The U.S.A. Mass Shootings Thread
Discussion
Castrol for a knave said:
Byker28i said:
Its the same tired excuses he makes
We have doctors checks to make sure we don't have a history of mental issues. We have checks on the house and interviews for any firearm, shotgun or rifle etc.
Knife crime, around 41000 offences in the latest stats, 224 deaths with a sharp instrument, which is knives, broken bottles, screwdrivers etc
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-brie...
Yet in the US, around 54% of deaths, over 24,000 are suicides... 79% of all murders are with guns
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-4148808...
The whole knife argument, when applied to gun ownership is a squirrel.We have doctors checks to make sure we don't have a history of mental issues. We have checks on the house and interviews for any firearm, shotgun or rifle etc.
Knife crime, around 41000 offences in the latest stats, 224 deaths with a sharp instrument, which is knives, broken bottles, screwdrivers etc
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-brie...
Yet in the US, around 54% of deaths, over 24,000 are suicides... 79% of all murders are with guns
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-4148808...
Like the whole "you could kill someone with a baseball bat, so why ban guns"?
Because you can't kill someone and several others, from 150m with a baseball bat
Id rather crazy people had access to neither, but if it has to be one then let it be a knife. Far less chance of multiple deaths.
g4ry13 said:
ZedLeg said:
When are people going to stop calling these killers mentally unstable loners and look towards the powerful cultural figures who are radicalising them?
This works both ways? dvs_dave said:
Money plays it’s part for sure,...
Who's taken the most from the NRAhttps://elections.bradyunited.org/take-action/nra-...
98% to Republicans
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-as...
Then that russian $30m spent on trumps campaign...
https://fortune.com/2019/08/21/how-much-did-nra-co...
Byker28i said:
dvs_dave said:
Money plays it’s part for sure,...
Who's taken the most from the NRAhttps://elections.bradyunited.org/take-action/nra-...
98% to Republicans
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-as...
Then that russian $30m spent on trumps campaign...
https://fortune.com/2019/08/21/how-much-did-nra-co...
rscott said:
Yep, it didn't work properly in Plymouth, so they're reviewing the system and changing it to prevent it happening again. Just like Switzerland (a country with massive gun ownership compared to the UK) did when they had a mass shooting.
In fact, most countries react to mass shootings by reviewing the rules and changing them to reduce the odds of it happening again. Only one major Western country seems unable to do this.
The UK had completely adequate firearms laws prior to Dunblane, Hungerford and Plymouth (ie availability of semi-automatics and pistols). In fact, most countries react to mass shootings by reviewing the rules and changing them to reduce the odds of it happening again. Only one major Western country seems unable to do this.
The people who carried out those murders had legally owned firearms, but were known nutters, kiddy fiddlers and thugs. Davison (Plymouth), unprovoked, assaulted a man and a pregnant woman outside a supermarket.
The police did not follow their own rules and the Home Office's rules by allowing them to have firearms/shotguns.
Sadly it seems another system failure rather than a lack of appropriate gun control laws is at least partly to blame for this one. There were clear warning signs that should have been appropriately acted upon.
Buffalo Shooting: Suspect Was Held For Mental Health Evaluation Last Year
As always, you can have as many laws, controls and procedures in place as you like. It’s all for naught if they’re not followed or enforced.
Buffalo Shooting: Suspect Was Held For Mental Health Evaluation Last Year
As always, you can have as many laws, controls and procedures in place as you like. It’s all for naught if they’re not followed or enforced.
ZedLeg said:
I’m talking about people like Trump, Tucker Carlson and other right wing commentators who have been promoting replacement theory and other white supremacist dog whistles to national audiences for years.
Not sure what rappers have to do with white supremacist mass killers.
You didn't say "white supremacists". Are white supremacists the only ones doing mass shootings? Do words only have the power to coerce people into doing bad things if they are from people one doesn't like?Not sure what rappers have to do with white supremacist mass killers.
I mention "rappers" as it seems to me that it is a genre that (in part) seems to push gun/violence culture (amongst other things), and likely also has a very large reach....
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Is that "190" shooters, killing 200+/injuring 850+? Nationally it's a tiny, tiny fraction of the population. Understandably it makes the news, and something is clearly not right....but it's easy to see how, as an example, the pro-gun lobby would argue that there is no need for more stringent measures.It's also difficult to argue that the spoken word from central figures is having a material impact on such things.
To ZedLeg's point, I also wonder how many of the killers are "white supremacists".
Iminquarantine said:
Murph7355 said:
To ZedLeg's point, I also wonder how many of the killers are "white supremacists".
Quite a lot; from what I see over recent years (not necessarily 20-ish years ago), the major perpetrators of terrorism in the developed, western world are white racists. https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publicatio...
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/12/us/politics/dom...
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/sep/08/po...
Murph7355 said:
Is that "190" shooters, killing 200+/injuring 850+? Nationally it's a tiny, tiny fraction of the population.
But it's a far, far larger proportion of the population than anywhere else in the developed world. "Let's handwave away hundreds of mass shooting deaths and refuse to address the underlying causes because hey, it's not that big a proportion of the population dying every year" seems a slightly bonkers approach to me. HM-2 said:
Murph7355 said:
Is that "190" shooters, killing 200+/injuring 850+? Nationally it's a tiny, tiny fraction of the population.
But it's a far, far larger proportion of the population than anywhere else in the developed world. "Let's handwave away hundreds of mass shooting deaths and refuse to address the underlying causes because hey, it's not that big a proportion of the population dying every year" seems a slightly bonkers approach to me. 
Iminquarantine said:
rscott said:
Yep, it didn't work properly in Plymouth, so they're reviewing the system and changing it to prevent it happening again. Just like Switzerland (a country with massive gun ownership compared to the UK) did when they had a mass shooting.
In fact, most countries react to mass shootings by reviewing the rules and changing them to reduce the odds of it happening again. Only one major Western country seems unable to do this.
The UK had completely adequate firearms laws prior to Dunblane, Hungerford and Plymouth (ie availability of semi-automatics and pistols). In fact, most countries react to mass shootings by reviewing the rules and changing them to reduce the odds of it happening again. Only one major Western country seems unable to do this.
The people who carried out those murders had legally owned firearms, but were known nutters, kiddy fiddlers and thugs. Davison (Plymouth), unprovoked, assaulted a man and a pregnant woman outside a supermarket.
The police did not follow their own rules and the Home Office's rules by allowing them to have firearms/shotguns.
dvs_dave said:
As always, you can have as many laws, controls and procedures in place as you like. It’s all for naught if they’re not followed or enforced.
The UK Government have a long history of taking failure to properly enforce existing laws as an excuse to "tighten up" the law, ie. stitch up the law abiding firearms owners even further on a wave of public anti gun sentiment.Mind you, this isn't entirely restricted to firearms, that other villain, the car driver, is also a victim of this. Get a car full of "lads" out of it on drink and drugs tearing down a country road that run out of talent whilst doing 90 mph on a 60 mph road and it totally justifies the imposition of a 40 mph limit, because that would have obviously stopped them.
HM-2 said:
Murph7355 said:
Is that "190" shooters, killing 200+/injuring 850+? Nationally it's a tiny, tiny fraction of the population.
But it's a far, far larger proportion of the population than anywhere else in the developed world. "Let's handwave away hundreds of mass shooting deaths and refuse to address the underlying causes because hey, it's not that big a proportion of the population dying every year" seems a slightly bonkers approach to me. Mass shootings like the one in Buffalo are mercifully still extremely rare in the grand scheme of things. However as they're lumped into the overall count, it paints a somewhat misleading picture of the reality of it. Just something that I think is worth pointing out. Not all mass shootings are equal, if you will.
dvs_dave said:
HM-2 said:
Murph7355 said:
Is that "190" shooters, killing 200+/injuring 850+? Nationally it's a tiny, tiny fraction of the population.
But it's a far, far larger proportion of the population than anywhere else in the developed world. "Let's handwave away hundreds of mass shooting deaths and refuse to address the underlying causes because hey, it's not that big a proportion of the population dying every year" seems a slightly bonkers approach to me. Mass shootings like the one in Buffalo are mercifully still extremely rare in the grand scheme of things. However as they're lumped into the overall count, it paints a somewhat misleading picture of the reality of it. Just something that I think is worth pointing out. Not all mass shootings are equal, if you will.
Yes, I'm sure some "mass shootings" that involve gangbangers shooting up house parties are captured in the statistics (as well they should be), but where's the evidence they are the bulk, or even a sizeable proportion of, mass shooting incidents recorded?
If you look at breakdowns of mass shooting incidents, the overwhelming majority of high casualty incidents are either spree shootings or acts of domestic terrorism. And most of the rest seem to be familicide.
HM-2 said:
This is a point that's been made several times, but I don't actually think is supported by evidence.
Yes, I'm sure some "mass shootings" that involve gangbangers shooting up house parties are captured in the statistics (as well they should be), but where's the evidence they are the bulk, or even a sizeable proportion of, mass shooting incidents recorded?
If you look at breakdowns of mass shooting incidents, the overwhelming majority of high casualty incidents are either spree shootings or acts of domestic terrorism. And most of the rest seem to be familicide.
It seems that it's tough to actually find any stats on that, and then there's a fair bit of ambiguity around what counts as a mass shooting. For example look at the chart contained in the below Statista link that plots mass shooting demographics since 1982. I can't find anywhere where it details what it counts as a mass shooting. It's clearly only some sort of mass casualty events, not "4 or more", as according to that data there's only been 127 mass shootings since 1982. That's clearly nonsense as in 2022 alone there's already been about 200 "4 or more" incidents.Yes, I'm sure some "mass shootings" that involve gangbangers shooting up house parties are captured in the statistics (as well they should be), but where's the evidence they are the bulk, or even a sizeable proportion of, mass shooting incidents recorded?
If you look at breakdowns of mass shooting incidents, the overwhelming majority of high casualty incidents are either spree shootings or acts of domestic terrorism. And most of the rest seem to be familicide.
It seems to be true that that the big ticket events are most likely to be white perps, but the volume of cases being white perps I'm highly skeptical of. A breakdown of this data is certainly conspicuous by its absence. Even just anecdotally speaking, living in Chicago, you hear about local gangland mass shootings of '4 or more' pretty often, which is business-as-usual in certain parts of the city.
Edited by dvs_dave on Tuesday 17th May 18:15
dvs_dave said:
It seems to be true that that the big ticket events are most likely to be white perps, but the volume of cases being white perps I'm highly skeptical of. A breakdown of this data is certainly conspicuous by its absence. Even just anecdotally speaking, living in Chicago, you hear about local gangland mass shootings of '4 or more' pretty often, which is business-as-usual in certain parts of the city.
So, the evidence doesn’t support your belief, so you dismiss the evidence?Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff