The one thing that can probably be done is to restrict the media (either voluntarily or by law) from reporting these incidents. Now that may seem counterproductive, but regardless of how many times its reported, nothing changes. What can change, is taking away these individuals way of m aking a name for themselves. Everyone knows the name Dylann Roof, but can anyone name one of his victims without looking it up?
I never use the actual names of high-profile shooters, referring to them only in generic terms such as "the shooter" or "this person", etc. In this particular case the shooter was not also killed, so he is going to have a public trial--he gets publicity for months.
Yep.
Now pass a law like Canada's Youth Criminal Justice Act where the minor can not be named after they commit a crime so everyone else (including the media) follows suit.
The one thing that can probably be done is to restrict the media (either voluntarily or by law) from reporting these incidents. Now that may seem counterproductive, but regardless of how many times its reported, nothing changes. What can change, is taking away these individuals way of m aking a name for themselves. Everyone knows the name Dylann Roof, but can anyone name one of his victims without looking it up?
I never use the actual names of high-profile shooters, referring to them only in generic terms such as "the shooter" or "this person", etc. In this particular case the shooter was not also killed, so he is going to have a public trial--he gets publicity for months.
We already get people who deny Columbine and Newtown and Vegas happened. Take away the names and it'll be even easier for these nutjobs to deny facts.
Gun laws will NEVER work. Compare Switzerland with UK in Europe. Compare tows with almost no gun laws in USA with Chicago/Detroit. In South America, Brazil have a insane strict gun control and 60.000 homicides/year, while Uruguay had only 289 homicides and Paraguay(more poor than Brazil) have 617 homicides and the gun laws in PY are almost nonexistent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
Guns aren't hard to make. Anyone with internet and a lathe machine can make a gun. Everything is easy to make except the rifling and the bolt.
All USA will become like Detroit... Also, if you don't like guns, you can simple move to a state/city with a strict gun control and enjoy the high criminality. About compare UK with US, why not compare UK with Switzerland? Switzerland have some gun control laws, but nothing like UK.
And there it is again. Nothing works perfectly, so do nothing.
Rinse repeat rinse repeat.
The problem is not that gun control don't "works perfectly" is that gun control simple INCREASE VIOLENCE in every country. In America, you have freedom do choose where to live. If you like gun control, you are free to move to Detroit. In the majority of world you don't have that freedom.
Even if guns increase violence(as i've posted statistics, knifes kill more than assault guns), if a comunity wanna have guns, why should the federal government force this community to disarm? Other question. What you will gonna do with the gun production? Will start wars? Let every gun company fail? And the unemployment?
These types of discussion are never about organized crime, yet people always point to them when the discussion does come up.
Criminal organizations like gangs, who use violence will always be able to get their hands on something illegal. It is how they operate.
Gang members, unless it is gang related and they have a individual target in mind, never go into a school and shoot it up for kicks like what happened in Florida. That is the type of violence gun control is attempting to prevent. Intimate crimes can also be prevented with gun control. It will never be perfect, but it is a preventive measure.
Better and more specific resources to community outreach programs can help curb gang violence if needed, but this isn't what gun control is attempting to prevent.
Employment, family, and a sense of community prevents people from just packing their bags and moving across the country to where better gun control exists, not to mention the cost of doing that. It rarely is an option, but I wouldn't be surprised if people who can afford to do that do it.
There are also more knives in the country than there are assault guns. A knife maybe able to kill one or two people up close, where a gun can kill and wound dozens from a distance. And that story limiting to just assault weapons, doesn't that seem odd to you? More people are killed by bicycles than nuclear weapons in the last 10 years, lets make nuclear weapons more available to everyone and ban bicycles. Does that make sense?
Gun manufactures LOVE when there is a shooting like this. Why? because people panic, think this is the incident when the government is going to act so they begin stockpiling ammo and guns and accessories before it is taken away.
No one is saying disarm. 601 billion dollars being spent on the military alone (not including local law enforcement, hunters and gun clubs) is enough to keep anyone in business. Employment differences will be miniscule if at all. All these questions distract everyone from the issue that can be fixed.
That graph about rape in Australia is absurd. The numbers fluctuate wildly for the entire time-period, from anywhere from 1000 to 1800. Dipping sharply, going up slightly, going up sharply, dipping slightly. That graph is less indicative of a trend than almost any I have ever seen. It also assumes that....what?? Every one of those women would have been carrying a gun??
That graph about rape in Australia is absurd. The numbers fluctuate wildly for the entire time-period, from anywhere from 1000 to 1800. Dipping sharply, going up slightly, going up sharply, dipping slightly. That graph is less indicative of a trend than almost any I have ever seen. It also assumes that....what?? Every one of those women would have been carrying a gun??
I'd be willing to bet a graph of their population graph goes upwards too the actual ratio of rapes is probably lowering or remaining the same.
Either way the US is the only country in the world with these mass shootings. We've tried doing nothing and it hasn't seemed to work. Our politicians have loosened gun regulations and the number of mass shootings are going up. What can it all mean?
No one is even suggesting banning guns. We are talking about assault weapons, which serve NO OTHER purpose than to kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible. And common sense, basic, rudimentary safeguards so buying a gun isn't easier than getting behind the counter cold medication.
No one is even suggesting banning guns. We are talking about assault weapons, which serve NO OTHER purpose than to kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible. And common sense, basic, rudimentary safeguards so buying a gun isn't easier than getting behind the counter cold medication.
How many people do you imagine you could kill with a knife in 60 seconds before being stopped?? This isn't about individual murders, it's about mass indiscriminate slaughter, in this case in a school.
Researching the data about rapes would require more work than I'm prepared to do at the moment - reported figures on sexual assaults are hugely influenced by changes in definitions, so without taking that into context the figures are not meaningful.
In relation to murders the decline in the US is in line with a general trend for reduced violence over the last 30 years or so. Obviously there are exceptions in specific countries, but the Western world generally has seen a significant reduction in criminal violence (and indeed crime more generally).
How many people do you imagine you could kill with a knife in 60 seconds before being stopped?? This isn't about individual murders, it's about mass indiscriminate slaughter, in this case in a school.
There are mass murders in countries with insane gun control laws like France. You will not stop a single mass murder with gun control, in fact you will only prejudice professional shooters, manufacturers and farmers, etc.
No one is even suggesting banning guns. We are talking about assault weapons, which serve NO OTHER purpose than to kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible. And common sense, basic, rudimentary safeguards so buying a gun isn't easier than getting behind the counter cold medication.
That chart shows total firearm murder victims 2009-2013: 44,077
Total knife or cutting instrument murder victims 2009-2013: 8,378
Those numbers do not support your claims. If you cherry pick rifles I guess it would work but that is no more meaningful than if you could break down "Knives or cutting instruments" to only butter knifes.
No one is even suggesting banning guns. We are talking about assault weapons, which serve NO OTHER purpose than to kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible. And common sense, basic, rudimentary safeguards so buying a gun isn't easier than getting behind the counter cold medication.
That chart shows total firearm murder victims 2009-2013: 44,077
Total knife or cutting instrument murder victims 2009-2013: 8,378
Those numbers do not support your claims. If you cherry pick rifles I guess it would work but that is no more meaningful than if you could break down "Knives or cutting instruments" to only butter knifes.
I was talking about rifles because people here tends to be more against rifles. And yes, rifles killed 285 people in 2013 while knifes killed 1,490. So if you support gun control makes more sense to restrict short arms than rifles(not advocating for control, this NEVER worked and will never work). Guns are easy to made and easy to obtain illegally; gun control will only impact citizens that follow the laws.
No one is even suggesting banning guns. We are talking about assault weapons, which serve NO OTHER purpose than to kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible. And common sense, basic, rudimentary safeguards so buying a gun isn't easier than getting behind the counter cold medication.
That chart shows total firearm murder victims 2009-2013: 44,077
Total knife or cutting instrument murder victims 2009-2013: 8,378
Those numbers do not support your claims. If you cherry pick rifles I guess it would work but that is no more meaningful than if you could break down "Knives or cutting instruments" to only butter knifes.
I was talking about rifles because people here tends to be more against rifles. And yes, rifles killed 285 people in 2013 while knifes killed 1,490. So if you support gun control makes more sense to restrict short arms than rifles(not advocating for control, this NEVER worked and will never work). Guns are easy to made and easy to obtain illegally; gun control will only impact citizens that follow the laws.
That's like saying speed limits and laws against murder only impact people who don't speed and commit homicide. The whole reason laws exist is to control behavior. The only time I EVER see this "people will do it anyway" argument used in regards to laws is when guns are the subject.
I'm in favor of gun control and rifles are among the least of my concerns. Handguns have always been more important in my eyes, and the data on the FBI's website bears it out: handguns are the top murder weapons in the United States by far.
I'm in favor of gun control and rifles are among the least of my concerns. Handguns have always been more important in my eyes, and the data on the FBI's website bears it out: handguns are the top murder weapons in the United States by far.
Easy and convenient. Tuck one into your pocket. Someone pisses you off and in a moment of rage shoot em. Rinse and repeat happens every day. At least with a knife you have to really mean it. It's harder than squeezing one finger from 10 feet away.
I'm in favor of gun control and rifles are among the least of my concerns. Handguns have always been more important in my eyes, and the data on the FBI's website bears it out: handguns are the top murder weapons in the United States by far.
Easy and convenient. Tuck one into your pocket. Someone pisses you off and in a moment of rage shoot em. Rinse and repeat happens every day. At least with a knife you have to really mean it. It's harder than squeezing one finger from 10 feet away.
By far the most important point. It is INFINITELY easier, from both a physical and mental standpoint, to shoot someone rather than to stab or beat them to death.
I always seem to mess up quote chains so I'm hoping I've tagged the right person.
@deltago I'm not saying to not do anything, I'm saying that focusing on the law aspect will only make things worse until the culture is changed. I'm saying focus on education and the value of life over "Murica! Guns! Yeah!". Guns are so INGRAINED in our culture that there is ZERO chance of the current generation changing anything in regards to guns. Focus on the next generation. Teach the children to value others' lives, and to not romanticize violence. They are the only hope for change.
We already get people who deny Columbine and Newtown and Vegas happened. Take away the names and it'll be even easier for these nutjobs to deny facts.
I haven't heard of anyone denying those events but then people do or believe all sorts of thing which, to me, are illogical and irrational; denying that those events occurred shouldn't come as a surprise to me.
Again, those of you who wish to have broader gun control legislation need to call and/or e-mail your State representative because Congress cannot do what you wish. The Constitution does not forbid State Legislatures from enacting gun control legislation, though. Also, the gun control law cannot be paraphrased as "it is illegal to purchase x in this State"; instead, it must read "it is illegal to own x in this State". This will prevent people from crossing the State line, buying the newly-outlawed item, then importing it back home. Well, okay--it wont' *prevent* it but if they get caught with it they will have to accept the consequences.
The point is all moot, in any event. As @jjstraka34 notes, no action will be taken on guns, especially with elections only 9 months away.
One that conservatives seem to fear. Part of the reason for denying Obama's Supreme Court pick is guns. The NRA and Republican party fearmonger that Obama is coming for your guns! Even now!
Speaking for the mentally ill, I get tired of hearing mental illness being using as the boogeyman for these shootings, over and over again. I don't mind saying I have 2 DSM classifications now myself, as regards mental illnesses. Neither one makes me feel particularly prone to killin folks (Dissociative subtype PTSD/ Depersonalization/Derealization Disorder -I alter my consciousness basically). Personally I think most people involved in these shootings are mad, angry about someone/something/ situation, or are caught up in a personal/group cause more than anything else. I dont think that automatically makes them ill. If anything else, most folks with mental/developmental difficulties are LESS likely to commit these mass murder incidents. For me it is harder to go out and interact with the world at large period, much less want to go out into a MORE stressful situation, such as a shooting. To me it just seems like an excuse to put off better gun control/loophole closing measures and put it on the the issue of mental health (which is not exactly on the front burner to get more attention/health/ help anyway-just from a strictly health perspective) which is not in the best state of helping people in this country, anyway.
On a side note, in NC the only reference to buying guns and mental illnesses is the question on the permit app asking one if they have been admitted to a mental treatment facility. And,well, it is dang hard to get any kind of help period with regards to mental health, even now, esp. when low on funds. That whole assault ban crap in the 90's was a disaster. The loopholes and exemptions basically just allowed the manufacturers remove some of the fancy doodads and in effect make the same type of semi-automatic rifle, Even then, guns made BEFORE the ban, and high capacity magazines made BEFORE the ban were still legal to sell. There was enough stock to keep selling these until the end of the ban, After it expired we just upped the stock even more. No one thing is a fix, and I hear lots of people on news and what not, saying that someone else's idea won't work and then nothing is done.
I also think it would be interesting to see how many folks listed with depression would be put on the restriction list. Many have had that at one point or another. Where would the classification start? Plus we have most GP's that think any mental illness is probably just depression and want to prescribe some anti-depression med as the only fix (I went through that myself), which can make things worse with the wrong diagnoses. Now we are potentially facing LESS medicaid, and more expensive health care for mental issues (alot not covered even for one with ins.)
Anyway, I guess today I would be the murdering mentally ill guy for one side and the gun freak on the other. I bout couldn't listen to any more of it from news sources as I got tired of hear one fix solutions and hearing about how deranged all of us with mental illnesses are. Same ol one side vs the other with no one in govt willing to budge a darn inch.
The blaming on mental illness is deflection and scapegoating. Blame anyone or anything but the easily available murder weapon. Because the NRA owns Republican politicians they can't blame guns or the NRA.
There is something very interesting happening after this shooting. These survivors are high school kids. And right now, they are really pissed off and naming names. They are telling people in no uncertain terms that, yes, this IS about guns, because we experienced it. And they are demanding something be done about it.
There is a reason the GOP has thrown all their chips in on voter suppression, gerrymandering, and cultural resentment. Because they are going to be dead party to most kids growing up under Trump.
I feel like I should call in @BelleSorciere from the bullpen here, because she speaks with far more authority on the fact that there really is no tie with mental illness and these kind of violent acts. I still fall victim to the rhetoric as well. We've turned mental illness into a scapegoat for our own inaction. And besides, even if there WAS a connection, exactly what are we doing about mental illness?? Last I checked, Trump's budget calls for draconian cuts to Medicare and Mediciad.
The US has similar rates of mental illness to other countries but those other countries do not experience spree killings (attempted or otherwise) at anywhere near the same rate.
The only thing that is different about the US is rates of gun ownership.
And it's all well and good to claim that increased gun ownership has a correlation with decreased murder and rape but correlation is not necessarily causation, and there is a strong likelihood that given the number of people killed by guns in the first place that guns already fuel the homicide rate.
Adjusted for population, only Yemen has a higher rate of mass shootings among countries with more than 10 million people. Yemen has the world’s second-highest rate of gun ownership after the United States.
Americans make up about 4.4 percent of the global population but own 42 percent of the world’s guns. From 1966 to 2012, 31 percent of the gunmen in mass shootings worldwide were American
A country’s rate of gun ownership correlates with the odds it would experience a mass shooting. Mental health, video games, and racial diversity have no bearing on mass shootings. More guns = more mass shootings.
There is something very interesting happening after this shooting. These survivors are high school kids. And right now, they are really pissed off and naming names. They are telling people in no uncertain terms that, yes, this IS about guns, because we experienced it. And they are demanding something be done about it.
There is a reason the GOP has thrown all their chips in on voter suppression, gerrymandering, and cultural resentment. Because they are going to be dead party to most kids growing up under Trump.
I don't want to burst their bubble because they have already been through enough but we shouldn't encourage them with false hope, leading them to think that something will be done. You and I both know that nothing will be done. At the very least, I will be highly surprised if something *is* done.
@smeagolheart What, then, would you propose as a solution to the problem?
If there is a lesson to be learned from the movie Thor: Ragnarok it is that nations do themselves a disservice when they try to ignore their past and pretend to be something they are not. This nation was founded on armed conflict, disobedience, bloodshed, and conquest. To the people wishing to change our basic nature I can only say "good luck", because you are going to need it, *especially* when you try to deal with those "molon labe" folks. I don't particularly like it that that is our nature but I didn't make the decisions that led us here.
I don't know....maybe this will be one of those times when I am incorrect--that would be pleasantly surprising. I am not going to bet on it, though.
There is something very interesting happening after this shooting. These survivors are high school kids. And right now, they are really pissed off and naming names. They are telling people in no uncertain terms that, yes, this IS about guns, because we experienced it. And they are demanding something be done about it.
There is a reason the GOP has thrown all their chips in on voter suppression, gerrymandering, and cultural resentment. Because they are going to be dead party to most kids growing up under Trump.
I don't want to burst their bubble because they have already been through enough but we shouldn't encourage them with false hope, leading them to think that something will be done. You and I both know that nothing will be done. At the very least, I will be highly surprised if something *is* done.
@smeagolheart What, then, would you propose as a solution to the problem?
If there is a lesson to be learned from the movie Thor: Ragnarok it is that nations do themselves a disservice when they try to ignore their past and pretend to be something they are not. This nation was founded on armed conflict, disobedience, bloodshed, and conquest. To the people wishing to change our basic nature I can only say "good luck", because you are going to need it, *especially* when you try to deal with those "molon labe" folks. I don't particularly like it that that is our nature but I didn't make the decisions that led us here.
I don't know....maybe this will be one of those times when I am incorrect--that would be pleasantly surprising. I am not going to bet on it, though.
Government buy back program of guns worked in Australia. Will it be expensive? Yes. Is it worth it? Yes. Here's a thought, maybe if we didn't keep giving tax cuts to rich political donors we could afford to make things better in the country instead of the wild west dog-eat-dog society we have now.
I'd say there should be a total ban on personally owned assault weapons. All those private prison contractors worried about not enough people going to jail due to changing attitudes towards drug sentencing? They can fill their prisons with with gun nuts and criminals who get caught with assault weapons.
Not asking for a total ban on guns. People could still buy rifles, shotguns and muskets as the founding fathers intended. It's hard to shoot hundreds of people with a handgun or shotgun.
There will still be a ton of shootings and murders because it's easy for people to move their finger to pull a trigger to solve a temporary grievance if they momentarily lose their minds. But at least the potential for hundreds of people getting shot at once like in Las Vegas will be gone.
Comments
Now pass a law like Canada's Youth Criminal Justice Act where the minor can not be named after they commit a crime so everyone else (including the media) follows suit.
Even if guns increase violence(as i've posted statistics, knifes kill more than assault guns), if a comunity wanna have guns, why should the federal government force this community to disarm? Other question. What you will gonna do with the gun production? Will start wars? Let every gun company fail? And the unemployment?
These types of discussion are never about organized crime, yet people always point to them when the discussion does come up.
Criminal organizations like gangs, who use violence will always be able to get their hands on something illegal. It is how they operate.
Gang members, unless it is gang related and they have a individual target in mind, never go into a school and shoot it up for kicks like what happened in Florida. That is the type of violence gun control is attempting to prevent. Intimate crimes can also be prevented with gun control. It will never be perfect, but it is a preventive measure.
Better and more specific resources to community outreach programs can help curb gang violence if needed, but this isn't what gun control is attempting to prevent.
Employment, family, and a sense of community prevents people from just packing their bags and moving across the country to where better gun control exists, not to mention the cost of doing that. It rarely is an option, but I wouldn't be surprised if people who can afford to do that do it.
There are also more knives in the country than there are assault guns. A knife maybe able to kill one or two people up close, where a gun can kill and wound dozens from a distance. And that story limiting to just assault weapons, doesn't that seem odd to you? More people are killed by bicycles than nuclear weapons in the last 10 years, lets make nuclear weapons more available to everyone and ban bicycles. Does that make sense?
Gun manufactures LOVE when there is a shooting like this. Why? because people panic, think this is the incident when the government is going to act so they begin stockpiling ammo and guns and accessories before it is taken away.
No one is saying disarm. 601 billion dollars being spent on the military alone (not including local law enforcement, hunters and gun clubs) is enough to keep anyone in business. Employment differences will be miniscule if at all. All these questions distract everyone from the issue that can be fixed.
Either way the US is the only country in the world with these mass shootings. We've tried doing nothing and it hasn't seemed to work. Our politicians have loosened gun regulations and the number of mass shootings are going up. What can it all mean?
In relation to murders the decline in the US is in line with a general trend for reduced violence over the last 30 years or so. Obviously there are exceptions in specific countries, but the Western world generally has seen a significant reduction in criminal violence (and indeed crime more generally).
Gun control din't prevented this Polish to have a 8mm full auto SMG
44,077
Total knife or cutting instrument murder victims 2009-2013:
8,378
Those numbers do not support your claims. If you cherry pick rifles I guess it would work but that is no more meaningful than if you could break down "Knives or cutting instruments" to only butter knifes.
@deltago I'm not saying to not do anything, I'm saying that focusing on the law aspect will only make things worse until the culture is changed. I'm saying focus on education and the value of life over "Murica! Guns! Yeah!". Guns are so INGRAINED in our culture that there is ZERO chance of the current generation changing anything in regards to guns. Focus on the next generation. Teach the children to value others' lives, and to not romanticize violence. They are the only hope for change.
Again, those of you who wish to have broader gun control legislation need to call and/or e-mail your State representative because Congress cannot do what you wish. The Constitution does not forbid State Legislatures from enacting gun control legislation, though. Also, the gun control law cannot be paraphrased as "it is illegal to purchase x in this State"; instead, it must read "it is illegal to own x in this State". This will prevent people from crossing the State line, buying the newly-outlawed item, then importing it back home. Well, okay--it wont' *prevent* it but if they get caught with it they will have to accept the consequences.
The point is all moot, in any event. As @jjstraka34 notes, no action will be taken on guns, especially with elections only 9 months away.
I don't mind saying I have 2 DSM classifications now myself, as regards mental illnesses. Neither one makes me feel particularly prone to killin folks (Dissociative subtype PTSD/ Depersonalization/Derealization Disorder -I alter my consciousness basically). Personally I think most people involved in these shootings are mad, angry about someone/something/ situation, or are caught up in a personal/group cause more than anything else.
I dont think that automatically makes them ill. If anything else, most folks with mental/developmental difficulties are LESS likely to commit these mass murder incidents. For me it is harder to go out and interact with the world at large period, much less want to go out into a MORE stressful situation, such as a shooting.
To me it just seems like an excuse to put off better gun control/loophole closing measures and put it on the the issue of mental health (which is not exactly on the front burner to get more attention/health/ help anyway-just from a strictly health perspective) which is not in the best state of helping people in this country, anyway.
On a side note, in NC the only reference to buying guns and mental illnesses is the question on the permit app asking one if they have been admitted to a mental treatment facility. And,well, it is dang hard to get any kind of help period with regards to mental health, even now, esp. when low on funds.
That whole assault ban crap in the 90's was a disaster. The loopholes and exemptions basically just allowed the manufacturers remove some of the fancy doodads and in effect make the same type of semi-automatic rifle, Even then, guns made BEFORE the ban, and high capacity magazines made BEFORE the ban were still legal to sell. There was enough stock to keep selling these until the end of the ban, After it expired we just upped the stock even more.
No one thing is a fix, and I hear lots of people on news and what not, saying that someone else's idea won't work and then nothing is done.
I also think it would be interesting to see how many folks listed with depression would be put on the restriction list. Many have had that at one point or another. Where would the classification start? Plus we have most GP's that think any mental illness is probably just depression and want to prescribe some anti-depression med as the only fix (I went through that myself), which can make things worse with the wrong diagnoses.
Now we are potentially facing LESS medicaid, and more expensive health care for mental issues (alot not covered even for one with ins.)
Anyway, I guess today I would be the murdering mentally ill guy for one side and the gun freak on the other. I bout couldn't listen to any more of it from news sources as I got tired of hear one fix solutions and hearing about how deranged all of us with mental illnesses are.
Same ol one side vs the other with no one in govt willing to budge a darn inch.
My two cents worth.
There is a reason the GOP has thrown all their chips in on voter suppression, gerrymandering, and cultural resentment. Because they are going to be dead party to most kids growing up under Trump.
The only thing that is different about the US is rates of gun ownership.
And it's all well and good to claim that increased gun ownership has a correlation with decreased murder and rape but correlation is not necessarily causation, and there is a strong likelihood that given the number of people killed by guns in the first place that guns already fuel the homicide rate.
aka
It's the Guns Stupid
Note: Includes countries with more than 10 million people and at least one mass public shooting with four or more victims.
source-
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/world/americas/mass-shootings-us-international.html
Adjusted for population, only Yemen has a higher rate of mass shootings among countries with more than 10 million people. Yemen has the world’s second-highest rate of gun ownership after the United States.
Americans make up about 4.4 percent of the global population but own 42 percent of the world’s guns. From 1966 to 2012, 31 percent of the gunmen in mass shootings worldwide were American
A country’s rate of gun ownership correlates with the odds it would experience a mass shooting.
Mental health, video games, and racial diversity have no bearing on mass shootings.
More guns = more mass shootings.
@smeagolheart What, then, would you propose as a solution to the problem?
If there is a lesson to be learned from the movie Thor: Ragnarok it is that nations do themselves a disservice when they try to ignore their past and pretend to be something they are not. This nation was founded on armed conflict, disobedience, bloodshed, and conquest. To the people wishing to change our basic nature I can only say "good luck", because you are going to need it, *especially* when you try to deal with those "molon labe" folks. I don't particularly like it that that is our nature but I didn't make the decisions that led us here.
I don't know....maybe this will be one of those times when I am incorrect--that would be pleasantly surprising. I am not going to bet on it, though.
The major problem with is state incompetence. If gun control NEVER worked in municipal level, will not work in federal level.
I'd say there should be a total ban on personally owned assault weapons. All those private prison contractors worried about not enough people going to jail due to changing attitudes towards drug sentencing? They can fill their prisons with with gun nuts and criminals who get caught with assault weapons.
Not asking for a total ban on guns. People could still buy rifles, shotguns and muskets as the founding fathers intended. It's hard to shoot hundreds of people with a handgun or shotgun.
There will still be a ton of shootings and murders because it's easy for people to move their finger to pull a trigger to solve a temporary grievance if they momentarily lose their minds. But at least the potential for hundreds of people getting shot at once like in Las Vegas will be gone.
Guns prevend 3600 rapes per day https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/178541/guns-prevent-3600-rapes-day-daniel-greenfield