And the shootings go on and on , and on, and on...

win231 said:
Well, you are expecting a sick psycho to think like a normal human being. A bit of logic would explain why a buy-back wouldn't help.
A nut case is planning a mass shooting & probably a suicide. He hears about a gun buy-back where he can get a gift card for a couple of meals or maybe $100.00 for his gun (that's what they pay).
So....he has a change of heart & cancels his mass murder plan for a free meal or $100.00??
Click to expand...
A question for you.
Does the United States have a higher rate of mental illness than other countries?
 

911 said:
How about:
1. Legislation that would limit the type of guns Americans could possess
2. Meaningful background checks
3. Disallow the manufacture of certain assault weapons, except for those used by the military and law enforcement
4. Gun owners could not possess a gun that used a detachable magazine
5. Maximum size magazine would be 10 bullets
6. Mandate that all gun owners be required to complete a safety course
7. Any prior felon caught having a gun in their possession would automatically be returned to prison to serve out the remainder of any sentence and if there was no sentence to serve out, a minimum sentence of 15 years would be imposed, plus fine if found guilty
8. Heavy jail sentence and fine for anyone breaking any of the above stated rules

Even imposing these rules would not guarantee that there would never be another mass shooting. But, it’s a start, a foothold, if you will. Something to build on.
Click to expand...

I believe your answer is the best answer I have ever heard.(y)(y)
 
Prohibit manufacture of assault weapons. Works if every country is banned from manufacturing. Other limits on ownership work if all are confiscated and illegal imports are 100% effective. Neither will happen so I doubt as a solution that would work. It's nice but not practical. I'll go with Albert Einstein's thinking.

As Albert Einstein said, “We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” Technology hasn’t created all of those problems – but it could provide some of the answers.

An example of technology combining factual input. https://lawcenter.giffords.org/scorecard/

I didn't read anywhere what laws are effective in that presentation. What was there is LEGISLATORS ENACTED A RECORD 67 NEW GUN SAFETY LAWS IN 26 STATES AND DC

I don't think quantity is what the criteria should be. As a start IMO inputting factual statistics using technology to determine what works then implementing those in all 50 states what has been shown to work would be the way to go.
 
IMO we need to focus on the criminal and not the criminal's weapon.

These atrocities have been committed for different reasons but it seems like in many of these cases the criminals have exhibited odd behavior, had previous run-ins with the law, taken to social media with rants and manifestos, made threats to family friends and employers, etc... and no one has taken them seriously enough to properly follow-up with them, confiscate their weapons, request a 72 hour psychiatric hold, etc...
 
Aunt Bea said:
IMO we need to focus on the criminal and not the criminal's weapon.

These atrocities have been committed for different reasons but it seems like in many of these cases the criminals have exhibited odd behavior, had previous run-ins with the law, taken to social media with rants and manifestos, made threats to family friends and employers, etc... and no one has taken them seriously enough to properly follow-up with them, confiscate their weapons, request a 72 hour psychiatric hold, etc...
Click to expand...

I think we need to focus on the motive as well as the means. Facts are facts. Other countries have the same mental health problems we do, but since they don't have the kinds of liberal gun ownership we have, their gun death rates are dramatically lower than ours.
 
win231 said:
I don't know. What does that have to do with a gun buy-back?
Click to expand...
That's one of the excuses used by the gun lobby for mass shootings.
Knight said:
Prohibit manufacture of assault weapons. Works if every country is banned from manufacturing. Other limits on ownership work if all are confiscated and illegal imports are 100% effective. Neither will happen so I doubt as a solution that would work. It's nice but not practical. I'll go with Albert Einstein's thinking.

As Albert Einstein said, “We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” Technology hasn’t created all of those problems – but it could provide some of the answers.

An example of technology combining factual input. https://lawcenter.giffords.org/scorecard/

I didn't read anywhere what laws are effective in that presentation. What was there is LEGISLATORS ENACTED A RECORD 67 NEW GUN SAFETY LAWS IN 26 STATES AND DC

I don't think quantity is what the criteria should be. As a start IMO inputting factual statistics using technology to determine what works then implementing those in all 50 states what has been shown to work would be the way to go.
Click to expand...
The claim is that background checks don't work.
But how would you know that someone turned down didn't stop a gun crime?
Without a background check proven previous violators would be able to buy a gun legally.
 
StarSong said:
I think we need to focus on the motive as well as the means. Facts are facts. Other countries have the same mental health problems we do, but since they don't have the kinds of liberal gun ownership we have, their gun death rates are dramatically lower than ours.
Click to expand...
I understand what you are saying but I don't believe that we will ever be able to put the genie back in the bottle when it comes to gun ownership in America. The vast majority of American gun owners are not part of this problem and shouldn't be penalized for the behaviour of a few. I do agree with some controls like background checks, red flag laws, elimination of fully automatic weapons or aftermarket accessories that increase the capacity of a gun but I do not believe that eliminating gun ownership is the answer.
 
Aunt Bea said:
I understand what you are saying but I don't believe that we will ever be able to put the genie back in the bottle when it comes to gun ownership in America. The vast majority of American gun owners are not part of this problem and shouldn't be penalized for the behaviour of a few. I do agree with some controls like background checks, red flag laws, elimination of fully automatic weapons or aftermarket accessories that increase the capacity of a gun but I do not believe that eliminating gun ownership is the answer.
Click to expand...

This is precisely what most people are saying should happen, myself included.
 
Camper6 said:
A question for you.
Does the United States have a higher rate of mental illness than other countries?
Click to expand...

I looked at several sites and it doesn't seem as though we do by diagnosis; one study showed slightly elevated rates of schizophrenia than other industrialized nations. But we do have a very high rate of people on psychotropic meds including kids on ADHD meds. The numbers of adults on them don't correlate with rates of mental illness--looks like many more are taking them than the diagnosis rates warrant. But that's not surprising since Big Pharma skews research studies with grants, sponsors most healthcare continuing education and throws the most money to politicians; they're at the top when you look at lobbying dollars by industry. I can't help but think that all those meds play a roll.
 
Camper6 said:
Fine but is it only males taking meds? They are the ones taking lives including their own. Something doesn't add up.
Click to expand...

I don't know if anyone has looked at how the use of the med impacts a child's developing brain in a meaningful way since a negative finding would be the sort of thing pharmaceutical companies wouldn't want known. Gender hormones may play into it. And I don't think there's anything published as to whether males who commit violent acts ever took them. Or whether it's socialization. Are these males the product of parents who are well to do enough to get them psych meds, buy them the tech to play first person shooter games and afford guns. I just don't know. We need to strengthen gun laws, and we need to know the factors behind what makes someone a mass murderer as well.

Edited to say ...before the widespread use of psych meds in kids, white males were more likely to become serial killers regardless of their method of killing. Lots that preyed on women strangled them. Then there's Ted Kaczynski who preferred to blow people up.
 
AnnieA said:
I don't know if anyone has looked at how the use of the med impacts a child's developing brain in a meaningful way since a negative finding would be the sort of thing pharmaceutical companies wouldn't want known. Gender hormones may play into it. And I don't think there's anything published as to whether males who commit violent acts ever took them. Or whether it's socialization. Are these males the product of parents who are well to do enough to get them psych meds, buy them the tech to play first person shooter games and afford guns. I just don't know. We need to strengthen gun laws, and we need to know the factors behind what makes someone a mass murderer as well.

Edited to say ...before the widespread use of psych meds in kids, white males were more likely to become serial killers regardless of their method of killing. Lots that preyed on women strangled them. Then there's Ted Kaczynski who preferred to blow people up.
Click to expand...
They're not interested in looking at Rx drugs because they make huge profits from antidepressants. Why look at something that will hurt profits when they already have a scapegoat that's free? And treating people with mental health issues costs money.
They also won't look at our pathetic revolving-door justice system. Releasing violent felons after they serve a fraction of their sentence is cost effective - especially with aging inmates whose costs increase as they age. And when they commit mass murder, just blame the gun they used.
 
Is it a problem of criminality? Looking at incarceration rates by population of different countries, US has an awful lot of people locked up. How many more can be squeezed into existing prisons and how many more prisons are needed?

Half of the world's prison population of about nine million is held in the US, China or Russia.


CountryPrison populationPopulation per 100,000
US2,193,798 737
CHINA1,548,498118
RUSSIA874,161615
BRAZIL371,482193

*** Australia has a prison population of 172/100,000, so not too far below Brazil. Canada is 114, UK 140

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate*** Perhaps not the same year as the above figures but you can search the list for a better comparison.

This may look like a red herring but is it? Is there an underlying problem in US society that does not exist in other countries that you have such a big problem with gun violence? Is it, as some people suggest, a problem of medication? How does the medication rate compare with other countries? Does this correlate with their incarceration and gun violence rate?

People are screaming out "Do Something". Making excuses for doing nothing is not going to last very much longer. Something needs to be done but it must address the root cause of the problem and it will need to be uncomfortable for some. Nowhere near as uncomfortable as having a family member taken out but an angry man with a gun.

To really decide whether the problem is the number of guns per 100,000, or the easy access to assault weapons, or some other societal factor, a serious study needs to be undertaken. Perhaps it already has been and is being ignored because of political pressure from powerful industries.
 
The stupid, worn out saying "Guns don't kill people, people do" should answer these questions. When the autopsies are performed do the doctors find people in the bullet wounds or bullets? Second question is during murder trials when a firearm is used is that firearm ever presented as evidence during the trials?
 
There is going to be a big turnaround coming soon. The president can't go into an election based on promises. Today Walmart announced they would no longer be selling ammunition for AR type weapons. Also no one will be allowed to carry a weapon into Walmart. The claim that a gun is an inert object. When it is activated it's no longer inert.
 
The issue isn't whether the U.S. has more mental illness or not. I imagine the frequency of mental illness is about the same all over the world. The big difference is the gun-worshipers here, who are holding the rest of us hostage to the violence and tragedy caused by their puppet-like following of the
NRA's nonsense. An unarmed mentally ill person is much less of a threat. Even a mentally ill person armed with a knife is much less of a threat. The variable is not mental illness, it's the guns.
 
Sunny said:
The issue isn't whether the U.S. has more mental illness or not. I imagine the frequency of mental illness is about the same all over the world. The big difference is the gun-worshipers here, who are holding the rest of us hostage to the violence and tragedy caused by their puppet-like following of the
NRA's nonsense. An unarmed mentally ill person is much less of a threat. Even a mentally ill person armed with a knife is much less of a threat. The variable is not mental illness, it's the guns.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's the guns at all. I think it's our culture and our economic system that by it's very nature leaves millions of people left out and marginalized. A certain small percentage of these are going to crack under the stress and act out.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top