More gun stuff
-
If you have such a problem with the BBC, pick your own source, there are plenty. Trouble is, most I can identify as left-leaning - if someone can find a right wing article on this study I'd love to see it. The cynic in me says that none will publish one because it doesn't fit their agenda - am I wrong on that?
Logic, yes, the general theme from over here is very much 'guns are bad' and you'll struggle to find anyone in this country lobbying for wider access to guns.
You can find studies on both sides that support their agenda. The problem is that they have agendas so you can't trust how they compiled the data. It is rare to get a balanced review of data pertaining to a political hot button issue.
You can find studies on both sides that support their agenda. The problem is that they have agendas so you can't trust how they compiled the data. It is rare to get a balanced review of data pertaining to a political hot button issue.
Agreed, so do you propose that we just disregard any topic because you can't find impartial reports? Trust me, I really tried to find a counter-view on this article. Just couldn't.
-
You can find studies on both sides that support their agenda. The problem is that they have agendas so you can't trust how they compiled the data. It is rare to get a balanced review of data pertaining to a political hot button issue.
Agreed, so do you propose that we just disregard any topic because you can't find impartial reports? Trust me, I really tried to find a counter-view on this article. Just couldn't.
Agreed, so do you propose that we just disregard any topic because you can't find impartial reports? Trust me, I really tried to find a counter-view on this article. Just couldn't.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13504851.2013.854294#.UwZC0PldUgk Just one that I found pretty quickly.
You can find countering reports pretty easily. The problem is that they suffer from the same sort of problems as the anti-gun studies. Too many variables can effect crime and violence. What can't be disputed is that gun crime over the last 10 or so years has declined and gun laws have loosened. That does not mean that "more guns = less crime" it just means that gun crime declined over a time period in which gun laws loosened. It could be a decrease in gang activity, increase in social programs, employment levels in neighborhoods have low or high crime levels, etc. Just too many things to figure in.
-
Sure, luck means a lot in football. Not having a good quarterback is bad luck. -Don Shula
-
Agreed, so do you propose that we just disregard any topic because you can't find impartial reports? Trust me, I really tried to find a counter-view on this article. Just couldn't.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13504851.2013.854294#.UwZC0PldUgk Just one that I found pretty quickly.
You can find countering reports pretty easily. The problem is that they suffer from the same sort of problems as the anti-gun studies. Too many variables can effect crime and violence. What can't be disputed is that gun crime over the last 10 or so years has declined and gun laws have loosened. That does not mean that "more guns = less crime" it just means that gun crime declined over a time period in which gun laws loosened. It could be a decrease in gang activity, increase in social programs, employment levels in neighborhoods have low or high crime levels, etc. Just too many things to figure in.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13504851.2013.854294#.UwZC0PldUgk Just one that I found pretty quickly.
You can find countering reports pretty easily. The problem is that they suffer from the same sort of problems as the anti-gun studies. Too many variables can effect crime and violence. What can't be disputed is that gun crime over the last 10 or so years has declined and gun laws have loosened. That does not mean that "more guns = less crime" it just means that gun crime declined over a time period in which gun laws loosened. It could be a decrease in gang activity, increase in social programs, employment levels in neighborhoods have low or high crime levels, etc. Just too many things to figure in.
I meant that I couldn't find an opposing view on this particular report - most of the reports I could find were from 'liberal' outlets. I've no doubt you could find a report to back up basically any theory you could think up.
-
Saw this. Hi-Point is awful but I would definitely take it over a pointy stick.
-
Yup.
It looks like they found it in a ditch. Still worked apparently. Haha
-
It grates my nerves when "assault rifle" as a term is improperly used.
-
Given what people have been saying about criminal charges for negligible parents wrt gun control, this is presumably the kind of thing you had in mind?
What do you think - a case for the parent (dad, I guess) to answer in terms of negligence?
-
"The Shelby Star reported that the children’s father and owner of the gun is Justin Carper, who writes a parenting column for the newspaper."
irony
If you have children in the home and you just leave your guns where a 3 year old could get them... yeah, I think you should be punished.
-
"The Shelby Star reported that the children’s father and owner of the gun is Justin Carper, who writes a parenting column for the newspaper."
irony
If you have children in the home and you just leave your guns where a 3 year old could get them... yeah, I think you should be punished.
"The Shelby Star reported that the children’s father and owner of the gun is Justin Carper, who writes a parenting column for the newspaper."
irony
If you have children in the home and you just leave your guns where a 3 year old could get them... yeah, I think you should be punished.
Has he not been punished enough, having his daughter shot? I mean, he's not likely to leave his gun unlocked any time soon is he? Devil's advocate.
-
Ehhh, I understand where you are coming from. But what if his 3 year old took it outside and shot the neighbor's kid on accident.
I think a punishment being in place would be more to deter future adults from leaving their gun on the counter with kids home in the future.
-
I agree, but there are also things you have to be careful of. If you make the punishment a jail sentence, then you run the risk of the head of a a single parent family going to jail, his kids being presumably taken in to foster care, when really the best thing all around is for them to stay with a dad that loves them and has learnt his lesson.
on the other hand, if you make it punishable only by a fine, you end up with people perhaps not taking it seriously enough if it's too low, or it potentially crippling the family if it's too high.
I agree there needs to be a punishment, but a measure of common sense needs to be used in some cases, which will inevitably lead to inconsistencies in sentencing, which people will bang on about to no end.
-
I agree. I mean, that could be said about a lot of crimes by heads of single family households that maybe got in desperate situations and needed to feed their kids. But I see how this example is a little different.
-
The gun owner should do time if they let a 3 year old shoot themself. Child neglect, especially where hubs are converned, should never be taken lightly. It is up to the person committing the crime to decide if the risk of punishment is worth it when they are the lone provider.
-
The gun owner should do time if they let a 3 year old shoot themself. Child neglect, especially where hubs are converned, should never be taken lightly. It is up to the person committing the crime to decide if the risk of punishment is worth it when they are the lone provider.
The gun owner should do time if they let a 3 year old shoot themself. Child neglect, especially where hubs are converned, should never be taken lightly. It is up to the person committing the crime to decide if the risk of punishment is worth it when they are the lone provider.
Agreed.
-
With rights, comes responsibility. Keeping guns secured from unauthorized access
is a responsibility.
-
I agree that if you have weapons in the home with children you have to keep the weapon secured in a place the child cannot possibly access. And the parent should be prosecuted if the child got a hold of the weapon and hurt killed themselves or someone else.
-
@walterwhite said:
4. To anyone who doesn't like "guns" DON'T FUCKING BUY ONE.
I'm pro-gun ownership, but this is a stupid argument. If you don't like abortions, don't get them.
-
No, there is no Amendment guaranteeing the right to murder unborn/born children.
Hardly a fair analogy there.
-
He is saying that if you are making the argument to just not be involved with guns because you disagree, then you can just not be involved with any abortion. If you can just ignore guns because you want stricter gun laws then just ignore abortion because you think it shouldn't be a thing.
Abortion, by the way, seems like another issues where science takes the back seat to religion. Specifically science takes a back seat to a two thousand year old book. As long as that is how we are deciding public policy... ugh...
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login