The Mass Shooting Thread

[geonuc]

You declaring that it's an assault weapon by modern social terms does not make it so. It's an assault weapon to people who want it banned. It's just a firearm to others.

Let's be clear. We've had this conversation many times on FWIS. Ban all the guns. I really don't care. I have no emotional investment in the second amendment. I don't own an AR-15 or want to.

I just don't believe it will solve the problem. We've had guns in this country forever. We haven't had mass shootings forever. Maybe I'm being simplistic, but to my mind, that means something else is wrong.

Again, ban all the guns you want to. I'll even vote for it. So you're preaching to the choir here. My point about harping on it being an assault weapon is that kind of language gets people who don't want to ban guns completely distracted from the subject at hand and it becomes all about is it or isn't it an assault weapon. I was trying to be helpful on how to get the other side to listen.

My proposal was to repeal the 2nd Amendment, not ban all guns. With the 2nd Amendment gone, we as a society can regulate gun ownership, as we do with many other things.

[Loresinger]

Geo that is an interesting proposal. Can you give me ideas of correlations on things we regulate now?

[geonuc]

Geo that is an interesting proposal. Can you give me ideas of correlations on things we regulate now?

Motor vehicle use
Boilers (the seminal case of government regulation)
Electrical wiring in houses
Airplanes
Pharmaceuticals
Food
Radio transmitters
Drones

The list would be quite long if I kept at it. The essence is that many things we have in society pose some hazard to others or the environment (which is the same things in larger scale), so we have laws on who can own them, how the can be used, how they must be manufactured, what licenses and training are required, etc. Firearms would just be another potentially hazardous thing we'd regulate.

[Loresinger]

How will that regulation differ from what is currently in place (forgive me I am a bit uneducated in the legalities field)

[SciFiFisher]

How will that regulation differ from what is currently in place (forgive me I am a bit uneducated in the legalities field)

Currently, it is very difficult to regulate guns at all. There have been various attempts but any of them that act as an effective ban on owning guns in almost any circumstances are usually challenged in court and struck down.

By "an effective ban" I mean that the law or regulation is written in such a way that it makes it almost impossible to own a gun. A few years ago Washington D.C. had a law that supposedly allowed you to own a gun. They required you to do practically everything except the "I am a little teapot" dance and would still deny you a permit to own a gun. That law as struck down.

With the 2nd Amendment in place, the federal government is literally forced to do almost nothing. I think the fact that we have a background check requirement, ban most fully automatic weapons and make it illegal for people convicted of domestic violence to carry guns are miracles. Aside from preventing international trafficking in certain weapons that is about all the federal government is able to do with regulating gun ownership.

And because of the 2nd amendment if a state gets too restrictive about gun ownership the federal government can be asked to step in and strike down the law passed by the state. That is usually done through the courts.

Without the 2nd amendment then guns could be strictly regulated. For example, it is illegal to drive with impaired vision. If you cannot see well enough to drive then the state can take away your drivers license and penalize you if you are caught driving. Technically, it is not illegal to own a gun if you are blind.

Of course, there is a distinction between owning a car and operating it. And that would be true of someone who wanted to own guns to collect vs shooting them. A blind person could own a gun for the purpose of being a collector. In some states it is legal for blind people to hunt if they are accompanied by a person who is able to see. I suppose they act as the shot spotter. "Just a little lower Tim. Your last shot was a bit high"

[geonuc]

How will that regulation differ from what is currently in place (forgive me I am a bit uneducated in the legalities field)

See Fisher's answer but in legal terms, having an individual right to own a firearm (as opposed to as a member of a militia, say) means laws must be tailored very narrowly so as not to unconstitutionally restrict that right. Without the amendment, the government just has to show it has 'an interest' in regulating something. The 'interest' doctrine is why the government can't just ban things because some asshole politician doesn't like that thing (it still happens but courts strike down those laws regularly). There must be a valid interest the government is charged to protect or deal with. Safety of the general public is such an interest.

As to what laws might be useful in particular, I hesitate to offer an opinion. I think it needs a lot of debate and research. Note that at present, federal agencies are quite limited in even researching gun violence, by Congressional statute. That too must change.

[Swift]

This will probably be my only post in this thread. I've had this debate too many times, here, Facebook, and elsewhere.

I have no clue as to what to do about this. But what we have chosen to do as a country is absolutely nothing, which unsurprisingly hasn't made anything better, and it seems only makes it worse.

My arguments with anti-gun-control, pro-2nd Amendment advocates are usually along the lines of them saying it isn't a gun problem, its a mental health problem, or a lack of law enforcement problem, or some other problem. Fine; you think that's the problem, then do something about one of those issues. Increase spending for mental health, hire more cops, fight poverty, something. Heck, let's try some really bad ideas (like arming teachers), at least we will have done something and we can at least rule out some bad ideas. But shooting after shooting, we do nothing.

We've had so many of these that I really don't get upset or angry about them anymore; the blanket of malaise just gets a little bit deeper. I think I have a clue as to how some poor soldier must have felt about trench warfare during WWI; a kind of dullness waiting for the next round of death.

Would I like to see a ban on assault weapons, large capacity magazines, closing the gun-show loopholes, comprehensive and mandatory background checks and waiting periods? Absolutely. Would I like to see the 2nd Amendment repealed? Absolutely. Do I think any of this will happen? Absolutely not.

Don't ask me to prove or offer evidence for any of this; I'm too tired and it is pointless.

[Loresinger]

I agree with you swift. It's infuriating. All they hear is "you want to take my guns" Noooooooooooooooooo

I want gun shows to have regulations including waiting periods
I want waiting periods for proper background checks
I want people to get a license to operate their weapon(s) just like we must a car. This may include some training or minimally a safety test
I would like people to prove they have proper housing for the weapon. Doubt this would happen but works in Japan.
I want a ban on the type of weapons you spoke of - they are not necessary in the hands of good ol' Ralph
I want a ban on individuals wth a history of domestic violence, psychiatric hospitalization, police record that includes violence

I don't think these are unreasonable. The truth is that America has a "gun culture" that is very sick. It's tied into ego as much as those monster trucks with balls hanging off the back.

[Rommie]

I really hate myself for thinking earlier this week "hmmm, we haven't had one of these in awhile..."

It's really hard to emphasize what a shock an event like this is in New Zealand (like, the cops don't even carry guns there). On par with the shock of the case in Norway a few years ago. Truly a case IMO of if it can happen there it can happen anywhere on the globe in terms of the radicalization these terrorists are now getting on the Internet.

NZ is also the sort of place that will definitely be implementing more gun control based on whatever allowed this man to do the shooting, so I will be interested in seeing how that process goes.

[geonuc]

I really hate myself for thinking earlier this week "hmmm, we haven't had one of these in awhile..."

It's really hard to emphasize what a shock an event like this is in New Zealand (like, the cops don't even carry guns there). On par with the shock of the case in Norway a few years ago. Truly a case IMO of if it can happen there it can happen anywhere on the globe in terms of the radicalization these terrorists are now getting on the Internet.

NZ is also the sort of place that will definitely be implementing more gun control based on whatever allowed this man to do the shooting, so I will be interested in seeing how that process goes.

I read that NZ has 1.5 million guns with a population just short of 5 million.

[SciFiFisher]

One twist to the case was that the shooters live streamed it on FB. It will be interesting to see what kind of pressure social media gets around the rest of the world to limit this type of thing.

[Thumper]

Shooter: I love Donald Trump. As a white supremacist, he gave me the courage to do this.
White House apologist: This has nothing to do with Donald Trump. To associate this tragedy with Trump is to twist things and politicize it and is everything that is wrong with society.

[SciFiFisher]

Shooter: I love Donald Trump. As a white supremacist, he gave me the courage to do this.
White House apologist: This has nothing to do with Donald Trump. To associate this tragedy with Trump is to twist things and politicize it and is everything that is wrong with society.

yep. They twist and turn. I watched a Trump supporter in an interview the other night with Lawrence O'Donnell. She served on the jury that convicted Manafort in one of his trials. She voted to find Manafort guilty. When Lawrence asked her a number of questions that dealt with Trump giving Manafort a pardon she was very fascinating to watch. There is this thing people do with their eyes when they are trying to deal with internal cognitive dissonance. It looks almost like the eyes are flickering and they gyrate and then they frequently turn up and to the right. It almost looked like she was going to have seizures.

I can only speculate but I think she was trying to resolve the conflict between knowing that Manafort was obviously a criminal and what the implications were that Trump supports Manafort and what it might say about Trump if he pardons Manafort. She was definitely sweating and trying really hard to avoid saying that if Trump pardons Manafort it will look like a criminal conspiracy or collusion.

[Sigma_Orionis]

Shooter: I love Donald Trump. As a white supremacist, he gave me the courage to do this.
White House apologist: This has nothing to do with Donald Trump. To associate this tragedy with Trump is to twist things and politicize it and is everything that is wrong with society.

yep. They twist and turn. I watched a Trump supporter in an interview the other night with Lawrence O'Donnell. She served on the jury that convicted Manafort in one of his trials. She voted to find Manafort guilty. When Lawrence asked her a number of questions that dealt with Trump giving Manafort a pardon she was very fascinating to watch. There is this thing people do with their eyes when they are trying to deal with internal cognitive dissonance. It looks almost like the eyes are flickering and they gyrate and then they frequently turn up and to the right. It almost looked like she was going to have seizures.

I can only speculate but I think she was trying to resolve the conflict between knowing that Manafort was obviously a criminal and what the implications were that Trump supports Manafort and what it might say about Trump if he pardons Manafort. She was definitely sweating and trying really hard to avoid saying that if Trump pardons Manafort it will look like a criminal conspiracy or collusion.

Long story short. Looked like a Communist trying to justify Maduro.

[Rommie]

I was wondering what I was going to notice upon moving back to the USA for the first time since 2011. Want to know the first? All the flags at half mast. At first I was wondering why, then realized it was for the mass shooting in Virginia.

Do you guys do this every time?!

[Thumper]

Our flags are at half mast about once a week...

"Thoughts and prayers...this will not define us. We remain strong."

Whatever.

[Swift]

I was wondering what I was going to notice upon moving back to the USA for the first time since 2011. Want to know the first? All the flags at half mast. At first I was wondering why, then realized it was for the mass shooting in Virginia.

Do you guys do this every time?!

Actually I don't recall flags at half mast for most mass shootings (how pathetic that we have enough to make for a good statistical analysis).

https://www.flagsexpress.com/HalfStaff_s/1994.htm
According to that website, Trump did order them on the 4th for the Virginia shooting.

[geonuc]

Having two mass shootings in 24 hours has accomplished one thing that even Sandy Hook didn't: it got one of my normally apolitical, thirty-something friends to start talking about gun control.

One down, 150 million to go.

[SciFiFisher]

Having two mass shootings in 24 hours has accomplished one thing that even Sandy Hook didn't: it got one of my normally apolitical, thirty-something friends to start talking about gun control.

One down, 150 million to go.

Well, I suppose it's a start.

[squ1d]

So this Walmart one happened in Texas, where you can open carry ?

What happened to all the good guys with guns?

[Thumper]

Um, yeah that's a myth.
Easily dispelled years ago when there was an active shooter on an army base. An army base full of trained soldiers with guns. An army base where there were soldiers practicing on the range adjacent to where the shooting was taking place. An army base where armed MP's were victims of the active shooter...

[geonuc]

That Walmart is an open-carry store too.

[Rommie]

Well, that and in the Dayton one there were trained police officers who got the guy in about a minute, and he still managed to kill 10 people.

[Rommie]

It's really fucking depressing that we have this and that we get to dust it off, huh...

I mean, what else is there to say that hasn't already been said? I'm not sure anything is ever going to change. I just always wonder if I have it in me to have a child in this country and send them to a school where you do school shooter drills because we decided traumatizing a generation makes more sense than not letting 18 year olds buy assault rifles.

[lady_*nix]

Yeah. That..

I feel sometimes like we're living in death's own country.