LogFAQs > #887743064

SushiSquid posted...

Okay. Let's say that's a valid reason to have guns. Can you honestly say that your paranoia about the government should outweigh the thousands of lives lost to firearms that wouldn't be lost if guns were less common and more regulated? And I'm not just talking homicide. Two thirds of gun deaths are suicide, and we know that if you make suicide harder, people are far less likely to kill themselves.

Is your paranoia about something that isn't likely to happen really worth thousands of lives? I think that anyone who honestly believes it is, is an ass hole.

Yes.

Because you're implying that gun control would automatically save thousands of lives and also negating the lives guns save.

Let's go back to Australia.

In 1995 prior to the gun ban, the homicide rate was about 18 in 100k. To about 13 in 100k in 2006. About 1/4 reduction in the homicide rate over 11 years.

The US homicide rate in 1995 was about 82 in 100k. In 2006, it was 6.1 in 100k. Roughly 1/4 reduction in the homicide rate.

I don't think you can definitively say that Australia's homicide rate dropped with any sort of significance solely because of the gun ban. Both homicide rates dropped at approximately the same right over the same amount of time. That doesn't necessarily imply that the gun ban DIDN'T help, but it also doesn't mean it did either.

Homicide is down across the board and has been trending downward for a long time. I believe it will continue to go down as we focus our efforts on other things.

And yes, my paranoia about the government is more important than some lives lost. I'm sorry. If you want to start down that road then you have to question every single thing you do. Is thousands of lives lost worth you not having to walk to work? Are thousands of lives lost worth you being able to cut up your chicken? Are thousands of lives lost worth implementing insane traveling restrictions?
---

"We're not even close" - Romans building Rome at the end of Day 1