First time video games have been proven to be the cause for lethal violence.
Comment has been collapsed.
And who would have thought that game would be Madden :0
Comment has been collapsed.
Just shows how much more violent sport handegg is compared to CS:GO for example.
Comment has been collapsed.
Interesting you mention CSGO, as few days earlier ex CSGO streamer and CSGO casinos owner killed mother and daugther during his rage/suicide ride, probably caused by seeing letters STEAM on the school's gate and being remembered all the money he lost due to ban he received.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well and again we can sort out the bad journalists when say start their killing game articles...^^
Comment has been collapsed.
I really believe a differentiation needs to be made between different vidgames. Just as there are many different books (and some ancient books encouraging people to kill other people just based on certain ethnic or religious backgrounds) there are many different vidgames. I do think the vidgame industry right now is dominated by just a few big game companies with narrow views, who are basically pushing their views onto a young audience. (Now that indie developers are starting to really be able to take off without the funding of big game companies, the playing landscape is starting to change & definitely become more varied.)
There is at least one boardgame out there that has players optimize loading up trains with meeples, representing Jewish prisoners, for conveyance to an extermination camp. (Edit: and there are currently games that have players shoot each other in order to settle differences.) Banning all games, or books, just because a few of them encourage players to think a certain way would just result in the authors finding other means to convey their messages (through Twitter, Snapchat, written pamphlets, or whatever).
Comment has been collapsed.
Comment has been collapsed.
Doubt this crap will change without war breaking out in the US.
The people in the US, specially down south (texas particularly), looove to remember everyone about the second amendment, and I've seen a few videos where people have said that if they try to regulate/take away their guns they will fight the government guns blazing.
Honestly... while it does suck and I'm sorry for the families of the people involved... it's just another day in America, hard to be surprised at this point when they're not even trying to help themselves in the first place.
Comment has been collapsed.
The exact same scenario happened in Australia though. People said they would fight the government if they tried to take their guns... but that never happened. And Australia is a much safer place now because they have sensible gun laws. The real problem is that politicians don't have the guts to go for gun legislation because that would throw them into a pit of controversy and essentially destroy their political careers. In American politics, politicians are more concerned about getting reelected than actually doing their job and doing what is best for the American people. Australia got their gun laws passed because a group of politicians blew up their own careers for the sake of doing what was right.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh yeah, politics has very little to do with the wellbeing of the public and more with a popularity contest, no one wants to tarnish their reputation, what they don't realize is that a few years, maybe a decade or 2 of flak for setting gun control is nothing compared to the potential (and let's be honest this is something that would happen in the US) glorification of whichever president goes through with it when stuff like this becomes an anecdote in the future and the country is safer.
Comment has been collapsed.
Except that the politicians' jobs are to represent the will of their constituents. If advocating a policy change (on guns or anything else) means they are not going to be re-elected, then that strongly indicates they would not be representing the will of their constituents.
A politician in a representative democracy is not there to act as a benevolent ruler to the lower classes. His or her job is to represent the people who elected him/her.
Comment has been collapsed.
Only they don't do that. Instead, they represent their donors.
Comment has been collapsed.
That often does happen, yes.
My point only is that if we're going with the logic that certain policy is being held up because of fear of disapproval that leads to not being reelected, then it follows that that policy is not the will of the people being represented. That was the claim made by the guy to whom I was replying.
Comment has been collapsed.
Logic.... How ironic. One of the first things you learn when studying Logic is how it can lead to false conclusions. The elephant in the room that nobody will discuss is that the people making the policies are ignorant, the people voting for them are ignorant, and the people agitating for something to be done are ignorant. This has always been the problem with democracies. Half the population has an IQ under 100, and any complicated job requires training and experience possessed only by a few. "The majority" usually get things wrong. While I ardently wish that our representatives were the best humanity has to offer, the manner of their selection runs counter to that.
Oh, well...
Comment has been collapsed.
It doesn't matter who votes. What matters is who nominates candidates that will run for election. Losing donors support means losing party support. What are the chances of being elected as independent? From my non-US perspective it looks like next to none
Comment has been collapsed.
But here is the thing, the way it is set up right now, the will of a few constituents (in one state) can block the will of the majority of constituents (in other states). This has everything to do with the electoral college which makes voters in less populated states up to 3 times as powerful as voters in the more populated states. Every state, regardless of population, gets 2 senators to represent them in the Senate, which means that some states have an unfair advantage over others. These are the middle states where less people live and more people hold a very unpopular opinion in America. Now they are still citizens so their vote still matters, but these groups and their politicians' unwillingness to risk angering them are one of the reasons why we still have a problem with gun control today.
And also, there is very vocal and loud minority that politicians are afraid of. And then of course there is the lobbying group known as the NRA, which does not actually represent gun owners... but gun manufacturers. All in all, it's a complicated issue that was made even more complicated by groups like the NRA in an attempt to confuse people. It probably won't change anytime soon and we will continue to have about one mass shooting per day.
Comment has been collapsed.
sadly its not fear of backlash but more because the nra is a major lobbyist and our government is up for sale.
Comment has been collapsed.
I would argue that it is both rather than one or the other. They need the NRA's money to fund their campaigns and they can't afford backlash because they need to get reelected.
The fact that politics in America is so focused on reelection and staying in office until you die is what is causing a lot of the problems we see today. They're not about serving the people, they are all about making politics their career and making as much money off of it as possible.
Comment has been collapsed.
well the people need something to hold over them. they make way to much money (in bribes and such) and become to far removed from the people they serve.
Comment has been collapsed.
No Australian politicians 'blew up' their careers over it, the then prime minister who was the main instigator of the legislation went on to become our 2nd longest serving PM. As for the people saying that they would 'fight the government', that is also incorrect, public support for the legislation was strong.
Comment has been collapsed.
Several Australian politicians ended up destroying their careers over it. The prime minister is elected by a national vote, whereas lower level politicians are elected by people in smaller areas. Those people in smaller areas had a different view on gun control and while they may be a minority, they are still a part of your nation. Therefore, when their representative voted for gun control, they threw away their chances of becoming reelected in that district. Therefore, they blue up their careers over it.
source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYbY45rHj8w
I know it's a comedy show, but the guy they are interviewing is real.
Edit: Also, most people in America are for gun control too, but it is exactly those small districts with the people who hold an unpopular opinion and the NRA who keep those politicians voting against it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Seriously?? Some American kid is going to try and tell me how the electoral system in the country I have lived in for over 50 years works. o_O
Nobody 'blew up' their careers over it pal. It was not the introduction of the new gun laws that cost Borbidge his Queensland premiership, he and his National party where on the way out already, they only held the Queensland parliament by pure chance and lost a lot of seats in the rural sector (which was their stronghold) due to the rise of the One Nation Party.
Perhaps in future you should think before you try and educate a person about the politics of their own country. I am actually flabbergasted at the gall of your reply.
Comment has been collapsed.
It was not just Rob Borbidge...there was also Richard Evans, Ricky Johnston, etc. Rob Borbidge was just one politician they were able to get into contact with.
And there were Australians at the time who did not agree and were angry with the National Firearms Agreement. So they obviously would not want to reelect a senator that would vote for it.
Source: https://youtu.be/mVuspKSjfgA?t=3m18s (yeah, I know it's some American late night show interviewing Rob Borbidge, but that American late night show interviewing Rob Borbidge has footage of pro-gun rallies in Australia, the footage is really the only thing I care about in this segment, you can watch the whole thing or not)
Also, I wish American politicians would take a stand when necessary. I am impressed that there was a group of representaives in Australia who voted for what they believed would be the right thing even if it meant that they would not get reelected. And Rob Borbidge's National party was on the way out, but there were other politicians who voted for the NFA that ended up losing all chances they had of reelection.
Like you said, public support for the legislation was strong.... but there was also a vocal minority of people who were against it... and these people had to be represented by some politicians... meaning they also got to vote for their representatives.
Also, sorry if it seemed like I was trying to educate you on your government, I was just trying to provide a comparison of America and Australia. They are very similar. Most Americans want some form of gun control just like how most Australians wanted some form of gun control. The difference is that American representatives do not have the guts to do what they think is right because of the NRA, party platforms, etc.
Anyway, have a good day and I hope I sound less like a prick.... probably not though... I can never get a handle on this tone thing on the internet.
Comment has been collapsed.
No need to apologize mate, 'tis simply a lively bit of banter. ;)
I am honestly astounded you are still trying to correct me about an event in my own country, using of all things a youtube clip of an American late night show (it being comedy is debatable). I did not get my facts from some inane American late night show, I was a voting, tax paying citizen of the country when this event happened and I still am champ. Of course there were pro-gun rallies, but the people did not as a whole proclaim 'we shall fight the government' as you put it. I myself had a vested interest and was against the new laws seeing as it would affect both my work and recreation, luckily they were not nearly as restrictive as I had feared.
No politician directly lost their seat because of the introduction of the new gun laws, no matter what Borbidge or any other clown says in that youtube clip. The only time a politician tells the truth is when he calls another a liar. It may have been a contributing factor and lost them some voters, but was not the end of anyones political career.
The introduction of the laws and the amnesties took a lot of firearms off the streets, however I agree with the studies that say it has all had little effect. If I want to get myself an illicit firearm it would only take a trip to the pub and a quick chat with the right sort of people.
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah, that's so weird and fucked up.. I mean, we hear about dozens of shooting sprees and we have all the feeling that everything won't ever change.. maybe as an european I get a different point of view and in some US states something changed but we always see those shootings and nothing changing..
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh i'm european too, so i know exactly what you mean.
The thing is that everyone (or almost everyone) uses the same excuse of 'I'm getting a gun for defense only'
Well... guess what.... it aint working, people should stop purchasing guns completely instead.
Comment has been collapsed.
I 100% agree.. here we never see shooting sprees, being them in schools cinemas or wherever else.. apart from the controls that should be mandatory (judging from the news it seems that there are places in which you can safely enter with a gun or a rifle =\ that's so weird for us..), I really think that a country like the States should align with European states.. I mean, getting a gun, a rifle and so on here in Europe is definitely hard.. I'm not talking about terrorists or criminals of course, that's another question.. I'm talking about the average man, teenagers, students, young boys.. and everyone as you said basically says "just for defense" and then they keep 3 or 4 guns and rifles in their houses without problems, so that if something happens in their mind or who knows why they can go and shoot freely.. as an European I would be scared if we had such a legislation about guns.. with everyone in my town or country potentially walking down the street with a gun under their coat
Comment has been collapsed.
The thing is that there are European countries in which people own guns, Swiss citizens have mandatory military service, and as far i know they keep their issued gun after they complete the service, of course it has to be kept in a proper gun locker and whatnot but still there are a lot of gun owners and nothing like what happens in the US comes up.
It really is a matter of education (or lack of it) when it comes to US citizens and guns.
Comment has been collapsed.
definitely, it's a matter of education for sure! :)
for what concerns Switzerland, living so close to them and having been tons of times there (well, my accountant is actually from Geneva xD), all the males who have underwent the mandatory service CAN decide wheter to BUY or not their SIG SG 550 assault rifle, which then gets blocked in order not to be able to burst-shoot.. grenades and burst-fire weapons are illegal.. anyways, crime rate is so low there and there are many gun owners that just keep their weapons locked or use them for hunting, it's quite hard to get a gun just like here in Italy..
here we have lots of hunters, my family owns many guns but they are all locked and never used, there is absolutely no way that a teenager from in or outside the family can even reach them or get to know where they are kept.. I saw videos and heard of Italians in America getting guns within a month without problems in some states..
well, education always comes first, that's the "2nd amendment" question raised by everyone.. if a culture (of some States) is so deep into that mentality of "everyone can own multiple weapons for personal defense, that's the amendment, no one can change a thing" it's hard to educate them in a proper way.. I'm not against weapons at all but it's so sad hearing always dozens of similar cases and nothing done to improve the situation..
Comment has been collapsed.
The thing is that everyone (or almost everyone) uses the same excuse of 'I'm getting a gun for defense only'
I couldn't agree more. Instead, they add to the problem during an incident such as this. Imagine an event with 10,000 people and one shooter. Every idiot and their brother whips out their smoke-wagon, and instantly you have 100 threats rather than one. Average people believing they can "handle themselves" in a situation for which only police and military are trained (extensively) is a huge problem.
Speaking as someone who works in personal security, and often at large events, "normal" people carrying guns have become one of our biggest threats in recent years.
Comment has been collapsed.
Now imagine if you had to do personal security at a kindergarten
Comment has been collapsed.
People not securing their weapons in a proper lock-box or safe in their own home annoy the fuck out of me, too.
Those sorts of incidents just shouldn't happen.
Comment has been collapsed.
Too much cowboy mentality.
A lot of it boils down to mental health and ease of access to both mental health and a firearm. People watch too much TV and think they would be able to function normally under an extreme situation without any training end up making things worse.
Comment has been collapsed.
The thing is that you're talking of the country as a political entity. But the country also has people in it. People died not because they had some personal thing they didn't want to fix, but because the country had an issue it was unwilling to fix.
These victims were at fault for nothing, yet they died. That's the sad part here.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's pretty crazy how they cherry pick from the second amendment and ignore the whole part about a "well-regulated militia" which would imply controls, regulations, training and organization/association, i.e. every kind of regulation "gun advocates" oppose.
Comment has been collapsed.
It wasn't just one person but two who were shot and killed by the killer.. RIP Eli and Taylor.. :(
Comment has been collapsed.
Comment has been collapsed.
and that's for sure.. really, ok, here in italy every teenager kid or whoever else most likely never even sees a real weapon until he gets adult or idk when but apart from this that should be the RULE!
Comment has been collapsed.
The problem is partially the gun control - but also the horrible mental health system and social net and how much of a trend is to treat symptoms instead of the diseases - often leading to addiction to various meds. At the end, easy access of guns, the hopelessness and untreated (or even undiscovered) mental problems lead to catastrophes like this one :(
Comment has been collapsed.
In this case, it looks like security at gaming events is lacking; as is the lack of mental health history checks when acquiring weapons after having 2 periods of hospitalization for MH issues.
Comment has been collapsed.
Don't make a joke out of either the shooting, or mental health care in this topic, please. Especially not in a way of playing stupid.
Comment has been collapsed.
Just to add perspective, I don't believe he was making a joke out of anything.
If someone walks into a gaming event with a gun, there's a definitely flaw in venue security, and if someone sold a gun to someone who's been hospitalized twice for mental health issues (I haven't verified that, I'm assuming he did), there's also a flaw in gun control checks.
To me, it appears as though Avantyr is saying this tragedy could have been avoided, had certain other measures been in place. I tend to agree.
Comment has been collapsed.
Where's the joke?
There were at least 2 points where it could have been prevented, at the point of entry (pro gamers and team owners have been coming out saying that there is a consistent lack of security measures in this kind of events) and at the point of sale (the guy had a history of mental health issues that should have disqualified him from acquiring a gun).
@Tzaar. I saw it in several articles, if it ends up being untrue or miscaracterized, I apologize.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oops, your text was missing a comma, and I misread it as the event's security should have checked people's mental health, not the gun seller.
Kinda sorry, kinda okay then :)
Comment has been collapsed.
If only we could have mandatory mental health checks for all multiplayer gaming. :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Just another normal day in 'murica. And this is why there needs to be more guns in America! The only thing that'll stop the bad guy with a gun is a good guy with the gun!
Sarcasm aside, I think it's very sad that massive shootings and murders are so common and "normal" in America that people don't even get surprised about them anymore. Something like this would cause a shock if it happened in Europe, but when it happens in America it feels like it's not even newsworthy due to how common it is.
My reaction when it comes to shootings in USA nowadays: "Oh, what'd you say? Another shooting? Well you guys have those all the time, tell me something new..."
Massive shootings, murders, cops shooting innocent people and getting away with it with excuses like: "I thought he had a gun". Things are pretty bad there and unfortunately it doesn't seem like they're going to improve anytime soon.
Comment has been collapsed.
What if that would happen in a CSGO, COD tournament, what media will be saying?
Comment has been collapsed.
I would love have guns, here you can only have small calibers previously authorized by the army. Cartels can have better weapons than them, and weapons are not that hard to buy illegally.
Comment has been collapsed.
I am in favor of not selling guns to the mentally ill or people having a history of mental issues and repeated hospitalizations.
Comment has been collapsed.
A fucking doctor that studied 5+ years and had many, many years of practise before he is allowed to get a licence and diagnose people?
"So who gets to decide whether I have diabetes or not? Maybe we all have diabetes!"
Comment has been collapsed.
They should ban videa gamez in USA because it's the only country where videa gamez make people violent.
Comment has been collapsed.
I thought the same thing when I heard it this morning. Video games will definitely be attacked for being "violent". What a load of shite.
Comment has been collapsed.
I feel for the families and friends of those who were killed. It also frustrates me when these tragedies are used to push a certain agenda.
There is definitely a problem with gun violence in the United States, but also with the way these events are reported in the media. For example, many people don't know that the United States does not have the highest number of mass shootings in western countries (per capita), gun violence has declined significantly since the 90s, and while we don't know the exact numbers firearms are used defensively much more than in committing a crime.
I think there are a myriad of issues contributing to gun violence, and while I don't have the solution I think there are some ways that it can be mitigated. Better mental health care, not reporting on mass shootings by glorifying the shooter with their face and "kill count" scoreboard as a headline. There are over 390 firearms in the United States, and if you really want to get your hands on a gun, you can. Gun control legislation would only serve to keep guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens. Guns are an equalizer of power, and it's important for less physically strong people (women, elderly people, etc) to be able to defend themselves against an attack.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah yes, the good old "statistics" where terrorist attacks by Brevic in Norway or IS in France are counted in the numbers to skew things over and make the US look better.
"There are over 390 firearms in the United States"
What?
Comment has been collapsed.
Assuming that you are correct that those statistics were counted, I can see why you think the ISIL attacks should not have been included. (I suppose a case could be made to refute that based on the fact that many of the attackers were French and Belgian nationals, basically attacking their fellow citizens - it just gets too complex when ties to organized terror are involved.) But, I don't understand how you can discount Breivik statistically. He fits the profile of the crazy lone gunman perfectly. If a right-wing neo-nazi shot up a summer camp in the US, regardless of his affiliation or lack of with any like minded organizations, you can be sure that regardless of whether it was considered a terrorist attack or not, it would definitely register as an example of American mass public gun violence.
Comment has been collapsed.
Because due to a single attack Norway got the #1 spot on that list, even if it's 1 attack vs. the hundreds if not thousands in the USA each year.
It would be if the USA was first just for the Vegas shootings. But it's not, these things happen all the damn time.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm simply pointing out that Breivik fits the criteria and should be included. Are you proposing that a mass shooting that took the lives of 69 people should not be, simply because it was just one attack?
I live in America. You do not. I can assure you that we do not have hundreds or even thousands of mass shootings per year.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm just taking in question "statistics" that try to dissaprove the USA is the one of the worst by making a country the worst based on 1 shooting. That generally makes it rather hard to take anything else afterwards serious at all.
That's like saying the most common target of Islamatic Terrorism is the USA since 3000 people died in the World Trade Center. While we got nowhere near that amount of loss of life in Europe, there have been about 20 attacks by terrorist organisations since (compared to, IIRC, 0 in the USA). It's just making up statistics, which albeit true, are intentionally skwered to try to "prove" a point.
It's about one a week. Considering we're so de-sensitised and probably only get the tip of the iceberg I would assume there's many more than that. But well, okay, fair enough. Avarage 50 mass shootings a year.
You know the avarage of Europe a year? 0.
Comment has been collapsed.
As of June 28, there were 154 mass shootings in the USA this year. We are certainly on track for "hundreds" in 2018.
A mass shooting being defined as: "as a single incident in which four or more people, not including the shooter, are shot and/or killed at the same general time and location."
https://www.businessinsider.com/how-many-mass-shootings-in-america-this-year-2018-2
Comment has been collapsed.
Fair enough, but I thought we were talking about mass shootings in public spaces. There are a few definitions of what classifies as a mass shooting, and the one that you are citing, GVA, includes gang shootings in private areas using illegal firearms. Please don't misunderstand me - this is also a very serious problem, but it is different and one that gun control laws cannot address.
Gun violence is a terrible problem in the US - I'm not denying that. But the problem is down to the social, political and economic injustices that are rampant here. Politicians don't seem to be too interested in fixing that, but until they do, gun control is going to be like putting a bandaid on cancer.
Comment has been collapsed.
Domestic terrorist attacks are counted in US statistics as well. I hardly think it makes the US look "better", just trying to put some counter perspective to the "mass shootings only happen in America" narrative.
Whoops, meant 390 million firearms.
Comment has been collapsed.
Do you guys have a major domestic terrrorist population then?
We got ISIS coming back from the defeated areas, trying their shot here. They are terrible, but they are singular attacks, planned (unlike the many many MANY flip-off-the-wrist attacks in the USA) and with weaponry that got smuggled from their former battlefield. But most of the times they can't even get them and resort to alternate means (why those attacks with trucks became "popular").
A common argument made against regulation by US-residents is if people use bombs and knives and cars etc. then.
Which makes it interesting... why isn't Europe a battlefield of people randomly blowing people up if that were the case?
Comment has been collapsed.
There are a number of groups that have been called domestic terrorists, though I try to avoid using that sort of arbitrary label. What do you mean by planned vs flip-off-the-wrist attacks? I find it difficult to believe that any of these shooters just decided on a whim to start killing people.
As for the use of bombs, knives, cars.. there are a lot of different reasons for violence. Poverty, drug use, inequality, cultural differences in the value of human life, to name a few. It's a complicated problem, and we've got to look deeper into the motivation for committing the crime than just the weapon used.
Comment has been collapsed.
That attacks with bombs or vehicles or anything takes a lot more planning and is a lot more prone to error than shooting. Shooting is simply taking the gun and go out. Infact, this is the epitome of "flip-of-the-wrist" since the gunman started shooting over losing a match in the competition. That doesn't sound as "on a whim"?
Humans are emotional creatures. Most of the crimes, violence and homicides are infact not planned ventures what-so-ever but emotional moments. If you got a gun in such a state compared to nothing what-so-ever... what do you think is the likeliest to create a bloody massacre?
Comment has been collapsed.
Is there another article that states he started shooting after losing a match? The one in the original post states the police haven't released a motive. Still, I guess I was generalizing when I said that these shooters weren't starting on a whim, as that could theoretically be the case here. In most of these high profile cases, the firearms were not legally owned by the perpetrator and therefore some planning was necessary. A lot of the shooters release manifestos, or posted plenty of warning signs on social media months in advance.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, I got it from local news, which is generally reliable.
Apparently the shooter was in a documentary about the event last year claiming he was "the best"... and this year, when he lost instead, he snapped.
