"Gun Cult in the US and How to Change It" split from Las Vegas Massacre

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Agreed.  In line with politics being the art of the possible; you are not going to get the Americans to give up their guns.  My suggested alternative is money for social programs and education.  Well fed, educated and adequately housed people are less prone to violence. 
If the democrats were smart they would present it as an option to the republicans;  i.e. Offer to drop pursuit of gun control in exchange for support of more social spending.

They have, on at least one aspect, but the Republican prefer to cater to their rich donators rather than ensure that more than 35 million American get proper health care. And that's just one little step in making many inequalities and poverty go away.

 

[Journeyman]

.....approach the problem from another angle.

How about Chris Rock's suggestion [it is  Radio Chatter, after all]:

“You don’t need no gun control, you know what you need?  We need some bullet control.  Man, we need to control the bullets, that’s right.  I think all bullets should cost five thousand dollars… five thousand dollars per bullet… You know why?  Cause if a bullet cost five thousand dollars there would be no more innocent bystanders.  Yeah!  Every time somebody get shot we’d say, ‘Damn, he must have done something ... Shit, he’s got fifty thousand dollars worth of bullets in his ass.’

And people would think before they killed somebody if a bullet cost five thousand dollars.  ‘Man I would blow your fucking head off…if I could afford it.’  ‘I’m gonna get me another job, I’m going to start saving some money, and you’re a dead man.  You’d better hope I can’t get no bullets on layaway.’

Even if you get shot by a stray bullet, you wouldn't have to go to no doctor to get it taken out.  Whoever shot you would take their bullet back, like "I believe you got my property.”

 

[Jarnhamar]

Just playing with some thoughts here (not meaning to offend American posters so correct me if I'm out to lunch)


-The US as a country was essentially born from a rebellion fending off an oppressive and tyrannical government. Firearms played an early pivotal role.
-A civil war devastated them with the cliche (but true) brother against brother where 2% of their population died from the war.
-Involved in 2 world wars where I'd guess their youth are taught in school they pretty much saved the world, twice.
-Their military is active in close to 150 countries spanning the entire globe. They export a lot of violence all over.
-Many of their citizens are employed in the Defense industry at home or abroad, as well, many are employed in all facets of the firearm industry.
-Music industry has violence associated with it, especially rap.
-Entertainment industry seems built on violence and war.  Even actors who profess to being anti-gun make millions of dollars off violent gory movies that gross tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. (Actors who themselves have private armed guards). Hit movies often seem to involve heros racking up body counts in the dozens or hundreds.
-Video game industry is ultra violent. [As an example the game I'm playing myself your character is out in the country side and a random stranger approaches them and tells you someone stole something from them/is harassing them/whatever and you're instructed to go kill the offending party. It's just build around a couple puzzles and a lot of killing strangers. There ARE some games out there where you're challenged with the option of NOT murdering everyone you meet, duex ex and Dishonoured come to mine, but those games are few and far between.]


Maybe one of the problems or contributing factors is that Americans are desensitizing their youth to violence. So when someone in the work place or school is picking on you or wrongs you go and blow them away.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

They have, on at least one aspect, but the Republican prefer to cater to their rich donators rather than ensure that more than 35 million American get proper health care. And that's just one little step in making many inequalities and poverty go away.

The democrats are in control of a good number of the 2% of counties were the main problems are, they have not bothered to fix things under their control. That being said, the US as a whole needs to tackle some of these social issues as you are looking at generational fix and not within 1 or 2 election cycles.

 

[mariomike]

Re-introduce conscription.

The US had it from 1940 to 1973.
Canada hasn't since 1945.

Has that had anything, or nothing, to do with gun culture in the US?

Then they'll all be so p*ssed off with dragging weapons around and cleaning them, and getting charged for losing them/ having NDs, that they'd want nothing to do with bang bangs after their period of service was up.

In the RCASC ( PRes ) we qualified on the range.  But, on time performance was priority.

"Victory is the beautiful, bright-colored flower. Transport is the stem without which it could never have blossomed."
Winston Churchill

 

[tomahawk6]

Most Americans dont want to change our right to bear arms. 8)

 

[FJAG]

Most Americans dont want to change our right to bear arms. 8)

I was going to cite this quote: People tend to forget their duties but remember their rights - Indira Gandhi , but decided that I wouldn't.

Instead when it comes to US gun control I'm somewhat perplexed by the fact that well over 90% of the US public (including Republicans) want some measure of gun control. Further, Many states have various types of gun control in place. It seems to me that the whole gun control issue is just a hot button issue to keep the "Federal" government from doing anything that might in some way put universal measures into effect across the country.

That leaves me with the somewhat jaded viewpoint that the "right to bear arms" debate isn't so much about putting reasonable controls on the right to be a gun owner but about having those controls apply universally within the US. Sometimes there's something good to be said about the "peace, order and good government " clause in our constitution.

:remembrance:

 

[Michael OLeary]

Most Americans dont want to change our right to bear arms. 8)

While Americans may have a right to bear arms, that doesn't imply a right to cheap arms.

If every firearm was taxed $100 at point of sale and every round of ammunition cost an extra five cents, how much would that produce to put into health care programs and education programs to counter the tendency of some to reach for a weapon every time they have a problem with someone else?

 

[kkwd]

While Americans may have a right to bear arms, that doesn't imply a right to cheap arms.

If every firearm was taxed $100 at point of sale and every round of ammunition cost an extra five cents, how much would that produce to put into health care programs and education programs to counter the tendency of some to reach for a weapon every time they have a problem with someone else?

Free analysis and meds for everybody? Or just people that own guns?

 

[Michael OLeary]

Free analysis and meds for everybody? Or just people that own guns?

Why not anyone, those who do not own guns may someday desire to own guns.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Americans buying a rifle with a barrel shorter than 16 inches or over all length shorter than 26 inches have to pay a short barrel rifle (sbr) tax of  $200.

 

[dimsum]

While Americans may have a right to bear arms, that doesn't imply a right to cheap arms.

If every firearm was taxed $100 at point of sale and every round of ammunition cost an extra five cents, how much would that produce to put into health care programs and education programs to counter the tendency of some to reach for a weapon every time they have a problem with someone else?

That just reminded me of a Dave Chappelle joke:

“You don’t need no gun control, you know what you need? We need some bullet control. Men, we need to control the bullets, that’s right. I think all bullets should cost five thousand dollars… five thousand dollars per bullet… You know why? Cause if a bullet cost five thousand dollars there would be no more innocent bystanders.
Yeah! Every time somebody get shut we’d say, ‘Damn, he must have done something ... Shit, he’s got fifty thousand dollars worth of bullets in his ass.’
And people would think before they killed somebody if a bullet cost five thousand dollars. ‘Man I would blow your fucking head off…if I could afford it.’ ‘I’m gonna get me another job, I’m going to start saving some money, and you’re a dead man. You’d better hope I can’t get no bullets on layaway.’
So even if you get shot by a stray bullet, you wouldn't have to go to no doctor to get it taken out. Whoever shot you would take their bullet back, like "I believe you got my property.”

 

[larry Strong]

Errrr Ummmm  :

How about Chris Rock's suggestion [it is  Radio Chatter, after all]:

“You don’t need no gun control, you know what you need?  We need some bullet control.  Man, we need to control the bullets, that’s right.  I think all bullets should cost five thousand dollars… five thousand dollars per bullet… You know why?  Cause if a bullet cost five thousand dollars there would be no more innocent bystanders.  Yeah!  Every time somebody get shot we’d say, ‘Damn, he must have done something ... crap, he’s got fifty thousand dollars worth of bullets in his ***.’

And people would think before they killed somebody if a bullet cost five thousand dollars.  ‘Man I would blow your ******* head off…if I could afford it.’  ‘I’m gonna get me another job, I’m going to start saving some money, and you’re a dead man.  You’d better hope I can’t get no bullets on layaway.’

Even if you get shot by a stray bullet, you wouldn't have to go to no doctor to get it taken out.  Whoever shot you would take their bullet back, like "I believe you got my property.”

That just reminded me of a Dave Chappelle joke:

“You don’t need no gun control, you know what you need? We need some bullet control. Men, we need to control the bullets, that’s right. I think all bullets should cost five thousand dollars… five thousand dollars per bullet… You know why? Cause if a bullet cost five thousand dollars there would be no more innocent bystanders.
Yeah! Every time somebody get shut we’d say, ‘Damn, he must have done something ... crap, he’s got fifty thousand dollars worth of bullets in his ***.’
And people would think before they killed somebody if a bullet cost five thousand dollars. ‘Man I would blow your ******* head off…if I could afford it.’ ‘I’m gonna get me another job, I’m going to start saving some money, and you’re a dead man. You’d better hope I can’t get no bullets on layaway.’
So even if you get shot by a stray bullet, you wouldn't have to go to no doctor to get it taken out. Whoever shot you would take their bullet back, like "I believe you got my property.”

Cheers
Larry

 

[kkwd]

Why not anyone, those who do not own guns may someday desire to own guns.

I'm not quite sure on the analysis part but I bet a few would partake of the free meds. That's a new angle, I want to buy a gun to get free meds.  ;D

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Belize, Barbados and Bahamas could have gun violence issues due to the drug trade.

Not sure what to think about Bermuda.

I wonder- is there a correlation between former slave owning states and gun violence?

That doesn't explain Chicago though. Not past slave owners, some of the strictest gun laws in the US and is responsible for a huge portion of gun deaths there. :dunno:

 

[Infanteer]

Initial guess?  Gun laws in Chicago and Illinois are useless when surrounding states like Indiana and Wisconsin have relatively lax laws.  I imagine if guns are harder to get in Illinois, then criminals get them a few hours away through a variety of relatively simple means.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

That doesn't explain Chicago though. Not past slave owners, some of the strictest gun laws in the US and is responsible for a huge portion of gun deaths there. :dunno:

By states, I mean countries. Not states in the USA sense.

Chicago is tickling my brain right now, but too tired to post a coherent thought. Maybe tomorrow it will come.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

This is a weak argument. Drinking and driving is against the law, so if there is a way to better enforce the law, why wouldn't we, as a society, want that? Unless you believe that people killed by drunk drivers is just something we should accept for "reasons"....  There is no valid reason why anyone should drink and drive anymore (or ever for that point). So, yes, if the law prohibits drunk driving and a breathalyzer engine block will stop people from doing it, than why wouldn't this be something every law abiding citizen wants?

So no, it's not a case of "if I don't like it it should be banned". It's more of a case of "if the law says something it should be enforced".

Funny you didn't pick the rest of the post to rebutt.

No biggie. Anyway, you want to take choice away from people. Basically, you're saying everyone is guilty until proven innocent. That's wrong and puts me in mind of group punishment used by socialists. That's being a control freak. Name me one democratic country that has implimented breathalyzer locks on every vehicle. There's tons of legislators around the world with a better handle on this than you and they've stayed clear of the discussion for a reason.

It's stupid like that from politicians as to why the US has a second amendment. When you start controlling every aspect of people's lives, to the point where you are removing choice of everyday things, especially against their wishes and against their preference, you can expect pushback. Which is why every dictator in the world, Mao, Mihn, PolPot, Hitler, Stalin, ad nauseum, have made firearms confiscation the top priority once they seize power.

I've brought us back to guns. Let's try keep it there. 

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Initial guess?  Gun laws in Chicago and Illinois are useless when surrounding states like Indiana and Wisconsin have relatively lax laws.  I imagine if guns are harder to get in Illinois, then criminals get them a few hours away through a variety of relatively simple means.

So why no problem in those states, with their lax laws. If that's a causation, why don't those states have the problem Chicago has?


edit-spelling

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Maybe one of the problems or contributing factors is that Americans are desensitizing their youth to violence. So when someone in the work place or school is picking on you or wrongs you go and blow them away.

Violent inner city youth are not the product of video games.

They are like that from growing up without father's to knock some respect into them.

A study I just saw last week (I hope I can find it or I'll be accused of making shit up). The increase in inner city violence correlated with the increasing amount of single mother families.

Not saying it's Obama's fault but the amount of those families moved into double digits during his reign.