PDA

View Full Version : The Certainty of More Shootings



Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 08:11 PM
....
The Certainty Of More Shootings

by James Fallows


Like everyone, and I'd say especially like every parent, I am of course saddened and horrified by the latest mass shooting-murder. My sympathies to all.

And of course the additional sad, horrifying, and appalling point is the shared American knowledge that, beyond any doubt, this will happen again, and that it will happen in America many, many times before it occurs anywhere else.

Recently I visited the site of the "Port Arthur Massacre," in Tasmania, where in 1996 a disturbed young man shot and killed 35 people and wounded 23 more. The site is a kind of national shrine; afterwards, Australia tightened up its gun laws, and there has been nothing remotely comparable in all the years since. In contrast: Not long after that shooting, during my incarnation as news-magazine editor, I dispatched reporters to cover then-shocking schoolyard mass shootings in West Paducah, Kentucky, and Jonesboro, Arkansas. Those two episodes, coming back to back, were -- as always -- supposed to provoke a "national discussion" about guns and gun violence. As always, they didn't; a while later they were nudged from the national consciousness by Columbine; and since then we have had so many schoolyard- or public-place shootings that those two are barely mentioned.

The Brady Campaign's list of mass shootings (http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/pdf/major-shootings.pdf) in America just since 2005 is 62 pages long.

I agree with The Atlantic's Garance Franke-Ruta about the inevitable pattern (http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/07/aurora-and-the-template-of-our-grief/260110/) of public reaction to these events. But I find my own thoughts most precisely matched by Adam Gopnik (http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2012/07/aurora-movie-shooting-one-more-massacre.html#ixzz21bpeztmr)'s on The New Yorker's site today. He says:

"The truth is made worse by the reality that no one--really no one--anywhere on the political spectrum has the courage to speak out about the madness of unleashed guns and what they do to American life....

The reality is simple: Every country struggles with madmen and ideologues with guns, and every country -- Canada, Norway, Britain - -has had a gun massacre once, or twice. Then people act to stop them, and they do -- as over the past few years has happened in Australia. Only in America are gun massacres of this kind routine, expectable, and certain to continue."

There will be more of these; we absolutely know it; we also know that we will not change the circumstances that allow such episodes to recur. I am an optimist about most things, but not about this. Everyone around the world understands this reality too. It is the kind of thing that makes them consider America dangerous, and mad.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/07/the-certainty-of-more-shootings/260133/

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 08:17 PM
...
Of course many Americans believe the U.S. Constitution, and the Second Amendment to the Constitution in particular, to be sacrosanct.

It is not and was never meant to be. The Founders anticipated periodic Constitutional Conventions altering, or completely replacing, the document.

Times change and the Founders anticipated the Constitution changing as well.
.

Glen Longino
07-20-2012, 08:24 PM
You got guts, Tom!;)
I'll check back here frequently to save you from the rope!

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 08:27 PM
.
Worth repeating: "The Brady Campaign's list of mass shootings (http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/pdf/major-shootings.pdf) in America just since 2005 is 62 pages long."
.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 08:28 PM
No doubt someone will come along to explain that this is the cost of Freedom.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 08:33 PM
"Only in America.

Every country has, along with its core civilities and traditions, some kind of inner madness, a belief so irrational that even death and destruction cannot alter it.

In Europe not long ago it was the belief that “honor” of the nation was so important that any insult to it had to be avenged by millions of lives.

In America, it has been, for so long now, the belief that guns designed to kill people indifferently and in great numbers can be widely available and not have it end with people being killed, indifferently and in great numbers.

The argument has gotten dully repetitive: How does one argue with someone convinced that the routine massacre of our children is the price we must pay for our freedom to have guns, or rather to have guns that make us feel free?"

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2012/07/aurora-movie-shooting-one-more-massacre.html#ixzz21DUY2AVk

Peter Malcolm Jardine
07-20-2012, 08:41 PM
The second admendment is safe as long as Americans look at their government with suspicion and fear. I don't think a lot of democratic countries look at their government this way. In my country, I am the government, in the sense that my vote controls who is in power, and the majority rules. In the United States, it seems that individuals look at government at a body that unfairly controls and restricts their rights.

On the other hand, if the majority of Americans wanted to reduce the amount and kinds of guns in the population, they would. Quite obviously, they do not, and as a direct result, we have massacres like the current one. It is simply democracy in action.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 08:43 PM
On the other hand, if the majority of Americans wanted to reduce the amount and kinds of guns in the population, they would. Quite obviously, they do not, and as a direct result, we have massacres like the current one.
Yep. And the rest of the developed world considers the U.S.A. to be dangerous and insane. Go figure.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 08:46 PM
What Forumite doesn't think this sort of mass shooting will happen again in America within 24 months?

Anyone?

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 08:49 PM
The second admendment is safe as long as Americans look at their government with suspicion and fear. I don't think a lot of democratic countries look at their government this way. In my country, I am the government, in the sense that my vote controls who is in power, and the majority rules. In the United States, it seems that individuals look at government at a body that unfairly controls and restricts their rights.

On the other hand, if the majority of Americans wanted to reduce the amount and kinds of guns in the population, they would. Quite obviously, they do not, and as a direct result, we have massacres like the current one. It is simply democracy in action.

So then what was the deal then in Toronto?

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 08:50 PM
What Forumite doesn't think this sort of mass shooting will happen again in America within 24 months?

Anyone?

AS long as there are human beings on earth there will be murder.

Peter Malcolm Jardine
07-20-2012, 08:51 PM
Yep. And the rest of the developed world considers the U.S.A. to be dangerous and insane. Go figure.


I wouldn't say insane, but dangerous is correct. The last big BBC poll of 28000 people across Europe found that the majority considered the USA as the biggest threat to world peace. What Americans do within their borders is their business.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 08:51 PM
RodSBT: Do you think another such mass shooting will occur in the U.S.A. within the next 24 months?

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 08:53 PM
I wouldn't say insane, but dangerous is correct. The last big BBC poll of 28000 people across Europe found that the majority considered the USA as the biggest threat to world peace. What Americans do within their borders is their business.
The average American simply does not understand that. Don't Europeans understand that we have good intentions?

Peter Malcolm Jardine
07-20-2012, 08:53 PM
AS long as there are human beings on earth there will be murder.


Absolutely true. In some countries that have determined that guns should be limited in the general population, there is less gun murder. No problem, it's just a choice.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 08:55 PM
RodSBT: Do you think another such mass shooting will occur in the U.S.A. within the next 24 months?


Doesn't matter what I think.
Sitting around wringing your hands in anticipation accomplishes nothing either.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 08:56 PM
AS long as there are human beings on earth there will be murder.
No kidding?

But we are discussing the phenomenon of mass murder by a lone armed civilian. And why it occurs most often (and frequently) in the U.S.A.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 08:57 PM
Doesn't matter what I think.
Sitting around wringing your hands in anticipation accomplishes nothing either.
There's nothing can be done, eh?

Kudos for settling for the bloody status quo.

That's the price of Freedom, right RodSBT?

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 08:59 PM
Absolutely true. In some countries that have determined that guns should be limited in the general population, there is less gun murder. No problem, it's just a choice.

Again, the progressive socialist mindset somehow thinks the type of weapon/method in which a person is murdered is more important than the act itself.

Glen Longino
07-20-2012, 09:00 PM
It's Friday night in Texas.
Aside from massacres, there will likely be more gun deaths, gun suicides, and gun inflifted wounds in Texas tonight than there were today in Aurora.
Same thing tomorrow night and Sunday night!
Nobody gives a big rat's arse because it won't be an all day show on National TV!
Massacres are the tip of the iceberg in the US.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 09:00 PM
the progressive socialist mindset somehow thinks the type of weapon/method in which a person is murdered is more important than the act itself.
We are talking about the phenomenon of mass murder, RodSBT.

Try to focus and stay on topic.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 09:02 PM
We are talking about mass murder, RodSBT.

Try to focus and stay on topic.

I am on task, you are the one that obsesses on some form of murder quota system.

Glen Longino
07-20-2012, 09:03 PM
Again, the progressive socialist mindset somehow thinks the type of weapon/method in which a person is murdered is more important than the act itself.

No they don't!
Do you think you can get away with such outrageous statements around here with nobody noticing?
Guess again!

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 09:03 PM
I am on task, you are the one that obsesses on some form of murder quota system.
Bah!

What a weak reply.

Address the phenomenon of mass murder by lone shooters or butt out.

Phillip Allen
07-20-2012, 09:06 PM
...
Of course many Americans believe the U.S. Constitution, and the Second Amendment to the Constitution in particular, to be sacrosanct.

It is not and was never meant to be. The Founders anticipated periodic Constitutional Conventions altering, or completely replacing, the document.

Times change and the Founders anticipated the Constitution changing as well.
.

how about collective barganing... sacrocanct?

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 09:06 PM
Doesn't matter what I think.
Of course you think another mass shooting by a lone gunman will occur in the U.S.A sometime within the next 24 months.

But you lack the gronicles to admit it and rationalize it.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 09:08 PM
How many pages long would the list of armed citizens who used firearms to successfully defended themselves against violent criminals?
That is your assigned task, grasshopper. Once you've done the research and complied the list get back to us.

seanz
07-20-2012, 09:08 PM
It's Friday night in Texas.
Aside from massacres, there will likely be more gun deaths, gun suicides, and gun inflifted wounds in Texas tonight than there were today in Aurora.
Same thing tomorrow night and Sunday night!
Nobody gives a big rat's arse because it won't be an all day show on National TV!
Massacres are the tip of the iceberg in the US.

You sure about that?

http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/u...rms-death-rate (http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/usa/texas-firearms-death-rate)

The real eye-opener on that chart is Hawaii..........

Just did some calculations (dubious at best, really suspect today ;)) and 7 people, every day, lose their life to a gunshot in Texas.

You're probably right about the weekend rate then.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 09:09 PM
how about collective barganing... sacrocanct?
Off topic. If you want to discuss collective bargaining start a thread. I'll be happy to engage you.

Do you have anything to say regarding the topic of this thread?

Phillip Allen
07-20-2012, 09:11 PM
Off topic. If you want to discuss collective bargaining start a thread. I'll be happy to engage you.

Do you have anything to say regarding the topic of this thread?

no, it is not

Glen Longino
07-20-2012, 09:12 PM
How many pages long would the list of armed citizens who used firearms to successfully defended themselves against violent criminals? A lot longer than the list of "mass shootings", that's for sure.

Oh boy, Geo Duck!
Go look it up!
The list will be Shorter, not longer!
What do you do, merely dream up stuff and spew it out as facts and expect us to believe it?
Never happen!

seanz
07-20-2012, 09:12 PM
how about collective barganing... sacrocanct?

Collective bargaining can kill you with boredom. But it won't gun down random strangers.



Oh.......and.........don't be a knucklehead.
:)

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 09:12 PM
Of course you think another mass shooting by a lone gunman will occur in the U.S.A sometime within the next 24 months.

But you lack the gronicles to admit it and rationalize it.

Get off your high horse tex, you can't read my mind or anyone else's.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 09:17 PM
no, it is not
Yes it is.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 09:19 PM
You sure about that?
Maybe yes, maybe no. Texas averages about 8 firearms deaths per day. Glen no doubt figures the greater number occur over the weekend. And particularly on Friday night. I don't have data to dispute his statement.

Phillip Allen
07-20-2012, 09:21 PM
Yes it is.

is not!

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 09:22 PM
Get off your high horse tex, you can't read my mind or anyone else's.
Speak to the topic or butt out, troll.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 09:22 PM
Maybe yes, maybe no. Texas averages about 8 firearms deaths per day. Glen no doubt figures the greater number occur over the weekend.

Why don't you do a little research and see where most of those "firearms" deaths are occurring. Very good chance they're not evenly spread out across the state even though per capita firearms ownership is fairly high across the state.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 09:23 PM
Care to speak to the topic of the frequent phenomenon of mass murder by a lone gunmen in the U.S.A., Phiilip?

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 09:24 PM
Why don't you do a little research and see where most of those "firearms" deaths are occurring. Very good chance they're not evenly spread out across the state even though per capita firearms ownership is fairly high across the state.
Glen said "Texas" genius. That means the entire state.

If you mean to say that most Texas firearm deaths occur in highly populated areas I would respond, "DUH." That would apply to every state in the Union.

Phillip Allen
07-20-2012, 09:25 PM
Care to speak to the topic of the frequent phenomenon of mass murder by a lone gunmen in the U.S.A., Phiilip?

off topic... you were talking about changing the constitution

seanz
07-20-2012, 09:29 PM
off topic... you were talking about changing the constitution

Was he talking about the part of the constitution that relates to firearms? He was? On topic then.

Don't worry about not being as smart as Joe, just be as smart as you can be.......
;)

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 09:32 PM
you were talking about changing the constitution
In the context of addressing the problem of the frequent mass murders by lone gunmen in the U.S.A.

Do you believe outlawing collective bargaining is the solution to stopping the massacres?

No? Then focus and address the topic.

Peter Malcolm Jardine
07-20-2012, 09:32 PM
Again, the progressive socialist mindset somehow thinks the type of weapon/method in which a person is murdered is more important than the act itself.


The progressive socialist mindset has the statistics to back it up too. Weird huh?

Again, I think Americans have the democratic choice here. They choose not to have stringent gun control, and a lot of people get shot. It really doesn't bother me, if it doesn't bother you. My family isn't at risk. Gun violence is a rare occurrence up here, even with the flow of illegal guns coming from your country. Too bad we share a border, otherwise we would be even safer.

Glen Longino
07-20-2012, 09:34 PM
Why don't you do a little research and see where most of those "firearms" deaths are occurring. Very good chance they're not evenly spread out across the state even though per capita firearms ownership is fairly high across the state.

Heheh!
Are you daft?:D
Of course guns are spread unevenly across Texas.
Of course more guns and people And Deaths occur in Houston than out here on the prairie!
What's your point?

Phillip Allen
07-20-2012, 09:34 PM
In the context of addressing the problem of the frequent mass murders by lone gunmen in the U.S.A.

Do you believe outlawing collective bargaining is the solution to stopping the massacres?

No? Then focus and address the topic.

divide and conquer

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 09:35 PM
Heheh!
Are you daft?:D
Of course guns are spread unevenly across Texas.
Of course more guns and people And Deaths occur in Houston than out here on the prairie!
What's your point?
He doesn't have a point, Glen. He has an agenda.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 09:36 PM
Glen said "Texas" genius. That means the entire state.

If you mean to say that most Texas firearm deaths occur in highly populated areas I would respond, "DUH." That would apply to every state in the Union.

What do you think the per capita firearms ownership of up state NY is compared to NYC? I hazard to guess it is quite a bit higher, so why is the murder rate so much lower.

What do you think the per capita fire arms ownership of Geneva, Switzerland( not to mention required assault rifles possession for defense of the country) is compared to NYC? Again I hazard to guess it is much higher. So which do you think has the higher murder rate?

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 09:38 PM
What do you think the per capita firearms ownership of up state NY is compared to NYC? I hazard to guess it is quite a bit higher, so why is the murder rate so much lower.

What do you think the per capita fire arms ownership of Geneva, Switzerland( not to mention required assault rifles possession for defense of the country) is compared to NYC? Again I hazard to guess it is much higher. So which do you think has the higher murder rate?
I have my theory. But what does it matter? You slammed Glen on a completely irrelevant point. And you were wrong to boot.

Phillip Allen
07-20-2012, 09:38 PM
He doesn't have a point, Glen. He has an agenda.

what is YOUR agenda?

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 09:39 PM
what is YOUR agenda?

To decrease the number of firearm related deaths in America.

And what is yours? Let's compare the two.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 09:42 PM
Heheh!
Are you daft?:D
Of course guns are spread unevenly across Texas.
Of course more guns and people And Deaths occur in Houston than out here on the prairie!
What's your point?

What us the per capita firearms ownership out on the prairie Glen. I'll bet higher than Houston.
In my neighborhood here in Mt. it is %100 and yet there hasn't been a murder or negligent shooting in decades.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 09:43 PM
You got guts, Tom!;)
I'll check back here frequently to save you from the rope!
No problem, Glen.

Unlike most I work really hard to keep the posters on topic.

pipefitter
07-20-2012, 09:43 PM
I don't have a fear of guns. I currently don't own any.

