Some facts about guns in the US

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by James R, Dec 17, 2012.

  1. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Well duh to the first and..

    Yes I am to the second.

    What makes someone want to carry a loaded gun? Especially when that gun is more likely to be used against them?

    Do you carry a loaded gun? What makes you feel you need one? Why do you want to carry one? Or even own one for that matter? I'm not talking about for hunting here, but those who feel they need it for protection or other reasons. And especially assault rifles and semi-automatics.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,466
    Immediate "need" is rarely reflected in an act of civil disobedience.
    Did Rosa Parks need to not give up her seat when there were other open seats?
    In '66, did I need to demonstrate with the local SDS in support of the united farm workers?

    Do I need the pistol?
    Not normally, but if I have to track a wounded deer, I strap it on just in case the initial shot wasn't fatal.
    Do I need the rifle? Not most of the time, (about 25 out of the 525,949 minutes in a year) but during hunting season, I use it 2-5 times to fill the freezer with venison.
    Do I need freedom of religion?

    Immediate need is usually not important.
    What is important is maintenance of our rights and those of our fellow humans, and sometimes, that seems odd to people who do not share the same mindsets, nor value the rights of others who might exercise them.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    I guess because:
    1) it's a right they have and people in the US don't like giving up rights
    2) they feel that a gun makes them safer
    3) they think it's cool

    No, but I would have no problem doing so.
    Hunting, carrying one to the range, being in an area where I needed such additional protection all might result in me carrying a loaded gun.
    I don't - see above. There are cases where I would want to.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    But not carrying one does not mean you are giving up your rights. Are you giving up your Constitutional rights by not carrying a gun?

    Statistics show they are less safe with a gun. Some might feel safer driving in a tank, should people exercise their rights and drive everywhere in a tank?

    A lot of people think the same about smoking cigarette. Heart disease, lung cancer, etc is obviously not cool..

    Which camp would you fall most into?

    But you choose not to. And I had specifically left out hunting for obvious reasons.. Same with the shooting range..

    Dangerous neighbourhoods? If they are exercising their rights to carry guns, why would you feel safer if you have one also? Presumably the majority are carrying them for self defense and to feel safer. If so many people are armed, how can people still not feel safe?

    It's strange that everyone deems that it is their right to own and carry guns, but the more people carry them, the less safe people seem to feel and the more guns they are then compelled to purchase to feel more safe. It's a vicious circle.

    [HR][/HR]

    Would Rosa Parks be the hero she is seen as being if she'd exercised her Constitutional Rights and used a gun to force the issue by use of intimidation to sit in the front of the bus?

    Do you strap your hunting rifle to go shopping for clothes, food, etc? How about to go and eat at a restaurant?

    Why do you feel you need freedom of religion?

    I mean I don't know, do you? Who is going to take your religion from you? Was it ever threatened by the State in the firs place?

    So you own them just in case there is tyranny?

    Do people who do not own guns not exercising their rights correctly?

    Just because you have the right to own a gun, does not mean you should own one. Aside from hunting, what other use do you have for them? Do you think people who have criminal records for violent crimes, or who are mentally ill, be allowed or have the right to own firearms?

    How about if you are out at a restaurant, having a nice lunch with your kids. And you see 20 or so armed men and women swarm into the restaurant, all carrying semi-automatic weapons. You wouldn't find that threatening? I would.

    See, that is what I don't understand. That pathological need to own a firearm just because it is my right. Your rights, even your Constitutional rights are curtailed and restricted. Your right to free speech does not give you the right to scream fire in a crowded theater. So why do gun advocates believe that their Constitutional rights to bear arms should be wholly unrestricted and untested (no checks or gun licenses, for example).
     
  8. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    Nope. These people feel that by not exercising their right they will lose it. (I disagree, but they clearly feel strongly about it.)
    Many do and drive huge SUV's - even though studies show that kids are not safer in one. That being said, there are specific cases where owning an SUV is safer than owning (for example) a Honda Civic.
    Agreed. But some people smoke and they think it''s cool. That's up to them.
    Neither one. I neither hate nor love guns, and don't feel a need to either ban them or own a lot of them. They are sometimes useful tools, and during such situations I use them.
    Usually, yes.
    Because I would stand a better chance of fighting back against a violent attacker.
    Hmm. I don't feel any less safe. I guess some people do.
     
  9. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,466
    We do have laws forbidding assault.
    If Rosa did what you suggest, she would either be dead or incarcerated in very short order.

    ............
    Personally, i do not feel the current need to carry firearms, even to a practice range. Should my marksmanship drop below it's current 97% kill ratio, I might drive to the range. If carry includes within an automobile(as it does in iowa) then, without a carry permit I would be in technical violation of the current laws in Iowa.

    ....................
    Bells, you seem to be advocating for the abrogation of others rights to suite your personal agenda and attitude.
    True?
    Why?

    .............
    personally, I think that the protesters in texas are a tad odd for my tastes.
    But do not begrudge them their act of civil demonstration.
     
  10. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Since those rights are enshrined in their constitution, why are they so fearful to the point of paranoia for some?

    Which is the subject for another thread. I don't get the obsession with big cars either.

    And I don't disagree with you. However in most places, it is illegal to smoke in many places in public. But in the US for example, in many places around the country, you can walk into a restaurant holding a semi-automatic that is fully loaded but not smoke a cigarette. Also, children are not allowed to smoke or drive a car, but they can own a gun...

    And that's the thing. I don't quite understand the obsession with them. To the point that there are protests if the State attempts to limit the mentally ill or those with a criminal record from accessing one, for example.

    The same can be said for chainsaws.

    But the violent attacker is more likely to be someone you know.

    Which is where the vicious circle comes in.

    [HR][/HR]

    Who said anything about assault. People carrying an assault rifle on their back will usually just get their way. After all, would you say no to a guy who has one strapped to his back and is with dozens of friends equally armed?

    These people are threatening and intimidating anyone who dares to disagree with their methods. Some even resort to stalking. I wonder if Rosa Parks would be seen to be a hero if she acted in the same manner?

    The reason she is a hero is because she did all that she did, in the face of absolute aggression and hatred, unarmed.

    Do you think that people should have to undergo a criminal check before being allowed to acquire a firearm of any sort?

    What rights do you think I am attempting to remove from you? Your rights to bear arms is in your Constitution. I am curious as to why people feel the need to own or bear them. Since the Constitution is clear in how and why people should bear arms. Yet it has been expanded to everything and anything, to the point where guns are made for children.

    I don't particularly care if you wish to own them or believe it is your right to own them. I am asking why you feel you need to own them in the first place. Hunting? Okay then. But what about others?

    Do you think it is appropriate or even safe to be walking down the street with a loaded firearm on your person and very obvious to all and sundry? What about with holding children or walking with children and having the trigger within grabbing range as it is strapped to their backs? This is what I do not understand. What the hell kind of dangers do people think they are likely to face that they need assault rifles and semi-automatics to protect themselves? From what? From whom?

    Intimidating and stalking men, women and children while swearing at them while holding a gun, swarming places of business while thus armed to intimidate and behave in a threatening manner and post videos online boasting about shooting bitches is hardly an act of civil demonstration.

    I find it interesting that you believe Rosa Parks would be dead or would have been arrested if she had attempted to do the same thing back in the day.. I wonder, how would these so called civil demonstrators feel if blacks and hispanics swarmed through their neighbourhoods while armed in a similar fashion and went into their places of business while thus armed.. Would they be praising open carry laws and asking for more? Somehow I really doubt that would be the case.
     
  11. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,466
    you did with:
    That is assault!

    And, dear Rosa was a schill, She was a well informed civil rights worker patiently awaiting just the right opportunity. When the opportunity came, she was prepared and the rest is history.
    Chance favors only the prepared mind.
     
  12. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    But you do when replying to my posts, quite obviously. And I'm willing. But I can't tell where exactly your train of thought missed the switch, without something other than the uninformative passive aggression you have posted to date.

    So? That's the thing about a right - it specifically does not require defense as a "need". It need not be justified, anywhere, to anyone.

    That's kind of important, because it prevents the kinds of bogus "you are better off without it" arguments so common when civil liberties are being taken away. Does anyone "need" to use drugs? Drink alcohol? Stay up late at night? Travel to other cities outside of work? Rent a hotel room in their own city? Listen to rock and roll music? Drive a private car? Talk on the phone without strangers listening in?
     
  13. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Flashing a gun is assault?

    Thankfully she wasn't armed. Then the black people would never have been allowed to sit in the front of the bus. It's not about chance, but the colour of your skin, really.


    Well statistically, you are better off without it.

    I just find it bizarre that people want domestic violence abusers, the mentally ill and people with criminal records to be armed. And I certainly find it strange that people view it as being an essential part of themselves, to the point where they intimidate, harass, stalk and threaten others with those weapons simply for having a different opinion to them.
     
    Last edited: Jul 1, 2014
  14. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    Terroristic threats are illegal, pointing a gun at someone without reasonable cause is assault.
    That was by design. Black people were not permitted to be armed like white people, and the bigotry of the day would not have allowed the message to have reached the general public.
    They don't. Really. Almost everyone wants background checks, violence checks, etc, on gun owners.

    The only exceptions would be among a fringe of crackpots regarded by even their friends as bricks shy of a load. You've got a universally favored cause there.

    Depends on your criteria. The only stats I've seen presented as backing that are the ones comparing the average odds of shooting oneself or family vs shooting an attacker, and that number is all but irrelevant to such an evaluation.
     
  15. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    I was reading something earlier today about rights. "... the right to bear arms shall not be infringed". Never mind the part about a well-regulated militia, which the US Supreme Court has basically decided is irrelevant, such that we can read the 2nd amendment as if that clause wasn't there. Never mind that the right to bear arms was intended initially as a protection from a tyrannical government, whereas today gun advocates primarily focus on the supposed utility of carrying a gun to protect oneself from regular, run-of-the-mill crime.

    So ok, there's this absolute right to bear arms. What about regulation then? What about those (regularly voted-down) background checks and the like, meant to ensure that nutty people and criminals have a harder time getting a gun? Oh no! We can't have regulation, because that would infringe the inviolable right to bear arms.

    Just like needing a licence to drive a car - or having to wear a seatbelt - infringes your right to drive. Or like how not being allowed to get away with shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theatre infringes your right to freedom of speech.

    All the evidence indicates that guns make the United States, as a society, less safe than other western democracies which have sensible gun control.

    Well, that's screwy right there. But you're right. US pop culture glamorises guns. It's a self-fulfilling feedback loop you've got going there, such that some of you think it's a neat idea to buy your 8 year old daughter a pink rifle for her birthday.

    And while we're here, let's quietly add...

    4) Because having a gun these days goes with identifying oneself as politically conservative and (bizarrely) Christian. It's one of those things that's just expected of you if you want to adopt a particular American identity.
     
  16. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    iceaura:

    What do these things have in common: drugs, alcohol, late-night venues, travel to other cities, driving, communications technology?

    Answer: all of them are regulated by government. And, in general, the more dangerous something is, the more it tends to be subject to government regulation. In fact, some things are made illegal (think illicit drugs, for example).

    And most Americans, along with people in other western nations, agree that regulation is appropriate in many cases, though they may argue as to the extent that is appropriate and where the lines are drawn.

    But when it comes to guns, suddenly if you're pro-gun then you're supposed to be against any regulation at all - even the most common-sense regulations that virtually everybody outside your particular cultural milieu agrees with.

    And then, every time there's another mass shooting (or even just your everyday shootings that go largely unreported) you all shake your heads and say 'Oh, how terrible!' Then you debate about how somebody really ought to do something to protect the children, or whatever. And that goes on for a few days, or a week, or a month. Then the NRA lobbies the congress and the congress fails once again to pass sensible control legislation. Or, in the rare event that it does, people jump up and down and whine about their 'rights', in exactly the way we're seeing from some posters in this thread.

    When that happens, it's suddenly not about dead children any more. No - now it's all about my personal freedom to do whatever I like, and anybody who wants to contradict that can come and try to take my gun from me!
     
  17. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,466
    Curiously, when I bought my last rifle, I had to wait while they did a federal background check.
     
  18. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    Did you buy it at a gun show?
     
  19. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,466
    no

    and, curiously, the check only took a phone call, so could as easily be done anywhere
     
  20. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    So, for example, it would be possible to have background checks done at gun shows. It would be possible to legislate that they must be done.
     
  21. Trooper Secular Sanity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,784
    "One does not bear arms against a rabbit..."

    I backpack and I carry.

    This past weekend, I was exploring a remote area. The road was overgrown and covered in moss. It looked like it hadn't been used in years. I hiked in a few miles and found an old growth forest, a beautiful waterfall, and a few old logging bridges. I was so excited. I have a group of girls that usually backpack with. I couldn't wait to show them this place. It was beautiful, remote, and a perfect place to camp. I was all alone, king of the forest.

    I explored a little further and accidentally ended up in another ravine. I heard something that sounded like wood rubbing together and then rocks clanking. At first, I thought that I might be near an illegal grow, which always makes the hair on the back of your neck stand up. The sound was getting louder and closer but I couldn't figure out what it was. My heart was pounding. King of forest my ass. What sounded like wood rubbing and rocks clanking together turned out to be huffing and jaw popping. I didn't know bears popped their jaws.

    I backed up slowly and headed out of that damn ravine. She followed me until I crossed the creek.

    I was glad that I didn't have to shoot her but at least I had that option.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  22. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    Because other rights enshrined in the Constitution have been partially lost. (the Fourth and Eighth amendments for example) They wish to avoid similar losses.
    I don't either - but some people like them, and some (few, but some) actually need them. That's fine.
    Actually it is up to the restaurant in most places, for both guns and cigarettes.
    Right. But people don't get worked up about them. Few people want to ban chainsaws, and few people would walk around with them just in case.
    Statistically, yes. In my case, no. Which is one reason I don't feel the need to carry a gun all the time.
    On the flip side, it's a good thing that all the people saying "I don't get the hysteria about the front of the bus! Why do they feel the need to do something that pisses so many people off?" didn't get their way.
     
  23. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    What about regulation? We have it now. There are laws against concealed carry, against carrying them in many public places (airports, courthouses) against selling them immediately to people, against selling handguns without a background check etc etc. Guns are already heavily regulated. Do we need more regulation? If it's a good regulation that would actually keep innocent people from getting shot - then maybe. If it's just another impossible to enforce law that really does no good - then no, we don't need more regulation of that sort.

    Right, and the corollaries are waiting periods, concealed carry laws, background check laws and gun bans in specific locations.
    Yes, and there's more than a little "look at how powerful WE are!" thing going on there.
     

Share This Page