Gun violence in the USA

[VILLAMARV]

9 hours ago, sne said:

"There are no reasons or excuses that will ever justify killing innocent people."

At least those words will be comforting when he starts WWIII eh

[Dodgyknees]

On 12/11/2018 at 21:40, HanoiVillan said:

But I thought being harmed was the solution?

Fixed.

[peterms]

 

[mjmooney]

43 minutes ago, peterms said:

 

Sure to be denounced as fake news (it might actually be). 

[villa4europe]

That's a whole lot of protection right there 

There's not a single argument anyone could create for owning that many, it is Jim jeffries "I like guns" 

They're not even trying to do anything about it

[peterms]

1 hour ago, mjmooney said:

Sure to be denounced as fake news (it might actually be). 

Yes, it might.  There are so many, and if everyone waited for a picture to be validated, it would be an interesting disruption to discourse.  Might create a few jobs though.

If the picture is a fake, it would unhelpfully distract from the simple fact that there's a racist, white supremacist, murderous current of thought among what seems to be a worryingly large segment of the US population, which Trump reflects, amplifies, validates, and strengthens.  In that sense, the picture portrays a truth, whether this guy used it or not.

So whether or not the picture is genuine, the existence and growth of this segment is the point.  I'm sure attention will be focussed on the question of the picture,  rather than the core issue.

But on the image itself, I expect there will be some people right now trying to arrange their weapons into a similar message, brows knitted with concentration, wishing they had done more jigsaws as a child.

[peterms]

This is the simple, foolish mechanism by which these ideas take hold.

This is how fascism happens,  if unchallenged.

[VILLAMARV]

[Kiwivillan]

Gun control in the Wild West was stricter.  

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/gun-control-old-west-180968013/

Quote

It's October 26, 1881, in Tombstone, and Arizona is not yet a state. The O.K. Corral is quiet, and it's had an unremarkable existence for the two years it's been standing—although it's about to become famous.

 

[peterms]

 

[tonyh29]

10 hours ago, peterms said:

Yes, it might.  There are so many, and if everyone waited for a picture to be validated, it would be an interesting disruption to discourse.  Might create a few jobs though.

If the picture is a fake, it would unhelpfully distract from the simple fact that there's a racist, white supremacist, murderous current of thought among what seems to be a worryingly large segment of the US population, which Trump reflects, amplifies, validates, and strengthens.  In that sense, the picture portrays a truth, whether this guy used it or not.

So whether or not the picture is genuine, the existence and growth of this segment is the point.  I'm sure attention will be focussed on the question of the picture,  rather than the core issue.

But on the image itself, I expect there will be some people right now trying to arrange their weapons into a similar message, brows knitted with concentration, wishing they had done more jigsaws as a child.

you’re saying we shouldn’t wait for any actual evidence that it might be true ? This seems a tad strange after your demands that Bicks give evidence for recent claims he made or you wouldn’t accept it ... you seem to be saying just post it even though it might be fake as that doesn’t matter because someone might have done it anyway and not posting fake pictures slows down the debate ??

twitter and such sharing this image without regard doesn’t help anyone  ... we don’t need fake pictures doing the rounds to establish anything ,  other than trying to link the murders to Trump in the minds of people .. Trump may be part of the problem , rhetoric like the use of the words invasion etc , but there have been 111 mass shootings in America since 1982 ,  America needs to look beyond blaming Trump for everything and having a good hard look at itself ...and start banning guns 

of course shortly it will be confirmed the picture is real and my post will become redundant 

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

No matter what problems or state of affairs Europe,  UK or Holland has,  nothing compares to mass shootings on this scale.  I actually feel embarrassed for the US in a way,  a childlike nation with childlike ideals equivalent to a under 3 share your toy nicely policy in a nursery where they all get a toy to bang each others head with.  words removed.  

[Davkaus]

7 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

but there have been 111 mass shootings in America since 1982

I've seen this mentioned in a couple of places, and I just thought I'd highlight the definition being used that leads to this number, which is any shooting with a minimum of 4 fatalities. It excludes a shooting in Brooklyn last month in which 12 people were shot but only one died, for example, which seems absurd. 

Using the definition of 4 of more people shot, not necessarily killed, they're up to 295 mass shootings in 2019 alone. 

Edited August 5, 2019 by Davkaus

[Xann]

[peterms]

7 hours ago, tonyh29 said:

you’re saying we shouldn’t wait for any actual evidence that it might be true ?

It's not hard to grasp.  The idea that white supremacist murders are linked to a white supremacist president stirring up hatred and resentment does not depend on whether this person had that picture on their facebook page.  The picture illustrates the notion, but the notion does not depend on the picture being on his page as described, and the notion would not become false if the picture had been faked.

[villakram]

https://www.vox.com/a/mass-shootings-america-sandy-hook-gun-violence

"On December 14, 2012, a gunman walked into Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, and killed 20 children, six adults, and himself."

Over 2k shootings characterized as "mass" since 

Edited August 5, 2019 by villakram

[tonyh29]

11 minutes ago, peterms said:

It's not hard to grasp.  The idea that white supremacist murders are linked to a white supremacist president stirring up hatred and resentment does not depend on whether this person had that picture on their facebook page.  The picture illustrates the notion, but the notion does not depend on the picture being on his page as described, and the notion would not become false if the picture had been faked.

You yourself said it , the fake picture will detract from the realness of the event itself rather than the core issue ,  it's not like we haven't already seen this happen before , there is enough real evidence out there without having to share what may be a fake image based on illustrating a notion

 

 

 

[peterms]

Just now, tonyh29 said:

You yourself said it , the fake picture will detract from the realness of the event itself rather than the core issue ,  it's not like we haven't already seen this happen before , there is enough real evidence out there without having to share what may be a fake image based on illustrating a notion

But there's no particular reason to think it may be a fake image, as far as I know.  Any image may be fake.  This one being genuine would be consistent with what seems to be known about the killer, it's not been suggested that it's fake (has it?  Other than MIke saying it may turn out to be), so it seems reasonable to accept it as genuine unless there's some reason to do otherwise.  Should we decide not to accept other things, like him publishing a "manifesto", just in case it later turns out that this was a fake?

[peterms]

Seems logical.

Quote

Short range nuclear missiles made available to American public in bid to reduce gun crime

 

[colhint]

I

22 minutes ago, peterms said:

Seems logical.

 

I actually think there maybe something in this. Obviously letting people getting their hands on Nukes is stupid, but. If one of the Stoneman Douglas students could get enough financial backing then apply for a licence to have nuclear weapons,  I'm certain it would be denied. Correctly so. But with the financial backing taking it through the courts, all the way to the supreme court. Two things may happen.

1. It would be all over the media.

2 The argument should be the 2nd Amendment states citizens have the right to bear arms for protection. So if the US military has nukes how can I protect against that without the same. The the supreme court has to decide if the 2nd ammendent is valid or it's too risky to let people to have them. 

Obviously a lot more legalese needed,