You have experienced mass shootings many times! If so, I am sorry. If your are talking about military combat, and losing friends, that's war and not out of the norm. It still hurts and makes us angry that we can't come up with better ways of dealing with conflict.
Another shooting spree...
- Thread starter GK4Herd
- Start date
The FBI defines mass shootings when 4 or more people are killed. Most media define it as 4 or more injured or killed. It is not really well defined.
So 4 gangbanger thugs get shot in a drug deal Chicago and you want take my gun. OK>
If you have had multiple police involvement for things mentioned in previous posts, yes. If you are a law abiding citizen, no!
Here's a list of the mass shootings. Study the list, then tell me what a large percentage of locations have in common relating to gun laws and regulations.
FAN your chart says nothing about locations and I do not understand what you are asking me to do! The list shows an increasing number of deaths caused by mass shooters. 2019 has already excxeeded 200 and we have more than quarter of the year remaining. Please be a little more explicit with your instructions. I realize you think I'm stupid, but geez. Herdfan 429 - it does not matter to me what definition we are using, the number of deaths from these occurrences should not be acceptable to anyone. You folks are splitting hairs. Thank God neither of you have lost someone in this way.
click on the link in my first post above. the chart came from another website and was an entirely separate post. frankly, i don't think you're stupid, but you not being able to follow instructions in one post and attempting to run two different posts together and figure out what is clearly indicated in one post is making me rethink that assessment.
No definitions absolutely matter. No one is saying the deaths are acceptable but when you are talking about limiting rights you need to be as accurate as possible
I have been as accurate as I can be, citing references, statistics and honest enough to admit there are various definitions applied to "Mass Shootings". That does not change the numbers and the fact that we are experiencing an increase in number over time. Please make an effort to give me your understanding about this increase.
Using the correct definition an change the debate. If it’s 4 people shot, then that will absolutely increase the number vs using the fbi definition of 4 people killed. As I’ve said in countless other thread the lack of empathy for others is the real problem.
Hey I get it...….You've got a small penis, and/or low self esteem, and/or you haven't gotten any in a very long time, heck maybe ever...….Maybe you're just scared. So you cuddle up with your AR or AK and it makes you feel better, makes you feel more manly, powerful even.
I'm tired of all of the slippery slope BS...…..No one and I mean no one, NEEDS a Semi-automatic weapon with a 100 round magazine, unless you're serving in the military.
Need it to make you feel better, get a dog. Need it for hunting, maybe you should take up fishing. So scared that you think you need it for protection, move!
My right and the rights of my children to pursue life and happiness, outweighs your right to own a weapon of war.
No private sales, Assault Weapons ban, high capacity magazine ban, thorough background checks, waiting periods, and red flag laws......They are all necessary.
I'm tired of all of the slippery slope BS...…..No one and I mean no one, NEEDS a Semi-automatic weapon with a 100 round magazine, unless you're serving in the military.
Need it to make you feel better, get a dog. Need it for hunting, maybe you should take up fishing. So scared that you think you need it for protection, move!
My right and the rights of my children to pursue life and happiness, outweighs your right to own a weapon of war.
No private sales, Assault Weapons ban, high capacity magazine ban, thorough background checks, waiting periods, and red flag laws......They are all necessary.
Why are your rights anymore important than my rights? Is my 1911 a weapon of war?
Sorry about that! I did not notice the font color difference in your post and I was confused by the other post with the chart and no references to location. I did read the article. I do not know enough about various state laws to comment. The map does show a preponderance of these events in the Northeast, along the west and east coast with a much smaller number in middle America. It would seem the larger the population, the greater the opportunity. This year, we are way ahead of any other time in terms of deaths. I am older than most on these boards and do not always pick up on nuanced statements. As a result, I'm not particularly good at social media. I would hope that I'm still permitted an opinion and to comment on what is going on in our country. I cannot adequately address your questions. But I still believe that we should do our best to keep guns out of the hands of individuals with a history of law enforcement entanglements unless they can demonstrate changes over a period of time. I believe I am not alone with that idea/opinion.
Are you kids safer if every AR15 is banned from this country? Seriously? How do you propose to take back all these weapons of war?
Last edited:
How about the muzzleloader ? Or Winchester Model 94? M9 pistol? Mossberg 500 shotgun? Bow and Arrow? Spear?
I distrust politicians more than I distrust an AR15.
Rights are fine as long as they are not used to harm others. All of our rights imply this. If you are not using your weapon to harm others, you should have no concern, especially if you are a law abiding citizen. If you have multiple legal/law enforcement contacts, in which anti social behavior has been demonstrated on many occasions, then you could lose that right. Domestic violence, bar fights, drug dealing, sexual assault, robbery, breaking and entering, property destruction are examples of behavior can be considered irresponsible warranting loss of some rights. This would be just like someone incarcerated except, they would be followed by the court system, with required meetings with judge and/or other court personnel to evaluate progress in making life changes, i.e., working in a stable job, going to school, participating in counseling/social work/rehabilitation program to improve earnings potential and employment options.
They can earn the right to own a gun, if that is their goal. I would believe that structured social interventions might help folks to recognize the need to change or end up in jail. That is same option in Drug Court and they tend to have more favorable than unfavorable outcomes. Society is safer, people are kept out of jail. They receive services to improve their chances of staying out of jail.
Now if you have better ideas, I'm all for listening to you. If you want things to remain as they are, then the conversation is not very productive.
We do require a license to drive and you cannot carry a knife into any federal building or courthouse. Sorry you have such a difficult time with trusting politicians! Some are certainly more trustworthy than others, much like any other group you would like to name.
Driving is also a privilege not a constitutional right and that privilege is granted by the states. You cannot carry a gun on federal property either. There are countless laws for guns and gun ownership, some federal and some state.
Agreed! So if there are federal and various state laws regarding guns and ownership, why can't we create others that will reduce mass shootings.
What laws are not being enforced and how is this contributing to mass shootings?
We don't live in some lawless society. Almost all these would forfeit a persons right to legally own gun.
Similar threads
