How to ban guns without firing a single shot!

[Spock]

And I don’t believe in your premise of not teaching children safe behaviors.

Firearm prevalence, access and promotion is the primary cause of firearm violence; it is not lack of education about safety.

Okay. But that’s not going to happen in the near or far future. So I don’t believe in your premise that we shouldn’t train in safe behavior if it will reduce accidents.
Why are you against it. ?

I am against any suggestion that groups of children are "safe" around firearms after a gun talk.

Not irrelevant

Explain. How firearms safety promotes firearms.

Your concept of firearm safety appears to be more than warning about risk.

No I don’t fail to understand . If you were able to wave a magic wand and remove firearms from each and every person then you’d have a point . But firearms are here to stay.
So. It stands to reason that based on the research that shows children can learn safe behaviors , that safety training is anything but” but useless”.

I am not the sort of defeatist you appear to be.
In your pursuit of firearm safety, are you willing to sacrifice convenience for required training and demonstration of skill, re-certification, registration, and inspection of storage?
I think not.

 

[jaeger19]

Firearm prevalence, access and promotion is the primary cause of firearm violence; it is not lack of education about safety.

In some way it is. Certainly the promotion of unsafe use of firearms in Hollywood and the gaming industry is in part due to lack of safety training.
One just has to watch almost any movie and see the lack of safety portrayed there.
How many movies do you see the cop getting his badge and gun taken away and he pulls his loaded firearm out, by pointing it at tge chief with his finger on the trigger in most cases, then slams his gun down on the desk.

How many times does the good guy shoot the bad guy but the bullets never through the bad guy to hit anyone else? I remember John wick where they surround a woman at a few feet away and shoot into her and no one gets hit.

Prevalence has in part to do with gamers playing games like call of duty and being fascinated with firearms (but not getting any real training in the dangers of misuse)) and then when 18 going out and buying your first firearm.
Access to other people. Certainly some of that is due to poor safety training.

I am against any suggestion that groups of children are "safe" around firearms after a gun talk.

Great. No one , not me, not anyone here is suggesting that they are “ completely safe after a gun talk”
We are stating that the science shows that if they are given proper safety training ( more than your 15minute talk) that their chances of being unsafe significantly decreases .

Your concept of firearm safety appears to be more than warning about risk.

Depending on the age of the child most certainly. I most certainly want children to know when the adults or older people they may around are acting irresponsibly with firearms and thus leave it intervene etc.
Or know when hunting etc how to be safe.

I am not the sort of defeatist you appear to be.

You certainly are. You think because not every child will respond to training on safety that training safety skills in children is “ useless”

In your pursuit of firearm safety, are you willing to sacrifice convenience for required training and demonstration of skill, re-certification, registration, and inspection of storage?

I think not.

Gun banners gotta lie . . As stated I have pushed for mandatory firearms training in public school starting with elementary education and up to high school training.
This is the best time to develop proper safety habits.

And yet you are against such training.
As far as wasting resources “ inspecting storage , recertifications and registration.

Not necessary and a waste of resources.

 

[jaeger19]

Since the consequences are so great with firearms, admonitions are generally useless as the guiding principle for a population.

So the consequences of going with a stranger and being raped and murdered we shouldn’t train children to avoid strangers?
Since the consequences of starting a fire and burning themselves today and everyone in the house is so great we shouldn’t teach children about safety around with fire causing implement s like matches?

Far better to have NO firearms than to debate nonsense instructions in the futile hope that a few fewer children will be harmed.

Well except that’s not going to occur in the foreseeable future so why are you against fewer children being harmed?

Not useful change in behavior considering the circumstances.

Certainly it is. That means almost half or more children remove themselves from a dangerous situation . How is that not useful?

Could be done. However, the less likely possibility is that the gun obsessed will ever realize the risk of household firearms.

First , what’s “ gun obsessed” ? Define it ,
Does owning a firearm make someone “ gun obsessed” .

I am not satisfied with inadequate interventions.

Sure you are. Cripes you offer up interventions tgat we tell you have no chance in heck of having any effect and you scream “ but but just because it’s not perfect , we shouldn’t teach children do it”.

In the case of firearms, the best solution is to eliminate them from the household.

Well not the best solution for those that need firearms for hunting , shooting and self protection.

Far superior to indulging a fantasy that children can be taught to be safe around firearms which is likely to promote the fallacy that children and firearms is a harmless combination.

Actually firearm training is what instills in children that firearms are not harmless if used incorrectly.. What promotes the fantasy of firearms being safe despite irresponsible behavior is Hollywood and gaming .

Cripes . How many movies do you see a person shoot at someone’s feet to “ make em dance” and yet no one gets hit by a ricochet.?

 

[Spock]

In some way it is. Certainly the promotion of unsafe use of firearms in Hollywood and the gaming industry is in part due to lack of safety training.
One just has to watch almost any movie and see the lack of safety portrayed there.
How many movies do you see the cop getting his badge and gun taken away and he pulls his loaded firearm out, by pointing it at tge chief with his finger on the trigger in most cases, then slams his gun down on the desk.

How many times does the good guy shoot the bad guy but the bullets never through the bad guy to hit anyone else? I remember John wick where they surround a woman at a few feet away and shoot into her and no one gets hit.

This rant is complete disregard for the reality for firearm violence and is speculation about irrelevant trivial factors.

Prevalence has in part to do with gamers playing games like call of duty and being fascinated with firearms (but not getting any real training in the dangers of misuse)) and then when 18 going out and buying your first firearm.
Access to other people. Certainly some of that is due to poor safety training.

Nonsense. No a significant factor in firearm violence.

Great. No one , not me, not anyone here is suggesting that they are “ completely safe after a gun talk”

There is no adequate partial solution to firearm violence involving children.

We are stating that the science shows that if they are given proper safety training ( more than your 15minute talk) that their chances of being unsafe significantly decreases .

Total waste of effort.

Depending on the age of the child most certainly. I most certainly want children to know when the adults or older people they may around are acting irresponsibly with firearms and thus leave it intervene etc.
Or know when hunting etc how to be safe.

Hunting is an inherently risk hobby.

You certainly are. You think because not every child will respond to training on safety that training safety skills in children is “ useless”

It is lipstick on a pig.

Gun banners gotta lie . . As stated I have pushed for mandatory firearms training in public school starting with elementary education and up to high school training.

Truly a duplicitous and wasteful use of public school resources that serves ONLY to promote firearm use and ownership.

This is the best time to develop proper safety habits.

And yet you are against such training.
As far as wasting resources “ inspecting storage , recertifications and registration.

Most firearm violence is caused by intentional activities by adults with inappropriate access to firearms, sociopathic tendencies, impulse control, or psychiatric disorders.
Education is not a solution; restriction is a far more productive action.
You are truly not interested in identifying the high risk situations, reducing access to firearms and promoting a healthier society.
Inconvenience is a small price to pay with likely huge rewards.

Not necessary and a waste of resources.

 

[Spock]

So the consequences of going with a stranger and being raped and murdered we shouldn’t train children to avoid strangers?
Since the consequences of starting a fire and burning themselves today and everyone in the house is so great we shouldn’t teach children about safety around with fire causing implement s like matches?

We should not be promoting arson or drug use or rape which would be the equivalents to your promotion of firearms.

Well except that’s not going to occur in the foreseeable future so why are you against fewer children being harmed?

Your fatalism compromises efforts at solutions and justifies the status quo.

Certainly it is. That means almost half or more children remove themselves from a dangerous situation . How is that not useful?

Not the best or even an adequate solution to firearm death and injury by children.

First , what’s “ gun obsessed” ? Define it ,
Does owning a firearm make someone “ gun obsessed” .

Sure you are. Cripes you offer up interventions tgat we tell you have no chance in heck of having any effect and you scream “ but but just because it’s not perfect , we shouldn’t teach children do it”.

Well not the best solution for those that need firearms for hunting , shooting and self protection.

Needed for two hobbies and to indulge a fear of the unknown. Brilliant!

Actually firearm training is what instills in children that firearms are not harmless if used incorrectly.. What promotes the fantasy of firearms being safe despite irresponsible behavior is Hollywood and gaming .

Firearm promotion merely feeds the illusions that firearm safety is possible.

Cripes . How many movies do you see a person shoot at someone’s feet to “ make em dance” and yet no one gets hit by a ricochet.?

Unreal fixation with fantasy.

 

[RF667799]

This rant is complete disregard for the reality for firearm violence and is speculation about irrelevant trivial factors.

Nonsense. No a significant factor in firearm violence.

There is no adequate partial solution to firearm violence involving children.

Total waste of effort.

Hunting is an inherently risk hobby.

As is motorcycle riding, roller skating, taking the family car to visit Granny.....

It is lipstick on a pig.

Truly a duplicitous and wasteful use of public school resources that serves ONLY to promote firearm use and ownership.

Most firearm violence is caused by intentional activities by adults with inappropriate access to firearms, sociopathic tendencies, impulse control, or psychiatric disorders.
Education is not a solution; restriction is a far more productive action.
You are truly not interested in identifying the high risk situations, reducing access to firearms and promoting a healthier society.
Inconvenience is a small price to pay with likely huge rewards.

 

[rahl]

Firearm prevalence,

Demonstrate it. Show us the firearm prevalence broken down by state, city and then household. Then prove the causal link.

access and promotion is the primary cause of firearm violence;

There is no such thing. Firearms are inanimate objects and can’t commit any act.

 

[jaeger19]

We should not be promoting arson or drug use or rape which would be the equivalents to your promotion of firearms

Interesting . Let’s stop here for a minute.

Explain how owning firearms and promoting firearm safety is the equivalent of promoting rape.

 

[Spock]

Interesting . Let’s stop here for a minute.

Explain how owning firearms and promoting firearm safety is the equivalent of promoting rape.

Wrong.
You consistently misrepresent or fail to understand posts.
Regarding safety training:

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/firearm-safety-training-requirements.html

 

[Spock]

Summary:
1. gun safety training of young children to prevent accession of firearms cannot be trusted sufficiently to change the need for keeping firearms away from this group by secure storage or by complete elimination of firearms from the household

2. hunter safety training promotes the use of firearms. Since firearms are instrumental in the high firearm violence in the USA, the argument is made that promotion of firearm usage must be considered contributory to that violence by spreading the usage or purchase of guns. Firearm death and injury increases during hunting season according to at least one study, as an example.

3. Firearm prevalence, especially easy access to handguns, is associated with greater risk of death or injury.

4. Most gun apologists refuse to accept the connection between firearms and firearm violence.

5. Opposition to regulations dealing with reduction of access to firearms by type or number or owner characteristics, with establishing qualifications for firearm ownership or with legislating firearm storage have likely contributed to the high firearm violence rate in the USA.

 

[RF667799]

Wrong.
You consistently misrepresent or fail to understand posts.
Regarding safety training:

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/firearm-safety-training-requirements.html

That doesn't explain your claim. Just another example of you ducking into some irrelevancy to avoid supporting a claim.

 

[jaeger19]

Wrong.
You consistently misrepresent or fail to understand posts.
Regarding safety training:

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/firearm-safety-training-requirements.html

What’s wrong.
We have your posts.

Your post:

“We should not be promoting arson or drug use or rape which would be the equivalents to your promotion of firearms.l”

You claimed that my support for firearms training is tantamount to promoting rape.

Explain yourself.

 

[RF667799]

Summary:
1. gun safety training of young children to prevent accession of firearms cannot be trusted sufficiently to change the need for keeping firearms away from this group by secure storage or by complete elimination of firearms from the household

2. hunter safety training promotes the use of firearms. Since firearms are instrumental in the high firearm violence in the USA, the argument is made that promotion of firearm usage must be considered contributory to that violence by spreading the usage or purchase of guns. Firearm death and injury increases during hunting season according to at least one study, as an example.

3. Firearm prevalence, especially easy access to handguns, is associated with greater risk of death or injury.

4. Most gun apologists refuse to accept the connection between firearms and firearm violence.

5. Opposition to regulations dealing with reduction of access to firearms by type or number or owner characteristics, with establishing qualifications for firearm ownership or with legislating firearm storage have likely contributed to the high firearm violence rate in the USA.

Oh my, those violent firearms. There's so few of them though, we should be able to discern the violent firearms from the peaceful firearms and take steps to inhibit their violent actions.

Any ideas about that?

 

[CLAX1911]

Wrong.
You consistently misrepresent or fail to understand posts.
Regarding safety training:

You lecturing anybody on the firearm safety is like David the klansman lecturing people on racial inclusion

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/firearm-safety-training-requirements.html

Safety training is four rules. It's not really something you need to be trained on.

 

[CLAX1911]

Summary:
1. gun safety training of young children to prevent accession of firearms cannot be trusted sufficiently to change the need for keeping firearms away from this group by secure storage or by complete elimination of firearms from the household

2. hunter safety training promotes the use of firearms. Since firearms are instrumental in the high firearm violence in the USA, the argument is made that promotion of firearm usage must be considered contributory to that violence by spreading the usage or purchase of guns. Firearm death and injury increases during hunting season according to at least one study, as an example.

3. Firearm prevalence, especially easy access to handguns, is associated with greater risk of death or injury.

4. Most gun apologists refuse to accept the connection between firearms and firearm violence.

5. Opposition to regulations dealing with reduction of access to firearms by type or number or owner characteristics, with establishing qualifications for firearm ownership or with legislating firearm storage have likely contributed to the high firearm violence rate in the USA.

Profound levels of ignorance.

 

[rahl]

Summary:
1. gun safety training of young children to prevent accession of firearms cannot be trusted sufficiently to change the need for keeping firearms away from this group by secure storage or by complete elimination of firearms from the household

No basis in fact.

2. hunter safety training promotes the use of firearms.

So what?

Since firearms are instrumental in the high firearm violence in the USA,

Already established there is no such thing.

the argument is made that promotion of firearm usage must be considered contributory to that violence by spreading the usage or purchase of guns.

Which is refuted by the actual data.

Firearm death and injury increases during hunting season according to at least one study, as an example

No it doesn’t.

.3. Firearm prevalence, especially easy access to handguns, is associated with greater risk of death or injury.

No it isn’t. And since you’ve repeatedly admitted it’s impossible to determine prevalence, it continues to be hilariously retarded when you claim it’s causal.

4. Most gun apologists refuse to accept the connection between firearms and firearm violence.

Because as we have already established, there is no such thing

5. Opposition to regulations dealing with reduction of access to firearms by type or number or owner characteristics, with establishing qualifications for firearm ownership or with legislating firearm storage have likely contributed to the high firearm violence rate in the USA.

Repeatedly proven false.

 

[Spock]

What’s wrong.
We have your posts.

Your post:

“We should not be promoting arson or drug use or rape which would be the equivalents to your promotion of firearms.l”

You claimed that my support for firearms training is tantamount to promoting rape.

Explain yourself.

I commented about your promotion of firearm and you, typically, have extended that to firearm "training" which may or may not be more than an Eddie Eagle equivalent class.
To the extent that firearm "safety" classes promote firearms in general and result in more firearms in the population, that inevitably contributes to the firearm violence problem. Directly or indirectly taking actions that result in more people with more guns should be seen as costly for society.

You are not really following the discussion with acceptable precision.

 

[RF667799]

I commented about your promotion of firearm and you, typically, have extended that to firearm "training" which may or may not be more than an Eddie Eagle equivalent class.
To the extent that firearm "safety" classes promote firearms in general and result in more firearms in the population, that inevitably contributes to the firearm violence problem. Directly or indirectly taking actions that result in more people with more guns should be seen as costly for society.

You are not really following the discussion with acceptable precision.

Your premise is faulty. More firearms does not necessarily result in less public safety, and we have observed that in reality.

 

[jaeger19]

I commented about your promotion of firearm and you, typically, have extended that to firearm "training" which may or may not be more than an Eddie Eagle equivalent class.

You sir decided to call safety training programs “ promotion” but you were never able to explain how it was promotion.

To the extent that firearm "safety" classes promote firearms in general and result in more firearms in the population, that inevitably contributes to the firearm violence problem.

Great explain how Hunter safety programs like hunters education are tantamount to supporting rape.

Directly or indirectly taking actions that result in more people with more guns should be seen as costly for society.

Explain how training people in the safe use of firearms is tantamount to promoting rape.

You are not really following the discussion with acceptable precision.

Yeah. Yeah . Help me with that . Help us all with that. Explain how a firearm safety program is tantamount to promoting rape.

Eddie eagle teaches that if you see or find a firearm .”STOP , DONT TOUCH , GO TELL AN ADULT.

Hunter safety teaches young hunters how to handle firearms safely. Understand their target and beyond , be responsible for the safety of themselves and others.
But you don’t think they should get that training because you think it’s like promoting rape.

Please explain yourself . Without diversion.
Thanks.

 

[Spock]

You sir decided to call safety training programs “ promotion” but you were never able to explain how it was promotion.

Great explain how Hunter safety programs like hunters education are tantamount to supporting rape.

Explain how training people in the safe use of firearms is tantamount to promoting rape.

Yeah. Yeah . Help me with that . Help us all with that. Explain how a firearm safety program is tantamount to promoting rape.

Eddie eagle teaches that if you see or find a firearm .”STOP , DONT TOUCH , GO TELL AN ADULT.

Hunter safety teaches young hunters how to handle firearms safely. Understand their target and beyond , be responsible for the safety of themselves and others.
But you don’t think they should get that training because you think it’s like promoting rape.

Please explain yourself . Without diversion.
Thanks.

Ok. All this has been explained and I will attempt for one final time to explain it again to you.

You have refused to recognize that teaching children not to handle guns is different from hunter safety course.
You conflate two programs that have entirely different purposes. Hunter safety involves, as you know, discussion of firearms (care and feeding), regulations, hunting culture, funding of conservation programs... which essentially promotes the hobby of hunting. Since hunting is primarily with firearms, essentially this hobby promotes firearm ownership and use. Hunter safety is not equivalent to teaching Eddie Eagle caution about guns. Essentially, hunting promotion is firearm promotion and promoting firearms increases the prevalence of firearms in America. As an example, firearm death and injury increases during hunting season.

The rest of your rant does not address the points I have made which you refuse to assimilate and you have chosen to distort. More firearms add to the death and injury in America and, since promotion of hunting promotes firearms, that hobby contributes to the firearm violence problem.

As concerns "gun safety" for both children AND adults. There is no evidence that these programs impact significantly the storage of and risks to children of firearms. I have posted multiple studies in support of my position. You have posted claims that short term impact exists for some education, but no evidence that there is an impact on overall reduction of problems from firearm storage. You have danced around the importance of these programs which you know very well will not allow adults to reliably trust unsupervised young children around loaded firearms. Handguns remain hypnotically attractive to young children (especially boys) and NO amount of safety training has long term and reliable impact on children in a fashion that prevents the threat from firearms to children. Rationally, the American Academy of Pediatrics acknowledges that fact and states that NO firearms is the safest home. I believe is useless to waste school time on extended "gun safety" (which you might call "hunter safety") because it is futile and as firearms become a part of school education, that prominence becomes a firearm promotion campaign.

Even training for adults, as currently structured, is likely useless to impact habits about secure storage of firearms (RAND corp study).

The entire overt agenda of the NRA is to promote firearms, reduce firearm regulation, and object to safe storage and Eddie Eagle feeds into that goal.

If you cannot understand this repeated message, there is no need for further discussion.

 

[RF667799]

Ok. All this has been explained and I will attempt for one final time to explain it again to you.

You have refused to recognize that teaching children not to handle guns is different from hunter safety course.
You conflate two programs that have entirely different purposes. Hunter safety involves, as you know, discussion of firearms (care and feeding), regulations, hunting culture, funding of conservation programs... which essentially promotes the hobby of hunting. Since hunting is primarily with firearms, essentially this hobby promotes firearm ownership and use. Hunter safety is not equivalent to teaching Eddie Eagle caution about guns. Essentially, hunting promotion is firearm promotion and promoting firearms increases the prevalence of firearms in America. As an example, firearm death and injury increases during hunting season.

I think the clientele of hunter safety programs have already planned on going hunting prior to the course. People not interested in hunting wouldn't generally be taking the course. So how is it promoting anything?

Besides that, if there's an entity promoting something, it would be the state government if they required such a course for hunting. And the various states agencies really do promote hunting. Special youth seasons. Special license fees for various demographics. Adjusting bag limits to maximize sustainable harvest.

The rest of your rant does not address the points I have made which you refuse to assimilate and you have chosen to distort. More firearms add to the death and injury in America and, since promotion of hunting promotes firearms, that hobby contributes to the firearm violence problem.

As concerns "gun safety" for both children AND adults. There is no evidence that these programs impact significantly the storage of and risks to children of firearms. I have posted multiple studies in support of my position. You have posted claims that short term impact exists for some education, but no evidence that there is an impact on overall reduction of problems from firearm storage. You have danced around the importance of these programs which you know very well will not allow adults to reliably trust unsupervised young children around loaded firearms. Handguns remain hypnotically attractive to young children (especially boys) and NO amount of safety training has long term and reliable impact on children in a fashion that prevents the threat from firearms to children. Rationally, the American Academy of Pediatrics acknowledges that fact and states that NO firearms is the safest home. I believe is useless to waste school time on extended "gun safety" (which you might call "hunter safety") because it is futile and as firearms become a part of school education, that prominence becomes a firearm promotion campaign.

Even training for adults, as currently structured, is likely useless to impact habits about secure storage of firearms (RAND corp study).

The entire overt agenda of the NRA is to promote firearms, reduce firearm regulation, and object to safe storage and Eddie Eagle feeds into that goal.

If you cannot understand this repeated message, there is no need for further discussion.

 

[P_T]

It seems to me Fireworks, old LPG tanks and NG leaks are far and away more of a problem than firearms with Cell Phones going down the street the worst.

MSN

Home LPG tank explosions recently - Bing

Intelligent search from Bing makes it easier to quickly find what you’re looking for and rewards you.

www.bing.com

Walk around your home with a spritz bottle with soap in the water. Spray every shut off valve and connection, see if you see bubbles.

The building / Home / Rural explosions are astounding and getting more frequent.

 

[Spock]

It seems to me Fireworks, old LPG tanks and NG leaks are far and away more of a problem than firearms with Cell Phones going down the street the worst.

MSN

Home LPG tank explosions recently - Bing

Intelligent search from Bing makes it easier to quickly find what you’re looking for and rewards you.

www.bing.com

Walk around your home with a spritz bottle with soap in the water. Spray every shut off valve and connection, see if you see bubbles.

The building / Home / Rural explosions are astounding and getting more frequent.

100,000 people killed or injured from fireworks, propane or natural gas explosions yearly?
Given the frequent use of those devices and the relatively rare use of firearms, they are far more dangerous and a greater threat to public health.

 

[RF667799]

100,000 people killed or injured from fireworks, propane or natural gas explosions yearly?
Given the frequent use of those devices and the relatively rare use of firearms, they are far more dangerous and a greater threat to public health.

You've decided firearms don't present a risk unless they're being used. Good. Baby steps towards abandoning baby talk.

 

[Feynman Lives!]

Because they can’t. There’s no mechanism to do so.

I’m sorry you failed 6th grade civics.

Cool! So in your fantasy world, there is no need to worry about judicial activism because. you don't believe know it exists. And senators who question nominees