Two Juveniles Killed <<Moderator's Warning Issued>>

"Dangers"...of course. I do not live in a war zone so I am not worried about it.

 

I wouldn't apply any remedy to them. If someone wants to take their own life, that is a decision for them to make. There are plenty of ways to seek help if they want it, but some people have just had enough and want off the planet quickly. That's their business.

The way I would fix that problem is remove GDP as how we rate how successful our country is, and replace it with quality of life and happiness. This country has had its priorities screwed up for many years.

 

Yeah … We would have to not only end the war on drugs, but provide them too. This would cut the legs out from under the cartels and the criminal gangs in our cities.

 

If it wasn't for straw man you would have very little to say. I happen to share your opinion but if you add your opinion in my opinion together it still won't buy a cup of coffee with a senior discount at McDonald's .

Here in the real world the laws matter far more than our opinion about those laws.

Why do you think your opinion is more relevant than the laws?

 

So those guns caused people to shoot others? Somehow I doubt it. Try again.

 

I welcome the opportunity for a well reasoned debate with people who disagree with me. However, like most people I don't come here to be spammed or trolled. So for obvious reasons you are now on my ignore list.

 

yep, just like alcohol, and labeling would need to show if it was like a beer or everclear, so people knew what they were getting

 

sorry your straw man failed, you can try again if you want

so if an unconstitutional law banned guns, would you support it?

it's unconstitutional to ban the Peyote religion for everyone but a certain race, do you support that?

 

Well, at least we know who the shooters at the Hampton Club are by this news clip alone.

https://www.wjcl.com/article/9-people-shot-at-hampton-county-night-club/39745005

 

Hi again, Seth Bullock.

I've noted in the past that, by actual surveys on my part, roughly 95% of American drivers are law-breakers. [Ed.: You can check this for yourself on any stretch of a local freeway when traffic is light. Just check speeds of cars against the posted speed limit.] Should these law-breakers be jailed? Where is the line to be drawn?

Regards, stay safe 'n well . . . 'n un-shot.

 

Hi, doombug.

Thank you for taking time to post a response.

Regards, stay safe 'n well . . . 'n un-shot.

 

Hi, Josh77.

Thank you for taking time to post a response.

Regards, stay safe 'n well . . . 'n un-shot.

 

Hi, Kal'Stang.

Thank you for taking time to post a response.

Regards, stay safe 'n well . . . 'n un-shot.

 

Hi Torus.

Thank you for taking the time to completely miss the point.

Stay safe and don't speed!

 

Hi, FatBack.


Thank you for taking time to post a response.

Regards, stay safe 'n well . . . 'n un-shot.

 

Note: I get that you're not worried about gun deaths near as much as other ways of dying (you used car accidents for example. But, would just like to point out something for others as others have used the term "war zone" before. So this doesn't apply to you....unless I'm reading you wrong and it does? Either way...

Even if you combine intentional homicide of people by people with guns and suicides by people using guns, it all adds up to less than .0001% of the population of US. Indeed 99.9% of the US is safe to live in. And 99.9% of gun owners never once use their gun on someone. So...war zone? Not even close.

The reason you hear about people dying by someone using a gun so much is because the media hypes it up to a far larger problem than it actually is. Not saying its not a problem. Any life cut short sucks the big one. But its not near the problem that its hyped up to be. Certainly not on the scale that so many anti-gunners like to make it out to be in order to try and curtail ownership of guns.

 

Throughout the thread above, one undeniable fact remains. Deaths by gunshot are, at day's end, caused by a bullet. {Ed.: There remains the possibility of a theoretical event that falls outside of this statement.]

There is a connecting chain, in most, if not entirely all gunshot deaths, of a bullet, the gun which fires it, and the shooter who manipulates the gun.

Reducing the number of gunshot deaths in the United States of America, estimated at 40,600 for the year 2022, requires that at least one link in the chain be altered. The alternative is to regard a gunshot death in the US every 15 minutes on average as acceptable.

Regards, stay safe 'n well . . . 'n un-shot.

 

Guns do not have a mind of their own, getting rid of guns ( and good luck thinking you can get the toothpaste back in the tube, that's just magical thinking) will not change the minds of people who do things like shoot other people illegally.

 

By the by...just a little factoid I recently learned that kind of puts things in perspective if you think about it...

New York City has roughly 8 million people living in it. If you built a "city" like NYC across 99.9% of Texas you could fit every single person on this planet with in it.

Just something to think about....has many many aspects that is actually worth noting if such was done.

 

There is a way to do this you know. And not once do you have to make a single law in regards to guns to do it. It would be a long and arduous process that considers only the long term. But it can be done. And you never once have to address guns through out the whole thing. Can you figure out what it is?

 

the “cure” is worse than the disease. So, nope. You havnt engaged in what most of us said besides thanking us for posting. That tells me you have no counter, or even thoughts about what we said really.

 

Hi again, Kal'Stang.

Finally, a discussion instead of repeated verbal memes. Thank you.

Let's see. There's changing the culture through education. That could [Ed.: And in all probability would,] run afoul of pro-gun groups who would attempt to change the syllabus. We can see that form of response to a number of concepts in some states these days.

Then there's the repeal of the section of the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America which relates to gun rights. That would not make a single law, though it would address guns.

