Liberals Roar As Elizabeth Warren Vows To Mobilize Democrats To Defeat The NRA

[Uponthegears]

105. Thank you for your response

friend. You miss the points of my post, not that this prevents you from again playing, "look at the squirrel."

No matter, discussion is good. As to your sad attempt to inject the NRA party line into my discussion of HPHCSARs and mass school shootings, I did not call for HPHCSARs to be banned . . . rather I stated that those who claim that banning of HPHCSARs will not reduce the number of deaths from mass shootings are . . . do not miss the absolute nature of my word here . . . liars.

I admitted in my post that the use of HPHCSARs in violent crimes as a whole is an infrequent occurrence. Being an ideologue, you ignored the fact that my argument took this into account and launched into a diatribe about how rarely HPHCSARs are used in violent crimes. Congratulations. You prevailed on an agreed-upon point. What you failed to address, however, was the fact that mass school shootings are unique vis a vis HPHCSARs in at least a couple of important aspects.

The first is that the objective of inflicting mass casualties is facilitated (that means "made easier&quot by the capabilities of the HPHCSARs. Such weapons are specifically designed to provide their user with a tactical advantage over their opponent. If you take away that advantage, you reduce the shooter's ability to inflict mass casualties by rendering him a less efficient killer. (This is basic stuff, hopefully you are with me here.) The second is that the majority of mass school shooters come from a particular demographic, i.e. disaffected suburban males with little or no history of serious criminal conduct in their background. In other words, they are uniquely ill-suited to obtaining guns from REAL criminals on the black market. IF HPHCSARs were banned, these disaffected suburban males would be forced to turn to the black market, a venue to which they SHOULD be reluctant to turn and, IF they were foolish enough to do so, a venue in which they would stand an increased risk of getting their posterior's capped and their carcass stuffed in a dumpster.

These two FACTS, which you never addressed, fully support my comment that a HPHCSAR ban would reduce the deaths resulting from that single segment of violent crime, mass school shootings. I believe (actually for the very reason you stated) that there exists a valid argument on both sides as to whether the relatively few deaths resulting from school shootings justifies as extreme a step as banning HPHCSARs. As I noted, the higher value we place upon the lives of children appears to be what most proponents of such a ban place in the balance, but the extremity of a complete ban on HPHCSARs weighs heavily on the other side. My point, however, was not which side should win, but rather that ANYONE who claims that a ban would accomplish nothing (in other words, that there is NOTHING weighing in favor of a HPHCSAR ban) are LIARS.

Now let's turn to you hurt feelings over my claim that the overwhelming majority of self-protection gun purchasers (and mind you I am referring to the purchasers of all types of firearms for self-protection purposes) face a near-zero risk of becoming the victim of a violent crime at the hands of someone other than a family member OR as a result of their own despondency. That statement has absolutely nothing to do with what threats you, or any other gun owner thinks, imagine, of "feel" they face. It is a statistical fact. When you look at the non-natural death rate in the suburban enclaves housing the hordes of self-protection gun purchasers, then remove the violent crimes committed by their "co-armed" family members and self-inflicted deaths from those statistics, the rate approaches zero. This is not to say there is NO risk, only that the risk is so low that a sane, responsible citizen should be asking themselves whether the minimal risk they personally face outweighs the risk to society created by increasing the supply of firearms flowing in the stream of commerce which is the source of almost every gun used in criminal activity (you do understand that increasing supply increases availability, right?).

This, of course, brings us to my final point (which, btw has NOTHING to do with gun laws) which is that the REAL cure to gun violence cannot be obtained through legislation (well, not without violating the 2nd Amendment). No, my friend, that solution comes ONLY when suburbanites discard the NRA-fostered DELUSION that there is some imaginary criminal from the other side of town hiding in their well-trimmed hedges, or that an imaginary radical Muslim wearing an explosive vest is running up their sidewalk, jumping over the electric trimmers that got left out, or that the kid mowing their lawn is some imaginary rapist/kidnapper ready to snatch their children (note: each of these examples are intended to illustrate the racism, classism, and xenophobia so prevalent among our conservative brethren) and QUIT BUYING GUNS they do not need and will never use except at some gun range as they blast away at a paper picture of Osama Bin Laden. Only then will the supply of readily-available firearms dry up and this country can advance along with the other so-called "advanced nations" of the world.