The Second Amendment and the "Right" to Bear Arms

[Nessie]

I said violent deaths in general, not just from crime. And I explained why.

Have you been able to figure out a formula yet for predicting homicide rates based on guns per capita? Why or why not?

The formula would include the number of people properly trained to use guns for self defence(a), the chances of arrest and conviction for gun related crime or crime with a gun (b), the severity of punishment for such (c) and the number of criminals/nuts/angry people/youths with guns (d).

I am not able to present an actual formula, but it would be the higher a, b and c are and the lower d is the better the overall result.

 

[The Norseman]

The common denominator is the US gun culture resulting in the widespread ownership and use of firearms. Cherry picking small portions of the US doesn't disguise this.

ETA The suggestion that the US doesn't have a gun violence problem because Vermont doesn't is just laughable.

The US has a violence problem which cannot be simply solved by removing legal access to firearms.

 

[RenaissanceBiker]

In the concealed carry course I took, and in all that I've heard about, it is emphasized how you need to make extra efforts to avoid confrontations you may not have before because in the eyes of a jury or judge the guy with a gun will always be the instigator and in the wrong.

That was my experience too. You may have heard someone say, "I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6." In reality, most gun owners would rather walk away from 1 than either of those.

 

[DavidJames]

The US has a violence problem which cannot be simply solved by removing legal access to firearms.

I agree and It's a good thing no one I know is suggesting that. In fact my point has been the culture must change before the issue of gun ownership by private citizens can be addressed.

It would however reduce the ready availability of guns tough guy cowboys are likely to use when they get enraged.

 

[The Norseman]

For the record, that few days was a long weekend. On my weekends I tend to like doing things other than sitting in front of a computer. I get out and do things, some of them outdoors. Sorry if this isn't convenient for you.

Furthermore, in a thread with many hundreds of posts, I am not going to dig up responses for posts that were made many pages ago.

Like I said, I have participated in a number of gun threads (including this one), lurked on quite a few others, and considered the arguments that gun owners such as yourself have put forward. I have come to the conclusion that they terrify me.

You have affected my opinion, though perhaps not in the way you like. You (spefically and others) have made me more in favour of severe gun control. Your vociferous and at times bordering on the religious support for guns and gun ownership makes me more and more certain that attitudes such as yours need to be curbed for the good of society.

Give me the power, and I will take your guns.

Lucky for you, there is no such power on this earth, and for that I despair.

Yeah, this is nearly a textbook example of a trolling thread -- throw out provocative statements that you knew would be sensitive and not interested in any responses because you refuse to change your mind.

Also, as has been stated, you are willing to use men with guns to prevent others from getting guns due to your irrational fear. I know you and your ilk claim that cops and the military get more training, but cannot explain why there are more accidental deaths by police and military than by ordinary armed citizens.

 

[The Norseman]

It appears to be simply every able-bodied man between certain ages. Doesn't strike me as conforming to "well regulated", for a start. If you're called up, by the government, they will provide you with weapons, so, again, I fail to see how it is relevant.

I specifically stated that the militia clause argument is a red-herring; it's based off of misunderstandings of the terms militia and well-regulated for one. However, the amendment was never intended to be limited in that fashion as I had already shown.

 

[lionking]

Jeezus, you can't stop yourself, can you? Why are you comparing tiny little countries to the USA?

What? Seriously? The comparative charts included large European countries, but go ahead and compare the US with all of (the larger) Europe.

The US has a gun violence problem, even in the so-called peaceful states. The first step to solving a problem is admitting it.

 

[The Norseman]

No it doesn't. That's awful statistical analysis. You haven't corrected for anything. there could be a hundred other factors bringing the rate down in the places you cherry picked that you haven't accounted for while guns per capita could still be a driving force.

How you are attempting to make your numbers work is very, very poor statistacal analysis. Stoppit.

Read More Guns, Less Crime. There is all of the statistical work done in tedious detail. I do not share the authors (can't remember his name off-hand) conclusions, though; there is no causative element with the amount of firearms available and the amount of violence and crime.

 

[The Norseman]

Ouch. I gave you far too much credit. Allow me to explain:

We're discussing this over and over again BECAUSE incidents like this keep happening, which proves that guns don't make people more careful about getting into confrontations.

No, that does not follow unless you have some evidence you can share.

 

[The Norseman]

Actually I am barely concerned at all with either of those problems. And I also doubt that you are.

I'm pretty much only interested in this from an intellectual or anthropological point of view so I am taking a detached look at all this.

I have noticed however, that both sides get awfully sanctimonious in these "debates".

By 'detached' do you mean 'neutral'? Because you are anything but neutral in this "debate".

 

[The Norseman]

I agree and It's a good thing no one I know is suggesting that. In fact my point has been the culture must change before the issue of gun ownership by private citizens can be addressed.

It would however reduce the ready availability of guns tough guy cowboys are likely to use when they get enraged.

What do you mean by "no one [you] know"? It's been stated in this thread many times that all guns should be banned.

Your second paragraph contradicts your first.

 

[lionking]

Read More Guns, Less Crime. There is all of the statistical work done in tedious detail. I do not share the authors (can't remember his name off-hand) conclusions, though; there is no causative element with the amount of firearms available and the amount of violence and crime.

Hmmm


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/More_Guns,_Less_Crime

Partially in response to Lott's book, a sixteen-member panel of the United States National Research Council was convened to address the issue of whether right-to-carry laws influenced crime rate. In 2004 they issued the report "Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review" which examined Lott's statistical methods in detail, including computation of the statistical uncertainties involved, and wrote
The committee found that answers to some of the most pressing questions cannot be addressed with existing data and research methods, however well designed. For example, despite a large body of research, the committee found no credible evidence that the passage of right-to-carry laws decreases or increases violent crime, and there is almost no empirical evidence that the more than 80 prevention programs focused on gun-related violence have had any effect on children’s behavior, knowledge, attitudes, or beliefs about firearms. The committee found that the data available on these questions are too weak to support unambiguous conclusions or strong policy statements.[2]There was one dissent among the sixteen-member panel, who felt that Lott's analysis was valid, that is, more guns do indeed result in less crime.[3]

 

[DavidJames]

What do you mean by "no one [you] know"? It's been stated in this thread many times that all guns should be banned

Let's recap, k? You said

The US has a violence problem which cannot be simply solved by removing legal access to firearms.

So now you get to provide the, in context" quotes where people think the gun violence problem can be simply solved by removing legal access to firearms.

Your second paragraph contradicts your first.

No it doesn't but, you are welcome to think it does. Now, let's see those quotes.

 

[triforcharity]

For the record, that few days was a long weekend. On my weekends I tend to like doing things other than sitting in front of a computer. I get out and do things, some of them outdoors. Sorry if this isn't convenient for you.

Furthermore, in a thread with many hundreds of posts, I am not going to dig up responses for posts that were made many pages ago.

Like I said, I have participated in a number of gun threads (including this one), lurked on quite a few others, and considered the arguments that gun owners such as yourself have put forward. I have come to the conclusion that they terrify me.

You have affected my opinion, though perhaps not in the way you like. You (spefically and others) have made me more in favour of severe gun control. Your vociferous and at times bordering on the religious support for guns and gun ownership makes me more and more certain that attitudes such as yours need to be curbed for the good of society.

Give me the power, and I will take your guns.

Lucky for you, there is no such power on this earth, and for that I despair.

You're right, there is no such power. Because I support our Constitution, and limiting the power of the federal government, and protecting the rights of EVERY citizen, you don't like my view. That's fine, I'm ok with that. I don't need your approval to exercise a right I am guaranteed under the Constitution. Lucky for me? That's amusing. Ever heard the old expression "Molan Labe"? It's kinda my new motto.

 

[Nessie]

What? Seriously? The comparative charts included large European countries, but go ahead and compare the US with all of (the larger) Europe.

The US has a gun violence problem, even in the so-called peaceful states. The first step to solving a problem is admitting it.

It may be better comparing the USA to Europe. Colorado has a similar population to Scotland, its two main cities have similar populations to Scotland and the rest is rural or even uninhabited.

Colorado in 2012 had 162 homicides. Scotland had 62.

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/cocrime.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...e-figures-drop-to-record-low-in-Scotland.html

Yet, as pointed out in the Telegraph article, Scotland is a more violent place than England and much of the EU. Colorado is one of the more peaceful US states.

 

[triforcharity]

Yes, but the last I checked Rwanda was not in the developed world. And neither is Congo or Somalia and they seem to get along quite well shooting at each other.



Only two clauses wrong with that sentence.

Somalia?????? BWAHAHAHAHAH!!! WTF? That's most likely the WORST example you could come up with.....

 

[NWO Sentryman]

What? Seriously? The comparative charts included large European countries, but go ahead and compare the US with all of (the larger) Europe.

The US has a gun violence problem, even in the so-called peaceful states. The first step to solving a problem is admitting it.

As I said before, the problems with violent crime in the US are largely due to the War on Drugs, rampant poverty and institutional racism, and nothing to do with this phantasm that people construct of "gun violence".

 

[The Norseman]

Hmmm


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/More_Guns,_Less_Crime

Isn't that what I said?

 

[The Norseman]

Let's recap, k? You said
So now you get to provide the, in context" quotes where people think the gun violence problem can be simply solved by removing legal access to firearms.
No it doesn't but, you are welcome to think it does. Now, let's see those quotes.

Sure, just as soon as you provide the evidence for all of the statements you've made regarding guns in this thread, k?

 

[lionking]

Isn't that what I said?

It was more a refutation of the title "More guns, less crime". Sorry I should have stated that and been clearer.