How are those gun control laws coming along

[cav scout]

I think it's because they weren't invented yet.

There have been dozens of amendments to the U.S. Constitution and I was speaking about the document as it is now.

 

[NickyJ]

I just followed the conversation back to his original point. It's quite obvious and I think it's odd that you've been arguing without knowing which point you are arguing against.

I'll give a hint: here's the strawman that led the conversation astray

He's left no other conclusion than the one I mentioned.

That the role guns play in food production is miniscule.

Then it's roughly what I suggested: "Your point is that if a group isn't among millions, it doesn't exist?" Change "doesn't exist" to "is miniscule" and that's what I said. And you know what? Your point is wrong. It isn't miniscule.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

So if you change his argument, it's what you said. You will also have to change "a group of people" into "the role" by the way. Oh, and "among millions" into "guns play in food production"

And the entirety of your counterargument is: No it isn't.

That's impressive.

 

[NickyJ]

So if you change his argument, it's what you said. You will also have to change "a group of people" into "the role" by the way. Oh, and "among millions" into "guns play in food production"

And the entirety of your counterargument is: No it isn't.

That's impressive.

That's your argument, not mine.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

It isn't miniscule.

So, what's the percentage of people who get their food with guns in North America, again, if it isn't miniscule?

 

[NickyJ]

So, what's the percentage of people who get their food with guns in North America, again, if it isn't miniscule?

I'm not going to waste my own time for facts you can't find. However, let me ask you this: How do you know that the amount of people who hunt for food with rifles is miniscule. Got sources? I'd love to see them.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

I don't know, maybe that whole agricultural industry in the US. Tons of numbers on them. Shoppers at grocery stores for instance. Plus, again, that whole thing about the urbanization of North America, in case you forgot.

 

[naterator]

So I know this is a thread about gun control; and to be honest, I'm not reading the 8 preceding pages, so I don't know if the incident in the OP itself has been discussed much in the thread, but if anybody is interested in a partial picture of why this happened, here goes.

Today at lunch, I was going over the news online. I had heard of this, but hadn't read any articles about it, so i opened one up and immediately recognized the mug shot. I worked with Scott Dekraai from 2001-2003 at a ferry company. He was a captain, and i split my time between the office and the docks. He was a good guy, well liked, and fun to be around. He was bipolar, but it wasn't an issue, I would have never known, except this was the kind of place where everybody knew everybody's business. Anyway, one day he gets drunk and takes one of the boats for a joyride, becomes a company legend, but of course gets fired, i never see him again (though i continue to hear how he's doing from mutual friends).

From there, Scott and a good friend of his family, a deckhand at the ferry named Piper, go to work on a tugboat. One day, Piper gets pinned by a line, Scott jumps to try to save her, but the line snapped. It nearly severed his leg and took off most of her head. They managed to save his leg, but she died in his arms before they reached shore.

He suffered from severe PTSD from the incident, as well as depression from both the incident and the fact that he was now incapable of doing the only thing he had ever known. Financial struggles followed, as they tend to do when you lose your livelihood. All this contributed greatly to the collapse of his marriage, and a bitter custody struggle for the children apparently was the last straw.

I can't even begin to reconcile the fact that the Scott i knew and the man who reloaded to continue murdering strangers are the same person. I can't help but wonder what would have happened if that fool would have just passed out on the boat, like usual, instead of taking it for a spin. Maybe this whole chain of events never happens.

 

[NickyJ]

I don't know, maybe that whole agricultural industry in the US. Tons of numbers on them. Shoppers at grocery stores for instance. Plus, again, that whole thing about the urbanization of North America, in case you forgot.

That doesn't answer the question. People can still get meat through hunting, and buy anything else they don't have. Again, what are you sources?

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

You need a source to tell you that the average 9 to 5 worker in a major urban area doesn't have the time nor money to buy the equipment and mount an expedition to a preserve to obtain enough game meat to comprise a significant percentage of the protein in their diet. Tell me, you are aware of what common sense and common facts are, at least? Please?

But fine. The US is 82% urbanized. And only 6% of Americans hunt (National statistics from US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service and US Department of Commerce, US Census Bureau, 2001 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife Associated Recreation, 27). And that 6% doesn't even distinguish between sport and food hunting (pro-tip: it's going to be less).

Your turn.

 

[warpus]

I live in a medium-sized city that's known as the "Forest City".

If I wanted to become a hunter and live off the land here, I would have to become a cannibal. The only other option would be to hunt dogs, cats, and squirrels.

 

[Bugfatty300]

A tiny fraction of Americans actually hunt and an even smaller fraction actually eat what they kill yet 1 in 3 own a gun. Even in rural areas pest control is a bigger issue than the need to hunt for sustenance. To me it seems hunting or sports shooting has no place the gun control debate especially considering hunting isn't constitutionally guaranteed. Hunting and competing are not the only legitimate reasons to own a gun.

 

[GhostWriter16]

A tiny fraction of Americans actually hunt and an even smaller fraction actually eat what they kill yet 1 in 3 own a gun. Even in rural areas pest control is a bigger issue than the need to hunt for sustenance. To me it seems hunting or sports shooting has no place the gun control debate especially considering hunting isn't constitutionally guaranteed. Hunting and competing are not the only legitimate reasons to own a gun.

Indeed, but hunting was brought up by some people in the pro-gun crowd as an additional reason why gun rights were a good idea, not as an argument for gun rights in itself.

 

[CaptainF]

A tiny fraction of Americans actually hunt and an even smaller fraction actually eat what they kill yet 1 in 3 own a gun. Even in rural areas pest control is a bigger issue than the need to hunt for sustenance. To me it seems hunting or sports shooting has no place the gun control debate especially considering hunting isn't constitutionally guaranteed. Hunting and competing are not the only legitimate reasons to own a gun.

I personally think "for the hell of it" is a good enough reason to own a gun.

Who needs a "legitimate" reason? Sheeple. This is a free country, you shouldn't have to explain yourself to do as you please.

 

[Cutlass]

Yes.

There are 1.3mill violent crimes of all descriptions and weapons a year. And yet you find it credible that there are 2 million defensive uses of guns a year?

 

[Bugfatty300]

There are 1.3mill violent crimes of all descriptions and weapons a year. And yet you find it credible that there are 2 million defensive uses of guns a year?

It's based on the fact that large percentage of crimes are never reported and that includes cases of self-defense with a firearm (the assailant runs away at the sight of the gun). Of course even the lowest estimate of 100,000 is still pretty significant.

 

[NickyJ]

You need a source to tell you that the average 9 to 5 worker in a major urban area doesn't have the time nor money to buy the equipment and mount an expedition to a preserve to obtain enough game meat to comprise a significant percentage of the protein in their diet. Tell me, you are aware of what common sense and common facts are, at least? Please?

One problem among the many in what you said: Not everybody has to go to a preserve. Heck, I've got a neighbor who hunts, and we even allow him on my family's land. And if worst comes to worst, we'll be out hunting too.

But fine. The US is 82% urbanized. And only 6% of Americans hunt (National statistics from US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service and US Department of Commerce, US Census Bureau, 2001 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife Associated Recreation, 27). And that 6% doesn't even distinguish between sport and food hunting (pro-tip: it's going to be less).

Your turn.

So you make an assumption that when people hunt, they usually don't use the food? Interesting. Very interesting.

A tiny fraction of Americans actually hunt and an even smaller fraction actually eat what they kill yet 1 in 3 own a gun. Even in rural areas pest control is a bigger issue than the need to hunt for sustenance. To me it seems hunting or sports shooting has no place the gun control debate especially considering hunting isn't constitutionally guaranteed. Hunting and competing are not the only legitimate reasons to own a gun.

Indeed, but hunting was brought up by some people in the pro-gun crowd as an additional reason why gun rights were a good idea, not as an argument for gun rights in itself.

Agreed. But pest control is certainly another factor.

I personally think "for the hell of it" is a good enough reason to own a gun.

Who needs a "legitimate" reason? Sheeple. This is a free country, you shouldn't have to explain yourself to do as you please.

Also agreed. But the people who want to ban guns don't take that as an answer for some reason.

 

[illram]

So I know this is a thread about gun control; and to be honest, I'm not reading the 8 preceding pages, so I don't know if the incident in the OP itself has been discussed much in the thread, but if anybody is interested in a partial picture of why this happened, here goes.

Today at lunch, I was going over the news online. I had heard of this, but hadn't read any articles about it, so i opened one up and immediately recognized the mug shot. I worked with Scott Dekraai from 2001-2003 at a ferry company. He was a captain, and i split my time between the office and the docks. He was a good guy, well liked, and fun to be around. He was bipolar, but it wasn't an issue, I would have never known, except this was the kind of place where everybody knew everybody's business. Anyway, one day he gets drunk and takes one of the boats for a joyride, becomes a company legend, but of course gets fired, i never see him again (though i continue to hear how he's doing from mutual friends).

From there, Scott and a good friend of his family, a deckhand at the ferry named Piper, go to work on a tugboat. One day, Piper gets pinned by a line, Scott jumps to try to save her, but the line snapped. It nearly severed his leg and took off most of her head. They managed to save his leg, but she died in his arms before they reached shore.

He suffered from severe PTSD from the incident, as well as depression from both the incident and the fact that he was now incapable of doing the only thing he had ever known. Financial struggles followed, as they tend to do when you lose your livelihood. All this contributed greatly to the collapse of his marriage, and a bitter custody struggle for the children apparently was the last straw.

I can't even begin to reconcile the fact that the Scott i knew and the man who reloaded to continue murdering strangers are the same person. I can't help but wonder what would have happened if that fool would have just passed out on the boat, like usual, instead of taking it for a spin. Maybe this whole chain of events never happens.

Wow. Thanks for sharing that. Life is crazy sometimes.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

One problem among the many in what you said: Not everybody has to go to a preserve. Heck, I've got a neighbor who hunts, and we even allow him on my family's land. And if worst comes to worst, we'll be out hunting too.

Not everybody has land they can hunt on. In fact, nearly everybody doesn't have land they can't hunt on. Need I explain this part again?

So you make an assumption that when people hunt, they usually don't use the food? Interesting. Very interesting.

Yeah, there's a difference between hunting to subsist and hunting for sport. We are discussing the former. I am growing tired of your silly attempts to deflect the discussion.

To me it seems hunting or sports shooting has no place the gun control debate especially considering hunting isn't constitutionally guaranteed. Hunting and competing are not the only legitimate reasons to own a gun.

He gets the idea.

 

[Methos]

The only other option would be to hunt dogs, cats, and squirrels.

Squirrels taste good. I used to hunt them a lot as a kid. My dog was excellent at treeing them. She quickly learned she got the innards, so it was a win for both of us.