Virginia Beach mass shooting

[JonNC]

JonNC:

Oh, we’ve learned all about the revisionist history that hid the Democrat Party’s role in all of these, the mischaracterization of the so called southern strategy.
It is finally being corrected.

Can you point me to the peer reviewed historians who are correcting Allen, Hofstadter, DuBois, Woodward, and the others you label (incorrectly) “revisionists?” I would like to read their work.

I would say Dinesh Desouza has done excellent work in exposing the lies about the Democratic Party

 

[billsherman]

I would say Dinesh Desouza has done excellent work in exposing the lies about the Democratic Party

He isn’t a historian, none of his works are peer reviewed, and as far as know none of them even remotely qualify as scholarship. Do you have any examples that are written by actual historians? Peer reviewed would be even better, but I’ll take anything that vaguely qualifies as scholarship at this point.

 

[Theo520]

If it were tainted lettuce, a faulty baby product, a car or plane that caused a death, the lettuce would be off the shelf nationwide, the baby product would be recalled and the plane would be grounded until it was resolved. There would be no use crying over spilled milk, someone was seriously injured or died and before it happens to you, your children, your husband or mother…measures would be taken.

Faulty guns are treated as tainted lettuce, or a faulty plane. They are pulled from the shelves.

Guns are more like cars for your analogy. Cars that operate according to design standards are kept in use, in spite of the fact their operators kill over 100 people a day using them.

For 2016 specifically, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) data shows 37,461 people were killed in 34,436 motor vehicle crashes, an average of 102 per day

 

[Emeraldlady]

Gun lobbies and NRA reps always, always, always , cite the 2nd Amendment as the reason that there can be no control of guns in the interest of the common good of the country. Always . The world hears the same thing over and over every time.

Anything that reduces the numbers of guns on the streets will reduce the number of gun deaths. It isn’t rocket science. Problem is though that reducing guns on the streets directly affects profits for the gun industry and the NRA. Can’t have that.

What is the point of a right that causes more harm and carnage than good? It is the antithesis of the principles of a constitution.

That is the most laughable statistic. What research shows that? I hope that researcher wasn’t paid for coming up with it. lol. Reduce the number of guns in the community and the need for guns is commensurately reduced. It really isn’t rocket science. The gun profiteers are exploiting your common sense for you to even buy these arguments.

Ask New Zealand.

Massacre occurred 15 March 2019

One month later:

Last updated 24 April 2019

New firearms laws are now in effect amending the Arms Act by:

** Banning most semi-automatic firearms and some pump action shotguns; and also certain large capacity magazines. There are limited exemptions.*

Are you calling the NZ police liars?

 

[Emeraldlady]

Emeraldlady:

That’s a strange way to reason. Mandating pool fencing as a ramification due to child drownings is not punishing people who haven’t had a child drown.

If this were about pools, the New Zealand response wouldn’t have been to mandate fencing, it would have been mandating that all pools be filled in.

The gun laws don’t get rid of all guns. They confine them to trained authorities, farmers, sporting shooters etc. The laws ensure that dangerous weapons don’t get into the wrong hands and when they do, the consequences are severe.

Lost in this is that the Virginia Beach shooter used 2 handguns, not “assault rifles” or “automatic weapons”.

Handguns with “extended magazines” which are the subject of the same restrictions applying to automatics weapons under gun control laws.

 

[GKMotley]

Handguns with “extended magazines” which are the subject of the same restrictions applying to automatics weapons under gun control laws.

I ask only for the info, because I didn’t know this. In what sense are extended magazines restricted in the same manner automatic weapons are? In Virginia, under state law? Some local ordinance?

 

[Theo520]

Anything that reduces the numbers of guns on the streets will reduce the number of gun deaths. It isn’t rocket science. Problem is though that reducing guns on the streets directly affects profits for the gun industry and the NRA. Can’t have that.

Actually this assertion is just in your mind, it’s not backed up by any science.

Looking at the facts, there is an inverse correlation between gun deaths in the US and proliferation of guns.

 

[Emeraldlady]

Emeraldlady:

Handguns with “extended magazines” which are the subject of the same restrictions applying to automatics weapons under gun control laws.

I ask only for the info, because I didn’t know this. In what sense are extended magazines restricted in the same manner automatic weapons are? In Virginia, under state law? Some local ordinance?

The poster was saying that the Virginia Beach shooter didn’t have an automatic weapon so there should be basically no talk of that here. But because the shooter had an “extended magazine” which converted his hand guns capacity, I stated that the same restrictions on auto weapons in countries addressing it by gun control, also applies to high capacity magazines that can convert a non auto designed weapon. For example, the new NZ laws state, "Banning most semi-automatic firearms and some pump action shotguns; and also certain large capacity magazines. There are limited exemptions.

Placing controls around who may possess parts of prohibited firearms."

 

[GKMotley]

Ok. This was in Virginia. Which has no statewide ban on extended magazines (AFAIK). Several states do have such, and the production of such magazines, though not the ownership, is restricted by federal law. Were you discussing only the NZ situation? Otherwise, I see no way that extended magazines are treated as fully automatic weapons are treated, under different federal law in this country.

 

[upant]

New Zealand because they would be forced to comment on their immediate gun laws enacted and effective

so effective that only 530 banned guns were turned in, leaving near 300,000 guns illegal

It is not the governments responsibility to protect civilians

this is truer than you realize.

Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone - The New York Times

We must recognize shootings will happen when we have “freedoms”

we need to recognize murder happens with freedoms or not. they will continue because we live in a fallen world and it seems to be moving further away from God. but let’s blame the tool and do nothing about the cause of the violence.

Anything that reduces the numbers of guns on the streets will reduce the number of gun deaths.

the current laws of Australia are supposed to be the model but today they are more guns in Australia than before the buy-back, why didn’t gun deaths rise with the rise in the number of guns?

What research shows that?

the link was provided, it was a CDC sponsored study that included the data

Are you calling the NZ police liars?

this info was provided by the NZ police, are they putting out false info?

 

[Emeraldlady]

Oh dear. The spurious charts of the neo conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute. They are a joke.

 

[Theo520]

Oh dear. The spurious charts of the neo conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute. They are a joke.

Are you claiming the numbers are wrong, or are you just deflecting.
Show your numbers that prove your point.

I never cited causation, that was you.

 

[Emeraldlady]

Anything that reduces the numbers of guns on the streets will reduce the number of gun deaths.

The strict gun laws created a new more healthy playing field. No auto and extremely restricted semi autos allowed at all in private hands. No large capacity magazines. No unregistered guns tolerated or crime involving guns and resulting in mandatory jail time. Require weapons licence from police which must be renewed and reassessed like a drivers licence. The effect being that the number of guns in the community is severely reduced.

 

[DENNYINMI]

What I was stating was being used rhetorically in an exact opposite stance for purpose of hyperbole and a point.

You understood that, right?

One thing we definitely should embark on is demanding that a gun owner have common sense. A rocket science degree not required but I believe the equivalency of at least a young adult would suffice.

Another should regulate gun transfers to family members which remains largely unregulated in most states.

Usually we hear later that Vern would be the last person we’d suspect of shooting up the town movie theatre, mom and dad and Uncle Wayne just didn’t see it coming, he showed “no signs”…Like a frog in a slow boil, family is usually the last to ‘notice’ changes when juniors been on the dark web, addicted to shootem up video games and is no longer establishing fact from reality…and Uncle Wayne gifts him a gun.

How smart is that?

Common sense is lost on some.

 

[FirstFiveEighth]

Your point was that white supremists support the second amendment, ergo supporting the second amendment is suspect, ergo attempts to curb second amendment rights are more properly seen as attempts to counteract white supremacy, which is a good thing that should be pursued.

Whether that is what you attempted to convey or not, that is what you said. It’s a bad argument, because both your premises are flawed- that support for the second amendment is strongly tied to white supremacy, and that the proper response to undesirable actors having access to rights is to take them away from everyone.

 

[billsherman]

Your point was that white supremists support the second amendment, ergo supporting the second amendment is suspect, ergo attempts to curb second amendment rights are more properly seen as attempts to counteract white supremacy

My point, as you can clearly read above is that guns and white supremacy are linked in the US. All the “ergos” are your points. Please don’t confuse my points with what you extrapolate from them. It would be just as irresponsible to claim “supporting the second amendment is” white supremacist as it is to claim that Democrats are primarily responsible for white supremacy.

It’s a bad argument, because both your premises are flawed- that support for the second amendment is strongly tied to white supremacy, and that the proper response to undesirable actors having access to rights is to take them away from everyone.

I don’t recall writing anything about taking guns away from everyone, or anyone. That is your extrapolation.

What I was clear about, though, is that my position is backed by some of the finest US historians the world has produced. DuBois, Woodward, Allen, Hofstadter, and others, all support the idea that guns are tightly linked to white supremacy in American history, and that you can’t really discuss the issue of guns in our society without discussing this aspect of it.

There have been three responses: ignoring my point entirely, claiming that Democrats caused white supremacy and Republicans are the cure, and you claiming that I want to take all the guns away because I think people who have them are white supremacists. All of these responses directly challenge the claims of major historians who dedicated their lives to understanding US society. I’ll stand with them until I see some evidence to persuade me they are wrong, and no one in this thread has provided that. And no, a list of things you don’t like about liberals does not count as evidence.

I suggest reading Allen’s “The Invention of the White Race” as a starting point, then explaining why he is wrong.

 

[Theo520]

The strict gun laws created a new more healthy playing field.

And why have gun deaths dropped in the US in spite of a rise in the number of guns?

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

I would say Dinesh Desouza has done excellent work in exposing the lies about the Democratic Party

He isn’t a historian, none of his works are peer reviewed, and as far as know none of them even remotely qualify as scholarship. Do you have any examples that are written by actual historians? Peer reviewed would be even better, but I’ll take anything that vaguely qualifies as scholarship at this point.

And he has done an excellent job.

So did Justice Scalia in the Heller Decision. No mention of white supremacy in it.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

 

[JonNC]

NRA Blog | Remembering Otis McDonald

From the MacDonald v. Chicago Decision:

(i) By the 1850’s, the fear that the National Government would disarm the universal militia had largely faded, but the right to keep and bear arms was highly valued for self-defense. Abolitionist au- thors wrote in support of the right, and attempts to disarm “Free- Soilers” in “Bloody Kansas,” met with outrage that the constitutional right to keep and bear arms had been taken from the people. After the Civil War, the Southern States engaged in systematic efforts to disarm and injure African Americans, see Heller, supra, at ___. These injustices prompted the 39th Congress to pass the Freedmen’s Bureau Act of 1866 and the Civil Rights Act of 1866 to protect the right to keep and bear arms. Congress, however, ultimately deemed these legislative remedies insufficient, and approved the Fourteenth Amendment. Today, it is generally accepted that that Amendment was understood to provide a constitutional basis for protecting the rights set out in the Civil Rights Act. See General Building Contrac- tors Assn., Inc. v. Pennsylvania, 458 U. S. 375, 389.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf

 

[DENNYINMI]

So. When I asked what we’ll be doing nothing or arguing about guns, I see there was a decision made. Gee. How hopeful. Same time, same place? Just what I thought.

Edited for: Thoughts and prayers for the victims and the victims families that are left to make sense of the useless tragedy that took the lives of their beloved family members in their prime.

Thoughts and prayers alone will never be enough. ^^^^^^^^^