Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 36 to 60 of 60

Thread: Gun Control discussion

  1. #36
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    11,323

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    ^ Isn't that the primary premise of all nuclear deterrents - Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD)?
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  2. #37
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    21,861

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    I don't think that MAD was founded on the idea that nuclear nations would be led by mad men.

  3. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    11,323

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    Self-fulfilling acronym?
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  4. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Winnipeg MB
    Posts
    15,322

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by mmd View Post
    ^ Isn't that the primary premise of all nuclear deterrents - Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD)?
    Well, it was the premise of the old nuclear balance of power, at any rate. Of course, it's predicated upon rational state actors, in much the same way that gun rights are predicated upon well-regulated militias.

    What are you doing about it?




  5. #40
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    11,323

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    As Pless would say, "Oh, snap!" <grin>
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  6. #41
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    13,781

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by TomF View Post
    Texting while driving injuries and deaths have indeed risen sharply. Great example, thanks.

    The response has been first to determine the size of the problem - which our own officials here in New Brunswick say accounts for more deaths/injuries than drunk driving, BTW. Then after determining the scope, consulting and then enacting legislation to create laws against it. To launch determined campaigns by various parts of government to make people aware of the danger, and of the penalties when caught. And to review the effectiveness of those actions once they've had enough time to begin to affect the incidence rate of texting-related accidents, and tweak them when necessary.

    Many jurisdictions have done comparative analyses of how other places have approached texting-while-driving, and tailored their own actions based on what others have found to be more effective.

    Why is this not possible with firearms? Why not even start by reviewing differences between the incidence rate in otherwise similar States, to see what apparently has already been shown to be effective within America?
    Exactly. We've banned texting while driving and made hands-free devices a requirement in most locales.

    Why do we never take action to reduce firearms deaths?

    In the whole scheme of things, cellphone use in vehicles is probably the number one reason that gun deaths haven't outstripped motor vehicle deaths in the recent past.
    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
    -William A. Ward



  7. #42
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Port Richey
    Posts
    11,432

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    Fox says some really stupid stuff but this really ought to qualify for some type of idiot of the year award.

    Tom

    "Leave the gun, take the cannolis"

  8. #43
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Port Richey
    Posts
    11,432

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    Seems appropriate.

    Tom

    "Leave the gun, take the cannolis"

  9. #44
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    42,393

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    David G
    Harbor Woodworks
    http://www.harborwoodworking.com/boat.html

    "It was a Sunday morning and Goddard gave thanks that there were still places where one could worship in temples not made by human hands." -- L. F. Herreshoff (The Compleat Cruiser)

  10. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Portland, Maine
    Posts
    14,910

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion


  11. #46
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    35,863

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by David W Pratt View Post
    Motor vehicle injuries and firearm injuries stem from entirely different causes, not a valid analogy.
    Diane Feinstein has stated her intention to confiscate guns.
    Many, if not most, States do require some sort of certifications to having passed a safety course before being able to buy a gun at a gun store.
    I'd bet injuries from driving while texting have actually risen precipitously since he was a boy.
    Quote Originally Posted by JimD View Post
    Seems pertinent.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  12. #47
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    2 states: NJ and confusion
    Posts
    28,168

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    Our gun control discussions fall directly into the common definition of insanity: Do the same thing over and over and over again and expect a different result.

    We have the same discussion over and over on guns, and the result is nothing changes.

    My view, which gets little support, is if we want a different result, we need to try a different conversation. My suggestion is simple. gunshot victims, if not dead, go to the ER. They get treated if it's a leg wound or a head wound or multiple wounds. Via taxes and/or higher health insurance premiums this costs all of us money.

    People do seem to understand money.

    MAYBE if we start the conversation in a different place it will end in a different place.
    May be some rough water ahead. We're getting new captain.

  13. #48
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Marietta, GA
    Posts
    8,677

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    Fight Entropy, build a wooden boat!

  14. #49
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    35,863

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by John Smith View Post
    Our gun control discussions fall directly into the common definition of insanity: Do the same thing over and over and over again and expect a different result.

    We have the same discussion over and over on guns, and the result is nothing changes.

    My view, which gets little support, is if we want a different result, we need to try a different conversation. My suggestion is simple. gunshot victims, if not dead, go to the ER. They get treated if it's a leg wound or a head wound or multiple wounds. Via taxes and/or higher health insurance premiums this costs all of us money.

    People do seem to understand money.

    MAYBE if we start the conversation in a different place it will end in a different place.
    You and I have both been saying that. Crickets.
    Do you think that if maybe some other forumite would put the question we would get an answer?
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  15. #50
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    11,323

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    "Murica is broken, and the citizenry are spending all their time looking for someone to blame and no time in looking for a solution.
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  16. #51
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    afloat with at least 6' of water under me.
    Posts
    51,585

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    The NRA was founded in 1871 because people couldn't shoot straight! And Thank you Sen. Burnsides!

