|
I remember reading something on how much crime is committed with pistols as they're perfect for criminals due to being small and concealable. Meanwhile rifles have the issue of high rate of fire, range and penetration meaning stray rounds kill people rooms away through lovely drywall. Would it be accurate to say that pump-action shotguns have the fewest drawbacks (EG: Crime, use for a mass-murderer) for legal use of the firearms available to the American civilian?
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 13:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 06:51 |
|
|
A good thread https://twitter.com/singlepayertom/status/914898896916176897
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 13:36
|
|
|
Gort posted:I remember reading something on how much crime is committed with pistols as they're perfect for criminals due to being small and concealable. Meanwhile rifles have the issue of high rate of fire, range and penetration meaning stray rounds kill people rooms away through lovely drywall. Pump and Bolt. You can get a good bolt-action with a decent internal clip for cheap and be able to hunt with that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 13:38
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:But then the Republican party dropped every pretense of empathy and became openly delightfully deliriously monstrous and all those people didn't just stick with it but even more exuberantly celebrated Republicanism for finally embracing their true values, and I realized that no nearly every Republican voter is just driven by spite and fear and unwavering hatred. I didn't figure out that conservatism was a lie because of some special genius on my part, it's not because I was smarter than 47% of America or anything, the theory or workability was never of any interest to them, conservatism promised to make other people's families suffer and that's all they care about and that's why they're Republican. my little brother for a few years was starting to lean hard conservative and talk about how mike huckabee was alright recently he was talking about how obvious it is now they were all lying to him so there's some hope 
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 13:55
|
|
|
I have trouble accepting that gun control would reduce suicide rates, because my experience with abortion statistics tell me "desperate people will do thing no matter how hard you ban it". It might deter those of weaker constitution at first, but untreated I doubt that would hold for long before they look up other methods of painless suicide. I'm not adverse to the domestic abuse angle though, because that's more "heat of the moment/crime of passion" rather than a gradual emotional and physical decay & disconnect from reality. In that case gun control would certainly turn murders into assaults. Neurolimal fucked around with this message at 14:07 on Oct 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 14:03
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:my little brother for a few years was starting to lean hard conservative and talk about how mike huckabee was alright Yeah, I'd argue that the volatility of Trump's approval ratings show that there are gains to be made, especially when a figure (like Trump) renegs on all of his campaign promises. We just shouldn't be exclusively targeting suburban republicans or even just republicans. If you offer an appealing solution they'll come naturally without heavy-handed and value-compromising pandering.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 14:06
|
|
|
Yardbomb posted:"No guns ever" is a stupid platform when some people still live in places where hunting deer etc. for food is a good and useful thing, also before you do some lovely dance about "hicks" or whatever those people are generally not rolling in money and anything to live off the land helps, I've lived around exactly those kinds of people in the country before and no you don't have to be some right wing isolationist to do that either. If you want to have a big dumb dream legislation, only allow bolt actions or shotguns and you have to specifically own them with proof that they're being used for hunting. I'm fine with compromising on that as long as the people asking for exceptions for single shot long guns are doing it in good faith and don't turn right around and go "oh well the law is useless, a really dedicated shooter doesn't need a semiauto, stupid libs, you're not stopping bad guys you're just taking my rights argle bargle it's my right to have a belt-fed light machine gun..." etc etc. What you're saying is exactly why all the responsible conservationist poor hunters out there need to stop enabling the NRA and the toxic gun culture it promotes, start making the positive case for guns as tools not toys or status symbols of conspicuous consumption, which need to be regulated to preserve their utility while protecting other people's families. Because gun ownership is falling and the loud toxic crazies are poisoning the discourse for everyone. When America gets tired of endlessly increasing spree killings followed by gun nuts' disgusting callousness toward the deaths of people's families and children, public opinion will eventually break against guns and it will break hard. I'm exmilitary, I still own pistols, and I was as pro-gun as anyone six years ago. The unreasonableness, paranoia, and absolutely chilling willingness to sacrifice thousands of other people's children in order for Team Gun to beat every law no matter how little sense the victory makes has disgusted me so that I no longer care if every last gun is launched into the sun. And I'm not the only former 2A supporter to feel that way. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 14:22 on Oct 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 14:18
|
|
|
Cross post from the suck zone: https://twitter.com/kenklippenstein/status/914955156856373248 this is the article in the tweet In it, this guy goes into how insurance even under ppaca has failed him. And now it's killed him. this man did everything right in our system. and he was utterly failed by it to the point of it costing him his life ppaca is not and never was enough. And all the fixes proposed by non-sanders democrats were not enough, as they would not have saved this man's life. It sickens me that so many democrats are such craven cowards that they will only stand up to defend a murderous system instead of fighting for one that will minimize unnecessary death
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 14:20
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:I have trouble accepting that gun control would reduce suicide rates, because my experience with abortion statistics tell me "desperate people will do thing no matter how hard you ban it". It might deter those of weaker constitution at first, but untreated I doubt that would hold for long before they look up other methods of painless suicide. There is a wealth of evidence showing that reduced gun availability leads to a reduced suicide rate. It's arguable there's a more solid connection between guns and suicide than guns and violent crime.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 14:24
|
|
|
The issue with trying to directly sever relations between gun enthusiasts/hunters and the NRA is that democrats do have a history of pushing very pointless regulation or going after "safe" guns that the NRA has fought against, so in a "its either me or the NRA" situation they're likely to defer to the NRA. There's only two real sokutions to that; allow the NRA to continue to polarize themselves with crazy "WE GUN SHOIT DEM MUZZIES HOLY WAR" pr that they've been doing, and regulate lobbying in general so that you dont have millions of dollars of ads backed by Smith & Wesson. MizPiz posted:There is a wealth of evidence showing that reduced gun availability leads to a reduced suicide rate. It's arguable there's a more solid connection between guns and suicide than guns and violent crime. I suppose a key difference between abortion & suicide rates is the factor of an obvious time limit in abortion's case, and that a lack of easy suicide deterring squeamish people gives enough time for intervention. I'm just personally pessimistic about that because depression and suicidal thoughts can be hard to catch, because people tend to look for theatrical "WOE IS ME I SHALT HANG THYSELF" signs. Neurolimal fucked around with this message at 14:27 on Oct 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 14:24
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:I have trouble accepting that gun control would reduce suicide rates, because my experience with abortion statistics tell me "desperate people will do thing no matter how hard you ban it". It might deter those of weaker constitution at first, but untreated I doubt that would hold for long before they look up other methods of painless suicide. I think you're wrong about suicide. One of the reasons men are more often successful at suicide than women, even though both genders attempt suicide at roughly the same rates, is because men more often use guns, while women tend to use pills. Yes, desperate people will try anything and if someone really wants to kill themselves, there are no shortage of bridges to jump off of. However, lots of people attempt suicide when they are at their lowest point (and suicide probably requires more mental "focus"/"desperation" than a back-ally abortion), and in some cases if you prevent the act, there is a pretty good chance you can get the person to rethink it. People, even suicidal people, are afraid of death. Guns are just a quick and easy way to go out for many of them and there are very few ways to save someone with a gun-inflicted head injury rather than a pill overdose. Please note that I support doctor-assisted suicide, so I'm not an anti-suicide crusader.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 14:27
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:What you're saying is exactly why all the responsible conservationist poor hunters out there need to stop enabling the NRA and the toxic gun culture it promotes, start making the positive case for guns as tools not toys or status symbols of conspicuous consumption, which need to be regulated to preserve their utility while protecting other people's families. Because gun ownership is falling and the loud toxic crazies are poisoning the discourse for everyone. Absolutely agreed on this, it's pretty much exactly why I try to bring up the argument for their utility in gun control stuff sometimes, but the last bit is also why it's so hard to, because of so many of those idiots trying to play deflection with it the way they like to. VitalSigns posted:The unreasonableness, paranoia, and absolutely chilling willingness to sacrifice thousands of other people's children in order for Team Gun to beat every law no matter how little sense the victory makes has disgusted me so that I no longer care if every last gun is launched into the sun. And I'm not the only former 2A supporter to feel that way. Same here even, best I've got is a revolver and a pump but I'd throw em both out in a heartbeat if it meant everything else went too. Yardbomb fucked around with this message at 14:38 on Oct 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 14:35
|
|
|
The sharpest point I'm seeing is that they have had to set up a GoFundMe for the medical costs of the victims. Because guns may be a right, but health care is a privilege.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 14:38
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/HuffPostMedia/status/915209543034003457
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 14:41
|
|
|
Stopped clock: the media generally is partially responsible because reporting mass shootings perpetuates the suicide cluster. It's no different from how reporting on celebrity suicides increases copycat suicides, etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 14:45
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Stopped clock: the media generally is partially responsible because reporting mass shootings perpetuates the suicide cluster. It's no different from how reporting on celebrity suicides increases copycat suicides, etc. had there been any mass shootings where the attacker mowed down crowds from above, from huge distance away? i wonder how many would be mass murderers will be inspired by this innovation
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 14:50
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:had there been any mass shootings where the attacker mowed down crowds from above, from huge distance away? i wonder how many would be mass murderers will be inspired by this innovation First thing that came to mind was the Austin tower shooter from 50+ years ago. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Texas_tower_shooting
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 14:54
|
|
|
MizPiz posted:There is a wealth of evidence showing that reduced gun availability leads to a reduced suicide rate. It's arguable there's a more solid connection between guns and suicide than guns and violent crime. Yep. The most likely person a gun is going to kill is its owner. That (and stopping spree killings) is why I'm in favor of banning all guns. Same reason we changed basic kitchen ovens to not be easy suicide machines. Neurolimal posted:I have trouble accepting that gun control would reduce suicide rates, because my experience with abortion statistics tell me "desperate people will do thing no matter how hard you ban it". It might deter those of weaker constitution at first, but untreated I doubt that would hold for long before they look up other methods of painless suicide. Means-reduction reduces overall rate if the particular mean is very easy to procure or very effective. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/means-matter/means-matter/saves-lives/ Harvard School of Public Health posted:Prior to the 1950s, domestic gas in the United Kingdom was derived from coal and contained about 10-20% carbon monoxide (CO). Poisoning by gas inhalation was the leading means of suicide in the UK. In 1958, natural gas, virtually free of carbon monoxide, was introduced into the UK. By 1971, 69% of gas used was natural gas. Over time, as the carbon monoxide in gas decreased, suicides also decreased (Kreitman 1976). Suicides by carbon monoxide decreased dramatically, while suicides by other methods increased a small amount, resulting in a net decrease in overall suicides, particularly among females. axeil fucked around with this message at 15:02 on Oct 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 14:59
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CfpRp8BL5g drat this was hard to watch
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 15:00
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:I have trouble accepting that gun control would reduce suicide rates, because my experience with abortion statistics tell me "desperate people will do thing no matter how hard you ban it". It might deter those of weaker constitution at first, but untreated I doubt that would hold for long before they look up other methods of painless suicide. Suicide is, generally speaking, not a reasoned decision but an impulse. There are certainly people who have made a conscious, reasoned decision to end their life, and you're probably not going to stop those people. But that's not most suicides. Most suicides are, basically, a desperate response to terrible pain (emotional, mostly). Those people don't really want to die, they want the pain to go away. They have to work themselves up to it. If they use a reversible method, or one that doesn't kill right away, frequently they change their mind. So that's basically the key: with guns, once you pull the trigger it's all over (unless you somehow miss anything vital, which does happen). No chance to reconsider, and one second of impulse is all it takes to complete the act. Some percentage, if all they had was a knife or pills, would reconsider halfway through and bind their wounds/vomit/call 911, and so you'd have a lower rate of completed suicides. It would not end suicide as a phenomenon but it would reduce it. Yes, some people will manage to kill themselves when all they have is a bucket of water. Most won't.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 15:03
|
|
|
Finland had a rooftop shooter 4 years ago, he had a semi .22 and swapped to bolt-action .308 for the police, 2 dead Seven injured. Now, noting that in Finland our shooters dont gently caress around when it comes to accuracy had he had a 30-rd semiauto he couldve propably taken down at least fifty targets I mean Humans my bad republican typo
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 15:09
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I was unaware how many hunter/gatherer societies existed in the US still I have in laws that a pound of venison shot is a pound of beef that can be sold. Some states even have programs to let poor people shoot more deer. Edit: And this in no way is an arguement against reasonable gun control.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 15:31
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:had there been any mass shootings where the attacker mowed down crowds from above, from huge distance away? i wonder how many would be mass murderers will be inspired by this innovation quote:
https://www.livescience.com/51429-mass-shootings-are-contagious.html
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 15:34
|
|
|
I'm not a superstitious person generally but if updating the OP hot topic makes the devil roll the dice and do some new evil I think I'll wait a bit before I try again.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 15:45
|
|
|
Gort posted:I remember reading something on how much crime is committed with pistols as they're perfect for criminals due to being small and concealable. Meanwhile rifles have the issue of high rate of fire, range and penetration meaning stray rounds kill people rooms away through lovely drywall. Modern milItary-type rifles in the 5-6mm caliber (AR's, AK-74s, etc) actually have fewer issues with over penetration in a self defense context. High velocity, lightweight spitzer bullets tend to tumble and fragment after hitting anything. Which saps a lot of their KE and results in poor aerodynamics. Heavier, slower handgun bullets tend to just make a hole and keep on truckin' and no reasonable amount of drywall is going to stop buckshot.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 15:53
|
|
|
My dream solution is that they just add semi-automatic rifles with detachable box magazines to the Title II weapons list that currently has things like machine guns and destructive devices. Basically use the existing legal framework for the few things that ARE decently regulated to clamp down on this crazy poo poo that you can just go buy as if it was a shotgun for shooting clay pigeons.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 15:54
|
|
|
Democrazy posted:I don't understand how anyone can believe in employer arbitration is a good thing without the financial incentive of a politician. Who is stupid enough to buy that line intrinsically? Kennedy doesn't believe that power disparities exist, except for when the government creates them with things like affirmative action, which he hates because he thinks racism ended forever a long time ago. Hieronymous Alloy posted:Stopped clock: the media generally is partially responsible because reporting mass shootings perpetuates the suicide cluster. It's no different from how reporting on celebrity suicides increases copycat suicides, etc. Perhaps, but copycatting is only really a problem when the thing is fairly easy to do. Copycat mass shootings are a big worry because we've done absolutely nothing to make it more difficult to commit mass shootings, and we never will. No one complains about 9/11 coverage causing copycat plane hijackings, because after 9/11 we put in place a wide variety of restrictions, laws, and security measures dedicated to making sure that it couldn't happen again. Sure, much of it is security theater and some of it is really overreaching, but for some reason no one listened to the people who complained that those measures violated civil liberties or wouldn't actually be effective at preventing the crime in question! The people insisting that gun regulation of any kind would be a grave crime against innocent Americans are, for the most part, the same people who cheer on refugee bans, rally behind Sharia law bans and surveillance against Muslims, and call for the deportation of all Hispanic and Muslim immigrants. They always get their way, and no one seems to care whether their arguments make sense or whether their proposals would actually be effective. Why doesn't gun control get that same level of latitude? What's with the double standard?
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 16:23
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:My dream solution is that they just add semi-automatic rifles with detachable box magazines to the Title II weapons list that currently has things like machine guns and destructive devices. Basically use the existing legal framework for the few things that ARE decently regulated to clamp down on this crazy poo poo that you can just go buy as if it was a shotgun for shooting clay pigeons. Bonus: every semi-automatic rifle immediately becomes a limited collectible and therefore more valuable!
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 16:25
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:I have trouble accepting that gun control would reduce suicide rates, because my experience with abortion statistics tell me "desperate people will do thing no matter how hard you ban it". It might deter those of weaker constitution at first, but untreated I doubt that would hold for long before they look up other methods of painless suicide. How many times does this have to be said? Suicide is usually a spur of the moment decision. When we stopped selling gas ovens that it was easy to suffocate yourself with, it wasn't just suicides by oven that fell, it was all suicides. The exact metrics on how many people who commit suicide would be saved if they didn't have easy access to a gun, but my guess is 'many'.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 16:26
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:What's with the double standard? I think you'll find that the answer is very simple in America. You could even say it's black (/brown) and white.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
axeil posted:Yep. The most likely person a gun is going to kill is its owner. That (and stopping spree killings) is why I'm in favor of banning all guns. Same reason we changed basic kitchen ovens to not be easy suicide machines. Whoa, can you expand on that a bit? I've never heard that before and it sounds horrifying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 16:49
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:Whoa, can you expand on that a bit? I've never heard that before and it sounds horrifying. The type of flammable gas that used to come out of the pipes in your house had carbon monoxide in it so you could suffocate pretty quickly breathing it. Nowadays that isn't the case so you can only really suffocate after the gas displaces all of the available oxygen from the space you are in. withak fucked around with this message at 16:58 on Oct 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 16:54
|
|
|
withak posted:The type of flammable gas that used to come out of the pipes in your house had carbon monoxide in it so you could suffocate pretty quickly breathing it. Nowadays that isn't the case so you can only really suffocate after the gas displaces all of the available oxygen. Not only this but carbon monoxide poisoning is painless and it was fairly easy to do - just stick your head in the oven with the gas on and you'll painlessly pass out and die. By changing the gas to not have CO in it the suicide rate in the UK dropped a ton as suicide is usually an impulse decision. Same reason putting up signs saying "people love you" and free crisis line phones on popular jumping points saves lives. People really, really don't want to die and the fact that people still end up killing themselves really speaks to just how powerful depression is and how hard it is to ward off.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
withak posted:The type of flammable gas that used to come out of the pipes in your house had carbon monoxide in it so you could suffocate pretty quickly breathing it. Nowadays that isn't the case so you can only really suffocate after the gas displaces all of the available oxygen from the space you are in. Oh okay. That's uh... Not what I was thinking. I'm not sure what I was thinking but it was significantly more terrible. e: As an owner of a gas oven it is good to know that I don't have to be unreasonably paranoid about killing myself and my family on accident anymore.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
withak posted:The type of flammable gas that used to come out of the pipes in your house had carbon monoxide in it so you could suffocate pretty quickly breathing it. Nowadays that isn't the case so you can only really suffocate after the gas displaces all of the available oxygen from the space you are in. Edit : Probably shouldn't detail that. Suffice it to say there are other easier ways of making that happen without the oven. Liquid Communism fucked around with this message at 17:02 on Oct 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 17:00
|
|
|
I find it very hard to believe that hunting is a more cost effective way to get food than going to the store. I don't see how the cost of guns, ammunition, hunting gear, licenses, and just the plain time spent can compete with industrial food production. Living somewhere incredibly remote is just shifting the costs - it takes a conscious and specific effort to make that happen, and it's an expensive choice. It's one thing to say that it's a way to get specific kinds of food that you want, but people won't starve to death if they're buying rice and beans instead of guns.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 17:15
|
|
|
Heaven help people live in places other than those you approve them living in.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 17:17
|
|
|
captainblastum posted:I find it very hard to believe that hunting is a more cost effective way to get food than going to the store. I don't see how the cost of guns, ammunition, hunting gear, licenses, and just the plain time spent can compete with industrial food production. Living somewhere incredibly remote is just shifting the costs - it takes a conscious and specific effort to make that happen, and it's an expensive choice. Hunting isn't more cost effective than the store, in most places. It's more cost effective than paying game wardens to thin the prey animal populations since we killed all the predators, by making conservation fee based instead of tax based.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
captainblastum posted:I find it very hard to believe that hunting is a more cost effective way to get food than going to the store. I don't see how the cost of guns, ammunition, hunting gear, licenses, and just the plain time spent can compete with industrial food production. Living somewhere incredibly remote is just shifting the costs - it takes a conscious and specific effort to make that happen, and it's an expensive choice. A deer might have three hundred or so dollars' worth of meat on it, all told. Kill three or four deer you might have a year's supply of organic, grass-fed, etc. meat. Then, If you live in the middle of nowheresville and you've been going hunting for thirty years you already have all the infrastructure and training in place, so the additional costs are minimal, but the store is a gas station an hour's drive away that mostly just sells pre-processed prepackaged gunk.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 17:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 06:51 |
|
|
Maybe I phrased it poorly, but those don't really seem to address the point that I was trying to make: that I don't believe the claims that people must hunt to survive anywhere in America. There are other, more cost effective choices for getting food.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2017 17:27
|
|