The Silence Here Is Deafening

[Ben Trovado]

If we pick on this round - a glorified .22 in most cases, because there are 2 major variations (among others), what do we do about 30.06 hunting rifles? This particular rifle is only semi-automatic and is a small enough round to NOT be recommended for hunting things larger than a coyote or rabbit. It won't stop a deer, and ethically is not supposed to be used for them. A .44 handgun is as powerful.

One other point, what sort of rifle does the military give its infantrymen? Something that could take down an elephant?

It's based on a design that was originally made for military purposes. It uses the same caliber of ammo as an M16 rifle. It's basically optimized not for hunting but for war.

It is no more deadly than any number of semi-automatic pistols (or rifles), and has been used in a tiny percentage of crimes.

What magical property does this thing have ?

[Ben Trovado]

The number of crimes this rifle is used in is tiny. The number of times a criminal needs more than 10 round in a magazine is even smaller.

I'm not talking about petty crime for profit.

. . . because those dead people aren't important?

I am not sure why some crimes are considered crucial and others don't count.

[Doctor X]

I am not sure why some crimes are considered crucial and others don't count.

As I am sure you know, it is a matter of how much attention one can obtain a profit from.

I am not one to pay any heedence ["Heedence?" – Ed.] to race baiting, but I recognize that "white girl killed" draws far more interest than "black girl killed." To which I would add "rich white girl" over "white prostitute."

"It's all about the money, boys!"

So if the hundred murdering each other in Chicago were . . . white?

But what is "white?"

A few decades ago, an Irish man being killed by an Italian was not "white violence."

In the rain.

– J.D.

[ed]

An AR is not a "high powered rifle".

You can always find something even more powerful, but compared to a typical handgun it is. I know that you are the expert on guns, and I'm not, but if it can shoot ammunition that can go through a bullet-proof vest, that's effectively pretty powerful. And people are easier to kill than an elk or a bear.

Every gun is powerful. That isn't really up for discussion. What is typically referred to as "high powered" is something more powerful than an AR caliber. And depending on the vest itself it may not go thru it. I am not sure tht that is really a problem, is it? That is t say what are the stats re. LE being actually incapacitated by different rounds.

[ed]

The number of crimes this rifle is used in is tiny. The number of times a criminal needs more than 10 round in a magazine is even smaller.

And if we limit it to just mass shootings resulting in 10 or more fatalities and not related to gang violence? The kind that make front-page national news. People who kill for no other reason than notoriety or ideology and are willing to die in the process. I'm not talking about petty crime for profit.

Here
https://i.imgur.com/9AIUtCq.png
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shoo ... ted_States
I removed shootings by anything other than putative AR's

Interesting that the vast majority occurred since 2010, don't know if that is fucked up data or something that is real. Anyway that is a total of 308 or roughly 30 deaths a year. I'm not minimizing it but look at Chicago

https://i.imgur.com/7k5RHFE.png
https://heyjackass.com/

(I will note parenthetically that the number of blacks lynched from 1882-1968 is 3446. We are supposed to get the vapors over "lynching's" to the point where the federal government gets involved if a piece of rope is found under suspicious circumstances. )

I submit that every one of those murders was performed with an illegal gun (and a handgun for that matter) and that there is no fear on the part of the perps. What are the feds doing? Lots of words. I see two convictions.

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndil/pr/us ... ies-comb-1

And could it be stopped? What are the federal penalties?

SALE TO A PROHIBITED PERSON: 18, USC, SECTION 922(D)
Under Title 18, United States Code, Section 922(d), it is unlawful for any person to sell or give any firearm or ammunition to any person, knowing, or having reasonable cause to believe that such person:

is a convicted felon
is a fugitive from justice
is an unlawful user or addicted to any controlled substance
has been committed to any mental institution
is an illegal alien
has received a dishonorable discharge from the United States Armed Forces
has renounced U.S. citizenship
has a restraining order
has been convicted of any domestic violence crime.
ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF A FIREARM: 18 USC, SECTION 922(G)
Similarly, under Title 18, United States Code, Section 922(g), it is unlawful for any person who:

is a convicted felon
is a fugitive from justice
is an unlawful user or addicted to any controlled substance
has been committed to any mental institution
is an illegal alien
has received a dishonorable discharge from the United States Armed Forces
has renounced U.S. citizenship
has a restraining order
has been convicted of any domestic violence crime
to possess, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, any firearm or ammunition.

