http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2012/12/13/seattle-times-puts-our-nations-gun-culture-in-perspective Comments On: <i>Seattle Times</i> Puts Our Nation's Gun Culture in "Perspective" by Goldy en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Mon, 17 Jun 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Mon, 17 Jun 2013 23:45:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Comment comment comment.

Comment. Comment.

That's all I see. Why is there even a section for this? Sometimes on issues, one side is right and the other doesn't deserve to have an opinion because it's wrong. Sometimes there are multiple sides like an octagon, or a triangle (that has THREE sides, woah), or even a RECTANGAL. Those issues are cool and fun to discuss (yay!!). This issue has one side. Look at examples around the world, use logic, and think for a moment. Do other countries without lots of mass shootings have armed teachers? Or millions of guns in circculation?

Chances are no one gives a fuck what I think, which is warranted because that's often how I feel. Feel free to skip past my comment and continue argueing with each other.
Posted by michael bell]]> Sat, 15 Dec 2012 07:33:26 -0800 The Stranger Posted by coolg]]> Sat, 15 Dec 2012 04:09:08 -0800 The Stranger
Violence in this country, while steadily declining overall, is abhorrent and simply doesn't exists in any other western democracy at the insane rate it exists here. So far our only solution has been to lock people up forever. Which is expensive and it is culturally destructive. There is something wrong. However things "are" now is clearly not working.

I think it's reasonable to attempt to first pass better regulations that restrict, delay, and control access to military and easily concealable weapons, mandate and fund more thorough background checks and finally fund a large scale cultural effort to address why people feel they "need" guns and prove to them that they do not in fact need guns. They may want them. But we can construct a safe enough society that a rational person can feel he/she doesn't require a gun to survive.

All of that is reasonable, doable, and does not abridge any rational persons right to self defense or firearm ownership.
Posted by tkc]]> Fri, 14 Dec 2012 10:41:56 -0800 The Stranger
You have no arguments, thought, or literacy. There are people who should be banned from owning guns. People like you.
Posted by Captain Wiggette]]> Fri, 14 Dec 2012 10:01:38 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty]]> Fri, 14 Dec 2012 02:55:21 -0800 The Stranger The worries I would have would be that if your government is truly supposed to be reflective of the dominant ideology of your populace, if indeed it is supposed to be a government for the people, of the people etc, I would not want to be lacking in gun registration, just as I wouldn't want to be purposefully ignoring scientific evidence of danger, or lacking constructive critique of education systems, or neglecting anything else on the pragmatic side while there was, oh I don't know, a good chance of parts of the country being under water in 50 years. I would worry about what goes unsaid in a society where there is a discussion at all, what is assumed about one another as a result of fear or simple apprehension. It's not really any the less dangerous than an (admitted cultural stereotype, don't kick me) Arab holding a scimitar, but it's certainly a cowardly way to protect yourself from politics, indicative of a sense of cultural divisiveness that might be doing things you don't even know to your society that are far more relevant to your well-being. Paranoia and defensiveness can be just as sinister in effect as threats of violence. Just wait until the environmental effects of a gun-toting invasion of the continent hit the fan and tell everyone that you were worrying about whether or not gun-regulations would do anything. Say at that point that your society did all that it could! I take pride in our gun regulations because I'm happy that the people in my country *think* they're mature enough to do that. They aren't after all - many of them voted for Stephen Harper, but it's the thought that counts.
Posted by Avant_Bard]]> Fri, 14 Dec 2012 02:14:11 -0800 The Stranger
Your anecdotes are as idiotic as they are specific and you don't represent anyone but yourself. ( nor does anyone really )

good day.
Posted by meanie]]> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 23:50:08 -0800 The Stranger
When I posted my previous note, several hours had passed between when I started composing my post and when I returned to complete it. (There were people trapped in my elevator and the fire department was involved... Much drama and bullshit.)

You raise a number of reasonable points in your last few posts. I suspect this is about the end of this thread, so let's take it up the next time the SLOG pisses and moans about guns, which should be a matter of hours...
Posted by CPN]]> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 22:10:30 -0800 The Stranger
I understand your notion of collective safety vs. individual liberty. Which is why, in my opinion, the gun nuts on this blog ask not for a limp-wristed, lilly-livered 'Adult Discussion About Gun Control,' but instead ask for specific answers about specific legislation and, most importantly, how said legislation would have prevented the latest gun crime du jour.

My fellow liberals always fail to articulate how whatever solution they're proposing would have prevented the tragedy of the day.

I'm not interested in feel-good bullshit and, guess what? There's been an 'adult discussion about the issue, raised by my fellow liberals, every goddamn time somebody gets shot. So I ask again, what specifically is your answer?

For me, it's not so much as what the answer is, but why the hell are my fellow liberals so freaked out about guns? The left-wing's visceral hatred of guns is really no different than the right-wing true believers stance on abortion.

I just don't understand it. I'm from Alaska and shot my first semiautomatic pistol on my grandfather's homestead when I was five years old. For me, a gun is the same thing as a screwdriver. It's a tool, nothing more, nothing less.
Posted by CPN]]> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 22:01:20 -0800 The Stranger I can't say that allowing concealed carry of firearms would prevent a madman from shooting people. I'm saying that allowing concealed carry on a college campus could prevent a madman from shooting ME.

Truthfully, I don't give a rat's ass about someone else's gun rights. I care about my own rights and my own ass... and my ability to equalize my odds against a madman with a gun who decides I'm next.

As an owner of guns, I resent the notion that someone else demand that I abdicate my right to personal safety. I, like every other person with a shred of humanity, abhor all gun violence.

This is the primary ideological problem with your line of thinking. It is entirely individualistic, and ignores any societal impacts. It is, essentially, a gun-based tragedy of the commons, which is where we basically are in the United States.

Just as you are worried about your own personal safety, so too are millions of other Americans who are endangered by the torrent of guns that are available and floating around this country. There is a tradeoff between what we do to make ourselves as individuals safer, and what we do to make our entire society safer.

Many other people resent the fact that people like you, in your rush towards individualistic self-preservation, wish, essentially to have the greatest availability and presence of firearms for the most amount of people at all times. The consequences of that, however, is greater societal danger by greater access to firearms, and an increase in the likelihood that a petty criminal and the like might have a gun.

We as a society make a choice that it is safer in the AGGREGATE that you shouldn't be able to carry a gun into a bar. Why? Because the likelihood that a madman walks into a bar and shoots up the place, including your defenseless self, is much smaller than the risk of having a bunch of drunk idiots with guns in a bar.

To be honest, I'm not terribly opinionated about concealed-carry on campuses. It is, at most, an irritant, mostly because there are so many campuses around and they're large and not always clearly marked. But as with you, it's a selfish perspective. It is annoying to ME if I'm carrying, but to be honest, I really would feel less safe on a college campus that allowed college kids to keep and carry guns everywhere.
Posted by Captain Wiggette]]> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 21:39:15 -0800 The Stranger @68 Just to pick nits: The difference between a semi-automatic rifle and a (semi-)automatic assault rifle is the color of the stock. Compare a Ruger Mini-14 and an AR-15. They are functionally the same. Regulating based on a fashion statement is stupid.

I acknowledge that, which is why I support high-capacity mag bans. Nobody needs 30-round mags to hunt, protect their home, or target shoot with a rifle. Nobody needs a glock with a 30 round mag for self-defense. Even the crazy 'liberty' militia mother fuckers can't justify the combat usefulness of such a stupid monstrosity.

If it were all about self-defense, I think revolvers, pistols, and shotguns are enough. Yes, you can hurt a fair amount of people with these tools if you wanted too, but you can't walk into a theater and unload 100 rounds in a minute or two like you can with an AR, an AK, and a drum magazine. But rifles being what they are, I think you can make some rather arbitrary choices about what constitutes an assault rifle that civilians don't need. I think rifles that civilians should be able to access should basically stop at the M14. There's really very little reason for anything beyond that. Is that rather arbitrary? Yeah, sure. So what.
Posted by Captain Wiggette]]> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 21:26:36 -0800 The Stranger unfortunately for your opinions, gun ownership is a civil right in this country.

choosing to demonize over educate won't fix this issue, but let me know when you have enough votes to alter the constitution.

Fucktard, unfortunately for your INABILITY TO READ ENGLISH, I exercise that right by owning and and carrying guns.

Did I advocate amending the Constitution to eliminate that right? NO. Has anybody here advocate that? NO.

What I did was rail against the completely batshit paranoia that the REGULATION of firearms either exists today (bullshit), or is equivalent to their ERADICATION. It isn't.

It is entirely sensible and reasonable to enforce strict purchase, ownership, safety, and insurance laws without infringing on or eliminating the right to be armed at home, or even the right to carry. It is entirely reasonable to restrict high-capacity mags and re-instate the assault weapons ban, and still allow citizens the right to bear arms. Military weapons are not needed when we HAVE a military. If you want to be a fucktard Constitutional originalist, then I want to see the NRA out on the streets EVERY FUCKING DAY protesting the existence of our (bloated) standing army. If that goes away, THEN you have an argument for firearms anarchy and people with a legitimate reason to possess military weapons.
Posted by Captain Wiggette]]> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 21:19:35 -0800 The Stranger
I'm happy to address your question.

I can't say that allowing concealed carry of firearms would prevent a madman from shooting people. I'm saying that allowing concealed carry on a college campus could prevent a madman from shooting ME.

Truthfully, I don't give a rat's ass about someone else's gun rights. I care about my own rights and my own ass... and my ability to equalize my odds against a madman with a gun who decides I'm next.

As an owner of guns, I resent the notion that someone else demand that I abdicate my right to personal safety. I, like every other person with a shred of humanity, abhor all gun violence.

I hate it. I hate violence. I hate war. I hate gun crimes. But I'll be damned if I'll let someone else dictate to me the terms of my own safety and the safety of my family.

When someone is going to kill you in the next few seconds, the police are only minutes away...

But what do I know? I'm just another illiterate and deluded gun nut, bitching about why I can't have a grenade launcher.


