[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by MrFlorida

When a drunk driver kills , do you want to ban cars ?

No but if the majority of people who killed a few dozen people were driving exclusively red Chevy Trailblazers, the insurance companies would probably raise their rates on red Chevy Trailblazers, and the police would be more watchful for people driving red Chevy Trailblazers, and the manufacturer would probably be getting pressure from various organizations (including, possibly, the government) to make it more difficult to kill a few dozen people by a single driver.

Instead - some people will suggest we just give more red Chevy Trailblazers to more people, because that'll solve the problem.

Again - that's just SO logical.

/sarcasm

[DAVES]

Originally Posted by Byte1

The problem is that when someone responds with an answer, if certain folks do not like the solution, it is immediately discounted as "that will never work."
Some folks say that they answer is guns in the hands of the good guys. I agree. I also believe that stricter penalties is a good deterrent. Unfortunately, then you have to consider that many "mass murderers" are merely performing a suicide by COP and no deterrent will work. Before anyone says that guns carried by good guys does not work, how about looking up the stats on how many lives have been saved every year by someone in possession of a gun. I believe it averages about a million per year are saved by a "good guy" with a gun.
When someone tell me that guns should be limited so they cannot be used to kill so many people in such a short time, I refer them to the fact that a revolver generally holds six rounds (bullets) and fires every time you pull the trigger until empty. A speed loader gives one the ability to reload in seconds. So, then you have someone like a certain person in D.C. that says a shot gun is all that is needed and that a warning shot in the air will solve the problem. Shot guns are also manufactured in the semi-automatic version, the pump version and the breech loaded style.
Now, consider home defense. If you home is being broken into by more than one perp. don't you want to even the odds of survival by having the ability to fire without reloading as much as you would if restricted by a six shot revolver or a shot gun? If the bad guys only had revolvers and were numbered two or more, they they would have twice the ability as you would, even if they were restricted by carrying only a revolver. Capacity of the gun the "good guy" is limited to, is not the answer either.
The fact really is that there is a very low number of folks killed by guns in America compared to the number of folks saved by guns, considering the amount of guns owned in the U.S. If not killed by guns, then by knives, cars, doctors, cancer, heart disease, etc. The only way to lower the killings is to scare the perpetrators into submission. Take away one instrument of murder and you only cause the person to find another. Blah, blah, blah, etc.

So many of these posts are written by people who have a view. Freedom of speech I do think it is an important right. It is actually the first amendment, considered the most important.
No where, does it say only those who agree with me can speak. Nor does it say the person speaking needs to know what they are saying is correct.

A revolver, there are revolvers that hold 7 and 9 shots. There are revolvers where you can change the cylinder. Today a revolver costs roughly twice what a semi automatic pistol does.

Why all the posts by both sides? Where we are and my view. Our country, our people, the same people who vote. There is no desire for a compromise. The anti gun people will not stop. The goal for them is NO GUNS. Perhaps interesting. England has greatly restricted guns. They have and sell really powerful air rifles and there are states where a gun is legal but a cross bow is not.

We expect, no demand perfect solutions-THERE ARE NONE. Our supreme court ruled Roe vs Wade is not good law and abortion would be a state issue. OK States rights vs central government. Same court ruled that NY gun laws are unconstitutional-central government vs states rights. This battle was the issue in the civil war. The TRUE ISSUE it is perhaps unsolvable.

[Number 10 GI]

Originally Posted by MartinSE

You are conflating all murders with mass shootings. Yes, violence will happen, but I feel safe saying zero out of the 300 mass shootings this year have been committed by Bludgeons.

Why are you deflecting from the fact that violence is the problem, not the tool used to commit the violence? It is VILOENCE that is the cause!

The weapon of choice is AR-15. PERIOD. That is not debatable.

Hand guns are the weapon of choice in mass murders by a pretty good margin.

• Guns used in mass shootings U.S. 2021 | Statista


That said, I will agree with you that melting down every AR-15 in the country/world would not stop mass shootings, they would simply switch to another weapon.

I disagree with your comment that people don't want to look at morals and social media et al. I have read numerous reports on those issues. And for the most part they show that those "symptoms" that you list are represent in almost every country in the world. And the other countries do not have 300 mass shootings this year. So, the implication is they are NOT the cause.

You don't consider murder a moral problem? We have an extremely high rate of fatherless children which has been shown to be a significant contributor to juvenile crime. As this chart shows the U.S. has one of the highest rates of fatherless families with the UK having the higest rate and they have been having a large juvenile crime problem.

https://spacedoutscientist.com/2017/07/18/single-parents-worldwide-statistics-and-trends/

I personally think the cause is a feeling of hopelessness by most poor and middle class Americans. I don't think I recall a rich person EVER committing a mass shooting in this country. They are typically by people with mental health issues (one could argue that to shoot 6 strangers for not apparent reason is a form of mental illness), or people that want to strike back at others that have bullied them, or men that feel they lives out of control and a significant number are coming from an abusive relationship where they abused their wives who finally left them and got restraining orders - again, a form of feeling like their life is out of control.

So, my question is why is it that so many feel so hopeless in the richest country in the world?

My answer is predatory capitalism, BIG corporations (not small ones) that control our lives, our government and our economy and leave broken people in their wake. That is what I think it is root cause.

][B]You don't think there is "predatory capitalism" in other countries of the world? You want an example, China!
[/B

Have you seen any bills introduced by our elected officials that put restriction on social media to screen the postings of people on the sites? I haven't! If a person posts something on one of the major social media sites that goes against their political/social/economic beliefs it is deleted and the original poster is banned in many cases. Why aren't they deleting and banning violent posts by some of these mass killers? Seems like they only find them when one commits an atrocity.

There have been numerous reports of teens, mainly girls, committing suicide because of bullying on social medial sites. Has anything been done by the owners of these media websites to prevent this type of shaming and bullying? Is that the sound of crickets I hear?

[DAVES]

Originally Posted by MartinSE

Well, the problem is the 2nd amendment. There is no way our divide government can make any changes to clarify it. The is debate over the meaning, and the current SCOTUS is not about to take a point of view that favors any controls.

This thread is simply going to circle the same old arguments, and once again nothing will change.

OF COURSE. people have a point of view and then will try to justify it by any means necessary.
We are not even aware of what we are being fed. The very popular movie Shidler's List by Spielberg was a great hit. Shidler was cast a a rich playboy hoodwinked by his Jewish accountant. Spielberg is anti right to bear arms.
Spielberg did a great job of spinning the TRUTH to fit his antigun BIAS. The TRUTH the REALITY. Hitler was able to do his horrors because the Jews were unarmed. Not just did they not have guns they did not know how to use them.

Why would the Jews that survived because of Shidler revere him if the move was true in suggesting that he took advantage of essentially free labor? The historical truth is that Shidler, risked his own life to train his labors to use guns.

People, want to DICTATE to others what they can do. I find it interesting. Abortion, the right to CHOOSE. Those on the left support it. Those on the right want to DICTATE to others what they can do. Right to bear arms, supported by those on the right some on the left want to DICTATE to others what they can do.

Laws need to be enforced. Endless posts about people and golf cart speed limits. Posters-the LAW does not apply to me. Mass shootings. It is illegal to take a gun onto school grounds. So obvious it is stupid. It is illegal to shoot innocent students and teachers.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by MartinSE

You are conflating all murders with mass shootings. Yes, violence will happen, but I feel safe saying zero out of the 300 mass shootings this year have been committed by Bludgeons.

The weapon of choice is AR-15. PERIOD. That is not debatable.

Actually, it is QUITE debatable...

The reason you think there have been 300+ mass shootings this year is because they changed the criteria for mass shootings. Same with school shootings. The vast majority were gang related, and happened near or on school property when school was not in session...

Also, the weapon of choice for the VAST MAJORITY of those 300 "mass shootings" were handguns, not an AR-15...

[Reiver]

Originally Posted by Wyseguy

Automatic weapons have been illegal for almost 100 Years now.

That is 100% false. You absolutely can own a fully automatic weapon and it isn’t all that difficult.

The requirements for owning a machine gun, or an automatic weapon, in the United States:

Must not be classified as a “prohibited person.”
Be at least 21 years of age to purchase a machine gun from the current owner.
Be a legal resident of the United States.
Be legally eligible to purchase a firearm.
Pass a BATFE background check with a typical process time of 8 to 10 months.
Pay a one-time $200 transfer tax. (You’ll need a stamp for each machine gun.)

And now you're good to go.

[Luggage]

There are many reasons our forefathers decided on the Bill of Rights and the fact that we are allowed guns in America. Probably the biggest one you can understand is what's happening in Ukraine right now. However I will not go over all the other reasons as many commentators have already said the bulk of the reasoning. I will point out however that America has the largest percentage of its population in jail and we still have crimes involving guns. I will also point out that while these mass shootings are terrible, we have other statistics that are even worse that we should be concerned about like over 30,000 people killed by cars every year, 90,000 people killed by alcohol every year. I do want to point out that suicides by gun are over half the gun deaths. Perhaps in 10 or 20 years technology will solve all of our problems by having an integrated circuit in the chip in a gun can tell whether the person holding it is nuts or not. But for now that's science fiction. I am always concerned when you want to have government people decide what I can do and what I cannot do based on my mental condition and social media because after all you can't really watch the watchers and it becomes pretty much non-factual

[jonathanb]

Problem is not guns. The problem is young men in this country are becoming increasingly mentally unstable. To many psychotropic drugs being handed out to young people with many long term psychological side effects that make drug companies like Pfizer way to
Much money. Our country walking away from God and biblical values along with Societal changes giving people feelings of worthlessness and making them angry along with these drugs is the problem. Law abiding citizens do not commit mass shootings no matter what type or how many guns they have. Guns are basically illegal in Chicago and look at what happens there daily. Taking guns away is a power grab of politicians to give Americans no right to protect ourselves and families from criminals and a corrupt government.

[gettingby]

Originally Posted by Wyseguy

Automatic weapons have been illegal for almost 100 Years now.

Not true, got a buddy that owns 5 of them. The background checks and requirements to get the paperwork needed is expensive and time consuming but you can get one.

[Dahabs]

Originally Posted by MrFlorida

When a drunk driver kills , do you want to ban cars ?

Cute.

[gettingby]

Originally Posted by tsmall22204

Vote blue to get the controls you seek

Horrible idea. Blue has been in charge for the last 18 months and all we have now is a nation wide crap show.

[Blackbird45]

Look to ignore there is a problem, is the problem. The left wants to control firearms and the right wants to blame the mentally ill. Both are valid positions. But let's face it, controlling firearm is easier than trying to figure out who is mentally ill.

A smart firearms company should be able to sit down at their drawing board with hunters and come up with the best gun ever made that will not destroy their target. They should also be able to come up with the best home weapon for home self-defense. Remember it's self-defense, not let me kill someone. There's money to be made if these companies have the right mind set.

[Andyb]

Originally Posted by charlie1

I used to be a hunter and really would not want anyone to stop me from having my hunting guns. I could even see the potential reason for personal handguns for self defense. BUT I do feel that there needs to be much more control on automatic guns and long range rifles. Why can't our politician see that there are different guns for different purposes and band, or at least strongly control, any weapon that could be used for mass murders! Gun violence has gotten OUT OF CONTROL!

Well, you are completely wrong, guns don’t kill people, people kill people. If a make a spelling error, did I make the mistake or did the pencil make the mistake? If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. We need to enforce the laws already on the books. Why is it the strictest gun laws states have the most gun violence. We have a societal and mental health crisis not a gun problem. If we lose our 2nd amendment we lose America, it’s about our only freedom we got left. Oh, I don’t own any guns, either.

[skarra]

Originally Posted by Blackbird45

Look to ignore there is a problem, is the problem. The left wants to control firearms and the right wants to blame the mentally ill. Both are valid positions. But let's face it, controlling firearm is easier than trying to figure out who is mentally ill.

A smart firearms company should be able to sit down at their drawing board with hunters and come up with the best gun ever made that will not destroy their target. They should also be able to come up with the best home weapon for home self-defense. Remember it's self-defense, not let me kill someone. There's money to be made if these companies have the right mind set.

An interesting idea, but waiting for that to happen could take a long time.

We need to look at the data. There are many countries with different approaches, and even within the US many states and towns. The police deal with this problem a lot - how do they feel about everyone being armed with a gun and open carry? How do the citizens feel about it?

Personally I don’t feel safe to see everyone I encounter in the street with a gun by their side - too many crazies out there with hair triggers. But locked away in a safe at home - that seems to meet most people’s requirement for safety and ability to bear arms.

An AR-15 shouldn’t be available to 18 year olds period. That should be an easy fix in our laws.

[srswans]

Originally Posted by charlie1

I used to be a hunter and really would not want anyone to stop me from having my hunting guns. I could even see the potential reason for personal handguns for self defense. BUT I do feel that there needs to be much more control on automatic guns and long range rifles. Why can't our politician see that there are different guns for different purposes and band, or at least strongly control, any weapon that could be used for mass murders! Gun violence has gotten OUT OF CONTROL!

We need a refresher on the Second Amendment. It’s main purpose, IIRC, was to keep the government in check. From this perspective, it is not a mystery why the left wants to get rid of guns. That’s the last thing we need.