FALSE STATEMENTS REGARDING FIREARMS: 18, USC, SECTION 924(A)(1)
Title 18, United States Code, Section 924(a)(1) makes it illegal for anyone to knowingly make any false statement or representation with respect to any records required to be kept regarding firearms. This can include any application, certification, authorization or licenses.

POSSESSION OR USE OF A FIREARM IN A VIOLENT OR DRUG TRAFFICKING CRIME: 18, USC, SECTION 924(C)
Under Title 18, United States Code, Section 924(c), any person who, during and in relation to any crime of violence or drug trafficking offense, for which the person may be prosecuted in a court of the United States (making it a Federal offense), uses, carries or possesses a firearm shall be sentenced for the firearms offense in addition to any sentence for the underlying crime of violence or drug trafficking crime. Depending on the circumstances, this can result in an increase of 25 years to any other sentence.

FEDERAL FIREARM CRIMES: PUNISHMENT, SENTENCE AND COLLATERAL CONSEQUENCES
Any violation of these Federal firearms offenses is typically punishable by up to 10 years in Federal prison and up to a $250,000 fine for each offense. However, as noted above, if the crime involves drug trafficking or a crime of violence, the sentence can be as high as 25 years in prison, in addition to the sentence for the underlying offense.

https://www.new-york-lawyers.org/federa ... %20offense.

BTW, the people put away would be black, largely since blacks disproportionately murder. But convicting them is, you know
https://www.bradyunited.org/program/com ... mographics

So... enforce existing laws, address the big problems then we can talk.

ETA I see the value of red flag laws. I have a problem with the lack of due process. We have such laws here in Fla. Our local Sherriff personally reviews each case, he is a big gun guy, and allows them if they are legit in his view. Remember that once you are in the system you are fucked, legally, temporally and financially. Those are things that have to be addressed before I would get behind these sort of laws.

[ed]

This will help provide a roadmap for understanding the dreaded AR


https://i.imgur.com/vhCWmM0.jpg

[robinson]

I support even more restrictive gun laws including not even being able to buy or own a gun

Because it has worked so well in Chicago and New York

Stopping shootings, stopping gun deaths and reducing crime







Right?

[ed]

And having only agents of the government armed is reassuring.

[robinson]

Until Russia invades

[robinson]

Or gang members show up

[robinson]

With guns

[Ben Trovado]

To expand on the above, I went looking at the FBI statistics on homicides.

In any given year, for every person murdered with *any* type of rifle (not just AR-15s, though they are included), there are 15 murdered with handguns, 1.7 with hands or fists, and 1.2 with blunt instruments. In fact, homicides with any sort of rifle represent only 3.2 percent of all homicides on average.

Per the FBI data, over the ten year period from 2007-2017, about one-tenth of one percent of homicides were produced by mass shootings involving AR-15s. According to a New York Times analysis on that time period, since 2007, at least “173 people have been killed in mass shootings in the United States involving AR-15s.” That’s 173 over a period of more than 10 years -- an average of 17 deaths per year. Effectively, it would take almost one-hundred years of mass shootings with AR-15s to produce the same number of homicide victims that knives and sharp objects produce in one year alone.

So I have to wonder - what is it with this particular gun?

[Hotarubi]

49 fatalities in mass shootings already this month. Type of weapon is not the issue.

[ed]

It is advertising 101.

Every brand/cause needs a unique selling proposition. A clear pitch and benefit if you will.

AR is perfect. Simple and identifiable.

Remember that those that crave power need a compliment and defenseless population.

It's not arms its means of defense.

Look at the uk and knives

[Doctor X]

So I have to wonder - what is it with this particular gun?

It looks scary.

Seriously.

Probably reminds people of the plastic toy "M-16s" they played with.

– J.D.

[Hotarubi]

It is advertising 101.

Every brand/cause needs a unique selling proposition. A clear pitch and benefit if you will.

AR is perfect. Simple and identifiable.

Remember that those that crave power need a compliment and defenseless population.

It's not arms its means of defense.

Look at the uk and knives

Compliant.

Thanks.

[The Atheist]

You are never going to stop a maniac.

What a fucking moron.

How many mass shootings have there been in Germany, France, UK, Canada, Australia, Italy & Spain over the past year?

Those countries added up have almost identical population to USA, and I'm sure they have as many maniacs. Probably not as many thick cunts, where USA seems to have a lock on stupid, but definitely as many crazies.

Yet they have a fraction of the shooting deaths as USA.

I'd suggest you think about it if I thought you were capable of rational thought.

[Ben Trovado]

https://worldpopulationreview.com/count ... by-country

One of the main causes for the vast range of stances on mass shootings is that reliable data on mass shootings can be notoriously difficult to obtain—what's more, the data that does exist is often incompatible with data from other sources. No official, universally accepted definition for a mass shooting exists. Rather, each stat-tracking organization has its own qualifying criteria. For example, the United States Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) defines a mass shooting as a single attack that happens in a public place and in which three or more people are killed with a firearm. However, most other stat trackers require at least four fatalities. As a result of these mismatched definitions, database-to-database differences are both common and confounding.

Similarly, some databases include events in which at least four people were wounded, but not necessarily killed. Others do not. Some databases include occurrences in which the shooter killed only family members (but still in a public place, such as a restaurant). Others do not. Some databases include organized terrorist attacks, armed robberies gone wrong, and gang-related shootings. Other databases discard some or all of these incidents. In fact, in a 2019 study that compared four different databases, the number of mass shooting events recorded in the U.S. for the year 2017 ranged from a low of 11 to a high of 346. Clearly, a significant error margin exists, particularly when creating country-to-country comparisons.

Although events in the U.S. tend to get the lion's share of media exposure, mass shootings are clearly a worldwide issue. The following is an alphabetized list of just some of the [developed countries] other than the United States that have experienced one or more mass shootings in the past few decades: Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Finland, France, Germany, India, Israel, Italy, Nigeria, Norway, the Philippines, Russia, Serbia, Spain, and Switzerland.

Average (Mean) Annual Death Rate per Million People from Mass Public Shootings (U.S., Canada, and Europe, 2009-2015):

Norway — 1.888
Serbia — 0.381
France — 0.347
Macedonia — 0.337
Albania — 0.206
Slovakia — 0.185
Switzerland — 0.142
Finland — 0.132
Belgium — 0.128
Czech Republic — 0.123
United States — 0.089
Austria — 0.068
Netherlands — 0.051
Canada — 0.032
England — 0.027
Germany — 0.023
Russia — 0.012
Italy — 0.009

Statistics discussed within.

Remove gang-related violence in 4-5 cities and the change is significant.

[ed]

annoyance deleted

You are incapable of rational conversation. Ergo you are now in the cornfield. Congats, you are the only person in decades to achieve such an honor.

[sparks]

Holy shit!

Even I haven't Cornfielded ed...

[Hotarubi]

https://worldpopulationreview.com/count ... by-country

One of the main causes for the vast range of stances on mass shootings is that reliable data on mass shootings can be notoriously difficult to obtain—what's more, the data that does exist is often incompatible with data from other sources. No official, universally accepted definition for a mass shooting exists. Rather, each stat-tracking organization has its own qualifying criteria. For example, the United States Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) defines a mass shooting as a single attack that happens in a public place and in which three or more people are killed with a firearm. However, most other stat trackers require at least four fatalities. As a result of these mismatched definitions, database-to-database differences are both common and confounding.

Similarly, some databases include events in which at least four people were wounded, but not necessarily killed. Others do not. Some databases include occurrences in which the shooter killed only family members (but still in a public place, such as a restaurant). Others do not. Some databases include organized terrorist attacks, armed robberies gone wrong, and gang-related shootings. Other databases discard some or all of these incidents. In fact, in a 2019 study that compared four different databases, the number of mass shooting events recorded in the U.S. for the year 2017 ranged from a low of 11 to a high of 346. Clearly, a significant error margin exists, particularly when creating country-to-country comparisons.

Although events in the U.S. tend to get the lion's share of media exposure, mass shootings are clearly a worldwide issue. The following is an alphabetized list of just some of the [developed countries] other than the United States that have experienced one or more mass shootings in the past few decades: Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Finland, France, Germany, India, Israel, Italy, Nigeria, Norway, the Philippines, Russia, Serbia, Spain, and Switzerland.

Average (Mean) Annual Death Rate per Million People from Mass Public Shootings (U.S., Canada, and Europe, 2009-2015):

Norway — 1.888
Serbia — 0.381
France — 0.347
Macedonia — 0.337
Albania — 0.206
Slovakia — 0.185
Switzerland — 0.142
Finland — 0.132
Belgium — 0.128
Czech Republic — 0.123
United States — 0.089
Austria — 0.068
Netherlands — 0.051
Canada — 0.032
England — 0.027
Germany — 0.023
Russia — 0.012
Italy — 0.009

Statistics discussed within.

Remove gang-related violence in 4-5 cities and the change is significant.

Unfortunately, the stat I researched above for two weeks in June in the USA surpasses the stat produced in your post.

So I would be hugely suspicious about the integrity of the data. Especially as the Norwegian data is completely skewed by a single incident. (Anders Breivik).

Do you also know that this particular study has been torn apart? Maybe not.

Wouldn't it be a monumental coincidence if the guy who compiled this "manipulated" data was the same guy that came up with this cherry picked and debunked "teh election fword" data :

https://amp.washingtontimes.com/news/20 ... ainted-sw/

And:

https://archive.thinkprogress.org/debun ... 6e83cf326/

But Lott’s recent successes belie a far more shadowy past. A little over a decade ago, he was disgraced and his career was in tatters. Not only was Lott’s assertion that more guns leads to more safety formally repudiated by a National Research Council panel, but he had also been caught pushing studies with severe statistical errors on numerous occasions. An investigation uncovered that he had almost certainly fabricated an entire survey on defensive gun use. And a blogger revealed that Mary Rosh, an online commentator claiming to be a former student of Lott’s who would frequently post about how amazing he was, was in fact John Lott himself. He was all but excommunicated from academia.

Trust that data now? I dont.

[The Atheist]

Holy shit!

Even I haven't Cornfielded ed...

Beats answering the hard questions.

[Doctor X]

Trust that data now? I dont.

Yeah, those figures are not worth the toilet paper they are printed on.

– J.D.

[Ben Trovado]

Trust that data now? I dont.

Yeah, those figures are not worth the toilet paper they are printed on.

– J.D.

Interesting. I'll keep looking, then.

I did a casual look for stats and found a couple of sources that broadly agreed, but I stopped too soon apparently.

[ed]

49 fatalities in mass shootings already this month. Type of weapon is not the issue.

I am curious about something... do you care about deaths per se or only death due to some non-pc cause?
eta or deaths that don't involve black folks? Seems most liberals don't really give a shit about the inner cities.

[Hotarubi]

49 fatalities in mass shootings already this month. Type of weapon is not the issue.

I am curious about something... do you care about deaths per se or only death due to some non-pc cause?
eta or deaths that don't involve black folks? Seems most liberals don't really give a shit about the inner cities.

Just the facts ma'am,

[Hotarubi]

On that note:

Remove gang-related violence in 4-5 cities and the change is significant.

Let's check it out. Can't be arsed to format the data properly.:

ncident ID Incident Date State City Or County # Killed # Injured
2335052 June 20, 2022 New York New York (Manhattan) 1 8
2334920 June 19, 2022 District of Columbia Washington 1 3
2334936 June 19, 2022 Michigan Detroit 1 3
2334620 June 19, 2022 South Carolina Walterboro 2 2
2334512 June 19, 2022 Florida Miami 0 5
2334374 June 19, 2022 Michigan Grand Rapids 0 4
2334359 June 18, 2022 Texas San Antonio 2 5
2333675 June 18, 2022 Florida Pensacola 0 5
2334096 June 17, 2022 Maryland Baltimore 0 4
2333667 June 17, 2022 Illinois Chicago 0 5
2333154 June 16, 2022 California Oakland 1 4
2332950 June 15, 2022 South Carolina Denmark 0 4
2328374 June 12, 2022 California Los Angeles 3 4
2328532 June 12, 2022 Michigan Roseville 0 4
2328265 June 12, 2022 Indiana Gary 2 4
2328215 June 12, 2022 Indiana Indianapolis 0 5
2328117 June 12, 2022 Louisiana New Orleans 0 4
2328342 June 12, 2022 Colorado Denver 2 4
2327598 June 11, 2022 Michigan Detroit 0 4
2328108 June 11, 2022 Tennessee Antioch 2 2
2327645 June 11, 2022 Illinois Chicago 1 4
2327991 June 11, 2022 Kentucky Louisville 0 6
2328482 June 11, 2022 Georgia Atlanta 0 7
2327247 June 10, 2022 Georgia Decatur 1 3
2325498 June 9, 2022 Maryland Smithsburg 3 3
2325328 June 8, 2022 Arizona Yuma 0 4
2323642 June 7, 2022 Virginia Portsmouth 4 0
2324475 June 7, 2022 Illinois Chicago 0 4
2324435 June 7, 2022 Maryland Baltimore 2 2
2324496 June 7, 2022 Illinois Chicago 0 4
2321693 June 5, 2022 Michigan Grand Rapids 1 3
2321532 June 5, 2022 Tennessee Chattanooga 2 12
2321440 June 5, 2022 Arizona Mesa 2 2
2322804 June 5, 2022 South Carolina Andrews 0 5
2321772 June 5, 2022 Michigan Saginaw 3 2
2321193 June 4, 2022 Michigan Ecorse 0 4
2321593 June 4, 2022 South Carolina Summerton 1 7
2321500 June 4, 2022 Georgia Macon 1 3
2320673 June 4, 2022 Texas El Paso (Socorro) 0 5
2321266 June 4, 2022 Pennsylvania Philadelphia 3 11
2320618 June 4, 2022 Arizona Phoenix 1 8
2321698 June 4, 2022 New York Hempstead 1 3
2320862 June 3, 2022 Nebraska Omaha 1 3
2320361 June 3, 2022 Virginia Chester 1 5
2319567 June 2, 2022 Texas Centerville 6 0
2318310 June 1, 2022 Oklahoma Tulsa 5 0

Computer says no.

[Grammatron]

I am curious about something... do you care about deaths per se or only death due to some non-pc cause?
eta or deaths that don't involve black folks? Seems most liberals don't really give a shit about the inner cities.

The silence here is deafening on all the drowning in USA

[Grammatron]

The silence here is deafening on all the overdoses in USA.

[Hotarubi]

Yes. Ah, I remember General Gordon, he of Khartoum fame ,
putting down the Taiping revolution with a team of crack immunisers.

Or Soga No Umako prevailing at the battle of Mount Shigi after deploying a platoon of ninja-syringers™.

I guess the right to mainline horse is stretching the right to bare arms to its limit.

(Hahaha. Thats brilliant if not tragic.)

Anyway let's pause for reflection at the latest in a long line of "lone bathmen" incidents at high schools this month.

Please. A moment.

[Ben Trovado]

I am curious about something... do you care about deaths per se or only death due to some non-pc cause?
eta or deaths that don't involve black folks? Seems most liberals don't really give a shit about the inner cities.

The silence here is deafening on all the drowning in USA

I think it is fair to look at gun homicides as its own issue. I do think it is reasonable to look at other homicides and violent crimes (and comparing autos or drownings can sometimes put the homicide numbers in perspective), I don't think bringing up drownings is wholly irrelevant, but I also don't think that leaving it out of a discussion is unreasonable, either - according to your focus.

But assuming that the "all guns magically disappear and we reverse he 2nd Amendment" is off the table, at least in the short run, I just wonder about enforcing the current laws that most people *have* agreed to. Why pass new laws if the police and DAs are going to just enforce the ones they approve of against the people that they don't?

[ed]

And that is the point

[Hotarubi]

I don't think bringing up drownings is wholly irrelevant, but I also don't think that leaving it out of a discussion is unreasonable, either - according to your focus.

It is wholly irrelevant unless you can bring me stats on mass assaults with automatic self inflating paddling pools.

But assuming that the "all guns magically disappear and we reverse he 2nd Amendment" is off the table, at least in the short run, I just wonder about enforcing the current laws that most people *have* agreed to. Why pass new laws if the police and DAs are going to just enforce the ones they approve of against the people that they don't?

Then you have address the integrity of those agencies.

[Ben Trovado]

And that. is your focus - mass assaults, only.

. . . But until those issues have been addressed, what precisely is being proposed? And while the issues exist, why new laws? Which ones? Why are they going to be enforced better and with such integrity?

[Hotarubi]

And that. is your focus - mass assaults, only.

T'was your data I addressed was it not? Someone else fallacied the fuck out of it.

. But until those issues have been addressed, what precisely is being proposed? And while the issues exist, why new laws? Which ones? Why are they going to be enforced better and with such integrity?

Maybe schools should follow procedure.

Maybe the Poliss should do their fucking job.

And maybe, just maybe, people that should not have guns, be given guns.

There's a good start. I know how scary that is.

[Doctor X]

It appears that none of the laws, already on the books, were followed.

– J.D.

[Ben Trovado]

And that. is your focus - mass assaults, only.

T'was your data I addressed was it not? Someone else fallacied the fuck out of it.

Not part of my original point, and added only because the issue was raised - as I noted, I should have looked longer, but felt it was a side issue from what I was talking about. It still is.

. But until those issues have been addressed, what precisely is being proposed? And while the issues exist, why new laws? Which ones? Why are they going to be enforced better and with such integrity?

Maybe schools should follow procedure.

Maybe the Poliss should do their fucking job.

And maybe, just maybe, people that should not have guns, be given guns.

There's a good start. I know how scary that is.
[/quote]

Gratuitous insult, and fallacious to boot.

But by all means, making "scary" accusations is always a fantastic way to make friends and influence people, second only to an accusation that people concerned about gun rights or protecting themselves are compensating for something.

[Hotarubi]

And that. is your focus - mass assaults, only.

T'was your data I addressed was it not? Someone else fallacied the fuck out of it.

Not part of my original point, and added only because the issue was raised - as I noted, I should have looked longer, but felt it was a side issue from what I was talking about. It still is.

. But until those issues have been addressed, what precisely is being proposed? And while the issues exist, why new laws? Which ones? Why are they going to be enforced better and with such integrity?

Maybe schools should follow procedure.

Maybe the Poliss should do their fucking job.

And maybe, just maybe, people that should not have guns, be given guns.

There's a good start. I know how scary that is.

Gratuitous insult, and fallacious to boot.

But by all means, making "scary" accusations is always a fantastic way to make friends and influence people, second only to an accusation that people concerned about gun rights or protecting themselves are compensating for something.

I would look up what fallacy means because all of those occurred at Uvalde which is the subject of this thread. Not too difficult.

And excuse me for getting agitated when kids get shot as a result of those failures. I'm actually agreeing with you if you'd stop to think about it instead of getting the vapors and relying on stereotypes.

[Hotarubi]

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/21/11063721 ... -arredondo

Happy days.

[sparks]

But remember, they're not here to protect individuals, just the community!

And who can deny that standing by the door arresting mothers wasn't taking care of that mandate?