|
|
|||||||
| Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
| Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
February 27, 2018, 06:33 PM
|
#26 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: January 9, 2007
Posts: 180
|
Quote:
While two data points do not an analysis make, it goes to the point that shooter intent is likely a more significant factor in casualty count than what firearm was used.
__________________
José |
|
|
|
February 27, 2018, 06:48 PM
|
#27 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: November 12, 2012
Location: Lometa, Texas
Posts: 333
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
February 27, 2018, 06:53 PM
|
#28 | ||
|
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,819
|
Quote:
Quote:
Our CDC (Center for Disease Control) decided quite a few years ago that "gun deaths" were a not only a public health issue, but were a disease....they did "research" and advocated strongly for gun control. To the point were it took a law being passed, forbidding them to use tax money to advocate for gun control. They could still use the money for research, but NOT for advocating gun control. The CDC stopped doing research on the issue.... The real problem with any kind of study of these shooting is that there is simply no way to know, for certain, just what is going on inside the minds of the killers. We get no answers from the dead, and those in custody can (and I expect, do) lie. Each and everyone of them is an individual, and what ever their personal trigger was, it is different from everyone else. That fact should be blatantly obvious, no matter what factor you look at as a possible cause, you will find literally millions of other people with the same factors in their lives, who do NOT become spree killers, in or out of schools. What if some study proclaims a "fascination" with guns is the cause (or one of the causes), something most of us here would dismiss, as money down the drain, but what about those who don't? 16 (or 60) million Facebook/twitter lemmings screaming how anyone who is in any way interested in guns is mentally unstable, can have an effect. Democracy (even in a republic) is about numbers more than it is about right and wrong. You can do a study that "proves" that 99% of these killers ate bread, or a bread product within 30 days of committing the killings. So, based on that, we should ban bread, and bread products!!! (intentional sarcasm) My point is that you can study the snot out of the subject, and while you will find a lot of information, and some points of congruity between some of the killers, there are others that are completely outside the profile. And what can one do with the information, anyway??? With certain exceptions, we cannot (yet) legally imprison or detain adults for crimes that have not yet committed. We cannot force people into treatment, without following due process of law, either. It doesn't matter if the police get called to the house 29 time, (or 49) until/unless the individual actually does something that violates a law, there is nothing that can be legally done. This is not a question of someone who is dangerous seeming, it is a question of whether or not that person is actually dangerous, under the standards of current law. And that, my friends is why you cannot reliably stop these killers beforehand. Because they aren't killers until they start shooting, and they can be "normal" enough when evaluated, and turn killer the very next day. Several of the mass killers in recent years were evaluated, by police (health & wellness check), and by mental health professionals, and found to be no threat. Until, some time later, when they went on a killing spree... One can argue, that, in order for us to be "safer", that the legal standards that allow us to take action should be lower. There is some merit to this, but there are also HUGE risks. Risks to liberty, and risks to just being able to live a "normal" life, unless you live by someone else's standard of "normal". The most difficult argument to prove is proving a negative. When the authorities show up at your door, and because they got a tip, demand you prove you aren't a dangerous wack job, spree killer in waiting, how does one respond? What proof is there that I don't, secretly in my mind desire to kill dozens of children??? There is none. There can BE none. IF we lower the legal standards too much, we risk becoming a society where people are at risk simply because someone anonymously accuses them. We already see the potential, in divorce cases, where one party falsely accuses the other in order to gain an advantage. When that ex-spouse, ex-girlfriend, or just the guy who's parking spot you took last week can call the cops and get you hauled in for "evaluation" (while they take your guns, as a precaution...) is THAT the kind of society you want? And, especially if we get that kind of society and STILL aren't safe?? Not I.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
||
|
|
February 27, 2018, 07:03 PM
|
#29 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: July 24, 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 917
|
Hello people. Sure it's been a while, but I have been around. I would not use these aforementioned shootings as ammunition against gun control "assault weapons" or no. They might just try and ban all semi autos period. Also, the thing is, before there were no perpetrators captured alive they all committed suicide before they could be arrested. There have now been a few, three i think taken alive but their motives were never brought to light only buried beneath BAN ASSAULT RIFLES wall to wall all day every day for months after the fact. when a murder takes place, the motive is the most useful thing to know for both solving the crime at hand and preventing future ones. Sure they may all be different, but that Knowledge is valuable nonetheless. I second the question as to why it hasn't been made public and also believe it's being swept under the rug for some unknown reason.
|
|
|
|
February 27, 2018, 07:15 PM
|
#30 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: November 12, 2012
Location: Lometa, Texas
Posts: 333
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
February 27, 2018, 07:56 PM
|
#31 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
Some research has been done. But no one wants to talk about it: It's an indictment of our society.
What do Adam Lanza, Nikolas Cruz and the vast majority of mass shooters have in common? They grew up without fathers. After his parents divorce Adam Lanza fell apart. Nikolas Cruz was adopted as a baby. Cruz's adopted father died when he was very young. The police were called to his home dozens of times. Quote:
It's much easier to simply blame guns, the, NRA and law abiding gun owners. |
|
|
|
|
February 27, 2018, 08:01 PM
|
#32 | |
|
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
Quote:
The problem is multifaceted and incredibly complex, and it can't be boiled down to one or two universal causes.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
|
|
|
February 27, 2018, 08:07 PM
|
#33 | ||
|
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
Quote:
A few shooters out of how many school shooting incidents? Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
February 27, 2018, 08:51 PM
|
#34 | ||
|
Senior Member
Join Date: January 25, 2013
Posts: 317
|
Quote:
Studies that claim otherwise say use Japan and S. Korea or European game purchase and say they are just as violent, but the games they are talking about are more abstract non realistic (halo v COD) or in the case of Asia, tentacle monsters being killed counting the same as ultra realistic first person stabber or shooter games. don't get me wrong, 999,999 out of a million of kids don't go out and kill anyone as a result of some kind of elevated affect. In terms of film, causal links are difficult, but American children are at in fact exposed to more murder on film than Asian or Europeans kids are and American minors do commit more murder. The US tends to give much stronger weight to a nipple in pushing to an R rating analogue, and other countries tending to ignore the nipple and taking films closer to R analogue due to realistic violence. Mocked as he was for it Trump I think was right in saying we need to consider and research a rating system that looks at realistic violence as more of a factor in what a ten year old sees , and worry less about a human nipple Realistic violent gaming has a laboratory measurable affect on aggression, and Us kids across age cohorts are exposed to more media depiction of murder and realistic violence: http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...38/2/e20161298 Quote:
Brievik killed 69 students and staff with a non assault rifle. The rifle is still legal in Norway, legal in Canada, legal in NYC and legal in DC -- higher fatality rate than any of those on the list or ANY mass shooting of students in the US As someone mentioned Cho is also higher than any on that list, higher than newton, than columbine etc, and that was handgun Where capability and capacity of a wepon matter most is for the DEFENDER, not the perp. The perp has the chance to plan out his killing, he has element of both surprise, planning and shock on hi side. he/she will have his reloads and probably thought about it and practiced it. it is not like the infantry where the side initiating the fight and attacking a defended position has disadvantage. these are soft target, surprised defenders, and they are at an inherent disadvantage. Any modern firearm can cause a lot of casualties. That is the point if they ban assault rifles to prevent them, are we really saying we wont see just also large killings with handguns or regular rifles when Cho, already did it at Va Tech and Breivik did it at Utoya (incidentally both killing a lot of military age male students who should be harder to kill than grade schoolers)?? We are not theorizing handguns or rifles that are not assault rifles are as good or better for killing students, the events show it for a fact. For one thing as Cho showed handgun allows a shooter to pocket the gun and move from one open area to another without people knowing they are armed. The fact remains that the defender needs the higher capability firearm. The attacker has surprise, planning advantages , and picks where and when they will attack. Last edited by TDL; February 27, 2018 at 08:57 PM. |
||
|
|
|
February 27, 2018, 09:48 PM
|
#35 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: January 25, 2013
Posts: 317
|
Quote:
More to the point can you imagine what the ACLU would have to say if the CDC were to start studying the effect of having a person with an arrest history domiciled in a home and affect on "health" defined as violence injury rates? or better yet the "effect" of the Fourth and Fifth amendments on injury rates? or shorter vs longer sentences? Given that most violent crime, ie injury ie "disease' is committed by prior offenders, shorter time served causes more public health damage. Can you image the reaction? This is the problem with looking at criminal violence from an epidemiology analytical framing -- where the agency is always a non human or human action, but is a thing, like a pathogen, a motorcycle helmet or a gun. It WILL find guns "cause" injury/disease. Guns are the instrumentality in a certain number of deaths or injury, remove guns remove all of those deaths or injury. Just like smokers, though self preciptationed risk and ACTS are what cause lung cancer, but in CDC terms it is always cigarettes that do. Standard epidemiology has no choice but to come to such findings -- even though they are ultimately specious. This is all quite simple, the CDC never once, in al its studies of risk of gun ownership, and it subsidized several, not once, parsed normal gun owners like you and I, from people who belong to gangs, run meth labs, fence goods out of their apartment, or are engaged in obvious primary risk criminal lifestyles. Simply one single group, be they person with a dozen arrests or persons with no criminal activity ever, one risk group: "gun owners." |
|
|
|
|
February 27, 2018, 10:01 PM
|
#36 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
The Norway mass murderer used a Ruger Mini-14 and a Glock.
This article states that Norway will ban "assault weapons" effective in 2021: Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
February 27, 2018, 11:21 PM
|
#37 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: June 10, 2004
Location: Tioga co. PA
Posts: 2,647
|
Some year ago Israel had a problem with their enemies raiding schools. It doesn't happen now and stopped quite suddenly when used a new tactic. If you want to know how they did it. Ask them.
__________________
USNRET '61-'81 |
|
|
|
February 28, 2018, 08:40 AM
|
#38 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,450
|
Quote:
If learning aggression is a necessary element in male social competence across a range of activities, isn't it an error to link it to violent crime?
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
|
|
|
|
February 28, 2018, 08:58 AM
|
#39 | |
|
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,460
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
February 28, 2018, 09:09 AM
|
#40 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,450
|
Quote:
Learning to engage in analysis, decide that someone else's interests may suffer for that decision, then execute the decision requires some level of aggression. A fellow with no aggressive traits will be a useless omega member of his group.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php Last edited by zukiphile; February 28, 2018 at 10:13 AM. |
|
|
|
|
February 28, 2018, 09:45 AM
|
#41 | |
|
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
February 28, 2018, 10:16 AM
|
#42 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
The professional literature has not demonstrated a clear link between video games, movies, TV, etc. and violence. The issue is raised by politicians or social scientists to raise an agenda item. Both the left and right try it out occasionally. The right tries to use it as an excuse to keep guns and the left to ban violence and sexism in general. Do they cause sexual violence?
The evidence is not good for either side if you look at it objectively. There is currently a debate whether on-line dirty stuff (can't use the word) alters young males' views of sexual relations to an unrealistic and inappropriate manner. As far as being fatherless - it is not a predictor either. The vast majority of kids from single homes do not become a mass shooter. Again, gun folks look for another causality to excuse the gun. I recall a brief flurry from Gun rights organizations to blame autism. No relationship there, either. The left looks to expand psychiatric diagnoses as to encompass as many folks as they can to make gun ownership limited. The only predictor we have of violence that works is a past history of violence and threats. Unfortunately, those have NOT been reported adequately as we see in several cases. That needs to be tightened up. I would caution against defending EBRs by pointing out that other weapons have been used. The Norway incident and the L'ecole Polytechinque shooting used Mini-14s. Handguns have been used. You can shoot a lever action really fast. One rampage used a lever action. The conclusion: Gun folks - let me keep my AR because I could kill everyone with another gun everywhere? Antigun folks - take all of them down or restrict their use to guns locked up at clubs and ranges for use there. That is done in other countries. You cannot excuse the guns. It is foolish to try. You have to make the case for owning them, not for sport or hunting, but self-defense and defense against tyranny.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
|
|
|
February 28, 2018, 10:21 AM
|
#43 | ||
|
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,460
|
Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
February 28, 2018, 10:25 AM
|
#44 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: January 22, 2014
Location: Floyd, VA
Posts: 241
|
In addition to a myriad of external factors that can influence a person towards violence, there is also a myriad of internal factors that are even harder to study and define. Some people are just wired differently from birth, and it may manifest itself in different ways. In severe cases like schizophrenia it may be obvious from behavior, while in other cases the individual learns to cope with his disorder and goes unnoticed until a breaking point is triggered.
There are likely many thousands walking among us with some serious form of "mis-wiring", but tagging people based on a reported observation of unusual behavior is dangerous to a free society. There needs to be something clear and tangible to take away a citizen's constitutional rights, and even then due process must be followed. But who defines such criterion? In the case of the Florida shooter I would think his verbal comments might justify a visit by law enforcement for a conversation, but not confiscation of his firearms. His post on social media proclaiming his desire to be a professional school shooter, however, is tangible evidence and might justify a temporary removal of the firearms followed by a hearing.
__________________
In NJ, the bad guys are armed and the households are alarmed. In VA, the households are armed and the bad guys are alarmed. |
|
|
|
February 28, 2018, 10:28 AM
|
#45 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,450
|
Quote:
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
|
|
|
|
February 28, 2018, 10:30 AM
|
#46 | |
|
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,460
|
Quote:
Focusing on GUNZ!!! is not a solution. |
|
|
|
|
February 28, 2018, 10:35 AM
|
#47 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
Explosives are controlled, so what. Just another way of trying to excuse the gun. IMHO, that's not convincing.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
|
|
|
February 28, 2018, 10:41 AM
|
#48 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,523
|
Quote:
The U.S. is not like this. We may have a huge military, but it is almost entirely geared towards facing distant external threats, and most citizens have never served. IMHO most Americans do not have a sense that securing their community against attack is their personal responsibility, nor that a serious attack by armed fanatics is likely in any place and at any time. While there are some here who believe that the U.S. should have this type of culture, IMHO it is not realistic to expect it to materialize in the short term, or possibly ever. Although I support allowing teachers to be armed, I do not honestly believe that the Israeli model will work here.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak Last edited by carguychris; February 28, 2018 at 10:49 AM. Reason: reword |
|
|
|
|
February 28, 2018, 11:09 AM
|
#49 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
They had a report on the tube that the Israeli teachers aren't armed but each school, by law, has to have an armed guard.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
|
|
|
February 28, 2018, 11:13 AM
|
#50 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,450
|
Quote:
There was a story that stood out maybe a decade ago. An arab israeli doctor saw that her father was having a heart attack and put him in the car to take him to the hospital. Two hours and more than a dozen checkpoints later, he still wasn't to the hospital, but he was dead. We can understand why they do what they do without wanting it for ourselves. I complain when the marshals make me remove my shoes o get through a radar detector. Israelis put up with intrusions I hope we never tolerate.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
|
|
|
|
|
|
