|
Rakosi posted:What do the pro-gun crowd say about the hordes of evidence that suggest gun restrictions/bans have a statistically significant effect in reducing gun crime in most other countries that have such legislation. Is the argument for guns literally only "Its our rights!!" and "black people will immediately rape my family in the middle of the night if I dont have firearms under my pillow"? American gun advocates live in a carefully constructed bubble of confirmation bias and tortured logic where any half-remembered excuse why guns have nothing to do with crime are ceaselessly and uncritically repeated as gospel truth.
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 05:49 |
|
|
Who What Now posted:The usual go-to argument is that those countries are "culturally homogenous" which roughly translates to "around blacks never relax". There are actually four and a half rough categories of gun apologetics, which one advocates is mostly predicated on one's politics. One is "cultural homogenity," popular amongst the center-right. One point five is the unmasked version of this among the hard right, which is "minorities and immigrants." Two is "it's poverty!" which is popular among liberals, who ignore comparisons of HDI and violent crime and murder rates which indicate that poverty cannot be the only factor. Three is "guns have a zero impact on crime for no apparent reason" which is popular amongst libertarians, who aren't comfortable with overt racism or talking about poverty reduction. Four is "regardless of the consequences, I need guns to make my half-baked revolution fantasies insignificantly more plausible" which is common amongst dumb tough-talkers of any political affiliation.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2015 17:13
|
|
|
various cheeses posted:A lot of those studies are based on extremely massaged statistics and are funded directly by gun control organizations. Also "gun crime" as a metric is stupid as hell. You're not an extra special kind of dead if you're killed by a gun rather than a knife or blunt object. You are, however, more likely to die or be seriously injured if the altercation involves a gun.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2015 17:27
|
|
|
Let's not worry about "gun crime" specifically and instead just look at murder rates. Ok, the US has a murder rate 3-48 times that of anywhere else in the industrialized world, and the upper end of that range is our next door neighbor. Seems odd.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
various cheeses posted:It's also been steadily dropping for years, while gun sales have gone through the roof. Gun diffusion and availability is already high enough that any increase in numbers will likely have a negligible effect on increasing crime rates, which is not the same thing as saying decreasing diffusion and availability will have a negligible effect on decreasing crime rates.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:People love American culture, but then they complain about the contest of terror that creates it. They only complain at certain times though, like when a black man shoots two white people. Actually I seem to recall myself and others complaining about American gun culture long previous to its most recent public manifestation of insanity. Aside from laughing this off as disingenuous whining, which I would prefer not to do, how do we resolve this apparent paradox except by reference to some kind of Time Engine?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:No, you complain in fits and starts, motivated by the sight of whites dying. Why are you lying and trolling to defend something as silly and destructive as untrammeled toy ownership, primarily advocated by the right-wing racists you so dislike?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Now is not the time to politicize this tragedy. Everything is political. Free Your Mind
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2015 19:33
|
|
|
crabcakes66 posted:I figured someone would make that point. I was more alluding to the seemingly widespread fantasy that you are going to have time for a movie style shootout with your attacker. http://kxan.com/2015/01/14/texas-gun-owners-re-enact-charlie-hebdo-massacre/ PLANO, Texas (CNN/KTVT) — Some Texas gun owners decided to stage a re-enactment of the Charlie Hebdo office massacre. They wanted to see what might have happened if the victims had their own guns. Two actors playing gunmen enter quietly. They’re on a set designed to look like the offices of Charlie Hebdo in Paris. But unlike the terrorist attack that killed 12 people, in this exercise, volunteers are taking turns in the role of an armed civilian inside. “He started shooting, and I started shooting,” said gun owner Linda Cruz. Time and time again, that armed civilian dies — shot by a round that marks him or her with paint. In only two cases, they were able to take out one of two gunmen in the process. “It’s interesting to see how people react under stress,” said gun owner Nick Leghorn. “It’s not what you’d expect people do.” A group called The Truth About Guns organized the simulation, hoping to learn how things might have been different in Paris — or any other mass shooting. “It’s the one people are Monday-morning-quarterbacking at the moment,” said Leghorn. Parks Matthew is a father of four and was curious to see what instinct would kick in. “If I’m in a movie theater and someone pulls a gun, what am I going to do?” he said. “I know now I’m not going to just fall on my kids and protect them; I need to advance on the threat.” He walked away armed with a little more information. “Still got killed, but did better than I thought I would,” said Matthew. In the end, only one of the 12 volunteer victims in the exercise survived. And it was because she ran away. No one was able to take out both mock shooters.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:So is worrying about "assault rifles," when you consider what type of weapon kills the most. Whenever you see a gun fanboy argue that we should not regulate whatever obscure tough guy cosplay accessory because it is used in so few crimes, ask yourself how they feel about regulating weapons that are used in hundreds of thousands of crimes.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2015 21:56
|
|
|
Here's a quick way to tell that gun fanboys are not serious when they argue that knives or pointy sticks are just as good at killing people as guns: their ownership and advocacy of guns and the reasons they forward as to why. If knives were really as good at killing people as guns then it wouldn't matter if guns were banned because they would be equally capable of defending themselves and succeeding in their half baked revolutions with knives, which are simpler to use and maintain and substantially less expensive
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2015 06:36
|
|
|
Graic Gabtar posted:Then isn't some of this 'take no prisoners' debate (that we see from afar through our own cultural lens) misdirected? Not all killings with guns are premeditated affairs by people determined, willing and able to kill their victim by other means
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2015 07:09
|
|
Gross Simplification
|
If the premise of the argument is correct and people are just as capable of killing humans using boards with nails in them as they are with firearms it seems odd that every major combat force in the world for at least the last two centuries has preferred to equip its soldiers with firearms and not with boards with nails in them. I think I have an idea to save billions in our military budget
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2015 07:21
|
|
|
Doccers posted:I've still not seen any causal link to gun control lowering suicide or homicide rates. Even the Australian ban has studies indicating strongly it did absolutely nothing. ( http://www.sascv.org/ijcjs/pdfs/bakersamaraijcjs2015vol10issue1.pdf ) The implicit fallacy here which gun advocates literally never seem to consider is that Australia already had strong gun laws, they didn't go from nothing to a full ban. You can use this data to argue that full bans are not significantly better than merely heavy regulation, but you cannot honestly use it to claim what they always do, which is that Gun Laws Do Nothing. This is without even going too far into their mythology that upon a gun ban crime will skyrocket and the government will viciously oppress (choose one according to your politics: taxpayers/the proletariat/the pure white man)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2015 14:27
|
|
|
Fat Ogre posted:retard retards retards retards retards retard retards loving morons retards retardation retard retards Retard retards retards a retard brain retards retards they are retarded. retards retards just how retarded they are. retards retards retards how loving moronic they are. Forums poster Fat ogre has a developmentally disabled child in real life.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
Fat Ogre posted:Using burns originated by Kid Gloves I see. Even if I did have a retard for a kid what bearing does it have on this discussion? It has bearing on your choice of words. I think shotguns are rifles when it comes to their size and concealability. You are correct that I don't think carrying a gun is the same as using a gun.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2015 18:22
|
|
|
You can tell how far down the hole of obsessive batshit gun fanboys are when a cutting rebuttal to "you used 40 ableist slurs in one post that reads like an fourteen year old wrote it" is "oh yeah well you think something wrong about guns." It's unbelievable how common it is too
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:sane people don't have plans to deal with an extremely rare event like home invasion. what's your plan for when you get mugged by a leprechaun? (it's to shoot the nearest minority with a gun) This isn't a good argument, because the logic goes hey, what's the harm in having a means to deal with it if it does happen? The better point to be made, not that it would ever get through their heads, is that it isn't just about them. The existence of poorly regulated firearms causes and exacerbates more violent crimes than there are home invasions prevented by firearms. So yes, for you personally it's probably better, but for society it's worse.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2015 20:09
|
|
|
raven4267 posted:No, you are part of the population who doesn't have to worry about violent crimes being committed against them on a daily basis. Quick reminder that all polling indicates that city residents, black people, gays and women, generally speaking all groups at higher risk of being victimized by crime, all support gun control at higher rates than the rural/suburban white dude demographic tough guy cosplayers seem to universally hail from
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
various cheeses posted:So in your mind it's "nothing I can do, oh well" or "criminal calmly withdraws after I announce the cops are on the way"? I need my firearms for self defense. That's why I own over a dozen of them and practice shooting them at ranges no civilian has ever needed to shoot in self defense.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:All those stats are thrown off by Trash. If you're not Trash, you owning guns doesn't make you a danger to your family. I got the strong impression from raven's post that he is a decent parent, not prone to violence etc. When people act like a gun owner like that is putting their kids in danger it strikes me as self-conscious bullshit. Actual black people and black organizations tend to largely support stronger gun control than the average. Why do you think this is?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
The stats are thrown off by Trash, who are a distinctly different and non-consubstantial group from the Average Gun Owner, and who do all the bad things. By the way, I am opposed to any mechanism which prevents the Trash, who are not like the good ones and do all the bad things, from owning as many of whatever firearm they desire.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
raven4267 posted:Maybe black people have different opinions on various subjects? I never denied that they did. I asked why you think most disagree with you.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2015 23:34
|
|
|
raven4267 posted:I don't know, maybe you should ask them. I don't speak for other people, just myself. I have my own theories as to why, I'm asking for a theory from you as to this discrepancy. SedanChair seems to believe it is because they are stupid. Do you agree?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2015 23:55
|
|
|
raven4267 posted:If you really want to know what my personal theory on why all people favor gun control, not just black people in general, it is due to fear of guns and a lack of education about them. Maybe people who live in high crime areas think that passing new laws will stop the criminals who terrorize them on a daily basis. I really don't know. I definitely don't think any new laws will stop anyone who is most likely already breaking the law by having a firearm. Sure. My theory is twofold: first the racist right wing belligerence of most gun advocates tends to put them off in general, and more importantly that it's logical that the people who are statistically most at risk of violence and who have suffered the most as a result of violence would be generally more in favor of restricting the most effective tools with which to commit violence than people whose experience with them is mostly as fun toys to coo and hoot at when they make loud noise
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2015 00:20
|
|
|
It's funny that people think that firearms just exist to kill things. If I, in a mock exercise to improve my skill in aiming at the most vital parts of a living organism, deliberately point my firearm at a thing that can't die, then it doesn't kill anything!
Tezzor fucked around with this message at 14:20 on Aug 29, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2015 14:11
|
|
|
lol that social justice wizards call the Avada Kedavra the killing curse. what if i like point it at a rock or something. checkmate liberals
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2015 14:14
|
|
|
I would also like to generally ban guns as an optimal solution, but am willing to compromise on laws similar to that of the gun fanboy paradise of Switzerland which they frequently invoke as evidence that guns can coexist with peaceful society, where for firearms ownership there is only the near-requirement of military service plus licensing and registration and mandatory training and testing both to purchase and to carry a specific type of firearm which cannot be carried loaded except in exceptional circumstances or carried with ammunition except in clear cases of present need.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2015 14:53
|
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:America really is unique on guns though because any attempt to institute Australian style gun control would result in an Iraqi-style insurgency, if the insurgents ever numbered more than 5,000 or so. Of course our superior military won an uncontested victory over there so I say let's do this thang. It probably wouldn't. There would be isolated cases but you have to remember that when gun fanboys start threatening murder and insurrection at the drop of a hat if their toy selection is even hypothetically limited, they're not revolutionaries making demands, they're fat teenagers brooding in their room about how if they take my Xbox I swear I'll burn this loving house down
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
cravius posted:Lot of priveliged white people ITT whining about things they don't understand. The best was yall laughing out the dude in inner city chicago because he was a "paranoid prepper" from behind the keyboards of your suburban castles. Reminder once again that people who are in demographics most at risk of violent crime support gun control more than toy obsessed crackers
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
Here is the thought process of people who feel compelled to keep a round in the chamber while walking around, or to keep guns laying around, or often having guns at all: 1. The chance of me killing or seriously injuring myself or an innocent person as a result of x is zero because I am smart and competent unlike the people who do things like that. 2. Since that risk is zero, as long as there is a nonzero risk of death or serious injury from any scenario which could have been prevented by x, it is rational to do x. This includes scenarios that exist solely in the Pruno induced nightmares of a white nationalist mental patient. Tezzor fucked around with this message at 20:52 on Aug 29, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
Petty criminals in all countries do not have guns at the same or similar rates as they do in the US
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2015 22:06
|
|
|
I never claimed that they did. If we are talking about dishonesty you are the one whose go to argument is that some criminals in countries with actual gun control still have guns while repeatedly and steadfastly refusing to acknowledge that these criminals and the number of crimes they commit with firearms are comparatively insignificant in number
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2015 22:23
|
|
|
On the one hand, death and serious injury mostly of innocent people. On the other hand, a dude cooing like an imbecile when his toy made something blow up. A short primer on the gun control debate.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2015 01:57
|
|
|
It's always fun when gun advocates of all people accuse others of being motivated by emotion, in between describing their night terrors of home invaders and writing their insurrection threats with gritted teeth and a boner
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
Lol, kid death. Not as serious and important as my toy selection
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:The number of guns flowing into Mexico from the US really isn't that large, or at least not as large as the media blitz was making it out to be years back. The headline grabbing statistics about 90% of cartel guns recovered found to be from the US originated from the ATF (before Fast & Furious) and were only based on the subset of recovered guns the Mexican government had submitted to the ATF for tracking. Of course the Mexican government (intelligently) only submitted guns to the ATF for tracking that they already suspected might be from the US based on manufacturer, serial #, etc. and that subset ended up only including something like a fifth of the total guns they recovered. Blah blah blah excuses excuses I checked into these claims a few months ago and was shocked to discover that the source appears to be a couple of right wing websites which do not substantiate their claims or appear to understand the basics of statistical sampling
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 05:49 |
|
|
A Wizard of Goatse posted:if you polled a thousand people carrying Clinton 2016 placards at a Clinton campaign rally and only 55% supported her, that probably would not be indicative that Hillary has 55% support nationwide. There is as far as I can tell zero evidence that they only test guns that they think are from the US aside from the unsubstantiated claims of guys so desperate to dispute anything that makes their guns look bad they've managed to convince themselves that most of the guns in country x don't come from country y despite their large porous border with established criminal smuggling and the fact that country y has a quadrillion easily purchased or stolen firearms
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2015 20:22
|
|