# 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:** 14
**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, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/261 "2019-08-06T17:46:29Z")
> [@sps49sd](#): > > You can’t engage in a discussion? I require a certain level of, let’s call it… reasonableness… in order to have a discussion. The good Dr is flat out stating that policies that effectively reduce homicides and mass killings in dozens of other countries “don’t work”. I’m not discussing that, it is pointless to discuss things with people that don’t accept reality. ---
**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, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/262 "2019-08-06T17:46:32Z")
> [@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. > > … What makes you think that “people of color” dont already have concealed weapon and open carry privileges? _They do._ Thinking they dont is pretty racist. The Mulford act had nothing to do with racism. ---
**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, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/263 "2019-08-06T17:47:04Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > Or they just shoot people from a hotel window instead of ground level. If that POS had had to worry about counterfire, he would have been more concerned about cover and less about aiming. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/264 "2019-08-06T17:47:13Z")
> [@sps49sd](#): > > Militia is a reason, not a requirement The amendment says otherwise. > [@](#): > > and weapons have advanced since the military style flintlock musket. Then let’s not hear from you about the intent of the Framers, okay? > [@](#): > > If my life (or others’ in certain circumstances) is under immediate threat by that someone. Or if you can convince yourself of that, and I suspect it doesn’t take much. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/265 "2019-08-06T17:47:49Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Then show us how it’s wrong. You don’t want to be shown it’s wrong; that would undermine your illusory sense of moral superiority > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Would you at least admit that they hold possessing the means to kill in far greater regard than other people’s right to _life_? Just who is violating those peoples’ rights? Millions of gun owners who don’t want to be punished for what someone else did, and thus (in your eyes) are collectively responsible for stubbornly blocking a simple(not), easy(not) solution(doubtful)? Or-maybe… the evil bastard who actually killed them? > [@](#): > > Can we further agree that that is psychopathic? No. > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > So we gain McConnell’s soul just by \*outbidding \*the NRA? > > Hmm, maybe you got a point there. You do know that it’s the _ **votes** _ of millions of gun owners which congresscritters pay attention to? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/266 "2019-08-06T17:48:18Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > But what’s most important is that gun control simply has never worked in the uSA. :dubious: also. > **[Gun Control Is as Old as the Old West](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/gun-control-old-west-180968013/)** > > Contrary to the popular imagination, bearing arms on the frontier was a heavily regulated business > [@](#): > > Historian Robert Dykstra focused on established cattle towns, recording homicides after a full season of cattle shipments had already passed and by which time they’d have typically passed firearm law. He found a combined 45 murders from 1870-1885 in Kansas’ five largest cattle towns by the 1880 census: Wichita (population: 4,911), Abilene (2,360) Caldwell (1,005), Ellsworth (929), and Dodge City (996). > > Averaged out, there were 0.6 murders per town, per year. The worst years were Ellsworth, 1873, and Dodge City, 1876, with five killings each; because of their small populations, their FBI homicide rates would be high. Another historian, Rick Shenkman, found Tombstone’s (1880 pop: 3,423) most violent year was 1881, in which also only five people were killed; three were the cowboys shot by Earp’s men at the OK Corral. > > As Dykstra wrote, frontier towns by and large prohibited the “carrying of dangerous weapons of any type, concealed or otherwise, by persons other than law enforcement officers.” Most established towns that restricted weapons had few, if any, killings in a given year. > > The settlements that came closest to unchecked carry were the railroad and mining boom towns that tended to lack effective law enforcement, a functioning judicial system, and firearm law, says Aron, and it reflected in higher levels of violence. Like Bodie, California, which was well-known during the 1870s and 1880s for vigilantism and street violence. ---
**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, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/267 "2019-08-06T17:49:53Z")
> [@sps49sd](#): > > If that POS had had to worry about counterfire, he would have been more concerned about cover and less about aiming. Counterfire from what, a pistol? Or do you expect people to attend concerts armed with hunting rifles? ---
**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, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/268 "2019-08-06T17:50:27Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > The amendment says otherwise. … Not according to the people whose opinion on the subject matters: > [@](#): > > [The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf) ---
**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, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/269 "2019-08-06T17:50:48Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > Other gun laws, nationwide gun laws, would be effectively enforceable where local gun laws are not. > > No they’re not. Any semi automatic rifle with a large magazine can fire over 30 shots in 30 seconds. That’s not what you said _“I’d like to make all guns illegal that allow, among other things, one to kill or maim 30 or more people in 30 seconds, yes.”_ Firing rapidly is not the same as \*killing \*rapidly. As for firing rapidly- So can a bolt action or a lever action. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2019, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/270 "2019-08-06T17:53:52Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > You don’t want to be shown it’s wrong; that would undermine your illusory sense of moral superiority Unfortunately, \*civilization \*decrees that the right to life is at or near the top of the list of rights, while the right to kill is, well, not. > [@](#): > > Just who is violating those peoples’ rights? Every Law-Abiding Citizen who suddenly stops being one. Who do you think shot all those people in El Paso? > [@](#): > > Millions of gun owners who don’t want to be punished for what someone else did “Punished” means having to abide by sort of regulations that control every other dangerous item and their owners, even those whose primary purpose is not causing death? Nope. > [@](#): > > No. Helluva an argument there. Care to expound on it? > [@](#): > > You do know that it’s the _ **votes** _ of millions of gun owners which congresscritters pay attention to? And that’s why the Republicans are quaking in fear. ---
**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, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/271 "2019-08-06T17:54:33Z")
> [@Buck\_Godot](#): > > 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. > > … > 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. Great, so lets pass a federal law that prevents you from going to a state where it is easy to buy a gun, and taking it back where they have strict gun control! Nationwide law, right? Wait- \*\*they already have such a law. \*\* Sure, except it doesnt work to reduce gun crime after the laws go into effect. ---
**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, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/272 "2019-08-06T17:54:51Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > More specifically, the root of the problem is the lack of nation-wide federal legislation that reflects the true dangers of firearms. Again, every advanced democracy on earth has such legislation, and every advanced democracy on earth has very much lower rates of gun violence. The gun lobby would seem to want us to believe that this is some kind of strange coincidence. > > It’s completely incomprehensible why anyone would reach or even consider such a bizarre conclusion. If the common element is that all these deaths are the result of guns, yet gun policy is not allowed to be a major part of the solution, it can only be because the unstated assumption is that gun control must be rejected out of hand. The further unstated assumption is that instead of controlling access to guns – the common factor here – a myriad of other solutions must be enacted instead, most of them ridiculous or impossible, such as magically identifying anyone who is, or might be, emotionally disturbed or even just vulnerable to being emotional, or angry, or depressed, or intoxicated. > > This describes a policy where the most dangerous guns are only available to people who genuinely need them, while everyone else still has access to the normal class of unrestricted guns. And this is a problem, why? To most of us, at least to anyone outside the US gun culture, this just sounds like sensible gun policy, one which balances public safety with an individual’s ability to own most normal types of guns, even if it’s just for fun. How on earth could this possibly be described as a “gun ban”? Furthermore, it’s hard to see how anyone other the most ardent gun zealot would consider this an unacceptable balance. But other nations still have levels of _violence_. What you advocated is removing a self defense option from those who need it. And Australia’s Category D? In the real world, a Ruger Mark IV (.22 caliber) can kill just as well as what the New Zealand, Orlando, El Paso, or Port Arthur murderers used. Which is why I, for one, oppose efforts to effectively ban such weapons from the general public- when rifles are banned (oh, excuse me, (regulated) and someone remembers Virginia Tech, then pistols will follow. Then shotguns. Then whatever is left. ---
**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, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/273 "2019-08-06T17:57:00Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > That’s not what you said _“I’d like to make all guns illegal that allow, among other things, one to kill or maim 30 or more people in 30 seconds, yes.”_ > Firing rapidly is not the same as \*killing \*rapidly. > > As for firing rapidly- So can a bolt action or a lever action. Nitpicking stats a few days after 9 people were killed and 14 others shot in 30 seconds is pretty fucking ugly. Do you want the claim adjusted to “kill or maim 23 people in 30 seconds”? Would that soothe your precious fee fees? ---
**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, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/274 "2019-08-06T17:57:33Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Same way we register that many cars. And examine and license their owners, too. > > You got any \*constructive \*ideas? You even recognize mass murder as a problem? It’s a bit too late to register those 300 million guns at the time of purchase. And guns are a tad easier to hide than a car is. Yes, I do. Get the media to voluntarily stop glorifying the killers. Have them not name them. Sociologists have made it clear that is the cause of mass shootings. Stop straw man sellers. Tighten up background checks. ---
**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, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/275 "2019-08-06T17:58:25Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > Counterfire from what, a pistol? Or do you expect people to attend concerts armed with hunting rifles? YES, a pistol. When someone is shot at, or even shot toward, the impulse is to seek cover. ---
**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, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/276 "2019-08-06T17:58:35Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > And to prevent this, what do you propose? The laws already in place which check to see if a potential buyer is listed as insane. ---
**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, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/277 "2019-08-06T18:00:27Z")
> [@sps49sd](#): > > YES, a pistol. When someone is shot at, or even shot toward, the impulse is to seek cover. You guys watch too many action movies. Possessing a gun does not make you John Wick or John McClain. These shootout fantasies are downright disturbing. ---
**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, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/278 "2019-08-06T18:02:12Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > Nitpicking stats a few days after 9 people were killed and 14 others shot in 30 seconds is pretty fucking ugly. > > Do you want the claim adjusted to “kill or maim 23 people in 30 seconds”? Would that soothe your precious fee fees? I think it’s ugly to use a tragedy to accomplish your aims. Like former Australian PM John Howard: -During the same television interview, Howard also stated that he saw the outpouring of grief in the aftermath of the Port Arthur massacre as “an opportunity to grab the moment and think about a fundamental change to gun laws in this country”. ---
**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, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/279 "2019-08-06T18:03:53Z")
> [@sps49sd](#): > > I think it’s ugly to use a tragedy to accomplish your aims. Like former Australian PM John Howard: > > -During the same television interview, Howard also stated that he saw the outpouring of grief in the aftermath of the Port Arthur massacre as “an opportunity to grab the moment and think about a fundamental change to gun laws in this country”. I think it’s ugly to impugn the motives of your opponents in an attempt to prevent discussion when we are discussing the repeated slaughter of our fellow citizens. ---
**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, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166/280 "2019-08-06T18:04:29Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > You guys watch too many action movies. Possessing a gun does not make you John Wick or John McClain. These shootout fantasies are downright disturbing. You want to be dismissive and condescending, fine. But have you seen what people do when they are shot at? Have you been in the military and in the line of fire, or spoken to anybody that was? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166.md?page=13) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-will-it-take-for-there-to-be-serious-gun-control-debate/838166.md?page=15)