Forum looks at gun violence as public health issue

[uberguy]

Why on earth would looking at what leads up to gun violence be a bad thing? The fact is, there lots of people with guns that shouldn't have them, and a gun is a very easy tool to commit violence with. Saying otherwise denies the reality of what a gun can do.

Have a few questions for you Mountainman38
Which people who shouldn't have them, how many, where are they?
Why would that be a public health concern? Is there medicine to cure this?
What would such a designation seek to accomplish ... specifically?
How could anyone have a rational discussion on this subject, if it starts by misleadingly lumping under the headline of 'Gun Violence' both violent criminal use of a gun together with suicide by gun, which share nothing in common in regards to correlation or causality except an inanimate object?

 

[edslhead]

I think if you use the term "gun violence" you might have a mental health issue.

 

[Mountainman38]

Well, when they realize it's not Gun Violence, it's Human Violence, maybe then they'll be able to come to some realistic resolutions. Sadly, too many keep trying to blame guns for the violence, when the minds of the humans inflicting the violence is the issue. So, who influenced this mind and allowed it to get so sick? How do we recognize and address this sickness, before it erupts in violence toward others or themselves?

I think you make a great point. The underlying causes of an outbreak of violence should definitely be studied.

That being said, when you have a tool like a gun that makes violence much easier to perpetrate, that will make thrse disturbed people act on their anger/depression much more readily.

All the posters in this thread who say guns have no influence on suicide, or violence, are delusional. A gun is a very easy tool to act on a rash impulse with.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

I respectfully disagree with the "A gun is a very easy tool to act on a rash impulse with." comment.
If someone acts on a rash impulse they tend to use whatever item is at hand.
Which brings up the point , that any item missed used can be dangerous.
A person who is acting with under a rash impulse is unsafe with anything or anyone.

Violence is violence no matter what item is used.
We need to focus on the cause , not the item used.
Andy

 

[Mountainman38]

Have a few questions for you Mountainman38
Which people who shouldn't have them, how many, where are they?

Really? You think that criminals who use firearms to commit their crimes with should have them? Or people who get them so they can feel powerful, and eagerly look for a chance to use them? I realize that's two different things, but neither group demonstrates responsible gun ownership.

Why would that be a public health concern? Is there medicine to cure this?

Because violence is a health concern. Your second comment is foolish.

What would such a designation seek to accomplish ... specifically?

What designation?

How could anyone have a rational discussion on this subject, if it starts by misleadingly lumping under the headline of 'Gun Violence' both violent criminal use of a gun together with suicide by gun, which share nothing in common in regards to correlation or causality except an inanimate object?

"Gun Violence" means just that - violence that involves the use of a gun. Criminals use them because they are a tool to take what they want, or to attack or destroy something they don't like. Suicidal people use them because they are a quick means to stop their pain. Well documented studies show that suicide is usually a short-term solution, which can be dealt with through counseling and help for the depressed person - as long as they can get past the quick solution of shooting themselves.

<broken link removed> from the Harvard School of Public Health says: "Though guns are not the most common method by which people attempt suicide, they are the most lethal. About 85 percent of suicide attempts with a firearm end in death. (Drug overdose, the most widely used method in suicide attempts, is fatal in less than 3 percent of cases.) Moreover, guns are an irreversible solution to what is often a passing crisis. Suicidal individuals who take pills or inhale car exhaust or use razors have time to reconsider their actions or summon help. With a firearm, once the trigger is pulled, there's no turning back."

I'm an avid firearm owner and shooter, and carry daily for self-defense. I just find it amazing that so many gun owners completely dismiss the reality that a gun is a powerful tool, that not only levels the field of combat for those who need to defend themselves, but also allows a quick and lethal response to what should often be a more carefully thought out event -- getting angry and pulling a gun on the loud neighbors when a few too many beers have been drunk, shooting a guy because he's taking a shower in the wrong house, or using a gun to kill yourself, when there's hope for a better life.

 

[Mountainman38]

I respectfully disagree with the "A gun is a very easy tool to act on a rash impulse with." comment.
If someone acts on a rash impulse they tend to use whatever item is at hand.
Which brings up the point , that any item missed used can be dangerous.
A person who is acting with under a rash impulse is unsafe with anything or anyone.

Violence is violence no matter what item is used.
We need to focus on the cause , not the item used.
Andy

Andy, I agree that impulses need to be controlled. If you'll read the Harvard study I linked above (and can ignore the "...and shot himself with a semiautomatic..." type nonsense), they address why a gun is much more dangerous for those with poor impulse control. Getting in a drunken fist fight, while messy, is hardly on the same level with shooting someone.

 

[Koda]

Really? You think that criminals who use firearms to commit their crimes with should have them? Or people who get them so they can feel powerful, and eagerly look for a chance to use them? I realize that's two different things, but neither group demonstrates responsible gun ownership.


Because violence is a health concern. Your second comment is foolish.


What designation?


"Gun Violence" means just that - violence that involves the use of a gun. Criminals use them because they are a tool to take what they want, or to attack or destroy something they don't like. Suicidal people use them because they are a quick means to stop their pain. Well documented studies show that suicide is usually a short-term solution, which can be dealt with through counseling and help for the depressed person - as long as they can get past the quick solution of shooting themselves.

<broken link removed> from the Harvard School of Public Health says: "Though guns are not the most common method by which people attempt suicide, they are the most lethal. About 85 percent of suicide attempts with a firearm end in death. (Drug overdose, the most widely used method in suicide attempts, is fatal in less than 3 percent of cases.) Moreover, guns are an irreversible solution to what is often a passing crisis. Suicidal individuals who take pills or inhale car exhaust or use razors have time to reconsider their actions or summon help. With a firearm, once the trigger is pulled, there's no turning back."

I'm an avid firearm owner and shooter, and carry daily for self-defense. I just find it amazing that so many gun owners completely dismiss the reality that a gun is a powerful tool, that not only levels the field of combat for those who need to defend themselves, but also allows a quick and lethal response to what should often be a more carefully thought out event -- getting angry and pulling a gun on the loud neighbors when a few too many beers have been drunk, shooting a guy because he's taking a shower in the wrong house, or using a gun to kill yourself, when there's hope for a better life.

What this comes down to is safe storage laws and due process (taking away gun rights from individuals without criminal record). Both are complicated subjects to solve without infringing on the rights of sane lawful citizens... And both fail big time at adressing the issue of providing mental health care to the struggling individual before he acts out. They are not solutions to the problem.

I would be more willing to consider them had the gun control community not sucessfully whittled down my constitutional right to practically nothing over the years. The evidence shows they continue to seek more and more infringements on my [sane and lawful] right and will not stop until it becomes so impractical to even own a gun there is no point in investing. Just go to ceasfires website and see what they are working on, just look at the gun laws in other restrictive countries that dont have the right, but still "allow" with permission... That is what they mean by "still have a right".

Until I can go anywhere I want, travel anywhere in out country, without any infringments on my right, and not be discriminated against like Im the criminal... Im not going to trust any open form to "gun violence" being anything other than anti gun, in the guise of safety and "common sense".

Common sense says lets talk about the solution to violence and suicide, and leave the gun out of it.

 

[Caveman Jim]

That's not going to happen. We are training our kids to outright lie if anyone asks if we have guns.

Exactly because our kids are not Savvy enough to deal with the left-leaning school counselors, principles or the what not idiots in charge of public education these days. We as parents are to answer for our children because that is our job but the left-leaning liberal progressives are sneaky bastards and you have to watch them at every angle especially in public schools!!! You see what they did when you have to fill out a form at the DR's office asking if there are guns in the house.... Snakes in an office!!!

 

[Mikej]

What this comes down to is safe storage laws and due process (taking away gun rights from individuals without criminal record). Both are complicated subjects to solve without infringing on the rights of sane lawful citizens... And both fail big time at adressing the issue of providing mental health care to the struggling individual before he acts out. They are not solutions to the problem.

I would be more willing to consider them had the gun control community not sucessfully whittled down my constitutional right to practically nothing over the years. The evidence shows they continue to seek more and more infringements on my [sane and lawful] right and will not stop until it becomes so impractical to even own a gun there is no point in investing. Just go to ceasfires website and see what they are working on, just look at the gun laws in other restrictive countries that dont have the right, but still "allow" with permission... That is what they mean by "still have a right".

Until I can go anywhere I want, travel anywhere in out country, without any infringments on my right, and not be discriminated against like Im the criminal... Im not going to trust any open form to "gun violence" being anything other than anti gun, in the guise of safety and "common sense".

Common sense says lets talk about the solution to violence and suicide, and leave the gun out of it.

Not just yeah. But HE!! YEAH!

The thing is fire arm possession is protected in The USA by the second amendment. As is free speech, and freedom to practice the religion of your choice, and not have any religion recognized by the government. And freedom of the press and a right to peacfull protest.

I do agree with @Mountainman38 that a fire arm is a quick easy tool to do bad things with. But so are cars, knives, drugs and other objects. Those objects are NOT mentioned in the amendments. When's the last time someone mentioned a law limiting the media's reporting? Banning the Muslim religion in the USA. Rounding up and jailing people for peaceful protest?

As far as firearms go, "They" will have to find a better way, that doesn't involve these INSANE infringements to the 2nd Amendment.

 

[etrain16]

What this comes down to is safe storage laws and due process (taking away gun rights from individuals without criminal record). Both are complicated subjects to solve without infringing on the rights of sane lawful citizens... And both fail big time at adressing the issue of providing mental health care to the struggling individual before he acts out. They are not solutions to the problem.

I would be more willing to consider them had the gun control community not sucessfully whittled down my constitutional right to practically nothing over the years. The evidence shows they continue to seek more and more infringements on my [sane and lawful] right and will not stop until it becomes so impractical to even own a gun there is no point in investing. Just go to ceasfires website and see what they are working on, just look at the gun laws in other restrictive countries that dont have the right, but still "allow" with permission... That is what they mean by "still have a right".

Until I can go anywhere I want, travel anywhere in out country, without any infringments on my right, and not be discriminated against like Im the criminal... Im not going to trust any open form to "gun violence" being anything other than anti gun, in the guise of safety and "common sense".

Common sense says lets talk about the solution to violence and suicide, and leave the gun out of it.

Not just yeah. But HE!! YEAH!

The thing is fire arm possession is protected in The USA by the second amendment. As is free speech, and freedom to practice the religion of your choice, and not have any religion recognized by the government. And freedom of the press and a right to peacfull protest.

I do agree with @Mountainman38 that a fire arm is a quick easy tool to do bad things with. But so are cars, knives, drugs and other objects. Those objects are NOT mentioned in the amendments. When's the last time someone mentioned a law limiting the media's reporting? Banning the Muslim religion in the USA. Rounding up and jailing people for peaceful protest?

As far as firearms go, "They" will have to find a better way, that doesn't involve these INSANE infringements to the 2nd Amendment.

Both of you!

Fact is that freedom comes with inherent risk. Our country was not founded on security and safety, but rather rights. The right to choose to live your life as you wish, the right to succeed or fail of your own free will, the right to say and believe what you want without some government trying to restrict that freedom. It seems more and more people wish to sell that freedom away for a perceived sense of 'safety'. Well guess what, that sense of safety is as much of a fairy tale as Little Red Riding Hood.

Freedom is messy, risky and dangerous. But that doesn't mean you're at risk at all times. It also comes with a need for folks to have a personal sense or responsibility, and to punish those that, through acts of evil, harm others. But we have lost our way. We no longer wish to punish bad people, but to understand them, all the while their victims pay the price. We seek to find safety by chipping away at rights, such as those afforded under the 2nd amendment, because THAT will now make us safe. But it never does, as can be easily shown in the most gun-restrictive parts of the country. Instead we lose our rights while the bad and the mentally deranged are allowed to wander the streets, unrestrained, and we are left wondering how we protect ourselves.

Not me. Those rights belong to me. They are, as was so eloguently spelled out by our founders, "inalienable". While our constitution may state certain rights, those rights were ours before being written down. And, they were written down to make one thing clear - those rights belong to the people, not the government - and the government is to keep their hands off of those rights. I find great difficulty in understanding people who think their rights include taking mine away. I cannot agree with such a person that would use their power to take my rights away to satiate some unhappy or unsafe "feeling" they may have. They have NO right to do so, regardless of whatever perceived threat they are trying to run away from. I for one, would rather stand and fight those threats than surrender my rights, my weapons and retreat to some phony safe space.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Andy, I agree that impulses need to be controlled. If you'll read the Harvard study I linked above (and can ignore the "...and shot himself with a semiautomatic..." type nonsense), they address why a gun is much more dangerous for those with poor impulse control. Getting in a drunken fist fight, while messy, is hardly on the same level with shooting someone.

I liked your post 'cause you cite a source. ( thank you )
And I think you are trying to get to the same place , but ...
I still disagree that a gun makes violence easier.
I have been around violence almost all my life.
I have caused violence to happen.
The violence that I have experienced would have been caused no matter if a gun was at hand or used or not.
In some cases the person committing the violence had easy access to guns and they were not used.

The only case ( for me ) where having a gun made the violence "easier" was in the Army ... where part of my job was to create and commit violence.

As for common "everyday violence" , I think that if a gun made it easier to commit violence , we would see more violent acts... given the amount of guns out here in America.

I mostly have a issue with the term "Gun Violence" ... as if it is somehow more violent than other violence.
If someone is hurt from a fist , club , knife , gun or whatever item ... it makes no difference to me.
The same if they are killed with any item.
Hurt is hurt and dead is dead.
I see only violence , nothing needs to be added.

Again these are only my thoughts ... Not that they really matter to anyone but me.
Andy

 

[Mikej]

As for common "everyday violence" , I think that if a gun made it easier to commit violence , we would see more violent acts... given the amount of guns out here in America.

Agreed!

Both of you!

Fact is that freedom comes with inherent risk. Our country was not founded on security and safety, but rather rights. The right to choose to live your life as you wish, the right to succeed or fail of your own free will, the right to say and believe what you want without some government trying to restrict that freedom. It seems more and more people wish to sell that freedom away for a perceived sense of 'safety'. Well guess what, that sense of safety is as much of a fairy tale as Little Red Riding Hood.

Freedom is messy, risky and dangerous. But that doesn't mean you're at risk at all times. It also comes with a need for folks to have a personal sense or responsibility, and to punish those that, through acts of evil, harm others. But we have lost our way. We no longer wish to punish bad people, but to understand them, all the while their victims pay the price. We seek to find safety by chipping away at rights, such as those afforded under the 2nd amendment, because THAT will now make us safe. But it never does, as can be easily shown in the most gun-restrictive parts of the country. Instead we lose our rights while the bad and the mentally deranged are allowed to wander the streets, unrestrained, and we are left wondering how we protect ourselves.

Not me. Those rights belong to me. They are, as was so eloguently spelled out by our founders, "inalienable". While our constitution may state certain rights, those rights were ours before being written down. And, they were written down to make one thing clear - those rights belong to the people, not the government - and the government is to keep their hands off of those rights. I find great difficulty in understanding people who think their rights include taking mine away. I cannot agree with such a person that would use their power to take my rights away to satiate some unhappy or unsafe "feeling" they may have. They have NO right to do so, regardless of whatever perceived threat they are trying to run away from. I for one, would rather stand and fight those threats than surrender my rights, my weapons and retreat to some phony safe space.

Dang it @etrain16 !! You need to get some of that ^^ stuff in an editorial, or something! That kind of writing needs to be read by the masses! Preaching to the choir here doesn't do anything but get cheers and likes.

 

[etrain16]

Agreed!



Dang it @etrain16 !! You need to get some of that ^^ stuff in an editorial, or something! That kind of writing needs to be read by the masses! Preaching to the choir here doesn't do anything but get cheers and likes.

Well thank you, I appreciate the kind compliment.

Honestly I wouldn't know where else to share it. The way I see it, by posting my thoughts here, it ends up being practice for those times I get to speak to folks face to face. I do better in those talks when I've already run through the thoughts and written them down before. True, this is an echo chamber for the most part, but it's good to see what kinds of statements folks like and what statements they don't. I had my fair share of 'misfire' posts along the way

 

[etrain16]

I mostly have a issue with the term "Gun Violence" ... as if it is somehow more violent than other violence.
If someone is hurt from a fist , club , knife , gun or whatever item ... it makes no difference to me.
The same if they are killed with any item.
Hurt is hurt and dead is dead.
I see only violence , nothing needs to be added.

Agreed. I am bothered by that term as well. The main reason I take issue with it is that they go out of their way to use the term "gun violence", while never using the term "knife violence", "hammer violence", "fist violence", "vehicle violence", etc. They want to make "gun violence" stand out over all other types of violence, as if they are less worthy of concern. This is negative spin toward guns and gun owners, plain and simple. If they were consistent, they would consistently apply the same/similar term to all kinds of violence. But then, we know they aren't really interested in other types of violence, because, in the end, they want to take our guns. It really is that simple.

 

[Koda]

this is the kind of BS I am talking about...
NY Army Veteran Charged with Possessing Pistol Magazines Faces 21 Years in Prison - Uncle Sam's Misguided Children

a mag perfectly legal in my state makes you a felon in another state. This is the result of a forum looking at "gun violence" as a public health issue.

 

[woody06]

Blaming guns for violence is like blaming food for obesity. Maybe we should start a "Ban food to prevent obesity movement".