Why gun control?

[Russell797]

yet the more water floods in, the drier it gets

Over 30,000 every single year...Half a football stadium of people...or if you like 11,000 homicides, half a basketball arena..every year...

You are content, we know that...to bad you don't give two s**ts about the people negatively affected...

 

[ttwtt78640]

The 2nd Amendment, way back when, granted the people the right to bear arms, according to currently accepted interpretation. Therefore the population, which are the people, have guns..

Doing so is asking for trouble...and trouble is what we have.

Giving folks the right to have guns is no more giving people guns than giving people the privilege to drive cars is giving people cars. What people have is what they bought (for the most part) - folks elected to buy things that they perceived as useful. Your argument boils down to freedom causes trouble (crime?) thus the only way to reduce trouble (crime?) is to reduce freedom.

 

[Russell797]

Giving folks the right to have guns is no more giving people guns than giving people the privilege to drive cars is giving people cars. What people have is what they bought (for the most part) - folks elected to buy things that they perceived as useful. Your argument boils down to freedom causes trouble (crime?) thus the only way to reduce trouble (crime?) is to reduce freedom.

Of course freedom causes trouble...people will abuse freedom....the question is what do we do about it...just let it happen? Reduce freedom? I suppose that's true, but either we want to reduce the statistics as much as possible or we don't...You obviously don't. YOUR freedom is more important to YOU than the lives of those lost.

Giving the population the opportunity to own and drive cars is absolutely the equivalent of giving them the opportunity to own and shoot guns .

 

[ttwtt78640]

Of course freedom causes trouble...people will abuse freedom....the question is what do we do about it...just let it happen? Reduce freedom? I suppose that's true, but either we want to reduce the statistics as much as possible or we don't...You obviously don't. YOUR freedom is more important to YOU than the lives of those lost.

Giving the population the opportunity to own and drive cars is absolutely the equivalent of giving them the opportunity to own and shoot guns .

Why do you constantly ignore the possibility of using the criminal justice system to eliminate the freedom of convicted criminals? Putting them on the (national?) bad person list and releasing them to again roam freely among us is what is not working - see recidivism rates. You seem to want to reduce freedom ever more until criminals stop claiming victims - which I perceive as mission impossible.

According to the National Institute of Justice, about 68 percent of 405,000 prisoners released in 30 states in 2005 were arrested for a new crime within three years of their release from prison, and 77 percent were arrested within five years.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recidivism

 

[Russell797]

Why do you constantly ignore the possibility of using the criminal justice system to eliminate the freedom of convicted criminals? Putting them on the (national?) bad person list and releasing them to again roam freely among us is what is not working - see recidivism rates. You seem to want to reduce freedom ever more until criminals stop claiming victims - which I perceive as mission impossible.



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recidivism

Why don't I acknowledge that putting people away for good would help?..I do acknowledge that...then do it...I will support you guys 100% in principle...but first you/we have to be serious about making it happen...talk is cheap....The Dems can't get it done, so how about you guys?

Of course not all crimes call for life in prison....so where do we draw the line? Will we build the requisite prison space?

 

[Casper]

Over 30,000 every single year...Half a football stadium of people...or if you like 11,000 homicides, half a basketball arena..every year...

You are content, we know that...to bad you don't give two s**ts about the people negatively affected...

Among 350,000,000 citizens, not such a huge number considering that most of these homicides are competed by criminals and usually against other criminals is very specific areas. Is it acceptable, No, but that is the issue that needs to be addressed, Criminal Activity, reduce that and you reduce murder.
You say why not use a different plug, maybe you can state exactly what you would suggest to deal with the homicide rate, then we can discuss the specifics of your ideas.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Why don't I acknowledge that putting people away for good would help?..I do acknowledge that...then do it...I will support you guys 100% in principle...but first you/we have to be serious about making it happen...talk is cheap....The Dems can't get it done, so how about you guys?

Of course not all crimes call for life in prison....so where do we draw the line? Will we build the requisite prison space?

Had you bothered to read up on recidivism data, it points out that younger offenders are the most apt to repeat (re-offend). They are also the least apt to receive a long(er) sentence. This bassackwards nonsense means that a lot of older and less dangerous (less apt to reoffend) folks are taking up lots of valuable prison space while loons get all "hopey changey" and let younger yet more dangerous (more apt to reoffend) predators out far too soon. A recent case of a confessed 19 year old perp to hate crime, intimidation and aggravated battery (a kidnapping charge was dropped) received a sentence of probation (no jail/prison time) and that was for multiple violent felonies.

The ideal prison design would be a very tall structures with those with longer times remaining on their sentences being moved to ever higher floors as the facility is filled. Beyond bread, water and vitamin/mineral supplements no other sustenance should be offered (no more commissary). Once the prisons become over full (top floor cells are all filled) then those with the most time left are either put on (or tossed off of) the roof. This should allow the be nice to the worst of the thugs crowd (at least their relatives) ample time to volunteer more funding to finance the building of ever more prisons.

 

[TurtleDude]

Over 30,000 every single year...Half a football stadium of people...or if you like 11,000 homicides, half a basketball arena..every year...

You are content, we know that...to bad you don't give two s**ts about the people negatively affected...

yes, the liberal ploy when they have no argument-we care more than you do!!!!

 

[Russell797]

Among 350,000,000 citizens, not such a huge number considering that most of these homicides are competed by criminals and usually against other criminals is very specific areas. Is it acceptable, No, but that is the issue that needs to be addressed, Criminal Activity, reduce that and you reduce murder.
You say why not use a different plug, maybe you can state exactly what you would suggest to deal with the homicide rate, then we can discuss the specifics of your ideas.

Out of the 30,000+ deaths by gunshot every year about 11,000 are homicides. Basically one third....

You ignore two thirds of the problem...

Trump wants to build a wall that would impact on the one third portion. Nine Americans killed in the past year by ISIS. Travel banes..all out war against them...

The risk assessment is miles off target.

You expect me, a complete ignoramus when it comes understanding all the intricacies of this issue to have solutions? Give me a break..The professionals at the CDC should be studying the matter....but they can't because the Republicans placed a gag order on the issue. They don't want to hear it.

 

[TurtleDude]

Out of the 30,000+ deaths by gunshot every year about 11,000 are homicides. Basically one third....

You ignore two thirds of the problem...

Trump wants to build a wall that would impact on the one third portion. Nine Americans killed in the past year by ISIS. Travel banes..all out war against them...

The risk assessment is miles off target.

You expect me, a complete ignoramus when it comes understanding all the intricacies of this issue to have solutions? Give me a break..The professionals at the CDC should be studying the matter....but they can't because the Republicans placed a gag order on the issue. They don't want to hear it.

most of their researchers are professionals at WHAT?

 

[Russell797]

yes, the liberal ploy when they have no argument-we care more than you do!!!!

I have an argument...You claim to have solutions.. I don't....so why is nothing happening....The Republicans don't even talk about it in their platform...not a peep other than bashing the opposition. The issue isn't on their radar screen.

So, round up the troops and get the ball rolling...Do something, if you don't like the way others are trying to solve the problem....

 

[TurtleDude]

I have an argument...You claim to have solutions.. I don't....so why is nothing happening....The Republicans don't even talk about it in their platform...not a peep other than bashing the opposition. The issue isn't on their radar screen.

So, round up the troops and get the ball rolling...Do something, if you don't like the way others are trying to solve the problem....

I am doing my part, not merely kvetching about something and having no solutions. The fact is you don't have solutions but its clear, the democrat agenda is harassing gun owners because they have been voting against the Dems ever since the Dems tried to pretend gun control was crime control

 

[Russell797]

most of their researchers are professionals at WHAT?

Science....you know that enterprise Republicans like to censure. Censure scientific study of climate change, censure the study of gun violence....stick head in sand...that'll make the issue go away.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...hut-down-for-20-years/?utm_term=.01abddd1ace6

 

[Russell797]

I am doing my part, not merely kvetching about something and having no solutions. The fact is you don't have solutions but its clear, the democrat agenda is harassing gun owners because they have been voting against the Dems ever since the Dems tried to pretend gun control was crime control

More assumed agenda driven conspiracy theory... The Democrats attempt at solutions will not fly, so if the Republicans really care, it's their turn...Do something meaningful to address the issue...is this issue not serious enough to be bothered with?

 

[TurtleDude]

Science....you know that enterprise Republicans like to censure. Censure scientific study of climate change, censure the study of gun violence....stick head in sand...that'll make the issue go away.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...hut-down-for-20-years/?utm_term=.01abddd1ace6

what exactly would anti gun researchers bring to the table? that assholes with guns shoot people?

here is what the CDC has the expertise to study and MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS about

1) the best way for ER/EMT personnel to stabilize critically wounded gun shot victims

2) how do deal with the mental health aspect of violent youth from broken homes

3) rehabilitation of those crippled by gun shot wounds

4) mental health issues concerning suicides

but that isn't what "researchers" at the CDC wanted to do

they wanted to advocate for anti gun laws:

https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2015/12/why-we-cant-trust-the-cdc-with-gun-research-000340


Let’s be clear, the National Rifle Association is not opposed to research that would encourage the safe and responsible use of firearms and reduce the numbers of firearm-related deaths. Safety has been at the core of the NRA’s mission since its inception. But that is not the goal of the gun control advocates who are behind the calls for CDC funding.

Government-funded research was openly biased in the 1990s. CDC officials unabashedly supported gun bans and poured millions of dollars into “research” that was, in fact, advocacy. One of the lead researchers employed in the CDC’s effort was quoted, stating “We’re going to systematically build the case that owning firearms causes deaths.” Another researcher said he envisioned a long-term campaign “to convince Americans that guns are, first and foremost, a public health menace.”

 

[TurtleDude]

In any normal situation, we would try to build a better plug. What we do is accept the flood as normal. We are not allowed to try a better plug...

that's because people such as you want to plug up honest people getting guns and ignoring the flood of criminals who are armed

 

[ttwtt78640]

More assumed agenda driven conspiracy theory... The Democrats attempt at solutions will not fly, so if the Republicans really care, it's their turn...Do something meaningful to address the issue...is this issue not serious enough to be bothered with?

This partisan slant idea deserves to be addressed - the best way, IMHO, is to look at who controls the law and its enforcement in these high crime zones and see whether crime is higher in red or blue controlled areas. To assert that Houston crime is a Texas problem ignores reality - but is a clever way of saying that demorat controlled Houston's problems are really a republicant controlled Texas problem.

https://www.thetrace.org/2016/10/chicago-gun-violence-per-capita-rate/

 

[Russell797]

what exactly would anti gun researchers bring to the table? that assholes with guns shoot people?

here is what the CDC has the expertise to study and MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS about

1) the best way for ER/EMT personnel to stabilize critically wounded gun shot victims

2) how do deal with the mental health aspect of violent youth from broken homes

3) rehabilitation of those crippled by gun shot wounds

4) mental health issues concerning suicides

but that isn't what "researchers" at the CDC wanted to do

they wanted to advocate for anti gun laws:

https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2015/12/why-we-cant-trust-the-cdc-with-gun-research-000340


Let’s be clear, the National Rifle Association is not opposed to research that would encourage the safe and responsible use of firearms and reduce the numbers of firearm-related deaths. Safety has been at the core of the NRA’s mission since its inception. But that is not the goal of the gun control advocates who are behind the calls for CDC funding.

Government-funded research was openly biased in the 1990s. CDC officials unabashedly supported gun bans and poured millions of dollars into “research” that was, in fact, advocacy. One of the lead researchers employed in the CDC’s effort was quoted, stating “We’re going to systematically build the case that owning firearms causes deaths.” Another researcher said he envisioned a long-term campaign “to convince Americans that guns are, first and foremost, a public health menace.”

They should because both statements are true.

 

[TurtleDude]

They should because both statements are true.

see that is nothing more than leftwing propaganda and that's why those bannerrhoid activists should not be publicly funded.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Science....you know that enterprise Republicans like to censure. Censure scientific study of climate change, censure the study of gun violence....stick head in sand...that'll make the issue go away.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...hut-down-for-20-years/?utm_term=.01abddd1ace6

The perfect place to study violent crime is inside of our prisons - neither the perps nor their victims (yes victims exist inside prisons and jails at an alarming rate) can evade the study.

Prison crime rate: The U.S. violent crime rate is falling partly because the Justice Department ignores the countless crimes that take place in prisons.

After all, it is this group that gets placed on the "bad pepole" list and thus deserves the bulk of our "crime control" attention. No additional study is needed to know that a tiny percentage of our population commits the vast majority of all violent crime. That leaves us with how best to prevent recidivism both inside and outside of the prison system.

 

[jet57]

This partisan slant idea deserves to be addressed - the best way, IMHO, is to look at who controls the law and its enforcement in these high crime zones and see whether crime is higher in red or blue controlled areas. To assert that Houston crime is a Texas problem ignores reality - but is a clever way of saying that demorat controlled Houston's problems are really a republicant controlled Texas problem.

https://www.thetrace.org/2016/10/chicago-gun-violence-per-capita-rate/

This tells an interesting story: all the red states have the highest rates. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/firearm_mortality/firearm.htm

 

[TurtleDude]

This tells an interesting story: all the red states have the highest rates. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/firearm_mortality/firearm.htm

red states have more white middle class males, military veterans and Alaska has lots of native Alaskans. those groups have the highest suicide rates. Blue areas have the highest homicide rates and homicide numbers

 

[gfm7175]

In any normal situation, we would try to build a better plug. What we do is accept the flood as normal. We are not allowed to try a better plug...

Ok...

 

[B'smith]

Only fire extinguishers are less dangerous to a human.

You're right except that they're not that great for self defense.

My point is that like spare tires, fire extinguishers & defensive handguns/firearms are just inanimate objects that all serve unpleasant tasks & you hope you never need to use them but you're glad to have them when you do need them.

 

[Russell797]

This tells an interesting story: all the red states have the highest rates. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/firearm_mortality/firearm.htm

I showed them that same website...It tells them nothing they want to hear....so they come back with and I paraphrase "That's all gun related deaths, not just homicides"...

The worst states by most metrics ranging from poverty to gun related deaths are the red states....by far. They are trying to turn us into them....No thanks.