|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Will there ever be effective gun control in the USA?
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Well played all round.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mere Nick
Shipmate
# 11827
|
Posted
I'm thinking I'll sell off all of my rifles but my little AR-7 and pick up a crossbow and a katana sword.
--------------------
"Well that's it, boys. I've been redeemed. The preacher's done warshed away all my sins and transgressions. It's the straight and narrow from here on out, and heaven everlasting's my reward."
Delmar O'Donnell
Posts: 2797 | From: West Carolina | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by jbohn:
Tigers are animate beings - they act without human interaction. They are predators by instinct. (Though I'm not sure if they find human toddlers to be their prey of choice. Fido, on the other hand...) Firearms - and for that matter, swords, sticks, whips, chains, and stern language - are not; they simply don't go attacking people/pets/etc. without a human behind them. Properly stored (away from small children, drunks, and such, obviously; locked up when not in use, with ammunition stored separately, etc.), they are unable to harm anyone.
And yet, one finds that in most parts of the world, a lot more people are harmed by improperly stored firearms than by improperly stored tigers...
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
I'm well aware of the tendency of tigers to go off by themselves, but the point was more about legal responsibility and 'needs' and 'wants'.
Even though weapons should be capable of being properly and carefully stored in a way that means they can't be misused, this doesn't seem to be working in real life. Guns are regularly misused. I think we've dealt before with the statistical claim that 22 out of 23 uses of a gun are misuse. Should we just ignore this and cling to the fact that guns are theoretically capable of being kept perfectly safely?
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290
|
Posted
Seems apposite to add this commentary here: "A Perspective on Guns from Attica"
by the John Lennon who killed a man with a gun on 2001.
quote:
I do take responsibility for the murder; I’m sorry for taking his life, and all the life he could have had but without a gun I would not have killed… a bold claim that screams rationalization, I know. But God knows I believe this to be true.
If I didn’t have that perfect killing machine I would have had to earn the kill — like a seasoned bow hunter I’d have to hit him just right leaving no room for error. Could I have stabbed him? Strangled him? Bludgeoned him? If I had done so and he hadn’t died, why would that have made me less culpable than I am now, a man who swiftly and cowardly shot another man to death?
So far we have arguments from those like jbohn who are cool and controlled about their weapons, others who are obsessed with a specific bit of a Constitution (but not about the idea of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness for the victims of aggression) somewhat balanced by those, like myself, and most of the hunters and gun owners I know, who are alarmed by indiscriminate, untrained gun fanatics running at large.
Before you rush around, Dalek-like, yelling "Rationalise", please read the article for comprehension.
--------------------
It's Not That Simple
Posts: 5372 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290
|
Posted
Apparently, I've killed the thread, but, what the hell.
Here's a stake to drive into its coffin: Mentally Ill? Sure, here are your guns back
No matter how mentally unstable you are, in the US, the police can't keep your guns for more than one year.
Which means: more dead police
--------------------
It's Not That Simple
Posts: 5372 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
Serial rapist? Want to keep your concealed-carry permit? Come to Idaho and be a state legislator:
quote:
... Patterson received notice that his concealed carry license was being revoked because in 2007 and 2012, he lied on his permit application when he said he hadn't pled guilty to rape (Mark Patterson, in fact, did). Patterson is fighting back, arguing that even though a 1990 law in Idaho exempts elected officials from having to apply for a concealed permit, having his permit (which he doesn't technically need) taken away because he lied on his application (about being a rapist) is a violation of his rights. ...
http://jezebel.com/convicted-rapist-lawmaker-loses-concealed-gun-license-1464381175
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
jbohn
Shipmate
# 8753
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
And yet, one finds that in most parts of the world, a lot more people are harmed by improperly stored firearms than by improperly stored tigers...
Touché.
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
I think we've dealt before with the statistical claim that 22 out of 23 uses of a gun are misuse. Should we just ignore this and cling to the fact that guns are theoretically capable of being kept perfectly safely?
I don't remember this one, which means nothing. Do you know the source of the claim? It seems a bit (read a lot) high to me. I'd be interested in knowing more.
quote:
Originally posted by Horseman Bree:
Apparently, I've killed the thread, but, what the hell.
Here's a stake to drive into its coffin: Mentally Ill? Sure, here are your guns back
No matter how mentally unstable you are, in the US, the police can't keep your guns for more than one year.
Which means: more dead police
The one year thing is state by state, not a federal law. Federally, a person who
quote:
has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution;
is barred from prohibiting firearms. The issues arise in the exact definition of "mental defective" and that the states often don't share commitment data with the federal government, despite being required to do so.
It's a huge problem - but not one that is best solved by gun laws; we need to fix the mess that passes for mental health care in this country. (To say nothing of the rest of the health care system.)
quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
Serial rapist? Want to keep your concealed-carry permit? Come to Idaho and be a state legislator:
Just. Flipping. Wow.
![[brick wall]](graemlins/brick_wall.gif)
--------------------
We are punished by our sins, not for them.
--Elbert Hubbard
Posts: 989 | From: East of Eden, west of St. Paul | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290
|
Posted
jbohn:
quote:
we need to fix the mess that passes for mental health care in this country.
Amen to that, in my country, too.
--------------------
It's Not That Simple
Posts: 5372 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
