It is time to revise/update the U.S. constitution.....

[AEON]

You never know. Once a bum broke into my friends house to sleep on their couch. Good thing they didn't shoot him!

I can't say I'd be trusting of a bum breaking into my house with two small kids running around.

My wife and I have an obligation to protect our babies. If that means shooting someone breaking into my home to "take a nap" - then that's what it means. I can't take that chance.

And I didn't mean to insult you. My example was based on the feelings my wife has when I am called away for service. She feels safer when I'm around. She's weird like that.

 

[yolland]

5. On one such occasion (a robbery of our home), the guns were stolen. Some time later, the police called because guns registered to my dad had been used in another crime. Safe, huh?
..........................................................
I'd get a Boxer dog and train it to alert bark if was really so paranoid, which I'm not.

Chop the Killer, come on, that's really why you want him.

Gun theft is a huge, huge source of the black market in guns...up to 500,000 guns stolen per year, according to the FBI. It is true that the majority of criminal convictions involving a firearm also involve a firearm possession offense in some way, though that can mean anything from not having registered it properly to belonging to a prohibited possession category (often despite having passed a background check) to having stolen it yourself. And of course gun smuggling is a serious problem too, and one which would have to be dealt with separately from any gun control law reform. But the fact remains that if there weren't so many guns available legally in the first place, it wouldn't be as easy as it is to acquire one illegally. It's like what Irvine pointed out about justifiable gun homicide rates vs. criminal ones--the latter figure dwarfs the former, and the same lax regulation and flourishing commercial trade that make it easy for you to get a gun "for self-defense" make it easy for all kinds of future firearms offenders to get one "for self-defense" too. And the notion that there's some kind of absolute existential distinction between "law-abiding gun owners" and gun-toting criminals is reassuring, but ultimately untrue--there's a first time for every criminal; sometimes that involves a legally acquired gun, sometimes it doesn't.

 

[BVS]

Are you a mother? Do you think if you had children (if you don't) and your husband got called away to war for a year that you would feel safer with a gun in the house? Close your eyes and actually imagine a large man breaking into your back door and you hear him.

If you felt safer with a gun - is that really being paranoid? Or prepared?

So a husband can be replaced with a gun? At least for those helpless fragile women, that is...

 

[Irvine511]

Re: Re: Re: Re: It is time to revise/update the U.S. constitution.....

What kind of contacts do you need to buy pot? I'm not saying it's that easy right now; while guns are legal. But putting prohibition on them will make the black market for them a lot more accessable just because of usual supply & demand.

i guess i think that guns and pot are different things and it's far easier to transport an ounce than to transport a bunch of handguns. and i think the demand for pot is way, way higher than for handguns.

i do think it would be impossible to totally ban handguns. it would create a Prohibition situation, and i dont know how one could go about removing all the guns currently circulating in society.

i do think, though, that 1) guns do way, way more harm than good, and 2) American attitudes towards guns is incredibly fucked up.

sure, AEON, you could take a shot at a guy breaking into your house. but then say you miss. and he has a gun. and he shoots back at you and your child gets caught in the crossfire. and then your wife gets shot in the head.

the fact remains, as i pointed out earlier, in 1998 there were only 154 justifiable homicides and nealry 9,000 murders due to handguns.

statistically, it's not even close.

 

[trevster2k]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It is time to revise/update the U.S. constitution.....

the fact remains, as i pointed out earlier, in 1998 there were only 154 justifiable homicides and nealry 9,000 murders due to handguns.

statistically, it's not even close.

Well, those 9000 murder victims should have armed themselves.

 

[martha]

considering the fact that the presence of a firearm in a house increases the likelihood of a homocide happening in the house by a factor of 22, and when someone is home, a gun is used for protection in fewer than two percent of home invasion crimes.

if that gun kills anyone, it will probably kill someone you know and love than an intruder.

Has AEON answered this yet? Or is he avoiding it like usual?

 

[MrBrau1]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It is time to revise/update the U.S. constitution.....

the fact remains, as i pointed out earlier, in 1998 there were only 154 justifiable homicides and nealry 9,000 murders due to handguns.

statistically, it's not even close.

That pretty much settles it.

A 58:1 ratio.

Those numbers can't be argued against.

 

[Irvine511]

And the notion that there's some kind of absolute existential distinction between "law-abiding gun owners" and gun-toting criminals is reasuring, but ultimately untrue--there's a first time for every criminal; sometimes that involves a legally acquired gun, sometimes it doesn't.

i think this is quite a good analysis -- it gets at an assumption in the semi-hysterical Nugent column, and it might get close to the heart of what might be termed "gun culture," and it might also be why notions about "evildoers" are resonant with so much of the population. the American outlook on many things can tend towards the Manichean, not least of which is criminals vs. non-criminals.

i make TV about crime these days. the crimes we cover all take place in the suburbs, and usually by upper-middle class people. it's amazing to me how many people simply snap one day and then kill somebody. it's not always with a gun, and in our shows these people obviously succeed by other means, but the availability of a firearm makes the moment of "snap" much deadlier.

 

[BVS]

Re: Re: It is time to revise/update the U.S. constitution.....

I have no problem with gun control, but banning guns does nothing but take guns out of the hands of honest people. Sorry. If this guy had wanted to, he could easily have procured those guns illegally. And from the lessons we've learned through history about first Alchohol & then drugs, banning guns will make getting them even easier to get for those wishing to break the law. It'd be your typical supply and demand.

How many contacts do you have with the black market?

Your analogy with alcohol isn't a fair one, for one can brew alcohol in their own house, but it would be difficult to manufacture guns in your basement. Black market guns are built by legit manufacturers. If these guns were banned eventually the black market would have fewer and fewer places to look to for their supply.

 

[AEON]

So a husband can be replaced with a gun? At least for those helpless fragile women, that is...

Concerning manners of protection against crime, yes. Is that some sort of stretch to think that most wives probably feel safer in their homes with their husbands present versus being home alone?

 

[Liesje]

Chop the Killer, come on, that's really why you want him.

Hehe, Chop is actually a "her", but yes part of her appeal is protection just based on her appearance and people's preconceived notions about the breed. For once, a false stereotype will be working in my favor!

Carry on....

 

[Irvine511]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It is time to revise/update the U.S. constitution.....

Well, those 9000 murder victims should have armed themselves.

i can accept the fact that if a student had a gun, they could have stopped Cho dead. but the odds of that happening would require a nearly fully armed citizenry, and that would have disasterous consequences.

and that's really what's baffling. that's a Wild Wild West mentality for you.





Mandy's in the backroom handing out valium sheriff's on the airwaves talking to the D.J.'s forty seven heartbeats beating like a drum got to live it up live it up Ronnie's got a new gun

 

[Liesje]

Concerning manners of protection against crime, yes. Is that some sort of stretch to think that most wives probably feel safer in their homes with their husbands present versus being home alone?

Yes, thanks

 

[AEON]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It is time to revise/update the U.S. constitution.....

the fact remains, as i pointed out earlier, in 1998 there were only 154 justifiable homicides and nealry 9,000 murders due to handguns.

The only thing these numbers show me that if handguns were made illegal to own - then there would be 9154 murders and zero justifiable homicides.


Also, who knows how many murders don't happen because the would be killer doesn't know if the house he wants to break into is armed or not.

 

[BVS]

Concerning manners of protection against crime, yes. Is that some sort of stretch to think that most wives probably feel safer in their homes with their husbands present versus being home alone?

But do they feel safer with a gun?

I'll let the women answer that one for you...

In theory you may be right, but here's reality.

A responsible gun owner has their gun locked away, or at least the ammo locked away to protect their kids from playing with it. The "bad guy" walks in the house armed, you wake up unlock the gun, load it, and are going to be able to outdraw them?! I don't think so, more than likely you'll just startle them and they will shoot first. When most times they weren't ever planning on shooting you in the first place.

Now look at the justifiable homicides and tell me owning gun is justifiable.

 

[Irvine511]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It is time to revise/update the U.S. constitution.....

The only thing these numbers show me that if handguns were made illegal to own - then there would be 9154 murders and zero justifiable homicides.


Also, who knows how many murders don't happen because the would be killer doesn't know if the house he wants to break into is armed or not.

so every single person who killed someone with a handgun would have been able to illegally obtain a handgun and carry out the murder?

most handgun murders are far from premeditated.

 

[BVS]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It is time to revise/update the U.S. constitution.....

The only thing these numbers show me that if handguns were made illegal to own - then there would be 9154 murders and zero justifiable homicides.


Also, who knows how many murders don't happen because the would be killer doesn't know if the house he wants to break into is armed or not.

I love how you can justify a change in statistics with the second sentence but can't with the first.

How many of those 9154 were killed with a legal gun, a lot more than you think.

 

[AEON]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It is time to revise/update the U.S. constitution.....

i can accept the fact that if a student had a gun, they could have stopped Cho dead. but the odds of that happening would require a nearly fully armed citizenry, and that would have disasterous consequences.

and that's really what's baffling. that's a Wild Wild West mentality for you.





Mandy's in the backroom handing out valium sheriff's on the airwaves talking to the D.J.'s forty seven heartbeats beating like a drum got to live it up live it up Ronnie's got a new gun

I agree not everyone should be walking around with guns around their waist. But I am supportive of those with a police or military with a very clean track record applying for the right to carry a concealed weapon.

 

[Snowlock]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It is time to revise/update the U.S. constitution.....

so every single person who killed someone with a handgun would have been able to illegally obtain a handgun and carry out the murder?

most handgun murders are far from premeditated.

I think that's a misnomer. Agreed that most handgun murders are not premeditated. But most handgun murders are carried out by people who are predisposed to murder or who are already living violent lifestyles or lifestyles surrounded by violence.

Very few are accidents.

 

[Irvine511]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It is time to revise/update the U.S. constitution.....

But I am supportive of those with a police or military with a very clean track record applying for the right to carry a concealed weapon.

i cautiously agree with you on this, though i'm more inclined to allow police officers than anyone who's ever served to have one.

 

[Snowlock]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It is time to revise/update the U.S. constitution.....

That pretty much settles it.

A 58:1 ratio.

Those numbers can't be argued against.

Unless you're one of the 154........................

 

[Vincent Vega]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It is time to revise/update the U.S. constitution.....

The only thing these numbers show me that if handguns were made illegal to own - then there would be 9154 murders and zero justifiable homicides.


Also, who knows how many murders don't happen because the would be killer doesn't know if the house he wants to break into is armed or not.

That probably explains the anarchy in every other country, and the huge numbers of people getting shot in other countries.

 

[Irvine511]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It is time to revise/update the U.S. constitution.....

I think that's a misnomer. Agreed that most handgun murders are not premeditated. But most handgun murders are carried out by people who are predisposed to murder or who are already living violent lifestyles or lifestyles surrounded by violence.

Very few are accidents.

when you say accident, i think you mean a child shooting his friend while they were playing around. while it does happen, i agree that it is a small number compared to the 9,000 or whatever.

however, i will disagree with your assessment of the people who murder with handguns. a large number of these murders result from domestic disputes that escalate, often in the heat of the moment.

 

[trevster2k]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It is time to revise/update the U.S. constitution.....

i can accept the fact that if a student had a gun, they could have stopped Cho dead. but the odds of that happening would require a nearly fully armed citizenry, and that would have disasterous consequences.

and that's really what's baffling. that's a Wild Wild West mentality for you.

Yep, the U.S should bring back hip holsters so we can all relive the good ole days, YEEHAAAWW!!!! Everyone armed to the teeth walking down the street proudly displaying their 9mm or .22 Caliber handguns. Then they could pimp em out with bling and shiny things and have designer bullets. Player pianos, whorehouses, and long handlebar mustaches....umm, good times. No one would fuck with anyone cause everybody has guns. This could open up a whole new industry. Guns which could have dual uses like as a cellphone too. Would you mess with a dude holding a gun to his head and talking to it?

 

[Snowlock]

and most kids don't swallow bottles of pills, or drink bleach, or push others down the stairs, or get drunk and drive their car into a tree when they're 16, or any number of things that parents teach their children not to do.

why add another dimension of danger to a household? why keep a tool around who's only function is to kill someone else? there's no reason for the existence of a gun beyond death.

You've kind of argued the other point here. If you can teach your kid not to swallow bottles of pills, drink bleach or push others down the stairs or get drunk and driver their car into a tree when they're 16 or any number of things that parents teach their children not to do, you can teach them not to handle the gun. Or teach them to handle the gun correctly.

Crap, irving, looks like we're gonna get into it here and I'm gonna need to combine threads.

Domestic incidents are exactly the type of incident that the statement "guns don't kill people, people kill people" was made for. If the gun wasn't around in the case of a domestic incident, most definately a knife (or whatever) would be used. These are cases were the killer isn't driven to use a gun on someone; they're driven to kill. Gun's just the quickest way.

Regarding prohibition you say: "i guess i think that guns and pot are different things and it's far easier to transport an ounce than to transport a bunch of handguns. and i think the demand for pot is way, way higher than for handguns."

Yes it is. But basic economics says that the supply will always rise to fill the demand. Criminals or those that desire to be criminals will always be able to get guns so long as guns are made. Or if they can't will just use something else that is legal.

 

[Liesje]

But do they feel safer with a gun?

I'll let the women answer that one for you...

In theory you may be right...

Woman here.

Now I only speak for myself, my female relatives, and my female close friends, but with certainty NONE of us feel "safer" with our husbands around. Wait, most of us don't even HAVE husbands.

Most women feel safe in their home, period. I can't imagine living somewhere I didn't feel safe at all. My childhood was like that, so we moved as soon as we could. If I felt unsafe in our apartment, either alone or with my husband, I'd move. If I could help it, I'd never bring children into the world and raise them where I feared for their safety so badly that I'd rather have a gun in the home.

Wouldn't you rather live where you feel safe than constantly feel unsafe and have to always be on guard with your gun?

 

[BVS]

Domestic incidents are exactly the type of incident that the statement "guns don't kill people, people kill people" was made for. If the gun wasn't around in the case of a domestic incident, most definately a knife (or whatever) would be used. These are cases were the killer isn't driven to use a gun on someone; they're driven to kill. Gun's just the quickest way.

I'd take my chances with a knife anyday, I can out run a knife.

 

[Tiger Edge]

Woman here.

Now I only speak for myself, my female relatives, and my female close friends, but with certainty NONE of us feel "safer" with our husbands around. Wait, most of us don't even HAVE husbands.

Most women feel safe in their home, period. I can't imagine living somewhere I didn't feel safe at all. My childhood was like that, so we moved as soon as we could. If I felt unsafe in our apartment, either alone or with my husband, I'd move. If I could help it, I'd never bring children into the world and raise them where I feared for their safety so badly that I'd rather have a gun in the home.

Wouldn't you rather live where you feel safe than constantly feel unsafe and have to always be on guard with your gun?

*Pipes in*

I live at home with my mom and brother. We don't feel unsafe ever, and we don't own guns or anything to protect us.

When my brother is home alone, he feels it necessary to turn on all the lights and sleep with MY signed baseball bat by his side.

This is an anger issue, not a safety issue. It's probably making the husband feel better about leaving the wife at home than the wife feeling better about her husband leaving.
Probably.

 

[BVS]

This is an anger issue, not a safety issue. It's probably making the husband feel better about leaving the wife at home than the wife feeling better about her husband leaving.
Probably.

It's just his views of women shining through again.

 

[Zoots]

Domestic incidents are exactly the type of incident that the statement "guns don't kill people, people kill people" was made for.

And the National Rifle Association says that, "Guns don't kill people, people do,” but I think the gun helps, you know? I think it helps. I just think just standing there going, "Bang!" That's not going to kill too many people, is it? You'd have to be really dodgy on the heart to have that. - Eddie Izzard

Gun's just the quickest way.

So that makes it okay...