and don't want to go back to that outdated way of thinking. Being glorified in the media and possibly being remembered definitely plays a role with some of these people.
Whoever first came up with the line we don't have a gun problem in America, we have a mental health problem fucking nailed it.
speaking as an outsider, I think America has a gun problem AND a mental health problem. mentally ill people + easy access to powerful firearms and infatuation with firearms = much higher incidence of mass shootings.
I agree. There are certainly a number of gun related issues that could be focused on and improved, but I don't think it is the #1 issue like so many (and I in the past) believe when these things happen. You don't go into an elementary school or a mall and shoot up strangers without having something seriously disconnected in your head.
as any political election thread is banned. Invariably we have about a half dozen ultra gun control freaks who get on the soap box and want to ban the unbannable. And then we have about half dozen not quite as fanatical gun rights advocates.
The two sides argue over the talking points every time there is an incident. It is divisive. It is useless. What is the point?
but I truly believe we have come to this as a result of a the glorification of violence - yeah we all love our action movies and TV shows and video games, but I believe we've desensitized ourselves (and our children) to the violence and have basically shown it as ok and "not real" to a degree.
Also, the media gives so much attention to these losers who commit these heinous acts that they achieve their mission of letting the word know how miserable they are and whatever their motive is.
Just a thought
so if you feel that these are the factors, what is your fix? do you ban/regulate all violent entertainment content? do you ban/force the media to not mention the names of the killers?
I don't have an answer Les. In our country we have great privileges. With great privileges comes great responsibility. I think we have collectively failed when it comes to responsibly managing our media and entertainment, and making sure we take care of those who need taking care of. I wish there was a simple answer. I was just making an observation.
This frees us up to discuss political issues (like gun control) if we like that kind of discussion.
Personally I think it would be horrible if we had to ban threads on newsworthy events as I enjoy them very much. The discussion of political stands related to that news is easy enough to stay out of if you want to, and these threads often turn into a great stream of information about the incidents.
Why is being against Islamic extremism and morons who shoot up schools mutually exclusive? And does this event cancel out the dozens of recent attacks committed by morons in the name of their faith?
RE: RE: I don't think it has to do with movies or games Â
and don't want to go back to that outdated way of thinking. Being glorified in the media and possibly being remembered definitely plays a role with some of these people.
Whoever first came up with the line we don't have a gun problem in America, we have a mental health problem fucking nailed it.
speaking as an outsider, I think America has a gun problem AND a mental health problem. mentally ill people + easy access to powerful firearms and infatuation with firearms = much higher incidence of mass shootings.
Actually Les, that is incorrect.
Western europe, with ~ the same population as the united States and all of them first world countries, the incidence is virtually the same. That was a few years back. I would dare to opine mass shootings appear to be on the uptick in Western Europe.
RE: RE: RE: I don't think it has to do with movies or games Â
and don't want to go back to that outdated way of thinking. Being glorified in the media and possibly being remembered definitely plays a role with some of these people.
Whoever first came up with the line we don't have a gun problem in America, we have a mental health problem fucking nailed it.
speaking as an outsider, I think America has a gun problem AND a mental health problem. mentally ill people + easy access to powerful firearms and infatuation with firearms = much higher incidence of mass shootings.
Actually Les, that is incorrect.
Western europe, with ~ the same population as the united States and all of them first world countries, the incidence is virtually the same. That was a few years back. I would dare to opine mass shootings appear to be on the uptick in Western Europe.
That's not exactly correct.
Between 2009-2013 there were 38 mass shooting incidents (3+ people shot) in the US. That's .12 incident per 1M people. When you compare to other westernized nations with permissive laws, the stats are fairly similiar. Some nations, Finland for instance, have a higher occurrence when adjusted for population.
However, comparisons to restricted gun laws tells a different story. Nations like the UK, Netherland, France and Canada who have restrictive gun laws and similar demographics have a fraction of the mass shooting instances we see here.
I realize that people on either side of the argument tend to cherry pick stats to support their bias, but this is pretty cut and dry.
Why is being against Islamic extremism and morons who shoot up schools mutually exclusive? And does this event cancel out the dozens of recent attacks committed by morons in the name of their faith?
There have been dozens of examples of Islamic extremists recently?
Why is being against Islamic extremism and morons who shoot up schools mutually exclusive? And does this event cancel out the dozens of recent attacks committed by morons in the name of their faith?
There have been dozens of examples of Islamic extremists recently?
Did you just wake from a year long nap?
Is it not possible to simultaneously care about terrorism and school violence? Or are we allowed to try and solve one problem at a time?
TOWNVILLE, S.C. — A volunteer firefighter who responded to the shooting at an elementary school Wednesday is said to have helped apprehend the shooter.
Jamie Brock, a 30-year veteran, reportedly “engaged the suspect and at that point took him down,” said Anderson County Emergency Management Director Taylor Jones.
Brock was able to hold the suspect until law enforcement arrived on scene. The 14-year-old shooter never entered the school, and was apprehended at the school’s playground, reported WISTV.
“There were some heroes here today,” Rev. Kyle Caudell, a chaplain for the local fire department told Greenville Online. “It could have been a ton worse.”
Two students and a teacher were shot; they were all transported to the hospital following the shooting. Before the shooting at Townville Elementary about 1:45 p.m., the teen gunned down his 47-year-old father, Jeffrey Osborne, at their home about 2 miles from the school, authorities told Associated Press.
Nice Job.
This is sad....why drives these kids to do this? Â
And access to guns certainly adds to the carnage...
keeping guns from mentally ill people....should be a law. I thought it was....
Keeping guns from 14 should be a law....which it is a law, no?
Laws are not the issue.
What is occurring in our society that drives kids to do this????...they tend to have less hardship in life....so i suspect when hardships occurs...they have a harder time dealing with it. I would blame gradma for wiping my son's ass...but I kept kicking it until he grew up.
And for those who think violence is a US problem .....need to travel more.
If anyone thinks removing the guns from lawful people will resolve this issue......think again. Guns protect lawful citizens....without them will cause massive crime, unlawfulness. Go to South Chicago.....guns are unlawful there.....but yet gun crime is rampant and the citizen are prisoners in their own community
RE: This is sad....why drives these kids to do this? Â
And access to guns certainly adds to the carnage...
keeping guns from mentally ill people....should be a law. I thought it was....
Keeping guns from 14 should be a law....which it is a law, no?
Laws are not the issue.
What is occurring in our society that drives kids to do this????...they tend to have less hardship in life....so i suspect when hardships occurs...they have a harder time dealing with it. I would blame gradma for wiping my son's ass...but I kept kicking it until he grew up.
And for those who think violence is a US problem .....need to travel more.
If anyone thinks removing the guns from lawful people will resolve this issue......think again. Guns protect lawful citizens....without them will cause massive crime, unlawfulness. Go to South Chicago.....guns are unlawful there.....but yet gun crime is rampant and the citizen are prisoners in their own community
The fly in your soup, of course, is the fact what while guns may be unlawful in Chicago, they are plentiful and rather easy to obtain in neighboring states. This is the same problem NY is facing with guns pouring in from Virginia.
And of course removing guns out of the equation will make folks safer. They already have in places like Canada, and France, and Germany. As referenced above.
This notion that citizens require guns to protect themselves is delusion. What's more likely is your gun being used to comitt a crime. As we've seen time and time again.
Just like 95% of drivers think they are better than average drivers, gun owners never think their gun will be used to hurt anybody. But then, shit happens. They lose their mind, the get angry, their wife has an affair, they make a mistake in handling it, they forget to lock it up etc.
It happens every day. And it happens to experienced gun owners and it happens to previously law abiding citizens every single day in this country.
YOU think it will never be YOU, but that provides slim solace to the rest of us.
that removing guns will make people safer is true.
yes, it may make them safer from gun violence, but the UK is not safer from violent crime (and I understand the different ways US and UK classify violent crime) and they have far more restrictive gun laws, and little gun violence.
I know this isn't reason for keeping the status quo for gun laws, but sometimes I think what would these monsters do if they didn't have guns. Do some of you think they'd simply decide, oh well I was about to murder some children at a school or mow down the people inside a predominantly black church, but since I don't have guns I'm just going to keep on living my life?
No, they'll find other ways of wreaking havoc, maybe even worse.
Some examples, and this conversation gets tiresome, are Columbine. Columbine was supposed to be a bombing, where the whackos only used planned to use guns to shoot the fleeing victims, but they thankfully wired the bomb wrong and it never detonated. that tragedy could have been infinitely worse than it was.
Boston Marathon only took pressure cookers.
Oklahoma City was fertilizer infused bombs
Bath all the way back in the 1920's in Maine killed more than 40 people including more kids than Sandy Hook was a bomb.
bombings are far more lethal than gun violence and again, not suggesting it's a reason to keep the status quo, but taking away the tool of destruction, doesn't change the intent and I'm not sure it will reduce much in the way of mass shootings.
the biggest benefit you'd probably get from removing all guns would be accidental deaths (pure guess by me) just based on crimes committed with legal vs illegal guns.
which means, more often than not I am going to use my gun to commit a crime, or to your other analogy, get in my car and get into an accident. More often than not, IMO, means 51% of the time, no?
You take away all guns, including the illegal guns, then sign me up. But you can't, so it won't and shouldn't happen. I don't even use my firearm for home protection but i'm sure as fuck not giving it back to the government knowing that criminals won't be doing the same.
Its a very unrealistic, and frankly, dumb idea to "ban" guns. It won't work, it can't work, and you won't be able to control the ones that are left on the streets of which there are tons.
which means, more often than not I am going to use my gun to commit a crime, or to your other analogy, get in my car and get into an accident. More often than not, IMO, means 51% of the time, no?
You take away all guns, including the illegal guns, then sign me up. But you can't, so it won't and shouldn't happen. I don't even use my firearm for home protection but i'm sure as fuck not giving it back to the government knowing that criminals won't be doing the same.
Its a very unrealistic, and frankly, dumb idea to "ban" guns. It won't work, it can't work, and you won't be able to control the ones that are left on the streets of which there are tons.
I wasn't acussing you.
I meant to say, it's more likely that the gun will go off inadvertantly through mishandling, be stolen, found by a child, or a myriad of other terrible things than you ever successfully defending yourself from home invaders.
Have any cop buddies who've had marital problems? If so, what did the department do once they found out?
You think that's because the PD thought they'd suddenly break bad and rob a bank?
RE: RE: RE: RE: I don't think it has to do with movies or games Â
and don't want to go back to that outdated way of thinking. Being glorified in the media and possibly being remembered definitely plays a role with some of these people.
Whoever first came up with the line we don't have a gun problem in America, we have a mental health problem fucking nailed it.
speaking as an outsider, I think America has a gun problem AND a mental health problem. mentally ill people + easy access to powerful firearms and infatuation with firearms = much higher incidence of mass shootings.
Actually Les, that is incorrect.
