General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAs long as the 800lb gorilla
known as socio-economic/mental health problems is ignored in this country, then men/women with baseball bats will keep robbing people and men/women will keep stabbing people.
Go ahead...ban baseball bats, ban guns, ban poison, ban knives, ban it all, ban every fucking thing you can think of in the name of your foolish emotions, and then ban some more. In the meantime, you have not done jack shit about socio-economic/mental health problems because that would require actual thought and labor on your part.
Oh look, Simon is about to ban somebody on Idol...
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Tejas
(4,759 posts)What the fuck is your point?
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)I bet every parent who had a child in that theater who survived is happy there were not 13 dead instead of just 12.
Is that a point you can "fucking" understand?
P.S. If you don't use that language with me then I won't use it with you. I consider it disrespectful.
Tejas
(4,759 posts)I'll just have to accept that you are more concerned with numbers than helping figure out the societal conditions that drive people to commit such crimes as this.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)simply by wishing it.
As you sit on your high horse and wish for perfection lives are being lost. A six year old girl was one of the twelve who died in Aurora.
Some people are just plain freaking insane. You will never figure out any societal conditions behind their motivations.
Tejas
(4,759 posts)"You seem to think you can change all of society simply by wishing it."
Before I accuse you of making shit up, I'll ask you to help me here by pointing out where I "wished" for anything.
Comrade_McKenzie
(2,526 posts)Which is another reason they don't need dangerous toys.
Edweird
(8,570 posts)Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Edweird
(8,570 posts)I like the real 'sciency' kind that come from reputable sources like the DOJ or FBI.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Besides all your FBI and DOJ "facts" are cherry picked. If you compare gun violence between nations with stricter laws to gun violence here it is clear. Stricter laws save lives.
Trying to pick out statistical variations between Houston and Chicago aren't facts, they are statistical variations.
Edweird
(8,570 posts)And my facts are 'cherry picked'? Please provide an example.
In fact, WTF are you talking about?
Substantiate your accusations.
Edweird
(8,570 posts)Tejas
(4,759 posts)boppers
(16,588 posts)If he could have used a thermonuclear gun, he probably would have.
Thankfully, thermonuclear guns are regulated, and since McVeigh, ANFO is more tightly watched.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)That was one event that happened in 1995. There were no incidents of ammonium nitrate truck bombs killing people before or since. So in all of eternity there have been 168 deaths caused using this weapon (in this country).
See where that puts it on this chart...
Gosh, it didn't make the chart. So I guess your point is completely invalid.
booley
(3,855 posts).. didn't they make it harder to get the fertilizer McVeigh used to make his bomb?
How many fertilizer bombs like McVeighs have we had since?
Even if someone tries to make another bomb like that, the police have at least a chance to see the warnign signs and stop it.
So I 'm hoping you aren't using this as a reason to not ban guns.
The Straight Story
(48,121 posts)Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)~3000 dead ~12 years ago
we lose more like 10,000 a year from guns
Why can nothing be done to reduce the body count?
villager
(26,001 posts)n/t
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)bat, you will have a point.
I understand why you would make such a ridiculous argument though, all of you gun culture types have blood on your hands and you know it.
malaise
(269,278 posts)Tejas
(4,759 posts)Okay.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)your arguments are worn out. You all have blood on your hands and you know it.
Tejas
(4,759 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)Tejas
(4,759 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)doesn't it make a major different to people 3-12? They are dead.
Tejas
(4,759 posts)It matters to me, that's why I started this thread.
treestar
(82,383 posts)and their loved ones. Are we assuming we or ours are never going to be person 3-12? Someone with a knife can be run away from. The knife has to be right next to the person, the attacker right there. Someone with a gun can kill people from some number of feet away. A person with a gun can kill more people before they are stopped. That number of people "more" are going to have a big difference: alive vs. dead. Can't have a bigger effect than that.
handmade34
(22,759 posts)I would bet my life that everyone here talking gun controls, more than knows and cares about causality and your willful unacceptance of that is disgraceful...
Tejas
(4,759 posts)I would bet my life that everyone here talking gun controls, more than knows and cares about causality and your willful unacceptance of that is disgraceful...
Did you have any theories or ideas or are you just snarking because...speaking of discraceful, that's all you have?
handmade34
(22,759 posts)...along with ideas and stories of what people here are doing to try and help... just because the discussion is focused on the 'guns' today because of yesterday's events, does not mean that is all people believe
Tejas
(4,759 posts)Links?
Edweird
(8,570 posts)left is right
(1,665 posts)we as a nation limited the amount of fertilizer one could buy without some sort of followup inquiry. We also made sure that the fertilizer had tags in it so it could be traced back to the seller and eventually to the buyer. Maybe instead of gun control, we should be talking about ammo control
lunatica
(53,410 posts)whatever
Tejas
(4,759 posts)find yourself giving a shit about the cause of these horrible crimes.
mysuzuki2
(3,521 posts)but it would certainly make violence a lot less efficient.
Edweird
(8,570 posts)I would still hope the root cause could be worked on.
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)Response to Tejas (Original post)
cthulu2016 This message was self-deleted by its author.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)The existence of a gun culture in the US and the relatively lax firearms laws are the biggest single factor. You can't look at the statistics of the US compared to Canada or Australia or the UK or Germany or Japan or France or any other advanced industrial democracy re gun crimes and deaths and not conclude that maybe there is in fact a problem. Are there other problems that also contribute to violence? Sure, and no-one is denying that; the USA is deeply broken and seriously fucked-up in many respects, but the ease of legal access to firearms is a big part of the problem nonetheless.
Tejas
(4,759 posts)The existence of a gun culture in the US and the relatively lax firearms laws are the biggest single factor. You can't look at the statistics of the US compared to Canada or Australia or the UK or Germany or Japan or France or any other advanced industrial democracy re gun crimes and deaths and not conclude that maybe there is in fact a problem. Are there other problems that also contribute to violence? Sure, and no-one is denying that; the USA is deeply broken and seriously fucked-up in many respects, but the ease of legal access to firearms is a big part of the problem nonetheless.
This is what I would like to see addressed but everyone seems consumed with gunsgunsguns and can't (or do not want to) look past that at the underlying problems. Maybe after a week or two of complaining about guns some will want to move forward with discussion on fixing what is broken.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)20 mass shootings a year, almost ten thousand murders a year committed with guns; you know, I don't really think this guy in Colorado would have been able to kill 14 people and injure 36 with a machete, or a bow and arrow. Would there be so many incidents of mass murder if guns were more regulated? No, probably not. You're talking as though the other factors are solely responsible; the fact is that a majority of murders aren't committed by mentally ill people, and other countries have probably worse socioeconomic problems while still having lower rates of violence (Greece and Italy come to mind for instance).
Edweird
(8,570 posts)So, no, he couldn't kill with a nerf gun or a sock filled with quarters - but he doesn't need a gun to do what he wants.
I figure he was too much of a chicken-shit to go that route so he went with shooting so he wouldn't get hurt.
Tejas
(4,759 posts)20 mass shootings a year, almost ten thousand murders a year committed with guns; you know, I don't really think this guy in Colorado would have been able to kill 14 people and injure 36 with a machete, or a bow and arrow. Would there be so many incidents of mass murder if guns were more regulated? No, probably not. You're talking as though the other factors are solely responsible; the fact is that a majority of murders aren't committed by mentally ill people, and other countries have probably worse socioeconomic problems while still having lower rates of violence (Greece and Italy come to mind for instance).
A gun being accessible somehow makes them go into Loughner mode? They see a gun and automatically want to murder people? The gun causes these events? Not trying to be difficult with you, I genuinely appreciate the cordial manner, but calling the gun the cause of an act is putting the cart before the horse.
Take drunk driving. It's not caused by the vehicle, it's caused by a very bad decision. Maybe my point in creating this thread is that we need to address the cause of these decisions(?)
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)A gun is the most efficent method of killing one or several people; it requires neither physical strength nor special proficiency and skill to use, unlike pretty much any other weapon.
Also:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2011-01-11-fox11_st_N.htm
http://rt.com/usa/news/mass-year-people-massacre-710/
And here, mass shooting incidents since 2005, sixty-two pages' worth: http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/pdf/major-shootings.pdf
Edweird
(8,570 posts)Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)And given sourcing explosive components and actually constructing a bomb vs simply loading a weapon, the gun is the less labour-intensive method (you can't just walk into your local hardware store and say "hi I'd like 50 pounds of ANFO and some blasting caps, please" after all).
Edweird
(8,570 posts)And, no building a bomb isn't more labor intensive. Explosives can be made - easily - with commonly available ingredients.
All of that notwithstanding, your claim that guns are the most efficient way to kill is false. Bombs are. Of course, the fact that you are using the Brady Campaign as a source explains the numerous falsehoods. Gun grabber groups lie. They have to. The facts are not on their side.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)Those are all readily verifiable.
And guns are the most efficient, readily available method requiring the least effort. Also we're talking in this instance about a .223 AR-15, not a .30-06 '03 Springfield. The recoil is negligible compared to a heavier calibre weapon, the actual physical effort of firing the weapon is mostly in control and aim. Explosives can't be made as easily as a gun can be loaded.
Edweird
(8,570 posts)Setting off a bomb is much easier than shooting - but that is not my point. The statement is that it is more *efficient*. That's why there's bombs on drones and not tiny machine guns.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)either the AP or newspapers. Depending on your definition of "mass shooting" some of it may be stretching a bit (the operating definition they're using seems to be "more than one dead and/or wounded" ; even eliminating the incidents of double homicide there are still over a dozen incidents a year in the US where multiple people are killed or wounded in a single incident.
Edweird
(8,570 posts)Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)Year's not over. And taking the claimed mass shooting incidents and subtracting those in which only two people were killed or wounded still leaves a dozen a year (which with seven counting this most recent, the US is on track for).
Edweird
(8,570 posts)It looks like your statistic is a perfect example of gun grabber lies. It is the end of the 7th month. With 6 'mass shootings'. That's less than 1 a month - if those counted are even really 'mass shootings'. 20 a year? Blatant LIE. You are repeating it like it's gospel without even bothering to fact check.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)see also clarification; they classify double wounding or murder as "mass shooting"; discounting those incidents it's still a dozen a year.
Edweird
(8,570 posts)so you get your average. Maybe this is just a slow year and we had 30 or so the past few years and it will even out to 20. Or maybe the 20 is just made up bullshit. My money is on bullshit. I've been googling the shit out of this and the only corroboration I can find are opinion pieces and known liar sites. (Godlikeproductions - LOL) But, you made the claim and you're sticking with it so lets see some proof. Show me 20 a year average from previous years.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)Try rereading the last thing I said. Slowly this time. Say the words aloud to yourself if it helps. "discounting double shooting or wounding incidents there are still a dozen a year". What part of that is not processing?
Edweird
(8,570 posts)20 a year is a blatant fucking fear mongering "take my rights away" gun grabber LIE. THAT is why sources are relevant. This is also why I despise lying scumbags like Brady and VPC. They not only want to take my rights away, but they LIE LIE LIE to accomplish it. Don't buy their lies. Think for yourself. Fact check.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)Edweird
(8,570 posts)Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Whereas all a potential shooter has to do is have enough left on his credit card for the weapon, ammo and any ancillary equipment he might find necessary..
Edweird
(8,570 posts)Yes, you can still buy ammonium nitrate. You may have to deal with some diatomaceous earth, but it's still simple and risk free.
Tejas
(4,759 posts)Brady? Seriously?
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)attacking the messenger isn't really a response...and "Republicans wanting to ban guns", does your head hurt from the cognitive dissonance yet? The NRA is up the GOP's arse up to the second knuckle. Or perhaps it's the other way round; anyway, gun control isn't an argument with any traction with the Republican Party.
Edweird
(8,570 posts)The facts are not on their side.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)Edweird
(8,570 posts)Substantiate your '20 mass shootings a year'. I believe that is yet another gun grabber lie, and the more I interact with you the more clear it becomes that I am right.
Tejas
(4,759 posts)It's not only relevant that they're biased, but it ludicrous that you defend their so-called "facts" to the bitter end. Good luck with that.
spanone
(135,924 posts)wandy
(3,539 posts)You can ban knives if you want to, it will help some. Make eating stake a bit harder though.
You can even ban baseball bats, it will help some. The Yanks may not be happy about it.\
James Holmes apartment proves one thing.
You can't ban crazy!
If someone for what ever reason intends on doing some harm they will find a way to do so.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)The is a complicated problem and it will take a complicated solution and even then it will not be 100% solved.
Tejas
(4,759 posts)I did not realize that, cite/quote/link?
hlthe2b
(102,509 posts)from long distances.... We can talk..
This has become so ridiculous.
Edweird
(8,570 posts)No gun needed. Get real. McVeigh killed 168 and wounded over 800 in about 2 seconds without firing a single shot.
boppers
(16,588 posts)It sits there. Maybe has some annoying fumes.
Hint: fuel needs an ignition source.
McVeigh used detonators.
Edweird
(8,570 posts)I didn't think I needed to spell out the 'igniting' part of it since we are all adults here. Yes, he would need to ignite it. No, it doesn't take some super unobtainable Special Forces only materials to do that. A trip to the hobby store will suffice. If he were to have set the theater on fire, the death toll would have been much higher and he wouldn't have needed a gun to do so.
boppers
(16,588 posts)That's part of what makes the gun nuts.
murielm99
(30,782 posts)He killed eight student nurses. Gee, only eight.
Let's look at the mental health issues here rather than the weapon.
left is right
(1,665 posts)It is pretty obvious that those with mental health issues, bad enough to go on killing spree, do not seek professional care pn their own. And, besides who would pay for it? We dont have universal healthcare especially care that includes mental health.
So the best that we can do is limit the number of people that are killed each year by limiting access to high capacity weapons of death
boppers
(16,588 posts)There's a reason we take away sharp objects from mentally messed up people in crisis.
They can, of course, go buy a gun, a knife, propane, etc.
Tsiyu
(18,186 posts)And I notice none of the gun fetishers - NOT ONE I'VE READ - has expressed even one word of sympathy for the victims. They save all their empathy for 100 round mags and the NRA, I suppose.
The reason this post is bullshit is because we discuss socio-economic/education/health care/mental health issues frequently on this site. It's what we're about. That gorilla is acknowledged here.
When we discuss health care, education, rebuilding infrastructure, a living wage, etc, we ARE dicussing the issues that lead to mental breakdown AND that impede getting help for those breaking.
When we bash the TSA and the FBI and the CIA and Homeland security, we bash them because they use all theri technology to fondle babies and find pot seeds rather than finding freaks who go on killing sprees.
Today, we're discussing the other part of the equation: Easy access to ammunition and guns by wacked out, violent lunatics.
Tough shit if you don't like it.
Poor attempt on your part to distract from the argument as well
quaker bill
(8,225 posts)We would clearly be better off if Mr. Holmes did not have any. I agree that there is a great deal of poorly treated to untreated mental illness out there and would also love to see something done about that.
Mr. Holmes is not the only untreated mental patient with a stash of firearms.
I do not see how letting them buy more is a good thing, even with the most generous cost / benefit analysis I can imagine.
Again, you are correct, they are undiagnosed and untreated, so they will pass background checks.
SILVER__FOX52
(535 posts)the real issues in this Country. The Media and the Politicians put on some bull shit show for awhile and the real debate and discussion gets buried or never happens. We need a new Government. Most of these Jack Ass, Senators and Reps are paid for, Whores. The bulk of the Media are Corporate lap dogs.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)known as socio-economic/mental health problems is ignored in this country, then men/women with baseball bats will keep robbing people and men/women will keep stabbing people.
And will keep 'shooting' people! You forgot to mention those other weapons they so often use, GUNS.
Tejas
(4,759 posts)FBI says 60% of homicides are by firearm, do the other 30% matter to you?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)And I am not for taking away people's guns. I AM for regulations that prevent lunatics from owning firearms because I also care about the other 60% who we could probably save if we could just disarm the lunatics. Why would anyone object to that?
If it were possible to prevent them from owning knives, bats, buying poison etc. I would be for that too. But since the easiest way to reduce the number of victims is to keep firearms out of the hands of psychopaths, is to keep them from getting their hands on guns, then that seems like a good place to start.
Saving 60% out of 100% seems better than not saving anyone at all.