Latest School Shooting - Nobody Cares

[_Some Schmo]

Like it or not, guns are here and they aren't going anywhere. Banning them just means an even bigger black market and ensures only the criminals have them. If you can get all the drugs you want any time any where (despite our government having a war against them for the last 20 years) then you can be sure guns will still be everywhere even if banned or taxed into obscurity. But only the criminals will have them.

It's hard to believe people are still making this ridiculous argument.

This is your essential argument: If we make a law, there are people who will break that law, so what's the point of making the law?

damned dumb, man.

[_Xenophon]

Relatively speaking though, mass shootings, as horrible as they are, are a rare thing, and among causes of death in the US, you can't even see the decimal point. Why isn't there the same anger and fury for heart disease, something largely preventable (614,348 deaths annually)? Even number 10 in the top 10 leading causes of death in the US (Suicide - 42,773) is still 39 times greater than all mass shoot deaths since 1966 (1077). (At least according to this link at the Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... 5afe5abc00) If its just about the loss of life, there are a lot of things we should put our efforts to before "how to stop mass shootings".

There are tons of organizations who devote enormous amounts of man power and dollars to the purpose of eliminating heart disease, suicide and a vast array of other issues. Anger and fury might be the wrong words, but they have passion and drive for sure.

Are we now saying that we lack the ingenuity and will to work on all of these problems simultaneously? Does my desire to end NRA's influence on politics or increase registration/training requirements for gun owners somehow negate my donation to the local children's hospital?

The reason mass shootings are particularly terrible comparable to your heart disease example (auto incidents is the other one I see a lot) is that the victims of a mass shooting don't get much say in the decision of their lives being taken. If you want to ignore modern medical advice on your health, that is your choice (cost of healthcare aside). You don't get to decide not to be there when a mass shooting happens.

[_Themis]

Relatively speaking though, mass shootings, as horrible as they are, are a rare thing, and among causes of death in the US, you can't even see the decimal point.

That does not mean we should ignore it. Better gun laws, not a ban on all guns, would help address deaths from guns not used in mass shootings.

Why isn't there the same anger and fury for heart disease, something largely preventable (614,348 deaths annually)?

Why would we need fury about people dying from something that is not done intentionally. There is a lot going on to address this problem, and the number of deaths have been going down. More needs to be done. It's a poor comparison to other issues you should know people do care about and are working to improve as a way to suggest people don't care.

Like it or not, guns are here and they aren't going anywhere. Banning them just means an even bigger black market and ensures only the criminals have them.

BS. They banned machine guns in the US and we don't see hardly any of them on the streets. I am not for banning all guns, but how can you have such ignorant views?

But only the criminals will have them.

Another stupid gun nut argument, and complete BS. Criminals in other countries have a lot less guns then the ones in the US because they are hard to come by.

That said, I'm all for more training, education, and background verification. Where I live, I can walk into any sporting goods store and in 30 minutes be just as armed as the Las Vegas Mandalay Bay shooter. While its convenient, I'm not sure how I feel about that. I'm certainly pro-gun ownership, but I don't necessary believe they should be easy to get, even for an upstanding guy like myself with a spotless record.

Now this I can agree with.

[_Maxine Waters]

BS. They banned machine guns in the US and we don't see hardly any of them on the streets. I am not for banning all guns, but how can you have such ignorant views?

You don't see AR-15s on the streets either. Most homicides are committed with pistols or handguns.

And as EAllusion likes to point out, the violent crime rate is going down, not up.

[_Some Schmo]

With all the other piss-poor arguments pro gun nuts use, I'm kind of surprised I haven't heard something about how banning guns will affect the economy. They use this idiotic reasoning to justify killing the planet. Why not people?

Then we could enjoy listening to people whine about how there are good people just trying to make a living in the gun manufacturing industry, like that makes a goddamn difference to the overall problem.

[_Some Schmo]

I read a piece yesterday talking about a comedy writer texting the amount of money a congressman had accepted from the gun lobby in response to any of their tweets offering their "thoughts and prayers." You ever think about what those thoughts and prayers actually are?

Thought: just because I accepted mass amounts of money from the gun lobby doesn't mean I'm responsible for those deaths.

Prayer: dear god, don't let the money train stop.

[_Themis]

BS. They banned machine guns in the US and we don't see hardly any of them on the streets. I am not for banning all guns, but how can you have such ignorant views?

You don't see AR-15s on the streets either. Most homicides are committed with pistols or handguns.

And as EAllusion likes to point out, the violent crime rate is going down, not up.

That most homicides are done with pistols does not mean AR-15's are not easy to get. Pistols are a better weapon for small areas and easier to hide. Just because violent crime is going down does not mean there is not a problem with gun laws.

[_Maxine Waters]

Just because violent crime is going down does not mean there is not a problem with gun laws.

More gun laws will not help reduce criminal homicides. They only disarm law biding citizens. It's a government power grab disguised as improving public safety.

[_Themis]

Just because violent crime is going down does not mean there is not a problem with gun laws.

More gun laws will not help reduce criminal homicides. They only disarm law biding citizens. It's a government power grab disguised as improving public safety.

BS. We see this with the machine gun ban, we see it in other countries, and they don't disarm law abiding citizens who actually have better odds of dying from their own gun then by some criminal.

[_DoubtingThomas]

You don't see AR-15s on the streets either. Most homicides are committed with pistols or handguns.

And as EAllusion likes to point out, the violent crime rate is going down, not up.

Yes, but the violent crime rate going down has nothing to do with guns according to a study

"Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense." For every gun used in self-defense, there are four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicide, and eleven attempted or completed suicides.

Kellermann, Arthur L., et al. "Injuries and deaths due to firearms in the home." Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery 45.2 (1998): 263-267.