Gun Control

[Junior]

A few quick responses from the thread, don't have time to read through the last few pages, sorry.

 

 

Err... "violent" crimes do not equal gun crimes. The fact that you can commit a violent crime without a gun in your hand is not an argument in favor of keeping guns. That's a nice stat, but it has nothing to do with a gun debate.

I think unintended consequences of gun control policy are very much relevant to a gun control debate.

 

 

 

I've posted two links which discuss multiple scientific studies, on this page alone, that directly refute your statements. You've responded by ignoring those links and posting your suppositions as "proof". Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts. If you want to keep your guns, fine, but don't try claiming Australia had no gun violence, or that more guns =/= more violence when every reputable scientific study says otherwise.

I concede your point about Australia, but there is absolutely no reputable scientific study that unequivocally proves more guns = more gun violence. Because in the context of reality, it's simply not true.

 

 

The thousands of peer-reviewed and published research articles on gun violence would disagree with you.

 

What I would love, is for you, Harry, B1G Red, et al. to actually provide evidence that supports your claims. Studies, research articles, newspaper articles, anything that supports your claims. I'm a scientist, I operate by looking at evidence to form and reach a conclusion. I'm willing to have my mind changed, but it has to be with hard data.

[The Dude]

I think we can all agree Dianne Feinstein is a ridiculous idiot. I don't think anyone here is basing their thoughts on her politics.

Agreed.

[The Dude]

The thousands of peer-reviewed and published research articles on gun violence would disagree with you.

When they can easily be refuted, I have little use for them. Though I doubt any of them exist. If they do, explain how Brazil has much more gun violence despite having about 1/14 the number of guns as the United States.

[sd'sker]

not brazil again.

[Junior]

The thousands of peer-reviewed and published research articles on gun violence would disagree with you.

When they can easily be refuted, I have little use for them. Though I doubt any of them exist. If they do, explain how Brazil has much more gun violence despite having about 1/14 the number of guns as the United States.

 

Please, then tell me how you've reached the conclusion that they are all useless and easily refuted. Explain how you debunk their statistics, please. I'm all ears.

[The Dude]

The thousands of peer-reviewed and published research articles on gun violence would disagree with you.

When they can easily be refuted, I have little use for them. Though I doubt any of them exist. If they do, explain how Brazil has much more gun violence despite having about 1/14 the number of guns as the United States.

 

Please, then tell me how you've reached the conclusion that they are all useless and easily refuted. Explain how you debunk their statistics, please. I'm all ears.

 

If any of them generically state more guns = more gun violence, then I just did. But I doubt any of them say that.

[The Dude]

What I would love, is for you, Harry, B1G Red, et al. to actually provide evidence that supports your claims. Studies, research articles, newspaper articles, anything that supports your claims. I'm a scientist, I operate by looking at evidence to form and reach a conclusion. I'm willing to have my mind changed, but it has to be with hard data.

What claim would you like me to provide evidence for?

[NebraskaHarry]

gun owners should own greater liability insurance, as should smokers pay higher health insurance premiums. that is just common sense. and if any damage is caused by your gun, regardless of who controlled it at the time of damage, the gun owner should pay.

 

Smoking and Guns are NOT THE SAME THING. Not remotely even close.

 

They are, is the thing. Studies have repeatedly shown that smoking increases your risk of cancer and death. Studies have repeatedly shown that owning a gun increases the likelihood that you or someone in your house will die by a gun. That is simply a fact you cannot dispute.

If that were true then owning a knife technically increases your chance of someone in your house dieing by a knife. Heck, the same holds true for owning a cat. You can just about make excuses for anything potentially dangerous.

 

People like me and many people on here who are responsible gun owners are going to be the ones who get punished for doing things the right way.

 

If you can show a study that demonstrates that houses with knives have death rates which are higher than houses with no knives at all (good luck finding those houses, btw), and show that these rates are statistically significant, then you have an argument. I could cite peer-reviewed scientific studies, literally all day long, that show owning a gun significantly increases the likelihood that someone in your house will die by a gun. Can you show me two peer-reviewed scientific studies that show knives or cats are the same threat? Until you can actually cite data that supports your claims, your argument is nothing more than "I WANT MY GUNS!!!"

You're missing the point. So to follow the direction you want I will use vehicles as an example since there are studies. Owning a vehicle technically increasing your chance on injury or death by owning a car. More so than owning a gun btw. Yet we're not banning vehicles. Sure vehicles are safer and such, but that's not the point. You're comparing apples and oranges, trying to lump gun related accidents with gun related homicides (non-accidents). And they're not the same thing.

[NebraskaHarry]

What I would love, is for you, Harry, B1G Red, et al. to actually provide evidence that supports your claims. Studies, research articles, newspaper articles, anything that supports your claims. I'm a scientist, I operate by looking at evidence to form and reach a conclusion. I'm willing to have my mind changed, but it has to be with hard data.

What claim would you like me to provide evidence for?

I like how he provides that he's a scientist. I mean what kind of scientist? Haha.

[The Dude]

Mad scientist !

[sd'sker]

You're missing the point. So to follow the direction you want I will use vehicles as an example since there are studies. Owning a vehicle technically increasing your chance on injury or death by owning a car. More so than owning a gun btw. Yet we're not banning vehicles. Sure vehicles are safer and such, but that's not the point.

that is the point. vehicles are dangerous so we do everything we can to make them safer, why should guns be different? no one is trying to ban guns, just like no one is trying to ban cars. but if there are ways to make us safer in regards to the ownership of an inherently dangerous weapon, then why not?

 

You're comparing apples and oranges, trying to lump gun related accidents with gun related homicides (non-accidents). And they're not the same thing.

a homicide is a homicide. non-accidents do count as homicide, not necessarily murder, but definitely homicide.

[NebraskaHarry]

Are you claiming that someone jumping over a barb wire fence while hunting and the gun accidentally killing themself is the same as someone robbing a store and shooting the clerk are the same thing?

[Junior]

The thousands of peer-reviewed and published research articles on gun violence would disagree with you.

When they can easily be refuted, I have little use for them. Though I doubt any of them exist. If they do, explain how Brazil has much more gun violence despite having about 1/14 the number of guns as the United States.

 

Please, then tell me how you've reached the conclusion that they are all useless and easily refuted. Explain how you debunk their statistics, please. I'm all ears.

 

If any of them generically state more guns = more gun violence, then I just did. But I doubt any of them say that.

 

What have you proven? I'm waiting for you to go back a few pages, look at one of the several articles I posted that say more guns = more death, and refute them. If it is so easy to do, telling me HOW you did so shouldn't be difficult.

[Junior]

Are you claiming that someone jumping over a barb wire fence while hunting and the gun accidentally killing themself is the same as someone robbing a store and shooting the clerk are the same thing?

 

Would he have died without the gun?

[NebraskaHarry]

Many of you claim we need more gun laws... well what are those. Oh and I'm all for background checks. But taking away certain types of guns because some bureaucrat thinks it's a dangerous gun is where I start to draw the line. Because where does it stop.