Just what is "common sense gun control?" How about a few examples?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Duesenberg
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
LeafByNiggle said:
Why isn’t gun control one of those very difficult issues?
Click to expand...
Because there is hard proof that it does not work:

Varying levels of “gun control” have long existed in all states. They range from Vermont (almost none - mostly federal) to California (a huge amount of gun control.) There’s already hard data which shows that gun control does not work.
 
Last edited:
Duesenberg said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
Why isn’t gun control one of those very difficult issues?
Click to expand...
Because there is hard proof that it does not work:

Varying levels of “gun control” have long existed in all states. They range from Vermont (almost none - mostly federal) to California (a huge amount of gun control.) There’s already hard data which shows that gun control does not work.
Click to expand...
This is just cherry-picking places that seem to support your contention for other reasons that you conveniently ignore. It does not prove what you say.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
This is just cherry-picking places that seem to support your contention for other reasons that you conveniently ignore. It does not prove what you say.
Click to expand...
You’re wrong. There’s a great deal of hard data on the subject that has been crunched by several different agencies on both sides of the aisle. “Gun control” does two things. First it allows politicos to use it as a wedge to divide and corral voters. Second, it takes the spotlight off the real reasons for an increase in “mass shootings.”

Facts is facts. I realize that’s a toughie for some, but there’s no way around it on this issue.
 
Duesenberg said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
This is just cherry-picking places that seem to support your contention for other reasons that you conveniently ignore. It does not prove what you say.
Click to expand...
Facts is facts. I realize that’s a toughie for some, but there’s no way around it on this issue.
Click to expand...
And your fact is that we can take the number of guns out of the equation. The reason that you have such an appaling gun death record is because…well, because the US has the same sort of problems as the rest of the world but you can’t seem to fix them in any meaningful way.

Why is that? Why do all the problems you listed cause such death and destruction in America but nowhere near the rate in other countries?

I guess you must have examined these types of problems in other countries to be able to compare them to the US. So please let us know why it is so.
 
Bradskii said:
…US has the same sort of problems as the rest of the world but you can’t seem to fix them in any meaningful way.
Click to expand...
That sounds like more US-envy, but you might be right.
Bradskii said:
Why is that? Why do all the problems you listed cause such death and destruction in America but nowhere near the rate in other countries?
Click to expand...
Let’s widen this discussion and see how the total homicide rates compare between the US and whatever shangri lah you live in.
 
Duesenberg said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
This is just cherry-picking places that seem to support your contention for other reasons that you conveniently ignore. It does not prove what you say.
Click to expand...
You’re wrong. There’s a great deal of hard data on the subject that has been crunched by several different agencies on both sides of the aisle. “Gun control” does two things. First it allows politicos to use it as a wedge to divide and corral voters. Second, it takes the spotlight off the real reasons for an increase in “mass shootings.”

Facts is facts. I realize that’s a toughie for some, but there’s no way around it on this issue.
Click to expand...
If there is so much objective hard data to support your point, why don’t you cite some of it?
 
Duesenberg said:
Let’s widen this discussion and see how the total homicide rates compare between the US and whatever shangri lah you live in.
Click to expand...
Let’s not. The discussion is about guns. Although you would like to deny the suggestion that the US’s unbelievable and unenviable record in gun deaths is based on guns in any meaningful way but can be laid at the door of the various ills that you have listed.

Now for that argument to hold any water whatsoever and for you to exhibit any credibility, you are going to have to explain why those problems cause such gun-related carnage in the US and nowhere else.
 
Bradskii said:
Let’s not. The discussion is about guns.
Click to expand...
It’s ultimately about violence. I’d love to compare the overall violence of the pit you live in with that of the community I live in, here in the USA.
 
Duesenberg said:
It’s ultimately about violence. I’d love to compare the overall violence of the pit you live in with that of the community I live in, here in the USA.
Click to expand...
No. No deflection. It’s your thread don’t forget. You are the one that wants to talk about gun control. And one of the controls could be reducing the number of guns, because there is gargantuan amount of freely available information that correlates the number of firearms with the number of gun related deaths. And gee, you wouldn’t have to be a Rhode’s scholar to join those two dots.

But you claim that it’s not the number of guns, it’s societal problems inherent in the US. Personally I don’t see that you have more problems than most other Western countries. But you must have because the per capita gun deaths are off the chart and you say it’s down to these problems.

So the obvious question to ask is: Why do these problems within US society result in so many gun related gun deaths if guns are not the problem? Take them out of the equation and tell us why you think the US is so bad at handling mental health, gangs, access to drugs etc.

You are obviously, and by your own admission, doing something wrong. So tell us what it is.

And really. ‘the pit that you live in…’? Ye gods, I don’t even think you know where I live. But lets do some comparisons as you suggested. Here are some figures for you:

The homicide rate here is one fifth of yours per capita. Armed robbery is likewise a fifth. And you’d never guess the rate of gun ownership compared to yours? Yes at the back? Correct. One fifth. Whodda thunk.

But I would imagine that your argument, to be consistent, is that gun rates are irrelevant. I guess that you would claim that we have better solved all those problems within society that you keep bringing up. Maybe we’re better at it than you.
 
Last edited:
@Bradskii
I miss the “tip of the hat” emoji we had in the old forums.

Well done, old foe.
 
Last edited:
Bradskii said:
But I would imagine that your argument, to be consistent, is that gun rates are irrelevant. I guess that you would claim that we have better solved all those problems within society that you keep bringing up. Maybe we’re better at it than you.
Click to expand...
Within the US, gun ownership has no valid correlation with homicide or suicide rates. It is possible to make this comparison between states in the same country. Comparing between countries is really more about weaving a story than proving using facts.
 
Theo520 said:
Comparing between countries is really more about weaving a story than proving using facts.
Click to expand...
Which is what I would prefer not to do, Theo. Duesenberg believes that it’s not the number of guns but the problems within society that cause the gun deaths in the US. Now if Australia (which is ‘the pit’ where I live) has a much better homicide rate and armed robbery rate than the US, then we can ignore the fact that our rate of gun ownership is a small fraction of America’s. According to Duesenberg.

So if our figures for homicide and armed robbery are one fifth of those in the US, then those problems are effectively five times as bad.

Now I’ve spent some time travelling through the States (and will be heading there for a few months again next year). I’ve also spent not an inconsiderable time in Europe and S E Asia. And almost every country I have ever visited, from the most left wing to the most right wing, from the richest to the poorest, from the least educated to the most, the most irreligious to the most religious, places where a small amount of drugs will get you the death penalty to places where they are freely available…all of these places have less a problem with guns than does the US.

So Druesenberg’s argument is that all these countries, whatever their racial, economic or political make-up is is likely to be are ALL a lot better at solving societal problems that the Land of The Free.

Really?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top