So, why are guns necessary?

[Pannonian]

I don't even think there is a country that is actually devoid of guns or that has an actual gun ban.
At least in Europe you can own a gun in most countries, you just have to fulfill certain criteria such as being an active member of a gun club or having been seriously threatened recently. It would be rather insincere and silly to think or demand that all Americans surrender all their guns, rendering the country completely devoid of all guns.

The main difference is, in European countries, there isn't a general culture of a right to have guns. In the US, the question is, why can't I have a gun? In Europe, the question is, why do you need a gun? The law matters less than the nature of the question your average citizen asks. That's why I respect the merkan view on their right to guns, because I know that we have opposite approaches on the subject and we'll never agree on common ground.

[ICantSpellDawg]

This situation is paradigm shiffting. The facts of this case are so frustrating for the enemy .

Obviously, as with most mass shootings, the perpetrator was white, right?
-Nope, black

Well, even so, he probably was some sort of Christian curmudgeon or Islamic jihad I, right?
-Nope, practicing Buddhist, mild mannered

Well, either way, this points to the heart of the problem in that he used an AR15 full auto assault murder cannon, at the very least?
-Nope, pump action Remington 870 which he assembled in the bathroom.

Even still, he never would have been able to purchase it if the background check law would have passed
-well, actually, he purchased it in a store and had a federal NICS background check at the time of purchase. Also, he had a revolving secret clearance with the DoD with a recent investigation,which is much harder to pass than a NICs check

But, at least admit that, since he attacked a naval base where everyone is armed - this harms the argument that people can stop a shooting with their own firearm.
-actually, the occupants are barred the use of firearms by federal regulation. Only the guards at the "high security" gate and police have access, and it took them 3 minutes to do anything at their own building, resulting in so many deaths. Also, the assault was ended by firearm.

Well, maybe he was disaffected by government and hated B.O?
-maybe, as Bullsh*t Orator is a terrible sack of President, but it is more likely that the fact that he heard commanding angry voices and was being tormented by them that precipitated this action


Nothing that you could have done barring banning all firearms or denying gun purchases to civilians with active secret security clearances could have altered this outcome. It is precious that the libtards and their devoted sheeple have jumped "the gun" and leapt into this corner. I'm sorry for all of the people who have lost their lives, but policies suggested by the gun control crowd of disarming good people are deadly, and these cowards should be ashamed for suggesting it.

BTW - before any one says "why is this guy calling us the enemy?"
- it is because when you talk about passing laws which encourage police to bust open gun owners doors who have committed no crime, you are endangering their lives and the lives of their families. Police use SWAT raids to bust low level marijuana offenses and shoot people, kill animals, and destroy property. If you think they would hesitate to kill me over my guns if I were no longer "authorized" to have them, even though I would have committed no crime, you are out of your mind. Your policies are deadly in many ways and I oppose them to the end. Make no mistake: your political agenda results in me being assaulted and my life endangered. My agenda results in people being able to defend themselves with property that they own.

[Husar]

I think it's enough to take away the firearms of people who jump through many hoops to get guns and then start to call others "enemies" for not sharing their view on firearms, sounds like people who are about to do something dangerous.

[The Lurker Below]

The order to which they put the first few amendments does have relevance. I'm NOT saying they valued one more than the other, but that some issues were of priority consideration at the time.

First, regarding guns, let me offer you this. Every year Ford's UAW workers vote to strike. They nearly never strike. IF they don't give their union the authority to strike, then the union walks into their annual negotiations with no real bargaining power. Consider that strike option the same way the founders considered their first two amendments.

1st Amendment - these are the values we wanted that were denied and/or hindered by our previous overlords and the reasons we picked up the guns to begin with.

2nd Amendment - this keeps the new overlords from considering removing the 1st.

Consider the founders recent history and motivation when they were developing a new government. Guns were not about hunting, sporting, or self defense. Several posters have already mentioned the tyranny abroad and within thing. That's why guns. Those guys were just humans. They didn't create a perfect government. Thankfully they created something very difficult to change. Does anybody believe that today's lobbyist centered government would care at all to protect the rights of common individuals? In two months the worlds largest army takes the field to harvest God's innocent creatures. Show me the lobbyist willing to pilot his drone in their direction.

[drone]

Inspiration for some of the first 10 amendments comes from the English Bill of Rights act of 1689, including the rights of the people to carry arms. The crown cannot take arms from the people, you Brits just let Parliament do it instead.

[Goofball]

Some interesting factoids in this article:

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/05/30/u-s-g...aq-war-deaths/

I was truly amazed to learn that there have been more gun deaths in the US since the Newtown killings THAN THERE WERE TO US FORCES OVER NINE YEARS OF WAR IN IRAQ!

Sorry, about the shouting, but COME ON!

I was also amused to see that gun deaths have been steadily rising in proportion to traffic deaths. I'm not sure if I agree with the conclusions in the article, but here are two of my own:

1) If you want to lower your risk of being shot, join the US army
2) Over the last ten years Americans have become both better drivers and better shots

[drone]

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/05/30/u-s-g...aq-war-deaths/

I was truly amazed to learn that there have been more gun deaths in the US since the Newtown killings THAN THERE WERE TO US FORCES OVER NINE YEARS OF WAR IN IRAQ!

Sorry, about the shouting, but COME ON!

I was also amused to see that gun deaths have been steadily rising in proportion to traffic deaths. I'm not sure if I agree with the conclusions in the article, but here are two of my own:

1) If you want to lower your risk of being shot, join the US army
2) Over the last ten years Americans have become both better drivers and better shots

A biased news source that lumps suicides in with gun violence and does not state that fact.

On traffic deaths: Drunk driving is down and vehicles are safer, hence fewer deaths on the roads.

The latest CDC report, 2010. Table 10 is the one you want.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_04.pdf

Motor Vehicle accidents - 35,332
Accidental firearm deaths - 606
Suicide by firearm - 19,392
Suicide by other means - 18,972
Homicide by firearm - 11,078
And for grins, Falls - 26,009. When the missus tells you to clean the gutters, she is really just trying to kill you.

[Brenus]

“I make this the rankings in terms of how heavily armed their country's peoples were in 1917/18.” This is the rank of ARMIES, not people.

Because you can be sure that the Autocrat Tsar of all the Russia didn’t want his newly freed slaves be armed when they realised HE was the cause of THEIR sufferings. We speak of the Tsar who order the crowd that his Secret Police gathered in order for him to show how good and nice he was to shoot at the crowd coming to ask for bread.

Well tried.

[rvg]

Because you can be sure that the Autocrat Tsar of all the Russia didn’t want his newly freed slaves be armed when they realised HE was the cause of THEIR sufferings. We speak of the Tsar who order the crowd that his Secret Police gathered in order for him to show how good and nice he was to shoot at the crowd coming to ask for bread.

It wasn't really a matter of legal prohibition as much as an economic one: most people were too poor to afford, say, a hunting rifle.

To put it into perspective: the cheapest Berdan hunting rifle cost about 12 rubles.
You could buy a cow for 3-5 rubles.

[Husar]

A biased news source that lumps suicides in with gun violence and does not state that fact.

On traffic deaths: Drunk driving is down and vehicles are safer, hence fewer deaths on the roads.

The latest CDC report, 2010. Table 10 is the one you want.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_04.pdf

Motor Vehicle accidents - 35,332
Accidental firearm deaths - 606
Suicide by firearm - 19,392
Suicide by other means - 18,972
Homicide by firearm - 11,078
And for grins, Falls - 26,009. When the missus tells you to clean the gutters, she is really just trying to kill you.

It's amazing how people are afraid of guns but take no precautions when they climb a ladder or a hill or summing.

As for being less likely to die by joining the army, I'm not sure that still holds true if the total number of dead soldiers in Iraq and gun deaths the US are relativized with the total number of soldiers in Iraq and the total number of people in the US.

[Goofball]

A biased news source that lumps suicides in with gun violence and does not state that fact.

On traffic deaths: Drunk driving is down and vehicles are safer, hence fewer deaths on the roads.

The latest CDC report, 2010. Table 10 is the one you want.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_04.pdf

Motor Vehicle accidents - 35,332
Accidental firearm deaths - 606
Suicide by firearm - 19,392
Suicide by other means - 18,972
Homicide by firearm - 11,078
And for grins, Falls - 26,009. When the missus tells you to clean the gutters, she is really just trying to kill you.

Shooting yourself in the head on purpose with a gun certainly qualifies as "gun violence" in my book. I see nothing wrong with that including the suicide numbers. I want to know how many people died by gun. What it's leaving out are all of the other deaths from guns that are not a suicide or a homicide. For example, a "legal" shooting to death of a person where the killer is not charged or not convicted. George Zimmerman, for example. If anything, the gun violence number is understated as far as I'm concerned.

[Goofball]

It's amazing how people are afraid of guns but take no precautions when they climb a ladder or a hill or summing.

As for being less likely to die by joining the army, I'm not sure that still holds true if the total number of dead soldiers in Iraq and gun deaths the US are relativized with the total number of soldiers in Iraq and the total number of people in the US.

I was being slightly tongue in cheek with those conclusions.

[a completely inoffensive name]

At this point gun violence is an entirely media manufactured problem. Was it serious in the early 90s? Probably. But all interactions I have had with gun owners had indicated to me that the gun culture is now exceedingly emphasizing safety and responsibility, if only to make sure the legislators don't come down upon them.

I mean, when falls account for more 2x more deaths than deliberate firearm homicides, you need to step back and ask what we could be focusing on instead.

It's a wedge issue, politicians know that, media knows that. You are all falling for it.

The reason these threads are always started by non-Americans is because they do not understand how American media operates. They hear from their media which takes the narrative from what American media manufactures.

I have never visited Germany. But I am sure if I bought a major news station and mandated that they report on Neo-Nazis once a week, I could convince all of Germany that the 4th Reich is rising.

[Husar]

I have never visited Germany. But I am sure if I bought a major news station and mandated that they report on Neo-Nazis once a week, I could convince all of Germany that the 4th Reich is rising.

I just supported the pro-gun argument and you bring up Nazis, that's despicable and unfair.

Also I'm sorry for the war.

Now what about landmines? Why does noone want to discuss the benefits of landmines?

[a completely inoffensive name]

I just supported the pro-gun argument and you bring up Nazis, that's despicable and unfair.

Also I'm sorry for the war.

Now what about landmines? Why does noone want to discuss the benefits of landmines?

I wasn't attacking you. I am making a point about the degree to which this entire subject is generated by a media narrative.

The example I chose is to highlight the ridiculousness of it all. the US probably has more neo-nazis right now than germany in 1933. But the fact is that I could alter the view of Germans regarding the status of neo-nazis if I pushed a media narrative that would not shut up about them.

[rvg]

I just supported the pro-gun argument and you bring up Nazis, that's despicable and unfair.

You sound surprised. Nazis make their way into every thread. It's the law.

[Husar]

I wasn't attacking you. I am making a point about the degree to which this entire subject is generated by a media narrative.

The example I chose is to highlight the ridiculousness of it all. the US probably has more neo-nazis right now than germany in 1933. But the fact is that I could alter the view of Germans regarding the status of neo-nazis if I pushed a media narrative that would not shut up about them.

I was actually just curious whether you knew I am not entirely for a ban on guns in the US or not. But asking directly is boring.

We Germans aren't really that touchy.

[spankythehippo]

I mean, when falls account for more 2x more deaths than deliberate firearm homicides, you need to step back and ask what we could be focusing on instead.

Yeah, because deliberate falling is a big issue. I'm assuming most of the falls would be in domestic circumstances, which would mean their death was caused by conscious decision not to use safety equipment or yoloswagging. In both cases, stupidity is the major cause of death.

[Montmorency]

Nope.

Workplace.

Elderly.

Cool empathy, bro.

[spankythehippo]

Nope.

Workplace.

Elderly.

Cool empathy, bro.

So we need to attach harnesses to people who work and the elderly at all times? Puh-lease. Falling down is an accident. Shooting someone in the face is not.

I should be dead right now from all the injuries I have sustained through stupidity. So yeah, I guess I can empathise. I just don't show it.

[Montmorency]

Shooting someone in the face is not.

(Let's leave out suicide here, as I am a strong supporter of the Right to Death.)

10,000 die in one year from firearm homicides, many of them in criminal-on-criminal violence. The marginal cost to reduce this figure via "gun control" grows very quickly, soon reaching the point of enormous social and fiduciary upheaval for microscopic - or perhaps even negative - benefit.

25,000 die in one year from falls, and millions more are rushed to the ER in the same period for the same category. Massive reduction in deaths and injuries can follow from introducing minor new safety measures, or stringently upholding old ones - never mind introducing actual new legislation.

Which is the low-hanging fruit here?

[spankythehippo]

(Let's leave out suicide here, as I am a strong supporter of the Right to Death.)

10,000 die in one year from firearm homicides, many of them in criminal-on-criminal violence. The marginal cost to reduce this figure via "gun control" grows very quickly, soon reaching the point of enormous social and fiduciary upheaval for microscopic - or perhaps even negative - benefit.

25,000 die in one year from falls, and millions more are rushed to the ER in the same period for the same category. Massive reduction in deaths and injuries can follow from introducing minor new safety measures, or stringently upholding old ones - never mind introducing actual new legislation.

Which is the low-hanging fruit here?

I said "Shoot someone in the face". That "someone" is not yourself. I'll change it to "Shoot someone else in the face". There. Much better.

So, saving 10,000 people from homicidal maniacs is a "microscopic or negative" benefit? Since when is a life merely a statistic? And people say I have no morality because I'm an atheist.

I come from a 3rd world country. Most of you live in a privileged society/environment (I'm assuming). I'm also assuming you haven't witnessed an execution with shots to the knees, elbows and then head. Or even a hanging or beheading? These were not carried out by the police or the government. These were carried out by street thugs. I witnessed these things at the ripe age of 5. Did it leave an impact? Sure did (especially since I was on holiday at the time). Has a family member of mine been killed? Most certainly. To be fair, I never even met that family member. But to see such sadness and grief expressed by my family was disturbing, to say the least. Now, before some of you say "those executions could have been prevented with a gun", let me make this clear. Violence breeds more violence. Hate breeds more hate, which ultimately leads to violence. So I do not hate. I do not wish death upon a single person (kind of). There are several people in this world that I ever so slightly wish death upon. And they're people like this:

http://www.eutimes.net/2009/11/book-...ler-in-israel/

Why do I wish death upon this man? Because he wishes death upon many more.

I'm not saying to ban guns, since it seems the American population is too inept at parting with their inanimate objects. Just control it. It's very simple to do. If you desperately want a gun, submitting to a background check is hell of a lot easier than obtaining it illegally.


I don't particularly care anymore about the American gun debate. It's your choice, and if someone kills you or any of your family with a legally obtained firearm... well, I won't say anything. I'll just live in my world doing what I want to do peacefully, until I leave this hellhole of a planet.

[Montmorency]

So, saving 10,000 people from homicidal maniacs is a "microscopic or negative" benefit? Since when is a life merely a statistic?

Did you not get the part about marginal cost vs. marginal benefit? Gun control is not like a binary switch.

I come from a 3rd world country.

I thought you were ethnic Japanese living in Australia?

It's very simple to do. If you desperately want a gun, submitting to a background check is hell of a lot easier than obtaining it illegally.

Sure - but again, it's marginal cost vs. marginal benefit. The cost of such measures is very low; however, the benefit (in terms of "lives saved") is also very low.

That's the point.

and if someone kills you or any of your family with a legally obtained firearm... well, I won't say anything.

Why would that change my view on things? Personal tragedy should not cloud one's judgement.

Anyway, I live in New York.

[Goofball]

Why would that change my view on things? Personal tragedy should not cloud one's judgement.

You didn't answer the question. Let me put it to you (and everyone who is against background checks for gun purchases) another way: If someone you love was shot and killed by someone who had no business owning a gun (registered history of mental illness and violence, for example) with a gun that they had obtained legally at a gun show by doing nothing more than showing up with the cash, no questions asked, would you not then maybe, just maybe, think that background checks might have some value?

[spankythehippo]

I thought you were ethnic Japanese living in Australia?

Yeaaaaah. About that. That was a ruse. When I first started frequenting the internet, I was slightly paranoid about identity theft. So I created a new identity. The only fabrications I made were regarding my physical appearance, age and race. Don't ask me why I did it. I just did. After a while, I realised that identity theft wasn't that big of a threat that I imagined, but I stuck with the gimmick. It soon became "I wonder how long it'll take until someone confronts me?". Turns out, over the internet where your face isn't exactly published on every conceivable website, no one confronted me. I even left clues to my identity on a forum I frequented on (not this one). No one picked up on it. If they did, they didn't question it. So consider me impressed to see that someone remember's where I stated I was from on this forum. The other forum I was on was filled with stoners and metalheads, with all the threads ultimately leading to masturbation techniques, porn, Skyrim or pooping etiquette.

Why did I choose to make my new persona Japanese? I didn't. I had those spinny globe things, and quite literally spun it, closed my eyes and pointed. "Where ever my finger points is going to be my nationality". My finger was pointing at the middle of the Pacific Ocean, and the closest country was Japan.

Sure - but again, it's marginal cost vs. marginal benefit. The cost of such measures is very low; however, the benefit (in terms of "lives saved") is also very low.

That's the point.

But how can you know if the number of lives saved will be low? Even if it saves 1 life, I'd say it's worth it. But since people are very stingy with their cash, I doubt the value the life of a fellow human being over their money. Yeah, I can see your point.

Why would that change my view on things? Personal tragedy should not cloud one's judgement.

Anyway, I live in New York.

Of course. Personal tragedy should not cloud one's judgment, since it can lead to bad things. Since you live in New York (and I listen to a podcast based in New York, who often talk about local news), remember Lieby Kletzky? After he was found butchered, all the Hasidic Jews were yelling "LET'S ROUND UP THE BLACK PEOPLE! THEY DID IT!". Turns out, it was another Hasid. I can only imagine the tension if they started accusing ALL the black people (since Hasidic Jews are paranoid like that, apparently).

I am not swayed by my emotions in my judgment. I don't know how this may sound, but if I had to choose between the life of my mother and a random woman, I wouldn't be able to choose. What right do I have to dictate this random womans death? That should give you a little insight into how my mind works, or lack thereof.

[Montmorency]

would you not then maybe, just maybe, think that background checks might have some value?

Perhaps I'm not being clear. I already do think that background checks have value - just not a very huge amount, in terms of preventing that sort of scenario. Most gun-crime is with illegally-obtained weapons.

As I said, the marginal cost is low, but the marginal benefit is as well.

There is no cure-all for gun-crime within gun regulation, even within the realm of the fantastic: e.g. full-on confiscation and proscription of all privately-owned firearms. For sure, even stringent checks would not prevent the thousands of deaths some seem to imagine it could. I doubt the effect of any increases to check-stringency would be beyond the magnitude of 1%.

someone you love

Does not compute.



As for spanky, I'll get to yours in 10 hours or so.

[Husar]

There is no cure-all for gun-crime within gun regulation, even within the realm of the fantastic: e.g. full-on confiscation and proscription of all privately-owned firearms. For sure, even stringent checks would not prevent the thousands of deaths some seem to imagine it could. I doubt the effect of any increases to check-stringency would be beyond the magnitude of 1%.

That depends on a lot of factors including time. I would suspect in about 300 years the first matchlock muskets should fail and need to be replaced. Now if plasma blasters are harder to get then, the number of guns should decrease "naturally".
And since you claim to be a robot, please share your algorithm for calculating the magnitude of 1%.

Does not compute.

Would you say you're more a Bijo or a worse version of Dr. Cooper?

[drone]

Shooting yourself in the head on purpose with a gun certainly qualifies as "gun violence" in my book. I see nothing wrong with that including the suicide numbers. I want to know how many people died by gun. What it's leaving out are all of the other deaths from guns that are not a suicide or a homicide. For example, a "legal" shooting to death of a person where the killer is not charged or not convicted. George Zimmerman, for example. If anything, the gun violence number is understated as far as I'm concerned.

The CDC report is some of my favorite annual government reading, and Table 10 has it all:
Legal Intervention - 412, I'm assuming this is both police shootings and self-defense, but it is not broken down by firearm/other means. It's such a small number that assuming it's all firearms doesn't matter. Cops tasing people with heart conditions probably goes here as well.
Events of undetermined intent, firearms - 252

So firearms accounted for 606+19392+11078+412*+252 = 31740 deaths in 2010, which is still lower than traffic accidents.

Also included in Table 10 is Injury by firearms - 31,672. Table 10 is broken down by age groups, old people tend to get wounded a lot more than the gangbanger ages.

Other fun stats:
Suicides by other means - 18,972, so roughly half of successful suicides are by firearm
Drug-induced deaths - 40,393
Alcohol-induced deaths - 25,692

Seriously, read the report. We like to think we are a modern nation, but 2,790 people died of malnutrition in 2010. Next time the media gets all in a tizzy about salmonella food poisoning or the trendy influenza de jour, look at the numbers (28 and 500, respectively). Cancer, heart disease, respiratory disease, and accidents are the main causes of death in this country, firearm homicides are in the noise, but pictures of a pnuemonia victim dying in a hospital doesn't sell papers.

[a completely inoffensive name]

2,790 malnutrition deaths in a nation of over 300 million with over 14 million being illegals immigrants. At this point, how many of those are college students who don't realize that you are not actually supposed to live solely off of ramen noodles?

[drone]

2,790 malnutrition deaths in a nation of over 300 million with over 14 million being illegals immigrants. At this point, how many of those are college students who don't realize that you are not actually supposed to live solely off of ramen noodles?

Judging by the age breakdown, it's actually older folks starving.