tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post5269200891108650546..comments2023-10-16T07:13:12.123-05:00Comments on A plain blog about politics: Sunday Question for LiberalsJonathan Bernsteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comBlogger69125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-80867159132914643322012-12-19T11:29:42.394-06:002012-12-19T11:29:42.394-06:00Thanks phat. It wouldn’t stop things like this fr...Thanks phat. It wouldn’t stop things like this from happening, but reducing the lethality of weapons would make a difference in some instances.<br /><br />Honestly, I don’t think many people are interested in applying critical thought and honest discussion to this issue -- it’s so much easier and more satisfying to just revert to preexisting prejudices and agendas.Couveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00926561539205771774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-1204060350150540132012-12-18T02:10:37.948-06:002012-12-18T02:10:37.948-06:00This might be the most, and really, only, attempt ...This might be the most, and really, only, attempt at a reasonable compromise from a gun advocate I've ever seen.phathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07711722602776883761noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-18096552034387294392012-12-18T00:32:27.808-06:002012-12-18T00:32:27.808-06:00JS - So is my own idea for banning the 30-round ma...JS - So is my own idea for banning the 30-round magazines used in the massacre part of a "passive-aggressive runaround."<br /><br />I was challenging you as gently as humanly possible to address a policy to the actual problem. If you can't take that, I really don't know what to say. Couveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00926561539205771774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-31386569023657796242012-12-18T00:25:31.418-06:002012-12-18T00:25:31.418-06:00phat, See my lengthy comment below on banning maga...phat, See my lengthy comment below on banning magazines. I'm interested in making policy that's both effective and politically viable. That's not possible without first looking at it with a critical eye.Couveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00926561539205771774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-61270652286593522232012-12-17T23:44:51.813-06:002012-12-17T23:44:51.813-06:00Yeah, I don't have the perfect, magic, compreh...Yeah, I don't have the perfect, magic, comprehensive gun safety proposal that is apparently all that will satisfy you.<br /><br />Sorry about that. Otherwise I can do without the passive-aggressive runaround.JSnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-49667567379412502742012-12-17T23:15:25.668-06:002012-12-17T23:15:25.668-06:00couves, you presented possible solutions and rejec...couves, you presented possible solutions and rejected them as you presented them. that's really not presenting solutions. that's listing off objections towards solutions you've already deemed unobtainable. you ask me if I have any ideas. but you apparently have none of your own. i think it'd be a good idea to ban clips larger than 10 rounds. you would probably include that in the "marginal effects" category. but what exactly do you mean by marginal? would it limit the amounts of gun crime in the US? probably not in toto, no. would it possibly have some effect on the total number of deaths? i think it could. no solution is going to work overnight. some will take a LOT of time.<br /><br />but again, I think you reject any solution out-of-hand.phathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07711722602776883761noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-26240535264455494922012-12-17T19:30:19.831-06:002012-12-17T19:30:19.831-06:00No zic, trying to fight off a crazed gunman with y...No zic, trying to fight off a crazed gunman with your bare hands is a nightmare.<br /><br />Nice touch with the bath salts though...Couveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00926561539205771774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-21123494859148658732012-12-17T18:11:31.304-06:002012-12-17T18:11:31.304-06:00Perhaps allowing school employees the capacity for...<i>Perhaps allowing school employees the capacity for self defense is a way to increase security in schools?<br /></i><br /><br />That's a freakin' nightmare. Do you realize this? <br /><br />Some times, the kids in a school are . . . difficult. Maybe they're having a psychotic episode, and are really and truly mentally ill, maybe they've been doing bath salts. But they're not always angels. Arms in the school? Armed teachers? <br /><br />I'm sorry, but it sounds like a gun-nut dream, and are really, really bad idea. zicnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-61243183221232023062012-12-17T17:33:32.022-06:002012-12-17T17:33:32.022-06:00Jazz, I’m familiar with the statistics. But you’r...Jazz, I’m familiar with the statistics. But you’re comparing us to countries in which it’s difficult or impossible for average people to legally defend themselves in their home, much less on the street. I’m someone who believes that the capacity for personal defense is inherent in your status as a free person. I’m ok with reasonable regulations that might help public safety, including strict regulations on military-style firearms (see my suggestion in a comment below). But European-level restrictions are, thankfully, a political impossibility. <br /><br />The comparison with China is a good one, but remember that guns are illegal in that country. Here in the US, concealed carry fits into the mitigation of public violence. At the Cackamas mall shooting, for example, the gunman killed himself when he saw an armed citizen train a gun at his head: http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html<br /><br />Perhaps allowing school employees the capacity for self defense is a way to increase security in schools? Couveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00926561539205771774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-65702524542994744572012-12-17T14:10:19.266-06:002012-12-17T14:10:19.266-06:00Yes, Mr. A, smoking is an excellent example -- mor...Yes, Mr. A, smoking is an excellent example -- more recent and therefore easier to draw lessons from than dueling or my other examples from ye olden times. Multi-pronged, public-health approach: exactly. To which I would add, lift caps on liability for people in the gun-supply chain. If whoever originally made or sold this kid's weapon had to pay out for 27 deaths, and then had to raise prices to compensate, every gun would end up costing as much as, say, Rafalca, even without any new taxes or criminal penalties. If you're one of those highly industrious, work-ethic-y people whom conservatives laud, you'd still be able to work and scrimp and save for your gun, just like you can today for a horse or a boat or a Cartier necklace. But mostly they'd be unavailable except to rich eccentrics, a smaller and (therefore) safer group than the alienated masses. Let's use the special privileges of wealth to our advantage, for once.<br /><br />So, to the original question, what's holding it up: My answer is that cultural change takes time, then, at some tipping point, suddenly happens pretty fast. And a string of massacres such as we're seeing may be that tipping point.Jeffnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-74072050071778304292012-12-17T13:53:47.728-06:002012-12-17T13:53:47.728-06:00Couves -
Do you also know that the number of fire...Couves -<br /><br />Do you also know that the number of firearm deaths in the U.S in 2009 was over 31,000? That's 85 per day. Sandy Hook is barely a blip, and we only know about it because the deaths were concentrated and involve little children<br /><br />With an additional 73,000 non-fatal injuries - that's 200 per day - it's worth considering that we might have a bit of a problem.<br /><br />It's also worth comparing the school attack in China on the same day as Sandy Hook -- 22 children injured, none fatal. Still tragic, but it's better to see your kid in recovery than in the morgue. That guy had a knife. It's also worth noting that you seldom hear about drive-by knifings, or innocent bystanders getting ought up in the cross stabbing.<br /><br />The other countries with gun related casualties on a par with ours are places like El Salvador. The U.S is unique among prosperous first world nations in having a gun problem. And also unique in lacking gun control.<br /><br />Please consider that telling you that you don't know something isn't an insult. It's an invitation to go learn about reality. Check the stats on resident vs intruder casualties in gun-owning homes. You won't believe it.<br /><br />Both internationally and within the US, places with stricter gun control laws have fewer gun related deaths. You can look it up.<br /><br />JzBJazzbumpahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07337490817307473659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-73956749495270009102012-12-17T12:29:26.444-06:002012-12-17T12:29:26.444-06:00Couves, here's what wikipedia says on self def...Couves, here's what wikipedia says on self defense:<br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States#Self-protection<br /><br />I fail to see how unrestricted access for self-defense rises to a level justifying the crime and carnage we're experiencing. zicnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-74365280841278696722012-12-17T11:41:31.312-06:002012-12-17T11:41:31.312-06:00Couves, I struggle with point 1. This needs facts ...Couves, I struggle with point 1. This needs facts to be true; and facts from some place other then the gun lobby.<br /><br />As you say, the statistics didn't account for point one. So where are the statistics that do? Are there any? zicnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-78421938382173213492012-12-17T10:33:25.214-06:002012-12-17T10:33:25.214-06:00By and large, I think I've seen more civility,...By and large, I think I've seen more civility, more creativity, and more willingness to compromise in this thread (and I'll include the conservative thread in that) than I have seen on this subject anywhere else.Scott Monjenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-48040920159786355092012-12-17T10:02:05.666-06:002012-12-17T10:02:05.666-06:00I like that idea. I certainly believe that a gun b...I like that idea. I certainly believe that a gun buy back scheme, like the one we had in Australia after the Port Arthur Massacre is impossible over here. But allowing certain weapons (automatic and semi-automatic and high-capacity ones) to be kept at Federally sanctioned ranges (by that I mean licensed and federally regulated), under lock and key where people can fire them there at their own desire. There is no need for these weapons to be in the community.<br /><br />Also ending the gun-show loophole would be a good place to start.Yaramah Zhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11545126290793710143noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-82130438670234465082012-12-17T09:49:59.395-06:002012-12-17T09:49:59.395-06:00That is a good point, Jeff. When Britain got seri...That is a good point, Jeff. When Britain got serious about dealing with firearms, one of the main and most effective lines of enforcement was to sharply restrict the activities of gunsmiths, essentially making the government defense and police contractors. This has been reinforced by banning sales of gun-cleaning and repair kits, etc. I believe the ban even includes certain kinds of gun manuals, although I may be wrong about that.