• A Mathematical Model Of Gun Control
    608 replies, posted
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41658739]but recreational shooting is just a pastiche of actual shooting.[/QUOTE] So? There are a hell of a lot of sports that are pastiches of violent activities
[QUOTE=Timebomb575;41659736]So? There are a hell of a lot of sports that are pastiches of violent activities[/QUOTE] but none of them fund industries that ultimately kills a lot of people
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41659811]but none of them fund industries that ultimately kills a lot of people[/QUOTE] motor vehicle industry.....
[QUOTE=JaegerMonster;41659854]motor vehicle industry.....[/QUOTE] non sequitur
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41659811]but none of them fund industries that ultimately kills a lot of people[/QUOTE] they fund industries (shoes, clothing, electronics) that ultimately result in the financial subjugation of millions of SE Asian workers and children, (many of whom die from or are left disfigured by their working conditions) and that pollute the hell out of the planet, which will have a far larger impact in the long run than firearms deaths I fail to see your point
[QUOTE=Timebomb575;41659946]they fund industries (shoes, clothing, electronics) that ultimately result in the financial subjugation of millions of SE Asian workers and children, (many of whom die from or are left disfigured by their working conditions) and that pollute the hell out of the planet, which will have a far larger impact in the long run than firearms deaths I fail to see your point[/QUOTE] except there is a steady pace of reform in SE Asia and conditions have improved greatly over the last few decades. I fail to see your point.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41659879]non sequitur[/QUOTE] how the fuck is it non sequitur Motor vehicle deaths many times outweigh the number of firearm related deaths per year in the US alone. Let alone the rest of the world.
[QUOTE=JaegerMonster;41659977]how the fuck is it non sequitur Motor vehicle deaths many times outweigh the number of firearm related deaths per year in the US alone. Let alone the rest of the world.[/QUOTE] because the motor industry isn't recreational and is a fundamental part of human civilization on this planet. Comparing it to the firearm industry is pretty desperate of you. Also: [url]http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-19/american-gun-deaths-to-exceed-traffic-fatalities-by-2015.html[/url] [img]http://www.bloomberg.com/image/i3cs6F7hTHkc.jpg[/img] The car industry is heavily regulated and is continuously being improved and deaths are being reduced every year as a result.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41659991]because the motor industry isn't recreational and is a fundamental part of human civilization on this planet. Comparing it to the firearm industry is pretty desperate of you. Also: [url]http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-19/american-gun-deaths-to-exceed-traffic-fatalities-by-2015.html[/url] [img]http://www.bloomberg.com/image/i3cs6F7hTHkc.jpg[/img] [B]The car industry is heavily regulated and is continuously being improved[/B] and deaths are being reduced every year as a result.[/QUOTE] so why cant you do this with firearms instead of your asinine idea of outlawing firearms and destroying all the factories and hoping for the best.
[QUOTE=JaegerMonster;41660019]so why cant you do this with firearms instead of your asinine idea of outlawing firearms and destroying all the factories and hoping for the best.[/QUOTE] So do you wish for increased gun control and regulation? its not asinine, even the study in this thread said that completely stopping firearm production is the most effective method according to their model.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41660025]So do you wish for increased gun control and regulation?[/QUOTE] I never actually said otherwise, contrary to what you likely think. But increased regulation would have to mean someone competent overseeing that regulation, not the idiotic and ineffective changes that the US has seen so far.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41659965]except there is a steady pace of reform in SE Asia and conditions have improved greatly over the last few decades. I fail to see your point.[/QUOTE] ok south america then the point is that many sports fund companies with extremely crappy human rights records/environmental records, whereas shooting sports just supports an industry whose products are misused
[QUOTE=JaegerMonster;41660044]I never actually said otherwise, contrary to what you likely think. But increased regulation would have to mean someone competent overseeing that regulation, not the idiotic and ineffective changes that the US has seen so far.[/QUOTE] So stronger and more far reaching changes to the firearm industry. Rather than petty arguments over dumb shit like magazines. I can agree with you on that. [editline]31st July 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Timebomb575;41660050]ok south america then the point is that many sports fund companies with extremely crappy human rights records/environmental records, whereas shooting sports just supports an industry whose products are misused[/QUOTE] I think factory workers rights in other countries are so far removed from this debate its not really relevant. Considering the issue isn't related to the sports, but rather that countries individual laws. Unlike the firearms industry.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41660055] Considering the issue isn't related to the sports, but rather that countries individual laws. Unlike the firearms industry.[/QUOTE] how are shooting sports more directly linked to the firearms industry than other sports are to their respective equipment manufacturers? [editline]e[/editline] moreover, why are the factory workers not relevant? we are talking about how the firearms industry effects the population of the country it makes its products in, shouldn't the effects that sports equipment manufacturers have on the populations that they employ (environmental disasters, poor wages, etc) be relevant?
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41659811]but none of them fund industries that ultimately kills a lot of people[/QUOTE] The smoking, alcohol, and fast food industries individually lead to a higher death-count each year than do firearms. Smoking itself can be attributed to 440,000 fatalities yearly. ( [url]http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5235a4.htm0[/url]) Alcohol is directly responsible for around 25,000 deaths with liver failure at around 15,000. (excluding accidents and homicides) [ [url]http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/alcohol.htm][/url] And obesity can be linked to 300,000 mortalities yearly. ([url]http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/calls/obesity/fact_consequences.html[/url]) Curbing and restricting just one of these industries will further decrease American mortalities and will do so in a much more effective manner than restricting the public availability of firearms.
[QUOTE=snapshot32;41660156]The smoking, alcohol, and fast food industries individually lead to a higher death-count each year than do firearms. Smoking itself can be attributed to 440,000 fatalities yearly. ( [url]http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5235a4.htm0[/url]) Alcohol is directly responsible for around 25,000 deaths with liver failure at around 15,000. (excluding accidents and homicides) [ [url]http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/alcohol.htm][/url] And obesity can be linked to 300,000 mortalities yearly. ([url]http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/calls/obesity/fact_consequences.html[/url]) Curbing and restricting just one of these industries will further decrease American mortalities and will do so in a much more effective manner than restricting the public availability of firearms.[/QUOTE] The difference is that people don't go out murdering each other with burgers, and its often an individual choice. But they are being tackled despite resistance from their respective industries. Why can't we do the same with the firearms industry?
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41660172] Why can't we do the same with the firearms industry?[/QUOTE] what would you suggest, out of curiosity?
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41660172]The difference is that people don't go out murdering each other with burgers, and its often an individual choice.[/QUOTE] It's not individual choice to get hit by some drunk asshole on the highway and it's not individual choice to get diabetes or cancer from your bad habits. Those were the results of an unregulated and dangerous industry. The fact of the matter is that restricting firearms will only lower gun-related deaths. Not all homicides. Here's a paper I suggest you read, it's backed and sourced by Harvard none the less. [url]http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf[/url] Specifically the conclusion on page 45.
[QUOTE=Timebomb575;41660199]what would you suggest, out of curiosity?[/QUOTE] Start taking the issue seriously and stop using 'muh guns' as a legitimate argument.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41660226]Start taking the issue seriously and stop using 'muh guns' as a legitimate argument.[/QUOTE] Why is "muh guns" not a legitimate argument? These laws affect pieces of property that I own (and have spent a fair amount of money on), and I kind of want to keep them, and maybe in the future even buy more. Im all in favor of legislation that makes the process of getting a gun more difficult (like licencing, background checks, etc), but Im not in favor of stupid regulations on what kinds of guns I can own, or taxes that arbitrarily jack up gun/ammo prices to make it more difficult for legitimate shooters to enjoy their hobby.
To my earlier point for those interested there was two home invasions in two days within miles of my house, take note mr "that can't be true or hollywood would be all over it" and guess what both times the perp was armed and the victim was injured, maybe that wouldn't be the case if the victim was armed. Statistics be damned people who constantly say that don't have to live with it every day like we do. [url]http://rockfordscanner.com/2013/07/29/home-invasion-call-in-loves-park/[/url] [url]http://rockfordscanner.com/2013/07/30/victim-battered-during-a-home-invasion-on-kent-st/[/url] and there has been over 15 violent home invasions this year in my area [editline]31st July 2013[/editline] even my own brother in law was stabbed in his home this year here you can see for yourself, don't let the seemingly dropping rates obscure the fact that i's still double the national average. Plus our cops do nothing 50% of the time they are on duty, and I can provide video evidence of this fact. [url]http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Rockford-Illinois.html[/url] as you sit either in your country that already has established gun control (even you admitted it) or in an area of very low crime, you tell me that I shouldn't be allowed to own a gun to protect myself so your averages and statistics can look better, and make you feel better. They don't solve every problem. What you see as 10 less deaths, I see as 10 violent criminals who survived because their victim wasn't armed.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41658739]but recreational shooting is just a pastiche of actual shooting.[/QUOTE] So are video game shooters. And martial arts are a pastiche for beating people up. Your point?
[QUOTE=frozensoda;41660823]you tell me that I shouldn't be allowed to own a gun to protect myself so your averages and statistics can look better, and make you feel better. They don't solve every problem. What you see as 10 less deaths, I see as 10 violent criminals who survived because their victim wasn't armed.[/QUOTE] Are you even capable of logic. If the statistics and averages are better then less people are being murdered directly as a result. So yes I would feel better. [editline]31st July 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Silly Sil;41660849]So are video game shooters. And martial arts are a pastiche for beating people up. Your point?[/QUOTE] People don't kill other people with video games.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41660935]People don't kill other people with video games.[/QUOTE] You haven't said anything about killing people. You said that recreational shooting is bad because it's just a pastiche of actual shooting. Following this logic video games are just the same. But fine, lets go with the martial arts you've ignored continently. If you want to ban all guns because some gun owners misuse them and hurt other people with them, then the same argument can be made about martial arts.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;41661057]You haven't said anything about killing people. You said that recreational shooting is bad because it's just a pastiche of actual shooting. Following this logic video games are just the same.[/QUOTE] Its bad only because it supports a culture and industry that is detrimental to society. [QUOTE=Silly Sil;41661057]But fine, lets go with the martial arts you've ignored continently. If you want to ban all guns because some gun owners misuse them and hurt other people with them, then the same argument can be made about martial arts.[/QUOTE] I don't think there has ever really been a situation where a guy had a breakdown and judo chopped his family to death.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41661107]Its bad only because it supports a culture and industry that is [B]detrimental to society. [/B] [/QUOTE] Isn't most industry detrimental to society in one way or another? The oil industry, textiles, electronics, all have detrimental effects on society.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41660935]Are you even capable of logic. If the statistics and averages are better then less people are being murdered directly as a result. So yes I would feel better. [editline]31st July 2013[/editline] People don't kill other people with video games.[/QUOTE] Are you even capable of understanding the just because there is less murders doesn't mean there is less victims? If you lived in an area where the threat was real, maybe you would understand. I have no use for the opinion of some douche who weighs everything by numbers. A working man with a family is more important than a career criminal, but to you it's all jsut numbers because it's not real in your fantasy world Basically you have about 0 right to speak about this issue since all of the legitimate uses for guns for defence are out of your realm of reality, you will never have to deal with the threat of someone breaking into your house and murdering your family for stuff, because in your words, "that just doesn't happen that often" which is a blatant lie and shows that you know nothing of inner city blight. so if you know nothing about the reason people like me want to own one how could you possibly argue against it
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41659811]but none of them fund industries that ultimately kills a lot of people[/QUOTE] because the people who make guns are responsible for how the people that acquire their guns use them?
[QUOTE=frozensoda;41661306]Are you even capable of understanding the just because there is less murders doesn't mean there is less victims?[/QUOTE] If the statistics and averages are better there are less victims. [editline]31st July 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=xxncxx;41661424]because the people who make guns are responsible for how the people that acquire their guns use them?[/QUOTE] [img]http://randazza.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/photo-1.png[/img] [editline]31st July 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Timebomb575;41661302]Isn't most industry detrimental to society in one way or another? The oil industry, textiles, electronics, all have detrimental effects on society.[/QUOTE] All of those things are building blocks of society. From power to clothing, to lighting and computers. So no.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41661457]If the statistics and averages are better there is less victims. [editline]31st July 2013[/editline] [img]http://www.feministe.us/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/bushmaster_desktop_1024x768.jpg[/img] [editline]31st July 2013[/editline] All of those things are building blocks of society. From power to clothing, to lighting and computers. So no.[/QUOTE] How is that related in anyway?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.