|
Texas school district to let teachers carry guns (pg. 16)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by Beat Blog
...but on a final note: how can you possibly say that if all guns were removed from the US it's debatable whether the homicide rate would improve? |
Because people debate that very question in journals quite a bit, and as far as I know there is no consensus on the answer.
If we are going to be pragmatic about it, given the existing culture of gun ownership and the huge number of guns floating around in the U.S., it is very debatable how effective a ban on them would really be. Assuming that we really could totally purge the streets of guns, then yes, I think the murder rate would go down at least a bit, because many potential murderers would be less willing to kill with a knife than with a gun. But that assumption -- that a gun ban would be completely or even nearly-completely effective in getting guns off the streets -- is very doubtful in the specific case of the U.S. |
|
|
| PETRAN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zild
Change that figure to .01 percent and you're getting close. |
Yeah whatever, the relation of homicides to disease or car-accidents is absolutely irrlevant to the current discussion. Deaths from accidents and diseases don't certify homicides.
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
The debate is really about values, and what people are willing to accept in their society, which is why it was doomed to permanent disagreement from the start and is ultimately kind of useless and beginning to wear on my patience. |
So you are saying that Americans actually "like" that, so it is better to satisfy them by justifying their "gun-loving values" despite the fact that those specific values are primitive?
If you are going to break the circle you are not going to do it by adding fuel to the fire. |
|
|
| Zild |
To BeatBlog
That's a state thing though different states have different laws regarding gun control. And even then they can't violate citizen's constitutional rights because then they're open to appeal from higher courts. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by PETRAN
So you are saying that Americans actually "like" that, so it is better to satisfy them by justifying their "gun-loving values" despite the fact that those specific values are primitive? |
"Primitive" is just more emotive name-calling.
Not very many people "love" guns, as far as I can tell, but a good number see them as necessary for their own self-protection. I am not going to deny them that for a nebulous idea of what is "good for society." |
|
|
| Beat Blog |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zild
To BeatBlog
That's a state thing though different states have different laws regarding gun control. And even then they can't violate citizen's constitutional rights because then they're open to appeal from higher courts. |
I'm not expert on American law, but isn't the clause "the right to bear arms"?
How would introducing tougher licensing or forcing people to provide a secure lock up box in the home violate this statement? |
|
|
| Zild |
| quote: | Originally posted by PETRAN
Yeah whatever, the relation of homicides to disease or car-accidents is absolutely irrlevant to the current discussion. Deaths from accidents and diseases don't certify homicides.
|
Say whatever all you want I'm just illustrating the fact that Americans aren't going to ban guns over less than a hundredth of a percent difference between firearm homicides in America vs. Europe. |
|
|
| Zild |
| quote: | Originally posted by Beat Blog
I'm not expert on American law, but isn't the clause "the right to bear arms"?
How would introducing tougher licensing or forcing people to provide a secure lock up box in the home violate this statement? |
Right so anything then not specifically given to the federal government by the constitution is reserved for the states. They can't make a law that says a citizen with no criminal record cannot bear a firearm because it will be appealed, but they can make laws regulating things like who can own a gun (what crimes will exclude someone from ownership etc...), and laws on who is allowed to carry concealed or openly, lockup laws, etc... |
|
|
| Beat Blog |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
I am not going to deny them that for a nebulous idea of what is "good for society." |
...and we shouldn't deny drunk drivers their right to cheap transportation just for the good of society either!
...or the right of people to deal drugs for the good of society, after all, there is ample demand!
How can you call the good of society "nebulous"? It's tangible and incredibly real, it's what I thought modern humans post WWI and WWII were working towards together? Improving living conditions for all?
I take back my earlier comment, we do have a difference in values.
That's one of the problems, America is founded on the basis of ME ME ME ME ME, and how everything is a right, not a privilege as it should be.
No wonder you're all so selfish and self-absorbed. |
|
|
| PETRAN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zild
Say whatever all you want I'm just illustrating the fact that Americans aren't going to ban guns over less than a hundredth of a percent difference between firearm homicides in America vs. Europe. |
Ok, where did you get this number from? Link...
Because the previous graph (in page 2) which presented homicides per 100.000 citizens demosntrated a different relation...
Its funny how you first state that you don't care about numbers then again you use them to prove your point...
| quote: | | "Primitive" is just more emotive name-calling. |
It may be but in the current case it coincides with the truth. using a gun to "justify your rights" is primitive and barbaric and these so-called "Rights" can be used as an alibi to engage in violent crime. I don't know what else to say its that simple. |
|
|
| Zild |
| quote: | Originally posted by PETRAN
Ok, where did you get this number from? Link...
Because the previous graph (in page 2) which presented homicides per 100.000 citizens demosntrated a different relation...
Its funny how you first state that you don't care about numbers then again you use them to prove your point...
|
If I recall correctly the number on the left was the number of deaths per 100,000 and the number on the bottom was the percentage of gun ownership, so to get a percent from that you divide the number for the country by 100,000 then multiply by 100 to get percentage.
What I did say is that the difference between the numbers is so small that I don't care about it. Not that I don't care about numbers. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by Beat Blog
...and we shouldn't deny drunk drivers their right to cheap transportation just for the good of society either! |
Talk about bad analogies.
| quote: | | ...or the right of people to deal drugs for the good of society, after all, there is ample demand! |
I happen to think drugs and their sale should be legal.
| quote: | | Improving living conditions for all? |
And we do this by effectively forcing law-abiding people to submit to criminals who consider themselves outside the law, I take it.
| quote: | | I take back my earlier comment, we do have a difference in values. |
Indeed. I do not believe that people should in effect be forced to lie down for injustice in the hope that the police will eventually solve everything, while you do. In any case, this is not about "me me me," nor is it even always about "the individual" in every case. It is about not having to submit to thugs who think that they should be able to intimidate people, harm them, and do whatever they please regardless of the law. |
|
|
| Aquadyne |
| I think we should shoot anyone who disagrees with America. |
|
|
|
|
