Gun Control

Talk about anything under the sun or stars - but keep it civil. This is where we really get to know each other. Everyone is welcome, and invited!
User avatar
neo-dragon
Commander
Commander
Posts: 2516
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:26 pm
Title: Huey Revolutionary
Location: Canada

Re: Gun Control

Postby neo-dragon » Fri Jul 20, 2012 8:45 pm

I know that quoting wikipedia is lazy and all, but if you care, you can check their primary sources yourself:
The reported US violent crime rate includes only Aggravated Assault, whereas the Canadian violent crime rate includes all categories of assault, including the much-more-numerous Assault level 1 (i.e., assault not using a weapon and not resulting in serious bodily harm).[31][32] A government study concluded that direct comparison of the 2 countries' violent crime totals or rates was "inappropriate".[44]
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_t ... lent_crime" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So apparently our two nation have different definitions of violent crimes, and ours is much looser.
Last edited by neo-dragon on Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic."
- Frank Herbert's 'Dune'

User avatar
thoughtreader
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 782
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 5:00 pm
Title: will wrestle you to the ground
First Joined: 13 Mar 2003
Location: Portland OR
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby thoughtreader » Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:05 pm

I would like to start by saying I was raised in a family that was anti gun pro gun control. But I married in to a family of responsible safe gun owners and I am a gun owner now. We have guns in or house. They are all unloaded and locked in a safe. a different safe then the ammunition is locked in. We follow all gun safety rules to the T.

Gun ownership does not cause crime, criminals commit crimes not their guns...

I would like to point out some information that supports gun ownership lowering crime rates. The town of Kennesaw GA passes a law in 1982 requiring all heads of house hold to own and maintain a gun and the ammunition for that gun. Mainly in response to the city of Morton Grove IL banning hand guns (except for law enforcement) the same year.

In 1982 the city passed an ordinance [Sec 34-21]

(a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore.
(b)Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.
(So if you had personal reasons/beliefs you didn't have to own a gun and of course felons were not aloud to own guns.)

According to this article Crime rates in the gun toting town dropped and have continued to drop. While crime rates rose up 15% in the year following the gun ban in the IL town. Kennesaw crime rates are less than half of US averages. Crime rates declined from 2003 through 2008. (wiki)

Personally if I was a criminal a town saying I couldn't have a gun wouldn't stop me from owning one and knowing that none of my potential crime targets were packing heat would be great! But knowing that almost everyone in a town was a "gun toting gun crazy American" would definitely make me think twice before committing a crime.

Now on the other side of the argument, I believe that there are some flaws in our current gun laws, mainly the gun show loop holes. So while the system is not perfect (and none are) the answer is not taking guns out of the responsible gun owner.

User avatar
Syphon the Sun
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2217
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 8:59 pm
Title: Ozymandias

Re: Gun Control

Postby Syphon the Sun » Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:22 pm

Thanks, Jason. I just clicked through and read the report cited. Looks like, conceptually, the crimes themselves aren't directly comparable with the exception of homicide only. Though even with homicide, I imagine the defenses of justifiable homicide may differ by nation. But even if not comparable to each other, you'd think the country-specific data would be comparable to itself over a trend.

The rate at which police record various reported crimes also varies by country. That's partially why I was asking what data and parameters were being used by Rei. I'm not sure how the comparison he was making was being done. Because it makes a difference. Victim surveys, population surveys, and official reported incidences generally have varying results.
Step softly; a dream lies buried here.

User avatar
Rei
Commander
Commander
Posts: 3068
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:31 pm
Title: Fides quaerens intellectum
First Joined: 24 Nov 2003
Location: Between the lines

Re: Gun Control

Postby Rei » Sat Jul 21, 2012 6:50 am

Syphon, by gun crazy I mean this adamant insistence upon the right of every individual to bear arms wherever they may be. And this is why I am speaking about the States in specific, because the socio-political situation and the general social mindset varies wildly from country to country. (It varies in far smaller areas than that, as well, but for sake of discussion I'm keeping to the area covered by this right to bear arms.) To give some of my background, I am not opposed to gun ownership. I have used guns on many occasions and know how to safely handle a gun. They have all been rifles and all in shooting ranges or on farms because rifles are far more common with people I know as they either are hunters or farmers who need them to keep away coyotes and other pests. I am very opposed to the long gun registry in Canada because I feel it is more likely to criminalise people who legally own and use their rifles. Relatedly, when I worked in a knife shop, we were told that knives are tools and if someone even joked about buying a knife to use as a weapon or for protection or anything related, we were legally not allowed to even let them handle the knives let alone sell them one.

