994 mass shootings in 1,004 days: this is what America's gun crisis looks like
477 replies, posted
[QUOTE=AaronM202;49261020]Okay?
Did you actually read that list?[/QUOTE]
Did you?
[QUOTE=DeEz;49261029]Did you?[/QUOTE]
Why yes, sir, i did in fact read that list.
In fact, it told me that most gun related deaths in the US are accidental or suicide.
Did you know mooses kill more people in Sweden than the US? Why don't you talk about Sweden's moose epidemic? "My country has mooses, yours doesn't, obviously there are more moose related deaths here..." Yeah, no fucking shit.
[QUOTE=DeEz;49261009][URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate"]If you say so.[/URL][/QUOTE]
compare it with this for maximum info
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country[/url]
The US is one of the very few countries that have both high gun ownership and high gun death rate.
Hondorus, is top in gun deaths but actually fairly low on gun ownership.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;49261019]I'm sure countries where laffy taffy is sold have more cases of choking on laffy taffy than countries where laffy taffy is not sold. People still choke on other foods.
AKA; no shit the US has more gun crime. We have more guns. That doesn't mean guns are actually causing people to commit crimes. Why can't you wrap your head around this? Corpses don't care how the crime was committed. They're fucking dead. All that matters is that somebody killed them, be it with a hammer, knife, woodchipper, bus, or gun.[/QUOTE]
Ah yes, I hear it is pretty easy to kill people across the street/through the windshield with a hammer.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;49261035]Did you know mooses kill more people in Sweden than the US? Why don't you talk about Sweden's moose epidemic? "My country has mooses, yours doesn't, obviously there are more moose related deaths here..." Yeah, no fucking shit.[/QUOTE]
Pssst, dont forget that he didnt actually read the list he linked, which doesnt actually help his point at all and at worst actually works against him.
Dont tell him.
[QUOTE=DeEz;49261040]Ah yes, I hear it is pretty easy to kill people across the street/through the windshield with a hammer.[/QUOTE]
It can be, yeah.
Contrary to your entire argument Sweden is 8th in gun ownership with just under 1/3rd of the ownership rate (likely attributable to a stronger collector culture here more than anything) yet 51st in firearms homicides. This pattern is pretty clearly developed and if anything is the strongest proof that legal firearm ownership does not correlate to violent crime.
You may be surprised to learn that there are that many in Sweden - because you don't really have a crime issue on the scale of the US, let alone a money-grubbing media trying to squeeze every dollar out of every story.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;49261069]Contrary to your entire argument Sweden is 8th in gun ownership with just under 1/3rd of the ownership rate (likely attributable to a stronger collector culture here more than anything) yet 51st in firearms homicides. This pattern is pretty clearly developed and if anything is the strongest proof that legal firearm ownership does not correlate to violent crime.[/QUOTE]
Hell, doesnt Switzerland have practically no gun crime, yet almost every guy there has one because they all work part time for the military?
[editline]6th December 2015[/editline]
Thats the right country right?
I might be wrong.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;49261074]Hell, doesnt Switzerland have practically no gun crime, yet almost every guy there has one because they all work part time for the military?[/QUOTE]
I don't use Switzerland in these arguments because IIRC they don't get to keep ammo in their homes, so it doesn't stick very well. Switzerland's lack of crime is, again, due to other reasons.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;49261085]I don't use Switzerland in these arguments because IIRC they don't get to keep ammo in their homes, so it doesn't stick very well. Switzerland's lack of crime is, again, due to other reasons.[/QUOTE]
Oh ok.
[QUOTE=Megadave;49260389]Not a good argument, why do we need fast ass cars, alcohol, or internet?[/QUOTE]
This is also not a good argument. Are fast cars, alcohol, or the internet tools to very efficiently kill people?
[QUOTE=billibobc;49261962]This is also not a good argument. Are fast cars, alcohol, or the internet tools to very efficiently kill people?[/QUOTE]
I love how you ardently refuse to address any of the more serious arguments leveled at you and instead pick out stuff you can throw buzzwords at. It's a really precise microcosm of the anti-gun mindset.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;49261967]I love how you ardently refuse to address any of the more serious arguments leveled at you and instead pick out stuff you can throw buzzwords at. It's a really precise microcosm of the anti-gun mindset.[/QUOTE]
Funny how you do the exact same thing except for the opposite argument eh
[QUOTE=billibobc;49261988]Funny how you do the exact same thing except for the opposite argument eh[/QUOTE]
Funny how I, uh, don't, actually.
[QUOTE=billibobc;49261988]Funny how you do the exact same thing except for the opposite argument eh[/QUOTE]
If you can point out those arguments I'd be happy to answer them if Grenadiac won't. It is entirely possible that I overlooked some good arguments buried in a sea of 'places with guns have more deaths due to guns' and 'what about the families???' and 'stupid gun owners something something overcompensating something something masculinity'.
Just so i can hear it, what do you guys think is the best plan to help stop gun violence in the US?
[QUOTE=billibobc;49262042]Just so i can hear it, what do you guys think is the best plan to help stop gun violence in the US?[/QUOTE]
Reducing poverty helps. Since most violent crime is a symptom of that...
[QUOTE=billibobc;49262042]Just so i can hear it, what do you guys think is the best plan to help stop gun violence in the US?[/QUOTE]
Dealing directly with firearms? Correct the currently inefficient background check program. This includes lengthening the 3 day wait period (but preferably make the entire checking process much more faster), allow mental health records to be released to the parties performing the background checks. Honestly there's not a lot of things that have to be done on the topic of dealing directly with guns. I pointed this out in an earlier post where someone pointed out all of the previous shooters since Sandy Hook and their timelines.
Outside of what I mentioned, the real seed of violence lies within cultural and societal issues, primarily poverty. I'm no economist, but I can tell you that we really need to bring some of the lesser parts of America's urban areas up to par. Mental health is also an issue, but, a far lesser one. On that topic though, diagnostics and readily available help for mental disorders need to become less stigmatized, so that people will actually take advantage of the help that we could provide.
There is no band-aid solution, and removing guns is no different than shoving a cork in your nostril when you have a cold. It's a people problem, and that is something that is hard for a lot of people to not only accept, but to also address with solutions because it admits fault. That is why pointing the finger is always easier.
[editline]6th December 2015[/editline]
Post that I mentioned about the previous shooters: [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1495887&p=49241387&highlight=#post49241387[/url]
Also, 1000th post!
[QUOTE=billibobc;49262042]Just so i can hear it, what do you guys think is the best plan to help stop gun violence in the US?[/QUOTE]
First off, I don't care about gun violence. I care about violence. It doesn't matter in the slightest to me whether a murder is committed with a knife or a gun, what matters to me is the frequency of incidence. Firearms may facilitate greater efficiency of killing, turn a 3-casualty stabbing into a 10-casualty shooting, but they're not the underlying cause, and shouldn't be treated as such. Combating violence by restricting guns is like combating drugs by restricting needles- it may help towards the intended goal, but it's still the wrong approach. A smart approach is to tackle the causes of violence, while simultaneously mitigating the impact of technologies that better facilitate that violence.
So with that in mind, there's a lot we can do to actually combat violence in this country, and make acts of violence less effective.
-Incorporate state-level psychiatric records into the NICS. There is no reason why this shouldn't already be the case.
-Make the NICS available to private citizens. Allowing private sellers to conduct background checks would help the overwhelming majority of gun owners who are law-abiding citizens and don't want their firearms to end up in the wrong hands.
-Increase enforcement of penalties for straw purchases. Make private sellers liable for misuse of their sold guns. Right now people get away with knowingly purchasing or supplying guns for criminal use.
-Stop plastering 'gun free zone' on businesses and schools. It has done nothing but make them targets. Plenty of colleges have allowed concealed carry and aren't Wild West gunfights, plenty of businesses allow concealed carry and aren't constant shootouts. On the other hand, nearly every active shooter in the past ten years has specifically targeted a place where they knew their victims would be unarmed.
-Do something about the media turning every attack into a shitshow of speculation and elevating the shooter to celebrity status. These are acts of terrorism and they [I]work[/I] because we are all too happy to plaster the shooter's name and manifesto across every news screen.
-Start reforming the criminal justice system and the war on drugs. Disadvantaged minorities are thrown into a justice system where they are turned into career criminals from the first offense, and end up joining gangs and conducting street crime.
-Start putting more money into the educational system, particularly in poor urban neighborhoods. Most shootings in the US are gang-related or involved in predatory crimes like burglary, rape, and mugging, not premeditated murder- address that violence at its roots, the dysfunctional school systems that turn kids out onto the streets and into gangs.
-Institute a federal concealed carry system and overrule the states' inconsistent and byzantine laws. Require demonstrated competence as a prerequisite for concealed carry, but allow reciprocity in all states. Treat it like a driver's license.
-Make the ATF and FBI take a more aggressive stance on pursuing handgun misuse. Handguns account for the overwhelming majority of firearm homicides in the US so there needs to be more focus on tracking down and punishing their sources. If a handgun is used in a crime and recovered, the last person it was legally sold to needs to be held accountable, with few exceptions.
-Address the rampant economic inequality in this nation, the decrease in social mobility and decreasing wealth of the lower and middle classes, and the widespread poverty that forces people into crime to make ends meet.
tl;dr Give ordinary people more powers to keep their guns from falling into the wrong hands, expand concealed carry while ensuring that people need to know what they're doing to be able to carry, and address the causes of violence at the social and economic roots rather than focus on the methods used. Some of these are not easy fixes, but nobody said this would be easy.
The seemingly easy measures, on the other hand, don't cut the mustard. Banning 'assault weapons' and 'high capacity magazines' might make proponents feel good but they're a demonstrably ineffective (see: 1994 AWB) means of addressing the problem. Banning all guns sounds nice but New York couldn't even get its citizens to turn in more than 4% of just their assault weapons, so I can't imagine a nation-wide ban would ever work, even leaving aside the ideological conflict that would literally lead to uprising in the streets. Most everything else (universal background checks, mandatory insurance and training, licensing) don't actually address the typical sources of firearms used to commit crimes.
This is a complex issue and it won't be solved with a boilerplate solution.
I was in the shower, but the last three posts nailed what I would have said anyway.
Gun crime statistics suggest that there is no solid correlation between legal gun ownership and gun crime rates, or indeed, violent crime rates in general, which suggests that instituting further restrictions or outright banning civilian ownership will have no effect on the violent crime rate. What would help is proper enforcement of the laws we already [I]have[/I].
The correlation is with poverty levels and, more specifically, the gang culture that forms in poor areas, which worsens existing depressions and creates a sort of economic tailspin.
There are, of course, killings that occur outside of these areas, but they're a minority in comparison - usually family on family or over relationship disputes. These can't be approached the same way as economic destitution.
The most important thing to remember is that despite how shockingly high the numbers seem, they are invariably twisted - in reality, even in the most dangerous parts of the nation, you are unlikely to be killed. The everyday gun owner will never pose a threat to another human being.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;49261085]I don't use Switzerland in these arguments because IIRC they don't get to keep ammo in their homes, so it doesn't stick very well. Switzerland's lack of crime is, again, due to other reasons.[/QUOTE]
I think that is wrong. The Swiss = no ammo thing was sensationalized from a change in their ammo supply policy. The military used to supply both the rifle and the ammo, but they no longer supply the ammo. Swiss can still go out and buy ammunition if they see fit, it just isn't supplied by the government anymore. Some retard journalist saw the Swiss government saying, "We are no longer giving out ammo and want the ammo we did give back returned," and deduced, "Hurr durr Swiss can't own ammo anymore."
[editline]7th December 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=billibobc;49259736]if guns nobody had guns there literally couldn't be "mass shootings"[/QUOTE]
They should just ban guns in France that'll do the- oh wait.
[QUOTE=catbarf;49262222]First off, I don't care about gun violence. I care about violence. It doesn't matter in the slightest to me whether a murder is committed with a knife or a gun, what matters to me is the frequency of incidence. Firearms may facilitate greater efficiency of killing, turn a 3-casualty stabbing into a 10-casualty shooting, but they're not the underlying cause, and shouldn't be treated as such. Combating violence by restricting guns is like combating drugs by restricting needles- it may help towards the intended goal, but it's still the wrong approach. A smart approach is to tackle the causes of violence, while simultaneously mitigating the impact of technologies that better facilitate that violence.
So with that in mind, there's a lot we can do to actually combat violence in this country, and make acts of violence less effective.
-Incorporate state-level psychiatric records into the NICS. There is no reason why this shouldn't already be the case.
-Make the NICS available to private citizens. Allowing private sellers to conduct background checks would help the overwhelming majority of gun owners who are law-abiding citizens and don't want their firearms to end up in the wrong hands.
-Increase enforcement of penalties for straw purchases. Make private sellers liable for misuse of their sold guns. Right now people get away with knowingly purchasing or supplying guns for criminal use.
-Stop plastering 'gun free zone' on businesses and schools. It has done nothing but make them targets. Plenty of colleges have allowed concealed carry and aren't Wild West gunfights, plenty of businesses allow concealed carry and aren't constant shootouts. On the other hand, nearly every active shooter in the past ten years has specifically targeted a place where they knew their victims would be unarmed.
-Do something about the media turning every attack into a shitshow of speculation and elevating the shooter to celebrity status. These are acts of terrorism and they [I]work[/I] because we are all too happy to plaster the shooter's name and manifesto across every news screen.
-Start reforming the criminal justice system and the war on drugs. Disadvantaged minorities are thrown into a justice system where they are turned into career criminals from the first offense, and end up joining gangs and conducting street crime.
-Start putting more money into the educational system, particularly in poor urban neighborhoods. Most shootings in the US are gang-related or involved in predatory crimes like burglary, rape, and mugging, not premeditated murder- address that violence at its roots, the dysfunctional school systems that turn kids out onto the streets and into gangs.
-Institute a federal concealed carry system and overrule the states' inconsistent and byzantine laws. Require demonstrated competence as a prerequisite for concealed carry, but allow reciprocity in all states. Treat it like a driver's license.
-Make the ATF and FBI take a more aggressive stance on pursuing handgun misuse. Handguns account for the overwhelming majority of firearm homicides in the US so there needs to be more focus on tracking down and punishing their sources. If a handgun is used in a crime and recovered, the last person it was legally sold to needs to be held accountable, with few exceptions.
-Address the rampant economic inequality in this nation, the decrease in social mobility and decreasing wealth of the lower and middle classes, and the widespread poverty that forces people into crime to make ends meet.
tl;dr Give ordinary people more powers to keep their guns from falling into the wrong hands, expand concealed carry while ensuring that people need to know what they're doing to be able to carry, and address the causes of violence at the social and economic roots rather than focus on the methods used. Some of these are not easy fixes, but nobody said this would be easy.
The seemingly easy measures, on the other hand, don't cut the mustard. Banning 'assault weapons' and 'high capacity magazines' might make proponents feel good but they're a demonstrably ineffective (see: 1994 AWB) means of addressing the problem. Banning all guns sounds nice but New York couldn't even get its citizens to turn in more than 4% of just their assault weapons, so I can't imagine a nation-wide ban would ever work, even leaving aside the ideological conflict that would literally lead to uprising in the streets. Most everything else (universal background checks, mandatory insurance and training, licensing) don't actually address the typical sources of firearms used to commit crimes.
This is a complex issue and it won't be solved with a boilerplate solution.[/QUOTE]
This is pretty much one of the most intelligent and thought out posts I've read to addressing the gun control issue in the USA ever. I only wish that all of the discussion on the matter was at this standard. The only thing that I would add, and this mostly goes with the first bullet point, is providing good mental health-care for people, not just keeping track of who's doing exceptionally poorly. Households with guns have something like a 40% higher suicide rate, just because suicide is a very impulse driven decision. Though I have a feeling that improving everyone's economic situation would help with the suicide rate.
I think America is a great country with great people. I think that if we address the issues that are really at the root of gun crime and violence, we can all share in the freedom and fun of owning a gun.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;49258726]Guns play a role in it, they aren't the cause of it. Removing the guns removes one method by which people can kill, it doesn't remove the intent to commit a murder and it [I]does[/I] remove millions of dollars of property, priceless sentimental value and a means of defense from millions of law abiding citizens who have a right to keep them. People who commit crimes with firearms make up an infinitesimally small percentage of people who do not.
It may also come as a surprise to you that areas in the US with the [I]strictest gun laws[/I] also have the highest gun crime.[/QUOTE]
"Strictest" gun laws? P. sure they can still buy a handgun at 21, like anybody else in the country?
[QUOTE=Bat-shit;49264325]"Strictest" gun laws? P. sure they can still buy a handgun at 21, like anybody else in the country that is not a felon or something?[/QUOTE]
Which is basically the problem with pretty much all gun control legislation that has been passed. It focuses on feel good, completely ineffective policies, that do absolutely nothing to actually help, while taking from law abiding people who've done nothing wrong.
[QUOTE=Bat-shit;49264325]"Strictest" gun laws? P. sure they can still buy a handgun at 21, like anybody else in the country?[/QUOTE]
Chicago requires a purchaser to have a Firearm Owner's Identification Card (FOID) for any purchase, even private sale, and to purchase ammunition. To acquire a FOID requires a clean record and a waiting period. They also have a three day waiting period on handgun purchases.
California doesn't allow private sale, registers all handgun serial numbers and sales, requires a ten-day waiting period on purchases, requires a Handgun Safety Certificate to purchase a handgun, only allows the sale of a special list of 'safe' handguns, and requires microstamping on all handguns to assist forensic evaluation.
DC does all this:
[quote]In addition to each firearm being registered with the police, the rules require that D.C. residents undergo an NCIC background check and submit to fingerprinting. The firearms registry photographs the applicant. Residents must take an online gun safety course, and pass a written test on the District's gun laws. Residents must also declare at what address it will be kept. There is a 10-day waiting period from purchase of firearm to possession, and a 30-day period between purchases of successive handguns. Each firearm is registered to an individual only, meaning couples who wish to own firearms must purchase two separate firearms. Handgun registrants must be 21. Long gun registration is allowed for persons 18–21 years of age with a NCIC qualified adult co-registering. Handgun models are limited to any handgun appearing on any one of the California, Massachusetts, Maryland or DC Police "approved rosters" by make/model. Long guns are controlled by an allowed/not-allowed attributes list. Non residents, with a place of business in DC may register a firearm to be maintained at that place of business.
Handgun and long gun ownership/possession licenses must be resubmitted and reapproved every three years before expiration for each firearm owned.[/quote]
And yet one look at the homicide rates in these areas should tell you how effectively those measures are working.
[QUOTE=catbarf;49264615]Chicago requires a purchaser to have a Firearm Owner's Identification Card (FOID) for any purchase, even private sale, and to purchase ammunition. To acquire a FOID requires a clean record and a waiting period. They also have a three day waiting period on handgun purchases.
California doesn't allow private sale, registers all handgun serial numbers and sales, requires a ten-day waiting period on purchases, requires a Handgun Safety Certificate to purchase a handgun, only allows the sale of a special list of 'safe' handguns, and requires microstamping on all handguns to assist forensic evaluation.
DC does all this:
And yet one look at the homicide rates in these areas should tell you how effectively those measures are working.[/QUOTE]
aren't DCs homicide rates dropping enormously
[URL]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/Washington_DC_vs_US_total_homicide_rates_1960-2012.svg[/URL]
that's a fairly fucking enormous reduction in homicide rate
in fact, in 1995-6, in conjunction with the whole Operation Ceasefire thing done elsewhere, the homicide rate absolutely plummets.
also in the wikipedia article for it, it says that a significant portion of gun-crime in the capital is committed with guns that came from out-of-state, or at unregulated events
[QUOTE=MaverickIB;49264136]I think that is wrong. The Swiss = no ammo thing was sensationalized from a change in their ammo supply policy. The military used to supply both the rifle and the ammo, but they no longer supply the ammo. Swiss can still go out and buy ammunition if they see fit, it just isn't supplied by the government anymore. Some retard journalist saw the Swiss government saying, "We are no longer giving out ammo and want the ammo we did give back returned," and deduced, "Hurr durr Swiss can't own ammo anymore."[/QUOTE]
I see- I was never sure and anyway there are plenty of other examples, so I just went with them. Thanks for clearing that up though, more ammunition for our side of the debate.
[editline]7th December 2015[/editline]
It's important to note I think that just as "less guns = less crime" is a fallacy, so too is "more guns = less crime."
One reason those highly regulated areas have high crime rates is that they already had those problems and tried to implement controls as a solution. What the numbers show is that they don't work. Accounting for the already declining rate of violent crime in the US, we can see that they didn't make a dent - and in some areas made it worse.
Adding more guns to these high crime areas won't help either.
I'm at work or I'd lay out some graphs and stuff for y'all but all this is pretty readily available info, you just need to be able to see it from the other side.
[QUOTE=catbarf;49262222]Words of wisdom[/QUOTE]
Holy shit this guy gets it.
[QUOTE=billibobc;49262042]Just so i can hear it, what do you guys think is the best plan to help stop gun violence in the US?[/QUOTE]
If I gave you a real solution, I'd get banned.
A more PC friendly answer? Elect Trump, engage full national socialism (but not national socialism, just the same thing with a less loaded name), make everybody in this country so fucking rich that they're too busy enjoying a glorious future to want to shoot everybody.
This can be accomplished by researching the Forbidden Sciences, re-education of the blacks so that they aren't living in perpetual fear and resentment, same thing with the jews, re-education of the whites so they remember they have a spine, and a re-focusing of our priorities as a species to end the need for money and work.
People are acting out primarily because they can act out. If only our women would retain their virginity till marriage! Then everybody could experience the sublime bliss of a woman truly in love with them, like me. This would also stop gun violence.
We could also disarm the population and render them vastly more vulnerable to internal and external threats, and smash a fundamental pillar of American culture, leaving it's population aimless and without real history.
There is also the option of a seven day torture extravaganza for anyone who commits a crime with a gun, a period which ends with a full pardon and the return of their gun.
We could also legalize duels again and let everybody sort out their problems that way.
These are all solutions which would reduce illegal gun violence.
There's also the option of creating a vast mental construct, allowing it to crystallize with emotional energy on the astral planes, then give it the imperative to guide probability and shape the world into one which you would view as a paradise.
You could also find a skilled somnambulist and train them to channel extraterrestrial forces, and use that connection to build advanced technology that would render the use of any violence such a losing proposition, that your enemies would have no choice but to bow to your will.
You could also do that same plan, but connect with someone a little less warlike, and learn how materialize matter from the primordial essence, the ether, or the void, all of which are the same thing. Using this strategy is pretty good, because then nobody will have to work anymore, which reduces stress, which reduces gun violence.
There's also the option of mass hypnosis and drug induced mind control to make people believe guns don't exist, but the logistics of that would be a nightmare, and also is about as good a plan as taking people's guns away. Possibly, it's slightly better.
Honestly, that's just off the top of my head.
[QUOTE=AlbertWesker;49267568]Holy shit this guy gets it.[/QUOTE]
No I get it too, trust me. But Chicago, cali, D.C., you can still get a gun [I]relatively[/I] easy, otherwise it would be drawing near to violating the constitution.
Despite the measures taken, and the little waiting processes, some of which seem p. reasonable actually. But it's still hard to regulate, or restrict people from getting a hold of guns, since.. you know. We all know the deal.
And like user cloak raider suggested, a lot of D.C.'s gun violence often seems to come from neighboring states, which is pretty interesting..
(Who knows how much private sales are conducted in cali as well despite illegal, too? etc..)
Anyways, no real solution here by me, either..
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.