Shooting erupts at Colorado supermarket, bloodied man shown in handcuffs

[polpott]

1 minute ago, Thomas J said:

The quote by one other on the site that gun deaths are 100 per day.  Those are all Mass Shootings. 

Nonsense.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shootings_in_the_United_States

 

Mass shootings are incidents involving multiple victims of firearm-related violence. The precise inclusion criteria are disputed, and there is no broadly accepted definition.^[2][3][4] One definition is an act of public firearm violence—excluding gang killings, domestic violence, or terrorist acts sponsored by an organization—in which a shooter kills at least four victims. Using this definition, one study found that nearly one-third of the world's public mass shootings between 1966 and 2012 (90 of 292 incidents) occurred in the United States.

[Yellowtail]

10 minutes ago, polpott said:

 Not really relevant to mass shootings. A skill that the US excels in.

 

In the UK we had 2 mass shootings and on the back of that the government brought in very strict gun laws, which removed guns from the hands of Joe Public, good guys and bad guys alike. There were many gun hobbyists in the UK who weren't too happy. But they sucked it up to eradicate mass shootings.

 

The subject is mass shootings in the US, do try to stay on topic.

 

Comparing the US to a small county with a tiny economy makes little sense. 

 

 

Edited March 26, 2021 by Yellowtail
sp

[Thomas J]

3 minutes ago, polpott said:

In the UK we had 2 mass shootings and on the back of that the government brought in very strict gun laws,

Yes however you are trying to compare the U.K. to the USA.  Switzerland has extremely high rates of firearm ownership and no mass killings.  So it is the people who own the guns, not the guns that are the culprit.  

Also remember these mass killers are indiscriminate.  They don't target for the most part a specific group of people.  In Nice France the person used a rented delivery truck to kill 84 people.  Is that a reason to ban trucks?  If guns were totally banned and assuming a black market did not exist, those who wish to do harm would find other tools to do so.  

The real question that seems to be impossible to answer is how do you identify people who will either shoot people, stab people, make bombs to kill people, use vehicles to run them over or fly airplanes into office towers.  

I wish I had an answer but I can guarantee that legitimate law abiding gun owners want a stop of the shootings also.  The misuse of firearms is something that certainly does not benefit them. 

[polpott]

4 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

 

The subject is mass shooting in the US, do try to stay on topic.

 

Comparing the US to a small county with a tiny economy make little sense. 

5th largest economy in the world. Small country? A very American (mine's bigger than yours) response.

[Thomas J]

5 minutes ago, polpott said:

Nonsense.

I agree it is nonsense.  However another following this posting topic quoted 100 people a day.  Yes approximately 100 per day die from a firearm.  62% of those are suicide.  Mass shootings in the USA totaled 211 for 2019.  To put that in perspective that is 4 days of highway deaths here in Thailand. 

[Thomas J]

Just now, polpott said:

5th largest economy in the world. Small country? A very American (mine's bigger than yours) response

I would agree with you.  The U.K. however is not the USA.  Just like Switzerland owns a lot of guns but doesn't have a problem.  I suggest even as a USA citizen that the character of those in other countries and their respect for law and others is substantially higher than the USA. 

[polpott]

1 minute ago, Thomas J said:

I agree it is nonsense.  However another following this posting topic quoted 100 people a day.  Yes approximately 100 per day die from a firearm.  62% of those are suicide.  Mass shootings in the USA totaled 211 for 2019.  To put that in perspective that is 4 days of highway deaths here in Thailand. 

Apples and oranges. Many deniers on this forum use the same argument for Covid. It doesn't stand up,

[Thomas J]

4 minutes ago, polpott said:

Apples and oranges. Many deniers on this forum use the same argument for Covid. It doesn't stand up

Not sure I understand you message about deniers and Covid. 

Here are the facts.  62% of all firearm deaths are suicide.  211 people died from mass shootings. in USA.  That is a far cry from the picture the post was trying to paint.  The inference was that shootings killing 100 a day were occurring in the USA.  While yes 38,000 die each year from gunshot wounds, the vast majority of those deaths were self-inflicted.  Less someone think that the removal of guns would stop that, look towards Japan where suicide is rampant but the deaths still occur using other means. 

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/aug/21/jason-miyares/62-us-gun-deaths-are-suicides/

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-29/us-mass-killings-hit-shocking-high-mark-in-2019/11831266

[polpott]

4 minutes ago, Thomas J said:

Not sure I understand you message about deniers and Covid. 

Several posters on this forum take great pains to point out that road deaths in Thailand exceed the number dying from Covid. An equally facetious argument,

[Thomas J]

1 minute ago, polpott said:

Several posters on this forum take great pains to point out that road deaths in Thailand exceed the number dying from Covid. An equally facetious argument,

Well not facetious.  It does point out the disparity of concern over death.  Get a handful of Covid cases and Thailand goes into complete lockdown and employs Covid sniffing dogs.  Thousands die on the streets and it does not raise an eyebrow.   To me, deaths are deaths.  If they can be prevented than steps should be taken to do so.  Certainly with traffic deaths here in Thailand a large percentage are alcohol related so a program to have sobriety checks would probably have some effect on lowering the death toll.  Despite what you might think.  I am for gun control  EFFECTIVE gun control.  That means keeping guns out of the hands of people who should not have them.  I just don't know how you identify those people, and take action against them prior to them committing a crime.  I see too many "laws" that are there just for window dressing.  The USA has totally banned Fentanyl but thousands die from it each year.  If deaths were really what mattered rather than just pure hatred for firearms the concern would be towards saving whatever is killing the "most" Americans and in my book 70,000 drug overdoses is a far more serious threat than 211 from mass shooters. 

[polpott]

1 minute ago, Thomas J said:

Well not facetious.  It does point out the disparity of concern over death.  Get a handful of Covid cases and Thailand goes into complete lockdown and employs Covid sniffing dogs.  Thousands die on the streets and it does not raise an eyebrow.   To me, deaths are deaths.  If they can be prevented than steps should be taken to do so.  Certainly with traffic deaths here in Thailand a large percentage are alcohol related so a program to have sobriety checks would probably have some effect on lowering the death toll.  Despite what you might think.  I am for gun control  EFFECTIVE gun control.  That means keeping guns out of the hands of people who should not have them.  I just don't know how you identify those people, and take action against them prior to them committing a crime.  I see too many "laws" that are there just for window dressing.  The USA has totally banned Fentanyl but thousands die from it each year.  If deaths were really what mattered rather than just pure hatred for firearms the concern would be towards saving whatever is killing the "most" Americans and in my book 70,000 drug overdoses is a far more serious threat than 211 from mass shooters. 

People DUI voluntarily. People take drugs voluntarily. The victims of mass shooters don't volunteer for it. Victims of Covid don't volunteer for it.

[Yellowtail]

48 minutes ago, polpott said:

Apples and oranges. Many deniers on this forum use the same argument for Covid. It doesn't stand up,

 

What is the topic again? 

[Yellowtail]

20 minutes ago, polpott said:

People DUI voluntarily. People take drugs voluntarily. The victims of mass shooters don't volunteer for it. Victims of Covid don't volunteer for it.

 

The victims that are killed in DUI related crashes don't volunteer for it.

 

The people killed 'by drug attics or in drug related shootings don't volunteer for it. 

 

People that get killed in airline crashes don't volunteer for it.

 

What's your point? And again, what's the topic? 

[Yellowtail]

1 hour ago, polpott said:

5th largest economy in the world. Small country? A very American (mine's bigger than yours) response.

 

Yeah, your economy is almost as big as California's, yes?

 

The US is about 37 times the area of the UK but only has about five times the people. If my arithmetic is correct, the US has about 94 people per square mile while the UK has about 698 people per square mile.

