The Mass Shooting Epidemic...how do we stop it?

[Ivy]

I think for it to be said that "the horse is out of the barn and there's nothing we can do now" is BS. Teresa gives some solid statistics on that.

I did not say there is nothing that can be done now. I have offered several ideas that would likely reduce the killings and still not breach the 2nd amendment. You do realize any new gun laws are going to be challenged in court as a breach of 2nd amendment rights? That is no small obstacle to overcome.

Political solutions are intended to make people feel good, they are not intended to actually change anything in any significant way. Politicians just need to cover their butts politically.

Look at the statistics. We can do something. The cultural will gradually change. It will likely take many decades, but it will happen.

[agricola]

Just curious but is there anyone here who owns any firearms. I have an old .22 rifle my grandfather left me. It hasn't been fired since I was born if ever. It really is just a wall deco now. It looks very pretty when all shined up.

I thought about buying a. 38 but decided against it. I have peace with all peoples now and my apartment only has one window two stories up no one can get to. The stairs and walkway do not run by it. The only way anyone could come in is through the double lock door.

I know me. I would never want to kill someone. But I know in real life I can be bad tempered. Knowing I had a gun may make me not willing to back down as easy as I otherwise would over something not worth killing over even if I technically was in the right to stand my ground . It's best in some cases to take a wrong than take a life
. The Quran says when dealing with stupid people it is best to just say peace peace and then go on..

Yes I have two old (very old) deer rifles I inherited from an uncle, and a small Remington .22 rifle (modern version of the one used by 'The Rifleman'), and a Harrington and Richardson 20 gauge shotgun - I used to hunt upland game birds, years ago.

None of them could be described as an 'automatic' anything - they are bolt action single shot rifles, basically. The shotgun ought be more scary, even though it is small, too!

We store them separately from the ammo (which at the moment we don't even HAVE) and the rifles have locks on them or else we removed the trigger mechanisms altogether, which is only reasonable when you have children in the house, or might have children in the house.

By the way, chukar are very exciting to hunt and taste quite good, and there is more meat on them than on doves. Doves aren't worth the effort, really. Grouse are bigger - almost as big as a chicken - But sage grouse taste very - sagey. Not a favorite of mine at all.

One of my old boss's had a handgun he would carry in the field, because he was deathly afraid of snakes, but I never saw the point. Handguns are really wildly inaccurate without a lot of serious practice.

[agricola]

Everyone seems to talk as if the second amendment cannot be tamed at all but must be shot dead at sunrise.
Look, the FIRST amendment is really quite clear - and yet the first amendment has had PLENTY of legally defined restrictions on its parts - freedom of speech, for instance, cannot include incitement to violence, or false claims leading to danger to others (shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater).

You have freedom of speech - STILL - but it has its limits.

If people would just look at the second amendment in terms of a RANGE instead of 'either/or', it might be helpful.

In fact, it already DOES have limits. Citizens have the 'right to bear arms' but they actually don't have the 'right' to have hydrogen bombs or their own personal nuclear subs.

In other words, weapons which may be described as 'military' are ALREADY against the law, second amendment go hang. A minimum of including 'rifles that shoot a whole lot of serious bullets very quickly' (call it whatever you like) is not asking for something outlandish. Really.

[Ivy]

If the 2nd amendment is overturned or repealed the result will almost certainly lead to another civil war. Those that love their guns will not give them up willingly. In a hundred or more years from now Ivy may be correct and the thinking of the masses will change, and like Australia people will willingly surrender their guns. I doubt that will happen, but ya never know the violence might become so overwhelming that people will do anything to stop it.

Remember, Cootie....I am not even talking about ALL guns. I appreciate having a gun or two in the house, ready to go just in case of the unthinkable. I am only talking about the mass killing machines as needing to be banned and phased out. If we were to have a "civil war", it would be because of a very few people in the gun culture who want to keep their semi-automatic toys. I honestly don't think it would come to that. I know gun owners who are reasonable, intelligent people, and who don't get into the histrionics. They, too, want the mass shootings to stop.

Edited to add: I concur with what Agri said, just above.

[Sean]

Rand survey and articles show that Gun policies have no significant impact on "mass" shootings.

h**ps://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analys ... tings.html

I point this out to support my point that the mentality of "we have to do something" is as dangerous as it is ineffective. It is a culture thing and there are those who continue to celebrate the destruction of culture. Only an ideologue who is convinced in banning guns and ultimately ending gun rights will deem this as an unhelpful or useless post and reference to many studies. Basically there are some it seems who continue to blast anyone who doesn't agree with the call for more gun laws and eroding of rights. But insisting that more gun laws are needed when the current gun laws have done nothing is the mentality of this group think. I can only point the horses to the water. If ye have tongues, slurp it up.

[teresa]

No trolling, please. This is the Tea House.

I would like to hear some of your ideas about how the mass shooting crisis could be stopped. Surely there is a way
to get a grip on it.

Are you feeling agreed to and supported on this thread? If not, would you like me to move the thread to Coffee House to allow others to share a variety of views? Or would you like me to move the posts that say there is no way to stop mass shooting, and that you are wrong to focus on this topic, wrong to call it a crisis, and so on?

[Ivy]

No trolling, please. This is the Tea House.

I would like to hear some of your ideas about how the mass shooting crisis could be stopped. Surely there is a way
to get a grip on it.

Are you feeling agreed to and supported on this thread? If not, would you like me to move the thread to Coffee House to allow others to share a variety of views? Or would you like me to move the posts that say there is no way to stop mass shooting, and that you are wrong to focus on this topic, wrong to call it a crisis, and so on?

Hi Teresa; just noticed your post. I would like to leave my post here, as I am interested in real solutions. If you'd remove the posts you mentioned above (the posts that say there is no way to stop mass shooting, and that you are wrong to focus on this topic, wrong to call it a crisis, and so on), I would appreciate it. That way we can hopefully generate some positive ideas.

[teresa]

I started another thread in Coffee House called "The Mass Shooting Epidemic ... various thoughts" where I moved some posts.

[Sean]

If we are really interested in finding real solutions it seems obvious to me at least that there has to be balance, perspective, and questioning of all presumptions. Why would anyone not want these aspects to a discussion looking for real solutions? If those are lacking then there is no real dialogue and then how can a real solution be found when the real intellectual honesty is not freely accepted. All I said was that that Neil Tyson Degras guy said that perhaps there was perspective lacking when people describe mass murders as epidemic and in the rise...he was just asking for an honest and factual starting point so that real progress can be more likely. And because honest discussion is claimed to be a "problem" then the likelihood of real solutions is diminished.

If that is "trolling" then we have a problem ever finding "real" solutions.

[Ivy]

If that is "trolling" then we have a problem ever finding "real" solutions.

I felt that your remarks were efforts at "trolling", and therefore not useful. I don't see how someone like yourself who thinks people are overreacting and overly concerned about the mass shootings could possibly have anything to contribute to a solution.