How To Argue For Gun Control.

I couldn't find the specific link but I found where you will find it here.

http://louderwithcrowder.com/vox-gun-rebuttal/

Because minorities make up the largest portion of crime and therefore would be more likely to have an illegal gun. Why are there so many oriental people being arested in China?

Yes.

Instilling morals.

If we instill the value of marriage then there would less divorce. For one you'll choose more carefully whom you pick because you'll be stuck with him/her for awhile.

Then look no further than Venezuela for there is the result of socialism.

 

Mac

Why do you think you need multiply layers of protection?

Why are you frightened someone is going to kick down your door?

Wouldn’t it be better to try and work toward having a society where you didn’t feel so scared?

So far your reply to that question is that nothing would work – but you don’t seem to want to try.

 

Mac

So you do think homosexuality is equivalent to incest and bestiality?

OK - you seemed to imply that you thought that homosexuality was equivalent to some things like incest and bestiality is that true?

 

Mac

Wow you are a weird type of Christian. You are motivated by selfishness even in your charitable giving – are you seeking earthly gain or trying to buy your way into your gods good graces?

But you said it was out of self interest not your heart - anyway why only the widows and orphans, what about the poor and disadvantaged? And the thing is that the reason people fought for decent public social provision was because voluntary provision was too little and often directed by bias than need.

You know the more I talk to you the less like a ‘Christian’ you seem to me, I mean you say you are motivated by self interest and don’t seem to care about the suffering and pain of others preferring to do nothing to stop it and shrug it off as acceptable.

Sorry but I’ve meet hard-line atheists that seemed more ‘Christian’ than you.

Although thinking about it there are many types of ‘Christians’ from the fire and brimstone fundamentalist nutters to the more tolerant love your neighbor crowd. I suppose I think Christianity should be more about love and helping rather than your brand.

 

Mac

Actually like Christianity there are many, many forms of socialism from the hard-line nutters to the extremely pragmatic. But generally most socialist are more interested in social justice and quality of life that total monetary equality. It’s about distributing the gains of society more fairly so they benefit everyone that doesn’t necessarily mean an emphasis on personal wealth but communal quality of life.

For example I’d rather have a healthy environment (clean air, clean water, well maintained sewage system) than not having those but having more money in my pocket.

As explained that makes no sense and could be unhelpful– can you please explain your thinking?

To me a welfare system is not just about giving a monetary stipend in times of need it’s about giving assistance where it is needed - from economic models designed to bring about full employment to decent public services and a clean healthy environment.

*

What is needed is social and economic policies aimed at tackling such problems – a good well funded social services system, public housing, universal public healthcare, a full employment economic model, and that is just to begin with. The problem as I’ve pointed out many times already is that neoliberals/free arketers oppose such things.

Again this makes no sense can you please explain your thinking.

 

Mac

The question then arises is it justified for the person born into advantage to retain exclusive rights to advantages it didn’t deserve rather than share them with others who through no blame of their own are disadvantaged.

That doesn’t make sense - So they don’t deserve the advantage they were born into – but they do deserve it because they were born into that advantage.

Can you please try and explain your thinking?

It’s not ‘government’ but those that dictate the policies of a government. A government can do ill or good depending on what policies it follows.

Clean air, clean water, food regulation, drug regulation, sewage systems, building regs, work place health and safety, voter rights, gun control measures etc etc etc etc.

Many people have fought to make things better against those that didn’t want to do anything.

 

Mac

So why do you think minorities are more likely to be involved in crime

 

Mac

How would you do that? Have you any details or have you not really given it much thought?

How would you instill these values and how would you keep people ‘stuck’ together?

 

Mac

I’ve already covered a lot of what you say in your latest replies, I can explain it again but I beg you again could you please read the posts and address the criticisms of your views rather than repeating them like some demented parrot… oh and you are still doing the little huffy replies, a bit of friendly advise they don’t enhance what you say they just make you come across as a petulant teenager.

*

Your stance seems based on the premise that gun related deaths are unimportant and should be ignored that it is acceptable.

But you admit that thousands are being hurt or killed because of ease of access to guns in the US.

The only conclusion is therefore that you are not that interested in those deaths and don’t mind if they continue.

As I say this seems to be irrational why would someone not want to do something?

These leads into you stance that ‘nothing will work’

Ok since you seem fond of traffic analogies - let us imagine a road junction that happens to be an accident hotspot, where many have been injured or died.

Now there are many things that can be done, better signage, lighting, redesigning the junction, speed limits, traffic calming measures etc – but you say you refuse to try anything until it is proved it will work – but it’s not known what will work until it is tried – basically your stance is that you want the injury and death to continue – which as I say seems irrational.

*

Your other stance is that ease of access to guns brings through DGU more benefits than harm.

Now the degree and effectiveness of DGU is disputed but let us for a minute accessed the high figure you and other have claimed.

The problem is that it actually counts against the pro-gun argument.

So let’s say all DGU’s are recorded in the crime statistics but US statistics for general crime are roughly the same as in other developed countries with much less ease of access to firearms. That would indicate that ease of access to guns isn’t very effective as a means of countering crime as those other coutries seem to be just as well without the guns BUT they don’t have the huge numbers of gun related injuries, deaths, murders, accidents etc that happen in the US.

Is the same if they DGU’s are not been recorded which would indicate that the US has a significantly larger general crime rate than those developed countries without such ease of access to guns, which would mean ease of access is dismally failing to reduce general crime figure while hugely boosting the numbers of gun related deaths and injuries.

 

In case the first level fails. And it's not like I'm walking around fully loaded for combat everywhere. On the door I have two locks, a deadbolt and the lock to the door knob and I lock both of those at night just as many people around the world does. Ifsomeone manages to break in intending to do harm I would have a third level which would be a firearm. I'm not dressing up for SWAT or anything I just have the firearm in that scenario. So in all I would have three layers of protection. Is that being paranoid?

I'm not. I'm also not afraid that I might die in a car accident either yet I still buckle my seatbelt.

If I felt scared then yeah but I don't. Besides guns offer recreation.

You never offered evidence that they would work.

 

Again, I'm not answering until you quote me properly.

 

That's not what I said. I said that every want to earn money is based off of self interest. Meaning that a person has an interest to make money regardless of reason. My self interest may be to just help humanity wherever I can. It's a noble self interest but still a self interest.

You twisted my words again. And of course we should help the poor and disadvantaged when we can but it shouldn't be forced.

Only because you twist the meaning of my posts.

What brand do you catagories me as?

 

Any justice with an adjective in front of it is not justice. Justice will automatically cover things like social justice.

Welfare gives money to otherwise able body people who are too lazy to work most of the time.

Do you have evidence of it working?

Explained above.

 

Most of them live in inner cities and cities create crime. Too many people compacted into one small area.

 

The best way that actually worked was Christianity. It's when we stepped away from it is when morals and marriages started going down the drain.

 

No, my premise is that gun deaths will drop once we focus on crime in general. In fact gun deaths are already dropping.

Which is dropping.

Or you are twisting my words.

I do.

All those things have been proven to work. It's just that with gun measures they have also been implemented and didn't worked.

Many DGUs don't even involve the gun being fired. Not only that but if it doesn't result in injury or property damage its likely for it to not be reported.

Actually if that many crimes are being prevented it actually favors the gun rights community. That's 3 million less crimes coming to blossom.

 

honestly i dont understand the conversation, if you dont want a gun then dont get one. problem solved.

 

Mac

Why do you believe people intend you harm and want to break in specifically to hurt you?

Then why do you seem to think people intend you harm and want to break into your home specifically to hurt you?

And if you are not scared of that why do you think it is going to happen and have therefore planned for it?

I mean if you were not scared it would happen you wouldn’t even be thinking about it let alone planning for it.

 

Mac
But you admit that thousands are being hurt or killed because of ease of access to guns in the US.

I’d say gun related murders were running steady they go up and down but around the same levels

2014: 10,945
2013: 11,208
2012: 11,622
2011: 11,068
2010: 11,078
2009: 11,493
2008: 12,179
2007: 12,632
2006: 12,791
2005: 12,352
2004: 11,624
2003: 11,920
2002: 11,829
2001: 11,348
2000: 10,801

And I believe the number of gun related murders went up in 2015
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/sep/26/rate-murder-fbi-increase

 

Mac

OK - you seemed to imply that you thought that homosexuality was equivalent to some things like incest and bestiality is that true?

Mac I told you being huffy just makes you come across as a petulant kid – anyway your refusal to answer such a simple question would seem to give us your answer – that you do equate homosexuality with incest and bestiality.

If that’s your viewpoint why are you reluctant to say it - are you ashamed of your own viewpoint?