Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Mass shootings/gun control
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Rice93 Online
1st String
*

Posts: 1,672
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 23
I Root For:
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #41
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 05:37 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 05:23 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 10:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Well, it looks as though the Democrats will be making this a main plank in their platforms, so starting its own thread seems apropos.

On CNN this morning, the anchors and guests are hard at work declaring these shootings to be Trump’s fault.

I think we have had relatively unfettered gun ownership in this country since 1776, yet these mass shootings are a relatively recent development. What was the difference between 2019 and 1919? I would like to hear some opinions.

The differences I can think of are the internet and 24 hour cable news.

The candidates are calling for more, stricter gun laws. IMO, the only law that would slow these shootings to a trickle would be total illegality of possession of guns. Even then, there would be some, because people who want to kill people really don’t don’t care about staying within the law. Most shooters use legal guns and passed background checks.

We still have shootings in countries with the stiffest ownership laws - Sweden, New Zealand, Australia, England. We have yet to have one in Switzerland. Maybe the presence of guns is not the factor that causes these.

OO... is this your original question to which you referred?

One obvious difference is the proliferation of rifles in 2019 that are easily available while being incredibly efficient at killing lots of people in an extremely short time span as compared to those rifles that were readily available to the public in 1919.

Actually not so. Ordinary citizens can (and did) own far worse guns in the 1920's.

That was a reason why the 'Tommy Gun' was the weapon of choice for the gangsters back then. Or, the BAR (essentially an early anti-armored car gun) was as easily available.

Criminy, my grandpa had a Tommy Gun.

The AR-15 has been commercially available since the late 60's, and AKs have been readily available as 'junk weapons' in this country since the 50's.

In the 1980s, (i.e. 40 years ago) the prevalance of the AK and the Chinese SKS amongst the hunters of this nation is kind of astronomical.

The Garand M1 has been a staple in the American rural areas since 1945, when literally almost every American GI in Korea and WW2 brought one home with them, *and* the US Government sold their absolute massive overstock of them.

All of those were 'readily available' to the public as of the dates mentioned. Tommy Guns dried up because of the 1934 National Firearms Act, iirc.

Please dont make facts up.

I said the proliferation of these guns. I find it hard to believe that the number of tommy guns per capita in 1919 is equal to the number of "AK-47 equivalent" (avert your eyes, Tanq) rifles per capita in 2019.
08-04-2019 05:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fort Bend Owl Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 24,409
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 306
I Root For: An easy win
Location:

The Parliament Awards
Post: #42
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
I would like to see Homeland Security and other security agencies work more towards identifying domestic terrorists through the dark web. More and more of these mass killings are publicized first on sites like 8chan.

I can't think of one single reason we can't use our resources to become more focused on domestic terrorism threats instead of foreign ones.
08-04-2019 05:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rice93 Online
1st String
*

Posts: 1,672
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 23
I Root For:
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #43
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 05:33 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 05:23 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 10:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Well, it looks as though the Democrats will be making this a main plank in their platforms, so starting its own thread seems apropos.

On CNN this morning, the anchors and guests are hard at work declaring these shootings to be Trump’s fault.

I think we have had relatively unfettered gun ownership in this country since 1776, yet these mass shootings are a relatively recent development. What was the difference between 2019 and 1919? I would like to hear some opinions.

The differences I can think of are the internet and 24 hour cable news.

The candidates are calling for more, stricter gun laws. IMO, the only law that would slow these shootings to a trickle would be total illegality of possession of guns. Even then, there would be some, because people who want to kill people really don’t don’t care about staying within the law. Most shooters use legal guns and passed background checks.

We still have shootings in countries with the stiffest ownership laws - Sweden, New Zealand, Australia, England. We have yet to have one in Switzerland. Maybe the presence of guns is not the factor that causes these.

OO... is this your original question to which you referred?

One obvious difference is the proliferation of rifles in 2019 that are easily available while being incredibly efficient at killing lots of people in an extremely short time span as compared to those rifles that were readily available to the public in 1919.

I agree with you that the internet has led a greater number of people being radicalized into extreme positions and that the 24-hour news cycle has fed into this.

Now to answer your question.

I don't know. But I do know some countries have lots of guns without lots of problems. Switzerland

But I think "more of the same" is not going to solve the problem. Most of these people passed a check when they legally bought their guns, and a stricter check will not change much, if anything.

I like the "red flag" Idea. I would enact a loophole to HIPAA that would allow medical doctors and mental health workers to put people on a no buy list if they are concerned. But nothing short of a complete eradication of private ownership will make a dent. People who want to do this kind of thing don't care about the laws, and they will find a way around them, just like the drug dealers in Baltimore. I think Columbine struck a chord in the minds of some off balance people, and now mass shootings are on the menu of available actions.

But if we outlaw gun ownership, they will become as rare as a bottle of whiskey in 1928, and just as hard to get and use.

I don't think you can say this. Look at the number of mass shootings in 2019 in the US versus every other country on the globe. We are an incredible outlier. Very few of these other countries have enacted a complete eradication of private ownership. Why is the frequency of mass shootings in these other countries so damn small compared to the US? What is it about us?

*edit* Tanq... do you have thoughts about why the US is such an outlier?
(This post was last modified: 08-04-2019 05:59 PM by Rice93.)
08-04-2019 05:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tanqtonic Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,343
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation: 340
I Root For: rice
Location:
Post: #44
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 05:48 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 05:37 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 05:23 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 10:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Well, it looks as though the Democrats will be making this a main plank in their platforms, so starting its own thread seems apropos.

On CNN this morning, the anchors and guests are hard at work declaring these shootings to be Trump’s fault.

I think we have had relatively unfettered gun ownership in this country since 1776, yet these mass shootings are a relatively recent development. What was the difference between 2019 and 1919? I would like to hear some opinions.

The differences I can think of are the internet and 24 hour cable news.

The candidates are calling for more, stricter gun laws. IMO, the only law that would slow these shootings to a trickle would be total illegality of possession of guns. Even then, there would be some, because people who want to kill people really don’t don’t care about staying within the law. Most shooters use legal guns and passed background checks.

We still have shootings in countries with the stiffest ownership laws - Sweden, New Zealand, Australia, England. We have yet to have one in Switzerland. Maybe the presence of guns is not the factor that causes these.

OO... is this your original question to which you referred?

One obvious difference is the proliferation of rifles in 2019 that are easily available while being incredibly efficient at killing lots of people in an extremely short time span as compared to those rifles that were readily available to the public in 1919.

Actually not so. Ordinary citizens can (and did) own far worse guns in the 1920's.

That was a reason why the 'Tommy Gun' was the weapon of choice for the gangsters back then. Or, the BAR (essentially an early anti-armored car gun) was as easily available.

Criminy, my grandpa had a Tommy Gun.

The AR-15 has been commercially available since the late 60's, and AKs have been readily available as 'junk weapons' in this country since the 50's.

In the 1980s, (i.e. 40 years ago) the prevalance of the AK and the Chinese SKS amongst the hunters of this nation is kind of astronomical.

The Garand M1 has been a staple in the American rural areas since 1945, when literally almost every American GI in Korea and WW2 brought one home with them, *and* the US Government sold their absolute massive overstock of them.

All of those were 'readily available' to the public as of the dates mentioned. Tommy Guns dried up because of the 1934 National Firearms Act, iirc.

Please dont make facts up.

I said the proliferation of these guns. I find it hard to believe that the number of tommy guns per capita in 1919 is equal to the number of "AK-47 equivalent" (avert your eyes, Tanq) rifles per capita in 2019.

The proliferation on a per capita basis of semi automatic weapons hasnt drastically changed in 50 years. Perhaps even 70 years.

The issue isnt the dreaded AK, or the evil AR; those are functionally the same (exactly so) to every single fking semi automatic ever produced. Ever. Seriously, no **** here.

But you all just seem to get a woodie about AKs, ARs, 'assault rifles', and 'military style weapons'. But in your zeal on those 'evil' things the left simply chooses to ignore the stark functional issue at hand.

Here is the essence of your fixation in an analogy:

Small town has a lot of souped up cars. No issues for years.

Then a bunch of people fixate on drag racing not just souped up cars --- but candy apple red souped up cars.

So the town wants to ban candy apple red cars. It is just an absolute fking stupid distinction.

Semi automatic firearms, going back to the mid 20's were even then exceedingly popular.

Semi automatic firearms have been exceedingly prevalent from the mid 1940s, when just about literally every fking GI brought one home in the form of the M1 Garand.

They continue to be so.

93, you are so absolutely off base with your assertion it is amazing. In essence, when you try to state 'oh no I dont mean those semiautomatic rifles and pistols that were exceedingly prevalent going back 70 years+, I mean *these* 'weapons of war'.

Considering there is *zero* functional difference between the two, now you attempt to justify your position by essentially rewriting by; a) still maintaining some dumb as fk differentiation with no functional difference; and/or b) rewriting the history of the larger group to comport with your political stance. It is just stupid.

Please stop with the crapola AK != semiautomatic crap. It is, for functional purposes, a difference that isnt. And please dont attempt to rewrite the history of semiautomatic weapons to fit *your* political point. Good grief.
(This post was last modified: 08-04-2019 06:26 PM by tanqtonic.)
08-04-2019 06:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tanqtonic Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,343
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation: 340
I Root For: rice
Location:
Post: #45
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 05:54 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 05:33 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 05:23 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 10:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Well, it looks as though the Democrats will be making this a main plank in their platforms, so starting its own thread seems apropos.

On CNN this morning, the anchors and guests are hard at work declaring these shootings to be Trump’s fault.

I think we have had relatively unfettered gun ownership in this country since 1776, yet these mass shootings are a relatively recent development. What was the difference between 2019 and 1919? I would like to hear some opinions.

The differences I can think of are the internet and 24 hour cable news.

The candidates are calling for more, stricter gun laws. IMO, the only law that would slow these shootings to a trickle would be total illegality of possession of guns. Even then, there would be some, because people who want to kill people really don’t don’t care about staying within the law. Most shooters use legal guns and passed background checks.

We still have shootings in countries with the stiffest ownership laws - Sweden, New Zealand, Australia, England. We have yet to have one in Switzerland. Maybe the presence of guns is not the factor that causes these.

OO... is this your original question to which you referred?

One obvious difference is the proliferation of rifles in 2019 that are easily available while being incredibly efficient at killing lots of people in an extremely short time span as compared to those rifles that were readily available to the public in 1919.

I agree with you that the internet has led a greater number of people being radicalized into extreme positions and that the 24-hour news cycle has fed into this.

Now to answer your question.

I don't know. But I do know some countries have lots of guns without lots of problems. Switzerland

But I think "more of the same" is not going to solve the problem. Most of these people passed a check when they legally bought their guns, and a stricter check will not change much, if anything.

I like the "red flag" Idea. I would enact a loophole to HIPAA that would allow medical doctors and mental health workers to put people on a no buy list if they are concerned. But nothing short of a complete eradication of private ownership will make a dent. People who want to do this kind of thing don't care about the laws, and they will find a way around them, just like the drug dealers in Baltimore. I think Columbine struck a chord in the minds of some off balance people, and now mass shootings are on the menu of available actions.

But if we outlaw gun ownership, they will become as rare as a bottle of whiskey in 1928, and just as hard to get and use.

I don't think you can say this. Look at the number of mass shootings in 2019 in the US versus every other country on the globe. We are an incredible outlier. Very few of these other countries have enacted a complete eradication of private ownership. Why is the frequency of mass shootings in these other countries so damn small compared to the US? What is it about us?

*edit* Tanq... do you have thoughts about why the US is such an outlier?

