Las Vegas shooting thread moved to polyass

[summit]

DEFINITIONS AND STATISTICS FOR MASS SHOOTINGS

FBI says four or more people selected indiscriminately, not including the perpetrator, are killed. When you use that definition, mass shootings are rare (less than 4 per year) and mostly perpetrated by psychopaths and terrorists.

If you include targeted victims and take injuries as well as homicides to reach 4 victims, then you get these "mass shootings every day" statistics, but the vast majority are gang/drug related shootings committed by perps with a criminal history and with illegally owned weapons.

Two very different problems if you ask me...

[summit]

Hey beer drinker, yep things are certainly looking better. You betcha. Here's something that is a fact:

A fucking wack job up (Canada) here wants to hurt some innocent folks. He rents a vehicle, rams a cop, and stabs him. Keeps driving and hits 4 innocent people. This sucks - 5 injured, none killed.

A fucking wack job down there......

Canada has plenty of guns. And we've seen vehicles-as-a-weapon kill more people than the Vegas shooting. So what was your point?

[DougW]

Canada has plenty of guns. And we've seen vehicles-as-a-weapon kill more people than the Vegas shooting. So what was your point?

That Canada doesn't have many mass shooting. In last 16 years have had ( 4 and above) have only 6. So about one every 3 years compared to 1 a day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...cres_in_Canada

edit actually LV could be considered a Canadian mass shooting as 4 Canadians died.

[reckless toboggan]

That Canada doesn't have many mass shooting. In last 16 years have had ( 4 and above) have only 6. So about one every 3 years compared to 1 a day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...cres_in_Canada

Exactly.

This is a Canadian mass shooting...

[summit]

That Canada doesn't have many mass shooting. In last 16 years have had ( 4 and above) have only 6. So about one every 3 years compared to 1 a day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...cres_in_Canada

edit actually LV could be considered a Canadian mass shooting as 4 Canadians died.

Indeed, so one asks if the Canadians have guns but not nassacres, what is the difference?

Answer : bagged milk

[DougW]

Bagged milk is just out east, Ont and east, not in Alberta and BC. Actually grew on bagged milk.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milk_bag

[XXX-er]

different culture, i don't just think guns were/are so much of it

you need to spend all weekend in a classroom to get an FAC (fire arm acquisition ) from an accredited instructor guy and a handguns is a restricted weapon with an extra course on top of that

You might see a hunter out in the bush carrying a hunting long gun/shotgun/ but I just don't ever see hand guns or assault style weapons which puts a whole different flavor on firearms imo

I do see defender shotguns in forestry but thats for bar protection eh

[Harry]

Bagged milk is just out east, Ont and east, not in Alberta and BC. Actually grew on bagged milk.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milk_bag

This is my kind of milk bag...

[XXX-er]

IMO Canada does not actualy have plenty of guns and the guns we do have are not the same

[GeezerSteve]

+1 to Mofro's well-reasoned, supported and lucid post

[XXX-er]

This is my kind of milk bag...

Chemicals leeching out of the plastic bags causes enlarged breasts

[wooley12]

Indeed, so one asks if the Canadians have guns but not nassacres, what is the difference?

Answer : bagged milk

Marketing

[WTF is dat]

Let me ask- what is your definition of a "mass shooting"? Are your attempting to trivialize homicides that occur when less than 5, less than 10 are killed? And as you can see from the data posted below in the pdf, gun violence as a percentage of total violent crime hasn't budged at all- holding steady at 8-9% comparing 1993- present. Moreover, guns used in homicide, as a percentage of overall homicides, hit an all time high in 2016.






you stated your main argument is that violent crime decreased while gun ownership increased. Notice that your supposition is not that "violent crime involving firearms decreased," it is overall violent crime.

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fv9311.pdf



Secondly, pay close attention to the data you posted- and note that in the period between 1993-98 when the largest decrease in violent crime occurred, guns sales were stagnant. The was virtually no uptick in gun sales until after 2004. But using gun sales as a proxy for increased gun owners is akin to using alcohol/weed/cigarette sales to proxy user ship in the general population; in each case it's the heavy user who is the money customer being catered to. The number of guns per 100 people continues upward but the number of those 100 people having guns in their possession has been trending downward across the same period. Hightened paranoia rarely induces people who do not already own guns to go out and buy them, but sure causes people who already own them to get more.


The assault weapons ban was enacted in 1994. Congress let the ban expire in 2004. Despite the overall downward trend in violence as shown by your graph, violence involving a gun to commit homicide, as a percentage of all homicides, was at it's highest point ever last year (2016- 73% of all homicides by gun).
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...its-1980-peak/



2016 may turn out to be an anomaly, hopefully, but citing a decrease in 2017 compared to 2016 really ignores that 2016 had 17,250 homicides, 2015 had 15,820, and 2014 14,150. 2016 was the highest year since 1998.

The use of Large capacity magazines in violent crimes, and crime against law enforcement has increased since the lapse of the assault weapons ban.
https://link.springer.com/epdf/10.10...OWHfgGAg%3D%3D





I like guns, I have no problem with people owning them, also don't have an issue with people hoarding them either just like board members here hoard skis. I really don't see any real way that any SINGULAR event could could be stopped by a dedicated perp. But having nationally consistent gun laws, eliminating loop holes for background checks, and cracking down on the 8% of gun dealers responsible for feeding the majority of the cross state black markets (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...ocon/guns.html) doesn't sound unreasonable to me.

Very well thought out and measured response.


I expect crickets from beer drinker.

[digitaldeath]

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/i...3172649AAYpXD7

[Adolf Allerbush]

If you are able to do some basic math, you will see the numbers on this website (http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/) show that 2017 is better than 2016.

There was a 50% drop in mass shooting victims, over last year, until this event.

Just pointing out that the stats are basically only for 3/4 of 2017. Of course they're lower.. Captain fucking obvious

[Bobby Stainless]

There were an estimated 17,250 murders¹ last year, up from 15,883 in 2015. The murder rate also rose for a second straight year, but it’s still roughly where it was in 2008, far below the levels of the 1980s and early 1990s. Meanwhile, the share of murders committed with a firearm rose to a record high.²

The numbers you used are not violent gun deaths. Those are total murders. 15,079 people died from gun violence in 2016.

Your number is almost 2200 too high. Thanks for the info though. I look through the rest later.

Very well thought out and measured response.


I expect crickets from beer drinker.

Other than his numbers for 2016, 2015, and 2014 being higher, than this cited website (http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/past-tolls), he actually responded to my question.

Unlike you or anyone else.

Now You are acting like the kid on the play ground, egging on a fight.

This is a discussion about gun violence. Maybe you think its a contest of some sort.

Furthermore, if you have made up your mind on this issue, why are you here arguing? Go do something about it.

Answer: You really don't intend to do shit, but type on anonymous forums, about how compassionate you are toward this cause. Strong work.

Just pointing out that the stats are basically only for 3/4 of 2017. Of course they're lower.. Captain fucking obvious

If you can't or won't read all of my posts, just head back to polyass where most of you lurk.

I mentioned 2017 still has 3 months left, over and over.

[Bobby Stainless]

I really don't see any real way that any SINGULAR event could could be stopped by a dedicated perp.

I agree with this statement the most. 100 percent correct.

I want to look at this article first. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...its-1980-peak/

The uptick in murders in 2016⁴ comes on the heels of a double-digit percentage increase in 2015 that was the largest jump in a quarter-century. That said, the nation’s overall murder rate in 2016 was 5.3 per 100,000 people, 48 percent below its peak, in 1980.

I think we all can agree that there are ups and downs, when watching a trend?



If you look at the data I posted for 2017, we are back on the down slope HOPEFULLY, even with the worst mass shooting in US history.

15,079 in 2016 to 11,819 so far this year. Of course, we still have three months left.

It seems some of you want more to happen, to prove your point...

Early indications from roughly the middle of 2017 show the number of murders up a few percentage points in big cities; that could mean — based on how cities and the nation overall typically compare — either a small increase or a small drop nationally this year, although it’s too early to say for sure.

From the data on gunviolencearchive.org 2017 has been a better year, thus far.

Just over half of murders⁵ were committed with a firearm in 1961 — the earliest year for which the FBI has data. By 1990, that share was nearly 65 percent. And for the next 24 years, the figure remained somewhere between 63 percent and 70 percent, even as the annual number of murders peaked nationally in the early 1990s. In 2015, the share of firearm murders rose above 70 percent for the first time, and in 2016, that figure rose again, to 73 percent, the highest rate of murders by firearm on record.

This is alarming, but these are not the types of shootings that outrage people. This goes back to the group of people that keep killing themselves, and those killings are done with handguns, not ARs and Bump Stocks.

Males, blacks, and persons ages 18 to 24 were mostlikely to be victims of firearm violence

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fv9311.pdf

Overall, the total number of major crimes in the seven categories that the FBI tracks fell 0.6 percent in 2016, compared with 2015, mostly because of a 1.5 percent drop in thefts and a 4.6 percent drop in burglaries.⁶ The remaining categories — rape, robbery, assault and auto theft — all saw an increase of between 1 percent and 8 percent.
But compared with 25 years ago, the rates of all seven major crime categories were significantly lower:

Perspective.

[Bobby Stainless]

+1 to Mofro's well-reasoned, supported and lucid post

How about that Big Steve?

He was able to respond like a grown ass man.

Unlike you, in your old age, thought it would be helpful to suggest that I enjoyed seeing 59 people get killed.

You are such a wise man. Kudos.

Maybe come up with your own thoughts sometime, instead of piggy backing on Mofros?

Same goes for you WTF. Don't let some other member do the work, and you tag along as a supporter. That's fucking weak bro.

[Bobby Stainless]

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fv9311.pdf

I am pretty familiar with this link, but it ends at 2011. I am not sure how this plays in, as it doesn't show the worst of mass shootings?

In 2011, a total of 478,400 fatal and nonfatal violentcrimes were committed with a firearm (table 1).Homicides made up about 2% of all firearm-relatedcrimes. There were 11,101 firearm homicides in 2011,down by 39% from a high of 18,253 in 1993 (figure 1).The majority of the decline in firearm-related homicidesoccurred between 1993 and 1998. Since 1999, the number offirearm homicides increased from 10,828 to 12,791 in 2006before declining to 11,101 in 2011.

As far as the AWB expiring in 2004, there is no denying that gun violence is caused primarily by handguns. Most mass shootings, were done with a handgun.

It goes with out saying, that a mass shooter, will gravitate towards hicap assualt weapons. Those weapons are not really responsible for all the gun deaths we see. They are responsible mainly in LEO and Mass shootings, like your article states.

So again we are back to the initial goal. Saving mass shooting victims, that number in the 300-350 per year.

[Bobby Stainless]

I like guns, I have no problem with people owning them, also don't have an issue with people hoarding them either just like board members here hoard skis. I really don't see any real way that any SINGULAR event could could be stopped by a dedicated perp. But having nationally consistent gun laws, eliminating loop holes for background checks, and cracking down on the 8% of gun dealers responsible for feeding the majority of the cross state black markets (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...ocon/guns.html) doesn't sound unreasonable to me.

I don't really like guns per se anymore. I used to shoot competitively, and I am a decent gunsmith. I used to build a lot of guns. I used to have a carry permit. Maybe I grew out of it, or having a family just took priority. I am into cars. So really, I have no skin in this argument, except for my G23 which I haven't even shot.

I do like having lots of freedoms and rights, and I do not agree with emotional knee jerk reactions to terrorism. I feel that is the point.

I also hate the bleeding hearts, who come out of the wood work during these events, but do fuck all to help their cause. That's called being a fake.

I still think the motive of this guy, was to call attention to this very thing. It's really the only thing that makes sense. Strange nothing has been released. He didn't do all that and record himself, not to have a reason.

As long as you can go to one state and buy some Cannabis extracts, and then drive to another and get a felony... I doubt our gun laws will be very congruous.

If people want to buy lots of guns, so be it. I have a client that owns a private jet company. He is ex military. He has over 100 NFA items. If the zombies come, I am going to his house.

[muted]

I haven't read most of your posts BD, what is your point again in a nutshell? Honestly asking. If you are at some point saying that banning machine guns won't do anything since statistically the number of people they kill is very low, that's a bit callous. Deaths aren't just stats on a paper, deaths can rip apart families and communities. It can give PSTD to survivors and first responders. It's one of the worst human experiences I can imagine and has an untold butterfly effect on all of us.

Even if that's not what you are saying, and I know you are making some point about handgun deaths and overall gun deaths going down (and I don't want to wade into that right now) that's why I think there should regulations on machine guns. They are made to destroy people, but sold as fun cosplay military accessories to people playing soldier so companies can make a profit. Arming troops is one thing, selling these guns to the tool bags of Americas is not necessary. I have friends that own these guns, they aren't bad people, don't get me wrong. But America is a bizarre place to me.

[Bobby Stainless]

Well machine guns are already banned. Next will be the bump stocks, as the NRA has even called for an investigation.

I don't think there is much to stop these types of killers, as Mofro said.

I don't think that death should spur people to act on a cause. That seems disingenuous.

Ultimately, the "machine guns" don't cause the majority of gun deaths. They cause 1-2%.

That said, I don't think they are "needed", but will banning them stop the Mass Killings?

As my sig states, I dont have all the answers.

I think there are two issues, and they don't really have the same solution.

[muted]

Nobody is claiming to have the answer to stopping mass killings 100%, but even if one is prevented that's huge. Just making it a bit harder for someone to kill dozens of people from their luxury suite while sipping martinis in a bathrobe seems logical, right? Make these idiots work just a little fucking bit? Unfortunately this fringes on the military cosplay boys having their fun, I mean their 'freedom', so that's what we are up against.

[Adolf Allerbush]

If you can't or won't read all of my posts, just head back to polyass where most of you lurk.

I mentioned 2017 still has 3 months left, over and over. [/FONT]

Not nearly enough, so I though it important to point out since it appears you have forgotten. It explains away your entire theory, which in the face of all statistics you are clinging too like it's life or death. Why is this argument so important to you?

Well machine guns are already banned. Next will be the bump stocks, as the NRA has even called for an investigation.

I don't think there is much to stop these types of killers, as Mofro said.

I don't think that death should spur people to act on a cause. That seems disingenuous.

Ultimately, the "machine guns" don't cause the majority of gun deaths. They cause 1-2%.

That said, I don't think they are "needed", but will banning them stop the Mass Killings?

As my sig states, I dont have all the answers.

I think there are two issues, and they don't really have the same solution.

Machine guns are not "banned"...they are more tightly regulated.

Death spurs people to a cause all the fucking time...and I for one am happy that it does. It's given us advances in cancer research, reduced drunk driving accidents, reduced tobacco deaths, given us things like seat belts, airbags, etc. etc. etc.

How about we try some sensible gun regulations, like get a license to operate a fire arm for one, background checks for all gun purchases, and maybe a state by state registry, just like we have cars registered. I think this would do something, but I can't be sure because the gun lobby makes studying the outcomes of such things impossible.

[Bobby Stainless]

It explains away your entire theory, which in the face of all statistics you are clinging too like it's life or death. Why is this argument so important to you?

I don't agree with knee jerk reactions, based on emotion.

How does anything you posted, explain away that theory?

Machine guns are not "banned"...they are more tightly regulated.

Sweet. Can you point me in the direction of one I can buy, that was made after 1986?