America's gun-loving madness | Hacker News Reader

America's gun-loving madness

timelines.latimes.com

14 pointsdragonbonheur14 comments

Now the hot thing in the general media will be to talk about gun control instead of focusing on the real problem. What drives someone to go and kill people en mass. Why are the majority of these mass shootings happening at school? Why were people who are not mentally healthy getting access to weapons? This is a problem with society, not with gun control. Restrict access to guns and the problem will still be there. Sure the number of mass killings will decrease because it wont be as easy but just wait for that one person that is smart and dedicated enough to build a bomb. Or instead of doing mass killings they will be more covert and kidnap and stab people to death one by one. Gun control wont solve anything.

Gun control certainly won't solve everything, but that does not imply that it's not worth doing. You say so yourself - "Sure the number of mass killings with decrease because it won't be as easy". I agree, and that seems like a pretty decent thing to me. Sure gun control isn't a panacea, but anything that can help reduce the number of mass killings is probably a good thing.

Furthermore, I think a plausible argument can be made that restricting access to guns in general (especially handguns, assault rifles, and other non-hunting guns) will, over time, result in a cultural shift away from guns. We're talking a cultural change, so I'm aware that's a hard thing to predict, but I think it's certainly a possibility.

When I say killings I meant mass killings. I actually don't believe the amount of murder will decrease in the US. In fact I think it will increase just because of the fact that people wont be deterred by the idea of their victim being armed.

edit: was just about to edit into my post when I realized that I had actually posted it correctly.

Sure the number of mass killings will decrease

Isn't that good enough? Instead of worrying about your new loopholes, let's make it harder to kill a lot of people quickly.

What? Then we have laws like in the UK where people under 18 can't buy kitchen knives? Basing national policy on fear does not solve anything.

No, just forbid guns. Kitchen knives are made to cut food. Guns are made for killing.

"Twenty-two children injured. Versus, at current count, 18 little children and nine other people shot dead. That's the difference between a knife and a gun."

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/12/american...

Why do you think access to kitchen knives was restricted in the UK? When people stopped having access to guns they started using knives for crimes. Guns have legitimate uses for self defense. What the object is made for is irrelevant, anything can be used to kill someone.

Stay focused here. Nobody is talking about knives.

The point I was trying to make was that when guns were banned in the UK people started using knives to commit crimes. Then they restricted access to knives too. Then they installed cctv cameras on every corner. This is not the type of world I would want to live in.

Among the 15 states with the highest homicide rates, 10 have restrictive or very restrictive gun laws.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_control#Gun_safety_and_gun_...

Not that gun laws should be less restrictive, but it is a complex issue. It's not as easy as just banning guns. There are so many people with stockpiles of guns. I have been to been to people's homes where there are hundreds of handguns, rifles, and shotguns. Making access to guns more restrictive will have the unwanted side effect of growing the black market for guns. Gun policies in Europe and Asia have been successful because people in these countries have never historically had easy access to guns the way Americans do now. Shifting to more restrictive policies won't necessarily have the desired side effects. Gun proponents have often argued to me that allowing concealed carry without a permit would create a situation in which no one would attempt shootings for fear of people defending themselves. This might make sense for rural areas, but I don't think this would go well in densely populated areas like New York City.

The title of this submission is in really bad taste.

The article is no better. It's just FUD.

Are you saying it's not politically correct? ;-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland

It's a complicated issue. Assuming guns in the hands of criminals in the populace today, its probably better to have an armed citizenry than an unarmed populace.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com