I have no major quibbles but I do have some minor problems with it. Mike quite correctly notes that issues such as alcohol and drug abuse, mental illness, anger issues and the profoundly stupid should disqualify people from gun ownership. And that these problems cut across all segments of society.But...here are the problems I see. First, as Mike notes "Obviously some of the marijuana and cocaine users also could be binge drinkers, and some of the rage guys are fueled by alcohol, so we will have some overlap."
Very true. But I strongly suspect abuse of drugs and alcohol is fairly intertwined; that is, folks who abuse alcohol will alos tend to abuse drugs--whether it's coke or meth or prescription meds such as painkillers or anti-depressants.
Second, Mike assumes such problems are normalized evenly across all segments of society. They are not. Instead, the preponderance of such issues tends to occur at the fringes. Think about it: are you more likely to have anger issues if you enjoy a satisfactory social and professional life or if you feel there are unknown forces constantly conspiring against you? Isn't one who lacks self-esteem and lives in constant irrational fear more apt to abuse alcohol and substances?
Third, stupidity and clumsiness. Probably an issue that cuts evenly across society. However, we're not talking about operating a toaster--we're talking about handling a deadly weapon. As we know, very few gunloons are adequately trained. Those who receive training usually do so from folks equally inept to safely handle firearms.
Bottomline: The true numbers:
Alcohol and/or substance abuse: 35%
Anger Issues/Mental Illness: 15%
Lack of training: 75%
Note these percentages aren't cumulative. But what they tell us is about 35% of gunloons should be disarmed because of substance abuse and mental illness issues. But the biggest problem is that the overwhelming majority of gunloons are simply unqualified to own a weapon.
Congratulations, Jadegold. You've managed to be even worse at sociology and mathematics than Mikeb.
ReplyDeleteWOW, another generalized insult from Ted Nugent.
DeleteKevin, if you're going to talk nonsense, what do you expect in return? Ted Nugent wasn't mentioned in this article.
DeleteGuess you missed my last comment. Not paying attention again!
DeleteAs my last comment stated, I will call YOU Ted Nugent from now on.
It is a PERFECT name to fit you.
I didn't miss it, but when you insist on being idiotic, I'm not obliged to take you seriously.
Delete"unknown forces constantly conspiring against you"
ReplyDeleteDo you mean like being paranoid that CCW holders are out to shoot you because you are black and then hide behind "get away with murder" laws? You mean that kind of nutty conspiracy?
Or that the cops are going to help these people get away with murder by photoshopping the evidence photos and the entire legal system is going to wink at that?
Delete"As we know, very few gunloons are adequately trained. Those who receive training usually do so from folks equally inept to safely handle firearms."
ReplyDeleteJadegold, what do you consider to adequate training? And if you have some hard data to support your 75% figure. Or is the 75% just a number you pulled out of your, well, somewhere.
Considering that in Minnesota carry permit instructors need to have their credentials to teach certified by the state to be adequate. Or are these extra requirements you feel should be in place. Something like the special "tests" minorities had to pass in order to vote in the Democratically controlled Jim Crow south?
Jadegold says,
ReplyDelete"But the biggest problem is that the overwhelming majority of gunloons are simply unqualified to own a weapon."
No one has to be qualified to OWN anything. But if you have to be qualified to exercise a civil right, ANY civil right, lets start with the first civil right and work our way down,,, shall we?