Second Amendment Repeal / Gun Control

[Fartsniffage]

Right now, the US has high all three.

We have less than 1,000 accidental gun deaths a year. That really isn't that high at all.

Yeah, it's about the 12th highest in the world. Per capita that is, not absolute number.

[Semia (Ancient)]

absolutely not, every dictator in the world just before taking power made sure that all the guns were " in the right hands". Hitler and Stalin both did these things said themselves that it was the best way to control a people.

[Prezelly]

I would legitimately take high suicides and accidental gun deaths over high gun homicides.

Right now, the US has high all three.

High compared to a place with no guns, but not high at all

[Fartsniffage]

Right now, the US has high all three.

High compared to a place with no guns, but not high at all

Yes, high. Compared to states both with and without strict firearms restrictions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... death_rate

You can sort the list using the little arrows at the top.

[Sevvania]

Right now, the US has high all three.

We have less than 1,000 accidental gun deaths a year. That really isn't that high at all.

And firearm homicides are at ~8,500 and have been steadily declining for years.

[Spirit of Hope]

We have less than 1,000 accidental gun deaths a year. That really isn't that high at all.

Yeah, it's about the 12th highest in the world. Per capita that is, not absolute number.

Yes and we have 30,000 car deaths, 3,500 drownings, etc.
Plus if you are using the Wikipedia list it is missing a lot of data on the unintentional side, and only covers 75 countries.

[Prezelly]

High compared to a place with no guns, but not high at all

Yes, high. Compared to states both with and without strict firearms restrictions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... death_rate

You can sort the list using the little arrows at the top.

10 Deaths per 100.000. That is very low

[Fartsniffage]

Yeah, it's about the 12th highest in the world. Per capita that is, not absolute number.

Yes and we have 30,000 car deaths, 3,500 drownings, etc.
Plus if you are using the Wikipedia list it is missing a lot of data on the unintentional side, and only covers 75 countries.

Feel free to substitute better data if you have it.

An I have no interest in your car deaths bollocks. I've already pointed out why.

[Arbolvine]

No. But clamp down on gun ownership. Seriously, how does more guns in the civilian population reduce gun use? We aren't in a state of emergency. The nation is not crumbling apart. There is little chance that it will. In fact, if it does, it will be because the gun nuts decide to start a revolution.

If we strengthen the police service, select police officers well to determine they are responsible with firearms, and reduce civilian gun ownership, we can ensure that guns are less of a threat to society. The argument that outlawing guns would let criminals have all the guns is flawed. The police would be even stronger and will clamp down on crime. When someone is arrested, their firearms would be confiscated. The process of arrest of suspects and confiscation of firearms would quickly eliminate the illegal gun pool.

I understand that many people here believe that civilian gun ownership reduces crime and saves more lives than it takes. But think of the early West. The ubiquity of gunslingers and vigilantes before law and order were established in California, Nevada, etc., certainly killed more than it protected civilian life. The mixture of law and order with civilian gun ownership may result in less crime, but I don't share that belief.

Someone invaded my apartment a couple years ago. I have a false pump-action shotgun, painted in reflective black, that I keep in my bedroom in case this happens. When the invader broke in, I grabbed the "shotgun" and let him hear the pump. He scurried off immediately. I didn't need to shoot to stop the invader. The power of the mind is a beautiful thing.

[Imperializt Russia]

I would legitimately take high suicides and accidental gun deaths over high gun homicides.

Right now, the US has high all three.

Because of the sheer magnitude of suicides, accidents are almost negligible and suicides dwarf homicides too.
If we could do something to halve homicides that would leave accidents and suicides unaffected, I'd consider that a huge leap forwards over a measure that halved suicides and left homicides unaffected.

[Imperializt Russia]

absolutely not, every dictator in the world just before taking power made sure that all the guns were " in the right hands". Hitler and Stalin both did these things said themselves that it was the best way to control a people.

Hitler relaxed gun control for the general populace, he only strengthened regulations against the Jews.

[Spirit of Hope]

Yes and we have 30,000 car deaths, 3,500 drownings, etc.
Plus if you are using the Wikipedia list it is missing a lot of data on the unintentional side, and only covers 75 countries.

Feel free to substitute better data if you have it.

An I have no interest in your car deaths bollocks. I've already pointed out why.

Because it is ok to be scared of a gun accidentally killing you when a car is 30 times more likely to accidentally kill you?

[Fartsniffage]

Right now, the US has high all three.

Because of the sheer magnitude of suicides, accidents are almost negligible and suicides dwarf homicides too.
If we could do something to halve homicides that would leave accidents and suicides unaffected, I'd consider that a huge leap forwards over a measure that halved suicides and left homicides unaffected.

You misunderstand. The US has high all three when considered per capita and compared to other countries.

And why would you consider halving homicides better than halving suicides if halving suicides would be reducing a number that "dwarfs" the number of homicides?

[Arbolvine]

Feel free to substitute better data if you have it.

An I have no interest in your car deaths bollocks. I've already pointed out why.

Because it is ok to be scared of a gun accidentally killing you when a car is 30 times more likely to accidentally kill you?

I have heard this argument way too much. Stop comparing apples to oranges. Transportation is meant to get you from A to B. Guns are meant to kill.

[Fartsniffage]

Feel free to substitute better data if you have it.

An I have no interest in your car deaths bollocks. I've already pointed out why.

Because it is ok to be scared of a gun accidentally killing you when a car is 30 times more likely to accidentally kill you?

Why would I only be worried about a gun accidentally killing me? Someone using one to intentionally kill me leaves me just as dead.

[Imperializt Russia]

Because of the sheer magnitude of suicides, accidents are almost negligible and suicides dwarf homicides too.
If we could do something to halve homicides that would leave accidents and suicides unaffected, I'd consider that a huge leap forwards over a measure that halved suicides and left homicides unaffected.

You misunderstand. The US has high all three when considered per capita and compared to other countries.

And why would you consider halving homicides better than halving suicides if halving suicides would be reducing a number that "dwarfs" the number of homicides?

Is it not reasonable to consider homicides as an objectively worse event that a suicide?

A homicide is a person's violent crime against another person, robbing them of their life.
A suicide, while unquestionably tragic, is a person's choice to end their own life.

One of these is not like the other.

[Spirit of Hope]

Because it is ok to be scared of a gun accidentally killing you when a car is 30 times more likely to accidentally kill you?

I have heard this argument way too much. Stop comparing apples to oranges. Transportation is meant to get you from A to B. Guns are meant to kill.

Accept they are far more commonly used for other purposes. Namely target shooting and hunting. And if you are going to complain about one things danger it better be more dangerous. Which surprise statistically guns are less dangerous to society than cars. They kill on average the same number of people, and cars injure far more.

I'm all for lowering the homicide and suicide rate, but guns aren't your problem. Getting rid of guns doesn't lower homicides or suicides. Those are the results of other issues, which should be what you are targeting.

Because it is ok to be scared of a gun accidentally killing you when a car is 30 times more likely to accidentally kill you?

Why would I only be worried about a gun accidentally killing me? Someone using one to intentionally kill me leaves me just as dead.

Then try and deal with the issues of homicide, since getting rid of guns has historically not been connected to a reduction in the homicide rate.

[Imperializt Russia]

Because it is ok to be scared of a gun accidentally killing you when a car is 30 times more likely to accidentally kill you?

Why would I only be worried about a gun accidentally killing me? Someone using one to intentionally kill me leaves me just as dead.

Aircraft crashes, nuclear incidents, firearms in the home and even cancer are broadly irrational fears that we hold and do not hold car deaths in the same response.

Car deaths have been horrifically, I would argue tragically, normalised. People don't respect the rules of the road. People don't respect speed limits. We don't care that using phones while driving, driving while drunk, driving while on drugs make us much more dangerous, often lethal drivers.
When we drive on the public highways, we're entrusting ourselves with one, two, three tons of metal and exploding fossil and we do not fucking care.

[Fartsniffage]

You misunderstand. The US has high all three when considered per capita and compared to other countries.

And why would you consider halving homicides better than halving suicides if halving suicides would be reducing a number that "dwarfs" the number of homicides?

Is it not reasonable to consider homicides as an objectively worse event that a suicide?

A homicide is a person's violent crime against another person, robbing them of their life.
A suicide, while unquestionably tragic, is a person's choice to end their own life.

One of these is not like the other.

Objectively, what's the difference?

Both leave a person dead and the ones most affected are the family and community of the deceased. If anything, the family of the suicide would probably be objectively worse off given that many life insurance policies don't pay out on suicide and they will never have the opportunity of the closure offered by the trial and sentencing of the person who killed their loved one.

[Fartsniffage]

Then try and deal with the issues of homicide, since getting rid of guns has historically not been connected to a reduction in the homicide rate.

What are you talking about?

[Arbolvine]

I have heard this argument way too much. Stop comparing apples to oranges. Transportation is meant to get you from A to B. Guns are meant to kill.

Accept they are far more commonly used for other purposes. Namely target shooting and hunting. And if you are going to complain about one things danger it better be more dangerous. Which surprise statistically guns are less dangerous to society than cars. They kill on average the same number of people, and cars injure far more.

I'm all for lowering the homicide and suicide rate, but guns aren't your problem. Getting rid of guns doesn't lower homicides or suicides. Those are the results of other issues, which should be what you are targeting.

My suggestion for lowering homicide and suicide rates is to reduce gun ownership.
What is your suggestion?

Then try and deal with the issues of homicide, since getting rid of guns has historically not been connected to a reduction in the homicide rate.

Source, please.

[Fartsniffage]

Why would I only be worried about a gun accidentally killing me? Someone using one to intentionally kill me leaves me just as dead.

Aircraft crashes, nuclear incidents, firearms in the home and even cancer are broadly irrational fears that we hold and do not hold car deaths in the same response.

Car deaths have been horrifically, I would argue tragically, normalised. People don't respect the rules of the road. People don't respect speed limits. We don't care that using phones while driving, driving while drunk, driving while on drugs make us much more dangerous, often lethal drivers.
When we drive on the public highways, we're entrusting ourselves with one, two, three tons of metal and exploding fossil and we do not fucking care.

Thing is, I'm not worried about guns. Spirit of Hope is trying to push me into a corner about something I never actually said.

[Imperializt Russia]

Is it not reasonable to consider homicides as an objectively worse event that a suicide?

A homicide is a person's violent crime against another person, robbing them of their life.
A suicide, while unquestionably tragic, is a person's choice to end their own life.

One of these is not like the other.

Objectively, what's the difference?

Both leave a person dead and the ones most affected are the family and community of the deceased. If anything, the family of the suicide would probably be objectively worse off given that many life insurance policies don't pay out on suicide and they will never have the opportunity of the closure offered by the trial and sentencing of the person who killed their loved one.

Intent counts for a lot in our society.

[Fartsniffage]

Objectively, what's the difference?

Both leave a person dead and the ones most affected are the family and community of the deceased. If anything, the family of the suicide would probably be objectively worse off given that many life insurance policies don't pay out on suicide and they will never have the opportunity of the closure offered by the trial and sentencing of the person who killed their loved one.

Intent counts for a lot in our society.

Only to the living. I doubt the dead care in the slightest.

[Imperializt Russia]

I am struggling to believe that you honestly don't see a difference between homicide and suicide.