Yet another shooting thread

[Loren Pechtel]

A law that's just going to be broken is worse than not having a law.

Which is why we should legalise armed robbery.

I guarantee you that there will continue to be armed robberies, despite any legal measures to try to eliminate them.

The point is laws should actually accomplish something. A law that's not meaningfully enforceable doesn't matter.

The bad guys already hide their guns. You gain nothing.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Perhaps you had a beneficial effect on mass shootings, but a look at US data says defensive uses clearly exceed mass shootings.

please point me to the statistics that show that AR-15s are used more for defensive uses than mass shootings. I’m interested in seeing that. Thanks!

 

[bilby]

Continuing to say this doesn't make it so.

Continuing to deny it doesn't make it not so.

 

[Gospel]

The bad guys already hide their guns. You gain nothing.

Considering that criminals often obtain guns illegally (most of which were initially acquired through legal means) and that individuals who turn to crime usually obtained their firearms legally, it makes sense to implement stricter regulations on legal firearm purchases. Ya know, the primary source of weapons that end up in the hands of criminals.

 

[bilby]

The bad guys already hide their guns. You gain nothing.

A hidden gun is a harmless gun.

The "bad guys" can't use their guns without revealing their guns. Guns are noisy, and the existence of bullet holes is a sure and certain indicator of their existence.

Your objection is (as so often on this topic) absurd.

 

[laughing dog]

A law that's just going to be broken is worse than not having a law.

Which is why we should legalise armed robbery.

I guarantee you that there will continue to be armed robberies, despite any legal measures to try to eliminate them.

The point is laws should actually accomplish something. A law that's not meaningfully enforceable doesn't matter.

Sounds like you agree that armed robbery should be legalized.

 

[Gospel]

most of which were initially acquired through legal means

Allow me to reiterate this point. Criminals acquire their guns from illegal channels. The majority of these firearms were initially purchased legally before finding their way into illegal channels.

 

[TomC]

The bad guys already hide their guns. You gain nothing.

A hidden gun is a harmless gun.

The "bad guys" can't use their guns without revealing their guns. Guns are noisy, and the existence of bullet holes is a sure and certain indicator of their existence.

Your objection is (as so often on this topic) absurd.

That's nonsense.
A violent criminal can hide their gun, except for the minute it takes to use it, then hide it again.
Your objection is (as so often on this topic) absurd.
Tom

 

[Elixir]

A violent criminal can hide their gun, except for the minute it takes to use it, then hide it again.

Minute? Dude is a lame draw.
I don't think they always get away with that (especially if it take a whole minute).

All that is really needed is to make them illegal, and destroy them as found. It's the ubiquity of guns that is the problem.
If all the legal guns were magically gone today, only the bad guys would have guns.
But an oft overlooked dynamic is that criminals tend to dispose of guns after using them for criming.
Eventually they'd start getting caught, and/or the number of illegal guns will decrease down to zero.

But it's too late for even that. Now all ya need for your crime spree are a few shaped pieces of metal and a 3d printer.

 

[bilby]

A violent criminal can hide their gun, except for the minute it takes to use it, then hide it again.

Minute? Dude is a lame draw.
I don't think they always get away with that (especially if it take a whole minute).

All that is really needed is to make them illegal, and destroy them as found. It's the ubiquity of guns that is the problem.
If all the legal guns were magically gone today, only the bad guys would have guns.
But an oft overlooked dynamic is that criminals tend to dispose of guns after using them for criming.
Eventually they'd start getting caught, and/or the number of illegal guns will decrease down to zero.

But it's too late for even that. Now all ya need for your crime spree are a few shaped pieces of metal and a 3d printer.

3D printed guns are shit, and not a notable threat.

A reasonably skilled amateur with a lathe and a drill-press can make a better gun, far cheaper. It would still be shit, though.

Low quality guns are as big a danger to their user as to their target. A gun is basically a device that causes an explosion in your right hand, and in the case of a long gun, right next to your face.

You seriously don't want anything other than the finest of materials, assembled competently, when using a device that causes an explosion in your dominant hand.

Home-made guns are rare, even where (particularly where) gun laws are strict. Even in the UK, it's not difficult or expensive to obtain an illegal gun, made by a reputable manufacturer (or Beretta).

Criminals in the UK don't eschew guns because the law makes them hard to get; They eschew guns because the law makes them undesirable to have.

Having a gun, as a British criminal, makes you much more likely to be caught, and much more likely to face a severe sentence if you are. It's usually easier to commit crimes without them.

If Americans want to reduce gun violence, they need to establish an environment that reduces gun violence. Actually collecting up and destroying all the guns, or making guns hard to obtain illegally, is almost an irrelevance.

As I said earlier, a hidden gun is a harmless gun.

If the merest hint of a gun causes a massive police response, the guns will stay hidden, and the problem is solved.

 

[Elixir]

You seriously don't want anything other than the finest of materials, assembled competently, when using a device that causes an explosion in your dominant hand.

Me? True. Your garden variety stick ‘em up Murkin criminal, not so much. They are acclimated to risk, and mostly hope to use the gun to intimidate. If it comes down to setting off the bomb in their dominant hand vs getting caught, well …

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Perhaps you had a beneficial effect on mass shootings, but a look at US data says defensive uses clearly exceed mass shootings.

please point me to the statistics that show that AR-15s are used more for defensive uses than mass shootings. I’m interested in seeing that. Thanks!

Please quit taking things out of context.

Do you see "AR-15" in the quoted words? Do you even see "rifle"?

I said civilian self defense deaths exceed mass shooting deaths. I said nothing about the weapon in either case.

The reality is that disarming the civilian population (even if you could do so, it's an unattainable goal) you would do nothing about most criminal guns. Thus you would be trading mass shooting deaths (which would be pretty much prevented) for the people who could no longer defend themselves. And the latter group is almost certainly considerably bigger.

You get them out of the news, you don't save lives.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The bad guys already hide their guns. You gain nothing.

Considering that criminals often obtain guns illegally (most of which were initially acquired through legal means) and that individuals who turn to crime usually obtained their firearms legally, it makes sense to implement stricter regulations on legal firearm purchases. Ya know, the primary source of weapons that end up in the hands of criminals.

Most people who turn to crime do so before they reach the age of purchasing firearms. The vast majority of crime guns are obtained illegally.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The bad guys already hide their guns. You gain nothing.

A hidden gun is a harmless gun.

The "bad guys" can't use their guns without revealing their guns. Guns are noisy, and the existence of bullet holes is a sure and certain indicator of their existence.

Your objection is (as so often on this topic) absurd.

And what you are talking about are things that are already very illegal. You want it to work, that doesn't mean it will.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

A law that's just going to be broken is worse than not having a law.

Which is why we should legalise armed robbery.

I guarantee you that there will continue to be armed robberies, despite any legal measures to try to eliminate them.

The point is laws should actually accomplish something. A law that's not meaningfully enforceable doesn't matter.

Sounds like you agree that armed robbery should be legalized.

No, I recognize that armed robbery is already illegal. And it typically triggers the use-a-gun minimum sentencing. Making it triply illegal rather than doubly illegal isn't going to change things.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Perhaps you had a beneficial effect on mass shootings, but a look at US data says defensive uses clearly exceed mass shootings.

please point me to the statistics that show that AR-15s are used more for defensive uses than mass shootings. I’m interested in seeing that. Thanks!

Please quit taking things out of context.

Do you see "AR-15" in the quoted words? Do you even see "rifle"?

I said civilian self defense deaths exceed mass shooting deaths. I said nothing about the weapon in either case.

no, I didn’t see “AR-15” in your quote.but I am still curious about whether AR-15s are used more for self defense than mass shootings. Some of us want to restrict AR-15s but not all guns. Every time any of us mention some amount of gun control or bans you seem to assume we are for complete and total gun bans.

I am not for banning handguns and you’ll not find a quote of me saying that on this board.

If AR-15s have no valid protective use but are still the number one choice of mass shooters there is a reasonable argument to be had for banning them.

You always seem to present as an “all or nothing” approach but there’s tons of room for nuanced negotiations in gun control.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

A violent criminal can hide their gun, except for the minute it takes to use it, then hide it again.

Minute? Dude is a lame draw.
I don't think they always get away with that (especially if it take a whole minute).

All that is really needed is to make them illegal, and destroy them as found. It's the ubiquity of guns that is the problem.
If all the legal guns were magically gone today, only the bad guys would have guns.
But an oft overlooked dynamic is that criminals tend to dispose of guns after using them for criming.
Eventually they'd start getting caught, and/or the number of illegal guns will decrease down to zero.

Which would take a long time. A low range estimate is there are 300 million guns in private hands.

But it's too late for even that. Now all ya need for your crime spree are a few shaped pieces of metal and a 3d printer.

Exactly. It's yet another case where there is no point in fortifying a door next to a window.

I do not know if it actually would be good for the average person if all guns were to vanish. (It would certainly benefit criminals who would end up not murdered as often, but that's not the same as an overall benefit.) I do know it's not going to happen and anything predicated on it happening is not a viable plan.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

But it's too late for even that. Now all ya need for your crime spree are a few shaped pieces of metal and a 3d printer.

3D printed guns are shit, and not a notable threat.

Note what he said--a few shaped pieces of metal.

A fully printed gun is as you say junk. It could possibly make sense as an assassination weapon as the whole thing can be non-ferrous and thus only react very weakly to a metal detector. There's no other use, though. (Same as despite all the steps they take about keeping metal out of the MRI they didn't care one bit about my wedding ring because it's gold. The magnet showed no interest in it.)

What the real danger is is machined guns. CNC milling has moved far enough down the scale that an advanced home workshop can turn out a fully operational gun. And most of the parts could be printed albeit at a decrease in performance.

 

[Elixir]

Which would take a long time. A low range estimate is there are 300 million guns in private hands.

Meh. 300 million gun crimes? How long could it take? In America?
I think long guns would probably be the last to go down. Derec can confirm: just getting all the handguns would take a huge bite out of crime. Probably swallow it whole in fact, other than a few mass murders here and there using rifles. So we can ignore those, leaving … according to an AI that I just consulted, only 145 million handguns.
You’re right though - even if we seized half of them every year, we’d never get there.
Woe is us, right?

 

[bilby]

And what you are talking about are things that are already very illegal.

You obviously don't know what I am talking about, if that's what you think I am talking about.

You want it to work, that doesn't mean it will.

You have hypotheses; I have data.

It's not hypothetical; UK style gun control does work. Despite illegal guns being cheap and fairly easy to obtain, UK criminals rarely have guns.

That's not something I want; It's an observation of the factual situation.

You want it not to be, but that doesn't mean it isn't.