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

[vegas giants]

When you don't read what is posted and instead rely on your canned, parrot-like response, of course you will miss it.

I asked a simple question. Can you answer it

 

[veritas1]

I asked a simple question. Can you answer it

Uh, yea. It worked in NYC. Aggressive law enforcement lowered murder from over 2,000 per year under Dinkins to about 300 when Giuliani left. It's amazing what a will to work and competence can do.

 

[vegas giants]

Uh, yea. It worked in NYC. Aggressive law enforcement lowered murder from over 2,000 per year under Dinkins to about 300 when Giuliani left. It's amazing what a will to work and competence can do.

Great so you admit it has only been done in places with strong gun control. I agree

 

[veritas1]

Great so you admit it has only been done in places with strong gun control. I agree

Really? What happened in DC and all the other cities I mentioned? They all have gun control and high murder rates. What they don't have is a will to do what's required to crack down on criminals. They are more beholden to PC than safety.

 

[vegas giants]

Really? What happened in DC and all the other cities I mentioned? They all have gun control and high murder rates. What they don't have is a will to do what's required to crack down on criminals. They are more beholden to PC than safety.

Even you admitted...your plan works nowhere that does not also have strong gun control. Facts are facts

 

[veritas1]

Even you admitted...your plan works nowhere that does not also have strong gun control. Facts are facts

I notice you avoided answering why gun control fails is so many big cities who do not also practice aggressive policing. NYC is not the rule. It is the exception.

 

[vegas giants]

I notice you avoided answering why gun control fails is so many big cities who do not also practice aggressive policing. NYC is not the rule. It is the exception.

I think I said quite clearly that NYC works because it is supported by gun control all around it. Gun control should be national

 

[veritas1]

I think I said quite clearly that NYC works because it is supported by gun control all around it. Gun control should be national

Oh, and it wasn't supported by gun control all around it in the early 90's? Are you suggesting that guns were pouring in from NJ and CT? The reason NYC saw a steep decline in crime was a change in its policing and sentencing. That is simply a fact. The reason gun control fails in DC, Detroit, Chicago and other places is because it won't address the real reasons for crime.

 

[vegas giants]

Oh, and it wasn't supported by gun control all around it in the early 90's? Are you suggesting that guns were pouring in from NJ and CT? The reason NYC saw a steep decline in crime was a change in its policing and sentencing. That is simply a fact. The reason gun control fails in DC, Detroit, Chicago and other places is because it won't address the real reasons for crime.

You said yourself.....it needs to be enforced. And it was. You made my case for me.

Where exactly does your plan work again?

 

[veritas1]

You said yourself.....it needs to be enforced. And it was. You made my case for me.

Where exactly does your plan work again?

Stop playing games. As I said, what was enforced was getting criminals off the streets and imposing longer sentences for recidivists in NYC. I have manifestly stated that your plan is a failure, as numerous US cities show year after year. Criminals don't care about gun laws. That's why they are criminals. My plan works wherever aggressive, engaged policing is practiced, something we don't see much of since the left's continued attacks on law enforcement post Ferguson. Yet another Obama gift.

 

[vegas giants]

Stop playing games. As I said, what was enforced was getting criminals off the streets and imposing longer sentences for recidivists in NYC. I have manifestly stated that your plan is a failure, as numerous US cities show year after year. Criminals don't care about gun laws. That's why they are criminals. My plan works wherever aggressive, engaged policing is practiced, something we don't see much of since the left's continued attacks on law enforcement post Ferguson. Yet another Obama gift.

Prove it. Prove NONE of those people were arrested for gun crimes. That is laughable

If your plan works....just name where? LOL

 

[veritas1]

Prove it. Prove NONE of those people were arrested for gun crimes. That is laughable

If your plan works....just name where? LOL

This is idiocy. I imagine they were arrested for all sorts of crimes, many, or even most, involving guns. I never suggested otherwise. What is that supposed to prove other than that aggressive policing works? BTW, if most of these criminals had guns, what does that tell you about gun control?

 

[vegas giants]

This is idiocy. I imagine they were arrested for all sorts of crimes, many, or even most, involving guns. I never suggested otherwise. What is that supposed to prove other than that aggressive policing works? BTW, if most of these criminals had guns, what does that tell you about gun control?

Yes those gun laws took them off the street. They HAD guns.....not so much now. Gun control works

 

[veritas1]

Yes those gun laws took them off the street. They HAD guns.....not so much now. Gun control works

People with criminal records are not supposed to have guns. That's criminal control, not gun control. If gun control worked, they wouldn't have had guns to start with.

 

[vegas giants]

People with criminal records are not supposed to have guns. That's criminal control, not gun control. If gun control worked, they wouldn't have had guns to start with.

But they DID. ENFORCEMENT of gun control got those people off the streets.

 

[veritas1]

But they DID. ENFORCEMENT of gun control got those people off the streets.

Arresting a criminal is not gun control. It's only gun control if, simply by virtue of having a gun, THAT makes you a criminal. People with pre-existing records are not supposed to have guns. I'm not sure why this is difficult for you to understand. Perhaps you do not want to understand it.

 

[Rob Larrikin]

Well I for one am proud of my convict ancestry

You should be!

They built the infrastructures and farms that Australia needed.

 

[Rob Larrikin]

Yea, Nancy Lanza should have had her weapons secured

Nancy Lanza should have had no weapons. Remember what your grandpappy used to say. “If you can’t be responsible with guns, you don’t get to have one.”

but her biggest failing was in not getting treatment for her troubled son.

Her son was spoiled like millions of others. Once a child is spoiled he or she can go in any of dozens of directions. Doctors then provide a convenient list of names for each of those conditions, designed to reassure baby boomers that it wasn’t their fault. “Your son has a disease called Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD),” or “Ballooning Hypertension Ego Exhaustion (BHEE), or “Gnashing Angerism Slamadoorus Scratchyereyesouter” (GASS). The word ‘spoiled’ actually covers it all. Spoil a kid and he or she may commit suicide, go crazy, kill others, you name it. If you have a spoiled brat who does nothing terrible, they will still suffer some if not all of the following; insecurity, loneliness, depression, alcoholism, drug addiction, obesity, divorce, child loss, poverty, ill health, anger issues, self-hate, self-destructive habits and bankruptcy, unless you are an exception to the rule.

Your glee at her murder is also unseemly.

I’d gleefully put a couple of extra rounds in her head if it would save those twenty schoolkids.

I love it. Let's make it so difficult to get a weapon that we've pretty much neutered the 2nd amendment.

Your grandpappy didn’t say, “You can be as irresponsible as you like with guns, ‘cos we gots the second amendment.”

As I've said, we have laws that can weed out undesirables getting guns.

Which fail.

They are unevenly enforced or not enforced at all. Also, shoddy and lax police work will not be legislated away. It can only be improved by replacing those who fail at their duties. There were three or four things that should have immediately sent authorities to look at Nicolas Cruz. They were all ignored. He in no way should have been in a position to buy a weapon nor should one have been sold to him. If we don't weed out that incompetence, we will not stop mass shootings, period.

True, but it is impossible to stop the carnage unless you ban the worst weapons. As you say there are millions of them lying around, and millions of Nancy Lanza’s with murderbrats just waiting to go off. When they do they’ll grab their mother’s guns and blast away another bunch of school kids. Now if Nancy was told that she had to hand in all her guns or face a steep fine or jail sentence, she would hand them in. Then she could apply for permission and fail. No guns for Nancy. That should be the slogan for this. “No Guns For Nancy”.

Millions of people don't have alarm systems or dogs.

Millions do, and there’s much more. Cell phones, security doors, good locks, security windows with good locks, sensor lights (cheap as) on all walls, video cameras, warning signs and thousands of other security devices.

the vast majority will not hand over their firearms, no matter what the bribe is.

Most have already swapped their firearms for cell phones.

 

[Mithrae]

But that information was not forwarded properly so no red flags appeared when he went to buy a weapon. . . .

If people don't like the 2nd amendment, we have a process for changing it. Of course, the people who don't like it know that they can never get the votes to water down or abolish it and that is why we have tens of thousands of other laws, many designed specifically to curtail people's right to own firearms. In the case of mentally ill people and criminals, that is not a problem, but those are not the people who are the focus of gun control efforts. The focus is on "gun nuts", the term they apply to law abiding gun owners.

It sounds like you are in favour of licensing and waiting/probationary periods for gun ownership (such as a year's membership in a gun club), registration of weapons and restrictions on the types and locations where they can be carried or used. Same as for motor vehicles. Is that correct?

I'm pretty sure few advocates of gun control have an issue with upstanding citizens who feel they really need the comfort of and are willing to go through a serious process of acquiring a handgun to keep locked up beside their bed. But lack of waiting/background checks, private ownership of automatic rifles, and folk whose enthusiasm for killing power outstrips their responsibility in acquiring it are pretty obvious areas of concern.

 

[vegas giants]

Arresting a criminal is not gun control. It's only gun control if, simply by virtue of having a gun, THAT makes you a criminal. People with pre-existing records are not supposed to have guns. I'm not sure why this is difficult for you to understand. Perhaps you do not want to understand it.

I'm still waiting for this place your plan works without strict gun control. Is it called Fantasyland?

Face it.....it can't be done your way

 

[Maccabee]

No, unless you have a country the size and density of the US, you have no comparables. You are comparing a pumpkin to a grape.

Grapes may have less mass but they have more density.

 

[D_NATURED]

From CNN

Why Americans don't do anything about mass shootings
​

In October, 2017, the worst mass shooting in US history took place at a country music concert in Las Vegas. Fifty-eight people were killed and more than 500 people injured. Bill O'Reilly boiled the massacre down to six words: "This is the price of freedom."

I hate to say it, but he is right. Sunday, just 34 days after Vegas, 26 people were gunned down and about 20 others were wounded during a church service in Texas. And here's what is really sick -- we won't be surprised when there's another mass shooting next month. Maybe it'll be your church, your mall, your concert or your movie theater. That's the price of freedom.


In America, we are free to stockpile weapons. We are free to order ammo online. We are free to outfit our guns with bump stocks, like the Vegas shooter did. This is the price we pay for freedom, alright. The freedom to not give a damn.

COMMENT:-

Is the comment about "The freedom to not give a damn." COMPLETELY off base?​

You can't say we do nothing about it. After all, we always ask for thoughts and prayers. OK...we do nothing.

 

[veritas1]

It sounds like you are in favour of licensing and waiting/probationary periods for gun ownership (such as a year's membership in a gun club), registration of weapons and restrictions on the types and locations where they can be carried or used. Same as for motor vehicles. Is that correct?

I'm pretty sure few advocates of gun control have an issue with upstanding citizens who feel they really need the comfort of and are willing to go through a serious process of acquiring a handgun to keep locked up beside their bed. But lack of waiting/background checks, private ownership of automatic rifles, and folk whose enthusiasm for killing power outstrips their responsibility in acquiring it are pretty obvious areas of concern.

I have no problem with rigorous background checks. Much of that is in the law now but it is unevenly carried out or the proper information isn't made available. Several of the recent mass shootings could have been stopped without the sloppy work of police, gun sellers and others responsible for keeping information updated. We can pass all the laws we want but if that isn't fixed, they will not work any better than the current ones.

As for gun owners, they have to be responsible with their firearms and I wouldn't be opposed to stripping any of their weapons who had them used in a crime as a result of their own carelessness. I do not support keeping law abiding people from buying semi auto rifles. There is no evidence that that will stop anything. There are millions of these weapons already available. Unless we think we can track down and collect every one, we will not stop determined mass shooters. What we need is competence and common sense. I mean, why on earth did nobody question why Steven Paddock needed 21 suitcases brought to his room over a few days. Why did that not raise any concerns? These are the types of failings that lead to horrible consequences.

 

[veritas1]

I'm still waiting for this place your plan works without strict gun control. Is it called Fantasyland?

Face it.....it can't be done your way

I'm still waiting for why your plan has failed miserably in city after city. NYC was a success because they went after CRIMINALS, not guns. The gun laws were largely unchanged.

 

[veritas1]

Nancy Lanza should have had no weapons. Remember what your grandpappy used to say. “If you can’t be responsible with guns, you don’t get to have one.”



Her son was spoiled like millions of others. Once a child is spoiled he or she can go in any of dozens of directions. Doctors then provide a convenient list of names for each of those conditions, designed to reassure baby boomers that it wasn’t their fault. “Your son has a disease called Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD),” or “Ballooning Hypertension Ego Exhaustion (BHEE), or “Gnashing Angerism Slamadoorus Scratchyereyesouter” (GASS). The word ‘spoiled’ actually covers it all. Spoil a kid and he or she may commit suicide, go crazy, kill others, you name it. If you have a spoiled brat who does nothing terrible, they will still suffer some if not all of the following; insecurity, loneliness, depression, alcoholism, drug addiction, obesity, divorce, child loss, poverty, ill health, anger issues, self-hate, self-destructive habits and bankruptcy, unless you are an exception to the rule.



I’d gleefully put a couple of extra rounds in her head if it would save those twenty schoolkids.



Your grandpappy didn’t say, “You can be as irresponsible as you like with guns, ‘cos we gots the second amendment.”



Which fail.



True, but it is impossible to stop the carnage unless you ban the worst weapons. As you say there are millions of them lying around, and millions of Nancy Lanza’s with murderbrats just waiting to go off. When they do they’ll grab their mother’s guns and blast away another bunch of school kids. Now if Nancy was told that she had to hand in all her guns or face a steep fine or jail sentence, she would hand them in. Then she could apply for permission and fail. No guns for Nancy. That should be the slogan for this. “No Guns For Nancy”.



Millions do, and there’s much more. Cell phones, security doors, good locks, security windows with good locks, sensor lights (cheap as) on all walls, video cameras, warning signs and thousands of other security devices.



Most have already swapped their firearms for cell phones.

I'm sure we probably agree on many, if not most, issues but this isn't one of them. Millions of kids are spoiled. They don't kill anybody. The people that do are troubled sorts, usually with underlying mental issues. Disarming everyone because of the handful of people who need treatment is like hitting a fly with a howitzer. It's all moot anyway because gun owners will not surrender their weapons. They may do so in the UK. They may do so in Australia. They will not do so here. That's just the long and short of it and no plan to supposedly keep semi auto weapons out of the hands of nuts, can succeed without the willing compliance of gun owners, compliance that will not be forthcoming except among a tiny few.