Now, here's a surprise...

[Anonymous]

You must be new here.



I'm not going to argue with you if you are going to get your panties all in a knot over a bit of light sparring.  You clearly did completely miss my point, just as you missed it in the original post.  Economics should not trump public safety.  It doesn't in any other industry.  Why should it in this one?  People are so intent on gun ownership that they make enormous concessions to protect it that are not permitted in any other area of society.

Sparring? Arguing? Missed you point? Are you high too when you go trolling? The debate was going well until you showed up asshole.

Herman, I like you and delight in your contributions to our little community..



But, reel is the furthest person you could find from a troll..



He is respected by myself, RW, Shen Li and cc la femme..



I understand you got off on the wrong foot, but I wanted to clear up any confusion about reel before this went any further.

I will take your word for it. It's water under the bridge now.

[Anonymous]

You must be new here.



I'm not going to argue with you if you are going to get your panties all in a knot over a bit of light sparring.  You clearly did completely miss my point, just as you missed it in the original post.  Economics should not trump public safety.  It doesn't in any other industry.  Why should it in this one?  People are so intent on gun ownership that they make enormous concessions to protect it that are not permitted in any other area of society.

Sparring? Arguing? Missed you point? Are you high too when you go trolling? The debate was going well until you showed up asshole.

Herman, I like you and delight in your contributions to our little community..



But, reel is the furthest person you could find from a troll..



He is respected by myself, RW, Shen Li and cc la femme..



I understand you got off on the wrong foot, but I wanted to clear up any confusion about reel before this went any further.

Reelsy is awesome. acc_hugz

[Bricktop]

You must be new here.



I'm not going to argue with you if you are going to get your panties all in a knot over a bit of light sparring.  You clearly did completely miss my point, just as you missed it in the original post.  Economics should not trump public safety.  It doesn't in any other industry.  Why should it in this one?  People are so intent on gun ownership that they make enormous concessions to protect it that are not permitted in any other area of society.

Sparring? Arguing? Missed you point? Are you high too when you go trolling? The debate was going well until you showed up asshole.

Herman, I like you and delight in your contributions to our little community..



But, reel is the furthest person you could find from a troll..



He is respected by myself, RW, Shen Li and cc la femme..



I understand you got off on the wrong foot, but I wanted to clear up any confusion about reel before this went any further.

I will take your word for it. It's water under the bridge now.

Don't be clouded by the testimonials.



Reel thinks far more of himself, and values his own opinion above all others.



If he knew half as much as he portrays, he'd be a genius.



And a genius, he aint.

[Renee]

:43(2):

You must be new here.



I'm not going to argue with you if you are going to get your panties all in a knot over a bit of light sparring.  You clearly did completely miss my point, just as you missed it in the original post.  Economics should not trump public safety.  It doesn't in any other industry.  Why should it in this one?  People are so intent on gun ownership that they make enormous concessions to protect it that are not permitted in any other area of society.

Sparring? Arguing? Missed you point? Are you high too when you go trolling? The debate was going well until you showed up asshole.

Herman, I like you and delight in your contributions to our little community..



But, reel is the furthest person you could find from a troll..



He is respected by myself, RW, Shen Li and cc la femme..



I understand you got off on the wrong foot, but I wanted to clear up any confusion about reel before this went any further.

I will take your word for it. It's water under the bridge now.

Don't be clouded by the testimonials.



Reel thinks far more of himself, and values his own opinion above all others.



If he knew half as much as he portrays, he'd be a genius.



And a genius, he aint.

Holy SHIT! I nominate that post for the fucking "PKB Award of the Year". No.....wait, the "PKB Hall of Fame" would probably be more fitting.



OMG, can you get any more pompous?

[Frood]

:43(2):

You must be new here.



I'm not going to argue with you if you are going to get your panties all in a knot over a bit of light sparring.  You clearly did completely miss my point, just as you missed it in the original post.  Economics should not trump public safety.  It doesn't in any other industry.  Why should it in this one?  People are so intent on gun ownership that they make enormous concessions to protect it that are not permitted in any other area of society.

Sparring? Arguing? Missed you point? Are you high too when you go trolling? The debate was going well until you showed up asshole.

Herman, I like you and delight in your contributions to our little community..



But, reel is the furthest person you could find from a troll..



He is respected by myself, RW, Shen Li and cc la femme..



I understand you got off on the wrong foot, but I wanted to clear up any confusion about reel before this went any further.

I will take your word for it. It's water under the bridge now.

Don't be clouded by the testimonials.



Reel thinks far more of himself, and values his own opinion above all others.



If he knew half as much as he portrays, he'd be a genius.



And a genius, he aint.

Holy SHIT! I nominate that post for the fucking PKB Award of the year. No.....wait, the "PKB Hall of Fame" would probably be more fitting.



OMG, can you get any more pompous?

I was going to comment on that but didn't want to be perceived as pompous.  ac_smile

[asal]

I get the argument that there are just too many guns in circulation in the US and that they can't all be removed, thus giving people the psychological impetus to feel they need to own a legal gun to protect from the illegal ones.  So you can't ban gun ownership.  Then don't.  



Ban the import and production of guns.  Destroy illegal guns as they are seized.  Increase penalties to and ease prosecution of people owning illegal guns.  People who own guns can keep them to protect themselves from the bogeyman.  People who want to own guns will have to pay an increasingly higher price to buy one from a decreasing stock.  Everyone will be hesitant to use their gun because its use will mean its destruction and a high price of replacement.



There are ways to control guns that overcome this perceived problem of only the criminals having guns.  You just don't want to.



And guns are not drugs.  They don't grow in fields.  A skilled blacksmith could handcraft a gun, but he's certainly not going to flood the market with them before he gets caught.  Banning import and production would rapidly decrease stock.

  Then we need to completely get rid of all weapons evetywhere. How realistic is that?

He's not saying to completely get rid of all weapons evetywhere.



What he's saying is stop importing them, stop making them in factories.



People will still own them, trade them, make them on their property.  Making them won't happen very often and the quality won't be reliable.

[asal]

:43(2):

You must be new here.



I'm not going to argue with you if you are going to get your panties all in a knot over a bit of light sparring.  You clearly did completely miss my point, just as you missed it in the original post.  Economics should not trump public safety.  It doesn't in any other industry.  Why should it in this one?  People are so intent on gun ownership that they make enormous concessions to protect it that are not permitted in any other area of society.

Sparring? Arguing? Missed you point? Are you high too when you go trolling? The debate was going well until you showed up asshole.

Herman, I like you and delight in your contributions to our little community..



But, reel is the furthest person you could find from a troll..



He is respected by myself, RW, Shen Li and cc la femme..



I understand you got off on the wrong foot, but I wanted to clear up any confusion about reel before this went any further.

I will take your word for it. It's water under the bridge now.

Don't be clouded by the testimonials.



Reel thinks far more of himself, and values his own opinion above all others.



If he knew half as much as he portrays, he'd be a genius.



And a genius, he aint.

Holy SHIT! I nominate that post for the fucking PKB Award of the year. No.....wait, the "PKB Hall of Fame" would probably be more fitting.



OMG, can you get any more pompous?

I was going to comment on that but didn't want to be perceived as pompous.  ac_smile

Reel is always right.  Someone said that a few years ago.  It's borne out to be true, mostly.

[Frood]

A homemade single shot 12 gauge pipe shotgun goes for virtually nothing here now, asal. Loads of them out there because big brother backed by their bitch media outlets decided to get so defamatory and regulatory.

[RW]

I get the argument that there are just too many guns in circulation in the US and that they can't all be removed, thus giving people the psychological impetus to feel they need to own a legal gun to protect from the illegal ones.  So you can't ban gun ownership.  Then don't.  



Ban the import and production of guns.  Destroy illegal guns as they are seized.  Increase penalties to and ease prosecution of people owning illegal guns.  People who own guns can keep them to protect themselves from the bogeyman.  People who want to own guns will have to pay an increasingly higher price to buy one from a decreasing stock.  Everyone will be hesitant to use their gun because its use will mean its destruction and a high price of replacement.



There are ways to control guns that overcome this perceived problem of only the criminals having guns.  You just don't want to.



And guns are not drugs.  They don't grow in fields.  A skilled blacksmith could handcraft a gun, but he's certainly not going to flood the market with them before he gets caught.  Banning import and production would rapidly decrease stock.

I agree but some people are committing these crimes with guns they obtained legally.  What about that?

[Renee]

:43(2):

You must be new here.



I'm not going to argue with you if you are going to get your panties all in a knot over a bit of light sparring.  You clearly did completely miss my point, just as you missed it in the original post.  Economics should not trump public safety.  It doesn't in any other industry.  Why should it in this one?  People are so intent on gun ownership that they make enormous concessions to protect it that are not permitted in any other area of society.

Sparring? Arguing? Missed you point? Are you high too when you go trolling? The debate was going well until you showed up asshole.

Herman, I like you and delight in your contributions to our little community..



But, reel is the furthest person you could find from a troll..



He is respected by myself, RW, Shen Li and cc la femme..



I understand you got off on the wrong foot, but I wanted to clear up any confusion about reel before this went any further.

I will take your word for it. It's water under the bridge now.

Don't be clouded by the testimonials.



Reel thinks far more of himself, and values his own opinion above all others.



If he knew half as much as he portrays, he'd be a genius.



And a genius, he aint.

Holy SHIT! I nominate that post for the fucking PKB Award of the year. No.....wait, the "PKB Hall of Fame" would probably be more fitting.



OMG, can you get any more pompous?

I was going to comment on that but didn't want to be perceived as pompous.  ac_smile

Reel is always right.  Someone said that a few years ago.  It's borne out to be true, mostly.

I have to agree.



When Reel adds to a discussion it's because he has a decent grasp of the subject matter. It doesn't always make him right but at least he adds and intelligent well thought out point of view. He never just beat his chest while screeching out shrill, hysterical, plaintive, gobbledygook like some others who I will not mention.  ac_biggrin

[reel]

Thanks all.  Herman you have my apologies.  My comment was indeed flippant and rude.  In my defense, I'm doing a health challenge and gave up coffee yesterday, which made me exceptionally ornery.  I'm feeling better today.

I mean I'd we continue this and really start narrowing in on the actual problem (people) that'd be great.

Of course it's about people.  But it would be silly to assume that your people are different from my people and that you somehow have a monopoly on vicious misguided assholes or desperate poor drug addicts.  We have plenty of those too.  What's different are the motivations.



Why do people buy guns?  I don't think more than a tiny fraction do it with the intention of actually using the gun to shoot someone.  I believe most of them do it because it gives them a feeling of power and control that for one reason or another they otherwise lack.  Holding a gun in your hand makes you feel like a big man.  Then, subsequently, some situation arises or is artificially created due to mental illness which leads to the gun being used to kill someone.



Guns aren't going away.  In some places, they are necessary tools.  In others, you aren't going to convince a person that they don't need them for protection, collection, or sport.  But, we can change the motivations.



For instance, if you are a skidball ghetto rat, your motivation is probably to feel like you have some control over your situation, you have the option of using violence to get what you want, and you can protect yourself from the other skidball ghetto rats who have the same motivation.  You can buy a hand gun on the street corner for $200, so you do.  If that same gun was much harder to obtain, the penalty for getting caught with it was severe, and it was $1200, so you had to choose between the gun and paying 3 months rent, the situation is different.  You probably don't buy the gun, but if you do, it doesn't make you feel that powerful.  It makes you feel like an idiot for putting yourself in a position to lose your home and be in even less control of your situation.



Of if you are an organized criminal, you possess a gun as a tool of the trade.  Sometimes you need to use it to defend your business.  But if the cost of ownership and the consequences of getting caught with it are severe, then you don't feel powerful holding the gun, you look at it as a business liability and you think a lot more carefully about what you do with the gun.  Organized criminals around here don't carry unless they are threatened, they intend to use, or they are stupid because it's bad for business.  It's rare that you are going to see one escalating a situation by flashing a gun because it's the most common way for them to get busted and shut down, and they know it.



Maybe a beaten wife can scrounge together $200 to buy an illegal gun to protect herself.  But again if the gun is $1200, she can't find the money and may seek out another (better) option.



I think the "people" factor has far more to do with economics and supply, and the motivations these enable, than the attitudes and tempers of the people.  So if you constrict supply and drive up price, the motivations change and the situation changes.  Canada and the US are culturally very similar, so it's not really the people who are different.  I think the difference is that it's more difficult and expensive to buy a gun here, legal or otherwise.

[reel]

I agree but some people are committing these crimes with guns they obtained legally.  What about that?

As my post above, the best way to prevent this is by removing their motivation to possess the gun in the first place.  You can't eliminate the guns, but you can reduce the harm by giving a strong economic disincentive to ownership through constricted supply.



I'm going to go ahead and assume that the vast majority of deaths due to legal gun ownership (and probably guns in general) are a result of domestic violence.  I'm also going to make the leap that domestic violence is more common amongst poor people.  If they can't afford to buy the gun because of a constricted supply and rising prices, they won't have the gun to use during a drunken argument.  I'd also put forward that most abusive spouses are relatively craven individuals and it takes more control and courage to get in close and wield a knife than it does to shoot a gun.  The abuse will continue, but it's less likely to be lethal.



As for mass shootings, access and cost would be an impediment.  There's no way to stop someone who is really motivated to do something like this, but I can only assume that there is a whole process that builds up to an act like this that might never take place if the first step on the path was much more difficult.

[Frood]

Armchair social engineers really shit me sometimes. They're always treating the overall quantity of life but avoid the hard questions about the quality of life and self determination. Every problem becomes a rubber stamping opportunity to make more broad policy instead of treating people as the responsible individuals they should be.



Makes me shake my head and worry about the continuance of our species sometimes.

[reel]

Before I jump down off my soapbox...  I think the Chief Inspector intended to ask a rhetorical question when he asked where the guns come from, but it seems none of you respect him enough to play along.  The answer is that they come from factories with dedicated machine tools and skilled labour.  They don't come from Colombian jungle peasants.  Unlike drugs, guns are a product for which supply chain can be severely restricted without massive, pointless expenditure.  All it requires is the will to do it.



And finally, the notion that small arms can make the difference in an insurrection against a tyrannical government is woefully outdated.  Control of military assets and control of flow of information are what would matter in today's world.  A thousand peasants with handguns would not be able to overcome a single modern battle tank.  That argument is silly.

[reel]

Armchair social engineers really shit me sometimes. They're always treating the overall quantity of life but avoid the hard questions about the quality of life and self determination. Every problem becomes a rubber stamping opportunity to make more broad policy instead of treating people as the responsible individuals they should be.



Makes me shake my head and worry about the continuance of our species sometimes.

You have to be quite the naïve, delusional idealist to believe that even a minority of individuals are capable of being responsible without some degree of social control.  Individualism is the American ideal, but like any ideal, it fails miserably when taken to the extreme.