Yet another gun thread

[Matabiri]

Because there aren't enough...

I found that this article (http://crookedtimber.org/2006/02/21/mr-saturday-night-special/) changed my mind, a lot. The point in this paragraph particularly:

Eugene Volokh has made the excellent point in a post I’m too lazy to find that polarization on gun control issues mirrors that of abortion issues. Pro-choice activists are opposed to any restrictions on abortion partially because they believe that the pro-life activists intend to chip away at the right until nothing is left. Why? Because their ultimate goal is a total ban on abortion. This is accurate as to the intentions of the core group, but not accurate with respect to the many citizens who favor some restrictions on abortion but do think first-trimester abortion should be legal. Pro-choice activists sometimes come off as maniacs who favor infanticide for this reason. Similarly, the NRA opposes even quite reasonable-sounding gun legislation because it sees the ultimate goal of the gun-control partisans as having Hitlery and the UN come to your house and take away your daddy’s rifle while your son looks on, sobbing at his father’s impotence and rage. Again, this isn’t totally inaccurate with regard to the most avid anti-gun campaigner (though less true than the beliefs about the pro-lifers), but it can alienate ordinary citizens who think that some restrictions on gun ownership are an obviously good idea.

Being British, I fall into the camp of not really understanding the fuss about guns in the US (and, on various visits, I have never seen any gun violence, apparently unlike the author's foreign acquaintance...). I also generally have a lot more respect for those who come out and say, "I like guns; they're fun," than those who go on about the second amendment, because I feel they're more honest about their intentions. But reading the argument put like this suddenly made the polarisation and posturing make sense.

So does this hold true? Are a lot of Americans in favour of some restrictions on gun ownership, but afraid that it's a slippery slope to gunlessness?

[Ed]

I've made this point repeatedly here. Negotiating in good faith with a true believer who knows that they are RIGHT is pointless. While you may come away thinking that you have a deal, all you have done is give the proverbial inch.

I think that most reasonable people would agree that late term abortion is morally repugnant and that there is a place for parental notification laws yet pro life people just want abortion outlawed. You would be foolish to encourage them. A similar situation applies with gun control.

Firearms legislation and abortion are two areas where I maintain unalterable solidarity wityh my white brothers.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

For me, the complaint I have with the abortion analogy is that the stated intention of firearms laws is to reduce crime. Different states have different levels of restriction. Given this, it should be possible to determine whether the said laws are effective in their intent. If they are, they should be considered. However, I have yet to see an anti-gun activist show where they are effective. Instead, they use the argument that the existing ones are not restrictive enough, and that is why they fail to have an effect.

Of course, this is far different from abortion, as the anti-abortion movement's stated intent is not crime reduction.

Since I lived in Ohio until a year ago I will use it as an example. About a year and a half ago there was a concealed carry law up for vote by the state reps. The anti-gun movement argued that the proliferation of firearms by citizens would cause an increase in gun violence. They ignored the evidence that 45 other states already had concealed carry laws of one form or another and that those states had not seen an measurable increase in either the proliferation of firearms, or of firearm violence.

The anti-gun movement has started taking a different tact though; I read this weekend that they are now arguing for a repeal (I believe) of Florida's concealed carry law. Not because of an increase in gun violence, or crime, but because out of state people who can not carry concealed firearms in Florida may become the focus of criminal activity because the criminals know it is far less likely that they will be armed.

[Matabiri]

For me, the complaint I have with the abortion analogy is that the stated intention of firearms laws is to reduce crime. Different states have different levels of restriction. Given this, it should be possible to determine whether the said laws are effective in their intent. If they are, they should be considered. However, I have yet to see an anti-gun activist show where they are effective. Instead, they use the argument that the existing ones are not restrictive enough, and that is why they fail to have an effect.

Surely the point is not the stated intention at the time of argument, but the overall desired endopint, in which case the analogy still holds up?

I know people who claim that they want to reduce abortion rates (by reducing the limits) because "it's distressing for the women involved".

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Surely the point is not the stated intention at the time of argument, but the overall desired endopint, in which case the analogy still holds up?

I know people who claim that they want to reduce abortion rates (by reducing the limits) because "it's distressing for the women involved".

What is the desired endpoint of the abortion laws though? I think that is where the analogy breaks down; the desired outcome of passing the legislation is different for the two topics. *shrug*

[elaine]

The anti-gun movement has started taking a different tact though; I read this weekend that they are now arguing for a repeal (I believe) of Florida's concealed carry law. Not because of an increase in gun violence, or crime, but because out of state people who can not carry concealed firearms in Florida may become the focus of criminal activity because the criminals know it is far less likely that they will be armed.

Wow. Do you have a link for this? Do you know if there is an increase in crime on visitors, or if the anti-gun crowd is making a bs claim and is ignorant of Florida's laws regarding permitting? Florida recognizes the CCW permits of many states and issues them to non-residents. I'm a Colorado resident who just received my permit to carry from Florida.

[Matabiri]

What is the desired endpoint of the abortion laws though? I think that is where the analogy breaks down; the desired outcome of passing the legislation is different for the two topics. *shrug*

Depends who you're talking to - I assume for some it's the banning of all abortions, and similarly some people would like to see all privately owned guns banned.

The point of the article, I think, is that the "slippery slope" mentality applies in both cases; giving in on small points would not result in a relaxation of the pressure to give in a little more.

[Ed]

What is the desired endpoint of the abortion laws though? I think that is where the analogy breaks down; the desired outcome of passing the legislation is different for the two topics. *shrug*

No. The objective of the two groups is similar: to outlaw that with which they disagree.

[Yjacket]

IMO the situation is very well summed up by Ed -
No. The objective of the two groups is similar: to outlaw that with which they disagree.

That said I will add a comment or two because I wonder how many of the firearm control advocates, especially those who post to various threads/boards, are really aware of just how much regulation exists concerning the acquisition of firearms. Are these folks aware of the 1934 National Firearms Act, the 1968 Gun Control Act, and the 1986 Gun Owners Protection Act? These are all applicable in all states and territories of the United States. When making a new firearm purchase from a licensed dealer, a legal purchase in other words, the buyer's background is checked and the FBI approves the transaction. Are these control advocates aware of this? What one person might consider a reasonable new regulation another will consider an infringement because the existing regulations apply to the law-abiding and are minimally enforced upon the criminals of our society.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

re elaine: Not finding a link at the moment, was in the last issue or two of Guns & Ammo magazine

re Matabiri: slippery slope is always a risk in debating of course.

re Ed: I agree that that may well be the desired outcome for both groups, but what is the stated goal for wanting that outcome?

[money]

Wow. Do you have a link for this? Do you know if there is an increase in crime on visitors, or if the anti-gun crowd is making a bs claim and is ignorant of Florida's laws regarding permitting? Florida recognizes the CCW permits of many states and issues them to non-residents. I'm a Colorado resident who just received my permit to carry from Florida.

That's funny. Even ten or twelve years ago my very pro-gun stepdad talked about violence against tourists in Florida as a reason for... well I don't remember his exact point other than everyone should be able to carry a gun to protect themselves. I think he got his info that carjackers were looking for people in rent-a-cars since they knew tourists couldn't carry from the NRA or somesuch.

So this is an interesting tactic by the anti-gunners...

[Ed]

re elaine: Not finding a link at the moment, was in the last issue or two of Guns & Ammo magazine

re Matabiri: slippery slope is always a risk in debating of course.

re Ed: I agree that that may well be the desired outcome for both groups, but what is the stated goal for wanting that outcome?

Anti abortionists want to outlaw abortion.

Gun control people want to ban the private ownership of firearms.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

That's funny. Even ten or twelve years ago my very pro-gun stepdad talked about violence against tourists in Florida as a reason for... well I don't remember his exact point other than everyone should be able to carry a gun to protect themselves. I think he got his info that carjackers were looking for people in rent-a-cars since they knew tourists couldn't carry from the NRA or somesuch.

So this is an interesting tactic by the anti-gunners...

It's being short-circuited though. A number of states do recognize CCW licenses from other states and there is currently federal legislation in the works that would force states to do so.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Anti abortionists want to outlaw abortion.

Gun control people want to ban the private ownership of firearms.

If that is the case, can we say that the slippery slope fallacy is not in use and that the polerized sides of the debate are reflective of the real issue?

[elaine]

It's being short-circuited though. A number of states do recognize CCW licenses from other states and there is currently federal legislation in the works that would force states to do so.

I haven't heard about this legislation. Do you have a link on this? In the unlikelyhood that this passes, I wonder how it would affect San Francisco's ban on handguns.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

I haven't heard about this legislation. Do you have a link on this? In the unlikelyhood that this passes, I wonder how it would affect San Francisco's ban on handguns.

That one I do have a link for:
http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?ID=189

[Yjacket]

In the unlikelyhood that this passes, I wonder how it would affect San Francisco's ban on handguns.San Francisco's ban initiative to ban handguns is already undergoing court challenge and the expectation is that it will be overturned. But the rest of your questions is best answered by noting that I as a resident of another county with a valid CCW can carry in San Francisco since the initiative exempts me from the ban.

[elaine]

San Francisco's ban initiative to ban handguns is already undergoing court challenge and the expectation is that it will be overturned. But the rest of your questions is best answered by noting that I as a resident of another county with a valid CCW can carry in San Francisco since the initiative exempts me from the ban.


So there's not a handgun checkpoint at the city limits, like there is a vegetation checkpoint at the state line :-)

[Jon_in_london]

As a British gun owner, I long for an organisation that will support all of us shooters and Will. Not. Give. An. Inch.

It is the only way to stop shooting beoming extinct in this country.

[elaine]

Back to the original purpose of the thread. When one talks about where most Americans stand on an issue, regardless of the issue you'll find that they are somewhere in between the extremes that usually get the press. Most people aren't absolutists.

[elaine]

As a British gun owner, I long for an organisation that will support all of us shooters and Will. Not. Give. An. Inch.

It is the only way to stop shooting beoming extinct in this country.


Maybe I should join the NRA.

[Yjacket]

So there's not a handgun checkpoint at the city limits, like there is a vegetation checkpoint at the state line :-)A firearms checkpoint at the city limits could do nothing about a firearm I might be carrying as long as I have a valid CCW issued by my county of residence that listed that particular firearm.

At the Nevada and Oregon state lines the veggie checkpoints are gone.

[bob_kark]

Anti abortionists want to outlaw abortion.

Gun control people want to ban the private ownership of firearms.

I beg to differ, many gun control advocates really only want firearms out of the hands of criminals. Of these advocates, many want assault weapons/rifles and handguns banned. I'm sure there are some who want any type of firearm banned, but they would be in the minority of gun control advocates, at least in my experience.

[Luke T.]

When I lived in Virginia if you carried a gun it was required to be concealed. If you carried it tucking into your belt under your shirt and accidentally exposed it, you could be charged with "Brandishing".

[Luke T.]

Passing a law and then waiting to see its effect is not exactly reliable. A lot depends on the enforcement level of that law and the number of people who choose to violate it.

[Ed]

I beg to differ, many gun control advocates really only want firearms out of the hands of criminals. Of these advocates, many want assault weapons/rifles and handguns banned. I'm sure there are some who want any type of firearm banned, but they would be in the minority of gun control advocates, at least in my experience.

In that case I am a gun control advocate.

The distinction is between those type of people and those that want to eliminate firearms incrementally.

The concept of "assault weapon" is a PR ruse to generate sympathy for an ugly segment of firearms that are indisingushable from more accepable firearms in any meaningful way. The concept of "assault pistol" has been floated to nip away from that segment. The latest meme floated is "sniper rifle" which, as far as I can tell, includes any high powered hunting rifle with a scope. It goes on and on. I would like to hear of any gun control gropup that publicly states that they are in favor of private gun ownership. Not Brady, not Handgun Control. I think you are simply wrong on this.

[Ed]

As a British gun owner, I long for an organisation that will support all of us shooters and Will. Not. Give. An. Inch.

It is the only way to stop shooting beoming extinct in this country.

Take a leaf from the NRA. It is organization and money that makes it happen.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

...
The concept of "assault weapon" is a PR ruse to generate sympathy for an ugly segment of firearms that are indisingushable from more accepable firearms in any meaningful way. The concept of "assault pistol" has been floated to nip away from that segment. The latest meme floated is "sniper rifle" which, as far as I can tell, includes any high powered hunting rifle with a scope.

Quite correct.


...I would like to hear of any gun control gropup that publicly states that they are in favor of private gun ownership. Not Brady, not Handgun Control...
Indeed, HCI has made their intentions and desired end goals crystal clear.

[Jon_in_london]

Take a leaf from the NRA. It is organization and money that makes it happen.

Unfortunately there is massive division between the (British) NRA (who are mostly concerned wth traget shooting) and BASC (who are mainly concerned with hunting). Until the two strands of British shooting are brought together there is precious little hope of anything like the US NRA.......

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Unfortunately there is massive division between the (British) NRA (who are mostly concerned wth traget shooting) and BASC (who are mainly concerned with hunting). Until the two strands of British shooting are brought together there is precious little hope of anything like the US NRA.......

Plus you are further down the slope (as it were) and are not only struggle to maintain rights, but to regain rights.

[shecky]

Firearms legislation and abortion are two areas where I maintain unalterable solidarity wityh my white brothers.

WTF?

[Ed]

WTF?

Got a problem with that, honkey?


Don't make me go all Tookie on you:D

[WildCat]

A firearms checkpoint at the city limits could do nothing about a firearm I might be carrying as long as I have a valid CCW issued by my county of residence that listed that particular firearm..
You are seriously misinformed. If you get caught w/ a handgun within Chicago city limits (suppose you're just traveling on I-94) you will be charged w/ felony gun possession, even if it is broken down, inaccessible and unloaded. Your CCW will mean nothing.

Yes, it's stupid.

[Ed]

A firearms checkpoint at the city limits could do nothing about a firearm I might be carrying as long as I have a valid CCW issued by my county of residence that listed that particular firearm.

