Why gun control cant be solved in the US- Blog

Posted June 22nd, 2016 @ 9:17am in #Trump #clinton2016

On average, Democrats (that’s my team*) use guns for shooting the innocent. We call that crime.

On average, Republicans use guns for sporting purposes and self-defense.

If you don’t believe me, you can check the statistics on the Internet that don’t exist. At least I couldn’t find any that looked credible.

But we do know that race and poverty are correlated. And we know that poverty and crime are correlated. And we know that race and political affiliation are correlated. Therefore, my team (Clinton) is more likely to use guns to shoot innocent people, whereas the other team (Trump) is more likely to use guns for sporting and defense.

That’s a gross generalization. Obviously. Your town might be totally different.

So it seems to me that gun control can’t be solved because Democrats are using guns to kill each other – and want it to stop – whereas Republicans are using guns to defend against Democrats. Psychologically, those are different risk profiles. And you can’t reconcile those interests, except on the margins. For example, both sides might agree that rocket launchers are a step too far. But Democrats are unlikely to talk Republicans out of gun ownership because it comes off as “Put down your gun so I can shoot you.”

Let’s all take a deep breath and shake off the mental discomfort I just induced in half of my readers. You can quibble with my unsupported assumptions about gun use, but keep in mind that my point is about psychology and about big group averages. If Republicans think they need guns to protect against Democrats, that’s their reality. And if Democrats believe guns make the world more dangerous for themselves, that is their reality. And they can both be right. Your risk profile is different from mine.

So let’s stop acting as if there is something like “common sense” gun control to be had if we all act reasonably. That’s not an option in this case because we all have different risk profiles when it comes to guns. My gun probably makes me safer, but perhaps yours makes you less safe. You can’t reconcile those interests.

Our situation in the United States is that people with different risk profiles are voting for their self-interests as they see it. There is no compromise to be had in this situation unless you brainwash one side or the other to see their self-interest differently. And I don’t see anyone with persuasion skills trying to do that on either side.


Fear always beats reason. So as long as Democrats are mostly using guns to shoot innocent people (intentionally or accidentally) and Republicans are mostly using guns for sport or self-defense, no compromise can be had.

If we had a real government – the kind that works – we would acknowledge that gun violence is not one big problem with one big solution. It is millions of people with different risk profiles voting their self-interest as they see it.

So stop acting like one side is stupid. Both sides of the gun issue are scared, and both have legitimate reasons to be that way. Neither side is “right.”

—

*I endorsed Clinton for president for my personal safety. I write about Trump’s powers of persuasion and it is not safe to live in California if people think you support Trump in any way. Also, I’m rich, so I don’t want anything to change in this country. The rest of you might have a different risk profile.

—

If you are in favor of common-sense gun control laws, you might like my book. But that would be more coincidence than causation because the book doesn’t mention guns. I don’t even know why I brought it up.

Very true.

Makes a certain amount of sense.

WTF I also belive the US prison population is predominantly Democrats. Or would be if they still had their civial rights.

it really does, and fits well with the mental basis of the parties. Protect me vs let me protect myself.

Wow, thats actually pretty good.

Shame on you Scott...bringing logic into an emotional argument

" And we know that poverty and crime are correlated."





And we know they are not causative so why mention it.



"So stop acting like one side is stupid. Both sides of the gun issue are
scared, and both have legitimate reasons to be that way. Neither side is
"right.”
"



Spoken like a non tool using animal.




 

I thought that too... kinda scary to think a dem made sense.

First sign of intelligence from the left.

Heh not sure what exactly he is, of his blogs he sounds rather libertarian.

All Democrats should turn in their guns. I'm OK with that solution.

Logic from an engineer???

Unheard of!

Much better to just roll around on the floor of the House like a bunch of two year olds!

We would certainly all be a lot safer if they did.

Without taking any fundamental rights into account, I like it.

They can think logically sometimes but their final answer is heavily influenced by some nonrational dogma - "we have to be inclusive", "We can't just let xxxxx happen to people", "It's unconscionable to not do something". You can't reason them out of it because they didn't reason their way into it.



 

*I endorsed Clinton for president for my personal safety. I write about Trump’s powers of persuasion and it is not safe to live in California if people think you support Trump in any way.

I don't think he's a hitlery fan. Libertarian maybe?

Yes, there have been a few articles about this in the past week or two.  He said it in jest, but meant it at the same time.  He's not a Trump supporter but thinks highly of his ability to influence and sell.

Because the same poor impulse control and low IQ that lead to poverty also lead to other things, like felonies and voting for Democrats.  


 

One of the more intelligent and interesting takes I've ever seen on the issue.

The part in read is almost poetic and I am certainly going to steal it.

Democrats are using guns to kill each other – and want it to stop
Orlando-
Chicago-
Newtown-

yep

Since republicans aren't the problem children, have dumbocrats turn in their guns, we keep ours.....everyone is happy.

The thing I liked about this article is that the author basically said democrats are more likely to be criminals and killers.....which is true.  Yet he still votes for them.

Wtf

What he needs is some common sense voting control.

He didn't say he voted for them. He said he endorsed Hillary so that his batshit california liberal neighbors wouldn't make his life a living hell.

Based on the constitution the Republicans are right

I can relate.

That was actually an interesting point.

While I might not agree with every tidbit of his argument, the article is insightful.

+1

For a lib.  The biggest fallacy is thinking that banning guns will magically disappear.  Here's a clue.  Criminals are criminals, and generally break the law getting guns.  A few more laws won't stop them.

So...a solution would be - if you're a registered democrat, you have to turn in your guns and be banned from future gun ownership.

The guy makes good points. He's at least intellectually honest. But, why are we listening to a cartoonist?

What goes unsaid here is that democrats and minorities frame their self-interests as democrat and minority group interests, so they must self identify by political party (ideology) or race.  If you walk up to one and said "answer quick, what are you?" they'd blurt "liberal" or "black" or some other political or racial label.  On the other hand it's clear that the vast majority of gun enthusiasts and the NRA want all Americans to have the right to self defense, even if in some ways that increases risks to ourselves and our racial or ideological group.   Ask us what we are and we'll say "proud to be American!" because we think of ourselves as Americans, and we therefore pursue the interests of the nation as a whole (exercise for the student: count the number of US flags on the liberal college campuses and in the ghetto, compare to a pro-gun area).

When framing self-interest as the interest of the political party or race it makes sense for democrats and minorities to beg for gun control, when framing self-interest as what is good for the individual and the nation as a whole, gun banning is insane.  As people who think in individualist and nationalist terms we gun owners are coming from a completely different frame of reference.  

The fundamental question that divides us is which is more rational and beneficial, propping up ideology and race or supporting the individual and country?  That choice roughly determines your position on gun rights, and all of the rest of the debates on the minutiae of the law are just minor tactical problems.

Because he makes more sense than most politicians.

Was it Teddy Roosevelt's FIL that said "All Democrats are horse thieves." ?

But we have to do something.We can't just let people die by gun violence.



 

THAT's the one that irks me.  No, you don't HAVE to do anything.


But, please, m'lord, before we step into the arena of death, might we also be armed?    

     

But he uses logic and not feelings...therefore he is irrelevant to any argument the left has.

correct

Lol so a high profile? democrat regursitates for his readers what i have read here thousands of times?

username?

LOL, the sad part is...he only half "gets it".


He should take his reasoning one step farther and realize that without guns, libtards-democrats-uneducated fools-commie lovers, would still be murdering each other, albeit with blunt objects and sharp knives.


Guns are not the problem......liberals are!

What Adams is doing is saying out loud what a lot of people want to say, not in favor of one candidate or another, but about the whole left vs right thing in general.



He's calling out the left vs right thing as very very very polarizing for a lot of people out there.

HOLY SHIT!!! Some of you guys are just incredible!

A well known and self-avowed Democrat with the ear of millions of people puts out a message that's very positive toward our side, and all you can do is bitch about how you could have done it better.

Unreal!

There was actually a liberal on NPR the other day who pointed out the same thing, and in fact seemed reticent to change the status quo.

 

I don't think this guy is actually a libtard.  He says he supports Hillary only because he's convinced that he'll be murdered by psychopathic leftists if he openly supports Trump.

Eh......You're assuming we live in the real world and most liberals aren't delusional.