General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCan ONE of the gun owner/ NRA members of DU answer a couple of questions for me?
This isn't a blast the gun owners thread OK? If it turns into that, I will request that it be locked. Or I will just delete my post. Whatever. But, I do have a couple of questions that I would like to hear opinions on from NRA folks.
The US has either the highest, or one of the top highest gun ownership rates in the country. If all those guns are designed to "keep us safe," or "keep YOU safe," (emphasis not meaning to be sarcastic...wanted to differentiate)...then why are the crime stats so high?
What is the point if less regulation clearly isn't working? Our overall violent crime stats aren't high compared to other wealthy countries (e.g. UK, Western Europe, Canada, etc.). But we do stick out like a sore thumb in the areas of homicide and gun violence. In other words, you are no more likely to be mugged or attacked in the US than in Europe, but if you are attacked, it is much more likely that your assailant will have a gun, which means you are much more likely to be killed. (Edited to add text written by DanTex)
The numbers aren't good obviously?
I don't really want to hear anecdotal answers....I am sure there are some here who successfully "defended" something.
I want to hear your thoughts about the statistics--
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Our overall violent crime stats aren't high compared to other wealthy countries (e.g. UK, Western Europe, Canada, etc.). But we do stick out like a sore thumb in the areas of homicide and gun violence. In other words, you are no more likely to be mugged or attacked in the US than in Europe, but if you are attacked, it is much more likely that your assailant will have a gun, which means you are much more likely to be killed.
JanMichael
(24,890 posts)Can I have your permission to add your paragraph to my OP? You are correct, of course, and I should have my that point clear.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)The reason I mentioned is that surely someone is going to come and claim that due to drugs/gangs/racial problems/anything other than guns, the US is a uniquely violent society. But that is not true.
IDoMath
(404 posts)We are the wealthiest nation in the history of the world. Our military is larger than the next 5 (?) militaries put together. We have between 11-22 aircraft carriers in our navy (depending how you count) while the no one else has more than 2.
We are a country of excess so, yes, we have an excess of guns. I see a lot of statistics out there but none seem particularly informative. I can tell you that Florida, Texas and California have the highest numbers of gun-related assaults per year but when you rerun those numbers as a percentage of population none of them are in the top ten.
I've never seen statistics comparing violent crime rates as a percentage of the number of guns existing in each nation or state.
Over the last few days everyone has used this tragedy as an opportunity to push their personal agenda. It's too many guns. It's not enough guns. It's not enough religion. It's not enough religion. It's too many drugs. It's not enough drugs. It's gay marriage (Thank you, Mr. Phelps). It's the media. It's bullying. It's coddling. On and on and on. So why not my pet cause - everybody should have kittens.
All of this single-vector analysis does more harm than good. It results in "silver bullet" solutions (Sorry about the pun). We've seen the same process in the health care debate for 30+ years.
I own guns. I am concerned by our national obsession with guns. But I have yet to see a convincing analysis to support the claims of either side in this debate. What I have seen is shallow, emotional ranting from both sides that does nothing to uncover real causes or promote real solutions.
JanMichael
(24,890 posts)But, we don't make the claim that we are somehow "safer"....as many gun owners here do.
IDoMath
(404 posts)I don't keep them for safety. The one time when I felt truly threatened I went through the process of buying a gun but stopped short of actually buying one. It felt like surrender to me.
The second amendment exists to protect us from our government. But that isn't about "guns" its about "arms." Did you know that encryption software is classified as a munition? In this day and age, guns are not sufficient to uphold that goal. So what do we do? Is it possible to rewrite the 2d amendment to be more meaningful in this day and age?
I don't think the answer lies in legislation. The answer lies in education and in undoing gunmania. Take away my guns and I might be one of the first to buy and stockpile illegal weapons. Maybe I should've started when they passed the unPATRIOTic act or the NDAA but I'm lazy. Undo the 2d amendment, though and I might have to take that as a sign.
I really believe that legislation will do more harm than good. I've heard reports that gunmakers actually push stories AND legislation to restrict guns and ammo because it makes their sales skyrocket.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)If "our government" did decide to take you out, you and your toys would be gone before you can load them. You'd be just as well off throwing dirt clods at them. You seriously think your "arsenal" is some sort of threat to the most powerful military ever assembled on this planet?
Ridiculous.
IDoMath
(404 posts)Prior to 1787 the "right to bear arms" just like the right to own real property was a right granted to the peerage by the King. It was codified into the bill of rights in part to emphasize that there we do not recognize nobility and in part because we had just fought a revolution against a tyrannical government and there was an expectation it would have to happen again.
If you read the rest of my post you will discover that I acknowledge that in today's world owning guns will not protect us.
In fact, if the government wants to come shut me up, I can't stop them. But I still yell and talk.
I still belong to organizations that have been marked as seditious by the US government.
I still march in opposition to government action.
Or maybe I should stop doing all of that and stop voting too because my one vote doesn't make a difference.
Maybe the Palestinians should give up.
Maybe Ghandi should never have tried because the odds were against him.
Why should anybody ever try?
Quixotic? Maybe. But I least I won't lay down give up.
(We return this thread to someone who will now rant about false equivalencies.)
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)Dealing with some Waco-like situation? A bunch of yahoos in the hills with their hunting camo and rifles? Sure. No way to resist the military.
Scenario of widespread insurrection? Entirely different matter, and one depending greatly on the reason for the insurrection. The US military is a rather diverse, remarkably well educated and informed (by the historical standard of soldiers) organization. It is not an organization of mindless automatons who will blindly follow orders to act against fellow Americans. Some would, some wouldn't...and the latter group would contain many who would forcibly resist, defect (with their weapons, when possible), etc. A genuinely widespread insurrection would fragment the military. This would have the effect of rendering many complex, logistically-demanding weapons and communications systems inoperable, and in short order. Some would remain in service...but on both sides.
In such a situation, civilian arms (in their millions) would be very valuable indeed. Unfortunately, those too would be distributed on both sides (in most plausible scenarios of widespread civil insurrection). It's a nightmare scenario, as similar situations in other nations illustrates.
krawhitham
(4,644 posts)Come on man, no one with the name "IDoMath" should every utter those words
IDoMath
(404 posts)But they don't give me access to those things... not sure why... 
DanTex
(20,709 posts)
IDoMath
(404 posts)Given that the x-axis specifies firearms and homicides, the outcome is unsurprising.
Change that x-axis to "All Homicides" or better, "All aggravated assaults" and we'll have a more informative data set.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)They find a link between gun ownership rates and overall homicide rates, not just gun homicide rates. Of course, not surprisingly, gun ownership has very little effect on non-gun homicides.
byeya
(2,842 posts)Affordable higher education? Affordable health care for all?
IDoMath
(404 posts)Wouldn't that be nice? An excess of educational opportunities. An excess of health care.
But no. Those things just aren't fashionable. Guns are. Maybe Walmart should offer those things next Black Friday.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)Last edited Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:47 PM - Edit history (1)
will NEVER be given up to any government entity because of right wing/poxnews fear mongering. The KKK would keep their guns. All white supremacist groups would keep their guns. All black nationalist group members would keep their guns. All guns in 'urban' areas(just using Aynryans code word for black communities)would NOT be turned in.All illegal gun owners/carriers would keep their guns. All run of the mill gun nuts/owners would keep their guns. If there was a national voluntary gun turn in day. Broken weapons and outmoded weapons would be turned in, nothing more. I am not in the NRA, I've called them what they are, a tool of the right wing establishment yet I know that there are just too many guns out there for OUR problem to be solved quickly or even in a generation or two.
hack89
(39,171 posts)in the past 30 years. Our murder rates are at historic lows and still declining.
The reasons for these declines are many and complex but it can't be said that our regulations aren't working. We can do more but don't loose track of the fact that your chances of being shot have never been lower.
hack89
(39,171 posts)and constant drug related gang violence - that is what makes parts of Chicago, Detroit, Philly, Atlanta and DC look like war zones.
Show me any other country with our level of gang violence.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)Our homicide rate is absurdly high for an industrialized Nation...but when broken down by specific region and economic demographics, it becomes obvious that our homicide problem is not evenly distributed. I consider this to a significant degree to be the result of economic class warfare. Widespread poverty breeds desperation and misery. These, in turn, create a market for drugs...and because that market is an illegal, underground one, it is dominated by violent criminal gangs.
Daemonaquila
(1,712 posts)By the way, the only thing I take issue with here is lumping gun owners in with NRA members. They are not equivalent. I have a gun, and I support gun ownership with reasonable safeguards, but I will never become a member of those scumsuckers.
Regarding gun violence, I think that statistics paint only a partial picture. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list. Despite the U.S. having the highest gun ownership rate in the world, we are #28 in gun homicides. NOT that this is a good statistic! On the other hand, a lot of people point to Swiss gun ownership and low crime rate to support gun ownership, which is in large part a red herring. (For a good article on why it's comparing apples to oranges, see http://www.businessinsider.com/switzerlands-gun-laws-are-a-red-herring-2012-12 and http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/articles/guns-crime-swiss.html.) If there is any takeaway here, it's that you can have very high rates of gun ownership without a problem IF AND ONLY IF you require people to be highly trained (which is only given lip service in the U.S., and only in the context of concealed carry), create a culture of RESPONSIBLE gun ownership (which we do NOT have), and maintain reasonable enforcement of sales and licensure rules (lackluster in the U.S.).
U.S. crime stats are so high because of a broken culture. We have staggering rates of crime and violence in general due to drug-related gang activity and a national numbing to violence so that it is "only natural" for someone to be injured or killed in an escalated crime where there was no call for it. Even our political rhetoric has escalated into easy violence against Muslims, LGBT, you name it, and nobody gets called out on it.
You don't have people walking into a mall parking lot and letting off 50 shots into the air, or running into a theater and shooting for whatever idiot purpose, or shooting at each other at a hotel registration desk in Vegas (all stories from this weekend) because they have access to guns and just felt like taking them for a spin. That happens because something is fundamentally busted in the American psyche so that the normal behavioral filters aren't in play. That's scary. Blaming it on guns is silly - they're a tool, not a cause. But there is a genuine problem when that broken psyche meets easy access to very dangerous tools. Of course, tighter controls will slow that to a limited degree, temporarily. But that's not a solution, any more than shutting down all mortgage lenders would be a viable solution to the mortgage banking and foreclosure problem.
Let's be honest - many people who carry guns "to protect themselves" are using that as an excuse to carry 'cuz they wanna. There is no great threat on the streets for most people. Yet I'm not willing to write that off as an illegitimate concern like some people are. For that, I'm going to draw on my own experiences where, YES, I HAVE DEFENDED SOMETHING.
I know you don't want anecdotal answers, but that's where you see the illustration of where things get so screwed up in this country.
For many years, I lived in a very rough neighborhood. It was the kind of area where you have people shooting each other car to car on a Sunday afternoon on a main thoroughfare, you wake up at 2 AM to see a hooker being beaten brutally on your own front lawn, and you have to call 911 first thing in the morning because an OD victim is hanging half out her car door, barely breathing. All that being said, I don't reach for a gun easily. I have spent a lot of time doing martial arts, and much prefer bare hands, a stick/baseball bat, or a knife. Between refusing to be afraid to walk down my own street and being a strong neighborhood activist to get rid of these horrors, I was targeted quite a few times with everything from a nearly laughable attempted mugging with a broken pocketknife, to having my life threatened repeatedly by a pimp who had taken over an empty house next door and didn't like it that I wasn't going to let him set up shot there.
I have had to defend myself, and I have had to defend others. The closest it ever came to someone being dead or severely injured was when I had to defend a domestic violence victim I took into my home, sitting with a cocked crossbow on my lap with a direct line of the front door, expecting it to be broken in by the husband who was outside screaming and beating on it. I have done everything, in every situation, to de-escalate, and barring that, to minimize injury. But there again, you get to make a judgment about what is an appropriate response only with training, training, training. A wasted guy with a broken knife can be disarmed and left concussed on the sidewalk, or he can be shot by a scared or macho person who feels the need or desire to pack a gun she barely can use. Someone threatening to break a door down can be stopped IF he actually breaks in with a non-lethal bow shot, or a person can freak out and start spraying bullets before he ever touches a doorknob.
Only once has a gun ever come into it. There had been a major uptick in violence, including break-ins at night, and I kept a gun in reach for a while. The reason was simple - anyone conducting a home invasion at 3 AM WILL be packing. If I wake up at 3 AM to my front door getting busted, I'm not going to make it downstairs with a baseball bat in time to stop multiple intruders before the bullets start flying. That's when you better be able to fire through the door from the top of the stairs.
What's the point? Simply this. The folks whose brains and hearts are out of control use every weapon in the book from knives to guns to pipe bombs, and violence means absolutely nothing to them. We might as well be living in Northern Ireland in the mid-80s. Even now, after peace has been negotiated and Sinn Fein essentially won the war, there are still some who can't let go of the poison mindset, still doing violence as the RIRA and others. It will take generations of doing the right thing for it to die out there. In America, we haven't even taken our first steps to dealing with the poisons creating our culture of violence. We absolutely must address that, and we can't start that process insisting that guns are the problem, not a symptom.
JanMichael
(24,890 posts)Please consider titling it and posting it so everyone on DU can read it. Thank you and everyone else on this thread for having good responses.
