What's new

Sorry gun advocates, you'll just have to suck it up

not gonna read too much liberal rantings as i believe it causes brain cancer if prolonged to long..


but if thats the criteria. are u allowed to enter the navy yard as a citizen with a gun?
NO

a navy yard is a gun free zone. the fact that law enforcement( including mp and special private armed security) are armed does not make it a non gun free zone.
a police officer can go to a gun free mall with his gun. does it mean the mall is gun free.


i see our definition of gun free zones differ.
you see it as a zone where even cops have to turn in their guns, there cannot be armed guards there. even military police and mp should turn in their gun!
i see a gun free zone as a zone where regular citizens are not allowed to carry a gun.
Dutch, don't be dumb.

A gun free zone is where guns are not supposed to be there.

The example provided was a location where there are always people walking around with guns (armed guards)
 
so whats a gun free zone in your world?

i know for most gun owners gun free zone is all about them a citizen to carry a gun or not into that zone.
they dont care about wether cops can carry a gun or not..


tried googling gun free zone.
first result i get is :gunfreezon.net
and second is :Gun-Free School Zones Act (GFSZA) - Wikipedia.


The Gun-Free School Zones Act (GFSZA) is a federal United States law that prohibits any unauthorized individual from knowingly possessing a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 921

i know this aplies to gun free school zones. but cant find any other reputable source that defines a gun free zone.

So by the definition you provided that navy base is not a gun free zone.
 
speaking of rants...

here is one of yours Dutch.

Donald-Trump.jpg


trump-v-trump.png
 
well some people see navy bases as gun free zones only police military police and guards are allowed to carry gun.
the majority of people on navy base's are unarmed.

https://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a272176.pdf.


i guess if you want it your way all mass shootings happened in a place where the general public is not allowed to carry guns!
The difference is that at a movie theater or a school or something there is not supposed to be guns there...... Except in an EMERGENCY when the cops get called in.

At the navy base there are always supposed to be guns there at all times. Its standard operating procedure. So the shooter knows and expects guns to be there and yet still carries out the attack anyway.

There is huge difference there that you are probably to stubborn to recognize.

I think I'm done discussing things with you for a while
 
The difference is that at a movie theater or a school or something there is not supposed to be guns there...... Except in an EMERGENCY when the cops get called in.

At the navy base there are always supposed to be guns there at all times. Its standard operating procedure. So the shooter knows and expects guns to be there and yet still carries out the attack anyway.

There is huge difference there that you are probably to stubborn to recognize.

I think I'm done discussing things with you for a while

ok bro
 
Really, I think there are several different sides to the issue of gun homicide - to the point that it's almost like they are different issues

One aspect - inner city violence, much of it related to the drug trade and gang affiliation; armed robbery probably falls into this category as well. Some of the problems related to poverty and unemployment factor into this type of violence.

Second aspect - the mass shooters such as the Columbine killings, James Holmes, Sandy Hook/Newton CT., the Charleston, SC church killings, etc etc; mental illness probably plays a role here. This typically involves shooting at random people who are not known to the killer

Third aspect - anger and jealousy - I think today's shooting in Roanoke fall into this category, though the shooter may have had some mental illness issues as well, but there are plenty of other homicides that are just simply someone going into a rage and shooting someone they perceive to be a rival or threat. Often times this is someone they know.

I think I had a fourth in mind, but I don't remember what it was.
(edit: I think the fourth one was accidental shootings, but that's an aspect with solutions that would be less directly related to the others)

At any rate, the factors frequently mentioned here as "root causes" , such as poverty, unemployment, unstable families etc. etc. etc. really play a role only in the first aspect. So what might be a way to start looking at solutions for one aspect of the problem (that is, for those who perceive it as a problem) is not going to do anything to resolve the issue of gun violence in those aspects where poverty and unemployment do not have a role - such as a jealous husband who kills his wife; or the angry young man who hates blacks.


OK, well since nobody offered any additional alternatives in evaluating the "sources" of gun violence, let's start a discussion of these various factors that lead to gun violence:
* gangs/drugs
* anger/jealousy
* accidental
* irrational reasons/mental health issues

(understanding that there can be some overlap between categories)

Now, I have a two questions to start:

1 - Are homicide statistics given by the number of deaths, by the number of incidents or what? Are injuries that are not fatal accounted for? I think it makes a bit of a difference and I'd be curious to know how many shootings involve just ONE victim, compared to those with two or more. Does anybody have a source where these things are broken down?

2 - Does anyone know of a link to a source where the number of shootings is broken down by "cause" similar to those I've listed above? And again, is it by number of incidents or number of fatalities and/or injuries?

Lots more questions of course, but I'd like to see if we can get some information towards those two questions and go from there.
 
well that would be hilarious, seeing as the argument to maintain gun access is always grouped with the notion of "we need to address systemic factors leading to gun violence!!"-- so this either means bigger government, or scapegoating black people.

Binary thinking bruh.

You're being too emotional in this conversation, Bruh.
 
what part of all mass shootings HAPPENED IN A GUN FREE ZONE!!!!!!!!!!! ALL OF THEM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


edit: Correction all SUCCESFULL MASS SHOOTINGS HAPPENED IN A GUN FREE ZONE

If someone brings in guns to a gun free zone, it clearly isn't gun free, now is it?
 
I still get security alerts for my alma matter, looks like there was an attempted shooting just now on campus.
 
OK, well since nobody offered any additional alternatives in evaluating the "sources" of gun violence, let's start a discussion of these various factors that lead to gun violence:
* gangs/drugs
* anger/jealousy
* accidental
* irrational reasons/mental health issues

(understanding that there can be some overlap between categories)

Now, I have a two questions to start:

1 - Are homicide statistics given by the number of deaths, by the number of incidents or what? Are injuries that are not fatal accounted for? I think it makes a bit of a difference and I'd be curious to know how many shootings involve just ONE victim, compared to those with two or more. Does anybody have a source where these things are broken down?

2 - Does anyone know of a link to a source where the number of shootings is broken down by "cause" similar to those I've listed above? And again, is it by number of incidents or number of fatalities and/or injuries?

Lots more questions of course, but I'd like to see if we can get some information towards those two questions and go from there.

Moe, I like what you're doing. I haven't had time to respond, but I'd like to. Just need to get a little coffee in me and wake up.
 
Back
Top