Toronto Votes For A Total Ban On Handgun Sales After Mass Shooting
140 replies, posted
I don't know if you're intentionally misrepresenting me or doing it by accident. We compare statistics PER CAPITA. He was comparing them in absolute terms...
Thank god, now all the criminals can stop buying their guns illegally.
My source does not include that but is mainly focused around misleading graphs - take a read: https://medium.com/@bjcampbell/everybodys-lying-about-the-link-between-gun-ownership-and-homicide-1108ed400be5
And for a chart that achieves the same thing but from a different source:
https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-338c55a9f9968d5ea2d1adabb5649021
What cannot move above shall move under, or outside city limits. Good job, you did literally jack shit.
I was careful to talk about gun-related homicides but it's interesting that you mentioned suicide because that IS correlated with gun ownership rates.
My experience with the threads on Facepunch is that mental health gets brought up more often and more readily than poverty. In regards to poverty, poorer regions in America will see more gun homicides but income inequality is more indicative for global trends. After all, there are many poor places in the world that don't have high gun homicide rates. In developed countries, the gun-related homicides seen are uniquely American while mental illness and poverty exist everywhere.
Legalize people's ability for unrestricted euthanization, and those gun suicides would drop like a brick in water.
People off themselves namely thanks to the lack of medical resources, and if they actually goto a doctor's office asking for the right to be euthanized, they can at least get the medical help they need.
Correlated, not caused. People still kill themselves without access to guns. Want to prevent suicide? Focus on mental health initiatives. Dont take away someone's spoons to make them lose weight.
Your experience is wrong.
Gun crime in poor areas is not unique to America, and violence in poverty stricken areas is certainly not unique to America. Pretending that violence is exclusive to America is disingenuous and naive. Go look at any homicide rate by country statistic and you'll very clearly see that the homicide rate increases while the quality of life decreases.
You can blame the poverty on whatever you want, but the fact remains that the poverty issue in America is extreme and its causing more issues than just gun violence.
As was stated previously, gun crime is higher in densely populated low income areas. Gun homicide, and violence in general, is a result caused by a low quality of life which is caused by being low income. Proliferations of guns does not cause people to kill each other. Gun crime is a consequence of a greater problem that extends far beyond the fact that firearms exist.
It depends on a bunch of factors and laws vary state to state, but generally the dumb meme of gun toting nut jobs looking for an excuse to shoot anyone on sight at the first signs of trouble is a myth perpetuated by the media; and a quite offensive mischaracterization at that.
One thing which pisses me off to no end is how often the media portrays gun owners as a bunch of Rambo wannabes who would want to attempt something stupid as this:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mnpTw3n2tFM
And people somehow unironically believe this garbage is the kind of people we are. In real life if by some miracle you didn’t end up getting killed, you’d end up with murder charges and lose everything. Yes there are idiots in gun culture who take things too far and make offensive jokes, but this video isn’t gun culture. It’s a blatant misrepresentation of gun culture by ignorant people who THINK they know what gun culture actually is.
I can’t stress this enough; the majority of people who own guns are NOT looking for a fight. It’s usually the exact opposite, where people have a defensive mindset and want to avoid bad situations and conflict by any means necessary. The reason to own a weapon for personal defense is for the very unlikely scenarios when avoiding conflict is not a feasible option or when there is a clear and immediate threat to your life or the life of others around you.
Castle or doctrine or “stand your ground” laws aren’t a free pass on murder either. You can’t just shoot trespassers on your property for any arbitrary reason like that idiot who shot a homeless person for using his shower. That guy ended up being convinced of murder. In some states like Massachusetts, there are even laws which go the opposite direction and require people to exhaust every available option before resorting to lethal force, to the point where it may defy common sense in some cases.
I can’t find the exact article, but someone affiliated with the police in Massachusetts told me about a story where a pregnant woman shot a home invader and the judge had the nerve to ask “why didn’t you try to escape out the second story window to get away from your attacker?”.
What the fuck is wrong with those graphs? You've plotted the high-high quadrant and the low-low quadrant separately, and each, on its own, shows no correlation. The two graphs also have completely different scales. How about plotting all the data instead of cherry picking partial scenarios that fit your point? Use log-log to deal with range issues.
maybe read the rest of the thread before throwing a fit
Yeah that guy has a lot of interesting posts on gun control
https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/238785/238df102-20bb-4ad3-8ca6-da7d25702be8/image.png
Whats questionable about that? Its rather crude but its an apt comparison for the history of gun control in the US, and perfectly describes why gun owners are always apprehensive and resistant to "compromise".
Where does the train of thought demonstrated in this comic falter?
Legit, the arguement used here is what I usually convert many would-be gun rights advocates with.
Seriously: I WANT MY FUCKING CAKE BACK, AND I WANT IT ALL!
Are you saying that you use this comic to convince people to be in favor of gun control or am I horribly misreading this?
It has in my city?
Convert gun control folk into gun rights advocates.
Part of the social contract is that in any society, people have to give things up for the greater good. Nobody is coming for your "cake" out of malice. This particular analogy, to me, always seemed a little childish.
Because you could use the same argument to argue against literally any law (Where is my crystal meth cake?! Where is my murder cake?! Where is my tax evasion cake?! Wahhh!). If you can use an argument to come to any nonsense conclusion you feel like, that's a problem with the argument.
If something were a problem I would give it up for the greater good. But I dont want my rights violated over ineffectual change. I don't particularly care if somebody is "coming for me" out of malice or ignorance, theyre still coming for me and theyre still wrong.
The people who stand outside of abortion clinics to protest aren't there out of malice. They dont understand that abortions are destroying life, theyre just flushing out a glob of cells that havent quite formed into something significant. They dont understand that, they think theyre literally killing unborn children and throwing them away. Theyre not there out of malice, theyre there to try and stop babies from getting murdered.
Does their ignorance and stupidity make it ok to harass people and try to hinder people's lives and rights? Of course fucking not. A person's ignorance is not an excuse for them to try and violate rights.
Whats actually childish is asking people to give their rights up and receive nothing in return. Its childish to present change that takes away liberties to ineffectually bolster securities.
"Duh greatr gud" is an incredibly slippery slope for giving up rights that a society should tread carefully down. Gun rights has been one of these and we're nearing the bottom. Nothing presented in regards to further control in the past 10 years has been actual compromise. Theres only taking, never giving.
So in yalls opinions, what is the solution to america's gun crime problem? (or if you don't think its a problem "America's abnormally high gun homicides per capita")
https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-338c55a9f9968d5ea2d1adabb5649021
That doesn't look particularly high to me, let alone abnormally so considering it's one of the smaller bars that's visible.
At one time people could own slaves and the discourse was very similar to the cake thing. At one time you could buy cocaine and sexually harass women. The cake argument is bs.
citation needed
I think this argument is silly, you could make the same type of argument for any of the rights we have today and just go "well back in the day you had other rights that were BAD rights, so clearly [insert any right or liberty here] is just a primitive and outdated one
It's nothing more than a false equivalency mixed with unsupported negative attribution tactics, there is nothing substantial behind your argument
Approximately four gun-related homicides per 100,000 people is pretty damned low. Especially when you take into account the 89 guns per 100 people. But even so you're not paying close attention to that graph anyways.I wouldn't call Switzerland, Canada, Germany, or even Serbia third-world nations yet they're all also on the far left side of the graph, meaning high rates of gun ownership, and their gun-related homicide rate is still pretty damned low.
Moving the goalposts. The graph was posted because they wanted a graph that included all countries. And now you don't like that all countries have been included? If you only want graphs with specific ranges of data those were posted on page 1.
I was referring to the gun homicide rate, implying the gun homicide rate in the USA is only low when you compare it to third world countries, compare it to most other developed nations and the USA has an "abnormally high gun homicide rate" which is what I called a problem.
I'll trust that your confusion between gun homicide rate and gun ownership WRT my post was an honest mistake.
Fair enough, though it's still not particular high when you take into account:
89 guns per 100 people.
That's a completely absurd level of gun ownership. Considering the poverty and mental healthcare issues that the US has it's actually kinda amazing that our gun homicide rates are as low as they are.
To answer this, however, the solution is to address poverty and mental healthcare issues. Mass shooting as well as the majority of gun-related deaths in general are mostly related to lacking mental healthcare standards. Actual gun crime in general, however, generally trends towards being caused by poverty. And the US has very high rates of poverty for a developed country. (And it's increasing thank's to trash like Trump.)
Although in some cases simply addressing poverty isn't the full solution. A lot of gun crime that arose due to poverty is in areas where gangs run rampant so police trust is very low. Even if poverty issues are addressed there will still be an issue with people getting pressured into joining gangs because of the culture that tends to arise in those areas. Rebuilding trust in the police in those areas in particular (but also addressing police brutality in general) will also help to decrease the crime rates even more.
Not sure if it was literally like that but its effectively 2 sides discussing something, concessions are made till one side feels wronged and goes apeshit.
For slavery: the 3/5ths compromise, the congressional slave ban after 1800, increased to 1808, then finally it taking the civil war to ban it.
I'd say all the graphs earlier that show no correlation between gun ownership and gun homicide rates is a pretty good argument.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.