Gun Politics

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Gun Politics

Post by GreenGoo »

Zaxxon wrote: Wed Apr 04, 2018 9:53 am It really is, in context. These kids just went through a school shooting, and the PTB are seriously suggesting clear backpacks will help. Can you not see how depressing/humiliating/embarrassing that is?

It's terrible, and we should all be furious.
Yeah...that's not Nox's position on why clear bags are outrageous.
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by noxiousdog »

GreenGoo wrote: Wed Apr 04, 2018 10:16 am
Zaxxon wrote: Wed Apr 04, 2018 9:53 am It really is, in context. These kids just went through a school shooting, and the PTB are seriously suggesting clear backpacks will help. Can you not see how depressing/humiliating/embarrassing that is?

It's terrible, and we should all be furious.
Yeah...that's not Nox's position on why clear bags are outrageous.
Yes it is. I'm fine with a meaningful response. I'm not fine with ridiculousness. You can look back through this thread to see how many times I've objected to a new safety measure.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Gun Politics

Post by GreenGoo »

Yeah, I'm familiar with your stance on gun control.

What's weird is that both you and Zax don't want clear bags, but you want something that is statistically effective and he wants significant gun control. At least I think that's his stance.

To be honest we've gone through these hoops so many times over the years that I've stopped paying attention. I mean...what's the point?
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by noxiousdog »

GreenGoo wrote: Wed Apr 04, 2018 10:51 am What's weird is that both you and Zax don't want clear bags, but you want something that is statistically effective and he wants significant gun control. At least I think that's his stance.
Maybe that should tell you something.

To be fair, clear bags are a bit of a trigger for me. Sports arenas have been using them for years to prevent alcohol and food smuggling with the pretend reason that it makes people safer. And people just accept it. Bag searches have twice caused me to lose something of sentimental value (one significant and one just really nice) and it aggravates the fuck out of me.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni »

GreenGoo wrote: Wed Apr 04, 2018 9:23 am
LawBeefaroni wrote: Wed Apr 04, 2018 8:37 am The NFL has had a "clear bag" policy for years. Total theater. Last few times I went to a game I just stuck my non-compliant bag in a clear bag and they waved me through. The only winner is the manufacturer of clear bags. I think the official NFL ones are like $25. For what is essentially the the kind of bag that linens come in.
But that's not the clear bag's fault, or a natural outcome of a clear bag policy.
The supposed point of a clear bag policy is a convenient and non intrusive way to verify that a bag's contents are safe. Or at least don't include a firearm or a bomb.

The thing is, as a security measure it is trivial to defeat it. You just put a firearm or a bomb in another bag (or in a hat, towel, t-shirt, etc) and put it in the clear bag. To counter this, you'd have to check all potential hiding places and you're right back to searching/scanning most bags. It's pure theater. You want to stop kids bringing in weapons? Use metal detectors.

Imagine if airports or courthouses dumped metal detectors and backscatter for clear bags.



In the case of the NFL bags, they're actually a security liability since the clear bags are assumed to be safe and bypass any kind of inspection while things outside of the bags life jackets, blankets, etc are wanded. But put that same jacket or blanket in a bag, wrapped around whatever you want, and voila, it's suddenly safe!
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
Zaxxon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 28118
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:11 am
Location: Surrounded by Mountains

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Zaxxon »

GreenGoo wrote: Wed Apr 04, 2018 10:51 amTo be honest we've gone through these hoops so many times over the years that I've stopped paying attention. I mean...what's the point?
The point (on the going through these hoops topic), for me at least, is that I think this time may really be different. It very well may not be, and maybe I'll look the idiot. But there is absolutely more momentum for gun reform today than there has been at any other time since I've been paying attention.

The widespread success of the MfOL marches is one example. The popularity of the Parkland kids six weeks after 'their' shooting is another (that's what, 3x the usual spotlight time of a shooting that size?).

For a third, I live in a congressional district that has never had anything but a Republican representative. This year it's leaning +2 Democratic. My town specifically is one of the R bastions within the district. The high school near me is hosting a town hall this Saturday as part of the Town Hall for Our Lives push. Our R rep as well as our R senator have both ignored their invites so far, but the high school gymnasium has already nearly filled to capacity with RSVPed guests. There are buses lined up to ferry in students from other HSs in the district.

