Re: We have officially become inured to mass shootings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
murphy
Why does it have to be one or the other? You seem to assume one root cause when I am betting there would be a multitude; a multitude of complex human problems. If we know or think something may make things better now, why not try it out? It seems like you are discounting the ok in hopes that the perfect will appear. Like I have said multiple times in this thread, I just want to move the bar which is something I have not seen in my entire life (except in the wrong direction).
Just because we don't have a cure for the common cold doesn't mean we don't take cold medicine to make it better.
I don't assume one root cause, the problems are complex. Taking actions without an expected result doesn't really serve a purpose. If we want to do something just to say we did something, what was accomplished, an ease of our collective consciences? What made it ok to do mass shootings? We have places with pretty strict gun control policies and they're some of the areas with the highest amounts of gun deaths. What is it about those policies that make them ineffective? We certainly know what doesn't work.
I'm not advocating doing nothing, but if we're going to have a national conversation, we have to have well thought out solutions that address the reasons.
Re: We have officially become inured to mass shootings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bigbill
I don't assume one root cause, the problems are complex. Taking actions without an expected result doesn't really serve a purpose. If we want to do something just to say we did something, what was accomplished, an ease of our collective consciences? What made it ok to do mass shootings? We have places with pretty strict gun control policies and they're some of the areas with the highest amounts of gun deaths. What is it about those policies that make them ineffective? We certainly know what doesn't work.
I'm not advocating doing nothing, but if we're going to have a national conversation, we have to have well thought out solutions that address the reasons.
The general correlation is that places with stricter gun laws have fewer firearm deaths though. And six out of the top ten states for gun deaths have passed "stand your ground" laws.
We need to get rid of the Dickey amendment; research around firearm deaths should have been going on for years. Either way, we are too late for a lot of people who have died.
You and I seem to be taking up all the oxygen in the room here. I am stepping away to see if anyone else has points to make, otherwise it is really just us butting heads and talking past one another.
Re: We have officially become inured to mass shootings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bigbill
I don't assume one root cause, the problems are complex. Taking actions without an expected result doesn't really serve a purpose. If we want to do something just to say we did something, what was accomplished, an ease of our collective consciences? What made it ok to do mass shootings? We have places with pretty strict gun control policies and they're some of the areas with the highest amounts of gun deaths. What is it about those policies that make them ineffective? We certainly know what doesn't work.
I'm not advocating doing nothing, but if we're going to have a national conversation, we have to have well thought out solutions that address the reasons.
Much of what I am proposing would require those who have done, and will do, absolutely nothing wrong to sacrifice rights - some of those people consider them unalienable rights. I don't want that to happen unless we get some real improvement in exchange. I want to be open minded and collaborative, but to Bill's point, doing "something" isn't worth it if it doesn't demonstrably save lives. It's not unreasonable to be suspicious/dubious of gun control effectiveness when towns like Chicago will surpass this year's mass-shooting fatality total on any given weekend.
Re: We have officially become inured to mass shootings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
King Of Dirk
It's not unreasonable to be suspicious/dubious of gun control effectiveness when towns like Chicago will surpass this year's mass-shooting fatality total on any given weekend.
That's not true.
Re: We have officially become inured to mass shootings.
Nothing will change with tRump in office
After Lobbying by Gun Rights Advocates, Trump Sounds a Familiar Retreat
After Lobbying by Gun Rights Advocates, Trump Sounds a Familiar Retreat - The New York Times
Re: We have officially become inured to mass shootings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
King Of Dirk
It's not unreasonable to be suspicious/dubious of gun control effectiveness when towns like Chicago will surpass this year's mass-shooting fatality total on any given weekend.
This argument only seems logical for those that are unfamiliar with the geography of the area around Chicago. The southeast side of the city where most of the trouble is located is bumped right up against Indiana where gun laws are very lax. If you were riding your bicycle east out of Chicago you would not know where Chicago ends and Indiana begins. It is all one metropolitan area. Even on a bicycle it would take very little time to ride from the tough areas of Chicago to the equally tough areas in Indiana. It is all a mess from the border to nearby Gary, Indiana that has to be one of the worst cities to live in the US. The land just south of the bottom of Lake Michigan is where steel miles and oil refineries were located. The only reason the air doesn't have the smoke and stink they used to is because they are closed down. It is a running joke on running forums when someone asks where is a good place to live for running and it is guaranteed someone will say Gary, Indiana. Everything is a hell hole from there to south Chicago. It isn't even an inconvenience for south Chicagoans to buy their guns in Indiana only minutes away.
Re: We have officially become inured to mass shootings.
wait, does Chicago have a force shield around it that doesnt allow guns obtained elsewhere to be brought in? if so, i want one of those in my town.
Re: We have officially become inured to mass shootings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mzilliox
wait, does Chicago have a force shield around it that doesnt allow guns obtained elsewhere to be brought in? if so, i want one of those in my town.
Wait, does our country have a similar force shield that doesn’t allow guns to be brought in?
Is the force shield of the same kind that prevents drugs from coming into our country?
Re: We have officially become inured to mass shootings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dallas Tex
Wait, does our country have a similar force shield that doesn’t allow guns to be brought in?
Is the force shield of the same kind that prevents drugs from coming into our country?
Well, we do have Customs and Border Protection. On the other hand, most US cities don't have protected borders with people monitoring what gets brought in and out. You can argue about the efficacy of the CBP all day long, but you can't equate border protection at the national and local levels.
Re: We have officially become inured to mass shootings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Matthew Strongin
Well, we do have Customs and Border Protection. On the other hand, most US cities don't have protected borders with people monitoring what gets brought in and out. You can argue about the efficacy of the CBP all day long, but you can't equate border protection at the national and local levels.
Sure I can. It’s meaningless. A country that can’t keep PEOPLE out, as well as drugs, is pretty much equal to a city with a sign that says ‘no unlawful guns allowed’ at the edge of town.
Re: We have officially become inured to mass shootings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
marley
Please, regale me with the gun control triumphs of Trump's predecessor.
Trump's DOJ - banned bump stocks.
Obama's DOJ - "lost" 1,430 guns to Mexican cartels: http://edition.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS...uns/index.html
Troll elsewhere.
Re: We have officially become inured to mass shootings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
thollandpe
That's not true.
Okay, this is no place for hyperbole. Fair enough. Based on the Tribune and Wikipedia's data, it seems Chicago's fatal shootings in 2019 are only slightly outpacing the number of mass-shooting fatalities in 2019. 297 - 248.
Does this not at least partially make the case that my high-capacity magazine ban proposal would be largely useless? Chicago is as effective with the ones and twos as the nutcases are with their Rambo-clones. It seems all or nothing, in that light.
Re: We have officially become inured to mass shootings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
King Of Dirk
Okay, this is no place for hyperbole. Fair enough. Based on the Tribune and Wikipedia's data, it seems Chicago's fatal shootings in 2019 are only slightly outpacing the number of mass-shooting fatalities in 2019. 297 - 248.
Does this not at least partially make the case that my high-capacity magazine ban proposal would be largely useless? Chicago is as effective with the ones and twos as the nutcases are with their Rambo-clones. It seems all or nothing, in that light.
Tracking Chicago homicide victims - Chicago Tribune
Here is the Chicago Tribune tracker ....
Yes, just banning high capacity magazines will probably not have that big an impact.
Re: We have officially become inured to mass shootings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
King Of Dirk
Fortunately, the DOJ redefined bump stock modified guns as machine guns which are already illegal under current statutes. Several gun rights groups have filed lawsuits against the 'new' definition and I do not think these have run there course through the courts.
If we require congress to pass a law and send it to DJT, it will not happen. Whether DJT wants to do something or not, it doesn't matter because the NRA has a lock grip on enough congressmen/women to prevent any new laws.
Re: We have officially become inured to mass shootings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dallas Tex
Sure I can. It’s meaningless. A country that can’t keep PEOPLE out, as well as drugs, is pretty much equal to a city with a sign that says ‘no unlawful guns allowed’ at the edge of town.
No, that's about issues of the effectiveness of a federal agency. Assuming you've travelled internationally, upon returning to the US did you just see a sign that says, "no unlawful shit allowed," as you exited the terminal or crossed the border? There may be failed attempts at ports of entry to prevent all people and drugs from entering, and you may feel that the borders are effectively wide-open, but that's not the same as unfettered access across state lines. There are literal barriers at most points of entry into the US and literally no barriers between states. You can quip all you want about how many people and drugs flood into the US, but it's not a good faith argument for the types of issues a place like Chicago deals with. Doug did a great job above outlining the specifics of why local laws and cherry picked data don't represent the reality on ground.
Re: We have officially become inured to mass shootings.
I actually agree with this. The problem isn’t owning a nuclear missile it’s bsing able to care for it and insure it doesn’t get used. I think that if you could reasonably prove these things/ you should be allowed to own an ICBM if you want.
Re: We have officially become inured to mass shootings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vertical_doug
I was afraid of that. I thought I was on to something.
Yesterday I read a bill (HR 1296) that assuages my "don't ban my deer rifle" fears pretty effectively: Cosponsors - H.R.1296 - 116th Congress (219-22): Assault Weapons Ban of 219 | Congress.gov | Library of Congress I gotta say, nothing puts the mind at ease like seeing my Remington 700 on a big list after "APPENDIX A—FIREARMS EXEMPTED BY THE ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN OF 2017"
Mandatory life sentence for use of a firearm in the commission of a violent felony? And actual uniform enforcement thereof? How does Bernie Madoff get 150 years in federal prison, yet use of a firearm in the commission of a violent felony is excusable?
Re: We have officially become inured to mass shootings.
The isisue with the whole gun thing is no one needs to show that the gun will never hurt people. In fact the idiot gun lobby thinks guns OUGHT to hurt people especially in defense of very valuable things like a ducking 98 Plymouth or whatever they murdering asshole thought was getting stolen.
Re: We have officially become inured to mass shootings.
Someone mentioned the Heller decision (sorry can't remember who). One of the dissenting judges has come out with some very un-judicial language and said the decision is wrong and the amendment needs to be repealled.
Opinion | John Paul Stevens: Repeal the Second Amendment - The New York Times
While this may be oldish news, it seems the most sensible and straightforward way to chisel away at the problem.
Assuming this were possible (and it would appear that it is not), then you have a combination of gun control laws, with the amnesty discussed in an earlier post. Give people the opportunity to hand back their weapons before the ban, in whatever form that takes, kicks in.
You also take up bigbill's recommendations of addressing the underlying issues. This requires and investment of time and lots of money into things like health care, mental health, education and providing opportunity to all.
People will still be allowed to own guns. Gun control does not equal taking away everyone's guns. Want to target shoot? You can still do that. And so on. Want to own the old 50 calibre for home defence. Sorry, no.
Re: We have officially become inured to mass shootings.
Oh and if you think any piece of private property is worth more than a human life you have to have your priorities examined. It’s bullshit that you can shoot someone for stealing your tv. It’s reprehensible that you can walk outside your home and kill someone for ducking with your piece of shit car.