McCarthy said it will be "hard" not to hit Pelosi with gavel

[zapatos]

16 minutes ago, Arete said:

carrying concealed every day is not a rational decision

Citation? That sounds like you are projecting what seems rational to you.

20 minutes ago, Arete said:

I'm unsure what emotion other than fear of attack that would motivate one to carry

I'm unsure how you are using the term "fear". When I hike by myself I carry an emergency shelter, a knife, and a way to start a fire. I just want to be prepared in case of a situation comes up, even though I think the chances of it happening are remote. Would you say I carry those things not because I'm rational, but because I'm fearful?

I also had life insurance when I was in my mid-20's, even though the chances of a sudden death was remote. Was that irrational and fearful?

[Arete]

4 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Citation? That sounds like you are projecting what seems rational to you.

Citation. A CCW is twice as likely to injure the carrier than be used in self defense. Your emergency shelter etc is not twice as likely to hurt you as to be used in the event of an unexpected night in the woods. Ergo it is rational to carry a spare tire, emergency shelter etc, but not rational to carry a firearm for self defense. 

[zapatos]

4 minutes ago, Arete said:

A CCW is twice as likely to injure the carrier than be used in self defense.

That's an average, right? I suspect some dolts are likely to injure themselves taking the gun out of the safe and don't even know it, while the chances of others injuring themselves (e.g. ex-military) are next to zero. Neither one of those people are acting irrationally by carrying. One doesn't know they are being risky, the other knows they are not.

I'll certainly accept some people are irrational and fearful, but I believe making a general statement that people carrying guns are irrational needs a little more support.

 

[TheVat]

I think there's a semantic gap here in using the term fear.  One can have a rational fear without being fearful.  If a black neighbor of mine, who happens to be from St Louis, moves back to his old neighborhood there he plans to have a gun, on the basis @zapatos outlined.  He's not fearful, but has solid intel that reports police service in that area is spotty, slow, and sometimes notably lacking in rapport with black people. And so he's doing what a rancher would do living on a range with multiple mountain lions and coyotes and a very distant sheriff.  Few question the rancher's reasoned choice of protective tools, but anyone who buys a gun for urban protection their decision is often interrogated as if they might turn into Travis Bickle or they are at least questioned on their rationality and fearfulness.  And I can see why the stakes of gun misuse are indeed higher in a crowded urban setting than in the middle of stixville.

I think the problem for my neighbor, and many other Americans, is that we personally didn't create the world.  We would love to get rid of all the guns, convert police into compassionate social workers and conflict resolvers, and take walks at midnight wherever our fancy took us.  But not everyone is on that same page (how I envy the Japanese). If I were stuck, by circumstances, in a dangerous neighborhood, I might choose differently than I have, and arm myself.  I would be sorry to do so, but at some point I might be asking why I should let myself be mugged or raped (if female) so that I can embody the ideals and virtues of gun-free life.  Many people are not very fit, or large, or fast runners or adept in martial arts, so carrying that burden of moral purity is difficult for them.

[CharonY]

3 hours ago, zapatos said:

Sure, I can see where it is bewildering. And I think the bewilderment primarily comes from living in a country with no guns.

That is not it, actually. There guns in much of Europe, sometimes a lot of them. We have yearly marches from the shooting clubs, for example (yey guns and alcohol). But the difference is that it has a very specific niches: hunting and sports. 

Outside of expected events any gun would be seen as an extreme oddity and even in high-crime areas folks would not think much about arming themselves. I know folks who eventually got a gas pistol around the time in the 90s when neo-nazis were patrolling the neighborhood, but got rid of it pretty quickly. As a whole, even in rather sketchy areas at least locals have a higher sense of security and safety. And if things go downhill most would think about the need to call the police rather than thinking about arming themselves.

American on the other hand think it is more rational to deal with things proactively just in case, as you mentioned and rationalize things very differently. I think back to my chainsaw comment, it is not that there are no trees, but elsewhere folks do not think frequently about the need to chop them down quickly.

[toucana]

10 hours ago, Arete said:

I think this is the crux - in most developed countries, if someone felt they needed to carry a concealed firearm to the grocery store to protect themselves, they'd probably be diagnosed as clinically paranoid and be given therapy and meds. 

 

Here in Blighty, they'd also be spending the next two years of their life in jail for the criminal offence of possessing a firearm and ammunition. Ditto for Russia, China (PRC), N. Korea, and a whole host of other countries too. I feel that Americans as a whole simply do not grasp how atypical ((and quite how deranged) their attitudes towards firearms and gun violence really are. It seems to come as a perpetual surprise to them to discover that their rates of firearm related homicides are generally 25 time higher than anywhere else in the world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

[dimreepr]

3 hours ago, toucana said:

Here in Blighty, they'd also be spending the next two years of their life in jail for the criminal offence of possessing a firearm and ammunition. Ditto for Russia, China (PRC), N. Korea, and a whole host of other countries too. I feel that Americans as a whole simply do not grasp how atypical ((and quite how deranged) their attitudes towards firearms and gun violence really are. It seems to come as a perpetual surprise to them to discover that their rates of firearm related homicides are generally 25 time higher than anywhere else in the world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

The thing is, here in blighty were only 25 steps behind that culture and 'the coming storm' will affect us all; we can't blame the culture we're apart of, only the value we put on revenge...

[Arete]

9 hours ago, CharonY said:

Outside of expected events any gun would be seen as an extreme oddity and even in high-crime areas folks would not think much about arming themselves

Combine it with stand your ground/castle doctrine and it's completely whackadoo. 

In most places, including the US a legitimate defense against a murder charge is justifiable homicide. If you genuinely acted in self defense, it's unlikely a prosecutor would develop the case and in cases where it's not clear cut, you have your day in front of a jury. But SYG/CD means the state can't even prosecute. Just say you feared for your life and you have a UNO reverse card for murdering someone ala Joe Horn/Byron Thomas/Cordell Jude. Totally crazy, fear driven legislation. 

[zapatos]

8 hours ago, CharonY said:

That is not it, actually. There guns in much of Europe, sometimes a lot of them. 

Sorry, I didn't mean to say there were "no" guns. 

8 hours ago, CharonY said:

But the difference is that it has a very specific niches: hunting and sports. 

Outside of expected events any gun would be seen as an extreme oddity and even in high-crime areas folks would not think much about arming themselves.

What you stated here is what I was trying to point out. Guns here are not an oddity and would not be seen as such.

 

8 hours ago, CharonY said:

And if things go downhill most would think about the need to call the police rather than thinking about arming themselves.

People use the tools at their disposal. People here also call the police, and that is because it is a tool at their disposal. If there are emergency call boxes, or roving neighborhood watch groups, people would utilize them. In America one of the tools is guns, and so we use that tool also.

And it is not as if all Americans are armed. Seventy percent of American adults do not own guns. (https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/06/22/the-demographics-of-gun-ownership/) Most Americans are not walking around armed.

It feels as if other Western countries see Americans as a breed apart when it comes to guns. I suspect we are basically the same, and if it was you who had a Constitutional Right to bear arms like ours and we had restrictions like yours, that this conversation would be playing out in reverse. Neither group is more right/wrong/moral/rational/pragmatic, it is just that we live in different environments. 

We eat biscuits and gravy, while others like that vile Marmite and Vegemite.

[TheVat]

3 hours ago, toucana said:

 I feel that Americans as a whole simply do not grasp how atypical ((and quite how deranged) their attitudes towards firearms and gun violence really are. It seems to come as a perpetual surprise to them to discover that their rates of firearm related homicides are generally 25 time higher than anywhere else in the world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

Many of us do grasp this only too well.  In fact, more than half of Americans will usually poll as favoring stricter gun laws, while recognizing that the 2nd Amendment (which politically is presently impossible to repeal or modify) limits how far this can go.  Most Americans aren't deranged in their attitude so much as resigned to the inherent derangement of applying rural eighteenth century thinking to 21st century urban society.  Over yonder in Limey Land it may not be apparent how many Americans strive for "the art of the possible" in getting some gun control on the books, an eternal uphill struggle due to the way our present electoral system favors conservatives and big money donors and lobbyists.  

What America really has is a canyon sized gap between the informed and the ignorant.  

And yes, SYG is just nuts.  Common sense dictates that if you can retreat and not shoot someone, that is a better option than possibly ending someone's life.  SYG empowers the flawed judgment.

[Arete]

4 minutes ago, zapatos said:

It feels as if other Western countries see Americans as a breed apart when it comes to guns. I suspect we are basically the same

Except: 

[zapatos]

3 hours ago, toucana said:

It seems to come as a perpetual surprise to them to discover that their rates of firearm related homicides are generally 25 time higher than anywhere else in the world.

Really? Americans I know are quite familiar with the knowledge that we have more guns and more firearm related homicides than others. It is in the papers nearly every day, and certainly every time there is a mass shooting, which is just about every day.

This is just a superior-than-thou emotional argument. Surely there are enough real data suggesting American gun laws are outrageously lax without having to make things up. 

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, TheVat said:

Many of us do grasp this only too well.  In fact, more than half of Americans will usually poll as favoring stricter gun laws, while recognizing that the 2nd Amendment (which politically is presently impossible to repeal or modify) limits how far this can go.  Most Americans aren't deranged in their attitude so much as resigned to the inherent derangement of applying rural eighteenth century thinking to 21st century urban society.  Over yonder in Limey Land it may not be apparent how many Americans strive for "the art of the possible" in getting some gun control on the books, an eternal uphill struggle due to the way our present electoral system favors conservatives and big money donors and lobbyists.  

What America really has is a canyon sized gap between the informed and the ignorant.  

And yes, SYG is just nuts.  Common sense dictates that if you can retreat and not shoot someone, that is a better option than possibly ending someone's life.  SYG empowers the flawed judgment.

It's not all about guns, sometimes a paper cut is more painful... 

 

[zapatos]

4 minutes ago, Arete said:

Except: 

Except:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

 

When you are burdened with this one, then you can tell me how your citizens would react differently.

[Arete]

2 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Except:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

 

When you are burdened with this one, then you can tell me how your citizens would react differently.

Well, 

1. I've lived in the US for the last 13 years.

2. The "Well regulated milita" at the time was effectively the US military. I'm a filthy immigrant to the US but my understanding is that the purpose of the amendment was to provision the states with the ability to raise a standing army. There's no statement about self defense, or having to keep said arms in your home - and when the National Guard has a predator drone program and the citizenry can't have an automatic rifle makes it something of a moot point. 

3. The court's interpretation to include self defense is fear based. Not saying it wouldn't be different in any other country if they had the history of the US. It has religious conservatism, libertarianism and a right to bear arms baked in - but that doesn't make the mindset evidence based. 

[zapatos]

9 minutes ago, Arete said:

but that doesn't make the mindset evidence based. 

Of course not. The people using the evidence are the ones fighting for gun control.

[StringJunky]

1 hour ago, zapatos said:

Sorry, I didn't mean to say there were "no" guns. 

What you stated here is what I was trying to point out. Guns here are not an oddity and would not be seen as such.

 

People use the tools at their disposal. People here also call the police, and that is because it is a tool at their disposal. If there are emergency call boxes, or roving neighborhood watch groups, people would utilize them. In America one of the tools is guns, and so we use that tool also.

And it is not as if all Americans are armed. Seventy percent of American adults do not own guns. (https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/06/22/the-demographics-of-gun-ownership/) Most Americans are not walking around armed.

It feels as if other Western countries see Americans as a breed apart when it comes to guns. I suspect we are basically the same, and if it was you who had a Constitutional Right to bear arms like ours and we had restrictions like yours, that this conversation would be playing out in reverse. Neither group is more right/wrong/moral/rational/pragmatic, it is just that we live in different environments. 

We eat biscuits and gravy, while others like that vile Marmite and Vegemite.

Americans, generally,  have become over-familiar with weapons and have lost respect for them. They also don't seem to realize that every one of them is a potential mass murderer should the 'perfect storm' affect their lives. Most mass murderers in the US are not inherently criminal and don't look like one. People like Nicholas Cruz are sad people, not evil. imo. The distress in court that he didn't get the death penalty because a unanimous verdict was required and the resulting outrage... US laxity allowed that violent expression and I wouldn't put the blame all on him. People who support the right to bear arms without restrictions are enablers for people in crisis  to carry out mass murders.

Edited November 11, 2022 by StringJunky

[zapatos]

12 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Americans, generally,  have become over-familiar with weapons and have lost respect for them. They also don't seem to realize that every one of them is a potential mass murderer should the 'perfect storm' affect their lives. Most mass murderers in the US are not inherently criminal and don't look like one. People like Nicholas Cruz are sad people, not evil. imo. The distress in court that he didn't get the death penalty because a unanimous verdict was required and the resulting outrage... US laxity allowed that violent expression and I wouldn't put the blame all on him. People who support the right to bear arms without restrictions are enablers for people in crisis  to carry out mass murders.

Well said.

[StringJunky]

2 hours ago, zapatos said:

Well said.

Cheers.

[CharonY]

5 hours ago, zapatos said:

Sorry, I didn't mean to say there were "no" guns. 

I did not take it as such, I should also add that in the past in Germany most men were familiar with guns due to obligatory military service. It is more about the realm (where do guns belong) rathe than familiarity around guns. I think others have expressed it better already, but what I tried to get at is the overall attitude that a gun is needed just in case. Americans I talked to seem to equate calling the police to deal with things like a sign of weakness but also impracticality (which I get in rural regions- the distances are vastly different compared to much of Europe).

But there is also a disconnect in terms of how folks think how they need to deal with crime. In most countries folks seem to overestimate criminality but the US is more likely to think that a shootout would be a viable option to address it. I.e. it is not only guns themselves (though they play a big part) but also the way folks think about threat (individualized vs communal actions, for example) and many other things. Americans seem to view Europeans as too trusting regarding their government, but also their community (hence the children comment) and this comes over as fearful in societies were you have (or had) a higher level of trust.

[zapatos]

7 minutes ago, CharonY said:

the US is more likely to think that a shootout would be a viable option to address it

These are the ones who scare me. The ones who say something like "If he pushes me I have the right to shoot him. It is self defense." And too many of our laws support that kind of response.

[CharonY]

2 hours ago, zapatos said:

These are the ones who scare me. The ones who say something like "If he pushes me I have the right to shoot him. It is self defense." And too many of our laws support that kind of response.

Yupp. It was eye opening when I heard a students saying that of of course they would conceal carry to bars as things can get dangerous when alcohol is involved.

Also I feel that many Americans are not that great when it comes to irony (coming from a country where sarcasm is the norm).

[iNow]

27 minutes ago, CharonY said:

I feel that many Americans are not that great when it comes to irony (coming from a country where sarcasm is the norm).

I guess it’s a good thing McCarthy didn’t say he was gonna receive a gun from Pelosi and struggle not to pistol whip her with it, but the people he’s trying to get to vote him into the speakership wouldn’t hesitate to say such a thing. 

Edited November 12, 2022 by iNow

[StringJunky]

1 hour ago, CharonY said:

Yupp. It was eye opening when I heard a students saying that of of course they would conceal carry to bars as things can get dangerous when alcohol is involved.

The outcome is self-fulfilling. He is helping to create the conditions for the necessity to carry. How does one begin to help people out of that mind-trap/cognitive feedback loop? How does one extricate a whole country out of that type of collective thought process?

Edited November 12, 2022 by StringJunky

[dimreepr]

11 hours ago, StringJunky said:

The outcome is self-fulfilling. He is helping to create the conditions for the necessity to carry. How does one begin to help people out of that mind-trap/cognitive feedback loop? How does one extricate a whole country out of that type of collective thought process?

It usually takes a war, of some sort, and it's always a better outcome without guns.