Connecticut School Shooting

[CaptainCrunch]

I think that I read somewhere that in the U.S. gun based homicides sits at 3.8 per 100,000 population. In Canada its .5 and the UK its .1. That alone is a stunning stat.

Thats 11,844 people in the U.S. killed per year by firearms. That alone has to speak to some sort or availability problem.

What the States is currently doing in terms of gun violence, in terms of the mental health issue its going to be the sexy topic right now because most of these mass murderers are classified as ill, though not all of them are.

But there's a ton of smaller crimes that don't get attention where the killer is not mentally ill and still uses a gun.

To be clear the old saying that guns don't kill people, people kill people is stupid. A gun is an enabling tool to do it quickly in the heat of the moment. The easy access to the tool to conform to a archaic constitutional right to protect against a corrupt government is coming to the point of stupid. Sometimes in rare instances public safety and societal requirements over come some civil liberties.

[EddyBeers]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...8310X920120402

Not sure how Huckabee explains this one then

A gunman opened fire at a private Christian college in California on Monday, killing at least seven people and wounding three others after telling former classmates to "get in line ... I'm going to kill you all."

The school's founder, Pastor Jong Kim, told the Oakland Tribune newspaper that the gunman had been a nursing student there, but was no longer enrolled.

I can only assume that God was at that private Christian school and that the moral training provided at that school at a bare minimum did not prevent a former student there from killing 7 people.

[Nyah]

This may already be posted in this thread, but I think it sheds a lot of light on the mental health arguement.

http://anarchistsoccermom.blogspot.c...thinkable.html

I live with a son who is mentally ill. I love my son. But he terrifies me.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by EddyBeers

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...8310X920120402

Not sure how Huckabee explains this one then





I can only assume that God was at that private Christian school and that the moral training provided at that school at a bare minimum did not prevent a former student there from killing 7 people.

Korean like the Va Tech shooter.

It's either not enough God, mental health or Korean. The only three reasons a shooting happens. Nothing to do with easy access to guns.

One day GirlySports is going to light us all up.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by GoinAllTheWay

http://www.ksn.com/news/national/sto...I6lPnzyww.cspx

Ya...massive argument failure I realize guns are the first choice, ya that's obvious. When that first choice is gone is what I'm getting at.

The article doesn't say if he had actually made any but clearly it was on his mind. The Colorado bomber had his house wired with explosives. Why do you feel it's so hard to make up a few pipe bombs?

Ya one example proves it right?

When you remove the first choice a significant number of people who might've used it won't go on to choice #2. Obviously some might not be deterred and might turn to making a bomb. But that number is far, far lower than the number of people who might grab an easily available gun. I'm not saying zero people would use bombs. But its pretty obvious not everybody who's used a gun to threaten or shoot people would make a bomb.

Guns enable violent crimes of passion because they are so ready at hand. It someone goes into a rage or heartbreak they aren't going to spend a weekend or week constructing a bomb. They will attack with a knife or gun or w/e is readily at hand.

Your argument only works for those who are planning and premeditating a larger scale attack. And yes some of those people could research, acquire the materials to construct, and then construct a bomb. What % that is we don't know exactly. But certainly some of the people would fail or just not complete some of those steps. Constructing a bomb with a remote detonation device is not something that a lot of people could complete IMO. Constructing a bomb with a fuse seems a little more reasonable.

The point is that it is much, much, much harder to construct a working bomb that will reliably go off and kill a bunch of people when you want it to. The issue is the ease of access to deadly weapons.

Finding a gun in your house? Easy
Buying a gun legally? Easy
Constructing a powerful bomb with a remote detonation device? Extremely hard
Constructing a small pipe bomb with a fuse? Still a lot more effort and work than most people would go to and requires a lot more planning and premeditation.

Care to point out how many bomb deaths there are per year in the US?

My argument was not that removing guns from the equation takes away all killing weapons. But you cannot seriously be arguing that everyone who commits a gun murder would have turned to making a bomb because we all know that isn't true.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by nik-

Korean like the Va Tech shooter.

It's either not enough God, mental health or Korean. The only three reasons a shooting happens. Nothing to do with easy access to guns.

One day GirlySports is going to light us all up.

She'll K-pop a cap in your ass.

[vektor]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

When you remove the first choice a significant number of people who might've used it won't go on to choice #2. Obviously some might not be deterred and might turn to making a bomb. But that number is far, far lower than the number of people who might grab an easily available gun. I'm not saying zero people would use bombs. But its pretty obvious not everybody who's used a gun to threaten or shoot people would make a bomb.

Guns enable violent crimes of passion because they are so ready at hand. It someone goes into a rage or heartbreak they aren't going to spend a weekend or week constructing a bomb. They will attack with a knife or gun or w/e is readily at hand.

Your argument only works for those who are planning and premeditating a larger scale attack. And yes some of those people could research, acquire the materials to construct, and then construct a bomb. What % that is we don't know exactly. But certainly some of the people would fail or just not complete some of those steps. Constructing a bomb with a remote detonation device is not something that a lot of people could complete IMO. Constructing a bomb with a fuse seems a little more reasonable.

The point is that it is much, much, much harder to construct a working bomb that will reliably go off and kill a bunch of people when you want it to. The issue is the ease of access to deadly weapons.

Finding a gun in your house? Easy
Buying a gun legally? Easy
Constructing a powerful bomb with a remote detonation device? Extremely hard
Constructing a small pipe bomb with a fuse? Still a lot more effort and work than most people would go to and requires a lot more planning and premeditation.

Care to point out how many bomb deaths there are per year in the US?

My argument was not that removing guns from the equation takes away all killing weapons. But you cannot seriously be arguing that everyone who commits a gun murder would have turned to making a bomb because we all know that isn't true.

I could make an explosive device in 5 hours as where getting a gun would take much much longer. The whole it's the guns is just illogical, if a mentally ill person wants to cause harm they have so many options that placing the entirety of the blame on one thing is a giant mistake.

People are misinterpreting the point here, yes assault rifles and ammo should obviously be made insanely hard to get but that won't really change much, it's a quick fix of the symptom but it doesn't assess the root cause. The guns aren't doing the shooting, to fix the problem we need to take away the root cause that's pushing these troubled young men to commit such atrocities. It's not a copout, it's a complete understanding of what pushes someone to do something so heinous. It's not a matter of weaponization because you or I could go to Canadian Tire with $50 and do something just as bad as any one of these guys a few hours later. Of course there aren't mass bombings now because guns are so easy to get but take them away and people will just switch to the next easiest solution. You can buy a fuze that would do its job for $5, it's way way easier than you are making it out to be. Fuze, lighter, fuel, canister... it doesn't take a high-tech weapon to cause massive damage, the U.S. army is befuddled by $20 improvised explosives hidden on the roadside and they've spent billions trying to fight them to no avail.

[sketchyt]

Originally Posted by vektor

People are misinterpreting the point here, yes assault rifles and ammo should obviously be made insanely hard to get but that won't really change much, it's a quick fix of the symptom but it doesn't assess the root cause.

Looking at numbers and facts, I have to disagree.

Source (Washington Post) - large image:

NSFW!

On average compared to other developed countries, Americans are TWENTY times likelier to be killed by a firearm. For comparison's sake, it looks like in the chart there are 3.2 firearm homicides per 100,000 people in 'Murica. It's about 0.5 in Canada. This chart doesn't include Mexico but when you start getting curious about firearm death comparisons with Mexico, I think you may be in trouble.

Under reasonable logic, some serious level of restriction to firearms would likely lower that unholy number.

[vektor]

Originally Posted by sketchyt

Looking at numbers and facts, I have to disagree.

Source (Washington Post) - large image:

NSFW!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...D-UN-data3.jpg

On average compared to other developed countries, Americans are TWENTY times likelier to be killed by a firearm. For comparison's sake, it looks like in the chart there are 3.2 firearm homicides per 100,000 people in 'Murica. It's about 0.5 in Canada. This chart doesn't include Mexico but when you start getting curious about firearm death comparisons with Mexico, I think you may be in trouble.

Under reasonable logic, some serious level of restriction to firearms would likely lower that unholy number.

now we are talking a completely different issue which is important to delineate. You are talking about deaths by firearms as a whole, which by restricting them would obviously show a decrease because most of the shootings aren't mass shootings but individual acts by a person more in touch with reality. So in terms of general deaths per annum yeah the number would go down. We are talking about mass shootings here though, I never once said violence wouldn't go down but the issue at hand is these delusional young man that go out and kill a bunch of people then kill themselves.

