The FAST Approaching Gun Ban

[buttslinger]

This is the same argument as before. Failure to solve all the problems means we shouldn't address any of them. We shouldn't punish tax evasion because we won't catch all tax evaders. We shouldn't prosecute murderers as long as some go undetected etc.

No, it means if you are wearing a dress right now, or you have an English accent, and you walk into a redneck bar and start talking gun control, you'll end up in the hospital. There are 300,000,000 guns in the USA right now. How do you address that? By all means, don't let me stop you from cooking up ideas how to make a gun that doesn't shoot, maybe half the country will buy them. But the other half won't. So you've changed nothing.
The only flaw in my argument is that maybe I'm perceived as laughing at you, or talking down at you, or scolding you. That's exactly how the Conservatives feel when the intellectual branch of the Democratic Party talks guns.
I think my broader point is that there are much more pressing issues to deal with, like how to prevent World War III.
If you look at History from Cain killing Abel to Hitler murdering Jews by assembly line, the human race has much bigger problems than gun control. The Middle East problem is the problem that makes gun control look easy. They say the Garden of Eden was in the Fertile Crescent, in Iraq. It's possible the entire World will end there. If some crazy Iranian shoots an atomic missile at Israel in 10, 20, 50 years from now, game over, man. Game over.
I'm not saying guns are bad, oh well. I'm saying fixing the problem is almost impossible, it's been tried before. You end up with a drop in the bucket. It's about priorities. Number one, get Hillary, not McCain into the White House. She is in a position to actually do something. We ain't.

[trish]

If you manage to make guns baby-proof, you're still a long way from making them adult-proof.

Of course. So we should continue to make guns that aren't baby-proof just because there are a lot of 'em already out there involving children every week in deadly accidents?

Write a letter to your congressman. Live your Life.

In other words don't bother you. I wouldn't, if you weren't so insistent upon engaging in this very conversation. I'm sorry you have lost so much. Having just a hint of where you're coming from I can sort of see how you might be pessimistic and depressed about the whole issue. I do write, phone and harass all my representatives (including my Congressman) and I find time to live too. Imagine that. You can write your Congressman too. It might make you feel better.

[buttslinger]

I harass all my representatives (including my Congressman) and I find time to live too. Imagine that. You can write your Congressman too. It might make you feel better.

OK.......

[Laphroaig]

Proof that it's not always the "person" who shoots the gun that's at fault...

"A woman in the US state of Indiana is recovering after being shot by her dog in a bizarre hunting accident, an environment official says.

The woman, named as Allie Carter, 25, was hunting waterfowl on Saturday in the north of the state, Jonathon Boyd, an Indiana conservation officer said.

She put down her 12-gauge shotgun but her chocolate Labrador stepped on it, shooting her in the foot.

To add insult to injury, the dog was named Trigger."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34644333

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...r-hunt-indiana

[trish]

We need to arm all dogs: only a good dog with a gun and stop a bad dog -or a dog with a stupid owner- with a gun.

[broncofan]

We need to arm all dogs: only a good dog with a gun and stop a bad dog -or a dog with a stupid owner- with a gun.

It's really irresponsible to just give every dog a weapon regardless of how many dog years he's lived or how many times he has committed an inside dump on the carpet. Your type of thinking is gonna get a lot of innocent dogs shot.

[Laphroaig]

Do you feel lucky...

[trish]

Cold dead paws?! Are you kiddin'?

[Laphroaig]

Going back to a slightly more serious point, while it may not be possible to retrofit/modify all existing guns in the USA to make them safer, the motor industry has shown that it is possible to organise large scale recalls when their products have been proved to be defective/unsafe in some way.

"The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration released new data today, tracking the total number of recalls over the past few decades. Across the industry in 2014, there were 803 vehicle recalls total involving 63.9 million vehicles, including two of the largest vehicle recalls in history."

http://jalopnik.com/these-are-the-10...ver-1689270859

http://www.investopedia.com/slide-show/car-recalls/

And of course this year, in the wake of the emissions scandal, VW will have to recall millions of cars to "fix" their engines. In the US it's around 500,000, but in Europe it amounts to around 8.5 million vehicles, with a total of about 11 million worldwide.


http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/02/vw-em...-congress.html

http://www.theguardian.com/business/...luntary-recall

I think I read somewhere in this thread that there are around 300 million guns in the USA, but that's no excuse for not making a start... Every single gun made safer is potentially a life saved.

[trish]

Just off the cuff, I would say the difference between recalling cars and guns lies in the perception of the owners. Recalls rely on the owners and dealers of the recalled product to realize that it is within their interest to cooperate with the recall.

In the case of cars, owners understand believe that after they take their car to the dealer, have it worked on and bring it home they will have a safer and and better car. Dealers can be pressured by manufacturers to cooperate, but they also know it's better for business to be perceived as someone who has the customer's best interests in the fore. I'm not up on this, but I think that in the case of recalls due a car not meeting an EPA standard, fines can levied against owners who don't have compliant vehicles.

In the case of guns, owners do not think safer weapons are better( e.g. the NRA encourages people to carry with one in chamber so they can get the drop on criminals). They would perceive the recalls as an elaborate scheme to "take away their guns." Because of these perceptions, any dealer who cooperates would be perceived as a government toady and would likely lose business to dealers who don't cooperate with the recall. I can't imagine the hoopla (possibly violent) that would ensue should owners of non-compliant weapons be subject to a fine.

But I appreciate your larger point. Massive recalls of products to make them safer and better ARE possible. In the case of firearms, I'm afraid we'll have to recall some minds first.