Skip to main content

View Diary: What you may not know about gun violence in Chicago (335 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Will we ever learn the lesson... (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RonV, FrankRose, bnk, Hangpilot, Dogs are fuzzy

    that prohibition -- be it of booze, drugs, or guns -- never works?

    Only when we honestly address the underlying issues of why people feel the need to be armed -- economic disparity, familial breakdown, the inability of some to see a future because they don't believe they have one -- will we make headway.

    We had a "national framework" for alcohol probition in the 1920s and '30s. We have a national framework today when it comes to drugs.

    Why would a national framework on guns work any better than those massive failures did?

    How about I believe in the unlucky ones?

    by BenderRodriguez on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 07:20:19 AM PST

    •  Of course it would work (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ChurchofBruce, cocinero, coquiero

      If you do not allow any grandfathering in of banned guns (Nancy Lanza's AR15 was banned under CT law but hers was grandfathered in) and you make the penalties for owning, say, assault weapons and high capacity mags very high (expensive in terms of money and jail time that is mandatory) it can work.
      Of course bad guys are going to still get and use guns but easy access to WMDs is not healthy for our society and everybody but the most ardent gun-fanatic sees it.  Australia could be a good example for the US to follow.  Their example is not perfect but the steps they took reduced their gun violence #s.

      Booze and Drugs (at least some drugs) were not created for the purpose of killing (although of course when used in excess they can and do kill).  Guns are killing machines, especially the military style civilian assault rifles that have become so popular in recent years.

      •  Actually... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dogs are fuzzy, annieli

        The 5.56 military round is designed to wound. The rounds used by deer hunters are designed to kill. In fact, it's written into most laws that rounds used for hunting game must deform and cause massive trauma.

        The AR is widely vilified despite virtually never being used for criminal purposes.

        If I was banning guns my list would be a lot more effective than yours. And that's not meant as offense. It's just that gun owners and veterans who are left leaning should be leveraged for this. If they aren't you'll get the absurdity of the old AWB which did nothing and was based on aesthetics.

    •  Guns are not booze and drugs (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      cocinero, coquiero, a2nite, Recall

      I can think of four reasons off the top of my head.  Further reflection should reveal more.

      1) Demand for alcohol and drugs is driven by addiction.  Demand for guns is not.  Any thoughts of a widespread black market for guns for ordinary people are unrealistic.  

      2) Alcohol and drugs are not expensive at the endpoint of sale.  Most guns already cost more than an iPad, and being illegal will send their price through the roof.  Ordinary folks will be priced out of whatever gun market there might be, and since they don't have an addiction to override that price, they won't be robbing people for the money to pay it.

      3) It is easy to hide one's use of alcohol and drugs.  Good luck using a gun without the neighbors hearing it.  You can drink or do drugs with friends together in a small room.  Can't do guns together without a little more space.  The more space you need, the harder it is to hide.  

      4) Alcohol and drug use do plummet with prohibition.  Even 80 years after the end of Prohibition, Americans still only drink a third of what we were drinking before the Volstead Act.  Likewise, gun use would plummet, and so would gun violence.  Which would be great progress.  

      Comparing guns to alcohol and drugs is facile and fallacious.  The NRA and its parroters need new excuses.

      Conservatives need to realize that their Silent Moral Majority is neither silent, nor moral, nor a majority.

      by nominalize on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 10:24:33 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  NRA parroter? Please. (0+ / 0-)

        I don't own a gun. I've never owned a gun. I have no desire to own a gun.

        I'm just being realistic, and I'll respectfully disagree with you.

        You mentioned "ordinary people" a few times in your comment, and I think that's part of the problem.

        It's not "ordinary people" I worry about having guns. It's criminals. And criminals will always find a way to get their hands on whatever it is they need, whether it's legal or not.

        How about I believe in the unlucky ones?

        by BenderRodriguez on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 11:03:17 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Ordinary people are the ones to worry about (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          coquiero, BenderRodriguez, Recall

          Especially those who are close to you.  The person most likely to do you wrong, from murder to theft to molesting your kids, is someone you already know and trust. Family, friends, acquaintances, social leaders... it's not a coincidence that every murder investigation starts with the family and friends: Most of the time, that's who did it.

          If you want to fear "criminals" out there, go for it.  But you should be quaking in your boots about the people in your life.  Otherwise, you're missing the forest for the trees.

          Conservatives need to realize that their Silent Moral Majority is neither silent, nor moral, nor a majority.

          by nominalize on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 01:07:37 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  That's a fair point but a different argument. (0+ / 0-)

            My belief is that if we want to solve this problem, we have to attack the underlying reasons that lead to gun violence.

            I also believe that criminals will always find a way to circumvent the law.

            We can respectfully disagree, but please understand, though, that calling me an "NRA parroter" is risible.

            Feel free to peruse any comment I've ever made on this site. If you find even one instance of me defending the NRA, I'll send you a six-pack of your favorite beer.

            How about I believe in the unlucky ones?

            by BenderRodriguez on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 01:27:27 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Point number 2 is especially applicable (0+ / 0-)

        to this diary. Most of the perpetrators (and victims) in the Chicago epidemic are low-income youths.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site