I'm still waiting for an answer to *my* question(s) on the 2nd Amendment. You still havent bothered with an answer, have you? You asked for background, which was supplied. Now, why dont *you* answer those questions instead of the steady stream of fairly rhetorical questions abounding from your side.
(This post was last modified: 08-04-2019 06:29 PM by tanqtonic.)
08-04-2019 06:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 66,279
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1785
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #46
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 05:54 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  I don't think you can say this. Look at the number of mass shootings in 2019 in the US versus every other country on the globe. We are an incredible outlier. Very few of these other countries have enacted a complete eradication of private ownership. Why is the frequency of mass shootings in these other countries so damn small compared to the US? What is it about us?
*edit* Tanq... do you have thoughts about why the US is such an outlier?

Not exactly.

"There is a common misconception that the United States is one of the top few countries, if not the top country, that have the highest mass shooting rates. But the truth of the matter is that the United States is actually number sixty-six on the list of countries in terms of mass shooting rates."

http://worldpopulationreview.com/countri...y-country/
08-04-2019 06:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 66,279
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1785
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #47
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
From same source:

"The Crime Prevention Research Center looked at the death rates that resulted from mass shootings between the years 2009 and 2015. Here are the average death rates, [per] million, per country, between 2009 and 2015. The countries are already listed in order of the highest death rates to the lowest median death rates.

Norway 1.888
Serbia 0.381
France 0.347
Macedonia 0.337
Albania 0.206
Slovakia 0.185
Switzerland 0.142
Finland 0.132
Belgium 0.128
The Czech Republic 0.123
The United States of America 0.089
Austria 0.068
The Netherlands 0.051
Canada 0.032
England 0.027
Germany 0.023
Russia 0.012
Italy 0.009"
08-04-2019 06:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tomball Owl Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,569
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 50
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Comal County
Post: #48
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
Evil and/or insane will find a way to do evil and/or insane things. I’d rather focus on identifying evil/insane and stopping and/or helping them versus focusing on particular styles of weapons or other devices used to carry out evil and/or insane.
08-04-2019 06:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 45,372
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 608
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #49
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 05:40 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 05:33 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 05:23 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 10:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Well, it looks as though the Democrats will be making this a main plank in their platforms, so starting its own thread seems apropos.

On CNN this morning, the anchors and guests are hard at work declaring these shootings to be Trump’s fault.

I think we have had relatively unfettered gun ownership in this country since 1776, yet these mass shootings are a relatively recent development. What was the difference between 2019 and 1919? I would like to hear some opinions.

The differences I can think of are the internet and 24 hour cable news.

The candidates are calling for more, stricter gun laws. IMO, the only law that would slow these shootings to a trickle would be total illegality of possession of guns. Even then, there would be some, because people who want to kill people really don’t don’t care about staying within the law. Most shooters use legal guns and passed background checks.

We still have shootings in countries with the stiffest ownership laws - Sweden, New Zealand, Australia, England. We have yet to have one in Switzerland. Maybe the presence of guns is not the factor that causes these.

OO... is this your original question to which you referred?

One obvious difference is the proliferation of rifles in 2019 that are easily available while being incredibly efficient at killing lots of people in an extremely short time span as compared to those rifles that were readily available to the public in 1919.

I agree with you that the internet has led a greater number of people being radicalized into extreme positions and that the 24-hour news cycle has fed into this.

Now to answer your question.

I don't know. But I do know some countries have lots of guns without lots of problems. Switzerland

But I think "more of the same" is not going to solve the problem. Most of these people passed a check when they legally bought their guns, and a stricter check will not change much, if anything.

I like the "red flag" Idea. I would enact a loophole to HIPAA that would allow medical doctors and mental health workers to put people on a no buy list if they are concerned. But nothing short of a complete eradication of private ownership will make a dent. People who want to do this kind of thing don't care about the laws, and they will find a way around them, just like the drug dealers in Baltimore. I think Columbine struck a chord in the minds of some off balance people, and now mass shootings are on the menu of available actions.

But if we outlaw gun ownership, they will become as rare as a bottle of whiskey in 1928, and just as hard to get and use.

Are you okay with the lack of due process with the "red flag"? Again, we are talking about a constitutional right here, for better or for worse.

I assume there would be notice and a right of appeal.
08-04-2019 06:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tanqtonic Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,343
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation: 340
I Root For: rice
Location:
Post: #50
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 06:50 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 05:40 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 05:33 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 05:23 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 10:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Well, it looks as though the Democrats will be making this a main plank in their platforms, so starting its own thread seems apropos.

On CNN this morning, the anchors and guests are hard at work declaring these shootings to be Trump’s fault.

I think we have had relatively unfettered gun ownership in this country since 1776, yet these mass shootings are a relatively recent development. What was the difference between 2019 and 1919? I would like to hear some opinions.

The differences I can think of are the internet and 24 hour cable news.

The candidates are calling for more, stricter gun laws. IMO, the only law that would slow these shootings to a trickle would be total illegality of possession of guns. Even then, there would be some, because people who want to kill people really don’t don’t care about staying within the law. Most shooters use legal guns and passed background checks.

We still have shootings in countries with the stiffest ownership laws - Sweden, New Zealand, Australia, England. We have yet to have one in Switzerland. Maybe the presence of guns is not the factor that causes these.

OO... is this your original question to which you referred?

One obvious difference is the proliferation of rifles in 2019 that are easily available while being incredibly efficient at killing lots of people in an extremely short time span as compared to those rifles that were readily available to the public in 1919.

I agree with you that the internet has led a greater number of people being radicalized into extreme positions and that the 24-hour news cycle has fed into this.

Now to answer your question.

I don't know. But I do know some countries have lots of guns without lots of problems. Switzerland

But I think "more of the same" is not going to solve the problem. Most of these people passed a check when they legally bought their guns, and a stricter check will not change much, if anything.

I like the "red flag" Idea. I would enact a loophole to HIPAA that would allow medical doctors and mental health workers to put people on a no buy list if they are concerned. But nothing short of a complete eradication of private ownership will make a dent. People who want to do this kind of thing don't care about the laws, and they will find a way around them, just like the drug dealers in Baltimore. I think Columbine struck a chord in the minds of some off balance people, and now mass shootings are on the menu of available actions.

But if we outlaw gun ownership, they will become as rare as a bottle of whiskey in 1928, and just as hard to get and use.

Are you okay with the lack of due process with the "red flag"? Again, we are talking about a constitutional right here, for better or for worse.

I assume there would be notice and a right of appeal.

I would go the other way; I would put it squarely that the 'state must show' before such placement on a list. And that 'state must show' should be with notice to the listee.

Even with a warrant you have to convince the state (a judge) to allow the search, the search doesnt 'just happen' and *then* you have the right challenge.
08-04-2019 07:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tanqtonic Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,343
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation: 340
I Root For: rice
Location:
Post: #51
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 06:43 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  From same source:

"The Crime Prevention Research Center looked at the death rates that resulted from mass shootings between the years 2009 and 2015. Here are the average death rates, [per] million, per country, between 2009 and 2015. The countries are already listed in order of the highest death rates to the lowest median death rates.

Norway 1.888
Serbia 0.381
France 0.347
Macedonia 0.337
Albania 0.206
Slovakia 0.185
Switzerland 0.142
Finland 0.132
Belgium 0.128
The Czech Republic 0.123
The United States of America 0.089
Austria 0.068
The Netherlands 0.051
Canada 0.032
England 0.027
Germany 0.023
Russia 0.012
Italy 0.009"

There goes *that* outlier......
08-04-2019 07:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 45,372
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 608
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #52
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 07:13 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 06:50 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 05:40 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 05:33 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 05:23 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  OO... is this your original question to which you referred?

One obvious difference is the proliferation of rifles in 2019 that are easily available while being incredibly efficient at killing lots of people in an extremely short time span as compared to those rifles that were readily available to the public in 1919.

I agree with you that the internet has led a greater number of people being radicalized into extreme positions and that the 24-hour news cycle has fed into this.

Now to answer your question.

I don't know. But I do know some countries have lots of guns without lots of problems. Switzerland

But I think "more of the same" is not going to solve the problem. Most of these people passed a check when they legally bought their guns, and a stricter check will not change much, if anything.

I like the "red flag" Idea. I would enact a loophole to HIPAA that would allow medical doctors and mental health workers to put people on a no buy list if they are concerned. But nothing short of a complete eradication of private ownership will make a dent. People who want to do this kind of thing don't care about the laws, and they will find a way around them, just like the drug dealers in Baltimore. I think Columbine struck a chord in the minds of some off balance people, and now mass shootings are on the menu of available actions.

But if we outlaw gun ownership, they will become as rare as a bottle of whiskey in 1928, and just as hard to get and use.

Are you okay with the lack of due process with the "red flag"? Again, we are talking about a constitutional right here, for better or for worse.

I assume there would be notice and a right of appeal.

I would go the other way; I would put it squarely that the 'state must show' before such placement on a list. And that 'state must show' should be with notice to the listee.

Even with a warrant you have to convince the state (a judge) to allow the search, the search doesnt 'just happen' and *then* you have the right challenge.

Let the doctor/mental health pro go to the state then, and the state apply for permission based on that. We need to do something to stop this endless cycle of More Checks and Outlaw Assault Weapons that the Left loves, which will do diddly-**** to stop the problem.

If we don't find a way to reduce it, the Left will eventually confiscate everything.
08-04-2019 07:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tanqtonic Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,343
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation: 340
I Root For: rice
Location:
Post: #53
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 07:35 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 07:13 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 06:50 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 05:40 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 05:33 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Now to answer your question.

I don't know. But I do know some countries have lots of guns without lots of problems. Switzerland

But I think "more of the same" is not going to solve the problem. Most of these people passed a check when they legally bought their guns, and a stricter check will not change much, if anything.

I like the "red flag" Idea. I would enact a loophole to HIPAA that would allow medical doctors and mental health workers to put people on a no buy list if they are concerned. But nothing short of a complete eradication of private ownership will make a dent. People who want to do this kind of thing don't care about the laws, and they will find a way around them, just like the drug dealers in Baltimore. I think Columbine struck a chord in the minds of some off balance people, and now mass shootings are on the menu of available actions.

But if we outlaw gun ownership, they will become as rare as a bottle of whiskey in 1928, and just as hard to get and use.

Are you okay with the lack of due process with the "red flag"? Again, we are talking about a constitutional right here, for better or for worse.

I assume there would be notice and a right of appeal.

I would go the other way; I would put it squarely that the 'state must show' before such placement on a list. And that 'state must show' should be with notice to the listee.

Even with a warrant you have to convince the state (a judge) to allow the search, the search doesnt 'just happen' and *then* you have the right challenge.

Let the doctor/mental health pro go to the state then, and the state apply for permission based on that. We need to do something to stop this endless cycle of More Checks and Outlaw Assault Weapons that the Left loves, which will do diddly-**** to stop the problem.

If we don't find a way to reduce it, the Left will eventually confiscate everything.

True.

I am still waiting for 93 to answer my two (loaded, in all honesty, but blunt) questions.
08-04-2019 07:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fort Bend Owl Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 24,409
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 306
I Root For: An easy win
Location:

The Parliament Awards
Post: #54
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
[Image: Total_deaths_in_US_mass_shootings.png]

We're at 83 deaths so far in 2019. There were 102 deaths in 2018. The last year in the above graph is from 2017.

Clearly, the status quo isn't working.
(This post was last modified: 08-04-2019 08:35 PM by Fort Bend Owl.)
08-04-2019 08:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 45,372
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 608
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #55
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 08:35 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  [Image: Total_deaths_in_US_mass_shootings.png]

We're at 83 deaths so far in 2019. There were 102 deaths in 2018. The last year in the above graph is from 2017.

Clearly, the status quo isn't working.

Apparently neither have background checks and waiting periods.

That graph goes back to 1980. Three years with zero.

What changed? Why is it getting worse?

You guys have no answers, except to clamor for more of what hasn't worked.

It's not enough to point out the problem. You should have some solutions, too.

Question: For that graph, and the statistics you quote, what qualifies as a mass shooting? How many people shot/killed? Mu understanding is that the BI uses four or more, but I noted that some of the people on CNN were using two or more.
(This post was last modified: 08-04-2019 08:55 PM by OptimisticOwl.)
08-04-2019 08:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 66,279
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1785
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #56
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
The common factor isn't the gun, it's the mental illness of the shooter. That's where we need to look for solutions.

Gun control laws, interestingly, have never actually worked to reduce gun violence. I know, I know, you will say that UK and Australia have strict gun laws and low rates of gun violence. But which came first? They had the low rates of gun violence before they had the gun laws, and it is not at all clear that the gun laws have made any difference at all. It is true that Australia's rates of gun deaths have declined in the 20 years since passing the law--but at the same rate as they were declining in the 20 years prior to passing the law, so it is not at all clear that the law had any effect. And UK's gun deaths have actually increased very slightly since passing their gun laws.
08-04-2019 08:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 45,372
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 608
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #57
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 08:59 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The common factor isn't the gun, it's the mental illness of the shooter. That's where we need to look for solutions.

Gun control laws, interestingly, have never actually worked to reduce gun violence. I know, I know, you will say that UK and Australia have strict gun laws and low rates of gun violence. But which came first? They had the low rates of gun violence before they had the gun laws, and it is not at all clear that the gun laws have made any difference at all. It is true that Australia's rates of gun deaths have declined in the 20 years since passing the law--but at the same rate as they were declining in the 20 years prior to passing the law, so it is not at all clear that the law had any effect. And UK's gun deaths have actually increased very slightly since passing their gun laws.

Mexico has strict gun laws and high rates of gun violence. Never hear about them, do we?
08-04-2019 09:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 66,279
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1785
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #58
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 08:35 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  [Image: Total_deaths_in_US_mass_shootings.png]
We're at 83 deaths so far in 2019. There were 102 deaths in 2018. The last year in the above graph is from 2017.
Clearly, the status quo isn't working.

By the way, the spike in 1999 is Columbine, which happened in the middle of the prior ban, so obviously the ban isn't the answer either. And the spike in 2007 is the worst school shooting ever, Virginia Tech, which was with pistols, so an "assault weapons ban" wouldn't have stopped that, either.

And if the ban is the answer, why were the numbers so much lower before the ban? HIPAA was passed in 1996, and placed privacy limitations on communications by mental health professionals. That may be the biggest factor of all, particularly considering that almost all of the mass shooters have turned out to be crazy. That is the one constant, not political affiliation or type of weapon.
(This post was last modified: 08-04-2019 09:11 PM by Owl 69/70/75.)
08-04-2019 09:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fort Bend Owl Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 24,409
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 306
I Root For: An easy win
Location:

The Parliament Awards
Post: #59
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
That graph I believe uses the definition of a mass shooting as one involving firearm violence resulting in at least four people being shot at roughly the same time and location, excluding the perpetrator.

It's obvious society is much more violent in the US at least. I don't think you can just blame mental illness. There are a ton of factors that could be at play including social media and violent video games.

I mentioned a potential solution earlier in this thread (security agencies using the dark web to thwart potential shootings), and it was completely ignored. Why has no one responded with any thoughts on that suggestion?
08-04-2019 09:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 66,279
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1785
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #60
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 09:26 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  That graph I believe uses the definition of a mass shooting as one involving firearm violence resulting in at least four people being shot at roughly the same time and location, excluding the perpetrator.
It's obvious society is much more violent in the US at least. I don't think you can just blame mental illness. There are a ton of factors that could be at play including social media and violent video games.
I mentioned a potential solution earlier in this thread (security agencies using the dark web to thwart potential shootings), and it was completely ignored. Why has no one responded with any thoughts on that suggestion?

I think that's definitely worth considering. I think these are the kinds of things we need to be doing far more intensively. Pretty much every one of these shooters has left a trail beforehand that should have tipped someone off. So why didn't it?
(This post was last modified: 08-04-2019 09:58 PM by Owl 69/70/75.)
08-04-2019 09:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2020 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.