Another Mass Shooting in the U.S.A.

Message boards : Politics : Another Mass Shooting in the U.S.A.
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 . . . 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 . . . 25 · Next

AuthorMessage
bobby
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 2866
Credit: 17,789,109
RAC: 3
United States
Message 1751330 - Posted: 23 Dec 2015, 17:42:00 UTC - in response to Message 1751290.  

I'm more afraid of the government than getting shot in a mass shooting. If you want to stop mass shootings stop creating gun free slaughter houses. I live in a town were most people are packing and own guns and we have no crime. Last break in was 3 years ago.

Of course I was brought up owning guns and I never seen one shoot someone without a person holding the gun. All criminals who do these things really don't care about any gun laws.

You must live in a fairly small town, it has lower crimes rates than any town in the US with a population > 25,000 (source. Not sure the solution there would work too well in my home town of NYC.
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

ID: 1751330 · Report as offensive
bobby
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 2866
Credit: 17,789,109
RAC: 3
United States
Message 1751344 - Posted: 23 Dec 2015, 19:05:33 UTC - in response to Message 1751334.  

bobby, when the population density of the U.S. reaches what the population density of NYC is, then I might actually consider the repeal of the 2nd amendment. But until then, you guys need to figure out how to strip search everybody entering NYC for guns. Maybe raise taxes? Ya, that's the answer. Raise taxes to create a task force to strip search everybody entering NYC for guns. NYC will then be a gun-free zone. Everybody perfectly safe! Problem solved. Why haven't you done this yet? It's been years. Come on! Get with the program up there! When you do it, maybe the rest of the country will do it! Lead by example! Come on! (oh ya... do as I say, not as I do... ya, that's working....)

Why do we need to strip search everybody entering NYC? Who is arguing that the solution that appears to work well in NYC should be applied to the US in general? Oh that's you. We need to do as you say. Managed to persuade anybody to do that (without waving a gun around)?
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

ID: 1751344 · Report as offensive
Profile Frank
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Jan 14
Posts: 10
Credit: 14,413,096
RAC: 27
United States
Message 1751351 - Posted: 23 Dec 2015, 19:35:00 UTC

You obviously don't know why the founding fathers put in the second amendment. They feared government just like me. I am not afraid, I'll leave the police to put up yellow crime scene tape somewhere else.

The second amendment was not put in the bill of rights for hunting it was so we could defend ourselves and our families.

You call the cops. If you live in a small town as I, they will take about 20 to 45 minutes to get to your house just in time to put up the tape.

Works well in FL, TX, GA etc etc etc they have large cities also. The good part is some states are passing open carry laws which will do more to curb crime.
ID: 1751351 · Report as offensive
bobby
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 2866
Credit: 17,789,109
RAC: 3
United States
Message 1751353 - Posted: 23 Dec 2015, 20:06:23 UTC - in response to Message 1751351.  

You obviously don't know why the founding fathers put in the second amendment. They feared government just like me. I am not afraid, I'll leave the police to put up yellow crime scene tape somewhere else.

The second amendment was not put in the bill of rights for hunting it was so we could defend ourselves and our families.

You call the cops. If you live in a small town as I, they will take about 20 to 45 minutes to get to your house just in time to put up the tape.

Works well in FL, TX, GA etc etc etc they have large cities also. The good part is some states are passing open carry laws which will do more to curb crime.

The founding fathers believed that a standing army was not a good idea, instead they wanted "well regulated militias" maintained by the states. Hence my comment noting fear of a military invasion by the British in response to Guy's post about "original purpose".
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

ID: 1751353 · Report as offensive
Profile John Neale
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Mar 00
Posts: 634
Credit: 7,246,513
RAC: 9
South Africa
Message 1751383 - Posted: 23 Dec 2015, 22:04:48 UTC

I am an outsider, but there's something that I just can't get my head around.

On the one hand, from what I observe - for example, by watching the Republican presidential debates - American political discourse (in some quarters, at least) seems to be dominated by the apparent threat of "Islamic fundamentalist jihadist terrorism" on American soil. The recent attack in California stands out as an example. Several politicians are calling for drastic measures to combat this perceived threat, with at least one calling for a ban on all Muslims from entering the USA.

On the other hand, again from what I observe, America is (and has been, for some time) suffering from fairly regular "mass shootings" that are in no way related to terrorism (although there have been some cases that are considered terrorism, but are not perpetrated by "Islamic fundamentalist jihadists") - attacks on abortion clinics spring to mind, as do some others that seem to have been perpetrated by mentally unsound individuals who gained access to deadly weapons. There have been a number of highly publicised cases of mass killings in the very recent past. My observation is that the numbers of people killed (and injured) in mass killings not related to "Islamic fundamentalist jihadist terrorism" exceeds by far the number of those killed and injured by "Islam-related" terrorism.

I also observe that those politicians who are calling the loudest for the Islamic terrorism threat to be dealt with, are also generally those who support America's current gun laws.

If my observations are correct, why aren't the Republican presidential debates being dominated by a discussion around ways to curb the spiraling incidence of non-Islamic-related mass killings that is afflicting the USA?

(Apologies for any spelling deficiencies; here in the former British colony of South Africa, our spelling of English is closely aligned with that used in the United Kingdom.)
ID: 1751383 · Report as offensive
bobby
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 2866
Credit: 17,789,109
RAC: 3
United States
Message 1751389 - Posted: 23 Dec 2015, 22:28:18 UTC - in response to Message 1751386.  

The second amendment's original purpose is as valid today as it was a couple of centuries ago.


There are still Americans that believe there's a threat of a British military invasion?

bobby...

Of course not. They have another agenda and interests.

What is so hard to understand?

Clyde, look at what I was responding to before asking me what I understand, Guy was talking about "original purpose" of the second amendment and "a couple of centuries ago" - the war of 1812 (against a British military invasion) ended in 1815 (or "a couple of centuries ago"). The original purpose, at least in part, of the second amendment was to ensure readiness to repel such an invasion.

What is so hard to understand?
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

ID: 1751389 · Report as offensive
bobby
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 2866
Credit: 17,789,109
RAC: 3
United States
Message 1751394 - Posted: 23 Dec 2015, 22:56:54 UTC - in response to Message 1751390.  
Last modified: 23 Dec 2015, 22:57:21 UTC

The second amendment's original purpose is as valid today as it was a couple of centuries ago.


There are still Americans that believe there's a threat of a British military invasion?

bobby...

Of course not. They have another agenda and interests.

What is so hard to understand?

Clyde, look at what I was responding to before asking me what I understand, Guy was talking about "original purpose" of the second amendment and "a couple of centuries ago" - the war of 1812 (against a British military invasion) ended in 1815 (or "a couple of centuries ago"). The original purpose, at least in part, of the second amendment was to ensure readiness to repel such an invasion.

What is so hard to understand?

bobby...

There are still Americans that believe there's a threat of a British military invasion?

What does your above quote mean about your belief regarding People?

Nothing, I'm asking somebody else what their beliefs are, I'm not saying anything about my own.

BTW: Any response to:

A majority of Americans oppose banning assault weapons for the first time in more than 20 years of ABC News/Washington Post polls,

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/now-oppose-assault-weapons-ban-doubts-stopping-lone/story?id=35778846

It's interesting. It's also interesting to me that 20 years ago was about the time Governor Christie was entering politics with a mission to ensure that a ban on assault weapons was implemented. He seems to have moved away from that view over the years.
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

ID: 1751394 · Report as offensive
bobby
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 2866
Credit: 17,789,109
RAC: 3
United States
Message 1751402 - Posted: 23 Dec 2015, 23:17:15 UTC - in response to Message 1751399.  

It's interesting. It's also interesting to me that 20 years ago was about the time Governor Christie was entering politics with a mission to ensure that a ban on assault weapons was implemented. He seems to have moved away from that view over the years.

He's a Politician. I believe.

Interesting, how the American people differ in their response, from most other Cultures.

