The Great ILX Gun Control Debate

this thread is so long & US-centric I haven't waded through a lot of it, but there are two quite different discussions: whether it is better when private gun ownership is introduced in countries where it doesn't exist, and the US-style one taking place here about the practicalities of removing them once they're established.

would/have any ilxors made a case for the US situation being preferable to e.g. the UK?

i think most of ilx "gets" the issue just fine. you could use the same argument for any conservative belief that stems from a particular upbringing/way of life. doesn't make it right

there's a lot about this story that just weirds me out, i guess. like i think it's pretty unlikely that three teenagers seeing a dude walking towards them with...

http://files.harrispublications.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2015/03/ar15-tw-m15-ruger-682x382.1426183524.png

...would do anything other than run away.

The trio allegedly forced their way into the residence through a back door and were killed after exchanging words with Peters, who fired multiple shots.

i don't know, of course. only five people know for sure and three of them are dead.

I'd still rather be murdered in my own home than own a gun.

...would do anything other than run away.

I wonder about the one whose body was in the driveway.

Does castle doctrine still apply if the intruders are running away?

You generally have to believe you were in danger. There have been cases where people have been convicted of murder for killing people who were running away or already too injured to pose a threat.

there are also cases where the opposite is true, or where castle doctrine has been extended even to cover a neighbor's property (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Horn_shooting_controversy)

seems like it depends on the state and ,as usual in the US justice system, the homeowners race vs the race of the "intruder" (in quotes because sometimes the intruder isn't an intruder at all)

The two other variables tend to be whether the belief that you were in danger has to be reasonable and whether you can, as in the case of the Joe Horn shooting, leave somewhere safe and confront the intruders while still claiming self-defence - but yes, there is a huge racial element to the way the law operates that makes it particularly dangerous to unwaiveringly back the right to shoot with few questions asked.

here's a murky example for you:

My cousin had a high school friend who had a neighbor who was harassing his mother through criminal vandalism. Slashing her tires, defacing property, etc. It was upsetting her greatly and I guess nothing ever happened to the kid because nobody could "prove" it was him to the police, and the dad was doing nothing about it.

In a particularly ill-advised move, the son dressed up in all black one night and entered the neighbor's yard. It's been about 12 years since he told me the story so I have forgotten what the friend was doing, but he was not armed. I believe he was trying to surreptitiously plant a camera overnight to catch him in the act.

Dude's father caught him in the yard, believing him a prowler, and shot him dead right then and there.

Now - do we think THAT was an acceptable reason for shooting? Obviously, the friend was trespassing, and being decked out in black doesn't exactly do much to convince a homeowner you're not a thief. But it was in his yard, not in his home. Since he's dead, nobody can say for sure what happened, if there was any confrontation on the lawn, etc. The friend was definitely not armed, though, just holding a camera/camcorder.

In that case, Stand Your Ground and not 'castle doctrine' is what granted the shooter immunity from prosecution. My cousin admits it was a terrible idea on behalf of his friend, who definitely broke the law himself and created a murky scenario, but stated his friend was doing it because authorities or the next door boy's parents had failed to act to protect his mother.

Obviously home invasions of the kind k3v posted above are different but really want to see this talked out.

that story is cited here though zero details are given, just a brief mention: http://www.heraldtribune.com/news/20120711/in-arcadia-varied-opinions-on-law

I'd still rather be murdered in my own home than own a gun.

― softie (silby), Wednesday, March 29, 2017 9:00 AM (four hours ago)

call me crazy, but i skew a little towards gun ownership if those are my only choices

the problem with castle doctrine is you can't just give someone permission to blow someone away simply because they enter their house illegally. The teens in the example were breaking in, yes, and did have weapons, yes, so I get they are also culpable for what happened to them, but by the same token, one of the bodies was found outside. and I would wager one or two of them were retreating and no longer a threat. Should someone REALLY still be allowed to kill them in that instance?

I'm not saying "prosecute people who legally defend their home", I'm saying is your motive really self-defense if you've parried the attack and one or more of the perpetrators are retreating? Castle doctrine and stand your ground laws were meant to give you leverage to protect yourselves lethally if you have a credible feeling your life is in danger. It's not about whether we feel "sorry" for the perpetrators, it's "they retreated, isn't this now a job for the police to handle"?

Again - lots of speculation in this particular case, and I'm sure if we knew exactly how it unfolded we might have different opinions. I just am not 100% down with "they broke in, homeowner can pretty much be judge, jury, and executioner regardless of what unfolds after".

there was one time I was housesitting for a friend and the key he gave me wasn't working so I had to go back onto his porch to look for another one (which I found) and all that time I kept sweating wondering if a nearby neighbor was going to think I was trying to break in.

that silby post = great moments in display name/post synergy

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/29/us/oklahoma-three-dead-home-burglary/index.html

A third person fled through the door and ran. "I didn't shoot him," the caller says, though later another suspect is found dead in the driveway.
The shooter says he is in a back bedroom with his gun. The door is locked.
The 911 operator tells him when a deputy gets to the house to put the gun away.
He tells her the gun will be on the bed

possible he shot at him and didn't think he was hit, but.....

https://68.media.tumblr.com/710665ceac502bdd4fbf5f3f43a262b3/tumblr_omvjjvokLi1vnq1cro1_400.gif

http://abcnews.go.com/US/manhunt-underway-gun-store-robbery-suspect-manifesto-trump/story?id=46662668

Wisconsin authorities and the FBI have expanded their urgent search for an "extremely dangerous" suspect who they say robbed a gun store, stealing at least 16 weapons, and who may be plotting an act of mass violence with his eye on President Trump.

"Basically, he's angry at all government officials,” Rock County Sheriff Robert Spoden said at a news conference today. “You know, whether it's the president or local officials or whether it's law enforcement. He basically has a dislike for anyone that has authority or governmental power.

he also made a bunch of religious threats in his 160 page manifesto. oh yeah, and the gun store he purchased weapons/ammunition at last week was called ARMAGEDDON SUPPLIES.

but really the suppliers of guns have nothing to do with the problem of gun violence, i mean are we gonna start suing fork makers?? you can kill people with a fork too, it's all about teaching responsibility.

i know, i know, he stole them

just highlighting the name of the gun store...

ARMAGEDDON SUPPLIES

i guess during and after armageddon there will be a need to hunt for food and all of that, but by and large i'm pretty sure the reason you stock up on guns and ammo is to shoot all the people who try to sneak into your compound.

"now, you wouldn't shoot any people with that gun, would you? ...thanks for coming to armageddon supplies!!"

I always think of the apocalyptic Family Guy episode:

"Guys, we need to make some guns."
"Guns? Guns only lead to trouble."
"And when that trouble happens, we'll blow its freaking head off."

Food is people too, my friend

I live 3 blocks from a gun store downtown called Revelation Armaments. Its next door neighbors are a bank and a church.

sounds like the neighborhood in the paranoid android video

https://www.yahoo.com/news/live-updates-san-bernardino-elementary-school-shooting-180311263.html

A Chicago man fatally shot his 22-year-old son after an argument over who would walk the dog erupted into a gunfight between them, say police.

I saw a picture of a guy posing with a matching purple guitar and Dodge Challenger in front of a "guns and guitars" store - it was one bald eagle short of being the most American thing I'd ever seen.

I tell you what, i for one am vv glad that the gun laws in this country are currently the way they are, because if this guy tries to pull a stunt like this again and manages to get to the point of firing his weapons, there's a slim chance a concerned citizen will be quick to pull his concealed carry piece and pop off a couple of shots before getting killed.

PASADENA >> What began as an investigation into public urination at a Pasadena Gold Line station on Wednesday led deputies to seize two guns, high-capacity magazines, suppressors and a machete from the suspect’s duffel bag, authorities said.

Deputies first approached a man about 9 a.m. after spotting a man relieving himself in a planter along the sidewalk outside the Sierra Madre Villa Gold Line Station at Madre Street and Foothill Boulevard, Los Angeles County sheriff’s officials said.

The deputies confronted the man about the offense, and the suspect provided them with what turned out to be a false name, according to Deputy Katherine Zubo of the sheriff’s Transit Policing Division, who took part in the arrest. The man was carrying a duffel bag with him.

A search of the suspect’s bag turned up a loaded AR-15-style rifle, fitted wit with two 30-round magazines and a suppressor, as well as a .40-caliber pistol with a high-capacity magazine and a suppressor and a large machete-style knife, Sheriff Jim McDonnell said. The bag also contained a notebook full of writings and a Bible. He was booked for weapons violations.

“Marking on the handgun specified its use for restricted law enforcement or government only,” sheriff’s officials said in a written statement.

Investigators said they had not determined what the suspect, identified as 28-year-old Christopher Harrison Goodine of Union City, Georgia, may have ultimately intended to do with the weaponry.

“There is no intelligence to indicate there is a nexus to terrorism,” the sheriff’s said.

But he noted that any time a person is walking around with this type of armament in a duffel bag, “The outcome would not have been good no matter what he was going to do,” McDonnell said.
Goodine was believed to have boarded a train in Chinatown before exiting at the Sierra Madre Villa Station in Pasadena and encountering deputies, Zubo said.

Other than the public urination, Zubo said Goodine was not doing anything that would have attracted attention.

The deputy said she was glad she and her colleagues found the weapons before they became involved in a tragedy.

“Upon finding the bags, honestly, the first thing I felt was relief, because we got to this stuff first,” Zubo said.

McDonnell praised the actions of the involved deputies.

“Their proactive actions are commendable,” he said.

According to news reports and records, a man of the same name and birth month has faced similar allegations on the East Coast.

A Christopher Harrison Goodine, then-26 and a resident of New Rochelle, New York, was arrested in November of 2015 after trying to sneak into the Waldorf Astoria Hotel in New York City while wearing body armor and carrying an empty gun holster and a ski mask, according to the New York Daily News. He told police at the time he wanted to take a shower. Information regarding the ultimate outcome of the case was not available Wednesday.

Records show the same man jailed in connection with the New York incident has multiple convictions around the country, including carrying a concealed weapon in Virginia in 2012, obstructing justice by force or threat in in Virginia in 2012 and obstructing police in Georgia in 2013. Records also show arrested in Florida and Washington, D.C.

Deputy Juanita Navarro-Suarez of the sheriff’s Information Bureau said officials could not confirm whether the suspect arrested in Los Angeles County was the same man previously arrested on the East Coast.

According to county booking records, Goodine was being held in lieu of $10,000 bail pending his initial court appearance, scheduled Friday in the Pasadena branch of Los Angeles County Superior Court.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/07/24/opinion/why-i-bring-my-gun-to-school.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur&referer=

when we cede rhetorical ground on this issue -- when we, with a sigh, cite the second amendment and refer to gun ownership as a "right" -- this is the kind of incoherent bullshit we invite.

GIS reveals another gun fetishist, not someone who just wants a small handgun to protect herself

not merely, i should say

distinction without a difference

we have a "right" to a well-regulated militia - that would be the armed forces, national guard and the reserves, who turn their weapons in whenever they go off duty, i.e. at the end of every duty assignment, and every shift.

sign up for a subsistence wage so you can point your gun into a bucket of sand every night and pull the trigger to prove that the chamber is empty, and have every round counted, and get questioned in case the number is less than what you left with. that's a well regulated militia.

thank you

conceding that there is a legitimate reason for owning a person-killer (for "protection", because so many other people have person-killers), is also known as "giving up"

I agree. But the frontier legacy firearms being a necessary tool of daily life has taken on a life that seemingly cannot be killed without well-directed, massive, crushing political force.

bump

maybe I'll c&p from the other thread if I have time

Nationalize the gun industry.

there are only a couple conservative relatives that i haven't defriended on facebook. one of them - actually she's more of an aspirational centrist who thought that we should give trump a chance for the first few months - posted the tearful jimmy kimmel monologue the other day, which was striking because she never ventures into any territory that could be even slightly controversial.

the immediate response was like american gun violence bingo. blaming it all on the mentally ill? check. multiple references to Chicago, "the gun control capital" (actually not, as proof that gun control doesn't work? check. impossibility of stopping violence when knives, machetes, baseball bats, etc, will still be around? yep, that was there. fears that a ban on guns would only lead to all the weapons being concentrated in the hands of "criminals and the government"? of course, someone's gotta mention that. blaming BLM, who "don't give a crap"? uh, yeah that was there too, i guess.

for better or worse (for worse) the "national conversation" that we have following events like this typically take place on facebook, for the most part, and this is the kind of mindnumbing bullshit that someone's stupid uncle barges in with so that everyone spends their time trying to prove the dumbass wrong instead of trying to figure out how to pressure political representatives to do something to fix the problem. maybe that's the ultimate problem - vast majorities of americans favor all sorts of gun control legislation, and yet our representatives do nothing. it's not hyperbole to say our democracy is just fucking WRECKED.

so instead we just yell at our stupid relatives and they yell back with thinly veiled breitbart talking points

People will debate endlessly about this or that particular gun-related tragedy and speculate on how to prevent it from happening again when these things are ultimately just a symptom of a bigger problem. Like, it's not that hard for me to believe that someone who's teetering on the edge would offhandedly decide to massacre dozens of people in the same country where thousands of people offhandedly decided to elect Donald Trump president. Both acts are informed by the same undercurrent of selfish nihilism, of disengagement from anything resembling social consciousness or responsibility to others, of seeing oneself as a righteous island surrounded by the inconvenient Other.

Which is to say that gun control is super important but I don't think gun control legislation alone (particularly in whatever weak tea variety has any chance of passing nowadays) is going to solve the larger issues underlying these instances of insanity.

the internet makes people think they need to have an opinion about everything and an answer for everything [/tr3nch3nt]

or rather, makes them think that they have the answer for everything

i guess thats just how people are though

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/opinion/guns-second-amendment-nra.html

Necon Bret Stephens says "Repeal the 2nd Amendment." (Nice bon mot here: "The Minutemen that will deter Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-un are based in missile silos in Minot, N.D., not farmhouses in Lexington, Mass.")

xpost I don't think that's how people always were. I do think the extent to which the internet allows people to broadcast their opinions to the ENTIRE WORLD has some weird psychological effect, makes people feel that their uninformed two cents are worth a whole lot more.

Signed,
A Genius Who Is Never Wrong

I will say that gun control is not a top priority issue for me, just because, in a cold, utilitarian sense, it seems like something that takes the most effort for the least effect. Like we expend enormous amounts of political capital to, IDK, ban assault rifles or something, and even if you get it done most gun deaths come from handguns. Mass shootings like Vegas are horrifying and also not that significant or likely a cause of death overall. At the same time, I feel a little torn about it because I don't want to cede more ground to the insanity of gun culture and the gun lobby in this country.

Whereas single payer healthcare, while politically very hard, would radically transform the quality of tens or hundreds of millions' of Americans' lives and prevent far more deaths.

uh yeah I don't want to live in a cold, utilitarian world, sorry

In terms of 'preventative care', I might argue for making some sort of community service compulsory. We're at a point where an uncomfortably-large number of people seem to have no real perspective on what actually binds a society together, and the longer that goes on the more likely those bonds are to eventually dissolve altogether.

In a rare moment of clarity, Tom Friedman said "save your breath" on this issue til after the '18 elections.