I also know that if it bothers me that much, I can move to a friendlier country. USA is like the bad side of town. If you don't know your way around it, best to avoid it.

I can say the same for anyone wanting to come here as so many do if you look at our immigration status. Why do they want to come here? They could go anywhere else. I'm willing to take my chances. Apparently, they are as well.

So then, lets have an all out war on guns. In this country, it will have the same disastrous effect as the war on drugs has.

I really don't want the USA to be another Canada or any other 'so-called' successful democracy. I'd rather take my chances here, as it is.

We have as many roads leading out as in. Take your pick.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 09:44 PM
What us the per capita firearms ownership out on the prairie Glen. I'll bet higher than Houston.

So what? Your criticism of Glen's post was still incorrect.

Try to focus and stay on topic.

Old Dryfoot
07-20-2012, 09:44 PM
This is the frequency of occurrence in the first two pages of the report.

July 17, 2012
July 11, 2012
July 09, 2012
July 06, 2012
July 02, 2012
July 01, 2012
June 26, 2012
June 20, 2012
June 09, 2012
May 21, 2012
May 26 - 29, 2012 <---This last one represents Memorial day weekend in Chicago, 40 shootings and 10 murders.

28 total dead, 49 total injured in a period of 57 days. Not including those killed and wounded in the Colorado tragedy. Three days later then the reports last entry.
That's the first two pages, the report is 62 pages long.

In the first 15 pages, there are 101 incidents.

It's staggering.

pefjr
07-20-2012, 09:45 PM
Speak to the topic or butt out, troll.Why, or you will block the thread?

It is not that this disgrace cannot be changed, it is that without strong leadership in the White House it will not ever change. There is no leadership on this issue. Now Brady and Reagan were Gov't and that is why there was a reaction at that time. This does not effect any part of Gov't so the shock will fade like a cloud in the sky. We have had so many of these threads in the four years I have been here, that I know what most will write before they post it. Yes, in the next two years, it probably will occur again, it has always been a part of our culture, and I regard it as Cultural Insanity. The more dense the population, the more it will happen. There are probably copy cats scheming at this moment. If I had any power, I would change this, and I would also be in favor of immediate trial, and public execution for the shooters. 10 Days or less.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 09:46 PM
Why, or you will block the thread?
No. But you will be subjected to ridicule.

seanz
07-20-2012, 09:46 PM
The progressive socialist mindset has the statistics to back it up too. Weird huh?

Again, I think Americans have the democratic choice here. They choose not to have stringent gun control, and a lot of people get shot. It really doesn't bother me, if it doesn't bother you. My family isn't at risk. Gun violence is a rare occurrence up here, even with the flow of illegal guns coming from your country. Too bad we share a border, otherwise we would be even safer.

I agree. I don't know what the fuss is about anymore. After-all, this kid did about as much damage as a Predator drone at a Pakistani wedding so what's the big deal?

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 09:47 PM
This is the frequency of occurrence in the first two pages of the report.

July 17, 2012
July 11, 2012
July 09, 2012
July 06, 2012
July 02, 2012
July 01, 2012
June 26, 2012
June 20, 2012
June 09, 2012
May 21, 2012
May 26 - 29, 2012 <---This last one represents Memorial day weekend in Chicago, 40 shootings and 10 murders.

28 total dead, 49 total injured in a period of 57 days. Not including those killed and wounded in the Colorado tragedy. Three days later then the reports last entry.
That's the first two pages, the report is 62 pages long.

In the first 15 pages, there are 101 incidents.

It's staggering.

Don't worry. Be happy. At least we are Free.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 09:47 PM
To decrease the number of firearm related deaths in America....

You just proved my point in post #19.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 09:51 PM
You just proved my point in post #19.

Post #19 was: "Again, the progressive socialist mindset somehow thinks the type of weapon/method in which a person is murdered is more important than the act itself."

You are not making any sense, RodSBT. This thread is about the problem of repeated mass murders by lone gunmen in the U.S.A.

If you don't think that is a problem just say so.

Peter Malcolm Jardine
07-20-2012, 09:52 PM
You just proved my point in post #19.


There is no point. The majority of Americans want a lot of guns in the population. As an easily correlated result, the United States has significantly more gun violence than progressive countries with more stringent gun control. No problem, shoot each other at will. Just don't claim that all those guns made you safer. They didn't, but that's okay with me.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 09:54 PM
RodSBT would like to divert this thread to a discussion of the choice of murder weapons.

But this thread is about the problem of the frequency of mass murder in the U.S.A by lone gunmen.

If RodSBT does not think that is a problem he should say so.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 09:56 PM
Post #19 was: "Again, the progressive socialist mindset somehow thinks the type of weapon/method in which a person is murdered is more important than the act itself."

You are not making any sense, RodSBT. This thread is about the problem of repeated mass murders by lone gunmen in the U.S.A.

If you don't think that is a problem just say so.


Are these not your words from post #52 ?

"To decrease the number of firearm related deaths in America.

And what is yours? Let's compare the two."

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 10:00 PM
Are these not your words from post #52 ?

"To decrease the number of firearm related deaths in America.

And what is yours? Let's compare the two."

So you want to quibble about my use of both the words "deaths" and "murder?"

A silly and a deliberate attempt at distraction.

This thread is about the problem of repeated and frequent mass murders in the U.S.A. by lone gunmen.

If you don't think that is a problem then say so.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 10:11 PM
So you want to quibble about my use of both the words "deaths" and "murder?"

A silly and a deliberate attempt at distraction.

This thread is about the problem of repeated and frequent mass murders in the U.S.A. by lone gunmen.

If you don't think that is a problem then say so.

What difference does it make whether a "lone gunman" murders a dozen people over a weekend or 12 people are knifed to death(murdered) the same weekend by different people in a Chicago neighborhood?
Are the knife murderers somehow less guilty than the "lone gunman" by virtue of quantity or is it just their choice in weapons?

Peter Malcolm Jardine
07-20-2012, 10:14 PM
What difference does it make whether a "lone guman" murders a dozen people over a weekend or 12 people are knifed to death(murdered) the same weekend by different people in a Chicago neighborhood?
Are the knife murderers somehow less guilty than the "lone gunman" by virtue of quantity or is it just their choice in weapons?


No, they are both equally guilty. The difference is that gun homicides are far more common than knife homicides in your country. That is a fact. If you want to argue the idea that someone who wants to murder someone will use a knife as easily as they would use a gun, we can go there, but you better have your evidence in order. (There isn't any evidence of that by the way) 65% of homicides in the USA are committed with a gun. EVERY OTHER METHOD OF HOMICIDE TOGETHER is 35%

PeterSibley
07-20-2012, 10:17 PM
What difference does it make whether a "lone gunman" murders a dozen people over a weekend or 12 people are knifed to death(murdered) the same weekend by different people in a Chicago neighborhood?
Are the knife murderers somehow less guilty than the "lone gunman" by virtue of quantity or is it just their choice in weapons?

Um ... one gunman kills 12
+ Eleven knife men kill 11
= Total 23

Twelve knifemen kill 12 (the gunmen had his gun replaced by a knife and only managed one murder).
= total 12

Eleven lives saved.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 10:17 PM
What difference does it make whether a "lone gunman" murders a dozen people over a weekend or 12 people are knifed to death(murdered) the same weekend by different people in a Chicago neighborhood?
You cannot be serious.


Are the knife murderers somehow less guilty than the "lone gunman" by virtue of quantity or is it just their choice in weapons?
Of course not.

So I take it you don't consider the frequency of mass murders in the U.S.A. by lone gunmen to be a problem.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 10:20 PM
I was hoping some of you would post ideas of a solution to the problem. But I guess few consider this phenomenon to be a problem.

Very sad. And telling.

Phillip Allen
07-20-2012, 10:25 PM
Um ... one gunman kills 12
+ Eleven knife men kill 11
= Total 23

Twelve knifemen kill 12 (the gunmen had his gun replaced by a knife and only managed one murder).
= total 12

Eleven lives saved.

I think it odd that you should use people's lives as political currency

PeterSibley
07-20-2012, 10:27 PM
Yep ,saving eleven lives is so political.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 10:27 PM
I think it odd that you should use people's lives as political currency

I find it odd that you think that is what PeterSibley's post is about. :rolleyes:

Glen Longino
07-20-2012, 10:28 PM
I think it odd that you should use people's lives as political currency

Moan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 10:28 PM
No, they are both equally guilty. The difference is that gun homicides are far more common than knife homicides in your country. That is a fact. If you want to argue the idea that someone who wants to murder someone will use a knife as easily as they would use a gun, we can go there, but you better have your evidence in order. (There isn't any evidence of that by the way) 65% of homicides in the USA are committed with a gun. EVERY OTHER METHOD OF HOMICIDE TOGETHER is 35%

Sorry PMJ, a Harvard study disagrees with your assumption.

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf
CONCLUSION
This Article has reviewed a significant amount of evidence
from a wide variety of international sources. Each individual
portion of evidence is subject to cavil—at the very least the
general objection that the persuasiveness of social scientific
evidence cannot remotely approach the persuasiveness of
conclusions in the physical sciences. Nevertheless, the burden
of proof rests on the proponents of the more guns equal
more death and fewer guns equal less death mantra, especially
since they argue public policy ought to be based on
that mantra.149 To bear that burden would at the very least
require showing that a large number of nations with more
guns have more death and that nations that have imposed
stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions
in criminal violence (or suicide). But those correlations are
not observed when a large number of nations are compared
across the world.

Phillip Allen
07-20-2012, 10:30 PM
Sorry PMJ, a Harvard study disagrees with your assumption.

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf
CONCLUSION
This Article has reviewed a significant amount of evidence
from a wide variety of international sources. Each individual
portion of evidence is subject to cavil—at the very least the
general objection that the persuasiveness of social scientific
evidence cannot remotely approach the persuasiveness of
conclusions in the physical sciences. Nevertheless, the burden
of proof rests on the proponents of the more guns equal
more death and fewer guns equal less death mantra, especially
since they argue public policy ought to be based on
that mantra.149 To bear that burden would at the very least
require showing that a large number of nations with more
guns have more death and that nations that have imposed
stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions
in criminal violence (or suicide). But those correlations are
not observed when a large number of nations are compared
across the world.

that's a hard read for most bilge rats...

Glen Longino
07-20-2012, 10:34 PM
Dangit Tom, Rod and Phillip have about got me convinced that Lone Gunman Massacres are the best thing to come along since sliced bread!
How about you?;)

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 10:35 PM
FOCUS PEOPLE!

This thread is about the problem of the frequency of mass murder in the U.S.A. by lone gunmen.

If Phillip Allen, RodSBT, or anyone else thinks this is NOT a problem they should say so.

This thread is neither about murder in general (most people are murdered by someone they know) nor about firearm suicides.

2MeterTroll
07-20-2012, 10:35 PM
there will be more deaths and massacres by lone gunmen. s well as high death rates by other methods, none of his will change.

Take a look at the car death rate. mass murder has nothing on the auto industry.


You sure about that?

http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/u...rms-death-rate (http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/usa/texas-firearms-death-rate)

The real eye-opener on that chart is Hawaii..........

Just did some calculations (dubious at best, really suspect today ;)) and 7 people, every day, lose their life to a gunshot in Texas.

You're probably right about the weekend rate then.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 10:38 PM
I was hoping some of you would post ideas of a solution to the problem. But I guess few consider this phenomenon to be a problem.

Very sad. And telling.

So tell us Tom, whats your solution, since this isn't about "guns" but the phenomenon itself?

Peter Malcolm Jardine
07-20-2012, 10:38 PM
As I have stated before: I think Americans have all the information they need to make a decision about gun ownership, gun violence, and gun homicide. What you do with that information is entirely up to you. Your peer group of nations feel quite differently, have more stringent gun control, and subsequently have lower rates of gun violence. Please, do whatever the majority of Americans feel is the right choice for them.


Surely you're not going to put forward Don Kates and his clan as evidence. Sheesh.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 10:42 PM
So tell us Tom, whats your solution, since this isn't about "guns" but the phenomenon itself?

The phenomenon is mass murder conducted by lone actors with firearms.

So, you first. Do you consider the frequency of mass murders in the U.S.A. by lone actors bearing firearms to be a problem or not?

If not you and I have nothing further to discuss.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 10:42 PM
As I have stated before: I think Americans have all the information they need to make a decision about gun ownership, gun violence, and gun homicide. What you do with that information is entirely up to you. Your peer group of nations feel quite differently, have more stringent gun control, and subsequently have lower rates of gun violence. Please, do whatever the majority of Americans feel is the right choice for them.


Surely you're not going to put forward Don Kates and his clan as evidence. Sheesh.

So what do you have to refute the above study since you are so adamant about getting facts in order?

Peter Malcolm Jardine
07-20-2012, 10:43 PM
take a look at the car death rate. mass murder has nothing on the auto industry.


I LOVE THIS COMPARISON!!!!!

Think of it this way.... people die of old age and disease more than any other method. Therefore, gun violence is not a big problem. DEATH IS THE PROBLEM. Stop worrying about guns, worry about elimination death!!! Priorities people... Priorities.

LMAO.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 10:46 PM
You first. Do you consider the frequency of mass murders by firearms in the U.S.A. to be a problem or not?

If not you and I have nothing further to discuss.


OK Tom, just to humor you..

Yes Tom, any kind of murder is a problem.. has been for thousands of years. What ever tool is used to commit the crime is irrelevant.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 10:48 PM
Yes Tom, any kind of murder is a problem.. has been for thousands of years.
I did not ask you about murder in general.

I asked you about the frequent phenomenon in the U.S.A. of mass murder by lone gunmen. That is what this thread is about.

Is this a problem or not? Or do you deny the phenomenon altogether?

Glen Longino
07-20-2012, 10:49 PM
OK Tom, just to humor you..

Yes Tom, any kind of murder is a problem.. has been for thousands of years. What ever tool is used to commit the crime is irrelevant.

I doubt that half-baked ignorant response will humor Tom!
It might humor Phillip, however.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 10:52 PM
I doubt that half-baked ignorant response will humor Tom!
It might humor Phillip, however.

These boys are not used to having their feet held to the fire.

Most of the time they are allowed to distract, shuffle, and jive.

Peter Malcolm Jardine
07-20-2012, 10:53 PM
So what do you have to refute the above study since you are so adamant about getting facts in order?

For gods sake, do your homework on Don Kates and Gary Mauser. Do you think this is the first time I've seen this study? It's a contrived piece of **** by a supporter of the gun lobby. Kates isn't interested in facts, he already has his opinion. If you look at the methodology on this study, it makes some very careful twists to arrive at it's preconceived destination.

Here is the fact: America's normally considered peer group of nations have stricter gun control laws. They have lower gun violence rates. It's fairly simple, but you're not listening. There is a MASSIVE amount of evidence to support long term gun control for reducing gun violence. Doesn't it worry you that the study you find is an American one by a gun lobby hack? Yikes.

YOU'RE NOT LISTENING: Shoot the hell out of each other. I DON'T CARE. We have lots of gun control. It works for us, and for every other similiar nation to us. You can come up with the conclusion that Santa should carry an Uzi. It isn't going to change my reality, or my nations opinion on gun control, or Australia's or NZ, or the UK or Germany, or Denmark or any other nation that has stringent gun control. WE'RE ALL GOOD HERE. PEOPLE DON"T MURDER PEOPLE WITH GUNS at anywhere near the rate you guys do. In fact, we just don't murder each other at the same rate, but you guys just keep doing the same things, and wish for different results. Your best thinking got you right where you are.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 10:54 PM
I did not ask you about murder in general.

I asked you about the frequent phenomenon in the U.S.A. of mass murder by lone gunmen. That is what this thread is about.

Is this a problem or not? Or do you deny the phenomenon altogether?

I'm not a bigot when it comes to murder.
Your turn, So whats your answer to the problem?

PeterSibley
07-20-2012, 10:56 PM
I'm not a bigot when it comes to murder.


What does that mean?

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 10:57 PM
What does that mean?
It means he is a student of Phillip Allen.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 10:58 PM
So whats your answer to the problem?

You have yet to acknowledge the existence of the problem addressed in this thread.

Do so and I'll give you an answer. Otherwise, bug off.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 11:00 PM
For gods sake, do your homework on Don Kates and Gary Mauser. Do you think this is the first time I've seen this study? It's a contrived piece of **** by a supporter of the gun lobby. Kates isn't interested in facts, he already has his opinion. If you look at the methodology on this study, it makes some very careful twists to arrive at it's preconceived destination.

Here is the fact: America's normally considered peer group of nations have stricter gun control laws. They have lower gun violence rates. It's fairly simple, but you're not listening. There is a MASSIVE amount of evidence to support long term gun control for reducing gun violence. Doesn't it worry you that the study you find is an American one by a gun lobby hack? Yikes.


YOU'RE NOT LISTENING: Shoot the hell out of each other. I DON'T CARE. We have lots of gun control. It works for us, and for every other similiar nation to us. You can come up with the conclusion that Santa should carry an Uzi. It isn't going to change my reality, or my nations opinion on gun control, or Australia's or NZ, or the UK or Germany, or Denmark or any other nation that has stringent gun control. WE'RE ALL GOOD HERE. PEOPLE DON"T MURDER PEOPLE WITH GUNS at anywhere near the rate you guys do. In fact, we just don't murder each other at the same rate, but you guys just keep doing the same things, and wish for different results. Your best thinking got you right where you are.

Like I thougt, you got nothin'.

I'm sure the Jews and the Poles and the Ukrainians and Tibetans and Chinese and Armenians and First Nations people of North America and Koreans and...etc. etc. might find a bit of deference to your claim that "a MASSIVE amount of evidence to support long term gun control for reducing gun violence" worked in their favor.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 11:02 PM
You have yet to acknowledge the existence of the problem addressed in this thread.

Do so and I'll give you an answer. Otherwise, bug off.

This is an open forum, if you don't like my answers, so be it, it's your problem.
You've been playing the crowd long enough, get to yur friggin' point.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 11:06 PM
I'm sure the Jews and the Poles and the Ukrainians and Tibetans and Chinese and Armenians and First Nations people of North America and Koreans and...etc. etc. might find a bit of deference to your claim that "a MASSIVE amount of evidence to support long term gun control for reducing gun violence" worked in their favor.

An ignorant statement on a number of levels.

And certainly irrelevant to the subject of this thread.

Glen Longino
07-20-2012, 11:07 PM
I'm not a bigot when it comes to murder.
Your turn, So whats your answer to the problem?

Why not a bigot when it comes to murder?
You're a bigot about everything else!
What are you, an all-purpose, one size fits all, massacre fan?

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 11:09 PM
Why not a bigot when it comes to murder?
You're a bigot about everything else!
What are you, an all-purpose, one size fits all, massacre fan?
Awww.... he simply made a stupid off-hand statement.

I've come to realize he is not that bright.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 11:14 PM
An ignorant statement on a number of levels.

And certainly irrelevant to the subject of this thread.

Sure Tom, irrelevant. Millions dead at the hands of their gov keepers, all in the name of gun control. You wanted to deal with mass murder so there you have it. Oh, the lone guy thing..like Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot. You know, all those progressive minds who went astray.

Like I said above, you've been stringing everyone along for long enough, cough up the goods or be done with it.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 11:17 PM
Sure Tom, irrelevant. Millions dead at the hands of their gov keepers, all in the name of gun control. You wanted to deal with mass murder so there you have it. Oh, the lone guy thing..like Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot. You know, all those progressive minds who went astray.

Like I said above, you've been stringing everyone along for long enough, cough up the goods or be done with it.

Completely off topic. I've not mentioned "gun control," and I started this thread.

Maybe "gun control" is a solution to the problem. Maybe not. But you have yet to acknowledge a problem.

Stay on topic or bug off.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 11:19 PM
Why not a bigot when it comes to murder?
You're a bigot about everything else!
What are you, an all-purpose, one size fits all, massacre fan?

Please show where I have posted this presumed " bigot about everything else!"

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 11:20 PM
Please show where I have posted this presumed " bigot about everything else!"

I think Glen was stating his conclusion based upon your Bilge posts. I rather doubt you have posted anything where you admit to bigotry.

2MeterTroll
07-20-2012, 11:20 PM
PMJ dont take my comparison as a slight to the mass killing via guns; I dont actually care. I dont think anything will change this time either. I will continue to hear folks tell me how dangerous things are and they will continue to squeal like stuck pigs about how unfair it is that they have to make any concessions to safety.

So another whacko got a gun put on his superman underroos and killed a bunch of folks. big deal its business as usual in the good ol USA; if its not guns it will be another method. its what happens when you raise folks on twinkies, violance and coolaid.





I LOVE THIS COMPARISON!!!!!

Think of it this way.... people die of old age and disease more than any other method. Therefore, gun violence is not a big problem. DEATH IS THE PROBLEM. Stop worrying about guns, worry about elimination death!!! Priorities people... Priorities.

LMAO.

PeterSibley
07-20-2012, 11:21 PM
Was does "a bigot about murder'' mean Rod ? Just curious seeing it's your self description.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 11:22 PM
How far we have strayed from the original post!

Thank you RodSBT and Phillip Allen.

Glen Longino
07-20-2012, 11:25 PM
Please show where I have posted this presumed " bigot about everything else!"

I'm too tired and am headed to bed!
I'll do it tomorrow.
If you're not a self-righteous bigot, you'll do until a self-righteous bigot shows up!

2MeterTroll
07-20-2012, 11:26 PM
nope Tom i answered it. I do think there will be another lone gunmen massacre in the next 12 months; I also think its not a relevant question in light of the other methods used to kill lots of folks quickly.
I dont think the Tool is relevant I think the social structure is

Horace
07-20-2012, 11:26 PM
Why don't you do a little research and see where most of those "firearms" deaths are occurring. Very good chance they're not evenly spread out across the state even though per capita firearms ownership is fairly high across the state.Observe the rates in North America (and the rest of the world) in the map below:


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/44/Homicide-world.png/400px-Homicide-world.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Homicide-world.png) http://bits.wikimedia.org/static-1.20wmf7/skins/common/images/magnify-clip.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Homicide-world.png)
Intentional homicide rate per 100,000.
(Clicking on the image will enlarge it and add a color-coded legend.)


What do you think the per capita firearms ownership of up state NY is compared to NYC? I hazard to guess it is quite a bit higher, so why is the murder rate so much lower.

What do you think the per capita fire arms ownership of Geneva, Switzerland( not to mention required assault rifles possession for defense of the country) is compared to NYC? Again I hazard to guess it is much higher. So which do you think has the higher murder rate?
I have my theory. But what does it matter? You slammed Glen on a completely irrelevant point. And you were wrong to boot.
Tom--I'd like to see your theory.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 11:27 PM
How far we have strayed from the original post!

Thank you RodSBT and Phillip Allen.

Tom,

You know d@mn well your op is about gun control. You've been playing a game the entire thread trying trap your opposition.
Quit whining, get to your solution and be done with it.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 11:29 PM
I'm too tired and am headed to bed!
I'll do it tomorrow.
If you're not a self-righteous bigot, you'll do until a self-righteous bigot shows up!

False claims and ad hom. accusations , very classy.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 11:29 PM
Horace: International homicide rates are interesting but beside the point of this thread.

This thread is about the frequency of mass murders by lone gunmen in the U.S.

Glen Longino
07-20-2012, 11:30 PM
Tom,

You know d@mn well your op is about gun control. You've been playing a game the entire thread trying trap your opposition.
Quit whining, get to your solution and be done with it.

Heheh!:DLMAO
Uh oh Tom, you've driven Rod batshyte crazy!:DLMAO

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 11:30 PM
Tom,

You know d@mn well your op is about gun control. You've been playing a game the entire thread trying trap your opposition.
Quit whining, get to your solution and be done with it.
This thread is about a problem the existence of which you refuse to acknowledge.

If there is no problem we need consider no solutions.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 11:31 PM
I thought you were going to bed?

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 11:32 PM
Heheh!:DLMAO
Uh oh Tom, you've driven Rod batsyte crazy!:DLMAO
It's like playing cards with children.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 11:33 PM
I thought you were going to bed?
Who are you speaking to?

Glen Longino
07-20-2012, 11:34 PM
Who are you speaking to?

Me!; See you tomorrow!

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 11:36 PM
I do think there will be another lone gunmen massacre in the next 12 months; I also think its not a relevant question in light of the other methods used to kill lots of folks quickly.
I dont think the Tool is relevant I think the social structure is

So you acknowledge that there is a problem? Do you think it is unique to the U.S.A.?

In any event, what should be done?

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 11:37 PM
Me!; See you tomorrow!
Me too. Goodnight all.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 11:38 PM
This thread is about a problem the existence of which you refuse to acknowledge.

If there is no problem we need consider no solutions.

Is it a problem? Yeah Tom, any murder is a problem.

How is it any more of a problem than 40 illegal shootings in one weekend in Chicago? What's the yearly total compared to that of innocent bystanders being shot by drug gangs Tom? Why is this "lone gunman" so much more of problem than the Mexican drug cartels on and inside our southern border Tom?
Why have you selected this particular data set as something more serious than those above?

We've been wait for pages now.

2MeterTroll
07-20-2012, 11:40 PM
I dont think i can answer that Tom. it would take a whole lot more than this little bit of space to deal with all the things i think go into this subject. guns have been easy to get for lots of years. the horrid number of mass killings is new, what changed? it wasn't the guns.


So you acknowledge that there is a problem? Then what should be done?

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 11:41 PM
Is it a problem? Yeah Tom, any murder is a problem.
This thread is not about "any murder".

This thread is about the problem of frequent mass murders in the U.S.A. by lone gunmen.

I keep reminding you of that and you continue to ignore it. Frankly, you are coming across as a dunce.

Do you have anything to say that is on topic?

PeterSibley
07-20-2012, 11:43 PM
Was does "a bigot about murder'' mean Rod ? Just curious seeing it's your self description.

Rod ?

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 11:48 PM
This thread is not about "any murder".

This thread is about the problem of frequent mass murders in the U.S.A. by lone gunmen.

I keep reminding you of that and you continue to ignore it. Frankly, you are coming across as a dunce.

Do you have anything to say that is on topic?

Gee, more name calling.
I thought you were going to bed.

htom
07-20-2012, 11:50 PM
Yes, there will be. Probably in another place filled with disarmed victims, by someone violating the law by bringing firearms there.

Horace
07-20-2012, 11:52 PM
Horace: International homicide rates are interesting but beside the point of this thread.

This thread is about the frequency of mass murders by lone gunmen in the U.S.To point out the obvious: comparisons can be drawn between countries (and between states and provinces and countries) with regard to social order, crime (especially drug crime), culture, laws, etc. To discuss this topic without some reference data, or even without considering variations from state to state, would be futile--the map is a start and a suggestion. (And the clip in the original post referred to foreign incidents.)

I'm still interested in your theory.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 11:53 PM
RodSBT: We are on 3 pages and counting and you have yet to directly address the topic of this thread.

I'm on vacation. I'll go to bed when the mood strikes.

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 11:54 PM
Rod ?
I try not to discriminate between murderers or their methods, I hate them all about the same... well, except maybe for murdering pedaphiles. I really hate those guys.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 11:55 PM
To point out the obvious: comparisons can be drawn between countries (and between states and provinces and countries) with regard to social order, crime (especially drug crime), culture, laws, etc. To discuss this topic without some reference data, or even without considering variations from state to state, would be futile--the map is a start and a suggestion. (And the clip in the original post referred to foreign incidents.)

I'm still interested in your theory.

My theory about what? Homicide in general or mass murders committed by lone gunmen?

RodSBT
07-20-2012, 11:56 PM
RodSBT: We are on 3 pages and counting and you have yet to directly address the topic of this thread.

I'm on vacation. I'll go to bed when the mood strikes.

Wow, I didn't realize I had such importance, I thought this was your gig.

Tom Montgomery
07-20-2012, 11:59 PM
I try not to discriminate between murderers or their methods, I hate them all about the same... well, except maybe for murdering pedaphiles. I really hate those guys.
Fascinating!

So you make no distinction between Joseph Stalin, Dylan Klebold, Ted Bundy, and Phil Spector.

How nice it must be to reside in such a simple universe.
.

Horace
07-21-2012, 12:03 AM
My theory about what? Homicide in general or mass murders committed by lone gunmen?Either one, but I presume you mean the latter.

The question was in the context of the following exchange:

http://forum.woodenboat.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Tom Montgomery http://forum.woodenboat.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?p=3477458#post3477458)


http://forum.woodenboat.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by RodSBT http://forum.woodenboat.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?p=3477457#post3477457)

What do you think the per capita firearms ownership of up state NY is compared to NYC? I hazard to guess it is quite a bit higher, so why is the murder rate so much lower.

What do you think the per capita fire arms ownership of Geneva, Switzerland( not to mention required assault rifles possession for defense of the country) is compared to NYC? Again I hazard to guess it is much higher. So which do you think has the higher murder rate? I have my theory.

RodSBT
07-21-2012, 12:12 AM
Fascinating!

So you make no distinction between Joseph Stalin, Dylan Klebold, Ted Bundy, and Phil Spector.

How nice it must be to reside in such a simple universe.
.

The only distinction is how quickly we deal with them. A bullet in their head earlier rather than later would have been a good thing.
So whats your excuse? You still haven't spilled the beans.

Tom Montgomery
07-21-2012, 12:12 AM
Horace:

I suspect this sick American phenomena is the result of a combination of profound cultural, social, and psychological disfunction and the easy accessibility to semi-automatic weapons.

What is to be done?

RodSBT and Phillip Allen have yet to acknowledge that any problem exists.

Tom Montgomery
07-21-2012, 12:17 AM
The only distinction is how quickly we deal with them. A bullet in their head earlier rather than later would have been a good thing.

So who should have preemptively put a bullet in Dylan Klebold's head to prevent him from murdering students at Columbine High School?

And Phil Spector? And Ted Bundy? And James Holmes? How about Robert Blake? O.J. Simpson?
.

RodSBT
07-21-2012, 12:21 AM
Horace:

I suspect this sick American phenomena is the result of a combination of profound cultural, social, and psychological disfunction and the easy accessibility to semi-automatic weapons.

What is to be done?

RodSBT and Phillip Allen have yet to acknowledge that any problem exists.


(BINGO!!!!! There you have it folks, the un anti gun, anti gun thread.)

So tell us Tom, what is to be done?

Tom Montgomery
07-21-2012, 12:25 AM
(BINGO!!!!! There you have it folks, the un anti gun, anti gun thread.)

So tell us Tom, what is to be done?

Merely my opinion regarding the problem.

I'll be happy to answer your question about solutions once you tell us whether or not you think a problem exists and why, as I have.

Tom Montgomery
07-21-2012, 12:30 AM
It is interesting how far a discussion can go without directly addressing the opening post.

RodSBT
07-21-2012, 12:33 AM
So who should have preemptively put a bullet in Dylan Klebold's head to prevent him from murdering students at Columbine High School?

And Phil Spector? And Ted Bundy? And James Holmes? How about Robert Blake?

Gee Tom, such big questions. Where's your imagination? Besides, there's lotsa ways to take a dirt bag down.
Take ol' Ted B, for instance. He liked preying on young women cuz he was too much of a wuss to go after a real challenge. Any one of his victims could have cut his throat in a nano second if they just wouldn't have listened to the progressive mantra of not fighting back. He escaped from two different county jails after his first murder conviction because the copshops had followed "progressive" rules on how they dealt with the criminal element. He went on to kill more women who didn't fight back until he got the chair in Florida.

Same goes for the rest of the human detritus you mentioned, stopping them just takes will. But then I suppose your answer is to create an even stronger stranglehold around the general populus, preventing them even further self defense measures. You know, like in Chicago. Working out well there.

Tom Montgomery
07-21-2012, 12:34 AM
Gee Tom, such big questions. Where's your imagination? Besides, there's lotsa ways to take a dirt bag down.
Take ol' Ted B, for instance. He liked preying on young women cuz he was too much of a wuss to go after a real challenge. Any one of his victims could have cut his throat in a nano second if they just wouldn't have listened to the progressive mantra of not fighting back. He escaped from two different county jails after his first murder conviction because the copshops had followed "progressive" rules on how they dealt with the criminal element. He went on to kill more women who didn't fight back until he got the chair in Florida.

Same goes for the rest of the human detritus you mentioned. But then I suppose your answer is to create an even more stronger stranglehold around the general populus, preventing them even further self defense measures. You know, like in Chicago. Working out well there.

So you make no distinction.

You come across as a simpleton.

And you consistently ignore the thread topic.

You should be embarrassed. Of course you are not. You are proud and feel triumphant. Good for you.

RodSBT
07-21-2012, 12:40 AM
Merely my opinion regarding the problem.

I'll be happy to answer your question about solutions once you tell us whether or not you think a problem exists and why, as I have.

I've already done that Tom. You've been playing this pathetic game for hours now. if I didn't know better I'd think you've got nothing to show for all this wasted band width. Heck, Scott should kick you off the forum for your carbon foot print, let alone all the name calling.

Come on Tommy, give us your ground breaking solution.

RodSBT
07-21-2012, 12:44 AM
So you make no distinction.

You come across as a simpleton.

And you consistently ignore the thread topic.

You should be embarrassed. Of course you are not. You are proud and feel triumphant. Good for you.

This is at least the third time you've called me names and you still haven't done the deed.
You obviously are a fraud. Good night.

Tom Montgomery
07-21-2012, 12:47 AM
I've already done that Tom.
You have? You acknowledge "murders" but not any particular types?

You recognize no distinction between killing one's wife and wiping out a dozen people in a movie theater?

You acknowledge "murders" as a problem but do not acknowledge repeated mass murders as a problem?

They are all the same in your mind?

Tom Montgomery
07-21-2012, 12:48 AM
This is at least the third time you've called me names and you still haven't done the deed.
I did not call you a "simpleton." I said you are coming across as one. There is a difference.

I also told Glen Longino that arguing with you is like playing cards with children. An insult without calling names.

I did call you a "moron."

So push the button.
.

PeterSibley
07-21-2012, 01:10 AM
(BINGO!!!!! There you have it folks, the un anti gun, anti gun thread.)

So tell us Tom, what is to be done?

Oh that's easy. Follow Australia's lead and crush 'em. It was a very popular move here for a quite conservative PM.

doorstop
07-21-2012, 02:22 AM
They are just having a pissing contest Peter.....

skuthorp
07-21-2012, 04:21 AM
Tom and PMJ, you are just wasting your time. This sort of event is a US cultural phenomenon, collateral damage from their interpretation of part of their constitution and seemingly acceptable to the majority of elected representatives and their electorates.
Very sad for individuals, but a fact the country seems comfortable with.

Rob Blackburn
07-21-2012, 04:36 AM
Deep breath you guys.

A bit more time out on the boat or down in the shed fiddling would be a good place to start.

We are all on the same side really.

bob winter
07-21-2012, 04:58 AM
Tom,

You know d@mn well your op is about gun control. You've been playing a game the entire thread trying trap your opposition.
Quit whining, get to your solution and be done with it.

What, precisely, is wrong with gun control? Hand guns in Canada have been tightly controlled for years and the vast majority of crimes involving them are carried out using illegal weapons ant it seems to me that most of the shootings have to do with gangs offing each other which may not be that bad a thing.

To legally possess a long gun for sporting purposes, one has to get at least a possession certificate. Without this, you can't purchase ammunition. Getting a certificate is not a complicated procedure. It mainly involves passing a test and not being an obvious nut case.

The reasons for the 2nd made sense at the time but I am afraid that things have changed a lot since then.

seanz
07-21-2012, 05:02 AM
Bob, there's gun control in the USA as well........but some people find that hard to admit, or accept. I mentioned Hawaii a while ago in this thread (probably this thread) and got a resounding silence.

varadero
07-21-2012, 05:34 AM
There will be more mass murders by lone gunmen in the USA soon. This is because, that is what happens in the USA. Here in Spain we will have more bull fights soon, that is what happens in Spain. There are mass murders carried out in the rest of the world by crazies as opposed to political reasons, in England, Scotland, Norway, Australia and other places, they are just not as common. The reason there are more in the US has nothing to do with legal or illegal access to guns, but has everything to do with the fact that it seams to be the fasionable thing to do when you go doolally there. Else where in the world the folks tend to go off and pour gasoline on themselves and strike a match, or some other locally fasionable thing like hose pipe in exhaust. Only in the States does it seem common to go and "take out as many innocent people as I can, dude" I am afraid you will have to take a look at your culture and change something there if you want to deal with this problem.

Phillip Allen
07-21-2012, 05:45 AM
I'm tempted to go to the gun range... some reporter is bound to show up demanding I explain the shooting yesterday

PeterSibley
07-21-2012, 05:54 AM
You're killing yourself so don't worry .

Phillip Allen
07-21-2012, 05:55 AM
You're killing yourself so don't worry .

that's a bit vague, at least it is to me

LeeG
07-21-2012, 06:05 AM
I was hoping some of you would post ideas of a solution to the problem. But I guess few consider this phenomenon to be a problem.

Very sad. And telling.

I avoided the thread because the problem is cultural and acceptable. Firearms are a totem just like the F22 or ABM systems. They protect us from evil and help give fear and unknown a form defined by a feeling of power and not
vulnerability. Unfortunately it's a delusion.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
07-21-2012, 06:26 AM
Only a few hundred people get killed by legally held guns every year, so what's your problem?

You might as well try banning marijuana...

2MeterTroll
07-21-2012, 11:42 AM
Give up Tom arguing with Rod is about as much use as mud wrestling a pig.
you asked a question and some of us have answered it as best we can. lets go on with the discussion.

Tom Montgomery
07-21-2012, 12:51 PM
Name calling seems rude to me. I'll just report your post.
Too late. Someone beat you to the punch. ;)

Glen Longino
07-21-2012, 01:30 PM
that's a bit vague, at least it is to me

Of course it's vague to you...that's why you're killing yourself!
So, you don't remember starting a thread here called,"I'm Killing Myself"?

Glen Longino
07-21-2012, 01:37 PM
Name calling seems rude to me. I'll just report your post.

Whiiine....sob....snifff....wipe...snort...Tom called me grasshopper....sob...Just you wait till Scot hears about this...Waaaaaaaaah!:DLMAO:D

Kevin T
07-21-2012, 01:42 PM
I'm tempted to go to the gun range... some reporter is bound to show up demanding I explain the shooting yesterday
Had to save this one:rolleyes:

Glen Longino
07-21-2012, 01:49 PM
Had to save this one:rolleyes:

:DLMAO!
I bet Phillip has been running around Arkieville all day looking for a reporter!:D

TomF
07-24-2012, 06:24 PM
Tom? Sure, there'll be another lone gunman mass shooting (or several) in the US in the next year. And yes, while other countries have the phenom type of shooter to lesser degrees, it is more usually an American phenom.

As you say, the body count tends to rise when the firearms are semi-auto, and as the shooter's purpose is to kill/wound as many as possible, a semi-auto seems to be a weapon of choice. Presumably many seem to choose semi-auto handguns for "personal protection" for similar reasons - the ability for perhaps a lesser trained person to get off a lot of rounds swiftly.

I would wager that stricter controls on semi-auto weapons would probably make the body count lower, as to my knowledge, most of these incidents use firearms which the shooter bought and owned legally. As was the case, for instance, in this latest tragedy in Aurora. A restriction on semi-auto wouldn't cause any criminal to turn one in ... but would quite likely reduce the body count in cases like this one.

Of course, such a restriction is likely not to happen, certainly not nationwide.

BTW, I agree that it's been entertaining to see this thread consistently trend away from your thread opening post. This is a particular kind of murder - mass murder usually of strangers. It's qualitatively different from gang-on-gang violence over the drug trade, or an incidental 1-off murder during a burglary, or a crime of passion where one spouse kills the other. If nothing else, the difference is in the relative infrequency, and the typically much larger number of bodies.

Oh, and for those who think this is typical liberal claptrap of the sort that leads women to be raped and killed because they're given some progressive claptrap not to fight and resist ... anyone who tries to do something unspeakable to my daughter will run some very real risks of encountering some rather nasty things she's trained and practiced. Nice progressive girl that she is, she's no soft target, trained to be passive. Which doesn't mean she's packing a semi-auto.

George Jung
07-24-2012, 09:19 PM
A bit of thread drift.... read where some 17 yo girl from ? Carolina? got drunk at a party, was raped by two boys, who also videotaped it/uploaded to the internet - they were convicted, but received light sentences. So in defiance of the judge-imposed silence, she posted her story, and the names of her assailants, on line, as well. These boys' lawyer tried to bring charges against her, and the judge seemed willing to sentence her - until the outpouring of support scared them off. If I was those boys, I'd be concerned about surviving to 'legal adulthood'.

seanz
07-24-2012, 09:26 PM
A bit of thread drift.... read where some 17 yo girl from ? Carolina? got drunk at a party, was raped by two boys, who also videotaped it/uploaded to the internet - they were convicted, but received light sentences. So in defiance of the judge-imposed silence, she posted her story, and the names of her assailants, on line, as well. These boys' lawyer tried to bring charges against her, and the judge seemed willing to sentence her - until the outpouring of support scared them off. If I was those boys, I'd be concerned about surviving to 'legal adulthood'.

That's definitely thread drift......but an interesting point made by the 17 yo girl was that the offenders had recorded their crime and posted it on social media, so why couldn't she name them?

Chip-skiff
07-24-2012, 09:30 PM
What us the per capita firearms ownership out on the prairie Glen. I'll bet higher than Houston.
In my neighborhood here in Mt. it is %100 and yet there hasn't been a murder or negligent shooting in decades.

Here are the crime stats for Montana for many years. Given the number of homicides (no doubt mostly by firearms), I have to assume you are talking about your neighborhood alone, or perhaps your block. Or maybe it's all in your head.

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/mtcrimn.htm

George Jung
07-24-2012, 09:31 PM
It provides a clear insight into regional 'values'.

htom
07-24-2012, 10:08 PM
(The primary advantage in concealed carry for the semi-auto is that they are usually thinner, and thus easier to conceal; revolvers are usually a little more reliable; rate of fire to the first reload is the same; with lots of practice, reload is maybe 0.5 .. 1.0 second faster for the semi-auto, probably not really significant in a self-defense situation.)

RodSBT
07-24-2012, 10:24 PM
Here are the crime stats for Montana for many years. Given the number of homicides (no doubt mostly by firearms), I have to assume you are talking about your neighborhood alone, or perhaps your block. Or maybe it's all in your head.

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/mtcrimn.htm

Glad you posted that Chip. I was referencing my neighborhood, not the state as whole.
Pretty much proves my point though. What is most noteworthy is the murder rate dropping on average as the state grows in population, which would include the number of firearms being purchased, if national numbers of sales are any indicator.

Iceboy
07-25-2012, 09:49 AM
Montana 2010 21 murders, 12 by firearm, 6 by handgun. 57.14%. Illinois 2010 453 murders, 364 by firearms, 355 by handguns. 80.35% which is the worst in the nation. Question, which state has the most restrictive firearms laws? Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state

Here are the crime stats for Montana for many years. Given the number of homicides (no doubt mostly by firearms), I have to assume you are talking about your neighborhood alone, or perhaps your block. Or maybe it's all in your head.

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/mtcrimn.htm

John Smith
07-25-2012, 10:48 AM
The second Amendment:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The Militia:
"To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"

We have miscontrued and abused the 2nd amendment over and over and over again. We have "ARMS" today our founders could not possibly have imagined and I doubt they'd want the people to be able to keep and bear.

However, we are where we are which is a different place than where many of us, myself included, would like us to be. Yes, we are going to have more incidents like this one. How frequently no one can say. There are one hell of a lot of guns, many capable of shooting many rounds in very short spans on time, and there are more guns being sold daily.

IMO it is fantasyland to think we can reverse this. If we ceased all gun sales today, tomorrow the guns already sold would increase in value.

Yes, this is the price we pay for our freedom to own guns. The price will continue to rise, no matter whether efforts are made to change our gun laws or not. So many horses have left the barn there's no point in closing the gate.

wardd
07-25-2012, 10:55 AM
many years ago gun control was proposed and the argument against it was that it would take 50 years to be effective

about 25 years later with another gun proposal the same argument was used and someone replied if it had been done earlier we'd be half way there, that was over 25 years ago

John Smith
07-25-2012, 10:56 AM
Montana 2010 21 murders, 12 by firearm, 6 by handgun. 57.14%. Illinois 2010 453 murders, 364 by firearms, 355 by handguns. 80.35% which is the worst in the nation. Question, which state has the most restrictive firearms laws? Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state

I don't think restrictions by state mean much. It's like fireworks: illegal in NJ, but legal in PA. Think there's nobody shooting off personal fireworks in NJ? It's pretty easy to drive where guns are easy to buy and bring them home.

Cuyahoga Chuck
07-25-2012, 11:49 AM
AS long as there are human beings on earth there will be murder.

But the ability for a single individual to slaughter 10, 20 or 30 random individuals, suddenly, and in short order is pretty much the result of the availability of big magazine equipt assault rifles or handguns.

Phillip Allen
07-25-2012, 11:52 AM
But the ability for a single individual to slaughter 10, 20 or 30 random individuals, suddenly, and in short order is pretty much the result of the availability of big magazine equipt assault rifles or handguns.

bombs will certainly work...

Phillip Allen
07-25-2012, 11:54 AM
I don't think restrictions by state mean much. It's like fireworks: illegal in NJ, but legal in PA. Think there's nobody shooting off personal fireworks in NJ? It's pretty easy to drive where guns are easy to buy and bring them home.

so, you want NJ to write ARkansas laws?

how about the other way around and Arkansas writes NJ laws... ?

I understeand that in NJ, everythilng is illegal unless specifically allowed by law

wardd
07-25-2012, 11:56 AM
so, you want NJ to write ARkansas laws?

how about the other way around and Arkansas writes NJ laws... ?

as it is ark is writing nj laws

Cuyahoga Chuck
07-25-2012, 12:01 PM
Montana 2010 21 murders, 12 by firearm, 6 by handgun. 57.14%. Illinois 2010 453 murders, 364 by firearms, 355 by handguns. 80.35% which is the worst in the nation. Question, which state has the most restrictive firearms laws? Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state

With only a million people spread out over 100,000 square miles it's alot more difficult to find a suitable victim.
Chicago is what drives Illinois' murder rate up. It alone has twice the population of Montana.
Chicago's problem right now is gang wars. And the gangs can readily get firearms from the easy-to-buy states. If that avenue wasn't available Chicago's murder rate would be alot less.

Iceboy
07-25-2012, 01:08 PM
Just posting some stats for post #167 and trying to point out how effective any gun law can be. Most of those gang weapons were not purposly sold to gang members in states with loose laws. Most are stolen or traded for drugs. I have a site from the FBI or ATF that traces that fact but can't seem to find it at the moment. I did post it in one of the threads with that Salty troll. We have already reached a saturation point when it comes to firearms. If you took every legal firearm out of circulation right now and every illegal one you come across it would still not scratch the surface for many decades. I am with Ernie the 2meter man here. We need to address the root causes and not give in to fear and knee jerk reactions. We live in a society that glorifies violence and mayhem coupled with a lack of personal responsibility for one's actions. I for one have no idea of how to solve these issues but until we do there will most certainly be more of these type of acts.
With only a million people spread out over 100,000 square miles it's alot more difficult to find a suitable victim.
Chicago is what drives Illinois' murder rate up. It alone has twice the population of Montana.
Chicago's problem right now is gang wars. And the gangs can readily get firearms from the easy-to-buy states. If that avenue wasn't available Chicago's murder rate would be alot less.

keyhavenpotterer
07-26-2012, 08:45 AM
Freedom to carry guns, or freedom from gun crime.

Iceboy
07-26-2012, 09:50 AM
I just wanted to add a source of info from the ATF. According to thier trace data a great majority of the firearms traced due to crime in Illinois were purchased within Illinois. http://www.atf.gov/statistics/download/trace-data/2011/2011-trace-data-illinois.pdf
I don't think restrictions by state mean much. It's like fireworks: illegal in NJ, but legal in PA. Think there's nobody shooting off personal fireworks in NJ? It's pretty easy to drive where guns are easy to buy and bring them home.