[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

The Obituary Page - Red_Dragon - Jan 30, 2023 - 6:58pm
 
• • • • Name My Possum • • • - haresfur - Jan 30, 2023 - 6:51pm
 
Upcoming concerts or shows you can't wait to see - Coaxial - Jan 30, 2023 - 6:09pm
 
Wordle - daily game - geoff_morphini - Jan 30, 2023 - 5:49pm
 
Ukraine - R_P - Jan 30, 2023 - 5:35pm
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - Manbird - Jan 30, 2023 - 3:35pm
 
TV shows you watch - Manbird - Jan 30, 2023 - 3:32pm
 
Things You Thought Today - Steely_D - Jan 30, 2023 - 2:55pm
 
Guns - Red_Dragon - Jan 30, 2023 - 2:11pm
 
Beer - DaveInSaoMiguel - Jan 30, 2023 - 1:57pm
 
Are you ready for some football? - cc_rider - Jan 30, 2023 - 8:02am
 
Out the window - DaveInSaoMiguel - Jan 30, 2023 - 7:56am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - cc_rider - Jan 30, 2023 - 7:55am
 
Things I Saw Today... - Red_Dragon - Jan 30, 2023 - 6:52am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Jan 30, 2023 - 5:45am
 
Florida - miamizsun - Jan 30, 2023 - 4:18am
 
USA! USA! USA! - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jan 29, 2023 - 9:07pm
 
NASA & other news from space - kurtster - Jan 29, 2023 - 8:05pm
 
SCOTUS - Red_Dragon - Jan 29, 2023 - 2:43pm
 
New Music - haresfur - Jan 29, 2023 - 12:34pm
 
Pretty Darn Good Bass Lines - among the best.... - miamizsun - Jan 29, 2023 - 8:28am
 
Outstanding Covers - Coaxial - Jan 29, 2023 - 7:56am
 
Bad Poetry - miamizsun - Jan 29, 2023 - 7:41am
 
Audials - roger.holroyd1217 - Jan 29, 2023 - 3:31am
 
The strange tale of KFAT - oldviolin - Jan 28, 2023 - 8:57pm
 
Sunrise, Sunset - islander - Jan 28, 2023 - 6:25pm
 
What Did You Do Today? - Bill_J - Jan 28, 2023 - 6:24pm
 
Strange signs, marquees, billboards, etc. - Isabeau - Jan 28, 2023 - 1:34pm
 
Economix - R_P - Jan 28, 2023 - 12:07pm
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - geoff_morphini - Jan 28, 2023 - 7:43am
 
Music Requests - Ralf - Jan 28, 2023 - 7:39am
 
last.fm-scrobbling - hans-juergen - Jan 28, 2023 - 12:25am
 
Immigration - westslope - Jan 27, 2023 - 4:13pm
 
Mixtape Culture Club - Steely_D - Jan 27, 2023 - 3:39pm
 
Linking to "What's Playing" - fraenki - Jan 27, 2023 - 2:18pm
 
What Makes You Cry :) ? - black321 - Jan 27, 2023 - 12:42pm
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - GeneP59 - Jan 27, 2023 - 10:19am
 
The Monks of Zagorsk - cathyetsylvain - Jan 27, 2023 - 9:16am
 
Having a Bad Day??? - GeneP59 - Jan 26, 2023 - 8:27pm
 
Living in America - Red_Dragon - Jan 26, 2023 - 8:16pm
 
Things for which you would sell ManBird's soul - GeneP59 - Jan 26, 2023 - 7:53pm
 
Trump - haresfur - Jan 26, 2023 - 3:59pm
 
OUR CATS!! - Isabeau - Jan 26, 2023 - 3:02pm
 
Oil, Gas Prices & Other Crapola - black321 - Jan 26, 2023 - 12:44pm
 
RightWingNutZ - R_P - Jan 26, 2023 - 12:20pm
 
Anti-War - R_P - Jan 26, 2023 - 10:07am
 
21st century technology - black321 - Jan 26, 2023 - 9:44am
 
The end of the world - miamizsun - Jan 26, 2023 - 6:38am
 
Joe Biden - kcar - Jan 25, 2023 - 9:21pm
 
Love is... - Isabeau - Jan 25, 2023 - 6:03pm
 
Least Successful Phishing Scams - Proclivities - Jan 25, 2023 - 6:35am
 
Poetry Forum - ScottN - Jan 25, 2023 - 5:12am
 
a thank you for the team - guy-wernher - Jan 25, 2023 - 3:05am
 
COVID-19 - thisbody - Jan 24, 2023 - 3:41pm
 
Todd Rundgren - Steely_D - Jan 24, 2023 - 11:08am
 
Republican Party - ScottFromWyoming - Jan 24, 2023 - 8:35am
 
Nuclear power - saviour or scourge? - miamizsun - Jan 24, 2023 - 6:44am
 
Surfing! - thisbody - Jan 24, 2023 - 2:15am
 
::odd but intriguing:: - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jan 23, 2023 - 9:00pm
 
Manbird's Episiotomy Stitch Licking Clinic - KEEP OUT - miamizsun - Jan 23, 2023 - 3:09pm
 
Way Cool Video - miamizsun - Jan 23, 2023 - 2:00pm
 
Russia - cc_rider - Jan 23, 2023 - 8:14am
 
NOT Main Mix - ScopPics - Jan 23, 2023 - 4:25am
 
Memorials - Remembering Our Loved Ones - GeneP59 - Jan 22, 2023 - 9:14am
 
News of the Weird - Bill_J - Jan 20, 2023 - 7:51pm
 
Breaking News - ScottFromWyoming - Jan 20, 2023 - 2:57pm
 
Philosophy (Meaty Metaphysical Munchables!) - R_P - Jan 20, 2023 - 1:48pm
 
The Bucket List - miamizsun - Jan 20, 2023 - 10:38am
 
Derplahoma! - Red_Dragon - Jan 20, 2023 - 10:02am
 
Things that make you go Hmmmm..... - haresfur - Jan 19, 2023 - 8:14pm
 
What music have you paid real money for recently? - kurtster - Jan 19, 2023 - 7:30pm
 
Twitter's finest moment - westslope - Jan 19, 2023 - 7:03pm
 
Tidal / Spotify - bigbargain - Jan 19, 2023 - 2:33pm
 
Is there any GOOD news out there? - black321 - Jan 19, 2023 - 2:06pm
 
Tesla (motors, batteries, etc) - Steely_D - Jan 19, 2023 - 11:17am
 
Index » Regional/Local » USA/Canada » Guns Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 482, 483, 484  Next
Post to this Topic
westslope

westslope Avatar

Location: BC sage brush steppe


Posted: Jan 26, 2023 - 9:32pm

 Lazy8 wrote:

No, you only hear about them within our borders. Only something really spectacular (like the Bataclan shooting that killed 130 in Paris, or the Charlie Hebdo shooting that killed 12, or Anders Breivik's rampage in Norway that killed 77) or with strong political overtones makes the news here if it happens overseas.

I bet you didn't hear about the shootings of Kurdish activists in Paris last year. Or the Copenhagen mall shooting. Or Oslo. Or several in Canada. Or the many in Russia.

You don't hear about them because our media is pretty parochial, but also because it doesn't fit the narrative.

No one has found an answer to stopping a determined spree killer. If you're willing (or eager) to die for your grievance a thick book of laws isn't going to stop you. Hell, the former Prime Minister of Japan was murdered with a homemade hand-cannon last year. Every aspect of that act was illegal.

The last two mass casualty shootings were in California, a place where most of the gun control wish-list is law, but similar things happen in Chicago or D.C. every weekend. Gang bangers shoot up those streets with impunity. They're already murdering people, and murdering people has always been against the law.

True.   

The most recent gun control legislation passed by the Canadian federal government will inconvenience serious gun owners and hunters, and accomplish nothing else other than gratuitously polarizing Canadians.  Prime minister Justin Trudeau leans far too heavily on vacuous virtue signalling for my liking.

There might be a few measures that could be contemplated in the USA and other countries.

1.  Start a debate on political violence and politically punish political leaders that support political violence. Socially trash celebrity narcissists like Elon Musk who support political violence.

2.  Educate people about security and the limitations of firearms.   Propose alternatives to firearms such as excellent physical conditioning, knives, mace, pens, pencils, knuckles, heels of the hand, knees, etc.  

During half a decade of hitchhiking and backpacking through South American and Africa, the only people who asked and then expressed shock that I was unarmed were Americans.  These well intentioned individuals had no understanding of how dangerous it would be to pack a firearm while travelling, let alone the challenges of illegally crossing borders with the weapon.   The whole notion of strategic interactions never occured.   

The problems:

- the usefulness of firearms can be severely limited in close quarter conflict. 
- uneducated and poorly trained security forces in low-resource countries can be nervous and trigger happy 
- popular American cultural imports exhort people to shoot first and ask questions later.    
- a hidden firearm takes time and effort to access.

3.   Teach people how to read a street.    Teach people how to avoid gratuitously antagonizing someone carrying a firearm or other deadly weapon.  

4.   Invade and occupy the problem areas in Chicago and Washington DC.  Completely sweep all homes and buildings for weapons.  Establish the equivalent of Martial Law for a period.   Ignore non-violent narcotics offenses while providing increased levels of public health services.    Ramp up capital available for local entrepreneurs.

Turn the neighbourhoods into weapons-free zones.  Use a massive police and military presence in order to accomplish that.    Make sure key Black American leaders and communities are on side before proceeding.  Evacuate the area of unarmed civilians before sending armed units in.    Clean house.   Setup community-based security organizations that share the function with municipal police forces going forward.  

Set up a perimeter and keep the weapons out, at least until the court issues an injunction.  


My suggestions are silly and they have no hope of being realized.        Next?  
Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 26, 2023 - 6:12pm

 islander wrote:
So again, what is your proposal? 

Haresfur made a couple. Mine generally involve supporting less structural violence - our military. We spend orders of magnitude more on our military than other countries, and then we're somehow surprised that we have a violent society.  It's basically a jobs program anyway, so lets make better jobs. Let's build stuff that doesn't blow up and destroy. Take some of that military industrial complex money and redirect it to housing, infrastructure, science, art...

Sure all these things are hard. But what happened to our willingness to accept challenges. 40+ shootings in 23 days, is just nuts and we shouldn't tolerate it.

If you want a Big Idea, a magic (ahem) silver bullet that will make American society peaceful...you're going to continue to be disappointed, and not just by me. There is no top-down fix here. While changes in policy would be part of it cultural change is mostly driven by forces outside the control of government.

Look how we got gay marriage. In 2008 California voters approved Pop. 8, amending the CA constitution to forbid state recognition of any marriage other than between one man and one woman. And won by a solid majority. By the time it was overturned in court it was (culturally anyway) a moot point—the issue was settled in the public mind.

That didn't happen because a law was passed or a TV show with gay characters aired or because a famous person or your neighbor or coworker or your doctor came out of the closet or because a university offered a a Queer Studies major. It came about because all those things happened. It was a campaign—not always conscious, not always intentional, and not centrally directed—with many, many fronts, many setback, many successes, many individual minds changed one at a time, often without the owners realizing they were changing.

Changing a culture of violence will be harder, and it will be harder to know when we've succeeded. There won't be a single milestone that tells us we have.

But you wanted a proposal. I'll give you a half-dozen, and the list won't be anything like complete. It also won't necessarily address violence directly, but address the root causes of what persuades people to accept violence as a first-resort solution to problems.

Convince the entertainment industry to accompany depictions of violence with depictions of the consequences. On-screen deaths shouldn't be neat and tidy, they should be horrifying. Bodies shouldn't vanish from the frame, they should stick around to remind the viewer that a character has been converted to a corpse. A wounded character shouldn't be fine in the next scene, s/he should be realistically debilitated. Violence should hurt.

Our legal system criminalizes far too many things and punishes them far too harshly. A lot of this is the result of previous attempts at solving social problems via the criminal code. That needs reform from top to bottom.

We have communities that are afraid to approach the authorities to report crimes against them due to their immigration status. This creates an opportunity for gangs to fill the role of protector, and breeds violence between competing gangs. Immigration reform would allow these communities to return that role to the police and eliminate that opportunity.

We have far too many places kept poor by policies created to fight poverty. Poverty alone doesn't cause violence but despair does, driven by generations of constrained prospects. Obstacles that more-established populations can navigate (like zoning, licensing, and the usual absurd array of rules and restrictions) can be impenetrable when you don't have resources or connections to power and credit.

Take bullying seriously as a behavioral problem in schools.

Hire mental health first responders to handle wellness checks, people in crisis, and non-violent conflict resolution.  Our approach has been to send the cops, but their limited toolset leads too often to a violent escalation. Not every 911 call needs to end with someone in handcuffs or dead.

No, this isn't (for the most part) a law you can pass, a set of political enemies to punish, a list of arbitrary objects to send people to prison for owning. You won't get a photo op at a signing ceremony where you get to declare victory. There will still be evil people doing evil things with objects you fear and loath, but that's going to be true no matter what we do.

But it also won't turn honest people into criminals, won't leave people helpless to defend themselves when the evil people do the evil things. And I think it leads to a better world.

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Jan 26, 2023 - 5:43pm

 Steely_D wrote:

Haven't read about this, but this my first take. 
Violence is people (like Soylent Green) - but destruction of property is vandalism. 
There are people who can't handle nuance, like - the entire Internet - but I see what they're doing, I think.


Around here it's perfectly justifiable to kill someone over property.
Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: Biscayne Bay
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 26, 2023 - 5:06pm

 kurtster wrote:

FWIW ... there is an attempt underway to redefine violence to exclude willful property damage as an act of violence.  This coming from the Stacey Abrams camp.

From the Oxford 

vi·o·lence
/ˈvī(ə)ləns/

noun
behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.


Haven't read about this, but this my first take. 
Violence is an attack on people - but destruction of property is vandalism. Nitpicking, that makes perfect sense. 
There are people who can't handle nuance, like - the entire Internet - but I see what they're doing, I think.



westslope

westslope Avatar

Location: BC sage brush steppe


Posted: Jan 26, 2023 - 3:54pm

 R_P wrote:

All it takes is one nasty mass shooting and small countries such as Norway will see the per capita mass shooting murder rate shoot up.

All it takes is one murder with a shovel in a village of 1,600 to send the per capita murder rate soaring.

Might be better to average over several decades.

Isabeau

Isabeau Avatar

Location: sou' tex
Gender: Female


Posted: Jan 26, 2023 - 3:18pm

 kurtster wrote:
you can continue with the tar and feathering...


But who would be our foil to hone our debate skills upon? Every good story needs an antagonist, a shadow, a mirror.  Friction and sand make the pearl, yada yada.
I've been lurking on the convos and you guys can really get into the weeds sometimes. Still, its provocative, entertaining and educational.  I found myself wanting to shake things up a bit.

So glad we are all trying to get away from combat attitude — something about music does that.  ;)
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 26, 2023 - 2:06pm

FWIW ... there is an attempt underway to redefine violence to exclude willful property damage as an act of violence.  This coming from the Stacey Abrams camp.

Marisa Pyle, a senior rapid response manager at Abrams' Fair Fight Action, who also worked as a senior manager for Abrams' One Georgia leadership committee during her most recent failed Georgia gubernatorial run, rushed to defend the anti-police protesters and the ensuing chaos.

"You cannot commit violence against a window or a car. Killing a human? Now that, that is violence," Pyle wrote on Twitter this past weekend. "Shame on Atlanta's leaders who fall into the same tired path of protecting property while our people are murdered by their police."



Those who control the language ... can change the culture, at the very least.
.
From the Oxford 

vi·o·lence
/ˈvī(ə)ləns/

noun
behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.

R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Jan 26, 2023 - 9:28am

Gun Violence: Is It a People Problem? (2018)  ♻ ♻ ♻
rgio

rgio Avatar

Location: West Jersey
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 26, 2023 - 5:27am

 Lazy8 wrote:

I bet you didn't hear about the shootings of Kurdish activists in Paris last year. Or the Copenhagen mall shooting. Or Oslo. Or several in Canada. Or the many in Russia.

You don't hear about them because our media is pretty parochial, but also because it doesn't fit the narrative.


Sorry to play process cop here... but the generally accepted definition of  "Mass Murder" in the US is 4 (including the shooter if they died).  Paris (3), Copenhagen (3), and Oslo (2) wouldn't make the news here either.  

There were 30 shot, 7 fatally, over the weekend in Chicago.  It's not about the narrative...it's about bandwidth.  Why talk about Chicago (or Europe) when you've got bigger stories to cover?

Here are just the Mass Shootings YTD.  FWIW...in the last 72 hours, there are 99 gun deaths in the US.

miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 26, 2023 - 5:20am

 haresfur wrote:
Yes, violence is the problem. 

i agree
mainly violence used as a solution
philosophy/dispute resolution has a huge impact on murder as well as suicide (overwhelmingly the biggest part of gun deaths in us)
i think this is mainly out of convenience
gang violence is another we really don't talk about as much as we should
the technologies for an individual to hurt/kill/maim/harm a large amount of people is upon us
the one in particular i'm concerned about is biotech (and really nuclear too)
initiating/promoting violence as a solution is the worst thing we could do
i'm going to go out on a limb and say it is the root cause of the vast majority death and destruction
the world is getting better and better and to teach more peaceful negotiation would accelerate that
regards

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 26, 2023 - 12:07am

 Isabeau wrote:
 kurtster wrote:

Since you decided to jack this thread, let me ask you a question related to your concerns regarding rights for biological women. So how do you feel about the usurping of Title 9 women's sports by transgender biological men ?  Is this fair to the biological women competing ?  Competing for things like scholarships ?  Is this not another way that men are keeping women down as you rail about so often ?
Kurt, dearest, these things mean moot to me. They are conceptual and philosophical discussions well met for misdirection. In all honestly, you masterfully mix, toss and purge misdirection ingredients in a genius, iron chef kind of way. 
But I digress... MY point, is the utter hypocrisy allowing religion to govern women's bodies over 'belief' of when 'life' begins, but GUNS are Sacrosanct after the fact. Having a child in this country is a lot like purchasing a new car, once that baby leaves the 'lot,' it's value immediately depreciates. No, I'm not a man hater. I love men. So much so that I would never impose on them to have a relationship with me. I'm a badass lil shit. Had to be with a Navy Dad, then a Marine Corps Uncle. I know about Guns. I know about the horrors of war - I have male friends maimed in the last decades of war. This infatuation with guns is childish and smacks of misplaced machismo in its  unconscionable defense while ten year olds are killed en mass. 
Neither gender has a monopoly on being an azzhat. Personal character and human souls are much more complex. Don't attempt to analyze me into your inner narrative. Don't turn this into a scrotum tanning forum. 
 
Thanks for your reply.  Btw, never took you for a man hater.  Just someone who is very well focused on the things that are important to you which is why I posed the question.  I mistakenly thought that you might have had some thoughts on the question.

FWIW, guns are inanimate objects and require a user to make them function, while humans are the users who interact with these inanimate objects.  In terms of politics and religion, I loosely agree with your analogy of cars and babies.  

We have our current laws that govern women's bodies over the "belief" of when life begins.  The drivers for these particular laws is the push / pull over this concept.  What is wrong with this whole argument is that morality is being legislated.  Something I was raised to believe is not and should not be a function of law or government.  While guns in particular as well as religion are dealt with in the Constitution, medicine and medical practices are not as well as science.  The issue you raise concerns the interaction between science and religion and how that interaction relates to the the formation of laws going forward.  Morality is then interjected into both and that is where the trouble begins.

We can safely and scientifically say when life begins.  It begins at conception.  From there we get into a moral discussion about when it has meaning and is worthy of protection based upon our Constitution.  This is where religion injects morality based upon its particular belief system.  We as a country have yet come to a conclusion of what if any limits other than pure medical decisions should apply as to who gets an abortion.  The moral ground claims that abortion is not needed because there are alternatives.  We have the same thing going on with guns.  The moral argument gets injected the same way with guns are not needed because there are alternatives.  Both sides are trying to base laws using morality as a justification.

It has been raised that abortion used to be common practice and unrestricted in the US.  The same wide open considerations also applied to guns.  These both changed in the 20th Century with the interjection of morality based arguments.  Look what happened to alcohol during the same time.  We put limits on guns, such as restricting fully automatic ones.  That made sense and was widely accepted. There was no morality that I can tell that was used to make that decision. I do not really know the history of abortion until I became of age in the 60's when it became an issue, fueled by The Pill and debates about birth control.  Guns are protected in the Constitution for well known reasons.  I would also say that one should be able to consider their bodies autonomous under the principle of individual liberty.  That ship sailed away many years ago, again in the 20th Century, regarding recreational drug use, the pinnacle being alcohol prohibition.  We are still dealing with the backlashes from these things.

Does any of this make sense in the how we got to where we are today and to explain the hypocrisy in play ?  Everyone is trying to make morality based arguments to restrict the rights of others.  IMHO, this is wrong.  Objecting to this is also IMHO, the basis for being a real Libertarian.

I dunno.  Y'all can now proceed with my tar and feathering.
haresfur

haresfur Avatar

Location: The Golden Triangle
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 25, 2023 - 10:07pm

 Lazy8 wrote:

That would indeed be a surprising argument, but it's not one I'm making. I'm making the argument that the violence is the problem, not the instrument of violence.

Take, for instance, the murder rate by knives. And let's compare the US and Germany (or whoever you like).

The US murder rate by knife is .60/100K. In Germany it's .23/100K. In fact, the overall murder rate (by all means) in Germany is only .8/100K. Americans kill almost as many people with knives as Germans kill with everything.

The implied argument is that the presence of guns causes Americans to murder people with guns. Does it also cause us to murder people with knives?

Yes, violence is the problem. But the instrument of violence is important. I doubt a six year old could kill as many people with a knife as a gun, same for most other people. If you institute more gun control I wouldn't be surprised if the knife murder rate increased but I would be very surprised if it increased as much as the gun murder rate decreased. If someone really wants to murder someone else let's make them work for it. And guns kill far more bystanders than knives. There are few drive-by knifings. Start somewhere. Violence begats violence and if you want to change that you work on the crimes that are the most violent and prevalent. So yes, I believe that the prevalence of gun violence indirectly increases the prevalence of knife murders.
islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 25, 2023 - 9:32pm

 Lazy8 wrote:

That would indeed be a surprising argument, but it's not one I'm making. I'm making the argument that the violence is the problem, not the instrument of violence.

Take, for instance, the murder rate by knives. And let's compare the US and Germany (or whoever you like).

The US murder rate by knife is .60/100K. In Germany it's .23/100K. In fact, the overall murder rate (by all means) in Germany is only .8/100K. Americans kill almost as many people with knives as Germans kill with everything.

The implied argument is that the presence of guns causes Americans to murder people with guns. Does it also cause us to murder people with knives?


So again, what is your proposal? 

Haresfur made a couple. Mine generally involve supporting less structural violence - our military. We spend orders of magnitude more on our military than other countries, and then we're somehow surprised that we have a violent society.  It's basically a jobs program anyway, so lets make better jobs. Let's build stuff that doesn't blow up and destroy. Take some of that military industrial complex money and redirect it to housing, infrastructure, science, art...

Sure all these things are hard. But what happened to our willingness to accept challenges. 40+ shootings in 23 days, is just nuts and we shouldn't tolerate it.
NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 25, 2023 - 9:18pm

Which of course all takes us back to the quixotic relationship between law and culture.  It is quite true that law is merely an expression of the underlying culture and means squiddly dee if it is not lived and breathed in practice.  OTOH, the mere passing of law by majority or general consensus is also a powerful cultural statement that can influence individual choices on the streets.

So, this whole discussion should be about do we want to have a culture that is tolerant of violence or not. Gun laws are a powerful way of stating "No, we don't". 
Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 25, 2023 - 9:09pm

 islander wrote:
You think the scale of idiotic violence here vs. there is somehow comparable?  I'm genuinely surprised you are making this argument.

That would indeed be a surprising argument, but it's not one I'm making. I'm making the argument that the violence is the problem, not the instrument of violence.

Take, for instance, the murder rate by knives. And let's compare the US and Germany (or whoever you like).

The US murder rate by knife is .60/100K. In Germany it's .23/100K. In fact, the overall murder rate (by all means) in Germany is only .8/100K. Americans kill almost as many people with knives as Germans kill with everything.

The implied argument is that the presence of guns causes Americans to murder people with guns. Does it also cause us to murder people with knives?
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Jan 25, 2023 - 7:17pm

 islander wrote:


You think the scale of idiotic violence here vs. there is somehow comparable?  I'm genuinely surprised you are making this argument.  


Those countries with higher rates than the US of A are all Third-World... yet we have far more guns per capita. hmmmm
islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 25, 2023 - 7:08pm

 Lazy8 wrote:

No, you only hear about them within our borders. Only something really spectacular (like the Bataclan shooting that killed 130 in Paris, or the Charlie Hebdo shooting that killed 12, or Anders Breivik's rampage in Norway that killed 77) or with strong political overtones makes the news here if it happens overseas.

I bet you didn't hear about the shootings of Kurdish activists in Paris last year. Or the Copenhagen mall shooting. Or Oslo. Or several in Canada. Or the many in Russia.

You don't hear about them because our media is pretty parochial, but also because it doesn't fit the narrative.

No one has found an answer to stopping a determined spree killer. If you're willing (or eager) to die for your grievance a thick book of laws isn't going to stop you. Hell, the former Prime Minister of Japan was murdered with a homemade hand-cannon last year. Every aspect of that act was illegal.

The last two mass casualty shootings were in California, a place where most of the gun control wish-list is law, but similar things happen in Chicago or D.C. every weekend. Gang bangers shoot up those streets with impunity. They're already murdering people, and murdering people has always been against the law.


You think the scale of idiotic violence here vs. there is somehow comparable?  I'm genuinely surprised you are making this argument.  
islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 25, 2023 - 7:05pm

 haresfur wrote:

Well, you reject the things that could be done to start changing the culture, too. And no, they are not easy answers. They wouldn't solve the problem, at least in the short term but would improve things.

So start by providing economic security to people who see crime as their only option for getting ahead. Provide decent medical care and leave so getting sick doesn't put them out of work and take any money they have tried to save. Make it possible to get out of poverty and start that by making it possible to survive.

I believe that developing a strong black middle class is crucial to solving racial issues. It helps if people can see that there are possibilities beyond poverty. It also helps to break down barriers because white people will have more positive interactions with black people. You could say that anything the government does to promote this like affirmative action is unfair to other individuals but that ignores the unfortunate reality that there are social and economic benefits from investing in education and other opportunities for blacks and those benefits are due to changing demographics that you won't get by the same investment in white people. I would say you also get benefits from programs in economically underdeveloped rural white areas.



Gee look. A couple of genuine suggestions that could have an impact.   Thanks for a couple of insightful thoughts and not the standard 'laws don't work, nothing can be done' bs that is the standard response. Although I'll note that you are not from the side that I think is due for some proposals. Maybe they'll take you up on them.
Isabeau

Isabeau Avatar

Location: sou' tex
Gender: Female


Posted: Jan 25, 2023 - 5:18pm

 kurtster wrote:

Since you decided to jack this thread, let me ask you a question related to your concerns regarding rights for biological women.

So how do you feel about the usurping of Title 9 women's sports by transgender biological men ?  Is this fair to the biological women competing ?  Competing for things like scholarships ?  Is this not another way that men are keeping women down as you rail about so often ?


Kurt, dearest, these things mean moot to me. They are conceptual and philosophical discussions well met for misdirection. In all honestly, you masterfully mix, toss and purge misdirection ingredients in a genius, iron chef kind of way. 
But I digress...

MY point, is the utter hypocrisy allowing religion to govern women's bodies over 'belief' of when 'life' begins, but GUNS are Sacrosanct after the fact. Sports is one thing.  Women's lives are at stake here over Religious belief. Splitting hairs over guns laws is an exercise in a philosophical tic tac toe. Accomplishes Nothing while People are being KILLED in greater numbers in the U.S. than any other country in the world. But the 'march for life' was all about laws on women's organs — not guns. How cafeteria of those 'life' lovers.

Having a child in this country is a lot like purchasing a new car, once that baby leaves the 'lot,' it's value immediately depreciates.

No, I'm not a man hater. I love men. So much so that I would never impose on them to have a 'romantic' relationship with me. I'm a badass lil shit. Had to be with a Navy Dad, then a Marine Corps Uncle. I know about guns. I know about the horrors of war - I have male friends maimed in the last decades of war. I've witnessed the cruel reality they deal with every day.  This infatuation with guns is childish and smacks of misplaced machismo in its  unconscionable defense while ten year olds are killed en mass. 
Neither gender has a monopoly on being an azzhat. Personal character and human souls are much more complex. Don't attempt to analyze me into your inner narrative. Don't turn this into a scrotum tanning forum. 


haresfur

haresfur Avatar

Location: The Golden Triangle
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 25, 2023 - 4:38pm

 Lazy8 wrote:

snip...

What has to change is culture. We need to make people understand that actions have consequences, that violence hurts. We also need to make it easier and more attractive to seek mental health care, to make communities that don't isolate people to stew in their grievances. Schools and parents that take bullying seriously. Serious attempts at legal and policy reform to make our cities less corrupt, and to earn trust in institutions like the law as a way to settle disputes rather than enforce a social order.

If you wanted an easy answer...we've tried all that. There aren't easy answers, not that work. This is a hard problem and will require creativity and the cooperation of people and institutions resistant to change.

But we'll probably just pass another law and congratulate ourselves.


Well, you reject the things that could be done to start changing the culture, too. And no, they are not easy answers. They wouldn't solve the problem, at least in the short term but would improve things.

So start by providing economic security to people who see crime as their only option for getting ahead. Provide decent medical care and leave so getting sick doesn't put them out of work and take any money they have tried to save. Make it possible to get out of poverty and start that by making it possible to survive.

I believe that developing a strong black middle class is crucial to solving racial issues. It helps if people can see that there are possibilities beyond poverty. It also helps to break down barriers because white people will have more positive interactions with black people. You could say that anything the government does to promote this like affirmative action is unfair to other individuals but that ignores the unfortunate reality that there are social and economic benefits from investing in education and other opportunities for blacks and those benefits are due to changing demographics that you won't get by the same investment in white people. I would say you also get benefits from programs in economically underdeveloped rural white areas.

Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 482, 483, 484  Next