Why Americans don't do anything about mass shootings[W:465]

[veritas1]

I’ll take your word for it, but I rarely meet a hippy that calls himself a hippy. Most of them turned into conservative looking folk, like my older brother. In the 70’s he had long black hair, a black beard, peace sign, tie-died shirt, blue jeans and flip flops. He was an anti-war university student who supported the Left, socialism, feminism, communism, etc. In the 90's he was a balding, short back and sides teacher in a collared shirt, pants, black shoes and looked conservative. Today he’s an old retired fart, still anti-war, supports the Left, socialism, feminism, communism, environmentalism, etc.



Nope – you jumped the gun again. 1, hippies remove discipline, 2, masses of murderbrats raised, 3, no more gun responsibility, 4, no right to guns. Society is no longer responsible with guns as a result of the children raised by it, and by you.



Most.

Most people under 40 were not disciplined as they grew up. Twenty two years ago I was explaining this online, only then I was saying, “Most people under 18 were not disciplined as they grew up.” In twenty more years I’ll be saying, “Most people under 60 were not disciplined as they grew up.”



Baby boomer’s kids had kids themselves, and those kids are now spoiling a new set of murderbrats. When they want their parents guns they’ll get them. If they ever decide to go off their heads and kill a bunch of people they’ll have no trouble.



Nobody disciplines kids. If you can find one that does, give yourself a medal for me.



It starts with those who want guns for protection against other gun owners. They shoot the attacker to stop his use of guns. Gun control. An armed militia will shoot guns at an enemy to stop them using their guns. Gun control. You have guns to control guns.



It’s both the Left and the Right who impose gun controls.



Most guns won’t be banned, but the mass murdering type will. They’ll be handed in – there won’t be any mobs of people going door to door.



Guns are not their means to self-defense. Haven’t been for centuries. Unless you mean the very rare occasion which you may see in the news. Most people defend themselves with hands, phones, dogs, fences, doors, windows, locks, alarms, security lights, signs and police (to name a few).



By stronger I mean they’ll come with stronger penalties for non-enforcement.



The idea that man would land on the moon, transplant hands and build robots was a very, very fanciful one.

1. Nope, no hippy "journey". Sorry. You've got the wrong idea if you think that about me.

2. Your argument is pretty much as it was. People aren't disciplining their kids so everyone has to hand in their guns. As I pointed out already, gun crime has been steadily decreasing and it is carried out by a tiny fraction of the population. Yet, you want to penalize everyone. BTW, the third largest mass shooting here, at VA Tech, was carried out with two handguns, no assault weapon required. People can commit mayhem with any sort of gun.

3. No, people don't own guns to protect themselves from other gun owners. They own them to protect themselves from criminals. We're all for disarming criminals. If you want to defend yourself with a broom and a spatula, have at it. We will do otherwise.

4. Nobody here is going to hand in anything. That is pure fantasy.

 

[Terryj]

I’ll take your word for it, but I rarely meet a hippy that calls himself a hippy. Most of them turned into conservative looking folk, like my older brother. In the 70’s he had long black hair, a black beard, peace sign, tie-died shirt, blue jeans and flip flops. He was an anti-war university student who supported the Left, socialism, feminism, communism, etc. In the 90's he was a balding, short back and sides teacher in a collared shirt, pants, black shoes and looked conservative. Today he’s an old retired fart, still anti-war, supports the Left, socialism, feminism, communism, environmentalism, etc.



Nope – you jumped the gun again. 1, hippies remove discipline, 2, masses of murderbrats raised, 3, no more gun responsibility, 4, no right to guns. Society is no longer responsible with guns as a result of the children raised by it, and by you.



Most.

Most people under 40 were not disciplined as they grew up. Twenty two years ago I was explaining this online, only then I was saying, “Most people under 18 were not disciplined as they grew up.” In twenty more years I’ll be saying, “Most people under 60 were not disciplined as they grew up.”



Baby boomer’s kids had kids themselves, and those kids are now spoiling a new set of murderbrats. When they want their parents guns they’ll get them. If they ever decide to go off their heads and kill a bunch of people they’ll have no trouble.



Nobody disciplines kids. If you can find one that does, give yourself a medal for me.



It starts with those who want guns for protection against other gun owners. They shoot the attacker to stop his use of guns. Gun control. An armed militia will shoot guns at an enemy to stop them using their guns. Gun control. You have guns to control guns.



It’s both the Left and the Right who impose gun controls.



Most guns won’t be banned, but the mass murdering type will. They’ll be handed in – there won’t be any mobs of people going door to door.



Guns are not their means to self-defense. Haven’t been for centuries. Unless you mean the very rare occasion which you may see in the news. Most people defend themselves with hands, phones, dogs, fences, doors, windows, locks, alarms, security lights, signs and police (to name a few).



By stronger I mean they’ll come with stronger penalties for non-enforcement.



The idea that man would land on the moon, transplant hands and build robots was a very, very fanciful one.

How is that working out for you Aussies? In an article written by the Daily News is stated: "It found that gun crimes have spiked dramatically in the Australian states of Victoria, New South Wales, South Australia, and Tasmania. In Victoria, pistol-related offenses doubled over the last decade. In New South Wales, they tripled. The other states saw smaller but still significant increases."

Guess who has the fire arms, the CRIMINALS, guess who is being attacked by these criminals, yep, the unarmed civilian population who have surrendered their fire arms. What is the weapon of choice used by these criminals? Yep, you guessed it, the semi-auto handgun. Now if Australia has such tight firearm laws, then only the criminal will have them, and guess what THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT THE LAW, why, because they are criminals.

 

[Rob Larrikin]

Nope, no hippy "journey". Sorry. You've got the wrong idea if you think that about me.

It makes no difference whether you’re a hippy or not, since the lack of discipline in the home and school has made America irresponsible with guns. As your great grandpappy used to say, “If’n yer ain’t gonna be responsible with yer gerns, you don’t git to keep ‘em.” I for one agree with him.

the third largest mass shooting here, at VA Tech, was carried out with two handguns, no assault weapon required. People can commit mayhem with any sort of gun.

Which is why you need greater gun control over all guns. Only the mass murder type need to be banned from civilian use.

No, people don't own guns to protect themselves from other gun owners. They own them to protect themselves from criminals.

Who usually own guns. So yes, you do own guns to protect yourselves from other gun owners.

We're all for disarming criminals. If you want to defend yourself with a broom and a spatula, have at it. We will do otherwise.

You need gun control to disarm criminals.

4. Nobody here is going to hand in anything. That is pure fantasy.

Nobody is going to the moon. Durned fantasy. And them durned “horseless carriages” aint never gonna work, no how.

 

[Rob Larrikin]

Guns are not their means to self-defense. Haven’t been for centuries. Unless you mean the very rare occasion which you may see in the news. Most people defend themselves with hands, phones, dogs, fences, doors, windows, locks, alarms, security lights, signs and police (to name a few).

How is that working out for you Aussies?

My statement was about Americans, but it does apply to all civilized countries. Guns are very yester-century. They’ve been replaced by a plethora of other tools, materials, objects, gadgets, animals and gizmos. Cell phones are a lot lighter than guns, and do much more than just provide security.

In an article written by the Daily News is stated: "It found that gun crimes have spiked dramatically in the Australian states of Victoria, New South Wales, South Australia, and Tasmania. In Victoria, pistol-related offenses doubled over the last decade. In New South Wales, they tripled. The other states saw smaller but still significant increases."

The 2015 article you cite from can be seen here.

It just means that a small problem is a little bigger than previously thought. It’s still a small problem – not a big problem. Here is an article from June 2017 concerning Australia’s murder rate:

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...-falls-to-record-low-of-one-person-per-100000

Quote:

Fewer people are being murdered in Australia, with the nation’s homicide rate hitting an all-time record low.

The latest report of the national homicide monitoring program reveals there were 238 homicide incidents in Australia in 2013-14 compared with 307 deaths in 1989-90.

That finding brings the national rate down to one victim per 100,000 people – the lowest since the program started in 1989.

By comparison, the United States had a murder rate of 4.88 people per 100,000 in 2015, according to the United Nations office on drugs and crime. The office said in 2014 the UK’s rate was 0.92 and New Zealand’s was 0.91.​

​

Guess who has the fire arms, the CRIMINALS, guess who is being attacked by these criminals,

You don’t let criminals set your laws for you. Murder is against the law, but murder still exists. According to your logic we should make murder legal.

yep, the unarmed civilian population who have surrendered their fire arms.

Wrong. There are many civilians with guns, but more importantly, civilians pay a police force to tote guns for them. They are mostly armed through their police, which they can summon at any time with their cell phones, from anywhere. This also happens to be the method used by most Americans to defend themselves. When Homer Simpson is threatened he calls the cops.

 

[veritas1]

It makes no difference whether you’re a hippy or not, since the lack of discipline in the home and school has made America irresponsible with guns. As your great grandpappy used to say, “If’n yer ain’t gonna be responsible with yer gerns, you don’t git to keep ‘em.” I for one agree with him.



Which is why you need greater gun control over all guns. Only the mass murder type need to be banned from civilian use.



Who usually own guns. So yes, you do own guns to protect yourselves from other gun owners.



You need gun control to disarm criminals.



Nobody is going to the moon. Durned fantasy. And them durned “horseless carriages” aint never gonna work, no how.

As I stated, 32 people were killed at VA Tech with handguns. So, you saying only the "mass murder" type of weapons need to be controlled, is meaningless. Any sort of weapon can be used for mass murder. Also, criminals, by definition, do not care about the law so any gun control laws you pass will be irrelevant to them. Gun control, whatever that means, will not disarm criminals. It will only disarm those willing to obey the law.

 

[veritas1]

My statement was about Americans, but it does apply to all civilized countries. Guns are very yester-century. They’ve been replaced by a plethora of other tools, materials, objects, gadgets, animals and gizmos. Cell phones are a lot lighter than guns, and do much more than just provide security.



The 2015 article you cite from can be seen here.

It just means that a small problem is a little bigger than previously thought. It’s still a small problem – not a big problem. Here is an article from June 2017 concerning Australia’s murder rate:

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...-falls-to-record-low-of-one-person-per-100000

Quote:

Fewer people are being murdered in Australia, with the nation’s homicide rate hitting an all-time record low.

The latest report of the national homicide monitoring program reveals there were 238 homicide incidents in Australia in 2013-14 compared with 307 deaths in 1989-90.

That finding brings the national rate down to one victim per 100,000 people – the lowest since the program started in 1989.

By comparison, the United States had a murder rate of 4.88 people per 100,000 in 2015, according to the United Nations office on drugs and crime. The office said in 2014 the UK’s rate was 0.92 and New Zealand’s was 0.91.​

​

You don’t let criminals set your laws for you. Murder is against the law, but murder still exists. According to your logic we should make murder legal.



Wrong. There are many civilians with guns, but more importantly, civilians pay a police force to tote guns for them. They are mostly armed through their police, which they can summon at any time with their cell phones, from anywhere. This also happens to be the method used by most Americans to defend themselves. When Homer Simpson is threatened he calls the cops.

If there is anything that has been proven over and over again, it is that the cops cannot protect you. Cops usually only arrive for clean up after the crime has been committed. Also, your entire country has fewer people than our state of Texas. Your country is an island. We have 310 million people in a highly diverse mix with over 300 million guns in circulation. We have people coming in illegally from Mexico. Any comparisons between the US and Australia, the UK or similar places, is completely invalid.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

If there is anything that has been proven over and over again, it is that the cops cannot protect you. Cops usually only arrive for clean up after the crime has been committed. Also, your entire country has fewer people than our state of Texas. Your country is an island. We have 310 million people in a highly diverse mix with over 300 million guns in circulation. We have people coming in illegally from Mexico. Any comparisons between the US and Australia, the UK or similar places, is completely invalid.

Surprisingly enough there are a lot of people who take the completely opposite view regarding comparisons between the US and other countries if that comparison supports what they want to believe.

 

[Rob Larrikin]

As I stated, 32 people were killed at VA Tech with handguns.

All rules come with exceptions which is why all laws are broken, but as a general rule most people do not murder, and as a general rule most mass murderers prefer rapid-fire devices. These rules are not followed 100% of the time and nobody said they were.

So, you saying only the "mass murder" type of weapons need to be controlled, is meaningless.

There are probably more vehicles than guns in America, and vehicles are controlled very well by a raft of rules, laws and regulations. These include cars, trucks, buses, motorcycles, trains, planes, helicopters and jets. Then there are cranes, forklifts, steamrollers, tractors, graders and many other industrial vehicles. Try operating any of these and see the wall of bureaucracy you will encounter – and guess what? All with the cheerful blessing of gun nuts.

Gun control, whatever that means, will not disarm criminals.

When cops, paid by you, take out their guns and shoot an armed felon, they are controlling his use of guns. Gun control.

It will only disarm those willing to obey the law.

Many will obey the law. Only a minority don’t – we call them criminals. The fact that a minority break laws is no reason to abandon laws.

 

[Rob Larrikin]

If there is anything that has been proven over and over again, it is that the cops cannot protect you.

They are one of many deterrents to crime and criminals. The list is very long.

Also, your entire country has fewer people than our state of Texas.

Yes, with a land the size of the USA (not including Alaska). We are mostly concentrated in cities along the East and South coasts. Most of Oz is empty of people.

Your country is an island. We have 310 million people in a highly diverse mix with over 300 million guns in circulation.

You have even more vehicles, the vast majority of which are registered or licensed and subject to a raft of strict and enforced laws, with no objection from gun enthusiasts.

We have people coming in illegally from Mexico.

We have boat people (mostly Africans and Muslims) coming by boats from Indonesia. When conservatives are in power this is stopped. When the Labor Party (same as Democrats) are in power it starts up again. The Left import their votes. At least you have Trump, who will stop a lot of illegals.

Any comparisons between the US and Australia, the UK or similar places, is completely invalid.

Britain is parent to both the USA and Australia, and there are plenty of valid comparisons between them. Most of the time we follow the US in whatever they do, a few years later. In this case we banned those kinds of guns before you (will), since we don’t have the powerful gun lobby as you do, which slowed you down. Rest assured, it is a natural and normal way to go, since guns are very yester-century, as I said. We have a plethora of security nowadays, putting guns to the very back of what’s important to have. For instance, I’d never swap my cell phone for a gun, and if I had a choice of motion sensor lights, cameras, good security door and windows and a dog, on the one hand, or gun on the other, I’d pick the former. How about you?

 

[Maccabee]

All rules come with exceptions which is why all laws are broken, but as a general rule most people do not murder, and as a general rule most mass murderers prefer rapid-fire devices. These rules are not followed 100% of the time and nobody said they were.



There are probably more vehicles than guns in America, and vehicles are controlled very well by a raft of rules, laws and regulations. These include cars, trucks, buses, motorcycles, trains, planes, helicopters and jets. Then there are cranes, forklifts, steamrollers, tractors, graders and many other industrial vehicles. Try operating any of these and see the wall of bureaucracy you will encounter – and guess what? All with the cheerful blessing of gun nuts.




When cops, paid by you, take out their guns and shoot an armed felon, they are controlling his use of guns. Gun control.



Many will obey the law. Only a minority don’t – we call them criminals. The fact that a minority break laws is no reason to abandon laws.

I'm only going to address the idea of mass shooters mostly using "rapid fire weapons." for one, if by rapid fire you mean semi automatic where one trigger pull equals one shot, practically every modern firearm has that capability. Even revolvers (though they use double action but the result is still the same) have that capability. So anything can be used for rapid fire.

Second, most mass shootings are done with handguns. So the V Tech shooting wasn't the exception to the rule, it is the rule.

 

[vegas giants]

If there is anything that has been proven over and over again, it is that the cops cannot protect you. Cops usually only arrive for clean up after the crime has been committed. Also, your entire country has fewer people than our state of Texas. Your country is an island. We have 310 million people in a highly diverse mix with over 300 million guns in circulation. We have people coming in illegally from Mexico. Any comparisons between the US and Australia, the UK or similar places, is completely invalid.

You misspelled valid

 

[Wan]

You misspelled valid

How about you make an actual argument if you disagree with what he said?

 

[vegas giants]

How about you make an actual argument if you disagree with what he said?

Sure. If it was one country I would say the evidence is weak for comparasion. But if it is a dozen very different countries all with the same low deaths from effective gun control I say the evidence is very strong

 

[Grand Mal]

If there is anything that has been proven over and over again, it is that the cops cannot protect you. Cops usually only arrive for clean up after the crime has been committed. Also, your entire country has fewer people than our state of Texas. Your country is an island. We have 310 million people in a highly diverse mix with over 300 million guns in circulation. We have people coming in illegally from Mexico. Any comparisons between the US and Australia, the UK or similar places, is completely invalid.

Seriously. One country was founded by religious refugees, the other by transported criminals. Of course one would develop a more violent society than the other.



oops. this is the time to invoke the code word 'demographics'.

 

[veritas1]

They are one of many deterrents to crime and criminals. The list is very long.




Yes, with a land the size of the USA (not including Alaska). We are mostly concentrated in cities along the East and South coasts. Most of Oz is empty of people.



You have even more vehicles, the vast majority of which are registered or licensed and subject to a raft of strict and enforced laws, with no objection from gun enthusiasts.



We have boat people (mostly Africans and Muslims) coming by boats from Indonesia. When conservatives are in power this is stopped. When the Labor Party (same as Democrats) are in power it starts up again. The Left import their votes. At least you have Trump, who will stop a lot of illegals.




Britain is parent to both the USA and Australia, and there are plenty of valid comparisons between them. Most of the time we follow the US in whatever they do, a few years later. In this case we banned those kinds of guns before you (will), since we don’t have the powerful gun lobby as you do, which slowed you down. Rest assured, it is a natural and normal way to go, since guns are very yester-century, as I said. We have a plethora of security nowadays, putting guns to the very back of what’s important to have. For instance, I’d never swap my cell phone for a gun, and if I had a choice of motion sensor lights, cameras, good security door and windows and a dog, on the one hand, or gun on the other, I’d pick the former. How about you?

We have over 20,000 gun laws. I'm not sure how many more you think we need. Also, even if you were to ban semi auto rifles tomorrow, there are millions already in private hands and they will not be turned in, that I can assure you. As for your last comment, motion sensors, locks, etc. are useful but if a criminal evades them and gets into your home, you must have the last line of defense, and that is a firearm. We will never give up that right.

 

[vegas giants]

We have over 20,000 gun laws. I'm not sure how many more you think we need. Also, even if you were to ban semi auto rifles tomorrow, there are millions already in private hands and they will not be turned in, that I can assure you. As for your last comment, motion sensors, locks, etc. are useful but if a criminal evades them and gets into your home, you must have the last line of defense, and that is a firearm. We will never give up that right.

We have the most lax gun laws in the developed world.

 

[veritas1]

Sure. If it was one country I would say the evidence is weak for comparasion. But if it is a dozen very different countries all with the same low deaths from effective gun control I say the evidence is very strong

Except that none of those countries compare to the US for the reasons stated. If you want to compare them to each other, you might make more valid comparisons. People talk about what gun confiscation has done in the UK and Australia and then compare that to the US but those places already had lower gun crime rates than the US did. That is the reason that this is an apples and oranges comparison. People are also hung up on semi auto rifles but the fact remains that they are used in a tiny number of crimes, albeit ones that get a lot of attention. But, as I said, you can wreak havoc with handguns as well. The answer is finding out what is driving these people, look for early indicators and take action. Most mass shooters give off some sort of warning signs. The Parkland shooter was sending up red flares and nobody did anything.

 

[veritas1]

We have the most lax gun laws in the developed world.

You mean because we haven't confiscated anything. Well, that is a pipe dream.

 

[vegas giants]

You mean because we haven't confiscated anything. Well, that is a pipe dream.

I wish our gun deaths were a pipe dream...instead its a nightmare

 

[vegas giants]

Except that none of those countries compare to the US for the reasons stated. If you want to compare them to each other, you might make more valid comparisons. People talk about what gun confiscation has done in the UK and Australia and then compare that to the US but those places already had lower gun crime rates than the US did. That is the reason that this is an apples and oranges comparison. People are also hung up on semi auto rifles but the fact remains that they are used in a tiny number of crimes, albeit ones that get a lot of attention. But, as I said, you can wreak havoc with handguns as well. The answer is finding out what is driving these people, look for early indicators and take action. Most mass shooters give off some sort of warning signs. The Parkland shooter was sending up red flares and nobody did anything.

That is like saying lets compare this cancer drug on people. On wait...we can't. No two people are exactly alike.....they are different in a million ways. Your assumption is hilarious and ignores anything related to statistical science

 

[veritas1]

I wish our gun deaths were a pipe dream...instead its a nightmare

They've been falling since the early 90's. Take away gang/drug shootings and it would be much, much lower. The reality, which the gun grabbers prefer to ignore, is that the chances of any average person getting shot by someone, are very tiny.

 

[veritas1]

That is like saying lets compare this cancer drug on people. On wait...we can't. No two people are exactly alike.....they are different in a million ways. Your assumption is hilarious and ignores anything related to statistical science

Right, because you have just as much chance of being shot in Wyoming as downtown Chicago, Detroit or Balltimore. That's your argument. I notice you have failed to address any of the points made. No surprise.

 

[Rob Larrikin]

We have over 20,000 gun laws. I'm not sure how many more you think we need.

The aim should be to arrive at a place where murderbrats can’t just grab mass murder weapons on a whim, then go to school to bump off fifty students because they were bullied or annoyed by someone. At the moment murderbrats have access to weapons their dopey parents leave lying around. Why? Because dopey parents weren’t raised with discipline. In the case of Sandy Hook, Adam Lanza had access to guns through his witless mother, Nancy Lanza, a gun nut with at least a dozen firearms. Her murderbrat son shot her four times in her bed before going to Sandy Hook Elementary School where he murdered 20 children and six adults. Nancy Lanza is a good example of why Americans will lose their right to have such weapons, and she deserved every one of those rounds to her head.

In Australia if you want a gun you have to fill in many forms and jump through many hoops, and the great majority just can’t be bothered. People like Nancy Lanza are weeded out, because a good for nothing simpleton like her would probably fail some of those tests. Aside from that, she wouldn’t have the maturity or patience to go through all the paperwork. In America on the other hand, a halfwit like her has no problem getting hold of an arsenal of lethal weapons so her murderbrats can have a carte blanche gun buffet. People like her and her spawn are ticking time bombs and America is infested with them.

Also, even if you were to ban semi auto rifles tomorrow, there are millions already in private hands and they will not be turned in, that I can assure you.

Most people follow the law, so yes, most will hand them in. The payment they receive for them makes this a lot easier. Obviously a minority won’t, as was the case here, but people get old and die, and their sons do the handing in.

As for your last comment, motion sensors, locks, etc. are useful but if a criminal evades them and gets into your home, you must have the last line of defense, and that is a firearm.

While the perp is breaking in the neighbors are busy calling the cops. The alarm, the lights, the barking dog – they alert neighbors. If someone is home that person is calling the cops. Only the stupidest burglar would proceed after lights go on, dogs bark and cameras film, and of them, only the stupidest again would forget that everyone has cell phones.

 

[vegas giants]

They've been falling since the early 90's. Take away gang/drug shootings and it would be much, much lower. The reality, which the gun grabbers prefer to ignore, is that the chances of any average person getting shot by someone, are very tiny.

Take away the gun deaths....and we have very few gun deaths. I love that one

 

[vegas giants]

Right, because you have just as much chance of being shot in Wyoming as downtown Chicago, Detroit or Balltimore. That's your argument. I notice you have failed to address any of the points made. No surprise.

Yeah like a guy is Wyoming is the same as me......your logic