|
|
Re: Would effective gun control laws be 'unacceptable social engineering'?
Posted:
Dec 17, 2012 4:12 PM
|
|
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Robert Hansen <bob@rsccore.com> wrote:
...We actually want anti violence. Trying to convince us to be anti
> gun instead, well, our minds don't work that way, we want anti violence.
>
A point of fact: Go to the Wikipedia page on intentional homicide rates
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
for the various regions and countries, list them by order starting
with the lowest murder rates, and then note that a pattern of an
inverse correlation emerges: The lower the murder rate, the more
stringent the gun control laws. This inverse correlation is not
perfect, but the pattern is there to be seen.
This inverse correlation is something that should be expected by
common sense, since although one can kill with a knife (to address
your "if it's not guns, then it's knives) as well as a gun, it's quite
a bit more difficult to kill with a knife than a gun, both physically
and psychologically.
Example for the physical side: Someone with even the best martial arts
training in the world can be easily killed by even just a child with a
gun. And think of it this way: Take two people or groups of people in
conflict, one side armed only with knives, the other side only with
guns - who wins? And this greater difficulty on the psychological side
should be clear - it's required to be up close and personal (just
think of all the implications) with high levels of energetic bodily
violence required. And think of it this way: Would it be easier
psychologically to commit suicide with a gun or with a knife?
It being more difficult to kill with a gun than a knife in not just
one but both ways should make clear that the inverse correlation,
imperfect as it may be, should be expected according to common sense.
As for Switzerland: Read the Wikipedia article
"Gun politics in Switzerland"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland
to see that there are some gun control laws there, and the type of
guns many are required to own are rifles, not handguns. They have more
controls on handguns. I'd say that the very extensive and very real
training that gun owners are required to have creates a tremendous
respect for how dangerous these weapons really are, and may put a lid
on the desire to treat them and use them as so many Americans do, as
toys - that happen to make it physically and psychologically easier to
kill in comparison to other toys.
(As for me: I've enjoyed the hobby of "punching holes in paper",
one-handed pistol target shooting, bullseye targets. But that does not
mean that I am against gun control - I'm for it, registration [as they
require such for handguns in Switzerland] but especially with respect
to requiring firearm owners to undergo extensive training, especially
with respect to safety and to develop a serious attitude towards these
weapons, how dangerous they really are, that they are not toys that
are part of some video game.)
|
|
