Saturday, January 12, 2013

"NRA Duality" by AHB

Jersey is gonna love this one for about 30 seconds, and then go back to hating me: NRA being two-faced. The NRA has cited a number of things other than guns that is the "problem." Now, while I disagree with the idea that guns are to blame, I also feel that people who throw the guns under the bus are arguing from a place of ignorance. Same goes for the NRA, they are arguing out of a place of ignorance.

Video Games, movies, tv, music, etc... have been cited by the NRA VP as the "problem." Just like there are millions of guns that never kill anyone, there are millions of people who are exposed to all forms of media like this that never go insane and shoot up a school or a movie theater. If you look at what the actual violent crime rate is PER CAPITA, then you would realize that the problem is not one dimensional.

I have heard the bullshit statistic that "Baseball bats killed more people than guns did." Well that is an outright lie. However I can fix this statement to make it true. "Baseball bats killed more people than RIFLES did." Which that statement is typically true for annual statistics. So what is the first thing targeted and blamed by the gun control zealots? Magazine fed semi-auto rifles. Clearly, something is amiss.

No one wants to look at the truth behind violent crime, because the truth is simple and "hopeless." The simple truth is crazy people do crazy things, and you will never eradicate violent crime as long as there are people with emotions. People are looking for a solution to the "gun problem" ... what they should realize first its not a "gun problem" as much as it is a "consequence problem."

There are certain consequences and burdens that comes from freedom. Our ability as humans to act out of Choice rather than Instinct is one of many key differences between us and every other life form on this planet. What is appalling to me is how short-sighted people are when it comes to problem solving, and how easy it is to sway people on fickle emotions alone.

I am called crazy because I am a libertarian, someone who wants a minimalist federal government. It is my belief that every social structure that involves most of the power at the top is more prone to abuse and corruption. I would much rather that the people "in charge" of most of what rules or policies you have to obey, are within arms length of you. How do I personally hold Pat Tiberi's feet to the fire for some of the shit he has done and said that I don't agree with? I can't just call him or email him, I have to go through a massive god damn hassle just to submit a question.

Laws only limit the actions of the lawful. It is not the lawful citizens you have to worry about in this matter. Quit hitting mister ed's skeleton with that louisville slugger... those things can kill ya know


Jersey McJones said...

I'm not really sure where you're going with this.

Yes, America has always had a streak of violence in our culture. I figure it's because of our heritage. We are, after all, the world's castaways or descendents of the world's castaways. There is a direct correlation between violence and poverty.

I think we're missing something in this discussion as we focus just on the actions of crazy people. Violent crime is a far broader problem than just the handful of loonies.

But this should be be all dismissed as a zero-sum, "hopeless" problem. Throwing up our hands is irresponsible and lazy.

But aside from ways we could reduce the number of "illegal" guns on the streets, there are much larger steps that must be taken.

Here's just a few things we could do...

End the War on Drugs.

Dramatically increase investment in education, infrastructure and healthcare, offset downsizing the military and bringing back progressivity to the tax code.

Completely overhaul the immigration system.

End "Free Trade" and replace it with Fair Trade.

These are big, BIG things, but they would greatly improve life in America and therefore reduce the violence.


Jersey McJones said...

"But this should NOT be all dismissed as a zero-sum, "hopeless" problem. Throwing up our hands is irresponsible and lazy."



Anonymous said...

Right, and I agree JMJ... but here is the problem with all that: If it aint good for business, it aint gonna happen in this america.

War on drugs... yes it costs us, and that is us as in me and you money, it is pissed away. Somehow, somewhere, some agenda is being fulfilled and some pockets are being lined or else there would be no war on drugs.

Dramatically increase spending on education: won't make a damn bit of difference and may actually hurt us in the long run. Per student, we already have the best funded education system in the world by a large margin. Yes I know china spends more on education, but that's also almost a factor of 4 in population size. Throwing good money after bad = meaningless imo.

Infrastructure: I can see this working, but it has to be the right infrastructure. Building a subway for instance is a waste with our current fiscal crisis. Subways can wait. What can't wait is updating our power grid.

Healthcare: again, we have the most money in healthcare per person than any other country on earth by a large margin. The killer with healthcare is the COSTS. Canada and France have the luxury of not having to maintain a massive juggernaut of a war machine capable of defeating the whole planet simultaneously, you touched on that.

