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

[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.

Why isn't there a tons of guns flowing into Canada and England then?

 

[Deleted member 848]

I came into this thread to make a pro-gun control argument.

I'd be much more inclined to put you on ignore than Dutchracist.

If I had to rank the top five posters who make threads unreadable I'd have to think for a second who 2-5 would be because by far you have destroyed more threads than any other poster in Jazzfanz history. Oh wait, I know who no.2 would be, but UGLI doesn't post here very much anymore.

Anyway, have fun with your circle-jerk.

Putting me ahead of teh UGLI Baby? Can't wait to brag about this to him.

 

[franklin]

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

Completely unrelated subjects. You don't have a moral issue with smoking weed. You do have a moral issue with killing. Make killing legal and you aren't going to go out capping off fools are you?

 

[Revolution 9]

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

What rights and privileges are there with gun ownership? Im not a gun owner so I dont know what else there is to lose.

Would a certification or training program you must attend be considered infringement on rights? Personally, I would like to train people to
properly handle guns starting at a very early age. We dont have to run away from guns. They arent going away,
and dont have to. In europe kids can drink beer, and wine at 16. There seems to be a different attitude towards drinking. We dont run away
from it, we accept it, and even embrace it. At the end of HS at age 16 the teens take crates of beer to the center of town and drink together. Its quite
shocking for Americans to see this. Maybe if guns were seen as something to enjoy, but responsibly we could educate more people. Teaching people how to be
really profincent in gun use, and safety. Its something that we aspire to, its not something that just falls in our laps without any warning. A training program that
requires someone to fully grasp what they are holding in their hands, and how to properly use it. Obviously this kind of goes away from the thinking of taking away
guns, but properly arming the millions of people with them.

 

[franklin]

Why isn't there a tons of guns flowing into Canada and England then?

Because metal sinks.

 

[Deleted member 848]

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

exactly-- making marijuana legal might increase usage to some extent, but that isn't the problem. The problem is from mass-incarceration stemming from the usage of a drug who's level of harm to users is debatable at best, and negligible at worst.

 

[Jamezz]

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

I don't agree fish, if they legalize drugs it would end so many issues at hand, prison population would decrease, drug cartel mafias would become obsolete, and people would actually be more interested in doing research on drugs if they knew they could use them if they wanted to. I think it would encourage a more responsible consumption, not more consumption.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Completely unrelated subjects. You don't have a moral issue with smoking weed. You do have a moral issue with killing. Make killing legal and you aren't going to go out capping off fools are you?

lol maybe he wouldn't, but millions upon millions would.

 

[Harambe]

How much have homicides gone down in those countries? And is the lower homicide rate an indication that they've become less violent?

Of course gun homicides will decrease. If that goal outweighs all others then sure, the only solution is to change gun ownership laws in the U.S..

But of course, many people don't see that alone as the goal.

No amount of gun ownership laws is going to eradicate gun violence. And we'll never be able to get rid of guns entirely.. and we'd never want to anyway. But why not mitigate the problem with background checks?

When you add all homicides up in a per capita fashion (1 per 100,000 people), the United States still sits at 5. The other countries on that list sit lower than 1.6. But what percentage of those homicides in America are gun related? Almighty google states that 67.7 percent of all American murders are conducted with guns. I can't help but think what that number would be if we just manage to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, and other high risk sections of the population.

If we can mitigate the problem by keeping guns out of the hands of those 67.7%, wouldn't that be worth it?

 

[fishonjazz]

Completely unrelated subjects. You don't have a moral issue with smoking weed. You do have a moral issue with killing. Make killing legal and you aren't going to go out capping off fools are you?

Stoked brought the drug subject up.

To answer your question though, right now I don't plan on killing someone but I don't know what the future holds. Maybe one day I will want to kill someone..... If I have a gun then I will be much more likely to carry that plan out

 

[Deleted member 848]

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.

you have yet to point out what the disease is, what is causing the disease, what aspects of the disease should be treated, and how this will hypothetically cure America's illness.

 

[Gameface]

Gangs exist in order to control the illegal drug market. They cannot seek legal recourse vs their rival drug gangs so they use violence to solve their issues.

Once again, the unintended consequences of the drug war shows its head.

Ending the drug war would be a major step in the right direction in regard to gun violence.

 

[Revolution 9]

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

Legit point.

We just need to take a look at the types of guns, and types weed we have out there. Do we really need thc candy,
and high potent keef that fries the mind? Where do we draw the line? Can we have rifles and hand guns, but leave out assault rifles? Can
we let citizens have uzis, and grenade launchers? How much does one need to protect themselves?

 

[Siro]

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.

The Disarming of the population would certainly lower the rate of gun violence. But you're disregarding a lot of what I've already said in this thread. I don't think it would be a solution to the high crime rate since it is not the cause of it. Like you said, Utah is a "gun state", but we have a low crime rate. I also agree that gang violence is a major issue. If we take gang-related murders into account, then the US murder rate is merely 2-3 times that of the rest of the developed world. But a case for gun control can be made. For one, it would allow communities that are plagued by gun violence (poor black for example) more of an opportunity to rebuild and improve. Right now, the ubiquity of guns make such places extremely dangerous for everyone, including the police. Secondly, on a philosophical level, I do not think the mentality that guns serve as a guarantee against government intrusion is a healthy one to assume in a modern, democratic, liberal society.

But I am just trying to add to the debate, because there SHOULD be a debate. I don't know why people on both sides insist on making their pet issues sacred.

 

[Jamezz]

lol maybe he wouldn't, but millions upon millions would.

Look Dala, it's easy. Prohibition of any kind = Bad thing

Take your time to process this info...

 

[fishonjazz]

I don't agree fish, if they legalize drugs it would end so many issues at hand, prison population would decrease, drug cartel mafias would become obsolete, and people would actually be more interested in doing research on drugs if they knew they could use them if they wanted to. I think it would encourage a more responsible consumption, not more consumption.

Dude, I'm the biggest pro marijuana legalization guy there is and I agree with most all of your post..... Except the end of it.
I'm quite certain that consumption would go up. I know myself and many others who would start using pot, my father in law has cancer and he has said that if it were legal here that he would use it (he is a Mormon btw), more people would begin to understand how great it is and would want to reap the benefits of using it. (Sleeping better, helping with depression and anxiety, and simply having a good time)

 

[fishonjazz]

Because metal sinks.

Lol

 

[Deleted member 848]

Look Dala, it's easy. Prohibition of any kind = Bad thing

Take your time to process this info...

Are you seriously arguing for anarchy as a form of government?

 

[franklin]

What rights and privileges are there with gun ownership? Im not a gun owner so I dont know what else there is to lose.

Would a certification or training program you must attend be considered infringement on rights? Personally, I would like to train people to
properly handle guns starting at a very early age. We dont have to run away from guns. They arent going away,
and dont have to. In europe kids can drink beer, and wine at 16. There seems to be a different attitude towards drinking. We dont run away
from it, we accept it, and even embrace it. At the end of HS at age 16 the teens take crates of beer to the center of town and drink together. Its quite
shocking for Americans to see this. Maybe if guns were seen as something to enjoy, but responsibly we could educate more people. Teaching people how to be
really profincent in gun use, and safety. Its something that we aspire to, its not something that just falls in our laps without any warning. A training program that
requires someone to fully grasp what they are holding in their hands, and how to properly use it. Obviously this kind of goes away from the thinking of taking away
guns, but properly arming the millions of people with them.

That wouldn't bother [most] gun owners one bit. In fact we would probably welcome it, especially if you made it part of gradeschool curriculum . The problem is you are putting up a straw man argument here. Gun safety is inherent in gun ownership. Think about it, Rev. Do you think parents like myself don't want our children to understand firearm safety? This is inherent to gun society. It's practically the first thing that comes out of a gun owner's mouth when teaching the young or those who they are not sure of knowing gun safety.

If I handed my gun to you I would chamber it, dry fire, and set the safety if that gun allowed with an empty chamber. If I handed my gun to Gameface I would chamber it, dry fire, and set the safety if that gun allowed for it. I don't know if you know how to handle guns. I do know Gameface is very knowledgeable about guns. I would treat you both the exact same, however, because gun safety is an inherent part of gun culture.

 

[fishonjazz]

Gangs exist in order to control the illegal drug market. They cannot seek legal recourse vs their rival drug gangs so they use violence to solve their issues.

Once again, the unintended consequences of the drug war shows its head.

Ending the drug war would be a major step in the right direction in regard to gun violence.

I like this post