Quote:

---

Arming oneself as you go about your everyday life seems to be something quite particular to Americans. Would you feel the need to carry a weapon in your car? On public transport? Do you take weapons into restaurants, movies, if you are walking in the park?

---

Quote:

---

I'm not sure if the Daily Mail is the most rational source of information...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Hey Frem,

I think the problem with your proposal (actually I don't think there's a damn thing wrong with it), anyway, the problem is that it does nothing to satisfy anyone's need for control. This entire debate is about controlling the uncontrollable. It's about making A FEELING (helplessness) go away.

Anything which folk who want their feelings to go away end up doing is gonna be as reactionary and as ill-advised and ill-starred as our war in Iraq in reaction to 9/11. It's like going on a three week brender when your girlfriend dumps you. It's gonna be overkill and ultimately ineffectual as hell, creating “unforeseen” new problems by the truck load.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:

Magons:

Quote:

---

Arming oneself as you go about your everyday life seems to be something quite particular to Americans. Would you feel the need to carry a weapon in your car? On public transport? Do you take weapons into restaurants, movies, if you are walking in the park?

---

It's just a tool to me, a small one which weighs little, and I carry for the same reason I carry my little bone wrench, rocketdriver, or spinlight - might come in handy, not lookin to need it but it's there in case I do.
Same essential principle behind spare tires, fire extinguishers, emergency generators, etc etc.

Ironically I do not carry a firearm while on duty - cause I am suited up, well geared and mentally in "condition orange" with homefield advantage, severely so, since all I need do is blow my whistle or shove a car (thus setting off its alarm) and half the damn neighborhood here will rush to my aid if needs be, so my little spring baton is entirely sufficient.

Now off alone in an unfamiliar place which might be a little unsavory, it's just one more card in my deck of options, not the WHOLE deck, mind you - cause there's plenty of ways to avoid or get out of trouble without resorting to it, but it's there if needed.

Oh, and....

Quote:

---

I'm not sure if the Daily Mail is the most rational source of information...

---

I would say, as whole... probably not - so far my assessment of them finds them every bit as guilty of sensationalism, distortion and yellow journalism as the worst of american media, although on a rare occasion they'll wind up the only coverage of something happening here that the american press refuses to cover, so it's definately grain-of-salt coverage.

-Frem

Bonewrench - this is a bicycle wrench with multiple sizes which is just enough to put leverage on, extremely useful and inexpensive enough to be disposable if you have to damage it getting the job done.
http://www.suntekstore.com/goods.php?id=13002518

Rocketdriver - This is a multi-bit screwdriver with extra bits in the handle, phillips, flat, torx, and some smaller not/bolt bits, VERY handy.

Spinlight - This is a crank powered light with a belt clip.
It is hands-down the very best of all that I have tested, extremely durable, and you can just clip to your belt and forget till you need it, cheap too.
http://www.amazon.com/Energizer-Weatheready-3-LED-Carabineer-Rechargea
ble/dp/B002MFK7BS]

Got to love the swiss army knife http://www.belindajanes.com/products/Victorinox-Swiss-Army-Knife-Handy
man-Red.html

I especially love the toothpick

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:

However scary my life is (or has been), I am proposing a path to a better world.

---

By trying your hardest to be as heavily armed as the police? We can see how well that has worked.

---

Hello,

I don't understand your difficulty. My proposed solution would solve the problem of mass-murder that we are trying to solve.

You seem to want police to deploy prohibited weapons for no reason I can identify.

Aren't they dangerous? Prone to misuse? Prone to theft and subsequent misapplication?

So I'm proposing to get rid of them. Actually and honestly rid of them.

And you give me the shakey head dissapointed face.

I'm not sure what you want.

--Anthony

Note to Self:
Raptor - woman testifying about birth control is a slut (the term applies.)
Context: http://tinyurl.com/d6ozfej
Six - Wow, isn't Niki quite the CUNT? And, yes, I spell that in all caps....
http://tinyurl.com/bdjgbpe
Wulf - Niki is a stupid fucking bitch who should hurry up and die.
Context: http://tinyurl.com/afve3r9

“The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget.” -T. S. Szasz

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

So Geeze, are you with the 99% club? Firearms as well as economics? We arm because we feel oppressed? But we vote mostly war mongers in?

---

Quote:

---

I've been here in short spells this week, and it appears that I've missed the details of your proposed solution. Limit weapons to everyone equally, maybe? I like that conversation.

---

Quote:

---

Sometimes people do experience danger outside their homes. Even in civilized nations.

---

Quote:

---

This entire debate is about controlling the uncontrollable. It's about making A FEELING (helplessness) go away.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Sometimes people do experience danger outside their homes. Even in civilized nations.

---

Yes, sometimes shit happens. Nothing will ever be perfect. But is it possible to reduce the "often" to the "rare"?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:

Quote:

---

I've been here in short spells this week, and it appears that I've missed the details of your proposed solution. Limit weapons to everyone equally, maybe? I like that conversation.

---

Hello,

What? You gave me the disappointed shakey head face without even reading what I've been writing?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
And I guess I still need to challenge the assumption that people who commit mass murder are always mentally ill, will always benefit from treatment.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
Frem, I haven't had time to get your post. I can see nothing wrong with requiring training. In fact, I think this has been often proposed by gun control proponents. You know, that line about how it ought to take as much training to own a gun as drive a car. But I've seen this line of reason rejected completely by NRA-ers.

I'm little surprised you present it is as something new that no gun control advocate will listen to. Perhaps we're in shock because that's something we've always wanted. But I have to read your post again. There were probably details in the implementation that I missed, since I glanced through everything really quickly last night.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
And I guess I still need to challenge the assumption that people who commit mass murder are always mentally ill, will always benefit from treatment.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
And I guess I still need to challenge the assumption that people who commit mass murder are always mentally ill, will always benefit from treatment.

---

Seems last week would have gone a lot better if a certain young man's mother had been successful in her bid to get him institutionalized.

No one will ever know what's in the head of people who do things like this, but I'll wager that making it easier to get unbalanced people into treatment is the better way to go. For all of us.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:
I dunno...
I think anyone who *IS* willing to do so has some serious issues, whether it be with weapon in hand, or by the stroke of a pen and ordering others to do so, I feel that the will and ability to do this is prettymuch ironclad proof that the person in question isn't all there upstairs.

-F

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:

I do offer a solution, one that is low cost, immediately applicable, and hedges on the side of freedom while still having good potential to reduce bloodshed - it just gets ignored every time I post it.
Here: Again.
(REPOST)

Cribbed from THIS thread
(which is a good read in and of itself, about use of force, and goes into more detail on this solution)
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=52836

Quote:

---

Quote:
Mal4 -

CCW is the very basic Carry-Concealed-Weapon cert required to carry a concealed weapon, obviously.
And I firmly think that it would be a damn good idea to hold that level of training as a minimal standard for anyone who wishes to purchase one - alas that it's been proven (See Also: Jim March, Shall-Issue versus May-Issue) that the Government cannot be directly trusted with that decision, but I would firmly support offering indemnity from lawsuit to manufacturers and distributors in exchange for requiring such training as condition of a firearm purchase.

The cool thing is that it costs us nothing, the infrastructure is already there, instructors are inexpensive and ubiquitous, and the training itself is fairly standardized with allowances for the specific state the permit will be issued in.
It's a very sensible solution without adding more Government interference or stepping on anyones rights - although I have issues with revoking peoples right to bear arms for supposed "crimes" which prolly shouldn't be, but we can save that element of topic for later.

I do think the training is very important, for a fact I'd rather someone with the training but no weapon, than a weapon without the training - cause they'd be fully aware of problems like you mention and would very more likely act accordingly, although I think you have some misperception of the NRA and their stance on the matter, although for the record I dislike them as well simply because I feel they have failed to defend rights and become more self-serving than useful.

---

Worth noting I've brought it up many times, Google: Fireflyfans + Fremdfirma + Indemnity - and you will find quite a few examples.

-Frem

---

Quote:

---

Seems last week would have gone a lot better if a certain young man's mother had been successful in her bid to get him institutionalized.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
Sorry, I'm outta here until this starts to blow over.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
NRA: Hey let's infringe on every right EXCEPT gun ownership to solve the problem pfffft

This isn't a problem that passing laws can solve. It's an inherent problem where we exacerbate the problems of the mentally ill to the breaking point. It's a problem where deep down, we're all terrified and don't understand what is wrong with the world, and don't know where we fit in this world, or how to live in it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by RionaEire:
Concerning committment of the civil variety:

The term "institutionalization" is problematic, all discussions work better without its use. That being said I defend your right to use it, I just don't think its a clear term that is really very helpful or logical currently.

On with committment. Committment comes in two forms regarding adults with mental health differences. There's the kind where the law makes you go to the hospital instead of jail, which depending on the crime committed can be indefinite in duration. And there's the kind called civil committment where someone is made to go to the hospital for a while against their will for up to six months at a time. A civil committment is hard to obtain and can only last six months or less. After six months it must be reevaluated at which time it can be re-upped but that is not common.

This is how it works in my state anyways, I don't know the rules in Connecticut but I'm sure they're similar.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:

Any parent who uses such a threat no longer has any right to be called one.

---

Quote:

---

Training alone simply won't do it, there's issues of mentality and nature, general response time and other factors like native situational awareness to consider

---

Quote:

---

Out of curiosity. If someone proposes something new that hasn't been tried in a particular form before, does that thing get disqualified through lack of statistics?

---

Quote:

---

I would like to address problems and solutions later, but have a couple of points to make about this data.

I would note that the U.S. figure of 10.2 deaths per 100,000 is significantly affected by suicide, which is around 60% of the total firearms-related deaths in the data quoted. The U.S. seems to have an inordinately high rate of such suicides, following only Montenegro. So while this is violence against self, and can hurt others, it is not direct violence against others. -Geezer

---

Quote:

---

The best I can figure, widespread gun prevalence is necessary but not sufficient for high gun deaths (homicide, suicide, and accident). In order to have a high gun death, you MUST have a society awash in guns.-signy

Not so much. The countries at the really crazy high end of the gun homicide rate charts (South Africa(12.7 guns per 100 people), Columbia(5.9), Thailand (15.6), Guatemala(around 15)) generally have much lower gun ownership than the U.S.(88)

---

Quote:

---

I might also note that the countries at the high end of the gun homicide table are generally also at the high end of the non-gun homicide table.

---

Quote:

---

Nationmaster.com has most of this data under their 'crime' category. I had to look up gun ownership in Columbia and Guatemala seperately.

---

Quote:

---

THE USA INCARCERATION RATE IS ALSO STARTLINGLY HIGH.-signy


Unfortunately, much of this rate has nothing to do with violent crime, and too much to do with the "War on Drugs". Only 8% of Federal prisoners and 52% of State prisoners are in for violent crimes. Federal prosecutors rarely bring charges for firearms possession by a convicted felon.-geezer

---

Quote:

---

This is a complicated topic for which there are no easy answers. But if we're prepared to have an opinion, shouldn't it be one which is well-researched and fully thought-out?

I agree. However, one must be careful of making assumptions in either direction. It's easy for one to accept data that supports one's position without getting down in the weeds where a slight difference, like between 'death rate' and 'homicide rate' becomes more apparent. I have made assumptions on bad data in the past, and it's made me very wary of numbers that 'prove' anything, unless I go back to the original data and do my own analysis.

---

Quote:

---

However, the proposal I over does satisfy it, cause while "Well Regulated" originally meant well TRAINED

---

Quote:

---

fostering private enterprise

---

Quote:

---

Nope! I'm done. I know that wasn't an attempt to bait me, but as someone who:

1) had threats of institutionalization from my parents to keep me in line
2) knows of how horrible and abusive those facilities can be, and
3) has questions about the mother threatening to institutionalize her son that runs along these lines

I'm afraid that is something I can't have a rational conversation about. Sorry, I'm outta here until this starts to blow over.

---

Quote:

---

I don't accept this as a valid goal. It is just another one of those things that you hold more dear than human life.

---

Quote:

---

While I find your proposal for training laudable, it still smacks of you threading two compelling but internally contradictory desires with a theoretical proposal. I have one big question on this, and that is your ASSUMPTION that the gun manufacturers will provide good faith training. After all, if they can avoid liability by providing training, what makes you think they won't shave money off both ends and simply avoid liability
BY providing shit training?

---

Quote:

---

So here I am in the land of "What-ifs", but you started it!

---

Quote:

---

I don't accept this as a valid goal. It is just another one of those things that you hold more dear than human life.-Signy

Hello,FOUL. You must prove that this person values free enterprise more than human life.-Tony

---

Quote:

---

While I find your proposal for training laudable, it still smacks of you threading two compelling but internally contradictory desires with a theoretical proposal. I have one big question on this, and that is your ASSUMPTION that the gun manufacturers will provide good faith training. After all, if they can avoid liability by providing training, what makes you think they won't shave money off both ends and simply avoid liability BY providing shit training? -Signy

You are ignoring that trainers themselves are to be regulated. No assumption of good faith is inherent in that. - Tony

---

Quote:

---

So here I am in the land of "What-ifs", but you started it!-Signy

Foul. You reject the 'what ifs' of others consistently. Then you say you can 'what if' because others started it? Can we all 'what if' now, too?-Tony

---

Quote:

---

I live with a son who is mentally ill. I love my son. But he terrifies me.

A few weeks ago, Michael pulled a knife and threatened to kill me and then himself after I asked him to return his overdue library books. His 7- and 9-year old siblings knew the safety plan -- they ran to the car and locked the doors before I even asked them to. I managed to get the knife from Michael, then methodically collected all the sharp objects in the house into a single Tupperware container that now travels with me. Through it all, he continued to scream insults at me and threaten to kill or hurt me.

---

Quote:

---

So, let's pretend we're epidemiologists in this thread. Set aside your fears and prejudices, go into the field (mentally) and let's look into the causes and cures of gun violence in the USA.

---

Quote:

---

I think there are 3 reasons why it is increasing:

1) more women are leaving abusive husbands (this is certainly a GOOD THING overall but leaves them vulnerable to kids mimicing their fathers. I believe we have made some progress in societal attitudes to DV (though still a long way to go!).

2) parents are more indulgent, permissive and democratic - most of the time this is a GOOD THING but for some children it becomes a serious problem. It is possible to be too child focussed and the idea that the more attention, praise and love a child gets the better they will be is naive. You can have too much of a good thing!

3) There have been societal changes that affect almost all children, but exaggerated in some families and for some individual children, and these act along with the other factors. As a society we do not respect age in the way that almost all past societies (and non-Western societies today) do. We are less in awe of authority, a trend which has been developing all last century but sped up in the sixties. We emphasise individualism more than any other society. Our children are exposed to an immersive brainwashing aimed at making them avid consumers. Gadgets and possessions are integral to thier lives in a dramatically new way. These factors lead to children with high feelings of entitlement. The changes in parenting add fuel to this fire. Media culture (playing an incresingly large role in children's lives) encourages kids to be demanding, over-entitled, bratty consumers with little respect for age or authority and a general air of nihilistic negativity. We let marketers spend billions creating demand in our kids so we shouldn't be at all surprised that some become far more demanding! As a society we have handed a large part of our children's socialisation over to people who just want to exploit them for profit!

---

Quote:

---

Alcohol a factor??? How many gun deaths were committed by people who were drunk?

---

Quote:

---

Wow, seems I have to do all of the heavy lifting myself.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:


This is some of the reasons he suggests for an increase in young people's violence.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Family violence, however, is way through the roof, at least partially due to better reporting and police having to take reports seriously and acting upon them and recording them.

---

Quote:

---

According to Eddie's research, reported violence by children against their parents has increased.

---

Quote:

---

Training alone simply won't do it, there's issues of mentality and nature, general response time and other factors like native situational awareness to consider

---

Quote:

---

Now, my FIRST reaction to Frem's proposal was that he was merely threading two pressing, contradictory desires with a theoretical construct. Like I said: not interested in personal boogeymen, nor in magical solutions to them. Frem's posted links have vaulted his proposal into a possibly workable one, because it looks like it may have a real-world effect. (I hope you see where I'm going with this approach.)

---

Quote:

---

>>fostering private enterprise<<

I don't accept this as a valid goal. It is just another one of those things that you hold more dear than human life.

While I find your proposal for training laudable, it still smacks of you threading two compelling but internally contradictory desires with a theoretical proposal. I have one big question on this, and that is your ASSUMPTION that the gun manufacturers will provide good faith training. After all, if they can avoid liability by providing training, what makes you think they won't shave money off both ends and simply avoid liability BY providing shit training? It's not like business in general can be trusted not to shoot itself in the foot, so to speak. And if THAT happens, and someone buys a gun which is subsequently used in a homicide, how does one check back to see if the training itself was adequate? And if it was laughably inadequate (Here's a gun, this is where the bullets go in, now point and shoot. Here's your license, go away.) what is the remedy? Civil court? Money damages for lost life?

---

Quote:

---

Do you have any data that shows that the system as you proposed would work, particularly the history of the gun industry in self-policing?

---

Quote:

---

Umm, you DO realize I threw that in as a sop to the Conservative end of things as a "selling point", right ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Nope! I'm done. I know that wasn't an attempt to bait me, but as someone who:

1) had threats of institutionalization from my parents to keep me in line
2) knows of how horrible and abusive those facilities can be, and
3) has questions about the mother threatening to institutionalize her son that runs along these lines

I'm afraid that is something I can't have a rational conversation about. Sorry, I'm outta here until this starts to blow over.

---

Byte, IIRC, you killed small animals for fun when you were young, correct? You ate strange non-food items, and still eat a deficient diet, no? You have insisted over and over that you're a sociopath. You may not recall, but when a chorus of people insisted that you were NOT a sociopath, I stayed out of it. I take you at your word: you are a potentially dangerous person. How is everyone else supposed to react to you, if not self-protectively?

---

Quote:

---

Another factor in gun death is gender. In the United States, males are FIVE TIMES (or more) prone to using guns than women. (Maybe only women should be able to own guns?)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WULFENSTAR:
In a somewhat good mood, so.

Sword = side arm

"None of you seem to understand. I'm not locked in here with you... YOU are locked in here with ME."

---

Quote:

---

Clarity of purpose, please!

---

Quote:

---

we will have learned how to set aside our preconceived and deeply-held emotions, and how to think entirely new thoughts, bravely.

---

Quote:

---

Aw shit, really? I've been calling the Firefly character guns "side arms"

---