The point on clear bags is simply that it's a bad idea. Like, obviously, on its face terrible. It has real costs both financial (who's going to buy a clear bag unless they're forced to?) and in liberty (why do you get to violate my privacy at all times simply because some douche may try to hide a weapon?). And it's ineffective as anyone who really wants to get a semiautomatic weapon in can still easily do so. Worst case you're shooting up the entrance hallway instead of Ms. Smith's Poly Sci class, or the stadium entrance rather than section 337. In neither situation is your potential casualty count reduced.

If we're going to accept that all students need to wear clear bags to school with no evidence that it will help the actual problem, then I would hope that we'll also quickly ensure that all concealed carry laws are immediately repealed using the same logic.
User avatar
Zaxxon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 28118
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:11 am
Location: Surrounded by Mountains

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Zaxxon »

LawBeefaroni wrote: Wed Apr 04, 2018 11:14 amThe thing is, as a security measure it is trivial to defeat it. You just put a firearm or a bomb in another bag (or in a hat, towel, t-shirt, etc) and put it in the clear bag.
That's putting way too much effort in. You don't need to hide it at all. Simply have your mass killing just prior to the bag check location, while you're in line with hundreds of other folks.
User avatar
Chaz
Posts: 7381
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 7:37 am
Location: Southern NH

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Chaz »

I don't like the clear bag thing for all the reasons cited. I'd be thrilled to do it though, as long as we also took some concrete measures to strengthen gun control. But that doesn't sound like it's on the table, right?
I can't imagine, even at my most inebriated, hearing a bouncer offering me an hour with a stripper for only $1,400 and thinking That sounds like a reasonable idea.-Two Sheds
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni »

Zaxxon wrote: Wed Apr 04, 2018 11:27 am
LawBeefaroni wrote: Wed Apr 04, 2018 11:14 amThe thing is, as a security measure it is trivial to defeat it. You just put a firearm or a bomb in another bag (or in a hat, towel, t-shirt, etc) and put it in the clear bag.
That's putting way too much effort in. You don't need to hide it at all. Simply have your mass killing just prior to the bag check location, while you're in line with hundreds of other folks.
No doubt. Checkpoint bottlenecks outside of venues are basically kill zones.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 43487
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Blackhawk »

The kids say, "We're tired of fearing for our lives. We need to make a real, meaningful change so we can be safe, and not just another feel-good measure that doesn't help, but lets people pretend they've done better."

The adults say, "Have some clear bags."

Does anyone really question why they'd object?
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni »

Blackhawk wrote: Wed Apr 04, 2018 3:00 pm
Does anyone really question why they'd object?
How about if we put lollypops and Skittles in the bags? No?

What if we put up ads to promote #clearbags during the CMAs and the Grammy's? No?

Man, tough crowd. What else can we offer you that doesn't fundamentally change anything?
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur »

LawBeefaroni wrote: Wed Apr 04, 2018 3:27 pm
Blackhawk wrote: Wed Apr 04, 2018 3:00 pm
Does anyone really question why they'd object?
How about if we put lollypops and Skittles in the bags? No?
Those might be mistaken for pills. And we all know that no one under the age of 18 can be trusted to take their own medication without making the school nurse dispense it.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
em2nought
Posts: 5305
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:48 am

Re: Gun Politics

Post by em2nought »

Technically, he shouldn't be here.
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by noxiousdog »

There wasn't.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
Moliere
Posts: 12295
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 10:57 am
Location: Walking through a desert land

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Moliere »

1) Read The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined by Steven Pinker. Violence has been declining. FBI stats back this up too.
2) It's a contradiction to use violence against children as an argument for less violence in the past.
"The world is suffering more today from the good people who want to mind other men's business than it is from the bad people who are willing to let everybody look after their own individual affairs." - Clarence Darrow
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70097
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LordMortis »

Because knew to keep their big yaps shut if they knew what was good for them in a polite society?
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Gun Politics

Post by GreenGoo »

noxiousdog wrote: Wed Apr 04, 2018 5:22 pm There wasn't.
And if you included "ass whoopin' in the statistics, there was more.
User avatar
Zaxxon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 28118
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:11 am
Location: Surrounded by Mountains

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Zaxxon »

Quote of the day: "What, *now* the GOP is all about transparency?"
User avatar
Victoria Raverna
Posts: 5012
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:23 am
Location: Jakarta

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Victoria Raverna »

Isgrimnur wrote: Thu Mar 29, 2018 10:14 am I'm all for well-crafted gun control policy. And I think you can save more than 500 lives a year through it. Let's close the holes in the system that are exposed every time a mass shooting comes up. Let's make it easier for the feds to know when little Johnny got expelled for making terroristic threats in high school. Let's increase spending and support for those with mental issues.

Let's stop trying to criminalize the millions of law-abiding citizens through blatant culture warfare like trying to ban "rifles that are capable of firing high-velocity ammunition', as that's pretty much all of them, when, if high-velocity ammunition were the problem, you could address that, rather than the rifles.

I'm on record in this thread as being for, or at least amenable, to some of the points on the Parkland list. But I want policy to be backed up by research and facts rather than emotion and fear.
Ban handguns seem to be the solution to deal with 10000 death instead of 1000. So are you supporting that?
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur »

As it's a Constitutional right in this country and would criminalize millions of otherwise law-abiding citizens, I am not.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41243
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Gun Politics

Post by El Guapo »

Isgrimnur wrote: Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:29 am As it's a Constitutional right in this country and would criminalize millions of otherwise law-abiding citizens, I am not.
It wouldn't really need to *criminalize* anyone. It could be a civil issue, basically saying if you have a banned or unlicensed handgun you get a fine and/or the gun gets seized.

But regardless, saying that it would impact the people subject to the ban is just sort of begging the question about whether that's a good idea or not. Every day new laws and regulations take conduct which was previously legal and prohibit it, restrict it, or regulate it in some way. That doesn't tell us anything about whether the advantages of that law outweigh the drawbacks or not.

The constitutional right does make the idea essentially DOA though - hard to see how a flat handgun ban would pass constitutional muster these days.
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
Zaxxon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 28118
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:11 am
Location: Surrounded by Mountains

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Zaxxon »

There's a lot of space between where we are today and 'ban all handguns for everyone.'

There's a general right to vote, yet not all citizens can vote, for example. There's a constitutional right to free speech, yet the government can restrict speech.

User avatar
Zarathud
Posts: 16433
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:29 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Zarathud »

Mandatory insurance with strict liability. You can keep your gun if you as the last lawful owner pay for any damage it does to anyone outside your immediate family. Insurers will price accordingly.
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." - Albert Einstein
"I don't stand by anything." - Trump
“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.” - John Stuart Mill, Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St Andrews, 2/1/1867
“It is the impractical things in this tumultuous hell-scape of a world that matter most. A book, a name, chicken soup. They help us remember that, even in our darkest hour, life is still to be savored.” - Poe, Altered Carbon
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni »

How many of those 10,000 deaths are caused by legal owners of the handgun? Because those are the only ones you would be stopping with a potential ban.

Also, many of the between 70,000 and 2.5m (I know, wide spread but those are the agreed upon extremes) annual DGUs would likely go away.



Enforcement of existing laws should be a top priority. Its not the only solution but it's one we can enact now while dithering about the others.

Trust me, the reason Chicago has such high crime, particularly related to firearms, is lack of enforcement at the prosecutorial level. Today's example..

And it's not just for prohibited persons. Both Parkland a YouTube had early warnings and law enforcement contact prior to the shootings. IIRC, Parkland led to several arrests of potential school shooters.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41243
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Gun Politics

Post by El Guapo »

Zaxxon wrote: Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:44 am There's a lot of space between where we are today and 'ban all handguns for everyone.'

There's a general right to vote, yet not all citizens can vote, for example. There's a constitutional right to free speech, yet the government can restrict speech.
Oh, I agree. There's a multitude of issues with a flat handgun ban. Any sensible gun control is going to tread other ground in between.

My point is more related to the impact on "millions of law-abiding citizens", which is an argument that comes up a lot in gun control, and I don't think there's really a lot of merit or substance underlying it. Like, Dodd-Frank impacted a lot of law-abiding financial firm employees - that doesn't really tell us anything about whether it's good or bad.
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
Zaxxon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 28118
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:11 am
Location: Surrounded by Mountains

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Zaxxon »

Agreed.
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Defiant »

El Guapo wrote: Tue Apr 03, 2018 5:25 pm
My main concern with clear backpacks is that it seems like a potentially massive privacy issue. It's not hard to imagine school administrators in some schools making them mandatory on public safety grounds. That's going to dramatically impact what students are willing to tote around in their backpacks, including a broad swath of things that are 100% legal and not at all dangerous. It's also not at all hard to imagine clear bag requirements spreading to a variety of other public locations, with similar results.
Certainly clear backpacks can be a massive privacy violation (consider if a student were carrying tampons?), but it's also trivially defeated - you can just hide a gun within another inconspicuous object (eg, wrapped in gym clothes, a textbook with the interior portion of the pages cut out, etc)

