Guns

I was wondering if we can get any links to statistics or studies or any sort of objective analysis to support your arguments.I have certainly been supporting mine with such, but there's been nothing from your side.Emotion-laden "What-if" scenarios and unsupported "It's so obvious" statments don't really send the objectivity meter very high, you know.

FYI, and not that it matters, but I'm a "she". Click on my avatar. It's me.

quote:

---

schraf's post didn't include numbers on accidental deaths, but rather gun use in domestic violence and homicide where women were victimized.

---

Yes it did, actually.I bolded it, even.

Nobody in this thread has said, even once that all guns should be banned.Why do the pro-gun people always hear that the minute anybody starts saying how crazy it is that tens of thousands of people die very year from the easy access to handguns in this country? It is a complete kneejerk response.

quote:

---

so we have 12 thousand homicides which are already illegal

---

And mostly preventable if handguns and ammunition weren't so cheap and easy to get. Mind you, there would still be plenty of violence, just not nearly as many deaths.

quote:

---

17 thousand suicides which could be prevented with counseling

---

And mostly prevented or reduced to failed attempts if handguns and ammunition weren't so cheap and easy to get.From Just a moment...: You know what the first sign that someone is suicidal often is?They attemt suicide.

quote:

---

and 900 accidental deaths which could be prevented with some simple safety courses or safety measures.

---

I don't think "simple" safety courses are enough. Tthe gun manufacturers need some regulations put on them to put child safety locks on all handguns. The NRA also needs to stop fighting such regulations, or the government needs to ignore the NRA.And you can buy sudafed. You just have to ask for it at the counter.Edited by nator, : No reason given.

quote:

---

and yet no one has suggested their "comprehensive policy plan,"

---

Except that I did, in my very first post in this thread, on the very first page. Message #12

quote:

---

i think that depends on the drug and whether you take to little and make yourself sick or too much and reject it.

---

Those were the odds according to Dr. Hemenway's work.

quote:

---

maybe it's the first sign people notice, but i really doubt it's the first actual sign.

---

The point is, the notion that "suicides can be prevented with counselling" is simplistic. People who's suicidal symptoms are not noticed by others are not likely to get counselling.

quote:

---

i think they are. just saying "this isn't a toy" can do a great deal.

---

It didn't work for many of the boys in that study. It took less than 15 minutes alone in a room for some of them to find a gun, handle it, and pull the trigger. Nearly ALL of those boys had gun safety training.

I'd put tough liability laws in place for people who don't secure their weapons, as in people who's guns are used to commit a crime after they are stolen out of their house because they weren't properly secured can be charged with criminal negligence. Same with parents who don't secure their guns and a child is accidentally shot or commits suicide; the gun owner should be liable if they didn't secure their firearms properly.I'd also close the gun show and private sale loopholes that exist that make it easy to sell a gun with no paper trail and no criminal check. In general, requirements of paper trails of sales of guns should be required.It is currently quite easy to remove or obscure the serial number on most guns, so changing that would be good.The sale of armor-piercing and hollow-point ammunition to civilians should be banned. They have no non-military purpose.

How about you support ANY of your arguments with evidence?I've already done that with mine. I've also already stated my position. Many times.If you want to know what it is, read post #12, on the very first page of the thread.This will be the second time I've asked for statistics, studies, and any objective numbers or research to support your side of the argument.

quote:

---

They claim that us pro-gunners”...”folk are creating the straw man of 'anti-gunners want to severely reduce the freedoms of people to own guns and/or want to severely increase the restrictions on obtaining guns.'

---

No, I'd say that's about right.The strawman the pro-gun folks on this thread have consistently raised is that we want to ban ALL guns.That is not true.

quote:

---

Tell me once again why it isn't totally possible for someone to want such an item for the sole purpose of adding it to their collection?

---

I do not deny that people may desire to collect things.But if someone wanted to merely collect spent nuclear power rods, or surface-to-air missles, or samples of various strains of smallpox, should the mere fact that they want to collect them make any difference at all to if they should be allowed to?Edited by nator, : No reason given.Edited by nator, : No reason given.

quote:

---

it is a small point, but jon does have a real issue with the collector thing.

---

People would collect anything and everything if they could.It is illegal to collect (new) real tortoise shell and real ivory and real wastebaskets made out of elephant legs and real tiger pelts and real rhino horns because the costs (extinction of endangered animals) is too great just to satisfy the material lusts of collectors.I really don't care that collectors of military weaponry couldn't get armor-piercing bullets. They can't get surface-to-air missiles or nuclear warheads, either.

quote:

---

Why have a licence? A friend of mine had a father who had a big old handgun. Completely genuine. We used to play with it as teenagers. The firing pin had been removed, a ball-bearing was welded into the barrel and the trigger had been removed.

​

Nobody got killed with that collector's item.

---

That's what I said earlier.

quote:

---

What if the only outcome is that they will sit and get dusty in a display case for many generations?

---

Jon, I (and others) have responded to this question already, and instead of adressing my reply, you just repeated your question as if we hadn't.My response was stated in a reply to you in Message #195: Now, if you would like to address that question, you will then be participating in the debate.

quote:

---

Of course, when death is the certain outcome, people shouldn't have the weapon.

---

quote:

---

Of course you can't collect those things; something is dying for certain.

---

When someone goes deer or turkey or rabbit or grouse hunting, something is dying for certain as well. (If the hunter is any good at hunting, that is) If we apply your argument above, people shouldn't be allowed to hunt.I am pretty sure you didn't want to propose that, so maybe you might want to think through your arguments a bit more before you make them.The reason we ban the trade in new ivory, tiger pelts, etc., is not merely and solely because animals are being killed; the chicken I ate the other night was an animal that was killed, too. The reason we ban the sale of those specific items is because those particular animals are endangered. If the world was overrun with elephants, for example, I am sure that the sale of ivory would not be restricted.The point that I was making when I brought up the banned animal trophies was that we do, in fact, restrict what collectors are allowed to possess if there is a compelling reason to do so. That a collector desires an object is not enough of a reason to allow them to have it if there is a compelling reason they shouldn't.Lastly, I have asked several times for the pro-gun people on this thread to supply some data to back up their side of the argument, as I have with mine. So far, nobody has, and my studies and statistics have been mostly ignored or brushed aside.Perhaps you can pick up the slack for your side and start doing some research and post your counter evidence to my studies here.Edited by nator, : No reason given.Edited by nator, : No reason given.

quote:

---

What is it that should have legally prevented him from purchasing a weapon?

---

Unless I am mistaken, a magistrate put him in a mental institution involuntarily because he was considered a danger to himself and others. That should be part of the public record, and therefore should pop up on a background check.People like that shouldn't be allowed to purchase a firearm without a lengthy waiting period and additional criminal and psychological evaluations.We also should not be depending upon the customer to be truthful on the application to purchase the gun.

quote:

---

Women who have been grappling with depression, for instance, are at a much higher likelihood of being sexually assaulted.

---

People with depression are also at a much greater risk of committing suicide.

quote:

---

There's risks with having guns, but there's a lot of instances where they are successfully used to defend oneself and others.

---

I keep hearing that claim, but so far nobody has actually demonstraded it.All the stats I've seen show that for every one woman who uses a gun in self defense, over 300 are killed with a gun.It's not worth it.

quote:

---

If they couldn't serve that function I doubt that police and soldiers would use them.)

---

I'm not talking about police and military use, and never have been.I am talking about civilian, residential use.

quote:

---

If we'd let someone commit assisted suicide because of a painful, chronic, terminal disease, why not a painful, chronic mental illness?

---

Because most people who suffer a major depression eventually recover, if they don't kill themselves. Edited by nator, : No reason given.

I can't conclude that there's no merit whatsoever in handguns for self defense, either, although the evidence shows that their legitimate use in self-defense is very rare.I do not advocate for banning them altogether, just for much stricter regulation on what kinds are available and stricter purchase and storage requirements. You don't need much of a gun to defend yourself, and you certainly don't need a military-style weapon.I'll also remind you that between 800 and 900 people die from accidental shootings every year in the US.