Trump is certainly to blame directly in the El Paso shooting, I don't think anyone denies that. Hollywood and video games just set the foundation.

Got any data, or is that just your emotional response? Maybe we should try writing an effective bill. New Zealand sees to have figured out how. Australia too.


[QUOTE=Eric Coffey;10548206]: See Mexico.

See: Every country in Europe. Hey, this is fun!



I am not familiar the Lankford paper, nor am I anti-2A. I am aware of what is available online in other countries, however, having spent time in Europe and Asia. It is as I claim.

Please separate inner city crime from mass shootings (the topic at hand).

The "blame movies and video games" thing is a bit tired IMO. Sort of like the "Satanic Panic" back in the 70's, or blaming "heavy metal" music.
We've had gun violence in movies for almost as long as movies have existed. Plenty of westerns, horror flicks, mobster flicks, cop flicks, etc.
The depiction of "splattered brains" in films has been around for 60+ years. Some of the most gory of the bunch came from the 60's/70's.

Terry,
I understand what you're saying and it's a noble thought. But we talk about mass shootings like it's the leading cause of deaths as a result of gun violence in this country when it's simply not. It's terrible when someone goes out and kills 30 people at one time... but is it more terrible than 30 people being killed in the same weekend in different cities in different incidents? It's certainly more shocking and I get that. But to think we're somehow going to be "safer" as a result of banning a certain type of weapon just isn't realistic.

No Shaun, some lunatic that got bent out of shape is to blame. Trump had nothing to do with it. Trump said "secure our borders" he said "stop people from entering illegally" he correctly said we were seeing an invasion of people across our southern border. Some wacko decided to go off the rails. Trump never told anyone to do this or even implied it be done.

Mass Shootings are particularly vile because they are random incidents against innocents. Yes, innocent people get killed in inner city gun violence but people have come to expect that they can go to a Walmart safely whereas they know how dangerous poor, inner city neighborhoods are.

Trump's rhetoric has been one of violence since the very day he declared is candidacy. In fact his first day was based on violence and has been ever since. People love it, it's just like being in your own reality TV show, and Trump knows it. He's as dumb as a brick but he knows how to manipulate people via TV. His presidency is a reality TV show. Great ratings.

This is pure nonsense.

Thank you.

But take away the Republic districts and what you have left is:
https://crimeresearch.org/2017/04/number-murders-county-54-us-counties-2014-zero-murders-69-1-murder/
"Murders in US very concentrated: 54% of US counties in 2014 had zero murders, 2% of counties have 51% of the murders"

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1565043678.jpg

I've presented facts and data that strongly suggest the contrary to be true, in many other countries.

The task is only impossible because you choose to make it such. By refusing to take reasonable gun safety measures, the extreme Right has virtually guaranteed that when the tide changes--as it will--the Left will implement far greater restrictions than are necessary or advisable. Your 2A rights, and mine, will be lost because of the intransigence of fanatics.

Now that the Supreme Court has established that the President can divert the military budget to pay for a "national emergency," what will stop a Democratic president from declaring a national gun violence emergency and diverting military budget to implement a gun seizure program?

Only to binge watchers.

In a world full of crazy people... that's an unrealistic expectation.

"She was just asking for it"

I honestly don't think it is.

And if it is, the 2nd Amendment supersedes all others in the Constitution. Which of course it shouldn't. It's not even relevant anymore.

And I posted earlier that the reality is, all banning a certain weapon does is move the needle in another direction.



This second half is a talking point more so than a reality. At no point did Trump's action on diverting funds infringe on a constitutional right. I don't refuse to take reasonable gun safety measures. I don't see where banning one platform will make any real difference in the end. The person bent on killing can't buy an AR... so they buy two 9mm's with a double stack and a shotgun with an extended magazine, load it with a very lethal round (00) and do the same job. Banning one platform isn't going to do anything of any real meaning. The only real way to move the needle in this instance is to severely reduce our freedom as a society and accept that we are constantly being watched. (1984 ring any bells?)

The problem is, it's not just the 2A, it just seems to be. One guy goes off the rails and runs a truck full of explosives into a Walmart and there are just as many dead people. The world is full of crazy people. It's unrealistic to believe you are safe in any location where a large group of people are gathered. I don't like it, but that's just the reality of the world we live in today regardless where you live.

Terry,
I don't know if you own a shotgun or not but if you do, go buy some 00 buckshot, step back 20 or so yards and let fly with a full or better choke tube. Then imagine that in a close quarters situation like we've seen over the last several mass shootings (vegas excluded). I don't see how there could possibly be a different outcome.

FWIW, I think almost everyone here knows my position on high capacity magazines. I still say limiting magazine capacity would have a more meaningful effect than banning a certain platform.

Uhmmm.... Have you not seen DC?

Just intelligent peopl.