Time to revisit the 2nd Amendment?

[DukeNukeEm]

Ah I see. Didn't realize you owned rocket launchers as well.

Point stands. Modern armies with all their toys cannot occupy an armed population, dont work. I mean, when has an American military successfully occupied a country with a hostile population?

[BigSqwert]

I think this right here is an important statistic.

knightni = James Joyner?

 

Joyner proposes one way to limit gun violence:

One intriguing po

s

s

ibility i

s

mandating

s

ome technological

s

olution to ma

k

e it harder for people other than the regi

s

tered owner to fire the gun. Variou

s

“

s

mart gun

”

technologie

s

exi

s

t or are in the wor

k

s

which rely on RFID chip

s

and biometric device

s

; cruder device

s

, which rely on complicated ring

s

to activate the trigger, have been available for decade

s

. If effectively implemented, they could conceivably greatly reduce the number of crime

s

committed with

s

tolen weapon

s

, including ca

s

e

s

s

uch a

s

thi

s

one where a teenager

s

teal

s

a weapon from a parent. They

’

d al

s

o, pre

s

umably, cut down on gun

s

uicide

s

and accidental

s

hooting death

s

of children.

 

link

[StrangeSox]

No, like everything else in life, when something goes wrong, we don't blame the product, we blame the person making the mistake. If you own a gun and someone accidentally gets shot, it's because you f***ed up and made a mistake, just like running a red light and hitting something with your car. It's not the cars fault, it's your fault for operating the car the wrong way. If your seven year old gets ahold of the gun, you made a mistake. If you have a teenager with a problem, and he gets your gun, you made a mistake. That doesn't make guns anymore dangerous because some asshole somewhere shoots up a school or some negligent gun owner allowed his kids to get his guns.

 

No, what makes guns more dangerous is that they are specifically designed to kill things whereas cars are designed to transport you and are designed, by law, to limit their ability to kill other things.

[Balta1701]

No, like everything else in life, when something goes wrong, we don't blame the product, we blame the person making the mistake. If you own a gun and someone accidentally gets shot, it's because you f***ed up and made a mistake, just like running a red light and hitting something with your car. It's not the cars fault, it's your fault for operating the car the wrong way. If your seven year old gets ahold of the gun, you made a mistake. If you have a teenager with a problem, and he gets your gun, you made a mistake. That doesn't make guns anymore dangerous because some asshole somewhere shoots up a school or some negligent gun owner allowed his kids to get his guns.

But we do! We take all sorts of efforts to blame the cars when people die in accidents. We investigate to see if anything was faulty with the car. We require all sorts of training, we require all sorts of licensing, we require huge amounts of safety equipment in order to use the thing. We acknowledge repeatedly that an automobile can be deadly if used improperly, to the point that some would say we require too many safety features (thus raising the price).

 

We blame the car all the time, and change the laws and regulations to make them safer.

[Soxbadger]

No, like everything else in life, when something goes wrong, we don't blame the product, we blame the person making the mistake. If you own a gun and someone accidentally gets shot, it's because you f***ed up and made a mistake, just like running a red light and hitting something with your car. It's not the cars fault, it's your fault for operating the car the wrong way. If your seven year old gets ahold of the gun, you made a mistake. If you have a teenager with a problem, and he gets your gun, you made a mistake. That doesn't make guns anymore dangerous because some asshole somewhere shoots up a school or some negligent gun owner allowed his kids to get his guns.

 

Hmm what world is this?

 

We blame drugs, we blame video games, we blame rap, we blame no religion in the classroom, we blame prostitutes, we blame gambling, we blame tv.

 

Since when we do we blame the person, all Ive ever seen is blaming everyone else. Everything is now an "addiction", tomorrow well have "gun addicts" and we cant blame them because "they are addicted to guns and its a disease."

 

I seriously dont know what world you are in where people ever take the blame.

[Jenksismyhero]

But we do! We take all sorts of efforts to blame the cars when people die in accidents. We investigate to see if anything was faulty with the car. We require all sorts of training, we require all sorts of licensing, we require huge amounts of safety equipment in order to use the thing. We acknowledge repeatedly that an automobile can be deadly if used improperly, to the point that some would say we require too many safety features (thus raising the price).

 

We blame the car all the time, and change the laws and regulations to make them safer.

 

Great! Do that with guns. No one in this thread is saying not to. I've argued it won't make much of a difference, but go for it!

 

However, we NEVER talk about BANNING vehicles because of the idiots that use them in the wrong ways.

[RockRaines]

I have one, too...but the reality is that the door frame is the weak point on any deadbolt. You don't actually try to pick or crack a dead bolt...you kick the door off the frame...it's actually quite easy to do. If you have a heavy hammer (smaller than a sledge) it'll take a few seconds to do it. It'll make noise...but I assume people that are breaking into houses don't much care for the most part.

My frame isnt the typical house door, its a firedoor thats very solidly in place. I should have enough time to arm myself if there is a general uprising.

[EvilMonkey]

No, like everything else in life, when something goes wrong, we don't blame the product, we blame the person making the mistake. If you own a gun and someone accidentally gets shot, it's because you f***ed up and made a mistake, just like running a red light and hitting something with your car. It's not the cars fault, it's your fault for operating the car the wrong way. If your seven year old gets ahold of the gun, you made a mistake. If you have a teenager with a problem, and he gets your gun, you made a mistake. That doesn't make guns anymore dangerous because some asshole somewhere shoots up a school or some negligent gun owner allowed his kids to get his guns.

Jenks, not so sure about that, Read stories that involve an SUV in a crash, they almost always read 'A white SUV crashed thru a house today...', seemingly blaming the SUV.

[knightni]

People who own driver's licenses don't usually own commercial or cdl licenses as well.

 

Those take extra training and are used for specific purposes.

 

The same should be said for larger/more dangerous weapons as opposed to handguns.

 

Different licenses and training should be required.

[Soxbadger]

Point stands. Modern armies with all their toys cannot occupy an armed population, dont work. I mean, when has an American military successfully occupied a country with a hostile population?

 

Japan, Germany, New Mexico, Arizona, California, North Dakota, anywhere that Native Americans lived...

 

Should I go on?

 

I assume what you meant is: "Modern armies who are willing to not commit genocide cant occupy an armed population."

 

If the US wanted to occupy Iraq, Afghanistan and Vietnam, it could. You just would be talking to the next Hitler, Stalin, etc.

[Jenksismyhero]

Hmm what world is this?

 

We blame drugs, we blame video games, we blame rap, we blame no religion in the classroom, we blame prostitutes, we blame gambling, we blame tv.

 

Since when we do we blame the person, all Ive ever seen is blaming everyone else. Everything is now an "addiction", tomorrow well have "gun addicts" and we cant blame them because "they are addicted to guns and its a disease."

 

I seriously dont know what world you are in where people ever take the blame.

 

Idiots do this, rational people do not. When you get involved in a car accident, you don't immediately blame the vehicle. You blame the driver.

[StrangeSox]

That's because vehicles and guns are not the same thing with the same sort of benefits to society. We don't talk about that because that argument is infantile.

[Jenksismyhero]

Jenks, not so sure about that, Read stories that involve an SUV in a crash, they almost always read 'A white SUV crashed thru a house today...', seemingly blaming the SUV.

 

Lol, good point.

[Soxbadger]

Idiots do this, rational people do not. When you get involved in a car accident, you don't immediately blame the vehicle. You blame the driver.

 

And rational people blame the person who shot the gun.

 

It doesnt mean that rational people dont say "Well how did that gun get into X persons hand in the first place."

 

Just like I would assume a rational person investigating a car crash would look into the vehicle to make sure that the brakes worked.

 

No idea where you are going with this line of reasoning if you are just trying to say "idiots say dumb things" well great they do, but I have yet to see anyone in this thread say "guns kill people on their own."

 

So really it just seems like a distraction.

[Jenksismyhero]

That's because vehicles and guns are not the same thing with the same sort of benefits to society. We don't talk about that because that argument is infantile.

 

Oh bulls***. At some point we just choose not to care because of the importance of the object at issue. Obviously you could give two s***s so of course it's a bad analogy for you. I do care, so it's a good one.

Edited December 17, 2012 by Jenksismybitch

[BigSqwert]

Oh bulls***. At some point we just choose not to care because of the importance of the object at issue. Obviously you could give two s***s so of course it's a bad analogy for you. I do care, so it's a good one.

Again, how many people were intentionally killed by guns vs being intentionally killed by cars last year?

[Soxbadger]

Oh bulls***. At some point we just choose not to care because of the importance of the object at issue. Obviously you could give two s***s so of course it's a bad analogy for you. I do care, so it's a good one.

 

I care and I pointed out why its a terrible analogy. You just choose to completely ignore it and say "Well dumb people say things", yet you are not recognizing you are creating an argument from something a dumb person would say and then acting like someone in this thread is making that argument.

 

Its boring.

[CanOfCorn]

Cars don't dole out deadly force as their PRIMARY function. Guns do. Even if you are shooting at a range or at tin cans. That is the lone job of a gun. Cars are definitely dangerous...but as was said before, their PRIMARY function is to get someone from point A to point B.

[Y2HH]

Hmm what world is this?

 

We blame drugs, we blame video games, we blame rap, we blame no religion in the classroom, we blame prostitutes, we blame gambling, we blame tv.

 

Since when we do we blame the person, all Ive ever seen is blaming everyone else. Everything is now an "addiction", tomorrow well have "gun addicts" and we cant blame them because "they are addicted to guns and its a disease."

 

I seriously dont know what world you are in where people ever take the blame.

 

I think in his post he's saying exactly that...it's peoples fault, not the objects fault.

 

And I absolutely despise that addiction is a disease excuse. People don't willingly choose to get cancer, or lupus, or the swine flu. But when it comes to addiction, they absolutely did choose at some point.

[StrangeSox]

Oh bulls***. At some point we just choose not to care because of the importance of the object at issue. Obviously you could give two s***s so of course it's a bad analogy for you. I do care, so it's a good one.

 

If you're taking a pragmatic approach to it, yes, you decide at which point it's not worth it. I've decided that the tens of thousands of gun deaths we have every year, and in particular this latest massacre with 20 dead children, is not worth it. I don't believe you can justify your need to own a handgun or an assault* rifle in the face of that reality. That doesn't mean I'm advocating for a ban on all guns, but it does mean I'm advocating for strict restrictions on many guns. There simply is not a net benefit to having 300+M guns floating around our society.

 

You can't make the pragmatic case against cars. Our economy would cease to function. The same isn't anywhere close to true if we started strong restrictions on certain types of guns.

 

*I note again that this category is problematic but for the sake of argument etc.

[Steve9347]

Ah. The one man army against the greatest military might in the world. That'd be fun to watch.

As I stated earlier, they have f***ing drones. The idea of a militia in this day and age actually mattering is absurd. As is the idea that people clutch to the 2nd Amendment 221 years after the Bill of Rights became law.

[StrangeSox]

Cars don't dole out deadly force as their PRIMARY function. Guns do. Even if you are shooting at a range or at tin cans. That is the lone job of a gun. Cars are definitely dangerous...but as was said before, their PRIMARY function is to get someone from point A to point B.

 

They are also specifically designed to ensure the safety of their occupants and to minimize the damage done to other vehicles and pedestrians that are hit. Comparing guns to any other thing that is not primarily designed to kill something is a s*** argument.

[Y2HH]

Again, how many people were intentionally killed by guns vs being intentionally killed by cars last year?

 

That depends on how you want to frame this...

 

I'd say we should include drunk driving as intentional uses of a car as a weapon, while it may not be their "intention", the fact they get in their car while intoxicated makes it exactly that.

 

And if we include that, I bet there are far more of such accidents with cars than with guns.

 

I also understand I'm stretching here to make an argument, but I think it's valid considering drunk drivers that kill people will get convicted of manslaughter.

[Jenksismyhero]

I care and I pointed out why its a terrible analogy. You just choose to completely ignore it and say "Well dumb people say things", yet you are not recognizing you are creating an argument from something a dumb person would say and then acting like someone in this thread is making that argument.

 

Its boring.

 

Are you not reading the headlines right now? It's not just dumb people responding. It's smart people who truly believe that proper response to these tragedies is to take away guns entirely.

 

[Soxbadger]

I think in his post he's saying exactly that...it's peoples fault, not the objects fault.

 

And I absolutely despise that addiction is a disease excuse. People don't willingly choose to get cancer, or lupus, or the swine flu. But when it comes to addiction, they absolutely did choose at some point.

 

I get what he is saying, I just dont understand how its a response to anything that is being said in this thread.

 

Most of the proposals are that PEOPLE should be punished if they do something that causes someone else to be hurt.

 

I have yet to see a proposal that states guns should be punished. BURN THOSE GUNS IN A FIRE FOR COMMITTING ALL THOSE CRIMES!

 

Yeah, no. This is about how we create rules to stop guns from getting in the hands of the wrong PEOPLE.

 

See how that is about people, and why the statement is irrelevant.

 

A gun by itself is neither good nor bad, it just is.