Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 115 (8733 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-25-2017 7:43 AM
420 online now:
AZPaul3, jar, PaulK (3 members, 417 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: timtak
Happy Birthday: OnlyCurious
Post Volume:
Total: 801,962 Year: 6,568/21,208 Month: 2,329/2,634 Week: 517/572 Day: 3/61 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
23456
...
333NextFF
Author Topic:   Gun Control Again
Percy
Member
Posts: 15490
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 1 of 4987 (683931)
12-14-2012 3:25 PM


See any news source.

--Percy


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Coragyps, posted 12-14-2012 3:39 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply
 Message 54 by roxrkool, posted 12-14-2012 10:47 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply
 Message 96 by New Cat's Eye, posted 12-15-2012 3:24 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5266
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 6.1


Message 2 of 4987 (683932)
12-14-2012 3:39 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Percy
12-14-2012 3:25 PM


Grrrrrr. I would sure like to see it as a standard, prominent bit of news reporting - and I guess it's getting there - whether guns used in this sort of senseless stuff are legally obtained or not.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Percy, posted 12-14-2012 3:25 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Rahvin, posted 12-14-2012 3:46 PM Coragyps has responded
 Message 55 by Faith, posted 12-15-2012 12:17 AM Coragyps has not yet responded

    
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 536 days)
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


(3)
Message 3 of 4987 (683933)
12-14-2012 3:46 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Coragyps
12-14-2012 3:39 PM


The existence of legal firearms only makes it easier to acquire firearms - legally or illegally.

Besides, current gun control laws have loopholes you could drive the Death Star through - like the gun show exception.

Does it really matter if they were acquired legally? In the case of school shootings, most times the guns are legally owned by a parent and stolen by the kid who shoots up the school. Is that "legally" or "illegally" acquisition?

If the guns had never been legal in the first place, the parent wouldn't have the guns to steal. The gun shows wouldn't have the guns to sell. Only criminals would own guns...but there would be fewer guns, and school shootings aren't generally perpetrated by the same people who participate in gang violence or other centers of illegal firearm possession.


The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.
- Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of
variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the
outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." Barash, David 1995.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Coragyps, posted 12-14-2012 3:39 PM Coragyps has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by crashfrog, posted 12-14-2012 4:19 PM Rahvin has responded
 Message 7 by dronestar, posted 12-14-2012 4:42 PM Rahvin has responded
 Message 11 by Coragyps, posted 12-14-2012 4:49 PM Rahvin has not yet responded
 Message 39 by AZPaul3, posted 12-14-2012 6:33 PM Rahvin has responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 4987 (683934)
12-14-2012 4:19 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Rahvin
12-14-2012 3:46 PM


If the guns had never been legal in the first place, the parent wouldn't have the guns to steal.

Well, this is true. For instance, this is how Japan maintains such a low rate of gun homicide - they didn't have any guns to begin with, and they prevented people from getting any more of them.

In the US, though, even if you banned guns tomorrow there'd still be 80 guns per every 100 people, or more than 2.5 million firearms. If you want to reduce the number of guns, you're talking about a program to confiscate guns, primarily from people who have not ever used them to any harmful purpose. Even in a country with no Second Amendment, we'd still have the Fourth Amendment, so how could such a program be legal?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Rahvin, posted 12-14-2012 3:46 PM Rahvin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Rahvin, posted 12-14-2012 4:32 PM crashfrog has responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 4406
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 5 of 4987 (683935)
12-14-2012 4:19 PM


When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn.........

Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.


Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

  
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 536 days)
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 6 of 4987 (683936)
12-14-2012 4:32 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by crashfrog
12-14-2012 4:19 PM


Well, this is true. For instance, this is how Japan maintains such a low rate of gun homicide - they didn't have any guns to begin with, and they prevented people from getting any more of them.

In the US, though, even if you banned guns tomorrow there'd still be 80 guns per every 100 people, or more than 2.5 million firearms. If you want to reduce the number of guns, you're talking about a program to confiscate guns, primarily from people who have not ever used them to any harmful purpose. Even in a country with no Second Amendment, we'd still have the Fourth Amendment, so how could such a program be legal?

