Do pro gunners only care about their guns? And not the lives lost because of guns?

 

I found this question and answer on Quora.com. (It’s raining here😕.) Quora.com is a great site and purports to be “a place to share knowledge and better understand the world.”

I have found very little bias on either side and much truth.

So, do pro gunners only care about guns? And not the lives lost because of guns? Here’s the answer: (with charts and statistics).

~tannngl

This is yet another egregious case of Begging the question – Wikipedia

Begging the question is a logical fallacy which occurs when an argument’s premises assume the truth of the conclusion, instead of supporting it. It is a type of circular reasoning and an informal fallacy, in which an arguer makes an argument that requires the desired conclusion to be true. This often occurs in an indirect way such that the fallacy’s presence is hidden or at least not easily apparent.

The assumed truth in this case is that common people having access to firearms leads to more deaths than where the people do not have access to firearms.

As most people know firearms did not always exist. Firearms were invented. The very first firearms were invented in China around 1200 AD; these were then high technology sophisticated weapon of war. In order to shoot these very early guns you had to carry a lit match to ignite it. These were practical as smaller hand weapons of war against heavily armored troops.

As cannons they were spectacular for breaking down walls.

Not very good as a self-defense weapon. That came some 300 years later in Austria where some genius figured out how to build a reliable wheel-lock gun, around 1500 AD. About 120 years later, the cheaper and more reliable flintlock was invented.

So, if your theory is that guns in the hands of the people results in a higher homicide rate, we ought to be able to see a dramatic rise in homicides after the introduction of portable ready-to-use firearms?

We do have such data, and that is not at all what is seen.

Homicides

The fact is that shortly after portable ready to use firearms were invented, homicide rates fell.

An economics paper on this was written entitled:

Firearms and the decline of violence in Europe: 1200 -2010

http://economics.wm.edu/wp/cwm_w…

This is end figure of the paper.

Much more modern data exists as well showing the same thing.

Solid Evidence that increased gun access reduces homicide rates. by Alfred Montestruc on Liberty at Large

Figures referenced in the blog post.

But homicides fell after 2003- true, but this is why:

The Brits threw money at the problem and hired a lot more cops. FYI volunteers with concealed carry permits are a lot more cost-effective.

There is simply no legitimate basis to think gun control works as crime control. Because of that, no legitimate basis to ask the question.

Having the guns SAVES LIVES, so this is a case of a begged question.

Begging the question – Wikipedia

Begging the question is a logical fallacy which occurs when an argument’s premises assume the truth of the conclusion, instead of supporting it. It is a type of circular reasoning and an informal fallacy, in which an arguer makes an argument that requires the desired conclusion to be true. This often occurs in an indirect way such that the fallacy’s presence is hidden or at least not easily apparent.

Your assumed truth is that lives are lost because of guns. The emperical data shows that in the net, guns save lives.

So we should ask you, why do you care so little about saving lives?

That bears repeating:  So we should ask you, why do you care so little about saving lives?

“An armed society is a polite society.”

~tannngl



Categories: Political

Tags: , , ,

12 replies

  1. Well, I think I’ll answer the actual questions that was asked: “Do pro gunners only care about their guns? And not the lives lost because of guns?”

    Though I do care about the lives lost to the misuse of guns, I care a LOT more about the existence of the Second Amendment right to own guns. A lot.

    Very often there’s a cost in blood for the existence of a desirable social policy. Our Revolution was very costly in lives, and we didn’t have to have it, but we did. We could have easily just acceded to King George’s demands, and saved a LOT of lives, but we didn’t.

    The cost in blood to free the slaves was very high, but we did it anyway because it was the right thing to do.

    On a more mundane level we could save tens of thousands of lives annually by simply lowering the speed limit on all public roads to 20 MPH and making it impossible for cars to exceed that speed, but we don’t. We accept those tens of thousands of annual deaths as a price for the convenience and efficiency high-speed car travel.

    Frankly, I think the question itself is stupid and childish.

    Liked by 1 person

    • So do I. But that’s the kind of thinking we’re dealing with today and they’re getting their voices heard without the facts.

      BTW, my great grandfather died at Gettysburg and my great great great grandfather fought the British in Eastern Pennsylvania and then came home to Western Pennsylvania to fight the Indians. We’ve lost our courage and wisdom. We had better get back the ability to think and discuss this stuff using cold hard facts.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. I answer questions on quora frequently.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Reblogged this on Lauren Creech's Random Thoughts and commented:
    I wish I could like this article 10 million times!

    Over 800 years of evidence that guns reduce homicides. I can hear the panicked breathing from the left already.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. There you go again, tannngl, confusing them with facts and data that are in direct opposition to their tired old false arguments. Good stuff!!

    Liked by 1 person

    • I do like facts over feelings. And I’ve always been on the lookout for the research behind the numbers from the left. I’ve been in conversations about the gun ban and murder decrease in the UK finding leftists have limited the timelines of the statistics, omitting other events impacting the numbers. This article has the full timeline as well as other actions that the government tried. And I say ‘tried’ because the murder rates have continued to climb after the gun confiscation.
      Thanks, Kathy.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. I suspected as much, but it’s nice to have actual evidence.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: