NameSilo

Gun Laws

Labeled as discuss in The Break Room started by Bernard Wright, May 13, 2019.

Replies:
223
Views:
2,717

  1. TestCase

    TestCase Note: Doesn't play well with others. VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    2,027
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Maybe not in your country, but it sure is here in the US.
    And hence the need to be able to defend one's self within one's home - and anywhere else.

    Yeah, bring on the Kung Fu fighting!

    (Note, those are not nunchuks the bad guys are carrrying...)
    View post on imgur.com


    (No sound so you'll have to read the captions at the top as they appear.)





    I'm assuming the basics of this next video are truth, but 2 things. 1) If that is marijuana he is smoking, then legally he's not able to own a gun. 2) Granted he is likely embellishing his story to some extent, but at the moment the bad guy was no longer an offensive threat to him, Soulja Boy had no right to shoot him again as he lay there.

    .
    I tried to resist, but just had to...
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2019
    The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
  2. Keith

    Keith Top Member VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    8,480
    Likes Received:
    8,763
  3. Joe Nichols

    Joe Nichols Common sense consultant VIP

    Posts:
    1,734
    Likes Received:
    3,445
    I think what @HotKey was getting at is that part of the reason this problem exists in today's US is because people see gun ownership as a right that does not need to be earned. So many take it for granted. Rather it should be seen as a privilege that must be earned by proving one is capable of owning and using a gun responsibly.
     
  4. Joe Nichols

    Joe Nichols Common sense consultant VIP

    Posts:
    1,734
    Likes Received:
    3,445
    Thanks Keith. Really interesting article.

    While I definitely fall on your side of the argument (i.e. gun ownership should be eliminated as much as possible), what I've learned is that all these studies are very subjective in nature. Not that the figures are inaccurate, but I think the authors of these articles (on both sides of the argument) fail to appropriately consider the context of the stats they're quoting.

    In the case of this article, while they mention guns are more likely to kill the owner than an intruder, they fail to mention how many times owning a gun stops or dissuades home invasions without even being fired. Those are the kinds of comparisons that are needed in order to make meaningful decisions on gun ownership, but it's impossible to get accurate numbers because they rely almost solely on the testimony of the individual gun owners.

    Even this fact needs a lot more context:

    "Research published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that living in a home where guns are kept increased an individual’s risk of death by homicide by between 40 and 170%."

    This is a blanket number, but it fails to take into account where you live, income level, criminal history, and on and on. So maybe a gun owner with criminal history has a 200% better chance of death by homicide, while your average middle class suburban adult has a 5% better chance, or 10% worse chance!

    So yeah, the stats are interesting to examine, but context is everything.
     
  5. oldtimer

    oldtimer Do some good for humanity and the environment VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    1,252
    Likes Received:
    773
    It seems that there are going to be a certain number of people killed no matter which side of the gun debate wins, if you take all the guns away you put people at the mercy of criminals and extremist and fanatical groups and if everyone is allowed to have guns you still have many people needlessly being killed by law abiding people who have passed background checks but were either careless with their guns or temporarily lost their senses due to having some kind of unexpected rage, like road rage or getting mad because of loosing their job or being unhappy with something at school.

    You cannot solve this problem by legislation, we just have to evolve out of this situation either with the help of technology or a reform in the way the society is operating as a whole.

    IMO
     
  6. Joe Nichols

    Joe Nichols Common sense consultant VIP

    Posts:
    1,734
    Likes Received:
    3,445
    And when we're talking about these mass shootings, I'm not sure that gun owners ever really factor into stopping them. Do they? I honestly have no idea, but they're always so unexpected that the average person carrying a gun wouldn't have the time or mental fortitude to react quickly enough to stop the event.

    Addressing these public shootings is as much about changing the culture as it is about limiting access to guns. But I think the latter is an important step toward starting the culture shift. First the government and the majority have to stand together and say that guns are not a part of American culture. And then it will likely take years or decades before meaningful changes can be measured.

    Take slavery as an example... It was legally abolished in 1865, but the country is still dealing with its ramifications today. Certainly attitudes have improved in the past 150 years, but they're far from perfect. When it comes to improving the gun violence situation, the American public needs to be aware that the problem can't be solved overnight, but the sooner changes are made, the sooner attitudes can start being re-shaped.
     
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2019
  7. TestCase

    TestCase Note: Doesn't play well with others. VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    2,027
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    And as a right, it doesn't have to be earned.

    I'm assuming Canada has some sort of formalized right to free speach. How would you feel if you had to meet a certain level of education to avail yourself of that right? What if you would be happy to get that education, but you're financially unable to pay for it? You would then be a second class citizen.

    If there are significant requirements, limitations or impedements in order to excercise a right, then it is no longer a right.

    A right is a right. End of story.
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2019
  8. TestCase

    TestCase Note: Doesn't play well with others. VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    2,027
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    This is kind of a Catch 22 situation.

    We don't know how much or how little gun owners might effect the outcome because there aren't enough gun owners carrying in public to be able generate significant data as to what effect they might have.

    Two of the biggest reasons for the low CCW count are: 1) Laws - and additional restrictions by some local law enforcement agencies - that make it damn near impossible to get a CCW pemit; 2) Even more laws and rules by private property owners that can severely limit where a gun can be carried once you do have one.

    There are other reasons as well, but these are what most people who have or want to get a CCW seem to complain about.

    Maybe another way to view things is, how many mass shootings have occurred at locations where a high number of armed individuals could be expected on-site?
     
  9. Joe Nichols

    Joe Nichols Common sense consultant VIP

    Posts:
    1,734
    Likes Received:
    3,445
    Whether it's a right or not isn't the problem. The problem is many peoples' attitudes toward that right.

    I would also put forth that not all rights are created equal. I think we can all agree that the right to free speech is a universally accepted right for all human beings, whereas the right to own guns is not.
     
  10. Joe Nichols

    Joe Nichols Common sense consultant VIP

    Posts:
    1,734
    Likes Received:
    3,445
    So maybe it should be mandatory for everyone in the country to carry a gun with them. Even those who legally cross the border could be provided with state issued loaners for as long as they're in the country. If everyone has a gun, I bet no one will shoot them.
     
  11. TestCase

    TestCase Note: Doesn't play well with others. VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    2,027
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Seriously Joe?!?!?

    You must be tired if that is the best that you can come up with. Why in the world would you even suggest that maybe carrying should be an all or nothing proposition? There is noone anywhere calling for or even suggesting what you put forth.

    If people have the right to own a gun and choose to carry where legal, then that is their choice. If other choose not to, then that is their choice.

    Please up your game. The discussion is about gun laws, where they are now and how they may or may not be realistically improved going into the future.

    FIFY
    I emphatically disagree. (Once again...) A right is a right is right!

    In my book they are all equal! I don't prioritize and I support everyone equally in what ever right(s) they choose to use.

    You do you in Canada and I'll do me here in the US.

    And without guns, the US may never have had the opportunity to codify free speach as part of our Constitution and belief system.

    A lot of countries and their leaders may pay lip service to freedom of speeach, but their actions prove different. And many other counties and their leaders would take great issue with allowing their citizens to have the right to free speach. They'll even cite all the reasons as to why it is bad for society. Even some of our closest, freedom loving allies have instituted significant restrictions on "free speach".

    I may not like what someone has to say, but - once agin - I'll support their right 100% to say it as long as it causes no direct harm.

    I'm done for the evening.
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2019
  12. oldtimer

    oldtimer Do some good for humanity and the environment VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    1,252
    Likes Received:
    773
    The number of people who are being killed by guns are a subset of the number of people who are being killed in general for so many different reasons, if we as a society care about saving people’s lives then we should address all killings that can be prevented and avoided not only by bullets that come out of real guns but we also have to care about all the people who are being killed by invisible bullets that come out of invisible guns that are used by certain political, religious, and racial groups who kill because of their twisted ideologies and beliefs or their self serving agendas and interests. Whether it’s the unborn who are being shot in the womb (in the case of systematic and unnecessary abortions) or whether its people who are being shot in their hospital bed because they are denied adequate and timely healthcare, or perhaps those who are targeted by the invisible guns of illegal and addictive drugs, STDs and preventable diseases, harmful and dangerous products and contaminated environments, abuse, humiliation, delinquency, torture, crime, war, and even avoidable accidents. Lets stop all unnecessary and preventable killings by all guns real or invisible. IMO
     
  13. Joe Nichols

    Joe Nichols Common sense consultant VIP

    Posts:
    1,734
    Likes Received:
    3,445
    There are certainly lots of problems worth addressing in the world. But lets keep this discussion focused on guns. :)
     
  14. HotKey

    HotKey Made in Canada VIP

    Posts:
    2,154
    Likes Received:
    4,945
    Placing the right to free speech beside the right to pack a firearm... I dunno.. kinda two different scenarios, no? Yelling at someone in a fit of rage can easily be undone with an apology and a handshake. Pulling the trigger and killing someone in a moment of rage, is finality. Forever. Can never be undone.

    The problem with pulling the trigger, is you've never given the chance for a different outcome. The worst-case scenario was already assumed on the preset. Regular civilians aren't trained to shoot to injure, to incapacitate their perceived danger. They will just point and hope for the best.

    Owning a firearm shouldn't automatically equate to the right to use it, even if one believes it it justified. And making it one's right to own a firearm, does just that. If the thought of millions upon millions of folks with that mindset isn't troubling to us, than I'm not sure there will ever be enough of a consensus for change.
     
  15. Joe Nichols

    Joe Nichols Common sense consultant VIP

    Posts:
    1,734
    Likes Received:
    3,445
    But if having more people carry guns would make these incidents happen less, isn't it a no-brainer to have everyone carry a gun?

    Wasn't there a southern state a while back that made it mandatory for every home-owner to have a gun? Maybe they're on the right track.

    And the NRA is even on record as saying that more guns will make communities safer.

    I mean... we're already discussing how removing guns could make things safer. If you disagree with that proposition, then you must agree that more guns make things more safe. If that's the case, then maximum guns should equal maximum safety. No?

    I get it, but I think it's a lazy approach. If we can just say a right is a right, then we never really have to take a hard look at anything wrong with our society. Owning slaves used to be a right... smoking on airplanes and in hospitals was a right...

    If we don't challenge some of these rights - particularly when they have a potentially negative impact on other human beings - then we don't evolve as a society.

    True. They are an important part of US history. However, that's not a reason to make them an important part of the country's future. Times change.
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2019
  16. Joe Nichols

    Joe Nichols Common sense consultant VIP

    Posts:
    1,734
    Likes Received:
    3,445
    Just read a great article comparing gun ownership in Sweden to ownership in the US. Written by an American hunter who went to Sweden for a year specifically to study the legal and cultural differences:

    https://www.vox.com/2016/8/8/12351824/gun-control-sweden-solution

    Some big take-aways:
    • The importance of putting gun responsibilities before gun rights.
    • Sweden has much stricter laws on acquisition and storage.
    • The homicide rate in Sweden is extremely low even though they rank 10th in the world in per capita gun ownership.
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2019
  17. oldtimer

    oldtimer Do some good for humanity and the environment VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    1,252
    Likes Received:
    773
    Ideally I like to see the day that we as a society have evolved to the point that guns are used for target practice only and nothing else ( and even then perhaps with virtual bullets and not real ones), but until then I believe that in the event of a mass shooting it might be helpful to have a few of the good guys to have guns, even if they don’t want to use the gun themselves, but at the very least they can give it to someone else in the group who might have the right training and courage to protect them. So even old ladies carrying guns in their purses can come in handy in an indirect way when people are caught in a mass shooting event.

    The only other option is for you to play possum and pretend to be dead by laying down motionless and letting your tongue hang halfway out, the mass shooter either will believe that you are dead and leave you alone or he will be laughing so hard that he won’t be able to bring himself to kill you any more. :)

    IMO
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2019
  18. Joe Nichols

    Joe Nichols Common sense consultant VIP

    Posts:
    1,734
    Likes Received:
    3,445
    I suspect that this shared belief is what has led to the idea that school teachers should be armed... or armed guards should be stationed at every school. Would make for nice additions to the metal detectors already employed by many schools.

    It's funny how ideas like this can seem reasonable when you look at them in a bubble, but then you think about what you're giving up for the sake of a mostly false sense of security. I guess we're throwing in the towel on preserving childhood innocence, huh?

    2.26-Editorial-Cartoon.png
     
  19. oldtimer

    oldtimer Do some good for humanity and the environment VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    1,252
    Likes Received:
    773
    I am going with what sounds logical when faced with the realities on the ground, otherwise I have already indicated what I would ideally like to see in the long run, we can only hope that we can eventually evolve out of this situation, but meanwhile I think that decent and law abiding people should have the right to protect themselves and if having a gun can give them an advantage to be able to stay alive in a mass shooting event then I don’t think that they should be deprived of having a chance (no matter how slim) to be able to save themselves.
    IMO
     
  20. Joe Nichols

    Joe Nichols Common sense consultant VIP

    Posts:
    1,734
    Likes Received:
    3,445
    This is exactly the problem, though... Americans see guns as a means of protecting themselves. No other first world country views gun ownership in this way. If protection is your primary consideration for carrying, then that thing is coming out as soon as you feel threatened. This is how so many accidental gun deaths occur.

    Your straight-line logic makes sense in a narrow tunnel, without other considerations, but it's reactionary. America needs to get to the root cause of the current issues and address them at their core. The country needs a culture shift, and a completely reformed attitude toward guns.
     
  21. oldtimer

    oldtimer Do some good for humanity and the environment VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    1,252
    Likes Received:
    773
    I Agree, but until then we cannot expect people to be left defenseless against those who indiscriminately want to mow everyone else down.

    There are many situations that require a short term and a long term strategy that might not be in the same lines.

    IMO
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2019
  22. biggie

    biggie Top Member VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    9,479
    Likes Received:
    8,697
    but.... from what and from who, do they feel they need protection from?

    that is the real question, behind issue of gun rights


    imo...
     
  23. Joe Nichols

    Joe Nichols Common sense consultant VIP

    Posts:
    1,734
    Likes Received:
    3,445
    I think the American public in general has been trained to be afraid, and this is what breeds the desperate need for protection that you're talking about. How many times a day do regular people get fed fear? By the media... by the government... commercials... internet forums... targeted online ads?

    Even language like what you used above: "mow them down". We hear this stuff everyday and then we repeat it to each other until everyone thinks that needing lethal protection is a major issue and a fundamental right that must be protected at all costs. People buy guns because they're afraid.

    And I can't blame them! Fear is easy to consume and hard to fight. But that fight needs to start.
     
  24. oldtimer

    oldtimer Do some good for humanity and the environment VIP ★★★★★★★★★★

    Posts:
    1,252
    Likes Received:
    773
    Some of their fear is justified, so there has to be some compromise by both sides, I believe that sooner or later there will be forced cooperation between people on the opposing sides of the gun issue in order to come up with solutions that can benefit the society at large. People have been fighting over the gun issue for decades and it hasn’t gotten them anywhere, perhaps its time for people to start cooperating based on the necessities of the situation and their shared values like we all agree that something has to be done to stop kids from getting killed at school. IMO
     

Want to reply or ask your own question?

It only takes a minute to sign up – and it's free!
Topics / Tags:

Share This Page

NameWorth
  1. NamePros uses cookies and similar technologies. By using this site, you are agreeing to our privacy policy, terms, and use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
Loading...