What Explains U.S. Mass Shootings?

[Kuzcotopia]

Get rid of Cars too. They are worse than guns.

Well, we have the political will to regulate cars and their use. . . automotive companies are constantly innovating for safety, and that regulation around the issue of cars is a huge factor in the effort to reduce auto accidents. Even the US drinking age is designed to reduce auto accidents. It's common sense really.

Why don't we exert common sense regulation on guns? What exactly is the downside?

 

[Jeremiahcp]

Who is the wrong person? With all respect, you could be a wrong person to own a gun... Just pointing out the subjectiveness here. But given our long dialog on the matter, I do respect you as a responsible gun owner. I know there are other responsible gun owners out there besides you.

Almost everyone sees themselves as the right moral person to own a gun. That's because the 2nd amendment doesn't limit ownership and has been used to justify ownership almost as an innate right of humans. That is the culture being defined in the US and it all starts with the 2nd amendment.

I think responsible owners should still be able to own guns but they have to prove it. Other nations like Korea and Japan have very strict policies on owning guns. Ownership should not be a right. It should be a responsibility through extensive training and extensive evaluations. The argument of a bad guy can bypass this to own a gun is true but real-world statistics prove that this goes down as the number of guns go down. This argument is still true for other restrictive nations, it's just much more difficult for these bad buys to obtain these guns so the percentage is less. Again, statistics prove this.

On a tangent, I think ownership should be divided into purpose like hunting, sportsmanship, self-defense and so on... Each purpose has different restrictions on the gun type and how/where its stored. And there should be a division specifically to address the intent of the 2nd amendment. There should be organized militias, however, these militias own the guns and are responsible for their safe-keeping and operations.

"Who is the wrong person?"

We let the data tell us. Data collected over time from things like purchase behavior and psychological evaluations will display trends and patterns that we can use to find explanatory variables that will help us to recognize potential problems before they happen. But if don't start trying to answer the question then it never gets answered and we get nowhere.

 

[bobhikes]

Dickey Amendment (1996) - Wikipedia

from the amendment you posted "none of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) may be used to advocate or promote gun control"

Did I state anything wrong?

 

[leibowde84]

So you advocate punishing law abiding citizens for the act of a few criminals and/or crazies?

No. Where did you get the idea that I would punish law abiding citizens?

 

[Revoltingest]

Well, we have the political will to regulate cars and their use. . . automotive companies are constantly innovating for safety, and that regulation around the issue of cars is a huge factor in the effort to reduce auto accidents. Even the US drinking age is designed to reduce auto accidents. It's common sense really.

Why don't we exert common sense regulation on guns? What exactly is the downside?

With the advent of self-driving cars, we'll even be able to safely drive drunk.
Of course, "drive" will come to mean just telling the car where to take us.
(We must ensure that the car remains sober.)

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

"Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary" -Karl M

Oh, please. That's just as stupid as when far-right militia hicks in the sticks with AR-15s think they're going to take on the govenment with them. Aren't you Canadian, anyway?

 

[Jeremiahcp]

from the amendment you posted "none of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) may be used to advocate or promote gun control"

Did I state anything wrong?

You claim is that it is blocking research. Do we really have to play these games?

 

[leibowde84]

I suppose one could say that Brazil, S Africa & some others aren't "developed".
But one would be wrong.

Brazil is not a developed country. It is "developing". Top 25 Developed and Developing Countries

 

[Kuzcotopia]

I disagree about Brazil.
Criminy, they hosted the Olympics last year.
They even have a space program.

Okay, the government of Revoltistan summarily rejects the standards of the HDI, originally set by the UN. Considering that there is some actual disagreement of such standards, the country has every right to set its own criteria.

Just don't expect it to add much to the delegate's argument.

 

[Revoltingest]

Brazil is not a developed country. It is "developing". Top 25 Developed and Developing Countries

Quibbling!
I gave my judgement & my basis.
Others may disagree.

 

[Revoltingest]

Okay, the government of Revoltistan summarily rejects the standards of the HDI, originally set by the UN. Considering that there is some actual disagreement of such standards, the country has every right to set its own criteria.

Just don't expect it to add much to the delegate's argument.

It's in the nature of Revoltistanians to question the standards of others, & to improve upon them.
And with Brazil, even its most developed cities are hotbeds of gun violence.
Proof:
There's even a Simpsons episode (wherein Homer was kidnapped) about this.

 

[sun rise]

But now dingoes steal all their babies.

I see some risk factors....
- Many guns.
- Poor storage security.
- Sloppy government record keeping.
- The wrong people can legally get them.
- Inadequate mental health services.
- Unproductive debate & lack of cooperation between pro & anti gun control camps.
- Restrictions upon self defense.
- Bush....everything is his fault.

What I would do - a starter list:

• Ban bump-stocks.
• Fix the record keeping that is now broken.
  
• Mandate that guns must be sold with devices to secure them. (I would not mandate use of those devices but would penalize those who don't use them if the gun was used to kill someone).
• Better mental health services .
  
• Mandate training and licensing of gun owners with a test that shows a couple of things: knowledge of gun safety and some minimal accuracy with a gun.

 

[Revoltingest]

What I would do - a starter list:

• Ban bump-stocks.
• Fix the record keeping that is now broken.
  
• Mandate that guns must be sold with devices to secure them. (I would not mandate use of those devices but would penalize those who don't use them if the gun was used to kill someone).
• Better mental health services .
  
• Mandate training and licensing of gun owners with a test that shows a couple of things: knowledge of gun safety and some minimal accuracy with a gun.

Dang, man....do you realize with whom you're flirting by such detentish suggestions?
And you're regurgitating right wing talking points by doing so!

 

[LuisDantas]

I suppose one could say that Brazil, S Africa & some others aren't "developed".
But one would be wrong.

Brazil isn't.

 

[LuisDantas]

I disagree about Brazil.
Criminy, they hosted the Olympics last year.
They even have a space program.

Is this supposed to be humorous, or are you just terminally ignorant about Brazil?

 

[Stanyon]

What Explains U.S. Mass Shootings? International Comparisons Suggest an Answer
International studies pretty conclusively demonstrate that the sheer availability of guns is the decisive difference between the US and other nations in which mass shootings are significantly less frequent. Reduce the number of guns, reduce the number of mass shootings. It's that's obvious.

Stating that more guns are the reason there are more mass shootings is like stating that more automobiles cause more automobile accidents, I'd say the better question would be what explains intentional homicide worldwide?
Reducing the number of guns does not reduce the number of intentional homicides, for example Russian gun ownership per capita is estimated at around 8.9 per 100 people and Mexico at 15 both of which have very strict gun control policies while the United States stands at about 101 guns per 100 residents. the intentional homicide rates of each respective countries calculated per 100,000 residents are as follows:
Russia 11.3
Mexico 16.3
United States 4.88
List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia
Estimated number of guns per capita by country - Wikipedia
a few more comparisons:
Brazil: 8 guns per 100 people and an intentional homicide rate of 26.74 per 100,000
South Africa: 12.7 guns per 100 and an intentional homicide rate of 34.27 per 100,000
Using these figures one could argue if we reduced the number of people then we could reduce the number of intentional homicides, it's a people problem.

If you were capable of making and implementing gun control policies in the U.S to reduce the numbers of them, how would you go about it?
For example:
Would you be willing to confiscate legally owned firearms from law abiding citizens and would they be fairly compensated for their property seizure?
What would be the penalty for otherwise law abiding citizens for not turning in firearms within a specified time, fines? jail time?
What would be the punishment for homeowners that shoot armed intruders into their home if that firearm was supposed to have been given up or seized?
(look to what has happened to some homeowners in the U.K.)

 

[sun rise]

Dang, man....do you realize with whom you're flirting by such detentish suggestions?
And you're regurgitating right wing talking points by doing so!

The right wing wants everyone to carry an AK-47 or equivalent all the time. I know that's a bit of an exaggeration, but given that the NRA and the gun nuts response to any gun related killing is to advocate for more guns and less tracking of the insane and criminal, to advocate any steps is to be a moderate at least. (The NRA says that they don't advocate for that, but what the want changed would have the effect of more criminals and insane getting guns).

 

[sun rise]

Stating that more guns are the reason there are more mass shootings is like stating that more automobiles cause more automobile accidents, I'd say the better question would be what explains intentional homicide worldwide?
Reducing the number of guns does not reduce the number of intentional homicides, for example Russian gun ownership per capita is estimated at around 8.9 per 100 people and Mexico at 15 both of which have very strict gun control policies while the United States stands at about 101 guns per 100 residents. the intentional homicide rates of each respective countries calculated per 100,000 residents are as follows:
Russia 11.3
Mexico 16.3
United States 4.88
List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia
Estimated number of guns per capita by country - Wikipedia
a few more comparisons:
Brazil: 8 guns per 100 people and an intentional homicide rate of 26.74 per 100,000
South Africa: 12.7 guns per 100 and an intentional homicide rate of 34.27 per 100,000
Using these figures one could argue if we reduced the number of people then we could reduce the number of intentional homicides, it's a people problem.

If you were capable of making and implementing gun control policies in the U.S to reduce the numbers of them, how would you go about it?
For example:
Would you be willing to confiscate legally owned firearms from law abiding citizens and would they be fairly compensated for their property seizure?
What would be the penalty for otherwise law abiding citizens for not turning in firearms within a specified time, fines? jail time?
What would be the punishment for homeowners that shoot armed intruders into their home if that firearm was supposed to have been given up or seized?
(look to what has happened to some homeowners in the U.K.)

What measures are you in favor of?

 

[Revoltingest]

Brazil isn't.

You seem quite developed.

 

[bobhikes]

You claim is that it is blocking research. Do we really have to play these games?

They are not allowed Federal Funds if the Research can lead to advocating or promoting gun controls. Yes they can technically do research but with private funding or a very limited range. For example Donald Trump declared this last shooting a mental health issue which technically falls to the CDC, they will not be able to get funding because the data may lead to gun control for mental health patients.