Skip to main content

View Diary: Driving, Drinking, Shooting (307 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The data show that there is no protection effect (0+ / 0-)

    from gun possession that comes even close to offsetting the deaths that occur in other situations. So that argument is dead.

    But cars serve an extremely useful purpose, but if we should, as a People, decide that, on balance, cars do more harm than good, then I say shut them down. Likewise, with guns. Now that we know, beyond any doubt, that guns do much more harm than good, then I say shut them down.

    It ain't hard to figure all that out.

    But gun owners, like you, squirm and wiggle trying to find a way off the hook of facts and rationality. So you cling to the idea of a "right." But even that defense is rotten in its core, because the Constitution says in its preamble that it was instituted to promote domestic tranquility. So, if any part of the Constitution is disruptive of domestic tranquility, which the second amendment clearly is, then it must be removed. So, turn in your gun. You do your part, and I will take care of the gang members. Just because you can't think of a way to do it does not mean that I can't. So, you just worry about holding up your end. I will do the heavy lifting. So, do I have your pledge to do your part? Do I have your pledge that you will turn in all your weapons to the nearest police department?

    Might and Right are always fighting, in our youth it seems exciting. Right is always nearly winning, Might can hardly keep from grinning. -- Clarence Day

    by hestal on Sun Dec 23, 2012 at 05:33:38 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  I suppose it's a difference of attitude... (0+ / 0-)

      BTW, I never said I owned a gun -- you are making a lot of assumptions (but your posts show that you do that freely).

      No, the argument is not "dead" as you say. I value my life more than that of criminals who shoot each others in gang violence or drug deals -- I understand you don't and that's your choice, but don't make that choice for ME.

      Some people here (mostly ignorant city dwellers who think the world ends at the boundary of Manhattan or San Francisco) would argue that cars, in their own right, are a horrific evil and that private citizens have no need for them if they would just use mass transit.

      It is your opinion that the benefits of firearms don't outweigh the costs. Don't confuse that with facts. No matter how many times you state your opinion, it doesn't make it a "fact".

      You seem to count each drug dealer who gets in a gunfight and kills another drug dealer because one "dissed" the other or someone who decides to commit suicide because they are about to go to prison for twenty-to-life for murdering someone as equal to my life being lost when someone breaks into my home and gets spooked. Sorry, we just disagree. You are free to eschew self protection and wait for the police to show up to call the coroner out to deal with your body. I, and any guns I may, or may not, own are less threat  to any innocent in the world than meteors are (if you are hit in the head by even a small meteor, you're likely dead).

      I'm fine with starting the process to amend the Constitution to eliminate the Second Amendment -- and perhaps someone will, in the name of maximum safety, also initiate a repeal of the Fourth Amendment or the Fifth Amendment (both of which hogtie, I think properly, law enforcement). There are a significant number of people who think police should be able to search anyone or any location without a warrant (BTW, this IS allowed in many "first world" industrialized countries) just because the benefit of doing so (nipping crime in the bud) outweighs the cost (some theoretical loss of rights if the police are not well disciplined). I don't share that view but it sounds like you would if the balance was "positive".

      But, I can't abide by people just ignoring parts of the Constitution that they don't like. The Founders understood the need to adjust the Constitution and included a mechanism to do so (look at the imposition of Prohibition and the subsequent repeal of it -- the system works). Use it.

      •  I am glad you don't own a gun of any kind. (0+ / 0-)

        I hope you will try to convince others to turn their guns in to the local police.

        In order to overcome my opinion about the net costs of owning guns all you have to do is offer concrete evidence. But, if you could, then you would already have done so. So, there is no such evidence anywhere. This means of course, that you are wrong. The net effects of civilian gun ownership are negative and do harm to the common good. I know it is hard to give up your true love, and you have my sympathy. But dealing in death and destruction is no way to live your life. You should change. You should take the right path to a long and happy life, free from gun violence and the love of guns.

        But you won't change. Such love of the power of death-dealing weapons is inherent. It is part of the psychological makeup of certain human beings and there is nothing to be done about it. This is what makes the problem so intractable. We are what we are, and you are what you are: a lover of guns. I know you don't like for me to say that, and you will reject it vehemently, but when you do, try a little introspection. Accept your biological, your evolutionary, fate.

        My only hope is that there are enough of us gun-haters to eventually overpower your group of gun-lovers and eliminate the civilian ownership of guns. My fear, of course,is that as we gun-haters make progress toward our merciful goal you gun lovers will use your guns to stop us-maybe you won't, or if you do maybe you won't have enough fellow extremists to succeed. But until then, the bleeding and dying will continue. However, just remember that you are for such evil and I am against it.

        Have a nice day.

        Might and Right are always fighting, in our youth it seems exciting. Right is always nearly winning, Might can hardly keep from grinning. -- Clarence Day

        by hestal on Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 04:53:34 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  On Hate and on Jumping To Conclusions. (0+ / 0-)

          You assert that you are a "gun hater".

          You also, incorrectly, claim that I'm a "gun lover".

          Guns, like bicycles, are inanimate objects and in my view it's irrational to hate or love either an individual instance of such an object or an entire class of such objects.

          If one thinks lethal violence is caused by widespread presence of firearms, taking a look at Switzerland is instructive. It has one of the world's lowest murder rates (0.7 vs. 4.2 in the United States). It also has one of the highest number of privately owned small firearms per capita in the world (45.7 per 100 residents and ranking fourth in the world compared to 88.8 in the United States which ranks first). Indeed, until recently, many individuals had government issued fully automatic Sig 550 rifles (i.e., a true assault weapon - a class of weapon that is virtually never found in a private residence in the United States) and government issued ammunition in their homes (most no longer have the government issued ammunition). Given that a proliferation of "highly lethal" weapons has not caused Switzerland to become the hell hole you seem to live in, there's something much bigger than "guns" that is causing violence and if you take away guns, baseball bats or something similar will become the murder weapon of choice (mass murders may switch to barricading public places and using fire). Banning guns (even if it actually meant that guns would no longer be available to criminals -- which is unlikely) makes barely more sense that attempting to eliminate gangs by banning red and blue clothing because the Bloods and the Crips claim those colors respectively.

          I am a strong supporter of democratically elected governments, basic human rights, and the U.S. Constitution (along with its embedded mechanism for modifying it). My views on gun ownership originate from these sources, not an emotional attachment or detachment to an inanimate object.

          When I see a gun I am neither repulsed by it or draw to it with any sense of affection. For the self preservation of myself and those around me, I am quite interested in some safety aspects. Is it loaded? Is a round chambered? Do people around the gun know and practice safe gun handling? Is the gun in possession or within easy access of someone with violent or irrational tendencies?... These are similar to the questions I ask when I see a car that may be running or is parked on a slope.

          You have now concluded that I don't "own a gun of any kind" after earlier concluding just the opposite. Again, you don't pay much attention to detail or facts in front of you, preferring to extrapolate beyond available data and substitute your views for reality.

          I've never said in this discussion if I DO or DON'T own one or more guns.

          But dealing in death and destruction is no way to live your life. You should change. You should take the right path to a long and happy life, free from gun violence and the love of guns.
          That's an interesting point of view from someone who chooses to live and stay in an area which, based on your statements, appears to be crime ridden to the point that you are fearful of others in your neighborhood. Although, unlike you, I would never tell someone what they "should" do, I would suggest that you might want to follow your own advice and consider moving to some place where you can be comfortable because guns are effectively illegal for private citizens to own/carry (Washington D.C. or Chicago come to mind).

          It's hard to have a meaningful discussion with someone that confuses facts with emotions and substitutes their opinion for reality about so I won't try.

          Have a Happy Holiday season and be safe.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site