Question for gun folks...

[glockman]

That hits the nail on the head.

As gun owners when we refuse to discuss violence and suicide in any meaningful way, it both turns general public opinion away from us and the 2nd Amendment (hard to generate sympathy for our cause when we don't show it publicly when people die) and leaves legislation in the hands of those whose proposals we don't find acceptable.

Join the conversation in a meaningful way and look for steps that may help reduce crime and suicide without limiting the rights of the rest. I will stir the hornets' nest and toss out steps like universal background checks (I will admit to being a little worried when I sell guns privately whose hands they may end up in), raising the age to buy rifles to 21 (two recent mass shootings were 18 year olds who purchased their weapons legally), make juvenile convictions part of a background check up to say 25 years of age, etc.

I will engage in conversation on all proposed measures. The issue i have is when I explain the problem with said measures, the other side doesn't care. They just want to do something, even if you show them data that it does more harm than good. I'll use your two proposals as an example.

How do enforce a universal background check without a registry? Every single registry in history has ended in confiscation. Maybe not absolute confiscation but pistols, semi autos etc. I will die on that hill because a totally neutered 2nd is useless.

How many people would be prevented from defending themselves if you increase the age to buy a rifle to 21? If it's ten, you did more harm than good. Less than 500 people in the US were killed with all rifles in the last cdc data. Without looking st the data I'd bet less than 50 people in the US were killed by a person between 18 and 21 with a rifle. Can you tell me any other public policy we set based on that few casualties nationwide?
In spite of what "common sense " tells you, an ar is a better, safer home defense weapon than a 9mm pistol. It's easier to shoot and penetrates fewer walls than a 9mm. So young people living in apartments should buy an AR instead of a pistol if you really want to prevent accidentally shooting someone through a common wall.

 

[jeeper]

In spite of what "common sense " tells you, an ar is a better, safer home defense weapon than a 9mm pistol. It's easier to shoot and penetrates fewer walls than a 9mm. So young people living in apartments should buy an AR instead of a pistol if you really want to prevent accidentally shooting someone through a common wall.

First off, don't be ageist. Anyone can live in an apartment, not just young people. You are just displaying you white male rich adult privilege.

Second, most ammo is shown to go through 10 drywall panels with ease.. and I know my home does not have anywhere close to 5 consecutive walls any any point. So if you are going to discharge a weapon of any size or caliber.. best know how to make a hit.

I have personally pulled a hollow point 9mm out of an attic after a shooting. The bullet went through a solid wood picture frame, 1 insulated wall, and 1 non insulated ceiling (shot from low level upwards). 3 layers of sheetrock, 2 of which were 5/8. It hit a 2x4 truss, and fell down on the drywall ceiling below. This was a bullet designed to stop when hitting a target.. I believe it mushroomed in the wood picture frame, which took a lot of it's energy away, and then it still carried through multiple walls.

It is my opinion that you must have a shoot/no shoot plan in place. You have to predetermine where and what is safe to shoot at in your home based on kids locations, back stops, neighboring homes, etc. If your situation falls in the no shoot zone, you need Plan B. (not the pill kind, the action taking kind..)

 

[Herzog]

You are just displaying you white male rich adult privilege.

 

[Houndoc]

How many people would be prevented from defending themselves if you increase the age to buy a rifle to 21? If it's ten, you did more harm than good. Less than 500 people in the US were killed with all rifles in the last cdc data. Without looking st the data I'd bet less than 50 people in the US were killed by a person between 18 and 21 with a rifle. Can you tell me any other public policy we set based on that few casualties nationwide?
In spite of what "common sense " tells you, an ar is a better, safer home defense weapon than a 9mm pistol. It's easier to shoot and penetrates fewer walls than a

Here is where all credibility is lost- look up data that you believe will fit you argument, and then on the flip side continue with "without looking at the data" to make your final argument. The Uvalde and Buffalo shootings a lone are 29 deaths caused by 18-21 year olds with rifles. And while 29 deaths is a small percent of the US population, I am not comfortable ignoring mass shootings any longer.

And is there any data to support your claim that more than 50 people per year are saved by self defense with a rifle by 18-21 year olds? A dubious claim at best.

If we want to go into the discussion of best firearm for in-house self defense, I will make the argument for a shotgun. Easiest to aim in a high stress situation and less likely to be deadly beyond a wall.

 

[anderson750]

Join the conversation in a meaningful way and look for steps that may help reduce crime and suicide without limiting the rights of the rest. I will stir the hornets' nest and toss out steps like universal background checks (I will admit to being a little worried when I sell guns privately whose hands they may end up in), raising the age to buy rifles to 21 (two recent mass shootings were 18 year olds who purchased their weapons legally), make juvenile convictions part of a background check up to say 25 years of age, etc.

This is the one I was referencing. Your solution would not have stopped this one.

Father of Highland Park shooting suspect sponsored son's firearm ownership card despite past violent threats

The father of suspected Highland Park gunman Robert Crimo sponsored his son's application for legal firearm ownership despite past threats of violence to himself and others.

www.foxnews.com

 

[glockman]

Here is where all credibility is lost- look up data that you believe will fit you argument, and then on the flip side continue with "without looking at the data" to make your final argument. The Uvalde and Buffalo shootings a lone are 29 deaths caused by 18-21 year olds with rifles. And while 29 deaths is a small percent of the US population, I am not comfortable ignoring mass shootings any longer.

And is there any data to support your claim that more than 50 people per year are saved by self defense with a rifle by 18-21 year olds? A dubious claim at best.

If we want to go into the discussion of best firearm for in-house self defense, I will make the argument for a shotgun. Easiest to aim in a high stress situation and less likely to be deadly beyond a wall.

I said, without looking up the data, because I know the data pretty well. I don't know the exact number but I know it is less than 500 because that's the total for all . It wasn't a wild guess, it was and educated estimate.

The estimates on defensive use of firearms is all over the place. The CDC estimated between 50k and 3 million times per year.
The most conservative estimate I can find is from David Hemenway of Harvard school of public health who is very pro gun control. It's quit buried but he used the National Crime Victims Survey data. His estimate is 100,000 times per year, which as I stated is the lowest I have found from actual research data. You can find that here https://www.gvpedia.org/fact-sheet-the-frequency-of-defensive-gun-use/.
There are 209 million people over 18, so potential legal gun owners. There are 197 million over 21, so 12 million between 18 and 21. If you use the 100k defensive uses, divide by the number of people who legally can own a gun you get one in 2090 people used a gun defensively. So take that number and divide it by the number of people in the 18-21 age group, 12 million. You'd get 5,741 defensive uses in that age group. Of course that isn't adjusted for cohorts or gun ownership. I'd bet the number of people 18-21 who are assaulted is much higher than those over 60 or pretty much any other age group so it would stand to reason they would be in a situation to use a gun defensively more often but that 5,741 is substantially higher than the number of people killed by a legally purchased rifle by someone between the ages of 18 and 21. I am sure of that because like I said, there were less than 500 people killed with rifles.

Your argument for a shotgun is factually false and is a commonly perpetrated myth. Depending on the ammo you choose, the shot pattern is not much bigger than an inch at distances inside a home. If you shoot smaller chill, like 8,7 or even 6, a shotgun is non lethal at any distance over 12 inches. I personally know 3 people shot at less than 5 feet with shotguns who didn't sustain life threatening injuries because they were shot with birdshot, which doesn't penetrate more than a few inches.
If you shoot lethal ammo like 00 buck, you have now sent 9-12 pellets roughly the size of a 9mm (.33") through the same number of walls as a 9mm would penetrate. A slug is much worse at penetrating even more walls. I can provide you with ballistics tests to prove this if you'd like.

 

[Spork]

I think folks get too willing to give up things for an imagined cause, if we just give up guns nobody will get shot, next if we give up knives nobody will be stabbed, if we just do X all our troubles will go away.
Examples of for your own safety:
Knife detector

https://www.essex.police.uk/news/essex/news/news/2022/august/southend-new-knife-detector/

looks like they raided grandma's junk drawer:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974645778558980096

so scary.


Personally I would rather live in a world you can have scissors than not.

 

[anderson750]

I said, without looking up the data, because I know the data pretty well. I don't know the exact number but I know it is less than 500 because that's the total for all . It wasn't a wild guess, it was and educated estimate.

The estimates on defensive use of firearms is all over the place. The CDC estimated between 50k and 3 million times per year.
The most conservative estimate I can find is from David Hemenway of Harvard school of public health who is very pro gun control. It's quit buried but he used the National Crime Victims Survey data. His estimate is 100,000 times per year, which as I stated is the lowest I have found from actual research data. You can find that here https://www.gvpedia.org/fact-sheet-the-frequency-of-defensive-gun-use/.
There are 209 million people over 18, so potential legal gun owners. There are 197 million over 21, so 12 million between 18 and 21. If you use the 100k defensive uses, divide by the number of people who legally can own a gun you get one in 2090 people used a gun defensively. So take that number and divide it by the number of people in the 18-21 age group, 12 million. You'd get 5,741 defensive uses in that age group. Of course that isn't adjusted for cohorts or gun ownership. I'd bet the number of people 18-21 who are assaulted is much higher than those over 60 or pretty much any other age group so it would stand to reason they would be in a situation to use a gun defensively more often but that 5,741 is substantially higher than the number of people killed by a legally purchased rifle by someone between the ages of 18 and 21. I am sure of that because like I said, there were less than 500 people killed with rifles.

Your argument for a shotgun is factually false and is a commonly perpetrated myth. Depending on the ammo you choose, the shot pattern is not much bigger than an inch at distances inside a home. If you shoot smaller chill, like 8,7 or even 6, a shotgun is non lethal at any distance over 12 inches. I personally know 3 people shot at less than 5 feet with shotguns who didn't sustain life threatening injuries because they were shot with birdshot, which doesn't penetrate more than a few inches.
If you shoot lethal ammo like 00 buck, you have now sent 9-12 pellets roughly the size of a 9mm (.33") through the same number of walls as a 9mm would penetrate. A slug is much worse at penetrating even more walls. I can provide you with ballistics tests to prove this if you'd like.

There is a reason his profile name is @glockman

 

[jeeper]

There is a reason his profile name is @glockman

Because he carries a S&W 🤣

 

[anderson750]

I am just going to pop some popcorn and watch facts and rebuttal for a bit. 🍿

 

[DAA]

I should have registered as @Nesikaman.

- DAA

 

[jeeper]

I think guns, along with abortion, marriage, and a few other hot topics will never be 'solved' for 2 reasons

1- Statistics can be manipulated with a single small variable change. I do it all day. Each side can have the statistics on their side with ease.

2- And the bigger reason, politicians get money from the hot button items being fought. If they solved them, the money dries up. That's why they are in the media significantly more before elections.

 

[anderson750]

2- And the bigger reason, politicians get money from the hot button items being fought. If they solved them, the money dries up. That's why they are in the media significantly more before elections.

I have always said that CONFLICT = JOB SECURITY. With a few exceptions, these a$$hats we have elected for the most part sip martini's together over dinner away from the camera then call each other dirty SOB's on camera.

 

[glockman]

Because he carries a S&W 🤣

It's a sig dammit.

 

[jeeper]

I think folks get too willing to give up things for an imagined cause, if we just give up guns nobody will get shot, next if we give up knives nobody will be stabbed, if we just do X all our troubles will go away.
Examples of for your own safety:
Knife detector

https://www.essex.police.uk/news/essex/news/news/2022/august/southend-new-knife-detector/

looks like they raided grandma's junk drawer:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974645778558980096

so scary.
View attachment 152390

Personally I would rather live in a world you can have scissors than not.

"UK knife law allows you to carry non-locking pocket knives with a blade length up to 3 inches (7.62 cm) without any need for a valid reason.

You are allowed to carry a knife which exceeds these guidelines in public, but please remember: you then do need a good reason to carry it. Gov.uk has the following to say on good reasons to carry a knife:

“Examples of good reasons to carry a knife in public can include:

• taking knives you use at work to and from work
• taking knives to a gallery or museum to be exhibited
• the knife is going to be used for theatre, film, television, historical re-enactment or religious purposes, eg the kirpan some Sikhs carry

A court will decide if you’ve got a good reason to carry a knife if you’re charged with carrying it illegally.”"

 

[Spork]

"UK knife law allows you to carry non-locking pocket knives with a blade length up to 3 inches (7.62 cm) without any need for a valid reason.

You are allowed to carry a knife which exceeds these guidelines in public, but please remember: you then do need a good reason to carry it. Gov.uk has the following to say on good reasons to carry a knife:

“Examples of good reasons to carry a knife in public can include:

• taking knives you use at work to and from work
• taking knives to a gallery or museum to be exhibited
• the knife is going to be used for theatre, film, television, historical re-enactment or religious purposes, eg the kirpan some Sikhs carry

A court will decide if you’ve got a good reason to carry a knife if you’re charged with carrying it illegally.”"

Sounds excessive to me.

 

[jeeper]

One piece of data does not make a trend or reliable data set... But this follows exactly my previous post that most adult male mass shootings are workplace related retaliations.

Man threatens to shoot up West Valley business, is stopped while en route, police say

A Utah man who police say threatened to shoot people where he used to work and was in possession of a loaded gun when he was pulled over, has been arrested.

www.ksl.com

 

[Corban_White]

You are allowed to carry a knife which exceeds these guidelines in public, but please remember: you then do need a good reason to carry it. Gov.uk has the following to say on good reasons to carry a knife:

“Examples of good reasons to carry a knife in public can include:

• the knife is going to be used for theatre, film, television, historical re-enactment or religious purposes, eg the kirpan some Sikhs carry

So as long as the bowie knife I'm carrying is being used to sacrifice virgins, then I'm good!

 

[Houndoc]

This is the one I was referencing. Your solution would not have stopped this one.

Father of Highland Park shooting suspect sponsored son's firearm ownership card despite past violent threats

The father of suspected Highland Park gunman Robert Crimo sponsored his son's application for legal firearm ownership despite past threats of violence to himself and others.

www.foxnews.com

My reference was to Uvalde and Buffalo, but you the point you bring up that no law will stop all gun violence is of course correct.

 

[anderson750]

My reference was to Uvalde and Buffalo, but you the point you bring up that no law will stop all gun violence is of course correct.

High five…..we agree on something.