Jovan Belcher and Gun Control

[Maximus]

Who's Uncle Gary?

Sorry...King Ralph.

 

[Maximus]

I think gun safety in this country could be improved.

Another headline yesterday, a 4 year old accidentally shot and killed his 2 year old brother playing. I don't know how any gun owner could be against improving gun safety in our country to help prevent this sort of tragedy. Like with most things, neither extreme position is the best answer.

115 people died in car accidents yesterday...i'd guess a dozen were children. If we cut the speed limit to 40MPH on highways and 20MPH on regular streets I bet over 100 of those people would still be alive....far bigger impact than widening streets which is impossible in many cases.

 

[JSS2306]

I haven't read the thread but needling together gun control and murder is the highest form of absurdity I can think of. Purchasing drugs is easier than grocery shopping, so why would the prohibition of guns be any different? You'd be adding another billion dollar industry for cartels and criminalizing those who protect themselves. There's just too many guns to do anything about it.

Besides, if someone is going to murder me I'd rather they put a bullet in me any day over a blunt foreign object or machete.

 

[KI4MVP]

115 people died in car accidents yesterday...i'd guess a dozen were children. If we cut the speed limit to 40MPH on highways and 20MPH on regular streets I bet over 100 of those people would still be alive....far bigger impact than widening streets which is impossible in many cases.

I already gave my suggestion for how to make roads safer, the solution is the median. Widening streets is to give room for the median, thus avoid head on collisions. Also, cars are constantly being engineered for improved car safety, and fatalities have declined as a result. And, again, the long term answer is self driving cars, which is also being strongly pursued by many companies.

Combine that with stricter control over drunk driving and car fatalities would plummet even further.

And no car accident leaves a 4 year old with the life long guilt of killing his brother. That is a clearly avoidable tragedy that very likely doesn't happen if gun safety was taken as seriously as car safety.

 

[Tornicade]

I already gave my suggestion for how to make roads safer, the solution is the median. Widening streets is to give room for the median, thus avoid head on collisions. Also, cars are constantly being engineered for improved car safety, and fatalities have declined as a result. And, again, the long term answer is self driving cars, which is also being strongly pursued by many companies.

Combine that with stricter control over drunk driving and car fatalities would plummet even further.

And no car accident leaves a 4 year old with the life long guilt of killing his brother. That is a clearly avoidable tragedy that very likely doesn't happen if gun safety was taken as seriously as car safety.

Yes because things that cause accidents like flat tires. defective parts and Faulty sensors would never happen in a self driving car.

more robots is always the answer

 

[Maximus]

I already gave my suggestion for how to make roads safer, the solution is the median. Widening streets is to give room for the median, thus avoid head on collisions. Also, cars are constantly being engineered for improved car safety, and fatalities have declined as a result. And, again, the long term answer is self driving cars, which is also being strongly pursued by many companies.

Combine that with stricter control over drunk driving and car fatalities would plummet even further.

And no car accident leaves a 4 year old with the life long guilt of killing his brother. That is a clearly avoidable tragedy that very likely doesn't happen if gun safety was taken as seriously as car safety.

Your suggestion has no impact on highways. It also has no impact on intersections. Also, i'll bet most roads are unable to have medians added and get widened...not to mention the cost would be extraordinary. My solution could be implemented for a microfraction of the cost, would impact every single road and would save wayyy more lives.

I get why you are telling the stories about a kid accidently shooting another kid...it's shock value, it's horrific. But why is it any more horrific than 5 kids that recently died in Texas when a tire blew out on a car legally going 70MPH that flipped? Had the speed limit been 40MPH, they are probably alive. Wider lanes or medians would have done nothing.

I guess I don't see why the gun issue is more serious than accidental car crash deaths which happen far more often.

 

[KI4MVP]

I guess I don't see why the gun issue is more serious than accidental car crash deaths which happen far more often.

when did I ever say I was against improving car safety? More than half of all fatalities occur on rural roads with no medians, so I don't see how you think my suggestion wouldn't have an enormous impact. If the road can't be widened to allow a median, by all means lower the speed limit. Make exceptions for roads with minimal traffic.

The fact is car fatalities per mile driven have been cut in half over the past 40 years.

And self driving cars should have a huge impact on road safety.

 

[MalTalm]

when did I ever say I was against improving car safety? More than half of all fatalities occur on rural roads with no medians, so I don't see how you think my suggestion wouldn't have an enormous impact. If the road can't be widened to allow a median, by all means lower the speed limit. Make exceptions for roads with minimal traffic.

The fact is car fatalities per mile driven have been cut in half over the past 40 years.

And self driving cars should have a huge impact on road safety.

And gun fatalaties have been more than halved in the past 20 years.

The issue you ignore is the cost of making cars safer through your suggested means (widening road margins, self-driving cars) imply a significant increase in cost and maintenance. Who fronts that cost? Who provides the man hours? In the case of self-driving cars, whose responsible for fatal errors, the manufacturer, the government, or some private company in charge of monitoring and maintaining traffic flow? How are self-driving cars implemented to the entire base of the population? We're likely 30 years away from that even being a reasonable possibility. Are the deaths of the millions of Americans between now and then acceptable? I'd argue yes, it's a tragic and unfortunate side effect of mass transportation, but I'm not advocating for stricter gun control on a similar premise.

You refuse to take the side of reducing speed limits to 40mph, not only because it would be an odd and unpopular stance that Max is trying to force you into, but because you know, inherently, it would be very inconvenient for your life, and you wouldn't want it to happen, regardless of how much safer it might be for the population as a whole. Yet you willingly bandy about a desire for increasing laws and regulations on guns because you aren't a gun owner, and such regulations wouldn't have a direct and immediate impact on your life. My guess is a guy who rides a bike to and from work and doesn't own a car would be far more agreeable to a reduction in speed limits nationwide. In his mind, it saves more lives, and provides him no further inconvenience.

I'm not a gun owner, though a few in my family are. I have a 7 year old daughter and a 2 year old son. While I have no doubt I could safely house a gun in a safe in my house, I live in a nice neighborhood, I don't hunt, and I'm not afraid of a home invasion. But I'm very familiar with gun collectors and their lifestyles. I also understand the purpose of the 2nd amendment, and the significant but subtle protection it provides the civilians as a whole from our government or foreign governments in the face of war. While I'll agree with anyone that any significant threat or attack from either entity seems distant and unlikely today, that does not mean it will be true in even 10 or 20 years, much less 100 years from now. But passing laws to remove or impair gun rights are highly unlikely to ever be repealed, so each step in that direction erodes the rights guaranteed by our forefathers, which seems like something we shouldn't be rushing to achieve.

Lastly, to the end of an assault weapon ban, it would be good if people looked up the laws regarding assault weapons in this country. I pointed out earlier that assault weapons cause very very few fatalities in this country. Part of the reason is due to the increased control and regulations on these weapons which already exist. There are strict laws for how the weapons need to be maintained in the home, how the ammo is to be housed, and at any point a federal official can show up at your door and demand to see the weapon. It is a serious crime if you can't account for its location on demand. People looking to use weapons for criminal activity probably don't want to invite the increased scrutiny on their lives. However, the responsible gun owners bear the burden regardless of the cost. At the end of the day, assault weapons account for 1.6% of gun-related deaths and injuries, and the number of gun related deaths and injuries, on a national scale, is already incredibly low.

 

[Stark]

What I'm gathering from this thread is that we should overthrow the government since we outnumber them by more than 4-1 and that we should invade Jigo's home, since he has no weapon to defend himself with.

Noted.

 

[Notorious]

And no car accident leaves a 4 year old with the life long guilt of killing his brother. That is a clearly avoidable tragedy that very likely doesn't happen if gun safety was taken as seriously as car safety.

But it does leave parents and other adults with that guilt. I guess they don't matter to you.

Cars have had all kinds of safety stuff added and besides decreasing the accidents as you say the cost has skyrocketed. I guess if we add enough safety features to cars only a small few will be able to afford them. The accident rate will surely decline then.

This is the problem with going nuts so "this never happens again." All you're doing is raising prices. Companies don't throw those safety items for free. It seems like every accident has someone parading around on TV saying we never want this obscure accident to happen to anyone again. We can't stop every accident from never occurring. Imagine if every we changed everything so it wasn't possible again. We'd completely halt everything.

 

[Notorious]

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=98055567

KI and Phills1 do you think it's acceptable that citizens have access to such murderous devices? Do you think because we license drivers that these kids deaths are acceptable. See what I did there.

The interesting thing is guns are such a small cause of child deaths and even adult deaths. So why do they get the most attention? Ask yourself that.

Water is 4 times more deadly than guns to children. BAN IT!

KI does posting stuff about kids killed by guns and not posting that cars are the most lethal thing to children make you a hypocrite? I believe it does.


Seriously who argues about the least likely killer of children like it's the most important? If you weren't a hypocrite you'd be talking about mandatory swim lessons, no driving or riding in cars, accident prevention training, fire safety, and fall protection.

All of which account for way more child deaths than guns.

 

[DDJ7777]

I can't take KI4MVP seriously.

 

[Notorious]

I can't take KI4MVP seriously.

The scary thing is there are millions out there just like him. I can't imagine what this country will be like in 30 years with his kind of thinking.

 

[KI4MVP]

KI does posting stuff about kids killed by guns and not posting that cars are the most lethal thing to children make you a hypocrite? I believe it does.


Seriously who argues about the least likely killer of children like it's the most important? If you weren't a hypocrite you'd be talking about mandatory swim lessons, no driving or riding in cars, accident prevention training, fire safety, and fall protection.

All of which account for way more child deaths than guns.

this thread is about guns.

Cars were brought up, I gave suggestions of how to make cars safer.

if the thread was about drownings, I'd give suggestions for how to prevent that.

I did post some stats I didn't research fully, I admitted as much when I did further research.

I'm open to suggestions and I have learned a few things in this thread.

How does any of that make me a hypocrite?

 

[Notorious]

this thread is about guns.

Cars were brought up, I gave suggestions of how to make cars safer.

if the thread was about drownings, I'd give suggestions for how to prevent that.

I did post some stats I didn't research fully, I admitted as much when I did further research.

I'm open to suggestions and I have learned a few things in this thread.

How does any of that make me a hypocrite?

I apologize. I just think it's crazy to want to take freedoms away from yourself. I hope maybe you can understand what I am trying to say.