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

Re: Gun laws where guns take the most lives

#161

Post by roganartu » Mon, Mar 04, 2019, 3:18 AM UTC

briandear wrote: post #129

ppseafield wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Having gone to the range here in the US I gotta say its not as easy as most think. You have rules amongst people who handle fire arms you must follow or get banned from a range. I don't think being banned from one particular range significantly reduces the chance someone will commit an act of gun violence. > ___ is a tool. Anybody can use a tool correctly and anybody can use a tool incorrectly. Any tool can be boug…

In Australia, homicide has decreased by nine percent since 1990 and armed robbery by one-third since 2001, but recorded assaults and sexual assaults have both increased steadily in the past 10 years by over 40 percent and 20 percent respectively. Crime was already decreasing in Australia before the 1996 ban, however since that time violent crime overall has increased significantly.

For those curious to do their own investigation, all these numbers are on wikipedia (and for Australia will mostly be sourced from the Australian Bureau of Statistics where you can freely access the original reports). All things in context though. A 9% decrease over 30 years doesn't sound very impressive, but when you consider that the per-capita homicide rate in Australia is ~5x lower than the US it doesn't sound so bad.

The sex crime example is interesting, because it's a raw count and does not take into account increasing reporting and investigation rates as a result of social change. Over the past few decades Australia has had significant public awareness campaigns for domestic and sexual abuse which are suspected to have significantly impacted reporting rates: https://aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi359

Statistics can be bent to show whatever you when when you assume your audience won't actually think critically. This is a very common problem on both sides of the gun debate unfortunately and I don't think leads to anything productive.

Re: Gun laws where guns take the most lives

#162

Post by stevenicr » Mon, Mar 04, 2019, 3:24 AM UTC

ppseafield wrote: post #115

giancarlostoro wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are a bit quieter with a knife though. A gun gives you away immedietly to all around you unless you have a silencer but those arent so easy to get in the USA (class 3 if I remember correctly). In England people get knifed and who can know? And if its not a knife it will be a car, power tools, planes, boats, pushing someone off of a building. I rather retain my right to protect myself from crazies and die trying t…

> Having gone to the range here in the US I gotta say its not as easy as most think. You have rules amongst people who handle fire arms you must follow or get banned from a range. I don't think being banned from one particular range significantly reduces the chance someone will commit an act of gun violence. > ___ is a tool. Anybody can use a tool correctly and anybody can use a tool incorrectly. Any tool can be boug…

> And yet 20 years it hasn't devolved into authoritarianism. In fact their rates of gun violence have dropped significantly.

Hasn't it been devolving into authoritarianism though? They have banned books and all sorts of things. I've read where lots of people have disagreed with the govt's new laws for censoring the internet and keeping data on people, yet the gov there still does what it wants without worry.

Australia and USA have so many differences that any comparisons are moot. It saddens me to see people trying to compare what happens on that island to what is going on in the states.

I understand there may be less guns there, but from the stories I've seen about violence at bars in parts of Australia leading the gov to shut down parts of the cities earlier just shows that the strong violent abusive people are comfortable engaging in criminal behaviors including assaults and battery, they are not being controlled by gun laws.

It also seems apparent that the weaker, vulnerable people plead for protection, and instead get shortened hours of access.

Re: Gun laws where guns take the most lives

#163

Post by stevenicr » Mon, Mar 04, 2019, 3:49 AM UTC

gotocake wrote: post #156

giancarlostoro wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are a bit quieter with a knife though. A gun gives you away immedietly to all around you unless you have a silencer but those arent so easy to get in the USA (class 3 if I remember correctly). In England people get knifed and who can know? And if its not a knife it will be a car, power tools, planes, boats, pushing someone off of a building. I rather retain my right to protect myself from crazies and die trying t…

A gun is a tool. Anybody can use a tool correctly and anybody can use a tool incorrectly. Any tool can be bought legally and illegally. People who do not follow laws will have an advantage against those who do in terms of available tools. A gun is a tool, but it is a tool with one use; wounding and killing organisms. A gun when used correctly, as designed and intended, is a ranged lethal weapon. A knife or a hammer,…

> A gun is a tool, but it is a tool with one use; wounding and killing organisms.

This is kind of true, it depends on the ammo used of course.

However I think they have multiple uses, and from what I have seen they are mostly used as a deterrent and sometimes as a compliance tool.

If it's a pistol on the hip of an armored car runner or security guard, it's existence is a deterrent - and there is a definite difference when people see an armed guard and a 'rent-a-cop / mall security with a whistle' -

Cops often use guns to threaten in order to get compliance in their orders. I suppose it's the same at military bases and prisons - they are used everyday to deter people not used everyday to kill people.

Of course this tool can be used to deter good things and to force compliance for nefarious things like armed robbery so it's not a tool that is always used for good or in good ways.

I would guess if stats could really be made - they are mostly used for target practice at paper and cans as such when being used, unless you consider them being on display at various places like courthouses as being in use.

So it's a tool with more than one use imho. Not the best tool for the job they are often used in sadly.

Re: Gun laws where guns take the most lives

#164

Post by ardy42 » Mon, Mar 04, 2019, 4:50 AM UTC

baroffoos wrote: post #61

jostmey wrote: post #55

The debate here has focused on guns as the problem. Guns are not the problem, they are an expression of the problem. To quote the article: "The Economist stated that rapid urbanisation and inequalities in wealth distribution were some of the largest factors in violent crime, and as one of the most unequal countries on the planet, Brazil backs up this claim." I think this statement applies to Mexico and other Latin Am…

Guns are like a megaphone for violence. Violent people will still exist but their reach is far less with a knife

> Guns are like a megaphone for violence. Violent people will still exist but their reach is far less with a knife

You'd think so, but I don't think that's the case. There have been many multiple-death stabbings in Asia, for instance:

https://newrepublic.com/article/151994/china-many-school-sta...

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/06/world/asia/china-knife-at...

Re: Gun laws where guns take the most lives

#165

Post by stevenicr » Mon, Mar 04, 2019, 5:41 AM UTC

peterwwillis wrote: post #8

Nobody seems to point out the obvious fallacy of the "right to protect yourself". If having that right actually results in being more likely to be harmed, or harm someone else, having that right is an unacceptable public safety risk. A common argument against gun control ("should we ban hammers next?") is obviously fallacious when you compare it to an even more extreme comparison ("should we ban private ownership of…

> the obvious fallacy of the "right to protect yourself". If having that right actually results in being more likely to be harmed, or harm someone else, having that right is an unacceptable public safety risk.

I disagree. I understand that the divorced female across the street has a higher chance to harm someone else because she has the right to own weapons - that does not make is unacceptable.

I would like to see increased access to instruction / training on safely using any weapons one may choose to have available, so that there is less chance of collateral damage, not restrictions on her rights to use them.

The same could be said of free speech. I do not want other people's ability to speak to be restricted, even though I am aware of the possible harms. Instead I want more education for people to know who to research facts and find other opinions.

> Guns are quite obviously a significant risk to public safety, as the murder statistics demonstrate.

I do not think this is true. I'd like to see some stats that show how many people are killed by guns that are not involved in illegal activities (and suicides), gun deaths in the circles of drug dealers, gangs and other illicit activities should not so much in the stats of risk to public safety imho.

car crashes, cell phone use, and hospitals likely contribute to more deaths than guns yet we don't rush to ban them - and yet access to those things are not 'rights'

Re: Gun laws where guns take the most lives

#166

Post by gotocake » Mon, Mar 04, 2019, 5:50 AM UTC

stevenicr wrote: post #163

gotocake wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A gun is a tool. Anybody can use a tool correctly and anybody can use a tool incorrectly. Any tool can be bought legally and illegally. People who do not follow laws will have an advantage against those who do in terms of available tools. A gun is a tool, but it is a tool with one use; wounding and killing organisms. A gun when used correctly, as designed and intended, is a ranged lethal weapon. A knife or a hammer,…

> A gun is a tool, but it is a tool with one use; wounding and killing organisms. This is kind of true, it depends on the ammo used of course. However I think they have multiple uses, and from what I have seen they are mostly used as a deterrent and sometimes as a compliance tool. If it's a pistol on the hip of an armored car runner or security guard, it's existence is a deterrent - and there is a definite difference…

Police and for that matter anyone in law enforcement are trained to draw and aim only when they intent to use the gun. Using a gun for anything other than shooting is how you either escalate a situation or how people are (too often) shot with their own guns. It is also a felony to use a gun as a threat or coercive tool, and it’s called ‘Brandishing’. Police don’t threaten with a gun outside of Hollywood. They offer a verbal warning, and if you don’t comply (and sometimes if you do) they will fire.

You never draw your gun unless you intend to use it.

You never point your gun at anything you don’t intend to destroy.

Treat all guns as loaded.

Anyone who hasn’t had that drilled into them has no business owning a firearm of any kind. Such a person is most likely to hurt themselves or someone else, or have their gun taken from them and used against them.

Re: Gun laws where guns take the most lives

#167

Post by tathougies » Mon, Mar 04, 2019, 6:27 AM UTC

mdorazio wrote: post #111

tathougies wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The united states and canada invest heavily in a physical barrier. Both countries regularly clear the forests on the border so that the entire border is more easily patrollable. Because of this physical barrier and cooperation between the countries it is extremely difficult to cross the canadian united states border without being immediately noticed and caught.

Wtf are you talking about? There are numerous stories of people accidentally crossing the border without even knowing it while hiking or boating. And you're really going to tell me that clearing the forests for 20ft at the border magically prevents people from crossing if they want to? Do you think there are thousands of drones patrolling the clearings or something?

There are numerous stories I've heard of people crossing the border and then being met by authorities and sent back: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2018/06/23...

For example, this guy crossed accidentally, and was promptly met by ICE agents.

> And you're really going to tell me that clearing the forests for 20ft at the border magically prevents people from crossing if they want to?

Yes... it's littered with ground sensors and cameras.

> Do you think there are thousands of drones patrolling the clearings or something?

No. Of course not. But there is a sophisticated system on both sides to deal promptly with these things.

Re: Gun laws where guns take the most lives

#168

Post by stevenicr » Mon, Mar 04, 2019, 6:59 AM UTC

gotocake wrote: post #166

stevenicr wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A gun is a tool, but it is a tool with one use; wounding and killing organisms. This is kind of true, it depends on the ammo used of course. However I think they have multiple uses, and from what I have seen they are mostly used as a deterrent and sometimes as a compliance tool. If it's a pistol on the hip of an armored car runner or security guard, it's existence is a deterrent - and there is a definite difference…

Police and for that matter anyone in law enforcement are trained to draw and aim only when they intent to use the gun. Using a gun for anything other than shooting is how you either escalate a situation or how people are (too often) shot with their own guns. It is also a felony to use a gun as a threat or coercive tool, and it’s called ‘Brandishing’. Police don’t threaten with a gun outside of Hollywood. They offer a…

Oh how I wish you were right on all this.

> Police and for that matter anyone in law enforcement are trained to draw and aim only when they intent to use the gun.

Which police are you describing? I would not mind this being true, but from my experiences on the east coast I don't think this is true of most law enforcement, unless you mean to say that drawing it to use as a coercive tool is the "intent to use" -

It may be a felony to stick a gun to someone's head and threaten them with violence if they do not comply with what you say - however I think that is not applied often. Most cops are not charged with that if they do it, and most criminals at that level are not ratted out either.

> Police don’t threaten with a gun outside of Hollywood.

I have seen just that, many times.

Again I wish you were right, but it's not true, and I'm sorry you believe that. Maybe things are different in your hometown and you don't worry about traveling.

I agree with not drawing unless you are prepared to use, and do not point at things that you would not be okay with destroying, and all guns are loaded. Those parts of your comment I believe are true.

However I still believe that people having a firearm without shooting it is still a use. Yes sometimes the appearance of one may be escalating, but often times one being visible (eg a soldier holding an m16 pointed at the ground, a bank guard with firearm in holster) does deter other violence from occurring.

edit for formatting - had to hit enter after quote.

Re: Gun laws where guns take the most lives

#169

Post by giancarlostoro » Mon, Mar 04, 2019, 12:28 PM UTC

stevenicr wrote: post #162

ppseafield wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Having gone to the range here in the US I gotta say its not as easy as most think. You have rules amongst people who handle fire arms you must follow or get banned from a range. I don't think being banned from one particular range significantly reduces the chance someone will commit an act of gun violence. > ___ is a tool. Anybody can use a tool correctly and anybody can use a tool incorrectly. Any tool can be boug…

> And yet 20 years it hasn't devolved into authoritarianism. In fact their rates of gun violence have dropped significantly. Hasn't it been devolving into authoritarianism though? They have banned books and all sorts of things. I've read where lots of people have disagreed with the govt's new laws for censoring the internet and keeping data on people, yet the gov there still does what it wants without worry. Australi…

People also tend to forget about Switzerland[0] entirely where guns are also legal, and yet you don't have the same issues. The problem with guns is gun education, the problem with murderers is psychological, if they can't use one weapon they will turn something else into a weapon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Switzerland

Re: Gun laws where guns take the most lives

#170

Post by giancarlostoro » Mon, Mar 04, 2019, 12:31 PM UTC

koyote wrote: post #124

giancarlostoro wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are a bit quieter with a knife though. A gun gives you away immedietly to all around you unless you have a silencer but those arent so easy to get in the USA (class 3 if I remember correctly). In England people get knifed and who can know? And if its not a knife it will be a car, power tools, planes, boats, pushing someone off of a building. I rather retain my right to protect myself from crazies and die trying t…

> You are a bit quieter with a knife though. A gun gives you away immedietly to all around you unless you have a silencer but those arent so easy to get in the USA (class 3 if I remember correctly). What are you trying to say with that statement? That knives should be the preferred murder weapon? That clearly isn't the case in any country where getting a gun is 'easy'. Or are murderers in the those countries idiots f…

Except that's not always true![0] Take Switzerland for example where knives rose as murder weapon of choice, and the rate of guns became lower. In fact... for a country that has so many guns, it's incredible to hear that only about 100 homicides occur per year[1]. The USA has a mental health issue, not a tooling issue. Gun safety and proper education can deter gun violence.

[0]: https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/homicide-report_statistics-show...

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Switzerland#Crime_sta...