More Mass shootings

[swake]

pancakes are you talking about.

Don't misjudge the human capacity for ingenuity. I think you are wildly underestimating it.

You literally don't understand?

[heironymouspasparagus]

NRA comes out in favor of regulating bump stocks.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/nra-white-house-congress-support-review-lawfulness-bump-stocks-190949986.html

[Conan71]

"Bump Stock" is just the latest bogeyman kind of like "Assault Rifle" was a made up term designed to create fear in the minds of those who don't know anything about firearms.  It's terrorism-by-media if you will.

Listening to the media group grope these events is as meaningful as me regaling a room with my vast knowledge of neurosurgery or nuclear physics- it's just painful and embarrassing.

Meanwhile the 24 hour wall-to-wall coverage on this is empowering someone somewhere to want to make his statement with 60 victims or more.

Paddock doesn't seem to fit the pattern from what is known so far, but I'd be curious to know how many other perpetrators of these mass killings might have been institutionalized in the past before we decided in-patient mental treatment was unfair or violated basic civil rights or simply quit prioritizing funding for in-patient facilities.  To that end- a blame game over whether it was Dims or Repugs who effected that change is pointless.  It's obvious society's attitude toward our mental health system is failing us on many levels, not just when a catastrophe like this happens.  Other symptoms are chronic homelessness as well as untreated addiction issues.

[BKDotCom]

Meanwhile the 24 hour wall-to-wall coverage on this is empowering someone somewhere to want to make his statement with 60 victims or more.

I though it was the automatic weapons  that empowered someone to kill 58 and injure 500+.
Saying the media causes mass shootings is like saying video games encourage violence.

[TeeDub]

I though it was the automatic weapons  that empowered someone to kill 58 and injure 500+.
Saying the media causes mass shootings is like saying video games encourage violence.

I'm not sure how this analogy thing works...   If a crazy shoots a crowd, we blame the guns...

So if a drunk kills someone while driving, do I blame the car or the alcohol?

(FYI, crazies with a truck have killed more people than this in a single incident.....   Do we discuss banning the rental of U-Hauls next?)

[heironymouspasparagus]

I'm not sure how this analogy thing works...   If a crazy shoots a crowd, we blame the guns...

So if a drunk kills someone while driving, do I blame the car or the alcohol?

(FYI, crazies with a truck have killed more people than this in a single incident.....   Do we discuss banning the rental of U-Hauls next?)

Or how about crazies with large airplanes?  When are we gonna outlaw 737's ??

[TeeDub]

Or how about crazies with large airplanes?  When are we gonna outlaw 737's ??

Son of a grumble!    I didn't realize that those were even a thing!   Now that I am aware of them, I think we should have ban them.

[heironymouspasparagus]

We need a brief "cute" break... this should do.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=rRi8LptvFZY

[BKDotCom]

I'm not sure how this analogy thing works...   If a crazy shoots a crowd, we blame the guns...

I though we blamed the media?

(FYI, crazies with a truck have killed more people than this in a single incident.....   Do we discuss banning the rental of U-Hauls next?)

AR-15's are made to kill people, Trucks are not.  Perhaps if there were some mods available on the market designed to make trucks more lethal, then yes, there should be regulations on the lethal truck mods..  

[swake]

I though we blamed the media?

AR-15's are made to kill people, Trucks are not.  Perhaps if there were some mods available on the market designed to make trucks more lethal, then yes, there should be regulations on the lethal truck mods..  

Gun nuts give me a headache.

Americans own more than half the worlds guns. Only 1/3 of American adults own a gun. Half of the 300 million guns in the US are owned by just 3% of adults. What on earth could that 3% be compensating for?

[TeeDub]

I though we blamed the media?

AR-15's are made to kill people, Trucks are not.  

I have shot several AR-15s.   Strangely none of them ever killed anyone.   A deer or two maybe.   Lots of paper targets, silhouettes, cans, etc.    Never a person.  (And before you say it, I have never killed anyone with a truck either.)  

That being said, I would bet, even with this incident, there are less deaths per year attributed to the AR-15 in the US than to trucks.  


(FYI The National Shooting Sports Foundation estimates there are roughly 5 million to 10 million AR-15 rifles owned in the United States.)

[swake]

I have shot several AR-15s.   Strangely none of them ever killed anyone.   A deer or two maybe.   Lots of paper targets, silhouettes, cans, etc.    Never a person.  (And before you say it, I have never killed anyone with a truck either.)  

That being said, I would bet, even with this incident, there are less deaths per year attributed to the AR-15 in the US than to trucks.  


(FYI The National Shooting Sports Foundation estimates there are roughly 5 million to 10 million AR-15 rifles owned in the United States.)

We have two different issues. Gun deaths and mass murders. First, overall gun deaths. By far most people that die by a gun are shot by a handgun. More than half of those are suicide. A plurality of the rest of gun deaths are murder between people that know each other. If a gun wasn't present a large percentage of those people wouldn't die each year. Some people would still succeed in killing themselves with pills or kill their spouse with a knife, but a handgun is so much a better tool to kill in a crime of passion or depression.

Assault rifles aren't used very often in crimes or self defense. So banning assault rifles again wouldn't change the overall statistics of gun deaths in this country. But assault rifles ARE used in mass murders. These ugly mass killings almost always are committed with assault style rifles.

Banning assault rifles probably would help with these mass murders, at least to make them less deadly. But addressing gun violence is going to take other measures. It's too bad Republicans at the direction of the NRA have banned the government from studying gun violence. The NRA is more dangerous and has killed far more people that terrorists and wars over the last 30 years. It's just a lobby for gun makers, and it has a lot of blood on it's hands.

[TeeDub]

I understand that we can round the edges on corners to make them safer for people, but crazy will always find a way to hurt people. 

Guns are merely a tool, that when used right, levels the playing field.  (ie. If a 300 lb man breaks into your house, intent on stealing your stuff and raping your wife, the only chance many people would have to stop the attack is through the use of a firearm.   Let's be honest, the police would not get there before serious harm could happen.)

If you ban guns, crazy will just move on to the next best thing, whatever it may happen to be.   (The truck attack in Nice, France.  Eighty-six people were killed, all but three of them at the time of the attack. The dead included 10 children and teenagers....  The Filipino laborer that went berserk and killed 17 with a machete...  etc.)

[swake]

I understand that we can round the edges on corners to make them safer for people, but crazy will always find a way to hurt people. 

Guns are merely a tool, that when used right, levels the playing field.  (ie. If a 300 lb man breaks into your house, intent on stealing your stuff and raping your wife, the only chance many people would have to stop the attack is through the use of a firearm.   Let's be honest, the police would not get there before serious harm could happen.)

If you ban guns, crazy will just move on to the next best thing, whatever it may happen to be.   (The truck attack in Nice, France.  Eighty-six people were killed, all but three of them at the time of the attack. The dead included 10 children and teenagers....  The Filipino laborer that went berserk and killed 17 with a machete...  etc.)

You won't remove all threats by banning all guns. But the fact does remain that the single best thing you can do to lower your odds of being killed by a gun is to not have a gun in your home. The idea that you are going to protect your family by having a gun is extremely remote, but having the gun present increases your own risk greatly. By suicide, accidents and family violence.

We need to have real studies on how to mitigate gun violence. The American public at this time has no appetite to ban guns, excepting assault rifles, so that's a non-starter to really address overall gun violence. But there may be other workable solutions to lessen risk We need to study those ideas.

[heironymouspasparagus]

We have two different issues. Gun deaths and mass murders. First, overall gun deaths. By far most people that die by a gun are shot by a handgun. More than half of those are suicide. A plurality of the rest of gun deaths are murder between people that know each other. If a gun wasn't present a large percentage of those people wouldn't die each year. Some people would still succeed in killing themselves with pills or kill their spouse with a knife, but a handgun is so much a better tool to kill in a crime of passion or depression.

Assault rifles aren't used very often in crimes or self defense. So banning assault rifles again wouldn't change the overall statistics of gun deaths in this country. But assault rifles ARE used in mass murders. These ugly mass killings almost always are committed with assault style rifles.

Banning assault rifles probably would help with these mass murders, at least to make them less deadly. But addressing gun violence is going to take other measures. It's too bad Republicans at the direction of the NRA have banned the government from studying gun violence. The NRA is more dangerous and has killed far more people that terrorists and wars over the last 30 years. It's just a lobby for gun makers, and it has a lot of blood on it's hands.

Here is some summary data from Brookings.  Very stark data there.  Black men are killed 33 per 100k.  White men at about 17 per 100k.  Two to one ratio.   Blacks are 12% of the population.  That is an 8 to 1 ratio.   The effect is that 16 times as many blacks can expect to die from gun violence as whites.  There have been laws written for over 100 years to specifically target gun ownership by blacks.  If you keep guns out of the hands of blacks, there will be 2/3 of  the gun deaths eliminated.  It is the same kind of short sighted stick your head in the sand approach as the concept of blanket gun prohibition.  Does not find, let alone address the root cause of the problems.    

It's called the "drunkard's search".  Google it.   On second thought, I will just put it here.

"A policeman sees a drunk man searching for something under a streetlight and asks what the drunk has lost. He says he lost his keys and they both look under the streetlight together. After a few minutes the policeman asks if he is sure he lost them here, and the drunk replies, no, and that he lost them in the park. The policeman asks why he is searching here, and the drunk replies, "this is where the light is".


https://www.brookings.edu/blog/social-mobility-memos/2015/12/15/guns-and-race-the-different-worlds-of-black-and-white-americans/


As for your comment about NRA being terrorists.  bull sh$t.  

Another meme highlighting what a crock of carp that is.

Legal gun owners have over 200 million guns in this country and about 25 trillion rounds of ammunition.  Seriously people, if we were the problem, you would know it.