Gun Control

[Janenmori]

Recently in the "Legalize It" thread, the topic of gun control was breached. Rather than have that thread derailed, I thought that making a new one on the topic of gun control would be appropriate.

This thread is not about whether guns, sale of guns, handguns, etc. should be banned, but rather on what your opinion of the current situation in the world is based on current laws and methods of controlling the illegal use of firearms.

Personally, as an American citizen who loves my guns very much, I think that the Second Ammendment right should be preserved as strongly as any other. The main argument against guns is that with easy access to guns, the crime-rate goes up, particularly murder. Guns, however, are not the only avaliable weapon to kill someone with, and are perhaps the most difficult possible murder weapon to acquire. Gun theft is another issue. Gun owners often have gun safes for the specific purpose of safeguarding their weapons, but not every person who owns a gun owns a gun safe, unfortunately. The restriction of guns does not significantly help the crime-rate. Most guns used in crimes are obtained illegally anyways, so the laws to prevent the criminal from obtaining the weapon are ultimately just burdens to a responsible user of guns.

Accidents are another issue entirely. Accidents are commonly caused by neglect of the weapon and ignorance on the user's part. These accidents can only be avoided ultimately by proper respect of the weapon and by educating oneself on how to handle the weapon.

 

[Surgo]

For me, gun theft is probably the biggest problem with anyone having guns at all. Where perfectly fine and legal gun owners put everyone, including themselves, in danger by providing a gun to anyone who wants to come and steal it, is not cool.

Gun theft really puts a damper on the argument of "the laws to prevent the criminal from obtaining the weapon are ultimately just burdens to a responsible user of guns" because criminals are obtaining the weapons from responsible gun users. Gun control is great for keeping criminals from easily getting guns from vendors. Now maybe we need to address the issue of criminals getting their guns from people that vendors sell guns to.

 

[Janenmori]

Gun theft really puts a damper on the argument of "the laws to prevent the criminal from obtaining the weapon are ultimately just burdens to a responsible user of guns" because criminals are obtaining the weapons from responsible gun users. Gun control is great for keeping criminals from easily getting guns from vendors. Now maybe we need to address the issue of criminals getting their guns from people that vendors sell guns to.

I agree. Basically the only way to prevent gun theft from responsible users is to have a bolted-down gun safe.

 

[Veedrock]

Guns are no more dangerous than automobiles. What's preventing some college lunatic from gettin' behind the wheel and running down others as opposed to shooting them? If that was to occur nobody would rally to ban automobiles. Guns get so much unneccessary heat.

 

[Surgo]

Guns can go a surprisingly large number of places that automobiles can't, and have many other advantages.

There's also substantially more to it than random murderous rampages (which most gun crimes are not).

 

[Trax]

Guns are no more dangerous than automobiles. What's preventing some college lunatic from gettin' behind the wheel and running down others as opposed to shooting them?

Much much easier to shoot someone with a handgun than to run them over (especially when they're inside), just as a general statement. Additionally, it's apparent that people don't substitute guns for automobile's where guns aren't available:

USA Murder Rate: 0.042802 per 1,000 people
Australia Murder Rate: 0.0150324 per 1,000 people
Canada Murder Rate: 0.0149063 per 1,000 people

Almost 3 times the murder rate in the country allowing handguns.

Additionally according to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention there are 3 non-fatal shootings for every fatal one.

Additionally the second chart on this Beurau of Justice Statistics website is pretty telling with over 60% of homicides in the USA having gun involvement.

Guns are guaranteed in the Constitution anyways; they can't legally be taken away unless there's an amendment (which isn't likely).

It doesn't cover types of guns, it merely states that members of the constitution have the right to bear arms as I recall (forgive me, I don't care about a foreign constitution all that much, I know of this because it crops up in these debates regularly). I'd suggest that perhaps the banning of certain easily concealed weapons (such as Handguns) would be a viable option.

 

[jamespicone]

Much much easier to shoot someone with a handgun than to run them over (especially when they're inside), just as a general statement. Additionally, it's apparent that people don't substitute guns for automobile's where guns aren't available:

USA Murder Rate: 0.042802 per 1,000 people
Australia Murder Rate: 0.0150324 per 1,000 people
Canada Murder Rate: 0.0149063 per 1,000 people

Almost 3 times the murder rate in the country allowing handguns.

Much as I favour gun control, the statistics are not so clear-cut. There are a lot of confounding factors for crime statistics - in particular, the significantly higher population of the US compared to, for example, Australia probably increases the per-capita crime rate, as does the higher population density, the higher proportion of people in a lower socioeconomic class, the lower rate of education in general, etc. etc. You can't simply take a single statistic and blame the difference on guns.

