A very bad night in Dallas

[kallend 1,647]

Hooknswoop

Quote

You are not willing to take concrete measures to reduce the number of guns in your society. That is the only fix. You are part of the population that is unwilling to give up gun rights for decreased gun violence. Guns are made to shoot people. That's what they were invented for and that is what they will be used for because that is all they are good for.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Data-Gun-Deaths-Plunge-Firearm/2016/07/13/id/738434/

"The firearm homicide rate in 1993 of 6.6 per 100,000 dropped by more than half by 2014, to 3.43 per 100,000."

"The number of privately owned guns ballooned from 192 million in 1994 to 357 million in 2013."

Maybe the issue is not a simple as you think it is. Firearm homicides cut by almost half while the number of guns almost doubled in the same time period.

Derek V

Misleading (not surprising from Newsmax).

The number of guns increased due to the average number of guns owned by gun owners increasing. It's now around 8 per gun owner. Not even a hotshot marksman like you can use so many at one time.

The percent of households that have guns has actually decreased.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Not even a hotshot marksman like you

Again, language like this makes having an adult conversation with you very difficult.

Derek V

[headoverheels 291]

kallend

The number of guns increased due to the average number of guns owned by gun owners increasing. It's now around 8 per gun owner. Not even a hotshot marksman like you can use so many at one time.

I have more than 8 cooking knives in my kitchen, even though expert Anthony Bourdain says that I only need one chef's knife.

[Coreeece 2]

gowlerk

***You're talking about merely reducing guns, but you'd have to get rid of practically every gun to reduce the gun homicide rate, because as long as there are guns out there, criminals will get there hands on them - just like drugs.

As a rational human being, do you think taking away practically every gun out of society is realistic?

Dude, it works in every other western nation. All of them.
Interesting. So how did they tame their violent inner cities and eliminate hundreds of millions of guns that have saturated their countries in the first 200 years or so since their inception?

gowlerk

America stands alone in tolerating the death rate.

We don't tolerate it. You and kallend have already made references to our large prison system/population.

gowlerk

Those are facts. Less people with guns equals less shooting.

Ok, great - so you admit that's it's not really about the number of guns as much as it's about the number of criminals with guns. Sounds like producing less criminals is a good idea after all - thanks CDC!

gowlerk

You have not only poisoned your country with the toys of war, you have poisoned your mind with irrational justifications that you need them. It is madness.

These guns, along with our violent culture were here long before my great grandparents set foot in this country.

Relatively speaking, it wasn't too long ago when one of our vice presidents and founding fathers settled political disputes through gun duels - maybe that's where all the madness comes from - but we have come a long way since then, and indeed things are getting better.

In case you haven't heard, we have cut the gun homicide rate in half over the last 20 years regardless of the number of guns, and it will most likely continue to decrease as the downward trend seems to suggest.

gowlerk

Wake up to reality.

You have made your bed, now go lie in it.

The reality is that you will wake up in whatever parking lot that you're sleeping in tonight and continue trolling in this forum with ad hom and unrealistic emotional pleas without addressing any of the points that I've been trying to discuss with you for the past 2-3 weeks.

gowlerk

But at least tell yourself the truth instead of sprouting the lies.

You can keep saying that all you want but it doesn't mean shit until you can collect your thoughts and provide at least a bit of commentary on how and why they are lies - but you can't, otherwise you would've already done so.

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[jclalor 12]

normiss

Can you point out the open carry portion of the second?
I think I missed it.

It's a tad bit hard to conceal a musket.

[kallend 1,647]

headoverheels

***
The number of guns increased due to the average number of guns owned by gun owners increasing. It's now around 8 per gun owner. Not even a hotshot marksman like you can use so many at one time.

I have more than 8 cooking knives in my kitchen, even though expert Anthony Bourdain says that I only need one chef's knife.

How many can you use simultaneously?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,647]

Hooknswoop

Quote

Not even a hotshot marksman like you

Again, language like this makes having an adult conversation with you very difficult.

Derek V

It's hard having an intelligent conversation with people who post misleading information from Newsmax.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[RonD1120 58]

Once again the current occupier of the White House has turned a memorial to our police forces into an opportunity spout his political agenda. He is disgusting an a disgrace to his position.

Trump is our only hope at this juncture.

ETA: Politically speaking of course.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[DanG 1]

Quote

Once again the current occupier of the White House has turned a memorial to our police forces into an opportunity spout his political agenda. He is disgusting an a disgrace to his position.

And once again I very much doubt you actually listened to or read his speech, instead relying on Glenn Beck to feed you little morsels of misinformation.

No wonder you like Trump so much.

- Dan G

[gowlerk 1,924]

I know, there is no use talking sense about guns to Americans. You gotta have 'em. You need them to protect your freedoms. Blah, blah, blah. You are more or less right about one thing. The ship has sailed.

I see two opposing angry groups are planning on being in Cleveland this weekend. Both making a point of exercising their right to carry loaded rifles at the demonstration. Madness, America's love affair with guns is madness I say.

Long live freedom.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[gowlerk 1,924]

RonD1120

Once again the current occupier of the White House has turned a memorial to our police forces into an opportunity spout his political agenda. He is disgusting an a disgrace to his position.

Trump is our only hope at this juncture.

ETA: Politically speaking of course.

It will be alright. Hillary will soon take over. She's white like you.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[Hooknswoop 19]

So do agree that reducing the number of guns is the only fix?

Quote

You are not willing to take concrete measures to reduce the number of guns in your society. That is the only fix.

I was not trying to mislead.

Derek V

[gowlerk 1,924]

gowlerk

I know, there is no use talking sense about guns to Americans. You gotta have 'em. You need them to protect your freedoms. Blah, blah, blah. You are more or less right about one thing. The ship has sailed.

I see two opposing angry groups are planning on being in Cleveland this weekend. Both making a point of exercising their right to carry loaded rifles at the demonstration. Madness, America's love affair with guns is madness I say.

Long live freedom.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/14/politics/cleveland-convention-guns-event-zone/index.html


Madness

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[Coreeece 2]

gowlerk

I know, there is no use talking sense about guns to Americans. You need them to protect your freedoms. Blah, blah, blah.

You think the only way to fix our violent gun culture is by banning guns, even though the facts suggest otherwise. Prohibition has an infamous history of making things worse.

You make no sense at all and offer no practical solution while sticking your fat fingers in your ears shouting blah blah blah anytime someone makes a legitimate point that doesn't fit your feeble-minded narrative - no wonder shit never gets done.

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[Coreeece 2]

kallend

***

Quote

You are not willing to take concrete measures to reduce the number of guns in your society. That is the only fix.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Data-Gun-Deaths-Plunge-Firearm/2016/07/13/id/738434/

"The firearm homicide rate in 1993 of 6.6 per 100,000 dropped by more than half by 2014, to 3.43 per 100,000."

"The number of privately owned guns ballooned from 192 million in 1994 to 357 million in 2013."

Misleading (not surprising from Newsmax).

They are merely listing the facts just like you do - just like Obama has recently without explaining the truth behind the numbers and how they correlate, if at all.

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[billvon 2,433]

>You think the only way to fix our violent gun culture is by banning guns

He never said that.

Why can't you debate what he said? Why do you have to make up strawmen to argue against instead?

>while sticking your fat fingers in your ears shouting blah blah blah anytime someone
>makes a legitimate point that doesn't fit your feeble-minded narrative

Whereas you stick your fat fingers in your ears shouting "you want to BAN GUNS!" while ignoring anything he says that doesn't fit your worldview.

[Coreeece 2]

billvon

>You think the only way to fix our violent gun culture is by banning guns

He never said that.

Why can't you debate what he said? Why do you have to make up strawmen to argue against instead?

I know, right? It's frustrating when people don't listen and refuse to address what you actually said, isn't it?

If you see post #144, you'll notice that I already acknowledged and addressed what he was actually saying. Too bad he's apparently incapable of reciprocating that courtesy without ad hom and unrealistic emotional pleas.

billvon

>while sticking your fat fingers in your ears shouting blah blah blah anytime someone
>makes a legitimate point that doesn't fit your feeble-minded narrative

Whereas you stick your fat fingers in your ears shouting "you want to BAN GUNS!" while ignoring anything he says that doesn't fit your worldview.

Nope, I've tried to address everything him and Kallend have been posting - they still have yet to respond to the content of what I actually posted, because they can't - It's contrary to their narrative.

If they would actually propose a real solution or a quick fix or at least try to honestly respond to what I've posted on the subject, I would listen.

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[gowlerk 1,924]

I'd like to debate any point you would like. One at a time. Pick one, post it here, or in a new thread, and let's see what comes up. For the record, Bill is correct, not once have I suggested banning guns in America.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[Coreeece 2]

gowlerk

I'd like to debate any point you would like. One at a time. Pick one, post it here, or in a new thread, and let's see what comes up.

Ok, I'm sure they'll most likely come up again in the future, so let's just stick to the current point addressed below.

gowlerk

For the record, Bill is correct, not once have I suggested banning guns in America.

I know, you've been saying how Canada doesn't ban guns, but has reasonable controls.

I'm not against reasonable controls. I think it's ridiculous that in many states, background checks won't red flag those guilty of violent misdemeanors and domestic violence.

However, Canada was never saturated with guns like the U.S. We've had gun control since the 1920s, but it can only do so much at this point.

You said that you think a reduction in guns is the only thing that will reduce gun violence. Ok, fine. Right now there are about 1.41 guns per person. Let's say we destroy about 100 million of them and go back down to lower ratios seen back in the 80s. What makes you think that that will reduce the gun homicide rate when it was almost double back then?

How many more firearms will law abiding gun owners have to give up in order to have an impact on the homicide rate?

How would you get guns out of the hands of criminals that already have them?

There is obviously something else at play here.

IMO, you'd have to sweep this county clear of guns, because we'd be failing to address the heart of the issue - our violent culture, especially in the inner cities.

...and how long would that take, and at what cost before the rates actually decreased?

Why take the chance at creating more problems when crime rates have steadily been declining since the late 80s/early 90s?

We just need to slightly amp up what we've already been doing.

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[gowlerk 1,924]

Yes, I see the impracticability of fixing the problem quickly. I don't see any of this happening, due to the politics. But I can see at least one long term path.

First, clarity around the meaning of the 2nd amendment is needed. I don't see it being repealed, but I could see a future SC looking at the words and deciding that "well regulated militia" is a key part of it. In the end, reasonable controls, even Canadian type controls, maybe ruled legal. As long as the citizens are afforded an opportunity to form and belong to well regulated militias.

It would then be possible to regulate sales of new weapons. Leaving the hundreds of million still out there. It would be nearly suicidal to require they be turned in, and I would never advocate for that. But how and when they are stored and used and resold could be regulated. Along with voluntary programs to turn them in. It would take decades to reduce the stock, but it took decades to get here.

Once that happens, those who have guns will be much more careful with them. They will become more valuable and difficult to replace. It will slowly become harder and harder for criminals to get them. When the rival gang no longer is fully armed, the local gang will not need to be either. Soon the police will no longer be so fearful of being shot.

Fear of those violent people in the inner cities is often cited by you and others. I'll say it again, those are criminals and most of them are stupid. In a society where guns are not available nearly everywhere, these will be the first, not the last people to disarm. Some may get there hands on weapons, but they won't have the resources to hold onto them for long. We have violent gangs in Canada too. And sometimes they shoot each other. Especially in Toronto, which I'm sure you know is not too far from both Detroit and Buffalo. But they do not have EASY access to guns. And it is hard for them to hang on to them for long. And very few would dare, or feel they needed to, walk around with one daily.

There are a host of road blocks in the way of this plan. Not the least of which is there is still a majority that would not vote for it. And the people who make and sell weapons would have a pretty predictable reaction. But just saying that because you can not solve the problem overnight, you can not do anything about it is, well, madness.


Finally your point about the death rates going down since they peaked in about 1981. I'm sure you know, correlation is not causation. All crime in general has been in decline since then. Some say it is related to an aging population. I don't know the complex causes behind it, but it is not reasonable to think that it is because there are more guns.


None of this is possible till a majority of the American voters wants it. And there are still too many of you who would rather keep things as they are.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[kallend 1,647]

RonD1120

Once again the current occupier of the White House has turned a memorial to our police forces into an opportunity spout his political agenda.

Rather better than dancing a jig at the memorial, like his predecessor did.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[christelsabine 1]

kallend

***Once again the current occupier of the White House has turned a memorial to our police forces into an opportunity spout his political agenda.

Rather better than dancing a jig at the memorial, like his predecessor did.

He truly enjoyed the music, dancing in his blue suit among all those boring black dressed people ...yes, this man has a serene mind

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[gowlerk 1,924]

christelsabine

******Once again the current occupier of the White House has turned a memorial to our police forces into an opportunity spout his political agenda.

Rather better than dancing a jig at the memorial, like his predecessor did.

He truly enjoyed the music, dancing in his blue suit among all those boring black dressed people ...yes, this man has a serene mind

He gave a very well received speech shortly after dancing that jig. He's is getting slammed for the dance and praised for the speech. I'd say the speech was more important. And I'm not a fan at all, but you have to give the man some credit.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[turtlespeed 212]

gowlerk

I'd like to debate any point you would like. One at a time. Pick one, post it here, or in a new thread, and let's see what comes up. For the record, Bill is correct, not once have I suggested banning guns in America.

What about when they broke into people houses and unlawfully confiscated (I think) guns, and because some of them were antique hand me downs, are no longer returnable?

That was okay, isnt it, in your book?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[billvon 2,433]

turtlespeed

What about when they broke into people houses and unlawfully confiscated (I think) guns, and because some of them were antique hand me downs, are no longer returnable? That was okay want it, in your book?

That's also not banning guns.