2 of 2
2
If We Allow Scientists to Study Gun Violence, What Aspects Should be Studied and What Will We Learn?
Posted: 02 February 2013 05:46 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2885
Joined  2011-08-15

Unfortunately, I tried that argument on a gun lover, Gary, and his response was, “If you want to
limit the Second Amendment to the time the Constitution was written, then, to be consistent,
you’d have to eliminate all electronic communication from First Amendment protection.”

Occam

You might reply, electronic communication doesn’t kill, people kill people.  A classic NRA argument. Gary’s argument has merit. Pass a law stipulating that all auto and semi auto weapons must be turned in to the local police whereupon each gunowner will be compensated with a British Tower musket (69cal.) OR a French Charleville, their choice. As a further incentive they may receive a flintlock pistol which they may carry for personal protection. A $750.00 value plus shooting a black powder weapon is much less expensive, around two cents a shot. Also, with reloading time at 2 rounds per minute you can get that bad guy and his cohort. Bayonets NOT included.


Cap’t Jack

 Signature 

One good schoolmaster is of more use than a hundred priests.

Thomas Paine

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 February 2013 10:50 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1741
Joined  2007-10-22
Thevillageatheist - 02 February 2013 05:46 AM

Unfortunately, I tried that argument on a gun lover, Gary, and his response was, “If you want to
limit the Second Amendment to the time the Constitution was written, then, to be consistent,
you’d have to eliminate all electronic communication from First Amendment protection.”

Occam

You might reply, electronic communication doesn’t kill, people kill people.  A classic NRA argument. Gary’s argument has merit. Pass a law stipulating that all auto and semi auto weapons must be turned in to the local police whereupon each gunowner will be compensated with a British Tower musket (69cal.) OR a French Charleville, their choice. As a further incentive they may receive a flintlock pistol which they may carry for personal protection. A $750.00 value plus shooting a black powder weapon is much less expensive, around two cents a shot. Also, with reloading time at 2 rounds per minute you can get that bad guy and his cohort. Bayonets NOT included.


Cap’t Jack

From my studies many years ago; the purpose of the Second amendment was to allow the state government to maintain a militia to resist the authority of the new Federal Government.  Remember these people had only recently fought the Revolution to resist centralizing British Authority.  Regardless of the gun lobby’s buying the Supreme Court’s decision to make this amendment cover something that it was not intended to do.

 Signature 

Gary the Human

All the Gods and all religions are created by humans, to meet human needs and accomplish human ends.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 February 2013 01:49 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5173
Joined  2010-06-16

The framers of the Constitution recognized that it was supposed to be a living document and that it would be changed to match a changing society.  Too bad they didn’t delete the 2nd Amendment when they had the chance. 

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 February 2013 04:52 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2282
Joined  2007-07-05

We need more Physics control!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vQhNvMRj_0

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 August 2013 06:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  19
Joined  2013-08-20

Ah…hate to burst your bubble guys but scientists have been studying this issue for decades - FBI keeping UGCR stats since Moses was a baby & CDC since the 80’s and a lot more since;

...you should brush up on the subject matter - if you are looking for a start on cross cultural comparisons of gun ownership and crime you can’t get a much better overview than David Kopel’s “The Samurai, the Mountie and the Cowboy.”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 October 2013 03:03 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  9
Joined  2013-10-24
Chrisan - 18 January 2013 05:58 PM

I didn’t realize the NRA had lobbied for years to prevent scientific study of gun violence.  I read an article to this effect a while back and now, of course, one of the president’s exec orders involves more study of the issue.  So what aspects should we study?

Me, I’m a data guy.  I’d like to see more good data.  Who’s shooting who?  Is it mostly crooks on crooks or crooks shooting civilians?  How often is a gun actually used by a private person to defend themselves?  And of those times how often was a gun the level of force that was necessary to prevent the perceived threat?  Could the person have just ran away?

We hear that if we outlaws guns “only the criminals will have them.”  Is that actually true?  I see countries like the UK and Australia with very restrictive gun laws and very low firearm homicide rates.  Do the crooks have guns but maybe they’re just not killing people with them?  Or do most of the crooks just not have guns?  If not, how was that accomplished in those countries?

And what is the true correlation between private gun ownership and violent crime rates.  I’ve seen conflicting data. 

So what are your thoughts?  What other aspects should we examine?  Mental health, video games? 

Chris

Chris,

Criminologists have been doing studies on gun violence for years. Not all of your questions are addressed though.  Would you like to provide you with a list of some peer reviewed articles to check out?

Stacy

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 October 2013 04:31 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5173
Joined  2010-06-16

Unfortunately Stacy, Chrisan hasn’t been on the site since last June, so he probably won’t see your offer.

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 October 2013 06:21 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  19
Joined  2013-08-20
kithain - 25 October 2013 03:03 PM
Chrisan - 18 January 2013 05:58 PM

I didn’t realize the NRA had lobbied for years to prevent scientific study of gun violence.  I read an article to this effect a while back and now, of course, one of the president’s exec orders involves more study of the issue.  So what aspects should we study?

Me, I’m a data guy.  I’d like to see more good data.  Who’s shooting who?  Is it mostly crooks on crooks or crooks shooting civilians?  How often is a gun actually used by a private person to defend themselves?  And of those times how often was a gun the level of force that was necessary to prevent the perceived threat?  Could the person have just ran away?

We hear that if we outlaws guns “only the criminals will have them.”  Is that actually true?  I see countries like the UK and Australia with very restrictive gun laws and very low firearm homicide rates.  Do the crooks have guns but maybe they’re just not killing people with them?  Or do most of the crooks just not have guns?  If not, how was that accomplished in those countries?

And what is the true correlation between private gun ownership and violent crime rates.  I’ve seen conflicting data. 

So what are your thoughts?  What other aspects should we examine?  Mental health, video games? 

Chris

Chris,

Criminologists have been doing studies on gun violence for years. Not all of your questions are addressed though.  Would you like to provide you with a list of some peer reviewed articles to check out?

Stacy


I would be interested in seeing that list Stacy…thanks.

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 2
2