The big difference I see in how guns are perceived is that in Canada they are tools, and so most people are glad to see handguns very restricted, but, especially when you get to the prairies, people do not like having long gun ownership restricted much, as most people are themselves farmers or they grew up with farmers' kids and are aware of the role of guns there. In the States it seems that people are upset at controls because they think it means a ban on all guns, as opposed to distinguishing between long guns, which can have a primary use as tools, and handguns. And with that, it seems like the perceived primary role for guns in the States is protection, meaning their ownership is primarily just in case you need to shoot somebody.
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point.
~Blaise Pascal


私は。。。誰?

Dernhelm

User avatar
Syphon the Sun
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2217
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 8:59 pm
Title: Ozymandias

Re: Gun Control

Postby Syphon the Sun » Sat Jul 21, 2012 10:11 am

Do you have any data, polling, whatever, or are those all just more assumptions/conclusions?
Step softly; a dream lies buried here.

User avatar
elfprince13
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1986
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:27 pm
Title: The Bombadil
Location: 127.0.0.1
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby elfprince13 » Sat Jul 21, 2012 11:55 am

I'm confused as to why you would think that people who view "long guns" as tools for hunting/pest control/etc wouldn't else view handguns as tools for self defense?
"But the conversation of the mind was truer than any language, and they knew each other better than they ever could have by use of mere sight and touch."

User avatar
Rei
Commander
Commander
Posts: 3068
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:31 pm
Title: Fides quaerens intellectum
First Joined: 24 Nov 2003
Location: Between the lines

Re: Gun Control

Postby Rei » Sat Jul 21, 2012 4:00 pm

Because a tool for defence against another human requires the will to kill another human, quite possibly in error (supposing you miss and hit a bystander or misunderstand a situation). It may even result in your own self-destruction if the other person who is threatening also has a gun (quite possibly also for protection) that they weren't going to use, but now that they are in a kill or be killed situation will be forced to use. What was going to just be a fight has suddenly turned into a gun fight and there are far greater odds of more severe or deadly injury than there had been. So yes, it is a tool, I agree, but there are better tools (for example, martial arts training) that present less risk of irreparable, accidental harm.

As for your accusation, Syphon, I deliberately sought to make it clear that these are my own observations. If you are speaking about my reasons for narrowing the discussion to one country and seeking data and polls proving that different nations and people groups have different concerns about gun control and different needs regarding defending themselves from their own government and the like, you have only to look to this discussion or to how the news in different countries report on violence to get the beginnings of a sense of different cultural mindsets. If you want polls and data backing my own observations, well I quite honestly can't be bothered. I have spent a fair amount of time in various regions of Canada and from this I draw my description of how the matter of gun control seems to me to be generally perceived. And all I have to do is look to this thread to find evidence of people seeming to believe that any control of guns is equivalent to the rapid banning of all guns in order to aid the government who is seeking to do some nefarious deed to its people.
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point.
~Blaise Pascal


私は。。。誰?

Dernhelm

User avatar
Rei
Commander
Commander
Posts: 3068
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:31 pm
Title: Fides quaerens intellectum
First Joined: 24 Nov 2003
Location: Between the lines

Re: Gun Control

Postby Rei » Sat Jul 21, 2012 4:47 pm

(Just in case my usage of the term "long guns" is not something used South of the line (I wasn't sure because of your quotes, elf), I just wanted to say that this is a standard term in Canada and that the registry is actually called, at least everywhere I've seen it mentioned, the "Long gun registry".)
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point.
~Blaise Pascal


私は。。。誰?

Dernhelm

User avatar
Syphon the Sun
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2217
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 8:59 pm
Title: Ozymandias

Re: Gun Control

Postby Syphon the Sun » Sat Jul 21, 2012 5:12 pm

As for your accusation, Syphon, I deliberately sought to make it clear that these are my own observations.
What accusation? Asking you to support numerous conclusions you've drawn with some kind of, you know, evidence, isn't an "accusation." It's a simple request. You don't have to comply, of course. You've shown no interest in supporting your dozens of assertions so far. And, hey, that's fine. You're free to believe whatever you want. You're even free to form your beliefs on a conversation you had once, on your hunches, on knee-jerk reactions, or heck, on the zodiac.

But I thought we were going to have a real, honest-to-goodness discussion. As I said earlier, "there's no real value-add to having a discussion if it's nothing but made-up facts and assertions." I'm not interested in wasting my time. If you don't want to have a real discussion, that's cool with me. But that's all you had to say.

Let me know if and when you want to get together and actually examine the issues.
Step softly; a dream lies buried here.

User avatar
Syphon the Sun
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2217
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 8:59 pm
Title: Ozymandias

Re: Gun Control

Postby Syphon the Sun » Sat Jul 21, 2012 5:26 pm

But knowing that almost everyone in a town was a "gun toting gun crazy American" would definitely make me think twice before committing a crime.
You're not alone.

Image
click to enlarge
Step softly; a dream lies buried here.

User avatar
elfprince13
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1986
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:27 pm
Title: The Bombadil
Location: 127.0.0.1
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby elfprince13 » Sat Jul 21, 2012 6:38 pm

(Just in case my usage of the term "long guns" is not something used South of the line (I wasn't sure because of your quotes, elf), I just wanted to say that this is a standard term in Canada and that the registry is actually called, at least everywhere I've seen it mentioned, the "Long gun registry".)
I've never heard the phrase used outside of artillery contexts before, but Wikipedia told me both contexts were fine.
"But the conversation of the mind was truer than any language, and they knew each other better than they ever could have by use of mere sight and touch."

Logical Facilitator
Launchie
Launchie
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 3:06 pm

Re: Gun Control

Postby Logical Facilitator » Tue Jul 24, 2012 3:12 pm

What accusation? Asking you to support numerous conclusions you've drawn with some kind of, you know, evidence, isn't an "accusation." It's a simple request. You don't have to comply, of course. You've shown no interest in supporting your dozens of assertions so far. And, hey, that's fine. You're free to believe whatever you want. You're even free to form your beliefs on a conversation you had once, on your hunches, on knee-jerk reactions, or heck, on the zodiac.

But I thought we were going to have a real, honest-to-goodness discussion. As I said earlier, "there's no real value-add to having a discussion if it's nothing but made-up facts and assertions." I'm not interested in wasting my time. If you don't want to have a real discussion, that's cool with me. But that's all you had to say.

Let me know if and when you want to get together and actually examine the issues.
Argument from silence.
Shifting the burden of proof.
Ad hominem argument.

User avatar
elfprince13
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1986
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:27 pm
Title: The Bombadil
Location: 127.0.0.1
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby elfprince13 » Tue Jul 24, 2012 3:25 pm

Emphasizing my previous point about home-made weaponry being just as deadly as a gun: http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/24/justice/c ... -shooting/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And of course, Switzerland, having higher (mandatory) gun ownership than the US, and significantly less violent crime.
"But the conversation of the mind was truer than any language, and they knew each other better than they ever could have by use of mere sight and touch."

User avatar
neo-dragon
Commander
Commander
Posts: 2516
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:26 pm
Title: Huey Revolutionary
Location: Canada

Re: Gun Control

Postby neo-dragon » Tue Jul 24, 2012 4:33 pm

I like this article which is linked to in the one above.

It doesn't make an argument about gun control laws one way or the other, it just discusses guns as a part of American culture. I touched upon this previously. I still don't think that you Americans see how weird it seems to us. It's not that there aren't gun enthusiasts in Canada, but it's just not the same. I don't think I even know anyone who owns a gun.
"Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic."
- Frank Herbert's 'Dune'

User avatar
Syphon the Sun
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2217
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 8:59 pm
Title: Ozymandias

Re: Gun Control

Postby Syphon the Sun » Tue Jul 24, 2012 6:35 pm

Argument from silence.
Shifting the burden of proof.
Ad hominem argument.
Do "logical facilitators" typically allege that a number of logical fallacies were used without explaining where and how? Clever alt account, whoever you are. Not all that useful as an introductory post. I fully expect future posts will be better.

Do you mind sharing precisely where the three fallacies you listed were used and why you classify those arguments in that way?

Where did anyone say that the absence of evidence proved a premise? Keep in mind that this is, in fact, different from asking for evidence of assertions made.

Where was the burden of proof shifted from the person making or resting on a particular assertion? In particular, did anyone ask the other party to disprove a claim, or were such requests confined to asking a party to prove the claim they had asserted?

What personal attacks were used as evidence that one or more premises or conclusions were false?

I certainly did not intend to commit any of the fallacies you accuse me of. I don't believe that I did commit them, but I'm happy to learn when, where and how you think I did.
Step softly; a dream lies buried here.

User avatar
elfprince13
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1986
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:27 pm
Title: The Bombadil
Location: 127.0.0.1
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby elfprince13 » Thu Jul 26, 2012 11:10 am

Even the remote possibility of gun control is now dead.
"But the conversation of the mind was truer than any language, and they knew each other better than they ever could have by use of mere sight and touch."

User avatar
Gravity Defier
Commander
Commander
Posts: 7854
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:32 pm
Title: Ewok in Tauntaun-land

Re: Gun Control

Postby Gravity Defier » Thu Jul 26, 2012 1:09 pm

Even the remote possibility of gun control is now dead.
[insert tacky question here asking if this is because someone shot it while citing their 2nd amendment rights to bear arms]

(No, I haven't read a thing in this thread closely enough to belong in here, so carry on.)
Se paciente y duro; algún día este dolor te será útil.

User avatar
Dr. Mobius
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 2523
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 12:11 pm
Title: Stayin' Alive
First Joined: 17 Aug 2002
Location: Evansville, IN
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby Dr. Mobius » Thu Jul 26, 2012 1:16 pm

(Also, you didn't cite any sources which apparently makes your opinion less than worthless.)
The enemy's fly is down.
Image

User avatar
Rei
Commander
Commander
Posts: 3068
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:31 pm
Title: Fides quaerens intellectum
First Joined: 24 Nov 2003
Location: Between the lines

Re: Gun Control

Postby Rei » Thu Jul 26, 2012 1:52 pm

More than gun control, I wonder how the ability to effectively print your own working gun out of plastic will affect security checks in places like airports. Part of the gun is still metal, plus I imagine bullets come up in such screenings, but it seems like such a device could make it more difficult to prevent weapons from being brought into areas intended to be secure.
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point.
~Blaise Pascal


私は。。。誰?

Dernhelm

User avatar
elfprince13
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1986
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:27 pm
Title: The Bombadil
Location: 127.0.0.1
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby elfprince13 » Thu Jul 26, 2012 2:02 pm

[insert tacky question here asking if this is because someone shot it while citing their 2nd amendment rights to bear arms]
More because you can't control the sale of something if you don't control the point of sale.

(Also, you didn't cite any sources which apparently makes your opinion less than worthless.)
I linked to one directly in my statement. Were you unable to click on it? Or do you not understand the implications of being able to manufacture working firearms in your bedroom?

More than gun control, I wonder how the ability to effectively print your own working gun out of plastic will affect security checks in places like airports. Part of the gun is still metal, plus I imagine bullets come up in such screenings, but it seems like such a device could make it more difficult to prevent weapons from being brought into areas intended to be secure.
Airport security doesn't actually prevent things from getting through. Even metal ones.



Getting back to a point from last page,
In the interest of being more reasonable I will downgrade my "almost certainly" to a "very likely", but I stand by my assertion that most people are useless in a panic, and arming them with a deadly weapon no matter how competent they are using it on a firing range will "very likely" make them worse than useless.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachia ... w_shooting" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parker_Mid ... e_shooting" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_High_School_shooting" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/2009 ... -ar-37595/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In all of these cases, guns were used defensively, and "very likely" saved the lives of bystanders.
"But the conversation of the mind was truer than any language, and they knew each other better than they ever could have by use of mere sight and touch."

User avatar
Dr. Mobius
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 2523
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 12:11 pm
Title: Stayin' Alive
First Joined: 17 Aug 2002
Location: Evansville, IN
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby Dr. Mobius » Thu Jul 26, 2012 2:23 pm

I was replying to Alea. Or do you not understand how the forum works?
The enemy's fly is down.
Image

User avatar
elfprince13
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1986
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:27 pm
Title: The Bombadil
Location: 127.0.0.1
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby elfprince13 » Thu Jul 26, 2012 2:27 pm

I was replying to Alea. Or do you not understand how the forum works?
She wasn't stating an opinion, she was asking a question, so your post didn't really make sense in that context. It did make slightly more sense in the context of replying to my post which was expressing an opinion (albeit one that was linking to a source justifying the opinion). Quoting people makes it obvious who you're replying to, particularly when you're making a nonsensical one that doesn't obviously continue the flow of conversation from the post you intend to reply to.



I'm also curious if anyone disputes the claims I made on the previous page regarding parallels between gun control and the drug war, and black market economics.
"But the conversation of the mind was truer than any language, and they knew each other better than they ever could have by use of mere sight and touch."

User avatar
fawkes
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 915
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 3:53 pm
Title: punk
Location: Denver, Colorado
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby fawkes » Thu Jul 26, 2012 2:51 pm

As a Colorado resident (living quite close to Aurora) may I interject?

My father owns several guns. He's taken me to shooting ranges and I've had my fun with them. But I still don't think the ease in which someone can come to possess a firearm is really a good thing. This state has seen a lot of gun violence in the last few decades. Is there some middle ground, perhaps? Maybe making the sale of automatic weapons to civilians illegal (or at least a whole hell of a lot harder)? Yes, it would be impossible to stop all criminals from getting these weapons if they had their minds set to it, but maybe we could at least slow down those crazed individuals on a mission to kill and destroy a little, maybe enough that someone notices that they are acting erratically and can intervene. Is it really necessary for private citizens to even own automatic weapons? This is what really frightens me.

Go ahead and call me a moron, or talk down to me for not having sources. I don't care. I'm just tired of checking lists of victims to see if someone else I know has been killed.
Step one, take off your shirt. Step two ... Step three, PROFIT!

User avatar
Gravity Defier
Commander
Commander
Posts: 7854
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:32 pm
Title: Ewok in Tauntaun-land

Re: Gun Control

Postby Gravity Defier » Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:01 pm

I was replying to Alea. Or do you not understand how the forum works?
She wasn't stating an opinion, she was asking a question, so your post didn't really make sense in that context.
To be fair, I was being snarky, alongside the tacky, and was giving an opinion in the form of a question in a way. I can see how that may have been unclear, so thank you for trying to clarify.


Josh, while I knew you were talking to me and am quote lazy myself, your response to elf wasn't exactly...friendly. There are times when who posts are directed to isn't always clear.


Erica, I sincerely appreciate your post. While I love the conversations people like Syphon and elf have, I think sometimes it becomes too much about the numbers and it almost feels heartless the way they approach these things. I know I tend to be the other extreme, where it's largely about feelings/gut reactions/etc. and so I don't try to join these conversations because it's hard to meet in the middle. So thanks for coming in to say something and to let it be *gasp* uncited!
Se paciente y duro; algún día este dolor te será útil.

User avatar
elfprince13
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1986
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:27 pm
Title: The Bombadil
Location: 127.0.0.1
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby elfprince13 » Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:23 pm

Is there some middle ground, perhaps? Maybe making the sale of automatic weapons to civilians illegal (or at least a whole hell of a lot harder)? Yes, it would be impossible to stop all criminals from getting these weapons if they had their minds set to it, but maybe we could at least slow down those crazed individuals on a mission to kill and destroy a little, maybe enough that someone notices that they are acting erratically and can intervene. Is it really necessary for private citizens to even own automatic weapons? This is what really frightens me.
Pretty much everywhere bans the sale and private ownership of automatic weapons (and the shooter in Aurora did not have one). Semi-auto is an entirely different matter, and banning semi-automatic guns would also end up banning many legitimate hunting weapons. The term "Assault Rifle" gets thrown around a lot, but this is not synonymous for "automatic weapon", and has more to do with the aesthetic of the rifle than it's capabilities. I hope that clears things up.

The problem with what you're addressing with your "at least it would slow them down and someone might notice" isn't just the "it would be ineffective and people could still get guns", it's that the options that would develop for them to get the guns would be a black market and gun running, which would promote further violence within the gun trade itself (think the drug cartels, only selling guns), while keeping guns out of the hands of people who are using them for legitimate purposes.


Erica, I sincerely appreciate your post. While I love the conversations people like Syphon and elf have, I think sometimes it becomes too much about the numbers and it almost feels heartless the way they approach these things. I know I tend to be the other extreme, where it's largely about feelings/gut reactions/etc. and so I don't try to join these conversations because it's hard to meet in the middle. So thanks for coming in to say something and to let it be *gasp* uncited!
The reason we approach things this way has nothing to do with being heartless, but with realizing that the decisions we make have measurable impacts on the world, and that the way this impact is measured can be quantified numerically. Doing that provides very powerful tools to analyze those impacts and make decisions based on a partial understanding of how things are actually working, rather than simply guessing based on emotion. The issues we care about and the outcomes we want to see are still very much driven by a human (and therefore emotional) view of the world. The difference is in how we approach bringing those outcomes about.

Ultimately, I think our Canadian friends (and other international friends I've talked to) have hit on something important, which is that problems like these are largely cultural rather than legal. As a Libertarian, this is something I agree with (and something Ron Paul, the presidential candidate I support, also agrees with). The laws and policies which I want to see are the ones which will preserve our liberties, allow for a healthy economy where prices communicate information about the way people value things, and allow corrupt people in positions of power to do the least harm. But laws can't make evil people good, or stop them from doing evil things, or protect good people from every bad thing that could go wrong. What we can do is try to change the culture that gives rise to that can't of evil.
"But the conversation of the mind was truer than any language, and they knew each other better than they ever could have by use of mere sight and touch."

User avatar
thoughtreader
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 782
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 5:00 pm
Title: will wrestle you to the ground
First Joined: 13 Mar 2003
Location: Portland OR
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby thoughtreader » Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:32 pm

More than gun control, I wonder how the ability to effectively print your own working gun out of plastic will affect security checks in places like airports. Part of the gun is still metal, plus I imagine bullets come up in such screenings, but it seems like such a device could make it more difficult to prevent weapons from being brought into areas intended to be secure.
Rei, I recently went through airport security at the SFO airport. They have the new fancy take an x-ray scanners and everyone goes through them. and they picked up some small embrodery on the breast of the shirt of the woman ahead of me in line. So they have the potential to pick up everything...
BUT
I descovered a loop hole in the system
I can't lift my left arm above my head into "proper scanning posotion" When I informed the TSA of this the just let me walk through with no scan, metal detector, or anything! No security screening at all. So if you want to sneak a gun/bomb/bad thing on an airplane all you have to say is I can't lift my arm because I had shoulder surgery ..... Not to mention I have accidentally taken pocket knifes and other prohibited things on planes before because I forgot they were in my purse and they weren't caught on the x-ray scan.

User avatar
fawkes
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 915
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 3:53 pm
Title: punk
Location: Denver, Colorado
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby fawkes » Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:42 pm

Pretty much everywhere bans the sale and private ownership of automatic weapons (and the shooter in Aurora did not have one). Semi-auto is an entirely different matter, and banning semi-automatic guns would also end up banning many legitimate hunting weapons. The term "Assault Rifle" gets thrown around a lot, but this is not synonymous for "automatic weapon", and has more to do with the aesthetic of the rifle than it's capabilities. I hope that clears things up.
Yeah, I'm not an expert on types of guns, sorry. I'm just saying that it's getting way too easy for people to get their hands on deadly weapons. And I do realize that a lot of sportsmen use those weapons. I don't want to take everyone's fun away, I just want to make things a little more difficult.

I know better than a lot of people how you never know when someone's going to just snap and take people's lives. I just want there to be a way to make it harder.
Step one, take off your shirt. Step two ... Step three, PROFIT!

User avatar
Dr. Mobius
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 2523
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 12:11 pm
Title: Stayin' Alive
First Joined: 17 Aug 2002
Location: Evansville, IN
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby Dr. Mobius » Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:55 pm

I descovered a loop hole in the system
I can't lift my left arm above my head into "proper scanning posotion" When I informed the TSA of this the just let me walk through with no scan, metal detector, or anything! No security screening at all. So if you want to sneak a gun/bomb/bad thing on an airplane all you have to say is I can't lift my arm because I had shoulder surgery ..... Not to mention I have accidentally taken pocket knifes and other prohibited things on planes before because I forgot they were in my purse and they weren't caught on the x-ray scan.
That's odd. I was frisked at the Arch when I told them I had an implant that would set off the metal detector. Which, incidentally, was the first time I've been through a security checkpoint in the almost ten years I've had the thing.
The enemy's fly is down.
Image

User avatar
Gravity Defier
Commander
Commander
Posts: 7854
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:32 pm
Title: Ewok in Tauntaun-land

Re: Gun Control

Postby Gravity Defier » Thu Jul 26, 2012 4:04 pm

Well, that's because you look like a terrorist.
Se paciente y duro; algún día este dolor te será útil.

User avatar
elfprince13
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1986
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 11:27 pm
Title: The Bombadil
Location: 127.0.0.1
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby elfprince13 » Thu Jul 26, 2012 4:17 pm

Yeah, I'm not an expert on types of guns, sorry. I'm just saying that it's getting way too easy for people to get their hands on deadly weapons. And I do realize that a lot of sportsmen use those weapons. I don't want to take everyone's fun away, I just want to make things a little more difficult.

I know better than a lot of people how you never know when someone's going to just snap and take people's lives. I just want there to be a way to make it harder.
I understand the sentiment entirely (or as entirely as I can without having lost someone), and that's a large part of why people advocate for the ability to own guns as defensive weaponry. The difference between us, is that I don't think there is any form of legislation that will practically make it harder for criminals to get lethal weaponry - by allowing people to defend themselves, you make it harder for them to use their weapons after they have them. Read some of the stories I linked to above.

Also, as someone who lives in a rural area, it's important for me to point out that hunters aren't all "sportsmen" out for fun. Around here, a lot of impoverished people can supplement their diet with a significant amount of meat through hunting.
"But the conversation of the mind was truer than any language, and they knew each other better than they ever could have by use of mere sight and touch."

User avatar
thoughtreader
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 782
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 5:00 pm
Title: will wrestle you to the ground
First Joined: 13 Mar 2003
Location: Portland OR
Contact:

Re: Gun Control

Postby thoughtreader » Thu Jul 26, 2012 4:53 pm

Also, as someone who lives in a rural area, it's important for me to point out that hunters aren't all "sportsmen" out for fun. Around here, a lot of impoverished people can supplement their diet with a significant amount of meat through hunting.
My husband grew up in a poor military family, his family had to hunt to put food on the table. Yes over the years they have taken a trophy buck or 2. But not because they went out looking for a trophy, the go hunting and shoot the first legal animal they can safely take and some just happened to be big bucks.
When they lived in Wisconsin where the deer population is hugely overpopulated they killed a large number if deer in the three years they lived there (close to 60 or 70). but none of the meat went to waist. first they filled their freezer, then the freezer of all the coasties his father worked with. then they donated to the "hunt for the hungry" program where butchers prepare the meat for free and then donate it to food banks and homeless shelters to feed the less fortunate. They were able to feed a large number of people for $10 a deer tag. While helping control an out of control deer population.

User avatar
Rei
Commander
Commander
Posts: 3068
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:31 pm
Title: Fides quaerens intellectum
First Joined: 24 Nov 2003
Location: Between the lines

Re: Gun Control

Postby Rei » Thu Jul 26, 2012 5:11 pm

I'm definitely in support of hunting, as it is both useful and fun. That and game tastes really good.
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point.
~Blaise Pascal


私は。。。誰?

Dernhelm

buckshot
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1286
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:20 pm
Title: Farmer from Hell
Location: Colbert Washington

Re: Gun Control

Postby buckshot » Fri Jul 27, 2012 12:14 am

Hunting and the collecting of firearms and early ammo and reloading tools and other related western goodies have been a main (like breathing) part of my life since birth. And I strive to foster safe handeling of such by my kids, grandkids,employees and any interested folks. I mostly try to stay out of such conservations because I am passionate about the subject, when asked I usually reply "this is the USA" and try to make a quick getaway. There are plenty of more liberal nations where like people can go live and feel safe and know their government will look to keeping everyone safe and under control. I would never try to convince anyone "my way is right" and sometimes even I wonder why someone would need a basement full of (high capacity "Black Guns") but limiting them may be opening a can of worms that would be dangerous to our constitutional rights . I have hunted and traveled with guns for a long time and I feel more limited and put upon every year and it does worry me. I don't like change and I will push against it, like it or not firearms are a undeniable part of our rich heritage.

User avatar
CezeN
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1254
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 1:24 pm
Title: will not be ignored

Re: Gun Control

Postby CezeN » Fri Jul 27, 2012 10:56 am

I'm relatively nonpartisan on the issue of gun control. Despite living in Texas, I've probably only shot a rifle/gun once when I was like 13 at a summer camp. Unless you want to count paintball...

But, I ran across this Cracked.com article, and the last point...
http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-4-most- ... ontrol_p2/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
#1. "Well, the Second Amendment says-"

Stop it. Technically yes, the Second Amendment says what you were going to say before I cut you off, but stop it. I'll tell you what the Second Amendment says.
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
There's quite a lot of debate over what this actually means, and many will argue that the amendment only refers to people in a militia. So if you're not in a militia, then you should not have a gun. Except in 2008, the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment protects the right of an individual to possess a firearm. So there. The Second Amendment wins. You can grab your gat and go get your kids back now.

Except that court ruling doesn't have as much meaning as you think, in the long run. The very nature of the Constitution is not permanent. We're talking about the Second Amendment, after all. The Constitution is supposed to be amended. Not only that, it's supposed to be completely rewritten. Take it from Thomas Jefferson, the guy who freaking wrote the thing:
"Every constitution, then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of nineteen years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, and not of right."
Our Constitution, of course, has not been rewritten in more than two hundred years (read: ever). But people change, and nations change. Ideals and rights change.


Read more: The 4 Most Meaningless Arguments Against Gun Control | Cracked.com http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; -most-meaningless-arguments-against-gun-control_p2/#ixzz21qDwfwzM
Wait... what? This is the first time I've read someone propose so ridiculous an argument. I mean, the point of the Bill of Rights was to protect us from the government infringing on natural, unalienable liberties. So, even supposing his argument was valid in some way, it wouldn't be valid concerning the Bill of Rights. Also, does he realize that several people wrote the Constitution - and that any single opinion on how it should be upheld(or changed) is not valid and really doesn't hold any weight? There's ya know an Amendment process that's been decided on.

This may be the stupidest thing I've read on Cracked. First time I've ever heard someone profess that the Constitution is invalid.
Gunny and his thoughts on First Earth:
Image

User avatar
Syphon the Sun
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2217
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 8:59 pm
Title: Ozymandias

Re: Gun Control

Postby Syphon the Sun » Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:43 am

(There's some stuff on the previous few pages I want to get to, but I'm in SLC right now and don't have time for a big response.)

Cezen:

The "militia" argument is silly in the historical context, or in the context of natural rights, but nevertheless, federal law classifies me as part of the militia.
The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
Also: Thomas Jefferson wasn't present at the Convention, or even in the United States at the time, which would make it incredibly hard for him to write the thing.
Step softly; a dream lies buried here.


Return to “Milagre Town Square”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 8 guests