Gun Legislation, Crime, and Events

[mtutiger]

21 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Life is complex, people are complex. What a person does that is good doesn't mean they can't be crazy. 

But seriously, that's exactly why what guy like Kirk preach is so terrible. The trans person I happen to know the best does more selfless good work out in the larger community than Charlie Kirk probably ever dreamed of doing in his life. He has(had) no right at all to impugn that person's existence or their value.

 

Kirk is also someone who made his name in the social media world, and social media, as it is constructed, is built to push all of us away from the larger community in front of us and monopolize our time. And one of the emotions that gets exploited by the platforms and the influencers who utilize them is anger. Anybody who has spent any amount of time on a social media platform in the last 24 hours should be able to notice how easily they exploit it.

None of it makes anybody happier, none of it makes us better off, none of it makes the world a better place. Treating people with dignity and respect, regardless of who they are, that's' what makes the world a better place. 

Charlie Kirk should not have had this happen to him. I feel bad for his kids, his wife and his friends, all the people who maybe saw a different side of him than any of us did. But in terms of his public life, the record speaks for itself... he said a lot of mean and terrible things about many different people from walks of life different than his own. It would be intellectually dishonest of me to pretend otherwise.

Edited September 12 by mtutiger

[gehringer_2]

7 hours ago, mtutiger said:

We live in such stupid times

Dickens actually already wrote this character once, but of course as fiction. But it's right out of 'A Christmas Carol' where Scrooge wants to see some "human feeling" over his death and the Ghost of Christmas Yet-to-Be shows him the chambermaid having a gay old time selling what she stripped from his bedroom as he lay there dead but still warm. 

[Mr.TaterSalad]

Charlie Kirk fundamentally believed (and the right still believes this) that a society that has more guns will be safer. That a good guy with a gun will keep you protected from a bad guy with a gun. That theory was tragically tested in a real life scenario, not in a laboratory or a college research paper, and didn't work out for Charlie Kirk. A bad guy with a gun shot and killed him and no good guy with a gun would have been able to save him. That's because bad guys with guns don't announce what they're going to do. There is no heads up or forewarning that they're going to commit a crime or a violent action. 

There are solutions that could solve this problem and things that could have saved Charlie Kirk's life. Solutions like background checks and mental health screenings on all individuals purchasing a gun, to ensure that person is capable and qualified to own a gun. Even more than that, we could have done, at any point in time after one of the thousands of mass shootings this country has experienced, a gun buyback program as Australia did.

In the wake of Australia's worst mass shooting event ever, the Port Arthur massacre of 1996, the Australian government instituted a gun buyback program to reduce the number of guns in society and prevent future mass shootings. Here in America, we have more guns than people in society. We have an estimated 120.5 guns per every 100 Americans. We have one of the highest gun death rates in the developed world. In 2023 we had 13.7 gun deaths per 100,000 citizens. In Australia the number of gun deaths per person is .103 for every 100,000 persons. Why is that number so low? One reason, among many, is because they simply have less guns in society. Therefore, angry, bad, mentally ill, and/or vengeful people would simply have less access to a gun and less ability to carry out their violent acts. A gun buyback policy, implemented at anytime over the last 30 years in this country could have saved the lives of countless Americans, including our children and Charlie Kirk himself. Gun buyback programs work!

[Tigeraholic1]

8 hours ago, mtutiger said:

 

None of it makes anybody happier, 

 

[Tigermojo]

Suspect in custody.

[Sports_Freak]

9 hours ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

Why? Because I am not celebrating an American being assassinated? Did you tell your kids and grandkids America is better off because a guy with a microphone was assassinated in front of thousands of college students?  

I volunteer as a suicide prevention  coordinator for the VA. Tomorrow I will check on my fifteen brothers who struggle with PTSD. 9/11 and Christmas are the worst for them. I started with twenty three and have attended all of their funerals and watched the honor guard place a folded flag in their loved ones hands.

 If you and your cronies don’t respect me I really couldn’t care less. 

You want to call caring and normal Americans "cronies?" While the hate coming out of the right is being questioned? 

[Tigermojo]

16 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

You want to call caring and normal Americans "cronies?" While the hate coming out of the right is being questioned? 

We're the hateful ones because we don't allow them to bully whoever they want to.

[Archie]

Kirk was all about dialog mostly with people who have different views.  Many on the left would rather silence there opposition than have a rational and polite conversation. It's a big part ofwhat's wrong  with politics today.

[Hongbit]

1 hour ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

Charlie Kirk fundamentally believed (and the right still believes this) that a society that has more guns will be safer. That a good guy with a gun will keep you protected from a bad guy with a gun. That theory was tragically tested in a real life scenario, not in a laboratory or a college research paper, and didn't work out for Charlie Kirk. A bad guy with a gun shot and killed him and no good guy with a gun would have been able to save him. That's because bad guys with guns don't announce what they're going to do. There is no heads up or forewarning that they're going to commit a crime or a violent action. 

