The US of A Shooting Mega-Thread

[tirebob]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Some people are blinded by ideology. You make solid points but they are lost on those with their eyes closed.

Both sides have closed eyes in regards to guns unfortunately...

[A790]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Both sides have closed eyes in regards to guns unfortunately...

We disagree. There are more than two sides to this.

[tirebob]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

We disagree. There are more than two sides to this.

Truth!

[NissanFanBoy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Cultural decline is the problem.

You mean the gays?

[Mitsu3000gt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Take cars away and everything would become unimaginabley worse. Take guns away and the biggest complaint would be that hunting became harder, while significantly improving things for potential shooting victims

Neither is plausible, but stop pretending like it’s a valid comparison

Did you even read my post?

There are 300M guns in the USA (many tens of millions more than vehicles), and the amount involved in murders or similar incidents each year are shockingly small, in the thousands of a percent. That means over 99.99% of owners are enjoying their guns responsibly. I can't think of anything else that has such a high ratio of existence to incident that people want to abolish or impose strict regulations on.

Knives are the most common weapon used in violent crime, why not start there and require a licence or registry to own those? That would be inconvenient though, right? Or maybe you personally enjoy using them - so who cares how many people die from them.

Fact of the matter is that over 99.99% of gun owners don't bother anyone or cause any problems, so why punish those people for the less than 1% of these weapons that are used irresponsibly? Everything else in our society seems to be generally accepted or ignored if the overwhelming majority of usage doesn't harm anyone. From a calculated risk standpoint - it is far safer than a lot of other things we do every day.

In the USA I think the bigger problem is the people, mental illness, and lack of education. States that have tighter gun control laws still have some of the worst gun-related crime.

As fun as it is to discuss, there are two things I have learned about the gun debate over the years:

1) The anti-gun people will always be anti-gun, nothing will ever change their minds and they think guns are only used for killing despite statistics showing that around 0.004% of the guns in the USA are involved in murders or deadly accidents, suggesting that over 99.99% of guns are used responsibly. People only care about saving lives as long as it's convenient for them, and doesn't affect their own hobbies or interests. All sorts of dangerous things are OK as long as they personally enjoy using them. We are around hundreds of things every day that could be dangerous or deadly if used irresponsibly. The reverse is probably true for the pro-gun people, to be fair.

2) Nothing in the USA is ever going to change significantly regarding gun control. Imagine trying to get 300M guns out of circulation or regulated - not going to happen. One of the biggest problems is also with illegal firearms (especially gang violence which are around 80% of gun related deaths), which wouldn't change much no matter how many regulations were implemented.

Personally I think the USA could be doing more to protect people without punishing the responsible gun owners too much, starting with better background checks, more education, and better access to mental illness resources or anti-gang resources. Some of their laws are probably a bit too relaxed in some states, and a general registry would probably be a good idea without causing too much uproar.

[A790]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Personally I think the USA could be doing more to protect people without punishing the responsible gun owners too much, starting with better background checks, more education, and better access to mental illness resources or anti-gang resources. Some of their laws are probably a bit too relaxed in some states, and a general registry would probably be a good idea without causing too much uproar.

@tirebob , found another side

[sexualbanana]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Did you even read my post?

There are 300M guns in the USA (many tens of millions more than vehicles), and the amount involved in murders or similar incidents each year are shockingly small, in the thousands of a percent. That means over 99.99% of owners are enjoying their guns responsibly. I can't think of anything else that has such a high ratio of existence to incident that people want to abolish or impose strict regulations on.

Knives are the most common weapon used in violent crime, why not start there and require a licence or registry to own those? That would be inconvenient though, right? Or maybe you personally enjoy using them - so who cares how many people die from them.

Fact of the matter is that over 99.99% of gun owners don't bother anyone or cause any problems, so why punish those people for the less than 1% of these weapons that are used irresponsibly? Everything else in our society seems to be generally accepted or ignored if the overwhelming majority of usage doesn't harm anyone. From a calculated risk standpoint - it is far safer than a lot of other things we do every day.

In the USA I think the bigger problem is the people, mental illness, and lack of education. States that have tighter gun control laws still have some of the worst gun-related crime.

Because if 99% of gun owners are responsible, then they shouldn't have a problem with tighter restrictions, should they? The problem with the anti-/pro-gun debate is that both sides act like there is a magic bullet that will magically solve the debate - there is none. The anti-gun side will say that abolishing guns like AR-15s and handguns will rid the country of all crime, while the pro-gun side will say that this just proves that more guns are needed to protect ourselves.

I have two suggestions to at least put us on the right path:

1) Limit the availability, or legality, of expanded magazines. You want a gun to defend yourself? Fine. But I would like to see these instances where a gun owner needed to use more than 5+ rounds in this scenario. I understand that loading magazines is a mind-numbing and time consuming exercise, but I would think that that inconvenience is worth it if it meant people weren't walking into movie theatres, malls and schools with 50+ rounds in a single magazine.

2) Reverse the law that says that toy guns need to be painted bright colours, or need the red tip, so that they can't be confused with real guns, and make it illegal to have a gun that doesn't follow said law. Instead, mandate that all guns need to be painted in bright colours like neon green, pink or canary yellow.

You've probably seen me advocate for the the latter in the past. I think it's a win-win. The guns become easier to identify, thus cutting down on incidents where cops thought the perpetrator had a gun that turned out to be toy, like Tamir Rice. And the public can easier identify when someone is carrying a gun, which could appease the group in the pro-gun side that also wants open carry.

This issue is far too complex for the solution to be to ban or encourage guns. But I think we can all agree that the status quo isn't working, can't we?

[dj_patm]

Can we update the title.... 17 dead in Florida.

Yet there is no gun problem.

[Mitsu3000gt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Because if 99% of gun owners are responsible, then they shouldn't have a problem with tighter restrictions, should they? The problem with the anti-/pro-gun debate is that both sides act like there is a magic bullet that will magically solve the debate - there is none. The anti-gun side will say that abolishing guns like AR-15s and handguns will rid the country of all crime, while the pro-gun side will say that this just proves that more guns are needed to protect ourselves.

I have two suggestions to at least put us on the right path:

1) Limit the availability, or legality, of expanded magazines. You want a gun to defend yourself? Fine. But I would like to see these instances where a gun owner needed to use more than 5+ rounds in this scenario. I understand that loading magazines is a mind-numbing and time consuming exercise, but I would think that that inconvenience is worth it if it meant people weren't walking into movie theatres, malls and schools with 50+ rounds in a single magazine.

2) Reverse the law that says that toy guns need to be painted bright colours, or need the red tip, so that they can't be confused with real guns, and make it illegal to have a gun that doesn't follow said law. Instead, mandate that all guns need to be painted in bright colours like neon green, pink or canary yellow.

You've probably seen me advocate for the the latter in the past. I think it's a win-win. The guns become easier to identify, thus cutting down on incidents where cops thought the perpetrator had a gun that turned out to be toy, like Tamir Rice. And the public can easier identify when someone is carrying a gun, which could appease the group in the pro-gun side that also wants open carry.

This issue is far too complex for the solution to be to ban or encourage guns. But I think we can all agree that the status quo isn't working, can't we?

I agree with pretty much everything you said - I am very much in favor of tighter control, specifically when it comes to mentally ill people or people with a documented history of violence having access to weapons of any kind. However as I said before, nothing will ever change. Guns are too far ingrained into America's society. I just listened to a researched podcast this morning and one of the things they found was that the number of guns in the USA has zero correlation to crime rate, so with stats like that as one example, it's not hard to see how the debate is endless.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Can we update the title.... 17 dead in Florida.

Yet there is no gun problem.

Did you read into it at all?

The guy had red flags everywhere and the system failed him big time. This was not a sudden or unpredictable event. He had major behavioral issues, he was expelled, he abused his GF, his mom had to call the cops on him on numerous occasions (he was adopted and his mom has since passed away), he's obsessed with guns, he repeatedly threatened other students, and he bragged about killing animals. He made online comments a year ago saying he was going to be a "professional school shooter". He was not allowed to carry a backpack to school because everyone was aware of his behavior. The FBI was warned about him a year ago and he was still allowed to own a gun. His classmates and neigbors have told people he was likely to do something like this. The family he was staying with said they noticed signs of depression. The kid was MAJORLY fucked up and nobody did anything about it.

Mentally ill people or people making public threats should NOT be allowed to own guns - you can thank Trump for that one because he automatically and categorically opposes anything Obama did, and reversed a bill that prevented people receiving social security cheques for mental illness and people not able to handle their own finances from owning guns (I am not sure if the shooter in this case would fall under that or not). Ironically Trump also labelled the shooter "mentally disturbed".

Also the exact same weapon he used is legally available in Canada - the issue here as is often the case seems to be a mentally ill individual and/or a failure of the background check system. This person should not have been allowed to own a gun due to a documented history of violence, obvious mental illness, and disturbing threats/comments - simple as that.

[dj_patm]

Justify it however you need to in your head. Country with the biggest gun culture in the world has their now 18th school shooting in 2018 and it's fuckin' February.

[T-Dubbs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Justify it however you need to in your head. Country with the biggest gun culture in the world has their now 18th school shooting in 2018 and it's fuckin' February.

