(no subject)

[0utlaw-immortal.livejournal.com]

Comments

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Guns: are out of control.

[joshthevegan.livejournal.com]

Amazing.

[icelore.livejournal.com]

I don't care how many *more* deaths by XYZ there are then by guns. I can't remove or regulate fire. I can't stop accidental injuries. I can't make people stop smoking or drinking booze. Guns on teh other hand...yeah, that's much more preventable. Hard concept for people with less then two brain cells to rub together, I know.

[catlin.livejournal.com]

On the other hand.. we DO license and regulate who owns cars, and require them to be insured... Why do guns, which are just as lethal, and in fact have NO other use besides lethality, not require the same?

[icelore.livejournal.com]

That's the point.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

You don't have an explicit right to a car.

[brother-dour.livejournal.com]

For one thing, during the post-Sandy Hook hearings and debates on Capitol Hill, insurance companies were pretty clear on their reluctance to even attempt to underwrite gun owners insurance. Given how U.S. government is pretty much run by corporate interests, that alone is a huge problem.

Personally, I think that the reason the Left was pushing so hard for gun owners insurance is because they knew it would be so risky that the insurance rates would be sky high, thus they would have a great little de facto gun ban. Quite a convenient end run around the Constitution and SCOTUS, right there...

[wight1984.livejournal.com]

You can do those things.

Fire regulations are a thing. Driving licences are a thing, as are speed limits and car safety regulations.

Does the US have a smoking ban? We do here in the UK. Given that a ban on smoking in public places would save lives, is that something you'd like to see in the US?

A ban on alcohol seems to have some of the same reasoning, but I hear prohibition didn't work out to well for y'all.

I think the problem is as per the first meme on this post; people don't care about these sorts of things because they're just not as interesting to talk about as guns.

Same with terrorism: Sunday Morning Breakfast Cereal (http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2080#comic)

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

A public safety ban isn't the same thing as prohibition - it just means that people don't have to inhale deadly second hand smoke.

Americans love to use guns to wound and kill each other and mentally unstable people seem to be able to get ahold of them pretty easily. Harm reduction is what most are asking for, not draconian bans.

[mylaptopisevil.livejournal.com]

There are smoking bans in some parts of the US.

[icelore.livejournal.com]

Cars and alcohol are already regulated byway of licensees. Fire is regulated by safety regulations. The US does have a smoking ban in public places, but that is moot as it doesn't pertain to the images posted. Guns are not licensed and regulated - that is the point. Comparing guns to things that are ALREADY limited in some way doesn't make it seem that guns are a "less bad" options.

[brother-dour.livejournal.com]

So how about we concentrate on the people who actually use the guns improperly, instead of passing laws that punish everyone who dares own a gun, hmmm?

Passing blanket gun control laws which may or may not fix the problem, but do affect law-abiding people regardless, are not about the guns anymore- they are about control.

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

They're more like the quarantine laws in the age of TB, plague, pox, etc. One person flares up, then everybody is restricted.

When you didn't have a cure, draconian measures were the only course of action.

Worse, the panic control on the gun side is matched by the gun panic on the control side. Every time there is a shooting that gains media "attention" (really just a clusterfuck of cameras and shouting, no reporting necessary), donations to both sides of the "debate" skyrocket. It's become a cha-ching bonanza.

The only thing lost in this kind of discourse is actual debate without passionate screaming.

[icelore.livejournal.com]

Where in my response did I insinuate that I thought blanket control laws were the way to go? Here's a hint - I didn't. I just said guns can be regulated and controlled better. Maybe instead of projecting what you are afraid I'm saying, try actually reading what is there, and only that.

[leaf-kunoichi.livejournal.com]

The US tried to make people quit drinking booze. It turned out really badly.

I don't see how banning firearms, which is against what the Constitution says, would be more successful than banning booze, which the Constitution said nothing about.

[icelore.livejournal.com]

Where in my response did I insinuate that firearms should be banned? Here's a hint - I didn't. I just said guns can be regulated and controlled better. Maybe instead of projecting what you are afraid I'm saying, try actually reading what is there, and only that.

[zadok-allen.livejournal.com]

I can't remove or regulate fire. I can't stop accidental injuries. I can't make people stop smoking or drinking booze. Guns on teh other hand...

All of those things are imminently preventable, and for many of them we have a variety of national and local programs that aid in prevention. Programs on gun safety, for whatever reason, are not as popular or common.

It's also worth noting that not many of those programs advocate outlawing space heaters, bicycles, cigarettes or alcohol.

[madscience.livejournal.com]

Regulating guns will reduce gun deaths in much the same way that regulating drugs reduced drug use. In other words, not at all, and it never even had a chance of working. Hard concept for people with less then two brain cells to rub together, I know...

[saint-monkey.livejournal.com]

the large pie chart excludes suicides and accidental death involving firearms
annual murders by fists and clubs and rifles specifically excludes handguns.

[zadok-allen.livejournal.com]

the large pie chart excludes suicides and accidental death involving firearms
I'd assume accidental GSWs would be included in the accidental injuries section. I agree suicides could have been included with homicides.

annual murders by fists and clubs and rifles specifically excludes handguns
And yet sporting rifles like the one pictured get far more ban attention.
Weird, huh?
It's the fear of the scary black rifle, and the anti-2A crowd's knowledge that handgun restrictions are far more difficult to implement than sporting rifle restrictions. They're going for the low-hanging fruit.

[bonesnapdeez.livejournal.com]

lol more "guns are just like cigarettes" bullshit.

Remember that guy who walked into a school and killed 20 kids by flicking a Pall Mall at them?

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

Remember to douse the kiddies in gasoline first!

[madscience.livejournal.com]

Remember how the toughest gun control laws in the country had no effect on that outcome?

[wight1984.livejournal.com]

That's surely an unfair summary of the infographic. It's not claiming that these things are exactly the same, or similar in any other way than being a cause of death.