4 ms·

> the obvious fallacy of the "right to protect yourself". If having that right actually results in being more likely to be harmed, or harm someone else, having

> the obvious fallacy of the "right to protect yourself". If having that right actually results in being more likely to be harmed, or harm someone else, having that right is an unacceptable public safety risk. I disagree. I understand that the divorced female across the street has a higher chance to harm someone else because she has the right to own weapons - that does not make is unacceptable. I would like to see increased access to instruction / training on safely using any weapons one may choose to have available, so that there is less chance of collateral damage, not restrictions on her rights to use them. The same could be said of free speech. I do not want other people's ability to speak to be restricted, even though I am aware of the possible harms. Instead I want more education for people to know who to research facts and find other opinions. > Guns are quite obviously a significant risk to public safety, as the murder statistics demonstrate. I do not think this is true. I'd like to see some stats that show how many people are killed by guns that are not involved in illegal activities (and suicides), gun deaths in the circles of drug dealers, gangs and other illicit activities should not so much in the stats of risk to public safety imho. car crashes, cell phone use, and hospitals likely contribute to more deaths than guns yet we don't rush to ban them - and yet access to those things are not 'rights'

peterwwillis 8y ago
Education does not always correlate to action. Behavioral psychology and economics show us that even when people know what they should be doing, they don't always do it. We have had training and instruction on the use and care of firearms for decades, but we still have an unacceptably high number of incidents, both accidental and intentional. States like NY have even passed laws that make not securing your weapon a misdemeanor; people aren't just uneducated, they need a clear incentive to act safer. > I'd like to see some stats that show how many people are killed by guns that are not involved in illegal activities (and suicides), gun deaths in the circles of drug dealers, gangs and other illicit activities should not so much in the stats of risk to public safety imho. Before I get into the stats, I'd like to point out that suicide risk is still a public safety risk that the united states takes very seriously. If someone is a danger to themselves, it's nearly the same as if they were a danger to others: either way, a life is at risk. Suicide is (most of the time) an impulse decision, and even small mitigations can prevent them. If not having a gun prevents a suicide, that saves a life, and thus has an impact on public safety. Suicide impacts not only families, but entire communities. This is a complex subject, but one that should never be discounted. Guns account for over half of all suicide deaths in the US. In fact, the use of guns in suicide has only increased, and is now even larger than gun homicides. [3] Gun deaths involved in illegal activities are definitely public safety issues. It's easy to dismiss gang violence as a lesser part of society that we shouldn't care about. But if you get to know the kinds of people in gangs, you realize it's 14 year old kids, and 50 year old lifers. It's people with families, who live in real communities. Their life affects many other lives. From the police they come into conflict with, to the social workers that try to help rehabilitate them, to the hospital workers that pick up the damage, and the prisons that generate hardened soldiers. Gun crime creates worse outcomes for all these parts of society and more. To say nothing of the collateral damage of their conflicts that reach out into any surrounding communities. Gang violence enacted through guns is a very significant public safety risk, perhaps one of the largest gun-related risks to public safety. Their impact on public safety is probably greatest through the impact of the drug trade, but second to that, the collateral of gun crimes. Snopes did an investigation on a meme about homicides. They found that only about 48% of homicides could be directly attributed to gangs, with the rest being due to interpersional relationships, and "unknown causes". [4] Gun crimes significantly affect minorities, which has a significant accumulative effect not just on public safety, but the health, safety and economic stability of significant portions of minority communities. Homicide is the fourth leading cause of death for non-Hispanic whites 15-24, but the second leading for Hispanics 15-34, and the leading cause for non-Hispanic blacks. [1] > car crashes, cell phone use, and hospitals likely contribute to more deaths than guns yet we don't rush to ban them - and yet access to those things are not 'rights' Wait, cell phone use causes deaths? You lost me there. Cars cause about as many deaths per year in the US as guns, so I would definitely say we need tougher regulations there. But like I mentioned before, people are not rational, and we should be legislating based on real-world harms, not based purely on the "perception" of risk. [1] https://www.apha.org/-/media/files/pdf/factsheets/160317_gunviolencefs.ashx?la=en&hash=AB71DE1BEDEBB2A797F8EC378E672791904FCF87 https://www.apha.org/-/media/files/pdf/factsheets/160317_gun... [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20160616013917/https://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/news/news/2016/2016-06-14-gun-violence-lobby-congress.page https://web.archive.org/web/20160616013917/https://www.ama-a... [3] http://www.bradycampaign.org/gun-violence-in-the-united-states http://www.bradycampaign.org/gun-violence-in-the-united-stat... [4] https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/gun-homicides-disputes/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/gun-homicides-disputes/
- stevenicr 8y ago
  >to point out that suicide risk is still a public safety risk... ... I disagree with about everything you mentioned about suicide. This does not mean I am saying you are wrong, you can be right as far as how you feel the impact and all that, I just don't feel the same about the impact, and I do not consider suicide a reason to consider banning anything. > Gun deaths involved in illegal activities are definitely public safety issues. I do not think this is statistically significant. How many members of public are also injured when a drug dealer is shot? There was a time when drive by shootings inuring and killing bystanders was more common in the news, but I think that is much less these days, and even at it's peak, if you take out the drug dealers, drug buyers, the thieves, etc - how many in the public are affected by being shot? > only about 48% of homicides could be directly attributed to gangs, with the rest being due to interpersional relationships, and "unknown causes" This is some information, it seems about than half the homicides are targeted deaths where a criminal is killing someone likely due to illegal activities, and about half are from people who have known each other a long time and were likely arguing about money or someone sleeping with someone kind of things. Skimming the info via snopes it seems about 2/3 of the 'interpersonal relationship kind of homicides' happened with a gun and 1/3 of the kills used something else. Here's the point I am / was trying to make above and here, I disagree that these deaths should be chalked up as public safety issues broadly. Most of these killings took out the intended target without collateral deaths of public bystanders, neighbors, etc. If there were no guns, knives, other methods, and the only way to kill a human was the use of poison gas, and 10,000 a year people killed not just the intended target in the interpersonal relationship but also anyone living in adjacent apartments or others at such and such restaurant / pub / etc.. then I would be behind this as public safety issue. > Gun crimes significantly affect minorities, which has a significant accumulative effect not just on public safety, but the health, safety and economic stability of significant portions of minority communities. Understand the importance here, but disagree. If you had said "Violent crimes significantly affect minorities, which has a significant accumulative effect on the health, safety and economic stability of significant portions of minority communities" - I would say yes, and this is important stuff. Regardless of the tools that violent offenders use, the issue is complex and I think it's important for the whole community. > Wait, cell phone use causes deaths? You lost me there. "In 2016 alone, 3,450 people were killed. 391,000 were injured in motor vehicle crashes involving distracted drivers in 2015. During daylight hours, approximately 481,000 drivers are using cell phones while driving" [1] This does not include times when baby drowns in tub while mom is addicted to fbook. Also does not include the times when texts or social accounts on a cell phone lead to argument about interpersonal relationships that ends in death. now here I agree: >people are not rational, and we should be legislating based on real-world harms, not based purely on the "perception" of risk. On that statement, we are on total agreement. [1] https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/distracted-driving https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/distracted-driving

peterwwillis 8y ago

Education does not always correlate to action. Behavioral psychology and economics show us that even when people know what they should be doing, they don't always do it. We have had training and instruction on the use and care of firearms for decades, but we still have an unacceptably high number of incidents, both accidental and intentional. States like NY have even passed laws that make not securing your weapon a misdemeanor; people aren't just uneducated, they need a clear incentive to act safer. > I'd like to see some stats that show how many people are killed by guns that are not involved in illegal activities (and suicides), gun deaths in the circles of drug dealers, gangs and other illicit activities should not so much in the stats of risk to public safety imho. Before I get into the stats, I'd like to point out that suicide risk is still a public safety risk that the united states takes very seriously. If someone is a danger to themselves, it's nearly the same as if they were a danger to others: either way, a life is at risk. Suicide is (most of the time) an impulse decision, and even small mitigations can prevent them. If not having a gun prevents a suicide, that saves a life, and thus has an impact on public safety. Suicide impacts not only families, but entire communities. This is a complex subject, but one that should never be discounted. Guns account for over half of all suicide deaths in the US. In fact, the use of guns in suicide has only increased, and is now even larger than gun homicides. [3] Gun deaths involved in illegal activities are definitely public safety issues. It's easy to dismiss gang violence as a lesser part of society that we shouldn't care about. But if you get to know the kinds of people in gangs, you realize it's 14 year old kids, and 50 year old lifers. It's people with families, who live in real communities. Their life affects many other lives. From the police they come into conflict with, to the social workers that try to help rehabilitate them, to the hospital workers that pick up the damage, and the prisons that generate hardened soldiers. Gun crime creates worse outcomes for all these parts of society and more. To say nothing of the collateral damage of their conflicts that reach out into any surrounding communities. Gang violence enacted through guns is a very significant public safety risk, perhaps one of the largest gun-related risks to public safety. Their impact on public safety is probably greatest through the impact of the drug trade, but second to that, the collateral of gun crimes. Snopes did an investigation on a meme about homicides. They found that only about 48% of homicides could be directly attributed to gangs, with the rest being due to interpersional relationships, and "unknown causes". [4] Gun crimes significantly affect minorities, which has a significant accumulative effect not just on public safety, but the health, safety and economic stability of significant portions of minority communities. Homicide is the fourth leading cause of death for non-Hispanic whites 15-24, but the second leading for Hispanics 15-34, and the leading cause for non-Hispanic blacks. [1] > car crashes, cell phone use, and hospitals likely contribute to more deaths than guns yet we don't rush to ban them - and yet access to those things are not 'rights' Wait, cell phone use causes deaths? You lost me there. Cars cause about as many deaths per year in the US as guns, so I would definitely say we need tougher regulations there. But like I mentioned before, people are not rational, and we should be legislating based on real-world harms, not based purely on the "perception" of risk. [1] https://www.apha.org/-/media/files/pdf/factsheets/160317_gunviolencefs.ashx?la=en&hash=AB71DE1BEDEBB2A797F8EC378E672791904FCF87 https://www.apha.org/-/media/files/pdf/factsheets/160317_gun... [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20160616013917/https://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/news/news/2016/2016-06-14-gun-violence-lobby-congress.page https://web.archive.org/web/20160616013917/https://www.ama-a... [3] http://www.bradycampaign.org/gun-violence-in-the-united-states http://www.bradycampaign.org/gun-violence-in-the-united-stat... [4] https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/gun-homicides-disputes/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/gun-homicides-disputes/

stevenicr 8y ago
>to point out that suicide risk is still a public safety risk... ... I disagree with about everything you mentioned about suicide. This does not mean I am saying you are wrong, you can be right as far as how you feel the impact and all that, I just don't feel the same about the impact, and I do not consider suicide a reason to consider banning anything. > Gun deaths involved in illegal activities are definitely public safety issues. I do not think this is statistically significant. How many members of public are also injured when a drug dealer is shot? There was a time when drive by shootings inuring and killing bystanders was more common in the news, but I think that is much less these days, and even at it's peak, if you take out the drug dealers, drug buyers, the thieves, etc - how many in the public are affected by being shot? > only about 48% of homicides could be directly attributed to gangs, with the rest being due to interpersional relationships, and "unknown causes" This is some information, it seems about than half the homicides are targeted deaths where a criminal is killing someone likely due to illegal activities, and about half are from people who have known each other a long time and were likely arguing about money or someone sleeping with someone kind of things. Skimming the info via snopes it seems about 2/3 of the 'interpersonal relationship kind of homicides' happened with a gun and 1/3 of the kills used something else. Here's the point I am / was trying to make above and here, I disagree that these deaths should be chalked up as public safety issues broadly. Most of these killings took out the intended target without collateral deaths of public bystanders, neighbors, etc. If there were no guns, knives, other methods, and the only way to kill a human was the use of poison gas, and 10,000 a year people killed not just the intended target in the interpersonal relationship but also anyone living in adjacent apartments or others at such and such restaurant / pub / etc.. then I would be behind this as public safety issue. > Gun crimes significantly affect minorities, which has a significant accumulative effect not just on public safety, but the health, safety and economic stability of significant portions of minority communities. Understand the importance here, but disagree. If you had said "Violent crimes significantly affect minorities, which has a significant accumulative effect on the health, safety and economic stability of significant portions of minority communities" - I would say yes, and this is important stuff. Regardless of the tools that violent offenders use, the issue is complex and I think it's important for the whole community. > Wait, cell phone use causes deaths? You lost me there. "In 2016 alone, 3,450 people were killed. 391,000 were injured in motor vehicle crashes involving distracted drivers in 2015. During daylight hours, approximately 481,000 drivers are using cell phones while driving" [1] This does not include times when baby drowns in tub while mom is addicted to fbook. Also does not include the times when texts or social accounts on a cell phone lead to argument about interpersonal relationships that ends in death. now here I agree: >people are not rational, and we should be legislating based on real-world harms, not based purely on the "perception" of risk. On that statement, we are on total agreement. [1] https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/distracted-driving https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/distracted-driving