The Main Problems With Gun Control

hm1996

Moderator
Staff member

The single most common problem with gun control proposals is that they are concocted by folks who either have no knowledge whatsoever on the subject (guns) but are experts when it comes to control and extremely enthusiastic in that pursuit.

To further compound the problem, they, almost to a person suffer from hoplophobia.

Hoplophobia is a term coined by retired American military officer Jeff Cooper as a pejorative to describe an "irrational aversion to weapons or a fear of armed persons."

Here is a short glossary of terms which seem to give the MSM and political types the most trouble:

a. Assault Weapon: U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect. Assault Weapon. Any weapon used in an assault.

b. Automatic or Full Automatic firearm is a weapon which fires multiple rounds with a single pull of the trigger.

c. Semi-Automatic or Self-Loading fires only one shot per each trigger pull but will automatically reload itself from a magazine or clip.

d. An ammunition clip is a device used to store individual rounds of ammunition together as a single unit that is then ready for insertion into the magazine of a gun.

e. Magazine: A magazine is a device which holds and feeds ammunition in a firearm and can be either fixed or detachable.

f. Cartridge or "round" is most commonly used in reference to the complete package of bullet, casing, powder/propellant, rim and primer that makes up the ammunition a firearm shoots.

g. The bullet is the projectile only.

Another issue with such folks is that, in their enthusiasm, they either are unaware of the facts or tend to exaggerate any statistics in order to support their position. Here are just two examples:

a. One gross exaggeration commonly pushed by the antis is the "gun violence" toll which would lead one to believe that the number quoted is only murder or accidental deaths. "Gun violence resulted in 33,172 deaths in 2014."

While the number of firearm related deaths is correct, they have included suicide in the tally. In the interest of honesty, here's the rest of the story:

Quote:These deaths consisted of 11,208 homicides, 21,175 suicides, 505 deaths due to accidental or negligent discharge of a firearm, and 281 deaths due to firearms use with "undetermined intent". Of the 2,596,993 total deaths in the US in 2013, 1.3% were related to firearms.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

And:

Quote:
Margot Sanger-Katz OCT. 8, 2015

When Americans think about deaths from guns, we tend to focus on homicides. But the problem of gun suicide is inescapable: More than 60 percent of people in this country who die from guns die by suicide.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/09/upshot/gun-deaths-are-mostly-suicides.html

b. Another claim you have heard from the gun grabbers, "The US has the highest firearm related death rate."

In reality, the US ranks #71....right behind the United Kingdom:

Quote: United States:Total 10.54 Method (2014) Homicides 3.60 (2014) Suicide 6.30 (2014) Unintentional 0.18 (2014) Undetermined 0.08 (2014) Guns in United States[*77] Guns per Inhabitant 112.6 Gun Related Death per Gun per Year 0.00009361

*77 "United States - Gun Facts, Figures and the Law". Gunpolicy.org. University of Sydney School of Public Health. Retrieved 2014-11-14.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

History has repeatedly proven the futility of attempting to control human behavior by banning inanimate objects during Prohibition and the War on Drugs.

Criminals, by definition, ignore the law and will scoff at any law restricting ability to obtain firearms when bent on committing the more heinous act of murder, a fact also supported by past history.

Regards,
hm
 
In regard to your b. Firearm death rate being #71, that list is ordered alphabeticaly, which puts the us at #71, which is tight behind the united kingdom.


If you go by murder per 100k, the us is 16 or 17. If you go by total, 11.

And the us is #1 in guns per person.
 
I'm just glad the that hollywood snobs have been able to spare the time from molesting each other to tell the rest of us ignorant backwood types all about guns.
 
OOOps, Thanks for pointing out my oversight, Indy.

I wondered which of the criteria they used to assign rank.

Not sure exactly where to go for true and accurate rating as the numbers are all over the place depending upon the point the provider is trying to prove!
cursing.gif


Originally Posted By: CBS NewsAmericans are 10 times more likely to be killed by guns than people in other developed countries, a new study finds.

Compared to 22 other high-income nations, the United States' gun-related murder rate is 25 times higher. And, even though the United States' suicide rate is similar to other countries, the nation's gun-related suicide rate is eight times higher than other high-income countries, researchers said.

The study was published online Feb. 1 in The American Journal of Medicine.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-u-s-gun-deaths-compare-to-other-countries/

Of course, we all know where CBS and the American Journal of Medicine stands on gun control.

Another interesting study by the Washington Post seems to show that the availability of firearms is not a contributing factor to firearms homicides but guns are the tool most often chosen for the deed. This should come as no surprise since they are obviously the most effective.

Another obvious point is that firearms related homicides are spectacularly higher in the western hemisphere than other parts of the world. And guess what, the US ranks very low by comparison to other countries in the western hemisphere.

One can't help but wonder how many (illegal?) immigrants the US receives from these countries south of our border. If numbers alone are the criteria, would this make a stronger argument for the wall/securing our borders? Maybe immigration control would be more effective than gun control???

I know, this is a stretch, but also serves to illustrate the many facets that, combined, (could) enter into the problem, making any solution all the more difficult.


Originally Posted By: Washington Post
Firearms homicide...% of homicides...Guns per...Number of guns
per 100k people.....gun related......100 pop....in country
US---------------3.2------67.5-------------89---------270,000,000
Mexico---------9.97-----54.9-------------15---------18,500,000
Brazil-----------18.1-----70.8-------------8----------14,840,000
Venezuela--38.97----79.5-------------11---------2,850,000
Columbia---27.09----81.1-------------6----------2,700,000
Guatemala--34.81----84---------------13---------1,650,000
Honduras---68.43----83.4-------------6----------500,000
Look at complete chart here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/nation/gun-homicides-ownership/table/

Regards,
hm

 
Originally Posted By: Stu FarishI'm just glad the that hollywood snobs have been able to spare the time from molesting each other to tell the rest of us ignorant backwood types all about guns.


Ain't it the truth!
lol.gif


ETA: Wife just pointed out that this proves that we need a gun to protect us from those sexual deviants!

Regards,
hm
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Stu FarishI'm just glad the that hollywood snobs have been able to spare the time from molesting each other to tell the rest of us ignorant backwood types all about guns.


laugh.gif
You got that right!!!!
 
on the low end we have at least 300 million guns. I think that number is actually well over 400 million by now.

but let's just use the smaller #, 300,000,000 guns in private hands.

annually we have about 30,000 - 35,000 total gun deaths, 2/3 of which are suicides. I regard them as irrelevant, not bc people dying is irrelevant but bc people who want to kill themselves will find a way to do it. the gun isn't the reason they did it, it's the how they did it & a choice they made.

less than 400 involve a rifle of any type, semi-autos aren't even reported as a separate number. almost all are pistols.

accidents similarly run about 400 per year.

10,000 - 11,000 are other than suicide, most are murders. a small percentage are justified defense but for simplicity let's just say "them all bad" and use round numbers.

to boil it down, out of 300,000,000 guns we have 11,000 killings per year.

300,000,000 x 0.000036666 = 10,998

that's what any persons chances of being killed by a gun of any type, for any reason other than suicide, are in America.
 
Originally Posted By: hm1996OOOps, Thanks for pointing out my oversight, Indy.

I wondered which of the criteria they used to assign rank.

Not sure exactly where to go for true and accurate rating as the numbers are all over the place depending upon the point the provider is trying to prove!
cursing.gif


Originally Posted By: CBS NewsAmericans are 10 times more likely to be killed by guns than people in other developed countries, a new study finds.

Compared to 22 other high-income nations, the United States' gun-related murder rate is 25 times higher. And, even though the United States' suicide rate is similar to other countries, the nation's gun-related suicide rate is eight times higher than other high-income countries, researchers said.

The study was published online Feb. 1 in The American Journal of Medicine.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-u-s-gun-deaths-compare-to-other-countries/

Of course, we all know where CBS and the American Journal of Medicine stands on gun control.

Another interesting study by the Washington Post seems to show that the availability of firearms is not a contributing factor to firearms homicides but guns are the tool most often chosen for the deed. This should come as no surprise since they are obviously the most effective.

Another obvious point is that firearms related homicides are spectacularly higher in the western hemisphere than other parts of the world. And guess what, the US ranks very low by comparison to other countries in the western hemisphere.

One can't help but wonder how many (illegal?) immigrants the US receives from these countries south of our border. If numbers alone are the criteria, would this make a stronger argument for the wall/securing our borders? Maybe immigration control would be more effective than gun control???

I know, this is a stretch, but also serves to illustrate the many facets that, combined, (could) enter into the problem, making any solution all the more difficult.


Originally Posted By: Washington Post
Firearms homicide...% of homicides...Guns per...Number of guns
per 100k people.....gun related......100 pop....in country
US---------------3.2------67.5-------------89---------270,000,000
Mexico---------9.97-----54.9-------------15---------18,500,000
Brazil-----------18.1-----70.8-------------8----------14,840,000
Venezuela--38.97----79.5-------------11---------2,850,000
Columbia---27.09----81.1-------------6----------2,700,000
Guatemala--34.81----84---------------13---------1,650,000
Honduras---68.43----83.4-------------6----------500,000
Look at complete chart here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/nation/gun-homicides-ownership/table/

Regards,
hm



No worries. I don't usually fact check but that one jumped out at me
laugh.gif


Pretty much anything and everything carries similar numbers of deaths with it. The tool isn't relevant IMO, unless there would be no death without the existence of the tool. If I'm ever walking down the street and some guy with a Uhaul decides to mow down everyone where I am I don't expect anyone to jump on here saying "THANK GOD, it wasn't a gun." I'm just as dead an more than likely suffered more. If you're going to kill me PLEASE do it with 1 to the back of the head when I don't know its coming.
 
Originally Posted By: hm1996 [font:Arial Black]
The single most common problem with gun control proposals is that they are concocted by folks who either have no knowledge whatsoever on the subject (guns) but are experts when it comes to control and extremely enthusiastic in that pursuit.

I have to completely disagree with you, and I think what you've said is the single most problem with gun control. The problem is that there shouldn't be any discussion concerning limiting or completely removing a freedom our founders deemed important enough to insure we keep it. Who cares how much knowledge someone has concerning a firearm? It has absolutely NOTHING to do with the second amendment...PERIOD. What's more important is understanding the purpose of the second amendment. Not the difference between semi-auto, full-auto, assault weapon, magazine, etcetera. Who cares? WHY we have a second amendment is far more important to understand, front to back, than how to operate a rifle. That's what these politicians are failing to understand.

 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Flesh EaterOriginally Posted By: hm1996 [font:Arial Black]
The single most common problem with gun control proposals is that they are concocted by folks who either have no knowledge whatsoever on the subject (guns) but are experts when it comes to control and extremely enthusiastic in that pursuit.

I have to completely disagree with you, and I think what you've said is the single most problem with gun control. The problem is that there shouldn't be any discussion concerning limiting or completely removing a freedom our founders deemed important enough to insure we keep it. Who cares how much knowledge someone has concerning a firearm? It has absolutely NOTHING to do with the second amendment...PERIOD. What's more important is understanding the purpose of the second amendment. Not the difference between semi-auto, full-auto, assault weapon, magazine, etcetera. Who cares? WHY we have a second amendment is far more important to understand, front to back, than how to operate a rifle. That's what these politicians are failing to understand.


Well, yeah! I thought that was pretty much what I stated.
grin.gif


I suspect you missed the word proposals in OP?? The point of my first paragraph was to point out the danger of the uninformed making recommendations as to solutions to the problem when they have not a clue as to the definitions involved. The uninformed media making suggestions to the equally uninformed public and politicians, either in ignorance or intentionally trying to misinform IS one of the major problems in the proposals that result.

Originally Posted By: hm1996The single most common problem with gun control proposals is that they are concocted by folks who either have no knowledge whatsoever on the subject (guns) but are experts when it comes to control and extremely enthusiastic in that pursuit.

To further compound the problem, they, almost to a person suffer from hoplophobia.

Hoplophobia is a term coined by retired American military officer Jeff Cooper as a pejorative to describe an "irrational aversion to weapons or a fear of armed persons."

I think that if you re read original post as well as my comments from a related thread partially quoted below, you will see that I am in full agreement with your point that "it", (the misuse of firearms by criminals, brainwashed fanatics and deviant behavior by mentally ill), is NOT related to the Second Amendment.

Originally Posted By: hm1996 Sorry, but our forefathers, having just secured our freedom from an oppressive governing body, realized the importance of a "well regulated" militia to protect that precious freedom and penned the Second Amendment. And let's be clear, the 2A is NOT about hunting or recreational shooting; it is about protecting our families and our freedoms.

Let me expound a moment and share a bit of background on the wording of the 2A.

Most of the general public, and specifically our opponents either do not know, or choose to ignore the accepted meaning of the phrase "well regulated" in the mid 1700's. Well regulated referred to a well trained, NOT controlled. The amendment continues, "the right of the people", clearly identifies the right guaranteed to be an individual right as opposed to a collective right.

A more detailed and very concise interpretation can be found @ The 'Lectric Law Library.

Originally Posted By: Bad Dawg You’ve made some valid points, but I still have to go back to the fact that we as a society have decided that instruments of warfare do not belong in the hands of the general population for the simple reason that they have the power to inflict a massive amount of destruction in a short period of time.

I would beg to differ that "we as a society have decided......". I, and many others like me, all members of society, do not concede my/our right to own the means to protect my family, my country, my freedom.

Originally Posted By: Bad Dawg I never mentioned that I was willing to give up my right to own an AR. It is a personal choice to not own one. My right to own one is still in place, for now.


Only so long as "they" (the progressives, democrats or socialists) decide to let you.

Complete post @:
http://www.predatormastersforums.com/for...1906&page=6

Regards,
hm
 
Back
Top