General Mass Shooting Thread (originally Las Vegas Strip)

[Destino]

3 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

What place do guns have in society? I’ll take a ninja over some bumble**** with a gun any day of the week.

By society I assume you don’t mean things like hunting, so I’ll provide an answer.  Guns allow the physically weak, or outnumbered, to defend themselves from the strong or numerous that mean to do them harm.  They allow average people to defend their families.  

 

I’m probably only alive today because my mother had a gun (not in the US at the time) and was able to use it to ward off an intruder that made it plain he was there to do her harm.  No law abiding person, of sound mind, should be prevented from being able to defend their own lives.  
 

This doesn’t mean that guns should be largely unregulated though, or that anyone should be able to have as many guns, or any gun, that they like without any questions being asked.  Doesn’t mean that people shouldn’t be held accountable when their unsecured firearm ends killing kids in a school either.  There’s room to tighten things up from the awful situation we’re in now.
 

 

[Destino]

1 hour ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

What positive benefit does alcohol serve?

Legal alcohol prevents vast fortunes of money from making their way into the hands of organized crime.  There’s no drug Americans like more than alcohol.  Look at how powerful illegal drugs today have made organized crime, and the drugs they sell wouldn’t compare to the numbers who want to drink alcohol in the US.

[CousinsCowgirl84]

7 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

If that is such a great idea, why do only 19 countries follow that example?  And why do police need guns in all of the other countries since gun ownership and violence and only an American problem?

 

 

Because our ape brains think pistols project power.

[Dan T.]

9 hours ago, Corcaigh said:

And those who love hammers … ‘Hammersexuals’?

 

 

Don't get me started on the ball peen style.

 

 

 

Edited December 2, 2021 by Dan T.

[PleaseBlitz]

12 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

I disagree.  At least with guns, you can say there is at least a minor reasonable place for them in society.  Alcohol (and I say this as a borderline alcoholic) doesn’t serve any necessary function.  Yet we aren’t taking extreme measures to stop alcohol related deaths.  

 

By this logic (not serving a necessary function), you can say the same thing about religion, basically all forms of entertainment, and nearly all consumable goods that people use for enjoyment rather than subsistence.  That's not how society, especially a capitalist society, works.  

 

And although some people may be in favor of "extreme measures" to curb gun deaths, most people want reasonable restrictions (which the gun lobby will certainly term as extreme).  And we do have reasonable restrictions to stop alcohol related deaths.  It is illegal to drink and drive (and the legal limit in most places is 1-2 beers), you can't buy it until you are 21 (when the age of majority for nearly everything else is 18) and you have to have ID to purchase it, you can't have an open container in most public spaces, you can't even walk around drunk in public.  Ads for booze can't show the people actually drinking.  Booze gets taxed like a mother****er.  Many states have strict restrictions on the sale of alcohol, like VA where you can only buy it at state-run ABC stores.  

 

I love drinking, and all of those, to me, are very reasonable restrictions (except maybe not being able to walk around with a drink so long as you are otherwise behaving).  

 

Guns have a MINOR reasonable place in society, yet you can buy them without ID in many places, you can walk around with them in most places.  Sticking with VA, since that's what im familiar with, there is no minimum age to buy a rifle (it's 18 for assault rifles).

[tshile]

4 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

It is illegal to drink and drive (and the legal limit in most places is 1-2 beers

This isn’t a reasonable restriction in the sense you’re using it. It’s an after the fact law. We have gun laws too governing the activities that relate to the subject of mass shootings. 
 

handguns are 21 too. 
 

and gun crime is illegal and punishable just as drinking and driving is. 

the kids dad bought the gun. If the kid had stolen the dads liquor and drove drunk, since were comparing the two criminal acts, the outcome is essentially the same (in that sense)

 

Edited December 2, 2021 by tshile

[Llevron]

....

Edited December 2, 2021 by Llevron

[tshile]

Ok the age 21 handgun requirement thing was ruled unconstitutional by a federal court this past summer

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/handgun-ban-under-21-law-unconstitutional-federal-appeals-court/

 

which means that is a constitutional issue, not a law on the books issue. But it was a law on the books. 
 

 

Edited December 2, 2021 by tshile

[Dan T.]

1 minute ago, Llevron said:

This is a stupid hill for yall to die on honestly. 

 

I see your point, but that's a bad idiom to use in a mass shooting thread.

[TheGreatBuzz]

10 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

you can say the same thing about religion,

I'd be fine with getting rid of that also.

 

As for the laws you mentioned, we also have laws against shooting people.  

 

Now I think I have derailed this thread enough.  It isn't the gun control thread.  I'm stopping this topic in here.

[Llevron]

Just now, Dan T. said:

 

I see your point, but that's a bad idiom to use in a mass shooting thread.

 

I didn't even think of it that way, my bad. 

[PleaseBlitz]

8 minutes ago, tshile said:

This isn’t a reasonable restriction in the sense you’re using it. It’s an after the fact law. We have gun laws too governing the activities that relate to the subject of mass shootings. 
 

handguns are 21 too. 
 

and gun crime is illegal and punishable just as drinking and driving is. 

 

Now do the rest of the 10 restrictions i posted. 

1 minute ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

I'd be fine with getting rid of that also.

 

As for the laws you mentioned, we also have laws against shooting people.  

 

Now I think I have derailed this thread enough.  It isn't the gun control thread.  I'm stopping this topic in here.

 

I'd all in favor of getting rid of religion too, but not entertainment or consumable goods.

 

And yes, we have laws against shooting people (that apply unless you shoot the "right people" but i digress).

 

We don't have the kind of gun control regime that we do for alcohol and a lot of other things that would lower the instance of gun violence.  As @tshile noted, we have after the fact laws, but not much in the way of lowering the likelihood of gun violence before they happen. So if someone wants to go shoot up a school, they'll find very few barriers to doing that.  Which sucks. 

[tshile]

9 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

Now do the rest of the 10 restrictions i posted. 

Um. I quoted a specific part and replied to that specific part for a reason?

 

this isn’t even my argument. I was just commenting on one part of it that keeps getting mentioned, because it’s silly and doesn’t apply. 

[TradeTheBeal!]

If the heroic Mr Myre (RIP) had attacked the shooter with a skateboard, would his killing have been justifiable self-defense in Wisconsin?

 

 

Edited December 2, 2021 by TryTheBeal!

[tshile]

16 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

As @tshile noted, we have after the fact laws, but not much in the way of lowering the likelihood of gun violence before they happen. So if someone wants to go shoot up a school, they'll find very few barriers to doing that.  Which sucks. 

Well a big component is not being able to enforce laws we do already have. 
 

like, for example, the NRA and conservatives have been very successful in kneecapping the ATF’s ability to conduct basic parts of their mission statement, and upholding (what I would view as key) parts of gun laws like keeping up with gun stores. 
 

going down the rabbit hole of how little the atf is able/allowed to do basic things like keeping up with inventorying gun shops is crazy and depressing. 
 

especially when available research suggests a small portion of gun shops are responsible for the vast majority of straw purchasing and guns on the streets in the hands of people that shouldn’t have them. 
 

I’m not saying we don’t need new/different laws. And I’m always willing to entertain any suggestion at this point. 
 

but we have a problem enforcing the laws on the books. 
 

and of course that problem is mostly caused by the dip****s that tell us “we need to enforce the laws on the books not make new ones”

1 minute ago, TryTheBeal! said:

If the heroic Mr Myre (RIP) had attacked the shooter with a skateboard, would his killing had been justifiable self-defense in Wisconsin?

This is a dumb pathetic attempt at cleverness because obviously the two situations are nothing alike. 

we’d be better off if people didn’t do this dumb crap. 

Edited December 2, 2021 by tshile

[China]

Again, please take the gun control discussion to the other thread.

[Cooked Crack]

 

[Dan T.]

2 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

 

 

 

While MAGA and NRA nation will stay silent on the young shooter, it would not surprise me if they rally around the pro-gun parents. During the 2016 election the mother wrote a fawning open letter to Donald Trump praising him for, among other things, his support for gun rights, and excusing some of his most loathsome conduct.   It may not happen, but I could see them becoming  minor cause celebres like that St. Louis couple who pointed guns at BLM protesters walking by their house.

[tshile]

I need more details on why they decided to charge the parents before forming an opinion on it. 

[Corcaigh]

14 minutes ago, tshile said:

I need more details on why they decided to charge the parents before forming an opinion on it. 

 

 

One thing I read is that the parents knew their child was a threat based on several incidents at the school very recently and still bought him a gun.

 

They were each charged with four counts of involuntary manslaughter. Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald previously called Crumbley's parent's actions “far beyond negligence."

 

Is there any legal requirement for a parent to secure a weapon when they know they have a minor in the house who may use it?

 

 

 

Edited December 3, 2021 by Corcaigh

[tshile]

14 minutes ago, Corcaigh said:

 

 

One thing I read is that the parents knew their child was a threat based on several incidents at the school very recently and still bought him a gun.

 

They were each charged with four counts of involuntary manslaughter. Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald previously called Crumbley's parent's actions “far beyond negligence."

 

Is there any legal requirement for a parent to secure a weapon when they know they have a minor in the house who may use it?

 

 

 

That would be a state by state thing. 
 

I want to know exactly what they did. 
 

im not against charging a gun owner for what their gun was used for - but I need all the details before I decide if I agree with it or not. 
 

Throwing out theories is useless as there’s infinite number of possibilities and any one detail could change my mind either way. 
 

it needs to be evaluated case by case - and the details need to be known. At least, for me. 
 

 

[EmirOfShmo]

RE: Charging the parents.

Listening to PBR driving this morning they mentioned a couple of things: Michigan doesn't have law(s) that require guns to be locked up & secured. So the discussion turned to if they could still charge the parents. However, several years ago a 6 year old shot & killed someone. The kid found his father's gun in a shoebox. The father was charged with manslaughter & served 6(?)  2 years & 5 months in prison. 

I'll see if I can find an article about that shooting & post it.

 

Edit: Here's a wiki link about the 6 year old shooting. It was an uncle & he served 2 years & 5 months in prison.

 

Jamelle James, the uncle who owned the .32-caliber pistol used in the shooting, was sentenced for leaving the gun in a shoe box in his bedroom.[10] He eventually pleaded no contest to involuntary manslaughter and spent two years and five months in prison before he was released on probation. The other adults involved would be in and out of court systems in the years to follow.[1] A search of James' house produced a loaded pump-action shotgun and a rock of crack cocaine.

 

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

Edited December 3, 2021 by EmirOfShmo

[Cooked Crack]

 

29 minutes ago, Corcaigh said:

Is there any legal requirement for a parent to secure a weapon when they know they have a minor in the house who may use it?

 

Not in Michigan it seems

[Dan T.]

Is there a minimum age for handgun ownership in Michigan?

[Cooked Crack]

 

55 minutes ago, Dan T. said:

 

 

While MAGA and NRA nation will stay silent on the young shooter, it would not surprise me if they rally around the pro-gun parents. During the 2016 election the mother wrote a fawning open letter to Donald Trump praising him for, among other things, his support for gun rights, and excusing some of his most loathsome conduct.   It may not happen, but I could see them becoming  minor cause celebres like that St. Louis couple who pointed guns at BLM protesters walking by their house.

Spoiler

 

Pure deplorable. Spoiler for language