+59

Buying a gun is easier than adopting a kitten. Heard this a few times in the last few weeks! Some guns should be a lot harder to buy.

75%Agree25%Disagree
ambams avatar Animals & Nature
Share
0 22

I call bullshit on the first sentence, AND on the last sentence. I doubt the process for adopting a kitten is as annoying as purchasing a firearm. You have to make a payment, wait 14 days while you get a background check, then get permission from the state police in order to buy a firearm. Is it anything like that to adopt a kitten? I doubt it.

Some guns are harder to buy than others. You need to be 21 and take a pistol safety course before you can even pick up a pistol at a gun-shop, versus being 18 for a long gun. Also, you have to be 21 to buy a shotgun with a pistol grip, even though it's completely identical to a shotgun with a standard stock. To buy a fully-automatic weapon, you need to pay at least 200 dollars for a tax stamp and wait several years for approval.

I am insanely sick of the ridiculous things people think about firearm laws in the United States. You can't just walk into any ole' store and pick one up and walk out. You're not allows to just drive down the street dual-wielding pistols and firing them into the air. The laws are already very strict, and THEY'RE FINE THE WAY THEY ARE.

Mike_Hawks avatar Mike_Hawk Disagree +2Reply
@Mike_Hawk I call bullshit on the first sentence, AND on the last sentence. I doubt the process for adopting a kitten is as...

Clearly they aren't fine if there are as many shootings as there are in America.
Canada has more guns per capita then America but clearly something wrong is happening

@Naggs Clearly they aren't fine if there are as many shootings as there are in America. Canada has more guns per capita...

There aren't that many shootings. The media is complete crap and is trying to scare us into thinking there is some serious crime problem that needs solving. Violent crime in the United States is at an all time low, and gun ownership is at an all time high. For the crime that exists, the majority of it exists in high population metropolitan areas with strict gun laws.

I'm going to call your second statement flat-out false. Canada has a population of 34 million, and a quick search yields a high estimate of 11 million guns in Canada. The United States has a population almost ten times that, and it's been said that there are enough guns here to arm every man, woman, and child. We have more guns, period, and we have more per capita.

Mike_Hawks avatar Mike_Hawk Disagree +3Reply
@Mike_Hawk There aren't that many shootings. The media is complete crap and is trying to scare us into thinking there is some...

http://usgovinfo.about.com/libr.../aa030500c.htm
This is a comparison of canadian and american stats but if you do not feel this is reliable then here are

stats from census of american deaths:
http://www.census.gov/compendia...es/12s0121.pdf
Here are stats from the canadian stats gov. website:
On page 6 of the pdf it talks about methods of homicide. (you are of course welcome to read the full article if you'd like)
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85...004008-eng.pdf

Yeah, I just threw that stat in there for the hell of it, but looking at not the amount of people but simply comparing the percentages, we have to ask ourselves where are we going wrong in the process? There is a disconnect, and unfortunately for America the majority of homicides happen because of firearm assault. I am by no means attacking americans, or american gun laws, but rather I am being critical of the situation because it is important to ask ourselves what is going wrong and how can we improve it.
Also I apologize for the Canadian stats being a bit dated, this is the most recent legitimate statistics I could find to compare.

@Naggs http://usgovinfo.about.com/libr.../aa030500c.htm This is a comparison of canadian and american stats but if...

Comparing Canada to the United States doesn't have much merit. What I really want to know is the effects of Canada's gun control. What are the statistics before and after? That's the important stuff. I know that in the US, the first assault weapon ban did absolutely nothing, and crime continued to drop after it expired. I'm going to comment again soon, but I'm doing some relatively in-depth research and my findings may take a while. Note: I am searching the FBI crime stats to determine violent crime of certain areas vs the national average. I will search a few states with less-restrictive gun laws, and I will search some states with very restrictive gun laws. My prediction is that metropolitan areas with tight gun laws will yield higher crime rates than anything else. I will post my results regardless of what my research actually turns up.

@Mike_Hawk Comparing Canada to the United States doesn't have much merit. What I really want to know is the effects of...

For Canada after they implemented stricter gun control the rates dropped, let me see what I can find for you

@Mike_Hawk Comparing Canada to the United States doesn't have much merit. What I really want to know is the effects of...

If you go down a little bit it talks about the decline of guns, from 1998 (when the firearms act was put into place) till 2006 (which was when the report was made)
Again this is for Canada where guns aren't as big of a deal and or "gun culture" is almost non-existent.

@Naggs If you go down a little bit it talks about the decline of guns, from 1998 (when the firearms act was put into...

Using the FBI databases and a website stating the percentage of gun owners per state, I compiled a list of the violent crime rate and murder rates of 20 states. I will admit, the numbers don't seem too solid either way, but I'm very annoyed with Alaska and Mississippi. They provide extremely high outliers for each category. I will discuss this later. The number of gun owners supposedly is from 2007, and the crime numbers are for 2011.

Violent crime rates: National average is 388 per 100k. Top ten gun owning states (over 50% of population owns gun) average is 328.2 per 100k. Bottom ten gun owning states (6.7%-25% gun owners) average is 378.8.

Murder rates in same order: National average is 4.7. Top ten states average is 4.2. Bottom ten states is 3.8.

Now, the outliers I was talking about earlier are more than enough to skew the data somewhat. Mississippi had a murder rate of 8, which is almost double that of the entire average. Alaska had a violent crime rate of 606.5, which is insane, and again, almost double the whole average. Alaska and Mississippi are both in the top ten states. The bottom ten states had some outliers, too. Hawaii and Rhode Island had very low murder

@Naggs If you go down a little bit it talks about the decline of guns, from 1998 (when the firearms act was put into...

rates, being 1.2 and 1.3 respectively. This would skew the average significantly down. Let me calculate the averages by eliminating outliers. I will subtract the highest number from both sets and calculate again.

Top ten violent crime rate adjusted: 297.7.
Bottom ten violent crime adjusted: 363.8.

Top ten murder adjusted: 3.8
Bottom ten murder adjusted: 3.6

Take from it what you will. The data shows me that areas with more guns tend to have less violent crime, but more murders. This is explainable in that guns make murdering easier, but their presence also makes the attempts less likely. I can give you the individual rates for each of the 20 states if you like.

@Mike_Hawk rates, being 1.2 and 1.3 respectively. This would skew the average significantly down. Let me calculate the...

No I think this is sufficient, but I was discussing homicides anyways, but this kind of proves my point.

I think the idea is not to out right ban guns because that would cause a national outcry, but perhaps we need to discuss the abundance (and in comparison to most countries) the ease of access of these guns.

Sure guns don't kill people, but they certainly make it easier, and I think the laws need to be stricter, I'm sure you disagree with me and you don't think they are a problem. However we must look objectively about why the rate for homicide with a firearm is so high, there has to be some correlation

@Frank_n_Furter That's because the shootings happen in gun free zones.

"There, you have seven movie theaters that were showing the Batman movie when it opened at the end of July. Out of those seven movie theaters, only one movie theater was posted as banning permit-concealed handguns. The killer didn't go to the movie theater that was closest to his home. He didn't go to the movie theater that was the largest movie theater in Colorado, which was essentially the same distance from his apartment as the one he ended up going to. Instead, the one he picked was the only one of those movie theaters that banned people taking permit-concealed handguns into that theater." "In the last 20 years, except for the congresswoman (Gabby) Giffords shooting, all of these mass murders have been in places where guns have been forbidden" http://lmgtfy.com/?q=do+most+ma...gun+free+zones

The gun control laws are fine, it's gun free zones that are a problem. That's what the response "that's because shootings happen in gun free zones" was addressing.

@Frank_n_Furter "There, you have seven movie theaters that were showing the Batman movie when it opened at the end of July. Out of...

Inb4 down-votes. It's getting very tiring watching people down-vote pure fact. It's cool if you disagree with a poster's opinion, but there's nothing you can do if their comment contains 100% true facts and reality.

If people want to try arguing with reality, they can really just go kill themselves. Or at least move very far away from me.

@Mike_Hawk Inb4 down-votes. It's getting very tiring watching people down-vote pure fact. It's cool if you disagree with a...

I think it's because gun free zones give people a sense of security and they don't like when they're told that sense of security is false- kind of a defense mechanism to protect them from facing the harshness of reality, and the whole "guns are scary" mentality only adds to that.

@Frank_n_Furter That's because the shootings happen in gun free zones.

I like how Izzie_23 is like "NUH UH. I DISAGREE WITH FACTS AND STATISTICS."

Anonymous 0Reply
@Mike_Hawk I call bullshit on the first sentence, AND on the last sentence. I doubt the process for adopting a kitten is as...

The judgment is made based on result and outcome, not on how annoying it already is. If we need to make it more strict to prevent future tragedy, so be it.

And it shouldn't just be about obtaining it, there should also be stricter laws on where it can be used, and where it can be stored for durations exceeding 24 (or something like that) hours. Otherwise, a person who legally owns a gun should have laws to prevent them from putting it into unsafe hands, or somewhere where unsafe hands can take them

@Watchful_questioneer The judgment is made based on result and outcome, not on how annoying it already is. If we need to make it more...

There are already laws like that. You can't use a firearm in city limits (unless at a certified firing range), on public property, or within 500 feet of a residence. A person who legally owns a gun can be arrested for unlawful storage if it is within reach of someone who is unfit to own a firearm. Adam Lanza's mother already broke a law by having her guns somewhere he could get them. Being convicted of this crime makes one a felon, which prevents future legal ownership of a firearm. The laws are strict, laws simply don't work on people who want to break them.

@Mike_Hawk There are already laws like that. You can't use a firearm in city limits (unless at a certified firing range), on...

Then instead of telling people not to do something, then waiting for them to do it, we have to actually prevent them from doing it. She should not have been able to obtain guns in the first place if she lived in a residence with someone unfit to use them. Or the gun could be stored in a location that checks how long she's had it, and make her return it in a set amount of time to ensure it's not being stored at her house

It scares me that you wrote "some guns should be harder to buy". All should be banned unless further license is showed. Thats my personal opinion.

@Daniella It scares me that you wrote "some guns should be harder to buy". All should be banned unless further license is...

What do you mean "further license"? You mean separate licenses for different types of guns? That sounds like a pretty good idea (unless it already exists, in which case I feel stupid)

Please   login   or signup   to leave a comment.