Gun laws in the United States

This section is specifically for serious non-footbag debate and discussion.
Pasquar
Fearless
Posts: 517
Joined: 17 Jul 2010 08:02
Location: Columbus, OH/ Philadelphia, PA

Re: Gun laws in the United States

Post by Pasquar » 13 Jan 2013 11:10

I have to admit looking back on some articles making this connection that there is a lack of empirical data proving it, it's rather an argument about privilege in general and how massacres happening in suburbia take precedent over very common inner-city crimes, underscoring some other societal issues. I didn't think to search for the words "white males" before I supported that claim, and that's fault on me.

That said, however, would you not agree that VERY present pattern is apparent when comparing male mass murderers to female?

62 shootings and only one of them involved a female... that definitely is statistically significant given that females make up ~50% of the population.. What do you think?
Nick Pasquarello


Shred on

User avatar
Jeremy
"Really unneccesary"
Posts: 10178
Joined: 08 Jan 2003 00:20
Location: Tasmania

Re: Gun laws in the United States

Post by Jeremy » 14 Jan 2013 16:36

If you look at US income distributions, the majority of people fit the demographic you're talking about. All of the middle three quintiles and most of the top quintile are middle class. Likewise the majority of these people live in suburbs. Just like with the "white" bias, you're merely saying that the majority of shooters come from the largest population pool.

Of course I agree there is a strong male bias, but that's the case with pretty much all crimes (indeed I wonder if there are any crimes that do not have a male bias?) Mass shootings merely reflect a much larger pattern found in all cultures, both in terms of violence and crime. Clearly for something to be found in all human societies in must reflect innate human nature, rather than some kind of post-feminism patriarchal capitalist hegemony (indeed there are good evolutionary explanations - see Matt Ridely's Red Queen). It's also worth noting that drawing generalised conclusions based on the actions of 60 people out of 150 million seems a bit silly. 99.99996% of males don't commit mass shootings. The number of white middle class suburban males not committing mass shootings is similar. There aren't conclusions about society that can be drawn from comparing the demographics of such tiny samples.

Pasquar
Fearless
Posts: 517
Joined: 17 Jul 2010 08:02
Location: Columbus, OH/ Philadelphia, PA

Re: Gun laws in the United States

Post by Pasquar » 15 Jan 2013 13:00

Jeremy wrote:If you look at US income distributions, the majority of people fit the demographic you're talking about. All of the middle three quintiles and most of the top quintile are middle class. Likewise the majority of these people live in suburbs. Just like with the "white" bias, you're merely saying that the majority of shooters come from the largest population pool.
The fact that all three quintiles and most of most of the top quintile qualify as "middle-class" I think highlights some disparity about how we even categorize "class". It's mostly a subjective notion that changes for everyone and as far as I know, there are no empirical measures (income/wealth or whatever) and ranges that can determine if someone is "middle class" or not. There are some misleading measures like mean income and the poverty line that can skew this perception, but it really varies from person to person. I knew people growing up who considered themselves "middle class" who were quite clearly upper-class from my perspective. Similarly I consider my background upper-middle class even though I grew up in a very small one story home.
Pasquar wrote:it's rather an argument about privilege in general and how massacres happening in suburbia take precedent over very common inner-city crimes, underscoring some other societal issues.
What I meant by this, which I don't think got through was how the media and other things care about this shit when it happens in suburbia, whereas it happens far more often in inner-cities, as the article you linked to earlier made a point a believe
Nick Pasquarello


Shred on

User avatar
Footbag Central
Circle Kicker
Posts: 12
Joined: 01 Mar 2013 08:42
Location: Minnesota, USA
Contact:

Re: Gun laws in the United States

Post by Footbag Central » 12 Apr 2013 18:56

First off i will say "touchy subject".....
I know someone that had guns in his possession illegally and the government really through the book at him and is using him as an example (kind of like Martha Steward case) he is locked up in jail and has a million dollar bail on his head.

