Today's Mass Shooting

[smartcooky]

Other developed nations have figured this out. America is too stupid to follow their example.

This is our definition which became Law in 2019 in the wake of the Christchurch Mosque shootings

Prohibited firearms are:

All semi-automatic firearms (including semi-automatic shotguns), but:

• excluding rimfire rifles .22 calibre or less as long as they have a magazine (whether detachable or not) that holds 10 rounds or less; and

• excluding semi-automatic shotguns that have a non-detachable, tubular magazine that holds 5 rounds or less.

Pump action shotguns that:

• Are capable of being used with a detachable magazine; or
• Have a non-detachable tubular magazine capable of holding more than 5 rounds.
​

NZ Firearms Regulations do not allow open carry in urbans or suburban areas. advise that The law does not permit the possession of firearms 'in anticipation' of a need for self-defence."

Handguns and Pistols
These are banned here, with very few exceptions. You can't own a handgun for any purpose other than as a collector (C endorsement) or a sports shooter (B endorsement). You certainly cannot just go down to Gun City and buy anything like Glock 17 or a SIG Sauer P226 or a 357 Magnum.

(C Endorsement) - Allows the holder to possess and use pistols and restricted weapons. Issued only to bona fide collectors, to people for whom a particular weapon has a special significance (e.g. as an heirloom), to museum curators, and to theatre, film and TV production armourers. Weapons held under a "C" endorsement may not be fired with live ammunition, though blanks may be fired for film, TV and theatre purposes.

(B Endorsement) Allows the holder to possess and use pistols. Issued only to bona fide members of pistol clubs. Weapons held under a "B" endorsement may only be fired at an approved pistol range, and are subject to strict controls on carriage away from the owner's home.

 

[bluesjnr]

I do respect the UK and Australia for actually banning guns, rather than half-assedly trying to ban politicized caricatures of guns.

When did this happen?

 

[Kestrel]

I've always loved/hated the "deeper underground" platitude.

It becomes harder to procure. The black market price goes up. Product elasticity is just as real for criminals. Cost recovery, ROI, all of it.

Then, in addition to a downturn in demand, it also becomes more tightly "regulated" (what situations to risk introducing it grow smaller) in criminal organizations.

Private sales that do not create a paper trail make it relatively safe and easy to divert firearms to the black market. Keeping prices low enough that a 15 year old gangbanger can afford a black market handgun.

It isn’t hard to understand why the gun lobby wants to keep the private sales loophole open. Diversion to the black market helps keep prices for used firearms high. It is easier to sell a new gun when customers can sell their old gun for a good price.

 

[Bogative]

8 people shot overnight in Virginia Beach. No description of the perp available, I'm guessing he's not a MAGA hat wearer.
https://gephardtdaily.com/national-...2-dead-in-virginia-beach-shooting-police-say/


Philadelphia – 7 shot during an "altercation" that started in da club.
https://www.fox29.com/news/7-shot-outside-golf-social-in-fishtown-police-say

 

[jimbob]

Guns are durable goods though. Even if you stopped the flow of pistols today, it would take a very long time to impact the available supply on the street.

I'm always impressed by the photos posted by the cops showing guns they take off the streets. Sure, there's modern stuff, but you see a lot of antiques. Sometimes it's comical, like percussion cap firearms or turn of the century revolvers that are probably hard to even source correct ammo for. These guns stick around forever.

Ive seen evidence - I think from Rank Organizion research, that whilst legal firearms have a long life, once they become illegal (through theft, etc) they only last a short time, maybe one crime, because they are tainted goods after that.

If course the situation is different in the UK, where criminals end up hiring illegal firearms and they end up being used by multiple criminals for multiple crimes, and are often more like zip guns than ones you get in the US.

 

[smartcooky]

8 people shot overnight in Virginia Beach. No description of the perp available, I'm guessing he's not a MAGA hat wearer.
https://gephardtdaily.com/national-...2-dead-in-virginia-beach-shooting-police-say/

This was not a spree-shooting, it was a riot.
One of the two dead people was shot by the police, a cop was hit by a car, and several people were arrested.

Philadelphia – 7 shot during an "altercation" that started in da club.
https://www.fox29.com/news/7-shot-outside-golf-social-in-fishtown-police-say

This was not a spree-shooting, this was a bar fight
No one was killed, and one "person-of-interest" was taken into custody

I know what you are up to here. You're trying to derail the thread with posts about gang-bangers and other assorted criminals shooting each other up.

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

Think of what it must be like in hell holes like Europe, where there is no second amendment.
Noone can defend themselves and mass shootings happen SO often they just do not get reported on at all.

Oh no... wait.
It's almost as if having both affordable mental health care and gun restrictions create a safer society.

 

[smartcooky]

Think of what it must be like in hell holes like Europe, where there is no second amendment.
Noone can defend themselves and mass shootings happen SO often they just do not get reported on at all.

Yeah, I hear you... all those "Childless Europeans"^TM

Oh no... wait.
It's almost as if having both affordable mental health care and gun restrictions create a safer society.

Indeed. When has a spree-shooter ever been stopped by a "good guy with a gun"? You would think that with all the 400 million civilian owned guns in 'Merica, at least a few spree-shooters would have come up against someone carrying a gun who shot back. The reason it doesn't happen, of course, is that relatively few people in America actually own guns, and even fewer carry. While 'Merica has 120 guns for every 100 persons, the reality is that only 22% of the population own guns, only 40% have access to one, but less than 3% actually carry one on a daily basis.

 

[xjx388]

This was not a spree-shooting, it was a riot.
One of the two dead people was shot by the police, a cop was hit by a car, and several people were arrested.



This was not a spree-shooting, this was a bar fight
No one was killed, and one "person-of-interest" was taken into custody

I know what you are up to here. You're trying to derail the thread with posts about gang-bangers and other assorted criminals shooting each other up.

In public... it really shouldn’t matter if it’s an indiscriminate shooter, gangs, criminals, a bar fight, whatever. If we are going to have a thread detailing the latest mass shootings, then why not include all mass shootings?

 

[xjx388]

Think of what it must be like in hell holes like Europe, where there is no second amendment.
Noone can defend themselves and mass shootings happen SO often they just do not get reported on at all.

Oh no... wait.
It's almost as if having both affordable mental health care and gun restrictions create a safer society.

Ah yes, I’ve heard about this Utopian paradise where no one ever kills each other.

Hyperbolic statements get us nowhere. Europe has its issues; the US has our issues.

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

Ah yes, I’ve heard about this Utopian paradise where no one ever kills each other.

Hyperbolic statements get us nowhere. Europe has its issues; the US has our issues.

But one of the problems Europe does not have is daily gang shootouts and near weakly random mass shootings in public places.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

In public... it really shouldn’t matter if it’s an indiscriminate shooter, gangs, criminals, a bar fight, whatever. If we are going to have a thread detailing the latest mass shootings, then why not include all mass shootings?

If you don't differentiate between at least some of these types of shootings, then what is the point? Whining about how awful things are?

Splitting off into different discussions, for example one discussion about how you are more likely to be shot/killed by someone you know than a stranger?

A discussion about gang violence?

Drunken brawls that end in shootouts?

Do you really think these are all the same?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

But one of the problems Europe does not have is daily gang shootouts and near weakly random mass shootings in public places.

Care to back that up?

 

[xjx388]

But one of the problems Europe does not have is daily gang shootouts and near weakly random mass shootings in public places.

I only know Europe from Guy Ritchie movies, so I dint believe you.

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

Care to back that up?

I stand corrected, weekly.

 

[xjx388]

If you don't differentiate between at least some of these types of shootings, then what is the point? Whining about how awful things are?

Splitting off into different discussions, for example one discussion about how you are more likely to be shot/killed by someone you know than a stranger?

A discussion about gang violence?

Drunken brawls that end in shootouts?

Do you really think these are all the same?

In the sense that they are all mass shootings in public that kill and injure people? Yes, they are all the same. I don’t care if my loved one is killed by a lone nut or as collateral damage from a gang shootout, the grief and horror of it all is the same, isn’t it?

 

[Checkmite]

That's a pretty ****** up thing to post, man. Even by your already low standards.

How do you figure?

You search for and post up figures that argue black people are "responsible for most violent crime" and then actively push back against anybody who offers an explanation for those figures that isn't "black people are naturally violent". The only other person who's supporting your position is Bogative, who just blatantly says that. What is an observer supposed to be inferring?

 

[Checkmite]

I've never said that and I never will because I don't believe that.

So then what do you believe is the explanation for all the statistics you love to post, since you obviously reject the expert analysis that it is a combination of things like poverty, population density, income disparity, systemic racial oppression, and so forth?

 

[Andy_Ross]

When did this happen?

He means within the context of the preceding post to which he was replying.
This refers to specific types of guns.

 

[Thermal]

How do you figure?

You search for and post up figures that argue black people are "responsible for most violent crime"...

You're a liar. I haven't "searched up or posted" a goddamned thing. I'm discussing FBI stats posted by others ITT. Prove me wrong, liar. Quote the data I "searched up or posted" or STFU.

{Eta: the only "figures" I introduced were the common knowledge info about Appalachia, which had nothing to do with black people. It demonstrates that poverty is not a standalone explanation of violent crime in a given demographic}

...and then actively push back against anybody who offers an explanation for those figures that isn't "black people are naturally violent".

You're a liar. I've said a thousand times, in this and other threads, that I think violence in the black community is the fallout of generational racism, resulting in poor educational systems and lack of meaningful opportunities, among other factors.

What I push back on, as you know you damned right well, are paternal racists and Great White Saviors like yourself. I push back against you and yours because your rhetoric is based on lying, and I really hate liars. It's cowardly.

The only other person who's supporting your position is Bogative, who just blatantly says that.

Edited by Agatha: 

Removed incivility

Several posters here (and I imagine some who are silent) share my position. My position is: can't we talk about these things without the endless posturing and the lying? White people are not "always" the shooter. Data shows the opposite. "Poverty" is not the reason for high rates of black crime; data shows huge areas of white poverty which do not have an exponential spike.

As always, year after year, I don't push back against black people. I push back against Great White Saviors.

What is an observer supposed to be inferring?

Edited by Agatha: 

Removed incivility

and stop trying to mind read. That would take intellectual honesty, though. I'm not holding my breath.