3 ms·

> I "need" "assault rifles" (which they're not) because I shoot them in competitive events and for fun and training. They're not a particularly good choice for

> I "need" "assault rifles" (which they're not) because I shoot them in competitive events and for fun and training. They're not a particularly good choice for suicide; they're not really that useful in crime scenarios; they are good at marksmanship and plinking. They're functionally identical to other semi-automatic rifles. This is great because the self-defence argument isn't applicable at all for these guns, then. Hooray! > It's a bit dubious that internet-rando-from-outside-the-US This seems a little emotional. You're an "internet-rando" too. > First, Ludwig and Cook performed a time-series analysis of the Brady law and found a statistically significant reduction in gun suicide rates after the law's passage, but a non-statistically significant change in suicide rates. So that right there is enough to question the efficacy of what you suggest (gun control as a mechanism to prevent suicide). Is this the same Ludwig and Cook that found in 2004 that handgun owners accounted for a much higher rate of suicides than long rifles? That's one of the reasons I suggest owning a 22 bolt action. I'm curious about what mechanism you think explains the result that owning a gun increases the non-gun suicide rate. Many meta-analyses across studies such as Santaella-Tenorio's in 2016 which stretches across 10 countries and 130 studies, suggest a strong link between better gun control and less gun violence and suicide. > But anyways-- time for me to move on. We're down in the weeds and won't be read by others; the stuff you assert seems to vary between uninformed and dubious; and neither of us is gonna convince the other. I'm really interested in how people form beliefs about their safety in the world, and this has been informative. Thanks!

mlyle 7y ago
> This is great because the self-defence argument isn't applicable at all for these guns, then. Hooray! But you ignored the whole actual line of argument around the guns used for defense, so you could get a little snipey comment in here. > I'm curious about what mechanism you think explains the result that owning a gun increases the non-gun suicide rate. Do you think that people who choose to own guns are identical to people who don't? Do you think attempts to pick a few controlling variables to try and even out the populations makes a difference? Maybe there are differences in values and personality attributes between gun owners and non-gun owners? Seriously, everyone knows that epidemiological studies, and even case control studies suck, in large part because of just how prone they are to finding associations that are actually caused by unmeasured factors that affect multiple measured variables. > Is this the same Ludwig and Cook that found in 2004 that handgun owners accounted for a much higher rate of suicides than long rifles? That's one of the reasons I suggest owning a 22 bolt action. Again, handgun owners have different underlying beliefs and demographics than people who only own rifles. And if you're going to buy a weapon just for suicide, everyone knows a rifle is less convenient than a handgun and only equally effective. But-- if one were to accept your argument-- this further "exonerates" "assault rifles". ;) I'm done with your cherrypicking of arguments and sniping at little passages. Have a nice day.
- tomlockwood 7y ago
  > But you ignored the whole actual line of argument around the guns used for defense, so you could get a little snipey comment in here. What argument negates the fact that owning a gun is dangerous for the owner, in some of the exact ways a gun is meant to defend against (and some of the ways rural men seem to think they're immune to)? > Seriously, everyone knows that epidemiological studies, and even case control studies suck, in large part because of just how prone they are to finding associations that are actually caused by unmeasured factors that affect multiple measured variables. What superior alternative are you proposing? > And if you're going to buy a weapon just for suicide, everyone knows a rifle is less convenient than a handgun and only equally effective. Again, this is precisely one of the reasons why I recommend owning a 22 bolt action.

mlyle 7y ago

> This is great because the self-defence argument isn't applicable at all for these guns, then. Hooray! But you ignored the whole actual line of argument around the guns used for defense, so you could get a little snipey comment in here. > I'm curious about what mechanism you think explains the result that owning a gun increases the non-gun suicide rate. Do you think that people who choose to own guns are identical to people who don't? Do you think attempts to pick a few controlling variables to try and even out the populations makes a difference? Maybe there are differences in values and personality attributes between gun owners and non-gun owners? Seriously, everyone knows that epidemiological studies, and even case control studies suck, in large part because of just how prone they are to finding associations that are actually caused by unmeasured factors that affect multiple measured variables. > Is this the same Ludwig and Cook that found in 2004 that handgun owners accounted for a much higher rate of suicides than long rifles? That's one of the reasons I suggest owning a 22 bolt action. Again, handgun owners have different underlying beliefs and demographics than people who only own rifles. And if you're going to buy a weapon just for suicide, everyone knows a rifle is less convenient than a handgun and only equally effective. But-- if one were to accept your argument-- this further "exonerates" "assault rifles". ;) I'm done with your cherrypicking of arguments and sniping at little passages. Have a nice day.

tomlockwood 7y ago
> But you ignored the whole actual line of argument around the guns used for defense, so you could get a little snipey comment in here. What argument negates the fact that owning a gun is dangerous for the owner, in some of the exact ways a gun is meant to defend against (and some of the ways rural men seem to think they're immune to)? > Seriously, everyone knows that epidemiological studies, and even case control studies suck, in large part because of just how prone they are to finding associations that are actually caused by unmeasured factors that affect multiple measured variables. What superior alternative are you proposing? > And if you're going to buy a weapon just for suicide, everyone knows a rifle is less convenient than a handgun and only equally effective. Again, this is precisely one of the reasons why I recommend owning a 22 bolt action.