From what I've read everyone has talked about tightening down gun laws and regulations or banning guns. What would happen if there weren't any insane people? Or instead of "your not cool if you dont got something or someone to hate" but instead walking in love and humbleness?

As I've gotten older it seam hate has been on the rise, and what I've noticed (especially when hanging around the younger generation) is if you dont got something or someone to hate your not cool, not tough, not mochoe....

And what about what we feed our minds? (not against movies) but in a lot of movies if someone gets ticket off they just blow the other guy away (or beat the snot out of him if hes nice) so they go around in these movies blowing people away willy-nilly like and have no consequence for for it..... And what is that teaching the impressionable youth of today.....

I dont know theres alot of messed up stuff in this world. Taking away guns and tightening down on laws would help reduce mass murder but I dont know as though it is hitting the root of the problem.

Love God, Love People :)

User avatar
C-Fan
Rekordy Polski
Posts: 11366
Joined: 23 Jan 2003 23:51
Location: Denver
Contact:

Re: Gun laws in the United States

Post by C-Fan » 17 Apr 2013 09:38

As the debate over guns has played out over the last year in the US, one of the analogies that has resonated with me is the one between cars and guns. Cars are potentially deadly, but we do a lot of things to reduce the number of fatalities associated with them. You have to have a license to drive a car. Cars have several safety features built in, which are required by law. There are established penalties for drunk driving. In America, nobody questions the right to own and drive a car, but owning and driving a car is subject to government rules designed to make them safer for everybody.

With guns though, there seems to be a resistance to any laws which would potentially reduce deaths, like smaller magazine sizes, background checks, purchasing laws, etc. What's the fundamental difference? When public safety is involved, is it unreasonable to have laws regulating the scope of rights? Using the classic example, just because I have the right of free speech, doesn't mean I should be allowed to yell "fire" in a crowded movie theater without consequence.
Footbag Central wrote:From what I've read everyone has talked about tightening down gun laws and regulations or banning guns. What would happen if there weren't any insane people? .
I bet there would be a lot fewer drunk driving deaths if there weren't any drunk people. But what makes more sense? Trying to reduce the number of drunk people? Or creating disincentives for drunk driving (e.g. 2 driver cab service, stiff penalties for DUIs, revoking licenses of DUI repeat offenders)? Making laws that make it harder for insane people to obtain weapons is similarly easier than trying to eradicate insanity. I don't think there's anybody in the world who doesn't want to reduce the number of insane people...but that's a much harder problem to solve than adjusting laws to reduce their ability to arm themselves.

Pasquar
Fearless
Posts: 517
Joined: 17 Jul 2010 08:02
Location: Columbus, OH/ Philadelphia, PA

Re: Gun laws in the United States

Post by Pasquar » 20 Apr 2013 11:43

First, while I *believe* I have expressed views in favor of gun regulation in this thread (I haven't gone to check on what exactly I've said :oops: ), I have to admit there seems to be a fundamental contradiction that even some gun-nuts have in opposition to restrictions, and that is the "monopoly of force" that the police, Homeland Security, our armed forces, etc. have when it comes to bearing arms. While I do think that these entities should exist, I think their power is misused and abused. Police in various cities continually beat and even shoot civilians when they are not attempting to harm the police, and our military.... don't even get me started. We act as the world police and take it as a given that it is our role to do so. We shoot suspected "terrorists" and drop bombs on them while killing innocent civilians and it's no big deal.

What I have to agree with here is that the government IS asking for more regulatory power for civilians and their 2nd Amendment right, but will NOT 'lead by example' in restricting their own power to do as they please with NO penalty, because they ARE the law.

And there is definitely a racial component. The people shot and killed by police tend to be black or latino, the civilians we shoot or strike with drones are brown Arabs, and military forces such as Israel that receive so much funding from the U.S. implores force on brown Arab Palestinians. The NRA back in the day was lobbying FOR regulation when they saw that the Black Panther Party was openly collecting arms to protect themselves against racist police in Oakland.

I do think regulation is needed but also think that for this to happen in earnest, the gov't needs to lead by example, admit its imperialistic flaws, and concede some its power. I do not see this happening any time soon, if ever.
Footbag Central wrote:And what about what we feed our minds? (not against movies) but in a lot of movies if someone gets ticket off they just blow the other guy away (or beat the snot out of him if hes nice) so they go around in these movies blowing people away willy-nilly like and have no consequence for for it..... And what is that teaching the impressionable youth of today.....
I sort of agree with this. What I think we "feed our minds" is more than movies depicting violence, it has a lot to do with our culture in general. The mainstream media is an outlet with is used to instill constant fear in us, and this leads to a worldview of fear and distrust of the other. I watched "Bowling for Columbine" right after the Sandy Hook shooting and that point was made clear by the fact that there are just as many (if not more) guns per citizen, there are the same violent movies and video games, but their culture is one that is open and trusting of other people, and their media doesn't cram this propaganda of fear and threat levels down their throats like we have here.

I think this can give way to much more dangerous attitudes and beliefs centered around bigotry. Since 9/11, we have an embarrassing culture stigmatizing and fearing Muslims and Arabs. This was seen in the most recent Boston bombing when a 20 year old Saudi VICTIM of the bombing was taken in immediately as a suspect. Whoops, they were actually white Chechnians.

Obviously, I feel it's a huge can or worms and there are no easy answers, such is the case when issues are related to culture and hegemony.
Nick Pasquarello


Shred on

Pasquar
Fearless
Posts: 517
Joined: 17 Jul 2010 08:02
Location: Columbus, OH/ Philadelphia, PA

Re: Gun laws in the United States

Post by Pasquar » 20 Apr 2013 11:47

Edit: The country I was talking about in "Bowling for Columbine" was Canada
Nick Pasquarello


Shred on

User avatar
Jeremy
"Really unneccesary"
Posts: 10178
Joined: 08 Jan 2003 00:20
Location: Tasmania

Re: Gun laws in the United States

Post by Jeremy » 20 Apr 2013 20:56

I don't buy the movie and media argument. Most of the Western World watches violent movies, and yet doesn't commit gun violence to the extent that the US does. Australian television, for example, is in fact, mainly US television, and I bet the same can be said for other English speaking countries, and indeed many non-English speaking countries.

I also don't think that attitudes towards Muslims and Islam have anything to do with it. Colombine obviously occurred prior to 9/11 and I don't think there is any evidence that gun violence in the US increased after 9/11, or that there's a correlation between terrorist attacks on Americans and gun violence. I do think it's worth pointing out too that Chechnya is predominately Islamic province, and the Boston bombers were Muslims, and appeared to support radical Islamic militancy, although obviously to what extent is unclear. Of course Islamic terrorists in the past have belonged to many different races, since Islam is an ideology, not a race. If people think only blacks or Arabs are Muslims, they are racists, but if people think Islam inspires more terrorist attacks than other religions, that's an easy to prove fact.

Pasquar
Fearless
Posts: 517
Joined: 17 Jul 2010 08:02
Location: Columbus, OH/ Philadelphia, PA

Re: Gun laws in the United States

Post by Pasquar » 22 Apr 2013 10:39

I don't quite know what exactly you're responding to regarding Islam. I was not arguing that gun violence perpetuated by or targeted at Muslims has increased post 9/11, I'm rather talking about contributing factors to the overall culture of fear and bigotry that is present in the U.S. I don't know how long you have spent in the U.S., Jeremy, but these are broader issues that can't quite be summed up in any articles/books/papers, no matter what. Just as I could never understand the culture forces present in Africa, the Middle-East, or Australia, no matter how much I educate myself from scholars or whatever.

