Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 1/0


EvC Forum Side Orders Coffee House Gun Control Again

Summations Only

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Gun Control Again
Percy
Member
Posts: 22394
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(3)
Message 166 of 5179 (684207)
12-16-2012 2:38 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by xongsmith
12-16-2012 11:22 AM


Re: The Reality aint easy
Hi XongSmith,
Commenting about a couple things from this and your exchange with Tangle.
First, simple and easy are two different things. The answer to reducing gun massacres is simple: reduce the availability of guns. Achieving this will not be easy. I doubt it's even possible in today's political climate.
Second, the massacres get all the attention, but what's most important is reducing gun deaths, which are about 10 times higher in this country, approximately proportional to the greater number of guns.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by xongsmith, posted 12-16-2012 11:22 AM xongsmith has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by kofh2u, posted 12-16-2012 5:09 PM Percy has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 167 of 5179 (684210)
12-16-2012 4:22 PM
Reply to: Message 154 by Tangle
12-16-2012 12:04 PM


Re: The Reality aint easy
So simple that most countries have done it
No, in fact, no country has done it. Other countries have simply preserved a pre-existing low rate of gun ownership by a series of restrictive laws. But no country has ever peacefully reduced its rate of gun ownership from US levels to Canada levels, and its not clear that there's any way to do so except by people voluntarily deciding they want to own less guns.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by Tangle, posted 12-16-2012 12:04 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by Tangle, posted 12-16-2012 4:28 PM crashfrog has replied

Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 168 of 5179 (684211)
12-16-2012 4:28 PM
Reply to: Message 167 by crashfrog
12-16-2012 4:22 PM


Re: The Reality aint easy
Crashfrog writes:
No, in fact, no country has done it.
Yes they have.
Other countries have simply preserved a pre-existing low rate of gun ownership by a series of restrictive laws. But no country has ever peacefully reduced its rate of gun ownership from US levels to Canada levels, and its not clear that there's any way to do so except by people voluntarily deciding they want to own less guns.
Oh, I see what you mean now. You mean that no other country called the USA has done it. Well that is, of course, true.
Pfnrrrr

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by crashfrog, posted 12-16-2012 4:22 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 169 by crashfrog, posted 12-16-2012 4:36 PM Tangle has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 169 of 5179 (684212)
12-16-2012 4:36 PM
Reply to: Message 168 by Tangle
12-16-2012 4:28 PM


Re: The Reality aint easy
Yes they have.
No, they haven't. Show me even a single example where a country has peacefully legislated their way from 80 guns per 100 citizens down to 16 guns per 100, the ownership rate of Connecticut which we will stipulate is the least we'd have to do.
You mean that no other country called the USA has done it.
No, what I mean is that as usual, you're saying things that aren't true.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by Tangle, posted 12-16-2012 4:28 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by Tangle, posted 12-16-2012 4:51 PM crashfrog has replied

Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 170 of 5179 (684213)
12-16-2012 4:51 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by crashfrog
12-16-2012 8:14 AM


You say that if guns were illegal he might not have had access to them.
Isn't that a good thing? Isn't it better for it to might not happen than definitely happen? Surely any chance of children not being killed is worth attempting.
If fewer people have guns the chance of shootings will drop. I really don't get why civilians want to own guns.

The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286
Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by crashfrog, posted 12-16-2012 8:14 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by crashfrog, posted 12-16-2012 5:40 PM Larni has not replied

Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 171 of 5179 (684214)
12-16-2012 4:51 PM
Reply to: Message 169 by crashfrog
12-16-2012 4:36 PM


Re: The Reality aint easy
Crashfrog writes:
No, they haven't.
Yes they have.
Show me even a single example where a country has peacefully legislated their way from 80 guns per 100 citizens down to 16 guns per 100, the ownership rate of Connecticut which we will stipulate is the least we'd have to do.
You mean that no country that looks exactly like the USA has done it.
Of course you could wait until there are 100 guns per one hundred people and even more deaths.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by crashfrog, posted 12-16-2012 4:36 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by crashfrog, posted 12-16-2012 5:26 PM Tangle has replied

kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3820 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 172 of 5179 (684215)
12-16-2012 5:09 PM
Reply to: Message 166 by Percy
12-16-2012 2:38 PM


Re: The Reality aint easy
...the massacres get all the attention, but what's most important is reducing gun deaths, which are about 10 times higher in this country, approximately proportional to the greater number of guns.
Such correlations actually misdirect attention to the Cause.
The major intercity murders just in the 10 largest cities are almost half of all kilings in America every year.
These are drive by and intercity violemt crime stats that also correlate with the Single Mother Families.
That is more evidence that broken families is the cause.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by Percy, posted 12-16-2012 2:38 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by Percy, posted 12-16-2012 5:46 PM kofh2u has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 173 of 5179 (684216)
12-16-2012 5:26 PM
Reply to: Message 171 by Tangle
12-16-2012 4:51 PM


