Another mass shooting, three or four hours ago.

by James Mixon 238 Replies latest social current

  • ttdtt

    Very true - 400 mill guns - hard to get the them off the streets. But other countries have - Australia put severe restrictions on guns after 1 mass shooting. Everyone screamed and yelled, but just a few years later, the vast majority of the country was very happy.

    My stance is this: Is the country better with lots of guns - or no guns. Why not work toward the best option. 1 step at a time.

    You cant just give up because there are to many out there. But yes its a complex problem with no easy solution. But as a nation, we just sit back and accept it - and that is the sick part.

  • Finkelstein

    Simple deductive reasoning, more guns available and in possession of a given society means more acts of violence by the use of those possessed guns.

    resolve = remove the majority of those guns.

    and again there are proven supportive evidence of that ideology such as seen in other countries around the world.

  • sloppyjoe2

    well at least that's a start. So while disagree with total gun control and saying it won't fix it, which I have said multiple times it won't stop it altogether, at least you did offer something. I didn't say I have the answer, I said I am offering a solution and repeatedly asked those who disagree with my solution to offer there own.

    So I think you said we need to focus on what the cause of the people wanting to do this with perhaps some sort gun control. I take that to mean, focus on mentally ill perhaps? Out of curiosity what version of gun control do you suggest?

    As a nation we can't just say guns are our right and ignore the problem. How many massive shootings would it take? Are endless mass shootings acceptible?

  • adjusted knowledge
    adjusted knowledge


    But now is your opportunity to say what your solution would be.

    I already stated my solution. Total gun ban. Same as yours. However, I stated such an event will not happen for a very long time in America and listed the reasons why. I'm a gun hobbyist and don't hunt, so a ban wouldn't really impact me much. Nor do I believe that my guns will protect me in a home invasion as I stated in another post.

    I slightly agree with Simon, for he is correct about the culture has to change. That is the key as it is with the Islamic extreme ideology. The problem is changing a culture can take a long time but it can happen within a 20 year period. I remember in 1995 that identifying as homosexual or even supporting basic rights for them was taboo but my generation (I was a teen then) were more liberal on the issue. Over 20 years my generation raise children that were even more liberal on the subject and so laws were changed and both private and public policy reflect the cultural change.

    I know my answer is not as concrete as gun control but I truly believe nothing will change unless our country gun culture changes. How this can happen I don't have an answer. I do know that MTV played a role in exposing my generation to homosexuals and perhaps media and pop cultural may be the answer too. Do you feel I'm wrong?

  • freemindfade

    I don't think America accepts it, they ignore it, how?

    Step 1. A mass shooting happens

    Step 2. Gun nuts put on the gloves and get ready for the inevitable attack on their precious rights

    Step 3. The anti-gun nuts put on their gloves

    Step 4. everyone starts swinging and talking about guns, for against whatever, while much deeper and disturbing issues go ignored in the dust of a gun debate. Nothing is accomplished because every ones fight response went up

    When this happens and the first words out of the presidents mouth make it an issue of an anti gun agenda the bottom falls out of the discussion. Because you have two sides fighting. There is no honest discussion that says there is to much access to firearms AND... there is more to the story that gets dropped.

    Can anyone admit that is the truth? Honestly most gun owners and even NRA members are in favor of the same things with regard to strict gun laws (not the NRA itself for some reason). But in the same way that moderate muslim sanitize jihadism gun owners should be honest and open and not sanitize gun crime. And anti gun folks should be realistic. American rampage shootings are not only a gun issue. People respect honesty more, and its seems dishonest to ignore the rest of the problem.

  • freemindfade

    Its fair to add that the media's sensationalism ads multiple problems

    1. Its created legendary fame status to these monsters that is almost always referred to by rampage killers.
    2. It beats this stuff to death creating a climate of mass fear, then what happens? Media fear mongering = gun sales, guns sales = more guns in America.

    These are just 2 of the things I feel the media is guilty of. If it bleeds it leads.

  • sloppyjoe2
    Adjusted knowledge I agree with a gun ban and know it would take many years to have full affect. Every mass shooting that takes place and nothing is done is just allowing it to go on longer. I personally don't own guns and yesterday morning had no real feelings on the matter. You could have put me in the I don't care and head in the sand category. But possibly watching it unfold and seeing the carnage live on television hit home with me. It really bothers me that after sandy hook that pro gun people really don't care about what's going on as long as they get to keep their guns. And if it's all guns or no guns, they pick all guns and accept more massive shootings as acceptable in order to keep their guns. I just don't get it.
  • James Mixon
    James Mixon

    Violence is going virtual. Cyberspace is a new domain fro violence. This ranges from the

    use of social media to project force( videos showing assassination, torture, threat to recruit

    would be members of extremist group). Yes violence is going virtual and someone with an

    impressionable mind can easily be influence, that's the flip side of progress.

  • JeffT

    I don't think its being disingenuous. Simon asserted that rights are not absolute (in general I agree by the way). The question is, does that apply to all rights? Any attempt to place any restriction on abortion is quickly turned into a fight over a fundamental right. Yet pretty much the same people think other rights can be restricted. Which is it? My question is theoretical , as with gun ownership, the Supreme Court has spoken.

    Back to the main topic, here's some interesting numbers. Out of 12,000 plus murders per year, rifles are used in about 300. I don't see that an assault weapon ban will move those numbers by very much.

    Also from what's on CNN right now, this is looking more and more like a terrorist attack, not a work place shooting. They had bombs and thousands of rounds of ammo in their house.

    Also I'm hearing rumors that they purchased the guns legally in California, which has some really strict gun laws, including an assault weapons ban. I haven't been able to confirm if they did fact buy the guns in CA.

    PS I do not currently own a gun.

  • James Mixon
    James Mixon
    A sleeper cell ( a dormant unit in a clandestine cell system), that's scary.

Share this