Las Vegas Shooting: 50+ Dead 500+ Injured at Jason Aldean Concert

[blankall]

Originally Posted by driveway

Access to firearms increases suicide rates regardless of access to mental health resources or suicide prevention efforts.

https://hub.jhu.edu/2017/08/17/high-...l-communities/



https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/ma...s-and-suicide/



https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2014/01/11...icide-homicide



http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi...PH.2015.302753

IMO this is a exaggerated. If you compare the suicide rates in Canada and the USA, they are fairly comparable. The USA is higher, but they also have a lot more poverty and drug addiction, whereas Canada is more socialist.

Suicide by country differs a lot in the way that people do it. In the USA, it's typically with a gun. In Canada people take pills. In Japan people hang themselves.

/morbid post

[Robo]

Originally Posted by chemgear

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-...002-story.html

Pop pop pop pop pop. As bullets rained onto the crowd gathered on the Strip for three days of country music, Travis Phippen’s training kicked in.

Phippen plugged wounds with clothing. As he worked, a woman next to him was shot in the head.

He crawled to his next patient, a 240-pound man, and rolled him over.

It was his father.

Unreal the bravery some of these people showed it takes a special kind of person to be a first responder.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I think that there is an unequivocally deep connection between the guns and American culture. The core of the issue is, as with many American issues (immigration, race wars, etc) is that America is an extremely insecure and fearful nation. A lot of this stems from a poor education system, as ignorance is the number one driver of fear and hate.

It goes right back to the founding and settlement of the country. Many of the early settlers were religious refugees, who carried a deep, deep resentment of secular authority. Others were indentured servants, who after meeting their terms of servitude, fled into essentially ungoverned wilds and borderlands to scratch out a subsistence. The bogeyman of a king/master following the self-reliant individual to his new home and depriving him of his freedom is imprinted deeply on the American psyche. Also, much of America was settled before there was any authority to impose order with a monopoly on violence, so a violent honour culture persisted.

Canada has an entirely different history, with merchants arriving first, then the law (RCMP), then settlers.

[icecube]

Originally Posted by Robo

Unreal the bravery some of these people showed it takes a special kind of person to be a first responder.

Reading that just made me even more angry and disgusted with America. They need to find the political willpower to do something about this once and for all. But we all know, barring a miracle that nothing will never happen.

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by icecube

Reading that just made me even more angry and disgusted with America. They need to find the political willpower to do something about this once and for all. But we all know, barring a miracle that nothing will never happen.

I travel to the US frequently on business and vacations but if I never set foot in the US again it would be just fine with me.

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by blankall

The 2nd Amendment just says "arms", which could include anything from a pocket knife to a nuclear weapons.

As you state, there are already many qualifications on "arms" in the current law. There's absolutely nothing more unconstitutional about adding more regulations.

The issue now lies with how it's framed with the pro-gun people. Taking away existing restrictions is easy for them "more freedom". But adding any restrictions is impossible as it erodes the 2nd amendment and is a slippery slope to the government taking away their guns.


Nothing is happening with this current government. Actually it'll probably get worse. This is my guess for what will happen. Many people, as always, will call for gun control and maybe some Democrats will introduce bills with small restrictions (none will get passed no matter how reasonable). Gun nuts will think their losing their 2nd Amendment so more laws will get passed loosening restrictions. Rinse and repeat after next tragedy.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

It goes right back to the founding and settlement of the country. Many of the early settlers were religious refugees, who carried a deep, deep resentment of secular authority. Others were indentured servants, who after meeting their terms of servitude, fled into essentially ungoverned wilds and borderlands to scratch out a subsistence. The bogeyman of a king/master following the self-reliant individual to his new home and depriving him of his freedom is imprinted deeply on the American psyche. Also, much of America was settled before there was any authority to impose order with a monopoly on violence, so a violent honour culture persisted.

Canada has an entirely different history, with merchants arriving first, then the law (RCMP), then settlers.

I take issue with this, the founding fathers weren't religious refugees, the only religion in the UK that was persecuted in the reformation was Irish Catholic, the founding fathers were a bunch of po faced joy killers who were resoundingly rejected by the English upon the return of Charles the second, they left England because they thought the country was a godless sinful hell hole and no one was interested in their brand of grim teetotal Taliban like view of Christianity, we were too busy developing a taste for Gin.

They weren't persecuted they were ignored, these were the spiritual fathers of the idiot on the corner with his bible telling shoppers in the mall we are all going to hell if we don't repent.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by kunkstyle

If a buyback would be in the hundreds of billions, you're suggesting the US would spend more than they spend on science, energy/environment, international affairs, housing/community, transportation, education, agriculture, and vet benefits?

The only thing they spend over 200B a year on is debt interest, military, medicare/health, and Social Security/Unemployment.

I'm sure they'll just throw a couple hundred billion at buying back guns though because they're American and can spend money.

Yes, for a one time buyback 200B would be fine if the US really wanted to do it. They could afford it if it was important enough. The US can pretty much do anything.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Yes, for a one time buyback 200B would be fine if the US really wanted to do it. They could afford it if it was important enough. The US can pretty much do anything.

The gun buy back could actually be folded in with military spending. I am sure some citizens have better guns than the military.

[Kybosh]

Originally Posted by Wormius

The gun buy back could actually be folded in with military spending. I am sure some citizens have better guns than the military.

Taking away my surface to air missile system infringes on my rights!

[oldschoolcalgary]

its really mind boggling some of the push back Americans have against gun control.

Universal background checks is the law of the land; Gun shows, private sales and online are loopholes that were never intended to exist...

These bump stocks are a similar loophole: Fully automatic weapons are banned... the fact that the gun "isn't being altered" is simply a loop hole... They effectively allow guns to simulate fully automatic weapons.

They absolutely should be banned.

But I have severe doubts it will happen because the NRA has the GOP in their back pocket...

[Derek Sutton]

Personally the ambiguity of the term "Gun Control" is part of the problem. So many take that to mean "...they're gonna take our guns away". Gun control is blanket statement open to interpretation, rejected by hunters, sport shooters and those who use guns for personal protection because owing a gun is their right. Well yes, you can own guns for the aforementioned reasons that is your right but the 2nd amendment can certainly be amended and add restrictions.

A nation wide (screw varying laws by state, huge part of the problem) proposal to ban automatic guns (which may or may not already exist, heard many conflicting reports of this r is it by state?), ban high capacity magazines, say 7 or more, ban online sales of guns, and create a national standardized back ground check system for buying a gun would be a good start that I would think the majority of Americans could get behind. All that combined with a firearm registry which would allow authorities the information of persons with weapon caches. Also make it unlawful to posses military grade weapons, to hell with grandfathering clauses. Impose severe punishment and ramp up enforecemnt of gun trafficking and smuggling. I'm not convinced a buy back program would take guns out of the hands of dangerous people but heck, give it a shot, even if it could eliminate a portion of accidental deaths.

I always have and still do consider myself "pro gun" but something has to change, pro gun should not mean anti legislation. Changing the rules will change the culture which will change behaviours, it may take 25 years but it has to be worth a short.

[oldschoolcalgary]

^ the NRA has been able to plant the idea of "slippery slope" and that ANY legislation simply leads to more legislation... so even though some controls make sense to most people, even GOP NRA members (the statistics show most Americans, regardless of party favor closing loopholes on universal background checks and limiting ownership to those with a history of mental illness), nothing gets done

At this point in history, most people have given up on the idea of gun control, wrt to Canadian/european controls, however if even some legislation is put in place to make things a little tougher to kill on that scale, why on earth wouldn't you do it? And how can any politician look themselves in the mirror after voting against such legislation?

Would a bump stock ban stopped the LV shooting? No... however if the LV police timeline is correct, it was 9-11 minutes from the time the first 911 call came and and the moment the door was breached...

No way the killer is able to kill 58 people and wound 400 without a bumpstock. Zero chance.

[afc wimbledon]

The irony is the NRA, by its own intransigence, probably will mean it will be a slippery slope or just a cliff edge. At some point the US public will get fed up and at that point, as is often the case with the US, there will be a massive over reaction.

I can see the NRA finding itself being seen as an American hating group of terrorists once some politician manages to harness the outrage, of course it may require several hundred dead at a collage football game or the like.

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

The irony is the NRA, by its own intransigence, probably will mean it will be a slippery slope or just a cliff edge. At some point the US public will get fed up and at that point, as is often the case with the US, there will be a massive over reaction.

I can see the NRA finding itself being seen as an American hating group of terrorists once some politician manages to harness the outrage, of course it may require several hundred dead at a collage football game or the like.

That wouldn’t even move the needle. Two things would happen, it would either be a lone wolf white shooter and the mental health boogeyman will get trotted out or it will be a darker complexioned shooter or Muslim and it will be used to enforce bans/camps/legalized discrimination. I firmly believe nothing will change the American gun psychosis

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

That wouldn’t even move the needle. Two things would happen, it would either be a lone wolf white shooter and the mental health boogeyman will get trotted out or it will be a darker complexioned shooter or Muslim and it will be used to enforce bans/camps/legalized discrimination. I firmly believe nothing will change the American gun psychosis

I don't think it will happen in my lifetime but I do think at some point, like prohibition or McCarthy, at some point the US will go utterly anti gun really quickly and relatively unpredictably

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I don't think it will happen in my lifetime but I do think at some point, like prohibition or McCarthy, at some point the US will go utterly anti gun really quickly and relatively unpredictably

I think with each mass shooting, there is growing empathy towards the gun-control movement from people who were pro-gun to start with. Previously these shootings involved people who, probably couldn't care less about ever owning a gun; whereas with the tragic events in Las Vegas, you're looking at a lot of people who probably fell into the pro-gun demographic. It's life changing events that force you to reconsider your belief system. Anyway, I don't know. I guess if something I previously valued a lot tried to hurt me, then I would likely eschew it. Maybe I am hoping that people look at this and say, "maybe I don't need all of these guns, and maybe I don't really care that much about the 2nd amendment".

[activeStick]

Originally Posted by Wormius

I think with each mass shooting, there is growing empathy towards the gun-control movement from people who were pro-gun to start with. Previously these shootings involved people who, probably couldn't care less about ever owning a gun; whereas with the tragic events in Las Vegas, you're looking at a lot of people who probably fell into the pro-gun demographic. It's life changing events that force you to reconsider your belief system. Anyway, I don't know. I guess if something I previously valued a lot tried to hurt me, then I would likely eschew it. Maybe I am hoping that people look at this and say, "maybe I don't need all of these guns, and maybe I don't really care that much about the 2nd amendment".

It's sad to point out but as others have mentioned, if the murdering of CHILDREN can't bring change, I have my doubts anything can.

[ernie]

I think things have changed...at least in public opinion. What hasn't changed is the same thing that causes all of the other political issues....politicians bending over for the well funded lobbyist.

The majority of people do want considerably more gun control in the country. And every time this happens more and more people know someone who was hurt or killed in these incidents and personal opinion does change. It is getting to the point where you have strong pro-second amendment people starting to speak out. That things have gone too far or that clearly the responsibility is too much.

You look at this case...a guy buys nearly three dozen firearms and thousands of rounds of ammo in a 12 month period. Sure it was all done legally but even just a small amount additional controls is going to at least put this guy on the radar. I don't think it happens tomorrow like it should but eventually the ruling party will start to listen to the public.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I don't think it will happen in my lifetime but I do think at some point, like prohibition or McCarthy, at some point the US will go utterly anti gun really quickly and relatively unpredictably

Then the Government has to be willing to see a lot of repeats of Waco Texas in their future.