Need some info to use for argument


PDA






crushbup
February 4, 2009, 09:06 PM
I've been talking to someone who is somewhat anti (isn't necessarily against gun ownership, but is afraid that a normal person could just "snap" and start shooting people). I would like to remove that fear, as I read somewhere on THR that sane people cannot suddenly "snap" and go wild.

Does anybody have any link to a study or a reputable article that proves that?

If you enjoyed reading about "Need some info to use for argument" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Grassman
February 4, 2009, 09:12 PM
I live it every day. No snappage here.

davera
February 4, 2009, 09:15 PM
There are many 10s of millions of guns in private hands. If people routinely snapped and went postal with them ... you'd have a Brady campaign style "blood in the streets" situation for sure.

But that isn't happening.

bonedust
February 4, 2009, 09:19 PM
just tell them an NRA member has never murdered an abortion doctor. sure, it may not fit here, but they will be confused long enough for you to walk away.

HeavenlySword
February 4, 2009, 09:20 PM
Sorry, but if you want, I can show you (in a PM & email) that A) Someone determined, and with basic knowledge of highschool chemistry could kill thousands of people with less risk than using firearms.

B) Firearms are amazingly simple devices. I could construct a fairly reliable (a bit less than the Sten) 9mm fully automatic submachine gun from common hardware store parts. I can send you this other dude's plans and diagrams through email.

Anyone with half a brain can build a working gun from the contents of a trash can, quoted from http://www.cracked.com/article_17016_7-items-you-wont-believe-are-actually-legal.html

C) In my opinion, it doesn't matter if people die, they have a responsibility to keep the government straight, and if that means taking a few casualties (and only a few, because an armed society will not long tolerate someone trying to shoot them), it has to be done. A crappy government kills more people through corruption, bureaucratic incompetence, and callousness.

crushbup
February 4, 2009, 09:21 PM
All of that is good enough to convince me, but this person will not believe it until they see a paper, a journal, something "official" that proves it. Thanks for the help so far, though.

HeavenlySword
February 4, 2009, 09:24 PM
The blueprints for the 9mm automatic smg from hardware/ plumbing supply parts are pretty 'official'

the 9mm automatic pistol is more evil looking, in my opinion, but probably less controllable in real life

If you want, I can give an detached, scientific writing (they are teaching us technical writing as part of stuying engineering :( ) explaining what you need to do to make military grade high explosives, or nerve agent, or underwater explosives, or how to locate blueprints for most large public buildings in most cities, etc.

crushbup
February 4, 2009, 09:28 PM
I think that would be a tidbit counterproductive in this situation:D

geronimo509
February 4, 2009, 09:38 PM
there was something on here that had a link to a website that showed all of the crimes and who committed them, non chl holders and chl holders. That right there should be enough.

ChemicalArts
February 4, 2009, 09:50 PM
Don't try to convince him that people won't "snap".

Dig up the Constitution and show him that the founders made it such a priority for people to have the right to keep and bear arms that they put it #2 in the Bill of Rights. They put it before unlawful search and seizure, trial by jury, and due process.

Then tell him that you firmly believe that self-defense against violence is a human right.

We can't ignore a constitutional right because of what people "might" do. That would be prior restraint.

HeavenlySword
February 4, 2009, 09:57 PM
How so? Someone can use common household products to commit mass murder and terrorism, while he whines about 'someone might go crazy and shoot some people'?

Heres a nice list of publicly reported firearm self-defenses, updated constantly.

http://www.claytoncramer.com/gundefenseblog/blogger.html

MachIVshooter
February 4, 2009, 10:31 PM
I've been talking to someone who is somewhat anti (isn't necessarily against gun ownership, but is afraid that a normal person could just "snap" and start shooting people). I would like to remove that fear, as I read somewhere on THR that sane people cannot suddenly "snap" and go wild.

1: Ask him if he lives in a state of terror, constantly fearful of all the ways he could (and more likely would) be injured or killed. Is he mortified of traveling by car, an activity that is thousands of times more likely to take his life than a shooting rampage?

2: While this is not a popular theme among antis, it matters not if some people die by gun violence; There is NO justification for disarmament of the citizens of the United States of America.

I grew tired of arguing from all the usual points, trying to convince people that they were not any safer without guns. It's beside the point. It is our right as a free people, and if they cannot understand "shall not be infringed", I don't waste my time.

Dihappy
February 4, 2009, 10:43 PM
Tell them that CHL/CCW holders are about 4.5 times less likely to commit a crime compared to the general public or even a police officer.

Then ask them if they think THEY would ever "snap".

ConstitutionCowboy
February 4, 2009, 10:55 PM
Tell him this:

"What dastardly deed a person might do and when is nigh impossible to predict. What another person can do to stop him IS predictable. You can't prevent what you fear, but you can prepare to deal with it. Arm yourself."

Woody

If you want security, buy a gun. If you want longevity, learn how to use it. If you want freedom, carry it. B.E.Wood

crushbup
February 4, 2009, 10:57 PM
Thanks for all the help guys: I think he'll at least think about it (which is all I really want) when I use the crime statistics. I'll also bring up the Constitution again. This wasn't so much a "convince him that guns are good" as it was "convince him that gun owners are not whackjobs." Hopefully this will work, otherwise I'll stop even bringing the topic up.

Flyerman
February 4, 2009, 11:10 PM
if he is looking for a hardcopy of something to do with the positive side of gun ownership, i can't think of anything better than the gunfacts website

http://gunfacts.info/


take the time to print it out, and let him read it. it's worth the paper and ink.

it covers everything about the gun control/gun rights debate

Grassman
February 4, 2009, 11:13 PM
The facts are usually the best argument, hard to dispute the truth.

conw
February 4, 2009, 11:36 PM
This will likely come in handy, check it out:

http://www.vcdl.org/new/raging.htm

("raging against self defense" - insight into the 'anti-gun' mindset)

Rifleman 173
February 4, 2009, 11:46 PM
Tell you what... Look up the number of all the guns that are in private hands in the USA. Compare that number against the number of guns used to commit crimes in the USA. Then you can say to your friend, "I know that less than 1% of all the guns in this country are used to commit crimes. Get that? Less than 1% of all guns." That's a good average for people who do not snap...

HeavenlySword
February 5, 2009, 12:22 AM
less than 1/300th of 1 percent

foghornl
February 5, 2009, 07:36 AM
Maybe also point him to Mr. Volk's other website:

www.A-Human-Right.com

Mousegun
February 5, 2009, 08:55 AM
Ask him why he isn't concerned while standing in a crowd on a sidewalk next to a road.

A driver could "snap" and make a quick right you know.

qajaq59
February 5, 2009, 10:27 AM
If they are afraid of people snapping, then they'd better get busy outlawing CARS. I haven't heard much about rifle rage, but Road Rage seems to be prevalent as all get out!

Mello
February 5, 2009, 11:02 AM
crushbup

Need some info to use for argument
I've been talking to someone who is somewhat anti (isn't necessarily against gun ownership, but is afraid that a normal person could just "snap" and start shooting people). I would like to remove that fear, as I read somewhere on THR that sane people cannot suddenly "snap" and go wild.


Is it a reasonable fear to expect one in a billion on any given day to go berserk and randomly start killing?

If that is something this person fears, how does that person leave the house? Does that person drive a vehicle, fly in a plane, or see a doctor and take meds? These three choices are much more likely to get that person killed than someone "snapping" on the order of a thousand times more likely. Someone "sapping" and killing people only happens a few times per year in the U.S.; not daily.

"In Hospital Deaths from Medical Errors at 195,000 per Year USA" http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/11856.php

# 2000 — 41,945 — 282,216,952
# 2001 — 42,196 — 285,226,284
# 2002 — 43,005 — 288,125,973
# 2003 — 42,643 — 290,796,023
# 2004 — 42,836 — 293,638,158
# 2005 — 43,443 — 296,507,061
# 2006 — 42,642 — 299,398,484
Vehicular deaths in the U.S. have exceeded 40,000 per year for a long time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year

in 2000
10,801 homicides
776 unintentional
270 legal intervention
http://www.uphs.upenn.edu/ficap/forum/docs/sept04lemaire.pdf

776.4 deaths per 100,000 in the U.S. from all causes in 2005.
10.3 deaths per 100,000 in the U.S. firearms death rate in 2005. If you removed suicides from this number it would be less than 5 per 100,000.
http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparemaptable.jsp?ind=58&cat=2


Gary Kleck, Ph.D. is a professor in the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Florida State University in Tallahassee and author of "Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America" (Aldine de Gruyter, 1991), a book widely cited in the national gun-control debate. In an exclusive interview, Dr. Kleck revealed some preliminary results of the National Self- Defense Survey which he and his colleague Dr. Marc Gertz conducted in Spring, 1993.
American civilians use their firearms as often as 2.5 million times every year defending against a confrontation with a criminal, and that handguns alone account for up to 1.9 million defenses per year.
http://www.rense.com/general76/univ.htm

Landor
February 5, 2009, 12:21 PM
Most anti's will not respond to facts that are provided by the NRA or any other pro gun org. You need to find stuff right from the main stream media. It will not be easy but it is out there.

You can start here. People that have either stopped, Killed or scared of the bad guy because they were armed.

http://rtkba.com/forums/index.php?showforum=195

ReadyontheRight
February 5, 2009, 12:22 PM
It's much easier to hit a target with an automobile. And a car has much more stopping power than any firearm.

So if a person is going to "snap", I'm much more worried that he would do it while behind the wheel.

This actually happened last night in Minneapolis. (http://www.startribune.com/local/39133982.html?elr=KArksi8cyaiUjc7YUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUU)

gdcpony
February 5, 2009, 12:43 PM
If someone snaps with a car, knife, pencil, or any weapon, he'll want you right beside him. ARMED.
Watch the car argument or you might be getting licensed for a rifle.

ReadyontheRight
February 5, 2009, 06:33 PM
Watch the car argument or you might be getting licensed for a rifle.

Unfortunately, we are basically licensed to "bear arms" with concealed carry permits.

And as my Dad always said when I was a kid "driving is NOT a right!". It took me a lot of years to figure out why he was so adamant about the difference between a priviledge and a right.

CAPTAIN MIKE
February 5, 2009, 07:05 PM
Whooah...What about all those people driving around in Vehicles that are 4000 to 6000 pounds. Geez ... what if one of them decides to suddenly get DRUNK and hits somebody. Oh my gosh, we gotta forget about banning those dangerous g..g...g...g..g...g...g..g..GUNS and get busy banning all those millions of AUTOMOTIVE VEHICLES - to prevent one driver from just "snapping".

Auburn1992
February 5, 2009, 08:19 PM
www.gunfacts.info is a good one.

lions
February 6, 2009, 10:20 AM
Thinking that people will suddenly "snap" is a perfect example of projection. What he is really afraid of is that if he had a gun he would "snap" or not be able to control his temper.

This is just like the brady bunch saying people would get in gun fights over parking spaces if us commoners could carry guns.

Ask him to find one example of a "normal" (previously well-adjusted) person suddenly snapping.

ConstitutionCowboy
February 6, 2009, 10:43 AM
This is just like the brady bunch saying people would get in gun fights over parking spaces if us commoners could carry guns.

Good point. How many westerns have you seen depicting a gun fight because one rider beat another to a particular spot at the hitching post?

Woody

If you enjoyed reading about "Need some info to use for argument" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!