Gun Control & RKBA

beevul

(12,194 posts)

47. Sure you did.

Tue Aug 23, 2016, 04:48 PM

Aug 2016

And I did not address gun control because there has never been a national level gun ban that was enforced. The US does not have gun control in any meaningful sense. It has a series of state laws that are under-enforced and generally weak.

It almost sounds like you're saying that our gun laws are worthless.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

215 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

U.S. judge denies Texas professors who sought gun ban in their classrooms [View all] Eugene Aug 2016 OP

The Gun rules over all. (nt) enough Aug 2016 #1

Not really surprised Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #2

I am a college professor retired chillfactor Aug 2016 #3

I'm in the college classroom, too, it wouldn't bother me. aikoaiko Aug 2016 #5

So, with 10 states allowing it, where's the explosion? DonP Aug 2016 #8

Like I said in my post Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #10

Such a funny gun topic, lol? elehhhhna Aug 2016 #88

Not really Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #91

Yours is a question that has been assiduously dodged for *years*: friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #15

There's constantly school shootings, so that proves guns shouldn't be allowed scscholar Aug 2016 #28

"Those gun owners can't be trusted." Empirical evidence indicates otherwise: friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #52

Thanks. That proves they're unsafe. 108 criminals with guns in public! scscholar Aug 2016 #92

Out of a population of 940,877-that's *1* conviction for every 8711 permitees friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #105

Numbers don't lie Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #114

It still proves those gun owners are criminals. scscholar Aug 2016 #122

It proves that those 108 convicted criminals are criminals friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #123

By tha standard everyone who drinks alcohol is responsible for all alcohol-related crime. Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2016 #124

Uh oh. beevul Aug 2016 #126

And how many of those shootings were by people with a CCW permit? DonP Aug 2016 #93

That is a question for which that sort dares not offer an accurate answer... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #108

I expected the usual response; "Hey look over there!" DonP Aug 2016 #109

Conflating all criminals that use guns with people with lawful carry permits is being tried upthread friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #110

Squirrel!!!! Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #116

"That is a situation just waiting to explode." pablo_marmol Aug 2016 #17

Science Denier or just Factose Intolerant? DonP Aug 2016 #18

Selective respect for the verdict of empirical evidence. pablo_marmol Aug 2016 #19

Interesting, sounds a lot more like religious belief than science DonP Aug 2016 #21

"I've always respected Kleck and his his work.......... pablo_marmol Aug 2016 #22

Factose intolerant science denier. N/t beevul Aug 2016 #32

Taught government at a CC for 3 yrs. No problems. Eleanors38 Aug 2016 #31

It was obvious that the outcome would be this way. aikoaiko Aug 2016 #4

No, it all comes down to THIS: guillaumeb Aug 2016 #6

I'm can live with the word illusory because that's fair and it doesn't really matter. aikoaiko Aug 2016 #7

If there is an "increased risk of violence", then why hasn't it happened elsewhere? friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #9

Probably the same place campus cops put the rape and assault reports. elehhhhna Aug 2016 #89

Do you have any evidence of such a coverup? Or even a media report of same? friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #90

My kids a TA in grad school in Tx who just completed her mandatory wtf to do elehhhhna Aug 2016 #146

Gunsucker? sarisataka Aug 2016 #147

What's with the insults? Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #149

Eh, I'll live-the devoutly religious can get quite emotional when they feel their faith challenged.. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #154

As 'valid'? Yes. beevul Aug 2016 #150

Instead of producing evidence, you get angry and spout insults. I don't take it too much to heart. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #153

Ladies and gentlemen ... Straw Man Aug 2016 #156

Indeed, some can do nothing but insult others Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #157

"Probably the same place campus cops put the rape and assault reports." beergood Aug 2016 #151

So where are all of these cases? Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #11

This is about virtue signalling, not demonstrable threat friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #13

Wonder if they know Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #14

We are all entitled to our opinions. nt... virginia mountainman Aug 2016 #12

"If they really protected there would be no police officers killed." pablo_marmol Aug 2016 #16

Hey! That's their favorite straw man you're picking on DonP Aug 2016 #26

Kind of makes you wonder ... Straw Man Aug 2016 #20

"any minimal protection that they might give will be negated by the increased risk of violence" Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2016 #23

taking those 2: discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #24

"Good argument for anarchy." Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2016 #25

And reliance on violence has always been the first position of the US. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #35

Violence has been the first position of every nation-state and NS-wannabe. Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2016 #36

And is there any difference between individual violence and state violence? guillaumeb Aug 2016 #39

The difference is people protecting themselves versus the elite protecting their power over people. Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2016 #43

And who are "the elite" of whom you are so fearful? guillaumeb Aug 2016 #53

Are you saying there is no valid reason for citizens to keep arms to protect themselves from Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2016 #62

Do you see your own government as an occupying force? guillaumeb Aug 2016 #67

Do you see your government as a perpetual source of benevolence and good will? Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2016 #76

So this was an official government action? guillaumeb Aug 2016 #79

It was official to Dr. Perry, his family and friends. Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2016 #83

The Klan, in many cases, were a de facto part of local power structures friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #84

True, but that still does not make this action guillaumeb Aug 2016 #95

have you ever seen beergood Aug 2016 #189

I don't. Then again, to regard the possiblity that it *might* become one as ludicrous... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #81

And we might both agree that fascism has appeal to a certain portion guillaumeb Aug 2016 #96

In your own words, who or what is "encourag(ing) individual violence"? friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #46

There are many reasons that people commit violence. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #54

Yet persons with concealed handgun licenses tend not to commit it friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #60

It is amazing how easily some forget this. beevul Aug 2016 #40

It is not an easy thing to come to terms with the implication that Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2016 #45

self defense beergood Aug 2016 #155

George Zimmerman also killed in "self-defense". guillaumeb Aug 2016 #159

And? beevul Aug 2016 #160

re: "And how safe has that made this country?" discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #158

Show me a modern society that doesn't rely on violence as the 'stick'... beevul Aug 2016 #161

"...how safe has that made this country?" Well, crime-wise things have improved... Eleanors38 Aug 2016 #186

If murder rates have gone down, guillaumeb Aug 2016 #193

"If murder rates have gone down ,...why are more guns needed?" Murder still happens... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #194

106 reported crimes, with 1 murder, versus 30,000 actual gun deaths. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #198

How many of those "30,000 actual gun deaths" were caused by CCW holders? friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #200

Here is a source that may help you out: guillaumeb Aug 2016 #201

3 in Oklahoma Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #202

Oklahoma? A 10 second Google search got me here: guillaumeb Aug 2016 #206

But my tens of thousands was Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #207

"You can thank me later." Feel free to hate me for these right now: friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #204

Some math that you keep ignoring: guillaumeb Aug 2016 #208

Mere collective guilt-tripping. You blame a verifiably safe subgroup for the actions of the entirety friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #210

Dismissing 30,000 deaths a year is what is sad. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #211

"30,000 deaths/dead" as used in this thread is a 'thought-terminating cliche': friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #215

And you don't? beevul Aug 2016 #212

That will leave a mark, lol Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #209

Gun ownership is for personal protection. To answer your question is to subsume gun Eleanors38 Aug 2016 #195

The number of guns sold has increased, guillaumeb Aug 2016 #199

Why have some states seen a large spike in FOID cards Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #203

The link. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #214

Actually, you misconstrue a major controller/banner talking point... Eleanors38 Aug 2016 #213

If they can ban guns based on illusions of safety, surely they may allow them for the same reason? jmg257 Aug 2016 #27

"If they really protected there would be no police officers killed." beevul Aug 2016 #29

"Shamed silence"? What an interesting phrase. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #33

