6-year-old boy dies after being shot during road rage incident

Okay, but this doesn't address those human factors that create selfish, greedy, entitled people that are committing the violence.

They may be the larger group, maybe not. It doesn't matter. With a gun, they can kill many people quickly and easily.

You want to turn regular people into judge, jury, and executioners, based on THEIR opinions on fear?

F@#_ that. I have seen too much to just simply TRUST that people will do the right thing. If we ever get to a point where a vast majority of people in this country have guns but haven't addressed the inequalities that create our culture, I will run. To either a different country, or a place in our country where there are very few people.

 

Depends.

Do you believe freedom Trump's all?

Because any laws I would enact would likely restrict the freedom of people that are rich from exploiting the poor.

 

The minute a person attacks another they have broken laws, which makes them a criminal. Because someone owns a firearm, they are selfish? The two are mutually exclusive, and inapplicable.

Trump has nothing to do with this discussion. Gun ownership have nothing to do with Trump.

 

What -I- believe is irrelevant to YOUR position.
I asked:
What laws do you believe will address the human factors that help turn black men into angry, selfish people that are willing to commit violence?
Well?

 

It's only failed because once again, you can't keep you eye on the prize. The guns are not the issue but the people that are becoming more and more desensitized to committing such heinous acts. We started shutting down our psychiatric hospitals some 50 years ago and as our mental health issue grew, so did the violent attacks.

How The Loss Of U.S. Psychiatric Hospitals Led To A Mental Health Crisis

Open these institutions back up and start treating people again.... That is a sound solution that will actually work!

And regarding your NRA statement. The NRA hasn't had to say a word to increase sales. It's been the democrats that have been the best salesmen to the gun manufacturers with "We aren't taking your guns" to "Hell yes, we're going to take your AR-15". The NRA has not been relevant in over a decade as subscriptions have plummeted. But the more liberals talk of taking the guns away, it inadvertently cause a dash to gun buying.

 

Indeed. Its not "paranoia" when someone publicly tells you they plan to do something to you.

 

You are equating firearms with greed. The greediest people don't need to be violent, they take what they want, usually using legal means through laws that they themselves enacted. As a test, tell me, who has been voted for life time benefits from their job? Who has the ability to not contribute to social safety net program that help all people, because they don't feel it's necessary because they won't receive it, and have voted themselves retirement benefits that other people pay for? Who voted that they receive full benefits after one year in their job? Who votes themselves raises and makes more than the average of the people they work for?

no one is asking you to do a thing. You can step back and let people that want to shoot each other, shoot each other. Those that don't care to join in this melee will pick up the mess later.

Perhaps you are trusting in the wrong people. As a really annoying saying goes, if you aren't part of the solution, then you are part of the problem. Taking away law abiding citizens ability to defend themselves is not a solution, so it must be part of the problem.[/quote][/QUOTE]

 

LOL, apparently you don't understand the gun laws in many of those countries. I think Sweden, Norway and Netherlands have similar laws to the US while Switzerland (not on your list) still require all able-bodied males to keep and store an automatic weapon for defense..

 

What you believe DOES matter, because the only way right now to fix the culture and/or race problem would require violating people's freedoms to be selfish and greedy.

You want specifics. No. I'm not giving you political ammo to use against me. Nothing I say would change your views.

On one hand, I am glad we have the freedoms we do, it has done a lot of good.

On the other, I KNOW nothing will change until we as a country hit rock bottom. Absolute freedom. We don't have to be moral, we just have to be legal.

 

Hopefully one day you'll realize that whatever happened there happened in your own head, not mine. In general, I take a systems approach to problem solving, however, I'm also trained in human behavior. Specifically nuerodivergent human behavior. People imagine that the government has control of the levers of society, that it can shift levers to control behavior and outcome. This is not true. It can influence the position of levers, but any attempt to influence one lever will have an impact on the position of all the other levers. In most cases, since the system is so complex, the real world responses produce outcomes that are often unforeseeable, and adverse. I'm sure you're certain you crafted a response that you imagine a reasonable person would immediately accept and agree with you on. I'm not disagreeing with you about your motive. I'm disagreeing with your system to produce the desired outcome because I recognize that it will not influence human behavior in the way you expect.

Can you name an instance of spontaneous mass murder? Is that a thing that needs to be prevented?

When did I convey that this was my idea? This is a fantasy that exists in your head, not mine.

Instead everyone should trust yours? If you were supreme leader, would everyone be safe?

All you have to do is analyze the system. How long have humans existed on the planet? There's always more of us. We must have some part of it figured out.

Don't you have to also use force to slow them down? Through what mechanism is that force exerted? Isn't it the use of guns?

 

No. It doesn't.
You, in no way, need my opinion on anything to meaningfully answer my question about YOUR statement:

What laws do ---YOU--- believe will address the human factors that help turn black men into angry, selfish people that are willing to commit violence?

Well?

And thus, your admission that you cannot meaningfully answer the question.
As expected, you offer soundbite slogans, and nothing more.
Thank you

 

There's been two recent spikes in gun ownership. The first happened during the "defund the police" protesting. Do you think that without the NRA people in that environment would not have been concerned that they would have to provide for their own security? No one was forced to rush to the gun stores by Wayne LaPierre. Do you think there was a rush because the majority of them realized that once the police were defunded they would be free to shoot 6 year old kids?

 

I often ask myself if many people really think there are only 2Aers and non-2Aers, as if it's an everything or nothing proposition.

And I often ask myself how many people would miserably fail a civics tests about anything having to do with the US Constitution, which was never intended to be holy relic, but rather, a living document, capable of being adjusted with time.

I am not against the 2A, but I see definite need for some changes.

 

Not only are they factors, they each confound your ability to draw a causal link between one variable and one outcome. There's no better way to screw up a system than to compare it statistically to a completely different system and expect that a difference in one system will produce an outcome in another.

EG: Woman are less violent than men. Woman have breasts. Give all men breasts and violence will be reduced.

 

I don't understand why you argue with positions you created for me. I made no such post lumping people together nor did I refer to people as "bad". I believe you are a good person with a genuine concern for human life. Good intentions do not negate results.

So I can understand your position, how far would you take gun control? Would you disarm armored car guards?

 

For your postulation vis-a-vis women to work, you would first have to prove that the breasts of a woman are the reason why they are less violent, otherwise, those breasts are merely an organ within (or, in this case, flopping outside) the body....

Oh and men with breasts is just plain old gross, thank you very much.

 

And then you can rest on a post hoc fallacy.
Further, I can show that the number of guns in the US has gone up while gun deaths have gone down -- which is impossible, if more guns = more gun deaths.

Despite the fact you cannot demonstrate the necessity for, or the efficacy of, the restrictions you seek.

 

You realize most Californians have zero ability to carry legally? You better pick a different state and example, because this is a huge swing and a miss.

The gun laws here in California are draconian.

 

So..you've proven you gotten my point. Good. Can you see how that point applies to the argument I quoted?

 

I'm not sure if you meant me or not. I know the problem is much complex than "them versus us".

I have found it to be true how ignorant people are on most things. My father and my father-in-law, both, are armchair "experts" on every topic on the planet so I'm just talking about us mere mortals.

Yes, there's much room for improvement. We just have to get everybody in the room to figure it out.

 

If those guards were held to a higher standard, and it was actually enforced, then I would be okay with them having guns.

As far as my personal standards? Well, they would involve shooting as a last resort. They would involve background checks to make sure they were upstanding citizens in all respects, and least likely to fall to corruption, racism, etc.

And yeah, I know others may have different standards than I do. And no, there is nothing I can really do about that.

I am a firm believer in law and order. I am also a 42 year old, white, fat guy that was raised as a pacifist.

I know black people have had it rough in our history, but they also have promoted their culture that encourages violence. It's a complicated situation that I could never solve.

But we cannot just sit and do nothing. The frequency and severity of mass gun attacks is going up, not down. And I don't see where the benefit of having more people with guns outweighs the fear I have of more greedy and selfish people having access to weapons that can kill someone so easily.

I can't kill someone with a club more quickly and easily as I could with a gun. What is the counter to that?

 

According to what the media tells you, while the Biden Administration pushes for more gun control.

Your inability to perceive and your irrational fear do not support a sound argument for unnecessary and ineffective restrictions on the rights of the law abiding.

 

I am curious how you can justify armed protection transporting for cash, but not for a mother transporting her children?

 

If the mother can meet my standards, I would not have a problem with her having a gun, as long as we can enforce those standards and she continually meets them.

 

-Your- standards.
To exercise -their- rights.