HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control Reform Activism (Group) » Gun control legislation: ...

Sat Mar 16, 2013, 08:34 PM

Gun control legislation: Logic and reasoning resource

From the excellent Steve Kangas resource Liberal Faq:

Myth: Guns don't kill people, people do.

Fact: Both guns and people kill; guns make it easier.

Summary

This sound bite misses the point; people are indeed ultimately responsible for pulling the trigger, but the national murder rate would surely fall if widespread gun availability didn't make it so incredibly easy to kill another human being.


Argument

This frequent pro-gun slogan is something that, upon reflection, seems entirely true. But it's not.

In actuality, the first half of this slogan is demonstrably false; guns do indeed kill people. But the point that the gun lobby is surely trying to make is that they do not kill people by themselves; they require a human to pull the trigger.

This argument is an attempt to divert attention away from the fact that guns make it much easier to kill people. Guns do this in two ways: enhanced ability and feasibility. We can see the enhanced ability from suicide statistics: the most successful suicide attempts are those that involve firearms. And this greater ability also makes murder feasible in a greater number of circumstances. To anyone entertaining murderous impulses, a gun makes it feasible to attack larger people, multiple people, people from a distance, from secrecy, etc. No one in their right mind would try to rob a bank with a knife. But a gun inspires confidence of success in a would-be bank robber, allowing a crime to occur when it wouldn't have otherwise.

Gun control advocates argue that a certain, extremely small percentage of the populace is actively contemplating murder at any given time, and would if they could. They argue the murder rate would drop if these would-be murderers did not possess the enhanced ability and feasibility provided by guns. The above pro-gun slogan responds to this argument illogically, by making an irrelevant point.

A wit once described this irrelevancy thus: "Fingers don't kill people, bullets do."


More...

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/LiberalFAQ.htm

4 replies, 2277 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 4 replies Author Time Post
Reply Gun control legislation: Logic and reasoning resource (Original post)
wyldwolf Mar 2013 OP
rdharma Mar 2013 #1
AceWheeler Mar 2013 #2
russ1943 Mar 2013 #3
wyldwolf Mar 2013 #4

Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Sat Mar 16, 2013, 09:11 PM

1. The trick is to ........

 

..... separate the guns that kill...... from the people who kill.

First step....... universal 100% thorough background checks for every firearms transfer in every state of the United States.

No exceptions......period!

And a system to keep track of all transfers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Sat Mar 16, 2013, 10:18 PM

2. Guns don't kill people.

People kill people with guns. Rather easily as it happens, since that's what they are made for: Killing.

Here's another commentary on this topic:

http://www.reality-check-online.org/guns.htm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wyldwolf (Original post)

Sat Mar 16, 2013, 11:32 PM

3. Good read for any liberal, progressive.

Wow, a reference to the almost 15 yr old Steve Kangas site! The Kangas site also is a great reference to those constant Kellerman study criticisms. http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-kellermann.htm
Steve Kangas was/is a fascinating story. Military intelligence background: was his death in 1999 at 37 years old, suicide or murder?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to russ1943 (Reply #3)

Sun Mar 17, 2013, 07:45 AM

4. It was one of the first sites I discovered when I became active online

and I still refer to it often in online discussions. Very reasoned arguments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread