What can we do about the shootings?

[Sarcelle]

What is it about American culture that does encourage this violence?

The other developed nations do not have this type of gun violence and yet they are even more secular than the USA.

 

[po18guy]

The shootings are a symptom of increasing loss of hope, loss of a sense of individual value, and increasing pent-up anger. There is a suicidal impulse in each case. In many cases, 24/7 media attention only drives the suicidal to carry out their plans. Virtually every suicidal person is also homicidal. If their life does not matter to them, ours also means nothing. Our society and culture have steadily devalued human life. What do we expect?

Now, as to the shootings, there are innumerable things that we can do without penalizing or stigmatizing the law abiding citizen. Since murder is illegal and always has been, another flurry of bad legislation will not and cannot help. From the Dallas Morning News:

We can stop mass shootings without restricting Second Amendment liberties

It is often said by people of all political persuasions, and certainly by my fellow conservatives, that the primary duty of the federal government...

www.dallasnews.com

Once you relinquish or surrender a freedom, you never get it back without bloodshed. And, isn’t bloodshed the very thing we wish to avoid?

 

[CarmeliteKnight]

You’re right they don’t have that type of gun violence, they just have knife stabbing sprees, radicals running innocent people over in trucks, and constant acid attacks.
Taking guns away from law-abiding citizens does not solve the problem, it makes it easier for criminals to kill people. Have you ever noticed that a majority of the gun violence and mass shootings ( that are publicized and sensationalized) happen in gun-free zones?

 

[vern_humphrey]

Better than being unarmed for sure. But the reality is that these headlining mass shooters are using longguns with a greater range than your concealed handgun, and so that makes you outgunned if you ever find yourself in their monstrous company.

However, they don’t know you’re carrying, and you have the advantage of surprise. In many such incidents the mere appearance of an armed opponent has caused the shooter to desist or commit suicide.

In any case, a gun is like a parachute – you’ll probably never need one, but if you do need one and don’t have one, you’ll never need anything again.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Nihilo:

Better than being unarmed for sure. But the reality is that these headlining mass shooters are using longguns with a greater range than your concealed handgun, and so that makes you outgunned if you ever find yourself in their monstrous company.

However, they don’t know you’re carrying, and you have the advantage of surprise. In many such incidents the mere appearance of an armed opponent has caused the shooter to desist or commit suicide.

In any case, a gun is like a parachute – you’ll probably never need one, but if you do need one and don’t have one, you’ll never need anything again.

But unlike a gun, a parachute is not used to kill people or to kill oneself to to kill a child by accident.

 

[goout]

What can we do about the shootings?
Support strong families.

 

[Nihilo]

…Once you relinquish or surrender a freedom, you never get it back without bloodshed. And, isn’t bloodshed the very thing we wish to avoid?

Those horrible weapons that Beto wants to grab have nothing to do with the much more severe problem that the US has too many murderers living here. Those horrible weapons are used to murder a small fraction of all the murder victims. And since guns don’t cause murder, or ppl to become murderers, “grabbing” them will not convert murderers back into innocent ppl again, nor will the process of generating murderers in the US (whatever sociological process that is) slow down. So the population of murderers will not change even if Beto and others like him get their wish.

And before anybody says it, I know that those horrible weapons are being targeted because it is easier for a mass murderer to murder more ppl whenever they do decide to commit a massacre. What I said above still holds, even if we should agree with Beto’s threat (which I don’t, but even if I’m wrong on that, what I wrote above stands).

 

[LilyM]

You’re right they don’t have that type of gun violence, they just have knife stabbing sprees, radicals running innocent people over in trucks, and constant acid attacks.
Taking guns away from law-abiding citizens does not solve the problem, it makes it easier for criminals to kill people. Have you ever noticed that a majority of the gun violence and mass shootings ( that are publicized and sensationalized) happen in gun-free zones?

But even the countries that do have those things (at least the Western countries that are comparable to the US) pretty much don’t, per capita, have nearly the rates or the death tolls from them.

And other western countries still pretty much have every single one of the reasons that has been given as an explanation for gun violence in the US. So what is the difference?

Mental heath, perhaps? But that would come down to that evil socialised govt funded healthcare that you hate so much.

 

[Nihilo]

Nihilo:

Better than being unarmed for sure. But the reality is that these headlining mass shooters are using longguns with a greater range than your concealed handgun, and so that makes you outgunned if you ever find yourself in their monstrous company.

However, they don’t know you’re carrying, and you have the advantage of surprise.

But that’s It. You’ve got one small edge that you can use once, and if you with that small edge manage to miss your target, for example, then you’ve used up that small edge, and now you’re outgunned.

Much better to be properly armed. Much better still to outgun your opponent.

In many such incidents the mere appearance of an armed opponent has caused the shooter to desist or commit suicide.

In any case, a gun is like a parachute – you’ll probably never need one, but if you do need one and don’t have one, you’ll never need anything again.

“It’s better to have a gun and need it, than to not have a gun and not need it.”

 

[po18guy]

Can’t deny it.

Gallup: 83 Percent of Adults Blame 'Mental Health' for Mass Shootings

A Gallup poll shows that 83 percent of American adults blame a "failure in our mental health system" as a reason for mass shootings.

www.breitbart.com

 

[Leo2014]

Much better to be properly armed. Much better still to outgun your opponent.

I do not mean to insult you, but goodness, where do you live that you would have to carry this deepen concern for your safety? I understand that there are areas of the country were violence is an epidemic. But, I think you can agree that the neighborhood is not any more safe with a stock pile of weapons.

Many people’s reason for owning a gun is that if a criminal attacks you; you want a weapon to gun him down. This is the main reason given for ownership of a handgun; assault rifles are another story. This answer has doubled in surveys since the 1990s’. During the same period, the chance that you would have such an encounter has decreased by half. The prospect of protecting oneself against random attacks are nearly none.

There are dozens of laws that encourage “citizen showdowns”; conceal carry, stand your ground are driven by hysteria rather than by reason and prudence.

I have to agree with the majority of people. This is an issue that needs to be seriously addressed.

 

[Nihilo]

Nihilo:

Much better to be properly armed. Much better still to outgun your opponent.

I do not mean to insult you, but goodness, where do you live that you would have to carry this deepen concern for your safety?

I live in the US, in the world. I also have read history enough to know that decades of peace are not a reason to conclude that we’re therefore doing anything right. Centuries are a much better gauge of how things are going. And we do not have centuries behind us to support that weapons of war should be restricted from civilian hands, which is in direct conflict with the Second Amendment’s prohibition against infringing the right to bear arms. Weapons of war have basically been out of civilian hands since the 1934 NFA, and yet here we are still fighting about restricting even irreversibly less functional replicas of real weapons of war.

I understand that there are areas of the country were violence is an epidemic. But, I think you can agree that the neighborhood is not any more safe with a stock pile of weapons.

Law enforcement has a stock pile of weapons, in every neighborhood.

Many people’s reason for owning a gun is that if a criminal attacks you; you want a weapon to gun him down. This is the main reason given for ownership of a handgun; assault rifles are another story.

No, same story.

…This is an issue that needs to be seriously addressed.

I agree with that.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I do not mean to insult you, but goodness, where do you live that you would have to carry this deepen concern for your safety?

If there is no concern for safety, what is the rational for new laws? If there IS concern for safety, the law should allow the innocent to carry arms for self-defense.

 

[vern_humphrey]

But unlike a gun, a parachute is not used to kill people or to kill oneself to to kill a child by accident.

I’ve had guns all my life – and I’ve never killed anyone (except in combat). I’ve never killed myself or a child by accident or on purpose.

 

[Economist]

I have never owned a gun, and don’t ever intend to own one. Obviously I am a wuss, and I like the words of Jesus: “if you live by the sword, you will die by the sword.” Furthermore, if you are not ready to use the gun, it is very likely that a criminal will take your gun away, and then you are really in trouble. Next, if you are ready to use a gun, be ready to kill with it. After all the old Wild West stories, where the sheriff shoots out the gun from the fist of the outlaw is just a fairy tale.

So if you have a gun, be prepared to use that gun, and be prepared to kill with that gun… no thanks, that is not for me. Your mileage may vary.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

But unlike a gun, a parachute is not used to kill people or to kill oneself to to kill a child by accident.

I’ve had guns all my life – and I’ve never killed anyone (except in combat). I’ve never killed myself or a child by accident or on purpose.

Well, good for you. Keep up the good work. The statistics show that not everyone has been that careful.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Well, good for you. Keep up the good work. The statistics show that not everyone has been that careful.

Actually the statistics show that accidental shootings are rare (in relation to population) and going down. If it weren’t for the politics of the thing, accidental shootings would no longer have their own category, but would be grouped under “other.”

Some activists try to inflate shooting deaths by including suicides – as if a deeply depressed person would not commit suicide if he couldn’t get a gun.

If you want to learn about how to prevent homicides, you might go here: https://crimeresearch.org/2017/04/n...54-us-counties-2014-zero-murders-69-1-murder/
“Murders in US very concentrated: 54% of US counties in 2014 had zero murders, 2% of counties have 51% of the murders”

Find out what’s wrong with those 2%! How will banning guns in the 54% that have NO homicides affect the 2% that have more than half?

 

[Leo2014]

If there is no concern for safety, what is the rational for new laws? If there IS concern for safety, the law should allow the innocent to carry arms for self-defense.

I don’t think I fully understand your response?

I am just analyzing my surroundings as an example. We are nearing the end of summer, yet I will go to sleep with all the windows open - I receive a nice breeze. I need to spend more time doing so, but I walk and jog through my neighborhood in the early morning or after dark. I never once felt the need to carry a weapon. There are common sense safety rules I follow when I am exercising, don’t approach someone too quickly, alert them of my presence, and avoid going somewhere that appears uninviting.

The growing concern is individuals with the intent to kill will target places of large gatherings.

I had a recent experience that was fortunately avoid; Thank You God for your protection. The incident made the news. A large hotel near an airport that I frequent was blocked by law enforcement. The story was an unhappy employee of the hotel had shared with a co-worker his intent to retaliate against his employer. The lead that law enforcement received lead them to his home where they confiscated a large amount of military grade weapons he purchased legally. The potential gunman had no history of any mental disorder.

As with the case in my local area, experts state that most mass killer are not suffering from clinical delusion. Rather they are unhappy people with flaws and failures they blame on others; the system, the elitist, the world. They worry those sensations into thoughts of vengeance and that acting on those impulses will cause others to pay attention them.

Yes, the need for safety is long overdue. But encouraging people to carry weapons is not the answer. One topic on this forum had to audacity to consider concealing weapons in Church! It is the fascination with weapons that is the source of to our crises.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I don’t think I fully understand your response?

I am just analyzing my surroundings as an example. We are nearing the end of summer, yet I will go to sleep with all the windows open - I receive a nice breeze. I need to spend more time doing so, but I walk and jog through my neighborhood in the early morning or after dark. I never once felt the need to carry a weapon. There are common sense safety rules I follow when I am exercising, don’t approach someone too quickly, alert them of my presence, and avoid going somewhere that appears uninviting.

My point is that the justification for gun control is to reduce violence. If the level of violence is negligible, then what is the need for gun control?

If the level of violence is NOT negligible, then a prudent man should be prepared to defend himself and his family.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Yes, the need for safety is long overdue. But encouraging people to carry weapons is not the answer. One topic on this forum had to audacity to consider concealing weapons in Church!

If carrying weapons is NOT the answer, what is? How can you defend yourself against an attacker who has a gun?

And can you not think of incidents of shootings in church? Mass murderers seek out soft targets. The obvious response is to harden those targets!!