Gun politics thread

I'd like to share a well done video about my alma mater's gun club. It's just under an hour long and a large chunk is devoted to political arguments with attention given to both sides of the issue.



After you finish watching:
My thoughts, in no particular order:

Keep in mind that UMass is a very liberal school in a very liberal state.

I think Sergey, the guy in the leather jacket, had some of the best points.

The arguments about stonings and such were just plain stupid.

One important part that I think was missing was in regards to the fact that we already do have gun control. Its severity varies by state but here in Massachusetts, gun ownership is already highly restrictive.

Registration has lead to confiscation in CA, CT, and NY.

I think the main argument with regards to capacity is that there is a huge difference between a self-defense situation and a mass shooting. The former arises when one is attacked by a single or multiple attacker(s). In this case, every second counts and every reload puts the defender in harm's way. The former involves an attacker engaging often defenseless victims, in which case he/she can easily take the time to reload because it in no significant way endangers them. Also, a law-abiding individual is unlikely to lug around several magazines, while to a gunman it simply does not matter.

Gun ownership does not correlate to gun murder rate:
gunmurderstate.jpg

note: DC excluded from graph because it's an outlier: by far the lowest gun ownership and by far the highest gun murder rate.

It is completely unrealistic to think that the US could ban guns outright like they did in Australia. Once you allow some guns, bans on others, such as "assault weapons", make no sense, as discussed many times in this thread and as shown in the video.

The historic gun control argument has some merit and the truth lies somewhere between "Obama is the next Hitler!" and "gun control did not play any role in Nazi Germany". As always, avoid the extreme viewpoints.
 
Last edited:
That video made me think of something, maybe if there was less of a fear of guns being taken away or heavily regulated there would actually be less guns in private hands.
 
You missed the point. Criminals don't care about laws by definition. They won't be deterred by a "no guns sign" or a "gun free zone" or the fact that they haven't passed a packground check. All of these measures affect only those who abide by the laws.

Edit: one more thought on this. I don't think anyone expects John MacLane to magically appear and save the day. Nor will Rambo mow down the bad guys. But at least an armed individual might have a chance. They don't even have to confront the bad guys in all situations (take the damn cash register and leave, as long as you don't get violent). Criminals know this so of course they will seek out areas where they are least likely to meet armed resistance.
 
Last edited:
calvinhobbes said:
I'm sure things would have gone as shown in "Pulp Fiction" if only people had had guns.
Click to expand...

To add to what LeVeL said. There is basic bully logic at work here as well, a bully never picks on an equal or stronger opponent, always on the weaker. In the case of gun free zones it basically makes attacking them a low risk proposition for criminals.
 
There was a legitimate story several months ago about a guy who tried to play the knockout game using a tazer and earned himself a gunshot wound. The knockout game is a unique crime because its so hard to prepare for it or see it coming. It's all about situational awareness.
 
LeVeL said:
There was a legitimate story several months ago about a guy who tried to play the knockout game using a tazer and earned himself a gunshot wound. The knockout game is a unique crime because its so hard to prepare for it or see it coming. It's all about situational awareness.
Click to expand...
Yeah I remember that, the other problem is that it's hard to judge when you just have a group of annoying youths vs someone legitimately trying to hurt you.
 
Here's a mall shooting that you won't see in mainstream media:

On May 10th 2014, a 34-year-old man named Fadi Qandil went to the Central mall parking lot in Ft. Smith, Arkansas to confront his estranged wife Tabitha while she was on her way to see a movie with two other people; 23 year old Grayson Herrera, and 27 year old Dustin O?Connor.

According to witnesses, Qandil approached the party and told them that he had a gun. He then raised his shirt to display a firearm tucked into his waistband. When he went to reach for his firearm, both Herrera and O?Connor, who are licensed to carry a concealed firearm in their state, drew their firearms and fired at Qandil.

Herrera suffered a non-life threatening wound, while Qandil was hit with multiple shots and pronounced dead at the scene by first responders.

Click to expand...
 
Successful self-defense is really a non-story for them. People tend to focus on the bad rather than the good, which is why, for example, Sandy Hook parents got bombarded with media attention. No one is really interested in hearing "all went well today in the area. An old lady crossed the street safely. Children played in the playground; there were no injuries. The Main St Starbucks sold an average number of coffees." What sucks is that negative stories can have a powerful sway on public opinion, just like continuously showing guns in sad, tragic, and negative stories creates the association that guns are bad.
 
calvinhobbes said:
I find them both unbearable, so I can't really answer that question.


Have you monitored them sufficiently to support that statement?
Click to expand...
Let me put it this way for you. I hardly follow any news outside of automotive and tech, yet I heard about the Batman shooter, Sandy Hook and the latest dude from Cali. These are all stories I didn't seek out, I don't have TV service so I didn't catch it on the headlines, etc... The story that LeVeL posted I have not heard anything about at all, it's not trending on social media, it's not being mulled over on every major network, people aren't talking about it, etc...

The only recent self-defense story that you couldn't avoid was Zimmerman.

So you tell me if the coverage is skewed.
 
Do you honestly expect to hear anywhere near as much about a murder that didn't happen as you hear about a massacre that did?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top