- Joined
- Feb 3, 2013
I've read Eric's journals. He whined about not getting laid a lot. Doesn't particularly strike me as someone who was popular.
Study shows gun control would prevent mass shootings
- Thread starter CatParty
- Start date
H
HG 400
Guest
kiwifarms.net
A
AP 297
Guest
kiwifarms.net
Interesting. I am amazed you call those mass shootings. I will go along with it.
You guys in Australia call these mass shootings:
Monash University Deaths - 2
Monash University Non-Fatal Injuries - 5
Hectorville Seige Deaths - 3
Hectorville Seige Non-Fatal Injuries - 3
Here in the US like our waistlines everything is bigger:
Sandy Hook Deaths - 26(20 of them being children) along with shooter and his mother
Sandy Hook Non-Fatal Injuries - 2
Aurora Theatre Shooting Deaths - 12
Aurora Theater Shooting Non-Fatal Injuries - 70
Thank you for proving my point. A guy with a pistol or knife is just not as effective as a guy with an AR-15 or a Smith and Wesson M & P 15 Rifle.
Is it wrong to want more people to survive these types of incidents? It might have been nice if fewer people died in both incidents because the shooter had to use revolvers and guns with smaller clips rather than walking in with a semi-automatic weapon that fires 5.56 NATO rounds designed to tumble with each shot.
H
HG 400
Guest
kiwifarms.net
1976 was Hoddle Street. 1996 was Port Arthur. There were maybe 5-6 spree shootings between them, with an average of 2 or 3 killed in each one. If "sixteen mass shootings" between those dates somehow count, they must be factoring in piss weak sprees like those, as well as every domestic gun murders and gang shootout.
A
AP 297
Guest
kiwifarms.net
Interesting.
I just know here in the US we have sprees that can get very very high.
The US Virginia Tech incident had 33 dead including the shooter. He actually used pistols alone. There was a catch. They were semi-automatic pistols with high capacity clips.
He was able to kill that many thanks to the pistols being semi-automatic with high capacity clips. They were able to stop the shooter when he had to reload. That is how they almost always stop them here in the US. I am not saying we should ban extended clips, but it would be nice not to have to worry about them.
I just know here in the US we have sprees that can get very very high.
The US Virginia Tech incident had 33 dead including the shooter. He actually used pistols alone. There was a catch. They were semi-automatic pistols with high capacity clips.
He was able to kill that many thanks to the pistols being semi-automatic with high capacity clips. They were able to stop the shooter when he had to reload. That is how they almost always stop them here in the US. I am not saying we should ban extended clips, but it would be nice not to have to worry about them.
- Joined
- May 4, 2015
what kind of pistol is not semi-auto
+ clips are not the hardest thing to make diy
+ clips are not the hardest thing to make diy
A
AP 297
Guest
kiwifarms.net
Revolvers
You can make your own extended clips for Semi-Automatic pistols, but you always have to worry about whether or not you did it right and if the gun will jam because of your incompetence. I have no problem with the guns themselves, but I have to admit that people who want to ban these guns make a strong point.
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2013
Japan has great gun control. Japanese citizens don't have guns.
Japan has more fatal stabbing and mass stabbings than us. Just saying.
Japan has more fatal stabbing and mass stabbings than us. Just saying.
- Joined
- May 4, 2015
So, people do not use revolvers nor muskets for mass shootings.
Color me surprised
Color me surprised
A
AP 297
Guest
kiwifarms.net
They used them in Australia. That was the only thing they had. The death rate was much lower.
- Joined
- May 3, 2015
I think the vast majority of school shootings could be prevented if gun owners were required to submit to mandatory psychiatric evaluations prior to any and all purchases. The current purchase system is so full of loopholes and lack of general enforcement that you might as well just put a free arsenal on the way out of the maternity ward.
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2013
What are the odds of getting killed in a mass shooting anyway? 1 in 20,000,000 or something? I don't worry about it, just like I don't worry about getting blown up in a terrorist attack or robbed by an illegal immigrant or whatever stupid thing people happen to be shitting themselves over this week.
A
AP 297
Guest
kiwifarms.net
Not significantly high, no. Still a lot of people died senselessly. I am sorry, but I don't think that human life is cheap thing. Being frustrated by the deaths of innocent people is not just people "shitting themselves" over something.
Right now US society is turning its schools into buildings that look like maximum security facilities, and its government facilities into something similar. I am personally tired of having to engineer society to protect us from the lowest base element. The Wayne LaPierre and Larry Pratts solution is to arm everyone even more. Lets make the US one giant prison where everyone is armed and security is everywhere.
Just because you may not be concerned, it does not mean that the world is not changing around you. If you want to bait post. Please make it less obvious.
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2013
There's so much shit that can happen to you, that I don't really care anymore. The average Israeli doesn't cower in fear due to the almost daily occurrences of attacks by Palestinian separatists. Nor did the average West German flip out over the Baader-Meinhof gang (AKA the Red Army Faction, or at least the first incarnation of it) when they conducted attacks during the 70s and 80s. People get used to it, and learn how to deal with it. Shit happens.
I can see where you're coming from, but first of all, the mental health system in this country is broken as it is, and it has some serious gaps with the NICS background check system. Besides, there's a serious difference between a guy who may have a mild form of autism that makes day-to-day life a little screwy but manageable, and someone with severe delusions and harboring insanely violent fantasies. Of course, if these repairs came to pass, people may be quieter about their thoughts and intentions out of fear of losing their rights, but that's a tale for another time.
Besides, forcing someone to submit to a psych eval before a purchase kind of reeks of putting the burden of proof on the accused. Guilty until proven innocent, you could say. It's not terrible in theory, but in actual practice, people would probably be more likely to shut themselves up to avoid getting diagnosed with anything that *might* be seen as a red flag, justified or not.
H
HG 400
Guest
kiwifarms.net
I can agree with this, the real problem isn't guns in general it's Assault Weapons. An Assault Weapon ban would stop mass shooters. When we allowed Assault Weapons a literally retarded autistic took out 35 (+ 23 wounded) he kept the high score until Breivik who basically cheated by using bombs, so even though we don't have that many mass shootings we're still better at it than America. I don't think anyone here could beat that guy's score now that Assault Weapons are not generally available to retarded autistic men.
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2013
Exactly how do you define an "assault weapon" as opposed to a "normal" weapon? You can assault someone with any weapon, really.
The 1994 "Assault Weapons Ban" was more of a moratorium on cosmetic features that made a firearm "look frightening." It's like trying to prevent drunk driving by outlawing cars that "look fast." Banning pistol style grips and bayonet mounts, for one, is rather asinine in the grand scheme of things.
Besides, who the fuck ever heard of a "drive-by bayoneting?"
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2013
Who said anything about frustration? It's fear that drives the reactionary demand for more gun control legislation every time a mass shooting happens, not frustration, and it's an irrational fear, hence my point about the statistical unlikelihood of actually being victimized in a mass shooting.
A
AP 297
Guest
kiwifarms.net
People are frustrated. The families of the victims are frustrated. The communities these events happen in are frustrated. I am particularly frustrated that we have these incident occur and it is a national embarrassment. We have many schools that now have cameras, police guards, fences and metal detectors for guns. It is absurd. There is nothing irrational or reactionary about this. This is a severe national embarrassment for the US. This type of thing seldom happens in other developed nations, and for it to happen in the US is very very disappointing.
For you to attempt cheap trolling by saying this actual issue that claims lives is "reactionary" or "irrational" is baiting. To use the argument that it seldom happens so you should not be talking about it is equally missing the point. If you are going to come into a thread and just plop in and drop 2 liners without actually delving into the substance of any of this, please at least provide us with the courtesy of doing a more thorough job of explaining your stance or using better bait.
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2013
I never said that the issue of mass shootings itself is reactionary or irrational. That wouldn't even make sense. I said that people's responses to it, to the extent that they include things like calls for more gun control (the topic of the fucking thread in case you didn't notice), are reactionary and driven by an irrational fear of being killed in such an incident, despite the utterly minuscule odds of that happening. I stand by my point that it's not a sense of national fatigue, frustration or embarrassment that motivates most gun grabbers in the wake of another shooting, but simple fear. Following that line of thought, it's perfectly sound to point out that a person's chances of being killed by a maniac shooting up their school or workplace or whatever is exceedingly small.
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2013
A lot of gun advocates sincerely believe, complete with bullshit stats to back it up, that the UK and Australia are awash with violent crime perpetrated by unchecked gangs of gun-wielding criminals terrorising a disarmed populace.