Firearm immunity

[Hoopsdoc1978]

Ahhh, the old NRA boogeyman.

They’re not even in the top 50 lobbying groups in DC.

I agree with that, to some extent.

Don't agree that the political gun culture is the same, however. That changed drastically in the late 70s.

http://theconversation.com/the-nras-journey-from-marksmanship-to-political-brinkmanship-92160

Aaah, yes, the old NRA boogeyman.

In a country in which 43 percent of the citizens own firearms, the NRA has 5 million members. They’re not the massive evil entity that Vox and MSNBC tell you they are.

They’re not even a top 50 lobbying group in DC. They have less impact on gun culture in this country than guns and ammo magazine or the outdoor channel, both of which reach far more people.

 

[Cortez88]

Every time I see someone open carrying, I want to ask them “what are you scared of?” Recently went to dinner with the family and there some idiot sat with his family and a pistol on his hip. Aside from alarming other customers, im not sure what he was hoping to accomplish.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

and yet it's every week we see some local story in the paper where some 4 yr old found a gun somewhere in the house and shot his mom or 5 yr old sister in the head with it.

seems like the adults get charged in those cases.

would be nice if just once some politician had the balls to come out and say, "well i have no problem coming for your guns".

has worked great elsewhere.

those countries where they did, look at us as the total idiots. and with good reason.

and spare me the "too many guns out there already" bs.

we outlaw guns and ammo, and those holding will play it a lot safer, and not risk losing what they have and will be difficult to replace, and gun deaths will start declining the next day, even if a lot of guns are still out there.

as time goes by, less and less guns and ammo will still be out there, and those still holding will play it safer and safer.

gun deaths will become a fraction of what they are now.

even Joe Sixpack who ain't givin his up without a fight, will still be a lot more careful about leaving it laying around the house where his 3 yr old can find it, or pointing it at the car who cut him off, or threatening his ex or her boyfriend..

 

[Standard Issue]

Every time I see someone open carrying, I want to ask them “what are you scared of?” Recently went to dinner with the family and there some idiot sat with his family and a pistol on his hip. Aside from alarming other customers, im not sure what he was hoping to accomplish.

I always assume there are dick issues involved.

 

[UncleMark]

Recently went to dinner with the family and there some idiot sat with his family and a pistol on his hip. Aside from alarming other customers, im not sure what he was hoping to accomplish.

It's only happened once, since we're too cheap to eat out much and we do live in Bloomington, but the one time this happened to me and the wife we left the establishment and told the proprietor why. My Canadian wife is especially freaked out by the gun nuts.

 

[Hoopsdoc1978]

Every time I see someone open carrying, I want to ask them “what are you scared of?” Recently went to dinner with the family and there some idiot sat with his family and a pistol on his hip. Aside from alarming other customers, im not sure what he was hoping to accomplish.

I don’t know, I see a person who has filled out a lengthy online questionnaire, submitted his fingerprints to the state, and sat down for an interview with the local police department, just to get that license.

That’s the kind of responsible gun owner we need more of.

 

[Cortez88]

I don’t know, I see a person who has filled out a lengthy online questionnaire, submitted his fingerprints to the state, and sat down for an interview with the local police department, just to get that license.

That’s the kind of responsible gun owner we need more of.

Ok I’ll ask. Why do we need more people carrying guns around? You know why the guy got shot during the parking lot squabble? The other guy was a responsible gun owner. Any time someone gets shot, it’s because the other guy had a gun.

So tell me. Why do we need more people carrying guns? I’m blown away that any sentient human being can have that thought.

 

[twenty02]

Ok I’ll ask. Why do we need more people carrying guns around? You know why the guy got shot during the parking lot squabble? The other guy was a responsible gun owner. Any time someone gets shot, it’s because the other guy had a gun.

So tell me. Why do we need more people carrying guns? I’m blown away that any sentient human being can have that thought.

It's a self-fulfilling issue, where more guns begat more guns....to the point where everyone feels like they need one so they aren't the one guy that shows up without one. It's total lunacy, but that's 'Merica.

We are basically on par with Iraq in number of gun deaths per capita.

One more way to consider these data: The IHME also estimates what it would expect a country's rate of gun violence deaths to be based solely on its socioeconomic status. By that measure, the U.S. should be seeing only 0.79 deaths per 100,000 people. Instead, its actual rate of 3.85 deaths per 100,000 is almost five times as high.​

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsa...how-the-u-s-compares-to-the-rest-of-the-world

 

[Ladoga]

Ok I’ll ask. Why do we need more people carrying guns around? You know why the guy got shot during the parking lot squabble? The other guy was a responsible gun owner. Any time someone gets shot, it’s because the other guy had a gun.

So tell me. Why do we need more people carrying guns? I’m blown away that any sentient human being can have that thought.

Its not a question of "need". It doesn't matter what we "need". It's a question of peoples' Consitutional Rights to be armed. That right does not require a license or the assent of the populace to exercise anymore than any other right acknowledged in the Constitution.

 

[Hoopsdoc1978]

It's a self-fulfilling issue, where more guns begat more guns....to the point where everyone feels like they need one so they aren't the one guy that shows up without one. It's total lunacy, but that's 'Merica.

We are basically on par with Iraq in number of gun deaths per capita.

One more way to consider these data: The IHME also estimates what it would expect a country's rate of gun violence deaths to be based solely on its socioeconomic status. By that measure, the U.S. should be seeing only 0.79 deaths per 100,000 people. Instead, its actual rate of 3.85 deaths per 100,000 is almost five times as high.​

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsa...how-the-u-s-compares-to-the-rest-of-the-world

Meanwhile, gun crime keeps dropping while gun ownership continues to rise. It’s not now, nor has it ever been, the number of guns that is the problem.

Sadly though, as is typical from the gun control lobby, their only solution is to further deprive only those who are responsible and law abiding.

 

[twenty02]

Meanwhile, gun crime keeps dropping while gun ownership continues to rise. It’s not now, nor has it ever been, the number of guns that is the problem.

Sadly though, as is typical from the gun control lobby, their only solution is to further deprive only those who are responsible and law abiding.

Care to then postulate why we have gun deaths 5 to 10x higher than all our peer nations, if it isn't number of guns?

 

[Hoopsdoc1978]

Care to then postulate why we have gun deaths 5 to 10x higher than all our peer nations, if it isn't number of guns?

I’m not sure.

Would you care to postulate why the number of deaths drop even while the number of guns rise?

And then explain how the city with the strictest gun control laws in the entire nation, Chicago, is also one of the absolute worst in terms of crime committed WITH guns?

One of the main arguments I hear from the gun control lobby is an assault weapons ban, which we had from 1994 until 2004. Guess what, crime peaked in this country in 1997, right in the middle of that ban, and has been dropping ever since, even without it. And that’s leaving aside the fact that hardly ANY crime is committed using an assault weapon in the first place. How to explain that?

 

[twenty02]

I’m not sure.

Would you care to postulate why the number of deaths drop even while the number of guns rise?

And then explain how the city with the strictest gun control laws in the entire nation, Chicago, is also one of the absolute worst in terms of crime committed WITH guns?

One of the main arguments I hear from the gun control lobby is an assault weapons ban, which we had from 1994 until 2004. Guess what, crime peaked in this country in 1997, right in the middle of that ban, and has been dropping ever since, even without it. And that’s leaving aside the fact that hardly ANY crime is committed using an assault weapon in the first place. How to explain that?

1) overall crime has been dropping for 30 years.

2) You can drive to Indiana or Wisconsin from Chicago in under an hour. Both states have very permissible gun laws. Nothing like this would be solved at a local/state level because the borders only exists on maps, and are entirely permeable. But thanks for rehashing talking points from right wing echo chambers.

3) assault weapons aren't the issue (other than in mass shootings). There are no place for them, but there really is no place for any semi-automatic gun.


It's pointless discussion. You are brainwashed American, like most, that refuses to look at the blatantly obvious data that the 2nd amendment is a disaster for our society.

"I'm not sure"....lol.

Americans are 10 times more likely to be killed by guns than people in other developed countries, a new study finds.

Compared to 22 other high-income nations, the United States' gun-related murder rate is 25 times higher. And, even though the United States' suicide rate is similar to other countries, the nation's gun-related suicide rate is eight times higher than other high-income countries, researchers said.....

Even though it has half the population of the other 22 nations combined, the United States accounted for 82 percent of all gun deaths. The United States also accounted for 90 percent of all women killed by guns, the study found. Ninety-one percent of children under 14 who died by gun violence were in the United States. And 92 percent of young people between ages 15 and 24 killed by guns were in the United States, the study found.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-u-s-gun-deaths-compare-to-other-countries/
​

You can carry on telling yourself that none of this data has anything to do with the fact that half the guns in the entire world are in the US...even though we're about 4% of the world's population.

If you want to stick your fingers in your eyes and ignore basic common sense, then that's your prerogative. But don't expect to spread bullshit that the numbers of guns has no impact, and not be called out on it. We're fkn equivalent to Iraq in gun deaths per capita....let that sink in. Or don't.

​

 

[Standard Issue]

Sat

I’m not sure.

Would you care to postulate why the number of deaths drop even while the number of guns rise?

And then explain how the city with the strictest gun control laws in the entire nation, Chicago, is also one of the absolute worst in terms of crime committed WITH guns?

One of the main arguments I hear from the gun control lobby is an assault weapons ban, which we had from 1994 until 2004. Guess what, crime peaked in this country in 1997, right in the middle of that ban, and has been dropping ever since, even without it. And that’s leaving aside the fact that hardly ANY crime is committed using an assault weapon in the first place. How to explain that?

Saturation.

 

[Hoopsdoc1978]

1) overall crime has been dropping for 30 years.

2) You can drive to Indiana or Wisconsin from Chicago in under an hour. Both states have very permissible gun laws. Nothing like this would be solved at a local/state level because the borders only exists on maps, and are entirely permeable. But thanks for rehashing talking points from right wing echo chambers.

3) assault weapons aren't the issue (other than in mass shootings). There are no place for them, but there really is no place for any semi-automatic gun.


It's pointless discussion. You are brainwashed American, like most, that refuses to look at the blatantly obvious data that the 2nd amendment is a disaster for our society.

"I'm not sure"....lol.

Americans are 10 times more likely to be killed by guns than people in other developed countries, a new study finds.

Compared to 22 other high-income nations, the United States' gun-related murder rate is 25 times higher. And, even though the United States' suicide rate is similar to other countries, the nation's gun-related suicide rate is eight times higher than other high-income countries, researchers said.....

Even though it has half the population of the other 22 nations combined, the United States accounted for 82 percent of all gun deaths. The United States also accounted for 90 percent of all women killed by guns, the study found. Ninety-one percent of children under 14 who died by gun violence were in the United States. And 92 percent of young people between ages 15 and 24 killed by guns were in the United States, the study found.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-u-s-gun-deaths-compare-to-other-countries/
​

You can carry on telling yourself that none of this data has anything to do with the fact that half the guns in the entire world are in the US...even though we're about 4% of the world's population.

If you want to stick your fingers in your eyes and ignore basic common sense, then that's your prerogative. But don't expect to spread bullshit that the numbers of guns has no impact, and not be called out on it. We're fkn equivalent to Iraq in gun deaths per capita....let that sink in. Or don't.

​

Lol. “My right wing talking points”, while you regurgitate the same tired old left wing talking points.

1. Overall crime has been dropping. Yes. That’s what I said. Overall crime(including gun crime) continues to drop while the number of guns rise. That blows a massive whole in the “the number of guns is the problem” BS argument. Which you conveniently ignore.

2. Of course, your progressive laws don’t work only because of those other dumbass areas that don’t subscribe to the same bullshit. How convenient. Do you think the Canadian or Mexican border is gonna be that much more difficult to bypass? The demand is still gonna be there. And that’s not even to mention that, even if you ban all guns, there’s still gonna be millions and millions of firearms you’ll never touch, the ones that are already here. The only ones you’re harming are the ones who play by the rules. The criminals and thugs(you know, the ones actually COMMITTING all these murders) are gonna carry on, business as usual.

3. I agree, assault weapons aren’t now, and never have been, a problem. It’s just a scary buzzword cooked up to rile up sheep like you who lap this shit up. You’re more likely to die from a lightning strike than you are from an assault weapon. But thanks anyway, for telling me what I do or do not need. How very authoritarian of you.

You’re right though. These discussions ARE pointless. The 2nd amendment will NEVER EVER be eliminated in this country. Our founding fathers were wise enough to make sure of that. And I thank God for that every day.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

1) overall crime has been dropping for 30 years.

