The Las Vegas Shooting -- Political Version

[Matata]

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/10/why-does-america-have-so-much-evil/541767/

 

[Matata]

https://www.vox.com/world/2017/10/2/16396612/las-vegas-mass-shooting-terrorism-islam

 

[whitewave]

I don't think he snapped. This was clearly planned.

Isis did take credit for it.

I'm open to the investigation to figure out what went on here.

It's all speculation at this point.

 

[arkieb1]

I saw the Gun lobby justification for it and I was like WTF, seriously they think it's O.K for everyone in US society to have these types of weapons because that is one of your civil rights and mass shootings like this by pissed off white guys etc are just an unfortunate but acceptable part or bi-product of gun ownership.

Yes the above should read;
ISIS member did that = mass fear of all Muslims, they are bad people we need to have less Muslims in our society and we need more guns to protect ourselves.
Pissed off old white guy does that = make excuses like guns don't kill people, people kill people. Because all old white people can't be evil only this one guy can be evil....
Young disenfranchised white guy does that = he must be mentally ill to kill people, again please don't blame the guns, don't take away the guns we need more guns..... and don't blame the white guy he wasn't black and he wasn't Muslim he's a mentally unstable lone attacker for sure....

 

[whitewave]

I saw the Gun lobby justification for it and I was like WTF, seriously they think it's O.K for everyone in US society to have these types of weapons because that is one of your civil rights and mass shootings like this by pissed off white guys etc are just an acceptable part of gun ownership.

Can you link it? I'm sick today and about to go to bed and it would be easy since you know where it is to click your link. Thanks.

 

[arkieb1]

Can you link it? I'm sick today and about to go to bed and it would be easy since you know where it is to click your link. Thanks.

It was over in the other post about the attack.

 

[whitewave]

It was over in the other post about the attack.

Thanks

 

[Matata]

I saw the Gun lobby justification for it and I was like WTF, seriously

I thought that was low even for them. It's the price of freedom. Mass murder is the price of freedom. I don't even know how to respond to that illogic.

 

[arkieb1]

I thought that was low even for them. It's the price of freedom. Mass murder is the price of freedom. I don't even know how to respond to that illogic.

As someone was hinting at in the other post your forefathers construction of the second amendment of the right to keep and bear arms in the US was set about for two reasons so that the US could be always free and defend itself against others and attacks (ie form a "Militia") and so that every person could defend themselves, their family and property.

No one in 2017 is attacking those rights, you have an army and an armada of nuclear and other weapons these days to do the former that your forefathers could never have dreamed about (your militia has been replaced by a full scale army) and all you need are basic rifles and handguns to do the latter ie for self defence. In 2017 no one needs these types of weapons unless you are in the army, police force or defence industry. And if you use these types of guns for recreation they should be locked away and kept safe at gun ranges only. I have no clue why that is so difficult for people to want to adhere to, if it means greater safety and protection of all.

Sadly I tend to agree with the NRA to a degree this is an inevitable part of gun ownership that your society has created and even worse when events like these do occur politically it's so unpopular that no one has the balls to step up and curtail or place even heavier restrictions on certain types of guns. It's like you are trapped in a rinse repeat cycle of accepting that is how it is until enough people realise what is going on is completely and utterly unacceptable.

 

[Snowdrop13]

I have just read (in the Guardian, which I consider a reliable news outlet) that only 22% of US citizens actually own a gun. I imagined this to be much higher, it's a minority! Astonishing that the gun lobby has so much power.

 

[E B]

I have just read (in the Guardian, which I consider a reliable news outlet) that only 22% of US citizens actually own a gun. I imagined this to be much higher, it's a minority! Astonishing that the gun lobby has so much power.

I was too! And that the average gun owner (75 percent male, no surprise there) owns just under 8 guns each. Whaaa?

 

[partgypsy]

There are supposedly 300 million guns in the US more than enough for every man, woman and child. Basically our entire country is awash in guns and ammo, as well as divisive politics and violent media. There are a lot of causes to the gun violence. When I did training in the VA for suicidality, if a gun is available the chance of the a completed suicide goes way up. If you take pills, you might be able to be resuscitated. With a gun, all it takes is a moment of sadness, rage, hopelessness, and the person is gone, sometimes taking other people with them. The entire gun mentality of the US is a tragedy. For the kids who accidently shoot themselves and others, to gang violence, to domestic violence, to suicides, and yes the mass shootings. I feel the US is being held captive by a minority of gun owners, and the gun industry who profits from yes the enjoyment and pleasure and comfort of owning a gun (whether for hunting, target practice or self-protection) but also the massive amount of bloodshed.
For those who lionize Ronald Reagan, the current NRA is at odds with what Ronald Reagan said about guns, and they themselves allowed were reasonable restrictions on gun ownership.
Let's quote Ronald Reagan
"I do not believe in taking away the right of the citizen for sporting, for hunting and so forth, or for home defense. But I do believe that an AK-47, a machine gun, is not a sporting weapon or needed for defense of a home.”
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10022209608

 

[Matata]

 

[Matata]

 

[arkieb1]

Trump's main supporters are white gun toting men. He isn't going to p@#* off his voting base and start changing laws over a mass shooting unless the general tide of opinion forces him into it.

 

[Matata]

The video is enlightening. Although it won't make a difference in our laws, it dispels some of the lame defenses used against tighter gun control.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/3/16405052/mass-shooting-politicize-gun-violence

 

[whitewave]

I thought that was low even for them. It's the price of freedom. Mass murder is the price of freedom. I don't even know how to respond to that illogic.

It is so outta there and isn't even resonating with many gun owners at this point....

 

[AprilBaby]

I don’t know anyone that owns a gun. I am neither republican or Democrat but don’t you think democrats own guns too? More shooting in Chicago than anywhere else and that’s totally democratic.

 

[cmd2014]

A non-US perspective.

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world...ited-states/ar-AAsRnCz?li=AAggv0m&ocid=ASUDHP

I think this quote is particularly relevant:

"A study published earlier this year in the American Journal of Medicine comparing the United States with 22 other developed countries revealed that Americans aged 15 to 24 in the United States are 49 times more likely to be shot to death than people in that same age bracket in all those other countries. The American gun homicide rate is 25 times higher. Add up all the gun deaths from those 23 high-income nation states and you find that 82 per cent of the dead are Americans.

The one data point that distinguishes the Las Vegas massacre is that it took only one man to kill 59 people in the space of perhaps 20 minutes..."

and this:

"According to a recent Harvard and Northeastern University Study, there are about 55 million gun owners in the United States, a gun ownership rate that hasn’t changed much since the 1990s—roughly half of the 265 million guns in the United States belong to only three per cent of the population. Guns that are designed for the purpose of killing lots of people—expensive, high-calibre semi-automatic and fully automatic assault rifles, for instance—tend to end up in the hands of people like Stephen Paddock."

So the US tolerates almost 300 mass shootings per year and thousands upon thousands of other gun deaths per year (if you count accidents, intentional shootings, and suicides) to keep three percent of the population happy??? That's insane.

 

[cmd2014]

From a sociologist who studies mass shootings:

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world...ction-movie/ar-AAsRISs?li=AAggv0m&ocid=ASUDHP

 

[t-c]

Hearing Protection Act

 

[t-c]

Do you think we would get the same reaction if the guy killed 527 instead of 59? Is it simply a matter of hitting the right body count or will nothing get the gun-lovers to reconsider their position?

 

[Calliecake]

I was too! And that the average gun owner (75 percent male, no surprise there) owns just under 8 guns each. Whaaa?

It has to be higher than 22% gun owners. If this was the case we would have much more sensible gun laws and there would be no types of guns like the one used in these mass murders. There would also be limits in how many bullets would be in a round. Wow it really goes to show how powerful the NRA is.

 

[katharath]

Do you think we would get the same reaction if the guy killed 527 instead of 59? Is it simply a matter of hitting the right body count or will nothing get the gun-lovers to reconsider their position?

I always wonder this too but have come to the conclusion that there will never be "too many". I think a personal connection to gun tragedy is the only thing that gets through to some people; and for others, literally nothing seems to work. If dead children can't change their minds, what possibly could?

 

[Dee*Jay]

I've heard many times that the way that AIDS would have received adequate funding for a cure to be found is if it affected middle aged straight white men. I fear this is the same thing -- unless the violence is turned upon that same group nothing will be done. (To be clear: I am not wishing violence on any one or any group, I am speaking illustratively.) That group, ironically, is the one calling for controls to remain unchanged or even loosened (silencers anyone?), and also the least affected in many recent mass murder situations (Sandy Hook and Columbine [children], Orlando [gays], a number of college campus shootings). And also (to clear up any obtusity), I am not saying middle aged straight white men weren't affected by extension due to these deaths, but they as a group, were not the main recipients of the violence. If that were indeed the case I truly believe there would be ALL SORTS of gun control passed in a New York Minute.

 

[arkieb1]

I'm always baffled by the arguments from the pro gun people and people that have guns in general that they have to have guns to defend themselves..... because if someone attacks you breaks into your house etc you have time to get your gun before they shoot you or a family member first? Or in this case how do you defend yourself against a guy with these types of rapid fire guns up high where you can't even see him? The answer to both is realistically you don't, the only way to reduce people dying from shootings is to have less guns and limit the types of guns some people can have in the first place.

 

[Calliecake]

I'm always baffled by the arguments from the pro gun people and people that have guns in general that they have to have guns to defend themselves..... because if someone attacks you breaks into your house etc you have time to get your gun before they shoot you or a family member first? Or in this case how do you defend yourself against a guy with these types of rapid fire guns up high where you can't even see him? The answer to both is realistically you don't, the only way to reduce people dying from shootings is to have less guns and limit the types of guns some people can have in the first place.

Responsible guns owners should have their guns locked up at all times. I also think if someone else gets your gun and shots someone you should also be held responsible. I've said this for years @arkieb1

 

[katharath]

 

[lovedogs]

@Kath thanks for posting. The hypocrisy is what I find most infuriating. Making legislation to limit the rights of women? GREAT! Making legislation that limits the rights of gun owners to have high caliber weapons with shit tons of bullets in each clip? NO NO NO! CANNOT HAPPEN! THE HORROR!

Goes back to @deejay's point. I've always said that if middle class white men were the ones who wanted abortions, it would have been freely legal without restrictions decades ago.

 

[t-c]

@Kath thanks for posting. The hypocrisy is what I find most infuriating. Making legislation to limit the rights of women? GREAT! Making legislation that limits the rights of gun owners to have high caliber weapons with shit tons of bullets in each clip? NO NO NO! CANNOT HAPPEN! THE HORROR!

Goes back to @deejay's point. I've always said that if middle class white men were the ones who wanted abortions, it would have been freely legal without restrictions decades ago.

Speaking of abortions, from The Mercury News:

Pro-life lawmaker reportedly urged mistress to end pregnancy
Hypocrisy, thy name is Rep. Tim Murphy. ... If there’s any consolation for Murphy, it’s that he wouldn’t be the only House Republican to be pro-choice for himself and pro-life for everyone else. Rep. Scott DesJarlais, R-Tenn., remains in Congress four years after it was revealed that he asked both his ex-wife and reportedly a mistress to obtain abortions.​