On the management of risk in a society...

arnisador

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 28, 2001
Messages
44,564
Reaction score
439
Location
Terre Haute, IN
This was a well-said and respectfully stated post and I appreciate hearing your experience on it. I'm in agreement, except that I'm more open-minded than you, I think, on marijuana. I don't mean to mock what you say at all but please understand that as I read it I couldn't help but see the analogy to my position on the main subject at hand (changed items in bold):

This debate always seems to circle around the "they are not hurting anyone" point. It's always framed as the harmless gun owner. The mellow NRA member storing guns in his basement, someone just using firearms as a hobby...whats the harm to anyone else but them thing.

A large chunk of my job is fielding complaints of "gun activity going on at my neighbors house"...most of which isn't really about the guns as much as it is about the types of people who are gun enthusiasts contaminating the neighborhood with their ********.

Of course handguns and assault rifles are not equal in same way that cigarettes and heroin are not the same. I've been on record here before saying that legalization of personal use handguns wouldn't drive me crazy

in the end the people in my Town obviously don't want open-carrying gun nuts with assault rifles in their neighborhoods based on the calls, complaints at public meetings and letters I receive
 

arnisador

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 28, 2001
Messages
44,564
Reaction score
439
Location
Terre Haute, IN
Where is it written you have a right to smoke crack I missed that amendment. So who's rights am I restricting?

It doesn't say women can hold political office, only men, but most people figure that comes under the 14th Amendment, right? You're missing a major point here.
 

ballen0351

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
10,436
Reaction score
1,116
That doesn't follow at all. Things not enumerated explicitly by name can fall under other headings like the equal protection clause, say. For example, it doesn't explicitly mention education but was the basis for Brown vs. Board of Ed.

Yes that's just another power grab by the feds that should bot have been the constitution is clear when written that if its not listed its left up to the states to decide. The feds decided to take that power away. Your OK with it I'm not. Either way what clause covers drugs then?
 

ballen0351

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
10,436
Reaction score
1,116
It doesn't say women can hold political office, only men, but most people figure that comes under the 14th Amendment, right? You're missing a major point here.

It also says I have the absolute right to bear arms any arms I can afford even the scary ones that hold more then 7 rounds. So I guess you missed a major point as well.
 

Tgace

Grandmaster
Joined
Jul 31, 2003
Messages
7,766
Reaction score
409
This was a well-said and respectfully stated post and I appreciate hearing your experience on it. I'm in agreement, except that I'm more open-minded than you, I think, on marijuana. I don't mean to mock what you say at all but please understand that as I read it I couldn't help but see the analogy to my position on the main subject at hand (changed items in bold):


Except that's not the case....I'd bet cash money based on the lines at the gun stores here that I could field an army of gun owners in my Town yet I do not field any complaints about "gun activity" (that isn't associated with CRIMINALS like bank robbers, drug dealers, etc).

The people in my Town are NOT complaining about their neighbors owning guns. And the working class gun owners are not bringing any sort of drama into the neighborhoods. And unlike dope. Some of the very BEST people I have ever met are gun enthusiasts.

I've seen my share of gun suicides..some so recent the victim was still spasming on the ground. But I've seen more overdoses.

I've said this MANY times and you plug your ears...statistics PROVE that "assault weapons" are a statistical non-entity in gun death numbers...handguns on the other hand.
 
Last edited:
OP
Makalakumu

Makalakumu

Gonzo Karate Apocalypse
MT Mentor
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
13,887
Reaction score
232
Location
Hawaii
This was a well-said and respectfully stated post and I appreciate hearing your experience on it. I'm in agreement, except that I'm more open-minded than you, I think, on marijuana. I don't mean to mock what you say at all but please understand that as I read it I couldn't help but see the analogy to my position on the main subject at hand (changed items in bold):

This is a great post and really draws at the heart of what I wanted to get at in this thread. There is a lot of commonality in the positions and all we have to do is interchange drugs with firearms.

I think the underlying principle is that people believe that they can force their view of risk on another. I disagree with this position. I think that people would be better off and society would be more peaceful if people were allowed to manage their own levels of risk.
 

Tgace

Grandmaster
Joined
Jul 31, 2003
Messages
7,766
Reaction score
409
This is a great post and really draws at the heart of what I wanted to get at in this thread. There is a lot of commonality in the positions and all we have to do is interchange drugs with firearms.

I think the underlying principle is that people believe that they can force their view of risk on another. I disagree with this position. I think that people would be better off and society would be more peaceful if people were allowed to manage their own levels of risk.


Your personal risk is one thing...your lifestyle bringing violence, upheaval, criminal activity and all the associated ******** next door to me? That's another matter.

A tool like a firearm and a recreational drug are two entirely different items.
 

Drasken

Brown Belt
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
442
Reaction score
18
Location
Houston Tx
Also keep in mind, since we're on the topic of drugs now too, that the statistics for issues arising from abuse of hard drugs such as cocaine, heroin, meth, etc. Show these drugs to be far more dangerous than guns. In fact many of the gun statistics fail to show the very real correlation between drugs and gun violence, unless you're looking at the big picture.

Criminals use guns. It is a tool. The same as a needle is a tool. A needle used to inject insulin prescribed for diabetes is life saving. A needle used for injecting heroin is detrimental and can very well be life ending.
A gun used in self defense can very well be life saving. A gun used by the criminal is different. But registration of guns does nothing to stop a criminal. They aren't supposed to have that gun anyway. That is a regulation, theoretically to keep guns out of the hands of people shown to misuse the tool. But the criminals still have them.

The point Arni, that you fail to realize, is that current proposed laws do nothing. In Texas there IS no registration. But if my gun is stolen I will report it as stolen. If it WERE registered, how would that help? It's not like reporting it stolen does any good overall. And it doesn't mean that criminal will regester any firearm they have.

If guns are smuggled into this country (which does happen more often than people may want to believe) these guns aren't registered.
So the question is, HOW is this going to help?
Limiting magazine size. I can just carry 5 mags instead of 2. Reloading is a quick action. And magazines don't weigh enough to be a huge issue. So how does it help?

Seriously, instead of stomping your feet and yelling about how we are wrong, educate me. Tell me how the government's proposed plans do anything but limit law abiding citizens. Because logically it doesn't. The proposed laws do nothing to stop gun related suicide, domestic violence related murder, or accidents caused by negligence of safety proceedure and parental negligence. They just don't.
 

ballen0351

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
10,436
Reaction score
1,116
This is a great post and really draws at the heart of what I wanted to get at in this thread. There is a lot of commonality in the positions and all we have to do is interchange drugs with firearms.

I think the underlying principle is that people believe that they can force their view of risk on another. I disagree with this position. I think that people would be better off and society would be more peaceful if people were allowed to manage their own levels of risk.

Its part of living in a society. When you choose to live in a society you choose to follow the rules that the society has deemed appropriate. You dislike the rules move to a different society. Sometimes society takes the rules too far and at least in our society we have a way to address it. Problem happens when the Govt decides it does not need to follow the rules of the society.
 

ballen0351

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
10,436
Reaction score
1,116
Fair enough. But they can both bring considerable harm to those who aren't involved with either.

Except of the 300 million guns a very small % ever harm anyone can't say the same for drug addicts
 

arnisador

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 28, 2001
Messages
44,564
Reaction score
439
Location
Terre Haute, IN
Limiting magazine size. I can just carry 5 mags instead of 2. Reloading is a quick action. And magazines don't weigh enough to be a huge issue. So how does it help?

By your logic, how does it hurt?

Seriously, instead of stomping your feet and yelling about how we are wrong, educate me. Tell me how the government's proposed plans do anything but limit law abiding citizens. Because logically it doesn't. The proposed laws do nothing to stop gun related suicide, domestic violence related murder, or accidents caused by negligence of safety proceedure and parental negligence. They just don't.

Which laws do you mean? The proposed expanded background checks would keep some weapons out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them. Drug lords will still get guns but the guy who has a rap sheet of domestic violence might not, making a domestic murder less likely.
 

arnisador

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 28, 2001
Messages
44,564
Reaction score
439
Location
Terre Haute, IN
Its part of living in a society. When you choose to live in a society you choose to follow the rules that the society has deemed appropriate. You dislike the rules move to a different society.

We're in agreement. And since the vast majority of this society wants greater gun control...
 

Drasken

Brown Belt
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
442
Reaction score
18
Location
Houston Tx
Your personal risk is one thing...your lifestyle bringing violence, upheaval, criminal activity and all the associated ******** next door to me? That's another matter.

A tool like a firearm and a recreational drug are two entirely different items.

I think that is an excellent point. And your previous post is very thought provoking. I will likely be seeing much of this myself, since I am applying to the police academy at the end of the year. I'm trying to keep an open mind, as I'm sure things aren't all black and white. And what I'm likely to see and experience if I do make it and become a LEO will probably change my mind drastically on many issues.
 

ballen0351

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
10,436
Reaction score
1,116
By your logic, how does it hurt?
Everyone because it moves attention away from real things that can help and everyone focuses on feel good "look what we did for the children" laws. Nothing effective gets done.

Which laws do you mean? The proposed expanded background checks would keep some weapons out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them. Drug lords will still get guns but the guy who has a rap sheet of domestic violence might not, making a domestic murder less likely.

Problem is how its written. The law passed here now says anyone convicted of multiple alcohol offenses is not allowed to own a firearm. It gives no clarification on what multiple is so you get 1 arrest at 20 for underage possession if alcohol, a DUI at 21 and a drunk and disorderly at 22 and the state can deny you from owning a gun. It has nothing to do with the running of the background check its changing the standards they apply to pass or fail.
 

ballen0351

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
10,436
Reaction score
1,116
You've got around 12k gun homicides per year and nearly 10 times as many injuries vs. what for drug addicts?

Ask every heroin addicts mother if she's effected by drugs and you get back to me
 

Latest Discussions

Top