Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
tooth
Trad climber
B.C.
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2013 - 09:29pm PT
|
The same reason that the other 48 states line up neatly between those two states in the same sequence. There is a linear relationship between gun laws and gun crime, no other factors considered eh?
|
|
Dropline
Mountain climber
Somewhere Up There
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2013 - 09:45pm PT
|
Coz: The only way the US population will raise above their government, is if the soldiers decide to take side with the population. Ding ding ding ding!! We have a winner!!
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2013 - 09:46pm PT
|
The same reason that the other 48 states line up neatly between those two states in the same sequence. There is a linear relationship between gun laws and gun crime, no other factors considered eh?
tooth, I don't see why the fact that you live in Canada makes anything you say less relevant than someone who lives in Alabama but that's just my take on geography
and yes you are right, there IS a clear relationship between gun laws and gun deaths
Alaska and Massachusetts at the top of the lists, how can it be any clearer than that?
|
|
tooth
Trad climber
B.C.
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2013 - 09:54pm PT
|
Coz, I lived in San Bernardino for enough years to know what's going on down there. I know many members of your military, and some ex-seals(now dentists) and some active seals. We went surfing a lot on the base down there. So my feelings for what your military thinks of things come from a few dozen guys who have seen multiple tours each this past 12 years, one who was so hard to kill that they have him teaching the new seals now. Not very likely that they will give up their guns. Whenever we meet (in the airport) they are checking their guns through and getting harassed and not very happy about it - especially since they have spent years in the sand for that freedom they say.
Picture this, 6-tour navy Seal getting patted down by a 280lb balding man who can't keep his blue shirt tucked in around his belly, harassing the guy because of a patch on his pack...
Just rolling my eyes at people picking the stats that back up their views when you can pick 10 examples for anything you like. I could care less if you guys ban guns altogether.
The biggest argument I see here is for idealism, which is great, but it isn't taking into account the fact that you aren't building a new country from scratch, you already have a starting point that many aren't taking into account. If you took that into account I'm sure an effective solution could be found.
A lot of the arguments are simplistic linear logic, guns are used in bad crimes, so if you restrict guns, you will reduce the crime. Others are emotional, 400 kids have been killed? I don't want to see more kids killed, so let's restrict guns.. They sound good, but we have so many examples of using this simplistic logic to make rules that don't have the results required.
Fact: you have criminals that will victimize weak people.
Fact: they can be stopped only by people who they perceive as stronger than them or as a threat to them. This doesn't apply to mass murderers, they shoot themselves when they are done. The only way they are stopped is to convince them to end it themselves faster or shoot them. This is why columbine changed how police respond to these types of situations. They no longer wait for a SWAT team... they no longer wait. 1 or 2 cops will now enter and show a gun which tells the shooter that it is over. They haven't fought back, they shoot themselves. When a cop does it, the average is 14 killed, when a citizen pulls a gun, the av. is down past 3 because they pull it and are on the scene sooner.
Fact: if you legislate armed guards you will go broke, and it isn't 100% effective, and it paints a target on an obstacle that can be overcome. CCW doesn't.
Fact: if you require non-guards to carry, and they haven't already taken the responsibility themselves to carry an equalizer, they will be ineffective. My relatives that hate guns would be a danger to themselves and others if they had to carry.
So for schools if you allow concealed carry for people who already do, you remove a hunting ground, remove targets, place barriers in the minds of shooters that will encourage them to go elsewhere.
You encourage them to go elsewhere because they are still mad. Looks like none of the laws coming out in NY include removing any of the existing guns, most likely the federal laws will follow suit. So they go elsewhere, pick up a few of the 300million guns floating around. You haven't solved THEM, just where they act out. To solve THEM, you have a lot more work to do and essentially need to remove a few hundred million guns from circulation.
For the #2 situations - anything but crazy killers on a suicide mission, removing all guns won't make a big difference since they will just bring them down from Canada like they did with liquor. Leaving individual states to decide isn't going to work unless you close borders between states. Leaving it wide open with no repercussions isn't great - look where you are now.
My wife is wondering if the Alaska stats have anything to do with anything besides gun laws. Being dark half the year is depressing compared to living in Texas, lots of alcohol abuse (I lived out in the bush in BC and my Indian neighbor lost all 3 sons while I was there to suicide by gun) and other factors play into life there compared to life elsewhere. If you cling to Alaska as the worst state for gun deaths because of the laws argument, it shows that you aren't thinking things through well, and are sticking to one outlier argument just as the NRA picks and chooses their outlier arguments.
Adopting Canada's rules where people get gun licenses and license their restricted guns (all the rest are now un-registered) at a Federal level would probably solve a lot of your issues except it will cost a lot! (tax the guns and ammo to cover it) Then the people who shouldn't get guns won't. When you are going through a divorce or mental issues the cops remove your guns and give them back later. They know who has guns, or who possibly has guns because the home has a licensed person living at it, and if they are restricted guns or handguns, they know which guns are in the home. If you loose a gun, it is registered to you if restricted, so you are going to report it because you loose all guns and your license plus other things if you don't report it. They never find out if it is a non-restricted (read, non-assult) weapon. No high-capacity. Limited to 5!
That would solve most of the gun problems you have there except for illegally-obtained gun crime and mass killings which you are only fooling yourself if you think gun laws will do anything about anyway. Crimpie, what percentage of gun crime is done with illegal/stolen guns? (mass-killings are less than 1% of total gun deaths)
|
|
tooth
Trad climber
B.C.
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2013 - 10:26pm PT
|
coz, I lived in WA, CA, and Guam. 10 years. 5 different zip codes. So yeah, not a lot, but not a lot fo Americans have moved around that much either eh?
I don't mind you! If I didn't like thinking about this and trying to find different experiences and points of view about it I wouldn't be here. I'm not married to my current views - they have changed quite a bit since this last shooting but I also laugh at the extreme views from the NRA and some on this thread. I guess that's why I feel like stretching the arguments far left or right, so see if there are good points far off in a corner somewhere.
I have learned that I can't get people to change how they argue or present information - if they are NRA extremists, they will only present stuff that supports their ideas. So I just listen to all their points, laughing once in a while as they brazenly cherry pick numbers or ignore bigger trends for that sweet data supporting their argument. I guess if I was worried about what I sounded like or about convincing people that I was right, I would post differently.
My two best climbing buds live in CO and MS. We get together a lot for everything from big walls to canoeing trips - their views of guns are as far apart as you can be, just without the name-calling you guys have here. But we always summit!
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2013 - 10:27pm PT
|
Tooth.....Is your name Bobby that looked like a potatoe , thank god you didn't spend the rest of your life in San Berdino...RJ
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2013 - 10:37pm PT
|
If you cling to Alaska as the worst state for gun deaths because of the laws argument, it shows that you aren't thinking things through well, and are sticking to one outlier argument just as the NRA picks and chooses their outlier arguments.
Hi tooth, ok yes your wife is right, it gets dark in Alaska much of the year
and thus you conclude that negates the fact that Alaska has the most guns per capita and also the most gun deaths?
Ok, turn your wife loose on Massachusetts where they have the toughest state guns laws and also the fewest guns deaths.
It does not get really dark there, does it, or maybe the sun shines too much?
Maybe you can look hard to find some climate stuff to diminish that statistic, because it happens to prove you wrong, as does Alaska. but keep trying.
I read your narrative tooth, and I agree with much you say, but it IS an undeniable fact that you leave out, much less guns means much less killing with guns.
That fact is true regardless, just like less cocaine means less overdoses.
You may not "like" to admit that fact, but it IS true nonetheless. Admit it.
|
|
philo
Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2013 - 10:41pm PT
|
|
|
tooth
Trad climber
B.C.
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2013 - 10:45pm PT
|
Oh NOrton, I agree with that and I have said so in this thread. But I do think that there is a ratio of total guns:criminals committing crimes with guns in reality that has to be dealt with until we get to the agreed less guns=less violence point because if you only remove guns from one side of that ratio the violence will not decrease. Theoretically less meth/crack = less dentistry to do. Realistically, I've got job security if the war on guns uses the same techniques the war on drugs has used for the past 40 years.
|
|
dave729
Trad climber
Western America
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2013 - 10:51pm PT
|
you are over thinking this Norton. If I can get philosophical about this, everyone is going to die sometime of something.
Connected to life support hoses and machines, drugged to near unconsciousness, for months in a hospital seems the ultimate horror far beyond any gun death. I know we don't get a choice for our ending but
this outcry about guns is silly.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2013 - 10:57pm PT
|
I know we don't get a choice for our ending but
this outcry about guns is silly.
yes, I agree
this outcry about guns is just SILLY
go tell that to the parents of the 20 third graders who were butchered SILLY
tell that to the loved ones of those butchered SILLY in Aurora
silly my ass
|
|
Dingus McGee
Social climber
Laramie
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2013 - 10:57pm PT
|
Dave 729,
if you can get philosophical about making choices in life, it is a much more sovereignty having life to elect less potential for violence than saying we are going to die some time so it is okay if some shots us against our will.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2013 - 11:00pm PT
|
ok tooth
so instead of general and frankly obvious generalizing,
let's hear your specific suggestions to mitigate mass gun murder?
and please don't say less violent video games or too many single parents, etc ,
got a problem with background checks on ALL guns sales, including private sales?
stuff like that, ideas of your own?
|
|
tooth
Trad climber
B.C.