Western europe, with ~ the same population as the united States and all of them first world countries, the incidence is virtually the same. That was a few years back. I would dare to opine mass shootings appear to be on the uptick in Western Europe.
That's not exactly correct.
Between 2009-2013 there were 38 mass shooting incidents (3+ people shot) in the US. That's .12 incident per 1M people. When you compare to other westernized nations with permissive laws, the stats are fairly similiar. Some nations, Finland for instance, have a higher occurrence when adjusted for population.
However, comparisons to restricted gun laws tells a different story. Nations like the UK, Netherland, France and Canada who have restrictive gun laws and similar demographics have a fraction of the mass shooting instances we see here.
I realize that people on either side of the argument tend to cherry pick stats to support their bias, but this is pretty cut and dry.
the jarring number there is 38 rampage shootings where the next closest country Germany has 3. even on a per capita basis (which is omitted - only fatalities per capita are highlighted) the US is a huge outlier.
on top of fatalities there are people who are disabled, injured or permanently psychologically scarred by witnessing a rampage incident which results in significant loss of productivity, health care costs, and leading to a culture of fear and anger.
you are saying that its more likely to cause harm either on purpose or accidentally than it is to not harm someone if you are a gun owner? How do those numbers even add up?
Using a round number of 300 million guns in the US, that would mean there's over 150 million cases of gun violence...
Listen, I get the other side of things, if there was an easy way to make them all go away or make all illegal guns disappear out of thin air I think most people would be for that. But it just isn't possible. If all of a sudden law abiding citizens no longer have that right, you don't think potential chaos could ensue? What would stop anyone from coming into my home or your home?
and while we're at it, let's make the drugs illegal. They're causing lots of problems and they're all over the place. I haven't looked at the stats, but they might even cause more deaths than the guns do (which is enough as it is).
And it's probably my fault. Posting from my phone.
I've never owned a gun, but my dad did. One night - I must've been about 10 or 11 - he decided it was the right time to teach me how to clean a gun. So he takes it out, lays it over a chamis towel and takes out the mag. He then starts explain what each part is and what it does. As he's doing this, he explains how to grip and how pulling the trigger will draw the hammer back and so on. He pulls the trigger and the gun goes off. Fires a round right through our duplex sheetrock into the house next door. The knucklehead forgot about the round in the chamber. This is guy who served almost 20 years as a Staff Sgt., had over 2000 career jumps (who's also afraid of heights - dafuq?). Had more weapons training than most gun owners and he still fucked up. Luckily, the couple next door was out doing the dinner/movie thing and we're close friends of the family, because the round went through their livingroom sofa.
So I don't own a gun. I've also never had to battle home invaders.
And no, I don't think it guns were restricted that all hell breaks loose. Absurd.
we just had riots for a shooting before facts came out, and 70% of the rioters didn't even live in that city. You think if legal gun owners all of a sudden had to give back their guns that chaos wouldn't ensue? I think you severely underestimate the power of the unknown.
you are saying that its more likely to cause harm either on purpose or accidentally than it is to not harm someone if you are a gun owner? How do those numbers even add up?
Using a round number of 300 million guns in the US, that would mean there's over 150 million cases of gun violence...
Let me guess. You're not a math major. :)
As simply put as is possible - a firearm adds risk. Period. Dead stop. Risk that does not exist if there is no firearm.
There is ZERO risk of one of my guns ever being fired because I own ZERO guns. Regardless of how safe a gun owner may be, their risk can NEVER be ZERO.
What the actual risk is for an individual gun owner relies on countless factors.
as any political election thread is banned. Invariably we have about a half dozen ultra gun control freaks who get on the soap box and want to ban the unbannable. And then we have about half dozen not quite as fanatical gun rights advocates.
The two sides argue over the talking points every time there is an incident. It is divisive. It is useless. What is the point?
I agree, and I agree with banning political threads. There are plenty of other forums you can go to and yell about your views.
you are saying that its more likely to cause harm either on purpose or accidentally than it is to not harm someone if you are a gun owner? How do those numbers even add up?
Using a round number of 300 million guns in the US, that would mean there's over 150 million cases of gun violence...
Let me guess. You're not a math major. :)
As simply put as is possible - a firearm adds risk. Period. Dead stop. Risk that does not exist if there is no firearm.
There is ZERO risk of one of my guns ever being fired because I own ZERO guns. Regardless of how safe a gun owner may be, their risk can NEVER be ZERO.
What the actual risk is for an individual gun owner relies on countless factors.
No, i'm quite good at math though and I was responding to another posters comments, not making up my own. I fully realize having no guns = no risk, I simply did not argue otherwise so you should probably re-read my post that states that getting rid of all guns period would be the only way this works, yet that can't happen. And since it can't happen, we have this lovely debate.
you are saying that its more likely to cause harm either on purpose or accidentally than it is to not harm someone if you are a gun owner? How do those numbers even add up?
Using a round number of 300 million guns in the US, that would mean there's over 150 million cases of gun violence...
Let me guess. You're not a math major. :)
As simply put as is possible - a firearm adds risk. Period. Dead stop. Risk that does not exist if there is no firearm.
There is ZERO risk of one of my guns ever being fired because I own ZERO guns. Regardless of how safe a gun owner may be, their risk can NEVER be ZERO.
What the actual risk is for an individual gun owner relies on countless factors.
Ok what are you doing with all the millions of illegal, unmarked guns in the US?
you are saying that its more likely to cause harm either on purpose or accidentally than it is to not harm someone if you are a gun owner? How do those numbers even add up?
Using a round number of 300 million guns in the US, that would mean there's over 150 million cases of gun violence...
Listen, I get the other side of things, if there was an easy way to make them all go away or make all illegal guns disappear out of thin air I think most people would be for that. But it just isn't possible. If all of a sudden law abiding citizens no longer have that right, you don't think potential chaos could ensue? What would stop anyone from coming into my home or your home?
No. He's saying it's more likely to cause harm than to successfully use it to defend yourself.
By far the most likely outcome is that it never hurts anyone.
But between the extremes: It harms and innocent and it saves your life- the former is much more likely. It isn't all that difficult to understand.
you are saying that its more likely to cause harm either on purpose or accidentally than it is to not harm someone if you are a gun owner? How do those numbers even add up?
Using a round number of 300 million guns in the US, that would mean there's over 150 million cases of gun violence...
Let me guess. You're not a math major. :)
As simply put as is possible - a firearm adds risk. Period. Dead stop. Risk that does not exist if there is no firearm.
There is ZERO risk of one of my guns ever being fired because I own ZERO guns. Regardless of how safe a gun owner may be, their risk can NEVER be ZERO.
What the actual risk is for an individual gun owner relies on countless factors.
Ok what are you doing with all the millions of illegal, unmarked guns in the US?
Don't worry Dep, all the criminals will turn them in, nothing to worry about.
I like Uconn. Not here to disparage his decision to own a gun. Story wasn't intended to change anyone's mind. Just to point out how even the most well intentioned person in possession of a firearm, who's had significant training, can make a mistake that can cost someone their life.
In comment 13147264 section125 said:
Quote:
I agree, and I agree with banning political threads. There are plenty of other forums you can go to and yell about your views.
The idea of banning topics that one prefers not to read will never not be bizarre.
I'm continually amazed that the concept of "don't click on a thread/close a thread that does not appeal to you" (like I do with IMV stupid Fantasy threads) eludes the more delicate among us.
Yeah, there are "plenty of other" political forums. And fantasy forums. And movie forums. And breaking news forums. And video game forums, etc. etc.
Ok what are you doing with all the millions of illegal, unmarked guns in the US?
Me? Nothing. Those who own them own most of the risk. Most of that risk is to suicide, btw. Vast majority of gun fatalities in the U.S. are suicides.
So lets say this is even remotely true. You're ok with million of illegal guns in the US. So lets reverse course here. We do ban guns or get rid of them (not even possible by the way).... you dont think criminals, gangs, or even your every day citizens wont get a hold of them? Just because they are "illegal" does not mean they go away. Little bit of a fantasy world you live in, huh?
I do not own a gun and never will. However, I feel safer knowing that my neighbors can own them. I am a believer in less guns = more crime. Not necessarily mor emurders, but definitely increase in crime.
RE: I don't think it has to do with movies or games Â
and don't want to go back to that outdated way of thinking. Being glorified in the media and possibly being remembered definitely plays a role with some of these people.
Whoever first came up with the line we don't have a gun problem in America, we have a mental health problem fucking nailed it.
Combine that with notions that anyone can feel aggrieved and slighted when they don't feel their lives are perfect.
My mom was the last of nine children from the depression era. She used to say hat they were so busy trying it survive no one worried about the stupid shit we do. Basically idle hands do the devils work. We have so much and appreciate so little.
Also the idiocy that a pill will cure whatever ails us mentally is dangerous and myopic
When it's a Muslim, the usual cast of characters parades their xenophobic ignorant bullshit how this country is under attack. When it's a white Christian male, it's always "can't we just keep the politics out of a tragedy?"
The important difference is that the Muslim murderers are using mainstream current teachings of the religion. The Christian ones are not supported by any of the currently accepted doctrine or supported by the institutions of Christianity. I know it's hard for some people to believe that religious beliefs and teachings have consequences in our mostly secular society, but there is a major difference between Islam and other major religions, which clearly plays out on a daily basis around the world.
Me? Nothing. Those who own them own most of the risk. Most of that risk is to suicide, btw. Vast majority of gun fatalities in the U.S. are suicides.
So lets say this is even remotely true. You're ok with million of illegal guns in the US. So lets reverse course here. We do ban guns or get rid of them (not even possible by the way).... you dont think criminals, gangs, or even your every day citizens wont get a hold of them? Just because they are "illegal" does not mean they go away. Little bit of a fantasy world you live in, huh?
I do not own a gun and never will. However, I feel safer knowing that my neighbors can own them. I am a believer in less guns = more crime. Not necessarily mor emurders, but definitely increase in crime.
Let's say 'what' is remotely true? The gun suicide rate is well documented. And a simple web search will show you the likelihood of death by cause - heart disease and cancer are top-2 - almost half - death by auto accident at about 5%, death by firearm at about 2% and even there - 2-1 ration of suicides to other causes.
I know there is a lot of fear mongering out there, that we are in imminent danger of being shot always, but it simply isn't true - and it's VERY easy to find the raw data on that.
Sure, I would love it if America was sane with our gun laws, but we're not! No country is perfect - America has shown that at least in the short term, we are NOT changing ANY meaningful gun laws - we have proven that as a nation, we love guns MORE than we love people, even more than we love Children - it's not that I wouldn't prefer the laws to be more safe and sensible, it's simply that it is not who we are, or where we live.
So I don't own a gun, and I will never be shot. (statistically speaking)
On the one hand you say that fear of death by firearm is overblown and on the other claim that America loves guns more than they love kids.
By your logic we also love cars more that we love kids.
Every day we all manage risk in our lives- which is what you are talking about. The fact that we allow private ownership of firearms is just another of those risks that we manage...just like most of us choose driving as our main mode of transportation over much less dangerous methods.
Suggesting we "love guns more than we love kids" is incredibly disingenuous and adds nothing constructive to the conversation.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: you are way off base Â
On the one hand you say that fear of death by firearm is overblown and on the other claim that America loves guns more than they love kids.
By your logic we also love cars more that we love kids.
Every day we all manage risk in our lives- which is what you are talking about. The fact that we allow private ownership of firearms is just another of those risks that we manage...just like most of us choose driving as our main mode of transportation over much less dangerous methods.
Suggesting we "love guns more than we love kids" is incredibly disingenuous and adds nothing constructive to the conversation.
"On the one hand you say that fear of death by firearm is overblown and on the other claim that America loves guns more than they love kids." That isn't a logical comparison. That's "Do you walk to school or carry your lunch?"
As to the gun v car comparison - We do everything we can to make cars less deadly, right? Speed limits, airbags, seatbelts - we've cut our death rate from car accidents tremendously.
Show me a single meaningful thing we've done for gun safety that compares to that.
Whoever first came up with the line we don't have a gun problem in America, we have a mental health problem fucking nailed it.
Then stop posting and go away. I am paying for your nonsense.
The two sides argue over the talking points every time there is an incident. It is divisive. It is useless. What is the point?
Link - ( New Window )
Quote:
but I truly believe we have come to this as a result of a the glorification of violence - yeah we all love our action movies and TV shows and video games, but I believe we've desensitized ourselves (and our children) to the violence and have basically shown it as ok and "not real" to a degree.
Also, the media gives so much attention to these losers who commit these heinous acts that they achieve their mission of letting the word know how miserable they are and whatever their motive is.
Just a thought
so if you feel that these are the factors, what is your fix? do you ban/regulate all violent entertainment content? do you ban/force the media to not mention the names of the killers?
I don't have an answer Les. In our country we have great privileges. With great privileges comes great responsibility. I think we have collectively failed when it comes to responsibly managing our media and entertainment, and making sure we take care of those who need taking care of. I wish there was a simple answer. I was just making an observation.
Seriously? Throwing out this shit after a tragedy is really low.
This frees us up to discuss political issues (like gun control) if we like that kind of discussion.
Personally I think it would be horrible if we had to ban threads on newsworthy events as I enjoy them very much. The discussion of political stands related to that news is easy enough to stay out of if you want to, and these threads often turn into a great stream of information about the incidents.
Derp.
I'll bet you know more about ISIS than the generals do.
Why is being against Islamic extremism and morons who shoot up schools mutually exclusive? And does this event cancel out the dozens of recent attacks committed by morons in the name of their faith?
Quote:
and don't want to go back to that outdated way of thinking. Being glorified in the media and possibly being remembered definitely plays a role with some of these people.
Whoever first came up with the line we don't have a gun problem in America, we have a mental health problem fucking nailed it.
speaking as an outsider, I think America has a gun problem AND a mental health problem. mentally ill people + easy access to powerful firearms and infatuation with firearms = much higher incidence of mass shootings.
Actually Les, that is incorrect.
Western europe, with ~ the same population as the united States and all of them first world countries, the incidence is virtually the same. That was a few years back. I would dare to opine mass shootings appear to be on the uptick in Western Europe.
Quote:
In comment 13147234 GiantFilthy said:
Quote:
and don't want to go back to that outdated way of thinking. Being glorified in the media and possibly being remembered definitely plays a role with some of these people.
Whoever first came up with the line we don't have a gun problem in America, we have a mental health problem fucking nailed it.
speaking as an outsider, I think America has a gun problem AND a mental health problem. mentally ill people + easy access to powerful firearms and infatuation with firearms = much higher incidence of mass shootings.
Actually Les, that is incorrect.
Western europe, with ~ the same population as the united States and all of them first world countries, the incidence is virtually the same. That was a few years back. I would dare to opine mass shootings appear to be on the uptick in Western Europe.
That's not exactly correct.
Between 2009-2013 there were 38 mass shooting incidents (3+ people shot) in the US. That's .12 incident per 1M people. When you compare to other westernized nations with permissive laws, the stats are fairly similiar. Some nations, Finland for instance, have a higher occurrence when adjusted for population.
However, comparisons to restricted gun laws tells a different story. Nations like the UK, Netherland, France and Canada who have restrictive gun laws and similar demographics have a fraction of the mass shooting instances we see here.
I realize that people on either side of the argument tend to cherry pick stats to support their bias, but this is pretty cut and dry.
Talking of cherry picking. Didn't know Canada and Israel where part of western Europe either. My geography must suck.
Why is being against Islamic extremism and morons who shoot up schools mutually exclusive? And does this event cancel out the dozens of recent attacks committed by morons in the name of their faith?
There have been dozens of examples of Islamic extremists recently?
Talking of cherry picking. Didn't know Canada and Israel where part of western Europe either. My geography must suck.
Are you truly this dense?
I defined it for you in my post. It's 3+ people shot. The same way the FBI currently defines it.
Forget Israel. Compare the incidence of shootings in permissive countries to regulated countries.
Suddenly getting myopic isn't going to change the numbers.
Quote:
With this imagined Muslim persecution.
Why is being against Islamic extremism and morons who shoot up schools mutually exclusive? And does this event cancel out the dozens of recent attacks committed by morons in the name of their faith?
There have been dozens of examples of Islamic extremists recently?
Did you just wake from a year long nap?
Is it not possible to simultaneously care about terrorism and school violence? Or are we allowed to try and solve one problem at a time?
TOWNVILLE, S.C. — A volunteer firefighter who responded to the shooting at an elementary school Wednesday is said to have helped apprehend the shooter.
Jamie Brock, a 30-year veteran, reportedly “engaged the suspect and at that point took him down,” said Anderson County Emergency Management Director Taylor Jones.
Brock was able to hold the suspect until law enforcement arrived on scene. The 14-year-old shooter never entered the school, and was apprehended at the school’s playground, reported WISTV.
“There were some heroes here today,” Rev. Kyle Caudell, a chaplain for the local fire department told Greenville Online. “It could have been a ton worse.”
Two students and a teacher were shot; they were all transported to the hospital following the shooting. Before the shooting at Townville Elementary about 1:45 p.m., the teen gunned down his 47-year-old father, Jeffrey Osborne, at their home about 2 miles from the school, authorities told Associated Press.
Nice Job.
keeping guns from mentally ill people....should be a law. I thought it was....
Keeping guns from 14 should be a law....which it is a law, no?
Laws are not the issue.
What is occurring in our society that drives kids to do this????...they tend to have less hardship in life....so i suspect when hardships occurs...they have a harder time dealing with it. I would blame gradma for wiping my son's ass...but I kept kicking it until he grew up.
And for those who think violence is a US problem .....need to travel more.
If anyone thinks removing the guns from lawful people will resolve this issue......think again. Guns protect lawful citizens....without them will cause massive crime, unlawfulness. Go to South Chicago.....guns are unlawful there.....but yet gun crime is rampant and the citizen are prisoners in their own community
keeping guns from mentally ill people....should be a law. I thought it was....
Keeping guns from 14 should be a law....which it is a law, no?
Laws are not the issue.
What is occurring in our society that drives kids to do this????...they tend to have less hardship in life....so i suspect when hardships occurs...they have a harder time dealing with it. I would blame gradma for wiping my son's ass...but I kept kicking it until he grew up.
And for those who think violence is a US problem .....need to travel more.
If anyone thinks removing the guns from lawful people will resolve this issue......think again. Guns protect lawful citizens....without them will cause massive crime, unlawfulness. Go to South Chicago.....guns are unlawful there.....but yet gun crime is rampant and the citizen are prisoners in their own community
The fly in your soup, of course, is the fact what while guns may be unlawful in Chicago, they are plentiful and rather easy to obtain in neighboring states. This is the same problem NY is facing with guns pouring in from Virginia.
And of course removing guns out of the equation will make folks safer. They already have in places like Canada, and France, and Germany. As referenced above.
This notion that citizens require guns to protect themselves is delusion. What's more likely is your gun being used to comitt a crime. As we've seen time and time again.
It happens every day. And it happens to experienced gun owners and it happens to previously law abiding citizens every single day in this country.
YOU think it will never be YOU, but that provides slim solace to the rest of us.
You think the folks whom originally purchased a weapon ever envisioned said weapon would be used in Columbine, VA Tech, Sandy Hook, et al.
Or do you suppose they considered themselves sensible gun owners? That's the crux of the issue. People are idiots.
yes, it may make them safer from gun violence, but the UK is not safer from violent crime (and I understand the different ways US and UK classify violent crime) and they have far more restrictive gun laws, and little gun violence.
I know this isn't reason for keeping the status quo for gun laws, but sometimes I think what would these monsters do if they didn't have guns. Do some of you think they'd simply decide, oh well I was about to murder some children at a school or mow down the people inside a predominantly black church, but since I don't have guns I'm just going to keep on living my life?
No, they'll find other ways of wreaking havoc, maybe even worse.
Some examples, and this conversation gets tiresome, are Columbine. Columbine was supposed to be a bombing, where the whackos only used planned to use guns to shoot the fleeing victims, but they thankfully wired the bomb wrong and it never detonated. that tragedy could have been infinitely worse than it was.
Boston Marathon only took pressure cookers.
Oklahoma City was fertilizer infused bombs
Bath all the way back in the 1920's in Maine killed more than 40 people including more kids than Sandy Hook was a bomb.
bombings are far more lethal than gun violence and again, not suggesting it's a reason to keep the status quo, but taking away the tool of destruction, doesn't change the intent and I'm not sure it will reduce much in the way of mass shootings.
the biggest benefit you'd probably get from removing all guns would be accidental deaths (pure guess by me) just based on crimes committed with legal vs illegal guns.
You take away all guns, including the illegal guns, then sign me up. But you can't, so it won't and shouldn't happen. I don't even use my firearm for home protection but i'm sure as fuck not giving it back to the government knowing that criminals won't be doing the same.
Its a very unrealistic, and frankly, dumb idea to "ban" guns. It won't work, it can't work, and you won't be able to control the ones that are left on the streets of which there are tons.
You take away all guns, including the illegal guns, then sign me up. But you can't, so it won't and shouldn't happen. I don't even use my firearm for home protection but i'm sure as fuck not giving it back to the government knowing that criminals won't be doing the same.
Its a very unrealistic, and frankly, dumb idea to "ban" guns. It won't work, it can't work, and you won't be able to control the ones that are left on the streets of which there are tons.
I wasn't acussing you.
I meant to say, it's more likely that the gun will go off inadvertantly through mishandling, be stolen, found by a child, or a myriad of other terrible things than you ever successfully defending yourself from home invaders.
Have any cop buddies who've had marital problems? If so, what did the department do once they found out?
You think that's because the PD thought they'd suddenly break bad and rob a bank?
Quote:
In comment 13147245 Les in TO said:
Quote:
In comment 13147234 GiantFilthy said:
Quote:
and don't want to go back to that outdated way of thinking. Being glorified in the media and possibly being remembered definitely plays a role with some of these people.
Whoever first came up with the line we don't have a gun problem in America, we have a mental health problem fucking nailed it.
speaking as an outsider, I think America has a gun problem AND a mental health problem. mentally ill people + easy access to powerful firearms and infatuation with firearms = much higher incidence of mass shootings.
Actually Les, that is incorrect.
Western europe, with ~ the same population as the united States and all of them first world countries, the incidence is virtually the same. That was a few years back. I would dare to opine mass shootings appear to be on the uptick in Western Europe.
That's not exactly correct.
Between 2009-2013 there were 38 mass shooting incidents (3+ people shot) in the US. That's .12 incident per 1M people. When you compare to other westernized nations with permissive laws, the stats are fairly similiar. Some nations, Finland for instance, have a higher occurrence when adjusted for population.
However, comparisons to restricted gun laws tells a different story. Nations like the UK, Netherland, France and Canada who have restrictive gun laws and similar demographics have a fraction of the mass shooting instances we see here.
I realize that people on either side of the argument tend to cherry pick stats to support their bias, but this is pretty cut and dry.
on top of fatalities there are people who are disabled, injured or permanently psychologically scarred by witnessing a rampage incident which results in significant loss of productivity, health care costs, and leading to a culture of fear and anger.
Using a round number of 300 million guns in the US, that would mean there's over 150 million cases of gun violence...
Listen, I get the other side of things, if there was an easy way to make them all go away or make all illegal guns disappear out of thin air I think most people would be for that. But it just isn't possible. If all of a sudden law abiding citizens no longer have that right, you don't think potential chaos could ensue? What would stop anyone from coming into my home or your home?
I've never owned a gun, but my dad did. One night - I must've been about 10 or 11 - he decided it was the right time to teach me how to clean a gun. So he takes it out, lays it over a chamis towel and takes out the mag. He then starts explain what each part is and what it does. As he's doing this, he explains how to grip and how pulling the trigger will draw the hammer back and so on. He pulls the trigger and the gun goes off. Fires a round right through our duplex sheetrock into the house next door. The knucklehead forgot about the round in the chamber. This is guy who served almost 20 years as a Staff Sgt., had over 2000 career jumps (who's also afraid of heights - dafuq?). Had more weapons training than most gun owners and he still fucked up. Luckily, the couple next door was out doing the dinner/movie thing and we're close friends of the family, because the round went through their livingroom sofa.
So I don't own a gun. I've also never had to battle home invaders.
And no, I don't think it guns were restricted that all hell breaks loose. Absurd.
Using a round number of 300 million guns in the US, that would mean there's over 150 million cases of gun violence...
As simply put as is possible - a firearm adds risk. Period. Dead stop. Risk that does not exist if there is no firearm.
There is ZERO risk of one of my guns ever being fired because I own ZERO guns. Regardless of how safe a gun owner may be, their risk can NEVER be ZERO.
What the actual risk is for an individual gun owner relies on countless factors.
The two sides argue over the talking points every time there is an incident. It is divisive. It is useless. What is the point?
I agree, and I agree with banning political threads. There are plenty of other forums you can go to and yell about your views.
Quote:
you are saying that its more likely to cause harm either on purpose or accidentally than it is to not harm someone if you are a gun owner? How do those numbers even add up?
Using a round number of 300 million guns in the US, that would mean there's over 150 million cases of gun violence...
Let me guess. You're not a math major. :)
As simply put as is possible - a firearm adds risk. Period. Dead stop. Risk that does not exist if there is no firearm.
There is ZERO risk of one of my guns ever being fired because I own ZERO guns. Regardless of how safe a gun owner may be, their risk can NEVER be ZERO.
What the actual risk is for an individual gun owner relies on countless factors.
No, i'm quite good at math though and I was responding to another posters comments, not making up my own. I fully realize having no guns = no risk, I simply did not argue otherwise so you should probably re-read my post that states that getting rid of all guns period would be the only way this works, yet that can't happen. And since it can't happen, we have this lovely debate.
Quote:
you are saying that its more likely to cause harm either on purpose or accidentally than it is to not harm someone if you are a gun owner? How do those numbers even add up?
Using a round number of 300 million guns in the US, that would mean there's over 150 million cases of gun violence...
Let me guess. You're not a math major. :)
As simply put as is possible - a firearm adds risk. Period. Dead stop. Risk that does not exist if there is no firearm.
There is ZERO risk of one of my guns ever being fired because I own ZERO guns. Regardless of how safe a gun owner may be, their risk can NEVER be ZERO.
What the actual risk is for an individual gun owner relies on countless factors.
Ok what are you doing with all the millions of illegal, unmarked guns in the US?
Using a round number of 300 million guns in the US, that would mean there's over 150 million cases of gun violence...
Listen, I get the other side of things, if there was an easy way to make them all go away or make all illegal guns disappear out of thin air I think most people would be for that. But it just isn't possible. If all of a sudden law abiding citizens no longer have that right, you don't think potential chaos could ensue? What would stop anyone from coming into my home or your home?
No. He's saying it's more likely to cause harm than to successfully use it to defend yourself.
By far the most likely outcome is that it never hurts anyone.
But between the extremes: It harms and innocent and it saves your life- the former is much more likely. It isn't all that difficult to understand.
Quote:
In comment 13147731 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
you are saying that its more likely to cause harm either on purpose or accidentally than it is to not harm someone if you are a gun owner? How do those numbers even add up?
Using a round number of 300 million guns in the US, that would mean there's over 150 million cases of gun violence...
Let me guess. You're not a math major. :)
As simply put as is possible - a firearm adds risk. Period. Dead stop. Risk that does not exist if there is no firearm.
There is ZERO risk of one of my guns ever being fired because I own ZERO guns. Regardless of how safe a gun owner may be, their risk can NEVER be ZERO.
What the actual risk is for an individual gun owner relies on countless factors.
Ok what are you doing with all the millions of illegal, unmarked guns in the US?
Don't worry Dep, all the criminals will turn them in, nothing to worry about.
Quote:
In comment 13147731 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
Ok what are you doing with all the millions of illegal, unmarked guns in the US?
Quote:
I agree, and I agree with banning political threads. There are plenty of other forums you can go to and yell about your views.
The idea of banning topics that one prefers not to read will never not be bizarre.
I'm continually amazed that the concept of "don't click on a thread/close a thread that does not appeal to you" (like I do with IMV stupid Fantasy threads) eludes the more delicate among us.
Yeah, there are "plenty of other" political forums. And fantasy forums. And movie forums. And breaking news forums. And video game forums, etc. etc.
Fear not though, Eric hast madeth thy space safe!
Quote:
In comment 13147782 x meadowlander said:
Quote:
In comment 13147731 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
Ok what are you doing with all the millions of illegal, unmarked guns in the US?
Me? Nothing. Those who own them own most of the risk. Most of that risk is to suicide, btw. Vast majority of gun fatalities in the U.S. are suicides.
So lets say this is even remotely true. You're ok with million of illegal guns in the US. So lets reverse course here. We do ban guns or get rid of them (not even possible by the way).... you dont think criminals, gangs, or even your every day citizens wont get a hold of them? Just because they are "illegal" does not mean they go away. Little bit of a fantasy world you live in, huh?
I do not own a gun and never will. However, I feel safer knowing that my neighbors can own them. I am a believer in less guns = more crime. Not necessarily mor emurders, but definitely increase in crime.
Whoever first came up with the line we don't have a gun problem in America, we have a mental health problem fucking nailed it.
Combine that with notions that anyone can feel aggrieved and slighted when they don't feel their lives are perfect.
My mom was the last of nine children from the depression era. She used to say hat they were so busy trying it survive no one worried about the stupid shit we do. Basically idle hands do the devils work. We have so much and appreciate so little.
Also the idiocy that a pill will cure whatever ails us mentally is dangerous and myopic
The important difference is that the Muslim murderers are using mainstream current teachings of the religion. The Christian ones are not supported by any of the currently accepted doctrine or supported by the institutions of Christianity. I know it's hard for some people to believe that religious beliefs and teachings have consequences in our mostly secular society, but there is a major difference between Islam and other major religions, which clearly plays out on a daily basis around the world.
Quote:
In comment 13147795 dep026 said:
Quote:
Me? Nothing. Those who own them own most of the risk. Most of that risk is to suicide, btw. Vast majority of gun fatalities in the U.S. are suicides.
So lets say this is even remotely true. You're ok with million of illegal guns in the US. So lets reverse course here. We do ban guns or get rid of them (not even possible by the way).... you dont think criminals, gangs, or even your every day citizens wont get a hold of them? Just because they are "illegal" does not mean they go away. Little bit of a fantasy world you live in, huh?
I do not own a gun and never will. However, I feel safer knowing that my neighbors can own them. I am a believer in less guns = more crime. Not necessarily mor emurders, but definitely increase in crime.
I know there is a lot of fear mongering out there, that we are in imminent danger of being shot always, but it simply isn't true - and it's VERY easy to find the raw data on that.
Sure, I would love it if America was sane with our gun laws, but we're not! No country is perfect - America has shown that at least in the short term, we are NOT changing ANY meaningful gun laws - we have proven that as a nation, we love guns MORE than we love people, even more than we love Children - it's not that I wouldn't prefer the laws to be more safe and sensible, it's simply that it is not who we are, or where we live.
So I don't own a gun, and I will never be shot. (statistically speaking)
Let's not be silly.
On the one hand you say that fear of death by firearm is overblown and on the other claim that America loves guns more than they love kids.
By your logic we also love cars more that we love kids.
Every day we all manage risk in our lives- which is what you are talking about. The fact that we allow private ownership of firearms is just another of those risks that we manage...just like most of us choose driving as our main mode of transportation over much less dangerous methods.
Suggesting we "love guns more than we love kids" is incredibly disingenuous and adds nothing constructive to the conversation.
Let's not be silly.
On the one hand you say that fear of death by firearm is overblown and on the other claim that America loves guns more than they love kids.
By your logic we also love cars more that we love kids.
Every day we all manage risk in our lives- which is what you are talking about. The fact that we allow private ownership of firearms is just another of those risks that we manage...just like most of us choose driving as our main mode of transportation over much less dangerous methods.
Suggesting we "love guns more than we love kids" is incredibly disingenuous and adds nothing constructive to the conversation.
As to the gun v car comparison - We do everything we can to make cars less deadly, right? Speed limits, airbags, seatbelts - we've cut our death rate from car accidents tremendously.
Show me a single meaningful thing we've done for gun safety that compares to that.