Two little boys playing with kittens.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/boys-killed-playing-kittens-yard-jesus-perez-salome-sebastian-perez-salome-lebanon-pennsylvania/

You are never going to end poverty that will always happen. Furthermore, the murderers did not do this due to their yearly annual income, nor did the gun compel them to do it. They killed those kids because they wanted to kill them. The only thing that would have stopped them is equal or greater force. 

Amen.

toranokaze wrote:

That operates the assumption that guns create crime which simply isn't true. 

Reality comes from history - more guns increase crime.

This was discussed in great detail in the old cellar.  For example, in the old west, gun crimes were few.  A gun costs two or more years salary.  Even wagon trains had few with guns.  So a decision was always made who would shoot and who would wait.  So that someone always had a loaded gun.

Things became quite violent after the Civil War.  With a massive increase in guns.

Now that AR-15s are in increased numbers, crimes by AR-15s also have significantly increased - especially in mass shootings.  For other crimes, other smaller guns can spray just as many bullets.  And are easier to hide.

Guns change the mindset of an individual.  Might makes right.  How great is a change?  The more emotional a gun carrier, the more likely he will use it in a crime.  Justified for many reasons - all emotional.

Police officers and soldier must be trained extensively.  To think logically - not emotionally.  So a gun is less likely to turn one to the 'dark side'.

Guns change the mindset.  Bigger guns and more ammunition means one is more righteous.  That has never changed.  And is currently demonstrated all across America.  Where the emotional (who are only concerned with their constitutional rights) freely use a gun.  Where others (who are only concerned with other's constitutional rights) les often commit gun crimes.

Guns change a mindset - especially of the most emotional.  We all know why.  Might makes right.  That explains a massive increase in crimes.  And also in Mexico where numbers of guns have massively increased.  So much less crime in Canada where guns are not in massive numbers.  And where a gun owner's responsibilities are more relevant than rights.

Now that AR-15s have also increased in numbers, violate crimes with them - especially massacres - have significantly increased.  AR-15 are not easily hidden.  So other guns can spary just as many bullets.  Those also have increaed in violent crimes.  Massacres or just spraying a party with bullets - is increasing as the number of guns increase.

 

Last edited by tw (7/19/2023 8:54 pm)

toranokaze wrote:

That operates the assumption that guns create crime which simply isn't true. Getting beat to death with a club, slashed with a machete, or face melted with acid are all equal. It is the people that are the problem not the tools. The only thing restricting guns does is create more people who are less capable of self defences, guns are used to stop crime more they are used to commit cirme. Just like how the AR15 is the most commonly owned rifle and least used in crime. 

I would say that guns can put people in an escalation mindset. Road rage shootings, although infrequent at something over 550 shot last year, are an example of situations where if we're rational we don't pull a pistol out of the glove box. When they happen we are not pulling a rock out of the glove box or a vial of acid we're pulling a gun which allows folks to maintain a distance and avoid acknowledging the humanity of the victim.

I would say that guns can put people in an escalation mindset.

That is an assumption.

Road rage shootings, although infrequent at something over 550 shot last year, are an example of situations where if we're rational we don't pull a pistol out of the glove box.

Again this is an assumption that they would not have just used a different weapon such as a knife, hammer, tire iron or their car. 

...allows folks to maintain a distance and avoid acknowledging the humanity of the victim.

The average gunfight occurs within 3 to 15 feet, this is a non sensical argument. 

Where do you stand, toranokaze, on gun restrictions for people under 21, or the mentally ill? Because I personally know someone who should absolutely never, ever, ever be allowed to purchase a firearm of any kind, yet in my state (which is also yours, if I recall correctly) neither his age nor his history of institutionalization prevents him from buying one.
 

Anon wrote:

... so they’ll think I’m just glad to see them.

That's what you think.  What do they think?  Ever ask them?  (And survive?)

 

Last edited by tw (7/20/2023 8:41 pm)

That is a well establish fact even from history.

No, it is just an assumption you have. 

How did old west towns massive reduce violence.  Everyone surrendered their gun before entering a town.

That happened in some places sometimes, the west during that period is complex and not really a good model for any other place and time. 

  

Voting booths do not encourage one to become emotional and then violent.  Guns do.

Voting is the most dangerous thing one can do, and if they are not mature enough to own a firearm they are too immature to vote

Why are AR-15s now so popular?  It makes one penis feel bigger

That is just  an ad hominin 

.  Obvious only to kill other humans.

Self defense is a reason, but also target shooting and hunting. 
It is a popular weapon because it is reasonably priced and versatile. 

We should all carry AR-15s with larger magazines to be safer.  Your reasoning.

It would do so, that is empirically true. 

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/concealed-carry/violent-crime.html 
Table incidence race ration associated with the effect of concealed-carry laws on violent crime: studies with no serious  methodological problems

Shows that concealed carry laws for shall issue and permit less carry reduce violent crime so yes it would make us safer. 

We all also have the right to own 155 mm howitzers.  The Constitution says so.

If someone has the money they should be able to have one. 

Why have homicide crims increased?

There is no one single answer to anything, but lockdowns most likely played a large role;  they spiked during and following lockdown periods which bucks the long trend of crime decreasing over the last 40 or so years

. 

More guns.  You study intentionally ignore that relevant fact.

That is an assumption on your part, and you can't dismiss data based on an assumption.


 

toranokaze wrote:

If someone is too dangerous to own a firearm they are too dangerous to be a free person and need to be either: in jail, or in a mental asylum, 

1.) It is not realistic to institutionalize people who are currently functioning, and anyone who has any experience with mental illness can tell you that it is a never ending cycle between (perhaps quite long) periods of functioning and short periods of decompensating.

2.) The same political party that wants free access to guns also eliminated funding for mental asylums. What you are suggesting would require an increase well beyond previous funding levels.

3.) At best, given your parameters, I can imagine a world in which medication for the severely mentally ill is dispensed by network-connected devices that monitor their use, and it is made a crime to not take your medication. This, again, would require massive amounts of funding, both for legal oversight and Medicare.

It is profoundly disingenuous to declare that mass shootings should be prevented by the mental health system while simultaneously voting to deny that system any meaningful funding.

But such reasoning explain ridiculous conclusions.

Most dangerous thing a emotional person (an adult who is still a child) does is carry a gun. 

yes because being beaten to death by an that same person would be a much more preferable option.

Why did thousands of only emotional people carry guns while attacking the Capitol?

They were unarmed and upset due to fraudulent actions during the election 

....Charlottesville VA?

They were unarmed the only death that occurred was because of a car (which led to a heart attack) 

 Only the emotional need more guns to both justify and increase their emotions (and satisfaction).  Having carried a gun justifies their opinions.

This is starting to feel like projection

  You intentionally ignore who is doing the most shootings.

Yes we should be harsher on gang members

Criminals with guns.

The people who do follow gun laws, 

People who are suddenly righteous because they have a gun. .

Like they aren't already with knifes, machetes and clubs? 
You act like guns are the only weapon and 

  means you cannot dispute a reality

No, it is a ad hominem, an insult that you repeat because you don't like the idea, 
it isn't productive. 

  Classic lie.  From the NRA, a long gun is no longer a useful defensive weapon when an attacker is within (if I remember) 11 feet.  Do you carry your AR-15 to keep everyone more than 15 feet from you?  That is not defensive. That is an adult so righteous as to even ignore facts.

It is to stop home invasion,  which I have had happen to me twice. 

AR-15 is a weapon of chose when one is so righteous as to arbitrarily kill anyone who gets in his way.  Its only purpose on the streets is as a street sweeper. 

 That is just silly . It is the most popular weapon and the least used in crime. 

But the emotional somehow know it is a defensive weapon to protect him from a mugger.

Again to stop home invasion. 

Posting an article from a extremist propaganda outfit is not what an honest adult does.  It is what one does when righteous.  Apparently you are packing. 

I am sorry you don't like the facts but they are what they are. 
You can pull the studies' data and make your own box plot if that will make you feel better. 

Anon wrote:

Now I'm looking for a good buy on a used hot air balloon. It doesn't have to still be able to fly; but, it can't have any rips or tears or holes. I want to fashion a holster for my 155 mm howitzer out of it.
 

Buy one already inside a C-130.  It works better.  The bad guys cannot fire back with their assault rifles.

Then you need not waste money on a bullet proof vest.  It also eliminates road rage.

And it is your Constitutional right.