We need more gun control

What do you suggest? Just watched a segment on the tv on the rally at NRA after the shooting with people screaming “their blood is on your hands”. This is what I’m sick and tired of, don’t blame law enforcement for not following thru on tips, don’t blame the kids who saw the signs and didn’t speak up and most of all DONT BLAME THE SHOOTER! Misplaced anger and rage. Let’s have a counter rally where we have potential victims who were saved by individuals who had guns. Can’t have that, oh no. Focus the blame where it should be...the individual.

rascal said:

Absolutely false decision tree there. In the past five years the US gun homicide rate of children is about 46% of the 1990-95 rate. In other words less than half of what it was a generation ago.

By Everytown for gun safety definition of US school shootings, they are today about 1/3 of what they were 25 years ago.

by Everytown's definition both Berlin (186 children mass murdered) and Utoya (69 shot dead) are school shootings and the US has never had a school shooting approaching either of those.

In fact Norway's mass school shooting death rate per capita the past ten years is much higher than the US.

We do not know all the details, but it looks for certain this guy made felony level specific threats of specific violence against specific people and the school local authorities, or increasingly likely the FBI totally fell down on the job.

I cant think of anything worse than advocating reductions in fourth, fifth or second amendment rights -- all while violent crime and murder rates are actually in a long term decline

Click to expand...

That guy was known to the fbi just like the Lanza boy who killed the school kids at sandy hook. But both of those guys are sick. Mentally ill, crazy, nuts, whatever you call it. They should not have been out in society.

Schipperke said:

Much of the drop in crime rates in USA was median age rising to now 38 years old, from the upper 20's in the 1970's.
The median age in Germany and Japan are 47! Much of Europe is reaching a median age of 45. Much of Africa's countries have median age's in the mid teens!

Crime rates can be directly correlated to the median age of a country. Makes perfect sense, as the majority of violent criminals tend to be younger. So while gun availability in Europe is used as a reason for lower gun murder rates, do we ever get the story on median age of Europe?

Click to expand...

Nowhere near affect of increased incarceration in large decreases in in murder rates. If it were mainly median age than why did US murder rates blip up specifically when US incarceration rates dropped four years ago, and go up most in cities where incarceration fell the most (all while median age went the other way)?

Incarceration rates are not merely a theoretical "correlation" they are slam dunk "casual" since 80-90% of all murders -- and all murder victims -- are themselves prior criminals. Locking them up longer removes the vast majority of the pool from which both murderers and their victims come from

so media age is relevant but nowhere near as big a a casual factor in violent crime reduction that incarceration rates are within US trends. Also Europe median age has been more than the US, and its murder trend reduction is nowhere near the proportion of reduction in murder (down ~60%) the US has seen in the past 25 years. Europeans got older than Americans did and did not see the drop we saw when we near tripled incarceration rates.

Also if it were only median age than the age cohort of 35-55 should not be committing less murder in 2015 than 1995, but that group also commits half as much murder as it did. Americans who are 40 year old in 2015 committed less murder than Americans who were 40 in 1993. It is not just that there wqere more 20 youer olds per cpatia in 1993; any 10,000 20 year olds IN 1993 committed more murder than 10,000 20 year olds do today.

Lots of developed democracies saw populations age more than the US, and only Australians came close in murder trend change (about 43% decline from its 1990's peak murder) to the US with our more than 50% decline.

so what was the same in the Us and Australia big success in cutting murder, but different than Europe? US, Canada, Australia, Europe all saw older populations, all saw abortion availability, all saw lead exposure to children drop. But only Australia and the US had increases in incarceration and huge decrease in murder rates.

In fact it is a handful of US cities that intentionally reduced incarceration rates outside of US trends the past five year that saw the big increases in murder (and ar ehthe sole driver of the slight reversal in overall murder rate trends.

And US murder rate reduction flattened the past five year, and rose in a handful of cities that did NOT see mediasn age reduction, but did see reduction in incarceration rates. In fact chicgo and Detroit saw big increase in murder 2-4 years ago, and then increase incarceration last year and saw drops in murder -- all with no appreciable changes in median age.

44man said:

Then worry not, because if something isn’t done one day you will be living in a country without guns.

I am starting to believe folks just don’t care when school kids are massacred, unless they are there kids.

Click to expand...

there are MUCH bigger massacre of school kids in Europe. Beslin 186 dead , Utoya 69 dead.


In the US murder of children 0-5 is mostly done by a mentally ill mother and virtually never with a gun. Murder 5-15 is driven by prior or active criminals withing homes, and 15-20 is driven by gang membership or criminal acicity by the victim themselves. "School massacres" are extremely rare in our country of 350 million people, a tiny tiny fraction of child death, and a tiny fraction of child murder.

Are you saying because we don't want to shred the fourth and fifth amendments we 'don't care" about kids unless it our kids??? that is specious.

And saying that if we don't get rid of part of the second amendment, we will lose it all is uttelry counterfactual. It is when small reductions in the second amendments are made that bigger ones follow (see California). The anti second amendment groups have a well understood and directly acknowledged strategy of incrementalism. If hey win a compromise, they quite specifically use that win to assert support for MORE reductions.

So advocating endless incremental compromise is the road to loss of gun rights, strong stands against compromise are the road to keeping them


If you want to "do" something, join the NRA, GOA and SAF or if a member send them some more money.

44man said:

That guy was known to the fbi just like the Lanza boy who killed the school kids at sandy hook. But both of those guys are sick. Mentally ill, crazy, nuts, whatever you call it. They should not have been out in society.

Click to expand...

Sorry but this guy in florida is very different. His mental health is trivial compared to his making CRIMINALLY actionable specific threats.

I've read the Sandy Hook report front to back and back to front, there is nothing that rises to the level of incompetence by federal law enforcement or any law enforcement that these Florida murders appears to. there was no felony level specif threat made by Lanza.

Lanza, like Aurora, involved third parties who knew of severe dangers and who should have acted (Mrs Lanza, and Holmes psychiatrist), but this florida case looks to be is utterly Keystone cops behavior by law enforcement, specifically the FBi itself.

rascal said:

"School massacres" are extremely rare in our country of 350 million people, a tiny tiny fraction of child death, and a tiny fraction of child murder.

Click to expand...

But its the only one that gets real headlines. That in and of itself is a problem.....

rascal said:

there are MUCH bigger massacre of school kids in Europe. Beslin 186 dead , Utoya 69 dead.


In the US murder of children 0-5 is mostly done by a mentally ill mother and virtually never with a gun. Murder 5-15 is driven by prior or active criminals withing homes, and 15-20 is driven by gang membership or criminal acicity by the victim themselves. "School massacres" are extremely rare in our country of 350 million people, a tiny tiny fraction of child death, and a tiny fraction of child murder.

Are you saying because we don't want to shred the fourth and fifth amendments we 'don't care" about kids unless it our kids??? that is specious.

And saying that if we don't get rid of part of the second amendment, we will lose it all is uttelry counterfactual. It is when small reductions in the second amendments are made that bigger ones follow (see California). The anti second amendment groups have a well understood and directly acknowledged strategy of incrementalism. If hey win a compromise, they quite specifically use that win to assert support for MORE reductions.

So advocating endless incremental compromise is the road to loss of gun rights, strong stands against compromise are the road to keeping them


If you want to "do" something, join the NRA, GOA and SAF or if a member send them some more money.

Click to expand...

I don't mean to hijack this thread but as per the bolded part of the above quote, in 2016 (I believe the year is correct) the CDC stated 200 plus children from the age of 0 to 14 were killed by drunk drivers and 2200 plus kids age from 15 to 20 are killed by drunk driving. These stats do not include violence due to being under the influence. These numbers also don't include those 18 or under who have committed suicide while under the influence whether by firearm, blade, pills or self strangulation.

They, and definitely Maryland, want to continuously restrict our 2A rights but yet they keeping opening more and more microbrew and microspirit pubs putting more and more people under the influence on the roads. If I had a dollar for every time I see one of these anti 2A liberals in brew pub with their infants and toddlers I would have been able to retire several years ago.

I think if I can make it to a Patriot Picket I'm going to hold a sign that says 21A kills more kids than the 2A! Maybe even holster an unopened full growler.

44man said:

They would do anything to have their kids back, anything

Click to expand...

This is not even close to true, and it does nothing to help make your case.

The fix isn't gun control or mental health treatment. Plenty of mentally ill that have the meds and treatment options don't take them. People need to be allowed to defend themselves without fear of prosecution or persecution. Its hard with school age children but times are changing and an armed police presence at schools would be the best option. Maybe a police force needs to be created strictly for schools with different training geared towards the specific mission of dealing with and protecting children. Politicians have there own protection. Why not our kids? Whack jobs have very little fear of resistance in places where people are unarmed or are too young or old to be armed. The whole veiw of guns and self defense in this country needs to change. Everybody is worried about feelings instead of action. YOU CANT HAVE HEROS IN A WORLD OF FEELINGS. Our heros are usually dead from being human sheilds.

Seems like we need less gun control so we can possibly defend ourselves against YOUR kid and others like him.
G&S?

Fredcohunter said:

yes I am aware of that. I focused more on the content of the post rather than the thread title

Click to expand...

Apparently, not. Here's some content:

But when it comes to gun control we need more of it.

Click to expand...

Mental illness in general is not the issue. The vast majority of people with mental illness are not violent and certainly not criminally violent. Criminally-violent mental illness is rare. Rare enough that it's easy to recognize when the signs are there. Cruz pegged the crazy-and-violent meter for years. Lanza did for years as well, regardless of false assertions made in this thread. Guns are not to blame. Neither are knives or anything else that can be weaponized. We need to get serious in this country about weeding out and dealing with people who are mentally ill and violent. It's a toxic combination and common denominator in mass shootings. Although our society decided decades ago to eliminate mental illness facilities in the broad context, we desperately need those facilities to be resurrected for the relatively-small amount of mentally ill people who pose an obvious, permanent, extreme danger to themselves and others. Above all else, we need to stop treating those people as common criminals. They are not. They are a cut above, ticking time bombs, and pose far more danger to everyone.

lonewolf220 said:

What you are proposing is denying the 2nd amendment rights to people based on what someone determines is a mental health issue. Again who defines this? Maybe they’ll say all religious people are crazy for believing in some guy in the sky who they think talks to them and answers their prayers. Let’s go ahead and lock them up cause we don’t need those people owning guns. Or maybe we’ll lock up the die hard sport fanatics who always refer to the team as “my team” even though they aren’t on it or have any ownership and outcomes have no impact on their life. Clearly they are crazy. Or maybe anyone who denies climate change is considered incapable of rationale thought and therefore can’t be trusted with a firearm. It is nuts to think politicians won’t try to use your solution to bar more people from owing guns

I’m not willing to live in a tyrannical state to keep my guns. Isn’t that part of the reason we want the 2nd, to put a check on an oppressive government?

Click to expand...

This is the best post in the thread. Whoever's in charge at the time will determine who goes on the mentally ill list and who doesn't. Well done, Sir.

Now please stop with the post whoring. 11 contributions since 2014 is highly unacceptable.

Man the **** up, do the work necessary to have him adjudicated mentally defective now and get that entered into NICS.

GHETTO BLASTER said:

The fix isn't gun control or mental health treatment. Plenty of mentally ill that have the meds and treatment options don't take them. People need to be allowed to defend themselves without fear of prosecution or persecution. Its hard with school age children but times are changing and an armed police presence at schools would be the best option. Maybe a police force needs to be created strictly for schools with different training geared towards the specific mission of dealing with and protecting children. Politicians have there own protection. Why not our kids? Whack jobs have very little fear of resistance in places where people are unarmed or are too young or old to be armed. The whole veiw of guns and self defense in this country needs to change. Everybody is worried about feelings instead of action. YOU CANT HAVE HEROS IN A WORLD OF FEELINGS. Our heros are usually dead from being human sheilds.

Click to expand...

I want to see a political leader step to a mic on national TV, and exhibit both the balls and the actual leadership to say exactly this. Instead, its the guns are bad focus, or the evil NRA focus, or its the mental health system shortcomings focus, or its the FBI and its shortcomings focus.

And all the while given today's PC circle jerk, the unprotected (school kids and law abiding citizens both) aren't the focus, and as such remain as unprotected tomorrow as they were yesterday.

You defend against guns with guns. And I DON'T CARE about the why's or the wherefores or the reasons why leopards are and will act like leopards, at the time one or more of them (for whatever reason) poses a threat. There's time for that discussion AFTER the threat they pose has been addressed.

iH8DemLibz said:

This is the best post in the thread. Whoever's in charge at the time will determine who goes on the mentally ill list and who doesn't. Well done, Sir.

Now please stop with the post whoring. 11 contributions since 2014 is highly unacceptable.

Click to expand...

Thanks. I tend to stay quiet unless I have a strong opinion on something. I prefer to sit back and learn from those who clearly know more than me

Hunterjjd, when I was in High School there was a great deal of access to guns. I had many friends that had rifles and shotguns sitting in their bedroom closet. Even so, mass shootings in schools was unheard of, even in high crime neighborhoods. This is not simply a matter of gun control.

lonewolf220 said:

Thanks. I tend to stay quiet unless I have a strong opinion on something. I prefer to sit back and learn from those who clearly know more than me

Click to expand...

Don't sell yourself short. You're probably better informed and more knowledgeable than a lot of blowhards. MD's General Assembly is chock full of ignorant blowhards.

rascal said:

there are MUCH bigger massacre of school kids in Europe. Beslin 186 dead , Utoya 69 dead.


In the US murder of children 0-5 is mostly done by a mentally ill mother and virtually never with a gun. Murder 5-15 is driven by prior or active criminals withing homes, and 15-20 is driven by gang membership or criminal acicity by the victim themselves. "School massacres" are extremely rare in our country of 350 million people, a tiny tiny fraction of child death, and a tiny fraction of child murder.

Are you saying because we don't want to shred the fourth and fifth amendments we 'don't care" about kids unless it our kids??? that is specious.

And saying that if we don't get rid of part of the second amendment, we will lose it all is uttelry counterfactual. It is when small reductions in the second amendments are made that bigger ones follow (see California). The anti second amendment groups have a well understood and directly acknowledged strategy of incrementalism. If hey win a compromise, they quite specifically use that win to assert support for MORE reductions.

So advocating endless incremental compromise is the road to loss of gun rights, strong stands against compromise are the road to keeping them


If you want to "do" something, join the NRA, GOA and SAF or if a member send them some more money.

Click to expand...

I have never said a thing about weakening the 2a ever.

There should be no gun control, no mds, or even the atf shouldn’t be.

But nuts shouldn’t be free on the streets with the rest of us, period.

And I am a member of all those groups, I am an nra lifer, and they get plenty of my money.

Boom Boom said:

Don't sell yourself short. You're probably better informed and more knowledgeable than a lot of blowhards. MD's General Assembly is chock full of ignorant blowhards.

Click to expand...

Yes! Given that low bar, we are all on pas with Einstein.