Support NeoGAF

[Mammoth Jones]

I think Opto's point is that the rationale for taking up arms as left-leaning minorities is almost identical to the rationale espoused by traditional gun loyalists: "we are afraid, we have identified threats, and we need protection."

Once again: (and I don't know how many different ways I need to say the same thing..) This only works if you look at the situation with ZERO context and zero historical context.

There is a vast difference between some guy worried the Black Panthers under Emperor Obama is coming for them and minorities knowing the history of violent oppression and the recent ascension of Trump and the Alt-Right and recognizing the actual rise in violent hate crimes.

How the two are some kind of parallel is beyond me.

Seems fairly ridiculous to chastise American minorities for wanting to arm themselves in the middle of a surge of white nationalist sentiment accompanied by an uptick in hate crimes as the GOP prepares to take all three branches of government while law enforcement goes largely unpunished for disproportionately targeting them for abuse and harassment.

You would think. But here we are.

 

[Opto]

I was wondering how long it'd take to get to some form of "You approve of kids being shot in mass shootings". Congrats. Grow up.

You get a response then you pout and bitch because it's not what you demand to hear. With "allies" like this who the fuck needs enemies....

I'm not the one jumping you on the street and screaming hail trump, but I guess I'm the same? Haha alright.

But don't act like your gun purchase won't add to another round of do nothing politicians after another classroom of kids is piled waist high. Admit that, and then I won't give you shit for buying a gun.

 

[Frozenprince]

Once again: (and I don't know how many different ways I need to say the same thing..) This only works if you look at the situation with ZERO context and zero historical context.

There is a vast difference between some guy worried the Black Panthers under Emperor Obama is coming for them and minorities knowing the history of violent oppression and the recent ascension of Trump and the Alt-Right and recognizing the actual rise in violent hate crimes.

How the two are some kind of parallel is beyond me.

For fucks sake the very same militias that we're being equated too march down the streets of minority neighborhoods armed to the teeth shouting off the usual hatemonger shit.

Like come on now. This is just ridiculous.

 

[Cindi Mayweather]

I think it's two sides of the same coin. Whatever it is they are afraid of may be illusory to you, but it's very real to them, and they have the confirmation bias to prove it.

I knew it.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

I'm not the one jumping you on the street and screaming hail trump, but I guess I'm the same? Haha alright.

But don't act like your gun purchase won't add to another round of do nothing politicians after another classroom of kids is piled waist high. Admit that, and then I won't give you shit for buying a gun.

Once again: "Your gun contribute to the killing of kids" is a shitty way to go about any type of rational discussion with people on the subject. It's so blind and dismissive to the genuine issues I as a minority am trying to communicate.

You can try to morally grandstand all you want. But I'll just have to apologize because I don't get in line with your sensibilities the way you think I should.

For fucks sake the very same militias that we're being equated too march down the streets of minority neighborhoods armed to the teeth shouting off the usual hatemonger shit.

Like come on now. This is just ridiculous.

It's disgusting is what it is.

 

[Frozenprince]

"Congrats you're all on equal footing to mass murderers now".

Gee that'll certainly win you some more supporters. That certainly conveys your argument the way it should be conveyed and doesn't at all attempt to demonize people simply for purchasing something that in and of itself does no harm to regulation of firearms.

Most major firearms regulations were only passed after minorities buy guns en masse anyway.

So again, all of you should be happy, this is getting you what you want anyway.

 

[Opto]

Once again: "Your gun contribute to the killing of kids" is a shitty way to go about any type of rational discussion with people on the subject. It's so blind and dismissive to the genuine issues I as a minority am trying to communicate.

You can try to morally grandstand all you want. But I'll just have to apologize because I don't get in line with your sensibilities the way you think I should.

I very much told you that if you could get guns without contributing to an alarmingly increasing problem of gun violence we're facing, I'd be all for it, despite the reservations I have on whether arming up would lead to just defense and not the other things that happen with gun. Arm yourself to the teeth because out of any group in America, you all deserve to the most.

But don't then hole up with your guns and think there isn't a downside to that purchase.

 

[collige]

I'm not the one jumping you on the street and screaming hail trump, but I guess I'm the same? Haha alright.

But don't act like your gun purchase won't add to another round of do nothing politicians after another classroom of kids is piled waist high. Admit that, and then I won't give you shit for buying a gun.

I don't think this is a very effective line of argument. Not because it isn't technically true, but because for any given individual, their safety is going to be drastically more valuable to them than the extremely small (in the grand scheme) amount of money from their gun purchase that goes towards supporting the gun industry and its inherent shittiness. You might as well bring up the carbon footprint of gun manufacturing.

 

[Frozenprince]

I very much told you that if you could get guns without contributing to an alarmingly increasing problem of gun violence we're facing, I'd be all for it, despite the reservations I have on whether arming up would lead to just defense and not the other things that happen with gun. Arm yourself to the teeth because out of any group in America, you all deserve to the most.

But don't then hole up with your guns and think there isn't a downside to that purchase.

You are literally equating people being oppressed exorcising the same rights their oppressors have been for years to having equitable culpability in a mass murder of children as those that go on TV and advocate for "A GUN IN EVERY CHILDS HAND" or some shit like that.

It's disingenuous and, quite frankly, insulting attempt at maintaining a moralistic high ground over people that you shouldn't be pontificating towards in the first place.

 

[Alienfan]

Lots of people in that aisle equate gun regulation with outright gun banning.

After a shooting where armed guards could have been placed, liberals argue that armed guards wouldn't have helped matters because guns are inherently evil!

Many liberals want gun regulation so tight and gun banning that when they are put into a situation where they might need a gun for defense there is not one around. See the recent France shootings.

Even when presented with evidence as to why people might want or need a gun, they don't consider it and criticize anyone who wants to buy one no matter the reason.

Going forward, such stances will only hurt liberals.

Thanks for your reply!


But fair points, except for the France shootings. While having guns in that situation would have been useful, you're not taking into account the repercussions that passing laws to make that possible would have elsewhere.

Conversely, the Republicans when faced with sone pretty damming facts about guns in relation to suicide and homicide rates, aren't exactly open minded. Guns being a right is unbelievably stupid.

You remove guns from everyone and suddenly its no longer necessary to have one to protect yourself. Every western country that's tightened up gun laws come out better for it, I don't think liberals should soften their message because that would be ignoring a substantial amount of evidence.

Pro-gun or not, regulations and strict laws are something that quite frankly need to be passed. And I don't see conservatives fighting that fight

 

[Mammoth Jones]

It's disingenuous and, quite frankly, insulting attempt at maintaining a moralistic high ground over people that you shouldn't be pontificating towards in the first place.

 

[Fuchsdh]

I would say that the average gaffer is smarter than the dumbasses who leave their loaded guns on top of the refrigerator. Which is why other gaffers saying that gaffers turned gaf gun owners will become a statistic is..sad.

The reality is that the 2nd amendment is a right to be excersized. The other reality is that, despite myself wanting guns to be a thing of the past, is thag the climate today is unfriendly to minorities.

Have you seen the threads that get posted in off-topic? I highly doubt GAF is some singular bastion of intelligence.

 

[Htown]

Not really sure Captain Jean-Luc Picard is who you should be referencing when criticizing someone pontificating about a moralistic high ground, lol.

 

[Opto]

You are literally equating people being oppressed exorcising the same rights their oppressors have been for years to having equitable culpability in a mass murder of children as those that go on TV and advocate for "A GUN IN EVERY CHILDS HAND" or some shit like that.

It's disingenuous and, quite frankly, insulting attempt at maintaining a moralistic high ground over people that you shouldn't be pontificating towards in the first place.

You know what?

ok. I admit that this conversation has gotten me heated, and I can't live in the shoes of others. So, I apologize. You gotta do what you need to do. Just please don't turn into a gun owner that puts more faith in themselves and their gun than trying to create a system that reduces gun violence.

Like I said, I know an outright ban is unlikely, but I feel like if I don't try to get every possible regulation I can, I'm on the hook for shit that could have been prevented.

 

[Principate]

Desperate times but it's unlikely this will lead to any good. Frightened people arming themselves never does. Outside of successful wars perhaps.

 

[Frozenprince]

Not really sure Captain Jean-Luc Picard is who you should be referencing when criticizing someone pontificating about a moralistic high ground, lol.

I mean it's certainly better than Janeway, tbh.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

Not really sure Captain Jean-Luc Picard is who you should be referencing when criticizing someone pontificating about a moralistic high ground, lol.

 

[Jonm1010]

This is your answer:




Just to point out..once again, it's that arrogance and condescension... For you to think I "owe" you an explanation? I live in NY. We already have tight gun control laws here. The fuck you expect me to do?

I purchased my firearms legally and store them safely. That's the extent of my social contract with you or anyone else.

Stop making the thread about your sensibilities. It's not always about you. Gun stores are seeing an uptick in minority and Black customers. There's a reason for that. We need to figure out what's making people apprehensive (not hard) and actually do something about it (hard).

But this requires more work than finger-wagging.

This thread has been almost entirely about people's sensibilities and finger-wagging. Those upset that people are questioning their response to an uptick in hate crimes and those on the other side upset that people have chosen this route when they see the costs outweighing the benefits. Everyone seems to be acknowledging the same premises, they just come to different conclusions due to beliefs and the evidence they lean on.

I find that to be a reasonable discussion to be had and one of the discussion that you would expect to emerge in a thread like this. And pointing out gun purchases are often in part funneled into things like the NRA seems like a reasonable point to make when discussing the cost side of the equation and why someone has come to different conclusions. Same too is your counter that many purchases go to things we don't agree on, so its hard to make that a disqualifier

 

[Cindi Mayweather]

I change my mind. I talked to a friend and I'm going Sig.

Dag.

 

[rykomatsu]

They were at stores, ready to be and planned to be sold because they wouldn't have them on hand as inventory otherwise.

Anecdotal, but this I believe was due more for the predicted year-end panic buying from California due to the laws that were crammed down our throats this summer that go into effect on 1-Jan-2017.

Immediately after Governor Moonshine signed a bill, an initial panic-buy resulted in a good number of shops going out of stock of firearms to be banned (or falling off CA DoJ approved handgun list).

This combined with 2016 being a presidential election year, a lot of shops have tried to increase inventory since presidential election years also result in panic buys due to the thought that democrats might try to castrate the 2nd amendment.

 

[Goatboy]

I change my mind. I talked to a friend and I'm going Sig.

Dag.

I'd recommend going to a range and trying a bunch of different ones out before you settle. Ergonomics is one of the most important things. It's crazy how from one gun to the next your accuracy and speed can go out the window. I personally could have saved a few hundred dollars had I taken my advice...

 

[Touchdown]

Trumpsters want to start some shit well now they got some shit

 

[Cindi Mayweather]

I'd recommend going to a range and trying a bunch of different ones out before you settle. Ergonomics is one of the most important things. It's crazy how from one gun to the next your accuracy and speed can go out the window. I personally could have saved a few hundred dollars had I taken my advice...

It's definitely not a sealed deal. I have to try it first.

Tips on going to the range and trying guns for a first timer?

Also, what about gun payment plans? Do you have to buy the gun full price right then and there?

 

[Goatboy]

It's definitely not a sealed deal. I have to try it first.

Tips on going to the range and trying guns for a first timer?

Also, what about gun payment plans? Do you have to buy the gun full price right then and there?

I'd go with someone you know has experience and trust. If that's not an option then take a beginners course. Don't be afraid to ask questions. Most people would love to help especially if you're new.

Usually you have to pay for the whole thing up front. Some stores offer layaway.

 

[kame-sennin]

Does the uptick in hate crimes occurring add a significant enough elevated risk to ones personal safety to override what the current evidence tells us about how personal and community gun ownership heightens numerous other risk factors? That is up for the person to decide. I just hope they take that self-reflection process seriously.

If you haven't already, read about the Tulsa Race Riot. That's what black people are afraid of. Gun violence stats don't have any relevance weighed against the threat of anti-black/muslim/queer/jewish pogroms. And they are coming. An upswing of white nationalism combined with economic hardship virtually guarantees it. What this thread is about is POC saying for the first time, "never again".

 

[Vicetrailia]

Maybe some of their rhetoric no matter how misguided has some - emphasis on some - truth to it?

Nah. If you wanna frame it this way then it goes back to the generic pro vs anti gun arguments. For the record robbers have always preferred to come when no one is home. Just as people armed against robbers, they'll arm as they intrude too (when you aren't home of course).

 

[Jonm1010]

If you haven't already, read about the Tulsa Race Riot. That's what black people are afraid of. Gun violence stats don't have any relevance weighed against the threat of anti-black/muslim/queer/jewish pogroms. And they are coming. An upswing of white nationalism combined with economic hardship virtually guarantees it. What this thread is about is POC saying for the first time, "never again".

Just to be clear on rhetoric here, you are saying there is a near guarantee of soon-to-be large scale organized massacres of ethnic groups? That is why you need to arm up?

 

[Javaman]

It's definitely not a sealed deal. I have to try it first.

Tips on going to the range and trying guns for a first timer?

Also, what about gun payment plans? Do you have to buy the gun full price right then and there?

Some indoor ranges have rentals you can try out. Ones around here charge $10 each to try different guns but you might be able to get a combo deal.

Try to figure out which caliber you'll want beforehand and that'll narrow things down a bit. 9mm is super common for a reason and is a good starter caliber. .380 is one to look for if you're looking for a smaller gun for concealed carry.

 

[Cindi Mayweather]

Nah. If you wanna frame it this way then it goes back to the generic pro vs anti gun arguments. For the record robbers have always preferred to come when no one is home. Just as people armed against robbers, they'll arm as they intrude too (when you aren't home of course).

In the very same article I linked also mentions that in the UK, which has harsher gun laws, nearly half of robberies are done while people are at home. This shows that guns prevent certain types of crime because people might be wary that you're armed. In the US, robbers have guns to worry about. It's a real risk to invade someone's house to take their things. Not as much elsewhere. If it makes sense then that if minorities make it known that there's a chance they are carrying, when these hate crimes eventually spill in to violence after Trump is inaugurated, they might think twice. Especially in places like Mississippi or Alabama.

Just to be clear on rhetoric here, you are saying there is a near guarantee of soon-to-be large scale organized massacres of ethnic groups? That is why you need to arm up?

I think that's an extreme example, but it's not exactly a leap for the current hate crimes to turn into actual violence eventually if you understand any element of human behavior. A few years ago, teenagers thought it would be fun to chase and continuously run over a black man in a store parking lot just because he was black. That was before this election, in a time when we had a black president. You would have to be a fool if you don't think certain groups of people will attempt to do things like this because they think they'll get away with it and all bets are off. For that, a concealed carry gun will do the job just fine.

 

[SporeCrawler]

Wait but "stand your ground" laws dont apply to non-whites right?

/s

 

[kame-sennin]

Just to be clear on rhetoric here, you are saying there is a near guarantee of soon-to-be large scale organized massacres of ethnic groups? That is why you need to arm up?

Absolutely. The form may be slightly different and the scale is hard to predict, but pogroms are a staple of human civilization. If you ascribe to the view that 'things are different now, something like that couldn't happen today' (a fallacy that people have believed throughout history), keep in mind that police today are lynching more black men than vigilante mobs were during Jim Crow.

 

[Jonm1010]

Absolutely. The form may be slightly different and the scale is hard to predict, but pogroms are a staple of human civilization. If you ascribe to the view that 'things are different now, something like that couldn't happen today' (a fallacy that people have believed throughout history), keep in mind that police today are lynching more black men than vigilante mobs were during Jim Crow.

Then we will have to agree to disagree. It has nothing to do with humans being different but circumstances do change.

Trump may be a lot of things, like a megalomaniac narcissist with sociopathic tendencies willing to fan the flames of racial sentiment for personal gain, but nothing he has done shows that he is capable of some sort of Third Reich shit or even condoning, let alone organizing something like Tulsa. Or that his party, which is not exactly falling in line right now, would go along with it. Things can change and I don't rule much out in life, but right now I think that's stretching it to say the least.

Not saying there is nothing to worry about because the uptick in harassment, threats, graffiti and violence are all up but I think we are a bit far away still from individualized incidences to an organized mass lynching.

 

[Cindi Mayweather]

I wanted to read more into the opposition of gun control. Found these.

https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/gun-control-myths-realities

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybe...-the-myths-promoted-by-the-gun-control-lobby/

What are some other gun control myths to be debunked?

I'm convinced that the Democratic Party should extend an olive branch to the NRA so they can talk. If you demonize them as only irrational republican donors and lobbyists that's all you're gonna get.

 

[Shadynasty]

I'm glad to see people seeing gun ownership in a positive light.

"Congrats you're all on equal footing to mass murderers now".

Well at least some people.

 

[Jonm1010]

I wanted to read more into the opposition of gun control. Found these.

https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/gun-control-myths-realities

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybe...-the-myths-promoted-by-the-gun-control-lobby/

What are some other gun control myths to be debunked?

I'm convinced that the Democratic Party should extend an olive branch to the NRA so they can talk. If you demonize them as only irrational republican donors and lobbyists that's all you're gonna get.

This is like a textbook confirmation bias process.

Take a side on something, then work backwards to find supporting evidence. Cherry-picking the side you want to be true to justify the decisions you already made.

The Cato institute with misleading bullshit from 16 years ago? A Forbes blogger thats crowning achievement is a book on the global warming hoax? The fuck lol. I wonder if you would defend the Cato institute on well proliferated views like this one?

You are better then this... Of course I am sure that next step is to put he onus on me to prove the counter-argument. Something that should already be a part of any critical thinking process on a topic any person is engaging in.

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

I wanted to read more into the opposition of gun control. Found these.

https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/gun-control-myths-realities

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybe...-the-myths-promoted-by-the-gun-control-lobby/

What are some other gun control myths to be debunked?

I'm convinced that the Democratic Party should extend an olive branch to the NRA so they can talk. If you demonize them as only irrational republican donors and lobbyists that's all you're gonna get.

The NRA is way too entrenched in those ideologies. What has been proven has been anti-gun groups have failed because of the monolithic NRA. If enough minorities can come together and offer an alternative to the NRA, focused on education, common sense gun legislation reduction of violence while doing all the recreational stuff it could become a counterweight to the NRA

 

[Cindi Mayweather]

Went to a store today with the SO.

I held my gun picks and any others that interested me.

Really, really impressed. Never had any experience with pistols. Holding them in my hand I had to treat them like a baby despite having gun experience. I'm used to rifles and shotguns comparatively, if you would imagine, because they are what I was raised on.

The p238 is surprisingly heavy for its size. Of course, I lift weights and do bjj so I'm confident in my grip strength and ability to hold it. The Shield is considerably lighter which really shocked me.

I'm still split so I'll separate them and rate them accordingly. We didn't get to shoot them but holding them after researching them made it feel real.

Sig Sauer p238:

The most beautiful gun I've ever seen, in picture, in video, in real life. I am in awe at its beauty. I went expecting the standard p238 colors. What I found was at least four different colors, including purple. Purple is my favorite color and I felt a connection to that gun like none other. I needed it based off of aesthetics alone.

Being more critical, I found it easy to rack the slide, the thumb safety is nice and big, allowing for easier unlocking, and it's such a great size for concealed carry. My only complaint if any so far is that the safety is on the side. I am left handed so this poses a problem. I'd probably have to have it customized for me so that the safety is flipped to the right part of the gun. Also, the gun is on the expensive side, costing 650 dollars, but art and beauty demands a hefty price.

M&P Shield:

Surprisingly light! The grip is comfortable as hell. It's really rough for me to tack its slide, though I partly attribute this to lack of experience. More worrying is the safety. I saw in the review I posted that the safety is hard to unlock and it really is. It's the biggest negative with the gun and could put me in danger in a moment if self defense. The Shield benefits from being cheaply priced while also boasting 9mm caliber, and being a proven gun.

Aesthetically, although not a appealing as the p238, it still remains a beautiful gun. I'm especially fond of the grip!

Also looked at a Kimber Micro Carry, the Walther suggested in this thread, and some others.

Right now I'm not which to get. The Shield has a great price but a really poor safety. The p238 is more expensive but seems like my perfect gun.

Tomorrow my SO and I are going on a date to the gun range and we're going to try out my picks to see what I like. We have picked the range and everything and I'm really looking forward to it. He has begged me to go with him to the range for months and I've always said no because of my fear of guns. No longer! That nigga is going to get his wish! Tomorrow will be the deciding factor. P238? Shield? Or something else? How do they shoot? How far do they shoot? How do they handle? Can't wait!

