Jump to content

US Politics


Thorgi Duke of Frisbee
 Share

  

20 members have voted

  1. 1. Death Penalty

    • Yay
    • Nay
    • Case-by-case
    • I judge from afar in my death penalty-less country


Recommended Posts

Well but that was my whole point, I agree with the "knives are just as dangerous" argument, but only within a very narrow set of circumstances.

 

Also, I really want to get some crazy fast-firing gun and try to cut a steak with it now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To put it out there, the furthest I would compromise on gun regulation would be reduced down rifles (semi to bolt) and shotguns. Those can actually be tools that a person might need out in semi rural to rural areas. To ban it out there would be down right silly. For something that can apply to everybody... the almighty home defense option. Very icky option, I know. There should be a gun education course to go along side with any of the above and of course, the background checks and stuff.

 

And I would love to see a gun cutting a steak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To put it out there, the furthest I would compromise on gun regulation would be reduced down rifles (semi to bolt) and shotguns. Those can actually be tools that a person might need out in semi rural to rural areas. To ban it out there would be down right silly.

 

Damn, straight! In the outskirts of town there are coyotes. Down at The Grapevine there are mountain lions. In the foothills there are bears. Foxes show up now and again, but a shotgun blast will scare them away from the chicken coop. It's a necessary tool of life out here.

 

Edit: To clarify, I have worked in the food industry, from cattle and crops (both organic and non-organic) to food processing in large facilities. To ensure a crop, and for the safety of the livestock and ranch hands, shotguns are typical. Mountain lions are of particular importance. Terribly dangerous, especially when hungry.

Edited by TheRevanchist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty much the only reason my father ever got a .44 Magnum was because of bears and cougars. We use to live in Alaska, so it was strictly for bears. Once you get into the slightly warmer parts of North America, then you have cougars. Essentially, if you're in the West, you could find a cougar if you went out into the wilderness.

 

Knew a guy who use to work for a national park (forget which one), and always carried a gun. Never had to use it until a cougar was literally perched two feet above his head on a hillside about to pounce. I'm told that if you happen to see a cougar close to you, you can safely assume it has been stalking you. There's barely any reason why a cougar would be casually appearing near you.

 

The only animals I've ever had to worry about in my life are coyotes, mainly for my grandmother's dogs. Didn't really have to once she got a Rottweiler that could go on a rampage when threatened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should maybe throw out, for those that don't know, but we don't have a blanket ban on fire arms in the UK. Mainly handguns from the '97 lw. Can still own various air rifles, and shotguns under license. Mainly for farmers and hunting. And since Dunblane in '96 there has only been one mass killing in the UK. Of course as noted in many places theres a fair amount of cultural differences at play such as not having gun ownership as our second commandment amendment n the free mental health stuff (if that's something in play with all this, I personally think not. At least on a general scale, it's clear some are a bit warped but so are many others that wouldn't think of shooting up people).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To ban it out there would be down right silly.

 

Agreed. I suppose I should be a bit clear about what I think is reasonable regulation too.

 

The gun show loophole is absurd, and people are cartwheeling through it neatly. The rest of the laws mean nothing at all if people can drive to one of those and load up. It basically exists to circumvent the law and get guns into more people's hands.

 

Once laws can't be danced around, I honestly think that guns & ammo (perhaps an emphasis on the latter) should get some variation of the car treatment. Specifics might include anything from periodic check-ins to refresher courses or even insurance. The point is to treat sales/ownership like the responsibility it is, both on the side of the owner, and on the side of the authorities that determine the legal boundaries on the vendors' side. Which also means that even beyond giant loopholes, the industry could use a healthy dose of policing. I would like to think that the matter of trafficking is already dealt with as it is encountered, but I get the impression that much of the industry has been pretty carefree about the way they do business.

 

That's what I think is a reasonable realm of regulation to work towards in this the US. I wouldn't suggest that we try to outlaw sales or ownership, for many reasons. It's not even worth considering. I generally don't see people suggesting it either, but I see a whole lot of people using the threat of it as a reason to get worked up, which is something I find worrisome. I'm pretty sure that in my (first) long-ass post in here I mentioned the fact that I see the NRA as a huge problem, and what I described is part of the reason why. And that silly (and potentially dangerous) ad with Obama's family. Everything is the hate/fear angle with them, and it seems completely clear to me that they are just endorsing a product. At the expense of whatever the hell it might result in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ethan: Something unfortunate happened. We must immediately come to sweeping and radical decisions. Something or someone must be blamed or we will not feel better about ourselves and our lives! RIGHT THIS WRONG! NO CHILD LEFT BE—wait, that was something else. You may as well ban people, as they're the lousy good-for-nothings truly responsible for everything.

Edited by Saturnine Tenshi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

By that logic I should be allowed to have an M1-A1 Abrams Main Battle Tank because people are going to do horrible things anyway and there's no point in limiting the tools they have access to with which to do those things.

 

If it's just how people are then why doesn't this stuff happen (nearly as frequently) in the rest of the world?

 

*Edit* - Also, I like how you equate thinking there's a problem we maybe should address with over-emotional reactionism. It is possible to react in a "we need to do something" way while still being calmly rational.

Edited by TheMightyEthan
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was being flippant when I began, so I guess I deserve it in return.

 

That's the thing: this does happen around the world. I think that was on the same day, actually. Maybe not so often with guns, but it happens. And even if it didn't, people aren't going on killing sprees because they have guns. (And let's not forget that there's research by rational anti-gun folk that illustrates no correlation between gun ownership her capita and murder rate.) I'll go search for it again if you like, but I already posted it in the status update and Dean just went on about how UK laws are the best thing since french toast.

 

As far as why it doesn't happen as often . . . well, I don't know that it doesn't happen as often. If that's the case, then it's certainly not an issue of gun ownership and more an issue of the culture of the good old US of A. Which, again, isn't something you're going to change through oversimplification.

 

Because that's how you're acting, Ethan. Maybe not you in particular, but it's this sort of knee-jerk, media-fueled crap that I'd think you guys would be used to. I suppose not.

Edited by Saturnine Tenshi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And in that Chinese knife attack, how many people died?

 

I know guns aren't the problem, they're not even most of the problem, but the easy availability of certain kinds of them is part of the problem, and it's a part that can be addressed.

 

I don't think guns should be (or legally can be) banned, but you can institute more rigorous checks before people buy them, and get rid of loopholes like the gunshow stuff, and make it a national system rather than state-by-state, and put limits on the size of clips allowed, etc etc. Those measures, of course, would only address a part of the problem, and would need to be enacted in conjunction with other efforts such as actually funding public mental health services, rather than just paying lip service to it, and I'm sure other things (education? social programs? I'm admittedly no expert on this subject, so I don't know what all goes into affecting this stuff).

 

The violence culture is definitely the root problem, but that's not something that can really be addressed with top-down solutions, at least not directly. If you can think of a way to do so I'm all ears. But just because we can't fix it completely doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking for things that we can do.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I was more highlighting that we don't have a blanket ban since the impression I've seen from many US based posters is they think other countries have a complete and utter ban on gun ownership which makes many americans balk when it isn't the case. I did highlight, as many have done that there is likely a deep seated cultural thing within the US that certainly makes it more prevalent, but as Ethan has noted gun ownership is one of the easiest things to resolve and certainly won't hurt.

 

Also as Ethan noted it's a bit hypocritical to say everyone is being "emotional soccer moms" and proceed to act the way you have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the thing: this does happen around the world. I think that was on the same day, actually. Maybe not so often with guns, but it happens. And even if it didn't, people aren't going on killing sprees because they have guns. you guys would be used to. I suppose not.

 

I remember that story. A bunch of alive children at the end of it, right? Why would you use that as an example in your argument? It highlights why a similar action taken in a society without guns lying around for the picking has a better outcome than the one that forces a national debate.

 

But I'm more interested in the philosophy itself.

 

"Look, crazy shit happens, what are we supposed to do, make an effort to blunt the effects of crazy shit?"

 

Actually, yeah, that's exactly what we're supposed to do. Police haven't made crime extinct, but we still use them. Seatbelts and drunk driving laws haven't made the road invariably safe, but it sure as hell has saved a lot of lives. Can you think of even ONE other problem for which society goes "Well, since we can't completely eradicate it at its roots, we may as well do nothing. Actually, let's facilitate it."? Once you come up with the answer "no", tell me why you think it is that guns are the exception.

 

Labeling something knee-jerk doesn't necessarily automatically make the reaction wrong. It's actually a knee-jerk reaction to plug your ears as soon as something is identified as a knee-jerk reaction. This isn't exactly a brand new discussion, it's just gotten very heated recently. As I pointed out in the posts that you saw fit to mock before dignifying with a response, the problem is much bigger than Sandy Hook, Sandy Hook was just the last straw.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What (I think) the Chinese stabbing spree and perhaps the Swedish (If you guys can remember that one and I'll admit I don't know their gun culture) shooting spree shows the mental health side of these kind of acts very strongly.

 

For our homegrown stuff... Sandy Hook is for sure the last straw. In our lifetime (I know there are a bunch of other stuff even further back), we as a country have been kicking this can down the road after every major shooting. We done nothing but some superficial fix or just plain lip service. Time to get something done.

 

As a side story... I was in a minor shooting while at school. Kind of humorous. It was during my community college days and I regularly take naps in my car with the radio on. One day I heard my CC mentioned with a shooting. Some gang member popped rival in the ass in a parking lot on the other side of campus and fled but at the time, no one knew. Well, it explained all the noise I heard behind me. Cops fully decked out and ready for war. I just laid back down and just mind my business until they came up to check my car and let me leave. Thanks for that since else I would of been stuck there all day.

 

Not sure how my story relates to our topic but eh. Guns. Its just that I have no idea how to stop gang members from getting hold of guns since a good deal can be illegally obtained. So yeah, about that protection... why does it have to be so complicated? :\

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...