Considering how many people are killed in automobile accidents every day, I guess the next logical step is to take all our X's away, or govern their speed to about 10 mph so you can just bounce off stuff. Land of the Free. As a gun owner, I'm just trying to make light of a situation not trying to offend anyone.
We've talked about Slippery Slope before. It's the same reason why Tread Lightly is so important to us to keep off roading a legal and viable recreation. It's incredibly easy for people who don't care about something to agree with people who say it's bad and make it illegal for the people who do partake in it.
The problem is this is a very emotional debate. People are riled up and want someone or something to pay for horrible things that have happened. We as a people need to blame something. And for as "non-biased" as the media is, guns have been made the clear enemy of this campaign. All the major media networks make anyone who's opposed to gun reform look like a terrible human being. So how can a person who relies on public opinion to keep their job possibly take the stance that is going to be made to look evil? Now that the federal government is looking at passing legislations that will mirror New York's I worry that things really could be taking a serious negative turn.
What's needed is public awareness that media companies don't seem to be willing to provide. The NRA continues to be the big name fighting new gun laws, but they've been made out to be gun toting psychopaths preaching "guns don't kill people, people kill people," which, though may be accurate, has left a great number of people not caring about what they have to say.
I don't like being a fatalist, but one of my concerns is that if you look at history at other republics that came before the USA, their collapse derived from willingly giving up their rights because at the time they were made to believe that it was in their best interest to do so.
So my point in this long rant is that decisions like this need to be thought out and rationalized. Facts need to be researched, and potential outcomes need to be analyzed. Over the last decade our country has been making too many decisions based on fired up emotions and media attention. Do you remember what other government faction used to get their way by using the media to stir emotions in people to let them get away with what they were doing? They were called Nazis.
I read this earlier and I don't think there is any other factoid, statistic, or article out there that clearly exposes the complete lack of effectiveness of gun control (by means of weapons bans) as well as this does. The statistics he lays out couldn't be more cut and dried... and ignored by the media of course.
For the sake of providing some non-biased data, let's consider the following statistics comparing eight OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries including the United States.
Quote:
The per capita mortality from handguns in the USA is 4.6 times that of its closest contender, Israel; 23 times that of Canada, and 265 times that of Great Britain. Are Americans 23 times as homicidal by nature as Canadians, or 265 times as homicidal as Brits? Of course not. The factor that differentiates these societies is that handguns are very strictly regulated (and generally unavailable to civilians) in both Canada and Great Britain, whereas they are easily available in the USA.
Images and quote pulled from this blog post. Granted, it's an opinion piece but the statistics are impossible to ignore.
Flame on.
__________________ GRANITE 2003 SE SC BUILD THREAD HP60/10.25" SAS in the works.
I appreciate the statistics, I respect people's opinions and admire anyone that actually looks up statistics rather than just saying blindly, "This is for the better good."
But...
There is a deeper statistic to consider.
You're looking at the mortality rate due to gun violence... but what if we looked at the murder rate per country?
It becomes apparent on this list that the United States murder rate isn't nearly as bad as many MANY other countries that have heavily regulated gun laws. Take Mexico for instance. No one is allowed to own guns outside the government there, and their murder rate is 5 times that of the United States.
Do some countries with tough gun laws have a lower murder rate than the United States? Yes. But that's definitely not all there is to it. There are countries without these strict gun control laws with murder rates lower than the United States as well.
What burns me is that folks who themselves and their families are protected by a security force (armed with automatic weapons) that I help pay for is restricting the means in which I can protect myself and my family.
I hate that when anyone suggests that "Gun Free Zones" should be eliminated....they (libs) freak out. "But the movies will then become like the OK Corral!" What they don't understand is that...nothing will change. Is the grocery store like the OK Corral? Is the sidewalk an OK Corral? There are people with CCW ALL AROUND and 99.999% of the time...NO ONE KNOWS IT!
This is maybe a horrible example to use, but it's just like a PFA doesn't keep some ass hat who's so determined to come beat the person who the PFA is suppose to protect
RJ...that is a good example...it just adds another charge to the rap sheet. Now a school shooter gets charged with multiple counts of murder...and violating a gun free zone. Someone planning on killing multiple people won't be upset about violating another law.
M3C...No flaming needed. It is totally possible to have a debate and discussion regarding these topics. There are a few points to be made though:
1) No one disputes that America has a) a lot of guns and b) a lot of violence
2) The question is what causes b?
3) It also depends on which debate people want to have. Do we want to talk hand guns or "assault weapons" or overall violence?
Thoughts with regards to the discussion:
Over the last 30 or so years, the gun supply has steadily increased. During that same period, gun violence has fluctuated. Currently, we are at historic lows of gun violence, and historic highs of gun supply.
Does removing guns remove violence? Or are they replaced with other tools to commit crimes?
Are we trying to reduce common gun violence, mass shootings, or all of the above? Mass shootings and common street violence have different root causes. There are multiple issues to address.
"Assault rifles" are the current scape goat. VERY few crimes are committed with assault rifles (though the ones that are, are bad, as are all gun crimes). As a portion of overall gun violence, handguns are used far more often. One of my biggest gripes with how things are represented in the media: the horrific mass killings are used for the attention, and assault rifles are shown all over TV as a giant scary thing. They scare people that do not understand the entire picture. AR 15 "assault rifles" use a standard round from other hunting rifles. They are cosmetically designed to resemble a military rifle, but they are just as powerful as a less scary looking hunting rifle. I have had people make comments about how shocked they were that it was so easy to get a military grade rifle. An AR 15 is a Jeep Wrangler...or a Hummer H2...a watered down version of the military version. If they have never shot a gun, or have no knowledge of the factual situation, they are left making assumption based on what the media suggests: US has an epidemic of mass shootings with military weapons. Mass shootings are TERRIBLE, but as far as overall gun violence, they are not a large portion.
Potentially, an argument can be made regarding carrying capacity, however I honestly don't think a magazine limit will serve any benefit. USA had an AWB for 10 years, and kids from Colorado still managed to find illegal weapons to shoot their school. The VT massacre was done with a semi automatic hand gun. 17 round capacity I believe. ~half as much as an AR 15, but more deaths. Less bullets means killers will do more planning (VT shooter chained and pad locked doors shut so people could not escape, for instance)
The vast majority of gun homicides are single victims. Most of them are young, most of them are involved with gang activity, or other criminal acts. Most of them live in poverty. Most of them commit crime as a means to try to get by. However, there is not much coverage of THIS segment of gun crime...it doesn't generate the headlines. it is the classic bait and switch.
Now, I am not purely ANTI gun control, but I do think there needs to be a better understanding of WHY these acts are committed. If the WHY is not addressed, people will still find a way.
Granted, it's an opinion piece but the statistics are impossible to ignore.
Flame on.
I find it incredibly easy to ignore since they cited no sources whatsoever for the source of these statistics. I can make pretty charts as well that support my position and conclusions, especially when I don't have to cite the sources of the data for scrutiny.
The AutoGuide.com network consists of the largest network of enthusiast-owned enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
AutoGuide.com provides the latest car reviews, auto show coverage, new car prices, and automotive news. The AutoGuide network operates more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share opinions as a community.
Linear Mode