"Make guns illegal" is a one-line simplification, not an overarching policy. Of course simply making firearms illegal wouldn't magically remove guns already in existence...and there are many, many guns already in the US.

But it would limit the ability to move guns. You couldn't just go to a gun show and buy one. Ammunition would no longer be legal. Spare parts would no longer be as easy to get. The basic ban of firearms would be a step, and possibly the largest step, but it wouldn't finish the job. We'd still almost certainly have mass gun violence in the short-medium term. Over long enough periods of time, gun possession would decrease on its own.

But why use confiscation? Use a gun-buyback program. Allow gun owners to voluntarily surrender firearms and ammunition and be compensated at least partially for their value. Combined with the threat of steep fees or even jail time for being caught owning guns (without the necessity of a door-to-door search), such an incentive would cause at least some percentage of gun owners to follow the new law.

Again - not a total solution. Just an acceleration of the reduction in firearm availability. And it bypasses any issues with the Fourth Amendment.

You don't need a police state and door-to-door warrantless searches to ban something.


The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.
- Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of
variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the
outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." Barash, David 1995.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by crashfrog, posted 12-14-2012 4:19 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by crashfrog, posted 12-14-2012 4:49 PM Rahvin has responded
 Message 30 by RAZD, posted 12-14-2012 5:30 PM Rahvin has responded

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1345
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 7 of 4987 (683938)
12-14-2012 4:42 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Rahvin
12-14-2012 3:46 PM


guns versus mentality
Rahvin,

No matter how many tragedies happen in america, there will continue to be too many people fighting for the right to own guns.

I believe this shows that too many americans simply don't mind living in a violent, hateful society. (Perhaps the remainder actually like it.)

Can you elsewise explain this?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Rahvin, posted 12-14-2012 3:46 PM Rahvin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by jar, posted 12-14-2012 4:47 PM dronestar has responded
 Message 14 by Rahvin, posted 12-14-2012 5:00 PM dronestar has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 28432
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 8 of 4987 (683939)
12-14-2012 4:47 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by dronestar
12-14-2012 4:42 PM


Re: guns versus mentality
I happen to own quite a few guns, yet I have not used them in a violent manner.

I am always armed, yet I have never hard to use a gun in a violent manner.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by dronestar, posted 12-14-2012 4:42 PM dronestar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by dronestar, posted 12-14-2012 4:49 PM jar has responded
 Message 65 by Larni, posted 12-15-2012 4:27 AM jar has responded

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1345
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 9 of 4987 (683940)
12-14-2012 4:49 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by jar
12-14-2012 4:47 PM


Re: guns versus mentality
Does this recent tragedy move you to do something to prevent the next tragedy?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by jar, posted 12-14-2012 4:47 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by crashfrog, posted 12-14-2012 4:52 PM dronestar has responded
 Message 15 by jar, posted 12-14-2012 5:00 PM dronestar has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 10 of 4987 (683941)
12-14-2012 4:49 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Rahvin
12-14-2012 4:32 PM


But it would limit the ability to move guns. You couldn't just go to a gun show and buy one.

You can't now "just go to a gun show and buy one." Gun vendors at gun shows have to follow the same laws at the gun show that they have to follow anywhere - they can't sell to you without running you through the FBI's criminal database, which requires ID, which is a requirement both of Federal law and of owning a Federal Firearms Dealer's license.

But why use confiscation? Use a gun-buyback program.

That's great, for people who want money more than guns. But the reason that people have guns in the first place is because they wanted the gun more than they wanted the money. You can certainly get some guns off the street like this - people at the margins who have a short-term need to liquidize their firearm "asset" - but the very fact that people buy guns proves that you'd have to spend absurd amounts of money to make any dent in gun ownership.

That's not to mention the distorting effect of a gun buyback on the local gun market; gun buybacks actually increase ownership of guns in an area because you're basically paying people to exchange their nonfunctional or inferior guns for better ones. Gun buybacks don't reduce the amount of guns; they actually make it more valuable to own a gun, so people get more guns.

Combined with the threat of steep fees or even jail time for being caught owning guns (without the necessity of a door-to-door search)

How are you going to "catch" people owning guns without a door to door search? You're proposing a "war on guns" almost topologically identical to the "war on drugs." How well has the war on drugs worked in terms of getting rid of drugs? How have our civil liberties fared under the war on drugs? Haven't we, in fact, already almost arrived at "police state" as a result of criminalizing possession of drugs?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Rahvin, posted 12-14-2012 4:32 PM Rahvin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Rahvin, posted 12-14-2012 5:14 PM crashfrog has responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5266
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 6.1


Message 11 of 4987 (683942)
12-14-2012 4:49 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Rahvin
12-14-2012 3:46 PM


My point is really very limited: I'd just like to feel fully justified in telling all my NRA-member co-workers to STFU about theie Sacred Constitutional Rights.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Rahvin, posted 12-14-2012 3:46 PM Rahvin has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Tangle, posted 12-14-2012 4:55 PM Coragyps has not yet responded

    
crashfrog
Inactive Member


(3)
Message 12 of 4987 (683944)
12-14-2012 4:52 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by dronestar
12-14-2012 4:49 PM


Re: guns versus mentality
Does this recent tragedy move you to do something to prevent the next tragedy?

I think we'd all love to do something to prevent the next tragedy. But you have to prove that what you want to do is something that would prevent the next tragedy without itself being a tragedy.

For instance, why are we proposing legislation around the circumstances that cause less than 1% of gun deaths? Why not legislate on the basis of 99% of gun deaths? Or for that matter, why don't we legislate on the leading cause of death in the United States instead of drafting Federal policy on the basis of which events grab headlines?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by dronestar, posted 12-14-2012 4:49 PM dronestar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by dronestar, posted 12-14-2012 5:02 PM crashfrog has not yet responded
 Message 17 by Tangle, posted 12-14-2012 5:02 PM crashfrog has responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 4406
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 13 of 4987 (683945)
12-14-2012 4:55 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Coragyps
12-14-2012 4:49 PM


The phrase "in denial" springs to mind.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Coragyps, posted 12-14-2012 4:49 PM Coragyps has not yet responded

  
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 536 days)
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


(1)
Message 14 of 4987 (683946)
12-14-2012 5:00 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by dronestar
12-14-2012 4:42 PM


Re: guns versus mentality
Rahvin,

No matter how many tragedies happen in america, there will continue to be too many people fighting for the right to own guns.

Unfortunately I agree. The gun lobby is extremely strong. It would be a stretch just to close the gun show loophole - a big stretch. Gun control threads are always an intellectual exercise in wishful thinking.

I believe this shows that too many americans simply don't mind living in a violent, hateful society. (Perhaps the remainder actually like it.)

Can you elsewise explain this?

I believe that, as jar demonstrates, nonviolent people who own guns prioritize their own "rights" over solutions that would have a real effect. I believe that Constitution-worshipers refuse to alter what they consider an important part of that document regardless of the reasons. I believe that it's extremely easy to rationalize reasons to keep guns, like "protection against the government," even though those reasons also fall to pieces under even slight scrutiny.

I think that even great tragedies like school shootings are always "someone else's problem" because they happen to strangers for the vast majority of us, and it's difficult for a person to give up a certain extant right to lower the possibility of a potential future tragedy.

There are a lot of reasons, dronester. I think the "violent, hateful society" bit is essentially hyperbole. It makes for a neat soundbyte, but it offends more than it convinces.

I don't think most people are hateful, I think they're apathetic. Most people simply don't notice an ethical problem until it's directly pointed out to them, that's simply an unfortunate fact of the human mind.


The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.
- Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity. Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of
variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the
outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." Barash, David 1995.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by dronestar, posted 12-14-2012 4:42 PM dronestar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by dronestar, posted 12-14-2012 5:10 PM Rahvin has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 28432
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 15 of 4987 (683947)
12-14-2012 5:00 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by dronestar
12-14-2012 4:49 PM


Re: guns versus mentality
No.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by dronestar, posted 12-14-2012 4:49 PM dronestar has not yet responded

  
1
23456
...
333NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017