Ongoing US Mass Shooting Thread

[2Stonedbirds]

That's one thing I would like to see happen, is quit giving these people their platform to enact their martyrdom. Try to reduce the amount of copycat crime is a good place to start.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by woob

Aside from the obvious needing to change the gun culture in the US (which I don't know how you start on that one), one thing that could be done is to curb or diminish the sensationalism that mass shootings receive in the US media. Look at the rise in people looking to get armed after big shootings. The media whips up their viewers with fear and then they go out and buy a gun.

It's funny you'd thank that, twostonedbirds. Your biggest defense in gun arguments is always "what can we do? We can't do much about it, so there's no point". Yet changing the way US media reports these things when the US media landscape is clearly modelled around fear and sensational reporting to the tune of billions of dollars, operated by some of America's richest and most influential companies/people seems like a good start?

That seems to be along the same lines as pro gun guys that go "what about mental health? We need to look at that more!!" Oh yeah, in what way, what do you propose? "Oh it doesn't matter, as long as we take the focus off guns!".

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds

That's one thing I would like to see happen, is quit giving these people their platform to enact their martyrdom. Try to reduce the amount of copycat crime is a good place to start.

Agreed, but maybe a problem this big needs a multi-pronged attack?


Reduce the platform, while reducing access to weapons.


All the ancillary steps mean nothing if the main issue isn't addressed.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Agreed, but maybe a problem this big needs a multi-pronged attack?


Reduce the platform, while reducing access to weapons.


All the ancillary steps mean nothing if the main issue isn't addressed.

Nah, don't worry about the weapons, what we need to do is "reduce" everything around the guns. Like maybe the amount of people, if we reduce the amount of people in America than the guns won't be able to do as much damage because there won't be as many people to fire them.

[2Stonedbirds]

Originally Posted by jayswin

It's funny you'd thank that, twostonedbirds. Your biggest defense in gun arguments is always "what can we do? We can't do much about it, so there's no point". Yet changing the way US media reports these things when the US media landscape is clearly modelled around fear and sensational reporting to the tune of billions of dollars, operated by some of America's richest and most influential companies/people seems like a good start?

That seems to be along the same lines as pro gun guys that go "what about mental health? We need to look at that more!!" Oh yeah, in what way, what do you propose? "Oh it doesn't matter, as long as we take the focus off guns!".

Not once has that been my position.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds

So what should be done?

Ban handguns.

[foshizzle11]

Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds

So what should be done?

I honestly don't know what they should do. Can they just stop selling handguns period? No because they have laws to allow their citizens to continue to arm themselves for protection. I don't know a single person in Canada that has a gun for protection. For shooting on the weekends at the range or on crownland, yes, for hunting, yes, for shooting gophers and other pests, yes.

There really is no need to be selling handguns to anyone, what is the need for them? Other an officers of the law no civilian has a need for a handgun. If civilians didn't have handguns, then their wouldn't be a need for protection with one. I get their will be criminals who obtain them illegally, can't do anything about that but making it more difficult to buy ammo and the pieces required to make ammo could be a way to help deter some people, maybe?

Short answer, like others mentioned above, it will take 200 years to fix this and the Americans won't like it if they do in fact stop selling handguns to civilians. There is no easy answer for this problem.

[2Stonedbirds]

Originally Posted by foshizzle11

I honestly don't know what they should do. Can they just stop selling handguns period? No because they have laws to allow their citizens to continue to arm themselves for protection.

Since yes, they do believe in self defense down in the US then I would agree with you.

I don't know a single person in Canada that has a gun for protection. For shooting on the weekends at the range or on crownland, yes, for hunting, yes, for shooting gophers and other pests, yes.

In Canada saying you want a handgun for protection (and you do have to specify what your want is when it comes to restricted firearms) you will be denied transfer. Never mind the can of worms you open up with the CFO.
No, you cannot, at any point, use your handgun anywhere other than an approved range. My .45 that shoots slugs at subsonic speed? Nope, too dangerous to shoot on private or crown land. A .50 BMG? Yup that's fine. Doesn't make any sense does it?

There really is no need to be selling handguns to anyone, what is the need for them? Other an officers of the law no civilian has a need for a handgun. If civilians didn't have handguns, then their wouldn't be a need for protection with one. I get their will be criminals who obtain them illegally, can't do anything about that but making it more difficult to buy ammo and the pieces required to make ammo could be a way to help deter some people, maybe?

Short answer, like others mentioned above, it will take 200 years to fix this and the Americans won't like it if they do in fact stop selling handguns to civilians. There is no easy answer for this problem.

You would have to ask individuals what their need is. In some cases it will be a want. There used to be a time in Canada when we could hunt with handguns.

If I was one of the lucky ones to be issued a wilderness carry for handgun I would over a shotgun.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by foshizzle11

I honestly don't know what they should do. Can they just stop selling handguns period? No because they have laws to allow their citizens to continue to arm themselves for protection. I don't know a single person in Canada that has a gun for protection. For shooting on the weekends at the range or on crownland, yes, for hunting, yes, for shooting gophers and other pests, yes.

There really is no need to be selling handguns to anyone, what is the need for them? Other an officers of the law no civilian has a need for a handgun. If civilians didn't have handguns, then their wouldn't be a need for protection with one. I get their will be criminals who obtain them illegally, can't do anything about that but making it more difficult to buy ammo and the pieces required to make ammo could be a way to help deter some people, maybe?

Short answer, like others mentioned above, it will take 200 years to fix this and the Americans won't like it if they do in fact stop selling handguns to civilians. There is no easy answer for this problem.

It isn't just handguns though

Open carry laws facilitate this:

Spoiler!

Who the #### needs to take this shopping with them?

[PsYcNeT]

They're really sticking it to Obummer.

[2Stonedbirds]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

Ban handguns.

Ok.

So let's say federal legislation is passed that makes all handguns prohibited devices and banned for citizens. Let's say that 1 in 10 firearms stateside are handguns. Which I think is conservative. That puts the number of handguns around 30 million, give or take.

So the instant that legislation is passed you will also have to provide an amnesty of sorts to protect people from being paper criminals overnight.

So how long does the amnesty last, and once that is in place what is the next step?

[woob]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Nah, don't worry about the weapons, what we need to do is "reduce" everything around the guns. Like maybe the amount of people, if we reduce the amount of people in America than the guns won't be able to do as much damage because there won't be as many people to fire them.

I don't think you'll get anywhere until you start changing the gun culture. Sure, the US could flat out ban handguns, but you and I both know they won't. Cultural changes can start chipping away at the mentality that guns are the only way citizens can protect themselves.

As undercoverbrother said, the best way to attack this is with a multi-pronged approach. There are countries that exist who's first thoughts they have when something bad happens is not to go buy a gun. The US can get there but it'll take either immediate and strict intervention by the government (which I have no faith in with this matter) or by changing the culture from several different angles.

But I'd be happy to be proved wrong.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds

Ok.

So let's say federal legislation is passed that makes all handguns prohibited devices and banned for citizens. Let's say that 1 in 10 firearms stateside are handguns. Which I think is conservative. That puts the number of handguns around 30 million, give or take.

So the instant that legislation is passed you will also have to provide an amnesty of sorts to protect people from being paper criminals overnight.

So how long does the amnesty last, and once that is in place what is the next step?

What they did in the UK a few times as laws changed, was anounce the new law then give gun owners a one year period to hand the gun in, the UK had periodic amnesties during my younger years to let people bring guns in, usually it was old WW2 kit so there were always stories of cops being presented with Bren guns or PIAT's or the ever popular German grenade grandad brought home.

[PeteMoss]

'MERICA

[Swift]

No more debates or discussion now that your classmates might shoot you if they disagree. What a country!

[Swift]

Iowa house passes bill to let children of all ages handle guns

Potentially, with this new bill a 2 year old could legally fire off a round as long as their parent is with them.

Currently in Iowa, children can legally use long guns and shotguns under adult supervision but not handguns. This bill would change that, allowing the use of handguns as long as parents are 21 years old and maintain “visual and verbal contact at all times with the supervised person”. Children would still not be able to purchase firearms on their own.
State representative Jake Highfill told the Washington Post that the new law “gives the power back to parents”.
“Allowing people to learn at a young age the respect that a gun commands is one of the most important things you can do,” Highfill said.
The alternative, he added, is “turning 18 with no experience”.

Kids turn 18 "with no experience" of lots of things. Why isn't this guy arguing that kids should be allowed to drive cars, vote, have sex, drink, smoke, take out a bank loan and a hundred other things at a young age? If it's all about being responsible at a later age, then kids should be taught all those things, no? I assume these are the same people who would have a fit if, say, 5 year olds were being taught sex education in school. Gun education though? A much more important priority.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Cameron Swift

Iowa house passes bill to let children of all ages handle guns

Potentially, with this new bill a 2 year old could legally fire off a round as long as their parent is with them.



Kids turn 18 "with no experience" of lots of things. Why isn't this guy arguing that kids should be allowed to drive cars, vote, have sex, drink, smoke, take out a bank loan and a hundred other things at a young age? If it's all about being responsible at a later age, then kids should be taught all those things, no? I assume these are the same people who would have a fit if, say, 5 year olds were being taught sex education in school. Gun education though? A much more important priority.

The only thing that can stop a bad baby with a gun is a good baby with a gun.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

'MERICA

This can't be real.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by peter12

This can't be real.

It is

[Roast Beef]

Another day, another shooting. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/reports-...ing-in-kansas/