TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 195

Thread: Route 91 Harvest Music Festival Shooting - Gun Control Thread

  1. #26
    Member
    Registered: Jun 2002
    Location: Girl with the Patreon Tattoo
    Quote Originally Posted by Draxil View Post
    The fact you call them "silencers" tells me everything I need to know about you.
    Says the guy who was sure the killer was firing an automatic weapon, making it the basis of their whole argument for a post.

  2. #27
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    My honest opinion on the matter? We've gone so far to enshrine guns as an import part of the American identity, there isn't anything we can actually do about it now. At last count, there's an estimated 90 guns per 100 people here in the United States, with a good chunk of those numbers concentrated among 25% of particularly enthusiastic gun owners.

    So say we outlaw guns tomorrow. Who's gonna take them away? The logistics alone show it to be a nigh impossible task. Hell, even if we take the far lighter, more likely route, and ban a select set of particularly dangerous weaponry, there are so many of these guns floating around the country, all we'd be doing is creating a black market for them. We'll see a slight drop in gun violence, sure, but not one nearly large enough to justify the effort and expense required to implement these new laws. It'd take a couple decades, billions of dollars, and a lot of unruly people being thrown in prison and/or martyred for their cause before society would start seeing a net gain on par with post-ban Australia.

    ...and at any time, these laws can be repealed.

    We're basically stuck with what we have. Our guns aren't going anywhere. By this point, it'd be better to address the root of the issue, rather than focusing the tools used to perpetuate the issue:

    What is it about the American psyche that makes us so partial to grandiose displays of indiscriminate, wanton violence? We're not the only country in the 1st world that allows for an armed citizenry, but we lead them all in mass shootings.

    Why is that?

  3. #28
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Gun control is not about banning all guns, though? What is it about the words gun control that makes people think, "They are coming for our guns!" What about the other aspects of gun control, like enforcing background checks or requiring people to know how to use and maintain these dangerous tools.

    I mean, there are a lot of regulations for cars, but nobody is saying, "They want to take our cars away."
    Last edited by Starker; 4th Oct 2017 at 18:44.

  4. #29
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    To understand why none of the measures will work, you have to sink into the mindset of your average gun-toting American.

    Background checks? Why does the government have to check to see if I'm eligible to exercise a natural, enumerated right guaranteed me by the Constitution?

    Banning certain weapons? Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that my right to bear arms shall not be infringed, save in certain circumstances. And it's not like banning things makes for a safer society. Drugs are illegal, yet they still flood our streets. If we ban dangerous weapons, only criminals will have dangerous weapons, and we'll be defenseless!

    Training? Do you require speech classes to exercise your 1st Amendment rights? Why should I require a gun safety course to bear arms?

    See, I'm all about background checks and mandatory training, but I also understand that any argument made pro-gun control will ultimately be met with a ton of circular arguments that end up always pointing towards those very clearly defined lines in the Constitution, and will ultimately be construed as the first step towards a blanket ban. It's obvious that no right is unlimited, but as long as its limits aren't spelled out within the Bill of Rights, advocating for such will always be met with resistance from a politically proactive countergroup that tends to vote far more often, far more regularly than just about anyone else.

    Until there's a massive change in public perception (which isn't going to happen anytime soon), I think it'd be more productive to address the core of the matter. Why does America tend to produce more bloodthirsty, trigger happy murderfucks per capita than any other 1st world nation? What is it about us that makes us so...exceptional?

  5. #30
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    I'd say that it's the availability of guns that drives the murder rates up (compared to other high-income countries). It's much easier to kill someone with a gun than a knife, both physically and emotionally.

    Likewise with suicides. Gun suicides have a vastly superior success rate to other common forms of suicide.

    And yes, if guns are less available, criminals will resort to other less effective tools, like heywood pointed out earlier, but surely that's preferable to guns? For example, while acid attacks are a horrific form of violence, would you rather have acid thrown at you or would you rather be shot in the face?
    Last edited by Starker; 4th Oct 2017 at 19:04.

  6. #31
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    Having more guns around certainly makes murder more convenient, but they don't serve as the catalyst for murder itself.

    Take the Nordic countries as an example. While not nearly as widespread as they are in the US, guns are still fairly prominent and easy to obtain in Finland, Sweden, Denmark, etc. I think they're all in the top 10 guns per capita list, having, on average, about 4 guns for every 10 people.

    Yet in a single year, the US will experience nearly 100 times the amount of gun violence when compared to any Nordic country. The difference here isn't nearly proportional. We have a little over double the amount of guns per capita, yet host SIGNIFICANTLY higher crime rates.

