Gun Control

[franklin]

So were do you draw the line?

5% of people might drink drano, might run around stabbing people, might bury pets alive, might run peopel over with cars, might...see the point.

Is it* still wrong if I dug it back out shortly after?



*neighbor kid

 

[One Brow]

5% of people might drink drano, might run around stabbing people, might bury pets alive, might run peopel over with cars, might...see the point.

Legislating just because what someone might do is a foolish slope to be on.
...
Why pass laws that will hit the 95% but not the 5% since they do not follow the law anyways? The premise that I have to surrender, or have limited in some way, my rights becasue someone else is irresponsible is itself irresponsible.

Not because of what the 5% might do, but because of what they actually do. Such as the 5% of butchers that did sell contaminated meat before there was a law.

 

[One Brow]

You do know what percentage of American's are gun owners, right? Yet you think more than 5% are irresponsible with their guns?

I think there is a much higher percentage of people that are irresponsible with guns than there are people who experience gun accidents, just like most people who text while driving don't don't have collisions or most people who don't secure their cleaning chemicals also don't have poisoned kids.

You clearly do not understand the reverence for the destructive power of firearms that is entrenched in America's gun culture.

I accept that the part of gun culture you interact with, read about, etc. has deep appreciation for that destructive power. I wish that appreciation extended further into issues like careful licensing and screening for not just mental health, but the knowledge and willingness to maintain proper care, but that's difficult in a partisan discussion. However, you are not the only type of gun owner, and you don't represent nor experience the entirety of the gun culture. As you said, there are a huge number of gun owners; we shouldn't pretend this represents some monolithic group with a common gun culture.

The most frustrating thing in this debate is that nearly every last supporter of increased gun control is willfully ignorant in regard to that which they seek to ban.

I think that's true for many control advocates, but there are also many who served in the military, are hunters, etc. There is no more a single gun control culture than there is a single gun culture.

Guns exist! So instead of trying to pretend that we can make them go away, let's try to learn the best way for them to exist in our society.

First, that's not necessary, as many societies do just fine with far fewer guns.

However, I agree they are entrenched in US culture, and that will not change in my lifetime. Not once in this entire thread have I said we should or could try to remove guns from our society. We just disagree on what the best way entails.

 

[Stoked]

Not because of what the 5% might do, but because of what they actually do. Such as the 5% of butchers that did sell contaminated meat before there was a law.

So you are willing to let your rights be trampled becasue others commit crimes. Not only that but the laws being passed, or that people are trying to get passed, will not stop those 5%!

 

[Stoked]

I think there is a much higher percentage of people that are irresponsible with guns than there are people who experience gun accidents, just like most people who text while driving don't don't have collisions or most people who don't secure their cleaning chemicals also don't have poisoned kids.



I accept that the part of gun culture you interact with, read about, etc. has deep appreciation for that destructive power. I wish that appreciation extended further into issues like careful licensing and screening for not just mental health, but the knowledge and willingness to maintain proper care, but that's difficult in a partisan discussion. However, you are not the only type of gun owner, and you don't represent nor experience the entirety of the gun culture. As you said, there are a huge number of gun owners; we shouldn't pretend this represents some monolithic group with a common gun culture.



I think that's true for many control advocates, but there are also many who served in the military, are hunters, etc. There is no more a single gun control culture than there is a single gun culture.



First, that's not necessary, as many societies do just fine with far fewer guns.

However, I agree they are entrenched in US culture, and that will not change in my lifetime. Not once in this entire thread have I said we should or could try to remove guns from our society. We just disagree on what the best way entails.

There are roughly 100 million gun owners in the U.S. In 2008 there were 10,886 deaths from guns. Even if each one of those deaths was from a different gun owner that means only .0001% of gun owners were involved in a shooting that resulted in a death. (excluding suicides and accidents)

These laws do not deter criminals. They simply limit the rights of people already proven to be law abiding citizens.

Unacceptable no matter how people try to paint it.

 

[moevillini]

There are roughly 100 million gun owners in the U.S. In 2008 there were 10,886 deaths from guns. Even if each one of those deaths was from a different gun owner that means only .0001% of gun owners were involved in a shooting that resulted in a death. (excluding suicides and accidents)

These laws do not deter criminals. They simply limit the rights of people already proven to be law abiding citizens.

Unacceptable no matter how people try to paint it.

everyone is a law abiding citizen - until they're not...

Oscar Pistorius is (or was?) a law abiding citizen, and yet, however the final verdict turns out, he did use a gun to shoot and kill his girlfriend

I don't generally understand or agree with One Brow's arguments, but in this instance, he actually makes sense. I'm just not sure exactly how it applies to this discussion.

Originally Posted by One Brow
I think there is a much higher percentage of people that are irresponsible with guns than there are people who experience gun accidents, just like most people who text while driving don't don't have collisions or most people who don't secure their cleaning chemicals also don't have poisoned kids.

 

[moevillini]

I know most of those responding in this topic will vehemently argue against what I'm about to say, but I think we need a long-term campaign to demonize guns much the way we've demonized drinking and driving, driving without a seat belt, cigarette smoking and other behaviors. And similar to how we're now trying to make folks feel that it's unacceptable to be texting while driving.

We need stronger laws, and enforcement of laws, and penalties to punish those who use guns to commit a crime. Stronger penalties to punish irresponsible gun owners whose children somehow get access to their guns, penalties to punish someone whose gun was stolen but never reported as such until it turns out the gun is used to commit a crime.

 

[Stoked]

Is it* still wrong if I dug it back out shortly after?



*neighbor kid

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to franklin again

In the words of a Lonely Islands song: "still counts!"

 

[Stoked]

everyone is a law abiding citizen - until they're not...

Oscar Pistorius is (or was?) a law abiding citizen, and yet, however the final verdict turns out, he did use a gun to shoot and kill his girlfriend

I don't generally understand or agree with One Brow's arguments, but in this instance, he actually makes sense. I'm just not sure exactly how it applies to this discussion.

So now you want to start legislating responsibility? To what degree?

 

[Stoked]

I know most of those responding in this topic will vehemently argue against what I'm about to say, but I think we need a long-term campaign to demonize guns much the way we've demonized drinking and driving, driving without a seat belt, cigarette smoking and other behaviors. And similar to how we're now trying to make folks feel that it's unacceptable to be texting while driving.

We need stronger laws, and enforcement of laws, and penalties to punish those who use guns to commit a crime. Stronger penalties to punish irresponsible gun owners whose children somehow get access to their guns, penalties to punish someone whose gun was stolen but never reported as such until it turns out the gun is used to commit a crime.

Stronger laws - depends on the laws
Enforcememnt of laws- I agree
Penalties to punish those that use a gun ina crime - I agree in prinicipal
Not reporting a stolen gun - I agree

Demonizing guns? No thank you. Might as well demonize cars.

 

[Gameface]

I know most of those responding in this topic will vehemently argue against what I'm about to say, but I think we need a long-term campaign to demonize guns much the way we've demonized drinking and driving, driving without a seat belt, cigarette smoking and other behaviors. And similar to how we're now trying to make folks feel that it's unacceptable to be texting while driving.

We need stronger laws, and enforcement of laws, and penalties to punish those who use guns to commit a crime. Stronger penalties to punish irresponsible gun owners whose children somehow get access to their guns, penalties to punish someone whose gun was stolen but never reported as such until it turns out the gun is used to commit a crime.

Well. the only thing I vehemently disagree with is that guns themselves should be demonized. I think irresponsible, reckless, negligent, dangerous, behaviors with guns should be demonized. But I agree 100% that penalties for any sort of misuse of guns should be severe. I'd add to your list harsh penalties for brandishing to discourage concealed carry permit holders from casually using the firearm they posses to intimidate people.

 

[moevillini]

Stronger laws - depends on the laws
Enforcememnt of laws- I agree
Penalties to punish those that use a gun ina crime - I agree in prinicipal
Not reporting a stolen gun - I agree

Demonizing guns? No thank you. Might as well demonize cars.

OK, I admit that demonize is the wrong word. But they shouldn't be glamorized, and I do feel that does take place to a certain extent. Sort of like how cigarettes were glamorized back in the 40's and 50's. Or drinking...