Another day ... / mass shooting

[4everwarriors]

Oh yeah, wee kneed more gun control. Izant killin' folks alreddy illegal. Deez dudes ar sick ass holes so laws no matta, hey?

[MuggsyB]

Well let me be clear that I'm not for an overall gun ban. I want to get that hurdle out of the way.

Next, I believe it's about calculated risk. If a pistol is the gun of choice for inner city violence the vast majority of America isn't effected by that so it doesn't pose a risk to people who aren't a part of that. Whereas we all go to theaters, go to a grocery store, have gone to school, have attended a concert. See how it's more relatable? Then you add in the just mental stats of "with this gun were all dead with that gun we aren't" and the choice becomes obvious.

the protection thing I'm not going to get into because you're right. Sure stats overwhelmingly show that having a gun is more dangerous than not but stats don't matter to the individual and if it worked for someone more power to them. 

Regarding your first paragraph, it seems to be a response that expects any solution to fix literally every issue. Unfortunately laws are always going to be patch fixes and sort of like banning high capacity magazines so that a shooting is 5 people instead of 50, it's about minimizing casualties and risk.

I'm no expert but I believe women prefer the AR-15 for protection.  Your overall point is well taken:  many people don't relate to handgun violence because of where they live... ..or even think about it for that matter..  But isn't that a tragedy ?  Why should we be more passionate about something that occurs far less frequently like Boulder than what happens every fking weekend??  Tbis is what I don't understand.  Worse, five seconds after this happened there is discussion about the race of the killer?  Who gives a crap?  If 200  people a month are murdered by handguns bought illegally vs 50 people per year by assault rifles why is the bigger problem never part of the overall discussion?  That's all I'm saying.  The passion after these specific tragedies is not philosophically consistent with the overall problem of gun violence . 

[Galway Eagle]

Oh yeah, wee kneed more gun control. Izant killin' folks alreddy illegal. Deez dudes ar sick ass holes so laws no matta, hey?

You know the black market isn't a place you just walk into right? I mean your average schizoid isn't going to get onto the dark web to order a high capacity rifle with a trigger attachment to enhance the rate of fire, plus armor piercing rounds. 

What is your solution?

[Galway Eagle]

I'm no expert but I believe women prefer the AR-15 for protection.  Your overall point is well taken:  many people don't relate to handgun violence because of where they live... ..or even think about it for that matter..  But isn't that a tragedy ?  Why should we be more passionate about something that occurs far less frequently like Boulder than what happens every fking weekend??  Tbis is what I don't understand.  Worse, five seconds after this happened there is discussion about the race of the killer?  Who gives a crap?  If 200  people a month are murdered by handguns bought illegally vs 50 people per year by assault rifles why is the bigger problem never part of the overall discussion?  That's all I'm saying.  The passion after these specific tragedies is not philosophically consistent with the overall problem of gun violence .

I completely agree. For me I was extremely anti gun since two of my high school classmates were shot, very sobering feeling seeing an empty chair in the classroom. But as I've grown older I get there's a middle ground to come to and being anti gun isn't feasible.

I think the immediate check on race is the default due to polarization of our country. The left is hoping it's a right wing nut job, the right is hoping it's someone with a Hispanic or Islamic last name or even better someone with "Antifa" tattooed on them. It's all a political game and those who deal with it on a daily basis get left behind.

[jesmu84]

Oh yeah, wee kneed more gun control. Izant killin' folks alreddy illegal. Deez dudes ar sick ass holes so laws no matta, hey?

Compare/contrast gun violence in the US to other first-world nations then.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

I completely agree. For me I was extremely anti gun since two of my high school classmates were shot, very sobering feeling seeing an empty chair in the classroom. But as I've grown older I get there's a middle ground to come to and being anti gun isn't feasible.

I think the immediate check on race is the default due to polarization of our country. The left is hoping it's a right wing nut job, the right is hoping it's someone with a Hispanic or Islamic last name or even better someone with "Antifa" tattooed on them. It's all a political game and those who deal with it on a daily basis get left behind.

I think most people are and have been in the middle ground for a long time.  Look at most of the laws being proposed have like 80%+ favorability to be implemented.
 
