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".

[mlmooney89]

You are going way further into this than I was with him. I agreed on your point that we need harder ways to get guns earlier in the thread but with that point made we started a second kind of conversation of why to carry them. You are jumping in trying to tie it to the original point which we aren't, well I'm not. This isn't about who should have them or how to get them I was just comparing two things that can save your life in certain situations but not all.

[brewer]

Obviously I'm not sane because I'm not giving up my gun nor am I telling any other good person to give up theirs.

What I want is a harder way of getting guns.

I'd add, and keeping them.

[downbeatplumb]

They do have a free shooting period but it's all in one line with guns only pointing one direction very similar to a gun range.

I don't think I've ever been to a gun range where the range master did not have to chew out some asshole for breaking the rules.

The problem with guns is that people are careless.

Yeah, I'd shoot my dick off after about ten minutes I'm sure.
Fortunately as a brit I cannot easily get a gun.

[brewer]

I'm not quick to call for restriction of technology, but I see no use for bump fire stocks other than entertainment and to facilitate mass shooting. They reduce accuracy and are prone to cause barrels to overheat, which is why he needed so many rifles. They can produce the thrill of automatic fire and are handy for putting a lot of bullets into broad area in a short time, and that's about it.

There are more ways than the bump/slide stock. Actually, if you practice, you can accomplish the simulation of full auto with no assisting device. But forget about hitting a damn thing. 

[Brian37]

You are going way further into this than I was with him. I agreed on your point that we need harder ways to get guns earlier in the thread but with that point made we started a second kind of conversation of why to carry them. You are jumping in trying to tie it to the original point which we aren't, well I'm not. This isn't about who should have them or how to get them I was just comparing two things that can save your life in certain situations but not all.

Ok gotcha....

I am with anyone on either side whom agree that firearms should not be so easily obtained.

Right, firearms are used to save lives, and have. I am not denying that. But again, I posted an article stating the data.

It is a myth that all conflicts end up with Roy Rogers riding off in the sunset. 

It is a myth that firearm use will result in the good guy winning all the time.

It is still far more likely that you will hurt yourself or someone you know in your own home, than successfully defending yourself from a complete stranger. 

Yes guns are used to save lives. But I don't think there are enough whom understand the training and responsibility needed to increase the chances when using one. There is a huge difference between mere intent, and actual training. There is a huge difference between a layperson stupidly thinking it is about hitting a target, and the muscle training firing under stress which cops and military have to CONSTANTLY maintain. 

I think far too much of the industry marketing is about entitlement and macho and Roy Rogers.

It still remains the biggest firearm death count is from legally purchased firearms that end up in suicide. The second is from legally purchased firearms that end up in family violence. The third number is kids finding their parent's legally purchased firearm or accidental. 

But, if you agree firearms should be harder to obtain, I can live with that, because that is a start. 

If that is the case with you, I'd trust you to shoot an apple off of my head.......Ok, maybe not, but it does mean we are not as far off as we think, or I think.

So my solution is to round up any firearm owner, and force them to listen to ABBA 24/7. 

JEW WANNA PIECE OF ME, PUT EM UP PUT EM UP

And Gawdzilla can bite me too......

[mlmooney89]

If that is the case with you, I'd trust you to shoot an apple off of my head.......Ok, maybe not, but it does mean we are not as far off as we think, or I think.

I can't shoot an apple off your head because I would never try that BUT I can shoot a playing card off a pole and I aced all tests I've been put through. I've got pretty good grouping actually and have since high school. The next part is I have a gun that has a laser pointer on it so I know exactly where I'm aiming. The last part is I am on that knows that gun only comes out in 100% emergencies that I KNOW I won't hurt an innocent party. My sister walking with me and someone comes up to us? Gun stays in my belt because I'm not risking her life if he jumps on me while I'm aiming. If they are already attacking me and I don't have time to grab my gun I won't go for it. I would rather get mugged than shoot a bad guy. Give them the money and let them leave. The gun is if throwing my money at them doesn't work and I have room to stop them. I wouldn't have brought my gun out during the theater shooting back in 2012 and I wouldn't have during Vegas. Carrying a gun should come with being taught these things. (Also I don't ever intend to use my gun inside my house, I have a large machete for that)

[Brian37]

I'm not quick to call for restriction of technology, but I see no use for bump fire stocks other than entertainment and to facilitate mass shooting. They reduce accuracy and are prone to cause barrels to overheat, which is why he needed so many rifles. They can produce the thrill of automatic fire and are handy for putting a lot of bullets into broad area in a short time, and that's about it.

There are more ways than the bump/slide stock. Actually, if you practice, you can accomplish the simulation of full auto with no assisting device. But forget about hitting a damn thing. 

I agree, which is when anyone brings up riffles or handguns saying there are ways around model limits is a dodge. NO shit, but that still does not excuse "sell more and do nothing"

The Va Tech shooter used to handguns, and murdered what 30? 

Yes individuals will look to modify anything. This is as stupid as claiming hackers exist so therefor anyone whom wants to do something about hacking is anti computer.

It still amounts to access regardless. 

My issue is not firearm ownership itself. My issue is the fear marketing by the NRA and the firearm corporations. 

It is the same delusional denial of climate change you get from coal and oil "You hate the private sector".....NO I am saying what you are doing isn't helping.

If "sell more and do nothing" worked, we would not see this happen over and over and over.

---

If that is the case with you, I'd trust you to shoot an apple off of my head.......Ok, maybe not, but it does mean we are not as far off as we think, or I think.

I can't shoot an apple off your head because I would never try that BUT I can shoot a playing card off a pole and I aced all tests I've been put through. I've got pretty good grouping actually and have since high school. The next part is I have a gun that has a laser pointer on it so I know exactly where I'm aiming. The last part is I am on that knows that gun only comes out in 100% emergencies that I KNOW I won't hurt an innocent party. My sister walking with me and someone comes up to us? Gun stays in my belt because I'm not risking her life if he jumps on me while I'm aiming. If they are already attacking me and I don't have time to grab my gun I won't go for it. I would rather get mugged than shoot a bad guy. Give them the money and let them leave. The gun is if throwing my money at them doesn't work and I have room to stop them. I wouldn't have brought my gun out during the theater shooting back in 2012 and I wouldn't have during Vegas. Carrying a gun should come with being taught these things. (Also I don't ever intend to use my gun inside my house, I have a large machete for that)

I have no doubt you have. But target shooting is still not the same as the muscle training under stress that police and military have to constantly maintain.

And again, when you say, "Only use it as a last resort", I am not talking about you. I am talking about HOW firearms are marketed. If 100% of civilians went into a firearm buy knowing the risks and had your attitude, I would not be bitching. But again, the fact that we have 36,000 firearm related deaths per year tells me not everyone who buys one takes them as seriously as you do.

That is why I agree with you that firearms should not be so easy to obtain.

FYI, any police officer will tell you if you get a gun stuck to your head in a robbery, the best thing to do is give them what they want. If someone already has a gun aimed at you, the odds of pulling your gun on them before they pull the trigger and shoot them first is mighty slim. It isn't a video game.

When police or military face a armed conflict they have warning and training.

If you keep your firearm locked up at home, GOOD FOR YOU, but even then, if someone breaks into your house, they are not going to wait for you to check your combo to allow a tumble weed duel at the O.K. Corral,  where both know it is coming. 

Even outside stranger crime, if a neighbor, or family member gets angry at you or is greedy and wants to use a firearm, just like a shark stalking a seal you wont see it coming.

But even muggers work like that. They are not going to announce on a PA speaker, or send you a text and say, "Hey I want your shit and I am going to use a gun to force you to give it to me." They are going to sneak up on you before you can draw your weapon.


Point is, I like you, you are far more reasonable than lots of firearm owners I run into. But I am not talking about you as a single person. I am talking about how the data does not point to a perfect utopia where the good guy always wins.

[vorlon13]

'Doing something' legislatively needs votes. If they aren't there, nothing is going to happen.

If the point of 'doing something' is in racking up partisan talking points that's one thing, but I confess an intense interest in the possibility of achieving results beyond more talking points.

Gun buy back was mentioned on POTUS (?, mebbee NPR) yesterday and while it looks like a nut with $100,000 to spend on AKs won't be interested, it does seem like whenever GBB grant money is available, guns come in. And I'm thinking those are ones that are likely to be in the category of "hmm, why do we have that laying around the house?" and those are likely the ones in the necessity of our triage situation we'd want turned in.

Maybe more these days, but still not 'universal' is prosecuting to the full extent of the law people who have their firearms picked up by children and toddlers who fire them. Seemed like the feeling formerly was "Well, their kid is dead, what's the point of prosecuting dad now and putting the rest of the family on welfare now?" but it's changing.

Something else that has been tightened up but could use some more is kids/teens taking guns to school. And there is the steady drizzle of weapons that TSA finds in carryon luggage, and the owner claims they 'forgot' they were there. All opportunities to literally crucify someone to make a vivid example to everyone else, yet it's not universally done.

Having firearms stolen is another issue. Did the crooks have to torch open your firearm safe to get your gun(s) or were they laying on the nightstand?? I can see some criminality in making it too easy for a gun to vanish.

Something else that came up a few years ago was a sawed off shotgun discovered in a wrecked (hit by a train!) vehicle. Don't know how the driver did it, but got PROBATION for possession of a fucking sawed off shotgun!! How the fuck does that happen ??

Hell, he was in more trouble for hitting a goddam train, had to pay a fine for disobeying a traffic control device.

Shit . . .

[vorlon13]

Forgot this:

Nancy Pelosi was on one of the news channels yesterday. OK, if that commentator I heard on POTUS had it right, her polling positives are in the mid SINGLE DIGITS !!! That's LESS THAN CONGRESS AS A WHOLE !!

How much brain power does it take to realize if your popularity is that low you need to GET THE FUCK OFF OF TV AND STAY THE FUCK OFF OF TV ???


Sheesh, fucking lame brains are going to drive me to distraction.