00000001

Let assume 240 million people drive a car each day. Two trips per day, 200 driving days per year. 30,000 fatalities per year. 0.00000031 chance of death per trip.

So, basically, when somebody pulls out their keys, they are 30 times more likely to accidentaly kill someone than when someone puts a bullet in the chamber.

I know when my grandmother pulled out her car keys I ran screaming in terror fearing for my life!

Given that guns are designed to kill people and cars are not, Ford Pinto not withstanding, guns seem pretty damn safe to me.

But I repeat, this per usage thing is IMO retarded.

Whats next ? Miles traveled per death vs the distance a bullet travels per death? Will vehicle distance be measure in kilometers and bullets in millimeters or what?

222

100 shots a year? We got members that probably shoot that many every day. But how many are at a person. Target practice really does not count in accidental shooting. But I suppose even that activity gets people killed occasionally.

223

You got better stats or better thinking/logic for that matter?

To repeat, the per usage angle is lame and meaningless, but you guys asked for it and I gave it to you.

I also noticed the crickets started chirping once I calculated a pulled out car key was 30 times more dangerous than a bullet being loaded.

What, now we gotta make up the lame arguments for your side and then debunk them as well? I certainly aint gonna do all the work for you guys.

Arent you anti gun guys gonna bring anything to the party other than “guns are bad…mmmkay”?

224

Yup, us “anti-gun guys” sure are quick with the blanket condemnations and strawman arguments, aren’t we?
Just as a point of interest, how many posts in this thread basically say something to the effect of “guns are bad…mmmkay”, and could you please point them out to us.
Thank you.

225

An object cannot be “bad”, mmmkay? But its nature is inherent in its design and purpose. A weapon is not a hammer, for building a house. It is not a CD player, for playing Bach. it is not a book, to express thought and information. It is a weapon, it’s intent, its design, is violent. As I abhor violence, I abhor weapons. It can also be as well used for creating fear, fear of violence, and as I loathe fear, I loathe weapons.

But gasp! What of target-shooting, what about hunting? Don’t much like punching holes in furry creatures who would prefer I didn’t. Since I very much doubt a paper target cares one way or the other, I’m pretty neutral on that, maybe even a bit positive. But in those instances, it is not a weapon nearly so much.

Well, what of self defense? Who is so craven and weak that they will not defend themselves and their family? Why, my goodness, we have over 5,000 instances per day of guns being used in self-defense, its only a peculiarity of circumstance that these uses leave no actual evidence of having occurred. Why, I must have and carry a weapon to protect myself from my fellow citizens, who plot every waking moment to injure me and my family.

You’ve already injured yourself. You live in fear, your weapon does not protect you from that fear, your weapon is that fear, it is a talisman and an amulet of that fear, it is a testimony to your fearful faith, as a crucifix is to a Catholic, a Davidic Star for a Jew. You are already a victim, a victim of fear. Fear rots the mind, weakens the spirit and corrodes the bonds between us all, the bonds that make us people, and citizens.

Am I never afraid? Of course I am, it comes with the navel. But I strive to overcome, to ignore, and to trust. If circumstances arise where I must have a weapon, where I must use a weapon, then I will, with reluctance and loathing, and I will put it down the very first second that I can.

226

That dime store psychology is comically off base. It may be the case for some people, but to paint everyone with such a large brush is wishful thinking and arrogant. “They believe differently from me, it must eminate from a personal inadequacy or weakness, which I, being an awesome badass of greatness, do not have”.

Do people who own fire extinguishers live in constant fear of fires? Does it define their existance and make them a victim, a meek person desperately clinging onto their extinguisher to alleviate their fear like a magical fire protecting talisman?

Your need to constantly ascribe childish motivations to those who feel differently from you about this issue says more about you than it does about them.

227

As your urgent desire to paint a weapon as a protective device speaks about you. A gun is comparable to a fire extinguisher? Who are you kidding? Seen any stories lately about a man going insane, and killing his family and himself with a fire extinguisher?

Hey, you want conceal and carry for fire extinguishers, well, go for it, Junior Fire Chief! With my blessings and whole-hearted approval!

228

This is both a straw man and a non-sequitor.

You make an assertion about the motivations of people who keep guns with the intention of using them as defensive tools. I respond to that assertion. You say “…your urgent desire to paint a weapon as a protective device…” - how is responding to a line of argument you just made “urgent”?

A weapon can be used as a protective device. It can be used for nefarious purposes too. You specifically attempted to explain the motivation of people who keep guns as a protective device. I responded to that. Now you’re attempting to create a straw man - that I was arguing that guns could never be used to murder or harm. It was completely out of the scope to my response to your specific argument, and obviously disingenuous.

And yes, a gun is comparable to a fire extinguisher in the sense that it may be of use to you some day in a crisis. The situation will probably not arise for most people, but having it available should you need it is not evidence that you are cowering in fear at all times and a gun is an emotional crutch any more than owning a fire extinguisher is.

And saying that my desire to consider a weapon as a means of personal protection speaks negatively about my character is just comically bizarre. I’ve come to enjoy your presence in these debates, you typically do more damage to your side than if you sat them out.

229

Well, if that were the case, wouldn’t you sit in contented silence? And yet, you feel the need to rebut?

And I think you are misguided and misguiding in your use of the word “motivation”. I don’t doubt the motivation, the motivation is to protect, there is nothing wrong with that. But the motivation is based on fear, a fear that is largely the product of a culture obsessed with violence. The reasoning that supports that motivation is invalid. However benign the motivation may be, it is based on a false assumption of need.

I preach to persons of good character, I assume their motivatons are good, I point out the false premises relied upon. I assume that, its entirely pointless to preach to men of evil intent, they only scoff. I can only seek to change the minds of good and reasonable men, the unreasoning mind is quite beyond my meagre powers.

230

Hard habit to break.

Yeah, I had someone spout “culture of fear!” at me after they saw a Michael Moore movie and they felt clever about it. Been here.

I’m curious - are there cultures that aren’t obsessed with violence? If not, what are the motivations of people who own weapons for protection?

Do people who own baseball bats or knives for personal protection similarly only do so due to a culture obsessed with violence?

What about people who take self defense classes or study martial arts?

So your goal here is to discourage gun ownership among persons of good character with good motivations, knowing it will have no effect on those with evil intent?

Well, that is pretty consistent with most gun control advocacy.

231

A devastating data point. Michael Moore says something similar? Boy, that really crushes my whole argument, doesn’t it? Good thing you were too smart to fall for it, huh? (Gosh, sure hope he doesn’t find out that Hitler favored gun control, then I’d really be buggered, for sure and for certain!)

Well, there used to be the Amish, but they were all murdered in their beds…

We covered this.

Excuse please, but…huh? What? In all sincerity, I have no idea what point you are trying to make here.

You probably don’t know, but I am a master of Cringing Mantis Kung Fu! But, OK, what about them? I’ve no doubt you’re laboring to a point here, but it eludes capture.

Yep, you got me, I’m hoping to make the good people helpless so evil men can plunder at will. Damn! You’re just too smart for me, saw right through the charade.

232

10 Kewl Kid points for bring* xkcd *into this, however. Credit where credit due, and all that.

233

I wasn’t saying your point was invalid by association, but that this whole “culture of fear!” thing seems to have sprung up from that and it’s pretty irritating.

So then to be clear, do you think all cultures, aside from the Amish, were/are obsessed with violence?

I meant to ask - if there were a culture that wasn’t obsessed with violence, what would the motivation be for people who choose to have a weapon for protection? But you seem to be implying now that (nearly) every culture is obsessed with violence, making that distinction unnecesary.

You keep switching between the generic “weapon” and gun. I’m asking if you think that people who own non-gun weapons are also consumed by fear in the same way that people own guns are, or if guns are a special category.

Your stated premise seems to be that you were attempting to influence “persons of good character”, which seems to be the group you should be least concerned with.

234

And you don’t see the irony that your own position is equally based on fear…and an irrational fear at that? It’s hilarious that you say ‘The reasoning that supports that motivation is invalid. However benign the motivation may be, it is based on a false assumption of need’…and it’s fairly ironic that this actually fits better with YOUR position than it does with the folks who want a weapon to protect themselves.

But when we are talking about the kinds of fear displayed in this thread (fear of guns, fear of those who own guns, fear of psychos who may get a gun, etc etc), the numbers are meaningless…it’s like trying to talk to a person who is afraid to get on an air plane…while blithely driving to work each day chatting on their cell phone with their seat belt off and their air bag disabled.

-XT

235

You clearly state that my position is irrational, but don’t tell me why. Perhaps when you have more time, and not so busy chuckling…

236

I could while away the hours, blastin tops off flowers
Reloadin’ in the sun.
And my barr’l I’d be cleanin’ while
‘gainst Congress I’d be keenin’
If I only had a gun.

237

I’m sorry…I assumed you were following along with the thread, not just randomly jumping in to give your pearls of wisdom to an eager if unruly crowd.

It’s irrational because the probability of being killed by a gun is so low…far out of proportion to the actual danger. Even if we count murders (which may or may not have happened if normal citizens were barred from gun ownership) and suicides (most of which would probably have happened anyway, just using different methods) along with the deaths due to accidental discharge (which are minuscule, especially given the vast numbers of guns in private hands in the US) we are talking about less than 30,000 deaths a year (and this includes the random psycho shooting up a school)…in a population of several hundred MILLION.

So…it’s ironic that you would bring up ‘fear’ when it’s YOUR side that seems to be the one’s being controlled by that emotion…and who most USES that emotion to try and push through your agenda (for further irony there is the fact that the gun grabbers are using Bush et al’s tactics to try and push through an agenda). It’s irrational because the numbers don’t justify the position, dont’ justify the fear of the gun banning crowd.

Now…let me get back to some serious drinking and chuckling…

-XT

238

That is exactly the music going through my head every time I see this thread pop up…

-XT

239

In any society that ever existed before the sixteenth century, you would be a slave.

240

You may be underestimating the timeline. I’d have enslaved him anywhere up through the 1970s.