    The same core question still applies. What is it about the US that makes us so prone to violence?

  7. #32
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    I don't know about Sweden or Denmark, but in Finland most of these guns are hunting rifles and shotguns -- not really best tools for murder sprees. Also, Finland has gun control, meaning that each gun has to be registered and be suitable for the purpose. You don't get a gun just like that. For example, when you apply for a gun for sporting purposes, you have to prove that it's your hobby. Or if you want a gun for hunting, it has to be suitable for the game you're targeting.

  8. #33
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Vertigo, DragonSand, Xeen
    Quote Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
    The same core question still applies. What is it about the US that makes us so prone to violence?
    I see the homeless people starving in the alleyways every morning, yet just around the corner and down the street, at the local Festival Food Market, they are throwing cartfuls of day old food into the dumpster.

  9. #34
    Southquarter.com/fms
    Registered: Apr 2000
    Location: The Akkala Highlands
    How is that relevant in the least? The guy who just killed 58 people in Vegas had the day before wired 100 grand to his girlfriend in the Philippines. These killing sprees are not being committed by homeless, destitute people. Try again.

  10. #35
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    Quote Originally Posted by Starker View Post
    I don't know about Sweden or Denmark, but in Finland most of these guns are hunting rifles and shotguns -- not really best tools for murder sprees.
    Murder sprees, yeah. Murders in general? No.

    I'm talking about violence overall, not just mass killings. The Finnish require you to jump through a number of hoops to gain access to a gun, but the access is still there, and in fairly large numbers. Yet their murder rates are still relatively low, especially when compared to the US.

    Of course, blanket bans on high powered, semi-automatic weaponry with high cap magazines would explain why mass shootings are pretty rare events in Europe, but that fact doesn't matter at this point. Regardless what any of us think, regardless of what solid arguments any of us provide, we should all just accept as concrete truth the fact that there isn't going to be any substantial gun ban implemented in the US for the foreseeable future. If we want anything done, we're going to have to argue around it. Concern ourselves less with the how, and more with the why.

    It's the only recourse we currently have.

  11. #36
    Member
    Registered: Feb 2007
    Location: Sevastapol Station
    Quote Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
    It's obvious that no right is unlimited, but as long as its limits aren't spelled out within the Bill of Rights, advocating for such will always be met with resistance from a politically proactive countergroup that tends to vote far more often, far more regularly than just about anyone else.
    In Canada, this is my problem with Gun Control. The thing is I see the conversation go like this everywhere this pops up. Gun nuts freak out over their rights and how everything in society is going to crap, anti-gun nuts freak out over their emotions and try to explain that statistics prove causation and believe that "assault weapon" is a real term.

    And then there are a few small percentage of us, that like to meet in the middle and have a discussion where we listen and realize that before we can even say things like "compromise" we have to listen to each others points and take them seriously. ON BOTH SIDES.

    I'm getting off topic but whatever I'll get back to it before I click POST.

    re: suppressors. They are suppressors, not silencers. They silence nothing, and they are legal in most the US after paying for a tax stamp. Also... It's not the most efficient way, but silencing a gun can be done with a chunk of metal, a tap and die set, and an oil filter. Genie is out of the bottle and there are a lot of makers out there. Also Also... the UK, in their gun control haven, MANDATE silencers for hunters. It's a safety device that has a happy consequence of making shooters better neighbors. It's not a murder peripheral.

    Back to what I quoted renz for. The problem with Canadian gun laws for an enthusiastic gun owner is not licensing (although I do take issue with registration, which is nothing like car registration, because it IS used for confiscation, unlike automobiles, in Canada anyway), is a lack of consistency, and common sense in how it is administered. In Canada the police are put in charge of classifying firearms because the government considers them the "experts." Which effectively gives the Judicial branch of government powers of the Executive, which literally means "Police State" if not for everybody, than at least for a law-abiding few. The police can unilaterally decide out of the blue to change the law at any point, and as a citizen you comply or go to prison. Or at the very least, lose your entire life savings defending yourself in court (I should mention that the RCMP also does not mention when they change laws to anybody, and frequently make people felons overnight without informing them).

    The classification system has a very rigid set of rules that everybody follows when they buy guns. Barrel length, overall length, action type etc. Except the last clause which always reads "And whatever else we say belongs in here." Meaning the rules don't apply to the police, the police who enforce AND create the laws.

    I'm happy with a certain form of gun control. I'm happy with training and criminal record checks. I'm not happy with the mandatory questions about conjugal partners that the RCMP wants to know about which would usually be considered the types of privacy invasion that the Geneva Convention frowns upon. I'm not happy with laws that have no effect, but appeal to emotions (ie magazine limits). I'm not happy with the lack of real discussion and anti-gun people not wanting to care about gun enthusiasts because they outnumber them (not in the US obviously).

    I'm not happy with vague laws that are written loosely enough that the police can do what they want, especially because they don't even know what is legal and what isn't most of the time ("Charge 'em and let the courts sort it out").

    I want solid, specific gun laws, that I can trust. I want to have the same types of punitive measures for my paperwork "crimes" that one would get in similar situations with their car. Up until a couple of years ago, being pulled over without a drivers license warranted a ticket and fine, whereas being found with firearms and without a license (as in failure to produce, whether or not you actually posses one) was a mandatory minimum 3 year sentence.

    I'm also not happy with pig headed gun nuts who use the term "libtards" and assholes like Zimmerman who thought it was his job to be public defender when he was just a fucking neckbeard.

  12. #37
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
    Murder sprees, yeah. Murders in general? No.

    I'm talking about violence overall, not just mass killings. The Finnish require you to jump through a number of hoops to gain access to a gun, but the access is still there, and in fairly large numbers. Yet their murder rates are still relatively low, especially when compared to the US.
    I think the hoops make a real difference, though. At least for the impulse murders. And it makes a difference in how people approach each other. For example, police are more likely to open fire when there's a reason to believe someone might be armed. In Finland, carrying a gun with you is not really an option, unless it's a part of your job. If you use it for sport, you are supposed to transport your guns unloaded.

    It's true that the homicide rate in the US is much higher than in other high-income countries, but the rate of firearm homicide is far far higher still. To put things in perspective, in the US, getting killed by a gun is about as likely as dying in a car crash -- rare enough occurrence for most people, but still far too common (though obviously it depends a lot on things like where you live and how old you are). In China, for comparison, it's about as likely as dying in a plane crash. In Japan, as likely as getting hit by lightning.

    Certainly, correlation alone doesn't prove anything, but there is a strong correlation between the number of firearms and number of homicides:
    https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/f...uns-and-death/
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3828709/


  13. #38
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Melbourne, Australia
    Quote Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
    The same core question still applies. What is it about the US that makes us so prone to violence?
    It's those damn filthy videogames corrupting the minds and encouraging murder. Ban em all!!!

  14. #39
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    Remember that one time you played D&D, Ice? Yeah. Your dalliance with the devils dice game ruined an entire generation. It's all on you.

    Should've damn well known better.

  15. #40
    Moderator
    Registered: Jan 2003
    Location: NeoTokyo
    My first idea is legislation which makes illegitimate harms by guns a strict liability claim on the manufacturers. Then it will be the manufacturers themselves that will have the incentive to figure out the best methods to minimize harms by their own weapons. I have an idea the manufacturers can figure out better methods than law-makers, but that cost has to be internalized into their bottom line for them to have the incentive.

  16. #41
    Administrator
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: above the clouds
    I just had a thought that most of the gun violence in the US is centred on poor urban areas. My experience of affluent suburban zones is that guns are almost as uncommon as they are in the UK. One of my ex-wife's relatives had/has a concealed carry license but I think he was unusual.

    Call me cynical but these headline shootings seem to come up more when it hits an affluent area suddenly sparking another round of the same debate we get each time. The depressing churn of gang violence just carries on.

    Also on a pessimistic note, well I think it's what SD said above, the culture is so attached to guns in certain areas that the US probably won't go in the direction of European countries.

    I'm not one of the people who is that convinced either way. I prefer not having high rates of gun related homicide in the UK, but it doesn't mean there isn't a load of urban violence. And the fact that you can get hold of pretty powerful weapons in the UK makes me think that there's more than gun control influencing the rates of freak shootings.

  17. #42
    Administrator
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: above the clouds
    Quote Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
    Yet in a single year, the US will experience nearly 100 times the amount of gun violence when compared to any Nordic country. The difference here isn't nearly proportional. We have a little over double the amount of guns per capita, yet host SIGNIFICANTLY higher crime rates.

    The same core question still applies. What is it about the US that makes us so prone to violence?
    Just quoting this as I'm hinting at something similar above - there's a difference in US culture that I'm not able to put my finger on either.

  18. #43
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Melbourne, Australia
    Quote Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
    Remember that one time you played D&D, Ice? Yeah. Your dalliance with the devils dice game ruined an entire generation. It's all on you.

    Should've damn well known better.
    Forever corrupted. That damn level 7 troll. Rolled my D12 and was all down hill from there.

  19. #44
    Moderator
    Registered: Jan 2003
    Location: NeoTokyo
    For homicides, that's just about 1/3 of all gun deaths; I'm thinking drugs and gangs. That's what the demographics and city maps of gun homicides suggest, I think. No coincidence one of the few countries with a higher gun homicide rate is Mexico for the same reason.

    There's a history of why the drug market is so large in the US, big market, the US-Latin American economic nexus, race & urban sociology, counter-productive drug laws... I imagine there's a feedback correlation between drugs and gun ownership as well; in that the guns that kill the most people (I'm hypothesizing) were obtained by people (like in gangs) with the intention of being used in the kinds of situations they actually end up killing.

    5% of gun homicides are of women, majority domestic violence. Less than 1% are accidents.
    Terrorism and mass shootings aren't even .1% of gun deaths (we might double check that), so I'm not sure they're very relevant to the problem in the grand scheme of things. Police shootings of civilians are somewhere around 3%, so there's something there; I'd hypothesize that the bulk of those are drug and gang related too.

    If you added suicide -- which you should; 2/3 of gun deaths in the US are by suicide -- then that seems like a good case of pure probability, more guns :: more suicides. I think suicide is about periodic severe down-swings in emotion; and if you just had access to a gun, it's very low-cost (to pull the trigger), very quick, and very irreversible, things that correlate high chance of death with mood swings that drive someone to take quick actions.

  20. #45
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: Qantas
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason Moyer View Post
    The purpose of gun control is to lower incidents of spree killing, not to end all crime forever. And it's been highly effective at that in places where assault weapons are banned.
    I don't think the purpose of gun control should be to prevent spree killing. The purpose should be to reduce the gun murder and suicide rate. Spree killings represent a tiny percentage of gun deaths, and spree killings also happen without guns.

    I'm also skeptical about your statement about assault weapons bans being highly effective. If you look through this list of mass shootings, a lot of the states they occurred in have assault weapons bans:

    http://timelines.latimes.com/deadlie...ting-rampages/

  21. #46
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: Qantas
    Quote Originally Posted by scumble View Post
    I just had a thought that most of the gun violence in the US is centred on poor urban areas. My experience of affluent suburban zones is that guns are almost as uncommon as they are in the UK. One of my ex-wife's relatives had/has a concealed carry license but I think he was unusual.
    I think it's very regional. In some parts of the country the majority of people own guns. In other parts it's comparatively rare, i.e. <10%.
    Also, the people who own large numbers of guns tend to be affluent suburbanites, because guns are expensive.

  22. #47
    LittleFlower
    Registered: Jul 2001
    Location: Netherlands
    It seems the whole discussion in the US is about whether gun control increases or decreases the amount of murders and killing-sprees. People arguing about statistics and hypothetical situations. Totally obfuscating the point.

    The whole world knows that you don't want everybody walking around with guns. The whole world knows you don't want people walk around with handguns or rifles. And certainly not with machine-guns. Except in the US. There half the population thinks this is OK. Many even think it is beneficial to society. I don't know what they're talking about, because every unbiased little kid understand that guns bring nothing but harm to society.

    "A 100 little kids got shot dead today. That's a sacrifice I'm willing to make".

    It seems Americans are just a bunch of sociopaths. All their stories and movies and folkore is about individuals fighting everybody else. Fight all the commies, fight the muslims, fight your own government, the north fights the south, the south fights the north. Rambo, the guy from Die Hard, those are the american heroes. They've been brain-washing themselves. (No the Ruskies have no influence on the US. You are fucking up your country yourself. You don't need help from outside). Americans are sociopaths, and they are loving it. Every generation becomes more sociapathic. Psychopaths maybe even. Doing anything together is frowned upon. Having a health-care system by everyone for everyone seems to be a thing from hell you need to avoid at all cost. It's pathetic. And it gets worse and worse.


    And now the point I wanted to make.
    Not having guns in society is not only about decreasing murder-rates.
    Guns have a much larger impact on people.
    They become scared.
    When everyone you meet might be packing an UZI, you need to be careful, All the time. When you do shopping, when you take your kids from school, etc. There can always be a nut with a gun. Be alert. All the time. And if you carry a gun yourself, you need to be even more alert. Because the guy who shoots first wins. So you'll have to make sure you shoot first. Because if you carry an UZI, and someone else shoots first and kills you, you'll look like a dork. Not like Rambo. So be alert. Keep your hands on your gun at all time. Be ready to shoot.

    You might think I'm overreacting.
    But just think about how the police in the US interacts with their own population.
    They are always ready to shoot and kill. No questions asked. If there is any doubt, shoot. Don't shoot once, shoot 10 times. Empty your gun. Make sure to shoot everyone in the head first. Then ask questions.

    This attitude has an impact on society.
    It is so common in the US that Americans don't realize it anymore.
    It makes life full of constant tension.
    It makes Americans the most scared pussies in the whole world.
    And they don't even know it.

  23. #48
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Melbourne, Australia
    The one area on guns where the U.S excels IMO is with the home defense side, where if someone breaks into your home then your within your rights to defend yourself and your family. Over here in Australia if you so much as injure an invader then your likely to go to jail over it, be arrested, or have your weapon(s) taken.

    We had a case of that a few weeks ago, where out in the country (where the rate of gun ownership is far higher due to hunting), a home owner awoke to a guy breaking in armed with a knife intent on causing injury to him and his family + steal possessions to fuel his drug addiction. The owner grabbed his gun which was not loaded (but the burgler obviously didn't know that), pointed it at the guy, demanded he get to the ground and performed a citizens arrest. When the police arrived, the home owners weapon was confiscated and his gun license revoked.

    Seems to me to be quite stupid, as what did the police expect the home owner to do then? Roll over and let the guy help himself to the possessions in the house? Fuck that.

    Another case, occurred a few years ago. A convicted child rapist was let out of jail, and soon after broke into a home. The owner awoke to his daughter screaming, bolted into her room and saw the guy standing over her bed with a knife in his hand. He chased the guy out of the house and grabbed him in a choke hold whilst his wife called the cops. By the time the cops got there, the rapist had died due to the choke hold. The home owner was arrested with murder. This ended up in the courts, but luckily the home owner got let off (largely due to the massive public outcry about it). Again I'd ask what the father should have done instead in that instance? Allow his daughter to be raped and stabbed?
    Last edited by icemann; 5th Oct 2017 at 11:27.

  24. #49
    Member
    Registered: Apr 2001
    You're overreacting, for sure. I live in a state and city where anyone can carry a gun without a license, whether in the open or concealed. There were a total of six murders in my county in 2016, population 587,000, and only 4 involved guns. 2 of those were random--alcohol fueled racism and rage. The other two were domestic disputes gone wrong. I've been pulled over by the police probably 1/2 a dozen times in my life, and arrested once. I'm probably lucky to be alive, according to you. What a crock.

  25. #50
    Typical talking points being thrown around of course, so let me add a new angle that hasn't been discussed yet:

    What about the US government's penchant for giving out weapons to militant groups like halloween candy? There's a fairly massive number of military grade guns handed out every single year by the lettered agencies for the sake of temporary political agenda. Many of those weapons end up being sold on the black markets ending up in the hands of domestic criminals and criminal organizations.

    And how effective are those measures going to be? We already have several key ingredients in place: large, highly organized, nearly state-sponsored criminal organizations to act as suppliers (Mexican cartels and gangs), a logistical network and distribution channels (the almost completely un-enforced southern border), a large supply of weapons (the market is flooded by state actors sponsoring insurgent groups around the world), and a large potential market here in the United States.

    Is anyone seeing any possible outcome of a full ban other than making drug cartels and biker gangs extremely rich?

    You might think I'm overreacting.
    But just think about how the police in the US interacts with their own population.
    They are always ready to shoot and kill. No questions asked. If there is any doubt, shoot. Don't shoot once, shoot 10 times. Empty your gun. Make sure to shoot everyone in the head first. Then ask questions.

    This attitude has an impact on society.
    It is so common in the US that Americans don't realize it anymore.
    It makes life full of constant tension.
    It makes Americans the most scared pussies in the whole world.
    And they don't even know it.
    If anyone is interested in being better informed on the topic, read Radley Balko's book "rise of the warrior cop".

    TLDR version there's three main causes:

    • "War on Drugs" and the resulting prevalent use of SWAT tactics
    • "War on Terror" and the resultant use of military tactics
    • Government spending: most municipalities are cash strapped and we have asset forfeiture, which leads them to run their police departments so as to maximize revenue generation.....the more confrontational interactions between cops and citizens the more tickets/seizures happen


    It's a bad recipe for American society: think about our existing racial and social wedges and how each will be impacted by aggressive, militarized policing.
    Last edited by Tony_Tarantula; 5th Oct 2017 at 12:28.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •