Have the Americans accepted that gun crime is a price worth paying to be able to hold arms?

[chikenwing]

On Air Now in the UK!

Have the Americans accepted that gun crime is a price worth paying to be able to hold arms?
Join the conversation:
Call: 0345 60 60 973 | Text: 84850

Tweet: @lbc | Email the studio



AUDIO
LBC Radio - Leading Britain's Conversation | DAB Digital Radio And 97.3FM

Violent crime has been steadily going down. Removeing freedoms for a false sense of security is a looser.

 

[BULLDOG]

You're just trying to change the subject and dodge the question. Why do we have more deaths here than in any other first world country?

One word:
Demographics

Care to explain further?

Sure.
Look at VT. No state or local level gun control. Virtually no gun-related crime - per capita, lower than almost all of Europe.
Look at CA. Draconian state and local level gun control gun control. Rampant gun related crime, significantly higher than the US averages.
See:
"Reasonable" gun control vs "gun nut gun control" | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Why the difference?

Don't dodge the question. Laws and demographics are not the same thing. Please explain what demographics have to do with it.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You're just trying to change the subject and dodge the question. Why do we have more deaths here than in any other first world country?

One word:
Demographics

Care to explain further?

Sure.
Look at VT. No state or local level gun control. Virtually no gun-related crime - per capita, lower than almost all of Europe.
Look at CA. Draconian state and local level gun control gun control. Rampant gun related crime, significantly higher than the US averages.
See:
"Reasonable" gun control vs "gun nut gun control" | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Why the difference?

Don't dodge the question. Laws and demographics are not the same thing. Please explain what demographics have to do with it.

Dodge the question?
You asked if I cared to explain my response.. I cared to do so, and did.
So... why the difference in crime between CA and VT?

 

[BULLDOG]

You're just trying to change the subject and dodge the question. Why do we have more deaths here than in any other first world country?

One word:
Demographics

Care to explain further?

Sure.
Look at VT. No state or local level gun control. Virtually no gun-related crime - per capita, lower than almost all of Europe.
Look at CA. Draconian state and local level gun control gun control. Rampant gun related crime, significantly higher than the US averages.
See:
"Reasonable" gun control vs "gun nut gun control" | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Why the difference?

Don't dodge the question. Laws and demographics are not the same thing. Please explain what demographics have to do with it.

Dodge the question?
You asked if I cared to explain my response.. I cared to do so, and did.
So... why the difference in crime between CA and VT?

No you didn't. Explain your claim that demographics is the difference between our gun deaths and the gun deaths of other countries. Laws and demographics aren't the same thing.

 

[M14 Shooter]

One word:
Demographics

Care to explain further?

Sure.
Look at VT. No state or local level gun control. Virtually no gun-related crime - per capita, lower than almost all of Europe.
Look at CA. Draconian state and local level gun control gun control. Rampant gun related crime, significantly higher than the US averages.
See:
"Reasonable" gun control vs "gun nut gun control" | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Why the difference?

Don't dodge the question. Laws and demographics are not the same thing. Please explain what demographics have to do with it.

Dodge the question?
You asked if I cared to explain my response.. I cared to do so, and did.
So... why the difference in crime between CA and VT?

No you didn't.

I most certainly did explain my response, as you asked.
You have been led to water; you refuse to drink.

 

[BULLDOG]

Care to explain further?

Sure.
Look at VT. No state or local level gun control. Virtually no gun-related crime - per capita, lower than almost all of Europe.
Look at CA. Draconian state and local level gun control gun control. Rampant gun related crime, significantly higher than the US averages.
See:
"Reasonable" gun control vs "gun nut gun control" | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Why the difference?

Don't dodge the question. Laws and demographics are not the same thing. Please explain what demographics have to do with it.

Dodge the question?
You asked if I cared to explain my response.. I cared to do so, and did.
So... why the difference in crime between CA and VT?

No you didn't.

I most certainly did explain my response, as you asked.
You have been led to water; you refuse to drink.

If you say so,but laws and demographics still are not the same thing.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Sure.
Look at VT. No state or local level gun control. Virtually no gun-related crime - per capita, lower than almost all of Europe.
Look at CA. Draconian state and local level gun control gun control. Rampant gun related crime, significantly higher than the US averages.
See:
"Reasonable" gun control vs "gun nut gun control" | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Why the difference?

Don't dodge the question. Laws and demographics are not the same thing. Please explain what demographics have to do with it.

Dodge the question?
You asked if I cared to explain my response.. I cared to do so, and did.
So... why the difference in crime between CA and VT?

No you didn't.

I most certainly did explain my response, as you asked.
You have been led to water; you refuse to drink.

If you say so,but laws and demographics still are not the same thing.

I do not understand why you refuse to understand the point made here.
Why is there virtually no gun crime in a state that has no gun control laws?

 

[mgh80]

When dealing with freedoms there's always a sense of "safety" or "security"...I personally agree with Benjamin Franklin that "Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one."

 

[IsaacNewton]

"Have the Americans accepted that gun crime is a price worth paying to be able to hold arms?"

Loaded question fallacy.

This is a mental health issue, not a 'gun' issue, having nothing to do with gun control, gun laws, or the Second Amendment.

There are two fundamental elements in play with this and other like incidents: the unwillingness or inability of Americans to implement comprehensive mental health programs and policies, and the inherently violent nature of American society, where violence is perceived as a legitimate means of conflict resolution.

Second Amendment jurisprudence in no way 'facilitates' gun violence, it concerns solely safeguarding the right to possess a firearm pursuant to the right of self-defense from unwarranted government regulation and interference – and rightfully so given the wrongheaded notion that crimes such as that which occurred in Oregon are the result of 'too many guns' that are 'too easily' acquired.

The resolution to this problem will be realized through the political – not legal – process, where the American people must insist in the funding and implementation of comprehensive mental health programs and policies and address the violent nature of American society.

The American people lost the ability to defend against their own government 100 years ago. This fantasy that being armed with a semi-auto rifle will give us the ability to fight our own military if necessary is just childish nonsense. As soon as a platoon of A1 Abrams tanks rolls into town the fight is over. Not to mention the helos, jets, missiles, intel, satellites, aircraft carriers, and thermo-nuclear bombs.

Anyone who thinks we have a right to bear arms to 'protect our liberties' is living in lala land. That shite ended long ago.

All this idea now is, is a way to feel warm and fuzzy and 'like our forefathers who yada yada'... It is a falsehood.

 

[mgh80]

"Have the Americans accepted that gun crime is a price worth paying to be able to hold arms?"

Loaded question fallacy.

This is a mental health issue, not a 'gun' issue, having nothing to do with gun control, gun laws, or the Second Amendment.

There are two fundamental elements in play with this and other like incidents: the unwillingness or inability of Americans to implement comprehensive mental health programs and policies, and the inherently violent nature of American society, where violence is perceived as a legitimate means of conflict resolution.

Second Amendment jurisprudence in no way 'facilitates' gun violence, it concerns solely safeguarding the right to possess a firearm pursuant to the right of self-defense from unwarranted government regulation and interference – and rightfully so given the wrongheaded notion that crimes such as that which occurred in Oregon are the result of 'too many guns' that are 'too easily' acquired.

The resolution to this problem will be realized through the political – not legal – process, where the American people must insist in the funding and implementation of comprehensive mental health programs and policies and address the violent nature of American society.

The American people lost the ability to defend against their own government 100 years ago. This fantasy that being armed with a semi-auto rifle will give us the ability to fight our own military if necessary is just childish nonsense. As soon as a platoon of A1 Abrams tanks rolls into town the fight is over. Not to mention the helos, jets, missiles, intel, satellites, aircraft carriers, and thermo-nuclear bombs.

Anyone who thinks we have a right to bear arms to 'protect our liberties' is living in lala land. That shite ended long ago.

All this idea now is, is a way to feel warm and fuzzy and 'like our forefathers who yada yada'... It is a falsehood.

Out of curiosity, I'm in my 30s, never been arrested/convicted of a crime, zero mental health issues, why should I not be able to purchase a firearm to protect myself and my family?

 

[IsaacNewton]

"Have the Americans accepted that gun crime is a price worth paying to be able to hold arms?"

Loaded question fallacy.

This is a mental health issue, not a 'gun' issue, having nothing to do with gun control, gun laws, or the Second Amendment.

There are two fundamental elements in play with this and other like incidents: the unwillingness or inability of Americans to implement comprehensive mental health programs and policies, and the inherently violent nature of American society, where violence is perceived as a legitimate means of conflict resolution.

Second Amendment jurisprudence in no way 'facilitates' gun violence, it concerns solely safeguarding the right to possess a firearm pursuant to the right of self-defense from unwarranted government regulation and interference – and rightfully so given the wrongheaded notion that crimes such as that which occurred in Oregon are the result of 'too many guns' that are 'too easily' acquired.

The resolution to this problem will be realized through the political – not legal – process, where the American people must insist in the funding and implementation of comprehensive mental health programs and policies and address the violent nature of American society.

The American people lost the ability to defend against their own government 100 years ago. This fantasy that being armed with a semi-auto rifle will give us the ability to fight our own military if necessary is just childish nonsense. As soon as a platoon of A1 Abrams tanks rolls into town the fight is over. Not to mention the helos, jets, missiles, intel, satellites, aircraft carriers, and thermo-nuclear bombs.

Anyone who thinks we have a right to bear arms to 'protect our liberties' is living in lala land. That shite ended long ago.

All this idea now is, is a way to feel warm and fuzzy and 'like our forefathers who yada yada'... It is a falsehood.

Out of curiosity, I'm in my 30s, never been arrested/convicted of a crime, zero mental health issues, why should I not be able to purchase a firearm to protect myself and my family?

Why do you assume I am against all gun ownership? Its a meme, let it go.

I think well regulated gun sales are warranted. Most current gun owners support rigid background checks, this seems sane to 80-90% of the population. Cars are licensed, every person has a number in the form of an SS number, the rules for operating an aircraft are very strict. Guns simply need to be treated like everything else in the society. Regulate and use current technology to embed a chip in each one so it can be identified if used in a crime, or even remotely disabled.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Cars are licensed

Driving a car on public property is a privilege, not a right.

every person has a number in the form of an SS number

Not a Constitutional issue.

the rules for operating an aircraft are very strict

Flying aircraft is a privilege, not a right.

Guns simply need to be treated like everything else in the society.

Unconstitutional.

Regulate and use current technology to embed a chip in each one so it can be identified if used in a crime, or even remotely disabled.

Unconstitutional.

 

[Geaux4it]

I always call it acceptable risk. Odds are very small that anyone you know will be harmed or killed by a firearm

-Geaux

 

[IsaacNewton]

Cars are licensed

Driving a car on public property is a privilege, not a right.

every person has a number in the form of an SS number

Not a Constitutional issue.

the rules for operating an aircraft are very strict

Flying aircraft is a privilege, not a right.

Guns simply need to be treated like everything else in the society.

Unconstitutional.

Regulate and use current technology to embed a chip in each one so it can be identified if used in a crime, or even remotely disabled.

Unconstitutional.

Yes we know you will lick your gun regardless, no reason for you to attempt discussion. Thanks for playing.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Cars are licensed

Driving a car on public property is a privilege, not a right.

every person has a number in the form of an SS number

Not a Constitutional issue.

the rules for operating an aircraft are very strict

Flying aircraft is a privilege, not a right.

Guns simply need to be treated like everything else in the society.

Unconstitutional.

Regulate and use current technology to embed a chip in each one so it can be identified if used in a crime, or even remotely disabled.

Unconstitutional.

Yes we know you will lick your gun regardless, no reason for you to attempt discussion. Thanks for playing.

Silly lad. Any discussion is moot. Consider the last twenty years of gun control history in America.

You people have been decisively defeated.

 

[Katzndogz]

Have you accepted that fatal car accidents is the price you pay to drive?

 

[BULLDOG]

Have you accepted that fatal car accidents is the price you pay to drive?

Are you saying that the efforts we take to prevent or at least reduce fatal accidents are not worthwhile?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Other countries have guns but don't have anywhere near the killings as in the US.

I believe there are some who actually want to arm terrorists, illegals, criminals and crazies. Why else would they support the NRA who openly fights keeping guns from those people. The NRA literally fights to arm terrorists, illegals, criminals and crazies.

Gun nutters know this.

Edited to ask - Why does the lobby (NRA) for gun manufacturers want to arm those groups? And why do RWNJs agree and financially support it?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Have you accepted that fatal car accidents is the price you pay to drive?

Are you saying that the efforts we take to prevent or at least reduce fatal accidents are not worthwhile?

What efforts do you refer to?

 

[BULLDOG]

Have you accepted that fatal car accidents is the price you pay to drive?

Are you saying that the efforts we take to prevent or at least reduce fatal accidents are not worthwhile?

What efforts do you refer to?

Google "efforts to reduce fatal auto accidents" you will find a long list of requirements for car design, and operation, as well as design of roads, signage, and a host of other things. There is constant research funded by most governments, all car manufacturers, and many independent research facilities, all specifically focused on reduction of fatal auto accidents