[Xtrema]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Justify it however you need to in your head. Country with the biggest gun culture in the world has their now 18th school shooting in 2018 and it's fuckin' February.

Meh, gun death has same number as car death. Just chalk it up as a stat and move on. Just admit that if you want freedom, there is a cost.

IMO, the debate is over. It's not fixed by a Democrat government, it definitely won't be fixed with a Rep government. Move on to other causes.

Just accept that in America, you will die by either lack of health care, lack of gun control, lack of social safety nets. But you can get rich quick.

What a shithole.

[SkiBum5.0]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Justify it however you need to in your head. Country with the biggest gun culture in the world has their now 18th school shooting in 2018 and it's fuckin' February.

You offer nothing to the discussion because you never offer a viable alternative to the problem. If you've got a solution to limiting gun deaths, while not encroaching on the majority of people who use guns responsibly let's hear it.

[dj_patm]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You offer nothing to the discussion because you never offer a viable alternative to the problem. If you've got a solution to limiting gun deaths, while not encroaching on the majority of people who use guns responsibly let's hear it.

Ban all but single action guns. All of them.

Worked well for Australia. Why not try it? Cause you absolutely need to have guns in your house?

Go to a shooting range if you need to get your jollys.

[Mitsu3000gt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Justify it however you need to in your head. Country with the biggest gun culture in the world has their now 18th school shooting in 2018 and it's fuckin' February.

How on earth is a shooting like that ever "justified"? The system failed hard and with the current government in place things will probably get worse before they get better. It is a definite problem when someone with such a long documented history like that can legally buy a gun. Lowering the threshold to which a mentally ill person can obtain a gun is insane.

You are presenting the data in a very misleading way, or maybe you just don't look into it because you don't seem to offer solutions either. As best I can tell there has been 8 incidents in 2018 that have resulted in injury. You also fail to mention that some of those were accidents and some were suicides including someone who drove to the parking lot of a school that was not even in use and shot himself in the car. A gun being discharged in the vicinity of a school with zero context is not what most people think of when they read "school shooting". Obviously zero incidents would be ideal, but you are exaggerating the issue.

[ExtraSlow]

The idea that it's totally impossible to infringe on the rights of a group of responsible individuals is silly. Most laws infringe on the rights or freedoms of someone for a social benefit.

How much infringement we are willing to accept for certain goals is the only sensible argument.

[HiTempguy1]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The idea that it's totally impossible to infringe on the rights of a group of responsible individuals is silly.

Well, technically, for those that believe in rights, yes, that is the case.

Of course, if you don't believe in rights as they become to be known in the 18th/19th century, then I suppose you are correct. Depends in what world you want to live in.

What is clear is that even "perceived" freedom is under threat now by soccer mom's who have zero clue how 95% of the rest of the world works. Further to that, you are making an issue out of nothing. THERE WERE 15,000 DEATHS BY GUN VIOLENCE IN THE USA IN 2017.

WE ARE TALKING 0.004% of the population. We are talking about a fucking rounding error. This is why it is such an absurd, stupid argument. There isn't a problem, violence levels in 1st world countries are at an all time low. 40,000 people died in car accidents. DIED. Which is still an impossibly small number relative to the size of the USA.

This all leads back into fucking retarded safety culture "zero incidents" and all that other bullshit. Its a worthwhile goal, but NOT at the expense of our rights and freedoms, regardless whether you are in the USA or Canada.

[dj_patm]

It's such a stupid, pointless freedom to protect at the expense of 15,000 people and a culture that breeds and normalizes gun violence.

Why can't you shoot off the crazy guns at a shooting range? Just like I need to go to a race track if I want to go go-karting or something.

[SkiBum5.0]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Ban all but single action guns. All of them.

Worked well for Australia. Why not try it? Cause you absolutely need to have guns in your house?

Go to a shooting range if you need to get your jollys.

So you are good with a Kimber 1911 then? See, you don't even know the basics of what you are arguing against. A move to a regimented license system such as the PAL/RPAL would be a viable solution. And yes, if you are rural, and a pack of coyotes is in the yard after the dogs, I'm going to need a gun in the house.

[bjstare]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Ban all but single action guns. All of them.

Worked well for Australia. Why not try it? Cause you absolutely need to have guns in your house?

Go to a shooting range if you need to get your jollys.

This is hilarious.

In addition to what skibum pointed out, just think about your suggestion for a moment. How many millions (or hundreds of millions?) of guns are you going to have to try and track down and take away from the american people. You think they can do that without a civil war happening?

Try this again, but use some critical thought for a moment - do you have a suggestion for a solution that is even remotely feasible?