What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Overall have guns had a positive or negative impact in the US recently? (1 Viewer)

Captain Cranks

Footballguy
I just know you can't have a thread here about guns without gun lovers whining about the equal danger of cars.  
You have to outlaw knives first.  There's a ton of nonsensical strawmen arguments to be made so that we don't actually talk about common sense regulation.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:

IC FBGCav

Footballguy
Let's stop talking about future arguments and say yes or no?  I have not researched if guns took or saved more lives in the US or the gap to save vs hurt.

 

wikkidpissah

Footballguy
I'm an abolitionist - i don't care if we have to issue single-shot rifles into every home in return, i want every handgun & repeater - in other words, tools whose only purpose is to pierce human flesh - gone. Serving a market of paranoia & penis/power envy has created an America that is the exact opposite of what the founders envisioned in their provisos - a rehearsal of tyranny

 

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
I don't think you can compare the useful utility to the public of cars to guns.
But I think that's really what you're asking, isn't it?

Does something provide enough good to outweigh the bad?

For legal Marijuana?

For legal Gambling?

For legal Alcohol?

For Legal Cars?

For Legal Guns?

And so on. I'm ok with looking at most things in this way.

 

IC FBGCav

Footballguy
But I think that's really what you're asking, isn't it?

Does something provide enough good to outweigh the bad?

For legal Marijuana?

For legal Gambling?

For legal Alcohol?

For Legal Cars?

For Legal Guns?

And so on. I'm ok with looking at most things in this way.
No, actually I am asking are guns a net positive for the US.

 

SaintsInDome2006

Footballguy
I think almost everyone I know in New Orleans knows someone or has met someone who knows someone who has lost a loved one to murder. I can think of four people, and one was a priest. Uptown, northshore, Marigny, downtown here, so all over.

Considering that every story about guns defending against attack also involve someone else using a gun, that has to be excluded. It’s hard to find the positive, but you’d have to make an argument that somehow individual right of gun ownership affects the balance of liberty vs government power somehow, I think that’s the best you can do.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

IC FBGCav

Footballguy
I'm an abolitionist - i don't care if we have to issue single-shot rifles into every home in return, i want every handgun & repeater - in other words, tools whose only purpose is to pierce human flesh - gone. Serving a market of paranoia & penis/power envy has created an America that is the exact opposite of what the founders envisioned in their provisos - a rehearsal of tyranny
I think we are close to the same.  I have no interest in taking away guns that are used for hunting.  I also know that in some places, these are necessary to survive.  

 

IC FBGCav

Footballguy
I think almost everyone I know in New Orleabs knows someone or has met someone who knows someone who has lost a loved one to murder. I can think of four people, and one was a priest.

Considering that every story about guns defending against attack also involve someone else using a gun, that has to be excluded. It’s hard to find the positive, but you’d have to make an argument that somehow individual right of gun ownership affects the balance of liberty vs government power somehow, I think that’s the best you can do.
I think the best argument for guns, is I like guns.  I am not ignorant so I assume that guns have a negative impact overall but I don't know the true facts or statistics.

 

IC FBGCav

Footballguy
But I think that's really what you're asking, isn't it?

Does something provide enough good to outweigh the bad?

For legal Marijuana?

For legal Gambling?

For legal Alcohol?

For Legal Cars?

For Legal Guns?

And so on. I'm ok with looking at most things in this way.
I will ask you this, if your child was going to misuse all of the things stated above and you could take one away, which one would it be?

 

General Malaise

Poop Lord
Let's stop talking about future arguments and say yes or no?  I have not researched if guns took or saved more lives in the US or the gap to save vs hurt.
I don't mean to be a wiseacre but what precisely do you hope to learn from this thread that hasn't already been bickered over to death by the dozens and dozens of other gun related threads posted on this website the last 20 years?  My initial post was a cynical commentary on the current nature of these very threads which I'm rather surprised you've not seen here before as a frequent poster.

Frankly, I'm disgusted by the whole thing.  Our country did nothing in the wake of Sandy Hook to prevent further tragedies.  If we couldn't come together as a nation after little kids were mowed down then, I have no faith in us ever doing anything to prevent gun related atrocities.  So I can't be anything other than jaded, disgusted, exasperated and exhausted over our national listlessness to do something - ANYTHING - to stem the bloody tide.  

 But maybe this thread will be different than all the others. 

 

General Malaise

Poop Lord
What's really frustrating to me is that New Zealand will use this act of terrorism to enact gun change immediately.  They won't wait for an encore.  There is no NRA to push their politicians around.  SAD!

 

huthut

Footballguy
Every gun is registered.

Specific purpose "sane" guns: shotgun, hunting rifle - Have a similar process as getting a drivers license, written test, maybe a small renewal every 5 years or so for your license.

Handguns - Same as above, but a yearly to biannual registration where you confirm it is still within your possession.

Other guns - essentially not for public use unless you have a very strong justification that is approved by some regulatory body

 

IC FBGCav

Footballguy
I don't mean to be a wiseacre but what precisely do you hope to learn from this thread that hasn't already been bickered over to death by the dozens and dozens of other gun related threads posted on this website the last 20 years?  My initial post was a cynical commentary on the current nature of these very threads which I'm rather surprised you've not seen here before as a frequent poster.

Frankly, I'm disgusted by the whole thing.  Our country did nothing in the wake of Sandy Hook to prevent further tragedies.  If we couldn't come together as a nation after little kids were mowed down then, I have no faith in us ever doing anything to prevent gun related atrocities.  So I can't be anything other than jaded, disgusted, exasperated and exhausted over our national listlessness to do something - ANYTHING - to stem the bloody tide.  

 But maybe this thread will be different than all the others. 
I don't go in your thread often and to how we don't cross paths is easy.  I give out many likes and get a few myself.  I can't remember giving or getting one from you in a while.  Doesn't mean it didn't happen but our personal circles on this board don't cross often.  

I wasn't looking for a debate.  I made the question simple on purpose.  Yes or no type thing.   I wanted to see if people would answer the simple question.  

 

-fish-

Footballguy
The data isn't complete, since NRA lobbying prevented the CDC from studying gun violence, but this article from Scientific American does a good job of going through the available data.

The answer is no, guns in the hands of citizens don't make anyone safer, including the people that own them.  This excludes guns in the hands of police and military.

 

IC FBGCav

Footballguy
The data isn't complete, since NRA lobbying prevented the CDC from studying gun violence, but this article from Scientific American does a good job of going through the available data.

The answer is no, guns in the hands of citizens don't make anyone safer, including the people that own them.  This excludes guns in the hands of police and military.
Yeah. That the stuff that pisses me off most.  No capitalism there.

 

timschochet

Footballguy
1. Personally, I believe we would be better off if we lived in a gun free society. But I am not a gun owner so my viewpoint may be biased. 

2. I am 100% sure that we will be worse off if we ever seriously attempt to become a gun free society from the point where we are now. It would be impossible to achieve and create nothing but terrible problems even to try it. 

 

IC FBGCav

Footballguy
1. Personally, I believe we would be better off if we lived in a gun free society. But I am not a gun owner so my viewpoint may be biased. 

2. I am 100% sure that we will be worse off if we ever seriously attempt to become a gun free society from the point where we are now. It would be impossible to achieve and create nothing but terrible problems even to try it. 
Is this a serious argument? 

 

IC FBGCav

Footballguy
Let's never do what's right long term because of short term problems?  Society has never moved forward on this premise.

 

wikkidpissah

Footballguy
Unpack please, just not understanding the senario.  Tia.
Hilariously, the militias are on the same side as the power structure now and the unarmed populace is largely those the militias are already targeting in times of peace. If i'm not mistaken, that blows up the letter AND spirit of the 2nd Amendment rrrreal good.

 

Rove!

Footballguy
Defensive gun use incidents occur anywhere from 116k incidents per year up to 2.5 Million incidents per year depending upon the survey methodology

 

-fish-

Footballguy
Defensive gun use incidents occur anywhere from 116k incidents per year up to 2.5 Million incidents per year depending upon the survey methodology
...And whether you get your numbers from discredited sources.  Only one person has ever claimed the number was in the millions, and he admitted his methodology was bad.   The NRA loves to repeat it though.   

Find a study not associated with Kleck or Lott—or look at the multiple studies from Harvard, Stanford and Johns Hopkins cited in the Scientific American summary posted above.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

supermike80

Footballguy
Interesting question.  wow..So much to consider.  God going back to the days of the pioneers and the early indian conquests.  

Wonder how the civil war would have gone without guns...really good question.   And I don't know.   When you really think about it, the vastness can make it hard to really gather up completely.

Well I see that the thread says "recently" I was looking through the history of the gun.   Not that thinking about it recently makes it easier.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Apple Jack

Footballguy
Interesting question.  wow..So much to consider.  God going back to the days of the pioneers and the early indian conquests.  

Wonder how the civil war would have gone without guns...really good question.   And I don't know.   When you really think about it, the vastness can make it hard to really gather up completely.

Well I see that the thread says "recently" I was looking through the history of the gun.   Not that thinking about it recently makes it easier.
And the guns used in the Civil War bear little to no resemblance to the guns at the forefront of the gun debate "recently." As do the muskets used when the amendment was written. It's antiquated language and is like badly ill-fitting clothing now.

 

supermike80

Footballguy
And the guns used in the Civil War bear little to no resemblance to the guns at the forefront of the gun debate "recently." As do the muskets used when the amendment was written. It's antiquated language and is like badly ill-fitting clothing now.
Still a VERY interesting debate. Have guns overall helped or hurt America?

 

Max Power

Footballguy
Recently makes it hard to say.  I haven't seen the stats, but we can all admit that the news generally reports only the negative side of gun use.  There is no answer that is going to make everyone happy. 

I do agree with Tim that trying to take away guns will cause more problems than it solves.  Enacting long term legislation is probably the only realistic option.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top