Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: The Official Gun Control Thread. « previous next »
Page: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 ... 40

John Galt?

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 18831
Offline
#135 : June 13, 2013, 03:20:07 PM

OBVIOUSLY . . .. . (cant believe I even have to type this) . . . . the solution is NOT to be the only civilzed nation on the planet that has every citizen walking around with a gun for personal defense. . .  . . . . wow


Is Switzerland NOT a civilized nation???

In Switzerland, all able bodied males are required to enlist in the militia where they are trained and issued weapons that they then store at their house. Switzerland has one of the highest gun ownership rates in the world (61% of all Swiss own or have a gun). Switzerland's gun homicide rate is 1/10th that of the US.

http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/fileadmin/docs/A-Yearbook/2007/en/Small-Arms-Survey-2007-Chapter-02-annexe-4-EN.pdf
http://www.guncite.com/swissgun-kopel.html
http://world.time.com/2012/12/20/the-swiss-difference-a-gun-culture-that-works/

militia   --- not personal use

by the way -- have you ever been to Switzerland? I am guessing no if you think that the militia gun requirement is why the gun homicide rate is so low. (Hint: think banks) Anyway, no need to take my word as there is a lot of writing on the subject. I will not find it all for you, but here's a couple quick ones:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/mythbusting-israel-and-switzerland-are-not-gun-toting-utopias/

Anyway, its really not that complicated.  We have WAY, WAY, WAY, WAY more guns than most similar civilized societies . . . .  and way more gun death . . . . hardly shocking  . . . . and a very wealthy country of  about 7 million of homogenous people keeping a gun in their home for militia duties does not chnage those simple statistics.



You completely miss the point. Switzerland has one of the highest gun ownership rates in the world AND one of the lowest gun murder rates. Does that mean more guns= fewer murders? NO But does it possibly mean that number of guns and murder rates are NOT correlated? Yes. Does it possible mean that factors other than number of guns or gun laws (like poverty levels, large immigrant pops, etc. etc.) have a much bigger impact on murder rates??  BINGO!!!

IOW Guns don't kill people, stupid, crazy or angry people kill people.
: June 13, 2013, 03:22:17 PM John Galt?


Bucfucious

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 3668
Online
#136 : June 13, 2013, 03:26:40 PM

 "...factors other than number of guns or gun laws (like poverty levels, large immigrant pops, etc. etc.) have a much bigger impact..."

Turn the solving of those problems into votes and you'll have something. Until then, 'appease the simpletons with meaningless gestures' will rule the day.

VinBucFan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 17629
Online
#137 : June 13, 2013, 03:36:21 PM

OBVIOUSLY . . .. . (cant believe I even have to type this) . . . . the solution is NOT to be the only civilzed nation on the planet that has every citizen walking around with a gun for personal defense. . .  . . . . wow


Is Switzerland NOT a civilized nation???

In Switzerland, all able bodied males are required to enlist in the militia where they are trained and issued weapons that they then store at their house. Switzerland has one of the highest gun ownership rates in the world (61% of all Swiss own or have a gun). Switzerland's gun homicide rate is 1/10th that of the US.

http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/fileadmin/docs/A-Yearbook/2007/en/Small-Arms-Survey-2007-Chapter-02-annexe-4-EN.pdf
http://www.guncite.com/swissgun-kopel.html
http://world.time.com/2012/12/20/the-swiss-difference-a-gun-culture-that-works/

militia   --- not personal use

by the way -- have you ever been to Switzerland? I am guessing no if you think that the militia gun requirement is why the gun homicide rate is so low. (Hint: think banks) Anyway, no need to take my word as there is a lot of writing on the subject. I will not find it all for you, but here's a couple quick ones:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/mythbusting-israel-and-switzerland-are-not-gun-toting-utopias/

Anyway, its really not that complicated.  We have WAY, WAY, WAY, WAY more guns than most similar civilized societies . . . .  and way more gun death . . . . hardly shocking  . . . . and a very wealthy country of  about 7 million of homogenous people keeping a gun in their home for militia duties does not chnage those simple statistics.



You completely miss the point. Switzerland has one of the highest gun ownership rates in the world AND one of the lowest gun murder rates. Does that mean more guns= fewer murders? NO But does it possibly mean that number of guns and murder rates are NOT correlated? Yes. Does it possible mean that factors other than number of guns or gun laws (like poverty levels, large immigrant pops, etc. etc.) have a much bigger impact on murder rates??  BINGO!!!

IOW Guns don't kill people, stupid, crazy or angry people kill people.

Many things lead to murder and death, but we have higher GUN deaths (homicide, murder and suicide) than similar countries with far less guns.  and, if you want to use your own phrase, with a slight edit

Guns don't kill people, stupid, crazy or angry people WITH GUNS kill people.

All people properly motivated to kill are going to kill or try to kill.  Ubiquitous guns and unfettered access to guns just make it VERY EASY  . . . . and . . . . things like "poverty levels"  etc. are not as susceptible to control as GUNS


The UK has high poverty levels and a very high immigrant population . . . almost no gun deaths . . .  what's missing from the equations:

United States:   poverty + immigrants + guns(x1000) --- highest gun death rate of most civilized countries
United Kingdom: poverty + immigrants  -- very, very very low gun death rate
: June 13, 2013, 03:44:38 PM VinBucFan

Dolorous Jason

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 15390
Online
#138 : June 13, 2013, 03:49:03 PM

Wasn't saying Vince specifically wants to ban guns - he doesnt seem to have the balls to tell us what he really wants one way or the other - I was speaking in generalities in regards to the supposed anti-gun solutions .

If the solution is to strip our freedoms I say no thanks.

What is your point? I was wrong? Ok. You win. I was wrong.

           

Bucfucious

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 3668
Online
#139 : June 13, 2013, 03:49:44 PM

So you don't care if people get killed, just as long as no guns are involved? Makes sense I guess. If you could turn all of the suicides into jumpers and cutters, and get those gang members to do less shooting and more vehicular homicides and stabbings, and get the psychos to rely on explosives, then you could say that you solved the gun violence problem and the statistics will support you. Of course you won't have solved anything at all, but that shouldn't be of any concern to someone like you.

spartan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 6892
Online
#140 : June 13, 2013, 04:01:13 PM



Maybe it would make sense to you if I said that you are arguing against a PRO-GUN argument that is all over these boards; namely, that its not guns, that we should focus on its mental illness. 

You are highlighting precisely why focusing on mental illness to the exclusion of guns makes no sense.  The only person with a mental illenss that could be stopped by a background check is a person who has been adjudictaed mentallly incompetent or dangerous. We should stop thoise people, no doubt, but as I already said earlier in the thread (discussing the CA propsed statute) it would only apply to an incredibly small number of people, that is the problem and that is why any solkution has to focus, at least in part, on guns --- they are more easily controlled.

So how do you propose to "control" guns?

VinBucFan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 17629
Online
#141 : June 13, 2013, 04:07:06 PM

Wasn't saying Vince specifically wants to ban guns - he doesnt seem to have the balls to tell us what he really wants one way or the other

oooh  . . .  . the fear card .   Vin is tricking us.  I have said over and over what I want to do and it is NOT to ban guns

VinBucFan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 17629
Online
#142 : June 13, 2013, 04:16:44 PM

So you don't care if people get killed, just as long as no guns are involved? Makes sense I guess. If you could turn all of the suicides into jumpers and cutters, and get those gang members to do less shooting and more vehicular homicides and stabbings, and get the psychos to rely on explosives, then you could say that you solved the gun violence problem and the statistics will support you. Of course you won't have solved anything at all, but that shouldn't be of any concern to someone like you.

That's just nonsensical. Look it's this simple:

1. People who want to kill somebody are going to try (we need to work on having better people-lol) and if properly motivated succeed
2. Guns being all over the place and easy to get make killing easier, in part because guns are more effective at killing

simple example. take all the guns and replace them with knives. Can people still kill? yes, but  let's see the guy in the denver theater try to kill all those people with knives and then explain to me how many people are going to die (including children) because a "knife accidentally went off" or because someon "accidentally pointed a knife at them? and then tell me how many people didnt get killed because they suffered a non-fatal knife wound in a domestic dispute or roberry rather than a fatal bullet wound . . . .  or they escaped their knife-wielding spouse as opposed to their spouse with 2 handguns gunning them down . . . . or they didnt have the courage to cut their wrist when they lost a job, but did have the courage to put a gun to their head.

Ubiquitous guns and easy access to guns makes gun death easy . . . as evidenced by simple statistics that anyone can get and that I have posted comparing our country to other similar countries. Reasonably restricting guns is no differnt than requiring seat belts. People will still get killed, but it doesnt mean we dont try.

simple

Dolorous Jason

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 15390
Online
#143 : June 13, 2013, 04:17:35 PM

You've said you don't want to ban guns,  but all your " guns are the problem " rhetoric doesnt match that position.  Then,  when pressed on specifics by Spartan,  you've been dodging his questions for days.

Not saying you are trying to trick anyone necessarily , but you are certainly succeeding in confusing the hell out of everyone.

What is your point? I was wrong? Ok. You win. I was wrong.

           

VinBucFan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 17629
Online
#144 : June 13, 2013, 04:20:48 PM



Maybe it would make sense to you if I said that you are arguing against a PRO-GUN argument that is all over these boards; namely, that its not guns, that we should focus on its mental illness. 

You are highlighting precisely why focusing on mental illness to the exclusion of guns makes no sense.  The only person with a mental illenss that could be stopped by a background check is a person who has been adjudictaed mentallly incompetent or dangerous. We should stop thoise people, no doubt, but as I already said earlier in the thread (discussing the CA propsed statute) it would only apply to an incredibly small number of people, that is the problem and that is why any solkution has to focus, at least in part, on guns --- they are more easily controlled.

So how do you propose to "control" guns?

right after I give you this answer, you tell me how you plan to "control" mental illness.

Here's an example of RESTRICTIONS on guns that are short of a ban:

Firearms in Australia are grouped into Categories determined by the National Firearm Agreement with different levels of control. The categories are:

Category A: Rimfire rifles (not semi-automatic), shotguns (not pump-action or semi-automatic), air rifles, and paintball markers. A "Genuine Reason" must be provided for a Category A firearm.

Category B: Centrefire rifles (not semi-automatic), muzzleloading firearms made after 1 January 1901. Apart from a "Genuine Reason", a "Genuine Need" must be demonstrated, including why a Category A firearm would not be suitable.

Category C: Semi-automatic rimfire rifles holding 10 or fewer rounds and pump-action or semi-automatic shotguns holding 5 or fewer rounds. Category C firearms are strongly restricted: only primary producers, occupational shooters, collectors and some clay target shooters can own functional Category C firearms.

Category D: Semi-automatic centrefire rifles, pump-action or semi-automatic shotguns holding more than 5 rounds. Functional Category D firearms are restricted to government agencies and a few occupational shooters. Collectors may own deactivated Category D firearms.

Category H: Handguns including air pistols and deactivated handguns. (Albeit both SA and WA do not require deactiv
ated handguns to be regarded as handguns after the deactivation process has taken place. This situation was the catalyst in QLD for the deactivation and diversion of thousands of handguns to the black-market the loophole shut since 2001) This class is available to target shooters. To be eligible for a Category H firearm, a target shooter must serve a probationary period of 12 months the first 6 months using club handguns,then in the remainder of the last 6 month probationary licence, an application may be made, permit to acquire. A minimum number of matches yearly to retain each category of handgun and be a financial member of an approved

Pistol Club. Source http://www.police.nsw.gov.au/services/firearms

These categories A,B,C,D and H were those determined by the NFA. The others listed here are determined by the states that have implement them at their own discretion.


: June 13, 2013, 04:28:24 PM VinBucFan

VinBucFan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 17629
Online
#145 : June 13, 2013, 04:27:47 PM

You've said you don't want to ban guns,  but all your " guns are the problem " rhetoric doesnt match that position.  Then,  when pressed on specifics by Spartan,  you've been dodging his questions for days.

Lol, youre just not paying attention (I cant say I blame you-lol).  The truth -- which you can see by going back through the thread -- is that it is SPARTAN who has been dodging for days . .  and still is.  There is no reasonable level of universal background checks that Spartan would accept and so he has been offering caveats without closing the door (i.e, saying that there could be more). It's a game he is playing. 

I am for universal background checks, PERIOD. End of story.  Spartan suggested a caveat a long time ago (CWP to CWP) and I said, yes that sounds fair. He's mentioned a few other, which I will respond to, but if you look, he will always have another caveat, and leaves the door open for that purpose, because he will not accepot any type of universal ckecks.  Fine, that's his right . .  but dont claim that I am evasive.

Btw, just posted an example of restriction on guns and I dont say "guns are the problem" I said that ubiquitous guns and unfettered access to guns explain in large part why our GUN deaths are so much higher than other similar countries


spartan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 6892
Online
#146 : June 13, 2013, 04:27:51 PM


right after I give you this answer, you tell me how you plan to "control" mental illness.

Here's an example of RESTRICTIONS on guns that are short of a ban:

Firearms in Australia are grouped into Categories determined by the National Firearm Agreement with different levels of control. The categories are:

Category A: Rimfire rifles (not semi-automatic), shotguns (not pump-action or semi-automatic), air rifles, and paintball markers. A "Genuine Reason" must be provided for a Category A firearm.

Category B: Centrefire rifles (not semi-automatic), muzzleloading firearms made after 1 January 1901. Apart from a "Genuine Reason", a "Genuine Need" must be demonstrated, including why a Category A firearm would not be suitable.

Category C: Semi-automatic rimfire rifles holding 10 or fewer rounds and pump-action or semi-automatic shotguns holding 5 or fewer rounds. Category C firearms are strongly restricted: only primary producers, occupational shooters, collectors and some clay target shooters can own functional Category C firearms.

Category D: Semi-automatic centrefire rifles, pump-action or semi-automatic shotguns holding more than 5 rounds. Functional Category D firearms are restricted to government agencies and a few occupational shooters. Collectors may own deactivated Category D firearms.

Category H: Handguns including air pistols and deactivated handguns. (Albeit both SA and WA do not require deactiv
ated handguns to be regarded as handguns after the deactivation process has taken place. This situation was the catalyst in QLD for the deactivation and diversion of thousands of handguns to the black-market the loophole shut since 2001) This class is available to target shooters. To be eligible for a Category H firearm, a target shooter must serve a probationary period of 12 months the first 6 months using club handguns,then in the remainder of the last 6 month probationary licence, an application may be made, permit to acquire. A minimum number of matches yearly to retain each category of handgun and be a financial member of an approved

Pistol Club. Source http://www.police.nsw.gov.au/services/firearms

These categories A,B,C,D and H were those determined by the NFA. The others listed here are determined by the states that have implement them at their own discretion.

So you do indeed want to ban guns and take them away from people? Kudos for being honest.

Mental illness. How about a certificate/document signed by a board certified Physician that in his opinion you are of sound mind and he can think of no reason why you should not be prevented from owning a firearm?

VinBucFan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 17629
Online
#147 : June 13, 2013, 04:30:28 PM


right after I give you this answer, you tell me how you plan to "control" mental illness.

Here's an example of RESTRICTIONS on guns that are short of a ban:

Firearms in Australia are grouped into Categories determined by the National Firearm Agreement with different levels of control. The categories are:

Category A: Rimfire rifles (not semi-automatic), shotguns (not pump-action or semi-automatic), air rifles, and paintball markers. A "Genuine Reason" must be provided for a Category A firearm.

Category B: Centrefire rifles (not semi-automatic), muzzleloading firearms made after 1 January 1901. Apart from a "Genuine Reason", a "Genuine Need" must be demonstrated, including why a Category A firearm would not be suitable.

Category C: Semi-automatic rimfire rifles holding 10 or fewer rounds and pump-action or semi-automatic shotguns holding 5 or fewer rounds. Category C firearms are strongly restricted: only primary producers, occupational shooters, collectors and some clay target shooters can own functional Category C firearms.

Category D: Semi-automatic centrefire rifles, pump-action or semi-automatic shotguns holding more than 5 rounds. Functional Category D firearms are restricted to government agencies and a few occupational shooters. Collectors may own deactivated Category D firearms.

Category H: Handguns including air pistols and deactivated handguns. (Albeit both SA and WA do not require deactiv
ated handguns to be regarded as handguns after the deactivation process has taken place. This situation was the catalyst in QLD for the deactivation and diversion of thousands of handguns to the black-market the loophole shut since 2001) This class is available to target shooters. To be eligible for a Category H firearm, a target shooter must serve a probationary period of 12 months the first 6 months using club handguns,then in the remainder of the last 6 month probationary licence, an application may be made, permit to acquire. A minimum number of matches yearly to retain each category of handgun and be a financial member of an approved

Pistol Club. Source http://www.police.nsw.gov.au/services/firearms

These categories A,B,C,D and H were those determined by the NFA. The others listed here are determined by the states that have implement them at their own discretion.

So you do indeed want to ban guns and take them away from people? Kudos for being honest.

Mental illness. How about a certificate/document signed by a board certified Physician that in his opinion you are of sound mind and he can think of no reason why you should not be prevented from owning a firearm?

lol, an example of restricted gun access = "ban guns"???? . . . . . . oh boy

you are willing to require someone to get that mental clearance?

spartan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 6892
Online
#148 : June 13, 2013, 04:41:29 PM


right after I give you this answer, you tell me how you plan to "control" mental illness.

Here's an example of RESTRICTIONS on guns that are short of a ban:

Firearms in Australia are grouped into Categories determined by the National Firearm Agreement with different levels of control. The categories are:

Category A: Rimfire rifles (not semi-automatic), shotguns (not pump-action or semi-automatic), air rifles, and paintball markers. A "Genuine Reason" must be provided for a Category A firearm.

Category B: Centrefire rifles (not semi-automatic), muzzleloading firearms made after 1 January 1901. Apart from a "Genuine Reason", a "Genuine Need" must be demonstrated, including why a Category A firearm would not be suitable.

Category C: Semi-automatic rimfire rifles holding 10 or fewer rounds and pump-action or semi-automatic shotguns holding 5 or fewer rounds. Category C firearms are strongly restricted: only primary producers, occupational shooters, collectors and some clay target shooters can own functional Category C firearms.

Category D: Semi-automatic centrefire rifles, pump-action or semi-automatic shotguns holding more than 5 rounds. Functional Category D firearms are restricted to government agencies and a few occupational shooters. Collectors may own deactivated Category D firearms.

Category H: Handguns including air pistols and deactivated handguns. (Albeit both SA and WA do not require deactiv
ated handguns to be regarded as handguns after the deactivation process has taken place. This situation was the catalyst in QLD for the deactivation and diversion of thousands of handguns to the black-market the loophole shut since 2001) This class is available to target shooters. To be eligible for a Category H firearm, a target shooter must serve a probationary period of 12 months the first 6 months using club handguns,then in the remainder of the last 6 month probationary licence, an application may be made, permit to acquire. A minimum number of matches yearly to retain each category of handgun and be a financial member of an approved

Pistol Club. Source http://www.police.nsw.gov.au/services/firearms

These categories A,B,C,D and H were those determined by the NFA. The others listed here are determined by the states that have implement them at their own discretion.

So you do indeed want to ban guns and take them away from people? Kudos for being honest.

Mental illness. How about a certificate/document signed by a board certified Physician that in his opinion you are of sound mind and he can think of no reason why you should not be prevented from owning a firearm?

lol, an example of restricted gun access = "ban guns"???? . . . . . . oh boy

you are willing to require someone to get that mental clearance?

Well, based on your conditions it's going to be pretty much impossible to get a gun. What about all those owned now where people cannot demonstrate a "need" or a "reason". What about all those weapons that hold more than 5 rounds? You would have to make it illegal for people to own them and force them to hand them in. Otherwise the system would be meaningless. You would also pretty much kill hunting in the US you realize that yes?

With regards to mental clearance, yes, you have to fill out a lot more paperwork than that to get a CCW so I don't see why not.

Bucfucious

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 3668
Online
#149 : June 13, 2013, 05:03:22 PM

The problem with "reasonable" restrictions lies in the question of who will be the arbiter of what is reasonable. Is it you? Because I've heard you make the claim that there are no restrictions on guns, when, in fact, they are heavily restricted. Reasonable just isn't in your reportoir. Rhetoric and poorly thought-out "solutions" are.

: June 13, 2013, 05:04:53 PM Von Mises
Page: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 ... 40
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: The Official Gun Control Thread. « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools