1. You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

Guns and violence

Discussion in 'World News & Politics' started by RxCowboy, Apr 24, 2012.

  1. RxCowboy

    RxCowboy Has no Rx for his orange obsession. A/V Subscriber

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    44,447
    Location:
    Wishing I was in Stillwater
    We have a problem with violence in this country. Before anyone says it, I know that there are countries where violence is far worse (like most of Africa), and countries where violence is far less (Northern Europe). I don't care. I don't live there. I care about the violence in our society. And I love the freedom in this country to own guns. However, it creates a problem, because that freedom means that guns are relatively easy for criminals to obtain meaning that guns are used in violence in the US at a pretty alarming rate. So, for serious discussion during an election year, how can we curb the violence and especially the gun violence without curtailing freedom for law-abiding citizens?
     
  2. zachya

    zachya Hero of Spielburg A/V Subscriber

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2004
    Messages:
    13,004
    Location:
    Tarna
    ...it'll take a sort of social awakening; what I mean is a movement towards the individual being responsible for their actions, and a respect for your fellow man...ya know, stuff that'll never happen...
     
    PlatypusJojo, DogDoc and OP150 like this.
  3. Wayne C

    Wayne C Deputy

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,825
    Location:
    Dallas and Istanbul
    Make penalties tougher for those who use guns to commit crimes. Seriously tougher penalties.
     
  4. MindAflame

    MindAflame Lurking. Screwed. A/V Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2012
    Messages:
    726
    Most gun deaths are suicides, and the use of guns in homicide is typically concentrated in low-income areas, and involves guns that are illegal in some way in the first place. The vast majority of Americans will never be touched by gun-related violence, beyond what's pushed at them in both news and entertainment media.

    I've never seen any solution floated that couldn't be argued away fairly well by one side or the other, often utilizing examples of similar attempts to curtail the availability of a physical item for which there is high demand. Prosperity seems to be the only solution, and for the areas in which gun violence is actually a serious issue that doesn't seem like a solution coming any time soon.
     
  5. ScooberJake

    ScooberJake Sheriff

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,949
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    An interesting idea.

    Yeah, I agree that this is not a real solution. People who are planning to commit a violent crime by definition are not taking responsibility for their actions and don't respect their fellow man. So in the case of violent crime, we need some other solution.

    When it comes to violent crime, all studies I have ever seen show that harsh penalties, including the death penalty, are not a significant deterrent.

    Interesting. I would suggest that perhaps the vast majority of Americans have been touched by gun violence (fear of the inner city, Columbine, etc.). But prosperity as a solution is an interesting idea.
     
  6. dds115

    dds115 Free Roverto!!! A/V Subscriber

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2007
    Messages:
    15,361
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX
    While it may not be a significant deterrent, it would keep offenders off the streets longer, which would keep many of them from committing crimes again when they get out.
     
  7. CocoCincinnati

    CocoCincinnati Territorial Marshal

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2007
    Messages:
    8,922
    Location:
    Tulsa, OK
    Privatize the ATF.
     
  8. dds115

    dds115 Free Roverto!!! A/V Subscriber

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2007
    Messages:
    15,361
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX
    First time I've ever heard that thrown around, what would be the benefit?
     
  9. Cimarron

    Cimarron It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2007
    Messages:
    42,808

    Agreed. While some will argue that it isn't a deterrent it does keep them off the streets.
     
  10. Epperley28

    Epperley28 Federal Marshal A/V Subscriber

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2005
    Messages:
    10,658
    I know you don't want to hear it, but that's kind of like saying, "I want to know about the most effective new cancer treatments, but do it without referencing any previous studies." The fact is that we have nearly sixty times the firearm homicides that they do in the UK and over 200 times the numbers in Japan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate). You can't say that fewer guns wouldn't lead to fewer gun deaths. Well, you can say it, but you and I both know you'd be lying. You could argue that it wouldn't decrease violent crime, but I'd take my chances for survival from a solid beating over a .45 to the dome any day. While I tend to like personal liberties, including the ability to own firearms, I believe this is an issue where some oversight and licensing are appropriate. There will always be a black market for guns in this country, and with the dearth of weapons in circulation today it would take centuries before they're thinned out by legislation, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't start. Sensible firearms controls shouldn't limit the well-intentioned gun owner from purchasing what they need to hunt and protect their homes. They wouldn't even stop patient, methodical criminals without a violent record. What they would do is keep the total number in circulation at a reasonable level and keep cartels from getting firearms at Wal-Mart by the dozen. A little common sense, reasonably applied, could go a long way.
     
  11. Epperley28

    Epperley28 Federal Marshal A/V Subscriber

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2005
    Messages:
    10,658
     
    dds115 likes this.
  12. MindAflame

    MindAflame Lurking. Screwed. A/V Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2012
    Messages:
    726
    I don't consider awareness - or the fostering and exploitation of fears about gun violence - to be the same as being touched by gun violence. There is a laundry list of frightening things that are much more common and broadly distributed that actually touch the lives of far more people, and which by their nature are more rational to fear.
     
  13. RxCowboy

    RxCowboy Has no Rx for his orange obsession. A/V Subscriber

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    44,447
    Location:
    Wishing I was in Stillwater
    You have data to back this up?
     
  14. RxCowboy

    RxCowboy Has no Rx for his orange obsession. A/V Subscriber

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    44,447
    Location:
    Wishing I was in Stillwater
    So what? Because there might be worse things does not mean that we do not have gun problems. That's like telling a hungry child that there are children starving in Africa, it is little comfort and doesn't solve the problem.
     
  15. MindAflame

    MindAflame Lurking. Screwed. A/V Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2012
    Messages:
    726
    What are you actually proposing here that we aren't already trying?
     
  16. Epperley28

    Epperley28 Federal Marshal A/V Subscriber

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2005
    Messages:
    10,658
  17. MindAflame

    MindAflame Lurking. Screwed. A/V Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2012
    Messages:
    726
    Responses like this are incredibly frustrating. I was responding to someone arguing that the majority of Americans are "touched" by gun violence through fear of that violence, and as part of that response I pointed out that fears of gun violence are both stoked and exploited (by which I mean they are done so in a manner that over-inflates fears), and that other dangers affect far more lives and do so regardless of socioeconomics.

    I never came anywhere near saying gun violence isn't a problem. Context is important.
     
    OSU Sig likes this.
  18. MindAflame

    MindAflame Lurking. Screwed. A/V Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2012
    Messages:
    726
  19. Epperley28

    Epperley28 Federal Marshal A/V Subscriber

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2005
    Messages:
    10,658
    Limitations on number of guns one person can purchase, waiting periods, licensing for shotguns and rifles. Remember, I live in Oklahoma so the laws here maybe a lot more lax than other areas, but I'm fairly confident I could legally be back to my house by next week with 10 AKs, 10 AR-15s, and 10 shotguns given the money. That's enough to easily storm and forcibly occupy the Tulsa County court house. Do we really need gun freedom to the point that arming a small militia is within the legal power of a single person?

    When the cops finally got my neighbor at our lake house to surrender after a 10-hour standoff, they found 117 firearms in his house. 117!!! The only people that should EVER be in possession of 117 firearms are gun dealers and the curator of the Smith & Wesson museum. Any level-headed American knows you don't need more than 53 guns to protect your family. Anything above that should require a special permit and an in-depth background check. ;)
     
  20. MindAflame

    MindAflame Lurking. Screwed. A/V Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2012
    Messages:
    726
    [I guess I would need to see more data on the movement of guns from legal to illegal. I'm not a proponent of private citizens having large weapons caches, but that's just my personal feeling on the matter, and that gets into the whole quagmire of argument over who can have what. I would think that if the illegal firearm market was being fed singificantly by legal purchases, the government would seize on that and play it up extensively, and use it as justification for stepped-up 'enforcement' activity.

    But I admit this specific aspect of the gun debate is one on which I'm not well-versed.
     

Share This Page