Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[delphonso]

Anyone who intends to shoot has a responsibility to be trained in its use but its mere presence does not necessarily lead to more violence.

I haven't reviewed the evidence in a bit, but I'm quite certain on a statistical level this isn't correct - the presence of guns in any altercation escalate the violence (true of any weapons, but guns also increase the range at which that violence can escalate). Not trying to rev up the gun debate again, but I think it bares mentioning that the idea of "guns as prevention of violence" isn't supported by much evidence.

[Random_Dragon]

Personally I would suspect that whether open carry will escalate or de-escalate any given situation will likely be a variable situation, depending on the mindset of whatever people are present and what their intentions are.

Basically you might have people looking to start something who would be deterred by obvious signs that a would-be target would not be worth the risk, while in other situations displaying a firearm will escalate tensions, or worse paint a giant "shoot me first the instant I look away" sign on the person carrying it.

[delphonso]

The point being, statistically, it will escalate things more often than de-escalate. A net loss, overall.

[Rolan7]

The point being, statistically, it will escalate things more often than de-escalate. A net loss, overall.

I don't dispute this.  But isn't it still a good thing if it reduces overall crime, in aggregate?  (Against minorities, in this case)

[Starver]

/remembers the fuss about the Black Panthers...

[delphonso]

The point being, statistically, it will escalate things more often than de-escalate. A net loss, overall.

I don't dispute this.  But isn't it still a good thing if it reduces overall crime, in aggregate?  (Against minorities, in this case)

Sure, if there's evidence of that. I suppose a risk-benefit analysis is necessary to say an increase in violent confrontations is enough for a decrease in property damage/theft. I'll have to do some browsing for any studies that look at this. Personally I would set the bar quite high, as I don't value property much (though I'll admit it's been a near decade since I was last mugged and don't own any property of my own).

I think Starver is alluding to something we all wouldn't be surprised to hear: if minorities can lower crime in their area by use of displaying firearms, I would expect police violence to close the gap and remove any 'advantage.'

[Frumple]

I mean, if you were worried about property theft in the US, you'd abolish/fetter the police and string up the CEOs -- far as I'm aware, police take more value from people than every other type of theft combined... if you don't count wage theft, which eclipses all the rest of it pretty comfortably. So, y'know. If you want to prioritize things appropriately...

[Andux]

I mean, if you were worried about property theft in the US, you'd abolish/fetter the police and string up the CEOs

Spoiler: Uncle Karl approves. (click to show/hide)

[da_nang]

Kenosha trial update:

Gun charge has been dismissed, and YT has suspended the stream I was watching.

[martinuzz]

Justice is dead

[LordBaal]

Justice is dead

Another casualty??? Jesus how many people did that kid shoot?

[martinuzz]

He didn't shoot her he raped her to death

[LordBaal]

To be fair he is just the defendant. The whole court has the fault here.

[Vector]

For those of us who have been enjoying "Bodily Autonomy: Abortion Edition" I present for your reading pleasure "Bodily Autonomy: Hysterectomy Edition." Enjoy!

[da_nang]

Kenosha trial update:

A jury of 12 has been randomly selected from the pool of 18 and is deliberating, and the judge sounds different today. Possibly sick.