Not a derailment at all!!! It is spot on, and it is much more of a step to finding a solution then just saying...... It's all the Guns fault it!Originally Posted by KenWats
Not a derailment at all!!! It is spot on, and it is much more of a step to finding a solution then just saying...... It's all the Guns fault it!
The Real Truth For All You Number Analytical Types
Everybody needs to watch this for some real truth about gun violence.
You are far more likely to be killed by a medical error than any type of gun violence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SK7WrsnuDPc
Rankings of causes of death are useful for a rational allocation of attention (I attempt to divert attention away from errorists with 'em).
This specific video on the other hand has a strong smell of propaganda and partiality.
Here ya go Fuchs. A Wall Street Journal article quite soberly written. 98,000 annual deaths in the US from preventable medical mistakes.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...334441352.html
"We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene
As Fuchs says proper ranking is important to support an efficient allocation of ressources. I remarked how little homicides are actually comitted with the vast arsenal of firearms dispersed in Western countries. Still far far more then by terrorists but overall we have surprisingly peaceful societies, at least compared to the some in which our ancestors lived.
In this context the graphics I posted show that for some reasons gun homicides dropped a great deal roughly twenty years ago. Almost all of it is due to fewer killings done with handguns in bigger cities, especially the biggest, with both the victim and shooter relative likely to have a criminal record. From a police and political point of view curbing this type of homocide should be the 'easiest' to target for obvious reasons. In this case focused gun control and police/government action can be quite efficient.
It is much more difficult to curb the type of shooting which has restarted the debate about gun laws. Far fewer dots to connect, no links to typical criminals. Health care and social support are of great importance. A low amount of firearms per capita makes it obviously much harder for such mentally disturbed persons to do such terrible things, but in a country like the US simply the vast amount of firearms in circulation makes it very difficult that moderate laws reduced that risk by a significant degree. (Especially since the most commone homicide weapon is a simple, run-of-the-mill handgun which works well enough without some easily banable evil feature.) The harsh UK approach on handguns must have consumed very considerable public ressources. Maybe somebody with knowledge on it could step in.
Last edited by Firn; 01-11-2013 at 01:43 PM.
... "We need officers capable of following systematically the path of logical argument to its conclusion, with disciplined intellect, strong in character and nerve to execute what the intellect dictates"
General Ludwig Beck (1880-1944);
Speech at the Kriegsakademie, 1935
The focus on 'assault weapons' is probably a cultural one.
"Team pro AR-15" appears to have in part a mindset that the a powerful government if powerful against its people, not for its people. They seek to weaken this government by making themselves more powerful, albeit hoarding mere rifles is clearly an illusory attempt at it.
The less extreme part of "Team pro AR-15" seems to have simply developed a huge affection for warlike and automatic weapons, and the area of convergence seems to be the market for the 'tacticool' equipment that flooded the arms market after the appearance of the picatinny rail (and thus the realization that guns can be pimped by laymen, too). Same for "hello kitty" or generally pink-themed AR-15s.
Team "counter AR-15" doesn't see an actual use for such weapons except killing people. They don't have an affection for the guns and seem to prefer the modern European view that in a civilised country the individual gives up his armament (so for example doesn't carry a dagger when he enters a bar as was usual only 200 years ago even in European metropolises). They bet instead on being safer when others aren't armed to the teeth because the state has a monopoly on force and almost-monopoly on firearms. A conversion to this state is probably hopeless with about 200 million firearms in private hands, but the least tolerable threat -the 'assault weapons' - is a logical target for an at least partial implementation.
They don't stare at their own (non-existing)AR-15 as provider of security, but are scared by the others' AR-15s as sources of insecurity.
There also seems to be a rural-urban divide, with rural people having good reasons to not trust the timely reaction of government security officials in case of emergency and having good practical uses for firearms (hunting, self-protection against animals). Urban people meanwhile have emergency services ~ 5 minutes away (or could at least), not going hunting much but experiencing a lot of firearm-empowered crime (on their TV screen).
___________
I wonder why the U.S. got the crime and firearms thing so wrong. I've yet to hear about rural Frenchmen placing much emphasis on having semi-auto spitzer bullet carbines (and they're got some really lonely places!).
Quite the same goes for Canada; they don't happen to have such a huge conflict either as far as I know.
Fuchs:
That is not such a bad analysis. I would add that one of the reasons for the popularity of the AR-15 in the US is that it is fun to shoot. People take it to the range and enjoy shooting it. One of the reasons they discovered that it is fun to shoot was the 'assault weapons ban' of the mid-1990s. As soon as it was suspected that limits of some kind would be placed on ARs, they flew off the shelves, just as they are doing now. People who had a mild interest in owning and shooting the weapon bought it because they figured it was then or never. The same thing is happening now I am sure. So the irony of trying to limit that type of weapon is that it increased the sales initially and then the quality of the product insured that sales would continue to grow. If they had never put limitations on it, many of those people's mild interest would have remained a mild interest instead of being transformed into a purchase.
The rural-urban divide is more than that. It is a very large cultural divide also. The divide that you missed is the divide between the South and the rural states and the Northeast, the West Coast and the states dominated by huge cities like Illinois.
People in the country, I believe, who have weapons for self defense are mostly concerned about defending themselves against humans. Dangerous animals just aren't that widely distributed in the US.
Very good point about people being frightened by what they see on TV.
You know Fuchs, you were doing so good but then the supercilious Euroweenie escaped. Myself, I wonder how Europe got the government, political, economic thing so wrong, since most all of the Americans have ancestors who came from Europe because life there really sucked.
"We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks