Widgets Magazine
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 141

Thread: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

  1. #101

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    In 1986 3 million new guns were sold in the US. In 2016 11.5 million new guns were sold in the US. Growth patterns suggest over 12.5 million new guns sold in 2022. These are ATF numbers. Unlike cars and VCRs, guns have longevity and functionality levels closer to bricks and wall plugs.

    America is awash in guns and the gun lobby is the most successful in US history. No society on earth has ever had more guns and more liberal gun laws than the US today.

  2. #102

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Robertson View Post
    And as I've pointed out that simply isn't possible in the US in the foreseeable future. Our gun culture is completely different than anywhere else in the world. Much like many of our customs. Come up with something else that will work.
    This right here is why we have mass shootings. Our gun culture is different from anywhere else in the world, and our society is worse off for it.

    Is there a solution? Probably not. The second amendment is an unalterable suicide pact and we're just going to have to live and die with that. It won't get better and will most likely just keep getting worse.

  3. #103

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    Quote Originally Posted by bucktalk View Post
    My concern is the young age most of these shooters have been. At their young age why is there a disconnect about how sacred life is?? A more difficult question is how can we help a younger generation deal with their mental health struggles so their mass killing temptation can be curtailed?
    Some young people are taught that certain lives aren’t sacred. It’s a lot easier to commit these violent crimes when you don’t see the people you’re aiming at as human.

  4. #104
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    8,632
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    Quote Originally Posted by GoGators View Post
    Some young people are taught that certain lives aren’t sacred. It’s a lot easier to commit these violent crimes when you don’t see the people you’re aiming at as human.
    So, who is teaching them that? And which young kids are you talking about?

  5. #105

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    Quote Originally Posted by David View Post
    The second amendment is an unalterable suicide pact and we're just going to have to live and die with that. It won't get better and will most likely just keep getting worse.
    I'd tend to disagree. It comes down to the SCOTUS. If, for example, Congress was to pass a comprehensive militia regulatory framework in which it commissioned officers of the militia, provisioned the militia and determined qualifications for membership in the militia, I could see a path for an evolution of the understanding of the 2nd Amendment.

    Remember, the first half of it is pretty much ignored by the gun nuts.

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
    It certainly seems that the original intent was that there would be a militia and that it would be a well-regulated one.

    Right now, the Court is a political problem. With the recent goings-on with Alito being outed for leaking the Hobby Lobby opinion to right wing donors prior to its release, and the increased likelihood he is also the source of the Dobbs leak, the right wing justices of that body are forfeiting the argument that the SCOTUS is an apolitical body. This certainly makes court expansion/reform far more palatable to me.

  6. #106

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    Quote Originally Posted by Rover View Post
    So, who is teaching them that? And which young kids are you talking about?
    Specifically the Colorado shooter is the young person I’m talking about in this instance. As far as who was teaching him, that would be his immediate family. The news interview the shooter’s dad gave after the crime was committed was one of the most grotesque things I’ve ever heard.

    Although generally, the internet is a great tool for radicalizing certain young people in this way.

  7. #107

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    ^ I quite honestly thought that interview was a (sick) parody when I first saw it. Disgusting.

  8. #108

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    Quote Originally Posted by Midtowner View Post
    I'd tend to disagree. It comes down to the SCOTUS. If, for example, Congress was to pass a comprehensive militia regulatory framework in which it commissioned officers of the militia, provisioned the militia and determined qualifications for membership in the militia, I could see a path for an evolution of the understanding of the 2nd Amendment than the 1st half of it.

    Remember, the first half of it is pretty much ignored by the gun nuts.



    It certainly seems that the original intent was that there would be a militia and that it would be a well-regulated one.

    Right now, the Court is a political problem. With the recent goings-on with Alito being outed for leaking the Hobby Lobby opinion to right wing donors prior to its release, and the increased likelihood he is also the source of the Dobbs leak, the right wing justices of that body are forfeiting the argument that the SCOTUS is an apolitical body. This certainly makes court expansion/reform far more palatable to me.
    The Supreme Court may always be a political problem for the foreseeable future as long as the 2nd Amendment isn't abolished or changed to reflect modern times. In other words, conservative high courts will always think it's more important to pay more serious and literal attention to the 2nd half of the 2nd Amendment. Too bad how the 2nd Amendment wasn't more clearly written. But, no doubt, times were much different back when it was written.

    After essentially nothing was done after the shocking, record-breaking Las Vegas and Orlando mass shootings, along with a congressman among 6 shot at a Congressional Baseball Game, I've given up hope that anything can be done about stopping mass shootings through gun control. Years before a congress woman was severally wounded from a shooting. So, mass shootings will continue. Gun rights supporters rule. They think the 2nd Amendment is more important to protect for the country than innocent human lives. If you like to be at mass gatherings, then better consider making a will or updating one if needed. In Oklahoma, the opposite of gun control could happen if state legislators pass a bill that all criminals getting out of prison must have their 2nd Amendment rights restored, unless federal laws would overrule it. After all, as gun rights supporters would reason, they have done their time for society.

    Roosevelt didn't need to resort to packing the Supreme Court because enough justices eventually came around to see things his way. But I'm afraid the present court won't see how much sensible gun control is needed without packing it.

  9. #109

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    It may be intended as satire from that satire site but is closer to the truth than satire.

  10. #110

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    Quote Originally Posted by GoGators View Post
    Specifically the Colorado shooter is the young person I’m talking about in this instance. As far as who was teaching him, that would be his immediate family. The news interview the shooter’s dad gave after the crime was committed was one of the most grotesque things I’ve ever heard.

    Although generally, the internet is a great tool for radicalizing certain young people in this way.
    Wow I went and looked that up. It almost seems like the dad knew he failed but he is tweaking hardcore:


  11. #111

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    Quote Originally Posted by Bunty View Post
    Roosevelt didn't need to resort to packing the Supreme Court because enough justices eventually came around to see things his way. But I'm afraid the present court won't see how much sensible gun control is needed without packing it.
    Roosevelt would have packed the Court had Justice Roberts not switched his vote. It's a political body. It's acting like a political body and it's time it started being treated as a political body.

    And Oklahoma won't restore gun rights to felons because the whole idea of keeping guns out of felons' hands is based upon keeping white folks armed and black folks disarmed.

    --and for the redneck parts of the State, the whole felon not being able to keep a firearm thing is what makes bow hunting season so popular.

  12. #112

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    Quote Originally Posted by Midtowner View Post
    Roosevelt would have packed the Court had Justice Roberts not switched his vote. It's a political body. It's acting like a political body and it's time it started being treated as a political body.

    And Oklahoma won't restore gun rights to felons because the whole idea of keeping guns out of felons' hands is based upon keeping white folks armed and black folks disarmed.

    --and for the redneck parts of the State, the whole felon not being able to keep a firearm thing is what makes bow hunting season so popular.
    Do the Democrats have enough votes to pack with a 50 or 51 seat majority?

    Seems like you’d need 60+ votes to change the Court’s composition. And I’m not sure it would play well electorally.

  13. Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    You act as though the court is there to rule based on popularity. They rule based on their interpretations of the law and the constitution. I certainly don't like every judgement they make, now or in the past, but l do know the justices have far more experience and knowledge than any of us on here.

  14. #114
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    5,207
    Blog Entries
    7

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    Quote Originally Posted by April in the Plaza View Post
    Do the Democrats have enough votes to pack with a 50 or 51 seat majority?

    Seems like you’d need 60+ votes to change the Court’s composition. And I’m not sure it would play well electorally.
    60 votes is only a Senate rule, that rule can be changed with 51 votes.

  15. #115

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    Quote Originally Posted by BoulderSooner View Post
    the assult rifle was defined for decades and decades .... PR choices do not change the meaning of words ...

    the AR platform is not a Military weapon .. i was in the military ... again .. PR ... it is also not a particularly powerful weapon ..
    The issue with the AR variants is not the "power" of the weapon, it's the amount of people who can be killed in a short period of time.

  16. #116

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    [QUOTE=April in the Plaza;1218596]Do the Democrats have enough votes to pack with a 50 or 51 seat majority?

    Seems like you’d need 60+ votes to change the Court’s composition. And I’m not sure it would play well electorally.[/QUOTE]

    I tend to agree with you, but this is such a polarized electorate, it's possible that NOT doing something could hurt the Dems more than doing something that may upset middle of the road voters. There basically aren't any middle of the road voters any more.

  17. #117

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    Quote Originally Posted by Midtowner View Post
    Roosevelt would have packed the Court had Justice Roberts not switched his vote. It's a political body. It's acting like a political body and it's time it started being treated as a political body.

    And Oklahoma won't restore gun rights to felons because the whole idea of keeping guns out of felons' hands is based upon keeping white folks armed and black folks disarmed.

    --and for the redneck parts of the State, the whole felon not being able to keep a firearm thing is what makes bow hunting season so popular.
    Did you feel that way when it had a left leaning majority or just now that it has a right leaning majority?

  18. #118

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    Quote Originally Posted by Bunty View Post
    The Supreme Court may always be a political problem for the foreseeable future as long as the 2nd Amendment isn't abolished or changed to reflect modern times. In other words, conservative high courts will always think it's more important to pay more serious and literal attention to the 2nd half of the 2nd Amendment. Too bad how the 2nd Amendment wasn't more clearly written. But, no doubt, times were much different back when it was written.

    After essentially nothing was done after the shocking, record-breaking Las Vegas and Orlando mass shootings, along with a congressman among 6 shot at a Congressional Baseball Game, I've given up hope that anything can be done about stopping mass shootings through gun control. Years before a congress woman was severally wounded from a shooting. So, mass shootings will continue. Gun rights supporters rule. They think the 2nd Amendment is more important to protect for the country than innocent human lives. If you like to be at mass gatherings, then better consider making a will or updating one if needed. In Oklahoma, the opposite of gun control could happen if state legislators pass a bill that all criminals getting out of prison must have their 2nd Amendment rights restored, unless federal laws would overrule it. After all, as gun rights supporters would reason, they have done their time for society.

    Roosevelt didn't need to resort to packing the Supreme Court because enough justices eventually came around to see things his way. But I'm afraid the present court won't see how much sensible gun control is needed without packing it.
    This seems like a fundamental misunderstanding of the Supreme Court’s role. It’s not the court’s job to see how much “sensible gun control” is needed. That’s the legislature’s job, it’s the court’s job to determine whether the laws passed by the legislature are constitutional if challenged. If they determine them not to be constitutional then it’s the legislature’s job to amend the constitution so that the sensible gun control that was ruled unconstitutional wouldn’t be any longer.

    Democrats had the majority in both houses from 2007-2011 (along with the presidency from 2008-2011 and at some point during that time I believe had a super majority) and controlled the house, senate and presidency from January 2021 through January 2023. Obviously the Democratic Party would be the most likely to agree on and pass sensible gun control policies…why haven’t they done more when they’ve been able to and why haven’t the laws they’ve passed made a much of a difference?

  19. #119

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    Howard Woodridge is a retired police officer who now works as a lobbyist in DC to try to convince Congress to legalize drugs. He regularly attends a weekly meeting of 100 very big shooter conservative Republicans who discuss a variety of issues. Never ever do they bring up that there’s a problem of mass shootings in this country. Instead, the problem of transgender athletes comes up on a regular basis. So, no wonder that was the only political issue in TV ads that Markwayne Mullin concerned himself with when running for senator. He likely thinks more guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens is the best way to combat mass shootings. But that would probably make more mass shooters see the importance of putting on body armor. The upside of that is they will be easier to take down by people brave enough to try to do it and they won't be able to run away as fast. But I sure don't see how more guns will reduce the number of suicides by gun. The majority of gun deaths are done that way.

    As for the drug issue, Woodridge believes the main part of his work is to convince DC Republicans and Democrats to employ the 10th amendment, when it comes to the issue of marijuana and other drugs.

  20. #120

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    Quote Originally Posted by PhiAlpha View Post
    This seems like a fundamental misunderstanding of the Supreme Court’s role. It’s not the court’s job to see how much “sensible gun control” is needed. That’s the legislature’s job, it’s the court’s job to determine whether the laws passed by the legislature are constitutional if challenged. If they determine them not to be constitutional then it’s the legislature’s job to amend the constitution so that the sensible gun control that was ruled unconstitutional wouldn’t be any longer.

    Democrats had the majority in both houses from 2007-2011 (along with the presidency from 2008-2011 and at some point during that time I believe had a super majority) and controlled the house, senate and presidency from January 2021 through January 2023. Obviously, the Democratic Party would be the most likely to agree on and pass sensible gun control policies…why haven’t they done more when they’ve been able to and why haven’t the laws they’ve passed made a much of a difference?
    The sad and sorry situation simply reflects that the 2nd Amendment is too vague for these modern times and should be abolished or substantially changed. The 2nd half of it goes: "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." What can that mean? That it is unconstitutional to deny convicted armed robbers their arms when they get out of prison for starters?

    The first half goes, "A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state..." What does that mean? That convicted armed bank robbers just out of prison should not be trusted to join a well-regulated militia and can be banned from joining? Of course, they should still have the right to keep their arms as a non-member, if you take the second half of the 2nd Amendment literally and seriously. If I was a Supreme Court Justice, I sure wouldn't like how to decide on gun control laws at all and would tell Congress to do something about the 2nd Amendment.

  21. #121

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    During prohibition the government regulated an object with the goal of increasing morality. If the government insists on banning an object to increase morality I do hope they have learned there lessons from the 20s.

    Personally I do not think the government can effectively regulate morality in this manner. If the goal is a more moral population then there are better approaches that the government and civil society could fund.

  22. #122

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    Quote Originally Posted by Canoe View Post
    During prohibition the government regulated an object with the goal of increasing morality. If the government insists on banning an object to increase morality I do hope they have learned there lessons from the 20s.

    Personally I do not think the government can effectively regulate morality in this manner. If the goal is a more moral population then there are better approaches that the government and civil society could fund.
    Conservatives would have a real problem with this framing given the impact on the topic of abortion (you either see the consistency in this point or you don't, but for the sake of this thread I will not argue this point any further)

    I have a bigger problem framing this issue in this way because the impacts of alcohol on society, good and bad are very different than the impacts of guns on society, good and bad.

    It *is* the governments job to legislate some degree of morality. Rights are based in morality, and it's this very reason why people above believing that the court should somehow be apolitical is problematic. Many of the differences between parties, but also where we agree, comes down to fundamental assumptions that we hold simply because we do, not because there is some objectively knowable truth. That's what makes politics so sticky. Back to abortion (not to discuss, but to make the clearest point): If you believe life starts at conception, holding the right to life makes sense. If you don't believe life begins until birth, holding a woman's right to choose makes sense. And there a million ways to define life, so there are a million ways to interpret legislation addressing that issue.

    The supreme court should be an interpreting body that reflects the beliefs of its people in it's wisest and most discerning form, not an arbiter of truth. It mostly is that, but in a country that disagrees on so many base assumptions of morality, their job (and the job of all politicians) is by default more difficult.

  23. #123

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    Quote Originally Posted by Teo9969 View Post
    Conservatives would have a real problem with this framing given the impact on the topic of abortion (you either see the consistency in this point or you don't, but for the sake of this thread I will not argue this point any further)

    I have a bigger problem framing this issue in this way because the impacts of alcohol on society, good and bad are very different than the impacts of guns on society, good and bad.

    It *is* the governments job to legislate some degree of morality. Rights are based in morality, and it's this very reason why people above believing that the court should somehow be apolitical is problematic. Many of the differences between parties, but also where we agree, comes down to fundamental assumptions that we hold simply because we do, not because there is some objectively knowable truth. That's what makes politics so sticky. Back to abortion (not to discuss, but to make the clearest point): If you believe life starts at conception, holding the right to life makes sense. If you don't believe life begins until birth, holding a woman's right to choose makes sense. And there a million ways to define life, so there are a million ways to interpret legislation addressing that issue.

    The supreme court should be an interpreting body that reflects the beliefs of its people in it's wisest and most discerning form, not an arbiter of truth. It mostly is that, but in a country that disagrees on so many base assumptions of morality, their job (and the job of all politicians) is by default more difficult.
    Teo, I have always respected you and your opinions. You have the ability to see pass the surface level and discuss the issues that are beneath. Your analysis is correct. As long as there are people like Teo around then it is not pointless to discuss these issues in public.

  24. #124

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    Quote Originally Posted by soonerguru View Post
    The issue with the AR variants is not the "power" of the weapon, it's the amount of people who can be killed in a short period of time.
    Yeah the USMC believed this weapon to be powerful enough to be the primary assault weapon for the infantry for decades so there is that. Now it is the M27. As you said it is about the number of kills. The AR was the direct predecessor of the M16.
    https://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/ar...he-ar-15-rifle

  25. #125

    Default Re: Mass Shootings & age of shooters

    Quote Originally Posted by Midtowner View Post
    , and the increased likelihood he is also the source of the Dobbs leak, the right wing justices of that body are forfeiting the argument that the SCOTUS is an apolitical body. This certainly makes court expansion/reform far more palatable to me.
    where are you seeing this ..

    seriously interested ... i have only read/heard that it was likely leaked by a Justice Sotomayor clerk??

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Chattanooga Shootings: Four Marines and Gunman Dead
    By kelroy55 in forum Current Events & Open Topic
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-17-2015, 09:51 AM
  2. New Life Church Shootings
    By Karried in forum Current Events & Open Topic
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-10-2007, 01:58 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO