Discussion Gun control

[SharkBait]

We need more efficient anti bully mechanisms in place. Without bullying we would have no gun deaths in schools.

 

[M3J]

Another mass shooting. Geez it's time to ban ordinary civilians from carrying firearms without any specific reason.

No, we need more stringent vetting and killing all and any loopholes.

 

[Arjuna]

We need more efficient anti bully mechanisms in place. Without bullying we would have no gun deaths in schools.

Not all shootings happen in schools or colleges though.

No, we need more stringent vetting and killing all and any loopholes.

Will it really matter?As long as people have machine guns or heavy fire arms with them,they can easily do all these things.

 

[SharkBait]

Not all shootings happen in schools or colleges though.

Workplaces can have bullying

 

[Arjuna]

Workplaces can have bullying

True but many times there were cases where bullying was not the factor for the shooter.

 

[M3J]

Not all shootings happen in schools or colleges though.


Will it really matter?As long as people have machine guns or heavy fire arms with them,they can easily do all these things.

Yeah because stringent vetting means people who are a clear risk or have bad history won't be able to get guns legally, and closing loopholes like being able to buy guns at gun shows mean they can't get guns that way either. And if you ban AR-15s and assault/semiautomatic rifles, that'd reduce the amount of such weaponry as well.

 

[SharkBait]

Why ban guns at gun shows? Where else would new guns be sold?

 

[xi0]

There needs to be a national database for all guns, mandatory waiting periods for buying them regardless of type or where they're purchased. No loopholes on private sales, period. Leaving gun laws up to the states clearly isn't helping anything.

Care about mental health and bullying when you're not for gutting funding to healthcare and the department of education, then maybe I won't be cynical about right-wingers only wanting to address these issues whenever the latest mass-murder occurs.

 

[Nemispelled]

While there is some room for improvement over gun control, I don't think that it was the main factor for the recent school mass shooting.

The primary concern here should be the shooter's mentality and up-bringing. I understand that the perpetrator suffered great misfortune throughout his 19 years of life... but obviously, this kid had a major problem with his crooked and twisted personality.

One pitiful flaw of American society is that growing individuals are highly unsupervised and lack the basic discipline. It has little to do with the means in which this guy killed his victims. His intentions were clear as day from the get-go.

If he didn't have access to a gun, he'd have access to knives, and even worse, a car/vehicle. Running over a crowd of people with your vehicle is just as effective as a shooting rampage.



With that said, there's no perfect solution to a tragedy like this. In my honest opinion, the best preventable mechanism is to allow for extreme deterrence... but that would naturally break the 8th amendment.

 

[M3J]

There needs to be a national database for all guns, mandatory waiting periods for buying them regardless of type or where they're purchased. No loopholes on private sales, period. Leaving gun laws up to the states clearly isn't helping anything.

Care about mental health and bullying when you're not for gutting funding to healthcare and the department of education, then maybe I won't be cynical about right-wingers only wanting to address these issues whenever the latest mass-murder occurs.

Ageed `100%.

While there is some room for improvement over gun control, I don't think that it was the main factor for the recent school mass shooting.

The primary concern here should be the shooter's mentality and up-bringing. I understand that the perpetrator suffered great misfortune throughout his 19 years of life... but obviously, this kid had a major problem with his crooked and twisted personality.

One pitiful flaw of American society is that growing individuals are highly unsupervised and lack the basic discipline. It has little to do with the means in which this guy killed his victims. His intentions were clear as day from the get-go.

If he didn't have access to a gun, he'd have access to knives, and even worse, a car/vehicle. Running over a crowd of people with your vehicle is just as effective as a shooting rampage.

With that said, there's no perfect solution to a tragedy like this. In my honest opinion, the best preventable mechanism is to allow for extreme deterrence... but that would naturally break the 8th amendment.

Gun control was the main factor for the recent shooting, or recent shootings, rather. If anyone is able to buy guns despite being investigated and shit, then that shows gun control isn't working well... though reports did say the cops didn't do anything despite the shooter's mom calling them over, and the FBI somehow didn't report the incidents with the shooter.

We've always had shooting. Didn't Alexander Hamilton die because he lost a gun duel with Aaron Burr? Problem is, guns are getting more powerful, and instead of being banned they're being sold without stringent background check and vetting, so anyone can get their hands on these guns.

That's dumb. Access to knives is better. He has to get up close to knife people to death, and if he tried, he'd have probably killed 10-20 people and hurt 10 people, as opposed to killing 17 people and hurting over 20 people. And funnily, despite trucks being used two times, mass killers still use guns. If they wanted to use trucks, they would have, but they used guns instead. Head about the mass knifing attack in China? I think about 10-20 dead? maybe more? If guns were used, there'd be over 100 people dead, most likely.

Best solution would be stricter and more extreme vetting and getting politicians in office who aren't going to accept NRA money in exchange for kids' lives.

 

[Nemispelled]

Gun control was the main factor for the recent shooting, or recent shootings, rather. If anyone is able to buy guns despite being investigated and shit, then that shows gun control isn't working well... though reports did say the cops didn't do anything despite the shooter's mom calling them over, and the FBI somehow didn't report the incidents with the shooter.

We've always had shooting. Didn't Alexander Hamilton die because he lost a gun duel with Aaron Burr? Problem is, guns are getting more powerful, and instead of being banned they're being sold without stringent background check and vetting, so anyone can get their hands on these guns.

That's dumb. Access to knives is better. He has to get up close to knife people to death, and if he tried, he'd have probably killed 10-20 people and hurt 10 people, as opposed to killing 17 people and hurting over 20 people. And funnily, despite trucks being used two times, mass killers still use guns. If they wanted to use trucks, they would have, but they used guns instead. Head about the mass knifing attack in China? I think about 10-20 dead? maybe more? If guns were used, there'd be over 100 people dead, most likely.

Best solution would be stricter and more extreme vetting and getting politicians in office who aren't going to accept NRA money in exchange for kids' lives.

I don't deny that there needs to be better investigations and background checks. Of course those are necessary. But that in itself only goes so far.

Take a look at the Las Vegas Massacre. Stephen Paddock was just any ordinary gambler living a relatively quiet and low-profile life. Who would've guessed that he would be the one to cause the deadliest mass shooting in US history?

Any ex-military veteran or hunter can pass "stricter" background checks, but you're still not gonna stop a murderer from successfully executing his premeditated deed.



The brutal truth is, "getting politicians into office" and stressing over tougher background checks is simply a waste of time. Don't expect politicians and government officials to feel sympathetic for us.

By bringing up matters to them, you're just playing their political games and diverting attention from the actual problem in society.



And it's not about whether "guns or knives are better at killing". You're missing the point, obviously, guns have greater range and power, which is why they are used on the battlefield and not knives.

The point is that there are other means of murdering, not just guns. If guns were completely non-existent, killers would just use a car/truck loaded with explosives.

But that's besides the point. Even 1 death by unnecessary violence is too much.



Like I said, there's no single solution. It takes a lot more than just "guns" to stop a person from committing an act of violence. The simplest forms of prevention would be behavioral/mental guidance & discipline as well as deterrence.

 

[Arjuna]

I personally feel guns are more "dangerous" than knives.If you hold a gun then there is a psychological effect in your mind that it is a weapon unlike knives or trucks.(Knives are also used for cooking while trucks for transportation).

Moreover overpowering a person holding a knife is much easier compared to a gun.

And let's take instances in other countries.The countries who don't have easy access to guns don't witness these kinds of mass-killings normally.


And i believe every country has bullies,psychologically disturbed persons.But that doesn't mean they take up knives or trucks to kill people.But if they had easy access to guns who knows what they would have done.


So i believe not only firearms sells should be restricted but also deep counselling should be done to vulnerable sections of the population.

 

[xi0]

Take a look at the Las Vegas Massacre. Stephen Paddock was just any ordinary gambler living a relatively quiet and low-profile life. Who would've guessed that he would be the one to cause the deadliest mass shooting in US history?

Any ex-military veteran or hunter can pass "stricter" background checks, but you're still not gonna stop a murderer from successfully executing his premeditated deed.

It's not about stopping these incidents, they can't all be stopped. However, the damage can be minimized if a person isn't allowed to buy bump-fire stocks (which even Trump himself is considering banning), tens of thousands of rounds of live ammunition, or dozens of weapons without a legitimate reason.

If Paddock didn't have legal access to all of these things, the casualties would have been way down. If someone like him decided to acquire these kinds of things illegally, they would have drawn the attention of any number of different law enforcement agencies.

I don't think guns themselves or gun ownership is the issue here. The AR-15 on it's own isn't really any more lethal than a Ruger Mini14, an SKS, or any number of semi-automatic hunting rifles. The problem is that AR-15s look like military grade weapons. And when you're allowed to legally modify them to work like most military carbines can, the line is blurred even further. Ban bump-fire stocks (hell, plenty of gun ranges ban them already since it's impossible to aim using one), ban extended magazines for civilian use, ban hollow-point ammunition... do something. Taking legislative action and trying to address mental health issues aren't mutually exclusive.

 

[Nemispelled]

It's not about stopping these incidents, they can't all be stopped. However, the damage can be minimized if a person isn't allowed to buy bump-fire stocks (which even Trump himself is considering banning), tens of thousands of rounds of live ammunition, or dozens of weapons without a legitimate reason.

If Paddock didn't have legal access to all of these things, the casualties would have been way down. If someone like him decided to acquire these kinds of things illegally, they would have drawn the attention of any number of different law enforcement agencies.

I don't think guns themselves or gun ownership is the issue here. The AR-15 on it's own isn't really any more lethal than a Ruger Mini14, an SKS, or any number of semi-automatic hunting rifles. The problem is that AR-15s look like military grade weapons. And when you're allowed to legally modify them to work like most military carbines can, the line is blurred even further. Ban bump-fire stocks (hell, plenty of gun ranges ban them already since it's impossible to aim using one), ban extended magazines for civilian use, ban hollow-point ammunition... do something. Taking legislative action and trying to address mental health issues aren't mutually exclusive.

True, but I've never supported bump-fire stocks to begin with, or any other rapid-firing guns for that matter. Even at the time when the Las Vegas Massacre occurred, I was in support of banning those modifications.

Though, in the recent school mass shooting, bump-fire stocks wasn't even an issue as far as I was aware of. That has only recently been brought to attention once again because Trump stated that he is in support of banning any modification that turns a semi-automatic weapon into a near-automatic one.

Which I see no problem with that.



On the other hand of the spectrum, I disagree with news reports that suggest mental health was the main factor in this case. In my opinion, neither "guns" nor "mental health" was the cause of the mass shooting.

It has to do with the conscious decision and behavior of the shooter. He didn't have a stable family life early on and nobody even cared to discipline him. He showed numerous signs of abnormal conduct and inappropriate ideologies, yet no attempts were made to supervise/control this individual.

I mean, this guy had a pretty consistent track record. He wasn't somebody who was off the radar like Stephen Paddock was.

The shooter probably knew that his worst punishment would be the death penalty, so his decision to commit the act was easy for him to make considering he likely didn't have any motivation to live anyways.



I'm also well aware that I may hold an unpopular opinion here, but I don't think that this situation has much to do with political reform.

Instead of protesters trying to get the government to do something about it, this should be a lesson to all families and ordinary citizens about the way in which they raise their children.

It is imperative for guardians to be aware of what their family member is doing as well as their mental state. Nobody was watching Nikolas Cruz's behavior and schools unknowingly took disciplinary actions on him (probably for the right reasons), which only provoked him even more. He was practically a ticking time bomb.

 

[kkck]

I don't deny that there needs to be better investigations and background checks. Of course those are necessary. But that in itself only goes so far.

Take a look at the Las Vegas Massacre. Stephen Paddock was just any ordinary gambler living a relatively quiet and low-profile life. Who would've guessed that he would be the one to cause the deadliest mass shooting in US history?

Any ex-military veteran or hunter can pass "stricter" background checks, but you're still not gonna stop a murderer from successfully executing his premeditated deed.

The brutal truth is, "getting politicians into office" and stressing over tougher background checks is simply a waste of time. Don't expect politicians and government officials to feel sympathetic for us.

By bringing up matters to them, you're just playing their political games and diverting attention from the actual problem in society.

And it's not about whether "guns or knives are better at killing". You're missing the point, obviously, guns have greater range and power, which is why they are used on the battlefield and not knives.

The point is that there are other means of murdering, not just guns. If guns were completely non-existent, killers would just use a car/truck loaded with explosives.

But that's besides the point. Even 1 death by unnecessary violence is too much.

Like I said, there's no single solution. It takes a lot more than just "guns" to stop a person from committing an act of violence. The simplest forms of prevention would be behavioral/mental guidance & discipline as well as deterrence.

What are you talking about? Just google how often politicians actually keep their promises. The US actually has a passable record on that. The way you frame that simply doesn't adjust to reality. If people in the US want proper gun control then it is a simple matter of voting for people who support proper gun control. It's literally that easy. What is worth noting is that republican voters are not aligned with republican politicians regarding gun control. However republican politicians don't actually support this. So why is the republican party not doing anything on gun control even though their voters would actually support at least a few basic regulations like increased background checks?

 

[xi0]

On the other hand of the spectrum, I disagree with news reports that suggest mental health was the main factor in this case. In my opinion, neither "guns" nor "mental health" was the cause of the mass shooting.

It has to do with the conscious decision and behavior of the shooter. He didn't have a stable family life early on and nobody even cared to discipline him. He showed numerous signs of abnormal conduct and inappropriate ideologies, yet no attempts were made to supervise/control this individual.

How exactly does that mean that the cause of the shooting was not a "mental health" issue though? A shit upbringing can do a lot of things to a person, but that doesn't automatically make that person capable of mass murder.

 

[Nemispelled]

What are you talking about? Just google how often politicians actually keep their promises. The US actually has a passable record on that. The way you frame that simply doesn't adjust to reality. If people in the US want proper gun control then it is a simple matter of voting for people who support proper gun control. It's literally that easy. What is worth noting is that republican voters are not aligned with republican politicians regarding gun control. However republican politicians don't actually support this.

Sure, politicians keep their promises (by passing laws that they support themselves), but that doesn't mean it's going to fix the problems of society.

Stuff like background checks have been around for years/decades. And we continue to have problems and mass shootings in the United States. Every time there is a massacre, people protest for "stricter/better" background checks.

Realistically, there's only so much the government can do.


The way background checks work is that a citizen fills out a form and gives it to the person who is selling them the gun. The seller then submits the form to the NICS, which is where the FBI goes over your track record.

But most killers can pass these checks because they only ask questions like:

• Are you in the US illegally?
• Have you ever been convicted a crime?
• Do you have a restraining order issued against you?
• etc.

And some gun sellers don't even care to submit these forms to the FBI/NICS.

The problem lies more on the general population, and not necessarily on the political front.

So why is the republican party not doing anything on gun control even though their voters would actually support at least a few basic regulations like increased background checks?

I mean, you pretty much said it yourself. This statement practically supports what I said about "not putting faith in politicians" to solve these issues. Political parties isn't the answer here. It's a waste of time in my opinion.

Neither Democrats nor Republicans have seem to make any progress on this matter.

The protesters are better off pointing out flaws in society and the need to control/discipline/supervise our citizens.

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 22, 2018, Original Post Date: Feb 22, 2018 ---

How exactly does that mean that the cause of the shooting was not a "mental health" issue though? A shit upbringing can do a lot of things to a person, but that doesn't automatically make that person capable of mass murder.

From my perspective, "mental health issues" refer to neurological disorders such as autism, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression, etc... Personally, I don't buy the excuses that these factors are to blame for Nikolas Cruz's actions.

This situation seemed to be largely preventable if the kid was supervised and controlled. In other words, he needed to be put in his place by an authoritative figure. His guardians practically admitted that they saw no problem with him owning multiple rifles and the AR-15.

Nobody was paying attention to him, and this guy had a pretty consistent track record of negative behavior and a poor attitude.



Everything about the shooter's life was a direct build-up for something like this to happen. The fact that there was little attempt to block this kid in his path is quite a shame.

The school shooting happened because of pure negligence by society and the community (ex. guidance, raising children properly, supervision/discipline, etc.).

 

[Onyx Darkmatter]

I'm at the point where this might as well as being a daily basis activity, because the American people themselves allowed this shit to happen, all because they value their kinks for guns over people's lives.
Countless more will eventually be a victim thanks to the Gun Culture we live around, and it won't stop unless everyone in the country abandons their barbaric and primitive hobby.

Also, fuck Dinesh D'Souza and everything he stands for. That cunt abandoned his humanity.

 

[M3J]

I don't deny that there needs to be better investigations and background checks. Of course those are necessary. But that in itself only goes so far.

Take a look at the Las Vegas Massacre. Stephen Paddock was just any ordinary gambler living a relatively quiet and low-profile life. Who would've guessed that he would be the one to cause the deadliest mass shooting in US history?

Any ex-military veteran or hunter can pass "stricter" background checks, but you're still not gonna stop a murderer from successfully executing his premeditated deed.

It'd have gone far enough and prevented so many victims had AR-15 been banned, and stricter gun control was in play. It could have been guessed that he had a nefarious plan, or his plan could have been prevented IF (I don't know if there is) there was a database on gun owners. He had twenty-three guns, which included two high-powered rifles. The source says those guns were bought in Nevada, California, Utah, and Texas, as well. Jump to IV. Suspect section, and you'll see there were signs he could have been capable of doing something dangerous. Stricter background checks and stricter gun control would have either prevented this or lowered the amount of victims.

You're more likely to stop a murderer from causing tons of damage, even if you can't stop his attempt to kill.


And funnily, you claim you're socially liberal or something, but this is pretty far from being socially liberal. Liberals are usually for stricter gun control because they don't like innocent lives ending.

The brutal truth is, "getting politicians into office" and stressing over tougher background checks is simply a waste of time. Don't expect politicians and government officials to feel sympathetic for us.

By bringing up matters to them, you're just playing their political games and diverting attention from the actual problem in society.

It's mostly republicans as under Obama, we did make some progress in keeping guns out of unfit people's hands. Trump and politicians are happy putting more guns in more people's hands, no matter how dangerous they are, as long as NRA gives them money, and their families are safe.

... er, almost anyone being able to buy guns, and however many they want, is one of the problems in society. Look at how many mass shootings we have, and gun violence in general, and compare those numbers to other countries.

And it's not about whether "guns or knives are better at killing". You're missing the point, obviously, guns have greater range and power, which is why they are used on the battlefield and not knives.

The point is that there are other means of murdering, not just guns. If guns were completely non-existent, killers would just use a car/truck loaded with explosives.

But that's besides the point. Even 1 death by unnecessary violence is too much.



Like I said, there's no single solution. It takes a lot more than just "guns" to stop a person from committing an act of violence. The simplest forms of prevention would be behavioral/mental guidance & discipline as well as deterrence.

No I'm not. You brought up knives and vehicles, and I answered that knives and probably vehicles would result in far fewer victims, if not death. I'm pretty sure using a car or truck loaded with explosives wouldn't be as effective, and they'd run a chance of being caught. If they wanted to try this way, they would have already, nothing would stop them from using an explosive car with a gun. The point is, no gun in the hands of bad people or people thought to be at risk of violence would mean fewer deaths and fewer mass shootings.

Violence most likely can't be avoided. However, casualties can be minimized, and I'd much prefer a knifing spree where victims have higher chances of surviving.


You're missing the point. We're not talking about acts of violence, we're talking about reducing mass shootings and ultimately, gun violence. Simplest and best form of prevention would be stricter gun control and more extreme vetting. Japan does this, and they've seen less gun violence in a year than US has in a week. Would Paddock have been able to kill as many people as he did if he used a knife instead of guns? Would there have been 8 lives lost in a Charleston church if Dylann Roof used knives instead?

It's not about stopping these incidents, they can't all be stopped. However, the damage can be minimized if a person isn't allowed to buy bump-fire stocks (which even Trump himself is considering banning), tens of thousands of rounds of live ammunition, or dozens of weapons without a legitimate reason.

If Paddock didn't have legal access to all of these things, the casualties would have been way down. If someone like him decided to acquire these kinds of things illegally, they would have drawn the attention of any number of different law enforcement agencies.

I don't think guns themselves or gun ownership is the issue here. The AR-15 on it's own isn't really any more lethal than a Ruger Mini14, an SKS, or any number of semi-automatic hunting rifles. The problem is that AR-15s look like military grade weapons. And when you're allowed to legally modify them to work like most military carbines can, the line is blurred even further. Ban bump-fire stocks (hell, plenty of gun ranges ban them already since it's impossible to aim using one), ban extended magazines for civilian use, ban hollow-point ammunition... do something. Taking legislative action and trying to address mental health issues aren't mutually exclusive.

This 90%.

It is imperative for guardians to be aware of what their family member is doing as well as their mental state. Nobody was watching Nikolas Cruz's behavior and schools unknowingly took disciplinary actions on him (probably for the right reasons), which only provoked him even more. He was practically a ticking time bomb.

His mom was. I think the schools and students were as well. The mom called the cops multiple times, and even the FBI apparently were told, but did nothing. If they mentioned that in a database, then Cruz would have been less likely to get a gun. If Florida didn't sell AR-15 or had a higher age limit, then he definitely would not have gotten a gun legally, and the mass shooting could have been avoided. Even if he got the guns illegally, he'd have to put in more work and hope he didn't get caught, IF he even managed to get the guns.


Also, anyone see how some right wingers are attacking the Parkland victims? These guys are fucked up, man, going after kids who went through a nightmare in order to delegitimize them and prevent them from succeeding with trying to make gun control laws better/stricter.

 

[SharkBait]

Gun control was the main factor for the recent shooting, or recent shootings, rather. If anyone is able to buy guns despite being investigated and ****, then that shows gun control isn't working well... though reports did say the cops didn't do anything despite the shooter's mom calling them over, and the FBI somehow didn't report the incidents with the shooter.

Seems to be the flaw of leadership and not the flaw of Guns that is the culprit here, as the measures of gun control that people want are in place but rouge leadership has led to systematic flaws.

Still mental health and people just not being plain nice to each other consistently are the reasons for gun issues.

You never see generally happy people or business leaders or millionaires go on killing sprees so mental health and happiness needs to be addressed. In countries with high levels of happiness you dont see gun issues.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report#2017_report

France is 30, while Australia and Switzerland are much higher, two places that did not have gun events in 2017.