Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Hordini wrote: I think that you might be erroneously equating the right to own guns with the right to shoot people with them.
Seems to be something of a pattern
Why else have one?
I doubt this would be so much of an issue if said guns were only for hunting or sports. I certainly would not have an issue with it.
Also, why do people make so much fuss about it being a right? It is a law, yes, but if a law is sub-optimal, then it is not invulnerable to criticism. No law is. The moment a law becomes uncriticisable democracy takes a blow. And it clearly is sub-optimal; otherwise I doubt such a large amount of people would take issues with it (In either direction)
You just answered your own question about "why else have one."
We make a fuss about it being a right, because it is our right. And I agree with you that that doesn't make gun laws invulnerable to criticism. For one, I would like to see complete national reciprocity for CCW licences. I would be fine if that included an increased training requirement to get it. My home state already requires 12 hours of training, which I think is a reasonable place to start.
Ashiraya wrote: Also, why do people make so much fuss about it being a right? It is a law, yes, but...
We Americans "make so much fuss about it being a right" because that is exactly what it is. Gun ownership is a Constitutionally protected civil right in the USA.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2014/08/29 23:56:05
I doubt this would be so much of an issue if said guns were only for hunting or sports. I certainly would not have an issue with it.
Also, why do people make so much fuss about it being a right? It is a law, yes, but if a law is sub-optimal, then it is not invulnerable to criticism. No law is. The moment a law becomes uncriticisable democracy takes a blow. And it clearly is sub-optimal; otherwise I doubt such a large amount of people would take issues with it (In either direction)
This might surprise you, but most people who have a gun don't run around hoping for a reason to shoot someone with it. But if the day ever comes were someone has to defend their life or that of a lived one you may as well use the most effective tool at your disposal.
The right to bear arms is connected to your right to self defense, which is in turn tied to your right to life.
2014/08/30 02:45:56
Subject: Chicago - Crime Rate Drops as Concealed Carry Applications Surge.
Yeah, when I see numbers that so clearly prove a desired point in an easy-to-read graphic, I start to get pretty dubious. Especially when I know for sure a few of those are wrong without any research at all.
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
Ouze wrote: Yeah, when I see numbers that so clearly prove a desired point in an easy-to-read graphic, I start to get pretty dubious. Especially when I know for sure a few of those are wrong without any research at all.
It isn't even consistent within the data provided. Somehow 88.8 out of 100 Americans own guns, while only 80,000,000 of them do. For the former to be true 266,400,000 would need to be gun owners, something that is clearly not true. What the graphic is citing is the number of firearms owned per person. It is improperly referring to that because it is crap.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2014/09/01 01:11:36
Subject: Chicago - Crime Rate Drops as Concealed Carry Applications Surge.
Unforuntately, what you think is interesting is actually delusional crap claimed by crazy people.
Seriously, look in to the source for the utterly ludicrous claims about the instances of defensive firearms uses. It's one survey, in which a phone poll called people and asked them if they'd used a firearm in the last year to protect themselves. This produced exactly what any polling agency knows it would produce, as well as anyone with a smidgeon of common sense - a really high rate of false positives. Now, for lots of questions the rate of false positives doesn't matter so much, because you're dealing with a reasonably high number of genuine positives. But when you're looking at an overall positive rate of about than 0.1%, then the reality that a lot of people give false positive answers becomes a real issue.
The result, of course, is a completely ridiculous set of findings, but one that produces the massively inflated figure the gun movement wants, and so it continues to be believed to this day.
The second set of graphics are probably sillier - comparing modern developed with professional, reasonably non-corrupt police forces with impoverished countries with corrupt police and judicial systems. Trying to insert a minor factor as in to the comparison without controlling for issues like poverty and effective policing is the work of either the very stupid or someone who is happy to lie for their cause.
The UK & US comparison is similar junk - the US figure is limited to non-negligent manslaughter, forced rape, aggravated assault and robbery. The UK figures include any kind of assault or theft, and any kind of sexual assault. So you're comparing the rate of rape under physical threat to the rate of innappropriate touching on the train in the UK. Or the rate of mugging in the US to the rate of shoplifting in the UK. The comparison is junk.
So please, just don't post this crap in future. And better yet, stop listening to the liars and halfwits who spread it around. Because no good comes out of believing half baked bs.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
dogma wrote: It isn't even consistent within the data provided. Somehow 88.8 out of 100 Americans own guns, while only 80,000,000 of them do. For the former to be true 266,400,000 would need to be gun owners, something that is clearly not true. What the graphic is citing is the number of firearms owned per person. It is improperly referring to that because it is crap.
88.8 is the average number of guns owned per 100 US citizens - taking the estimated total guns in the US and dividing by the total population. 80 million is the number of people who own at least one firearm. The discrepancy comes from many people owning more than one gun.
What this highlights, I think, is the habit of picking and choosing stats to help each argument, and ending up with an incoherent mess. One classic argument made by the gun lobby is that the rates of robbery are declining as the number of gun per capita increases... but the number of households with one or more guns in it is actually decreasing. So if the average burglar was swayed by the possibility that a house contained a gun... then the rate of robbery should be increasing.
If the question is whether the US is better off with or without stricter gun laws then it isn't relevant. You simply decide yes or no, and exactly what should be done about, and what could be done about it are seperate issues.
If, hypothetically, it was decided that the US would be best off by banning some or all guns, and the question moved on to how you go about doing that, then the constitutional protection as understood by SC become an issue.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/01 03:08:19
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2014/09/01 03:14:04
Subject: Chicago - Crime Rate Drops as Concealed Carry Applications Surge.
88.8 is the average number of guns owned per 100 US citizens - taking the estimated total guns in the US and dividing by the total population. 80 million is the number of people who own at least one firearm. The discrepancy comes from many people owning more than one gun.
I'm well aware, I was merely pointing out that the presented infographic did not stipulate this fact and was either intentionally designed to be misleading, or assembled by an idiot; possibly both given the transparency of the error.
What this highlights, I think, is the habit of picking and choosing stats to help each argument, and ending up with an incoherent mess. One classic argument made by the gun lobby is that the rates of robbery are declining as the number of gun per capita increases... but the number of households with one or more guns in it is actually decreasing. So if the average burglar was swayed by the possibility that a house contained a gun... then the rate of robbery should be increasing.
I've also heard the argument that the gun lobby's publicization of gun ownership is what is causing the decline in robbery, and that this justifies its activities.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
dogma wrote: I'm well aware, I was merely pointing out that the presented infographic did not stipulate this fact and was either intentionally designed to be misleading, or assembled by an idiot; possibly both given the transparency of the error.
Ah, I see. And yeah, intentionally misleading or designed by an idiot? Probably a little from column A and a little from column B.
Well, actually, it's neither in one sense. Rather it's people of reasonable intelligence who are unwilling to question facts if they support things they want to be true. Those people then come to believe those untrue things as things that all sensible people 'know' about this issue, and exclude anyone who challenges those ideas. Creation of an echo chamber in two easy steps.
I copped a bit of flack in the massive Obamacare thread for pointing out how the people predicting ACA failure had created an echo chamber like that, likening it to the French echo chamber that formed in their military around the Maginot Line. I guess the only difference there was that when ACA didn't collapse it was very much like Germans marching through the Ardennes, whereas here with guns there is no final, absolute point that makes all the nonsense clear.
I've also heard the argument that the gun lobby's publicization of gun ownership is what is causing the decline in robbery, and that this justifies its activities.
Got to give them points for imagination.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2014/09/01 05:04:38
Subject: Chicago - Crime Rate Drops as Concealed Carry Applications Surge.
Breotan wrote: Gun ownership is a Constitutionally protected civil right in the USA.
As an American, my question to you is: why is this at all relevant?
Given that I was answering Ashiraya's question, "Also, why do people make so much fuss about it being a right?". I'd say the relevance is pretty obvious.
dogma wrote: I'm well aware, I was merely pointing out that the presented infographic did not stipulate this fact and was either intentionally designed to be misleading, or assembled by an idiot; possibly both given the transparency of the error.
Ah, I see. And yeah, intentionally misleading or designed by an idiot? Probably a little from column A and a little from column B.
Well, actually, it's neither in one sense. Rather it's people of reasonable intelligence who are unwilling to question facts if they support things they want to be true. Those people then come to believe those untrue things as things that all sensible people 'know' about this issue, and exclude anyone who challenges those ideas. Creation of an echo chamber in two easy steps.
I copped a bit of flack in the massive Obamacare thread for pointing out how the people predicting ACA failure had created an echo chamber like that, likening it to the French echo chamber that formed in their military around the Maginot Line. I guess the only difference there was that when ACA didn't collapse it was very much like Germans marching through the Ardennes, whereas here with guns there is no final, absolute point that makes all the nonsense clear.
I've also heard the argument that the gun lobby's publicization of gun ownership is what is causing the decline in robbery, and that this justifies its activities.
Got to give them points for imagination.
I wouldn't congratulate myself too much about being right about Obamacare if I were you. Speaking from my own experience I don't know of anyone it helped, but I do know several it has hurt. Anicdotal, I know, but it still has yet to have it's effects fully felt, and from what I've seen personally and read, it won't be good.
2014/09/01 05:12:36
Subject: Chicago - Crime Rate Drops as Concealed Carry Applications Surge.
I had a man break into our house while i was at work and chase my wife and son to the bedroom with a knife in his hand. She pushed the crib in front of the door but he was still trying to get in. Fortunately we own several fire arms and she put a 40. defense round through the door and he took off running. I understand both sides, but i'll never support further gun control due to my personal experience. It's easy to see firearms as the root of these evils, but in the hands of the proper person they are a tool that can save lives.
Relapse wrote: I wouldn't congratulate myself too much about being right about Obamacare if I were you. Speaking from my own experience I don't know of anyone it helped, but I do know several it has hurt. Anicdotal, I know, but it still has yet to have it's effects fully felt, and from what I've seen personally and read, it won't be good.
That’s not really anything to do with my point. Whether you or the American population as a whole comes to embrace ACA is entirely irrelevant. What I was countering in the ACA thread was the narrative that enrolments were miniscule and the whole thing was soon to collapse. That story was based on a bunch of factoids passed around conservative news sources, many of which were straight up wrong and most of the rest missed important context. An actual look at the enrolment numbers and their demographics told a much different story, and so day by the conservative narrative of impending ACA collapse was just more and more wrong, but that reality completely escaped the anti-ACA groups that had sprung up because they just didn’t allow in information that was counter to what they believed.
It was a question which had a factual answer – how many people are going to sign up through the on-line exchanges. Lots of people got that question completely wrong because they were engaged in a process of convincing themselves that their preferred answer was true, instead of looking outside of their own personal political circle for actual real world data.
Being completely wrong about that factual question doesn’t mean the opposition to ACA was wrong about everything, it doesn’t even mean they’re wrong on more things than they’re right on. But it should have been a slap in the face to realise that their methods were wrong, and that they needed to break out of the echo chamber and going looking for what was really happening.
It’s the same thing with the pro-gun movement. They’re not wrong on everything, in fact I’d say they’re probably more right than wrong, and a lot more right than the anti-gun movement. But much of what they believe isn’t just incorrect, it’s miles away from reality and in some cases completely flying rodent gak insane. And it’s gotten that way because of the same process as happened with ACA.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Well, actually, it's neither in one sense. Rather it's people of reasonable intelligence who are unwilling to question facts if they support things they want to be true.
I would argue that such people aren't of reasonable intelligence, but I also happen to be an elitist prick, so that is probably a factor.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2014/09/01 15:25:46
Subject: Chicago - Crime Rate Drops as Concealed Carry Applications Surge.
There's also the prohibitive cost of owning an automatic weapon -- an M5 might go for $25,000, while a chance to gun down zombie targets with an AR-15 and three other weapons costs less than $200.
A Sabre M5 definitely would not sell for 25k, perhaps the author was refering to an MP5?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/01 15:39:23
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2014/09/02 01:44:33
Subject: Chicago - Crime Rate Drops as Concealed Carry Applications Surge.
Rotary wrote: I had a man break into our house while i was at work and chase my wife and son to the bedroom with a knife in his hand. She pushed the crib in front of the door but he was still trying to get in. Fortunately we own several fire arms and she put a 40. defense round through the door and he took off running. I understand both sides, but i'll never support further gun control due to my personal experience. It's easy to see firearms as the root of these evils, but in the hands of the proper person they are a tool that can save lives.
i am glad all safe. We have a 9mm with a lot of spare mags for just such a contingency.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
dogma wrote: I would argue that such people aren't of reasonable intelligence, but I also happen to be an elitist prick, so that is probably a factor.
I guess it depends on how you define intelligent. If we consider a person intelligent because they say and think insightful things, then I guess that means they’re not intelligent. But if we think of a person as intelligent because they are capable of saying and thinking intelligent things, then I’d think we could say they’re intelligent, even if for various reasons they’re not being very smart at all about this issue at this time.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/03 02:02:11
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2014/09/02 04:58:17
Subject: Chicago - Crime Rate Drops as Concealed Carry Applications Surge.
That's a bit of a dodge to my question, don't you think?
If someone is going to bring up that it's a constitutional right to own guns in a gun debate, I imagine they brought it up for a reason.
Sorry, it wasn't meant as a dodge - I was legitimately curious, although I can see how it could be taken that way. Others have covered it, but it certainly seems pertinent if we're discussing firearm rights in the US, and non-Americans are confused as to why it's such a contentious issue with many Americans. It doesn't end the discussion or win the argument by any means, but it certainly is what I would consider to be important background knowledge to bring to the table.
Got to give them points for imagination.
