Like Tree518Likes

Guns in the US

Closed Thread
Page 4 of 120 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 12 ... LastLast
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Quote Originally Posted by closedcasket:
    Replace guns with alcohol in your argument. In fact, I would argue that alcohol is far worse ...responsible for more deaths, maiming incidents, rapes, falls, abuses, vandalism.

    Should we ban alcohol? Why not?
    Banning alcohol would be quite tough as it is relatively simple for a black market to appear as has been shown previously but yes a Government should do what ever is necessary to reduce to risk to society from it.

    Perhaps laws should be enacted to try to create a responsible use of Alcohol such as

    - Setting the minimum age at 21
    - Licensed bars only
    - Make it illegal to combine alcohol with other activities
    - High taxes
    - restrict hours that people are allowed to sell/sell/use alcohol
    - regular and costly inspections to make sure organisations are fit to sell alcohol
    - fixed period permits to sell alcohol that get re-assessed (not for life)
    - ban alcohol use in public areas
    Last edited by East_coast; 10-03-2013 at 08:34 AM.
    INXS likes this.

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    4,043

    NRA is for guns as where do you think this major lobby that has members of national and state legislatures in the USA in their back pocket gets their money from? Guns are good for manufactures.
    The USA military - industrial complex has vast influence on legislators and that is why in large measure why the US love those foreign wars - Cheney/Bush kind.

    Cars are a good analogy and certain types of vehicles for off road use are not allowed on the road and you need training and a license to drive. Alcohol and drugs (incl. ethical drugs - prescription and over the counter) have a major role to play in crashes.

    There used to more Americans killed each year in cars than in the entire Vietnam war where they lost over 57000 over the entire war. Road safety has become a priority and campaigns like increased seat belt use, safer cars, road blocks all year round in some places - all help.

    Road safety programs to be highly effective touch on the 4 Es - Education - Enforcement - Engineering - Environment. Part of the obstacles in road safety is who pays. With hundreds or more auto insurers out there they only care about who they insure and gov't is usually interested in revenues from drivers to pay for roads, etc - not safety.

    But you can't take your off course race car for drag racing or NASCAR on the streets. But you can take your assault weapons which fire hundreds of rounds in minutes! Insane.


  3. #33

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Quote Originally Posted by closedcasket:
    It is a slippery slope when we start taking things away from people due to 'some' people's abuse in the name of bettering society.
    Can you clarify this as it is not clear. Surely there are many laws that have been created to stop the actions of a few harming society.
    Last edited by East_coast; 10-03-2013 at 08:40 AM.

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    4,040
    Quote Originally Posted by East_coast:
    Banning alcohol would be quite tough as it is relatively simple for a black market to appear as has been shown previously but yes a Government should do what ever is necessary to reduce to risk to society from it.

    Perhaps laws should be enacted to try to create a responsible use of Alchohol such as

    - Setting the minimum age at 21
    - Licensed bars only
    - Make it illegal to combine alchohol with other activities
    - High taxes
    - restrict hours that people are allowed to sell alchohol
    - regular and costly inspections to make sure organisations are fit to sell alchohol
    - fixed period permits to sell alcohol that get re-assessed (not for life)

    Most of these laws are already in place...and yet alcohol is still more damaging to a society than guns.

    Banning alcohol would be extremely tough....but so would banning guns. There are almost as many guns as there are people in the US. Unlike alcohol, guns are not consumed. Guns still work hundreds of years after they are produced. How are you going to get all the guns off the streets?

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Quote Originally Posted by closedcasket:
    Most of these laws are already in place...and yet alcohol is still more damaging to a society than guns.

    Banning alcohol would be extremely tough....but so would banning guns. There are almost as many guns as there are people in the US. Unlike alcohol, guns are not consumed. Guns still work hundreds of years after they are produced. How are you going to get all the guns off the streets?
    So now the argument is because it can't be solved completely overnight nothing should be done?

    Laws should change to reflect changes in society and the laws for alcohol use have evolved and keep evolving.

    More guns in society results in more deaths and maiming but that is less important than having the right to 'play' with guns.
    Last edited by East_coast; 10-03-2013 at 08:50 AM.

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    4,040
    Quote Originally Posted by East_coast:
    Can you clarify this as it is not clear. Surely there most laws that have been created to stop the actions of a few harming society.

    Sorry, poorly worded perhaps. What I am trying to say is that there are millions of responsible hunters in the US. Is it right or fair to ban all guns based on the actions of a tiny minority?


    Sure, laws are made all the time due to the actions of a few. One example would be no eating on the MTR. I would love to eat a snack or drink a beer while riding on the MTR, and I would never consider littering on it. However, I understand, that because many people would litter, and the entire train would become a mess...that I can't enjoy a Tsing Tao while riding home at night. But giving up a snack or a beer on a train is a small price to pay for having a clean MTR system..so no problem.


    Asking all hunters to change their way of life is a lot to ask. It is a family tradition that is deeply ingrained into society, especially in some parts of the US.

    I think the logical approach might be to leave this issue up to the individual states or even cities. For a place like Hong Kong, it makes complete sense to ban guns. There is no hunting or cultural ties to them. In a place like Chicago or Washington DC, it might also make sense to ban them (which they tried to no avail) due to the large amount of gun violence. However, I don't think just because there is a lot of gun violence in Chicago...that ranch owners in Colorado should have to give up there guns.....do you? Many states like New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, Utah rely heavily on hunting tourism and those same states don't have a large amount of gun violence (relatively speaking).

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    4,040
    Quote Originally Posted by East_coast:
    So now the argument is because it can't be solved completely overnight nothing should be done?

    Laws should change to reflect changes in society and the laws for alcohol use have evolved and keep evolving.

    More guns in society results in more deaths and maiming but that is less important than having the right to 'play' with guns.

    When did I say that? When did I say nothing should be done? I said lots of things need to be done...but an outright ban across all the US is not the answer.

    Again, why not attack alcohol the same way? More alcohol in society results in more deaths, rapes, domestic violence, vandalism, theft.....but it is less important than having the right to attend happy hour and lower your inhibitions for a few hours?
    dear giant likes this.

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Quote Originally Posted by closedcasket:
    Sorry, poorly worded perhaps. What I am trying to say is that there are millions of responsible hunters in the US. Is it right or fair to ban all guns based on the actions of a tiny minority?


    Sure, laws are made all the time due to the actions of a few. One example would be no eating on the MTR. I would love to eat a snack or drink a beer while riding on the MTR, and I would never consider littering on it. However, I understand, that because many people would litter, and the entire train would become a mess...that I can't enjoy a Tsing Tao while riding home at night. But giving up a snack or a beer on a train is a small price to pay for having a clean MTR system..so no problem.


    Asking all hunters to change their way of life is a lot to ask. It is a family tradition that is deeply ingrained into society, especially in some parts of the US.

    I think the logical approach might be to leave this issue up to the individual states or even cities. For a place like Hong Kong, it makes complete sense to ban guns. There is no hunting or cultural ties to them. In a place like Chicago or Washington DC, it might also make sense to ban them (which they tried to no avail) due to the large amount of gun violence. However, I don't think just because there is a lot of gun violence in Chicago...that ranch owners in Colorado should have to give up there guns.....do you? Many states like New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, Utah rely heavily on hunting tourism and those same states don't have a large amount of gun violence (relatively speaking).
    Again it seems that there are no conceivable laws for suggested by some gun advocates that could be enacted that would not impinge on bona-fide use of a weapon for hunting.

    Perhaps if you spent a few minutes thinking of a few sensible laws that would not affect your 'games' e.g. shooting game birds rather than just being personally happy with the higher levels of death and maiming in society so you can play with your guns unfettered.

    Can you think of any sensible gun laws that would reduce gun violence but not seriously impinge on a sensible 'hunter'.
    Last edited by East_coast; 10-03-2013 at 09:05 AM.

  9. #39

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Quote Originally Posted by closedcasket:
    When did I say that? When did I say nothing should be done? I said lots of things need to be done...?
    Please suggest some things that could be done to reduce the cost of guns on society?
    Last edited by East_coast; 10-03-2013 at 09:06 AM.

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    4,040
    Quote Originally Posted by East_coast:
    Again it seems that there are no conceivable laws for suggested by some gun advocates that could be enacted that would not impinge on bona-fide use of a weapon for hunting.

    Perhaps if you spent a few minutes thinking of a few sensible laws that would not affect your 'games' e.g. shooting game birds rather than just being personally happy with the higher levels of death and maiming in society so you can play with your guns unfettered.

    Can you think of any sensible gun laws that would reduce gun violence but not seriously impinge on a sensible 'hunter'.

    Of course, there are many:

    -ban assault/automatic type weapons
    -ban armor piercing rounds
    -limit the amount of bullets held in a magazine
    -make background checks tougher and more thorough
    -stricter gun laws etc.

    this could go on and on.....

    Tougher and more sensible laws are absolutely needed, but not an all out ban.
    dear giant likes this.

Closed Thread
Page 4 of 120 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 12 ... LastLast