Is it me, or is it anyone else?

Discussion in 'Off Topic Area' started by 47MartialMan, Mar 11, 2016.

  1. philosoraptor

    philosoraptor carnivore in a top hat Supporter

    I think one thing that gets lost in the gun control debate is the line between the personal and political. While it might be sound to personally advise people to arm themselves for their own protection, it is not logical to then conclude that an armed populace is a safer populace. It may be that the society that has stricter gun control has fewer murders per capita, but offers fewer choices for 130 pound people confronted with two 200 lb people.

    With sufficient preparation, Batman can beat all threats. With sufficient preparation, the handgun that someone is carrying to protect themselves can be neutralized. What we've created in effect is an arms race among civilians, and I'm not quite sure how to derail it. Should each person carry enough weaponry on their person to neutralize a team of agents and a helicopter?

    Just pointing out that this is EXACTLY what I'm talking about when I mention flattening the distinction between personal and political advice. Arguing that it is prudent to pack heat in our society as it currently exists does not address the method by which we construct a society where it is not necessary. Also, encouraging dat arms race.
     
  2. raaeoh

    raaeoh never tell me the odds

    Based on this my entire family should be dead. Well so should most of the people I know.

    Fact one person I familiar with tried.to kill himself with a gun. He was a drug addict he finally killed him self.with pills.? Wait! Pills should be banned.

    Any way you might be shocked to know that my 6 yr old knows more about gun control, saftey, and over all use than many here on map it seems. My children learn safety first. Fire arms are a huge part of the American culture. A very small part of the population makes it look like there is some kind of epidemic. I blame the "un" biased media for the "fair" reporting on this subject.

    You never hear about how many people are saved by a firearm. That would be a crime.
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2016
  3. Dead_pool

    Dead_pool Spes mea in nihil Deus MAP 2017 Moi Award

    Bro, you need to read up on your statistics.


    If your risk of being murdered is 1% (its not), and having a gun triples the risk, (correlation is not causation) that's still only a 3% risk.

    So not your entire family should be dead, literally 97% of your family wouldn't be dead.

    But as a population, have 3% of your country being murdered is a massive issue.
     
  4. raaeoh

    raaeoh never tell me the odds

    So if I get this straight my family is 3% more likely to be murdered because we own and train with fire arms.

    Here is a a few facts. I have know 1 person to die from pills one from a razor blade to the wrist. 1 person beaten with a baseball bat I was given a concussion from nunchuka, 3 people run down by a car, and a freind beaten by a book.

    None of this is recorded. But someone shoots themselves in the foot and firearms should be banned. Smh. Man is violent by nature. Man will kill with ANY tool they can. Only firearm homicides are an issue?
    Hammers and cars kill more people in my country than guns.
     
  5. Simon

    Simon Administrator Admin Supporter MAP 2017 Koyo Award

    I think that stats are the best place to look when trying to make a case for or against and you'll find better argument for or against depending on what you search for.

    Are guns beneficial when looking to defend yourself?

    Are guns beneficial when only looking to defend property?

    If looking to defend yourself or property would something like mace be as effective?

    Are those that live without guns more likely to have their property broken into?

    Are those who live without firearms more likely to be the victim of gun crime?

    Would owning a gun increase the chance of a death (home owner or criminal) had the home owner been armed?

    When it comes to break ins are you taking into account gun theft?

    Now I'm not coming down on any one side and I'm not trying to change anyone's mind, but if you want a balanced argument or are trying to change someone's thinking about gun ownership then your argument needs to be balanced and factual.

    If it isn't you are just shouting, "I'm right and I'm not listening to you", and we already have a load of those threads.
     
  6. philosoraptor

    philosoraptor carnivore in a top hat Supporter

    Just for reference, here is a study that shows a strong correlation between having a gun in the home and and violent death.

    http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/160/10/929.full

    Having a gun in the home increased risk of firearm related homicide and suicide. Could not begin to guess what the causation is. :confused:
     
  7. Dead_pool

    Dead_pool Spes mea in nihil Deus MAP 2017 Moi Award

    Person anecdotes are not statistics, you have to look at the actual facts before considering anything.

    Currently the CDC arnt allowed to gather these facts.

    Isn't that strange, considering any decision at all (even to do nothing) should always be based on facts, not misleading emotion.
     
  8. Moosey

    Moosey invariably, a moose Supporter

    Is that true? Given the population density in modern cities and the prevalence of large-scale shootings in the US today, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the peak of gun violence is now.
     
  9. Dead_pool

    Dead_pool Spes mea in nihil Deus MAP 2017 Moi Award

    In terms of percentages, population totals shouldnt effect this, although populations density probably has a negative effect, the more social interactions you have, the more are likely to go wrong.
     
  10. philosoraptor

    philosoraptor carnivore in a top hat Supporter

  11. 47MartialMan

    47MartialMan Valued Member

    To simply state; "Guns only do harm. There is no use for guns in our society".. People say they need guns for protection, but they are usually trying to protect themselves against other people with guns. If guns were banned, shouldn't there be a need to protect against those who do not follow the ban and commit a violent gun crime. And so forth many gun owners have to recite their right, provided by the 2nd Amendment as a last line of defense. There are those who say that owning guns to defend against a tyrannical government is useless, because the modern American Military is so powerful. However, there are those who believe while the military is powerful, it is not indestructible. They reflect upon 13 little colonies banded together to defeat the most powerful empire in the world at that era. They believe the same situation could happen in modern times from their government. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of Independence
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2016
  12. 47MartialMan

    47MartialMan Valued Member

    Nice post.

    However, this is where, to reiterate one of my other posts:

    All I ask is someone to take reflection of themselves per their life span, look upon the "people they know", and take a consensus of how many were involved in a home intruder, rape, public firefight, etc. Whereas I am not saying it is not possible, again depending on the culture-area-environment one is in, the percentages are interesting per EACH consensus category (Separate each category: Rape-Mugging-Fisticuff-Self Defense-Home Invasion-Home Robbery-Car Jacking-Actual shoot out-Being Shot-Shooting another)

    I separated each category:
    Rape
    Mugging
    Fisticuff
    Self Defense
    Home Invasion
    Home Robbery
    Car Jacking
    Actual shoot out
    Being Shot-Shooting another


    This subject restarted my thinking on it, per my friend getting shot. On a note, as I had somewhat conveyed in my opening passage: I am not using this to take either side, anti-pro gun, I am trying to get genuine, logical, rhetorical discussions. On the gun forum I was on, of course, they were pro-gun. But I challenged their views, I wanted to see if they can apply the same genuine, logical, rhetorical discussions to their convictions....THANKS TO MAP FOR PARTICIPATION TO THIS SUBJECT
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2016
  13. Dead_pool

    Dead_pool Spes mea in nihil Deus MAP 2017 Moi Award

    http://www.humanosphere.org/science/2015/10/visualizing-gun-deaths-comparing-u-s-rest-world/

    Theres some nice comparison charts on here.

    The question really is, what are the root causes of America's high muder and suicide rates, and does the easy access to firearms increase or decrease these rates.

    Really most people who own guns, own them, because they like them, personal defence, freedom from the british etc arnt the real reasons for ownership. Which is why this debate is so hard to have, its hard to disprove feelings with facts, and its not untill the people involved actually feel/see what guns do, that the good feeling is replaced by something else.
     
  14. Adrastia

    Adrastia Valued Member

    gun people

    http://www.news.com.au/world/north-...n/news-story/17342957f49df34cb4c4341da563abac


    I'm not in Florida, but I'm still surrounded by people like this woman - and her
    supporters and apologists.

    Lip-service to training and safety. Reality = Not.

    the pro-gun (total access 27/7/365/anywhere/anytime/zero restrictions on as much firepower as I like) are solid behind her and others like her.

    I ask them (pro-gun) to police their own (like her). Nope.
    Rights of the individual, you know.

    pure luck for this woman - and kid, in spite of her criminal negligence. Seriously hoping she loses custody until she _demonstrates_ her capacity to protect her own child - not just make mouth noises about it.

    yep. had one of these (male) in my extended family. Lots of mouth-noise.
     