What seems completely bizarre is that while they are implementing clear backpacks, they haven't made a decision on metal detectors. Now metal detectors can be a potential privacy violation (but I wouldn't think nearly as much as the backpacks), but would be far harder to defeat. It makes zero sense to go with clear backpacks over metal detectors.
User avatar
Skinypupy
Posts: 20331
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Utah

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Skinypupy »

Defiant wrote: Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:00 am It makes zero sense to go with clear backpacks over metal detectors.
A bit of both cost and ease of implementation difference between the two options.
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Defiant »

Skinypupy wrote: Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:02 am
Defiant wrote: Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:00 am It makes zero sense to go with clear backpacks over metal detectors.
A bit of both cost and ease of implementation difference between the two options.
You're right. Spend some money and effort to get absolutely no increase in security, vs spending more money and effort to get some increase in security.

If I'm forced to be spending at least some money and effort, I'd rather get something for my return.'

Honestly, it doesn't even at least give security theater, because the method of defeating it is so transparent. (sorry)
User avatar
Victoria Raverna
Posts: 5012
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:23 am
Location: Jakarta

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Victoria Raverna »

LawBeefaroni wrote: Thu Apr 05, 2018 9:54 am How many of those 10,000 deaths are caused by legal owners of the handgun? Because those are the only ones you would be stopping with a potential ban.

Also, many of the between 70,000 and 2.5m (I know, wide spread but those are the agreed upon extremes) annual DGUs would likely go away.



Enforcement of existing laws should be a top priority. Its not the only solution but it's one we can enact now while dithering about the others.

Trust me, the reason Chicago has such high crime, particularly related to firearms, is lack of enforcement at the prosecutorial level. Today's example..

And it's not just for prohibited persons. Both Parkland a YouTube had early warnings and law enforcement contact prior to the shootings. IIRC, Parkland led to several arrests of potential school shooters.
Banning legal guns will still affect availability of illegal guns. It'll also make it easier for police to deal with illegal gun trade. Kinda like curfew, you ask people to stay inside so police can deal with the criminals easier because now everyone that is outside is likely to be bad guys.

But if you don't support solution to try to reduce the 10000 and say that is not acceptable. Why complain about solution that deal with 1000? If nothing can be done for the 10000 then at least do something for the 1000. If nothing can be done for the 1000, then do something for the 100.
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni »

Honestly, my problem with the show-measures like banning "assault rifles" is that it just kicks the can down the road. If we eliminate all AR-15 "style" weapons, we'll just see massacres with AK style. Or with handguns. Or revolvers or bolt action rifles.

The solution is not playing whack-a-mole with looks and features.

A blanket ban is impossible. Style bans are a waste of time at best. We need to tackle the problem closer to the root. Normal people don't go shoot other people. Just possessing a gun doesn't make normal people go shoot other people. It's a people problem. Granted you can fix access much easier than fixing people so ultimately we probably need to work on both. But once, if, we give up the deep and fundamental right, we will never get it back. It's something that demands serious deliberation and far more thought than it's being given right now, with knee-jerk and often rote reactions on both sides.


Am I ok with playing whack-a-mole in the interim? Sure, fine, but don't let it give you a false sense of accomplishment.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
YellowKing
Posts: 30125
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 2:02 pm

Re: Gun Politics

Post by YellowKing »

Lawbeefaroni wrote:Honestly, my problem with the show-measures like banning "assault rifles" is that it just kicks the can down the road. If we eliminate all AR-15 "style" weapons, we'll just see massacres with AK style. Or with handguns. Or revolvers or bolt action rifles.
I guarantee you're not going to see 56 people gunned down at a concert with a handgun or bolt action rifle.

I agree "style bans" need to be looked at carefully and not be a blanket solution, but we can't pretend there is an equivalence between all types of guns and the damage they can do.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur »

YellowKing wrote: Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:55 am
Lawbeefaroni wrote:Honestly, my problem with the show-measures like banning "assault rifles" is that it just kicks the can down the road. If we eliminate all AR-15 "style" weapons, we'll just see massacres with AK style. Or with handguns. Or revolvers or bolt action rifles.
I guarantee you're not going to see 56 people gunned down at a concert with a handgun or bolt action rifle.

I agree "style bans" need to be looked at carefully and not be a blanket solution, but we can't pretend there is an equivalence between all types of guns and the damage they can do.
The Virginia Tech shooter killed 32 people and injured 18 others. With one .22 and one 9mm pistol.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41243
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Gun Politics

Post by El Guapo »

LawBeefaroni wrote: Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:02 am Normal people don't go shoot other people. Just possessing a gun doesn't make normal people go shoot other people. It's a people problem.
Yeah, all we need to do is fix people. In any event, the bigger issue with the "it's a problem with people argument" is that it doesn't really explain the vast differences in frequency of mass shootings between nations (and really, between the United States and most nations), unless you think there is something uniquely American about shooting a lot of people.
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by noxiousdog »

El Guapo wrote: Fri Apr 06, 2018 10:23 am
LawBeefaroni wrote: Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:02 am Normal people don't go shoot other people. Just possessing a gun doesn't make normal people go shoot other people. It's a people problem.
Yeah, all we need to do is fix people. In any event, the bigger issue with the "it's a problem with people argument" is that it doesn't really explain the vast differences in frequency of mass shootings between nations (and really, between the United States and most nations), unless you think there is something uniquely American about shooting a lot of people.
Of course there is. Compare our prison populations.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41243
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Gun Politics

Post by El Guapo »

noxiousdog wrote: Fri Apr 06, 2018 10:24 am
El Guapo wrote: Fri Apr 06, 2018 10:23 am
LawBeefaroni wrote: Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:02 am Normal people don't go shoot other people. Just possessing a gun doesn't make normal people go shoot other people. It's a people problem.
Yeah, all we need to do is fix people. In any event, the bigger issue with the "it's a problem with people argument" is that it doesn't really explain the vast differences in frequency of mass shootings between nations (and really, between the United States and most nations), unless you think there is something uniquely American about shooting a lot of people.
Of course there is. Compare our prison populations.
If you're talking about the size of our prison populations, that has much more to do with drug and sentencing laws than with people differences. If you're talking about differences in composition of the prison populations between nations (the % there due to violence), then I'd be interested to hear more about what you have to say about that.
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by noxiousdog »

El Guapo wrote: Fri Apr 06, 2018 10:28 am If you're talking about the size of our prison populations, that has much more to do with drug and sentencing laws than with people differences. If you're talking about differences in composition of the prison populations between nations (the % there due to violence), then I'd be interested to hear more about what you have to say about that.
Rape
Murder
Overall Crime
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni »

El Guapo wrote: Fri Apr 06, 2018 10:23 am
LawBeefaroni wrote: Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:02 am Normal people don't go shoot other people. Just possessing a gun doesn't make normal people go shoot other people. It's a people problem.
Yeah, all we need to do is fix people. In any event, the bigger issue with the "it's a problem with people argument" is that it doesn't really explain the vast differences in frequency of mass shootings between nations (and really, between the United States and most nations), unless you think there is something uniquely American about shooting a lot of people.
You could have included the next sentence:
LawBeefaroni wrote: Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:02 am Granted you can fix access much easier than fixing people so ultimately we probably need to work on both.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni »

Isgrimnur wrote: Fri Apr 06, 2018 10:06 am
YellowKing wrote: Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:55 am
Lawbeefaroni wrote:Honestly, my problem with the show-measures like banning "assault rifles" is that it just kicks the can down the road. If we eliminate all AR-15 "style" weapons, we'll just see massacres with AK style. Or with handguns. Or revolvers or bolt action rifles.
I guarantee you're not going to see 56 people gunned down at a concert with a handgun or bolt action rifle.

I agree "style bans" need to be looked at carefully and not be a blanket solution, but we can't pretend there is an equivalence between all types of guns and the damage they can do.
The Virginia Tech shooter killed 32 people and injured 18 others. With one .22 and one 9mm pistol.
University of Texas was mostly a bolt action rifle.

Fort Hood was two handguns, one being a revolver. 46 shot with 14 fatalaties. On a military base.

That's the thing. No, the Vegas shooting couldn't be replicated with a handgun or bolt action but a mass shooting event could still take place without a bag full of AR-15s.

Like I said, go ahead with banning AR-15s but you're just kicking the can down the road. What happened last time? A 10 year ban that was eventually lifted.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur »

LawBeefaroni wrote: Fri Apr 06, 2018 11:19 am Fort Hood was two handguns, one being a revolver. 46 shot with 14 fatalaties. On a military base.
Regular military personnel do not carry weapons, and certainly not combat loaded, while on base.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
Post Reply