Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Mass shootings/gun control
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 45,297
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 608
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #1
Mass shootings/gun control
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.
08-04-2019 10:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 45,297
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 608
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #2
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
Saw an interesting graphic on ABC

Gun deaths, nationally:

60% suicide
38% murder
1% accidental
1% mass shootings
08-04-2019 01:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fort Bend Owl Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 24,386
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 306
I Root For: An easy win
Location:

The Parliament Awards
Post: #3
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
251 mass shootings this year. That's 251 too many. We've had 18 years of civil liberties messed with since 9/11 and no one seems to mind.

We can deal with some inconveniences for gun owners. When it's easier to get a gun than a driver's license for a teenager, there is something seriously wrong.

Climate control and gun control - I'm fine with that being the main two talking points for Democrats. You guys stick with the economy and immigration and we'll see what happens in 15 months.
08-04-2019 02:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rice93 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,646
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 23
I Root For:
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #4
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
OO... why do you think that the frequency of mass shootings in the US is so astronomically high compared to most other nations? What is it about the US that leads to this story happening over and over when you just don't see it in most other countries? Is it something inherent to the American spirit? Is it that our mental health services are so incredibly abysmal when compared to every other country in the world? Is it the number of guns?

Other countries have 24-hour cable news, mental health disease, serious political divides, access to the internet, video games, etc.
(This post was last modified: 08-04-2019 03:01 PM by Rice93.)
08-04-2019 02:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rice93 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,646
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 23
I Root For:
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #5
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 10:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  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.

Nobody thinks that we can eliminate all mass shootings in the United States. The goal is to markedly reduce the frequency so that they are less of a public health crisis. What are Sweden, New Zealand, Australia, and England doing that makes their frequency of mass shootings so very miniscule compared to ours?
08-04-2019 02:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rice93 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,646
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 23
I Root For:
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #6
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
Without getting into the semantics of what a "military style rifle" means (please grant me this with the assumption that the lawmakers get it right when it comes to defining this when drafting the legislation)...

Would anybody have a problem with prohibiting ownership/use of this type of weapon for anybody under the age of 25? 21?

Thoughts?
08-04-2019 03:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Tomball Owl Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,564
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 50
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Comal County
Post: #7
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 03:05 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  Without getting into the semantics of what a "military style rifle" means (please grant me this with the assumption that the lawmakers get it right when it comes to defining this when drafting the legislation)...

Would anybody have a problem with prohibiting ownership/use of this type of weapon for anybody under the age of 25? 21?

Thoughts?

My insurance company thinks my under 25 kids are more dangerous behind the wheel of a car. Maybe we should limit under 25s’ ability to own/use cars? Maybe just some bureaucrat’s definition of a “dangerous” car/truck?
08-04-2019 03:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rice93 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,646
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 23
I Root For:
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #8
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 03:30 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 03:05 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  Without getting into the semantics of what a "military style rifle" means (please grant me this with the assumption that the lawmakers get it right when it comes to defining this when drafting the legislation)...

Would anybody have a problem with prohibiting ownership/use of this type of weapon for anybody under the age of 25? 21?

Thoughts?

My insurance company thinks my under 25 kids are more dangerous behind the wheel of a car. Maybe we should limit under 25s’ ability to own/use cars? Maybe just some bureaucrat’s definition of a “dangerous” car/truck?

If you are under 25 you can't rent a car. I think you oppose my proposal but I'm not completely clear based on your response?
08-04-2019 03:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tanqtonic Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,325
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation: 340
I Root For: rice
Location:
Post: #9
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 03:05 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  Without getting into the semantics of what a "military style rifle" means (please grant me this with the assumption that the lawmakers get it right when it comes to defining this when drafting the legislation)...

Would anybody have a problem with prohibiting ownership/use of this type of weapon for anybody under the age of 25? 21?

Thoughts?

Hate not to get into the semantics, but that is the core of it. "Military style rifle" means zero in functional terms.

Give me a specific function that is wished to limit and there can be a discussion.

A discussion on a nonsense term, is just that. Nonsense.

One might as well ask for a ban on meeflewumps style firearms.

I take it you do not know what the difference between a semi-automatic deer rifle and a 'military style weapon' is. That is actually healthy. I dont know the difference either. Much the same as I dont know the difference between a military style weapon and a meeflewumps style weapon.

You ask for a discussion on 'banning' ages from certain weapons --- I dont think anyone here would shirk from that discussion. Nor would they castigate another for a well delineated discussion. But in order to have a cogent discussion one has to understand what is delineated. Your (and every other call for this) does not do this in the slightest. Especially when the topic is on the efficacy of a ban.

Not meaning to be a prick, but that is the simple reality based on the choice of words.

And no, I cannot grant your assumption. They tried before. It was a 'it looks nasty' bill. Kind of the same thing as 'lets ban candy apple red cars' type delineation. That is a major problem, and assuming that 'they' can get it 'right' explicitly fails the actual real world time that they have actually done it.

You are better suited to simply ask if banning firearms from the age group is warranted. That actually has meaning.

Those are my thoughts.
(This post was last modified: 08-04-2019 03:48 PM by tanqtonic.)
08-04-2019 03:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
tanqtonic Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,325
Joined: Nov 2016
Reputation: 340
I Root For: rice
Location:
Post: #10
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
Turning your question to a *real* question (the one that Tomball answered): what is the expected outcome of the proposed ban of all firearms from people less than 25 that you put forth? Why 25? Why not 45? Why not 75?
(This post was last modified: 08-04-2019 03:51 PM by tanqtonic.)
08-04-2019 03:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tomball Owl Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,564
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 50
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Comal County
Post: #11
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 03:32 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 03:30 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 03:05 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  Without getting into the semantics of what a "military style rifle" means (please grant me this with the assumption that the lawmakers get it right when it comes to defining this when drafting the legislation)...

Would anybody have a problem with prohibiting ownership/use of this type of weapon for anybody under the age of 25? 21?

Thoughts?

My insurance company thinks my under 25 kids are more dangerous behind the wheel of a car. Maybe we should limit under 25s’ ability to own/use cars? Maybe just some bureaucrat’s definition of a “dangerous” car/truck?

If you are under 25 you can't rent a car. I think you oppose my proposal but I'm not completely clear based on your response?

Yes you can rent a car if you are under 25. You just have to pay a premium. Or some companies waive the “young driver charge” if the driver has a valid AAA card.
08-04-2019 04:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Rice93 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,646
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 23
I Root For:
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #12
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 03:36 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 03:05 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  Without getting into the semantics of what a "military style rifle" means (please grant me this with the assumption that the lawmakers get it right when it comes to defining this when drafting the legislation)...

Would anybody have a problem with prohibiting ownership/use of this type of weapon for anybody under the age of 25? 21?

Thoughts?

Hate not to get into the semantics, but that is the core of it. "Military style rifle" means zero in functional terms.

Give me a specific function that is wished to limit and there can be a discussion.

A discussion on a nonsense term, is just that. Nonsense.

One might as well ask for a ban on meeflewumps style firearms.

I take it you do not know what the difference between a semi-automatic deer rifle and a 'military style weapon' is. That is actually healthy. I dont know the difference either. Much the same as I dont know the difference between a military style weapon and a meeflewumps style weapon.

You ask for a discussion on 'banning' ages from certain weapons --- I dont think anyone here would shirk from that discussion. Nor would they castigate another for a well delineated discussion. But in order to have a cogent discussion one has to understand what is delineated. Your (and every other call for this) does not do this in the slightest. Not meaning to be a prick, but that is the simple reality based on the choice of words.

Those are my thoughts.

OK... on vacation and thought I'd try to quickly participate in the discussion. I didn't have the time to go back through the posts to make sure I had the perfect definition of the weapon that was going to avoid generating the above response. I guess I'll wait for the next mass shooting when I return home (unfortunately I will likely not have long to wait) to revisit this proposal when I have more time to lay out a definition that can be discussed.

Tanq, do you think that there are any styles of guns that would make sense to place age-restrictions on?
(This post was last modified: 08-04-2019 04:03 PM by Rice93.)
08-04-2019 04:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rice93 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,646
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 23
I Root For:
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #13
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 04:00 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 03:32 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 03:30 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 03:05 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  Without getting into the semantics of what a "military style rifle" means (please grant me this with the assumption that the lawmakers get it right when it comes to defining this when drafting the legislation)...

Would anybody have a problem with prohibiting ownership/use of this type of weapon for anybody under the age of 25? 21?

Thoughts?

My insurance company thinks my under 25 kids are more dangerous behind the wheel of a car. Maybe we should limit under 25s’ ability to own/use cars? Maybe just some bureaucrat’s definition of a “dangerous” car/truck?

If you are under 25 you can't rent a car. I think you oppose my proposal but I'm not completely clear based on your response?

Yes you can rent a car if you are under 25. You just have to pay a premium. Or some companies waive the “young driver charge” if the driver has a valid AAA card.