  15. Ben Gash CLF

    Ben Gash CLF Valued Member

    However the 13 little colonies idea is a myth. The American war of Independence was largely a civil war, and the rebels received significant resources and crucially naval support from France and Spain.
    England has very strict gun laws and we have less than 50 gun murders a year. Illegal firearms are incredibly hard to aquire. Many, many illegally held guns in the US entered circulation from a legal source.
     
  16. raaeoh

    raaeoh never tell me the odds

    The article assumes that only law abiding citizens are killing each other with legally purchased firearms.
    Stronger gun laws will only limit thoes of us who obey them. I do believe that tighter restrictions should be in place.
     
  17. raaeoh

    raaeoh never tell me the odds

    This is my point. Media covers this. As they should, but had her son used the gun to save his mother from getting raped or worse, no one would hear about it.

    I also think this partially answers Deadpool 's question. Over confidence leads to complacent day to day routine activity and mistakes are made. In this case a bad one.
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2016
  18. raaeoh

    raaeoh never tell me the odds

    If it is witnessed personally does it not then become a fact to the person who witnessed it?

    Granted it does not become a statistic,but it is defiantly easier to believe a Stat when you actually are witness to it.

    I personally believe most studies are in favor of who ever funded them are thus inherently flawed.
     
  19. 47MartialMan

    47MartialMan Valued Member

    Anecdotal fallacy, any type of heuristic, the availability heuristic in media, have a double standard. On the subject of guns or gun violence, people who are in fear of guns, will use information to establish a thought process to look for heavy legal legislation, including proscription. However, on the opposite, people that are pro guns or own guns, will use the same heuristic and believe they need to have one for protection and obtain conceal carry permits, being superfluous.
     
  20. 47MartialMan

    47MartialMan Valued Member

    *Europe does not have as much gun violence as the U.S. The main difference between Europe and the U.S. is that to have gun you need to have a license and part of that licensing is being trained by and maintaining membership in a shooting club. From what I read the shooting clubs are very active over there. If you do not maintain that membership you have to liquidate your weapons.

    The difference, and this is the general attitude I found in Europe, is that there is just less of a "gun culture." Europe has a "shooting culture" that involves sport shooters and hunters. Europe has an "antique enthusiast" culture as well, regarding weapons from older wars.

    Comparing gun violence of other countries and/or cities to the U.S. cannot be an accurate comparison.

    In Venezuela, there was too much death, too much crime. A few years ago, in response to national outcry, the government of Venezuela took steps to fix this problem. So they imposed strict gun control laws to stop the murderers and thieves. The end result? Violent crime actually increased. And Caracas is now one of the most dangerous cities in the world.

    However, in Andes, the city of Bogota, was considered as one of the most dangerous in the world. Years ago, Bogota led the region in murder. And they imposed their own strict gun control laws trying to clean up the streets. It worked. Bogota became safer. There was less murder. Less crime. Less violence.

    Honduras and Brazil both have very high homicide rates. Yet Brazil has highly restrictive gun laws, while Honduras has fairly lax gun laws.

    Pakistan has some of the loosest gun laws in the world. Chile’s are fairly restrictive. Yet both have low homicide rates.

    Bosnia has a very liberal gun laws. Belgium has very restrictive laws. Yet their homicide rates are similar.

    Luxembourg has few privately-owned guns per capita, yet its murder rate is much higher than Germany’s, which has over twice as many.

    As for states within the U.S., Hawaii and Vermont have polar opposite gun laws yet nearly the same homicide rate. Maryland and Virginia have vastly different gun laws, yet almost identical rates of gun-related deaths. California and New Jersey have strict restrictions, yet crime and murder result as if the restrictions were not in place.

    This disparity becomes even more vexing when we look at other countries and U.S. cities The numbers are all over the board. Staunch advocates for gun control tend to think that more regulations and fewer guns make us safer. Those who oppose gun control tend to think that more guns and fewer regulations make us safer. But how could the same policy engineered, completely have different results in different countries and states or cities within the same country? The data doesn’t support either assertion, meaning there must be other factors at work.
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2016

Share This Page