There are 120 guns for every 100 Americans

[PoliTalker]

Hello Dutch,

Who construed that???

Every individual who committed a mass gun slaughter, and all those who think nothing should be done about it, or claim the answer is more guns.

Obviously, more guns is not the answer. We now have more guns in the USA than people.

I'm not hearing any good ideas either because they are address the symptoms, not the disease.

Well if there is no solution that pleases everyone, then there will have to be one that some disagree with. Regardless, we must have a solution.

I have voiced my ideas.

Repeal the 2nd. Establish a new more limited right of gun ownership. Perhaps make it a privilege to be earned. Get rid of assault weapons in public. Raise the age to purchase. Create a national registry. Make new guns that only work for the owner.

There are plenty of good ideas.

What we need is the social steel to enact something that works.

And if we don't get something that works I am going to have to ratchet my view up into one of total abolishment of gun ownership.

Really, in a civil society, there is no need of one.

 

[Mina]

Sorry, I'm not a lawyer. Lawyers are like toilet paper; necessary at times but best disposed of quickly when no longer needed.

Regardless, you're evading the point: there's a structure. A structure good enough for the past 21 decades. Why is it suddenly a disaster now? We're the world's richest and most powerful nation. What did our Founders do so wrong in your opinion?

It's not just recently that it's a disaster. Remember, the country descended into Civil War fast enough that there were people alive who could both remember the ratification of the Constitution and a war that nearly destroyed the country. Other advanced nations managed to outlaw slavery through a normal legal process, but the Constitution made the US rigid, such that the votes would never be there for the needed amendments without a bunch of the states first leaving the union, sparking a disastrous war.

Also, we're not the "richest" nation, in any per-capita sense. Using UN GDP per capita numbers, we're the tenth richest. Sure, we have the biggest GDP, so in that sense we're richest, but in that sense, Iran is richer than Switzerland and Vietnam is richer than Denmark.

If you look at national wealth more in terms of human well-being, rather than just dollars and cents, we're a lot worse. We're 54th for life expectancy, for example -- ranking lower than Turkey, Thailand, and Colombia, among others. We have the 47th-lowest infant mortality rate - worse than Cuba and Bosnia. And when it comes to freedom, we're a joke, with the largest share of the population behind bars of ANY nation (comfortably ahead of second-place-finishing El Salvador).

It's actually a bit of a surprise that we AREN'T doing better, when you inventory our advantages. For starters, we have a big population, which should give us economies of scale that most other nations can only dream of. In the same way that small companies cannot typically afford to compete with big ones when it comes to benefits for employees (since big companies can negotiate much lower payments for things like health insurance, thanks to market power and efficiencies of buying in bulk), a big country should be able to pay less for the same thing than a small one.

We also control the world's de facto global currency, allowing us to inflate it or deflate it for our convenience, while others are stuck along for the ride. It also means other countries wind up sitting on a lot of our dollars, which deflate in value over time, meaning we get more value in our spending, paying by way of that money, than the money is worth later when others try to use it. We also have the de facto global language, which means our business people can go pretty much anywhere and expect to find a big supply of native speakers of the foreign tongue who are also fluent in English, which really gives us an edge against, say, a monolingual speaker of Danish. And we've got massive reserves of diverse natural resources, giving us flexibility other countries lack. Plus, we're highly defensible, so we could be saving on defense spending if we wanted (even Britain, at the height of their empire, couldn't put down a resistance here, because sustaining a military operation across a whole ocean is a nightmare). And we've got as many warm-water ports as you could ever want, on the Atlantic, Pacific, and Caribbean.

When you look at our inherent advantages, it's interesting that we are nowhere near the top of the pack on those quality-of-life metrics.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Hello Dutch,



Every individual who committed a mass gun slaughter, and all those who think nothing should be done about it, or claim the answer is more guns.

Obviously, more guns is not the answer. We now have more guns in the USA than people.



Well if there is no solution that pleases everyone, then there will have to be one that some disagree with. Regardless, we must have a solution.

I have voiced my ideas.

Repeal the 2nd. Establish a new more limited right of gun ownership. Perhaps make it a privilege to be earned. Get rid of assault weapons in public. Raise the age to purchase. Create a national registry. Make new guns that only work for the owner.

There are plenty of good ideas.

What we need is the social steel to enact something that works.

And if we don't get something that works I am going to have to ratchet my view up into one of total abolishment of gun ownership.

Really, in a civil society, there is no need of one.

You can wish for repealing the Second Amendment, but I strongly doubt that will happen in our lifetimes because the votes aren't there. Also, once that door is opened, it stays open just like requiring psych evals to exercise one's rights.

 

[Stringfellow Hawk]

Dude. My health is fine. It's YOU I'm worried about. I'm thinking you live in a shack in rural MS with no running water or safe sewage disposal. Your governor, just to troll Democrats refused Medicate assistance for you, which is why you can't afford to fix your teeth or to replace your missing wang.

Poor you, Beeyaaach


Matt!!! Do you have this lady's guns yet? Please! Hurry!!!!

You're thinking, OMFG its a miracle!

 

[LurchAddams]

Hello Lurch,



Not a gun enthusiast, here. Willing to allow responsible ownership with strong regulation under a new Amendment, after repealing the outdated 2nd.

For now.

If there is no consensus in the right for some kind of effective compromise, I am being drawn towards a position of simply repealing the 2nd altogether and leaving it at that. The longer I see intransigence and a lack of meaningful movement on the right, the more I am being drawn toward favoring a much simpler solution.

No. You said "Columbine happned with the AWB in place". Let's stay with that before we go onto something else.

Weapons bans work. You're wrong. We can talk about repealing the 2A but the answer is simple. Get those guns and that head exploding ammo off our streets. You know some of the little girls in Uvalde's bodies were so blown apart their parents needed to provide their DNA to ID them?

It's those guns, sporto. ITS THE GUNS.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

....Also, we're not the "richest" nation, in any per-capita sense. Using UN GDP per capita numbers, we're the tenth richest. Sure, we have the biggest GDP, so in that sense we're richest, but in that sense, Iran is richer than Switzerland and Vietnam is richer than Denmark.

If you look at national wealth more in terms of human well-being, rather than just dollars and cents, we're a lot worse. We're 54th for life expectancy, for example -- ranking lower than Turkey, Thailand, and Colombia, among others. We have the 47th-lowest infant mortality rate - worse than Cuba and Bosnia. And when it comes to freedom, we're a joke, with the largest share of the population behind bars of ANY nation (comfortably ahead of second-place-finishing El Salvador). ...

Per capita is an interesting tool but, except for Moon, who here really wants to live in Iran or Vietnam? El Salvador?

As for life expectancy, are you suggesting banning fast food restaurants and making healthy eating mandatory for everyone?

 

[Stringfellow Hawk]

Hello Dutch,



Every individual who committed a mass gun slaughter, and all those who think nothing should be done about it, or claim the answer is more guns.

Obviously, more guns is not the answer. We now have more guns in the USA than people.



Well if there is no solution that pleases everyone, then there will have to be one that some disagree with. Regardless, we must have a solution.

I have voiced my ideas.

Repeal the 2nd. Establish a new more limited right of gun ownership. Perhaps make it a privilege to be earned. Get rid of assault weapons in public. Raise the age to purchase. Create a national registry. Make new guns that only work for the owner.

There are plenty of good ideas.

What we need is the social steel to enact something that works.

And if we don't get something that works I am going to have to ratchet my view up into one of total abolishment of gun ownership.

Really, in a civil society, there is no need of one.

the leftwing nuts need to learn what an assault rifle is, I have an AR 10 Armalite, it is not an assault weapon. Assault weapons are full auto and the barrels are made of better materials for rapid fire

 

[volsrock]

I support the 2nd amendment, and the right to own a gun.

But there is something wrong w/ America. Gun ownership has a near-religious devotion among some segments of the population. We hear "God, guns & gays" from voters in some regions, and for many, it is the top voting issue. Every small regulation or background check is a "slippery slope." The NRA refuses to postpone or move a large event that is taking place within days of a devastating shooting in a nearby location.

Like Trump support, it's a bit of a cult, and always a battle for those who are believers. The government is just an entity that wants to "grab their guns."

We're unique in the world in this respect. The 2nd country on the list has half the guns per capita that America does.

We're a gun nation.

The share of American households owning at least one firearm has remained relatively steady since 1972, hovering between 37 percent and 47 percent. In 2021, about 42 percent of U.S. households had at least one gun in their possession.


Percentage of households in the United States owning one or more firearms from 1972 to 2021

1972 43%

2021 42%

U are a stupid fuck

https://www.statista.com/statistics...eholds-in-the-united-states-owning-a-firearm/

More households had a gun in 1972.....blows your spew up!

 

[Matt Dillon]

the leftwing nuts need to learn what an assault rifle is, I have an AR 10 Armalite, it is not an assault weapon. Assault weapons are full auto and the barrels are made of better materials for rapid fire

How much did that cost to build , does it have a heavy barrel, and what does the grouping look like?

 

[Matt Dillon]

No. You said "Columbine happned with the AWB in place". Let's stay with that before we go onto something else.

Weapons bans work. You're wrong. We can talk about repealing the 2A but the answer is simple. Get those guns and that head exploding ammo off our streets. You know some of the little girls in Uvalde's bodies were so blown apart their parents needed to provide their DNA to ID them?

It's those guns, sporto. ITS THE GUNS.

I said that, and it's absolutely true. Banning "Assault rifles" did not stop Columbine from happening.

They used sawed-off shotguns and pipe bombs. Crazy people are going to kill no matter what. Keeping arms from normal people is not a solution.

 

[Stringfellow Hawk]

How much did that cost to build , does it have a heavy barrel, and what does the grouping look like?

I didn't build it, I bought it new from Armalite, It is called the Hogzilla, that is what I purchased for. I think it has a 1:10 twist for barrel. I have a photo somewhere of a 1" grouping at 200 yards

 

[Lionfish]

 

[Matt Dillon]

I didn't build it, I bought it new from Armalite, It is called the Hogzilla, that is what I purchased for. I think it has a 1:10 twist for barrel. I have a photo somewhere of a 1" grouping at 200 yards

That sounds not bad. How many shots before the grouping opens up?

You know what my boy kills hogs with? A .17 HMR. Headshots only.

I shit you not he took one @ 3-400 yds. He's a Hoginator! A gatorinator, too!

I'm a gatorinator, sharkinator, snakeinator, and stingrayinator myself.

I ain't never killed a hog, I had a dog that did..

Uh, there's nothing on the internet about a gun like that.

 

[Mina]

As for life expectancy, are you suggesting banning fast food restaurants and making healthy eating mandatory for everyone?

No. As you're aware, that's not what I'm suggesting. Rather, that's a straw man attack. You've propped up a policy idea that I never even hinted at. A more honest way to approach this might be simply to ask what ideas I have that could raise our life expectancy.

I'd start by looking at what appears to be working. Like we have three states where people live to be over 81: HI, CA, and NY. That's a respectable level -- top 25 in the world, and in line with peers like Canada. So, start by figuring out what they do well (and to a lesser extent, the other states with non-embarrassing life expectancies: MN, CT, MA, CO, and NJ, each of which is at 80.5 or higher).

None of those banned fast food restaurants or made healthy eating mandatory, any more than the world-leading countries did. Japan, for example, leads the world and has fast food all over the place. But, we could take policy steps that make healthy choices cheaper and more convenient than unhealthy ones.

For example, rather than subsidizing corn syrup, subsidize the growing of high-nutrition, low-calorie foods like green leafy vegetables. Rather than favorable tax treatment and loans for farms that raise beef, swine, and simple-carb crops, have such treatment for raising healthier foods (e.g., beans), and also for seeding neighborhoods with more stores that sell such things (e.g., lower taxes for grocery stores providing fresh produce than for dollar stores packed with Little Debbie snacks). We could also look at "sin taxes," similar to what is done with alcohol and tobacco, but for other indulgences that statistically create societal costs, like, say, sugary drinks.

That would let people continue to make unhealthy food choices if they want, but would make healthier ones cheaper and more convenient.

Similarly, invest less in car infrastructure, and more in bike and walking paths, and mass transit, all of which are associated with a healthier population. And using zoning rules to encourage the building of tight, walkable settlements, rather than sprawling suburbs where people sit in their cars for an hour and a half each way to work.

We could also restrict what is an "exempt employee" for overtime purposes, so that we push more people towards 40-hour weeks, so desk workers don't spend so long sitting every day. Also, have mandatory paid vacation, to help encourage more active lifestyles.

We can also continue to improve Obamacare, until it looks more like the healthcare systems in Germany or Japan (still using private insurers, but with tighter cost controls and more government-imposed standards of care).

We could also look at ways to encourage more vaccination, since the higher-vaccination states tend to have higher life expectancies. And we could look at things like gun control, since those states also have fewer gun deaths. "Deaths of despair" also seem to be particularly bad in rural areas (see the list of states with the highest suicide rates), so possibly we'd also benefit from policies that encourage more urbanized settlement patterns.

 

[Stringfellow Hawk]

That sounds not bad. How many shots before the grouping opens up?

You know what my boy kills hogs with? A .17 HMR. Headshots only.

I shit you not he took one @ 3-400 yds. He's a Hoginator! A gatorinator, too!

I'm a gatorinator, sharkinator, snakeinator, and stingrayinator myself.

I ain't never killed a hog, I had a dog that did..

Uh, there's nothing on the internet about a gun like that.

I would say 9-11 shots, if on the bipod, holding in your hands much sooner

 

[Port Tack]

Don't vote Republican Taliban ever again!

Yes they talk of how it is so difficult to get gun legislation approved and it is actually very simple. Put 60 democratic senators in congress and it will be done.

 

[Port Tack]

I agree with you. Again, what I'm disagreeing with is the anti-American solutions being offered by the Democrats and the Republicans; Banning guns vs. Doing nothing.

Our nation needs better leaders but the odds favor most Americans will just vote their party line this November.

Democrats are not for banning guns but you are right that republicans are for doing nothing. Raising the age to purchase a gun, banning a particular type of gun, Requiring a background check that evaluates someone's mental stability before purchasing a gun and/or having a waiting period to purchase a gun are all NOT banning guns. If legislation were to be presented in the HOR or the senate to ban guns you might find a couple democrats to support it but most would not. Saying democrats want to ban guns is utter bullshit. That sounds like what a right wing fuckwit would say.

 

[Port Tack]

An AR15 isn't a war machine dumbass. Now you can make that argument for an M16. I wish leftist were better educated and informed. Really I do.

Of course, you think the logical course are more laws which no criminal ever cared about. Now that is the definition of stupid.

The 2 guns are damn near identical when it comes to caliber and mode of action, if one is a "weapon of war", they both are.

 

[Port Tack]

when people lose their guns, the government has free reign to treat citizens anyway they want

Who the fuck said people would lose their guns? Making it difficult for the deranged whacko to purchase one is far from "people losing their guns". It's ignorant shitheads like you that think that way. Not to mention the government pretty much has free reign to treat it's citizens how they want right now. They aren't worried about a bunch of rednecks with guns in the slightest.

 

[Port Tack]

Hello Dutch,



Because in order to have gun safety we are going to have to require gun owners to pass a psyche test, register their guns, and conform to new regulations. That is allowing the power of the government to work for we the people in the interest of safety. It is not giving absolute power to the government.

You actually do not have to do a damn thing other than make the sale of assault rifles illegal to drastically cut down on the number of people massacred. If Ramos could not buy one he would have to steal one and that ain't easy. If someone who owns one sells it make it a felony and if it's used in a killing they are charged as an accomplice. Good luck trying to buy one on the black market because the seller is looking at 20-30 yrs behind bars if it is and he's caught. That single law would save countless lives and would not be unconstitutional.