Another public multiple shooting

[Displaced Flames fan]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/29/mal...ter/index.html

Hopefully this turns out to be something domestic. I think it's a little easier to digest that way.

Doesn't sound like it though.

Seems the police were there awfully quickly.

[Eddie Bronze]

America the Great!

[STeeLy]

Anyone keeping count?

What is USA coming to, honestly?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Eddie Bronze

America the Great!

I don't get it.

[Bill Bumface]

Yup, because we've never had public shootings in Canada

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

Yup, because we've never had public shootings in Canada

Nope, no one shoots anyone in Canada... it must be cause those Americans are savage brutes...

Oops, what's this?

http://calgary.ctv.ca/servlet/RTGAMA...calgary.ctv.ca

Maybe its not just an American thing??? I hate when people make stupid, bigoted statements about America when Canada has the same faults, just less frequently due to having less than 1/9th the population.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

Yup, because we've never had public shootings in Canada

Thats why I don't get it.

Even Japan has public shootings.....and check out their gun laws.

[TurnedTheCorner]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Nope, no one shoots anyone in Canada... it must be cause those Americans are savage brutes...

Oops, what's this?

http://calgary.ctv.ca/servlet/RTGAMA...calgary.ctv.ca

Maybe its not just an American thing??? I hate when people make stupid, bigoted statements about America when Canada has the same faults, just less frequently due to having less than 1/9th the population.

Gun laws have nothing to do with it, obviously.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by TurnedTheCorner

Gun laws have nothing to do with it, obviously.

Frankly, it doesn't. Legal or Illegal, if someone wants a gun, they'll get it. They'll buy it illegally, they'll have some smuggled, or they'll simply steal one from someone. Hell, its not outside the realm of possibility that they would have them illegally manufactured. Gun control is like drug control... impossible, but possible to reduce it to an "acceptable" level. Like Azure posted, Japan does not have very strict gun laws, and they have shootings too, but at a much lower rate than Canada.

Its a human flaw and with that, a societal one, not a political one. We share a very similar societal structure with the United States, and most of the "Western" nations.

[TurnedTheCorner]

So we have less cases of shootings in Canada strictly because of population level/density?

You've got me convinced.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by TurnedTheCorner

So we have less cases of shootings in Canada strictly because of popoulation level/density?

You've got me convinced.

Its statistical based on population.

Say the murder rate is one per 100 000 people. (Its a high example, but whatever)

Canada has 33 million people, so there would be a statistical expectation of 330 murders.

United States has 305 million people, so there would be a statistical expectation of 3050 murders.

The US has 9.2x times the instances of murder, but the ratio is the same.

Simple enough for you?

[TurnedTheCorner]

Is it simple enough for you to suggest that the more guns that are available, the more likely they are to be used illegally?

And I'm not discussing the murder rate. I'm discussing shootings. I understand math. Do you have any statistics not pulled from your ass to add to the discussion? Or are you still in knee-jerk response mode?

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by TurnedTheCorner

Is it simple enough for you to suggest that the more guns that are available, the more likely they are to be used legally or illegally?

And I'm not discussing the murder rate. I'm discussing shootings. I understand math. Do you have any statistics not pulled from your ass to add to the discussion? Or are you still in knee-jerk response mode?

Its not so much about the supply of guns, its about guns in the hands of people with a desire to commit acts, and those people will acquire guns. That is the point. That is a societal ill that transcends borders. Trying to take away people's guns won't accomplish a whole lot. Gun related crime has increased in Canada despite the Gun Registry and other laws, why is that?

You'll likely point to 70% of murder in the US is firearm related v. 30% in Canada. This is true, and I won't dispute that, but what I am getting at is that guns don't kill people, they are a tool used by people to kill people. The difference is, more Canadians choose to use a less efficient form of weapon in their murders, be that blades or blunt objects. Yet, they are still choosing, and at an increasing rate, projected to mirror the US in the forseeable future. Canada's crime rate is also several times that of Japan and Sweden.

Removing the causal factors for murder should be the goal, and teaching responsible storage and care of guns for their proper use. These are issues that transcend borders.

We're arguing ridiculously. We both agree that gun crime is an issue, but looking at it from different sides. You have a supply-side argument, whereas I have a demand-side arguement. Personally, I think reducing demand is the best way of reducing supply. Obviously there is no easy answer for this. Reducing supply has proven effective to some degree, but is not the sole causal factor in why there are so many gun related crimes in North America. My point is that its not an America-only issue, like some make it out to be. (See: Taber and Montreal)

[TurnedTheCorner]

I simply think that attempts can be made to both supply and demand that can positively reduce the occurence of stories like this, wherever they happen. Ignoring one side or the other seems like a recipie for failure to me.

Sorry if I came across too hostile before.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by TurnedTheCorner

I simply think that attempts can be made to both supply and demand that can positively reduce the occurence of stories like this, wherever they happen. Ignoring one side or the other seems like a recipie for failure to me.

Sorry if I came across too hostile before.

Its a passionate issue. I probably came off a little pompous, and I apologize for that. I agree with what you said as well. It just really bothers me when people think it only happens over there and gets this notion of gun-toting cowboys, when there are States much more aggressive on reducing crime and adding gun controls than we are.

[Sparks]

I think there are a few more issues here, Thunderball. Do you really think that all murders (via firearms) are committed by people who purchase a gun with the intent to kill someone? I would suspect that many of the gun-related homicides in the States (or Canada, for that matter) are committed by people who just snap. They have a gun, they lose their job, they aren't as mentally stable as you or I - you never know. Not to mention accidental shootings (eg. people shooting their family members at night, because they think they're an intruder instead, or kids playing with Dad's guns).

In terms of people "just snapping" you might argue that they could use a knife instead. Well, it's obviously much easier to kill someone with a gun, and in the heat of the moment and just a simple pull of a trigger, someone gets shot.

I also completely fail to see the possibility that "more guns" is a better or equal state of affairs than "less guns."

[peter12]

So... did the police get this guy?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Its statistical based on population.

Say the murder rate is one per 100 000 people. (Its a high example, but whatever)

Canada has 33 million people, so there would be a statistical expectation of 330 murders.

United States has 305 million people, so there would be a statistical expectation of 3050 murders.

The US has 9.2x times the instances of murder, but the ratio is the same.

Simple enough for you?

It's not simple enough for me, although I am kind of simple myself.

You appear to be saying that people get whacked at roughly the same rate in both countries, which is simply not true.

In 2005, 658 people were murdered in Canada, while nearly 17000 people were murdered in the States. The ratio is not the same. It's not even close.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by Sparks

I think there are a few more issues here, Thunderball. Do you really think that all murders (via firearms) are committed by people who purchase a gun with the intent to kill someone? I would suspect that many of the gun-related homicides in the States (or Canada, for that matter) are committed by people who just snap. They have a gun, they lose their job, they aren't as mentally stable as you or I - you never know. Not to mention accidental shootings (eg. people shooting their family members at night, because they think they're an intruder instead, or kids playing with Dad's guns).

In terms of people "just snapping" you might argue that they could use a knife instead. Well, it's obviously much easier to kill someone with a gun, and in the heat of the moment and just a simple pull of a trigger, someone gets shot.

I also completely fail to see the possibility that "more guns" is a better or equal state of affairs than "less guns."

I never said more guns. I simply argued that reducing demand is more effective than reducing supply, much like with drugs. Its important to get guns out of the hands of dangerous people, but its also important to root out many causal factors of violent crime. When people "snap", like in a domestic dispute, they are just as likely to grab a steak knife than they are to go get their gun.

Accidents like Junior shooting his friend are horrible and are a result of people improperly storing their weapons (which is law in most of the states) and not teaching their children about guns.

[worth]

Originally Posted by Sparks

I think there are a few more issues here, Thunderball. Do you really think that all murders (via firearms) are committed by people who purchase a gun with the intent to kill someone? I would suspect that many of the gun-related homicides in the States (or Canada, for that matter) are committed by people who just snap. They have a gun, they lose their job, they aren't as mentally stable as you or I - you never know. Not to mention accidental shootings (eg. people shooting their family members at night, because they think they're an intruder instead, or kids playing with Dad's guns).

In terms of people "just snapping" you might argue that they could use a knife instead. Well, it's obviously much easier to kill someone with a gun, and in the heat of the moment and just a simple pull of a trigger, someone gets shot.

I also completely fail to see the possibility that "more guns" is a better or equal state of affairs than "less guns."

I'm trying to find the statistic, but in the US if you apply for a permit in some states, you can carry a concealed weapon on your person. Basically, what the statistics said is that thousands of permits are issues, and thousands of guns are registered to people who carry their weapons, but the number of permits that are being revoked ie: unauthorized use of force, inappropriate use of a weapon etc. are almost negligable.

I'm a staunch supporter of gun rights for those who follow the law. I'm a gun owner. All of my guns are registered. I pay the government and take courses to get my Posession and Acquisition license. I'm a regular person like you. I have a Business Degree and hold down a good gob. And I shoot guns. I don't feel as if I should be lumped into the category with those who go and shoot up schools.

People who follow the rules and collect guns, target shoot or hunt are not the ones to go after in these cases. Banning more guns or increasing gun control hurts only the people that are willing to follow the law. Law abiding target shooters and hunters have to spend hundreds of dollars to comply, all along the guy who wants to go and shoot up the school can get a gun on the street in 5 minutes. This includes Canada.

Infact, I may even go so far as to advocate the ability to carry a concealed weapon in Canada. Perhaps if one of the kids in the VT shooting was allowed to carry a legal concealed weapon, he could have stopped the murdering of 32 innocent people and the injurys suffered by many more. But because the people are supposed to trust their security to the police force, we no longer, especially in Canada, have the right to defend ourselves.

Edit:

Here's some stuff off Wiki, although this isn't the report I was trying to find, it gives a general idea:

The numbers of permit revocations are small; North Carolina reports only 0.2% of their 263,102 holders had their license revoked in the 10 years since they have adopted the law — a lower proportion than the crime rate among North Carolina police officers.[citation needed] Revocation of license is for any criminal conviction, and need not involve an illegal firearm usage. Revocations typically arise from DUI.[citation needed] Similarly, Of the 14,000 licenses issued in Oregon, only 4 individuals (0.03%) were convicted of criminal (though not necessarily violent) use or possession of a firearm.[citation needed]

So really, I don't see guns in the hands of responsible law abiding people as a problem at all.

Perhaps efforts should go toward collecting illegal weapons, and identifying those who may be prone to voilence so we can get them the help they need in order to prevent things like this from happening.