Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Questions the left won't discuss about gun control, but should - and soon. [View all]Straw Man
(6,771 posts)77. No, it hasn't.
It's been done
Most of Europe has access to rifles and almost no access to handguns..
Guess what, people aren't getting huge numbers of shotguns and rifles and killing themselves or committing crimes...
Most of Europe has access to rifles and almost no access to handguns..
Guess what, people aren't getting huge numbers of shotguns and rifles and killing themselves or committing crimes...
If you are suggesting that Europe has drastically reduced suicide and violent crime by banning handguns, then you're whistling in the wind. Show me that correlation independent of any other factors and you might have something to discuss. Europe didn't always ban handguns. You would have to show rate changes that coincide with bans to even begin the discussion.
You list two examples of murder by shotgun, but the statistics don't back up the idea that people kill themselves as frequently with shotguns as they do with handguns... not even close really...
Please read carefully. First, those were examples of suicide, not murder. Second, my contention is that it is quite possible to kill oneself with a shotgun in the absence of a handgun, not that it is currently done in equivalent numbers. And let me emphasize once more that suicide is almost always a one-shot process; a single-shot long gun is more than adequate for the task and will be used if that is all that is available.
BECAUSE
The rest of the world manages to live with out an epidemic of gun violence. It's possible. All you have to do is hop on a plane and visit any industrialised nation and check for yourself. Where I live, the police don't even carry guns, and people are cowering in their homes at night afraid of armed intruders. Kids don't have to go through metal detectors at schools or have school shooting drills. You may THINK that the "freedom" you have is worth all the death and fear and misery, and worth raising kids to be aware that they could be mowed down at any moment, but no one I know here thinks it is... and neither do many Americans.
The rest of the world manages to live with out an epidemic of gun violence. It's possible. All you have to do is hop on a plane and visit any industrialised nation and check for yourself. Where I live, the police don't even carry guns, and people are cowering in their homes at night afraid of armed intruders. Kids don't have to go through metal detectors at schools or have school shooting drills. You may THINK that the "freedom" you have is worth all the death and fear and misery, and worth raising kids to be aware that they could be mowed down at any moment, but no one I know here thinks it is... and neither do many Americans.
I have traveled to many industrialised nations, and lived in one -- Japan -- for almost a decade. I currently do not live in fear of being "mowed down," and I do enjoy many freedoms that the residents of that fine nation never have and never will enjoy, including the right not to be detained for several days by police without charge or counsel, the right to marry a person of my own gender if I should choose to do so, and yes, the right to keep and bear arms.
Hand guns are owned by 25% of the population, but are used in 8/10 gun crimes. Take them away and you'll only impact 1 of 4 american's right to carry a specific type of gun, and you'll take the main weapon in violent crime off the street.
Only to be replaced by whatever else is available, which you can then proceed to try to ban. Pointy knives, anyone?
I'm not anti-hunting, and not anti-gun per se, but I am completely unconvinced that the Founding Fathers would see 30K dead Americans a year and just shrug it off as the cost of freedom..
Considering that they lived with homicide rates that equaled or exceeded those of present-day America, I think you are very wrong.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
160 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Questions the left won't discuss about gun control, but should - and soon. [View all]
EdwardBernays
Oct 2015
OP
sure but you would need to PROVE that your law would absolutely improve...
discntnt_irny_srcsm
Oct 2015
#16
Yup, Ireland's always been such a peacful, safe place with no violence to speak of
DonP
Oct 2015
#75
Your WaPo articles speaks to gun violence, not violence as a whole as GE was speaking.
Nuclear Unicorn
Oct 2015
#54
Welcome. I will respond when I have time to consider your questions thoroughly...
Eleanors38
Oct 2015
#19
I would restrict concealed carry permits to trained professionals with a demonstrated need.
Maedhros
Oct 2015
#27
I wasn't suggesting that it was. I was simply pointing out that a carrying populace does not
Kang Colby
Oct 2015
#34
"Too bad no one but the two of us is reading it." Incorrect, unfortunately for the Stuart heir
friendly_iconoclast
Oct 2015
#160
I currently "live with" tens of thousands of alcohol-related deaths a year...
Eleanors38
Oct 2015
#80
I should have said that there are no mass killings in other countries like in the US.
guillaumeb
Oct 2015
#104
Let's see two threads today about people getting shot by reckless concealed carry
upaloopa
Oct 2015
#127