It should be noted, though, that if you have a gun in your house, the people most likely to be shot with it are members of your household, statistically speaking - that is, on average, having a gun makes you - and your family - less safe. You in particular? Maybe not, if you're a responsible gun owner. But given how many people are irresponsible, say, car owners...

 

[Trax]

Much as I favour gun control, the statistics are not so clear-cut. There are a lot of confounding factors for crime statistics - in particular, the significantly higher population of the US compared to, for example, Australia probably increases the per-capita crime rate, as does the higher population density, the higher proportion of people in a lower socioeconomic class, the lower rate of education in general, etc. etc. You can't simply take a single statistic and blame the difference on guns.

Per Capita accounts for population differences by definition.

Australia has quite high population density (for instance, 1/3 of people or thereabouts live in 2 of Australia's cities).

The lower socioeconomic class thing is not entirely true, Australia has around 13% of its population in poverty as of 2001, and it's hard to imagine this having changed - it's extremely common among Indigenous communities.

I will agree on the education though.

That said, the chart I linked was important as was the non-fatal shooting statistic.

 

[sbc]

There's a clear correlation between the availability of guns and the number of intentional kills with firearms.

Guns are no more dangerous than automobiles.

I'd much rather someone tried to run me over deliberately than get shot with a pistol, not to mention the fact that cars are not designed to kill people.

 

[CaptKirby]

Freer access to guns helped create the mafia for fuck's sake. Freely available gun access is a problem, and there need to be very strict and pressing reasons to have a gun in one's life (like being an actual bodyguard or something). I live in Texas, and the overriding feeling I get is people just want guns because they are badass or to hunt, not to actually feel/be protected.

 

[ferron]

Freer access to guns helped create the mafia for fuck's sake. Freely available gun access is a problem, and there need to be very strict and pressing reasons to have a gun in one's life (like being an actual bodyguard or something). I live in Texas, and the overriding feeling I get is people just want guns because they are badass or to hunt, not to actually feel/be protected.

wait, what? you realize that the mafia was founded in sicily (general belief is around palermo) and then moved to america, right? the only gun that really benefitted the mafia was the tompson submachine gun (aka. tommy-gun) because it made bank robberies and drive-bys easier.

 

[Psycho]

My thoughts on the availability of guns lie somewhere between if we didnt have easy access there would be a lot more of your petty theft/break ins because those criminals would be getting black market guns anyways and when you have a gun you are more likely to do something stupid out of rage.

 

[DM]

The Libertarian in me says that we should never take guns away from the people. Coupled with the fact that legalizing drugs will lower the prevalence of handgun homicide, there's absolutely no reason to infringe on the right to bear arms.

The Democrat-raised side of me, though, says that in our current system there is absolutely NO logical reason to own a handgun. Their sole purpose is for humans to kill other humans, and that to me is why they should be outlawed.

Rifles, however, don't pose much of a problem to me. They are primarily for hunting, and while I think shooting animals for fun is pretty fucking stupid, hey... the people eat the meat, and that's fine. You can't exactly stick a rifle in your pants and walk down the street. You can't exactly sneak a rifle into a nightclub. Get rid of handguns (and anything semi-auto or auto, that shit's fucking ridiculous).

 

[cim]

There's a clear correlation between the availability of guns and the number of intentional kills with firearms.

Correlation does not imply causation. Many of the countries listed have always banned guns or in general don't have easy ways to get them illegally. Not all countries have the same culture, values, ideas, morals, or people as the United States; you can't just make that conclusion.

I'd much rather someone tried to run me over deliberately than get shot with a pistol, not to mention the fact that cars are not designed to kill people.

One shot in a random spot on the body is less likey to kill you than being hit by a car traveling 30 miles per hour (though gunmen don't aim for random spots).

I kind of see the gun issue in the United States as a "floodgates are open" kind of thing. We can't ban guns even if we wanted to, because lawbreakers have access to them and at that point law abiding citizens can't even try to use them to defend themselves.

Gun control like background checks, etc. isn't bad, as long as regular citizens can have firearms to defend themselves. I basically like the laws exactly as they are now.

An interesting argument I'm ripping directly from Penn and Teller is that the Second Amendment is designed to allow violent overthrow of the US Government if the need should ever arise. If only police had guns, it would make oppression significantly easier. I'm not advocating violent overthrow of the US Government, but it's an interesting perspective.

 

[Caelum]

In the US, I do believe people have the right to maintain arms under the 2nd Amendment (an Amendment I don't believe should be repealed). I have to wonder though, where does the limit on "arms" stop? For example, I don't believe I should have the constitutional right (nor do I currently lol) to keep a nuclear weapon in my basement; but what about a semi-automatic weapon? I don't believe all arms are bad, but a ban (maybe not a ban; but a strong restriction) on assault weapons would probably do quite well. The idea of overthrowing your government was of much more concern back in the 1700s; today, I can't imagine many (okay, a few nuts maybe) would even consider overthrowing the United States government violently.


I personally believe some "arms" are too danger to be kept by private citizens with our current system. At a minimum, I believe we need stronger restrictions and it needs to be more difficult to access assault weapons. Despite the current laws in place, they are quite easy to get around and that needs to be put to a stop. While certainly guns don't cause crime and no law would end criminals access to them; a strong restriction would certainly go a long way.

 

[Force Majeure]

My strongest feeling on gun control is that the assault weapons ban needs to be reinstated, and quickly.

 

[Polis4rule]

As far as I know Caelum, the US does prohibit assault weapons for most people. I think you can still apply for a special permit, but if my memory serves me correctly, it's virtually limited to people in the military or working for a law enforcement department of the government.

EDIT by TAY: There was an assault weapons ban; however, it expired a few years ago. The Obama administration has mentioned plans to reinstate it.

 

[Janenmori]

The Democrat-raised side of me, though, says that in our current system there is absolutely NO logical reason to own a handgun. Their sole purpose is for humans to kill other humans*, and that to me is why they should be outlawed.

The reason one would own a handgun, is for protection or for sport. Handguns are easy to quickly draw and fire and can be kept in a small area, for example on one's nightstand. Sport shooting is another reason one would own a handgun. It requires skill and practice to get good with it, and although it is recreational, it serves a purpose and is really fucking fun.

*This statement is a little blunt. Guns CAN kill another humans, but it is not their SOLE purpose. They can be used by an outdoorsman for protection, which is a reason that I carry one in the woods to protect against bears and cougars and whatnot. They can be used recreationally. Saying that guns are simply designed for killing other people is a bit extreme. Actually operating a firearm in reality is a lot different than talking about how dangerous they are in theory.

(and anything semi-auto or auto, that shit's fucking ridiculous).

Semi-auto weapons are a bit frivolous yes, but again it comes down to recreational shooting. No one wants to keep pulling that bolt back and forth. Shooting a semi-auto in rapid succession also takes skill to do accurately. Automatic weapons, if I recall correctly, are banned in the U.S. to anyone outside law enforcement or the military. That does not stop people from modifying weapons illegally, though.

EDIT: chris is me beat me to it

^Another point I would like to make is that worse come to worse, guns are the people's security against the government. They allow the people rebel in case of a corruption of the government, however unlikely this may be.

 

[Kalypso]

I only really have one comment for this discussion- Those who advocate large-scale gun legislation that severely limits the number of guns in private citizens households need only think so to prevent gun accidents. Many seem to want guns abolished to lower the incidence of crime, and it's silly. Criminals don't follow laws, if you take guns away from all the private citizens you make it much easier for criminals to do what they do. If you want to stop crime, giving guns to everyone makes more sense. Not that I advocate either option.

 

[sbc]

Correlation does not imply causation. Many of the countries listed have always banned guns or in general don't have easy ways to get them illegally. Not all countries have the same culture, values, ideas, morals, or people as the United States; you can't just make that conclusion.

Yes fair enough, but I'd argue that the illegal access to guns stems from the availability of them in the first place as has been mentioned before, via burglary whilst otherwise they would have to be smuggled into the country mainly which obviously makes it harder for criminals to get their hands on guns.

One shot in a random spot on the body is less likey to kill you than being hit by a car traveling 30 miles per hour (though gunmen don't aim for random spots).

I kind of see the gun issue in the United States as a "floodgates are open" kind of thing. We can't ban guns even if we wanted to, because lawbreakers have access to them and at that point law abiding citizens can't even try to use them to defend themselves.

Gun control like background checks, etc. isn't bad, as long as regular citizens can have firearms to defend themselves. I basically like the laws exactly as they are now.

If someone ran you over deliberately at 30 miles an hour, quoting from road safety ads there is a ~80% chance of survival, if someone shot you deliberately there's nothing you can do to stop a someone launching a bullet into your head from 2 metres away. I'd prefer my chances at dodging the car going 10 times slower.

An interesting argument I'm ripping directly from Penn and Teller is that the Second Amendment is designed to allow violent overthrow of the US Government if the need should ever arise. If only police had guns, it would make oppression significantly easier. I'm not advocating violent overthrow of the US Government, but it's an interesting perspective.

Hence the amendment is outdated.

 

[Deck Knight]

Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

Criminals are defined by their lack of concern for the law. No matter how strict gun control is a criminal will always have a gun if they want one.

Virginia Tech was a "firearms free zone" ... except for the crazy kid with the firearm.

10 per 100,000? Big deal. 300 million population is 3 thousand 100,000s.

So 30,000 people in the US get murdered via firearms in a year and all of a sudden government needs to act? What we need is firearms education, not restriction.

A gun is a weapon for defense. The threat of lethal force is enough to deter most criminals without firing a shot. The capability of lethal force is for the bastards who don't run away. Do you own a machete? You could lob an arm off with that easily, or tie someone up and behead them without incident, yet no one bloviates about how machetes are for the sole purpose of dismemberment. No one complains that you could hang a man with a rope, a ladder, and a tall tree. No one bans rivers because some woman might decide to drown five of her kids in one.

Let us ban everything that anyone could possibly use for a murder weapon. Chuck Norris' foot is first to go.

 

[CaptKirby]

Deck Knight, the kid who had the gun had it because of your logic. That is terribly hypocritical argumentation.

Furthermore, your argument that people will get them no matter what is patently fraudulent. Ordinary people will not be willing to go to the length of using a black market/whatever to get guns. Ordinary people who get guns and then do something criminal now do it because of ease. Desperate people or very driven people might still relentlessly pursue access to guns otherwise, but not ordinary (lazy) people. Getting rid of the guns everyone already has certainly would be a highly expensive and impossible task though.

ferron, the United States mafia was not imported; it sprung up due to Prohibition/easy gun access/some other factors, at least as far as I have heard. If that is wrong, then my apologies, it is not something I care about, as I hate mafiaosos.

DM, your point is the best in this topic so far (though I mostly skimmed each post). With drug influence decreased, this would also be less of a contentious issue. That does not excuse the times it still matters though, unarmed people dying from guns, although it conversely gets very messy to argue how many would die without guns to defend themselves of course.

 

[Surgo]

Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

Criminals are defined by their lack of concern for the law. No matter how strict gun control is a criminal will always have a gun if they want one.

I would seriously be alright with more law-abiding citizens, myself included, having handguns if it wasn't for the fact that some nutcase could pull my door open, search through my closet or wherever the hell I end up putting it, and then leave with it and shoot some other person tomorrow or next week.

Let's be clear though: handguns are the real problem here. The guy in his house with a shotgun up on the wall behind his bed might be making the entire neighborhood less safe by having that shotgun, but not noticeably so. The ridiculously huge crime statistics, and the ones we all care about, are crimes committed with handguns.

 

[highstakespkmn]

There's a clear correlation between the availability of guns and the number of intentional kills with firearms.

Can't argue with statistics, huh? Yes, you fucking can, and this graph is bogus. I refuse to take this graph to mean anything. The filthy libtards are at it again. They want to take away your rights so they can have total control over you eventually. Don't you see what is happening? Anyway, back to why the graph is bogus (in 3 reasons, each of them standing on their own):

1. The "intentional kill" wording makes me think that the graph includes suicide as well as homicide. Per year, only slightly over a half million murders are committed, while over a million suicides are committed. So the majority of the graph is basically how people choose to commit suicide related to the prevalence of guns.

2. One of the big arguments for being allowed to own guns is for responsible citizens to defend themselves. If crime rates are low, you have little to no reason to carry a gun for self-defense. So yeah, it would make sense that the places with more murders, people are more likely to want to own guns for their own self defense. So what is causing what? The gun ownership causing murders, or other incentives for murder causing murders, which in turn causes gun ownership?

3. Note again, number of intentional kills with firearms. Why do you think they are graphing that rather than number of total murders? Cause if someone wants to kill someone that bad, they are probably going to do it anyway, and they probably couldn't get as good of a correlation with that or the correlation didn't exist at all. Just use some common sense. The majority of people dont say "WOO GUNS ARE LEGAL NOW LETS GO SHOOT SOME PEOPLE". That's not how murders happen. Incentive to murder causes murders, not guns. Cut down on poverty, take away the illegal drug markets by legalizing drugs. That's how you lower murder statistics.

 

[CaptKirby]

I never knew that I was filthy or retarded for being a liberal and wanting reasons to rid the United States of rampant gun ownership. After all, I shower quite regularly and attend a university..where, pray tell, did I go so wrong!