Why doesn't the US do something about mass shootings?

[truethat]

Preventing people owning guns would prevent shootings. But you would take ALL guns, starting with illegal ones. Starting with "responsible owners" will solve nothing. In the first place, they won't give you their guns. They will rather risk having illegal gun hidden somewhere, than being unarmed. And nobody knows how many guns people have ..
Gun control must be slow and gradual. All countries which have total gun control now were working on it for decades, typically already before WW2. And no country in the world has a history so tightly connected with guns and being able to defend yourself as US.
As I said, I would appeal to responsibility, and start with registration, handling exams, things like that. Also I would work on dissolving myths like "we need guns to keep government in check".

I am not interested in preventing general homicide in this country. There's no way to prevent that in a country that has guns.

I am concerned about the recent "terrorist attacks" that are occurring with increasing regularity in this country. Funny how we don't call them "terrorist attacks" when white people do them.

The motives of a mass shooting are very different than regular homicides.

We need to focus on regulation to make it less EASY (not impossible) for a nut job to get a gun.

In my opinion, one of the motivating factors of why people commit these shootings is that it is easy to buy a gun.

Consider, it's not that the semiautomatic or assault rifles are the gun of "choice for shootings" it's more likely that someone motivated to do it, would see that the people on TV used those guns and go to the gun store to see if they could buy one. When it's EASY to buy then they know they can do the same thing.

Almost everyone involved in one of these shootings had some major red flags going on in the background. So if there was a point system that was similar to what I suggested and this person hit 9 points on the system, there'd be a block on them purchasing the gun.

They could appeal the block by going to court.

But if it isn't that "EASY" to do, they most likely won't do it. They probably could come up with ideas for doing damage anyway (The truck in Nice) but it would deter it a bit.

We could make this apply to these types of weapons and the guy could still buy a gun. Just not semiautomatic or assault rifles.

 

[Polaris]

Right so as I'm pointing out, your argument is that you consider it worth the risk of dozens of people to be killed rather than preventing a person who is innocent from being able to own a gun.

It's a stupid argument.

It's a stupid argument because it's made of straw. I've already stated my argument, but I'll repeat it anyway since you ignored it the first time: nobody is saying dozens of dead people are better than (fill in the blank). What I am saying is that your solution, in which any innocent person whose rights are trampled on, should just suck it up and deal with it because they're not you simply sucks as a solution because it's majority rules with dismissal bordering on contempt for those who fall through the cracks.

 

[cullennz]

It's a stupid argument because it's made of straw. I've already stated my argument, but I'll repeat it anyway since you ignored it the first time: nobody is saying dozens of dead people are better than (fill in the blank). What I am saying is that your solution, in which any innocent person whose rights are trampled on, should just suck it up and deal with it because they're not you simply sucks as a solution because it's majority rules with dismissal bordering on contempt for those who fall through the cracks.

A lot of states don't seem to mind the same logic with the death penalty.

If a couple of people who turn out to be innocent die it's cool as long as you kill the bad ones

 

[truethat]

It's a stupid argument because it's made of straw. I've already stated my argument, but I'll repeat it anyway since you ignored it the first time: nobody is saying dozens of dead people are better than (fill in the blank). What I am saying is that your solution, in which any innocent person whose rights are trampled on, should just suck it up and deal with it because they're not you simply sucks as a solution because it's majority rules with dismissal bordering on contempt for those who fall through the cracks.

Actually they should suck it up. Because basically where there's smoke there's fire. For someone to have 9 points on that list they have to have had some major problems in their life. And again, which you keep ignoring, they can always appeal the decision. So I'm not going to cry a river about someone's rights being trampled on when they've achieve 9 points on that list, made a gun seller uncomfortable, appealed the decision and a judge still said no.

The 2nd Amendment said you have right to bear arms. It doesn't say you have the right to BUY arms. And it says it should be "well regulated" so I fail to see the "trampling of rights" I see an inconvenience because of bureaucracy. Something we deal with as citizens all the dang time. And this is just about buying a gun. It's not about a life altering issue the way the Sex Offender registry would impact someone's life. I don't see you screaming about their "rights being trampled on."

