• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: Today's Mass Shooting (part 3)

Meanwhile I'll go back to teach again today. And I don't have to do drills on how to deal with shooters.
And I'll probably take a nice hike trough some park adjoining private property in the weekend. And I don't have to worry about being shot by someone 'standing their ground' if I misread a sign.
And I might go to a restaurant downtown in the foreseeable future. And never have to worry about a drive-by shooting.
And of course I might drive somewhere and very occasionally run into a road rage incident. And I will never have to worry about someone pulling a gun and shooting me.
And, unlikely, I might get into contact with the cops. And I don't have to worry about them shooting me on sight.

I pity the results of the American freedom to bear arms.
 
Hercules56 said:
So if we only have say 30 mass-shootings a year, its not that big a deal????

Wow.
Click to expand...

The USA will never be able to reduce the number of mass shootings to anything like 30 a year. The actual number of mass shootings is unknown, because many Americans ignore certain types of shooting, to try and make out the problem is not as bad as it is.

Even the definition of 4 people have to die is stupid, because an incident where 10 people are shot, but none die, is clearly still a mass shooting. The shooter is clearly someone who should not have been able to possess a gun. It does not matter if that person is in a gang and shooting at another gang, or robbing a bank, or tacking revenge on their former workplace, or school, or family, or an argument at a party.

In every case, someone who is not suitable to have a gun, got one. Only the USA makes it easy for people who should not have guns, to get guns.
 
Norman Alexander said:
This is the problem.

[qimg]https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/sites/default/files/charts-and-maps/framed/14c00d51-0b8d-4dd6-a71e-0caa61f54155.png[/qimg]
Click to expand...

That is only a tiny part of the problem. The actual level of mass shootings, is every incident, when someone fires multiple shots at multiple people. It does not matter if anyone was even hit or not, any person who goes out to shoot at other people, should never have been able to possess a gun.

The UK has lots of angry, violent people and a high rate of assaults proves that. But virtually none can get a gun, so mass shootings here are incredibly rare, including ones where lots of bullets are fired, but no one is hit.
 
smartcooky said:
....bUt We NeEd To LoCk tHe ScHoOl DoOrS sO tHe ShOoTeR cAn'T gEt In...

(The all the kids can burn to death if there is a fire... because they can't get out)
Click to expand...

You are a bit out of touch with the current thinking. Which is to build schools so there are no long sight lines, curved corridors, with hunker down areas, bulletproof glass used in all windows, kids have bulletproof backpacks and so on, lockdown routines where kids are taught to ensure no feet stick out when they're hiding. I mean it is the only possible viable way to ensure your 5-year-old is safe at school.

That so many people in the USA do not see the insanity in even thinking you may have to design schools in such ways shows how deep the insanity is.

And in case people think this is just some silliness thought up by a liver lilied UKian: https://www.dezeen.com/2019/09/05/fruitport-high-school-tower-pinkster-michigan-mass-shooting/

"...American firm Tower Pinkster has designed a school in Michigan with the aim of reducing the number of student casualties in the event of a terror attack.

The architecture, engineering and interiors firm designed the entire Fruitport High School campus, from the building's form to details of door locks, with the aim to limiting the effectiveness of a shooter...."​
 
arthwollipot said:
Nothing.

"Tranny" is a derogatory form of "transvestite", which in turn is used by ignorant ****s to refer to transgender people, even through it's completely inappropriate and extremely rude.
Click to expand...


I used a rude word to describe a dead woman who spent months planning and then executed an assault on a school with the express purpose of murdering children. How dare I!
 
Darat said:
You are a bit out of touch with the current thinking. Which is to build schools so there are no long sight lines, curved corridors, with hunker down areas, bulletproof glass used in all windows, kids have bulletproof backpacks and so on, lockdown routines where kids are taught to ensure no feet stick out when they're hiding. I mean it is the only possible viable way to ensure your 5-year-old is safe at school.

That so many people in the USA do not see the insanity in even thinking you may have to design schools in such ways shows how deep the insanity is.

And in case people think this is just some silliness thought up by a liver lilied UKian: https://www.dezeen.com/2019/09/05/fruitport-high-school-tower-pinkster-michigan-mass-shooting/

"...American firm Tower Pinkster has designed a school in Michigan with the aim of reducing the number of student casualties in the event of a terror attack.

The architecture, engineering and interiors firm designed the entire Fruitport High School campus, from the building's form to details of door locks, with the aim to limiting the effectiveness of a shooter...."​
Click to expand...

