would the changes they wanted have stopped any other killing afterwards?
What types of "gun control" would actually be effective? What sort of "gun control" would I actually support?
First, let me say I agree with much of what I clipped from your posting, and I agree with this part too, with this provisio: Even if gun regulations are at the federal level, they should still take into account local conditions. Just as speed limits on highways are different from speed limits on residential streets, so the needs of a Montana rancher are different from the needs of Louisiana fisherman or the needs of a college student in Ann Arbor. One agency might oversee and unify the regulations, but those regulations should still take into account the different conditions in various places, just like speed limits do.
Also, if you are going to have mandatory gun safety classes in school, you should also have mandatory testing of adults to who want to buy guns to see if they remembered anything from their one hour of watching Eddie Eagle.
That is not a very accurate description of Duesenberg’s first posting.
The statement you quoted is a bit of an exaggeration. Obviously there are other factors besides guns to explain this trend. Others that I can think of are:
An increase in instant media coverage of shootings providing instant gratification for those seeking such notoriety.
An increase in distrust and animosity toward societal institutions.
But it is not quite true to say that the number of guns has not increased tremendously. The first graph in this article shows the number of guns manufactured from 1986-2013. In 2011 there were 11 million guns manufactured. At that rate there would be an addition one gun for every US citizen in 28 years. Since the lifetime of a gun is generally much longer than 28 years, we are certainly making guns at a rate that increases their per capita presence in the population. Also, the AR-15 was not really sold in the civilian market until the 1960’s, and even then, not in the numbers we are seeing today. The conclusion of the NYT article, when properly scaled back to a non-superlative form, is mostly correct.
FYI, I am American by birth and love of country.
Not so much, no. Chicago for instance his very strict gun control and its South Side is a killing field. People claim “it’s a big city, there must be tight gun control!” Yet in reality, other cities that are just as big (e.g. Houston) have far less gun control – and far less gun-related crime.
I have no problem with that, but I don’t want the testing to have to be redone with every purchase of a firearm. Perhaps once every 10 years.
So? I detected what I detected.
I never claimed otherwise. More guns were sold during the Obama Administration than any other time in the USA’s history. Obama was a better gun salesman than Samuel Colt and Oliver Winchester combined.
The AR15 has been for sale to the private public since 1957. The article was crap.
Couple of points…a thread on Gun Control does not belong on Social Justice page.
Point 2: Why ask for opinions if when they are stated you don’t agree with them you paint the originator as “Wrong” or the opinion as “Poppycock”?..What’s a point of a forum?
Sure it does. It’s the social justice warriors that are often the biggest pushers of gun control.
I would only use those words when someone is clearly spewing untruths. Either they are lying or they are parroting garbage before stopping to consider if its accurate.
For the year 2016 the homicide rate for Chicago was 16.02 and for Houston it was about 13. Not a very big difference. It should also be noted that although the two cities have similar populations, the population density of Houston is 3372 people per square mile. The population density of Chicago is 4582 people per square mile. Could population density affect the crime rate? Possibly.
That is fine by me too. But I just got in extended argument in another thread over that very question, and everyone on the other side was firmly against any mandated testing of adults. I will keep your support in mind in case that argument resurfaces.
What I’m pointing out is that the anti-gunners exclaim “we could NEVER have such laws in big cities in the USA! The killings would multiply manifold!”
You just gave an example of a large city with little gun controls actually being safer than one with draconian gun controls.
The difference between the cities is far more than population density.
If no one has a history of owning a firearm I think it prudent that they either complete some basic firearms safety training or they pass a test. What I am very much against is the gov’t charging more to administer the training or the test (it could be done online via the BATFE) or for someone to have to take it before every firearms purchase. Sadly, while this is a good idea, I have no doubt the gov’t would screw-up it’s implementation.
I’m not sure how to make quotations except manually so I will just respond without them.
California is a state, not a country. I asked you what countries have failed gun control policies, not states. I assume that as you cannot name such a country, so you resorted to naming a state, and one which has insane laws regarding almost everything. Also, I’m sure that the policies have been ineffective for many reasons, but not because “gun control doesn’t work”.
You said that most criminals don’t buy guns legally, but ignored my statement that people who do buy guns legally and then use them for illegal purposes BECOME criminals.
Effective & intelligent gun control measures would dramatically reduce gun violence, & countless lives would be spared. What country with gun control laws had an increase in gun-related crimes, afterall? It’s common sense that only Americans seem to fail to have. I don’t see how anything other than self-deception can be responsible for the notion that without easy access to guns, the young man and his parents would both have had them anyway. If guns are extremely difficult to get, far fewer people would have them, and domestic squabbles wouldn’t turn deadly so easily. It takes a lot more rage, physical strength, and a very brutal, savage character to beat someone to death with a baseball bat, or to stab them to death with a knife, etc. With a gun, it’s a matter of pulling a trigger which only takes a moment and almost no physical effort. Most who kill with guns in a fit of passion do not have it in them to do something that brutal.
I’ve noticed something about opponents of gun control that bothers me. They’re unfazed by violence and murder and diminish or dismiss it in a detached and rather heartless way. An abstract “right” to own lethal weapons is more important to such people than human lives and public safety. The fact that so many religous people place more importance on such “rights” than human life says a LOT. I’m proud to be a Southerner, but not of being an “American”. That my country grants the “right” to own guns and other “rights” that violate the laws of God, yet not to basic human needs, is EVIL.
I recently moved back from mainland China, where gun control most certainly DOES work. Murder is almost unheard of there. When it does happen, the police will spare no means and will search the ends of the earth to find the killer and deliver justice. China has its own problems as a developing country, but their excellent infrastructure (at least in the East where most live), inexpensive health care that isn’t dominated by private interests, and low violent crime rates (which are staggering considering the size of the country and population), not to mention the complete ban on pornography put the US to shame.
Or take a look at Australia, a country far less dissimilar to the US than China. They had problems with gun violence and implemented effective gun control measures that DO work. Like anywhere, crime still happens, but it did and does work.
australia had 14 mass killings in the 20 years prior to the ban and they have had 14 mass killings in the 20 years since the ban. yes the 14 since the ban were not carried out with guns if that makes you feel better. but dead is still dead!
do they have a gun problem yes just google it. Melbourne is becoming a hotbed of gun crime. this is a year old but you get the picture from it.
You’re absolutely right. The Australia gun confiscation has been a hue, dangerous FLOP when it comes to reducing violent crime.
It’s not a matter of “gun control” in China. Unless you are of privileged class, you DO NOT own a gun. The state is free to do whatever it wants to the people – and it does. The people have absolutely no recourse. All they can do is die.
It’s amazing that anyone would use China as an example of ANYTHING worth emulating.
I think God I don’t live in a hole like China that’s absent of all human rights.
Since you ignored everything else I said, I’ll just ignore what you said. The fact is, since almost nobody owns guns in China, almost nobody gets shot. Murder by way of any method is extremely low. The infrastructure is decades ahead of ours, and decency/anti-pornography laws help preserve the innocence of children and prevent sex crimes, among other things. To call a country that I’m sure you have never even visited a “hole” and to say that Chinese citizens have “no” human rights is ridiculous.
Maybe Australia wasn’t the best example, but to pick that one thing, or the technicality over what bans on guns are called, out of all that I said and spent time patiently typing on my phone, just for you and others to ignore the rest of what I said because it doesn’t fit in with your worldview or opinion is small-minded to say the least. Unlike you, I’m willing to read and learn more about views that oppose my own with an open mind, and if sensible, change my opinions accordingly. Sticking too rigidly to an opinion and tuning out anything that doesn’t align with it is neither reasonable or humble. The arrogance that your last post oozed with is enough to make me see that a kindhearted and friendly discussion with you would likely be impossible unless I suddenly assented to all of your views. So, since you have it all figured out, I would suggest that you write to as many politicians as possible and enlighten them as to how they should go about taking measures to solve the problem.
Yet many still get killed – particularly by the gov’t.
You ignored everything else I said, yet again. You are simply determined to feel right. Have you considered that the US government kills its own citizens everyday? At least in China, unlike the US, police brutality is uncommon. In 2015, the US ranked #5 in confirmed executions, and China #1. China has a much higher population than we do, obviously. But please, ignore every part of this post you can’t use to try to make yourself feel right, as before, and pardon my annoyance, but it’s just silly to pretend to have a real discussion.
I believe the aim of gun control laws are primarily to reduce GUN violence. Obviously, that HAS worked. In order to address other forms of violent crime, other measures must be taken. I think that blaming gun legislation (that HAS proven effective in reducing gun violence) for the incidence of other forms of violent crime is nonsensical. As far as I know, there is no causal relationship between gun legislation and incidents or even increase of other forms of violent crime, but if you can provide some solid research that suggests that there is, I would be interested in reading it.
Also, the overly emotional tone of your post and odd suggestion that I would “feel better” because those crimes didn’t involve guns suggests to me that you would be better served by doing something relaxing rather than arguing at me, since apparently you’re too high strung to discuss this in a more easygoing fashion. Best wishes, though.
If you think 14 in 20 years is a lot, please take a look at these statistics of gun violence in America.
It should give you an idea of how serious the problem of gun violence in America is. Highlighting gun violence isn’t to make light of or ignore other forms of violent crime that don’t involve guns, because those are serious problems that need to be addressed as well. Human life is precious.
As for Melbourne, I can’t say much as I have never been there, but I do know that Australia’s racial demographics have been changing quite rapidly, and that immigrants from other countries often bring their problems with them, along with their cultural and other contributions. Maybe this, and/or other factors, are responsible for the increase in violent crime there? Certainly, gun control laws are not responsible for it.