What does the science data say about firearms?

[Brian37]

Um no, the "seat belt" is a horrible metaphor.

The real prevention isn't forcing everyone to drive a car.

The real prevention is VETTING before someone drives the car.

Yes you should wear a seat belt while driving. But you ALSO take a drivers test FIRST.

I suffer from depression, but since our current laws would not vet me or prevent me from buying a firearm, I could go out right now, buy one, then pop myself. Fortunately I am very self aware, but lots of people are not.

All these distractions coming from the right, not you, but from the right, cause us to get caught up in details that miss the elephant in the room.

If everyone agrees, and both the right and left agree, nobody wants them in the wrong hands, then VETTING is the easiest way to prevent them from getting in the wrong hands.

Now, I am old enough to remember when cigarettes were sold on the isle, not behind the counter, but in the isle. Despite even back then the law being 18 I bought them because the adult and or the clerk didn't give a fuck. Now they are behind the counter and if the employee gets caught, they can lose their job, and or the store lose it's tobacco license.

Point being, with rights come responsibility, and not giving a shit after the sale isn't working. "Not my fault".

Yet if a underage kid drinks at a bar then kills someone driving, the bar can be held responsible.

We cannot and should not sell firearms to the mentally ill, or any type of disturbed person out for revenge. But, some people wrongfully think that vetting is a presumption of guilt. I am 51 and sometimes even at my age, I still get carded when buying beer. I don't assume the clerk is going to deny me, but they are simply doing their job.

I am not accusing you personally of anything. I am simply tired of the climate that no record at time of buy means nothing bad happens after the legal buy. Most firearm injuries and deaths, ARE NOT due to theft then assault. Most firearm injuries and deaths are after a legal buy. This nut in Vegas bought 30 firearms in 1 year and had no record and was LEGAL. The Va Tech shooter too. The Newton killer got his mothers LEGALLY purchased firearm.

I really am not trying to go after anyone's rights, I am simply saying how we are doing things isn't working. 

The elephant in the room is our flooded market and ease of access.

Um it fits just fine. The logic being of WHY I'm carrying a gun/wearing a seatbelt not how I can access these things. He said that carrying doesn't stop a gun man up high which implied 'why carry at all?'. I responded because not all situations are unable to be helped. This goes hand in hand with the seatbelt because why wear something protective every time you get in the car if it won't save you every time? Because of the times it CAN help you.

I want to make sure I am understanding your argument, feel free to correct me.

"My gun is my seat belt" is that correct?

Because that is just a false perception according to the data, I posted an article proving that injury and death are far more likely IN THE HOME with someone the user knows. 

Nobody is saying guns should never be owned. I am saying our current laws suck. Nobody is talking about you as an individual, I am talking about HOW firearms are COLLECTIVELY viewed with a very impractical "do nothing" mentality.

Again, my Redneck friend from Oklahoma grew up with firearms, he still has a shotgun, but even he thinks our laws suck.

I am not calling for a ban, but we as a COLLECTIVE society are allowing a small minority of nutty blind worshipers hold us hostage.

"I would never" has nothing to do with it, other people HAVE

---

Um no, the "seat belt" is a horrible metaphor.

The real prevention isn't forcing everyone to drive a car.

The real prevention is VETTING before someone drives the car.

Yes you should wear a seat belt while driving. But you ALSO take a drivers test FIRST.

I suffer from depression, but since our current laws would not vet me or prevent me from buying a firearm, I could go out right now, buy one, then pop myself. Fortunately I am very self aware, but lots of people are not.

All these distractions coming from the right, not you, but from the right, cause us to get caught up in details that miss the elephant in the room.

If everyone agrees, and both the right and left agree, nobody wants them in the wrong hands, then VETTING is the easiest way to prevent them from getting in the wrong hands.

Now, I am old enough to remember when cigarettes were sold on the isle, not behind the counter, but in the isle. Despite even back then the law being 18 I bought them because the adult and or the clerk didn't give a fuck. Now they are behind the counter and if the employee gets caught, they can lose their job, and or the store lose it's tobacco license.

Point being, with rights come responsibility, and not giving a shit after the sale isn't working. "Not my fault".

Yet if a underage kid drinks at a bar then kills someone driving, the bar can be held responsible.

We cannot and should not sell firearms to the mentally ill, or any type of disturbed person out for revenge. But, some people wrongfully think that vetting is a presumption of guilt. I am 51 and sometimes even at my age, I still get carded when buying beer. I don't assume the clerk is going to deny me, but they are simply doing their job.

I am not accusing you personally of anything. I am simply tired of the climate that no record at time of buy means nothing bad happens after the legal buy. Most firearm injuries and deaths, ARE NOT due to theft then assault. Most firearm injuries and deaths are after a legal buy. This nut in Vegas bought 30 firearms in 1 year and had no record and was LEGAL. The Va Tech shooter too. The Newton killer got his mothers LEGALLY purchased firearm.

I really am not trying to go after anyone's rights, I am simply saying how we are doing things isn't working. 

The elephant in the room is our flooded market and ease of access.

Um it fits just fine. The logic being of WHY I'm carrying a gun/wearing a seatbelt not how I can access these things. He said that carrying doesn't stop a gun man up high which implied 'why carry at all?'. I responded because not all situations are unable to be helped. This goes hand in hand with the seatbelt because why wear something protective every time you get in the car if it won't save you every time? Because of the times it CAN help you.

I want to make sure I am understanding your argument, feel free to correct me.

"My gun is my seat belt" is that correct?

Because that is just a false perception according to the data, I posted an article proving that injury and death are far more likely IN THE HOME with someone the user knows. 

Nobody is saying guns should never be owned. I am saying our current laws suck. Nobody is talking about you as an individual, I am talking about HOW firearms are COLLECTIVELY viewed with a very impractical "do nothing" mentality.

Again, my Redneck friend from Oklahoma grew up with firearms, he still has a shotgun, but even he thinks our laws suck.

I am not calling for a ban, but we as a COLLECTIVE society are allowing a small minority of nutty blind worshipers hold us hostage.

"I would never" has nothing to do with it, other people HAVE made LEGAL purchases and gone on to commit suicide, murder their spouse, have their kid get a hold of it, or get in a beef with their neighbor. The Vegas shooter bought all his firearms legally because he had no record. The Va Tech shooter also had no record. 

You feel it is your seat belt, but nobody is talking about you as an individual sample. 

Feel free to correct me if I am misunderstanding. 

Gun=seatbelt is that how you view them?

Data shows the opposite, you are far more likely to injure yourself or someone you know in your home, than to successfully defend yourself from a complete stranger.

My point is with better vetting, you'd have less to worry about someone else who doesn't know how to drive slamming into you, even with your "seat belt".