Today's mass shooting in the US

[hurfdurf]

It's bizarre you sat there typing up 3 long-winded paragraphs where you invent this stereotype of a "Republican NRA" guy who goes out and buys an AR-15 because it looks scary and then leaves it loaded around his toddler. This just isn't an accurate reflection of American society, most gun deaths are crime and gang related, people buy hand guns and get into a dispute about drugs, it's not the Republican voter with his American flag on the front porch, it's the random scrotes keeping hand guns in their car glove box etc. Please educate yourself, watch some American cop footage, there's loads on Youtube.

Please educate yourself does not = go watch American cop footage on YouTube.

Peer reviewed papers are done on the social, economic and legal implications of legal firearms. Try reading things written by actual experts or even getting a degree level education in something.

 

[GGizmo]

I’m going way out on a limb here, but are you sure that it wasn’t an old black and white newsreel of the siege of Sidney Street, which happened in 1910?
That was a shootout between armed police and two Latvian revolutionaries, Churchill was there, as then Home Secretary.
The Latvians had attempted to rob a jewellery shop in Houndsditch, City of London.

That sounds like the scene I saw. I don't remember the Latvian element. But I know it was before Churchill was PM. So I think you're correct.

 

[Washout]

The Hungarian approach is none violent and effective, Victor has the Right idea to maintain peace without spending a fortune on future osteopathy on the bent knee brigades, or impractical and hugely expensive lifetime surveillance on known wanton terrorists in their midst.

Ah, a far right dictator. Most folks here would think anyone with sympathies to those sort of people should be locked up. I expect you’ll be happy enough to hand yourself in should the government here or in nz follow your logic.

 

[sigma]

Ah, a far right dictator. Most folks here would think anyone with sympathies to those sort of people should be locked up. I expect you’ll be happy enough to hand yourself in should the government here or in nz follow your logic.

Chris Wilson would happily lock up anyone who isn’t white.

 

[Chris Wilson]

Ah, a far right dictator. Most folks here would think anyone with sympathies to those sort of people should be locked up. I expect you’ll be happy enough to hand yourself in should the government here or in nz follow your logic.

So you are suggesting the European Union has a member state under the rule of a dictator? That sounds a bit dodgy for the EU's reputation, such as it is...

 

[Chris Wilson]

Chris Wilson would happily lock up anyone who isn’t white.

Only those, for example, that the authorities deem such a risk to the public as to need 24 hour surveillance due to the risk of terrorism. But in my ideal world they wouldn't be in the country in the first place due to Draconian immigration rules.

 

[Meridian]

Those figures show about ~90% of homicides by shooting being done with a legally owned gun with the dead person not proven to be in the process of committing a crime at the time. That doesn't rule out most of those deaths being crime and gang related.

Wow, that's an interesting use of stats. Your argument seems to be: if the victim can't be proved to be innocent, then they must have been committing a crime. So, another question: if the stats support the NRA's view, why does the NRA spend so much money bribing lobbying politicians to make sure that stats are very hard to get, and by law prevent inquiries into why how mass shootings occur? If the NRA's view was correct, surely they'd be trumpeting it from the roof-tops?

 

[Angilion]

Wow, that's an interesting use of stats. Your argument seems to be: if the victim can't be proved to be innocent, then they must have been committing a crime. [..]

If that had been my argument, I would have written that. I didn't write that. You wrote that.

Here's one example scenario. One of many.

A member of gang A decides to kill a member of gang B. They drive past and fire a dozen bullets into a car being driven by the member of gang B. One of the bullets passes through the windows on both sides of the car and kills a person completely unconnected to either gang. Just a random person who happened to be on the pavement at the time. According to your argument, that random passerby must have been committing a crime. Why on earth do you think that? Also, why on earth do you think that the incident isn't gang-related?



I'm glad you find it interesting that it's possible to interpret incomplete stats in more than one way. It's an important thing to know.

EDIT: I'd also like to know why you think that nobody in the USA is ever killed by a bullet from an illegally held gun when they were not committing a crime at that time. That was the figure you gave - zero. That seems implausible to me.

 

[Angilion]

In case there's anyone rational reading this, here's a famous real world example of why the quoted figures are at best incomplete information:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Valentine's_Day_Massacre

The victims were most definitely not committing any crime when they were killed. The killing was most definitely gang or crime related.

Why is it apparently so difficult to understand that a murder can be gang or crime related without the victims committing a crime at the time at which they were killed? If anyone can explain why they can't understand that point, maybe there's something to discuss.

I'd also like someone to explain how it's possible that nobody was ever killed by a bullet fired from an illegally held gun in the USA unless they were in the process of committing a crime at the time they were killed. That doesn't seem at all plausible to me.

 

[[FnG]magnolia]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...ne-suspected-of-killing-four-including-a-baby

"A former US marine has shot and killed four people in Florida, including a woman and her three-month-old baby boy in her arms, before surrendering, acccording to police.

The shooter, alleged by police to be Bryan Riley, 33, a former US marine, also allegedly wounded an 11-year-old girl in a shootout in Lakeland near Tampa in central Florida on Sunday. The girl underwent surgery for seven gunshot injuries."

“It would have been nice if he would have come out with a gun ... We would have shot him up a lot. But he didn’t because he was a coward,” Judd said.

 

[deuse]

Discussing Texas via email with a NYC attorney friend she sent me this;
You can have a gun but not an abortion in Texas — go figure!

You could ask your friend why NYC let known convicts out with out bail.
And most go on to rob banks and people and even kill.

https://nypost.com/2021/08/09/nycs-no-bail-law-rewards-criminals-punishes-law-abiding-citizens/

 

[deuse]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...ne-suspected-of-killing-four-including-a-baby

"A former US marine has shot and killed four people in Florida, including a woman and her three-month-old baby boy in her arms, before surrendering, acccording to police.

The shooter, alleged by police to be Bryan Riley, 33, a former US marine, also allegedly wounded an 11-year-old girl in a shootout in Lakeland near Tampa in central Florida on Sunday. The girl underwent surgery for seven gunshot injuries."

“It would have been nice if he would have come out with a gun ... We would have shot him up a lot. But he didn’t because he was a coward,” Judd said.

That is very bad.

"Authorities said Riley’s girlfriend of four years, whom he lived with, had been cooperative and was shocked, saying he was never violent but suffered from PTSD and had become increasingly erratic."

"She said he’d spent the previous week on what he called a mission from God, stockpiling supplies that he said were for Hurricane Ida victims, including $1,000 worth of cigars. Riley allegedly told police that he had been taking methamphetamine."

Hope he gets death.

 

[deuse]

Not quite sure how this is going to help.
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/09/01/us/texas-open-carry-laws/index.html

I see no problem.

Most of the criminals already have guns

 

[chroniclard]

Every week the USA goes further down the pan from these gun shagging loonies.

 

[Werewolf]

You could ask your friend why NYC let known convicts out with out bail.
And most go on to rob banks and people and even kill.

https://nypost.com/2021/08/09/nycs-no-bail-law-rewards-criminals-punishes-law-abiding-citizens/

No cash bail is far, far fairer than basically locking everyone who can't afford bail up for potentially years before they've been found guilty.
In the US it's not uncommon for people to be in prison for 1-2 years or more before they face a jury for relatively minor crimes and the reason the likes of the police and prosecutors don't like "no cash bail" is because it removes one of their key levers to get guilty verdicts - if you're facing spending 12+ months in jail before getting any chance to plead your case for a minor crime losing your job whilst you wait your turn before a jury, or you get told by a prosecutor to plead guilty and they'll let you out on time served even people who aren't guildy will take the plea.
It's an incredibly unfair system as it means that you literally have two classes of justice, someone who has commited a major crime but has money in the bank can get bail, whilst someone who might not even be guilty and has only comitted a minor crime (say possession of weed) might be locked away for a year or more just because they can't come up with a couple of thousand dollars.

The issue comes with not doing risk assessments on those being given bail.

The article you link to gives no information on how many who are released on bail go on to commit crimes, that's just your take on it.

The UK and many other countries operate a "no cash" bail as a default because it's the system that doesn't punish people who are poor far worse than those who are rich, instead they operate variations on risk based bail, you're a repeat offender for a serious crime and you're unlikely to get bail, you're charged with murder you're unlikely to get bail, if you're charged with a non violent crime, or a minor violent crime (say you got involved in a fight) and you're likely to get bail.

 

[Roar87]

Every week the USA goes further down the pan from these gun shagging loonies.

Why are people loonies because they enjoy owning firearms? Are people who enjoy cars or computers loonies also?

 

[Jean-F]

You could ask your friend why NYC let known convicts out with out bail.
And most go on to rob banks and people and even kill.

https://nypost.com/2021/08/09/nycs-no-bail-law-rewards-criminals-punishes-law-abiding-citizens/

While I take your point deuse, my attorney friend in NYC is a dyed in the wool bra burning founder member of Womens Lib, and she’s not super interested in Texas gun laws, she was taking a pop at the new Texas abortion laws, banning abortions as early as 6 weeks into pregnancy when a lot of women don’t even know that they’re pregnant yet, this flies in the face of Roe v Wade, in which the Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. Constitution protected a woman’s liberty to opt for abortion without government restriction.
If it helps, she’s not over the moon about Mississippi’s abortion laws either.
In effect, she doesn’t give a toss about guns, or who can carry them, she was lashing out at abortion laws.

 

[chroniclard]

Why are people loonies because they enjoy owning firearms? Are people who enjoy cars or computers loonies also?

Because they are shooting each other up left, right and centre. Your average American isn't responsible enough to own guns of any kind. Country is wrecked because of their obsession with firearms, perceived liberties and freedom and there's nothing can be done. It's only going to get worse and worse. The gun nutts are loons.

 

[deuse]

No cash bail is far, far fairer than basically locking everyone who can't afford bail up for potentially years before they've been found guilty.

Which state are you talking about?

You have only 3 to chose from.
I'll wait.

In the US it's not uncommon for people to be in prison for 1-2 years or more before they face a jury for relatively minor crimes and the reason the likes of the police and prosecutors don't like "no cash bail" is because it removes one of their key levers to get guilty verdicts - if you're facing spending 12+ months in jail before getting any chance to plead your case for a minor crime losing your job whilst you wait your turn before a jury, or you get told by a prosecutor to plead guilty and they'll let you out on time served even people who aren't guildy will take the plea.
It's an incredibly unfair system as it means that you literally have two classes of justice, someone who has commited a major crime but has money in the bank can get bail, whilst someone who might not even be guilty and has only comitted a minor crime (say possession of weed) might be locked away for a year or more just because they can't come up with a couple of thousand dollars.

Talking rubbish.

"Ricardo Hernandez faces three hate-crime charges after allegedly trying to shove an Asian undercover cop onto Queens subway tracks. He was released Sunday as Justice Louis Nock explained, “My hands are tied because under the new bail rules, I have absolutely no authority or power to set bail on this defendant for this alleged offense.” That is indeed the law: no injury, no bail."

"You know New York has a problem when even Mayor Bill de Blasio admits it. On Thursday the New York Police Department held a press conference to report that major crime is up 22.5% this February over a year ago. Both the cops and the mayor attribute the spike to the bail reform pushed through the state Legislature in Albany last year, which is releasing people who have been arrested for one crime to go out and commit another.

“There’s a direct correlation to a change in the law, and we need to address it, and we will address it,” Mr. de Blasio said of the increase in crime. The mayor also said he was “absolutely confident” it will be addressed in Albany in the budget due April 1."

There's shed loads of these scum

 

[deuse]

While I take your point deuse, my attorney friend in NYC is a dyed in the wool bra burning founder member of Womens Lib, and she’s not super interested in Texas gun laws, she was taking a pop at the new Texas abortion laws, banning abortions as early as 6 weeks into pregnancy when a lot of women don’t even know that they’re pregnant yet, this flies in the face of Roe v Wade, in which the Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. Constitution protected a woman’s liberty to opt for abortion without government restriction.
If it helps, she’s not over the moon about Mississippi’s abortion laws either.
In effect, she doesn’t give a toss about guns, or who can carry them, she was lashing out at abortion laws.

Tell her that Deuse said "Get your own home(NY) in order first"