Yet another shooting thread

[robnisch]

Her chances are better armed than not armed.

Citation please!

I can find no clear evidence that being armed makes you safer. If anything you increase the chances of harm. Being armed emboldens you to escalate a situation. There is some evidence that it helps prevent property loss.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Well, had a two-fer, UNLV and a killing spree in Texas.

Her chances are better armed than not armed.

Citation please!

I can find no clear evidence that being armed makes you safer. If anything you increase the chances of harm. Being armed emboldens you to escalate a situation. There is some evidence that it helps prevent property loss.

Property loss prevention can only happen if the person robbing a home knows there is a weapon or it require a direct confrontation with the robber.

 

[Elixir]

Property loss prevention can only happen if the person robbing a home knows there is a weapon or it require a direct confrontation with the robber.

I wonder how those “Insured by Smith&Wesson” stickers are selling.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Hasn't worked for me. Maybe I'm doing it wrong.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Hasn't worked for me. Maybe I'm doing it wrong.

The pie goes on the porch and the oil on the steps.

 

[robnisch]

To me it is like the drug problem. Prohibition and interdiction does not work well. It is a cultural problem. Until we can change how people think about guns nothing will change. The 2nd amendment is flawed. And there is little hope of changing it any time soon.

 

[Elixir]

Hasn't worked for me. Maybe I'm doing it wrong.

The pie goes on the porch and the oil on the steps.

You jest, but you’ve never seen Mrs Smith. One scary mama!

 

[Elixir]

Prohibition and interdiction does not work well. It is a cultural problem.

I admit to some “radical” views on this. I believe that prohibition and interdiction ARE the problem, for the most part. In fact I think that the expense and loss of life of instantly decriminalizing the ingestion of all substances, would be more than recouped in short order if not immediately, due to cultural change. Deaths might Instantly go down from current levels as soon as legally supplied, quality controlled drugs were available. Let the free market and accurate labeling work its magic to weed out fentanyl-laced fakes, Chinese imports and bathtub preparations from cartels. People -including addicts - would soon learn to use the Good Stuff, which would be cheap due to accurate labeling being the main regulatory requirement, with fiscal death penalties for violators. Property crimes would plummet. Studies could be provided by those wishing to gain credibility in their consumers’ eyes, and caveat emptor.
The resulting cultural change would be dramatic. And when things settle down, there will be no more cartels, the jails will be half empty, governments at every level will see surpluses …

(and we will all live happily ever after )

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

To me it is like the drug problem. Prohibition and interdiction does not work well. It is a cultural problem.

When did it become a cultural problem. Is American culture in post assault ban ending that much different than pre assault ban ending? Certainly television has had an effect, but all of the social media and media stuff exists in Europe and Canada too. So are they not seeing these rash killings because it isn't so bleeping easy to get weapons that make mass killings much easier?

Until we can change how people think about guns nothing will change.

Some people feel very strongly about guns. Those people are not as often going to go on a murder spree. The trouble is, they are very supportive of allowing those who do go on murder sprees to be allowed to get the guns to go on those sprees.

 

[robnisch]

To me it is like the drug problem. Prohibition and interdiction does not work well. It is a cultural problem.

When did it become a cultural problem. Is American culture in post assault ban ending that much different than pre assault ban ending? Certainly television has had an effect, but all of the social media and media stuff exists in Europe and Canada too. So are they not seeing these rash killings because it isn't so bleeping easy to get weapons that make mass killings much easier?

Until we can change how people think about guns nothing will change.

Some people feel very strongly about guns. Those people are not as often going to go on a murder spree. The trouble is, they are very supportive of allowing those who do go on murder sprees to be allowed to get the guns to go on those sprees.

The mythos of the wild west is a big part of it. Movies, TV Westerns, rugged individualism, ext.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

To me it is like the drug problem. Prohibition and interdiction does not work well. It is a cultural problem.

When did it become a cultural problem. Is American culture in post assault ban ending that much different than pre assault ban ending? Certainly television has had an effect, but all of the social media and media stuff exists in Europe and Canada too. So are they not seeing these rash killings because it isn't so bleeping easy to get weapons that make mass killings much easier?

Until we can change how people think about guns nothing will change.

Some people feel very strongly about guns. Those people are not as often going to go on a murder spree. The trouble is, they are very supportive of allowing those who do go on murder sprees to be allowed to get the guns to go on those sprees.

The mythos of the wild west is a big part of it. Movies, TV Westerns, rugged individualism, ext.

But why did that become a growing issue after the ban expired?

 

[Derec]

But why did that become a growing issue after the ban expired?

Did it? Can you show some evidence that crime using so-called "assault weapons" increased after the ban expired?
Note that if all gun crime went up around the same time, then it was probably just a coincidence and due to something different like economy.

 

[Derec]

Some people feel very strongly about guns. Those people are not as often going to go on a murder spree. The trouble is, they are very supportive of allowing those who do go on murder sprees to be allowed to get the guns to go on those sprees.

The problem is that many on the left do not focus on common sense reforms but demand things like banning certain kinds of guns for everybody.

So the gun owners do not trust the gun control crowd not to come for their guns.

 

[Derec]

Hasn't worked for me. Maybe I'm doing it wrong.

 

[bilby]

So the gun owners do not trust the gun control crowd not to come for their guns.

Why would the gun owners want to own guns in the first place though?

This is only a problem if there are people out there who have a need for a gun, and who can be trusted not to ever use it in a disproportionate response against another person.

That requirement for its use to be proportionate essentially means that it can only be used in a situation in which the person they are trying to kill is in the process of attempting to kill someone.

Most people are so unlikely ever to be in such a situation, that the desire to own a gun for "self defence" is itself diagnostic of a level of paranoia more than sufficient to make them unsuited to own firearms.

That paranoia of this kind is endemic in the US, is not evidence that it isn't a dangerous and disqualifying mental illness.

Nobody who doesn't live in a warzone needs a gun for self defence; No first world polity has ever outlawed guns for hunting, vermin control, sport, or veterinary euthanasia purposes.

TL;DR: Anyone who is worried that soneone might "come for their guns" should never be trusted to own a gun.

 

[ZiprHead]

To me it is like the drug problem. Prohibition and interdiction does not work well. It is a cultural problem. Until we can change how people think about guns nothing will change. The 2nd amendment is flawed. And there is little hope of changing it any time soon.

It's access to guns we have to change. Peoples thoughts will follow.

 

[Tigers!]

To me it is like the drug problem. Prohibition and interdiction does not work well. It is a cultural problem.

When did it become a cultural problem. Is American culture in post assault ban ending that much different than pre assault ban ending? Certainly television has had an effect, but all of the social media and media stuff exists in Europe and Canada too. So are they not seeing these rash killings because it isn't so bleeping easy to get weapons that make mass killings much easier?

Looking from Australia it seems the hatred or comtempt that so many Yanks hold other Yanks in must be a factor too.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

To me it is like the drug problem. Prohibition and interdiction does not work well. It is a cultural problem.

When did it become a cultural problem. Is American culture in post assault ban ending that much different than pre assault ban ending? Certainly television has had an effect, but all of the social media and media stuff exists in Europe and Canada too. So are they not seeing these rash killings because it isn't so bleeping easy to get weapons that make mass killings much easier?

Looking from Australia it seems the hatred or comtempt that so many Yanks hold other Yanks in must be a factor too.

Must be nice to live in a social utopia.

 

[Tigers!]

To me it is like the drug problem. Prohibition and interdiction does not work well. It is a cultural problem.

When did it become a cultural problem. Is American culture in post assault ban ending that much different than pre assault ban ending? Certainly television has had an effect, but all of the social media and media stuff exists in Europe and Canada too. So are they not seeing these rash killings because it isn't so bleeping easy to get weapons that make mass killings much easier?

Looking from Australia it seems the hatred or comtempt that so many Yanks hold other Yanks in must be a factor too.

Must be nice to live in a social utopia.

It is actually. Come join us (but leave your guns at the door)

 

[marc]

words of wisdom from the past