The Right to Carry a Gun

[Nebfanatic]

8 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

Read my last post (reply to you). If that isn't clear enough, I can't help you.

I guess you can't help me because it appears you are still blaming the issue on mental illness. When you say things like we could blame any problem in the US on easy access it leads me to believe you don't actually think that is the problem. 

[Nebfanatic]

The argument is essentially if ease of access and gun culture is the problem, why isn't everyone shooting up malls? It's pretty weak logic imo

[Redux]

47 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

That's strange, I didn't know mental health statistics and gun violence statistics were only posted on anti or pro gun right websites. Funny how when scientific data doesn't go peoples way they want to throw it out the window.

 

Question, does evil exist less in Norway? Do we have an evil problem in America? 

 

Way to spin it.  You were asking for data, aka links, which loosely translates into the following:

 

I post it, favoring my opinion, you s#!t on it

 

You post it, favoring your opinion, I roll my eyes

 

Why go through that hassle?  And as to that Norway question, yes evil probably does exist less in Norway.  Yes, we do have an evil problem in America.  That's kind of the whole point, that this country eats itself alive and gives us easy ways to do it.  Guns are just one of the tools.  

[Redux]

26 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

The argument is essentially if ease of access and gun culture is the problem, why isn't everyone shooting up malls? It's pretty weak logic imo

 

The point he is making is that most people aren't psychopaths and ease of access isn't the only thing in play leading to mass shootings.  If ease of access were the root cause, we would have even more shootings than the far too many we already have.

 

Did making marijuana legal in a few states create more stoners?  Does changing the cigarette law to 21yrs or older make teen smokers stop trying to aquire cigarettes?

[Nebfanatic]

21 minutes ago, Redux said:

 

Way to spin it.  You were asking for data, aka links, which loosely translates into the following:

 

I post it, favoring my opinion, you s#!t on it

 

You post it, favoring your opinion, I roll my eyes

 

Why go through that hassle?  And as to that Norway question, yes evil probably does exist less in Norway.  Yes, we do have an evil problem in America.  That's kind of the whole point, that this country eats itself alive and gives us easy ways to do it.  Guns are just one of the tools.  

That is a BS excuse. If you have information that supports your argument then bring it to the discussion. 

[Nebfanatic]

21 minutes ago, Redux said:

 

The point he is making is that most people aren't psychopaths and ease of access isn't the only thing in play leading to mass shootings.  If ease of access were the root cause, we would have even more shootings than the far too many we already have.

 

Did making marijuana legal in a few states create more stoners?  Does changing the cigarette law to 21yrs or older make teen smokers stop trying to aquire cigarettes?

How do we know that if we already have far too many shootings? That really doesn't make sense. 

[knapplc]

2 hours ago, JJ Husker said:

there must be something other than easy access and a culture that worships guns

 

You've said it, but you haven't shown it.

 

You've provided opinion. I've provided facts. When those facts don't agree with your opinion, you resorted to personal attacks.

 

[knapplc]

What a great exercise in how letting facts form your opinion is an unimpeachable stance.

[Redux]

37 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

That is a BS excuse. If you have information that supports your argument then bring it to the discussion. 

 

It's not an excuse. It's pretty well documented, any time data or links are posted, they get ignored for the large part during a disagreement.  Asking for them is just a way of trying to inconvenience your opponent.

 

37 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

How do we know that if we already have far too many shootings? That really doesn't make sense. 

 

It makes perfect sense once you get past the "guns are the only problem" mentality.

[JJ Husker]

My point is simple. I don't know why a couple of you are struggling with it. I've said easy access contributes to the problem. But no one has answered my question. Why does person A commit a mass shooting while so many others do not? I'm not talking data points or why the US has more of a problem than other places. I'm simply asking what makes one person commit the act of shooting. It's a logic question, not something that requires a link to be posted. I'm saying easy access is not the answer to THAT question. And maybe, maybe if we can begin to answer THAT question then maybe we'll be on to a better understanding and solution. I mean logic also tells me that we will never rid the world of every single gun so hopefully we can come up with something else.

[Redux]

8 hours ago, knapplc said:

What a great exercise in how letting facts form your opinion is an unimpeachable stance.

 

Facts don't only support one side of an argument, kind of why there is a debate to begin with.  It's not black and white.

[NM11046]

On 1/5/2020 at 12:49 AM, JJ Husker said:

But it’s not as easy for mentally ill people to get guns in other countries.

 

Dont get me wrong (either side), I don’t have any answers. But there are a couple things I know and believe.

 

1- Anyone who commits these gun crimes has something wrong with them. Mental illness, lack of respect for human life, something.....and it’s not normal. Guns seem to be the weapon of choice and definitely can contribute to a higher toll but guns themselves are not the core problem.

 

2- Responsible law abiding citizens who have guns are not the problem. As soon as a person crosses that line and commits one of these mass shootings they cannot be counted in the responsible law abiding citizen category.

 

I think the problem could definitely be lessened by having fewer guns in circulation and I also think it should be tougher to acquire guns. Maybe it should be treated as a privilege more than a “right” and maybe potential gun owners should be required to prove proficiency, responsibility and a real need or purpose for the gun they want to acquire. But I firmly believe guns themselves are not the problem. They are an inanimate object that will only hurt others when in the wrong hands. I just don’t know how far we have to go or what exactly we need to do to keep them out of the wrong hands. The only thing I know is that we have to do more than we are because what we are doing is not working. I’d sure like to see more focus on the people problem rather than the object problem. I just wish the solution(s) were more obvious and that fewer people were opposed to doing anything because of some stupid crap written in a 240 year old document.

This is a great, thorough post.  

To answer one question you posed, I think social media has played a huge role.  I'd like to look back at mass shootings in alignment with live online streaming and FB, Twitter etc.  i think we see a spike when these sad, lonely, sick men decide the best thing they can expect out of life is to go out with their name being known.  

[teachercd]

First, people need to stop using Norway as an example...that place has like 5 million people...not 315 million people.  I am going out on a limb here and I am going to guess that while Norway has less shooting than the USA...that the USA has more doctors, nurses, lawyers, PhD's, people with graduate degrees, more engineers, more teachers (Just tossed that in for me) more of everything that is also "good".  You know why?  Because America has more people.

 

To help out on what @JJ Husker said and to help beat down some of the "where are the facts" crowd...well PTSD was not "a thing" until 1980...until that became a thing you were just not "tough enough" or you had "shell shock" or you were "going through some things" Now, we realize that it is a real thing.

 

If you use a gun, knife, bat or anything to kill someone...you have an issue.  

 

Ted Bundy refused to ever admit he was "nuts" he even went as far as to say he was insulted by his outside council when they said he should try using that as his defense.  I don't think it was until 86 where a doctor finally said Ted was bipolar.  We all know Ted was nuts.

 

Crazy doesn't need to fit into an already determined box, just like it didn't for people with PTSD until 1980.  The "facts" crowd in 1979 "Oh that vet just needs to get their act together, nothing is wrong with them" the "facts crowd" in 1980 "Oh, that vet needs mental help, he has PTSD"

 

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled off was convincing people he didn't exist. Evil to that magnitude is a result of mental illness in one way, shape or form.  It doesn't mean it should not be punished.  It should.  But some people are born bad and others become bad.

 

[Nebfanatic]

9 hours ago, Redux said:

 

It's not an excuse. It's pretty well documented, any time data or links are posted, they get ignored for the large part during a disagreement.  Asking for them is just a way of trying to inconvenience your opponent.

 

 

It makes perfect sense once you get past the "guns are the only problem" mentality.

By who? Because you rarely post factual information to back up your argument so I'd like to see this documentation. When has this happened to you? 

[Redux]

8 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

By who? Because you rarely post factual information to back up your argument so I'd like to see this documentation. When has this happened to you? 

 

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