Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So tell me... What has changed to cause the recent rash of mass shootings? The same guns were available in the past as are available now. Given that, could it be that there is something else going wrong in our society that is the root cause? Shouldn't we be looking at what has changed?
I don't know, there have been very limited amount of studies on this, and even Congress years ago made it so the government couldn't allocate money to studying this growing problem. That has to change if we ever hope to reduce the amount of mass shootings that happen.
My idea would be to tighten background checks and make them universal so that each state goes through the same background laws. We need to make gun control a federal thing rather than state control because it doesn't make sense to have states with lax rules next to states that have strict regulations, there needs to be some common ground among the states. We also need to confiscate guns from those that have domestic violence calls against them, and medical records needs to be a part of background checks. There also needs to be a requirement for people to be trained on how to use and store a gun before even being allowed to buy a gun.
You asked what could possibly be done to prevent or stop some of these mass shootings. In answer to your own question, you support Universal Background Checks...
Name me one of the recent mass shooters that didn't pass a background check to buy their gun? Save, for the Sandy Hook Shooter, who actually did fail a background check, and stole his mothers guns.
Now don't come back and say "a law doesn't have to be 100% effective to be worth it".... Of course that is true enough, but your question was what can be done in relation to mass shootings, and as far as mass shootings are concerned, background checks aren't doing diddly.
I don't know, there have been very limited amount of studies on this, and even Congress years ago made it so the government couldn't allocate money to studying this growing problem. That has to change if we ever hope to reduce the amount of mass shootings that happen.
I can tell you now that if you eliminate firearms from the equation, you will see bombings introduced in their place. The problem isn't with the guns but rather with our culture. Until you address the issue that is driving this, you will never reduce the mass killings. All you will do is change the weaponry and possibly make matters even worse.
Location: When you take flak it means you are on target
7,646 posts, read 9,953,657 times
Reputation: 16466
Quote:
Originally Posted by freightshaker
So tell me... What has changed to cause the recent rash of mass shootings? The same guns were available in the past as are available now. Given that, could it be that there is something else going wrong in our society that is the root cause? Shouldn't we be looking at what has changed?
What has changed is violent video games, lack of parenting skills, poor role models for youth, inability for youth to express frustrations, and most importantly IMPROPERLY MANAGED OR UNDETECTED MENTAL ILLNESS.
Most young people's lives revolve around their school and friends. When they lash out it is against the institution or those they feel have wronged them.
When I went to high school in the '70's, I can't ever remember a police car at our school. I can't remember a fight, ever. I am still friends with probably a dozen of my schoolmates. I think a lot of kids now don't have the connections and the authoritarian controls of the modern police state is exaberating problems.
But kids are far more violent now. It never occurred to us to attack innocent people with knock out games.
I remember in high school nearly every truck had a gun rack and Winchester or shotgun. Most people were trained and aware of the maturity and dangers of guns. And we hadn't been exposed to decades of violent media. But nobody got shot - and nobody ever had their car broken into.
So, I blame the parents, and violence in media and untreated mental illness.
If you check, most mass shooters are disaffected nerd types, not drug/crime thugs or gang bangers.
Though the private transfer of guns between family members is one I would still be iffy about simply because one could buy a gun for their dangerously mentally unstable child to bypass the gun laws.
So you're saying you're concerned someone might buy a gun for a relative who can't legally buy one for themselves? You realize that's against the law right this moment, even without universal background checks, right? It is against the law to buy a gun for someone who can't buy one for themselves under current law. How would requiring universal background checks change anything? If I'm willing to knowingly buy a gun for someone who can't legally buy one themselves, do you honestly believe I'm going to go through with the background check knowing they'll fail? Of course not, I'm going to give them the gun without doing a background check, and there's no way to prevent that unless you assign an ATF agent to follow gun owners around and watch everything they do at all times.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78
Once there is no more "gun free zones" and mass shootings continue, what next is the GOP going to propose to held decrease mass shootings in this country?
That's a fair question.... Once we pass universal background checks and these mass shootings continue, what next will Democrats propose to stop them? That's also a fair question.
Quote:
This isn't about creating a "utopia," this is about making mass shootings a rarity like they use to be in the US,
Not to minimize the tragic loss of life that comes from mass shootings, and with all due respect to the victims, but mass shootings ARE a rarity right now. Mass shootings account for 1/10th of 1% of all homicides in this country.
Last edited by WhipperSnapper 88; 11-02-2015 at 12:11 AM..
You asked what could possibly be done to prevent or stop some of these mass shootings. In answer to your own question, you support Universal Background Checks...
Name me one of the recent mass shooters that didn't pass a background check to buy their gun? Save, for the Sandy Hook Shooter, who actually did fail a background check, and stole his mothers guns.
Now don't come back and say "a law doesn't have to be 100% effective to be worth it".... Of course that is true enough, but your question was what can be done in relation to mass shootings, and as far as mass shootings are concerned, background checks aren't doing diddly.
Current background checks clearly do not go far enough, but that doesn't answer my question with what should be done? This is a question I think only the GOP will be able to answer because it will require their support to make something happen.
I can tell you now that if you eliminate firearms from the equation, you will see bombings introduced in their place. The problem isn't with the guns but rather with our culture. Until you address the issue that is driving this, you will never reduce the mass killings. All you will do is change the weaponry and possibly make matters even worse.
And we should be changing our culture on guns, though I am surprised we haven't seen mass killings resorting to bigger things like bombs. So again I ask, what should we be doing?
Current background checks clearly do not go far enough, but that doesn't answer my question with what should be done? This is a question I think only the GOP will be able to answer because it will require their support to make something happen.
Don't go far enough? What exactly does that mean?
A lot of these shooters don't have a criminal record, and have never been judged mentally ill by a court. How much further can a background check go?
And we should be changing our culture on guns, though I am surprised we haven't seen mass killings resorting to bigger things like bombs. So again I ask, what should we be doing?
What does that mean? Sounds a lot like a sneaky way of saying social engineering. Like saying we should discourage gun ownership. Demonize and stigmatize gun owners, like we did with cigarette smokers over the last few decades. I don't like the sound of it.
One thing about our gun culture we could change, is that we could quit depcting guns as play things in our entertainment. Of course, that would require that we humans give up our lusting over violence in entertainment, and that isn't likely to happen.
And we should be changing our culture on guns, though I am surprised we haven't seen mass killings resorting to bigger things like bombs. So again I ask, what should we be doing?
No, we shouldn't be making changes to our gun culture. What we should be doing is making parents responsible once again and in particular men. We need to work on recreating the family unit and instilling respect, honor and decency in our youth. We need to work towards stopping children having children through education. We need to start reporting peculiar behavior of troubled youth and start developing a system to handle such youth. Each of these shooters gave warning signs that were ignored. This country needs its people to begin enforcing existing laws, including gun laws. There are plenty on the books, but they simply aren't enforced. If these current laws are not enforced, what makes you think new laws will be?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
