Page 6 of 21 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 313

Thread: Gun Control

  1. #76
    Dirty Kiwi Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    10 Nov 04
    Location
    Te Whanganui a-Tara, Te Ika a Maui, Aotearoa
    Posts
    19,870
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Grape View Post
    Last time I checked Black Americans were still considered Americans.
    Well duh.
    In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

    Leibniz

  2. #77
    Idiot Mode [ON] OFF Senior Contributor YellowFever's Avatar
    Join Date
    17 Jul 06
    Posts
    6,094
    Quote Originally Posted by Red Team View Post
    Hell Vermont, the state with the loosest gun laws in the country.....
    ...also has one of the lowest gun violence rates.

    Places like California...or Chicago, with draconian gun control laws have some of the hightest gun murder rates, which should tell you it's not just about the guns.

  3. #78
    Senior Contributor Bigfella's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 07
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,673
    Quote Originally Posted by Doktor View Post
    Ok.
    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-33547806

    Is that good enough?
    Much. Britons are lucky to live in a nation where the 'big' story in crime is a weapon that kills under 300 people per year despite being easily obtained by anyone old enough to open a drawer. There simply isn't a meaningful comparison to gun in the US & the more you try to make one the sillier it gets.

    You blame DM for being partial, but what you don't say is 2/3 are suicides of your gun deaths.
    Why write a story all full of scary figures & accusations and not put the number of people actually killed? You know the reason - it would have deflated the headline because 269 people in a population of 55 million isn't very shocking.

    All the figures I have used are for homicides Doc, not gun deaths. Straight from the FBI. Sorry you'll have to do MUCH better than that if you are going to accuse me of manipulating data.

    Medical malpractice kills way more. Let's ban hospitals.
    How about we ban shithouse false equivalence arguments?

    Yo are too smart to be saying crap like this & I like you too much to continue an argument where you do. I'm out.


    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

  4. #79
    Senior Contributor Bigfella's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 07
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,673
    Quote Originally Posted by Red Team View Post
    It's absolutely no secret that black on black violence, especially in the ghettos, is a problem and has been for decades.
    Easy availability of firearms has turned a bad problem into a catastrophic one. There are plenty of Western nations with entrenched areas of poverty, disadvantaged ethnic minorities etc. They don't have even vaguely comparable homicide rates. Baltimore has about double the number of murders as London with less than 10% of the population and 40% fewer blacks. Guns, especially handguns, have been petrol on the fire. It is the difference between an area being economically depressed & an area being Belfast....or worse (for comparison, 'the Troubles' killed about 100 people a year on average).


    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

  5. #80
    Senior Contributor Bigfella's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 07
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,673
    Quote Originally Posted by GVChamp View Post
    And what's incomprehensible to me are the draconian gun laws the rest of your nations pass in order to achieve marginal mortality gains.

    That's why you live in Australia, and I live in America.
    If you think a homicide rate 400% higher is a 'marginal' difference then you need to re-do math.

    I live in an overcrowded inner city area with pockets of entrenched poverty that pre-date my nation's existence, a rampant drug trade, a largely non-white population with a history of gang violence and massive towers block I can see from my back yard ('the projects' if you will). In America this would be 'the hood'. People go about their business in safety day and night. I can recall two shootings in public in 25+ years, only one fatal. It is an area people want to live in, despite the problems, and real estate prices reflect that.

    Sane firearms policy isn't about 'marginal' gains, it is about a liveable society. I wouldn't make any more than marginal changes to your gun laws for no other reason than it is no longer practical. We started the process in the 1920s & continue to reap the benefits in terms of human life and society in general.

    That is why I live in Australia & I am thankful for it.


    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

  6. #81
    Dirty Kiwi Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    10 Nov 04
    Location
    Te Whanganui a-Tara, Te Ika a Maui, Aotearoa
    Posts
    19,870
    Quote Originally Posted by Red Team View Post
    Since when should this be a party issue? There's plenty of liberal gun owners with a vested interest in the second amendment. And plenty of people on both ends of the political spectrum have been affected by gun violence. Hell Vermont, the state with the loosest gun laws in the country, is a freaking blue state.
    It shouldn't be, but has been declared so by your president
    In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

    Leibniz

  7. #82
    Senior Contributor Red Team's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Oct 11
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    800
    Quote Originally Posted by Parihaka View Post
    It shouldn't be, but has been declared so by your president
    I'm pretty certain it has more to do with our current hyperpolarized political climate than the actions of our president, who has yet to declare the sweeping gun snatch that most of his opponents are panicking about.
    "Draft beer, not people."

  8. #83
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,848
    Quote Originally Posted by Red Team View Post
    I'm pretty certain it has more to do with our current hyperpolarized political climate than the actions of our president, who has yet to declare the sweeping gun snatch that most of his opponents are panicking about.
    Only because he knows he faces certain legislative defeat. So, no panic, only vigilance.

  9. #84
    Dirty Kiwi Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    10 Nov 04
    Location
    Te Whanganui a-Tara, Te Ika a Maui, Aotearoa
    Posts
    19,870
    Quote Originally Posted by Red Team View Post
    I'm pretty certain it has more to do with our current hyperpolarized political climate than the actions of our president, who has yet to declare the sweeping gun snatch that most of his opponents are panicking about.
    Agreed, what I was specifically referring to though was this
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...after-shooting
    In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

    Leibniz

  10. #85
    Senior Contributor Red Team's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Oct 11
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    800
    Quote Originally Posted by citanon View Post
    Only because he knows he faces certain legislative defeat. So, no panic, only vigilance.
    Certainly, but one would have thought he'd have rolled major gun legislation in during the Dem's dominance in Congress alongside the ACA if it was such a vested interest for him to take our guns.
    "Draft beer, not people."

  11. #86
    Senior Contributor Doktor's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Aug 08
    Location
    Skopje, Macedonia
    Posts
    13,668
    Quote Originally Posted by Bigfella View Post
    Much. Britons are lucky to live in a nation where the 'big' story in crime is a weapon that kills under 300 people per year despite being easily obtained by anyone old enough to open a drawer. There simply isn't a meaningful comparison to gun in the US & the more you try to make one the sillier it gets.



    Why write a story all full of scary figures & accusations and not put the number of people actually killed? You know the reason - it would have deflated the headline because 269 people in a population of 55 million isn't very shocking.

    All the figures I have used are for homicides Doc, not gun deaths. Straight from the FBI. Sorry you'll have to do MUCH better than that if you are going to accuse me of manipulating data.



    How about we ban shithouse false equivalence arguments?

    Yo are too smart to be saying crap like this & I like you too much to continue an argument where you do. I'm out.
    We have a very very very tight gun regulation. It is enforced very strictly. Guess how many shootings we fet. Heck, yesterday we had one. And a week earlier another. Out of 2 mil. So, we have more shootings without guns, then Americans with 1.333 guns per capita.
    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

  12. #87
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,848
    Quote Originally Posted by Doktor View Post
    We have a very very very tight gun regulation. It is enforced very strictly. Guess how many shootings we fet. Heck, yesterday we had one. And a week earlier another. Out of 2 mil. So, we have more shootings without guns, then Americans with 1.333 guns per capita.
    Exactly Dok. Different countries are, gasp, different.

  13. #88
    Senior Contributor Doktor's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Aug 08
    Location
    Skopje, Macedonia
    Posts
    13,668
    Quote Originally Posted by citanon View Post
    Exactly Dok. Different countries are, gasp, different.
    I am not the one saying hey look how good it works for us we only have 1/6 per capita compared to...
    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

  14. #89
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,848
    Quote Originally Posted by Doktor View Post
    I am not the one saying hey look how good it works for us we only have 1/6 per capita compared to...
    No I actually agree with you.

    The US is a very large country and different US cities have different sets of problems. Comparing the US specifically to country X is not useful.

    There are large US cities that are very safe, and then there are specific areas that are very much different, and that's a product of what's happening in those areas, and the history of how it got that way.

  15. #90
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,688
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Grape View Post
    The one I always see is 4 or more people shot with at least 2 dead. But you brought up the term.

    SO you have to kill someone for there to be a gun violence problem?

    Death is not a public health concern. Everyone dies. People killed in a mass shooting(or car accident......) don't eat up health care money. Wounded people do.
    You tag and bag the dead at the scene. Its the survivors that cost health care money.
    I still cannot tell what you are trying to argue. I don't actually know the number of survivors of gun deaths, but for the total US health care system, I am pretty sure the majority of expenses are on issues like heart disease, cancer, diabetes, etc.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bigfella View Post
    If you think a homicide rate 400% higher is a 'marginal' difference then you need to re-do math.

