More mass shootings

[jcd11235 0]

Bob_Church

People will keep dying because we keep waiting for these magical "gun laws" which, never having helped in the past …

Except, you know, where they've been tried.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[billvon 2,400]

>People will keep dying because we keep waiting for these magical "gun laws" which, never
>having helped in the past, are going to save us somehow.

People will keep dying because the NRA and the GOP will do anything to stop any change that might prevent gun deaths. Research into gun deaths? Ban funding for it! New gun laws? Unconstitutional! Mental health funding? Too expensive; must kill Obamacare! Prevent mentally ill people from buying guns? Never; give them any gun they want!

What WILL the GOP do? Thoughts and prayers after people are dead.

So yes, people will keep dying until we remove the leaders who are stopping any progress on the issue.

[dmcoco84 4]

billvon

>There would have been dead people all over the place!

===========================
3-year-old critically injured after finding dad's gun, shooting self on Detroit's east side
photo
POSTED: MAY 08 2018 11:03AM EDT

DETROIT (WJBK) - A 3-year-old child has been critically injured in a shooting in Detroit, Detroit Police confirm to FOX 2, and they said the young child found his father's gun.

We're told the shooting happened in the 5900 block of Marcus Street, which is on the city's east side near Mt. Elliott and Huber streets.

Just after 4 p.m., Detroit police said the young boy found his father's gun inside the home and shot himself.
=================================
Child dies after accidentally shooting himself in Roanoke

A 2-year-old boy died after accidentally shooting himself Tuesday afternoon in Roanoke, police said.

People in a car flagged down police on Melrose Avenue near Peters Creek Road Northwest about noon, police spokeswoman Caitlyn Cline said. A man and woman in the car told the officer that their son had accidentally shot himself at their residence. The boy was taken to Carilion Roanoke Memorial Hospital, where he was declared dead at 12:49 p.m., Cline said.

Police investigated the shooting scene at Caru apartments on Bennett Drive Northwest. An assistant commonwealth’s attorney was at the scene.
================================
CBS NEWS April 2, 2018, 5:34 AM
3-year-old killed in drive-by shooting just outside Atlanta

ATLANTA -- Police near Atlanta are investigating after a 3-year-old boy was shot and killed late Sunday night, reports CBS Atlanta affiliate WGCL-TV. The child's mother said a grey Dodge Charger pulled up to her vehicle at a stop light just before midnight, and the driver showed what she thought was a paintball gun.

She told police she heard a pop, but drove on.

"She heard a real gunshot. She didn't think anything of it," DeKalb County Police Chief James Conroy told the station.

The suspect fled the scene, and the mother drove on, then noticed her child wasn't breathing. The boy was transported to a hospital, where he was later pronounced dead.
====================================

So far 124 children have been killed by guns this year alone. I think you will agree that counts as "dead people all over the place."

Thank you for those two additional examples of Natural Law.

I count that as "stupid people all over the place."

The stupid is Widespread and Rampant!

#3 doesn't aid (any of) your case(s).

All of which, of course, has absolutely no bearing on my Natural Rights. %guncontrolBS
.

[Bob_Church 7]

billvon

>People will keep dying because we keep waiting for these magical "gun laws" which, never
>having helped in the past, are going to save us somehow.

People will keep dying because the NRA and the GOP will do anything to stop any change that might prevent gun deaths. Research into gun deaths? Ban funding for it! New gun laws? Unconstitutional! Mental health funding? Too expensive; must kill Obamacare! Prevent mentally ill people from buying guns? Never; give them any gun they want!

What WILL the GOP do? Thoughts and prayers after people are dead.

So yes, people will keep dying until we remove the leaders who are stopping any progress on the issue.

If someone snaps and there is a gun they will pick it up and use it. This discussion seemed to be mostly about school shooting and I've posted what I think has caused the rash of them, along with increase in teen suicides and other problems. But it would involve limitations on something that too many people don't want to see limited, so we'll keep waiting for those magic laws.

[billvon 2,400]

>If someone snaps and there is a gun they will pick it up and use it.

Agreed.

If someone snaps and they can't easily get a gun, fewer people will die.
If someone is about to snap and they get professional care, fewer people will die.
If you remove/ameliorate the things that make people snap, fewer people will die.
If we learn more about why people snap, then we can reduce the incidence of that - and fewer people will die.

There are a lot of potential solutions. We should be pursuing them, even if they're not politically correct.

[Bob_Church 7]

SkyDekker

Quote

It has never been a gun issue. It's a mental health issue.

Americans are more mentally defective than other Western cultures? Cause I am pretty sure people outside of the US suffer from mental health problems.

Didn't Australia greatly reduce the number of guns available? That's a real action, it changes the situation and makes it harder for someone to get a gun when the do have mental health problems or whatever that causes them to snap.
But that's very different from just passing more laws basically saying "don't do that" and "don't let him have one." In the US we've had those laws for decades but, and this seems to be to some peoples' surprise, a lot of people don't follow them. If they did follow the laws the gun ones wouldn't be necessary since it's already illegal to take a gun to school and shoot people.
We're never going to change anything until we move past coming up with more futile laws that either have no affect or are completely unenforceable.

[billvon 2,400]

>I count that as "stupid people all over the place."

Yep. Lots of stupid toddlers killing themselves. Hopefully that gives you a good chortle, and a bit of a feeling of superiority.

>All of which, of course, has absolutely no bearing on my Natural Rights.

The right to live trumps your right to enjoy a toy.

[rushmc 18]

Stumpy

***
Since we're on a roll, I submit that anyone who supports 'reasonable' restrictions on firearms put their money where their mouth is and have their security limited to nonlethal means.

Works for me, and just about everyone else in a developed country.

You just made a stretch that only a liberal can make!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[RMK 3]

I’ve often noted that if someone disabled the exclamation mark “!” key on my keyboard, I wouldn’t even notice. If you did read often, you’d probably notice that intelligent people use words to convey their message as opposed to excessive use of exclamation marks or all caps.

A quick scroll through just the past four pages of this thread shows you using the exclamation mark 7 times in just 8 posts (I didn’t count the number of uses of the word “liberal”).

Carry on with your inarticulate poorly-punctuated one-line zingers; you serve as a source of amusement rather than insight.

"Pain is the best instructor, but no one wants to attend his classes"

[billvon 2,400]

The NRA just announced that it does not like the term "mass shooting" and would like it changed.

I wonder what the Newspeak term for "mass shooting" will be? Perhaps "large scale opportunity for thoughts and prayers" or "profit enabling event" or "mass end-of-life event that would have happened with or without guns." It's important to get this right so we can change the name of the thread to the more politically correct term, lest any NRA snowflakes get offended.

[RMK 3]

Great, the NRA has brought us a fun game for all. Here are the game pieces:

Mass
synonyms: large number, abundance, profusion, multitude, group, crowd, mob, rabble, horde, barrage, throng, huddle, host, troop, army, herd, flock, drove, swarm, pack, press, crush, mountain, flood

Shooting
synonyms: gun down, shoot down, mow down, hit, wound, injure, cut down, bring down

Not much to work with, but I’ll go first – “multitude mow down”

"Pain is the best instructor, but no one wants to attend his classes"

[wmw999 2,123]

Maybe something like “violent event.” No one can dispute it’s either violent, or an event, after all . After all, we prefer that in reporting other violence, that the reporter only identify the gender or race if it’s relevant... or something like that.
It’ll be all spun up regardless.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[BIGUN 1,053]

rushmc

******
Since we're on a roll, I submit that anyone who supports 'reasonable' restrictions on firearms put their money where their mouth is and have their security limited to nonlethal means.

Works for me, and just about everyone else in a developed country.

You just made a stretch that only a liberal can make!

To Winsor's point; there are viable options for personal defense available. To your point, there are a considerable number of liberals AND conservatives that have started "conceal carrying" these:

Fires up to 4 Separate Shots to 23 feet at 590 FPS from the nozzle
High Grade OC Solution
Not Considered a Firearm by ATF

https://www.amazon.com/FIRESTORM-Shot-Compact-Pepper-Spray/dp/B06XVKRRQM?tag=bespepspronl-20

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[BartsDaddy 4]

To Winsor's point; there are viable options for personal defense available. To your point, there are a considerable number of liberals AND conservatives that have started "conceal carrying" these:

Fires up to 4 Separate Shots to 23 feet at 590 FPS from the nozzle
High Grade OC Solution
Not Considered a Firearm by ATF

https://www.amazon.com/FIRESTORM-Shot-Compact-Pepper-Spray/dp/B06XVKRRQM?tag=bespepspronl-20

Yea someone coming at me with a knife, I want 4 shots of pepper spray to stop him NOT. When cops start carrying that instead of a firearm let me know.

Handguns are only used to fight your way to a good rifle

[Bob_Church 7]

BIGUN

*********
Since we're on a roll, I submit that anyone who supports 'reasonable' restrictions on firearms put their money where their mouth is and have their security limited to nonlethal means.

Works for me, and just about everyone else in a developed country.

You just made a stretch that only a liberal can make!

To Winsor's point; there are viable options for personal defense available. To your point, there are a considerable number of liberals AND conservatives that have started "conceal carrying" these:

Fires up to 4 Separate Shots to 23 feet at 590 FPS from the nozzle
High Grade OC Solution
Not Considered a Firearm by ATF

https://www.amazon.com/FIRESTORM-Shot-Compact-Pepper-Spray/dp/B06XVKRRQM?tag=bespepspronl-20


I wonder if I could rent one of those long enough to get rid of these damned cats. We have that one house out here, the one that among other things thinks owning a cat means getting a bag of them and letting them run free. When distemper gets the last one they'll just get another bag of them.

[BIGUN 1,053]

>>>>>>>>>>>Yea someone coming at me with a knife, I want 4 shots of pepper spray to stop him NOT.

1. It would only take one shot at someone with a knife.

2. The Marines Non-Lethal Weapons Committee, Prisons, German Polizei, the Spanish Police Association, US Police Officers, County Sheriff's Departments along with all the other "professional" endorsements could all be wrong.

3. My reply said, "viable option(s)" There's more non-lethal options out there.

I am in the camp of carrying a weapon; but there are options for those who simply do not see themselves killing someone. I would rather see them with something (anything) to defend themselves; than nothing.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[yoink 321]

Bob_Church

People will keep dying because we keep waiting for these magical "gun laws" which, never having helped in the past, are going to save us somehow.
We'll never look for the real problems, just blame it on something, anything, that we can say we don't have. .

Would you accept mandatory psychological testing every 6 months for every single American past the age of 8?

[Bob_Church 7]

yoink

***
People will keep dying because we keep waiting for these magical "gun laws" which, never having helped in the past, are going to save us somehow.
We'll never look for the real problems, just blame it on something, anything, that we can say we don't have. .

Would you accept mandatory psychological testing every 6 months for every single American past the age of 8?

There are two problems with that idea. One, it's not possible. And two, it wouldn't help. But that doesn't mean that I would be surprised if people started demanding it as a way to stop gun violence. In fact, it fits right in with most of the current ideas that are tossed out as 'if we just did that, but nobody listens."

[Bob_Church 7]

yoink

***
People will keep dying because we keep waiting for these magical "gun laws" which, never having helped in the past, are going to save us somehow.
We'll never look for the real problems, just blame it on something, anything, that we can say we don't have. .

Would you accept mandatory psychological testing every 6 months for every single American past the age of 8?

About the whole psychological testing thing. Test for what? We're not talking measles here. What are these psychological markers that tell us that some day this kid will get bullied past the breaking point and shoot up his school? And who who would give them? Vulcans? Even if you could find psychiatrists with so many gambling debts to the mob that they,d be willing to sign someone off as safe or not for the money how many of them would we need?
Come to think of it, has anyone ever asked psychologists or psychiatrists what they thought their chances are of finding anything that would help?
It doesn't work that way, it's not like getting screened for an STD.

[billvon 2,400]

>About the whole psychological testing thing. Test for what?

A proclivity towards violence.

(BTW I agree with you that mandatory testing every six months for just this wouldn't work.)

[Bob_Church 7]

billvon

>About the whole psychological testing thing. Test for what?

A proclivity towards violence.

(BTW I agree with you that mandatory testing every six months for just this wouldn't work.)

Assuming that was even possible, then what?

[winsor 186]

billvon

>>You're not really following the conversation, are you.

>Basically he's way ahead of you.

Nor are you. It's like you are trying to prove that skydiving is dangerous in the Incidents forum.

Mediocre analogy. It's more like trying to explain skydiving to a whuffo.

When someone commits a hideous crime with gasoline or other commonly available materials, the means is ignored and the perpetrator is the focus of any discussion.

Like the discussions of 'climate change' where only the popular factors are deemed fit for consideration (say carbon, as opposed to population in general), violence similarly results in discussions of the means rather than the root cause analysis of the event.

I won't get into the other means immediately available to the dipshit in Las Vegas to cause carnage at the concert, which could easily have resulted in a much higher body count, since popular hysteria would only tend to fuck things up in areas unrelated to firearms, and I don't want to give anyone any ideas.

The relationship between the most horrific examples of mass murder and psychotropic medication approaches unity, but this gets little traction in the media. Despite all the soliloquies regarding a journalist's end goal of 'the truth,' the end goal is selling papers or getting ratings, as the case may be. You don't see 'U.S. News and World Report' by the checkout line at the supermarket.

The saying in advertising that exceeding the 8th grade level means losing 50% of your audience strikes me as optimistic. The fears upon which mass murderers prey are nothing short of atavistic.

If you filter out suicides, incidents involving law enforcement and their counterparts on the other side of the law - where firearms are considered tools of the trade - and justifiable homicide, the statistics look quite different.

I know it is inconvenient to focus on the perpetrator, but the Parkland and the Santa Fe shooters both stated on the record that their intent was to kill. In each case, it was known in advance that the individual in question had murderous intent, and planned to go to school to engage in mayhem.

The idea of using these people as the lowest common denominator to establish standards that would hopefully keep everyone safe from them, or at least to minimize the number of people who they could destroy in their rampage, is abhorrent.

I do not expect to sway anyone's opinion, but to fully express my contempt for those who so blithely pontificate on issues on which they are so singularly ignorant would result in my being banned.


BSBD,

Winsor

[billvon 2,400]

>When someone commits a hideous crime with gasoline or other commonly available
>materials, the means is ignored and the perpetrator is the focus of any discussion.

So you claim that, in the past, drunk driving crimes/deaths have not resulted in discussions on tighter restrictions on driving (BAC levels etc)? (You may never have heard of an organization called MADD, but that's basically all they do.)

In the past, accidents involving pilots with suicidal or homicidal intent have not resulted in discussions on new pilot regs/qualifications?

In the past, bombings using ANFO have not resulted in discussions over tighter oversight of ammonium nitrate sales?

That just doesn't jibe with reality.

>I won't get into the other means immediately available to the dipshit in Las Vegas to
>cause carnage at the concert, which could easily have resulted in a much higher body
>count, since popular hysteria would only tend to fuck things up in areas unrelated to
>firearms, and I don't want to give anyone any ideas.

Agreed. Even a poorly designed nuclear weapon, or a small amount of VX, would have had immeasurably worse results. Perhaps even an ANFO bomb, although that's harder now with the new restrictions on obtaining the materials - and requires a level of education beyond imbecile.

But people don't commit mass murder in the US with chemical or nuclear weapons - and even ANFO bombs are very, very rare. What they do use is guns. '

If this guy were a chemist he might have been able to do even more damage. But he wasn't. He was a guy who liked guns, like many Americans. And he had easy access to them. As a result, he was able to kill 58 and injure 851.

This is the difference between a hypothetical discussion and a real one. Yes, hypothetically he could have done that with something else. In reality, people use guns.

[jcd11235 0]

Bob_Church

In fact, it fits right in with most of the current ideas that are tossed out as 'if we just did that, but nobody listens."

It's more frequently a suggestion floated by those who are still living in denial about the fact that gun restrictions have consistently worked in nearly every developed country in which they've been implemented.

We need easier access to mental health care in the US, but there's no reason to believe that mental health issues are the root cause of America's gun violence problem.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[jcd11235 0]

winsor

The relationship between the most horrific examples of mass murder and psychotropic medication approaches unity …

I would love to see the source of evidence supporting your claim that virtually no mass murderers commit their crimes while sober.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!