Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
19. That's not how I read it.
Wed Sep 16, 2015, 07:37 AM
Sep 2015

I'm not going to argue your interlocutor's case for him -- in case I'm mistaken in some regard -- but I'm not seeing your interpretation. In fact, I'm at a loss to see how you came to your interpretation.

You could implement a ban on gun ownership tomorrow and there would still be millions of guns in the hands of felons who would go around shooting people, and the only people that wouldn't have access to a gun are those who obey the law.


It seems to me he's acknowledging the fact there are hundreds of millions of guns in the US and billions more worldwide. The djinni cannot be put back in the bottle and the horse is already out of the barn, if I may borrow some metaphors.

That being said, you cannot ensure criminals will not have access to this residual supply of guns (or that new ones won't be made).

So, if you cannot guarantee criminals will not have access to guns -- just like you cannot guarantee criminals do not have access to illegal drugs -- what is the value of disarming the victims of violent criminals?

It's not the guns its the intent of the party seeking the gun. The criminals have the intent to prey upon people. The law abiding have the intent of going about their lives as peaceably as possible, which is why gun control only disarms the peaceable.

Even if you could keep guns away from criminals do you honestly think that will be the end of crime? More than 95% of violent rapes do not involve a gun. Do you think the disarmed 5% will suddenly stop being rapists? Do you think there will be an end to home invasions, robberies, muggings and car-jackings? Do you think rampage killers will shrug their shoulders and seek psychiatric intervention? Or will they simply turn their psychotic fixations towards inventing other means for creating grandiose images of carnage on the evening news?
Actually, private gun ownership is not rare gejohnston Sep 2015 #1
You make Switzerland sound just like the US. flamin lib Sep 2015 #2
It is a bigger pain in the ass than most of the states gejohnston Sep 2015 #4
Still peddling that Lott shit, right? flamin lib Sep 2015 #5
Are you back again? oneshooter Sep 2015 #6
Actually, I'm peddling Wright and Rossi. gejohnston Sep 2015 #14
Glad we live in America... ileus Sep 2015 #3
Glad you do too Starboard Tack Sep 2015 #7
Isn't it amazing when common sense comes into play. Starboard Tack Sep 2015 #8
As a non-resisident and not a citizen of the U.S., Snobblevitch Sep 2015 #42
Only you can answer that Starboard Tack Sep 2015 #43
A follow up to the OP flamin lib Sep 2015 #9
Well thanks... discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2015 #11
Didn't you swear NEVER to post on this Forum ever again? oneshooter Sep 2015 #13
I admire your ability to converse with these folks. I guess someone has to do it. randys1 Sep 2015 #26
You just have to pick and choose who to respond to. flamin lib Sep 2015 #28
I totally agree Starboard Tack Sep 2015 #44
The problem with many Democratic proponents of gun control branford Sep 2015 #49
"Gun Culture:" A patchwork of sociological & psychological terms meant to disparage... Eleanors38 Sep 2015 #10
This OP is a good point of departure for good discussion... Eleanors38 Sep 2015 #12
The argument that guns are causing all the violence in the US TeddyR Sep 2015 #15
That doesn't make sense. DetlefK Sep 2015 #16
You fixate on the metal and plastic, his post focuses on the people intent on committing crime. Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2015 #17
No, this is about his reasoning. DetlefK Sep 2015 #18
That's not how I read it. Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2015 #19
"The biggest difference between the US and Switzerland? How they think about guns:" Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2015 #20
Eh, the militias right now wouldn't accept joining a well-regulated militia. DetlefK Sep 2015 #21
well regulated in the amendment gejohnston Sep 2015 #22
Uhhhh...in the 18c. the government didn't control militias the way you suggest. Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2015 #23
any bonehead allowed in the UM jimmy the one Sep 2015 #24
re: the unorganized militia discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2015 #25
Unorganized militia is a JOKE jimmy the one Sep 2015 #31
"Unorganized militia is a JOKE" Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2015 #34
woman up jimmy the one Sep 2015 #35
Okay. Females who are members of the National Guard are the only ones eligible for the Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2015 #36
nuclear yammering jimmy the one Sep 2015 #37
"The sleeping masses" are not a federal statue James; the unorganized militia is. Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2015 #38
re: your thoughts above from #31 discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2015 #41
(unorganized) groups of one jimmy the one Sep 2015 #47
Please, render for us... discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2015 #48
You're arguing a red herring again, james. beevul Sep 2015 #27
2ndA both a right & a limitation jimmy the one Sep 2015 #33
Negative ghost rider. beevul Sep 2015 #39
Hey, you know very well facts and historical context don't really matter DonP Sep 2015 #40
do you see the 'and' I wonder? jimmy the one Sep 2015 #45
regurgitating a half truth jimmy the one Sep 2015 #46
Says the guy with one eye closed. beevul Sep 2015 #50
"Stop embellishing requirements to join the unorganized MOB" Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2015 #30
Unorg'd militia, obsolete JOKE jimmy the one Sep 2015 #32
Concept of being a citizen HassleCat Sep 2015 #29
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»The new anti-gun-control ...»Reply #19