One responding law enforcement vehicle is a tank?

---

Books @ Amazon
"If only he had used his genius for niceness, instead of Evil." M. Smart

We saw it a little bit on a recent school shooting, but I think they need to quit publishing the names of the people who do this. They need to refer to them as "the coward" so they don't receive the fame that many appear to be looking for. While it won't stop every school shooting it may have an effect on others.

Still at large

Police scanner: https://www.broadcastify.com/listen/ctid/321

This is gong on just south of me. Guess you never know where these things are gonna happen. :(

---

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace." Jimi Hendrix

I didn’t notice it on cbs, cnn, Fox, msnbc, abc,... thanks

I didn’t notice it on cbs, cnn, Fox, msnbc, abc,... thanks

You're not looking very hard.

Seriously, earlier this school year at happened 20 minutes from me.

I’ve always been appalled at these events. That has never been a question. But having it hit so close to home as it did really hit me hard and made me feel even more so for the places where these events occur.

I work in a lab and the doors are badge access only so I don't worry about t hings like mass shootings, but the hospital does, we have classes on what to do.

What kind of world is it we live in where you have classes on mass shootings.

I guess you could say the same thing about the practice for the nuclear bomb attacks in the 70's. Hide under your desk, like that's gonna help.

---

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace." Jimi Hendrix

I work in badged access and we still had active shooter training before the last layoff. As if people losing their jobs isn’t depressing enough.

17 dead

Thoughts and prayers should take care of this and prevent future incidents

Just another day in America Schools.

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

Just found out a good friend's daughter goes to that school. She is home and safe.

---

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace." Jimi Hendrix

Good idea, because we all know gun control won't work, even some of the time.

We've had hundreds of these conversations and nobody on the gun-control side is able to provide a convincing argument as to how gun control could be effectively implemented to stop something like this. Drugs are illegal and yet I imagine there are more drugs in any given school than guns. But let's keep focusing on something that would likely make a minimal difference, if any, versus looking for other solutions that address one of the roots of the problem.

//Good idea, because we all know gun control won't work, even some of the time.//

//Thoughts and prayers should take care of this and prevent future incidents//

Next will be bullshit comments about the NRA when these incidents never seem to involve anyone who is a member of the NRA, or who've been through safety training provided through the NRA.

PLEASE NOTE: I'M NOT AN NRA MEMBER NOR A GUN OWNER.

I'll admit, I've never understood why people throw around snarky comments like the above on the immediate heels of a horrible tragedy. Then we'll see gun control banter enter the political fray with proposals for controls that would not have prevented the incident. Very constructive.

What are you ideas other than smartass comments?

Personally, I would like to see laws that require gun security to be stricter when a troubled youth and/or mentally ill person resides in the house. I know there are issues related to the definition of mentally ill / troubled youth but this particular shooter was well-known to authorities. In Sandy Hook, it was well known, atleast within the family and inner circle, the kid had serious mental issues and had access to locked guns.

Maybe this is a place to start?

How about we outlaw guns like the one used? For starters?

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I think the snark comes from both side of the gun debate being thoroughly frustrated with the stalemate in conversation. You know some idiot is going to come on here saying "maybe we should just ban butter knifes because they dangerous too!!!" Etc. It gets tiresome.

Personally, I don't think there is anything really to do in terms of gun control in the US. The population doesn't want it, and it's not right to force it on them. Also, to be effective gun control would have to be far reaching, drastic and nation wide, which will never happen. But, I do hope strong 2A advocates at least think of those 17 coffins in the ground next time they go target shooting, as the reality is their freedom is paid for in the blood of a lot of innocent people.

I think you're on the right track that responsibility for these sort of things should fall at the feet of those who own or are supplying weapon that get used in these types of events.

Or, just carry on and shrug our shoulders as these events just kind of happen every couple months.

---

Long Chile was a silly place.

Because "assault rifles" account for fewer murders than knives, fists, and feet combined?

https://www.statista.com/...e-us-by-weapon-used/

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

That is an obscene comment and you truly should feel ashamed for making it.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

That'll never work.
#Straya

Or, you could just keep on doing what you're doing and accept that weekly mass shootings are the price you pay.

In the context of being immediately after a school shooting when tempers and emotions are high, sure, I'll give you that maybe it's not the appropriate time for that comment.

It is 100% true though that there is a cost to your right to arms and your culture around guns, and that cost is a lot of lost innocent life.

---

Long Chile was a silly place.

Gun ownership is an incredible responsibility that entails not only safeguarding the firearms, but being proficient in their usage. Responsible gun owners regularly go to the range to ensure then proficiency, which is exactly what they should do. For you to impugn those who take seriously these responsibilities displays your ignorance. You claim that I, acting as a responsible gun owner, should feel shame every time I go to the range as I should? Really? Then fuck you.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Where else in the world do these school shootings happen regularly? The root of the problem is easy access to firearms and americans thinking that a gun is somehow going to solve a problem. which is aligned with some americans and their obsession with guns and the right to 'bare arms'.

I completely agree re: ownership and responsibility.

But your right to practice that responsibility also allows countless others who are irresponsible, reckless, and unstable access to guns.

And no, I don't feel guilt for those who die in car crashes whenever I get behind the wheel. Vehicles are not guns, are not bananas, are not can openers.

---

Long Chile was a silly place.

Why change anything.
Nothing is more American than mass shooting.
The USA is famous in the western world for mass shootings.

Gun sales have been down. This will probably give them a boost.

---

“Read the transcript.”

A few thoughts (because I need to procrastinate just a bit more). Not necessarily at you JSA, but your brought the stats.
* 7105 murders by Handgun, I wonder how many of these guns fall into "Combat Style / Look" variety versus a .38 snubnose that was last cool in a 1960s copshow. (I know nothing about guns, but you know what I am getting at).
* Total guns all types 11,004 versus 2732 for Knives, Personal, Club / Hammer. Guns are designed to kill efficiently. Assault Riffles, Black Guns, old 30-06 with Wood Stocks etc etc etc
I do not know the answer as there are too many guns in the US already out there. Short of a military confiscation door to door (which would not go well) we will always have them in this country. However, it is without question that it is too easy for the wrong people to obtain guns. In addition, everyday more and more of the wrong people have them.
FWIW I am not a gun guy. In most cases, I look at guns the same way as I look at bikes. Fun toys that allow us to escape our day to day lives. However, the person who is 50lbs overweight that buys a P5x because they can, cannot do the same damage as the buy who buys an AR with all of the toys having a bad day or life.

ok back to work now.

---

2017 Cervelo P2
2017 Cervelo S2
itraininla.com
#itraininla

Then address that issue. Don't make asinine comments about people who exercise the responsibility that comes with gun ownership.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

sure. but i thought we were talking about this particular kind of thing. maybe it's my imaginzation, but it seems to me these large-fatality shootings are usually perpetrated with this kind of weapon. your typical murder, sure, you're right. mass shooting deaths, am i under a wrong impression as to the weapon usually used?

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Handguns have been used in more mass shootings than any type of rifle, including "assault rifles."

https://www.cga.ct.gov/.../rpt/2013-R-0057.htm

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

One problem is that for quite a while there has been virtually no time that has not been immediately on the heels of a mass shooting. If you make that the standard you can never have the conversation.

I'm in favor of a coherent system of gun control. But to do it, we are going to need a rewrite of the second amendment. Good luck with that.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

#2 is probably shotguns.

But by the list, I'm very surprised to see a Ruger Mk3

I disagree. There are numerous gun control laws that are not enforced and violations that are not prosecuted. Every time this topic comes up, I post a link to Milwaukee Police Chief Ed Flynn's testimony before Congress when he was asked why he did not pursue the thousands of background check violations and he responded, "We're not in a paper chase."

What??? That's disgusting. That's irresponsible. That should be grounds for prosecution for misconduct in public office.

Give me a break. Enforce the laws on the books. That would be the logical start.

GRAHAM: When almost 80,000 people fail a background check and 44 people are prosecuted, what kind of deterrent is that? I mean, the law obviously is not seeing that as important…. We absolutely do nothing to enforce the laws on the books…

FLYNN: Just for the record, from my point of view, the point of a background check…

GRAHAM: How many cases have you made? How many cases have you made?

FLYNN: It doesn’t matter, it’s a paper thing. I want to stop 76,000 people from getting guns illegally. That’s what a background check does. If you think we’re going to do paperwork prosecutions, you’re wrong. […] We don’t make those cases. We have priorities. We make gun cases. We make 2,000 gun cases a year, senator, that’s our priority. We’re not in a paper chase. We’re trying to prevent the wrong people from buying guns. That’s why we do background checks. If you think I’m going to do a paper chase, then you think I’m going to misuse my resources.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

I don’t see why we’d need a rewrite of the 2A to put controls in place intended to keep guns away from ‘high risk’ individuals given the long list of current gun controls. I could imagine a broad PSA campaign, new laws, and harsh liability for those who enable access for ‘high risk’. To me, today, Sandy Hook, and Columbine MAY have been prevented with this approach.

(Btw, my wife says hello). ; )

I was watching FoxNews after Sandy Hook. They were interviewing an "expert in school shootings." That's the kind of country we live in. If only there was an easy way to significantly reduce the amount of school shootings.

Replying to the last post in the thread:

Violent PEOPLE will commit violent acts.

168 people were killed, including 16 children, when the Alfred P. Murrah federal building was BOMBED.

The BOMBING at the Boston Marathon a few years back did not involve firearms. Common, household pressure cookers.


Brett

---

"Du or Du not-there is no Tri" - Yoda

I don't disagree that enforcing current laws is a good start. But I suspect that my concept of coherent gun control goes somewhat further than your own.

Though I will say there is no obvious and clear answer even in my simple world where I am king.

What we are doing now is clearly not working well. But I think we are more likely to resolve the abortion debate than the firearms debate. Which is to say, not going to happen.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

probably because they are easier to get hold of. it doesn't mean that the other guns don't have the ability to cause more damage.

Twisted Stat... they account for far more mass killings then knives, fists or feet.

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

But, as the statistics show, they are not causing more damage.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

No. Not even a little bit. See my latest response to Slowman. Keep up.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Yup, this is now the American way... Every time one of these happens I comment this is just the American way now.

Oddly I don't get much reaction from either side on it. Because both of them are unwilling to compromise and actually do anything.

I think they passed the no bumpstop law, but even that little thing, I am not sure has been enacted. Sad, but true. America doesn't care, just another day.

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

Sorrrrryyyyy I reply as I read a thread, so your data... Will return to my normal comments on this topic.


Just another day in America. America has accepted this is the way of life.

Move along.

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

See, here is the problem with this debate. Every fucking time we have this debate, we have a display of ignorance on the subject that makes having an intelligent discussion impossible.

People who know nothing about how guns work want to opine on what should and should not be outlawed.

People who do not know the facts about what type of firearms are used most often, even in mass shootings, want to opine on what types of firearms should be banned.

We bitch when health insurance companies opine on patient care over the opinion of the doctors treating the patient. But, then we accept that same level of ignorance on this topic.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Whilst americans continue to display the negative attitudes towards gun control shown in this thread, school shootings will continue to be part of their culture.

Or we could demand law enforcement officials like Democrat Milwaukee Police Chief Ed Flynn enforce the law.

GRAHAM: When almost 80,000 people fail a background check and 44 people are prosecuted, what kind of deterrent is that? I mean, the law obviously is not seeing that as important…. We absolutely do nothing to enforce the laws on the books…

FLYNN: Just for the record, from my point of view, the point of a background check…

GRAHAM: How many cases have you made? How many cases have you made?

FLYNN: It doesn’t matter, it’s a paper thing. I want to stop 76,000 people from getting guns illegally. That’s what a background check does. If you think we’re going to do paperwork prosecutions, you’re wrong. […] We don’t make those cases. We have priorities. We make gun cases. We make 2,000 gun cases a year, senator, that’s our priority. We’re not in a paper chase. We’re trying to prevent the wrong people from buying guns. That’s why we do background checks. If you think I’m going to do a paper chase, then you think I’m going to misuse my resources.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

17 confirmed killed (no word yet on the student/teacher/staff ratio) and unknown number of wounded.

Apparently, the 19-year-old shooter, Nikolas Cruz, had been expelled a few months ago and gave every indication that he was a bomb waiting to go off, including on his various social media pages and sites. But as far as we know, there'd been no intervention, either by law enforcement or social services-type agencies.

Cruz was legally an adult, so I don't know how much could have been done if he wasn't breaking any laws or actively threatening to commit mayhem against either the school or individuals associated with it.

I'm wondering if the school had any active shooter countermeasures or prior training of students and staff. Most likely not.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

Your not willing to give an inch. You can not deny removing XXX type gun would reduce / eliminate some weapons used in mass shootings. As you demonstrated in the other posts, when it comes to stat's around guns you can find stat's to make any point you want... Not worth discussing further..

Nothing is going to be done, the gun side won't give in on anything, and the anti gun folks wont give on allowing guns in gun free zones. Both refuse to move from their position. Both would rather have more of these then give up their position. AKA

Just another day in America. American's have accepted this as normal.

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

Just keep making my point..

Just another day in America.

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

We have evidence that does not work. I posted in a prior thread the statistic from Australia. When Australia effectively banned guns, their mass murder rate remained statistically the same.

There was no statistical decrease in mass murders.

In the US, you are talking about affecting a Constitutional Right, unlike in Australia. If you want to do that, you better show it will have some impact. But, you cannot.

So, you can make these bold assertions, but they are ignorant and unsupported by any evidence.

Let me ask you this: Why do you want to ban some types of firearms when we are not enforcing the current laws? Answer that question, please.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Just keep displaying your ignorance.

Seriously, you just look foolish.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Sad, In this situation it looks like simple see something say something may have prevented this.
Seems like everyone that new this kid expected this to happen.

CDC stepped in and looked at Suicides in Palo Alto even though the County’s rates were below the national rate. So, perhaps if this hits a wealthy, well connected enough community there will be some action. (I can’t believe I actually wrote that - but wonder if anyone disagrees...)

Just about every student interviewed today, post-shooting, that knew Nikolas Cruz said that they all also knew he was the most likely to commit a mass shooting at the school. Privacy laws possibly shielded Cruz from follow-up by law enforcement, and most schools, even in Florida, are famously gun-free zones.

It doesn't appear as if a single person at the school was either armed or able to fight back, although this doesn't mean that they wouldn't have if there'd been time. My shooting instructor, who also teaches various police departments, running their officers through shooting houses and such, has said before that in these types of shootings, the vast majority of victims are shot within the first 5 minutes.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

The median income in Sandy Hook is $106k vs. $126k in Palo Alto vs. $59k median income in the US. Is Sandy Hook considered wealthy enough?

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

My comments were directed at strong 2A advocates, not specifically the portion (minority?) of whom are hyper-responsible in their practices.

You brought guilt in to the discussion. I asked that those who take advantage of their right and are quick to defend it simply think about the aftermath of this shooting. Dont take their right for granted, realize it comes at a cost. Maybe consider your safety practices, maybe think about your buddy's loner unstable son who has access to firearms and say something about it, I don't know. Maybe such reflection brings up emotions of guilt or shame for you, I don't know.

What I can't stand is the collective shrugging of shoulders and just waiting around for the next one to happen.

---

Long Chile was a silly place.

So, some crazed person who is intent on killing people would say "Well, I can't get an AR-15 due to gun laws. So, I guess I won't try to kill anyone now"?

If we removed the AR platform, killers would find another gun to use that was probably just as effective. Then, in a few years people would say "Look, there aren't as many people killed with AR-15's since we outlawed them, so now they're using shotguns. Let's outlaw shotguns and that will finally solve the problem".


I appreciate that everyone is sickened by these acts - we all are.

Ticking time bomb, it looks like. It's easier to say we all would have done something about him than it is to actually do it, though, because most people -- even today -- are more focused on minding their own business and, again; it's not really certain if anyone really could have done anything about him beforehand, absent any credible and serious threats made by him.

I'd be curious to know how and when he obtained his weapon (right now, they think a single AR-15 with multiple mags) and what sort of indications of prior planning he demonstrated, because it's almost a certainty he gave clear indications of his intent to other people, either in the real world or online.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

I would say of the hyper-responsible gun owners, 99.9% are strong 2A advocates. There are over 300M guns in the US. If the majority were not responsible, the population of the US would be dramatically decreased.

You think I brought guilt into the discussion? Really? Here is what you said:

But, I do hope strong 2A advocates at least think of those 17 coffins in the ground next time they go target shooting, as the reality is their freedom is paid for in the blood of a lot of innocent people.

Your position was that, every time I go to the range, I should think about the fact that my ability to go to the range was paid for in the blood of a lot of innocent people. But, you think I brought guilt into the discussion?

Holy shit.


Who here is displaying that attitude?

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Right now, I have the plans -- in PDF form -- for a 9mm handgun made completely from over-the-counter parts, and I've had them for a couple years. You can practically 3D print every part of an AR-15 but the lower, I think.

There's also NO WAY we're going to peel hundreds of millions of legally owned rifles and handguns from the hands of Americans, that much is for certain. In my opinion, we're better off spending our time figuring out how to plan for and protect against, as well as preempt, such mass shooters going forward.

Unfortunately, it's the age we live in and maybe it's time to treat the active shooter scenario and planning for it as something akin to how we used to train schoolkids on how to seek shelter in case of a nuclear attack.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

The lower is one of the easiest parts to 3D print. The part you cannot 3D print is the barrel (and a few other parts).

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

My observation is the anti-2A (anti gun) crowd believe these occurrences don’t affect responsible gun owners as deeply. My further observation is these occurrences affect the responsible more deeply than the others.

When we deal with cars killing people we focus on the people who were responsible. WRT mass shootings we tend to focus on the guns. Why? As JSA said it’s mainly ignorance about guns and responsible ownership.

I grew up hunting, lots of guns in the home, solid safety training; one sister became a decorated marksman(person). Virtually every home in the town had guns and I can’t recall one single murder by gun in this small town.

As I previously stated, my only practical input is to focus on the mentally-Ill and ‘at risk’ individuals and their access. As evidenced in Australia, this may not reduce mass killings but it’s likely to reduce mass shootings IMHO.

What a shithole country!

Funny thing in at least a small way, maybe one side is willing to compromise.

Just did some math and posted to one of our city council persons page, that for about a 1/4 of mil we could put an armed police officer in each school in our city. And much to my surprise its quickly picking up traction, with most of their constitutions who are all VERY strong dem's.

So who knows maybe the citizens of the city I live in do care. Will keep you informed if anything really develops.

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

BK, I wasn't actually proposing a solution, but making a point, that neither side will compromise. So if a bill to pay for 10 Armed guards were placed in each school and we banned, the BD3234s gun were to try to be passed, it would get no support cause the Liberals don't want armed schools and the conservatives dont want their gun touched. Stat's figure ect.. don't matter. If stopping these types of events were really important we would have gotten it done in the 19yrs since Columbine. I'll keep saying it WE DONT CARE. JSA can rattle off all his gun stat's they don't matter, neither side thinks this is enough of an issue to move an inch. Pretty sure we still don't have a law banning Bump stops. We can't even get that done. JUST ANOTHER DAY IN AMERICA.

---

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.

As a non-American, and not a gun guy, these sorts of things used to blow my mind, and I used to believe America would find a way to reduce their gun deaths. As I hit my forties, I now realise, this is just America.

No one cares enough to fix it. I don't even care anymore. Sad to say, I read "17 dead in a school shooting" with the same fatalism as I might read "car crash on the 405". I know America will never change, and this is the price of "freedom".

Carry on killing each other, or at the very least arguing across each other about how this can't ever change (while ignoring the fact that America is pretty much the only nation on the planet to accept mass shootings on basically a monthly basis).

Would love to see those statistics of which you speak... We haven't had a mass shooting here since 1996 (notwithstanding 3 dead in the 2014 Sydney seige), and only a handful of arson attacks that have claimed more than a few lives.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Australia

I love how Americans stand behind their "Constitutional Right" as if it's immutable. It's called an "amendment" ....

<Insert Jim Jeffries standup bit>

Given the way AMENDMENTS to our Constitution come into existence -- and NONE of the first 10 amendments which make up the Bill of Rights has ever come close to being eliminated -- the Second Amendment, as well as the First, Fourth and Fifth, might as well be immutable. And that's for reasons that most non-Americans don't understand nor readily accept.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

<SIGH>

Do the math.

In the 20 years since the Port Arthur massacre, you have had 76 deaths from mass killings. In the 20 years prior to Port Arthur, you had 77 death from mass killing.

Yep, you solved the problem of mass killings ...

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

The fact that you are too ignorant to see that the stats matter show that you are the biggest part of the problem.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

You are right. They are "only amendments." Just like the "right" of women to vote. The "right" to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. The "right" to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. The "right" to be free from slavery. Just amendments. Not immutable.

Wow ...

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

So-called "Constitutional rights" are nothing more than the natural rights each of us are due as a result of our humanity. They can't be taken away -- absent extremely good reason -- nor can an American citizen give them away.

Those rights aren't GIVEN to us by the Constitution. All that document does is acknowledge their existence and then REQUIRE our government to safeguard them on our behalf.

Obviously, a mechanism exists for amending the Constitution but the amendment process is very difficult for good reason. For one, it insulates the document from the momentary passions of the people, such as you get whenever there's a mass shooting like this.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

Consider that different countries have different constitutions that interpret one's natural "rights" differently. Unless you believe USA is the only country that got natural rights exactly right, you must be able to see that there is no such thing as a "natural right". I am not arguing this from a gun control point of view, I am just pointing out that it isn't a given that there is a set of rights that we all have upon birth.

Many would argue whatever "rights" we have are simply bargained as part of a social contract.

Enough with the "gun owners don't care enough to fix it". That's bullshit. The issue is that we do not believe your solution would work. Plain and simple. I'm pretty sure that most of us, especially those of us with children, would jump on to any solution that would actually work. We just do not believe that banning XYZ gun type will make any noticeable difference.

Do you honestly believe that a crazed person with the intention to kill will give up if he can't get an AR-15? I don't. Neither do many other gun owners. To us, banning AR type guns would be no more effective in stopping mass shootings as would banning Vodka. So, why should we give up our rights to follow a plan that will not work.

Tragic. But when it comes from US it is hardly a news.

So because you believe that getting rid of guns won't affect people getting killed, your response is to try... nothing?

https://www.theonion.com/...re-this-r-1823016659

You are onto something. Sometimes I feel that Americans want 100% guarantee of success 100% of the time or they want even try. At least when guns are in question.

Ad Muncher

Thankfully we have the "thoughts and prayers" movement to bring awareness to complicated social issues like this. If that isn't sufficient, we can always put a watermark on our facebook profile pic.

In all seriousness though, I'm disgusted by it all. Politics has so completely polarized the country that we can't solve the most basic problems. Problems that should be absolutely top national priority such as "how to keep our children from being murdered at school".

I said "shithole country" in semi-jest. But it's really becoming like that when we won't even agree to protect our children from being murdered by lunatics. My child doesn't go to public school, and when I retire in 4.5 years, I'm taking my family and moving us out of this fucking insane place. Some of you arrogant fucks will tell me "good riddance" but I will be the one to really mean "good riddance" when I say it back to you as I'm leaving.

With that mentality. Let’s try this. Do away with gun free zones. This should take away the soft targets.
Arm every teacher and teach them to shoot properly. I’d pay more taxes to support the additional costs.

What do you say. Worth a try?

I've worked in public schools for 20 years. Most teachers won't have anything to do with guns. Furthermore, most of them are people that you would not want handling a gun due to total incompetence. These are people who can't even press a power button on a printer when they want something to come out of their magical paper copying machine.

Sure, why not, it's worth a try, they're your kids not mine. I don't expect the results to be good, but in a year or two you'll have some data.

So where are ya'll gonna move to?

/r

---

Steve

If they teach with loaded gun pointed at the door with finger on the trigger, then yes, try it. If they keep the gun anywhere else, then no.

Portugal and/or Denmark depending on my son's university prospects.

<SIGH> indeed. From which gun porn site are you getting this BS? You are truly exhibiting a Trumpian capacity to replace reality with 'alternative facts' that you prefer.

In the 10 years prior to gun reform we had 112 mass killings by guns alone.

In the 23 years since gun reform we have had 76 mass killings from every means in total. Mostly arson, vehicular, & stabbings; with gun mass killings, as Matty notes, have been virtually eliminated.

No, we haven't "solved" the problem of mass killings, but we have massively reduced them, in the period in which they have spiraled ever further out of control in the USA. Along the way, there was a huge drop in armed hold-ups, in domestic violence murders and in suicides (which, all causes, dropped by about 70% - a huge side benefit to the primary motivation for gun reform.)

BTW (and this not for you, JSA, but rather for any rational readers) Matty mentions the Sydney siege in 2014. It is highly instructive of the differences between gun control in our countries. The Sydney perp was an ISIS inspired Muslim radical. He was known to police and anti-terrorism authorities. He had assault and other criminal charges pending. He made the decision to go out in a blaze of inglory, committing suicide by cop, taking as many victims with him as he could and gaining international notoriety.

Had he lived in the US, he'd have done what the Las Vegas gunman recently did - exercise his Constitutionally guaranteed right to collect as many military-grade weapons as he could feasibly transport, find a crowd and start shooting. The Las Vegas outcome was 58 dead and 851 injured.

In Australia, he didn't have the same options. Although the evidence showed he had planned his siege for some time, and executed it with some care, when it came to weapons procurement all that he was able to obtain was an old twin-barrel shotgun, which he sawed down for concealment. No handguns. No "assault" weapons. He was highly motivated, but had limited options.

The result was, when he decided to unleash hell, he shot, and killed, one person. The SWAT team killed him, and horribly, a hostage in a ricochet from a SWAT team shot.
3 victims: one by the perp, one accidental victim and the perp himself constituted the most nationally traumatic shooting incident in the nation in the entire year.

But then we remind ourselves that in the USA in 2017 (& to date in 2018) there were worse mass shootings (4 or more deaths - up to 58) on average every single day. Mass shootings, pretty much daily. In the USA, it needs to have some special media appeal to even gain national reporting. DavHamm is right - it is an entrenched and accepted part of quotidian life for Americans. You see it as inevitable and normal, although it really doesn't need to be.

Independently, 2 people commented to me today that although it is horrible that kids are being slaughtered, it is no longer possible to feel sympathy for the USA as a whole. This is an ongoing self-inflicted wound that you have an implacable determination to continue.

I say it's a great troll post. Not a troll? Most idiotic thing I've read since the last time it was said. More guns. The answer is ALWAYS more guns. Idiotic.

I can't help you if you don't see the differences here. They are stark and they are significant.

The somewhat controversial (or, he at least holds "controversial" views on some things) Australian politician Bob Katter was interviewed by Sky News Australia yesterday about the school shooting tragedy:

"Three years before the Port Arthur ban, there were less gun deaths then the three years after the ban. And that’s a sign in East Germany that the highest death rate with guns was in East Germany, a Communist country. The lowest death threat with guns in Europe was Switzerland, where every single household had a gun. There’s no relationship between gun ownership and death. But there is definitely some sort of serious problem occurring and it seems to be confined to the United States."

He does make a salient point about a problem, and it seems to me it's more to do with us as a people, culturally rather than with guns specifically.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

Exactly. We had quarterly nuclear attack drills. That said, at some point they became like a fire drill. Ho hum because nobody every attacked the school with a nuclear bomb. These gun attacks/murders are recurring.

Agreed that this topic gets snarky quickly. Probably because there is no foreseeable solution.

Not sure about FL but this training/drills is occurring in AZ schools.

I've heard some reports that say the school just had some sort of training session or discussion among staff and teachers about active shooters. Not sure if that's true or not.

Other reports also confirm suspicions about the shooter: He was a giant, flashing red warning sign -- complete with sirens and whistles -- that screamed "I'M GOING TO KILL A LOT OF PEOPLE SOON!!"

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

You do realize that these mass killings were not all shootings, right?

There were 101 people killed up to and including Port Arthur Massacre (I didn't count 2 since it didn't specifically said shooting and it wasn't even needed to beat your argument).

There were 14 due to shooting since then.

Now, please continue going around telling anyone who disagrees with you that they're ignoring and dumb.

Why can't it be our cultural attitude towards guns? Gun advocates always want to be separating the two when they are intricately intertwined.

Well, at least you admit you have not solved the problem of mass killings.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

I cannot believe you continue to miss the point. No one is arguing that the banning of guns would not reduce shootings. Of course it would. But many are arfothe banning of guns would reduce mass killings. There is no evidence of that. We have evidence to the contrary.

If you are going to ask for the elimination of a Constitutional Right, you better be able to show there will be dramatic positive results. If you cannot show a reduction in mass killings then you will get no support for that proposition.

It isn’t that hard to understand.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

I think the problem runs deeper than Americans' historical and traditional acceptance of guns -- handgun and rifle -- in our lives. I mean, many schools used to have shooting clubs, where rifle handling and firing were accepted parts of the curriculum. No one back then was taking those rifles and committing mass murder with them. But as schools became more progressive and less accepting of guns those clubs slowly faded away in many parts of the country.

For myself, my most memorable birthday was my tenth, when my uncle gave me my first .22 rifle for Christmas and we actively began to go 'up North' for small game hunting season. There were responsibly handled guns in our household for as long as I can remember, and I've been a gun owner (including concealed carry) ever since.

I'm sure Steve Hawley, JSA and many others here have had the same or very similar experience. We all were taught that guns were a tool and, like all tools, had to be handled seriously. They weren't toys (we had cap guns for that).

Nowadays, I think there are a variety of cultural input factors that are combining to give these folks the impression that grabbing a handgun (they're what the Virginia Tech shooter, Choi, used to kill 33 people, with a combination of a Glock 19 and a Walther P22) or a rifle (an Armalite-style rifle in .223 caliber, usually) and killing as many people as possible is an acceptable response to the pressures they're dealing with.

I think we're going to find, as well, that as with most of these shooters, Cruz left a bright trail of clues behind him as he made his way towards infamy and villainy. At any one point, if some intervention had occurred, there would have been no shooting.. That makes yesterday's event doubly tragic, in my opinion.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

Just replying to the last post in the thread:

After Columbine, there were those who wanted to place the blame on Marylin Manson.

But "oh no-no-no, that's not it"

Then there were those that wanted to place the blame on video games.

"Oh no-no-no, that's not it"

When the blame turned to firearms: "Yes! That's it!"

The shooter in this most recent scenario wasn't some well adjusted youth who touched a firearm for the first time and suddenly went crazy.

A long series of events occurred that lead to his decision that this was the best way to resolve whatever was going on internally.

I think both "sides" of the gun control debate can agree that that is a problem.

Alcohol prohibition in the 1920's didn't do jack.

Heroin is illegal and my city is flooded with it.

It's not that "Americans" or gun owners don't care, it's just that a very large percentage of the population understands that banning a certain type or even all fire arms won't make the problem of violence go away.

So, everyone: How do we, as a society, set about helping youths who are in crisis before they act out?

My solution: Licensing parents before they are allowed to produce offspring. Children produced by unlicensed parents will become wards of the federal government.

"But wait - that won't work..."

See?

Brett

---

"Du or Du not-there is no Tri" - Yoda

I have not said a single thing about constitutional rights, suggested bans, or anything of the sort.

I just pointed out that while you brag about being so smart and knowledgeable, and 'gave statistics demonstrating gun control does not work', you didn't even bother checking cause of death in the massacres listed. You wrongfully argued that the numbers of gun deaths were the same prior and after Port Arthur and I pointed out it's blatantly false.

My guess is that you're fully aware of that. You were just thinking no one would notice or know that the number of mass murders from guns actually decreased significantly post Port Arthur. It did drastically decrease numbers. It's not that hard to understand, especially with such a superior intellect...

It was reported last night that the school had an armed security guard on site, and that it was a single secured entry facility, as are most public schools today. And now it's the site of one of the worst school shootings in our history.

You're right about it being a symptom of a cultural illness. But that illness runs through an ocean of readily available, high capacity, historically lethal weaponry, and this is what we should expect as a result. Because we're incapable of fixing the former, and unwilling to budge on the latter.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

I don't know about the armed part, but the first victim identified was an assistant football coach and security guard at the school. The shooter took him under fire prior to entering the building.

It's obvious Cruz -- who knew the layout of the school as well as its various responses -- sought to kill those who'd likely have put up resistance, including any security people. He killed a number of people outside before going inside. Reports are also mixed, but some say the school office instituted a lockdown procedure and sounded the alarm. At the same time, Cruz may have pulled the fire alarms in the halls, hoping kids would stream out of their classrooms, at which point he would shoot them.

Finally, it appears he made his escape by throwing away his gear and weapons and mingling with evacuating students as they ran from the building, getting past the initial police cordon that had been emplaced. All of his actions indicate a high degree of planning and a desire to escape without losing his own life.

Now, would he have undertaken an attack on the school absent an ability to obtain his AR-style weapon? We don't know yet. I'm curious where it was he got the rifle, his magazines and the ammunition and other gear he brought with him.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

Show me a single time I said gun control doesn’t work. I have used this argument multiple times in exactly the same manner I used it here. I have steadfastly stated that Australia shows us gun control does not reduce mass killings.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Yup, I have been saying this for a while now. Call them the shooter, or whatever you will but don't name them, that is what they want.

Fuck these assholes.

Every time I see one of these shootings I am thankful that I live in a quiet suburb with little to no gun violence. Two murders in Whitby since I moved here in 2009.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

If the trail was so bright, how did they get permits to have guns? If the trail was so bright, why weren't their guns confiscated? The current gun control system is broken. But hey, let's just yell and scream you ain't takin my guns.

Here's the gun lobby's response to that.


He's either lying about the reason, or Flynn has a valid reason for not using limited resources to go after these denials. What do you think is the truth?

What do you think of a 30- or 60-day waiting period to buy a gun? If a gun purchaser wants to make the argument that the gun is needed immediately (e.g, for defense against an aggrieved spouse), provide a mechanism for police protection if the threat is deemed credible.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

Ask the teachers in your city if they have all the resources they need to teach, then ask if they might have any use for that $250,000.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

I think the gun lobby comment has some truth, but is exaggerated.

I would make it harder to buy a gun. I’m not sure waiting periods are the right answer. If I have 3 guns already, why would I have to wait 30 days for number 4?

But, I have advocated for a longer qualifying process for ownership. I have talked about having to go through the CCW process (or something like that) to get a permit before one can purchase any firearms. I also have no issue with more detailed background checks. There are a lot of procedures of which I would be in favor.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

My teacher wife and I agree on one thing for sure: when they start arming teachers, she's done as a teacher.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

That ought to do it. This sort of thing never happens in places where guns are allowed.

For the record, I don't think that "Gun free zones" work. Nor do I think they are "target areas". Both arguments are absurd.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Does that truth explain Flynn's reluctance to go after those 70,000 denials?

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

My response would be, "where were the required interventions?" This is from a legal as well as psychological and social sense. There were most likely well-defined points along this gentleman's road to evil where someone or some agency was legally required to intervene and yet didn't do so.

This is the curmudgeon in me talking now, but where is the once-widely-enforced respect for authority, including adults, when it comes to kids' lives? I think we've taken the whole "I'm not my brother's keeper" thing way too far these days. The result? We end up with 19-year-old shooters like this who have managed to stumble through their formative years and late adolescence largely unsupervised and with no one to check their basest impulses.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

Sigh. Someone remind me what the FBI is good for these days?



The FBI Was Warned About A School Shooting Threat From Nikolas Cruz In September
In September, a YouTube user named Nikolas Cruz left a comment on a video stating: "I'm going to be a professional school shooter." The video's creator alerted both the FBI and YouTube.
buzzfeed.com

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

i think that what some of these guys are saying is that a "responsible" gun owner means being accepting responsibility for more than just your own use of your own gun. it means recognizing and advocating for limitations on the right to own a firearm, and what kinds of firearms are sold.

there's a reason stephen paddock shot semi automatic rifles with bump stocks out his window in las vegas (and not a handgun). same reason why nikolas cruz brought the gun he brought to his old high school.

outlawing guns which have as their only use mass carnage; outlawing overlarge magazines; and the sales of guns at shows; are reasonable limits. if you don't want to feel under siege from those who feel that the restrictions on gun ownership should be much, much tighter even than this, then the responsible thing the community of responsible gun owners should do is band together with those who see things differently than you do and hash out compromises which will mean limits on gun rights.

alternatively, just say "fuck you" to those who don't see things as you do.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Too much talk of Rights in this thread and not enough talk of defensive use of firearms. A "Right" is an abstract thing, so as an argument isn't going to resonate with the opposition. Until it's a Right, they care about, that is.

What needs to be added to the conversation is the annual 500k to 3million "defensive use of firearms", each one an honest citizen protecting themselves. The spread of the #'s is because the various folks going after the statistic have a dog in the fight.

When I hear folks advocating more gun-laws, I hear folks advocating for a defenseless populace. Of course innocent deaths and injury due to easy access to firearms is a cost. But so is making those 500k to 3million folks defenseless.

Don't ask the guy going to practice his hobby at the range re. the "cost" of his hobby, ask the lady that defended herself with a handgun.

Also, when people go after firearm casualty statistics, they usually don't bother to notice how many of the deaths were innocent. Sure, it's callous, but who here applies the same measuring stick of tragedy to kids in a HS gunned down, to teenage gangbangers gunning each other down? Gun violence becomes an emotional issue when innocents get gunned down, but the #'s are almost all violent criminals and suicides. It's hard to be sympathetic to a violent criminal, and if I decided it was time to take my own life, I certainly wouldn't thank anyone trying to interfere with a decision I perceived to be pretty fundamentally "mine".

---

Books @ Amazon
"If only he had used his genius for niceness, instead of Evil." M. Smart

That is really unfortunate but are we really talking about one throwaway youtube comment (even assuming it's the same guy)? Spend half an hour on youtube or reddit, let alone 4chan and you could find 100 better leads for the FBI to chase.

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

He was turned in by another viewer or user. I'd be curious to know what, if anything, happened after that. Whether a referral was made to local law enforcement, or if the FBI sent an agent around to visit and then file a field interview report or anything at all.

Somehow, we have other three-letter federal intelligence gathering agencies able to pick out the most obscure of details from millions and billions of cellular calls daily, and this fellow managed to skate through unchecked after basically saying he was going to be a school shooter. It's a little concerning, I have to say.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

much more likely for that lady to get killed by her husband's handgun.

the thing that is just incredulous to "us" is that the gun ownership community has created a cult-of-the-gun, and then is trying to tell us (as you are now) that the solution is for the rest of us to join your community, rather than accept any responsibility to rein in the excesses of your community.

were it up to me i'd rather repeal the 2nd amendment than have the situation be as it now is. but i'd be willing to negotiate a compromise. while you can't see it now, there will eventually be a pendulum swing. you're going to eventually lose all your gun ownership rights altogether. there's going to be a #nomore. it'll show up on your doorstep one day and you'll lose it all with breathtaking speed.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I'm not against anything you are saying here. Probably all rights have costs, so I'm not against contemplating them. I'm also not against some tweaks in the gun laws to try and avoid these school shootings.

At the same time, this is the lowest personal cost we've ever had with respect to the 2A in our country's history. It seems counterintuitive to give up what we've always regarded as an important civil right when the cost of that civil right is at its lowest.

For the record, I don't think that "Gun free zones" work. Nor do I think they are "target areas". Both arguments are absurd.


Brian,

Nothing will work on the short to mid-term because the U.S. is too far gone with this. Forget the (somewhat wrongful) interpretation of the constitution - the gun culture is VERY deeply ingrained. I see that.

As a Canadian I struggled for a long time to try and understand it all. A few years ago I arrived at the following philosophical position to put some frame-work to it:

Many Americans (a majority?), honestly and deeply feel that a safer society is a society where more people have more guns. Reasons: 1) If I was going to violently attack someone somehow, I would be crazy to do that knowing that the other person might have a gun on them. 2) That the Good-Gun owners will somehow come to the defense, somehow of society. On the SURFACE, I can see this makes SOME sense. However, the U.S is paying a HUGE price in lost lives for this position with a total number of guns deaths that is proportional off-the-charts compared to all other western democratic counties.

In all those other western democratic countries, we feel that simply having less guns leads to a safer society with less gun deaths. And the numbers do bear this out.

Are there shootings, gun deaths etc . . in Canada (most often with illegal firearms from the U.S.!!), Europe and elsewhere - yes there is, but they are extremely rare! The U.S. has had what are now termed and considered a "mass-shooting" incident, 18 times already this year!!

Again, as hard as it is, forget the constitution, until the U.S. decides that it REALLY wants to decrease gun deaths - this will go on. It will take MASSIVE cultural and societal shifts in attitudes to do that, and that sort of thing only comes from multi-generational time lines - in other words a VERY long time.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

But for now..

I have stopped arguing for tougher gun laws. Nothing the US can do will stop this sort of thing. JSA rightly points out that they aren't willing to enforce the laws that are on the books already. Tougher laws will just be further ignored.

They are fucked.

And I am glad I live here.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

The US is not even remotely close to Switzerland for a multitude of reasons; homogeneity being perhaps the most important.

There are other major differences between the US and comparator, not least of which is access to mental health support and without venturing in to the socialised medicine debate that will have some impact on capturing SOME of those likely to do this slightly earlier.

As a parent i would never want my child in a school with any adult who is armed simply because the presumption would be that those adults are less susceptible to mental health issues than the general population but that is materially not the case so sending your kid to a school where a teacher is every bit as likely to go all falling down as anyone else is ridiculous

You need to check the source of those numbers and compare that to more accurate sources. For instance, this.

Here's one thing to consider when talking about those honest citizens: "In 2014, the FBI reports there were only 224 justifiable homicides involving a private citizen using a firearm. That same year, there were 7,670 criminal gun homicides. Guns were used in 34 criminal homicides for every justifiable homicide."

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

But the right won't budge one little bit when it comes to ANY kind of gun control at all. The lack of any action taken after Sandy Hook drove this point home. As one astute observer said:

"Sandy Hook marked the end of the US gun control debate. Once America decided killing children was bearable, it was over."

I grew up in a small farming/ranching community in Texas. It was common to see pick up trucks with a gun rack in the back window and even a gun in the rack.



Our daily entertainment typically includes guns, shootings, murders. Most nights they are part and parcel of the TV dramas. A great many of our movies too. Oh, video game entertainment takes it to an amped level.

I don't see that changing. I don't see guns being effectively controlled. We just accept and adapt.

The cost of that civil right, according to your chart, is about 100,000 dead people in 2010, not counting non-homicide firearm deaths, of course.

Why, in your opinion, is this an important civil right? What, today, is its value that offsets the 100,000 firearm homicides in 2010?

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

The US is not even remotely close to Switzerland for a multitude of reasons; homogeneity being perhaps the most important.


The Swiss example is always trotted out by Pro-Gun types in the U.S. For some reason their brains are blocked from seeing the massive societal and cultural differences between Switzerland and the U.S.

That model WORKS in Switzerland - for some reason, the Pro-Gun side can't see that it's NOT working in the U.S.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

I agree. I own 5 guns. I am comfortable with the 'right to bear arms' and 'arms control'. We have it now. I don't mind it being stricter.

I did not, in any way, encourage you to join our gun ownership community. I pointed out that the "defensive use of firearms" is a big #, so when we talk about the cost of gun ownership, we need to remember those folks.

Those ladies with angry violent husbands.....you going to tell them that your solution is that they aren't allowed to buy a firearm? That you'll ensure their safety because just like we can't get drugs, once the government has passed it's law, that husband won't be able to get a gun.

The idea that one person can make another defenseless, thru government firearm laws, to me is a very big deal. No one has the right to make another defenseless. Sure, there's always warts in any simplistic idea, but with cleverness the worst of the warts can be dealt with. The alternative is to question the validity of the fundamental right of self defense.

Do you have the right to defend your family from violent attack or not? If so, is it reasonable for your neighbor, thru the ballet box, to strip you of the means of that defense?

---

Books @ Amazon
"If only he had used his genius for niceness, instead of Evil." M. Smart

Those same TV shows and movies, and video games, are a staple in much of the rest of the developed world too.

Why aren't those countries seeing school (or other) shootings occurring with the same frequency?

Are you arguing they are benign?

I'm not arguing anything.

I'm just wondering why those same exact shows, movies and videogames aren't causing kids (or adults) in other countries to go out and shoot up schools, or concerts, or workplaces.

I'm glad, as well, that you live there. ;-)

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

There's all sorts of articles debunking Hemenway's biased work that you linked to. Here's an example. http://reason.com/...esigned-to-measure-d

The FBI stats you listed don't add value. Defensive use of a firearm is almost always a matter of brandishing, not killing the bad guy.

---

Books @ Amazon
"If only he had used his genius for niceness, instead of Evil." M. Smart

i think their solution is to leave their violent husbands; or for their violent husbands to lose their rights to own firearms. i think the wife is going to be safer with no guns in the house, rather than with 2 guns in the house.

i am a part of your community. what i'm saying is that you need to join me, and advocate for a reasonable solution, or you and i both will lose our right to own firearms.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

A smart guy like you can realize that a gun can be used defensively without it causing death. I would venture that most gun owners are reluctant to pull the trigger when threatened, but the mere presence of a visible gun is enough to deter the threat. So the number of justifiable homicides is an inaccurate representation of the defensive use of firearms.

Short of complete and total confiscation, which I guarantee you isn't going to happen in this lifetime, you really are left with the option of dealing with the tactical situation, for lack of a better phrase. So, what are the things we can do to handle the tactical side of the equation?

Saying that more gun laws is the answer is an incomplete solution, because we have plenty of gun laws on the books that no one seems to want to enforce consistently. So again, we have to look at the tactical aspects of this problem, and devise solutions that will protect kids while they're in school.

Is it more and better armed school resources officers? Installation of anti-terror-type barriers and checkpoints? Mandatory active shooter drills and regular training of staff and students?

I also agree that arming teachers simply isn't the solution, nor should teachers be armed. They're teachers, mentors and guides for a reason, and they shouldn't be expected to sling lead with the bad guys.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

I think that there are probably some teachers who would be helpful in situations if they were armed. My father (military veteran) retired after teaching for 35 years. At one point he taught gun safety on the side (not at school). He practiced regularly and was a good shot with hand gun and rifle.

Knowing my dad, he would have faced danger to protect his students. If each school had 2 or 3 teachers like him, and I'm sure many do - then it would be an added layer of safety that could save some lives. While it might not be enough to prevent all the murders, it could reduce them.

No offence but if idiotic scales were not used on that graph it would not look any thing like as good

Try 0 to 3.5 and then see how good it looks

Slowman,

Respectfully, you're an idiot. The only way for a woman to deal with her violent husband is to arm herself to the gills. That's the only way. That's the 'MURICAN WAY!

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

How do you tell beforehand which teachers would be helpful, and which are likely to a) mishandle their weapon or not secure it correctly *all the time*, b) shoot the first person they see with a gun (who might be another teacher), and/or c) kill an innocent bystander through lack of judgment and/or skill? Law enforcement officers, who I would hope receive far more gun and situational training than any teacher would ever get, make mistakes even so.

Sorry, the answer is not "more guns." Especially not teachers.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

At issue isn't "guns or no guns". At issue is "should we add another gun law?"

When we add another drug law, does it stop the ellicit use of narcotics? Have we won the drug war with our laws? Heck, have we won the drug wars with our enforcement?

Guns laws only block honest citizens. We already can't be bothered to enforce many of the gun laws on our books. There isn't a link between the (entirely reasonable) concerns of the anti-gun lobbies, hell they're reasonable concerns for everyone, and the solutions the anti-gun lobbies suggest.

---

Books @ Amazon
"If only he had used his genius for niceness, instead of Evil." M. Smart

You are onto something. Sometimes I feel that Americans want 100% guarantee of success 100% of the time or they want even try. At least when guns are in question.

That's kind of the problem I see. Americans tend to throw around statistics, looking at countries where gun control was attempted (usually Australia) and then use statistics to prove that it doesn't work. At the same time, they will be the first to say Australia is a different country and what happens there can't necessarily work in the U.S. In other words, it didn't work there and even if it did, they're not the same as us so you can't compare apples and oranges.

Then they point to individual cities (Chicago) or states (California) where gun control measures haven't statistically worked, while ignoring the fact that the city or state beside them doesn't have the same controls, making it easier for people to get guns, and cross the border.

The thing I don't understand is that if the U.S is different than other countries, and isolated places of gun control haven't proven successful, why not try a national policy that is geared towards the U.S.? If no one really knows the result since it has never been tried, why not try? It's the complete lack of trying anything that is disturbing and of course, leads to the 'conclusion" that the NRA is in control of the government or that people don't care. Neither is accurate but that is how the conclusion is reached.

Finally, anyone who doesn't know every detail about every kind of gun, or every detail about every statistic on attempts at gun control is quickly labelled ignorant and therefore any intelligent discussions can't be initiated so the whole thing is dismissed until the next time. It's a revolving door with the same arguments and tactics over and over again.

Trump says the shooter was mentally disturbed.

An article I read said that the shooter has been seen sporting a #MAGA hat. (really important and useful information to include in the article BTW...)

Trump:

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Is a gun the only way to defend oneself?

---

Long Chile was a silly place.

I like the concept of compromise where everyone has some skin in the game. To that end, I really think we have a cultural problem. I have kids and have major issues with the current entertainment/media complex.

Are you willing to give up some 1st amendment rights for me to give up some of my 2nd? I'd say we have way too much violence that desensitizes people portrayed in movies, video games, and on TV.

No. A 100 pound woman should simply learn karate to be able to defend herself against her 250 pound husband. And, we know that restraining orders always work /pink

We can probably count on one hand the number of persons on this thread who have actually taken and returned fire, and none on this thread that had to face what teachers had to face yesterday. No one can predict just who'd perform as expected, though training, training and more training can help reduce the odds that someone who's expected to mount a concerted defense won't simply fold when taken under fire.

This problem of school shootings is a hugely tough nut to crack. As I pointed out earlier in the thread, they're not just limited to rifles, either. The Virginia Tech shooter used two handguns and managed to kill 33 students and instructors (not sure if he's included in that number, as he shot himself dead once he'd carried out his evil).

An Armalite-style rifle is a .223 caliber, slightly larger than your classic .22 caliber rifle used to hunt small game. It's known as a "modern sporting rifle" and it's a hugely effective home defense weapon and is used increasingly in the hunting of small game and even larger game. There have been a number of instances here in the Detroit area over the last several years where homeowners equipped with an AR-type rifle ("AR" stands for "Armalite," not "Automatic Rifle") have chased away or fired at home invaders and other intruders.

It is not a true "assault rifle," a term that I'd never heard prior to 1994. It surely resembles a US military M16A2 to M4 infantry rifle but it in no way, shape or form can perform as that rifle does.

I and my wife have a few different models of AR rifles for home defense (I've said before that I conceal carry and I don't go ANYWHERE in Detroit without carrying), and I wouldn't willingly give up the AR precisely because it does work as well as advertised. It's truly a "scary black rifle" that, to me, has done more to discourage the random acts of random bad guys than any beat or patrol cop making intermittent rounds has done. The police simply aren't there to protect individual lives and they also simply can't be there in time if the balloon goes up, as we found out (yet again) yesterday.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

The gun has surely made it possible for a 100-pound woman to defend herself against a 250-pound man, though the movies do their best to convince viewers that some 100-pound woman actually has a chance in a fight against a man outweighing her by 50, 75, 100 or even more pounds.

There's an old saying that God created man, but Sam Colt made them all equal. Me, I'm getting too old to carry a cop around on my back. Which is why I carry a concealed handgun.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

Do military veterans as a rule suffer more or less mental illness than the general population?

Your father or three of him do not policy, or at least sensible policy make.

The old trope of Australia is rolled out as an example of how it does not work. Try post hungerford in the UK.

The reality is, and i could give zero fucks about this one way or another, at this point the US as a rule tolerates the risk associated with kids being shot at school.

At some point it won't and at that point in time when laws start to be enforced they won't be the laws currently on the books but new ones as a result of the tolerance pendulum swinging the other way.

In my lifetime I've gone from, to use the pejorative, gays, queers, homosexuals being a marginalised second class ostracized by most of mainstream society. In less than two generations my friends are married and enjoy the same rights as I do. If you do not think the gun debate can not go the same way and choose not to constructively take part in it, you will get fucked (metaphorically not literally ;))

There will come a tipping point. The US is not the conservative Christian right wing country it may once have been and as more liberal values pervade gun ownership will increasingly become a literal target

It may not be my life time, but I think people's intolerance of the bull shit arguments rolled out around it will increasingly fray amd then people will have wished they gave up the ar15 to keep the handgun

I'm not arguing for more gun laws. They are pointless given our current society. I'm arguing for more informed citizens who realize that guns aren't needed for 99.9999% of the population, nor are they needed to defend democracy from their own government, and for those citizens to stop listening to the propaganda that pushes those myths in order to perpetuate the gun industry's profits.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

Yeah but don't you live in Detroit? I'd be walking around armed like Rambo if I lived in Detroit ;-).

---

Long Chile was a silly place.

That same desensitization doesn't lead to mass shootings in other countries, does it?

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

If you can't see the ridiculously obvious flaw in your argument I'm not going to waste my time holding your hand and spelling it out for you.

Now carry on waiting for the next mass shooting.

---

Long Chile was a silly place.

My wife is an elementary school teacher. Besides shelter in place and that type of training you know what they were outfitted for self defense this year? Lacrosse balls ! I shit you not. Each room is stocked with 3 - 5 lacrosse balls for the teachers to throw at an attacker in order to what I was told "distract them". That is frightening to me as a husband and as a father with kids in school.

It's called A L I C E and I believe it's part of a trend that teaches fighting back if no other alternative. But seriously , lacrosse balls.

---

"I think I've cracked the code. double letters are cheaters except for perfect squares (a, d, i, p and y). So Leddy isn't a cheater... "

Hahahahahahaha! Thanks for the pro tip! ;-)

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

We are not talking about initial denials. At least that was not the question posed to Flynn. Flynn was asked how many cases he prosecuted. Flynn said he does not pursue ANY of those cases b/c they are "paper prosecutions."

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

No, in other countries they're running around doing their mass killings with hammers, pressure cookers and knives. I think that's how the argument goes anyway.

There are many of us here in the LR who do support more actions to ensure safe gun ownership. I, personally, have expressed the view, not only in this thread, but in others, that some check akin to the CCW application process may be in order.

But, that's not what he said and you know it.

Here is part of the problem. You see the scary black rifles as evil and serving no legit purpose.

Might be a step.

How do you think guns are sold at gun show?


Are you not following my responses, and those of others, in this thread?


Nice try. Here is what he said:

But, I do hope strong 2A advocates at least think of those 17 coffins in the ground next time they go target shooting, as the reality is their freedom is paid for in the blood of a lot of innocent people.

You that is merely not seeing things as I do? Really? You do not see this comment as over-the-line?

Pathetic effort on your part.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpdt7omPoa0

FWIW - it's important to note when Trump goes on one of these numbers/facts rants, he's wrong, lying or making it up with every number and fact!

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

What I hate about the 'violent husband's defense:

Many people advocating for poor 100lbs Ms muppet's right to self defense are also the ones saying to be a responsible gun owner one must spend considerable time and resources learning about guns, target shooting, etc. Not to mention the money spent on the gun itself, said training, safes, etc.

So, either to defend herself Ms muppet must spend a lot of time and money making herself profecient in firearms safety and proper use (which, at that point one could argue she could be as well served spending that time and money on other avenues of defense training) or just allow anyone to go out and buy a gun and have the free for all the US now has.

Can't have it both ways.

---

Long Chile was a silly place.

First and foremost, yes, anyone who purchases a gun for self-defense needs to put in the time and training to be proficient. Second, abusive/violent members in the household are usually bigger/stronger than the victim. Therefore, if the victim is not highly proficient with the firearm, then introducing a firearm into the household puts the victim in MORE danger as the firearm can be taken and used against the victim. Finally, despite what we saw Jennifer Lopez do in Enough, no amount of self-defense training is going to level the playing field between a 100lb woman and a 200lb man in hand-to-hand combat. A gun levels that playing field but ONLY if the owner is highly proficient with it.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

your last 2 responses that i've read end with "fuck you" (to someone else) and your response above to me. my guess (and maybe i'm wrong, we'll see) is that we'll be hitting a cultural tipping point on a couple of issues sometime this generation. one is climate change. another is gun laws. a critical mass of an informed society is going to realize it's been had by moneyed interests, and the price paid to protect corporate profits is too high.

tho i don't think either my post or the other warranted the response, fuck you and pathetic effort works fine for you today. the time is coming when we'll all have gotten fuck you one too many times, and the resultant set of laws will be way more restrictive than you want it to be.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Only part way through this, but as someone said prior to your posts, stop using the shooters name and just refer to them as an anonymous being or use a derogatory term.

You sir, are giving these people the infamy they crave.

Once.

Post 18 was BCtriguy1 making the obscene comment (i.e., But, I do hope strong 2A advocates at least think of those 17 coffins in the ground next time they go target shooting, as the reality is their freedom is paid for in the blood of a lot of innocent people.) to which I responded, to him: "That is an obscene comment and you truly should feel ashamed for making it."

Post 22 was BCtriguy1 doubling down on his comment in Post 18. Post 23 was my response to BCtriguy1 doubling-down on his obscene comment in Post 18. Post 23 was my one and only time saying "fuck you" and I stand by the comment in response to BCtriguy1's original statement in Post 18.

You want to paint me as saying "fuck you" to people with whom I disagree. You are completely and utterly wrong. My "fuck you" was to BCtriguy1 (who I like a lot) not because we do not agree on a topic, but because of his obscene statement.

I'm not sure why you are falsely claiming I have acted any differently and I really do not understand why you think I said "fuck you" to you. I will reiterate my point to you, however - your attempt to paint me in this negative light is truly pathetic.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

I'd be interested in seeing the backup for those numbers. That range indicates an average of 1,370 to 8,220 "defensive use of firearms" incidents EACH AND EVERY DAY. Sorry, that doesn't seem remotely plausible.

if i can reboot, here is where i think the problem lies with these big magazines and semi auto rifles. both sides talk about the "legitimate" uses of guns (self-defense against a perp, hunting, etc.).

but i think the "legitimate" use for these other mayhem producing weapons is to protect the civilian against the govt. one might consider that sedition or treason, but that seems to me what was contemplated in the 2nd amendment. if you read the bill of rights - prohibition against a citizen's forced quartering of soldiers in his house - each of these articles speaks to states that had had enough of colonization, and wanted to protect their citizens from a new govt they hadn't yet seen in action. okay. fair enough.

but, 250 years in, are we still in that same place? do we still need to arm ourselves against our govt? because i don't see any other valid reason for the militarization of our citizenry. we dance around this in our debate. democrats talk about the legitimate use of the gun and omit entirely what i think is the elephant in the room: the view that this is a legitimate reason for gun ownership.

i don't feel we are in that same place. we've had a quarter of a millennium worth of the american experiment. i think the 2nd amendment should be amended to reflect this, or we ought to have a reasonable interpretation of what statutes can limit the 2nd amendment.

ironically, the very same side that arms itself to the teeth to protect itself against govt overreach tends to be the bloc most likely to vote for the side that is least interested in husbanding the other 9 articles in the bill of rights.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

It's in the CDC report:

"defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year."

https://www.nap.edu/read/18319/chapter/1

---

---

"100% of the people who confuse correlation and causation end up dying."

I agree with all of this so far.

This is an interesting discussion, given the last two Presidents, especially the current President. Now, many (myself included) were quite taken aback by President Obama's exercise of Executive Power. Except for the tinfoil hat types, it was never to the point where people felt the need to take up arms. I certainly am not saying that. But, there were questions about how far that power would be taken.

Contrast that to President Trump. Do you believe President Trump will push the power of the Office outside its proper scope? I think it is possible. MANY on the Left think it is inevitable (if it hasn't already). Again, I do not see this rising to the level of citizens taking up arms. But, I find it ironic many on the Left are talking civil disobedience and pushing for an overthrow (albeit via lawful impeachment) of the President.

So, do we still need this? I dunno. Maybe we feel we do not need that possibility b/c it has always been present and has kept the gubment in check.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

but, see, here is the wacky thing about this. the democrats should be the ones arming themselves to the teeth in this scenario. trump has shown himself to be uninterested in judicial independence, he wants the ability to easily sue the media into submission, and so forth.

the democrats are saying no, a bazooka in every home is not the proper response. rather, raising up in all of us the understanding that we're a country of laws not men, that we settle our disputes peacefully, that is the proper solution. while the democrats may be on the wrong side of policy, they seem on the right side of process. but i'm willing to hear a rebuttal and, in either case, i do think this is a missing backdrop to the gun rights discussion.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I agree. But, there are sheep and there are sheep dogs and you will never see the sheep standing post.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Well, that survey admits that there is controversy on those number (see below). And there are others who strongly disagree. Like I said, it's simply not plausible. If it were happening 5,000 time a day, don't you think it would be in the news more often?

http://www.vacps.org/public-policy/the-contradictions-of-kleck


https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearm-researcher-surveys/





Defensive Use of Guns
Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed (Cook and Ludwig, 1996; Kleck, 2001a). Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million (Kleck, 2001a), in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008 (BJS, 2010). On the other hand, some scholars point to a radically lower estimate of only 108,000 annual defensive uses based on the National Crime Victimization Survey (Cook et al., 1997). The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field. The estimate of 3 million defensive uses per year is based on an extrapolation from a small number of responses taken from more than 19 national surveys. The former estimate of 108,000 is difficult to interpret because respondents were not asked specifically about defensive gun use.
A different issue is whether defensive uses of guns, however numerous or rare they may be, are effective in preventing injury to the gun-wielding crime victim. Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual
Page 16
Suggested Citation:"Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence." Institute of Medicine and . 2013. Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18319.
×
Save[/url]
Cancel[/url]
[/url]
defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was “used” by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies (Kleck, 1988; Kleck and DeLone, 1993; Southwick, 2000; Tark and Kleck, 2004). Effectiveness of defensive tactics, however, is likely to vary across types of victims, types of offenders, and circumstances of the crime, so further research is needed both to explore these contingencies and to confirm or discount earlier findings.
Even when defensive use of guns is effective in averting death or injury for the gun user in cases of crime, it is still possible that keeping a gun in the home or carrying a gun in public—concealed or open carry—may have a different net effect on the rate of injury. For example, if gun ownership raises the risk of suicide, homicide, or the use of weapons by those who invade the homes of gun owners, this could cancel or outweigh the beneficial effects of defensive gun use (Kellermann et al., 1992, 1993, 1995). Although some early studies were published that relate to this issue, they were not conclusive, and this is a sufficiently important question that it merits additional, careful exploration.

I've been slipping in and out on that one with this fellow. Sometimes, I've been calling him by his name and sometimes just "the shooter." But I absolutely agree that the one thing this guy craves is the infamy and notoriety. No more names now.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

Why did you change and misrepresent what I wrote?

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

So: Has anyone's mind -- pro-gun or anti-gun -- been changed as regards the issues under discussion?

Didn't think so. I'd say that'll be the case nationwide, as well -- absent a few do-gooders on either side of the equation.

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

How about the CDC?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/01/16/the-study-that-gun-rights-activists-keep-citing-but-completely-misunderstand/?utm_term=.12f89d1e1319


Cliffnotes on CDC report:

• Gun statistics are highly politicized. That is to say, both sides tend to juggle the variables to get the outcome that they want.
• Defensive gun use estimates range from 100k to 3 million annually.

---

Books @ Amazon
"If only he had used his genius for niceness, instead of Evil." M. Smart

I've never understood this line of reasoning. Does anyone think that the reason a president doesn't become a dictator is because he's worried about the handguns some people own? If the military really wanted to take you out, does owning an assault weapon make a difference?

As Dan said, it made a kind of sense 250 years ago when the farmer and the army could be equally well armed, but that balance is at least a century out of date and yet somehow we haven't sprouted a dictatorship.

But I'm willing to be shown I'm wrong.

Dan raised the question, I did not. I do not believe you are reading Dan's comments properly.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

"In the choice between changing ones mind and proving there's no need to do so, most people get busy on the proof." - John Kenneth Galbraith

Then there's this, which is why I now generally try to disengage from these debates (though, clearly with limited success today):

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/believe

---

---

"100% of the people who confuse correlation and causation end up dying."

Regarding your "fuck you", these are your words:

You claim that I, acting as a responsible gun owner, should feel shame every time I go to the range as I should? Really? Then fuck you.

But I did not claim that. Read that obscene statement again. I claimed that strong 2A supporters (not all of whom I'm sure take their responsibility as seriously as some, like yourself, do) should absolutely have the aftermath of this shooting on their minds next time they exercise their rights. With rights come responsibilities. This one being a particularly heavy responsibility, with a heavy cost, and not something to take lightly, IMO.

I think slowman nicely distilled my thoughts when he said something akin to responsible gun owners taking ownership and coming up with solutions to some of the problems that stem from the ability to easily obtain guns.

---

Long Chile was a silly place.