Damn your ninja-edit, Sir. DAMN IT I SAY!
2 Likes
You are certainly proving worthy of your salary, Mr. Wham; I daresay the next year shall see it doubled.
3 Likes
Why, I oughtaâŚ
2 Likes
Tut, tut, young man. I believe I hear your grammar-tutor calling.
Â
.
Â
(I think you forgot this on your desk.)
2 Likes
You leave my grandmother out of this!
2 Likes
Assuming that by âthisâ you do not mean âmy bedâ, I shall be happy to oblige.
2 Likes
Every developed country experienced a substantial violent crime decrease between the 80s and now which pretty much balanced out the substantial violent crime increase they experienced between the 60s and the 80s. At all times along that curve, the US had far higher homicide rates than the others.
Anyone who wants to look at facts will be forced to admit you can have a society that has tons of guns around that is not abnormally violent. But Iâm not very convinced you can have a society that values an individualâs right to own guns above the good of the many and not have an abnormally violent society. I donât think that laws restricting guns necessarily cause lower rates of violence* but I also donât think they are unrelated. They both look like results of the same cause to me.
*Except suicide - data (and an understanding of suicidal behaviour) does say that lower gun ownership reduces suicide completions.
Especially if you live in Florida. Donât worry about responsibility there at all.
Suicide completion is in huge part about managing to successfully kill yourself. Maybe you are convinced you would be a suicide virtuoso and would get it right on the first try, but most suicide attempts are failures. Having access to a gun while suicidal is a huge boost to killing yourself. This is reality that is not in dispute by anyone who knows anything about suicide.
6 Likes
That last one is not the only schism in the modern Catholic Church. Mel Gibsonâs (antisemetic) dad follows this schism:
No you donât. You love it here, just like all of us!
1 Like
I love it here. Just like all of us.
3 Likes
Thatâs better⌠I knew youâd see it our way.
5 Likes
@redesigned, I was asking specifically for those kinds of things. If there are âmany successful waysâ and ânumerous other countriesâ I donât know why we only have one countryâs method (Australia) being described in even minimal detail here. Seems like a lot of handwaving - or did I miss something? I donât see âmanyâ or ânumerousâ descriptions or links to descriptions of how these other countries accomplished disarmament without use of force. But Iâd sure like toâŚ
@Electras0l, great posts! That graph is a major contribution to this discussion. Has anyone compared handgun ownership in other countries to see if there are more correlations?
@Phuzz, we have some of that already (so your suggestion that this be a long-term, slow and inexorable process could fit well with our culture) but I want to point out that in my limited experience all weapons and ammo seized by law enforcement in the USA goes home with officers and ends up back on the street in due time. This is true of weapons that are seized without arrest or prosecution as well as those supposedly destroyed or warehoused. Cops often have âcollectionsâ - itâs part of their subculture (along with high rates of spousal abuse and alcoholism.)
@AnonyMouse, Please be aware that the âlikeâ I gave your post #271 was for the second paragraph.
Too late now. Your reticence has been noted, Netizen.
I love it here. Just like all of us.
2 Likes
But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved BB.
5 Likes
You are going off the rails here, how are gun owners producing the same chaos as drivers in Indonesia? Most gun owners in the US are law abiding and are not doing âwhatever the f*ck they feel like with no consideration for anyone elseâ. Everyday people carry firearms for personal defense with no issues, they hunt and shoot for sport with no issues. Gun violence is only a part of everyday life in areas where we have serious issues of poverty and social inequality. Your comparison doesnât make any sense, the similar chaotic results just arenât there.
@LDoBe Guns are durable. I have a few that are approaching 70 years old and they work as well as or better than one I can buy new off the shelf today. Guns are a pretty accessible and somewhat inexpensive hobby compared to some other high cost hobbies. Even a very basic setup could be 2-4 firearms, and you wouldnât even be taking into account having duplicates for multiple family members to use at the same time.
@aeon - Iâm not really up to date on the situation in NZ and it is high on my list to visit for other reasons than sociology and firearms, but I am guessing that the risk would be the same for you in either place - rapidly approaching zero, because the worst of it is highly concentrated in certain areas.
2 Likes
Iâm extraordinarily unlikely to die by gunshot in NZ, unless I go hunting and someone mistakes me for a deer. Homicides using a firearm arenât common and hit the national news.
I understand that the risk of being a gun homicide statistic in the US is much higher in some geographical areas âwhich are almost certainly predominantly socio-economically deprived and probably have been so since slavery, Jim Crow and redlining? So the odds of it being me on the receiving end are slim.
Likewise, the odds of being a gunshot suicide statistic would be low for me as Iâm contented in my own skin and unlikely to try and top myself.
So, thatâs great for me. Therefore I should be able to own all the firearms I want and damn everyone else by ensuring they have as much access as I do, because after all Iâm not going to be a statistic. Kind of selfish, donât you think?
1 Like
The flipside is elitism. Why would I grant myself special privileges that my fellow man should not have? Ensuring the access of others isnât damning them. Unless they are otherwise prohibited (mental health issue, criminal history, etc.) why would I deny them access to the same tools that I use and enjoy? It isnât rooted in being selfish, it is a commitment egalitarian treatment.
It is OK for me since I am educated and safe and can afford to jump through regulatory hoops? That type of ability to pick and choose and discriminate runs a very distinct danger of becoming the Jim Crow that you spoke of.
ETA: and yes - we are all damned to live in a complex world with technology that grants each of us the ability to do tremendous harm. I think we all win by encouraging education and liberty for all, so that we can increase the prosperity of all. We donât win by restricting items and thoughts.
3 Likes
