7 ms·

About the gun part: I grew up in a gun owning family. On the other hand my dad wouldn't even let is have toy guns or water guns as he was afraid of us picking u

About the gun part: I grew up in a gun owning family. On the other hand my dad wouldn't even let is have toy guns or water guns as he was afraid of us picking up the habit of pointing guns at fellow humans. Much of my childhood I also shared house with an actual (full auto, large caliber) assault rifle, but my dad was always very careful to point out that war was not cool. In fact, from my childhood, the gun owning part of the family were simultaneously the mild mannered, book reading part of the family. My Swiss friend in town told me as far as he knew Switzerland still people keep fully functional assault rifles at home but those who have them need to show up for three weeks of training each year and show up at a shooting range twice a year. (He left a few years ago so anyone actually living there now should feel free to correct this.) My conclusion has always been that the gun violence problems in US is largely a culture problem.

underlines 6y ago
"My conclusion has always been that the gun violence problems in US is largely a culture problem." I would strongly argue against this. Swiss gun law is very different from US, please read my five points above. Do you think US gun violence would decrease if they adopted those points? In my opinion yes. In my opinion the conservatives, nationalists and the National Rifle Association fight against any tighter regulations that would probably save thousands of lives.
- adsjhdashkj 6y ago
  I very likely agree with you on every gun ppoint, but i do have a question / counter often raised to me - that i don't have to answer to: How would tight regulations like that look in a large country already flooded with weapons of all shapes and sizes? I know multiple pro-gun people who seem to compose a large percentage of their pro-gun belief system around the foundation of the inability to remove them. Ie any bad guy who ever wants a gun will always have it (because there's so many), so give more guns to the good people. What are your thoughts there? I don't really have a counter.
  - dmitriid 6y ago
    You need political will. - Refuse sales of ammunition without proof of gun purchase and registration. - Refuse gun purchase for specific gun types and if a person already has a certain number of guns. - Mandate and enforce training before gun purchases, with obligatory re-training every X years. Checked at every purchase of ammo and guns. No training, no sale. - Mandatory licensing for open carry. Mandatory army-level training for concealed carry. With mandatory re-training. - Buyback and exchange plans for existing weapons. - Huge fines (not jail time, fines) for non-compliance. Money is a much bigger deterrent than jail time.
    - Mirioron 6y ago
      You do all this and then find out that gun violence didn't decrease. Everyone will say it worked, but upon closer inspection it is mostly massaged stats. You'll find things like suicides being counted in the statistics for gun violence. Then what? Do you think anyone would be willing to roll back something like this?
      - dmitriid 6y ago
        Europe: 500 million people.
    - refurb 6y ago
      CA has most of these already. They just instituted a requirement for a background check for ammo purchases. One of the biggest problems is your last point - non-compliance isn’t really enforced. If you ask your friend to buy a gun for you because you’re not eligible, the dealer might stop the transaction, but there is a very low likelihood there will be any police follow up.
      - agensaequivocum 6y ago
        That is a federal crime and there are absolutely cases that have been prosecuted. I would not mess around with the ATF.
- 082349872349872 6y ago
  Compare the level of violence in the (religiously-motivated) swiss Civil War (mid nineteenth century) with the level of violence in the (slavery-motivated) US Civil War (mid nineteenth century). That's part of my argument for culture. US gun violence probably would decrease if they adopted the swiss system, but good luck getting people who think a two-day hunting license course infringes their 2A rights to agree to a two-year process involving written, oral, and practical tests.
- skinkestek 6y ago
  Your points are reasonable. But remember: the US is what it is. There is an insane amount of guns floating around already. My suggestion is the "Norwegian model" from now on and going forward: to get anything except a manually reloaded rifle or a (max 2 cartridge) shotgun you need a clean record with the police + (and here comes the interesting part:) you need a recommendation from a local shooting club. Oh, and before buying any hunting gun at all there's a mandatory 50 hours training. I'd recommend trying something similar in the US: tell NRA "we want you to help us". Parts of HN might hate NRA all they want but my understanding is a good chunk of the people in NRA would love to keep weapons out of the hands of crazy people as every criminal shooting hurts peaceful owners as well.
- zdragnar 6y ago
  Most law-abiding gun owners do not end up misusing them. Aside from sensationalized media coverage, much of the gun violence in our most violent cities (Boston, Chicago, NYC, etc) would not go down with new laws, because many of the crimes are perpetrated by people who are already violating gun laws (not allowed to posses them, illegal modifications, etc). Unfortunately, with police departments being defunded or restricted, illegal gun ownership and use will only rise over time.
  - ceejayoz 6y ago
    > Most law-abiding gun owners do not end up misusing them. Well, yeah. Most non-murderers don't murder, too.
    - amadeuspagel 6y ago
      In this context, it's pretty clear that law-abiding gun owner means someone who owns a gun legally, so the statement isn't tautological.
    - zdragnar 6y ago
      Murder has generally always been illegal, yet it hasn't stopped murders from happening. Making new gun laws about how many bullets you get from your military service or how you can transport them won't stop criminals from using them to commit further crimes. As someone else pointed out, you can still buy ammunition in Switzerland. There's plenty of access to guns. The difference is absolutely one of culture, which is what my point was.
  - pdonis 6y ago
    > Most law-abiding gun owners do not end up misusing them. You should probably add that most US gun owners are law-abiding gun owners.
  - bwanab 6y ago
    None of the three cities you mention are even in the top ten of most violent cities and only Chicago (at 17) is in the top 25.
- rayiner 6y ago
  How do you square that opinion with the observation that some of the places with the loosest gun regulations (Oregon, Idaho) also have some of the lowest homicide rates? In Idaho, something like 60%+ of households own guns. But the homicide rate in the capital city of Boise is at Scandinavian levels, 1/10 of the US average. Utah also has high gun ownership and low gun homicides. (Note that this way of looking at the data gets around the notion that you can’t draw conclusions from homicide rates in cities with high control because guns freely flow into them from elsewhere.)
  - Krustopolis 6y ago
    If your statistics are correct, that lends credence to the old saw, "An armed society is a polite society." But that's likely predicated on everything thinking that everyone else is armed (which in high gun control areas would not be the case). Sort of like nuclear weapons' "mutually assured destruction."
    - oblio 6y ago
      Yet some of what people commonly referred to polite societies barely have guns and the opposite can be said for those with lots of guns. The exceptions for the latter category being countries with high external national risk or no standing army.
  - brnt 6y ago
    Maybe the sparseness of the population plays a significant role. Its a lot easier to develop conflicts in more populated areas.
    - rayiner 6y ago
      That’s why I used Boise as an example.
  - sorokod 6y ago
    By treating statistics with respect (so no cherry picking), by recognising that violence involving firearms has more then one cause. As to Oregon, consider this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umpqua_Community_College_shooting https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umpqua_Community_College_sho... in the context of easily available firearms.
- refurb 6y ago
  One of the talking points of the NRA is that the US has many gun laws that aren’t really enforced all that well. The NRA agrees that you shouldn’t be able to buy a guy if you have mental problems, drug problems, aren’t in the US legally, criminal history, etc. The only one restriction that is strongly enforced is the criminal history because it’s easy to do a check. But the system for mental health checks is a patchwork across states. And to layer on, if someone does violate these laws, there is often no punishment. Straw purchases are a good example - it usually falls on the dealer to stop the transaction, but there is rarely any police follow-up.
  - kevin_thibedeau 6y ago
    Straw purchasers do get convicted when someone is killed.
    - refurb 6y ago
      True. They certainly do prosecute some straw purchases. But I guess my point would be - if they actually followed up on all straw purchase attempts (even just a call from the ATF saying “yeah, that’s illegal, don’t do that”) you could at least say the law is being enforced. Right now the most likely outcome is the dealer just refusing the sale. You’re free to tighten up your game and try another dealer.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 6y ago
  I wonder how much of the US gun violence is a problem with guns, and how much of it is a problem with crime. Despair and poverty without a perspective breeds crime. Switzerland doesn't have much of that.
082349872349872 6y ago
Also, if the army thinks someone is getting a bit extreme, they will say "congratulations! you don't need to pass the shooting test next year ... and, by the way, please return your service rifle." https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/extremism_swiss-army-takes-measures-against-right-wing-extremism/44068724 https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/extremism_swiss-army-t... (fun fact: until the cavalry was disbanded, troopers would not only keep their rifles at home, but also their horse.) I agree on culture. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23809211 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23809211 , footnote 1. Not entirely serious: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgYJ5V2HYy4&t=222 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgYJ5V2HYy4&t=222 (but then again, life should be sympa, gemütlich, simpatica, shouldn't it?)
Mirioron 6y ago
I would say that most social problems are cultural. The culture is what defines what kinds of options people think that have in their life. When something isn't part of your culture you're less likely to think of it. Ie gun violence being very common somewhere means that people are more likely to resort to gun violence. We observe this effect with suicide too. I believe that gun violence, stabbings, acid attacks, bombings, terror attacks with cars etc are all like this.
abc03 6y ago
"My Swiss friend in town told me as far as he knew Switzerland still people keep fully functional assault rifles at home but those who have them need to show up for three weeks of training each year and show up at a shooting range twice a year. (He left a few years ago so anyone actually living there now should feel free to correct this.)" That's new law due to Schengen. If you had a gun before, you don't need to do this. Three weeks is probably the compulsory military service.

underlines 6y ago

"My conclusion has always been that the gun violence problems in US is largely a culture problem." I would strongly argue against this. Swiss gun law is very different from US, please read my five points above. Do you think US gun violence would decrease if they adopted those points? In my opinion yes. In my opinion the conservatives, nationalists and the National Rifle Association fight against any tighter regulations that would probably save thousands of lives.

adsjhdashkj 6y ago
I very likely agree with you on every gun ppoint, but i do have a question / counter often raised to me - that i don't have to answer to: How would tight regulations like that look in a large country already flooded with weapons of all shapes and sizes? I know multiple pro-gun people who seem to compose a large percentage of their pro-gun belief system around the foundation of the inability to remove them. Ie any bad guy who ever wants a gun will always have it (because there's so many), so give more guns to the good people. What are your thoughts there? I don't really have a counter.
- dmitriid 6y ago
  You need political will. - Refuse sales of ammunition without proof of gun purchase and registration. - Refuse gun purchase for specific gun types and if a person already has a certain number of guns. - Mandate and enforce training before gun purchases, with obligatory re-training every X years. Checked at every purchase of ammo and guns. No training, no sale. - Mandatory licensing for open carry. Mandatory army-level training for concealed carry. With mandatory re-training. - Buyback and exchange plans for existing weapons. - Huge fines (not jail time, fines) for non-compliance. Money is a much bigger deterrent than jail time.
  - Mirioron 6y ago
    You do all this and then find out that gun violence didn't decrease. Everyone will say it worked, but upon closer inspection it is mostly massaged stats. You'll find things like suicides being counted in the statistics for gun violence. Then what? Do you think anyone would be willing to roll back something like this?
    - dmitriid 6y ago
      Europe: 500 million people.
  - refurb 6y ago
    CA has most of these already. They just instituted a requirement for a background check for ammo purchases. One of the biggest problems is your last point - non-compliance isn’t really enforced. If you ask your friend to buy a gun for you because you’re not eligible, the dealer might stop the transaction, but there is a very low likelihood there will be any police follow up.
    - agensaequivocum 6y ago
      That is a federal crime and there are absolutely cases that have been prosecuted. I would not mess around with the ATF.
082349872349872 6y ago
Compare the level of violence in the (religiously-motivated) swiss Civil War (mid nineteenth century) with the level of violence in the (slavery-motivated) US Civil War (mid nineteenth century). That's part of my argument for culture. US gun violence probably would decrease if they adopted the swiss system, but good luck getting people who think a two-day hunting license course infringes their 2A rights to agree to a two-year process involving written, oral, and practical tests.
skinkestek 6y ago
Your points are reasonable. But remember: the US is what it is. There is an insane amount of guns floating around already. My suggestion is the "Norwegian model" from now on and going forward: to get anything except a manually reloaded rifle or a (max 2 cartridge) shotgun you need a clean record with the police + (and here comes the interesting part:) you need a recommendation from a local shooting club. Oh, and before buying any hunting gun at all there's a mandatory 50 hours training. I'd recommend trying something similar in the US: tell NRA "we want you to help us". Parts of HN might hate NRA all they want but my understanding is a good chunk of the people in NRA would love to keep weapons out of the hands of crazy people as every criminal shooting hurts peaceful owners as well.
zdragnar 6y ago
Most law-abiding gun owners do not end up misusing them. Aside from sensationalized media coverage, much of the gun violence in our most violent cities (Boston, Chicago, NYC, etc) would not go down with new laws, because many of the crimes are perpetrated by people who are already violating gun laws (not allowed to posses them, illegal modifications, etc). Unfortunately, with police departments being defunded or restricted, illegal gun ownership and use will only rise over time.
- ceejayoz 6y ago
  > Most law-abiding gun owners do not end up misusing them. Well, yeah. Most non-murderers don't murder, too.
  - amadeuspagel 6y ago
    In this context, it's pretty clear that law-abiding gun owner means someone who owns a gun legally, so the statement isn't tautological.
  - zdragnar 6y ago
    Murder has generally always been illegal, yet it hasn't stopped murders from happening. Making new gun laws about how many bullets you get from your military service or how you can transport them won't stop criminals from using them to commit further crimes. As someone else pointed out, you can still buy ammunition in Switzerland. There's plenty of access to guns. The difference is absolutely one of culture, which is what my point was.
- pdonis 6y ago
  > Most law-abiding gun owners do not end up misusing them. You should probably add that most US gun owners are law-abiding gun owners.
- bwanab 6y ago
  None of the three cities you mention are even in the top ten of most violent cities and only Chicago (at 17) is in the top 25.
rayiner 6y ago
How do you square that opinion with the observation that some of the places with the loosest gun regulations (Oregon, Idaho) also have some of the lowest homicide rates? In Idaho, something like 60%+ of households own guns. But the homicide rate in the capital city of Boise is at Scandinavian levels, 1/10 of the US average. Utah also has high gun ownership and low gun homicides. (Note that this way of looking at the data gets around the notion that you can’t draw conclusions from homicide rates in cities with high control because guns freely flow into them from elsewhere.)
- Krustopolis 6y ago
  If your statistics are correct, that lends credence to the old saw, "An armed society is a polite society." But that's likely predicated on everything thinking that everyone else is armed (which in high gun control areas would not be the case). Sort of like nuclear weapons' "mutually assured destruction."
  - oblio 6y ago
    Yet some of what people commonly referred to polite societies barely have guns and the opposite can be said for those with lots of guns. The exceptions for the latter category being countries with high external national risk or no standing army.
- brnt 6y ago
  Maybe the sparseness of the population plays a significant role. Its a lot easier to develop conflicts in more populated areas.
  - rayiner 6y ago
    That’s why I used Boise as an example.
- sorokod 6y ago
  By treating statistics with respect (so no cherry picking), by recognising that violence involving firearms has more then one cause. As to Oregon, consider this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umpqua_Community_College_shooting https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umpqua_Community_College_sho... in the context of easily available firearms.
refurb 6y ago
One of the talking points of the NRA is that the US has many gun laws that aren’t really enforced all that well. The NRA agrees that you shouldn’t be able to buy a guy if you have mental problems, drug problems, aren’t in the US legally, criminal history, etc. The only one restriction that is strongly enforced is the criminal history because it’s easy to do a check. But the system for mental health checks is a patchwork across states. And to layer on, if someone does violate these laws, there is often no punishment. Straw purchases are a good example - it usually falls on the dealer to stop the transaction, but there is rarely any police follow-up.
- kevin_thibedeau 6y ago
  Straw purchasers do get convicted when someone is killed.
  - refurb 6y ago
    True. They certainly do prosecute some straw purchases. But I guess my point would be - if they actually followed up on all straw purchase attempts (even just a call from the ATF saying “yeah, that’s illegal, don’t do that”) you could at least say the law is being enforced. Right now the most likely outcome is the dealer just refusing the sale. You’re free to tighten up your game and try another dealer.
tgsovlerkhgsel 6y ago
I wonder how much of the US gun violence is a problem with guns, and how much of it is a problem with crime. Despair and poverty without a perspective breeds crime. Switzerland doesn't have much of that.

082349872349872 6y ago

Also, if the army thinks someone is getting a bit extreme, they will say "congratulations! you don't need to pass the shooting test next year ... and, by the way, please return your service rifle." https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/extremism_swiss-army-takes-measures-against-right-wing-extremism/44068724 https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/extremism_swiss-army-t... (fun fact: until the cavalry was disbanded, troopers would not only keep their rifles at home, but also their horse.) I agree on culture. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23809211 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23809211 , footnote 1. Not entirely serious: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgYJ5V2HYy4&t=222 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgYJ5V2HYy4&t=222 (but then again, life should be sympa, gemütlich, simpatica, shouldn't it?)

Mirioron 6y ago

I would say that most social problems are cultural. The culture is what defines what kinds of options people think that have in their life. When something isn't part of your culture you're less likely to think of it. Ie gun violence being very common somewhere means that people are more likely to resort to gun violence. We observe this effect with suicide too. I believe that gun violence, stabbings, acid attacks, bombings, terror attacks with cars etc are all like this.

abc03 6y ago

"My Swiss friend in town told me as far as he knew Switzerland still people keep fully functional assault rifles at home but those who have them need to show up for three weeks of training each year and show up at a shooting range twice a year. (He left a few years ago so anyone actually living there now should feel free to correct this.)" That's new law due to Schengen. If you had a gun before, you don't need to do this. Three weeks is probably the compulsory military service.