What's new
By:

At least the guns are okay

fishonjazz said:
I didn't realize that this shooting in texas was only 1 of three that happened yesterday. There are just too many for them all to be big news.

Saturday's mass shooting was the nation's third of the day, following others in Chico, California, and Columbus, Ohio.

James Alan Fox, a professor of Criminology, Law & Public Policy at Northeastern who has studied mass killings for 40 years, says 2023 has been the worst year in terms of mass killings "since at least 2006 and probably ever."

"I've not seen anything like this," Fox said. "We have more guns in the hands of Americans. Gun sales have skyrocketed since COVID. There's a lot of divisiveness in this country, and people suffering emotionally and economically since the pandemic."

Mass killings are happening with staggering frequency in the United States this year: an average of about one a week, according to an analysis of the Associated Press/USA TODAY/Northeastern University mass killing database. So far there have been 22 mass killings in the U.S. in 2023.

The Gun Violence Archive says the Texas mass shooting is the 200th in the nation this year and the 12th in May. Mass shootings, defined as four or more people shot, differ from mass killings, defined as four or more people killed.


I dont understand that last part. One sentence says we have had 22 mass killings in the U.S. in 2023. Then the very next sentence says we have had 200 mass shootings and 12 in may. Which is correct?

Click to expand...
It's how it's defined. Mass shootings are when 4 or more are shot in one incident, but they don't all necessarily die. Mass killings are when 4 or more people are actually killed, not just shot. So 200 mass shootings ended up in 22 mass killings.

All mass killings are also mass shootings, but not all mass shootings end up as mass killings.
 
LogGrad98 said:
It's how it's defined. Mass shootings are when 4 or more are shot in one incident, but they don't all necessarily die. Mass killings are when 4 or more people are actually killed, not just shot. So 200 mass shootings ended up in 22 mass killings.

All mass killings are also mass shootings, but not all mass shootings end up as mass killings.
Click to expand...
Ah, makes sense. thanks.
 
fishonjazz said:
The dumbest solution that I have seen proposed is more guns. I mean we literally have more guns than people. We have more guns than ever before. We also have more gun violence. We tried that solution already. Turns out, its actually a problem instead of a solution.

Is there any other problem that we try that solution for? Like does anyone think the solution to fetanyl/opiod deaths is more fetanyl/opiods? Fetanyl/opiods aren't the issue. They are inanimate objects. They aren't bad. What we need to solve the crisis is more of the object that is the common denominator of the crisis!
Click to expand...
This is a few years old, but still valid:


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuS-e-5oOiU
 
  • Like
Reactions: slc
had a co worker today telling me that a knife is no different from a gun. They are both tools that can be used for killing. I asked him "so you use a knife for your home protection and carry a knife in your belt holster then right?" He was like no, a knife wouldn't work well enough for protection. I said, exactly. A knife and a gun isn't the same. ya they are both tools that can kill but one is specifically made for killing and much more effective. A screwdriver and a hammer are both tools but one is better than the other for hammering nails.
 
fishonjazz said:
had a co worker today telling me that a knife is no different from a gun. They are both tools that can be used for killing. I asked him "so you use a knife for your home protection and carry a knife in your belt holster then right?" He was like no, a knife wouldn't work well enough for protection. I said, exactly. A knife and a gun isn't the same. ya they are both tools that can kill but one is specifically made for killing and much more effective. A screwdriver and a hammer are both tools but one is better than the other for hammering nails.
Click to expand...
I've got a fully automatic 22cal pistol I use for dicing veggies. In mere seconds my veggies are in tiny pieces. they are also all over the walls, the floor and the ceiling, but I haven't found a knife yet that can get the job done faster.
 
SteakNEggs said:
It did no such thing.
Click to expand...
The plain statistics on the numbers of mass shootings before, during, and after the ban indicate otherwise, but if you have an evidenced-based argument to make that this data is misleading, I'm all ears.
 
blitt_kvetch_guns_mobile.jpg
 
I had bb guns at 7. I had my first 30-30 at 10. There were no mass shootings or very very little?

What changed? Cell phones? Constant access to the internet? More people on anti-depressants? Gun safety?
I'm genuinely curious.
 
SteakNEggs said:
I had bb guns at 7. I had my first 30-30 at 10. There were no mass shootings or very very little?

What changed? Cell phones? Constant access to the internet? More people on anti-depressants? Gun safety?
I'm genuinely curious.
Click to expand...

Does it matter? For the purpose of solution, anyway?
 
SteakNEggs said:
I had bb guns at 7. I had my first 30-30 at 10. There were no mass shootings or very very little?

What changed? Cell phones? Constant access to the internet? More people on anti-depressants? Gun safety?
I'm genuinely curious.
Click to expand...
The Comumbine High School massacre happened. News media was obsessed. Movies were made. The cultural impact was massive, and mentally disturbed people everywhere took note.
 
Before columbine there was a phrase in pop culture called "going postal" because until then most mass shootings took place in the workplace and there had been a rash of them at post offices. My mother was a letter carrier at the time and she said it was a pretty toxic work environment that was probably organization wide that was caused, at least in part, by the adversarial relationship between the union and management. The post office also hires a lot of vets which probably contributed.

But yeah, these things are sort of like trends. You don't hear about post office shootings anymore because that's not the trend now. Those same people who might have shot up their workplace now go to a public place to do the shooting because that's just the way it works now.
 
JimLes said:
Does it matter? For the purpose of solution, anyway?
Click to expand...
I think it does matter. Guns are part of the equation, but something has changed that is causing people do this stuff. Without a Constitutional amendment, there will be guns in this country, so you have to do your best to fix it from both sides. One side of the equation is hard due to constitutional protection, the other side is easier. It needs to be a combined approach. When assault weapons truly account for so little death, their bans won't do much towards a real solution. Handguns are the real threat, but not even dems want to try to ban them, and probably can't based on Heller/Bruen.

When there is a shooting, while always horrible, I can at least somewhat understand when a shooter has a "reason" for going after the victims, even if abhorrent and not based on reason or reality. Examples are people getting fired, left by companion, etc. At least in those cases, there is a reason.

When an adult goes and shoots up a school of kids, or randomly shoots up a concert, or mall, we have to figure out what is causing people to go off the rail like this for no apparent reason. Because if you only get rid of guns, there will still be knives and 8,000 lb trucks, gasoline, homemade bombs and SUVs to take people out. Seriously, what the **** is wrong with people in our society?

Until there is a real solution, I'd like to see more protection in schools. Maybe not metal detectors as I don't want any kid to feel like they are "institutionalized", but maybe reinforced doors with bullet proof glass, doors that actually stay locked from the outside and more resource officers at the schools.

We put more armed guards on our politicians than we do our own kids. The Nashville shooter allegedly skipped her first intended target as it had armed security and went to her old school which was vulnerable. Gun-free zones seem to have the opposite of the intended effect. It seems like schools are often preferred targets as they are gun-free zones without security.

At the same time, spend money on mental health. Require mental health and background check screenings for every gun purchase, and have those checks be recurring (not just when you buy the gun). And punish straw buyers or gun owners that don't secure their guns, which then get used in mass shootings with heavy jail sentences.
 
The Thriller said:

View: https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1646957717519466496?s=46&t=QT7YFlZ_IlHq81PpZAhKgw


View attachment 14395
Re-election video for Reeves released a week ago. I love how he like totally articulated plans and ideas in this video…

View: https://twitter.com/teamtatereeves/status/1653502357399916549?s=46&t=QT7YFlZ_IlHq81PpZAhKgw


And we wonder why mass shootings are a problem here? Most countries just don’t have this sick fetish around guns.
Click to expand...

Republicans flaunt guns for money and votes. Democrats flaunt banning the same guns pictured for money and votes. 103 people died in "mass shootings" in 2001 using FBI definitions or 706 if you include Gun Violence Archive's definition (shootings with no deaths included) of the 48,830 deaths (more than half are suicides). Most of these shootings did involve rifles. However, these are a sliver of gun homicides each year, but are the most publicized.

Basically these ARs that Republicans celebrate and Democrats abhor are responsible for less than 3% of all deaths by gun (shotguns were 1%). Handguns are responsible for approximately 60% of firearm homicides. The number is much higher as 36% don't list the type of guns, but many estimate that handguns truly account for closer to 90% of firearm related deaths.
 
TheGoldStandard said:
Republicans flaunt guns for money and votes. Democrats flaunt banning the same guns pictured for money and votes. 103 people died in "mass shootings" in 2001 using FBI definitions or 706 if you include Gun Violence Archive's definition (shootings with no deaths included) of the 48,830 deaths (more than half are suicides). Most of these shootings did involve rifles. However, these are a sliver of gun homicides each year, but are the most publicized.

Basically these ARs that Republicans celebrate and Democrats abhor are responsible for less than 3% of all deaths by gun (shotguns were 1%). Handguns are responsible for approximately 60% of firearm homicides. The number is much higher as 36% don't list the type of guns, but many estimate that handguns truly account for closer to 90% of firearm related deaths.
Click to expand...
Don't forget, firearms are the most common and lethal means of suicide attempts, and if someone survives a first attempt they are unlikely to try again.
 
TheGoldStandard said:
I think it does matter. Guns are part of the equation, but something has changed that is causing people do this stuff. Without a Constitutional amendment, there will be guns in this country, so you have to do your best to fix it from both sides.
Click to expand...

Well, then work on a constitutional amendment. And reforming the system so you don't have ridiculous things like the Senate or the Electoral College.

I'm a grandson of a man who went into the forest with a stolen rifle to simultaneously overthrow a ****** monarchy and a Nazi-puppet state, so I guess I just don't believe in half-measures.

Guns are killing people. I don't know why or even if this wasn't like that in the past, but trying to figure out a solution while making sure that everyone still has as many guns as they want seems ridiculous. In fact, it seems like people are more concerned about guns than human lives, but I suppose that's the title of this thread, so why should I be surprised.
 
And no, you wouldn't even need a constitutional amendment. The second amendment simply says:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Nothing here says that a private citizen has the right to purchase weapons at will.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top