Lost in the scuffle.

[Bootz]

So many questions, apparently a gun ban is the other answer, at least for some. But i started doing Google searches and found that the 4th leading cause of death in America was in the category unintentional accidents. over 114k.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm

Then i saw figures on Homicides and 2/3rds were with firearms. roughly 11k out of 16k.

and then i went to look at suicides which is reported as the 10th leading cause of death and rates are on the rise. Not my far right source. Ha

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/suicide-rates-teen-girls_us_59848b64e4b0cb15b1be13f4

My conclusion is this. The gun debate masks the real issue of why people want to kill themselves and others. It also elicits the question are mass murderers really committing suicide?

More important than gun control is understanding why violence and suicide is on the rise.

 

[Cardinal]

More important than gun control is understanding why violence and suicide is on the rise.

But if we focus on other issues, how can we focus on guns? Guns are the factor in every gun-related murder, so looking at other factors seems like an extremely inefficient way of focusing on guns.

 

[Bootz]

But if we focus on other issues, how can we focus on guns? Guns are the factor in every gun-related murder, so looking at other factors seems like an extremely inefficient way of focusing on guns.

actually there is another commonality amongst homicides and it is people. perhaps people should be the focus. or we could prevent all accidents and prevent 10 times the deaths.

 

[Cardinal]

actually there is another commonality amongst homicides and it is people. perhaps people should be the focus. or we could prevent all accidents and prevent 10 times the deaths.

But then we wouldn't be focusing on the gun factor.

It would be like if you wanted to focus on air pollution, and I told you no, focus on car safety. Okay, so you're focusing on car safety now, but you're no longer focusing on air pollution.

 

[Captain Adverse]

But if we focus on other issues, how can we focus on guns? Guns are the factor in every gun-related murder, so looking at other factors seems like an extremely inefficient way of focusing on guns.

...And knives are the factor in every knife related murder, cars in every car-related murder, bombs in every bomb-related killing, etc., etc., etc.

Correlation does not imply causation. Tools are tools, and any tool can be misused.

Finding out why a person wants to misuse the tool and develop methods of treatment and prevention is better than banning the tool.

 

[Bootz]

But then we wouldn't be focusing on the gun factor.

It would be like if you wanted to focus on air pollution, and I told you no, focus on car safety. Okay, so you're focusing on car safety now, but you're no longer focusing on air pollution.

actually it would be like focusing on car emissions or electric vehicles. apply your gun thesis to suicides, are they going up because of guns?

 

[Bootz]

...And knives are the factor in every knife related murder, cars in every car-related murder, bombs in every bomb-related killing, etc., etc., etc.

Correlation does not imply causation. Tools are tools, and any tool can be misused.

Finding out why a person wants to misuse the tool and develop methods of treatment and prevention is better than banning the tool.

Cardinal seems fixated on obfuscation.

 

[ttwtt78640]

But if we focus on other issues, how can we focus on guns? Guns are the factor in every gun-related murder, so looking at other factors seems like an extremely inefficient way of focusing on guns.

Yep, if only we could stop guns from selecting targets, loading themselves up, going to where those targets are and then firing themselves at those targets we would have no more gun crime. Maybe we need to design guns that can only do what their owners intend.

 

[Cardinal]

...And knives are the factor in every knife related murder, cars in every car-related murder, bombs in every bomb-related killing, etc., etc., etc.

And if you're looking at knives, cars, and bombs, then you're not focusing on guns. That's a highly inefficient way of approaching the gun issue.

Correlation does not imply causation. Tools are tools, and any tool can be misused.

Finding out why a person wants to misuse the tool and develop methods of treatment and prevention is better than banning the tool.

 

[Cardinal]

Yep, if only we could stop guns from selecting targets, loading themselves up, going to where those targets are and then firing themselves at those targets we would have no more gun crime. Maybe we need to design guns that can only do what their owners intend.

It's strange how gun enthusiasts think that's a clever argument. In a meeting among fellow gun enthusiast it must sound terribly clever. When your audience isn't each other, however, it's just sad and stupid.

 

[Cardinal]

actually it would be like focusing on car emissions or electric vehicles. apply your gun thesis to suicides, are they going up because of guns?

Are the people who commit suicide with guns using guns?

 

[Bootz]

Are the people who commit suicide with guns using guns?

they are people first and there are many methods of committing suicide, however I posed the question as to why suicides are on the rise. You believe guns are the motive?

 

[Cardinal]

they are people first and there are many methods of committing suicide, however I posed the question as to why suicides are on the rise. You believe guns are the motive?

But they're using guns, right? The people who kill themselves with guns, I mean.

 

[ttwtt78640]

It's strange how gun enthusiasts think that's a clever argument. In a meeting among fellow gun enthusiast it must sound terribly clever. When your audience isn't each other, however, it's just sad and stupid.

So is the blame the tool argument if applied when trucks are used as weapons to perform mass killings. Those truck enthusiasts think it's a loose nut behind the wheel problem, not a truck problem.

 

[Captain Adverse]

And if you're looking at knives, cars, and bombs, then you're not focusing on guns. That's a highly inefficient way of approaching the gun issue.

Correct.

I prefer focusing on CAUSES rather than methods.

Killing can be done via all sorts of methods.

WHY someone feels the need to act out in such a way...i.e. finding the MOTIVE goes further toward prevention IMO than any bans or restrictions may provide.

 

[Cardinal]

So is the blame the tool argument if applied when trucks are used as weapons to perform mass killings. Those truck enthusiasts think it's a loose nut behind the wheel problem, not a truck problem.

If I focus on trucks then how can I focus on guns? No thank you, I will focus on the guns, since they are the present factor in every death involving a gun.

 

[Cardinal]

Correct. I prefer focusing on CAUSES rather than methods.

Killing can be done via all sorts of methods.

WHY someone feels the need to act out in such a way...i.e. finding the MOTIVE goes further toward prevention IMO than any bans or restrictions may provide.

No, you prefer redirecting the conversation so we don't talk about guns. You may be successful in controlling the gun control conversation using that tactic with other people, but it won't work with me.

 

[Rexedgar]

curious as to the thread title, my keyboard is qwerty and there is ample space between the key of 'c' and 'h'?

 

[Captain Adverse]

No, you prefer redirecting the conversation so we don't talk about guns. You may be successful in controlling the gun control conversation using that tactic with other people, but it won't work with me.

And you prefer focusing on the overall goal raised by your side of all such discussions, violation of our right to keep and bear arms.

It is an emotion-based argument that I cannot support. Crying about the horror and pointing to the particular tool rather than the perpetrator.

Yet such acts, however terrible, are extremely rare among those who own guns.

Just as acts using cars are rare among those who own cars, etc.

If you were honest about prevention, you would argue for cause prevention rather than result prevention.

As long as there is a cause, the perpetrator will find the tool to reach the same result.

 

[Cardinal]

And you prefer focusing on the overall goal raised by your side of all such discussions, violation of our right to keep and bear arms.

Your appeal to authority is rejected.

It is an emotion-based argument that I cannot support. Crying about the horror and pointing to the particular tool rather than the perpetrator.

Which emotion-based argument are you referring to?

These acts, however terrible, as rare among those who own guns.

Your opinion on what constitutes statistical relevance is not valued.

Just as acts using cars are rare among those who own cars, etc.

Your attempt to redirect my attention from guns to other things won't succeed.

 

[Crovax]

But if we focus on other issues, how can we focus on guns? Guns are the factor in every gun-related murder, so looking at other factors seems like an extremely inefficient way of focusing on guns.

I thought you were being sarcastic, the idea that this is a serious post is highly disturbing

 

[Captain Adverse]

Your attempt to redirect my attention from guns to other things won't succeed.

I don't expect to succeed with you.

My counter-arguments are for those viewing these discussions who chose reason over emotion-based efforts to give up essential liberties in exchange for a sense of false security. :coffeepap:

 

[Cardinal]

I thought you were being sarcastic, the idea that this is a serious post is highly disturbing

I'm just aware of one of several debate tactics used by gun enthusiasts.

Don't look at the guns, look at mental health.
Don't look at the guns, look at the poor educational system.
Don't look at the guns, look at past behavior of the shooter.
Don't look at the guns, look at the poor social safety net.
Don't look at the guns, look at video games.
Don't look at the guns, look at tightening the rating of movies.
Don't look at the guns, look at casualties in other areas.
Don't look at the guns, look at poverty.
Don't look at the guns, look at the security guard failing to enter the school to confront the shooter.
Don't look at the guns, look at other ways that people can murder.
Don't look at the guns, look at school security.

But whatever you do, never ever look at the guns. Look anywhere else but at the guns.

Well, if it's all the same to you, I will look at the guns.

 

[Glen Contrarian]

So many questions, apparently a gun ban is the other answer, at least for some. But i started doing Google searches and found that the 4th leading cause of death in America was in the category unintentional accidents. over 114k.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm

Then i saw figures on Homicides and 2/3rds were with firearms. roughly 11k out of 16k.

and then i went to look at suicides which is reported as the 10th leading cause of death and rates are on the rise. Not my far right source. Ha

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/suicide-rates-teen-girls_us_59848b64e4b0cb15b1be13f4

My conclusion is this. The gun debate masks the real issue of why people want to kill themselves and others. It also elicits the question are mass murderers really committing suicide?

More important than gun control is understanding why violence and suicide is on the rise.

More guns, more suicides.

Consider Australia's experience:

The gun law reforms enacted after the Port Arthur massacre 20 years ago did not only bring about an uninterrupted hiatus on mass shootings in Australia, but precipitated a decline in all intentional deaths, including those that did not involve firearms.
Research published in the prestigious American journal JAMA demonstrates fears that gun suicides would merely be replaced by other methods have proved misguided, with an initial spike in suicide deaths immediately following the buyback followed by a steady downward trend.

The rate of homicide deaths, which were already in decline, declined further.
University of Sydney Emeritus Professor Simon Chapman, who was the lead author of the paper, said while there had been 13 mass killings - defined as five or more victims - between 1979 and 1996, there had been none since.

"But far more significant in terms of lives that are lost are the day-to-day, very unspectacular killings where an individual shoots another individual or maybe two, and by far and away the biggest category of gun deaths are suicides," Professor Chapman said.
"We showed that if you put those killings together, they were going down before the Port Arthur massacre but they went down even faster after the law reforms and that's a really big story."

Of course this will mean nothing to "gun rights" advocates since anyone outside America's borders is obviously a different species of human being, and so what happens there can't possibly be replicated here. After all, it's now considered unpatriotic to learn any beneficial lessons from other nations - except, perhaps, on how to vilify the media....

 

[Crovax]

I'm just aware of one of several debate tactics used by gun enthusiasts.

Don't look at the guns, look at mental health.
Don't look at the guns, look at the poor educational system.
Don't look at the guns, look at past behavior of the shooter.
Don't look at the guns, look at the poor social safety net.
Don't look at the guns, look at video games.
Don't look at the guns, look at tightening the rating of movies.
Don't look at the guns, look at casualties in other areas.
Don't look at the guns, look at poverty.
Don't look at the guns, look at the security guard failing to enter the school to confront the shooter.
Don't look at the guns, look at other ways that people can murder.
Don't look at the guns, look at school security.

But whatever you do, never ever look at the guns. Look anywhere else but at the guns.

Well, if it's all the same to you, I will look at the guns.

You’re the extremist ideologue focus on whatever minutiae you prefer.