| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/10/2013 09:29:00 AM · #151 |
from a related article, how about holding the these negligent gun owners feet to the fire.
Under state law, anyone who knows that a child under the age of 16 could access a loaded firearm in their home can be charged with a disorderly persons offense if they fail to securely it or install a trigger lock.
But advocates for reducing gun violence and a state lawmaker said the law is ineffective because most people don̢۪t even know it exists and prosecutors rarely, if ever, bring charges when a problem arises.
"The common reaction of prosecutors is, ‘Oh, the family has suffered enough,’" said Bryan Miller, former executive director of Ceasefire NJ. "It’s not about suffering. It’s about negligence and it’s about the lethality that results and these laws should be enforced." |
|
|
|
04/10/2013 09:41:13 AM · #152 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
Smart newtown parent
You wont see this on CNN
ETA My heart bleeds for all the families affected by new town. This father seems to be going in the right direction as far as keeping this from happening again |
So a better national health care system is the answer? Interesting. |
|
|
|
04/10/2013 10:58:27 AM · #153 |
Originally posted by bohemka:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
Smart newtown parent
You wont see this on CNN
ETA My heart bleeds for all the families affected by new town. This father seems to be going in the right direction as far as keeping this from happening again |
So a better national health care system is the answer? Interesting. |
Dis you watch the video??
|
|
|
|
04/10/2013 11:54:23 AM · #154 |
Originally posted by mike_311:
at the time i posted, a new headline came out the poor little boys died. such a shame and utterly senseless but hey people like keeping their "toys" lying around. |
You surely have to realize that the gun wasn't the problem.
These are the sort of parents who leave pots of boiling oil on the stove with the handle out. |
|
|
|
04/10/2013 12:33:19 PM · #155 |
I just want to go back for a second to the split in views on this topic and point out that gun control views are more strongly divergent among urban vs. rural residency than by republican vs. democrat affiliation. In other words, rural democrats are much more likely to be gun ownership advocates than their urban counterparts (and vice versa for republicans). To be sure, there is an association between political party and views on gun controls, but it is likely secondary to the association between political party and whether you live in an urban setting or a rural one. As far as guns, it makes some sense too. If the police are an hour away you may want some semblence of "protection" for your family at hand (leaving completely aside how much protection a gun affords versus how much danger it introduces).
I only bring this up because too often these Rant threads become "bash the Republicans" threads (due to the fact that the overwhelming majority of vocal participants are far-left liberals). This issue, unlike many others we discuss, is blurred much more along party lines. |
|
|
|
04/10/2013 12:41:53 PM · #156 |
nope, i get that.
point is, not everyone is a responsible gun owner.
maybe strict punishments and regulations aren't the answer as people have the mentality that bad will never happen to them.
so, and this transcend guns, how do you change a mindset of accountability and thinking? we recently had this discussion in class the other night, the topic was traffic safety, but still applies here. people know the risks of their actions, they know the consequences, they are willing to accept that or don't think about the risk of injuring or killing someone. so what is the solution, how do you get people to be conscious of their behavior?
is it education, is it strictly enforcing punishments, incentives for good behavior? is there no answer?
i don't know.
there are a lot of responsible gun owners out there and it sucks when one idiot like this ruins it for everyone, but at some point the risks outweigh the benefits in a what needs to be a coexisting society, are we at that point?
|
|
|
|
04/10/2013 12:44:44 PM · #157 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I just want to go back for a second to the split in views on this topic and point out that gun control views are more strongly divergent among urban vs. rural residency than by republican vs. democrat affiliation. In other words, rural democrats are much more likely to be gun ownership advocates than their urban counterparts (and vice versa for republicans). To be sure, there is an association between political party and views on gun controls, but it is likely secondary to the association between political party and whether you live in an urban setting or a rural one. As far as guns, it makes some sense too. If the police are an hour away you may want some semblence of "protection" for your family at hand (leaving completely aside how much protection a gun affords versus how much danger it introduces).
I only bring this up because too often these Rant threads become "bash the Republicans" threads (due to the fact that the overwhelming majority of vocal participants are far-left liberals). This issue, unlike many others we discuss, is blurred much more along party lines. |
I'm starting to think the solution is to place weapons bans based on population density.
|
|
|
|
04/10/2013 12:49:39 PM · #158 |
Originally posted by mike_311:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I just want to go back for a second to the split in views on this topic and point out that gun control views are more strongly divergent among urban vs. rural residency than by republican vs. democrat affiliation. In other words, rural democrats are much more likely to be gun ownership advocates than their urban counterparts (and vice versa for republicans). To be sure, there is an association between political party and views on gun controls, but it is likely secondary to the association between political party and whether you live in an urban setting or a rural one. As far as guns, it makes some sense too. If the police are an hour away you may want some semblence of "protection" for your family at hand (leaving completely aside how much protection a gun affords versus how much danger it introduces).
I only bring this up because too often these Rant threads become "bash the Republicans" threads (due to the fact that the overwhelming majority of vocal participants are far-left liberals). This issue, unlike many others we discuss, is blurred much more along party lines. |
I'm starting to think the solution is to place weapons bans based on population density. |
It's not a bad idea, but in practice it would prove impossible.
Of course, they did exactly that in the old west, but it's rather impossible to say how effective it was.
Message edited by author 2013-04-10 12:51:41. |
|
|
|
04/10/2013 12:55:52 PM · #159 |
|
|
|
04/10/2013 12:58:58 PM · #160 |
Originally posted by mike_311:
can it be any worse? |
Always.
In fact, worse is very easy. Better is what's hard.
Message edited by author 2013-04-10 12:59:33. |
|
|
|
04/10/2013 01:38:40 PM · #161 |
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by mike_311:
can it be any worse? |
Always.
In fact, worse is very easy. Better is what's hard. |
Hasn't NYC been attempting to do this very thing? and with with good results i thought, they are also strictly enforcing the punishments against violators as well.
they are saying if you want to live in NYC or come here, don't bring a gun. gun violence hasn't been eliminated but isn't it down? and has their been an increase in violent crimes?
i could be wrong. |
|
|
|
04/10/2013 02:21:51 PM · #162 |
Originally posted by mike_311:
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by mike_311:
can it be any worse? |
Always.
In fact, worse is very easy. Better is what's hard. |
Hasn't NYC been attempting to do this very thing? and with with good results i thought, they are also strictly enforcing the punishments against violators as well.
they are saying if you want to live in NYC or come here, don't bring a gun. gun violence hasn't been eliminated but isn't it down? and has their been an increase in violent crimes?
i could be wrong. |
As of 2005 New York City achieved the lowest crime rate among the ten largest cities in the United States - the handgun restrictions weren't enacted until 2006.
I'd say their trajectory is a complex thing, and the gun law is really probably less effective than the list of other measures that were enacted previous to 2006.
Note that your case study here really supports my position.
Look at this interactive media - note that the %of homicides throughout the years remains very steady, actually increasing after the ban.
Is this enough to convince you? It's certainly the most convincing thing I've seen, and I just randomly found this researching your position.
The number of homicides has declined drastically, but the percentage of the homicides committed with a firearm hasn't changed a bit - actually slightly higher in 2011 than before than ban.
In fact, I find that many more conclusions can be drawn from that interactive map as well. Interesting that many of the statistics stay the same from year to year, no matter what laws were enacted. The truth is that NYC has become much less violent over the years, but laws are probably only a small part of the reason for this change, and firearm laws are probably the most ineffective of the entire lot.
Message edited by author 2013-04-10 14:28:05. |
|
|
|
04/10/2013 02:24:12 PM · #163 |
For those who TL;DR posts longer than three lines:
See the previous post for some very supportive evidence that my argument here has been quite right indeed.
:)
Message edited by author 2013-04-10 14:24:42. |
|
|
|
04/10/2013 03:00:02 PM · #164 |
Originally posted by Cory:
The number of homicides has declined drastically, but the percentage of the homicides committed with a firearm hasn't changed a bit - actually slightly higher in 2011 than before than ban.
|
well yes, but that's just a percentage, why would that percentage change? that just means that those who committed the homicide didn't look for an alternative. for instance, if the homicide rate stayed the same and firearms % decreased wouldn't that suggest they found something else to kill with? we talking a large drop here, almost 40% drop? so either the ban had a profound effect or something else is at play here. it isnt just a single spike, it drops severely and stayed down.
correlation doesn't not equal causation but it is still a very bold statistic unless you can find a solid alternative reasoning for such a severe drop, it certainly isn't an increased economic state where violent crimes usually decrease.
Message edited by author 2013-04-10 15:02:21. |
|
|
|
04/10/2013 03:04:14 PM · #165 |
| to add every statics on that chart is relatively consistent year to year, just the overall homicide number drops. |
|
|
|
04/11/2013 12:28:40 AM · #166 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I just want to go back for a second to the split in views on this topic and point out that gun control views are more strongly divergent among urban vs. rural residency than by republican vs. democrat affiliation. In other words, rural democrats are much more likely to be gun ownership advocates than their urban counterparts (and vice versa for republicans). To be sure, there is an association between political party and views on gun controls, but it is likely secondary to the association between political party and whether you live in an urban setting or a rural one. As far as guns, it makes some sense too. If the police are an hour away you may want some semblence of "protection" for your family at hand (leaving completely aside how much protection a gun affords versus how much danger it introduces).
I only bring this up because too often these Rant threads become "bash the Republicans" threads (due to the fact that the overwhelming majority of vocal participants are far-left liberals). This issue, unlike many others we discuss, is blurred much more along party lines. |
This is a very good point. And it's frustrating that I typically get painted as insanely anti-gun as a result, regardless of the fact that I'm actually pretty centrist on things.
I'm curious to hear from Cory about triggerlocks and such. Is not a "properly" secured firearm sorta pointless for home defense? How can you argue that the parents who have an accessible firearm are being reckless but still purport firearms are necessary for self defense, considering a properly secured (gun safe, triggerlock) weapon is pointless for home intrusion. |
|
|
|
04/11/2013 12:35:47 AM · #167 |
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I just want to go back for a second to the split in views on this topic and point out that gun control views are more strongly divergent among urban vs. rural residency than by republican vs. democrat affiliation. In other words, rural democrats are much more likely to be gun ownership advocates than their urban counterparts (and vice versa for republicans). To be sure, there is an association between political party and views on gun controls, but it is likely secondary to the association between political party and whether you live in an urban setting or a rural one. As far as guns, it makes some sense too. If the police are an hour away you may want some semblence of "protection" for your family at hand (leaving completely aside how much protection a gun affords versus how much danger it introduces).
I only bring this up because too often these Rant threads become "bash the Republicans" threads (due to the fact that the overwhelming majority of vocal participants are far-left liberals). This issue, unlike many others we discuss, is blurred much more along party lines. |
This is a very good point. And it's frustrating that I typically get painted as insanely anti-gun as a result, regardless of the fact that I'm actually pretty centrist on things.
I'm curious to hear from Cory about triggerlocks and such. Is not a "properly" secured firearm sorta pointless for home defense? How can you argue that the parents who have an accessible firearm are being reckless but still purport firearms are necessary for self defense, considering a properly secured (gun safe, triggerlock) weapon is pointless for home intrusion. |
I think trigger locks are dumb as hell for a defense weapon, as is keeping it unloaded.
It's not as if these kids went into a secured cabinet in a high location in an off-limits room. The guns were left laying on table, or sofa, or some such - loaded and presumably off-safety.
Also, another gun safety issue is to teach the kids about guns, and explain that anything in front of the gun dies, forever, with blood and guts spread about. These kids, no doubt, didn't understand what, exactly, a gun would to do another human who they liked - to them it was just a toy, because they have been "protected" from such realities.
Again, though, it's worth noting that my immediate home-defense weapons of choice are hatchets, hammers and kitchen knives - the guns really are more or less inaccessible for immediate use.
Message edited by author 2013-04-11 00:37:11. |
|
|
|
04/11/2013 12:40:31 AM · #168 |
Originally posted by Cory:
I think trigger locks are dumb as hell for a defense weapon, as is keeping it unloaded.
It's not as if these kids went into a secured cabinet in a high location in an off-limits room. The guns were left laying on table, or sofa, or some such - loaded and presumably off-safety.
Also, another gun safety issue is to teach the kids about guns, and explain that anything in front of the gun dies, forever, with blood and guts spread about. These kids, no doubt, didn't understand what, exactly, a gun would to do another human who they liked - to them it was just a toy, because they have been "protected" from such realities. |
This is sorta what I was curious to hear. You likened the parents to somebody who leaves pot handles sticking out... But how worthwhile is a home defense weapon that is properly secured in a safe?
And while I completely agree about proper education for anybody in contact with a gun (meaning, anybody who has access in any regard), how do you approach the fact that humans of that age fundamentally lack the ability to understand the action as a result of their underdeveloped prefrontal cortex and it's ability to understand future events?
ETA: per your addition- I don't disagree with you, but in many other instances you've cited home defense as a very real need for arming with firearms. How do you reconcile that?
Message edited by author 2013-04-11 00:42:04. |
|
|
|
04/11/2013 12:44:20 AM · #169 |
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
Originally posted by Cory:
I think trigger locks are dumb as hell for a defense weapon, as is keeping it unloaded.
It's not as if these kids went into a secured cabinet in a high location in an off-limits room. The guns were left laying on table, or sofa, or some such - loaded and presumably off-safety.
Also, another gun safety issue is to teach the kids about guns, and explain that anything in front of the gun dies, forever, with blood and guts spread about. These kids, no doubt, didn't understand what, exactly, a gun would to do another human who they liked - to them it was just a toy, because they have been "protected" from such realities. |
This is sorta what I was curious to hear. You likened the parents to somebody who leaves pot handles sticking out... But how worthwhile is a home defense weapon that is properly secured in a safe?
And while I completely agree about proper education for anybody in contact with a gun (meaning, anybody who has access in any regard), how do you approach the fact that humans of that age fundamentally lack the ability to understand the action as a result of their underdeveloped prefrontal cortex and it's ability to understand future events? |
You equate properly secured with "under lock and key" ... There are plenty of ways to secure something without the need for locking it up.
Answer to your second question: Take them hunting. Actual blood and real guts will do a lot to overcome the underdeveloped prefrontal cortex issue - or at least they did for me - by age three I was perfectly able to explain EXACTLY what a gun does, and by five I had my own.
..
As for the hatchet comment earlier, I think Kai the heroic hatchet wielding hitchhiker has the right idea. :)
Message edited by author 2013-04-11 00:54:15. |
|
|
|
04/11/2013 12:50:49 AM · #170 |
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
ETA: per your addition- I don't disagree with you, but in many other instances you've cited home defense as a very real need for arming with firearms. How do you reconcile that? |
I weigh just over 200lbs, and stand 5'11 tall - I have years of martial arts training, I grew up as the only gringo in a neighborhood where problems were solved with crowbars, and fights were rarely one-on-one - plus I approach physical conflict in such a manner that I am honestly an extremely dangerous person in such a situation, some of my preferred targets are eyeballs, ears and cheeks/lips -- real disfigurement usually will stop an attacker very quickly.
The need is not mine. The need is that of my girlfriend who, although she does have martial arts training, is only 100lbs or so, and is very cute and sleeps alone in truck stops, rest areas, and seedy motels. The need is that of the 85 year old man who can't fight any longer. The amazing thing about a firearm is the equalization capabilities - it doesn't matter how big or tough you are, a bullet really isn't too easy to intimidate.
As I've stated previously, I personally would be MUCH safer if guns weren't readily available, it's not entirely unlikely that I will die because I stood up to the wrong person. But I'm not really arguing this from the "I need guns" standpoint, so it's not terribly important to my argument.
Message edited by author 2013-04-11 00:53:01. |
|
|
|
04/11/2013 12:53:23 AM · #171 |
Originally posted by Cory:
You equate properly secured with "under lock and key" ... There are plenty of ways to secure something without the need for locking it up.
Answer to your second question: Take them hunting. Actual blood and real guts to a lot to overcome the underdeveloped prefrontal cortex issue - or at least they did for me - by age three I was perfectly able to explain EXACTLY what a gun does, and by five I had my own.
..
As for the hatchet comment earlier, I think Kai the heroic hatchet wielding hitchhiker has the right idea. :) |
You make assumptions as to my stance. I have not stated what exactly my idea of a secured firearm are, nor have I even touched on the actual viability of such measures. In fact, I specifically noted properly with quotes to denote the fact that it is what is commonly cited as a legitimate measure by the opposition. I asked because you seemed to paint the parents as at fault for access, but I had a feeling you wouldn't acknowledge trigger locks or safes as solutions.
I am curious what your alternate methods of securing are. Bear in mind, I don't disagree with proper ownership, but you can't leave unanswered questions if you're going to take that stance. You can't leave it as an unknown. As I've stated elsewhere, I know plenty of very responsible owners who I have no issue with their ownership, and on the contrary, I've also witnessed plenty of individuals who have endangered my safety by irresponsible gun use in the forest.
Next, since you seem to agree with education, how do we ensure that this education takes place?
