Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: What is the function of a gun? [View all]beevul
(12,194 posts)321. No. Just no.
Your problem is, you're refusing to translate your game of percentages into raw numbers affecting real lives. Raw numbers which, when placed up against countries of similar stature, are staggeringly higher than everyone else.
Raw numbers don't define the problem. They define the the extent of the problem.
You keep wanting to steer this discussion into focusing only on the extent of the problem, and you want to just ignore everything else. You're essentially trying to load the question, so it suits the answer you already have in your line of argument.
Sorry, not buying it.
Beyond that, if your problem is me not expressing it in raw numbers, then here it is in raw (estimated) numbers:
Some 30is thousand people misuse guns every year resulting in gun violence. Thats 30,000
Some 100ish million people own guns and do not. Thats 100,000,000.
Either way you express it, the super super super majority of gun owners do not commit gun violence.
You say you'd want to have the numbers that Canada or the UK or Australia or Germany has, but none of the pesky policies that have helped achieved those numbers. The problem with your side--the gun enthusiasts--is that you're not offering any real solutions. You're only offering sound bites. Yada yada yada mental illness is the problem, not guns. Yada yada yada 99.9% of gun owners. Yada yada yada good guys with guns.
Neither are you guys offering any real solutions. You guys spend all your time offering up solutions which you know wont fly, solutions which you know wont work, and solutions which you know will just piss off the majority who are not the problem, and most of the things I see proposed are a combination of two or more of those.
And its not like you don't have your own soundbites. Yadda adda yadda 30 thousand deaths...yadda yadda yadda assault weapons...yadda yadda yadda registration...Yadda yadda yadda blood on all your hands...
(we have a thread in the gun forum nearly 400 replies long of some of the most noteworthy examples)
We on the other hand, spend most of our time and effort defending against the certain to fail, misguided, short sighted, and routinely outlandish things some of you guys propose.
Guess what? Canada/the UK/Australia/Germany didn't achieve those numbers with sound bites. Nor did they achieve those numbers with concealed carry or writing the problem off as, "Well, 99.9% of gun owners don't use their guns for illegal purposes, so really it's not a gun problem."
Thats all fine and good, but you aren't going to have all the options available to you to that those nations did. Thats just reality.
At a certain point, it's going to be put up or shut up for you folks.
Reality check:
We - the 99 percent that do not commit gun violence - do not need the anti-gun folks.
You anti-gun folks NEED us.
And as for the whole "want vs. need" debate, that's entirely contingent on the item being sold. People might want a Halloween Whopper for the sole purpose of whether or not it turns your poop green (spoiler alert: it really does!) and not really need it. Problem is with guns, you're dealing with something a little more serious than just green poop. So brushing it off as "None of your business" is pure laziness and shortsightedness.
Nope. Thats a matter of principle. Whether I or anyone else does or does not 'need' any given thing, gun or otherwise, is none of your damn business. Period. Thats not open for debate or discussion, or negotiable, as far as I'm concerned.
And again, I think there's a distinction between "illegal use" and "misuse". AR-15 designers (as well as designers of other guns) designed that gun to rapidly and effectively shoot its bullets into the intended targets, which includes--like it or not--human beings for the purpose of injuring or killing that human being. It's a grim reality of what a gun is.
Fucking DUH. Of course you do! It serves your arguments and your intentions where guns are concerned, to see one, even where none reasonably exists. I always get a kick out of the 'rapidly' argument you guys make when talking about simple repeating firearms. Thats a function of the user, not the weapon, unlike with automatic weapons.
And whether you're using a gun to shoot at the people shooting at you in a battlefield, or whether your using it to carry out a massacre of innocent people, you are using that gun for an intended purpose. The only difference between the situations is a legal one, but not of misuse. "Misuse" trivializes the dark reality of what guns are and what guns do and what guns are designed to do.
Yes, and ignoring 'misuse' allows one to project and proceed from a pretense that 100ish million American voters that do not commit gun violence, do not exist or matter or have any place in the debate.
Well' I'm here to tell you: Yes we do on all three counts.
A car being used to intentionally run down someone and kill them is an example of "misuse" of that item. A gun being used to intentionally shoot someone is not "misuse", it's illegal use.
No. Its only illegal if its not a legit self defense shooting, but I'd be happy to call it 'misuse resulting in gun violence' if that makes you happy.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
333 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
you will get nowhere without the support of Democratic gun owners. +1 [nt]
Ichigo Kurosaki
Oct 2015
#37
Why do we always see pictures of human beings as targets in shooting competitions..
madinmaryland
Oct 2015
#227
What about the obstacle course, urban warfare, type shooting that is becoming popular
Hoyt
Oct 2015
#259
You act like there is absolutely nothing to fear with the conditions we face now.
boston bean
Oct 2015
#39
Thats what the parents/family and friends of the latest victims of mass murder thought too
workinclasszero
Oct 2015
#78
A whole lot more families and friends lost people to garden variety murders.
Lizzie Poppet
Oct 2015
#155
Statisically, about 30 people die every day in the U.S. in alcohol related car crashes.
Adrahil
Oct 2015
#188
Not funny, but the repubs are making voting far more harder to do than getting a gun. So thanks
madinmaryland
Oct 2015
#230
If it's the intent of the designer that matters, lots of guns were made with no such purpose in mind
Lizzie Poppet
Oct 2015
#75
Actually I do. I am concerned that the cats will grow opposable thumbs and come
madinmaryland
Oct 2015
#318
"Every gun owner is up for scrutiny now imo. Why a person owns them cannot simply go unremarked."
Brickbat
Oct 2015
#85
I would bet its near 100% of the mass shooters practiced target shooting.
riderinthestorm
Oct 2015
#137
In the 12th century they were weapons of mass destruction and were owned by the 1%'ers of the time..
madinmaryland
Oct 2015
#233
Oh. Ok. Then you agree with the OP. I misinterpreted what you said, then. I'm sorry. nt
madinmaryland
Oct 2015
#237
target shooting is nothing more than improving one's ability to kill more accurately
DrDan
Oct 2015
#103
no one is claiming all gunowners kill something/someone - only that the purpose of a gun is to kill
DrDan
Oct 2015
#111
If the 99.9x percent are suspect in your eyes, due to the actions of .0x percent...
beevul
Oct 2015
#198
And horseshoes is even more insidious and evil: It's practice for killing people with skinny necks.
cherokeeprogressive
Oct 2015
#242
A person has the right to kill in self defense if he is facing an attacker who ...
spin
Oct 2015
#277
Bookmarked for later. This has potential to be epic. You have hit the nail on the head. nt
Electric Monk
Oct 2015
#4
If you want to absolve yourself of having to talk about gun violence....
Tommy_Carcetti
Oct 2015
#74
Zero summing it into white hate/black hat is a foolish way of thinking of it.
Tommy_Carcetti
Oct 2015
#313
The problem is still guns, no matter how you want to move away from it.
Tommy_Carcetti
Oct 2015
#322
Shooting at paper targets could reasonably be considered practice killing.
MillennialDem
Oct 2015
#10
The purpose of all weapons is to injury or kill. Hence the name "weapon". I find that the gun
Fred Sanders
Oct 2015
#19
Yeah, fencing is a real problem here in New Haven! All these fencers are going around
CTyankee
Oct 2015
#331
That reminds me, I've got to file some papers away in a three ring binder.
Tommy_Carcetti
Oct 2015
#71
Primarily to kill people. Secondarily to instill fear in a terroristic manner.
onehandle
Oct 2015
#24
What's wrong with shooting a rapist, home invader, stalker or other violent criminal?
Nuclear Unicorn
Oct 2015
#25
Rights aren't subject to precentages or wild speculation about being disarmed by ninja burglars.
Nuclear Unicorn
Oct 2015
#77
or your little brother, a random shoplifter, or that guy who just got car jacked.... and that
bettyellen
Oct 2015
#267
If you believe you can prohibit a thing to all based on the misues or abuse of a scant minority then
Nuclear Unicorn
Oct 2015
#279
"And no country has similar levels of gun violence" Not the least bit true..
EX500rider
Oct 2015
#186
John Prine said it very well in a song about the death and destruction of a small town
loyalsister
Oct 2015
#182
Alert us, the next time some maniac uses a crossbow to turn a classroom into a slaughterhouse. (nt)
Paladin
Oct 2015
#73
Demonizing the mentally ill isn't helpful, and abouta third of people will have it in their lifetime
frizzled
Oct 2015
#149
Not a lot of armed home invasions in unincorporated counties out in the middle of nowhere
Algernon Moncrieff
Oct 2015
#282
In 30 years of firearm ownership none of mine have done those things either.
EX500rider
Oct 2015
#311
A gun - like a sling, bow, or throwing arm - delivers a projectile to a target
Algernon Moncrieff
Oct 2015
#157
The function of a gun is to send a projectile out of its muzzle at a high rate of speed
Waldorf
Oct 2015
#202
Did it ever occur to you that it's obviously a weapon, so why refute it? n/t
Decoy of Fenris
Oct 2015
#239
If guns are designed solely to kill, then are the majority of them somehow defective?
X_Digger
Oct 2015
#240