Tax code, shit... tax us ALL 100%, where is the other 13 trillion dollars gonna come from?

I wanna see the war on drugs ended too, from a purely economical standpoint.

I just don't get why all of the sudden this shit is a problem, the homicide rate is down by over 5% per 100,000 since 1991 and is the lowest it has been since the 60's... how god damn strapped in do people expect us to be in the rollercoaster?

Yes, the mass shootings are bad, but they are not new... what is new is the media's instant god damn attack plan to misconstrue as many facts as possible for the shock value. OH, Adam Lanza had a fucking Vulcan Cannon mounted on his honda, it was raining bullets and the cordite was flying like snow for days... gets a lot more viewers.

The time for gun control in the form most of the dems are preaching about is over, it will accomplish nothing. Make it harder for the lawful to get arms, make it easier for the criminals to do business, its the war on drugs applied to guns.

I don't think it is reasonable to fuck up whatever we have lucked into in terms of our per capita crime rate. I know the gun control folks are tired about hearing of Chicago and Washington D.C.... but look how god damn big those cities are, even the outright banning of guns didn't halt the madness of humanity.

Jersey McJones said...

When it comes to the War on Drugs, it's not some pockets getting filled, but rather thousand upon thousands of paychecks taxpayer paid paychecks. The War on Drugs is a massive industry, and therefore wields a lot of power and influence on government.

The same goes for the military.

That aside, the War on Drugs CREATES violence. And that is the main reason it should be done away with, and not just for the cold calculations of economics.


If you believe an educated populace won't be less violent, then I'm sorry, but the evidence is completely and unarguably against you.


Healthcare itself costs the same pretty much everywhere. It is how we pay for it that makes the difference. The overhead of the private insurance market explains up to 30% of those costs. We need universal healthcare. A healthy population means less misery and violence, and more money to be made and spent on other things.


Violent crime, like most social ills in general, has been going down since the early 90's. This is probably a result from RvW. Tens of millions of unwanted babies never being born has obviously had an impact on crime.

This is not an argument for the advocating of abortion, that's another matter. But it is a significant side-effect.


As for gun control, we have to end private, untraceable sales. A gun is a serious tool for grown-ups, not an old Mickey Mouse lamp on a garage sale table. We register all sorts of things in our lives. It's stupid beyond belief to allow guns to be sold willy-nilly like bottle cap collections.

I could "legally" buy a gun at Walmart, turn around and sell it at a gun show to a homicidal maniac, or a drug dealer, or a pimp, or a child molester, and there would be no way to hold me accountable for that.

What you guys want is irresponsible gun ownership. And I find that reprehensible.


Jersey McJones said...

Oh, as for taxes, we have historically high wealth disparity, and lower upward mobility than Europe. And this is tied in with how and what we invest in ourselves.

Talking about "100%" taxation is silly and childish. Let's get serious about this. Taxation is historically low on the wealthy and the country is in a historically bad economic state. This is not a coincidence.


Jack Camwell said...

On Education:

Jersey, in the 30's and 40's, the Germans were among the most well educated and cultured people in the world.

Proper education does not make people less violent, and the historical evidence is overwhelmingly against your claim.

As for your gun stuff:

I could legally own a gun from the government, have it registered and everything. Then, I can file off the serial number and sell it to a homicidal maniac, or a drug dealer, or a pimp, or whatever, and i couldn't be held accountable for it.

For every single thing you do to regulate guns futher, there is a way around it. Those bent on doing harm to others will do whatever it takes to work around your regulations.

And here's an interesting fact that many people are ignoring right now. In 2012, New York City had FEWER homicides than Chicago. That's funny considering Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation.

If you dog Huffpo, then I'll just go find some other sources that prove I'm right. A lot of good that handgun ban did for Chicago . . .

Anonymous said...

I never said I didn't want people to be educated... I claimed that more money will accomplish precisely jack shit, and may in fact have the opposite effect. Money does NOT make education better. Money does NOT make education more of a priority. We already pour tons of money into education with little to no effect on the results. Education is a bottom heavy affair, the kids have to apply themselves, the parents have to do their part, and the teachers have to be willing to pick up the slack in regards to "funding", and the administrators have to make policies that encourage a positive environment for learning... none of this is solved by more bennies.

War on Drugs does create violence, you are correct... but it also costs us tons of money. Most people have a choice to participate actively as a criminal or an agent in the drug war... none of us that pay taxes can avoid paying for it. Ending it from that perspective alone is worth it to all of us. cold calculation be damned, its just logic.

RvW was early 70's, that's a hell of a lag time on policy effectiveness. I won't try to argue that abortion is a contributing factor to less crime, however I will cite that people in general seem to be waiting longer to have a family, I am one of those people. I can support myself more than adequately, but adding a family to the mix destroys my financial safety net. I won't do it.

Private sales... Register all the guns you want sir, you still won't stop tyrone from selling his gats in the slums. The criminal "scene" I am familiar with does not rely on buying a legal gun, and trust me, these cats have so many guns its insane. They get them primarily from smugglers, and secondarily by theft... not legal channels.

I don't know what sort of gun show you have been to Jersey... but every single gun show, auction, or otherwise "sale" I have been to had a background check, and the serial number is part of that sale.

I can respect the fact you want accountability, however that is a two-way street. A bottle of whiskey is not a mickey mouse lamp, but if you sell that hooch to someone who gets drunk and takes out some pedestrians on the sidewalk, do you march in and close down the corner store?

Sooner or later we have to blame the bastard who made the final choice.

I bring up 100% taxation to drive home the point that even 100% is UNSUSTAINABLE. We have unsustainable and out of control consumption. Everything needs to be cut across the board, really cut, not proposed cuts of spending increases. Spending any more money of absolutely any sort is simply out of the fucking question if you want to right this ship.

Tax the rich, tax em to fucking death for all I care, make them beg like Oliver at the street corner for a ham sandwich. Unless you stop the rabid spending all the taxes you could get won't help.

Just remember, without the wealthy greasing the wheels, the economy will suffer immensely for a while as we detox, be prepared for that shit.

Jersey McJones said...


I'm not sure why you brought up 1930's Germany here. If anything, you're bringing up how educating people immorally and improperly creates holocaust. Certainly you don't think I'd advocate the teaching that Jews are sub-human and only Aryans own the world.

Education, in general, presses society. It can be used for bad, yes, but in the end, the more we know, the better.

"I could legally own a gun from the government, have it registered and everything. Then, I can file off the serial number and sell it to a homicidal maniac, or a drug dealer, or a pimp, or whatever, and i couldn't be held accountable for it."

Well, then maybe gun manufacturers could add a little this or that to any metal used in the manufacture to give it a unique fingerprint. No. We do that with shot, right?

"For every single thing you do to regulate guns futher, there is a way around it. Those bent on doing harm to others will do whatever it takes to work around your regulations."

Yes, Jack, but human nature is what it is, and we can maybe help a little - avoid a few more murders. We shouldn't just throw up our hands. Every murder is a horrific thing for our fellow citizen impacted by it.

I'm dealing with a relative who died under suspicious circumstances right now. Nothing to do with guns, though. The point is, we have to be responsible for our actions.

Selling and trading guns like bottle caps and baseball cards is reprehensibly reckless and irresponsible.


Jack Camwell said...

"Well, then maybe gun manufacturers could add a little this or that to any metal used in the manufacture to give it a unique fingerprint. No. We do that with shot, right?"

That only matters if they already have a suspect and need to prove that he used a specific gun in the murder. They can't pull ballistics off of a gun and then say "oh it must have been this specific gun with this specific serial number." Not possible.

In 2005, over 80% of gun violence was gang related. How many of the guns used in those crimes do you think were obtained legally?

The rest of the gun violence was mostly felonies and arguments. Those were likely guns purchased legally. That means they were people who passed the background check.

How many mass shootings were there? 4? Maybe 5 in 2012? That accounts for less than 1% of the total gun deaths in the country. In 2011, apx 9,800 people were killed by drunk drivers. About 11,000 were killed by guns.

As AHB said, does that mean we need to start cracking down on liquor stores and punishing them, and everyone, for the actions of a few irresponsible asshats?

If banning guns works, why the hell did Chicago still have over 500 gun deaths in 2011? WHy did you ignore that little factoid?

My stats are from the Bureau of Justice and MADD, btw.

Jersey McJones said...

Os you're advocating throwing the hands up, right?


Jack Camwell said...

Our point is that no matter what you do--throw your hands up, or enact every gun control measure imagineable--either course will net the same results.

You want proof? Chicago.

Anonymous said...

I am simply advocating to not go out on witch hunts. Our society is registering the lowest per capita violent crime rate in 50 years, and to blanket that and say "its cause of X" is silly. Multiple factors probably contribute to this current statistic.

I am for any and all action that is logical and sound. Banning guns is akin to banning alcohol. People make bad choices with alcohol, people make bad choices with guns. Either way prohibition backfired.

Crackdown on private sales, ok, but is that tyrone in the dark alleyways of the slums sales or is that old macdonald selling his double barrel shotgun? Or all of it?

I can tell you this much, Old Macdonald isn't the one to worry about in this scenario, and he is the only one who would co-operate with the government in this scenario.

It's not the ones following the law you have to watch.

I believe with all of my being that freedom isn't free. I leverage the rights and freedom of the nation over the suffering of the few, and these days it really is a paltry sum of lives we must "pay" for our freedom as compared to years past. We are getting less violent, not more violent.

Acknowledge please that you understand this.

As for what I personally think can be done, again I say testing. You need to pass a test to operate a damn HAM radio legally, why not a handgun and firearm. I am not talking about some impossible ass test that can only be done on the solstice just as the moon is rising over the mountains, accompanied by the smell of jasmine. Once you get the basic permit, tie the weapons to that permit if you wish, but I swear to god don't hassle us about background checks at the counter anymore, we passed the test, we have the permit, leave us in peace for 4 fucking years. You win, we win, the government loses. As it should be.

If you really want to split hairs I feel that in the areas of the most crime within a city there should be no such thing as gun-free zones. Think before you attack that one.

Jersey McJones said...

I would love to play marbles with you guys. You're just completely convinced that no matter how you roll the results will be the same.

I've got news for you - things can, and always do, change.


Anonymous said...

I would love to play marbles with you because you are convinced the government would be obligated to roll perfectly for you every time, unerringly without flaws, and without risk, toward the greatest victory in marbles.

Newsflash - The federal government has earned the nickname: "Fails-a-Plenty"

Silverfiddle said...

@ Jersey: "I would love to play marbles with you guys. You're just completely convinced that no matter how you roll the results will be the same."

Marbles? You've lost yours. You're trafficking in 20th century progressive bromides that have failed.

Do you have any new ideas that go beyond the red propaganda you have ingested and now spread all over Blogistan like the manure that it is?

Jack's bottom line, and it is axiomatic, is that freedom entails risk. Attempts to mitigate risk always impinge upon personal liberties.

Our Founders set up a system of pretty good tradeoffs, but as the balance tips more and more, people get pissed off.

How many laws are on the books? What have they solved?

Go take the guns away from the criminals first, then we'll talk.

manapp99 said...

"In 2005, over 80% of gun violence was gang related. How many of the guns used in those crimes do you think were obtained legally?"

This helps make the case for the legalization of all drugs. The primary way that gangs finance themselves is with selling drugs. If you take away their revenue they will be far less powerful. Legalizing drugs, gambling and prostitution would aid greatly reducing gun violence by greatly reducing the power of gangs. Less money and power would lessen the desire of young people to want to join them as well. So if you want to reduce gun violence and reduce gang influence, legalize drugs.

Jersey McJones said...

Silver, we have the largest incarceration rate in the world. We're getting guns off the streets every day in vast numbers. The trough is that they keep flowing in. And you irresponsible gun owners seem to think it's okay to sell guns without any trace of the transaction whatsoever. Thanks to the NRA, and people like you, we have "legal" buyers "legally" selling guns to criminals. So thanks for that.

This whole notion of the "illegal" or "legal" gun is a bullshit, sleazy, spurious argument. Most all "illegal" guns are originally sold legally. We have a murderous underground gun trade in this country and it's mostly coming from legal purchases - let alone the purchases at legal gun shows and places with lax gun sale laws.

You guys just don;t want to deal with the issues. So you make up bullshit bait 'n switches, and nonsensical, unrealistic (thanks to you) demands.

So thanks again. You're utter irresponsibility is refreshingly stupid.


Jack Camwell said...


Tell me how you plan to stop someone from buying a gun legally, and then turning around to sell it illegally.

Tell me how you plan to stop the trafficking of illegal weapons.

And please, PLEASE tell me why the handgun ban in Chicago DID NOT WORK. Why does Chicago have a higher murder rate than New York City--a city that is MORE populous than Chicago and does NOT have a gun ban.

None of this is non-sensical. The whole point is to get you, and people like you, to recognize reality.

What you don't understand is that being able to trace the gun transaction means very, very little. Just because a man's gun is registered does not necessarily mean that he's going to think twice about killing someone with it. Having a registered gun will not make it more likely for someone to get caught.

As AHB said, you STILL have to go through a background check if you buy a gun at a gun show.

The fundamental difference between you and the people here arguing against you is that we want to implement a solution that will actually have a chance of working.

You apparently want to ignore all of the facts of reality that make most of the gun control ideas on the table today seem really pointless and a waste of everyone's time and money.

You're like most Americans who simply want to do *something* in the hope that it will work just so that you can feel like you at least tried. You do it just to make yourselves feel better.

We're working in the realm of what could possibly work, whereas you are working in the realm of what you can possibly DO, regardless of whether or not it will work.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, I have heard of the gun shows that are willy nilly and let you get away without the check, but I have been to dozens and every purchase either myself or my cousin has made was background checked.

If there are gun shows that don't do the check, they certainly aren't the big ones that are advertised months in advance.

JMJ, I agree, there is something that could be done. Less freedom is not the answer, however. If the powers that be would simply say "you know what, this is a problem, but not that widespread of a problem, so let's focus on the illegal guns" I would have no problem with that. Laws or bans, or whatever you throw at it is only going to stop the people who give a shit about the law.

Enforcement needs to step it up.

As it is, the people I personally know who stockpile and trade illegal weaponry have never been arrested... they have been looked at in the past, but never charged.

In my estimation, it is the police that has "thrown their hands up" in this situation, and now the blame is passed off to people who will never kill anyone with a firearm.

I mean, this is like saying "Breathalyzers should be standard on all cars ignition systems"... that fine and good, but what if they get someone else to blow in the breathalyzer for them so they can go to work after a bender.

Sales and trades be damned, the end result is someone willfully pulled that trigger.

You say we are giving up, I say you are giving in.

Jersey McJones said...

"Tell me how you plan to stop someone from buying a gun legally, and then turning around to sell it illegally."

Well, there's no guaranteed way to stop that, just as there's no guaranteed way to keep a parent from selling their children, but by making the consequences very harsh, it would probably dissuade most legal gun owners from doing that.

"And please, PLEASE tell me why the handgun ban in Chicago DID NOT WORK."

Jack, that's just silly question. Chicago does not exist in vacuum. Just silly.

Chicago is going through some painful demographic changes and these sorts of problems arise at such times. Throughout our history (and all history) when demographics change dramatically, when new groups move into areas preoccupied by other groups, there's been violence.

The Germans and Irish in Philadelphia in the 18th and early 19th centuries, the WASPs and Catholics in Boston, the Mormons and pretty much everyone else until they finally settled in Utah, the blacks and Mexicans in L.A.... and now Chicago...

The gun angle here would be to try to dissuade legal gun purchases from willy nilly selling their guns to people involved in the troubles in Chicago. The actual gun bans in Chicago are not relative to the new surge in violence beyond that. Just as the occasional crazed mass shooting is not necessarily addressed by any particular gun laws here or there.

"As AHB said, you STILL have to go through a background check if you buy a gun at a gun show."

That's a lie. Lying does not make you guys look any better here.


I'm not giving in to anything. I'm not an insecure little goofball, desperately clinging to my guns.


Anonymous said...


Your damn gunshow loophole is the LIE.

Jersey, that is wholly beneath a man of your intellect.

Any FFL dealer, meaning any dealer you would find at a large regional gunshow, is required by law to do a background check. Interstate firearms transactions have to go through an FFL between the parties.

IF there gunshows I haven't been to that are so podunk they have private sellers in the stalls, I seriously doubt even still they would become one of the 0.09% of firearms used in crimes. That's the reality of the situation you refuse to acknowledge.

Tell me how I am lying, when every single time me or my cousin has purchased anything be it surplus rifles, handguns, or even just the barrels, we had to wait through a background check.

I am the insecure goofball. Me. The man who is saying "I can protect myself" while you are saying "Please Mister Joe Biden, protect me"

That's rich.

Just because you do not share my hobby/enthusiasm about firearms do not even pretend I am doing this wholly for myself. I am doing this for you as well as any other American who would not be subjugated by Tyranny.

I guess when it's the government killing people like at Kent St. or Waco, or all other manner of bullshit excessive force it's cool and doesn't require a serious discussion about gun control... but when an insane lunatic who is in no way representative of law abiding gun owners goes and shoots up a school, gun control is on the table.

The argument another Dem gave me is "The government has guns anyway regardless of the law"

ISN'T THAT CONVENIENT? she only now comes to the realization that laws don't stop people from obtaining guns, least of all the government. This knowledge was selectively lost when I pointed out that is precisely the reason criminals wont care either.

They are all around us, they are shooting people in the face this very moment completely unaided, hell I heard a gun even set a few fires and laughed maniacally as it drove a tank down the street in san diego.

Anonymous said...

Also my mistake, 0.009% of firearms used in crimes, and that's over the course of 5 years roughly.

There is way better chance of you getting killed accidentally by your doctor than of you getting killed by a firearm.

This isn't just one bad apple spoiling the basket, this is one bad apple tree spoiling the entirety of the nations apple harvest.

It's insane and it's manifestly irresponsible to allow the government to puppet us in this manner.

Silverfiddle said...

We are wasting our breath on Jersey. His is a liberty-hating statist standing on his hind legs waiting for the strongman to use the power of the state to bulldoze our freedoms. It comes down to this for all progressives. At some point, a strongman must take action, for the good of all, dontcha know.

He's already admitted in another forum that he does not know how much gun crime is attributable to gun show purchases.

Jersey's just another emotional liberal talking out his ass. No facts, no rational thought, just an emotional cry for Big Daddy Government, to "Do Something!"

Jack Camwell said...

"I'm not an insecure little goofball, desperately clinging to my guns."

The gloves are coming off on this one.

You have *never fucking met AHB*, so where in the blue fuck do you get off judging his character? Who in the hell do you think you are?

First of all, he's not insecure--at all. Secondly, he's not a "little goofball." I can almost guarantee you that he has more intellect in his index fingernail than you have in your entire brain.

Thirdly--what is this "desperately clinging to his guns," bullshit? Eating too many Obama Sandwiches lately? He likes guns. It's a hobby. So how about you take your preconceived notion about who this man is and shove it? How does that sound?

Or I suppose I can do the same thing. I can generalize, too. You're just a mouthpiece for the Democrat party and their insufferable liberal agenda. You'll eat every morsel of bullshit flung out by the lefty asshats. You're an insecure little robot, desperately clining to your government for protection.

I've never fucking met you, so I don't know if any of that is true. One thing that I can discern is that you very easily get caught up in the politi-speak flava of the month. That's disappointing given that you generally present fairly intelligent.

And what about me? Am I some insecure little goofball clinging to MY guns? Here's a fun little fact: I don't own a single, solitary firearm. I probably never will. They're expensive, and the ammo is expensive. I have a lot of good experience with guns, and I love shooting.

I want you to keep commenting and contributing to the discussion here. But if you want to continue, you first have to drop the notion that myself or AHB are mouthpieces for the agendas of political asshats. I don't give a shit about any party. All I care about is that the American people are as free as possible.

Jersey McJones said...


I have some advice for you. Stop relying on anecdotes as establishment of reality.

And Silver, what the **** man?


I'm glad you took the gloves off on this one. And I'm glad you noticed I asked for it.

Rope a Good Argument.

I just don't understand why you guys want these fucking guns. Please, for fucking Christ's sake, answer me this: Do you not understand that guns are very dangerous things, they're everywhere, and people are getting shot at crazy high numbers for such a fucking great City on a Fucking Hill?

(By the way, I figure we're all pretty similar guys - kinda big, strong, imposing fellas. So yes, I did not mean "little goofball" for real. I just wanted the emotional reaction, because for the life of me, I don't understand why you guys think emotion is something to be ignored - it's a reality)


Jack Camwell said...

"Stop relying on anecdotes as establishment of reality."

Oh, so anecdotes aren't enough? Those aren't reality, nor are they indicative of the common experience? The fact still remains Jersey: Adam Lanza, James Holmes, the Oregon Mall shooter, and the guy that shot the fireman all got their hands on legally obtained guns.

Lanza, the Oregon Mall shooter, and the fireman shooter STOLE the guns they used from citizens who went through the legal process--the background check, the waiting period, all of that. They circumvented the process already in place.

James Holmes passed his background check as he did not have a history of violence or mental illness. Those are the facts.

And look at what Obama is proposing now. Tougher penalties on people who perpetrate gun violence? You really think the Adam Lanzas of the world give a shit about a prison sentence considering they just off themselves? You think Holmes gives a shit about how long he will stay in prison?

Furthermore, violent crime in America has been steadily declining since 1989. Like I said before, most gun deaths were a result of gang violence.

People are *not* getting shot at "crazy high numbers." Do you not understand that people who perpetrate gun violence simply do not give a shit about the law?

In 2011, about 11,000 people were killed by guns. That is less than 1% of the population. It's about .00003% of the population.

Assuming that in most cases, the offender to victim ratio is about 1:2 (one guy on average kills 2 people with guns) that means that only .000015% of the population is using guns to unlawfully take another human being's life.

So your solution is to punish the other 99.9999% of gun owners and make it harder for them to own guns, simply because .000015% of the US population can't stop themselves from shooting someone else?

We have emotion about this, Jersey. Both AHB and myself feel very strongly about our second amendment rights. Neither of us are callous individuals who don't give a shit about the death and the violence. We care.

But throughout this whole argument, you have been guided by emotion, while AHB and myself try to guide ourselves by logic. I have presented fact after fact, statistic after statistic that shows that gun violence and murder is actually HALF of what it was 20 years ago. We've provided example after example of how the law does not stop criminals from obtaining guns illegally, and it certainly doesn't stop them from killing. Chicago is a GLARING example of how even the most stringent gun control laws don't do shit to stop gun violence.

All you keep saying is "guns are bad, and scary, and people have been shot with them! So we need to make sure there are less guns in America, even though only .000015% of the population uses guns to commit murders!"

So perhaps when the gun control nuts actually approach this discussion with FACTS, then maybe the discussion can go somewhere. I'm not holding my breath.

Silverfiddle said...

Jack: You broke it down quite nicely. I'll be interested to read Jersey's response.

@ Jersey: "By the way, I figure we're all pretty similar guys - kinda big, strong, imposing fellas."

Actually, I barely stand 5'8", but I've been a fighter all my life, and I've learned that size don't mean much without skill.

And anyway, what does that have to do with anything? This is an internet forum, not the octagon...

Anonymous said...

Guns are dangerous, I have acknowledged this countless times.

Guns are dangerous.

Guns are dangerous.

Guns are dangerous.

Now. Do you own a car?

A Knife?

A baseball bat?

A hammer?

A Bottle of Johnnie Walker Black label?

Get Rx's from a Doctor?

All that shit is dangerous too. Yet I don't see you or anyone else screaming from the rooftops or the throne of utopia about how we need to get rid of anything else.

You are again putting guns in a category and singling them out as the problem. I could just as easily say human frailty is the problem. If the Yellowstone Caldera erupts, who do you blame? Lets ban Super-volcanoes.

Putting us in the same category as Adam Lanza is beyond the realm of logic.

And to answer your question about why we need the guns, that's all too easy- Because without them we lose a tool that can be a tremendous engine of positive force.

Ask any WW2 Vet why he needed a gun. A farmer who has to defend his ranch from wolves. A man or woman who just defended their house from a rapist/kidnapper/looney. Ask a police officer why he feels the need to have a gun. Someone in Alaska who just shot an adult Grizzly because it was charging at them.

You know- There is a Sylvester Stallone movie called Demolition Man, that you seriously need to watch. Even in a society without widespread firearms, there is still evil.

I do not put you into the category of people who get drunk and drive around swerving at people on sidewalks. Do NOT put me in the category of people who go around and shoot up a school.

I have no doubt... NO doubt that if you totally eliminated guns from this country, that the gun related deaths would go down dramatically. What wouldn't change is the hearts of men.

Silverfiddle said...

I have tangled with Howard Beale (Is that Anon HB?) in the past, but he is my hero.

I love this line:

"Yet I don't see you or anyone else screaming from the rooftops or the throne of utopia about how we need to get rid of anything else.

Actually, I love the whole post.

Nicely ranted!