Crime FBI report reveals what most active shooter situations have in common

[My Spot]

No you're just so completely stupid that you have no reading comprehension. I responded specifically to one person's post and you got it wrong and like a dog looking at its own ass you can't stop.

You think MSNBC is "the right."

 

[Islam Imamate]

Kind of like those 5 cops that beat Tyre Nichols to death. There is a reason why that story vanished like a fart in the wind.

Because all the officers were dismissed from their PD and charged with murder? In fact their unit, the SCOPRION unit, was disbanded and even EMTs involved in the incident were fired. Seems like justice was served right?

 

[LeonardoBjj]

They have, but imagine the looks you’d get at a gun show in the 1980s if you were selling assault rifles, BP vests, all the tacticool gear- they’d think you were insane

- Didnt you see on movies how people used to dress in the 80's?

 

[HomeCheese]

Wow. Criminals don’t care about gun laws? Who knew? And low hanging fruit, so hey, let’s do it while it will do absolutely nothing to stop gun violence. And who cares if we infringe on the second a little bit-I mean, the founding fathers carried glocks and not long guns, after all. And going for handguns as the ultimate goal is the whole point of my post, but thanks for agreeing there

Whenever I see one of you ammo-sexuals invoking the founding fathers I know you never really thought through this argument. I mean, the FF didn't even think African Americans were human beings, do you really think they would want them to have free access to guns?

You know what the founding fathers would say if they were here today: "Why the fuck are black people and women allowed in the same room as me!"

So you really think society doesn't do anything to curtail gun violence? Think really hard here.

 

[nhbbear]

I agree with everything here except that I'm not wrong because I have already stated what the actual definition is but what I'm saying is that the definition we are using opbfuscates the facts and only confuses people and we need to come up with better language for it in order to discuss the phenomenon accurately. Or we could just all be honest and delineate and distinguish between the two kinds of shootings and not try to lump them together to win points.

Classifying gang violence statistically alongside of mass shootings according to the common parlance usage of that term makes an idiot out of everybody and keeps anybody from seeing what's really being discussed. Accurate distinctions really matter.

I hear right-wingers use it all the time here to pretend that the left people are not wanting to discuss mass shootings. But the fact is we're discussing very very different phenomenon and all that kind of talking point does is confuse the issue.

And I'm being told the left does the same thing in a different way when trying to advocate for gun control.

I think we would delineate between those two very different kinds of shootings every single time we ever discussed anything to do with this topic if either side was trying to be honest and not just push forth a certain agenda.

The metacriss and the meaning crisis are a big part of why this distinction really matters because this new kind of random baseless killing of completely uninvolved individuals is a symptom of the growing meaning crisis. Whereas gang, violence and certain bad actors have always existed in nearly every culture.

I think we have reached an understanding with just little bits of difference. We both neglected to mention the role the media plays as well-a huge role.

 

[nhbbear]

- Didnt you see on movies how people used to dress in the 80's?

Yeah, but they were inter dimensional raiders and mutants

 

[nhbbear]

I remember reading about how he had a plethora of literature from Marx and the like. His targets were right wingers as well. Idk. It's always hard to tell what's real and not real because of how the news is so politically motivated.

I agree. And I am not saying he wasn’t leftist, but that would be rare for a lefty to do the lone shooter thing as well as have a plethora of guns. Personally, I briefly thought maybe he had been thinking about it and wanting to be famous but maybe didn’t plan this particular shooting-it just so happened he was at the casino when it happened-but then why take so many guns. So I am not so sure this was political and maybe just he was there, was oissed at the casino, and had his guns to make a statement and that’s where the most people were.

 

[terrapin]

I think we have reached an understanding with just little bits of difference. We both neglected to mention the role the media plays as well-a huge role.

Imagine that the two of us agreeing on the freaking fighting forum!!!

 

[nhbbear]

Whenever I see one of you ammo-sexuals invoking the founding fathers I know you never really thought through this argument. I mean, the FF didn't even think African Americans were human beings, do you really think they would want them to have free access to guns?

You know what the founding fathers would say if they were here today: "Why the fuck are black people and women allowed in the same room as me!"

So you really think society doesn't do anything to curtail gun violence? Think really hard here.

The true foundation of the constitution is to add rights, not subtract or chip away at them. Giving blacks and women equal rights doesn’t have to be mutually exclusive from gun rights-they’re not even close to the same issue.

And no, society is moving away from what works to curb some of the violence. Things were really bad in the 90s but the crackdown on drugs and adding long sentences to violent offenders cut down on it. We don’t do that any more.



Now, the thought of catching a black felon with a firearm and locking him up for years makes people uneasy. Philly da larry krasner has flat out said he won’t prosecute this crime because it is all black and brown suspects-yet he will charge a cop that shoots someone with “having an instrument of crime” meaning the gun and an extra bullshit crime to tack onto the more serious charges. He hasn’t won a conviction on a cop yet, lol. Fuck him and his woke ilk. I have worked shootings that netted a year and a murder that netted seven years. It’s pathetic

 

[nhbbear]

Imagine that the two of us agreeing on the freaking fighting forum!!!

Hey man, I love to have good conversations where common ground is reached. I just have a lot of haters that want to fight me-though not irl

 

[MarleyLynx]

Whenever I see one of you ammo-sexuals invoking the founding fathers I know you never really thought through this argument. I mean, the FF didn't even think African Americans were human beings, do you really think they would want them to have free access to guns?

You know what the founding fathers would say if they were here today: "Why the fuck are black people and women allowed in the same room as me!"

So you really think society doesn't do anything to curtail gun violence? Think really hard here.

The founding fathers wanted to abolish slavery in the declaration and was part of the original draft but needed the support of the wealthy plantation owners to to win the war. Slavery was abolished within the year in some states after America's conception.

Just some food for thought.

 

[Cool Hand Luke]

The thing about changing the definition of 'mass shooting' to pad statistics is that it makes a mass killing by a semi automatic rifle even less likely.

 

[shockaholic12]

The founding fathers wanted to abolish slavery in the declaration and was part of the original draft but needed the support of the wealthy plantation owners to to win the war. Slavery was abolished within the year in some states after America's conception.

Just some food for thought.

There was a massive amount of gun regulations and restrictions of many different forms immediately following the declaration up until the 1920’s. The notion the founders of the country didn’t intend for guns to be heavily regulated doesn’t jive with history.

Just something often left out when the topic of the founders is brought up.

 

[MarleyLynx]

There was a massive amount of gun regulations and restrictions of many different forms immediately following the declaration up until the 1920’s. The notion the founders of the country didn’t intend for guns to be heavily regulated doesn’t jive with history.

Just something often left out when the topic of the founders is brought up.

I'll look more into that. I see that slaves weren't allowed to have guns in some states or take them off their masters land and some states in the 1800's took issue with concealed carry. However, the first law passed regulating the possession of firearms was the National Firearms Act of 1934.

 

[shockaholic12]

I'll look more into that. I see that slaves weren't allowed to have guns in some states or take them off their masters land and some states in the 1800's took issue with concealed carry. However, the first law passed regulating the possession of firearms was the National Firearms Act of 1934.

Quite untrue. You can find about a thousand gun laws enacted between the founding of America and the 1934 act.

“Yet even now, far too few understand or appreciate the fact that though gun possession is as old as America, so too are gun laws. But there’s more: gun laws were not only ubiquitous, numbering in the thousands, but also spanned every conceivable category of regulation, from gun acquisition, sale, possession, transport, and use, including deprivation of use through outright confiscation, to hunting and recreational regulations, to registration and express gun bans.”

https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4825&context=lcp

 

[PhitePhan]

Quite untrue. You can find about a thousand gun laws enacted between the founding of America and the 1934 act.

“Yet even now, far too few understand or appreciate the fact that though gun possession is as old as America, so too are gun laws. But there’s more: gun laws were not only ubiquitous, numbering in the thousands, but also spanned every conceivable category of regulation, from gun acquisition, sale, possession, transport, and use, including deprivation of use through outright confiscation, to hunting and recreational regulations, to registration and express gun bans.”

https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4825&context=lcp

Interesting information!

Your source cites the first “gun laws” being enacted in 1619 (hardly fair to include anything pre-Revolution, no?)… and funny enough, some of the laws were enacted as a means to subjugate the native population.

 

[shockaholic12]

Interesting information!

Your source cites the first “gun laws” being enacted in 1619 (hardly fair to include anything pre-Revolution, no?)… and funny enough, some of the laws were enacted as a means to subjugate the native population.

Yes, the research is a comprehensive look at gun laws from America’s start so some laws are pre-revolution but those were still passed in the colonies and most are post revolution.

You could find some laws aimed at subjecting minorities in every field of law back then.

Lobbyist have done a great job convincing gun owners and politicians to completely ignore the history of gun laws while simultaneously invoking the founding fathers.

 

[MarleyLynx]

Quite untrue. You can find about a thousand gun laws enacted between the founding of America and the 1934 act.

“Yet even now, far too few understand or appreciate the fact that though gun possession is as old as America, so too are gun laws. But there’s more: gun laws were not only ubiquitous, numbering in the thousands, but also spanned every conceivable category of regulation, from gun acquisition, sale, possession, transport, and use, including deprivation of use through outright confiscation, to hunting and recreational regulations, to registration and express gun bans.”

https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4825&context=lcp

I just read your article. The only thing i'd have to point out is these laws restrict things like concealed carry, which I stated, and brandishing or dueling, which is a crime and not some regulation, as well as laws that were enacted by a non-american state - I.E 1619 (America was founded in 1776).

My information came from these two sources, which were done admittedly off just a quick google search without in depth research.

Scholarly Articles on Gun Control: History, Legislation & Activism

Gale offers an overview of issues related to gun control, derived from scholarly sources and academic journals. Read about legislation and activism.

www.gale.com

USDOJ: United States Department of Justice Archive - Appendix C

 

[SummerStriker]

The way righties on this board cheered the last targeted shooting of LGBT people lets you know that none of them have morals or religion that goes below the surface. The majority of them would do a mass shooting if they knew they could get away with it, but they have lives. That's why they use the internet the way they do, hoping to trick an unhinged person into doing the work. The majority of chronically online psychopaths jerk it to gun violence daily.

Mass shootings are a "mental health" issue in that political violence is carried out first by the least well, as they serve their purpose. I have guns but I'd give up mine in an instant if someone stripped the MAGA of theirs first.

 

[shockaholic12]

I just read your article. The only thing i'd have to point out is these laws restrict things like concealed carry, which I stated, and brandishing or dueling, which is a crime and not some regulation, as well as laws that were enacted by a non-american state - I.E 1619 (America was founded in 1776).

My information came from these two sources, which were done admittedly off just a quick google search without in depth research.

Scholarly Articles on Gun Control: History, Legislation & Activism

Gale offers an overview of issues related to gun control, derived from scholarly sources and academic journals. Read about legislation and activism.

www.gale.com

USDOJ: United States Department of Justice Archive - Appendix C

I mean yes they address those topics. They addressed pretty much every other aspect of guns as well.

There’s clear precedent for regulating pretty much every aspect of guns society came across immediately leading up to and after the founding of the country and then for the next century plus so the claim this approach would offend the founders is ridiculous and ignorant of history.