Shooting erupts at Colorado supermarket, bloodied man shown in handcuffs

[Thomas J]

3 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

have no argument on the fact that current laws required background check. Apparently the checks are not extensive enough

That is like saying "lots" what is "extensive enough"  Right now they are mandated to run a person through the NCIS system by the FBI.  That determines if the person is a felon who would be ineligible to purchase a firearm.  Now what "other" checks.  Call his neighbors and see if he is a "nice guy"  What would you be checking on that would make the person "ineligible" 

In terms of a gun registry. Attached is a link the the form a dealer must complete when a gun is sold.  So is that not a record or who owns guns?  Now even if there is a "registry" as you envision it for firearms.  What does that do to prevent crime?  It only shows who "legally" owns a gun, not who is going to or likely to misuse a firearm. So you know have the "REGISTRY" as you envision it.  What exactly is the government to do with that information to "prevent" mass shootings. 

Now in terms of your comments that this is broken and out of control. 
A database compiled by the Associated Press (AP), USA Today and Northeastern University recorded 41 incidents and a total of 211 deaths.in 2019.  To put that into context that is 4 days of death toll on Thailand roads.  I don't mean to minimize the death of anyone but the media has hyped mass shootings to the point where the imagery is endless bodies each day in the street. 

 

Homicides committed with firearms peaked in 1993 at 17,075, after which the figure steadily fell, reaching a low of 10,117 in 1999. Gun-related homicides increased slightly after that, to a high of 11,547 in 2006, before falling again to 10,869 in 2008.[4]

Find data on homicides by weapon type from the Bureau of Justice
Statistics.

Now you say "something" must be done.  Here is a list of the worst mass killings using a firearm.  Please tell me exactly 'WHAT LAW' would have prevented these persons from obtaining a firearm and performing the mass murder.  If there isn't a law that would do that, than passing more laws is merely window dressing. 

 

Las Vegas Strip massacre (Las Vegas, NV, 2017)

Orlando nightclub massacre (Orlando, Florida, 2016)

Virginia Tech massacre (Blacksburg, Virginia, 2007)

Sandy Hook Elementary massacre (Newtown, Connecticut, 2012)

Texas First Baptist Church massacre (Sutherland Springs, TX, 2017

Luby's massacre (Killeen, Texas, 1991)

San Ysidro McDonald's massacre (San Ysidro, California, 1984)

El Paso Walmart mass shooting (El Paso, Texas, 2019)

Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting (Parkland, Florida, 2018)

United States Postal Service shooting (Edmond, Oklahoma, 1986)

San Bernardino mass shooting (San Bernardino, California, 2015)

Binghamton shootings (Binghamton, New York, 2009)

Fort Hood massacre (Fort Hood, Texas, 2009)

While all of the focus is on "mass shootings"  62% of all deaths attributed to firearms are suicide.  Of those where it is truly a homicide the overwhelming gun is a handgun rather than a rifle.  Of those homicides the majority are "gang drug related"  Chicago is a perfect example.  Guns are virtually illegal to own or obtain but waring drug gangs kill each other each and every day. 

Now as to gun deaths.  If "deaths" are really what the intention is to stop. Over 70,000 die each and every year from drug overdose.  The overwhelming majority of illegal drugs come through Mexico and are smuggled into the USA.  But the same people calling for saving lives by gun control are in many cases calling for those entering the country not to have any background check and come unimpeded allowing the drug cartels to distribute people throughout the country to facilitate their drug sales.  With drug gangs constituting the majority of the total gun homicides, the ease of entry and lack of controlling the border is a major contributing factor to the total number of gun deaths. 


https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/4473-part-1-firearms-transaction-record-over-counter-atf-form-53009/download

 

 

Edited March 25, 2021 by Thomas J

[polpott]

3 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

Trump did nothing and even threatened veto on gun legislation if it passed Congress. He even said the gun and magazine bans are a total failure. Biden is pushing for extensive and expansive gun law reforms and the Dems in Congress are in unison on this push. The Dems kept their part of the deal for stricter gun reforms. The GOPs will be remembered for not doing much at all not Biden nor the Dems. 

I was speaking generally, not just on gun laws. As for gun laws nothing will get through the senate. Biden is very reluctant to get rid of the filibuster (I've no clue why), without which not much in any area will be passed. Specifically on gun laws not even every Democrat will pass reforms. Madison will vote against.

[Surelynot]

3 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

Over 70,000 die each and every year from drug overdose.

The 'not as bad as Hitler' defense is very weak.

[Yellowtail]

9 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Since you asked the question, it is my prerogative to provide an answer based on countries that ban guns and gun crimes punishable with capital punishment have little mass shooting like the scale in US. These strict deterrence worked in those countries. You can’t argue against that. 

 

What are a few of the countries for example? 

[Surelynot]

4 minutes ago, polpott said:

Biden is very reluctant to get rid of the filibuster

I guess he knows it will come back and bite the Democrats on the bum at sometime in the distant future.

[Yellowtail]

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

People are stripped of their right to vote on the basis of a conviction, why not stripped of their right to own a gun?

 

But since you asked.

 

There are good arguments to remove the right to own a gun from people convicted of domestic violence:

 

https://efsgv.org/learn/type-of-gun-violence/domestic-violence-and-firearms/

 

The right to vote (and the right to own firearms) is stripped from people convicted of felonies, not simple assaults, and it's relatively easy for felons to get their voting rights back. It is interesting the big push to have voting rights automatically restored to felons and the vote-harvesting that goes on in US prisons...

 

I agree that people with a history of violence should be barred from gun ownership. I would support any number of gun control measure that do not disproportionately affect the poor.

[Yellowtail]

16 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

The 'not as bad as Hitler' defense is very weak.

 

That's all you have, really? Weak.

[Surelynot]

5 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

It is interesting the big push to have voting rights automatically restored to felons and the vote-harvesting that goes on in US prisons...

Felons being predominantly Democrats?

[Surelynot]

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

 

That's all you have, really? Weak.

Yep....not packing today....as the really cool guys say.....555

[Thomas J]

20 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

The 'not as bad as Hitler' defense is very weak.

Why those 70,000 deaths are not important but the 221 who died in 2019 from Mass Shootings do? 

[Surelynot]

Just now, Thomas J said:

Why those 70,000 deaths are not important but the 221 who died in 2019 from Mass Shootings do? 

Ha......even weaker.....the topic is gun related deaths.....

[Yellowtail]

2 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

Why those 70,000 deaths are not important but the 221 who died in 2019 from Mass Shootings do? 

 

Because they can make political hay out of the 70,000

[Eric Loh]

22 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

 

What are a few of the countries for example? 

Goodness. Try doing some research. Try the regions around Thailand where I suppose you are living. 

[Yellowtail]

2 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

Ha......even weaker.....the topic is gun related deaths.....

 

So 40,000 firearms deaths a year, and you guys are focused on the 221 you can make political hay with.

 

How does that make sense?

[Thomas J]

Just now, Surelynot said:

Ha......even weaker.....the topic is gun related deaths....

I see a typical" deflect the question response.  Drug gangs contribute the vast majority of GUN RELATED homicides in the USA.  So not only do you get 70,000 people dying from drug overdose but using Chicago as an example you get drug gangs killing each other each and every day as rival drug gangs compete.  

221 deaths from Mass Shootings involving a firearm and the cries go out for the need to control.  70,000 die from drug overdoses and the cry is to open the border.  I am just pointing out the hypocrisy of it. 

No different than Thailand.  If two airplanes carrying 200 people were to crash on a Thai airliner there would be a massive outcry for greater airline safety.  53 people die each and every day on Tha roads and well that is too bad, just another normal day.  Lets not do anything to improve traffic safety. 

[Surelynot]

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

 

So 40,000 firearms deaths a year, and you guys are focused on the 221 you can make political hay with.

 

How does that make sense?

Nope......I am commenting on gun related deaths in general, not mass shootings, even accidental shootings are abhorrent to me.

[Thomas J]

7 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

Ha......even weaker.....the topic is gun related deaths.....

OK Surelynot I agree with you.  There needs to be "gun control"  

Now instead of that meaningless abstract term.  Just exactly what law(s) would you pass and exactly how would they have prevented any of the mass shootings. 

Edited March 25, 2021 by Thomas J

[Surelynot]

2 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

I see a typical" deflect the question response.  Drug gangs contribute the vast majority of GUN RELATED homicides in the USA.  So not only do you get 70,000 people dying from drug overdose but using Chicago as an example you get drug gangs killing each other each and every day as rival drug gangs compete.  

221 deaths from Mass Shootings involving a firearm and the cries go out for the need to control.  70,000 die from drug overdoses and the cry is to open the border.  I am just pointing out the hypocrisy of it. 

No different than Thailand.  If two airplanes carrying 200 people were to crash on a Thai airliner there would be a massive outcry for greater airline safety.  53 people die each and every day on Tha roads and well that is too bad, just another normal day.  Lets not do anything to improve traffic safety. 

You really need to take a more considered approach to the basis for your arguments......airline incidents and road traffic accidents bear no relation  to gun related deaths.......

 

You need to focus......the topic is gun related deaths......it is not....... "what might cause more deaths than guns"....so therefore gun related deaths aren't so bad.......!!!!

[Surelynot]

7 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

OK Surelynot I agree with you.  There needs to be "gun control"  

Now instead of that meaningless abstract term.  Just exactly what law(s) would you pass and exactly how would they have prevented any of the mass shootings. 

As in my earlier posts I would not allowed any private ownership of guns.....apart from in some exceptional circumstances.

 

Far fetched I know.......but imagine if you or I could press a button and all the guns in America suddenly disappeared .........don't you think it would be a safer, happier more relaxed place to be?

Edited March 25, 2021 by Surelynot

[Thomas J]

2 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

You really need to take a more considered approach to the basis for your arguments......airline incidents and road traffic accidents bear no relation  to gun related deaths.......

 

You need to focus......the topic is gun related deaths......it is not....... "what might cause more deaths than guns"....so therefore gun related deaths aren't so bad.......!!!!

Ok you have convinced me. Tell me, you are in charge.  You get to pass those "gun control laws"  Tell me specifically WHAT LAW(S) would you pass and how would that have prevented any of the mass shootings. 

 

[KarenBravo]

Well.......this certainly doesn't help.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/25/iowa-passes-bill-children-handle-guns

[Surelynot]

1 minute ago, KarenBravo said:

Well.......this certainly doesn't help.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/25/iowa-passes-bill-children-handle-guns

Can't see any problem with that....although I really don't see why they have to have parental control......that's no fun.

[Thomas J]

1 minute ago, Surelynot said:

As in my earlier posts I would not allowed any private ownership of guns.....apart from in some exceptional circumstances.

So really you are not for "gun control"  You are for gun abolishment.  At least you are honest.   That approach has certainly worked well in Mexico and Venezuela where guns are all but not to owned by private citizens. 

Perhaps you can also ban all illegal drugs as well and save those 70,000 from drug overdoses also.   

[Surelynot]

2 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

Perhaps you can also ban all illegal drugs as well and save those 70,000 from drug overdoses also.   

You are losing focus again!!!!

[Surelynot]

2 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

So really you are not for "gun control"  You are for gun abolishment.

Yes....100%...no qualms.....no reservations at all.

[Thomas J]

Just now, Surelynot said:

You are losing focus again!!!!

No you are deflecting.  There is a total ban on illegal drugs and it does not work But somehow you believe a ban on firearms will.  As stated it is technically near to impossible to legally own a gun in Mexico and Venezuela see how that has stopped them there.  But somehow you believe it will be different in the USA.  Did you ever hear of prohibition in the USA and how that worked out stopping all alcohol.

[polpott]

17 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

OK Surelynot I agree with you.  There needs to be "gun control"  

Now instead of that meaningless abstract term.  Just exactly what law(s) would you pass and exactly how would they have prevented any of the mass shootings. 

Removal of firearms from the hands of private citizen, as in the UK.

 

At the very least ban all semi automatic weapons aka assault rifles. Absolutely no justification for their existence. In the latest incident a lone police officer found himself in possession of a handgun facing a crazy with an AR-15 and extended magazine. The cop didn't stand a chance. If the perp had only been armed with a handgun he may have stood more of a chance.

 

"Oh, oh, but what about my 2nd amendment rights?" Are you serious? Are you really serious?

 

 

Edited March 25, 2021 by polpott

[Thomas J]

20 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So 40,000 firearms deaths a year, and you guys are focused on the 221 you can make political hay with.

 

How does that make sense?

Yellowtail even the 40,000 figure is a misleading statistic.  62% of those are suicides.  Only 35% are homicide and the vast majority of those are drug gang related with handguns. 

https://health.ucdavis.edu/what-you-can-do/facts.html

[Surelynot]

1 minute ago, Thomas J said:

No you are deflecting.  There is a total ban on illegal drugs and it does not work But somehow you believe a ban on firearms will.  As stated it is technically near to impossible to legally own a gun in Mexico and Venezuela see how that has stopped them there.  But somehow you believe it will be different in the USA.  Did you ever hear of prohibition in the USA and how that worked out stopping all alcohol.

Again....laws in a lawless country are pretty much useless.......as bad a s America seems it is not quite in the same magazine as Mexico.......with political will, a sea change in attitude and time..... it could happen.........at the risk of being accused of deflection think........

 

Slavery

Apartheid

East Germany

Communist Russia

Berlin Wall

 

[Thomas J]

5 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

Again....laws in a lawless country

I "think" you are giving too much credit to the USA.  Kennesaw Georgia mandates each and every citizen have a firearm.  It neighbors Atlanta but has a crime rate 5 times lower.  Chicago and New York ban guns and yet they lead the nation in gun homicides.  So "it is the people" not the presence of firearms that contributes to the death.  

If the USA was so "law abiding" it would not have a drug problem nor would it have a gun problem.  It is people who by definition break and ignore the law.