|
r.y.f.s.o. posted:What separates voters who think school shootings suck enough to seriously do something about it, and those that do not?
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 00:42 |
|
|
Even before she made her concessions, all of the provisions she wanted to include involved "assault weapons", mainly rifles and shotguns, which are responsible for the smallest share of gun deaths. I don't think it would have been any more effective. quote:The senator glumly acknowledged that her watered-down bill would not remove from the nation's streets any existing grenade launchers or AK-47s, which are capable of firing 30 rounds within a few seconds. How many Americans have been killed with grenade launchers in the last 200 years?
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:28
|
|
|
Also, twodot, friend, philosophy is not just like, referring to some dead dudes books to inform modern political decisions or whatever strange conception you've repeatedly presented here. When we talk about values, about ideologies, about rights, it's fuckin philosophical discussion. This is important to know because this is where our actual disagreements reside, not up in the numbers. Numbers can inform policy but if you have a different value judgment on a given outcome then fiddling around with statistics is pointless and will be endlessly circular. Which, if you're the NRA type, you're super into that. I"m just trying to get some honesty out of the pro-gun side, which, like I said, is difficult, because an honest, sober assessment of the position that leads to "do nothing" as the response to a bunch of preventably dead kids is preeeeeetty ugly, and most people aren't going to own up to that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:28
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:Demanding effective gun control while accepting stupid gun control is not a good way to get anyone to pass effective gun control. As has been demonstrated by the last 30 years of gun control. We don't have a choice about what we'll "accept" from politicians because writing legislation always involves compromises with other politicians we didn't vote for. As long as gun owners keep voting for anti-gun-control politicians, the only gun control that will pass is the kind politicians on both sides of the aisle like: stupid laws that Democrats can point to as evidence they tried and Republicans can point to as ineffective while they fundraise off the outrage. Don't want dumb gun control? Stop getting played by the NRA and start supporting the kind of gun control that works.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:30
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:We don't have a choice about what we'll "accept" from politicians because writing legislation always involves compromises with other politicians we didn't vote for. As long as gun owners keep voting for anti-gun-control politicians, the only gun control that will pass is the kind politicians on both sides of the aisle like: stupid laws that Democrats can point to as evidence they tried and Republicans can point to as ineffective while they fundraise off the outrage..
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:32
|
|
|
r.y.f.s.o. posted:I"m just trying to get some honesty out of the pro-gun side, which, like I said, is difficult, because an honest, sober assessment of the position that leads to "do nothing" as the response to a bunch of preventably dead kids is preeeeeetty ugly, and most people aren't going to own up to that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:35
|
|
|
twodot posted:Anyone who isn't willing to say "preventably dead kids is an acceptable outcome" is just an idiot, identity confirmed, twodot is Sideshow Bob
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:37
|
|
|
twodot posted:Well my charitable answer is "value systems". My uncharitable answer is "people who think we should do something about school shootings are having an emotional reaction to low probability events that are not significantly dangerous from a public policy perspective or even related to each other and they need popsicles". Yeah, value systems. Are those necessarily fixed, unchangeable, do they never change? I think they do. Minds change. It takes a while and people have to be coaxed into it and feel like it's their own idea, but it works. And yes, I have one motherfucker of an emotional reaction to school shootings. One of my closest friends survived a school shooting. So, in your estimation, the probability and frequency of mass (or school, you pick) shootings in the US is at an acceptable level?
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:38
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:identity confirmed, twodot is Sideshow Bob
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:39
|
|
|
beep boop why is human life important all humans are chemicals which will still exist in some form, boop beep humans who are sad when a roomful of child corpses are stacked like cordwood should raise their dopamine levels with a popsicle to compensate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:40
|
|
|
Marijuana posted:I'm gonna go out on a limb here and suggest that you aren't really interested in an answer to this question. I actually am. I figure I agree with 90% of the gun control measures you might believe in. Total disarmament I think is so impossible in the USA I don't know if it's even practical to argue about
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:45
|
|
|
r.y.f.s.o. posted:Yeah, value systems. Are those necessarily fixed, unchangeable, do they never change? quote:And yes, I have one motherfucker of an emotional reaction to school shootings. quote:So, in your estimation, the probability and frequency of mass (or school, you pick) shootings in the US is at an acceptable level? twodot fucked around with this message at 23:53 on Mar 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:45
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:beep boop why is human life important all humans are chemicals which will still exist in some form, boop beep humans who are sad when a roomful of child corpses are stacked like cordwood should raise their dopamine levels with a popsicle to compensate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:46
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:I mean Barack Obama personally ordered the murder of at least one American child and dozens if not hundreds of foreign children and then got reelected so let's face it kid death is not that high on anyone's priority list. Don't worry there are always plenty of people willing to explain why murdering children is nothing to get all bothered about
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:49
|
|
|
twodot posted:Of course they do, but I understood our conversation to be in the context of "What can we expect from a gun thread on the Internet?", and I don't think it's realistic to expect value systems to change in that context. Two people promoting value systems might have some influence on third parties, but there's not a lot of people posting that are thinking "maybe my value system is bad?". Over in the Trump Thread there are multiple examples of posters who started their forums life with one ideological standpoint and through reading and thinking eventually arrived at another, sometimes opposite stance. It happens. And all I'm saying is, our differences aren't in the interpretation of the numbers, it's in our value systems, our moral / ethical judgments, and that's where the discussion should focus, if, IF, anything of use is going to come of this. twodot posted:Sorry to hear that, to be clear I'm not trying to invalidate the concept of emotional reactions to things, just that they are not helpful for crafting policy. I am not advocating for policy crafted emotionally; policy should be scientific in approach, outcome focused, tested, etc. We are capable of crafting such policy as to drastically reduce the number of mass shootings, the blueprints are all over for us to see. But the following viewpoint is what prevents such policy from being enacted: twodot posted:They're at a level where I have no interest in spending any effort in fixing them if you call that acceptable. Obviously if we can click a button and improve things we do, but I have my view set on much higher priorities. Yes, that is basically the working definition of acceptable in this context. Thanks for clearly stating this. It's a lot more honest than this discussion is used to. I guess my first reaction to that is... Really? Jesus.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 00:04
|
|
|
r.y.f.s.o. posted:Over in the Trump Thread there are multiple examples of posters who started their forums life with one ideological standpoint and through reading and thinking eventually arrived at another, sometimes opposite stance.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 00:06
|
|
|
r.y.f.s.o. posted:Yes, that is basically the working definition of acceptable in this context.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 00:11
|
|
|
twodot posted:Anyone who isn't willing to say "preventably dead kids is an acceptable outcome" is just an idiot, because there's hundreds of items that create preventably dead kids where restricting them would reduce preventably dead kids where no one's advocating for restrictions. I mean, we don't even mandate vaccines for children (some places do, sort of). I realize you are likely a person who would advocate for more vaccinations, I'm just pointing out that our society is fundamentally structured in a way that accepts some amount of children will die in a preventable manner as a result of policy choices. I am personally responsible for suggesting that some amount of preventably dead kids is acceptable in road safety.  (cost-benefit stuff on crash mitigation and prevention with an X million dollar per life soft restriction; we weren't looking at kids specifically, but some fraction of the tiny number of deaths per year we, effectively, recommended not preventing would presumably be sub-adult) note: I am in favor of much more gun control than we have, and extremely angry the CDC isn't allowed to fund research on gun health impacts Goatse James Bond fucked around with this message at 00:20 on Mar 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 00:15
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:Big ups to them. It took me years before D&D beat the libertarian out of me. The last eight years have seen me go from like, middling lib to full throated anarcho communist, it rules
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 00:24
|
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:The last eight years have seen me go from like, middling lib to full throated anarcho communist, it rules Yeah I'm not quite that far yet. I'm more of a De Leonist Syndicalist tbqh.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 00:35
|
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:No, that's literally a thing that was reported on in the early 90s, that the 94 bill was a piece of poo poo because people who got nra money fought for it to be that way because they got nra money, you're stupid as poo poo Not passing a bill at all would have been better in the long run for gun control than the 94 AWB, hindsight is 20/20. The 94 AWB was instrumental in the NRA and gun nuts' narrative about how those awful liberals just watch action movies and get scared, dont understand guns, and that they already tried to take away your guns but were beaten back, and can't be allowed to try again. hakimashou fucked around with this message at 01:05 on Mar 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 01:02
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Not passing a bill at all would have been better in the long run for gun control than the 94 AWB, hindsight is 20/20. Right and they engineered that scenario. Stick with us here
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 01:23
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:Not passing a bill at all would have been better in the long run for gun control than the 94 AWB, hindsight is 20/20.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 01:29
|
|
|
r.y.f.s.o. posted:Why does asbestos "suck"  Captured in the WA town of Wittenoom, which was abandoned soon after All of the men pictured except for one died from asbestos triggered cancer Asbestos was used on the roads, pavements, and playgrounds of the town Over 2000 former residents and workers of the town died from exposure The Western Australian government is still trying to clean up the town
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 01:41
|
|
|
twodot posted:Different people measure these things differently, but by my count the US in 2017 had something like 100 deaths and 600 injuries from mass shootings does that sound accurate to you? That's ~0.3% of gun deaths, ~0.15% of violent deaths in the US. If you've got an easy proven way to shave off 0.3% of gun deaths, then sure we should do it, but we need to be thinking at a much bigger scale. Even if we all sociopathically agreed that lives lost in preventable mass shootings are worthless, limiting the analysis of gun control's effects to the prevention of mass shootings would still be a disingenuous framing of the gun control argument because we have observed the results of gun control and the effect was orders of magnitude greater than 0.3% of firearm deaths, for example. quote:A summary of these laws is provided in Table 3. In regards to homicide rates, Ozanne-Smith et al. (78) examined the NFA using Victoria as a control group, given that this state had previously enacted firearm restrictions in 1988. The authors found a reduction (14%) in overall firearm death rates in states implementing NFA restrictions relative to Victoria Someone quote this at twodot on the off chance that he decides not to be a disingenuous pedant for once.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 02:18
|
|
|
twodot posted:Anyone who isn't willing to say "preventably dead kids is an acceptable outcome" is just an idiot, because there's hundreds of items that create preventably dead kids where restricting them would reduce preventably dead kids where no one's advocating for restrictions. I mean, we don't even mandate vaccines for children (some places do, sort of). I realize you are likely a person who would advocate for more vaccinations, I'm just pointing out that our society is fundamentally structured in a way that accepts some amount of children will die in a preventable manner as a result of policy choices. It turns out that a person can be in favor of multiple unrelated things simultaneously, such as supporting mandatory free vaccination for children, public healthcare, and even gun control. You don't have to just choose one of these things
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 02:22
|
|
|
I still think that gun control folks ought to build a big stately monument as a memorial to all the people who give their lives for the Second Amendment. Michael Bloomberg or any one of a number of philanthropists could pay for it. Start at say 2004 when the AWB expired and engrave the name of everyone who was murdered with a gun. Maybe infil the names of kids with gold. Have a full time engraving staff once it's unveiled to add new names every day. Get politicians to go lay wreaths at it and kids to take field trips there. Call it the National Second Amendment Memorial.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 02:31
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:It turns out that a person can be in favor of multiple unrelated things simultaneously, such as supporting mandatory free vaccination for children, public healthcare, and even gun control. You don't have to just choose one of these things edit: I guess someone could argue they are in favor of preventing every possible preventable kid death, but they'd end up in MANY weird situations where they need to figure out if allowing cigarettes is net-positive kid death or if cigarette prohibition would create crime that would outweigh the savings. twodot fucked around with this message at 02:43 on Mar 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 02:40
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:I still think that gun control folks ought to build a big stately monument as a memorial to all the people who give their lives for the Second Amendment. Michael Bloomberg or any one of a number of philanthropists could pay for it. If we did this, people like you would accuse us of politicizing tragedies. "It's too soon to talk about gun control!" - the refrain after every single shooting Can't wait for the next bad faith argument about how the gun control side should actually try to accomplish anything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 02:48
|
|
|
Everything that dude says is fuckin retarded, it's impressive
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 02:50
|
|
|
twodot posted:How is this in any way related to what I said? Like yeah this is obviously true, and it's still obviously true that society is set up to accept a certain amount of preventably dead kids. Should reiterate that this "but is it worth the cost" point is reliant on underestimating the lives saved by gun control by a factor of 50
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 02:58
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:I still think that gun control folks ought to build a big stately monument as a memorial to all the people who give their lives for the Second Amendment. Michael Bloomberg or any one of a number of philanthropists could pay for it. This would own. Unironically
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 03:00
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:If we did this, people like you would accuse us of politicizing tragedies. People like me?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 03:07
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:People like me? People who say the phrase "gun control folks" and have very opinionated ideas about how they should be behaving.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 03:09
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:People who say the phrase "gun control folks" and have very opinionated ideas about how they should be behaving. I can't speak for other people but it isn't something *I* would say. I always end up voting for gun control proponents in elections though so I'm sort of drawing a blank as to what any of it has to do with people like me. I mean I don't vote based on a gun control stance, but the democrats are pretty pro gun control and I always vote for democrats.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 03:11
|
|
|
 "You have to do gun control the right way, not just poo poo like the AWB that banned attachments! IT POISONED THE WELL!" "Okay, fine, let's ban all handguns because they're used the most in killings" "THAT'S SO UNREASONABLE, SEE IF YOU GIVE AN INCH THEY'LL TRY TO BAN ALL GUNS!" 
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 03:12
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:
Like I posted already before, I think banning handguns faces very high hurdles since the self-defense arguments are strongest for them, and the supreme court said it's unconstitutional to ban them. Meanwhile almost all gun homicides are committed with handguns unfortunately. Without repealing the second amendment, which I think is absurd and impossible, the best we can really hope to do is to shave little bits off the gun deaths in the US. It's possible though that trying to do even that would incur a serious cost that offset any potential good it could have done though, I really don't know. It almost certainly did in 1994. In the meantime, gun control advocacy does get people engaged with and interested in liberal politics so there's some upside to it. hakimashou fucked around with this message at 04:05 on Mar 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 03:14
|
|
|
edit: nice new avatar text, you twoRent-A-Cop posted:Big ups to them. It took me years before D&D beat the libertarian out of me. These forums are definitely partly responsible for my move from libertarian / conservative to... not full communism now, but mostly communism soon? twodot posted:Different people measure these things differently, but by my count the US in 2017 had something like 100 deaths and 600 injuries from mass shootings does that sound accurate to you? That's ~0.3% of gun deaths, ~0.15% of violent deaths in the US. If you've got an easy proven way to shave off 0.3% of gun deaths, then sure we should do it, but we need to be thinking at a much bigger scale. I can't help but think that, in a year where the Vegas shooting happened, that number is derived from a very narrow definition of "mass shooting." Also, what does "easy" mean in this context? r.y.f.s.o. fucked around with this message at 04:00 on Mar 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 03:48
|
|
|
r.y.f.s.o. posted:I can't help but think that, in a year where the Vegas shooting happened, that number is derived from a very narrow definition of "mass shooting." quote:Also, what does "easy" mean in this context? edit: Literally lightly amused by this red text, I think I'll keep it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 03:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 00:42 |
|
|
r.y.f.s.o. posted:edit: nice new avatar text, you two I actually do have an assault rifle 15 rifle with high capacity bullet clips! It's even on the federal gun registry! I dunno if I love it though, something of the joy of the gun hobby went away after Sandy Hook 
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 04:07
|
|