Gun Arguments

Don't see the relevance.

 

So what ?

We welcome them and integrate them well.

And you know, radical Islamists are much less dangerous when they don't have access to guns.

Canadians may be socialists without notion of freedom, but we still understand that.

 

you're so completely unaware of the Menace you are importing. They don't want to integrate.

yeah because they haven't been beheading people with knives for 1300 years

yeah you're going to make the laws that's going to control the lawless...

Haha HA HA HA HA HA HA

 

There's s lot you don't see. Tough to see much of anything with your eyes closed tight

 

Actually, no.
In my posting that you responded to I was clearly comparing between countries BECAUSE. I had asserted that there is a cultural component to which people engage in gun violence...AND in order to make that point it is necessary to look across cultures WHICH MEANS you have to look at dDIFFERENT cultures. WHICH in turn can only effectively be done by looking at different countries... which is what I did

 

Please, with Afghanistan you might as well be comparing Pluto to earth. A more sane analogy would be comparing France to the US. And then how do you decide something a nebulous as "culture?" Not much of a variable.

 

We'll get to this

In other words, it clearly isn't the original claim of mercury, so it must be your own pet theory?

So here is the crux of why I wanted to write back. Of course too many anecdotal studies shouldn't make you wonder. There are anecdotes galore for every thing out there, no matter how silly. Now of course, it should be studied, but it has, and the only relation that has ever been found between vaccines and autism were almost completely fraudulent.

Also, the one time you absolutely should ignore the opinion of a medical professional is when it involves themselves or their family members. You should really know this.

Again, as a doctor, you really really should have a better understanding of what herd immunity is.

Ok, you think the canadians are the illuminati behind a plot to take over the United States, so, you are insane. I don't say that angrily, but like many other people there is something broken in your brain, I suspect you know this too. I know you won't do anything about it, but you should.

Now, it is perfectly possible for a doctor to be insane, and you may just be a really terrible doctor on top of that. But your understanding of science is extraordinarily suspect.That being said however, the one thing I really want to ask is: Are you sure you are an M.D. and not an n.d. or maybe a chiropractor?

 

No, that's not true. Here in the U.S. stupid people and losers don't care about what works. Smart people and winners care about what works no matter who thought of it.

Obviously the point is just to reduce the damage those homicidal maniacs can do. I'm also obviously not here trying to change anything, I just like to see how much smarter I am than other people.

 

Lol, I'll take that bet. Let's ban all pro-gun speech and press. Nobody can speak or report on guns unless it's negative. And all anti-gun people have to give up their guns. How do you think that will turn out?

 

lol, but the only parallel is tugging on superman's cape, in both cases, you feel safer, but you aren't really. I stated in the OP that one argument that actually holds some water is the impracticality of getting the salt out of the ocean. That being said, there are things that could be done to reach that final objective.

...gathering dust and killing cans.

 

While there is something to that, for the most part, anybody who is half a winner in this country is doing just fine. It's so easy to succeed in this country I don't understand anybody being so willing to (in their mind anyway) trash the whole country and turn it into syria over a hobby. Slavery was much different in that it was a backbone of the economy, and abolition was a major major threat to monied interests who had a lot of pull, sort of like the oil industry has massive interest in creating doubt around climate change. Guns are just toys.

My opinion of course is absolutely not. If they came into my house and confiscated my skis, it would be the same thing. If you really think about it, that is exactly what the government did with drugs. And people love their drugs way more than guns. It's not that that was a good thing, but we didn't go to war over it thank god.

 

You could easily argue that gun laws would simply protect rights of innocent civilians to not get shot.

 

I feel like maybe it's alex jones or something that is creating crazy ire over nonexistent threats? Where does all this nutty conspiracy theory come from?

 

Taking this apart isn't very interesting, I'll just say half of it doesn't make your point, and half of it makes my point.

This is a much much more interesting path. That being said, there are several problems. Of note, none of this that I could find made any mention of 'more' guns, just right to carry laws. That being said, the first difficulty is the same as any study done on social issues. Social issues are notoriously knotty because they involve a massive massive amount of confounding variables, so conclusions are very difficult to draw, and can't be drawn from single individual studies. Also, self reporting and surveys are wildly notorious for inaccuracies. There is lots of criticism of these studies, but of course on something so emotional, it's to be expected, so that criticism requires some skepticism, but it can't be ignored.

Also, the logical notion would be that more guns do not make things safer. The idea that they don't would require significant evidence. This is some evidence, but not nearly conclusive. Even psychological studies are very fuzzy and very often have significant reproducibility issues.

So, my conclusion is that they present some evidence, but not convincing unless you really really want to believe in it. We really really should be doing far more of these studies, but that leads me to https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...hut-down-for-20-years/?utm_term=.591385bf1438 (of course that's not the only source). It seems to me that those who are pro-gun don't want it studied which is pretty high evidence that it doesn't want people to know the reality.

 

Of course they do make things safer if you assume that most people are not crazy insane idiots. If the odds are good that someone else, in fact, several someone else's are likely to be carrying, you are likely to conclude that pulling out your own weapon and blazing away for no good reason is likely to put you in an early grave and there by cause you to decide to refrain from doing so. Crazyness is not caused by owning a gun. Gun accidents with modern weapons are extremely rare. You are more likely to drown in your bath tub than to be accidentally shot.

 

When would we be justified in armed resistance, iyo?

 

The anti-gunners do argue that, but that's akin to taking away a person's freedom of speech because others don't want to hear what they have to say.

 

And rabbits, deer, Elk, antelope, moose, prairie dogs, gophers. ducks, Geese, sage grouse, turkey and Coyote or three Spoken like a true Piggly Wiggle hunter, how boring your life must be to have such a minimal use for things But I'm sure you're at the top of your game in world you grow old and tired in

 

I guess jone would be considered rightwing

But liberals and the dont-know-dont-care crowd are doing it too

 

The rest of the sane nations frankly don’t care anymore of how many massacre’s in the past and those that are inevitably to come all in the name of ‘freedom and liberty’.
America has allowed herself to become awash with firearms and has to accept the consequences. If America is content to be happy with the count of 33,000 deaths and over twice the amount of gun injuries yearly plus the slaughter their wild life, carry on, it’s not our concern.

 

Let's be honest instead of emotional: How many of those "33,000 deaths" are suicides? How many are black-on-black gang-banger murders?

Banning guns won't cure mental illness nor gang problems.

 

Guns are not the issue the problem is the most diverse population in the Western world. Germany is 75% to 85% German and older on average by 5 years. France and Britain are pretty much the same. America isn't forty percent anything. Without guns in the hands of law abiding citizens the homicide rate would be far worse than it is.

 

You are making a massive amount of assumptions here. But you know that people get drunk, they get fired, they get dumped, they get emotional and do dumb things and impulsive things. One of the biggest predictors of suicide is owning a gun. The reason is the barriers for entry. If you want to murder someone without a gun, you are going to have to get your hands dirty and you better have some strength and ability to overpower in some way. With a gun, all you have to do is move a finger 1/4". If you are carrying a gun, even if you are a 7 year old girl, the decision to end someone's life is one that can be made in half a second. If people really thought long and hard about the consequences of their actions, the prisons would be pretty empty.

On a related note, there is a fair amount of evidence that the death penalty is not deterrent. https://scholarlycommons.law.northw...e.com/&httpsredir=1&article=7323&context=jclc.

As for the bathtub thing, that isn't true for me, because I spend more time around guns than bathtubs. That statistic is, I'm sure, mostly a matter of exposure.

 

...and then you go on to a massive amount of assumptions?

Dude, you can't cure mental illness or gang violence by banning guns. You don't solve crime by harming innocent citizens. Less than half of all suicides are with a gun. Yes, some use guns, but in lieu of a gun, a suicidal person can take pills, hang themselves from their doorknob like Robin Williams, drive a car into a head on collision with a cement truck, any number of methods.

Should the need arise, my plan is some really, really good drugs (I'm thinking fentanyl-laced heroin) and a long hike deep into the woods. I don't want loved ones finding my body and having a mess to clean up.

https://afsp.org/about-suicide/suicide-statistics/
Each year 44,193 Americans die by suicide

Additional Facts About Suicide in the US

• The annual age-adjusted suicide rate is 13.26 per 100,000 individuals.
• Men die by suicide 3.5x more often than women.
• On average, there are 121 suicides per day.
• White males accounted for 7 of 10 suicides in 2015.
• Firearms account for almost 50% of all suicides.
• The rate of suicide is highest in middle age — white men in particular.

 

That's a question that I couldn't really give you a set-in-stone answer, however, the real answer is probably never.

First of all, an armed resistance against the government would almost certainly be completely futile. Any scenario that people try to dream up where it isn't, essentially means the end of the US forever.

Second, this sounds to me a little bit like "In a tank battle, when am I justified in using my pen-knife." What I mean is that the weapons that matter are things like votes, protests, the press, politics, science, rationality, and above all, money. If all of those giant weapons are overpowered, the tiny tiny weapon that personal guns represent certainly isn't going to make a difference.

I think that people who talk about this 'armed resistance' against the government are mostly children in adult bodies that haven't properly matured. In their mind must be some childishly romantic notion of red dawn where they take a stand in the hills against obama and his charging orcs. After they shoot the demon between the eyes, the sun comes out, the women go back into the kitchen and it's leave it to beaver and 1952 until the end of time. These are people spoiled and made soft by how good things are in this country. They have never had to experience war. And I mean real war, not tours in afghanistan, but war that is in your backyard, that threatens your family, and against an enemy that could really defeat you. The reality is syria, and the end of all that is good in this country.

If we think about the last time Americans took up arms against the bleeding-heart elitists that were trying to tell them how to live, it represented by far the greatest existential threat to this country ever. Germany never really threatened us, isis and al quaeda never even remotely came close, but the civil war was a real threat. Had the confederacy won the war, this country would be a shell of what it is today. The result of wwii might have been completely different, the spread of democracy, many many of these things that make life great in this country might not exist.

In the end however, the north had more money, therefore more soldiers, better weapons, more weapons, better supplies etc etc, and really that's how it went in wwii, and honestly, most wars. The side with the money wins, or nobody wins, but (maybe desert storm aside) it always represents a massive cost to all involved. It's not something to enter into over hobbies. If it is entered into for anything, and is successful, then the end of all life as we know it is probably at hand.