Today's mass shooting in the US

fez said:
Of course they would, because they would have no power. When was the last time we had an attack on a school? When was the last time someone made a bomb and took it to a school. When was the last time someone took a knife or any other weapon into a school to try and kill multiple people. Do you think that kids in the UK don't have the same issues they have in the US?

The reason guns are so ******* dangerous is because some scrawny little kid can walk into a school and start murdering people and play out their power fantasy with easy. If all these school shooters in the US didn't have guns I wouldn't expect even a single one to happen.

Guns are the core element of all these things. You can take your maps, plans etc wherever you like but if you don't have a gun you ain't getting far. Someone comes into a classroom with a gun and its a massacre. Someone comes in with a knife and everyone picks up a chair and beats the living **** out of them.
Click to expand...

Mass stabbings in schools are riff in China. 100's of children are dead this year alone.
 
StriderX said:
When a group of people who believe their innate character is being isolated and assaulted then it's highly likely to result in violence as it has done innumerable times before, undoubtedly the reaction will be entirely cynical and highly counter-productive since the acceptance of exploiting political violence to push agendas is now baked in.
Click to expand...

Belief and reality. Two very different things.
 
Guns are the problem. Stabbing people takes effort and getting close to them.

Guns are a hands off weapon where you simply play out your video game at a distance.

To think that if there was no guns they would just use knives etc is way off the mark.

As above we had gun shootings which led to the ban of guns, we don't get them anymore, there's no denying we are a safer country now as far as gun deaths are concerned.

Of course I am taking criminal organisations out the equation here, but criminals tend to use guns on other criminals, there is a difference and that wont change anytime soon
 
fez said:
Guns are the core element of all these things. You can take your maps, plans etc wherever you like but if you don't have a gun you ain't getting far. Someone comes into a classroom with a gun and its a massacre. Someone comes in with a knife and everyone picks up a chair and beats the living **** out of them.
Click to expand...

Can you explain why other countries, such as Canada - where they have very high numbers of guns, (around 13 million) they don't have anything like the same number of mass shootings, or school shootings, they have hardly any whatsoever.

If the guns are the core element - why are some countries able to exist with high levels of gun ownership and not have problems, when the US has thousands of mass shootings?
 
Last edited:
Caracus2k said:
Just to add some more context to the whole 'scary AR-15' let's ban them argument.

I think a lot of people misunderstand rifles and their efficacy in a 'mass shooting' scenario.

In a lot of cases a mass shooter would be more lethal using a pistol vs a rifle.

You can carry far more pistol ammo than you can rifle ammunition. Extended capacity pistol mags can carry as many rounds, if not more vs rifle magazines.

And you don't need the increased over penetration characteristics of rifles if you goal is to shoot a large number of unarmed and unarmoured civilians.

Also handguns are far easier to conceal, lighter and easier to handle with/ swap to another firearm vs swapping from using a rifle to another firearm.

A rifle only really becomes more relevant if you end up in a shootout with the cops wearing some body armour and armed with their own firearms
Click to expand...
Yes and no.

Fully loaded 33 round Glock 17 magazine weighs 20 ounces, roughly the same weight as a loaded polymer AR-15 magazine (18.5 -19.5 ounces).

An AR-15 is way easier to shot accurately than a handgun for shooters with little or no training, especially if the AR-15 has a red dot style sight fitted. Way faster target acquisition than trying to align front and rear sights on a handgun. The other advantage is that an AR-15 zeroed at 25 metres will score torso hits out to 200-250 metres without changing the point of aim, though some basic trigger control is needed for more distant shots. Can’t do that with a handgun unless we’re talking about a highly trained shooter with a larger calibre handgun.

Over-penetration in standard North American wood frame & plasterboard buildings will be almost as bad using 9mm FMJ as 5.56 NATO FMJ. The only difference is that later (M855 Ball etc) 5.56 NATO ammunition could well exit the building involved and enter another building across the street. If you want all your projectiles to stay in the same room as you in the USA, you need to use a shotgun loaded with birdshot.
 
If only some states had stricter gun controls and we could see what happens when gun stricter controls are enforced

California has the strictest gun laws in the country. Some of the state’s most notable legislation is its proactive removal of firearms from people who are facing domestic violence charges, or from people that have domestic abuse protective orders filed against them.

In addition to having the strictest gun laws, California also has a relatively low rate of gun-related deaths, at 8.5 deaths per 100,000 people—37% below the national average.

Mississippi has the highest death rate at 28.6 per 100,000, which is 110% above the national average.

In Mississippi, you don’t need a permit to carry a concealed gun—not even on university campuses
Click to expand...
 
Keep the 2nd Amendment, sure, but limit the types of weapons it covers to those at the time it was written - muskets and flintlocks.
 
Screeeech said:
Can you explain why other countries, such as Canada - where they have very high numbers of guns, (around 13 million) they don't have anything like the same number of mass shootings, or school shootings, they have hardly any whatsoever.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what the core reasons are. They are also irrelevant because these things are happening regularly in the US. Always with guns. Take away the guns and they stop or if they do happen they are nowhere near as deadly.

Screeeech said:
If the guns are the core element - why are some countries able to exist with high levels of gun ownership and not have problems, when the US has thousands of mass shootings?
Click to expand...

The guns are not the fundamental reason they are happening...they are the reason they are so bloody deadly. The gun isn't whispering things to these people. Its a tool that enables these people to carry out their attacks with easy and deadly efficiency. If you take away the guns these peoples issues and feelings won't disappear but it will be a damn site harder for them to act on them.
 
Any attempt to bring in safety, training, background checks, storage etc. Seems to get quashed by the "shall not be infringed" crowd. I cannot fathom why anyone would object to simple safety practices. It's infuriating but I'm done trying to debate Americans on this. It's fruitless.
 
StriderX said:
When a group of people who believe their innate character is being isolated and assaulted then it's highly likely to result in violence as it has done innumerable times before, undoubtedly the reaction will be entirely cynical and highly counter-productive since the acceptance of exploiting political violence to push agendas is now baked in.
Click to expand...

It's they that started demanding everybody else conform to their demands. Nobody is assaulting them, they can do as they please as adults but that doesn't give them the right to demand everyone else comply with their arbitrary rules which are constantly changing.

Not complying in no way justifies vengeance or violence.
 
The issues with violence in the US are entirely due to the way the US has been built over the last 100 or so years. It's set up to seperate people in to similar units. Haves and have-nots. When you seperate different societies it breeds fear of the differences, and as we know; fear leads to hate, hate leads to suffering. Just look at the approval of immigration in the UK. The areas with the lowest foreign immigration voted for Brexit in the highest numbers.
You have suburbs of middle class Americans who will never come in to contact with anyone of a lower socioeconomic group. Cities have been designed this way for decades and it all stems from racism.
 
Last edited:
Lots of stuff going on here I see:
  • People have changed, firearms used to be widely owned used and carried in US without these incidents - big social issues to be looked into post 1970's
  • The US owners, have seen what happens with "sensible" restrictions elsewhere in the world. Pretty much ends in a total ban, every politician want's to be see to do more than the last.
  • Their primary reason for ownership is self defence, it's a huge country and the police won't be there to help you.
  • Criminals are highly likely to be armed
  • 400 million firearms, 330 million people
  • Owning something doesn't mean you are a potential criminal, we don't apply that to other areas and we don't quite live in Minority Report yet!

    Biggest things missing are personal responsibility, respect, empathy, character, stable families, community, shared identity and mental health care.
    No easy solutions to that.
 
fez said:
have no idea what the core reasons are.
Click to expand...

What hope do you have, of solving a problem if you don't understand what the core reasons are behind something?

fez said:
The guns are not the fundamental reason they are happening...they are the reason they are so bloody deadly. The gun isn't whispering things to these people. Its a tool that enables these people to carry out their attacks with easy and deadly efficiency. If you take away the guns these peoples issues and feelings won't disappear but it will be a damn site harder for them to act on them.
Click to expand...

I agree that if you take the guns away 100% then it would obviously help, because yes - killing people with an AR15 is much easier than building a bomb, or going on a stabbing spree. The problem is that such suggestions are not grounded in reality.

There's no way, in a million years you'll be able to ban all of the guns in the US, it just cannot be done, it's a pointless suggestion.

And as I said earlier, wouldn't it be better to understand why people feel this way in the US - as in understanding the reasons why somebody wants to go and shoot children at school to air their grievances.

Because this is not really a long standing thing, it started to get bad around the 1990s, then from the 2000s onwards - it's just gotten out of control and it's an almost entirely American problem - nobody else has this problem, literally.

What has changed in the US over the past 30 years, which has led to this problem getting worse and worse, because something is causing it..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom