62 mass shootings since 1982? Enter at your own risk

[likeawashboard]

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...-shootings-map

Are there more pros to tightening up gun laws against the argument that; it's in our constitution, too many guns to do anything, etc etc.

If you are sick of these threads then don't bother commenting. I'm just curious to hear some solid arguments from either side as I haven't given it much thought..

[Gemuadrken]

Well I think I speak for all of us when I say thank god there havent been 63

[Lvisaa2]

If you check the other thread then it has pages on this with views from both sides

[mynameisuntz]

Less individualized society, reduced wealth/opportunity gap, greater social safety nets. There are some of the greatest preventions against violence. For those who are truly against violence, here are some things that deserve attention.

But, people don't really pay much attention to mental health in America. Can't expect them to look at this issue deeper than new regulation/de-regulation on the guns used to commit atrocities rather than the mentality which initiates it.

[midcoastking33]

Less individualized society, reduced wealth/opportunity gap, greater social safety nets. There are some of the greatest preventions against violence. For those who are truly against violence, here are some things that deserve attention.

But, people don't really pay much attention to mental health in America. Can't expect them to look at this issue deeper than new regulation/de-regulation on the guns used to commit atrocities rather than the mentality which initiates it.

big pharma profits off mental illness way too much

[mynameisuntz]

big pharma profits off mental illness way too much

Don't I know it. That's why these people are "crazy" and have "chemical imbalances" in their brain, because in reality, they are products of our society and if we admit that then we are admitting that our societal construction is remarkably flawed. Probably further fuel for the highly individualized nature of America, where everyone is their own responsibility and nothing else outside of oneself should have a bearing on one's actions, emotions, cognition, etc. (big myth).

Individualized society --> ostracized people --> mental disorders --> violence --> reaffirmation that such folks needed to take responsibility for themselves (maybe even through legislative change of some kind, creating greater disparity between the classes) --> further ostracized people --> further mental disorders --> further violence --> repeat

If we are to acknowledge why these events happen and what forces give rise to such mindsets then we are simultaneously calling for drastic social overhaul to amend our horribly developed state. Who wants to acknowledge that the society they have built/supported is what causes these events to happen? No one. So we just call them crazy, assign this to unbalanced brain chemicals, call for greater/stronger medication, and repeat the process.

[illiniStrive]

You do realize I posted this at least once in the other thread right?

Not sure why there are now THREE threads on a topic that was already being discussed in one thread...

[sawoobley]

Most of the division in the area is between those who want to outlaw all guns versus those who want responsible citizens to have the right to own guns if they wish.

[sawoobley]

How come no one is talking about the obvious issue here? The gunman was mentally ill. Perhaps we should be discussing how our society deals with mental illness. If this kid received proper help whether it was in the form of treatment or being put in a place where he can be monitored and not be a threat to himself and others then perhaps this event would have been prevented.

[JasonDB]

I've already made my stance perfectly clear and presented dozens of arguments in support of it in other threads. No need for me to hash this out again on an internet forum where no one will be pursuaded anyway.

[sawoobley]

I've already made my stance perfectly clear and presented dozens of arguments in support of it in other threads. No need for me to hash this out again on an internet forum where no one will be pursuaded anyway.

I'm still waiting for the video.

[zakatak333]

there's a gun culture... people hunt, target shoot, take pride in ownership & gun safety

its american tradition

guns are not responsible for the destruction caused by psychopaths. is alcohol responsible for the destruction caused by drunk drivers?

guns keep this country safe. the more guns there are, the less power each gun has

gun laws would only affect people who are willing to abide by them(does not include murderers)

so basically, more gun restriction = less guns for good people, but the same amount of guns for bad people

the REAL problem is, too FEW people are armed... killers target schools & malls because the people there have no guns to shoot back... a killer would be put down almost immediately upon attacking a police station, gun range or other location full of well-armed RESPONSIBLE individuals

take away guns from the people of a land, that land becomes defenseless

also, you're not going to cure the fundamental ills of society by banning something... brb SOME people get addicted to alcohol & drive drunk...lets ban alcohol, disregarding the privilege of the majority of people who drink responsibly

[MITCHAPAL00ZA]

I have no real stance on the gun control issue...but im curious, do these type of mass shootings ever happen in other developed countries? I feel like its always in the US

[mynameisuntz]

there's a gun culture... people hunt, target shoot, take pride in ownership & gun safety

its american tradition

guns are not responsible for the destruction caused by psychopaths. is alcohol responsible for the destruction caused by drunk drivers?

guns keep this country safe. the more guns there are, the less power each gun has

gun laws would only affect people who are willing to abide by them(does not include murderers)

so basically, more gun restriction = less guns for good people, but the same amount of guns for bad people

the REAL problem is, too FEW people are armed... killers target schools & malls because the people there have no guns to shoot back... a killer would be put down almost immediately upon attacking a police station, gun range or other location full of well-armed RESPONSIBLE individuals

take away guns from the people of a land, that land becomes defenseless

also, you're not going to cure the fundamental ills of society by banning something... brb SOME people get addicted to alcohol & drive drunk...lets ban alcohol, disregarding the privilege of the majority of people who drink responsibly

See, it sounds like you're assuming the most successful battle in deterring such crimes takes place when the event occurs. That is, the best defense from gun crime is more guns to diminish the harm upon the event arising. In reality, the real deterrent needs to happen long before the manifestation of the thought, "I want to cause harm to others."

[zakatak333]

See, it sounds like you're assuming the most successful battle in deterring such crimes takes place when the event occurs. That is, the best defense from gun crime is more guns to diminish the harm upon the event arising. In reality, the real deterrent needs to happen long before the manifestation of the thought, "I want to cause harm to others."

that's a good theory, and has potential to prevent violence from happening in the first place

but putting that solution into action is a tall order. its much easier to defend yourself than instill a change of heart unto the perpetrators

steps to minimize/discourage serial kililng should be taken... but until its no longer a threat, we better beef up security

[germaine07]

guns are not responsible for the destruction caused by psychopaths. is alcohol responsible for the destruction caused by drunk drivers?

guns keep this country safe. the more guns there are, the less power each gun has

gun laws would only affect people who are willing to abide by them(does not include murderers)

so basically, more gun restriction = less guns for good people, but the same amount of guns for bad people

the REAL problem is, too FEW people are armed... killers target schools & malls because the people there have no guns to shoot back... a killer would be put down almost immediately upon attacking a police station, gun range or other location full of well-armed RESPONSIBLE individuals

take away guns from the people of a land, that land becomes defenseless

also, you're not going to cure the fundamental ills of society by banning something... brb SOME people get addicted to alcohol & drive drunk...lets ban alcohol, disregarding the privilege of the majority of people who drink responsibly

There is so much wrong with this post, I don't even.....

[Chuck2600]

You do realize I posted this at least once in the other thread right?

Not sure why there are now THREE threads on a topic that was already being discussed in one thread...

Are you upset you have been ignored?

[likeawashboard]

If you check the other thread then it has pages on this with views from both sides

Can't remember if I commented in the other thread, just saw in the OP that he didn't want it to be a back and forth between pro/anti guns.

Less individualized society, reduced wealth/opportunity gap, greater social safety nets. There are some of the greatest preventions against violence. For those who are truly against violence, here are some things that deserve attention.

But, people don't really pay much attention to mental health in America. Can't expect them to look at this issue deeper than new regulation/de-regulation on the guns used to commit atrocities rather than the mentality which initiates it.

Can you explain what you mean by this? Isn't society the exact opposite - most people don't think for themselves and are hardly considered 'individualised'. Perhaps we need a more individualised society, but I think you're talking about the "everybody for themselves" mindset?

You do realize I posted this at least once in the other thread right?

Not sure why there are now THREE threads on a topic that was already being discussed in one thread...

Does this disorganisation rustle your jimmies? And also I only saw one other thread that said it wasn't about a pro/anti gun debate.

[VlKlNG]

How many people have been killed by drunk drivers since 1982?

[germaine07]

How many people have been killed by drunk drivers since 1982?

How massacres have occurred as a result of drunk drivers?

[likeawashboard]

How come no one is talking about the obvious issue here? The gunman was mentally ill. Perhaps we should be discussing how our society deals with mental illness. If this kid received proper help whether it was in the form of treatment or being put in a place where he can be monitored and not be a threat to himself and others then perhaps this event would have been prevented.

Society is a tricky business mayne;P Whose responsibility is it to help these people? If he refuses care should he be forcefully committed? The more freedom we have the more responsibility we have, and it seems society can't handle either of those things very well.

I think a movement of some sort needs to happen to aware people on mental health issues and how we can deal with it everyday.

I've already made my stance perfectly clear and presented dozens of arguments in support of it in other threads. No need for me to hash this out again on an internet forum where no one will be pursuaded anyway.

Thanks for the contribution.

[VlKlNG]

How massacres have occurred as a result of drunk drivers?

I don't know how many people have to be killed at once for you to consider it a massacre?

[likeawashboard]

How many people have been killed by drunk drivers since 1982?

A car is arguably a more necessary asset than a gun. They also aren't specifically designed to kill people. Alcohol can also be drank in moderate amounts, you can't 'moderately' shoot someone.

[VlKlNG]

A car is arguably a more necessary asset than a gun. They also aren't specifically designed to kill people. Alcohol can also be drank in moderate amounts, you can't 'moderately' shoot someone.

You can apply that reasoning to owning a gun.In 2011, 9,878 people died in drunk driving crashes - one every 53 minutes, from MADD.org. My point being is we shouldn't take away everyone's right to drink or own a firearm because of irresponsible/immoral people. Should only criminals be allowed to own weapons bought from the black market?

[zakatak333]

Can you explain what you mean by this? Isn't society the exact opposite - most people don't think for themselves and are hardly considered 'individualised'. Perhaps we need a more individualised society, but I think you're talking about the "everybody for themselves" mindset?

yes. think for yourself and consider the needs of others

Does this disorganisation rustle your jimmies? And also I only saw one other thread that said it wasn't about a pro/anti gun debate.

with popular topics, its either 1 thread with 50 pages in the first day

or 50 threads with 1 page

hard to organize it... and also there's slight differences between OP's objective for a thread(example: OP #1 wants to discuss pro/anti gun, OP #2 wants to rant about some nonsense, yet OP #3 wants to mourn the losses) so its hard to consolidate for a variety of reasons(different OP objectives, people don't search before posting, etc.)

[likeawashboard]

You can apply that reasoning to owning a gun.In 2011, 9,878 people died in drunk driving crashes - one every 53 minutes, from MADD.org. My point being is we shouldn't take away everyone's right to drink or own a firearm because of irresponsible/immoral people. Should only criminals be allowed to own weapons bought from the black market?

I'm pro gun. I'm just throwing out ideas.

Good point.

[germaine07]

You can apply that reasoning to owning a gun.In 2011, 9,878 people died in drunk driving crashes - one every 53 minutes, from MADD.org. My point being is we shouldn't take away everyone's right to drink or own a firearm because of irresponsible/immoral people. Should only criminals be allowed to own weapons bought from the black market?

You're comparing alcohol to guns when you should really be comparing the car to guns. The car is the tool which was used to kill in the incident just like the gun is the weapon to kill. The difference is, cars were designed for transportation and guns were designed to kill. Also, drunk drivers don't intentionally kill people, whereas when people shoot other people, the intention is to kill as that is what the weapon was designed for.

[zakatak333]

guns were designed to kill.

guns are designed to fire a projectile

[germaine07]

guns are designed to fire a projectile

With the intention to kill. Think back to when guns were first were invented. What was their purpose? It was, and still is, a weapon of war.

[zakatak333]

With the intention to kill. Think back to when guns were first were invented. What was their purpose? It was, and still is, a weapon of war.

the gun itself has no intention. it can be used as a weapon, much like anything else