Gun Violence in America

[RockRaines]

 

Perfectly legal firearm.

[BigSqwert]

Disagree. It’s a lot cheaper to buy some sparklers, duct tape and nails than it is to purchase a gun and do the background check. I’ve built plenty of them, minus shrapnel. All I’m saying is it’s gonna suck when somebody finally does it and throws it in a crowd. It’ll make this look like a cartoon.

 

If it's so easy and brilliant then why is this not the weapon of choice for these mass killings?

[Jerksticks]

So you think sparklers, duct tape and nails tossed into a crowd is more deadly than someone firing high capacity clips into a crowd from a distance?

 

I have no idea what’s more deadly. What I do know is that a few sparkler bombs loaded with shrapnel could wound or kill hundreds of people in a crowd quite easily.

 

Just throwing the idea out there that if all the semi automatic rifles are banned, will something replace them? Because a sick sonofab**** that wants to kill lots of people thinks like a sick sonofab**** that wants to kill lots of people. What vehicle of destruction does he then choose?

 

Not against or for gun laws, just trying to apply rational, unemotional thinking to examine a sick mind.

 

[SoxFan2003]

I have no idea what’s more deadly. What I do know is that a few sparkler bombs loaded with shrapnel could wound or kill hundreds of people in a crowd quite easily.

 

Just throwing the idea out there that if all the semi automatic rifles are banned, will something replace them? Because a sick sonofab**** that wants to kill lots of people thinks like a sick sonofab**** that wants to kill lots of people. What vehicle of destruction does he then choose?

 

Not against or for gun laws, just trying to apply rational, unemotional thinking to examine a sick mind.

 

Why are there no mass sparkler bombings in some of these countries with better gun control?

 

[StrangeSox]

Explosives that can "wound or kill hundreds of people" are bigger and more complicated than some shrapnel sparkler bombs.

 

e: that doesn't mean that they're impossible to pull off, obviously. Both the Boston Marathon and the Ariana Grande bombings were pressure-cooker shrapnel bombs. But it still takes additional knowledge, skills and time to be able to successfully carry out an attack like that. It's more difficult than just shooting someone with store-bought guns. The opportunities don't present themselves as easily.

Edited February 22, 2018 by StrangeSox

[RockRaines]

I have no idea what’s more deadly. What I do know is that a few sparkler bombs loaded with shrapnel could wound or kill hundreds of people in a crowd quite easily.

 

Just throwing the idea out there that if all the semi automatic rifles are banned, will something replace them? Because a sick sonofab**** that wants to kill lots of people thinks like a sick sonofab**** that wants to kill lots of people. What vehicle of destruction does he then choose?

 

Not against or for gun laws, just trying to apply rational, unemotional thinking to examine a sick mind.

I disagree that it would kill hundreds, and I also disagree that there is anything more efficient than a legally modified semi automatic rifle. There is a reason it is the weapon of choice of our domestic terrorists.

 

I personally think eliminating the easiest means to mass murder is a good step in the right direction.

Edited February 22, 2018 by RockRaines

[bmags]

I do think especially motivated people can kill people regardless, but when we discuss that in terms of terrorists we try to throw many obstacles in their way and have been fairly effective at that.

 

Meanwhile for these mass shootings we've thrown very little into the way of preventing the shooters ability to increase lethality. Without any resistance in the supplies they can acquire, they have just ratcheted up tactics and strategy, and it has happened more frequently.

 

The Parkland shooting was over in 5 minutes. The lethality of these weapons means a whole bunch of damage can be done by the time it takes an armed officer to run across a high school campus (my campus took 5 minutes to walk from one end to the other).

 

So, for the love of god, can we stop curtailing the rights of literally everyone else, and try to make the high casualties of these events harder to accomplish? Forcing someone to make 100 sparkler bombs and plant them and light them successfully as the best way to perform massive casualties sounds a lot more favorable to reducing the amount/lethality of them than their current ability to buy a stockpile of weapons legally and go into a highly populated area prepared to die shooting.

 

In the latter, if they were checked at their house as being suspicious nothing could be done.

 

We need to acknowledge that the goal is to reduce the amount of shootings, but at very least, lower the amount of casualties, and it's okay if not every solution eliminates all violence forever.

 

But while the rest of the country now has kindergartners performing drills for an active shooter, the small vocal percentage says "I cannot be restricted in any way, ever, no matter what"

[StrangeSox]

armed SRO never entered the building, waited outside

 

https://twitter.com/passantino/status/966799616602615808

[RockRaines]

armed SRO never entered the building, waited outside

 

https://twitter.com/passantino/status/966799616602615808

Not surprising, he didnt want to die. Not everyone in a position of authority runs towards danger.

Edited February 22, 2018 by RockRaines

[pettie4sox]

Man that will be politicized so hard.

[Soxbadger]

HOW DARE YOU QUESTION THAT HERO?

 

Lets attack the paid students.

[Dick Allen]

My sister teaches special ed. Her first day on the job, she was told depending on the day a few of her students could stick a pencil in their eye or try to stick one in hers. She has thus far avoided any trouble in her years at the school. Her packing heat would make me a nervous brother..

[caulfield12]

NRA seems to be mostly upset with shootings where lots of white people are killed because that gets more coverage than random Chicago gang violence...basically, mass shootings of upper class heterosexual whites (Pulse and Sutherland Springs don’t fit) is the ONLY thing that really puts pressure on the gun lobby

 

See LV, Aurora, Columbine, Sandy Hook.

 

"Now I'm not saying that you love the tragedy," she continued, "but I am saying you love the ratings." She added: "Crying white mothers are ratings gold to you." Loesch noted that her choice to highlight "crying white mothers" was intentional, because "there are thousands of grieving black mothers in Chicago every weekend and you don't see town halls for them, do you?" Loesch on Wednesday night attended a CNN town hall with the survivors of the high school shooting in Parkland, Florida, where 17 people were killed by a teenager with a semiautomatic rifle.

 

"Where's the CNN town hall for Chicago? Where's the CNN town hall for sanctuary cities?" she asked. Watch her remarks (which start at 0:20) below. Kelly O'Meara Morales

 

http://theweek.com/speedreads/756858/nras-...re-good-ratings

Edited February 23, 2018 by caulfield12

[caulfield12]

HOW DARE YOU QUESTION THAT HERO?

 

Lets attack the paid students.

 

Just like every teacher wielding a gun would then become the first targets of the attacker.

 

Since public school records have to be published, it would be easy to research exactly who has certification and permits to carry a gun.

 

Also, for all we know, ex military suffering from PTSD might not react well under stressful combat conditions after 10-15 years away from that environment. Just like this SRO apparently.

[Dick Allen]

Just like every teacher wielding a gun would then become the first targets of the attacker.

 

Since public school records have to be published, it would be easy to research exactly who has certification and permits to carry a gun.

 

Also, for all we know, ex military suffering from PTSD might not react well under stressful combat conditions after 10-15 years away from that environment. Just like this SRO apparently.

I agree. Teachers will be the first target. These attackers do so,e planning. Let’s face it, the chances of your particular school being attacked is slim, so chances are the guards will either not be on guard satisfactorily or might be a little too gung ho.

[Dick Allen]

Trump says Obama took no action on guns. He will. Obama had a bipartisan bill to expand background checks. The republicans killed it.

 

When will this guy be required to tell the truth?

[StrangeSox]

[RockRaines]

My sister teaches special ed. Her first day on the job, she was told depending on the day a few of her students could stick a pencil in their eye or try to stick one in hers. She has thus far avoided any trouble in her years at the school. Her packing heat would make me a nervous brother..

The police definitely don’t want more guns in the school. The only people who do are be people who sell f***ing guns.

[Reddy]

Man that will be politicized so hard.

As it should be.

[Chicago White Sox]

I f***ing hate the NRA.

[caulfield12]

The Atlantic

 

Kevin Lamarque / Reuters

Wayne LaPierre’s Cynical Exploitation of Outrage

 

The NRA executive vice president’s pugnacious speech on Thursday provoked an indignant response—exactly as he’d aimed to do.

 

 

But more often, post-shooting discussions have reverted to stalemate, and as LaPierre knows, stalemate favors the NRA. Existing gun laws are relatively loose, and all the NRA needs to win is to prevent immediate action, or else limit regulation to tinkering around the margins.

 

LaPierre’s claims will upset and alienate many Americans, but from the NRA’s standpoint, that’s the point. When LaPierre says wild things, the mainstream media covers them; when the mainstream media covers them, it gins up NRA supporters, who renew memberships, send new money, or rededicate themselves to lobbying their representatives. It doesn’t matter that most people will be angry at what LaPierre says. After all, poll after poll after poll has shown majority support for a range of gun-control measures, but the NRA has learned to achieve its goals with a small but staunch base.

 

This kind of base-oriented strategy is reminiscent of Trump’s approach to politics. It’s probably not a coincidence that LaPierre, echoing Trump, attacked “the unbelievable failure of the FBI” Thursday morning. Trump also tweeted supportively before LaPierre’s speech: “What many people don’t understand, or don’t want to understand, is that Wayne, Chris and the folks who work so hard at the @NRA are Great People and Great American Patriots. They love our Country and will do the right thing.” The danger for Trump is that it’s hard to be reelected with a small, embattled base and massive disapproval. Not so for the NRA, which functions quite effectively that way.

 

Even for LaPierre, there is a risk in his strategy of provocation. Someday he may go too far and incur a backlash even from his supporters. Perhaps this is that day, though there’s no particular reason to believe that at this point. The thing to remember is that outlandish statements at venues like CPAC aren’t an unforced error or a lapse in judgment. They are a carefully calibrated, and thus far highly successful, strategic choice.

 

 

He also falsely warned seniors this week that seeking assistance with tax filing would get them put on a national “mental impairment” list that would allow “the Feds” to take their guns away...

Edited February 23, 2018 by caulfield12

[StrangeSox]

Twitter thread with a bunch of links to contemporary gun violence research

 

https://twitter.com/jenniferdoleac/status/915932641211375616

 

Based on the abstracts:

 

1) gun shows don't increase local violent crime rates

2) strengthened self defense laws don't decrease burglary, robbery, or aggravated assault. they do increase murder and nonnegligent manslaughter rates.

3) marginal externalized social cost of gun ownership is $100-$1800 per household

4) Right-to-carry laws: a very mixed bag, increasing some crimes, decreasing others, and varying over time

5) Right-to-carry laws: higher aggregate violent crime rates with increasing rates over time. 10 years after RTC implementation, violent crime is estimated to be 13-15% higher than it would have otherwise been.

6) Curfews can increase gunfire incidents by 150%, but in contrast voluntary reports of gun crimes (911 calls) indicate reductions in gun violence.

7) Child access prevention laws reduce gun carry rates by 13% and rates of students reporting being threatened or injured with a weapon on school property by 18%. They promote a safer school environment but appear to have no impact school deaths

8) Banning juvenile gun possession does not appear to have the intended effect

9) The "More Guns, Less Crime" hypothesis is bunk (John Lott was the primary pusher of this and has been shown over and over to be a hack if not outright fraud)

10) gun availability at home increases rates of juvenile crime

11) 3-day handgun purchase delays provide a small decrease in suicide rates (3%) but not overall homicide rates

12) The underground gun market in chicago has high transaction costs

13) Rates of gun ownership positively correlate with rates of homicide but show less impact on other crime categories

14) A "disease" model for urban gun violence doesn't really hold up--gun violence doesn't really "spread"

15) Demand shock (e.g. after Sandy Hook, gun purchases increased in many states) positively correlates to increased murder rates, especially for women. Delays for purchasing firearms could have saved and estimated 98 people per month in 2013.

[Brian]

I f***ing hate the NRA.

 

The NRA used to be for responsible gun ownership, which their are millions of in this country, but they fact they don't give an inch on anything, makes them f***ing assholes in my mind.

Their public relations sucks because they have Dana Loesch on TV ripping media, They hold gun rallies at the worst times, and don't realize what the forefathers had in mind when the amendment is written.

They're close minded and greedy.

[RockRaines]

The NRA used to be for responsible gun ownership, which their are millions of in this country, but they fact they don't give an inch on anything, makes them f***ing assholes in my mind.

Their public relations sucks because they have Dana Loesch on TV ripping media, They hold gun rallies at the worst times, and don't realize what the forefathers had in mind when the amendment is written.

They're close minded and greedy.

The NRA gets money for increasing gun sales. Nothing more, nothing less.

[caulfield12]

Bright Trump CPAC idea of the day...

 

Because all teachers love their students and all students love their teachers, they will be much more effective shooters than an SRO cowering outside with no connection to those students. (Obviously doesn’t know most public schools well.)

 

Love will help handguns outduel automatic weapons.

 

Problem solved. More handgun sales and trainings for the NRA.

Edited February 23, 2018 by caulfield12