North Texas students stage school walkouts against gun violence amid recent mass shooting at Allen outlet mall

[torturedsole]

I just want to go shopping in peace and quiet and don't want to be stabbed, assaulted or shot.

 

Inflation is another story.

[Hanaguma]

59 minutes ago, eisfeld said:

And homicides are about 0.1% of crimes in the country. So clearly we should not care about them and just think about the bigger picture. (sarcasm)

 

It is as much obfuscation as well as it is deflection. There evidently is an issue with mass shootings in schools and tighter gun controls would be one of the important measure to counter it. No matter what stats you bring about other crimes and trying to draw attention away from the very specific topic will change that. You don't need to solve a bigger problem before trying to solve a smaller one.

You are using vague terms. "Tighter gun controls" would mean what exactly- assault weapons only or handguns/shotguns as well? Any statistics or research on how many mass shootings would be prevented by these measures? 

 

To me, obfuscation is focusing inordinate attention on one grain of sand on the beach, then using that to deprive millions of law abiding citizens of their constitutional rights. Mass shootings in schools cause the deaths of 40-60 people per year on average. And every one of those deaths is a tragedy. But law cannot prevent every single bad outcome.   There is an element of risk in everything we do, every choice we make. 

 

Hundreds of kids every year drown in swimming pools in the USA- leading cause of  death in kids under 5 years old actually. So do you think we should have tighter pool controls? Perhaps ban private ownership of swimming pools- make everyone fill them in with cement? I mean, nobody NEEDS a pool in their backyard, they can just go to the local rec centre.  Yet we allow people to have pools.

 

Traffic accidents are the leading cause of death for children from 5-16.  Lowering the speed limit nationwide to 40mph would save dozens, if not hundreds, of their lives.  Yet we don't do that. Why not?  If it saves one life...

[Chomper Higgot]

35 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Not obfuscation. You are focussing so narrowly on such a small subsegment of shootings that it is impossible to make sense of it.  From the data I posted, those altogether are about 35% of mass shootings. Not sure what you mean by "non crime related"... you mean shootings not connected with another criminal plan, like a robbery, but just random acts of violence by nutcases?

As I have pointed out, the shootings that are giving rise to wide public calls for gun control are non crime related mass shootings in schools, colleges, places of worship and shopping malls.

 

Nobody is calling for gun controls because criminals in gangs are murdering each other.

 

Quit with your obfuscation already.

[torturedsole]

My brain doesn't understand the American way, so excuse me.

 

But I regularly read that many Americans 'carry' and the reason that they're armed is that they're ready to counter a possible shooter. 

 

It's very rare that a carrier fells a shooter, although appreciate there was a recent instance of a carrier taking out a shooter, but it's very rare.

[eisfeld]

32 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

You are using vague terms. "Tighter gun controls" would mean what exactly- assault weapons only or handguns/shotguns as well? Any statistics or research on how many mass shootings would be prevented by these measures? 

 

To me, obfuscation is focusing inordinate attention on one grain of sand on the beach, then using that to deprive millions of law abiding citizens of their constitutional rights. Mass shootings in schools cause the deaths of 40-60 people per year on average. And every one of those deaths is a tragedy. But law cannot prevent every single bad outcome.   There is an element of risk in everything we do, every choice we make. 

 

Hundreds of kids every year drown in swimming pools in the USA- leading cause of  death in kids under 5 years old actually. So do you think we should have tighter pool controls? Perhaps ban private ownership of swimming pools- make everyone fill them in with cement? I mean, nobody NEEDS a pool in their backyard, they can just go to the local rec centre.  Yet we allow people to have pools.

 

Traffic accidents are the leading cause of death for children from 5-16.  Lowering the speed limit nationwide to 40mph would save dozens, if not hundreds, of their lives.  Yet we don't do that. Why not?  If it saves one life...

You are trying again to divert attention away from this specific topic. We are not talking about swimming pool or traffic accidents. The topic is about students protesting gun violence at institutions like schools. Obviously without access to guns these mass shootings would not happen. The question is how to solve this issue. What would you propose?

[Tug]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

As I have pointed out, the shootings that are giving rise to wide public calls for gun control are non crime related mass shootings in schools, colleges, places of worship and shopping malls.

 

Nobody is calling for gun controls because criminals in gangs are murdering each other.

 

Quit with your obfuscation already.

He can’t it seems that’s all he got. we as Americans need to vote out the legislatiors that refuse to do the will of the people period all stop do not pass go! The vast majority of Americans want stricter gun control vote the coward out!

[Hanaguma]

56 minutes ago, eisfeld said:

You are trying again to divert attention away from this specific topic. We are not talking about swimming pool or traffic accidents. The topic is about students protesting gun violence at institutions like schools. Obviously without access to guns these mass shootings would not happen. The question is how to solve this issue. What would you propose?

First, the reason I mentioned other forms of tragedy is to get some perspective on the scale of the problem. Relatively speaking, the chances of getting shot in a school is almost zero- far lower than many other daily activities. So we need not panic about it or blow the problem out of proportion.  Also, you cannot take away a class of weapon from all people. That is a non starter. Twenty million legal and law abiding AR owners are not going to hand in their weapons because a very few people use them in crime. 

 

So I would suggest, for starters;

 

1. Mandatory prison sentences for crimes committed with firearms- 5 years add on to the sentence which cannot be plea bargained away.

2. Minimum age 21 to buy a firearm- I have no problem with this.  Perhaps 18 for those with hunting licenses, for hunting weapons only.

3. No firearms for convicted felons. 

4. Death penalty for drug dealers. 

 

Good start?

[Hanaguma]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

As I have pointed out, the shootings that are giving rise to wide public calls for gun control are non crime related mass shootings in schools, colleges, places of worship and shopping malls.

 

Nobody is calling for gun controls because criminals in gangs are murdering each other.

 

Quit with your obfuscation already.

Which begs the question, why not? Criminals do murder each other, they also murder innocent people who get caught in the crossfire. Far more than die in school shootings as well. 

 

I know that public opinion can be influenced by the publicity given to shootings at schools and the like. But that should not influence policy or law making unduly.  If the goal is to reduce overall crime and murder,  there are other ways to do so. 

[eisfeld]

1 hour ago, Hanaguma said:

First, the reason I mentioned other forms of tragedy is to get some perspective on the scale of the problem. Relatively speaking, the chances of getting shot in a school is almost zero- far lower than many other daily activities. So we need not panic about it or blow the problem out of proportion.  Also, you cannot take away a class of weapon from all people. That is a non starter. Twenty million legal and law abiding AR owners are not going to hand in their weapons because a very few people use them in crime. 

 

So I would suggest, for starters;

 

1. Mandatory prison sentences for crimes committed with firearms- 5 years add on to the sentence which cannot be plea bargained away.

2. Minimum age 21 to buy a firearm- I have no problem with this.  Perhaps 18 for those with hunting licenses, for hunting weapons only.

3. No firearms for convicted felons. 

4. Death penalty for drug dealers. 

 

Good start?

I think this is indeed better. But what about the fact that most school mass shooters obtained the firearm from their home or friends/relatives? They didn't buy it themselves so the minimum age of 21 might not help much. But nonetheless I would agree they should prohibit sales to under 21 year olds. This should at least help to some degree. Same for the proposal regarding drug dealers and convicted felons, they are not in those categories usually. And for the first one I'm not sure if someone with such strong mental issues that they commit a mass shooting in a school would care much about a 5 year prison sentence.

 

Quote

In around 74% of incidents, the firearm used was obtained from the student’s home or from that of a friend or relative.

 

My suggestion: anyone who wants a gun needing a license which would carry a requirement to keep it securely locked away from anyone under 21 via biometrics or two factor auth. This is not perfect but could go a long way. Subject to randomized checkups and failure to do so carrying a strict punishment (not sure what would deter people enough). Should the weapon be involved in a crime by someone else then get 50% of the penalty of the one who committed the crime for negligently enabling it.

