The U.S.A. Mass Shootings Thread

The U.S.A. Mass Shootings Thread

Author
Discussion

Halb

53,012 posts

184 months

Monday 2nd September 2019
quotequote all
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_regulation_...
wiki said:
The UK has one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in the world. There were 0.05 recorded intentional homicides committed with a firearm per 100,000 inhabitants in the five years to 2011 (15 to 38 people per year). Gun homicides accounted for 2.4% of all homicides in the year 2011. Office for National Statistics figures show 7,866 offences in which firearms were involved in the year ending March 2015, 2% up on the previous year and the first increase in 10 years. Of these, 19 were fatalities, 10 fewer than the previous year and the lowest since records began in 1969. There was a further rise to 8,399 in the year ending March 2016, the highest number in four years, but significantly lower than the all-time high of 24,094 in 2003/04. Twenty-six resulted in fatal injuries.
Spree killings and mass shootings
Britain has had three spree killings or mass shootings since 1980: the Hungerford massacre of 1987, the Dunblane school massacre of 1996, and the Cumbria shootings of 2010. After Hungerford and Dunblane, firearms legislation was amended, tightening firearms restrictions in the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom Gun legislation has been described by The Huffington Post as "one of the toughest regimes in the world".

Derek Smith

45,703 posts

249 months

Monday 2nd September 2019
quotequote all
Halb said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_regulation_...
wiki said:
The UK has one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in the world. There were 0.05 recorded intentional homicides committed with a firearm per 100,000 inhabitants in the five years to 2011 (15 to 38 people per year). Gun homicides accounted for 2.4% of all homicides in the year 2011. Office for National Statistics figures show 7,866 offences in which firearms were involved in the year ending March 2015, 2% up on the previous year and the first increase in 10 years. Of these, 19 were fatalities, 10 fewer than the previous year and the lowest since records began in 1969. There was a further rise to 8,399 in the year ending March 2016, the highest number in four years, but significantly lower than the all-time high of 24,094 in 2003/04. Twenty-six resulted in fatal injuries.
Spree killings and mass shootings
Britain has had three spree killings or mass shootings since 1980: the Hungerford massacre of 1987, the Dunblane school massacre of 1996, and the Cumbria shootings of 2010. After Hungerford and Dunblane, firearms legislation was amended, tightening firearms restrictions in the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom Gun legislation has been described by The Huffington Post as "one of the toughest regimes in the world".
Some of the 7,866 firearms offences probably consist of certification and possession offences (unless the way of recording crime has changed significantly since end-of-year stats were of importance to me.) My force, with no woundings or deaths from firearms, had a number of firearms offences and the CC was taken to task over it during some meeting or other. Most of these records related to crimes of possession and certification that were discovered by the police when being proactive regarding compliance with the various regulations, something that was added to the CC's annual report in the bewildering belief that anyone read the text.




LimaDelta

6,530 posts

219 months

Monday 2nd September 2019
quotequote all
ferrisbueller said:
LimaDelta said:
djc206 said:
LimaDelta said:
Yes, because since Dunblane gun crime has been completely eradicated from our shores. Our inner city areas have never been safer now that handguns are illegal.
How much more dangerous would they be if they weren’t?
Who knows? But it is disingenuous at best to suggest the knee-jerk reactions to Hungerford and Dunblane have reduced gun crime in the UK. Now only the bad guys have the guns. This is a big part of the argument in the US.
Can you post up the list of mass shootings since?
Oh I see, we are only concerned about mass shootings. The regular kind are fine?

paulguitar

23,533 posts

114 months

Monday 2nd September 2019
quotequote all
ferrisbueller said:
Must be a fluke.

How about Australia since Port Arthur?
Crikey, looks like just one. It's almost as if having tough gun legislation appears to have some kind of link to fewer gun-related deaths!

Bigends

5,424 posts

129 months

Monday 2nd September 2019
quotequote all
Halb said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_regulation_...
wiki said:
The UK has one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in the world. There were 0.05 recorded intentional homicides committed with a firearm per 100,000 inhabitants in the five years to 2011 (15 to 38 people per year). Gun homicides accounted for 2.4% of all homicides in the year 2011. Office for National Statistics figures show 7,866 offences in which firearms were involved in the year ending March 2015, 2% up on the previous year and the first increase in 10 years. Of these, 19 were fatalities, 10 fewer than the previous year and the lowest since records began in 1969. There was a further rise to 8,399 in the year ending March 2016, the highest number in four years, but significantly lower than the all-time high of 24,094 in 2003/04. Twenty-six resulted in fatal injuries.
Spree killings and mass shootings
Britain has had three spree killings or mass shootings since 1980: the Hungerford massacre of 1987, the Dunblane school massacre of 1996, and the Cumbria shootings of 2010. After Hungerford and Dunblane, firearms legislation was amended, tightening firearms restrictions in the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom Gun legislation has been described by The Huffington Post as "one of the toughest regimes in the world".
The vast majority of recorded firearms offences will involve the possession of imitation firearms (not necessarily use) plus possession of tasers and CS type sprays.

Edited by Bigends on Monday 2nd September 11:56

Byker28i

60,142 posts

218 months

Monday 2nd September 2019
quotequote all
The man who killed seven people in Odessa, Texas, over the weekend had been fired from his trucking job hours before the mass shooting, according to multiple reports.

Despite the reports of his firing, police say a motive is still not known for the shooting.

“There are no definitive answers as to motive or reasons at this point, but we are fairly certain that the subject did act alone,” Odessa Police Chief Michael Gerke said at a news conference.
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/459604-te...

Byker28i

60,142 posts

218 months

Monday 2nd September 2019
quotequote all
Texas relaxed a lot of rules on Sunday

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/01/shooting...

TheRainMaker

6,344 posts

243 months

Monday 2nd September 2019
quotequote all
Not a bad day yesterday only 32 Gun deaths, down from 48 the day before.





More mass shootings in the US than days so far this year.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mass-shootings-2019-m...




Edited by TheRainMaker on Monday 2nd September 15:20

WCZ

10,537 posts

195 months

Monday 2nd September 2019
quotequote all
I personally would rather thugs in london etc had knives than all be carrying guns, just my personal preference

J4CKO

41,634 posts

201 months

Monday 2nd September 2019
quotequote all
LimaDelta said:
djc206 said:
LimaDelta said:
Yes, because since Dunblane gun crime has been completely eradicated from our shores. Our inner city areas have never been safer now that handguns are illegal.
How much more dangerous would they be if they weren’t?
Who knows? But it is disingenuous at best to suggest the knee-jerk reactions to Hungerford and Dunblane have reduced gun crime in the UK. Now only the bad guys have the guns. This is a big part of the argument in the US.
So, if we went to US gun laws and ownership, do you think our current gun death rate would, Go Up, Go Down or stay the same ?

I think the fact that we still have firearms offences despite guns being largely outlawed except for specific types, hints at the complete and utter carnage if the Great British public had largely unfettered access to Assault Rifles, hand guns and whatever they fancied, without the understanding Americans have.

As it is, its hard for 99.99 percent plus of the population to get a gun, most actually dont want one, if you arent involved in organised crime, then its very, very unlikely that you will get shot or ever see a gun of any description.

It saddens me that people leave the house and think, keys, phone, wallet and a device to accelerate a lead projectile to a high enough velocity to end someone elses life.







p1stonhead

25,576 posts

168 months

Monday 2nd September 2019
quotequote all
J4CKO said:
LimaDelta said:
djc206 said:
LimaDelta said:
Yes, because since Dunblane gun crime has been completely eradicated from our shores. Our inner city areas have never been safer now that handguns are illegal.
How much more dangerous would they be if they weren’t?
Who knows? But it is disingenuous at best to suggest the knee-jerk reactions to Hungerford and Dunblane have reduced gun crime in the UK. Now only the bad guys have the guns. This is a big part of the argument in the US.
So, if we went to US gun laws and ownership, do you think our current gun death rate would, Go Up, Go Down or stay the same ?

I think the fact that we still have firearms offences despite guns being largely outlawed except for specific types, hints at the complete and utter carnage if the Great British public had largely unfettered access to Assault Rifles, hand guns and whatever they fancied, without the understanding Americans have.

As it is, its hard for 99.99 percent plus of the population to get a gun, most actually dont want one, if you arent involved in organised crime, then its very, very unlikely that you will get shot or ever see a gun of any description.

It saddens me that people leave the house and think, keys, phone, wallet and a device to accelerate a lead projectile to a high enough velocity to end someone elses life.
This. I still feel uneasy when I see armed police at an airport say. I like that they are so uncommon its unnerving to see one. My grandad had a shotgun in rural Ireland but I have never any other type of gun in my life other than on specialist police.

red_slr

17,266 posts

190 months

Monday 2nd September 2019
quotequote all
p1stonhead said:
J4CKO said:
LimaDelta said:
djc206 said:
LimaDelta said:
Yes, because since Dunblane gun crime has been completely eradicated from our shores. Our inner city areas have never been safer now that handguns are illegal.
How much more dangerous would they be if they weren’t?
Who knows? But it is disingenuous at best to suggest the knee-jerk reactions to Hungerford and Dunblane have reduced gun crime in the UK. Now only the bad guys have the guns. This is a big part of the argument in the US.
So, if we went to US gun laws and ownership, do you think our current gun death rate would, Go Up, Go Down or stay the same ?

I think the fact that we still have firearms offences despite guns being largely outlawed except for specific types, hints at the complete and utter carnage if the Great British public had largely unfettered access to Assault Rifles, hand guns and whatever they fancied, without the understanding Americans have.

As it is, its hard for 99.99 percent plus of the population to get a gun, most actually dont want one, if you arent involved in organised crime, then its very, very unlikely that you will get shot or ever see a gun of any description.

It saddens me that people leave the house and think, keys, phone, wallet and a device to accelerate a lead projectile to a high enough velocity to end someone elses life.
This. I still feel uneasy when I see armed police at an airport say. I like that they are so uncommon its unnerving to see one. My grandad had a shotgun in rural Ireland but I have never any other type of gun in my life other than on specialist police.
Which is all fine, but there are just a smidge under 2,000,000 firearms and shotguns in the UK. So about 1 for every 30 people.
There are around 700,000 people who are licenced to own a shotgun or firearm in the UK so about 1 in 100 people.
The rate of ownership has been growing year on year for the last 10 years and we are at peak ownership since 1988 IIRC.

The fact its very rare for anything to happen with a legally held firearm here is a good thing, but it also shows our previous changes to firearms laws have perhaps not been well thought out.

TheRainMaker

6,344 posts

243 months

Monday 2nd September 2019
quotequote all
red_slr said:
The fact its very rare for anything to happen with a legally held firearm here is a good thing, but it also shows our previous changes to firearms laws have perhaps not been well thought out.
Why do you think laws have not been thought out?




Gary C

12,489 posts

180 months

Monday 2nd September 2019
quotequote all
red_slr said:
Which is all fine, but there are just a smidge under 2,000,000 firearms and shotguns in the UK. So about 1 for every 30 people.
There are around 700,000 people who are licenced to own a shotgun or firearm in the UK so about 1 in 100 people.
The rate of ownership has been growing year on year for the last 10 years and we are at peak ownership since 1988 IIRC.

The fact its very rare for anything to happen with a legally held firearm here is a good thing, but it also shows our previous changes to firearms laws have perhaps not been well thought out.
Or, our processes reduce the numbers of legal weapons being bought by unstable and dangerous people.

Though its probably a cultural thing as well.

rscott

14,771 posts

192 months

Monday 2nd September 2019
quotequote all
red_slr said:
Which is all fine, but there are just a smidge under 2,000,000 firearms and shotguns in the UK. So about 1 for every 30 people.
There are around 700,000 people who are licenced to own a shotgun or firearm in the UK so about 1 in 100 people.
The rate of ownership has been growing year on year for the last 10 years and we are at peak ownership since 1988 IIRC.

The fact its very rare for anything to happen with a legally held firearm here is a good thing, but it also shows our previous changes to firearms laws have perhaps not been well thought out.
Surely the fact it's very rare means the laws here are working well and doing a good job of restricting access to firearms?

At least we have decent, searchable, records as to who own firearms here, unlike many parts of the US.

dvs_dave

8,644 posts

226 months

Tuesday 3rd September 2019
quotequote all
Gary C said:
red_slr said:
Can you now see why the vast majority of US gun owners oppose restrictions on rifles?

.
No, not really.

apart from the belief that more guns makes you safer ?
Well yes, that is actually the case.

You’re around half as likely to be the victim of a violent crime in the US than you are in the UK.

However the victim of a violent crime in the US is more likely to be murdered.


djc206

12,362 posts

126 months

Tuesday 3rd September 2019
quotequote all
LimaDelta said:
Who knows? But it is disingenuous at best to suggest the knee-jerk reactions to Hungerford and Dunblane have reduced gun crime in the UK. Now only the bad guys have the guns. This is a big part of the argument in the US.
But fewer of the bad guys can get guns legally (cheaply). It might be part of the argument in the US but the stats suggest it’s not a good one

Byker28i

60,142 posts

218 months

Tuesday 3rd September 2019
quotequote all
rscott said:
Surely the fact it's very rare means the laws here are working well and doing a good job of restricting access to firearms?

At least we have decent, searchable, records as to who own firearms here, unlike many parts of the US.
and you have a visit from the firearms officer to have a chat, see if you're stable, interview you before you get the firearm signed off.
Then we have rules like lockable safes...

Byker28i

60,142 posts

218 months

Tuesday 3rd September 2019
quotequote all
Byker28i said:
Ted Cruz cites the bible

2/x The right to self-defense is recognized repeatedly in the Bible, eg Exodus 22:2: “If a thief is caught breaking in at night & is struck a fatal blow, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed.” (Note, though, verse 3 says it IS murder if during daylight (ie, not self-defense).

https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/116831746885672...


Can anyone knowing fuller american history explain Cruz here:
8/x That’s also why, post Civil War, disarming Black Americans was a critical objective of the KKK, and was memorialized in countless Jim Crow laws—to strip African-Americans of their God-given right to self-defense from violence.
So as no-one answered I went looking and found this interesting article (which also includes the statistic that only 6% of americans have a valid hunting licence)
https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-roots-of-anti-go...

The same author follows up with an article on the 2nd amendment,
https://www.thedailybeast.com/no-the-2nd-amendment...





Edited by Byker28i on Tuesday 3rd September 07:40

Byker28i

60,142 posts

218 months

Tuesday 3rd September 2019
quotequote all
Bret Stephens two years ago wrote a piece on the issues with the second amendment argument, which still is valid today

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/opinion/guns-se...