Poll: Do you think more guns means less crime?
Yes
No
I did until I saw these data
[Show Results]
Note: This is a public poll, other users will be able to see what you voted for.
"More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-04-2015, 02:33 PM
RE: "More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
(25-04-2015 08:10 AM)Hafnof Wrote:  A report on consensus gun science:
- Having a gun in the home increases suicide
- Having a gun in the home increases the risk a woman living there will be the victim of homicide
- Having a gun in the home makes the home more dangerous to its inhabitants rather than safer
- Guns are more likely to be used in a crime than self-defence
- More permissive carry laws do not reduce crime rates
- Strong gun laws reduce homicide
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-...story.html

(25-04-2015 02:20 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(25-04-2015 08:43 AM)Drunkin Druid Wrote:  Having a swimming pool in your back yard increases your chances of drowning.
Having a knife in your kitchen drawer increases your chances of cutting your finger off.
Driving a car increases your chances of getting into a car accident.
Crossing the street increases your chances of getting hit by a bus.
Owning a boa increases your chances of getting killed by a boa.
Going out in the rain increases your chances of getting your hair wet.
How do we prevent these things from happening? Being responsible helps. Regardless of what any of you say, freedom is a responsibility.
My neighbor having a swimming pool does not increase my chances of drowning.
Nor does it increase my chances of being robbed or murdered.
People don't tend to murder their girlfriend/wife by drowning them in the swimming pool.
Owning/possessing a swimming pool does not make someone brave enough to attack me.

People don't force others to cross the road right in front of busses.

People don't rob or rape or murder people with boa constrictors.

The first three on Hafnof's list are specific to the home and the residents therein. They do not mention danger to others.

You are cherry picking your arguments or reading DD's post wrong.[/quote]

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF

We're all mad here. The Cheshire Cat
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2015, 02:37 PM
RE: "More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
(25-04-2015 02:26 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(25-04-2015 09:08 AM)Chas Wrote:  I'll say it again because it can't be said enough: statistics apply to populations not to individuals.

The sample population includes the untrained and uneducated and careless along with the trained, educated, and careful.
It doesn't seem that there is an effective way to ensure only well trained, educated, careful people without anger issues and without jealousy issues and without vigilante heroism dreams and without murderous motives have guns.

There could easily be requirements that would help insure that.
But that would require both sides of the debate to be reasonable, and I don't see that happening.

Quote:If you open up gun access it seems you need to include access to people ill suited to gun possession.

Was I arguing for opening up gun access? Consider

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2015, 02:39 PM
RE: "More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
(25-04-2015 02:33 PM)Anjele Wrote:  You are cherry picking your arguments or reading DD's post wrong.
Perhaps you are cherry picking and ignoring the fact that there are others living at a residence who are in danger because "dad" decides he wants a gun.
Many wife's and girlfriends get murdered, many kids play with guns inappropriately stored.


But also there is the aspect of me!
Besides my prying interest in someone else's wife or kids, I am concerned about the dangers to me.
Someone elses swimming pool gives me no concern. Someone else possessing a loaded gun in the neighborhood does worry me.
In a cherry picking fashion, I am concerned for my own safety. So I worry about such matters.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2015, 02:44 PM
RE: "More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
(25-04-2015 02:39 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(25-04-2015 02:33 PM)Anjele Wrote:  You are cherry picking your arguments or reading DD's post wrong.
Perhaps you are cherry picking and ignoring the fact that there are others living at a residence who are in danger because "dad" decides he wants a gun.
Many wife's and girlfriends get murdered, many kids play with guns inappropriately stored.

The problem is the inappropriate storage by the owner.

Quote:But also there is the aspect of me!
Besides my prying interest in someone else's wife or kids, I am concerned about the dangers to me.
Someone elses swimming pool gives me no concern. Someone else possessing a loaded gun in the neighborhood does worry me.
In a cherry picking fashion, I am concerned for my own safety. So I worry about such matters.

The pool next door is a hazard to your children and all the other children in the neighborhood.
The law classifies such things as an 'attractive nuisance' and requires mitigation of the danger.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2015, 02:50 PM
RE: "More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
(25-04-2015 02:37 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(25-04-2015 02:26 PM)Stevil Wrote:  It doesn't seem that there is an effective way to ensure only well trained, educated, careful people without anger issues and without jealousy issues and without vigilante heroism dreams and without murderous motives have guns.

There could easily be requirements that would help insure that.
But that would require both sides of the debate to be reasonable, and I don't see that happening.
In NZ we make it very hard for people to own hand guns and as a result crime involving handguns here is very low. It's much more likely that a gun incident involves a rifle or sawn off shot gun.

When you allow people to have hand guns for self defence then the crims will also get access to the hand guns.
I personally don't see how you can stop that. How can you accurately profile people to ensure they are sensible and not prone to getting angry? How can you know you may get jealous? Would anyone have been able to predict that Pistorious has a personality capable of murdering his GF?

(25-04-2015 02:37 PM)Chas Wrote:  
Quote:If you open up gun access it seems you need to include access to people ill suited to gun possession.

Was I arguing for opening up gun access? Consider
I didn't imply that you were.

My argument is that you cannot allow people to have handguns AND ensure people who would use those guns to commit crimes and murder wouldn't have those guns.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2015, 02:58 PM
RE: "More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
(25-04-2015 02:50 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(25-04-2015 02:37 PM)Chas Wrote:  There could easily be requirements that would help insure that.
But that would require both sides of the debate to be reasonable, and I don't see that happening.
In NZ we make it very hard for people to own hand guns and as a result crime involving handguns here is very low. It's much more likely that a gun incident involves a rifle or sawn off shot gun.

Dead is dead, whether handgun or shotgun.

Quote:When you allow people to have hand guns for self defence then the crims will also get access to the hand guns.
I personally don't see how you can stop that. How can you accurately profile people to ensure they are sensible and not prone to getting angry? How can you know you may get jealous? Would anyone have been able to predict that Pistorious has a personality capable of murdering his GF?

As I recall from the trial, he had a history of violent behavior.

Quote:
(25-04-2015 02:37 PM)Chas Wrote:  Was I arguing for opening up gun access? Consider
I didn't imply that you were.

My argument is that you cannot allow people to have handguns AND ensure people who would use those guns to commit crimes and murder wouldn't have those guns.

That's likely true, but guns are also used to stop crime and save lives.

There is no other means of self defense that is as effective for most people.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2015, 03:19 PM
RE: "More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
(25-04-2015 02:58 PM)Chas Wrote:  That's likely true, but guns are also used to stop crime and save lives.

There is no other means of self defense that is as effective for most people.
Yeah, it comes down to that argument as to whether you are safer having a handgun for protection even if that means making handguns more available to those who would be keen to use them against you.


Not sure if you are interested but here is an article written by an American who immigrated to NZ and went through the NZ process to get himself a firearms licence for a handgun. He probably speaks your "language" more than I can. BTW this isn't an anti gun article.
http://seattleglobalist.com/2012/08/06/g...oting/5740

Quote:my partner and I immigrated to New Zealand two years ago.

And we are currently going through the process of legally obtaining firearms in New Zealand

Quote:Our reasons for owning firearms are also varied but have to do partially with our upbringing.

Both of us grew up with fathers who shot guns and taught us basic firearm safety. The desire also stems the recent life-changing experiences of emergency survival situations during the Christchurch earthquakes (a whole other story) and partially out of curiosity about New Zealand gun culture.

Quote:Without a valid and current firearms license, you cannot legally purchase any firearm other than a pellet gun anywhere in New Zealand. There is probably a black market or some other means of acquiring a firearm illegally, but firearms recovered from drug busts or other organised criminal activities typically amount to hunting rifles or pump action shot guns. Handguns and military style semi-automatics are rare, difficult to obtain, and very expensive.

Quote:In other words, it’s a tremendous pain in the ass. But it’s a pain in the ass that appears to be saving lives.
Of course his conclusion isn't necessarily correct and isn't by any means definitive, its just his opinion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2015, 03:28 PM
RE: "More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
(25-04-2015 02:44 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(25-04-2015 02:39 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Perhaps you are cherry picking and ignoring the fact that there are others living at a residence who are in danger because "dad" decides he wants a gun.
Many wife's and girlfriends get murdered, many kids play with guns inappropriately stored.

The problem is the inappropriate storage by the owner.
Sure, so we have laws that guns are to be disarmed in the house, separated from ammunition etc. This makes a gun in the home ineffective for home defense.

(25-04-2015 02:44 PM)Chas Wrote:  The pool next door is a hazard to your children and all the other children in the neighborhood.
The law classifies such things as an 'attractive nuisance' and requires mitigation of the danger.
That's why we have a law that people need a fence around their pool.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2015, 03:44 PM
RE: "More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
(25-04-2015 03:28 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(25-04-2015 02:44 PM)Chas Wrote:  The problem is the inappropriate storage by the owner.
Sure, so we have laws that guns are to be disarmed in the house, separated from ammunition etc. This makes a gun in the home ineffective for home defense.

(25-04-2015 02:44 PM)Chas Wrote:  The pool next door is a hazard to your children and all the other children in the neighborhood.
The law classifies such things as an 'attractive nuisance' and requires mitigation of the danger.
That's why we have a law that people need a fence around their pool.

We also have to have a fence around our pool. That is to protect unattended kids and animals from wandering into the yard and possibly falling into, or getting into, the pool and drowning.

We also have loaded guns in the house. If someone enters, uninvited, we are able to have a defense. Of course, the first lines of defense are locked doors and yappy dogs. We aren't trigger happy, nor are we waving guns around at the neighbors.

I would be willing to bet there are guns in nearly every house around us. So far, in the 8 years we have lived in this house, I have not been made aware of one single shooting. And this is Texas. It's not a lack of guns, it's responsible ownership.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF

We're all mad here. The Cheshire Cat
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-04-2015, 03:48 PM
RE: "More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
(25-04-2015 03:44 PM)Anjele Wrote:  I would be willing to bet there are guns in nearly every house around us. So far, in the 8 years we have lived in this house, I have not been made aware of one single shooting. And this is Texas. It's not a lack of guns, it's responsible ownership.
Not one single shooting.
It seems you live in a safe neighborhood then.

Why then do you feel the need for a loaded gun in the house?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: