EPTIf you're seeing this topic then another mass shooting hap…
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. | ||
|
SamsungStar
United States912 Posts
| ||
|
StarStrider
United States689 Posts
On February 01 2013 07:16 Zandar wrote: That precious innocence is hurt by a gun drill though. And it probably won't solve anything. While there is a clear solution that has been proven to work around the world, but you refuse to accept it. It 'probably' won't solve anything. Hmm. Well, I guess that settles it then. We shouldn't teach children that firearms are not toys and DO NOT TOUCH and get an adult, and we shouldn't go through drills that teach them to differentiate the sound of gunfire and to know how to lock doors and duck for cover, and to egress quickly.... because you said it probably won't help. I guess teaching children about safe zones and duck and cover during the nuclear threat during the Cold War wasn't worth the risk to their innocence because that 'probably' wouldn't have helped them anyway. Yes, there is a clear solution, we make all the evil guns go away. Let's say we accept it, and we ban guns tomorrow. Now what? School shootings will not also disappear tomorrow. It is still a risk to kids until we eliminate every gun from our society, which cannot happen overnight in a country with more guns than people. | ||
|
Lockitupv2
United States496 Posts
On February 01 2013 07:20 Thieving Magpie wrote: Justifiable gun deaths have no reason to be included? Those guys don't count as dead? The more guns we have, the more we use guns to kill people people. We could justifiably kill with a spoon as well as a gun--why differentiate? The more guns we have the more often we prefer to kill with guns than with a spoon. We don't have to use guns to defend ourselves--we simply choose guns as the method of defending ourselves. I didnt say that accidental, justifiable, or suicidal death didnt include a gun. Im saying its sill to include those things in this info graph. If you wanna talk about gun violence thats fine, just dont include this nonsense. Its like including fish in a fishing pole deaths graph. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On February 01 2013 07:16 Zandar wrote: It probably won't solve anything. While there is a clear solution that has been proven to work around the world, but you refuse to accept it. The "clear solution that has been proven to work around the world", as you see it from that graph, isn't quite so crystal clear to me. Canada and Germany. Very similar guns per capita, but Canada has somewhere in the range of 250% of the gun deaths, according to that same graph. Now, sure, it LOOKS like a pretty cluster of dots showing that gun deaths and guns per capita are the major factors here, but I don't think that's exactly within tolerance of rounding errors. Obviously something different is going on in different places that affects gun deaths compared to guns per capita. You know, like that weird point for Mexico. Where there's an "external factor" of gang violence that totally mitigates the data point in the eyes of people who choose to cherry pick. That's exactly the sort of intellectual dishonesty that lets people say with a straight face that banning guns in America would stop gun violence. Saying "Oh, that data point doesn't count because it's related to a social issue, but we know America doesn't have those (unless we're bashing on those today, because it's in right now)" is a farce. There's clearly risk factors besides guns in play here, and pretending it's not the case is ludicrous when you can't even show me statistics without trying to ignore all the inconvenient parts of your own 'evidence'. | ||
|
Zandar
Netherlands1541 Posts
On February 01 2013 07:24 StarStrider wrote: Yes, there is a clear solution, we make all the evil guns go away. Let's say we accept it, and we ban guns tomorrow. Now what? School shootings will not also disappear tomorrow. It is still a risk to kids until we eliminate every gun from our society, which cannot happen overnight in a country with more guns than people. That's true, but gun fans present the drilling as if it's going to take the problem away, it won't | ||
|
StarStrider
United States689 Posts
On February 01 2013 07:27 Zandar wrote: That's true, but gun fans present the drilling as if it's going to take the problem away, it won't Nope. False. Find me a credible gun fan who says that drilling is going to eliminate the problem. I'll be waiting. | ||
|
Salteador Neo
Andorra5591 Posts
In other countries maybe I would say 30 years, but USA has a story of learning and adapting fast. It's a "new" country after all, and always at the vanguard of change. | ||
|
StarStrider
United States689 Posts
On February 01 2013 07:33 Salteador Neo wrote: If you ban all guns today, in 15-20 years the only people who would still want to keep their weapons are old farts and sons of rednecks who were teached to love their guns over people. That is progress. In other countries maybe I would say 30 years, but USA has a story of learning and adapting fast. It's a "new" country after all, and always at the vanguard of change. Criminals who desire money and power wouldn't want to keep their guns to use against a population of the gun free? Or do you think that in 20 years people either won't commit crimes anymore or criminals with guns would have all been either caught or killed? This thread harps alot on psychos who kill innocents to watch them bleed. As if that's even a significant portion of the problem. The drug industry, their low level distribution gangs (that claim territory), people who commit violence or threat of violence for easy profit, or people in dire poverty who are desparate enough to commit crimes as a last resort....THESE are the gun problems in the United States. Not the occasional psycho who slaughters kids or the man who puts a bullet in his neighbors' head because he got heated. But no one wants to talk about that. Everyone is harping on people who premeditate the most amount of indiscriminate death possible in the quickest time possible, and think that taking 20 rounds out of his clip is going to somehow dent the other 10,000+ gun deaths that happen across our country and in our inner cities, including a far higher innocent body count. THOSE things aren't going to be addressed by limiting law abiding citizens in purchasing this or that gun or mag, so no one is talking about them. Doesn't that seem unusual? | ||
|
Zandar
Netherlands1541 Posts
On February 01 2013 07:29 StarStrider wrote: Find me a credible gun fan That will be hard yes  | ||
|
StarStrider
United States689 Posts
I knew as soon as I hit enter with that in my post that you would pick it out and avoid the task. Tsk tsk. Ok, now remove the word credible and find one, you cutesy cute cutie. | ||
|
Innovation
United States284 Posts
Like Mexico you mean? There are gang wars there. Many killed by few. That's also true of the United States. The overwhelming majority of gun deaths in the U.S. are gang/drug related. One of the fastest way to significantly reduce gun deaths in America would be to simply legalize and regulate most drugs. It would also help to reduce Mexico's gun deaths as the issues over there are directly related to America's demand for illegal drugs. Conditions that make the argument seem ultimately less about affecting change and more about scoring political points. 1) If politicians were actually interested in reducing gun death's rather than scoring political points they would focus on the conditions that cause the majority of gun violence and death rather than politicizing an unstoppable tragedy. 2) The NRA is just as crazy as the politicians as they are more interested in making sure that it is as easy as possible to buy guns despite the danger of guns being in the wrong hands. 3) As clearly demonstrated by the war on drugs making something illegal often does not solve the problem and in many cases actually makes it worse. 4) The cat is out of the bag, it is impossible to remove guns from our current society due to the amount already out there and the long culture of gun ownership and the constitution and the politicians know this. For the most part this is simple posturing and expoitive behavior of a terrible crime on innocent children. Begin rant: I wish that the question was fundamentally changed to deal with reality. "Guns are hear, they are a fundamental part of American society and aren't going anywhere any time soon. Let's find the best balance possible between protecting the innocent and protecting the rights and culture of American citizens" There is a center ground to this debate where most truth and honest debate lies. In my opinion universal background checks are a good thing and worth the extra time and effort required to purchase and own guns. There should be a required level of responsibility for anything that has the power to kill but more specifically is designed to kill. We require more to drive a car in terms of responsibility and training than we do to own a gun...does this make sense? But at the same time most legislation is focused against the vast majority of responsible gun owners rather than focusing on the primary problem which is gang/drug related gun deaths. If we make guns illegal or so difficult/punitive to own that responsible people can no longer arm themselves than we create an imbalance of power between those who would use them for good and those who would use them for evil. It's already illegal for ciminals to own a gun, does it stop them? No. The two things we can do to sensibly approach the issue is to do our best to help responsible gun ownership and to make the tough decision to approach the root issues behind criminal use of guns. Sadly though I am a realist and as nice as it would be to see realistic debates on this issue our political representatives gave up on honesty and real representation long ago and their corruption/greed has leaked into American society effectively dividing our population even though we almost all agree on the core principals that made this country great. It has become more about who get's to claim victory/retain power rather than how do we help improve our society for the betterment of our citizens. Old news I know but sometimes I just have to let the frustration out. | ||
|
Zandar
Netherlands1541 Posts
On February 01 2013 07:48 StarStrider wrote: I knew as soon as I hit enter with that in my post that you would pick it out and avoid the task. Tsk tsk. Ok, now remove the word credible and find one, you cutesy cute cutie. :D | ||
|
DannyJ
United States5110 Posts
| ||
|
Innovation
United States284 Posts
The whole gun issue is just growing super tiresome. No one will ever forcibly be able to take peoples guns in the US so there's 300 million out there already, as we all know. That basically really is the sticking point...Add in the fact that overall gun violence is predominantly centered in inner cities and the violent crime / murder rate overall in America is PLUMMETING over the last 20 years, I really don't see any truly compelling reason that will force any substantive action on the issue. We will just get things like better background checks (which is good) and useless things like AR bans that only make uneducated and paranoid people feel better. Trying to improve the lives of people in our ghettos and tackling gangs/drugs would do more towards lowering gun violence than any physical gun act could ever do I think. That's where our focus should be, not trying to do sweeping, impractical measures that are in reaction mainly to media hype. At least there are two of us who agree | ||
|
StarStrider
United States689 Posts
On February 01 2013 07:59 DannyJ wrote: The whole gun issue is just growing super tiresome. No one will ever forcibly be able to take peoples guns in the US so there's 300 million out there already, as we all know. That basically really is the sticking point...Add in the fact that overall gun violence is predominantly centered in inner cities and the violent crime / murder rate overall in America is PLUMMETING over the last 20 years, I really don't see any truly compelling reason that will force any substantive action on the issue. We will just get things like better background checks (which is good) and useless things like AR bans that only make uneducated and paranoid people feel better. Trying to improve the lives of people in our ghettos and tackling gangs/drugs would do more towards lowering gun violence than any physical gun act could ever do I think. That's where our focus should be, not trying to do sweeping, impractical measures that are in reaction mainly to media hype. I think you said well what my own views on the subject are. I've grown especially tiresome at the recent attempt to make every shooting outside the ghetto a mainstream big news headline, shootings that were always commonplace before but only earned a local newspaper or cable station headline, if that. | ||
|
mordk
Chile8385 Posts
On February 01 2013 07:44 StarStrider wrote: Criminals who desire money and power wouldn't want to keep their guns to use against a population of the gun free? Or do you think that in 20 years people either won't commit crimes anymore or criminals with guns would have all been either caught or killed? This thread harps alot on psychos who kill innocents to watch them bleed. As if that's even a significant portion of the problem. The drug industry, their low level distribution gangs (that claim territory), people who commit violence or threat of violence for easy profit, or people in dire poverty who are desparate enough to commit crimes as a last resort....THESE are the gun problems in the United States. Not the occasional psycho who slaughters kids or the man who puts a bullet in his neighbors' head because he got heated. But no one wants to talk about that. Everyone is harping on people who premeditate the most amount of indiscriminate death possible in the quickest time possible, and think that taking 20 rounds out of his clip is going to somehow dent the other 10,000+ gun deaths that happen across our country and in our inner cities, including a far higher innocent body count. THOSE things aren't going to be addressed by limiting law abiding citizens in purchasing this or that gun or mag, so no one is talking about them. Doesn't that seem unusual? When there are no guns, not even criminals get them. In Chile even in the roughest neighborhood there's few guns. A few gangs have them, and they mostly use them to intimidate, since most of them have no experience with guns whatsoever, in worst cases they engage in firefights with cops, resulting in a few deaths a year. Criminals would rather invest their money in their drug business in the clubs and stuff rather than guns, they don't need them that badly. Trust me VERY few people have guns, even considering illegal access can't be too difficult. It would be pretty tough at the beginning, but I'm sure in around 20 years or so, the US would have successfully adapted to life without guns. They really serve no purpose. | ||
|
Laeon
France53 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
|
mordk
Chile8385 Posts
On February 01 2013 10:17 Laeon wrote: How can you debate 396 pages on that. The answer is : NO, people should not to be allowed to own weapon ! While I somewhat agree, 396 pages clearly means there is a lot to discuss Or actually, many points to repeat over and over again to no end  | ||
|
StarStrider
United States689 Posts
On February 01 2013 10:11 mordk wrote: When there are no guns, not even criminals get them. In Chile even in the roughest neighborhood there's few guns. A few gangs have them, and they mostly use them to intimidate, since most of them have no experience with guns whatsoever, in worst cases they engage in firefights with cops, resulting in a few deaths a year. Criminals would rather invest their money in their drug business in the clubs and stuff rather than guns, they don't need them that badly. Trust me VERY few people have guns, even considering illegal access can't be too difficult. It would be pretty tough at the beginning, but I'm sure in around 20 years or so, the US would have successfully adapted to life without guns. They really serve no purpose. 1.5 - 2 million civilian guns is a shit ton for a country that sees no purpose for them, and an estimated 750,000 - 1.3 million is a hell of a lot of guns to be held illegally if criminals don't see the benefit of them. If you looked at the same numbers I did, how can you reach that conclusion? | ||
|
mordk
Chile8385 Posts
On February 01 2013 10:23 StarStrider wrote: 1.5 - 2 million civilian guns is a shit ton for a country that sees no purpose for them, and an estimated 750,000 - 1.3 million is a hell of a lot of guns to be held illegally if criminals don't see the benefit of them. If you looked at the same numbers I did, how can you reach that conclusion? Hmm I don't know the exact figures, what I do know is that guns don't really matter here, people barely even use them for anything. More people get killed by knives than by gunshot. And trust me, I live here. The only times I hear about guns are 2 instances: -Firefights between cops and gangs resulting in a bystander's death (1-3 each year, usually 1 dead) -Getting an accidentally shot kid in the ER, which is a fucking tragedy Oh I could also add that lately, with a huge mess with indigenous ethnicities in the country and the landowners there's been a few more incidents involving guns. Actually, this is so irrelevant I just found out carrying guns is allowed in my country ROFL, the fact that I have never seen a gun not held by a police or a military person in my entire life speaks as to how little guns matter here. It's a cultural thing, we don't give a fuck about guns. I don't know anyone who has one for protection, for example. | ||
| ||
