Ongoing US Mass Shooting Thread

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by HockeyIlliterate

1) What oversight is there in regards to who gets on the Terrorism Watch list?

As in, what keeps it from being a "political enemy list"?

2) What does "shall not be infringed" mean to you?

What does "well regulated militia" mean is the more important question.

[2Stonedbirds]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

I mean, we're talking about a GOP that voted down a measure that would've stopped those on the Terrorism Watch List (who aren't even allowed on an airplane) from obtaining firearms. They'd rather allow potential terrorists access to legally purchased weapons than enact any kind of gun control. They're sure not going to try to stop everyday Americans from getting guns, regardless of how unfit those Americans are.

California has the strictest gun control in the US. Even more so than Canada.

All gun owners must pass a test, background check and be licensed.
All handguns, and only those approved for sale in California, are registered.
New handguns for the civilian market are essentially banned through manufacturers fees. You won't find new Smith and Wesson models in California.
All firearm sales are recorded, serial numbers of all long guns are recorded.
All private sales must be done through a dealer and recorded.
Magazine restrictions.
Certain firearms are banned.
Certain features (pistol grips etc) are prohibited.

California gun control is operating above and beyond what Obama is asking for.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds

California has the strictest gun control in the US. Even more so than Canada.

All gun owners must pass a test, background check and be licensed.
All handguns, and only those approved for sale in California, are registered.
New handguns for the civilian market are essentially banned through manufacturers fees. You won't find new Smith and Wesson models in California.
All firearm sales are recorded, serial numbers of all long guns are recorded.
All private sales must be done through a dealer and recorded.
Magazine restrictions.
Certain firearms are banned.
Certain features (pistol grips etc) are prohibited.

California gun control is operating above and beyond what Obama is asking for.

Other state laws...

Arizona gun control laws are among the least-restrictive in the United States. Arizona law states that any person 21 years or older, who is not a prohibited possessor, may carry a weapon openly or concealed without the need for a license. (A concealed carry permit is required in most other states.)

I'm pretty hammered, but I think AZ and CA are neighbors.

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds

California has the strictest gun control in the US. Even more so than Canada.

All gun owners must pass a test, background check and be licensed.
All handguns, and only those approved for sale in California, are registered.
New handguns for the civilian market are essentially banned through manufacturers fees. You won't find new Smith and Wesson models in California.
All firearm sales are recorded, serial numbers of all long guns are recorded.
All private sales must be done through a dealer and recorded.
Magazine restrictions.
Certain firearms are banned.
Certain features (pistol grips etc) are prohibited.

California gun control is operating above and beyond what Obama is asking for.

Until all states have border patrols preventing the movement of firearms between said states, none of this matters. It's like people talking about how Chicago has strict gun laws--it doesn't matter if everywhere surrounding it has lax gun laws.

You're never going to stop all crime, all gun crime, all homicides, whatever. But as a country we need to do better. We as a country need to get past the hard-on we have about weaponry and do something. Thoughts and prayers aren't doing anything. Laws and culture change are what will change this awful trend.

These things do not happen in other countries. These things can be stopped. But there are entirely too many people in this country who refuse to change. There are too many people in this country who think that their right to own weapons supersedes the rights of all others to remain alive.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds

California has the strictest gun control in the US. Even more so than Canada.

All gun owners must pass a test, background check and be licensed.
All handguns, and only those approved for sale in California, are registered.
New handguns for the civilian market are essentially banned through manufacturers fees. You won't find new Smith and Wesson models in California.
All firearm sales are recorded, serial numbers of all long guns are recorded.
All private sales must be done through a dealer and recorded.
Magazine restrictions.
Certain firearms are banned.
Certain features (pistol grips etc) are prohibited.

California gun control is operating above and beyond what Obama is asking for.

State gun control laws don't mean a whole lot when they share borders with states with some of the loosest gun regulations in the country. If someone in LA can drive a few hours to Vegas or Phoenix to load up on guns it defeats the whole purpose of the California laws

[2Stonedbirds]

It's also illegal to transfer a firearm from one state into California without notifying and registering with local police.

[metallicat]

Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds

It's also illegal to transfer a firearm from one state into California without notifying and registering with local police.

So what? Is that good enough?

[afc wimbledon]

In defence of Stonedbirds I believe he and his ilk are the majority in the U.S. which, as I ain't a yank, I'm fine with, I thinks it's nuts, but it's their country.

I see no point in arguing the rights and wrongs of either congress or the constitution or the practicality of self defence, everyone, Stonedbirds, the NRA, your loony racist cousin in Montana knows these are ridiculously false arguements that are used as window dressing, the reason America has and keeps guns legal is because the vast majority of Americans like them and want them even though they cost the U.S. 30,000 dead a year.

[Minnie]

Originally Posted by peter12

Can people stop acting like the GOP is the crazy party

Ordinary Joes don't really have to act like the GOP is the crazy party. The GOP does a good enough job of that without anyone "acting like" they are. Now, if it was the actual GOP and not this Tea Party Nutbar hijacked version, you might have a point. Are the Dems wonderful? No. I don't see a viable candidate for their side but let's be real here - Trump, Carson, Cruz et al might just be a few reasons people are aghast with what happens from the GOP side.

[MelBridgeman]

If CBC is reporting it, it must be big

I will wait for Nenshi to make his opinion known first.

[2Stonedbirds]

Originally Posted by oilers_fan

So what? Is that good enough?

Probably not. Better draft some more useless legislation.

[SportsJunky]

Did anyone mention that there was another mass shooting in Atlanta this morning? Barely made the radar. Only one dead and three wounded.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Add in if its linked to someone that's been inspired by ISIS or involved with ISIS, that the President will be forced to make a substantial retaliation.

How though? They've be n bombing Isis for a year without huge effect - it seems like there's no there there to hit. This guy seems to have been in the us a fair while so he would likely have been radicalized over here, maybe in part because they're bombing over there. How do you retaliate against that?

[2Stonedbirds]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

In defence of Stonedbirds I believe he and his ilk are the majority in the U.S. which, as I ain't a yank, I'm fine with, I thinks it's nuts, but it's their country.

I see no point in arguing the rights and wrongs of either congress or the constitution or the practicality of self defence, everyone, Stonedbirds, the NRA, your loony racist cousin in Montana knows these are ridiculously false arguements that are used as window dressing, the reason America has and keeps guns legal is because the vast majority of Americans like them and want them even though they cost the U.S. 30,000 dead a year.

I'm not a Yank, but here's the thing. And this has been argued ad nauseam in previous pages so I really don't want to go over it all again. And again.

The pandoras box has been opened. No one is going to close the lid on over 300 million firearms in civilians hands, most of which are derived from 200 year old tech. The US have many laws already in place, and they vary by state. The point is, like I said in a earlier post that it's illegal to move firearms from one state into another where they may be prohibited, restricted, or have legislation that dictates you must declare your firearm.

If people do not obey the law, it makes them a criminal. Well durr right?

It's also illegal to murder people.

So go ahead and make firearms illegal. Anyone wanna place bets on how many of those 300+ million show up for a date with the chop saw?

I have yet to hear a reasonable argument as to what legislation or laws can STOP gun crime, and how to effectively enforce such laws. No one has a solution.

There is undoubtedly a mess right now in the US. How you fix it, I honestly do not know. I'd love it if people would stop murdering one another at inexplicable rates. (even if those firearm related rates are at the lowest in 30 years) Regardless if its with firearms, knives, bats, fists, or your sick of grandmas incessant crying so you push her head down in the tub and wait for the thrashing to stop. How the murder happens doesn't matter.

As it pertains to firearms I wish we could see something happen with actual safety training that is ingrained from the first time a user picks up a firearm. Now this isn't dependent on the state in the US, it's up to the individual. So... how you enforce or make that happen, again I do not know.

The vast majority of firearm owners in the US are no different from anywhere else. The firearm is a tool, is treated with respect and used, stored and cared for with safety in mind.

Firearm safety was pounded into my head ever since I've been but a wee lad and was trusted to go out into the field and clean up gophers with the ol cooey .22.

My experience, I can guarantee was vastly different then say, someone who grew up in the hood. Or where having a loaded firearm laying around in a house with kids is acceptable. Or where "packing a heater" is considered tools for the trade if you are a criminal.

You cannot, and will not, ever legislate personal responsibility. And this is where the problem lies. If someone snaps and decides to go on a rampage, then where and how was the ball dropped? And even though these laws exist in Cali, no one will still face the fact that these people DO NOT GIVE A **** about your laws.

Elliot Rodger owned 2 registered handguns, had 7 police officers come to his house on a violent dispute call. They had every chance to run his name against the registry, collect his guns and leave him with a BMW as his only weapon. He still stabbed his roomates to death, and went on a rampage shooting and running people over with his car. So we need effectual legislation, and effectual enforcement. How we get it, and find that balance between useful controls and respecting individual rights, I really do not know.

It's also illegal to make and posses pipe bombs. Have yet to read any outrage over that.

The problem IMO, is a certain segment of the population that views firearms as something you use for an offensive. Not as a tool.

[edslunch]

What is a handgun or assault rifle a tool for?

[driveway]

Repeal the second amendment, only effective long-term solution.

[Bunk]

Australia did it with very aggressive gun control following the Port Arthur massacre. Effectively ended mass shootings. So could the U.S., it just will never choose to because of a lot of warped people.

[wittynickname]

I have yet to hear a reasonable argument as to what legislation or laws can STOP gun crime, and how to effectively enforce such laws. No one has a solution.

Basic gun control measures: if you want to own a weapon, pass a background check, a drug test, a mental health examination, and then finish a thorough educational course about how to use, clean, and store said firearm. There should also be annual registration of those weapons. There should also be strict laws about storage of weapons and ammo in the home, so when a reckless gun owner's kid gets a hold of the gun and kills his cousin in the back yard while "playing," the gun owner has to face some consequences for their recklessness. If a person has a violent history or some kind of domestic abuse history, they can't have a weapon.

Really if we basically treated firearms the way we treat vehicles, it would probably stop a lot of this insanity.

What exactly is unreasonable about these ideas?

There is undoubtedly a mess right now in the US. How you fix it, I honestly do not know. I'd love it if people would stop murdering one another at inexplicable rates. (even if those firearm related rates are at the lowest in 30 years) Regardless if its with firearms, knives, bats, fists, or your sick of grandmas incessant crying so you push her head down in the tub and wait for the thrashing to stop. How the murder happens doesn't matter.

I call total BS on this "how the murder happens doesn't matter" thing. Yes it absolutely does. Guns are a fast, impersonal, incredibly effective way of killing another human being. It's a lot harder to kill another human with a bat or a knife or a fist, also you have to be in very close quarters with your victim in order to kill in that way.

You can grab a gun and shoot someone from a huge distance without any chance of the person being able to stop you. Guns are an incredibly effective way of exerting deadly force from a distance. That is their main purpose of existence.

The vast majority of firearm owners in the US are no different from anywhere else. The firearm is a tool, is treated with respect and used, stored and cared for with safety in mind.

Firearm safety was pounded into my head ever since I've been but a wee lad and was trusted to go out into the field and clean up gophers with the ol cooey .22.

Homes with a firearm are far more likely to have an accidental shooting than to ever actually prevent any harm to their family with said firearm. Lots and lots of gun owners don't treat them as tools nor do they respect their power--otherwise you wouldn't get weekly stories about small children finding their parents' weapons and killing themselves or someone else.

It's also illegal to make and posses pipe bombs. Have yet to read any outrage over that.

When pipe bombs are responsible for 30K deaths a year, there will be lots of outrage over them.

[Trailer Fire]

Originally Posted by edslunch

What is a handgun or assault rifle a tool for?

Killing people, far as I can tell.

[ernie]

Saying that transporting guns across state lines is illegal and throwing up your hands and pointing see criminals are going to do it is disingenuous. There isn't a person this form that doesn't knowing break the law every day in some manner. It's one thing to smuggle a gun across an unguarded state border and across a country border. There's a difference to buying a gun at Walmart and having to get one on the black market.

One also can't simply say well too many guns too late no point in trying. I think many would be amazed at what a gun buy back does. Guns also age like everything else. Prohibit sales and the numbers will come down.

And lets not pretend there isn't a whole hell of a lot more that can be done in terms of laws to limit sales and ensure guns are properly stored etc. is it going to stop every idiot who wants to shoot up a place? No. But it will limit a lot of needless death and that's a good thing.