Guns - TTLG Forums

PigLick on 13/6/2016 at 13:47

I do believe that may have had something to do with it

scumble on 13/6/2016 at 13:49

Or maybe it's those drugs you've just scored...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

PigLick on 13/6/2016 at 13:49

dammit

scumble on 13/6/2016 at 14:12

Well this was an interesting derail.

Don't use guns, use the c word.

Mr.Duck on 13/6/2016 at 17:49

As someone who comes from a country where a lot (or most, tbh) of the gun violence -in a country already more violent and dangerous than the US- is a direct consequence of the US selling (legally or otherwise) guns that end up in criminal hands, I have this to say: fuck you US and your goddamn 2nd amendment.

That is all I have to say on the matter. Good day.

PS. Anyone trying to argue with me, don't. I already left this thread.

PSS. *Shags scumble* <3

scumble on 13/6/2016 at 18:01

Yes, but make sure you shag everyone first.

demagogue on 14/6/2016 at 05:23

Did I already post in here?

Guns are one thing, but I'd want to get to the root of violence with mental health services, develop poor neighborhoods & bring economic opportunities to areas with gangs, do a better job of teaching tolerance in schools and get the religious communities on board, and legalize drugs already.

And apparently I missed the Piggeh Pride Fest. All I see is an avalanche of deleted posts without knowing what they were. Too bad. (-_-);

heywood on 14/6/2016 at 13:53

I would put more effort on suicide prevention first, since that is by far the largest cause of gun deaths. And consider whether any reasonable gun control measures could be targeted specifically at reducing suicides. Then redirect the bulk of anti-terrorism resources at gangs, which are widely believed to be the second biggest source of gun deaths.

There are on average over 50 gun deaths per day from people committing suicide in the US, and it gets no media attention. But if a Muslim shoots 50 people in a nightclub, it will be the lead story for a month. While terrorist attacks and other mass shootings are tragic, they kill so few people that they hardly qualify as a public health menace.

Also, to keep things in perspective:

Inline Image:

http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Screen-Shot-2016-04-05-at-Tuesday-April-5-1.05-AM.png

Mass shootings are picked up by the media globally whenever they occur in the US, but most mass shootings in other countries are only covered by national media.

Vivian on 14/6/2016 at 14:13

Isn't that stuff from the (http://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/comparing-death-rates-from-mass-public-shootings-in-the-us-and-europe/) Crime Research Prevention Center? The one run by (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lott) Fox gun rights columnist John Lott? Not to ad hominen, but that kind of baggage has to demand a pinch of salt at least.

hahhahah and they have (http://crimeresearch.org/about-us/) Ted fucking Nugent on the board of directors, ok then sure, I'm convinced they're on the level

catbarf on 14/6/2016 at 14:30

Quote Posted by faetal

If the US treated guns as a hobby or a sport, there probably wouldn't be anywhere near the same level of problem. For me, it's this idea that gun ownership turns each individual into a sovereign nation by bestowing the capability to destroy anyone who goes near your freedoms*. The problem of course being that society doesn't work like that - freedoms of individuals within society are necessarily consensus-based (or should be, if governments weren't bought) so one person deciding that their ability to trade shots with someone they disagree with strongly enough equates to their freedom doesn't fit. The problem is nothing to do with people who enjoy going to shooting ranges or hunting. But having so many guns in so many hands in a country which grew from a frontier mentality and is full of aggressive notions about rights and shows of force and you're bound to end up with a problem.

The other issue is supply. If you send teams of police out into the streets on a weekly basis to confiscate guns from drug dealers etc, the vast amount of guns in the US means they can re-stock easily. Illegal guns don't just wink into existence, they start out somewhere as legal guns and there are a lot of them. If guns did disappear from the US overnight, gun crime would fall year on year because after a lag period, the illegal gun pool would begin to dry up too.

I don't disagree with any of this. American culture is very resistant to imposition on a mentality of personal freedom that was more at home when we actually had a frontier and mostly-rural population. I do think there are some legitimate arguments to be made- for example, personal responsibility for your safety is a lot more important if you live someplace where the police response time is thirty minutes or more- but I consistently see some absolutely awful arguments for unrestricted access to guns born out of 'muh freedoms'.

I think you're right that guns would start to dry up following a ban, but I think there are other factors that need to be considered- like I mentioned before, criminologists estimate anywhere from 300k to over 1mil defensive gun uses per year in the US depending on who you ask, and the question of how an armed populace affects petty crime is conjecture at best. In an ideal world we wouldn't have all these guns in the first place, but since we have so many already in criminal hands I think legislation has to consider how removing the legally-owned ones will affect things in the intervening decades before that illegal supply dries up.

Quote Posted by faetal

Do you have some data on the spike in violent crime after firearm bans? That sounds like something I'll need to look at for a bit before I comment.

(http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2012/08/some-notes-on-claims-about-australias.html) Here's a blog post (disclaimer: John Lott, but the stats are publicly sourced data) talking about Australia's stats. (http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/UK-Firearm-Homicide-Rate.png) Here's a graph showing the UK's firearm homicide rate before and after the ban.