With that being said... do you think it would be reasonable to place age-restictions on certain styles of weapons?
08-04-2019 04:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tomball Owl Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,564
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 50
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Comal County
Post: #14
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
I guess 93 thinks it’s OK for an under 25 person to use a real “military” style weapon defending this country or as a member of the police force, but that same individual shouldn’t /can’t own or use a legally purchased so called “military style” rifle as a private citizen?
08-04-2019 04:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rice93 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,646
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 23
I Root For:
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #15
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 03:49 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Turning your question to a *real* question (the one that Tomball answered): what is the expected outcome of the proposed ban of all firearms from people less than 25 that you put forth? Why 25? Why not 45? Why not 75?

25 because the thought is that perhaps an 18-year-old isn't mature enough to handle the responsibilities of owning and handling a weapon that can kill dozens of people in a few minutes? Incomplete brain development, etc...

I guess the expected outcome is that there might be less mass shooters under the age of 25?

Most of us were likely a lot more hot-headed/prone to stupid and rash decisions when we were 18 as compared to age 26.
08-04-2019 04:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tomball Owl Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,564
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 50
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Comal County
Post: #16
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 04:04 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 04:00 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 03:32 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 03:30 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 03:05 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  Without getting into the semantics of what a "military style rifle" means (please grant me this with the assumption that the lawmakers get it right when it comes to defining this when drafting the legislation)...

Would anybody have a problem with prohibiting ownership/use of this type of weapon for anybody under the age of 25? 21?

Thoughts?

My insurance company thinks my under 25 kids are more dangerous behind the wheel of a car. Maybe we should limit under 25s’ ability to own/use cars? Maybe just some bureaucrat’s definition of a “dangerous” car/truck?

If you are under 25 you can't rent a car. I think you oppose my proposal but I'm not completely clear based on your response?

Yes you can rent a car if you are under 25. You just have to pay a premium. Or some companies waive the “young driver charge” if the driver has a valid AAA card.

With that being said... do you think it would be reasonable to place age-restictions on certain styles of weapons?

Wow, what an open ended question.

Yes, I think everyone should be restricted from owning/using “certain styles of weapons”, for example, tanks, RPGs, etc. Happy?
08-04-2019 04:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Rice93 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,646
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 23
I Root For:
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #17
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 04:05 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  I guess 93 thinks it’s OK for an under 25 person to use a real “military” style weapon defending this country or as a member of the police force, but that same individual shouldn’t /can’t own or use a legally purchased so called “military style” rifle as a private citizen?

Yep... that would be one of the "chinks in the armor" of this proposal. It's not an ideal situation to say that a 23-year old can be killed in battle while serving our country and using these "military" style weapons but they can't be trusted with them for private use.

But why would these people really need to use that "military" style weapon as a private citizen? What exactly are stripping away from them that they have to wait until age 25 to enjoy? Perhaps, when looking at the pros and cons of the situation... their 7 years of waiting to use these weapons privately is justified if this proposal prevents some mass shootings?

How do you feel about the fact that a 20-year old person can serve our country in battle but can't be legally served a beer in the United States. Or they can't rent a car at the same rates as a 25 year-old computer programmer?
08-04-2019 04:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rice93 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,646
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 23
I Root For:
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #18
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 04:10 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 04:04 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 04:00 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 03:32 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  
(08-04-2019 03:30 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  My insurance company thinks my under 25 kids are more dangerous behind the wheel of a car. Maybe we should limit under 25s’ ability to own/use cars? Maybe just some bureaucrat’s definition of a “dangerous” car/truck?

If you are under 25 you can't rent a car. I think you oppose my proposal but I'm not completely clear based on your response?

Yes you can rent a car if you are under 25. You just have to pay a premium. Or some companies waive the “young driver charge” if the driver has a valid AAA card.

With that being said... do you think it would be reasonable to place age-restictions on certain styles of weapons?

Wow, what an open ended question.

Yes, I think everyone should be restricted from owning/using “certain styles of weapons”, for example, tanks, RPGs, etc. Happy?

Specifically rifles, Tanq. Any thoughts on those? It's less specific than you want because I am not able to speak to the specifics of the weapons on the same level as you.
08-04-2019 04:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RiceLad15 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,830
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 97
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #19
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
(08-04-2019 04:05 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  I guess 93 thinks it’s OK for an under 25 person to use a real “military” style weapon defending this country or as a member of the police force, but that same individual shouldn’t /can’t own or use a legally purchased so called “military style” rifle as a private citizen?

Is a civilian trained in the same manner as someone in the military?
08-04-2019 04:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rice93 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,646
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 23
I Root For:
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #20
RE: Mass shootings/gun control
Also... nobody has addressed my initial question as to the reasons behind the United States having so many more mass shootings compared to almost every other country. Do you guys have thoughts on that?
08-04-2019 04:29 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.