Florida School Shooting

[guacamole]

I did.



Maybe we should outlaw criminals!

(we're all just saying the same things over and over - this is getting wearisome. It's like the global warming arguments - they generate a whole lot more heat than they do light, and the problem doesn't change)

We were discussing where the guns come from. I get the sense you've simply decided it doesn't matter where they come from. Okay. Like I said, Chicago is such an important meme-argument for the pro-gun crowd that I didn't think it would matter.

[Mountain Man]

If you reduce the availability, then logically, it becomes harder and harder to obtain the guns to use in crimes.

I would say theoretically rather than logically, and that theory has yet to be conclusively proven in practice.

I'm not necessarily arguing for gun abolition either--In this case, I'd argue, for starters, that the gun-show loop holes be closed.

Short of abolition, how do you propose we reduce availability?

Also, I reject the implication that gun-shows are somehow a "loop hole" in our existing laws. Besides, I doubt that's where kids from the "hood" are buying guns anyway.

[guacamole]

I would say theoretically rather than logically, and that theory has yet to be conclusively proven in practice.

At this point, in order to defend permissive gun laws, you're disputing basic economics. Fewer guns, less supply, same demand, more cost, harder to get.

[Mountain Man]

At this point, in order to defend permissive gun laws, you're disputing basic economics. Fewer guns, less supply, same demand, more cost, harder to get.

At least in theory. How has that theory worked out for the drug trade?

[Sparko]

Yes. They're then illegally possessed. So? No one is arguing that only non-criminals commit murder.

You keep arguing for more gun control regulations and laws. But apparently criminals don't give a fart about them and will get the guns anyway.

[Adrift]

You keep arguing for more gun control regulations and laws. But apparently criminals don't give a fart about them and will get the guns anyway.

Well...no. They won't. If there are no guns because of a gun ban, then they can't get guns, at least, not easily, and not cheaply.

[guacamole]

At least in theory. How has that theory worked out for the drug trade?

I don't know. What does modern legal status to criminalization look like in the case of drugs? Or are you advocating that we end drug prohibition?

[Darth Executor]

Well...no. They won't. If there are no guns because of a gun ban, then they can't get guns, at least, not easily, and not cheaply.

Just like they can't get drugs easily and cheaply.

[Adrift]

At least in theory. How has that theory worked out for the drug trade?

You've stated previously that you're for the illegalization of hard drugs. Wouldn't that mean that you believe that illegalization is somewhat effective? If not, then why do you think they should be illegal?

[Darth Executor]

You've stated previously that you're for the illegalization of hard drugs. Wouldn't that mean that you believe that illegalization is somewhat effective? If not, then why do you think they should be illegal?

it will keep them out of the hands of many law abiding citizens (just like a gun ban would). nobody thinks a drug ban would end drug dealers or other hardcore criminals.

[Adrift]

Just like they can't get drugs easily and cheaply.

Correct. I believe that it's harder to buy crack illegally than if it were sold at the local gas station. I understand that you're for the legalization of hard drugs, but I'm not.

[Darth Executor]

Correct. I believe that it's harder to buy crack illegally than if it were sold at the local gas station. I understand that you're for the legalization of hard drugs, but I'm not.

harder for who? the criminals would be not just using but trading guns, just like they trade drugs. criminalizing guns would probably boost their profits rather than increase costs. just like drugs.

[Adrift]

it will keep them out of the hands of many law abiding citizens (just like a gun ban would). nobody thinks a drug ban would end drug dealers or other hardcore criminals.

What does that matter? Your argument is that people who want drugs will find a way to get them, right? All laws do is make law abiding citizens non-law abiding citizens.

[Adrift]

harder for who? the criminals would be not just using but trading guns, just like they trade drugs. criminalizing guns would probably boost their profits rather than increase costs. just like drugs.

Harder for everyone.

[Mountain Man]

I don't know. What does modern legal status to criminalization look like in the case of drugs? Or are you advocating that we end drug prohibition?

No, what I'm saying is that your theory of economics only works when everybody agrees to play by the rules, which criminals most certainly don't. Abolishing guns could very well spur a thriving black market like it did for drugs where our law-enforcement agencies have to spend considerable resources in an almost futile attempt to keep it in check, and yet people have still made fortunes dealing illegal drugs.