Poll for gun control activists:

[dancupid]

I'm not licensed to practice medicine as I'm totally unqualified and therefore it is illegal for me to practice medicine.
I cannot fly a Boeing 747 for similar reasons.
Deep sea diving is also currently out of the question for me.
I am not a trained and qualified slaughter man so I let others kill animals for me.
The 'increase penis length by 20%' drug I've developed has been rejected by the FDA so I'm not allowed to sell it.

'Right to bear arms', but I can't go deep sea diving or give a woman a gynecological examination without being controlled by these fuckers?

Edit: satire

[myrkul]

Well, I see we have some more votes, and interestingly, "yes" is pulling ahead. Probably has nothing to do with me calling all the "no" voters hypocrites. We do have another "I have a gun, but you shouldn't asshole, however, and to you, as well: Fuck you.

To the permission discussion, I would add this: Someone who accepts reality the way it really is understands that you don't need permission to do anything, or own anything, or be anything. These are societal constructs, lies we tell each other.


But in a just society, actions that harm another have consequences, because that society understands that "No person has the right to initiate the use of force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property."

[asdf]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=132065.0

relevant thread.

[Richy_T]

I'm not licensed to practice medicine as I'm totally unqualified and therefore it is illegal for me to practice medicine.
I cannot fly a Boeing 747 for similar reasons.
Deep sea diving is also currently out of the question for me.
I am not a trained and qualified slaughter man so I let others kill animals for me.
The 'increase penis length by 20%' drug I've developed has been rejected by the FDA so I'm not allowed to sell it.

'Right to bear arms', but I can't go deep sea diving or give a woman a gynecological examination without being controlled by these fuckers?

Edit: satire

You don't need to be licensed to go deep sea diving.

You'd be stupid to go without training and the people who do the boats and equipment will (probably) not rent to you without being certified but there's nothing legally stopping you.

The fine state of Tennessee, however, requires a person to go through training and certification for the "privilege' of bearing arms in public. Is that good enough for you?

[dancupid]

I'm not licensed to practice medicine as I'm totally unqualified and therefore it is illegal for me to practice medicine.
I cannot fly a Boeing 747 for similar reasons.
Deep sea diving is also currently out of the question for me.
I am not a trained and qualified slaughter man so I let others kill animals for me.
The 'increase penis length by 20%' drug I've developed has been rejected by the FDA so I'm not allowed to sell it.

'Right to bear arms', but I can't go deep sea diving or give a woman a gynecological examination without being controlled by these fuckers?

Edit: satire

You don't need to be licensed to go deep sea diving.

You'd be stupid to go without training and the people who do the boats and equipment will (probably) not rent to you without being certified but there's nothing legally stopping you.

The fine state of Tennessee, however, requires a person to go through training and certification for the "privilege' of bearing arms in public. Is that good enough for you?

I'd love to go deep sea diving in Tennessee - but the fucking bastards don't allow it.

[Richy_T]

I'd love to go deep sea diving in Tennessee - but the fucking bastards don't allow it.

Haha, yeah. Top of my list of the cons of Tennessee is that it's land-locked. Quarries just aren't the same.

[niko]

Questions for pro-gun activists: do you realize there are places and communities in this world where you don't have to fear a random armed idiot will invade your home or shop, and you don't have to consider the whole "should I own a gun?" question? Do you realize how fucked up place you live in?  Do you realize that you owning a gun and having certain related "rights" does not make it any less fucked up? Do you think you live in a normal place? Have you asked yourselves what can actually be done to make things better, other than playing along and perpetuating the madness?

[FirstAscent]

Questions for pro-gun activists: do you realize there are places and communities in this world where you don't have to fear a random armed idiot will invade your home or shop, and you don't have to consider the whole "should I own a gun?" question? Do you realize how fucked up place you live in?  Do you realize that you owning a gun and having certain related "rights" does not make it any less fucked up? Do you think you live in a normal place? Have you asked yourselves what can actually be done to make things better, other than playing along and perpetuating the madness?

You live in a place where murder, rape, assault, robbery, arson, kidnapping, etc doesn't exist?

Did you suggest that a gun can not prevent crime? This is an outright lie and I have no idea what gave you such a misguided view.

Yes, I live in a normal place. I don't know of anywhere on Earth that has zero crime.

Yes, I've thought long and hard on how to make things better, but I do not control policy, so I'm left doing what I can to protect my family.

If, with the snap of my fingers, I could remove all deadly weapons from the world, assured that this would cause no harm on any innocent lives for the rest of time, I would. (Difficult when someone can beat another human to death with their fists. Suddenly, large powerful men have an advantage over women, children, and the elderly.)

If someone invented a force shield that could protect an individual from all forms of aggressive violence, and it could extend to their property and shelter (to prevent being starved to death, etc), I would trade all my guns for one shield for each of my friends and family and be done with guns forever. Unfortunately, these shields don't exist.

A firearm is my imperfect solution to an imperfect world filled with imperfect beings. Would you force law abiding citizens to disarm?

All well and good. But have you forgotten our discussion? Guns exacerbate the problem. Take a cue from other countries and their policies. It's mind boggling that you think 300 million guns in this country is a good thing.

Did it ever occur to you that more guns means more police, and more guns in the hands of police? The opposite is true in many other countries.

[deeplink]

I don't think I should be allowed

I pity you... that you require permission to do anything or be anything or have anything.

I was thinking the same thing. It is bad enough as it is, but some people just won't stop until you require permission to breath.

[niko]

You live in a place where murder, rape, assault, robbery, arson, kidnapping, etc doesn't exist?

Did you suggest that a gun can not prevent crime? This is an outright lie and I have no idea what gave you such a misguided view.

Yes, I live in a normal place. I don't know of anywhere on Earth that has zero crime.

Yes, I've thought long and hard on how to make things better, but I do not control policy, so I'm left doing what I can to protect my family.

I was not clear enough, I'll try again. Certainly there is, and always has been, unprovoked violence in all societies. However, the fact is that in some countries at some points of time the rates of violent attacks are 10 or 50 times lower than what we see today in the U.S., Russia, Colombia, or Thailand. How come? This is a good question to ask.

I spent time living in all sorts of countries, and have pretty much seen it all, from armed conflicts to gang violence, to boring and safe small towns, to safe and vibrant cities, to ghettos. I am not your typical gun control advocate. I think it's much more productive for us all to ask ourselves "how come?" than to seek a quick fix in gun control or in arming ourselves and our homes.

So, the topic being discussed in this thread is a red herring, and I can't even answer the poll.

[deeplink]

I think it's much more productive for us all to ask ourselves "how come?" than to seek a quick fix in gun control or in arming ourselves and our homes.

So, the topic being discussed in this thread is a red herring, and I can't even answer the poll.

This.

Whatever the result of this poll or any discussion about gun control is going to be, it will not change a single thing about the root causes for these catastrophic events.

People are angry and some will snap. And they will use whatever tools are available to them to hurt others.

There are many possible solutions, but to weaken everybody (4) is probably the worst solution and has very dangerous side effects.

1) Solve the cause why they become angry
2) Take them out before they hurt anyone
3) If they do get angry, try to prohibit that they snap
4) Restrict everyone from owning (some of the) tools that maniacs (could) use to hurt others

[notme]

You live in a place where murder, rape, assault, robbery, arson, kidnapping, etc doesn't exist?

Did you suggest that a gun can not prevent crime? This is an outright lie and I have no idea what gave you such a misguided view.

Yes, I live in a normal place. I don't know of anywhere on Earth that has zero crime.

Yes, I've thought long and hard on how to make things better, but I do not control policy, so I'm left doing what I can to protect my family.

I was not clear enough, I'll try again. Certainly there is, and always has been, unprovoked violence in all societies. However, the fact is that in some countries at some points of time the rates of violent attacks are 10 or 50 times lower than what we see today in the U.S., Russia, Colombia, or Thailand. How come? This is a good question to ask.

