The Thread Where We Discuss Guns and Gun Control

[Aiken_Drumn]

I don't really believe in the right to have guns.

I really don't think people with a history of violence should be allowed guns.

If the laws around domestic violence disproportionately target black demographics, that's an argument to improve domestic violence reduction an laws.. Not exclude domestic violence for a reason not to have guns removed.

To get even more convoluted, its almost like you're saying black demographics lead more dangerous lives so need guns more? Which seems utterly bonkers to me.. But I figure to those who like guns will feels that's common sense!?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

If there are a set of conditions, and there is a change and then new outcomes, then the change caused the new outcomes.

that's not the principle claim in question. when we talk about gun control policy or w/e, the objection to them is sometimes that they result in observed disparities.

it does not hold, even as a logical proposition, that the policy (which defines nothing in terms of stratifying groups) itself is "causing" that disparity. it causes controls/consequences for certain actions, but not the disparity between how different groups interact with it.

thus, when one claims that the policy itself is causing the disparity, it can only be correct by coincidence (unless the policy defines for this disparity to happen).

The motive of a policy will not always matter as much as the outcome of the policy.

often the observed disparity in outcome also does not matter, because it is reflecting a problem elsewhere. insofar as you have a problem, that "elsewhere" is the place where addressing it is useful.

Like, if people notice that more black people will lose 'permission to own guns' if domestic violence convictions prevent gun ownership

if people notice that, they should also notice that the only reason this would matter is if the law itself is enforced unfairly, and even that would provide evidence of bias in law enforcement, not the particular law itself.

"don't create social conditions that encourage domestic violence or selective policing".

that would be nice if we could do it

But the observation about the outcome doesn't presuppose any of those things.

my point is that, among common usage, it does presuppose one of those things, and frequently uses that presupposition as basis to reject or criticize the policy. if, when using it, that's not what you're doing, then there is a disambiguation to be made with our terms. it's not good to have the same shorthand mean very different things.

To get even more convoluted, its almost like you're saying black demographics lead more dangerous lives so need guns more?

averages/trends across populations don't track/generalize to individuals like this. how much someone "needs" or even just "wants" a gun depends on the individual.

the problem for "don't believe in a right to have guns" is that (as a matter of principle) you need some basis to dictate to people which property they are or are not allowed to own. the rationale for most gun control legislation tends to meme harder than most discord channels. it's why we keep getting graphics/statistical "analysis" that lumps suicides and homicides together and has no issues with putting "domestic homicide incident" into the same bucket as "indiscriminate mass shooter incident" for the purposes of creating a narrative.

when a law is based on such a narrative, its going to be similarly nonsense.

 

[Sommerswerd]

People caring about gun violence almost doubles in a month

Surely there are the votes available to do something useful?

Looking at this graph and thinking about the problems with combining "crime" and "gun violence" that I mentioned in the other thread... something else springs to mind. There is a troubling literal death-spiral/cycle with those two particular issues. Specifically, the gun industry has worked very hard over the years to foster the falsehood that guns make people's homes more safe, the implication being, from crime. However, the statistical/research indications seem to be the opposite... that guns in the home make accidents, homicides and suicides significantly more likely, and the increase of guns in the country has been accompanied by an increase in gun deaths.

So the vicious cycle, appears to be, that as people become concerned about "crime", the gun industry convinces them (or they convince themselves) that they need to buy guns to keep their homes and selves safe from all this crime, which puts more guns in the public domain, which in turn leads to more gun violence, more coverage of gun violence, and more reports of "crime", which again, leads to people having increased concern over crime and gun violence, leading to increased gun purchases for "safety", leading to more gun violence and so on... No way off this crazy train, as long as people are being convinced to associate guns with increased safety.

Just ban anyone who's ever done domestic violence from even being around guns.

There is apparently also a high-correlation between animal abuse and gun violence. The article I linked isn't the first/only place I've heard this, it was just the first link that popped up when I Googled it.

 

[Farm Boy]

And we wonder why we can't find enough hunters.

 

[Samson]

There is apparently also a high-correlation between animal abuse and gun violence. The article I linked isn't the first/only place I've heard this, it was just the first link that popped up when I Googled it.

Restrict guns to vegans. The Republicans will love that.

 

[EgonSpengler]

Looking at this graph and thinking about the problems with combining "crime" and "gun violence" that I mentioned in the other thread... something else springs to mind. There is a troubling literal death-spiral/cycle with those two particular issues. Specifically, the gun industry has worked very hard over the years to foster the falsehood that guns make people's homes more safe, the implication being, from crime. However, the statistical/research indications seem to be the opposite... that guns in the home make accidents, homicides and suicides significantly more likely, and the increase of guns in the country has been accompanied by an increase in gun deaths.

So the vicious cycle, appears to be, that as people become concerned about "crime", the gun industry convinces them (or they convince themselves) that they need to buy guns to keep their homes and selves safe from all this crime, which puts more guns in the public domain, which in turn leads to more gun violence, more coverage of gun violence, and more reports of "crime", which again, leads to people having increased concern over crime and gun violence, leading to increased gun purchases for "safety", leading to more gun violence and so on... No way off this crazy train, as long as people are being convinced to associate guns with increased safety. There is apparently also a high-correlation between animal abuse and gun violence. The article I linked isn't the first/only place I've heard this, it was just the first link that popped up when I Googled it.

One of the links in that Fortune article takes us to University of Michigan's Health Lab, which says

Rates of death from firearms among ages 14 to 17 are now 22.5% higher than motor vehicle-related death rates. In the U.S., middle and high school age children are now more likely to die as the result of a firearm injury than from any other single cause of death.

School shootings are a focus of media attention and raise awareness about the problem of firearm deaths among children and teens. But they remain the smallest proportion of deaths, accounting for 1.2% of all homicides among 5 to 18-year-olds.

And that was published in August of 2019. I shouldn't be too surprised if these numbers have only gotten worse in the last 3 years.

Here's a doozy for us:

The U.S. stands out among high-income countries: Over 90% of all the firearm deaths among children and adolescents that occur in industrialized nations occur in this country.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

and the increase of guns in the country has been accompanied by an increase in gun deaths.

homicide rate per capita has fluctuated up and down despite a steady increase in number of guns. i don't think we can make this particular conclusion wrt homicide. shuffling about with age to buy/own rifles and some rifle-related things will have practically no impact on this, too.

if you go by absolute numbers...well...there are more people in the us than before, and thus should be more of most things related to that.

the most common forms of gun crime barely see news reports beyond local levels. mass shooters get way more attention than their share of homicides.

the better argument is about freedom and capability to protect oneself, if able. it has been clearly demonstrated to us multiple times that the police are not (broadly) compelled to do it, and may or may not be there in time (or even 90 minutes later). telling otherwise law abiding individuals they can't possess firearms in this context is dubious. there are times using a gun is appropriate, and many where it is not. i would prefer the individual whose life is on the line make that choice, and not some rando or the government. yes, despite the "costs" of this (i put in quotations, because the precedent set by government making this decision for people will have ramifications beyond just homicide rate that i bet are more harmful than the marginal savings of any arbitrary gun law).

Here's a doozy for us:

since a tiny % of these are indiscriminate school shootings, it might be worth asking what processes lead to this happening. considering fbi crime statistics, i suspect the top causes here are gang violence and domestic violence

 

[Farm Boy]

It's not like it's legal to kill yourself, I'd bet it's still suicide.

 

[E.man]

I'd like to speak for the rest of the world, but I can't so I'll just speak for myself.

It looks like your political system is *stuffed*. Appalling mass murders continue, lots of calls for change, POTUS agrees, ...nothing happens. This time it's Republican numbers in the Senate. No mass voting change to get it to happen. The system doesn't work !!

In Oz we had enough of mass shootings and changed the gun laws years ago. It was a Conservative government at the time. Guns are not banned outright, but I can't go into a department store and walk out with a military grade assault weapon. I have family who own guns and I lived in the country and there was plenty there.

We have the AEC (Australian Electoral Commission) which independently administers electoral boundaries and runs all levels of elections. We have the same actual process of voting everywhere. A tiny loud voice was trying the trumpian 'election fraud' line recently and got no traction because simply no one believes them because we can see changes in governance after voting.

It has also become a practise to have a 'Democracy Sausage' on election days.

 

[Estebonrober]

homicide rate per capita has fluctuated up and down despite a steady increase in number of guns. i don't think we can make this particular conclusion wrt homicide. shuffling about with age to buy/own rifles and some rifle-related things will have practically no impact on this, too.

if you go by absolute numbers...well...there are more people in the us than before, and thus should be more of most things related to that.

the most common forms of gun crime barely see news reports beyond local levels. mass shooters get way more attention than their share of homicides.

the better argument is about freedom and capability to protect oneself, if able. it has been clearly demonstrated to us multiple times that the police are not (broadly) compelled to do it, and may or may not be there in time (or even 90 minutes later). telling otherwise law abiding individuals they can't possess firearms in this context is dubious. there are times using a gun is appropriate, and many where it is not. i would prefer the individual whose life is on the line make that choice, and not some rando or the government. yes, despite the "costs" of this (i put in quotations, because the precedent set by government making this decision for people will have ramifications beyond just homicide rate that i bet are more harmful than the marginal savings of any arbitrary gun law).



