That’s what all the people those things happened to thought as well.
There’s a pretty significant difference between “Gun owners who don’t care”, “Gun owners who want to appear to care but are sloppy about their precautions”, and “Gun owners who care and are stringent about their precautions”.
I imagine 99% of the victims of the things you’re discussing are about people from the first two groups, and that most gun owners on the SDMB and their friends are in the last group. I don’t tend to hang out with people who have unsecured firearms, as a firearm owner, and I suspect the majority of the gun owners on here are the same way.
– Zeriel, whose one shotgun is behind two locks, all of the keys to which are in his pocket or in his nightstand at all times. When I have kids, we switch to combination locks since you can’t steal combination lock keys out of dad’s nightstand.
I believe you, as the SDMB tends to attract and hold a population overall much more sensible than the teeming millions beyond our fane. But it then follows that there is a not insignificant percentage of gun owners who don’t measure up to the standards you and your fellow SDMB gun owners set for yourselves and your circle of acquaintance. It’s those folks that worry us non-gun-owner types.
They worry me too, to be frank, I’m just not sure what the best way to go about things are–I’m on the record on other forums as favoring a much more strict training/licensing requirement while keeping it as affordable as driver’s licensing, I think I’d even given an analogy of driver’s license = long rifle/shotgun (typical sporting/recreational stuff anyone should be able to have), motorcycle license = handgun (more training required, as it’s significantly easier to hurt yourself or others), heavier stuff (assault rifles, burstfire/full-auto weapons) as a CDL/Pilot’s License (very dangerous, hard and costly to license as a hobbyist and therefore unlikely to attract abuse (I think there’s been one case since 1938 where a legally registered machine gun was used in a crime), but probably worth it for some people).
I do know that there needs to be a balance between people’s right/desire to carry their firearms and own firearms for recreational, hobby, and defensive purposes, and society’s interest in seeing those firearms used and stored appropriately and safely.
Now, that sounds very sensible, and I would be delighted to see some such scheme put in place. It wouldn’t, of course, entirely solve the various problems that guns in our society pose, but it would be helpful.
I should probably point out here that, while I’m not a gun owner, I have fired a handgun a few times when a friend brought me to a shooting range, and found it enjoyable. On one such occasion, the man in charge of the range showed us his old (antique?) wood-stocked rifle, a firearm I found to be a thing of simple elegant beauty. I’m not opposed to gun ownership per se; I’d simply like to see it intelligently regulated, and the step process you outline makes a good deal of sense.
It is. qv John Locke’s second treatise on government.
Of course they are. How clear are you on set theory and its application to social systems?
That’s a bizarre misunderstanding of the utility of statistics, and I’m not even sure where to begin addressing it.
Daniel
When they gave up their guns at the outskirts ,the town was very safe.
Oh, I agree the police should have a responsibility to protect individual citizens, especially if it’s a locality that infringes the right of the people to protect themselves. It’s inconceivable that they’d take taxpayer money to keep taxpayers from protecting themselves and then turn around and deny any duty to protect a taxpayer, right?
Cops rarely use their guns. A lot of cops never pull one out during their entire careers. They have been trained to go into a situation,analyze it and find a peaceful, way out. If you want to carry a gun because you can pretend you are playing a cop,get the training. Then I will be more likely to agree you should carry. These dingbats running around with guns in their pockets are not trained. They are just someone who wanted one and could afford it.
Plaxico is a typical gun owner.
I ask again whether you’re clear on set theory and its application to social systems. I feel kind of like I’m talking with my sister when she saw Rosecrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead and concluded that probability was a meaningless branch of mathematics.
Daniel
I assume if I was clear on it, I’d be quaking in my boots at the strength of the argument you dare only to hint at making.
As it is, I expect you’ll restate of some of the things I’ve already said in a precise jargon. Have at it, if it pleases you.
The difference between you and gun advocates who are worth talking to is that those folks are interested in listening. It’d clearly waste my time to continue the discussion; thanks for making that clear.
Daniel
I’d be interested in your discussion on the point, if my lack of familiarity with the “application to social systems” part isn’t an obstacle.
What frightens me is the people who think ANY licensing or regulation for ANY gun is an intolerable infringement on their rights. As though the 2nd Amendment were more important than the 1st, which has reasonable regulations (“Fire in a crowded theatre”) that no one complains about.
There’s a fear among a class of gun owners that any licensing or regulation is a precursor to removing all gun rights by starting with a reasonable excuse to get a list of all gun owners and firearms. Unfortunately, there are left-wingers in this country who would and have used those kinds of tactics, and it’s poisoned the well a bit from the gun owner side of things.
Well, dammit, Zeriel, we’re just going to have to do a sensibility transfusion into our respective sides of gun ownership, then. I’m already a blood donor; how hard would it be to extend the concept? 
Me too, if you’d be willing to explain in terms that a nonmathematician could have a shot at grasping.
You’re welcome, but I was motivated to give you a graceful/righteous way to bow out mostly by a desire to not have you waste my time. Neener.
I am curious to read how you’d put it, and it seems several other people want to hear it as well.
Very safe huh? Cite please?
Don’t hold your breath.
See, that’s the problem here. The real problem. Gun owners can’t give a reasonable inch, because someone is there to take a mile. I wish we could have honest discussions with gun control proponents. But… some are as bad as creationists, as far as slipping, sliding, and lying blatantly is concerned.
So how can you have a honest discussion about a fundamental right, when there are people out there who do want to simply remove it, and are dishonest about that fact?