The 'Mass-Shooting In The US' thread

[Sgt PSN]

I oppose the new laws because they don't address the roots of gun violence

The roots of gun violence is pretty simple, imo.  Human nature.  There's been gun violence basically since the invention of the hand held gun.  Plenty of people say that we've created a "gun culture" over the last 20 or 30 years with movies, video games and music that glorifies and encourages gun violence, but we all know that simply isn't the case.  If it were, then we wouldn't have the stories of legendary gun slingers in the Old West, would we?  Afterall, Billy the Kid wasn't inspired by Dirty Harry, Halo or NWA. 

People are dicks and we're inherently violent towards one another and when we get mad enough we reach for the most convenient weapon we can get our hands on.  I imagine that a few thousand years ago, rock violence was out of control.  After that, spears didn't kill people....people with spears killed people.  Then knives and the bow and arrow.  And today it's guns.  The tools have changed over the years to make our killing more efficient, but man's violent behavior hasn't....at least not much.  We're really no less civil today than we were 200 or even 2000 years ago.

So unless science nerds can somehow discover a way to suppress the violence gene, it really doesn't matter what gun laws are put in place.  You can't stop gun violence unless you can figure out a way to stop violence altogether. 

I'm in favor of putting more rules and regs around gun ownership.  I think we need to make sure that anyone buying a gun is properly trained, licensed and mentally stable enough to bear the responsibility of owning them and to also make owners criminally responsible if their gun results in an accidental death or is used in criminal activity.  But I'm not under the delusion that any changes to the purchasing/registration system are going to significantly change the amount of deaths/injuries by gun in this country.  That won't change until we do.   

[Diomedes]

You can't stop gun violence unless you can figure out a way to stop violence altogether.

False.  You are assuming guns are naturally as abundant as rocks and knives.  They happen to be as easy to get in America as knives and rocks, but they don't have to be. 

No gun=no gun violence.

I read something interesting recently on the topic of suicide and guns.  More people kill themselves with a gun each year than are killed by someone else with one, so suicide is being talked about a lot now too.  It turns out that people who attempt suicide and survive, without regard to the method of the attempt, are a lot more unlkely to try again than you would think.  In short, a great number of suicide attempts are done rashly, and if the person doesn't succeed, they usually don't try again.  It is also true that guns are by far the most successful method, with mortality rates per suicide attempt far far higher than any other method.

So the argument goes that, if guns weren't so profligate in our society, we'd have far fewer suicides, even if all the people who would have attempted suicide with a gun still go through with the attempt by a different method.

No gun=no bullet to the brain.

[ice grillin you]

machine guns are the perfect example that gun control laws work

ban semi automatic weapons and eventually they will not be used to mass murder

[Diomedes]

Why isn't the NRA lobbying to have machine guns de-criminalized?

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

machine guns are the perfect example that gun control laws work

ban semi automatic weapons and eventually they will not be used to mass murder

Sorry, no. Not if a cop can carry them too. Not if you don't start (and fund) a massive program to have all the ones out there, like mine and Dio's, confiscated with adequate compensation. You're not thinking this through... Not that it's anything new for you, but being a stubborn know-it-all is no excuse for avoiding reasonable debate.

[Diomedes]

Confiscated?  Pshaw. 

Set up a buy back program, call it mandatory.  People either bring their shtein in and get paid, or they don't, and after a defined date, they become de facto criminals subject to any and all laws should they be caught in possession of the gun.  We don't have a registry, so it's not like the boogie man feds are going to come knocking on your door.

Want to keep your gun, take the risk that you'll get put in jail for it should someone rat you out, or should you end up using it/having someone else use it. 

[ice grillin you]

its pretty simple actually....but if we gave up semi autos we wouldnt be able to shoot down the black helicopters

[Sgt PSN]

You can't stop gun violence unless you can figure out a way to stop violence altogether.

False.  You are assuming guns are naturally as abundant as rocks and knives.  They happen to be as easy to get in America as knives and rocks, but they don't have to be. 

No gun=no gun violence.

Are you suggesting that knives are naturally abundant? 

Obviously rounding up every gun, melting them down and making them extinct puts an end to gun associated violence.  But it doesn't end violence, it just changes the tool people use to be violent.  The only real benefit is that it would make killing less efficient.  Can't kill fifty people in the mall with a bow and arrow in 10 seconds.  Maybe you look at that as a victory because only 2 people are dead instead of 50, but the families of those 2 people won't see it the same way.   

I read something interesting recently on the topic of suicide and guns.  More people kill themselves with a gun each year than are killed by someone else with one, so suicide is being talked about a lot now too.  It turns out that people who attempt suicide and survive, without regard to the method of the attempt, are a lot more unlkely to try again than you would think.  In short, a great number of suicide attempts are done rashly, and if the person doesn't succeed, they usually don't try again.  It is also true that guns are by far the most successful method, with mortality rates per suicide attempt far far higher than any other method.

So the argument goes that, if guns weren't so profligate in our society, we'd have far fewer suicides, even if all the people who would have attempted suicide with a gun still go through with the attempt by a different method.

No gun=no bullet to the brain.

I'm curious about the number of failed suicide attempts with guns vs other methods.  I suspect that the fail rate is much lower with guns than it is with attempted drug overdose, poisoning, wrist cutting, etc.  Probably because the people who put a gun in their mouth seriously want to leave this world and the wrist cutter is crying out for help. 

