CDZ Why Americans don't give a damn about mass shootings

[Dogmaphobe]

View attachment 159041

Will you be utilizing the argument that you were armed with only a knife and not in effective range to stop the guy with the handgun if the next incident involves only a handgun?

*****CHUCKLE*****

Time to pull out the old YES albums.

I have several Roger Dean prints around the house.

I always had a feeling you were a starship trooper going for the one in a roundabout way.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I have to disagree with the premise of this thread. Disagreeing on the best way to prevent such shootings is not tantamount to apathy -- not by a long shot.

The problem here has more to do with the deep entrenchment of political positions rather than the position of one "side" or the other. I find it ironic that the very same people who clamor for strict gun control are the very same ones who are against any process that attempts to restrict entry into this country of those who are most likely to engage in such actions based upon their ideology, while those who support the restriction on people won't budge an inch when it comes to mechanical engineering created to maximize casualties.

THese issues are highly complex and everybody seems to focus on just one aspect of it like the op, here. We need to focus on ALL aspects, instead, such as ideological motivations, mental health, and enforcing current laws rather than offering what amounts to a very simple approach to a very complex issue.

 

[2aguy]

Very interesting article Why Americans don't give a damn about mass shootings - CNN

One month ago, the worst mass shooting in US history took place at a country music concert in Las Vegas. Fifty-eight people were killed and more than 500 people injured. Bill O'Reilly boiled the massacre down to six words: "This is the price of freedom."
I hate to say it, but he is right. Sunday, just 34 days after Vegas, 26 people were gunned down and about 20 others were wounded during a church service in Texas. And here's what is really sick -- we won't be surprised when there's another mass shooting next month. Maybe it'll be your church, your mall, your concert or your movie theater. That's the price of freedom.
In America, we are free to stockpile weapons. We are free to order ammo online. We are free to outfit our guns with bump stocks, like the Vegas shooter did. This is the price we pay for freedom, alright. The freedom to not give a damn.
Tweeting "prayers for the victims" does not equal giving a damn. Feeling bad for a day or two does not equal giving a damn. Changing your Facebook profile photo to support the victims does not equal giving a damn.

This hit home for me:

Why the apathy?
Until gun violence impacts your family directly, you won't care enough to do something about it. There's a ton of research to explain this apathy.
After World War II, the famous Cambridge psychologist J.T. MacCurdy studied an interesting phenomenon about the bombings in London in 1940 and 1941.
He found that people affected by the bombings fell into three categories: those who died, those who were a "near miss" (who closely witnessed the horror of the bombings but lived), and those who had a "remote miss" (people who may have heard the sirens, but were removed from the direct scene of the bombing).
Here's what's interesting. MacCurdy found the people who witnessed a "near miss" were deeply affected by the bombing -- while the "remote miss" group felt invincible and even excited.

I was 800 yards +/- from the shooter at Mandalay Bay, well within range. I was armed with a Glock. Nothing I could have done with that, I was out armed and nowhere near effective range.

IMO: ALL automatic and semi-automatic rifles should be banned.

An AR-15 was used to stop the shooter in Texas.....he saved 26 lives. there are 16 million of these rifles vs. the 2 that were used, illegally, to murder people....

The Right to bear these arms is protected by our natural right to self defense....we do not change the constitution based on 2 criminals breaking the law......

Had you engaged the shooter, he would have retreated or given up...as all of them do...or committed suicide.....that is how they act when confronted by an armed citizen.

 

[2aguy]

Very interesting article Why Americans don't give a damn about mass shootings - CNN

One month ago, the worst mass shooting in US history took place at a country music concert in Las Vegas. Fifty-eight people were killed and more than 500 people injured. Bill O'Reilly boiled the massacre down to six words: "This is the price of freedom."
I hate to say it, but he is right. Sunday, just 34 days after Vegas, 26 people were gunned down and about 20 others were wounded during a church service in Texas. And here's what is really sick -- we won't be surprised when there's another mass shooting next month. Maybe it'll be your church, your mall, your concert or your movie theater. That's the price of freedom.
In America, we are free to stockpile weapons. We are free to order ammo online. We are free to outfit our guns with bump stocks, like the Vegas shooter did. This is the price we pay for freedom, alright. The freedom to not give a damn.
Tweeting "prayers for the victims" does not equal giving a damn. Feeling bad for a day or two does not equal giving a damn. Changing your Facebook profile photo to support the victims does not equal giving a damn.

This hit home for me:

Why the apathy?
Until gun violence impacts your family directly, you won't care enough to do something about it. There's a ton of research to explain this apathy.
After World War II, the famous Cambridge psychologist J.T. MacCurdy studied an interesting phenomenon about the bombings in London in 1940 and 1941.
He found that people affected by the bombings fell into three categories: those who died, those who were a "near miss" (who closely witnessed the horror of the bombings but lived), and those who had a "remote miss" (people who may have heard the sirens, but were removed from the direct scene of the bombing).
Here's what's interesting. MacCurdy found the people who witnessed a "near miss" were deeply affected by the bombing -- while the "remote miss" group felt invincible and even excited.

I was 800 yards +/- from the shooter at Mandalay Bay, well within range. I was armed with a Glock. Nothing I could have done with that, I was out armed and nowhere near effective range.

IMO: ALL automatic and semi-automatic rifles should be banned.

Can not outlaw semi automatic weapons the Courts already ruled that in order to be protected by the 2nd Amendment a weapon must be of use to the military.

There is no apathy....this guy wasn't stopped, not because of the NRA or the AR-15 rifle.....he wasn't stopped because a clerk in the Air Force didn't press "send."

 

[2aguy]

We have sown the seeds of gun violence by our apathy. We have cultivated the fields with political intimidation through the powerful gun lobbies. We have watered the fields with the blood of the innocent. And now we must reap the whirlwind.

Gun advocates will argue that as no law could prevent gun violence, no laws need be written. The argument of the unimaginative and truly uncompassionate. But those gun advocates insist on using the second amendment as a national suicide note. They see powerful weapons used on the battlefield as their uninfringible right to bear. I ask them: what is the virtue of high capacity magazines and semi-automatic (or modified semi-automatic firing systems). They argue that such weaponry is absolutely necessary to defend themselves from the hordes of gun toting criminals at their door. They live in a make believe world of Rambo and Dirty Harry where they can be the hero gunslinger saving the day.

Gun advocates won't take responsibility for the havoc brought by those weapons. Those of us who want to act are thwarted by their intimidation. And the bodies keep piling up.

If Charleston, Newtown, and Las Vegas couldn't move the needle, no tragedy will.

To quote Sonny & Cher, and the beat goes on.

No....we say correctly that this criminal ignores all the laws....all that is left is to catch them and punish them....this guy already could not legally buy, own or carry a gun....your god...the government, failed.

These are not powerful weapons...considering a man with 2 pistols at Virginia Tech murdered 32 people....and of course if you get AR-15s you will also come after those common pistols....

The virtue of standard capacity magazines.....since you lie and call them high capacity magazines showing you don't care about the truth or facts.....

The Costs and Consequences of Gun Control



In 2012, Arizona repealed its limitations on magazine capacity for hunters precisely because of the possible need for self-defense against unexpected encounters with cartel gangs in the southern part of the state.36 In that region, it is well known that drug traffickers and human traffickers use the same wild and lonely lands that hunters do.



---

For the firearms that are most often chosen for self-defense, the claim that any magazine holding more than 10 (or 7) rounds is “high capacity” or “large” is incorrect. The term “high-capacity magazine” might have a legitimate meaning when it refers to a magazine that extends far beyond that intended for the gun’s optimal operation. For example, although a semiautomatic handgun can accept a 40-round magazine, such a magazine typically extends far beneath the gun grip, and it is therefore impractical to use with a concealed-carry permit. For most handguns, a 40-round magazine could be called “high-capacity.”

------

The persons who have the most need for actual high-capacity magazines are those who would have great difficulty changing a magazine — such as elderly persons or persons with disabilities. For an able-bodied person, changing a magazine only takes a few seconds. Typically a gun’s magazine-release button is near the trigger. To change a magazine, the person holding the gun presses the magazine-release button with a thumb or finger. The magazine instantly drops to the floor. While one hand was pushing the magazine-release button, the other hand can grab a fresh magazine (which might be carried in a special holster on a belt) and bring it toward the gun. The moment the old magazine drops out, a fresh one is inserted.37


-----


Although one can quickly change magazines, persons being attacked by criminals will typically prefer not to spend even a few seconds for a magazine change. The stress of being attacked usually impedes fine motor skills, making it much more difficult to insert the magazine.38 That is why many semiautomatic handguns come factory-standard with a magazine of 11 to 20 rounds. Thus, a ban on magazines with a capacity of more than 10 rounds means a ban on some of the most common and most useful magazines purchased for purposes of recreational target practice and self-defense.

Why might someone need a factory-standard 17-round magazine for a common 9mm handgun? As noted, standard-capacity magazines can be very useful for self-defense. This is especially true if a defender faces multiple attackers, an attacker is wearing heavy clothing or body armor, an attacker who is turbo-charged by methamphetamine or cocaine, or an attacker who poses an active threat from behind cover. In stressful circumstances, police as well as civilians often miss when firing a handgun even at close range, so having the extra rounds can be crucial.
It is important to consider the advantages a criminal has over his intended victims. The criminal has the element of surprise, whereas the victim is the one surprised. The criminal can decide at leisure what weaponry he will bring; whereas the victim must respond with what’s at hand at the moment of attack. A criminal can bring several guns, or lots of magazines; whereas the victim will usually have on hand, at most, a single defensive gun with only as much ammunition as is in that gun. Thus, legislation confining law-abiding victims to magazines of 10 or fewer magnifies the criminal’s advantage over his intended victim
Violent confrontations are unpredictable; for example, if a person is fighting against one or two perpetrators, he may not know if there is an additional, hidden attacker. Thus, defensive gun users need to keep a reserve of ammunition. So even though armed defenders do not usually fire more than 10 shots, reducing reserve capacity (e.g., from a standard 17-round magazine to a 10-round substitute) will reduce the number of defensive shots. Fewer shots fired at the attacker reduces the risk of injury to the attacker, and thereby raises the risk of injury to the victim.
Would a Magazine Ban Be Beneficial?
The National Institute of Justice study found that the 1994-2004 federal ban on the manufacture of large magazines had no discernible benefit because the existing supply of such magazines was so vast.40

The types of criminals most likely to get into shootouts with the police or with other criminals are precisely those who are very aware of what is available on the black market. Although gun prohibitionists often link assault weapons to gang violence associated with the illegal drug trade, they miss the irony of their argument.41 They are, in effect, claiming that the very gangs operating the black market in drugs will somehow be restricted from acquiring high-capacity magazines by legislation limiting the manufacture and sale of such magazines. The claim — at least as it pertains to career criminals — is ludicrous. If gangsters can obtain all the cocaine they want, despite a century of prohibition, they will be able to obtain 15-round magazines.

What about the typical perpetrators of random mass attacks — mentally ill young men? They, too, could acquire magazines by theft, or on the black market. Given that 36 percent of American high school seniors illegally acquire and consume marijuana, it is clear that plenty of people who are not gangsters or career criminals use the black market.42 Besides that, the truly high-capacity magazines, such as a 100-round drum, are very prone to malfunction. For example, during the 2012 mass murder at the movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, the murderer’s 100-round magazine jammed, allowing people to escape.43 Hundred-round magazines are novelty items and are not standard for self-defense by civilians or police.

Advocates of a ban on standard-capacity magazines assert that while the attacker is changing the magazine, an intended victim might be able to subdue him — yet they cannot point to a single instance where this actually happened. They cite a trilogy of events that happened in Tucson, Arizona (2011), Aurora, Colorado (2012), and Newtown, Connecticut (2013). In fact, all of those events involved gun jams, not magazine changes. At Newtown, the criminal changed magazines seven times and no one escaped, but when his rifle jammed, people did escape. Clearing a gun jam takes much longer than changing a magazine. Fixing a gun jam involves all the steps of a magazine change (remove the empty magazine and insert a new one) plus all the intermediate steps of doing whatever is necessary to fix the jam. Similarly, in the Luby’s cafeteria murders (24 dead), the perpetrator replaced magazines multiple times. In the Virginia Tech murders (32 dead), the perpetrator changed magazines 17 times.44

----

When one also takes into account rifle magazines, the number of American magazines holding more than 10 rounds could be more than 100 million. That in itself is sufficient, according to the Supreme Court’s Hellerprecedent, to make the ban unconstitutional.

 

[2aguy]

We have sown the seeds of gun violence by our apathy. We have cultivated the fields with political intimidation through the powerful gun lobbies. We have watered the fields with the blood of the innocent. And now we must reap the whirlwind.

Gun advocates will argue that as no law could prevent gun violence, no laws need be written. The argument of the unimaginative and truly uncompassionate. But those gun advocates insist on using the second amendment as a national suicide note. They see powerful weapons used on the battlefield as their uninfringible right to bear. I ask them: what is the virtue of high capacity magazines and semi-automatic (or modified semi-automatic firing systems). They argue that such weaponry is absolutely necessary to defend themselves from the hordes of gun toting criminals at their door. They live in a make believe world of Rambo and Dirty Harry where they can be the hero gunslinger saving the day.

Gun advocates won't take responsibility for the havoc brought by those weapons. Those of us who want to act are thwarted by their intimidation. And the bodies keep piling up.

If Charleston, Newtown, and Las Vegas couldn't move the needle, no tragedy will.

To quote Sonny & Cher, and the beat goes on.

No....you refuse to face the fact that Americans use guns, including the AR-15, 1,500,000 times a year to stop violent crimes....including rapes, robberies, murders and also mass public shootings......those are lives saved and lives saved from horror.......

They argue that such weaponry is absolutely necessary to defend themselves from the hordes of gun toting criminals at their door. They live in a make believe world of Rambo and Dirty Harry where they can be the hero gunslinger saving the day.

You do realize...right....that the civilian, NRA instructor used an AR-15 civilian rifle to stop the shooter and to save 26 lives....right? That it wasn't a horde of attackers but one man that you failed to stop with your background check laws and your gun free zones...they didn't stop him....the civillian armed with the AR-15 civilian rifle stopped him....

The police didn't stop him...they never even made it to the church.....the civilian plumber, with an AR-15 civilian rifle stopped him and saved 26 lives...

 

[2aguy]

As guns should be.

It's funny but gun lovers often point to the hazards of the automobile. But to operate one, you must be licensed, pay an annual fee for plates, be insured and be at least sixteen years old.

If we could treat guns as carefully as we treat that damn hazardous car...

Small problem with your "correlation" driving a car is not a constitutionally protected right. But, how about we use the falls statistic instead? 27,000 (approximately) every year. Gun murders? about 8,500. So, maybe we should spend more time teaching people how to not fall?

It's really disgusting the way you people hide behind the 2nd Amendment. The founding fathers never imagined mass shooting, never imagined the fire power private citizens are allowed to have nowadays.

As well, it is completely ridiculous to think, no matter what firepower you idiots have that you could defend yourselves with some kind of insurection against the US government. Ridiculous. We have the biggest, most powerful military in the world. As well, there is no way our government in modern times is a threat to you or your security. It isn't like the English king is going to try to control you. You people are just holding the people of this country hostage with your 2nd Amendment BS. The constitution is meant to be amended, and this particular amendment will be amended.

Your understanding of how things really are is simply pathetic. Your statement is that people should just acquiesce to the whims of "gubemint" because resistance is futile....what a chickenshit you are. Allow me to remind you that over 200,000,000 people (mostly unarmed) have been murdered by their "gubermint" and mostly that of commies and socialists such as yourself. Fuck you.....you want to disarm the public? Please put your ass on the front line for the "door to door" confiscation.

More ignorance, stupidity, and lies from the right.

No one wants to ‘disarm’ anyone, no one seeks to ‘take’ anyone’s guns.

And the Second Amendment doesn’t ‘trump’ the First – citizens have the right to possess firearms pursuant to lawful self-defense, not to ‘take up arms’ against a government some subjectively and incorrectly perceive to be ‘tyrannical,’ a government lawfully elected and put into place through the political process, that can only be removed by the political process.

Then explain the statements of obama and other democrat leaders that they do, in fact, want to ban guns.....

then explain the ruling in the 4th circuit that essentially bans all guns because all guns have been used by the military...explain that.....

 

[2aguy]

As guns should be.

It's funny but gun lovers often point to the hazards of the automobile. But to operate one, you must be licensed, pay an annual fee for plates, be insured and be at least sixteen years old.

If we could treat guns as carefully as we treat that damn hazardous car...

Small problem with your "correlation" driving a car is not a constitutionally protected right. But, how about we use the falls statistic instead? 27,000 (approximately) every year. Gun murders? about 8,500. So, maybe we should spend more time teaching people how to not fall?

It's really disgusting the way you people hide behind the 2nd Amendment. The founding fathers never imagined mass shooting, never imagined the fire power private citizens are allowed to have nowadays.

As well, it is completely ridiculous to think, no matter what firepower you idiots have that you could defend yourselves with some kind of insurection against the US government. Ridiculous. We have the biggest, most powerful military in the world. As well, there is no way our government in modern times is a threat to you or your security. It isn't like the English king is going to try to control you. You people are just holding the people of this country hostage with your 2nd Amendment BS. The constitution is meant to be amended, and this particular amendment will be amended.

Your understanding of how things really are is simply pathetic. Your statement is that people should just acquiesce to the whims of "gubemint" because resistance is futile....what a chickenshit you are. Allow me to remind you that over 200,000,000 people (mostly unarmed) have been murdered by their "gubermint" and mostly that of commies and socialists such as yourself. Fuck you.....you want to disarm the public? Please put your ass on the front line for the "door to door" confiscation.

What 200 million people have been killed by the government? By our government or by a communist dictatorship? It is ludicrous and lacking all logic and reasoning to suggest that our government has any similarities to a dictatorship. Again, you lack reasoning: on the one hand you believe so strongly in the constitution and the 2nd Amendment, and yet on the other hand you suggest the government is a threat to you. All self serving nonsense.

That is exactly what the German people believed in the 1920s when they willingly registered their guns and gave up their military rifles to the government....20 years later, when the government used those registration lists to disarm them.....and then send them to gas chambers....they had a rude awakening to how fast a government can change...

 

[2aguy]

Precisely, and you blaming an inanimate object is foolish.

The gun as inanimate object is a popular fall back position. Automobiles are also inanimate objects, but their use and design are regulated for public safety.

As guns should be.

It's funny but gun lovers often point to the hazards of the automobile. But to operate one, you must be licensed, pay an annual fee for plates, be insured and be at least sixteen years old.

If we could treat guns as carefully as we treat that damn hazardous car...

Small problem with your "correlation" driving a car is not a constitutionally protected right. But, how about we use the falls statistic instead? 27,000 (approximately) every year. Gun murders? about 8,500. So, maybe we should spend more time teaching people how to not fall?

It's really disgusting the way you people hide behind the 2nd Amendment. The founding fathers never imagined mass shooting, never imagined the fire power private citizens are allowed to have nowadays.

As well, it is completely ridiculous to think, no matter what firepower you have, that you could defend yourselves during some kind of insurection against the US government. Ridiculous. We have the biggest, most powerful military in the world.

As well, there is no way our government in modern times is a threat to you or your security. It isn't like the English king is going to try to control you. You people are just holding the people of this country hostage with your 2nd Amendment BS. The constitution is meant to be amended, and this particular amendment will be amended.

Wrong...had the Founders known that governments in the future would murder close to 100 million innocent men, women and children....who were all disarmed by their governments...they would have mandated that all Americans own several rifles and pistols......

Governments have murdered more people than all the criminal murders combined....

 

[2aguy]

Very interesting article Why Americans don't give a damn about mass shootings - CNN

One month ago, the worst mass shooting in US history took place at a country music concert in Las Vegas. Fifty-eight people were killed and more than 500 people injured. Bill O'Reilly boiled the massacre down to six words: "This is the price of freedom."
I hate to say it, but he is right. Sunday, just 34 days after Vegas, 26 people were gunned down and about 20 others were wounded during a church service in Texas. And here's what is really sick -- we won't be surprised when there's another mass shooting next month. Maybe it'll be your church, your mall, your concert or your movie theater. That's the price of freedom.
In America, we are free to stockpile weapons. We are free to order ammo online. We are free to outfit our guns with bump stocks, like the Vegas shooter did. This is the price we pay for freedom, alright. The freedom to not give a damn.
Tweeting "prayers for the victims" does not equal giving a damn. Feeling bad for a day or two does not equal giving a damn. Changing your Facebook profile photo to support the victims does not equal giving a damn.

This hit home for me:

Why the apathy?
Until gun violence impacts your family directly, you won't care enough to do something about it. There's a ton of research to explain this apathy.
After World War II, the famous Cambridge psychologist J.T. MacCurdy studied an interesting phenomenon about the bombings in London in 1940 and 1941.
He found that people affected by the bombings fell into three categories: those who died, those who were a "near miss" (who closely witnessed the horror of the bombings but lived), and those who had a "remote miss" (people who may have heard the sirens, but were removed from the direct scene of the bombing).
Here's what's interesting. MacCurdy found the people who witnessed a "near miss" were deeply affected by the bombing -- while the "remote miss" group felt invincible and even excited.

I was 800 yards +/- from the shooter at Mandalay Bay, well within range. I was armed with a Glock. Nothing I could have done with that, I was out armed and nowhere near effective range.

IMO: ALL automatic and semi-automatic rifles should be banned.

yea, the left isn't coming for our guns..


you freedom hating filth won't be happy until we are down to plastic sporks

the idiotic idea that bans would make us safer is just ignorant on a level that can't be described.

It would make mass shootings harder to commit and less prevalent.

The texas shooter with a rifle....26 murdered.

Virginia Tech shooter with 2 pistols....32 murdered.

Nice, France muslim...rental truck, 89 murdered.

See the problem with your post?

 

[2aguy]

We have sown the seeds of gun violence by our apathy. We have cultivated the fields with political intimidation through the powerful gun lobbies. We have watered the fields with the blood of the innocent. And now we must reap the whirlwind.

Gun advocates will argue that as no law could prevent gun violence, no laws need be written. The argument of the unimaginative and truly uncompassionate. But those gun advocates insist on using the second amendment as a national suicide note. They see powerful weapons used on the battlefield as their uninfringible right to bear. I ask them: what is the virtue of high capacity magazines and semi-automatic (or modified semi-automatic firing systems). They argue that such weaponry is absolutely necessary to defend themselves from the hordes of gun toting criminals at their door. They live in a make believe world of Rambo and Dirty Harry where they can be the hero gunslinger saving the day.

Gun advocates won't take responsibility for the havoc brought by those weapons. Those of us who want to act are thwarted by their intimidation. And the bodies keep piling up.

If Charleston, Newtown, and Las Vegas couldn't move the needle, no tragedy will.

To quote Sonny & Cher, and the beat goes on.

Spoken like one that doesn’t have a real clue. It isn’t the guns of those legally possessing guns, it’s those with illegal guns. It is a society not on gun violence, but on violence. It is the cheapening of life, when you can abort a kid because, when you raise a generation of entitlement, a generation where it is all about me, me, me. Where we don’t need a mom and a dad, where God and the family unit are looked down upon, this is what you get.

The two step is still a popular dance, and as a means of avoiding responsib. Social Secuirty checks aren't being used to kill dozens of people at once.

Precisely, and you blaming an inanimate object is foolish.

The gun as inanimate object is a popular fall back position. Automobiles are also inanimate objects, but their use and design are regulated for public safety.

So are guns...they are as heavily regulated as cars...

 

[2aguy]

Spoken like one that doesn’t have a real clue. It isn’t the guns of those legally possessing guns, it’s those with illegal guns. It is a society not on gun violence, but on violence. It is the cheapening of life, when you can abort a kid because, when you raise a generation of entitlement, a generation where it is all about me, me, me. Where we don’t need a mom and a dad, where God and the family unit are looked down upon, this is what you get.

The two step is still a popular dance, and as a means of avoiding responsib. Social Secuirty checks aren't being used to kill dozens of people at once.

Precisely, and you blaming an inanimate object is foolish.

The gun as inanimate object is a popular fall back position. Automobiles are also inanimate objects, but their use and design are regulated for public safety.

But yet automobiles and the careless use still accounts for more deaths than guns....no?

38,000 gun deaths. Could that number be reduced? Only if gun advocates could imagine it could. But to rely on gun advocates for solutions to gun violence is a fool's game.

If you want to reduce those deaths...

1) mental health and suicide prevention.

2) lock up actual gun criminals for 30 years.

3) Gun safety education in all public schools

There.....since the majority of gun deaths are suicides and criminals murdering other criminals, those two solutions will actually lower gun deaths, gun safety in Schools will save the lives of the 48 children who die from gun accidents....it isn't a fools game, it is reality. You guys keep putting criminals back on the street, that causes gun murder....

Gun suicide..

Leading Causes of Death | WISQARS | Injury Center | CDC

2015
Gun suicide...

22,018

Non Gun suicide...

22,078
========================

Gun Accidental death.....
2015

489

==================

Gun murder ( 70-80% of the victims of gun murder are actual criminals, not law abiding people)

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8


2015--

9,616

=======================

Suicide
...even though Japan, Korea, China, all have absolute gun control for law abiding citizens...only criminals and cops can have guns.......and they have higher suicide rates than we do....and our non-gun suicide rate has been higher than our gun suicide rate for 2 years in a row.....

Gun Accidental Death...

Gun accidents....in a country with over 320,000,000 people...... with 400,000,000 guns in private hands, and over 15,700,000 people carrying guns for self defense..... 489 accidental gun deaths....

Gun murder
Of the 9,616 gun murders in this country, 70-80% of the victims are criminals, engaged in criminal activity or part of the criminal life style....and of the remaining victims....many of them are friends and family of the criminal...caught up in the criminal's lifestyle.....


Here is the actual breakdown of gun deaths....notice that

 

[Markle]

Either powerful assault weapons,are too cool to lose, or the public safety he damned.

What is an assault rifle?

All these guns do exactly the same thing, NOT ONE is an assault weapon. ALL, except one, can take high capacity magazines.

When are REAL solutions going to be proposed?

This shooter had been court-martialed for assaulting his wife and child. He was discharged and that should have been entered into the Federal database as a felony conviction and he should not have been allowed to buy a gun. He was committed to a psychiatric facility and he escaped several days later.

His neighbors knew he was unbalanced. NO ONE DID ANYTHING. How is that the fault of a weapon?

Where do we have to put people like him, and there are millions since mainstreaming became such a grand idea?

 

[usmbguest5318]

I don't think Americans are indifferent about mass shootings.

I'm okay with the notion of banning semi-automatic rifles because for game hunting and target shooting and the like, IMO, a bolt action or lever action rifle is sufficient. (There's no way they cannot be, for humanity survived as hunters long before rifles of any sort were invented.) FWIW, I'm also of the mind that a revolver is sufficient as a close range self defense weapon.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I don't think Americans are indifferent about mass shootings.

I'm okay with the notion of banning semi-automatic rifles because for game hunting and target shooting and the like, IMO, a bolt action or lever action rifle is sufficient. (There's no way they cannot be, for humanity survived as hunters long before rifles of any sort were invented.) FWIW, I'm also of the mind that a revolver is sufficient as a close range self defense weapon.

Semiautomatic weapons have been around since the 19th century.

And what you prefer means nothing to me and quite frankly you have no right to force me to accept what you prefer.

If you want to own nothing but single shot bolt action rifles that's your choice.
If you want to own nothing but revolvers again your choice.

The fact that I own semiautomatic rifles or handguns has nothing to do with murder rates, or crime rates because I will not commit murder or any crimes with my weapons.

 

[OnePercenter]

"In America, we are free to stockpile weapons. We are free to order ammo online. We are free to outfit our guns with bump stocks, like the Vegas shooter did. This is the price we pay for freedom, alright. The freedom to not give a damn." - From the article

Damn right! Bless America.

Why would you NOT give a damn about mass shootings?

I don't give a damn about anyone who uses a tragedy - be it terrorism or psychotic with a gun - to advance a political agenda.

As soon as the argument goes towards depriving anyone of their rights who wasn't involved in the shooting it's time to tune out.

You don't give a damn. When you or your family are involved in a mass shooting, are you going to give a damn?

Nobody is depriving anyone of their rights.

Nor will anyone. That ship has sunk.

You can't show that anyone is depriving you of your rights.

 

[OnePercenter]

Very interesting article Why Americans don't give a damn about mass shootings - CNN

This hit home for me:

I was 800 yards +/- from the shooter at Mandalay Bay, well within range. I was armed with a Glock. Nothing I could have done with that, I was out armed and nowhere near effective range.

IMO: ALL automatic and semi-automatic rifles should be banned.

Can not outlaw semi automatic weapons the Courts already ruled that in order to be protected by the 2nd Amendment a weapon must be of use to the military.

Which court ruling was that?

Perhaps you should do a little research BEFORE you make stupid statements?

Or you could answer the question.

It is a well known Supreme Court decision from the 1930's. Look it up and you will be smarter then you were before you made the ignorant statement.

I simply asked a poster to make their point. How is that stupid?

 

[OnePercenter]

Very interesting article Why Americans don't give a damn about mass shootings - CNN

This hit home for me:

I was 800 yards +/- from the shooter at Mandalay Bay, well within range. I was armed with a Glock. Nothing I could have done with that, I was out armed and nowhere near effective range.

IMO: ALL automatic and semi-automatic rifles should be banned.

yea, the left isn't coming for our guns..


you freedom hating filth won't be happy until we are down to plastic sporks

the idiotic idea that bans would make us safer is just ignorant on a level that can't be described.

It would make mass shootings harder to commit and less prevalent.

no it wouldn't, that's a dream with no reference in reality

Except for Canada, Australia, and the UK.

Could Paddock have amassed his weaponry? NO.

Could the Texas shooter who was denied a gun sale in Texas drive to a different State and buy? NO.

yes he could have, ever hear of the black market?

moving on to people with a grasp of reality

Do you have firsthand knowledge of a black market in gun running?

 

[OnePercenter]

The fact of the matter is that the box has already been opened and no matter how much you try to put a lid back on it the plague on humanity will spread as it does with all technology.

In other words if someone wants it they'll find a way to obtain one.

*****SMILE*****

Australia did it, why can't we?

 

[OnePercenter]

Very interesting article Why Americans don't give a damn about mass shootings - CNN

One month ago, the worst mass shooting in US history took place at a country music concert in Las Vegas. Fifty-eight people were killed and more than 500 people injured. Bill O'Reilly boiled the massacre down to six words: "This is the price of freedom."
I hate to say it, but he is right. Sunday, just 34 days after Vegas, 26 people were gunned down and about 20 others were wounded during a church service in Texas. And here's what is really sick -- we won't be surprised when there's another mass shooting next month. Maybe it'll be your church, your mall, your concert or your movie theater. That's the price of freedom.
In America, we are free to stockpile weapons. We are free to order ammo online. We are free to outfit our guns with bump stocks, like the Vegas shooter did. This is the price we pay for freedom, alright. The freedom to not give a damn.
Tweeting "prayers for the victims" does not equal giving a damn. Feeling bad for a day or two does not equal giving a damn. Changing your Facebook profile photo to support the victims does not equal giving a damn.

This hit home for me:

Why the apathy?
Until gun violence impacts your family directly, you won't care enough to do something about it. There's a ton of research to explain this apathy.
After World War II, the famous Cambridge psychologist J.T. MacCurdy studied an interesting phenomenon about the bombings in London in 1940 and 1941.
He found that people affected by the bombings fell into three categories: those who died, those who were a "near miss" (who closely witnessed the horror of the bombings but lived), and those who had a "remote miss" (people who may have heard the sirens, but were removed from the direct scene of the bombing).
Here's what's interesting. MacCurdy found the people who witnessed a "near miss" were deeply affected by the bombing -- while the "remote miss" group felt invincible and even excited.

I was 800 yards +/- from the shooter at Mandalay Bay, well within range. I was armed with a Glock. Nothing I could have done with that, I was out armed and nowhere near effective range.

IMO: ALL automatic and semi-automatic rifles should be banned.

One of my very close friends killed her abusive husband with a bullet between the eyes.

Violence has touched our lives directly.

I'm glad she had the rifle. He said he was going to kill her horses, then her. He was the only one to die.

I have no problem with personal protection. It's mass killing that is being discussed.

btw, the violence was the abusive husband, the killing was the end.