I spent time living in all sorts of countries, and have pretty much seen it all, from armed conflicts to gang violence, to boring and safe small towns, to safe and vibrant cities, to ghettos. I am not your typical gun control advocate. I think it's much more productive for us all to ask ourselves "how come?" than to seek a quick fix in gun control or in arming ourselves and our homes.

So, the topic being discussed in this thread is a red herring, and I can't even answer the poll.

I notice your list of places neglects rural farming communities (outside of even the small towns, just a few hundred people per square mile).  This is where I live, and out here not only do we use guns to harvest much of our food, we use them to keep vermin under control (they will eat the crops, groundhog holes have killed at least one person I knew and injured many others when their tractor rolls).  The problem isn't guns, it's the way you psycho flatlanders live.  I would go crazy too if I had to be stacked hundreds of feet high without a single piece of grass or a tree to my name.  No thanks, I'll stay in the hills please.  And I'll keep my guns.

[niko]

I notice your list of places neglects rural farming communities (outside of even the small towns, just a few hundred people per square mile).  This is where I live, and out here not only do we use guns to harvest much of our food, we use them to keep vermin under control (they will eat the crops, groundhog holes have killed at least one person I knew and injured many others when their tractor rolls).  The problem isn't guns, it's the way you psycho flatlanders live.  I would go crazy too if I had to be stacked hundreds of feet high without a single piece of grass or a tree to my name.  No thanks, I'll stay in the hills please.  And I'll keep my guns.

I recommend you go on a travel binge for a few years and then try to paint the picture. Clearly you have not spent time in Tokyo, for example. People are "stacked up", and there's not much grass, but typically you can walk around in the middle of the night, and only good or interesting things will happen to you. At this moment, Moscow or L.A. - not so much.

Consider these per-capita rates of violent crimes in Canada:

Quebec 756/100,000
Ontario 756/100,000

Manitoba 1,598/100,000
Saskatchewan 2,039/100,000
Yukon 3,007/100,000
NWT 6,448/100,000

Had you ever spent time in these places, you would have noticed that reality is exactly opposite of what you claim: more urbanized and densely populated areas have generally lower incidence of violent crimes. I don't say that there is a casual relationship, but obviously your claim of rural communities being less violent is false.

[notme]

I notice your list of places neglects rural farming communities (outside of even the small towns, just a few hundred people per square mile).  This is where I live, and out here not only do we use guns to harvest much of our food, we use them to keep vermin under control (they will eat the crops, groundhog holes have killed at least one person I knew and injured many others when their tractor rolls).  The problem isn't guns, it's the way you psycho flatlanders live.  I would go crazy too if I had to be stacked hundreds of feet high without a single piece of grass or a tree to my name.  No thanks, I'll stay in the hills please.  And I'll keep my guns.

I recommend you go on a travel binge for a few years and then try to paint the picture. Clearly you have not spent time in Tokyo, for example. People are "stacked up", and there's not much grass, but typically you can walk around in the middle of the night, and only good or interesting things will happen to you. At this moment, Moscow or L.A. - not so much.

Consider these per-capita rates of violent crimes in Canada:

Quebec 756/100,000
Ontario 756/100,000

Manitoba 1,598/100,000
Saskatchewan 2,039/100,000
Yukon 3,007/100,000
NWT 6,448/100,000

Had you ever spent time in these places, you would have noticed that reality is exactly opposite of what you claim: more urbanized and densely populated areas have generally lower incidence of violent crimes. I don't say that there is a casual relationship, but obviously your claim of rural communities being less violent is false.

Well I can walk around just fine in my community without problems.  I do not generally carry a firearm unless I'm hunting.  Obviously your claim that rural communities are violent is false.

Also, the Quebec and Ontario regions are distinctly different cultural populations from the rest of Canada.  Try again.

Oh, and I have spent time in Saskatchewan, Yukon, NWT, and Northern BC.  I never experienced or even saw an act of violent crime.  Too bad it's only your experience that matters .

Finally, these regions have very large transitory population of oil workers.  Not only are these not the most civilized people, depending on how they calculated their statistics (tough to say since you didn't provide a reference), they might only be counting crimes per citizen.  If this is the case, it would easily explain the discrepancy since permanent residents are few and far between.

[myrkul]

Had you ever spent time in these places, you would have noticed that reality is exactly opposite of what you claim: more urbanized and densely populated areas have generally lower incidence of violent crimes.

100% false.

[claire]

LOL Most awesomeness!

I'm going to assume the pro-gun guys would like something more like this:

[sega01]

So...

I'm curious. How many of you guys would be comfortable putting one of these:

On your front lawn?

Hahaha! That is a good point. This question alone is a pretty convincing argument to be armed, in my opinion. I'm still convinced that an NRA (not saying I completely support the NRA) or similar sticker is more effective than any security system in terms of detering theives and the like.

And a sign like this basically says: Please rob me! I can't shoot back, I promise!

I do understand that there are other countries where this is "less" of an issue. However, wherever I am, I'd like to be armed at all times. Knife, machette, axe, revolver, and rifle. For the trees, bushes, bears, and people trying to take my God-given rights away.

[organofcorti]

Had you ever spent time in these places, you would have noticed that reality is exactly opposite of what you claim: more urbanized and densely populated areas have generally lower incidence of violent crimes.

100% false.

Perhaps in the US. In Australia, the rate of deaths caused by firearms is much higher in country areas than city or urban areas:

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/productsbytopic/9C85BD1298C075EACA2568A900139342?OpenDocument

However this increased rate might be due to the higher rate of suicides in country areas, since in the period recorded in the above link 76% percent of firearm deaths are caused by suicide and the country areas have a much higher rate of suicide than cities.

I couldn't find rates of firearm use in violent crimes (seems to be lumped with other weapons, for example "Armed robbery"), but this link makes for interesting reading:

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/tandi/341-360/tandi359/view%20paper.html

Finally, a comparison between Australian and US crime:

http://www.nationmaster.com/compare/Australia/United-States/Crime

I can't vouch for the data, but it appears to show that although there are twice as many assault victims in Australia than in the US, there are 158 times more firearm murder in the US as in Australia. That's 15700% more.

Australia does have strict gun laws, and they seem to be useful. There are more assaults in Australia than in the US, but far fewer result in firearm murders. Maybe the assaults are all pub violence, but maybe keeping firearms out of drunk hands is a good thing when the assault rate here is so high.

Thoughts?

[organofcorti]

So...

I'm curious. How many of you guys would be comfortable putting one of these:

On your front lawn?

Hahaha! That is a good point. This question alone is a pretty convincing argument to be armed, in my opinion. I'm still convinced that an NRA (not saying I completely support the NRA) or similar sticker is more effective than any security system in terms of detering theives and the like.

And a sign like this basically says: Please rob me! I can't shoot back, I promise!

I do understand that there are other countries where this is "less" of an issue. However, wherever I am, I'd like to be armed at all times. Knife, machette, axe, revolver, and rifle. For the trees, bushes, bears, and people trying to take my God-given rights away.

Really? I assume you're anti-paedophile. Would you be comfortable putting up a "This is a paedophile free zone" sign on your front lawn? I would hope not, because that too would be extremely tacky. Just like an accursed "Baby on board" sign.

[Richy_T]

I can't vouch for the data, but it appears to show that although there are twice as many assault victims in Australia than in the US, there are 158 times more firearm murder in the US as in Australia. That's 15700% more.

Australia does have strict gun laws, and they seem to be useful. There are more assaults in Australia than in the US, but far fewer result in firearm murders. Maybe the assaults are all pub violence, but maybe keeping firearms out of drunk hands is a good thing when the assault rate here is so high.

Thoughts?

"Firearm murder" is a useless statistic and its very use is an indication of a predisposition to a bias against firearms. Outlawing seatbelts and airbags would reduce deaths involving seatbelts and airbags. Then there's the tradeoff, murders vs rapes vs home invasions vs mugging. Guns offer a level of defense otherwise unobtainable for those not a physically fit adult male.