Gun Incident Tax

Duck and cover
User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12223
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby JO 753 » Mon Jan 05, 2015 7:13 am

Wut happenz wen the orijin uv the offending bullet iz unknown?
Or wen the shooter did not hav insurance?

And, az iz often the case with all types uv insurance claimz, the goddam insurance company will do their best to cheat the claimants. In fact, they want to maximize profits, so they woud be motivated to maintain sum level uv gun ownership, so a steady stream uv shootingz in the newz woud suit them fine.

Frum a victimz perspectiv, no; private insurance companyz bekuming the primary administratorz uv the gun hobby liability situation duznt work.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

clarsct
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1429
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 10:56 pm
Location: The Cultural Desert

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby clarsct » Mon Jan 05, 2015 8:26 am

From the victim's perspective, they got shot. In fact, they may no longer be capable of a perspective, as it were.

I haven't seen a nuts and bolts way that you're going to assess and collect the tax, let alone distribute the funds. Where do the funds go? To the victims? Also, you're confusing some basic economics. Moving the price slides the axis up or down the Supply and Demand curves, but never changes the curves themselves. And, has been alluded, for some folks the price might be inelastic.

I had an idea at one point to leave the guns alone and make the bullets about $20 a piece. The idea was to help prevent innocent folks from being sprayed, drive-by style. But that, too, wasn't practical. First off, people can and do make their own bullets. Secondly, criminals don't pay taxes, generally, when they buy guns and ammunition. It only penalizes those folks who participate in the system. The main idea was that I cared less about two people who are making their living pushing poison on children so much as the collateral damage they cause from not ever learning to aim.

Now I see that ending the War on Drugs would do more to eliminate gun crime than anything else. See? There was an economic solution! ;)

But I see a lot of hand-waving over some rather tough questions, overall. As a law, I think this would be one of those well intended laws that becomes a civil and legal nightmare.
When Religion becomes State, and breaking the Law becomes a Sin, then Dissenters will become Heretics.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12223
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby JO 753 » Mon Jan 05, 2015 11:09 am

The fundz woud go to anybody and evrybody who incurred any cost due to an incident.

Determining how any particular gun ownerz tax woud be figured woud hav to be worked out by actual accountants with real data. I am not an accountant and the complete real data on this subject haz probably never been assembled into a coherent form. Its mostly just a bunch uv random factoids from many perspectivez.
It can be fairly complicated.

I suppoze you are going by an established law uv economics concerning the supply/demand, but it duznt matter. 'how much?' iz the #1 parameter on everything, so ajusting that affects salez. Moving the price down sumhow can make an otherwize prohibitivly expensiv item acsesubl to peeps who want it. Where do you think home printer salez woud be if you had to pay the real cost?

Just az moving the majority uv the cost to the ink cartrijez made them a viable product, hiding the true cost uv bullets from the customerz, or you coud say, protecting customerz from the true cost, makes the entire enterprize viable. Even moreso than printerz kuz we still actually pay for the ink cartrijez.

If Joe Sixpak walks into the gun shop and seez '200$ per month' added to every price tag, even if the gun iz only 50$, it will certainly influens hiz buying decision. He mite just chooz to go get a case uv beer insted uv continuing hiz injenius plot to 'accidentally' shoot hiz cheating slut wife.

The secondary direct effect iz that cheap gunz woud not be economicly viable products for manufacturerz. Not many customerz will blow 300$ to walk out uv the store with a crummy 50$ gun wen they coud pay another 50$ and hav a reazonably good 100$ gun. And the manufacturerz, also being hit with a comparable tax % per sold gun woud be making little, nothing or negativ profits on gunz below a certain price. Thus the bottom floor cost uv gun ownership gets moved up substantially. It woud probably escalate for several yirz and stabilize at sum balansing point.

That point woud be where the gun ownerz, who woud be the real world financial supporterz uv the entire enterprize, are the remaining hard core hobbyists with the dispozable income needed to own gunz.

That leadz to the dezired effect: less proliferation.

Ending the war on drugz woud probably do wonderz, but its about az unlikely to happen az the GIT. Plus, gun incidents are not exclusively drug related.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
True Skeptic
Posts: 10407
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby OlegTheBatty » Mon Jan 05, 2015 5:12 pm

JO 753 wrote:The fundz woud go to anybody and evrybody who incurred any cost due to an incident.

Hey kid, you shot your mom. Here's a wheelbarrow of money to pay for your therapy.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12223
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby JO 753 » Mon Jan 05, 2015 8:27 pm

Good point. If you let the video run, its a small collection uv similar incidents.

There woud need to be detailz in the lawz to prevent profiting from intentionaly or carelessly cauzing an incident. Got any ideaz?

Maybe owning a gun shoud disqualify peepl frum the deth & time benefits. The hobbyists are suppozed to be paying the entire expens uv their hobby, but not neseseruly spredding their own costs to the other hobyists. Or scamming the system, az woud be likely without such limitationz.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
Flash
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6001
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:09 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby Flash » Tue Jan 06, 2015 1:07 am

JO 753 wrote:
If Joe Sixpak walks into the gun shop and seez '200$ per month' added to every price tag, even if the gun iz only 50$, it will certainly influens hiz buying decision. He mite just chooz to go get a case uv beer insted uv continuing hiz injenius plot to 'accidentally' shoot hiz cheating slut wife.

This would be another step in the class war on poor Americans who would no longer be able to do the family shooting and massacres in public places just because they are poor.

I don't need to remind you JO that this is not what the country stands for. The founding fathers wanted everybody to have the equal opportunities killing sluts (by accident). Therefore, the second constitutional amendment which even doesn't mention a tax on killed sluts. ;)
When I feel like exercising, I just lie down until the feeling goes away. Paul Terry

User avatar
digress
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1692
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 2:11 am
Custom Title: doomer
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby digress » Tue Jan 06, 2015 1:17 am

Flash wrote:The founding fathers wanted everybody to have the equal opportunities killing sluts (by accident).


whoa now... not just the founding fathers, but modern fathers too. not everyone backs the constitution because of a founding faith.
  God is an idea.  

"For now, I am going to err on the side of freedom of speech..." -Pyrrho
"Every instance that has always existed is a piece of evidence that God is not needed." -yrreg
"I am not a concept..." -Confidencia

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12223
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby JO 753 » Tue Jan 06, 2015 1:53 am

You are correct, Flash.

Its another point that woud need to be addressed in the spesific lawz. Otherwize us poor Joe Sixpaks woud need to create even more elaborate accidents or risk getting our hedz crushed by ATM machinez.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12223
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby JO 753 » Fri Apr 17, 2015 12:52 am

Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby xouper » Fri Apr 17, 2015 2:12 am

JO 753 wrote:Bunch uv charts showing the cost frum Mother Jones.

As Lance would say, sorry, that is a biased source and totally unreliable. Hey, if Lance thinks that's a valid argument, then why can't I use it too?

In my experience, Mother Jones has a reputation for extreme bias on some things, and guns in particular. And while that is not a refutation, it is a reason to be skeptical of any of their arguments.

I'm not going to read it -- it's way too long -- unless you have a specific point you would like me to address.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12223
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby JO 753 » Fri Apr 17, 2015 2:25 am

Hey! You just C/Ped that frum another topic!

Iznt serving up recycled commentary agenst the rulez in this diner? Stale rehashed xoup! I shall leave no tip.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby xouper » Fri Apr 17, 2015 2:55 am

JO 753 wrote:Hey! You just C/Ped that frum another topic!

Since you admit to seeing it there, then why did you not post your link in that same discussion? Why repeat the same conversation here?

Yes, I know you cited a slightly different article from Mother Jones but it is almost exactly the same topic.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12223
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby JO 753 » Fri Apr 17, 2015 3:23 am

Kuz it iz different and a consise compelation uv charts about the monetary expens fits rite in here.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby xouper » Fri Apr 17, 2015 3:40 am

JO 753 wrote:Kuz it iz different and a consise compelation uv charts about the monetary expens fits rite in here.

OK, I'll accept that. Now, can I interest you in addressing the points I made in my original reply? They are no less valid in this thread than they were in that other thread.

viewtopic.php?p=457689#p457689

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12223
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby JO 753 » Fri Apr 17, 2015 7:43 am

You can ritefully say they are a biased source, but unless they are making up the examplez and statistics, it duznt matter.

And you shoud read at least enuf uv it to get the point. Saying you wont kuz its too long hurts your credibility.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby xouper » Fri Apr 17, 2015 8:50 am

JO 753 wrote:You can ritefully say they are a biased source, but unless they are making up the examplez and statistics, it duznt matter.

Finally, someone gets it. You are correct. That is the point I have been trying to get people here to admit. I have tried making that point directly, but no one buys it. So instead I tried using it against you, and now you complain.

Lance repeatedly uses the argument about bias for sources I cite so he can dismiss arguments he doesn't like. I'm glad you finally say it is not valid for him to do that. Well done, JO.

As for reading the article, If you have some particular point you want me to address, then quote something from the article. Otherwise, I have better things to do than read the whole thing.

JO 753 wrote:Saying you wont kuz its too long hurts your credibility.

Then I will cite several books that refute your position and if you decline to read them, then by your own argument, it hurts your credibility. Is that really where you want to go? Because if that's the game you want to play, I will cite so much stuff on this forum you will not want to read it all, and then I can say your credibility is hurt by your refusal to read it. Seriously? Let's not go there.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3078
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby ElectricMonk » Fri Apr 17, 2015 9:05 am

It would already be awesome if you had to register your gun ...

but there is still the (false) assumption that taxing gun ownership would violate the 2nd amendment...
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby xouper » Fri Apr 17, 2015 10:37 am

ElectricMonk wrote:but there is still the (false) assumption that taxing gun ownership would violate the 2nd amendment...

Why is that a false assumption?

Is it a false assumption that taxing churches would be a violation of the First Amendment?

Be careful how you answer that because there is a Supreme Court ruling on that very question.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3078
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby ElectricMonk » Thu Apr 23, 2015 5:36 pm

Well, the Supreme Court never rejected the tax on machine guns (NFA). And it has never been established that extending the tax to all firearms would be unconstitutional - it just hasn't been tried yet.

There is the completely bonkers case of Haynes v. United States, which basically states that you only have to register a weapon if you do not want to commit crimes - giving criminals a free pass to get illegal weapons.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12223
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby JO 753 » Sat May 02, 2015 8:36 am

xouper wrote:As for reading the article, If you have some particular point you want me to address, then quote something from the article.


I do not. The point iz to gain sum insite into the personal cost surviving shooting victimz bear. Nothing there to refute.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12223
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby JO 753 » Sat May 02, 2015 9:12 am

Over a bunch uv thredz, all the objectionz hav been razed and dismissed repeatedly on the issue uv gunz. Plainly we woud be much better off if gunz coud be eliminated from the sivilized envirement we hav attempted to create.

But the reality iz that they are so abundant everywhere, so entrenched in our lawz & culture and so many peepl want to keep theirz that it woud be impossible for the gummit, even with the support uv the majority uv the sitizenz, to simply ban them & round them all up.

Making a fundamental chanje to the perseptionz uv the pro-gun crowd iz the only way to turn the tide on the problem. The GIT puts all the monetary expense on them, motivating their lobbying organizationz to reduse that expense rather than their current mission uv remooving az much restriction on ownership & use az possible.

By itself, it coud gradually reduse the toll az ownership bekumz too expensiv and lawz are chanjed to make firing a gun a less attractiv option. Az mentioned in the OP, a concurrent jenerous buy back program woud acselerate the deproliferation, especially uv illegal gunz.

Sure there are detailz to be worked out. Granted, sum peepl hav a real need to be armed. Yes, it coud take decadez to reach shooting insident levelz that are normal in sivilized countryz. In spite uv theze detailz, I think its a fundamentally solid plan.

Now. Anybody got a better plan?
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
ElectricMonk
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3078
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 6:21 pm
Custom Title: His Beatitude

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby ElectricMonk » Tue May 12, 2015 5:44 pm

http://www.pire.org/documents/GSWcost2010.pdf

The Pacific Institute For Research estimates annual firearm injuries end up costing $645 per gun in America.
I've come up with a set of rules that describe our reactions to technologies:
Spoiler:
1. Anything that is in the world when you’re born is normal and ordinary and is just a natural part of the way the world works.
2. Anything that's invented between when you’re fifteen and thirty-five is new and exciting and revolutionary and you can probably get a career in it.
3. Anything invented after you're thirty-five is against the natural order of things.
- Douglas Adams

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12223
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby JO 753 » Tue May 26, 2015 6:37 am

From converstationz here, on other forumz and RL, I can understand why the petition haz gotten virtually no signaturez (aside frum the Care2 either not promoting it or maybe even actively suppressing it).

Anything thats more complex than 1+1=2 direct cauze & effect on a social issue iz beyond the amount uv brainpower they will devote to it. A stratejic compexity equal to Tic-tac-toe iz too much. I say 'proliferation' and eyez glaze over.

Its not that they arent smart enuf, its that they are programmed to reseive info from spesific soursez, so sumthing like this woud need to be brot down from the mountain by wutever political authority they pray to. A liberal or conservativ think tank woud need to jenerate a 2,000 paje report (99% bloat) and feed it into the propaganda machine. There it woud be broken down to a small selection uv sound bites and pumped into the media stream.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby xouper » Tue May 26, 2015 2:08 pm

JO 753 wrote:From converstationz here, on other forumz and RL, I can understand why the petition haz gotten virtually no signaturez ... Anything thats more complex than 1+1=2 direct cauze & effect on a social issue iz beyond the amount uv brainpower they will devote to it. A stratejic compexity equal to Tic-tac-toe iz too much. I say 'proliferation' and eyez glaze over.

My guess is that the lack of signatures on your petition is because your "proliferation argument" is rubbish. If people's eyes glaze over, it's because they recognize what a stupid argument it is.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12223
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby JO 753 » Tue May 26, 2015 9:28 pm

I dont agree. Nobody iz actually thinking far enuf to detrmin for themselvez if proliferation iz the problem. Their brainz are in suspend mode befor the 2nd syllable.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby xouper » Tue May 26, 2015 9:37 pm

JO 753 wrote:I dont agree. Nobody iz actually thinking far enuf to detrmin for themselvez if proliferation iz the problem. Their brainz are in suspend mode befor the 2nd syllable.

Free feel to speculate all you want about why people don't sign your petition. You have no way of actually knowing without asking them personally. And there is no reasonable reason I should accept your biased speculations.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12223
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby JO 753 » Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:31 am

Here iz an example uv the level uv problem solving going on. This iz an email I got from the Care2 organization:

JO,

Today, we are stunned and saddened by the horrific murder of nine people at Emmanuel A.M.E Church in Charleston, South Carolina.

Many of us are struggling with feelings of sadness, fear, and heart break, and we wanted to offer a chance to come together as a community.

A member of the Care2 community has created an image that expresses the love and support we want to send out into the world at this time. We want to give attention and energy to the victims, their families, and everyone trying to fight against the violence that occurred.

Charleston500x500.png


Please feel free to share this image on Facebook if it helps express your feelings in the aftermath of this tragedy. You may also read more about the story here.

At Care2, it is our honor to be part of this community for good. This community has spoken out against acts of violence and racism before, and today we must organize and lend our voices in support of those mourning in Charleston and across the country.

Thank you, sincerely, for all you do.


This iz the same organization wich haz the website I did the GIT petition on. Last time I looked it wuz still stopped at 33 signaturez. Completely ignored by the Care2 organization.

It makes me think uv a pen full uv sheep next to the lion display in a zoo. at feeding time, wun uv them will be lifted out and depozited into the open area where everybody can watch. The rest uv the sheep will just stand there bleating pitifully. Its all they can do.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12223
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby JO 753 » Tue Jun 30, 2015 3:27 am

Started a new petition with MoveOn.org. GIT2

I'm gessing it will do about the same az on Care2.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12223
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby JO 753 » Wed Aug 26, 2015 9:56 pm

I think gun proponents need to see this video.

12- 4 - 2015 video removed due to spam

It showz the fundamental flaw with the 'self defens' idea; the attacker haz the advantaj and then its too late kuz you are ded.
Last edited by JO 753 on Fri Dec 04, 2015 6:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby xouper » Wed Aug 26, 2015 11:40 pm

JO 753 wrote:I think gun proponents need to see this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPzYuilPpFo

It showz the fundamental flaw with the 'self defens' idea; the attacker haz the advantaj and then its too late kuz you are ded.

It's true there are sometimes scenarios when the victim does not have the chance to defend himself. That does not mean the victim is always defenseless. As you well know, I posted a whole thread full of examples of successful self defense with a gun. And you have posted a thread with examples that weren't.

What is your point, exactly? Where is the "fundamental flaw"?

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12223
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby JO 753 » Thu Aug 27, 2015 2:46 am

The flaw iz that the equal availability uv gunz to the bad guyz and good guyz produsez an unequal situation in wich the bad guyz hav an overwelming advantaj.

If you can find a way to prevent bad guyz frum uzing gunz, then therez no problem with gunz being everywhere. But that seemz like an impossibl task, so making gunz hard to get and costly to own for everybody iz wut can be dun insted.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby xouper » Thu Aug 27, 2015 3:35 am

JO 753 wrote:The flaw iz that the equal availability uv gunz to the bad guyz and good guyz produsez an unequal situation in wich the bad guyz hav an overwelming advantaj.

That sounds reasonable, until we look at the data, which seems to show the situation is not as bad as you suggest.

It's true that sometimes the bad guy has the advantage of surprise. The victims do not see it coming and cannot defend themselves. And then there are incidents such as the recent one on a train in France where three unarmed good guys took down a well armed bad guy.

You seem to be claiming the balance overwhelmingly favors the bad guys, but I cannot agree with that. I have not seen any data to support your opinion.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12223
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby JO 753 » Thu Aug 27, 2015 12:16 pm

It duznt take a statistical analysis to see the truth.

Everybody iz potentially the bad guy, so if everybody can get a gun, lawz that forbid crazyz and criminalz from buying gunz are worthless.

And owning gunz iz a poor defens agenst gunz. You only get to shoot back if you arent ded alredy.

There iz no practical defens to balans the equation. This iz the reality until sumwun invents a fors shield devise thats so small that you can clip on your belt and forget about it.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby xouper » Thu Aug 27, 2015 1:14 pm

JO 753 wrote:It duznt take a statistical analysis to see the truth.

To see the truth means looking at the data, the empirical evidence. You can speculate and hypothesize all you want but without looking at the evidence how can you know what the truth is? Aristotle made the same fundamental error when he said he could rationalize his way to the truth and there is no need for empirical evidence. Sorry, Jo, but I simply cannot agree with your argument here.

JO 753 wrote:Everybody iz potentially the bad guy, so if everybody can get a gun, lawz that forbid crazyz and criminalz from buying gunz are worthless.

Now you see the fallacy of such gun control efforts. Also, the alternative you seem to be proposing is to presume everyone is guilty until proven innocent. Sorry, Jo, but I cannot subscribe to that moral position.

JO 753 wrote:And owning gunz iz a poor defens agenst gunz. You only get to shoot back if you arent ded alredy.

Tell that to all the people who are still alive today because they had a gun for self defense.

There is no question that a gun cannot guarantee a successful defense, but being denied the option to have a gun if you want one leaves with you even fewer options for surviving an attack.

Official US government data show that armed victims are less likely to be injured than unarmed victims. That's what the evidence shows. You can bloviate all you want that that should not be the case, but it's hard to argue with reality.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12223
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby JO 753 » Thu Aug 27, 2015 5:42 pm

xouper wrote:Now you see the fallacy of such gun control efforts.


Now? I'v been saying this for yirz.

Also, the alternative you seem to be proposing is to presume everyone is guilty until proven innocent.


I'm like a Precrime ajent!

Tell that to all the people who are still alive today because they had a gun for self defense.


Tell us about the persentaj uv thoze casez in wich the bad guy didnt hav a gun.

There is no question that a gun cannot guarantee a successful defense, but being denied the option to have a gun if you want one leaves with you even fewer options for surviving an attack.


There is no question that a gun cannot guarantee a successful offens, but being denied the option to have a gun if you want one leavz with you even fewer optionz for surviving your attack.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10277
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby xouper » Fri Aug 28, 2015 1:21 am

JO 753 wrote:
xouper wrote:Now you see the fallacy of such gun control efforts.

Now? I'v been saying this for yirz.

OK, sorry, I forgot.    :oops:

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4740
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby Tom Palven » Fri Aug 28, 2015 9:53 am

There are no laws in Vermont preventing citizens from carrying concealed weapons or openly carrying a gun, and yet Vermont has very little gun violence:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Vermont
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_viole ... s_by_state
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12223
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby JO 753 » Mon Oct 12, 2015 11:43 pm

A similar basic idea is actually the law now in Seattle: Seattle Gun Violence Tax

Uv course, they are being sued by the NRA now.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10236
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Oct 13, 2015 12:07 am

The fallacy of gun control efforts?.....///// That notion that there has been any?

...........turning down the hyperbole........................>>> The ineffectiveness of gun control efforts /// Make them effective.

Much like the war on drugs. Why hasn't the war on drugs worked???===>Because they have never been effectively enforced. Best Demonstration: when USA started spraying the MJ crops in Mexico with paraquat poison to kill the plants but the Narco Drug Lords saved what tainted product they could and shipped it North. The drug war was being won as while Highs are nice, who wants to smoke poison? ..... but when a few upper class white kiddies of privilege died from the paraquat laced MJ...the war was over and it reverted to the class divisions it always has been.

If you want to control guns.....that is what you do and you man up for the harm that causes on the notion that on balance the effort is worthwhile.

Like any multicausal issue, the facts can be isolated and spun to totally cloud an electorate 60 % of which believe in Angels, Fairies and Leprechauns.

THE MAIN FACTOR: any working solution will take generations to solve because its as much about gun culture as it is about the guns themselves. First Step: Single Issue Voting in favor of gun control resulting in a President placing gun control judges on the Supreme Court. They reverse the Roberts Court making gun ownership contingent on service in a Militia (times change and all men don't need to be armed to regulate the Militia) and all private guns are removed from our society.

Course, Climate Change comes along and disrupts this goal.....but hey.... its doable..........over a few generations.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12223
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Gun Incident Tax

Postby JO 753 » Wed Oct 28, 2015 12:05 pm

I started another petition for it: http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/gun-incident-tax

Rite now it sez 'this petition haz not been reviewed' but it can be sined. Hopefully they will put sum effort into promoting it, unlike the previous organization.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.


Return to “Guns”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest