Gun Control

[BigRedBuster]

2 minutes ago, DefenderAO said:

We'll use this case as an example.  It seems like she was already flagged in the system.  What protocols did they keep on her to be closer to a potential problem?  

 

Stepping back, there's a cultural issue in big cities that have a huge violence problem where handguns are used in most shootings.  I mentioned earlier I believe public housing and perpetual government handout policies exacerbate the issues we see from that culture.

 

I don't think anyone has a great policy answer. It's easier to say what won't work than what will.

 

Stepping further back, there are about 150 million people in the country ages 20-54.  To date, there have been 88 days in the calendar year.  That is 150 million * 88 days (billions) opportunity where someone from age 20-54 can go on a mass shooting spree.  How can you parse out the mentally ill from this group?  Why punish 149,9xx million in this group for issues the minority mentally ill have?

Why do other countries not have this problem when their policies are much more liberal than ours?

[ColoradoHusk]

9 minutes ago, DefenderAO said:

I think you nailed much of this one.  Thank you for the thoughtful and honest response.

I am far from perfect, and not going to pretend like I am the smartest person or have all the answers on certain issues.  Maybe I misjudged you, as well, based on some of your initial responses.

 

Regarding gun control, I don't have an issue with people having the right to defend themselves.  However, when there is resistance to any type of gun regulations because of the concern of potential future regulations, all while children and other innocent people are getting "truly mutilated" in places which they should feel safe, that bothers me.  I can't wrap my head around people who just think that there is no room for any type of regulated gun control, just because of their interpretation of the 2nd Amendment written 250 years ago.  I am far from a historian, but I like what Teach says about the gun issue "If people want to use their 2nd Amendment right to own a gun, let them use a musket which takes 2 minutes to load one (very inaccurate) shot." 

[BigRedBuster]

 

[ZRod]

2 hours ago, DefenderAO said:

I’d suspect some folks throughout history, namely ones put in ovens and gas chambers, would carry a different perspective. 

Defend what is good and the innocent from the deeply disturbed who don’t value life.  

 

Guns only destroy, there is no other purpose for the "tool". None.

 

The Jews, Poles, and GAYs were murder because of a xenophobic majority in power, not because they didn't have guns. They weren't going to stop the German military with bolt action rifles and pistols, just like you're not stopping the US military or police that has infrared systems, night vision, depleted uranium munitions, reactive armor, and drones you'll never see or hear. You're an absolute fool if you honestly believe that.

[BigRedBuster]

2 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

I am far from perfect, and not going to pretend like I am the smartest person or have all the answers on certain issues.  Maybe I misjudged you, as well, based on some of your initial responses.

 

Regarding gun control, I don't have an issue with people having the right to defend themselves.  However, when there is resistance to any type of gun regulations because of the concern of potential future regulations, all while children and other innocent people are getting "truly mutilated" in places which they should feel safe, that bothers me.  I can't wrap my head around people who just think that there is no room for any type of regulated gun control, just because of their interpretation of the 2nd Amendment written 250 years ago.  I am far from a historian, but I like what Teach says about the gun issue "If people want to use their 2nd Amendment right to own a gun, let them use a musket which takes 2 minutes to load one (very inaccurate) shot." 

This interpretation of the 2nd amendment is with people who are totally bought into the gun lobby's (NRA) bought and paid for thought process.  As I showed in my last post, this is not how Republicans used to interpret the 2nd amendment.

[DefenderAO]

Just now, BigRedBuster said:

Why do other countries not have this problem when their policies are much more liberal than ours?

The plurality, if not majority, of shooting is where a pistol is used and has become a norm in certain cultures.  Those countries don't have those cultural issues.  A part that makes America such a great place (diversity) is also part that holds a truth there is a deep cultural issue that uses handguns for terrible ends.

 

Secondly, you could say that not all liberal policy is directly, or tangentially, related to issue at hand.  Fiduciary and fiscal policy, liberal vs conservative, may not tie in as a tenet that solves anything here.  I think it's too high level to say "country x = more liberal = less violent."  

 

Australia and Sweden have significant rape issues.  We'd both say we're not okay with rape, mass shootings, burglary etc.  Given the thread is gun control, it's the proper focus to talk about guns.  But looking at related issues (violent crimes, mental health, human condition, policy) is valuable.  

 

Net: I believe there is a culture issue in America where gun violence animates from.  I believe it makes sense that, the country with the most volume of guns, and culture issues other countries might not contend with, has poor statistics here.  However, violent crimes and humanity depravity exist everywhere whether a gun ever existed or not.

[BigRedBuster]

8 minutes ago, DefenderAO said:

The plurality, if not majority, of shooting is where a pistol is used and has become a norm in certain cultures.  Those countries don't have those cultural issues.  A part that makes America such a great place (diversity) is also part that holds a truth there is a deep cultural issue that uses handguns for terrible ends.

 

Secondly, you could say that not all liberal policy is directly, or tangentially, related to issue at hand.  Fiduciary and fiscal policy, liberal vs conservative, may not tie in as a tenet that solves anything here.  I think it's too high level to say "country x = more liberal = less violent."  

 

Australia and Sweden have significant rape issues.  We'd both say we're not okay with rape, mass shootings, burglary etc.  Given the thread is gun control, it's the proper focus to talk about guns.  But looking at related issues (violent crimes, mental health, human condition, policy) is valuable.  

 

Net: I believe there is a culture issue in America where gun violence animates from.  I believe it makes sense that, the country with the most volume of guns, and culture issues other countries might not contend with, has poor statistics here.  However, violent crimes and humanity depravity exist everywhere whether a gun ever existed or not.

So, there's nothing we really can do.

[DefenderAO]

8 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

I am far from perfect, and not going to pretend like I am the smartest person or have all the answers on certain issues.  Maybe I misjudged you, as well, based on some of your initial responses.

 

Regarding gun control, I don't have an issue with people having the right to defend themselves.  However, when there is resistance to any type of gun regulations because of the concern of potential future regulations, all while children and other innocent people are getting "truly mutilated" in places which they should feel safe, that bothers me.  I can't wrap my head around people who just think that there is no room for any type of regulated gun control, just because of their interpretation of the 2nd Amendment written 250 years ago.  I am far from a historian, but I like what Teach says about the gun issue "If people want to use their 2nd Amendment right to own a gun, let them use a musket which takes 2 minutes to load one (very inaccurate) shot." 

The intent was not a musket, it was just the latest weapon commensurate to what/who they were fighting.  It's not musket thing, it was a use-what-is-on-par-to-the-other-side thing.  And things are highly regulated now.  No full auto (full auto serves very little practical purpose and is largely a waste), regulated silencers (AR's and guns shoot, unsuppressed, at around 165-170 decibels; a suppressor cuts that down to around the hearing safe threshold of 140 dB) etc.  

 

I'm really good with practical regulation, but I think we differ on the focal genesis?  I would start at mental health reformation (not evolving it, true overhaul).  Then, I'd look at the data on where the plurality of crimes happen, from who, using what.  But even then, some of the strictest gun law cities in the country have the worst gun crime rates.  Then I'd look at the 150 million ages 20-54 right now, the 88 days in 2023 they've all had to go on a mass shooting spree (with more guns ever in the country at any time in our history), and see what also makes sense for them as ones who realize evil exists and would like a very viable means to protect themselves and those around.

[Archy1221]

45 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

If there were no guns, there would be zero deaths. You're OK with death ("just one loss of life") so you can keep your guns. That's the evil. 

 

You need to seriously rethink your choices. 

@BigRedBuster  remember when you said no one was seriously talking about taking all guns away

 

Yet I’m sure this poster has a super duper awesome plan to get the guns off the criminals hands prior to the law abiding folks giving up theirs. 

[BigRedBuster]

This is the guy that also said....they aren't going to fix it.

 

 

[DefenderAO]

16 minutes ago, ZRod said:

You're a nutcase. Guns only destroy, there is no other purpose for the "tool". None.

Evil exists.  Defend good.  

 

Let's avoid petulant name calling and lazy labels.    

[DefenderAO]

4 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

So, there's nothing we really can do.

I'd like to hear your side.  Confiscation?  Preemptively imprison gun cultists? (hyperbole, of course).

 

It's not an easy answer or we may have implemented it.

[Scarlet]

18 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Why do other countries not have this problem when their policies are much more liberal than ours?

This is what's being intentionally missed in this argument....that it's mental illness not the guns.  The USA is 29th in depression rates around the world and yet we're second for gun deaths.  

 

It's simple.  It's our gun culture.

 

https://wisevoter.com/country-rankings/depression-rate-by-country/

 

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/gun-deaths-by-country

 

[Archy1221]

22 minutes ago, ZRod said:

Guns only destroy, there is no other purpose for the "tool". None.

Police and regular citizens use guns as a deterrent for safety without firing the weapon every single day of the year.  That’s one more than none 

[NM11046]

Ok don't have time to dig into all the content here - but your rape comment on Sweden and Australia is just wrong.   Many people don't even report rape (only 10-40% depending on what figures you look at.  Even fewer are prosecuted (~9%) and convicted (~3%).  And in addition to that every country defines rape differently so it's difficult to truly compare countries - Apples to Oranges.  Swedens reports might be high because their definition is more broad.  And Austrailia has numbers similar to US.

 

Deaths by gun is a pretty clearly defined outcome.

 

And I agree to some extent on your comments about morallity, but feel as if in your posts you are referring to things that offend yours.  We know that the majority of white, christian, male, mass shooters (which make up 95%+ of mass shootings) have been violated in some way in their lives by someone else.   THAT moral offense is the commonality that triggers them to go commit their own.  Sure we can attack the initial triggering problem in the long term, but in the short term not allowing them to have access to commit their own atrocity would be a start.