Parkland, FL High School Shooting

[Landlord]

3 hours ago, Making Chimichangas said:

I am pretty liberal, but when it comes to guns I am definitely a right-winger.  

 

Here's what I do not understand: why do people always blame the gun(s)? 

 

When people lose their lives in a car wreck, (assuming no manufacture defect) nobody blames the car.

 

If you go skiing and hit a tree, no one blames the ski resort.

 

If you get stabbed by a crazy ex, no one blames the knife manufacturure.

 

But when people are killed by guns, most everyone blames the gun makers and it doesn't make sense.

 

I have a conspiracy theory about why most mass shootings occur at schools but am hesitant to put it into this thread.

 

I do agree though that Trump was 100% wrong to end Obama's ban in selling guns to people with a history of mental issues.  That law/executive order should have stayed in place.

 

For the record, plenty of people do blame America's car culture for an unnecessary amount of car-related deaths, pollution, etc., and push to move our culture more towards public transportation.

 

Also, nobody is blaming guns. Guns are some plastic and metal thrown together. People are blaming the obsessive culture of gun ownership, as well as greedy organizations who shut down even hypothetical research on gun violence, and partisan politics obstructing sensical and reasonable legislature to make sure guns are sold properly.

 

You know, if a child stabs themselves, you don't blame the knife, but you do blame the people who made knives so easily accessible to that child, don't you?

 

 

 

Guns and cars are not analogous. For so many reasons. The biggest being that guns, while possible to be safely owned and operated, are made with the purpose of killing, whereas cars are made with the purpose of safely transporting you, but also happen to be dangerous. The fundamental nature of the two is completely opposed to one another. Another way in which they are drastically different is that when cars have been the source of, or at least perceived, source of problems, we've made changes to the law to make them better, and manufacturers have constantly improved upon their safety instead of lobbying for it to be illegal to even research car-related deaths. Backup cameras, better security/locking, brake assistance, whatever the hell you call the thing that helps you stay in your lane if you doze off or whatever, etc. Do gun manufacturers have a history of using technology to improve the safety of their products? No. Because they don't care about it. Car manufacturers do, because they know nobody will buy a car that isn't safe.

 

If you insist on making an analogy out of the two, okay, so be it. If you want to own and operate a vehicle, you have to:

 

• Acquire a license, with written and practical tests

• Renew your license every few years, and be in a state and federal database

• Get specialty licensing for specialty vehicles

• Have your vehicle registered, pay yearly tag fees, and have at least liability insurance

• Restriction of crazy high-performance and potentially unsafe vehicles to private courses/competitions/etc.

 

That's a good list of reasonable ways to approach something that is serious and important to regulate the right way. Does any of that seem unreasonable to apply to gun ownership? If so, could we at least research it to make sure? Well, apparently, we can't. Apparently we can't do anything, other than offer thoughts and prayers. I'm going to go ahead and offer mine up in advance to the families of the kids who get murdered 5-6 months from now.

Edited February 16, 2018 by Landlord

[commando]

let's have the same rules for everyone.   take down the metal detectors and security guards in washington.  if our kids have to live and die based on thoughts and prayers so should our elected officials.  we can guard them with our thoughts and prayers  as well as their thoughts and prayers can keep our kids safe.

[BigRedBuster]

13 hours ago, Stumpy1 said:

Take away guns and people will still find ways to cause mass casualties.  Its not necessarily a gun issue but a mental issue IMO.  

 

Then, why aren't there mass killings all over Europe?

 

To the bolded, it's actually both.  Our political problem is that we have two sides that each only want to point at one of them.

[Stumpy1]

13 hours ago, QMany said:

England, Australia, and other countries have implemented stricter gun bans. They have markedly lower occurrences such as this. Why? They must not have mental health issues there, lucky. 

Let's take a look at Australia and maybe you will understand my post a little more.  Australia implemented a gun control law after a mass shooting in 1996 and it greatly reduced gun mass killings but it didn't stop mass killings altogether. 

 

In June of 2000,  15 people were killed by arson at a hostel

In Feb of 2009, 10 people were killed by arson at a ralley

In July of 2009,  5 family members were beat to death with a hammer

In November of 2011,  11 people were killed by arson at a nursing home

In Dec of 2014,  8 children were killed by a knife at a residence

In Jan of 2017,  6 people were killed by a car at a mall

 

Before the gun control, the only other arson attack was in 1973 which killed 15 people. 

 

Like I mentioned,  take away guns and people will still find ways to cause mass casualties.  I am not opposed to stricter gun laws.  I actually wouldn't mind it because I know a few people that own guns and they are dumber then a box of hammers.   I was just simply pointing out that people with mental issues will find other ways to cause harm. 

 

[Fru]

The rest of the world has figured this problem out. The only dissenting opinions come from people who get paid millions by the NRA, and the sycophants who follow them. 

[ColoradoHusk]

11 minutes ago, Stumpy1 said:

Let's take a look at Australia and maybe you will understand my post a little more.  Australia implemented a gun control law after a mass shooting in 1996 and it greatly reduced gun mass killings but it didn't stop mass killings altogether. 

 

In June of 2000,  15 people were killed by arson at a hostel

In Feb of 2009, 10 people were killed by arson at a ralley

In July of 2009,  5 family members were beat to death with a hammer

In November of 2011,  11 people were killed by arson at a nursing home

In Dec of 2014,  8 children were killed by a knife at a residence

In Jan of 2017,  6 people were killed by a car at a mall

 

Before the gun control, the only other arson attack was in 1973 which killed 15 people. 

 

Like I mentioned,  take away guns and people will still find ways to cause mass casualties.  I am not opposed to stricter gun laws.  I actually wouldn't mind it because I know a few people that own guns and they are dumber then a box of hammers.   I was just simply pointing out that people with mental issues will find other ways to cause harm. 

 

Nobody is going to "stop" mass killings altogether, but why not take steps to greatly reduce the number of mass killings?  I am glad you are not opposed to stricter gun laws, but when people comment "gun control is not going to stop mass killings" it gets really old.  I know all drunk drivers can't be taken off the road, but let's roll back all drunk driving laws because we can't stop them all.

[knapplc]

Gun culture has gone from essentially a hobby or a pastime to a full-fledged religion. People hold their guns more dearly than to their country, their fellow citizens, or their god. 

 

Maybe the first step in fixing the gun problem is to declare the NRA a Public Threat.  Under their lobbying, 440,095 people died by firearms on US soil through homicide, accident and suicide. Over the same time span, 369 Americans have died overseas due to terrorist incidents.  1

 

The NRA is clearly far more dangerous to Americans than terrorists.  Let's fight the fight that needs fighting. Ban the NRA.

[BigRedBuster]

3 minutes ago, knapplc said:

Gun culture has gone from essentially a hobby or a pastime to a full-fledged religion. People hold their guns more dearly than to their country, their fellow citizens, or their god. 

 

What is really disturbing to me as a Christian is that so many people in a twisted way think the two bolded are some how connected.

[Danny Bateman]

48 minutes ago, Stumpy1 said:

Like I mentioned,  take away guns and people will still find ways to cause mass casualties.  I am not opposed to stricter gun laws.  I actually wouldn't mind it because I know a few people that own guns and they are dumber then a box of hammers.   I was just simply pointing out that people with mental issues will find other ways to cause harm. 

 

 

I wholeheartedly agree with you. People with bad intentions will always try to find a way. But we are long overdue in addressing the most dangerous, prevalent weapon at their disposal to accomplish those ends.

 

I also think we need increases funding and better outcomes for mental health for all Americans. We have to approach this issue with a multifaceted approach, and this would have great societal benefit. The VAST majority (nearly 2/3) of gun deaths are suicides. Really useful graphic from 538.

 

But of course, the GOP voted for huge cuts to mental health funding via Medicaid, which provides 28% of all mental healthcare services. Trump's budget would cut $665M in mental healthcare spending as well.

Edited February 16, 2018 by dudeguyy

[ColoradoHusk]

12 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

What is really disturbing to me as a Christian is that so many people in a twisted way think the two bolded are some how connected.

[Fru]

39 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

Nobody is going to "stop" mass killings altogether, but why not take steps to greatly reduce the number of mass killings?  I am glad you are not opposed to stricter gun laws, but when people comment "gun control is not going to stop mass killings" it gets really old.  I know all drunk drivers can't be taken off the road, but let's roll back all drunk driving laws because we can't stop them all.

This. 100% This. 

[Stumpy1]

14 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

Nobody is going to "stop" mass killings altogether, but why not take steps to greatly reduce the number of mass killings?  I am glad you are not opposed to stricter gun laws, but when people comment "gun control is not going to stop mass killings" it gets really old.  I know all drunk drivers can't be taken off the road, but let's roll back all drunk driving laws because we can't stop them all.

It didn't reduce the number of mass killings by a lot in Australia though, just the means of those killings.  In the 20 years after the laws went into effect,  76 people have lost their lives, 10 of those by guns, in 12 mass killings.  The 20 years before that, 112 people (35 in one shooting) lost their lives in 14 attacks.  All the attacks before the gun control laws went into effect were caused by guns.    

 

  

[Danny Bateman]

@schriznoeder already mentioned it on page 1, but on the subject of the NRA, I'll just leave this here without comment.

 

 

[Stumpy1]

13 minutes ago, dudeguyy said:

 

I wholeheartedly agree with you. People with bad intentions will always try to find a way. But we are long overdue in addressing the most dangerous, prevalent weapon at their disposal to accomplish those ends.

 

I also think we need increases funding and better outcomes for mental health for all Americans. We have to approach this issue with a multifaceted approach, and this would have great societal benefit. The VAST majority (nearly 2/3) of gun deaths are suicides. Really cool graphic from 538.

 

But of course, the GOP voted for huge cuts to mental health funding via Medicaid, which provides 28% of all mental healthcare services. Trump's budget would cut $665M in mental healthcare spending as well.

I agree with this 100%...We do need stricter laws when it comes to guns. 

 

My wife works with kids that have mental issues and she complains all the time about not getting enough help for the kids.  She has said it makes her sad and angry at the same time.  

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

Time to be blunt.