MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus:         Newsletters 
Friday, December 19, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 24.0° F  Fog/Mist
Collapse Photo Bar

The gun thread

If it's news, but not politics, then it goes here.

Re: The gun thread

Postby wack wack » Mon Jul 29, 2013 8:24 am

penquin wrote:
Start with reasonable firearms regulations.


That is pretty vague. Can you please be specific?

Also, when you phrase it as you did, you are inferring that those who disagree with you are unreasonable.


Can you define a position, based on reason and evidence, which supports a significant lack of firearms regulations? Can you defend the suggestion that those who believe in unfettered firearms access hold a reasonable position?

Claiming "Second Amendment" is not a reasoned or evidenced position.
wack wack
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3192
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:32 pm

Re: The gun thread

Postby BSH » Wed Jul 31, 2013 8:02 am

wack wack wrote:Can you define a position, based on reason and evidence, which supports a significant lack of firearms regulations? Can you defend the suggestion that those who believe in unfettered firearms access hold a reasonable position?

Claiming "Second Amendment" is not a reasoned or evidenced position.


There you go again, putting the cart before the horse. If you want to pass a restriction on a constitutional right, you must show good evidence that doing so serves a compelling government interest, be narrowly tailored to do just that and does so in the least restrictive means possible. None of the recently proposed gun law revisions has been accompanied by any EVIDENCE that such proposals would have a real effect on crime and public safety. Unsupported assertions are not evidence.
BSH
Senior Member
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:32 pm

Re: The gun thread

Postby BSH » Wed Jul 31, 2013 8:09 am

An example of why gun control arguments so often fall completely flat: CNN column.

This column says that Starbucks should implement a gun ban on their property, for the sake of public safety. Yet, it also cites as examples incidents where massacres happened in places subject to gun bans, illustrating that any such "gun free zone" accomplishes no public safety objective at all. They conclude by saying openly that their reasons for pushing this goal are not rational, but emotional.

Far from building support for the idea that Starbucks should join the gun policy fracas, the authors only illustrate that they are full of noise, not sound reason.
BSH
Senior Member
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:32 pm

Re: The gun thread

Postby wack wack » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:08 am

BSH wrote:There you go again, putting the cart before the horse. If you want to pass a restriction on a constitutional right, you must show good evidence that doing so serves a compelling government interest, be narrowly tailored to do just that and does so in the least restrictive means possible. None of the recently proposed gun law revisions has been accompanied by any EVIDENCE that such proposals would have a real effect on crime and public safety. Unsupported assertions are not evidence.


The issue regards referring to gun nuts as "unreasonable." When one makes such a claim, the suggestion is that the gun nut is acting without reason. In such a case it is not necessary for me to provide evidence.

Regarding your comments directly: the main thrust of your statement is incorrect; no evidence is required to change the Constitution, only the desire of the people. And any changes to a Constitutional right should be done in the interest of the people, not the government. Especially a government undergoing a slow motion coup like ours is enduring.

And if you really don't see any reasoned, evidenced cause in our society to reconsider the Second Amendment, you are one of the unreasonable gun nuts.
wack wack
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3192
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:32 pm

Re: The gun thread

Postby wack wack » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:10 am

BSH wrote:They conclude by saying openly that their reasons for pushing this goal are not rational, but emotional.


At least they're honest about it, unlike the unreasonable gun nuts, who also appeal exclusively to emotion rather than rationality.
wack wack
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3192
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:32 pm

Re: The gun thread

Postby david cohen » Wed Jul 31, 2013 11:37 am

Well, suicides by handgun are down since the Army has been downsized according to the American Psychiatric Association!
david cohen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1422
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 12:48 pm

Re: The gun thread

Postby snoqueen » Wed Jul 31, 2013 3:17 pm

Here's my reasoned reason I'd be more likely to go in a Starbucks (where I never go, but whatever) with a no-guns sign on the door:

If shooting was to take place, I believe I would be safer if there was only one gun being shot than if there were four or five or a dozen.

Example: the theater massacre in Colorado. If a whole bunch of people in that theater had guns lord only knows how many more fatalities would have resulted. Nobody could tell who they were supposed to be shooting at and they'd have ended up shooting every which way back and forth across the room.

Overall principle: the fewer shooters we have in public places, the fewer people are likely to get shot. The fewer guns, the fewer shooters. This goes for street corners as well as enclosed areas.

In a crisis, I would prefer coordinated actions by professionals than random behavior by anybody who felt like getting into it (in the same way I would prefer no neighborhood watch to the Florida-gated-community version).

You might not agree, but I'm being perfectly serious and perfectly reasonable and using the rational thinkig over the emotional emotional although both have their places. You asked for reasons, and there they are.
snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 11824
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

Re: The gun thread

Postby jonnygothispen » Thu Aug 01, 2013 8:21 pm

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... fact-check
Myth #2: Guns don't kill people—people kill people.
Fact-check: People with more guns tend to kill more people—with guns. The states with the highest gun ownership rates have a gun murder rate 114% higher than those with the lowest gun ownership rates. Also, gun death rates tend to be higher in states with higher rates of gun ownership. Gun death rates are generally lower in states with restrictions such as assault-weapons bans or safe-storage requirements.


Myth #3: An armed society is a polite society.
Fact-check: Drivers who carry guns are 44% more likely than unarmed drivers to make obscene gestures at other motorists, and 77% more likely to follow them aggressively.
• Among Texans convicted of serious crimes, those with concealed-handgun licenses were sentenced for threatening someone with a firearm 4.8 times more than those without.
• In states with Stand Your Ground and other laws making it easier to shoot in self-defense, those policies have been linked to a 7 to 10% increase in homicides.


Myth #6: Carrying a gun for self-defense makes you safer.
Fact-check: In 2011, nearly 10 times more people were shot and killed in arguments than by civilians trying to stop a crime.
• In one survey, nearly 1% of Americans reported using guns to defend themselves or their property. However, a closer look at their claims found that more than 50% involved using guns in an aggressive manner, such as escalating an argument.
• A Philadelphia study found that the odds of an assault victim being shot were 4.5 times greater if he carried a gun. His odds of being killed were 4.2 times greater.


Myth #10: We don't need more gun laws—we just need to enforce the ones we have.
Fact-check: Weak laws and loopholes backed by the gun lobby make it easier to get guns illegally.
• Around 40% of all legal gun sales involve private sellers and don't require background checks. 40% of prison inmates who used guns in their crimes got them this way.
• An investigation found 62% of online gun sellers were willing to sell to buyers who said they couldn't pass a background check.
• 20% of licensed California gun dealers agreed to sell handguns to researchers posing as illegal "straw" buyers.
• The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives has not had a permanent director for 6 years, due to an NRA-backed requirement that the Senate approve nominees.
Yep! No evidence at all in support of gun restrictions. None. Case closed. Next...
jonnygothispen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3218
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

Re: The gun thread

Postby BSH » Sun Aug 04, 2013 1:50 pm

wack wack wrote:Regarding your comments directly: the main thrust of your statement is incorrect; no evidence is required to change the Constitution, only the desire of the people. And any changes to a Constitutional right should be done in the interest of the people, not the government.


I quite agree. And the solution is found in Article V. That's how to change the constitution, and the People can enact such a change at any time.
BSH
Senior Member
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:32 pm

Re: The gun thread

Postby BSH » Sun Aug 04, 2013 3:41 pm

jonnygothispen wrote: [snipped a whole bunch of cherry-picked (and made up?) statistics]
Yep! No evidence at all in support of gun restrictions. None. Case closed. Next...


Gun bans do not correlate with reductions in homicide rates. Magazine bans do not correlate with reductions in homicide rates. The state of Utah has liberal (i.e. permissive) gun laws, but a homicide rate nearly equal to UKs, where recorded gun crime doubled AFTER they banned most guns. Gun laws are not the determinative factor in violent crime, and the wildly inconsistent correlation makes it tough to say that gun laws are even a contributory factor. For every statistic you cherry pick showing one thing, somebody else can cherry pick something else showing the opposite, because real world experience is all over the board.
BSH
Senior Member
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:32 pm

Re: The gun thread

Postby Henry Vilas » Sun Aug 04, 2013 3:43 pm

BSH wrote:
jonnygothispen wrote: [snipped a whole bunch of cherry-picked (and made up?) statistics]
Yep! No evidence at all in support of gun restrictions. None. Case closed. Next...


Gun bans do not correlate with reductions in homicide rates. Magazine bans do not correlate with reductions in homicide rates.

Links, please.
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 20269
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: The gun thread

Postby jonnygothispen » Tue Aug 13, 2013 8:48 pm

It's a small price to pay for your security...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/1 ... 68652.html

"Woman In Starbucks Drops Purse With Forgotten Gun Inside, Shoots Friend In The Leg"
jonnygothispen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3218
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

Re: The gun thread

Postby wack wack » Fri Aug 16, 2013 1:18 pm

I have a genuine question (no snark or baiting) for Dman or whoever else might know:

I do not have a carry permit. Can I legally carry a concealed weapon in the common areas of my apartment building? There are no "NO FIREARMS" signs. I guess the real question is: are the common areas part of my abode, or am I in public when I go to the lobby to get my mail?
wack wack
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3192
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:32 pm

Re: The gun thread

Postby admin » Fri Aug 16, 2013 4:37 pm

And with 122 pages and over 1800 posts in this one thread, it seems time to kill it off.
Feel free to start 'The Gun Thread II', 'Son of Gun Thread', 'Godzilla vs Gun Thread' or 'Gun Thread Does Dallas'.
But this one needs to be done.
admin
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 313
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm

Previous

Return to Headlines

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR
Created with flickr badge.

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar