Using a tragedy to push laws that do not address the cause of the shooting

[TurtleDude]

An excellent reason why most of us pro gun advocates reject the anti gun reactions to mass shootings

https://www.nationalreview.com/corn...ts-show-why-gun-control-advocates-mistrusted/

as to the Texas HS Shooting
If his public statements are to be believed, Senator Murphy does not want to ban shotguns or .38-caliber revolvers, which is why he has made no effort to convince Congress to do so. Per Murphy’s website, the senator favors “universal background checks, cracking down on straw purchasers and illegal weapon sales, and limiting access to high-capacity magazines and military-style assault weapons.” In addition, he hopes to secure “legislation to close loopholes in our background check system; to make it illegal for those on the FBI terror watch list to buy a gun; to end the ban on gun violence research at the Center for Disease Control; to encourage licensing requirements for handgun purchases; and to help keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers.” None of these provisions intersect with today’s incident. Which means that if, as Murphy claims, Congress is to blame for not having taken steps to stop what happened today, then Senator Murphy is, too. He cannot have it both ways. If today’s murders were the result of congressional inaction on shotguns and revolvers — if, to borrow his unlovely phrase, a “green light” was shown to the killer — then he must share in the responsibility. And if he isn’t responsible, then nor is anybody else.

​

 

[Skeptic Bob]

It is the “we have to do something even if it won’t work” mentality. It is like when someone’s child is dying of an incurable illness. They will spend all their money on some woo woo alternative medicine treatment that has no chance of working. It is irrational but it is perfectly human.

 

[TurtleDude]

It is the “we have to do something even if it won’t work” mentality. It is like when someone’s child is dying of an incurable illness. They will spend all their money on some woo woo alternative medicine treatment that has no chance of working. It is irrational but it is perfectly human.

with politicians its more cynical and disgusting. its about pandering. its akin to some quack telling the parents of a child dying from an incurable brain tumor that if they spend 40,000 dollars he will cure the child, when he knows he cannot. Gun banners are even worse because they want to rape the rights of millions for crass political reasons .

its like the assholes who claimed we needed background checks after Sandy Hook knowing full well someone who kills his own mother to get guns is not going to get a background check

 

[Common Sense 1]

It's the "we must do something" syndrome and it does not matter that the something will not do one darn thing to stop someone from shooting as long as we did "something".

All will feel better when something is done! The anti's try this method time after time.

 

[Renae]

An excellent reason why most of us pro gun advocates reject the anti gun reactions to mass shootings

https://www.nationalreview.com/corn...ts-show-why-gun-control-advocates-mistrusted/

as to the Texas HS Shooting
If his public statements are to be believed, Senator Murphy does not want to ban shotguns or .38-caliber revolvers, which is why he has made no effort to convince Congress to do so. Per Murphy’s website, the senator favors “universal background checks, cracking down on straw purchasers and illegal weapon sales, and limiting access to high-capacity magazines and military-style assault weapons.” In addition, he hopes to secure “legislation to close loopholes in our background check system; to make it illegal for those on the FBI terror watch list to buy a gun; to end the ban on gun violence research at the Center for Disease Control; to encourage licensing requirements for handgun purchases; and to help keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers.” None of these provisions intersect with today’s incident. Which means that if, as Murphy claims, Congress is to blame for not having taken steps to stop what happened today, then Senator Murphy is, too. He cannot have it both ways. If today’s murders were the result of congressional inaction on shotguns and revolvers — if, to borrow his unlovely phrase, a “green light” was shown to the killer — then he must share in the responsibility. And if he isn’t responsible, then nor is anybody else.

​

Notice how our resident banners avoid this thread like the plague.

 

[Rucker61]

Notice how our resident banners avoid this thread like the plague.

I refer to the actions described in the OP as "dancing of the graves of children".

 

[Rich2018]

Sadly it takes a tragedy to make something positive happen.

Like an office block that never has a fire drill...then there's a fire and people die because of a panic. Afterwards there are fire drills.

Or an apartment building that has a fire and an investigation blames a certain type of material used in construction - the building code is changed.

The Titanic sinks with massive loss of life - new laws came into effect on life boat capacity and loading weights.

Or 9/11. Before then you could meet people at the gate on a flight.
The TSA didn't exist.


So yes, tragedies often at the catalyst for change to prevent similar events from happening.

 

[TurtleDude]

Notice how our resident banners avoid this thread like the plague.

facts and logic tend to be anathema to them. Years ago I noted logic was to gun banners as sunshine was to Count Dracula

 

[TurtleDude]

Sadly it takes a tragedy to make something positive happen.

Like an office block that never has a fire drill...then there's a fire and people die because of a panic. Afterwards there are fire drills.

Or an apartment building that has a fire and an investigation blames a certain type of material used in construction - the building code is changed.

The Titanic sinks with massive loss of life - new laws came into effect on life boat capacity and loading weights.

Or 9/11. Before then you could meet people at the gate on a flight.
The TSA didn't exist.


So yes, tragedies often at the catalyst for change to prevent similar events from happening.

only fools believe and the dishonest claim-that disarming honest people is going to stop sociopaths and hard core criminals from getting guns.

 

[TaterTots]

1. It seems there is never a perfect time to discuss regulation. There have been a lot of school shootings as of late so we're stuck in this loop of, "can't talk about it." There will never be a perfect time to speak on the subject at this rate.

2. The real issue is mental health, but I can't bring that up. People on the left tell me its guns that have to go and people on the right tell me preventing people that are mentally ill from obtaining a firearm crosses over to their rights.

Conversation is going nowhere. Lets just keep shooting each other.

 

[TurtleDude]

1. It seems there is never a perfect time to discuss regulation. There have been a lot of school shootings as of late so we're stuck in this loop of, "can't talk about it." There will never be a perfect time to speak on the subject at this rate.

2. The real issue is mental health, but I can't bring that up. People on the left tell me its guns that have to go and people on the right tell me preventing people that are mentally ill from obtaining a firearm crosses over to their rights.

Conversation is going nowhere. Lets just keep shooting each other.

I disagree with your claims about the right. What is true is that we don't want gun banners being able to declare anyone they want as being "mentally ill" and thus deny those people their rights. Right now, Congress (18 USC 922) determined that people adjudicated mentally incompetent are treated the same as felons, fugitives, those under felony indictment and dishonorably discharged veterans (there are other classes) when it comes to not being able to own or possess, buy or use firearms. The leftwing gun ban movement has tried to expand that definition without enacting a new law. the gun ban movement tried to claim that people who had someone manage their financial affairs are the same as those adjudicated mentally incompetent without changing the law. some want to change that to anyone who as any degree of "mental illness"

 

[Nickyjo]

It is the “we have to do something even if it won’t work” mentality. It is like when someone’s child is dying of an incurable illness. They will spend all their money on some woo woo alternative medicine treatment that has no chance of working. It is irrational but it is perfectly human.

Why does it seem to work in other countries?

 

[TurtleDude]

Why does it seem to work in other countries?

like Mexico and Russia?

 

[Nickyjo]

An excellent reason why most of us pro gun advocates reject the anti gun reactions to mass shootings

https://www.nationalreview.com/corn...ts-show-why-gun-control-advocates-mistrusted/

as to the Texas HS Shooting
If his public statements are to be believed, Senator Murphy does not want to ban shotguns or .38-caliber revolvers, which is why he has made no effort to convince Congress to do so. Per Murphy’s website, the senator favors “universal background checks, cracking down on straw purchasers and illegal weapon sales, and limiting access to high-capacity magazines and military-style assault weapons.” In addition, he hopes to secure “legislation to close loopholes in our background check system; to make it illegal for those on the FBI terror watch list to buy a gun; to end the ban on gun violence research at the Center for Disease Control; to encourage licensing requirements for handgun purchases; and to help keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers.” None of these provisions intersect with today’s incident. Which means that if, as Murphy claims, Congress is to blame for not having taken steps to stop what happened today, then Senator Murphy is, too. He cannot have it both ways. If today’s murders were the result of congressional inaction on shotguns and revolvers — if, to borrow his unlovely phrase, a “green light” was shown to the killer — then he must share in the responsibility. And if he isn’t responsible, then nor is anybody else.

Who cares if they intersect with the most recent tragedy? Why don’t you discuss what is wrong with the proposals? Seem reasonable. You could get all the guns you want, but might have to jump through some more hoops. Big deal.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

Why does it seem to work in other countries?

I am certain there are numerous reasons but I don’t pretend to know what they all are. Nor do I deny the number of guns we have has nothing to do with it. We know some things, though. A significant percentage of our gun homicides are due to gang violence. We have much worse gang problems than most developed countries. But we also have much worse income disparity than most developed countries and that creates a prime recruiting ground for gangs. That in itself explains much of the differences in numbers between us and the other countries without the same level of gangs.

As for all the school shootings we have that is much less clear. I don’t know what is going on. The percentage of household with guns in Switzerland is only about 5% lower than the percentage of American households with guns and yet their kids aren’t taking their parents’ guns and going and shooting up their schools. Why? It isn’t race. Most of these school shooters are white. It isn’t income disparity. Many of these kids come from financially stable households. It isn’t a lack of prayer in the classroom as Swiss schools tend to keep things secular like we do. It isn’t violent video games as Swiss kids play all the same games our kids do.

So what is it? I wish I knew.

 

[TurtleDude]

Who cares if they intersect with the most recent tragedy? Why don’t you discuss what is wrong with the proposals? Seem reasonable. You could get all the guns you want, but might have to jump through some more hoops. Big deal.

why should I have to jump through hoops to exercise my rights when that nonsense has no value in decreasing crime. the burden is on YOU to prove the crap you want actually works, not on me to prove it burdens me too much.

 

[Nickyjo]

like Mexico and Russia?

m

No, I am thinking of societies similar to ours, like Canada, Western Europe, Aussies and Kiwis... Gun control seems to work in those countries. Mexico grants the right to own firearms but apparently has strict prohibitions on carrying in public. Russia from what I gather seems to be a mixed bag, but like Mexico, hardly comparable to the US.

 

[TurtleDude]

m

No, I am thinking of societies similar to ours, like Canada, Western Europe, Aussies and Kiwis... Gun control seems to work in those countries. Mexico grants the right to own firearms but apparently has strict prohibitions on carrying in public. Russia from what I gather seems to be a mixed bag, but like Mexico, hardly comparable to the US.

we've had a second amendment since day one and until the POS FDR administration pissed all over it, there were no federal gun control laws. Mexico has almost no legal firearms.

trying to compare the USA with countries where owning firearms is a privilege at best is worthless

 

[Nickyjo]

I am certain there are numerous reasons but I don’t pretend to know what they all are. Nor do I deny the number of guns we have has nothing to do with it. We know some things, though. A significant percentage of our gun homicides are due to gang violence. We have much worse gang problems than most developed countries. But we also have much worse income disparity than most developed countries and that creates a prime recruiting ground for gangs. That in itself explains much of the differences in numbers between us and the other countries without the same level of gangs.

As for all the school shootings we have that is much less clear. I don’t know what is going on. The percentage of household with guns in Switzerland is only about 5% lower than the percentage of American households with guns and yet their kids aren’t taking their parents’ guns and going and shooting up their schools. Why? It isn’t race. Most of these school shooters are white. It isn’t income disparity. Many of these kids come from financially stable households. It isn’t a lack of prayer in the classroom as Swiss schools tend to keep things secular like we do. It isn’t violent video games as Swiss kids play all the same games our kids do.

So what is it? I wish I knew.

Good points all. Guns are a factor but not the only one.

 

[Nickyjo]

why should I have to jump through hoops to exercise my rights when that nonsense has no value in decreasing crime. the burden is on YOU to prove the crap you want actually works, not on me to prove it burdens me too much.

It seems to work in other developed countries. They have more controls, fewer gun deaths, though that is not the only reason. You still haven't said what’s wrong with the proposals. Some of them were even supported by the NRA before they became a marketing arm of the gun industry. And, remember, you still get your guns.

 

[Nickyjo]

we've had a second amendment since day one and until the POS FDR administration pissed all over it, there were no federal gun control laws. Mexico has almost no legal firearms.

trying to compare the USA with countries where owning firearms is a privilege at best is worthless

So you are ok with people owning any kind of weapon? You are blaming FDR? What did he do that was so awful? We have had gun control since Tombstone and the OK corral, as well as in other states awhile ago.

(Btw, it is apparently legal to own a gun in Mexico, restrictions are apparently on carrying/concealed carry in public.)

 

[TurtleDude]

It seems to work in other developed countries. They have more controls, fewer gun deaths, though that is not the only reason. You still haven't said what’s wrong with the proposals. Some of them were even supported by the NRA before they became a marketing arm of the gun industry. And, remember, you still get your guns.

you cannot prove they would work here can you. what's wrong with them-they INFRINGE on our rights since they are only DIRECTED at people who haven't caused problems with firearms. and at least half of the Democrats want to ban most modern sporting rifles

 

[TurtleDude]

So you are ok with people owning any kind of weapon? You are blaming FDR? What did he do that was so awful? We have had gun control since Tombstone and the OK corral, as well as in other states awhile ago.

(Btw, it is apparently legal to own a gun in Mexico, restrictions are apparently on carrying/concealed carry in public.)

you are confused, FDR raped the second and tenth amendment. those controls you talk about were not bans on possession. and yes most gun control is idiotic. ANY FIREARM CIVILIAN police are issued, law abiding adult citizens ought to be able to own. Along with the standard individual rifle of the infantry.

 

[Rich2018]

only fools believe and the dishonest claim-that disarming honest people is going to stop sociopaths and hard core criminals from getting guns.

What's stopping them from getting guns in the UK ?
Look at the mass shootings, almost all are committed with legally bought guns. (and even the illegal guns were bought legally by someone at sometime)


Only someone blinded to the truth and who would rather see the world burn than give up his guns denies this.

 

[Rich2018]

you are confused, FDR raped the second and tenth amendment. those controls you talk about were not bans on possession. and yes most gun control is idiotic. ANY FIREARM CIVILIAN police are issued, law abiding adult citizens ought to be able to own. Along with the standard individual rifle of the infantry.

Whilst I would love to be able to buy and own an HK-416, what possible need do you have of one ?