 

One reason we have a "gun" culture is because many people in remote areas and or on farms and ranchers need guns cull wildlife. There are also a lot of places to go shooting. It's really no different than fishing. A lot of guys like fishing and like to buy fishing gear. You can fish all over the US just like you can shoot all over the US. A lot of kids  grow up fishing and hunting with their fathers, and take their kids hunting and fishing. 

 

But as always, the few ruin it for the many. And because it's more difficult to punish the few than the many, the many get punished for the actions of the few. 

 

 

 

 

[Yellowtail]

1 hour ago, Thomas J said:

Well not facetious.  It does point out the disparity of concern over death.  Get a handful of Covid cases and Thailand goes into complete lockdown and employs Covid sniffing dogs.  Thousands die on the streets and it does not raise an eyebrow.   To me, deaths are deaths.  If they can be prevented than steps should be taken to do so.  Certainly with traffic deaths here in Thailand a large percentage are alcohol related so a program to have sobriety checks would probably have some effect on lowering the death toll.  Despite what you might think.  I am for gun control  EFFECTIVE gun control.  That means keeping guns out of the hands of people who should not have them.  I just don't know how you identify those people, and take action against them prior to them committing a crime.  I see too many "laws" that are there just for window dressing.  The USA has totally banned Fentanyl but thousands die from it each year.  If deaths were really what mattered rather than just pure hatred for firearms the concern would be towards saving whatever is killing the "most" Americans and in my book 70,000 drug overdoses is a far more serious threat than 211 from mass shooters. 

 

The left does not care about deaths they can not make political hay from. They don't care about blacks killing each other in urban areas because they can't blame that on the right. 

 

Notice how little you heard about the people (over 30?) killed during the months of antifa/blm riots and hardly a peep. One cop dies of a stroke the day after a crowd riots in DC and it's an insurrection the likes of which the world has never known.

 

Also, is it not interesting that we're just now being inundated with news about the hundreds of mass shootings the took place in 2020? Why were we not hearing about them in 2020? Why is it only now, after the election that all the sudden the left is full of concern for the victims and is going on about haw something must be done.

 

If it's that important, why didn't they do something eleven years ago?

 

[heybruce]

6 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

 

It is pretty difficult to conceal a "lightweight assault rifle" with a thirty round clip. Actually, it's pretty difficult to conceal a thirty round clip. 

 

You saying there are no legitimate uses but that is just not correct. That they are light and easy to handle is one of the reasons they are so popular for sport. They are popular with women and you can carry them (and a hundred rounds of ammo) all day. Not for deal hunting but certainly popular for plinking and varminting. 

 

An assault rifle with a folding stock is easily concealed under a long coat along with the magazine.  In this case the shooter used a AR-556 'pistol', basically an AR-15 with a shortened barrel.  https://www.yahoo.com/news/boulder-shooting-suspects-gun-looked-001655008.html

 

A .22 rifle (22 long, not .223) is also an excellent plinking gun, cheaper to shoot than a .223, good for small varmints, and doesn't use a military round designed for combat use. 

 

Why would anyone outside of a combat zone want to carry an assault rifle all day?

[heybruce]

6 hours ago, pacovl46 said:

Well, that’s stupid! Proper gun storage while you’re not home should be mandatory if you don’t carry your guns with you! 

I agree.  But the US has lots of Dirty Harry wannabees who think they need a loaded gun at the ready at all times, and so leave them in drawers and cabinets around the house and in cars, often unlocked. 

 

This is a big part of the reason it is so easy for criminals to get guns; idiots make it easy to steal guns.

[heybruce]

6 hours ago, pacovl46 said:

Ok, let me rephrase it then, most shooting crimes are committed with guns that were not legally obtained by the shooter! Does that work for you?! 
 

Trust me, there’s no way the black market demand is satisfied with stolen guns only! 

You miss my point:  In most of the US there is no need to obtain a 'black market" gun because guns are ridiculously easy to obtain legally, even by those who should not have one.  Private sales with no paperwork and involving nothing but an exchange of cash for weapon are common.

[heybruce]

6 hours ago, pacovl46 said:

What you fail to realize is this:

 

Murders are committed under two circumstances only

 

1. It’s a heat of the moment thing where the murderer “loses” it and kills someone on the spot. In this particular case they’re seeing the proverbial red and aren’t capable of thinking about the consequences. They will use anything they can get their hands on in that particular moment to get the job done. Banning guns will not have an effect on the outcome of this particular situation! 
 

2. It’s a planned murder. In this case the murderer to be plans the crime accordingly so he/she hopefully won’t get caught. Since they have all the time in the world to make that plan they can use whatever. Therefore not having a gun at their disposal will just make them choose something else, therefore not having a gun will not prevent that particular type of murder either. 
 

So, saying less guns equals automatically less homicides is a wishful fantasy! If one wants to truly kill someone they’ll find a way! Getting rid of guns will NOT do the trick because as long as there’s a demand there will always be someone satisfying that demand if there’s money to be made. The best example for that is illegal drugs. Just because they made them illegal didn’t make them go away and neither will a gun ban make the guns disappear completely. It’s that simple!

Crimes of passion are less likely to result in deaths if there is not a weapon designed to kill at a distance at hand.

 

Opportunistic crimes (I assume many drive-by shootings are opportunistic) are also less likely to result in death without a gun.

[heybruce]

5 hours ago, Thomas J said:

I don't know how much you know about rifles.  an AR-15 weighs 6.5 pounds.  A beefy Remington 742 semi-automatic chambered in .308 weighs 7.5 pounds.  I doubt the 1 pound difference will slow down the mass shooter. 

Second, any rifle, any caliber can be easily modified.  The attached picture shows the very common Remington hunting rifle.  Below is the same rifle after replacing it with a pistol grip and FOLDING STOCK.
 
 

The Remington 742 has not been made in 40 years and is difficult to find.  I assume if you find one it will be expensive.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remington_Model_742

 

I also assume the 7.5 lb figure is unloaded.  .308 cartridges weigh much more than .223 cartridges, and if you feel the need for several 30 round magazines (which would have to be specially made for the Remington) the extra weight would add up.

[heybruce]

5 hours ago, Thomas J said:

So true, in April 2018 a person drove his vehicle in Toronto into a crowd of people killing 10 and injuring 15.   The Boston Bomber killed 3 and injured 260 using bombs make from a pressure cooker. On October 17, a man outside the World Trade Center deliberately drove into a crowd of people on a bicycle path killing 8.  In June 2016, a  person rented a cargo van, plowed into a crowd of people in Nice, France Killing 86 and injuring hundreds.  Timothy McVeigh demonstrated that with some common fertilizer and diesel fuel he could bring down a building  killing  and injuring 759.  

So unless you can somehow identify a person bent on attacking and have the grounds to stop them, it is grasping as smoke to think that it will stop the mass killings.  

Stopping people from killing with everyday items is difficult.  However if a few dozen lives can be saved every year by banning weapons that have no legitimate civilian use it is worthwhile.

[heybruce]

4 hours ago, Thomas J said:

Gun training.  Are you suggesting that the shooters who kill people should become better marksmen?  Now that one wins the award for the most ludicrous suggestion to stop mass killings yet. 

Have you had military small arms training?  The emphasis is on safety. 

 

In my case the NCO threatened to shoot anyone who pointed the weapon in an unsafe direction.  He said it in a sincere manner; we all believed him.  To this day when I hold a weapon I am very careful about where it is pointed, even if I know it is unloaded. 

 

That's the kind of training that should be mandatory; training that makes it clear that guns are not cool or fun, they are not to be carried to look macho, they are dangerous weapons that must be handled responsibly and with great care.

[heybruce]

4 hours ago, Thomas J said:

Tell me 1. define precisely what is 'AN ASSAULT RIFLE'  Using the much talked about AR-15 tell me exactly what makes it "more deadly" or function any differently than any other semi-automatic rifle of any caliber. 

Second, does the litmus test for guns in your mind mean they have to be used for hunting purposes otherwise they are to be banned?  I owned numerous firearms.  The vast majority only saw the target range and were never used to hunt anything nor were they likely to ever see the hunting field.  My Trap Gun weighed over 12 pounds. 

An assault rifle is a high capacity weapon firing a round designed for combat use that has no legitimate civilian use.

[heybruce]

4 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

 

HeyBruce has already shown that at least with respect to firearms, the data on the Wikipedia site is unreelable. I was taken to task for trusting their data. 

 

I think the 212 came from a Newsweek article that showed the last nine years of date. In any event, the number of mass shootings changes depending on how you count them. 

It was not the Wikipedia site that had the error.

[heybruce]

3 hours ago, Thomas J said:

Not sure I understand you message about deniers and Covid. 

Here are the facts.  62% of all firearm deaths are suicide.  211 people died from mass shootings. in USA.  That is a far cry from the picture the post was trying to paint.  The inference was that shootings killing 100 a day were occurring in the USA.  While yes 38,000 die each year from gunshot wounds, the vast majority of those deaths were self-inflicted.  Less someone think that the removal of guns would stop that, look towards Japan where suicide is rampant but the deaths still occur using other means. 

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/aug/21/jason-miyares/62-us-gun-deaths-are-suicides/

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-29/us-mass-killings-hit-shocking-high-mark-in-2019/11831266

So restricting access to guns could also reduce suicides.  I could live with that.

[sirineou]

7 hours ago, Thomas J said:

Ok but tell me. WHAT LAW you would pass "to control" as you put it the actions of this shooter or any other shooter.  How exactly would that prevent that person from obtaining a firearm and killing people.  I will wait for that answer.  

The proposals have been discussed at nauseum, I am not about to post any of them so we can get in a  debate abut their merits. 

If you truly don't  know, you are interested, and since you are waiting, below is an article explaining them. Enjoy.

" 6 proposals to reduce gun violence and how they work" 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/6-proposals-reduce-gun-violence-how-they-work-n851736

 

 

[polpott]

8 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

But as always, the few ruin it for the many. And because it's more difficult to punish the few than the many, the many get punished for the actions of the few. 

I had a friend in the UK who was an avid pistol shooter. He went to the local range and took part in competitions a couple of times per week. He claimed that the level of concentration required brought him an inner calm, similar to meditating. When the UK beefed up its gun laws (all hand guns were forbidden) he had to give up his hobby. He was gutted and a year later he died of a heart attack. He accepted that the change in the law was for the greater good. These are the breaks when you live in a civilized society. Something that Americans and particularly Trump supporters have difficulty with. Me, me, me all the way USA!

[Jeffr2]

11 hours ago, Thomas J said:

Gun training.  Are you suggesting that the shooters who kill people should become better marksmen?  Now that one wins the award for the most ludicrous suggestion to stop mass killings yet. 

Never said it was going to stop mass killings.  But if guns are going to be sold, safety classes should be mandatory.  Ludicrous to suggest it's not needed.  And it's not all about being a better marksmen.  You obviously have never taken gun safety classes.

[Jeffr2]

8 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

 

The left does not care about deaths they can not make political hay from. They don't care about blacks killing each other in urban areas because they can't blame that on the right. 

 

Notice how little you heard about the people (over 30?) killed during the months of antifa/blm riots and hardly a peep. One cop dies of a stroke the day after a crowd riots in DC and it's an insurrection the likes of which the world has never known.

 

Also, is it not interesting that we're just now being inundated with news about the hundreds of mass shootings the took place in 2020? Why were we not hearing about them in 2020? Why is it only now, after the election that all the sudden the left is full of concern for the victims and is going on about haw something must be done.

 

If it's that important, why didn't they do something eleven years ago?

 

Jeez...the left does not care about deaths?  You've lost the plot buddy.  Terrible comment.

[Jeffr2]

10 hours ago, Thomas J said:

So mass shootings are not homicides.  The quote by one other on the site that gun deaths are 100 per day.  Those are all Mass Shootings.  

Perhaps you need to research what mass shooting are.