Sorry gun advocates, you'll just have to suck it up

[Siro]

Might reduce it?
I guarantee it would reduce it. Not sure how much but if you take away the most effective way of killing someone then it's a guarantee that killing would decrease.

But I hate how populated the country is so I say make guns easier to get

Yes, that "might" wasn't intended as "may or may not". As for the next part of your post, I personally like the human species, and I think the more the merrier!

 

[Stoked]

Ask all people to turn in outlawed guns, whether gang-involved or not. Extend regulations on the rest of purchasable firearms. Fines and sentences to those who don't oblige, and are proven to maintain ownership over then. I don't really care for your "America will launch a civil war" argument, really-- if America needs to launch in a civil war, then so be it. I posted an article earlier in this thread that talked about how America didn't always have his widespread fanaticism with firearms, and that the meaning of the 2nd amendment has not always been interpreted in the same way. America has led the entire world in so many regards since its conception, and this homicide and crime problem simply cannot be ignored. America has changed, and it will continue to change. Complacency is the demon of every civilization.

If so be it is your response to a civil war then that brings into serious doubt your argument about saving lives. Makes it seem more about control.

Sure offer incentives to turn in guns. There are already many programs like that ran by local PDs.

As for penalties. There is no registration of all gun owners. They won't know who has them as the underground market for guns will explode. Trafficking firearms into America would be as big or bigger than narcotics is now. So now your 300+ million is 250+ million guns and a huge under ground market. Sure you decreased the number but I don't think that will be enough.

Confiscation is as much of an absurd non-starter as the GOPs idiotic "self deportation" for illegals.

 

[Revolution 9]

We can throw our hands up in the air and give up. Arm ourselves more. Or eliminate future weapons sales of guns we deem to have no real purpose in society. Obviously what Stoked and gun supporters are saying does carry weight. How does that solve the hundred of millions of guns that are already out there. Well, for one it doesnt. Second we dont want to get rid of all the guns. We want to have smarter gun ownership. Better training, and better screening. You cant change culture overnight, nor should we want to. We should strive to put our heads together, and talk like human beings. I think we can solve even the hardest of challenges if we do. We arent the worst of the worst. We could be Honduras.

 

[Stoked]

In the short term it wouldn't do any good.
In the long term though I think eventually you would see a decrease in homicides as little by little there would be less and less total guns

In the long term the majority of guns stay unregistered and the black market/illegal trade for guns explodes.

 

[Hotdog]

No, I've never done that. It's funny seeing the racists reveal themselves in this thread because they're making it about their problems with me.

Furthermore, this thread was started about a national discourse being needed about gun violence/gun control laws. Threads in which I've gotten some of the racists upset were about cops killing unarmed people - which is not the same topic as gun control. Keep going though, you're doing a great job revealing yourself.

I don't have a racist bone in my body. I bet I know and hang out with more non white people than you do. Two of my very best friends, who I hang out with every week, are black. I also listen to a lot of rap music. I really like black culture.

I just don't care for racist people either way. And in my opinion you are very racist against white people. I don't like that. So I'm gonna let you know all about the discrepancies in your logic.

 

[Revolution 9]

In the short term it wouldn't do any good.
In the long term though I think eventually you would see a decrease in homicides as little by little there would be less and less total guns

I think Stoked is dealing in absolutes. Banning guns isnt an easy fix. Banning guns alone wont solve the problem. However, it could be a part of a larger solution.

 

[Stoked]

We can throw our hands up in the air and give up. Arm ourselves more. Or eliminate future weapons sales of guns we deem to have no real purpose in society. Obviously what Stoked and gun supporters are saying does carry weight. How does that solve the hundred of millions of guns that are already out there. Well, for one it doesnt. Second we dont want to get rid of all the guns. We want to have smarter gun ownership. Better training, and better screening. You cant change culture overnight, nor should we want to. We should strive to put our heads together, and talk like human beings. I think we can solve even the hardest of challenges if we do. We arent the worst of the worst. We could be Honduras.

I absolutely agree with the bolded.

But "gun control" by itself will never solve the problem of gun violence.

As Franklin* has point out...gangs anyone? just to name one of many areas that would need to be directly addressed to stop gun violence.

Gun violence is so much deeper and complex than the availability of guns.

 

[Stoked]

I think Stoked is dealing in absolutes. Banning guns isnt an easy fix. Banning guns alone wont solve the problem. However, it could be a part of a larger solution.

I agree that it could be part of a larger solution. But is it a solution that we could all stomach? What else would be needed beyond banning future firearm sales?

 

[Revolution 9]

"gun control" by itself will never solve the problem of gun violence.

I completely agree.

 

[Hotdog]

About guns...

I don't really care for them. Don't own one. Don't need one. But I get that it's a right that people have, and they should be able to defend themselves. Because the reality is that there is a lot of danger out there.

I'm tired of people not taking responsibility for their own actions.

This is why I'm all for the death penalty. We should be executing every single person who commits violent crimes against innocent people.

No more excuses.

 

[Revolution 9]

I agree that it could be part of a larger solution. But is it a solution that we could all stomach? What else would be needed beyond banning future firearm sales?

If the end result is was less violence without losing the basic right to own a gun hopefully we could live with it.

 

[franklin]

So, let me see if I understand your reasoning. Liberals' concern about gun violence and gun deaths is misplaced because there are other causes of preventable deaths that are larger? Correct?

Out of curiosity, what is the threshold for the number of preventable deaths that you believe suddenly propel something from 'minor' unworthy of attention to major and worthy of attention?

A follow-up question. It is possible that US society and political system is capable of addressing multiple issues simultaneously?

BS. There are many perfectly valid reasons for liberals, or anyone for that matter, to be concerned about the level of gun violence in this country AND there is simply no way to even begin to address this issue in a rational way without factoring in the extent to which people in this country have easy access to guns. It is unavoidably part of the issue/problem, and to pretend otherwise is just plain willful ignorance.

I would argue, moreover, that it is the 2nd Amendment crowd that have done a far more extensive and successful job of politicizing this issue. Look no further than the grossly disproportionate influence of the NRA within the halls of Congress. If that is not politicizing the issue, I don't know what is.



WTF????



I ask myself why, and I find your explanation totally wanting of even the whiff of a scintilla of even the most remotest insight.[/QUOTE]

I haven't seen a single thread here about vehicle control yet there are hundreds of anti-gun threads. This isn't about guns to liberals, it's about politicizing hot-button issues for votes.

 

[fishonjazz]

In the long term the majority of guns stay unregistered and the black market/illegal trade for guns explodes.

Says you. I disagree.
I think criminals continue to get caught committing crimes, the guns that the criminals had at the time of apprehension get taken and destroyed and little by little there are less and less guns.
If you are right then there should be huge black markets in every country that doesn't allow guns.

I also think that non criminals that still possess guns take better care of them (locking them up better) and there are less accidental shootings as well.

 

[Stoked]

If the end result is was less violence without losing the basic right to own a gun hopefully we could live with it.

What additional rights and privileges were lost/violated along the way?

 

[fishonjazz]

But "gun control" by itself will never solve the problem of gun violence.

Literally no one thinks this.
But gun control would help

 

[Jamezz]

I can't believe how it's being discussed to get away with our beloved 2nd Amendment, very disappointing.

 

[Stoked]

Says you. I disagree.
I think criminals continue to get caught committing crimes, the guns that the criminals had at the time of apprehension get taken and destroyed and little by little there are less and less guns.
If you are right then there should be huge black markets in every country that doesn't allow guns.

I also think that non criminals that still possess guns take better care of them (locking them up better) and there are less accidental shootings as well.

Because that worked with drugs? There will be a growing influx of guns across the border. Cartels and other shady groups would jump on a gun ban instantly. Not to mention the already growing trend of making your own firearms and bullets.

 

[Jamezz]

I guess it's trendy and cute.

 

[franklin]

I don't disagree that gun aren't the cause of the problem, but I don't understand what your example is supposed to illustrate. Most European countries are vast (population wise) compared to Utah, and Europe as a whole has a lot more people than the US, and a lot less crime.

But for those interested:

https://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-nationally-and-state

Utah's rate is at 1.7 per 100k right now, which is on par with an above average European country.

The point is making fare comparisons. Gun violence is not uniform across the US states, and many states with the highest gun density have the lowest crime rates. There is not a correlation to violence and gun ownership, regardless of how the liberals or NRA want to spin some random statistic.

Taking away guns might lower some crime, but that's assuredly not certain as you and fishonjazz have both implicated. There is the possibility that in the absence of guns certain crime rates will rise. There will be a displacement in what crime is committed and how. Everyone seems to be ignoring that possibility or completely unaware that alternatives exist to people with alternative choices.

Addressing guns is treating the symptoms rather than the cause of the disease. Remove the disease and then let's see if there is a valid comparison.

 

[fishonjazz]

Because that worked with drugs? There will be a growing influx of guns across the border. Cartels and other shady groups would jump on a gun ban instantly. Not to mention the already growing trend of making your own firearms and bullets.

Ya I do think it worked with drugs if the goal is to have less people doing drugs.

I don't smoke pot right now because it's illegal and I would lose my job.
Legalize pot and I smoke it regularly. There are many others like me too that would smoke if it were legal. So yes, making drugs illegal means less drug users.

Making guns illegal would mean less guns imo