One year later, we're still here. Thank you, Seattle, for your resilience and readership throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.
Contributions from our readers are a crucial lifeline for The Stranger as we write our new future. We're calling up legislators, breaking down what's going on at Seattle City Hall, and covering the region's enduring arts scenes thanks to assistance from readers like you. If The Stranger is an essential part of your life, please make a one-time or recurring contribution today to ensure we're here to serve you tomorrow.
We're so grateful for your support.
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
Sign up for the latest news and to win free tickets to events
Buy tickets to events around Seattle
Comprehensive calendar of Seattle events
The easiest way to find Seattle's best events
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
Comments
And that applies to gun laws in the United States - how, exactly?
Protip: When someone is in the business of selling X, they will never ever agree that buying less of X is a good idea. We all understand that, and treat statements made by shills with the appropriate skepticism... for everything except guns. No idea why a substantial portion of the country has a ginormous blind spot there.
The difference is that Americans like guns a lot, do not like the idea of changing the bill of rights, and there has not been decades of public health initiatives to teach people how dangerous guns are.
Tobacco companies are seen as death merchants by the public, and gun makers are not. It is a public perception problem, not one of the NRA buying votes.
"Okay ma'am. Are you a convicted felon? No? Do you have a history of serious mental illness or a restraining order out against you? No? Okay then; the measures in enacting won't make it any harder for you to get a gun. Now statistically, having a gun in the home makes you less safe. But if you want to take your chances, nothing I'm doing here will make it any more difficult for you to do so."
So many people are just nitwits, though. And as we all know, facts are no match for confirmation bias.
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/20…
Agree that some Americans love guns, though. See above re: the single-issue voter. Therein lies the ginormous blind spot.
If you're the kind of person who worries about being killed by an intruder, your gun will make you feel safer even though it puts your safety at greater risk. That's all there is to it.
@15: It is pretty horribly malformed. It would be a mercy.
How many mosques are there in Stockholm?
How many mosques total are there in Europe?
How many mosques total are there in Europe and the USA?
Now how many Christian churches are there in Saudi Arabia?
How many times have you heard of any murders by Christian terrorists occurring in Saudi Arabia?
Now how many times have you heard of any murders by Sunni terrorists in America? In Europe?
Best argument against gun control (which I used to be for, BTW)?
http://www.salon.com/2016/01/12/emails_e…
Best argument against gun control in France?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qy_6Nibo…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZG3eKi4…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ESI4pTD…
Bullshit. If there were 8,000 times every day that an American used a gun to ward off a threat (i.e. black teenagers giving you the side-eye), the police reports would be filled with it. The whole country would be New Orleans. Our homicide rate would be astronomical.
http://www.armedwithreason.com/debunking…
How many Christian Churches are there in the United States?
How many times have you heard of any murders by Christian terrorists occurring in the United States?
Notice that she isn't interested in getting a weapon just big enough to stop her attacker (if that's what it would do). She wants a firearm "of her choosing." Would a bazooka do? Sorry the lady was attacked and no longer feels safe, etc., but she sounds like an NRA plant.
@20: I know you are clinically insane, and I hope you're making progress in your therapy, but I hope you are aware that that link has literally nothing whatsoever to do with gun control.
Example: I was recently in a car accident when some careless driver rear-ended me at high speed. My car was totaled, and I was significantly injured (though on my way to a complete recovery!). I totally saw the guy coming in my mirror, but as I was stopped there was nothing I could do in the second before he hit me.
Now if you asked me in that second "do you want a button on your car that would disintegrate that truck?" I would have said yes. I did not know in that second whether I would survive, my life was endangered by a careless idiot, and I would rather he go than me. My actions would even be legally justified as self-defense. Thus, all cars should be equipped with disintegration death rays, right?
Well, no. It doesn't take a genius to see that installing automotive death rays would be a terrible idea. Road rage incidents would probably cause hundreds of thousands of deaths per year. Police would be terrified to make a stop, as the car might decide to disintegrate the cruiser rather than pay a fine. This in turn would make the cops more likely to fire their own death rays, even at citizens who were peaceful. Even my own traffic accident might have ended badly for me: realizing that he was about to collide with me, the driver might have disintegrated my car rather than risk being killed himself.
In other words, the fact that I would want a death ray in a specific scenario does not lead to the conclusion that everyone should have death rays all the time. Same with guns.
O RLY?
Marissa Alexander fired a warning shot to deter her abusive ex husband from attacking her in her own home. No one was hurt, and he admitted he would have hit her had she not been armed. She got 20 years.
Gun owners are well aware that self-defense can be tough to prove. If they successfully deterred a burglar or attacker by brandishing a gun, no shots fired, why on earth would they retort it to police and open themselves up to prosecution?
Naturally, this does not mean there are definitely 8000 defensive uses a day. But there is good reason to think defensive uses are underreported.
@24: Nice. Are their any other women you would like to cast doubts and aspersions on today for talking about their sexual assault? Gross.
If anti gun actually bigots cared about safety, gun control would look very different. But no. It's about hating the sort of people that want guns.
That's why the very people that are quick to holler "victim blaming" at the slightest provocation immediately leap to accusations that she made up a sexual. She's a gun nut, so she deserves rape.
If you get caught driving an unsafe vehicle, you just need to fix it and pay a small fine. A minor "safety" violation with a gun, like having the wrong hand grip attached? That's three years in prison.
Gun control laws are punitive, and heap on draconian punishments for tiny missteps. Like the guy prosecuted for a straw purchase when transferring a gun via a licensed dealer with a background check. No one involved hurt anyone, nor had any intention of hurting anyone. They didn't intend to violate any law. Everyone involved had a clean record. But I'm sure anti gun bigots are thrilled that they had their lives ruined.
Meanwhile, killing people with a car earns little to no jail time. And you can get your license back!
Also, wouldn't it be great if felons trying to buy guns got arrested?
A denial should trigger a call the police. They should investigate, arrest if warranted, and if they don't charge the buyer with a crime, the buyer should get their gun.