What is the end goal for the left on the 2nd?

a reply to: chr0naut

And suicides by gun aren't gun deaths or aren't a societal problem?

They are - and that needs to be addressed with the individual. Fun fact is that people that really want to die are going to die.

But I wonder if you calculate the percentages of gun deaths related to number of guns owned, if it would be vastly different in ratio?

Do you know what else is awesome? If you dig deep enough, you can find all sorts of links to those states with the highest gun rates and crime rates also having foreign drug cartel operational footholds in those states, contributing to the high rates of fentanyl and trafficking. Weird. It's like high gang violence and high gang presence go hand in hand. A problem to be addressed not with legal gun owners, but open borders...

Here's some other info on gun myths:

Debunking Gun Myths at the Dinner Table

Listing anything from "Everytown" is the same as posting a link to a Trump Tweet.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: chr0naut

Besides, do you think that a band of armed citizens could stand against modern highly armed and armoured defense forces?

the Taliban called and left you a message. The message is as follows and I quote:

"Bwahahahahahahahahhhahahaha!!!"

List of military equipment used by mujahideen during Soviet–Afghan War

Of course, after the Russians left, the Taliban aquired leftover Russian millitary equipment, too.

... and prior to the American withdrawal, US forces had defeated most of the Taliban fighters.

I try not to interrupt someone in mid DERP, but in this case, it's important. How many weeks did it take the US to win the war in Afghanistan against bearded guys in caves with AK-47's?

originally posted by: mechtech87
a reply to: network dude

I honestly don't see any issue with those proposals.

As I said in the OP, I don't see these proposals as anything I couldn't live with or without. But that's not where it ends, we both know that. And the part where it's targeting legal firearm owners is the bothering part. We aren't the problem. The criminals who use stolen guns are.

So why should there be any effort at all to limit the rights of legal US citizens who have the God Given right to own a firearm?

I will try to not bring left vs. right into this as it never should be that, but somehow always ends up that way.

a reply to: network dude

It took about 6, maybe 7 weeks total.

The other SEVERAL DECADES were spent having recreational activities, like playing volleyball and drinking tea.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: chr0naut

Besides, do you think that a band of armed citizens could stand against modern highly armed and armoured defense forces?

the Taliban called and left you a message. The message is as follows and I quote:

"Bwahahahahahahahahhhahahaha!!!"

List of military equipment used by mujahideen during Soviet–Afghan War

Of course, after the Russians left, the Taliban aquired leftover Russian millitary equipment, too.

... and prior to the American withdrawal, US forces had defeated most of the Taliban fighters.

I try not to interrupt someone in mid DERP, but in this case, it's important. How many weeks did it take the US to win the war in Afghanistan against bearded guys in caves with AK-47's?

How long did it take for US forces to locate Saddam Hussein?

Apparently you can hide in a hole for a long time and it has little to do with holding a rifle.

Especially if the US forces decided they had defeated the enemy and just put in place a policy of holding the places they had already attained.

a reply to: chr0naut

Because banning isnt going to solve the mental health crisis, also the we have a drug for that approach to care has contributed to the problem since nobody ever gets help only masks the problem till the mind snaps.

Next you should champion banning cars to fix drunk driving.

And yes we only have two effective parties, (really only two sides of the same coin) and until that changes unreasonable stances on our bill of rights will remain the norm.

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: chr0naut

Because banning isnt going to solve the mental health crisis,

It isn't going to solve economic issues, either.

Mental health issues have nothing to do with a significant number of shootings, but guns relate to 100% of them.

also the we have a drug for that approach to care has contributed to the problem since nobody ever gets help only masks the problem till the mind snaps.

Next you should champion banning cars to fix drunk driving.

And yes we only have two effective parties, (really only two sides of the same coin) and until that changes unreasonable stances on our bill of rights will remain the norm.

Transportation is fairly neccesary for modern life, for the majority.

Alcahol and firearms aren't.

You don't ban or limit the neccessities.

I'd also say that the US is governed mainly by two fairly innefective parties, whose opposition to each other has overcome the requirements of good governance by either of them.

This is the problem with all adversarial systems of government, it looses the cooperative push to achieve things that simply must be done and turns it into hours (years, decades?) of futile and unproductive debate.

originally posted by: dothedew
a reply to: chr0naut

And suicides by gun aren't gun deaths or aren't a societal problem?

They are - and that needs to be addressed with the individual. Fun fact is that people that really want to die are going to die.

But I wonder if you calculate the percentages of gun deaths related to number of guns owned, if it would be vastly different in ratio?

Do you know what else is awesome? If you dig deep enough, you can find all sorts of links to those states with the highest gun rates and crime rates also having foreign drug cartel operational footholds in those states, contributing to the high rates of fentanyl and trafficking. Weird. It's like high gang violence and high gang presence go hand in hand. A problem to be addressed not with legal gun owners, but open borders...

So, areas with high gun ownership and high crime attract the foreign cartels?

I'll give you a hint about the American drug problem. Most of those who use or deal are American citizens.

And for instance, the opioid crisis that has driven people to more dangerous drugs like Fentanyl was due to an American company, Perdue Pharma which promoted its product OxyContin extensively for conditions that did not warrant it and hid the truth about its true addictiveness.

Purdue Pharma

America's current drug woes are driven by its extreme prioritization of capitalism before social issues and health, and have little to do with border security.

Here's some other info on gun myths:

Debunking Gun Myths at the Dinner Table

Listing anything from "Everytown" is the same as posting a link to a Trump Tweet.

Fair enough, but they are left-leaning, and Trump is usually fairly far right.

..

a reply to: chr0naut

It isn't going to solve economic issues, either.

What??

Mental health issues have nothing to do with a significant number of shootings

So you think shooting other people or yourself is the sign of a healthy mind?

You don't ban or limit the neccessities.

Firearms are 100% a necessity in many areas of the united states, in some of the poorer areas its the only way kids get protein, in some areas like where I live, bear, moose, and wolf attacks are all possible. (seriously I have found grizzly tracks and moose tracks within a quarter mile of home and every time im outside I am carrying)

I get it you live on an island but there are such wild swings in our environment (about 9.6 million sq kilometers) a lot of different deadly animals are a high risk for many people.

Yay for doubles

doubles

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: chr0naut

It isn't going to solve economic issues, either.

What??

Mental health issues have nothing to do with a significant number of shootings

So you think shooting other people or yourself is the sign of a healthy mind?

Are you suggesting that those that shoot someone in self-defense are of unsound mind?

What of police who are bringing down those that they feel are a danger? What of hunters who accidentally shoot at someone, mistaking them for prey? What about those who shoot themselves or others by accident?

These are all shootings, with guns, and aren't suicides or the result of mental illness. You can't just ignore those shootings because they don't comply with either your gun-hero fantasy, or can't be written off as the result of mental illness.

You don't ban or limit the neccessities.

Firearms are 100% a necessity in many areas of the united states, in some of the poorer areas its the only way kids get protein, in some areas like where I live, bear, moose, and wolf attacks are all possible. (seriously I have found grizzly tracks and moose tracks within a quarter mile of home and every time im outside I am carrying)

Hunting for food, especially in a subsistence society, is a legitimate reason to have a gun. As is having a gun for animal control. They are better and more legitimate reasons than having a gun for self-defense.

I get it you live on an island but there are such wild swings in our environment (about 9.6 million sq kilometers) a lot of different deadly animals are a high risk for many people.

I have always wondered why the Kalahari Bushmen stay living in an almost treeless desert, where they are continually precariously on the edge of existence where there is never enough food or water?

As for me, I was born in a relatively safe country (Australia) but that didn't stop me and my young family from moving to an even safer environment here in New Zealand.

And the whole domain of New Zealand incorporates more than 700 islands, with a combined land area of 103,483 sqare miles. Although New Zealand's two main islands are narrow, the distance from the top of the North Island to the bottom of the South Island is about the size of the US North to South.

a reply to: chr0naut

Are you suggesting that those that shoot someone in self-defense are of unsound mind?

What of police who are bringing down those that they feel are a danger? What of hunters who accidentally shoot at someone, mistaking them for prey? What about those who shoot themselves or others by accident?

Im done, you want to play word games and move goal posts fine enjoy yourself.

I am very safe from 2 legged animals my only risk is 4 legged, where people have lived for many years even further out than I do and have plenty to eat.

Its the lower 48 where the out of season hunting typically occurs.

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: chr0naut

Are you suggesting that those that shoot someone in self-defense are of unsound mind?

What of police who are bringing down those that they feel are a danger? What of hunters who accidentally shoot at someone, mistaking them for prey? What about those who shoot themselves or others by accident?

Im done, you want to play word games and move goal posts fine enjoy yourself.

I am very safe from 2 legged animals my only risk is 4 legged, where people have lived for many years even further out than I do and have plenty to eat.

Its the lower 48 where the out of season hunting typically occurs.

I wasn't moving any goalposts. If people are shot and killed with a gun, for any reason, it is a gun fatality.

It is unresonable in a debate on gun control, to discard some of those statistics arbitrarily.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: chr0naut

Are you suggesting that those that shoot someone in self-defense are of unsound mind?

What of police who are bringing down those that they feel are a danger? What of hunters who accidentally shoot at someone, mistaking them for prey? What about those who shoot themselves or others by accident?

Im done, you want to play word games and move goal posts fine enjoy yourself.

I am very safe from 2 legged animals my only risk is 4 legged, where people have lived for many years even further out than I do and have plenty to eat.

Its the lower 48 where the out of season hunting typically occurs.

I wasn't moving any goalposts. If people are shot and killed with a gun, for any reason, it is a gun fatality.

It is unresonable in a debate on gun control, to discard some of those statistics arbitrarily.

and if that's as deep as you drill down to find out where the problem is, it's no wonder you see guns as the culprit. But just as drinking water is a good thing, you can die from it, so should it be outlawed? Or should folks be taught not to drink too much of it?

Once you separate suicides, and gang violence, the gun crime issue seems to fade into obscurity. Both of those are important, but neither will be solved by removing guns. Actually, you will never be able to remove guns, and only the law abiding citizens who follow all the stupid rules already in place will be the one's to give them up if it comes to that. The criminals will keep theirs. Focus on mental health first, and the rest will follow.

a reply to: network dude

It gets really hard to argue with with someone who only wants to see one aspect of things.

But, on the same note, also hilarious to watch someone from another country try to justify us losing our constitutional rights when they have none of their own.

a reply to: PorkChop96

it would be like Me championing Koala bear rights not to be touched. Have I ever seen a koala bear in the wild? nope. Will I ever unless I travel to their habitat? nope. So I have little chance of learning all the nuances of what makes a koala bear sad. Perhaps I should leave the koala bear rights to those who understand them better.