Gunfire erupts at Arkansas nightclub, 28 hurt

[impulse]

8 hours ago, Grubster said:

Are you comparing mass shootings in the US to all shootings in Thailand or mass shootings in Thailand?

 

The guy I'm responding to claimed there are mass shootings every week in the USA.  That's 12 times more than the real number.

 

We may never agree on the subject of gun control, and that's fine (or we may be closer than this exchange would indicate).  But basing an argument on absolutely false numbers isn't a good way to enter a debate.

 

In my post #17, there's a link to a previously discussed (here on TVF) article comparing the total gun fatality rate in Thailand vs the USA.  That's in response to another statement that claimed (falsely) that the gun death rate in the USA makes Thailand look like Disneyland.  Again, we may not agree on the topic, but let's at least start with correct facts.

 

I'm actually in favor of much tighter gun control, but taken in the context of the erosion of quite a few of our personal freedoms and privacy rights since 9/11, it's a slippery slope we're all on.  Because once the government has taken rights away, it's very seldom that we get them back.  Ever.

 

Edited July 3, 2017 by impulse

[impulse]

18 hours ago, Thakkar said:

Only in a bizarre alternate universe can policy be based on things that didn't happen.

 

Based on one FAILED attempt at a shoe bomb, everyone at American airports have to take their shoes off. Based on 3 dozen school shootings since Columbine, gun laws haven't been touched.

 

Gun advocates claim that if more people have guns then there will be less crime.  The evidence is quite the opposite: more guns results in more homicides and suicides. 

 

Death and injury data: http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/index.html

 

Correlate above with Gun ownership data: http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/ (much digging around required)

 

Another problem with tens of millions of households having guns is that EVERY YEAR (on average) a quarter of a million guns are stolen in household burglaries. Those stolen guns aren't going to be used for good or to protect true patriots from a tyrannical government. (http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fshbopc0510.pdf)

 

Most of the pro gun arguments make no sense. Here's a comedian who expresses that much better than I can ( and, yes, I've posted this before, so sue me):

 

There may be a correlation between guns, gun ownership and crime and violence.  Just like the most crime ridden streets are usually the ones with the most cops.  But that doesn't mean that cops cause crime (well, in most places, anyway)

 

There's a big disconnect between correlation and causation.  Otherwise, I'd never go to a hospital.  Too many people die in them.

 

I agree that 250,000 guns stolen is a huge problem.  But that means there's a 1 in 1000 chance that mine will be stolen in a given year.  Big numbers are scary, but they need to be put into context next to other big numbers.

 

[ddavidovsky]

19 hours ago, impulse said:

 

Afraid Pandora's box is already open.   You figure a bunch of gang bangers are going to be good sports and turn in their stolen weapons?

 

You won this debate in the beginning.

As usual, the hecklers are arguing from emotion rather than reason. In advocating gun control, they need to address how to get the guns off the thugs first. There's no solution.

[Thakkar]

5 hours ago, impulse said:

 

There may be a correlation between guns, gun ownership and crime and violence.  Just like the most crime ridden streets are usually the ones with the most cops.  But that doesn't mean that cops cause crime (well, in most places, anyway)

 

There's a big disconnect between correlation and causation.  Otherwise, I'd never go to a hospital.  Too many people die in them.

 

I agree that 250,000 guns stolen is a huge problem.  But that means there's a 1 in 1000 chance that mine will be stolen in a given year.  Big numbers are scary, but they need to be put into context next to other big numbers.

 

 

You can parse the numbers any way you want--the facts on the ground remain the same. And the facts don't look good for gun advocates. This is why the NRA lobbied hard (and successfully) for Congress to defund CDC studies on gun deaths.(http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/12/gun_violence_research_nra_and_congress_blocked_gun_control_studies_at_cdc.html)

 

And crime-related gun deaths is less than half the story. Over 60% of gun deaths are suicides. And, yes, having a gun in the house is a major contributor (http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199310073291506 and confirmed by other studies http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/09/13/2617131/largest-gun-study-guns-murder/)

 

Yes, violence is a complicated phenomenon. But it is made far more lethal by the easy availability and killing power of firearms.

 

Every deflection by gun advocates can be argued back to the basic inescapable facts:

Easy access to guns--> more guns in more hands.

More guns-->more gun deaths

 

A study of 27 developed countries shows that the U.S. Has the highest per capita gun ownership (88.8 per 100) and also the highest gun related deaths (10.2/100k) while Japan has the lowest (0.6/100; 0.06/100k). The study's authors concluded that, "more guns do not make people safer." (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2013/09/19/u-s-has-more-guns-and-gun-deaths-than-any-other-country-study-finds/)

 

Now, correlation is not *necessarily* causation. But when study after study done by various organisations in various countries at various points in time over the past 30 years point to the same thing, then it is pretty clear that, in fact, more guns=more gun deaths.

 

For those who say that the U.S. is somehow exceptional and cannot be compared to other countries, studies conducted exclusively within the U.S. show the same thing: http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301409?journalCode=ajph&

 

No wonder the NRA doesn't want the government to finance CDC studies on the phenomenon.

 

Now, having said all that, I agree that the 2nd Ammendment made perfect sense at the time it was promulgated. Today, while the the chance of tyranny in the US is slim to none, we all know that history turns on a dime. I therefore understand those Americans who say, "Hey, you never know; we should stock up just in case."

 

But, realistically, this isn't 1850. Police forces are militarized. Barely-trained 300 pound gun owners aren't going to protect us from tyranny no matter how heavily armed they are.

 

T

 

[impulse]

1 hour ago, joecoolfrog said:

Now compare the gun fatality rate in the US to that of say the UK. Not fair you say because the UK has strict gun regulation  , well isnt that the point ?

Ok I will be generous , lets compare the overall murder rates of the US and the Uk , pretty much the same diferential , how odd.

So whats the problem ; Perhaps the UK has no inner city poverty , no gang strife , no immigrants , no nutcases . Well none of thats true so why are you about 15 times more likely to get murdered in the USA , its a huge mystery !

 

You may want to check your numbers since you're only 5 x as likely to be murdered in the USA as in the UK.  And if you drill down through the FBI database, you'll find that the rates are about on par if you're middle class and don't live in a blighted city.  But we'll leave aside your erroneous numbers for now, though they are evidence that so many people are basing their opinions on false information.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

 

And as tempting as it is to compare the USA with the UK, there are quite a few cultural and societal differences that make gun ownership just one factor in the difference in the rate of violence and murder.

 

Better to compare the UK with other, closer (both geographical and cultural) countries in Europe with much looser firearms laws and higher gun ownership rates.  I doubt you'll find that the gun ownership rate will be the factor with the best correlation for violence.  But I stand to be corrected, since I've never delved into Euro gun violence rates.

 

[Thakkar]

5 hours ago, ddavidovsky said:

You won this debate in the beginning.

As usual, the hecklers are arguing from emotion rather than reason. In advocating gun control, they need to address how to get the guns off the thugs first. There's no solution.

The usual refrain from gun advocates is that if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. Think about that. What they're saying is that criminals don't respect laws. Let the brilliance of that argument sink in. And by "brilliance", I of course mean "idiocy". 

 

Laws, restrictions and sanctions affect everyone, including criminals. Otherwise, why have any laws at all? The existence of criminals is the very reason for criminal laws.

 

Removing legal guns from American homes will immediately reduce by a quarter million (every year!) the number of guns in the hands of criminals because that's the number of guns stolen in burglaries every year, most of which are never recovered. (http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fshbopc0510.pdf)

 

Severely restricting gun ownership will make guns more expensive and harder to obtain, even for criminals.

 

No matter how you slice it, tighter gun laws = fewer guns and fewer guns = fewer gun deaths. So, again, the bottom line question is this: how many thousands of avoidable American deaths (yearly!) is your second amendment right worth?

 

In the absence of gun control, what we have is an ever escalating civilian arms race with no end in sight. Everyone armed to the teeth and living in constant fear is no way to go through life.

 

T

 

[impulse]

4 hours ago, Thakkar said:

A study of 27 developed countries shows that the U.S. Has the highest per capita gun ownership (88.8 per 100) and also the highest gun related deaths (10.2/100k) while Japan has the lowest (0.6/100; 0.06/100k). The study's authors concluded that, "more guns do not make people safer." (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2013/09/19/u-s-has-more-guns-and-gun-deaths-than-any-other-country-study-finds/)

 

Interesting that your linked article shows the firearm related gun death rate to be over twice as high as the UNODC published rate for ALL homicides in the USA at 4.88.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

 

I suspect it's related to suicides and accidental deaths, but your article doesn't link to the data.

 

[Thakkar]

6 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Interesting that your linked article shows the firearm related gun death rate to be over twice as high as the UNODC published rate for ALL homicides in the USA at 4.88.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

 

I suspect it's related to suicides and accidental deaths, but your article doesn't link to the data.

 

I haven't had time to compare the numbers, but here's an intital reaction.

 

one is about total gun related death rate and the other is just about homicide. They aren't directly comparable. The former includes suicides and accidents involving guns—both of which, other studies show, are much less likely were it not for the ready availability of guns.

 

T

[ddavidovsky]

4 hours ago, Thakkar said:

The usual refrain from gun advocates is that if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. Think about that. What they're saying is that criminals don't respect laws. Let the brilliance of that argument sink in. And by "brilliance", I of course mean "idiocy". 

 

Laws, restrictions and sanctions affect everyone, including criminals. Otherwise, why have any laws at all? The existence of criminals is the very reason for criminal laws.

 

Removing legal guns from American homes will immediately reduce by a quarter million (every year!) the number of guns in the hands of criminals because that's the number of guns stolen in burglaries every year, most of which are never recovered. (http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fshbopc0510.pdf)

 

Severely restricting gun ownership will make guns more expensive and harder to obtain, even for criminals.

 

No matter how you slice it, tighter gun laws = fewer guns and fewer guns = fewer gun deaths. So, again, the bottom line question is this: how many thousands of avoidable American deaths (yearly!) is your second amendment right worth?

 

In the absence of gun control, what we have is an ever escalating civilian arms race with no end in sight. Everyone armed to the teeth and living in constant fear is no way to go through life.

 

T

 

Fewer guns only means fewer deaths for those that still have guns.

 

I only believe in the intrinsic insecurity of human nature, which is a result of the intrinsic competitiveness of societies. People are well-behaved if they have enough what they want - including pride. When they don't, almost anyone is capable of an astonishing brutality that we all call inhuman. Things may be secure enough at the moment, but who can trust the future, after the next economic crash or environmental catastrophe or race war? Gun ownership will only increase with perceived insecurity, and all the evidence is that the world is getting more and more insecure every day. Close all the gun shops and people will start creating guns with 3D printers - good luck with controlling that...

 

America is a somewhat dysfunctional society, stemming largely from its brutal, racially divided origins. I wouldn't want to live there.

 

[impulse]

12 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

I haven't had time to compare the numbers, but here's an intital reaction.

 

one is about total gun related death rate and the other is just about homicide. They aren't directly comparable. The former includes suicides and accidents involving guns—both of which, other studies show, are much less likely were it not for the ready availability of guns.

 

It appears 2/3 of those gun related deaths are suicides. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate

 

Since Japan has a 50% higher suicide rate than the USA, it's hard to blame suicides on easy access to guns. 

[Thakkar]

3 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

It appears 2/3 of those gun related deaths are suicides. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate

 

Since Japan has a 50% higher suicide rate than the USA, it's hard to blame suicides on easy access to guns. 

Guns don't cause suicides; the easy access to guns means that carrying out a suicidal impulse is easier. In this instance, comparing two vastly different cultures is unhelpful.

 

T

[Thakkar]

11 minutes ago, ddavidovsky said:

Fewer guns only means fewer deaths for those that still have guns.

 

I only believe in the intrinsic insecurity of human nature, which is a result of the intrinsic competitiveness of societies. People are well-behaved if they have enough what they want - including pride. When they don't, almost anyone is capable of an astonishing brutality that we all call inhuman. Things may be secure enough at the moment, but who can trust the future, after the next economic crash or environmental catastrophe or race war? Gun ownership will only increase with perceived insecurity, and all the evidence is that the world is getting more and more insecure every day. Close all the gun shops and people will start creating guns with 3D printers - good luck with controlling that...

 

America is a somewhat dysfunctional society, stemming largely from its brutal, racially divided origins. I wouldn't want to live there.

 

If the US is as dysfunctional as you say, then all the more reason for stricter gun control. A dinky little 3D printed gun is not the same as a semi-automatic assault rifle I can walk into any gun show and buy.

 

T

[impulse]

16 minutes ago, ddavidovsky said:

America is a somewhat dysfunctional society, stemming largely from its brutal, racially divided origins. I wouldn't want to live there.

 

Calling America one society is like calling Southeast Asia one society.  It's a melting pot, but one that's always in progress.

 

I'm always amazed at the disconnect between what I read in the international press and what I find on the ground when I go to visit family.  

 

The press would have you believe that society is breaking down, bullets are flying everywhere, the economy has tanked, and the future is bleak.  The family just passes me the potato salad and shows me pictures of the kids off at university and in their new homes with their new families.  I'm looking forward to repatriating.

 

[ddavidovsky]

10 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

If the US is as dysfunctional as you say, then all the more reason for stricter gun control. A dinky little 3D printed gun is not the same as a semi-automatic assault rifle I can walk into any gun show and buy.

 

T

We're talking about street hoodlums here. Semi-automatics weren't used in this incident.

A 3D printed gun at close range will be good enough for them. And if the technology isn't quite there yet, it will be.

[ddavidovsky]

6 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Calling America one society is like calling Southeast Asia one society.  It's a melting pot, but one that's always in progress.

 

I'm always amazed at the disconnect between what I read in the international press and what I find on the ground when I go to visit family.  

 

The press would have you believe that society is breaking down, bullets are flying everywhere, the economy has tanked, and the future is bleak.  The family just passes me the potato salad and shows me pictures of the kids off at university and in their new homes with their new families.  I'm looking forward to repatriating.

 

I'm sure it's lovely in Connecticut, but my general experience, as a visitor, has not been so rosy. Never actually been mugged but lots of no-go areas, authority is high handed, people generally distrust each other, lots of anti-social behaviour (I'll never again take an overnight Greyhound bus). In McDonalds one time a black dude sat down opposite me and without a word just started eating my fries. If I lived there, gun ownership would be tempting... 

[impulse]

1 hour ago, ddavidovsky said:

You won this debate in the beginning.

As usual, the hecklers are arguing from emotion rather than reason. In advocating gun control, they need to address how to get the guns off the thugs first. There's no solution.

 

And here's one that always stumps them:

 

Alcohol kills many times as many people in the USA as guns each year.  

 

https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/alcohol-health/overview-alcohol-consumption/alcohol-facts-and-statistics

 

If you want to get a sense of how American gun owners feel about our right to own guns, and our acceptance of the downsides and risks, imagine how most people around the world (and especially tuned in to TVF here) feel about their right to drink alcohol, and are willing to accept the downsides and the risks to keep that right.  

 

And how they'd feel if an outsider came in and pointed out the obvious- fewer people would die from alcohol related causes if you just banned alcohol.  It's so simple.

 

I challenge them to try that on for size.

Edited July 3, 2017 by impulse

[InMyShadow]

  Calling America one society is like calling Southeast Asia one society.  It's a melting pot, but one that's always in progress.

 

I'm always amazed at the disconnect between what I read in the international press and what I find on the ground when I go to visit family.  

 

The press would have you believe that society is breaking down, bullets are flying everywhere, the economy has tanked, and the future is bleak.  The family just passes me the potato salad and shows me pictures of the kids off at university and in their new homes with their new families.  I'm looking forward to repatriating.

 

 

But bullets are flying! The media is not lying. Your looking through rose colored glasses because your repatriating.

 

This is reall brother and its not even including 2017. Why would you want to live in the world's sickest 1st world society?

 

http://timelines.latimes.com/deadliest-shooting-rampages/

 

 

 

[Thakkar]

27 minutes ago, ddavidovsky said:

We're talking about street hoodlums here. Semi-automatics weren't used in this incident.

A 3D printed gun at close range will be good enough for them. And if the technology isn't quite there yet, it will be.

 

I don't understand. Are you saying more law-abiding citizens should have guns because hoodlums have guns?

[impulse]

18 minutes ago, InMyShadow said:

But bullets are flying! The media is not lying. Your looking through rose colored glasses because your repatriating.

This is reall brother

http://timelines.latimes.com/deadliest-shooting-rampages/

 

Let's look at the numbers.  The real numbers.  With 15,000 annual murders among 321,000,000 people, my odds of not being murdered in a year in the USA are 99.995%.  (They're better than that because of my demographic profile, but let's stick to averages)

 

If I lived there for 50 years, my chances of being murdered are 0.2%, with a 99.8% chance I won't be murdered.  Being middle class and living in the 'burbs, my chances are even better than average.

 

So, what's real and what's sensationalism and who's reporting with an agenda?

 

Edit:  But feel free to avoid the place like the plague...

 

Edited July 3, 2017 by impulse

[ddavidovsky]

32 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

 

I don't understand. Are you saying more law-abiding citizens should have guns because hoodlums have guns?

I don't prescribe, I describe. Fact is that insecure people are more likely to want guns.

If you want a solution from me, there isn't one. America is all bolloxed up. By all means ban new gun sales to prevent further escalation - and ban 3D printers as well (yes, seriously, who needs it?). But as I said, the problem is to get the existing guns out of society, and that is like trying to unscramble an egg.

[Thakkar]

10 minutes ago, ddavidovsky said:

I don't prescribe, I describe. Fact is that insecure people are more likely to want guns.

If you want a solution from me, there isn't one. America is all bolloxed up. By all means ban new gun sales to prevent further escalation - and ban 3D printers as well (yes, seriously, who needs it?). But as I said, the problem is to get the existing guns out of society, and that is like trying to unscramble an egg.

"the problem is to get the existing guns out of society, and that is like trying to unscramble an egg."

 

Not necessarily. AUstralia did with a high degree of success. America isn't Australia, but it's possible. Realistically though, you may be right and it's an unlikely scenario. Just like gay marriage was a decade ago.

 

T

[Thakkar]

52 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Let's look at the numbers.  The real numbers.  With 15,000 annual murders among 321,000,000 people, my odds of not being murdered in a year in the USA are 99.995%.  (They're better than that because of my demographic profile, but let's stick to averages)

 

If I lived there for 50 years, my chances of being murdered are 0.2%, with a 99.8% chance I won't be murdered.  Being middle class and living in the 'burbs, my chances are even better than average.

 

So, what's real and what's sensationalism and who's reporting with an agenda?

 

Edit:  But feel free to avoid the place like the plague...

 

I realize you are responding to a specific comment, and in that context your response may be correct. I agree with your apparent contention that the US is on the whole, a relatively safe place. As with any place, if you go looking for trouble, it isn't hard to find. I'd argue that it might be somewhat easier in the US. But then, don't go looking for trouble.

 

In the broader context, I think though that your murder argument is kind of a backwards way of looking at the issue. It's not about you (or me), but about the people that are actually murdered. *Their* chances of having been killed would have been lower if there were stricter gun control. And, again, it's not just about murder rates. Gun deaths include accidents and suicides, both of which would be lower without the easy access to guns, not to mention mass shootings with semi automatics and extended clips.

 

So it comes down to this: how many preventable deaths per year is a reasonable payment for the sake of having unhindered access to a veritable armory of firearms for all and sundry?

 

Societies make such choices all the time. My contention is that Americans have not been allowed to make that choice. The vast majority of Americans support stricter gun controls. Why aren't legislators doing their jobs? Instead, these same legislators are passing laws to suppress government financing of studies on the effects of gun ownership.

 

T

 

[pegman]

On July 2, 2017 at 0:27 AM, williamgeorgeallen said:

all the staff at night clubs need to be armed to take out active shooters. the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. should be compulsory for good guys to be armed. anyone know a good test for goodness?

2nd stupidest thing I read today. 1st was the Little Rock Police Chief stating it was Devine Intervention that kept there from being deaths. Why people wonder how a Trump could be elected by these lunatics I'll never know.

[williamgeorgeallen]

15 minutes ago, pegman said:

2nd stupidest thing I read today. 1st was the Little Rock Police Chief stating it was Devine Intervention that kept there from being deaths. Why people wonder how a Trump could be elected by these lunatics I'll never know.

was a joke. how could you not see that was a joke? a test for goodness? how can anyone be so devoid of humor?

Edited July 3, 2017 by williamgeorgeallen

[pegman]

Just now, williamgeorgeallen said:

was a joke. how could you not see that was a joke?

I am so sorry. If you knew some of the Americans I do you would understand my mistake. 

[pegman]

1 hour ago, impulse said:

 

Let's look at the numbers.  The real numbers.  With 15,000 annual murders among 321,000,000 people, my odds of not being murdered in a year in the USA are 99.995%.  (They're better than that because of my demographic profile, but let's stick to averages)

 

If I lived there for 50 years, my chances of being murdered are 0.2%, with a 99.8% chance I won't be murdered.  Being middle class and living in the 'burbs, my chances are even better than average.

 

So, what's real and what's sensationalism and who's reporting with an agenda?

 

Edit:  But feel free to avoid the place like the plague...

 

Here is another context. A person is 46x more likely to be killed by a firearm in the USA than in the UK. 176x more than in Japan.

[robblok]

On 2-7-2017 at 1:13 PM, ResandePohm said:

These people with a screw loose would find it harder to carry out these atrosities if the US were to change their archaic gun laws and bring itself into line with the more civilised countries

I am all for gun control, Dutch guy here with only around 150 murders last year in my country. However in the states its far to late. Too many guns around to ever rectify the problem. Now you would only take them away from law abiding citizen and the criminals would keep them. They have a large problem over there with no easy solutions. 

[pegman]

3 hours ago, ddavidovsky said:

You won this debate in the beginning.

As usual, the hecklers are arguing from emotion rather than reason. In advocating gun control, they need to address how to get the guns off the thugs first. There's no solution.

There is so. Mandatory minimum of 5 years for gun possession. Get caught with a gun you are going away. Applies to everyone. This is like the leaky south border  false argument that nothing can be done to stop it. Do what Thailand just threatened to do and it stops overnight. Lay criminal charges against anyone that employs illegal immigrates with 2year mandatory minimum. I don't think the bosses at Tyson's would still be hiring any. No work means no reason for being in the country.

It's not rocket science it's all about lack of political will.

[impulse]

12 minutes ago, pegman said:

Here is another context. A person is 46x more likely to be killed by a firearm in the USA than in the UK. 176x more than in Japan.

 

Still I'm not going to lose any sleep over something with a 0.2% chance of happening to me in the next 50 years.  

 

That's a 1 in 500 chance in 50 years.

 

[pegman]

Just now, impulse said:

 

Still I'm not going to lose any sleep over something with a 0.2% chance of happening to me in the next 50 years.  

 

That's a 1 in 500 chance in 50 years.

 

Yes, all about you and not those young kids at Sandy Hook. I'll give you people one thing your reputation is well and truly earned.