A Sane Discussion About Gun Violence

[Mountain Man]

Making sentences for using a gun in the commision of a crime more harsh, longer and without possibility of parole, may or may not have a deterrence effect...but, if the sentence is long enough, it will definitely have a prevention effect...and since 57% of criminals reoffend (FBI stats) and are sent back to prison, then they are not in the "Free World" to commit another gun related crime.

My thought on harsher punishments as a deterrent is that I suspect the majority of criminals expect to get away with it, so it likely wouldn't even factor into their thinking.

On the other hand, the chance of dying because the criminal doesn't know whether or not his intended victim might be able and willing to defend himself with deadly force, now there's a deterrent that would cause all but the most sociopathic of criminals to think twice.

[carpedm9587]

I am a compassionate conservative. Otherwise, I wouldn't have spent the last three months trying to redeem the helpless homeless man I've been working with, or be as involved in "street ministry" as I am.

I was mostly teasing, CP. "Compassionate Conservative" is a Bushish - and a bit of a hackneyed phrase. But I do recognize that compassion is not limited to liberals and moderates. One or two conservatives are also capable of the feat...

[carpedm9587]

As I have mentioned like prohibition - or, more currently, the "war on drugs".

Well, they'll have to pry them from my cold....

... um

neermind

[Mountain Man]

I think the legal phrase "reasonable person" comes into play here. It would be interesting to see how this is defined, should it ever happen. I'm inclined to think, in this day and age, that prudence would require us to be a bit more careful than we were "in the good old days". They're long gone.

Good point. I remember my grandfather telling me stories about how he used to go on vacation without locking the house and never thought twice about it. These days, most people wouldn't even consider leaving the house for 20-minutes without locking up.

[carpedm9587]

So if we keep locking up gun-toting criminals, wouldn't that eventually get all of the criminals off the street? Heck, stick them in the Army and send them to Afghanistan where they can use the guns all they want.

[carpedm9587]

Bunches!

Don't have to, I have my CCNA.

I teach that class...

[Cow Poke]

If they would get 3 years for burglary, but 15 if they had a gun, how many burglars do you think would risk using guns?

Reminds me of an episode of Happy Days where there was a robber in the store (or house?) and they called Fonzie, who simply shoved him into a closet and closed the door. Richie was paranoid "but what if he has a GUN!"

Fonzie told them he didn't have a gun. When they asked how he could know that, Fonz replied "he who robs with a gun in his hand - does 10 to 20 in the can".


OK, back to your serious debate.

[carpedm9587]

But it's obvious that it's not even a "close" analogy on so many fronts.

It depends on what we are talking about. In some ways, it's close. In other ways, it's miles away.

As with all analogies.

[Cow Poke]

I teach that class...

I wrote the book!

(first liar doesn't stand a chance)


(kidding about the liar)

[Cow Poke]

It depends on what we are talking about. In some ways, it's close. In other ways, it's miles away.

As with all analogies.

We been there done that.

[Sparko]

Thanks for the correction. And I have to admit that I agree with you. I cannot see widespread gun bans as a viiable solution. Yes, I think SOME types of guns should be banned. And I lean towards control on magazine capacity. And there IS a part of me that think hunting will only truly become a sport when we arm the deer (OK - I couldn't resist that). But the fact is we don't have good data on the viability of ANY of these solutions, and I am sensitive to any proposition that simply guts citizens of their right to bear arms. My dad was a hunter - and my brother and brother-in-law are hunters. We live in a community where hunting is as natural as breathing. Anything that would compromise that would seem to me to be a problem. I recognize the role of a gun as a tool on a ranch or even a farm.

I think the question we need to keep returning to is - how do we keep guns out of the hands of people who ought not have them? To achieve that, I think, at the very least, gun owners need to recognize that they are in possession of a weapon of harm - and part of the right to have that weapon includes the responsibility to help the rest of us ensure that they are not acquired by those who ought not have them.

If you could find a solution to poverty and inner city gangs, you would eliminate most of the gun problems in the USA. Nobody ever goes after the cause of the gun violence, just the guns. That is what is so frustrating to most conservatives. Because like you said, to them guns are a part of life: Hunting, target practice, defense against wildlife or intruders. I think people go after the guns because they are an easy target (no pun intended) and they know that it is nearly impossible to solve gang violence, so why bother? but stuff like that is the actual problem, not the guns. The guns are a result not the cause.

[carpedm9587]

How is an IP packet structured?

Carefully!

And what caliber is it?

[Adrift]

right. Banning drugs didn't eliminate drugs because they didn't go after the root of the problem: People want to use drugs. As long as there is a market for them there will be illegal drugs. Guns are the same. As long as criminals want guns, they will get guns.

We have to go after the end user. If we can't change people's minds or get them mental help, we need to keep them off the streets or frighten them so much that they won't want to risk using guns on something. If they would get 3 years for burglary, but 15 if they had a gun, how many burglars do you think would risk using guns? Strict punishment probably won't work on mass shooters because like CP said, they don't expect to survive. We just need to stop them before they get to that point. Like take seriously all the warnings like they got with the Cruz kid.

No solution will be 100%. We will always have crime and murder. Until Jesus comes back.

Are you advocating that we legalize drugs then? I have to admit that I find it absolutely fascinating to see people who typically are of a conservative bent, who years ago would adamantly not have been for the legalization of drugs, suddenly sort of soften on the issue when parallels are made to the nation's gun problem.

Also, our prisons are filled to overflowing with drug users. We have more people in prison than any other nation on earth. That doesn't seem particularly healthy for a society. While I agree that no solution will be 100% on this issue till Christ's return, other industrialized nations don't seem to have nearly the issues we have on this front.

[Mountain Man]

Today, possibly. Breaking it down helps. Storing the parts in different places would be better. Locking it in a gun locker would be best.

I can't argue with that.

[carpedm9587]

And is it air cooled, gas operated, and magazine fed?

Mostly turbo-charged....