(February 20, 2018 at 12:34 pm)Lutrinae Wrote:

(February 20, 2018 at 12:29 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: No.

From my perspective, Spanish guys still have white skin. Care to provide a link associating a black man to a mass shooting?

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/cr...new-cookie

There is a site that keeps track of all shootings with 4 Or more victims. http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/mass

Most of them are gang related and get no press, the victims and perpertrators are both dispreportionally minorities (even if you dont consider hispanics white, I think their opinion of their "whiteness' or lack thereof probably counts more)

because the media in the U.S. dispreportionally reports on mass shootings where the victims (which means the killers are likely to be, since most crimes against white people are committed by other white people) are white, doesnt mean that they all are. In fact mass shootings are mostly gang related and get no national coverage.

(February 20, 2018 at 11:59 am)CapnAwesome Wrote:

(February 20, 2018 at 11:15 am)pocaracas Wrote: Confiscation can get tricky, yes.
But I can envision that, just as some may evolve into unsustainable situations like you mentioned, many people will be conscientious enough to understand the risks and will give them up, willingly.... particularly, if a certain reasonable monetary value is exchanged for them.
Most of the time, cops wouldn't even be required.... but they are the best trained to handle it.

Trying to confiscate guns in the U.S. would cause an untold amount of mass shootings. If you cared about mass shootings at all. I for one, don't think 'from my cold dead hands' is a bluff.

---

(February 20, 2018 at 11:57 am)pocaracas Wrote: Try reading some of what I wrote, instead of spewing hate towards statistics.
I'd advise to go into some of those links as well, but I understand that it can become too much.

I edited my post two seconds afterwards to acknowledge that, no reason to be a dick. It is a nonsense statistic though, or do you think gun deaths some sort of value? It doesn't tell you the murder rate of a country. I mean, I'm in favor of voluntary suicide, so in favor of some gun deaths and obviously against others. So the stat is nonsense when a cancer victim ending their own life and a murder of a child are both 'gun deaths ' I mean do some thought experiments with that stat and the murder/suicide/accident mix and you'll see that pretty quick.

Also try responding thoughtfully to my points,  not being a dick to feel smug. Also I agree with a lot of your other points, which is why I didn't respond to them. Just think gun deaths is a pointless stat.

Again, had you read what you quoted, you would have noticed that I based all that text around HOMICIDES.... the very same thing you want people to address: "murder rate".
That's why I told you to read it... and I see you failed to even do that.

(February 20, 2018 at 12:59 pm)pocaracas Wrote:

(February 20, 2018 at 11:59 am)CapnAwesome Wrote: Trying to confiscate guns in the U.S. would cause an untold amount of mass shootings. If you cared about mass shootings at all. I for one, don't think 'from my cold dead hands' is a bluff.

---

I edited my post two seconds afterwards to acknowledge that, no reason to be a dick. It is a nonsense statistic though, or do you think gun deaths some sort of value? It doesn't tell you the murder rate of a country. I mean, I'm in favor of voluntary suicide, so in favor of some gun deaths and obviously against others. So the stat is nonsense when a cancer victim ending their own life and a murder of a child are both 'gun deaths ' I mean do some thought experiments with that stat and the murder/suicide/accident mix and you'll see that pretty quick.

Also try responding thoughtfully to my points,  not being a dick to feel smug. Also I agree with a lot of your other points, which is why I didn't respond to them. Just think gun deaths is a pointless stat.

Again, had you read what you quoted, you would have noticed that I based all that text around HOMICIDES.... the very same thing you want people to address: "murder rate".
That's why I told you to read it... and I see you failed to even do that.

I didn't address that because I agree with it and acknowledged that in the post. I just was using it as a foil for my point about gun deaths, which you also brought up. Unless you are denying that all of a sudden. Go back and reread what i wrote with the edit 10 seconds later. If you didn't just instant rage and took a moment to consider what you were reading you would see that. Geez, did you not have coffee this morning Or something?

(February 20, 2018 at 12:23 pm)wallym Wrote:

(February 20, 2018 at 12:16 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: Wtf??

I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt.  I assume he means repairing race relations to the point they don't have a reason to fear government.

Yeah, mostly this, but also how non-blacks perceive blacks.... I hear there's still lots of racism floating around and that leads to an opposite and equal force.
The mentalities on both sides (or more than both, latinos, asians, etc also feel that somewhat, no?) need to evolve. I know many people are already there, but this is one aspect where the lowest denominator sets the bar.

I'm sorry if my wording came out wrong...

---

(February 20, 2018 at 1:02 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote:

(February 20, 2018 at 12:59 pm)pocaracas Wrote: Again, had you read what you quoted, you would have noticed that I based all that text around HOMICIDES.... the very same thing you want people to address: "murder rate".
That's why I told you to read it... and I see you failed to even do that.

I didn't address that because I agree with it and acknowledged that in the post. I just was using it as a foil for my point about gun deaths, which you also brought up. Unless you are denying that all of a sudden. Go back and reread what i wrote with the edit 10 seconds later. If you didn't  just instant rage and took a moment to consider what you were reading you would see that. Geez, did you not have coffee this morning Or something?

ok, I just read your edit...
Weird way to acknowledge it, but alright... have a bike.

It will be interesting to see if this "movement" will continue long term and result in change.

Hoping that it does but not holding my breath. The US seems to have a short attention span when it comes to mass shootings.

(February 20, 2018 at 1:51 pm)mh.brewer Wrote: The US seems to have a short attention span when it comes to mass shootings.

With everyone's attention focused on asinine mobile entertainment, it's even worse for other social matters as well.

(February 20, 2018 at 1:51 pm)mh.brewer Wrote: It will be interesting to see if this "movement" will continue long term and result in change.

Hoping that it does but not holding my breath. The US seems to have a short attention span when it comes to mass shootings.

There's going to be a march here in Boston.

(February 19, 2018 at 7:58 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote:

(February 19, 2018 at 7:51 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk...eople-die/

According to this site = 

FBI Crime Statistics: More People Killed by Hammers, Clubs Than Guns
POSTED BY: BENJAMIN KNIGHT JUNE 16, 2016
Regressive left calls for gun control but not hammer control.
https://wethevigilant.com/2016/06/16/fbi...than-guns/

CapnAwesome made a great point about both sides using misleading stats, and this is a big one.

Firstly, the stat is true...when talking about rifles, not "guns" in general. Handguns accounted for 6,220 murders according to the same FBI stats, shotguns 356, "other guns" 97, and finally "Firearms, type not stated" accounted for 1,587 (that stat presumably includes some rifles).

Secondly, the article states that "hammers and clubs" accounted for 496. The actual wording used by the FBI was "Blunt objects (clubs, hammers, etc.)". The FBI does not break down the murders by blunt objects any further than that, it just lumps them together. So there's no actual way of telling how many of the 496 murders were actually committed by a hammer. All we know is it's a number between 0 and 496, whereas for "guns" the total is 8,583.

Finally, the whole "hammer control" argument misconstrues what people want to restrict regarding gun crime. People will always find ways to murder each other, and nobody is arguing that any item capable of being used for murder should be banned or restricted. Rather, the argument is that guns are capable of killing multiple people in quick succession, and from a distance, something that cannot be said about things like hammers, knifes, etc. Nobody can seriously argue that had Nikolas Cruz been armed with a hammer or a knife instead of a gun, he would have killed / injured the same number of people that he did.

Furthermore, hammers have a designed purpose that does not include killing. So do knifes, so do cars. Guns are designed primarily as a weapon. Yes, you can use them for recreational activities, but their main purpose is to kill.


Full Disclosure: I do not own a gun but I have had gun training and fire handguns at a local shooting range.

(February 20, 2018 at 2:15 pm)Tiberius Wrote: Guns are designed primarily as a weapon. Yes, you can use them for recreational activities, but their main purpose is to kill.

Precisely.

(February 20, 2018 at 2:08 pm)Shell B Wrote:

(February 20, 2018 at 1:51 pm)mh.brewer Wrote: It will be interesting to see if this "movement" will continue long term and result in change.

Hoping that it does but not holding my breath. The US seems to have a short attention span when it comes to mass shootings.

There's going to be a march here in Boston.

That's great. And I expect to see a lot of marches/protests in the coming days.

The question is one of staying power.