![]() |
Quote:
|
Quote:
The next mass shooting was in 1975, then 1982. 2009 is when things really started to get bad. ETA: I was referencing an article that listed mass shootings of 10 or more people. |
A huge part of the problem is an elephant in the room that gets threads shut down. So there's really no point in discussing it at all, because you can't discuss the root of the CURRENT situation.
I will state though - it isn't mental illness. Only 22% of all mass shootings involved a shooter who was declared mentally ill. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Thanks for the correction, I was only 16 at the time, so I was not paying much attention. |
Quote:
|
Fixing mental illness issues doesn't solve a darned thing. The Sandy Hook killer was mentally ill, and was not a gun owner. His MOTHER was a gun owner. And here's the source of the song "I don't like Mondays" by the Boom Town Rats:
Quote:
|
Quote:
You are proposing we need to ban cars also because one may be killed while in one with intention by a mentally deranged person? Just how many items does the government need to ban to protect us? No thought is given to the obvious, monitoring the mentally ill. We have total invasion of our lives with cyber information gathering for everything but no one suggests monitoring bizarre behavior and information gathering by the mentally ill. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
These shootings have been driven by hate. You want to address the shootings, then address the encouragement of hate, the culture that promotes it, that feeds it, that profits from it.
Til then, you will see more of them. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I don't believe guns should be banned. Hunting is part of our culture and people own guns for protection. People also shoot guns for sport. But I have a hard time understanding why someone needs to own a semi-automatic weapon or any gun that can shoot a large amount of bullets in a short amount of time.
I get all the arguments... "only criminals will have guns," "it's a mental illness issue," "guns don't kill people." etc. But guns that fire a large amount of bullets in a short amount of time can potentially kill a lot of people. Why should people have a right to own this type of weapon? What do you use them for? And If you can own this type of weapon, why shouldn't you be able to own a machine gun... a grenade... or an atomic bomb? None of those kill people, it's the person that uses them. If it is illegal to own a machine gun, I think it should be illegal to own a "semi automatic weapon" of any sort. Will it stop killings or mass murders? No. Will making it illegal keep it out of the hands of killers? No. But maybe it will stop one person from buying that weapon.. or make it a lot harder for someone to buy that weapon. If it stops a mass shooting.. would it be worth it? " |
Quote:
And these military weapons would probably tear apart game animals so I do not see much use of them for hunting. Home protection, maybe. But weapons long available to the general public would be just as useful for home defense. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
1. The argument does not require unlimited unregistered guns of any kind to protect ones self at home or in public. One could say they need automatic weapons using this argument, since without them only bad guys would have automatic weapons. One could say they need a Challenger 2 tank to protect their family. One could say they need a nuclear weapon to protect themselves against N. Korea and others. One of the fundamental reasons villages and larger groups of people were created is to provide for the common defense so individuals do not have to protect themselves from every possible enemy. 2. The argument does not require you be able to defend yourself without training and certification/licensing - neither of which would prevent your defending yourself or your family and would in fact help you do so. 3. The argument does not require you be able to accumulate unregistered guns. I personally do not believe that registering your guns would help stop mass shootings, but I see no reason it would hurt. 4. Requiring guns to be designed to only be able to be used by registered owners would not prevent you from defending yourself or your family and would prevent a bad guy from taking your gun away from you and killing you and your family (and other families) with it. The number of lives saved by having unlimited access to guns seems to be seriously out weighed by the number of innocent people that are killed by bad people having guns. The argument that society would be safer if there were more guns would seem to have been proven wrong, since we now have over 300 million guns in circulation, that is more guns than adults. With 300 million guns in circulation it is not possible to enforce a ban, so that is not going to happen. (Or let's just say, attempting to do so would probably make the civil war look like a peace rally). We have allowed this untenable situation to happen, and we need to figure out how to resolve it. As has been said, the guns of themselves are not the problem. It is the undesirable uses of them that are the problem. I find it difficult to understand why people who want to own guns are not the most vocal in trying to resolve this problem. It would be in both sides interest to work together to find a solution. And finally, some statements from both sides from are just not useful. I have a daughter in law who said she was not worried about her son being killed in a school shooting, she was going to train him to use guns and he would be packing went he went into first grade. Seriously, I am not making that up. Can you imagine a class full of first graders all carrying guns? |
Quote:
In any case, it is in fact true that the US does not lead the world in mass shootings. the exact place we hold in the list depends on how you arrange the numbers (per capital, numbers killed, etc.) but in almost any way you analyze the data there are in fact much more dangerous places in the world. But, also, on a per capita basis (which is how it is often reported) countries with small populations will tend to be higher in the list with fewer shootings. It also depends on what you call a "mass shooting" - how many people killed by how many people, and why. All that being said, I don't see it as significant. tell the families and children of the dead at any of the shootings here that they are safer here than they would be somewhere else, I expect you will receive a fairly incredulous glare in return. We in fact have a problem. The problem is getting worse. We need to find a solution that we all can live with. We the people. |
Quote:
Why the devil is it necessary to unarm US citizens who day in and day out uphold the law, act responsibly and store their weapons accordingly? If it is the perfect plan to unarm the citizenry does it make Russia shine as a country? Is anyone watching the squelching of the voice of the people right now in that country as they try to protest the questionable actions of their government? When do we ban automobiles and airplanes? These two vehicles have caused far more injury and death in the US than any guns. Or maybe the most we allow is a smart car for everyone because fewer people would be killed or injured with a smaller vehicle. To say that there is very little mental illness involved in shootings and that people are evil instead makes me laugh. A normal brain does not function on the premise that taking lives is fun. Isn’t that the main thrust of PTSD syndrome? There is something wrong upstairs when people want to commit mass murders! It would be a huge mistake to unarm our citizenry, your freedom may depend on it someday. Why don’t those who champion government gun control champion mental health facilities and monitoring? Because grabbing guns is cheaper and easier. |
Quote:
Many terrorists are fanatics. They look mentally ill to "normal" people. The 9/11 terrorists were not mentally ill nor the Boston Marathon bombers. They were radicalized though by propaganda. I have not seen any signs of mental illness in the Dayton nor El Paso mass murderers. |
Quote:
I don’t even know what to say about that observation. |
Quote:
Complex issues are not easy to solve, but are often averted by moral parents making sacrifices to be with their children when they are small and being tough on their tots when they steal, lie, and do all of the things little humans do. This post won't last long. Good morning everyone. It is a beautiful day in The Villages where the large majority of folks agree with what I just said. deaths in the u.s. due to overdose in 2018 - Bing Disclaimer. I don't own a gun. |
Quote:
“Radicalization” is, in studies, defined with mental health issues as the risk factor along with psychoses and autism are reported as common. As reported earlier in this thread, shootings have increased slowly since the 1960’s. Guess when mental health institutions began to close, the 1960’s. Do online searches for: how release of mental health patients began. It has been admitted that it was a huge mistake and I think more than likely responsible for the mass murders the US has suffered. |
Quote:
Mental illness used by the average person could mean many things-- depression, addiction, etc. Some seem to be using these two men's evil actions as yet another ruse not to actually address the gun problem in the US as well as the hate problem. These are connected. |
Quote:
And look at the practices at some of those institutions. Many of these people had no clue about how to treat people. And there are still problems. There's a Psychiatrist Crisis in America That Few Are Talking About |
We in UK banned hand guns many years ago, after a mass shooting of children in Scotland in 1996.
Banning guns was not a big deal, as we never really had a 'gun culture' anyway. Stict laws were put onto shotgun ownership for sport, ie. blowing birds out of the sky every fall for a few months. Our major problem now is knives. Stabbings, singular and mass, are daily occurences, and amongst the young in most major cities, being stabbed is sadly, a normal risk if you get into an argument. Most tpypes of knife, with few exeptions are banned from being carried, but it has made not a jot of difference to the number of incidents, in fact numbers of stabbings are on the rise. So just banning certain types of weapon is not always the panacea. It takes a whole lot more, and that 'more' is the major stumbling block, and the million dollar question in getting a ban to work. |
Quote:
I agree that SOME of the mentally ill have been victims of violence and many because the safety net was removed. The institutions were shuttered because lack of interest in cleaning up the management and money that politicians were saving for their own interests. This doesn’t change the fact that mental illness is the leading factors in these murders and they will continue to wreak this sad havoc if the public is unwilling to advocate for change in dealing with those individuals. Trust me when I say they will find even more heinous methods than automatic weapons. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I think the real line here is the solution is simple, remove all guns with the exception of pistols and shotguns. Bill from the UK has provided some powerful insight here. Those intent on doing harm will find a way whether or not there are guns. |
In the Dayton Ohio shooting, the gunman was killed in LESS THAN one minute after he started shooting. In less than a minute 9 people were killed and 27 people were injured. He used an assault-style rifle with high capacity magazines. He bought the gun legally. I can't imagine a reason why citizens are able to legally buy this type of weapon.
|
Quote:
The round the AR15, M16/M4 shoots is the 5.56 X45 aka .223 in commercial ammo caliber designation. It does not tear up game animals. The .223/5.56 in most states is not allowed to be used on large game (deer, antelope, elk, etc.) not because it is so powerful, but because it isn't powerful enough. |
Quote:
But police and others can plan for these kind of actions. And these murderers are usually driven by hate not mental illness. Hate propagated usually for the benefit of someone using it as a tool. And these players could not care less about the people they use. I had a friend in library school in 1983-1984 who was from the U of Mosul Library in Iraq. Nice man and not mentally ill in any way. But as soon as he returned to Iraq from Denver and got into the propaganda surrounding the 1980 Iran-Iraq war he was angrier and angrier at anything about the West. I had stop writing him as a pen pal because his letters had so much hatred in them. They destroyed the U of Mosul library around 2014. ISIS. Fanatics driven by hatred. Some probably are mentally ill too from what they have seen and done in those many wars in Iraq. |
Quote:
Why do people love these so much? You only need a gun for home protection and maybe some for hunting. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Conflating "disarming Americans" with regulating who can own guns is a bit of a scare tactic from my point of view. During the previous administration it was believed that guns sales were going to be seriously reduced, resulting in massive increases in people buying guns and ammunitions. Now that the previous administration is over, the numbers have been added up and in fact just the opposite occurred, and more guns were sold during it that under any other in history. Again, conflating regulation with disarming is not helping the conversation or helping to solve the problem. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:29 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by
DragonByte SEO v2.0.32 (Pro) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.