135 replies to this topic

[Lorikz Kain]

I only have 4 guns, I should buy more

[Rand0m her0]

 

 

Which brings us right back to:   "There is nothing that can be done about this" cries the only nation in the world where this happens on a regular basis.      And so the issue goes nowhere. Because every time it comes up, a certain section of america, whipped up by the gun lobby, goes off about their freedoms. Because America admitting that it's gun culture is fundamentally broken would cut into the bottom line. And then 4 months later, someone shoots up another school and we do this all over again. 

 
100% agree.
 
I'm sure there are parents prior to this shooting who shared the same exact view as you Lys. But what happens when they are directly affected by it? You think their views don't change?

RH is essentially saying here what Lys himself likes to often quote. “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people”. Damn right. And people are influenced by the culture they live in.

 

 

 

Not quite. More something to the effect of  "the culture and laws around people shape their views and actions". Unforntally right now American gun culture  looks a lot like this. American gun culture looks like a place where freaking Obama got reelected and gun sales go through the roof because the news told em the black guy's gonna take their guns. 

 

When gun control exists in most of the world, it's not about eliminating peoples access to arms. The objectives are to limit the black and grey markets and to shape the culture of ownership. When you apply for a restricted firearm licence here you're required to provide a couple references, complete a set of safety courses, and have a purpose for owning such a thing. Although "purpose" is rather loose, target shooting and collecting are both perfectly legitimate reasons. Although collecting here means you do in fact need to be a collector, not simply a person who has a lot of guns. ie you'd better have some solid knowledge of the technical features and history of your firearms.

 

Of course most restricted firearms are bullshit...from a capability perspective. The Ar-15 is on that list for example, and you can buy pretty  comparable non restricted rifles. A common feature of firearms on that list however is the stupid tacticool marketing wank *points up at that image*.  You can still get one of course, but the process goes a long way to shaping a culture of responsible ownership  and means that gun culture in general here isn't dominated and directed by that marketing wank. 

 

Something similar could be done in America without ever touching the  second amendment. As with all rights, the ones granted by the second amendment are not unlimited. Unfortunately a section of Americans, in fact a minority of Americans, feel that the second amendment is more absolute and the rights granted by it more protected than little things like the right to vote. Which brings us back to the source of that opinion and how much of American gun culture is an artificial construction by corporate marketing teams so they can sell more guns. 

 

The reason why this debate dies in america isn't because of "the people of america", or the "the second amendment" or any other given reason, but because of a spectacular mount of lobbying by corporations and corporate controlled groups I mean generous campaign donors to ensure it goes nowhere. 

 

 

 

I put this up on Facebook the other day, and its the best representation of my feelings on the subject.

 

 

 

So here is how I expect the next 30 days to go down. Republican lawmakers call for legislation to place armed security guards at schools. Democrat lawmakers reject that notion and call for more gun control legislation. After much deliberation, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING will be done to prevent school shootings. And we will find ourselves reliving this issue again in the relatively near future.

 

In this specific incidence, it seems the majority of the blame lies with bureaucracy and broken communication systems. In 2013, the Broward County School board started a program that stopped the relay of information to police in regards to bad student behavior. Therefore, the School did not notify the local PD of (insert low life's name) being a possible threat. The PD gets called to (insert low life's name) house 39 times in 7 years. (insert low life's name) begins posting photos online holding knives/guns and starts creeping people out when having physical, in person conversations. In September 2017, FBI gets notified about a YouTube comment that was made stating "I'm going to be a professional school shooter". FBI receives the information, does some follow up, then the case falls into a black hole due to hitting a dead end. Apparently the FBI failed to track the username to an actual person. Which seems odd because lets say (insert low life's name) used a VPN to mask his IP, he still used his full, real life name for his YouTube username. For those interested, here is a video of the guy who saw the comment on YouTube and reported it to the FBI.

https://nypost.com/2018/02/15/youtuber-i-tipped-fbi-about-alleged-florida-shooter-last-year/

 

So apart from complete lack of communication in regards to LE agencies and school administrators, there are a couple other factors which allowed this event to play out.

 

Lack of parenting/bad parenting. It appears (insert low life's name) had a rough childhood and was from a broken home. This likely contributed to his deviance.

 

Broken mental health system. I am surprised the school Psychologist never got involved and sat him down to talk. A lot of his classmates believed if anyone was going to shoot up the school it would be him. So clearly multiple people were aware of his issues, and the school had documentation of his disciplinary actions. It seems odd that if the school adopted a policy of not reporting bad behavior to police, and that the school itself wanted to handle problems internally, then why was it a half hearted approach? Yes he was disciplined, yes he was expelled, but the school apparently failed to investigate further.

 

In retrospect, hindsight is always 20/20, but their are clearly several glaring mistakes present which could have confronted this threat prior to the shooting. Countless people said something and yet the system to process information and subsequently react failed.

 

So how many [more] times does this need to happen before you want to consider the issue as something more than a one off series of failures. Beacuaracy isn't why this happened . it happened because this is just the latest incident in a multi decade long pattern of similar incidents. Something *always* fails. 

[Lysistrata]

Not quite. More something to the effect of "the culture and laws around people shape their views and actions". Unforntally right now American gun culture looks a lot like this. American gun culture looks like a place where freaking Obama got reelected and gun sales go through the roof because the news told em the black guy's gonna take their guns.

This is like the third time you have called us racist. Through my life I have found that anyone calling me a racist is either using race as a debate tool in an attempt to create an indefensible situation for me... in other words, you can't win so you end it trying to make us look guilty of something morally repulsive... or you are a racist yourself, therefore it's best to accuse them of it first.

 

Classic deflection tactic of the liberal left, and we see it playing out today. The Clintons, the Obama Administration, and the DNC, "colluded" with the Russians, and weaponized government agencies to influence an election... and then continued to do it in order to cover up their crimes, and undermine the authority, and the policies, of an elected President. In short... Whatever Democrats are accusing you of... it's a pretty good bet they are accusing you of what they themselves are guilty of. Sure does muck up the system.

[Rand0m her0]

 

Not quite. More something to the effect of "the culture and laws around people shape their views and actions". Unforntally right now American gun culture looks a lot like this. American gun culture looks like a place where freaking Obama got reelected and gun sales go through the roof because the news told em the black guy's gonna take their guns.

This is like the third time you have called us racist. Through my life I have found that anyone calling me a racist is either using race as a debate tool in an attempt to create an indefensible situation for me... in other words, you can't win so you end it trying to make us look guilty of something morally repulsive... or you are a racist yourself, therefore it's best to accuse them of it first.

 

Classic deflection tactic of the liberal left, and we see it playing out today. The Clintons, the Obama Administration, and the DNC, "colluded" with the Russians, and weaponized government agencies to influence an election... and then continued to do it in order to cover up their crimes, and undermine the authority, and the policies, of an elected President. In short... Whatever Democrats are accusing you of... it's a pretty good bet they are accusing you of what they themselves are guilty of. Sure does muck up the system.

 

 

You realize you haven't actually responded to a single thing i've said. Like not one response you've made this is thread has actually addressed a single thing. You have contributed nothing. 

 

What you continue to do is latch onto a small, trivial verifiable, not controversial point and then treat it like a personal attack against yourself in an attempt to inject your own politics into a conversation that should have little to do with politics, because you're apparently so very insecure about your views you need to "win points" whenever possible.

 

America saw such a massive fit of panic buying of firearms after Obama's election that you had a multi year long ammo shortage and this panic buying was driven by media whipped up hysteria, and that much of the hysteria around his election was driven by stupid racist bullshit because that was an easy way for his opposition to rally their base (kenya, birth certificate, muslim, how many times did he get called a monkey?) is not a controversial statement.

 

If that statement offends you personally? Well then I'd question why you feel it hits so close to home. 

 

 

Otherwise if you dislike my position on the state of America's gun culture, my position on the cause of it, or any statement i've made around the influence firearm manufacturers have on the debate and discussion, do feel free to actually address any of those points. Or even contribute a point of your own.

[Lorikz Kain]

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/day-prior-parkland-grandmother-foiled-grandson-s-alleged-school-shooting-n848426

 

 

Even if all firearms are removed it won't matter if people still want to kill people they are going to do it. The only difference is they aren't going to be as effective at it.

 

I believe the point RH is trying to make, correct me if I'm mistaken, is that behavior is a visible response to stimuli and that response is shaped by our culture. Looking at statistics there is an increase in "mass" shootings over the years. Now while correlation doesn't imply causation in this case "it does waggle its eyebrows suggestively and gesture furtively while mouthing 'look over there'".(XKCD)

Sure to some extent crazies are going to be crazy but the point trying to be made is at what point are these just "mentally ill people" and what point are they "born and bred" to think like this.

[HackSlash]

To be honest, I didn't read any of the previous posts.  I'm not going to waste my time.  I'm not going to sit here and read polarized opinions.  I'm going straight for the heart of the matter.  I'm going to be as offensive as fuck.  

I don't care.

I don't care if I hurt your precious "feels".  You're more than welcome to crawl back into your safe space, suck on your thumb, and cuddle up with your unicorn.

Don't think for one minute, one second, that I don't care about the families that have been ripped apart by another senseless act of gun violence.  I do.

Lets be honest here's how this will play out:

"Our thoughts and prayers"

Some asinine comment from the NRA, their bought politicians, and Fox Propaganda.

A week from now it will be forgotten.

Then you'll go back to pacifying yourselves with brainless television, and stuffing your faces with double quarter ton cheeseburgers from MacDonald's.  While you sit there and wait for the next one.

Then...

"Our thoughts and prayers"

Some asinine comment from the NRA, their bought politicians, and Fox Propaganda.

A week from now it will be forgotten.
Then you'll go back to pacifying yourselves with brainless television, and
stuffing your faces with double quarter ton cheeseburgers from
MacDonald's.  While you sit there and wait for the next one.

Then...

"Our thoughts and prayers"

Some asinine comment from the NRA, their bought politicians, and Fox Propaganda.

A week from now it will be forgotten.

Then you'll go back to pacifying yourselves with brainless television, and
stuffing your faces with double quarter ton cheeseburgers from
MacDonald's.  While you sit there and wait for the next one.

Rinse and repeat.

Have I pissed you off?  Good, you should be pissed. 

You should be enraged.  At the simple fact that your nation is so divided it can't come together long enough to admit that it has a problem. That you are going to scream racism. socialism, liberalism, communism, Hitler, Second Amendment, and "We need guns to defend ourselves"

That you are prepared to deny the truth.

 

Every single year you reenact the Battle of Antietam (by far your bloodiest day), on your streets.

 

That every two years more of your citizens are killed by guns, than your Armed Forces lost in the entirety of Vietnam.

 

Every single year, millions of man hours of production is lost.

 

Every single year, your out of control gun violence costs your economy (by conservative estimates), hundreds of billions of dollars.

 

Every single year (2017), over 42 000  of your fellow citizens are gunned down in cold blood.

 

Don't you feel their pain?  Don't you feel their loss?  That's your mother, your father, your son, your daughter, your nephew, your niece, your husband, your wife, your sister, your brother, your friend, who has been killed by some asshole with a gun.  Are their lives worth less than your right to carry a gun?

I never thought that I would see Americans so scared, so frighten, so cowardly that they wouldn't stand up and demand change.

Here's a nation that has given the world so much.  

Yet you can't stand for yourselves.

You are too terrified to enact change.

Never thought I'd see the day.

Edited by HackSlash, 18 February 2018 - 06:18 AM.

[Lorikz Kain]

Arguments tend to lose effectiveness when you start to make personal attacks as people then focus on the attack and not on any of the logical points you may have made. If your goal is to vent then that's fine but if you hope to persuade or make change happen that's probably not the best way to go about it. Plus using stereotypes tends to lead people to discredit your argument as it shows a clear lack of understanding of the very target audience you hope to influence.

[onbekende]

HAHA, and the feds get called out cause they are wasting time on Russia. Thats like complaining to the Park Rangers when a guy escapes from a state penitentiary.

 

Which ties in wonderfull with this:

 

 

Classic deflection tactic of the liberal left, and we see it playing out today. The Clintons, the Obama Administration, and the DNC, "colluded" with the Russians, and weaponized government agencies to influence an election... and then continued to do it in order to cover up their crimes, and undermine the authority, and the policies, of an elected President. In short... Whatever Democrats are accusing you of... it's a pretty good bet they are accusing you of what they themselves are guilty of. Sure does muck up the system.

 

 

The deflection that started all deflections...

[Lysistrata]

You realize you haven't actually responded to a single thing i've said.

False. I have responded with the ultimate authority... you just don't want to hear it. Nothing can be done about the legal purchase and ownership of guns by law abiding US citizens. It's in the Constitution, and I told you why it's there. Congress can do nothing constitutionally to infringe on the right to bear arms. They must abolish the 2nd Amendment first before anything can be done, and there is no way the American people will go along with that. So all the crying about it, does nothing. It has nothing to do with race.

America saw such a massive fit of panic buying of firearms after Obama's election that you had a multi year long ammo shortage and this panic buying was driven by media whipped up hysteria

​False. Everybody knew Obama wanted to bring back the Clinton era ban on semi-automatic weapons, but this time he wanted it permanent. This caused an increase in buying those guns. We had an ammo shortage because Janet Napolitano used taxpayer money to purchase 1.6 billion rounds for Homeland Security in 2013 to drain the ammo supply from the population. Didn't work. It had nothing to do with race.

Otherwise if you dislike my position on the state of America's gun culture, my position on the cause of it, or any statement i've made around the influence firearm manufacturers have on the debate and discussion, do feel free to actually address any of those points. Or even contribute a point of your own.