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2013 - 11:22pm PT
|
Adopting Canada's rules where people get gun licenses and license their restricted guns (all the rest are now un-registered) at a Federal level would probably solve a lot of your issues except it will cost a lot! (tax the guns and ammo to cover it) Then the people who shouldn't get guns won't. When you are going through a divorce or mental issues the cops remove your guns and give them back later. They know who has guns, or who possibly has guns because the home has a licensed person living at it, and if they are restricted guns or handguns, they know which guns are in the home. If you loose a gun, it is registered to you if restricted, so you are going to report it because you loose all guns and your license plus other things if you don't report it. They never find out if it is a non-restricted (read, non-assult) weapon. No high-capacity. Limited to 5!
This may make a difference, given a generation to work - if you could get it to actually happen in a country that still has a lot of fiercely independent, live free or die people in it. Another generation of TSA seeping into everyday life and more surveillance and if the government continues to log you e-mails, tweets, and grow in this area it will create an environment of shrugging. Oh well, they know everything anyway, is what the new kids will think. If I want the PRIVILEGE of a gun it is no different than anything else in life as far as registering and getting licensed. No problems with anyone in the next generation. It is only this generation who remembers when cars didn't have remote dis-connect On-Star, etc. that will still complain. Canadians never thought arms were a right in the first place, so a third of them actually registered their guns with the long gun registry that they finally gave up on entirely. It is a societal issue of compliance that is definitely headed in that direction. If you can get a third of Canadians to do so, I wouldn't doubt that you would try to use force to get Americans to do so, it just isn't Canada's way to use force for anything, which brings us full-circle to our use of guns. We have 33 guns for every 100 people, you have 88. Our gun crime should be 1/3 of yours if you look only at a narrow slice of data. But our mentality accounts for the rest of the difference. I wonder how the laws they propose will be enforced and followed by this generation. The next will have a much higher compliance rate.
|
|
tooth
Trad climber
B.C.
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2013 - 11:37pm PT
|
Thanks QITNL. It is good to get out and live in other countries. I've spent about half of my life in Canada.
BTW, my wife and I have guns, she asked me this week if we could get another one so we can be equally matched on the dueling tree. I don't even know if she is a republican or democrat or if she identifies with either party. She is one of the few Americans I know who wasn't raised to look at things in a black/white repub/democrat pro/con way.
|
|
Captain...or Skully
climber
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2013 - 11:38pm PT
|
Actually, they are many, Tooth. We're just not as loud.
|
|
dave729
Trad climber
Western America
|
|
|
Jan 16, 2013 - 12:09am PT
|
the pen in mightier than the sword
ergo must license anyone who wants to exercise their 1st Amend Rights
and limit each communication to a maximum of 7 words.
Guess which body parts to be removed for failure to pass 1st Amend safety training.
|
|
blahblah
Gym climber
Boulder
|
|
|
Jan 16, 2013 - 01:15am PT
|
But hardly anywhere in the world did I feel as safe. Simply due to the absence of guns. And all the Brit girls I dated in the States and all the Yanks I dated abroad would confirm that, without a second thought.
The people you know or knew may simply have been fools--I thought I've learned form this thread that total UK violence is as high or higher than in US. So your friends feels safe if they may be beaten, stabbed, raped, stomped, etc., as long as they are not going to be shot? Nice.
By the way, I wonder how many people posting on this thread actually have any real fear of violence in their personal lives.
|
|
tooth
Trad climber
B.C.
|
|
|
Jan 16, 2013 - 01:38am PT
|
I'm going to feel really safe at night in Port au Prince next week because the rate of gun ownership in Haiti is 0.62 firearms per 100 people.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/12/29/haiti-travel-warning-advisory.html
http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/tw/tw_5850.html
"U.S. citizens have been victims of violent crime, including murder and kidnapping, predominantly in the Port-au-Prince area. No one is safe from kidnapping, regardless of occupation, nationality, race, gender, or age. In recent months, travelers arriving in Port-au-Prince on flights from the United States were attacked and robbed shortly after departing the airport. At least two U.S. citizens were shot and killed..."
This is the ratio that I'm talking about. Sure, there are practically no guns there. .62 compared to 88 in the US. But the ratio of guns out there with a decent guy holding onto it vs. a moron is way out of wack - enough for our governments to tell people not to visit there.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!