Should semiautomatic weapons be banned? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 01, 2024, 04:28:24 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Individual Politics (Moderator: The Dowager Mod)
  Should semiautomatic weapons be banned? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: ?
#1
Yes (D)
 
#2
No (D)
 
#3
Yes (R)
 
#4
No (R)
 
#5
Yes (I/O)
 
#6
No (I/O)
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 79

Author Topic: Should semiautomatic weapons be banned?  (Read 2507 times)
Storebought
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,326
« on: February 17, 2018, 04:26:26 PM »

In my ideal world, gun ownership would be a privilege that the State grants with great reluctance to a select few individuals. Reducing the firearm distribution of the US would also lower the distribution of firearms within the Caribbean and Central America where they do the most damage.
Logged
Storebought
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,326
« Reply #1 on: February 19, 2018, 09:49:04 PM »

I mean, dozens of shootings per year out of more than 300 million guns in private hands is a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percent. Its like banning tide pods from all 300 million americans because 50 stupid kids tried to eat them. Obliterating our freedoms because a teeny tiny fraction of people abuse them is a recipe for dictatorship.

That's a completely invalid comparison. And its premise is not right, either. Mass shootings are a more common form of death than natural disasters (tornadoes, heat waves) or terrorist attacks.
Logged
Storebought
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,326
« Reply #2 on: February 19, 2018, 10:28:02 PM »

I mean, dozens of shootings per year out of more than 300 million guns in private hands is a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percent. Its like banning tide pods from all 300 million americans because 50 stupid kids tried to eat them. Obliterating our freedoms because a teeny tiny fraction of people abuse them is a recipe for dictatorship.

That's a completely invalid comparison. And its premise is not right, either. Mass shootings are a more common form of death than natural disasters (tornadoes, heat waves) or terrorist attacks.

Wait ... are you saying that more people in the US die in spree killings with guns each year than die from natural disasters? I really dont buy that. What I do buy, is that the odds of a particular firearm in privately owned hands in the US being involved in a spree killing is miniscule. And the only invalidity I see in my comparison, is that firearm ownership is a right specifically enumerated in the constitution whereas tide pods ownership is only protected through the due process clause.

The odds of dying in a mass shooting is greater than for dying in a heatwave or tornadoes. I don't mean that it's greater than all natural disasters. The data come from Business Insider. Yeah, I'd prefer a higher quality data set, but the CDC isn't permitted to gather high quality statistics on gun shot fatalities.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.026 seconds with 15 queries.