Keep voting for those who reject common sense gun legislation.
Minority rules.

I see some very good responses to this question, which in my opinion is not a political issue but a social issue. But the NRA and its adherents turned it into a political one.

Face it, folks, we were born in violence and we are dying in violence. We had a bloody Civil War during which half a million combatants were killed -- more than all the rest of our wars put together. And it seems we are moving in that direction now unless some sanity returns to our leaders and the fighting stops.

People need to realize that our leaders set an example that subconsciously affects the people they serve and when you have leaders that are mentally ill, you get what we have now.

If guns were more tightly controlled EVERYWHERE then they couldnt get them in chicago as easily as driving a few miles away as they do now. What other civilized country has the shooting that we have. NONE by a long shot. We need more more more gun control

21.5 Million concealed carry permits. These are the guns which are legally carried outside the home. 45 states have open carry, however it is rare to see folks carrying openly in public.
Maybe if more people carried there would be fewer criminals willing to attempt public gun crimes...
My personal belief is we all have a personal responsibility for our own safety.

With 400 million people we will always have shootings. We can trade freedoms for safety. I would think that is something many would find unacceptable. In NYC we had stop and frisk (done away when DeBlasio was mayor). It was extremely effective in reducing shootings. It was also far from what I expect or want in a free country. Taking place in high crime areas such as Washington Heights, the great majority of people stopped were minorities who lived there. Innocent people, a Dominican Dad working the late shift to support his family would be hassled and frisked because he was on the street at night returning from his job. Same situation as many call for now, restrict the rights of law abiding citizen gun holders in the name of reducing crime. Actions like stop and frisk, gun bans, will reduce crimes but at what cost. Both are unacceptable.
To control the shootings and decrease crime, elect/appoint DAs who will prosecute crime. Get a tighter control on immigration. Realize that diversity on its own is not automatically a positive. Bringing in people from diverse backgrounds is great, but if they do not melt into one people it is not. Countries with a national character, homogenous countries like Japan have lower crime. Punishing law abiding people in the name of increased safety is not something I am willing to accept.

Arm yourself
 

Instead of disarming everyone in the name of public safety, why not arm more of them and quickly reduce the body count perhaps to one, the bad guy. You anti-gun people only dream of a utopia with rainbows and unicorns. Wake up, defend yourself, your family and loved ones. Most drones are over in 10 minutes or less, how often can first responders get there in 10 minutes. Bad guys have always been here and they will always be among us. Get them first!

So what you are saying is that your freedom to carry a gun is more important than the lives of other people because that's all gun control laws do, restrict your rights on a carrying a gun.

In a civilized society with responsible law enforcement, we don't need to carry a gun for protection. Unfortunately, it's looking like we are becoming less and less civil. Why are you blaming immigrants, who our nation has caused to emigrate because of our foreign policy? Most of them are not criminal but very poor people looking for a second chance.

Stop listening to mentally-ill, power hungry demagogues who currently occupy the highest level positions in our government.

Assault weapons were banned in the USA to citizens in 1934.
Clinton then tried to ban weapons that had the appearance of an assault weapon.
Any automatic weapon not registered as per the 1934 law can not be owned. If you find a machine gun from 1934 in your great great grandfathers attic, and it was not registered in 1934 it must be destroyed or made inoperable. If it was registered you can "try" and jump through the hoops to make it ok for you to own it (Almost Impossible).

Just what is that common sense gun legislation that would have made a difference in the last three shootings?

Minority rules?? What gives you that idea; does it come from the "random" polling conducted by to prove a point?

Stop listening to mentally-ill, power hungry demagogues who currently occupy the highest level positions in our government.[/QUOTE]


I agree with your sentiment above, but you should still keep respect for the office of the President.

I guess you and I have a different opinion on the US. As someone who actually emigrated from another country here, I see the US as the most welcoming country that shines like a beacon to the rest of the world. You seem to have a different view.

Who is this "WE"?

I've never murdered anyone. Speak for yourself.

But yes, that is Modern America. Look at all the people in foreign countries (Vietnam, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, the ukraine, etc) that the US government has murdered or has assisted in murder (Palestine, Yemen...)

USA # 1 in something.

lol, nice. How many got that?

5 percent of the population commit 50 percent of all murders in the USA.

(You know who they are)

Really? Then how about Brazil? Pretty bad "social conditions" there, wouldn't you say? But when Bolsonaro ended Brazil's gun ban, murders dropped TWENTY-FIVE PERCENT! Turns out, murderers aren't so murderous when their victims are armed!

Houston and Dallas/Ft Worth are each nearly the same size as Chicago, with the same inner-city populations, and even run by left-wing politicians. But no gun bans. And they each suffer less than a quarter of the gun crime as "gun free" Chicago.

How many examples do you need? How many times must we run the same stupid experiment before we admit that theory doesn't equal facts?

Hey, I have an idea! Instead of banning guns, why don't we go back to the good old days, when we used to ban criminals and lunatics?

So, you think TOTV going change anything?

Here we are in a thread full of the usual arguments and blaming, but may I filter it down……………

How can families not notice they are housing a sullen, depressed, angry, young, undirected, white male who finds his only “friends” on the internet where they all feed on each other? Now the internet even has a special place for incels where they can fill up on hate for females and also hate for males who have romantic relationships.

How did parents allow their children to turn into monsters?

Do we need public service announcements listing the signs?

Do we need public service announcements about not allowing your kid to hole up in his room with a computer — just because it is easier — only to learn too late that a monster has been growing all along?

Pogo was right.

Boomer

Maybe if you and yours are poor little rich boys with big bad toys who don’t want to play by the rules. Don’t count me among your “we.”

In USA you are free to move to those wonderful countries.

No, you filter on has one white element.

How about banning all caps?

Here is what a New Zealander friend thought about latest:

Right now in America it is the 4th of July, a day of independence and celebration. Unfortunately due to their 2nd amendment, 6 more people have died in the 358th shooting this year to date, that's nearly 2 shootings a day.😪
Meanwhile in New Zealand we are concerned with lack of gender equality in "Hairy McCleary from Donaldsons Dairy" WTF?????

Topspinmo, no need to critique my filtering. I am talking only about the stats applying to mass shootings.

Boomer

Who is this "WE"?

I've never murdered anyone. Speak for yourself.

But yes, that is Modern America. Look at all the people in foreign countries (Vietnam, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, the ukraine, etc) that the US government has murdered or has assisted in murder (Palestine, Yemen...)

USA # 1 in something.

I never said those were wonderful countries. Where did you get that?

I said the US government (with support of most of the citizens- looking at you NeoCons), over the years, has murdered hundereds of thousands of civilians in other countries.

Go back a little farther and ask what about children morals in the home/schools.
No respect for people's lives born and raised by parents with the same problem.

Short story:
Reading some years back a survey was performed in the worst prison that housed the worst criminals.
One thing that was discovered was, NONE OF THOSE VILILIENT PRISONERS HAD PETS TO CARE FOR AS CHILDREN.
Meaning, none had any respect for animals or people.
End of story.

Sorry, but the AR-15 is NOT an assault weapon. Assault weapons are select-fire, semi-auto and full auto. An AR-15 is a semi-auto, and only looks like the military version. Besides, semi-automatic rifles were invented for civilian (hunting) use years before the military decided to go semi-auto. Also, hunting, sport shooting, and target shooting is done on a daily basis with semi-automatic weapons. It would help if you got your facts together before issuing an emotional and illogical statement. But, I do understand where you are coming from.

All facts, thanks.

We know. What are the solutions?

Correlation does not equal causation. I assume you are not saying we could solve all the mass shootings by simply giving everyone a pet.

I agree with your statement, but not everyone is gun smart, I am sure the poster was simply using the current popular term (assault weapon) to refer to the Assault styled weapon commonly called the AR_15, which is the weapon of choice for mass shootings. That does not take away from your points, but we could all use a little more effort to reason what people are trying to say instead of getting all bent over they saying it wrong.

I was a IT consultant most of my career and I would not have had many clients if I constantly corrected their incorrect usages of IT terminology, instead I tried to understand what they meant, so we could address the problem they have.

Arguing over terms while mass shooting occur about every 2 days in this country is not really productive and tends to make people feel confrontational.

Yep, that's Chicago for you and where is the idiot Lightfoot at? Oh that's right, she has her own security so she doesn't care who gets murdered. Crazy!

Never heard of a sanitary seeker. What are they, folks who need a restroom ASAP?

Wyoming's population as of the 2020 census was 576,851. Over the years I have met several people from Wyoming. Without exception they were among the friendliest people I ever knew.

This is pretty weak. It offers NO solutions, and just throws out dog whistles.

If it is Lightfoot's fault, what happened in the other 327 mass shootings this year?

Gun violence and mass shootings are two different animals. And just to clarify, 8 of the top 10 states for murder rate by guns are red states. The top 3 are all red states. Notice I said RATE not numbers of shootings when you have a city like Chicago that has more residents than 6.7 million than states like Wyoming (500K) it is not much of a surprise that Chicago has more deaths by gun fire. Illinois has 14/100,000 while Wyoming (25.9/100,000), Alabama (23/100,000), Missouri (23.9/100,000) - so, I just have to ask what do all those blue states have in common as opposed to those red states? (besides color) they have stronger gun control laws in Blue states.

Crime did drop during stop and frisk, but not because of stop and frisk. It was demographics. There were far fewer males age 18-25 in the city during that time period. And why was that? Roe v Wade had been decided about 20 years earlier. Yup, forced birth increases crime, pro-choice reduces crime. Makes sense when you think about it.

The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime over the Last Two Decades - Journal Article - Stanford Law School.

Do you need a military weapon designed to kill and rip apart anything it hits?
Do you need a 30 + round clip?
Do you need a gun that can fire 30 rounds in 15 seconds?
Do you have a problem waiting for a week to get a gun while a person is checked out for a mental and and or criminal record.
Do you think it's ok for people to have guns more powerful than the police?

A overwhelming number of people want these changes EVEN GUN OWNERS

Wake up

I can see needing a semi-automatic for the "sport" of hunting. Make sure the animal has no chance.

The Supreme Court say's its our Constitutional right, if you don't agree you can move.

What politicians?
 

Do you want to tell me what politicians coming from Chicago to Milwaukee your referring to??




"I lived in Wisconsin most of my life and Chicago was concerned a cesspool to us.
Even the politicians in Milwaukee all came out of Chicago, ran for office, retired then crawled back to Chitown."

So you're not a hunter. Many bird hunters use semi-automatics in order to get more than one shot at a group of birds flying away.

The police think they got the shooter. Given a fair trial and found guilty. I think he should be hung. Anyone who commits horrendous crimes like this should dangle from the end of a rope.