Taking away the gun only changes the means, not the result.  If someone truly wants to kill himself, he'll jump off a bridge or do something else that leaves little/no room for survival.  No one is forcing you to be in this world.  You didn't come here voluntarily but if you choose to take yourself out, by all means feel free.  Just try not to take anyone else with you or leave a huge mess to clean up. 

[Seabiscuit36]

machine guns are the perfect example that gun control laws work

ban semi automatic weapons and eventually they will not be used to mass murder

This is the problem i have with the "ban semi automatics" argument.  Semi-automatic just means that a gun that operates on a gas system or load another round rather than a manual action.  I have a Browning A-5 12ga magnum,and a Remington 11-87 that I use for goose and duck hunting.  Would that fit your list of Scary? 

I happen to agree with Sarge with Humans are inherently violent.  No matter what weapon you have around, some icehole is going to find a way to kill another. 

[ice grillin you]

machine guns are the perfect example that gun control laws work

ban semi automatic weapons and eventually they will not be used to mass murder

This is the problem i have with the "ban semi automatics" argument.  Semi-automatic just means that a gun that operates on a gas system or load another round rather than a manual action.  I have a Browning A-5 12ga magnum,and a Remington 11-87 that I use for goose and duck hunting.  Would that fit your list of Scary? 

I happen to agree with Sarge with Humans are inherently violent.  No matter what weapon you have around, some icehole is going to find a way to kill another. 

you are wasting your time giving me the differences in guns because id abolishment the 2nd amendment if i had my way

obviously thats not going to happen so ill start with any gun i can

i honestly cant think of a single legitimate reason for guns to be legal outside of ones home or business...and guns that are allowed in those two places should be limited to non automatic handguns

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

Confiscated?  Pshaw. 

Set up a buy back program, call it mandatory.  People either bring their shtein in and get paid, or they don't, and after a defined date, they become de facto criminals subject to any and all laws should they be caught in possession of the gun.  We don't have a registry, so it's not like the boogie man feds are going to come knocking on your door.

Want to keep your gun, take the risk that you'll get put in jail for it should someone rat you out, or should you end up using it/having someone else use it.

"Mandatory buy back" = confiscated = totalitarian, controlling, fascist government

That's some preposterous stuff, guys.

[Diomedes]

The only real benefit is that it would make killing less efficient.  Can't kill fifty people in the mall with a bow and arrow in 10 seconds.  Maybe you look at that as a victory because only 2 people are dead instead of 50, but the families of those 2 people won't see it the same way.

That's a hell of a real benefit, wouldn't you say?

I'm curious about the number of failed suicide attempts with guns vs other methods.  I suspect that the fail rate is much lower with guns than it is with attempted drug overdose, poisoning, wrist cutting, etc.  Probably because the people who put a gun in their mouth seriously want to leave this world and the wrist cutter is crying out for help.

This is just the point...all evidence from suicide survivors points to the act being, by and large, impulsive, not deliberative.  Whether you use a gun or jump off a bridge is irrelevant, except the former is a hell of a lot more efficient.

Taking away the gun only changes the means, not the result.  If someone truly wants to kill himself, he'll jump off a bridge or do something else that leaves little/no room for survival.  No one is forcing you to be in this world.  You didn't come here voluntarily but if you choose to take yourself out, by all means feel free.  Just try not to take anyone else with you or leave a huge mess to clean up. 

No, no, no.  The lack of the gun would guarantee a higher survival rate.  People jump off bridges and survive all the time.  They take pills and wake up in hospital.  They run the car in the garage and someone finds them. 

It is true that people who are determined to kill themselves will do so gun or not, but it is not true that most of the people who attempt suicide are in fact determined to do it.  Most are acting on impulse.  With a gun, that impulse is far more likely to result in suicide than without a gun.

pullling numbers out of my ass here, but this is the gist of it

Gun + impulse=95% success rate.
No gun + impulse=80% success rate.

15% of 30k plus people per year is a lot of lives.

[Diomedes]

That's some preposterous stuff, guys.

What's preposterous is guns for anyone and everyone, which is what we've got now thanks to the gun industry, and paranoid ignorant people who think their gun is what makes them free.

It's one or the other...wicked strict system for controlling guns--fascist as you would call it--or dead kids on the regular.  Seems to me that dead kids is a price that gun lovers are willing to pay so they can cling to the frontier fiction of their gun keeping the wolves at bay.

[SunMo]

  Seems to me that dead kids is a price that gun lovers are willing to pay so they can cling to the frontier fiction of their gun keeping the wolves at bay.

yup, what's a few dead kids as long as we have our walmart assault rifles to shoot at unmanned drones in the event our government turns on us

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

That's some preposterous stuff, guys.

What's preposterous is guns for anyone and everyone, which is what we've got now thanks to the gun industry, and paranoid ignorant people who think their gun is what makes them free.

It's one or the other...wicked strict system for controlling guns--fascist as you would call it--or dead kids on the regular.  Seems to me that dead kids is a price that gun lovers are willing to pay so they can cling to the frontier fiction of their gun keeping the wolves at bay.

My point is that going after the guns is fruitless and wasteful. The government must go after the system of purchasing guns, acquiring licenses, etc... And make efforts to go through the backlog of crazies who already own or have access to guns. Also, the penalties should be absolutely prohibitive for any mishandling of a gun whatsoever. I don't care if it's an "accident"... If someone shoots YOUR GUN somewhere they shouldn't, YOU go to jail. Period.

Start with the penalties for gun crimes, and work backwards. Put more people in jail for misuse of guns and fewer people in jail for drugs and prostitution, etc. No fanfare or hero worship for surviving gun criminals... Make their asses anonymous.

Seriously, write this down.