Why More Gun Control Laws Would Be Superfluous

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

Gun control relies on the myth that a varied, diverse people in differing social and geographic settings can be controlled by setting up an appropriately formulated set of rules. The entire construction relies upon what is fundamentally unreliable.

The facts are these:
- People determined to commit crimes (criminals) will ignore the rules.
- People with psychosis have lost touch with reality.
- People that are drugged, drunk or otherwise intoxicated have to a degree, at least temporarily, lost touch with reality.

The final fact, the one that seems most ignored by those who've bought into the control myth:
- There are lawful gun owners who cannot be characterized as belonging to any of those groups above. It is not your social station, parentage, intelligence, goods owned, political party or wealth that will decide if someone will ever be part of one of those groups. Neither is it fair or just to try to guess who will become members of one of those groups and treat them differently under the law.


There, what's so damn hard about that?



ETA: I've changed the title in order to make clear my belief that more, stronger, tighter laws will have no effect. (Thanks to the person who made the suggestion.)
I also want to make clear that it's not my belief that laws are without effect and useless. I believe that laws do not control the folks in the three groups I've mentioned.

[Kolesar]

1. That's some weak ass writing, Mr. Discontented

The "paragraphs" don't even follow each other. There is no linkage.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

9. Thank you for another one of your content free drive by postings

Take on the substance...if you can

[Kolesar]

12. Who asked you, Mr. Buttinski?

[DanTex]

15. LOL. A drive-by post complaining about drive-by posts!

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

35. My apologies...

...I'll try to do better in the future.

[safeinOhio]

2. Here I thought crime and murder rates were way down.

Looks like the laws work in some places and not so much in others.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

3. Why would you...

...ascribe such a result to gun control laws? That's not very scientific.

[safeinOhio]

6. But, your the one that is saying gun laws are not working.

I just cited evidence that it may be working. Crime and murder rates are down, even with laws on the books like background checks and only one gun purchase a month. Where is your evidence that gun laws are not working, just to be scientific?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

7. Evidence

I gave three instances where gun laws don't work. Can we agree on that?

[safeinOhio]

11. Hard to agree on that unless we remove gun control laws

on the 3 groups you mention. Then we could see if gun crime goes up among those 3 groups. If crime goes up, then you'd be wrong about gun control laws.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

16. Before we move on...

...to experimentation, please outline the theory that you're proposing here.

[4th law of robotics]

45. We have more guns now than in the past

and we've weakened gun restrictions significantly.

And yet crimes are "way down".

Why?

[DanTex]

4. It seems to be working in Canada, UK, Germany, Japan, Australia, etc.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

5. Seems...

- To give the impression of being; appear;

Maybe or maybe not.

[DanTex]

8. Their homicide rate is a small fraction of ours...

Tighter gun laws, less gun violence. Gun control doesn't work in the US because the laws are too weak.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

10. I gave three instances where...

...laws won't work. Would please show which of them is not valid.

[DanTex]

13. But you're just hypothesizing. The data doesn't support your hypotheses.

Of course, there will always be some gun crimes, but gun control can and does reduce gun violence significantly.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

17. Respectfully, we are both hypothesizing.

I do accept that the folks who respect the law will continue to do more good and not so much evil with or without new tighter laws. Those folks will accept and use good laws and systems (like the NICS) because they make sense and work. When the law empowers the everyday citizen, that person can have a positive effect their environment.

[DanTex]

20. Yes, but the evidence supports my hypothesis.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

24. While the facts...

...show a relation, they don't necessarily point to a causation.

Let me reiterate that I'm not questioning whether having some laws is a good thing. I accept that it is a good thing. I am questioning whether more, tighter laws will really change anything.

[safeinOhio]

14. You've talked yourself into a corner.

If laws won't work in those 3 areas, are you suggesting remove gun control laws for those 3 groups and it would improve crime rates?
If you remove all gun control laws for everyone, that would include those 3. If you only impose laws on those 3 groups......well, you'd be something......not very nice.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

18. Please see...

...the ETA in the OP. Thanks

And no of course not.

[gejohnston]

19. Japan is the worst example

You should live there couple of years, you'll see what I mean. This is the country where I saw cops on foot simply point their night sticks at a speeder to pull them over, and the drivers complied. If leave a tip at a restaurant, the server chases you down the street to give it to you. Tipping is not customary there. Power plant melts down and power goes out? No rioting, no looting, everyone stands in line and then puts stuff back on the shelves when the cash register doesn't work.
Even if Japan adopted Vermont's gun laws, which will never happen, the only thing that would change would be a few more skeet shooters and maybe a couple of pistols ranges. Murder rate wouldn't change. The suicide rate wouldn't change either. I actually doubt few people would actually buy guns if they could.

[TPaine7]

22. There are no cultural, demographic, historical, economic or

other differences between Japan and the US.

Essentially, gun laws are the only difference, thus allowing an easy but valid comparison that would otherwise be silly.

[MercutioATC]

23. There are no cultural differences between Japan and the U.S.?

Mkay...

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

26. Not to butt in...

...however I feel that the post to which you're replying may be missing a sarcasm thingie.

[MercutioATC]

32. Ahhh...thanks.

This wouldn't be the least ignorant thing I'd seen tonight if it were sincere...

[GreenStormCloud]

28. So other violence (knife, clubs, fists, feet) is OK with you?

The UK has a higher violent crime rate than ours. Most of our gun crime is criminal on criminals. Since I am not involved in any criminal enterprise, then the primary threat to me is from our low rate of muggings, home invasions, etc. My annual exposure to those is less than 1%, so I am fairly safe. Just in case it should happen to me, I am armed. The gun that I carry is no threat to anyone else so I don't understand why you fear me.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

43. Often...

...the controllers don't seem to care if stabbing statistics go up as long as shootings go down.

[Missycim]

40. well considering

gun crimes weren't so high to begin with before the bans, I fail to see your point. How can it lower next to nonexistent gun crime?

[4th law of robotics]

46. Britains homicide rate was lower to begin with

and Australia's and the rest.

There is no indication that harsher gun control measures in those countries caused the murder rate to drop.

[rDigital]

21. Russia has 3x our MURDER rate. THREE TIMES and no legal civillian handguns

whatsoever. It's not the guns, it's the people.

Please don't respond with that "industrialized/developed nation" cherry picked info. Russia builds computer chips, high tech airplanes, nuclear reactors and weapons.

[DanTex]

25. LOL. Russia! You guys are funny.

[MercutioATC]

27. Is there a reason that all of you pro-control people think everything is funny?

I know of medications that do that, but I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt.

[DanTex]

30. Gun nuts can be pretty funny...

Well, there's wackos out there...

[gejohnston]

33. actors in a movie

that really wasn't a documentary.

[MercutioATC]

34. Yes, there are. On both sides of the issue.

I don't automatically assume that somebody in favor of expanded gun control laws is mentally unstable, however.

...and most of the time, they're not. I have met a few here, though...

[Simo 1939_1940]

38. "Well, there's wacos out there...."

Why am I not surprised that you post a clip from a "documentary" as dishonest as Bowling for Columbine?

http://www.davekopel.org/NRO/2003/Bowling-Truths.htm

[DanTex]

41. Why am I not surprised that you are linking to the blog of a right-wing nutjob?

[gejohnston]

42. and the points he made?

Point is Moore was pretty dishonest in his movie. You used actors in a propaganda movie to prove your "gun owners are nuts".
Right wing? The real world isn't that polarized.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Kopel

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

47. Good info.

Your counter seems to have killed the "Moore" thread. TY

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

44. Michael Moore...

...is a joke. He mixes lies with truth and you know what they say about the ones who do that.

[Jenoch]

37. By mentioning those countries, which by the way,

have vastly different gun laws from one another not just the U.S. are you saying the U.S. should enact gun laws similar to theirs? Which country's gun laws should the U.S. emulate and how to you propose those laws be enacted nationwide?

[Missycim]

39. well considering

gun crimes weren't so high to begin with before the bans, I fail to see your point. How can it lower next to nonexistent gun crime?

[MotherPetrie]

29. So by that convenient rationale - shitcan ALL laws.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

31. Nope, not hardly.

Laws serve a valuable purpose but they do not "control" people. They make people aware of consequences, they provide a guide by drawing an explicit line between what is acceptable and what is criminal. They provide criteria to adjudicate criminals.

As we can see from the crazy or intoxicated or evil folks out there laws just don't stop those determined on mayhem or too out of touch.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

36. BTW....

...a belated welcome to you.