I have a friend who was all for loosening gun laws, etc.  He has some kind of semi-automatic legally purchased in Virginia at the time.  Then Sandy Hook happened and he changed his mind that all the closing loophole laws, limitations, etc. should be passed.  His thought was that the proposed laws are not gun bans and the responsible people would have no issue following restrictive gun laws because they're responsible.  The irresponsible owners ruin it for everyone.  (Along these lines.)     

[shoothoops]

Lots of things going on here with regards to guns.

First, the simple response is that less access to guns both legal and illegal is the only way the U.S. will ever approach numbers similar to other developed countries. 

The longer discussion is the break down of types of gun violence. Suicides, urban gun violence, domestic violence, mass shootings.

Racial apathy is a repeated occuring theme in these situations.

Beginning with mass shootings, often times, the victims of mass shootings are White, and, therefore get more attention. And,. studies have shown that mental health is much more often the focus and discussion when the shooter is White.

By far the vast majority of gun deaths are suicides. This also is an example of the fact that most people with mental health issues are non-violent towards others. In fact, people with mental illness and/or mental health issues are much more likely to be victims of gun violence and violence, than be the cause of it towards others. I realize some, perhaps many people know this, but, far too many don't know this and/or don't care.

With urban gun violence, there needs to be a focused deterrence, instead of broad one size fits all policies. The old school policies of only focusing on law enforcement aspects are less effective,...the old guns and drugs on the table.

You have to target the people who commit and are more likely to commit gun violence, and, you have to target the people who are more likely to be victims of it. These are smaller percentages of people than the general population. Homicide clearance rates are massively higher for White victims than people of color victims. That is a combination of systemic racism, racial profiling which causes police distrust, which also causes police apathy to solve some of these crimes. Instead many civilians take matters into their own hands do to this mistrust and repeat cycles of violence.

Disingenous people will say police shoot more White people than Black people annually. What they don't add is that there are more White people. And the percentage of people that police shoot are much higher with Black people.

There is way to much empahsis on petty crimes, traffic violations, City ordinances, or even harrassment for no reason at all.

Social Services, jobs, education, healthcare, cognitive behavioral therapy, teen interrupters, recreational activities are complimentary to the focus on the small percentage who commit the crimes, and the small percentage who are victims of it. Much more focus and resource emphasis needs to be on these areas, but they aren't overly costly.

If you took a group of White kids from White Folks Bay and dropped them into a rough inner city neighborhood with few resources, no escape, murders all around, nobody cares etc...what would happen?

The U.S. doesn't necessarily have more crime than other developed nations. It does however have much more lethal crime because there are way more guns in the U.S. with easy access to them. Much of the proposed, often discussed legislation, doesn't go anywhere near far enough to address the problem.

In 1959, 60% of Americans wanted all hand guns banned (Gallup) except for police. By 1980 it was 38%, and more recently roughly 28%. What changed? NRA and Republicans. What is necessary is a shift to reverse that, and it can be done, instead of focusing so many years on small incremental change. One very small example of many is having a license to own a gun goes beyond universal background checks. It means less people will go to the trouble to own a gun and therefore less guns out there and less gun violence. There is a Johns Hopkins study on this which also references Massachusetts. Research also supports buyback programs. Banning assault weapons and handguns. Yes handguns. More than 70% of gun violence is committed with a handgun.

The United States gun problem is unique to the United States. The United States has a higher homicide rate than any other developed country because it has more guns than any other country. The United States makes up less than 5% of the World's population, but makes up 45% of private gun owners. You can look at the data upside down, backwards, forwards, side to side, up and down, but more gun ownership=more gun deaths.

You will hear mental illness when a mass shooting occurs even though the percentage of mass shooters with mental illness is very small. You will see an increase in gun buys after mass shooting because some will say they have to protect themselves.But high gun ownership rates don't reduce deaths, they increase deaths. Simulations show most people would not be able to protect themselves or others in active shooter situations.

There are other propoganda things such as don't take away my guns even though many are for this, or don't make me wear a mask, even though many are for this and benefit from this or government Affordable Care Act, even though many like and benefit from specific aspects of it etc...

[naginiF]

^^^well stated and laid out

[Billy Hoyle]

I'm no expert but I believe women prefer the AR-15 for protection.  Your overall point is well taken:  many people don't relate to handgun violence because of where they live... ..or even think about it for that matter..  But isn't that a tragedy ?  Why should we be more passionate about something that occurs far less frequently like Boulder than what happens every fking weekend??  Tbis is what I don't understand.  Worse, five seconds after this happened there is discussion about the race of the killer?  Who gives a crap?  If 200  people a month are murdered by handguns bought illegally vs 50 people per year by assault rifles why is the bigger problem never part of the overall discussion?  That's all I'm saying.  The passion after these specific tragedies is not philosophically consistent with the overall problem of gun violence .

handguns are more likely to be owned by the average citizen. My wife got one due to the proliferation of homeless camps in town (here the homeless have more rights than us "gentrifiers") and after being attacked by a homeless individual. Oh, and the anti-Asian violence.

Handguns serve a specific purpose as far as the general public is concerned but "nobody needs" an AR-15.

As far at the recent media focus on the Boulder gun control law being struck down, it wouldn't have mattered in the end. The guy could have gone to a neighboring municipality to purchase his gun. Chicago has strict gun control laws and more than 70% of the guns confiscated come from out of state.

[Galway Eagle]

handguns are more likely to be owned by the average citizen. My wife got one due to the proliferation of homeless camps in town (here the homeless have more rights than us "gentrifiers") and after being attacked by a homeless individual. Oh, and the anti-Asian violence.

Handguns serve a specific purpose as far as the general public is concerned but "nobody needs" an AR-15.

As far at the recent media focus on the Boulder gun control law being struck down, it wouldn't have mattered in the end. The guy could have gone to a neighboring municipality to purchase his gun. Chicago has strict gun control laws and more than 70% of the guns confiscated come from out of state.

Most of Chicago's gun control laws were struck down in this lawsuit from what I recall.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald_v._City_of_Chicago

[shoothoops]

handguns are more likely to be owned by the average citizen. My wife got one due to the proliferation of homeless camps in town (here the homeless have more rights than us "gentrifiers") and after being attacked by a homeless individual. Oh, and the anti-Asian violence.

Handguns serve a specific purpose as far as the general public is concerned but "nobody needs" an AR-15.

As far at the recent media focus on the Boulder gun control law being struck down, it wouldn't have mattered in the end. The guy could have gone to a neighboring municipality to purchase his gun. Chicago has strict gun control laws and more than 70% of the guns confiscated come from out of state.

That doesn't go far enough.

Increased handgun ownership results in increased gun violence and gun death. It doesn't reduce or prevent it. 70% of gun deaths are from handguns.

[Hards Alumni]

1.  Mandatory background checks for all firearm purchases (absolute no brainer to try to keep firearms away from criminals/mentally unstable)
2.  Trigger lock requirements on firearms that aren't in use  (saves kids from messing with guns, reduces gun theft)
3.  A national firearm registry.  One year grace period to register your firearm.  (Think of this as contact tracing for guns.  We do this for cars, so it shouldn't be difficult)
4.  Culpability of firearm owners for crimes committed using their firearm.  (To prevent people from loaning their weapons to people.  Also, forces people to be serious about #2)

Violation of any of these rules carries a 10 year penalty.  Of course, this won't fix everything, but it's a good start.

Do these four simple things if we want to reduce gun death in the US.  Both sides should easily be able to agree. 

[Billy Hoyle]

Most of Chicago's gun control laws were struck down in this lawsuit from what I recall.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald_v._City_of_Chicago

they are still able to have strict (not the strictest in the nation as the right claims) gun laws, including an assault weapons ban.

It is true that Illinois has tougher gun laws than many other states. The state is one of seven that requires licenses or permits to buy any firearm, and it's one of five that requires waiting periods for buying any firearm. The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which tracks gun laws nationwide, has given the state a B+ for its gun laws.

[jesmu84]

Shoot hoops-

That was incredible

[MuggsyB]

Lots of things going on here with regards to guns.

First, the simple response is that less access to guns both legal and illegal is the only way the U.S. will ever approach numbers similar to other developed countries. 

The longer discussion is the break down of types of gun violence. Suicides, urban gun violence, domestic violence, mass shootings.

Racial apathy is a repeated occuring theme in these situations.

Beginning with mass shootings, often times, the victims of mass shootings are White, and, therefore get more attention. And,. studies have shown that mental health is much more often the focus and discussion when the shooter is White.

By far the vast majority of gun deaths are suicides. This also is an example of the fact that most people with mental health issues are non-violent towards others. In fact, people with mental illness and/or mental health issues are much more likely to be victims of gun violence and violence, than be the cause of it towards others. I realize some, perhaps many people know this, but, far too many don't know this and/or don't care.

With urban gun violence, there needs to be a focused deterrence, instead of broad one size fits all policies. The old school policies of only focusing on law enforcement aspects are less effective,...the old guns and drugs on the table.

You have to target the people who commit and are more likely to commit gun violence, and, you have to target the people who are more likely to be victims of it. These are smaller percentages of people than the general population. Homicide clearance rates are massively higher for White victims than people of color victims. That is a combination of systemic racism, racial profiling which causes police distrust, which also causes police apathy to solve some of these crimes. Instead many civilians take matters into their own hands do to this mistrust and repeat cycles of violence.

Disingenous people will say police shoot more White people than Black people annually. What they don't add is that there are more White people. And the percentage of people that police shoot are much higher with Black people.

There is way to much empahsis on petty crimes, traffic violations, City ordinances, or even harrassment for no reason at all.

Social Services, jobs, education, healthcare, cognitive behavioral therapy, teen interrupters, recreational activities are complimentary to the focus on the small percentage who commit the crimes, and the small percentage who are victims of it. Much more focus and resource emphasis needs to be on these areas, but they aren't overly costly.

If you took a group of White kids from White Folks Bay and dropped them into a rough inner city neighborhood with few resources, no escape, murders all around, nobody cares etc...what would happen?

The U.S. doesn't necessarily have more crime than other developed nations. It does however have much more lethal crime because there are way more guns in the U.S. with easy access to them. Much of the proposed, often discussed legislation, doesn't go anywhere near far enough to address the problem.

In 1959, 60% of Americans wanted all hand guns banned (Gallup) except for police. By 1980 it was 38%, and more recently roughly 28%. What changed? NRA and Republicans. What is necessary is a shift to reverse that, and it can be done, instead of focusing so many years on small incremental change. One very small example of many is having a license to own a gun goes beyond universal background checks. It means less people will go to the trouble to own a gun and therefore less guns out there and less gun violence. There is a Johns Hopkins study on this which also references Massachusetts. Research also supports buyback programs. Banning assault weapons and handguns. Yes handguns. More than 70% of gun violence is committed with a handgun.

The United States gun problem is unique to the United States. The United States has a higher homicide rate than any other developed country because it has more guns than any other country. The United States makes up less than 5% of the World's population, but makes up 45% of private gun owners. You can look at the data upside down, backwards, forwards, side to side, up and down, but more gun ownership=more gun deaths.

You will hear mental illness when a mass shooting occurs even though the percentage of mass shooters with mental illness is very small. You will see an increase in gun buys after mass shooting because some will say they have to protect themselves.But high gun ownership rates don't reduce deaths, they increase deaths. Simulations show most people would not be able to protect themselves or others in active shooter situations.

There are other propoganda things such as don't take away my guns even though many are for this, or don't make me wear a mask, even though many are for this and benefit from this or government Affordable Care Act, even though many like and benefit from specific aspects of it etc...

A lot of good points but I'm curious about your "focused deterrence" of urban gun violence.  I haven't looked at recent stats but it used to be something like 75% of the gun murders in Chicago where from black men and the victims were over 70% black.  I have no doubt police profile but police killings, even if they are disproportionate statistically towards blacks, are infinitesimal compared to suicides and black on black shootings. 

So, the real issue is how can we make it far more difficult for gangs and people acquiring guns illegally?  And with the distrust  and various issues police departments have had over the years it seems like an extremely complex situation to me.  Because fewer police in the hardest hit areas seems like a terrible solution. 

[shoothoops]

I appreciate that positive feedback. But these are accessible things statistics, studies, data, analysis etc...for anyone.

It's a problem that can be greatly improved if different, specific, coordinated measures are taken.

[Galway Eagle]

A lot of good points but I'm curious about your "focused deterrence" of urban gun violence.  I haven't looked at recent stats but it used to be something like 75% of the gun murders in Chicago where from black men and the victims were over 70% black.  I have no doubt police profile but police killings, even if they are disproportionate statistically towards blacks, are infinitesimal compared to suicides and black on black shootings. 

So, the real issue is how can we make it far more difficult for gangs and people acquiring guns illegally?  And with the distrust  and various issues police departments have had over the years it seems like an extremely complex situation to me.  Because fewer police in the hardest hit areas seems like a terrible solution.

I know on at least one instance a gun used in multiple shootings was tracked back to bumble f*ck Wisconsin. Seems like banning private sales could easily end this. Also make the original gun owners and manufactures have mandatory insurance. If the manufacturers were able to be sued I'm quite confident they'd be all in favor of stricter measures. Additionally if the original owner was permanently liable for where the gun was given to they'd be much more careful about sales.


Here's the article I was referencing:

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/breaking/ct-met-chicago-police-paul-bauer-gun-20180228-story.html

[shoothoops]

A lot of good points but I'm curious about your "focused deterrence" of urban gun violence.  I haven't looked at recent stats but it used to be something like 75% of the gun murders in Chicago where from black men and the victims were over 70% black.  I have no doubt police profile but police killings, even if they are disproportionate statistically towards blacks, are infinitesimal compared to suicides and black on black shootings. 

So, the real issue is how can we make it far more difficult for gangs and people acquiring guns illegally?  And with the distrust  and various issues police departments have had over the years it seems like an extremely complex situation to me.  Because fewer police in the hardest hit areas seems like a terrible solution.

Now do Native Americans, Hispanic people etc...because police shoot those people at mich higher percentages too.

It takes a very coordinated effort from a great deal of people. It also takes targeting the small % of people doing the crimes and being the victims of the crimes. It takes all of the other things mentioned.

Now do suicides. Suicides is #1 cause of gun deaths. Now do domestic violence which is #3. Now do mass shootings which is #4.

It isn't just about the prevention of illegally obtained handguns. It's about not having handguns, as in any, none, zero, legal or illegal. This isn't a band aid problem with band-aid solution. And so forth.

[Hards Alumni]

I know on at least one instance a gun used in multiple shootings was tracked back to bumble f*ck Wisconsin. Seems like banning private sales could easily end this. Also make the original gun owners and manufactures have mandatory insurance. If the manufacturers were able to be sued I'm quite confident they'd be all in favor of stricter measures. Additionally if the original owner was permanently liable for where the gun was given to they'd be much more careful about sales.


Here's the article I was referencing:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.chicagotribune.com/news/breaking/ct-met-chicago-police-paul-bauer-gun-20180228-story.html%3foutputType=amp

FYI google.com/amp articles are bad for the internet.  Don't use em!

[Galway Eagle]

FYI google.com/amp articles are bad for the internet.  Don't use em!

I've been trying so hard not to. And I knew the moment I saw that posted you'd say something 😂

[MuggsyB]

Now do Native Americans, Hispanic people etc...because police shoot those people at mich higher percentages too.

It takes a very coordinated effort from a great deal of people. It also takes targeting the small % of people doing the crimes and being the victims of the crimes. It takes all of the other things mentioned.

Now do suicides. Suicides is #1 cause of gun deaths. Now do domestic violence which is #3. Now do mass shootings which is #4.

It isn't just about the prevention of illegally obtained handguns. It's about not having handguns, as in any, none, zero, legal or illegal. This isn't a band aid problem with band-aid solution. And so forth.

This sounds like a blanket gun ban which simply isn't plausible as I'm sure you would admit.  However, I think it's a really important conversation because neither political side ever brings this up as a solution.  We have 2nd Amendment issues as well as cultural issues that would make this impossible as far as I can tell so are you advocating amending the Constitution? 

Because the die hard 2nd amendment advocates will point to the actual purpose of the law and historically I think  it's a convincing argument.  Now, certainly there are many that think it's insane to think governments like the USA could go tyrannical and that no one who owns a gun is thinking about this possibility.  I just think it's a total non-starter to think a gun ban is remotely possible in this country.  Unfortunately, we can't all be like Iceland. 

[shoothoops]

This sounds like a blanket gun ban which simply isn't plausible as I'm sure you would admit.  However, I think it's a really important conversation because neither political side ever brings this up as a solution.  We have 2nd Amendment issues as well as cultural issues that would make this impossible as far as I can tell so are you advocating amending the Constitution? 

Because the die hard 2nd amendment advocates will point to the actual purpose of the law and historically I think  it's a convincing argument.  Now, certainly there are many that think it's insane to think governments like the USA could go tyrannical and that no one who owns a gun is thinking about this possibility.  I just think it's a total non-starter to think a gun ban is remotely possible in this country.  Unfortunately, we can't all be like Iceland. 

Big problems require big solutions.

But even some of the things I mentioned would improve the situation substantially.

Right now we see partisan discussion whether or not to ban assault rifles and have universal background checks. We can’t have even accomplish this, which is just a small aspect of the problem and solution. There’s a lot more to do than just that.

[Pakuni]

Because the die hard 2nd amendment advocates will point to the actual purpose of the law and historically I think  it's a convincing argument.  Now, certainly there are many that think it's insane to think governments like the USA could go tyrannical and that no one who owns a gun is thinking about this possibility.  I just think it's a total non-starter to think a gun ban is remotely possible in this country.  Unfortunately, we can't all be like Iceland. 

I don't think anyone is advocating for a total gun ban.

That said, what's even more insane than thinking the US can't "go tyrannical" is thinking that a bunch of Jethroes and their AR-15s is going to defeat an Army that has drones, cruise missiles and tanks.
There may have been a time when am armed citizenry served as a check on government tyranny, but that time is long past.

[Jockey]

I, for one, don’t want to live in a police state where we aren’t even able to shoot lots of people in just a few seconds time.

[JWags85]

The taxing/increased cost of ammo as a deterrent is interesting.  But just empirically, a good friend of mine has a handgun he has solely for range shooting (he lives in a condo complex in Mequon, he's not worried about easy access for self defense) and his brother has the same as well as a large rifle.  He really likes going to the range to relax and let off steam, but he says he goes so infrequently now because ammunition has become exponentially more expensive in the last 18-24 months.  Anyone else hear similarly?

Im fairly anti-gun, selfishly as I don't hunt or overly subscribe to the self-defense notion.  That being said, Ive always been intrigued by the differences in the historical fundamental mentality on guns in the US against other developed nations.  Cause I think the psychology of it is a bit trickier than people want to admit.  Viewing European nations, their foundings, by and large, were just the ongoing transformation and developments of city states, kingdoms, etc...  Revolutions were either removing kings or dictators.  France or the UK or Sweden didnt have a citizens rising up with guns to expel a foreign government and gain their freedom.  So while I think its antiquated and dumb, the "right to bear arms" as some defense against tyranny, foreign or domestic, is just so much more deeply baked into the American psyche than elsewhere.  I have a rep and good friend in Belgium, another country with incredible strict gun laws, he's very amusing in perspective when it comes to American things.  His take was roughly "yeah, gun culture isn't really a thing here, we're too close together, you're not off in the country shooting at things.  But Americans, I get it, we Belgians never had to band together to get the f***ing Brits off our backs.  Its a point of pride.  That sort of identity is often hard to shake, takes generations, and its not always a bad thing even if the byproduct can be."

Look at the UK gun laws.  Going back hundreds of years, it was just a gradual response by the Crown and then the government to perceived threats.  Gradually, before the age of modern weaponry.

The NRA is an insidious earworm in terms of gun culture, no doubt, but there is a very different base they were building off of and tapping into as opposed to "other developed countries".