This argument is retarded. You are suggesting since you can die from practically anything, then we should regulate nothing? Lol
Gun control
- Thread starter Saladus
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
did i say crime? I said "murder". the US has 10.2 gun related deaths / 100k people per year. the U.K had .25 per 100k.
The argument that people will use whatever is at hand is fucking stupid. Its a lot more difficult to kill someone with a knife or bow than a gun. In many cases, the target can flee or sustains a non life threatening injury. Guns relative to other weapons are incredibly efficient and ending life.
here is a citation that shows owning a gun doesn't protect you (which I am sure you will find a way to dismiss):
Source: Branas, C., Richmond, T., Culhane, D., Ten Have, T., & Wiebe, D. (2009). Investigating the Link Between Gun Possession and Gun Assault American Journal of Public Health DOI:
Results. After adjustment, individuals in possession of a gun were 4.46 (P<.05) times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession. Among gun assaults where the victim had at least some chance to resist, this adjusted odds ratio increased to 5.45 (P<.05).
Conclusions. On average, guns did not protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault. Although successful defensive gun uses occur each year, the probability of success may be low for civilian gun users in urban areas. Such users should reconsider their possession of guns or, at least, understand that regular possession necessitates careful safety countermeasures.
- 6,051
- 6,036
For every study, there is an equal and opposite study.
That being said, I looked for the antithesis to your study and couldn't find one in a few minutes. I'm sure it's out there somewhere, and someone will be happy to link it just to attempt to prove you wrong...
I was trying to find statistics on officer involved shootings to see how much the police contribute to gun injuries and homicide rates that people cite and I was surprised to find that there is no national data collected.
I wonder how many people in that study linked above recently purchased a gun because they felt in danger from something like a dangerous ex or having angered a local gang.
Regardless of if it's more dangerous to own a gun than not (which I don't think that study definitively proved), I don't think the option should be taken away from people. Requiring better training is fine by me, but banning ownership altogether isn't the answer.
That study's authors take no issue with police owning guns and nobody is arguing guns don't make them safer.
I wonder how many people in that study linked above recently purchased a gun because they felt in danger from something like a dangerous ex or having angered a local gang.
Regardless of if it's more dangerous to own a gun than not (which I don't think that study definitively proved), I don't think the option should be taken away from people. Requiring better training is fine by me, but banning ownership altogether isn't the answer.
That study's authors take no issue with police owning guns and nobody is arguing guns don't make them safer.
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 47,443
- 81,047
Police are there to enforce law in encounters with lawbreakers, not survive encounters with lawbreakers.
B_Mizzle
Golden Baronet of the Realm
- 7,751
- 15,324
Or necessitates training with a gun. I wonder if that study differentiated gang-members/thugs who were found dead with a gun on their person and legitimate home defense scenarios.
If I'm understanding you correctly, it's your assertion that the purpose for owning the gun affects it's effectiveness for safety?
I would argue that training and education are more important than the purpose for gun ownership.
Lithose
Buzzfeed Editor
- 25,946
- 113,036
You said "murder" yet you use the gun related deaths which include suicide. And I KNOW you did this intentionally since the information is always kept together and you probably pulled it fromhere. 6.3 of those gun deaths are suicides. If we're talking about murder, like you fuckingsaid, the U.S. has 3.6.
But I guess 3.6 doesn't have the same flare as 10.2, much like being rational about the chance of dying in a school shooting doesn't have the same flare as screaming about the sky falling.
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 47,443
- 81,047
My assertion is that the ownership of a gun affects an officer's effectiveness at enforcing the law.
and private citizens are not allowed to enforce the law?
If they are allowed too, wouldn't a gun help them enforce the law also (especially when it comes to situations involving law breaking that affect their safety)?
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 47,443
- 81,047
I'm not educated enough to describe the legality of vigilantism.
However, the primary purpose that private citizens arm themselves isn't to enforce the law, it's to protect themselves. Often when protecting oneself you are 'enforcing the law' where that law is rape or assault. The difference between law enforcement and civilians is that civilians aren't under an obligation to enforce the law nor is their purpose to go out to look for lawbreakers. In fact nearly every message I've heard from officers is to NOT try to enforce the law Zimmerman-style, just report it to the police and let them handle it.
Really I just think you pulled out a dumb argument from a false equivalence from your ass and are being obtuse to prevent from having to admit that 'yeah, cops needing firearms to be safe whilst enforcing the law doesn't necessitate that civilians need firerarms to be safe when going to the grocer'.
Here we go again with the need argument.
Gun owners don't have to justify a need to own a weapon.
Many gun owners are willing to show their reasons for gun ownership and educate others about why they choose to own weapons. Whether or not those reasons are valid to you personally doesn't affect their right to own weapons.
Gun owners have no obligation to prove their right to own weapons.
Gun owners don't have to justify a need to own a weapon.
Many gun owners are willing to show their reasons for gun ownership and educate others about why they choose to own weapons. Whether or not those reasons are valid to you personally doesn't affect their right to own weapons.
Gun owners have no obligation to prove their right to own weapons.
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 47,443
- 81,047
Now that you've sidestepped the argument of whether a firearm is used by police officers to be safe instead of to enforce the law to a different one of whether civs need a reason to own a firearm, we agree. I don't believe that civilians need a good justification for owning a gun.
Clearly I'm the one who side stepped it.
You decided to change the subject to the reasons for owning weapons and I responded that there isn't one over all reason to own guns and gun owners don't even need to justify owning them.
- 6,051
- 6,036
You can kill with a soup spoon. You can also kill with a gun. Surely you aren't attempting to argue that it's equally easy to kill with a soup spoon as it is to do so with a gun?
Yes, there were homicides before the invention of guns. I'm sure there have been -more- homicides since the invention of guns, and even more since they became commonplace and easy to get for the average citizen. But really, are you still going to go there, and argue that guns weren't at all instrumental in the homicide rate going up over time?
Sulrn
Deuces
- 2,159
- 360
Are you really going to imply that there aren't numerous other factors involved in the increase in homicide rates?
As has been stated, guns increase efficiency but they don't increase aggressive/suicidal tendencies already present.
No, I'm arguing that banning or heavy regulation of guns does little to curb violence. You can't legislate away human aggression. We did a helluva good job killing each other prior to the invention of guns, kill lots of people WITH guns, and will kill more with something else.
If someone wants to arm themselves with a modern weapon, they should be able to do that. Simple.