Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Gun Control & RKBA

Showing Original Post only (View all)

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,479 posts)
Fri Jan 4, 2013, 12:57 PM Jan 2013

Trust the misnomer [View all]

That's essentially what's required. Lots of folks favor gun control because they believe gun control laws will eliminate or severely limit violence. The term "gun control" is a misnomer for several reasons.

First, gun control laws aim at controlling those who possess guns not the guns themselves. Realizing this deletes from the set of concepts the anthropomorphic ideas about guns. Guns don't cause people to become criminally antisocial and start shooting sprees.

Second, passing a new law(s) which aim(s) to interrupt a hypothetical sequence of events that lead to murder (which is already illegal) fundamentally affect more those not involved in the plan for any crime. Media campaigns which enlighten the misguided/uninformed are generally more successful than laws. I see ads in the media all the time relating to drunk driving, drug addiction, texting while driving... but I have yet to see an ad about difficult circumstances which could arise consequential to the casual sale, exchange or careless storage of firearms. I've seen ads about safe sex but not safe storage.

Third, doesn't it seem as an evidence against the actual premise of "control" that a law whose intended effect is some measure of positive control also having criminal penalties? If it is accepted that a particular law will change the behavior of most of those subject to the law such that certain negative (and already illegal) sequelae will be abated, it does seem rather contradictory to also add a criminal penalty as consequence of a conviction for breaking the law in question. If it is the existence of the law that brings about the desired "control" then a criminal penalty is superfluous. If it is the existence of the penalty that brings about the desired "control" then realize that those who are most responsible for the most heinous instances of crimes which these types of laws seek to abate will go unpunished because they are almost all killed by their own hand or by law enforcement.

Gun control is not only a misnomer but, in the philosophical sense, also an oxymoron.

27 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Trust the misnomer [View all] discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2013 OP
Fun argument. ZombieHorde Jan 2013 #1
Enjoy :) n/t discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2013 #6
Still readin'?? n/t discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2013 #16
It is often the case that the non-targeted groups are more impacted than the targeted groups. Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #2
Mandatory sentences for using a gun in a crime, Lurks Often Jan 2013 #3
How about the same way... bobclark86 Jan 2013 #4
pick something that works gejohnston Jan 2013 #5
I take it from... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2013 #7
The question was for you. I was waiting for your reply. Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #8
Well thank you discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2013 #9
The other posts tended to focus on social needs, which are difficult to implement and harder... Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #10
You're certainly not alone in your assessments. discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2013 #11
I question this statement in your post: .... spin Jan 2013 #12
I was rather... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2013 #13
As I was. (n/t) spin Jan 2013 #14
A user name... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2013 #15
OK. ZombieHorde Jan 2013 #17
Thanks for the thoughts discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2013 #18
Just having thought it over for a bit discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2013 #19
Gun regulation or firearm regulation. ZombieHorde Jan 2013 #20
Cool discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2013 #21
And thats why laws have penalties, so their lak of allegiance costs them, jmg257 Jan 2013 #22
Hmmm... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2013 #23
one could say the same about pot smokers who gejohnston Jan 2013 #24
The same as other criminals (if so in statute), no? Non violent possibly, but still jmg257 Jan 2013 #27
never said that guncontrol would elimate or severely reduce jimmy the one Jan 2013 #25
You're welcome discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2013 #26
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»Trust the misnomer»Reply #0