Gun Control

[thesunfan]

watched "How Small Arms Work" in the OP, I think that it might be a bit more accurate for you to say that the video is more than a bit out of date, but it was very educational.

I think I learned a lot from it and I would encourage anyone that doesn't know shit about guns to give it a shot if you're interested.

[DaBackpack]

Originally Posted by Reincarnate

IIRC, it had something to do with the CDC trying to pump out some really crappy studies in the 80's to push an anti-gun agenda that they had already decided on beforehand.

Edit:

http://www.drgo.us/?p=266
http://www.drgo.us/?p=285
http://www.drgo.us/?p=314

this frustrates the fuck out of me because

yeah it was shitty that they announced biases

yeah it sucks that taxpayer money funded these studies

but that was 15 years ago and the issue is as present as ever, and it is the job of scientists to get to the bottom of issues like this

maybe not as hot-topic as gun violence,, but gun suicides, gun storage, gun distribution are all topics that deserve attention

aren't there other public research institutions that can do this? the above articles describe CDC comments, but what about NIH? this would apply just as much to them too right?

[DaBackpack]

Dickey's amendment didn't explicitly ban gun research, and it kept the Center for Injury Prevention alive. But Congress simultaneously took $2.6 million from the CDC's budget — a number that was not coincidentally the exact amount the agency had spent on gun-related research the year before. As far as the CDC was concerned, the message was clear: Do gun research, lose funding.

"Precisely what was or was not permitted under the clause was unclear," gun violence researchers Frederick Rivara and Arthur Kellermann wrote in The Journal of the American Medical Association in 2013. "But no federal employee was willing to risk his or her career or the agency's funding to find out."

In fact, after an NIH-funded study in 2009 found that carrying a gun is not protective against being shot in an assault, Congress expanded the language of the Dickey Amendment to apply it to all Department of Health and Human Services agencies, Rivara and Kellermann wrote.

http://www.livescience.com/52970-fed...l-stalled.html

seems there's now a stigma behind gun research, which is just great isn't it

[RB_Spirit]

Guava, also, hi. Cool thread. I'll leave now, goodluck!

[MarioNintendo]

Association Between Gun Law Reforms and Intentional Firearm Deaths in Australia, 1979-2013

[MarioNintendo]

tl;dr gun control works, get over it USA

[Reincarnate]

Originally Posted by sickufully

'This made a helluva lot of sense when it was just muskets. You do realise you'll be bringing guns to a drone fight, right?'

This guy is hilarious but on point.

[adlp]

Originally Posted by MarioNintendo

tl;dr gun control works, get over it USA

LOL ok comparing the 24 million people on a single continent with 3 million civilian firearms to the 320+ million in the USA with 250 million guns? noice m8

i bet youre the same guy who thinks copy pasting socialism from tiny european countries to the US would fix everything too huh

[choof]

Originally Posted by MarioNintendo

tl;dr gun control works, get over it USA

no, it fucking doesn't work
no, it fucking won't work

I'll say it again, america is directly north of this fancy country called mexico that exports massive amounts of illegal weapons (and drugs) to criminals
what countries does australia have nearby that has those same exports? new guinea? fuckin new zealand?

illegal use of weapons is a huge issue here in america, and it cannot be fixed by taking away legal use of weapons.

if gun control worked, gun free zones would be the safest fuckin places in the entirety of the country, and yet a huge number of shootings have been where? gun free zones

[Reincarnate]

Please keep it civil, errbody.

IMO the lack of civility regarding this debate is a big part of the problem.

[MarioNintendo]

It still is a relevant study, and I don't think it should be brushed off.

Originally Posted by choof

no, it fucking doesn't work
no, it fucking won't work

I'll say it again, america is directly north of this fancy country called mexico that exports massive amounts of illegal weapons (and drugs) to criminals
what countries does australia have nearby that has those same exports? new guinea? fuckin new zealand?

illegal use of weapons is a huge issue here in america, and it cannot be fixed by taking away legal use of weapons.

if gun control worked, gun free zones would be the safest fuckin places in the entirety of the country, and yet a huge number of shootings have been where? gun free zones

Yet, Omar Mateen got his guns legally. Probably a completely different debate, it still amazes me. He didn't even need to resort to these illegal weapons you're speaking of.

Look, I'm not American. I don't live near the border. I don't know what it's like to live there. To be quite honest, I don't even know the full circumstances around the recent shooting. It just baffles me how the USA is constantly the country with the most shootings.

[MarioNintendo]

BTW, I highly enjoy the videos sickufully posted

[choof]

Originally Posted by MarioNintendo

Yet, Omar Mateen got his guns legally. Probably a completely different debate, it still amazes me. He didn't even need to resort to these illegal weapons you're speaking of.

this debate is why gun control is such a touchy subject
I think that deeper background checks, mental health exams, and rigorous courses on the use of a gun

It just baffles me how the USA is constantly the country with the most shootings.

because it's easier in america to put a weapon in the hands of someone who will use it for wanton violence

I also think it's related to the failed war on drugs but I'd have to research that

[choof]

it might be a relevant study to australia, who has a significantly less violent history and has an entirely different culture
but it's not relevant to america at all

[DaBackpack]

Originally Posted by choof

this debate is why gun control is such a touchy subject
I think that deeper background checks, mental health exams, and rigorous courses on the use of a gun


because it's easier in america to put a weapon in the hands of someone who will use it for wanton violence

I also think it's related to the failed war on drugs but I'd have to research that

This is my evaluation too imo

And as much as I hate to admit it I think there are a lot of factors that contribute to gun violence that don't exactly apply to Australia (in my knowledge at least)

some of these being income inequality and the ubiquity of mental health disorders

That said, I do seem to recall reading a study that posited that gun control actually lowers suicide rates (not just GUN-related suicide rates, but suicide rates altogether)

The common argument is "well somebody who can't kill themselves with a gun will find another way to do it" but this is verifiably wrong

[adlp]

Originally Posted by MarioNintendo

It still is a relevant study, and I don't think it should be brushed off.



Yet, Omar Mateen got his guns legally. Probably a completely different debate, it still amazes me. He didn't even need to resort to these illegal weapons you're speaking of.

yes he got them legally, but the gun vendor notified the fbi that he was a suspicious individual and the FBI either lacked the resources to respond or consciously neglected to act to be politically correct

[Frank Munoz]

Originally Posted by adlp

yes he got them legally, but the gun vendor notified the fbi that he was a suspicious individual and the FBI either lacked the resources to respond or consciously neglected to act to be politically correct

the fbi can't deny Omar of his right to bear arms though

they mentioned their reason for discontinuing their investigations too(you can find info on this quite easily, any info regarding the orlando shooting is literally one google search away) which was something along the lines of he had no connections to any terrorist related activities or ISIS after multiple interrogations.

but he had a history of violent verbal outburst, and domestic violence(which is illegal in the US, that makes him a criminal) if a thorough background check were made Mateen would have never been able to purchase any firearm.

law breakers/heavily mentally unstable/violent people shouldn't have access to guns is what i believe gun control should be about.

[Mollocephalus]

When you try to acquire gun license in Italy, well before you can even set foot in a gun store and buy one, you go through multiple checks. Failing just one of them will prevent you from ever getting the license or even join the military or the police.

The criteria are:

- Everyone in your family has to be clean. Cousin got jailed 20 years ago? no gun license for you.
- You are pressured multiple times by the police answering why do you need that license and what are you going to do with a gun, then go through a mental check.

Starting from these premises, which seem very logical to me, i always look at America as the odd one when it comes to gun regulations. The thing is guns are part of your culture in a way similar to how corrida is part of spanish culture. You love your guns and fabricate reasons why you need them, but it's quite apparent than even in self defense chances are you're safer without firearms.

[-JiZ53-]

repost of one of my posts from somewhere else, but relevant:


martial law and fascism is just around the corner if we continue to pay attention to what the media and facebook shove in our faces. it is too easy to orchestrate a political event through these channels. it is too easy to manipulate such a large number of people. we can all agree that what happened was horrible and wrong, but we are naive if we think that some gun control law will stop similar thing from happening. it is a cultural problem. those in power would rather disarm the populace than admit that their method of government and the way of life that they support is to blame for all of these dramatic acts of violence. humans will always commit atrocities, and really, what happened is very small in the big picture of things. it only seems large because of the media that you pay attention to; that is the only reason why this seems so important to people. who couldnt disagree with such an unjustifiable act of violence? the only reason this act seems so depraved is because the general public opinion is opposed to it. even people who speak ambiguously about what happened are judged for their lack of passion. had it been another group of people killed similarly for a reason deemed "justified" by the general media, people would cheer and celebrate. we all condone murder under the proper circumstances. we are all hypocrites when we call this a tragedy. are we not the very reason this happened at all? is our culture of destruction not to blame for the ways in which this type of dehumanization becomes possible? why do we blame guns? simply because that is the tool that is most commonly used? if guns are to be taken away, they can only be taken away from everyone. to only allow some to possess guns and others to not is to create a new hierarchy within a society with enough hierarchy as it is. shame on you who have taken advantage of what happened. shame on you who wish to put the general populace under the rule of a government gun. is the gun not what you preach against???? why then is it that you only wish a certain strata of society have access to guns?? is this not similar to the idea of only allowing a certain strata of society to vote? is this not simply an attempt to remove even more power from the voting populace? we fought for voting rights and we should fight similarly for gun rights. it should be noted, felons are not allowed to vote or possess guns. are we all judged as felons all(whether felons are judged justly or injustly is another matter)? all men are created equal, so therefore all men should have access to guns, or no men should have access to guns. will the war on guns be the new war on drugs??? there is too much emotion involved when discussing this topic... stop being so easily swayed. stop paying attention to these poison media voices and read the ideas of the founding fathers. once we start to discredit the founding fathers, we discredit the very basis of our government. revisionism will be one of the first steps towards fascism. we should be able to have faith in the courts. if that fails, then we have faith in protest. but, our judges will not even uphold the constitution. while cases on privacy and warrantless intrusions into the lives and information of innocent citizens go unheard, we rejoice over a decision on marriage and say to ourselves "look our court is just"(i do not disagree with the gay marriage decision, only the fact that the court ever had the ability to preside over the rights of marriage at all). where do we go when the courts will not even hear our cases? where do we go when the federal government has become so massive that even the supreme court dare not oppose it?? was it not states rights that led the way for the supreme court's decision on gay marriage?? is it not the history of states rights that was attacked through the emotionalization of a violent act similar to the one that has happened most recently(i am talking of the trend of removing confederate monuments and discrediting the motives of secessionists after the attack on the black church in charleston)? is there not a trend of the erosion of rights through emotional manipulation whenever a violent attack occurs in our country? look at the obvious, please. please, ignore the media that has tainted our views and played with your emotions. do not forget the history of our country. dont let the emotional aspect of these type of murders drive you to a frenzied decision. remember your history. read your history. PLEASE!!!!!!

[Contrapasso]

domestic violence blacklists you on gun purchases
dont remember the law name but it was a huge thing in the military

big ups to chef boyardee for popping into the thread, rly love hearing ur opinions on something u dont know anything about