The Right to Carry a Gun

[Nebfanatic]

5 minutes ago, Redux said:

 

.....you're seriously asking for data on this.  

I'm asking you to provide examples of times you've posted information and it's been ignored because truth be told you rarely post any sort or supporting information so it kinda just sounds like an excuse as to why you never post any sort of supporting information 

 

 

The fact of the matter is if you are just posting your opinion with nothing to back it up you will be taken less seriously than others. I like to deal in real information rather than peoples points of views because those tend to be flawed, including my own. 

[Redux]

8 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

I'm asking you to provide examples of times you've posted information and it's been ignored because truth be told you rarely post any sort or supporting information so it kinda just sounds like an excuse as to why you never post any sort of supporting information 

 

 

The fact of the matter is if you are just posting your opinion with nothing to back it up you will be taken less seriously than others. I like to deal in real information rather than peoples points of views because those tend to be flawed, including my own. 

 

Yeah, I'm not doing that.  You're clearly being difficult.  I've been asked to provide data before, in other threads in this forum and have gotten chastised for them.  So why do that?  It's an opinionated platform, my opinion is plenty.  I'm not asking you ti agree with it.  I'm just sharing it.

 

You're going to ignore anything I say or post based off your own opinions.  The fact is, as Teach JUST pointed out, we have hundreds of more millions of people than Norway.  That's a garbage example.  We have a far more screwed up culture than Norway.  The guns are just a tool of ways those screwed up people hurt others.

 

Do you SERIOUSLY need a Link for that?  I mean, seriously?

[Nebfanatic]

20 minutes ago, Redux said:

 

Yeah, I'm not doing that.  You're clearly being difficult.  I've been asked to provide data before, in other threads in this forum and have gotten chastised for them.  So why do that?  It's an opinionated platform, my opinion is plenty.  I'm not asking you ti agree with it.  I'm just sharing it.

 

You're going to ignore anything I say or post based off your own opinions.  The fact is, as Teach JUST pointed out, we have hundreds of more millions of people than Norway.  That's a garbage example.  We have a far more screwed up culture than Norway.  The guns are just a tool of ways those screwed up people hurt others.

 

Do you SERIOUSLY need a Link for that?  I mean, seriously?

I'm not being difficult. Your stance that you don't have to support your position with factual inform doesn't really fly here. 

 

I never responded to the assertion Norway was a bad example, but no I don't need a link for that because Norways population is an easily verifiable fact. Those countries are used as a best case example but if we think it's a bad comparison, fine. Let's use a country with a larger population and less developed society to illustrate the point that the main issue is access. India has far more people than we do, yet they have far less gun violence. Why? They have some of the strictest gun laws in the world. Illegal guns are a thing there, but mass shootings rarely happen. In fact gun violence only accounts for 10% of murders in the entire country. By comparison, in the US 2/3rds of all murders are committed with a firearm. It's not a perfect system in India, but the statistics paint a clear picture. More access to firearms means more gun violence.

 

 

https://www.news18.com/news/immersive/guntantra-guns-in-india.html

[Redux]

38 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

Your stance that you don't have to support your position with factual inform doesn't really fly here. 

 

I can't believe I wasted my time on this.  Bottom line, I'm not going out of my way to provide you with data or links or whatever that you'll shrug off anyways.  Feel free to look it up yourself though.

[Moiraine]

8 minutes ago, Redux said:

 

I can't believe I wasted my time on this.  Bottom line, I'm not going out of my way to provide you with data or links or whatever that you'll shrug off anyways.  Feel free to look it up yourself though.

 

 

I don’t know where you’re coming from with the Norway comments. In every mental health related issue I’ve seen they have the same or similar rates of problems as we do (the map below is just 1 example). You may be right that we have “a far more screwed up culture than Norway” but I don’t know why you think that’s the case because you haven’t explained it. 

 

[Nebfanatic]

1 minute ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

I don’t know where you’re coming from with the Norway comments. In every mental health related issue I’ve seen they have the same or similar rates of problems as we do (the map below is just 1 example). You may be right that we have “a far more screwed up culture than Norway” but I don’t know why you think that’s the case because you haven’t explained it. 

 

Seems India has a worse mental health problem than we do. Less access to medical help for those problems than we do. They have far more people than we do. A more ostracizing sociatial structure than we do. Yet far less gun violence. I wonder why? 

[BigRedBuster]

I don't see the logic about the debate between the supply of guns or mental illness being the issue.  

 

First off, long before mass shootings became as big of a problem as it is now, I have thought anyone who murders another human does it within the realm of some type of mental issues.  That might be long term problems or temporary.  But, someone who actively goes out and plans and kills another human (not in self defense) has something wrong.  That might be some form of mental illness that we currently have a diagnosis for, or it could be something new that that field of healthcare needs to address, but....I can't see being convinced that someone who carries out (especially) mass shootings is totally normal upstairs.

 

Also, there is something wrong in our society that produces so many of these people.

 

That said, the supply of guns is CLEARLY part of the problem to me.  When you have the above issues in your society and then it's so easy to get ahold of something that can do so much damage...well....that's an issue.

 

We get bogged down in the discussion as to which it is and then nothing happens on either issue.

 

 

[Redux]

8 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

I don’t know where you’re coming from with the Norway comments.

 

Norway was used as an example a couple of pages ago by knapp I believe.

 

6 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

Seems India has a worse mental health problem than we do. Less access to medical help for those problems than we do. They have far more people than we do. A more ostracizing sociatial structure than we do. Yet far less gun violence. I wonder why? 

 

Because they have stricter gun laws, you're arguing with yourself.  If you want to believe that gun violence sole or main root is availability, go right ahead.  It's misinformed, but go ahead.

[teachercd]

8 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

I'm not being difficult. Your stance that you don't have to support your position with factual inform doesn't really fly here. 

 

I never responded to the assertion Norway was a bad example, but no I don't need a link for that because Norways population is an easily verifiable fact. Those countries are used as a best case example but if we think it's a bad comparison, fine. Let's use a country with a larger population and less developed society to illustrate the point that the main issue is access. India has far more people than we do, yet they have far less gun violence. Why? They have some of the strictest gun laws in the world. Illegal guns are a thing there, but mass shootings rarely happen. In fact gun violence only accounts for 10% of murders in the entire country. By comparison, in the US 2/3rds of all murders are committed with a firearm. It's not a perfect system in India, but the statistics paint a clear picture. More access to firearms means more gun violence.

 

 

https://www.news18.com/news/immersive/guntantra-guns-in-india.html

More of something = more of the negative of that something.  

 

More cars = More deaths by car.  But why are the 10% of those gun murders in India happening?  Is it because a lot of dudes that have guns in India are nuts?  I think everyone is in agreement that more guns equals more shooting deaths.  I think we all agree that people that kill people are nuts.

 

Also, I think India has the lowest reported amount of rapes in the world, even though it is clearly very high in that country and women are treated really really poorly.  I would not put a ton of stock into results from India on most topics.  Not that the information you found is not accurate but they do enjoy some number manipulation. 

[Nebfanatic]

3 minutes ago, teachercd said:

More of something = more of the negative of that something.  

So if we want less of the negative then an easy solution is to have less of the something wouldn't that be correct?

[Nebfanatic]

4 minutes ago, Redux said:

 

Norway was used as an example a couple of pages ago by knapp I believe.

 

 

Because they have stricter gun laws, you're arguing with yourself.  If you want to believe that gun violence sole or main root is availability, go right ahead.  It's misinformed, but go ahead.

So stricter gun laws result in less gun violence. Isn't the goal less gun violence? 

[teachercd]

2 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

So if we want less of the negative then an easy solution is to have less of the something wouldn't that be correct?

Yep, you take it away, there are no more issues (in theory).

 

I am not into guns, so it doesn't matter to me what happens to them.

 

Now, I assume you agree that people that kill other people are "nuts" right?

[Nebfanatic]

Just now, teachercd said:

Yep, you take it away, there are no more issues (in theory).

 

I am not into guns, so it doesn't matter to me what happens to them.

 

Now, I assume you agree that people that kill other people are "nuts" right?

I think it depends on the situation to a degree but if we are talking about mass shootings I suppose yes something isn't right. But other countries have these same issues with mental health but do not face the same issues with gun violence. I guess the argument I'm making is solution based. We aren't going to fix the gun violence issue by just focusing on mental health and continuing to have easy access to guns. We also have to consider the instances that are far less mental health related. Deaths by accidental discharge, children getting ahold of guns, heat of the moment shootings are all a problem here as well and I'd argue those have little to nothing to do with mental health. If we want to have less gun violence the only common sense solution is to limit gun access

[Redux]

2 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

So stricter gun laws result in less gun violence. Isn't the goal less gun violence? 

 

Sure is.  But here's a hypothetical for you.

 

Class of 20 students, chewing gum is allowed and always has been.  The school consolidates and 10 more kids are added over time.  Now the class is at 30 kids.  They start putting gum in the vending machine, more kids start buying it and chewing it in class.  Some teachers don't like it but it's not a problem.

 

Then, one day.  The smelly kid up and decides to put gum in the hair of the girl in front of him.  Now we have a problem that has to be dealt with.

 

Question: Did he put gum in her hair because of the easy access to gum?  Would he have done it had he not been able to buy it?  Is the best course of action to remove gum from the vending machine?  Is the best course of action to ban gum from the classroom?  How can we only punish those who will use gum irresponsibly without restricting the ones chewing gum responsibly?  What made the smelly kid smelly to begin with?

 

My point, it's not black and white like you want it to be.  Availability is not the only problem here.

[Nebfanatic]

Just now, Redux said:

 

Sure is.  But here's a hypothetical for you.

 

Class of 20 students, chewing gum is allowed and always has been.  The school consolidates and 10 more kids are added over time.  Now the class is at 30 kids.  They start putting gum in the vending machine, more kids start buying it and chewing it in class.  Some teachers don't like it but it's not a problem.

 

Then, one day.  The smelly kid up and decides to put gum in the hair of the girl in front of him.  Now we have a problem that has to be dealt with.

 

Question: Did he put gum in her hair because of the easy access to gum?  Would he have done it had he not been able to buy it?  Is the best course of action to remove gum from the vending machine?  Is the best course of action to ban gum from the classroom?  How can we only punish those who will use gum irresponsibly without restricting the ones chewing gum responsibly?  What made the smelly kid smelly to begin with?

 

My point, it's not black and white like you want it to be.  Availability is not the only problem here.

Well if multiple kids started putting gum in peoples hair and it was a regular occurrence I can guarantee the school would ban gum and that would certainly curtail the issue.