Edited May 13, 2023 by eisfeld

[Hanaguma]

48 minutes ago, eisfeld said:

I think this is indeed better. But what about the fact that most school mass shooters obtained the firearm from their home or friends/relatives? They didn't buy it themselves so the minimum age of 21 might not help much. But nonetheless I would agree they should prohibit sales to under 21 year olds. This should at least help to some degree. Same for the proposal regarding drug dealers and convicted felons, they are not in those categories usually. And for the first one I'm not sure if someone with such strong mental issues that they commit a mass shooting in a school would care much about a 5 year prison sentence.

 

 

My suggestion: anyone who wants a gun needing a license which would carry a requirement to keep it securely locked away from anyone under 21 via biometrics or two factor auth. This is not perfect but could go a long way. Subject to randomized checkups and failure to do so carrying a strict punishment (not sure what would deter people enough). Should the weapon be involved in a crime by someone else then get 50% of the penalty of the one who committed the crime for negligently enabling it.

Interesting suggestion. This of course would require all states to abandon their "open carry" or "concealed carry" laws, and also 4th Amendment protections. Not to mention being expensive for gun owners to implement, and there fore would disproportionately affect black and brown communities.  

 

Just curious, has any jurisdiction on earth tried these methods yet to see if they would actually work?

[eisfeld]

1 hour ago, Hanaguma said:

Interesting suggestion. This of course would require all states to abandon their "open carry" or "concealed carry" laws, and also 4th Amendment protections. Not to mention being expensive for gun owners to implement, and there fore would disproportionately affect black and brown communities.  

 

Just curious, has any jurisdiction on earth tried these methods yet to see if they would actually work?

If someone is carrying their gun on their person then obviously at that point they don't need to lock it away. So no issues with carry laws. 4th Amendment probably is a more interesting matter though I'm pretty confident a reasonable solution can be found. I disagree regarding the expenses. A secure safe wouldn't cost much.

 

I'm not aware of any juristiction that implemented this method but I have not tried to research it either. The vast majority of countries have nothing like the US 2nd Amendment and have drastically lower gun ownership rates. The US has twice as many guns per capita than the second country, Falkland Islands and about four or more times as much as most others. The other countries also have drastically fewer school schootings so they probably don't feel the need.

 

I grew up in Europe. Gun crime was so rare that you really don't think about it. Nobody I know of even contemplated obtaining a gun. And so school mass schootings really weren't a thing to begin with.

 

Quote

The US has had 57 times as many school shootings as the other major industrialized nations combined

 

From January 1, 2009 to May 21, 2018

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/21/us/school-shooting-us-versus-world-trnd/index.html

 

I think it's a very clear picture.

[pegman]

17 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

This.

 

The truth that anti gun people do not want to admit.  Rifles and shotguns are not the problem.  Handguns are the weapon of choice in the vast majority of both murders and suicides.   It is beyond ridiculous to attempt to craft social policy based on feeling and not on data. 

Yes, banning handguns would bring about huge change in the number of Americans dying from guns. The role model countries for reducing gun violence are Japan and the UK.

[Chomper Higgot]

6 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

First, the reason I mentioned other forms of tragedy is to get some perspective on the scale of the problem. Relatively speaking, the chances of getting shot in a school is almost zero- far lower than many other daily activities. So we need not panic about it or blow the problem out of proportion.  Also, you cannot take away a class of weapon from all people. That is a non starter. Twenty million legal and law abiding AR owners are not going to hand in their weapons because a very few people use them in crime. 

 

So I would suggest, for starters;

 

1. Mandatory prison sentences for crimes committed with firearms- 5 years add on to the sentence which cannot be plea bargained away.

2. Minimum age 21 to buy a firearm- I have no problem with this.  Perhaps 18 for those with hunting licenses, for hunting weapons only.

3. No firearms for convicted felons. 

4. Death penalty for drug dealers. 

 

Good start?

None of which address the specific problem mass shoutings in schools.

 

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

6 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Which begs the question, why not? Criminals do murder each other, they also murder innocent people who get caught in the crossfire. Far more than die in school shootings as well. 

 

I know that public opinion can be influenced by the publicity given to shootings at schools and the like. But that should not influence policy or law making unduly.  If the goal is to reduce overall crime and murder,  there are other ways to do so. 

Public opinion should not influence policy or law making.

 

Is that the argument you just made?

 

Yes it is.

 

 

Edited May 13, 2023 by Chomper Higgot