General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRolling Stone: 4 Pro-Gun Arguments We're Sick of Hearing
Another day, another horrible mass shooting. This one was in the small town of Roseburg, Oregon, on the Umpqua Community College campus. More than two dozen people were reportedly hit with gunfire.
While victims are being rushed to the hospital, many right-wing pundits and politicians are no doubt readying their talking points to explain why the 264th mass shooting of the year does not mean the United States should tighten up access to deadly firearms.
Well, guys, I hate to break it to you, but we heard you the first time. And the second time. And the hundreds of times since that our country has grappled with an individual eager to take out as many lives as possible with a firearm. We can recite your arguments in our sleep, and they haven't grown better through repetition.
1. "Guns don't kill people. People kill people."
This is a fantastic argument for those who can't tell the difference between one death and a dozen. Absolutely, a murderer can often kill one person or two with a knife before being stopped. But to really rack up those mind-blowing death counts to make sure that many lives are destroyed and families ruined in the space of five or 10 minutes you need a gun. If all you care about is apportioning blame and declaring that someone does or does not have murderous intent, then by all means, claim a knife and a gun are equivalent weapons. For those of us who are more worried about preventing unnecessary deaths than merely acknowledging the hate that resides in some people's hearts, however, the sheer amount of damage a gun can do is reason to limit who can get their hands on one.
2. "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."
If you prefer pithy sayings to hard evidence, I can see why this would be convincing. But if you look at the real world, you'll find that far from being our only hope, good guys with guns are barely any help at all. No mass shootings in the past 30 years have been stopped by an armed civilian; in 1982, an armed civilian successfully killed a shooter, but it was only after he committed his crime.
<snip>
4. "Second Amendment, baby."
Here's a good time to remind everyone that the Second Amendment was written by slaveholders before we had electricity, much less the kind of weaponry that would-be murderers can buy today. But sure, if you think it's that precious, we can compromise: If you love the Second Amendment that much, feel free to live in a powdered wig and shit in a chamberpot while trying to survive off what you can kill with an 18th century musket. In exchange, let those of us living in this century pass some laws so we can feel safe going to class, or the movies, or anywhere without worrying that some maladjusted man will try to get his revenge by raining death on random strangers.
<snip>
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/4-pro-gun-arguments-were-sick-of-hearing-20151001?page=2
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)91% of Americans believe in the right to own and sell guns.
http://www.harrisinteractive.com/NewsRoom/HarrisPolls/tabid/447/mid/1508/articleId/1405/ctl/ReadCustom%20Default/Default.aspx
So while the constitution was written by slave holders, Americans overwhelmingly support it.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)The article derisively says "if you think it's that precious"
91% believe in that right to bear arms. It is precious. Dismissing it as an outdated law is in total contradiction to what Americans believe.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)and no-one is talking about completely banning guns; things like limits on magazine capacity and restrictions on semi-automatic weapons are much more feasible.(If you need an AR-15 with a 30-round magazine to hunt, you're doing it wrong, anyway.)
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)And yeah, 9% of people seem to favor a gun ban, including a number of DUers
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)doesn't mean that they can be taken seriously.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Poster, let's call him Dumbass, is going on and on about sitting ducks and gun free zones. Someone finally gets through to Dumbass that the campus was NOT a gun free zone. Without missing a beat, Dumbass goes right for "See, that obviously means we need even more guns!" It's like listening to a particularly dull wind-up doll.
Algernon Moncrieff
(5,780 posts)Kingofalldems
(38,361 posts)Of course that's a lie but it continues to be posted.
The GOP/NRA needs a Special Prosecutor full time.
beevul
(12,194 posts)A completely false assertion:
At about 1:00 p.m. MST (20:00 UTC), thirty minutes after the 11:00 a.m. service had ended at New Life Church, Murray opened fire in the church parking lot, shooting the Works family and Judy Purcell. Murray then entered the building's main foyer where he shot Larry Bourbonnais, hitting him in the forearm. At this point, church member Jeanne Assam, a former Minneapolis police officer, opened fire on Murray with her personally owned concealed weapon. Police say that after suffering multiple hits from Assam's gun, Murray fatally shot himself.[7]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Colorado_YWAM_and_New_Life_shootings
Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)It cites a Mother Jones analysis of 62 mass shootings. Your example wasn't included as it's technically a spree killing because multiple locations were involved.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data
beevul
(12,194 posts)I think "stopped what would have been a mass shooting" is probably a step above "stopped a mass shooting", and thus should count.
How about you.
Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)I'm just pointing out what they are talking about.
melm00se
(4,974 posts)1st 2 of 8 examples in the referenced article
2. In a Philadelphia barber shop earlier this year, Warren Edwards opened fire on customers and barbers after an argument. Another man with a concealed-carry permit then shot the shooter; of course its impossible to tell whether the shooter would have kept killing if he hadnt been stopped, but a police captain was quoted as saying that, I guess he [the man who shot the shooter] saved a lot of people in there.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)The entirety of the Constitution was written by slaveholders before we had electricity, so I am not sure that is really a good place to go with this argument.
yurbud
(39,405 posts)Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)Judging by this article they're well on their way.