    I live in an overcrowded inner city area with pockets of entrenched poverty that pre-date my nation's existence, a rampant drug trade, a largely non-white population with a history of gang violence and massive towers block I can see from my back yard ('the projects' if you will). In America this would be 'the hood'. People go about their business in safety day and night. I can recall two shootings in public in 25+ years, only one fatal. It is an area people want to live in, despite the problems, and real estate prices reflect that.

    Sane firearms policy isn't about 'marginal' gains, it is about a liveable society. I wouldn't make any more than marginal changes to your gun laws for no other reason than it is no longer practical. We started the process in the 1920s & continue to reap the benefits in terms of human life and society in general.

    That is why I live in Australia & I am thankful for it.
    What in the world makes you think the United States isn't livable? Have you actually lived in the United States? My Wife is absent-minded: she's left the door unlocked or her keys in the door 3 or 4 times in the 6 months we've lived her, and we haven't had a problem. Once she left the window open. The only problem is that it was 45 degrees outside and cooled the entire house.

    Clearly the United States is livable. It's the richest nation on Earth, and it's the most populated of the advanced nations, not to mention the 3rd most populous nation on Earth. We have immigration, including the brightest and best in the world.

    Not sure where you are getting this idea that the United States isn't livable. The 400% higher rate of homicides doesn't meaningfully affect most Americans, because it's such a low number to begin with.

    By the way, what does Vox say about Australia's sane gun control of seizing law-abiding citizen's guns?

    . Leigh and Neill found that the buyback resulted in a 35 to 50 percent decline in the gun homicide rate, but because of the low number of homicides in Australia normally, this change wasn't statistically significant
    Yeah, it's a 35 percent decline, of something that's terribly small to begin with, so small we can't even come up with a way to measure it. That small.

    So, yes, you have a number, but it doesn't mean anything.

    Here's what it actually means:
    For gains so small you can't even statistically measure it, you sent police officers into the homes of tax-paying, law-abiding, fellow citizens, in order to seize their property.

    You then insist you have a monopoly on sanity and everyone who disagrees with you is obviously irrational.

    Here's the thing: no one in my family, besides service members, has ever been shot at. No one in my family has ever shoot at anther person. I know of one person in my entire life who has ever been shot, and that was indeed in a mass shooting with international press coverage.
    I do not think that justifies disarming my family. I certainly do not think that should allow a federal bureaucrat to manage a database of all the mental health information for every person in my family. My family does not have good experiences with government databases.

    That some people kill themselves with their guns is not a good enough reason. That the 'hood cannot police itself is not a good enough reason, though the local officials there can pass whatever laws they deem necessary for their safety. That there are sometimes mass shootings in a nation of 300+ million people is not a good enough reason.

    Nope, not a good enough reason, I am going to continue my blessed life in the world's richest nation that somehow operates despite all these guns. I am even going to a public place today because I don't fear mass shootings from my fellow Americans anymore than I fear mass shootings from ISIS.


    EDIT: I should add that I don't think your preference for policy choices is irrational or crazy. It is a measured policy response I would expect of someone who is very interested in reducing gun violence and does not care much about gunowner rights.

    The United States does not share that policy preference. It's not odd that different nations have different policy choices. That does not make us uncivilized.

    I do not want the federal government making unilateral policy decisions for the United States. Americans are way too eager to get the federal government involved in every little problem.

    I also worry about Americans overresponding to little problems. The last time an American city became unlivable was when the police shut down Watertown after the Boston bombing, because there was a half-dead teenager bleeding out somewhere. That is completely irrational and dangerous.
    Last edited by GVChamp; 05 Dec 15, at 17:56.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Air traffic control
    By tankie in forum The Field Mess
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 26 Jan 10,, 16:10
  2. Who would take control in this what if?
    By BudW in forum International Politics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 30 Dec 07,, 20:12
  3. US Keeps Control of Net
    By Julie in forum International Economy
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 19 Nov 05,, 15:28
  4. This is way out of control...
    By troung in forum International Economy
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 24 Jul 05,, 00:10
  5. Do we control the media or does it control us?
    By MaximumDefiance in forum International Economy
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 21 Aug 04,, 23:09

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •