1. 2aHawaii
  2. General Topics
  3. Political Discussion
  4. Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
Print
Pages: [1] 2

Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos (Read 17892 times)

punaperson

Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
« on: April 12, 2017, 01:11:10 PM »
A rather rambling article from NBC News. While one pro-rights person is interviewed (a former anti-rights person who was assaulted with a gun), the rest are dyed-in-the-wool ignoramuses who make statements like the one quoted below. And that's from a college student! I have to wonder if they are that stupid (don't know the logic of "A is not equal to NOT A"), and the definition of "semi-automatic" or they just think people won't notice what they are saying is self-contradictory because of the FEELZ. It's also quite possible that the reporter is totally ignorant and misunderstood what they actually said, but one statement is in quotes...

Millennials Are Less Likely to Support Gun Control Than You’d Think

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/millennials-are-less-likely-support-gun-control-you-d-think-n610546

For Khepra and Clements, gun control isn't about taking firearms from people, it's about making sure the wrong people don't have access to dangerous weapons through proposals such as increasing background checks, implementing waiting periods after purchasing guns, and a ban on semi-automatic guns.

"We as gun reform activists need to continuously say we support the Second Amendment — we are not trying to do away with it or 'take away all the guns.' That said, I do not believe it gives us the right to own a gun anytime, by anyone, and to be taken anywhere," Clements told NBC News.

* * * * *
So they're not going to ban ALL guns, just the semi-autos. So all the people that own only semi-sutos will have ALL their guns taken away. Maybe they'll confiscate their AR-15 and their Glock 17 and "give" them a single shot .22LR Derringer. That sounds like something the politicians and government could get behind as "commonsense gun safety regulations" demonstrating their "support for the Second Amendment"!
Logged

rklapp

Re: Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
« Reply #1 on: April 12, 2017, 02:34:22 PM »
The main problem I have with gun control (other than the Constitution bit) is that there is no definitive proof that it protects the public from gun violence. What is the cost benefit?

SCOTUS has said that it's unconstitutional to outright ban guns (unless Congress does it) but jurisdictions can impose "reasonable" controls and make it harder to obtain guns. So the municipalities spend millions of tax payer money on making sure that law abiding citizens get screwed.

How much does HPD spend on background checks, psychiatric evaluations, rapback, recordkeeping, etc.? How much does this actually protect the public compared to a simple 3 day waiting/criminal/psychiatric background check like most States?

Personally, I think CCW is nuts and wouldn't if I could, but how much is the ban protecting the public?

I know the NRA hates scientific studies on this. IMHO, knowledge is power and ignorance is stupid.
Logged
Yahh! Freedom and justice shall always prevail over tyranny, Babysitter Girl!
https://ronsreloading.wordpress.com/

Flapp_Jackson

Re: Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
« Reply #2 on: April 12, 2017, 02:54:19 PM »
Quote from: rklapp on April 12, 2017, 02:34:22 PM
The main problem I have with gun control (other than the Constitution bit) is that there is no definitive proof that it protects the public from gun violence. What is the cost benefit?

SCOTUS has said that it's unconstitutional to outright ban guns (unless Congress does it) but jurisdictions can impose "reasonable" controls and make it harder to obtain guns. So the municipalities spend millions of tax payer money on making sure that law abiding citizens get screwed.

How much does HPD spend on background checks, psychiatric evaluations, rapback, recordkeeping, etc.? How much does this actually protect the public compared to a simple 3 day waiting/criminal/psychiatric background check like most States?

Personally, I think CCW is nuts and wouldn't if I could, but how much is the ban protecting the public?

I know the NRA hates scientific studies on this. IMHO, knowledge is power and ignorance is stupid.

Why do you think that is?
Logged
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world;
the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw

Flapp_Jackson

Re: Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
« Reply #3 on: April 12, 2017, 02:55:40 PM »
Quote from: rklapp on April 12, 2017, 02:34:22 PM
The main problem I have with gun control (other than the Constitution bit) is that there is no definitive proof that it protects the public from gun violence. What is the cost benefit?

SCOTUS has said that it's unconstitutional to outright ban guns (unless Congress does it) but jurisdictions can impose "reasonable" controls and make it harder to obtain guns. So the municipalities spend millions of tax payer money on making sure that law abiding citizens get screwed.

How much does HPD spend on background checks, psychiatric evaluations, rapback, recordkeeping, etc.? How much does this actually protect the public compared to a simple 3 day waiting/criminal/psychiatric background check like most States?

Personally, I think CCW is nuts and wouldn't if I could, but how much is the ban protecting the public?

I know the NRA hates scientific studies on this. IMHO, knowledge is power and ignorance is stupid.

Please explain the reasoning behind your opinion.
Logged
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world;
the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw

punaperson

Re: Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
« Reply #4 on: April 12, 2017, 03:02:35 PM »
 :popcorn:
Logged

omnigun

Re: Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
« Reply #5 on: April 12, 2017, 03:36:11 PM »
GEN Z are some of the most conservative generation since the baby boomers.  We will eventually get our gun rights back when we are old.
Logged

rklapp

Re: Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
« Reply #6 on: April 12, 2017, 03:56:20 PM »
Quote from: Flapp_Jackson on April 12, 2017, 02:54:19 PM
Why do you think that is?
https://www.wired.com/2017/01/gun-research-will-get-even-difficult-nra-friendly-trump/

It's a double edge sword. Most studies show that family members are more likely to get shot in the home, guns and alcohol don't mix, guns and children don't mix, blah blah blah. What I want to know is how effective are gun controls on protecting the public from gun violence. My speculation is that it doesn't. The problem is that it's difficult to research one without the other.

Quote
Please explain the reasoning behind your opinion.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/06/27/after-orlando-examining-the-gun-business

I say that if you're gonna carry a weapon, have it out in the open so everyone can see it or don't carry it at all. Perhaps I'd change my mind if I saw a study (from an unbiased source) that says you're X times more likely to survive a robbery with a CCW. Send me a link if you know of one and I'll evaluate their study method.
Logged
Yahh! Freedom and justice shall always prevail over tyranny, Babysitter Girl!
https://ronsreloading.wordpress.com/

punaperson

Re: Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
« Reply #7 on: April 12, 2017, 04:05:48 PM »
Quote from: rklapp on April 12, 2017, 03:56:20 PM
https://www.wired.com/2017/01/gun-research-will-get-even-difficult-nra-friendly-trump/

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/06/27/after-orlando-examining-the-gun-business

Perhaps I'd change my mind if I saw a study (from an unbiased source)...
You cite those two sources (both are have errors and anyone claiming Garen Wintemute is the "best" researcher in the country is biased beyond believability) as the basis for your conclusions and then ask someone to provide "unbiased source(s)" to try to convince you otherwise?  :crazy:  :rofl:
Logged

Flapp_Jackson

Re: Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
« Reply #8 on: April 12, 2017, 04:20:40 PM »
Quote from: rklapp on April 12, 2017, 03:56:20 PM
https://www.wired.com/2017/01/gun-research-will-get-even-difficult-nra-friendly-trump/

It's a double edge sword. Most studies show that family members are more likely to get shot in the home, guns and alcohol don't mix, guns and children don't mix, blah blah blah. What I want to know is how effective are gun controls on protecting the public from gun violence. The problem is that it's difficult to research one without the other.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/06/27/after-orlando-examining-the-gun-business

I say that if you're gonna carry a weapon, have it out in the open so everyone can see it or don't carry it at all. Perhaps I'd change my mind if I saw a study (from an unbiased source) that says you're X times more likely to survive a robbery with a CCW. Send me a link if you know of one and I'll evaluate their study method.


Here's one for you:  People alive today are at the greatest risk of dying over any other group.

When you own a gun and store it at home, what do you think the odds are going to be that someone could get shot compared to a home that has no guns?  It's not 100-to-0, because bad guys often bring guns to victims' homes. 

It's common sense that if a weapon exists, you have a higher chance of it being used than if it does not exist.  We don't need studies for that. 

Firearms are NOT for everyone.  You have to be mentally willing and capable of using it to harm someone.  Since it's classified "deadly force", you have to have the mindset needed to possibly end someone's life if you feel they pose a serious threat to your or your family.

If you aren't willing or able for any reason to injure and perhaps kill another person, even to save your own life, then you should never consider owning, let alone carrying, a firearm.

Statistics on gun violence are meant to do one thing:  tell YOU what YOU should do.  I would never try to convince you to carry a gun.  That's your choice.  In the same vein, you should not use statistics or any other "evidence" to convince me not to carry.

I am responsible for my own safety, just as you are.  If I choose guns, and you choose a cellphone and 911, we are both looking for the same thing:  a way to stop someone from victimizing us. 

Most people can go through life and never use a gun they carry, because it's often a "wrong place-wrong time" issue when violence strikes.  I've never shot anyone, but I've never needed to, either.

I don't live my life based on statistical odds.  Ever hear of Murphy's law?  I've seen that have more effect on my life than statistical probabilities!  If I need a gun, it'll be when I least expect it.  At that point, I'm justified carrying a gun.  Before then, it was an exercise in preparation.






Logged
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world;
the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw

rklapp

Re: Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
« Reply #9 on: April 12, 2017, 04:21:25 PM »
Quote from: punaperson on April 12, 2017, 04:05:48 PM
You cite those two sources (both are have errors and anyone claiming Garen Wintemute is the "best" researcher in the country is biased beyond believability) as the basis for your conclusions and then ask someone to provide "unbiased source(s)" to try to convince you otherwise?  :crazy:  :rofl:

Logged
Yahh! Freedom and justice shall always prevail over tyranny, Babysitter Girl!
https://ronsreloading.wordpress.com/

rklapp

Re: Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
« Reply #10 on: April 12, 2017, 04:28:08 PM »
Quote from: Flapp_Jackson on April 12, 2017, 04:20:40 PM
I don't live my life based on statistical odds.  Ever hear of Murphy's law?  I've seen that have more effect on my life than statistical probabilities!  If I need a gun, it'll be when I least expect it.  At that point, I'm justified carrying a gun.  Before then, it was an exercise in preparation.
I do. It's part of my profession. I do believe that everyone should have the decision to own a gun with simple controls as I mentioned. The problem I have is when the liberal side says it's common sense to ban guns and the conservative side says it's common sense to own a gun. The scientist in me wants to know what the unbiased research shows. By unbiased, I mean that they're willing to ask the if it's safer to ban guns or safer to own a gun. If Wintemute is not willing to do both, then he's biased.
Logged
Yahh! Freedom and justice shall always prevail over tyranny, Babysitter Girl!
https://ronsreloading.wordpress.com/

Flapp_Jackson

Re: Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
« Reply #11 on: April 12, 2017, 04:54:16 PM »
Since you're relying on secondhand info to state your opinions, here's something I've seen on live TV from the NRA chair.  The reason the NRA opposes FUNDING for gun-related studies is, the studies usually have (1) bad data, (2) bad conclusions, and (3) are focused to support gun control. 

The NRA believes if the government is going to appropriate our taxes for studies, they should not be used to push a political agenda.  Many members of Congress and some administrations have openly admitted there should be fewer, or zero, guns in the hands of the public.  There is no evidence that fewer guns in the hands of law abiding people reduces crime, so they are already starting from a standpoint of a political agenda using a patently unproven premise.

The government benefits from a reduction in numbers and types of firearms the public can own, where we can have them, and how many each can have.  Therefore, the government should not be spending our taxes to produce reports supporting their position.  Bias is "baked into" everything they touch based on their agenda.

There is no centralized database of gun-related violence or injuries and deaths.  Often, the categories don't capture the "flavor" of an injury or death, just the pigeonhole it most closely matches.  So many examples of how the news blasts a shooting all over the media, then we find out the fact it was justified was completely omitted.

Not all gun deaths are equal.  Nor are all gun injuries.  We can't create good stats from bad data.  We have to fix the data collection PROCESS first. 

One good example:  Most defensive gun use (DGU) end in no injuries, no deaths and no shots fired.  When confronting a gun wielding "victim," attackers often change their mind.  Since the crime and the gun use never really happened, there are often no police reports.  How do you track something when there is no report?  CDC said in 2013 the number of DGUs is AT LEAST as high as criminal use of guns.  That means, mathematically, the worst case says as many people prevent injury or death as victims experience injury or death involving guns.  Some studies put the number of DGUs at 1.4M - 3M annually, which greatly exceeds the 60K reported uses of guns in crimes. 

So, if you're going to plan your life around statistical probabilities, MAYBE you should make sure the data and conclusions you choose can be trusted first.
Logged
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world;
the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw

punaperson

Re: Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
« Reply #12 on: April 12, 2017, 05:24:16 PM »
Quote from: Flapp_Jackson on April 12, 2017, 04:54:16 PM
CDC said in 2013 the number of DGUs is AT LEAST as high as criminal use of guns.  That means, mathematically, the worst case says as many people prevent injury or death as victims experience injury or death involving guns.
One minor correction: The stat on total crimes involving the use of guns includes mostly cases of guns used without that gun being used to injure or kill the crime victim, it's merely a "persuasive" tool, much like in the case of the DGUs where the guns are not fired (over 98% of DGUs), but "brandished" to alert the would-be criminal to potential consequences.
Logged

rklapp

Re: Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
« Reply #13 on: April 12, 2017, 05:40:14 PM »
Here's an example. How does this makes sense? They're trying to extrapolate that the Assault Weapons Ban reduced handgun violence, but the other guns rate stayed the same. Was it a coincidence or were there specific activities that reduced handgun violence? I'm asking for research that counters this misinformation.

Logged
Yahh! Freedom and justice shall always prevail over tyranny, Babysitter Girl!
https://ronsreloading.wordpress.com/

Flapp_Jackson

Re: Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
« Reply #14 on: April 12, 2017, 05:46:59 PM »
Quote from: rklapp on April 12, 2017, 05:40:14 PM
Here's an example. How does this makes sense? They're trying to extrapolate that the Assault Weapons Ban reduced handgun violence, but the other guns rate stayed the same. Was it a coincidence or were there specific activities that reduced handgun violence? I'm asking for research that counters this misinformation.


Repeat after me ....

CORRELATION DOES NOT EQUAL CAUSATION
Logged
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world;
the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw

rklapp

Re: Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
« Reply #15 on: April 12, 2017, 05:50:39 PM »
Here's another example. This is used to argue that firearms are more lethal than automobiles. There are many confounding factors in this graph. Half of the firearm fatalities are suicide by gun. Most of the firearm homicides are with handguns. The decrease in auto fatalities are due to building better cars.

Logged
Yahh! Freedom and justice shall always prevail over tyranny, Babysitter Girl!
https://ronsreloading.wordpress.com/

rklapp

Re: Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
« Reply #16 on: April 12, 2017, 05:52:33 PM »
Logged
Yahh! Freedom and justice shall always prevail over tyranny, Babysitter Girl!
https://ronsreloading.wordpress.com/

punaperson

Re: Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
« Reply #17 on: April 12, 2017, 05:55:45 PM »
Quote from: rklapp on April 12, 2017, 04:28:08 PM
I do. It's part of my profession. I do believe that everyone should have the decision to own a gun with simple controls as I mentioned. The problem I have is when the liberal side says it's common sense to ban guns and the conservative side says it's common sense to own a gun. The scientist in me wants to know what the unbiased research shows. By unbiased, I mean that they're willing to ask the if it's safer to ban guns or safer to own a gun. If Wintemute is not willing to do both, then he's biased.
I'm skeptical that someone who makes that claim would cite "Wired" and "The New Yorker" as sources supporting their position. Here's an example of a blatant error in the New Yorker article: "Under the new “right to carry” laws, which two dozen other states later adopted, officials had no choice but to issue a permit to anyone who was “mentally fit” and had not been convicted of a violent felony." With that level of (in)accuracy, one would have to be skeptical of the accuracy of every other statement in the article that one did not have firsthand knowledge of.

Every "study" done by Wintemute in over 20 years lead one to the inevitable conclusion that "the fewer people have the fewer guns the better for everyone". He never met a DGU he liked. And here's a quote from him: "Assault weapons play a disproportionate role in violence generally." [https://www.thenation.com/article/wresting-gun-policy-hands-radical-fringe-qa-garen-wintemute/]

That's laughable. Everyone (almost) knows that handguns play a disproportionate role in criminal use of guns (even including non-criminal uses such as "accidents" and suicides). Let's compare his claim to the FBI published stats. In 2014, the last year for which we have complete data, the FBI recorded 248 homicides by rifles [this category includes ALL rifles, not just those that Wintemute would arbitrarily label as "assault weapons") and 262 by shotguns, both the lowest in the previous five years. Rifles accounted for just two percent of all homicides. More than twice as many homicides were committed by “personal weapons,” such as hands, fists, feet, and so on (660), and almost twice as many by blunt instrument (435). Knives and cutting instruments accounted for 16.4% of all homicides, eight times as many as rifles. It’s also worth pointing out that murders overall declined in every year from 2010 to 2014, including murders by firearms, without a so-called “assault weapons” ban.

I believe that if one looks carefully enough at any study methodology one can find weaknesses, thus raising the question if such a thing as true "objectivity" exists. It's going to be a matter of degree. I mentioned Gary Kleck earlier because he is a card-carrying Democrat and member of the ACLU who did not expect to find what he did, but published anyway even though it went against his politically-based beliefs about the issue (though for some unclear reason, at the end of "Point Blank" he still calls for gun control!).

Logged

Flapp_Jackson

Re: Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
« Reply #18 on: April 12, 2017, 06:03:29 PM »
Quote from: rklapp on April 12, 2017, 05:50:39 PM
Here's another example. This is used to argue that firearms are more lethal than automobiles. There are many confounding factors in this graph. Half of the firearm fatalities are suicide by gun. Most of the firearm homicides are with handguns. The decrease in auto fatalities are due to building better cars.


Apples and oranges.  The two have completely different applications and require different degrees of skill to use (guns are much simpler to operate than a car).  There are also fewer vehicles owned and operated daily than guns.  347 million guns vs. 253 million cars and trucks.  More of a population means higher likelihood of causing death.

You could look at the stats as:  Firearms are designed to be lethal.  Cars are designed to be safe modes of transportation.  Are cars really as lethal as guns?  If so, maybe the safety engineers need to go back to the drawing board!

Finally, the title states:  Deaths Caused by:  Motor Vehicles   Firearms.

"Caused by" is a misleading and loaded phrase."  Should say "Involving".  Cars and guns don't cause death.  People using them do.  Except Christine.   :shake:
Logged
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world;
the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw

punaperson

Re: Millennials for the Second Amendment AND Banning Semi-autos
« Reply #19 on: April 12, 2017, 06:21:22 PM »
Quote from: rklapp on April 12, 2017, 05:40:14 PM
Here's an example. How does this makes sense? They're trying to extrapolate that the Assault Weapons Ban reduced handgun violence, but the other guns rate stayed the same. Was it a coincidence or were there specific activities that reduced handgun violence? I'm asking for research that counters this misinformation.


Of course correlation does not equal causation. But it's even worse with this graph. During the "Assault Weapons Ban" (a ban on the sale of semi-automatic rifles having certain cosmetic features), the rate of handgun homicides drops relatively precipitously during the first 5 years, 4.8 to 3.0 = 37%. There is a similar decline in homicide rate BY ALL CAUSES (guns, knives, feet and fists, blunt objects, poisoning, etc.). However, the weapons that were banned, so-called "assault rifles" are part of the group of "other guns" (which includes all long guns, ALL rifles and shotguns, but excludes handguns). The homicide rate for this group including the "assault rifles" declined during the same period from 1.0 to 0.8, or 20%. So the homicide rate for the guns NOT banned (handguns) declined TWICE AS MUCH as the decline for the group including the guns that WERE banned. The explanation for that is going to read like a Ninth Circuit opinion concluding that the "right to bear arms" does not include the right to concealed carry, and may not include the right to open carry. I'm just sayin'...
Logged
Print
Pages: [1] 2
« previous next »