Ongoing US Mass Shooting Thread

[Shnabdabber]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Yes, every single gun starts it's life as a legal product.

No, not every firearm starts out as a legal firearm. Employees have made receivers disappear in the past, and the google machine will provide you with many examples of homemade firearms. The basic knowledge of modern firearm design is 18th century tech. Nevermind 3d printing machines that can produce workable firearms.

My point was, however, how if the federal govt cannot be trusted when it comes to operations such as fast and furious, why should they be trusted with the process of striping Americans of their unalienable rights?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...A331K720140404

California (former) Dem. senator Yee, a proud anti gun supporter who proposed many gun control bills, was himself indicted on conspiracy to traffic illegal firearms, and sell them to criminals for profit. Understand why Americans are a little hesitant to follow gun control directives?

This of course, is ignoring the truth that gun related homicide has been on a steady, measurable decline for the last 30 years in the US.

[Shnabdabber]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

This is actually an outright lie. If you use Toronto (most likely very applicable to the rest of Canada) as an example, ~70% of guns are smuggled illegally into the country from the US. A good chunk of the remaining 30% comes from theft (I think this is illegal as well) and then a small percentage come from actual, legal owners.

Bill Blair acknowledged this and CBC had a special on it.



This argument is contingent on criminals suddenly handing in their guns and not trying to source new ones. It would also require a massive joint crackdown on cross-border smuggling by US and Canadian law enforcement, which everyone you ask will support (gun owners included).

And part of Olivia Chows election platform is pushing a handgun ban in Toronto. IE banning those who legally have the ability to own them from doing so, while doing jack squat about the real problem.

Gun owners are just low hanging fruit for politicians who want to appear to be doing something.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Canuck-Hater

Because criminals will always find a way to get their hands on weapons regardless of gun control laws.

In Australia, the gun used in the Sandy Hook massacre costs $34,000 on the black market. In America, it's $1000 and they deliver it to your house.

[Igottago]

Criminals are going to find a way to get guns anyways, so we might as well make it as easy as possible for them?

Yes, people who want to do something bad can find a way to do it, but society can also try to make it difficult or somewhat ineffective for them to take the steps to do it.

I also eagerly await the story where a mass shooter is pre-emptively taken out by a law abiding citizen who is carrying a legal firearm and becomes Rambo at the precise instant the killer is going to fly off the handle, and saves the day. That's going to be a huge victory for the pro gun side of the debate.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Shnabdabber

No, not every firearm starts out as a legal firearm. Employees have made receivers disappear in the past, and the google machine will provide you with many examples of homemade firearms. The basic knowledge of modern firearm design is 18th century tech. Nevermind 3d printing machines that can produce workable firearms.

My point was, however, how if the federal govt cannot be trusted when it comes to operations such as fast and furious, why should they be trusted with the process of striping Americans of their unalienable rights?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...A331K720140404

California (former) Dem. senator Yee, a proud anti gun supporter who proposed many gun control bills, was himself indicted on conspiracy to traffic illegal firearms, and sell them to criminals for profit. Understand why Americans are a little hesitant to follow gun control directives?

This of course, is ignoring the truth that gun related homicide has been on a steady, measurable decline for the last 30 years in the US.

Home made guns are incredibly limited in numbers, scope and calibre, I've worked in a jail, zip guns are at best a single shot .22 with a 3 foot range.
The 3d printed guns are little better, I'd be more scared of a knife.

[Shnabdabber]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

In Australia, the gun used in the Sandy Hook massacre costs $34,000 on the black market. In America, it's $1000 and they deliver it to your house.

If thats what the market will bear, then thats what they will sell for yes.

Many people think the solution is to just simply ban them yet no one has a solution of how to make 300+ million firearms disappear.

[Shnabdabber]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Home made guns are incredibly limited in numbers, scope and calibre, I've worked in a jail, zip guns are at best a single shot .22 with a 3 foot range.
The 3d printed guns are little better, I'd be more scared of a knife.

So they do exist.

Again, the tooling and know how is centuries old, and the cat is out of the bag. Legislation is not going to make them disappear, smuggling will always exist.

I guess my beef with the gun control side though is too many are eager to strip a majority of their rights based on the actions of crazed individuals. Especially since we already have laws on the books to deal with those individuals.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Shnabdabber

If thats what the market will bear, then thats what they will sell for yes.

Many people think the solution is to just simply ban them yet no one has a solution of how to make 300+ million firearms disappear.

Personally I'd just ban all handguns, make possession of them a mandatory sentence (like you do with weed in most places), add in a small bounty for handing them in, say an xbox. Close down production by anyone but the Feds.
Let people keep their shotguns and rifles.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Shnabdabber

So they do exist.

Again, the tooling and know how is centuries out, and the cat is out of the bag. Legislation is not going to make them disappear, smuggling will always exist.

I guess my beef will the gun control side though is too many are eager to strip a majority of their rights based on the actions of crazed individuals. Especially since we already have laws on the books to deal with those individuals.

So to be clear, your rights to own weapons are greater than my rights to live in a society with reduced access weapons.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Shnabdabber

So they do exist.

Again, the tooling and know how is centuries out, and the cat is out of the bag. Legislation is not going to make them disappear, smuggling will always exist.

I guess my beef will the gun control side though is too many are eager to strip a majority of their rights based on the actions of crazed individuals. Especially since we already have laws on the books to deal with those individuals.

They're not crazed individuals, the vast majority of those 30,000 dead a year are as a result of the witless ness of very ordinary people, you are the most dangerous person your wife ever meets statistically (I'm assuming your male).

[Shnabdabber]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Personally I'd just ban all handguns, make possession of them a mandatory sentence (like you do with weed in most places), add in a small bounty for handing them in, say an xbox. Close down production by anyone but the Feds.
Let people keep their shotguns and rifles.

Why discriminate against handguns and the millions of legitimate owners?

I would be fine with a stiff mandatory sentence if someone was carrying in public a handgun without a corresponding license saying they are certified to do so. Make commision of crimes with the use of any firearm beyond stiff. Punish those severely who do ill will with a firearm and leave the average joes alone.

[Shnabdabber]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

They're not crazed individuals, the vast majority of those 30,000 dead a year are as a result of the witless ness of very ordinary people, you are the most dangerous person your wife ever meets statistically (I'm assuming your male).

Sure, and yes I am male.

I am sorry though but when someone wigs out and kills everyone around them, yes they are crazed. Spouse abuse is a very serious problem, but its commision is not exclusive to firearms being present.

[Shnabdabber]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

So to be clear, your rights to own weapons are greater than my rights to live in a society with reduced access weapons.

Which amendment states "the right to live in a society with reduced access (to) weapons"?

edit: You also must have missed this part as well...

"Especially since we already have laws on the books to deal with those individuals."

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Shnabdabber

Why discriminate against handguns and the millions of legitimate owners?

I would be fine with a stiff mandatory sentence if someone was carrying in public a handgun without a corresponding license saying they are certified to do so. Make commision of crimes with the use of any firearm beyond stiff. Punish those severely who do ill will with a firearm and leave the average joes alone.

You ban handguns for the same reason you ban heroin or naked pictures of children, because the over all good of society massively outweighs the few legitimate uses for them.

[Shnabdabber]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

You ban handguns for the same reason you ban heroin or naked pictures of children, because the over all good of society massively outweighs the few legitimate uses for them.

There are legitimate uses for handguns, there are no legitimate uses for either of your two examples.

But since you brought up naked pictures of children, lets compare and draw a parallel with that to this issue.

Someone shoots/murders someone else. The anti side is to just flat out ban firearms. Nevermind the laws we have to deal with murder, ban the object.

Someone takes naked pictures of children. The same logic would dictate we ban cameras. Who cares about the laws we have to deal with the crime, ban the object that was used to commit it.

Both ideas are asinine.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Shnabdabber

Which amendment states "the right to live in a society with reduced access (to) weapons"?

edit: You also must have missed this part as well...

"Especially since we already have laws on the books to deal with those individuals."

I live in Canada, we don't have amendments. However, I would suggest my right to "Life" should supersede your right to bear arms.

I honestly believe that the anti-ban side will never change. They are so deeply entrenched in their beliefs they will never change.

[Shnabdabber]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I live in Canada, we don't have amendments. However, I would suggest my right to "Life" should supersede your right to bear arms.

I honestly believe that the anti-ban side will never change. They are so deeply entrenched in their beliefs they will never change.

Whats the thread title again?

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Shnabdabber

Whats the thread title again?

Ah yes good point.


Mod can you please change the title to the Neverending Americian Stupidity Thread?


Shnabdabber (#### that was hard to type correctly) are you in/from the US?

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by Igottago

I also eagerly await the story where a mass shooter is pre-emptively taken out by a law abiding citizen who is carrying a legal firearm and becomes Rambo at the precise instant the killer is going to fly off the handle, and saves the day. That's going to be a huge victory for the pro gun side of the debate.

Clackamas Town Center shooting
- CCW holder Nick Meli draws his firearm on shooter Jacob Tyler Roberts after Roberts has gunned down two bystanders. Meli does not shoot due to bystanders present behind Roberts. At this point Roberts disengages, flees and commits suicide minutes later within the service areas of the mall.

West Pullman, Chicago
- Denzel A. Mickeil opens fire on a group of party goers leaving a party. One of the party goers is active military and has a CCW permit. His returns fire, strikes Mickeil twice, allowing the victims to flee the scene. Mickeil is charged with attempted murder due to two of his shots that hit a 22 year old woman in the arm and back.

Golden Food Market, South Richmond
- Assailant enters the store and proceeds to shot and wound the clerk, he then fires several more shots at patrons before being shot and wounded by a CCW holder in the store. Patrons then urge the CCW holder to shot the assailant again, CCW holder declines and waits for police to show up.

Early, Texan trailer park
- Charles Connor shots two neighbors and their dogs in a dispute over the dogs barking. Conner then opens fire on the responding police officer with an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle fitted with a scope. Vic Stacy fires on Connor with his .357 Magnum revolver, hitting him in the thigh. Connor then turns to Stacy and targets him, Stacy fire four more shots, killing Connor.

Appalachian School of Law
- Peter Odighizuwa returns to the school with a .380 semi-automatic pistol and executes the dean and a professor. He murders a student and injures threes more before being confronted leaving the building by two students who happen to be off-duty police officers who have retrieved their firearms from their vehicles. Odighizuwa is subdued and placed under arrest, he receives life sentences plus 28 years.

New Life Church
- Matthew Murray kills two and injures four at the Youth With A Mission training center before proceeding to the New Life Church in Colorado Springs. He then kills two and injures five more before a volunteer security officer who had been allowed CCW by the church shoots him. Murray then commits suicide.

Shoney's restaurant, Anniston, Ala
- Two robbers armed with stolen handguns herd customers and staff into a walk-in cooler before beginning their collection of loot. Thomas Glenn Terry is found by one of the robber under the table where he had hidden. Terry fires five rounds from his .45 semi-auto into the robber's chest at point blank range, killing him instantly. The second gunman (who had been holding the manager at gunpoint) opens fire on Terry, grazing him, Terry returns fire and critically injures the second gunman.

Players Bar and Grill, Winnemucca NV
- Ernesto Villagomez opens fire inside the restaurant, killing two patrons and wounding three. CCW holder shoots him after he had reloaded and begun firing again.

New York Mills AT&T store
- Abraham Dickan, who had lost his firearms permit after repeated threats against the staff of the store, returns with a .357 Magnum and a hit list of six employees. His opens fire killing Seth Turk before being killed by Officer Donald Moore who was carrying his .40 calibre pistol concealed off-duty.

National Shooting Club, Santa Clara
- Richard Gable Stevens rents a firearm and after several minutes on the range, returns to the office where he turns the gun on three staff members. He herds them outside with the intent to kill them, at which point one of the employees who was carrying concealed fires several times and keeps Stevens at gun point until police arrive.

There are a bunch more, but this is a decent sample that shows CCW does have the ability to prevent incidents from growing in scale and severity.

[GoinAllTheWay]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Shnabdabber (#### that was hard to type correctly) US?

That's what copy & paste is for