main
side
curve
  1. In Memory of LAJ_FETT: Please share your remembrances and condolences HERE

Senate Gun Control

Discussion in 'Community' started by Ghost, Dec 14, 2012.

  1. Jabbadabbado

    Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus star 7 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Mar 19, 1999
    The NRA is desperate to keep a lid on research of gun violence as a public health/epidemiological issue. Increased suicide risk, increased risk of being shot in a domestic abuse, increased risk of accidental gun deaths and injury, increased risks of being impacted by gun violence in neighborhoods where guns are most prevalence. increased risk of being shot in a barroom brawl. increased risks of mistaken self defense shootings. increased risk of deadly escalation of minor altercations between strangers. increased risk of police being shot when they respond to domestic disturbances. Etc. Etc.

    The gun lobby doesn't want you to know what the prevalence is. Obscure the scope of the problem. Muddy the discussion of possible solutions. No different from the energy industry and climate change.
     
  2. anakinfansince1983

    anakinfansince1983 Skywalker Saga/LFL/YJCC Manager star 10 Staff Member Manager

    Registered:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Vezner : I give you credit for wanting to fund treatment for mental illness and supporting mandatory background checks. I believe jabberwalkie said something similar earlier.

    However, finding out what makes someone want to kill another person is exactly what Congress has banned the CDC from doing, at the behest of the NRA. See the article I posted above.
     
    Juliet316 and Jedi Merkurian like this.
  3. Chewgumma

    Chewgumma Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    Apr 14, 2009
    [​IMG]

    [face_flag][face_flag] 'MURICA!!! [face_flag][face_flag]

    Edit to add: I as a Brit usually stay out of these debates, for the sake of my mental health more than anything. Yet due to the fact that my partner lives in America, and for reasons outside of my control, it's becoming increasingly apparent that I'm going to have to move to America in the near future.

    Thing is I don't really have a problem with that. I love a lot about life in America and the time I have spent there. I'm even okay with leaving the NHS for the infamously crap American healthcare system. Yet the thought of moving makes me incredibly unsteady for one major reason: My chances of getting shot by some drunk ass is going to rocket up. In my time in America my partner's parents waved their guns under my nose because 'lols, you're a brit, you don't have these do you", then slipped out the clips to show me that, of course, they were loaded.

    Chalk it down to bad personal experience, but it did no favours to the image the international media has painted of America: You trivialize guns to the point that they aren't tools meant to kill another living being, nor treated with the respect such an item deserves, but toys.
     
  4. anakinfansince1983

    anakinfansince1983 Skywalker Saga/LFL/YJCC Manager star 10 Staff Member Manager

    Registered:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Given that firing ranges have birthday parties where 9-year-old kids can accidentally shoot their instructors, are you surprised?
     
  5. Chewgumma

    Chewgumma Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    Apr 14, 2009

    I really wish I could say I am. Yet considering one of the first things I ever saw during my first time in America was this

    [​IMG]

    I just curl up into a ball of despair instead.
     
  6. Admiral Volshe

    Admiral Volshe Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Sep 2, 2012
    How is banning research legal? Or is it just specific governmental research that's banned?
     
    Juliet316 likes this.
  7. mikeximus

    mikeximus Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 6, 2012
    That chart is actually quite hilarious...

    It tries to portray that the states with the highest death rate related to firearms correlate with loose gun laws. What's absolutely funny about that is the criteria they used to figure out the numbers:

    "*Gun death figures include homicides, suicides, accidental gun deaths, and legal intervention involving firearms."

    First the "legal intervention involving firearms" I'm sure means when the cops have to shoot someone as well as justifiable homicide. Strict or loose gun laws have no bearing on that number, so why do they include that as part of their number in figuring out the per 100,000 of gun deaths in relation to the states gun laws? The guns that are being used in these deaths, are being used in lawful and legal ways. Stricter gun laws will not change this number at all because the people that own the guns being used are obviously got the guns legally anyway. The only reason is to pad the stats.

    The next one is "accidental gun deaths", again an irrelevant stat when it comes down to whether a state has weak gun laws or not because whether an accident happens with a gun is not dependent on whether the state that it was bought in had weak gun laws. Accidents happen regardless of the gun laws.

    Suicides, well to me, suicides are irrelevant. Stricter gun laws mean nothing if someone wants to truly kill themselves. Waiting period for them to cool down and change their mind? Possibly, but, it's their body right? Who are we to tell them what they can or can't do with their body. Does anyone have the stats that show a correlation with suicide by a gun bought the same day? I would bet most suicides are with guns that were legally obtained well before the act, or a gun that was stolen from friends or family.

    The whole point of talking about guns and death is when it's used in relation to committing an illegal homicide, I mean that's what is going on right now, someone goes on a mass shooting and commits mass murder, and this leads to the discussion of stricter guns laws to save innocent lives. Let's look at Alaska's numbers, which this chart has as the biggest culprit.

    According to the FBI, in 2013 Alaska reported 34 murders, 12 of which involved firearms:

    https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/u..._20_murder_by_state_types_of_weapons_2013.xls

    So less than half of the murders committed in Alaska involved a firearm. What is the per 100,00 number? I will use the U.S. Census bureaus 2014 estimate for Alaska's population which has it at 737,000

    So...

    (12 murders / 737,000 people) x 100,000= 1.63

    1.63 gun related murders per 100,000 people in Alaska. Again, it's the murder of innocents we are talking about right because of the mass shootings? Not legal homicides, or accidents, or someone deciding to do something with their own body/life. The national discussion is about stopping people from killing other people with guns, illegally.

    So let's look at California's numbers as they have some of the strictest gun laws in the U.S.A., at least according to the chart above. According to the FBI, California (2013) reported 1,745 murders of which 1,224 involved firearms. What's the per 100,000 number using the U.S. Census Bureaus 2014 population estimate?

    (1,244 gun related murders/ 38,802,500 people) x 100,000 = 3.21

    That's 3.21 gun related murders per 100,000 people in California, almost double that of Alaska's number.

    If someone wants to kill you in California, you are almost twice as likely to be shot than if you were in Alaska...

    What does this mean? It means that stats, figures, numbers can all be skewed to try and fill an agenda, something both sides of this debate are guilty of, not just that nasty mean ole NRA.

    So far all I hear is nonsense from one side (need more guns) and lip service from the other (comprehensive background checks will work). I am all for trying to find a realistic way to stop the gun violence in this country, and what I mean realistic is not a gun ban, as that won't ever happen. Realistic in that we need a law that would actually stop all these murders from happening.

    What is the answer? I don't know what it is, it will take someone much smarter than I to figure it out. We continue to find out though that if you apply the POTUS comprehensive background checks to all these mass shooters we find out that most would still qualify for guns. We need to stop using charts that skew the numbers to try and fulfill an agenda. Because if Californian's are murdering each other with guns at almost double the rate Alaskans are, then what good are the laws in California? What good is that chart?
     
  8. KnightWriter

    KnightWriter Administrator Emeritus star 9 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Nov 6, 2001
    The only thing that will cause a change of opinion for the most dedicated anti-gun control/pro-gun people is losing a loved one to an easily preventable death by shooting. Until it becomes completely personal, you won't see any change.
     
    Juliet316 and Dinos4Ever like this.
  9. anakinfansince1983

    anakinfansince1983 Skywalker Saga/LFL/YJCC Manager star 10 Staff Member Manager

    Registered:
    Mar 4, 2011
    My understanding is that Congress can tell the CDC what it will or will not research. Other agencies can research what they want, if they have the funding.

    ...which is a definite "if," when a powerful lobbying group is doing its best to stop anyone from finding information.

    KnightWriter, I wonder if that would work, just because the response from the pro-gun side regarding any gun-related death (unless it's an unarmed black person shot by the cops) is that the victim should have had a gun and shot back.

    Which brings me to this question: What about the right to NOT own a gun and still not be shot a gun-wielding nut? Pretty sure the right to life is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence. Does that only apply to people who are willing/eager to use a gun?
     
  10. mikeximus

    mikeximus Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 6, 2012

    How is it all on one side though, when we see that stricter gun laws doesn't necessarily mean lower gun related murders...? Like I said, what is the point of that chart when it comes to the national discussion of trying to stop what happened in Oregon? It's been a while, but, if I remember right, the 2013 bill that got shot down in the Senate would have not stopped what happened in Oregon. So why does the POTUS continue to push that as the answer? It comes across as lip service to make the anti-gun people happy... but it's a false hope.

    To me, it's both sides, not just one.
     
  11. anakinfansince1983

    anakinfansince1983 Skywalker Saga/LFL/YJCC Manager star 10 Staff Member Manager

    Registered:
    Mar 4, 2011
    I agree with you to a point, which is why I have been saying that the culture around guns/gun fetishism needs to change.
     
    Juliet316, Rew and FatBurt like this.
  12. Jabbadabbado

    Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus star 7 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Mar 19, 1999
    we do see that stricter gun laws reduce gun-related murders. The goal maybe would be to make every state's gun laws as strict as Hawaii's. Codify that at the federal level. Then you reduce the frequency of mass shootings. We don't have to have the attitude that unless we eliminate all of them in perpetuity our policy has failed and we shouldn't bother. Epidemiology and public health take the approach of reducing prevalence as a win.

    My attitude as a parent is that anyone who owns a gun is dangerous to my family unless proven otherwise. My father-in-law is a hunter. He has 4 or 5 hunting weapons. He keeps them locked away and didn't parade them in front of the kids when they were little. Hunters are carefully trained in Austria and are required to be certified, licensed, and be members of local hunting associations that establish guidelines and set quotas. People who have been doing it 40 or 50 years train newcomers. They have a very established culture and no one gets to participate unless they know what they're doing. Sure you hear about mistakes, but not very often.

    Here in the U.S. 95% of people with guns are rank amateurs; more than half are probably too reckless and stupid to own guns. Alcohol and guns mix too easily. There's no oversight of anyone. Everyone thinks of themselves as an island capable of making good decisions. But it's just not the case. We know how stupid people are.
     
  13. mikeximus

    mikeximus Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 6, 2012


    OK so where is this culture though? I have seen so many generalizations in this thread about gun owners with nothing to back it up other than gun owners = stoopids...

    And before anyone thinks they can call me out, I live in NYS and I do not own one gun. Never even shot one. However, I do believe in the 2nd Amendment, but, I do believe in strong gun laws as well.

    There are millions upon millions of responsible gun owners out there, how do you separate them from the bad guys? What is the criteria for gun fetishism that we must stop, so as to stop these mass shootings, or the massive number of shootings in Chicago or Baltimore. Over the last couple weekends more people were killed with guns in Chicago than the incident in Oregon. I highly doubt any of the murderers in Chicago were card carrying members of the NRA or would consider themselves rednecks... So where is the fetish? Does it run along racial, economic, political lines?


    I think Hawaii is the one place where I think their culture is more indicative of the low gun related murders than their laws. I don't see anything on that chart above that stands out as stopping what happened in Oregon, or sandy Hook, etc etc.

    But, admittedly I don't know all their laws.... so whatever that's worth.
     
  14. KnightWriter

    KnightWriter Administrator Emeritus star 9 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Nov 6, 2001

    The idea that stricter gun lows don't necessarily lower gun-related murders is complete nonsense. One reason that pro-gun folks struggle in these arguments is because they consistently ignore the rest of the world, which features countries that have enacted sweeping anti-gun measures (or have had them for decades, such as Japan) and seen great success with them. If you block out the rest of the world, as American Exceptionalists frequently do (unless it's to use another country for the U.S.'s benefit in some way), it's easier to get around this.
     
  15. mikeximus

    mikeximus Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 6, 2012

    Right, because culture doesn't have a part to play in Japan as well as the law... I agree with anakinfansince1983 that there is a culture problem here in the U.S. but, I don't necessarily believe that it can be thrown on the shoulders of one particular group like it always does.

    Go ahead and restrict people to only shotguns, and have them to take classes and get permits. You would still see people shooting each other and shooting up schools in this country, just with shot guns. That is the fundamental problem in this country.
     
    ma_petite likes this.
  16. anakinfansince1983

    anakinfansince1983 Skywalker Saga/LFL/YJCC Manager star 10 Staff Member Manager

    Registered:
    Mar 4, 2011
    I don't think in stereotypes, and no, I don't think all gun owners are stupid rednecks. In fact, most of the gun owners who posted in this thread are not stupid rednecks.

    The aspect of gun culture that needs to change is this: one, responding with "b...bu...but Second Amendment!" any time any proposal whatsoever is presented to restrict access to guns. That response is given even when a proposal to research causes of gun violence is presented, as I posted earlier. Two, an absolute refusal to look at how other countries similar to us economically, keep their rates of gun deaths low. This refusal comes in the form of throwing hands in the air and saying "We can never be like any of those countries" to the more extreme response of getting offended: how dare you compare us to the commie Europeans!!!"

    Three, and this is the biggest one: a belief that the best or one of the better ways to solve a problem is with a gun. This can come in the form of the mild "But I LIKE shooting things!" to the heavier "I want to shoot animals that come in my yard" to the worst one: "This mass shooting would not have happened if someone had shot back." The mentality that we're all in a Clint Eastwood movie.
     
    Juliet316 and Jedi Merkurian like this.
  17. KnightWriter

    KnightWriter Administrator Emeritus star 9 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Nov 6, 2001

    It doesn't matter if it's a cultural problem or not. No amount of culture is going to get around being unable to buy guns due to it being illegal to do so, or without going through a certain amount of red tape (i.e. background checks and so on).

    Folks like you keep saying that certain things would happen instead of what we see now, but clear evidence in other countries contradicts that and shows otherwise. There's no getting around it. Conservatives like to say that this or that will happen if a given law is passed (i.e. the ACA will cause a major recession, for example, and/or kill a lot of jobs), and all evidence has been to the contrary. The same was true for Clinton's tax raises in 1993. Unfortunately, there's no accountability for anyone who says these things-- when they don't come to pass as predicted, people just move on and act as if they were never wrong. It's no different with guns.

    All we need to do is look at the rest of the world to see what would happen if we enacted sweeping gun restrictions and laws.
     
  18. mikeximus

    mikeximus Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 6, 2012
    Really? People like me? You mean an atheist, that doesn't own a gun, prob never will, that while doesn't believe in abortion for myself or my family believe I am no place to tell someone else what to do... I could go on....

    The simple point I am making, is that there is a deeper problem in this country, and it isn't oh noes the big bad guns.....

    2013 in the U.S.A, if you remove all gun related murders there is still a 1.40 per 100,000 murder rate in the U.S.A. again, keep in mind that number is adjusted to remove all firearm related murders.

    Japan usually hangs out less than 1.0 per 100,000 I believe Australia also hangs out around 1.0 as well, and both of those numbers are with their gun related murders...The two countries that are held up as the shining symbol, and Americans still kill each other at higher rate even without guns.

    In the U.S.A. it just isn't a gun related issue, it is a cultural issue that murder is more prevalent here. But let's pretend it's the guns and not the people, lets pretend that if we snapped out fingers and tomorrow every gun simply vanished, that the 1.40 wouldn't skyrocket. Would it reach the same level as if we still had guns? No, obviously not, but the problem here is the lack of actually dealing with the problem at hand...

    Edit: Math corrections
     
  19. KnightWriter

    KnightWriter Administrator Emeritus star 9 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Nov 6, 2001
    I'm sure it isn't only about guns, but no one can get around the basic fact that guns are a major part of the problem. It's low-hanging fruit that can be picked as far as working toward fewer deaths, but we're not allowed to get at it because it's not "the" problem, or it wouldn't solve everything by itself. As if perfection is the only solution.
     
    tom, Juliet316, CT-867-5309 and 3 others like this.
  20. Darth Guy

    Darth Guy Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Aug 16, 2002
    Hey, I have an idea! The problem is multi-faceted and guns are one major cause.
     
    tom, Juliet316, Jabbadabbado and 5 others like this.
  21. Admiral Volshe

    Admiral Volshe Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Sep 2, 2012
    Reread that sentence. You mention not believing in it for people other than you. Those people are "someone else". ;)
     
    Shira A'dola likes this.
  22. anakinfansince1983

    anakinfansince1983 Skywalker Saga/LFL/YJCC Manager star 10 Staff Member Manager

    Registered:
    Mar 4, 2011
    I think the Clint Eastwood movie mentality is a big part of the reason, that murder is more prevalent here, and guns make it easier to commit murder, especially mass murder.

    I have heard the argument from pro-gun folks, when the suggestion is made that certain types of assault rifles be banned, that weapons that fire several shots in as many seconds without reload are necessary because "What if several people break in your house at once?"

    ...as I said...Clint Eastwood movie.
     
  23. Jedi Ben

    Jedi Ben Chosen One star 9

    Registered:
    Jul 19, 1999
    Well....

    [​IMG]
     
  24. mikeximus

    mikeximus Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 6, 2012

    Um no, luckily I married someone that believes abortion is not just a women's issue but something that should be discussed between both people involved. Luckily we never had to have that discussion because it's not something either of us believe in for our family.

    If other people want to do it, that's up to them.
     
    Jedi Merkurian likes this.
  25. Rogue_Follower

    Rogue_Follower Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Nov 12, 2003
    In general, I agree with your point that the chart is aimed at promoting an agenda and doesn't contain all the necessary facts to make a truly informed judgement. However, proper context needs more than just Alaska and California, as those are two very, very different states. Here are the same calculations for a few other states at the bottom of the original chart, to make sure those two weren't cherry picked:

    Louisiana
    • 2014 population estimate: 4,649,676
    • 2013 murders, total: 453
    • ~9.74 murders per 100,000 people
    • 2013 murders, firearm: 356 (~79% of total)
    • ~7.66 gun related murders per 100,000 people
    Missouri
    • 2014 population estimate: 6,063,589
    • 2013 murders, total: 371
    • ~6.12 murders per 100,000 people
    • 2013 murders, firearm: 273 (~74% of total)
    • ~4.50 gun related murders per 100,000 people
    Alabama
    • 2014 population estimate: 4,849,377
    • 2013 murders: who knows, Alabama didn't provide the FBI with those statistics. Good job, Alabama!
    Arkansas
    • 2014 population estimate: 2,966,369
    • 2013 murders, total: 154
    • ~5.19 murders per 100,000 people
    • 2013 murders, firearm: 110 (~71% of total)
    • ~3.71 gun related murders per 100,000 people
    Wyoming
    • 2014 population estimate: 584,153
    • 2013 murders, total: 15
    • ~2.57 murders per 100,000 people
    • 2013 murders, firearm: 9 (60% of total)
    • ~1.54 gun related murders per 100,000 people
    Montana
    • 2014 population estimate: 1,023,579
    • 2013 murders, total: 15
    • ~1.47 murders per 100,000 people
    • 2013 murders, firearm: 9 (60% of total)
    • ~0.88 gun related murders per 100,000 people
    And a few from the top of the chart, for comparison:

    Hawaii
    • 2014 population estimate: 1,419,561
    • 2013 murders, total: 9
    • ~0.63 murders per 100,000 people
    • 2013 murders, firearm: 6 (~67% of total)
    • ~0.42 gun related murders per 100,000 people
    Massachusetts
    • 2014 population estimate: 6,745,408
    • 2013 murders, total: 135
    • ~2.00 murders per 100,000 people
    • 2013 murders, firearm: 78 (~58% of total)
    • ~1.16 gun related murders per 100,000 people
    New York
    • 2014 population estimate: 19,746,227
    • 2013 murders, total: 648
    • ~3.28 murders per 100,000 people
    • 2013 murders, firearm: 362 (~56% of total)
    • ~1.83 gun related murders per 100,000 people
    Connecticut
    • 2014 population estimate: 3,596,677
    • 2013 murders, total: 86
    • ~2.39 murders per 100,000 people
    • 2013 murders, firearm: 60 (~70% of total)
    • ~1.67 gun related murders per 100,000 people
    Rhode Island
    • 2014 population estimate: 1,055,173
    • 2013 murders, total: 31
    • ~2.94 murders per 100,000 people
    • 2013 murders, firearm:18 (~58% of total)
    • ~1.71 gun related murders per 100,000 people
    New Jersey
    • 2014 population estimate: 8,938,175
    • 2013 murders, total: 401
    • ~4.49 murders per 100,000 people
    • 2013 murders, firearm: 291 (~73% of total)
    • ~3.26 gun related murders per 100,000 people
    Ideally someone would calc the metrics for all 50, but it's Saturday, so, eh, I'm going to Alabama off and not do the rest. Everyone can interpret as they wish.