Another Day In The USA

[Derec]

If guns in the US were regulated just like motor vehicles are, there would be far fewer gun owners and likely far fewer shootings. But if you even hinted at bringing in such a level of regulation, the NRA would have a fit.

No kidding. Licensing and insurance would go over real well ...

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/08/fb...-hate-crime-cnn-panel/#comments_section_start

...
“As for the suspect, of course, we’ll all wait, but it would suggest why the FBI seems to be involved that if this is a hate crime or an ideologically motivated crime, a white male with a manifesto or something that we are now reporting on that the FBI would have jurisdiction because it could be a federal hate crime,” CNN national security analyst Juliette Kayyem explained.
...

So the FBI might be getting involved as this may be classified as a hate crime.

I suspect as we speak the FBI will have a warrant and will be raiding his home, confiscating computers and other materials that establish a motive and evidence of a hate crime.

Faux News squealing to start in 5, 4, 3......

 

[bilby]

Well, the primary purpose of a motor vehicle is to transport people. That's a good thing. It has utility.

And the primary purpose of a gun is?

For defending yourself against nutbags.

Guns are not a defence against anything.

A bulletproof vest is a defense against nutbags. A gun is not.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Why do Americans always pretend to act so shocked when things like this happen? This is the society which you have chosen and the trade off you have accepted as a reasonable cost of having your second amendment rights. It's not something out of place or unusual that doesn't reflect who you are as a people.

 

[Half-Life]

1) That's a bullshit statistic
2) Vehicles have uses other than killing people
3) There isn't a lobby group advocating unsafe vehicles be accessible to everybody
4) There is a concerted effort to make vehicles as safe as possible

But apart from those minor details, you hit the nail on the head.

5) You must pass a practical test and obtain a licence before you are permitted to drive a vehicle
6) Vehicles that are able to do more harm (heavy vehicles) require additional licences
7) Vehicles must be registered and a record of vehicles and their owners is kept by the state
8) Before operating a vehicle, you must have third party insurance to cover any injuries you cause to others (and in many jurisdictions also to cover any damage done to their property).

If guns in the US were regulated just like motor vehicles are, there would be far fewer gun owners and likely far fewer shootings. But if you even hinted at bringing in such a level of regulation, the NRA would have a fit.

it does suck for some people who want to protect themselves today.

"Sorry, your life isn't worth protecting today. Fill out all the paperwork and if it all checks out, you can start defending your own life in a few weeks or so. Hopefully nothing bad happens to you until then."

 

[Patooka]

Why do Americans always pretend to act so shocked when things like this happen? This is the society which you have chosen and the trade off you have accepted as a reasonable cost of having your second amendment rights. It's not something out of place or unusual that doesn't reflect who you are as a people.

This was written seven years ago:

Doing the same thing over and over...you know the rest.

 

[Derec]

Guns are not a defence against anything.
A bulletproof vest is a defense against nutbags. A gun is not.

Of course they are a defense. If you can shoot the attacker before they can harm you or somebody else, that's an effective defense.

'Hero' 7-Eleven customer with gun foils robbery bid as he shoots one suspect and seriously wounds another

Two robbers, who have been identified as Michael Moore, Ronald Lee Brookins Jr., and Deric Breon Simmons, walked into a store in Virginia Beach around 2 a.m. on Thursday and demanded money. According to a bystander, Barrie Engel, the young men asked the shoppers to stay where they were, not move. While most shocked and scared customers followed the order, a man who was carrying a legal gun “confronted and ultimately shot” the suspects.

I'd say he successfully defended that 7-11, wouldn't you say?
The same crew was responsible for a string of robberies, not just this one. I'd say this was a good use of a gun. One suspect dead, two apprehended and charged with multiple felonies.

 

[Toni]

1) That's a bullshit statistic
2) Vehicles have uses other than killing people
3) There isn't a lobby group advocating unsafe vehicles be accessible to everybody
4) There is a concerted effort to make vehicles as safe as possible

But apart from those minor details, you hit the nail on the head.

5) You must pass a practical test and obtain a licence before you are permitted to drive a vehicle
6) Vehicles that are able to do more harm (heavy vehicles) require additional licences
7) Vehicles must be registered and a record of vehicles and their owners is kept by the state
8) Before operating a vehicle, you must have third party insurance to cover any injuries you cause to others (and in many jurisdictions also to cover any damage done to their property).

If guns in the US were regulated just like motor vehicles are, there would be far fewer gun owners and likely far fewer shootings. But if you even hinted at bringing in such a level of regulation, the NRA would have a fit.

it does suck for some people who want to protect themselves today.

"Sorry, your life isn't worth protecting today. Fill out all the paperwork and if it all checks out, you can start defending your own life in a few weeks or so. Hopefully nothing bad happens to you until then."

I’ve successfully defended myself against assault in more than one occasion. At less than 62 inches in height and somewhere south of 100 lbs. No guns. I’ve had multiple family members who were held up at their own homes, including elderly relatives. The only time anyone was hurt was my then middle aged uncle who was a war veteran and a life long hunter and expert marksman. He was being robbed of his own guns in his own home. When he made the move to ‘defend himself and my aunt against the attacker’s, one fired one of my uncle’s own guns st his head, narrowly missing him.

So, I call bullshit on guns ‘protecting’ innocent people in their own homes or on their own property.

 

[bilby]

1) That's a bullshit statistic
2) Vehicles have uses other than killing people
3) There isn't a lobby group advocating unsafe vehicles be accessible to everybody
4) There is a concerted effort to make vehicles as safe as possible

But apart from those minor details, you hit the nail on the head.

5) You must pass a practical test and obtain a licence before you are permitted to drive a vehicle
6) Vehicles that are able to do more harm (heavy vehicles) require additional licences
7) Vehicles must be registered and a record of vehicles and their owners is kept by the state
8) Before operating a vehicle, you must have third party insurance to cover any injuries you cause to others (and in many jurisdictions also to cover any damage done to their property).

If guns in the US were regulated just like motor vehicles are, there would be far fewer gun owners and likely far fewer shootings. But if you even hinted at bringing in such a level of regulation, the NRA would have a fit.

it does suck for some people who want to protect themselves today.

"Sorry, your life isn't worth protecting today. Fill out all the paperwork and if it all checks out, you can start defending your own life in a few weeks or so. Hopefully nothing bad happens to you until then."

Guns don't protect people. They do the exact opposite. The only effect of a gun is to escalate violence; They are strictly a 'first strike' tool, so they can initiate violence, but cannot prevent it.

The 'Mexican stand-off' is a fictional scenario that cannot exist in real life. If two people are pointing guns at each other, the winner is whoever shoots first, and there is therefore no advantage in not shooting immediately. So no 'defence' or 'protection'.

If you want protection, get a bulletproof vest.

 

[Derec]

If you want protection, get a bulletproof vest.

Or shoot first.

 

[Patooka]

it does suck for some people who want to protect themselves today.

"Sorry, your life isn't worth protecting today. Fill out all the paperwork and if it all checks out, you can start defending your own life in a few weeks or so. Hopefully nothing bad happens to you until then."

Guns don't protect people. They do the exact opposite. The only effect of a gun is to escalate violence; They are strictly a 'first strike' tool, so they can initiate violence, but cannot prevent it.

The 'Mexican stand-off' is a fictional scenario that cannot exist in real life. If two people are pointing guns at each other, the winner is whoever shoots first, and there is therefore no advantage in not shooting immediately. So no 'defence' or 'protection'.

If you want protection, get a bulletproof vest.

I have yet to hear the "I need guns for protection" argument from people who live in legitimately dangerous areas where their life is in peril. Generally, it's an argument used by people who think Steven Segal is a good role model. They're also generally the type of geniuses who will fork out hundreds of bucks accessorizing their shooters, but can't spend $5 a year making sure their smoke detectors in their house have fresh batteries. Not the sort of people I would go to for advice about protection.

 

[Jarhyn]

it does suck for some people who want to protect themselves today.

"Sorry, your life isn't worth protecting today. Fill out all the paperwork and if it all checks out, you can start defending your own life in a few weeks or so. Hopefully nothing bad happens to you until then."

Guns don't protect people. They do the exact opposite. The only effect of a gun is to escalate violence; They are strictly a 'first strike' tool, so they can initiate violence, but cannot prevent it.

The 'Mexican stand-off' is a fictional scenario that cannot exist in real life. If two people are pointing guns at each other, the winner is whoever shoots first, and there is therefore no advantage in not shooting immediately. So no 'defence' or 'protection'.

If you want protection, get a bulletproof vest.

I have yet to hear the "I need guns for protection" argument from people who live in legitimately dangerous areas where their life is in peril. Generally, it's an argument used by people who think Steven Segal is a good role model. They're also generally the type of geniuses who will fork out hundreds of bucks accessorizing their shooters, but can't spend $5 a year making sure their smoke detectors in their house have fresh batteries. Not the sort of people I would go to for advice about protection.

Yeah, as someone who lives in an area that sees shootings fairly often, "needs guns for protection" isn't really a position I hold.

(Though I do own a ballistics vest rated for up to 5.56...)

 

[JohnG]

Why do Americans always pretend to act so shocked when things like this happen? This is the society which you have chosen and the trade off you have accepted as a reasonable cost of having your second amendment rights. It's not something out of place or unusual that doesn't reflect who you are as a people.

Same thoughts. I'm surprised people still argue for or against shooting people en masse in the USA. It's just part of the culture.

After next week's mass shooting, someone's going to post that "Guns are awful" and then someone else is going to post "But guns don't kill people". and on and on it goes.

 

[Derec]

After next week's mass shooting, someone's going to post that "Guns are awful" and then someone else is going to post "But guns don't kill people". and on and on it goes.

I think both sides are way too entrenched in their extreme positions at this point.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

After next week's mass shooting, someone's going to post that "Guns are awful" and then someone else is going to post "But guns don't kill people". and on and on it goes.

I think both sides are way too entrenched in their extreme positions at this point.

There's no problem with being entrenched in a position if that position reflects reality.

 

[Derec]

There's no problem with being entrenched in a position if that position reflects reality.

The "guns are useless for protection" position does not reflect reality though.
I would support gun license and liability insurance requirements though.

 

[RavenSky]

Multiple people have been killed in a shooting in El Paso, Texas, police say

An independent journalist is reporting eighteen people dead. Numerous injuries.

One person detained, one in custody per the police information officer.

An average of 90 Americans die every day in motor vehicle accidents. Time to ban cars yet, guys?

Maybe it would better to ban white guys from owning guns. Makes just as much sense.

View attachment 22923

So he's fine with murdering people, but heaven forbid he suffer any hearing loss while he does it.

 

[RavenSky]

1) That's a bullshit statistic
2) Vehicles have uses other than killing people
3) There isn't a lobby group advocating unsafe vehicles be accessible to everybody
4) There is a concerted effort to make vehicles as safe as possible

But apart from those minor details, you hit the nail on the head.

Guns have other uses too. People play target practice and see who gets the most points, like playing darts. No use for darts other than throwing them at a dartboard. Someone could go crazy in a bar and start throwing darts at people's heads!

The sole purpose of guns are to kill.

 

[JohnG]

After next week's mass shooting, someone's going to post that "Guns are awful" and then someone else is going to post "But guns don't kill people". and on and on it goes.

I think both sides are way too entrenched in their extreme positions at this point.

It seems that only in the USA are mass shootings a partisan issue.

 

[RavenSky]

Just another lone wolf murdering white guy.

Why are you emphasizing that he was a white guy? Would it have somehow been more understandable if he was black?

Because these types of rampage shooting are overwhelmingly enacted by white males.


Let me rephrase that... white U.S. American right-wing racist males.