[MERGED] Post-Sandy-Hook Gun-Chat Thread [MERGED]

[Norm]

Borrowed, but the quote is quite relative to this day.

[Grey Ghost]

I'm not talking about the govt. I'm talking about family, friends, people that are around these type people and KNOW that they have a problem. You are painting with a broad brush...I'm painting with a model car brush.

Gunman's mother kept trials of home life hidden - Yahoo! News

Originally Posted by DAB

again, what signs did he exhibit that would warrant butting into his life by the govt?

[DJ_Critterus]

So, now that we've had time to think about this, repost facebook statuses, hit the "like" button to send prayers and don't do it to say you don't care, rant about the guns being evil, blah blah blah.... does the mom have any chance of getting her weapons back when the investigations are complete and will she still be able to buy another one later if she wants to?

[Broken Wind]

She's dead, Deej.

[DJ_Critterus]

Originally Posted by PortDawg

Gentlemen, let's turn it down a notch before someone says something that earns them some time off. It is Christmas after all.

what a damn Grinc...err...

[DJ_Critterus]

Originally Posted by Broken Wind

She's dead, Deej.

Oops...forgot about that. Well, supposing she was still alive and hasn't been hassled to death by the media?

[Giraffe (He/Him)]

does the mom have any chance of getting her weapons back when the investigations are complete and will she still be able to buy another one later if she wants to?

I'm thinking no. She's dead.

[DJ_Critterus]

Originally Posted by Thomas

You seriously didn't know the mother was killed?

I knew but it slipped my mind. To quote Obama, "I misspoke" Cheebus...you have one teleprompter glitch....

[mrvette]

Originally Posted by DJ_Critterus

Oops...forgot about that. Well, supposing she was still alive and hasn't been hassled to death by the media?

A gas station owner/friend committed suicide years ago, and the gun he used was given back to his wife.....complete with brain/blood matter all over it......some 25 years ago, an old friend still has it, she gave it and all Pete's guns to Larry, dunno where they are now.....

[VITE1]

Doing The Math On Guns | Neon Tommy

Doing The Math On Guns

Comments (27)
| Aurora, aurora shooting, Bloomberg, Columnists, Gun Control, Gun Violence, guns, NRA, switzerland

Matt Pressberg |


July 30, 2012 | 5:25 a.m. PDT

Switzerland has many guns and few murders. (Kecko/Flickr)
FOR THE LATEST NEWS: Read Neon Tommy's coverage of the Connecticut shooting.

My sincerest thoughts are with the family and friends of the victims of the Aurora massacre, as they are with all innocent victims of gun violence in America.

One of my least favorite aspects of tragedies like this, which happen rarely but still far too often, are the emotional and uninformed salvos on gun rights that it seems every Tom, Dick and Bloomberg feel compelled to share. Instead of it being a remembrance of the victims' lives, the “you’re coming for my guns,” “no I’m not” back-and-forth ends up monopolizing the public discourse about the event. The shooter was a deranged neuroscientist who nearly blew up his neighborhood with homemade explosives. I feel like that is not getting enough attention.

The public gun rights debate in America has devolved into a sideshow. On one side, we have middle-aged men with unfulfilled Rambo fantasies, and on the other, people who really do think that anyone who owns a gun wants to kill. For them, either more guns make us safer, or no guns do. You are either prepared for a shootout at all times or there is never a reasonable use for a handgun. There is no in-between.

Accepting the ever-present bar argument challenge, I decided to do the math. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) has comprehensive statistics on homicide between 1995 and 2011, and approximate civilian gun counts for almost all of the U.N. states can be found in the Small Arms Survey of 2007. Some of the homicide statistics from the UNODC were from different years; to account for this and some fluctuations due to extraordinary events, I used the average of whatever years between 1995 and 2011 were available.

This is what I found:

Gun ownership has no correlation with murder rates

Because a picture says 1,000 words (and this is going to be long enough already):






This chart shows no relationship at all between civilian gun ownership (which can also be used as a proxy for relaxed gun laws) and murder rates. The U.S. is a true outlier in just how much we love guns (we have 270 million of them—a nice defensive cache) but this set of data points tells us nothing about the impact of gun ownership on homicide, if there is any. It looks almost completely random.

Since most of these countries plotted above are not really comparable to the U.S., if we want knowledge we can actually apply to make America safer, it makes sense to drill down and focus on those that are. Think of it this way: American cops and German cops probably deal with many of the same types of crime but German cops and Zambian cops occupy two different worlds.

The following chart shows homicides per capita in wealthy countries (separated into gun and non-gun) compared to gun ownership per capita. An appropriate title for it could be “guns don’t kill people, murderers do.”





Killers in countries where civilians tend to be armed show a slight preference for guns but just as in the first scatter plot, gun ownership and murder rates show no relationship. Swiss and American murderers use guns simply because they’re around. South Korean and British murderers don’t have a pistol in the closet so they take a knife from the drawer. Either way, killers gonna kill.

High murder rates are caused by the same factors in high-gun countries as they are in low-gun countries. St. Louis, Johannesburg and Tegucigalpa have very different gun laws, but most of their gun crime comes from some form of broken institution, urban poverty and gang violence, and not the presence or absence of a culture of owning firearms.

The same effect can be observed within the U.S. itself. Chicago, Washington, D.C., and Camden, N.J., have high murder rates, as do Memphis, Little Rock and Birmingham. The first three cities are in states with relatively restrictive gun laws, with D.C. and Chicago recently having longtime handgun bans overturned. The remaining cities are in states with extremely relaxed gun laws, because they are full of hunters and recreational shooters.

High crime in low-income neighborhoods of Little Rock has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that pheasant hunters in the Ozarks love shotguns. It’s caused by the same vicious cycle that plagues Chicago and Camden. Local gun laws reflect local gun culture and not local gun crime because criminals don’t care about laws.

Spree killers may dominate media coverage but the overwhelming majority of shootings in America are not like Aurora. The Los Angeles Times’ Homicide blog paints a much truer picture of gun violence in America than cable news.

Poverty and failing institutions appear to be much better predictors of homicide than gun ownership. Murder rates are higher in neighborhoods of America that are poorer and less educated, regardless of gun culture, and it would seem to back up this theory if the same trend were repeated elsewhere. It would also help to shoot down some of the “America is a uniquely violent place” garbage.

This chart has our answer:





There is indeed a strong correlation between murder rates and socio-economic development, which is even more striking considering the measurement used. Murders per gun is a metric that isolates the impact of gun ownership on the murder rate: someone who believes many civilian guns almost always lead to many homicides per capita and few to few would expect the green bars to be relatively flat, and not necessarily aligned with the kind of factors measured in the Human Development Index, things like poverty and failing institutions. This is obviously not the case at all.

What makes a Nigerian gun more dangerous than a Swedish gun? Sweden has a much stronger economy and law enforcement regime, which means that the gun is a lot less likely to find its way to someone who would use it for murder. There are marginally fewer murders per 100,000 Swiss guns than there are per 100,000 American guns, and massively fewer murders per 100,000 American guns than 100,000 Venezuelan guns. Compared with things like the economy and education, civilian gun ownership doesn’t seem to make an impact at all in murder rates. People in Switzerland are too busy being rich and punctual to bother with gun violence. Hungry and desperate rebel gangs in Mali are not.

[VITE1]

More

To answer another point, this chart also shows that the United States is actually pretty nonviolent considering how many guns are floating around. This is quite a credit to the safety record of the vast majority of American gun owners, especially considering most gun homicides aren’t tied to the legal gun marketplace.

Assault weapons are not the problem

President Obama was silent on gun control for a few days (it is election season), but during a speech in New Orleans last Wednesday, he decided to wade in by tossing a soft applause line to a friendly crowd about keeping AK-47s off the street.

The Aurora shooter carried an AR-15 (and three other weapons), but that is beside the point. The reality is that taking all AK-47s, AR-15s and similar assault rifles off the street tomorrow would have a negligible impact on gun violence in America. Despite the name, assault rifles are popular among Americans mainly for target shooting and hunting.

Most murders, such as the double homicide that struck the University of Southern California earlier this year, are committed with cheap handguns which have now been ruled unconstitutional to ban anywhere and would be impossible to eradicate even if we wanted to. Assault rifles are generally expensive and conspicuous, not really the optimal weapon for gang members or meth addicts. They are much more of a problem in countries with active militarized gangs or rebel groups that are not under the control of law enforcement, and not in highly developed places like the United States and Western Europe where almost all homicide is lower-level street crime with the rare mass murder that overshadows all.

The main problem with assault weapons laws is they target firearms based on a scary military or tactical appearance and not actual use in crimes. In California, guns are banned for such reasons as having a thumbhole stock and a forward pistol grip, under the apparent logic that a more comfortable hand position is somehow a public safety threat.

California has among the most restrictive gun laws in America, particularly with regard to assault weapons. They didn’t stop the Seal Beach killings and have no impact in reducing the handgun violence that plagues parts of Los Angeles, Oakland and Stockton.

What we can do to actually improve safety

The United States may be a relatively non-murderous place, especially on a per gun basis, but we should always look to improve. The problem is, we often address the symptom and not the cause of gun violence in the parts of our country where it is a major issue. Gun bans or arbitrary restrictions are easy and politically popular in many areas but gun laws are about as responsible for most American murders as McDonald's is for making people obese.

Prosperity, stability and strong institutions allow Swiss and Canadians to own a lot of guns and hardly kill each other, while the absence leads to the opposite for many developing countries. Parts of Chicago and D.C. with failing schools and declining economies deal with the type of murder rates many people don’t want to believe could be possible in a country as rich as ours despite some of the strictest gun laws in America.

The way to reduce the murder rate in the most violent parts of America is by fixing schools and creating jobs, not by refusing to let me buy this. I’d love to see the governor repeal the California assault weapon ban and add a special tax to assault weapons that would fund such school-fixing and job-creating programs in some of the poorest parts of California. Gun-owning liberals like me are already on board but this is easily the best way to get conservatives excited about helping the type of people they normally don’t love the government spending money on.

Massacres like Aurora, Tucson and Virginia Tech are the work of narcissistic and psychotic young men who are looking for fame and attention after being unlikable weirdos their entire lives. They are not a consequence of poverty or gangs but known crazy people fulfilling the nightmare that their acquaintances expected. Cho and Loughner scared the hell out of pretty much everyone they came into contact with, and Holmes gave a gun range owner a bad feeling with only a voicemail greeting.

Putting the puzzle together on these guys makes it clear that they are/were the exact type of people who should not have had guns but the problem was that there was a puzzle to be put together. Holmes, over the past few months, bought several guns in stores, thousands of rounds of ammunition online, tactical gear online and dropped out of an extremely selective doctoral program. All these things together paint the picture of a guy ready to do something stupid, but as one-off events, each action is explainable. That makes stopping these killings so challenging.

[VITE1]

Last part

My humble proposal is a very democratic (small D) one. A longer and more thorough criminal and mental health background check for first-time gun buyers under 30 or so, as well as a public notice of their application and a 30 day period for public complaints. There would be some type of committee to review anything that came in and hold follow-up talks with the applicant. The committee could also take complaints after the permit was issued but there would be much a higher standard needed to revoke an existing permit than to issue a first one. This is hardly a magic bullet but I do think if Cho or Holmes were listed as a gun applicant on a notice on a campus bulletin board, there would be a good chance of someone complaining and maybe arousing suspicion before it was too late.

In exchange for this, I’d like to see gun owners with a long-term track record of safety be able to enjoy some expanded privileges. The mandatory 10-day waiting period is kind of silly for people who already own several guns; it’s not like they wouldn’t be able to do something stupid and impulsive if they wanted to. Also, being able to use extended pistol magazines at the range would be nice for those of us who value our thumbnails. The NRA could sponsor all kinds of certifications that would allow more and make a lot of money, which would be the only way they’d agree to any kind of compromise.

For better or worse, the U.S. is a frontier nation that was built, won, expanded and kept together at the barrel of a gun. We have a unique gun culture that many Americans, including some of us liberals, grew up around, enjoy and consider an integral and valuable part of our national heritage. Our relative safety considering the amount of guns we have is a testament to how responsible so many Americans are in keeping such dangerous weapons away from situations in which they might cause harm, and only using them for those in which they tend to cause fun.

Our innate gun culture is given high priority in our Constitution. The Second Amendment, which everyone on both sides of the gun debate seems to be a self-appointed expert on, gives us the right to bear arms as part of a “well regulated” militia. This should be the guide for gun policy; guns should not be unregulated, like one side seemingly wants, nor arbitrarily overly regulated, like the other does. Banning things is easy; risk management is harder. Well regulated implies a constant process that adapts with circumstances and it should be based on evidence. Gun ownership does not lead to gun violence. Politicians may lie but numbers don't

[RedLS1GTO]

Originally Posted by Thomas

It's ok man. We understand. "Words" aren't for everybody. I know it's asking a lot, but keep trying and 1 of these days you just might actually come up with something resembling an intelligent response.


Maybe.

[Aerovette]

I won't go into details, but there is a young person I know of that quite honestly scares me. I know you cannot lock someone away for being "not right" but I will tell you this kid is a candidate.

Genius IQ
Socially inept
Arrested development (at 20, still obsessed with Legos)
Has made direct threats to others
Has been removed from school twice, once in handcuffs (he is still in High School)
Quasi-military training (ROTC)
Tourette's type of random outbursts and disconnected statements.

Individually, these all mean less than the sum of the parts.

Collectively, well, if he made headlines, I would not be the LEAST surprised. I only hope I am not on his radar when the safety switch in his head fails.

So, what do you do? Wait for the bomb to go off? What proactive measures could be taken based on just being "not right"?

I perceive him as a potential danger, but legally...he is free to be free.

[ft laud mike]

Originally Posted by aerovette

I won't go into details, but there is a young person I know of that quite honestly scares me. I know you cannot lock someone away for being "not right" but I will tell you this kid is a candidate.

Genius IQ
Socially inept
Arrested development (at 20, still obsessed with Legos)
Has made direct threats to others
Has been removed from school twice, once in handcuffs (he is still in High School)
Quasi-military training (ROTC)
Tourette's type of random outbursts and disconnected statements.

Individually, these all mean less than the sum of the parts.

Collectively, well, if he made headlines, I would not be the LEAST surprised. I only hope I am not on his radar when the safety switch in his head fails.

So, what do you do? Wait for the bomb to go off? What proactive measures could be taken based on just being "not right"?

I perceive him as a potential danger, but legally...he is free to be free.

Genius Iq & still in HS? WTF, if you, or anyone else feels he is a danger (direct threats seem like he would be), call the police In Fla we Baker act (72 hour observation in secure facility) people who may be a threat to themselves or others, I'm sure all states have something similar.

[Aerovette]

Originally Posted by ft laud mike

Genius Iq & still in HS? WTF, if you, or anyone else feels he is a danger (direct threats seem like he would be), call the police In Fla we Baker act (72 hour observation in secure facility) people who may be a threat to themselves or others, I'm sure all states have something similar.

At 5 he was learning Chinese and playing piano. Maybe idiot savant is a better term than genius. Thing is, he is so socially disconnected, and was home schooled poorly and fell way behind the required studies. He is in catch up mode. A genius still need formal education. They don't learn from breathing.

Nothing can be done unless he is actively threatening or actively endangering himself or someone else. He just creeps me out and I may be the only one that really believes he is a prime candidate for snapping one day.

I am telling you that nothing he could do would surprise me in the least. From bombing to suicide and all points in between. He is a mental child of about 10 or 11 years old, but chronologically is 20. In my mind, his abilities are that of a 20 something and his rationale or processing capabilities more reflect a child much younger. Someone that does not understand the ramifications of their actions.

[PortDawg]

In regards to the Assault Weapons Ban and the lie that it made a difference I submit it did not. Here is the evidence.

The Report from the National Institute for Justice

[Broken Wind]

No ‘excuse for inaction’ on gun control - The Washington Post

THE BUSHMASTER .223-caliber semiautomatic rifle that Adam Lanza carried into Sandy Hook Elementary School on Friday is a frightful killing machine. Just take a look at the manufacturer’s catalogue for this best-selling firearm. “At home on the range and on patrol,” it boasts. “Take on the predators with devastating performance.”

The Bushmaster is known for a design that can be configured for hunting, police work, range shooting and more. But the last place on earth this weapon should have been was in an elementary school. On Friday, Mr. Lanza wielded a Bushmaster to kill 20 children ages 6 and 7 and six adults in a rampage at the school that lasted some 10 minutes. He carried high-capacity magazines allowing him to fire off 30 bullets before he had to reload. A coroner said most of the victims were hit with at least three bullets — and some with up to 11 — that exploded with devastating lethality, tearing them apart from inside. The Bushmaster was a juggernaut of death.

Obviously, something snapped in this young man that points to evil beyond comprehension. Yet the tragedy leads to an inescapable conclusion. There is no defensible reason for civilians to own a Bushmaster or other semiautomatic rifles, known more broadly as assault weapons. This is essentially a military weapon, a version of the M-16, capable in some cases of shooting bullets at more than 2,000 feet per second. It does not belong in private hands, any more than M-1 Abrams tanks belong on Rockville Pike or mortars in the backyard.

Gun-owner advocates who point out that violent crime has fallen in recent years, in the absence of new gun controls, are correct. The link between guns and violence is not always clear-cut. But the link between a certain kind of mass murder and a particular killing technology is clearer. It makes sense to reimpose strict limits on these assault weapons, including a ban on high-capacity magazines with more than 10 bullets each. These magazines have figured in several of the most heinous mass shootings in recent years, including the one that severely wounded Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) in 2011. The Bushmaster is also a source of grief for Mexico, where it has become a favorite weapon of warring drug cartels.

In his remarks in Newtown on Sunday, President Obama noted that this was the fourth time in his presidency he has consoled a community grief-stricken by a mass shooting. He made clear he no longer wants to be simply the consoler in chief.

“We can’t tolerate this anymore,” he said. “No single law — no set of laws can eliminate evil from the world, or prevent every senseless act of violence in our society. But that can’t be an excuse for inaction. Surely, we can do better than this.”

Yes, we can. We can start by locking up these killing machines. Mr. Obama endorsed an assault weapons ban when running for president in 2008, but in office he has been cautious. The loss of life in Connecticut demands a move from caution to action.

[VITE1]

Got to love the left. The Number one cause for the increase in crime is socio economic issues ( Welfare, Single mother families and Societal disruption) yet the left refuse to admit their policies of the nanny state and Entitlement state are the main driver.

[6spdC6]

The people that own a summer camp up where I live have a kid that fits the WATCH CLOSE category.

He is now 21, totally refuses to work, sleeps during the day in the basement of the family home, and plays garbage violent music at high levels all night. He also plays a lot of video game (the violent ones of course) and does a lot of weight lifting and heavy duty work outs.(quite possibly taking steroids) I saw him he is built like those prisoners you see in some of the prison TV shows.

He has changed from an introverted decent kid to what I described above in about two years. He has assaulted his father twice, one time even putting him in the hospital for a few days. HE has been in jail, a mental hospital for an evaluation and been arrested at least 3 times that I know of. The powers to be in this liberal shithole of a state will not commit him. His parents are both afraid of him but say hey it’s our kid we will try to help him. BULLCHIT this kid should be behind bars! Yes the father a hunter has gotten rid of his guns but even unarmed this kid is very dangerous and I fear his name is going to be on the front page of the paper one of these days.

The family camp is relatively close to my house, possibly a 1/4 mile away. Most all up here know the story and we are watching our back when the wacko is up here. As of now he hardily comes up, but he is there some weekends.

Thanks to the idiot liberal democrats and their asinine policies on incarceration of nut jobs this kid is on the streets.