Mass shooting: At Least 11 Shot At Gilroy Garlic Festival

[2aguy]

great. so before we go changing things, how about some research instead of emo-grandstanding.

Did you know around half of US homicides were committed with handguns? I found that out by researching it.

how many laws do we have?
why are they not working?
what laws would you suggest that would have stopped any known mass shooting in the last decade?

The way you frame the question is par for the course. If an action won't stop shootings it's to be ridiculed. The idea that actions can reduce shootings is dismissed as nonsensical. When the experience of other countries is put forward the exceptional USA excuse is trotted out immediately. Fair enough, it's not my country, I just giggle at the loons.

The way to reduce the US firearm homicide and mass shooting rates is to severely limit the numbers of handguns and military style semi automatic rifles in circulation.

I understand you don't want to do that, rather you happily accept the current consequences. No worries.

Your theory.....to reduce gun crime we reduce the number of guns...

You just posted that, that is your theory.....

26 years, the opposite happened....More Americans went out, bought guns, own them and carry them....according to your theory, gun crime goes up.

That is your theory, not mine....

The actual result...

over that 26 years....

Gun Crime down 75%.

Gun murder down 49%

Violent Crime down 72%

So, again, your theory....more guns = more gun crime

actual experience....more guns .....gun murder, gun crime, violent crime went down 50%, 75%, 72%.

In science....when you propose a theory...you implement the theory, and the exact opposite of that theory happens. .......in Science that means your theory is wrong.

 

[2aguy]

great. so before we go changing things, how about some research instead of emo-grandstanding.

Did you know around half of US homicides were committed with handguns? I found that out by researching it.

how many laws do we have?
why are they not working?
what laws would you suggest that would have stopped any known mass shooting in the last decade?

The way you frame the question is par for the course. If an action won't stop shootings it's to be ridiculed. The idea that actions can reduce shootings is dismissed as nonsensical. When the experience of other countries is put forward the exceptional USA excuse is trotted out immediately. Fair enough, it's not my country, I just giggle at the loons.

The way to reduce the US firearm homicide and mass shooting rates is to severely limit the numbers of handguns and military style semi automatic rifles in circulation.

I understand you don't want to do that, rather you happily accept the current consequences. No worries.

Your theory....More Guns = More Gun Crime...

We will look at other 1st World Countries that did what you want.....they banned and confiscated guns....

Britain...banned guns in 1996.....gun crime spiked for 10 years, then returned to the same level it was at before they banned guns.

Your theory, More Guns = Less Gun Crime.

Result in experience in Britain.....Guns Banned, no change in gun murder.

In science....when you have a theory and do an experiment....and nothing changes that you said would change with your theory....in Science, that means your theory is wrong.

 

[2aguy]

great. so before we go changing things, how about some research instead of emo-grandstanding.

Did you know around half of US homicides were committed with handguns? I found that out by researching it.

how many laws do we have?
why are they not working?
what laws would you suggest that would have stopped any known mass shooting in the last decade?

The way you frame the question is par for the course. If an action won't stop shootings it's to be ridiculed. The idea that actions can reduce shootings is dismissed as nonsensical. When the experience of other countries is put forward the exceptional USA excuse is trotted out immediately. Fair enough, it's not my country, I just giggle at the loons.

The way to reduce the US firearm homicide and mass shooting rates is to severely limit the numbers of handguns and military style semi automatic rifles in circulation.

I understand you don't want to do that, rather you happily accept the current consequences. No worries.

Australia.....1st world country.

Your Theory.... More Guns = More Gun crime...

Australia banned guns.....

Result.....their gun crime rates did not change, their public shootings did not change.....

Again, your theory is wrong.....

Australia’s 1996 Gun Confiscation Didn’t Work | National Review

University of Melbourne researchers Wang-Sheng Lee and Sandy Suardi concluded their 2008 report on the matter with the statement, “There is little evidence to suggest that [the Australian mandatory gun-buyback program] had any significant effects on firearm homicides.”

“Although gun buybacks appear to be a logical and sensible policy that helps to placate the public’s fears,” the reported continued, “the evidence so far suggests that in the Australian context, the high expenditure incurred to fund the 1996 gun buyback has not translated into any tangible reductions in terms of firearm deaths.”

A 2007 report, “Gun Laws and Sudden Death: Did the Australian Firearms Legislation of 1996 Make a Difference?” by Jeanine Baker and Samara McPhedran similarly concluded that the buyback program did not have a significant long-term effect on the Australian homicide rate.

The Australian gun-homicide rate had already been quite low and had been steadily falling in the 15 years prior to the Port Arthur massacre. And while the mandatory buyback program did appear to reduce the rate of accidental firearm deaths, Baker and McPhedran found that “the gun buy-back and restrictive legislative changes had no influence on firearm homicide in Australia.”

=======

2007 report..

http://c3.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/Baker and McPhedran 2007.pdf

Conclusions Examination of the long-term trends indicated that the only category of sudden death that may have been influenced by the introduction of the NFA was firearm suicide
------

However, this effect must be considered in light of the findings for suicide (non-firearm). Homicide patterns (firearm and non-firearm) were not influenced by the NFA, the conclusion being that the gun buy-back and restrictive legislative changes had no influence on firearm homicide in Australia. The introduction of the NFA appeared to have a negative effect on accidental firearm death. However, over the time period investigated, there was a relatively small number of accidental deaths per annum, with substantial variability. Any conclusions regarding the effect of the NFA on accidental firearm death should be approached with caution
=========

2008 report...


http://c8.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/Lee and Suardi 2008.pdf

In this paper, we re-analyze the same data on firearm deaths used in previous research, using tests for unknown structural breaks as a means to identifying impacts of the NFA. The results of these tests suggest that the NFA did not have any large effects on reducing firearm homicide or suicide rates.
-------

6. Conclusion

This paper takes a closer look at the effects of the National Firearms Agreement on gun deaths. Using a battery of structural break tests, there is little evidence to suggest that it had any significant effects on firearm homicides and suicides. In addition, there also does not appear to be any substitution effects – that reduced access to firearms may have led those bent on committing homicide or suicide to use alternative methods.

 

[2aguy]

great. so before we go changing things, how about some research instead of emo-grandstanding.

Did you know around half of US homicides were committed with handguns? I found that out by researching it.

how many laws do we have?
why are they not working?
what laws would you suggest that would have stopped any known mass shooting in the last decade?

The way you frame the question is par for the course. If an action won't stop shootings it's to be ridiculed. The idea that actions can reduce shootings is dismissed as nonsensical. When the experience of other countries is put forward the exceptional USA excuse is trotted out immediately. Fair enough, it's not my country, I just giggle at the loons.

The way to reduce the US firearm homicide and mass shooting rates is to severely limit the numbers of handguns and military style semi automatic rifles in circulation.

I understand you don't want to do that, rather you happily accept the current consequences. No worries.

And Australia, 1st world country that banned guns....Melbourne is now called the "City of the Gun." over 20 years later.......and public shootings still happen......

Nothing you believe about gun control here or around the world is remotely true, factual or based in reality.

Gun city: Young, dumb and armed

The notion that a military-grade weapon could be in the hands of local criminals is shocking, but police have already seized at least five machine guns and assault rifles in the past 18 months. The AK-47 was not among them.

Only a fortnight ago, law enforcement authorities announced they were hunting another seven assault rifles recently smuggled into the country. Weapons from the shipment have been used in armed robberies and drive-by shootings.

These are just a handful of the thousands of illicit guns fuelling a wave of violent crime in the world’s most liveable city.

----

Despite Australia’s strict gun control regime, criminals are now better armed than at any time since then-Prime Minister John Howard introduced a nationwide firearm buyback scheme in response to the 1996 Port Arthur massacre.

Shootings have become almost a weekly occurrence, with more than 125 people, mostly young men, wounded in the past five year

-----------

While the body count was higher during Melbourne’s ‘Underbelly War’ (1999-2005), more people have been seriously maimed in the recent spate of shootings and reprisals.