How are their rights being trampled on? We're talking about terrorism here and preventing terrorism. Just like we have "Freedom of Speech" in this country. But you don't get to say you have a bomb in the airport.

Someone who does? Well cry me a *********** river for their rights being trampled on. I actually had a situation like that happen in my real life.

I'll share it below. Hope you like it. I put it in spoiler tags because it's so long.

Quick question. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the EASE with which someone can buy a gun. So please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm assuming that a person can walk into a gun shop and if they have ID they can plop down money and buy a gun. How long does it take to buy a gun? Can you just put money down and walk back out right away with the gun? Or do people have to "order the gun" and then a background check is done and they are approved and they come back in and pick up the gun a week later?

Here is what I have so far

http://money.cnn.com/2015/06/19/news/guns-background-checks/

Why my ex husband got talkened to by the FBI
April 15, 2009 at 11:24am

Well you know when you get divorced there's always those moments that show up that continue to be peppered through your life, that say "Yes, this is why I divorced you buddy!" And so unfortunately with my ex husband his ego tends to really cause major problems in his life. That coupled with his astounding cluelessness regarding American culture.

So perfect example my ex decided to take the kids to Florida for Spring Break. Why he goes there during Spring Break is yet another curiosity to me. Also the fact that it is always the beaches in Florida and never anywhere else. My kids have been to Disneyland about 8 times by now. But anyway.

One of the things about my ex that is really annoying is that he is frequently late. Almost every time he's late. In fact when we were married people would invite us to dinner and tell us the time was an hour earlier than it really was because he was notoriously late. The other classy thing Ex does is never bother to contact the waiting person to let them know what's going on. He also doesn't admit he has time management issues preferring instead to blame the traffic, the car, the people, the weather. I think we all have flaws that can be turned endearing if we acknowledge the things that cause us to struggle but not my Ex. If he's late its because you planned things too early. I tend to get very annoyed with people who act as though their time is more valuable than everyone else's and since Ex is doing quite well financially (he has four stores in New York) he tends to treat everyone else like they are annoyances in his plan.

So of course he shows up to the airport and checks in for the trip to Florida and then, not wanting to be one of the fools that actually sit on the plane waiting to take off he has a habit of showing up to the gate a minute or two before the take off. Everyone else sitting there waiting? Too bad suckers!

Except this time its Spring Break and probably they've overbooked the flight as it is. So when he gets to the gate the flight attendant tells him "Sorry but you didn't show up when we paged you on the intercom so we sold your tickets to someone else!"

Screeching of the record to a halt! What? This cannot be? Do you know who I am? Where is the manager? Who's the boss? says he..

"I'm the boss, we can and we did, you should have been on time, sorry about that but the flight is leaving......you can go buy another set of tickets at the desk!"

So of course he's on to her, he tells me later, he knew she was just stalling to make sure the plane left without him to cover up her mistake. He wasn't going to take it that easy!

"You had no right to do that! I'm here! I'm standing right here! And the plane is there and my ........(he grasps at straws!) my medicine is in my suitcase! Where are my suitcases? Where is my luggage!"

"It's on the plane sir, you'll have to sort that out later, you were late!"

Then he steams up full force and starts ranting about how irresponsible the airline is and how this is a breach in safety. He really gives it to her now......."You aren't supposed to do that! I could have put a bomb in my suitcase and then not gotten on the plane! You are supposed to off load the luggage.'

Bam. Not to mention, in case you didn't know, my Ex is Egyptian and pretty much looks exactly like Mohammed Atta.

Tahdah........security is called and he's kept in a room where he shrieks about racial profiling. Thank god he was traveling with his girlfriend who kept the boys in the terminal until he was released. He has since been banned from flying on US Airways.

I worried for the kids except when I spoke to them later Z's take was, "wow that was pretty dumb." And B said "All I could think the whole time is what would Eddie Izzard do with this routine" so alls well. They are coming home tomorrow.

I am concerned however that their names are going to be on some sort of a watch list by association.

But oh brother.

My Ex's take is that US Airways is a stupid airline and who wants to fly on it anyway.....yeah........ok.

 

[marplots]

Someone who does? Well cry me a *********** river for their rights being trampled on. I actually had a situation like that happen in my real life.

I'll share it below. Hope you like it. I put it in spoiler tags because it's so long.

Why my ex husband got talkened to by the FBI
April 15, 2009 at 11:24am

Well you know when you get divorced there's always those moments that show up that continue to be peppered through your life, that say "Yes, this is why I divorced you buddy!" And so unfortunately with my ex husband his ego tends to really cause major problems in his life. That coupled with his astounding cluelessness regarding American culture.

So perfect example my ex decided to take the kids to Florida for Spring Break. Why he goes there during Spring Break is yet another curiosity to me. Also the fact that it is always the beaches in Florida and never anywhere else. My kids have been to Disneyland about 8 times by now. But anyway.

One of the things about my ex that is really annoying is that he is frequently late. Almost every time he's late. In fact when we were married people would invite us to dinner and tell us the time was an hour earlier than it really was because he was notoriously late. The other classy thing Ex does is never bother to contact the waiting person to let them know what's going on. He also doesn't admit he has time management issues preferring instead to blame the traffic, the car, the people, the weather. I think we all have flaws that can be turned endearing if we acknowledge the things that cause us to struggle but not my Ex. If he's late its because you planned things too early. I tend to get very annoyed with people who act as though their time is more valuable than everyone else's and since Ex is doing quite well financially (he has four stores in New York) he tends to treat everyone else like they are annoyances in his plan.

So of course he shows up to the airport and checks in for the trip to Florida and then, not wanting to be one of the fools that actually sit on the plane waiting to take off he has a habit of showing up to the gate a minute or two before the take off. Everyone else sitting there waiting? Too bad suckers!

Except this time its Spring Break and probably they've overbooked the flight as it is. So when he gets to the gate the flight attendant tells him "Sorry but you didn't show up when we paged you on the intercom so we sold your tickets to someone else!"

Screeching of the record to a halt! What? This cannot be? Do you know who I am? Where is the manager? Who's the boss? says he..

"I'm the boss, we can and we did, you should have been on time, sorry about that but the flight is leaving......you can go buy another set of tickets at the desk!"

So of course he's on to her, he tells me later, he knew she was just stalling to make sure the plane left without him to cover up her mistake. He wasn't going to take it that easy!

"You had no right to do that! I'm here! I'm standing right here! And the plane is there and my ........(he grasps at straws!) my medicine is in my suitcase! Where are my suitcases? Where is my luggage!"

"It's on the plane sir, you'll have to sort that out later, you were late!"

Then he steams up full force and starts ranting about how irresponsible the airline is and how this is a breach in safety. He really gives it to her now......."You aren't supposed to do that! I could have put a bomb in my suitcase and then not gotten on the plane! You are supposed to off load the luggage.'

Bam. Not to mention, in case you didn't know, my Ex is Egyptian and pretty much looks exactly like Mohammed Atta.

Tahdah........security is called and he's kept in a room where he shrieks about racial profiling. Thank god he was traveling with his girlfriend who kept the boys in the terminal until he was released. He has since been banned from flying on US Airways.

I worried for the kids except when I spoke to them later Z's take was, "wow that was pretty dumb." And B said "All I could think the whole time is what would Eddie Izzard do with this routine" so alls well. They are coming home tomorrow.

I am concerned however that their names are going to be on some sort of a watch list by association.

But oh brother.

My Ex's take is that US Airways is a stupid airline and who wants to fly on it anyway.....yeah........ok.

I liked your story, but contrary to your comment, I think it actually illustrated a common attribute of American culture - the "me first" bit. Not that his jerkitude wasn't apparent, just that it's a very "American" style of jerkitude.

 

[truethat]

I liked your story, but contrary to your comment, I think it actually illustrated a common attribute of American culture - the "me first" bit. Not that his jerkitude wasn't apparent, just that it's a very "American" style of jerkitude.

Truethat! Maybe that's the part he picked up from American Culture! I just meant that he had no idea that you can't say bomb in the airport. I've shared this with many people and they all gasped the minute he said bomb. He had no a clue you couldn't do that. He was screaming about freedom of speech the entire time. LOL

 

[catsmate]

Everyone needs to be cognizant of their surroundings whenever they go out in public. If one goes to a restaurant, theatre, store, where've, note where the exits are. Note where the hardened structures are. Have a plan for one's spouse or kids. In one's place if business, encourage management to conduct emergency drills. If necessary, fight. It would only take two to three individuals, even if unarmed, to overpower one guy with a gun. Be prepared. React, don't freeze.

Or, and I know this might be a revolutionary concept to many USAians, you could construct a civilised society where this behaviour isn't needed.

 

[catsmate]

Yes, it's clear that better gun control prevents disturbed individuals from carrying out mass murder. That's why such things never happen in France, for instance.

Oh wait.

How about you compare the number of mass shootings, and the consequent fatalities, in the USA and France? Or would that detract from your puerile attempts at points-scoring.

 

[catsmate]

This is a game of equivocation. Shootings are one thing. But terrorist attack type mass shootings are a real problem.

Compared to what? Let's look at some actual numbers.

2014:
USAians killed in terrorist incidents within the USA 18
USAians killed in mass shootings within the USA 17

2013:
USAians killed in terrorist incidents within the USA 7
USAians killed in mass shootings within the USA 31

2012:
USAians killed in terrorist incidents within the USA 7
USAians killed in mass shootings within the USA 67

2011:
USAians killed in terrorist incidents within the USA 0
USAians killed in mass shootings within the USA 18

2010:
USAians killed in terrorist incidents within the USA 4
USAians killed in mass shootings within the USA 8

2009:
USAians killed in terrorist incidents within the USA 18
USAians killed in mass shootings within the USA 38

2008:
USAians killed in terrorist incidents within the USA 2
USAians killed in mass shootings within the USA 16

Hmmm....

[Data from here and here]

 

[arthwollipot]

No one is asking anyone to give up their guns

I am, sort of. But I'm asking people to voluntarily give up their guns. They should want to give up their guns. But in today's political climate in America, very few people are going to do that.

There's this idea that "criminals will get their hands on the gun anyway!!! They'll go to some back door arms dealer and buy a gun!

That's a mythology. First up, most of these mass shooter types are cowards. They don't try to "solve problems" if they did they would probably not be the cowards that they are.

It's a lot easier in America than it is anywhere else. That's because America is absolutely awash with guns.

 

[truethat]

Did you read the statistic that only 31% of households in America have guns. (Obviously this is talking about legal guns)?

The country is awash in guns, that is for sure, but most people don't have guns and most people don't want guns.

So asking people to voluntarily give up their guns is an irrelevant point. The people who have guns usually have a bunch of them. That's why it seems like so many Americans have guns. The statistics are skewed by this.

What we need to do is regulate access to guns that are used in mass shootings. The Adam Lanza case is a good example of someone who should never have had access to guns being allowed access because there is not Responsible Regulation.

 

[cullennz]

Joke post

You get your guns

Just ban all bullets and material to make them

 

[arthwollipot]

What we need to do is regulate access to guns that are used in mass shootings.

No, mass shootings are only a tiny part of the problem. Regulate the guns that are used for the majority of murders, suicides and accidental deaths - ie, handguns. Once you've got those under control, you can then start going for the semiautomatic rifles.

 

[truethat]

No, mass shootings are only a tiny part of the problem. Regulate the guns that are used for the majority of murders, suicides and accidental deaths - ie, handguns. Once you've got those under control, you can then start going for the semiautomatic rifles.

That's a different discussion. And I don't agree with you in your plan.

The problem with guns is that they are being used in terrorist attacks on an increasingly regular basis.

I am only addressing the regulation to prevent mass shootings.

 

[arthwollipot]

That's a different discussion. And I don't agree with you in your plan.

The problem with guns is that they are being used in terrorist attacks on an increasingly regular basis.

I am only addressing the regulation to prevent mass shootings.

And I'm saying that focusing on mass shootings is misguided. Deal with the gun problem and the problem of mass shootings (which isn't as big as you seem to think it is) will handle itself.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Preventing people owning guns would prevent shootings. But you would take ALL guns, starting with illegal ones. Starting with "responsible owners" will solve nothing.

Sure it would, most mass shooters are responsible gun owners, if by that you mean legal gun owners. Or they get their guns from a legal gun owner.

 

[truethat]

And I'm saying that focusing on mass shootings is misguided. Deal with the gun problem and the problem of mass shootings (which isn't as big as you seem to think it is) will handle itself.

That's not going to work though. We have a second Amendment that guarantees us the right to bear arms.

I still think that many foreigners do not understand WHY people are so gung ho on the 2nd Amendment issue. It's a unique thing in the US. (Please note I am not suggesting that it is in any way superior to other countries or that other countries don't have their own.)

However, to Americans, the Bill of Rights are considered sacrosanct. If you **** with one of them you open the door to **** with the rest of them.

Many people seem to think that the conservatives in this country are all about the government controlling everything. They are not. They are very suspicious of the government and want the government to stay out of people's lives.

Their interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is to protect citizens from Government tyranny. Every time I've seen this topic come up, no matter how many times this is pointed out the other side just totally ignores it. But it's the main reason that they are clinging to their guns.

Not for protection from someone breaking into their home or a wild gunman shooting up a shopping mall.

But to create a deterrent for the GOVERNMENT to enact tyranny in this country with military rule. When you look at how the government tossed the 4th and 5th Amendments out the window for Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay you can see why these people view the potential for Government Tyranny as imminent and not some far off random possibility.

So there are two issues at play here. One is that they won't give up their guns and that they think they should have access to the best military weapons they can get their hands on. If everyone could only carry handguns or rifles, it would be next to impossible to stand up to a government attack on civilians. (And yes they do believe that this could happen)

Second, once you mess with ONE of the Bill of Rights, it opens the door for messing with the others. And that is something that is taken very seriously.

We saw this happen after 911 when John Ashcroft pushed the idea that the government needed to be able to have the right to hack into people's computers for Homeland Security reasons.

People were willing to give up their protected rights because of fear mongering. So this is exactly how they see the push to ban weapons. It's use of fear mongering to try to get people to give up their guns. And to them this is the first step in Government Tyranny. (This is why they referred to Sandy Hook as a "false flag" and said that 911 was an inside job.)

This is how they see the world. I think many foreigners confuse "conservatives" with people who would vote for Trump because he's racist and says the things they feel inside. The main argument I've seen for the approval of Trump is that he's not a "Washington Player" and his lack of experience is portrayed as "non corrupted" He's not a "government player."

So all the homicides in this country mean basically nothing to them. They consider it par for the course and worth the risk.

That's why we need to address the mass shootings. (And why they think the mass shootings are false flags designed to get us to give up ALL guns) They will not be willing to consider any sort of policy that doesn't allow the good guys to keep their guns.

And their angle is that MENTAL ILLNESS is the problem. Not gun ownership.

Here's an interview with Piers Morgan and you can see what I mean. He totally ignores what Ben Shapiro is saying and spins out in an emotional argument. But from the get go the guy starts talking about "that's why my ancestors are ashes in Europe"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHIQtxLCgrM

 

[arthwollipot]

That's not going to work though. We have a second Amendment that guarantees us the right to bear arms.

Which is why I say that you have to get people to want to give up their guns. Trying to implement gun control in a top-down, authoritarian manner isn't going to work, for exactly the reasons that you go into. You need to win hearts and minds. Since top-down, authoritarian gun control only wants people want more guns, and want guns more, America will need to find another solution. I don't know what that will be. But it's very clear that what America is currently doing doesn't work.

 

[Ranb]

Joke post

You get your guns

Just ban all bullets and material to make them

Ban lead, copper, brass, bronze and steel? Bad joke.

 

[AdamSK]

Omar Mateen did not have "a history of domestic violence;" his wife told reporters he had beat her after he died.

Upon what basis do we prevent him from owning a gun based on his record as it existed the day he bought it?