Also, I was pointing out a clear racial component. I was not saying anything about the bombers being Muslim/support radical Islamic militancy. I was making a point that a victim of the bombing was automatically regarded as a suspect based on his ethnicity. Authorities jump to this conclusion without empirical evidence: this is the problem. And the fact that the mainstream media is in a constant rat race to report proves problems that further expose our propensity to jump to conclusions (http://www.democracynow.org/2013/4/18/a ... nn_faulted). There was also a 17-year old who was depicted on the cover of the New York Post who had nothing to do with the plot, yet the NYP insisted on getting it out before any proof was looked at (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/04/1 ... on-bombing).

This stuff runs deep.
Nick Pasquarello


Shred on

User avatar
Jeremy
"Really unneccesary"
Posts: 10178
Joined: 08 Jan 2003 00:20
Location: Tasmania

Re: Gun laws in the United States

Post by Jeremy » 22 Apr 2013 17:14

I'm responding to the Islam comments because you bringing it up makes no sense. You're saying it's essentially a vibe that can't be measured, but that's rubbish. You can easily measure feelings towards Islam in the US. Here's one example of many:

http://www.people-press.org/2011/08/30/ ... extremism/

You can also easily measure gun crime and homicide. Again here's an example of many;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ushom ... weapon.svg

These are statistics that don't correlate. Gun violence didn't change as a result of 9/11, yet obviously attitudes towards Muslims did. You're simply using the issue of gun violence to try and push you're completely unrelated agenda regarding Muslims.

Pasquar
Fearless
Posts: 517
Joined: 17 Jul 2010 08:02
Location: Columbus, OH/ Philadelphia, PA

Re: Gun laws in the United States

Post by Pasquar » 23 Apr 2013 08:14

OMFG you just proved my point.
Pasquar wrote:I don't know how long you have spent in the U.S., Jeremy, but these are broader issues that can't quite be summed up in any articles/books/papers, no matter what. Just as I could never understand the culture forces present in Africa, the Middle-East, or Australia, no matter how much I educate myself from scholars or whatever.
In general, I feel like you think you can understand absolutely everything because you can read.

I feel you have completely misinterpreted everything I've been saying, and this is mostly due to the fact that no matter how much you read about something, lived experience is something completely different. You'll never understand this because of you own limitations, just as I will never understand what it is to be black, latino, asian, arab, or a woman even though I consistently educate myself to try to at an empirical level.
Nick Pasquarello


Shred on

User avatar
Jeremy
"Really unneccesary"
Posts: 10178
Joined: 08 Jan 2003 00:20
Location: Tasmania

Re: Gun laws in the United States

Post by Jeremy » 30 Apr 2013 22:36

Certainly, as a rationalist, I believe things to be true only if good evidence can be presented in favour of them. In this case, clearly if there was a link between feelings about Islam and gun violence, it really would have to show up as a correlation. Instead we see places around the world with similar attitudes to the US on Islam, but not the same kind of gun violence, and we see changes to attitudes about Islam but not changes to gun violence. The evidence clearly shows this. It doesn't show that the relationship is "unknowable" and indeed if that was our hypothesis we could make predictions about what data we'd see that are at least consistent with that.

Anyway these have been going viral in Australia, and no doubt seen by a few Americans too;

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pOiOhxujsE[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYbY45rHj8w[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Y3p527Bs-U[/youtube]

Pasquar
Fearless
Posts: 517
Joined: 17 Jul 2010 08:02
Location: Columbus, OH/ Philadelphia, PA

Re: Gun laws in the United States

Post by Pasquar » 06 May 2013 06:23

Oh ok, now I believe what you're saying because you're throwing clips of The Daily Show at me. :roll:
Nick Pasquarello


Shred on

User avatar
Jeremy
"Really unneccesary"
Posts: 10178
Joined: 08 Jan 2003 00:20
Location: Tasmania

Re: Gun laws in the United States

Post by Jeremy » 06 May 2013 13:35

I posted those because they're on the topic of gun control and both make a strong point while being funny. At no point did I suggest they are any kind of response to to you.

Post Reply