Why simply comparing U.S. gun laws with Australia's is bullshit...

Topics without replies are pruned every 365 days. Not moderated.

Moderator: Dux

Gene
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 5130
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Inner Pindostan

Re: Why simply comparing U.S. gun laws with Australia's is bullshit...

Post by Gene » Mon Nov 13, 2017 9:44 am

Sangoma wrote:
Thu Oct 12, 2017 6:19 am
Without a doubt, crime rate is a multi-factorial phenomenon. However, the availability of weapons plays significant role in crime. States with more guns have more death related deaths: The Relationship Between Gun Ownership and Firearm Homicide Rates in the United States, 1981–2010 Correlation between ownership and death rate is pretty much a straight line. Apparently, the relationship is also true for suicides. Add to it the fact that about half a million guns are stolen from the law abiding citizens every year - and the idea of guns and freedom is not as straightforward anymore.
Correlation isn't causality. Vermont manages to have low rates of firearm related homicides with very permissive gun laws. Vermonters never needed a permit to carry concealed. No bans on firearms except on the Federal level. They are fifth from the bottom in gun violence. New Jersey and New York have more gun death with much tougher gun restrictions.

The Japanese and South Koreans have higher suicide rates per capita than the US. Both have very restrictive firearms laws. Most US "gun deaths" are suicides. The relationship in the US might suggest a correlation between gun ownership and suicide. The rest of the world gets it done better without them.

Chicago Ill and Houston Tx have roughly the same populations. Chicago has much tougher gun laws than Houston Tx. Houston has half of Chicago's murders each year. Wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that "wide open" Houston should have more "gun violence" than Chicago?

The average American will die because of bad dietary and lifestyle choices. Somewhere way down the line, except for African American kids who get enmeshed in the illicit drug trade, are "gun deaths". Take out the suicides and you're left with less than 10,000 deaths a year. Sixty times as many Americans will die of heart attacks than be murdered with firearms..... and if we Americans would stop banning weed and other soft drugs, we would probably have fewer gun deaths.


To me the main rationale for restricting firearms has been to benefit the Administrative State. US Bureaucrats who want to implement shitty policies have to summon the Police. If the object of the regs is armed the bureaucrat has to summon more police or SWAT. The more force required, the more noisy the operation becomes and the more likely people are going to start asking questions about why the police showed up in the first place.

A good regulation? Nobody is going to ask "Why?". A crooked bureaucrat is going to get some investigating. That's going to get them fired or worse.

Big business likes gun control too. They cannot bully rural people out of their land and mineral rights if some "noise" happens. Might even apply to labor relations.



How many little nuisance regulations do you live with each day? How often are people's lives impacted by crooked bureaucrats?

You once lived in Russia, perhaps the USSR. How did you like having petty bureaucrats tell you what to do? You accepted it because you had no choice. I've read of people in the USSR being bullied for the most petty reasons - they were a Jew, the bureaucrat didn't like their looks, they weren't "accommodating enough". You could complain to a local party member, sure, but what if they don't like you either?

Over here bureaucrats can push us but it's more expensive if they go outside of acceptable behavior. They have to justify the resources to do it. Cause someone, probably not me but someone, just might shoot them. Gun ownership forces them to observe a threshold of action.

Deterrence works. So does self regulation.
This space for let

Gene
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 5130
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Inner Pindostan

Re: Why simply comparing U.S. gun laws with Australia's is bullshit...

Post by Gene » Mon Nov 13, 2017 9:58 am

Gun thefts are a definite problem. I keep running into people who buy "truck firearms". Cheap handguns. Why anyone would do such a thing is a mystery to me. It's really annoying because these get into illicit circulation. If the gun control lobby would cease with the creeping incrementalism and stealth prohibition I would probably support mandatory reporting of thefts. Every damn time they write a law they insert weasel language that expands the scope of prohibition.

I figure everything I own is my responsibility. If it's not on me it's locked up. Never had anything of the sort stolen.
This space for let

User avatar
Herv100
Sgt. Major
Posts: 3696
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:12 am

Re: Why simply comparing U.S. gun laws with Australia's is bullshit...

Post by Herv100 » Wed Nov 15, 2017 11:40 pm

Image
Image

User avatar
Sangoma
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 6677
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:16 pm
Contact:

Re: Why simply comparing U.S. gun laws with Australia's is bullshit...

Post by Sangoma » Fri Nov 17, 2017 12:43 am

I know a 94 year old guy who smoked and drank his whole life. Does it mean that smoking is harmless? Is Vermont - the outlier in the statistic - proof that gun ownership is not a factor in gun related crime? Whereas the data from all other states confirms the relationship? I just don't see how availability as the factor can be ruled out. Since you mentioned Soviet Russia, it had very strict gun laws - and the gun related crime was very rare.

Gun control is a complex issue. However, there are several weak points in your reasoning. If companies decide to bully people out of their land it will not be done by armed conflict. Big Money will do it by influencing legislation through politicians, as it has always done it, as well as trickery and lying. Even if it gets to shoutouts, do you think it is possible for a bunch of farmers to win a war with the Army? Out of curiosity, is there an example when guns deterred the Big Business doing their thing?

If you have a look around there are interesting examples of presumption. The bank presumes that I am a criminal until proven otherwise, so I have to prove I earned cash legally. Funny, in a supermarket in Australia I can eat a pack of chips while shopping and then present empty packaging to the cashier for payment. Doing that in Moscow created a small storm: when they saw the empty packet they called the manager who was quite lost, but then gave me the lecture of "pay first, then eat". I had a little fun for five minutes debating this with him.

In any case, of all instances I think when getting a gun it is way more reasonable to demand of you some proof that you will not be a danger to those around you, directly or indirectly. Criminal record check, psych health check, cool off period etc. In addition, regulations regrading the storage of firearms to prevent theft. JMO.
Image

User avatar
Sangoma
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 6677
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:16 pm
Contact:

Re: Why simply comparing U.S. gun laws with Australia's is bullshit...

Post by Sangoma » Fri Nov 17, 2017 12:46 am

Herv, don't be a moron.
Image

User avatar
Herv100
Sgt. Major
Posts: 3696
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:12 am

Re: Why simply comparing U.S. gun laws with Australia's is bullshit...

Post by Herv100 » Fri Nov 17, 2017 1:43 am

dont comment on memes you don't even understand, old-timer
Image

User avatar
Herv100
Sgt. Major
Posts: 3696
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:12 am

Re: Why simply comparing U.S. gun laws with Australia's is bullshit...

Post by Herv100 » Fri Nov 17, 2017 1:50 am

Image
Image

dead man walking
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 6797
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 10:34 pm

Re: Why simply comparing U.S. gun laws with Australia's is bullshit...

Post by dead man walking » Fri Nov 24, 2017 5:49 pm

vegas gunman fired 1,100 rounds.

using weapons available at the time of the drafting of the constitution, that would have taken the shooter something like 5 hours, assuming a rate of fire of one musketball every 15 seconds.

so i propose we stick to an "originalist" interpretation of the constitution. the right to bear arms means the right to own muskets.

win/win: gun owners get their guns and safety advocates get a safer world.
Really Big Strong Guy: There are a plethora of psychopaths among us.

User avatar
tough old man
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 7535
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 9:43 pm
Location: Hell

Re: Why simply comparing U.S. gun laws with Australia's is bullshit...

Post by tough old man » Sat Nov 25, 2017 12:18 am

so i propose we stick to an "originalist" interpretation of the constitution. the right to bear arms means the right to own muskets.
win/win: gun owners get their guns and safety advocates get a safer world.
So no women vote, and we get our slaves back?

win/win
"I am the author of my own misfortune, I don't need a ghost writer" - Ian Dury


"Legio mihi nomen est, quia multi sumus."

dead man walking
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 6797
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 10:34 pm

Re: Why simply comparing U.S. gun laws with Australia's is bullshit...

Post by dead man walking » Sat Nov 25, 2017 3:20 pm

wrong, tom

the constitution was amended to abolish slavery.

the constitution was amended to give women the right to vote.

just the same way the constitution was amended to give a guy the right to own a musket.
Really Big Strong Guy: There are a plethora of psychopaths among us.

User avatar
tough old man
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 7535
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 9:43 pm
Location: Hell

Re: Why simply comparing U.S. gun laws with Australia's is bullshit...

Post by tough old man » Sat Nov 25, 2017 6:30 pm

damn!
"I am the author of my own misfortune, I don't need a ghost writer" - Ian Dury


"Legio mihi nomen est, quia multi sumus."

The Ginger Beard Man
Sgt. Major
Posts: 4258
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:27 pm
Location: 4th largest city in America

Re: Why simply comparing U.S. gun laws with Australia's is bullshit...

Post by The Ginger Beard Man » Sat Nov 25, 2017 6:53 pm

dead man walking wrote:
Fri Nov 24, 2017 5:49 pm
vegas gunman fired 1,100 rounds.

using weapons available at the time of the drafting of the constitution, that would have taken the shooter something like 5 hours, assuming a rate of fire of one musketball every 15 seconds.

so i propose we stick to an "originalist" interpretation of the constitution. the right to bear arms means the right to own muskets.

win/win: gun owners get their guns and safety advocates get a safer world.
This musket bullshit is the dumbest anti gun argument of all. That logic also means no free speech or privacy protection for anything we do on our computer, smartphone, or tablet.
Blaidd Drwg wrote:Disengage from the outcome and do work.
Jezzy Bell wrote:Use a fucking barbell, pansy.

dead man walking
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 6797
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 10:34 pm

Re: Why simply comparing U.S. gun laws with Australia's is bullshit...

Post by dead man walking » Sat Nov 25, 2017 7:27 pm

of course it's stupid, like originalism.

p.s. do you actually believe the stuff on your electronic devices is private? hah!
Really Big Strong Guy: There are a plethora of psychopaths among us.

Post Reply