• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

Mass Shooting and Gun Control Megathread

If I have to paint it black and white like that, then yeah I think my (and others) right to own whatever the hell we want is more important.

i know my question was blunt, and emotionally charged. thanks for the honest answer.

What happened in Uvalde, and all the other school shootings, is horrific. I don’t wish death upon children.

indeed. we can surely all agree on that.

It's really unfair to ask CG? if he thinks his constitutional right to own a gun is more important than children not dying.

i don't believe so.

people demonstrably believe that kids dying in mass shootings again and again is the price society pays for the right to bear arms. we should be able to discuss that.

cg? took the question in the spirit in which it was intended and answered honestly. i've asked that question before and i think this may be the first time somebody has answered.

alasdair
 
but, with due respect, 19 dead children and 2 dead adults at robb elementary, 20 dead children and 6 dead adults at sandy hook, etc. is the price society pays so that you (plural) can have a gun, right?

so, on some level, it's more important that those people died and americans have guns than they lived and americans don't?

alasdair

I think that's a little unfair... it's not a black and white thing. Someone thinking we should be able to have guns doesn't mean they also think school shootings are an acceptable price to pay. The situation in other countries that allow guns to citizens suggests that the mass shooting problem we have has its roots in something other than gun ownership. Certainly the easy availability of large magazine, fast shooting rifles increases the death tolls in these incidents, but removing the sale of them wouldn't stop it. Nor do I believe that people suddenly wouldn't be able to get them. As drug prohibition has shown, prohibition doesn't work.

At this point the cat is out of the bag, there are too many guns to stop people who want guns from having them. There are more guns than there are humans in America. Perhaps if our gun culture and availability was totally different from the start... but that isn't the case.

I think we need to enforce measures already in place, and strengthen said measures, like background checks and sale delays (like a 10 day waiting period to help prevent impulsive purchases while people are enraged or having a moment)... largely increased background checks... many of the mass shooters we come to find out had been openly stating their plans on social media ahead of time. It would be a simple matter to check that stuff before making a sale and I think it would make a big difference.

The other important thing (even more important) is addressing the reasons why so many angry young men are deciding they want to commit mass shootings.

So I’m a little confused how anyone who is pro-legalization/anti-prohibition can turn around and say “a whole population of people shouldn’t have rights because sometimes people die.” Yeah, people die from drugs too you know, far more than from guns. And I 100% believe drugs don’t kill people, people kill people. No one ODs on ‘accident’ for the most part, they know the risks they’re taking with their life and they ignore them.

I agree with the stuff you were saying by and large, except that these days, there are tons of accidental ODs, because of fentanyl, especially fentanyl in cocaine/etc, but also fentanyl sold as heroin and oxys. The same bag can have hot spots, so one time you're fine, and the next time you overdose. Of course, legalization and regulation would solve that problem.
 
I agree with the stuff you were saying by and large, except that these days, there are tons of accidental ODs, because of fentanyl, especially fentanyl in cocaine/etc, but also fentanyl sold as heroin and oxys. The same bag can have hot spots, so one time you're fine, and the next time you overdose. Of course, legalization and regulation would solve that problem.
True, I don’t blame people for being addicted, nor for accidentally ODing on fent. It’s a real problem and one that should truly be addressed *legalize heroin cough cough*. It was a bit harsh for me to say “most ODs are intentional” when that hasn’t been the case for five or so years now.

I didn’t mean to demonize drug use of any sort, rather offer the comparison of how fent is killing 100k people annually, far more than guns do.
 
Should the legal purchase age go up? Yeah. Should we instill minor waiting periods? For sure. Should we expand background checks? Definitely. Should we have red flag laws? Depends on how they’re enforced, I have a feeling they may become the new “swatting” approach when you hate someone but don’t have the balls to fight them. If your parents and wife testify you’re not in a good state of mind and they’re worried, yeah read lag laws would be good. But I worry about how broad red flag laws might be interpreted. Should we have licensing for carrying handguns? Absolutely, it’s not an undue burden upon citizens and it helps put you into the FBI database so they can be sure if you’ve committed a crime with your gun. Should LTCs be ‘shall issue’? Definitely, the NYC law will (and should be, it infringes on 2A rights heavily) struck down. Should we bar ‘mentally I’ll’ people from owning guns? I’m not sure, like with the red flag laws that could be a good thing or very bad. If someone has ADD are they then disqualified? Or being treated by your GP with a psychiatric substanceoff-label? The mental health thing is a slippery slope. I’m all for keeping guns out of the hands of actual lunatics but just because someone sees a counselor weekly for stress or depression doesn’t mean their rights should be taken from them.
All of these statements are forms of responsible gun control. Kudos to you as a gun owner to acknowledge and admit something needs to be done above and beyond the status quo. So why are most other gun owners and the lawmakers they vote for so insistent on NOT allowing any of this to happen?

Also, gun ownership is not a God given right. It's a right given by the Constitution, which by the way was written by deists and explicitly does not mention God or Jesus anywhere.
 

He brings up some good points. I've always been faithful to the "entertainment doesn't cause violence" crowd/studies, but I'm really not so sure when I think about it. These movies and games are so immensely popular that I find it hard to believe a mass shooter HASN'T played or watched them even if it had nothing to do with it.

Violent entertainment has been with us for so long it's engrained in our culture. I don't know if we can really blame it, but it seems almost dumb not to in at least some little way.

I'm surprised he didn't mention this video game mission in which you literally walk into an airport and mass murder hundreds of civilians on purpose:



The uvalde shooter loved this game...
 
Should the legal purchase age go up? Yeah. Should we instill minor waiting periods? For sure. Should we expand background checks? Definitely. Should we have red flag laws? Depends on how they’re enforced, I have a feeling they may become the new “swatting” approach when you hate someone but don’t have the balls to fight them. If your parents and wife testify you’re not in a good state of mind and they’re worried, yeah read lag laws would be good. But I worry about how broad red flag laws might be interpreted. Should we have licensing for carrying handguns? Absolutely, it’s not an undue burden upon citizens and it helps put you into the FBI database so they can be sure if you’ve committed a crime with your gun....
We're in 99% agreement on these issues, yet somehow you are seen as "pro-gun" and I am seen as "anti-gun."

Why is that?
 
He brings up some good points. I've always been faithful to the "entertainment doesn't cause violence" crowd/studies, but I'm really not so sure when I think about it. These movies and games are so immensely popular that I find it hard to believe a mass shooter HASN'T played or watched them even if it had nothing to do with it.

Violent entertainment has been with us for so long it's engrained in our culture. I don't know if we can really blame it, but it seems almost dumb not to in at least some little way.

I'm surprised he didn't mention this video game mission in which you literally walk into an airport and mass murder hundreds of civilians on purpose:



The uvalde shooter loved this game...

Yeah, I am not (nor is Bill) saying that movies and video games cause mass shootings. We're just saying that when kids grow up watching thousands of hours of extreme violence (often glorified), it surely must have some kind of effect on them.
 
Senate just reached a deal. Has enough votes to pass into law

FVEBt0mWYAIGxWL

FVEBuFxXsAUDuvC

FVEBuTqXoAAj0Wr


 
We're in 99% agreement on these issues, yet somehow you are seen as "pro-gun" and I am seen as "anti-gun."

Why is that?
I guess the major difference is I believe in civilian ownership of military style weaponry. I believe that is enshrined in the second amendment and that it is already being infringed upon by the NFA from the 1930s and subsequent laws that have curtailed ownership of various weapons.

As stated in a previous post I think, I believe fully automatic weapons should be legal. I mean, technically they are, but because of the 1986 law they’re collector items worth more than a new car, and thus unobtainable by the average citizen.
 
This election season has been crazy with the masa shootings. After seeing what that guy that went to assassinate Brett kavanaugh said, I absolutely see some sort of mk ultra shit being employed. The mexican shooter in Texas was in a discord with multiple federal agents, they know exactly what they are doing IMO
 
The proposed senate legislation sounds like a great step. As long as they leave bans out of these new laws them I’m on board.
 
The proposed senate legislation sounds like a great step. As long as they leave bans out of these new laws them I’m on board.
Only part I don't like is red flag laws.

Remember when parents speaking up at school board meetings were labeled as potential Domestic Terrorists in an FBI memo? Too much room for abuse imo
 
Only part I don't like is red flag laws.

Remember when parents speaking up at school board meetings were labeled as potential Domestic Terrorists in an FBI memo? Too much room for abuse imo
Yeah, I’m not a huge fan of red flag laws. Where do they draw the line? Just because someone is a misanthropic loner doesn’t mean they’re crazy. It’s like I said, it may well become the next version of “swatting” people.

I also worry about the focus on “mental health”; again, where is the line drawn? Is someone with ADD or depression “dangerous” or “unstable”? I really doubt it.

Even if mental health counseling was 100% free to me, I’d never use it now, because it’s an excuse to say, “This person should be disarmed against their will,” and falsely claim that they might somehow be “dangerous” just because they want a third party to discuss their issues with.

The stigmatization of those suffering from mental health issues is seemingly getting worse, not better. Shooting up a school isn’t a mental health issue… it’s sheer evil, sheer madness. Yes we need to addrsss mental health… but saying that anyone who is ever given counseling or psychiatric medication is “unstable” is just absolutely fucked up and wrong.

If red flag laws are to be implemented, there should be a strong system of checks and balances to ensure people don’t have their rights infringed without a proper reason, i.e. having at least ten people ranging from friends to family to coworkers testifying against someone to prove they’re actually a danger.
 
Top