Guns, crime, laws and solutions

[Crimefree]

Can't read your mind tho.

Gun control is, in my opinion a very poor label for the solution that is needed, but to answer your question, more laws offer little more than "feel good" results.

I really don't care what you label it as if it seeks to control possession or use of guns it is gun control. Euphemisms are unimpressive to me and do not change the fact.

Laws as such is such a broad term some may not understand you cannot legislate criminal behaviour. They are totally convinced that a person willing to commit murder is going to obey a gun control law. The mind boggles at such abject folly.

 

[Crimefree]

Sure there would be, the projectile passing through since it could not shed its energy by being stopped.

Physics is not your subject. How does it "pass through" magic?

 

[Crimefree]

In an indirect way.

Have no intention.

Yes, I did that is why I said you could not read your mind.

I don't think you did either, nor did I say you did. I said more laws...

Huh?

That is why I said more laws do not offer the needed solution.

Well since you have decided unjustifiably to relegate the only thing that can be shown to have been successful to the scrap heap, there does not seem to be a solution. Unless of course your treatment of removing the idiotic gun free restrictions can be shown to be full of holes. Would you like me to do that for you or can you do it yourself?

 

[Lutherf]

Obviously none targeted at guns, since several countries with pretty strict gun control have experienced massacres, terrorist attacks, etc.



Perhaps we should consider targeting terrorists...

And criminal behavior.

We know that the vast majority of gun crime occurs in urban areas where communities have more or less adapted to a relatively high level of crime in general. The ONLY way to fix that problem is to establish and enforce higher standards of behavior in those communities. It will be called "profiling" and it will be called "gentrification" but in the end it will be called "success".

 

[prometeus]

I guess you're just sad I didn't take the bait. Sorry.

Sad? Why would I be, as I offered no bait. In a way I am glad it just confirmed the narrow perspective of your views.

 

[prometeus]

Physics is not your subject. How does it "pass through" magic?

Now I suggest that you read back, especially the part where the laws of physics was eliminated.

 

[prometeus]

Well since you have decided unjustifiably to relegate the only thing that can be shown to have been successful to the scrap heap, there does not seem to be a solution. Unless of course your treatment of removing the idiotic gun free restrictions can be shown to be full of holes. Would you like me to do that for you or can you do it yourself?

Which part of "be specific" in the OP did you not fully grasp? Can you offer a solution with specifics or are just bloviating?

 

[Crimefree]

And criminal behavior.

We know that the vast majority of gun crime occurs in urban areas where communities have more or less adapted to a relatively high level of crime in general. The ONLY way to fix that problem is to establish and enforce higher standards of behavior in those communities. It will be called "profiling" and it will be called "gentrification" but in the end it will be called "success".

So you are trying to cure the symptoms instead of looking at the causes?

 

[Crimefree]

Which part of "be specific" in the OP did you not fully grasp? Can you offer a solution with specifics or are just bloviating?

Which part of remove the idiotic gun free restrictions did you not understand as specific? Not clear enough for you. The only success as already pointed out have been the odd occasion an armed citizen was present. Can you refute this only success or not?

 

[prometeus]

Which part of remove the idiotic gun free restrictions did you not understand as specific?

Post nr. 7. I addressed that in post nr. 10

 

[Crimefree]

Now I suggest that you read back, especially the part where the laws of physics was eliminated.

Well then cast a magic spell. Problem solved. What more do you want of do you concede trying to eliminate physics is just plain stupid.

I suggest you get back to reality I'm to busy dodging all those millions of bullets that have been fired with no laws of physics still in full flight. Flights of fantasy are not my thing

 

[Lutherf]

So you are trying to cure the symptoms instead of looking at the causes?

Gun violence is just one aspect of violent crime as a whole. It makes no sense to focus on "gun crime" without focusing on the roots of violent crime in general. Those roots include a general sense of entitlement, a lack of respect for the community and tolerance of anti-social behavior. That's been evidenced in blighted communities in every country and of every race.

 

[prometeus]

Well then cast a magic spell.

Fresh out.

Problem solved.

Actually it remains and I do not believe that reasonable people can not improve at least on the situation. Just because you or I do not have the solution, it does not mean the search should end.

Flights of fantasy are not my thing

Mine neither. I was not the one who suggested that initially. That exchange was humor.

 

[Crimefree]

Gun violence is just one aspect of violent crime as a whole. It makes no sense to focus on "gun crime" without focusing on the roots of violent crime in general. Those roots include a general sense of entitlement, a lack of respect for the community and tolerance of anti-social behavior. That's been evidenced in blighted communities in every country and of every race.

There is no classification "gun violence" it is a propaganda invention of gun control to stigmatise firearm ownership. It is best to avoid using such irrelevance and obvious bias in serious discussion.

Let me help with a better idea of the causes of crime.

The causes of crime are complex. Most people today accept that poverty, parental neglect, low self-esteem, alcohol and drug abuse are all connected in explaining why people commit crimes. Some people are simply at greater risk of becoming offenders because of the circumstances into which they are born.

These are all social problems dealing with the results of poor outcomes for life. Poverty, employment, low self-esteem, parental neglect, housing, lack of viable opportunity, education...... leading to crime as a means of support and drug taking as a means of escape.

Boredom, social exclusion, gang culture, fatherlessness....

There is no single cause but all lead to stress on the individual

Gun control can repair or reduce none of these which is why all gun control laws will fail. What gun control does is deflect spending that should be addressing these social problems into a bottomless and ever increasingly voracious pit.

How much more proof is needed that there is not in the whole world one single gun control law that has reduced crime, the supply of guns to criminals or increased PUBLIC SAFETY. Not one claimed success can be repeated with the same results. It is physically impossible for gun control laws to do this as there is no known causal relationship. Nor can anyone explain how guns could possibly cause crime without a magical element or referral to the paranormal. What we have is people with an induced belief no different to the flat earth or a belief banning alcohol and drugs will rehabilitate people.

 

[Crimefree]

Post nr. 7. I addressed that in post nr. 10

Did I not suggest you figure out why I could rip that to shreds or I could tell you? So you have tossed it aside without examination of why your claims were wrong.

Go back to it it is all you have. Or you now can ask nicely why you were wrong.

 

[prometeus]

Did I not suggest you figure out why I could rip that to shreds or I could tell you? So you have tossed it aside without examination of why your claims were wrong.

Go back to it it is all you have. Or you now can ask nicely why you were wrong.

I agreed in principle with you. That was wrong?

 

[Crimefree]

In theory you are correct. However simple gun ownership and availability at the needed time is not as effective as one would hope.

Irrelevant there are no guarantees in life and you have no idea of how effective it may be. The only thing that can be said with absolute certainty is it is better than nothing.

It is not that easy to stop a bad actor without some serious training and mental fitness.

Seems to me somebody not equipped to do the job is even worse off. As for training I am not aware of any study that has shown training beyond reasonable operations and skilled needed has made any difference to the success rate of self-defence. In fact all 23 studies of citizens success rate seem to suggest they do just fine in fighting off criminal attacks.

Sadly, from what I have seen, too many gun owners if not most lack both the skill and the training.

As just demonstrated you are not a very good judge of what is actually needed as against what you want them to be. Should I mention it is anecdotal evidence and what you have seen is by no means representative of the empirical evidence.

Just look at some of the police shootings in the news and you will see that even with their training, which is a bit more extensive than the average gun owner's they have problems to say the least.

We are not discussing the police and private citizens have no duty to act or take risks. There simply is no comparison.

It that a big enough hole for you?

 

[Crimefree]

I agreed in principle with you. That was wrong?

Your principle was good your reasoning not.

The idea of trained specialists, a NRA suggestion chasing money is absurdly expensive. While it has some merit how many would be needed at each location and would some idiot suggest they be dressed in uniform? Rotation would also be required to reduce identification. This really is no solution.

The criminally irresponsibly idea of creating gun free zones is directly a cause in giving these nuts a location of choice as a safe shooting gallery. The first thing needed is to reduce the attractiveness of guaranteed safety for the shooter.

If a better solution is available have you heard mention of it?

So you have my suggestion and my reasoning.

 

[prometeus]

Irrelevant there are no guarantees in life and you have no idea of how effective it may be. The only thing that can be said with absolute certainty is it is better than nothing.

Why are you willing to settle for one step above nothing? Are you suggesting that the status quo is adequate and no improvement can be achieved or sought?

Seems to me somebody not equipped to do the job is even worse off.

Possession of the proper tool while crucial for a well done job does not automatically qualify someone to do it right or even well enough.

As for training I am not aware of any study that has shown training beyond reasonable operations and skilled needed has made any difference to the success rate of self-defence.

Have you ever had to do it? If so do not take it for granted that anyone capable of hitting a target is also equipped to engage an attacker.

In fact all 23 studies of citizens success rate seem to suggest they do just fine in fighting off criminal attacks.

Can you tell me which studies are you referring to?

As just demonstrated you are not a very good judge of what is actually needed as against what you want them to be.

Actually you have not demonstrated anything but offered your opinion.

Should I mention it is anecdotal evidence and what you have seen is by no means representative of the empirical evidence.

While under the circumstances presented it can only be considered anecdotal and I have not claimed it as some universal fact, it is in fact quite extensive and real world.

We are not discussing the police and private citizens have no duty to act or take risks.

No, we are not discussing that, I was pointing out that even police with their more extensive training can and do have difficulties, then want can be expected of the average citizen thrust into a scenario?

It that a big enough hole for you?

What hole? You are attempting to pile a lot of nothing onto thin air.

 

[BretJ]

In theory you are correct. However simple gun ownership and availability at the needed time is not as effective as one would hope. It is not that easy to stop a bad actor without some serious training and mental fitness. Sadly, from what I have seen, too many gun owners if not most lack both the skill and the training. Just look at some of the police shootings in the news and you will see that even with their training, which is a bit more extensive than the average gun owner's they have problems to say the least.

120,000,000 or so gun owners do just fine....most of the bad actors you refer to are not legally allowed to own firearms in the first place. Or you can hold the 120,000,000 or so accountable for the criminal actions of .0001℅... Kind of like Trump.

 

[BretJ]

Of all the tragedies that took place in recent times and not only on US soil in which people were killed with guns, what laws would or could have prevented them and how? Please be specific.

Laws holding parents responsible for their children's antisocial behavior and lack of respect for others. Not really much difference holding the majority of gun owners responsible for criminals antisocial behavior and lack of respect for others. At least it is taken care of at an earlier, less lethal point...

 

[NonoBadDog]

Of all the tragedies that took place in recent times and not only on US soil in which people were killed with guns, what laws would or could have prevented them and how? Please be specific.

It would be unconstitutional to legislate good manners so my answer is "none". There are a ton of laws already on the books. Crimes are illegal or they wouldn't be crimes. The end.

 

[MickeyW]

Of all the tragedies that took place in recent times and not only on US soil in which people were killed with guns, what laws would or could have prevented them and how? Please be specific.

None! The laws that need be used, have been on the books for eons.

What is needed is the elimination of liberalism ...........and politicians and judges who are soft on crime and won't insist that the rule of law be followed. Starting with obozo.

Back the police and stop giving a voice to the scum.

Physics. If you want to use laws to stop gun deaths you need to get rid of the laws of physics.

Haaaaaaaaa!

 

[MickeyW]

Then please explain how even without the transfer of energy would we deal with the gaping holes?

Do you mean bullet holes?

In theory you are correct. However simple gun ownership and availability at the needed time is not as effective as one would hope. It is not that easy to stop a bad actor without some serious training and mental fitness. Sadly, from what I have seen, too many gun owners if not most lack both the skill and the training. Just look at some of the police shootings in the news and you will see that even with their training, which is a bit more extensive than the average gun owner's they have problems to say the least.

That's why I train people to use their brains and not just their guns. I urge people to think of scenarios in their daily living as to when and how they might be useful to stop crime....starting with knowing their surroundings, observe and report, don't expect the police to help you and if a gun is needed, make it a good shoot by observing the rules of safe shooting.

 

[MickeyW]

Bringing up the kids better.

Agreed.

Can't read your mind tho.

Gun control is, in my opinion a very poor label for the solution that is needed, but to answer your question, more laws offer little more than "feel good" results.

Agreed.