I was giving you credit, and assuming you were capable. My bad. beevul Aug 2016 #37

And I gave you credit for understanding, however....... guillaumeb Aug 2016 #44

Sure you did. beevul Aug 2016 #47

You also are a mind reader? guillaumeb Aug 2016 #56

No, I just hear the gears grinding from time to time. beevul Aug 2016 #59

I think the key phrase here is: guillaumeb Aug 2016 #65

I think the key phrase is 'biased control freaks'. beevul Aug 2016 #75

Projection on your part? guillaumeb Aug 2016 #78

Who is it that I'm trying to control? Whos choices am I trying to dictate? beevul Aug 2016 #80

You are trying to control both the framing of the question guillaumeb Aug 2016 #94

You accepted the framing when you brought up 'projection'. beevul Aug 2016 #104

Background checks are a national law. So is the Lautenberg (sp?) Amendment. Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2016 #48

Background checks are easily avoided. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #57

We are discussing people who did not avoid background checks- in fact, passed them friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #63

Which does not invalidate my point. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #69

Should you be banned from driving because others choose to speed? friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #72

So are drug laws in spite of the fact they're as restricted by a regime of laws and agencies as Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2016 #64

How often, in practice, are background checks actually avoided? N/T beevul Aug 2016 #162

Think about your question and the answer is apparent. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #165

In a straw prchase, a background check is done. beevul Aug 2016 #167

If a person who cannot pass a background check wishes to buy a gun, guillaumeb Aug 2016 #170

Except that I wasn't referring to that beevul Aug 2016 #172

Were you then referring to gun sales in parking lots, guillaumeb Aug 2016 #173

How often does a gun sale happen in which no background check is done? beevul Aug 2016 #175

Reread 173. I answered it. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #176

That was an answer to...something...just not the question I asked. beevul Aug 2016 #177

As is your habit of asking unanswerable questions. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #178

I have this habit or requiring substantiation... beevul Aug 2016 #180

The problem is 30,000 gun deaths each year. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #192

Which are caused at a lesser rate by CCW holders than the general public- or cops, for that matter. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #197

If thats the problem, start focusing on causes rather than instrumentality. beevul Aug 2016 #205

" How do we determine in advance which legal gun owner will later commit homicide?" Nancyswidower Aug 2016 #183

Why do you believe that it's possible to diagnose psychiatric disorders at a distance? friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #38

Vaccinations do not provide perfect protection from disease Mugu Aug 2016 #30

But no one walks around with a needle killing people, guillaumeb Aug 2016 #34

Nor do people defend themselves with a needle. beevul Aug 2016 #41

Does the defense outweigh the 30,000 homicides? guillaumeb Aug 2016 #50

The lowest DGU estimates are over double that figure. beevul Aug 2016 #51

So potential homicides outweigh actual homicides? guillaumeb Aug 2016 #58

If we're only talking homicides... beevul Aug 2016 #68

"(V)accines are not designed to kill." But they still kill people on very rare occasions. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #42

30,000 gun homicides every year, on average. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #49

Thats an answer to a question you weren't asked. beevul Aug 2016 #55

The "question" was a nonsense type of question. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #61

Given that this has been legal in colleges elsewhere for years, without apparent problem... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #70

The question is legitimate. Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2016 #71

What is the percentage of homicide victims killed by guns? guillaumeb Aug 2016 #77

That is not the quesiton being asked. The question was -- Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2016 #82

It is a question that is obviously being avoided. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #86

Unanswerable, and the reason is apparent if you read my citations. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #98

Actually, it is easily answerable for concealed weapons permitees in Texas. 27 friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #107

So "only 27" cases of assault with a weapon in one state in one year. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #118

What leads you to claim that trouble is somehow inevitable that in Texas, when it hasn't... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #119

Guns are required for a gun homicide to occur. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #120

Murder is not the only crime that occurs on campuses- but you knew that already. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #121

SO the solution for this tiny number of crimes guillaumeb Aug 2016 #128

That was the most concentrated Gish Gallop I've seen to date friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #131

Allow me to simplify: guillaumeb Aug 2016 #132

Yet again, you are employing a strawman argument against claims that I have not made. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #139

There aren't 30 thousand gun homicides every year. beevul Aug 2016 #163

Homicide refers to killing a person. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #166

So you know the proper definitions, you just aren't willing to use them. beevul Aug 2016 #169

Keep avoiding or minimizing suicide. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #171

You're the one avoiding it. beevul Aug 2016 #174

The terms "suicide" and "problem" are extinct; now the one is "homicide," the other "issue." Eleanors38 Aug 2016 #187

Pretty much. beevul Aug 2016 #188

Or as the old school hip-hop song said... Eleanors38 Aug 2016 #196

There are about 11,000 yearly victims of gun homicides. Waldorf Aug 2016 #144

Is a student be allowed to defend herself against a rapist? Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2016 #125

Defense necessitates a gun? guillaumeb Aug 2016 #127

A gun is the best means of defense against a rapist. Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2016 #129

Your answer is pure assumption. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #130

"You assume that:" You know what they assume, how exactly? Telepsychology? friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #133

The post was basically a "Dirty Harry" argument. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #135

That post contains two strawman arguments and an argument by assertion friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #140

It's not an assumption to those who defend themselves. Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2016 #136

All of my points are still valid. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #138

No, they are not. You are still arguing mightily against an assertion that poster did not make: friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #141

I argued against what I inferred from the poster's remarks. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #148

Their reasons for buying guns are not subject to your approval friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #191

A gun doesn't equate automatic protection, it equates better protection than defenselessness. Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2016 #145

you sound like sen Hudak beergood Aug 2016 #190

A strawman argument-your interlocutor made no such claim friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #134

A nice try that ignores what was asked. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #137

A reply to your points: 1) The 'implication' is entirely yours, not voiced by that poster. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #142

I repeat myself, at the risk of seeming rude: guillaumeb Aug 2016 #143

You still argue vigorously against an idea that *no one* here seems to have to expressed. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #152

It necessitates leaving the decision up to the individual... beevul Aug 2016 #164

It is answerable because others have answered it. Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2016 #111

Not sure but most of them get a... discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #115

No, it isn't. beevul Aug 2016 #73

You appear to have either misunderstood the question, or *did* understand it and don't like... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #66

Incorrect. Straw Man Aug 2016 #106

So you are minimizing suicide to defend gun carnage? guillaumeb Aug 2016 #168

Loading the question a bit, aren't you? Straw Man Aug 2016 #179

Thats the intended purpose... beevul Aug 2016 #181

Dueling definitions. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #182

Not at all. Straw Man Aug 2016 #184

I thought you were reaching before, but this newest is really bullshit. beevul Aug 2016 #185

If looks could kill... Ilsa Aug 2016 #74

"Guns on campus may not make any difference whatsoever" They probably won't: friendly_iconoclast Aug 2016 #85

I was never worried about being shot by a cop on campus. Ilsa Aug 2016 #87

How many have done that in the 10 states Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #97

It doesn't matter how many accidents there are specifically Ilsa Aug 2016 #99

Just a small point Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #100

And put in prison if their negligence kills someone. Ilsa Aug 2016 #101

Hard to hold a person accountable for a true accident Duckhunter935 Aug 2016 #103

"It is almost impossible for any modern gun to go off accidentally. 99% are negligent discharges..." Ilsa Aug 2016 #117

But you are even less likely to be shot if no one is carrying a gun. guillaumeb Aug 2016 #102

If a person is determined to shoot at someone else that someone else will be shot at. Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2016 #112

re: "Gun free zones only apply to victims." discntnt_irny_srcsm Aug 2016 #113