Isn't More Gun Control The Obvious Solution? Yes, Yes It Is.

[fides' Jack]

To all who have posted in here - I just wanted to say thanks!  I'm quite ignorant in this subject, but the thread has been enlightening.

 

Obviously, more gun control is a bad solution.  At this point I can only think that gun-control activists are either ignorant or power hungry.  There doesn't seem to be any other possibility here.

[dairygirl4u2c]

Obviously, more gun control is a good solution.  At this point I can only think that anti gun-control activists are either ignorant or power hungry. There doesn't seem to be any other possibility here.

[dairygirl4u2c]

on issue of background checks alone.

most criminals arent these black hoodies wholl stop at nothing to get a gun and do teir crime. most or a significant portion are just regular ppl who happened to have a gun at a time when theyd do crime. if they didnt gave a gun, they wouldnt do a crime.
most guns in houses cause crimes or violence to that household that wouldnt have otherwise occurred. if the person didnt have a gun most would be better off.

cooling off periods included, and simple access problems.

its indisputable background checks would stop some guns and some crime thereby. if there's any queston, why not err on teh side of caution and have checks? it could only help. checks would at worst be a mere incovenience.

but like i said... it's indisputable

[dairygirl4u2c]

whats ironic is u see this kind of stuff posted everywhere.

 

 

 

the truth is stupidity is thinking control would be pointless. see last post

it's as if they cant sift throgh all the terrible arguments from
both sides, granted, or come up with their own argument, truths.
the irony is always to me the stupidity and lack of critical thinking skills of ppl who post this stuff

[4588686]

whats ironic is u see this kind of stuff posted everywhere.

 

 

 

the truth is stupidity is thinking control would be pointless. see last post

it's as if they cant sift throgh all the terrible arguments from
both sides, granted, or come up with their own argument, truths.
the irony is always to me the stupidity and lack of critical thinking skills of ppl who post this stuff

 

 

Well it's not like we have any empirical data here.  I mean it's not like a lot of other countries have enacted strong gun laws and correspondingly have vastly lower rates of gun violence.  Oh, wait.  

 

 

We could enact strong gun laws and enact laws that limit the access that ordinary police have to handguns, as the UK has done.  We could also, and should also, enact strong reform of the paramilitarization of the police force.

 

 

Or we could just whine and romanticize violence.  

[Jesus_lol]

Quick question for you Hasan. Do you actually think any of the recent gun control measures in places like canada, australia or the UK, have anything to do with them having a fraction of the USA's murder rate?

 

Because that same difference in rate has been there for like 100 years, decades before any significant gun control laws were put in place in any of these countries.

 

It is pretty stupid to say "the controls put in canada in the 90s are the reason canada has 1/3rd of the homicides of the USA" when that same rate existed before those controls. Before the Gun laws passed primarily in the 90s, canada had pretty damn loose gun control laws, much looser than many states today.

 

It is also pretty stupid to say "well after Australia put in their controls in the 90s, their violence dropped by like 29%!!!" while failing to include that the USA's rate has dropped by over 40% in the same time period without the same controls being in place, in many cases, with some being removed.

 

"After the gun controls in australia, there have been very few murders and shooting sprees!!", well, that is just ducky for them, except that they had very few murders and basically no shooting sprees before that either.

 

"England banned handguns, and now their violence is a fraction of the USA's". Well, no It was a fraction of the USA's BEFORE they put in the laws, not because of the laws. In fact, since then it has gotten worse. 

 

What has NOT been shown, is a country that had a violence problem before gun laws, and then had that problem significantly reduced directly because of gun laws put in place, and that the resulting drop in crimes was happening any more than was already happening, as in most countries, the USA included, violence has been dropping pretty steadily for the last few decades, probably due to changing demographics.

 

 

 

[dairygirl4u2c]

those are some pretty bold claims to make, that no controls have ever been shown to work, at all, n any country, without citing some sources.

 

plus it's just common sense that at least certain controls like background checks will have some effect.
even if it wasnt statistically significant, it could only have a positive effect.
a few lives saved might not be statistically significant but it can oly be lives saved w any control.

especially background checks id agrue but i digress

Edited February 17, 2013 by dairygirl4u2c

[dairygirl4u2c]

but i suspect it's more than just statistically insignifcant lives saved.... it's solid, and controls are proportionate to lives lost etc. USA is worst amd japan is best. (their death rate is obscenely low)
i do acknowledge culture is a big component and might throw a wrench into my theories.

[StMichael]

[attachment=3115:guns.jpg]

[Winchester]

Well it's not like we have any empirical data here.  I mean it's not like a lot of other countries have enacted strong gun laws and correspondingly have vastly lower rates of gun violence.  Oh, wait.  
 
 
We could enact strong gun laws and enact laws that limit the access that ordinary police have to handguns, as the UK has done.  We could also, and should also, enact strong reform of the paramilitarization of the police force.
 
 
Or we could just whine and romanticize non-state sponsored violence.

Truthified.

The last sentence is what really applies to the advocates of a class system, on this thread.

[God the Father]

Obviously, more gun control is a good solution.  At this point I can only think that anti gun-control activists are either ignorant or power hungry. There doesn't seem to be any other possibility here.

 

Haha what on earth? There's a thousand over a hundred posts in this thread and 75% of them reasonably argue against additional federal gun regulation.

Edited February 19, 2013 by God the Father

[dairygirl4u2c]

then please humor me and debate me a lttile. i feel my ponts have been unaddressed. i just recently asked a poster for some citations on some bold claims for one.

 

for two, you could start with....

"

on issue of background checks alone.

most criminals arent these black hoodies wholl stop at nothing to get
a gun and do teir crime. most or a significant portion are just regular
ppl who happened to have a gun at a time when theyd do crime. if they
didnt gave a gun, they wouldnt do a crime.

most guns in houses cause crimes or violence to that household that
wouldnt have otherwise occurred. if the person didnt have a gun most
would be better off.

cooling off periods included, and simple access problems.

its indisputable background checks would stop some guns and some
crime thereby. if there's any queston, why not err on teh side of
caution and have checks? it could only help. checks would at worst be a
mere incovenience.

but like i said... it's indisputable"

[Winchester]

I'm impressed at your ability to know that without guns, violence would not have occurred. I really don't think there's a way to compete with such prescience. I'll just have to deal with whatever sort of aggression you, and all the other control freaks, decide shall be wielded by the ruling class.

Edited February 19, 2013 by Winchester

[dairygirl4u2c]

i think its next ot proveable cause stats show those with guns get more violence from those guns. if they didnt have guns... many wouldnt cause violence, or at least death.

 

and at the end of the day.... why not go with this?

""if there's any queston, why not err on teh side of

caution and have checks? it could only help. checks would at worst be a

mere incovenience."

[Allykatzlive]

What about educating about guns in general and keep repeating the same thing over and over again. It does not have to be all about gun control. Yes, there should be more restrictions. However, we can't just restrict to the point of insanity. And no I am not promoting killing.