ETA: You should all butt out of Colorado's politics! State rights! ;0
Message edited by author 2013-04-11 00:57:17. |
|
|
|
04/11/2013 01:03:15 AM · #172 |
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
Originally posted by Cory:
You equate properly secured with "under lock and key" ... There are plenty of ways to secure something without the need for locking it up.
Answer to your second question: Take them hunting. Actual blood and real guts to a lot to overcome the underdeveloped prefrontal cortex issue - or at least they did for me - by age three I was perfectly able to explain EXACTLY what a gun does, and by five I had my own.
..
As for the hatchet comment earlier, I think Kai the heroic hatchet wielding hitchhiker has the right idea. :) |
You make assumptions as to my stance. I have not stated what exactly my idea of a secured firearm are, nor have I even touched on the actual viability of such measures. In fact, I specifically noted properly with quotes to denote the fact that it is what is commonly cited as a legitimate measure by the opposition. I asked because you seemed to paint the parents as at fault for access, but I had a feeling you wouldn't acknowledge trigger locks or safes as solutions.
I am curious what your alternate methods of securing are. Bear in mind, I don't disagree with proper ownership, but you can't leave unanswered questions if you're going to take that stance. You can't leave it as an unknown. As I've stated elsewhere, I know plenty of very responsible owners who I have no issue with their ownership, and on the contrary, I've also witnessed plenty of individuals who have endangered my safety by irresponsible gun use in the forest.
Next, since you seem to agree with education, how do we ensure that this education takes place? |
My bad on the assumption, I was simply going off of this:
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
But how worthwhile is a home defense weapon that is properly secured in a safe? |
As for alternate methods? Don't leave it laying around at kid-height. Put it in a cabinet at a level where a full-height adult can barely reach it. Put the clip next to the gun, and make sure you'll need to rack a round for extra security. Put it in an off-limits room. Basically, put it somewhere kids either can't, or won't access - and furthermore, make sure it's not ready to fire, but instead takes at least some measure of preparation.
I know that my 1911 .45ACP can't be racked by a kid, and the safeties on the gun itself would probably make firing it very unlikely for anyone under 7 or 8 at a minimum, at which point the little goofballs should know how to use the gun properly.
So, do tell, what is your stance here? Do you think these parents were completely negligent for leaving the guns laying around ready to fire, at kid height, and letting the kids go around unsupervised? I'd like to know exactly what the parents were up to when these things happened? What is the average BAC for a parent of a still-warm child's corpse? This isn't really about the guns, but really more about stupid irresponsible parents. Is it any different from that pan with it's handle out? Or from the parent who left a vehicle jacked up, or didn't have a pool fence and let the kid go around unsupervised? What about chemicals and poisons? Matches and lighters? Hell, there's a thousand possibilities when parents are this bad at parenting - let the TV babysit, and the schools teach - no need to actually be involved or anything.
As for how to ensure the education takes place??
More guns, in the hands of children. <-- I do think this is a good answer, but I doubt many would support it - far too logical and common sense.
Message edited by author 2013-04-11 01:04:31. |
|
|
|
04/11/2013 02:33:55 AM · #173 |
Originally posted by Cory:
I weigh just over 200lbs, and stand 5'11 tall - I have years of martial arts training, I grew up as the only gringo in a neighborhood where problems were solved with crowbars, and fights were rarely one-on-one |
Sweep the leg! |
|
|
|
04/11/2013 02:37:56 AM · #174 |
Originally posted by JH:
Originally posted by Cory:
I weigh just over 200lbs, and stand 5'11 tall - I have years of martial arts training, I grew up as the only gringo in a neighborhood where problems were solved with crowbars, and fights were rarely one-on-one |
Sweep the leg! |
Heh.. No no no... Pick something up - preferably something made of steel, and come from behind, quietly. ;)
Message edited by author 2013-04-11 02:42:19. |
|
|
|
04/11/2013 06:14:40 PM · #175 |
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by JH:
Originally posted by Cory:
I weigh just over 200lbs, and stand 5'11 tall - I have years of martial arts training, I grew up as the only gringo in a neighborhood where problems were solved with crowbars, and fights were rarely one-on-one |
Sweep the leg! |
Heh.. No no no... Pick something up - preferably something made of steel, and come from behind, quietly. ;) |
The Tire Thumper Lead Filled Night Stick, Side Handle Batons and the Stun Batons are also quite useful things to have around. :O)
Ray |
|