It doesn't matter if I like your position or not. My contributing point is it doesn't matter how you feel about any of this. As long as the 2nd Amendment is included in our highest law of the land... nothing you feel means anything. It has nothing to do with race.

Everything you said...

I love your honesty about not reading any of this... We love our Canadian friends and your opinion is noted, but we got this.

[Lysistrata]

I would also like to add that during the entire year of 2009, Obama had super majorities in both houses of Congress, could have done anything he wanted, Republicans could do nothing about it... did they do anything about guns? No, they didn't.

[onbekende]

If your 2nd amendment is so holy, why aren't you guys sporting bazooka's?

 

 

I would also like to add that during the entire year of 2009, Obama had super majorities in both houses of Congress, could have done anything he wanted, Republicans could do nothing about it... did they do anything about guns? No, they didn't.

 

1) Republicans would have both whined about it until Christ himself came down to shut them up.

2) Republicans would have destroyed that at first instance possible

 

=> as such, a common ground solutions > reckless back-and-forth legislations that do nothing.

[Rand0m her0]

 

You realize you haven't actually responded to a single thing i've said.

False. I have responded with the ultimate authority... you just don't want to hear it. Nothing can be done about the legal purchase and ownership of guns by law abiding US citizens. It's in the Constitution, and I told you why it's there. Congress can do nothing constitutionally to infringe on the right to bear arms. They must abolish the 2nd Amendment first before anything can be done, and there is no way the American people will go along with that. So all the crying about it, does nothing. It has nothing to do with race.

 

 

America saw such a massive fit of panic buying of firearms after Obama's election that you had a multi year long ammo shortage and this panic buying was driven by media whipped up hysteria

​False. Everybody knew Obama wanted to bring back the Clinton era ban on semi-automatic weapons, but this time he wanted it permanent. This caused an increase in buying those guns. We had an ammo shortage because Janet Napolitano used taxpayer money to purchase 1.6 billion rounds for Homeland Security in 2013 to drain the ammo supply from the population. Didn't work. It had nothing to do with race.

 

 

Otherwise if you dislike my position on the state of America's gun culture, my position on the cause of it, or any statement i've made around the influence firearm manufacturers have on the debate and discussion, do feel free to actually address any of those points. Or even contribute a point of your own.

It doesn't matter if I like your position or not. My contributing point is it doesn't matter how you feel about any of this. As long as the 2nd Amendment is included in our highest law of the land... nothing you feel means anything. It has nothing to do with race.

 

 

 

 

There's the Schrodinger's Obama: Simultaneously doing a thing, but also not doing the thing. Lovely. Not  that Obama has anything to do with the topic at hand beyond one off hand example used to illustrate my point. So you know, moving on. 

 

On the subject of such  illustrations however, thank you for continuing to be a living demonstration of my point re: a minority of Americans holding the second amendment as somehow more absolute than any other right held by American citizens. You are literally repeating the gun lobbies nonsense wholesale. You're also fundamentally wrong. If you take the Heller decision as the ground (which is it's own issue, but whatever)...well even Scalia agreed: 

 

Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms 

 

The second amendment prevents the US government from banning the sale or possession of arms, absent some significant compelling interest (ie, why you can't go out and buy a howitzer willy nilly). It does not prevent either the federal government, or the states from regulating the sale and ownership. 

 

And even then all of this remains off topic. The second amendment has little to do with the political and social influence of the gun lobby, the literally millions of dollars they've poured into lobbying  groups and PR firms in order to maintain their bottom line or pretty much any other point anyone here has brought up. 

[DeathMerchant]

[quote name="onbekende" post="939340" timestamp="1518990060"]If your 2nd amendment is so holy, why aren't you guys sporting bazooka's?
 
 I should point out that most US States allow the civilian transfer and possession of Destructive Devices (DD), as they fall under the NFA laws. Why don't you see them outside of private collections? Mostly has to do with cost. Not only are you required to pay a $200 tax stamp to register that Destructive Device (lets say its a Bazooka from WW2), but each 'round' of explosive ammunition must also be registered and you have to pay a $200 tax stamp on each individual 'round'. So if you want to buy 5 Bazooka rockets, not only do you have to pay the high upfront cost of the rockets, but you are shelling out an additional $1,000 in tax stamps. The way around that high cost would be if you wanted inert rounds with no explosive warheads. Yugoslavian SKS rifles are sold in the US with the rifle grenade attachment, and you can buy foam/plastic grenades to launch. Those inert rifle grenades don't require a $200 tax stamp as the possess no explosive properties.

[Lysistrata]

And even then all of this remains off topic. The second amendment has little to do with the political and social influence of the gun lobby, the literally millions of dollars they've poured into lobbying groups and PR firms in order to maintain their bottom line or pretty much any other point anyone here has brought up.

Good... I'm glad I'm getting somewhere. So it appears your real problem is with campaign finance. You don't like that an organization has been created to protect the 2nd Amendment. The NRA is this organization. Do you actually believe that the NRA gives money to a candidate, and that candidate changes his, or her, view on gun control? That's absurd. The NRA will support a candidate that already shares their view on the 2nd Amendment... and I will remind you that it's a Constitutional right they are protecting.

 

I wager you have no problem with Fahr LLC, Paloma Partners, Service Employees International Union, Newsweb Corp, NextGen Climate Action, American Federation of Teachers, Priorities USA, National Education Association, Laborers Union, Soros Fund Management, Carpenters and Joiners Union, Bloomberg LP, Pritzker Group, For Our Future, AFL-CIO, Asana, Saban Capitol Group, American Federation of State/County/Municipal Employees, Comcast Corp, Environment America, Operating Engineers Union, Plumbers/Pipefitters Union, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, League of Conservation Voters, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and the entire Hollywood/Television/Entertainment Mega-group... just to scratch the surface... and they all push for things that are not in the Constitution. Go figure.

 

                                                                             

[DeathMerchant]

I wager you have no problem with Fahr LLC, Paloma Partners, Service Employees International Union, Newsweb Corp, NextGen Climate Action, American Federation of Teachers, Priorities USA, National Education Association, Laborers Union, Soros Fund Management, Carpenters and Joiners Union, Bloomberg LP, Pritzker Group, For Our Future, AFL-CIO, Asana, Saban Capitol Group, American Federation of State/County/Municipal Employees, Comcast Corp, Environment America, Operating Engineers Union, Plumbers/Pipefitters Union, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, League of Conservation Voters, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and the entire Hollywood/Television/Entertainment Mega-group... just to scratch the surface... and they all push for things that are not in the Constitution. Go figure.

 

I think the same exact thing anytime someone blames the NRA for being a massive financial entity, then proceeds to complain about their donations controlling Congress.

 

I will let everyone in on a secret. The NRA, really doesn't have that much money. It just appears to have a massive amount due to media hype. Traditionally speaking, whatever the NRA spends trying to get a candidate elected, it is often a paltry sum to what the Liberal groups/donors give to their candidate.

[Lysistrata]

We all hate the lobbyists on the other side... but what the left is trying to do to the NRA is deny them the 1st Amendment Constitutional right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Batting a thousand here... in order to stomp on their 2nd Amendment rights... we have to stomp on their 1st Amendment rights. I think they hate the USA a little bit, or at least they hate what the USA is.

[SeaBeeGipson]

I don't believe the shooting has anything to do with "gun culture". The killer would kill regardless. Whether he had access to a gun,

Knives - (DailyMail's Knife Statistics - Britain / Source - Annual Crime Survey - does not include crimes by minors), Canada's Violence Statistics (Knifes #1 weapon used, guns second with 37% v 30% respectively.)

Bombs - UK Terrorist Backtrack for 2017 (Please see most are bombs or explosive materials) 

We can even look at the past few years for solely the US (to include shootings, bombings, knife/sword attacks, vehicle attacks.) - color coated for type of incident too
Feb. 18th, 2010 - Dude flies a plane into the IRS building in Austin, Texas. 2 Dead (1 IRS employee and himself), 13 injured.
May 1st, 2010 - Dude tries to ingite a bomb in Times Square, thankfully bomb fails to go off
October 29th, 2010 -  Cargo planes  discovered with plastic explosive bombs, destined for two synagogues in Chicago. Thankfully, discovered beforehand.
August 5th, 2012 - Sikh Temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin came under shooting from domestic terrorist. Seven dead (six + the shooter), 4 injured
Feb. 3rd - 12th - Christoper Dorner killing spree and manhunt in Southern California 5 Dead (4 + Christoper Dorner), 6 inured, mainly police officers and their families
April 15th, 2012 - Boston Bombing (please note the shootout related to this event was in regards to the police and the bombers) - 6 dead ( 5 + 1 bomber), 281 injured (280 + 1 bomber)
October 24th, 2014 - New York City Hatchet attack - 3 police injured, attacker dead
June 15th, 2017 - Charleston Church Shooting - 9 dead, 1 injured
December 2nd, 2015 - San Bernarindo Shooting, 16 dead ( 14 + 2 attackers), 24 injured
June 12th, 2016 - Orlando NightCLub shooting, 50 dead (49+1 attacker), 53 injured
September 17th-19th - New York/New Jersey Bombings, 35 injured (34 + 1 bomber)
November 28th, 2016 - Ohio State Stabbing, Vehicle Runthrough, 1 attacker dead, 13 injured
August 12th, 2017 - Charlottesville protest - Protest by antifa and white supremesicts led to one driving a charger through the crowd, 1 dead, 19 injured
October 1st, 2017 - Las Vegas Sniper - 59 killed, 529 injured
October 31, 2017 - New York Truck Attack - Dude drives rented truck through crowd, 8 dead, 12 injured (11 + 1 attacker)


