Assault weapon bans

[Rampion]

Thanks for the info. All that tells me, though, is that things are much more complicated.
I wish there was some comparable set of data/countries/regions where cultures were the same, and guns were the only difference. I thought maybe Canada and US (both have similar gun restrictions, but vastly different crime rates), but even that isn't very adequate.

Things are complicated. But maybe, just maybe, you could let go of your insistence that guns are great for a moment, and realize that maybe the numbers are telling you something.

If I put a gun in one room, and no guns in the other, step out, and close the door, the number of crimes in that room will be the same: 0. I didn't know that Switzerland had strict gun regulations for instance, and always believed that Switzerland has few, even requiring almost everyone to have a gun. The main variable, though, is people, and whatever that involves. Sure, guns make it easier to kill from a distance, but they also make it easier to stop others from killing. And that's why I was hoping that there was some set of data to compare things to, where the culture isn't much of a variable. Obviously the culture in USA is total shit in some places, especially compared to Europe, and in Japan it's even more respectful of others than in Europe. I wouldn't be surprised that, if we were to give a gun to every single person in Japan, their murder and crime rate would still be lower than in places in US where guns are totally banned. Likewise, how can you tell is banning guns is due to cultural reaction to mitigate violence, or if it's cultural agreement that is simply an extension of an already non-violent culture?

Switzerland requires almost every citizen to learn to use a gun, and requires that 10% of the households to have an assault rifle at home (provided by the state) and (always sealed) ammo, as that's their citizens military duty, because in switzerland there is no professional army at all, switzerland's army is the Swiss militia.

Superficially this may seem similar to the "US militia" and the second amendment, but it is not similar at all. Switzerland has a "peace culture" in its dna, is the prototypical neutral country that never takes part in any conflict, in all its history never entered in armed conflict despite all the wars that happened close by (the biggest example is 2nd world war). Obviously US is quite the opposite, while in Switzerland learning how to use a gun is an unfortunate event that is the price you have to pay for being a "peace"  country, and therefore not even having an army, for americans guns are some sort of ill "freedom tool" that is loved and celebrated by a big part of its population. For the prototypical switzerland citizen real freedom resides in not sending your neighbour to slaughter, they abhor violence, while the prototypical American sees violence as some unavoidable evil you need to master to be free.

And there you have the difference between an imperialistic country, and one that it's not.

Plus, nobody in Switzerland wishes to be able to carry a gun, and thus nobody is allowed to carry one loaded except for very specific exceptions (reservist en route to its unit or security workers).

The real difference is not in the policy but the culture. That piece of paper called American constitution wrote in a very specific context that some americans adore like Christians the bible may be part of the problem.

[Rassah]

^^^^^  That, Rampion, is my point and understanding of the matter entirely, which I completely agree with.

[FirstAscent]

^^^^^  That, Rampion, is my point and understanding of the matter entirely, which I completely agree with.

Note the statement Rampion made: "Nobody in Switzerland wishes to carry a gun..."

It would help if people in the U.S. stopped wishing to carry guns...

[mdude77]

^^^^^  That, Rampion, is my point and understanding of the matter entirely, which I completely agree with.

Note the statement Rampion made: "Nobody in Switzerland wishes to carry a gun..."

It would help if people in the U.S. stopped wishing to carry guns...

Finally, something that makes sense from you!  Guns don't kill people, people do. 

M

[Rassah]

^^^^^  That, Rampion, is my point and understanding of the matter entirely, which I completely agree with.

Note the statement Rampion made: "Nobody in Switzerland wishes to carry a gun..."

It would help if people in the U.S. stopped wishing to carry guns...

Meaning the US should focus on making people stop wishing they could carry guns, instead of trying to forcefully prevent them from doing so. All that does is create distractions, especially in a time when anyone can 3D print guns at home.

[TheButterZone]

We innocents will stop wishing to carry guns when all criminals lay down all their weapons (which includes everything, even fists and feet) and stop murdering, raping, maiming, and otherwise victimizing disarmed and defenseless gun control victims. And not just innocents in the U.S. either, 86% of UK respondents as well (source: Daily Telegraph). Not that fundamental human rights can be rightfully voted infringed out of existence by a "majority", either.

Insidious prick.

[EscrowBTC]

FirstAscent, where did you get those statistics?

This is madness!

[Spendulus]

^^^^^  That, Rampion, is my point and understanding of the matter entirely, which I completely agree with.

Note the statement Rampion made: "Nobody in Switzerland wishes to carry a gun..."

It would help if people in the U.S. stopped wishing to carry guns...

Meaning the US should focus on making people stop wishing they could carry guns, instead of trying to forcefully prevent them from doing so. All that does is create distractions, especially in a time when anyone can 3D print guns at home.

More wannabe Authoritarian Controller perversions of the Liberal Progressive Type.

For three periods of two or three years each I pretty routinely (and legally) carried a gun.  It had to do with work and handling/carrying fair amounts of money.  When a reasonable need to carry ceased, I stopped it.  They are heavy and bulky. 

Sorry but I can't relate this kind of real world experience with your fantasies.  "Wishing they  could carry".

Has it occurred to you there may be REASONS?

[FirstAscent]

^^^^^  That, Rampion, is my point and understanding of the matter entirely, which I completely agree with.

Note the statement Rampion made: "Nobody in Switzerland wishes to carry a gun..."

It would help if people in the U.S. stopped wishing to carry guns...

Finally, something that makes sense from you!  Guns don't kill people, people do. 

Another NRA meme with no merit. Tell me, can you cite one example where gun control advocates called for a banning of guns from a society where no people existed? If you can, then that might lend some credence to your repetition of that pointless slogan. Instead, you'll discover that gun control advocates seek a reduction in the possession of guns by people, which is a condition, not an object. Possession is a condition in which people possess guns, which implies a relationship between two things - a person, and a gun, which in combination, can be deadly.

Please, stop with the meaningless sayings.

[randomcloud]

Another NRA meme with no merit. Tell me, can you cite one example where gun control advocates called for a banning of guns from a society where no people existed? If you can, then that might lend some credence to your repetition of that pointless slogan. Instead, you'll discover that gun control advocates seek a reduction in the possession of guns by people, which is a condition, not an object. Possession is a condition in which people possess guns, which implies a relationship between two things - a person, and a gun, which in combination, can be deadly.

Please, stop with the meaningless sayings.

So what do you hope to accomplish by banning guns in areas where the population doesn't want them to be banned? Don't you think they have the right to make up their own minds?

[TheButterZone]

The only logical answer is every evil act up to and including genocide. He just refuses to admit that he is upholding the beliefs of every genocidal monster who first needed to disarm his victims, which is why he's on my ignore list. Banning guns (the most effective tool for self-defense) from only innocents' hands has proven endlessly to create criminals' utopias, bloodbaths at the times and places of criminals' exclusive choosing.

[FirstAscent]

Another NRA meme with no merit. Tell me, can you cite one example where gun control advocates called for a banning of guns from a society where no people existed? If you can, then that might lend some credence to your repetition of that pointless slogan. Instead, you'll discover that gun control advocates seek a reduction in the possession of guns by people, which is a condition, not an object. Possession is a condition in which people possess guns, which implies a relationship between two things - a person, and a gun, which in combination, can be deadly.

Please, stop with the meaningless sayings.

So what do you hope to accomplish by banning guns in areas where the population doesn't want them to be banned? Don't you think they have the right to make up their own minds?

Funny how if you look at the cultures that like guns, you'll find the most gun deaths. Funny how that works. Therefore, what you're saying is: cultures which don't want guns banned want to live in a culture where there are a lot of gun deaths.

[randomcloud]

Another NRA meme with no merit. Tell me, can you cite one example where gun control advocates called for a banning of guns from a society where no people existed? If you can, then that might lend some credence to your repetition of that pointless slogan. Instead, you'll discover that gun control advocates seek a reduction in the possession of guns by people, which is a condition, not an object. Possession is a condition in which people possess guns, which implies a relationship between two things - a person, and a gun, which in combination, can be deadly.

Please, stop with the meaningless sayings.

So what do you hope to accomplish by banning guns in areas where the population doesn't want them to be banned? Don't you think they have the right to make up their own minds?

Funny how if you look at the cultures that like guns, you'll find the most gun deaths. Funny how that works. Therefore, what you're saying is: cultures which don't want guns banned want to live in a culture where there are a lot of gun deaths.

Please answer the questions, don't try to tap-dance around them.

[NewLiberty]

Another NRA meme with no merit. Tell me, can you cite one example where gun control advocates called for a banning of guns from a society where no people existed?

Guns with no people?  Sounds like a drone.
Lots of gun control advocates hating on those.
http://blogs.sacbee.com/crime/archives/2013/01/5-face-federal-charges-in-drone-protest.html
Most of the guns with no people are still government guns not private ones.

Though some private drones apparently do get shot down by police (even if armed with only a camera filming a protest).
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-06/24/turkish-protest-drone-shot-down.

[FirstAscent]

Another NRA meme with no merit. Tell me, can you cite one example where gun control advocates called for a banning of guns from a society where no people existed? If you can, then that might lend some credence to your repetition of that pointless slogan. Instead, you'll discover that gun control advocates seek a reduction in the possession of guns by people, which is a condition, not an object. Possession is a condition in which people possess guns, which implies a relationship between two things - a person, and a gun, which in combination, can be deadly.

Please, stop with the meaningless sayings.

So what do you hope to accomplish by banning guns in areas where the population doesn't want them to be banned? Don't you think they have the right to make up their own minds?

Funny how if you look at the cultures that like guns, you'll find the most gun deaths. Funny how that works. Therefore, what you're saying is: cultures which don't want guns banned want to live in a culture where there are a lot of gun deaths.

Please answer the questions, don't try to tap-dance around them.

If a culture wants guns, then that culture has failed itself. Have you noticed that the same people who want guns also want their government to not tax them, and not provide social nets, thus creating desperate situations, and crime?

[randomcloud]

Another NRA meme with no merit. Tell me, can you cite one example where gun control advocates called for a banning of guns from a society where no people existed? If you can, then that might lend some credence to your repetition of that pointless slogan. Instead, you'll discover that gun control advocates seek a reduction in the possession of guns by people, which is a condition, not an object. Possession is a condition in which people possess guns, which implies a relationship between two things - a person, and a gun, which in combination, can be deadly.

Please, stop with the meaningless sayings.

So what do you hope to accomplish by banning guns in areas where the population doesn't want them to be banned? Don't you think they have the right to make up their own minds?

Funny how if you look at the cultures that like guns, you'll find the most gun deaths. Funny how that works. Therefore, what you're saying is: cultures which don't want guns banned want to live in a culture where there are a lot of gun deaths.

Please answer the questions, don't try to tap-dance around them.

If a culture wants guns, then that culture has failed itself. Have you noticed that the same people who want guns also want their government to not tax them, and not provide social nets, thus creating desperate situations, and crime?

Do you think they have the right to make up their own minds, or don't you? It's a yes or no question. And what do you hope to accomplish by banning guns in areas against their will?

[TheButterZone]

He's a bloody sociopath. Just give up already.

[FirstAscent]

Another NRA meme with no merit. Tell me, can you cite one example where gun control advocates called for a banning of guns from a society where no people existed? If you can, then that might lend some credence to your repetition of that pointless slogan. Instead, you'll discover that gun control advocates seek a reduction in the possession of guns by people, which is a condition, not an object. Possession is a condition in which people possess guns, which implies a relationship between two things - a person, and a gun, which in combination, can be deadly.

Please, stop with the meaningless sayings.

So what do you hope to accomplish by banning guns in areas where the population doesn't want them to be banned? Don't you think they have the right to make up their own minds?

Funny how if you look at the cultures that like guns, you'll find the most gun deaths. Funny how that works. Therefore, what you're saying is: cultures which don't want guns banned want to live in a culture where there are a lot of gun deaths.

Please answer the questions, don't try to tap-dance around them.

If a culture wants guns, then that culture has failed itself. Have you noticed that the same people who want guns also want their government to not tax them, and not provide social nets, thus creating desperate situations, and crime?

Do you think they have the right to make up their own minds, or don't you? It's a yes or no question. And what do you hope to accomplish by banning guns in areas against their will?

Do they have the right to fail themselves? Is that what you're asking? Why don't you ask yourself that question and provide the answer?

[NewLiberty]

Do they have the right to fail themselves? Is that what you're asking? Why don't you ask yourself that question and provide the answer?

If the metric of "fail themselves" is disagreement with you, then yes, they have the right to disagree with you, and "fail themselves".

[FirstAscent]

Do they have the right to fail themselves? Is that what you're asking? Why don't you ask yourself that question and provide the answer?

If the metric of "fail themselves" is disagreement with you, then yes, they have the right to disagree with you, and "fail themselves".

And where does that leave them, in the end? Civilized behavior does not arise magically. It arrives through sharing of knowledge and cooperation. There are better examples in this world. Or at least ideas which can be merged.