Crimes associated with firearm possession have also more than doubled, driven by the easy availability of handguns, semi-automatic rifles, shotguns and, increasingly, machine guns, that are smuggled into the country or stolen from licensed owners.

-------------

These weapons have been used in dozens of recent drive-by shootings of homes and businesses, as well as targeted and random attacks in parks, shopping centres and roads.

“They’re young, dumb and armed,” said one former underworld associate, who survived a shooting attempt in the western suburbs several years ago.

“It used to be that if you were involved in something bad you might have to worry about [being shot]. Now people get shot over nothing - unprovoked.”

------------

Gun crime soars
In this series, Fairfax Media looks at Melbourne’s gun problem and the new breed of criminals behind the escalating violence.

The investigation has found:

• There have been at least 99 shootings in the past 20 months - more than one incident a week since January 2015
• Known criminals were caught with firearms 755 times last year, compared to 143 times in 2011
• The epicentre of the problem is a triangle between Coolaroo, Campbellfield and Glenroy in the north-west, with Cranbourne, Narre Warren and Dandenong in the south-east close behind
• Criminals are using gunshot wounds to the arms and legs as warnings to pay debts
• Assault rifles and handguns are being smuggled into Australia via shipments of electronics and metal parts

In response to the violence, it can be revealed the state government is planning to introduce new criminal offences for drive-by shootings, manufacturing of firearms with new technologies such as 3D printers, and more police powers to keep weapons out of the hands of known criminals.
============
The second part of the series....
Gun city: Gunslingers of the North West


========================
'Thousands' of illegal guns tipped to be handed over in firearms amnesty

Asked roughly how many he expected to be handed in, Mr Keenan said: "Look I certainly think the number will be in the thousands."

The Australian Crime Commission estimated in 2012 there were at least 250,000 illegal guns in Australia. But a Senate report noted last year it was impossible to estimate how many illicit weapons are out there.


And despite Australia's strict border controls, the smuggling of high-powered military-style firearms is also a growing problem.

 

[2aguy]

Oh, as to a specific question you posed, a law that prevented the sale of an assault style weapon in Nevada may well have reduced the number of casualties in the latest mass shooting

Wrong.....

Number killed in Gilroy using Russian semi-auto rifle...3.

Number Killed in Russia using 5 shot shotgun...20.

What you don't care about, because all you want to do is ban guns, you don't want to reduce gun crime......

It isn't the weapon in a mass public shooting.....it is the time a shooter has in the gun free zone before a defender points a gun at them.......we know this from actual real world experience and research....real research, not emotional, feelings about the issue...

Kerch Polytechnic College massacre - Wikipedia

 

[2aguy]

Current law prevented Mr. Legan from transporting this firearm across state lines. But he did it anyhow.

Yet if there was a law preventing sales of military style semi automatic rifles in Nevada the vendor could be punished, reducing the likelihood of further such sales.

Wrong....

First...you keep saying Military style....the AR-15 has never been in the military, the SKS that the guy used is not a military version of the weapon...it is semi-auto....

Semi-auto rifles are constitutionally protected weapons......they were named by Justice Scalia in Heller and later in his opinion in Friedrich v Highland Park....

And again, in Russia, 20 killed with a 5 shot pump action shotgun....this guy with that rifle....3.

It isn't the weapon....it is the gun free zone, that allowed him the time to kill.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

Hmmm...maybe it's my failure to couple population with geography that's at fault here. It is far harder to police the area that the US encompasses--than it is the relatively smaller area of Switzerland...

So, now you're saying that in less densely populated areas - where there is almost nothing other than dirt and cattle, those most infamous of crime hot-spots - the police need to drive greater distances, and that's why it is next to impossible to enforce laws in the U.S.?

Darn!

Hold on Kiddo..did not say 'next to impossible'. now did I? I said difficult...and not to correct your erroneous impression of rural America...but there are a lot of small towns and cities out there..with a lot of people..if fact..some might contend that these are the folks that picked our current president. And..they are the people most likely to ignore any gun laws they don't like. This I know..they are my neighbors..LOL!

I also did not say 'laws' ...I said gun laws. The issue is quite a bit more nuanced than that...don't you think? Not sure why you are so very hung up on 'population'...but you seem to be convinced that it isn't a factor in this issue..while I disagree..won't be the first time..nor the last, this happens.

European solutions for American problems are almost always doomed...IMO.

 

[2aguy]

70% of all murders take place in poor urban areas and are committed by people who cannot legally possess firearms

So take the firearms out of circulation to reduce the firearms homicide rate. But I understand gun nuts are too selfish to do that as their paranoia will be aggravated.

Your theory Less Guns = Less Gun Crime....

26 years in the U.S......more people bought, own and carry guns.....

Gun crime went down 75%

Gun murder down 49%

Violent crime down 72%

The exact opposite of your theory...

In science, when you have a theory and you do an experiment...and the exact opposite happens from what your theory predicts.....

Your theory is wrong.......according to actual science.

 

[2aguy]

Three years ago. And that one truck killed more than all of the mass shootings we have had since Las Vegas. NEXT!

Trucks have a purpose. An assault type rifle doesn't.

good thing a purpose is not necessary for a right.

You don't have a right to own an AR-15. The USSC said so.

Do the words in common use mean anything to you?

Don't run around claiming the Second Amendment means no regulation.

As Heller states, the dangerously mentally ill can't have guns, felons can't have guns, and some places like courtrooms can ban them...

That is the regulations stated in Heller......all the rest is unConstitutional.

 

[2aguy]

But we cannot deny people any of their rights because they MIGHT commit a crime.

True, you can make it so handguns and military style semi automatic rifles are not a right. Just like other weapons which citizens have no right to. After all, RPGs are commonly carried by the military and would be damned useful to a militia.

Any other wishes you want to share?

Everyone knows how to change the Constitution and if there was any chance in hell of repealing the Second Amendment it would have already been tried.

The Second will never be repealed in our lifetime. But in the meantime we should enforce the laws we already have because when they are enforced they work.

There is absolutely no reason to deny law abiding people the right to own firearms

I think the problem is that people think the ight to own firearms means any firearm of any style.

If you had a single shot .22 rifle, you would bear arms.

No...only Bearable Arms are protected....that would mean all rifles and pistols...according to the Supreme Court.

 

[2aguy]

70% of all murders take place in poor urban areas and are committed by people who cannot legally possess firearms

So take the firearms out of circulation to reduce the firearms homicide rate. But I understand gun nuts are too selfish to do that as their paranoia will be aggravated.

It wouldn't reduce the murder rate because people would just kill with some other weapon

And people who want to keep their rights are not selfish.

People who want to take away rights are selfish

I have the right not to be shot for no reason.

Yes you do....and is someone shoots you, we can arrest them and lock them up.....we can't just walk around and arrest someone because we think, with no other evidence, that they might shoot you. Do you understand that?

 

[ph3iron]

I thought he was a white boy.
Nice insult.
Can't you post w/o one?
wV debate rules?

When it comes to you, probably not. Can you ever back any of your assertions up with facts? No?

STFU then, dumbass.

Is your google broken or are you too stupid to know how to use it?

I'm smart enough not to use Google these days. See, unlike you, I've been around for a long time and know how the internet stuff works.

Google used to suck, Babelfish, and Altavista.com and Yahoo were better..
Then around 2006-2007 Google got good.

Now they've reverted back to sucking again, but not before buying up huge swaths of necessary internet servers, so all traffic has to go through them and they can filter it.

That's bullshit. GoDaddy is bullshit too. Until you've chained 9 anonymous proxies together and been on the web for 18 hours straight, Cracking porn sites and slap raiding all their content, you can fuck off on telling me how the internet works, ok?

DuckDuckGo is the best these days. No trackers and no selling of your info.

Next is bing.

I thought he was a white boy.
Nice insult.
Can't you post w/o one?
wV debate rules?

When it comes to you, probably not. Can you ever back any of your assertions up with facts? No?

STFU then, dumbass.

Is your google broken or are you too stupid to know how to use it?

I'm smart enough not to use Google these days. See, unlike you, I've been around for a long time and know how the internet stuff works.

Google used to suck, Babelfish, and Altavista.com and Yahoo were better..
Then around 2006-2007 Google got good.

Now they've reverted back to sucking again, but not before buying up huge swaths of necessary internet servers, so all traffic has to go through them and they can filter it.

That's bullshit. GoDaddy is bullshit too. Until you've chained 9 anonymous proxies together and been on the web for 18 hours straight, Cracking porn sites and slap raiding all their content, you can fuck off on telling me how the internet works, ok?

DuckDuckGo is the best these days. No trackers and no selling of your info.

Next is bing.

Why bother reading a lady with a WWII deferment guy as her pic?
"Roberts and Olson's John Wayne, American states that in 1943, Duke was given a “3A” deferment for dependency reasons. The deferment was later changed to “A” status for National Service. Another deferment was given in late 1945 because he was too old for the draft.Apr 1, 2007"
And apparently is too dumb to know what the meaning of snowflake.
"19 c pro slavery white boys "
Iguess you are in favor of our fat boys 5 deferments?

 

[2aguy]

Bats, knives, clubs, bare hands.... the list is literally endless

But swimming pools were quoted so often as being so dangerous in gun control debates. Someone must have attacked someone with a swimming pool, Shirley?

No.....they pools kill more people every single year than rifles do....

Rifles in 2017....403

Pools...3,536 died in non-boating related drownings...

You want to ban these rifles for 403 deaths...pools kill over 1,500 every single year....

Knives are used to kill over 1,500 people every single year...

According to your logic, if we have to ban 18 million rifles, a low count, for 403 murders...then we also have to ban Pools for the 3,536 deaths every year, and knives for the over 1,500 deaths every year...

That is your logic, not ours.

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8


Rifles... 403

Knives.....1,591

Hands and feet......696

Clubs.....467

 

[ph3iron]

California has banned guns, right? but...this sort of tragedy still happens over there!

Perhaps a good guy should have carried a gun to defend himself and others,and the outcome would have been different.

Nah, we needed 10000 rubes all blasting away

 

[Olde Europe]

European solutions for American problems are almost always doomed...IMO.

Yeah, testing all other options before finally ending up doing the right thing is time consuming - it's also "consuming" kids, see Sandy Hook, Gilroy Garlic Festival, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.

BTW, you are the one hung up on population and geography - China (population) and Russia (geography) prove you wrong.

It's been fun - as always. Let's agree to disagree, shall we?

 

[ph3iron]

Bats, knives, clubs, bare hands.... the list is literally endless

But swimming pools were quoted so often as being so dangerous in gun control debates. Someone must have attacked someone with a swimming pool, Shirley?

No.....they pools kill more people every single year than rifles do....

Rifles in 2017....403

Pools...3,536 died in non-boating related drownings...

You want to ban these rifles for 403 deaths...pools kill over 1,500 every single year....

Knives are used to kill over 1,500 people every single year...

According to your logic, if we have to ban 18 million rifles, a low count, for 403 murders...then we also have to ban Pools for the 3,536 deaths every year, and knives for the over 1,500 deaths every year...

That is your logic, not ours.

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8


Rifles... 403

Knives.....1,591

Hands and feet......696

Clubs.....467

I think the gov should give every citizen 100 guns.
My neighbors a pain, think I'll shoot up his house

 

[2aguy]

you keep saying "military style" as if that means shit or can really be defined.

They've had the shit defined out of them. What it boils down to is a semi automatic rifle that will take large capacity removable magazines. It's not rocket science except to gun nuts at their most obtuse.

Yes...it is science.....magazine capacity has no bearing on deaths and injuries in mass public shootings....

Gilroy, rifle.....3.

From Mother Jones list of mass public shootings......

US mass shootings, 1982-2019: Data from Mother Jones’ investigation


Shotgun

Russian Polyteknic shooting....20
#13.......5 dead
#25.......3
#47.......12
#113...8

#103...revolver....8

These are shotguns and revolver mass public shootings.....it isn't the magazine...it is the gun free zone that allows a shooter to be unmolested when he is killing people, who isn't stopped until someone else points a gun at him.

 

[2aguy]

Oh, here's one.

You're as full of shit as I expected.

Not the mini argument. So why isn't it the most popular semi automatic?

Because...moron....

The AR-15 is customizable for different sized people, you can attach different sights, scopes, lazers and lights to it.....

If you have several members of a family, not all of them will fit that rifle above comfortably, you can't attach a light, laser or any other pieces of equipment for self defense or sport.

 

[2aguy]

Not the mini argument.

I understand the Minis have 20 round removable magazines available. They're out.

They are protected by the Constitution.......as explained in the Heller decision and by Scalia in his opinion in Friedman v Highland Park...

 

[2aguy]

I'm sorry for your lack of comprehension. To put is simply..I was rejecting Swiss laws as a solution to American problems...as I feel that our large population and diverse culture argue against it. 8m is not 300+m. Yes, the American culture is unique among developed nations..you used the term 'exceptional'... in its tolerance of gun violence as the 'go to' solution.I don't believe that this is going to change any time soon.
I also reject a per capita rubric as a valid basis of comparison between the two cultures...for many of the same reasons listed above.

To conclude..just because the Swiss have a large per capita rate of gun ownership with a low rate of per capita gun violence does not mean that the same is possible here.

CNM's comprehension is okay, the occasional lapse notwithstanding. Happens to all of us.

This - "8m is not 300+m" - just doesn't make sense, unless you are willing to say that a duly enacted law cannot be enforced once the population grows beyond a certain number. This is obviously nonsensical in face of the fact that laws, even unpopular laws such as the tax code, are routinely being enforced. It isn't easy, and folks find ways to counter act and violate that law, but it is in force. The same would happen with strict, Swiss-style gun regulations, just as it happens with the tax code, and against a "culture" that in essence maintains, "tax is theft", or at the least, "taxes are too high".

Gun regulations are fare more a case of political will (or rather the lack thereof), and even that appears to be changing, and rapidly, as urbanization and modernization see to it that tolerance for guns and gun violence is dwindling, and Democrats are more and more willing to pick up the cause. The question, "Are scores of dead kids really a price worth paying for lax gun laws and hundreds of millions of guns in private hands?", is going to demand an answer with increased urgency, and the trend is toward answering in the negative. It's just a matter of time, fighting spirit, and, devastatingly enough, a case of the costs of the current non-regulation piling up.

Indeed the laws are 'in force'...but they don't appear to be 'enforced', with any degree of consistency or regularity.
As for population..well yes..it is easier to enforce a law in a smaller population...just as a matter of logistics and expense. Most people obey the law..not for fear of consequence..but because they believe in the rule of law and that it is their duty to abide by statute. I'm not at all sure that this would be the case in this country as regards gun regulation..in fact, I'm pretty sure that the gun laws are violated every day with no consequence..either social or criminal.
We come to the crux of it..as tens of millions still answer your question with a resounding 'yes'..that the deaths of innocents are worth what they perceive of as their gun rights.

When our gun laws are enforced they work

Virginia Project Exile

Study 1
Firearm Homicide Rates, Project Exile
Rosenfeld and colleagues (2005) found a statistically significant intervention effect for Project Exile. Firearm homicides in Richmond exhibited a 22 percent yearly decline, compared with the average reduction of about 10 percent per year for other large U.S. cities. The difference is statistically significant.

See....the anti-gunners couldn't give a rats ass if a law actually reduces actual gun crime committed by actual criminals......all they care about is taking guns away from normal people...because those people obey the law.