And yet, this is the reason a lot of people want to own guns. And we both know it. Some here, have already admitted it. To a lot of gun owners, guns are 'fun'...
Correct, and that was my point --its not right for people to enjoy operating a device, designed and built exclusively for killing human being's.
...They like the idea of their power, and they like shooting at things with them, both as a marksmanship challenge and as a display of power. It's really why so many people are so fascinated with automatic assault weapons. They don't really intend to assault any armed cadres with them, they just like the idea of all that firepower, and they like playing with them. Let's be honest...
They're are lot's of tool's that people love using because they make the work so much easier. Having the right tool for the job give's worker's satisfaction and confidence in doing there job.
...And as much as we all have a right to have our fun, we don't have a right to endanger our society, doing it...
Certainly agreed.
...We are not responsible for the choices other people make. But we are responsible for them having such easy access to very effective assault weapons that enable them to kill lots of innocent people...
Agreed.
...And the only reason all those weapons are out there, and are so easy for them to get hold of is because some people like having them for fun, and because the manufacturers don't care how many American their guns kill, so long as they can sell lots of them...
No, this is not a complete list. I myself do not own a single firearm because its fun. And, it is slanderous to suggest that Springfield Armory, Smith & Wesson, Colt, Sig, etc., "don't care how many American their guns kill, so long as they can sell lots of them," without some sort of proof. Thats a terrible thing to think of people, without any evidence supporting it. Thats bearing false witness.
...I think these are all conditions that warrant investigation. But that doesn't answer the immediate problem: that we have far too many guns out there...
I don't perceive this problem. I know the data say's that they're are 300 million civilian-owned firearm's in America, making America the global leader in civilian-owned firearm's per capita. I also know that they're are many country's with far less civilian-owned firearm's per capita, who suffer from much higher murder rate's than does America. If you examine where the bloodiest country's are, you'll find that they all lie south of the American border, with Mexico 1 of the safer country's, but still much bloodier than America, and we all know that the violence in these country's is from 1 thing and 1 thing only --organized crime, specifically drug cartel's. This violence has bled over our southern border, and specifically not over our northern border.
I would perceive a problem with too many firearm's if I saw them everywhere, especially just sitting somewhere, unattended, where children and other inappropriately prepared people can access them. I know, of course, that this happen's, in isolation, but the trend is not toward's treating firearm's as less dangerous than they are; but more. Which is not a bad thing. I alway's remind my children that 1 of the stupider thing's you could do, is treat something dangerous as if its not. I also lead by example, as best I can. (I'm not talking strictly about firearm's, which I do treat with utmost caution, but other thing's that I am less diligent about being perfectly safe with; like not wearing safety glass's sometime's when working with power tool's.)
If the problem were too many civilian-owned firearm's, it would be more obvious, is what I'm offering.
...and are making far too many more available to anyone who wants them. And not everyone who wants them should have them. Because they will kill themselves or other people with them.
So the bottom line is that we need to find a way to keep the people who are likely to use these guns to kill themselves, or others, from getting hold of them. How do we do that?...
Thats why I'm suggesting raising the minimum age, because so much violence is done by the young and immature; young men who are still grappling with how to be a grownup, what to do about a career, about love, about . . . all the thing's that we struggle to get a read on, throughout our development.
...Then obviously, we need to keep those unstable young men from getting access to firearms...
I thought so. I mean, if we're not going to repeal the Second Amendment, then we need to look very carefully at what we can do.
...But you're too focussed on the mass shooters, here...
No, I don't think so. I'm giving mass shooting's the attention that these ghoulish event's deserve. No matter how many murder's occur over time, in drib's and drab's, its the mass shooting's that draw the most attention, that prompt us to once again revisit this issue. We don't think about it when they're are isolated case's, no matter how frequent they are. Mass shooting's are so scary because they can happen to you anywhere, unless your too afraid to venture outside you're home, which is no solution at all.
Mass shooting's are
terrorism.
...Yes, they're mostly unstable young men. But the majority of people killed in this country with firearms are not killed by young men shooting up middle schools...
This is very true, and yet, it remain's irrelevant, when we're faced with another mass shooting, so close to us in our rearview mirror. These dreadful tragedy's light up our danger radar's like its Christmastime, more than almost any other violence that occur's everyday in our world (JFKs filmed assassination was also pretty rattling I think).
...They are killed by their own hand...
True. More than half of all firearm-related death's are suicide's in America. What are the age's of these suicide's? I haven't seen the data.
I think that suicide is perhap's more of a risk for the young, but its not as starkly contrasted as are mass shooting's, which are almost exclusively perpetrated by young men.
...they are killed by their own spouses/lovers or family members and friends, and they are killed by drunk or drug or rage-addled strangers. Most of whom would not have committed murder had a gun not been so handy at the time they fell into their particular unreasonable state of mind. (Usually aided by drugs or alcohol.)...
Well, we know that operating heavy machinery is a terrible idea when impaired by booze or drug's. Why should we think that firearm's are different?
...The point remains the same: that the guns are all around us, and so are just too easy for these unstable people to get hold of, whatever their age, and whatever their particular mental imbalance. And we need to find a way to stop this...
I agree. You'll probably hear a whiny adolescent in me saying it, but I'll say it anyway; I'm tired of being treated like a child, just because a genuine child (at least, emotionally, spiritually and mentally) shot up some people. Keep these people from getting there hand's on a firearm. And by "these people," in spite of you accusing me of focusing too much on mass shooting's, I mean, "young men." Not young men who are being treated for psychological disorder's, but young men. You never know, and hopefully you will never know, since medical record's should be private, what young man is unstable and developmentally delayed, and what young man isn't, so raise the minimum age for all of them for the R.K.B.A. For those young men who are mature enough to handle the grave responsibility of owning a firearm, they'll either have to suffer through it, or we could have a procedure for permitting those underage, on a very careful case-by-case basis, who are fit for this.
...Good.
My suggestion would be to begin by identifying and addressing the problem, honestly. (I'm not saying that you aren't, but I'm seeing a lot of BS on these various "gun threads", mostly by people who think we should do nothing.)
I don't think we should do nothing.
DJ
1.0
