--be cognizant of your surroundings-----

[davids]

Thanks Matthew.

Isn't there the case of Australia, which enacted very strict gun control after a mass shooting?

[bcm119]

Gun control is an important topic and I agree we need a lot more of it. And the GOP is certainly complicit in these hate crimes by their divisive rhetoric that is effectively fanning the flames of racial and class hatred. The GOP has smart strategists who understand there is a vulnerable population whose emotions are easily played.

But, I think the root cause of the explosion of hatred is the explosion of misinformation. This is a new age of misinformation and conspiracy theories running amok on the internet. It is the common thread among every recent hate crime. Misinformation and conspiracies are infecting many of our emotionally and intellectually vulnerable citizens like a cancer. And we seem to have no viable solution at this point; any effort to raise awareness or counter the misinformation campaigns play right into their rhetoric. I’m convinced that the internet will bring a repeat cycle of some of the ugliest periods in history.

[guido]

Thanks Matthew.

Isn't there the case of Australia, which enacted very strict gun control after a mass shooting?

Yes. When Australia program to reduce firearm ownership came into force, violence/deaths related to guns dropped nearly to zero.

[GrantM]

A father eating with his children happened to be armed, and was able to stop the shooter before it became our country's latest mass murder.

The "good guy with a gun" theory of mass shooting prevention should be viewed for what it is,
another step up in the arms race. Nothing about mass shootings is static. What used to
be an attack with a handgun now have often become a heavily armed individual with a duffel bag
of high powered weapons. Nothing leads me to believe this won't escalate further.

So what's the response going to be with those intent on murdering random people? Snipers? Full body armor?
Loners searching out accomplices for multiple attacks? Sending bombs in the mail?
We're starting to see it already.

Arming more folks wouldn't have the intended outcome the proponents are hoping.

-g

[Dallas Tex]

Would any of you good folks support stricter laws that hold the people accountable rather than just the tools?

Would you support a law of mandatory life in prison / no parole for anyone that commits any offense while in the possession of an illegally obtained hand gun. Steal a car with a stolen gun in your pocket? Immediately removed from society forever. Drunk driving with a gun you purchased without a background check on the street? Same thing.

[snotrockets]

But, I think the root cause of the explosion of hatred is the explosion of misinformation. This is a new age of misinformation and conspiracy theories running amok on the internet. It is the common thread among every recent hate crime. Misinformation and conspiracies are infecting many of our emotionally and intellectually vulnerable citizens like a cancer. And we seem to have no viable solution at this point; any effort to raise awareness or counter the misinformation campaigns play right into their rhetoric. I’m convinced that the internet will bring a repeat cycle of some of the ugliest periods in history.

The internet only made it slightly cheaper. Henry Ford's had to pay more for his distribution of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" than the current admin pays to spread vile lies about refugees. The problem isn't with digital media, it's that violence encouraging racists are being elected into positions, instead of being tarred, feathered, and have their jaws broken.

[Dallas Tex]

The "good guy with a gun" theory of mass shooting prevention should be viewed for what it is,
another step up in the arms race. Nothing about mass shootings is static. What used to
be an attack with a handgun now have often become a heavily armed individual with a duffel bag
of high powered weapons. Nothing leads me to believe this won't escalate further.

So what's the response going to be with those intent on murdering random people? Snipers? Full body armor?
Loners searching out accomplices for multiple attacks? Sending bombs in the mail?
We're starting to see it already.

Arming more folks wouldn't have the intended outcome the proponents are hoping.

-g

maybe, maybe not. I've seen videos where trained police officers have a shootout (literally empty the magazine) with criminals that are 10' away and no one gets hit.


But in similar circumstances would you rather be the guy with the ability to defend himself and others, or the guy that isn't?

[snotrockets]

Would any of you good folks support stricter laws that hold the people accountable rather than just the tools?

that's post action. when there's no access to a fire arm, committing a murder becomes harder. going after the murderer post-action won't bring back the dead.

but if you are talking about public-accessible metal health (& health) system, police that takes care about working with the local population instead of targeting it as an enemy, that's a good idea.

Would you support a law of mandatory life in prison / no parole for anyone that commits any offense while in the possession of an illegally obtained hand gun. Steal a car with a stolen gun in your pocket? Immediately removed from society forever. Drunk driving with a gun you purchased without a background check on the street? Same thing.

sentencing to prison serves two goals: preventing harm (by removing harmful persons from the general population), and extracting revenge. you suggesting the latter, which does nothing but fills jails, and give some a misguided, but warm feeling inside.

[guido]

Would any of you good folks support stricter laws that hold the people accountable rather than just the tools?

Would you support a law of mandatory life in prison / no parole for anyone that commits any offense while in the possession of an illegally obtained hand gun. Steal a car with a stolen gun in your pocket? Immediately removed from society forever. Drunk driving with a gun you purchased without a background check on the street? Same thing.

Only if it is applied to all guns, not just illegally obtained ones. Include full background checks and we have a deal. Do you think the NRA would allow this through the Congress?

[snotrockets]

maybe, maybe not. I've seen videos where trained police officers have a shootout (literally empty the magazine) with criminals that are 10' away and no one gets hit.


But in similar circumstances would you rather be the guy with the ability to defend himself and others, or the guy that isn't?

in such a situation, i'd do the most rational thing to do, and the one most combat shooting instructors would suggest you do: run the fuck away. as most with real armed combat experience would tell you, it takes years of training; even if i had the best weapon in the world, in the heat and confusion of battle, i'd have more chance as causing more risk to others. just look at "friendly fire" [sic] statistics.

[davids]

But in similar circumstances would you rather be the guy with the ability to defend himself and others, or the guy that isn't?

I would rather be the guy living in the country that chooses human life over handguns and automatic weapons.

And yeah, I know I'm not answering your question. But fundamentally I reject the premise.

First, the circumstances were this scenario has any relevance are extraordinarily limited. The Tree of Life attack is one of these and having read the timeline I do not see where or when a hero could have jumped up and saved the victims. They were slaughtered in the first moments of the attack. When the police arrived it took multiple officers (several of whom were wounded in the attempt) to subdue the terrorist.

Second, I think the evidence establishes that fewer guns translate into fewer gun deaths. Fewer handguns and no semi-auto or automatic weapons legally in civilian hands would dramatically reduce the available weaponry for more quotidian murder and suicide. That's where most gun deaths occur in our imperfect union.

[Matthew Strongin]

Would any of you good folks support stricter laws that hold the people accountable rather than just the tools?

This requires a misrepresentation of the arguments of those in favor of strict gun control (including making all guns illegal). We (to generalize) don't want to hold guns accountable; that would be silly. Eliminating guns isn't punishment for guns. Guns aren't sentient beings who can be held accountable for their actions. We want to reduce or eliminate guns from our society as we've proven unfit to own them AND we want to hold those who use them or posses them illegally accountable.

maybe, maybe not. I've seen videos where trained police officers have a shootout (literally empty the magazine) with criminals that are 10' away and no one gets hit.


But in similar circumstances would you rather be the guy with the ability to defend himself and others, or the guy that isn't?

Well, by your argument, there's a good chance that at 10' away it wouldn't matter if you did or didn't have the gun. But to play along, I'd rather not be in the circumstance in the first place. If cars are hitting cyclists at alarming rates in a city, you don't argue for giving cyclists equivalent tools for fighting back, you make it illegal for cars to come close to cyclists and hold cars who do accountable through enforcement and prosecution. The wild west mindset of "I'd rather have a gun if shit goes down" overlooks the simple goal of reducing how often shit goes down or how bad it is when it does. This "debate" generally goes south when people argue anecdotes rather than arguing data. But the side in favor of good guys with guns doesn't have data to support the position, so all we get are anecdotes and hypotheticals.

[Dallas Tex]

Only if it is applied to all guns, not just illegally obtained ones. Include full background checks and we have a deal. Do you think the NRA would allow this through the Congress?

So all guns used in the performance of criminal activities? Any gun obtained without a background check? I could support that. The NRA ? they're just playing the ying to the 'no guns ever' yang lobby.

[GrantM]

But in similar circumstances would you rather be the guy with the ability to defend himself and others, or the guy that isn't?

I think you've raised a really interesting point.

It's entirely possible that at the "population level" of analysis, doing what is clearly the best policy possible may mean that
events go bad for an individual. The obvious example is a person riding their bicycle for health, which we know is extremely
effective, extends life at the population level, reduces health costs, improves quality of life - but we also know some individuals
will be injured or killed in accidents. That's why public policy implications need to be extremely well understood.

There are consequences and unintended consequences for every action at the society level.

-g

[snotrockets]

So all guns used in the performance of criminal activities? Any gun obtained with a background check? I could support that. The NRA ? they're just playing the ying to the 'no guns ever' yang lobby.

Guns have a single purpose: kill. I can't think of any "good" use for a gun.

[davids]

The internet only made it slightly cheaper. Henry Ford's had to pay more for his distribution of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" than the current admin pays to spread vile lies about refugees. The problem isn't with digital media, it's that violence encouraging racists are being elected into positions, instead of being tarred, feathered, and have their jaws broken.

Thank you for trying to turn this conversation away from gun control (which is a secondary or maybe tertiary issue when it comes to this terrorist attack) and back towards the primary issue in play here: Antisemitism, racism, xenophobia and hate.

This starts with the President. He has consistently and predictably enabled all of these things for decades. Begin with the Central Park Five and end with whatever hateful lies he tweeted this weekend.

It continues to his enablers, the politicians who shut up or who condemn his noxious statements while working with him to advance their shared interests. They are complicit and I do not excuse them.

And then there are the emboldened racists and antisemites who want me, my friends, and my family dead or gone.

We must condemn them, and work to remove them from positions of influence and power.

[Dallas Tex]

that's post action. when there's no access to a fire arm, committing a murder becomes harder. going after the murderer post-action won't bring back the dead.

but if you are talking about public-accessible metal health (& health) system, police that takes care about working with the local population instead of targeting it as an enemy, that's a good idea.



sentencing to prison serves two goals: preventing harm (by removing harmful persons from the general population), and extracting revenge. you suggesting the latter, which does nothing but fills jails, and give some a misguided, but warm feeling inside.

I think you may have missed my point. Catch the bad guy with a gun & remove him from society when he was stealing a car and his incarceration would physically prevent him from graduating to murder.

[Dallas Tex]

But, I think the root cause of the explosion of hatred is the explosion of misinformation. This is a new age of misinformation and conspiracy theories running amok on the internet. It is the common thread among every recent hate crime. Misinformation and conspiracies are infecting many of our emotionally and intellectually vulnerable citizens like a cancer. And we seem to have no viable solution at this point; any effort to raise awareness or counter the misinformation campaigns play right into their rhetoric. I’m convinced that the internet will bring a repeat cycle of some of the ugliest periods in history.

I could not agree with the above more.

can I assume that you believe this is limited to one tribe and not the other?

[sk_tle]

I think you may have missed my point. Catch the bad guy with a gun & remove him from society when he was stealing a car and his incarceration would physically prevent him from graduating to murder.

My observation is that in the case of mass shooting or domestic violence the murderer is considered by the society as a good guy until he it is too late.

I'm pretty sure every single man who later killed his own wife and kids would have told you years before this is insane and there is no way he could kill the people he love the most.

[Saab2000]

I could not agree with the above more.

can I assume that you believe this is limited to one tribe and not the other?

I firmly believe it really began with Rupert Murdoch and Fox News in the mainstream media. There has been far right conspiracy radio for much longer.

That’s just me thinking out loud. I have no data to support a theory but that is my gut feeling.