In response to the bubling discussion over arms control perhaps this article will add a different perspective. Do read the article in full.

I don't agree with the title of this article but I agree with most of the content. It's the first time I've read an article that answers a few questions I've had and mentions recent reports that has information I've had a hard time getting my hands on.

The most interesting finding was that a prevalence of gun ownership does not only increase the rate of gun homicide in that state/county but that the overall rate of homicide also goes up. The idea that a murderer will murder anyway and will find some other way does not necessarily follow.

The second argument worth noting is that owning guns in general do not make you more safe and can make you less safe. An argument that I have heard repeated ad nauseum in the literature I've so far read.Must states and countries start to control arms more strictly? That's up to them. Should the debate focus more on stronger and clearer arguments with a grounded understanding of the benefits and dangers? Yes. Should we pay far more attention to statistics and empirical research. No brainer.

Views: 1241

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Here are some more stats on gun ownership and rates of gun homicides globally.

Thanks Reg. The stats on the Bahamas is pretty wild. I wonder what that's all about!

Thanks GM. I'd never read anything about Australia and gun control. I'm sure they would march in droves if the government tried to take their box cutters away.

The gun control issue in Australia was immortalized in an extraordinarily popular (locally) song by Johnny Farnham, called "You're the voice".

Some of the lyrics say:-

We're all someone's daughter, we're all someone's son
How long can we look at each other, through the barrel of a gun

I'd paste the link to YouTube for it, but my antiquated iPad denies me such e-agility. It's a really good anthem.

Ok - here it is.

I'm sure they would march in droves if the government tried to take their box cutters away.

How else would we cut our boxes? Seriously though, knives and such have significant uses outside of killing people... quite different to guns.

Indeed, having a serious knife with one (not a Swiss Army Knife) with one at all times is hardly a bad idea. A knife is certainly a contender for most useful all around tool, unless one counts duct tape as a tool.

Now That's a knife!

Hopefully you won't include me, or the millions of other competent firearm owners in those statistics concerning stupid people who do stupid shit like waving guns around in a car, leaving a firearm on the coffee table for little johnny to come across, or lack adequate firearm training. As Forrest Gump said "Stupid is as stupid does." Common sense seems to be at a premium for some.

It remains true, in America anyway, that the vast preponderance of LEGAL gun owners possess firearms without incident. Tens of millions of gun owners each and every day conduct themselves responsibly, whether in the home environment, at the shooting range, hunting game, or legally carrying a firearm. I know here in Arkansas that you have to take a fairly demanding course before a conceal permit is granted. Plus there's the background check and hefty permit fee on top of that. 

So really the question is how in the hell are you going to convince millions of responsible gun owners like myself that it is in their best interests to give up their firearms?  

I have no desire to convince any American they should give up their gun. I'm just calling bullshit on some of the arguments people make.

Amongst the issues is that a "responsible gun owner" can have a bad day. Everyone can have a bad day. So on the worst day in a 60 year lifespan of gun owning, you have a gun in your hand, a means to right whatever wrongs you feel have befallen you.

I'm not pointing a finger at you Ed, but statistics say that if there are 1000 responsible gun owners, each with an average of having a gun for 60 years, more of the RGO's will die from gun violence than from a similar population without guns.

1000 people over 60 many of them will have a nasty divorce? How many will get drunk and/or abusive. How many will feel threatened by their neighbors? How many will be cheated on by their lovers and feel a need for revenge? How many will feel like they are a target just because they have a gun?

Every other day of their lives could be awesome and incredible. Or shitty and miserable, out of 1000, who knows? But on their worst day, they are deadly in a way that a control population is not.

I live in a city of 250,000. So all of those bad days, multiplied by 250, make for a crime statistic in my town. Everyone is responsible, until the day they are not.


You are making yourself  crazy with your "what if" statistical analysis, I call that The Boogeyman Syndrome.  

People who have a bad day don't regularly go kill their neighbors, you are purposing an unreasonable causal condition without the evidence to backup the value for it's use.

I agree with Ed's comment 100%. You can't punish the normal people for what some idiots do.


© 2023   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service