Interview with reeveseb on the subject of gun control
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-09-2017, 09:00 PM
RE: Interview with reeveseb on the subject of gun control
Considering your views on men and women and gun ownership doesn't that mean that while men are the most likely to own gun they are also the most likely to be idiots with them, that the reason they own those weapon are pretty much the same behind most gun accidents and, dare I say crime?

How do you explain the racial divide in US gun owners? While less impressie than the gender one's non-hispanic white people are much more likely than others to own firearms.

PS: I know these last few questions are very politically charged, but I want to stress that I am not here to judge, just to roast a little bit. I would also like to remind you that you have the right to remain silent... and also to lawyer. It's in your constitution. Tongue

Freedom is servitude to justice and intellectual honesty.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-09-2017, 10:35 PM
RE: Interview with reeveseb on the subject of gun control
(02-09-2017 09:00 PM)epronovost Wrote:  Considering your views on men and women and gun ownership doesn't that mean that while men are the most likely to own gun they are also the most likely to be idiots with them, that the reason they own those weapon are pretty much the same behind most gun accidents and, dare I say crime?
I had to read your question a couple of times. I don't understand what you mean, but if I'm reading it right, you're trying to draw a correlation between the rates of accidents and crime, both of which are results of men being idiots? Need a little more clarification here before I can respond in any coherent way.

(02-09-2017 09:00 PM)epronovost Wrote:  How do you explain the racial divide in US gun owners? While less impressie than the gender one's non-hispanic white people are much more likely than others to own firearms.
I think about this quite a bit, believe it or not. I'm a white, middle-aged male. I haven't ever experienced racism. I've never been detained and asked for my citizenship papers. I've never been pulled over for driving while black. I was pulled over one time in Texas because we drove an older Chevy Nova and the state trooper wanted to search my trunk for drugs. I know he pulled us over (I was driving, my mother was the passenger) because of the car. It was a car usually driven by hispanics and I'm assuming if he'd known he was pulling over a 16 year old white kid with his mother, he never would have lit us up. Anyway, sometimes when I carry my firearm in public, I don't conceal it. It sits on my right hip in my holster. I'll go into convenience stores, grocery stores or other public places. I get odd looks on occasion, and even hear some comments as people walk by to their companion, "Hey, did you see that? He's carrying a gun!" or something like that. I've seen other white people do this. Not many, but it does happen. It's well within the law to do that here in North Carolina. I have never seen a black man do this in public. Each time I'm wearing my pistol out in the open and I walk past black men, I will often wonder if they would ever feel comfortable enough to do exactly what I am doing. They have the exact same rights as I do, but I wonder if the general response would be the same toward him as it is toward me. Would somebody call the police if they saw a black man walking through a grocery store with a sidearm showing? They've never done that to me. Is is because I appear to be less of a threat because I'm white? I can't say that I know for sure, but I would imagine that carrying a pistol in plain view in public is not something most black men would willingly do knowing the possible ramifications. And it saddens me to say that.

I know all of that really doesn't answer your question. I don't know why white people are more statistically likely to own firearms. I can speculate that in my experience, more white people than black or hispanic hunt for a hobby. That could be part of it. Another part might be that black people make up about 13 percent of the US population while non-hispanic whites make up about 64 percent as of 2010. That could skew numbers greatly if you're just talking about raw numbers. Additionally, the most dense populations of black people tend to be urban areas usually with much stricter gun laws, further restricting access (Chicago, Washington D.C., Baltimore, New York City, etc.). Another reason could be that somewhere around 13 percent of US black males are felons (according to an article by ABC news), who would then be ineligible to buy or own a firearm. These are just a few guesses.

(02-09-2017 09:00 PM)epronovost Wrote:  PS: I know these last few questions are very politically charged, but I want to stress that I am not here to judge, just to roast a little bit. I would also like to remind you that you have the right to remain silent... and also to lawyer. It's in your constitution. Tongue

I might need a lawyer after this is all said and done!!!

It pays to keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2017, 09:11 AM
RE: Interview with reeveseb on the subject of gun control
I will attempt to clarify my first question. If we posit that men are attracted to firearms to a greater degree than women because they are more aggressive, tolerent of violence, tend to fight more often than flight in case of danger and are generally perceived as a symbol of virility, this would mean that the more a person possess those traits, the more likely they are to possess guns. The question I am raising and the problem inherant to this situation is that those traits are fundamentally those who are the most tightly linked to violent and reckless behaviors. Violent and reckless behaviors are behind most crimes and accidents that causes injuries to self and others. Thus, the person who possess the most dangerous traits are those are attracted the most by firearms. Guns aren't nearly as dangerous in the hands of people who are calm, patient, pacifists and who aren't in any way anxious about their own virility, yet those people are less likely to own and carry weapons than their opposite. Do you think firearms and their marketing/perception is feeding this dangerous loop? Do you think that there is a toxic cultural side in gun ownership?

I have other question on race relation within the US and domestic terrorism and their relation to gun ownership, but I think my first question is complecated enough.

Freedom is servitude to justice and intellectual honesty.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes epronovost's post
03-09-2017, 10:29 AM
RE: Interview with reeveseb on the subject of gun control
(03-09-2017 09:11 AM)epronovost Wrote:  I will attempt to clarify my first question. If we posit that men are attracted to firearms to a greater degree than women because they are more aggressive, tolerent of violence, tend to fight more often than flight in case of danger and are generally perceived as a symbol of virility, this would mean that the more a person possess those traits, the more likely they are to possess guns. The question I am raising and the problem inherant to this situation is that those traits are fundamentally those who are the most tightly linked to violent and reckless behaviors. Violent and reckless behaviors are behind most crimes and accidents that causes injuries to self and others. Thus, the person who possess the most dangerous traits are those are attracted the most by firearms. Guns aren't nearly as dangerous in the hands of people who are calm, patient, pacifists and who aren't in any way anxious about their own virility, yet those people are less likely to own and carry weapons than their opposite. Do you think firearms and their marketing/perception is feeding this dangerous loop? Do you think that there is a toxic cultural side in gun ownership?

Thanks for clarifying?!?

I don't think the your posited link between testosterone and gun ownership feeds any type of dangerous loop. I think the majority of our society are law-abiding, calm, cool, collected and who think of gun ownership as a right, be they men, women, white, black, gay, straight, or other. They don't use guns to fight, kill or maim just for the hell of it because they are civilized and appreciate their responsibility not to deprive other humans of their rights. Then there are the residual and leftovers who don't really care about other people's rights. They use guns (cars, airplanes, knives, bombs, hammers, sticks, etc.) to inflict harm on others because they are psychos who don't adhere to the societal norms which the rest of us appreciate and follow in an effort to sustain a cohesive and functioning society.

I don't think that my owning of a gun feeds any type of toxic culture. The toxicity comes from people who misuse ANY weapon for whatever reason. I think your question is blowing the problem out of proportion. I agree there are more steps we could take to limit the "crazies" from getting their hands on guns, but I don't think the problem is as sinister as you appear to believe based on your question.

It pays to keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2017, 01:00 PM
RE: Interview with reeveseb on the subject of gun control
Actually, I never posited that there is a link between testosterone and gun ownership. What I posited was based on your own interpretation of gun owners demographic; that is that men are overwhelmingly gun owners because guns are basically a manly thing to have. I simply posited that there is a strong relationship between aggressivity, tolerance of violence, fight over flight reflex and anxious virility and crime. Criminals are people who overwhelmingly possess those traits in greater quantity than the average person. These are also the traits you have mentionned or alluded to as to why men own guns while women don't. Thus, in that world view, it makes sense to believe that the more likely a person is to own a firearms, the more likely that person is to possess those traits and the more it possess those traits, the more likely she is to be involved in criminal or reckless behavior.

What is more contentious, it the following. The more guns and other cultural trappings that promote and represent those traits are common or are seen as positive or a sign of status, the more aggressivity, tolerance of violence, fight over flight reflex and anxious virility become common traits in the population. The more those traits are common amongst a population, the more violent, divided and paranoid a society becomes. The US, despite being an economically extremely prosperous country and possessing a stable government possess a ridiculously high carceral population, a powerful and authoritarian judicial system and a very high level of violence of all sorts compared to countries with a similar level of development. You seem to not completly reject the idea that the American society is more violent than that of other comparable nations. You also seem to believe that there is a certain link between aggressivity, tolerance of violence, fight over flight reflex and anxious virility and gun ownership. You do think that gun ownership does not CREATE any of those traits, neither do you seem to think that gun owners are a danger to society since the vast majority of them are perfectly normal people. You do think more could be done to limit weapon possession by the ''crazies''. So far, am I still corect in my assessment of your opinion of the situation? I need to be very certain of your position because my next questions will touch terrorism and racism in the US and these are very touchy subjects.

Freedom is servitude to justice and intellectual honesty.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2017, 02:14 PM
RE: Interview with reeveseb on the subject of gun control
(03-09-2017 01:00 PM)epronovost Wrote:  Actually, I never posited that there is a link between testosterone and gun ownership. What I posited was based on your own interpretation of gun owners demographic; that is that men are overwhelmingly gun owners because guns are basically a manly thing to have. I simply posited that there is a strong relationship between aggressivity, tolerance of violence, fight over flight reflex and anxious virility and crime.
I feel like you took a bit of a leap in linking all of those attributes to crime. I don't know why people commit crimes. Could be because they feel hopeless and destitute. Could be they want more than what they have. Could be they had traumatic experience as children or young adults and became unstable. Could be they feel trapped in a cycle of poverty and the only choice they see is crime. Could be some are racist, like the guy recently in Charlottesville. Could be they are religious nuts who believe apostates should be killed or enslaved. Point is, linking my reasons for why men tend to gravitate to guns moreso than women to criminal tendencies is not what I was saying at all, and I don't want to try to answer questions defending a position I never held.

(03-09-2017 01:00 PM)epronovost Wrote:  Criminals are people who overwhelmingly possess those traits in greater quantity than the average person.
I don't know if that I'm on board with this assumption.

(03-09-2017 01:00 PM)epronovost Wrote:  These are also the traits you have mentionned or alluded to as to why men own guns while women don't. Thus, in that world view, it makes sense to believe that the more likely a person is to own a firearms, the more likely that person is to possess those traits and the more it possess those traits, the more likely she is to be involved in criminal or reckless behavior.
I don't agree with this at all. To me, what you are saying is similar to the following: God is love, love is blind, therefore God is blind. While there might be "some" truth to what you're saying, it's only coincidental in nature and no real tangible relationship exists.

(03-09-2017 01:00 PM)epronovost Wrote:  What is more contentious, it the following. The more guns and other cultural trappings that promote and represent those traits are common or are seen as positive or a sign of status, the more aggressivity, tolerance of violence, fight over flight reflex and anxious virility become common traits in the population. The more those traits are common amongst a population, the more violent, divided and paranoid a society becomes.
I understand what you're saying, but I don't agree with you. I don't think guns represent those traits. Neither do I think that having them promotes a more violent, divided and paranoid society.

(03-09-2017 01:00 PM)epronovost Wrote:  The US, despite being an economically extremely prosperous country and possessing a stable government possess a ridiculously high carceral population, a powerful and authoritarian judicial system and a very high level of violence of all sorts compared to countries with a similar level of development.
I agree with all of this.

(03-09-2017 01:00 PM)epronovost Wrote:  You seem to not completly reject the idea that the American society is more violent than that of other comparable nations.
Yes, I think most rational people could agree to this statement.

(03-09-2017 01:00 PM)epronovost Wrote:  You also seem to believe that there is a certain link between aggressivity, tolerance of violence, fight over flight reflex and anxious virility and gun ownership.
Only in that I think these are possible reasons explaining why men gravitate to gun ownership as opposed to women. This has nothing to do with a higher propensity to be violent or commit crimes in my opinion.

(03-09-2017 01:00 PM)epronovost Wrote:  You do think that gun ownership does not CREATE any of those traits, neither do you seem to think that gun owners are a danger to society since the vast majority of them are perfectly normal people.
Correct. However, normal is relative, so I would prefer to say sane and law-abiding.

(03-09-2017 01:00 PM)epronovost Wrote:  You do think more could be done to limit weapon possession by the ''crazies''. So far, am I still corect in my assessment of your opinion of the situation? I need to be very certain of your position because my next questions will touch terrorism and racism in the US and these are very touchy subjects.
I agree with this last part.

It pays to keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2017, 04:01 PM
RE: Interview with reeveseb on the subject of gun control
The US does have a certain issue of domestic terrorism crystalised in the collective memory of the country by people like Timothy Mcveigh or Ted Kaczynski. The Militia movement and the Sovereign Citizen movements are also well known as potential if not outright terrorist organisation. Gun ownership is a fundamental element and rallying point for domestic terrorism in the US. Do you fear that defense of gun ownership and of the second ammendment might be transformed in a dog whistle term for supporting those movements?

What's your general opinion of the Sovereign Citizen and Militia Movement in the US?

Freedom is servitude to justice and intellectual honesty.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2017, 05:29 PM
RE: Interview with reeveseb on the subject of gun control
(03-09-2017 04:01 PM)epronovost Wrote:  The US does have a certain issue of domestic terrorism crystalised in the collective memory of the country by people like Timothy Mcveigh or Ted Kaczynski. The Militia movement and the Sovereign Citizen movements are also well known as potential if not outright terrorist organisation. Gun ownership is a fundamental element and rallying point for domestic terrorism in the US. Do you fear that defense of gun ownership and of the second ammendment might be transformed in a dog whistle term for supporting those movements?
I wouldn't consider it to be anything substantial. These people might use the second amendment to justify what they are doing, but to my mind, it's just like islamic terrorists perverting the koran to justify their terrorism. They are fringe and inconsequential in the big scheme of things.

(03-09-2017 04:01 PM)epronovost Wrote:  What's your general opinion of the Sovereign Citizen and Militia Movement in the US?
I've seen people use the "sovereign" defense in courtrooms and they are all loony. They utilize all of the infrastructure and services that are paid for via tax dollars, then claim that the government has no right to tax them and that they don't have to abide by any laws because they didn't enter into any contracts with any public servants. Just a bunch of nonsense to me. Their numbers are small and they pose no real threat.

Honestly, I see them as free to organize and say whatever they want. But the moment they start acting violent or inciting violence, they are crossing a line and should be dealt with. At this point, just like any other group out there who resorts to violence of any kind, they become cowards. The applies to right wing and left wing groups who resort to violence to get their point across.

It pays to keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2017, 10:31 PM (This post was last modified: 03-09-2017 10:46 PM by epronovost.)
RE: Interview with reeveseb on the subject of gun control
I do thnk that the comparison between Islam and gun ownership is apt when it comes to their relationship with terrorism. Do you fear that your defense of gun ownership could lump you with terrorsit due to over zealous people for gun control?

Finally do you think that gun ownership for self defense has a racist undertone by portraying minorities as dangerous gangsters, the one people need protection against? Many 24/7 news outlet and reality TV shows (Cops most famous of all) do sell this narrative heavily in my opinion.

Freedom is servitude to justice and intellectual honesty.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2017, 05:46 AM
RE: Interview with reeveseb on the subject of gun control
(03-09-2017 10:31 PM)epronovost Wrote:  I do thnk that the comparison between Islam and gun ownership is apt when it comes to their relationship with terrorism.
I hope I'm reading this correctly in that you are comparing only those fringe elements that pervert their causes to justify mayhem.

(03-09-2017 10:31 PM)epronovost Wrote:  Do you fear that your defense of gun ownership could lump you with terrorsit due to over zealous people for gun control?
Not in the least. I do realize there are a few out there who will equate me with terrorists just because I happen to own guns, but that's a cross for those people to bear. Frankly, linking myself or the millions of other lawful gun owners to terrorism is absurd and shouldn't take up any time at all to ponder.

(03-09-2017 10:31 PM)epronovost Wrote:  Finally do you think that gun ownership for self defense has a racist undertone by portraying minorities as dangerous gangsters, the one people need protection against? Many 24/7 news outlet and reality TV shows (Cops most famous of all) do sell this narrative heavily in my opinion.
I do not think gun ownership for self defense has any racist undertones, nor does the act of owning a gun perpetuate any stereotypes. I think it's just owning guns for self defense. Why does it have to me more sinister than that? Frankly it doesn't matter who the aggressor is. Anybody who initiates violence on myself or my family should be prepared to receive a .357 round to the chest.

For me, race doesn't enter the equation. "Dangerous gangsters" are just that regardless of race. If some people want to read into that and think racism, so be it. I've never been exposed to gangs personally, so I'm not an authority. There are gangs with every race, and gangs seems to form up and operate based mostly on race. That's not my fault, nor the fault of any other legal gun owner. At some point, doesn't that come into play? If there are people in the suburbs of larger urban areas who can legally obtain firearms and are afraid of being victims of gang violence, why shouldn't they be able to protect themselves without being labeled a racist? Call them anti-gangists, or violent crime protectioninsts, or don't break into my homeists. Label it however you choose. We all live within driving distance of some type of violent gang whether it be crips, bloods, MS13, KKK, Keystone United. That means potential for running into members and being victims of violent crimes are not as remote as some people think. Just because I choose to prepare myself for this possibility doesn't make me anything more than a well prepared person. That's it. No more, no less.

It pays to keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: