What is better, no guns, or more guns?

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, DC Tom said:

 

Again, that is entirely dependent on your definition of "mass shooting."

Someone is digging a rabbit hole! 

[jrober38]

11 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Again, that is entirely dependent on your definition of "mass shooting."

 

Anyway you define it, this is something the US sees happen far more than any other developed country. 

 

The notion that bad guys will always find guns simply doesn't ring true with any consistency anywhere else in the developed world.

 

My opinion is that if you make it harder to get guns, these loner, lone wolf shooters with no social skills usually have no idea how to find the black market let alone purchase a high powered rifle there. The black market is a place for career criminals to find weapons, but I don't think the type of deranged psycho who wants to kill a bunch of random people will have any success buying illegal weapons there, otherwise you'd see these things happen way more in other developed countries around the world. 

[row_33]

Is every week in Chicago included in the mass shootings?

 

 

[IDBillzFan]

40 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

They're not relatable.

 

Chicago has about 2.7 million people, or 0.8% of the country's population.

 

I don't have exact numbers, but I imagine that tens of millions, if not 100 million Americans shop at Walmart at least once a month. 

 

When people die in Chicago, no one cares because it'll never affect them because they don't live there.

 

When people get massacred in Walmart on a Friday night, it's a completely different story.

 

This is one of the dumbest things I've read here, but that's probably because I have Qbaby on ignore.

 

You truly believe that the reason no one reports ALL the murders in Chicago is because people don't live there?

 

Read THIS STORY. Chicago had 1500 people shot JUST THIS YEAR.

 

Then read THIS STORY. New York is celebrating because they FINALLY dropped below their 2018 best of five shootings PER FREAKING WEEK

 

You really think the national media doesn't report on this because people who don't live in Chicago and NYC don't care?

 

People should have to blow into a Stupidity Breathalyzer before they're allowed to post on message boards.

 

 

 

[Tiberius]

4 minutes ago, IDBillzFan said:

 

This is one of the dumbest things I've read here, but that's probably because I have Qbaby on ignore.

 

You truly believe that the reason no one reports ALL the murders in Chicago is because people don't live there?

 

Read THIS STORY. Chicago had 1500 people shot JUST THIS YEAR.

 

Then read THIS STORY. New York is celebrating because they FINALLY dropped below their 2018 best of five shootings PER FREAKING WEEK

 

You really think the national media doesn't report on this because people who don't live in Chicago and NYC don't care?

 

People should have to blow into a Stupidity Breathalyzer before they're allowed to post on message boards.

 

 

 

There are shootings all over the country everyday. Of course the population centers have more, they have more people! 

Math matters 

 

[njbuff]

26 minutes ago, row_33 said:

Is every week in Chicago included in the mass shootings?

 

 

 

Of course not. It is RASYS.

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

 

 

TRUMP CONDEMNS BIGOTRY AND WHITE SUPREMACY [WITH VIDEO]

by Paul Mirengoff

 

 

 

 

ON TRUMP’S EXCELLENT SPEECH

by John Hindraker

 

Paul has noted the comments that President Trump made on the weekend’s two mass shootings this morning. His post embeds a video of the president’s speech, which is 10 minutes long. I recommend that you watch it. It was thoughtful, measured, and, in my opinion, struck all the right notes.

 

It consisted in large part of denunciations of the murderers and sympathy for their victims. Beyond that, Trump’s comments were notable in several ways.

 

First, Trump attacked white supremacism without noting that socialism, the doctrine of the Ohio murderer, was equally fatal in this case. That was probably sound from a political standpoint, and perhaps manifests the president’s conviction that the Democrats will get nowhere by trying to tie him to the El Paso murderer.

 

Second, the president expressed determination to do something about mass shootings. He said that on this issue, as elsewhere, America will “win.” It is easy to be skeptical about this promise; as I wrote in May, the United States does not have an unusual number of mass shootings on a per capita basis. We rank 56th in the world in that regard, far behind countries like Norway, Switzerland, Finland and Russia. Mass murders are so rare that it is easy to be cynical about our ability to do much about them, even though we have cut the overall homicide rate in half. Still, it was bracing to hear the president express confidence that the problem can successfully be addressed.

 

Third, Trump called for capital punishment for mass hate-murderers. This isn’t going to happen, but it puts liberals in a box. Most people think death is the appropriate punishment for mass murderers like the El Paso and Dayton shooters. Liberals don’t agree, but they have a hard time explaining to the average voter their reticence when it comes to punishing the actual murderer, as opposed to people who disagree with them politically.

 

Fourth, Trump did not take the easy way out by endorsing more useless gun control measures. Rather, he came out in favor of the one thing that actually might make a difference: so-called “red flag” laws. Such legislation has, I believe, been enacted in a few states and introduced in others. The basic idea is that if you think someone is mentally ill and dangerous and therefore should not possess firearms, you can go to court on an expedited basis, potentially without notice to the “dangerous” person, and obtain an order that 1) bars that person from possessing firearms, and 2) directs police officers to go to his residence and confiscate any firearms they find there.

 

It is easy to imagine circumstances in which a procedure of this sort might actually work. Mass shooters are pretty much all as nutty as fruitcakes. In most cases, it is obvious to everyone who encounters them that they are crazy and might be dangerous. Sometimes (like the Parkland murderer) they advertise their intent to commit mass murder on social media. So in some cases, a “red flag” process might actually work.

 

On the other hand, the potential for abuse is equally obvious. 

 

More at the link:

[B-Man]

“GUN-FREE ZONES” ARE AN IDIOT’S IDEA OF SAFETY: 

 

El Paso mass shooting brings back debate over gun-free zones.

 

 

.

 

[Boatdrinks]

3 hours ago, jrober38 said:

 

They're not relatable.

 

Chicago has about 2.7 million people, or 0.8% of the country's population.

 

I don't have exact numbers, but I imagine that tens of millions, if not 100 million Americans shop at Walmart at least once a month. 

 

When people die in Chicago, no one cares because it'll never affect them because they don't live there.

 

When people get massacred in Walmart on a Friday night, it's a completely different story.

It still doesn’t affect me because if I go to a Walmart it’s in Hamburg NY not El Paso Texas. Not exactly the same thing. Still, the liberal media has selective outrage about shootings. Just depends who’s pulling the trigger . 

[Deranged Rhino]

The logic of the partisans: 

 

[Boatdrinks]

2 hours ago, Tiberius said:

There are shootings all over the country everyday. Of course the population centers have more, they have more people! 

Math matters 

 

But where is the media outage over these shooting deaths ? Don’t all lives lost to senseless shootings matter ? It’s outrageous and it must be somebody else’s fault ( Trump) that people are shot everyday. Something must be done ! 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Hedge]

37 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

Really the only good news from this horrible situation is that the band (Menstrual Munchies, yes, really) now has an opening for Robert Francis O'Rourke, who will soon be looking for a new gig.

 

 

 

[/dev/null]

4 hours ago, Hedge said:

 

 

 

File this guy into the unpersonned memory hole along with James Hodgkinson

[BeginnersMind]

8 hours ago, Boatdrinks said:

But where is the media outage over these shooting deaths ? Don’t all lives lost to senseless shootings matter ? It’s outrageous and it must be somebody else’s fault ( Trump) that people are shot everyday. Something must be done ! 

 

Do you really think there isn’t outrage over city shootings and gang related violence? “Make the streets safer” has been a platform of more community movements maybe than any other. 

 

These shootings get attention because of the number dead due to one (one Hedges right?) human. 

 

Deeper and better background checks checks might have prevented the El Paso shooting. They would have less effect on the gang violence. No single approach will fix this but less guns would have a more immediate impact.  

 

Mostly you need to love your neighbor and pass that on. That’s the long term option. 

 

Edited August 6, 2019 by BeginnersMind

[GG]

12 hours ago, jrober38 said:

 

Mass shootings required easy access to high powered weapons capable of a high rate of fire. 

 

50 years ago your average American didn't own an AR-15. 

 

The Dayton shooting lasted 24 seconds before police killed the gunman. In that time he killed 9 and injured many more. 

 

Even when there are good guys with guns, these weapons are capable of extreme carnage in a very short amount of time. 

 

In 2019, an average American doesn't own an AR-15 either.  High capacity magazines have existed for decades before mass shootings became common.

[DC Tom]

7 hours ago, Hedge said:

 

Really the only good news from this horrible situation is that the band (Menstrual Munchies, yes, really) now has an opening for Robert Francis O'Rourke, who will soon be looking for a new gig.

 

 

 

 

There's a reason most of the coverage is of El Paso.

[SoCal Deek]

If those photos of the Dayton shooter are real we have a MAJOR credibility problem with the media. Two mass shootings on the same day just hours apart and the coverage by the media and politicians couldn’t be more starkly slanted! 

[/dev/null]

16 minutes ago, GG said:

 

In 2019, an average American doesn't own an AR-15 either.

 

Maybe it's a regional thing, but many "average American's" that I know do.

[BeginnersMind]

 

25 minutes ago, GG said:

 

In 2019, an average American doesn't own an AR-15 either.  High capacity magazines have existed for decades before mass shootings became common.

 

None of these mass shooters are using decades old guns. They are almost all using recent purchases. 

 

There are lots of reasons for the rise, and no single solution will fix the problem. But I don’t see how requiring a more extensive background check to own a weapon like this is a bad thing. 

 

Young men play violent video games the world over. Young men have social media everywhere. 

 

Young men men do not have easy access to buy their own firearms everywhere. 

 

Repeating, this is only one piece of a bigger puzzle to put together. 

Edited August 6, 2019 by BeginnersMind