Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A discussion of Gun Control for schrafinator
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 346 of 409 (130860)
08-05-2004 9:04 PM
Reply to: Message 345 by mark24
08-05-2004 8:59 PM


Comparison of different social experiments
Riiight! It might be time for someone to compare US and Canadian rates of homocide and suicide by all causes.
One should note that we are not a large a population and we don't have cities of the size, density and social disparity that the US has. So sorting out all the reasons for the differences may be hard.
England however, does have similar city sizes, densities and disparities.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 345 by mark24, posted 08-05-2004 8:59 PM mark24 has not replied

xavier999
Inactive Member


Message 347 of 409 (130887)
08-06-2004 12:10 AM
Reply to: Message 345 by mark24
08-05-2004 8:59 PM


Re: Misconception about the Constitution and Bill of Rights
quote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I think the point being that the US constitution pertains to the US, not contracycles country of birth. Fortunately both he/she & I are protected from your constitution in this regard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, that would explain a few things. I thought that seemed like an odd statement to make, but thought perhaps contra was going for the "what that amendment REALLY means is..." angle.
quote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
My chances of being a victim of gun crime are fractional compared to you folks. Posessing a gun just doesn't seem to act as a deterrent in the good ol' USA. No matter what the hype.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
True. I seem to recall the UK having fairly strict laws regarding handguns and thus it follows that you would have less gun violence. But the whole argument ISN'T just based on "guns make us safer." It's a common misconception that we all have guns only as a deterrent to crime, though I argue they are effective as such (there are many other posts in this thread that deal with that so I'm not going to spend time rehashing those arguments. You'll just have to make up your own mind on that one). But the whole point of the 2nd Amendment is to acknowledge that the people have a right to bear arms in order to maintain the security of a free state. This does NOT only mean from other governments, but from our government itself. Like I said, I do not see the need to overthrow our government any time soon, but things can change. There is no guarantee that we will always have the democracy we have now.
quote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Posessing a gun just doesn't seem to act as a deterrent in the good ol' USA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the US as a people have always had guns since our inception you can't really say that "Posessing a gun just doesn't seem to act as a deterrent" because there has never been a time where the US had an unarmed population with which to compare it. We can try and compare different countries, as you said, and that can be somewhat useful. Of course, even then we still have to acknowledge that comparing two similar countries (i.e. both democracies) is hard because there is more than one variable. Sure you may have lower crime, but is that solely due to gun laws or do the other differences play a part? Do you do a better job (as a whole) of educating your children on what it means to be a responsible adult? Do you have better social programs that help out the less fortunate so they don't try and resort to crime? I argue that if you raise a person with a sense of responsibility and instill in them a sense of morals that it doesn't matter whether they have a gun or not, they aren't going to use it irresponsibly. If you want to know what the problem is in the US it is that there are way too many kids learning their "life lessons" from TV and movies instead of their parents. Too many parents are not willing to actually put EFFORT into raising their children, but just let them grow up on their own and hope for the best. We're becoming complacent as a nation and it's starting to show. But let me stop digressing and get back to the topic of guns. The fact is our forefathers acknowledged the RIGHT of people to own a firearm and thus limited the POWER of the government so they would not try and infringe upon this RIGHT. They did NOT give us this right, but merely acknowledged that it already existed (along with the other rights in our Bill of Rights). If we start just trying to take away even ONE of these rights then it goes against the most important principle that THIS country was founded on. That there are certain things that are above even human government. That no person should not be able to speak their mind for fear of reprisal. That no person should be forced to follow a certain religion. Etc, etc. I hope you understand what I'm trying to say. That this is not just about guns, but about whether we are going to turn against those things that make us who we are.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 345 by mark24, posted 08-05-2004 8:59 PM mark24 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 348 by mark24, posted 08-06-2004 4:37 AM xavier999 has replied

mark24
Member (Idle past 5195 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 348 of 409 (130928)
08-06-2004 4:37 AM
Reply to: Message 347 by xavier999
08-06-2004 12:10 AM


Re: Misconception about the Constitution and Bill of Rights
xavier999,
True. I seem to recall the UK having fairly strict laws regarding handguns and thus it follows that you would have less gun violence.
You can own shotguns, & pistols up to .22 calibre. Maybe more, I'm not sure. Certainly no semi-automatics.
Although I accept the reasons for violent crime, even gun crime, are complex. It just seems silly to us outsiders to hear people defend gun ownership in the US when your chances of being murdered are something like ten times greater than anywhere (per capita)in Europe (off the top of my head, remembering a radio prog from a month back).
It is difficult to attribute the disparity to anything other than the gun culture that exists in the US & not Europe. The reasons for the need to bear arms are unconvincing. We manage without them perfectly well in Europe. The crime rates are not elevated because we don't have guns to defend ourselves with, nor do we particularly feel the need to protect ourselves from our governments, we just vote them out if they piss us off. Certainly there's no reason to allow the elevation the murder rate by a factor of ten just in casethere's a coup.
This does NOT only mean from other governments, but from our government itself. Like I said, I do not see the need to overthrow our government any time soon, but things can change.
A few popguns won't protect you from the material might of the US Army. Even if you had the right to bear tanks, it would just get you killed quicksharp.
Mark

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

This message is a reply to:
 Message 347 by xavier999, posted 08-06-2004 12:10 AM xavier999 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 356 by xavier999, posted 08-06-2004 2:14 PM mark24 has not replied

contracycle
Inactive Member


Message 349 of 409 (130935)
08-06-2004 6:20 AM
Reply to: Message 342 by Silent H
08-05-2004 1:09 PM


quote:
What the????
In one thread you are arguing with me that people should be helping in open revolution struggles and allowed to arm for them... including against the US.
Yes
quote:
And I find you in this thread arguing for tighter gun laws and saying how you'd NEVER have one in your house!
Yes.
I don't understand why you find these contradictory. I am not at war; were I at war, I would no doubt be armed. While I am living as a private citizen going about my peaceful day, I have no need or interest in being armed, and the presence of arms around me constrains my freedom.
Gun Ownerships is not some ontologically meaningful entity. It's a living arrangement, and we should deal with it practically, not based on Essentialist idealisms of weapons and their uses.
This message has been edited by contracycle, 08-06-2004 05:21 AM
This message has been edited by contracycle, 08-06-2004 05:30 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 342 by Silent H, posted 08-05-2004 1:09 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 351 by Silent H, posted 08-06-2004 7:46 AM contracycle has replied

contracycle
Inactive Member


Message 350 of 409 (130936)
08-06-2004 6:28 AM
Reply to: Message 341 by xavier999
08-05-2004 12:55 PM


Re: Misconception about the Constitution and Bill of Rights
quote:
Riiiiight. If you're going to deny the existance of the Constitution I don't think we'll get very far.
Huh? Please don't make yout local legal problems my problems.
quote:
Paranoid? You're the one who thinks "everyone around you could shoot you on a whim." And you don't know my family well enough to make that last assertion. Nice scare tactic though.
i don't need to know your family. And the FACT that my life is in the hands of anothers is NOT paranoia. Someone who is armed in my presence is in fACT physically capable of killing me. That threat exists implicitly or explicitly.
quote:
Your lack of a means of protecting your family poses a risk. I know you think the cops will always be there,
Ha ha ha. You're still missing the point; introducing a gun into the househiold defintely introduces risks thaqt did not exist before, and only mildly reduces the risk of some criminal activity. It might even increase the risk of criminal violence if its your gun they come to steal. And EVEN THEN, I'm more likely to survive a criminal encounter by trying to make my escape than by seeking to escalate the conflict.
quote:
I KNOW you can't back that up. You're making huge assumptions. Do you even personally know anyone who owns a gun?
Many. Have you actually read my other posts?
[quote] If so, exactly in what ways are they not responsible as gun owners? [quote] By bringing a device for homicide into the family domicile.
quote:
I know plenty of "responsible gun owners" that ACTUALLY exist. Not to mention I am one myself.
Where is you firearm right now?
Do you have a safe?
Where is your firearm stored at night?
Answer these questions and I can give you a meaningful response.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 341 by xavier999, posted 08-05-2004 12:55 PM xavier999 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 353 by joz, posted 08-06-2004 1:42 PM contracycle has replied
 Message 354 by xavier999, posted 08-06-2004 1:44 PM contracycle has replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 351 of 409 (130942)
08-06-2004 7:46 AM
Reply to: Message 349 by contracycle
08-06-2004 6:20 AM


I don't understand why you find these contradictory
Well that about says it all.
I am not at war; were I at war, I would no doubt be armed.
How? How would you arm yourself for a war against your own government, when it says you cannot have arms and has eliminated ways for you to get them?
As it is, these people are discussing the US which you say people SHOULD be fighting. Thus you should at least alter your argument that "peaceful" Africa should not allow people to have guns, but the US should.
That is if you are going to have any tiny bit of consistency.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 349 by contracycle, posted 08-06-2004 6:20 AM contracycle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 352 by contracycle, posted 08-06-2004 8:57 AM Silent H has replied

contracycle
Inactive Member


Message 352 of 409 (130949)
08-06-2004 8:57 AM
Reply to: Message 351 by Silent H
08-06-2004 7:46 AM


quote:
How? How would you arm yourself for a war against your own government, when it says you cannot have arms and has eliminated ways for you to get them?
Because the kind or arms I would need in order to conduct an armed resistance to the state - tanks, artillery, fighter bombers, fuel-air explosives, C4, cluster bombs, landmines, laser guidance systems, radar etc are so hopelessly beyond my reach (and have never been offered to civilians anyway) that the two issues are entirely orthogonal. If I was in actual armed rebellion, I'd be shopping on the international black market like every other non-state military.
You can buy an AK47 in Africa for, umm, about $20 in some places.
quote:
As it is, these people are discussing the US which you say people SHOULD be fighting. Thus you should at least alter your argument that "peaceful" Africa should not allow people to have guns, but the US should.
What a bizarre remark. Whether or not there should or should not be a war made against the US is entirely separate from whether it is a good idea to have commercial access to tools for homicide by the citizenry.
If you think I should advocate gun ownership by American citizens to facilitate a rtevoilution against the American state... my answer is still no for multiple reasons, not least the above disparoity of real force, but also because I advocate a mass strike strategy, not an off-with-their-heads strategy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 351 by Silent H, posted 08-06-2004 7:46 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 355 by Silent H, posted 08-06-2004 1:44 PM contracycle has replied

joz
Inactive Member


Message 353 of 409 (131023)
08-06-2004 1:42 PM
Reply to: Message 350 by contracycle
08-06-2004 6:28 AM


Re: Misconception about the Constitution and Bill of Rights
If so, exactly in what ways are they not responsible as gun owners?
By bringing a device for homicide into the family domicile.
Do these people by any chance also own kitchen knives? Or a hammer? Or a screwdriver? Or a......

This message is a reply to:
 Message 350 by contracycle, posted 08-06-2004 6:28 AM contracycle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 359 by nator, posted 08-06-2004 8:42 PM joz has not replied
 Message 380 by contracycle, posted 08-09-2004 10:59 AM joz has not replied

xavier999
Inactive Member


Message 354 of 409 (131024)
08-06-2004 1:44 PM
Reply to: Message 350 by contracycle
08-06-2004 6:28 AM


Re: Misconception about the Constitution and Bill of Rights
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Huh? Please don't make yout local legal problems my problems.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where do you live anyway? I guess I should inherently know these things.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i don't need to know your family.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh, so all families have the same likelyhood of killing each other if a gun is in a house? All people are alike. Just carbon copies of each other. Nobody has different personalities. Nobody is more responsible than anyone else when it come to evil firearms. When we get a gun in our hands we all turn into homicidal maniacs. I see your point so clearly now. Nice job of dodging my question, though.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And the FACT that my life is in the hands of anothers is NOT paranoia. Someone who is armed in my presence is in fACT physically capable of killing me. That threat exists implicitly or explicitly.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, the fact that you think everyone with a gun might blow you away on a whim is what makes you paranoid (reference my earlier post). People who aren't armed are physically capable of killing you too.
quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
And EVEN THEN, I'm more likely to survive a criminal encounter by trying to make my escape than by seeking to escalate the conflict.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why do you ASSUME a person with a gun won't try to make an escape first too? Why do you not ASSUME they will only use the firearm as a last resort? You think everyone with a gun is trying to be a cowboy don't you? I talk with other gun owners all over the US on several bulletin boards and websites and there is one thing that is commonly discussed. How your firearm is to only be used when no other means of protecting yourself (including retreating) is available. I've talked with quite a few who got into bad situations, but were able to get away and they NEVER EVEN DREW THEIR WEAPON because it did not come to the point where they had no other option. One guy I know had a car pull in front of him while driving through a bad neighborhood and block him. Two guys got out and started running toward his car. Did he pull out his gun and shoot them? No. He backed up and drove away because even with a gun he still is able to be rational.
quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
By bringing a device for homicide into the family domicile.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, you definately have been watching too much television. A device for homicide? Please. You're such a drama queen/king. I can tell you are so afraid of guns that nothing that ANYONE says is going to change your mind. You obviously have a preconditioned fear response that you will probably never overcome. Even the many other people in this post who are anti-gun at least approach it with rationality and I can respect that. You have your fears and your catch phrases.
quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where is you firearm right now?
Do you have a safe?
Where is your firearm stored at night?
Answer these questions and I can give you a meaningful response.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
They are all in safes. Yes, the ones I keep my firearms in. In the safes. I await your meaningful response.
This message has been edited by xavier999, 08-06-2004 12:58 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 350 by contracycle, posted 08-06-2004 6:28 AM contracycle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 382 by contracycle, posted 08-09-2004 11:33 AM xavier999 has replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 355 of 409 (131025)
08-06-2004 1:44 PM
Reply to: Message 352 by contracycle
08-06-2004 8:57 AM


Because the kind or arms I would need in order to conduct an armed resistance to the state
YOU would not need tanks, artillery, fighter bombers, etc etc... Only if you had enough people to form an ARMY would you need this. And then you would not get them on a black market, but rather from friends within the military that are taking sides in your civil war.
The size struggle we have been discussing is individual size which is guns and basic explosives.
You can buy an AK47 in Africa for, umm, about $20 in some places.
I take it these are safer in home use than US guns, sold on the white market?
my answer is still no for multiple reasons, not least the above disparoity of real force, but also because I advocate a mass strike strategy
And the tools of this will be safer in the home, how?
You just can't have it all ways contra. But this is what it seems, you want a strong government that protects the people from themselves by making sure they stay disarmed, yet people should be arming themselves with explosive devices to overthrow that same government.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 352 by contracycle, posted 08-06-2004 8:57 AM contracycle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 381 by contracycle, posted 08-09-2004 11:07 AM Silent H has replied

xavier999
Inactive Member


Message 356 of 409 (131029)
08-06-2004 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 348 by mark24
08-06-2004 4:37 AM


Re: Misconception about the Constitution and Bill of Rights
quote:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Although I accept the reasons for violent crime, even gun crime, are complex. It just seems silly to us outsiders to hear people defend gun ownership in the US when your chances of being murdered are something like ten times greater than anywhere (per capita)in Europe (off the top of my head, remembering a radio prog from a month back).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is mostly the large cities where gun violence is a problem (L.A., D.C., etc.). In most rural areas there is practically NO gun violence. So it varies from place to place. But yes, there are dangerous areas that even without guns would still be full of dangerous people. And having grown up in a country with a differnt "gun culture" I can understand why you do not see things the same as we do.
quote:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
nor do we particularly feel the need to protect ourselves from our governments, we just vote them out if they piss us off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Theoretically we should always be able to do that too, but the type of government you have to worry about overthrowing isn't the type that accepts votes. It may never happen, but it's always great to keep things in check.
quote:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A few popguns won't protect you from the material might of the US Army. Even if you had the right to bear tanks, it would just get you killed quicksharp.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Small arms can be very effective in guerilla warfare. You are correct that a direct confrontation of the US army would be unsuccessful in the long run, but unconventional warfare just might.
This message has been edited by xavier999, 08-06-2004 01:15 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 348 by mark24, posted 08-06-2004 4:37 AM mark24 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 357 by NosyNed, posted 08-06-2004 2:18 PM xavier999 has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 357 of 409 (131030)
08-06-2004 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 356 by xavier999
08-06-2004 2:14 PM


History already?
It may never happen,...
Maybe it already did.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 356 by xavier999, posted 08-06-2004 2:14 PM xavier999 has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 358 of 409 (131111)
08-06-2004 8:35 PM
Reply to: Message 344 by jar
08-05-2004 6:33 PM


Re: How about the question
quote:
How will you know when a private sale is made?
When the seller turns in some kind of paperwork to a law enforcement agency, maybe the ATF or whoever oversees gun dealers, indicating that they performed the criminal background check.
This shouldn't be a problem if the seller wants to be sure they are not selling a weapon to a criminal, right?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 344 by jar, posted 08-05-2004 6:33 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 361 by jar, posted 08-06-2004 8:47 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 359 of 409 (131113)
08-06-2004 8:42 PM
Reply to: Message 353 by joz
08-06-2004 1:42 PM


Re: Misconception about the Constitution and Bill of Rights
quote:
Do these people by any chance also own kitchen knives? Or a hammer? Or a screwdriver? Or a......
Little five year old Jimmy is not likely to be able to kill his little sister accidentally with a kitchen knife, hammer, or screwdriver.
Someone is not likely to break into their home specifically to steal a kitchen knife, hammer, or screwdriver.
Nobody can nearly effortlessly kill anyone else from mere yards away with a kitchen knife, hammer, or screwdriver.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 353 by joz, posted 08-06-2004 1:42 PM joz has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 360 of 409 (131115)
08-06-2004 8:45 PM
Reply to: Message 324 by xavier999
08-04-2004 5:26 AM


Re: Misconception about the Constitution and Bill of Rights
A reply to 326 and 329 please, xavier.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 324 by xavier999, posted 08-04-2004 5:26 AM xavier999 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 374 by xavier999, posted 08-07-2004 3:55 AM nator 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