Posted by CPN]]> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 21:06:31 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Ipso Facto]]> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 17:24:13 -0800 The Stranger
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-de…
Posted by Ipso Facto]]> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 17:15:33 -0800 The Stranger "I have repeatedly proposed commonly known regulations to have an aggregate impact."

And you provide more support for my position.
You CAN claim that you HAVE proposed specific laws.
But you CANNOT post specific proposals.
The same as Goldy has not been able to even after dozens of his posts.

"It is you who is implying that nothing can be done because nothing can be passed."

No.
I am saying that YOU (gun control advocates) will keep LOSING because YOU cannot address the specific issues with specific laws that can pass.

"So, yes, how about a restriction on the sale of concealed weapons permits across state lines ..."

Two items of support for my position from a single post of yours. Nice!
Concealed weapon permits are not sold "across state lines".

"...or mandatory trigger locks..."

How would that have affected this incident?

"... or fuck, you aren't even listening"

I am listening to you.
But you aren't capable of formulating a coherent thought on the issue.
A trigger lock would have had no effect on this specific instance.
You don't even know if there wasn't a trigger lock on the gun BEFORE he stole it.

You (and Goldy) are good at the generalized wailing about "gun violence" but you completely fail at specific proposals to address specific issues in specific cases.

Which is why the NRA has been and will keep winning these debates.
Stick to your straw men if you want to.
You will just keep losing.
Posted by fairly.unbalanced]]> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:55:58 -0800 The Stranger allowing concealed carry of firearms on campuses would prevent a madman from shooting someone on a college campus?

The idea seems to be that concealed carry is a disincentive to crime, but I sure haven't seen any data that proves that.
Posted by Matt from Denver]]> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:33:04 -0800 The Stranger
Can you please explain to me how banning concealed carry of firearms on a college campus would prevent a madman from shooting someone on a college campus?

I would really like to know. Please explain so I can understand.
Posted by CPN]]> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:01:24 -0800 The Stranger Posted by cracked]]> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 15:34:41 -0800 The Stranger Posted by ScrawnyKayaker]]> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 15:34:03 -0800 The Stranger
However, you should note that Goldy is doing exactly what YOU have said needs to be done, trying to create a more receptive environment for debate and gun regulation, by fostering as sense of outrage in the citizenry toward the gun nut coup over how we handle guns in our society. If citizens are outraged enough by the killing and direction we have been heading in, then legislators can actually bring up things like trigger locks, magazine restrictions, etc. without risking having their reelection totally derailed by an NRA campaign against them.

I use the term concern troll toward posters who encourage a sense of helplessness and powerlessness while professing to care.

I say anyone who thinks colleges should be FORCED to allow ALL their students and faculty to carry concealed weapons is frickin' crazy and should be called a gun nut. And if those same nuts want 30 or 40 or 60 round clips, I'm not going to sit back and marvel on how constitutional they think it is if I think it is just plain nutty. So, yes, how about a restriction on the sale of concealed weapons permits across state lines , or a restriction on the size of clips, or mandatory trigger locks, or fuck, you aren't even listening.... But there are a lot of people who are starting to listen again, because they don't like being powerless against crazy bastards with 20 round clips on semi-automatic assault weapons or mentally unstable vigilantes with concealed weapons permits.
Posted by cracked]]> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 15:25:41 -0800 The Stranger
unfortunately for your opinions, gun ownership is a civil right in this country.

choosing to demonize over educate won't fix this issue, but let me know when you have enough votes to alter the constitution.
Posted by meanie]]> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 15:18:49 -0800 The Stranger
Driving isn't a freedom, its a privilege. That's false equivalency. Deaths from drivers are considered the cost of doing business, that's really messed up. Drivers can *only* be charged if their actions can be proven beyond a doubt were malicious. That's also really messed up. All you have to do to get your license back from DUI or any accident, is say you need to drive to work.

Calling firearm deaths like this one a *massacre* or * epidemic* is hyperbolic nonsense

Firearms are already tightly regulated, the BATF has hundreds of rules that the breaking of which will land in in federal prison, some are as simple as adding the wrong accessory to the wrong firearm.

In this specific example, the shooter stole the firearm used. Making it double triple illegal would not bring back the people he killed.

Posted by meanie]]> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 15:14:56 -0800 The Stranger Try to address the issue I've raised instead of the straw men that you prefer.

Also, learn what a "concern troll" is. Because you are using the term incorrectly.

But feel free to post again.
Because each time you do WITHOUT proposing an effective law is just providing more support for my position that you CANNOT do so.

If Goldy was actually interested in effecting a change, he'd have a specific outcome that he referenced every time he posted one of these articles AND he'd skip the articles that did not support that outcome.
Posted by fairly.unbalanced]]> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 14:40:01 -0800 The Stranger
I particularly note your parting comment. It isn't just the lobbying for firearms free-for-all that makes the NRA so dangerous and crazy, it is also how they foster and encourage an overarching sense of paranoia about the world around us and the idea that the gun is the great equalizer. These are exactly the kind of paranoia and "great equalizer" solutions that so many "crazy" or "evil" or simply "mistaken" shooters bring with them into the street, the theater, or the shopping mall.
Posted by cracked]]> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 14:39:12 -0800 The Stranger