Can we have a rational discussion about guns and why the typical arguments for gun control and its implementation won't work?

[GO-NAD!]

You don't need a mind exercise to demonstrate this. This is demonstrated in my previous post on the knife crime numbers.
The rates of knife homicide are roughly comparable between UK and US at 0.48 and 0.49 per 100,000.
UK and US have similar access to knives, and these figures show that when UK and US populations have equal access to knives we are both as stabby as each other.
That said, UK realises the issue with knives and youths so are clamping down on Zombie style knives and already have age restrictions for purchasing knives.
But when it comes down to guns you in the US are 120x more likely to die by the gun. You can argue about densities of population and so on.

There's some US data here, it's a bit old and the one thing that has risen is the number of mass shootings for whatever reason.
Take home message, beware of your friends or acquaintances, the gun will likely get you, although your son or daughter may well beat the crap out of you.
View attachment 66970
The US will require legislation to get to grips with its gun problem. The UK was pretty much a free-for-all until after the Great War which resulted in the Firearms Act 1920, amended in 1937. This was updated in 1968 and amended in 1988 following the Hungerford mass shooting incident and again in 1997 after Dunblaine with amendments after this.

The fact that I can name the two incidences of mass shootings and one in 1990 (Cumbria NW England), so 3 in 36 years, shows you what proper regulation of firearms can achieve. It's never to late to start.

I have no expectations that there be any legislation in the US sufficient to make a meaningful dent in the numbers of gun deaths. Even if there were, a whole lot of firearms would have to be confiscated in order to make any legislation worth the paper it's written on. And that is when civil war would erupt.

 

[GO-NAD!]

I was thinking about this later in the day- for a country that has done a lot of great things, I think the US has more uncivilized people than any other developed country. THAT'S the reason this crap happens here and not in other places. However, if you look at the statistics, the US IS NOT #1 in gun deaths and the link shows this- it's from NPR, so you don't need to crap on my source.

No, the US is not #1 in gun deaths. But, comparing apples to apples, it's #1 amongst developed countries.

The US has far more suicides than homicides and mass shootings, which happen far too often and for reasons that usually include "Yeah, that guy was really screwed up", don't actually happen as often as the media want us to believe. None is acceptable, one is too many.

YOU mentioned guns being smuggled into Canada, so I'll say it again- It's bad people who are responsible, not the guns!

Sadly, Australia has had two mass knife attacks, two days apart. Who was at fault, the two who attacked, or the knives? Once again, it was the attackers and the father of the first said that his son was very screwed up, mentally.

This is what happens when freedoms are important to a country with millions of messed up people I was going to call them A-holes, but we can't necessarily assume they are although gang related shootings are far too common and if you pay attention, you should notice that it's not really front & center of the conversation.

How much do you see in your area that involves Tren de Aragua and MS-13? Check that crap out.

The narrative from those who want nothing more than to have illegals allowed into the country without scrutiny completely ignores some of the problems they cause- look into those two groups.

That said, would you want to be penalized for something done by other people? I doubt it. What I want is for the criminal court system to prevent this happening because suspects were released. I want people who know and are related to someone with serious mental problems to find a way to get help.

You mentioned society being dysfuntional- that, again, is about PEOPLE, not hardware. Fix the people and the problem goes away. The hard part is, how can millions of people be fixed when it's not a one size fits all situation?

There are bad people in every country - including my own. And, different countries have different degrees of access to firearms. While Canada has a much lower gun death rate than the US, it is significantly higher than many (most?) other developed countries. Why might that be? Could it be the longest undefended border in the world bleeding smuggled firearms into the hands of bad Canadians?

You insist that bad people are the problem, not the guns. Well, I would insist that it's bad people with easy access to guns. Like I stated before, I really don't think it matters what legislation is enacted - the US is already marinating in weapons. It's too late.

If you want people to stop behaving badly, prevention earlier is better than punishment later. While crime needs to be punished, you can't incarcerate your way out of the problem, as demonstrated in the US. You already have the highest incarceration rate in the developed world, which is probably why suspects get released - there's no place to jail them.

To reiterate - it's not bad people who are the problem, it's bad people with easy access to firearms. That's it, that's all.

 

[highfigh]

I have no expectations that there be any legislation in the US sufficient to make a meaningful dent in the numbers of gun deaths. Even if there were, a whole lot of firearms would have to be confiscated in order to make any legislation worth the paper it's written on. And that is when civil war would erupt.

The criminal justice system needs to incarcerate anyone who commits violent crimes. The constant whining of "America has too many people in prisons" shows the lack of civility- banning guns won't affect them, as too many believe it will- the black market is far too large for that to happen.

That said, I'm not opposed to firearm confiscation, but only if they're taken from those who have them illegally. That particular mountain is the problem- the number of legal gun owners who commit gun crimes is incredibly small but there are a lot of stupid legal gun owners. The US already has many gun laws WRT possession, concealment, sales, use, etc- the problem, as usual, is that criminals don't care about laws and what's not legal- they don't like being told what they can and can't do. Maybe they really don't know that something is immoral, cruel, disgusting or insane. MKE just had another homicide & dismemberment- the guy seemed to be friendly enough, but something must have triggered his sickness.

 

[highfigh]

No, the US is not #1 in gun deaths. But, comparing apples to apples, it's #1 amongst developed countries.

There are bad people in every country - including my own. And, different countries have different degrees of access to firearms. While Canada has a much lower gun death rate than the US, it is significantly higher than many (most?) other developed countries. Why might that be? Could it be the longest undefended border in the world bleeding smuggled firearms into the hands of bad Canadians?

You insist that bad people are the problem, not the guns. Well, I would insist that it's bad people with easy access to guns. Like I stated before, I really don't think it matters what legislation is enacted - the US is already marinating in weapons. It's too late.

If you want people to stop behaving badly, prevention earlier is better than punishment later. While crime needs to be punished, you can't incarcerate your way out of the problem, as demonstrated in the US. You already have the highest incarceration rate in the developed world, which is probably why suspects get released - there's no place to jail them.

To reiterate - it's not bad people who are the problem, it's bad people with easy access to firearms. That's it, that's all.

Bad people will find other ways to do bad things, as shown in Australia over the weekend. You and others want to blame guns but seem to be forgetting that most guns used in crimes are stolen before being sold illegally although many are stolen, then used, traded or given to someone. They're not bought at gun shows in sufficient quantity to make a large impact- that's just a shouting point. The online gun market isn't something I know about because I'm not in it but I have seen people try to take firearm purchase applications out of a store in order to have someone else fill it out, which isn't allowed. Anyone who buys a gun for the specific purpose of selling it to someone who can't legally possess guns is committing a felony- that makes them bad, too. But you don't want to consider the whole picture- people can be generally law abiding and allowed to buy guns and still contribute to the gun problem. It happens frequently, but the media don't usually report on that.

So, bad Canadians are different from my use of 'bad people'? For every bad Canadian getting a gun, there's at least one bad person from this side of the border. Canada needs to define who's transferring them and fix the problem on your side and I think it will help but the US seems to be refusing to do its part- we had some programs but they have been dismantled and/or handled incredibly badly. Remember Fast & Furious? That was not only badly managed, it was criminal.

From the link, "New York state also prohibits people convicted of several violent misdemeanors from buying or owning a gun. Many other states do not, Webster said.' I think this should apply in all states- violence may start small, but domestic violence calls are the worst because they escalate faster than any other type and more cops are shot and killed during these calls. But that assumes people will be prosecuted for these violent crimes and the stupid fact is that the charges are reduced in far too many cases.

Do illegal gun owners commit most gun crime?

U.S. Rep. John Faso says he opposes some gun-control measures because they target the wrong people. Laws that limit the

www.politifact.com

 

[GO-NAD!]

The criminal justice system needs to incarcerate anyone who commits violent crimes. The constant whining of "America has too many people in prisons" shows the lack of civility- banning guns won't affect them, as too many believe it will- the black market is far too large for that to happen.

That said, I'm not opposed to firearm confiscation, but only if they're taken from those who have them illegally. That particular mountain is the problem- the number of legal gun owners who commit gun crimes is incredibly small but there are a lot of stupid legal gun owners. The US already has many gun laws WRT possession, concealment, sales, use, etc- the problem, as usual, is that criminals don't care about laws and what's not legal- they don't like being told what they can and can't do. Maybe they really don't know that something is immoral, cruel, disgusting or insane. MKE just had another homicide & dismemberment- the guy seemed to be friendly enough, but something must have triggered his sickness.

Well, by default guns are confiscated are already confiscated from people who are in illegal possession, aren't they?

 

[GO-NAD!]

Bad people will find other ways to do bad things, as shown in Australia over the weekend. You and others want to blame guns but seem to be forgetting that most guns used in crimes are stolen before being sold illegally although many are stolen, then used, traded or given to someone. They're not bought at gun shows in sufficient quantity to make a large impact- that's just a shouting point. The online gun market isn't something I know about because I'm not in it but I have seen people try to take firearm purchase applications out of a store in order to have someone else fill it out, which isn't allowed. Anyone who buys a gun for the specific purpose of selling it to someone who can't legally possess guns is committing a felony- that makes them bad, too. But you don't want to consider the whole picture- people can be generally law abiding and allowed to buy guns and still contribute to the gun problem. It happens frequently, but the media don't usually report on that.

Bad people may find other ways to do bad things, but "other ways" are usually more difficult. If it was easier to kill lots of people with knives, they wouldn't bother getting and using a gun, right? How many more people might have died in that Australia incident, if the nutter had a gun?

Every single legally manufactured firearm is a potential crime gun. Every. Single One.

So, bad Canadians are different from my use of 'bad people'? For every bad Canadian getting a gun, there's at least one bad person from this side of the border. Canada needs to define who's transferring them and fix the problem on your side and I think it will help but the US seems to be refusing to do its part- we had some programs but they have been dismantled and/or handled incredibly badly. Remember Fast & Furious? That was not only badly managed, it was criminal.

Canada needs to fix the problem from our side? Well, until an illegal firearm in the smuggling pipeline actually crosses the border, it's an American problem to fix.

I'll say it again, one last time. I don't think it matters what legislation is enacted in the US - there are already so many firearms in circulation, legislation isn't going to help. You could ban any further manufacture for civilian use and there would still be plenty. The price would go up for existing ones and, of course, there would be more theft of them. But still, lots of them around.

 

[highfigh]

Well, by default guns are confiscated are already confiscated from people who are in illegal possession, aren't they?

You haven't heard about the guns stolen from law enforcement impounds, have you? That's part of the bad people/black market. Lots of guns in circulation that were confiscated.

And to answer the question, not necessarily. Sometimes, when a legal gun owner has to use a gun in self-defense or to defend someone else (actual self-defense, not shooting at/hitting someone who broke into a house/business, stole something, etc), it sometimes takes a long time and a lot of effort to get the gun(s) back because in cities where gun control is popular, they want to get in the way of someone's 2A rights. This also leaves people who live in bad areas vulnerable and if someone associated with the shooting "victim" comes back for revenge, the legal gun owner is screwed. And don't say "just move"- it's not always financially possible.

The prevailing attitude in the inner city here has been hat cops are bad, 'snitches get stiches, White people are racist and it's futile to try to get ahead, but the 'snitches get stiches' seems to be decreasing and the Milwaukee PD has been doing a lot of outreach to show that they're not all bad. The fact is, MKE has very little Black on White or White on Black crime in the "I want XXXXXs to die!"- if it happens, it's more because the victims were targets of opportunity but the majority of crimes against Blacks here are committed by other Blacks and the people of the city are sick & tired of it. The drive-by shootings still happen, sometimes in cases of mistaken identity or location and people are still being hit and dying when it happens. Road rage is a big one, now- happens on surface streets and on the freeways. Used to be if someone drove stupidly, it was safe to flip them off or honk- now, it's pretty likely that a gun will come out and even if they only flash it, they're guilty of a crime, but it takes days to find the specific section.

https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/941/iii/20

Before I bought my house, I lived in an area of Milwaukee that wasn't great, but it wasn't totally gone. Now, I wouldn't live there if someone paid me. My Neighbor who lived across the alley was shot ad hit six times by someone who wanted to rob everyone at a gas station/convenience store. He was a MKE cop, off duty, and carrying. He shot the guy, killing him. I heard about it on the news that evening and almost immediately, the "victim's" family went on the news to say that it was a racially-motivated shooting without knowing who shot the guy. That stopped as soon as they showed Wayne's photo. The shooter was and Wayne is, Black. BTW, Wayne is fine- I saw him at WalMart last week. He hates what has happened to the community as much as anyone I know.

 

[highfigh]

Bad people may find other ways to do bad things, but "other ways" are usually more difficult. If it was easier to kill lots of people with knives, they wouldn't bother getting and using a gun, right? How many more people might have died in that Australia incident, if the nutter had a gun?

Every single legally manufactured firearm is a potential crime gun. Every. Single One.


Canada needs to fix the problem from our side? Well, until an illegal firearm in the smuggling pipeline actually crosses the border, it's an American problem to fix.

I'll say it again, one last time. I don't think it matters what legislation is enacted in the US - there are already so many firearms in circulation, legislation isn't going to help. You could ban any further manufacture for civilian use and there would still be plenty. The price would go up for existing ones and, of course, there would be more theft of them. But still, lots of them around.

While we're here- is your area done with COVID?

Yes, they have the potential, but again, not on their own. OTOH, many people are potential shooters- what prevents them doing it?

How many people could be saved if a nutter with a gun starts shooting and it's not a gun safe zone, so an armed person stops them? That happened not long ago in Indiana-

Armed 'hero' stopped mass shooter at Indiana mall

Elisjsha Dicken, 22, gestured to other shoppers to flee "as he engaged and closed in on the suspect", say police.

www.bbc.com

In gun free zones, everyone is a target and there's nobody to stop it- why would a shooter want to go somewhere that has armed people if they want to kill?

Fortunately, a cop was there to stop the first knife attacker in Australia.

Yes, you have people breaking the laws on your side of the border, so it's up to Canada to handle that part. Again, you're blaming the guns and not people- they don't waltz across the borders under their own power- it takes two to tango and someone in Canada is apparently willing to dance- are you saying the ones on the Canadian side are being forced to buy or take them? Not likely, so they ARE complicit.

AFAIK, the law enforcement agencies who can work on both sides of the border are the FBI and US Marshalls, but the ATF probably can, too. Whether Canadian Law Enforcement or the government will allow them to operate without being involved is another story.

You're right- legislation won't help. The only way to stop this is to get people to change their behavior or to lock up the offenders. If it makes them and their families sad, too effing bad- who told them to be criminals, anyway?

 

[David_Alexander]

There seems to be an essence of denial. Guns are the problem here. The number, availability and celebration of them.

If you are not going to deal with this issue, all other measures are like sticking a plaster on an arterial wound.

If you are trying to work your way out of the problem (guns) without addressing the issue (guns). I don't know. I'm out.

 

[everettT]

There seems to be an essence of denial. Guns are the problem here. The number, availability and celebration of them.

If you are not going to deal with this issue, all other measures are like sticking a plaster on an arterial wound.

If you are trying to work your way out of the problem (guns) without addressing the issue (guns). I don't know. I'm out.

Let's say that everything you've said is true, what do you suggest that the US do with the over 400 million guns that are estimated to be in private collections?

 

[highfigh]

There seems to be an essence of denial. Guns are the problem here. The number, availability and celebration of them.

If you are not going to deal with this issue, all other measures are like sticking a plaster on an arterial wound.

If you are trying to work your way out of the problem (guns)
without addressing the issue (guns). I don't know. I'm out.

I'm not expecting a reply, but in case you choose to.....

If you had kids who were running over others on their bikes or beating others with baseball bats, would you solve the problem by taking the bikes and bats away? No, of course not. Why should the guns be removed, rather than changing behavior and punishing the bad actors?

 

[cpp]

Guns, knives, baseball bats, pipe bombs, using a car or truck to drive into a crowd, explosives all have been used to kill people. What do all of these have in common, well the human using them.

 

[dlaloum]

Firearm sales, or crimes? Gun crimes have dropped- it's the media that sensationalizes them that makes it seem worse.

Total number of firearms in the community have risen back to pre 1996 levels... we have a larger population now, and Gun crimes are well controlled - still the prevalence of firearms is something that needs to be kept in focus.

 

[dlaloum]

Sadly, Australia has had two mass knife attacks, two days apart. Who was at fault, the two who attacked, or the knives? Once again, it was the attackers and the father of the first said that his son was very screwed up, mentally.

Yes we had two mass attacks... with knives.

The key point to take home here, is that in an environment with ready/easy/uncontrolled firearm availability, those attacks would have been with a firearm, most likely an assault rifle in the US... and the likely deaths would have been several multiples of the casualties experienced.

The availability of an automatic/semi-automatic firearm, is the equivalent of pouring petrol on a BBQ.... yeah you can get burnt without it - but it makes a bad situation a heck of a lot worse.

 

[GO-NAD!]

While we're here- is your area done with COVID?

Yes, they have the potential, but again, not on their own. OTOH, many people are potential shooters- what prevents them doing it?

How many people could be saved if a nutter with a gun starts shooting and it's not a gun safe zone, so an armed person stops them? That happened not long ago in Indiana-

Armed 'hero' stopped mass shooter at Indiana mall

Elisjsha Dicken, 22, gestured to other shoppers to flee "as he engaged and closed in on the suspect", say police.

www.bbc.com

In gun free zones, everyone is a target and there's nobody to stop it- why would a shooter want to go somewhere that has armed people if they want to kill?

Fortunately, a cop was there to stop the first knife attacker in Australia.

Done with COVID? Do you mean is it still circulating? Or, has everyone just moved on and are pretending it doesn't exist anymore?

People are still getting it, but it isn't nearly as virulent as earlier variants. I had my second bout in February and it was like a very mild cold. While there are some people wearing masks in public, it's pretty rare.

I get the logic presented by some that the answer to bad guys with guns is more good guys with guns. We occasionally hear stories where the bad guy was stopped by a good guy with a gun. But, where it gets more complicated is that the gun owned by a good guy is also a potential crime gun. It good get lost or stolen. It could be taken from the good guy by a bad guy in a confrontation. In other words, having more good guys carrying sounds like a good idea until you consider all the ramifications.

Then there are the "good" guys who were good right up to the point that they became bad or - at best - very stupid.

Common mistakes, uncommon reactions in 4 separate shootings | AP News

The guys responsible for Ahmaud Arbery's death weren't criminals until they chased him down and killed him.

I dare anyone to say George Zimmerman was being a good guy with a gun when he killed Trayvon Martin. Same with Kyle Rittenhouse. In fact, Rittenhouse was too stupid to be accepted by the Marines.

Woman Who Shot at Home Depot Shoplifters Sentenced to 18 mos | TIME

The above incidents range from gross stupidity to underlying malevolence. All shooters were in legal possession. Even with the best of intentions, carrying a firearm can encourage people to initiate or intervene in confrontations where better judgement might have suggested other actions. Call it 9mm bravery...

Then there's this:
Many mass shooters acquire guns legally (axios.com)


The big picture: From 1966 to 2019, 77% of mass shooters purchased at least some of the weapons used in the shootings legally, per data compiled by the National Institute of Justice, a research agency of the Department of Justice.

• Many mass shootings in the U.S. after 2019 have also underscored the same reality.
• Illegal purchases were made by just 13% of mass shooters, per the data, which also notes that 32.5% of mass shooting cases could not be confirmed.
• More than 80% of the assailants responsible for K-12 shootings stole their guns from family members, per the National Institute of Justice.

So no, I don't agree that putting more guns in circulation will help. While there are incidents where the "good guy with a gun" saved the day, when I look at the big picture, I see a cure that is worse than the disease.

Yes, you have people breaking the laws on your side of the border, so it's up to Canada to handle that part. Again, you're blaming the guns and not people- they don't waltz across the borders under their own power- it takes two to tango and someone in Canada is apparently willing to dance- are you saying the ones on the Canadian side are being forced to buy or take them? Not likely, so they ARE complicit.

AFAIK, the law enforcement agencies who can work on both sides of the border are the FBI and US Marshalls, but the ATF probably can, too. Whether Canadian Law Enforcement or the government will allow them to operate without being involved is another story.

Yes, we have to address the issue on our side of the border. But, the bad guys here are being helped by bad guys on your side and the vast quantity of firearms available in the US. We can't address that. We should start a "war on guns", because the war on drugs was so successful?

Coincidentally:
3 from Brampton charged with alleged weapons trafficking in U.S. | CBC News

Those bad guys from Brampton had help from bad guys in the US.

You're right- legislation won't help. The only way to stop this is to get people to change their behavior or to lock up the offenders. If it makes them and their families sad, too effing bad- who told them to be criminals, anyway?

I agree somewhat - I think legislation won't help. But, only because it's too late - there are already too many firearms in circulation.

Getting people to change their behaviour? There will always be bad, stupid and crazy people. You address that problem by restricting access to firearms. However, when there are so many in circulation, bad, stupid and crazy people find a way...

 

[cpp]

There will always be bad, stupid and crazy people. You address that problem by restricting access to firearms.

And how do you do that. A person can buy a gun on street in the US, anywhere.. That crazy person has other means to harm someone or even harm a large group.

Ex: Time Magazine
UPDATED: JULY 15, 2016 2:32 AM [ET] | ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED: JULY 14, 2016 6:33 PM EDT;
A large truck plowed into a crowd of people in the southern French of city of Nice on Thursday night, killing at least 84 people and leaving 18 in critical condition as the heavy vehicle mowed over its victims along hundreds of feet, according to police and government officials.

 

[GO-NAD!]

Let's say that everything you've said is true, what do you suggest that the US do with the over 400 million guns that are estimated to be in private collections?

That's the biggest issue, but it doesn't get discussed because to even broach it in the US would just cause RWNJ's heads to scream about conspiracies to confiscate their guns.

 

[GO-NAD!]

And how do you do that. A person can buy a gun on street in the US, anywhere.. That crazy person has other means to harm someone or even harm a large group.

Ex: Time Magazine
UPDATED: JULY 15, 2016 2:32 AM [ET] | ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED: JULY 14, 2016 6:33 PM EDT;
A large truck plowed into a crowd of people in the southern French of city of Nice on Thursday night, killing at least 84 people and leaving 18 in critical condition as the heavy vehicle mowed over its victims along hundreds of feet, according to police and government officials.

The difference is that "other means" have other primary uses. Talk about trucks, bats, knives, etc is just a distraction. You can kill somebody with a rope, a plastic bag, or a brick. They all have primary practical uses. The primary purpose of firearms is to kill people or animals. To narrow it down a bit, the purpose of handguns is to kill people. Target shooting is a secondary use.

"There are too many people being killed by trucks!"
"OK, lets ban trucks."
"But, how are we going to move goods around?"
"Oh, right. I guess we can't ban trucks"

"There are too many people being killed by handguns!"
"OK, lets ban handguns."
"But, how will we...."
"Yes...go on...finish your statement."

 

[cpp]

The difference is that "other means" have other primary uses. Talk about trucks, bats, knives, etc is just a distraction. You can kill somebody with a rope, a plastic bag, or a brick. They all have primary practical uses. The primary purpose of firearms is to kill people or animals. To narrow it down a bit, the purpose of handguns is to kill people. Target shooting is a secondary use.

"There are too many people being killed by trucks!"
"OK, lets ban trucks."
"But, how are we going to move goods around?"
"Oh, right. I guess we can't ban trucks"

"There are too many people being killed by handguns!"
"OK, lets ban handguns."
"But, how will we...."
"Yes...go on...finish your statement."

No statement to finish. People kill people is my point and they will use anything they can do it. People can chat about gun control and have been for as long as I have been alive, hell it all started back in 1934 with The National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934, and its still going on today in this country. Nothing will ever change. Sad yes, but 90 freaking years and its still going, there is more hate than ever, rudeness is everywhere.

 

[Mikado463]

To narrow it down a bit, the purpose of handguns is to kill people. Target shooting is a secondary use.

Ahhhh, the classic rebuttal used by most liberals with little to no knowledge of firearms !

While you would be correct in many areas, I doubt that you know much about the various disciplines that involve handguns to which many are designed with a primary function outside of 'defensive purposes'.