Gun laws where guns take the most lives • Hacker News Board

Re: Gun laws where guns take the most lives

#141

Post by mynegation » Mon, Mar 04, 2019, 2:19 AM UTC

briffle wrote: post #78

mynegation wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If American guns are the problem, why aren't the gun homicide rates higher in the United States than Mexico? One of the answers is money. USA has more of it - for policing, for prisons, for making sure corruption and taking bribes from crime is less of an attractive choice. More poverty and profits of drug trafficking push the homicide numbers up in Mexico. Of course American guns are not the whole problem but they…

Where do the rest of the illegal guns in Canada come from?

From Canada. Despite tighter regulation, guns are still not completely prohibited and many illegal guns start their life as a legal purchase.

Re: Gun laws where guns take the most lives

#142

Post by lvs » Mon, Mar 04, 2019, 2:19 AM UTC

barry-cotter wrote: post #37

lvs wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're clearly looking to veer this into a traditional debate along traditional lines. I don't think you'll find anyone in sociology who believes that any civic problems are monocausal. People who make these kinds of arguments are usually trying to ensure that, on a list of correlation coefficients, your favored cause is not considered highly correlative or "the sole problem," in your words. Inevitably, your next arg…

The article that sparked this discussion was about murders. In that context suicide is a red herring.

No, then you didn't even click the article links. From the first study, for example, the correlation with homicide rates is 0.746.

Re: Gun laws where guns take the most lives

#143

Post by beatgammit » Mon, Mar 04, 2019, 2:21 AM UTC

leereeves wrote: post #122

baroffoos wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See what happens when someone gets in a crowded place with a gun vs a knife. Also the general public should not be allowed to take a vehicle in to a dense area like a city.

> Also the general public should not be allowed to take a vehicle in to a dense area like a city. First, ban guns. Then, ban knives. Then, ban vehicles. Where does it end?

We're going to get to books eventually...

Honestly, I think banning guns won't work, especially in a country like the US. However, it seems like an easy solution to a difficult problem, hence the relatively widespread support.

To find solutions, we need to look at the problem from as many angles as we can. What I see is:

- gang violence - lack of jobs, profitability in illegal industries like drugs and prostitution, poor high school graduation rate - mass murders - mental health issues, anger at "society" (desperation or desire to right some wrong), intolerance - murders - jealousy, revenge, etc, without a better outlet - covering for another crime - robbery, burglary, drugs, etc

So, now we look at solutions, which will be some mix of:

- gangs - better job availability, better eduction, access to capital for self employment - mass murder - better mental health care access, more informed public - murder - more social interaction/feeling of community, access to counselors, better HR departments - other crime - similar solutions as gang violence

We can't eliminate all violent crime, but there are more solutions than taking away the tool. Honestly, I think more people should be familiar with guns, not fewer, so part of my solution would be to encourage people to get basic training with them, which should help people appreciate their destructive power more.

However, spit balling solutions like this isn't particularly helpful, just like attacking guns isn't helpful. Let's look at what the causes to the problems are, look at possible solutions, and look at how much those solutions will cost and estimate an ROI for each solution. I'm a fan of generally removing restrictions where those restrictions are big causes of crime (e.g. legalize marijuana, which will likely reduce drug crime; legalize prostitution, which will decrease sex trafficking and organized crime), but I want to look at the numbers before deciding which changes to make. We need more studies and policy proposals based on those studies, not populist crap to get reelected.

Re: Gun laws where guns take the most lives

#144

Post by hellllllllooo » Mon, Mar 04, 2019, 2:23 AM UTC

jostmey wrote: post #81

flattone wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

lets have a serious discussion... knife is like number 5000 on a crazy persons shopping list. gun is probably 300 but also easier than 1-299

I'm not saying that guns should be legal (I'm also not saying they should be illegal ). What is important is to focus on the root issues, and I don't believe that the root issues are "guns".

This is a false dichotomy. Why do you have to focus on the "root issue"? What's wrong with dealing with a part of the problem? No complex problems get dealt with as a whole. They get broken in to pieces and dealt with using the tools available. Guns are clearly a part of the problem so let's do something about them while also doing something about other social issues.

Re: Gun laws where guns take the most lives

#145

Post by beatgammit » Mon, Mar 04, 2019, 2:25 AM UTC

dahfizz wrote: post #117

VoodooJuJu wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then how do you explain India? There exists massive wealth inequality in India as well, yet the murder rate is infinitesimal compared to Latin America. I believe the issue is more cultural than economical.

Does india have a drug problem or such a corrupt, unhelpful government? I don't know which way the causality goes, but all of the above (drugs, culture, crime, poor government) seem to be correlated.

> illegal drugs

Drugs don't seem to be the problem (e.g. look at Portugal or The Netherlands), but illegal drug trade. The violence doesn't seem to come from drug users, but drug traffickers. If we make it legal, the drug traffickers go out of business.

My guess is that Latin America is worse than India because the US is close to Latin America, and the US buys a lot of drugs. If we legalize the more common drugs, I anticipate that the weaker demand will drastically reduce gang violence because there just isn't as much money as stake.

India doesn't border a wealthy country, so it isn't likely as lucrative to murder. That's my guess, and I'd like to see some research to explain it better than my gut reaction.

Re: Gun laws where guns take the most lives

#146

Post by hellllllllooo » Mon, Mar 04, 2019, 2:31 AM UTC

setr wrote: post #131

hexane360 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This actually isn't well backed up by psychology. The large majority of violent crimes aren't premeditated--they're impulses.

Wouldn’t that mean the same thing? They decide to hurt (the impulse), and they grab whatever happens to be nearby. That is, they don’t see a gun and decide to use it; they decide to use something and see a gun

Violence still happens but the magnitude would be reduced.

It's a lot harder to kill people with things that aren't guns. If it was as easy then soldiers would primarily equipped with "knife, or acid, or poison, or fists". The army chooses guns as the primary weapon are they are clearly much more effective at killing.

Re: Gun laws where guns take the most lives

#147

Post by ndnxhs » Mon, Mar 04, 2019, 2:31 AM UTC

leereeves wrote: post #122

baroffoos wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See what happens when someone gets in a crowded place with a gun vs a knife. Also the general public should not be allowed to take a vehicle in to a dense area like a city.

> Also the general public should not be allowed to take a vehicle in to a dense area like a city. First, ban guns. Then, ban knives. Then, ban vehicles. Where does it end?

Vehicles should be banned in cities because they are a huge health and safety risk when used as intended. They have an endless list of downsides.

Re: Gun laws where guns take the most lives

#148

Post by beatgammit » Mon, Mar 04, 2019, 2:32 AM UTC

updateYourMind wrote: post #67

whiddershins wrote: post #36

This article mixes and matches statistical types and conclusions in a confusing manner. For example, if most United States firearm deaths are suicides, it is misleading to then follow with a quote saying “where there are more guns there is more homicide.”

Yet the US has the highest numbers of mass shootings.

Isn't that kind of irrelevant? How many people have died from mass shootings vs other violent crime? Yes, it's a problem that we should address, but it's also not a significant contributor to death, so the average person isn't really at a significant risk of being involved in a mass shooting, much less being killed by one. The media and politicians just like to make a big deal about it because it draws eyeballs.

Instead of focusing on mass shootings, we should be looking at violent crime in general and the causes for it. This would lead us toward more general solutions (e.g. improve schooling for inner city students instead of just taking away their guns), which would solve a far bigger problem than some media headlines, and those solutions would be far easier to implement than attacking one of the core parts of American culture.

Re: Gun laws where guns take the most lives

#149

Post by briandear » Mon, Mar 04, 2019, 2:34 AM UTC

dahfizz wrote: post #117

VoodooJuJu wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then how do you explain India? There exists massive wealth inequality in India as well, yet the murder rate is infinitesimal compared to Latin America. I believe the issue is more cultural than economical.

Does india have a drug problem or such a corrupt, unhelpful government? I don't know which way the causality goes, but all of the above (drugs, culture, crime, poor government) seem to be correlated.

> Does Indian have such a corrupt, unhelpful government?

Yes.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ronakdesai/2018/03/07/india-con...

Re: Gun laws where guns take the most lives

#150

Post by ASalazarMX » Mon, Mar 04, 2019, 2:36 AM UTC

ouid wrote: post #2

> Small Arms Survey reported that in 2017, Mexico had 12.9 guns per 100 civilians, although of the 16,809,000 guns estimated in circulation in that year, only 3,118,592 were legally registered. >This high level of unregistered firearms has been attributed to Mexico’s proximity with the United States, as thousands of gun retailers sit just over the border. A report on gun trafficking between the US and Mexico revealed…

"Operations" like the ones listed here [1] were one of the reasons thousands of illegal guns flooded Mexico while the cartels were at their worst. It was as if destabilization was a goal, just as George Bush Junior insistently called Mexico a failed state, while pressuring our government to buy American weapons or be outgunned. Everyone knows the huge mess that did, I'm surprised we didn't end with guerrillas like Colombia, but it was likely because the next president wasn't Republican.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal