Greatest Success

Well, that's not how he put it, but it's the biggest single thing we've accomplished during his governance.
If you ask me where has been the one area where I feel that I’ve been most frustrated and most stymied, it is the fact that the United States of America is the one advanced nation on earth in which we do not have sufficient common sense gun safety laws.
You're too modest, sir. You've seen us flourish, under your leadership. Respect for the Second Amendment has come to be taken seriously by the Supreme Court, during your tenure, and you've helped to ensure a similar court will endure for decades to come. We're on the cusp of seeing gun permits treated like, dare I say it, marriage licenses. All 50 states will now respect one issued by any of the 50 states.

And, of course, we've seen record levels of gun purchases during your tenure as well. You're passing on to the future an America that is not only more respectful of the civil right to keep and bear arms, but far better armed as well.

To think that's happened maugre your head, as Malory would put it. And you the President, and everything.

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

I dare say having so many people learning how to shoot properly and getting various permits is far better "common sense gun control" than any of the Eurocrats and home-grown Eurocratic-wanna-bes can imagine. Nor do they seem to see the connection between the lack of an armed populace and the fires and unrest going on in Europe (or Eurafrica as some sections appear to have become).

LittleRed1

Gringo said...

POTUS
it is the fact that the United States of America is the one advanced nation on earth in which we do not have sufficient common sense gun safety laws.

If you look at gun possession per capita, the US is tops in the world. If you look at murder rate, the US is middle of the pack. The last time I looked, the US ranked 114th of 218 in murder rate.

If you run a correlation of gun possession per capita and murder rate, the last time I checked you got about -0.10, meaning that if there is any correlation between murder rate and gun possession per capita, there is a slight negative correlation.

When I last looked at Europe, the 39 countries in Europe for which there was data on both gun possession per capita and murder rate, the correlation was ~ -0.3, which doesn't support the "more guns mean more murder" narrative.

I last ran these correlations about 6 months ago, so they may be somewhat different currently.

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

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

Grim said...

I note that the USA is less like the European countries we always see it compared with, and more like Brazil -- i.e., a multi-ethnic American democracy with a history of slavery. Brazil has very strict firearms laws that basically ban private ownership. Does it also have murder? Like you wouldn't believe.

raven said...

Sift out the suicides (which are 2/3rds of the "gun deaths" and are going to happen anyway) and the gang war deaths( which are going to happen anyway) and the US firearm death rate is very low. So far down the list of causes of death as to be insignificant , in totals.

The people who advocate more gun control primarily want to attack the conservative gun owners by criminalizing conduct that has been legal. And establish a data base for confiscation. They won't admit it, normally, until you get one spun up a bit (couple of drinks, a bit of news, "ain't Trump grand", that should do it) . Commies excel at one thing- murdering their own populations.Somewhat easier if they are disarmed. Funny thing though, like most progressive ideas, they are living in 1802. Ban firearms? Kidding, yes?
This is a country where hobbyists build airplanes in their garages, have bio tech labs on the kitchen table, and hack into government computers for fun. There was recently a flight restriction because someone or another decided to get permission to shoot off a model rocket-to 25,000 ft. They might as well try to ban longbows.

Matt said...

To play devil's advocate on the gun suicide question, how sure are we that those deaths would happen anyway? Most of what I read about suicide suggests that it's often very much a spur-of-the-moment decision: it's usually less a case of someone being bound and determined to kill themselves, and more a matter of someone who's in a bad mental state momentarily (and often temporarily) tipping over a threshold and having ready access to a method. People who survive suicide attempts generally seem to be relieved that they failed, rather than determined to try again.

I don't consider this to be a reason to restrict firearm ownership (I don't see suicide as a violation of another's rights in the same way that murder is, and thus not a justification for government to abridge the right to self-defense), but I don't want to wrongly dismiss the concern, either.

douglas said...

That's and interesting set of questions, Matt- This piece should likely answer most of your questions- since there's a big difference between who attempts suicide and who succeeds in general, and also tied in with that the differences between the sexes on this issue, it seems likely that most of those would find another successful way.

Clearly it's not a violation of another's rights, but as we were established under the belief that we held a God given right to life, then to end it is still a violation of that right (and an offense to God). Self-murder would seem not that much less of a sin than other-murder, in that sense. So if we are to uphold this idea that life is itself a God given right, then it's incumbent on us to make suicide also illegal, as a matter of consistency. After all, there's some logic (however flawed) in the idea that if you can take your own life freely, what's the prohibition against taking another really mean?

Grim said...

The problem is that most of the people who argue for gun control will turn around and argue for assisted suicide as a human right. Then there's no moral grounds for gun control; you're just disputing the aesthetics of how someone carries out their human right of self-destruction.

(Likewise, it is important not to recognize a right to life -- how then to justify abortion rights? -- and certainly not murder as wrong because it is an offense to God!)

If you want to set up a more troubling question, consider it from the perspective of the right. Say that you do believe that self-murder is a mortal sin. Now we have a natural right to self-defense, but what if you could show that stripping guns out of society would reduce the incidence of suicide by the same degree that it increases the incidence of assault or armed robbery? Couldn't you say to the religious man, "How do you insist on remaining armed to protect yourself from robbery, which only harms your body, at the cost of another man's soul?"

The robber is of course in some peril of his soul, too, but he remains alive and might repent. The suicide does not (at least under ordinary theological ideas) have any hope after death. So isn't it better to disarm and suffer increased crime, but save souls? Doesn't that make you, indeed, a kind of Christian martyr?

Ymar Sakar said...

Couldn't you say to the religious man, "How do you insist on remaining armed to protect yourself from robbery, which only harms your body, at the cost of another man's soul?"

The Japanese had all kinds of ways to commit suicide without using guns.

The suicide does not (at least under ordinary theological ideas) have any hope after death.

A false theology. A suicide is much like Peter's denial of his mentor and God, 3 times in public. On the physical realm, all it requires is the renewal of the covenant and oath, plus punishment. In the spiritual realm, they just need a guide which will give them a choice, to remain in the hell of their own choosing or Lucifer's own, or take a different route.

Part of that has to do with who Michael, the archangel is: Adam. Although other theories have him as Jesus, according to some Jehovah's Witnesses. When humans can become angels and spirits, and angels can take on human form, there's no permanent death or perma fate from a suicide. The Calvinists would differ.

So isn't it better to disarm and suffer increased crime, but save souls?

Since Lucifer creates more minions and gains more powerful by the minute from the corruption of crime and secret cabals, it's not a strategic decision people would make in spiritual warfare. Not that they understand earthly warfare let alone spiritual warfare.