sc94597 said:
That is a ridiculous argument. I never said that people can't hunt at all. Just that they can't hunt with guns. It is like saying that a ban of cars would not infringe on my right to freely transport myself because I can walk to anywhere I want to go, or ride a horse. Rights can be separated into parts. Alright, that doesn't make it any less of an intrusion on one's right to self-defence. Alright, and the critique was given. Firstly: it is untrue to say that mass shootings don't happen in Europe, they do. Charlie Hebdo is a recent example. Secondly, there is no conclusive correlation between gun ownership and murder rates. There have only been slight correlations in all studies, concluding either way. Socio-economics and diversity of population are much stronger factors. Thirdly, due to different socio-politics and different border relations, a one-size fits all, "U.S should ban guns" does not work. For starters, the number of guns in circulation, in the U.S, outnumber the number of guns in Europe and also the population of Americans (and this is despite Europe having twice the population.) Furthermore, there are considerably more people capable of producing weapons. A black market in the U.S would be very strong, and by limiting the ability of moral and lawful Americans from owning weapons you are creating an environment in which they are vulnerable to the use of force by others. If any country is comparable to the U.S in terms of gun-ownership it would be Mexico, as both countries face similar sources of crime. Mexico, contrast to the U.S, has very strict weapon regulations, nevertheless the crime rate in Mexico vastly exceeds that of the U.S (not because they ban guns, but despite the fact.) So there are a plethora of other issues an caustations that we need to address before gun ownership. The biggest solution to this problem, as I had mentioned earlier, is the decriminalization of drugs (all drugs.) The U.S crime-rate and prison population would be halved, and the violent crime rate would have a significant decrease as well (as drug cartels have less power.) After this occurs, then we can possibly compare the U.S to Western Europe. |
It's not really an argument, it's a statement of fact. Guns are not a requirement for hunting, which was a direct critique upon your assertion that somehow it was, making arguments and then moving the goalposts isn't exactly the best way to discuss these things. I'm not really sure the comparison to cars/horses is apt, while a bullet travels far, far faster than an arrow or bolt, in terms of how quickly it puts down an animal, you're not talking the difference between a car going from point A to point B, and a horse going from point A to point B. Once you pull the trigger/release the arrow, in human terms, you're still field dressing a dead animal w/in the next 5 minutes (provided aim/accuracy etc...)
Yes, the critique was given, and that's how this debate needs to happen (which is me saying Good job). A freeflow exchange of ideas, solutions etc... not shutting down discussion or taking topics completely off the table. The person who said mass shootings don't happen in Europe was clearly wrong, and I've never made that claim. I also never said banning guns alone will fix this issue, so, sorry but I'm not really going to continue that line of thought. It's nothing I've said, nor alluded to in any of my posts.
I would suggest going after the black markets, far, far harder. Like, 1 strike and severe penalties. Severe. And I agree with legalizing all drugs, that would solve several problems. As it stands now, with the legalization of Marijuana (fully or medicinal), most cartels in Mexico have already shifted to harder drugs, as they cannot compete with the price or quality in the US, and the profit margins just aren't there. I would suggest we already have the evidence we need to support decriminalizing all drugs and putting the billions/year into treatment, education etc...