Couldn't the same be said of any culture compared to most others? Or are you making a case for American exceptionalism?
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

ID: 1751402 · Report as offensive
bobby
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 2866
Credit: 17,789,109
RAC: 3
United States
Message 1751407 - Posted: 23 Dec 2015, 23:51:34 UTC - in response to Message 1751405.  
Last modified: 23 Dec 2015, 23:52:04 UTC

It's interesting. It's also interesting to me that 20 years ago was about the time Governor Christie was entering politics with a mission to ensure that a ban on assault weapons was implemented. He seems to have moved away from that view over the years.

He's a Politician. I believe.

Interesting, how the American people differ in their response, from most other Cultures.

Couldn't the same be said of any culture compared to most others? Or are you making a case for [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism]American exceptionalism[/url]?

bobby...

All Culture's have differences.

Why the difference in the American Cultural Response?

BTW: I usually have this discussion with Europeans. Who apparently believe that America, is just European - Primitive. It's not.

Read Winston Churchill's: History of the English-Speaking Peoples.

Where he, more elegantly, proposes that it is Britain's 'Mission' to 'Civilize' America.

You are having this discussion with a European (at least by birth).

I do not believe as you that European cultures are primitive, nor do I believe, as you suggest Churchill did, that American culture is in need of civilizing.

I suspect that cultures are something like species, different in character though not significantly different in advancement (all extant species have been subject to essentially equal levels of evolution, and can be traced back to a common ancestor, I suspect cultures are are subject to equivalent pressures, and also have a common ancestor).
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

ID: 1751407 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1751441 - Posted: 24 Dec 2015, 5:36:20 UTC - in response to Message 1751383.  

@John, First you have to understand American Media. There is Ted Turner's opinion and there is Rupert Murdoch's opinion. Those two dominate the little screen "news." Of course 99% or their programming is opinion cleverly disguised to look like news.

Next you have to factor in that fear is a driver of sales. An ordinary mass killing is, well, ordinary. Now a terrorist mass killing is extraordinary and hence something to over hype so you get more eyeballs and hence sell more advertising making your obscenely fat pocket bigger.

Third you need to understand the number of people killed by guns in the USA is in sharp decline. The only thing making it noticeable now is an increase in mass suicide shootings.

Fourth you need to understand humans are terrible at comparing risk. A mass shooting is "horrible" so it is seen are far worse than a car accident which is "ordinary." The actual risks are now about the same as the safety increases in cars, airbags, crumple zones, better emergency medicine, and so on.

No one has this feeling of terror about crossing the street and being struck by a car, but they have a hysterical response to a gun. Same risk though.

Now as to politicians, they have two tools to trot out to buy votes. The first is to promise two chickens in every pot. The second is to offer protection from some evil, real or manufactured. In this case the evil is the unknown fear of Islam. So keep them out and have your gun ready if one happens to sneak in anyway. Can't think of a better way to spread fear and keep your name coming out the talking head's mouth.

Anyway hope that helps.
ID: 1751441 · Report as offensive
Profile Sarge
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 12273
Credit: 8,569,109
RAC: 79
United States
Message 1751524 - Posted: 24 Dec 2015, 16:54:23 UTC - in response to Message 1751512.  

You are having this discussion with a European (at least by birth).

I do not believe as you that European cultures are primitive, nor do I believe, as you suggest Churchill did, that American culture is in need of civilizing.

I suspect that cultures are something like species, different in character though not significantly different in advancement (all extant species have been subject to essentially equal levels of evolution, and can be traced back to a common ancestor, I suspect cultures are are subject to equivalent pressures, and also have a common ancestor).

bobby...

I spoke of American, not European. Your mistake?

Ever read Winston Churchill's (American born mother): History of the English-Speaking Peoples?

Re: Different Cultures.

Please explain the Cowboy and Gun Culture (200,000,000 guns and support of Assault Rifles in their hands) of Americans. And if it differs from most Western European Cultures?


Clyde, I have not read Churchill. Before Bobby posted, I guessed what you meant but I also saw how it could be read. Whether Bobby guessed what you meant but responded based on the way it could be read or did not know what you were saying and responded based on how it could be read ... ?
Capitalize on this good fortune, one word can bring you round ... changes.
ID: 1751524 · Report as offensive
bobby
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 2866
Credit: 17,789,109
RAC: 3
United States
Message 1751630 - Posted: 25 Dec 2015, 14:01:29 UTC - in response to Message 1751512.  
Last modified: 25 Dec 2015, 14:02:43 UTC

You are having this discussion with a European (at least by birth).

I do not believe as you that European cultures are primitive, nor do I believe, as you suggest Churchill did, that American culture is in need of civilizing.

I suspect that cultures are something like species, different in character though not significantly different in advancement (all extant species have been subject to essentially equal levels of evolution, and can be traced back to a common ancestor, I suspect cultures are are subject to equivalent pressures, and also have a common ancestor).

bobby...

I spoke of American, not European. Your mistake?

You said:

BTW: I usually have this discussion with Europeans. Who apparently believe that America, is just European - Primitive. It's not.

The proximity of the word "Primitive" to the word "European" appeared to suggest you were saying European culture is primitive, that you were restating what you previously said:

We, in The USA , have evolved beyond the primitive European belief in...
(here)
and

Very European and primitive thinking.
(here)

Ever read Winston Churchill's (American born mother): History of the English-Speaking Peoples?

Not that I recall, though I may have seen the series of plays the BBC produced based on the work.

Re: Different Cultures.

Please explain the Cowboy and Gun Culture (200,000,000 guns and support of Assault Rifles in their hands) of Americans. And if it differs from most Western European Cultures?

You claim expertise in cultural comparison, not me.
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

ID: 1751630 · Report as offensive
Profile Es99
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 10874
Credit: 350,402
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1752933 - Posted: 1 Jan 2016, 18:28:11 UTC

'If You Leave Me, I Will Kill You': The Gut-Wrenching Truth About Guns, Abuse and Murder in America

Another side to America's gun problem.
Reality Internet Personality
ID: 1752933 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1753244 - Posted: 2 Jan 2016, 16:46:53 UTC - in response to Message 1752933.  

'If You Leave Me, I Will Kill You': The Gut-Wrenching Truth About Guns, Abuse and Murder in America

Another side to America's gun problem.

The ugly truth that you refuse to understand:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/12/03/weve-had-a-massive-decline-in-gun-violence-in-the-united-states-heres-why/
Premeditated mass shootings in public places are happening more often, some researchers say, plunging towns and cities into grief and riveting the attention of a horrified nation. In general, though, fewer Americans are dying as a result of gun violence — a shift that began about two decades ago.

In 1993, there were seven homicides by firearm for every 100,000 Americans, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. By 2013, that figure had fallen by nearly half, to 3.6 — a total of 11,208 firearm homicides. The number of victims of crimes involving guns that did not result in death (such as robberies) declined even more precipitously, from 725 per 100,000 people in 1993 to 175 in 2013.

Older data suggests that gun violence might have been even more widespread previously. The rate of murder and manslaughter excluding negligence reached an apex in 1980, according to the FBI. That year, there were 10.8 willful killings per 100,000 people. Although not a perfect measure of the overall rate of gun violence, the decline in the rate of murder and manslaughter is suggestive: Two in three homicides these days are committed with guns.

This decline in gun violence is part of an overall decline in violent crime. According to the FBI's data, the national rate of violent crime has decreased 49 percent since its apex in 1991. Even as a certain type of mass shooting is apparently becoming more frequent, America has become a much less violent place.

ID: 1753244 · Report as offensive
Profile Es99
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 10874
Credit: 350,402
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1753246 - Posted: 2 Jan 2016, 16:52:19 UTC - in response to Message 1753086.  

'If You Leave Me, I Will Kill You': The Gut-Wrenching Truth About Guns, Abuse and Murder in America

Another side to America's gun problem.

Es99...

Doesn't matter what anyone, outside of American Culture, thinks. As noted below.

- But on Friday, gun rights throughout the state expanded still more, as a new law took effect that allows certain Texans to wear their handguns in holsters on their hips — or in shoulder holsters, Dirty Harry-style — openly displaying the fact that they are armed as they work, shop, dine and go about their day.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/01/us/-2016-01-01-texas-open-carry-gun-law.html

- TEXAS BECOMES 45TH STATE TO PASS OPEN CARRY LAW

http://abc13.com/news/texas-becomes-45th-state-to-pass-open-carry-law/1143146/

- Supporters with the non-profit group Open Carry Texas planned a rally Friday to "unconceal" handguns at the Texas State Capitol in Austin. Still, the group pushed for "constitutional carry," which would all citizens who could legally own guns to carry them in public without obtaining a license and paying a tax first.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/01/01/open-carry-law-takes-effect-in-texas-but-activists-keep-fighting.html?intcmp=hpbt2

Es99...

According to the last article:

Black Texas Law Makers, voting for the Law, refused to allow Police to 'Check' if person carrying the Exposed Weapon, has a license. Because that may result in Racial Profiling.

Good luck changing another peoples culture.

That shows how messed up your country is. Black people know that if they carry guns they are more likely to be targeted by police and be considered scary and dangerous than white people.

Personally I find anyone walking around with a gun scary, especially as the sort of person who thinks that walking around with a gun is a good idea is the last person you want walking around with a gun.
Reality Internet Personality
ID: 1753246 · Report as offensive
Profile Es99
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 10874
Credit: 350,402
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1753248 - Posted: 2 Jan 2016, 16:56:20 UTC - in response to Message 1753244.  

'If You Leave Me, I Will Kill You': The Gut-Wrenching Truth About Guns, Abuse and Murder in America

Another side to America's gun problem.

The ugly truth that you refuse to understand:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/12/03/weve-had-a-massive-decline-in-gun-violence-in-the-united-states-heres-why/
Premeditated mass shootings in public places are happening more often, some researchers say, plunging towns and cities into grief and riveting the attention of a horrified nation. In general, though, fewer Americans are dying as a result of gun violence — a shift that began about two decades ago.

In 1993, there were seven homicides by firearm for every 100,000 Americans, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. By 2013, that figure had fallen by nearly half, to 3.6 — a total of 11,208 firearm homicides. The number of victims of crimes involving guns that did not result in death (such as robberies) declined even more precipitously, from 725 per 100,000 people in 1993 to 175 in 2013.

Older data suggests that gun violence might have been even more widespread previously. The rate of murder and manslaughter excluding negligence reached an apex in 1980, according to the FBI. That year, there were 10.8 willful killings per 100,000 people. Although not a perfect measure of the overall rate of gun violence, the decline in the rate of murder and manslaughter is suggestive: Two in three homicides these days are committed with guns.

This decline in gun violence is part of an overall decline in violent crime. According to the FBI's data, the national rate of violent crime has decreased 49 percent since its apex in 1991. Even as a certain type of mass shooting is apparently becoming more frequent, America has become a much less violent place.

Not sure of your point, Gary. Are you pointing out that its insane that two in three homicides are committed with guns? Because to me that's a terrifying statistic.

The article compares past America with present America. When talking about gun problems it is worth comparing present America with places that don't have guns.
Reality Internet Personality
ID: 1753248 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1753320 - Posted: 2 Jan 2016, 20:29:05 UTC - in response to Message 1753248.  

The article compares past America with present America. When talking about gun problems it is worth comparing present America with places that don't have guns.
It is worth comparing with past to see how much progress is being made and what thing is not changing and the progress is still being made. Comparisons with elsewhere are rather useless as they have utterly different forms of government where the citizens are used to being sheep and given cradle to grave rules they must obey.
ID: 1753320 · Report as offensive
Profile Es99
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 10874
Credit: 350,402
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1753331 - Posted: 2 Jan 2016, 20:49:17 UTC - in response to Message 1753320.  

... where the citizens are used to being sheep and given cradle to grave rules they must obey.

Did you get out of the wrong side of bed today?
Reality Internet Personality
ID: 1753331 · Report as offensive
Profile celttooth
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Nov 99
Posts: 26503
Credit: 28,583,098
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1753370 - Posted: 2 Jan 2016, 22:18:50 UTC - in response to Message 1753320.  

to see how much progress is being made


Gary how can people see problems when they believe every thing is all OK?


edit:
I was just askin'......
ID: 1753370 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 . . . 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 . . . 25 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Another Mass Shooting in the U.S.A.


 
©2024 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.