The NRA is way too entrenched in those ideologies. What has been proven has been anti-gun groups have failed because of the monolithic NRA. If enough minorities can come together and offer an alternative to the NRA, focused on education, common sense gun legislation reduction of violence while doing all the recreational stuff it could become a counterweight to the NRA

The NRA has no reason to appeal to us if we don't bother to be counted. Although an alternative would be nice.

This is like a textbook confirmation bias process.

Take a side on something, then work backwards to find supporting evidence. Cherry-picking the side you want to be true to justify the decisions you already made.

The Cato institute with misleading bullshit from 16 years ago? A Forbes blogger thats crowning achievement is a book on the global warming hoax? The fuck lol. I wonder if you would defend the Cato institute on well proliferated views like this one?

You are better then this... Of course I am sure that next step is to put he onus on me to prove the counter-argument. Something that should already be a part of any critical thinking process on a topic any person is engaging in.

I'm going to consider all sides from now on. The election made me realize I didn't know a single Trump voter and I lived in a bubble. Time to change that and consider other arguments. Are these arguments perfect? Nope. But they certainly offer an alternative view and I can see their logic. With the gun issue the needle probably points more in the middle than at the poles.

 

[Jonm1010]

The NRA has one singular focus in politics: mobilizing pressure against any and all actions that can be viewed as infringing on the second amendment. Which basically means, any and all gun control legislation.

There are not a body that can be negotiated with, only worked around.

That likely requires reducing their power on legislators and that will only come through political reforms.

I'm going to consider all sides from now on. The election made me realize I didn't know a single Trump voter and I lived in a bubble. Time to change that and consider other arguments. Are these arguments perfect? Nope. But they certainly offer an alternative view and I can see their logic. With the gun issue the needle probably points more in the middle than at the poles.

They offer an inaccurate view. This is not a question of opinions, it is one of what the facts say that we have at our disposal. If you want to know the truth about an issue, look beyond interpreters that have obvious agendas like Cato and Climate Change denier(and as a rule of thumb, if a person can't grasp the science of climate change, there is probably some critical flaws in their information analyzing process). This goes for liberals too, that end up trying to make overwrought cases for things like assault weapons bans despite it being a largely low efficacy policy by most accounts. But it is doubly so for Conservatives due to them being on the wrong side of what the overwhelming data from every level of study, from numerous countries tells us.

I posted a database of studies on all manner of topics from a few doctorate statisticians a few pages back that have taken gun science as their focus. That would be an infinitely better way to build up your knowledge base and wade through the talking points.

 

[Cindi Mayweather]

Don't care about stats at this point. Everyone knows guns are dangerous and I'm willing to take that risk. So are others as the rise in minorities buying guns tells us. You can post as many stats as you want. None of them will top my self defense instinct that tells me I should have a weapon on me. When I was at the shop, half of the people there were black. I talked to another black woman and she agreed. This will be her first gun.

 

[Jonm1010]

Don't care about stats at this point. Everyone knows guns are dangerous and I'm willing to take that risk. So are others as the rise in minorities buying guns tells us. You can post as many stats as you want. None of them will top my self defense instinct that tells me I should have a weapon on me. When I was at the shop, half of the people there were black. I talked to another black woman and she agreed. This will be her first gun.

So then why are you posting articles that are trying to argue against the stats?

You seem to be talking out both sides. The numbers and risk factors don't matter(they absolutely should) but then you want to spam a bunch of misleading bullshit that relies almost entirely on statistical arguments. Which comes off like typical gun nuts that want the stats that prove their side but don't want to hear about how they are wrong.

 

[Cindi Mayweather]

I need to read self defense stats that justifies my fear and urge to own a weapon. Those two articles are part of that. You act like those stats you posted are perfect when they lump fun suicides with actual gun deaths, inflating the number. The data is missing lots of variables and is only used to carry an anti-gun stance. I have read both sides and from the information I have read, I have deduced that my need for a firearm is justified with caveat that I treat the weapon with the respect it deserves.

 

[Jonm1010]

Just because nothing annoys me more then the propagandists trying to lull a false sense of complacency and reduction of harm by misleading about gun statistics.


In that Cato article, the author tries to mislead about what the gun control loophole is and deflect the actual argument being made.

What the gun show loophole is is the private purchase loophole. They know this but intentionally don't want to clarify the argument because it is an argument they know public opinion is not on their side as most want it closed.

A person can sell a gun private to private with no background check or registration in many states. Most states in fact.

Two independent studies, the most recent we have, show upwards of 25% of gun show vendors have no federal license. Another study showed at least 22% of guns purchased at gun shows were done without background checks. That is before bringing up the growing online selling trend that is even more prone to not being registered or having background checks.

Furthermore, the infrastructure of verifying registrations is grossly out of date. To determine a crimes origins requires backtracking a gun and that process has been intentionally hamstrung and kept dysfunctionally archaic thanks to NRA lobbying. So any number misses that important, vitally important context that most traces are never going to be solved due to this poor infrastructure. Add to that what undercuts Cato's bullshit. New York for instance, has shown that 90%, yes 90% of guns recovered in crimes come from out of state. That means these guns are being brought in and used for crimes which speaks very heavily to the Iron Pipeline.

 

[Jonm1010]

I need to read self defense stats that justifies my fear and urge to own a weapon. Those two articles are part of that. You act like those stats you posted are perfect when they lump fun suicides with actual gun deaths, inflating the number. The data is missing lots of variables and is only used to carry an anti-gun stance. I have read both sides and from the information I have read, I have deduced that my need for a firearm is justified with caveat that I treat the weapon with the respect it deserves.

You are justifying it by cherry picking arguments that support the decision you already made. Reaching for Cato bullshit(unsourced I should say, and on a simple reading it is clear they are in one instance referring to a readily debunked Lott study on Defensive gun use where its own author took his name off it due to how poorly its process was conducted) or global warming deniers after the fact and now defending that just proves it.

You sound like a climate change denier at this point. No offense. Dismissing experts, data and studies by making underhanded charges of politicization and agenda. As if such a conspiracy could be kept in check across so many institutions and nations. What is rich is like a climate change denier you reach for what is easily proven bullshit as a substitute foundation for your position.

I feel for your fear and you seem like you clearly have already made your decision, but at least don't lose your intelligence on this subject by over-trying to rationalize away or minimize the risks that do exist.

My issue is not with you coming to your conclusion but with the information you are propping up as credible to make that decision from. It is not. And it is that rabbit hole that leads otherwise rational people to start taking irrational positions.

 

[Shadynasty]

That is before bringing up the growing online selling trend that is even more prone to not being registered or having background checks.

Are we talking about legitimate online firearm vendors or private citizen selling another private citizen?

 

[Jonm1010]

Are we talking about legitimate online firearm vendors or private citizen selling another private citizen?

Well clearly the later. Sites like Armslist for instance.

Private to private is what the gunshow loophole ultimately is.

 

[Cindi Mayweather]

You mistake me taking their word literally rather than reading what they have to say and posting it. I ignored why people would support Trump. I've learned my lesson, and I need to understand the issue from as many sides as possible. Yes, this includes against your expert staticians.

It ranges from sources I normally wouldn't read to this

http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=18319

And this

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...y-after-decline-in-90s-suicide-rate-edges-up/

Those two aren't the only thing I have read and I have no idea why you're so against someone owning a gun. I don't care what your gun stats say. Or rather, I care, but I don't care about those stats alone. You have used these stats to lord over the idea that your stats justify an anti-gun stance. You don't want discussion or debate, you just want to convince me not to buy a gun.

The most damning part of the studies against self defense is that it only counts murders from self defense. They don't consider brandishing, or cases when the perp was shot but didn't report it. Meanwhile my cousin found a robber in his home and stopped it by simply telling the man that he has a gun and it's loaded. Those studies are incomplete and do not tell a big picture. But the same is true for the pro-gun side. Gun stats are terribly incomplete and neither side probably wants a full scientific study to see the truth of the matter because it would harm their narrative.

Fuck that, I'm buying a gun and I'm going to protect myself like my cousin. I'm not sure what online gun sellers and background checks has anything to do with me. I'm going to buy from a gun shop irl and have a background check. I am fully with regulation and will submit myself through the same system that I support. This talking down stuff and statistics is just annoying me.

 

[Vicetrailia]

In the very same article I linked also mentions that in the UK, which has harsher gun laws, nearly half of robberies are done while people are at home. This shows that guns prevent certain types of crime because people might be wary that you're armed. In the US, robbers have guns to worry about. It's a real risk to invade someone's house to take their things. Not as much elsewhere. If it makes sense then that if minorities make it known that there's a chance they are carrying, when these hate crimes eventually spill in to violence after Trump is inaugurated, they might think twice. Especially in places like Mississippi or Alabama.

On this matter there are actually some alternative theories. This is a good ol' study that talks about the international comparisons a bit, but more importantly gives perspective on other matters. You should check it out. It won't stop you from wanting to own a gun as it seems that you like them despite, but it broadens the base compared to something from the Cato institute.

The effects of gun prevalence on burglary: deterrence vs inducement

 

[Shadynasty]

Well clearly the later. Sites like Armslist for instance.

Private to private is what the gunshow loophole ultimately is.

Well it's not so clear to some. I can't tell you how many times I've had to clear up the misconception that I can't just order a firearm online and have it delivered to my door (except for C&R firearm purchases) or go to a vendor at a gun show and pickup a gun without a background check.

 

[kame-sennin]

Trump may be a lot of things, like a megalomaniac narcissist with sociopathic tendencies willing to fan the flames of racial sentiment for personal gain, but nothing he has done shows that he is capable of some sort of Third Reich shit or even condoning, let alone organizing something like Tulsa.

I don't think Trump will do it. I'm talking about his supporters who have been emboldened by him.

 

[Jonm1010]

You mistake me taking their word literally rather than reading what they have to say and posting it. I ignored why people would support Trump. I've learned my lesson, and I need to understand the issue from as many sides as possible. Yes, this includes against your expert staticians.

It ranges from sources I normally wouldn't read to this

http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=18319

And this

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...y-after-decline-in-90s-suicide-rate-edges-up/

Those two aren't the only thing I have read and I have no idea why you're so against someone owning a gun. I don't care what your gun stats say. Or rather, I care, but I don't care about those stats alone. You have used these stats to lord over the idea that your stats justify an anti-gun stance. You don't want discussion or debate, you just want to convince me not to buy a gun.

The most damning part of the studies against self defense is that it only counts murders from self defense. They don't consider brandishing, or cases when the perp was shot but didn't report it. Meanwhile my cousin found a robber in his home and stopped it by simply telling the man that he has a gun and it's loaded. Those studies are incomplete and do not tell a big picture. But the same is true for the pro-gun side. Gun stats are terribly incomplete and neither side probably wants a full scientific study to see the truth of the matter because it would harm their narrative.

Fuck that, I'm buying a gun and I'm going to protect myself like my cousin.

They are not perfect, true, but you are intentionally taking an angle that the data we have does not support. That is the problem. Including some of those assumptions you just made like what the defensive gun studies say. Some do talk about brandishing and other things, Most in fact. There are multiple, credible studies analyzing defensive gun use. On the personal and macro level. This is a good primer. Their database of studies is also an excellent resource.
http://www.armedwithreason.com/more...-new-study-finds-dgu-is-ineffective-and-rare/

My issue with your logic regarding pointing to Cato and a climate change denier is like the people that try and argue I learn about Climate change by listening to Fox News and CNN so therefore they rationalize they have a balanced view. As if there is always some arbitrary two sides to begin with or that one side is even credible. When what you really need is credible scientific analysts and to see what the experts and the studies in the field say and take steps on how to understand the data and make sense of it properly. For instance crime stats are really a red herring to the debate if you understand no one is making a 1 for 1 correlation for guns and violence.


You are talking to someone that at 21 had several guns. Got into many an argument quoting stuff like you just did. Had many fights with family members who did not approve. Then in upper level policy classes in college got my shit rocked on this topic in a mock debate. Because I refused to do what I had done prior with my assumptions about healthcare and that was to take a hard look at my biases and re-analyze the topic from the ground up and form a better, more informed position by trying to be as objective as possible. Once i did that I realized how far off the track of reality I had gotten.

You are getting your gun, fine, I have said multiple times that is a personal choice, but don't let that deter you from education yourself on gun issues. And I will also continue to step in when I feel people are making incorrect cases surrounding the level of risk or effectiveness of their use.