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
05-05-2015, 06:56 PM (This post was last modified: 05-05-2015 07:01 PM by Thumpalumpacus.)
RE: "More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
(01-05-2015 02:14 PM)Stevil Wrote:  I understand that some people assume the world = USA. They state "here" as if everyone is to assume that "here" = USA.
They discuss gun issues as if only USA is to be considered.

In many countries handguns are not prolific, even the crims don't tend to have them.

In this context of a thread about "pro-NRA" argumentation, mentioning foreign countries seems out of place, unless they have NRA chapters.

I understand that some folks get tired of Americans hashing out their issues publicly, but if you can't even be bothered to read the thread title and post appropriately, your opinion will lose weight.

(01-05-2015 02:26 PM)Stevil Wrote:  As evidenced in NZ, most crims don't have handguns. Due to the law and customs it is very hard for them to get them. It is very rare for a crime to involve a handgun and during police raids it is rare for them to find handguns.

Great. Customs in NZ are not customs in America. Your opinion is formed in and by your living conditions. Americans aren't Kiwis, our customs aren't yours, and I would not deign to offer my own opinion to you as to how you'd ought to run your country, because I don't know too much about the local conditions pertaining.

(01-05-2015 02:26 PM)Stevil Wrote:  I think perhaps you think criminals are stupid.

No. I do, however think that when they're breaking into a stranger's house, they don't have the same level of knowledge about said house as the homeowner. Now, If you have a problem with that point, state your problem, rather imputing to me views I don't hold.

(01-05-2015 02:26 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Given your level of superior "good guy" intelligence, what would you do if you were to invade a house that currently had occupants? Would you make it a priority to take out the occupants first, or would you go for the stuff and worry about the occupants only once they come after you?

Setting aside for the moment your rude and unseemly assumption of attitude on my part, if I knew my break-in was to be contested, I'd leave, because I would be searching for valuables, not shootouts. In other words, your question posits a false dichotomy, and is therefore useless.

Now, as for my intelligence, what little I have doesn't derive from being a good guy.

I will ask this of you once and only once, for the sake of a decent discussion: stop talking down to me. I'm a reasonable guy and will happily discuss civilly over any disagreement, but I make change in the coin tendered. If you insist on being an asshole, you will be treated like one -- and no, that does not include "ignore". I'm not that nice.

(01-05-2015 02:26 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Ahh, perhaps you are a Arnold fan or maybe Twilight is your cup of tea. all those wolfs I bet you were mentally considering how best to sneak up on a wolf and shoot it so you could put its mounted head on your wall in your trophy room.

See how stupid you look making uncharitable assumptions about people? Why would you choose to be in this position you find yourself in now, opting to be the jackass when your interlocutor is being civil?

Really, there's nothing charming about being supercilious. Stop it.

Also, lol being unable to distinguish a coyote from a wolf. You impeach your opinion with every word you type.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thumpalumpacus's post
06-05-2015, 04:56 PM
RE: "More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
(30-04-2015 11:18 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  Suicide is a choice. What do you mean by that curious phrase of yours? Edit: saw your clarification, but I don't see how suicide is "compulsive". It may or may not be irresistible, but it is still a conscious decision.

While in an ideal world all suicides would be the result of conscious rational consideration, in this world I would wager that the vast majority of them are the result of impulsive subconscious and mostly temporary mental states.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2015, 05:02 PM (This post was last modified: 06-05-2015 05:06 PM by Hypatia.)
RE: "More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
(13-04-2015 03:10 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  I know, I know, this horse has been beaten to death at times, but I found myself back in this clusterfuck of a topic in the last couple of days and I've reencountered this moronic argument. So, I decided to look a little closer at this specific claim that "more guns means less crime, including murders and violent crime."

If this is indeed true, then gun ownership should highly correlate with reduced crime rates and lower murder rates. We will stick to just the US for the time being because trying to compare the US to other countries is a bit hairy because I don't know who to compare us to. Do I compare us to other countries with comparable intentional homicide rates as per (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cou...tion=ufi)? That puts the US (rate of 4.7 per 100,000 people) on par with places like Yemen (4.8) and Latvia (4.7). There are not really any comparable countries with similar cultures and governments to the US, because places like Finland (1.6), Australia (1.1), the UK (1.0), Canada (1.8), Sweden (0.7), etc, all have intentional homicide rates that are less than half of the US rate. I mean, even if we try and take the best case scenario of somewhere like Sweden, we find that their firearm laws are much more restrictive than ours (http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/sweden), even though they have a lot of guns per person, as we do in the US.

So, we can just look at within the US to try and get a sense of whether or not this correlation holds true. I have posted the graphs from this on the post, and the data comes from these sources (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violenc...ation=ufi) and (https://www.census.gov/statab/ranks/rank...tion=ufi).

So, what do we see in the plot of murder rate vs gun ownership? No trend (r^2 of 0.01). So, more guns does not mean a lower murder rate.

Violent crime v. murder rate? No trend (r^2 of 0.02)

It would seem that more guns most definitely does not mean less crime or murders.

The last two graphs are me looking for a trend. The one is population density vs gun ownership, and we see something curious. The lower the population density, the higher the gun ownership percentage. Now, typically I would make the case that lower population density correlates with reduced crime rates and murder rates. Primarily because the less dense the population, the lower the rate of incidence. So, population density should correlate with murder rate, but it doesn't (r^2 of 0.01). Which is very curious. As it turns out, the 4 states you see with the high population densities are New Jersey, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and Connecticut, and they all have abnormally low murder rates for their population density. Otherwise, there is no clear trend or abnormality. As such, my prediction that lower population density means lower murder rate also appears untrue.

I'll hypothesize then that there should be a lower murder rate with lower population density, but lower population density correlates with higher gun ownership rate, which may influence the murder rate such that it is elevated above what it might be otherwise.

To summarize, more guns doesn't mean safer.


First, and without sarcasm, I would ask that you find a more credible source for any claims you offer if you wish to be taken seriously. Wikipedia is usually footnoted with some legitimate primary source material, but generally dismissed in thoughtful discussion, owing to its inadmissability as a scholarly citation. Always find the primary source material for a..."bullet-proof" argument. (I do love a pun! Wink Wink

And THEN.... lets talk about a more specific statistic....like the per capita violent crime rate by CONCEALED WEAPON or OPEN CARRY regulations by state.

I do not entertain theories from NRA nutters or Leftists regarding the correlation/causation of such general concepts as "guns" to "crime" nor, likewise, theories on the relation of "spoons" to "obesity".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2015, 05:15 PM
RE: "More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
(05-05-2015 06:56 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  Setting aside for the moment your rude and unseemly assumption of attitude on my part, if I knew my break-in was to be contested, I'd leave, because I would be searching for valuables, not shootouts. In other words, your question posits a false dichotomy, and is therefore useless.
It's not useless.
If you were intending to rob a place uncontested you would make sure no-one is home. Therefore the home owner is not in threat from this type of danger.
However, if the intruder intends to target the home owner, they will make sure the home owner is home, in this case the invader will first takle the home owner before focussing on other things.
(05-05-2015 06:56 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(01-05-2015 02:26 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Ahh, perhaps you are a Arnold fan or maybe Twilight is your cup of tea. all those wolfs I bet you were mentally considering how best to sneak up on a wolf and shoot it so you could put its mounted head on your wall in your trophy room.

See how stupid you look making uncharitable assumptions about people? Why would you choose to be in this position you find yourself in now, opting to be the jackass when your interlocutor is being civil?
I was obviously responding in kind with regards to your own uncivil comments regarding people who enjoy Rambo movies.
People who live in glass houses...

(05-05-2015 06:56 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  Also, lol being unable to distinguish a coyote from a wolf. You impeach your opinion with every word you type.
A NZer must need knowledge on coyotes and wolves? We have neither here.
Anyway, this is beside the point. Swap wolf for coyote, the point stands.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2015, 08:00 PM
RE: "More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
Hello, new member but long time listener and lurker here. I hope to add some meaningful points to the conversation at large.

First, the question is poorly formed.

More Guns means Safer

A safer country, city, community, home, or person? It fails on so many levels.

Regarding the poll question:

Do you think more guns means less crime?

Nope, nor do I think more guns mean more crime (excluding murder by firearm).

If one were to look at OCED countries, the US is medium in its level of crime [1]. This brings forth those that are murdered (according to criminal law) by firearms. I say that most these deaths are ones many of US do not care about.

These are mostly gang members, criminals, or those involved in illicit activities. Of those that are "innocent" persons that do die, I accept these deaths as a result of having guns.

This acceptance is just the same as the one that US society has adapted to when it comes to driving faster than 25MPH. I the reason that we do not mandate speed governors on all civilian cars is for convenience and some economical reasons.

As to me owning weapons I own four firearms. Do I think they will be used in self defense? Not really. About 100,000 Defensive gun uses take place every year [2] but my life is not exactly high risk, excluding pirates!

I have a concealed pistol permit and carry but realistically do not believe that I will need to use it. Nevertheless, I carry a gun just the same as I carry a fire extingusher in my car, and a first aid kit with CPR device / AED.

I philosophically support:
Background Checks and that is about it amoung new firearms laws.

Magazine limits are useless as most gun fights uses three -five rounds and the real planners will just 3D print or machine them.

Assault Weapons bans are useless as evidence by the DOJ own study.

[1] http://www.civitas.org.uk/crime/crime_st...an2012.pdf

[2] http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/201...lf-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2015, 08:14 PM
RE: "More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
I suspect that if one were to lay a map of gun crimes and crimes in general along with a map of gun ownership, it would reveal that the areas with the highest number of guns has a low number of gun crime.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-05-2015, 04:42 AM
RE: "More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
(05-05-2015 06:56 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(01-05-2015 02:26 PM)Stevil Wrote:  I think perhaps you think criminals are stupid.

No. I do, however think that when they're breaking into a stranger's house, they don't have the same level of knowledge about said house as the homeowner. Now, If you have a problem with that point, state your problem, rather imputing to me views I don't hold.
It's not like your house is a paintball arena.
You'll be either watching TV, or be asleep in bed. Or maybe they just knock on your door and shoot you when you answer the door.
It would be very very easy for them to kill you if that is their goal. You won't even see it coming.
But anyways, it's incredibly unlikely that they will invade your house.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-05-2015, 09:28 AM
RE: "More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
(07-05-2015 04:42 AM)Stevil Wrote:  
(05-05-2015 06:56 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  No. I do, however think that when they're breaking into a stranger's house, they don't have the same level of knowledge about said house as the homeowner. Now, If you have a problem with that point, state your problem, rather imputing to me views I don't hold.
It's not like your house is a paintball arena.
You'll be either watching TV, or be asleep in bed. Or maybe they just knock on your door and shoot you when you answer the door.
It would be very very easy for them to kill you if that is their goal. You won't even see it coming.
But anyways, it's incredibly unlikely that they will invade your house.

If killing was the goal of the home invader then why not just use a hunting rifle and shoot from afar. The threat of home invasions is fairly low depending on area and lifestyle. Mostly I believe it's 30% of burglars occur at times when someone is likely to be home.

Further, there are 100,000 defensive gun uses every year most probably occur at home. Your vision seems to be some Die Hard shoot it out, but this is not likely. Most likely is that the robber will take off if they hear the homeowner and the gun is just an additional safety measure.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Gatheist's post
07-05-2015, 10:29 AM
RE: "More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
Wow! This discussion has got my head spinning. I think I'll take some rifles and handguns over to my gun club for a couple hours and get it straightened out. Then I'll run down to my ranch and see if the coyotes are still trying to kill my beloved barn cats. If they are, and I see them, the coyotes can kiss their asses goodbye.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-05-2015, 05:43 PM
RE: "More Guns means Safer" the nonsensical pro-NRA argument
(07-05-2015 10:29 AM)Black Eagle Wrote:  Wow! This discussion has got my head spinning. I think I'll take some rifles and handguns over to my gun club for a couple hours and get it straightened out. Then I'll run down to my ranch and see if the coyotes are still trying to kill my beloved barn cats. If they are, and I see them, the coyotes can kiss their asses goodbye.

Them barn cats can probably take care of themselves against them coyotes. Ever seen a dog and a cat fight? Dog loses. You shouldn't be worried about the coyotes, them barn cats are probably sizing you up. Big Grin

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: