Darkness

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Well don't expect me or anyone to provide any simple solutions, and I know this, but as with so many other beliefs, if one is so tied to them and no possibility of change is even contemplated then no such will ever occur. Perhaps admitting that the foundation of the USA was not on firm rock might be a start - so as to amend the constitution and start reeling in the weapons more suited to warfare than personal protection. Other countries must have similarly gone through such processes.

Neither am I in fear of my life, like so many others in countries where such weapons are not common, and I am less likely to be killed by a toddler getting hold of such a weapon, or seeing a child killing another, or a child shooting a teacher, or some nut killing some innocents as expressions of their anger, or all the rest.

Perhaps you just can't envisage a more peaceful society - without all these deaths?

Why would criminals not use guns if we banned them.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Why would criminals not use guns if we banned them.

They probably would, as in many other countries, and which is often what we must suffer as to crime being inevitable. Crime will always go on, but many societies have shown that guns are excessive as to being protection when they also tend to cause so much more in the way of injuries or deaths. Apparently so many in the USA can put up with these deaths - or otherwise they might decide change was necessary.

 

[Audie]

They probably would, as in many other countries, and which is often what we must suffer as to crime being inevitable. Crime will always go on, but many societies have shown that guns are excessive as to being protection when they also tend to cause so much more in the way of injuries or deaths. Apparently so many in the USA can put up with these deaths - or otherwise they might decide change was necessary.

Don't suppose you ever seriously
examine your own beliefs.

 

[wellwisher]

You really think the USA is somehow different from all the other countries that feel no such requirement? Granted that the USA did perhaps have a longer period of such necessity than some others - but the way forward is rather obvious to many looking in to the USA rather than being there, even if such views are often not welcome. It will hardly be easy to wean the population off personal protection and all the other weapons available but do you really want to live with the constant deaths from such weapons?

The taboo of legal guns is driven by a media illusion. It is similar to when an Airliner crashes. The hype will give one the impression airliner crashes are so common, we need to constantly, look up. If you ignore the media, it is not as scary, since common sense comes back.

Most deaths by guns in the US are connected to criminals. Chicago has already had 45 shooting deaths this year, during the slowest killer season; winter. That is only one Democrat run city. This stat is not pushed forward by the Left. They will instead fixate on the solo shooter, who goes on a rampage, as though all law abiding citizens with guns, are ticking time bombs. The total of all the mass shooting for the entire US, so far in 2023, is 13. One Democrat city already has 4X, but this is not the center of fake news attention when they discuss guns. Assume a scam! Are there any scientists who can compare the numbers to see where we need to address, first? Scientist who discuss evolution make clear the differences between science; facts, and religion; imagination that is not in line with the hard facts.

The real underlying and hidden problem in the USA is we have too many lawyers. Defense lawyers contribute 90% of their campaign donations to the Democrat party. What is the quid pro quo? The paid job of Democrat politicians is to make more laws and more scapegoats, so there are more jobs for defense lawyers.

Guns are the holy grail of their lawyer job creation goal, since tens of millions of otherwise innocent people can be defined as criminals, over night. Sin is not imputed until a law appears. The sinless today will become sinners, overnight, by the laws Democrat politicians hope to push, if they can con public opinion with propaganda. This will create hundred of thousand of defense lawyer jobs, where innocent people, now said to be criminals, will feel happy giving their hard earned money to lawyers, so they can become free again; clear their records.

This law will not impact criminals getting guns, since the black market will continue to import and sell anything that is illegal an has demand. The criminals with guns; Chicago, who are ignored by Left wing media propaganda, will be protected, since they are already making money for defense lawyers. You will not hear the leaders on the Left, give their plan to eliminate criminals with guns, since they have already tried this in Chicago, and it was not very effective. It did not end criminal gun violence. We can assume it will get worse and not better, when all guns are in the black market.

Name me one prohibited thing, with demand, that is now less plentiful on the black market? The open border policy of the Left, will help with gun smuggling lie it now does with the illegal and taboo fentanyl. The boneheads must know making guns taboo will add tax free profit to the black market, and add to the criminals violence with even more guns. But they will do it anyway, since they relate better to the criminals, and do not want victims able to fight back.

Victims fighting back, cut into defense lawyer profits ask they job number goals. The Left recently created more lawyer jobs, via the new Left wing Big City revolving door justice system. Revolving door means same people, more often, needing a lawyer. This is the dirty secret.

I do not own guns, but I have fired hand guns, rifles and shotguns. It can be fun if you know gun safety. Maybe we need to teach gun safety in schools, like we teach sex education, so the students are better prepared and can better deal with reality of our rights and their pitfalls. Or will teaching guns, cause bad things to happen more often, like sex education and the increases in STD's and pregnancy? A school gun safety program will be a good litmus test to see extra knowledge of all the facts is counter productive, or useful, like with sex education and providing props for sex. Maybe students can borrow guns to practice and learn. It is less scary if you understand with experience.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

They probably would, as in many other countries, and which is often what we must suffer as to crime being inevitable. Crime will always go on, but many societies have shown that guns are excessive as to being protection when they also tend to cause so much more in the way of injuries or deaths. Apparently so many in the USA can put up with these deaths - or otherwise they might decide change was necessary.

Then you are ok with criminals having guns and non criminals being defenseless. You sound like a politician that says I don't want you to have a gun to protect yourself as they have armed security guards protecting them such as Newsome.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Then you are ok with criminals having guns and non criminals being defenseless. You sound like a politician that says I don't want you to have a gun to protect yourself as they have armed security guards protecting them such as Newsome.

Of course I'm not OK with this, but criminal activity is inherent in all societies - with some able to get hold of weapons easier than others. You fail to associate the ready availability of weapons and the criminal use of them - given that the easier it is to obtain weapons, and the abundance of them also, will mean that many more will fall into the wrong hands. Countries that have strict regulation of weapons - usually for sport or countryside matters - will have a better chance of controlling the numbers in criminal hands at least - and few of these will be the types of weapons commonly found in the USA.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Don't suppose you ever seriously
examine your own beliefs.

Perhaps as much as those who have fixed views on things? The evidence as to so many weapons being available tends to show that more deaths will occur - whether by accident or intent.

 

[Mock Turtle]

The taboo of legal guns is driven by a media illusion. It is similar to when an Airliner crashes. The hype will give one the impression airliner crashes are so common, we need to constantly, look up. If you ignore the media, it is not as scary, since common sense comes back.

Most deaths by guns in the US are connected to criminals. Chicago has already had 45 shooting deaths this year, during the slowest killer season; winter. That is only one Democrat run city. This stat is not pushed forward by the Left. They will instead fixate on the solo shooter, who goes on a rampage, as though all law abiding citizens with guns, are ticking time bombs. The total of all the mass shooting for the entire US, so far in 2023, is 13. One Democrat city already has 4X, but this is not the center of fake news attention when they discuss guns. Assume a scam! Are there any scientists who can compare the numbers to see where we need to address, first? Scientist who discuss evolution make clear the differences between science; facts, and religion; imagination that is not in line with the hard facts.

The real underlying and hidden problem in the USA is we have too many lawyers. Defense lawyers contribute 90% of their campaign donations to the Democrat party. What is the quid pro quo? The paid job of Democrat politicians is to make more laws and more scapegoats, so there are more jobs for defense lawyers.

Guns are the holy grail of their lawyer job creation goal, since tens of millions of otherwise innocent people can be defined as criminals, over night. Sin is not imputed until a law appears. The sinless today will become sinners, overnight, by the laws Democrat politicians hope to push, if they can con public opinion with propaganda. This will create hundred of thousand of defense lawyer jobs, where innocent people, now said to be criminals, will feel happy giving their hard earned money to lawyers, so they can become free again; clear their records.

This law will not impact criminals getting guns, since the black market will continue to import and sell anything that is illegal an has demand. The criminals with guns; Chicago, who are ignored by Left wing media propaganda, will be protected, since they are already making money for defense lawyers. You will not hear the leaders on the Left, give their plan to eliminate criminals with guns, since they have already tried this in Chicago, and it was not very effective. It did not end criminal gun violence. We can assume it will get worse and not better, when all guns are in the black market.

Name me one prohibited thing, with demand, that is now less plentiful on the black market? The open border policy of the Left, will help with gun smuggling lie it now does with the illegal and taboo fentanyl. The boneheads must know making guns taboo will add tax free profit to the black market, and add to the criminals violence with even more guns. But they will do it anyway, since they relate better to the criminals, and do not want victims able to fight back.

Victims fighting back, cut into defense lawyer profits ask they job number goals. The Left recently created more lawyer jobs, via the new Left wing Big City revolving door justice system. Revolving door means same people, more often, needing a lawyer. This is the dirty secret.

I do not own guns, but I have fired hand guns, rifles and shotguns. It can be fun if you know gun safety. Maybe we need to teach gun safety in schools, like we teach sex education, so the students are better prepared and can better deal with reality of our rights and their pitfalls. Or will teaching guns, cause bad things to happen more often, like sex education and the increases in STD's and pregnancy? A school gun safety program will be a good litmus test to see extra knowledge of all the facts is counter productive, or useful, like with sex education and providing props for sex. Maybe students can borrow guns to practice and learn. It is less scary if you understand with experience.

The fact is that there are plenty within the USA who do not like the easy availability of weapons, and who might wish to follow the example of so many other countries where they have been severely restricted. I suspect it will take a very long time, if at all, for the USA to change, given the country does tend to be more right-wing than so many others - and security plus control and views on justice tend to reflect this.

I don't expect things to change but I and many who live outside of the USA are just as likely to be correct in our beliefs as to this as those within the USA, and it is not down to the left-wing who might be the ones voicing such views, but merely common sense - if one looked at the nations where strict gun control is the norm and where they are quite happy with such. I would bet that few in such countries would ever vote for more weapons to be made available - apart from some obvious groupings.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Of course I'm not OK with this, but criminal activity is inherent in all societies - with some able to get hold of weapons easier than others. You fail to associate the ready availability of weapons and the criminal use of them - given that the easier it is to obtain weapons, and the abundance of them also, will mean that many more will fall into the wrong hands. Countries that have strict regulation of weapons - usually for sport or countryside matters - will have a better chance of controlling the numbers in criminal hands at least - and few of these will be the types of weapons commonly found in the USA.

You are playing a numbers game, I want to protect my family. What is the plan to get rid of the 400+ million guns in the US? How will criminals have less access to them?

 

[Mock Turtle]

You are playing a numbers game, I want to protect my family. What is the plan to get rid of the 400+ million guns in the US? How will criminals have less access to them?

As I replied to another, I don't expect the USA to change at all - not while I'm alive or for many decades - but I'm suggesting (as are so many others) what the USA would need to do if they were serious about reducing the numbers of deaths from such weapons. But by owning a weapon for self-protection - which is understandable - you are hereby making this change less likely. I've no idea what might enable a shift of opinion.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

As I replied to another, I don't expect the USA to change at all - not while I'm alive or for many decades - but I'm suggesting (as are so many others) what the USA would need to do if they were serious about reducing the numbers of deaths from such weapons. But by owning a weapon for self-protection - which is understandable - you are hereby making this change less likely. I've no idea what might enable a shift of opinion.

I don't see how I am making a change less likely. How does my having a gun in a locked safe at my house change anything about the gun violence in the US?

 

[Mock Turtle]

I don't see how I am making a change less likely. How does my having a gun in a locked safe at my house change anything about the gun violence in the US?

Just the ownership does so surely, unless you will vote for changes if such became a possibility. Plenty would no doubt see your usage of any weapons as not being that safe anyway - as to your protection - unless you do carry it outside. And where then it becomes liable to use by some other person perhaps. Some criminals are not that obvious as to their intent until it is too late. Hence why the protection argument for their use isn't all that it appears to be.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Just the ownership does so surely, unless you will vote for changes if such became a possibility. Plenty would no doubt see your usage of any weapons as not being that safe anyway - as to your protection - unless you do carry it outside. And where then it becomes liable to use by some other person perhaps. Some criminals are not that obvious as to their intent until it is too late. Hence why the protection argument for their use isn't all that it appears to be.

Just me owning a gun increases gun violence is nonsensical.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Just me owning a gun increases gun violence is nonsensical.

If you say so.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

If you say so.

You have provided no evidence that it does.

 

[Mock Turtle]

You have provided no evidence that it does.

You have provided no evidence that your gun will not be used by someone else, unless it is permanently locked up, and you can guarantee someone will not threaten you enough so as they might take possession of it. No gun, no such scenario.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

You have provided no evidence that your gun will not be used by someone else, unless it is permanently locked up, and you can guarantee someone will not threaten you enough so as they might take possession of it. No gun, no such scenario.

That is a risk I am willing to take. Conversely you cannot guarantee that I will never need the gun.

 

[Mock Turtle]

That is a risk I am willing to take. Conversely you cannot guarantee that I will never need the gun.

But you were pointing out that your gun ownership couldn't contribute to crime. Much like the mother of the six-year-old who apparently took his mother's gun and fired it at his teacher. Various scenarios tend to open up when someone has such weapons.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

But you were pointing out that your gun ownership couldn't contribute to crime. Much like the mother of the six-year-old who apparently took his mother's gun and fired it at his teacher. Various scenarios tend to open up when someone has such weapons.

I cannot prove that my car or knife set will contribute to crime either. Should I get rid of those as well? Do you have knives or a car that can potentially be used in a crime. If someone uses something I own in a crime without my permission I am not at fault, they are.

 

[Mock Turtle]

I cannot prove that my car or knife set will contribute to crime either. Should I get rid of those as well? Do you have knives or a car that can potentially be used in a crime. If someone uses something I own in a crime without my permission I am not at fault, they are.

Back to the same old argument - as I mentioned before - that guns have no other purpose but to injure or kill. All the other things could be used for crime too but have other main aims as to their use, so this is just a 'whataboutism' fallacy. And also as mentioned before, they seem to be an addition to societies (perhaps pointless) which so many other similar societies feel no need to allow.