Yes and no. Americans are crazier than most but still: Now let's talk about guns: It's simplistic to say either/or. Fact of the matter is, when you marinate in guns you see guns as viable solutions to problems. Doesn't mean the problems aren't real, but it does mean that in places without guns, gun violence is a less prevalent approach. Should we place more emphasis on mental health? Absolutely. Should we insist that we do something about mental health before addressing the prevalence of gun violence in the United States through gun control? I don't think so. I think there are at least two fronts to the fight and the resources for each are different. Yeah, I get why militias are important and I'm a big fan of civil liberties but it's always struck me as weird that I needed $25, a driver's license and a 4-part form in order to pull a trout out of a lake but it only cost me $59 to buy a chinese assault rifle and the dude didn't so much as check ID.
You hit the nail on the head here. There needs to be a two-pronged approach to this sort of thing. Mental health issues are abundant, that's without a doubt true; but it also true that having access to a lot of weaponry and having those mental problems means that a lot of people die. Needlessly. It is frustrating to see it happen, again and again and again...
Well, seeing as how you can't legally purchase a gun if you have a clinical history of mental health problems, closing both the individual sale and gun show loopholes could go a long way. Also, going further, we could also do more to encourage the purchasing of gun safes, trigger locks, etc. to prevent people from taking firearms that don't belong to them and committing crimes.
Yep. Never did buy a piece. But damn, if Texas's marinade isn't thick and smelly. Edit: sorry for the link quality, audio in particular ;)
Other countries have mentally ill people too. No other country has so many shootings.
Yeah, kleinbl00 basically expressed the viewpoint I hold as well. I just feel that OftenBen's comment is another one of those trite phrases people use to excuse the US's gun policy.
As someone who supports both the owning of firearms as well as better laws and policies for them, I find the rhetoric on both sides absolutely maddening. People are constantly parroting bullet points without actually thinking about the whether or not the logic behind them is sound. It does nobody a hint of good.
As a German seeing gun-ownership defended just seems like such a bad idea. I don't invest myself much in those debates because the pro-gun camp seem so obviously wrong, you know? Like, you have all these security measures at airports, but hand out guns to people? In my opinion if one life was saved by nobody owning guns it would be worth it. But since you support gun ownership, why do you think having them is a good idea?
It's really tragic that this stuff happens. I guess we get to spend a little more time revisiting gun legislation because of this, right? The shooters use of a handgun will only complicate this even further. In other news they already released the shooters name to the public, and they have failed again not to publicize the criminal... One kind of unimportant aspect is how this will affect movie theaters. Could we see the expected push from movie theaters to homes?
After the last mass shooting (a few weeks ago), Dan Hodges from the Telegraph remarked on Twitter: "In retrospect, Sandy Hook marked the end of the US gun control debate. Once America decided killing children was bearable, it was over." I think that pretty much sums it up. We're not going to spend a moment more revisiting gun legislation. The same people who already think about it will continue to, while the ones who don't will not. And that's beyond pathetic.I guess we get to spend a little more time revisiting gun legislation because of this, right?
I would have agreed with you previously. I'm not sure I do anymore. Just because the debate is over doesn't mean there won't be any change. Take gay marriage. That shit was settled and it was settled in a bad direction. The "debate" was angry conservatives were louder and had more money to spend. Fuckin' Utah mormons spent $11m banning gay marriage in California for Prop 8 (one of many reasons I never visit). Then, almost as if by consensus, everyone else said "we're tired of your shit" and overturned all the hate. It was a lot quieter than all the bans - it was as if everyone silently agreed that the conservatives had had their say, they were wrong, and it was time to do the right thing. And the conservatives mostly grumbled and watched it happen. I feel we're there with gun control. The Tea Party has been herping and derping and walking around with AR15s slung across their backs and making a big stupid spectacle about gun rights but this is the first time I've seen the "NRA doesn't speak for me" rhetoric really catch on. Wayne LaPierre has overreached and I think everybody knows it. It's not much, but it's a start. If it took seven years between Utah mormons keeping Californians from getting married and the Supreme Court shutting the whole thing down, we're still 4-5 years before things start getting reasonable. Not a guarantee, not nearly soon enough, but from my perspective, not a reason to despair.
I think 4-5 years is ambitious because this isn't a social equality issue like gay marriage was, plus it's a constitutional protection. Buuuuut, we have had assault weapons bans, there are gunshow loopholes that can reasonably and pragmatically be closed, as well as a host of other minor legislation. With gay marriage, I got the sense even as it was getting shut down by state referendum momentum was actually building against that and the referendums were fueled by a desperate fear on the right while the tide was turning beneath their feet. I'm looking for that current here, but I have to say I'm coming up a bit short. That being said, I'm not going to stop being politically engaged on the issue...but it's true that I'm pretty pessimistic at the moment.
Well, 4-5 years before what? I don't think we're Australia but I think the tide is turning towards "common-sense gun laws." What's "common sense?" There's gonna be a debate there. I mean, you can't own .50 cal or assault rifles in California. That's an infringement on the 2nd amendment. Illinois requires showing a specific ID. That's infringement. Hawaii requires registration. That's infringement. New York City requires a permit. Massachusetts is its own thing. And that's how it starts. Local municipalities sick of the chaos do something that requires the NRA to strike it down, and the NRA doesn't. Before too long, you'll see something at the Supreme Court. - Massachusetts Declaration of Rights, Article 17"The people have a right to keep and bear arms for the common defense. And as, in time of peace, armies are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be maintained without the consent of the legislature, and the military power shall always be held in an exact subordination to the civil authority, and be governed by it.”
It does boggle my mind how uninterested people can be in such serious issues like these. I have friends that will argue/discuss policy with me for literally hours, and others who are actually angered by the slightest conversation about politics. Most people that show disinterest in these things talk about how their actions won't change anything, but I find that ridiculous because to propagate that ideal only makes the problems worse...
I don't mean to sound like I've given up. I'll continue to support common sense regulation on arms. But I just don't have the sense that there can be movement here. I really do think that after all those kids getting got down and the same week the NRA proposed the solution was more guns in the classrooms on the teacher's hips...that said it all. America either agreed, disagreed, or didn't bother to engage. Bottom line is that there wasn't an uproar either from the population and certainly not from our politicians. I think we have to wait for the Dems to control both houses and the presidency and have some more kids gunned down all at the same time. Then maybe. But the actual reality is that there's only so much we can ever do without a constitutional amendment. The pro-gun lobby is actually correct in many instances that any given piece of proposed legislation often wouldn't stop the actual crime that propelled it. We're allowed to have guns. If you have a gun you have a gun.
It is very discouraging to watch the conversation after one of these shootings when you're anywhere left of the NRA. I disagree with the NRA that this dude would have stabbed 12 people, "successfully" killing at least 2, if he hadn't had a gun. I do think it's easy for criminals and other loonies to get guns in spite of existing laws, which is why we need better existing laws.
Well politically the NRA is a massive force for intimidation. Right after Sandy Hook there was support for some fairly mild gun control where it doesn't exist, but all it took was the NRA making an example with some attack ads and that was that. Americans certainly wouldn't support sweeping gun control legislation, but even those minor changes they might support won't happen as long as the NRA can just scare politicians into submission.
Assuming the loser bought his gun in Louisiana, there is lots of room for improvement on Louisiana's gun laws: http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/07/24/3684114/louisiana-lax-gun-laws/
Well that's horrible. It's good that the news doesn't seem to be showering the killer in publicity. How long do you think until we get armed guards and metal detectors in theaters? Do we wait for this to happen a third time? Is that even an economically viable possibility? I'll tell you one thing, I don't think I'll be moving back to a city any time soon.
I'm sure all of their best people are on the case, called into the office late last night to begin building a profile of our newfangled American celebrity. This is cracking me up. Like the experience I have going to the movies isn't already dreadful. Maybe this rash of shootings will be the tipping point of the absurd business model Hollywood is desperately propping up.It's good that the news doesn't seem to be showering the killer in publicity.
How long do you think until we get armed guards and metal detectors in theaters? Do we wait for this to happen a third time? Is that even an economically viable possibility?
Yeah, from the other comments it already looks like they've released the asshole's name. I like seeing some movies on the big screen. It is a bit of a funky business model though. From what I've heard the whole thing is centered around a loss leader and basically profiting on soda and popcorn. Joke's on them, I bring my own beer.