Liberal arguments for supporting gun ownership rights

[Bern80]

Thanks for you help.

Now I have stats showing that the pro gun states have higher suicide, homicide, and violent crime rates.

Now there is no question that loose gun laws contribute to all these problems.

Here are some more 'states' to add to your list. I will epect a post admitting that YOU were wrong to follow:

Suicides per 0,000 people.

Lithuania - 42
Russia -37
Belarus - 35
latvia -34
Estonia -33
Hungary - 32
Slovenia - 31
Ukraine - 29
Kazahkstan - 28.7
Finland - 24.3

Highest Suicide Rates in the World

Here is a link to a more complete list.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate

Rank may very due to year, but I think you can grasp the idea
You will note that even Finland, 10th down on the list, still has a higher rate than any state you listed. Most all of those countries have stricter gun laws than the U.S. Thus your notion that there is correlation between gun control and suicide rates is bullshit.

 

[Missourian]

Thanks for you help.

Now I have stats showing that the pro gun states have higher suicide, homicide, and violent crime rates.

Now there is no question that loose gun laws contribute to all these problems.

Lol...Only in your fantasy land. I gave you the benifit of the doubt but everone else is right. Anyone who can get pounded with their own stats over and over and still think they won is either delusional or an idiot or both.

Believe whatever you want Chris. Get the last word if you think that's important.

 

[Chris]

Here are some more 'states' to add to your list. I will epect a post admitting that YOU were wrong to follow:

Suicides per 0,000 people.

Lithuania - 42
Russia -37
Belarus - 35
latvia -34
Estonia -33
Hungary - 32
Slovenia - 31
Ukraine - 29
Kazahkstan - 28.7
Finland - 24.3

Highest Suicide Rates in the World

Here is a link to a more complete list.

List of countries by suicide rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rank may very due to year, but I think you can grasp the idea
You will note that even Finland, 10th down on the list, still has a higher rate than any state you listed. Most all of those countries have stricter gun laws than the U.S. Thus your notion that there is correlation between gun control and suicide rates is bullshit.

Hardly.

The state statistics in the United States prove it.

 

[Missourian]

Here are some more 'states' to add to your list. I will epect a post admitting that YOU were wrong to follow:

Suicides per 0,000 people.

Lithuania - 42
Russia -37
Belarus - 35
latvia -34
Estonia -33
Hungary - 32
Slovenia - 31
Ukraine - 29
Kazahkstan - 28.7
Finland - 24.3

Highest Suicide Rates in the World

Here is a link to a more complete list.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate

Rank may very due to year, but I think you can grasp the idea
You will note that even Finland, 10th down on the list, still has a higher rate than any state you listed. Most all of those countries have stricter gun laws than the U.S. Thus your notion that there is correlation between gun control and suicide rates is bullshit.

Yes it is but Chris is impervious to facts and reason.

You shouldn't waste you're time.

After he was pounded mercilessly by fact after fact until my hands were sore, proving every one of his fabrications false using his own sources, when he came to, he looked up from the puddle of his blood, piss and vomit to proclaim:

"I won...I deflected every blow with my face."

 

[Dr Grump]

and of course 100 million people with guns,many militarily trained wont make a nice little resistance,right....and of course EVERY cop and soldier will just follow that "nut case" am i right?.....and heres a heads up for you Grump,lay down and follow the nutcase or fight the nut case, no one is talking about a coup Sherlock......if they take one constitutional right away from ya grumpo.....which one is next?....and after that which one?.....have the passive "i dont see whats wrong with that"attitude Grump,that wont fly over here.....

You have no trust in your Govt. I do in mine. If they do something I don't like, I'll help vote them out.

As for my scenario, you started making the stupid ones, not I...

 

[Tech_Esq]

You have no trust in your Govt. I do in mine. If they do something I don't like, I'll help vote them out.

As for my scenario, you started making the stupid ones, not I...

If you trust your government, you sir are a fool.

"I'll help vote them out"

I can only surmise that you are incredibly naive.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Irrelevent. It was not in the constitution and it was just 'allowed'. But here's a heads up for you Harry: If some nutjob decides to take over your country with a coup, backed fully by the military, your constitution means squat. Same down here. You can fight the govt. with your peashooters (as can an Aussie, who has the right to own a firearm), but you'll probably lose.

You Yanks get all het up about what is written down, when all is said and done though, having listened to Yanks and Aussies, Australia seems more free than the US...

Hmmm....my peashooter is a 7.62x54mm NATO and capable of firing armor piercing ammo. But, yes, the military can bring greater arms to bear. It is, however, utterly unlikely that the military would completely unite behind some nutjob. The US military is a reflection of society. Our society is not autocratic and not characterized by blind devotion. Therefore, what you would get is some units following the nutjob, mass desertion and some units siding with the people.

Want to know what it looks like? Ask Ceauşescu.

 

[Chris]

Lol...Only in your fantasy land. I gave you the benifit of the doubt but everone else is right. Anyone who can get pounded with their own stats over and over and still think they won is either delusional or an idiot or both.

Believe whatever you want Chris. Get the last word if you think that's important.

State Ranking on Suicide Rates

Suicides per 100,000 residents**

1. District of Columbia: 5.3

2. New York: 6

3. Massachusetts: 6.4

4. New Jersey: 6.8

5. Rhode Island: 7.5

6. Illinois: 8

7. Connecticut: 8.2

8. Maryland: 8.9

9. Hawaii: 8.9

10. Nebraska: 9.5

11. California: 9.6

12. New Hampshire: 9.8

13. Minnesota: 10.1

14. Texas: 10.6

15. Michigan: 10.8

16. Virginia: 10.9

17. Delaware: 11.0

18. Pennsylvania: 11.1

19. Georgia: 11.1

20. North Dakota: 11.2

21. Indiana: 11.3

22. Ohio: 11.3

23. South Carolina: 11.3

24. Iowa: 11.5

25. Alabama: 11.8

26. Wisconsin: 11.9

27. North Carolina: 11.9

28. Louisiana (pre-Katrina): 12.1

29. Mississippi: 12.2

30. Missouri: 12.4

31. Maine: 12.4

32. Arkansas: 13

33. Florida: 13

34. Kentucky: 13.2

35. Tennessee: 13.2

36. Washington: 13.2

37. Kansas: 13.5

38. Vermont: 14.2

39. Oklahoma: 14.4

40. South Dakota: 14.9

41. Oregon: 14.9

42. West Virginia: 15.4

43. Arizona: 15.6

44. Colorado: 17.1

45. Utah: 17.1

46. Idaho: 17.5

47. Wyoming: 17.6

48. Montana: 18.7

49. New Mexico: 18.8

50. Nevada: 19

51. Alaska: 23.1

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-11-28-depression-suicide-numbers_N.htm

 

[Diuretic]

If you trust your government, you sir are a fool.

"I'll help vote them out"

I can only surmise that you are incredibly naive.

Why? Is the US system of government so inferior to others that you feel you should live in fear of your government? Has a government in the US which lost an election even refused to cede office to its successors? Do you see that as a possibility any time soon? Do you think the US is capable of being usurped by a dictator?

If the answer to any of the above is "no" then there's no need to fear your government.

Just like us, you get to boot your government out of office and replace it with another one, happens all the time here, no problems so far.

 

[Diuretic]

Hmmm....my peashooter is a 7.62x54mm NATO and capable of firing armor piercing ammo. But, yes, the military can bring greater arms to bear. It is, however, utterly unlikely that the military would completely unite behind some nutjob. The US military is a reflection of society. Our society is not autocratic and not characterized by blind devotion. Therefore, what you would get is some units following the nutjob, mass desertion and some units siding with the people.

Want to know what it looks like? Ask Ceauşescu.

Not capable of blind devotion?

Give me a break!

 

[del]

Why? Is the US system of government so inferior to others that you feel you should live in fear of your government? Has a government in the US which lost an election even refused to cede office to its successors? Do you see that as a possibility any time soon? Do you think the US is capable of being usurped by a dictator?

If the answer to any of the above is "no" then there's no need to fear your government.

Just like us, you get to boot your government out of office and replace it with another one, happens all the time here, no problems so far.

i would posit that there is a distinct difference between fearing your govt and not trusting it.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Not capable of blind devotion?

Give me a break!

You'll find the word that I used is characterized not capable, they are not synonymous and I used the word I intended to use to convey the sentiment I wanted to convey.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Why? Is the US system of government so inferior to others that you feel you should live in fear of your government? Has a government in the US which lost an election even refused to cede office to its successors? Do you see that as a possibility any time soon? Do you think the US is capable of being usurped by a dictator?

If the answer to any of the above is "no" then there's no need to fear your government.

Just like us, you get to boot your government out of office and replace it with another one, happens all the time here, no problems so far.

I'm saying trust but verify. I'm not saying go nuts. I'm not saying I "fear" the government. I am saying that I can imagine a time when people get control of the government who decide they don't really need to abide by the rules, including the one that says when they lose a vote, they go.

It seems a remote possibility, yet this country was founded on that notion. (Read the Declaration of Independence as a resource). The Second Amendment was not put into the Constitution because the founders thought people have nothing to fear from government.

 

[Bern80]

Hardly.

The state statistics in the United States prove it.

Okay you are most definately out to lunch. Let me explain it to you like you're a fifth grader. You posted a list of sucides per 100,000 people. I posted a list of sucided per 100.000 people. The numbers on my list are all higher than the numbers on your list. Yet you contend that strict gun control correlates to lower suicide. That, my fifth grade friend, is what we call a contradiction. Those countries almsot all have stricter gun laws than the U.S.

 

[Bern80]

Why? Is the US system of government so inferior to others that you feel you should live in fear of your government? Has a government in the US which lost an election even refused to cede office to its successors? Do you see that as a possibility any time soon? Do you think the US is capable of being usurped by a dictator?

If the answer to any of the above is "no" then there's no need to fear your government.

Just like us, you get to boot your government out of office and replace it with another one, happens all the time here, no problems so far.

This post illustrates an important point. it shows that you, Diuretic are kind of like the frog in boiling water. If someone threw you into some boiling water (a dictator took over your country or President refused to leave office) you would go 'hey somethings up here". But my guess is if you started in the cool water and the gradually cranked the heat up on you you would be dead before you'd know enough to figure out that something isn't right.

In the U.S. it is our DUTY to question our government. has a regime wrested complete control of the citinzenry in one fell swoop? No. However there is zero doubt that our government has far more control over our lives now than it did 50 or even 10 years ago. If you aren't going to be scared of government until a military coup takes place than you need get off your complacent ass, friend. The time to start worrying about your government is when it can't reign in spending and keeps asking for more. When judges start legislating from the bench. When it starts redistributing wealth. And when it comes with entitlement after entitlement after entitlement.

 

[Diuretic]

i would posit that there is a distinct difference between fearing your govt and not trusting it.

True, I think it's probably the case that in those states where people fear their government they usually have good cause. But not trusting government is interesting. If someone doesn't trust their government then it seems to me that they can do one of two things - get rid of the concept of government altogether or move.

 

[Diuretic]

You'll find the word that I used is characterized not capable, they are not synonymous and I used the word I intended to use to convey the sentiment I wanted to convey.

I'll have another look.

 

[Diuretic]

Okay I had a look.

Hmmm....my peashooter is a 7.62x54mm NATO and capable of firing armor piercing ammo. But, yes, the military can bring greater arms to bear. It is, however, utterly unlikely that the military would completely unite behind some nutjob. The US military is a reflection of society. Our society is not autocratic and not characterized by blind devotion. Therefore, what you would get is some units following the nutjob, mass desertion and some units siding with the people.

Want to know what it looks like? Ask Ceauşescu.

Your society is not autocratic - yes, I'd agree with that. "Not characterised by blind devotion". Disagree. The last eight years is an example of blind devotion. Not by everyone, true enough, but sufficient majority, huge majority, uncritical acceptance of everything BushCheney. But to be fair the repudiation has been significant so I should concede the point that your country has retreated from its blind devotion. Now wait, any minute now smeone will attack me and suggest your country is now in a state of blind devotion to Obama.

Jeez I can't win. Just as well I don't take too much of this seriously.....

 

[Diuretic]

I'm saying trust but verify. I'm not saying go nuts. I'm not saying I "fear" the government. I am saying that I can imagine a time when people get control of the government who decide they don't really need to abide by the rules, including the one that says when they lose a vote, they go.

It seems a remote possibility, yet this country was founded on that notion. (Read the Declaration of Independence as a resource). The Second Amendment was not put into the Constitution because the founders thought people have nothing to fear from government.

Funnily enough I would have agreed with your point that a government might tell the populace to get stuffed, rude letter following. I thought - put this down to my own form of political paranoia - that BushCheney would launch on Iran and declare a state of emergency, suspend the elections, etc. I was wrong, happily.

Second point. Given the fact that your nation's founders wrested their freedom from a totalitarian British government, I'm not surprised at the sentiments in the Declaration of Independence. I might be going well off track here but so be it, I think some of us fail to realise that the concept of the people having control over the fate of their government is very recent in those countries which can be said to have developed from the British system. Britain itself has only recently (comparatively) arrived at true democracy. Same goes for the US. If we look at universal emancipation as a marker I mean. The rule holds for other western democracies built on the British model or which, like my country, owe their establishment directly to Britain.

I'm aware of the argument about the 2nd Amendment and I'll stay away from it except to say that it's reflected in British law before 1789 and after that year up until about the early 20th Century. But that's another discussion.

I prefer to hold my government in trust until such time as I decide that they no longer deserve my trust (and that's usually on policy issues) so then I'll do my utmost to overthrow them at the ballot box.

 

[Diuretic]

This post illustrates an important point. it shows that you, Diuretic are kind of like the frog in boiling water. If someone threw you into some boiling water (a dictator took over your country or President refused to leave office) you would go 'hey somethings up here". But my guess is if you started in the cool water and the gradually cranked the heat up on you you would be dead before you'd know enough to figure out that something isn't right.

In the U.S. it is our DUTY to question our government. has a regime wrested complete control of the citinzenry in one fell swoop? No. However there is zero doubt that our government has far more control over our lives now than it did 50 or even 10 years ago. If you aren't going to be scared of government until a military coup takes place than you need get off your complacent ass, friend. The time to start worrying about your government is when it can't reign in spending and keeps asking for more. When judges start legislating from the bench. When it starts redistributing wealth. And when it comes with entitlement after entitlement after entitlement.

The frog in boiling water metaphor is useful to illustrate complacency. But that assumes complacency exists. In my case it doesn't. So the metaphor doesn't apply.

I'd suggest that government has less control over any of us than it ever has, well unless the US is going backwards that should be the case for you. My country, as everyone is well aware, began its existence as a penal colony. Need I say any more about control? My country's government has far less control than that now and its control is lessening during each parliamentary session. It's not going to go away of course but it's not trying to exercise the sort of controls it used to. I know both our countries are very different and we don't have the space/time (nor in my case, expertise) to give a whole treatise on the topic but the government of this country in the 1950s tried to get the Communist Party banned. Can you believe that for authoritarianism? Yes, the government tried to have the Commos proscribed. It was narrowly defeated at a national referendum.

In 1967 there was another national referndum which (this is complex but I'll refer to the effect rather than the mechanism) gave aboriginal people the vote (it having been removed from them in 1901 when the colonies federated). I'd suggest that signifies a lessening of government control (I have to point out that this accompanied significant changes to previous stifling legislation which controlled, I'm using the word deliberately, controlled aboriginal people).

Anyway I won't swamp the thread, just pointing out that my experience is possibly different to yours. I suspect you're right in one sense and I'm not being demeaning, but that Patriot Act sure handed power to the executive, as did the BushCheney declaration of the notion of the "unitary executive."

Wait a minute.

You're right. Your government has gone back to authoritarianism.

I might owe you an apology.