Mass shootings in El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio
- Thread starter Novalee
- 669 comments
- 28,133 views
McLaren
Premium
- 45,196
- Texas
The punishment isn't, not having the gun, it's punishing me as a gun owner for the actions of another who took his life due to depression. The solution to that situation should've been how to read the signs of depression and prevent his suicide rather than hoping if we took away his gun, he wouldn't have possibly hung/OD/poison/jumped/etc. to his death.
It had all the right messages, I think his wording is where it comes off as the shrug. It's 100% right that we focus on the spectacle of a mass shooting and everyone says they're concerned about the deaths caused from them, but after a while, it fades into obscurity until another shooting happens. Even within firearm death statistics that are debated during these events, it always baffles me that through commotion over guns & whether or not ARs should be banned, rarely do the debates bring up handguns. There's so much focus on banning a weapon that, according to 2017 FBI statistics, caused 403 homicides compared to a more popular weapon for civilians, far easier to acquire for civilians, and a weapon used more against civilians: 7,032 homicides. That specific weapon accounted for nearly half of the 15,129 murder victims listed. Why are there not protests against handguns to the same degree you see against ARs?
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u....17/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-11.xls
Joey D
Premium
- 47,161
- Boyne Falls, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
In order to get that gun in your house though, you need to go through roughly the same process. When you look at the guns used in these types of mass murder situations, they're also pretty expensive. If you already have it in your house, I feel like your thought process probably isn't that different compared to say, having a truck in your driveway already. But whatever the situation, my guess is most of the time mass murder incidents are premeditated and not made rashly. It takes some degree of planning to carry something like that out.
It's baked into the founding principals of the country. As a US citizen, you're guaranteed the right to bear arms and if you're to give up a firearm, it's violating the rights granted to you as a citizen. It's also assuming you're guilty of something, which goes against another founding principal of the country.
Hmm, this is a fair point and I suspect you're correct here. The problem though is you can't just outright ban military-style weapons since you can't really draw a line anywhere. I mean I can buy all sorts of crap to mount on my pistol to make it look tacti-cool but at the end of the day, it's not really a military-style weapon. Same goes for some hunting rifles. You can tart them up to make them look like you're some sort of operator, but really it's meant for taking out rabbits.
Personally, I don't see any reason to own something like an AR-15. All the variants I've ever shot have been crap, inaccurate, and not very easy to hold. Same goes for the AK-47 style rifles I've shot too. For me, unless a gun is good for hunting or personal protection, I don't see much of a use for it. I know people who've spent tens of thousands of dollars to buy a gun just to shoot at a range. All I see is a huge waste of money because a $200 rifle blows a hole in a paper target just as well as a $20,000 "sniper" rifle.
Do they serve a purpose? Nope. Huge magazines are heavy, cumbersome, and absurdly expensive. But I guess the justification for allowing ownership is that there's really nothing that makes them illegal.
McLaren
Premium
- 45,196
- Texas
If that's all you see at the end of the range, then it's possible you're just not that fully into the hobby and the differences people can feel in multiple guns. It's much the way 2 cars can achieve the same lap times, but the feeling of each one is different. There is a reason you can see gun guys always weigh in on the popular 1911 vs. Glock debate. Most people just see 2 pistols, but those who are passionate about shooting firearms can pinpoint accuracy, reliability, feedback, etc. between them.
I think many people don't get a chance to realize the gun community in the US likes using their weapons at the range for fun the same way track rats in the US like putting in a few laps at their local club circuits every so often. You can see a guy at the range with a $7,000 rifle that has no purpose in modern society, but he has it b/c he likes shooting it and seeing what a $7,000 rifle can do much like a guy who has a $200,000 Porsche GT3 that he only bought just to put on the track every 6 months. For people in both hobbies, the object is nothing more than an escape and relaxing time for many who don't want to do anything but enjoy their "toy" with like minded individuals.
- 11,646
- Marin County
I've owned two AK74-pattern rifles (a Polish and a Bulgarian IIRC) and I only wanted them because they were cool. I still own 4 guns (Swiss K31, 2x CZ52, 1x 1894). I suspect my ownership is quite different from those after tacticool (or whatever). That being said, I don't think gun control measures should seek to categorize based on aesthetics. Much like good rules in motorsports (or at least rules I perceive as good) they should strive to limit the performance of a weapon. How tenable is that? I don't know. A pump action shotgun has limited ability to mow down a mall full of people compared to a AR15 with a 100 round drum magazine. Crafting laws to allow the former and outlaw the latter should be at least attempted. Federal agencies scrutinize and test every single car model before it can be sold in the US: they have to be clean, they have to be safe. What if the ATF ran every gun model through a similar field test? Targets per minute, penetration, etc. If the gun performs above a certain threshold in the hands of a skilled operator, it is unlawful. Is that unwieldy? Probably, but maybe it could work?
Gun laws, if they aren't a wholesale repeal of the 2nd amendment, should be tuned to limit the amount of devastation one individual can unleash. That's the reason field artillery and heavy machine guns are not legal, right? I've said it before, and I'll continue to say that I think our current laws are in need of a re calibration.
I actually do think the prevalence of counter-strike/call of duty has created a cult of obsession with military style weapons. I feel I can say that because I honestly felt like I was part of it for a while. Eventually, it just seemed a bit silly (to me), not to mention expensive, so I dropped the habit. But close friends I had, that started on parallel trajectories as me (we met freshman year of university) have gone down the path of detachment from real social circles, involvement on 4chan, 8chan, Qanon, etc. Counterstrike communities and near-cult like obsession with AR15 variants (+ others) led them there. The problem is all wound up tight. It's not just about guns, but to say guns are not part of it I find ludicrous.
EDIT: I don't see why certain weapons* can't be legally geo-fenced. You want to throw some lead downrange with your AR15? Fine. It feels great. I've done it plenty. It can be immensely satisfying. But put it in the range's safe when you're done. Keep your shotgun, magazine-restricted glock, and your antiques at home, if you want. But that FN FAL doesn't need to leave the range.
*see paragraph 1
Last edited:
- 2,647
He associated with antifa, trained to shoot with a local chapter of the Socialist Rifle Association (antifa), and posted on antifa subjects on his twitter account, iamthespookster (now suspended). I have not seen any evidence that he necessarily intended to make a terroristic statement on behalf of antifa with his chosen targets, but he had connections to leftwing terrorist ideology.
It appears to me that he was distraught and motivated by the El Paso shooting. Not as a copycat, then, but perhaps out of retaliation and/or grief for what a "fascist" did.
Novalee
(Banned)
- 708
- Earth
what left wing terrorist ? antifa fights nazis . nazis are not nice we saw in ww2 . who would stand up for nazis ?
the women that went to school with him said he had a hit list to rape and kill women. that is not a antifa ideology . rightwingers are trying to conflate it because they know their boy in el paso makes them look bad as it should .
- 28,972
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
I know you are maybe playing Devil's Advocate here, but no... frankly, anyone who thinks that mass murders of innocent people are 'acceptable' in any way are woefully misguided. Mass shootings are a cost of private gun ownership, but not an 'acceptable' one.
-
As to why incidents like the Dayton shooting are happening, my theory is that it has a lot to do with entitlement... not so much that these individuals feel entitled to do what they do, but more that they are experiencing the result of a removal of entitlement(s) that young, white males may have previously assumed (esp. in the USA) that they are increasingly no longer able to. While this is a good thing in general, there is inevitably going to be a backlash from a small number of individuals who either just don't 'get it' or who refuse to accept the reality of their lack of entitlement.
Other societal groups (particularly women and ethnic minorities) are not reacting in the same way because they have, until now at least, been on the opposite side of this equation - groups that have been discriminated against historically are now, rightly, being afforded rights they should have been all along. However, this lack of recognition of the rights of others (e.g. black people, women, LGBT community, ethnic and religious minorities etc.) remains embedded in society/culture to the extent that it is coming as something of a shock, esp. to disaffected young white males, when they realise that their personal belief in their own superiority is no longer accepted or recognised in society.
I might be totally wrong, but I reckon this explains why the demographic of the worst mass shootings and atrocities in the US is currently dominated by young, white males.
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
- 24,612
- Anoka, MN
He's a gay man whose parent's came here from Vietnam (Andy Ngo). He was also attacked by antifa protesters.
Granted I don't 100% know he's not a nazi, but I would say it's a pretty safe bet.
- 2,214
- Isle of Wight, UK
He's a murderer. The lot of them are murderers. I really couldn't care less if he was a Nazi or a Communist, to be honest, that only gives people the chance to use them and their crimes as political ammo. That's exactly what extremists want - keep us all angry, not trusting each other, using these extreme actions to make our points instead of reasoning with each other.
It sickens me how every time this happens, people scramble to find the shooter's manifesto and politics, often before even giving their sympathies to the victims and their families.
Isn't that exactly what these sick bastards want? For you to look at their politics instead of the inhuman act they've committed? For us all to find someone to blame that isn't the guy with the gun, but some politician or opinion-haver who influenced him? To turn on each other and fling blame so we can say "well im not right wing, right wingers shoot people" "well im not antifa because antifa shoot people so ha!"
Maybe this keeps happening because its a guaranteed way to become famous in a world you feel doesn't understand you and only responds to violence and desperation. Personally i think thats bugger all to do with politics. Far more to do with education and a feeling of having nowhere to go.
News outlets shouldn't be allowed to release their names, faces and political statements. It doesn't add anything but ammunition for more division, which is ultimately empowering to people who think killing innocent people is a good way to make a point.
It sickens me how every time this happens, people scramble to find the shooter's manifesto and politics, often before even giving their sympathies to the victims and their families.
Isn't that exactly what these sick bastards want? For you to look at their politics instead of the inhuman act they've committed? For us all to find someone to blame that isn't the guy with the gun, but some politician or opinion-haver who influenced him? To turn on each other and fling blame so we can say "well im not right wing, right wingers shoot people" "well im not antifa because antifa shoot people so ha!"
Maybe this keeps happening because its a guaranteed way to become famous in a world you feel doesn't understand you and only responds to violence and desperation. Personally i think thats bugger all to do with politics. Far more to do with education and a feeling of having nowhere to go.
News outlets shouldn't be allowed to release their names, faces and political statements. It doesn't add anything but ammunition for more division, which is ultimately empowering to people who think killing innocent people is a good way to make a point.
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
I think you are on to something, someone is finally starting to get the message.
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
- 24,612
- Anoka, MN
That's the thing, you asked if he looked like a Nazi. I don't know, and nor do you. You evidently know who he is and more about his background, but none of that helps those who know nothing of him with your question
That was kind of the point, we dont know if he is a nazi or not, so neither can antifa.
Yet the problem has yet to be resolved when other similar, first world nations quickly come to some sort of resolution (usually gun control).
I also asked earlier about the state of Americans mental health system, yet no one replied.
While it seems (I’m assuming) kind of insane to you and me that people would value access to a object or hobby over the lives of hundreds (or thousands) of people a year, it seems to be the case with guns and Americans. It’s just that no one actually wants to say it.
- 16,931
- United Kingdom
@baldgye
Whilst I agree that the attitude behind some pro-gun arguments seems ludicrous, and I do generally support the concept of gun control, America's situation has evolved too far to expect gun control alone to work... stemming the tide of new guns doesn't address the hundreds of millions of guns already circulation, and that - IMHO - is one of the more practical issues at play. And, although doing something about that would be a gargantuan exercise probably requiring massive military intervention and cause a civil war... it's probably still easier to address that, than do something about the underlying issues in society these days. Simply, I think it's too late for America to do anything about it, it's a fact of life now in America, like earthquakes, tornado's, wild fires, and flooding. The only thing that can really be done is pretty much the same as anywhere else where your life might be at risk for some reason... take precautions and hope for the best.
Whilst I agree that the attitude behind some pro-gun arguments seems ludicrous, and I do generally support the concept of gun control, America's situation has evolved too far to expect gun control alone to work... stemming the tide of new guns doesn't address the hundreds of millions of guns already circulation, and that - IMHO - is one of the more practical issues at play. And, although doing something about that would be a gargantuan exercise probably requiring massive military intervention and cause a civil war... it's probably still easier to address that, than do something about the underlying issues in society these days. Simply, I think it's too late for America to do anything about it, it's a fact of life now in America, like earthquakes, tornado's, wild fires, and flooding. The only thing that can really be done is pretty much the same as anywhere else where your life might be at risk for some reason... take precautions and hope for the best.
- 86,088
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
One could say the same thing about cars.
People usually baulk at that comparison, because they understand cars and have a use for cars, and because - despite the requirements for proficiency testing before you're allowed to use them, and licensing (or "control") - the deaths from car use are accidental rather than deliberate, so they wish away the notion that cars are incredibly deadly because they... value access to them and have them as a hobby. And besides, they're responsible car owners and they'd never crash and it's the minority that cause the problems.
Yet the fact remains that there's 100 deaths a day due to cars in the USA, compared to one from what we term mass shootings. If you add up all gun deaths, they actually come pretty close to car deaths, but nearly 60% of gun deaths are suicides and 20% of the remainder are cops (this too is sometimes unlawful, for balance; cops in the USA do seem way too keen to use guns to protect and serve themselves rather than the public). The proportion of vehicle deaths that are suicide and murder are so small that I can't even find numbers for them.
There's also significantly fewer cars than guns - about 260m cars and 300m guns - although it seems pretty likely that cars are used more often than guns; I'd reckon far fewer guns are used of the total than cars (I did a calculation for another thread once; I forget what the number was, but it was under a quarter of guns seeing regular use), and those guns that are used are mainly used at a firing range... which you'd probably drive to
"Mass shootings" are no more an acceptable result of private gun ownership than drink driving is an acceptable result of private car ownership, or stabbings (six times higher murder rate than spree shootings) are of home cookery. They're an undesirable consequence which can and should be addressed without punishing hundreds of millions of people who do not break the law.
Thing is, while spree shootings grab the headlines, they're not even the biggest issue with shootings. On average across 2018, one person a day died in a spree shooting incident (it's about 10% higher in 2019 so far). Meanwhile 30 a day died in other shootings, and the victims and perpetrators in those shootings are predominantly black males - and black men die in firearms incidents at a rate 30 times higher than white men. About a fifth of those deaths come in the cities of New York, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Detroit and Chicago.
In effect, young white male perpetrators commit the spree shootings, but they and their victims are ~3% (yes, three) of all incidents where a person killed by a bullet is not the person holding the gun. Saturday's murders in El Paso and Dayton were huge, shocking, headline-making events... but basically a regular Saturday if you're a young, black, city-living male.
It seems that the privilege of young white males is actually that your death or your murders are newsworthy.
A non-issue as far as guns are concerned (although they are "homicides" and often included in the USA's gun homicide stats) is the 60 a day that die from self-inflicted (and, in the case of those spilling secrets on Hillary Clinton, "self-inflicted") gunshot wounds. Two-thirds of those are white males across all ages. A similar number die each day in non-firearm suicides (usually OD or hanging), with a higher representation of women. That speaks to a larger mental health issue.
Novalee
(Banned)
- 708
- Earth
yes mr andy that lied about cement milkshakes and gave addresses of people to rightwing extremists so the neo nazis could direct violence towards them . you might as well have posted a pic of hitler or stalin .
Dude's got nazi written all over him!!!
heres what mr ngo gets up to
few days later, while at work, Alexander received the DM on Twitter from a journalist friend who was not mentioned in the video or Lenihan article: “Wow,” it read, “I just saw that crazy death threat against you and the other journalists and activists Quillette has been targeting. Are you doing OK?” Indeed, his name showed up on a hitlist called “Sunset the Media” amid images of Nazi violence. The video, posted to YouTube by a fan of the neo-Nazi terror organisation Atomwaffen Division, featured the images of several journalists, suggesting we should be murdered. The video ended with a quote from Atomwaffen's neo-Nazi guru, James Mason, regarding lone wolf attacks: “I do not urge anyone to do anything like that, but when it gets done, I won’t disown them.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/alt-right-antifa-death-threats-doxxing-quillette-a8966176.html
it also worth noting the anti defamation league which is run by jews who would know few things about extremists do not consider antifa a hate group .
it is important to reject attempts to claim equivalence between the antifa and the white supremacist groups they oppose. The antifa reject racism but use unacceptable tactics. White supremacists use even more extreme violence to spread their ideologies of hate, to intimidate ethnic minorities, and undermine democratic norms. Right-wing extremists have been one of the largest and most consistent sources of domestic terror incidents in the United States for many years; they have murdered hundreds of people in this country over the last ten years alone. To date, there have not been any known antifa-related murders.
https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounders/who-are-the-antifa
Last edited:
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
Is there is a fundamental condition common to a great many young males everywhere in the US: If they have nothing productive to do, are they going to get into trouble? By biological evolution over millennia, haven't males acquired the role and responsibility to create and provide for a family of dependent women and children? Isn't this their prime evolutionary/ biological/DNA mission and purpose in life? If you take away a male's occupation and his ability to provide for a family, take away his role as responsible for a family and a productive life, is he then essentially purposeless, useless, derelict, and going to spiral down in some numbers? Does social engineering have a cost to be paid in terms of cross purposes with biological evolution? Is that cost worth it?
- 86,088
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
It's right there. It's the light blue line. That's the same total as firearms with firearm suicides and lawful interventions by police included.
The KSI rate is even similar (although not depicted on that chart).
It should be. We should be able to understand what the issues are with firearms and address them so that more and more people (as per that chart) can enjoy them safely and legally and there's an even greater proliferation of them. It's a good goal.
But it seems that, unlike private car ownership, people want to blame the guns instead of addressing the issues...
