Mass Shootings Thread (3 Viewers)

[Stealthycat]

You’ll still have others that will serve you just as well. But assault rifles like AR-15s are, IMO, used too often in violent crimes and I believe that banning them would lead to a reduction in those crimes. Statistics from the previous ban of such weapons, incomplete as it was, suggest that this is the case. I’d like to try. 
My purpose is not to punish you or any other lawful gun owner. If I could find a way to allow you to possess such weapons and prevent the bad guys from owning them I would do so. But I don’t know how to achieve that so I am in support of restricting your freedoms in this instance in the name of public safety. I don’t think it’s a significant infringement upon your freedoms. 

they're RARELY used in violent crimes - c'mon man, I've shown you this so many times .... 

are you going to keep believing what's not true and if so, why? 

on the second part - we have many restrictions on guns, gun owners, gun buying etc - maybe at this point we can finally say hey, the problem isn't the 80 million gun owners today who did nothing wrong, but the 1 person who did ? 

 

[Stealthycat]

Agree here.   The vast majority of gun owners are responsible; that's why the vast majority of gun owners support reasonable laws like expanded background checks.   Despite that, we still can't get even basic laws passed at the federal level because of the influence of the gun lobby, and particularly the NRA.

how well do background checks work ?  gun owners supported what we have because we were told that was going to be the extent of intrusion and it would make such a big difference

tell me, how many background checks fail every year and how many are prosecuted ? do you know? you kinda must know to assume they are successful right ?

 

[tuffnutt]

You’ll still have others that will serve you just as well. But assault rifles like AR-15s are, IMO, used too often in violent crimes and I believe that banning them would lead to a reduction in those crimes. Statistics from the previous ban of such weapons, incomplete as it was, suggest that this is the case. I’d like to try. 
My purpose is not to punish you or any other lawful gun owner. If I could find a way to allow you to possess such weapons and prevent the bad guys from owning them I would do so. But I don’t know how to achieve that so I am in support of restricting your freedoms in this instance in the name of public safety. I don’t think it’s a significant infringement upon your freedoms. 

It wont lead to a reduction in mass shooting crimes, but it would lead to a reduction in the number of casualties... and this is what Im talking about when I say common sense measures. It has got to be give and take from both sides. The problem is when you talk about banning ALL guns its a non starter, and in turn, when you start talking about common sense reform, the gun lobby and their bought politicians silence the conversation. As someone wrote upthread there were Republicans who actually supported the Brady bill. that would NEVER happen in todays climate.

 

[Stealthycat]

It has got to be give and take from both sides.

how much have gun owners given? we are the side that gives, the anti-gun side takes

 

[-fish-]

That’s not the same thing. And it’s a rather unsubtle question, almost an attack. I can pretty much guarantee you that everybody who voted no reject the entire premise of the question in the first place. 

That's the pollyanna in you.  

HEY SC:  if you could stop all mass shootings by giving up all of your guns forever, would you do it?

 

[Max Power]

Agree here.   The vast majority of gun owners are responsible; that's why the vast majority of gun owners support reasonable laws like expanded background checks.   Despite that, we still can't get even basic laws passed at the federal level because of the influence of the gun lobby, and particularly the NRA.

I see it as a give and take thing.  I look at the gun community at times and wonder why some people take such a strong stand against ANY and EVERY gun control measure. Some measures that seem extremely reasonable to me.

On the other hand I can see where they are coming from when they cite failures in the current system as not stopping crime, and question why we would add more checks and regulations when the current ones aren't enforced properly.

The ATF also tends to nitpick the little things in the community and has rolled a small nit pick item into several small nitpick items and gun community sees the "infringement creep" becoming real. Their current proposal on stabilizing braces would have a MASSIVE impact on the gun community.  Its moved to a point where the diehards just dig their heels in against any and all changes/infringements. 

If both sides came to the table with priorities set and agreed there wouldn't be a slippery slope to enforcement, I think there could be progress.  Right now there is no trust between sides.  

 

[dkp993]

I can't confirm, but I heard a report that the person on the other side of the door said the word "bro" and that tipped the other students to doubt he was actually a sheriff. 

Wow.  Thats amazing.  Saved lives right there.

If you watch the video in the link this is all very clear.  The person first claims to be a Sheriff wanting in the class room.  When the kid safe he isn’t comfortable opening the door the person then says “well just let me in bro to grab my bag”.  The kids all hear the bro part and know it’s not a sheriff, immediately start jumping out the window.  I’m convinced it was the shooter at the door. 

 

[tuffnutt]

how much have gun owners given? we are the side that gives, the anti-gun side takes

fair question... and for practical purposes you are correct. when you go from no limitations to some, its does feel like you are the one giving up your rights and freedoms... I guess for those on the left they feel like they are giving up a sense of safety in their lives with guns in society?? I cant speak for them... but I, for one and ok giving up some things for the better good... as long as they make sense. Im not ok with throwing away all guns as a  starting point. I dont want to see anymore school children dead. Maybe I am naive, but I think we can  all agree with that and make sensible progress towards that goal   

 

[Stealthycat]

That's the pollyanna in you.  

HEY SC:  if you could stop all mass shootings by giving up all of your guns forever, would you do it?

no, because we would all also lose the ability for self defense, to hunt with guns, defend property with guns, all the things that guns are used for that non-gun owners don't think about

no and besides, these crazies would use a mini-van, a knife, home made bombs, something ... they're wacko's hell bent on killing people

 

[rcam]

So we can totally discount the doctors theory?

Yes, it can be discounted. Pretty sure there have already been studies doing just that - no link to criminal violence. 

 

[Stealthycat]

fair question... and for practical purposes you are correct. when you go from no limitations to some, its does feel like you are the one giving up your rights and freedoms... I guess for those on the left they feel like they are giving up a sense of safety in their lives with guns in society?? I cant speak for them... but I, for one and ok giving up some things for the better good... as long as they make sense. Im not ok with throwing away all guns as a  starting point. I dont want to see anymore school children dead. Maybe I am naive, but I think we can  all agree with that and make sensible progress towards that goal   

oddly enough many anti-gun people fight hard the idea of people hired to protect schools ... they want schools unarmed

nobody wants kids killed by guns, or drugs, or mini-vans, or alcohol ......... but in a free society such as ours, there is a responsibility citizens absolutely HAVE to have 

these rare individuals lack that 

I'm guessing this kid was on prescribed drugs, had previous issues and was a ticking time bomb and nobody wanted to address what he was

 

[Stealthycat]

Yes, it can be discounted. Pretty sure there have already been studies doing just that - no link to criminal violence. 

we know for a fact that for decades kids had guns in schools and kids used guns everyday ... and school shootings never happened

what changed?  it wasn't the guns, it was the kids - we can agree on that right ?

so we need to figure out WHAT in these kids changed (the few who do this) ... why do they feel compelled? just evil by birth? conditioned by society? what ?

 

[belljr]

There are millions of kids who play those games but don’t engage in real violence. Just as there are millions of lawful gun owners who don’t commit mass murder. 
I’m all for reasonable restrictions (see my above post) but we should be careful about moving too far away from individual culpability, IMO. 

I'm not one to blame "video games/music/movies" etc BUT there are ratings on these things for a reason and too many parents don't give a #### so their 11 year old is running around in virtual world shooting people up or watching violent movies.

I think letting kids that young with out guidance "could" have some impact.  I know we waited probably a little too long until we felt my son was "mature" enough to handle it.

I'm not saying these things should be banned but I wish parents would take the ratings a little more seriously

 

[Gatorman]

oddly enough many anti-gun people fight hard the idea of people hired to protect schools ... they want schools unarmed

nobody wants kids killed by guns, or drugs, or mini-vans, or alcohol ......... but in a free society such as ours, there is a responsibility citizens absolutely HAVE to have 

these rare individuals lack that 

I'm guessing this kid was on prescribed drugs, had previous issues and was a ticking time bomb and nobody wanted to address what he was

SC- the data works against you here.  When higher powered weapons were banned and semi autos were banned there was less of these type of issues as there are now.  Other countries have stricter laws and there are less "mass killing" tragedies than there are in the US.

I'm always surprised when a responsible gun owner looks at what most people are proposing and have a huge reaction to any gun laws.  It's silly when you compare it to the data.

1) If you have a history of physical or sexual abuse against someone, you are more likely to kill them with a gun.  Now, you might say, well he (or she) could still kill them with a knife but it is harder to kill someone with a knife than with a gun.

2) You may have an issue with restrictions on High capacity magazines, but this shouldn't affect your ability to 1) Protect yourself or 2) allow you to hunt.

3) the whole concept of "open carry" seems so far to cause more problems than it solves.  I'll wait for more data for this to be conclusive (as it seems anecdotal as of now) but seeing someone with a gun out in the open seems to create more drama than it disuades.

 

[-fish-]

I see it as a give and take thing.  I look at the gun community at times and wonder why some people take such a strong stand against ANY and EVERY gun control measure. Some measures that seem extremely reasonable to me.

On the other hand I can see where they are coming from when they cite failures in the current system as not stopping crime, and question why we would add more checks and regulations when the current ones aren't enforced properly.

The ATF also tends to nitpick the little things in the community and has rolled a small nit pick item into several small nitpick items and gun community sees the "infringement creep" becoming real. Their current proposal on stabilizing braces would have a MASSIVE impact on the gun community.  Its moved to a point where the diehards just dig their heels in against any and all changes/infringements. 

If both sides came to the table with priorities set and agreed there wouldn't be a slippery slope to enforcement, I think there could be progress.  Right now there is no trust between sides.  

It's a little more than that.   The NRA in particular has scared legislators into believing that if you favor any gun legislation, you'll be run out of office.   The NRA used to actually favor reasonable gun control laws, but switched positions after its corrupt leadership was raided by the FBI in the late 60's.   Since then it no longer focuses on gun safety, but on opposing literally every single piece of gun control legislation at the state or federal level.  This includes non-controversial laws like secure storage, closing private sale loopholes, and even provisions of the Violence Against Women Act that prevent convicted domestic abusers and stalkers from possessing guns.

I understand the slippery slope arguments regarding bans/restrictions of certain guns or components.   This goes well beyond that.   If you read the NRA's legislative action website, they would have you believe that all gun legislation is an affront to the second amendment and is part of a vast liberal conspiracy to confiscate everyone's guns.

 

[Gatorman]

we know for a fact that for decades kids had guns in schools and kids used guns everyday ... and school shootings never happened

what changed?  it wasn't the guns, it was the kids - we can agree on that right ?

so we need to figure out WHAT in these kids changed (the few who do this) ... why do they feel compelled? just evil by birth? conditioned by society? what ?

Well, that seems a bit "straw man-ish"  The guns did change.  They became more powerful and more able to kill people in mass. I will stipulate that somewhere along the way things that used to be solved with fists are no longer solved that way, but again, the "other countries" argument seems to refute your logic here, especially if you are trying to go the "violent video game" excuse.

 

[tuffnutt]

3) the whole concept of "open carry" seems so far to cause more problems than it solves.  I'll wait for more data for this to be conclusive (as it seems anecdotal as of now) but seeing someone with a gun out in the open seems to create more drama than it disuades.

This is where I am with open carry as well. If open carry really caused less gun violence... then there should have been little death in the wild west where EVERYONE opened carried... but we know that not to be the case.

 

[Stealthycat]

You’ll still have others that will serve you just as well. But assault rifles like AR-15s are, IMO, used too often in violent crimes and I believe that banning them would lead to a reduction in those crimes. Statistics from the previous ban of such weapons, incomplete as it was, suggest that this is the case. I’d like to try. 
 

@timschochet

lets put this to bed - can you admit you're wrong ?

2019 stats

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/table-20

Handguns - 6368

Rifles  364

Shotguns  200

Knives or   1,476
cutting
instruments

 

[Godsbrother]

how much have gun owners given? we are the side that gives, the anti-gun side takes

I am not an expert but I don't recall the NRA & gun owners willfully giving anything.  They pushed back on pretty much every form of gun legislation.   

 

[Stealthycat]

SC- the data works against you here.  When higher powered weapons were banned and semi autos were banned there was less of these type of issues as there are now.  Other countries have stricter laws and there are less "mass killing" tragedies than there are in the US.

I'm always surprised when a responsible gun owner looks at what most people are proposing and have a huge reaction to any gun laws.  It's silly when you compare it to the data.

1) If you have a history of physical or sexual abuse against someone, you are more likely to kill them with a gun.  Now, you might say, well he (or she) could still kill them with a knife but it is harder to kill someone with a knife than with a gun.

2) You may have an issue with restrictions on High capacity magazines, but this shouldn't affect your ability to 1) Protect yourself or 2) allow you to hunt.

3) the whole concept of "open carry" seems so far to cause more problems than it solves.  I'll wait for more data for this to be conclusive (as it seems anecdotal as of now) but seeing someone with a gun out in the open seems to create more drama than it disuades.

2 decades later with tens of millions more semi-auto rifles out there, with so many carry states now ... if they were the problem, you'd know it because hundreds a day would be being shot - they're not

1) that's true, those people are a problem

2) we have high cap magazine bans already

3) open carry murders are exceptionally rare - exceptionally 

 

[Gatorman]

@timschochet

lets put this to bed - can you admit you're wrong ?

2019 stats

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/table-20

Handguns - 6368

Rifles  364

Shotguns  200

Knives or   1,476
cutting
instruments

Ok, I looked and is there a link to the "total number of deaths per instrument?"

 

[Stealthycat]

Well, that seems a bit "straw man-ish"  The guns did change.  They became more powerful and more able to kill people in mass. I will stipulate that somewhere along the way things that used to be solved with fists are no longer solved that way, but again, the "other countries" argument seems to refute your logic here, especially if you are trying to go the "violent video game" excuse.

wrong, wrong and more wrong

you know a .223/.556 common AR round isn't powerful per say when compared to the decades old rifle rounds and/or handgun round - right ?

these rifles are the SAME basic functions as the single shot, semi-auto rifles that's been around for decades 

c'mon man, are you a gun owner? been around guns all your life? if you were - you'd know these things

 

[Stealthycat]

Ok, I looked and is there a link to the "total number of deaths per instrument?"

google it all you want - rifles are rarely used in murders

 

[Stealthycat]

Hundreds a day?  Come on now. 316 people are shot every day in the US, so you are proving my point.

link to 316 a day being shot with open carry please

 

[dkp993]

I don’t believe there is anyone here who values their guns over the lives of children. I think it’s a terrible, unfounded accusation. 

I completely agree Tim.  But it’s also disingenuous for gun owners to deny there is a gun culture and fascination in American society.  That’s undeniable.  Absent very few exceptions, like family heirlooms, when someone owns multiple guns (more then say 2 or 3) or feel the need to conceal carry consistently its a very fair description to say there is a fascination.  Just as it would be to say about someone owning the same number of watches or sneakers.  And like @HerbI say this as a pro 2A not anti gun person.  

 

[Stealthycat]

There have been school shootings going back 200+ years. The difference being, there haven't been as many mass casuality school shootings. I suspect it is because guns have become more deadly/efficient though I have no study/article to back that.

again, you don't know guns, do you ? words changed from powerful now to deadly/efficient ? 

really? 

 

[Gatorman]

wrong, wrong and more wrong

you know a .223/.556 common AR round isn't powerful per say when compared to the decades old rifle rounds and/or handgun round - right ?

these rifles are the SAME basic functions as the single shot, semi-auto rifles that's been around for decades 

c'mon man, are you a gun owner? been around guns all your life? if you were - you'd know these things

https://globalnews.ca/news/4043345/ar-15-handgun-bullet-wounds-difference/ again, I think you are cherry picking to reinforce your argument.  the data seems to say otherwise.  I was a gun owner and then I wasn't (we took them out of the house when we had kids).  Have 3 in the house now after the kids left but they are my dad's old shotgun and 2 smaller handguns that I "inherited" after he passed.

 

[-fish-]

I am not an expert but I don't recall the NRA & gun owners willfully giving anything.  They pushed back on pretty much every form of gun legislation.   

Yep.

Even the Brady Bill, which had strong bipartisan support, was opposed by the NRA.  They spent millions lobbying against it and caused it to take 7 years to get passed, and once it did it was extremely watered down.   Then, even after their lobbyists had rewritten the bill to remove many significant features, such as a 5 day waiting period, they brought constitutional challenges against it in something like a dozen states.

 

[Stealthycat]

I completely agree Tim.  But it’s also disingenuous for gun owners to deny there is a gun culture and fascination in American society.  That’s undeniable.  Absent very few exceptions, like family heirlooms, when someone owns multiple guns (more then say 2 or 3) or feel the need to conceal carry consistently its a very fair description to say there is a fascination.  Just as it would be to say about someone owning the same number of watches or sneakers.  And like @HerbI say this as a pro 2A not anti gun person.  

I think you're wrong

you have locks on your house, right? fascinated with them? a privacy fence? security system? are you fascinated with them ?

man I have like 12 pairs of sneakers ... hunting boots, walking shoes, running shoes, court shoes, leisure shoes .... its not fascination, its that each shoe provides me with different things I need for the different things I'm doing. That's not fascination 

I have guns - there is one I actually might call a fascination ... a sweet 16 born in 1959 in very very good condition and I think its a great 60 year old shotgun in a gauge not often seen anymore and a throwback to when guns were made differently ... its just a great piece. All my other guns provides me with different things I need for the different things I'm doing.

 

[yak651]

Should be some kind of training and test for proper gun safety that gun owners are required to take and update- call it updating their militia membership. 
 

Gun owners who allow minors to have possession of their gun (whether intentional or due to negligence) should face criminal charges if that gun is used in a crime. 

Insurance requirements also

 

[Gatorman]

link to 316 a day being shot with open carry please

Stop changing the discussion.  It's so very silly of you.  You wish to keep redefining the argument when things show your concept in a bad light. I never said open carry in that part of the conversation, and if you read instead of reacted perhaps you'd see that.  is 316 people a day being shot acceptable to you?  Is that the "cost of freedom"? 

 

[Stealthycat]

https://globalnews.ca/news/4043345/ar-15-handgun-bullet-wounds-difference/ again, I think you are cherry picking to reinforce your argument.  the data seems to say otherwise.  I was a gun owner and then I wasn't (we took them out of the house when we had kids).  Have 3 in the house now after the kids left but they are my dad's old shotgun and 2 smaller handguns that I "inherited" after he passed.

stupid article and here is why

the premise isn't wrong DEPENDING on what bullets are shot - FMG bullets are different than self defense round / hollowpoint rounds, bullet weight matters of course but serious damages from momentum from a 300 gr bullet vs a 60 gr bullet also matters

I mean look at this

"while all rifle bullets have this capability, the ammunition used by the AR-15, a .223 Remington cartridge"

an AR15 isn't just a .223 cartridges' (though its a common caliber) but the article makes it count like it is. Its wrong, its false, its misleading and its intentional

"The cavitation effect from a handgun is typically not very severe."

that's a lie - you get shot in the chest with a 9mm and hollowpoints - you're going to see massive, massive damage

the biggest lie is

"“What the mass shooter is looking for  — because they want to cause mass casualties — is a rifle that has a large magazine capacity, interchangeable magazines so they can easily change magazines and shoot a large quantity of ammunition, quickly, and kill a lot of people,” said Somerset, whose book Arms, the Culture and Credo of the Gun, came out in 2015."

if the above were true, why are handguns the #1 choice of school shooters and mass shooters in general ? 

 

[tonydead]

Stop changing the discussion.  It's so very silly of you.  You wish to keep redefining the argument when things show your concept in a bad light. I never said open carry in that part of the conversation, and if you read instead of reacted perhaps you'd see that.  is 316 people a day being shot acceptable to you?  Is that the "cost of freedom"? 

I have no gun in this fight.  But his original claim you took issue with included both semi-auto rifles and conceal carry.  He didn't change the discussion, you did, starting with 316 deaths per day which clearly isn't concealed semi-auto rifles.  

 

[Stealthycat]

Stop changing the discussion.  It's so very silly of you.  You wish to keep redefining the argument when things show your concept in a bad light. I never said open carry in that part of the conversation, and if you read instead of reacted perhaps you'd see that.  is 316 people a day being shot acceptable to you?  Is that the "cost of freedom"? 

I changed nothing - you were talking about open carry and the problems you feared with that and then quoted 316 a day being shot after I said open carry isn't a fear

316 a day tells me we have a lot of criminals on the streets and you better be worried about them, because you might be next

your choice to be defenseless - but don't take away mine

 

[Ilov80s]

I agree with where you are coming from, but I would disagree that a lot of gun owners are irresponsible.  I think a small percentage are, but it only takes a couple to give the rest of the responsible owners a bad name.  

I don’t mean a lot as in % but just raw numbers. There’s a lot of gun owners.

 

[The Big Donkey]

a 4th student has died.

 

[Ilov80s]

Talking with my students who of course all over this on social media. The kid who did it seemed to fancy himself a gangbanger. Has pictures of him online with the gun, flashing gang signs, etc. His GF posted she still wants to be with him and his friends are posting #FreeXXXX (I’m not putting his name out there). Looks like he was even somehow able to post to his IG while in the back of the cop car.
 

Police say the intention was definitely to kill. He fired at peoples heads and chests, fired into locked doors when he wasn’t able to breach them. Police also say they have obtained some writing that they feel explains the motive. I wouldn’t be surprised if some level of “clout” was involved. A lot of kids are obsessed with being famous/getting attention online. 

 

[Da Guru]

a 4th student has died.

I heard he walked up behind some people and just shot them in the head and torso.

In these kinds of cases I really wish the cops on the scene would have just taken him out on the spot and spared the families who lost a child waiting for a trial and having to relive a nightmare.

 

[The Big Donkey]

I heard he walked up behind some people and just shot them in the head and torso.

In these kinds of cases I really wish the cops on the scene would have just taken him out on the spot and spared the families who lost a child waiting for a trial and hsving to relive a nightmare.

heard that as well.   he hit with most of the shots he fired.

 

[leftcoastguy7]

fired into locked doors when he wasn’t able to breach them. 

I read somewhere (not sure how true this is) that in all school shootings in history in the US, not once has a shooter got into a locked area and caused harm. New schools today are built with reinforced doors and strong locking mechanisms. 

 

[Ilov80s]

I read somewhere (not sure how true this is) that in all school shootings in history in the US, not once has a shooter got into a locked area and caused harm. New schools today are built with reinforced doors and strong locking mechanisms. 

Not sure. There’s definitely been money invested in improving those things though the school I worked at a few years ago, I feel like the doors were pretty flimsy wood. The thought process of generally the kids are just looking for a body count and a locked door is enough of a deterrent for them to just move on since they know they likely only have a couple of minutes before the place is flooded with cops. 

 

[Max Power]

I read somewhere (not sure how true this is) that in all school shootings in history in the US, not once has a shooter got into a locked area and caused harm. New schools today are built with reinforced doors and strong locking mechanisms. 

The Sandy Hook kid shot his way into the building. 

 

[-fish-]

This is literally from the NRA guidance on how to respond to a school shooting:

First, “Say nothing.” If media queries persist, go on the “offence, offence, offence”. Smear gun-control groups. “Shame them” with statements such as – “How dare you stand on the graves of those children to put forward your political agenda?”

Sound familiar?

 

[Joe Bryant]

Done with this thread for a while. Don't start a new one.

It's possible moderators may open back up in the future if people can be less toolish to each other.