As this says, there are multiple ways people will commit violence. When guns are taken away, or inaccessible, they will find other alternatives. Sick minds will do what sick minds want to do. We can make it harder, yes, but blaming the majority of gun owners ( or knife collectors, or car enthusiasts) because of the actions of a few is non-sense. 

Here are the deadliest attacks in US history
9/11 Twin Towers - 2759 dead, ~8700 injured
9/11 Pentagon - 189 dead, ~200 injured
9/11 Flight - ~45 dead

October 31st, 1999 - Intentional crash of Egyptian Air, 217 dead
20 April, 1999 - Columbine (not one of the deadliest in history, but impactful so included) - 15 dead, 27 injured
17 Jul, 1999 - Mid-air explosion of TWA 800 - 230 dead
19th April, 1995 - Oklahoma City Bombing - 169 dead, 675 injured
27th April - 2nd May, 1993 - LA Riots - multiple incidents shootings, stabbings, bare-hand beatings, vehicles running people over - 58 dead, ~4,000 injured
25 Mar, 1990 - Arson in New York Social Club - 87 dead


As we can see, most of the deadliest attacks happened from Planes and bombings. Are we still allowing to buy Bleach/Ammonia (mustard gas), alcohol, a rag, and a lighter (molotav), or fertilizer with ammonium nitrate and fuel? Security on planes might have been stricter, but as I stated earlier, it doesn't neglect people from doing evil, just changes their tactics. (Increase in shootings and bombings). Could we use some sort of further evaluation of guns? Yes. I has ALWAYS believed no one who knows how to use a gun responsively should buy one. A target course to ensure someone can aim properly, a written test over basic gun knowledge (no booger hook on the trigger unless you plan to shoot, etc). However, I also believe in using guns as a deterrent. 

Take the recent shooting in FL. The JROTC kids used kevlar mats to block a doorway. The reality? A 5.56 would pierce those mats like paper. However, the classroom became a HARD target. A shooter without that knowledge is not going to waste limited ammo on a doorway blocked by Kelvar when soft targets exist. Where I live in Texas, we have dozens of schools with armed teachers. They've been armed for years. I've done work on several. The security is intense. (No parking outside the parking lot, no running cars around the entrances or within X amount of the school, the armed teachers are trained and the students never know who has the gun (concealed)). I can also say, I've never seen a shooting at any of these schools. People choose soft targets, not hard targets. You don't see terrorist trying to drive an explosive truck through the white house gate. You don't see people trying to shoot up a gun convention.

Taking away guns won't accomplish anything. Beyond that, taking away "Scary" guns won't either. Like I stated, a 5.56 will pierce those kelvar mats. You don't need an AR-15 to fire a 5.56 or larger round. That's just my take on this whole thing. 

I feel sad for the families involved. I've watched videos of the news, and even the snapchats of the kids during the chaos (guys in my military group chat share it alot). One thing we did discuss that broke my heart is these are kids. A few guys kept stating what they would do, or how they would react. The reality we need to realize is these are high school kids. They aren't trained. They aren't accustomed to hearing gun fire. They don't and shouldn't have to live with the idea of "I might be attacked today", whether by guns, bombings, or knives. It really is heartbreaking.

 

[DeathMerchant]

^ Seeing the incidents color coded was nice. Thank you for listing it all out in an easy to understand format.

[Fox Fire]

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/day-prior-parkland-grandmother-foiled-grandson-s-alleged-school-shooting-n848426

 

 

Even if all firearms are removed it won't matter if people still want to kill people they are going to do it. The only difference is they aren't going to be as effective at it.

 

I believe the point RH is trying to make, correct me if I'm mistaken, is that behavior is a visible response to stimuli and that response is shaped by our culture. Looking at statistics there is an increase in "mass" shootings over the years. Now while correlation doesn't imply causation in this case "it does waggle its eyebrows suggestively and gesture furtively while mouthing 'look over there'".(XKCD)

Sure to some extent crazies are going to be crazy but the point trying to be made is at what point are these just "mentally ill people" and what point are they "born and bred" to think like this.

Mass shootings are not on the rise per say, they are just getting more deadly. The frequency is about the same as it was in the 80s and 90s. 

 

 

[quote name="onbekende" post="939340" timestamp="1518990060"]If your 2nd amendment is so holy, why aren't you guys sporting bazooka's?
 
 I should point out that most US States allow the civilian transfer and possession of Destructive Devices (DD), as they fall under the NFA laws. Why don't you see them outside of private collections? Mostly has to do with cost. Not only are you required to pay a $200 tax stamp to register that Destructive Device (lets say its a Bazooka from WW2), but each 'round' of explosive ammunition must also be registered and you have to pay a $200 tax stamp on each individual 'round'. So if you want to buy 5 Bazooka rockets, not only do you have to pay the high upfront cost of the rockets, but you are shelling out an additional $1,000 in tax stamps. The way around that high cost would be if you wanted inert rounds with no explosive warheads. Yugoslavian SKS rifles are sold in the US with the rifle grenade attachment, and you can buy foam/plastic grenades to launch. Those inert rifle grenades don't require a $200 tax stamp as the possess no explosive properties.

This^

Many weapons that people seem to think are illegal are not illegal. Just very expensive. 

 

To add to all of this, assault weapons are a tiny fraction of American murders. The favorite murder weapon in the US is by far a handgun. Drug and gang related crime kills far more people than the occasional mass shooter. But nobody cares about them black ghetto kids. We only talk about this whenever some white kids get shot. Taste the rainbow...

[Rand0m her0]

I don't believe the shooting has anything to do with "gun culture". The killer would kill regardless. Whether he had access to a gun,

As we can see, most of the deadliest attacks happened from Planes and bombings. Are we still allowing to buy Bleach/Ammonia (mustard gas), alcohol, a rag, and a lighter (molotav), or fertilizer with ammonium nitrate and fuel? Security on planes might have been stricter, but as I stated earlier, it doesn't neglect people from doing evil, just changes their tactics. (Increase in shootings and bombings). Could we use some sort of further evaluation of guns? Yes. I has ALWAYS believed no one who knows how to use a gun responsively should buy one. A target course to ensure someone can aim properly, a written test over basic gun knowledge (no booger hook on the trigger unless you plan to shoot, etc). However, I also believe in using guns as a deterrent. 

Take the recent shooting in FL. The JROTC kids used kevlar mats to block a doorway. The reality? A 5.56 would pierce those mats like paper. However, the classroom became a HARD target. A shooter without that knowledge is not going to waste limited ammo on a doorway blocked by Kelvar when soft targets exist. Where I live in Texas, we have dozens of schools with armed teachers. They've been armed for years. I've done work on several. The security is intense. (No parking outside the parking lot, no running cars around the entrances or within X amount of the school, the armed teachers are trained and the students never know who has the gun (concealed)). I can also say, I've never seen a shooting at any of these schools. People choose soft targets, not hard targets. You don't see terrorist trying to drive an explosive truck through the white house gate. You don't see people trying to shoot up a gun convention.

Taking away guns won't accomplish anything. Beyond that, taking away "Scary" guns won't either. Like I stated, a 5.56 will pierce those kelvar mats. You don't need an AR-15 to fire a 5.56 or larger round. That's just my take on this whole thing. 

I feel sad for the families involved. I've watched videos of the news, and even the snapchats of the kids during the chaos (guys in my military group chat share it alot). One thing we did discuss that broke my heart is these are kids. A few guys kept stating what they would do, or how they would react. The reality we need to realize is these are high school kids. They aren't trained. They aren't accustomed to hearing gun fire. They don't and shouldn't have to live with the idea of "I might be attacked today", whether by guns, bombings, or knives. It really is heartbreaking.

 

 

 

5% of the world's population, 33% of the mass shootings. And if you aim for any sort of "mass killing" and then exclude acts of organized terrorism, things tilt even worse for the USA. the US is literally the only country in the world in which attacks like this happen on a regular basis.  There were more incidents of mass shootings in the USA in 2017  alone than Europe has seen with any sort of weapon in the last decade. You're also equating all acts of violence as comparable, which they're manifestly not. Treating a group of murderous bastards flying planes into the trade center as part of a religiously motivated terrorist organization that arose out of socio-political factors half the world away dating back to the cold war and this asshole kid shooting up his former school....not the same. They're just not. Treating them as equlviant makes as much sense as saying "Millions of people died last year from non trafic accident causes so we don't need to work to improve trafic safety because people die anyways." 

 

 

When you see people call out shit like the AR-15, it's not because ooooh scary gun kills more people but because it's marketed like this. That shit is bascily why it's on the restricted list in canada, it's not marketed as a hunting rifle, or something for target shooting, or hell even something for home defense. Instead it's....frankly i'm not even fucking sure what Bushmaster was going for there. You want a rifle that does bascily  the same thing, you can find similar ones, all easily acquirable. And if you really really want an AR-15, you can still get one. A few of the rest on the restricted list are ones that bascily have no real purpose from a civil PoV; rifle and shotguns meant to be easily concealable for example. 

 

The model couldn't be wholesale ported over to america, but the net effect and the goal would be useful. It helps towards having guns being treated as tools (and dangerous ones)  not toys, allows for people who are dumbfucks who shouldn't be trusted with a nerf gun to lose their access, and generally promotes culture of a greater responsibility. And similar models exist around the world. This isn't an untested hypothetical, this isn't some serious experiment, it works around the world. Canada has as many, possibly more gun owners than the USA as a percentage of the population, it has a lot of cross cultural pollination with the USA, shares many of the same ideals and yet doesn't have this problem. It's not a coincidence. 

 

 

 

 can also say, I've never seen a shooting at any of these schools. People choose soft targets, not hard targets.

 

I've a walrus repelling rock for sale. Guaranteed you won't be attacked by a walrus  while you're holding it. 

 

All that security is reactive, if someone walks in with a rifle the best it can do is limit the issue, not prevent it. Unless you get very very lucky, an armed teacher can respond after the first shot is fired. Which you know, if you consider 15-20 kids getting shot instead of 30+ a good deal, may be worth it...but that's a pretty shit metric for a solution. 

 

For that matter, even if it did work what's gonna stop someone doing it before class whenever someone's outside. Or doing it at a movie theater with a field trip.  Or shooting up the local library where the kids go to study. Or the community center. or the....

 

Unless you want to turn every single location where people gather in more than small numbers into a small military base, the approach fails. All you'll do it redirect targets, not prevent it.  

 

 

 

 

I wager you have no problem with Fahr LLC, Paloma Partners, Service Employees International Union, Newsweb Corp, NextGen Climate Action, American Federation of Teachers, Priorities USA, National Education Association, Laborers Union, Soros Fund Management, Carpenters and Joiners Union, Bloomberg LP, Pritzker Group, For Our Future, AFL-CIO, Asana, Saban Capitol Group, American Federation of State/County/Municipal Employees, Comcast Corp, Environment America, Operating Engineers Union, Plumbers/Pipefitters Union, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, League of Conservation Voters, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and the entire Hollywood/Television/Entertainment Mega-group... just to scratch the surface... and they all push for things that are not in the Constitution. Go figure.

 

I think the same exact thing anytime someone blames the NRA for being a massive financial entity, then proceeds to complain about their donations controlling Congress.

 

I will let everyone in on a secret. The NRA, really doesn't have that much money. It just appears to have a massive amount due to media hype. Traditionally speaking, whatever the NRA spends trying to get a candidate elected, it is often a paltry sum to what the Liberal groups/donors give to their candidate.

 

 

 

Fortunately it takes very little money to buy a politician in the USA. Seriously, a couple thousand bucks in campaign contributions and the promise of some more or an "official endorsement" in the future can be enough to get support. It's kinda pathetic.    The why of that is a whole other issue however. 

 

As well, net spending is not the net effect on how law gets shaped. We've seen this over and over again. To use a settled example rather than a current one: Look into the history of leaded gasoline getting banned. The issue had been well recognized since the 1960s, and had the first mandate to reduce it put in place by nixon in the 70s, but by lobbying a relative handful of the right candidates the oil companies managed to delay a full ban till freaking 1995. It's not about spraying money everywhere, you threaten jobs in a few states with influential  party members, agree to help promote candidates in a few key states next election, withdraw support from a rival to to, maybe give somebody's kid a job and generally some basic horse trading and 50 fucking years of gradual phase out of freaking leaded gasoline in order to protect profits. 

 

Secondarily: while most lobbying and campaign finance in the USA is just legalized bribery, you can very much pick and choose who to criticize more and why. Pharmaceutical companies and the ACLU both spend money on political causes and lobbying. However right now the pharmaceutical companies are spending their money to bury their role in the opioid crisis, while the ACLU continues to deal with it's agenda of citizen rights issues.The whole system is filthy, but *one of these things is not like the other*

 

The NRA is one of the greatest cons in the US however. They don't support individual rights, and they don't represent gun owners. They're a marketing and lobbying tool for gun manufacturers, and everything about it's current actions and tactics is literally borrowed wholesale from the tobacco industry. They're also just *one* corporate controlled political organ. Groups like ALEC and the influence they give corporations on drafting legislation are rather more concerning.