Guns in the US,an alternative view..

[chang50]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/20

Interesting and thoughtful opinion.Discuss.

[Night Strike]

I assume you meant this piece of idiocy: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/21/american-gun-out-control-porter ?

Besides that it's full of simply idiotic and incomplete arguments (like the inclusion of suicides to make their argument, even though that obviously isn't gun violence), there's nothing rationale in the post. And even if we accept the premise that gun violence by private citizens constitutes a civil war, let's find out where ALL of those guns will get pointed if another country tries to intervene.

[Phatscotty]

As citizens of the world......

[chang50]

I assume you meant this piece of idiocy: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/21/american-gun-out-control-porter ?

Besides that it's full of simply idiotic and incomplete arguments (like the inclusion of suicides to make their argument, even though that obviously isn't gun violence), there's nothing rationale in the post. And even if we accept the premise that gun violence by private citizens constitutes a civil war, let's find out where ALL of those guns will get pointed if another country tries to intervene.

I thought the idea of other countries intervening to sort out your problems was brilliant,if unpractical,considering the non stop intervention by the US all over our planet.Seems some don't like it when the boot is on the proverbial other foot,predictably.You are correct any country foolhardy enough to intervene will come unstuck.Even the biggest dog on the block comes unstuck unexpectedly sometimes...as in Vietnam.

[Lootifer]

i like where this is going.

[Borderdawg]

.....well, that article should make excellent fertilizer, since it's mostly bullshit......

[chang50]

.....well, that article should make excellent fertilizer, since it's mostly bullshit......

Or too near the mark.perhaps?

[Night Strike]

.....well, that article should make excellent fertilizer, since it's mostly bullshit......

Or too near the mark.perhaps?

There's nothing factual in it, and that's obvious because they have to include someone's personal decision to kill themselves to inflate their numbers for justification. Furthermore, they're comparing the actions of private citizens to actions by the government, which means they're inherently comparing two unlike things. But it's not surprising that collectivists would believe that it's society's problem when individuals commit crimes.

[chang50]

.....well, that article should make excellent fertilizer, since it's mostly bullshit......

Or too near the mark.perhaps?

There's nothing factual in it, and that's obvious because they have to include someone's personal decision to kill themselves to inflate their numbers for justification. Furthermore, they're comparing the actions of private citizens to actions by the government, which means they're inherently comparing two unlike things. But it's not surprising that collectivists would believe that it's society's problem when individuals commit crimes.[/quote

Did you just say that its not society's problem when individuals commit crimes?In that case why have any laws or sanctions at all?Also even if you remove the suicides the figures are still staggeringly high,and that is as close to a fact as possible.

[Symmetry]

I assume you meant this piece of idiocy: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/21/american-gun-out-control-porter ?

Besides that it's full of simply idiotic and incomplete arguments (like the inclusion of suicides to make their argument, even though that obviously isn't gun violence), there's nothing rational in the post. And even if we accept the premise that gun violence by private citizens constitutes a civil war, let's find out where ALL of those guns will get pointed if another country tries to intervene.

Suicide should be an issue in the debate about firearms, especially as so much of it comes to issues of how we view mental illness. It's very far from wrong to consider the impact that gun laws have on some of the most vulnerable people in society.

[BigBallinStalin]

Quick! Ban anything which can be used to commit suicide!

[Night Strike]

Did you just say that its not society's problem when individuals commit crimes?In that case why have any laws or sanctions at all?Also even if you remove the suicides the figures are still staggeringly high,and that is as close to a fact as possible.

Society is not to blame when an individual commits a crime. Society chooses to put laws in place, but that doesn't mean that society is also guilty when individuals choose to break those laws. And don't forget, murder, even mass murder, is still against the law. If a person is willing enough to murder, they're going to be willing to break a comparatively minor law of obtaining a gun illegally. That's not society's fault - it's the individual's choice.

[Symmetry]

Quick! Ban anything which can be used to commit suicide!

While I know you're being ridiculous, there's a point here. I even managed to persuade Scotty on this.

The classic argument- that people who want to commit suicide will find another way is mostly BS. Mostly, of course, because there will always be a hard core of people who will find a way. They are the minority of people who feel suicidal.

The majority, they can be saved. Take the UK example. Coal gas used to be used in ovens. It was lethal, and a favoured way to commit suicide. Head, oven, death. The UK switched to natural gas, none lethal. The suicide rate plummeted, but more importantly stayed there.

Suicides tend to fixate on an easy way out. Stuff that makes it more difficult, even keeping guns unloaded if you're really into the gun stuff, will help.

[jonesthecurl]

Suicide tends to be an impulsive thing. The chance of success is higher with a gun. The "If they really want to" argument is false because, well, given a chance to think about it, most people don't want to.

[BigBallinStalin]

Quick! Ban anything which can be used to commit suicide!

While I know you're being ridiculous, there's a point here. I even managed to persuade Scotty on this.

The classic argument- that people who want to commit suicide will find another way is mostly BS. Mostly, of course, because there will always be a hard core of people who will find a way. They are the minority of people who feel suicidal.

The majority, they can be saved. Take the UK example. Coal gas used to be used in ovens. It was lethal, and a favoured way to commit suicide. Head, oven, death. The UK switched to natural gas, none lethal. The suicide rate plummeted, but more importantly stayed there.

Suicides tend to fixate on an easy way out. Stuff that makes it more difficult, even keeping guns unloaded if you're really into the gun stuff, will help.

Looks like an empirical matter which has yet to be resolved.

[Fewnix]

As I understand it, there are some saying most Americans should own guns,and carry gums with them. or have easy access to guns. pretty well 24/7 You should have a gun handy at home, at work, at play, at school, in bars and in Starbucks at church, temple or mosque, A reasonable assumption is that in any "conflict" between two or more people, a shouting match over spilled beer in a bar, neighbours complaints over noise, spouses arguing about sleeping around, negative performance reviews or lay-offs by an employer, IRS audits , one or more people has access to a gun and may use it.

Doesn't make much sense to me.

[jonesthecurl]

Actuallly, it's illegal to carry a gun in a Post Office. I'm surprized there haven't been more protests about this.

[Night Strike]

Actuallly, it's illegal to carry a gun in a Post Office. I'm surprized there haven't been more protests about this.

It's illegal to carry guns in a lot of places, which is why those are usually the places hit by people who want to go on a killing spree.

As I understand it, there are some saying most Americans should own guns,and carry gums with them. or have easy access to guns. pretty well 24/7 You should have a gun handy at home, at work, at play, at school, in bars and in Starbucks at church, temple or mosque, A reasonable assumption is that in any "conflict" between two or more people, a shouting match over spilled beer in a bar, neighbours complaints over noise, spouses arguing about sleeping around, negative performance reviews or lay-offs by an employer, IRS audits , one or more people has access to a gun and may use it.

Doesn't make much sense to me.

99.9% of gun owners have them for hunting and/or self-protection, not for settling an argument. Your assumptions are invalid.

[Lootifer]

Doesn't make much sense to me.

As much as I loath to say it thats a rather moot point. It only has to make sense to Americans.

It doesnt makes sense to me either. I personally think US gun policy is crazy (and so does the rest of the world, generally speaking); but its their country, they get to make the rules.

[demonfork]

Doesn't make much sense to me.

As much as I loath to say it thats a rather moot point. It only has to make sense to Americans.

It doesnt makes sense to me either. I personally think US gun policy is crazy (and so does the rest of the world, generally speaking); but its their country, they get to make the rules.

Can you please quantify "and so does the rest of the world, generally speaking"

[Fewnix]

Night Strike. I take it you support the idea of most Americans carrying guns or having easy access to guns, pretty well 24/7, especially for self protection? The basic idea is that AmerIca is a dangerous place, a threat might show up any time, at any residence, any workplace, any bar, school, starbucks,church, temple mosque, IRS office and so it would be good if many people at these places had a gun handy when and if any threat emerges?

99.9% of gun owners have them for hunting and/or self-protection, not for settling an argument. Your assumptions are invalid

[chang50]

Doesn't make much sense to me.

As much as I loath to say it thats a rather moot point. It only has to make sense to Americans.

It doesnt makes sense to me either. I personally think US gun policy is crazy (and so does the rest of the world, generally speaking); but its their country, they get to make the rules.

Which would be fine and dandy if Americans applied that logic to everywhere else..

[Phatscotty]

Doesn't make much sense to me.

As much as I loath to say it thats a rather moot point. It only has to make sense to Americans.

It doesnt makes sense to me either. I personally think US gun policy is crazy (and so does the rest of the world, generally speaking); but its their country, they get to make the rules.

Which would be fine and dandy if Americans applied that logic to everywhere else..

Then maybe next time you can win World War 3 and have the most stable currency and the world turns to it as a store of value and you can have your say where it goes and how it's spent until it then too gets inflated and you need to export your currency around the world to keep value just so your family can get food and healthcare and shelter.

[Lootifer]

Doesn't make much sense to me.

As much as I loath to say it thats a rather moot point. It only has to make sense to Americans.

It doesnt makes sense to me either. I personally think US gun policy is crazy (and so does the rest of the world, generally speaking); but its their country, they get to make the rules.

Can you please quantify "and so does the rest of the world, generally speaking"

The opinions of the international posters on these forums is exactly consistent with the discussions I have had with even the most pro-gun guys I know locally (I have a few avid hunting friends).

This is also consistent with international and domestic media articles I have seen that refer to US gun policy/culture from a foriegn perspective.

I have not seen anything to the contrary.

[chang50]

Doesn't make much sense to me.

As much as I loath to say it thats a rather moot point. It only has to make sense to Americans.

It doesnt makes sense to me either. I personally think US gun policy is crazy (and so does the rest of the world, generally speaking); but its their country, they get to make the rules.

Which would be fine and dandy if Americans applied that logic to everywhere else..

Then maybe next time you can win World War 3 and have the most stable currency and the world turns to it as a store of value and you can have your say where it goes and how it's spent until it then too gets inflated and you need to export your currency around the world to keep value just so your family can get food and healthcare and shelter.

??? It's not clear to me what your point is,unless it's something along the lines of the US won ww2 (inaccurate) and therefore can do as it pleases (ridiculous).And we should be grateful because of your great sacrifices on our behalf (laughable).Perhaps you can clarify because I must have that wrong..