U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-02-2015, 04:52 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
72,869 posts, read 64,312,187 times
Reputation: 68751

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Westcoastnavy View Post
I am confused. It sounds like your trying to turn gun violence into a race issue?
If that is so, why start with immigration? That simply makes no sense.
All she's saying is that it's a lot easier to work with fairly homogeneous populations. A lot of issues become much simpler.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-02-2015, 04:55 PM
 
2,620 posts, read 2,352,142 times
Reputation: 7195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westcoastnavy View Post
I am confused. It sounds like your trying to turn gun violence into a race issue?
If that is so, why start with immigration? That simply makes no sense.
The point I was trying to make, apparently badly, is the culture in Switzerland is vastly different than the culture in the United States. Giving one group of people a bunch of guns doesn't mean you'll get the exact same outcome if you give a bunch of guns to an entirely different group of people. I think that's pretty obvious when you compare gun violence in Europe to gun violence in America.

I don't intend to drum up a lot of links to prove that claim. It's typically gun advocates who like to flaunt that statistic in order to prove it's not the guns but the people. And I agree with that claim.

The problem with the "it's the people not the guns" argument is, it never addresses the core issue: How do you change the people? In America, the answer is typically, "Give more people more guns". IMO that's a horrible, horrible solution. Clearly, if "it's not the guns", then you can't fix the people with "more guns".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2015, 04:55 PM
 
2,004 posts, read 1,141,687 times
Reputation: 2904
There sure is a lot of emphasis on using laws in an attempt to prevent mistakes. How does that work? We have laws that can't prevent people from violating the laws against murder but can somehow legislate to prevent accidents with guns. How about we start with cars first, people are still being killed by the thousands as a result of their use.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2015, 04:56 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
72,869 posts, read 64,312,187 times
Reputation: 68751
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddyline View Post
The police chief of Peach Tree Ga, just shot his wife in the back because he thought he would be safer sleeping with a loaded and cocked gun. I hope you sleep alone.
So much for safety training solving carelessness problems.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2015, 04:57 PM
 
Location: Martinez, ca
297 posts, read 262,623 times
Reputation: 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
Was there anything in my post you quoted about taking guns away? No.

Down, boy.
Never suggested you did. I was simply pointing out that in terms of child safety, stupid is as stupid does. There should be an IQ test before breeding rights are established. OR before someone gets a dog. Because holy crap! Just my opinion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2015, 05:01 PM
 
2,620 posts, read 2,352,142 times
Reputation: 7195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Year2525 View Post
We have laws that can't prevent people from violating the laws against murder but can somehow legislate to prevent accidents with guns.
It should be obvious to most, but let me help you out here. Having laws against murder GREATLY REDUCES the amount of murders that happen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2015, 05:04 PM
 
2,775 posts, read 2,585,989 times
Reputation: 2967
Quote:
Originally Posted by JWG223 View Post
Actually, the CDC concluded the opposite during a $10M study ordered by Obama:




CDC Gun Violence Study Didn't Give Obama White House Outcome It Wanted - Investors.com

Also couple those numbers with the number of unintentional injuries from firearms:

http://www.nssf.org/PDF/research/IIR...istics2013.pdf

It seems pretty clear-cut that firearms are a net positive. Can you support your stance with more than conjecture and opinion?
Awesome information. I see too many people jumping at this instance of gross neglect as a reason to take away everyone's right to own firearms.

Here's the gross neglect that most of us people that know about guns understand/have all probably thought of:
1) the gun could/should have had a safety engaged

2) since it was a semi-auto it didn't need to have a round chambered (cocked and ready to go doesn't even make sense in my opinion unless there was imminent threat somewhere).

3) the maximum strength of a typical 2 year old's finger is about 1 pound of pull on a trigger (I read this today and believe it - I have 3 little kids - my 3 year old couldn't lift much less pull the trigger on anything I have). The gun ideally should have had a stronger pull weight than 1 pound! In fact I've never owned a gun which had so little. My 9 year old has a hard time pulling a trigger on anything I own (and rightfully so). I wouldn't feel safe with anything such a light trigger pull (aka hair trigger)

4) I like holsters with strong snaps or strong velcro securing the firearm in place. No two year old could manage to pop or un-velcro what I own. If I fell my gun wouldn't go flying. I like things that way.

5) You never leave a firearm ready to go in front of a child. The lady should have been wearing her CC purse on her shoulder at all times or had it with her in the changing room (if she was trying on clothes for example). It was a new purse she received for Xmas, she wasn't accustomed to it obviously. That stated, it was ridiculous to leave it with a gun inside within reach of a toddler. I know better, I suspect she did as well but made a fateful judgement call about that.

6) My children from the time they could speak have been taught firearm safety for children 101... you see a gun you run and go tell mom or dad... you never touch it. 2 years old is young for this type of instruction, but you need to be smart and do this early on. If you are in law enforcement, your children are taught early on that the gun you bring home and leave loaded and ready to go on or inside the end table/counter, etc is to be respected. You don't hear about the children of cops shooting each other or their parents too often for a reason. They are taught early on what to do and not do around firearms.

If in a dangerous situation I will unsnap/un-velcro, un-safety, and chamber the first round of any semi auto (for revolvers I obviously wouldn't worry about a safety or chambering the first round). Otherwise, things are safely locked up and hidden away as they should be. The lady in the article doesn't represent the gun culture nor does she represent a typical accident scenario involving children. It's unique, and bizarre, and unfortunate. Let it serve only as a reminder to those that have CC permits to be vigilant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2015, 05:06 PM
 
2,620 posts, read 2,352,142 times
Reputation: 7195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westcoastnavy View Post
Never suggested you did. I was simply pointing out that in terms of child safety, stupid is as stupid does. There should be an IQ test before breeding rights are established. OR before someone gets a dog. Because holy crap! Just my opinion.
I actually agree with this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2015, 05:09 PM
 
Location: NWA/SWMO
2,749 posts, read 2,617,577 times
Reputation: 2659
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoriBee62 View Post
The point I was trying to make, apparently badly, is the culture in Switzerland is vastly different than the culture in the United States. Giving one group of people a bunch of guns doesn't mean you'll get the exact same outcome if you give a bunch of guns to an entirely different group of people. I think that's pretty obvious when you compare gun violence in Europe to gun violence in America.
The firearms in Switzerland have ammunition allotments that are inventoried, and are kept in safes, and can only be shot in certain locations. The claim that "everyone in Switzerland has a firearm" could be similarly related to pretending that everyone in America earns an income that includes their tax dollars...well...technically, and banks do use that to figure loans (gross income), but we all know it's not that way. Also, yes, homogenous populations or immigrant populations ("Everyone's new here" are usually a LOT better off than 2+ generation split populations.

I don't intend to drum up a lot of links to prove that claim. It's typically gun advocates who like to flaunt that statistic in order to prove it's not the guns but the people. And I agree with that claim.
Exactly. It's because there is a difference in how people's brains work. Some people are technical, some people are emotional. This is part of why there is such an issue with things. Left brain, right brain. It's like Ford vs. Chevy.

The problem with the "it's the people not the guns" argument is, it never addresses the core issue: How do you change the people? In America, the answer is typically, "Give more people more guns". IMO that's a horrible, horrible solution. Clearly, if "it's not the guns", then you can't fix the people with "more guns".
The issue is that people are people. They are not immaculate creatures. They are not perfect. Some are just going to take daddy's BMW and run girls over because they can't get laid. Some are going to drown their kids in swimmingpools (on purpose). Some are going to go on shooting sprees.

Kindof like some hearts will be more prone to CAD. Some livers will be prone to hepatitis. Some pancreases will be more prone to diabetes.

It's just a fact of imperfection.There is no fixing it. There is HELPING it, but there isn't fixing it. Also, the more people in existence, the higher volume of failures to coexist we will see. The media will make sure we see every single one of them. When I see a school shooting or rampage with a car or whatever, it is a terrible thing. However, except in some cases, it is a terrible thing which I think falls under the clause of "sometimes there is a bad apple".

It's tragic, and I know this will offend the "everyone is a winner" crowd...but some people are only alive to show us how not to be, if you will.

My neighbor had 3 kids (I think 3?) 2 of them are successful, "normal" people. The 3rd shot and killed a guy over a drug deal/murder plot a few years ago. It was NOT an "isolated incident". He was a rotten apple from the beginning, so much so that when normal methods failed, his father actually sent him to "boot camp". Nothing helped. Everyone knew the kid was trouble. Everyone TRIED to help. It just couldn't be done. Bad apple.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2015, 05:15 PM
 
Location: Martinez, ca
297 posts, read 262,623 times
Reputation: 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoriBee62 View Post
The point I was trying to make, apparently badly, is the culture in Switzerland is vastly different than the culture in the United States. Giving one group of people a bunch of guns doesn't mean you'll get the exact same outcome if you give a bunch of guns to an entirely different group of people. I think that's pretty obvious when you compare gun violence in Europe to gun violence in America.

I don't intend to drum up a lot of links to prove that claim. It's typically gun advocates who like to flaunt that statistic in order to prove it's not the guns but the people. And I agree with that claim.

The problem with the "it's the people not the guns" argument is, it never addresses the core issue: How do you change the people? In America, the answer is typically, "Give more people more guns". IMO that's a horrible, horrible solution. Clearly, if "it's not the guns", then you can't fix the people with "more guns".

This is like a merry go round.

I posted on how I like the Swiss approach to guns.
to which you said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoriBee62 View Post
The thing about Switzerland though is, everyone's Swiss. It's easier to get along and not be so fearful of each other when everyone looks and acts alike and you operate under a generally monolithic culture.


Then I posted information on how this is the opposite of the Swiss situation in terms of one outlook because of thier very high immigration population that has its own views and opinions and culture
then you said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoriBee62 View Post
Switch those statistics over to race and national origin.
To which I posted more information on race and national origin that show no major differnce when it comes to race.

Followed by your post:

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoriBee62 View Post
The point I was trying to make, apparently badly, is the culture in Switzerland is vastly different than the culture in the United States....
Which is exactly what I was pointing out in my original post! They maintain a standing militia, and everyone is militarily trained and as a possible result they have a much lower gun violence statistic. Hard to find a home or business to rob when 1/2 of them have well trained military inside with automatic rifles, right?
Anyway, that was my original point, was I wish the US did what the Swiss do. Make everyone serve in the military. At the moment the US employes less than .5% of its population as military active or reserve.
In Switzerland's militia system, professional soldiers constitute about 5 percent of military personnel; the rest are conscript citizens 18 to 34 (in some cases up to 50) years old.
The emphasis was on the training and maintenance of said training, not on the possession of firearms.

Its like a giant crazy merry go round!!!!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top