TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Does owning weapons make one more likely to be a killer?

Go To

setnakhte That's terrifying. from inside your closet Since: Nov, 2010
That's terrifying.
#76: Apr 9th 2012 at 11:22:42 AM

[up]Gun Control does not mean banning the ownership of guns, this is disingenuous exaggeration to the point of being an outright lie.

"Roll for whores."
Kino Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: Californicating
#77: Apr 9th 2012 at 11:29:02 AM

That being said, there are some people who would never hand over their guns, be it willingly or otherwise. In addition, there are some people who view any form of gun control as an.infringement on their rights.

TheStarshipMaxima NCC - 1701 Since: Jun, 2009
NCC - 1701
#78: Apr 9th 2012 at 1:00:00 PM

I'm completely with Lawyerdude (for once). The constant chorus of "Well, if you really mean to kill, you'll do it with anything" is really besides the point. The point is that guns give an unparalleled power to people and doesn't require any training, strength, or permission to wield.

Hey, my right-wing leanings say that I don't want anyone depriving Americans of their right to bear arms. Fact is 68 million firearms in the country and one of the lowest instances of gun-related homicide, no need to ban them.

There absolutely needs to be more in the way of making it so that people understand the destructive power of these small metal pieces.

In short, it shouldn't be easier for me to get a driver's license than a gun license; I can kill way more people with the gun that the car.

It was an honor
whaleofyournightmare Decemberist from contemplation Since: Jul, 2011
Decemberist
#79: Apr 9th 2012 at 1:40:18 PM

Fact is 68 million firearms in the country and one of the lowest instances of gun-related homicide, no need to ban them.

Actually its the 4th highest % of gun homicides and the 14th highest murder rate in the world

edited 9th Apr '12 1:41:27 PM by whaleofyournightmare

Dutch Lesbian
MidnightRambler Ich bin nicht schuld! 's ist Gottes Plan! from Germania Inferior Since: Mar, 2011
Ich bin nicht schuld! 's ist Gottes Plan!
#80: Apr 9th 2012 at 1:41:49 PM

Conscripts have to keep their gun at home while being in the reserve (until 30), with a sealed pack of ammunition that gets inspected regularly (intended for use when fighting your way to the barracks).

Wow. Switzerland really is a World of Badass.

Mache dich, mein Herze, rein...
TamH70 Since: Nov, 2011 Relationship Status: Faithful to 2D
#81: Apr 9th 2012 at 2:16:32 PM

[up]Which is why the Pope is the only Head of State authorised to employ Swiss mercenaries. Anyone else would be hit with a war crimes trial faster than he could blink.

TheBatPencil from Glasgow, Scotland Since: May, 2011 Relationship Status: I'm just a hunk-a, hunk-a burnin' love
#82: Apr 9th 2012 at 2:28:21 PM

And that's why Switzerland is always neutral: all the other countries agreed that they're so much of a game-breaker that it's just unfair to recruit them to your side.

FACT.

And let us pray that come it may (As come it will for a' that)
Martello Hammer of the Pervs from Black River, NY Since: Jan, 2001
Hammer of the Pervs
#83: Apr 9th 2012 at 2:28:44 PM

@setnakhte - It certainly can be banning gun ownership in general. It's not a lie at all, and I don't appreciate the insinuation. As far as the OP question is concerned, gun control would mean banning gun ownership. "Does owning weapons make one more likely to be a killer?" If the answer is yes, the solution would be to ban gun ownership.

"Did anybody invent this stuff on purpose?" - Phillip Marlowe on tequila, Finger Man by Raymond Chandler.
whaleofyournightmare Decemberist from contemplation Since: Jul, 2011
Decemberist
#84: Apr 9th 2012 at 2:35:17 PM

[up]

But you shouldn't out right ban guns for everyone because it is a tool that can be useful in the right situations like hunting Gray squirrels for example or other vermin. Also what about shooting ranges?

The answer is yes gun control and licensing but not a ban on guns

Dutch Lesbian
TamH70 Since: Nov, 2011 Relationship Status: Faithful to 2D
#85: Apr 9th 2012 at 2:36:01 PM

[up][up]Was that not an example of an ad hominem argument? Attacking the man rather than the idea, or using an attack on the man to attack the idea?

I am going to commit one myself by pointing out that the logical extension to what you are saying is that possession of anything that could be found in the average room and can be used to kill would be banned.

My inner Rational!Harry and inner Rational!Quirrell are having an argument as to the validity of what I have just said, and Harry has pointed out that I have at least ten things that I could use to kill within plain sight of my current seated location.

edited 9th Apr '12 2:36:15 PM by TamH70

Martello Hammer of the Pervs from Black River, NY Since: Jan, 2001
Hammer of the Pervs
#86: Apr 9th 2012 at 2:46:40 PM

To be clear - I obviously don't condone gun control. I was just making the point that gun control can indeed include banning all gun ownership. Kind of like the Australians did, or very nearly.

Tam, I'm with you on the "anything can be used to kill" thing. For me, two coffee mugs, water glass, beer glass, bread knife, chair, laptop when closed. Uh, and .22 caliber derringer in my pocket. It's unloaded, but even such a small pistol can be used to pistol-whip if need be.

edited 9th Apr '12 2:46:58 PM by Martello

"Did anybody invent this stuff on purpose?" - Phillip Marlowe on tequila, Finger Man by Raymond Chandler.
Pykrete NOT THE BEES from Viridian Forest Since: Sep, 2009
NOT THE BEES
#87: Apr 9th 2012 at 3:15:03 PM

The only thing you really need to kill someone with your bare hands is bad luck. Because even lacking any of the things you referred to, Lawyerdude, having that could be your downfall. Cases come to trial with charges of murder in Britain because of that one factor every year with depressing regularity.

True story. There was a case not too long ago where a middle school kid got punched in the back of the head by a classmate being a dick — it burst a blood vessel near the brain and he died. The human body is very fragile in very unexpected ways.

Barkey Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
#88: Apr 9th 2012 at 6:02:41 PM

My biggest issue is with where guns are stored. I know of some countries where you can own a gun, but you don't have free access to it. It has to be stored at a range or armory somewhere with a range, and you check it out to go and use it in that same building.

No. My guns stay in my home, stored with me, within arms reach in case I need them. No dice.

On the bright side, if they did start slowly banning more and more things, I know it'd take ages for them to decide to ban shotguns, so I'll always have my 870.

setnakhte That's terrifying. from inside your closet Since: Nov, 2010
That's terrifying.
#89: Apr 9th 2012 at 7:07:07 PM

But Martello, no-one but the radical pacifists are actually proposing that. Referring to gun control as seeking to take away everyone's guns is distorting the truth to make people turn against any form of regulation on guns, no matter how reasonable.

"Roll for whores."
Pykrete NOT THE BEES from Viridian Forest Since: Sep, 2009
NOT THE BEES
#90: Apr 9th 2012 at 7:28:25 PM

I spent four years at a college where a whole lot of loud hippies were proposing exactly that, among other very shortsighted things. So I'm gonna go ahead and call BS on that.

Furthermore, the whole point of why gun possession is baked into our culture in the first place is because people who just got done throwing off one corrupt government wanted to be in a position to throw off the next one if it turned bad again. So technically even "reasonable" things like only banning higher-powered weapons will still be seen as an intrusion on that by the very institution that has the most to gain from it.

edited 9th Apr '12 7:36:13 PM by Pykrete

BlackElephant Obsidian Proboscidean from In the Room Since: Oct, 2011
Obsidian Proboscidean
#91: Apr 9th 2012 at 7:30:39 PM

I think possessing murderous tendencies makes one more likely to be a killer than possessing a gun.

I may be biased, though. I have relatives who own guns, but they just use them for hunting deer and birds (for food).

But I do think maybe there should be some sort of test or filter to make sure the guns don't fall into the wrong hands.

I'm an elephant. Rurr.
setnakhte That's terrifying. from inside your closet Since: Nov, 2010
That's terrifying.
#92: Apr 9th 2012 at 7:37:46 PM

[up][up]Note the "radical pacifists" bit. Loud, college-age hippies are the lifeblood of them. Colleges are not a good place to understand the political environment of the country. It's the first time that people are unrestrained by their parents' beliefs and tend to become very radicalized. After a few years they generally calm down. But when the second amendment was written guns were slow, inaccurate weapons. I'm sure that that law would have been written with much different wording had the founders been prescient to modern weapons tech. Also, the second ammendment does use the phrase "well-regulated militia".

"Roll for whores."
Pykrete NOT THE BEES from Viridian Forest Since: Sep, 2009
NOT THE BEES
#93: Apr 9th 2012 at 7:52:23 PM

It wasn't just that they were slow and inaccurate — it was that everything was at a level that small organizations could be expected to obtain, and the military didn't really have anything that utterly eclipsed it. A cannon wasn't exactly the sort of thing the average Joe had, but it wasn't particularly hard to make, and private ships got hired out and refitted. There wasn't really any concept of nigh-indestructible multibillion dollar battleships shelling the shit out of things from miles away, or supersonic jets leveling an entire field before you could hear them.

edited 9th Apr '12 7:53:42 PM by Pykrete

TuefelHundenIV Night Clerk of the Apocalypse from Doomsday Facility Corner Store. Since: Aug, 2009 Relationship Status: I'd need a PowerPoint presentation
Night Clerk of the Apocalypse
#94: Apr 9th 2012 at 8:14:18 PM

On guns. It takes more then just picking up a gun to use it effectively. Both Police and Military go through a fair bit of training to learn to use them effectively. Any idiot can get point blank and shoot you. If they can get that close and shoot you they can get that close and use other weapons on you as well.

Any idiot can also use a knife, club, bit of hefty chain, sharp stick, or any other improvised or purpose made weapon. Not only are they easy to obtain they are easy to use and they are silent. They are also easily as lethal as a gun and are used to intimidate as well as cause physical harm.

Literally nearly any object around you can become a weapon and used to kill. You don't need training to do this. People have been killed with a wide array of non-weapon objects. It doesn't take special training or even purpose designed weapons to kill someone.

Better yet it doesn't take any training to kill someone with your bare hands. Every single one of us in this thread is capable of killing someone without any trianing. It is a fallacy to assume any object wielded as a weapon is any less lethal then another. You only have to be hit once to die, you can be lucky and receive a light flesh wound, or escape unscathed.

Having any weapon of any type doesn't make you a killer. Inflicting fatal lethal force on someone makes you a killer. You can use your car to kill someone, you could use a pen on your desk, a rolling pin, a kitchen knife, etc. It is all about intent and action of the indvidual not the objects.

You can't always run or run fast enough. You can't always act fast enough or avoid every dangerous situation. What do you do if you get jumped by two or three guys working together? What happens if you unintentionally get cornered etc.

There are too many x factors to consider when trying to determine how effective any one item or weapon is going to be in any given situation.

Pykrete:Canons were not easy or cheap to make or get. Transporting and supplying them with materials is even more expensive. If you don't know how to load it correctly you could have the fresh powder charge your loading go off and destroy or damage the gun or injure the crew. There was such a thing as ships shelling the shit out of cities. They used both cannons, ship board mortars and later early rockets to do so. Before guns ships would have things like ballstas, onagers, and other siege equipment that could hurl projectiles at a city. Incendiary projectiles were frequently used despite the hazard.

As for guns being innacurate that is not true. Smoothbores could hit a man sized target at 100yds reliably. The early rifles could hit a man sized target at 200yds. There was a well known push for a constant improvement in weapons the fore fathers would have been more then familiar with.

edited 9th Apr '12 8:19:45 PM by TuefelHundenIV

Who watches the watchmen?
Thorn14 Gunpla is amazing! Since: Aug, 2010
Gunpla is amazing!
#95: Apr 9th 2012 at 8:25:49 PM

So here's a question.

How do you prevent a deranged man from simply pulling out a concealed handgun in a crowded mall and just going wild? That college shooting shows that if someone really wanted to, they could easily kill a couple people in a class room.

[up] There may be many factors but a gun makes most of those factors irrelevant. To kill someone with your bare hands, you need to probably surprise them, be alone, be stronger than them, and win in a struggle.

A gun you can pull out of a jacket and open fire and kill probably 3 more people in seconds. And thats someone with little to no training.

edited 9th Apr '12 8:27:40 PM by Thorn14

Barkey Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
#96: Apr 9th 2012 at 8:34:30 PM

There's no real way to stop something like that, aside from making psychological standards for purchasing guns. Or rather higher standards for what puts you on a list of people who cannot own firearms.

At the end of the day though, murder happens. We can't stop every single thing bad from happening. Even the most extreme forms of gun control wouldn't stop it, and in my opinion it isn't worth the cost, giving up our right to bear arms to make the homicide rate take a small dip.

Yeah, I said it. I don't think it's worth it. Sometimes rights take precedent over lives.

TuefelHundenIV Night Clerk of the Apocalypse from Doomsday Facility Corner Store. Since: Aug, 2009 Relationship Status: I'd need a PowerPoint presentation
Night Clerk of the Apocalypse
#97: Apr 9th 2012 at 8:37:43 PM

You can pull a knife out of your jacket and stab someone just as easily 3-4 times as you could shoot them. There is no gurantee every shot or blow is a killing shot. I can make a molotov cocktail and kill dozens in seconds with items from a hardware store.

edited 9th Apr '12 8:41:29 PM by TuefelHundenIV

Who watches the watchmen?
breadloaf Since: Oct, 2010
#98: Apr 9th 2012 at 8:43:10 PM

Look, the discussion of how easy it is to kill someone with various tools ignores what we can use. Statistics.

What statistics? Well crime ones aren't going to work well because America simply has way more crime than everyone else due to some poor social policies. It's difficult to also judge the effect of gun control, since once you have it, all factors OTHER than gun control is what affects your gun related homicide rate. So what is there left to do?

Well the argument is that guns help protect you or guns don't help protect you.

  • Statistics showing that similar crimes with a gun are more likely to result in a death of participants
  • Statistics showing gun accidents kill many per year, injuring others (we can ignore hunting accidents)
  • Statistics showing what number of crimes were prevented by guns (extremely low)

The problem is, so many die just from poor gun handling it really doesn't justify stopping a crime unless that crime was attempted murder, which in most cases, it was not.

Barkey Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
#99: Apr 9th 2012 at 8:45:39 PM

Meh, not a lot of sympathy for people who shoot themselves in the face for being idiots. I'm a firm supporter of mandatory classes on gun safety being a requirement for purchase.

And not just like "Ok look, I demonstrated that I can turn the safety on and off, load the gun, unload it, and lock the slide back. Gimme my gun."

Like an actual class. It doesn't take long to do, just make people take the damn class to buy a gun. Make it last two years, and then if they buy another gun after that 2 year period, they have to take the class again. Problem solved.

If you can still shoot yourself or somebody else by accident with a gun, it means you're a fucking fool. If you shot yourself, you deserved it, if you shot someone else, you're a murderer via incompetence.

edited 9th Apr '12 8:46:27 PM by Barkey

Thorn14 Gunpla is amazing! Since: Aug, 2010
Gunpla is amazing!
#100: Apr 9th 2012 at 8:56:58 PM

[up][up][up]

I'm 20 feet away from you. I pull out a gun and shoot you.

I'm 20 feet away from you, I pull out a knife and try to stab you. Which is easier for me?

[up] I agree on the classes. As much as I'd love firearm restrictions I think its only possible in a country where firearms are not a firm part of the culture.

Kind of scares me at times really when I hear my college classmates talking about what guns they own.


Total posts: 188
Top