With suicide by gunshot being a major factor in the 40,000 or so gunshot deaths in the US in 2022, the development of an effective program to detect and treat potential suicides is another.

Strict enforcement of existing laws, with maximum sentences, might work. It's an expensive 'fix'.

Yet another approach would be to use the best knowledge we have to determine the best way to reduce recidivism among criminals. This might not necessarily mean more punishment. Again, the resources needed would not be insignificant.

What have I missed?

Regards, stay safe 'n well . . . 'n un-shot.

 

Hi, Josh77.

I read carefully what is posted when I'm quoted. My responses have nothing to do with having a counter. I have no interest in 'winning'. Rather, I hope to make people aware of the great loss of lives through gunshot in the United States of America, currently estimated at 40,000 in 2022. Along the way, I try to examine some of the 'talking points' expressed.

How, for example, would the 'cure' of severely reducing the number of guns in private hands in the US be worse than the 40,000 deaths the present level produces?

Regards, stay safe 'n well 'n un-shot.

 

Unfortunately almost everything. Remember, I said that you wouldn't have to address guns once in any of it.

Your first suggestion regarding education, in the way that you framed it, would be to create an education program that makes kids want to avoid having guns. This is not needed. Education does need reformed yes. And is one of the ways to reduce what you wanted. But not in the way that you suggest here. Its simply not needed that way. My suggestion is to create a panel of people that would go out to the top 5 or top 10 educational ranked countries in the world. Study their education systems. Compile a list of things that they do and bring it back to the US. Decide from different parts of those countries what would be best for OUR country, adjust those to match with our heritage and culture and then implement them into a revamped system of education.

For example: Japan requires that Students clean the school and does not hire janitors to do the job. This teaches kids to be responsible and to want to stay in a clean environment...after all, if they didn't do the job then they would be sitting in garbage. And who wants that? This also promotes cleaner living. Which equals healthier living. In another country (can't remember which, sorry) classes are tailored to students. Or rather students are put in classes that reflect the students. The first few years of school (our elementary) students are taught the basics, during this time they are also evaluated to see what each student's strengths and likes are. In the next few years (middle school) students are still being evaluated and at the same time steered towards their strengths and likes (which almost always coincide btw). By what we consider high school students are sent to classes that are appropriate for their strengths and likes. Both of these are fine examples of what we should be doing in OUR schools. Because of both of these things students would graduate at a higher rate than we have in the US. They would also be more likely to succeed in life. And people who succeed are less likely to commit crimes. So really this suggestion isn't JUST about reducing people using guns to commit crimes...its about reducing OVER ALL crime. And not once did guns needed to be mentioned or even thought of.

Your second suggestion...obviously way out of bounds for what I asked of you. Same with your third suggestion. You're still focusing on guns.

Your 4th suggestion ...PERFECT! You're starting to get there. And one that can actually be incorporated into the education reform I mentioned above by teaching ALL students the various signs that lead towards such things. Along with mental problems in general. After time this makes it to where our entire society could eventually detect such things far easier and get help far sooner.

As for your 5th suggestion, it is another good one. Best ways to reduce recidivism is one of the ways. But in order to do this we need to change our way of thinking about criminals. Being an ex-con puts people as 2nd class citizens. Not only do they not have their full Rights back but society as a whole treats them rather horribly. Many cannot find decent paying jobs or homes because of their criminal past. Due to this it gives many ex-cons a feeling of helplessness and hopelessness. And its those two things more than anything else that turns them back into a life of crime. So what do we do about it? There's two things.

First: Seal up their records. Make it to where the ONLY people that can look up your criminal history are law enforcement officers and judges. Additionally make a law denying renters and employers from even asking the question of criminal history. Of course, there is a concern with this. But its addressed in the second part of this plan.

Second: Justice reform. Make it one focused on rehabilitation rather than punishment. I have an idea about how to go about doing this but this post is going to be rather long so will skip most of it. Needless to say though it starts out with NOT releasing anyone unless they can convince a panel of at least 5 people that they have been rehabilitated. That panel will include 1 psychologist who has personally been working with the convict to rehabilitate. Another psychologist who does either 1 year or 6 month evaluations of the convict to see how they have changed. And another neutral psychologist. The other two people on the panel would of course be the Warden of the prison and one other neutral party. And they ALL have to agree that the convict has been rehabilitated for the person to be let free. ONLY exceptions to this general rule would be pedophiles, rapists and depending on situation, murderers. The first two are simply not reformable at least with our current knowledge and tech. The last one might be depending on the situation.

So, you're getting there. What else do you think we could work on to reduce what you want to reduce? Or better yet...reduce crime over all.

 

Kal'Stang;

Wow!

As far as I can see, we've no disagreement on anything you've proposed. Each makes sense. Some come with caveats, mainly the maximum prison sentence idea. There's a great loss there of potential contribution to society. Flipping the coin, it's deucedly difficult to separate those in prison who will, once released, resort to violence again from those who will not. [Ed.: Note the 'resort to violence' vs. shoot someone with a gun']

At present, we are a violent society when compared to a number of other modern democracies. The comparative study you propose sits well with me. When I was studying for a masters in education, I took a course in comparative educational systems in other countries. To this day, I'm still stunned by just how filthy rich the US is compared to many other nations.

Regards, and thank you again for giving me food for thought. I hope that others are reading what you wrote and taking time to think about the concepts.