Gun Master Debate

[UltimateApathy]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state

The FBI link:

Aggravated assaults accounted for the highest number of violent crimes reported to law enforcement at 62.4 percent. Robbery comprised 29.4 percent of violent crimes, forcible rape accounted for 6.9 percent, and murder accounted for 1.2 percent of estimated violent crimes in 2011.
Information collected regarding type of weapon showed that firearms were used in 67.7 percent of the nation’s murders, 41.3 percent of robberies, and 21.2 percent of aggravated assaults.

So 2/3 murders were committed by guns, and the simple act of stealing something from someone was accompanied almost half the time by a gun, and physical altercations between people were accompanied 1/5 of the time by use of a firearm. These kinda numbers are very telling indeed, they tell of a country with out-of-control gun problems.

 

[EffigyForgotten]

Just shut the fuck up already.

 

[Summerian]

I don't have stats handy. Anybody want to dig up a stat about what percentage of gun crimes are committed with legally obtained guns?

My gut tells me that taking guns out of the hands of well-meaning citizens won't do much to solve the cause of the vast majority of gun violence. Mass shootings? Probably. But in the grand scheme of things those numbers are few compared to those everyday shootings on the streets that society only cares about for the thirty seconds they're reported on the local news.

There is no question that there is an unhealthy gun culture in the US. And using a gun yourself to defend yourself from that is a legitimate reasonable choice that I have chosen not to make.

"taking guns out of the hands of well-meaning citizens"
It's what the right wing says the libs want to do.
I want to know what so so impossible about making sure those with a gun know how to use it and are right in the head. Still waiting for the answer to why responsible gun ownership is such an awefull thing.
And you make a good point about mass shootings and everyday shootings.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-crime-murders-with-firearms
United States: 9,369
Slovakia: 2,356
Germany: 269
Poland: 111
Spain: 97
Sweden: 58

Even when counting Slovakia(?) most can see there's something up with USA:s stats.
Are americans really pointing at Colombia to try to look normal?
When looking at the EU, USA:s "murders with firearms" is at least 4 times higher than expected.

 

[Summerian]

So it's absurdly alarmist to be afraid of the gubment killing us all, instead we need to fear a Red Dawn scenario? I think you have been watching too many movies.

Well I'm sorry you feel that way.
Now lets get back to guns and the nuts.

Did you hear about the million fat man marsh?
From all across america they were huffing and puffing their way to washington to stop Obama from taking their penises away.
They all died of heart attacks after a few minutes of walking. There were stained tank tops, sizzling lard and soiled underwear everywhere.
And guns...

 

[Diggi]

Who's mind (here) has been changed by this debate/thread?

Who has read an opposing side, opinion, etc in this thread and has taken a new, different or perhaps even a 180 degree turn from their initial opinion on this subject?

I don't mean this in any cynical way at all, I am literally just curious. I find the idea of written debate/argument a fascinating medium of discussion (etc)

 

[Summerian]

 

[Dak]

So much for levels of mass murder rate decreasing, ignorant minions:

Where did anyone make this claim?

I think you've been force-fed too much NRA propaganda if you think you'd be able to resist the government with your precious little guns.

Yes, I've been strapped to a chair and "waterboarded" with the history and statistics of all the governments who banned guns. Damn history class.

Here are 12 facts that all go to prove you mindless puppets wrong on just about every scenario you've tried to argue for or against in this topic:

I see two relevant "Scenarios", and there's plenty of contrary evidence from better or equivalent sources than Gallup or Harvard

7. Gun ownership in the United States is declining overall.

“For all the attention given to America’s culture of guns, ownership of firearms is at or near all-time lows,” writes political scientist Patrick Egan. The decline is most evident on the General Social Survey, though it also shows up on polling from Gallup, as you can see on this graph:

This polling doesn't line up with the national background check numbers from the FBI:

8. More guns tend to mean more homicide.

The Harvard Injury Control Research Center assessed the literature on guns and homicide and found that there’s substantial evidence that indicates more guns means more murders. This holds true whether you’re looking at different countries or different states. Citations here.

9. States with stricter gun control laws have fewer deaths from gun-related violence.

Last year, economist Richard Florida dove deep into the correlations between gun deaths and other kinds of social indicators. Some of what he found was, perhaps, unexpected: Higher populations, more stress, more immigrants, and more mental illness were not correlated with more deaths from gun violence. But one thing he found was, perhaps, perfectly predictable: States with tighter gun control laws appear to have fewer gun-related deaths. The disclaimer here is that correlation is not causation. But correlations can be suggestive:

(map)

“The map overlays the map of firearm deaths above with gun control restrictions by state,” explains Florida. “It highlights states which have one of three gun control restrictions in place – assault weapons’ bans, trigger locks, or safe storage requirements. Firearm deaths are significantly lower in states with stricter gun control legislation. Though the sample sizes are small, we find substantial negative correlations between firearm deaths and states that ban assault weapons (-.45), require trigger locks (-.42), and mandate safe storage requirements for guns (-.48).”

Small samples (big red flag). Ignore DC. Ignore Chicago. Ignore New York. Ignore where other rates of crime rise in correlation. Anyway, since Harvard was cited:

Harvard Law Study: No discernible impact on crime from Gun Control

Here's an entire study, but it probably uses too many words and terms you wouldn't recognize.

Did you miss the numerous memos earlier about gun crime making up more than 65% of all murders in the USA every year?

So what? Why is the tool important?

Deadly count: US averages 20 mass shootings every year

So what? Overall/all crime to include homicide is down. It doesn't matter if it's 50 at one time or 50 one at a time. You can't seem to get that through your head.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state

The FBI link:

Aggravated assaults accounted for the highest number of violent crimes reported to law enforcement at 62.4 percent. Robbery comprised 29.4 percent of violent crimes, forcible rape accounted for 6.9 percent, and murder accounted for 1.2 percent of estimated violent crimes in 2011.
Information collected regarding type of weapon showed that firearms were used in 67.7 percent of the nation’s murders, 41.3 percent of robberies, and 21.2 percent of aggravated assaults.

So 2/3 murders were committed by guns, and the simple act of stealing something from someone was accompanied almost half the time by a gun, and physical altercations between people were accompanied 1/5 of the time by use of a firearm. These kinda numbers are very telling indeed, they tell of a country with out-of-control gun problems.

So do you feel yourself being laughed off the internet? You stated earlier that "gun crime far exceeds all other sorts of crime" when you couldn't read the statistics. Now that you have pulled the statistics you can see they prove the opposite: Over 60% of crime is aggravated assault, and only 1/5 included a firearm in the altercation. Even if everything else had a 50% firearm involvement rate, it's still far less on the whole. Plus, those stats are only on violent crime, and do not include the crime without violence (many types of property crime).

Well I'm sorry you feel that way.
Now lets get back to guns and the nuts.

Did you hear about the million fat man marsh?
From all across america they were huffing and puffing their way to washington to stop Obama from taking their penises away.
They all died of heart attacks after a few minutes of walking. There were stained tank tops, sizzling lard and soiled underwear everywhere.
And guns...

Have you heard about ad hominems and strawmen and red herrings? Obviously not. It's why you and UA are so frustrated. But lets look at a different kind of nut: Why are you afraid of the Chinese invading?

 

[Summerian]

Oh, I'm not frustrated.
Sorry you feel that way.

People don't kill people - bullets do.

 

[Dak]

"taking guns out of the hands of well-meaning citizens"
It's what the right wing says the libs want to do.
I want to know what so so impossible about making sure those with a gun know how to use it and are right in the head. Still waiting for the answer to why responsible gun ownership is such an awefull thing.
And you make a good point about mass shootings and everyday shootings.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-crime-murders-with-firearms
United States: 9,369
Slovakia: 2,356
Germany: 269
Poland: 111
Spain: 97
Sweden: 58

Even when counting Slovakia(?) most can see there's something up with USA:s stats.
Are americans really pointing at Colombia to try to look normal?
When looking at the EU, USA:s "murders with firearms" is at least 4 times higher than expected.

Why does it matter what the murder is committed with? Plus you are comparing aggregate numbers from countries the size of one US state to the whole US aggregate. That is, from a statistical analysis standpoint, stupid and misleading.

The total homicide rate for the US as per most recent data is under 3%. It's just under 1% for Spain. So while you could spin that and say its "triple" the rate, it's still only 3 and 1%.

But let's look at all violent crime: The EU is much worse than the US even with rampant underreporting in the EU

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196941/The-violent-country-Europe-Britain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html

 

[Summerian]

Now you can't prove that.

 

[Summerian]

Oh and...
Bullets don't kill people - death do.

 

[Dak]

The bottom line is that myself and others are providing a wide range of information to defend our position, from FBI statistics to Harvard studies to foreign crime rate comparisons, while both UA and Sum provide nothing but a dozen ways to say the exact same information (mass killing totals and "gun deaths") plus a bunch of meaningless memes.

There is no mystery to who is ignorant and uninformed here.

 

[Summerian]

The bottom line is that myself and others are providing a wide range of information to defend our position, from FBI statistics to Harvard studies to foreign crime rate comparisons, while both UA and Sum provide nothing but a dozen ways to say the exact same information (mass killing totals and "gun deaths") plus a bunch of meaningless memes.

There is no mystery to who is ignorant and uninformed here.

Your ego got you in knots, buddy.

 

[matt schrauben]

^Case in point

 

[matt schrauben]

The bottom line is that myself and others are providing a wide range of information to defend our position, from FBI statistics to Harvard studies to foreign crime rate comparisons, while both UA and Sum provide nothing but a dozen ways to say the exact same information (mass killing totals and "gun deaths") plus a bunch of meaningless memes.

There is no mystery to who is ignorant and uninformed here.

Not to meniton how you pointed out (more than once) UA's inability to read and interpret the very information he provided.

This post was priceless:

Here you go again. You said gun crime. Those charts don't compare gun crime to other weapons, it only compares homicide(murder) by firearm vs other weapons. So not only are you unable remain consistent as to what you are talking about, you can't even read graphs and charts.

The table of the raw data only gives rates of common types of gun crimes per 100,000 - not vs other types violent crime (IE, VC without a gun). As you can see, the homicide rate is only 2.75 nationally, which is down from the previous year. 2.75 is quite low absolutely and internationally, even though the US is far and away #1 in gun saturation.

None of this data backs up any possible point other than "people can do bad things with guns". But it further displays the point that "They very rarely do, and it's getting more rare each year" (even though there are more guns in circulation in the US than ever, and gun companies are selling faster than they can make them).

 

[Summerian]

^Case in point

^ditto

 

[Jimmy... Dead.]

The bottom line is that myself and others are providing a wide range of information to defend our position, from FBI statistics to Harvard studies to foreign crime rate comparisons, while both UA and Sum provide nothing but a dozen ways to say the exact same information (mass killing totals and "gun deaths") plus a bunch of meaningless memes.

There is no mystery to who is ignorant and uninformed here.

Why do you bother? You're talking to monkeys.

 

[Dak]

That was my wrap up. I've pretty much presented all the necessary data for the standard arguments and obviously they were out a several pages ago. Maybe someone new will come in later and wow me with a new and nuanced argument for gun control, fully backed with authoritative citations (accurately comprehended), then I'll respond.

 

[viewerfromnihil]

I thought Sam Harris' comments on gun control were of the most well reasoned to be spoken as of late: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-riddle-of-the-gun

edit: In relation to how the gun debate has occurred in this thread, here is an equivalent rebuttal against Harris' comments: http://www.salon.com/2013/01/10/why_does_anyone_take_sam_harris_seriously/

 

[Dak]

And the author of the article has the audacity to charge strawman building?