Let's talk about guns. . . . . .

Jonnybgood35

Well-Known Member
I read it. I'm asking a follow up question. If successful will your "not a plan" plan reduce the gun homicide rate to that of Canada's? Show analysis please.

You told me that I needed to tell you what I am for. I am for the US gun homicide rate to drop from 4.7 per hundred thousand to 0.72 per hundred thousand. It would save 12,000 lives every year. Is there something wrong with asking why we can't have that?

I don't own a gun, so I'm not part of the problem. Gun owners complain about anybody even talking about this issue by accusing people who see value people's lives of wanting to take away their guns. They jump to some authoritarian fantasy about "take mah gunz apocalypse" as if that's the ask. It is not. Canadians can have guns too. They are just regulated better.

I'm not trying to troll or be an asshole to you either. This is a real issue in the US. To put it in a provocative way (but not directed at you), gun owners are telling the families of the 12,000 people killed by gun homicide each year that their loved one's life was not worth trying to change our gun regulations.
I already told you, I am not in charge, I don’t have a solution to offer to violence in America and neither do you. Gun homicides are no different that other homicides. You have to recognize that we are culturally and geographically distinct from our neighbors to the north. Death is a part of life. Is it tragic to lose someone to violence? Yes, but it has been happening since before the dawn of man. I’d be a fool to try to offer a solution to that. I do like discussing this with you but I wish you would stop acting like I’m saying I have all the answers. I have repeatedly said I don’t. My position is simple: if you make a large population of armed but law abiding citizens outlaws with the stroke of a pen then, the death toll is sure to rise.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
I already told you, I am not in charge, I don’t have a solution to offer to violence in America and neither do you. Gun homicides are no different that other homicides. You have to recognize that we are culturally and geographically distinct from our neighbors to the north. Death is a part of life. Is it tragic to lose someone to violence? Yes, but it has been happening since before the dawn of man. I’d be a fool to try to offer a solution to that. I do like discussing this with you but I wish you would stop acting like I’m saying I have all the answers. I have repeatedly said I don’t. My position is simple: if you make a large population of armed but law abiding citizens outlaws with the stroke of a pen then, the death toll is sure to rise.
Almost all homicides ARE by gun. I just showed you the numbers.

Out of 19,000 homicides, 14,000 of them were by gun. So, yeah, dead is dead. By reducing the rate of gun homicides to that of Canada's, 12,000 fewer would die each year. In ten years, more than 120,000 lives saved. Is that too much to ask?

Are the telling me that I have to simply accept it? That the problem is too large to fix?
 

Jonnybgood35

Well-Known Member
Almost all homicides ARE by gun. I just showed you the numbers.

Out of 19,000 homicides, 14,000 of them were by gun. So, yeah, dead is dead. By reducing the rate of gun homicides to that of Canada's, 12,000 fewer would die each year. In ten years, more than 120,000 lives saved. Is that too much to ask?

Are the telling me that I have to simply accept it? That the problem is too large to fix?
If you count homicides in Canada vs homicides in the us we have 3x the homicides not 6x. That shows killers will find a way to accomplish their goal with or without a gun. That is quite the difference. I accept reality for what it is. I protect myself and my family. I don’t live in a place where I can wait for the cops to come so I shoot and train once every month or so. If you can’t accept reality feel free to try to change your circumstances. Sounds like you really like canada. Maybe you would be happier there but as our forefathers said: don’t tread on me. Meaning I won’t restrict your rights don’t restrict mine. That shit will not fly in America. Trying would result in violence.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
If you count homicides in Canada vs homicides in the us we have 3x the homicides not 6x. That shows killers will find a way to accomplish their goal with or without a gun. That is quite the difference. I accept reality for what it is. I protect myself and my family. I don’t live in a place where I can wait for the cops to come so I shoot and train once every month or so. If you can’t accept reality feel free to try to change your circumstances. Sounds like you really like canada. Maybe you would be happier there but as our forefathers said: don’t tread on me. Meaning I won’t restrict your rights don’t restrict mine. That shit will not fly in America. Trying would result in violence.
Cut it however you like. There were 651 homicides in Canada in 2018, rate was 1.76 per 100,000, There were 16,000 homicides in the US, rate was 4.96 per 100,000. I agree that some murders in the US would still happen, so, OK. Let's say US had same as Canada or 328 million x (1.76/100,000) = 6,000 per year. That cuts my request from saving 12,000 lives to saving 10,000 lives.

What changes would you be willing to accept in order to meet the goal of saving 10,000 lives each year?
 

Jonnybgood35

Well-Known Member
Cut it however you like. There were 651 homicides in Canada in 2018, rate was 1.76 per 100,000, There were 16,000 homicides in the US, rate was 4.96 per 100,000. I agree that some murders in the US would still happen, so, OK. Let's say US had same as Canada or 328 million x (1.76/100,000) = 6,000 per year. That cuts my request from saving 12,000 lives to saving 10,000 lives.

What changes would you be willing to accept in order to meet the goal of saving 10,000 lives each year?
I’d love to see some change in the mental health system to be more accessible to people who need it. I’d love to see gang related deaths not counted, if you are playing the game you’ve got to accept the consequences, even death. What I don’t accept is any adjustment to the Second Amendment without a two thirds majority as outlined in the Constitution. Thankfully it doesn’t matter what either of us wants as an individual.

Ps. I live in one of the most heavily armed and SAFEST states in our country
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
I’d love to see some change in the mental health system to be more accessible to people who need it. I’d love to see gang related deaths not counted, if you are playing the game you’ve got to accept the consequences, even death. What I don’t accept is any adjustment to the Second Amendment without a two thirds majority as outlined in the Constitution. Thankfully it doesn’t matter what either of us wants as an individual.

Ps. I live in one of the most heavily armed and SAFEST states in our country
We aren't talking about taking your guns away, so calm down.

How many gun related deaths would changing the mental health system prevent?

Now we get to the nub of the argument. Could be a bystander, could be the gang member. You just said their life is not worth the effort of finding answers to gun violence. So, discount the value of the lives of people who aren't like you. Is that really how you feel?

The 2A includes the clause "well regulated militia". It's not just right to bear arms. Just saying, the well regulated part doesn't seem to be happening much.
 

Jonnybgood35

Well-Known Member
We aren't talking about taking your guns away, so calm down.

How many gun related deaths would changing the mental health system prevent?

Now we get to the nub of the argument. Could be a bystander, could be the gang member. You just said their life is not worth the effort of finding answers to gun violence. So, discount the value of the lives of people who aren't like you. Is that really how you feel?

The 2A includes the clause "well regulated militia". It's not just right to bear arms. Just saying, the well regulated part doesn't seem to be happening much.
I haven’t discounted anyone’s lives. I just said if you join up with an organization that’s involved with violence you accept the consequences, just like if you join the army.
If you don’t want to take guns away then what is your solution? I’ve yet to hear that. Do you think homicidal people are generally sane? Maybe they need a little help. If you understand history you know that the militias were formed because of British overreach and lack of representation of interests of the citizenry by the government. The intention of that part you quoted of the second amendment was indeed to allow the citizens to form militias to fight the country’s army should the need ever arise. Militias form when they need to. They aren’t part of the government by definition. The intention of those words are clear to people who read the entire second amendment instead of cherry picking what part of the facts they want to present (a tendency I have noticed in you.) Things become more clear when reading the entire law and my view is supported by what legal scholars have to say about it and not a few Supreme Court decisions.
Ps. I’m calm, none of this bothers me because, your right, no one is taking my guns away. I think you’re projecting.
 

Budley Doright

Well-Known Member
Would a start be to require anyone who purchases a gun to take a mandatory 3-4 day course and those who don’t that are found in possession of a gun of any kind are charged with a felony. Make gun laws a federal jurisdiction and not state? Would this not be a start?
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
I haven’t discounted anyone’s lives. I just said if you join up with an organization that’s involved with violence you accept the consequences, just like if you join the army.
If you don’t want to take guns away then what is your solution? I’ve yet to hear that. Do you think homicidal people are generally sane? Maybe they need a little help. If you understand history you know that the militias were formed because of British overreach and lack of representation of interests of the citizenry by the government. The intention of that part you quoted of the second amendment was indeed to allow the citizens to form militias to fight the country’s army should the need ever arise. Militias form when they need to. They aren’t part of the government by definition. The intention of those words are clear to people who read the entire second amendment instead of cherry picking what part of the facts they want to present (a tendency I have noticed in you.) Things become more clear when reading the entire law and my view is supported by what legal scholars have to say about it and not a few Supreme Court decisions.
Ps. I’m calm, none of this bothers me because, your right, no one is taking my guns away. I think you’re projecting.
You keep asking what I want and then reject it as being too onerous. What I want is the same low rate of gun homicides that Canada has. I want gun owners to take responsibility for solving this issue. You don't want me, a non-gun owner to implement solutions. You guys need to take ownership for reducing the harm caused by the weapons you love. Fix it. Instead, gun owners through their lobby, the Russian financed NRA blocks attempts by the NIH to even study how best to reduce deaths by fire arms.

Another example of the careless attitude towards life that many (not all) gun owners have is how they store their weapons. Most don't follow even the NRA's guidelines for safely storing those killing machines. Half of all gun owners store them loaded and in an unlocked drawer or cabinet. As a result, every year, kids are killed or injured in unintentional shootings.

Guns used in gang shootings are obtained through a very healthy black market. So, how about setting about to eliminate or greatly reduce that black market? In any case, joining a gang isn't a capitol offense. You might, but society can't write off a kid just because they joined a gang.

I don't understand why you expect me to fix all of this when I don't feel the same need you have to own one of them.
 

Jonnybgood35

Well-Known Member
You keep asking what I want and then reject it as being too onerous. What I want is the same low rate of gun homicides that Canada has. I want gun owners to take responsibility for solving this issue. You don't want me, a non-gun owner to implement solutions. You guys need to take ownership for reducing the harm caused by the weapons you love. Fix it. Instead, gun owners through their lobby, the Russian financed NRA blocks attempts by the NIH to even study how best to reduce deaths by fire arms.

Another example of the careless attitude towards life that many (not all) gun owners have is how they store their weapons. Most don't follow even the NRA's guidelines for safely storing those killing machines. Half of all gun owners store them loaded and in an unlocked drawer or cabinet. As a result, every year, kids are killed or injured in unintentional shootings.

Guns used in gang shootings are obtained through a very healthy black market. So, how about setting about to eliminate or greatly reduce that black market? In any case, joining a gang isn't a capitol offense. You might, but society can't write off a kid just because they joined a gang.

I don't understand why you expect me to fix all of this when I don't feel the same need you have to own one of them.
I’ll do my part and not shoot anyone who isn’t a threat to the safety of my family and practice gun safety, as I have been for years. Realize that the responsibility for these killings is on the killers not the tool. I’m a gun owner and I have never killed anyone. That’s my solution be a responsible example. My actions affect me and those around me. It’s called personal responsibility. You want a solution to the evils of the world ask god or government whoever you put your faith in. I accept reality and prepare for most possibilities.

I’m not writing anyone off just saying that people have a responsibility for their choices. If you join a drug gang you are likely to end up shot or in jail. If you don’t defend yourself you are at the mercy of any ill intentioned person who does have a weapon. Those are choices people make. Thank god I’m allowed to choose too.
 
Last edited:

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
I’ll do my part and not shoot anyone who isn’t a threat to the safety of my family and practice gun safety, as I have been for years. Realize that the responsibility for these killings is on the killers not the tool. I’m a gun owner and I have never killed anyone. That’s my solution be a responsible example. My actions affect me and those around me. It’s called personal responsibility. You want a solution to the evils of the world ask god or government whoever you put your faith in. I accept reality and prepare for most possibilities.

I’m not writing anyone off just saying that people have a responsibility for their choices. If you join a drug gang you are likely to end up shot or in jail. If you don’t defend yourself you are at the mercy of any I’ll intentioned person who does have a weapon. Those are choices people make. Thank god I’m allowed to choose too.
So, then, gun owners don't take responsibility for the problems they cause.

I'll just start with the initial question. Is it too much to ask that the US have the same low rate of gun homicides that Canada has? Even adding in a fudge factor, 10,000 lives would be spared each year.
 

Jonnybgood35

Well-Known Member
So, then, gun owners don't take responsibility for the problems they cause.

I'll just start with the initial question. Is it too much to ask that the US have the same low rate of gun homicides that Canada has? Even adding in a fudge factor, 10,000 lives would be spared each year.
Gun owners are not some unified group. Just regular people. Do carpenters and fabricators take responsibility for hells angels killing people with ball peen hammers? Think about how ridiculous that would be to ask. It is a similar situation. I never claimed to have a solution to your problem. I tried to discuss some things I thought were reasonable which you quickly rejected or ignored.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Gun owners are not some unified group. Just regular people. Do carpenters and fabricators take responsibility for hells angels killing people with ball peen hammers? Think about how ridiculous that would be to ask. It is a similar situation. I never claimed to have a solution to your problem. I tried to discuss some things I thought were reasonable which you quickly rejected or ignored.
I don't buy guns and so am not part of the club.

So, I get it. Gun owners like the situation they caused. They aren't going to do anything about it (they, meaning "a lot of them, not all, maybe not even most"). The population of gun owners in the US is shrinking. In the 1970's, about half the households in the US owned a gun. As of a couple of years ago, that number was down to about 1/3 of all households owning a gun. Why is that important? Voters. A supermajority of households in the US don't own a gun. They don't feel the need for one. Public opinion supporting the existing system of gun regulations (a joke) has slid below 50%. The trends are against gun ownership. They are losing in the courts. The NRA is bankrupt and tarred with the scandal of being a lobbying group accepting foreign donations. Butina. It's a mess for you guys.

Eventually, the supermajority of non gun owners are going to demand from lawmakers what I'm asking gun owners to do. Get the rate of gun homicides down to the same as in other countries that are similar to ours. Not that I should be making the decisions but if gun owners won't then I care and will agitate for a solution that has shown to be effective. Canada has a similar economy and society to ours. I suggest we look at adopting their system of gun regulations. This isn't some take yer gunz thing, it's just a movement toward tracking the damn things, ensuring regular safety certifications are in place, SOME restrictions on weapons that can do serious mayhem, additional restrictions on hand guns and fairly harsh penalties for breaking these rational regulations.


The people in Canada don't seem to mind. The ones who post here are shocked at the carnage in the US. There is no way the gun owners in this country can stop a super majority if we decide to make it a priority. So, you and your kind ought to do something now. We will do what is necessary later if you don't.

Also, I think its time that we talk about that ugly lie about more guns making society safer. Clearly not true.
 

Jonnybgood35

Well-Known Member
I don't buy guns and so am not part of the club.

So, I get it. Gun owners like the situation they caused. They aren't going to do anything about it (they, meaning "a lot of them, not all, maybe not even most"). The population of gun owners in the US is shrinking. In the 1970's, about half the households in the US owned a gun. As of a couple of years ago, that number was down to about 1/3 of all households owning a gun. Why is that important? Voters. A supermajority of households in the US don't own a gun. They don't feel the need for one. Public opinion supporting the existing system of gun regulations (a joke) has slid below 50%. The trends are against gun ownership. They are losing in the courts. The NRA is bankrupt and tarred with the scandal of being a lobbying group accepting foreign donations. Butina. It's a mess for you guys.

Eventually, the supermajority of non gun owners are going to demand from lawmakers what I'm asking gun owners to do. Get the rate of gun homicides down to the same as in other countries that are similar to ours. Not that I should be making the decisions but if gun owners won't then I care and will agitate for a solution that has shown to be effective. Canada has a similar economy and society to ours. I suggest we look at adopting their system of gun regulations. This isn't some take yer gunz thing, it's just a movement toward tracking the damn things, ensuring regular safety certifications are in place, SOME restrictions on weapons that can do serious mayhem, additional restrictions on hand guns and fairly harsh penalties for breaking these rational regulations.


The people in Canada don't seem to mind. The ones who post here are shocked at the carnage in the US. There is no way the gun owners in this country can stop a super majority if we decide to make it a priority. So, you and your kind ought to do something now. We will do what is necessary later if you don't.

Also, I think its time that we talk about that ugly lie about more guns making society safer. Clearly not true.
Again I’m not in any club and I’m doing my part for your cause by not killing anyone who doesn’t threaten me. I live in a state that is top 5 guns per capita in the US and bottom 3 for violent crime. What was your argument about guns making society less safe? Can I just blame the people from LA, NYC, Detroit, and Chicago for driving up the murder rate? Just like you blame all gun owners. Is that fair? Somebody start looking into the dentists! I heard people were killing people with toothbrushes in prison. We’ve got to start tracking dental hygiene equipment!

Doesn’t take much to shock a Canadian they’re used to that low voltage hydro power. That’s a joke by the way.
 

Jonnybgood35

Well-Known Member
Let’s see some harsh regulations cause the real mayhem. Turn law abiding Americans into outlaws and see what happens. Keep thinking people will just hand over their pistols and ARs and AKs. I thank god I lost all mine in that tragic boating accident.

Your you people shit is getting tired too. People are just people there’s you, me and us. Not us and them. This is the problem you want to grow your pot just like I do. I respect that as your god given right even though it isnt entirely legally protected. Good luck doing something about it. Jerry said “Just don’t step on anybody’s head.” You should listen. Live and let live. I’ll do my thing and you do yours it’s that simple. Freedom or chains. Just don’t say I didn’t want these shackles when they put them on.
 
Last edited:
>
Top