Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-12-2015, 04:33 PM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(08-12-2015 11:14 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(08-12-2015 09:03 PM)Chas Wrote:  If you look at the definition, you will see that it is arbitrary, even ridiculous.

[Image: 1Evil1Not.jpg]

The first is not an assault weapon, the second is.
They are both semi-automatic, have a detachable box magazine, and fire the same ammunition.

Neither is an assault rifle.

I read enough of these threads to know that they eventually degenerate into semantics and minutia. So, instead of getting all hot and bothered over which killing tool is called what lets break it down to the essence of the issue.

The terminology is important not only so that discussion can be clear, but these terms get enshrined in law.
N.B. The term 'assault weapon' was made up and defined by legislators.

Quote:How do we keep guns, especially the most effective and lethal ones, out of the hands of religious fanatics and the mentally disturbed? That’s it in a nutshell.

We need to have a real health care system that actually diagnoses and treats people, and better social safety nets for those who might otherwise become disaffected or turn to crime.

Quote:How do we as a nation balance the right to bear arms with safety and security?

See above.

Quote:What should we do to keep our families safe?

In the short term, learn how to safely and effectively use a gun and get one. Store it safely so that the kids can't get at it.

Quote:What steps are we willing to take to avoid another San Bernardino, Sandy Hook or Columbine?

See above.

Quote:In my opinion acquiring (and maintaining) a firearm should be more difficult than walking into a gun show or Wal Mart and slapping down some money or breaking into a house and stealing one.

It is in some states. In Massachusetts, it takes three levels of background check (local, state, and federal), fingerprinting, and pictures to get a license; and that takes up to 10 weeks.
All guns are required to have locks or be stored in a locked container when not in use.
Guns must be locked and kept separate from ammunition when being transported.
There's more, but you get the idea.

Quote:The two biggest hurdles that I see are that some people don’t see a problem to begin with and others are so paranoid that they vehemently oppose any law or bill that ammends or restricts the current gun ownership laws in any way, no matter how sensible.

Many gun owners are all for laws that make it difficult for those who shouldn't have guns to not have them. The issue comes when a law that does nothing to accomplish that end and only negatively affects the rest of us.
The federal assault weapons ban is a case in point.

Quote:I don’t have the answers on how to fix what I see as a priority one problem, but what is painfully apparent to me is that existing laws on gun ownership cannot remain in stasis while expecting that the mass killings will become less frequent.

One thing that is a real problem is that the existing laws, especially federal, are not enforced by prosecutors. They often won't even charge a criminal with those violations if they can convict on the crime itself. With a little effort, a criminal who had or used a gun in a crime could be sentenced to decades of prison time if convicted under federal statutes.

Quote:So which firearms should be more stringently controlled? I think it takes people who know firearms to answer this question and then act on it. As I look over the landscape I am not seeing the political willpower to change the status quo.

I agree.

Quote:There will continue to be mass killings, active shooter scenarios and large body counts until we decide enough is enough and adopt something similar to the Australian model.

Not if we addressed the actual underlying problems.

Quote:Next month we’ll be talking about another one of these, and the month after that, and the month after that and the same people who today rail against adopting stricter gun controls will be railing then too with the same non-answers.

And nothing will change and the slaughters will continue.

That may be so, but a great deal of the resistance by gun owners to changes in the laws is that so many of the proposals wouldn't solve anything; they would just make it more difficult and expensive to own a gun.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2015, 04:37 PM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(09-12-2015 11:36 AM)cjlr Wrote:  
(08-12-2015 09:03 PM)Chas Wrote:  If you look at the definition, you will see that it is arbitrary, even ridiculous.

[Image: 1Evil1Not.jpg]

The first is not an assault weapon, the second is.
They are both semi-automatic, have a detachable box magazine, and fire the same ammunition.

Neither is an assault rifle.

Well, duh. Black is scarier than woodgrain.

Yup, pretty much. Facepalm

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2015, 04:40 PM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(09-12-2015 12:40 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(09-12-2015 12:13 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  OK. Maybe it could look something like this test.

Each answer is worth 1 point.

Q1:

What is the ratio of gun related deaths in the US as compared to each of the countries listed using the graph below?
(1 point per correct ratio)

[Image: Gun-Violence-Graphic_053867749874.jpg]

Q2:

Using the graph below, what percentage of gun related deaths per 100,000 of the population would you get if you considered all the other G8 countries (excluding Russia) as one entity and compared them to the US?
Bonus question: Is it higher or lower?

[Image: URF0r7E.png]

Learning math through gun violence. Thumbsup

In the statistics I looked at the other day, something jumped out at me that is also apparent in these charts. Of the U.S "gun deaths", there are almost twice as many suicides as homicides. This surprised me. Although statistics are never as simple as they appear, it's tempting to jump to the conclusion that Lord Dark Helmet is twice as likely to shoot himself as to be shot by anyone else. So if he really wants to be safe, he should get rid of all his guns pronto.

Big Grin

Suicide is a right and a personal choice. Drinking Beverage

Including them in crime statistics or accident statistics just muddies the waters.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2015, 05:09 PM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(09-12-2015 04:33 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(08-12-2015 11:14 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  I read enough of these threads to know that they eventually degenerate into semantics and minutia. So, instead of getting all hot and bothered over which killing tool is called what lets break it down to the essence of the issue.

The terminology is important not only so that discussion can be clear, but these terms get enshrined in law.
N.B. The term 'assault weapon' was made up and defined by legislators.

Quote:How do we keep guns, especially the most effective and lethal ones, out of the hands of religious fanatics and the mentally disturbed? That’s it in a nutshell.

We need to have a real health care system that actually diagnoses and treats people, and better social safety nets for those who might otherwise become disaffected or turn to crime.

Quote:How do we as a nation balance the right to bear arms with safety and security?

See above.

Quote:What should we do to keep our families safe?

In the short term, learn how to safely and effectively use a gun and get one. Store it safely so that the kids can't get at it.

Quote:What steps are we willing to take to avoid another San Bernardino, Sandy Hook or Columbine?

See above.

Quote:In my opinion acquiring (and maintaining) a firearm should be more difficult than walking into a gun show or Wal Mart and slapping down some money or breaking into a house and stealing one.

It is in some states. In Massachusetts, it takes three levels of background check (local, state, and federal), fingerprinting, and pictures to get a license; and that takes up to 10 weeks.
All guns are required to have locks or be stored in a locked container when not in use.
Guns must be locked and kept separate from ammunition when being transported.
There's more, but you get the idea.

Quote:The two biggest hurdles that I see are that some people don’t see a problem to begin with and others are so paranoid that they vehemently oppose any law or bill that ammends or restricts the current gun ownership laws in any way, no matter how sensible.

Many gun owners are all for laws that make it difficult for those who shouldn't have guns to not have them. The issue comes when a law that does nothing to accomplish that end and only negatively affects the rest of us.
The federal assault weapons ban is a case in point.

Quote:I don’t have the answers on how to fix what I see as a priority one problem, but what is painfully apparent to me is that existing laws on gun ownership cannot remain in stasis while expecting that the mass killings will become less frequent.

One thing that is a real problem is that the existing laws, especially federal, are not enforced by prosecutors. They often won't even charge a criminal with those violations if they can convict on the crime itself. With a little effort, a criminal who had or used a gun in a crime could be sentenced to decades of prison time if convicted under federal statutes.

Quote:So which firearms should be more stringently controlled? I think it takes people who know firearms to answer this question and then act on it. As I look over the landscape I am not seeing the political willpower to change the status quo.

I agree.

Quote:There will continue to be mass killings, active shooter scenarios and large body counts until we decide enough is enough and adopt something similar to the Australian model.

Not if we addressed the actual underlying problems.

Quote:Next month we’ll be talking about another one of these, and the month after that, and the month after that and the same people who today rail against adopting stricter gun controls will be railing then too with the same non-answers.

And nothing will change and the slaughters will continue.

That may be so, but a great deal of the resistance by gun owners to changes in the laws is that so many of the proposals wouldn't solve anything; they would just make it more difficult and expensive to own a gun.

Thanks for the thoughtful response.

As for terminology I think it would be more productive if a board of knowledgeable individuals would determine if a current model of firearm and any new designs that may come into production conformed with a specified guideline regardless of label. Determining that guideline will be contentious but it needs to be drawn up with the purpose of limiting the most lethal and effective weapons. The word “limiting” is key, and what that entails addressed below.

I completely agree with your comment, “We need to have a real health care system that actually diagnoses and treats people”. There are multiple countries that require an evaluation by a Psychologist before an individual may obtain a gun. This seems to me to be the correct sequence of events, a diagnosis first, firearm second.

You say in the short term use a gun to fight a gun and while I don’t necessarily agree with this I’m curious to hear your long term solution. Hopefully it isn’t more guns.

I agree that whatever the laws are they must be uniform nationwide. The current State by State laws renders most laws powerless as your Mass. example.

“Many gun owners are all for laws that make it difficult for those who shouldn’t have guns to not have them.” Laws such as?

“One thing that is a real problem is that the existing laws, especially federal, are not enforced by prosecutors.” I see this as another reason to nip the problem before there is a problem. A person who cannot obtain a firearm becuase they cannot pass a psych exam renders the second point moot. One of my concerns is that others want to remedy the problem on the back end, meaning with stiffer sentences. To me this is closing the barn doors after the horses are gone.

One of the underlying problems is access to firearms so “mak(ing) it more difficult and expensive to own a gun” is one way of keeping the public safer.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2015, 05:17 PM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(09-12-2015 04:40 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(09-12-2015 12:40 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  In the statistics I looked at the other day, something jumped out at me that is also apparent in these charts. Of the U.S "gun deaths", there are almost twice as many suicides as homicides. This surprised me. Although statistics are never as simple as they appear, it's tempting to jump to the conclusion that Lord Dark Helmet is twice as likely to shoot himself as to be shot by anyone else. So if he really wants to be safe, he should get rid of all his guns pronto.

Big Grin

Suicide is a right and a personal choice. Drinking Beverage

Including them in crime statistics or accident statistics just muddies the waters.

I have no major beef with either of your statements. I was mostly just poking fun at LDH, who seems to think that the greatest danger in life is Islamic jihad, and that he will live forever because guns.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2015, 05:25 PM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
The belief in gun ownership IMO, is like the belief in a god. There's no reasoning with a true believer. And it affects many highly intelligent people.

I worked as a hunter. But I used rifles. One shot, cock fire type of deal. .22 for rabbits and a .303 for larger game. Occasionally a shot gun.

Now I no longer live in the bush or hunt, I own no guns. To look at some Americans with semi automatics and machine guns and their addiction to assault weapons of all kinds is kind of strange.

It is pointless to debate many Americans on this subject.

So why bother?

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2015, 06:49 PM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(09-12-2015 05:09 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  Thanks for the thoughtful response.

As for terminology I think it would be more productive if a board of knowledgeable individuals would determine if a current model of firearm and any new designs that may come into production conformed with a specified guideline regardless of label.

That was what the federal 'assault weapons ban' was about. It had absolutely no effect on crime so after 10 years it was not renewed.

Quote: Determining that guideline will be contentious but it needs to be drawn up with the purpose of limiting the most lethal and effective weapons. The word “limiting” is key, and what that entails addressed below.

I completely agree with your comment, “We need to have a real health care system that actually diagnoses and treats people”. There are multiple countries that require an evaluation by a Psychologist before an individual may obtain a gun. This seems to me to be the correct sequence of events, a diagnosis first, firearm second.

You say in the short term use a gun to fight a gun and while I don’t necessarily agree with this I’m curious to hear your long term solution. Hopefully it isn’t more guns.

I think we have been outlining those solutions, have we not?

Quote:I agree that whatever the laws are they must be uniform nationwide. The current State by State laws renders most laws powerless as your Mass. example.

I don't understand what you mean. The Massachusetts laws are very effective in Massachusetts.

Quote:“Many gun owners are all for laws that make it difficult for those who shouldn’t have guns to not have them.” Laws such as?

Background checks and licenses.

Quote:“One thing that is a real problem is that the existing laws, especially federal, are not enforced by prosecutors.” I see this as another reason to nip the problem before there is a problem. A person who cannot obtain a firearm becuase they cannot pass a psych exam renders the second point moot. One of my concerns is that others want to remedy the problem on the back end, meaning with stiffer sentences. To me this is closing the barn doors after the horses are gone.

The laws are there to discourage as well as to punish. If they are not enforced, they will be ignored.

Quote:One of the underlying problems is access to firearms so “mak(ing) it more difficult and expensive to own a gun” is one way of keeping the public safer.

By punishing the innocent? Consider

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2015, 10:14 PM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(09-12-2015 06:49 PM)Chas Wrote:  That was what the federal 'assault weapons ban' was about. It had absolutely no effect on crime so after 10 years it was not renewed.

Based on the failure of the ban (it did not address existing assault weapons already owned) a more robust ban seems in order. It seems that a half-hearted attempt isn’t the answer.

(09-12-2015 06:49 PM)Chas Wrote:  I think we have been outlining those solutions, have we not?

Trying to flesh out what could be done to remedy gun violence, yes.

(09-12-2015 06:49 PM)Chas Wrote:  I don't understand what you mean. The Massachusetts laws are very effective in Massachusetts.

Having different laws by State makes it impossible to uniformly implement any gun control. When all you have to do is drive across State lines to purchase what is illegal in your resident State it greatly weakens the effectiveness. I applaud Massachusetts for having the strictest gun laws in the country. Maybe if the rest of the States would follow suit many of these tragedies could have been averted. It may be that all that is needed is a nationwide adoption of Massachusetts’ gun laws. Consider

(09-12-2015 06:49 PM)Chas Wrote:  Background checks and licenses.

see above

(09-12-2015 06:49 PM)Chas Wrote:  The laws are there to discourage as well as to punish. If they are not enforced, they will be ignored.

Agreed

(09-12-2015 06:49 PM)Chas Wrote:  By punishing the innocent? Consider

Do you consider being personally punished because you aren’t allowed to purchase an RPG for instance? To curb gun related violence there will be have to be restrictions that will affect law-abiding people, I don’t see a way around it. I’d love to own a Gatling gun but I fully understand why no one, including someone like me with no criminal record, should not be allowed to own one.

Tangetial: I’m truly at a loss for words when I see how impossible it is to pass sensible gun laws. A few days ago we were treated to another example of the insanity that is our legislative body:

"The Senate rejected a measure from Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) to expand background checks for guns purchased online and at gun shows on a 48 to 50 vote and an amendment from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to prevent individuals on the terror watch list from purchasing firearms on a 45 to 54 vote.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powe...-shooting/

The shooters in San Bernardino had their neighbor (related by marriage) purchase the firearms three years ago. http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/man-b...n-35684429
How do laws stop that? As long as the guns are available to be purchased a determined individual will find a way to obtain them. This is why the Australian answer to the problem seems to me the best solution.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-12-2015, 08:23 AM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(09-12-2015 10:14 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(09-12-2015 06:49 PM)Chas Wrote:  That was what the federal 'assault weapons ban' was about. It had absolutely no effect on crime so after 10 years it was not renewed.

Based on the failure of the ban (it did not address existing assault weapons already owned) a more robust ban seems in order. It seems that a half-hearted attempt isn’t the answer.

(09-12-2015 06:49 PM)Chas Wrote:  I think we have been outlining those solutions, have we not?

Trying to flesh out what could be done to remedy gun violence, yes.

(09-12-2015 06:49 PM)Chas Wrote:  I don't understand what you mean. The Massachusetts laws are very effective in Massachusetts.

Having different laws by State makes it impossible to uniformly implement any gun control. When all you have to do is drive across State lines to purchase what is illegal in your resident State it greatly weakens the effectiveness. I applaud Massachusetts for having the strictest gun laws in the country. Maybe if the rest of the States would follow suit many of these tragedies could have been averted. It may be that all that is needed is a nationwide adoption of Massachusetts’ gun laws. Consider

(09-12-2015 06:49 PM)Chas Wrote:  Background checks and licenses.

see above

(09-12-2015 06:49 PM)Chas Wrote:  The laws are there to discourage as well as to punish. If they are not enforced, they will be ignored.

Agreed

(09-12-2015 06:49 PM)Chas Wrote:  By punishing the innocent? Consider

Do you consider being personally punished because you aren’t allowed to purchase an RPG for instance? To curb gun related violence there will be have to be restrictions that will affect law-abiding people, I don’t see a way around it. I’d love to own a Gatling gun but I fully understand why no one, including someone like me with no criminal record, should not be allowed to own one.

Tangetial: I’m truly at a loss for words when I see how impossible it is to pass sensible gun laws. A few days ago we were treated to another example of the insanity that is our legislative body:

"The Senate rejected a measure from Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) to expand background checks for guns purchased online and at gun shows on a 48 to 50 vote and an amendment from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to prevent individuals on the terror watch list from purchasing firearms on a 45 to 54 vote.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powe...-shooting/

The shooters in San Bernardino had their neighbor (related by marriage) purchase the firearms three years ago. http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/man-b...n-35684429
How do laws stop that? As long as the guns are available to be purchased a determined individual will find a way to obtain them. This is why the Australian answer to the problem seems to me the best solution.

The Australian way will never work here. It just won't. Austraila wasn't a gun heavy nation when it implented its ban. Only 650,000 guns were bought back through their program. Nobody knows exactly how many guns are in America. The number could be in the 500,000,000 to billion range or more with around 100,000,000 gun owners or more. Australians never had the right to bear arms empowered by the people through a Constitution. The NRA alone if they got together would be a 5,000,000 strong army. The firepower owned by us gun owners would blow your mind. Most guys I know own multiple AR15, M14 type rifles. High powered hunting rifles are common, as well as shotguns and semi auto handguns. And we stockpile ammo and the reserves to make more. There are even civilians that own rifles that shoot .50 BMG rounds.

No, Australian style gun control will never happen here. Any attempt to implement it would result in the possible splitting of the country, or worse, a real civil war. At the least you would see the elected leaders that voted for it arrested by the militia and removed from their positions as traitors. You could even see a forced christian takeover since the vast majority of gun owners are christian republicans. This isn't a road that should even be considered. Ever.

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet
[Image: 25397spaceballs.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-12-2015, 08:50 AM
RE: Root Causes: San Bernardino, California shooting
(10-12-2015 08:23 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(09-12-2015 10:14 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  Based on the failure of the ban (it did not address existing assault weapons already owned) a more robust ban seems in order. It seems that a half-hearted attempt isn’t the answer.


Trying to flesh out what could be done to remedy gun violence, yes.


Having different laws by State makes it impossible to uniformly implement any gun control. When all you have to do is drive across State lines to purchase what is illegal in your resident State it greatly weakens the effectiveness. I applaud Massachusetts for having the strictest gun laws in the country. Maybe if the rest of the States would follow suit many of these tragedies could have been averted. It may be that all that is needed is a nationwide adoption of Massachusetts’ gun laws. Consider


see above


Agreed


Do you consider being personally punished because you aren’t allowed to purchase an RPG for instance? To curb gun related violence there will be have to be restrictions that will affect law-abiding people, I don’t see a way around it. I’d love to own a Gatling gun but I fully understand why no one, including someone like me with no criminal record, should not be allowed to own one.

Tangetial: I’m truly at a loss for words when I see how impossible it is to pass sensible gun laws. A few days ago we were treated to another example of the insanity that is our legislative body:

"The Senate rejected a measure from Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) to expand background checks for guns purchased online and at gun shows on a 48 to 50 vote and an amendment from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to prevent individuals on the terror watch list from purchasing firearms on a 45 to 54 vote.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powe...-shooting/

The shooters in San Bernardino had their neighbor (related by marriage) purchase the firearms three years ago. http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/man-b...n-35684429
How do laws stop that? As long as the guns are available to be purchased a determined individual will find a way to obtain them. This is why the Australian answer to the problem seems to me the best solution.

The Australian way will never work here. It just won't. Austraila wasn't a gun heavy nation when it implented its ban. Only 650,000 guns were bought back through their program. Nobody knows exactly how many guns are in America. The number could be in the 500,000,000 to billion range or more with around 100,000,000 gun owners or more. Australians never had the right to bear arms empowered by the people through a Constitution. The NRA alone if they got together would be a 5,000,000 strong army. The firepower owned by us gun owners would blow your mind. Most guys I know own multiple AR15, M14 type rifles. High powered hunting rifles are common, as well as shotguns and semi auto handguns. And we stockpile ammo and the reserves to make more. There are even civilians that own rifles that shoot .50 BMG rounds.

No, Australian style gun control will never happen here. Any attempt to implement it would result in the possible splitting of the country, or worse, a real civil war. At the least you would see the elected leaders that voted for it arrested by the militia and removed from their positions as traitors. You could even see a forced christian takeover since the vast majority of gun owners are christian republicans. This isn't a road that should even be considered. Ever.

[Image: death-second_opinion-doomsayer-street_pr...12_low.jpg]

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: