Moving back to NE from the South (Boston, Lowell: apartment, movers)

[msRB311]

Apparently people who think they need guns are the people who purchase them.

[bostongymjunkie]

Originally Posted by MikePRU

Yeah. I'll actually agree with the gun folks that guns are harmless without someone to pull the trigger. Guns don't have emotions or mental illness and that really is the underlying issue. This being said, sometimes it's way easier to treat the symptom than the disease to limit the amount of damage caused. Eliminating all or the majority of the guns in this country is far more of a realistic task than diagnosing and treating every single case of mental illness. I know some of the tin foil hat wearing people who are afraid of the government will disagree with me on this but IMO no one in this country needs a gun. Make gun ownership illegal and create incredibly stiff penalties for crimes that involve a gun (collecting every single firearm is not a realistic expectation at this point) and you'll see the vast majority of gun violence go away and given some time it will virtually disappear.



Bud, who's screaming? Again, I'd love to have a more in depth conversation about this but the wonderful NRA prevents anyone from collecting meaningful statistics. Any guesses as to why that might be? You haven't addressed that question.

Maybe six people do get shot in a day here chief. I can only assume (thanks NRA!) that more people get shot in other states with less restrictive gun laws. Currently, I only know more people die in other states from gun violentce. This being said, even if our superior healthcare system saves more people it doesn't seem realistic that this would slash death rates significantly enough to account for the differences you see in less restrictive states.

Again, there seems to be a correlation between lower population density and llower rates of gunn violence. If you don't see other people on a daily basis then I guess it would be tough to shoot someone else. Seems to make sense don't you think?



Very true! There's an old saying that I think is pretty applicable here though . . . if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck then guess what? It's probably a duck. 1

You can argue semantics all you like but all you're doing is finding a way to ignore the facts. 2 If a place has lots of BBQ restaurants are you going to tell me next that I can't draw the conclusion that the people of that area enjoy BBQ food or consume a lot of BBQ food? Again, you can't have gun violence without guns. Remove the guns from the equation and you take care of the gun violence. Guns are a unique issue because so many people can die so quickly from gun violence. I just don't know how anyone can watch the news day after day and hear about little kids being shot down in school and continue to think that guns should be a part of our society.

I just don't understand why people are so passionate about the right to own a gun. I know a few gun owners and they seem to think of them as toys or if it's a very expensive/rare/antique gun then a status symbol more than anything else. You can still hunt without a gun. Also, if you get rid of the guns and create severe legal penalties for gun related crimes then no more criminals with guns and you can feel safer in your own home without a gun. So, please explain to me . . . why does anyone need a gun? Are you really that concerned that one day you're going to have to overthrow the government?

1) I don't see this is as relevant to this discussion whatsoever. Some here are attempting to simplify complex social conditions with cliches. That's over-simplified lazy thinking that only provides some sense of false moral high ground for the person doing it.

2) I'm not making any semantics arguments, but you may be.

3) And your proposal is what, remove all the guns in the United States? Pipe dream and irrelevant because not only won't it ever happen but it's just a distraction from seeking actual solutions. You also don't explain how you plan to keep guns out of the hands of people who don't obey laws. Gun deaths are a multi-faceted problem requiring a multi-faceted approach. Some policies seem to reduce mass shootings, others may influence other factors like accidental death among children. Based on my observations over a lot of information, what seems universally agreed upon is universal background checks appear to have some positive influence on some factors, as do child-safety restrictions. However the effects of most policies would vary state by state. Rather than think you have the infinite wisdom to know who needs a gun and who doesn't, who is more morally righteous and who's not, it might be more helpful to focus on finding solutions. Consider yourself lucky you feel safe enough to not have a gun because you have a life that's relatively low-risk and you're protected by other men and women with them.

[perennial millennial]

Originally Posted by WestieWhitie

Wealth? Education? Have you seen rural NH and VT outside of the usual ski and tourist playgrounds? Small population doesn’t make much of a difference either - Jackson isn’t that much larger than Manchester for example. And lastly, as far as “liberal policies” go, are you saying playing catch and release with known violent criminals helps curb gun violence?

Well, there you go: if its mostly rural folk who have it for hunting and whatnot...

[msRB311]

3 UVA football players killed in campus shooting; suspect in custody

Welcome to Biden's America.

[jayrandom]

Originally Posted by msRB311

3 UVA football players killed in campus shooting; suspect in custody

Welcome to Biden's America.

It was a real shame he rammed through that legislation making mass shootings legal. This must be the very first time there’s been a mass shooting at a school.

[perennial millennial]

Originally Posted by msRB311

3 UVA football players killed in campus shooting; suspect in custody

Welcome to Biden's America.

You act like mass shootings haven't been a thing for decades here in America

[msRB311]

Right the next mass shooting will be at Harvard or MIT maybe.

[WestieWhitie]

Originally Posted by perennial millennial

Well, there you go: if its mostly rural folk who have it for hunting and whatnot...

But our amigos here are saying guns, not goons are the problem - if that's the case and all those rural folks have enough guns in each house to equip a small army, shouldn't they all have shot each other by now?

[MikePRU]

Originally Posted by msRB311

Apparently people who think they need guns are the people who purchase them.

Is this a serious comment?

Originally Posted by bostongymjunkie

1) I don't see this is as relevant to this discussion whatsoever. Some here are attempting to simplify complex social conditions with cliches. That's over-simplified lazy thinking that only provides some sense of false moral high ground for the person doing it.

2) I'm not making any semantics arguments, but you may be.

3) And your proposal is what, remove all the guns in the United States? Pipe dream and irrelevant because not only won't it ever happen but it's just a distraction from seeking actual solutions. You also don't explain how you plan to keep guns out of the hands of people who don't obey laws. Gun deaths are a multi-faceted problem requiring a multi-faceted approach. Some policies seem to reduce mass shootings, others may influence other factors like accidental death among children. Based on my observations over a lot of information, what seems universally agreed upon is universal background checks appear to have some positive influence on some factors, as do child-safety restrictions. However the effects of most policies would vary state by state. Rather than think you have the infinite wisdom to know who needs a gun and who doesn't, who is more morally righteous and who's not, it might be more helpful to focus on finding solutions. Consider yourself lucky you feel safe enough to not have a gun because you have a life that's relatively low-risk and you're protected by other men and women with them.

Why is it a pipe dream? They outlawed private gun ownership in Australia. I'm happy to compromise and just highly restrict gun ownership and see how that goes. These states like Texas that have virtually eliminated any kind of gun control (and at the same time have the one of the highest rates of mass shootings) are just clearly headed in the wrong direction.

I think I've been pretty clear in my belief that many illegally held firearms started off life as legally procured guns. Guns are stolen all the time in home robberies. There are also a percentage of careless gun owners who don't properly secure their weapons and those end up in the wrong hands as well. Making gun ownership illegal would make it a lot harder for criminals to get their hands on them. It's not realistic to say it would be impossible but if you combined it with strict punishments in the law for crimes that involve a firearm that will further dissuade someone from using one. Take away the guns from a thug and hopefully people who are not as fortunate as I am will not feel the need to own a gun. Also, an alarm is probably cheaper than a gun to buy and they do a pretty good job of dissuading criminals.

My belief is that guns have done far more harm in our society than good. Just because I'm fortunate enough to not feel the need to own a gun to protect my family does not mean that I am somehow "holier than thou."

Originally Posted by msRB311

3 UVA football players killed in campus shooting; suspect in custody

Welcome to Biden's America.

I'm dying to know what this has to do with Joe Biden. Were you not aware of the many mass shootings that occurred under Trump's watch or Obama's?

Originally Posted by WestieWhitie

But our amigos here are saying guns, not goons are the problem - if that's the case and all those rural folks have enough guns in each house to equip a small army, shouldn't they all have shot each other by now?

Goons are 100% part of the problem. Guns combined with goons are a major issue. Goons on their own without guns are far less concerning.

Matches on their own are dangerous. When you combine them with a can of gasoline they got a lot more dangerous. Most people wouldn't argue so hard that putting matches next to a can of gas is a bad idea but for some reason those same people seem to be OK with putting guns within the reach of goons.

[msRB311]

Plenty of goons don't have guns and do plenty of other crappy things.