America..why won't you just ban the fucking gun?

[Rangi Guy]

How long before the NRA releases their spin on this?

[Simple Torture]

How long before the NRA releases their spin on this?

Somehow they responded yesterday...conspiracy? #jetfuelcan'tmeltsteelbeams

[Strat]

lol @ "one disturbed individual...."

[LetMeSleep]

Not sure if true but an Australian news outlet said there'd been 45 school shootings in 2015. What the hell? These arms can't be their own.

45.

[Green Habit]

The only scenario I can think of is if a GGG (good guy with a gun) kills some innocent bystanders in an attempt to take down a mass shooter.

Didn't this happen in NYC a few years ago? My memory is foggy, but didn't a cop accidentally kill some people in line at the Empire State Building going after a criminal?

My standard response to things like this has become "lol fart." You can already play fill-in-the-blank to anticipate the reaction of all sides, and tomorrow the world keeps spinning.

As I said: memory foggy, but this is as close as we've come to the situation GH describes- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Em ... g_shooting

Cops don't really work in the scenario I'm thinking, more like a card carrying NRA member acting as a private citizen who shows a shitload of remorse as to what he's done. Maybe throw in a huge debate on whether he should be charged with involuntary manslaughter as well.

[Stickman]

4 Pro-Gun Arguments We're Sick of Hearing

Thursday's mass shooting is sure to be met with the usual arguments for why we can't do anything about gun control

By Amanda Marcotte October 1, 2015 for Rolling Stone



Another day, another horrible mass shooting. This one was in the small town of Roseburg, Oregon, on the Umpqua Community College campus. More than two dozen people were reportedly hit with gunfire.

While victims are being rushed to the hospital, many right-wing pundits and politicians are no doubt readying their talking points to explain why the 264th mass shooting of the year does not mean the United States should tighten up access to deadly firearms.

Well, guys, I hate to break it to you, but we heard you the first time. And the second time. And the hundreds of times since that our country has grappled with an individual eager to take out as many lives as possible with a firearm. We can recite your arguments in our sleep, and they haven't grown better through repetition.

1. "Guns don't kill people. People kill people."
This is a fantastic argument for those who can't tell the difference between one death and a dozen. Absolutely, a murderer can often kill one person or two with a knife before being stopped. But to really rack up those mind-blowing death counts – to make sure that many lives are destroyed and families ruined in the space of five or 10 minutes – you need a gun. If all you care about is apportioning blame and declaring that someone does or does not have murderous intent, then by all means, claim a knife and a gun are equivalent weapons. For those of us who are more worried about preventing unnecessary deaths than merely acknowledging the hate that resides in some people's hearts, however, the sheer amount of damage a gun can do is reason to limit who can get their hands on one.

2. "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."
If you prefer pithy sayings to hard evidence, I can see why this would be convincing. But if you look at the real world, you'll find that far from being our only hope, good guys with guns are barely any help at all. No mass shootings in the past 30 years have been stopped by an armed civilian; In 1982, an armed civilian successfully killed a shooter, but it was only after he committed his crime.

It's not that there aren't enough guns, either. There are as many guns as people in this country, and fully a third of people are armed. Even when shootings happen in gun-happy places, where armed people are sure to be nearby, this vigilante scenario simply doesn't work. That's because pulling a gun out and shooting back in the chaos of a mass shooting just makes things worse, as was discovered when a would-be hero at the 2011 shooting of Gabby Giffords very nearly shot the wrong man. (The actual shooter was tackled by an elderly man.)


3. "But, mental health!"
Opponents of gun control love bringing up the problem of inadequate mental health care after a shooting. This is strictly for deflection purposes, as there is no indication that Republicans will ever work on meaningful reform for our mental health systems – which, its true are woefully inadequate. It's an issue that only matters to them in the immediate aftermath of a shooting – then it's forgotten, until there's another shooting. Rinse, repeat.

Also, the "mental health" gambit, in this context, is always vague. What exactly is the plan? Round up everyone with a mental health issue and put them under lock and key? That amounts to 1 in 5 Americans, the vast majority of whom have no violent tendencies. Will we have some kind of extensive mental health registry? A lot of Americans who struggle with mental health are undiagnosed, though, and putting them on a government list that restricts their rights is not a great inducement to get a diagnosis. There are a lot of shooters in this country, so we have some pretty good data on mass shooters. And that data shows there's no reliable way to tell who is going to go off like this, and only 23 percent of shooters have a diagnosis. Even if all of those individuals got gold-star treatment, the system would only stop a few shooters.

4. "Second Amendment, baby."
Here's a good time to remind everyone that the Second Amendment was written by slaveholders before we had electricity, much less the kind of weaponry that would-be murderers can buy today. But sure, if you think it's that precious, we can compromise: If you love Second Amendment that much, feel free to live in a powdered wig and shit in a chamberpot while trying to survive off what you can kill with an 18th century musket. In exchange, let those of us living in this century pass some laws so we can feel safe going to class, or the movies, or anywhere without worrying that some maladjusted man will try to get his revenge by raining death on random strangers.

[simple schoolboy]

Slaveholders wrote the Bill of Rights? Well shit, I guess we've got to go back to a hereditary monarchy.

Oh, I didn't read the by-line. Amanda Marcotte. That pretty much sums it up.

[Mine]

What is the general opinion about the issue throughout the US? It seems to me as if one part of the country holds hostage the other, I just can't tell which part is larger.

[McParadigm]

What is the general opinion about the issue throughout the US? It seems to me as if one part of the country holds hostage the other, I just can't tell which part is larger.

It's pretty close, actually, but in 2014 the anti-gun control group was something like 52%.

[Green Habit]

Slaveholders wrote the Bill of Rights? Well shit, I guess we've got to go back to a hereditary monarchy.

Yeah, #4 doesn't make much sense at all since you could use that same argument for the entirety of the Bill of Rights.

[Mine]

What is the general opinion about the issue throughout the US? It seems to me as if one part of the country holds hostage the other, I just can't tell which part is larger.

It's pretty close, actually, but in 2014 the anti-gun control group was something like 52%.

Is there any statistic data that involves a middle of the road scenario as an option?

[Fuck You Jobu]

4 Pro-Gun Arguments We're Sick of Hearing

Thursday's mass shooting is sure to be met with the usual arguments for why we can't do anything about gun control

By Amanda Marcotte October 1, 2015 for Rolling Stone



Another day, another horrible mass shooting. This one was in the small town of Roseburg, Oregon, on the Umpqua Community College campus. More than two dozen people were reportedly hit with gunfire.

While victims are being rushed to the hospital, many right-wing pundits and politicians are no doubt readying their talking points to explain why the 264th mass shooting of the year does not mean the United States should tighten up access to deadly firearms.

Well, guys, I hate to break it to you, but we heard you the first time. And the second time. And the hundreds of times since that our country has grappled with an individual eager to take out as many lives as possible with a firearm. We can recite your arguments in our sleep, and they haven't grown better through repetition.

1. "Guns don't kill people. People kill people."
This is a fantastic argument for those who can't tell the difference between one death and a dozen. Absolutely, a murderer can often kill one person or two with a knife before being stopped. But to really rack up those mind-blowing death counts – to make sure that many lives are destroyed and families ruined in the space of five or 10 minutes – you need a gun. If all you care about is apportioning blame and declaring that someone does or does not have murderous intent, then by all means, claim a knife and a gun are equivalent weapons. For those of us who are more worried about preventing unnecessary deaths than merely acknowledging the hate that resides in some people's hearts, however, the sheer amount of damage a gun can do is reason to limit who can get their hands on one.

2. "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."
If you prefer pithy sayings to hard evidence, I can see why this would be convincing. But if you look at the real world, you'll find that far from being our only hope, good guys with guns are barely any help at all. No mass shootings in the past 30 years have been stopped by an armed civilian; In 1982, an armed civilian successfully killed a shooter, but it was only after he committed his crime.

It's not that there aren't enough guns, either. There are as many guns as people in this country, and fully a third of people are armed. Even when shootings happen in gun-happy places, where armed people are sure to be nearby, this vigilante scenario simply doesn't work. That's because pulling a gun out and shooting back in the chaos of a mass shooting just makes things worse, as was discovered when a would-be hero at the 2011 shooting of Gabby Giffords very nearly shot the wrong man. (The actual shooter was tackled by an elderly man.)


3. "But, mental health!"
Opponents of gun control love bringing up the problem of inadequate mental health care after a shooting. This is strictly for deflection purposes, as there is no indication that Republicans will ever work on meaningful reform for our mental health systems – which, its true are woefully inadequate. It's an issue that only matters to them in the immediate aftermath of a shooting – then it's forgotten, until there's another shooting. Rinse, repeat.

Also, the "mental health" gambit, in this context, is always vague. What exactly is the plan? Round up everyone with a mental health issue and put them under lock and key? That amounts to 1 in 5 Americans, the vast majority of whom have no violent tendencies. Will we have some kind of extensive mental health registry? A lot of Americans who struggle with mental health are undiagnosed, though, and putting them on a government list that restricts their rights is not a great inducement to get a diagnosis. There are a lot of shooters in this country, so we have some pretty good data on mass shooters. And that data shows there's no reliable way to tell who is going to go off like this, and only 23 percent of shooters have a diagnosis. Even if all of those individuals got gold-star treatment, the system would only stop a few shooters.

4. "Second Amendment, baby."
Here's a good time to remind everyone that the Second Amendment was written by slaveholders before we had electricity, much less the kind of weaponry that would-be murderers can buy today. But sure, if you think it's that precious, we can compromise: If you love Second Amendment that much, feel free to live in a powdered wig and shit in a chamberpot while trying to survive off what you can kill with an 18th century musket. In exchange, let those of us living in this century pass some laws so we can feel safe going to class, or the movies, or anywhere without worrying that some maladjusted man will try to get his revenge by raining death on random strangers.

lol @ Rolling Stone. They really have surrendered any legitimate opine and credibility they have.

[Strat]

The sheriff has been vocal in opposing state and federal gun-control legislation. In 2013, Hanlin sent a letter to Vice President Joe Biden after the shooting at a Newtown, Connecticut, elementary school, declaring that he and his deputies would refuse to enforce new gun-control restrictions "offending the constitutional rights of my citizens.

[Fuck You Jobu]

The sheriff has been vocal in opposing state and federal gun-control legislation. In 2013, Hanlin sent a letter to Vice President Joe Biden after the shooting at a Newtown, Connecticut, elementary school, declaring that he and his deputies would refuse to enforce new gun-control restrictions "offending the constitutional rights of my citizens.

Job security

[Electromatic]

.

[Strat]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34424385

[dpupenya]

Another mass shooting. Seriously guys. The discussion needs to progress.

i'm not sure anything would change if someone opened fire at the super bowl or world series and took down 2 dozen pro athletes

Funny you mention this, just the other day Dept of Homeland Security named the Super Bowl a Level One threat event

[LetMeSleep]

Hear the Sirens, 'Murica.

[B]

[Stickman]

American Deaths From Gun Violence vs. Terrorism, in One Chart

There were more than 316,000 firearm deaths between 2004 and 2013, compared to 313 terrorism deaths (no, that's not missing any zeros)

By Tim Dickinson October 2, 2015

In his speech last night, after the gun rampage at Umpqua Community College in Oregon, President Obama made an unusual request:

"I would ask news organizations [to] tally up the number of Americans who’ve been killed through terrorist attacks over the last decade and the number of Americans who’ve been killed by gun violence, and post those side-by-side on your news reports."

The figures from 2004-2013 below – compiled from the CDC and the State Department – are conscience-shocking, and also shocking from a public policy perspective.

As President Obama noted:

"We spend over a trillion dollars, and pass countless laws, and devote entire agencies to preventing terrorist attacks on our soil, and rightfully so. And yet, we have a Congress that explicitly blocks us from even collecting data on how we could potentially reduce gun deaths. How can that be?"