Thoughts and whatever

@1: prayers

@3,
Like I said: whatever.

We must pray harder people!!! And where was that "good person with a gun" to save the day?

@6, well if they always acquire their means for mass murder lawfully sounds like a great reason to get rid of the legal means to gain access to these weapons (aka abolish the stupid 2nd amendment and make all gun sales illegal)

That way, they wont be able to legally acquire a gun and will give up.

@ 6,

So are you saying that grievance killers in Australia, Canada, Europe, and Japan are too jaded and erudite to acquire their means of mass murder, or that more Americans have off the charts levels of homicidal psychosis?

@6: FERTILIZER is now regulated in the wake of OK City. that's one means that hasn't been used again. guns are cheap, plentiful, and easy to use. why bother with any other means?

organize the unorganized militia. with power should come responsibility.

Thoughts and prayers go out to our poor, paralyzed Congreƒƒ.

I know money counts as speech and we cant regulate it but do bullets count as speech now?

@6 "they will ALWAYS aquire the means for mass murder lawfully" wait I thought if we banned guns then only criminals would have guns? You seem to be saying that if we pass laws regulating everything from hand guns to fertilizer and make it illegal to obtain these things then people will have to go on killing sprees using their bare hands? Then we have to rely on a good guy with hands to stop him?

@6 I'm inclined to agree. Guns are NOT the most effective mass-murder implement available to average citizens, it's pretty conclusive that fire is significantly better at killing lots of people. The 9/11 hijackers used box cutters (although they took the first-mover advantage with them). Even the las vegas shooter who had multiple guns, was firing from cover onto a crowd in a big open space, could "only" kill 50. meanwhile, a simple night club fire gets to triple digits without much difficulty.

@14: there have been 2 "simple" night club fires that got to triple digits in my lifetime:

1977, 165 killed in Kentucky in a supper club filled to 200% of allowable capacity.
2003, 100 killed at a Great White concert in in RI by a pyrotechnic-ignited flashover.

if it's so simple, why isn't that the preferred means for rampage killers?

"if it's so simple, why isn't that the preferred means for rampage killers?"

Because @14 is full of shit?

For a nightclub fire, one needs a crowded nightclub. I don't think one was readily available at the newspaper office in Maryland. They're quite a bit more expensive to buy than guns.

@15 @16 probably because they don't get the visceral thrill of personally killing their victims. But the fact remains, it's still the best way to kill a lot of people, if that's your aim.

@7
I agree with you completely. If we simply made guns illegal, that would solve the problem.
Perhaps we should make murder illegal as well.

A biker gang is speeding through town at 80 mph, scaring the citizens because the speed limit is 35 mph. The typical anti-gun mindset would think an effective solution is to lower the speed limit to 25.

@5
There is no 'good guy with a gun' in Maryland because it's one of the most restrictive states in the U.S. A 'good guy' pretty much isn't allowed to have a gun to defend themselves and their family. You can call 911 and hope for the best and beg the deranged killer for your life.

'Assault Weapons' are banned.
'High Capacity' magazines are banned.
A Handgun Qualification License is required to purchase a handgun.
All weapons are registered.
No private sales of handguns are allowed without a background check.
Concealed carry permits are 'may issue' not 'shall issue,' meaning only the rich and powerful get a permit. (ala NYC)
This is only a partial list. I could go on and on.

Maryland is already a gun-free utopia!
I simply can't see how gun violence is even possible in Maryland, just look at the laws!
They clearly need more gun laws.

The people who say "there's no simple solution to this complex problem" are full of shit.

Plenty of other countries have implemented a very simple and straightforward solution and lo and behold it's worked.

Same with healthcare. There's a really simple solution that plenty of other countries have implemented and they spend a fraction of what the US spends on healthcare.

The bottom line isn't that this is a complex problem with a complex solution. The bottom line is that America is a deplorable shit hole full of people who don't give a fuck about anyone but themselves and stigginit.

@18

No, you're still full of shit. You can kill people under certain circumstances, but starting a major fire in a building full of people and catching them unaware is not that easy. Unless you can cover everything with gasoline without anyone noticing, the fire won't spread that quickly before people are alerted.

@23, 24,

I'm interested, do you know what the average number of mass homicides committed by guns, gasoline, vehicles, and pressure cookers are?

I'm too lazy to google, but I'd guess that the number of MASS homicides (let's say, 5+ people killed?) committed by guns is more than the combined number of mass homicides committed by gasoline, vehicles, pressure cookers... let's add knives, swords, chainsaws... what else? go ahead and add in anything else you'd like... I'm going to guess that the number committed with guns is greater than the combined total of those committed with every other device.

If true, that means guns are a significantly different subject than gasoline, vehicles, pressure cookers, etc.

Though, as I said, I'm only guessing here. If I'm incorrect I'll admit it.

Why not get tough on domestic abusers before they kill people, AND universal background checks? We're such a great country we can do both. Fuck we could even do three things probably.

@23 hahahahaha

Cherry picking “grievance killers” is some stupid fucking goal post moving.

The data is most certainly overwhelming that regulating firearms reduces gun homicides of ALL kinds. It’s not remotely debatable. It’s a settled matter with social science, statisticians and law enforcement all over the world but here in the NRA bubble.

Facts do not support your case, dipshit.

@25
I'm tired, too, and I understand your point.

We'll take this up again (unfortunately) sometime soon and I'll dig out all the peer reviewed papers from leading scientific criminology journals and the results have been on the same trajectory in America for decades. They just don't get reported for ideological reasons.

Generally speaking:

Gun violence and gun homicide is down 50% from it's peak in 1993 and the trend continues ever downward.

Gun violence in America is at it's lowest point since the 1950's.

Mass killings in America peaked in 1929 and have remained relatively stable at about 60 per year since.

The most common method of mass killing in America is via arson and the most common means is is familicide (sp?), where the head of the household torches his entire family.

I'm too tired to list references here right now, but we've been here long enough that in our next discussion I'll list the pertinent papers, some of which are very new from our government and even surprised me.

The way I see it, is that the only thing that has changed is the media fetishizing mass murderers and the explosion of social media sensationalizing these monsters and giving them the fame they so desperately crave.

When AR-15's were first made available to the public, you could buy them through the mail with no I.D. and have USPS deliver it to your doorstep. And they were cheap military surplus.

Where were the mass killings then?

Guns are harder to obtain than ever before in the history of the United States. So where does the real problem lie?