Gun violence

1. 81

   Stephen Tomkinsonposted 2 years ago

   After today's horrific incident in Sacramento, isn't it time that Americans started taking gun control seriously?

   replyreport
   1. 81

      Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Not in America, Stephen, after all, guns don't kill people, people kill people........

      replyreport
   2. 85

      tsmogposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      There are already somewhere around 300 thousand gun laws. Seems pretty serious to me.
      
      Federal Gun Laws
      https://gunlawsuits.org/gun-laws/federal-gun-laws/

      replyreport
   3. 90

      lions44posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      FBI stats on state murder rates 2018-2019 (I believe 2020 is similar):
      
      Louisiana has the highest murder rate in the U.S. of 14.4 murders per 100,000 residents. Murders are disproportionately concentrated in New Orleans, which has a murder rate of about 37 per 100,000 residents.
      
      Alabama has the second-highest murder rate of 12.9 murders per 100,000 residents.
      
      Mississippi has the third-highest murder rate in the United States. Mississippi’s murder rate is 12.7 murders per 100,000 residents.
      
      All of them have very loose gun laws, but so does Vermont, Wyoming and Utah, which have low murder rates/gun deaths.  It's a combo of factors: weak gun laws, large pop., and social issues.

      replyreport
      1. 89

         wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         There is no correlation at all between the gun ownership rates and the homicide rate anywhere in the world.  Weak gun laws aren't affecting anything.  There is something else - something perhaps unique in American culture - that causes the violence in America, and we steadfastly refuse to address it or even acknowledge it.  Instead we continue the fight to disarm our population.

         replyreport
         1. 90

            lions44posted 2 years agoin reply to this

            I stated in my last sentence that it is a combination of factors. But weak gun laws (lack of background checks, etc.) do contribute.  The mentally ill and bad guys can easily get weapons in many states.   I would bet that 75% of the weapons used in mass shootings are legally purchased, regardless of whether it's NY or Texas. 
            Getting a gun in NYC is difficult, but all I have to do is drive to the Poconos (90 min away) and buy one. There is no waiting period in PA.   Over 30% of Americans own a gun. We are not being disarmed.
            
            You're a responsible gun owner, like most of the gun owners I know. However, I've known a few nuts/bad guys who should not have had weapons of any kind but bought them at the local gun store. How do you stop them from obtaining a gun?

            replyreport
            1. 89

               wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

               "I would bet that 75% of the weapons used in mass shootings are legally purchased, regardless of whether it's NY or Texas. "
               
               Untrue.  The (very) large majority of mass murderers did not purchase their weapon legally.  Unless, of course, it was not a gun - matches, fertilizer, cars, etc. are freely available.

               replyreport
               1. 90

                  lions44posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  Those are FBI stats. Call them if you have a problem.
                  
                  Since OK City, how many mass murders have been committed using fertilizer?  Not the best example.

                  replyreport
2. 81

   Stephen Tomkinsonposted 2 years ago

   So if we swapped guns for skillets, they'd batter each other to death?

   replyreport
   1. 81

      Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      in a civilized society we should not need guns.
      
      
      The pertinent quest would be to induce civilization, some how.
      For instance, letting in uncivilized, desperate people from other vicious countries and situations will not help induce civilization.
      What will?

      replyreport
   2. 89

      wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      How about if you swap guns for poison, knives, bats (more people bludgeoned to death than killed with all long guns combined, including that dreaded "assault" rifle), cars, etc?  If you're going to be silly (batter them to death with a skillet) you can include swords, axes, biological agents, chain saws and a dozen other things.

      replyreport
      1. 81

         Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         Yes, let us carry swords.
         ban guns.
         
         Who are we needing to protect ourselves from?
         
         This is the question.

         replyreport
         1. 68

            Ken Burgessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Ask Ukrainians that.
            
            What happened to the Germans in the 30s after they were forced to give up their guns?
            
            And for those who would deny that German citizens were disarmed (because I know there are plenty of "Left leaning" and "fact check" sites that fabricate that lie):
            
            https://www.nationalreview.com/2013/12/ … -halbrook/

            replyreport
            1. 96

               Readmikenowposted 2 years agoin reply to this

               You make a valid point about Ukraine.
               
               MOST people had a firearm of some kind.  Even in the cities.  There were never mass shootings like there are in the United States.
               
               You may not see it in the news, but there were small towns in the Ukraine that defended themselves with shot guns, other hunting rifles as well as handguns.  These were weapons used by civilian citizens.  They of course captured the Russian rifles and the ammunition of those who had fallen in battle, but without citizens owning guns, Ukraine would have had a much worse time.

               replyreport
            2. 81

               Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years agoin reply to this

               - oh. the problem is swords used to do a pretty good job in battles and in defending damsels in distress and oneself, but then guns were invented.
               Darn it.
               Meandering thoughts:
               Well, if we did carry swords we could wear armor and carry shields ... Would all that metal protect us from gun shots/bullets?
               What is the material in protective vests?
               Comedians may need to wear some type of protective gear as we saw one comedian at the Grammys wearing. Its ridiculous.
               What is happening to us? I guess we should just buckle up, be prepared and get used to it.
               Darn, again.

               replyreport
      2. 68

         Ken Burgessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

         Didn't someone just commit mass murder with a car not too long ago?
         
         I know they made the story disappear quick because it was someone who posted he wanted to kill all white people or something like that.
         
         But the point is, if you want to commit mass murder you do not need a gun.
         
         Timothy McVeigh is another good example.

         replyreport
         1. 89

            wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Yes they did. 
            
            In fact there is a tiny portion of murders carried out with the so-called "assault" guns...so we go after those guns with fake terminology and fear rather than addressing the problem.  It works well for politicians spreading fear to buy votes and it works for those ignorant of guns, though.

            replyreport
   3. 81

      Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      My comment was a sarcastic one....

      replyreport
3. 81

   Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

   "A lot of victims with blood, just watching some of the families that didn’t know if their loved one was alive, running, trying to figure out what was happening, people distraught, people discombobulated," Accius said. "It was just horrific."
   
   https://www.abc10.com/article/news/loca … 85cc0925a8

   replyreport
4. 81

   Stephen Tomkinsonposted 2 years ago

   My comment about skillets was too glib, I apologize. However, we in Europe don't understand the obsession with guns that (some) Americans have. Of course, it's true that you don't need a gun to kill someone but few other weapons cause such havoc.

   replyreport
   1. 68

      Ken Burgessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Curious... if someone breaks into your home with the intent to harm you how are you going to stop them?
      
      If society breaks down, how are you going to protect yourself or your home?
      
      In America, in states where it is legal to carry openly or carry concealed you hardly ever hear of mass murders, because those that begin to try and commit mass murder are killed pretty quickly.

      replyreport
5. 81

   Stephen Tomkinsonposted 2 years ago

   Is that true, Ken?

   replyreport
   1. 68

      Ken Burgessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      It is, these tragedies are stopped everyday, and the news rarely mentions them, perhaps local news, rarely if ever on the national news.
      
      However the Mass Murders that do occur, almost always occur in a school or church, where weapons usually are not allowed.  One was in a theater in a "gun free" county... it being "gun free" means only criminals will have guns.
      
      Some examples:
      
      https://preparedgunowners.com/2016/06/1 … e-killers/
      
      https://www.reactionarytimes.com/texas- … -citizens/
      
      https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/am … ad-n706381

      replyreport
6. 96

   Readmikenowposted 2 years ago

   I've always said, if there is an effective way to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, I will give up my conceal carry permit.  It is obvious gun laws DO NOT work.  Responsible gun owners should not be punished,  That happens after every shooting, punish the responsible for the actions of criminals.

   replyreport
7. 81

   Stephen Tomkinsonposted 2 years ago

   But there are also too many accidental deaths caused by firearms.

   replyreport
   1. 85

      tsmogposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I am lost . . . who are you responding too? Or, is this just a general reply?

      replyreport
   2. 96

      Readmikenowposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      There are also too many accidental deaths from automobiles...what's your point?

      replyreport
8. 81

   Stephen Tomkinsonposted 2 years ago

   General tsmog. I am sure that most gun owners are responsible people. But accidents do happen.

   replyreport
9. 81

   Stephen Tomkinsonposted 2 years ago

   Yes, of course, but people need cars.

   replyreport
   1. 96

      Readmikenowposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I've known people who live in cities around the world and have never owned a car.  I've even known people who have lived in rural areas and didn't have a car.  Just ask the Amish.  Driving in the US is considered a privilege.

      replyreport
   2. 89

      wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Do they?  Or do they simply want to live in the suburbs and commute rather than live near their job?  I'd agree that rural people need a car (groceries may be 20 miles or more) but urban folks?  People with bus/subway service?  No, they don't need one.
      
      All of which has zero to do with the fact that our Constitution does not indicate a need in order to own a gun.

      replyreport
10. 81

    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 years ago

    The best policy is to make sure gun-use for private citizens comes along with gun training and safety courses.
    Perhaps guns can only be purchased with proof of classes and completion with a Certificate of Gun Safety/Training.
    
    Who would conduct the safety course?
    The Red American Red Cross, of course.
    
    No ACR certificate, no Gun.
    
    No?

    replyreport
    1. 89

       wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

       I doubt that gun training will keep a murderer from pointing his weapon at someone and pulling a trigger.

       replyreport
11. 81

    Stephen Tomkinsonposted 2 years ago

    Hi, wilderness. The way I read it, the Constitution does establish a need. The need to have a militia ready to defend the country.

    replyreport