Gun Control vs. D.W.I.

It never ceases to amaze me how so many of our elected representatives have so little common sense.

 

I have to get a kick out of how effective the Assault Weapons Ban was. It restricted purchase of specific firearms such as the Steyr Aug, a $2000+ rifle. But yet I could get a full auto AK parts set (less receiver) sent to my house mail order without a FFL for about $85. I could also order an AK receiver flat (stamped receiver flat that only requires a press brake or jig to make functional) for about $15, also sent to my house mail order without a FFL. Put those together and I have an unregistered full auto AK-47 for about $100, bypassing all background checks, Federal Firearms laws, etc.... If you were looking for an assault rifle to commit a crime which would you have chosen?

 

Not to mention these so called "assault weapons" were only used in about 1% of gun crimes.

 

Just remember that before every major dictator, be it Stalin or Hitler or Mussolini (and I am sure Asian dictators like Pol Pot), before the worst of their purges happened, major gun control laws went into affect.

I also think there should be laws against some of these fucked up anti depressants that most of the shooters are heavily on before they shoot up places.

Gun control the way media and some of the sheeple envision = a totally disarmed public...and you think that will equal peace? Only hardcore criminals and government will be armed...Do you think that is ideal? And government time and again has proven to be less than effective to its people.

I don't have a gun. I don't want one. I have never fired one. But I realize how important they are to other people.

School shootings are actually down these past few years. But the media will make it seem otherwise.

 

Exactly my point. While politicians were worried about banning a $2000 gun because of its bullpup design, any felon could get mail order parts to assemble an unlicensed full auto for a benajmin or two. The assault weapons ban was a fucking joke.

 

I also think there should be laws against some of these fucked up anti depressants that most of the shooters are heavily on before they shoot up places.

I heard a talk recently on BookTV by an author who wrote a book called Comfortably Numb. The author said that a very large percentage of psychiatric drugs are now prescribed by doctors in Family Practice or Internal Medicine, not by actual psychiatrists. With controlled medicines now advertised, the mess is likely to grow. Meanwhile, other people cannot afford medicine at all.

 

Gun control vs Drink Driving?

Verses, is this a case of ‘either / or’ that they are mutually exclusive that if you favour gun control you cannot have views on drink driving or vis-versa?

That is just plain stupid.

Most people can have more than one idea in there heads and more than one opinion.

I’m in favour of the regulation of firearms and I’m also in favour of policies to reduce the levels of drink driving, I’ve also go opinions on a whole host of other issues and subjects.

**

As to the rest of this so called argument it seems to consist of slogans and slogans are not rational arguments they are what people use when they don’t have rational arguments.

It seems to me and others that the US has social problems of which one of the symptoms is a very high level of gun related crime and murder.

I’ve been trying to find out what Americans think they can do about it.

But many times all I seem to get is a blank.

You see once the problem is mentioned the sloganizing begins.

And all the noise seems to be about shutting down the discussion not opening it up.

It happens over and over -

Say – gun issue

and, nearly always what you get is slogans not genuine argument.

‘guns don’t kill people, people kill people’

True, but that doesn’t answer the question, why are the people killing each other in such high numbers?

‘if it wasn’t guns it would be something else’

Again it doesn’t answer, why these people seem so determined to kill or injure?

‘If more people were armed they could shoot the crazy shooters’

But why are there so many more crazy shooters in the US?

And this old chestnut

‘When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns’

But why is your society producing so many outlaws, and is the best way of finding a solution to that more guns?

And so on and so on…

Many people seem more concerned about defending guns (or promoting them) than they seem to be about the reasons why the issue keeps being raised.

**

“Hitler, Mao, Stalin, all imposed the most draconian gun laws to prevent the people from rebelling”

And all three armed huge numbers of their citizenry, people that would never had a gun were given one and also taught to shoot it.

I mean in the 1940’s virtually every man in Germany 16 over, had access to a gun.

We are talking here of literally millions of people that could have rebelled any time they wanted.

But what has to be remembered is that many Germans willingly followed Hitler. Stalin was thought of as a heroic leader by large numbers of Russians. And Mao was revered as the liberator of the people by a great many Chinese.

Having an armed population is no guarantee against suppression especially if that armed population accepts or is complicit in the suppression.

For example, in this post -

‘Can guns save you from suppression?’ http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=253937

I show how most Americans were happy to accept or were complicit in suppressing the rights of their fellow citizens. They didn’t rise up to put down such ‘tyranny’, because they agreed (or learnt to agree) with what was being done.

How far could it be taken in the US, look no further than the fate of the native American tribes, many of which don’t exist anymore, or just how long black people had to wait before getting the protection and privileges already held by the white sections of society.

**

 

Whats wrong with slogans if they are true? You criticize them without considering the possibility that they are true. I agree that America is a violent country, but it is not because law abiding citizens own guns. The percentage of law abiding citizens who commit crimes with legally obtained firearms is tiny, but the percentage of crimes committed with illegally obtained weapons is huge. But you and the other gun control advocates seem to argue based on the assumption that anyone with a gun is a danger to everyone around him. If guns are banned, it will disarm the law abiding population, who are not likely to commit crimes, of their legally obtained firearms, but it would do nothing to prevent criminals from obtaining illegal weapons, since by definition criminals dont follow the law. Look no further than the war on drugs or alcohol prohibition to see that these kind of laws wont work in America. It would simply line the pockets of gangsters and create an even bigger black market gun trade.

The reasons why this country is so violent are way more complicated than guns. We are a diverse society with all types of people. We have a long history of gangs and organized crime in large cities all over the country. On top of this we have huge problems with poverty all around the country and especially in inner cities. Not to mention the so called "hip hop" culture that preaches violence, hate, and ignorance to the black community from a young age.

 

Drunk Driving results in 50 Billion in damages per year??? Get the fuck outta here!


Seriously, are you use it's THAT much and not like maybe 500 Mill or 5 Bill?? You sure you didn't make a typing error??

Anyway I own 4 guns myself, they make me feel safe.

 

Coral

Whats wrong with slogans if they are true? You criticize them without considering the possibility that they are true.

You need to read my post not just react to them, the problem with slogans is they cannot convey the complexities of an issue.

For example my reply to the slogan - ‘guns don’t kill people, people kill people’

was – “True, but that doesn’t answer the question, why are the people killing each other in such high numbers?”

Do you see about reading a persons post – it is true that people use guns to kill others but that doesn’t address the issue of why or how we can try and limit the numbers.

Are you saying you don’t care about the issue that all you care about is you own selfish interest in owning a gun?

**

I agree that America is a violent country, but it is not because law abiding citizens own guns.

But a person is a law abiding citizen right up to the point where they commit a crime or are you claiming that people are born as criminals?

It is true that some people graduate through levels of criminality from shop lifting to shooting someone through the head in cold blood. But the thing is that many people don’t take that route but still end up committing a crime. Remember many gun crimes are domestic incidences and that many of the ‘crazed’ shooters hadn’t got criminal records that would have excluded them from owning a gun legally.

Which raises another problem, who do you see as a law abiding citizen? Is it someone with a 100% clear record, someone that has never, ever being subject to the law in any way whatsoever, so that even a parking ticket would exclude them?

Are you saying that only those with a completely clean record should be allowed to have a gun?

You might say that is silly but you then have to explain what you mean by ‘law abiding citizen’. I mean some people here have gone the other way and argued that no one should be excluded from owning a gun, that even if a person has a record of violence or a conviction for murder they should still be entitled to own a gun legally.

**

The percentage of law abiding citizens who commit crimes with legally obtained firearms is tiny, but the percentage of crimes committed with illegally obtained weapons is huge.

And all those illegally held guns started out as legal guns.

Why not try and stop guns getting into the hands of criminals?

For example people here talk of using their guns to thwart burglars but the thing is that most burglaries take place when the home owner is away or the owner never knows until afterwards. But still many Americans have unsecured guns and in many places guns are not even reported as stolen just another purchased.

“You might think cash and jewelry are the top items stolen during a home burglary, but they are actually fifth on the list. Stereo equipment is fourth, followed by video equipment—grouped as TVs, VCRs and cameras. Guns are the number one items stolen in a home burglary. Can you guess what’s second? Booze and cigarettes! Go figure.”
http://www.aadvantagesafeandlock.com/gunsafes.html

Another way that guns get into the hands of criminals is through third parties who’ve brought them legally, this is already an offence but seems at the moment to be very hard to prove or gain a conviction.

**

But you and the other gun control advocates seem to argue based on the assumption that anyone with a gun is a danger to everyone around him.

Again it’s clear you haven’t read my posts on this subject, I’ve not been calling for a complete gun ban, just regulation to try and reduce the harm. I don’t even think regulation alone will work and so I’ve being advocating a wide range of other measures intended to reduce the levels of violence in US society.

**

If guns are banned, it will disarm the law abiding population, who are not likely to commit crimes, of their legally obtained firearms, but it would do nothing to prevent criminals from obtaining illegal weapons, since by definition criminals dont follow the law.

I think this is covered just above.

**

Look no further than the war on drugs or alcohol prohibition to see that these kind of laws wont work in America. It would simply line the pockets of gangsters and create an even bigger black market gun trade.

Well as I’ve said I’m not proposing a complete gun ban. But it should be remembered that recreational drugs (of which alcohol is just one) are difficult to prohibit since many, many people like to use them, and the evidence is consumed. Are you saying guns are exactly the same? And while drugs users may poison themselves they are not brought by users as weapons.

Then it should be remembered that even though alcohol was made legal after Prohibition its manufacture and sale is heavily regulated and monitored.

**

The reasons why this country is so violent are way more complicated than guns.

I agree, and why I dislike the issue being reduced to sloganizing.

**

We are a diverse society with all types of people.

I’m unsure what you mean, my first though has to be, so what? What has that to do with your society being much more violent? I mean why do the divisions exist and why isn’t it possible to stop it causing violence?

**

We have a long history of gangs and organized crime in large cities all over the country.

So what do you think should be done about it? Are you saying there is therefore no point in trying to combat their power or influence, you give up?

**

On top of this we have huge problems with poverty all around the country and especially in inner cities.

So what do you think should be done about it? Are you saying you prefer to have a gun in the hope of suppressing the symptoms of these societal problems rather than tackling the problems themselves?

**

Not to mention the so called "hip hop" culture that preaches violence, hate, and ignorance to the black community from a young age.

So are you saying the deep seated resentments and feelings of alienation expressed in some sections of the “so called "hip hop" culture” didn’t grow out of any feelings of resentment and alienation within the black community, but were instead a complete fabrication of a cynical pop industry?

That music corporations got together to sell violence, hate, and ignorance to the black community of the US along with millions of non black Americans and other people around the world?

**

 

Where are you from, exactly?

 

Are you asking because I own guns? lol, I'm a member of a Gun Club north of Toronto but I go to school in Ottawa, which also has a gun club near it that I use as I am a member of the one back home.

 

thanks.

 

Yes 50 billion in property and medical injuries. Just think of the numbers of DWI related accidents nationwide, the physiacal damage to the car, and the medical costs from the injuries which alone could be well into the 100's of thousands.

 

Dividing 50 billion by the number of DUI fatalities per year results in a figure of about three million dollars per death. That sounds about right.

Years ago my wife was in a car hit head on by a someone drunk and with other drugs in their system (who crossed the double-yellow); she survived, but only after a $58,000 hospitalization, three or four follow-up surgeries, nearly-daily seizures that continued for years and which still happen even all these years later. Our household costs totalled about half a million, with at least $400,000 in lost wages alone.

 

This is fear-mongering. Hitler rode a huge wave of popular support into office; its not as if having militias would have stopped him coming to power.

 

The elephant in the room is that many countries with stricter gun control regulations are as free, if not more so, than the United States.

 

And what countries are these, the ones that have stricter gun laws AND are more free? More laws but more free????

 

R.I.P. Mr Heston.


I couldn't agree more.

 

Guns are safe and cool. Children should have guns, and so should every impressionable person - especially automatic guns, for those are even cooler.

Every person deserves the infallible right to have as many guns as they want. That is how a society remains safe and betters itself.