My gun control compromise

Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by Maccabee, Jan 4, 2020.

  1. Thingamabob

    Thingamabob Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2017
    Messages:
    14,267
    Likes Received:
    4,465
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Everything you want to know about my interest in stopping rape in Sweden you will find in the "Stopping Rape in Sweden" thread.
     
  2. BryanVa

    BryanVa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2015
    Messages:
    451
    Likes Received:
    354
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Thingamabob,

    I am sorry if my responses do not keep pace with your impatient desire to see what I will say. I will note that you appear to average something around 8 posts a day on this forum, while I, who have been a member far longer, can only average around 1 every 4 days. We all lead different lives, and clearly some of us have more demands outside this forum than others do.

    I am also aware that what I say creates an impression of what kind of person I am. I for one consider the “reply” button to be something more than clickbait—and that the word “reply” should be proceeded by the words “intelligent and thoughtful.”

    For these reasons I do not post as often as you do, and I think about what I am going to say before I post it.

    Now to the issue of gun violence, I will start with this….

    Those of us who are actually involved in fighting violent crime know the issue cannot be summarized with an elementary school math equation. This is particularly true when that equation is based upon a baseless tin foil hat conspiracy theory that lacks any explanation or data. Attempts to explain the causes of gun violence this way are—in my opinion—clear demonstrations of ignorance of the subject.

    I can tell you from my experience that the presence of the weapon is never the cause of the crime. Crime, whether violent or not, occurs for a multitude of reasons. Petty emotions like envy, greed, anger, hatred, and revenge are often present. In my experience drugs and/or alcohol are present in about 85% of crime (from dealing drugs; enforcing drug debts; robberies, burglaries and larcenies to take property to trade for drugs; crimes committed by those under the influence; etc.) This is not to suggest drugs and alcohol are always or even mostly a cause, but there is a strong correlation.

    Simply put, there is no one cause to violent crime. Likewise, there is no one solution. Yet we know from experience that while the motivations to commit crimes vary widely from individual to individual, there are always three deterrent factors which any person who is thinking about committing a crime likely considers:

    1. What is the likelihood that I (or, to a lesser extent, my friend and co-defendant) will suffer a serious injury as a result of attempting the crime?
    2. What is the likelihood that I will be caught and charged with committing the crime?
    3. What is the likelihood that I will suffer a punishment which I am unwilling to accept if I am caught and found guilty of the crime?


    Laws that call for mandatory sentencing address the third factor, and we have seen that they do drive down violent crime rates—by both their deterrent effect and by incarcerating those who demonstrate a willingness to commit these crimes. For example, in 1995 Virginia abolished parole and enacted laws requiring mandatory sentences for violent firearm-related crime. During this current Virginia legislative session I was present for a committee hearing on a parole change bill. At that hearing a parole board representative testified about the effect the 1995 changes have had on our recidivism rate. She testified that Virginia’s recidivism rate fell from just above 60% in 1995 to its current level of 23%. She testified that Virginia currently has the lowest recidivism rate in the nation, where the national average hovers around 58%. So we know there are laws that do have an impact on crime.

    Most important to this discussion (at least for me) is how we in America do not believe in punishing the innocent for the crimes of the guilty. Laws like those enacted in Virginia focus on holding the guilty accountable for their actions without infringing on the rights of the innocent. That, in my opinion, is the only acceptable way to address gun violence.

    ------------------------------------------

    "False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, the most important of the code, will respect the less important and arbitrary ones, which can be violated with ease and impunity, and which, if strictly obeyed, would put and end to personal liberty--so dear to men, so dear to the enlightened legislator--and subject innocent persons to all the vexations that the guilty alone ought to suffer? Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. The ought to be designated as laws not preventative but fearful of crimes, produced by the tumultuous impression of a few isolated facts, and not by thoughtful consideration of the inconveniences and advantages of a universal decree."--Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book, 1774-1776, quoting with approval 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria from his work, On Crimes and Punishment, 1764.
     
  3. BryanVa

    BryanVa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2015
    Messages:
    451
    Likes Received:
    354
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Let me also address the # of guns v. crime rate arguments.

    I have seen people on my side of the debate argue that if a crime rate drops after a state passes a CCW statute then the deterrent effect of armed citizens must be responsible for the drop. Listen, I am as strong a supporter of the individual RKBA as there is, but I cannot find sufficient evidence to prove that crime rates go down just because we pass a CCW bill. It’s the same problem gun control proponents have: We all want to believe what we want to believe.

    What I do know, however, is that the overall violent crime rate in America does not appear tied to the number of privately available firearms. More guns does not equal more violence.

    Here is why I say this:

    The FBI collects national data on crime. The FBI has released a report that included a 20 year review of crime rates—from 1998 to 2017. You can see it here:

    https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/topic-pages/tables/table-1

    Table 1 shows the per capita (per 100,000 people) crime rates for each year from 1998 to 2017.

    In 1998 the violent crime rate was 567.6 per 100,000 people.

    In 2017 the violent crime rate was 382.9 per 100,000 people.

    Across the 20 year review the rate steadily declined (with some up and down fluctuation).

    In 1998 the murder/non-negligent manslaughter rate was 6.3 per 100,000 people.

    In 2017, the rate was 5.3 per 100,000 people.


    Now compare this to known firearm data. We do not have a way of determining exactly how many new firearms enter circulation during this period, but we do know how many background checks were performed due to a purchase or an attempted purchase of a firearm. Before I share this data I caution that you cannot make an assumption that every background check resulted in a new firearm walking out a gun dealer’s door into civilian circulation (if for no other reason the check is still counted even in the purchaser is denied—and likewise it does not capture whether one gun or a multiple of guns are actually purchased in each check—or whether the check indicates a new firearm entering circulation rather than one that had been sold back to a dealer and the re-sold as used, or even a transfer between two people in a state that has UBC requirement). Still, the data for the number of background checks initiated because of a purchase or attempted purchase of a firearm is staggering:

    In the 20 years from 1998 to 2017, while the overall violent crime rate was in steady decline, there were 278,452,380 background checks initiated because of a purchase or attempted purchase of a firearm from a licensed dealer.

    The data can be found here:

    https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/nics_firearm_checks_-_month_year.pdf/view

    I do not suggest cause and effect for we don’t have enough information to say the obvious influx of millions of firearms into civilian hands has led to the drop in the violent crime rate.

    But the reverse is patently obvious: Millions more guns entering civilian hands has not resulted in an increase in the overall violent crime rate.
     
    Well Bonded likes this.
  4. JET3534

    JET3534 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2014
    Messages:
    13,350
    Likes Received:
    11,517
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Who would develop the criteria for a mental exam? Consider that for many libs voting for Trump or thinking a person with male chromosomes and male sexual equipment is a male is evidence of insanity. For many libs, owning a gun is evidence of insanity.
     
    Jarlaxle, SiNNiK and Well Bonded like this.
  5. JET3534

    JET3534 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2014
    Messages:
    13,350
    Likes Received:
    11,517
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Excellent post with a lot of information -- but maybe too much information for the low information types.
     
    Richard The Last and Well Bonded like this.
  6. Thingamabob

    Thingamabob Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2017
    Messages:
    14,267
    Likes Received:
    4,465
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    BryanVa
    So you've been relegated to fleeing the debate by avoiding “notice” (twice now) and offering not a drop of your anticipated rebuttal. Conclusion: You underestimated my depth of understanding with one toe in the water but you feel intimidated now that I've taken a full step forward and so you've decided to blow some smoke for the purpose of placating me and soliciting my mercy.
     
  7. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    41,184
    Likes Received:
    16,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Nah, much simpler there just aren't any. NOBODY having them licenses or no, and mandatory death sentences for using one in a crime. Mandatory 10 years for first-time possession and life for 2nd.

    Right. If I want to kill my wife I want to do it NOW, not next week
    I think I was replying to someone who was saying they couldn't get enough guns
     
  8. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you want to kill your wife NOW, you don't need a gun.
    If you already have a gun, a waiting period won't have any effect.
    So, why is it against we need waiting periods?
     
  9. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    41,184
    Likes Received:
    16,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    My wife is a rather formidable individual :couple_inlove:
    We need waiting periods to prevent SOME impulse murders. The type where the impulse is gone in less time than it takes to go and get a gun and where the gun was necessary (and yes, I realize you can kill a person with a rolled-up dollar bill but it's a LOT easier with a gun, even for John Wick.
     
  10. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You cannot demonstrate the necessity or efficacy of such a thing, especially for people who already own a gun.
     
  11. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What serves to discourage or otherwise prevent an impulse murder from being committed after the firearm has already been taken possession of?
     
  12. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You have no facts to back up that claim, as such it's BS.
     
  13. BryanVa

    BryanVa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2015
    Messages:
    451
    Likes Received:
    354
    Trophy Points:
    63
    No one believes what you just said—including you.
     
  14. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    41,184
    Likes Received:
    16,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
  15. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    41,184
    Likes Received:
    16,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Impulses that last a week aren't impulses, they're plans
     
  16. Thingamabob

    Thingamabob Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2017
    Messages:
    14,267
    Likes Received:
    4,465
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I am happy to see that you have reverted to fair "notice" tactics but you are wrong in your statement. If you were right you would have addressed the elephant in the room. But no. You side-stepped it in your last post and now you've laid another level of earth over it in order to bury it. Well? Would you care to make good on your highly anticipated promise/threat on the causes of gun violence in the U.S.? You seem to have lost all steam hence my conclusion.
     
  17. Thingamabob

    Thingamabob Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2017
    Messages:
    14,267
    Likes Received:
    4,465
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Lack of strength, resolve, courage, pre-meditation.
     
  18. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
  19. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,644
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Based upon what constitutional authority?
     
  20. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What is the precise duration of time for something to be classified as an impulse?

    How was it determined the impulse coincides precisely with the time of purchasing a firearm, but does not occur either before the purchase, or after the purchase?
     
  21. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The causes are nothing more than the individuals themselves. There are no faults that can be blamed and addressed through legislative actions and/or activities, as it ultimately boils down to the individual who decides to use a firearm for the purpose of harming others. Just as how some individuals will operate a motor vehicle in a responsible manner while others will deliberately plow into a crowd of pedestrians.
     
  22. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And yet none of these factors are supposedly present during the moment the individual is actually purchasing their firearm, as this is apparently believed to be the precise moment in time where their impulse to go out and murder is at its strongest and most irresistible moment of existence. A moment that is supposedly so strong it lasts ten full days after the purchase, yet disappears on the eleventh day and never comes into existence again, unless the individual decides to purchase another firearm.
     
  23. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    41,184
    Likes Received:
    16,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    [
    merriam webster says an impulse is:

    "1.
    a sudden strong and unreflective urge or desire to act."

    So the time period would vary depending on how long it takes one to "reflect" on something, and on how strong the urge or desire is, which would interfere with one's thinking processes.

    7 days should be more than enough for anyone to err on the side of caution.

    The purchase is the only overt act we have to make the determination, so we must measure any time from it.
     
  24. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    41,184
    Likes Received:
    16,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The methodology and results of the study were clear, you should direct any criticisms to that
     
  25. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You posted the BS article without checking the background of the authors, therefore I am directing it to you.
     

Share This Page