There are solutions that could solve this problem and things that could have saved Charlie Kirk's life. Solutions like background checks and mental health screenings on all individuals purchasing a gun, to ensure that person is capable and qualified to own a gun. Even more than that, we could have done, at any point in time after one of the thousands of mass shootings this country has experienced, a gun buyback program as Australia did.

In the wake of Australia's worst mass shooting event ever, the Port Arthur massacre of 1996, the Australian government instituted a gun buyback program to reduce the number of guns in society and prevent future mass shootings. Here in America, we have more guns than people in society. We have an estimated 120.5 guns per every 100 Americans. We have one of the highest gun death rates in the developed world. In 2023 we had 13.7 gun deaths per 100,000 citizens. In Australia the number of gun deaths per person is .103 for every 100,000 persons. Why is that number so low? One reason, among many, is because they simply have less guns in society. Therefore, angry, bad, mentally ill, and/or vengeful people would simply have less access to a gun and less ability to carry out their violent acts. A gun buyback policy, implemented at anytime over the last 30 years in this country could have saved the lives of countless Americans, including our children and Charlie Kirk himself. Gun buyback programs work!

Great post.  America is so backwards.  

As we’ve heard first hand in this forum, the immediate response from gun owners when these violent acts is to go buy ammo so they can arm themselves even more.  

[gehringer_2]

5 minutes ago, Archie said:

Kirk was all about dialog mostly with people who have different views.  Many on the left would rather silence there opposition than have a rational and polite conversation. It's a big part ofwhat's wrong  with politics today.

hard to have a polite conversation with a merchant of hate and intolerance.

Edited September 12 by gehringer_2

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

Charlie Kirk fundamentally believed (and the right still believes this) that a society that has more guns will be safer. That a good guy with a gun will keep you protected from a bad guy with a gun. That theory was tragically tested in a real life scenario, not in a laboratory or a college research paper, and didn't work out for Charlie Kirk. A bad guy with a gun shot and killed him and no good guy with a gun would have been able to save him. That's because bad guys with guns don't announce what they're going to do. There is no heads up or forewarning that they're going to commit a crime or a violent action. 

There are solutions that could solve this problem and things that could have saved Charlie Kirk's life. Solutions like background checks and mental health screenings on all individuals purchasing a gun, to ensure that person is capable and qualified to own a gun. Even more than that, we could have done, at any point in time after one of the thousands of mass shootings this country has experienced, a gun buyback program as Australia did.

In the wake of Australia's worst mass shooting event ever, the Port Arthur massacre of 1996, the Australian government instituted a gun buyback program to reduce the number of guns in society and prevent future mass shootings. Here in America, we have more guns than people in society. We have an estimated 120.5 guns per every 100 Americans. We have one of the highest gun death rates in the developed world. In 2023 we had 13.7 gun deaths per 100,000 citizens. In Australia the number of gun deaths per person is .103 for every 100,000 persons. Why is that number so low? One reason, among many, is because they simply have less guns in society. Therefore, angry, bad, mentally ill, and/or vengeful people would simply have less access to a gun and less ability to carry out their violent acts. A gun buyback policy, implemented at anytime over the last 30 years in this country could have saved the lives of countless Americans, including our children and Charlie Kirk himself. Gun buyback programs work!

this is one of the reasons that the right has such a need to devalue science, because guns are such a big piece of the right's theology and science absolutely proves that guns are a bad idea. So what do you do? You don't want to change your mind so you must deny the facts and the systems that produce the facts. 

Edited September 12 by gehringer_2

[Deleterious]

Australia: More Guns Now Than Before Port Arthur

Quote

New research from the Australia Institute finds that there are more guns in Australia now than there were before the Port Arthur massacre and introduction of strict gun controls.

The Australia Institute report, commissioned by Gun Control Australia, comes off the back of research which finds the gun lobby in Australia is as large, per capita, as the NRA in the US. The new report also finds that the number of guns per gun-owner in Australia has increased dramatically, despite a drop in the number of people engaged in sport shooting overall.

Key findings

• The number of guns per gun-owner in Australia has increased dramatically, from 2.1 guns per gun owner in 1997 to 3.9 guns per owner at present
• Alarmingly, the number of firearms reported in Australia in 2017 (3.6 million) is now higher than pre-Port Arthur levels, prior to the 1996 National Firearms Agreement (3.2 million firearms)
• The increase in gun numbers is despite a drop in number of people engaged in sport shooting overall
• Using a rough measure of a gun selling for $1,000, the gun lobby has sold an additional $1.45 billion worth of guns because of the cultural change since 1997 of keeping more guns

“Australians would be surprised to learn that Australia has more guns now than even before the Port Arthur massacre and the introduction of strict gun controls,” said Bill Browne, researcher at the Australia Institute.

“While the number of hunters, sporting shooters and licensed gun owners has fallen over the last 20 years, the number of firearms has increased. In short, our research finds fewer gun owners are buying more guns.”

“The watering down of gun laws across the country has meant there are now more guns per licence holder even though there are fewer gun owners,” said Sam Lee, President of Gun Control Australia.

“Placing a limit on the number of guns per licence holder will prevent individuals from accumulating large caches of firearms and storing these guns in the home. It will also prevent gun manufacturers from utilising legislative loopholes that allows for the sale of more guns.”

 

[Sports_Freak]

So when hundreds of school children get slaughtered or when Democratic politicians get shot, it's "too soon to talk about gun control." But when one right-wing wacko gets killed, it's "time for a civil war."  GOP credibility lost...

[Motown Bombers]

 

[RatkoVarda]

14 minutes ago, Archie said:

Kirk was all about dialog mostly with people who have different views.  Many on the left would rather silence there opposition than have a rational and polite conversation. It's a big part ofwhat's wrong  with politics today.

"Tonight on Fox, "Should fags be stoned to death?"

Some, like internet sh|t poster Charlie Kirk, say "Yes"

Others on the radical left are trying to silence him.

Let's have a debate!"

 

F*** off.

[Deleterious]

Just now, RatkoVarda said:

"Tonight on Fox, "Should fags be stoned to death?"

Some, like internet sh|t poster Charlie Kirk, say "Yes"

Others on the radical left are trying to silence him.

Let's have a debate!"

 

F*** off.

lol

[oblong]

25 minutes ago, Archie said:

Kirk was all about dialog mostly with people who have different views.  Many on the left would rather silence there opposition than have a rational and polite conversation. It's a big part ofwhat's wrong  with politics today.

Charlie Kirk was a scumbag racist and sexist.  

[gehringer_2]

30 minutes ago, Deleterious said:

Australia: More Guns Now Than Before Port Arthur

 

interesting, But a hunter that buys another a 3rd gun doesn't really change the calculus of how many armed people are wandering around the streets or how many households where a gun becomes the end point of some stupid drunken argument or a suicide vector. As has been discussed before, we tend to debate the gun issue backwards in the US. The gun control issue always comes up after some kind of high profile assassination - but what gun control really does is make the streets safer - and reduce suicides. Under almost any reasonable gun control regime you can imagine, a Lee Harvey Oswald probably could still have obtained a rifle. That's not what you are going to stop. What you can get are safer streets, and at least a reduction in lethality of the mass shooters - for instance in '66 the Texas Tower shooter was able to kill 15 compared to the Vegas Shooter killing 60 in somewhat similar circumstances.

Where the debate in the US always founders is that we let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Just because there may be nothing that can stop all gun deaths, doesn't mean we can't stop a lot of them. And despite what you quoted about Australia's possible backsliding, gun deaths still fell by something like 2/3 with the actions they took. 

And in the end, I just don't get it. If I knew I could save the life of some poor unknown person by going out my way just a little bit, or even to prove I was competent to own a weapon, I'd leap at the chance. I just don't understand American gun owners who would rather see people die than be inconvenienced a little. And so many profess to be Christian. How can they care so little for their fellow man?

Edited September 12 by gehringer_2

[chasfh]

20 hours ago, oblong said:

of this?  Yes.  Capable.  Not probably. I'm not ready to go there yet but a non secret service protectee?  sure that's doable from people with expertise in things like this.  Is it doable morally?  Absolutely.  These people have no morals.  They think they're going to heaven anyway.

 

This is a big ball of wax right here. This lays bare the whole fallacy of that born again nonsense, which stipulates the only way to get to heaven is by "accepting Jesus Christ as your personal lord and savior", and that good works or good behavior or good ethics count for nothing. Doesn't matter how evil you act because you're going to heaven if you've accepted Jesus etc. It serves as a cosmic license to lie and steal and kill.

[Deleterious]

I laughed when people said the shooter was from the right because it was a 200-yard shot.

I laughed when people said the shooter was from the right because he was young and white.

I can't laugh away the Dodge Challenger evidence, though.  

[Tigeraholic1]

 Sounds like everyone here is pretty happy he is dead.... The left in a nutty shell.

[Deleterious]

From zero presence on the ground to suspect in custody in under 48 hours is a job well done.

[gehringer_2]

1 minute ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

 Sounds like everyone here is pretty happy he is dead.... The left in a nutty shell.

If you think everyone is saying that you maybe you should parse the conversation a little more closely. But even if some are, can you blame them? If you were one of those people Charlie so cavalierly suggested be removed from the population how could you be blamed for being happy he's gone? Why was virtually every American glad to see Bin Laden gone? Because he had made himself our mortal enemy. Charlie made himself that for a lot of people.

[CMRivdogs]

Kirk espoused everything that was the opposite of Christ's teachings.

 

Prove me wrong

[oblong]

11 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

 Sounds like everyone here is pretty happy he is dead.... The left in a nutty shell.

Can you show evidence of this claim?