# So what will it take for there to be serious gun control debate? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 4, 2019, 9:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166 "2019-08-04T09:51:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/221 "2019-08-06T17:01:02Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I see this as two different things. People choosing to not own guns is a personal choice and I don’t feel it will have any significant effect on the amount of gun crimes for the reason I mentioned above. People calling for a repeal of the Second Amendment is different; they’re asking for a change that will apply to everyone. That, in my opinion, is what’s needed to significantly reduce gun crimes. We need to be able to take guns away from the small minority of people who will use them to harm others - because those people will not willingly give up their guns. Obviously, I disagree. Not with your assessment of personal choice, but in its overall effect. Sure, a few people making a personal choice to own a gun (or to stop smoking or not drink and drive) is not going to have a very great effect. But if you have the majority of people who decide, not by fiat but decide for themselves that they don’t need or want a gun (or need or want to smoke, etc), then real change is possible…it’s even probable at that point. It’s actually happening in the real world wrt tobacco, at least in the US. And I think, to a degree, it’s happening with guns as well. Fewer people CHOOSE to own a gun per household than in the past. You can call for the repeal of the 2nd all you like (it would be a refreshing change from people trying to backdoor it by fiat), but until and unless a majority of Americans basically don’t want or feel they need a gun and don’t feel they need or want a protected right to keep or own one you just aren’t going to get real change. You’ll have a vocal minority pushing for bans or serious control by hook or by crook or by any means, slimy or otherwise to get it done while the majority basically don’t want that change and will resist, generally through their vote, to prevent it. You couldn’t have had the restrictions on tobacco we have today in the 50’s or even the 60’s or 70’s because people would have resisted it and opposed it. Yet today, it’s changed substantially. The same goes for gun control, IMHO…the general public isn’t ready, yet, for meaningful and substantial gun controls that would actually do anything other than look like we are doing something for the faithful and piss off the folks looking at them and going ‘WTF??’ as they either make no sense or are clearly slippery slopes. The public has to WANT those changes, and basically not want or feel they need guns. Until and unless those conditions are generally the attitude of the majority of citizens it’s just not going to happen…or if it does, the resistance and push back will be large, and it will probably end up having a backlash that pushes back gun control for decades. Sort of like the candy from a baby episode on the mythbusters. Try and take the candy from the baby and the baby fights you and throws a tantrum. Leave the baby alone, and sooner or later the baby loses interest in the candy and tosses it away. It’s a simplistic analogy, and not very relevant, but I think it shows the underlying concept…if people don’t want something, they won’t fight for it. If they do and you try and take it, they will. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/222 "2019-08-06T17:03:03Z")
> [@Kearsen1](#): > > I know this has been floated a few times but I don’t know what to do with this thought other than to point and laugh at it. > It’s a ridiculous notion. It’s a notion that’s supported by historical evidence. See the Mulford Act, and see the Cruikshank decision (and Code Noire). I guarantee you: arm people of color, give them concealed weapon and open carry privileges, and you’ll see gun control. Nothing scares white men like seeing black and brown men having the ability to turn the barrel of the gun around. Wait for it, wait for it…cue remarks about how black and brown people should spend less time killing each other. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/223 "2019-08-06T17:05:22Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > … Gun rights activists keep decrying an increasingly broad and diverse set of proposals; they keep covering their eyes and ears, and they’re completely fucking oblivious to the fact that it’s their refusal to budge an inch that is leading more and more voters - many of whom wouldn’t have even fathomed supporting firearms restrictions 10-15 years ago - to reconsider their positions. … You and I must be looking at different polls, because I mostly see the anti-RKBA side getting it’s ass kicked in the public opinion polls. In 1996, 57% of those [polled by Gallup](https://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx) were “for” “a law which would make it illegal to manufacture, sell or possess semi-automatic guns known as assault rifles” and 42% were “against”. Last year, public opinion had essentially reversed itself with 40% “for” and 57% “against”. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/224 "2019-08-06T17:08:16Z")
> [@Kearsen1](#): > > Guns are NOT the disease you seem to think they are. Hell, they aren’t even a symptom. Research has shown that those statements are not accurate. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/225 "2019-08-06T17:09:28Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Buying a gun across state lines is already illegal, and in fact they cant sell to you unless you have ID which shows you reside in that state. So how are more gun laws going to help? Other gun laws, nationwide gun laws, would be effectively enforceable where local gun laws are not. > [@](#): > > Well, those guns are already illegal. No they’re not. Any semi automatic rifle with a large magazine can fire over 30 shots in 30 seconds. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/226 "2019-08-06T17:09:45Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > It’s a notion that’s supported by historical evidence. See the Mulford Act, and see the Cruikshank decision (and Code Noire). > > I guarantee you: arm people of color, give them concealed weapon and open carry privileges, and you’ll see gun control. Nothing scares white men like seeing black and brown men having the ability to turn the barrel of the gun around. > > Wait for it, wait for it…cue remarks about how black and brown people should spend less time killing each other. I’m all for more non-prohibited-person black and brown people owning guns, mostly because I think it’ll effectively tamp down on the dems’ constant mewling for more gun control. ---
**Author:** ![drachillix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/48db29/32.png) [@drachillix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drachillix)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/227 "2019-08-06T17:11:51Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > And tax the bejeezus out of guns so society can cover the costs. Like, a pistol should cost $500,000 or so. i’m having trouble locating the case using my phone but there is a case that creating unreasonable encumbrances to a right effectively violates it. It also tends to impact marginalized populations harder. ---
**Author:** ![Lamoral](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lamoral/32/16078_2.png) [@Lamoral](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamoral)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/228 "2019-08-06T17:17:43Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > I guarantee you: arm people of color, give them concealed weapon and open carry privileges, and you’ll see gun control. Nothing scares white men like seeing black and brown men having the ability to turn the barrel of the gun around. 😕 they already have those rights, and I don’t see white conservatives pushing for gun control. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/229 "2019-08-06T17:19:23Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > BTW, can we agree that local gun control is simply worthless nonsense? … Yes. And so is nationwide. I mean, then the excuse will be “well the guns are coming from over the borders”. Gun control simply doesnt work- it can’t work to reduce mass killings. It could, maybe reduce violent crime a bit. Mass killings here in the USA aren’t caused by guns- we have had lots of guns since 1776. They are caused by the media glorifying the killers. Noted sociologists have done many studies (which I have linked to previously) that show it’s the media that is pushing the recent increase in mass shootings. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/230 "2019-08-06T17:20:24Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > You’re not entitled to afford a gun; you’re just entitled to possess one if you can afford it, no different from any other piece of property… You’re not entitled to afford a book; you’re just entitled to possess one if you can afford it, no different from any other piece of property. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/231 "2019-08-06T17:22:17Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > You’re not entitled to afford a book; you’re just entitled to possess one if you can afford it, no different from any other piece of property. Same with voting. We could tax people to vote if encumbering a constitutional right with high fees is now acceptable. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/232 "2019-08-06T17:23:36Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > Is this really the argument you want to try and defend? Equating guns with books? > > … > > a) A gun buyback program would mean anyone wanting to sell a gun could do so legally, removing the need to sell to someone else. > > b) Register every gun. … > > You need to get fingerprinted to work in some finance jobs, FFS. It’s equating one constitutional right with another. Sure, and they have them every so often in most cities. They bring in a bunch of old crap, and some guns where the owner inherited them and didnt know how to get rid of them, etc. Nothing wrong with a voluntary buy back. Go for it. How are you gonna register 300 Million guns? Yes, and so? ---
**Author:** ![sps49sd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@sps49sd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sps49sd)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/233 "2019-08-06T17:24:25Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > If you don’t want murder and terror, then what are you doing about it? Pwning the libs on a messageboard when they try to have a discussion isn’t really helping. When you find delight and amusement in the frustration of someone trying to prevent death and violence is pretty gratuitously offensive too. > > Actions speak louder than words, and given that it has been expressed in this very thread that a gun ban involves bloodshed, then implying that the only reason that we want to try to reduce deaths is to take away their guns is the same as claiming that we want to kill them. > > There are some people here and there who advocate for a full ban, and those are used as an excuse to claim that we are lying about our intentions. There really are gun nuts out there that really do use their guns to kill and maim people, how generous should I be in determining the motives of those who demand we do nothing? Do nothing? No, penalize criminals, murderers, robbers; all assailants who use firearms in the commission of their crimes. Depriving everyone of their rights because someone else might commit a crime is against what this country should stand for. ---
**Author:** ![drachillix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/48db29/32.png) [@drachillix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drachillix)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/234 "2019-08-06T17:25:44Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > I guarantee you: arm people of color, give them concealed weapon and open carry privileges, and you’ll see gun control. Nothing scares white men like seeing black and brown men having the ability to turn the barrel of the gun around. Pretty much any major city can serve as a cite. PoC are not lacking firearms. they just mostly use them on each other. ---
**Author:** ![Jasmine](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jasmine/32/2964_2.png) [@Jasmine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jasmine)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/235 "2019-08-06T17:27:11Z")
I don’t know but, apparently, whole sale slaughter of innocent men women and children isn’t enough. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/236 "2019-08-06T17:28:11Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > California falls _exactly in the middle_ of state by state homicide rates. > > New Hampshire, however, has the very lowest homicide rate and rates a F (which means lax gun laws) from Giffords: > > [https://lawcenter.giffords.org/scorecard/](https://lawcenter.giffords.org/scorecard/) > > North Dakota has the 2nd lowest rate and also gets a F. Maine has the 3rd lowest rate- and gets a F. Idaho has the 4th lowest - and gets a ? What? Bueller? Bueller? Yes, a F. I could go on, but your cherrypicking was pretty bogus. > > But yes, CA likely has the strongest gun control laws- which didnt stop the Gilroy incident. > [@DrDeth](#): > > Indeed, that was my reply. BA’s post gave stats out of context which gave a incorrect conclusion. Actually, overall, the states with the lowest homicides rates also have very little gun control. CA actually has a homicide rate exactly in the middle, not low at all. The problem with these stats is that they ignore extraneous factors. 1. As others have pointed out it is difficult for a single state or city’s gun laws to be effective when there are lax gun laws in neighboring states and no way to prevent guns crossing state lines. This is why any gun control legislation needs to be enacted nation wide. 2. There are differences in overall crime rates between states that have nothing to do with gun laws. In particular population density is correlated with crime. So straight up comparison the gun crime rate of a rural state with a that of an urban state without taking that into account will be fundamentally flawed. This flaw is exacerbated by… 3. Having a high rate of gun homicide is leads to the enacting of gun laws, not the other way around. I see all the time statistics that say “Chicago has the strongest gun laws but also the highest gun death rate, That proves they just need more good guys with guns Hur Hur”. But saying this makes a much sense as saying Chemotherapy is counter productive in fighting Cancer because a much larger proportion of people undergoing Chemotherapy die of cancer than so die among the general population who don’t take chemotherapy. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/237 "2019-08-06T17:28:26Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > Historically, gun control becomes more popular when more people of color possess guns. Maybe that’s what it will take: people of color so scared of, so fed up with, taking shit from white male racists that they make it clear they are not to be fucked with anymore. That will scare the shit out of whites, and even moderates will probably want some form of gun control then. This is totally false, and a meme that was spread to equate guns with racism, as if blacks , asians and hispanics dont own guns. Which is pretty racist. Yes, in CA, during the Reagan era, the Black Panthers discovered CA had a obscure and not used open carry provision. They open carried their guns. This caused CA to ban open carry. But it didnt have to be the Black Panthers, it could have been the KKK- it was just that the legislature didnt realize CA had a sort of open carry, since it hadnt been a issue until then. Nothing to do with racism, everything to do with a scary group finding a loophole and the legislature closing it. ---
**Author:** ![Lamoral](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lamoral/32/16078_2.png) [@Lamoral](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamoral)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/238 "2019-08-06T17:28:57Z")
> [@drachillix](#): > > Pretty much any major city can serve as a cite. PoC are not lacking firearms. they just mostly use them on each other. :smack::smack::smack: Asahi literally said in that very post: > [@](#): > > Wait for it, wait for it…cue remarks about how black and brown people should spend less time killing each other. It’s a red herring anyway. PoC have the legal right to buy guns, to carry guns, open or concealed, legally, and they’re already doing it now and have been for years, and I don’t see conservatives being sufficiently intimidated by it to advocate gun control. ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/239 "2019-08-06T17:29:38Z")
> [@sps49sd](#): > > Do nothing? No, penalize criminals, murderers, robbers; all assailants who use firearms in the commission of their crimes. > > Depriving everyone of their rights because someone else might commit a crime is against what this country should stand for. Standing there shrugging our shoulders while our fellow citizens are slaughtered senselessly again and again and again is not what this country should stand for either. ---
**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:** [August 6, 2019, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/240 "2019-08-06T17:29:43Z")
> [@sps49sd](#): > > Do nothing? No, penalize criminals, murderers, robbers; all assailants who use firearms in the commission of their crimes. Do you have any suggestions that involve prevention? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166.md?page=13)