I think I figured out why I hate the issue of gun control so much

[they don't love you like i love you]

Because BOTH sides base virtually everything off ridiculous oversimplifications and bumper sticker statements. Take a look at any libertarian argument on it or Morgan's current signature. It's downright ridiculous, idiotic and an extreme oversimplification. But WalterMitty's "OMG BAN THE GUNS!" rants from a few years back weren't any better. Neither is Carolyn McCarthy trying to ban things she has no clue about.

Really using exclusively logic and relevant facts in political debate isn't something I expect in any issue, but it's especially big here. 90% of it consists of nothing but "GUNS ARE BAD, BAN THE GUNS!" or "FREEDOM! STAND AGAINST THE GUBMINT! SHOOT BAD PEOPLE WITH GUNS!" I can't think of any other issue that is so juvenile.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I hate most issues, really. On any given issue, the vast majority of people are fast in their opinion. Debating it has less to do with convincing the other side of your correctness & more to do with galvanizing your own side. Republicans have recognized this better than Democrats, which is a large part of the reason for their disproportionate success in the last few decades.

     Gun control just reflects this more than others due to the fact that the "intuitive" answer is completely & thoroughly unworkable in reality. Combine the left-wing nonsense on this issue with the right-wing nonsense on most issues & you have a massive headache.

[SvenssonRS]

Alright, BRTD, I'm going to say that, for once, I agree with you pretty much entirely. While I'm against (MOST) gun control, the issue itself and debates that follow it are utterly, unchangingly stupid. It's one of those issues with almost literally no objectivity; only ridiculous, unbacked opinions.

[Marokai Backbeat]

"Ban the guns!" talk is incredibly stupid, for sure, but I don't actually see much of that around here unless it's from a foreign poster. I don't think the rhetoric you mentioned are in equal opposing parts on here.

[they don't love you like i love you]

"Ban the guns!" talk is incredibly stupid, for sure, but I don't actually see much of that around here unless it's from a foreign poster. I don't think the rhetoric you mentioned are in equal opposing parts on here.

You missed WalterMitty in his hardcore anti-gun phase.

And I meant in general, not on this forum.

[fezzyfestoon]

For me the most frustrating part is reconciling reason with feeling.  I have very strong convictions on the issue, but gun control largely fails to achieve its primary goals.  Beyond the reason of the issue I still support gun control.  That and my complete inability to understand the necessity of free access to weapons of no purpose beyond maximum damage.  I usually agree that we should be free to harm ourselves, but I just can't find it in myself to agree it's a good idea to allow people access to such massively dangerous tools of death that pose a general threat to everyone.

Beyond my own displeasure with the issue, I agree about the debate in general.  It mostly consists of very heated rhetoric with a huge disconnect between sides.  Neither usually can or wants to see it from the other point of view and that makes for a painfully shallow debate.

[John Dibble]

Because BOTH sides base virtually everything off ridiculous oversimplifications and bumper sticker statements.

So it's like every other political issue ever?

[memphis]

Abortion is so much worse.

[dead0man]

Abortion is so much worse.

That's what I was coming in here to say.

The recent thread on allowing guns on trains is a perfect example of the typical knee jerk reaction the "gun control" crowd has every time the word "gun" is mentioned.  They didn't even read the article, they have NO idea what the law change was.  They just read that guns were going to be allowed on trains, made a couple of mental assumptions and proclaimed the law was stupid and would lead to tragedy.  I'm sure you can find the same kind of knee jerk from the pro-gun crowd, but nothing recently that I can remember.

...but yeah, abortion is worse.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Abortion is so much worse.

That's what I was coming in here to say.

The recent thread on allowing guns on trains is a perfect example of the typical knee jerk reaction the "gun control" crowd has every time the word "gun" is mentioned.  They didn't even read the article, they have NO idea what the law change was.  They just read that guns were going to be allowed on trains, made a couple of mental assumptions and proclaimed the law was stupid and would lead to tragedy.  I'm sure you can find the same kind of knee jerk from the pro-gun crowd, but nothing recently that I can remember.

Pretty much any signature that deals with being anti-gun control.