since a tiny % of these are indiscriminate school shootings, it might be worth asking what processes lead to this happening. considering fbi crime statistics, i suspect the top causes here are gang violence and domestic violence

Look I know the GOP supporters out there who are standing by current gun laws are in full monster mode but lets be clear here, and AR-15 or similar long barreled rifle is not good for home defense. You are likely to accidentally murder your neighbor while trying to "defend" your home. The mass shooting rifles are fudging hobby rifles and anyone arguing otherwise is a hog piece of refuse. It would be great to get waiting periods and licenses back for all firearms including consequences for selling arms to people who use them to commit crimes. Thats a pipe dream probably, but we can get these mass shooter rifles highly regulated again if only these hog fudgs would bend once in their ignorant sociopathic lives.

 

[Lexicus]

It looks like your political system is *stuffed*. Appalling mass murders continue, lots of calls for change, POTUS agrees, ...nothing happens. This time it's Republican numbers in the Senate. No mass voting change to get it to happen. The system doesn't work !!

QFT, can only hope more Americans realize this

 

[choxorn]

It looks like your political system is *stuffed*. Appalling mass murders continue, lots of calls for change, POTUS agrees, ...nothing happens. This time it's Republican numbers in the Senate. No mass voting change to get it to happen. The system doesn't work !!

Most of us who are sensible are well aware that the system is screwed. Because it is screwed, it's really hard to un-screw it.

 

[Sommerswerd]

And we wonder why we can't find enough hunters.

Tonight I'm eating beer can chicken wings, with fresh green beans and oyster mushrooms, sautéed in fresh garlic, ginger, peppers and herb infused lamb fat, with boiled corn. Nobody hunted jack **** that I ate tonight. All that squeeze was farmed... and it is delicious.

 

[Farm Boy]

Well, yes. But the hunting is for management purposes. No tax more efficient than convincing the citizenry to pay for a permit to do work the government is tasked with performing!

It's probably competing entertainment options more than anything, but it's in a sort of weird cultural space, isn't it? Or is my read off?

 

[AmazonQueen]

It looks like there may be some bipartisan agreement on extremely limited gun control proposals.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/worl...sedgntp&cvid=16bed93d7c1c4ed2b66deeb666529ea7

I suspect both sides had an eye on the mid-terms and not wanting to look unreasonable or unwilling to work with others.

 

[E.man]

It looks like there may be some bipartisan agreement on extremely limited gun control proposals.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/worl...sedgntp&cvid=16bed93d7c1c4ed2b66deeb666529ea7

I suspect both sides had an eye on the mid-terms and not wanting to look unreasonable or unwilling to work with others.

Very limited. Doesn't do much about the guns. Looks like they have to wait until they can legally have a beer before they can pop down to the shop and get an assault weapon.

Saw a promo for a little clip on device (called a Hellraiser I think) that turns an AR15 , AK 47 etc into a full automatic. Bloody fantastic, just what's needed.

 

[Farm Boy]

I mean, it's not rocket engineering. The AKs, if they're older, have probably been converted to not be automatic, already.

 

[AmazonQueen]

Very limited. Doesn't do much about the guns. Looks like they have to wait until they can legally have a beer before they can pop down to the shop and get an assault weapon.

Saw a promo for a little clip on device (called a Hellraiser I think) that turns an AR15 , AK 47 etc into a full automatic. Bloody fantastic, just what's needed.

Agreeing to do anything about guns is something.. That is if anything happens and it doesn't all fall apart each side blaming the other which is about what I expect to happen.

 

[IglooDame]

Very limited. Doesn't do much about the guns. Looks like they have to wait until they can legally have a beer before they can pop down to the shop and get an assault weapon.

Saw a promo for a little clip on device (called a Hellraiser I think) that turns an AR15 , AK 47 etc into a full automatic. Bloody fantastic, just what's needed.

Bump stock type devices are already legally treated as class-III full-auto firearms themselves. Devices aside, modifying a semi-auto to shoot full auto is already against the law.

 

[E.man]

Bump stock type devices are already legally treated as class-III full-auto firearms themselves. Devices aside, modifying a semi-auto to shoot full auto is already against the law.

I saw that about the bump stop stuff when it happened.

Might be illegal. I didn't get into when the vid was made. Promotional point was how quickly it clips off and "slips right into your pocket".