<br /><br />Of course there is the problem of the internet, garage mechanics, etc. But those problems exist in other areas as well (garage meth labs, for instance, and even most who advocate the end of the drug war don't advocate repealing the laws against making meth). So, it would be a law widely evaded. On the other hand, it would also be a policy very cheaply enforced, and together with some other low-hanging fruit, to use Couves' phrase, might significantly cut down on the number of firearms (particularly relatively complex firearms that require greater care and repair) in circulation over time. As far as home repair faciities (i.e. unlicensed facilities) over time, it would be easiest to simply enforce by severe action and legal penalties if the guns in question are used as part of a crime (which could include suicide if the person commiting suicide was not the builder/repairer/cleaner of the gun).<br /><br />In general, I think the best way to approach restriction of the gun culture is by taking a kind of public-health tack such as has been used in other public-health scourges, I am thinking particularly of smoking. At one time smoking was essentially ubiquitous in American culture, and the thought of restricting it evoked even more objections than gun control now brings. But we were able to greatly restrict the prevalence of smoking and address its effects. No, we have not eliminated smoking. No, we have not able to get rid of all the problems associated with smoking. Yes, cigarettes are widely and easily available. But by any reasonable measure the effort has made things much better for most people, and society as a whole, than was the case even a generation ago, never mind in the 1950s.<br /><br />What worked? A multi-prong effort that aimed not at banning smoking but at making it expensive, extremely inconvenient, and socially unacceptable. This involved everything from action against tobacco companies to public awareness campaigns to restricting smoking in public places to scientific research to you name it. And it involved difficult choices and controversy as well. Yes, it is unfair to target law-abiding gun owners, but it was also unfair to target stressed out blue-collar workers who only wanted to enjoy a smoke in the break room. Yes, it would be unfair to target hard-working gunsmiths who are only trying to provide for their families. It was also unfair to target the livelihood of hard-working tobacco farmers who only wanted to provide for their families.<br /><br />We have a health scourge in America, one that isn't as prevalent and overall as deadly as smoking, but one that that is prevalent and deadly nevertheless. We did not make smokers criminals, but we made it more and more difficult and unacceptable for them to indulge. Let us not make gun owners criminals, but let us put great obstacles and inconvenience in their path and make it clear that their activity is severely disapproved of, and make clear the reasons. We did not make tobacco companies criminals, much as they richly deserved it. Let us not make gunsmiths or firearms companies criminals, but force them to partner in the effort in the same way the tobacco companies have. In the end smoking is still with us, but it has gone from being a socially approved scandal to a disapproved problem that is, granted, still major, but at least better controlled. Let us take the gun culture from a place of socially acceptable moral horror to a place of legal but inconvenient, controlled, and disapproved public health problem.Anastasiosnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-37313653969001574842012-12-17T06:11:56.829-06:002012-12-17T06:11:56.829-06:00I hate this issue and wasn't going to weigh in...I hate this issue and wasn't going to weigh in, but reading the thread did get me thinking. "If you're good old boys like we are, they [the blasts from firing into explosives] are exciting," says a firing-range owner quoted on Talking Points Memo. I would have said "If you're mental 11-year-olds like we are," but whatever. Seems to me that gun enthusiasm will eventually go the way of dueling, dog- and cockfighting, lynching and other "exciting" practices that were once common, then less common but tolerated -- persisting for a time in certain regions, subcultures and/or legal gray areas -- but that finally came to seem stupid, idiotic and uncivilized except to a scattered few sufferers from arrested development. That's not (quite) to say that the gun problem will eventually solve itself -- pressures will still need to be brought, legislation will still need to be passed when the opportunity finally arises, etc. -- but I do think we're looking at a phenomenon destined for the scrap heap of history. And when cultural or generational change makes something look childish and idiotic, as we've seen lately with, for instance, homophobia, it can collapse in a relatively short time.<br /><br />Also, legislatively, you don't need to confiscate guns. You just need to make it very difficult to repair or replace them, then wait a time while the ones that are out there wear out.Jeffnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-81590948115056994892012-12-17T02:27:59.416-06:002012-12-17T02:27:59.416-06:00Anon, even the most favorable statistics didn'...Anon, even the most favorable statistics didn't account for:<br /><br />1) Defensive gun uses in which no one is killed (bad guy is either injured or runs away when he sees/hears the gun).<br /><br />2) While owning a gun makes you more likely to shoot yourself, it doesn't make you more likely to kill yourself. (ie, guns don't inspire suicide any more than bridges do)Couveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00926561539205771774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-5433399775127591722012-12-17T02:07:04.020-06:002012-12-17T02:07:04.020-06:00Crissa, I may not be familiar with the case. I kn...Crissa, I may not be familiar with the case. I know concealed carry is basically illegal in NYC and almost impossible in Boston.<br /><br />It seems reasonable to protect the right of law-abiding people to defend themselves in their home.Couveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00926561539205771774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-64585337633535222872012-12-17T02:01:32.019-06:002012-12-17T02:01:32.019-06:00Just thinking out loud here of a potential comprom...Just thinking out loud here of a potential compromise on assault weapons:<br /><br />Require all rifle magazines >10 rounds and pistol magazines >20 rounds to be turned in to local authorities, who would allow gun owners (screened by local law enforcement) to use them only at properly authorized and secured gun clubs.<br /><br />Benefits: Unlike the Assault Weapons Ban, which does nothing about pre-existing high capacity magazines, this ban would require that they be turned in, in addition to banning their sale. Also, this would only impact true military-style weapons and would only require the confiscation of magazines. Basically, it would accomplish what gun control advocates really want, while avoiding true gun confiscation and the parts of the AWB that bother gun owners the most (that you can’t buy a glock with a standard magazine, can’t have an adjustable rifle stock, etc.). And if gun owners still wanted to play soldier, they could just go to their local gun club. <br /><br />But why would gun owners agree to this? What would they get in return? Some ideas:<br /><br />End onerous taxation and regulation of suppressors (Despite urban legend, they don’t actually “silence” guns, but they do reduce the risk of deafness and tinnitus. Like car mufflers, their use is actually encouraged in a few countries.)<br /><br />Sell ammo at authorized gun clubs at Federal contract prices (ammo is the biggest expense for recreational shooters).<br /><br />End import restrictions on foreign arms (firearms that are no more dangerous than domestic arms)<br /><br />The main problem with this is that many magazines would probably never be turned in or seized (some people would bury them, a few might sell them on the black market, etc,). While a determined and resourceful person would still be able to track down some of these magazines, a lot of these mass shooters seem like the type that would have trouble with that. The feds could run stings to catch at a lot of the low-hanging fruit. Couveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00926561539205771774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-89814860614234109152012-12-17T01:50:33.675-06:002012-12-17T01:50:33.675-06:00My favorite thing from the Truth About Guns critiq...My favorite thing from the Truth About Guns critique is that it shows that, yes, you are in fact more likely to end up killing yourself or a family member than you are to stop an intruder, and yes, guns do cause more people to die, even under the absolute most favorable interpretation of the results of that study.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-28726566843034152482012-12-17T01:12:20.590-06:002012-12-17T01:12:20.590-06:00The Supreme Court recently decided that cities can...The Supreme Court recently decided that cities can't choose where guns are within them.<br /><br />Why is it so unreasonable for cities to choose for themselves if what are allowed in apartments and private homes, along with their public spaces?<br /><br />If you don't like it, you can move to a town with looser requirements. You don't have to live in Santa Cruz if you don't like bare breasts, but it's damn legal to bare them in Santa Cruz. You're imposing your right to drive a gun around town is higher than a town to choose where is appropriate for guns to be in them.Crissahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13389565751169783614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-10309091927232459642012-12-17T01:05:45.767-06:002012-12-17T01:05:45.767-06:00JS - You're ducking the issue. I don't th...JS - You're ducking the issue. I don't think it's too much to expect a solution to have some significant impact on the problem.Couveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00926561539205771774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-79332213818192260722012-12-17T01:05:09.626-06:002012-12-17T01:05:09.626-06:00Me too.
I don't buy this whole must-be-in-pri...Me too.<br /><br />I don't buy this whole must-be-in-private-home crap, I don't buy this must-carry-around crap, and I don't buy this they-didn't-actually-mean-militia-or-regulated crap.Crissahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13389565751169783614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-84208614164625857262012-12-17T01:00:58.888-06:002012-12-17T01:00:58.888-06:00Gosh, all your problems seem to be 'the NRA...Gosh, all your problems seem to be 'the NRA'.<br /><br />I think one of the problems is that since we're all afraid of the NRA because it's so powerful - we don't bother to learn or write reasonable strengths into our laws.<br /><br />Our weapon laws are stupid, aren't based upon what they do but how they do it or specific weapons and their names. For instance, if a semi-auto is easily modified to a fully-auto, it should be banned. Our laws don't care about how easily they're changed, they talk about specific weapons in the past not weapons in the future.<br /><br />And then we have the stupid ATF that has multiple conflicting jobs, the FBI that handles their records, and the ATF's hands are tied to do anything but draconian raids. It's stupid. And if an ATF agent's raid fails, they suffer criminal prosecution! It's stupid.Crissahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13389565751169783614noreply@blogger.com