USA Guns, gun control, and rights.

[Albion]

--all the more reason not to fall for the easy logic that says a few more gun control laws would have averted this massacre.

 

[MoreCoffee]

--all the more reason not to fall for the easy logic that says a few more gun control laws would have averted this massacre.

Is that like the logic that says fewer back yard swimming pools leads to fewer children drowning in back yard swimming pools? Or that fewer drugs being available on the streets leads to fewer people using drugs bought on the streets? You know, like saying that fewer guns in the hands of the populace leads to fewer members of the populace using guns to shoot down other people.

 

[Albion]

Is that like the logic that says fewer back yard swimming pools leads to fewer children drowning in back yard swimming pools?

No.

Or that fewer drugs being available on the streets leads to fewer people using drugs bought on the streets? You know, like saying that fewer guns in the hands of the populace leads to fewer members of the populace using guns to shoot down other people.

No again. I was referring to the logic that says that more restrictions--waiting periods, background checks, prohibitions on the sale of equipment that can juice up semi-automatic rifles, etc., and even downright phony proposals like making the sale of silencers illegal--will prevent or significantly reduce the instances of mass shootings.

The facts show that such things, which the demagogues promote as their answer to every tragedy of this sort, will not and do not accomplish what is claimed.

 

[MoreCoffee]

No.


No again. I was referring to the logic that says that more restrictions--waiting periods, background checks, prohibitions on the sale of equipment that can juice up semi-automatic rifles, etc., and even downright phony proposals like making the sale of silencers illegal--will prevent or significantly reduce the instances of mass shootings.

The facts show that such things, which the demagogues promote as their answer to every tragedy of this sort, will not and do not accomplish what is claimed.

I see, so you're claiming that gun laws that restrict the availability of guns and the type of guns that are available do not reduce shooting incidents but that laws that restrict the availability of street drugs and laws that regulate the number and kind of swimming pools that can be installed in back yards does work for reducing drug availability and children drowning in back yard swimming pools?

 

[Albion]

I see, so you're claiming that gun laws that restrict the availability of guns and the type of guns that are available do not reduce shooting incidents but that laws that restrict the availability of street drugs and laws that regulate the number and kind of swimming pools that can be installed in back yards does work for reducing drug availability and children drowning in back yard swimming pools?

No, I didn't say that. I said that neither of your analogies provides an accurate parallel to the claims made by the gun-control lobbyists.

 

[Stravinsk]

Is that like the logic that says fewer back yard swimming pools leads to fewer children drowning in back yard swimming pools? Or that fewer drugs being available on the streets leads to fewer people using drugs bought on the streets? You know, like saying that fewer guns in the hands of the populace leads to fewer members of the populace using guns to shoot down other people.

Oh, I agree. It would be far more preferable if the general populace used led pipes to bash one another over the head, or knives of various types and sizes to gut each other. Guns are so barbaric and violent - I much prefer double arrow heads for the killing that needs to be done. Guns are so noisy! Blow guns with poison darts that leave people writhing in pain emitting fluids from both ends before they give up the ghost - this has to be preferable to the gun. Even a sling shot or a sling would be preferable to a gun. With enough force - a rock might even pierce the skull and get lodged in a person's brain - whereas a gun's bullet would likely pass clear through given the same range. Come to think of it, hammers are silent too. It would be far better if peeps could tear open skulls and fracture limbs swinging hammers around. Aside from the cries of pain and horror - at least they aren't so noisy!

Your argument is LAME - it relies on the implicit suggestion that removing the implement of violence removes the violence - or by moral argument - that the violence done with a certain implement is worse than violence done with another.

 

[Imalive]

Oh, I agree. It would be far more preferable if the general populace used led pipes to bash one another over the head, or knives of various types and sizes to gut each other. Guns are so barbaric and violent - I much prefer double arrow heads for the killing that needs to be done. Guns are so noisy! Blow guns with poison darts that leave people writhing in pain emitting fluids from both ends before they give up the ghost - this has to be preferable to the gun. Even a sling shot or a sling would be preferable to a gun. With enough force - a rock might even pierce the skull and get lodged in a person's brain - whereas a gun's bullet would likely pass clear through given the same range. Come to think of it, hammers are silent too. It would be far better if peeps could tear open skulls and fracture limbs swinging hammers around. Aside from the cries of pain and horror - at least they aren't so noisy!

Your argument is LAME - it relies on the implicit suggestion that removing the implement of violence removes the violence - or by moral argument - that the violence done with a certain implement is worse than violence done with another.

Well the violence is far less w out guns, at least here, but in India or something they just put a whole school on fire, so it isn't the only solution.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Well the violence is far less w out guns, at least here, but in India or something they just put a whole school on fire, so it isn't the only solution.

Violence that needs physical contact is much harder to do than shooting from a 32nd floor window at a crowd hundreds of meters away. Trying physical violence on the 32nd floor against a crowd a few hundred meters away is going to be very ineffective and probably rather frustrating. Of course I am stating the obvious here and driving a truck into a crowd is fairly effective for killing people as was shown in France nevertheless there are fewer truck murders happening in the Euro Zone than mass shootings in the USA and the two areas are comparable in population.

 

[Stravinsk]

Violence that needs physical contact is much harder to do than shooting from a 32nd floor window at a crowd hundreds of meters away. Trying physical violence on the 32nd floor against a crowd a few hundred meters away is going to be very ineffective and probably rather frustrating. Of course I am stating the obvious here and driving a truck into a crowd is fairly effective for killing people as was shown in France nevertheless there are fewer truck murders happening in the Euro Zone than mass shootings in the USA and the two areas are comparable in population.

If I were a person intent on killing/injuring large amounts of people at a group gathering to make some sort of statement - I certainly would not use a loud weapon that could pinpoint my relative location quickly and be fairly ineffectual range wise from so far up and so far away as the shooter is supposed to have been. If what I have recently heard is correct - the supposed "lone gunman" also had some 9 other automatic rifles with him and tons of ammunition. Was he an octopus? Last I knew it was only possible to shoot 1 rifle at a time. Also - How did he avoid suspicion carrying all that gear up to a 32nd story hotel room?

Did MoreCoffee ask himself any of these questions? Is MoreCoffee even aware that it is highly difficult to even get fully automatic weapons in the USA as a citizen? It's not like you can just go to Kmart and buy one. And the guy is not supposed to have any kind of military background.

Anywhoo - If it were me - I'd be using a sniper rifle with a silencer. In that way I could pick off people from all around the concert area for some time before any major suspicions affecting the whole crowd were raised. I'd also pick a spot that couldn't be easily pinpointed and where it would be possible to move to multiple locations - such as a hotel roof.

That being said - there are a number of silent weapons (non guns) available or easily homemade that also could be used to kill or injure large amounts of people in a crowded area - without immediate detection or alerting the greater number anything is wrong.

The more I look into it - the Vegas incident isn't adding up. Charlottesville was easier because of the obviously faked video - but that was missing this time. If the official narrative is false (as some details now suggest) then it is more psychological warfare against the American public in favor of overall gun grabs.

 

[MoreCoffee]

If I were a person intent on killing/injuring large amounts of people at a group gathering to make some sort of statement - I certainly would not use a loud weapon that could pinpoint my relative location quickly and be fairly ineffectual range wise from so far up and so far away as the shooter is supposed to have been. If what I have recently heard is correct - the supposed "lone gunman" also had some 9 other automatic rifles with him and tons of ammunition. Was he an octopus? Last I knew it was only possible to shoot 1 rifle at a time. Also - How did he avoid suspicion carrying all that gear up to a 32nd story hotel room?

Did MoreCoffee ask himself any of these questions? Is MoreCoffee even aware that it is highly difficult to even get fully automatic weapons in the USA as a citizen? It's not like you can just go to Kmart and buy one. And the guy is not supposed to have any kind of military background.

Anywhoo - If it were me - I'd be using a sniper rifle with a silencer. In that way I could pick off people from all around the concert area for some time before any major suspicions affecting the whole crowd were raised. I'd also pick a spot that couldn't be easily pinpointed and where it would be possible to move to multiple locations - such as a hotel roof.

That being said - there are a number of silent weapons (non guns) available or easily homemade that also could be used to kill or injure large amounts of people in a crowded area - without immediate detection or alerting the greater number anything is wrong.

The more I look into it - the Vegas incident isn't adding up. Charlottesville was easier because of the obviously faked video - but that was missing this time.

He managed to kill 59 and injure hundreds. That does not sound ineffective.

 

[Stravinsk]

He managed to kill 59 and injure hundreds. That does not sound ineffective.

So the news said. The Corporate news says a lot of things. They have a long history of lying and being caught in lies. But anyway, sort of hard to verify those numbers unless you're one of the few people that was actually in the area.

 

[MoreCoffee]

So the news said. The Corporate news says a lot of things. They have a long history of lying and being caught in lies. But anyway, sort of hard to verify those numbers unless you're one of the few people that was actually in the area.

thousands were there

 

[Stravinsk]

thousands were there

And all of them verified those numbers by going to the hospital and morgue and checking, right?

Which hospital(s) took the victims? They must have been flooded with all the injured. What are the names of the deceased?

 

[MoreCoffee]

And all of them verified those numbers by going to the hospital and morgue and checking, right?

Which hospital(s) took the victims? They must have been flooded with all the injured. What are the names of the deceased?

No, but all of them heard gun shots and they were rapid fire gun shots. The statistics come from the coroner and the hospital people with the police and others reporting them.

 

[Imalive]

https://www.boredpanda.com/las-vegas-mass-shooting-heroes/

 

[Josiah]

18% of crimes committed with a gun are guns actually owned by the criminal. 79% of the guns used in crimes don't belong to the one using them. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...long-time-about-crime/?utm_term=.9759e2c93bd2


Far fewer than 1% of guns (legal or otherwise) are used in crimes in the USA. (Source: FBI)


90% of violent crimes in the USA don't involve guns at all, fired or not. (Source: FBI)


THAT said, I see no reason for citizens to have automatic/machine guns (like the type used in Las Vegas) and I'm all in favor of licensing (yearly) and severe fines for those who do not keep their guns secure. Owning such suggests great responsibility.




.

 

[Stravinsk]

https://www.boredpanda.com/las-vegas-mass-shooting-heroes/

That's supposed to be a neck wound - but the patch is on his shoulder/upper chest. Just sayin.

 

[MoreCoffee]

18% of crimes committed with a gun are guns actually owned by the criminal. 79% of the guns used in crimes don't belong to the one using them. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...long-time-about-crime/?utm_term=.9759e2c93bd2


Far fewer than 1% of guns (legal or otherwise) are used in crimes in the USA. (Source: FBI)


90% of violent crimes in the USA don't involve guns at all, fired or not. (Source: FBI)


THAT said, I see no reason for citizens to have automatic/machine guns (like the type used in Las Vegas) and I'm all in favor of licensing (yearly) and severe fines for those who do not keep their guns secure. Owning such suggests great responsibility.

I wonder if 100% of mass shootings happen with guns and how many of the mass shooters own the guns they use?

 

[Andrew]

Banning drugs sure didnt stop anyone from doing them.
Killers will always find a means to kill, actually the first technology of weaponry ever used was the rock Cain slew Abel with.
People have quick access to a bomb makers cookbook which many underestimate, I know of a doomsday prepper that can make ammo from pee and charcoal and it actually works
Guns dont kill people, people kill people

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

 

[MoreCoffee]

Banning drugs sure didnt stop anyone from doing them.

Do you think that laws against drugs ought to be removed because some people still manage to get drugs?

Killers will always find a means to kill, actually the first technology of weaponry ever used was the rock Cain slew Abel with.
People have quick access to a bomb makers cookbook which many underestimate, I know of a doomsday prepper that can make ammo from pee and charcoal and it actually works
Guns dont kill people, people kill people

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk