Jed Eckert

March 3rd, 2018 at 10:47 AM ^

Not totally off base i suppose. Maybe some modifications...you dont need a license to own a car and use on your property, only public usage. Maybe make it the same for handguns-like the concealed carry restrictions, For public usage (off your property). Those are licensed, do have to renew, aptitude testing i have questions about (do we really test aptitude for driving?). As far as liability, that should be an individual decision not mandated.

Joined: 11/02/2017

MGoPoints: 179

Monocle Smile

March 2nd, 2018 at 12:46 PM ^

Japan had 11 gun deaths last year. Murder rate as a whole is super low, and you can scream all you want about whatever evils of their culture you want, but it doesn't change the numbers. Somehow their "destroyers" inflict far less damage.

Joined: 09/17/2009

MGoPoints: 23074

GhostOfMega

March 2nd, 2018 at 12:45 PM ^

I absolutely agree with you about handguns. It's insane to me to see all this focus on the AR15 when rifles of all types kill less than 300 people a year while handguns kill 6,000 annually. While I'm all for restrictions on magazine sizes and increased scrutiny on purchases, I worry that any ban on "assault weapons" will be so nebulous so as to make all semi-automatic rifles illegal. I personally would not want to try taking out a pack of feral hogs with a bolt action, for example. Rifles, even the scary looking semi-automatic ones, have legitimate uses that go beyond shooting people. Handguns do not.

Joined: 02/26/2018

MGoPoints: 73

Jed Eckert

March 2nd, 2018 at 5:41 PM ^

And this is why the discussion normally falls apart.  No matter how much people try, there is always another that has a different opinion than the one you stated.  For example your last 2 sentences are one opinion - what about the guy working out in the woods, in an area that has significant wolf or other predator presence.  Would he have the same opinion on the legitmate use of having a handgun available to him?

Joined: 11/02/2017

MGoPoints: 179

Mgoscottie

March 2nd, 2018 at 12:13 PM ^

far too many people think they're special and that their guns could never be used to harm and that they're safely contained.  We could use a lot more critical thinking about guns/evidence/statistics and a lot fewer talking points that circle around and go nowhere.  

Joined: 08/25/2009

MGoPoints: 16374

twgolf19

March 2nd, 2018 at 11:53 AM ^

This was not somebody walking in trying to kill as many random people as possible. This was obviously a targeted killing. I guess you would somehow be happier if they would’ve walked in and poisoned the people to death, or stab them to death. But because they use the fire arm, everybody else’s rights should be taken from them.

Joined: 11/19/2012

MGoPoints: 411

FauxMo

March 2nd, 2018 at 12:32 PM ^

Ohhhhh, Hitler did it! Hitler did it! He also started Volkswagen and built the Autobahn. Therefore, anyone who wants to build cars or roads is a monster. Don’t be dumb.

Joined: 06/17/2010

MGoPoints: 137610

RDDGoblue

March 2nd, 2018 at 12:47 PM ^

You misunderstand what I am trying to say, but that is my fault, I should not have been so vague.  My post has nothing to do with Hitler.  At all.

 

It has to do with the "any gun i want" verbiage used in the post I was responding to.  The first US gun restriction law that I am aware of was enacted in 1934.  So while people may want further gun control (not saying im for or against, my opinion is fluid), in fact one could not use "any gun I want" beginning in 1934.  The post I am quoting was at least being hyperbolic, which does not further any discussion on the topic.

Joined: 09/07/2008

MGoPoints: 1824

Wolverine91

March 2nd, 2018 at 12:42 PM ^

Maybe, maybe not. He had it in his deranged head to kill innocent people. Yes, the gun was easy access to do that but that's just one of the reasons. Mentally, there's something wrong with you if you wanna kill people and he should've received the necessary treatment. Btw, just as a gun may have stopped Cruz, the local police department failed on so many levels. We have a lot more problems than just guns, and until we as a society, left and right realize that, nothing will change

Joined: 01/12/2014

MGoPoints: 10414

ijohnb

March 2nd, 2018 at 1:21 PM ^

think you fail to recognize in your analysis is the extent to which gun ownership, itself, contributes to the derangement of the individuals who perpetrate these acts.  A gun, or the multiple assault style weapons that most of these offenders own is a variable in the equation that lead them to take the action they did.  So, it is a prudent inquiry to discuss what the effect of weapon ownership itself had on the perpetrator. 

Look, when you see a facebook post or some other social media post where a person is showing off a gun or a gun collection, you may see somebody showing off a hobby.  That is not what everybody sees.  When somebody tells me or shows me that they have 8, 9, 10 guns or assault style weapons, etc., I note that person down as somebody I don't want myself or my kids to be around, because that is not sane, rational behavior.  The ownership of a full artillary of guns like that is, itself, seemingly a notable mental disturbance or a symptom of one.

Joined: 09/21/2009

MGoPoints: 69986

Wolverine91

March 2nd, 2018 at 2:03 PM ^

There is absolutely zero proof that a gun is attributed to mental illness. I understand what you're saying but most responsible gun owners don't show off a gun and view it as a toy. They know the dangers that come with handling a gun. It's the few that do that ruin it for the rest of us. And they have more issues than just treating a gun the way they do

Joined: 01/12/2014

MGoPoints: 10414

taut

March 2nd, 2018 at 3:41 PM ^

ijohnb, that kind of closeminded attitude toward someone who owns numerous guns is pretty shallow. Idon't own a single gun, but I know a half-dozen people who own a lot and they're all normal folks. Most are avid hunters and appreciate the variety of guns they own the way I appreciate tools and tech gadgets. None of their guns have ever been fired at a human being. Your attitude contributes to the country's polarization. You may not care, but that makes you part of the problem.

Joined: 12/01/2015

MGoPoints: 1057

ijohnb

March 2nd, 2018 at 3:59 PM ^

I understand that you may feel that way, but I don't think it is "part of the problem."  I think it is a part of the discussion regarding gun control, mass shootings, and mental health that needs to be had even if it hurts some people's feelings.  I don't care if it is a "polarizing" opinion.  Is it inherently problematic for a person to collect assault weapons?  Is it relevant to their mental health?  Should a person who does so be questioning why exactly they are doing it, particularly when these weapons are implicated in so many terrible events?  I think they should.

Joined: 09/21/2009

MGoPoints: 69986

JBE

March 3rd, 2018 at 2:24 AM ^

I agree wholeheartedly with this. If you own a bunch of guns, you’ve got problems, and are most likely deranged, even though you will never see or believe that, and that’s why I’m staying away from you. The gun culture in this country is pure insanity. It’s not the price of some invented American freedom. Many other places are free without this ignorance, and this ignorance, this veneration of guns as some symbol of citizen empowerment, which is an illusion, especially in this day and age, is killing people everyday, both in the hands of citizens and police. Fuck off if you own more than one for family protection, and even that’s pushing it.

Joined: 08/18/2008

MGoPoints: 19316

TIMMMAAY

March 2nd, 2018 at 12:32 PM ^

That's a leap too far. 

Tighten controls, background checks, and don't let 18 year olds buy AR's and pistols. Domestic violence in your past? No guns.

Banning everything is a complete overreaction, and is dumb. But the thing I don't see so many people talking about, at least not seriously, is what the fuck is wrong with our society. It's not just the fact that we have guns, we have had guns from the inception. Be intellectually honest, don't just make the loud noises that are going to get upvotes. That's one thing that's wrong with society. 

Here is where someone takes one snippet of what I just said, and makes a totally false narrative from it. Another thing wrong with society. 

Joined: 09/08/2008

MGoPoints: 56289

Wolverine91

March 2nd, 2018 at 12:37 PM ^

Absolutely agree with you. Take illegal drugs as an example. Over 50,000 people died last year as a result of overdosing from drugs. Life is precious. I just wish more people view it as such and for those that don't to get some serious help.

Joined: 01/12/2014

MGoPoints: 10414

Tuebor

March 2nd, 2018 at 7:52 PM ^

 

https://www.nap.edu/read/18319/chapter/1

 

Please read the entire study.  But I'll outline some choice takeaways from the study.

 

1. Armed citizens are less likely to be injured by an attacker:
“Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was ‘used’ by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies.”

 

2. Defensive uses of guns are common:
“Almost all national survey estimates indicate thatdefensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year…in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.”

 

3. Mass shootings and accidental firearm deaths account for a small fraction of gun-related deaths, and both are declining:
“The number of public mass shootings of the type that occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary School accounted for a very small fraction of all firearm-related deaths. Since 1983 there have been 78 events in which 4 or more individuals were killed by a single perpetrator in 1 day in the United States, resulting in 547 victims and 476 injured persons.” The report also notes, “Unintentional firearm-related deaths have steadily declined during the past century. The number of unintentional deaths due to firearm-related incidents accounted for less than 1 percent of all unintentional fatalities in 2010.”

 

4. “Interventions” (i.e, gun control) such as background checks, so-called assault rifle bans and gun-free zones produce “mixed” results:
“Whether gun restrictions reduce firearm-related violence is an unresolved issue.” The report could not conclude whether “passage of right-to-carry laws decrease or increase violence crime.”

 

5. Gun buyback/turn-in programs are “ineffective” in reducing crime:
“There is empirical evidence that gun turn in programs are ineffective, as noted in the 2005 NRC study Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review. For example, in 2009, an estimated 310 million guns were available to civilians in the United States (Krouse, 2012), but gun buy-back programs typically recover less than 1,000 guns (NRC, 2005). On the local level, buy-backs may increase awareness of firearm violence. However, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, for example, guns recovered in the buy-back were not the same guns as those most often used in homicides and suicides (Kuhn et al., 2002).”

 

6. Stolen guns and retail/gun show purchases account for very little crime:
“More recent prisoner surveys suggest that stolen guns account for only a small percentage of guns used by convicted criminals. … According to a 1997 survey of inmates, approximately 70 percent of the guns used or possess by criminals at the time of their arrest came from family or friends, drug dealers, street purchases, or the underground market.”

 

7. The vast majority of gun-related deaths are not homicides, but suicides:
“Between the years 2000-2010 firearm-related suicides significantly outnumbered homicides for all age groups, annually accounting for 61 percent of the more than 335,600 people who died from firearms related violence in the United States.”

 

Joined: 03/14/2011

MGoPoints: 17467

Noleverine

March 2nd, 2018 at 8:12 PM ^

"Violence prevention programs, legislative reforms, and declines in firearm availability may contribute to decreased firearm violence (Dowd and Sege, 2012). Some studies identify an association between increased firearm legislation (including firearm purchase background checks) (Sumner et al., 2008) and lower rates of fatal firearm violence (Fleegler et al., 2013), while other studies have not found this correlation (Hahn et al., 2005)." (pp. 35)

 

K. I'll read further, but it took me ten seconds to find a point that counters your narrative, which you failed to bring up in your nice little run-down above. Part of reliably sourcing material is representing it properly, not cherry-picking random studies that support your beliefs.

Also, nowhere that you cited supports the original, unsourced claim that "guns save more lives each year than they take."

I'm not in this to get into a gun debate. I'm in this to get into a "do your research before spouting off claims" debate. We ALL could stand to be more informed.

Joined: 10/06/2010

MGoPoints: 3839