Mass Shooting Epidemic Is the Result of Republican Minority Rule

[Black Panther]

The racial dichotomy and social challenges in America are unique...

"Unique" does not equal "insurmountable". :bpunimpressed:

Moreover the proposed changes would not have and will not prevent the majority of these shooters from arming themselves.

The data we have shows that, actually, yeah, it will.:bpunimpressed:

Most, if not all, mass shooters acquired their weapons through completely legal means. That's not a credit to the law-abiding gun owning community. :bpunimpressed:

Are you suggesting a ban of some sort?

A national gun registry, universal background checks, and an assault rifle ban (all three together, not just one or two of these) would be a powerful enough combo to reduce the number of mass shootings we see.:bpunimpressed:

 

[DEAD7]

"Unique" does not equal "insurmountable". :bpunimpressed:

No one is arguing its insurmountable... I'm saying side by side comparisons with other countries/cultures are dubious.

The data we have shows that, actually, yeah, it will.:bpunimpressed:

As far as I know, neither the El Paso nor the Dayton gunman would have been stopped from purchasing a weapon by an “expanded” background check or any kind of registry/background checks that didn’t have a pre-crime component. Link please?

Sutherland
The 26-year-old passed required background checks because the Air Force never informed the FBI about his criminal conduct

Las Vegas
Paddock purchased 33 of the 49 weapons found in the hotel room and at his homes between October 2016 and Sept. 28, 2017, according to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
None of the purchases drew scrutiny because the 64-year-old Paddock passed all background checks.

San Bernardino
Syed Farook and his wife used weapons that the FBI said were legally purchased by his neighbor, Enrique Marquez, from a licensed dealer in 2011 and 2012.

Roseburg
Christopher Harper-Mercer and his family members legally purchased the handguns and rifle he used in the Umpqua Community College shooting from a federally licensed gun dealer, according to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

Charleston
A drug arrest should have prevented Dylann Roof from purchasing the pistol authorities said he used at Emanuel AME Church, but a record-keeping error and background check delay allowed the transaction to go through. The FBI said a background check examiner never saw the arrest report because the wrong arresting agency was listed in state criminal history records. After three days, the gun dealer was legally permitted to complete the transaction.

Washington DC
Aaron Alexis, a former reservist turned civilian contractor, passed state and federal background checks and legally purchased the pump-action shotgun used in the Washington Navy Yard shooting

Aurora
James Holmes was receiving psychiatric treatment when he passed required federal background checks and legally purchased the weapons he used in his movie theater assault.

A national gun registry, universal background checks, and an assault rifle ban (all three together, not just one or two of these) would be a powerful enough combo to reduce the number of mass shootings we see.:bpunimpressed:

Americans can’t buy “assault rifles”—and no amount of repeating this phrase will change that reality...Semiautomatic rifles are not “military assault guns” or “weapons of war” or even “assault weapons.”
The distinction matters. Semiautomatic rifles are commonly owned and protected by law. Fully automatic “assault weapons” are not, which, I suspect, is why leftist conflate them... and why pundits use "assault style" rifle when reporting.
Moreover, the Federal Assault Weapons Ban (1994 to 2004) did little if anything to alter gun violence trends. Once the assault weapon ban was lifted, the AR-15 became the most popular rifle in the country, likely out of fear of another ban, or cool factor having been banned. Gun related crimes continued to decline for what its worth.

 

[Berniewood Hogan]

ah, the good old "heh, liberals don't even know that AR doesn't stand for assault rifle"

 

[StatUS]

Maybe they should stop selling bullets or magazines if all people want to do is collect guns

 

[Berniewood Hogan]

Heh. LIBRULS don't even realize AK doesn't stand for "assault krifle."

 

[Gus Money]

Gun control measures work. Period. This is proven worldwide.

Side by side comparisons is literally how you’re supposed to make comparisons. You compare and contrast similarities/differences, and then you make adjustments based on those differences. This is common sense and something that most people just infer when comparing policies from other countries. It’s not a good argument.

The distinction isn’t really that important. The point is that guns that fire at a rapid pace meant to kill high numbers of people should be banned from civilian ownership. Those aren’t hunting guns and they have no purpose besides killing people. The assault weapons ban arguably did reduce the number of mass shootings, though some sources say it didn’t have a major impact on overall gun violence. Still, it wasn’t worthless and if it stayed in place then we would have... less assault rifles.

 

[Gus Money]

GOP Politicians Are Much More Resistant To Gun Control Than GOP Voters Are

Polls show that Republican voters prioritize gun rights over gun controlbut aren’t universally opposed to restrictions on firearms. In fact, most Republicans support expanding background checks. Most back “red flag” provisions allowing the police to take guns away from people deemed dangerous by a judge. A majority support requiring a licenseto purchase a gun.

So with Democrats calling on the GOP-controlled Senate to take action on gun control in the wake of last weekend’s mass shootings in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio — in particular, to pass a bill adopted in February by the Democratic-controlled House that would essentially create universal background checks — will anything happen?

It isn’t impossible. President Trump suggested in a speech on Mondaythat he would push for “red flag” laws. But Trump has indicated support for gun control measuresafter previous mass shootings, and then either backtracked or done littleas the measures failed to move through Congress. And indeed, Republicans in Congress have blocked every recent attempt to pass major new gun control laws.

Don’t be surprised if that happens again. It’s not that Republican voters are adamantly opposed to gun control, as the data above shows. But the Republican Party as an institution is hostile to gun control measures.

First, guns are tied in with the dominant political identity within the GOP, which muddies the political consequences of backing gun control measures despite the poll results on individual policies. If you’re a Republican elected official, you have to be aware that a vote for some kind of gun control measure (even a popular one) could potentially get you cast as “anti-gun” and broadly “of the left,” in a way that could make you electorally vulnerable.

You can see evidence of this in the more abstract poll questions about gun policy; most Republicans support some specific provisions, but on the general issue, they clearly fall on the side of gun rights:

These people are useless. Despite future attempts to surely rewrite the story, they will end up on the wrong side of history.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

A national gun registry, universal background checks, and an assault rifle ban (all three together, not just one or two of these) would be a powerful enough combo to reduce the number of mass shootings we see.:bpunimpressed:

I dunno about mass shootings but those simple steps would have an ENORMOUS impact on gun crime.

Imagine if every single gun was traceable to its owner. You couldn't sell a gun, couldn't transfer it, without registering the sale. And since the sale had to include a background check, you couldn't claim plausible deniability.

Who would sell guns on the black market? Who would buy guns and then transfer them to crooks? The second the gun was found after a crime, or the second the criminal got arrested with a gun on them, it would be traced back to you, and you would have no way to deny that he had gotten it from you.

A lot of fools would see their gun supply dry up real quick. Even if you could get a gun the price point would go way up.

 

[acri1]

I dunno about mass shootings but those simple steps would have an ENORMOUS impact on gun crime.

Imagine if every single gun was traceable to its owner. You couldn't sell a gun, couldn't transfer it, without registering the sale. And since the sale had to include a background check, you couldn't claim plausible deniability.

Who would sell guns on the black market? Who would buy guns and then transfer them to crooks? The second the gun was found after a crime, or the second the criminal got arrested with a gun on them, it would be traced back to you, and you would have no way to deny that he had gotten it from you.

A lot of fools would see their gun supply dry up real quick. Even if you could get a gun the price point would go way up.

Yep, I actually think it would be a good idea to put some kind of computer chip or at least code on every gun manufactured saying who it's registered to, that only the agency that registers guns can legally change.


If you get caught with a gun without a code

Somebody else commits a crime with a gun with your code

Get caught tampering with a code


Probably not plausible in the current political climate, but I think a system like that would greatly reduce gun violence. Even if there was some kind of way to illegally change the code it would be enough of a hassle/expense to reduce the number of guns in circulation. Which would by itself reduce gun violence a lot.

 

[mr. smoke weed]

It's such a joke that this stuff is even up for discussion. Why do people need fukking guns? Ban anything that isn't a pistol or simple shotgun..........it's extremely easy and not complicated. 2nd amendment doesn't let us hold protection against the govt, see what's happening right now.

 

[acri1]

It's such a joke that this stuff is even up for discussion. Why do people need fukking guns? Ban anything that isn't a pistol or simple shotgun..........it's extremely easy and not complicated. 2nd amendment doesn't let us hold protection against the govt, see what's happening right now.

Unfortunately the NRA isn't having it.

And the scary thing (and I've talked about this before) is that just three percent of the population owns half the guns. These are in large part paranoid white guys who think they're stockpiling weapons for an upcoming race war or some shyt. It's not hard to see more and more of that group snapping as the political climate gets worse and Trump eggs them on.

 

[Berniewood Hogan]

Yep, I actually think it would be a good idea to put some kind of computer chip or at least code on every gun manufactured saying who it's registered to, that only the agency that registers guns can legally change.


If you get caught with a gun without a code

Somebody else commits a crime with a gun with your code

Get caught tampering with a code


Probably not plausible in the current political climate, but I think a system like that would greatly reduce gun violence. Even if there was some kind of way to illegally change the code it would be enough of a hassle/expense to reduce the number of guns in circulation. Which would by itself reduce gun violence a lot.

"THEY'RE PUTTING THE MARK OF THE BEAST ON OUR GUNS!"