In the last 5 months there have been at least 71 kids killed by guns. Average just under 6 years old

[rrneck]

187. Ooh. Another turn. Cute.

Last edited Sat May 11, 2013, 10:19 PM - Edit history (1)

My solution is to improve everyone's safety by reducing the likelihood that they will be killed.

Ah. So you have a "plan". Here's the news. Nobody cares. Any prudent person will assume a risk they can control to avoid a risk they cannot control. Some call it the real world. Your solution to an ideological problem does not address the problem of self defense. Nobody cares about the overall chances of assault here or in some European country. Nor do they care about the fine distinctions you make between some criminals ability to beat them to death and getting shot. Nobody cares. Nobody will ever get murdered congratulating themselves that they reduced the rate of "firearm violence" a miniscule fraction of a percent because they don't own a gun. The only people that even pretend to care are the ones that are more interested in defending their ideology than people. And they do that because they don't think they will ever have to fight to survive. But if they were being honest they would admit that if they were being assaulted they'd shoot that fucker full of holes if they only had a gun.

And keep dodging. The "faux intellectualism" to which I refer is your touting research to avoid thinking about how to actually help people. You have shown no real intellectualism to date; merely the evasive parroting of other people's work. And you flog it relentlessly in the safest place you can find. It's easy to tell people what they want to hear, but sycophancy doesn't solve the problem either.

Your objective is not to make criminals somewhat less efficient. That's bullshit. Your objective is not to treat people like fungible assets on a spreadsheet. That's arrogant bullshit. Your objective is not to cook up some convoluted scheme to keep guns out of the hands of people who could beat someone to death. That's condescending bullshit. Your objective is not to select the "political cause du jour" and flog it in an attempt to score points off anonymous people you will never meet in real life. That's narcissistic bullshit. Your objective is to figure out how to actually help people deal with a specific problem. You won't find that solution by proselytizing about reducing peoples chances of being brutalized a fraction of a percent. That's insulting bullshit.

So to return to our illustrious car analogy - cars are the solution people have selected to facilitate mobility. Guns are the solution people have selected for self defense. What solution do you offer to replace the solution selected by millions of people that will work better than a gun?

Each and every one of millions of people will need a gun to stop an assault. Whatever solution you produce has to work for each and every one of them without reducing their chance of survival.

Get it? Costs versus benefits.