Can America be fixed?
- Thread starter Dozer
- Start date
I don't really see how quibbling over definitions of what kind of shooting is which is important at this point. Shitloads of kids have been gunned down at school, by people with very powerful weapons which are easily obtained. I don't think there needs to be a threshold of children killed before it's defined as being a serious issue as opposed to being an unfortunate incident.
Do we need to have an economist work out the cost to the economy through lost productivity from all of the trauma in the families and communities affected? This isn't just numbers.
Surely we can agree that it's a massive problem to which, so far, no acceptable solution has been enacted.
I thought that was implicit in my previous posts. Assault rifles like the AR-15, and whatever other similar weapons are currently easily available should not be for the average punter to take home and do whatever he likes with.
I mean you could ban sales to teenagers - raise it to age 21 and there you go...there's a way I propose for teenagers not to be easily able to get an AR-15.
Or perhaps the average punter needs to go through extensive training and regular background checks, or he has to keep it at the gun club/shooting range. There's no doubt plenty of proposals that have been prepared by experts in the field out there already.
The fact that there are three million AR-15s in circulation obviously means it's not practical to retrieve them all. But you could at least start by controlling heavily who can buy a new one, and ditto with used ones through gun shops and shows.
Do you think the current regulations are optimum?
Don't patronise me.
Where else in the western world do shootings like this go on with such regularity?
I just don't see how the easy access to automatic weapons can be considered basically irrelevant to the problem
Z
Zaf
Guest
Removed by user
Last edited by a moderator:
Boom King
downloaded a pic of moorey's bruised arse
Effected as opposed to affected is pretty idiotic, that's for sure.
Sorry, but I think the significance goes well beyond the number of fatalities. I know where you want to go with this: the percentage of mass shootings is small compared to the bigger picture, and therefore the response should be proportionate to that.
In that sense, I can't 'consent' to the use of the numbers because I simply don't think they reflect what effect these incidents have on the larger community.
If I wanted to argue this in a statistical way, I would suggest we calculate the cost to the economy in lost productivity and ruined lives all the way through extended families of the victims, and every single kid and teacher who was there on the day. I'm sure the amount would be staggering.
You don't give much away about what you think about these incidents beyond a detached analysis of a narrow set of facts. I suspect we have a very different threshold at which we think drastic action needs to be taken, and for me it has passed and for you it has not. So be it.
Z
Zaf
Guest
Removed by user
Last edited by a moderator:
pink poodle
気が狂っている男
Oh...this shit again.
Z
Zaf
Guest
Removed by user
Last edited by a moderator:
ctguru
Likes Bikes and Dirt
danncam
Likes Dirt
Zaf, some good news here, via a meta analysis, that suggests there are ways to further drop homicide and suicide rates.
https://www.sciencealert.com/scientific-evidence-that-stricter-gun-control-works-saves-lives
Further to the link between mental illhealth and Suicide, that is correct in many cases. However, many men Suicide in a abrupt way, without any mental illhealth background, due to anger or grief. Sadly guns hugely increase the success of a Suicide attempt.
There is good work here in Australia on the issue of middle aged and older men and suicide. Luckily we don't have to deal with the easy access to guns and ammo when the personal shit hits the fan (divorce, death of a loved one, redundancy and so on).
danncam
Likes Dirt
I assume his response to each mass shooting in the immediate sense is the very helpful thoughts and prayers.
Z
Zaf
Guest
Removed by user
Last edited by a moderator:
For sure.
Not to say that there are measurable levels of grief; any parent will be devastated by that loss. Again, this is not about numbers.
If someone loses a loved one to illness, often there is the opportunity to say goodbye in some form. Not here.
If hundreds of children witness their classmates being shot to bits, there is a much bigger picture here.
One child dead does not simply equal one unit of trauma requiring one unit of giving a shit.
Am I missing something fundamental here? If the law permits access to bigger, faster, nastier weapons then at some point those will be involved in a mass killing. Whether it is mental health or a jihad or someone's coffee had too much froth the nastiest machine will get used. So if that was a thermonuclear grenade then the numbers killed and injured will be higher than if it was a handful of gravel.
Of course access to automatic and semi automatic weapons makes things worse than access to single shot rifles.
Of course access to automatic and semi automatic weapons makes things worse than access to single shot rifles.
Nambra
Definitely should have gone to specsavers
I suspect you're not a parent with that statement Zaf, but I won't presume anything.
There will always be grief, but cause of death will be a factor. If a child decides to take up a pursuit such as SCUBA diving, motor racing, skydiving or even MTB, acknowledging the associated risks and happens to die in the undertaking of that pursuit, it is less senseless as that child chose to take up that activity despite the risks involved.
A child senselessly murdered whilst in class at school, by someone with a semi-automatic rifle (or any gun for that matter) is going to cause greater grief, and outrage, because going to school isn't and shouldn't be considered a high risk activity. Of course we can't stop someone from choosing to take a life (unless Minority Report becomes a reality), however the provision of ready access to a very effective means of carrying out that choice makes it that much easier for a person to do so.
You might have missed my earlier post, and Tubbsy has asked something similar - can you explain your own motivations behind your points of view? The objective presentation of facts and statistics is one thing, but you seem guarded as to why you are actually taking the position you are. Facts and figures alone don't tell the full story - the point Tubbsy is making. Look at the number of gun related deaths in Japan in 2014; just 6 in a population of 127 million. Statisically that makes Japan a pretty safe place, but what if those six deaths were your friends or relatives, who were just sitting in a park, or waiting at a bus stop, or in class at school? There's not much solace in statistics in that scenario.
Z
Zaf
Guest
Removed by user
Last edited by a moderator:
ozzybmx
taking a shit with my boobs out
With depression, anxiety and suicide rates at an all time high, the impact of having a negative experiences on social media without even leaving the house, spending too much time living in awe at other people's lives and the unrealistic perception that there are perfect people out there... and that you are not a perfect person. Can only see these mass shootings getting more and more common.