Started By
Message

re: The Elephant in the Room

Posted on 10/2/17 at 2:53 pm to
Posted by tigerpawl
Can't get there from here.
Member since Dec 2003
22302 posts
Posted on 10/2/17 at 2:53 pm to
Culture
Posted by 20MuleTeam
West Hartford
Member since Sep 2012
3862 posts
Posted on 10/2/17 at 2:54 pm to
Then why are most of the conservatives in this board in favor of gun control?
Posted by tigersbh
Baton Rouge
Member since Oct 2005
10257 posts
Posted on 10/2/17 at 2:55 pm to
quote:

how can mental health become a priority in a country that doesn't prioritize their own healthcare?


We don't?
Posted by shspanthers
Nashville, TN
Member since Sep 2007
769 posts
Posted on 10/2/17 at 3:12 pm to
quote:

Switzerland may be heavily armed but their process of obtaining and retaining a gun is waaaaay more restrictive than in the US.



And, since 2007, they don't keep military-issued ammo at home any longer. So many of the weapons in people's homes are useless. They aren't an apples-to-apples comparison to the US, but then what is?
Posted by SquirrelyBama
Member since Nov 2011
6389 posts
Posted on 10/2/17 at 3:12 pm to
(no message)
This post was edited on 6/3/20 at 10:16 am
Posted by abitaman6363
Baton Rouge
Member since Oct 2008
445 posts
Posted on 10/2/17 at 3:57 pm to
OP assumes a singular distinction. Multiple differences can lead to the differences, including differences in wealth inequality, stress levels, population density, etc.

OP also claims it is lazy to blame these types of events on guns when other heavily armed countries don't have the same problem--but I would argue it is also lazy to not recognize the different in rates of violent crime between countries with high rates of gun ownership and those with low rates of gun ownership.
Posted by RedStickBR
Member since Sep 2009
14577 posts
Posted on 10/2/17 at 4:13 pm to
quote:

Switzerland is a homogeneous society


While I mostly agree, I don't see why this is relevant to my point. It would be relevant to something like a single payer healthcare system discussion, but I don't see how it's relevant to the gun debate. Unless you're saying homogeneity increases happiness or is better for society, in which case the left would scream "racism" faster than you can blink an eye.
This post was edited on 10/2/17 at 4:14 pm
Posted by bamafan1001
Member since Jun 2011
15783 posts
Posted on 10/2/17 at 4:16 pm to
The lack of joy in our society is not good. Even our comedy is always attacking someone.

Cultural rot is a very real thing. Everyone has been told they are a victim of oppression of some sort. The media hatefully lashes out against "hate" every hour of the day. Everything has been politicized and people are more secluded than they ever have been.

The one part of our society which preached love, kindness, forgiveness, and accountability to something higher than ones's self since the founding has now been marginalized and has been labled hate speech.
Posted by RedStickBR
Member since Sep 2009
14577 posts
Posted on 10/2/17 at 4:18 pm to
quote:



The underlying difference is that America has a different demographic make-up than Switzerland (a larger underclass, for one) and a more violence prone history.

Basically, guns in the hands of members of polite society will not induce more violence. But making them available to the violence-prone underclass will. It's a tough distinction and it's not easy to draw a line in the sand, but ghettos don't become less dangerous when more people are armed. The violence gets worse.


This is a really good point. But it's still superficial. Why are we more violence prone? Why do we have more ghettos? Why do we have a permanent underclass?

These are questions, by the way, that both the left and right should be asking and trying to address.
Posted by Centinel
Idaho
Member since Sep 2016
43337 posts
Posted on 10/2/17 at 4:20 pm to
quote:

This is a really good point. But it's still superficial. Why are we more violence prone? Why do we have more ghettos? Why do we have a permanent underclass?


War on Povery and War on Drugs.

Next question.
Posted by ghost2most
Member since Mar 2012
6587 posts
Posted on 10/2/17 at 4:21 pm to
quote:

it's not the restriction of guns that allows criminals to kill innocents...it's the restriction of innocent's Lawful Rights to kill criminals that allows criminals to even exist in any number. The altruistic and tolerant State labels such actions as 'vigilantism' and inflicts severe punishment on vigilantes. However, at a given point of tolerant-based and painful consequence, the (tolerant) Law will be rejected, nullified or even rebelled against. From the Left, BLM's attack on Cops is an example. We have not seen this from the Right. Yet. But we will lest the Rule of Law be enforced.



How is one single thing you said in this post relevant to what happened in Vegas?

Perp wasn't a criminal and no amount of law abiding people with guns could do shite to stop what happened.

Posted by RedStickBR
Member since Sep 2009
14577 posts
Posted on 10/2/17 at 4:31 pm to
quote:

OP assumes a singular distinction. Multiple differences can lead to the differences, including differences in wealth inequality, stress levels, population density, etc.

OP also claims it is lazy to blame these types of events on guns when other heavily armed countries don't have the same problem--but I would argue it is also lazy to not recognize the different in rates of violent crime between countries with high rates of gun ownership and those with low rates of gun ownership.


My point is that we should discuss ALL distinctions and nuances. If the left's argument is "the high rate of gun ownership is the cause of the high rate of violent deaths," I only have to find one example to disprove that and don't have to discuss any distinction and nuance at all. That's why it's such a lazy argument.

Your latter point is a good one, but was not the scope of this thread. This thread was simply to show that overly simplistic assertions are likely to lead to overly simplistic rebuttals and not help with the real underlying causes.
This post was edited on 10/2/17 at 4:37 pm
Posted by Rougarou13
Brookhaven MS
Member since Feb 2015
6839 posts
Posted on 10/2/17 at 4:44 pm to
quote:

In order to purchase most weapons, the purchaser must obtain a weapon acquisition permit (art. 8 WG/LArm). Swiss citizens and foreigners with a C permit over the age of 18 who are not psychiatrically disqualified nor identified as posing security problems, and who have a clean criminal record can request such a permit. Foreigners with the following citizenship are explicitly excluded from the right to possess weapons: Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Macedonia, Turkey, Sri Lanka, Algeria and Albania.


Honestly aside from our right to bear arms being secured in the constitution it seems we have similar disqualifying factors for gun ownership.
Posted by Clames
Member since Oct 2010
16572 posts
Posted on 10/2/17 at 4:49 pm to
quote:

So he's arguing that their gun ownership rate regardless of the hoops you have to jump through to own a gun in that country are somehow emblematic of the failure of strict gun laws?


He said gun ownership doesn't equal gun violence which is indisputably correct.

quote:

English isn't your first language, is it?


Logic, intelligence, honesty, and reading comprehension aren't your strong suits, are they? Go away you ignorant little turd, mental midgets like you should find other threads to pollute.
Posted by DoctorO
BTR
Member since Jun 2010
274 posts
Posted on 10/2/17 at 4:57 pm to
quote:

Thus, what is that underlying difference? Is it mental illness? Is it general American stress levels? Is it [insert whatever you want here]?


The difference is that this country lacks the wisdom to shame people for what they do; from kids to adults.

The second thing, after mourning the victims, is to shame this idiot and to shame pre-emptively anyone that considers doing something similar.
Posted by RedStickBR
Member since Sep 2009
14577 posts
Posted on 10/2/17 at 5:00 pm to
Thanks for the assist but I'd just been ignoring him. I don't know if my message board maturity is setting in or what, but I've recently found ignoring comments devoid of logic to be far superior to engaging them.
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 3Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram