Page 2 of 25 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 483

Thread: The US 2nd Amendment.....

  1. #21
    Senior Member dneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    538
    Thanks
    142
    Thanked 459 Times in 199 Posts
    Rep Power
    6

    Default Re: The US 2nd Amendment.....

    Quote Originally Posted by HughC View Post
    If I read the US stats correctly the majority of gun related deaths are suicides and hand guns the favoured weapon in all instances. Mass shootings are percentage wise very small, again hand guns feature prominently. There are also stats that break down down race , gender, socio economic background etc. On a cursory take mental illness , people with a violent past and substance abuse seem to feature highly ( hardly surprising...). All of which are issues that can (possibly) be addressed with earlier intervention to reduce the risks. It would appear reducing gun access to certain people and addressing the underlying problems would reap benefits.
    I would like to see a study involving the effects of the "treatment" of ADHD and young men shooting up schools (and a movie theater).

    I grew up in rural Missouri. We went to school with rifles and/or shotguns prominently displayed in the gun racks of our pick-up trucks, as we were off hunting before and/or after the school day. We didn't have any mass shootings for some reason.

    ADHD's popularity as a (mis)diagnosis rose to prominence in the U.S. in the late-80's. Strangely, this malady seems to affect young men in the U.S. much more than anywhere else in the world. We have experimented with Ritalin, Adderol and a whole host of pharmaceuticals on 2 generations of children.

    My son was "diagnosed" with ADHD when he was 6. The "diagnosis" was made by his 1st grade teacher. She was 25, had no children of her own, and clearly didn't understand what happens to 6 year old boys when you only give them one 15 minute recess after lunch. I told her as much, and my son (now 20) remains fine and ADHD-free.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    540
    Thanks
    350
    Thanked 377 Times in 187 Posts
    Rep Power
    7

    Default Re: The US 2nd Amendment.....

    With all due respect raw statistics only tell part of the story. Places with high crime rates generally have several predetermining factors that may include racial mix, gang culture, substance abuse etc. Without including such factors raw data has little meaning in a broader sense. Gun related homicides in Australia is less than 0.15/100,000 compared to the US rate ~3.5/100,000 ....you have a lot greater chance of dying from a bullet in the US than Australia....Australia has much stricter gun laws than the US. As to your questions the answer is in most cases a decline, sexual victimisation remains steady and from '96 to '12 the homicide victimisation rate never exceeded 2/100,000 ( Australian Institute of Criminology).

    Yet a comparison isn't that valid as hand gun usage ( the main weapon of choice in the US) in Australia is, and was, minimal. In fact gun ownership was never that high anyway. Twisting stats to suit a view point is all too common which makes finding the "true" ( if there is such that can be claimed as reliable with all factors taken into account) results much harder. Determining whether gun control made any difference in Australia is difficult.

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to HughC For This Useful Post:

    Crazyorange (September 29th, 2015)

  4. #23
    Senior Member dneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    538
    Thanks
    142
    Thanked 459 Times in 199 Posts
    Rep Power
    6

    Default Re: The US 2nd Amendment.....

    I do agree that comparisons can't be made between dissimilar countries and cultures. I do not agree with the implication that raw statistics have been twisted in the case of John Lott's work. I suggest reading the work (which is horribly dry and academic), examining the controls and testing used, and then reaching a conclusion.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to dneal For This Useful Post:

    stevekolt (October 17th, 2015)

  6. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    540
    Thanks
    350
    Thanked 377 Times in 187 Posts
    Rep Power
    7

    Default Re: The US 2nd Amendment.....

    While I didn't specifically mention Lott he has plenty of critics, engages in somewhat suspect methods of self promotion ( using himself as Mary Rosh to praise himself) and is clearly biased. Still skewing stats isn't confined to one side of the debate.

    As to the validity of his work , plenty don't agree . See this .

    Like you I grew up in a rural environment with little issues regarding guns, statistically not surprising due to population size.

  7. #25
    Senior Member dneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    538
    Thanks
    142
    Thanked 459 Times in 199 Posts
    Rep Power
    6

    Default Re: The US 2nd Amendment.....

    There are a lot of articles like that one, discounting his work through personal attacks. His bias is for the strength of his work and conclusion, if anything, and his data is readily available. Where are the academic arguments disproving the validity? God knows I've searched for them. President Obama ordered the CDC to conduct a study on gun violence, and in 2013 the gun control lobby waited with bated breath for the results.

    That 2013 report supported Lott's argument.

    I am persuaded by facts and reason, not vitriol. I think there's a reason Lott's critics ignore the former and focus on the latter.

  8. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    42
    Thanks
    13
    Thanked 12 Times in 8 Posts
    Rep Power
    0

    Default Re: The US 2nd Amendment.....

    Hi dneal & HughC,
    It strikes me that the difference between the US and the Australian approaches can be laid out using set theory.

    Consider the following population sets:

    1. People with guns.
    1a. Bad guys with guns
    1b. Good guys with guns.

    2a. People hell bent on mass shootings
    2b. People not wanting to shoot people
    2c. People who will to stop people who are hell bent on mass shootings.

    So, mass shootings occur at the intersection of sets 1a. & 2a. Think theaters and schools.
    Mass shootings are started and then stopped at the intersection of sets 1a, 2a, 1b & 2c. Think the Texas Mohammad cartoon contest. Nobody Messes with Texas. ;-)

    Here in Australia the government reduced the size of set 1 to a level to make it statistically very small in order to solve the mass shooting problem.

    In the US it's very unlikely to be able to significantly reduce the size of set 1a and so the US leverages the sizes of sets 1b & 2c to deter those in sets 1a & 2a, with varying degrees of success.

    I hope that makes some sort of sense, .... and yes, I'm an engineer......

    Cheers
    Noel

  9. #27
    Senior Member dneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    538
    Thanks
    142
    Thanked 459 Times in 199 Posts
    Rep Power
    6

    Default Re: The US 2nd Amendment.....

    That's the gist of it, although I think you are focusing on mass shootings too much. Other types of property crime are far more common, and the threat of an armed 'victim' scares the bejusus out of bad guys.

  10. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    42
    Thanks
    13
    Thanked 12 Times in 8 Posts
    Rep Power
    0

    Default Re: The US 2nd Amendment.....

    Quote Originally Posted by dneal View Post
    That's the gist of it, although I think you are focusing on mass shootings too much. Other types of property crime are far more common, and the threat of an armed 'victim' scares the bejusus out of bad guys.
    Yes, you're quite right. I imagine that home invasions would be far more common that mass shootings.
    It makes more sense to me now.

    I guess the bottom line is that the Gun-Genie is out of the bottle in the US.
    Even if the 2nd Amendment was repealed there's just no way criminals would give up their guns.
    Therefore Australian style gun laws that work here just wouldn't work in the US.

    Cheers & thanks
    Noel
    Last edited by duckmcf; September 29th, 2015 at 02:24 AM.

  11. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    540
    Thanks
    350
    Thanked 377 Times in 187 Posts
    Rep Power
    7

    Default Re: The US 2nd Amendment.....

    Lott is not a creditable source by virtue of using himself as "Mary Rosh" to spruik himself, poor form. The apparent loss of 2000 interviews to support his 98% argument in "More guns, Less Crime" likewise raises doubt. I don't know if Lott is right or wrong but it's clear he's made some bad choices that do tend to discredit him and ,as such, I tend to place little trust in people who engage in deceptive practices to support their argument. I note both sides are "at fault" in this issue.

    Gun control laws naturally affect the law abiding people to a greater extent than the criminal element. Suicide rates at present in the US are around 12.2/100,000 and over 50% gun related ie ~6.5/100,000 or ~ twice the homicide rate. So two thirds of gun related deaths are not crime related. I would have thought it should feature prominently in any gun debate. Is the issue skewed in that outlook?

    Suicides rates in Australia are around 11/100,000 with hanging being the preferred choice. Does this indicate suicide will occur regardless of available methods and their ease?

    Statistically a low gun culture like Australia has less gun related deaths than the US. Why?

    Plenty to toss but it would seem addressing suicide related issues would reap significant benefits.

  12. #30
    Senior Member pengeezer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Tampa,FL
    Posts
    417
    Thanks
    279
    Thanked 266 Times in 157 Posts
    Rep Power
    6

    Default Re: The US 2nd Amendment.....

    Quote Originally Posted by HughC View Post
    Lott is not a creditable source by virtue of using himself as "Mary Rosh" to spruik himself, poor form. The apparent loss of 2000 interviews to support his 98% argument in "More guns, Less Crime" likewise raises doubt. I don't know if Lott is right or wrong but it's clear he's made some bad choices that do tend to discredit him and ,as such, I tend to place little trust in people who engage in deceptive practices to support their argument. I note both sides are "at fault" in this issue.

    Gun control laws naturally affect the law abiding people to a greater extent than the criminal element. Suicide rates at present in the US are around 12.2/100,000 and over 50% gun related ie ~6.5/100,000 or ~ twice the homicide rate. So two thirds of gun related deaths are not crime related. I would have thought it should feature prominently in any gun debate. Is the issue skewed in that outlook?

    Suicides rates in Australia are around 11/100,000 with hanging being the preferred choice. Does this indicate suicide will occur regardless of available methods and their ease?

    Statistically a low gun culture like Australia has less gun related deaths than the US. Why?

    Plenty to toss but it would seem addressing suicide related issues would reap significant benefits.


    Think maybe it might have something to do with power and the accessibility to that power(i.e.,guns)? Some of us here in the US think
    that having a gun equates to power(a temporary & quick form,anyway). Plus,our elected officials here can be very
    lax on enforcing laws in place already and would much rather let the lawyers handle that kind of problem....wouldn't
    want to mess up our incumbency,would we?

    My point is: Our laws in the US should be enforced harder than they are. As long as they're not,criminals will do what
    they can to gain an upper hand.


    John

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to pengeezer For This Useful Post:

    Crazyorange (October 2nd, 2015), HughC (September 29th, 2015)

  14. #31
    Senior Member david i's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    994
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 955 Times in 319 Posts
    Rep Power
    7

    Default Re: The US 2nd Amendment.....

    It's well past time to have banana chocolate pudding.

    The world would be a better place with more banana chocolate pudding...

    -d
    David R. Isaacson, MD

    http://www.vacumania.com : Sales site for guaranteed, restored collectible pens.

    The Fountain Pen Board /FPnuts : Archived Message Board with focus on vintage.

    The Fountain Pen Journal: The new glossy full-color print magazine, published/edited by iconic fountain pen author Paul Erano.

    Facebook pen group "Fountain Pens"/FPnuts: Davey's casual Facebook group for collectible pens.
    7500 members and growing. World's heftiest daily vintage pen eye candy

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to david i For This Useful Post:

    Dreck (October 2nd, 2015)

  16. #32
    Senior Member dneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    538
    Thanks
    142
    Thanked 459 Times in 199 Posts
    Rep Power
    6

    Default Re: The US 2nd Amendment.....

    Quote Originally Posted by HughC View Post
    Lott is not a creditable source...
    His compiled data, methodology and conclusions are or aren't valid, independent of his behavior. Perhaps you should also apply a similar level of scrutiny to the gossip-mongers, assign possible or probable motive, and then assess their credibility. You seem to have accepted the prosecution's argument in toto, without cross-examining them or hearing the defense. I suspect you haven't read "More Guns, Less Crime" and are basing your assertions from sites you found after a Google search.

    There are plenty of anti-gun sites that offer selective and unfair criticisms of Lott, plenty of pro-gun sites that vehemently defend him, and a very few objective pieces regarding the issue. The 1997 surveys (along with a large amount of other data) were lost in a hard-drive crash, which is corroborated by many (quite distinguished) individuals. Bizarre accusations have arisen nonetheless.

    I don't condone the Mary Rosh incident (although I can sympathize, given the years of attacks and misrepresentations by various publications he has endured and tried to correct). I also don't condone whatever is going on with his eyebrows. Frankly, they freak me out.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to dneal For This Useful Post:

    Dreck (October 2nd, 2015)

  18. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    540
    Thanks
    350
    Thanked 377 Times in 187 Posts
    Rep Power
    7

    Default Re: The US 2nd Amendment.....

    Quote Originally Posted by dneal View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by HughC View Post
    Lott is not a creditable source...
    His compiled data, methodology and conclusions are or aren't valid, independent of his behavior. Perhaps you should also apply a similar level of scrutiny to the gossip-mongers, assign possible or probable motive, and then assess their credibility. You seem to have accepted the prosecution's argument in toto, without cross-examining them or hearing the defense. I suspect you haven't read "More Guns, Less Crime" and are basing your assertions from sites you found after a Google search.

    There are plenty of anti-gun sites that offer selective and unfair criticisms of Lott, plenty of pro-gun sites that vehemently defend him, and a very few objective pieces regarding the issue. The 1997 surveys (along with a large amount of other data) were lost in a hard-drive crash, which is corroborated by many (quite distinguished) individuals. Bizarre accusations have arisen nonetheless.

    I don't condone the Mary Rosh incident (although I can sympathize, given the years of attacks and misrepresentations by various publications he has endured and tried to correct). I also don't condone whatever is going on with his eyebrows. Frankly, they freak me out.
    I did say "I note both sides are "at fault" in this issue." I think this covers any issue of bias you seem to to think I display. As far as Lott goes his behaviour reflects poorly on him, compromising oneself to promote your view, getting caught and then expecting your credibility not to be compromised is wrong.

    Perhaps more to the point is looking for solutions to gun related deaths, today's latest tragedy just a reminder of an ongoing and very damaging trend. As I said earlier there needs to be more discussion on personal rights v community rights. It's abundantly clear there is a percentage of people who should not have access to guns.

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to HughC For This Useful Post:

    Crazyorange (October 2nd, 2015)

  20. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    540
    Thanks
    350
    Thanked 377 Times in 187 Posts
    Rep Power
    7

    Default Re: The US 2nd Amendment.....

    Quote Originally Posted by david i View Post

    The world would be a better place with more banana chocolate pudding...

    -d
    Isn't that promoting obesity ? Or does more banana chocolate pudding have health benefits....

    Regards
    Hugh

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to HughC For This Useful Post:

    Neo (October 2nd, 2015)

  22. #35
    Senior Member Dreck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    IN
    Posts
    599
    Thanks
    1,245
    Thanked 745 Times in 338 Posts
    Rep Power
    6

    Default Re: The US 2nd Amendment.....

    I think that only the police and military should be allowed to own guns--because it worked so very well in Cambodia with the Khmer Rouge, in Russia with Stalin, and in Germany with Hitler.

    It's been a long time since I've stumbled across such a dismally stupid thread (yes, yes, I know-nobody forced me to read this. I was actually looking for something else and stumbled upon it. Like a train wreck, I was unable to look away from the slow-motion horror). I'm grateful to those who were able to interject some amount of common sense into something that began with the descendant of felons trying to dictate an untenable national policy for a country whose domestic policies are none of his concern.

    Far more people are killed with cars than with firearms, yet there is no nationally-mandated public transportation and ban on personal vehicles. The figures for drunk-driving deaths are staggering, yet we don't ban all alcohol (Prohibition caused crime to skyrocket, btw). Firearms are kind of like genitalia; some people will always use theirs in an evil or irresponsible manner, but that doesn't mean we should all become eunuchs.
    Χάρις ἐσοι καὶ εἰρήνη, ἀδελφὸς σου ἐν Χριστῷ

  23. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Dreck For This Useful Post:

    dneal (October 2nd, 2015), TAYLORPUPPY (May 22nd, 2016), VertOlive (May 1st, 2016)

  24. #36
    Senior Member dneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    538
    Thanks
    142
    Thanked 459 Times in 199 Posts
    Rep Power
    6

    Default Re: The US 2nd Amendment.....

    If banning guns works, how does a 15 year old obtain a gun and shoot a police employee in front of a police station in a country where guns are supposed to be banned?

    Thoughts and prayers to those families affected.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...sed-youth.html

  25. #37
    Senior Member Empty_of_Clouds's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,682
    Thanks
    337
    Thanked 1,260 Times in 560 Posts
    Rep Power
    7

    Default Re: The US 2nd Amendment.....

    This...

    It's been a long time since I've stumbled across such a dismally stupid thread
    ... was so ironically followed by this:

    Firearms are kind of like genitalia; some people will always use theirs in an evil or irresponsible manner, but that doesn't mean we should all become eunuchs.

    In case you hadn't noticed - and perhaps you really hadn't - genitalia are an intrinsic part of the wetware, guns are an external add-on.



    I think that only the police and military should be allowed to own guns--because it worked so very well in Cambodia with the Khmer Rouge, in Russia with Stalin, and in Germany with Hitler.
    This kind of deliberate bias doesn't help either. So, add UK, New Zealand, Australia, Canada and Iceland - to pick just a handful where strict regulation and limited access DOES work.


    Far more people are killed with cars than with firearms, yet there is no nationally-mandated public transportation and ban on personal vehicles.
    This is unfortunate. Although there are a plethora of rules and regulations about who drives and how, many people still get killed on the road. Perhaps the sheer utility of the motor vehicle is considered more important than a few lives here and there (I don't agree with this, just putting it there for thought). There are always risks involved in anything we do. How well, how much, and how easy it is to manage or minimise those risks is a recurring question, often without a clear answer


    In my non-US opinion it is gun mentality that requires attention and not the guns themselves. The way the US pro-gun lobby portray their country is of a people who consider the gun as the only sure fire way to keep the peace. The simple fact that there are more than one other country that manage to be relatively or more peaceful without the need for an armed populace is ample proof that this particular part of the argument is dangerously flawed.

    For clarification, as an ex-armed forces person my opinion is not based on a sense of the unfamiliar when it comes to weapons.


    As for alcohol, well, if it were invented today it wouldn't get past FDA regulations. Therefore I must conclude that people who know this and still drink are willfully careless of themselves and others. Those who don't know are just ignorant (in the knowledge sense).

    Trying to alter behaviours and beliefs - no matter how self-destructive or irrational - is a thankless and very difficult task.

  26. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Empty_of_Clouds For This Useful Post:

    Crazyorange (October 3rd, 2015), HughC (October 2nd, 2015)

  27. #38
    Senior Member Empty_of_Clouds's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,682
    Thanks
    337
    Thanked 1,260 Times in 560 Posts
    Rep Power
    7

    Default Re: The US 2nd Amendment.....

    If banning guns works, how does a 15 year old obtain a gun and shoot a police employee in front of a police station in a country where guns are supposed to be banned?

    Thoughts and prayers to those families affected.

    Very sad day.

    However, dragging outliers into the argument does not strengthen it, even though it is a very common internet tactic.

  28. The Following User Says Thank You to Empty_of_Clouds For This Useful Post:

    HughC (October 2nd, 2015)

  29. #39
    Senior Member dneal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    538
    Thanks
    142
    Thanked 459 Times in 199 Posts
    Rep Power
    6

    Default Re: The US 2nd Amendment.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Cryptos View Post
    If banning guns works, how does a 15 year old obtain a gun and shoot a police employee in front of a police station in a country where guns are supposed to be banned?

    Thoughts and prayers to those families affected.

    Very sad day.

    However, dragging outliers into the argument does not strengthen it, even though it is a very common internet tactic.
    I'm happy to see that statement. Do you consider yesterday's shooting in Portland an outlier as well?

    More to the point though, the assertion of the liberal media and anti-gun coalition (not to mention the OP) is that banning guns is a way to prevent the very thing that just happened. That's the argument that's not strengthened.

    Dismissing it as a "common internet tactic" is disingenuous.

  30. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    540
    Thanks
    350
    Thanked 377 Times in 187 Posts
    Rep Power
    7

    Default Re: The US 2nd Amendment.....

    Quote Originally Posted by dneal View Post
    If banning guns works, how does a 15 year old obtain a gun and shoot a police employee in front of a police station in a country where guns are supposed to be banned?

    Thoughts and prayers to those families affected.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...sed-youth.html
    Guns are not banned, there's a licensing and firearms registration system in place. Anyone with a legitimate reason can obtain a firearm legally ( and that includes sporting shooters), as a grazier (or rancher in the US) I have access to most categories and own the guns my business requires. Naturally there's a criminal element and guns can be obtained illegally. Many firearms where never licensed or declared in the first place, especially the high powered SLR types, and remain in play as well the buyback was used by many to get rid of worthless or non required guns. SLRs available to those with a genuine need, ie pest animal control such as wild dogs, pigs etc.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •