Thoughts and Prayers

[BabyPeterzz]

I’m not going to say I fully believe her stats, as I’ve not looked into them. I’m just putting this here because it’s relevant to the discussion happening.

Would love to hear her selective data representation around mass shootings, instead of homicides.

 

[franklin]

I don't "want" a militia system... I want to explore the idea. To think about what that would mean.

Understood. I meant to include something about I like the fact that you are searching for solutions instead of just complaining about a problem as people seem to only ever want to do. I don't like your proposed solution but at least it's an outside the box idea worth thinking about.

I think expanding the Class III permitting to include new purchases of "assault" rifles would be a good start, with the aim of eventually requiring all current owners to obtain a permit. Bump stocks should have been outlawed before they ever caused a problem, as should these new high capacity 12-gauge modifications. X-Rail for Benelli gives it 22+1, making it a devastating gun. The latter is a very slippery slope to the NRA types however, and would be met with resistance.

 

[Stoked]

Some students in FL, including survivors of the latest shooting, went to Tallahassee and confronted state lawmakers. They demanded gun reform/control.

Then they did interviews and basically put all lawmakers on notice. That they will go after all of them that take NRA donations or oppose more gun control.

Do we start to see something build from this new generation?

 

[JazzGal]

Just read this article. I found it to be fairly balanced and it pointed out some of the things states can do to hopefully reduce the number of mass shootings or fatal shootings in general.

https://everytownresearch.org/reports/mass-shootings-analysis/

Sounds like getting rid of this loophole makes the most sense, at least as a starting point.

Very informative article. I find it frustrating that the government won't fund the type of research that this organization is doing. I do not understand why anyone on either side of the argument (other than the NRA) would not want to know what they are dealing with. But at this point, people use ideas in their arguments for their side that may or may not be borne out by research because other than private organizations, the information isn't there.

The conclusion of the article seems like the obvious starting points that really shouldn't upset anyone: "Policymakers across the country should examine their state’s current laws, and address the gaps that make it too easy for dangerous individuals to arm themselves. This involves requiring background checks on all gun sales; ensuring that domestic abusers do not have access to firearms; and creating mechanisms that allow for the temporary removal of guns from individuals who have demonstrated a risk to themselves or others."

 

[bigb]

Would love to hear her selective data representation around mass shootings, instead of homicides.

No matter your position (the generic your, not you specifically) any data presented would be selective. It’s impossible to bring all the data for both views into a discussion.
I posted this here because the subject got brought up about modeling Australia’s system.

 

[RandyForRubio]

No. They were illegally modified, fully automatic.

Again, I think both should be banned.

I too, think illegally modified guns are bad.

You're still missing the point.

Automatic rifles are so expensive, and require so many checks/paperwork/time that they have never been used in a shooting. We're not talking modified versions, we're talking legit automatic rifles. Do a little research, please. You are showing your ignorance.

There is absolutely no reason to ban something that isn't, and hasn't been a problem.

 

[Archie Moses]

I too, think illegally modified guns are bad.

You're still missing the point.

Automatic rifles are so expensive, and require so many checks/paperwork/time that they have never been used in a shooting. We're not talking modified versions, we're talking legit automatic rifles. Do a little research, please. You are showing your ignorance.

There is absolutely no reason to ban something that isn't, and hasn't been a problem.

What part of I think both types of guns should be banned are you not following?

Do you own a fully automatic rifle by chance?

 

[franklin]

No matter your position (the generic your, not you specifically) any data presented would be selective. It’s impossible to bring all the data for both views into a discussion.
I posted this here because the subject got brought up about modeling Australia’s system.

I've read several studies lately and the amount of mind gimmickry reporting was par the course. Yes, many studies exclude non-terrorist attacks when discussing school shootings and yes many exclude @Wes Mantooth 's good article side of this about in-home violence when discussing mass shootings. And yes, "mass shooting" is a term that who the hell knows what definitive number was decided upon. So yeah, data is parsed.

 

[♪alt13]

not commenting on the specific accuracy of either your statement or Thriller's - - just pointing out that 66% of Americans wanting STRICTER gun control laws does not negate the idea that 85% of Americans might support gun control. The higher number would include those satisfied with current laws who might not favor stricter controls.

Nope that's silly. Nowhere has Thriller ever said that he is happy with current law. You can't argue for stricter gun control and use a group of people who are happy with the current laws as part of your argument.

Again, there's an argument to be made. Instead of making that argument Thriller weakened his position. It drives me crazy when he does this especially when I agree with him.

 

[BabyPeterzz]

No matter your position (the generic your, not you specifically) any data presented would be selective. It’s impossible to bring all the data for both views into a discussion.
I posted this here because the subject got brought up about modeling Australia’s system.

Agreed. The counter argument for the pro-gun side is Switzerland. Also apples and oranges.

But I think for this discussion, and the gun discussion as a whole, would be better served centered around mass shootings and domestic terrorism, as homicide is a problem every modern industrialized nation deals with. Mass shootings not so much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[fishonjazz]

Agreed. The counter argument for the pro-gun side is Switzerland. Also apples and oranges.

But I think for this discussion, and the gun discussion as a whole, would be better served centered around mass shootings and domestic terrorism, as homicide is a problem every modern industrialized nation deals with. Mass shootings not so much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agreed.

 

[bigb]

Agreed. The counter argument for the pro-gun side is Switzerland. Also apples and oranges.

But I think for this discussion, and the gun discussion as a whole, would be better served centered around mass shootings and domestic terrorism, as homicide is a problem every modern industrialized nation deals with. Mass shootings not so much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agreed