I dont think environmental factors relinquish people from personal responsibility.Originally Posted by bu villain
I dont think environmental factors relinquish people from personal responsibility.
I agree. But likewise, personal responsibility does not absolve us from addressing environmental factors. If you really care about reducing crime, you need to address all the factors. Fortunately, it's not an either/or choice, we can address both.
I dont disagree here either.... but there's a variety of different ways to deal with it... and that's where the disagreement begins.
Sure but perhaps we can find some areas of agreement. I know you are in favor of harsher sentencing but that is more on the personal responsibility side. Do the crime, do the time and all that. What are your suggestions for the environmental factors? I have listed some of mine.
I think they do to an extent.
Well, with all due respect, you're a moron.
Then you have a warped mind. You cannot justify an unprovoked criminal behavior based on an economic environment without declaring that personal responsibility is a null and void concept.
As such, explain how creating legislation that targets law-abiding citizens that already are practicing personal responsibility, and for the vast majority, are in an economically stable environment, is going to improve crime statistics that are generated by those who show a disregard for the laws created, since per your thinking, they no longer should feel that they should be held personally accountable for their actions..
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
I didn't even say what middle was. Lol
An emotional response.We need to redirect the focus away from the tools utilized, and towards the actual cause - people.
A gun cannot kill without some person utilizing it that way - neither can a knife, rope, saw, car, bed sheet, anvil, or any other inanimate object. Until you address the human element, anything else is a futile and emotional response.
You're right.
Oh wait....you're not. My mistake. I'm right again. Son of a bitch
http://www.udel.edu/chem/C465/senior...ing/enviro.htm
I could care less what your stupid ass read in some book. I lived through these environments and they did nothing more than grow my disdain for people who use them as an excuse.
If child XY grew up in a very low income household, in a poverty stricken neighborhood, with no positive adult influences, is it possible that child XY might be predisposed to a life of crime?
Would you agree with me that most guns used in violent crimes are manufactured by some sort of business that manufactures guns?As such, explain how creating legislation that targets law-abiding citizens that already are practicing personal responsibility, and for the vast majority, are in an economically stable environment, is going to improve crime statistics that are generated by those who show a disregard for the laws created, since per your thinking, they no longer should feel that they should be held personally accountable for their actions..
"Predisposed" - not the best choice of a word, but if you mean that repeatedly having negative influences would have a high potential to influence the individual to think that crime was normal, then yes, absolutely; however, that does not absolve the individual from being held legally accountable in court, should the individual get caught.
Absolutely. Are you suggesting that if all guns were removed from society, that all violent crime would be removed from society? If so, why did we have violent crime before the invention of firearms?
Again, the gun bill in question does not remove all firearms, so exactly what measureable results can we expect from its passage?
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
Then once again, you are beneath intelligent discussion. I'll let you know when we dumb back down into a scope you can understand.
I understand environmental factors more than you ever will from reading about them in a psychology class. You're a pseudo intellectual liberal apologist. You have no personal experience with any of the things you pretend to know about.
just want to throw this out there, http://www.jrsa.org/ibrrc/background...rearmUsage.pdf
This child's concept of personal responsibility may be skewed. You didn't say legal accountability.
Nope. Not suggesting complete removal at all.Absolutely. Are you suggesting that if all guns were removed from society, that all violent crime would be removed from society?
Even if he felt that he was not responsible at all for his actions due to a lack of ethical indoctrination, unless he had a medical, psychological, or similar condition that could be substantiated in court, the legal system would find him responsible for any actions he chose to take. Personal responsibility is recognized as freedom of choice, freedom of action, and the freedom to bear the results of action. You already know this, of course.
Why do you keep avoiding answering my earlier questions, since you do not suggest a complete removal?
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
So living in one neighborhood in one state makes you an expert on environmental factors of criminal behaviors? LOL. Pretty small sample size you got there.
Done responding to you since you're obviously either trolling, or not serious.
I know its possible to overcome environmental factors. You seem to believe that people have no control over their lives and are simply victims of circumstance.
His sample size is still bigger than the sample size of your telephone survey that had 43 responses.
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
Not avoiding anything.
So, you accept that someone has to make guns used in violent crimes, and someone has to sell them.
Suppose for a minute, for simplicities sake, that Smith and Wesson makes all things you can pull a trigger on
The guy running S&W is a good businessman and runs a pretty tight ship, so he makes 500k guns a year, and sells 500k a year. He's always very close on his numbers. Lets assume that 5000 of these make their way into the black market every year.
So what if one year he made 500k guns and people didnt buy any, and he only sold 300k? He's gonna make less guns next year correct?
So, the following year, S&W only makes 300k guns. Since the supply has changed here, do you think more or less guns will make it to the black market?
You are either assuming that he is selling to the black market, or you are not - but you are not making that clear.
No smart business owner would sell weapons on the black market, and risk losing his license and going to prison, so the answer would be - the same amount, the 5000 that you stated. Supply and demand for the black market would not change, as those individuals are not purchasing firearms from the owner. You cannot say that the legal production and consumption of goods regulates the black market - they do not share the same supply and demand. That's not how economics works.
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
I'm not saying everyone as a whole. I'm talking about a single factor. Now you've introduced an external pressure. People can overcome bad situations, a dad can come into the picture, the kid could get interested in reading instead of hustling.
Im not assuming he's selling them to the black market. I simply said "make their way"
You did agree that the guns had to be manufactured from somewhere, correct? The supply on the black market HAS to directly or indirectly come from S&W, correct?No smart business owner would sell weapons on the black market, and risk losing his license and going to prison, so the answer would be - the same amount, the 5000 that you stated. Supply and demand for the black market would not change, as those individuals are not purchasing firearms from the owner. You cannot say that the legal production and consumption of goods regulates the black market - they do not share the same supply and demand. That's not how economics works.
This is how economics works, bud.
You really don't have a grip on the reality of economics.
The manufacturers sell legally. Their legal sales volume does not directly impact the supply or demand of the illegal market.
If you wanted to argue a trickle-down effect, then you would see the supply eventually lower, but not likely in our lifetime. Then, the cost would rise on illegal weapons as the supply was lowered; however, that would make it more likely for another gun distributor to enter the market with imported firearms, or for a private maker to produce them, seeing the possibility of profit.
Use some critical thinking.
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
Now, back to my earlier question that you haven't answered.
The FBI says that in GA for 2011, there were 522 murders, using 370 total firearms, of which:
326 were handguns
16 were rifles
16 were shotguns
12 were of unknown firearm type
61 were with knives
83 were with other weapons
8 were with hands, feet, etc.
The FBI does not break down the rifle number into which were bolt action, semi-auto, hunting, or assault-style, but let's assume that all of them were with AK's. Can you do the math and tell me if you are more likely to get murdered with an AK, or a knife?
In fact, for the entire US, DC, and the VI, there were 12,664 murders in 2011, with 8,583 with firearms.
323 of those were with rifles, but there were 1,659 with knives, and 728 with hands and feet. Perhaps we should cut off the hands of everyone instead?
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
Then you don't agree that guns aren't manufactured somewhere, and that somehow the black market manufactures its own guns, is this what you're suggesting?
You know every time you tell me I don't grasp economics, I get a little chuckle, right?
You clearly lack the ability to read and comprehend.
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
You and I both know if I answer this, it's just gonna force you to accept an inevitable fact that you don't want to accept. You know this right?
Please answer. I will just continue to laugh at your desperation to ignore the truth.
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
...to which you will inevitably backpedal on
You still haven't answered my original question. Seems that you are afraid that you will need to backpedal.
I give facts, you ignore them. That's pretty standard for you.
You think that legal supply from a single manufacturer is going to affect the black market? Learn:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/hot-guns-fu...0#.UWdRvPjD99A
"According to the Justice Department, more than 1.4 million guns were stolen or lost between 2005 and 2010." Where do you think that these go to?
"According to the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (ATF), more than 4,000 gun stores and retailers have been targeted in the last three years, with 74,000 guns reported stolen or lost."
"An estimated 230,000 guns per year are stolen in home burglaries and property crimes, according to a study by the Department of Justice."
These guns are stolen - taken out of the legal and economic market - and sold via the black market - then used in crimes. No matter how you attempt to spin it, the fact is that your scenario was a bogus one from the start.
Now, for the sake of argument, let's assume that we somehow eliminated this problem, and we only have to deal with straw man purchases and corrupt FFL dealers - and yes, we can both agree that there are still quite a few of those, although it has declined since the 1990s with the increased restrictions and enforcement - both of which I support fully, as I suspect you do as well.
Even then, the purchaser is a criminal, and would get his hands on a weapon regardless of where it came from. It's just a tool - the problem is the person. And most of what they are using are handguns, not rifles. Look at the FBI statistics - there were only 16 murders using ANY rifle in GA in 2011. The bottom line is that this is the highest number possible for that period of time. Focusing on banning one type of rifle is a waste of time and resources when that is a tiny percentage of the overall problem.
Last edited by David88vert; 04-11-2013 at 07:34 PM.
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
Ok. I'm busy at work, so I'm not gonna fact check you at the moment. We'll assume you're able to do basic research. So we'll assume for your sake all of that's true: there were 60 murders with long guns, and 150 murders with knives and hands in the year 2011.
If we're trying to examine a policy that takes affect over time, would it or would it not be important to compare data from 2011 to a time before 2011?
Look up FBI Table 20 - those are the statistics. That will help you.
2011 - Table 20 - FBI — Table 20
There were 16 murders with rifles and 16 with shotguns - that is 32 if you can do basic addition, not 60. Even if you add in the 12 of unknown type, that is 44, not 60.
61 were with knives, and 8 with hands and feet. That's 69, not 150.
You might want to take basic math and reading again.
And here is 2010 - FBI — Table 20
Total murders - 527
With Rifle - 19
With Shotguns - 21
With knives - 64
Pretty consistent.
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
EVERY TIME you post a link, you confirm what I say! LMAO.
If S&W only makes 200k guns down from 500k, that means WalMart ordered less guns...right?
Can you not understand that taking them from stores is only a portion of all of the new weapons that make their way into the black market each year? Many are stolen from homes, and have been purchased legally many, many years before.
Like I said, you're desperate.
Ok, go back to work. You making money and providing for your family is much more important that discussing something that neither of us can control.
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
I do admire your persistence though. Even when you're clearly wrong, you never give up. I like that. Keep going though, it's fun! Lol
I'm giving FBI statistics, you aren't providing anything, and I'm wrong? LOL
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
One year isn't enough. Lets go back to say, 1992
And I rounded up for YOUR convenience.
You said 60+ knives, 80+ other weapons, and 8 hands. Sound close enought to 150 to me. This is what YOU posted! Lol.
I already said the numbers were correct! The way you're interpreting data is flat out wrong. Lol.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote