Another Mass Shooting in the Good Ol' USA

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

And all these prospective shooters need to do is stroll down to Walmart and come out armed better than a Marine prepared to storm the beaches at Iwo Jima.

And yet, guns have always been with us. So, what are the components that have changed?

Guns, if anything, have become more difficult to obtain, at least within the "legal" acquisition process. Violent crimes have also been trending downward.

Logically, the two pieces of the puzzle that stick out like sore thumbs are the increase in mass shootings and the shooters who tend to have very similar profiles. A myopic focus on gun legislation will never address issues.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

And yet, guns have always been with us. So, what are the components that have changed?

Guns, if anything, have become more difficult to obtain, at least within the "legal" acquisition process. Violent crimes have also been trending downward.

Logically, the two pieces of the puzzle that stick out like sore thumbs are the increase in mass shootings and the shooters who tend to have very similar profiles. A myopic focus on gun legislation will never address issues.

Mass shootings (and AR-15 ownership) have increased dramatically since the assault weapons ban was allowed to expire in 2004. That's what's changed.

The AR-15 has gone from ~0.8%% in 1996 of all firearms manufactured in the USA to to 25.4% in 2019. Meanwhile, all 8 of the most deadly mass murders in the USA since 2012 have involved assault weapons (6 AR-15's, one MCX, and one AK-47).

I understand that this doesn't comport with wingnut messaging on the subject, but that doesn't render it untrue.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Mass shootings (and AR-15 ownership) have increased dramatically since the assault weapons ban was allowed to expire in 2004. That's what's changed.

The AR-15 has gone from ~0.8%% in 1996 of all firearms manufactured in the USA to to 25.4% in 2019. Meanwhile, all 8 of the most deadly mass murders in the USA since 2012 have involved assault weapons (6 AR-15's, one MCX, and one AK-47).

I understand that this doesn't comport with wingnut messaging on the subject, but that doesn't render it untrue.

It's a fact, but that doesn't make it a related fact. Nor does the number of times you trot out this fact make it any more related. But it does comport with lefty wingnut messaging which is why you keep trotting it out.

Your point that AR-15 ownership has increased is true. The reason is simply supply - or the constant threat to that supply - and demand:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...-ar-15-n831171

It is the focus of multiple attempts at prohibition, which in turn has prompted people to run out and buy more. Such “panic buying” drove sales of AR-15s to record levels during the presidency of Barack Obama and the 2016 presidential campaign.

Also, some people just like the damn thing.

Yes, the AR-15-style rifle has been used in a some, but not all, of the mass shootings in the US. Most gun crimes, however, don't involve such weapons. Gun violence is most likely to occur with a handgun, which is easier to conceal.

An interesting point: https://abcnews.go.com/US/type-gun-u...ry?id=78689504

The 2016 Survey of Prison Inmates said that 90% of the prisoners who had a gun during their crime didn't get it from a retail source.

So, we can ban the hell out of the AR-15 if you want. If someone is truly bent on using one in the commission of a crime, it seems that obtaining one on the street is easy enough to do.

Also, a number of these shooters had other firearms at their disposal during the crime. The lack of availability of an AR-15 doesn't seem a likely deterrent.

I'd suggest focusing efforts on stopping the shooter before he/she gets to the point where they believe that murder/suicide is their last and best course of action.

[init4fun]

[QUOTE=finnbow;417193] ....wingnut messaging....[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by whell

..... wingnut messaging.....

And there we have it, , , common ground reached, your both hurling the exact same insults at each other. Got any idea how this looks to us political independents out here ?

Just, , you know, , , asking for a friend.....

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by finnbow

....wingnut messaging....

Originally Posted by whell

...wingnut messaging...

Originally Posted by init4fun

And there we have it, , , common ground reached, your both hurling the exact same insults at each other. Got any idea how this looks to us political independents out here ?

Just, , you know, , , asking for a friend.....

Fixed it for you. You were missing the / to close the Finnbow quote....

But really, a 'wingnut' is pretty mild, compared to what we've seen rather recently from one of the two.

[bobabode]

[QUOTE=init4fun;417201][QUOTE=finnbow;417193] ....wingnut messaging....

And there we have it, , , common ground reached, your both hurling the exact same insults at each other. Got any idea how this looks to us political independents out here ?

Just, , you know, , , asking for a friend.....

You have a blind spot bigger than a '56 Buick, init.

[Mark B]

[QUOTE=init4fun;417201][QUOTE=finnbow;417193] ....wingnut messaging....

And there we have it, , , common ground reached, your both hurling the exact same insults at each other. Got any idea how this looks to us political independents out here ?

Just, , you know, , , asking for a friend.....

I wouldn't make a value judgement based on the pejorative term ....wingnut messaging.... used in both posts.

Assuming the hypothetical political independent had just dropped by and had no frame of reference for either party and wanted to understand the exchange they could look at the content of the posts and the thread, and even look up other posts and threads by both parties.

That's what I would do in that situation.

[BigElCat]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

Fixed it for you. You were missing the / to close the Finnbow quote....

But really, a 'wingnut' is pretty mild, compared to what we've seen rather recently from one of the two.

I guess I'm the other member who's on beyond Wingnut.

You can't see the world rule and domination of the Prince of Power of the Air, AKA the devil, because allegorically speaking, you've 'drank the wormwood water'. It imposes a spiritual blindness.

It's why you guys think I'm crazy. Oh well.

We can share a laugh once in while, I hope.

Initforfun is an alter-ego of some other member, don't 'him' yank your chain.

[init4fun]

[QUOTE=bobabode;417204][QUOTE=init4fun;417201]

Originally Posted by finnbow

....wingnut messaging....

You have a blind spot bigger than a '56 Buick, init.

Hi Bob, perhaps so, but I really do think that a modicum of respect on both sides would help to elevate the discourse here beyond petty insults and allow the topics to be discussed without the unneeded noise

Originally Posted by BigElCat

Initforfun is an alter-ego of some other member, don't 'him' yank your chain.

Hi BigElCat, I'll make a deal with ya right here right now;

If you or anyone else, right on up to the site management (Bob), can prove by IP numbers that I'm an "alter-ego of some other member" I will sign out of this board and never return. Is that your standard response to any new member who posts something you find uncomfortable, "He's new and I don't like what he says, so he MUST be a sock puppet"???? Tell ya what, why don't you do a search of the init4fun name and see exactly who I am? I've been a VK member since 2009 and an AK member for a couple of years and am a Moderator at AK as well. So, with that said, the challenge is on, I defy you to pin any other poster's "alter-ego" on me. I know it's MUCH easier to play "Kill the Messenger" VS taking an honest look at yourself and how the conversations here ALWAYS devolve into the same name calling nonsense, this board is after all a microcosm of what goes in in the real political world. To Hell with trying to reach common ground, tis way better to demonize the other side so that "our" side looks superior, is that really how you think politics should operate Mr. Cat?

There will be NO agreements on anything, gun violence included, until BOTH sides knock off the BS "us VS them" schoolyard mentality, recognize that a problem truly DOES exist with the current lack of respect between the two major political parties, and begin to actually focus on (in this case) why people keep getting shot dead en masse, rather than focusing on who can come up with the best insult for the other side

[Pio1980]

The USA has a unique problem with this issue, at least partly a result of oversupply combined with poor accountability of the distribution by whatever means and the verified responsibility of the aquisitors.
Oversupply makes them very easy to slip into a grey/ black market, and reclaiming them from untrustworthy possession is obviously hazardous.
All of this goes back to the perceptions of the purpose of the second amendment vs that actual wording of the first portion.
Did they indeed intend no accountability for possession for any purpose, including armed insurrection?