Re: The Reality aint easy
Yes they have.
So show me one.
You mean that no country that looks exactly like the USA has done it.
I don't care what the country looks like. The country can have any shape at all, I don't care. Just show me a country that has peacefully legislated their way from over 80 guns per 100 citizens down to 16, and I'll consider your claim supported.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by Tangle, posted 12-16-2012 4:51 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by Tangle, posted 12-16-2012 5:44 PM crashfrog has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 174 of 5179 (684218)
12-16-2012 5:40 PM
Reply to: Message 170 by Larni
12-16-2012 4:51 PM


You say that if guns were illegal he might not have had access to them.
I didn't say that if guns were illegal he wouldn't have had access to them. Making things illegal doesn't mean that its impossible to obtain them. That is, after all, the strategy of the War om Drugs - make it illegal to use and possess drugs, and people won't use or possess drugs. How well has that strategy worked? Why would it work any better for guns?
If fewer people have guns the chance of shootings will drop.
Almost nobody in Connecticut owned guns. Connecticut has a lower rate of firearms ownership than Canada, France, and parts of the UK. Again, I'm prepared to consider additional gun control measures in the US but proponents of those measures need to grapple with the fact that this tragedy happened in a state widely considered a model for effective gun control, and almost all of the measures I've heard proposed were already in effect for this shooting. What more could be done, short of nationwide confiscation of firearms?
What you UK guys keep asking is basically "why can't there suddenly not be 300 million firearms in the US"? Well, because there's no such thing as magic, is why. You just can't wish that America didn't contain 300 million privately-owned firearms inside its borders. The way you achieved a largely gun-free society was by already being a largely gun-free society, and then you took steps to keep it that way. For obvious reasons, that's not something that can happen here. Not because we have the Second Amendment, but because we don't have time machines.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by Larni, posted 12-16-2012 4:51 PM Larni has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by NoNukes, posted 12-16-2012 6:31 PM crashfrog has replied

Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 175 of 5179 (684219)
12-16-2012 5:44 PM
Reply to: Message 173 by crashfrog
12-16-2012 5:26 PM


Re: The Reality aint easy
crashfrog writes:
So show me one.
Firearms (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 1997
Firearm - Wikipedia(Amendment)_(No._2)_Act_1997
Just show me a country that has peacefully legislated their way from over 80 guns per 100 citizens down to 16, and I'll consider your claim supported.
This is special pleading. Many countries have legislated successfully against guns.
"Approximately 30 rounds per magazine"
"How many magazines?"
"Several....er, numerous. Hundreds of bullets, yes."
Four guns owned legally by his mother.
Open your eyes.
Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by crashfrog, posted 12-16-2012 5:26 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by crashfrog, posted 12-16-2012 6:14 PM Tangle has replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22394
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 176 of 5179 (684220)
12-16-2012 5:46 PM
Reply to: Message 172 by kofh2u
12-16-2012 5:09 PM


Re: The Reality aint easy
Hi Kofh2u,
The chart you offered above is 20 years out of date and doesn't support your assertions anyway. Youth crime rates began a dramatic decline in the early 1990's. I told you this once before.
kofh2u writes:
These are drive by and intercity violemt crime stats...
In think you meant inner city? Not "intercity"?
Anyway, inner city homicides, indeed all homicides, would be dramatically reduced by the elimination of guns.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 172 by kofh2u, posted 12-16-2012 5:09 PM kofh2u has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 200 by kofh2u, posted 12-16-2012 9:54 PM Percy has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 177 of 5179 (684222)
12-16-2012 6:14 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by Tangle
12-16-2012 5:44 PM


Re: The Reality aint easy
This is special pleading.
No, it's asking you to support your contention that "every other country" has done what we need to do, which is go from a country with more 80 guns per 100 people to a country with 15 or 30, like Canada.
Except that you're wrong, foolishly so. No country has ever done that. Not a single one of them. If there was one, you'd be able to present it. But you can't, even though you said that you could.
Many countries have legislated successfully against guns.
Well, the United States has successfully legislated against guns. We passed the Federal assault weapons ban. We passed the Brady Bill. Various states have various gun control measures of their own.
The problem is, we've done everything that we can do without convening a Constitutional convention to repeal the Second Amendment. And we can't do that. And it turns out, all that stuff didn't do anything in other countries; their low rates of gun homicides after passing gun control legislation simply reflect their low rates of gun homicide before they passed gun control legislation.
There's no country that has gone from 80 guns per 100 people or more to 15 except by violence and oppression. Not even a one.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by Tangle, posted 12-16-2012 5:44 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by Tangle, posted 12-16-2012 7:32 PM crashfrog has replied

NoNukes
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 178 of 5179 (684226)
12-16-2012 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 174 by crashfrog
12-16-2012 5:40 PM


need to grapple with the fact that this tragedy happened in a state widely considered a model for effective gun control, and almost all of the measures I've heard proposed were already in effect for this shooting. What more could be done, short of nationwide confiscation of firearms?
Perhaps it would be helpful to discuss exactly what Connecticut's gun laws actually were. That might allow us to speculate on possible provisions.
Page not found – Twin Cities
quote:
In 2011, Connecticut was rated the fifth toughest by the pro-gun control Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence on a scorecard which gave points for each restriction the group favors.
But the state scored only 58 points out of a possible 100, below the 81 points of top state California but far ahead of most other U.S. states. Thirty-one states didn’t even score in the double digits.
To buy a gun, Connecticut law requires residents apply for a local permit, typically with the town’s police chief, have their fingerprints taken and submit to a state and federal background check with a 14-day waiting period. To buy a handgun, residents also are required to take a gun safety course.
The state is also one of seven to have an assault weapons ban that specifically lists more than 35 semiautomatic and automatic weapons. It does not appear to cover the .223 caliber rifle used in Friday’s attack.
Pinciaro said the state weapons ban, which dates back to 1994, did not go far enough because it did not also include restrictions on high-capacity magazines, which allow users to fire off dozens of shots before stopping to reload.
After the 2011 shooting in Arizona at a constituent event held by Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, Connecticut lawmakers proposed a restriction that would limit magazines to 10 rounds. But after hundreds of protesters showed up at the state capital for a hearing, the bill died in committee.
So, yes there are some possible changes to Connecticut law that would have been helpful. Sure, Connecticut ranks fifth overall, but the overwhelming majority of states don't do diddly squat. There is plenty of room to argue that Connecticut's gun control laws are not tough enough.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by crashfrog, posted 12-16-2012 5:40 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 179 by crashfrog, posted 12-16-2012 6:55 PM NoNukes has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


(1)
Message 179 of 5179 (684227)
12-16-2012 6:55 PM
Reply to: Message 178 by NoNukes
12-16-2012 6:31 PM


So, yes there are some possible changes to Connecticut law that would have been helpful. Sure, Connecticut ranks fifth overall, but the overwhelming majority of states don't do diddly squat.
That's abundantly false. There's not a state in the US where firearms aren't regulated under state law.
There is plenty of room to argue that Connecticut's gun control laws are not tough enough.
By noting that other states have less strict gun control regimes? How does that leave "plenty of room" to argue that Connecticut would be more strict? You're aware, surely, that Connecticut can only pass laws that apply to Connecticut.
quote:
But the state scored only 58 points out of a possible 100, below the 81 points of top state California but far ahead of most other U.S. states.
I read today that last night, in a California parking lot, some guy popped off over 50 rounds from a semi-auto rifle. Nobody was hurt because apparently he fired into the air (not sure what that was about) Isn't it time to take a look around at all these gun crimes that happen under gun control regimes and admit that you can't actually control guns with a law?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by NoNukes, posted 12-16-2012 6:31 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 180 by NoNukes, posted 12-16-2012 7:28 PM crashfrog has replied

NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 180 of 5179 (684228)
12-16-2012 7:28 PM
Reply to: Message 179 by crashfrog
12-16-2012 6:55 PM


That's abundantly false. There's not a state in the US where firearms aren't regulated under state law.
That's not what I meant. I am referring to the 31 states that scored less than 20 on a scale of 100 as doing "diddly squat". I apologize for speaking less than literally.
By noting that other states have less strict gun control regimes? How does that leave "plenty of room" to argue that Connecticut would be more strict? You're aware, surely, that Connecticut can only pass laws that apply to Connecticut.
I cannot make any sense out of your comment. I gave examples of a measure that Connecticut did not adopt. I also noted that four other states have measures that are tougher than Connecticut's, and that fifth place isn't a big deal given that Connecticut rates a 58 out of 100. You ignored all of that and chose to interpret my remarks in the most ridiculous way possible. What was the point of that?
Connecticut is free to adopt measures adopted in other places. That means there is room to discuss the possibility of tighter measures.
Isn't it time to take a look around at all these gun crimes that happen under gun control regimes and admit that you can't actually control guns with a law?
Laws that actually try to reduce gun ownership seem to work elsewhere. I agree that laws that simply make it hard to get guns don't seem to work.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 179 by crashfrog, posted 12-16-2012 6:55 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by crashfrog, posted 12-16-2012 10:00 PM NoNukes has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024