Can we please just admit that maybe gun control is a good idea finally?

As has been a theme with Harris's recent writings I found that article beyond infuriating. I won't go into much detail as I'll inevitably end up posting a wall of quotes, but in brief, he mixes legitimate points and evidence in with wild emotional appeals - "Imagine being one of the people in the Houston video trapped in the office with no recourse but to hide under a desk. Would you really be relieved to know that up until that moment, your workplace had been an impeccably gun-free environment and that no one, not even your friend who did three tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, would be armed?" - including frankly bizarre links to youtube videos, as if this is all equally valid and convincing in a conversation about state policy. He also affirms various NRA talking points as being the "truth" on the basis of empirical data, somehow failing to realise that it's the interpretation and response to that data which is at issue. For someone whose career is built on being (perceived as) impeccably rational this is confusing at best.

Not that it's of great surprise to me, given his long history of mixing reasonable criticisms of Islam with "either this ideology dies or we do" rhetoric reminiscent of Hitchens at his very worst, except without the latter's eloquence. It's a pity given how eminently reasonable much of what he has to say about atheism and so forth is.

Well, naturally, I understand what you wanted to express and just let me reiterate, that my reply was in no way meant to come across as chastisting or anything like that.

It's just that there are tons of more less ludicrous ideas concerning Switzerland floating around. Even in publications and from people which really should know better, like for examples the NYT, I've never, not once, read anything which came close to accurately reporting what the situation in Switzerland actually is. So I hope it's understandable if my tone seems to be quite a bit more snarky/exasperated/what-have-you than might be called for.
See for example my second post in this thread; I've heard that trope countless times and invariably from people which seemingly have never talked to a Swiss person, been in Switzerland or even the continent itself. It's still utter and despicable bullshit.

And the term "realtively low gun violence" does need some defining in my opinion. It certainly isn't especially low when compared to other so-called first world countries:
png (source: http://www.informaticsblogs.com/author/mark-reid/ )

Which is simply the best source in english that I managed to scrounge up on the fly. Just one caveat however: Quite a lot of these deaths are due to suicides, which I still view as a problem of easy access to guns, as potentially preventable deaths. So your mileage may vary, on how to interpret this.

I've actually bought and read the end of faith. Oh, how I rue that day...I've also had my problems with Hitchens, for example, but in his case there were at least, to my mind, good stuff that he did to make up for his failings. But when it comes to Harris, I've thought from the beginning that he was an selfabsorbed asshat and stuff like that article, or exchanges like this debate between him and Bruce Schneier (http://boingboing.net/2012/05/27/bruce-schneier-explains-securi.html) have done nothing to change my mind.

Apparently it is possible to feel sympathy for Piers Morgan. If he is interviewing Alex Jones.

It really isn't. Morgan is awful and was awful in that interview.

Now there is a guy who may have been exposed to too much lead as a child.

Harris has posted a follow-up "FAQ" to his article. Previously I thought he was worth following as an exposure to different and interesting perspectives, but this has convinced me he's too disingenuous to bother with. He starts with:

What a perfect storm of self-importance and condescension. Out of the hundreds of responses he's had the most salient point he can identify is that some people just don't want to do the hard thinking about violence. They'd prefer to carry on living in their naive bubbles, and that's fine, because Sam is willing to confront this difficult issue head on.

I think he has a degree in philosophy but it's quite evident that it's had little effect. A founding principle of philosophy (while not always followed!) is that when presented with objections to your argument you should identify and respond to the strongest case against your position, even to the point of interpreting said objections in the most favourable and persuasive way you can, and then attempt to refute that.

And just to show how rigorous he is he makes a remark about high levels of rape in Sweden and Australia as compared with the US, failing to note that this discrepancy is to do with rates of reporting rather than rates of actual rape. He also claims, sincerely, that guns are an equalizer in violence done by men to women. He quotes a massive interview with a couple of UK thugs and insists that the problem is they live in a gun-free society so can beat up whoever they like, and if their targets had guns that would be better. He even suggests that the UK could start from scratch in arming only the good guys, because "What if the penalty for selling or possessing a firearm illegally were life in prison?" Uh, yea, and what if the penalty for stabbing someone in the kidneys was life in prison? Might better law enforcement be a more sane approach to mitigating thuggery than arming the populace?

Okay sorry for venting, I'll stop reading his articles now.

Just in case anyone has any lingering doubts that we've collectively gone through the looking glass on this issue, I refer you to this WaPost story.

Short summary: Gregory uses what appears to be a 30-round magazine as a prop in his interview with NRA's LaPierre. Apparently it's still illegal to possess magazines/clips that hold ten or more rounds in DC. DC police are investigating. Gun rights advocates are lobbying for Gregory's arrest and prosecution. NRA is at least internally consistent in arguing that he shouldn't be prosecuted but can't resist dig about how this demonstrates "how silly some of these laws are."

This story brings to mind the theory that an armed society is a polite society, since you never know who's packing. Apparently this was one cutting-in-line incident too far.
It also occurs to me that if Mr. Benn had not had a gun, this would have been a fistfight, and while you can hurt each other pretty badly without weapons, the other folks in line would most likely have been able to intervene.

Judge certifies murder charge in drug store shooting
http://hamptonroads.com/2013/01/judge-certifies-murder-charge-drug-store-shooting
By Louis Hansen
The Virginian-Pilot
© January 9, 2013
A Norfolk General District court judge certified a murder charge today against a man accused of a fatal shooting inside a drug store.

Prosecutors accuse Bernell Benn, 42, of murder in the August shootout inside a Rite Aid that left Ramon Colorado dead. Police say the two men argued over a spot in line.

Colorado, 42, was struck several times, according to testimony. Benn was also wounded in the incident.

John D. Levin, Benn's attorney, maintained his client acted in self defense. Benn had a valid concealed weapon permit and no criminal record, court files show.

Prosecutor Patricia O'Boyle argued that Colorado was running away from Benn during the attack.

Another argument-in-line-leads-to-a-shooting incident. Here in Canada we just say "Sorry, eh?" to each other...

Also,



Violence plays role in shorter U.S. life expectancy
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=168958972
Associated Press
Washington — The United States suffers far more violent deaths than any other wealthy nation, due in part to the widespread possession of firearms and the practice of storing them at home in a place that is often unlocked, according to a report released Wednesday by two of the nation's leading health research institutions. [National Research Council and the Institute of Medicine.]

(emph. mine)

Of course it's important to note that this is only one part of the shorter life expectancy.

Link to actual study:
http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2013/US-...-Perspective-Shorter-Lives-Poorer-Health.aspx

VP Biden has been talking to gun control advocates and it was brought up that perhaps President Obama could bypass Congress and use an executive order to ban assault weapons, limit magazine capacity, etc.

I follow James Yeager, the owner-operator of a firearms training facility, Tactical Response, on YouTube and I was a bit unnerved about his response to VP Biden. This video would be ammunition (pun intended) for the gun control lobby.

That video is private.

I guess he took it down after he cooled off. Basically he said that if the US government (I think he threw in "dictator" as well) tries to ban/take away his guns there will be a civil war and he'll be one of the first to fire the first bullet.

James Yeager follows up after calming down and editing the first video (he removed the "I'm going to start shooting people"). I'm a bit disappointed because I like his training and survival videos -- he's allowed to voice his opinion but when he calls out for a possible armed rebellion it goes too far.



(Edit: Added an updated video from James Yeager)

Clearly the proper response to the government fiddling with outlier guns is to revolt.

I've been seeing that a lot in other places. They don't seem to realize how unhinged it makes them sound.

Today in GUN NEWS:

School shooting in Cali during Biden's speech on gun control:
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/10/16449709-two-reported-shot-at-california-high-school?lite

Youtube gun enthusiast found shot at his place of business:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/09/keith-ratliff-fpsrussia-dead_n_2439284.html

I think I'm finally at my breaking point on Facebook. The de-friendings will begin immediately. So many people are posting about Sandy Hook being a False Flag event based on a vimeo video tribute supposedly posted before the shooting and a WordPress blog posting about a fundraiser for the children killed with a datetime stamp of December 10th, 2012.

I mean, these are mostly IT people, people who should be saying "Umm, anyone can hack/fake a timestamp in a database" but instead are talking about needing to overthrow the government.

The zombie apocalypse cannot come soon enough.

Which is why people who think guns are useful at defense against other guns are fucking idiots. If you're the second one to pull out the gun, you're already dead.

We all just need robot gun turrets on our shoulders that are capable of identifying and neutralizing threats. A society with shoulder-mounted robot gun turrets is a polite society.

Because, apparently, I need to atone for some awful sin, I have set up a gigantic RSS feed of newspapers from all over the country and filtered it for "gun" and "shoot". I tweet unique results to http://twitter.com/gundeaths for inclusion in his/her twitter stream. I am seeing all kind of ridiculous and/ or heartbreaking shit and have mostly restrained myself from posting them here. It surprises me how many people survive serious gun wounds. With just a bit less medical care, the death rate would be much higher. I read somewhere that after 10 years of war, the state of the art in gun wound care has gotten really good even here in the civilian world.

The human body can take a lot of damage. Former congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords is a great example how someone can survive a headshot and recover quite well. In the 1986 Miami shootout that left two FBI agents dead, the two bank robbers were mortally wounded (one was shot in the neck and was temporarily unconscious) but kept firing.

There's a reason why stop an attacker it's suggested to use the Mozambique Drill, where you double-tap to the sternum (hit the heart) and one at the bridge of the nose (to sever the brain stem).

Note: I'm not trying to glorify gun violence but just stating factoids.

Yeah, the whole "the best defense against a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun" spiel is getting old. Reality is at odds with that hypothesis. Columbine had an armed guard. Virginia Tech had an entire police department. Fort Hood was a military base. In none of these cases did the presence of "good guys with guns" deter disaster.

Has anyone in the media or politics addressed mental illness or will that cost too much to deal with?

The Onion continues to dominate American discourse on this issue.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/gorilla-sales-skyrocket-after-latest-gorilla-attac,30860/

Well, you know what they say: an armed society is a society with lots of drunken barroom shootouts.

That article is old; since then it's come out from security camera footage that it all started over a spilled beer. True story.

Whatever happened to good ol' fist fights?

Guns.

Apparently there was another attempted school shooting out in California. I say "attempted" because the teacher talked the student into putting the gun down.

:P

Sorry! I scanned for it and missed it!

No biggie, I do the same thing at times. :)

Also: WHAT DO YOU MEAN A SHOOTING WAS STOPPED BY PEOPLE WHO WERE UNARMED?!

I think you mean that after 10 years of LA, the state of the art in gun wound care has gotten really good even there in the military world.

Don't worry, the people trying to protect the guns are mostly the same people trying to take away the health care. That number should skyrocket.

I'm curious: Will Americans revolt over their 1st Amendment rights taken away by the government?

Wow, I'm no psychiatrist but that Yeager dude looks really unhinged.

"If everyone with a gun would just shoot themselves there'd be no more gun problem" - George Harrison

I do think you would see riots and all that if the government actually tried to take away our 1st amendment rights. And I mean a lot further then what is already going on, it would take things like closing down newspapers and other media critical of the government and other such overt measures.

It's extremely doubtful. The government censored the living hell out of everything in WW1, WW2, and interwar anarchist hysteria, including actually shutting down newspapers and deporting and arresting people for their political views and nothing else. It got nearly that bad during the Cold War in relation to communism. There was virtually no armed pushback.