Nobody is saying that access to assault rifles and what not is a good thing, in my opinion people should only be allowed hunting rifles that require bolt action so that they still can rise up against the government should it be necessary but it would make mass shooting nearly impossible because it would be too hard to pull off with a bolt action. Let people have the guns that the law was made for in the first place, creating an arsenal designed to kill other humans is obviously problematic.

If you want to lower the deaths per annum then regulate guns better, you want to restrict mass shootings start looking at the mental health problems because that one in a million that snaps doesn't need guns.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by sketchyt

Looking at numbers and facts, I have to disagree.

Source (Washington Post) - large image:

NSFW!

On average compared to other developed countries, Americans are TWENTY times likelier to be killed by a firearm. For comparison's sake, it looks like in the chart there are 3.2 firearm homicides per 100,000 people in 'Murica. It's about 0.5 in Canada. This chart doesn't include Mexico but when you start getting curious about firearm death comparisons with Mexico, I think you may be in trouble.

Under reasonable logic, some serious level of restriction to firearms would likely lower that unholy number.

What's interesting about this is the fact Israel, which has some pretty strict gun laws is so low on that list. I believe it is extremely easy to obtain an illegal weapon in that region, yet they somehow have very few gun murders there because of their gun laws. Kind of puts to rest the idea that more guns make a society safer against illegal guns.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I think that I read somewhere that in the U.S. gun based homicides sits at 3.8 per 100,000 population. In Canada its .5 and the UK its .1. That alone is a stunning stat.

Thats 11,844 people in the U.S. killed per year by firearms. That alone has to speak to some sort or availability problem.

What the States is currently doing in terms of gun violence, in terms of the mental health issue its going to be the sexy topic right now because most of these mass murderers are classified as ill, though not all of them are.

But there's a ton of smaller crimes that don't get attention where the killer is not mentally ill and still uses a gun.

To be clear the old saying that guns don't kill people, people kill people is stupid. A gun is an enabling tool to do it quickly in the heat of the moment. The easy access to the tool to conform to a archaic constitutional right to protect against a corrupt government is coming to the point of stupid. Sometimes in rare instances public safety and societal requirements over come some civil liberties.

On the other hand, the us murder rate is 4.2, while Canada is 1.6. Not nearly the difference when you look at it that way. The telling statistic though is that the black murder rate in the us is about 15 and the white murder rate is around 2.5. The US has a race problem much more than it has a gun problem.

While banning assault rifles and getting people mental health help are both good things, they are not going to save any kind of significantly statistical amounts of lives. Focusing resources and efforts on these types of things will help people who feel lke they need to do something, but if saving lives that are lost to preventable deaths is the goal, it is not where our efforts should be focused.

And if it is the murder rate that we want to go down, we need to figure out why black people are killing each other and what could be done to help. Because my guess is the motivations and reasons for murder are a lot different in a poor black community than they are for a young middle class mass murderer.

[polak]

Umm the bomb an average person could make in 5 hours would be lucky to kill anybody in a regular public area.

I can't believe this is even being discussed. 90% of the idiots that do these type of things would blow themselves up if they had to resort to making a bomb.

[vektor]

Originally Posted by polak

Umm the bomb an average person could make in 5 hours would be lucky to kill anybody in a regular public area.

I can't believe this is even being discussed. 90% of the idiots that do these type of things would blow themselves up if they had to resort to making a bomb.

This is pure naivety, I'd tell you how easy it is but it would be illegal. It would come down to what recipe "the idiots" find on the internet. If you don't think it's easy to make explosives look at what they do in Afghanistan and Iraq with $20

[Azure]

Originally Posted by _Q_

What's interesting about this is the fact Israel, which has some pretty strict gun laws is so low on that list. I believe it is extremely easy to obtain an illegal weapon in that region, yet they somehow have very few gun murders there because of their gun laws. Kind of puts to rest the idea that more guns make a society safer against illegal guns.

Or perhaps because they have mandatory military service, which includes firearms training, gun violence isn't a problem simply because more people are better educated as to the safety protocols.

I think another issue is that the shooter was able to gain access to the weapons not only because his mother had them in the house, but because they weren't locked up. I own a $200 safe from Canadian Tire(required by law), and there is no way anyone is getting in without a key, or some other serious kind of hardware.

Anyone that is familiar with gun safety, and has half a brain does the same.

[Regorium]

Do you think each of these bombers go and spend 5 hours making their own bomb?

OR do you think that maybe Al Qaeda and them have bomb "experts" that have enough experience to make deadly explosives for their field agents to use?

[sketchyt]

Originally Posted by vektor

If you want to lower the deaths per annum then regulate guns better, you want to restrict mass shootings start looking at the mental health problems because that one in a million that snaps doesn't need guns.

While I agree mental health and treatment is something that should be a bigger issue, I'm not sure there is great statistical linkage between mental health causing murder and violence in general. (Time Magazine link)

You're right though, unsurprisingly, those who commit mass murders suffer from mental illness (from the article):

When looking at the rates of violent crime overall — homicide, for instance — the best estimate is that 5% to 10% of murders are committed by people with mental illness. But a far larger proportion of mass homicides, including the brutal July 2011 attacks in Norway, the Tucson, Ariz., shooting that wounded Congresswoman Gabby Giffords and the Virginia Tech massacre in 2007, involve perpetrators with mental illness. The proportion far outstrips the rates of mental illness in the population.

What scares me is that would mean 90-95% of murders are by people who do not have mental illness... so I'd probably concentrate a larger proportion of efforts to that side of things... proper gun restrictions being on that side.

[PIMking]

Originally Posted by Azure

Or perhaps because they have mandatory military service, which includes firearms training, gun violence isn't a problem simply because more people are better educated as to the safety protocols.

I think another issue is that the shooter was able to gain access to the weapons not only because his mother had them in the house, but because they weren't locked up. I own a $200 safe from Canadian Tire(required by law), and there is no way anyone is getting in without a key, or some other serious kind of hardware.

Anyone that is familiar with gun safety, and has half a brain does the same.

I have two safe's, one for ammo, the other for the guns. Never in the same one. Also when I leave the house on vacation (like this week in Indy) I take the bolts out of the rifles and barrels from the semi auto pistols and still cable lock them and put them in the safe.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

On the other hand, the us murder rate is 4.2, while Canada is 1.6. Not nearly the difference when you look at it that way. The telling statistic though is that the black murder rate in the us is about 15 and the white murder rate is around 2.5. The US has a race problem much more than it has a gun problem.

While banning assault rifles and getting people mental health help are both good things, they are not going to save any kind of significantly statistical amounts of lives. Focusing resources and efforts on these types of things will help people who feel lke they need to do something, but if saving lives that are lost to preventable deaths is the goal, it is not where our efforts should be focused.

And if it is the murder rate that we want to go down, we need to figure out why black people are killing each other and what could be done to help. Because my guess is the motivations and reasons for murder are a lot different in a poor black community than they are for a young middle class mass murderer.

There have been numerous studies done over the years of how the war on drugs has contributed to the vicious cycle of crime in the black community. Father is sent to jail because of the stupid 'possession' laws, child grows up without father figure, child is more likely to resort to 'crime' because his father figure is the local gang leader.

There have also been studies done that have shown that effective social services, i.e. 'welfare', do more to lower the murder/crime rate than ANY law banning guns has ever done.

The reason the US has such a higher gun crime rate has as much to do with the fact that so many live in poverty, or are considered part of the lower class with NO WAY up, as it has to do with easy access to guns and such a high amount of firearms existing in the US.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by PIMking

I have two safe's, one for ammo, the other for the guns. Never in the same one. Also when I leave the house on vacation (like this week in Indy) I take the bolts out of the rifles and barrels from the semi auto pistols and still cable lock them and put them in the safe.

Here in Canada we are actually required by law to store ammo and the firearms in a different safe.

Not sure about the law regarding taking the bolts out, but I also do that.

The obvious issue is that it is hard to enforce. You're pretty much just stuck teaching it and hoping people choose to follow the guidelines.

[polak]

Originally Posted by vektor

This is pure naivety, I'd tell you how easy it is but it would be illegal. It would come down to what recipe "the idiots" find on the internet. If you don't think it's easy to make explosives look at what they do in Afghanistan and Iraq with $20

You would still need to find a recipe that works in your situation, then you would need to acquire all the materials and then on top of this, you need to actually build the thing.

Those are all points at which a person may calm down and realize that they shouldn't do this. Those are also all points that involve risk. You don't think that joe-shmo is going to second guess his bomb making skills when he gets to the point where there is a real chance that he'll blow himself up?

And even if he does manage to put it all together, there is still the real chance that he screwed something up and it's a dud.

Do you not see the difference between this process and buying a gun from Wal-Mart and going nuts?

P.S. No way you're making a bomb without any previous experience in 5 hours that can actually do any significant damage.