The Truth About Gun Control

[Collector1337]

I see a lot of intellectual dishonesty on this forum. It's truly disappointing to see from people who claim to be so "rational," but can't stomach facts that might be uncomfortable.

Watch this video in it's entirety. A link to all the sources used are in the video description.

The video provides an explanation for the cultural differences in America and why we have more "gun murders" than the other so-called more "civilized" Western nations.

[Hermit]

That's the best exposition by a gun proponent I have encountered yet, though there is only one piece of information I was not previously aware of: the relationship between poverty and crime is not what I expected.

Now I wait for Blind groper to repeat his argument about lower murder rates in almost all other nations with strict gun control laws, which will, I expect, be dismissed with no more than a wave of the hand and perhaps the mention of an outlier or two.

[Rum]

In terms of 'facts' the guy in the video listed the source of guns and that most were obtained illegally. In the UK of course guns are not widely available legally or illegally so the comparison is not valid. The USA is swimming in the things.

[laklak]

Collector:

Q. E. muthafucken D.



Word, homes.

[Tero]

Sorry, the guy is pro gun and if he can't get his message in 7 minutes, I am not going to watch it.

The truth is, not everyone is entitled to a gun. Not everyone is entitled to drive a car either. Or fly a plane. Or dispense drugs. We regulate things. Live with it.

I watched 7 minutes. 5% guns is enough to get a high rate per 100 000 in DC. Therefore: even 5% is too many guns. If 2% are criminals, 3% patriots with guns, then 2% guns in the hands of criminals is too much. How do they get guns? Straw purchases from friend, relative or other IDIOT.

[Collector1337]

Sorry, the guy is pro gun and if he can't get his message in 7 minutes, I am not going to watch it.

The truth is, not everyone is entitled to a gun. Not everyone is entitled to drive a car either. Or fly a plane. Or dispense drugs. We regulate things. Live with it.

This is a great example of the anti-intellectualism on this forum.

"I expect complicated issues to be condensed for me in 7 minutes or I'm not watching it."

I mean, what a fucking joke.

Then, your response has nothing to do with the content of the video or facts therein, just some shitty platitude of, "we regulate things, live with it."

Talk about a complete absence of any critical thought.

[Rum]

Looking for something a little less opinion driven? (which, given the pro gun position of your OP I think we can assume the video is)..

http://www.citylab.com/politics/2013/03 ... aths/4902/

Of course it takes a bit longer than watching a video to get to grips with, so you may give it a miss I guess..

[Hermit]

Looking for something a little less opinion driven? (which, given the pro gun position of your OP I think we can assume the video is not).

We can assume Collector's video to be more opinion driven than anti gun arguments? How?

http://www.citylab.com/politics/2013/03 ... aths/4902/

Fewer guns means fewer deaths by firearms. Who would have thunk it? That argument was shot down, so to speak, a long time ago a long time ago. In 1996 the Australian gun buyback scheme took 20% of all privately owned firearms out of circulation in under a year. It made no difference to the murder rate in Australia whatsoever. While the anti gun lobby crowed about the fact that murders by firearms dropped somewhere between 60 and 75%, which is true, they totally ignored the fact that the trend in murder rates remained the same after the gun buyback scheme as before. People just used other tools to murder. That's something the "opinion driven" video pointed out with facts while the allegedly not opinion driven article advocating gun control completely ignores those facts, which makes the bottom line of the article a fucking cruel joke.

[Tero]

Your guy was well into a biased 25 minutes in the first 7 minutes. No point in watching the rest.

[Tero]

Hermit, 20% is insignificant. Taking 95% of guns out of circulation would be the first point with measurably fewer deaths.

In the US the average gun nut has 8 guns. Taking out 7 still leves one in each owner's hand. The number of armed persons remains the same!

[Hermit]

Hermit, 20% is insignificant.

Actually, it is. You see, murder by firearms decreased by somewhere between 60 and 75%. Deal with that fact, if you can.

[Tero]

With guns and crime there is not always cause and effect. You have to look at who has the guns.

[Hermit]

With guns and crime there is not always cause and effect.

Exactly. While murder by firearms decreased by somewhere between 60 and 75% in Australia, the trend in overall murder rates remains unchanged.

Broadly speaking, fewer guns do not mean less crime, and conversely and more guns do not mean less crime either.

[Tero]

Ah but we have you now. More guns always means more shooting. We can't keep track of the bullets anymore. Some are going to hit something, perhaps a cow, perhaps a baby.

[Tero]

Whether this shooting is criminal or just dumb, we can't always say. But there the permit system would come into play. You lose your gun and permit for reckless shooting for 1-5 years. The gun itself is destroyed or held under lock for the period.