Mother Jones: Total of mass public shootings in U.S. in 2015 = 4.

[Care4all]

All very good ideas 2aguy...

I think we also should focus on stopping them before they commit another crime.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could reduce the number of felons getting the guns in the first place?

I mean, maybe we should have local law makers increase the sentences for those who make straw purchases for someone....? Not just for straw purchases where the gun was used in a crime, but for first time doers, and even if the gun was not used in a crime....? Or who buys 20 guns at a gun show, just to sell them on the Black Market?

Make the sentencing of the so to say, black marketeers so heavy, that the gun black market would near shrivel on the vine...?

I dunno?

 

[Care4all]

Honestly, I am clueless of the rules and regs on this, just through seeing other posts over the years have I become a little bit knowledgeable, but nothing I would write home about so here goes, and don't laugh at me for not knowing!!!!

What is everyone really talking about with purchases at gun shows?

Can any citizen just go in and buy 20 guns with no back ground check? And then sell them to whomever he wants as long as he claims he did not know they were criminals or something?

What do people mean when they say the term, "gun show loophole"? Loophole from what??

I am sorry if this sounds dumb..... but could you enlighten me?

 

[longknife]

Yes...rabidly anti gun, gun owner hating mother jones totalled up the number of actual mass public shootings in 2015.....and they got a total of 4.

US Mass Shootings, 1982-2015: Data From Mother Jones' Investigation

With muslim terrorism making up 2 of those attacks....

A total of 37 people killed by mass public shootings, the majority of which were because of muslim terrorism.

gun murder committed by violent criminals won't be out for a while....but in 2014 there were 8,124 gun murders the majority of which were committed by violent criminals against other violent criminals....

And 4 mass public shootins with a death toll of 9 people.

You didn't mention that a huge number of murders are black on black.

Are blacks not Americans? Are blacks not human beings? Should we just turn a blind eye to them and ignore the murdering of them just because it was a person of the same color murdering them?

What exactly was your point with that comment, which has been made on this thread a couple of times already by other right wing posters?

I made the comment as a simple matter of FACT. There was no racial intent. The OP is reporting on mass shootings and, as always happens, Leftists/Progressives have turned it into a gun control rant.

Guns don't kill people, people do. And, the biggest death toll is among blacks who are killed by other blacks.


You have a problem with that?

 

[longknife]

View attachment 58592

Please point that out to the poster who accused me of being a racist for posting that!

 

[longknife]

All very good ideas 2aguy...

I think we also should focus on stopping them before they commit another crime.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could reduce the number of felons getting the guns in the first place?

I mean, maybe we should have local law makers increase the sentences for those who make straw purchases for someone....? Not just for straw purchases where the gun was used in a crime, but for first time doers, and even if the gun was not used in a crime....? Or who buys 20 guns at a gun show, just to sell them on the Black Market?

Make the sentencing of the so to say, black marketeers so heavy, that the gun black market would near shrivel on the vine...?

I dunno?

Please explain to me just how you plan on taking guns away from criminals.

They are "criminals" because they don't obey the laws meaning if guns are illegal, it won't stop them from buying them.

And just how do you determine who is buying a lot of guns just to sell to criminals?

Okay, here's the "gun show loophole." Selling guns there is like you selling a gun you own to another private individual. You are not a licensed dealer so you don't meet the criteria of the laws.

Here is what I believe Congress should enact - not another ignorant Executive Order - if you apply for a background check to purchase a weapon from a dealer, you should be required to record any sales of that weapon to another individual. Failure to do so should result in a heavy fine. And, if the person you sell the gun to commits a crime, you should be tried for aiding and abetting.

 

[jillian]

Yes...rabidly anti gun, gun owner hating mother jones totalled up the number of actual mass public shootings in 2015.....and they got a total of 4.

US Mass Shootings, 1982-2015: Data From Mother Jones' Investigation

With muslim terrorism making up 2 of those attacks....

A total of 37 people killed by mass public shootings, the majority of which were because of muslim terrorism.

gun murder committed by violent criminals won't be out for a while....but in 2014 there were 8,124 gun murders the majority of which were committed by violent criminals against other violent criminals....

And 4 mass public shootins with a death toll of 9 people.

are you a sociopath?

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

View attachment 58592

This is the real problem, black on black crime, obviously the criminal gene is just in their DNA, which is another reason why whites shouldn't degrade themselves by mixing DNA with them.

Of course, an open debate about black on black crime would be "racist" and my goodness, those crime figures from the notorious Ultra Right-Wing and racist bastion of San Francisco

San Franciscans, what a group of racists!

I'm a White male who was married to a Black Woman who is more Conservative than myself. Stating it's a DNA problem instead of a failure in the family unit and Liberal policies is retarded. You sound like an old school Democrat I hope you don't consider yourself a Republican.

 

[aaronleland]

View attachment 58592

You DO know that's a lie, right?

Drumpf LIED to you and you fell for it.

Noted Racist Donald Trump Tweets Out Anti-Black Propaganda

According to the most recently released set of crime statistics from the FBI (which are from 2014), 82 percent of white homicides are committed by other white people, while black offenders account for just 14 percent of white homicides.

And out of the total number of black homicides, 7 percent are actually committed by white offenders, while 89 percent are committed by other black people.

Expanded Homicide Data Table 6

Notice he hasn't posted anymore? He feels like a fool for posting data from an organization that doesn't even exist.

 

[the_human_being]

 

[2aguy]

All very good ideas 2aguy...

I think we also should focus on stopping them before they commit another crime.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could reduce the number of felons getting the guns in the first place?

I mean, maybe we should have local law makers increase the sentences for those who make straw purchases for someone....? Not just for straw purchases where the gun was used in a crime, but for first time doers, and even if the gun was not used in a crime....? Or who buys 20 guns at a gun show, just to sell them on the Black Market?

Make the sentencing of the so to say, black marketeers so heavy, that the gun black market would near shrivel on the vine...?

I dunno?

Criminals don't get their guns at gun shows....there is too much police observation...they prefer straw buyers they know..that is why I said friends and family.

If you catch someone knowingly supplying a felon with a gun as a straw purchaser they should get 10 years...I have posted several stories where known straw buyers got away with light sentences. I just don't want the brother buying his brother a gun getting ten years for screwing up the paperwork....

At least one member of the straw purchase has to be a felon....otherwise you are catching normal gun owners buying and selling a legal product and destroying their lives to no real purpose other than to destroy that life.

 

[the_human_being]

 

[2aguy]

Honestly, I am clueless of the rules and regs on this, just through seeing other posts over the years have I become a little bit knowledgeable, but nothing I would write home about so here goes, and don't laugh at me for not knowing!!!!

What is everyone really talking about with purchases at gun shows?

Can any citizen just go in and buy 20 guns with no back ground check? And then sell them to whomever he wants as long as he claims he did not know they were criminals or something?

What do people mean when they say the term, "gun show loophole"? Loophole from what??

I am sorry if this sounds dumb..... but could you enlighten me?

this is a good piece on gun shows......and the truth about them......

7 Gun Control Myths That Just Won't Die

Nine Myths About Gun Control

1) The ‘Gun Show Loophole’ Allows Anyone, Even Criminals, To Get Guns

In reality, the so-called “gun show loophole” is a myth. It does not exist. There is no loophole in federal law that specifically exempts gun show transactions from any other laws normally applied to gun sales. Not one.

If you purchase a firearm from a federal firearms licensee (FFL) regardless of the location of the transaction — a gun store, a gun show, a gun dealer’s car trunk, etc. — that FFL must confirm that you are legally allowed to purchase that gun. That means the FFL must either run a background check on you via the federal NICS database, or confirm that you have passed a background check by examining your state-issued concealed carry permit or your government-issued purchase permit. There are zero exceptions to this federal requirement.

If an individual purchases a gun across state lines — from an individual or FFL which resides in a different state than the buyer — the buyer must undergo a background check, and the sale must be processed by an FFL in the buyer’s home state.


What does exist, however, is a federal exemption for sales between two private, non-FFL residents of the same state, regardless of whether that transaction happens at a gun show or not.
The identity of the parties involved in the transaction, not the venue of the sale, is what matters under federal law.

This federal exemption makes perfect sense: there’s no federal nexus for a purely private transaction between two private individuals who reside in the same state. Many states, including Oregon,Colorado, and Illinois, have enacted universal background checks in order to eliminate the exemption for same-state private firearms transactions.

Federal universal background checks may or may not be a wise idea — the U.S. Senate in 2013 explicitly refused to enact them — but referring to the federal exemption for private, same-state sales as a “gun show loophole” is misleading and factually inaccurate.


So that private seller could go to a gun show and simply say...meet me down the block....and sell the gun...the gun show has no bearing on the sale of that gun since it is one individual selling a legal product to another individual.

To stop "monitor" individuals selling to other individuals, there is the Universal Background Check concept...which would mean any individual, selling a gun to another individual, would have to get a federal background check on that individual before they sold the gun.

That sounds nice, it sounds common sense, it sounds reasonable....until you get into what exactly it means in the real world.

If you Care4all have a gun...and you want to sell it to your dad...you know he is not a felon...you would have to take him to a police station, or a gun store and get the background check done...paying a fee to do it. That means the police would have to devote someone to run that check, or the gun store would have to say they will do it, and again, devote someone to do the check....and if either one refuses...then what? You need another law.

Now most people think...well...that isn't too bad.....just inconvenient...unless of course you don't have a lot of money, and the additional cost on top of everything else...which technically would be unconstitutional the same way a Poll Tax for voting would be.

Also....those who hate guns, Mayor Bloomberg and his two anti gun groups have a different definition for requiring background checks.

Let's say you go to the gun range with a friend and your friend, who you know is not a felon, wants to try out the pistol you have because they may want to buy one.....under the background check system bloomberg and obama want...you cannot hand your gun to that person to let them shoot a few rounds down range without a background check...if you do....you could possibly be a felon for doing it. I have the post on that...

Dittos lending a gun to a family member.....or using a gun provided by a gun safety class.......

Or...you want to take a vacation and you want to be responsible...you want to store your gun/guns with a friend while you are away....each gun would then require a background check to hand over to your friend...and another one to hand them back.......at the local gun store. If you don't...you could both be felons.....

So when you here that 90% of gun owner support background checks, that means they don't understand what the anti gun groups are actually pushing for background checks.

Now keep in mind....criminals won't do any of this....neither will mass shooters. This is why 2nd Amendment supporters get irritated....these new background checks are targeted solely at normal gun owners and normal gun owning activity. And they will do nothing to stop criminals or mass shooters from getting guns.

The only way to do that is to arrest them when they are caught committing a crime, or during traffice stops or other interactions with police......or setting up police stings at gun shows and other places to set up straw purchases.

 

[2aguy]

Honestly, I am clueless of the rules and regs on this, just through seeing other posts over the years have I become a little bit knowledgeable, but nothing I would write home about so here goes, and don't laugh at me for not knowing!!!!

What is everyone really talking about with purchases at gun shows?

Can any citizen just go in and buy 20 guns with no back ground check? And then sell them to whomever he wants as long as he claims he did not know they were criminals or something?

What do people mean when they say the term, "gun show loophole"? Loophole from what??

I am sorry if this sounds dumb..... but could you enlighten me?

Here is what Bloomberg wants......

How Everytown’s background check law impedes firearms safety training and self-defense

Laws based on the Bloomberg system have been enacted in Colorado, Oregon and Washington. They will be on the ballot in 2016 in Nevada, and perhaps in Maine. A similar law (Fix Gun Checks Act, S. 374) has been repeatedly proposed federally by Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.)

The Bloomberg system applies to every firearms “transfer.” In normal firearms law, a “transfer” means “a permanent exchange of title or possession and does not include gratuitous temporary exchanges or loans.” Chow v. State. 393 Md. 431, 473, 903 A.2d 388, 413 (2006).



However, the Bloomberg laws create a very different definition. For example, the Washington state law says that “ ‘Transfer’ means the intended delivery of a firearm to another person without consideration of payment or promise of payment including, but not limited to, gifts and loans.” Rev. Code Wash. § 9.41.010(25).

In other words, it applies to sharing a gun while target shooting on one’s own property, or to lending a gun to a neighbor for a weekend hunting trip.

Under the Bloomberg system, transfers may take place only at a gun store. The transfer must be conducted exactly as if the retailer were selling a firearm out of her inventory. So the transferee (the neighbor borrowing the hunting gun) must fill out ATF Form 4473; the retailer must contact the FBI or its state counterpart for a background check on the transferee; and then, the retailer must take custody of the gun and record the acquisition in her Acquisition and Disposition book. Finally, the retailer hands the gun to the transferee and records the disposition in her Acquisition and Disposition book. A few days later, after the hunting trip is over, the process must be repeated for the neighbor to return the gun to the owner; this time, the owner will be the “transferee,” who will fill out Form 4473 and undergo the background check.

 

[2aguy]

Honestly, I am clueless of the rules and regs on this, just through seeing other posts over the years have I become a little bit knowledgeable, but nothing I would write home about so here goes, and don't laugh at me for not knowing!!!!

What is everyone really talking about with purchases at gun shows?

Can any citizen just go in and buy 20 guns with no back ground check? And then sell them to whomever he wants as long as he claims he did not know they were criminals or something?

What do people mean when they say the term, "gun show loophole"? Loophole from what??

I am sorry if this sounds dumb..... but could you enlighten me?

And this is how the Universal Background check they want hurts actual gun safety training for normal people.....

Safety training

Sensible firearms policy should encourage, not impede, safety instruction. The Bloomberg laws do just the opposite. They do so by making ordinary safety training impossible unless it takes place at a corporate target range. (The federal S. 374 allows transfers “at a shooting range located in or on premises owned or occupied by a duly incorporated organization organized for conservation purposes or to foster proficiency in firearms.”)

A target range is usually necessary for the component of some safety courses that includes “live fire” — in which students fire guns at a range under the supervision of an instructor. However, even the courses that have live fire also have an extensive classroom component. Some introductory courses are classroom-only. In the classroom, dozens of firearms transfers will take place. Many students may not yet own a firearm; even if a student does own a firearm, many instructors choose to allow only their own personal firearms in the classroom, as the instructor may want to teach particular facts about particular types of firearms. The instructor also wants to use firearms that he or she is certain are in good working order. In any classroom setting, functional ammunition is absolutely forbidden.


In the classroom, students are taught how to handle guns safely. Some safety skills can be taught with inert, plastic replicas — for example, the lesson that a person should always keep a gun pointed in a safe direction, or that a person should keep her finger off the trigger until a gun is on target. Learning other safety skills, though, requires using a real gun. For example, when a person hands a gun to someone else, she must first make sure that the gun is unloaded, that the safety is “on” and that the gun is inoperable because the “action” is open. For this latter requirement, this would mean that a double-barreled shotgun is broken open so that the hinged barrels are not aligned with the rest of the gun. For a semiautomatic gun, it would mean that the slide is locked back into the open position. For a revolver, it would mean that the cylinder is swung open, and not inside the rest of the gun. The training requires real guns with moving parts.

Another element of safety instruction is teaching students how to safely load and unload a gun. This is typically done by using real guns along with inert dummy ammunition. (The dummy ammunition is orange so that it can instantly be distinguished from real ammunition.) During the course of instruction, the instructors and students may “transfer” firearms dozens of times, with each transfer lasting only seconds or minutes.

Under the Bloomberg laws, the above activities are allowed only if they take place at a firing range owned by a corporation.
Pre-Bloomberg, these classes had been commonly offered in office buildings, churches, schools, and homes. Limiting the classes to target ranges makes the classes much more inconvenient.


Target ranges are often located on the outskirts of town, not where most people live. In rural areas, there may be many places where shooting is lawful and safe, but the nearest corporate-owned shooting range may be far away.


The likely result will be fewer people taking safety class

 

[TheCrusader]

View attachment 58592

You're a fucking idiot get informed:

Trump's Pants on Fire tweet that blacks killed 81% of white homicide victims

 

[airplanemechanic]

Here's a map of all the mass shootings in 2015 | PBS NewsHour

WHERE 4 or more were KILLED

You do know that your source cites shootings were less than 4 were killed right?

 

[Care4all]

Here's a map of all the mass shootings in 2015 | PBS NewsHour

WHERE 4 or more were KILLED

You do know that your source cites shootings were less than 4 were killed right?

i dunno if they did or didn't, just know this is what is claimed in the map definition

The group defines mass shootings as incidents when at least four people are killed or wounded, including the gunman.

so i guess some include wounded

I see no difference though, being wounded is not something to be taken lightly, just because you lived.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Yes, there you go, KILLED OR WOUNDED. For example, where I live, Lafayette LA was on that map. You click on the "12" and it shows, 12 wounded, 3 dead. What they don't tell you is ONE OF THE 3 WAS THE SHOOTER. Only 2 innocent people died in that shooting. Yet the shooting is depicted by a "12" on that map making someone think 12 people died.

You really need to check your own sources before you post them. Self pwnage is the best pwnage. Check more than the title of your source, man.

Perhaps your map should be titled "mass shootings, not mass killings." Because these are far different.

 

[Care4all]

Yes, there you go, KILLED OR WOUNDED. For example, where I live, Lafayette LA was on that map. You click on the "12" and it shows, 12 wounded, 3 dead. What they don't tell you is ONE OF THE 3 WAS THE SHOOTER. Only 2 innocent people died in that shooting. Yet the shooting is depicted by a "12" on that map making someone think 12 people died.

You really need to check your own sources before you post them. Self pwnage is the best pwnage. Check more than the title of your source, man.

Perhaps your map should be titled "mass shootings, not mass killings." Because these are far different.

Do you see being wounded by a gunman in your legs or spine, where you are now a crippled, or being wounded in the eye where you are now blinded in it, or in the pelvic area where you can no longer bear children, or shot in the head where you no longer remember who you and your family are, any less critical or important than those killed?

 

[airplanemechanic]

Yea I do, and I also see it as fudging the numbers to make it seem worse than it is. 8 of the 9 people wounded that night were released from the hospital within 24 hours. They weren't wounded that severely, as most gunshot victims aren't. They had grazing wounds or ricochet wounds. Quit catastrophizing everything. The Grand was a gun free zone. Had someone had a gun they could have stopped him, but that would have meant they were law abiding citizens. The ones you want to disarm so badly.

I know this because it happened 500 feet from where I used to work. My coworker knew one of the people actually killed. This is a tight community.