School Shooting in Connecticut - Multiple Fatalities

[Illestia]

I just happen to have a heightened appreciation of irony, I suppose.

I think its fucking amazing that we only see accusations of "politicizing a tragedy" after a gun tragedy. Can you imagine the collective facepalming if, after Hurricane Katrina, attempts to fix the broken levee and flood wall system were met with accusations of "politicizing a tragedy"?

Nowhere did i claim that anyone here did politize the tragedy. i merely stated that i think that the ones doing so (and those exist) are subjectively more evil then the shooter.
and then my words got turned inside my mouth and ripped into shreds in the attempt to make them something they never were.

[Daelos Tribes]

I suggest surveillance.

Every legal gun would have a camera built into it, and whatever the gun is pointed at goes on the public record. For government, for your worst enemy, for stalkers and for gore-fetishists.

If gun users want to be considered "law abiding" in their use of guns, what do they have to hide?

Alternatively, there's requiring owners to drop off their guns in specific, public places to use them that are lined with police officers who will take the gun back before the checkpoint. And then keeping the areas surveyed. And allowing the police to block entry to anyone.

So two ideas for solutions, only one of which got a response.


Also, thinking further about a gun ban...it would easily kill gun manufacture in the US, but might Mexico pick up the slack there?

Might a ban still reduce gun use in further-North areas?

Would that really just be an argument for getting Mexico to ban guns too?

[The UK in Exile]

Alternatively, there's requiring owners to drop off their guns in specific, public places to use them that are lined with police officers who will take the gun back before the checkpoint. And then keeping the areas surveyed. And allowing the police to block entry to anyone.

So two ideas for solutions, only one of which got a response.


Also, thinking further about a gun ban...it would easily kill gun manufacture in the US, but might Mexico pick up the slack there?

Would that really just be an argument for getting Mexico to ban guns too?

Guns go North to South across the border. if anything it migh improve Mexico's crime rate.

[The Black Forrest]

I just happen to have a heightened appreciation of irony, I suppose.

I think its fucking amazing that we only see accusations of "politicizing a tragedy" after a gun tragedy. Can you imagine the collective facepalming if, after Hurricane Katrina, attempts to fix the broken levee and flood wall system were met with accusations of "politicizing a tragedy"?

Er? Katrinia wasn't political?

[The Joseon Dynasty]

I think its fucking amazing that we only see accusations of "politicizing a tragedy" after a gun tragedy. Can you imagine the collective facepalming if, after Hurricane Katrina, attempts to fix the broken levee and flood wall system were met with accusations of "politicizing a tragedy"?

Nowhere did i claim that anyone here did politize the tragedy. i merely stated that i think that the ones doing so (and those exist) are subjectively more evil then the shooter.
and then my words got turned inside my mouth and ripped into shreds in the attempt to make them something they never were.

It's more that the "examples" you used spoke volumes about your political position on this matter. And I found that rather amusing, given the context.

[Choronzon]

I think its fucking amazing that we only see accusations of "politicizing a tragedy" after a gun tragedy. Can you imagine the collective facepalming if, after Hurricane Katrina, attempts to fix the broken levee and flood wall system were met with accusations of "politicizing a tragedy"?

Nowhere did i claim that anyone here did politize the tragedy. i merely stated that i think that the ones doing so (and those exist) are subjectively more evil then the shooter.
and then my words got turned inside my mouth and ripped into shreds in the attempt to make them something they never were.

I'm not saying that you guys are politicizing the tragedy, I just think your side is politicizing the tragedy!

[Choronzon]

I think its fucking amazing that we only see accusations of "politicizing a tragedy" after a gun tragedy. Can you imagine the collective facepalming if, after Hurricane Katrina, attempts to fix the broken levee and flood wall system were met with accusations of "politicizing a tragedy"?

Er? Katrinia wasn't political?

Thats not what I said at all.


You really ought to get that reading comprehension thing looked at.

[The UK in Exile]

I think its fucking amazing that we only see accusations of "politicizing a tragedy" after a gun tragedy. Can you imagine the collective facepalming if, after Hurricane Katrina, attempts to fix the broken levee and flood wall system were met with accusations of "politicizing a tragedy"?

Er? Katrinia wasn't political?

bush thought it wasn't. it didn't turn out well for him.

[Tmutarakhan]

I think its fucking amazing that we only see accusations of "politicizing a tragedy" after a gun tragedy. Can you imagine the collective facepalming if, after Hurricane Katrina, attempts to fix the broken levee and flood wall system were met with accusations of "politicizing a tragedy"?

Nowhere did i claim that anyone here did politize the tragedy. i merely stated that i think that the ones doing so (and those exist) are subjectively more evil then the shooter.
and then my words got turned inside my mouth and ripped into shreds in the attempt to make them something they never were.

Ah, so you're just fighting with Imaginary THEM. You know, THEM. The horrible THEM who are responsible for everything that goes wrong.

[Norjagen]

I see you chose to just ignore the actual study (which was linked, in the article I posted- but you probably didn't read it, because it conflicts with your agenda), and poison the well. Thats the kind of intellectual honesty I expect from the Gun Lobby.

Again, those are outliers. They mean nothing. I gave you a study (or rather, I initially gave you an article linking the study- I have since edited the post to link to the actual study). Either show me meaningful studies showing that the presence of other shooters reduces fatalities or drop the argument. Your anecdotes count for nothing.

EDIT: Not to bring this up again, but I was at Northern Illinois University where it was shot up. NIU has a trained (they aren't rent a cops, the hold the technical rank of state trooper), armed police ON CAMPUS at ALL TIMES.

It did not help. At all. So I have anecdotes too. Luckily, I also have studies. Lets see yours.

The following study is focused entirely on the effects of citizen intervention, as opposed to police intervention. The conclusion presented is that far fewer people are killed when bystanders intervene, even when they're unarmed. Proactive citizens, acting in self-defense, have a far greater chance of survivability than cowering citizens, waiting for police to take action.
Auditing Shooting Rampage Statistics

[Illestia]

Nowhere did i claim that anyone here did politize the tragedy. i merely stated that i think that the ones doing so (and those exist) are subjectively more evil then the shooter.
and then my words got turned inside my mouth and ripped into shreds in the attempt to make them something they never were.

It's more that the "examples" you used spoke volumes about your political position on this matter. And I found that rather amusing, given the context.

Yes, my position (which i made very clear throughout the thread) is that i oppose a ban on guns and that i think that there are more important topics that should be discussed first (or better that should be the priority in the discussion).
I used the examples because i have yet to see a person who is in any form a supporter of private gunownership to boost the issue when a shooting occurs. And i used them because those are the current examples that disgust me most. Not because of the guns but because it takes a special kind of evil to change what should be the attempt to fix a problem into an agenda-driven hatefest.

That may have given my post an underlying irony, but that was unintentional and, i think, not supported by any of my former posts on the topic.

[Choronzon]

The conclusion presented is that far fewer people are killed when bystanders intervene, even when they're unarmed.

See the bolded? That right there neuters your argument that we should all pack heat. It doesn't matter if people had guns or didn't- you admit that yourself.

[Illestia]

Nowhere did i claim that anyone here did politize the tragedy. i merely stated that i think that the ones doing so (and those exist) are subjectively more evil then the shooter.
and then my words got turned inside my mouth and ripped into shreds in the attempt to make them something they never were.

I'm not saying that you guys are politicizing the tragedy, I just think your side is politicizing the tragedy!

Again not what i said.
I am actually, quite sad about the fact that the advocates of stricter guncontrol regularly get hijacked by agenda driven assholes.
Still you will have to put up with the fact that i will and do critizes those said assholes. But i also do not take those seriously, which is why i am quite happy to discuss the topic in a civilized matter, as i am currently trying to do.

[Norjagen]

The conclusion presented is that far fewer people are killed when bystanders intervene, even when they're unarmed.

See the bolded? That right there neuters your argument that we should all pack heat. It doesn't matter if people had guns or didn't- you admit that yourself.

from the article, which you clearly didn't read...

With 15 incidents stopped by police with a total of 217 dead that’s an average of about 14.29. With 17 incidents stopped by civilians and 45 dead that’s an average of 2.33...

...within the civilian category 11 of the 17 shootings were stopped by unarmed civilians. What’s amazing about that is that whether armed or not, when a civilian plays hero it seems to save a lot of lives. The courthouse shooting in Tyler, Texas was the only incident where the heroic civilian was killed. In that incident the hero was armed with a handgun and the villain was armed with a rifle and body armor. If you compare the average of people killed in shootings stopped by armed civilians and unarmed civilians you get 1.8 and 2.6 but that’s not nearly as significant as the difference between a proactive civilian, and a cowering civilian who waits for police.

So, given that far less people die in rampage shootings stopped by a proactive civilian, only civilians have any opportunity to stop rampage shootings in roughly half of incidents, and armed civilians do better on average than unarmed civilians, wouldn’t you want those heroic individuals who risk their lives to save others to have every tool available at their disposal?

[Illestia]

Nowhere did i claim that anyone here did politize the tragedy. i merely stated that i think that the ones doing so (and those exist) are subjectively more evil then the shooter.
and then my words got turned inside my mouth and ripped into shreds in the attempt to make them something they never were.

Ah, so you're just fighting with Imaginary THEM. You know, THEM. The horrible THEM who are responsible for everything that goes wrong.

I am tired of explaining by now. Please look at the media in the next few days. I guarantee you that the question about what society could do to do something about the causes of masskillings will rarely come up. gun control and gun-bans though will quite regularly.

By the way, would you please refrain from trying to argue by ignoring my arguement and instead trying to attack me personally? It's not only uncalled for but also not useful in any way.

[Choronzon]

from the article, which you clearly didn't read...

No, I read it. I read through his cherry picked studies. You know what counts for way, way more than cherry picked studies?

Studies that analyze all shoots in the last 20 years. Looking at 62 shootings. Looking at all the major shootings since the 1980s.

So, its partly my fault. I shouldn't have asked you merely to show me a study. I should have asked for a study with equal methodology and rigor.

[Ovisterra]

It's a horrible tragedy. My heart goes out to all those involved or affected.

One thing that disgusts me about it is its use by Facebook pages to get likes. I saw one of my friends liking such a picture and I was not amused.

[Illestia]

Good night for now.
I am tired and pretty much fed up with constantly having to clarify again and again in the last couple minutes what i said or didn't say instead of getting anywhere in the discussion.
Pretty sad since it was actually getting quite interesting after we resumed discussing the actual topic.

I am happy to continue this tomorrow, but for now good night all.

[Norjagen]

from the article, which you clearly didn't read...

No, I read it. I read through his cherry picked studies. You know what counts for way, way more than cherry picked studies?

Studies that analyze all shoots in the last 20 years. Looking at 62 shootings. Looking at all the major shootings since the 1980s.

So, its partly my fault. I shouldn't have asked you merely to show me a study. I should have asked for a study with equal methodology and rigor.

And what was the conclusion of your study? I saw lots of data, but no real point to it. Also, you're taking a very hostile and condescending tone. You should rethink it. It's unbecoming.

[Choronzon]

And what was the conclusion of your study? I saw lots of data, but no real point to it.

Then I suggest you learn to read charts and graphs. I'm sorry that you weren't spoon-fed a conclusion.

Also, you're taking a very hostile and condescending tone.

Because your position is stupid.

It's unbecoming.

I'm only going to say this once: Words cannot express how little I care what you think of me.

We good? We get that taken care of?

[Choronzon]

For the record I am in favor of concealed carry and gun ownership.

I just am not going to sit here and pretend like throwing more guns into a situation is good way to address gun crime, nor will I pretend like the current system works.

Hopefully that has cleared up any confusion.

[Wolfverya]

Every body is at rage with guns.. we have enough gun laws in place. I'm all for beatin the crap out of the ass bag that let this retard in. Y was this mental fr. Allowed on campus? He doesn't work at the school and his mom was not working at the time. People need some damn common sense. How bout making it law if u have a suicidal dumb fk kid you report it to your work place as not to be let in unescorted...

[The Black Forrest]

Er? Katrinia wasn't political?

Thats not what I said at all.


You really ought to get that reading comprehension thing looked at.

*shrugs* Maybe if you wrote better......

[The Black Forrest]

Ahh yes. Religion starts to chime in.

"Well, you know, it's an interesting thing. We ask why there is violence in our schools but we have systematically removed God from our schools. Should we be so surprised that schools would become a place of carnage? [...]

Well Mike? Go fuck yourself.

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/

That logic always drives me nuts.

If we only had the 10 commandments and prayer in school, these kids wouldn't have been murdered.

[Bafuria]

There seems to be some level of misunderstanding on both sides of the gun control argument. Allow me to dispel some myths using not only reason, but unbiased statistics.

1. More guns = More murders

That's not entirely true.

If we rank the Top 5 countries by household gun ownership rate it breaks down as follows:

United States: 39%
Norway: 32%
Canada: 29.1%
Switzerland: 27.2%
Finland: 23.2%
http://www.allcountries.org/gun_ownership_rates.html

These are the most recent numbers I could find, they are from the early 1990's
Let's compare the household gun ownership rates to the murder rate of each country the year the earlier statistics were found

1st United states: 9.5
5th Norway: 1.0
3rd Canada: 2.6
4th Switzerland: 1.16 (1995)
2nd Finland: Finland: 2.9

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... cade#1990s

Yes this is a small sample, but it does tell us that the relationship between guns and homicide rates is at least not linear.
So why does America have such a high homicide rate?
The reason is actually well known among Criminologists, but is for some reason not known to the general public.

High Income inequality, great cultural diversity and poor social cohesion.

Firearms homicide rates are strongly correlated with income inequality levels as well as social cohesion.

(Image)

http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0277953698000975 ... a6dc6e005d
http://urbanpolicy.berkeley.edu/pdf/HQ_SF82.pdf
http://www.firearmsresearch.org/content ... e_id=3953#

There is however a strong link between household gun ownership rates and domestic homicide and rates. This risk is still practically low however, and unlikely to result in a high homicide rate by itself.
http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/160/10/929.full

tl;dr
Guns make killing easier, but if no one has the will to commit murder thanks to progressive social policies that point is moot.

2. I need my gun to defend my family from home invaders!

In 2010 there were 278 justifiable homicides committed by civilians.

During the same year, 1336 people murdered their intimate partner, often with firearms.
You are more likely to kill a family member than to kill the ones who are going to hurt them.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/cr ... micidemain

3. We need to ban Assault rifles and Assault weapons to prevent postal killings.

This is unlikely work for 2 reasons.

1. The vast majority of mass shootings are committed with Handguns, not self-loading rifles

2. Although self-loading rifles and select-fire rifles can fire up to 40 accurate rounds per minute for a brief period, this rate of fire cannot be sustained due to overheating and is rarely useful to the mass shooter.

If we look at the rate of fire of most mass shootings it is clear that in the vast majority of cases, the perpetrators did not fire any faster with their self-loading rifles than they could have done with a manually operated rifle or shotgun.

Anders Behring Breivik fired 186 rounds over a period of 90 minutes, just over 2 rounds per minute.
Cho Sheung Hui fired 14.5 rounds per minute during his 12 minute shooting. Killing 32
George Hennard shot 44 people, 24 fatally, over a period of 16 minutes during the Luby's massacre in killeen texas, 3 people per minute
Columbine: 0.73 people hit per minute.
etc.
A typical hunting weapon can fire roughly 15-20 accurate rounds per minute.

In other words, the type of gun doesn't matter.
So what makes mass shootings deadly?

1. Location: An enclosed, crowded area ssuch as a classroom, restaurant or a small Island camp have few exits for victims to use and a lot of people for a mass shooter to kill.

2. Response time: The faster the police gets to the scene the better. CHL carriers are unlikely to be there when needed because they don't have the 911 dispatcing them and future mass shooters are likely to wear body armor, making them virtually immune to handgun rounds.

4. Concealed carry will prevent mass shootings and give me the upper hand in a gunfight.

1. Mass shooters adapt to new gun laws, whether they are stricter or less strict.
Both the Aurora and Connecticut shooters were wearing body armor. The only way to penetrate body armor is to use a centerfire rifle. Good luck carrying one in your purse.

2. Your stand a far better chance hauling your ass out of a firefight than sticking around and shooting back.

http://gunstuff-jd.blogspot.com/2012/03 ... ks-in.html

5. Machine guns and anti-materiel rifles are super-dangerous weapons that must be banned. Big guns = Dangerous guns

If criminals preferred more firepower they would use shotguns and rifles rather than handguns and knives.

They don't.
(Image)
Criminals will pick a compact weapon with poor wounding characteristics, like a knife or a handgun rather than a big powerful weapon like an M60 general-purpose machine gun or an Anti-Materiel rifle.
You just can't walk around with a rifle in your waistband unnoticed and you are certainly not going to walk around with a 60 kilogram M2 .50 cal. machine gun in your waistband.