Date: 2009-04-13 06:41 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] phawkwood.livejournal.com
You're not gonna pitch to me that a couple of anecdotal incidents takes away from the 5,665 homicides by gun (offender over 25 years) in 2005?

Date: 2009-04-13 06:46 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rsmit212.livejournal.com
No, but I'll pitch to you the other 11,027 non-gun murders the same year: Source.
Edited Date: 2009-04-13 06:47 pm (UTC)

Date: 2009-04-13 06:50 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] phawkwood.livejournal.com
I still win, including offenders of all ages: 12,672

My statistics came from here

I don't advocate removing guns from people, but I think stricter controls are necessary.

And I think the over all level of violence in society, in our media, in our every day thinking is much too high.

Date: 2009-04-13 07:46 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rsmit212.livejournal.com
Ok, there's a 2.5-3K difference between the totals.

How can there be 19,126, when there were only 16,692 that year? Statistical shenanigans.

And do you really believe that those murders would not have occurred with more gun laws? We don't even enforce the laws we have now. Let's work on that before calling for more.

The tool is NOT the issue. It is a waste of effort at best, and a criminalization and disenfranchising of otherwise lawful citizens to attack the tool chosen. Foolish and wasteful.

And I agree, the level of violence in our culture is more the cause than the tools used. Seriously look at the data for Australia. I have not been able to find data for the UK, year over year. Solving *why* we're a violent people is far more important to focus on than *how*.

Interesting to note: The homicide *rate* per 100,000 people has not significantly changed in Australia since the 1997 gun buyback program. A variance of < 2% in fact.
Edited Date: 2009-04-13 07:47 pm (UTC)

Date: 2009-04-13 07:57 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] phawkwood.livejournal.com
I actually think that some changes do need to be made in the laws. I agree with strong federal waiting periods and I think that every owner should be licensed. Yes I know that raises a hugh and cry, but I think that I should be registered as a gun owner. I don't have any grand conspiricy theories about the government coming to take my guns, so it doesn't bug me. I don't think ATF should be required to get rid of records.

If the NRA truly believed the "enforce the laws we have" talk, they'd stop trying to roll those laws back.

I think there's strong eveidence that the gun companies have been dumping weapons on the streets to make a profit and that needs to be persewed. There can be no other explanation for than then making profit off of urban violence. And yet everyone leaps to the companies defense crying 2nd amendment.

And yes, we must solve the why, but the how is a lot important. I can defend myself against a guy with a bat (running for example) but somebody with a gun, it's a lot harder to get away from.

I know we're both gonna stick to our positions on this one. I think we can agree to disagree.

Date: 2009-04-13 08:30 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rsmit212.livejournal.com
The major problem with many current laws is that they are just bad laws. I don't have a problem with waiting periods, but, if we're to do a licensing scheme, why do I have to wait on my second or third purchase? There's no thought in the law about that, is there? No.

The NRA is trying to remove the laws that make no sense. Two guns, with the same power and accuracy at all ranges, one is banned cause it "looks" dangerous (has a handle sight and pistol grip) and the other isn't. Bad law made by people that have no idea what they are banning and refuse to meet with people that do know firearms to come to a resolution. There is no communication between the two sides to come to a fair and equitable set of laws. It's Ban or Bust! And yes, to some degree, both sides are at fault.

Trigger locks absolutely defeat the purpose of a self/home-defense weapon. Does it need to be stored properly for the environment it's in? Absolutely. But keep the damn locks out of the picture. There's enough anecdotal evidence of the locks causing shooting accidents than they are worth.

If there's evidence of gun dumping, show it. I've never seen anyone that throws that claim out actually have evidence. None.

I'm sorry that you wish to ignore the fact that most major dictatorships and fascist regimes in the last century, and through history really, started with weapon registry/banning. No, not all registries have turned into dictatorships or fascist regimes. Just the vast majority of them.

The NRA does not fight to remove all laws, just the bad and ill informed laws. Laws that lead to the removal of our rights as protected by the Constitution. Never have they called for the ridiculous such as pocket nukes, rocket launchers, etc. BS rhetoric to pander to the bleeding hearts. And no, they aren't perfect either, but they take a more rational look at the situation then just sitting down wit ha gun catalog and a highlighter and making a list of guns to ban by looks.

Date: 2009-04-13 08:56 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] phawkwood.livejournal.com
I agree there are a lot of bad laws out there. I disagree that the NRA is the "rational" one in the debate however. That's going to be a matter of point of view no matter what.

I think a waiting period is good simply for the cooling off effect. I have no idea if it statistically makes a difference or not, but I don't think a gun should ever be an impulse buy. Having said that, I like the idea of a national licensing set up that would allow you, with sufficient background monitoring to buy guys as you liked.

I agree about trigger locks, but I also think that gun owners who store their weapons inappropriately should be held accountable when they cause harm either accidentally or purposefully.

So you think that the US is going to devolve into 1930's Germany, or some sub Saharan African country? And even if that did happen, do you think that citizens would band together to defeat that? I doubt either one of those things would happen, times are different now then they were 200 years ago.

Don't have time to look into the dumping thing today, if I think of it, I will, you may very well be right on that one. My impression of what I read of the court cases was that there was very strong leanings that looked like dumping, but no beyond a shadow of a doubt proof.

You're going to have a hard time convincing me that a tech-9 style gun is the same as my Glock22. I can defnd myself just as well with the glock and I don't need a 30 round mag in that configuration. If there's some practical reason to arrange the gun like that (and there may very well be, I'm not an expert), fine. Otherwise what's the point?

Date: 2009-04-13 10:43 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rsmit212.livejournal.com
Specific to the two similar guns, they are 30-30, bolt action, 7 round magazine rifles. One has the carry handle sight like an M16 and a pistol grip. All other aspects are the same. The pistol grip one is banned because of the grip. In other words, for no true reason other than it looked like an M16.

Date: 2009-04-13 11:24 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] phawkwood.livejournal.com
I'm not gonna stand up for each decision made, and I really have no information about how this one was reached, but I know in other instances, the policy makers (or more to the point their flunkies) who do this stuff have no special expertise in these things. All kinds of dumb decisions are made simply because the people making them don't know any better.

That is certainly part of the system that needs to be fixed, but my question is how do you fix it, keeping in mind that this is the real world and "sweeping change" is only ever campaign rhetoric.

I'm in favor of allowing people the tools they need to defend themselves, but you're gonna have a tough time convincing me that an SKS with a 40 rnd clip is a more effective tool than something with less capacity. Really unless you're expecting your house to come under siege, I don't see how a long gun is going to help you much at all. Most houses I've been in would qualify as close quarters, and a hand gun is gonna be your best defense.

Profile

rsmit212: (Default)
rsmit212

May 2010

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30 31     

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 24th, 2017 01:29 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios