[HoosierDaddy]

Fine, lock up all the weapons. I'm good with that too.

Easy access is the key. I don't care how batshit insane you go overnight (which can never be stopped by looking for warning signs of mental health problems), if you don't have access you can't do this.

And if you want to talk about tools, lets talk about the USE of tools. Cars: Useful for things other than killing. Knives: Useful for things other than killing. Guns: Not useful for things other than killing or practicing killing.

[nacht]

HoosierDaddy, on 15 December 2012 - 02:37 AM, said:

Fine, lock up all the weapons. I'm good with that too.

Easy access is the key. I don't care how batshit insane you go overnight (which can never be stopped by looking for warning signs of mental health problems), if you don't have access you can't do this.

And if you want to talk about tools, lets talk about the USE of tools. Cars: Useful for things other than killing. Knives: Useful for things other than killing. Guns: Not useful for things other than killing or practicing killing.

Guns: Useful for defending life and property

[HoosierDaddy]

nacht, on 15 December 2012 - 02:39 AM, said:

HoosierDaddy, on 15 December 2012 - 02:37 AM, said:

Fine, lock up all the weapons. I'm good with that too.

Easy access is the key. I don't care how batshit insane you go overnight (which can never be stopped by looking for warning signs of mental health problems), if you don't have access you can't do this.

And if you want to talk about tools, lets talk about the USE of tools. Cars: Useful for things other than killing. Knives: Useful for things other than killing. Guns: Not useful for things other than killing or practicing killing.

Guns: Useful for defending life and property

Killing things or threatening to kill things to defend life and property. And no property is worth defending to the death of anyone. Lives I'll give you.

[Gnaw]

HoosierDaddy, on 15 December 2012 - 02:40 AM, said:

. And no property is worth defending to the death of anyone.

Really?

[HoosierDaddy]

What property is worth the death of any person?

It's just property. Houses can be rebuilt. Gold insured. Chattel bought.

People die and can't be brought back.

[Shinrei]

Just a few points I would like to make, in no particular order:

I'm with Gnaw, there are prefectly reasonable gun-control things that we can do, since I think getting rid of guns is a non-starter.

I agree with HD that you cannot entirely stop people with mental health issues from harming others, but there certainly could and should be better care and help for mentally diseased or disabled people in this country. There system of mental healthcare in the US could be much better, and more money could/should be spent in this area. It will not prevent these things outright, but more can be done.

I have not been able to find statistics or a study on this, but I've always wondered if you find more attacks on young school children in countries where guns are banned because it's really hard to do damage on adults with a knife - meaning wackos choose schools because they are more defenseless. Other than today, most of the horrific shootings in the US have been young adults (Virginia Tech) mixed (Batman Premier) and high school (Columbine). I'm not saying this is actually true or not, but it seems to me that whenever I read about an attack in Japan/China etc. it's against small children. (except for the akihabara killing, where the guy used his car first and then a knife).

One thing I've always wondered about knives actually - outside of certain specialty knives how come the default is to make them pointy? Who uses the point for anything? I actually think it would be a smart thing for knife manufacturers to go to a square end since it makes them less dangerous not only from a deranged killer aspect but also preventing kitchen accidents like stabbing yourself when someone has carelessly left knives in soapy water (This actually happened to me during cleanup after a cooking class...)

[Shinrei]

HoosierDaddy, on 15 December 2012 - 02:48 AM, said:

What property is worth the death of any person?

It's just property. Houses can be rebuilt. Gold insured. Chattel bought.

People die and can't be brought back.

So I should just cower in a corner while people make off with my valuables?

Should police keep their weapons holstered when confronting criminal action?

This post has been edited by Shinrei: 15 December 2012 - 03:01 AM

[nacht]

HoosierDaddy, on 15 December 2012 - 02:40 AM, said:

nacht, on 15 December 2012 - 02:39 AM, said:

HoosierDaddy, on 15 December 2012 - 02:37 AM, said:

Fine, lock up all the weapons. I'm good with that too.

Easy access is the key. I don't care how batshit insane you go overnight (which can never be stopped by looking for warning signs of mental health problems), if you don't have access you can't do this.

And if you want to talk about tools, lets talk about the USE of tools. Cars: Useful for things other than killing. Knives: Useful for things other than killing. Guns: Not useful for things other than killing or practicing killing.

Guns: Useful for defending life and property

Killing things or threatening to kill things to defend life and property. And no property is worth defending to the death of anyone. Lives I'll give you.

Slavery is worse than death.

If you can guarantee that after after banning guns, no single one will have a gun, then perhaps it is agreeable.
Sadly 20 children have died but each parent is grieving for their own child. Perhaps tor that parent, 1 or 10000: it does not matter. Perhaps, whether the child died in an earthquake or in the hands of a crazy man, it does not matter. I don't know

In a perfect world, there would be no violence of any form. How do we get that in a world of limited resources?
If everybody abjured violence no matter what, then that one mutant will rule over all through the threat of violence.

[HoosierDaddy]

Shinrei, on 15 December 2012 - 02:59 AM, said:

HoosierDaddy, on 15 December 2012 - 02:48 AM, said:

What property is worth the death of any person?

It's just property. Houses can be rebuilt. Gold insured. Chattel bought.

People die and can't be brought back.

So I should just cower in a corner while people make off with my valuables?

Should police keep their weapons holstered when confronting criminal action?

You want to risk your life for your property that is your choice. That is a value judgment.

Police should keep their weapons holstered unless they are ready to defend either their life or another, and I think that is generally their protocol. (The first is fairly subjective and massively broad due to their job.)

[Shinrei]

Well, it's a judgement call I would think.

If someone is mugging me, they can have my wallet if it appears they are not planning on harming me unless they have to.

But if someone breaks into my home while my family and I are in it, all bets are off since that's a level of criminal intent that brings uncertainty as to what they plan to do. Maybe they're just trying to grab something and run, but I'm not going to take any chances that they are not planning on harming us.

[HoosierDaddy]

Shinrei, on 15 December 2012 - 03:17 AM, said:

Well, it's a judgement call I would think.

If someone is mugging me, they can have my wallet if it appears they are not planning on harming me unless they have to.

But if someone breaks into my home while my family and I are in it, all bets are off since that's a level of criminal intent that brings uncertainty as to what they plan to do. Maybe they're just trying to grab something and run, but I'm not going to take any chances that they are not planning on harming us.

When your home is broken into, is subjective, but you are much more defending lives at that point, which is why the Castle Doctrine was originally founded. Homes were/are regarded differently. That said, guns in homes with children have their own terrible history.

[worry]

That China thing is basically the sub-Drudge every-old-person-on-Facebook meme post of the day. Glad to see you all dismiss it out of hand, as was 100% proper.

Kinda skimmed thread so far, but as far as I can tell, there isn't that huge a difference between what Shin and HD are arguing. Self defense is legitimate, self-appointment of judge/jury/executioner status is illegitimate, situations inside one's home are generally a unique matter in terms of presumptions of violence (but rule of law still applies). But in terms of protecting property I do agree with HD's position -- the "all bets are off" might be a starting position before you know anything, but you don't get to go in guns blazing regardless of how scared you are. And outside the home, keep in mind that just this week a woman was shot to death while entering her car, by a Walmart security guard who suspected she shoplifted and was escaping. A couple weeks back a kid was shot to death in a parking lot because he was playing his music too loudly. I bring these up because there are people who feel they've been wronged, that the victim is a criminal, or even merely that their space has been invaded, who believe lethal force is an appropriate response. And these are people who qualify for gun ownership by existing.

And another thing, if I'm reading it right, that HD, Gnaw, and others are arguing is that even though it's a complicated problem with potentially no perfect answers...we can't even get to the complicated stuff because one of the strongest, most bone-head dumb lobbying groups in the nations opposes with all its force of will even the good simple answers we could be applying.

[amphibian]

So with 300 million guns already out there, why not bump up the time/monetary cost of purchasing a new weapon to a point where only the very dedicated can get it?

I'm talking about getting a mandatory trigger lock - or showing proof that one exists for each weapon you have in the house - and a mandatory firearms safety course that has to be repeated every so often for a gun license to be had. It should be harder to have a gun than to drive a car.

That is a more workable solution to me than to try and remove all guns from the United States. It's not ideal, but it's more workable.

[HoosierDaddy]

Offer an incentive to purchase guns well above street-value. Find a way to use them.

Classes, costs, and limited availability of single shot hunting rifles for hunters. Want to be tough? Use bows.

Massive penalties for being caught with hand-guns, semi-auto rifles. Penalize it so much it isn't worth it for anything other than those crimes people would commit no matter what.

[worry]

Hey, I'm finally to the right of somebody.

[Shinrei]

Require proof of lockable gun case with any purchase of a firearm. If one isn't owned, then no gun is sold unless you buy one of those, too.

My family is not a gun family, just an uncle and brother-in-law who are hunters. They have kids, and they keep their guns in locked cases.

I always wonder why this is such a hard concept. Perhaps crazy shootings aren't 100% preventable, but the whole kids playing with guns accidents should be nearly 100% preventable.

This post has been edited by Shinrei: 15 December 2012 - 07:27 AM

[Primateus]

How about something a bit more simple to start out with at least. You drive a car you MUST have your license and registration with you. You want to own a gun you MUST have a license and registration, you want to carry your gun with you, then you must have said license and registration on your person. If you don't have that, your weapon is illegal and will be confiscated. If you DO have it, but forgot it at home, your weapon will confiscated and returned to you until such a time as you have paid a sizable fine.

And talking about registration. Do you guys have to registrate your firearms with the authorities? If not, how about making that mandatory?

Oh, and I don't really care what argument people want to whip out, private citizens do NOT need assault rifles, of ANY kind! Heck, they don't even need high-powered sniper rifles.

"But Primateus, I need my high-powered sniper rifle so I can hunt deer!" Then get a fucking hunting rifle! Or be a real man (apologies ladies) and hunt with a bow/crossbow/spear.

I agree with Sombra, the majority of gunowners don't need firearms, they just want them. And that's fine with me, by all means. Heck, I wouldn't mind owning a couple of handguns and go to the shooting range once in a while to have some fun, but I don't need it.

Oh, and sure, you can kill people, lots of people with a knife if you're determined enough, but guns makes it easier. In fact, it makes it too easy.

Oh, and finally, just for the record. If you're one of those "I need guns to protect myself from the big bad government" then you're a paranoid fuckwit who should be banned from owning guns. And don't give me that "keep telling yourself that the government isn't coming for you" bullshit. It's ridiculous, I'll bet your good money that the very same people who claim the government will become oppressive and dictatorial are the very same people who will make a government that is those things.

OH OH OH OH OH, I KNOW! How about when you want to sell your snubnosed revolver, or whatever, to your buddy you have to fill out a bill of sale. Forms for that could available at your nearest convenient (and certified) gun store, or at the police station. After the sale you then submit that form, or bill of sale if you will, to the proper authorities.

Oh, and how about some serious bullet control? Yes, gun-control probably includes that. But how about when you buy bullets, at your nearest convenient and certified gun store, you show your license and registration and the sale gets registered with the proper authorities. And just to make it really annoying, how about a requirement that you keep a record of how many bullets you use and when and where? And how about requiring people to pick of the bullet casing for rycycling after a fun day at the range? (I hope people already do that, because it would just be silly not to do it)

The good part about all this is that should the big bad government really try and oppress you, none of these measures prevents you from blowing their heads off.

This post has been edited by Primateus: 15 December 2012 - 09:55 AM

[Use Of Weapons]

[Shinrei]

That video is interesting, because the psychologist they had on CNN today was saying the opposite - his findings were desire for TV glory was not a prime motivator or instigator.

This post has been edited by Shinrei: 15 December 2012 - 12:51 PM

[Khellendros]

HoosierDaddy, on 15 December 2012 - 03:04 AM, said:

Shinrei, on 15 December 2012 - 02:59 AM, said:

HoosierDaddy, on 15 December 2012 - 02:48 AM, said:

What property is worth the death of any person?

It's just property. Houses can be rebuilt. Gold insured. Chattel bought.

People die and can't be brought back.

So I should just cower in a corner while people make off with my valuables?

Should police keep their weapons holstered when confronting criminal action?

You want to risk your life for your property that is your choice. That is a value judgment.

Police should keep their weapons holstered unless they are ready to defend either their life or another, and I think that is generally their protocol. (The first is fairly subjective and massively broad due to their job.)

Just going to chip in by pointing out that in the UK, unless they belong to special divisions, even the police don't carry guns. We have extremely tight gun laws here and, I'm sure at least partly as a result, one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in the world. Of course it still happens, but far rarer than in other regions. I believe 0.22 homicides per 100,000 people, compared to 3 per 100,000 in the US. Police officer fatalities are also extremely rare despite them not carrying guns.

We supposedly have a problem with knife crime on the other hand.