Mass shootings in El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio

[Corsa]

Or just do what Australia did and get rid of firearms. If you hunt, you have to go through a much tougher process and you can only get your gun and ammo from an officially designated store. You only get access to your gun when you are going on a hunting trip. Otherwise it's locked up there and you have to get it. You also have to fill out paperwork to get your hunting trip approved so they approve the gun, etc. Sounds good right?

Sounds much better than what we currently have and I would support it.

 

[Northstar]

Banning guns doesn't really fix the "people wanting and willing to kill other people" problem though.

The easiest solution would be just being nicer to each other. Currently there far too much vitriol towards anybody that doesn't agree with you that crap like this is bound to happen. It's not limited to "right wingers" either.

 

[DesertPenguin]

It makes sense. If you only need it for a certain thing, then we (government) will hold onto it until you are prepared to do said thing. I just thought of the perfect wording for this. Temporary Permit. Every time you want to go hunting you have to get a permit and it has to be approved. Not just some bureaucratic thing you pay money for and anyone can get.

 

[DesertPenguin]

You can't forcibly make people be nice, but you can limit the ways in which they can be "not nice". Sure there will still be violence but it won't be gunshots. Stab wounds are much more easily treated. There won't be mass shootings anywhere. You can't go around with a bow and arrows trying to take out a crowded mall. You might get one or two people but still, how many will be lethal shots, Mr. Legolas, sir?

 

[Northstar]

You can't forcibly make people be nice

No, no you cannot. What you can do however is change how you yourself act. And while you cant force other people to be pleasant, your being nice to those who are not may just change their viewpoint.

but you can limit the ways in which they can be "not nice".

I guess I would just rather address the cancer instead of just the cough, but to each his own I guess.

 

[DesertPenguin]

What you can do however is change how you yourself act. And while you cant force other people to be pleasant, your being nice to them may just change their viewpoint.

Hey, I try.

 

[Imari]

Or just do what Australia did and get rid of firearms. If you hunt, you have to go through a much tougher process and you can only get your gun and ammo from an officially designated store. You only get access to your gun when you are going on a hunting trip. Otherwise it's locked up there and you have to get it. You also have to fill out paperwork to get your hunting trip approved so they approve the gun, etc. Sounds good right?

Sounds good, but it would never fly in the US. It worked in Australia largely because there was massive public support for the additional restrictions. If you impose additional restrictions in the US then all you've done is created a whole lot of illegal gun ownership, because I seriously doubt that people are going to hand them in.

Banning guns doesn't really fix the "people wanting and willing to kill other people" problem though.

This. It's ultimately a culture problem. Violence is deemed a valid solution, and past a certain point even non-violent people can recognise that the only defense is the threat of additional violence. It's an endless game of oneupmanship.

Unfortunately, an idiot with a gun is always going to be able to kill at least a handful of people when they have the element of surprise. And while guns are convenient, there's plenty of ways to kill for the enterprising psychopath.

 

[Touring Mars]

since it is basicaly same day here we go again

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/shooting-dayton-ohio_n_5d467878e4b0aca3411eede9


There are reports of an active shooter and mass shooting at Ned Peppers bar in Dayton, Ohio just hours after a gunman in El Paso, Texas shot and killed 20 people at a Walmart. At least seven peoplemay be dead in Dayton, and authorities referred to it as a “mass casualty incident” on the scanner.

https://heavy.com/news/2019/08/dayton-ohio-active-shooter-shooting/

Police have now confirmed the names and ages of the nine fatalities in the Dayton shooting - one of the victims was the murderer's own 22 year old sister.

 

[CodeRedR51]

And people wonder why I stay at home as much as I do. Enough is enough. Between this and multiple other things, the state of this country disgusts me.

 

[GranTurNismo]

Why is it that when ever a white male commits an act of terrorism, people always assume “mental illness” but not when a Muslim or anyone of a different race does the same? Let me make this clear, this is not an issue of mental health, it’s an issue of white supremacist rhetoric exponentially growing in popularity, and even being endorsed by the president. The types of people who usually latch on to white supremacist rhetoric tend to be lonely, introverted, “edgy” white boys who tend to frequent less mainstream social media platforms like 4Chan or Gab, not the mentally ill. Sure, it is possible that these shooters do have a mental health problem, but that’s not the main issue, and it’s far from it. There are millions and millions of mentally ill individuals in the United States, and they actually commit violence at a lower rate then “normal” Americans. Not only is blaming these massacres on mental illness inaccurate, but very offensive to those afflicted by mental illness as well, as they are not violent, crazed monsters. Like I said, we should be calling out white supremacy, white male entitlement, and the easy availability of assault rifles (which should be completely abolished) before anything else, if we really want to reach an end to this uniquely American crisis.

 

[baldgye]

As @Danoff has said, the United States has a serious violence problem. It must be addressed and can't be ignored with 250+ mass shootings this year so far.

Yeah, but imagine how many more would die thanks to mass knifings...

 

[Rallywagon]

Would be nice if the alternative to guns in a mass killing were as simple as knives. But. We know that's not the case by a country mile. Pressure cookers, fertilizer bombs, various pipe bombs, nail bombs, so on and so forth and on and on. And to be honest, IEDs can be far more devastating and insidious than guns. Bombs dont need a person to blow up. They can also be made to blow up separately. So first you kill a bunch in a crowd, then you can blow up the first responders. And then you can blow up the crowd watching the first responders being blown up.
You dont stop mass killings by taking away guns. You infringe on the rights of the innocent.
You stop mass killings by addressing the issues that are causing the mass killings. Division in all walks of america. Divisive politics and the echo chamber social media being the two major causes of the sepsis of our society.

 

[ryzno]

Wendy asked on her show the the other day "clap if you've wanted to kill someone" it was almost unanimous. It's not the guns, it's the person.
I say that cause she has probably at least 100 people in her audience. We've all been pissed enough to want to kill someone but we don't.

 

[Dotini]

Anyone remember the Texas Tower Shootings?

On August 1, 1966, after stabbing his mother and his wife to death the night before, Charles Whitman, a former Marine, took rifles and other weapons to the observation deck atop the Main Building tower at the University of Texas at Austin, then opened fire indiscriminately on persons on the surrounding campus and streets. Over the next 96 minutes he shot and killed 14 more people (including one unborn child) and injured 31 others. One final victim died in 2001 from the lingering effects of his wounds.

Note the date. After this massacre, unheard of at the time, this type shooting became commonplace and remains so today.

You stop mass killings by addressing the issues that are causing the mass killings. Division in all walks of america. Divisive politics and the echo chamber social media being the two major causes of the sepsis of our society.

This is a modest start on explaining the situation, but there are far clearer and much more powerful explanations. Nobody wants to hear them, because they cannot be addressed.

 

[Sander 001]

Banning guns doesn't really fix the "people wanting and willing to kill other people" problem though.

Suddenly we’re concerned with people’s wants.

Funny how when people wanted affordable healthcare, education, safety, basic standards of living, those considerations are tossed.

 

[Rallywagon]

This is a modest start on explaining the situation, but there are far clearer and much more powerful explanations. Nobody wants to hear them, because they cannot be addressed.

Anything can be addressed. It's the willingness, or rather, the resistance to change that is the issue I think. At least, quick, conscientious change. And not just to the mass shooting problem, but most of the social issues we are facing.

 

[Northstar]

Suddenly we’re concerned with people’s wants.

Funny how when people wanted affordable healthcare, education, safety, basic standards of living, those considerations are tossed.

Not sure why you're responding to that, I've never thought that those other concerns shouldnt be discussed or addressed.

 

[Danoff]

Armed, crazed, entitled white men are and have been the biggest and most serious threat in the United States, more so than any other identity or group. They account for over 65% of mass shootings, yet Trump and the media claim that illegal immigrants, African Americans and Muslims cause the most crime and that they are the “real problem”.

You pulled a bait and switch there. You said that one group is the most serious, biggest threat, and then supported it with a very specific type of crime (and then didn't normalize it by population), and then you followed it by talking about all crime.

You cannot say that a group is the biggest most serious threat in the US unless you can actually substantiate the amount of threat the group makes as a percentage of all threats. You're talking about a mass shootings, which are in no way indicative of all threats, not even most threats.

Before you go linking race with behavior (dangerously close to racism), at least get your statistics in order.

Edit:

Let me give you an example of what you just did.

Crazed black men are and have been the biggest and most serious threat of murder in the US. More so than any other group.

In 2013, number and percentage of murder arrests by race were:

Black or African Americans 4,379 = 51.3%
White Americans (non-Hispanic Americans) 2,861 = 33.5%
Hispanic Americans 1,096 = 12.8%
American Indians or Alaska Natives 98 = 1.14%
Asian Americans 101 = 1.18%

Keep in mind that only 12% of Americans are black, so committing 51.3% of murders (or account for 51.3% of murder arrests anyway) is wildly out of proportion. White people make up 60%, or 5 times as many. They should have 5 times the murder rate.

Now that's a much more statistically supported statement than yours (I didn't adjust for gender, but of course anyone who is familiar with violent crime knows that step is a formality). But it immediately draws into question why I am making the connection. Why do I link skin color with crime statistics? It begs the conclusion of racism.

So basically, re-think your position.

 

[Joey D]

Or just do what Australia did and get rid of firearms. If you hunt, you have to go through a much tougher process and you can only get your gun and ammo from an officially designated store. You only get access to your gun when you are going on a hunting trip. Otherwise it's locked up there and you have to get it. You also have to fill out paperwork to get your hunting trip approved so they approve the gun, etc. Sounds good right?

That's illegal to do in the US. To get that to pass you'd need to amend the Constitution, which more than likely won't happen.

And if I own something, I want to own it. I don't want it to be locked away somewhere for use whenever some entity deems I'm allowed to use my own property.

It makes sense. If you only need it for a certain thing, then we (government) will hold onto it until you are prepared to do said thing. I just thought of the perfect wording for this. Temporary Permit. Every time you want to go hunting you have to get a permit and it has to be approved. Not just some bureaucratic thing you pay money for and anyone can get.

So you live in the US, you must see how god awful the government is at managing anything. Why would you want them to control physical guns? All the government would do is end up either losing them or allowing someone to steal them.

This. It's ultimately a culture problem. Violence is deemed a valid solution, and past a certain point even non-violent people can recognise that the only defense is the threat of additional violence. It's an endless game of oneupmanship.

This hits the nail on the head. For, whatever reason, the culture in the US gravitates towards solving problems with violence. It's not just shooting either, all one needs to do is drive around any major city long enough. Do something that pisses off the wrong driver and next thing you know they're trying to fight you in a parking lot or even at the next light.

I'm not sure how you fix this though and whatever the answer it, it will take an absurdly long time because changing culture is difficult.

 

[Sander 001]

 

[zzz_pt]

/copypaste


It's crazy how nothing ever changes. Arguments, conversations, discussions, cartoons, viral videos and news repeat all over again and remind us all of how ludicrous and out of control the situation got in the USA. Every politician seems utterly powerless, useless, careless or a mixture of the three.

 

[Wolfe]

There's no reason that in all of Europe, Oceania, and Brazil combined, only five mass shootings happened this year, but in just one country alone, America, there has been roughly 250 of them.

The reason is on TV every day; on phones, on computer monitors, on tablets. Shared around social media, and promoted or even orchestrated by the social media companies themselves. Repeated and endorsed by influential people. Motivated by the economic interests of powerful companies.

Media are tearing society to shreds to make a buck, and the U.S. is the hotbed because of the resentments and lingering shock over the 2016 election. Manufacturing bogeymen and collecting revenue by reporting on them. Cherrypicking incidents and details to support a narrative. Or straight-up lying because they know their target demographics won't question anything that supports their preconceived notions, and any correction will only receive a small fraction of the views, likes, and shares of the original article.

Common cognitive distortions/fallacies are rampant in reporting and widely-circulated opinion columns, and not only go mostly unchallenged but are actually celebrated and encouraged. You see it everywhere: filtering for negatives, black-and-white thinking, overgeneralization, jumping to conclusions, catastrophizing, emotional reasoning...unhealthy reasoning being broadcast to millions. Of course, it seems pretty clear that we are facing a crisis of mental health in general; no doubt the offending journalists are anxious and/or depressed themselves.

Yeah, people are angry. Anger can feel righteous, which motivates people to share what made them angry, and to click on reports about outrageous things. Or to go out of their way to buy products from a company that makes a statement on something. It's business. Desperate business, spurred by media's failures and financial uncertainty. Cashing in on the public's trust, while obfuscating the truth.

The news has never been 100% trustworthy, but we are living in an era of yellow journalism adapted for the internet. You can't be reasonably sure of facts without digging around -- if you think you can trust the independent source(s), and if you aren't just absent-mindedly confirming your bias. This, if you didn't know, is key to how right-wing extremists are being radicalized. They know damn well the media is full of it, and radicals and conspiracy theorists are more than willing to fill the vacuum left by the media's negligence. Meanwhile, left-wing extremists are being radicalized by an impassioned reading of what the media reports.