2) You can drive to Indiana or Wisconsin from Chicago in under an hour. Both states have very permissible gun laws. Nothing like this would be solved at a local/state level because the borders only exists on maps, and are entirely permeable. But thanks for rehashing talking points from right wing echo chambers.

3) assault weapons aren't the issue (other than in mass shootings). There are no place for them, but there really is no place for any semi-automatic gun.


It's pointless discussion. You are brainwashed American, like most, that refuses to look at the blatantly obvious data that the 2nd amendment is a disaster for our society.

"I'm not sure"....lol.

Americans are 10 times more likely to be killed by guns than people in other developed countries, a new study finds.

Compared to 22 other high-income nations, the United States' gun-related murder rate is 25 times higher. And, even though the United States' suicide rate is similar to other countries, the nation's gun-related suicide rate is eight times higher than other high-income countries, researchers said.....

Even though it has half the population of the other 22 nations combined, the United States accounted for 82 percent of all gun deaths. The United States also accounted for 90 percent of all women killed by guns, the study found. Ninety-one percent of children under 14 who died by gun violence were in the United States. And 92 percent of young people between ages 15 and 24 killed by guns were in the United States, the study found.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-u-s-gun-deaths-compare-to-other-countries/
​

You can carry on telling yourself that none of this data has anything to do with the fact that half the guns in the entire world are in the US...even though we're about 4% of the world's population.

If you want to stick your fingers in your eyes and ignore basic common sense, then that's your prerogative. But don't expect to spread bullshit that the numbers of guns has no impact, and not be called out on it. We're fkn equivalent to Iraq in gun deaths per capita....let that sink in. Or don't.

​

it's not the bad guys their gun protects them from, it's "fear" that it protects them from.

to take that gun would impose fear on their every day, rational or not, as emotions are generally immune from reason.

it's not that they don't grasp the problem, it's that they just don't care.

they just don't care how many people are killed by guns, how many neighborhoods are terrorized, how many families destroyed.

to them that's all just collateral damage that they have no problem with, because they need their gun for their own sense of security, way more than they care whether other peoples' lives are ruined by their need for their guns.

they love their guns, because their gun is what protects them from their fear, and the anxiety of not having it.

how rational that is is irrelevant, and not something even they can control.

they are never going to fall out of love, or should i say dependence, with their guns, and never going to care how much damage is done.

this isn't about them not agreeing whether gun reform would save lives, or how many, nor will it ever be.

it's about that daily comfort blanket.

those for whom their gun is an anti anxiety drug you'll never sway, as anxiety is just as real whether rational or not.

you can spout statistics all day every day that that gun in their home makes their home many times a far more dangerous place for their family than were it not there.

no amount of news stories about the 4 yr old who found a gun in the house and accidentally killed his sister or mother with it will ever even make a dent in their mindset.

it's not about statistics or the greater good to them.

it's about how that gun makes their daily life less anxious, regardless of whether it should have the opposite effect or not..

to them, they would be naked and vulnerable without it, they aren't giving it up, and you're never going to make them.

as to the repercussions that has on everyone else in society, they just don't care, any more than a drug addict cares about the repercussions of his needs..

perhaps we should see this more as an addiction.

 

[zeke4ahs]

I take issue with the “the rest of society” part. There are still many of us who haven’t completely lost our minds when it comes to guns. Those of us who recognize that guns(particularly those that are most used in crimes) haven’t changed a whole lot in 200 plus years and probably won’t for another 200. Yet now, even though all crime, and gun crimes in particular, are falling across the board, we wanna go after them through the back door by targeting the manufacturers.



If we really wanna save lives, we’d go after the alcohol manufacturers, whose products cost trillions of dollars a year in health care costs and impact 1000 times the number of lives that gun violence does.

But saving lives has never been what any of this is about.

Saving lives isn’t what it’s about? What is it then? Deep state wanting to confiscate all your guns?

 

[zeke4ahs]

Lol. “My right wing talking points”, while you regurgitate the same tired old left wing talking points.

1. Overall crime has been dropping. Yes. That’s what I said. Overall crime(including gun crime) continues to drop while the number of guns rise. That blows a massive whole in the “the number of guns is the problem” BS argument. Which you conveniently ignore.

2. Of course, your progressive laws don’t work only because of those other dumbass areas that don’t subscribe to the same bullshit. How convenient. Do you think the Canadian or Mexican border is gonna be that much more difficult to bypass? The demand is still gonna be there. And that’s not even to mention that, even if you ban all guns, there’s still gonna be millions and millions of firearms you’ll never touch, the ones that are already here. The only ones you’re harming are the ones who play by the rules. The criminals and thugs(you know, the ones actually COMMITTING all these murders) are gonna carry on, business as usual.

3. I agree, assault weapons aren’t now, and never have been, a problem. It’s just a scary buzzword cooked up to rile up sheep like you who lap this shit up. You’re more likely to die from a lightning strike than you are from an assault weapon. But thanks anyway, for telling me what I do or do not need. How very authoritarian of you.

You’re right though. These discussions ARE pointless. The 2nd amendment will NEVER EVER be eliminated in this country. Our founding fathers were wise enough to make sure of that. And I thank God for that every day.

Your last sentence is the problem. We have a gun culture in America like no other. The fact that someone would admit to saying they thank God for guns every day? Sick.

 

[zeke4ahs]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...tivists-were-outraged/?utm_term=.8d9803a49758
Since we are speaking of guns, did you say what these very fine lawmakers chose to do while they were listening to victims of gun violence tell their stories? Seems like that might backfire....no pun intended.

 

[twenty02]

Lol. “My right wing talking points”, while you regurgitate the same tired old left wing talking points.

1. Overall crime has been dropping. Yes. That’s what I said. Overall crime(including gun crime) continues to drop while the number of guns rise. That blows a massive whole in the “the number of guns is the problem” BS argument. Which you conveniently ignore.

2. Of course, your progressive laws don’t work only because of those other dumbass areas that don’t subscribe to the same bullshit. How convenient. Do you think the Canadian or Mexican border is gonna be that much more difficult to bypass? The demand is still gonna be there. And that’s not even to mention that, even if you ban all guns, there’s still gonna be millions and millions of firearms you’ll never touch, the ones that are already here. The only ones you’re harming are the ones who play by the rules. The criminals and thugs(you know, the ones actually COMMITTING all these murders) are gonna carry on, business as usual.

3. I agree, assault weapons aren’t now, and never have been, a problem. It’s just a scary buzzword cooked up to rile up sheep like you who lap this shit up. You’re more likely to die from a lightning strike than you are from an assault weapon. But thanks anyway, for telling me what I do or do not need. How very authoritarian of you.

You’re right though. These discussions ARE pointless. The 2nd amendment will NEVER EVER be eliminated in this country. Our founding fathers were wise enough to make sure of that. And I thank God for that every day.

1) What evidence do you have that gun deaths are dropping so much?

2) You really think smuggling guns in from Mexico is equivalently easy as driving them from Gary to Chicago? LOL.

3) Uh, ok....


Bottom line....not once have you given any explanation for why our gun deaths are 10x what they should be based upon our social-economic status as a nation. Didn't even try...because you can't. You have nothing to add, other than the same regurgitated nonsense I've heard my whole life.

 

[Rockfish1]

1) What evidence do you have that gun deaths are dropping so much?

2) You really think smuggling guns in from Mexico is equivalently easy as driving them from Gary to Chicago? LOL.

3) Uh, ok....


Bottom line....not once have you given any explanation for why our gun deaths are 10x what they should be based upon our social-economic status as a nation. Didn't even try...because you can't. You have nothing to add, other than the same regurgitated nonsense I've heard my whole life.

As you observe, all forms of crime have been declining since the 1990s, but even as crime has plummeted, we still have vastly higher rates of gun crime because we have vastly more guns. The argument that the Second Amendment dooms us to suffer these vastly higher levels of gun violence is entirely: FREEDUMB! Just ask Jim Jefferies.

By the way, there's an interesting theory that crime and other dysfunctional behaviors have sharply fallen because we sharply limited environmental exposures to lead, including the elimination of lead from gasoline and paint. A reduction in the rate of stupid and destructive behaviors is exactly what we'd expect from people with declining lead levels in their brains, and that's exactly what we've seen.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

as i said above, everybody misses the real issue here on why people are so obsessed with keeping their guns.

you want to attach reason and statistics to it, when the obsession has nothing to do with reason or statistics or greater public good.

guns are many peoples Prozac against fear of everyone else.

it's not about their lust for power, it's about battling their anxiety and fear.

reason and logic will never work, because they don't care what effects guns have on society, and never will.

they care only that they give them a sense of security, and without that security blanket, they'd be nervous wrecks.

think of their need for guns as a dependence, like a drug addiction, that spares them anxiety and fear.

we need gun control as a an intervention, the same as with a drug addict.

logic and reason will never work on an addict.

the key is getting the non addicted to have great enough numbers to force the intervention, in the face of the addicts kicking and screaming with all their might to avoid giving up their anti anxiety drug of choice, their gun.

 

[Thyrsis]

As you observe, all forms of crime have been declining since the 1990s, but even as crime has plummeted, we still have vastly higher rates of gun crime because we have vastly more guns. The argument that the Second Amendment dooms us to suffer these vastly higher levels of gun violence is entirely: FREEDUMB! Just ask Jim Jefferies.

By the way, there's an interesting theory that crime and other dysfunctional behaviors have sharply fallen because we sharply limited environmental exposures to lead, including the elimination of lead from gasoline and paint. A reduction in the rate of stupid and destructive behaviors is exactly what we'd expect from people with declining lead levels in their brains, and that's exactly what we've seen.

This doesn't really belong here, but as we talk about topics like this and about "liberals" pushing back more aggressively to gain back ground, I think things like this are meaningful and reflect a willingness among new voices to lay it all out there without any consideration for triangulating.

 

[twenty02]

As you observe, all forms of crime have been declining since the 1990s, but even as crime has plummeted, we still have vastly higher rates of gun crime because we have vastly more guns. The argument that the Second Amendment dooms us to suffer these vastly higher levels of gun violence is entirely: FREEDUMB! Just ask Jim Jefferies.

By the way, there's an interesting theory that crime and other dysfunctional behaviors have sharply fallen because we sharply limited environmental exposures to lead, including the elimination of lead from gasoline and paint. A reduction in the rate of stupid and destructive behaviors is exactly what we'd expect from people with declining lead levels in their brains, and that's exactly what we've seen.

That Jim Jefferies bit is hilarious and spot on.....have seen it several times but has been a while.

Basically hits all the points. The only real reason people want guns is cause they ****ing like guns. It's a toy and a culture. The rest of the arguments in support of the 2nd amendment are as intellectually bankrupt as one of Trump's stump speeches.

I grew up in a rural area, my grandfather had a gun in my hand (BB, air pellet, etc) starting when I was in grade school. And then would go hunting with him through my teen years....had a variety of 12 gauge shotguns and .22 bolt action rifles. So I get it the cultural aspect of gun ownership. And a 12 guage is probably the best home defense weapon you could have, anyway.....if you are inclined to be so paranoid.

But the rest of it is total nonsense.....particularly once we get into semi-automatic weapons of any type. So we basically have the 2nd amendment so heavily guarded because people don't want their toys taken away, like little children.

 

[Hoopsdoc1978]

it's not the bad guys their gun protects them from, it's "fear" that it protects them from.

to take that gun would impose fear on their every day, rational or not, as emotions are generally immune from reason.

it's not that they don't grasp the problem, it's that they just don't care.

they just don't care how many people are killed by guns, how many neighborhoods are terrorized, how many families destroyed.

to them that's all just collateral damage that they have no problem with, because they need their gun for their own sense of security, way more than they care whether other peoples' lives are ruined by their need for their guns.

they love their guns, because their gun is what protects them from their fear, and the anxiety of not having it.

how rational that is is irrelevant, and not something even they can control.

they are never going to fall out of love, or should i say dependence, with their guns, and never going to care how much damage is done.

this isn't about them not agreeing whether gun reform would save lives, or how many, nor will it ever be.

it's about that daily comfort blanket.

those for whom their gun is an anti anxiety drug you'll never sway, as anxiety is just as real whether rational or not.

you can spout statistics all day every day that that gun in their home makes their home many times a far more dangerous place for their family than were it not there.

no amount of news stories about the 4 yr old who found a gun in the house and accidentally killed his sister or mother with it will ever even make a dent in their mindset.

it's not about statistics or the greater good to them.

it's about how that gun makes their daily life less anxious, regardless of whether it should have the opposite effect or not..

to them, they would be naked and vulnerable without it, they aren't giving it up, and you're never going to make them.

as to the repercussions that has on everyone else in society, they just don't care, any more than a drug addict cares about the repercussions of his needs..

perhaps we should see this more as an addiction.

More unabashed horseshit. I own one gun, a 20 gauge shotgun that was a gift from my father, who taught me to shoot and hunt. That gun comes out maybe 5 times a year.

Fear, indeed.

If you could give me one good reason, just one, for why my giving up my shotgun would help reduce murder rates in LA or Chicago, I’ll gladly give it up. You can’t, because that reason doesn’t exist.

 

[Hoopsdoc1978]

as i said above, everybody misses the real issue here on why people are so obsessed with keeping their guns.

you want to attach reason and statistics to it, when the obsession has nothing to do with reason or statistics or greater public good.

guns are many peoples Prozac against fear of everyone else.

it's not about their lust for power, it's about battling their anxiety and fear.

reason and logic will never work, because they don't care what effects guns have on society, and never will.

they care only that they give them a sense of security, and without that security blanket, they'd be nervous wrecks.

think of their need for guns as a dependence, like a drug addiction, that spares them anxiety and fear.

we need gun control as a an intervention, the same as with a drug addict.

logic and reason will never work on an addict.

the key is getting the non addicted to have great enough numbers to force the intervention, in the face of the addicts kicking and screaming with all their might to avoid giving up their anti anxiety drug of choice, their gun.

Yes, indeed, it is I the gun owner who is afraid, while you, the one who wants to ban the scary things, who is not.

That makes a ton of sense.

 

[Hoopsdoc1978]

1) What evidence do you have that gun deaths are dropping so much?

2) You really think smuggling guns in from Mexico is equivalently easy as driving them from Gary to Chicago? LOL.

3) Uh, ok....


Bottom line....not once have you given any explanation for why our gun deaths are 10x what they should be based upon our social-economic status as a nation. Didn't even try...because you can't. You have nothing to add, other than the same regurgitated nonsense I've heard my whole life.

Gun violence is high in this country, you’re correct.

Now, show me how confiscating them from law abiding citizens will lower that rate. You won’t, because you can’t.

You have nothing to add than the same regurgitated nonsense I’ve heard my whole life.

 

[Hoopsdoc1978]

Let’s take a look at a country which implemented the toughest gun control measures ever attempted, Australia.

Research shows this attempt had little to no effect on crime, or even gun related crime.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3086324

 

[i'vegotwinners]

Gun violence is high in this country, you’re correct.

Now, show me how confiscating them from law abiding citizens will lower that rate. You won’t, because you can’t.

show me one case of someone killed by a gun where a gun wasn't the cause in the death, and i'll totally reconsider my stance.

good luck with that.

no guns, no gun deaths.

not rocket science.

if you're not willing to sacrifice your 5 uses a yr to save 10s of thousands of lives a yr, and neighborhoods in fear, and workers in fear, and schools in fear, and billions in criminal justice and medical costs, then that's on you.

you're apparently just incredibly self centered.

that said, i don't think the incredibly self centered are the big obstacle here, (though i could be wrong).

i think it's those for whom their gun is their anti anxiety drug, and whom would feel vulnerable to the world without it, that are the real opposition.

for most of those who just like shooting a few times a yr, i doubt it's a single issue vote for them.

for those who would feel anxious all the time without it, it is.

 

[twenty02]

Gun violence is high in this country, you’re correct.

Now, show me how confiscating them from law abiding citizens will lower that rate. You won’t, because you can’t.

You have nothing to add than the same regurgitated nonsense I’ve heard my whole life.

I've posted 3-4 articles/studies already that more guns per capita = more gun deaths per capita. It's something so common sense, it's absurd that you are actually trying to debate it, but yet you continue to.

Surely you understand basic regression analysis:

Not sure what else you need. Maybe you don't like statistics.

 

[Hoopsdoc1978]

show me one case of someone killed by a gun where a gun wasn't the cause in the death, and i'll totally reconsider my stance.

good luck with that.

no guns, no gun deaths.

not rocket science.

if you're not willing to sacrifice your 5 uses a yr to save 10s of thousands of lives a yr, and neighborhoods in fear, and workers in fear, and schools in fear, and billions in criminal justice and medical costs, then that's on you.

you're apparently just incredibly self centered.

that said, i don't think the incredibly self centered are the big obstacle here, (though i could be wrong).

i think it's those for whom their gun is their anti anxiety drug, and whom would feel vulnerable to the world without it, that are the real opposition.

for most of those who just like shooting a few times a yr, i doubt it's a single issue vote for them.

for those who would feel anxious all the time without it, it is.

Show me one case where someone is killed legally with a gun, and I’ll concede your point. You won’t because you can’t. And that’s where the rub is. I won’t give up my car because some people drive drunk. I won’t give up my knife because some people use them to kill. And I won’t give up my constitutional right to own a gun because some people use guns to kill.

The whole premise is ignorant. It’s beyond ignorant. If you’d have your way, only criminals would have guns.

 

[Hoopsdoc1978]

I've posted 3-4 articles/studies already that more guns per capita = more gun deaths per capita. It's something so common sense, it's absurd that you are actually trying to debate it, but yet you continue to.

Surely you understand basic regression analysis:

Not sure what else you need. Maybe you don't like statistics.

Did you read the study I linked on Australia’s efforts? That was a failure. A comprehensive failure despite the attempts to disguise it.

It’s actual proof that strict gun control doesn’t work.

Maybe you just don’t like statistics.

 

[hoosboot]

Show me one case where someone is killed legally with a gun, and I’ll concede your point. You won’t because you can’t. And that’s where the rub is. I won’t give up my car because some people drive drunk. I won’t give up my knife because some people use them to kill. And I won’t give up my constitutional right to own a gun because some people use guns to kill.

The whole premise is ignorant. It’s beyond ignorant. If you’d have your way, only criminals would have guns.

Why'd you give up your constitutional right to a suitcase nuke?

 

[twenty02]

Did you read the study I linked on Australia’s efforts? That was a failure. A comprehensive failure despite the attempts to disguise it.

It’s actual proof that strict gun control doesn’t work.

Maybe you just don’t like statistics.

A failure? Australia has per capita gun deaths that are 1/5th what they are in the US. I'd take that "failure".

 

[Hoopsdoc1978]

A failure? Australia has per capita gun deaths that are 1/5th what they are in the US. I'd take that "failure".

So would I. But what that study shows us is that massive, overreaching gun control is not the way to get there.

 

[Hoopsdoc1978]

A failure? Australia has per capita gun deaths that are 1/5th what they are in the US. I'd take that "failure".

Intellectually dishonest argument is intellectually dishonest.

 

[twenty02]

Intellectually dishonest argument is intellectually dishonest.

Intellectually dishonest would be ignoring all the data that shows more guns per capita equates to more gun deaths per capita. It's as simple as that.

You are either a dumb person or so ideologically rigid that you don't care about very crystal clear statistical correlation.

Either way, you are worth no more of my time on this topic. Have a good evening.

 

[Hoopsdoc1978]

“Senior police officials call for emergency funding and cobra meetings to combat the precipitous rise in knife crime in England.”

Now they’re coming after your butter knives. Some stores have already pulled them from their shelves. I’m sure it will work.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/mar/06/police-chief-says-rise-in-knife-crime-in-england-is-national-emergency

There were 39,818 crimes committed with knives or sharp objects in England and Wales in the span of Jan-Sep 2018.

 

[Hoopsdoc1978]

Intellectually dishonest would be ignoring all the data that shows more guns per capita equates to more gun deaths per capita. It's as simple as that.

You are either a dumb person or so ideologically rigid that you don't care about very crystal clear statistical correlation.

Either way, you are worth no more of my time on this topic. Have a good evening.

Still no comment on the study, eh?

Oh well. I think you’re an intelligent poster on most issues but you’re clearly letting your bias affect your judgement on this one. So, in that sense, you are correct. This discussion is a waste of time.

Good day to you.

 

[hoosboot]

Still no comment on the study, eh?

Oh well. I think you’re an intelligent poster on most issues but you’re clearly letting your bias affect your judgement on this one. So, in that sense, you are correct. This discussion is a waste of time.

Good day to you.

And you totally aren't letting your bias affect yours.

Why does your constitutional right stop with a suitcase nuke or grenades?