Do Guns Kill People or Do People Kill People?

Meh.
Good, thoughtful posts at last, and you guys sure got me thinking.

I never said completely, just: less. So it might still hold.

True. On the other hand you prevent unneccesary violence and escalation.

Then an insurance on a bike still is not a lot of money. Take it from me.

I'd fight. Sure. I'd go mad. In which case, I should hope the thief isn't carrying a gun (which would be more likely in a scenario where guns were more freely available). So this works both ways. Smart thing would be to call the cops and claim your insurance...

I'm not forgetting that. Don't think I'm preaching some kind of Utopia here or anything. All I'm saying is: less. Less guns availability means less gun violence.

Again, I never said 'everybody'... The guy down your street, remember.

Well, I agree for the most part: I'd say it's both a gun and a health issue. I wouldn't discard other cultural or social influences. But I think guns are part of the health issue. I don't think looking upon guns as cool things is particularly healthy.

Well, I'd point at the gun and I'd say: 'look! POTENTIAL for evil!' I know a human being is already potential for evil, but you have to draw the line somewhere. I'm just drawing the line there because this is a

 

This sounds a lot like unsupported opinion. Would you care to back it up?

In the US at least, I haven't seen any bike insurance policies. Usually you have to cover it under your homeowner's or renter's policy. At that point, you are still looking at a deductible of several hundred dollars, which is a significant percentage (if not the entire cost) of a new bike (and is often more than the cost of a decent used bike). Under such a system, each bike owner is essentially self-insuring their bike, so your approach of "get your insurance company to pay" doesn't really work. (You can reduce the deductible on the homeowner's policy or renter's policy, but that usually requires higher premiums.)

Well, as I pointed out above, the insurance doesn't really work out (at least not in the US). Because of that, your "smart thing" answer here reduces down to "suck it up and deal."

But, since you admit that you would likely fight, then could you answer this: What is the functional difference between my martial arts training and someone carrying a gun for defense? Both can be used in an offensive or defensive manner, and both can be lethal or non-lethal. Both can be used to obey the law, or to break it.

So, what is the difference?

Except, that doesn't logically follow. You are treating it as if it were a single-variable deterministic function.

Consider the Cold War for a bit. One of the key things that kept the US and USSR from

 

I'm not forgetting that. Don't think I'm preaching some kind of Utopia here or anything. All I'm saying is: less. Less guns availability means less gun violence.

It just hasn't ever worked out in the real world that I know of.

I think before you joined the thread, we discussed the phenomenon that when strict gun controls were placed in London, gun smuggling related crime/violence went up. In fact, in London, an entirely new category of criminal offense was created because smugglers started converting previously legal devices (starter and flare pistols) into weapons that fired real bullets and were selling them. Making something illegal didn't decrease the demand, it just shifted the burden. The result? Overall crime in London both increased and decreased independently of the gun laws.

Perhaps another loose analogy would be the Prohibition period in the US.

So I guess it could make sense to say "less guns=less gun violence," but that doesn't equate to less violence overall.

 

My stance is one of trying to look further. Further than what's known. Not facts, not speculation, just logic. Isn't it logical that if you prohibit guns, you'll have less school shootings?

That's just putting a band aid on the problem? Why put a band aid on a problem that goes much deeper then kids getting guns in there hands. You might want to look at these kids pasts. The root problem is that they have emtionlly and mentally problems and taking guns away won't help them.

If they don't have a gun they will just use some other type of weapon.

 

My stance is one of trying to look further. Further than what's known. Not facts, not speculation, just logic. Isn't it logical that if you prohibit guns, you'll have less school shootings?

Not one damn bit. Ever heard of the expression, 'There's a million ways to die?' Well, that's true. And whether kids got their guns from their parents or not or if they used some other methods it wouldn't stop it. Maybe on a large scale it'd be prevented, but there'd always be that one case where one got through. Besides, school shootings are rarer than our news media makes them out to be.

 

Well know your just making things up there.

 

It might not actually. I'm not 100% sure but I think it's harder to obtain a knife or a crossbow or something than a gun. Actually that probably depends on which country you're in. But think about it...semi-automatic gun vs. knife or crossbow. I can't believe I'm going to say this, but a gun is actually the easier choice so people are more likely to pick that.

Another point: Australia has strict gun laws = WAY less shootings (except for the mafia in South Melbourne hehe...I shouldn't laugh actually.)

 

Am not.


Check your dates. From Wiki

*University of Texas at Austin massacre - Austin, Texas, United States; August 1, 1966
* Orangeburg Massacre - Orangeburg, South Carolina, United States; February 8, 1968
* Kent State shootings - Kent, Ohio, United States; May 4, 1970
* Avivim school bus massacre - Avivim, Israel; May 8, 1970
* Jackson State killings - Jackson, Mississippi, United States; May 14-15, 1970
* Ma'alot massacre - Ma'alot, Israel; May 15, 1974
* California State University, Fullerton Library Massacre - Fullerton, California, United States; July 12, 1976
* Brenda Ann Spencer, Cleveland Elementary School - January 29, 1979
* Parkway South Junior High School shooting - Saint Louis, Missouri, United States; January 20, 1983
* Stockton massacre - Stockton, California, United States; January 17, 1989
* École Polytechnique Massacre - Montreal, Quebec, Canada; December 6, 1989
* University of Iowa shooting - Iowa City, Iowa, United States; November 1, 1991
* Concordia University massacre -Montreal, Quebec, Canada; August 24, 1992
* Simon's Rock College of Bard shooting - Great Barrington, Massachusetts, United States; December 14, 1992
* Richland High School shooting - Lynnville, Tennessee, United States; November 15, 1995
* Frontier Junior High shooting - Moses Lake, Washington, United States; February 2, 1996
* Dunblane massacre - Dunblane, Scotland, United Kingdom; March 13, 1996
* Sanaa massacre - Sanaa, Yemen; March 30, 1997
* Pearl High School shooting, Pearl, Mississippi, United States; October 1, 1997
* Heath High School shooting, West Paducah, Kentucky, United States; December 1, 1997
* Jonesboro massacre - Jonesboro, Arkansas, United States; March 24, 1998
* Thurston High School shooting - Springfield, Oregon, United States; May 21, 1998
* Columbine High School massacre - Littleton, Colorado, United States; April 20, 1999
* W. R. Myers High School shooting - Taber, Alberta, Canada; April 28, 1999
* Heritage High School shooting - Conyers, Georgia, United States; May 20, 1999
* Santana High School - Santee, California, United States; March 5, 2001
* Appalachian School of Law shooting - Grundy, Virginia, United States; January 16, 2002
* Erfurt massacre - Erfurt, Germany; April 26, 2002
* Monash University shooting - Melbourne, Australia; October 21, 2002
* Rocori High School shootings - Cold Spring, Minnesota, United States; September 24, 2003
* Southwood Middle School tragedy, Miami, Florida; February 3, 2004
* Red Lake High School massacre - Red Lake, Minnesota, United States; March 21, 2005
* Campbell County High School - Jacksboro, Tennessee: November 8, 2005
* Dawson College shooting - Montreal, Quebec, Canada; September 13, 2006
* Platte Canyon High School shooting - Bailey, Colorado, United States; September 27, 2006
* Amish school shooting - Nickel Mines, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, United States; October 2, 2006
* Weston High School shooting, Cazenovia, Wisconsin September 29, 2006
* Springfield Township High School Shooting-Springfield, Pennsylvania,Dec. 12, 2006
* Henry Foss High School - Tacoma, Washington, United States January 3, 2007
* Beirut Arab University shooting - Beirut, Lebanon; January 25, 2007
* Virginia Tech massacre - Blacksburg, Virginia, United States; April 16, 2007


Now, these are the 'biggest' (I assume) meaning the highest body counts and the most national coverage in the US. If you look at the dates you'll see how dispersed these shootings have been. Not to mention that they're not concentrated in one area. So, from this (at least in my opinion) this 'threat' of school shootings isn't as big as

 

OMG! I didn't know ther were THAT many!

 

Of course there have been a lot. I don't think banning guns will stop this problem, though. Nor will tougher rules or softer playing (no dodge ball? BOO). I think when things become more equally distributed and bullies no longer get a free pass because they're jocks. Then they'll stop. But school shootings are not a common thing that happen every day. You could apply the banning logic just as easily to postal workers. Not to mention that some of those (at least in the 60's and 70's) were done by government employees.

 

Actually, there were 41 on that list (by my count), and it goes back 41 years. That's on average 1 per year.

When you consider how many schools there are just in the US, each of which is open for about 180 days a year, that's still an infinitesimal number of school shootings compared to the potential for them.

Kimball Kinnison

 

Exactly my point. People make them out to be this big bogyman and herald them as proof that we need to ban guns. They give these school shootings too much credit.

 

But, won't you think of the children?

Personally, I wouldn't include the various shootings on college campuses as "school shootings". College is completely different from high school, and supposedly everyone there is an adult and responsible for their own actions. Because of that, college campus shootings should be treated no different from any other shooting involving adults.

Kimball Kinnison

 

I never think of the children. What have they ever done for me?

 

Fire... one word. Thailand.


And now that I've alienated everybody with horribly bad taste (and no, that wasn't implying anything about Fire)... first of all, I'm in the same room with a set of knives. Second, I can build a bomb entirely with legal materials. Heck, the worst school massacre in U.S. history happened when bombs were planted. Columbine featured pipe bombs that thankfully didn't go off.

 

Child labor laws should be repealed.

There, I've alienated those you missed.

 

Hey, I forgot about the sweatshops there too.

Thanks for the assist

 

No porb.

 

Aside from the first two listed incidents, every one of these occured after the Gun Control Act of 1968.

The following occured after the implimentation of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (aka the Brady Bill):

 

Ah, post hoc ergo propter hoc, my old friend.

E_S

 

Ender, I think you're misapplying that falacy.
Surfer didn't say that the gun bans CAUSED those shootings, just that if gun control was supposed to prevent these crimes that then there should have been a decrease correlating to those increased gun control measures, which does not show, at a minimum in relation to school shootings.

 

Not really:

"If gun control works, none of those events should have taken place, after passage of a gun control act"

After we've established through facts and figures that gun availability isn't a factor in crime, then to assume that more guns would have been preventative is as amusing a fantasy as the notion that arming Africans would keep the peace.

E_S

 

Pretty much. The gun control measures, designed to keep these kinds of massacres from happening, clearly haven't despite adding layer after layer of laws. In spite of these laws, and those passed at the state and local levels, these crimes still occured.