It's true that we are facing some real problems in this country, which makes it all the more egregious that media companies take any opportunity they can get to yank the population's heartstrings and manipulate the truth for their own gain. They inspire violence and motivate political action justified by the catastrophic narratives they've woven, and divide family/friends according to politics. It's 🤬 disgusting.

The pretext for violence on both sides of this cultural conflict is a product of horribly irresponsible reporting. That includes attacks with the simple morbid purpose of trolling for a predictable & politicized media response, which is too damned easy to do. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

[Carbonox]

Good news, we have *sigh* found the root cause for them shootings.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Good news, we have *sigh* found the root cause for them shootings.

I knew it would be that before even clicking the link. Before games it was horror films, before that it was pulp novels, before that it was bawdy broadsheets, before that it was saucy etchings. 'Twas ever thus, the most conservative sections of society blaming free will for people having free will. Best crack down on it, or tax it more.

 

[PzR Slim]

 

[TJ13]

Good news, we have *sigh* found the root cause for them shootings.

Then the TV shows and then the movies and then we'll be in a box watching the Bachelor and Batchorette and Big Brother and The Kardashian's and all other reality tv shows.
No thank you.

 

[McLaren]

Armed, crazed, entitled white men are and have been the biggest and most serious threat in the United States, more so than any other identity or group.

Being armed doesn't mean anything because the a killer will want to be armed to begin with. It's like assuming anyone with a truck in the middle east/Europe must be a concern b/c terrorists were using trucks to carry out attacks. Crazed? Any individual who commits murder is crazy; the idea of seriously taking innocent human life is absurd thought. Entitled? Oh, yes, I forgot white privilege gets to play a role in mass shootings now.

For example, it's perfectly okay to call out radical Islamic terrorists (a minuscule portion of Muslims), but obviously not okay to call out Muslims in general or Islam as a religion. The former is a normal reaction to an act of terror, the latter is a racist, bigoted generalization.

Truck driving, radicalized, religious middle eastern men are and have been the biggest and most serious threat in Europe/Middle East, more so than any other identity or group.

I just turned your statement around and directed it towards the amount of terrorist attacks committed by plowing trucks into people or detonating an innocent truck in a group of people.

Want to know why it's as bigoted as your statement? Because it's still attacking a broad group of people: Middle Eastern men are mostly religious by default and a huge amount drive trucks for a profession.

Let's get 1 thing straight. You're not calling out a specific group, you're calling out all white men for the actions of others b/c your descriptions are vague enough to cover potentially most white men to begin with.

They account for over 65% of mass shootings,

"There have been at least 184 mass public shootings in the U.S. since 1900, including the Las Vegas attack," Duwe said. "Among these mass public shooters, non-Hispanic whites make up 63 percent, which is close to what we see for the U.S. population in general. So, the Mother Jones data actually underreport the extent to which whites are involved as mass public shooters."

The vast majority of mass shootings is committed by men.

Looking only at the male population, some have argued that statistical claims based on Mother Jones data on the racial makeup of mass shooters leaves out important context. Critics argue that when you consider that non-Hispanic white men make up about 63 percent of the male population, white men appear proportionally less likely to commit a mass shooting, according to the Mother Jones statistics showing white men account for 54 percent of mass shootings. (Duwe’s finding that non-Hispanic white men make up 63 percent of mass shooters is roughly in line with the white portion of the male population. White men make up roughly 31 percent of the overall U.S. population.)

Another tally, with a longer timeline and a different definition of mass shooting, found non-Hispanic white men make up 63 percent of these attacks. Under both definitions and datasets, white men have committed more mass shootings than any other ethnicity group.

Newsweek's claim is literally accurate. But it's worth noting the imprecision of this data, and the percentage of mass shootings by white men is lower than their share of the male population, according to Mother Jones.

https://www.politifact.com/punditfa...ite-males-responsible-more-mass-shootings-an/

 

[Dennisch]

Damn facts getting in the way all the time.

 

[TS050]

I’m hearing all these facts but I would like to know the ethnicity of recent perpetrators of mass shootings.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I wonder if flooding 8chan with meaningless posts would disrupt it's ability to concentrate these hateful ****s? Or if that doesn't work, just DDoS'ing it into oblivion.