I think it is an admission the gun violence problem is unsolvable, so instead, coping strategies need to be developed.
 
Hercules56 said:
I have some bad news for you: We will not ban guns in the USA.
Click to expand...
It's not bad news for me. I don't have to live there.

Also, I didn't say "ban", I said "control".

The current trajectory in the USA is for looser gun laws, not stronger.
Click to expand...
And it's ******* crazy.

That's why we need to focus on other solutions, especially when dealing with mass-shootings.
Click to expand...

There's a solution right there and it's staring you in the face. The other solutions are just as much pie in the sky for the USA. For example, you may say you need to improve mental health care, but that is never going to fly because you simply can't do health care right at all.
It's another one of your blind spots.
 
How the US compares with other similar countries

| GHR | GOR | SSR | CP | AWB | %SS USA | 4.38 | 121 | 0.6 |
checkbox_checked.png
|
checkbox_crossed.png
| 73
Canada | 0.67 |35 | <0.1 |
checkbox_crossed.png
|
checkbox_checked.png
| 3
Australia |0.15 |14.5 |<0.1 |
checkbox_crossed.png
|
checkbox_checked.png
| <1
New Zealand | 0.2 |26| <0.1|
checkbox_crossed.png
|
checkbox_checked.png
| <1
United Kingdom | 0.05 |7.2| <0.1 |
checkbox_crossed.png
|
checkbox_checked.png
| <1
Switzerland |0.09 |28 |<0.1 |
checkbox_crossed.png
|
checkbox_checked.png
| 1.5

Per 100,000 population
GHR = Gun Homicide Rate
GOR = Gun Ownership rate
SSR = Spree Shooting Rate

Laws
CP = Constitutional Protection of the Right to Firearms Ownership
AWB = National Assualt Weapons Bans in place

%SS = Percentage of the world's spree shootings

SK-per-100K.png


The evidence is clear and its irrefutable. The primary driver of spree shootings in the US is not mental health issues (every country has those). The primary driver is its unrestricted access to guns, particularly assault weapons and other firearms such as handguns that are purpose-designed to kill HUMANS, as many of them as possible in the shortest period of time - weapons that should never, ever be allowed to be in the hands of private citizens.

As long as America buries its collective heads in the sand over this fact, it will ALWAYS carry a far worse record for the wholesale shooting slaughter of its men, women and children than all other counties in the world, combined - 73% of all spree shootings in the world in a country with only 5% of the world's population is a withering indictment of American society

Sources:
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-that-have-banned-assault-style-firearms.html
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01924036.2022.2052126
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1382509/gun-homicide-rate-g7-countries/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation
https://www.trtworld.com/magazine/us-accounted-for-73-percent-of-global-mass-shootings-12787908
https://wisevoter.com/country-rankings/mass-shootings-by-country/
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/how-do-u-s-gun-laws-compare-to-other-countries
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/us-gun-policy-global-comparisons
‎
‎
 
smartcooky said:
How the US compares with other similar countries

| GHR | GOR | SSR | CP | AWB | %SS USA | 4.38 | 121 | 0.6 |[qimg]https://www.dropbox.com/s/ygxdgwipczu9due/checkbox_checked.png?raw=1[/qimg] | [qimg]https://www.dropbox.com/s/nuv2jvnjz0loqvz/checkbox_crossed.png?raw=1[/qimg] | 73
Canada | 0.67 |35 | <0.1 | [qimg]https://www.dropbox.com/s/nuv2jvnjz0loqvz/checkbox_crossed.png?raw=1[/qimg] | [qimg]https://www.dropbox.com/s/ygxdgwipczu9due/checkbox_checked.png?raw=1[/qimg] | 3
Australia |0.15 |14.5 |<0.1 | [qimg]https://www.dropbox.com/s/nuv2jvnjz0loqvz/checkbox_crossed.png?raw=1[/qimg] | [qimg]https://www.dropbox.com/s/ygxdgwipczu9due/checkbox_checked.png?raw=1[/qimg] | <1
New Zealand | 0.2 |26| <0.1| [qimg]https://www.dropbox.com/s/nuv2jvnjz0loqvz/checkbox_crossed.png?raw=1[/qimg] | [qimg]https://www.dropbox.com/s/ygxdgwipczu9due/checkbox_checked.png?raw=1[/qimg] | <1
United Kingdom | 0.05 |7.2| <0.1 | [qimg]https://www.dropbox.com/s/nuv2jvnjz0loqvz/checkbox_crossed.png?raw=1[/qimg] | [qimg]https://www.dropbox.com/s/ygxdgwipczu9due/checkbox_checked.png?raw=1[/qimg] | <1
Switzerland |0.09 |28 |<0.1 | [qimg]https://www.dropbox.com/s/nuv2jvnjz0loqvz/checkbox_crossed.png?raw=1[/qimg] | [qimg]https://www.dropbox.com/s/ygxdgwipczu9due/checkbox_checked.png?raw=1[/qimg] | 1.5

Per 100,000 population
GHR = Gun Homicide Rate
GOR = Gun Ownership rate
SSR = Spree Shooting Rate

Laws
CP = Constitutional Protection of the Right to Firearms Ownership
AWB = National Assualt Weapons Bans in place

%SS = Percentage of the world's spree shootings

[qimg]https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/kqy17hs9g7vmsrojcpxoy/SK-per-100K.png?rlkey=vg3jpi2xshlyf6qzcyim3csnz&raw=1[/qimg]

The evidence is clear and its irrefutable. The primary driver of spree shootings in the US is not mental health issues (every country has those). The primary driver is its unrestricted access to guns, particularly assault weapons and other firearms such as handguns that are purpose-designed to kill HUMANS, as many of them as possible in the shortest period of time - weapons that should never, ever be allowed to be in the hands of private citizens.

As long as America buries its collective heads in the sand over this fact, it will ALWAYS carry a far worse record for the wholesale shooting slaughter of its men, women and children than all other counties in the world, combined - 73% of all spree shootings in the world in a country with only 5% of the world's population is a withering indictment of American society

Sources:
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-that-have-banned-assault-style-firearms.html
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01924036.2022.2052126
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1382509/gun-homicide-rate-g7-countries/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation
https://www.trtworld.com/magazine/us-accounted-for-73-percent-of-global-mass-shootings-12787908
https://wisevoter.com/country-rankings/mass-shootings-by-country/
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/how-do-u-s-gun-laws-compare-to-other-countries
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/us-gun-policy-global-comparisons
‎
‎
Click to expand...

I agree we need stronger gun laws for most states.
 
Darat said:
And as by clockwork the other common "diversion" pops-up. It doesn't matter what you call the guns.
Click to expand...

Actually it does. There is a significant difference between an automatic weapon and semi-auto.

One is heavily regulated in the USA, the other is not, for one.
 
Lukraak_Sisser said:
Meanwhile I'll go back to teach again today. And I don't have to do drills on how to deal with shooters.
And I'll probably take a nice hike trough some park adjoining private property in the weekend. And I don't have to worry about being shot by someone 'standing their ground' if I misread a sign.
And I might go to a restaurant downtown in the foreseeable future. And never have to worry about a drive-by shooting.
And of course I might drive somewhere and very occasionally run into a road rage incident. And I will never have to worry about someone pulling a gun and shooting me.
And, unlikely, I might get into contact with the cops. And I don't have to worry about them shooting me on sight.

I pity the results of the American freedom to bear arms.
Click to expand...

:thumbsup: Just passed my 70th birthday. Not once in those 70 years have I left my house with the concept in my head that I may be shot before I return. Or even that any person I encounter on my outing may be carrying a gun. The fear prevailing in American society is indeed sad.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
I thought gathering Data like this was forbidden by repeated GOP administrations at the behest of the NRA.
Click to expand...


You are referring to data collected by a private organization. There are no US laws that forbid collection of such data by private organizations or individuals.

The Dickey Amendment of 1997 placed the following restriction on one particular governmental agency:
...none of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) may be used to advocate or promote gun control.
Click to expand...
Out of cowardice and fear that collecting data on gun violence might be misconstrued as advocacy of gun control, the CDC went to great lengths to avoid doing any research on gun violence.

In 2018, Congress passed a continuing resolution that was signed into law by then-President Donald Trump. That continuing resolution contains language that explicitly allows the CDC to conduct research into gun violence, so long as the CDC does not use government funds to advocate gun control.

In 2020, after 24 years in which no federal funds were allocated for research into gun violence, the US federal budget allocated $25 million to the CDC and NIH for research toward reduction of gun deaths and injuries.

The New York Times has published a (paywalled) story with the following headline and subhead:
[size=+2]Can New Gun Violence Research Find a Path Around the Political Stalemate?[/size]
[size=+1]Congress quashed funding for C.D.C. gun violence research 25 years ago. But an extraordinary friendship between an agency scientist and the “point man” for the N.R.A. helped bring the money back.[/size]
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom