Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by ArtVandelay, Jun 20, 2014.
it is the onion
however we DON'T need gun control
Kind of late to the party with this. If you havent seen this before, you probably don't use much social media.
never heard of the onion...
i meant to post this one...
The Yakuza don't have guns now?
glad you asked. did some research. looks like even with the Yakuza it's still working...
anyone else want to take a crack at why we should just stand pat and do nothing???
Who said to do nothing? I'm sure you'll find damn near universal agreement with stripping gun ownership from criminals, children, the mentally ill, etc. Where the disagreement comes in is 1.) the method for doing that; 2.) what defines each of those categories; and 3.) convincing responsible, law-abiding gun owners, such as myself, to forsake their own right to gun ownership.
In all earnestness, you have nothing to fear in the world from me owning a gun. Taking mine does not make you any safer. Now taking the automobiles away from many of the idiots you see every day would make you much safer, but that's entirely different discussion, of course.
I'm constantly amazed at people who see govt as the answer to EVERY problem.
do nuclear bombs kill people? i think everyone would agree that they do. and im pretty sure no one would die if they had a nuclear bomb show...i know you are smart enough to know the difference. but keep up with your gun enthusiast talking points...i'll take you seriously when you actually have something original to add to the conversation
artie- I agree that killing people is wrong but outlawing guns won't stop people being killed by guns
The violent crime rate in Japan is much lower than it is in the USA. Is it because of the culture or gun control?
Japanese Americans, who have access to guns, also commit violent crimes at a much lower rate than the rest of the US. Maybe it is a cultural thing rather than a gun control thing.
Private weapon ownership is also not part of Japanese culture. If you were not a samurai or under active service to your lord, it was death to own military weapons. Okinawan weapons, such as the bo and sai, came about specifically because they could be disguised as ordinary tools. When firearms first became available to the Japanese around 1600, the Shogunate strictly controlled them as military tools only, so there was no culture of hunting or sporting (skeet, target practice, etc.) with them or the like. Simply put, Japanese people do not have hundreds of years of culture ingrained into them that owning a gun is a civil right and a characteristic of a free citizen. We do. If nothing else, all involved in this debate need to recognize that culture is a powerful thing and not easily resisted.
No one says there should not be laws on gun ownership. Or very few say that. Even enumerated rights can have some restrictions. In factevery enumerated right DOES have some restrictions. Including the right to bear arms. Recent Supreme Court decision suggest that current laws controlling gun ownership are Constitutional, but that few beyond them would pass muster.
Probably for the same reason that there are virtually no automobile-related fatalities at car dealerships.
This may be one of the few things you've ever posted that I didn't disagree with.
Those same people have to hire someone to come into their home and screw a lightbulb in for them. Since THEY know they have no confidence in their own personal accountability, they extrapolate that to necessarily be the same for EVERYONE else....hence, the govt will take care of everyone's problems and solve them all...regardless.
Simply put--weak individuals need the govt. for everything. They simply can't do for themselves. And that includes thinking.
There is a lot more to it than just gun ownership. The US homicide rate (murders by all methods) was 4.7 for 2012 according to linked source. The rate has steadily declined since the early nineties when the rate was twice as great.
If you look at homicide by state, you see a wide array of rates from Lousiana over 10 and New Hampshire at 1. In between you have states with very liberal gun laws like Wyoming (concealed carry without a permit) at 2.4 and Illinois with more restrictive guns laws at 5.8. New Jersey is mentioned in the article as having a low "gun death" rate, but their homicide rate is near the national average at 4.4.
All this to say that all you accomplish with restrictive guns laws is to disarm the law-abiding citizen. Culture and poverty have much more to do with homicide rates, whether by gun or otherwise, than gun laws do.
From the FBI murder rate by weapon stats, handguns account for about half of murders.
However, rifles, which I assume would include the notorious assault weapons, are used for less than 3% of murders.
Various weapons used for murder at a higher rate than rifles include knives, blunt objects (clubs, hammer), and fists. Strangulation and asphyxiation combine for nearly 2/3 the rifle murder rate.
no one has ever proposed 'taking people's guns away'
no one is trying to talk people like you into forsaking your 2nd amendment rights.
a better background check, no gun show loopholes, that's what everyone is 'up in arms' about?
i know i know, it's that 'slippery slope' argument.
the left uses that 'slippery slope' argument all the time...regarding late term abortions.
probably we should stop worrying so much about slippery slopes, and get sensible, wrt both topics