At the Nevada and Oregon state lines the veggie checkpoints are gone.

provided there is reciprocity. The NRA ILA site has current laws.

[elaine]

A firearms checkpoint at the city limits could do nothing about a firearm I might be carrying as long as I have a valid CCW issued by my county of residence that listed that particular firearm.

At the Nevada and Oregon state lines the veggie checkpoints are gone.
Guess I really didn't think that post through. And it's been years since I've been out there. Had no idea the checkpoints were gone.

[Yjacket]

Originally posted by WildCat -
You are seriously misinformed. If you get caught w/ a handgun within Chicago city limits (suppose you're just traveling on I-94) you will be charged w/ felony gun possession, even if it is broken down, inaccessible and unloaded. Your CCW will mean nothing.

Originally posted by Ed -
provided there is reciprocity. The NRA ILA site has current laws.

I am suggesting that both you back up a bit and slow down. The sub-topic was maybe setting up an inspection station at the city limits of San Francisco to determine if someone is carrying a firearm. Since I have a CCW issued by the county I reside in California the San Francisco handgun ban is meaningless, to me. First because SF cannot preempt state and second because the ban notes just that. So I do not care about what happens in Chicago, except you might take some time to look up the 1986 Gun Owner Protection Act. As to reciprocity - don't need it from one county to another in California because even though the CCW is issued by one county it is a State permit.

[Yjacket]

Guess I really didn't think that post through. And it's been years since I've been out there. Had no idea the checkpoints were gone.

Actually I should be more careful with what I say. The stations are still there but automobiles no longer need to pull in and stop. Produce haulers do. I believe that is all to old stations but I know it that way on I-5 at Oregon State line and on US 395 just north of Reno.

[Ed]

I am suggesting that both you back up a bit and slow down. The sub-topic was maybe setting up an inspection station at the city limits of San Francisco to determine if someone is carrying a firearm. Since I have a CCW issued by the county I reside in California the San Francisco handgun ban is meaningless, to me. First because SF cannot preempt state and second because the ban notes just that. So I do not care about what happens in Chicago, except you might take some time to look up the 1986 Gun Owner Protection Act. As to reciprocity - don't need it from one county to another in California because even though the CCW is issued by one county it is a State permit.

I really have no idea what the situation is or will ne in SF but I can absolutely garentee you that no carry permit from any NY county is good in the 5 counties that make up NYC.

[Yjacket]

I really have no idea what the situation is or will ne in SF but I can absolutely garentee you that no carry permit from any NY county is good in the 5 counties that make up NYC.Thank you. The sub-topic is and was the San Francisco ban on ownership and carrying of handguns inside the city limit. As I have said, my CCW issued by the county in which I reside overrides that action in SF because it is a State permit. Also the authors of the initative recognized this situation and specifically noted that in the initative. I am not trying to inform you of the situation in New York or that in New York City and my comments in no way ever should have been applied there because I specifically stated "San Francisco."

[Ed]

Thank you. The sub-topic is and was the San Francisco ban on ownership and carrying of handguns inside the city limit. As I have said, my CCW issued by the county in which I reside overrides that action in SF because it is a State permit. Also the authors of the initative recognized this situation and specifically noted that in the initative. I am not trying to inform you of the situation in New York or that in New York City and my comments in no way ever should have been applied there because I specifically stated "San Francisco."

If I slit my wrists will you take that as suitable contrition?

Sheesh.

[Yjacket]

If I slit my wrists will you take that as suitable contrition?

Isn't that somewhat on the messy side? Also somewhat drastic IMHO.

[Matabiri]

If that is the case, can we say that the slippery slope fallacy is not in use and that the polerized sides of the debate are reflective of the real issue?

Yes, sorry - I didn't intend to mean the fallacy was in use, but that the absolute positions were taken as a response to a genuine perception of such a slope.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Yes, sorry - I didn't intend to mean the fallacy was in use, but that the absolute positions were taken as a response to a genuine perception of such a slope.

Fair enough. Heck I'm just enjoying being on a forum where an intellectual debate about this issue can take place rather than just seeing people foaming at the mouth and using every logical fallacy in the book. It's a breath of fresh air.

[Pope130]

Matabiri,
Thanks for bringing this point up. Firearms is one of those topics (along with abortion) where extreme views are all that are heard. Moderates are attacked by both sides.
Myself, I'm a gun owner, shooter, former firearms instructor and retired military gun toter. I am absolutely in favor of the right of the individual to arm himself to defend his person, property and neighbors. I am also in favor of controls on the manufacture, sale and transfer of arms to assist in crime control. Reasonable controls need not interfere with legitimate ownership and use.
If I expressed those views in either a pro-gun, or anti-gun forum I'd be condemed as a radicle. We are fortunate to have a forum where moderation goes (relatively) uncriticised.

Robert Klaus