"In most of these high profile cases, the firearms were not legally owned by the perpetrator"
Really? I though the Las Vegas shooter had all those weapons legally bought for example. I mean, they generally don't really extrapolate on the source of the weapons here, so I suppose it's possible that just slipped under my radar. But it would seem odd to have dozens of illegal weapon shootouts while other countries have bar to none.
Comment has been collapsed.
But normal gun control laws would not server to keep the guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens. They are meant to keep the guns away from the hands of mentally ill or people with criminal background. I really don't know where the conception that having sensible gun laws equals normal people not being able to own guns comes from.
Comment has been collapsed.
It comes from the ancient history when every household required a gun to defend against their rightful Queen coming and taking their freedom away. It has just been going on for long enough that people take it for granted without any thought.
Comment has been collapsed.
Indeed, people completely misinterpreting the 2nd amendment annoy the fuck out of me.
Comment has been collapsed.
But normal gun control laws would not server to keep the guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens. They are meant to keep the guns away from the hands of mentally ill or people with criminal background.
The US already has those restrictions in place: https://www.atf.gov/firearms/identify-prohibited-persons
Any time you purchase a firearm from a licensed dealer in the US, the dealer is required by law to submit your information to the FBI, which will run it through their database. If they find that you don't line up with those guidelines, you will not be getting a gun.
But of course, people are able to get ahold of firearms illegally, as with most controlled items.
Comment has been collapsed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
Order the deaths by homicide and tell me which countries above you are you proud to be better than?
Comment has been collapsed.
Order the deaths by homicide and tell me which countries above you are you proud to be better than?
How does that pertain to anything I just said? My comment was informing Keenzor that the restrictions which he proposed are already in place.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not much, I guess it would better fit as a reply to the first message. Misread your comment as the usual defending of gun violence Americans are fond of so replied to you instead.
Edit: here's something for you about the "restrictions": http://digg.com/video/how-easy-buy-gun
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm hardly defending gun violence, that's rather unfair. As to the mass shootings vs homicide rate, while there is a relation they are still two separate issues. Similar to many of the other countries on that list with a high homicide rate, there is a large problem with gang violence in the United States. 80% of all gun homicides in the US are gang related.
Comment has been collapsed.
Most gun crimes are committed with legal firearms though.
The main problem is mental health, there is no good access to it. It is easier to get a Rx for opioids than to get actual mental health therapy or counseling. Docs don't have time to listen to the problem, they just have enough time to give you some pills and set you on your way.
Not to mention the stigma there is with mental health. Many people don't bother to ask for help because they don't want to be put on the database.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, I wouldn't know how seriously are those rules actually reinforced in US. We got these rules in my country and we are under 50 in the list Starwhite posted.
Comment has been collapsed.
Criminal background checks and background checks for involuntarily committed patients are already in place. Many of the shootings in the US were not committed using firearms owned by the shooter, but bought illegally or taken from a family member. While I would agree that these guns should have been locked up better, what constitutes 'sensible' gun laws is another conversation.
Comment has been collapsed.
I swear, if people say it's 'cause Madden is violent, oh my lord...
Comment has been collapsed.
Makes you wonder why if guns are needed to stop a mass shooter then why nobody actually use them.
But maybe it has to do with the fact that guns don't actually stop a mass shooting.
Comment has been collapsed.
Except when they do: List of Mass Shootings Stopped by Armed Civilians
Comment has been collapsed.
24 cases in 27 year, less than once every year. Considering that mass shootings happen on a monthly bases, we can agree that guns still don't actually stop mass shootings, if not by statistics.
Comment has been collapsed.
This is not a comprehensive or statistical list, just a couple of examples that counter the claim that mass shootings are never stopped by an armed citizen. Even if that were all the cases, 24 shootings stopped is much better than 0 stopped.
Comment has been collapsed.
You'd now need to compare them to shootings caused by armed civilians, aka vast majority of all of them. And then you'd receive a nice statistics that would probably show something like "with confidence factor of 95% I can clearly state that common access to guns is making the situation far worse".
I'm just glad that there is no common access to nuclear missiles yet. And I'm also glad to live in a country where I don't need to worry about accidentally finding myself in a shooting caused by some idiot who doesn't realize what the heck he's doing, it probably has something to do with government not supplying them with tools that can be used for nothing but killing other people and creatures.
I'm also wondering if all pro-guns people are also pro-anarchy, or they're just plain stupid.
Comment has been collapsed.
Reason would indeed dictate that most shootings would be caused by armed civilians (the only other options being the shootings caused by armed police or armed military personnel). Thankfully, wildlife and household AI has not yet learned to use firearms. You make another good point also with the "confidence factor of 95%", that statistics can be interpreted or manipulated to reach whatever conclusion you set out to find. I include myself in this also, as we're all susceptible to confirmation bias.
Regarding nuclear weapons, the same with other weapons it would have certainly have better if humans didn't kill each other and invent tools to do so. Now, let me be clear; I am strongly opposed to the imperialism and regime changes perpetrated by the American empire. That said, I do think nuclear weapons are a strong deterrent to direct, boots on the ground military conflict. In the same manner, just knowing a citizen is armed is enough to turn away many criminals. If you're a mugger choosing a victim, would you go for the woman who's open carrying? Are you likely to invade a smaller country if you know they have a few ICBM's stored away? Not likely.
I myself sometimes wonder if all gun control advocates believe everything they hear on television, or if they just believe in false dichotomies.. :P just kidding, I think it's great that we can have a civil discussion without resorting to ad hominem. I certainly have been wrong about many things in the past, and I am open to changing my beliefs if I'm presented with compelling arguments and evidence.
Comment has been collapsed.
"I myself sometimes wonder if all gun control advocates believe everything they hear on television, or if they just believe in false dichotomies.. :P"
Maybe, just maybe... we live outside the USA where "muh guns" isn't a thing and, shockingly I know, we don't get a mass-shooting about once a week?
I mean... there's a reason the first thing everyone asks about these happens is "It's in the USA, right? Okay then, moving on till the next time it happens. Thoughts and prayers with you and all, but never any change."
Comment has been collapsed.
I mean... there's a reason the first thing everyone asks about these happens is "It's in the USA, right? Okay then, moving on till the next time it happens. Thoughts and prayers with you and all, but never any change."
In all honestly, most Americans react that way these days, too. For instance, my 60+ year old neighbor was shot and killed in a drive-by a few years ago while walking his dog in broad daylight, and when I was telling another neighbor about it, all he could say was "Not surprising."
Comment has been collapsed.
That's pretty bad.
About the only mass-shooting that happened here (Netherlands), in my hometown, had the whole country shook up. Heck, it's been, what, 8 years now and it's still talked about from time to time (and nothing of the kind happened since mind you).
The ironical thing? Despite our stricter gunlaws this too was caused with "legal" weaponry. The perpetrator had mental health issues and while they should have taken them away bureacracy flooded the order and it never got executed.
The first (and only) big shootout since actual Terrorism in 1977 (And yes, that is still talked about to this day too) and it was done with legal weaponry. Makes the whole "If banned people just go with illegal weaponry and nothing changes!" ring a bit hollow.
Comment has been collapsed.
Practically, it's only when the shooters turn the guns on themselves.
That 0.3% is completely negligible...
Comment has been collapsed.
you need someone with balls to go into the gun fire with their gun to actually have a chance of doing something about it. the one school shooting had 2 cops there and they waited for backup. not knocking them cause not everyone's a hero.
Comment has been collapsed.
just heard on the news on sky italy.. it's still so strange to us, in europe we never experienced any kind of school or mass shooting in general, cinemas and so on, except for lone terrorist attacks (and in my country, italy, we never had a terrorist attack yet so far) so we really can't fully understand everything.. i'm really sad for what happened and sorry for the survivors.. obviously i agree with all of you when talking about videogames that will be used saying that they promote violence and bad behaviours and such, that's pure crap of course, we've been hearing these things since mortal kombat and the NES times..
Comment has been collapsed.
you must be young, if you don't remember terrorism in Italy. those facts should not be forgotten. blame families and schools I suppose.
Comment has been collapsed.
ho più di 30 anni, due lauree con 110 e lode in civiltà orientali e scienze storiche e sono di famiglia emiliana, ne ho persa metà fino agli anni '60 e so bene tutto ciò che è successo sia qui sia nel resto del paese, forse sarai in grado un secondo di operare una minima distinzione. di leggere ciò che ho scritto e soprattutto di contestualizzare, poi naturalmente puoi anche comparare l'adolescente americano che compra nel 2016 il fucile su internet o con roberto ognibene o valerio fioravanti che sicuramente comprarono pistole bombe e fucili al negozio sotto casa aderendo a movimenti transnazionali
Comment has been collapsed.
dal tuo post si capisce che il mio testo, volutamente generico, non ti ha descritto correttamente.
comunque, lontano dal voler entrare in polemica su un argomento delicato, per di più in un sito dedicato a un hobby, volevo solo farti capire che, se da una parte chiedi di contestualizzare, dall'altra devi ammettere che il tuo post precedente può essere facilmente inteso in un'altra maniera, visto che in un contesto di sparatorie indiscriminate provocate da cittadini con le loro armi private e con un movente diciamo futile, tiri in ballo il terrorismo nel nostro paese, dicendo che ne le une ne l'altro sono presenti. semplicemente a volte gli altri leggono le nostre parole seguendo un filo diverso dal nostro, tutto qui.
Comment has been collapsed.
This whole incident boils down to piss-poor security at that venue.
At any large gathering of people, metal-detecting wands should be in use to prevent people entering with weapons.
Unless you're a police officer, there's no reason to be carrying at any event. Conceal and carry does not apply when it comes to entering venues. (It's amazing how many idiots don't know that.)
Comment has been collapsed.
This tends to become just a regular day in America.
Comment has been collapsed.
Guns do make it much more easy to randomly kill people as for example a knife would.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yet somehow European homicide rates are much lower and we aren't kniving, driving over each other, torching or bombing each other and more random strangers every week like there's a shootout in the USA.
PS. The American "moral and structural decadence" is the same as the rest of the Western World. Your politicians might be a bit more nutcase though.
Comment has been collapsed.
Of all the excuses this got to be my favorite. Killings are rampant in the US but not Europe since "we're soft"?
Nothing to do with guns... it's just super-macho's in the US and wimps in Europe.
Wow... mind blown.
Comment has been collapsed.
But you're much better at soccer and rugby, so you've got that going for you.
Be right back, gotta go take muh 'roids and pump some iron in front of my wall-length mirrors with muh glock shoved down muh underoos!
Disclaimer: I have no wall-length mirrors in my home.
Comment has been collapsed.
...said Tzaar pulling lipstick from his pocket... p
Comment has been collapsed.
;D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1mlCPMYtPk
EDIT: Sry, just couldn't resist hearing that song in my mind to that picture you just drew :>.
Comment has been collapsed.
I often like to crank that song on my super bumping sub-system when I'm tooling around the city in muh gas-guzzling, air-polluting 8 cylinder truck, complete with over-sized tires and a gun rack that accommodates 4. If I'm feeling especially macho, I may lean my head out the window to feel the breeze in my mullet and catch a few grasshoppers in muh teeth.
Comment has been collapsed.
wrong! US has the highest gun homicide rate because we have the most massive amount of guns in the industrialized world!
less guns, less deaths. that simple.
japan has almost no guns, and japan has almost no deaths from guns.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's both, tbh.
More restrictions on gun ownership + better public mental health = solution.
Comment has been collapsed.
"less homicidal people", what the hell are you talking about?
there are cultural differences in every country, but people are people all over the world.
give them guns, and more guns and you get tons more gun deaths.
https://www.statista.com/chart/3672/americas-insane-rate-of-gun-homicide-in-perspective/
Comment has been collapsed.
are you saying you have killed someone? not sure if you are willfully ignorant or just trolling, but this discussion is about mass shootings. they don't occur without guns. period. why don't you research facts yourself. your "violent crime" what aboutism is nonsense. stop being brainwashed by conservative propaganda.
Comment has been collapsed.
haha, that's funny, centrist. you are trolling. everything you write is very right wing.
i didn't state "access to guns turn people to violence", you are just making things up!
You have no evidence for what you state. You just pulling nonsense out of your ass. I provided evidence!
Pointless to respond to you anymore.
Comment has been collapsed.
In the end it's people problem... We need to end people...
Comment has been collapsed.
Shoot everyone who has a gun, problem solved and the guns fulfilled their purpose of protection.
Comment has been collapsed.
Everyone with a gun needs to register it. Every month 12 random people get drawn (more guns more tickets) to enter the arena to fight each other, the winner gets to keep his gun.
Sounds like a good idea, maybe I should make a movie or game out of it :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Yea I heard about this yesterday. I know several people that live in Florida who are quite involved in the gaming scene, and was worried for a moment, but then I remembering none of them really like Madden (quite thankful of that in this case). Very sad and scary stuff.
Comment has been collapsed.
In case some of you haven't heard, or cared. there was another shooting in Jacksonville Florida. This time during a Madden tournament. 11 wounded and 2 dead. One of them the shooter.
Great. Just what we need. Another shooting. And this time at a video game tournament. You just KNOW the advocates will just come out of the woodwork with their evangelistic cries about banning video games because they make people violent.
How about, instead of advocating that, jump on the backs of your local leaders and senators to enforce REAL gun control?
I swear, for the next 6 months we are going to be bombarded with news articles by advocates that claim video games make people violent. What? Did mankind live in peace and harmony before the invention of the video game? Be fore the invention of the movie or television set? Or the invention of the gun? As George Carlin once said- I bet the Spanish Inquisition must have come up as a bad episode of Gilligan's Island.
Don't get me wrong. I do feel bad for the innocent guy that got killed and the others that got wounded, but this has GOT to come to an end somewhere.
Edit- Added a couple of small GA's for you all for reading this.
Comment has been collapsed.