Guns, I know, not again, can't help myself

[ClakarEQ]

Ganzo, I don't get your point. You don't have to believe it. I feel there is enough organic information to correctly come to that conclusion.

Lets spin this a bit though, lets say I'm wrong, does it matter? Is it the right thing for a mature society to realize that an armed populace is no longer needed? Are you suggesting an armed populace, given what you know, is a better environment to live in? This isn't iseral, we don't have bombs dropping on us, we are probably the most secure nation on the planet given the size and number of people along with the freedoms we have.

If you tweak that graph to show peer nations instead of third world nations mixed up with first world, mature nations, your comment falls to peices and mine is bolstered.
Are you saying we're like Argentina? Also, you should know the top and bottem percents are thrown out anyway and Argentina would probably fall off alltogether.

And Spazz, I havn't really offered any "solutions", just my blanket statements. If we were to do what other nations have done, it could be a boom for some folks. What if the GOV offered, through lottery, 1k buy back for every weapon you forefieghted? Would you give up your weapons? Would most? I would never want to see our military or police going door to door demanding weapons, I would argree that this would never work.

If we over the course of 10 years, said that we will give 1,000.00 for every gun returned, selected by lottery, and that after 10 years, all firearms are deemed illegal and should any firearm be found after that date, you can and will be subjected to felony possession of a firearm, whats the big deal? You can still go hunt on private property just don't get caught and don't use up all your ammo.

[Ganzo]

Ganzo, I don't get your point. You don't have to believe it. I feel there is enough organic information to correctly come to that conclusion.

You claimed it was a fact. If it is a fact I don't need to believe it is the difference between faith and fact. If it is your conclusions, then don't blame others for not recognizing them as facts and call them idiots for it.

Lets spin this a bit though, lets say I'm wrong, does it matter?

It does when you call people idiots for not recognizing your beliefs as facts. This makes you sound like a bible thumper

If you tweak that graph to show peer nations instead of third world nations mixed up with first world, mature nations, your comment falls to peices and mine is bolstered.

If you are going to bring in more variables into this, such as GDP, poverty, incomes, crime levels, etc..; then this graph will be even more convoluted and meaningless. My point is this graph is nothing but a show of correlation and without a factual study to show causality this graph is about as valid as the one I've posted before.

Also, you should know the top and bottem percents are thrown out anyway and Argentina would probably fall off alltogether.

In that case US would fall off too as an outlier, while Argentina would stay as it is closer to the mean.

[Reynaldo]

Reading this does make me think: If a crazy dude boosted a school bus on the way home from school and then drove it off a cliff killing the same amount of kids, what sort of reaction would the country be having.

[ClakarEQ]

Ganzo, facts have been provided, you just don't like them.

You can find whatever fringe you want, I really don't care, I can throw you in the idiot bucket just as quick as you can place me there.

Are you going to tell me that logic no longer applies when it comes to guns and gun violence?

You can't dispute the fact that less guns = less gun violence, that chart provides no exception to the factual statement I'm making.

Proof of my statement:
Q: Would gun violence exist if no gun existed?
A: No

So, where is the flaw in logic here when I say; FACT: less gun = less gun violence? That if you do not agree then you're an idiot (ie. foolish, stupid)?

BTW, this is no belief, it's a fact. One you just can't come to terms with it seems.

[Gypsiyee]

Reading this does make me think: If a crazy dude boosted a school bus on the way home from school and then drove it off a cliff killing the same amount of kids, what sort of reaction would the country be having.

That it was a tragedy and a horrific event; but no one would say to ban school busses, and imo rightfully so until 1) school busses transform into an item that is only useful for doing harm and 2) school bus hijackings/car jackings/whatever have you account for the majority of the nation's homicides and violent crimes.

But that won't ever happen because to hijack a bus, you need to exert physical force and actually win a battle where you overpower someone to take control of the vehicle.. unless, of course, you're hijacking someone with the threat of a pistol in their face. Guns are a quick wham bam thank you ma'am with no physicality, no strategy, no thinking, no close physical contact, and little to no risk required allowing it to be very simple to cause permanent damage with no commitment. Essentially, guns are always going to be the lazy crazy's weapon of choice.

My opinion, purely speculation: I'd wager that the majority of firearm homicides are not carried out by committed killers married to the idea of the carnage. You can usually tell the people who are sincerely committed to killing and doing permanent damage, I think.. the true psychopaths who dedicate months to a plan, who intricately plan out every single detail, who want to go out in a blaze of glory, who put serious effort into the uniqueness of their plan so that they can go down in history infamous. The mind of a real killer is a complex thing.. they're willing to put in the effort because they're devoted to it. A killing tool so simple as a gun just makes it easy for wannabes and copycats who lack that same dedication to pull off the same carnage.

That probably sounds like I'm glorifying murderous psychopaths re-reading it, but I'm not.. I'm just saying, look at the history of the most infamous killers in history. Creative, cunning, manipulative.. I'm willing to bet that most of those shooting up schools in bouts of rage would never have become killers if it required the same devotion and execution as the truly deranged. No one has to agree with me on that, obviously, but I'm just saying.

[Ganzo]

Ganzo, facts have been provided, you just don't like them.

Where can you show at least one

You can't dispute the fact that less guns = less gun violence, that chart provides no exception to the factual statement I'm making.

Declaring something a fact does not make it so, it requires evidence. Can you provide any besides a flawed picture that could have been drawn on baseless numbers by Brin, 5 minutes before he posted it.

Proof of my statement:
Q: Would gun violence exist if no gun existed?
A: No

Great but it has nothing to do with the topic, the question is would reducing the amount of legally purchased guns reduce gun violence.

Are you going to tell me that logic no longer applies when it comes to guns and gun violence?

So, where is the flaw in logic here when I say; FACT: less gun = less gun violence? That if you do not agree then you're an idiot (ie. foolish, stupid)?

The flaw is that you are basing your logic on perception not on evidence. Example: "I can't see past the horizon so logically Earth is flat"

BTW, this is no belief, it's a fact. One you just can't come to terms with it seems.

Once again can't simply claim something is a fact because you belive it to be so, need to provide proof

[ClakarEQ]

Great but it has nothing to do with the topic, the question is would reducing the amount of legally purchased guns reduce gun violence.

Who asked this question? This statement / question you've made as nothing to do with mine. I made no reference to legal or otherwise, you spin master you

I'm asking if you believe this is a fact, it requires absolutely zero evidence or data, it is a logic based question.

less guns = less gun violence.

What you're asking for is akin to me stating this as a fact, BTW it is a fact.

less missile launches into Israel = less deaths in Israel by missile attack (yes to hit home a bit to better conclude you're flawed thoughts)

Is that a fact? If you say it is not a fact then this MUST without question be true

less missile launches into Israel != less deaths ...

less missile ... = more death ... (this does not compute)

You see how that logic doesn't work . . . ?

Again, I'm sorry you're unable to come to terms with this logic, but frankly that isn't my problem, it's yours.

You can take my words out of context as you have, it changes nothing though, the fact I've stated is just that /shrug, it requires no evidence, and I never posted any, because I didn't need to. I thanked those that took the time to post graphs and links. Don't apply the flawed logic in your mind to me as you're doing right now.

Please now, quote away on me . I suppose one hang-up you can't release yourself from is facts do not require statistical data in any form, not sure you knew that. Just because I chose to use what others provide changes nothing in my logic.

[Harrison]

God, I'm glad nutjobs like Clakar are in the minority.

Outlaw all guns? Fucking. Lawl.

[ClakarEQ]

Yeah, I know, wanting less guns is such a bad thing. That's ok though, that's what makes this country so great, I'll take that as a pat on the back harri, thanks

[Harrison]

Sorry guys, you can't feed your families. There's people out there that think inanimate objects spontaneously create societal problems all on their own.

Lol what hippie drug-addled nonsense

Poverty, drug abuse, prohibition? Nah, it's just the guns themselves. Hurr durr

[ClakarEQ]

I never said it's the gun themselves, people kill people with guns, not guns themselves, as if you didn't know tough guy /chuckle.

Yet if there were no guns, how again would people kill people with guns? Are you able to answer me that? You can turn a blind eye all you want, it's ok. Wisdom comes with age and experience, you'll get there one day.

Now be a good little troll and quip something fast.

[Drem]

You're being pretty naive tho

Sure, your logic is right, but it's also impossible

[Jay]

You're being pretty naive tho

Sure, your logic is right, but it's also impossible

Sorry Clak I'm with Drem on this one. Old doesn't = wise. You can rationalize "...in a world with no guns" if you want but Narnia doesn't exist and Earth does, with plenty of guns in it. What we need here are practical solutions not ideological utopian nonsense.

[Tikker]

.

[Kaemon]

[Spazz]

Im gonna throw this out there... There is so much shit that kills so many people a year it really rings with a flase note when people obsess about guns. I think booze and guns are a great comparison I really do. Other things like cars serve a everyday purpose but booze and guns really have a lot in common. Most people use that shit and go about there day but in the hands of a moron death of self and others seems to happen quite a bit. Also it totally ruins families the irresponsible user doesnt just affect themselves. You dont need it. Theres no reason to have it. Most people can use it responsibly but surely if it wasnt so easily available quite a few deaths could be prevented. Last but not least it kills way more people than guns and serves no purpose at all other than its fun and you want to have it.

One of you guys who likes to argue with me come on out and tell me that anything I just said doesnt add up.Some one man up and tell me that the 2 dont compare. Some one man up and tell me that the world wouldmt be a better safer place with no booze in production at all. Criminals ruled the streets when one was made illegal and I dont see a ban on the other IN AMERICA not having the exact same affects least not with drug prohibition and mandatory sentencing laws.


• Each year approximately 16,000 are killed in alcohol related crashes

thats just crashes not assault or rape or any of the other fun shananagins. Im pretty sure without looking that blows assault rifles out of the water.

Some of you dont really give a fuck about a safer society guns just give you an icky feeling inside and thats what it really boils down to. If you were really serious about getting rid of needless deaths in this country ...


I wont argue that guns dont lead to a lot of senseless tragedy but they dont take the prize at all and im just wondering why you dont want to protect the childen.

Ill be around all night.

[Spazz]

Drug use, especially alcohol, is frequently involved in rape. In 47% of rapes, both the victim and the perpetrator had been drinking. In 17%, only the perpetrator had been. 7% of the time, only the victim had been drinking. Rapes where neither the victim nor the perpetrator had been drinking were 29% of all rapes.[37]

The U.S. Department of Justice Report on Alcohol and Crime found that alcohol abuse was a factor in 40 percent of violent crimes committed in the U.S.

About 3 million violent crimes occur each year in which victims perceive the offender to have been drinking at the time of the offense. Among those victims who provided information about the offender's use of alcohol, about 35 percent of the victimizations involved an offender who had been drinking. About two-thirds of the alcohol-involved crimes were characterized as simple assaults.

Two-thirds of victims who suffered violence by an intimate (a current or former spouse, boyfriend, or girlfriend) reported that alcohol had been a factor. Among spouse victims, 3 out of 4 incidents were reported to have involved an offender who had been drinking. By contrast, an estimated 31 percent of stranger victimizations where the victim could determine the absence or presence of alcohol were perceived to be alcohol-related.

An estimated 32 percent of fatal accidents involved an intoxicated driver or pedestrian (the majority are drivers, however) with a blood alcohol concentration, or BAC, of at least 0.10 grams of alcohol per deciliter of blood, the most commonly used definition of intoxication.


Among the 5.3 million convicted offenders under the jurisdiction of corrections agencies in 1996, nearly 2 million, or about 36 percent, were estimated to have been drinking at the time of the offense. The vast majority, about 1.5 million, of these alcohol-involved offenders were sentenced to supervision in the community: 1.3 million on probation and more than 200,000 on parole.

An analysis dependence among trauma center patients found that the prevalence of alcoholism was substantially higher among vehicular crash victims and other trauma patients than among the equivalent general population group. More than half of trauma patients with a positive BAC at the time of the trauma were diagnosed as alcoholics, and nearly 1 in 7 patients who were not drinking at the time of the trauma were diagnosed as alcohol-dependent.

http://alcoholism.about.com/cs/costs/a/aa980415.htm


We really do have a dangerous problem in our country that due to powerful lobbying groups and misguided individuals we are powerless to do anything aboot .

Stats and numbers are fun.

[Menelvir]

Logic is about form, not truth-values. Logic doesn't infer the truth or falsity of a lone assertion.

To arrive a true conclusion, you need true premises.

Based on simple accumulation, numbers of guns have steadily risen over time (existing guns + newly-produced guns).

I'm not necessarily against the idea of certain restrictions, but in regard to more broadly sweeping reforms, up to and including prohibition of firearms, I don't find the statement 'less guns = less gun violence' particularly compelling impetus for doing so.

If you're interested, here is an article in Slate that discusses how many assault rifles there may be in America, as well as the possible cost of buying them back à la the Australian approach.

The article doesn't mention anything about other costs (lost jobs or revenues due to halting or drastically slowing production), nor the funds that would be required to implement, manage, and oversee any such endeavor.

[ClakarEQ]

A couple things and I'll fade into the sunset for a bit leaving you all in peace .

My logic has no flaw and it is completely obtainable, not an impossibility. It won't happen, I know that, just like my desire to outlaw guns. That doesn't make me want it less and it doesn't cause fault in my logic.

My digs to age and wisdom regarding harri was troll food, plain and simple. You all should have known that :p

I've been vary calculated in my use of = over "equal" to convey a formula of sorts and not "words". It's not like I can't be long winded (i.e. I didn't write "equal" for a reason) /chuckle.

I find it truly unfortunate that folks live in our nation today that feel guns are the answer to gun crime. That guns solve things other than create sorrow. That an armed populace is a required component to be alive or safe or whatever fiction you want to invent.

Of course I want that unreachable utopia, don't you? If any action in today's world can be taken that is a grain of sand on the scale to tilt me towards that utopia why wouldn't I do it? Why wouldn't you? This goes across the spectrum of my diatribes. I want a better world, a safer world.

I feel at times folks would rather do nothing to fix what’s broken because the effort is just too great, too much sacrifice, too much change. These folks will be left in the dust if I had my way for you are nothing but a drag on society and our ability to move forward, towards that "impossible" utopia.

Why try at all right? Let’s just quit before we start. That will fix things, that will make it better.

I wish you all the best and a safe / happy new year. I'll catch you all in a few months perhaps.

[Spazz]

You intellectual cowards dont want to take on my argument ? Figures.

[Reynaldo]

Good listen from the NRA head today talking about how we guard everything we love (money/banks, office buildings, airports) with armed officers, yet we leave our children completely vulnerable at unarmed schools.

Regardless of anyone's stance on 100% yes guns or 100% no guns at all, that really kind of makes me sick to my stomach when put in that perspective that of all things we leave wide open to killers, it's our children

[Kaemon]

You intellectual cowards dont want to take on my argument ? Figures.

Apples and Oranges

I think I'll drink this bottle of vodka to chop upl 20 6yr olds in a classroom/strangle a crowd of people in a theatre/use my chainsaw in a crowded mall said nobody.

[Spazz]

Its not apples and oranges its complete bullshit. Both are dangerous and could be argued that neither makes society a better place.

WHy does the useless item that kills more people get the free pass !?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

[Ganzo]

A couple things and I'll fade into the sunset for a bit leaving you all in peace .

My logic has no flaw and it is completely obtainable, not an impossibility.

[brinstar]

columbine had armed guards