What Are People's Motivation To Outlaw Guns In The US?

DS1119

PJ_Soul wrote:

DS1119 wrote:

For the record. I don't own a gun and I never will. I just find it funny how people get so lost in what the problem with guns actually is in this country. How they want to over regulate an industry and lawful citizens who participate in that industry for their hate for guns. Pumping up this "huge problem" to push their own personal agendas.


Fuck, the media could start printing stories about how harmful the color fucking brown is and enough stories later people will be rallying for "brown regualtions" or lets "ban brown". It's laughable and almost sad at the same time.

When thousands of people die from brown inflicted wounds, then maybe.

It's true. Sad but true. Just read the paper/watch the news and watch how people react. Its no different than advertising. The more of a certain advrtisemtn the average person sees of a product the more they feel they need or want it.

It's so eveident with foods....don't eat eaggs....eat eggs....don't eat eggs. ANd the mindess masses follow them. No different than the gun issue. The public is sold that this is an issue when in reality it's not.

JonnyPistachio

DS1119 wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

No they don't. Its a study conducted by a university, they can do what they want.
You really dont like to focus on the point of any one specific thing do you?
This is a fact: of 626 specific shootings in a variety of demographics over a year period, they showed results that are common among most incidences (of which many were likely legally owned guns). Just because its not 30,000 incidences, doesnt make it unimportant. Just because there are a zillion guns out there, doesnt make it unimportant.

The statistics prove time and again, that when a gun is used, its often not for its intended purpose, legal or not.

Actually, this is unimportant. Studies that analyze illegal gun ownership in any numbers, will always lead results toward the end result that guns must be the issue. They were illegal in the first place.

I guess I could always do a study of 626 cases of people going to a firing range and I could report zero instances of any injured or no crimes committed. That study would hold about as much water as the one you posted.

You sure could, but you'd just be trying to dance around the facts.

I'll accept that its your opinion that this study is unimportant. But to the rest of the world, I think we should take notice. And the more that gun owners realize the potential dangers, I think they do go out and take classes and try to protect their families from their own weapon. I've heard that many people are taking classes voluntarily because they've become aware that legally owned guns are often used as they were not intended. Its a fact, and people should be educated about it, not brush it under the rug.

fife

DS1119 wrote:

For the record. I don't own a gun and I never will. I just find it funny how people get so lost in what the problem with guns actually is in this country. How they want to over regulate an industry and lawful citizens who participate in that industry for their hate for guns. Pumping up this "huge problem" to push their own personal agendas.


Fuck, the media could start printing stories about how harmful the color fucking brown is and enough stories later people will be rallying for "brown regualtions" or lets "ban brown". It's laughable and almost sad at the same time.

DS, I think you over assume things. I would love to live in a world where guns are not used but I would also love to live in a world where smoking is not done and I smoke. But I know that this would never happen. The reason that I ( I am only speaking for myself) would like to put more restriction on guns is because I have seen first hand the damage it causes.

I would just to like you to answer one question. you keep saying that people keep pumping up this huge issue but would you not say that you are doing the opposite and down playing the issue.

PJ_Soul

DS1119 wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

DS1119 wrote:

For the record. I don't own a gun and I never will. I just find it funny how people get so lost in what the problem with guns actually is in this country. How they want to over regulate an industry and lawful citizens who participate in that industry for their hate for guns. Pumping up this "huge problem" to push their own personal agendas.


Fuck, the media could start printing stories about how harmful the color fucking brown is and enough stories later people will be rallying for "brown regualtions" or lets "ban brown". It's laughable and almost sad at the same time.

When thousands of people die from brown inflicted wounds, then maybe.

It's true. Sad but true. Just read the paper/watch the news and watch how people react. Its no different than advertising. The more of a certain advrtisemtn the average person sees of a product the more they feel they need or want it.

It's so eveident with foods....don't eat eaggs....eat eggs....don't eat eggs. ANd the mindess masses follow them. No different than the gun issue. The public is sold that this is an issue when in reality it's not.

I know it's true... however, I'm totally aware of all this, do NOT all prey to it, and still see gun laws as lacking... In a lot of cases, I think you underestimate the intelligence of those who disagree with your point of view.

JonnyPistachio

DS1119 wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

Az, and Co -- Those were high profile examples, yes, but there are boatloads of more cases of legal guns being a problem. We're obviously never going to agree because you think since thousands of people dying is a small percentage of gun owners so it doesnt matter...but I dont care about the proportion. Because nobody suffers through the regulations i've proposed. And I dont care about the proportion because I think our gun culture is out of control and there are nearly more guns than people in the US I think, so proportions are out the window simply because its out of control...I care more about innocent individual lives that could be saved through some simple changes/compromises. I figure it cant hurt to try something new because LOTS of people are dying senselessly. (see here I go again, I said I actually want to save lives, and thats exactly what I mean, I'm not pushing some stupid agenda so I can get elected.)

You can use proportions all you want to justify thousands of people dying if you wish.

And yet you use words like "boatloads" when it comes to legal gun ownership and deaths from those.

And if you don't care about proportions but just "saving lives" wouldn't you worry about the bigger issues first? Like I sadi before cigarettes and alcohol kill more people in this country per year than 100 years of leagal gun ownership could even come close to so why not concentrate on that issue?

:fp: again, you have a hard time following along dont you...MULTITASKING. I'm trying to stay on topic of guns. Start all the threads you want on scissors, color brown, cigarettes, condom mishaps, drinking, auto-erotic asphixiation, choking on cockroaches...for godsake man, I do worry about those things, just as equally, but you seem to have run out of analogies again. :fp:

vant0037

DS1119 wrote:

Again....Illegal gun ownership is a problem...not legal gun ownership.

But your argument there isn't helped or hindered by pointing out that there are "only" XXXX gun murders out of the total U.S. population or that the gun used in a crime was legal or not. I'm not sure why you continue to refer to that.

Here's what I'm piecing together:

You are arguing that the frequency of gun murders in relation to the total U.S. population is so low, that regulation as it exists must be working, and therefore gun murders/violence isn't a problem.

My argument is that the proportion of murders and violent crime that involve guns is so disparate, that guns are too widely available - whether legal or not, which in turn causes more murders and violent crime.

Your argument rests on an unsupported premise that most of those 9,000 - 11,000 gun murders (2009 numbers) were NOT used by legal weapons/owners. I have yet to see any support for that proposition.

My argument rests on the premise that it doesn't matter if a gun is licensed, legal etc or not. Many crimes are what criminologists call "crimes of opportunity" (crimes that wouldn't have otherwise occurred, were it not for the right circumstances). If that's true, then the fact that (1) there are 200,000,000 guns (legal or not, it doesn't matter) in the U.S. alone, and (2) a severely disproportionate number of violent crimes are committed using guns, tells me there's a problem. Most gun crimes are NOT assault weapons, so we can stop worrying about China importing illegal weapons as the explanation. Guns - legal or not - are getting into the hands of people who are committing crimes.

So again, I don't know what the solution is. But I certainly reject the idea that gun violence in the U.S. is not a problem and doesn't deserve our attention.

JonnyPistachio

DS1119 wrote:

It's true. Sad but true. Just read the paper/watch the news and watch how people react. Its no different than advertising. The more of a certain advrtisemtn the average person sees of a product the more they feel they need or want it.

It's so eveident with foods....don't eat eaggs....eat eggs....don't eat eggs. ANd the mindess masses follow them. No different than the gun issue. The public is sold that this is an issue when in reality it's not.

That may be true in some cases, but its sad that you'd just assume we are like that because we bring up cases that were in the media. Its comical how much you assume.

its not always analogous to media hype, sorry that it appears that way because I brought up high profile cases..I dont have time to dig up the thousands of accidental shootings in florida alone right now. the media hype thing is a cop out, and you've again run out of reasons why you think we think there's a gun problem. I have been against guns since I've had several run ins and quite a few close calls, one in which I came inches from losing my life. I also speak out vehemently against cigarettes when the time is right because I know people who have suffered from negative side effects. My convictions are from what have affected me personally and what I've seen first hand for the most part.

kenny olav

Unfortunately, the best we can hope for in the US anytime in the forseeable future is a reinstiution of the Federal ban on assault weapons... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_As ... eapons_Ban

I do hate guns. It seems unnatural to me to not hate guns. Because guns give far too much power to any individual. I really don't care if a gun owner has a good record of being a responsible citizen. Any person is capable of losing their mind, or of letting emotion take over them, and a gun makes it far too easy to kill another person or kill oneself. Guns also easily fall into the wrong hands.

The instances where guns are used in self-defense are far outnumbered by instances where guns are used in acts of violence and murder. It's something like 3% of guns are used for self-defense. And if you have a gun in your home, it's far more likely to be used against you than against an attacker. http://arstechnica.com/science/2011/04/ ... ambiguity/

There's talk here about how the media makes people fear guns. I think the opposite is true. The media makes people fear crime, and therefore makes them want to own guns for self-defense.

This country is swimming in guns, and people are getting shot every fucking day. If you don't think we need better control of guns, then you are responsible for this madness!!!

JonnyPistachio

vant0037 wrote:

DS1119 wrote:

Again....Illegal gun ownership is a problem...not legal gun ownership.

But your argument there isn't helped or hindered by pointing out that there are "only" XXXX gun murders out of the total U.S. population or that the gun used in a crime was legal or not. I'm not sure why you continue to refer to that.

Here's what I'm piecing together:

You are arguing that the frequency of gun murders in relation to the total U.S. population is so low, that regulation as it exists must be working, and therefore gun murders/violence isn't a problem.

My argument is that the proportion of murders and violent crime that involve guns is so disparate, that guns are too widely available - whether legal or not, which in turn causes more murders and violent crime.

Your argument rests on an unsupported premise that most of those 9,000 - 11,000 gun murders (2009 numbers) were NOT used by legal weapons/owners. I have yet to see any support for that proposition.

My argument rests on the premise that it doesn't matter if a gun is licensed, legal etc or not. Many crimes are what criminologists call "crimes of opportunity" (crimes that wouldn't have otherwise occurred, were it not for the right circumstances). If that's true, then the fact that (1) there are 200,000,000 guns (legal or not, it doesn't matter) in the U.S. alone, and (2) a severely disproportionate number of violent crimes are committed using guns, tells me there's a problem. Most gun crimes are NOT assault weapons, so we can stop worrying about China importing illegal weapons as the explanation. Guns - legal or not - are getting into the hands of people who are committing crimes.

So again, I don't know what the solution is. But I certainly reject the idea that gun violence in the U.S. is not a problem and doesn't deserve our attention.

Good summation, and the funny thing is, we all have an opinion, but Im always amazed that someone cant admit that something is a problem (even a slight problem?) or that it could be changed somehow without too much compromise. I honestly dont know the answers to fix the problem, but it simply shouldnt be ignored because of simple proportions. Its like saying there are 400 billion stars in the milky way so why bother doing anything to our single planet since its only .00000000001%. Let the fucker burn.

Go Beavers

pandora wrote:

What's with the assault rifles jamming?

A couple at least of the most recent mass shootings this happened.
Has been said it could have been far worse if the gunmen had been armed
with something different, something that did not jam.

Could this be that the gunmen don't know the correct way to use them...
no practice to insure effectiveness ? Or is this common with these type of guns?

Winner of today's oddest post award.

Jason P

DS1119 wrote:

For the record. I don't own a gun and I never will. I just find it funny how people get so lost in what the problem with guns actually is in this country. How they want to over regulate an industry and lawful citizens who participate in that industry for their hate for guns. Pumping up this "huge problem" to push their own personal agendas.

Then it's odd how we are at odds. I've been contemplating getting a revolver over the last month.

Vitalogensia

MotoDC wrote:

SK359828 wrote:

I was about to ask the opposite question.

I don't see the point, I guess. I've never owned a gun, never fired a gun, don't hunt, and never felt unsafe, whether I was living in the suburbs or the city. Plus I listened to a lot of PJ and 311 growing up.

Haha, Guns Are for Pussies!

I had a girl (friend) once who thought the song was a tribute to female genitalia...she thought the lyric was "Guns off for pussies". As in, fire your guns in the air if you like 'em. She was a riot.

Glad someone picked up on that!

Hilarious story, I would definitely unload a banana clip for pussy!

Jason P

pandora wrote:

What's with the assault rifles jamming?

A couple at least of the most recent mass shootings this happened.
Has been said it could have been far worse if the gunmen had been armed
with something different, something that did not jam.

Could this be that the gunmen don't know the correct way to use them...
no practice to insure effectiveness ? Or is this common with these type of guns?

It could be a few things. A lot of high capacity magazines are poor quality and have a tendency to jam. The quality of ammo can have an effect as well as the gun manufacturer's quality. And last but least, if the gun hasn't been cleaned properly it can jam.

Thankfully, these mishaps that are often overlooked by madmen have prevented countless people from being injured or killed in these rampages.

JonnyPistachio

Jason P wrote:

DS1119 wrote:

For the record. I don't own a gun and I never will. I just find it funny how people get so lost in what the problem with guns actually is in this country. How they want to over regulate an industry and lawful citizens who participate in that industry for their hate for guns. Pumping up this "huge problem" to push their own personal agendas.

Then it's odd how we are at odds. I've been contemplating getting a revolver over the last month.

You seem very knowledgeable when it comes to guns, and its good to see a gun owner that recognizes that there are indeed some issues when it comes to guns in our society.

KennyO, thanks for those additional links that support what I was saying earlier too.
I cant even begin to think about the assault weapons like the AR-15...though they're less common in accidents and shootings, I'm amazed that anyone would think they need one of these.

pjhawks

JonnyPistachio wrote:

vant0037 wrote:

DS1119 wrote:

Again....Illegal gun ownership is a problem...not legal gun ownership.

But your argument there isn't helped or hindered by pointing out that there are "only" XXXX gun murders out of the total U.S. population or that the gun used in a crime was legal or not. I'm not sure why you continue to refer to that.

Here's what I'm piecing together:

You are arguing that the frequency of gun murders in relation to the total U.S. population is so low, that regulation as it exists must be working, and therefore gun murders/violence isn't a problem.

My argument is that the proportion of murders and violent crime that involve guns is so disparate, that guns are too widely available - whether legal or not, which in turn causes more murders and violent crime.

Your argument rests on an unsupported premise that most of those 9,000 - 11,000 gun murders (2009 numbers) were NOT used by legal weapons/owners. I have yet to see any support for that proposition.

My argument rests on the premise that it doesn't matter if a gun is licensed, legal etc or not. Many crimes are what criminologists call "crimes of opportunity" (crimes that wouldn't have otherwise occurred, were it not for the right circumstances). If that's true, then the fact that (1) there are 200,000,000 guns (legal or not, it doesn't matter) in the U.S. alone, and (2) a severely disproportionate number of violent crimes are committed using guns, tells me there's a problem. Most gun crimes are NOT assault weapons, so we can stop worrying about China importing illegal weapons as the explanation. Guns - legal or not - are getting into the hands of people who are committing crimes.

So again, I don't know what the solution is. But I certainly reject the idea that gun violence in the U.S. is not a problem and doesn't deserve our attention.

Good summation, and the funny thing is, we all have an opinion, but Im always amazed that someone cant admit that something is a problem (even a slight problem?) or that it could be changed somehow without too much compromise. I honestly dont know the answers to fix the problem, but it simply shouldnt be ignored because of simple proportions. Its like saying there are 400 billion stars in the milky way so why bother doing anything to our single planet since its only .00000000001%. Let the fucker burn.

the solution is to limit the effectiveness of the bullets.

but you can't have a full ban on guns. as much as i dislike the NRA their point about only the bad guys having guns if you outlaw them is absolutely true. so yes guns should be legal, just not all of them which baffles me that people argue agains that point.

hedonist

Jason P wrote:

Then it's odd how we are at odds. I've been contemplating getting a revolver over the last month.

Got a revolver, fact I got two...vinyl versions though :P


To me, statistics have way too many variables, agendas and manipulations.

There are idiots (and plain ol' nutjobs) out there who possess guns both legally and not. Accidents and crimes are committed in both cases. Accidents are committed even by non-idiots...carelessness, fear, what have you.

And with the exception of a few of those rascally radicals, I haven't seen a call to ban all guns - certainly not in this forum, unless I've missed it...just a desire to do what's possible to implement more safety, training and responsibility.

I understand playing the devil's advocate role - it's useful at times - but oh man, this thread...to the extreme.

catefrances

dead children... thats my motivation.

ComeToTX

catefrances wrote:

dead children... thats my motivation.

Amen

pureoc

If you want to have a hunting rifle fine, I have no problem with that. But I have posed this question many times and have yet to get a sensible answer: Why does anyone need a semi-automatic/assault gun (a weapon that can shoot hundreds of rounds of ammo in a very short amount of time)? To me this weapons serve as one purpose, to kill many people in as quick amount of time as possible. It's mind boggling that anyone would think it is good idea for people (regardless of applications, background checks etc) to own these. What good do these weapons bring to society? Absolutely none! I just can't comprehend what type of person would think these are a good thing to have in everyday life/society.

otter

Simple minds. The solution to every problem is the first thing that comes to their minds.

The politicians use this to their advantage. They can get votes, get on tv, or get in the public sphere by exploiting these simple minds with simple explanations and solutions.

They compare the US with Japan or any other country when it is impossible to make that comparison.