Scarlett O'Hara

There's no sensible reason.

__________________

Paedantic Basterd

I think that there could be a substantial and effective reduction of firearms, but not before the cultural/economic structure is reassessed, and that is what I see as the real impossible task.

Freebase Dali

Before I ask how you lumped us all together to come up with this very bad argument, I'll ask you to actually formulate an argument worthy of addressing. Let me know when you're ready.

Actually, no, there isn't, depending. I'm totally for limiting the kind of weapons people can have, within reason. I mean, I know the constitution was a major foundation for my country and there's a part about gun ownership basically being a safeguard against the very type of government that led us to create it in the first place, but for me, personally, it's not really about that so much, because I don't expect the U.S. to start turning on its own citizens like Syria or anything. At least, not any time soon. But it's not like we'd stand a chance against their drones anyway...

With that said, I do think I should at least be allowed an effective means to stand on equal footing against those more common threats who would use firearms against us that are commonly available and unable to be realistically removed from existence. These are your typical handguns, shotguns, etc. If people want to hunt with a rifle, fine. They don't really need a 30 round magazine to do so. I'm fine with all that. I just don't want things to shift to a position where we're denied any sort of arms, because the only effect that would have in America is a large increase in the number of possible victims to criminal firearm crime.

Again, we all know that simply saying "no more guns here" won't magically wipe them from existence, and I don't care if it's only a temporary period before they start becoming less common... my life and that of my family is more valuable to me than some remote percentage of chance that I might ever need to actually use a gun.
I don't care if I have to go to monthly headshrink checks and have constant background checks. I'd rather do all that than be the guy trying to survive a criminal's black market gun with a tomato and a Stephen King novel, regardless of how unlikely the encounter may be.

Freebase Dali

I agree that a lot of people in the U.S. seem to have misguided ideas about why they should have guns. I feel like they're misrepresenting those of us who just want a fighting chance and to be able to protect our loved ones against others who may wish to harm us, but their position is their position.

I'll defend the right of gun ownership only up to the point where it's reasonable. Beyond that, I can't support those people who seemingly need to pump 30 rounds of incendiary hollow-point rounds into a deer, or even a picture of one, because it's "fun". That's not me, and that's definitely not where I'm coming from.

Paedantic Basterd

I remember some of the cities in the northwest US did exchanges during the recession, where people could trade in their firearms for groceries and basic necessities, to astounding results. Australia did a gun-buyback thing after Port Arthur that was massively successful, and there hasn't been a massacre (defined as 4+) since.

I think if we were to start helping people to obtain what they need, they would stop having to take it from others. Unfortunately, the capitalist attitude blames these shortcomings on the individual, and that's a dead end path with no long term solution in it. A society has to take care of all of its individuals or it just fosters a paranoid and selfish environment.

EDIT: I'm not questioning your right to your own saftey whatsoever, I just think it's immensely sad that the threat is valid, and that this culture/society doesn't leave its citizens feeling safe.

Neapolitan

Well it is a shame that a thread that started out about a tragedy went off on a a tangent about the right to bear arms or gun ownership.

I doesn't understand that part: "... the threat to it has any validity" as if for some people their saftey isn't threaten. And no firearms are not necessities like a stove, wahser, dryer, and refridgerators are, but the criminal element isn't assualting people with household appliances either.

__________________

Freebase Dali

I would caution against confusing correlation with causation with this one. I'm not saying there wasn't a positive effect either way, but with matters such as these, it's important to remember that the effecting factors of any given situation is highly sensitive to the particular place and time, and definitely the culture and history of a given set. We cannot see a good idea somewhere and automatically assume that it is a good idea everywhere. It's easy to slide into the uncomplicated idea of it working as a blueprint across the board, but I think care needs to be taken when it comes to implementation of such things without first considering the particular demographics and situations of each individual area.

It's a grand idea to be able to give everyone what they need. I wish we could. The truth of the matter is that someone has to pay for it. And while capitalism has (and continues to) contributed to a large percentage of what this country is financially and opportunity-wise, the government programs have to have an income. Taxing 1 percent of the population is definitely not a solution that, for some reason, a sh*t-load of people in the U.S. recently seem to not understand.
People helping people is a really nice concept, but, again, we have to see things contextually. In our fiscal climate here, the government is spending so much on programs that no amount of taxation will ever reverse the inevitable result. The solution of the left is generally to create new revenue, while the solution of the right is generally to cut the spending associated with governmental cost. Regardless of who is right or wrong, the people suffer from either position when not approached in a balanced way.

Anyway, without diverting further into current fiscal politics, I mean to say that yes, there is a culture of need here, but short of abandoning Democracy and Capitalism and replacing it with all-out Socialism whereupon there is no other goal than to carry your own weight to the extent that it carries others, without hope for rising above that without being limited by how much of society you can support, there are always going to be casualties stemming from a system that rewards those with something to offer it.
Whether everyone is afforded the same baseline to start from is another discussion entirely, but I don't think that is relevant to capitalism at its core, but more to societal perceptions and accommodations as a whole.

I don't disagree that existing at the bottom of the barrel fosters the kind of environment that breeds violent alternatives. This is practically the nature of survival. It is a mechanism. Yet, I don't think that humanity is defined by it, and I do think that it is far more possible to excel these days than it ever was. But, obviously, this is still dependent on a Capitalist system. The people have to provide a product or service if they expect someone else to pay for it.

Seeing these points as standard "gimmes", as it were, I would like to use them to state that yes, things can stand some change. But I would be careful about assigning blame to the system itself, rather than the way the system is used (or abused). You apparently align along that reasoning, so I know you know what I'm saying is at least partially true. I would, however, like to add that I think our problem here in the states is less about the unavailability of success than it is about the expectation that success is a right, and that survival and growth is no longer something that must be achieved, but bestowed at the expense of those who achieved it themselves.

Freebase Dali

I also don't feel like I'm constantly in danger (I don't watch American sensationalist news media every day).
But I also feel like I'm statistically better off WITH a firearm than WITHOUT one. I can break this down to simple math or not. The fact remains that I place my own life and those I love a bit higher than global statistics, regardless of how they may rate to other countries, where I incidentally don't live...

Scarlett O'Hara

Sorry freebase I don't want to lump you all together its just something I've observed online.

__________________

Freebase Dali

Guess you better file that in the evidence folder and send it off to the district attorney then! Saw it on the internet. That's about as solid a case as you can make.