[Sarah_W]

With the 4th of July, Uvalde, and the Greenwood Mall mass killings many people want to discuss this societal problem and find solutions to not only protect our children, but the public as a whole.

I know this thread will get locked if it becomes political so please do your very best to keep politics out of it.


The first issue in identifying a solution is understanding the problem. It begins with a failure of uniform definition. The FBI defines a mass murder event as 3 or more people killed. The media is inconsistent with their definition.

Mass shootings are the catalyst for people who wish to ban AR style rifles, despite the fact that 77% of mass shootings don't involve AR style rifles.

In my opinion a logical definition of a mass shooting should be:

1. 1 or more individuals plan to kill many strangers and 3 or more people are killed
2. Family quarrels and murder-suicides are not included
3. Gang violence is not included

[RVJim]

Originally Posted by Sarah_W

With the 4th of July, Uvalde, and the Greenwood Mall mass killings many people want to discuss this societal problem and find solutions to not only protect our children, but the public as a whole.

I know this thread will get locked if it becomes political so please do your very best to keep politics out of it.


The first issue in identifying a solution is understanding the problem. It begins with a failure of uniform definition. The FBI defines a mass murder event as 3 or more people killed. The media is inconsistent with their definition.

Mass shootings are the catalyst for people who wish to ban AR style rifles, despite the fact that 77% of mass shootings don't involve AR style rifles.

In my opinion a logical definition of a mass shooting should be:

1. 1 or more individuals plan to kill many strangers and 3 or more people are killed
2. Family quarrels and murder-suicides are not included
3. Gang violence is not included

Given your profile picture we know where your bias is at. No thanks not interested in engaging with an obviously biased original poster with some sort of agenda.

[Kenswing]

Originally Posted by RVJim

Given your profile picture we know where your bias is at. No thanks not interested in engaging with an obviously biased original poster with some sort of agenda.

Every thread in this forum is started by someone with an obvious bias. lol

[Caymus]

Originally Posted by Kenswing

Every thread in this forum is started by someone with an obvious bias. lol

Probably not the ones about favorite movies

[Keefelane66]

Reinstate the assault weapons ban it was a reasonable law until Bush allowed it to sunset now it’s out of control!

[Sarah_W]

Originally Posted by RVJim

Given your profile picture we know where your bias is at. No thanks not interested in engaging with an obviously biased original poster with some sort of agenda.

Actually, no agenda. I started the thread for one of our members who doesn't know how to start a thread but has strong opinions on the topic. I also promised to contribute to the conversation.

My bias is rooted in my knowledge of the Constitution, our Bill of Rights, and of firearms based my experience as an Instructor, competitive shooter and hunter.

What is your bias based on?

[Sarah_W]

Originally Posted by Keefelane66

Reinstate the assault weapons ban it was a reasonable law until Bush allowed it to sunset now it’s out of control!

What is an assault weapon?

[Blueblaze]

100% of mass murder events are perpetrated by lunatics.

We've had semi-automatic weapons for 150 years. But we didn't start having regular mass murder events until 50 years ago, when we emptied the asylums.

400 million firearms

10,000 lunatics

You don't need an "agenda" to see the solution here. It would simply be a lot easier to lock up the lunatics than the firearms -- particularly since the lunatics invariably announce their intentions beforehand on social media!

[RVJim]

Originally Posted by Sarah_W

Actually, no agenda. I started the thread for one of our members who doesn't know how to start a thread but has strong opinions on the topic. I also promised to contribute to the conversation.

My bias is rooted in my knowledge of the Constitution, our Bill of Rights, an of firearms based my experience as an Instructor, competitive shooter and hunter.

What is your bias based on?

yeah, everyone on the internet has “done their research” at the University of Google School of Law and are constitutional scholars and bill of rights subject matter experts. Maybe you are different, maybe you studied constitutional law under Professor Tribe or someone of his caliber but I doubt it. Maybe you wrote your PhD dissertation on the bill of rights, but I doubt it. Self appointed and self certified arm chair experts are everywhere on the internet.

I too am an NRA life member and certified firearm safety instructor as I have mentioned in other posts. The difference is that I don’t need to use pictures of myself with firearms for my profile picture. Responsible gun owners don’t need to prove they own or use firearms. Walk softly and carry a big stick unless you need a picture of you and a firearm to boost your ego.

[Get real]

outlaw lunatics...problem solved. oh yeah term limits for the dopes that can't get a real job.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by Sarah_W

With the 4th of July, Uvalde, and the Greenwood Mall mass killings many people want to discuss this societal problem and find solutions to not only protect our children, but the public as a whole.

I know this thread will get locked if it becomes political so please do your very best to keep politics out of it.


The first issue in identifying a solution is understanding the problem. It begins with a failure of uniform definition. The FBI defines a mass murder event as 3 or more people killed. The media is inconsistent with their definition.

And that is the problem right there. That YOU have decided that the problem is a failure of uniform definition of the term "mass murder."

Here's the solution to that problem: stop insisting that's the problem. That's not the problem. The definition of "mass murder" doesn't matter a darned bit.

What matters is that people who shouldn't have had firearms, had them, and used them to kill people who they didn't have the right to kill.

That's the "problem."

[Sarah_W]

Originally Posted by RVJim

yeah, everyone on the internet has “done their research” at the University of Google School of Law and are constitutional scholars and bill of rights subject matter experts. Maybe you are different, maybe you studied constitutional law under Professor Tribe or someone of his caliber but I doubt it. Maybe you wrote your PhD dissertation on the bill of rights, but I doubt it. Self appointed and self certified arm chair experts are everywhere on the internet.

I too am an NRA life member and certified firearm safety instructor as I have mentioned in other posts. The difference is that I don’t need to use pictures of myself with firearms for my profile picture. Responsible gun owners don’t need to prove they own or use firearms. Walk softly and carry a big stick unless you need a picture of you and a firearm to boost your ego.

I'm trying to determine what your point is exactly. At no time have I said that I am an expert or scholar on the Constitution. I did say my bias is based on my knowledge of the Constitution. My knowledge is based on my study of the Constitution, speaking in public on the topic, my personal library containing about 70 books related to the Constitution, including a 1785 copy of Samuel Johnson's dictionary, the same dictionary our Founding Fathers used. Of course, anything I say on the Constitution is easily verified. Lastly, my study of law was at University of California Santa Barbara (UCSB) and I don't recall any of my professor's names.

My image shouldn't intimidate you at all. That just comes across kinda snarky.

I'm also a member of the NRA, CRPA, USCCA, USPSA, and SCSA. I'm an NRA Certified Pistol Instructor, Certified Range Safety Officer, Certified Range Development and Operations, Certified to teach Refuse To Be A Victim. I'm the founder of the US Women's Shooting Academy and am a competition shooter in Steel Challenge, Action Pistol, and Precision Rifle Series.

[Sarah_W]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

And that is the problem right there. That YOU have decided that the problem is a failure of uniform definition of the term "mass murder."

Here's the solution to that problem: stop insisting that's the problem. That's not the problem. The definition of "mass murder" doesn't matter a darned bit.

What matters is that people who shouldn't have had firearms, had them, and used them to kill people who they didn't have the right to kill.

That's the "problem."

Of course it matters. Everyone is up in arms (forgive the pun) claiming that banning AR's will solve the problem when 77% of mass shootings are done by handguns, not AR's. How many mass murder events have happened so far in 2022? Everyone has a different answer to that. Why?

Every problem can be solved with a Cause and Effects Analysis (Ishikawa) combined with Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA). Or, as we do in criminal law, we should look at Means, Motive and Opportunity. I see nobody even attempting to solve the problem.

[Trayderjoe]

I agree that a consistent definition of mass murder events needs to be set, and further that gang violence, although abhorrent, should not be included. This has nothing to do with the value of lives lost, but rather evidence shows that non gang related mass shootings are more widely reported by the media and for longer periods of time.Consider too that people on this board seem to invest more of their time posting on these sensationalized murders versus the weekly killings in Chicago, or the loss of 380 people per day from excessive alcohol per the CDC (link), or “necking it down” to the 32 alcohol related drunk driving deaths per day reported by the NHTSA (link)

Another thing that needs to be done is to define mental illness. Does it include people with little to no socialization skills? Does it include pure evil? How are these types of people treated or managed? Are we self aware enough to recognize that “Nintendo babysitters” may be a contributory cause to lack of socialization skills?

Why is it that we continue to hear after a tragic event that these mass shooters left social media posts, or told people about intended violence, prior to the shootings? What can be done to facilitate reporting?

It has been suggested that we take away “the prize” of attention that may be driving copycat killers. Why is this so hard to do?

The focus needs to be on identifying the underlying causes in OUR society that trigger these shooters and then try to fix those causes. The waters get muddied by those who would compare countries since no country operates in a vacuum and such comparisons ignore the differences in cultures and their effects on societal pressures.

Lastly, we need to go back to enforcing the law and holding people accountable for their actions. You choose to do the crime, then be prepared to do the time.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Okay so let's establish that "Mass Shooting" is no fewer than 5 victims, at least one of them must be a stranger to the others, none of them should be undocumented immigrants, and none of them should be pregnant females.

That's still one person who shouldn't have had a firearm, having one, and using it to kill people. And THAT one person is the only "problem" that needs to be solved.