Do Gun control proponets think that criminals obey laws?

Page 1 of 4 [ 51 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

rvacountrysinger
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 26 May 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 380
Location: Richmond, Virginia

10 Oct 2017, 11:54 am

I'm trying to understand logic behind more gun control legislation. Do people really think these laws will actually work? In the sense that bad people who want to do BAD things with guns- what makes people think laws will deter them? These people are anti- social personality anyway (usually) and they aren't going to follow any laws. Meanwhile, good people who want guns for protection and defense may be delayed or even denied getting them in the red tape process. When our founding fathers said right to bear arms, they meant it. Its our right and part of our freedom as American citizens.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,338
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

10 Oct 2017, 3:39 pm

They oversimplify it by thinking that if guns can somehow be removed from the equation that people will be disabled from doing harm to one another.


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


modernmax
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2012
Age: 19
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,116
Location: Near Chicago

10 Oct 2017, 4:19 pm

It's funny how there's far more restrictions on guns today than there was 20 years ago and there were no mass shootings then, but the solution to stop them is apparently to add more restrictions.


_________________
This is not a signature, I just make a line and write this under it every time I post.


sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,959
Location: US

10 Oct 2017, 5:54 pm

They don’t care about the situation or victims they just use it as political points.

They push for all the same things they push for after every shooting. Things that wouldn’t have stopped any of them. They push for universal background checks. He passed backroung checks how would expanding them to every private purchase stop him?
They want to track all gun purchases so they can eventually do a gun registration. Can’t do a registration unless you track all gun purchases. Banning simi autos? Been a bit much of shootings using pump shotguns.
Magazines? Tech shooter used two pistols with 10 round mags. Columbine happen mid point of the assault weapon ban.
None of it will do anything to stop mass shootings. It’s a people thing we need to fix societies mind set



AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,638
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

10 Oct 2017, 6:21 pm

I dunno, y’all. It seems to be effective in the UK. Now they just need to get their knife and acid attacks under control. More laws, I guess?



sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,959
Location: US

10 Oct 2017, 9:12 pm

AngelRho wrote:
I dunno, y’all. It seems to be effective in the UK. Now they just need to get their knife and acid attacks under control. More laws, I guess?

Last I heard cops in London were starting to arm and they keep finding more and more guns off criminals each month. If it worked shouldn’t they find less and less til they find 0? And they’re an island which if gun control would work anywhere it’s be on an island which makes illegally importing guns harder.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,338
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

10 Oct 2017, 11:37 pm

[sarcasm]If we approach gun control the same as the "war on drugs" I'm sure we'll be gun crime free in no time.[/sarcasm]


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,308

11 Oct 2017, 7:06 pm

Raptor wrote:
They oversimplify it by thinking that if guns can somehow be removed from the equation that people will be disabled from doing harm to one another.


Not quite, the argument is that with less access to more effective weapons people will be less capable of committing large scale violence. You're unlikely to stop violence between people, but people armed with more effective weapons are capable of harming more people in a shorter time. Considering some portion of violent criminals (like mass shooters) often have little to no criminal record prior to committing that crime, asking if criminals will obey the law misses the point. Further, the more guns in circulation, the easier they are to acquire via the black market or through theft.

The best argument against that logic is that the genie is already out of the bottle and personally I can't and don't support the idea of rounding up privately owned weapons. This would mean all the guns that hardline gun control advocates are worried about would remain out there with the same possibility of being used by formerly law abiding citizens, or to end up on the black market.

Of course, if more effective weapons don't allow one to commit worse acts of violence, why are we restricting the right to own BMGs, RPG-7s, etc? I mean, if the main concern is fighting tyrannical government, why restrict the right to own the sort of weapons one would need to overthrow a tyrannical government?


_________________
Let's celebrate the superiority of our ideas by calling everyone who disagrees a cuck.


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,338
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

11 Oct 2017, 10:27 pm

Raptor wrote:
They oversimplify it by thinking that if guns can somehow be removed from the equation that people will be disabled from doing harm to one another.


funeralxempire wrote:
Not quite, the argument is that with less access to more effective weapons people will be less capable of committing large scale violence. You're unlikely to stop violence between people, but people armed with more effective weapons are capable of harming more people in a shorter time. Considering some portion of violent criminals (like mass shooters) often have little to no criminal record prior to committing that crime, asking if criminals will obey the law misses the point. Further, the more guns in circulation, the easier they are to acquire via the black market or through theft.

The guns usually in question weren't particularly popular until there were attempts to ban them.
BTW: Registration is a vehicle for confiscation.

funeralxempire wrote:
The best argument against that logic is that the genie is already out of the bottle and personally I can't and don't support the idea of rounding up privately owned weapons. This would mean all the guns that hardline gun control advocates are worried about would remain out there with the same possibility of being used by formerly law abiding citizens, or to end up on the black market.

Hard line gun control advocates want to ban ALL guns, they just go after the scary looking ones first.

funeralxempire wrote:
Of course, if more effective weapons don't allow one to commit worse acts of violence, why are we restricting the right to own BMGs, RPG-7s, etc? I mean, if the main concern is fighting tyrannical government, why restrict the right to own the sort of weapons one would need to overthrow a tyrannical government?

Wasn't my idea to restrict them...


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


The_Walrus
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 22
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,700
Location: Reading, England

12 Oct 2017, 6:35 am

rvacountrysinger wrote:
These people are anti- social personality anyway (usually) and they aren't going to follow any laws.

Quick [mod] point - be aware that this is ableist. Blaming gun crime on people with ASPD is no different to blaming it on autism.

Quote:
I'm trying to understand logic behind more gun control legislation. Do people really think these laws will actually work? In the sense that bad people who want to do BAD things with guns- what makes people think laws will deter them?

I'm not especially in favour of stricter gun control. I don't think the evidence suggests that it has much effect. However, this is a silly argument. By this logic, we shouldn't have laws at all because "bad people" will always break them.

As conservative pro-gun cartoonist Scott Adams writes here (interesting read):
Quote:
Many pro-gun people in the debate seem to be confused about the purpose of laws in general. Laws are not designed to eliminate crime. Laws are designed to reduce crime. The most motivated criminals will always find a way, and law-abiding citizens will avoid causing trouble in the first place. Laws are only for the people in the middle who might – under certain situations – commit a crime. Any friction you introduce to that crowd has a statistical chance of making a difference.

Humans are lazy and stupid, on average. If you make something 20% harder to do, a lot of humans will pass. It doesn’t matter what topic you are discussing; if you introduce friction, fewer people do it.

...
Quote:
We’ve never seen a law in any realm that stopped all crime. At best, laws discourage the people on the margin. Gun control is no different. The objective is to add some friction and reduce the risk that someone angry enough to pick up an AR doesn’t also have a bump stock in the house.

The Vegas gunman had over 40 guns yet he used bump stocks on his weapons instead of buying illegal fully-automatic weapons in the first place. He also did not purchase grenade launchers, which would have been ideal for his purposes. The reason in both cases is that there was more friction for acquiring the illegal weapons. It wasn’t impossible. It was just harder.



AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,638
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

12 Oct 2017, 6:52 am

sly279 wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
I dunno, y’all. It seems to be effective in the UK. Now they just need to get their knife and acid attacks under control. More laws, I guess?

Last I heard cops in London were starting to arm and they keep finding more and more guns off criminals each month. If it worked shouldn’t they find less and less til they find 0? And they’re an island which if gun control would work anywhere it’s be on an island which makes illegally importing guns harder.

The keep finding more guns on criminals? That’s interesting. I don’t ever hear that in the news. All I ever hear about are knives and acid.



rvacountrysinger
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 26 May 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 380
Location: Richmond, Virginia

12 Oct 2017, 12:20 pm

The_Walrus wrote:
rvacountrysinger wrote:
These people are anti- social personality anyway (usually) and they aren't going to follow any laws.

Quick [mod] point - be aware that this is ableist. Blaming gun crime on people with ASPD is no different to blaming it on autism.

Quote:
I'm trying to understand logic behind more gun control legislation. Do people really think these laws will actually work? In the sense that bad people who want to do BAD things with guns- what makes people think laws will deter them?

I'm not especially in favour of stricter gun control. I don't think the evidence suggests that it has much effect. However, this is a silly argument. By this logic, we shouldn't have laws at all because "bad people" will always break them.

As conservative pro-gun cartoonist Scott Adams writes here (interesting read):
Quote:
Many pro-gun people in the debate seem to be confused about the purpose of laws in general. Laws are not designed to eliminate crime. Laws are designed to reduce crime. The most motivated criminals will always find a way, and law-abiding citizens will avoid causing trouble in the first place. Laws are only for the people in the middle who might – under certain situations – commit a crime. Any friction you introduce to that crowd has a statistical chance of making a difference.

Humans are lazy and stupid, on average. If you make something 20% harder to do, a lot of humans will pass. It doesn’t matter what topic you are discussing; if you introduce friction, fewer people do it.

...
Quote:
We’ve never seen a law in any realm that stopped all crime. At best, laws discourage the people on the margin. Gun control is no different. The objective is to add some friction and reduce the risk that someone angry enough to pick up an AR doesn’t also have a bump stock in the house.

The Vegas gunman had over 40 guns yet he used bump stocks on his weapons instead of buying illegal fully-automatic weapons in the first place. He also did not purchase grenade launchers, which would have been ideal for his purposes. The reason in both cases is that there was more friction for acquiring the illegal weapons. It wasn’t impossible. It was just harder.



No, its backed by science. People with anti social personality disorder have disregard for the safety of other human beings and are less likely to obey laws. With early intervention, there can possibly be a change in behavior. But anti social personality disorder spectrum is a part of (not always) the broader psychopathic personality. It isn't "ableist", its psychology. Every now and then a person without such disorder can "snap" and shoot people. But guns aren't the only weapons people have used to do acts of violence. knives, explosives, and vehicles as well as airplanes have been used.

The main argument for "gun control" is that it will keep guns out of the hands of those who wish to do harm to others. But if someone is hell bent on doing (premeditated acts of violence) there is really no way to thwart their efforts. They will certainly not be obeying and gun laws.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,338
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

12 Oct 2017, 12:52 pm

The_Walrus wrote:
rvacountrysinger wrote:
These people are anti- social personality anyway (usually) and they aren't going to follow any laws.

Quick [mod] point - be aware that this is ableist. Blaming gun crime on people with ASPD is no different to blaming it on autism.

Sociopaths considered handicapped and are now a protected group on WP?
I'll have to remember that...


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,638
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

12 Oct 2017, 12:57 pm

The idea that “criminals will still get guns anyway” as an argument against gun control is crap. I get that. The problem I have with the legality of weapons issue is that if you force weapons underground, you make it impossible for people to protect themselves and still comply with laws.

You get a population well-armed and well-schooled in what self-defense means, when deadly force is actually appropriate, you have criminals or potential criminals thinking a bit harder on whether using force is advantageous or worth the risk.

My church at one point floated the idea of having a few men trained specifically to deal with the unthinkable, having them posted at key points within the sanctuary, and keeping concealed carriers secret from the congregation. I can’t say if anything ever came of it, because I really don’t know. But I do know for a fact one of our choir members does carry.

It’s not that any of us are itching for vigilante justice. It’s just that if someone does come in on a shooting rampage, they want it ended QUICKLY before the situation can become worse.

No, it won’t stop it from happening if a criminal wants to bad enough. But knowing that there are unidentifiable targets that will shoot back, plus tighter security measures will discourage some of those who might otherwise “feel lucky.”



AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,638
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

12 Oct 2017, 12:58 pm

Raptor wrote:
The_Walrus wrote:
rvacountrysinger wrote:
These people are anti- social personality anyway (usually) and they aren't going to follow any laws.

Quick [mod] point - be aware that this is ableist. Blaming gun crime on people with ASPD is no different to blaming it on autism.

Sociopaths considered handicapped and are now a protected group on WP?
I'll have to remember that...

Yeah, I caught that, too. Disturbing.