Here's my main point, I have yet to see an argument about gun control ANYWHERE that focuses only on raw data and facts as to whether restricting guns is any good at reducing crime or whether increased gun ownership is any good at reducing crime. 90% of it consists of "EVIL GUNS! BAN!" or "FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS! FREEDOM!"

[WalterMitty]

"Ban the guns!" talk is incredibly stupid, for sure, but I don't actually see much of that around here unless it's from a foreign poster. I don't think the rhetoric you mentioned are in equal opposing parts on here.

You missed WalterMitty in his hardcore anti-gun phase.

And I meant in general, not on this forum.

my views on guns havent changed.

[Mechaman]

Abortion is so much worse.

Definitely.
You don't see people threatening to not support x candidate for Republican presidential (or vice presidential) nominee because they are pro gun control.  The Buchananites threatened to go third party if the GOP nominated a pro-choice VP in 1996.  McCain has one of the most pro gun control voting records in the GOP and I don't remember hearing any threat to go third party in 2008 by gun rights GOP activists.
Hell, abortion is one of the reasons why there is no solid libertarian movement in the United States.  It is a hell of a divisive issue with passionate supporters on either side.  Let me put it this way: on the issue of abortion I am officially Pro-Shut the Hell Up.  And that is directed toward both extremes that can't coexist to the point of disowning other libertarians based on their views on this one issue.  It really pisses me off to say the least.
I can't say I feel the same about gun rights, though I do agree that the rhetoric on both sides is more often than not emotional rather than logical.  Believe me, I do not like the idea of the government getting a hold of my Colt 45 (that I don't really have) but there has to be a little more honest way of debating the issue than resorting to "OMG EVIL EMPIRE!!!!!"  Better ways like you know pointing out that with the already established gun culture in the US gun control would be an infeasible goal due to the amount of guns in circulation, a lot of those "Saturday Night Specials" that are circulating on the Black Market (you know kind of like how Prohibition has failed and how the War on Drugs is failing).  It is actually pretty easy to argue against gun control (or for gun control for that matter) without resorting to an extreme talking point like "A GUN FREE SOCIETY IS A CIVILIZED SOCIETY!  GUNS KILL KILL KILL KILL KILLLLLLLL BABIES!!!!" or "A GUN FREE SOCIETY IS AN ENSLAVED SOCIETY!  GUNS EQUAL FREEDOM!!!! FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDOM!!!!!!!"

[minionofmidas]

Took you quite a while, now did it.

[Mechaman]

Took you quite a while, now did it.

I admit I used to be a paranoid lunatic fringe person on this issue, but now that I know there isn't a snow ball's chance in hell of an all out ban being pushed through Congress I've mellowed out some over the issue.  Needless to say I base most of my opinion now out of a more common sense logic (ie the gun culture argument I brought up earlier).
I wasn't the most mature poster in the past.  I think a lot of people on here will attest that I've probably matured a great deal since I showed up.

[Frodo]

Took you quite a while, now did it.

I admit I used to be a paranoid lunatic fringe person on this issue, but now that I know there isn't a snow ball's chance in hell of an all out ban being pushed through Congress I've mellowed out some over the issue.  Needless to say I base most of my opinion now out of a more common sense logic (ie the gun culture argument I brought up earlier).
I wasn't the most mature poster in the past.  I think a lot of people on here will attest that I've probably matured a great deal since I showed up.

It's called the 'Atlas effect'.  It grows stronger the longer you are here.    

[minionofmidas]

Took you quite a while, now did it.

I admit I used to be a paranoid lunatic fringe person on this issue, but now that I know there isn't a snow ball's chance in hell of an all out ban being pushed through Congress I've mellowed out some over the issue.  Needless to say I base most of my opinion now out of a more common sense logic (ie the gun culture argument I brought up earlier).
I wasn't the most mature poster in the past.  I think a lot of people on here will attest that I've probably matured a great deal since I showed up.

Heh. I was replying to the OP actually.

[Mississippi Political Freak]

As a new member to this forum, I'll just share my view on gun control and raise a few questions.

I'm raised in a major East Asian city which gun controls are among the strictest in the world (probably only the law enforcement are allowed to carry handguns and some exceptions are created for athletic shooters).  Yet, it has some of the lowest murder rates in Asia, if not in the world.  Such circumstances might serve as a proof for some foreign posters here that gun control works, and also predisposes me in favor of gun control.

My experience in this country as a non-owner of any firearms so far, I feels pretty safe as long as I stays at major business/tourist/transportation centers during the daytime, even in certain supposedly dangerous cities in the Southern US.  (Of course, there are select residential neighborhoods I'll avoid on foot even during daytime)

On the issue of gun control here, I'm really appalled by the recurrence of mass shootings every now and then, and abhorred by the GOP-controlled Congress to allow the Assault Weapons Ban to expire back in 2004.  I'm also really puzzled that the NRA has so much political clout and that many people (or at least politicians) buy into its slippery slope argument that all firearms will eventually be banned even a single common-sense gun control measure is implemented.

While a total ban on handguns seems impossible in this country, I do think the widespread circulation of firearms greatly increase the lethality of the violent outbreaks among certain folks, and that guns has little place in big cities and major suburbs.  I'd like to therefore stress the ideas on improving gun safety in this country:

• Renew the Assault Weapons Ban, as civilians generally have no business in owning high-firepower arms designed only to cause maximum casualty.
• Design a index that includes neighborhood crime rate, ease of policing and risk of business type to allow local authorities leeway in allowing applications for concealed firearm permits, subject to strenuous background checks on the applicant
• Allow urban localities to set the appropriate level of civilian firearm circulation appropriate to the best public safety interest of the localities
• Mandate safety training for concealed weapons permit applicants.
• Require child locks on newly-manufactured guns
• Make federal tracking of guns, ammunitions and background information on gun owners easier (Repeal the Tihart Amendment.

Now the time for my questions:

1. Why the NRA's slippery slope argument argument so persuasive on politicians and some gun owners as well?

2. Why rural areas are the most supportive of gun rights?

3. Why the South, Mountain West and parts of the Midwest are strongly supportive of gun rights?

4. Does it seem that the NRA is promoting a vision of a heavily-armed citizenry is safer for the country, and why?

5. Why it is now pretty much an article of faith that one can't be a good Republican and support any forms of gun control?

6. Are instances of successful self-defense by gun owners being exaggerated by the gun lobby to promote further gun rights?

7. Which of the following drives the widespread American support on gun rights?

• Distrust on the government, including the police (I've heard a few co-workers claiming their local police forces being corrupt, or even colluding with the bad guys)
• Large pockets of this country is hard to police (due to extensive road networks, remoteness or both)
• Popular fear of crimes
• Nostalgia on our frontier past/frontier justice
• The libertarian heritage behind our country's founding

8. How valid is the argument that if gun ownership is restricted, only the criminals can get guns?

9. Do Americans tend to accept that mass shotting casualties are an acceptable cost of their cherished liberty on gun-ownership?

10. Finally for now, do you think any meaningful gun control is impossible here for the foreseeable future, or even for generations?

Sorry for my extremely lengthy response, but I'd like to trigger a serious, intelligent debate an issue where the stake for public safety is so high.  Thanks!

[dead0man]

1. Why the NRA's slippery slope argument argument so persuasive on politicians and some gun owners as well?

Because there are a lot of people that DO want a full ban on guns.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Because they (the people in the rural areas) have a valid reason to own guns and many city folk don't.  City folk are often ignorant of that need.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Same as above.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

no

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You'd have to ask one of them.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Maybe, it's not exactly an easy thing to get stats on.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't think that's a widespread belief (of the police at least....yes, of course there are many out there that distrust the police...of all political stripes...but I doubt the majority of gun rights supporters have some unhealthy fear of the police)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

yes

You must be logged in to read this quote.

and often overblown too!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

a little

You must be logged in to read this quote.

sure

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Clearly it's very valid, how could it not be?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

mmm loaded questions are teh awesome!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

hopefully

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's hard to trigger a serious debate when people on both sides of the issue have already made up their minds on the issue.  I'm not a Republican and do not now, nor have I ever owned a gun.  I still feel the right to own a gun is one of our most cherished rights...right up there with speech, religion, press and assembly and it's MUCH more under threat than those.  Every time a gun is used in a tragedy it comes under threat.  Look at how many people want to bring the totally pointless AWB back or were against the guns on trains topic recently.  I mean, I'm glad the gun control crowd is full of ignorant people, makes my job easier...but it kind of takes the fun out of it.