    The NRA’s first president was a northern Army General, Ambrose Burnside. He was chosen to reflect this civilian-militia mission, as envisioned in the Second Amendment, which reads, “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” The understanding of the Amendment at the time concerned having a prepared citizenry to assist in domestic military matters, such as repelling raids on federal arsenals like 1786’s Shays Rebellion in Massachusetts or the British in the War of 1812. Its focus was not asserting individual gun rights as today, but a ready citizenry prepared by target shooting. The NRA accepted $25,000 from New York State to buy a firing range ($500,000 today). For decades, the U.S. military gave surplus guns to the NRA and sponsored shooting contests.
    In the 1920s and 1930s, the NRA’s leaders helped write and lobby for the first federal gun control laws—the very kinds of laws that the modern NRA labels as the height of tryanny. The 17th Amendment outlawing alchohol became law in 1920 and was soon followed by the emergence of big city gangsters who outgunned the police by killing rivals with sawed-off shotguns and machine guns—today called automatic weapons.
    In the early 1920s, the National Revolver Association—the NRA’s handgun training counterpart—proposed model legislation for states that included requiring a permit to carry a concealed weapon, adding five years to a prison sentence if a gun was used in a crime, and banning non-citizens from buying a handgun. They also proposed that gun dealers turn over sales records to police and created a one-day waiting period between buying a gun and getting it—two provisions that the NRA opposes today.

  17. #52
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Winnipeg MB
    Posts
    15,322

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    On a completely unrelated note, did you know that he's the guy sideburns were named for?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sideburns

    What are you doing about it?




  18. #53
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    afloat with at least 6' of water under me.
    Posts
    51,585

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Flying Orca View Post
    On a completely unrelated note, did you know that he's the guy sideburns were named for?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sideburns
    Yes!He had a great set too!

  19. #54
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    64,391

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  20. #55
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    honolulu,hawaii,usa
    Posts
    182

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    Control isn't limited to supression - it can also mean reconfiguring or ramping up. So I have a suggestion more pragmatic than utopian dreams of supression of what can be alternatively home made.

    Problem: Armed kooks, hardened criminals, and military opponents wearing body armour. How should military, police, private security, or private citizens respond?

    The military has this problem after standardizing feeble NATO rifle and pistol cartridges assuming no body armour. So there has been some un-mothballing of older rifles with more punch, and the new generation US army pistol has been chosen with ability to modularly plug in larger caliber barrel and clip. The above may increase knockdown power without actual armour penetration, but the Russian police have at least experimented with a 9mm round with max powder and a slim core high velocity penetrator bullet (that is banned for military use by Geneva convention).

    What about other police, private security, alter boys, and whatever citizens you want to enable against these armoured baddies? I forget the name of the pistol and it's slim super high velocity .17 caliber round, but there was a slew of these things built that uniquely had modest success against many types of body armour. Or at least if you were aiming at flesh near fringes of armour coverage and you missed into the fringe of armour it would have some effect. There was much angst assuming only good guys wore armour and that the rare rounds cost a lot, but maybe it is time to rethink this. I think the pistol went out of production, but maybe it should be almost mandatory for US "citizen soldiers" to have, like in Switzerland.
    Last edited by rudderless; 11-09-2017 at 08:49 AM.

  21. #56
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    35,863

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    ^If they are that pokey what of rounds that pass through and stray rounds taking out innocent bystanders?
    Arms races just mean more dead Americans, not less.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  22. #57
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    42,393

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    David G
    Harbor Woodworks
    http://www.harborwoodworking.com/boat.html

    "It was a Sunday morning and Goddard gave thanks that there were still places where one could worship in temples not made by human hands." -- L. F. Herreshoff (The Compleat Cruiser)

  23. #58
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Kitty Hawk, NC
    Posts
    5,933

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by LeeG View Post
    What a miracle, a president who can articulate a problem with multiple factors using understandable facts.

    It was too much for some.
    I watched the video. It is always easy to present one side of an issue and sound articulate and fluent with the facts.

    I am against most gun ownership. But I do understand that the government has seldom treated people fairly with respect to their constitutional rights. Gun owners have fears similar to the fears that black people have - despite the constitutional protections black people have. There are so many other groups that the government sets it sights on with the intent of violating their rights.

    I would suggest that the government could reduce the fears of gun owners buy admitting to and correcting for past constitutional violations. I don't expect either party to move in that direction.
    Life is complex.

  24. #59
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    2 states: NJ and confusion
    Posts
    28,168

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    To my way of thinking, we need to come at this from different perspectives. I've often read that most of the 'normal' gun violence is due to illegal drugs, much like how things were during Prohibition. Maybe if we legalize the drugs, as we legalized booze, they'll be fewer people shot.

    Those who do get shot, either die on the scene or go to the ER. Treating gunshot wounds costs us all money via taxes or higher premiums.

    Why can't we broaden the discussion?

    Then, if you read the constitution, the only 'arms' people have the right to keep and bear are those provided to them, as militia members, BY THE GOVERNMENT, who specifically had the responsibility to arm the militia.

    From Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution
    “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
    To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;”
    2nd Amendment, written later
    "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

    How does on put all this together, in context, and interpret it as anything other than the government would provide arms to militia and the members of the militia could keep those arms so as to make them readily available when needed, or that this amendment served NO PURPOSE once we had police, National Guard, and standing armies.?
    May be some rough water ahead. We're getting new captain.

  25. #60
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Bradford, VT
    Posts
    5,319

    Default Re: Gun Control discussion

    If you sincerely want to reduce gun violence, look at the types and attack those causes.
    Of the ~30,000 gun fatalities per year, roughly 20,000 are suicides. Perhaps locked storage could prevent some suicides by non-owners of guns who use others guns. Prohibition of "assault rifles", bump stocks and or limits on magazine capacity would have little effect.
    Of mass shootings (4 or more fatalities) about half are domestic violence episodes. My guess is that gunplay was not the first manifestation of the DV; early, effective enforcement of relevant statues might reduce this toll.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •