So what IS the best way to reduce or prevent mass shootings?

[2aguy]

Europe...murdered 12 million unarmed people.....Russia murdered 25 million unarmed people, China murdered 70 million unarmed people...Japan murdered millions of unarmed Chinese, Koreans, Okinawans, Phillipinos, Cambodia murdered 1/3 of it's unarmed population....Rwanda murdered 800,000 unarmed people.....

Are those nations peaceful because they murdered so many people..the rest are too afraid to get on the wrong side of the well armed government?


Yeah....I would prefer to have armed citizens to keep the government from murdering people.....

Uh, guy, most of those conflicts both sides were armed, and the winners killed the losers.

Violence only begets more violence.

They killed the unarmed civilians.......who had no way to stop the murder.......you guys sure do like your mass murder, genocide and ethnic cleansing.....

 

[2aguy]

Except when they murder their unarmed citizens in the millions.....or their criminals decide they need a gun and get them easily........notice that the criminals in Europe prefer to use fully automatic military rifles, grenades and pistols...all of which are almost impossible for a normal citizen to get over there...but the criminals get them easily....

Yet they have on mass shooting a decade while we have one every other week. Interesting.

And that is changing...they caught a 19 year old 2 weeks ago about to shoot up his school, in Britain.

A 15 year old immigrant kid murdered a police employee in Australia......

Their culture is changing and they are getting the guns they want.....

In fact, gun ownership in Australia is back to the levels before they confiscated their guns...and their gun crime is escalating.

 

[2aguy]

They did nothing because they were all pacifists terrified that any counter to hitler would lead to war…so they all let him gobble up country after country until it was too late to stop him...

Uh. No.

They let him gooble up countries because they were more scared of Stalin. He was killing Rich people. Hitler was just killing Jews. So they let him Gobble up Countries that actually wanted to be gobbled up. Austria wanted the Anchluss. The Sudatenland Germans wanted to join Germany.

If anything, the West instigated the war by writing the Polish Colonels a blank check in dealing with the Danzig Corridor (mostly populated with Germans at that point). Then Hitler outfoxed them by making a treaty with Stalin, the guy they backed him to counter.

Again, the Allies had 7 million men under arms in 1940. They were hardly unarmed or defenseless.

But some frenchman with a gun would have turned the tide.

Horseshit. French civilians had plenty of guns. But the fact is, more French backed the Vichy than the Resistance. All the way up until the allies "liberated" them.

The allies didn't have the will to fight, the Germans had the will and had prepared for modern warfare....

And then when the millitaries of Europe were defeated, easily by the Germans, the unarmed civilians were murdered in their millions by the German occupiers...as the people willingly gave up their rifles and pistols believing that their governments would protect them.....

 

[saveliberty]

Stronger mental health system, which confines the violent.

Make firearms a mandatory class in school.

What if you're simply not interested in blood guts killing violence intimidation loud noises aggression via remote control destruction death firearms?

Vacation in Europe A LOT?

 

[saveliberty]

Someone asked for a possible solution. I offered an idea, without a claim one-size-fits-all.

 

[Pogo]

Stronger mental health system, which confines the violent.

Make firearms a mandatory class in school.

What if you're simply not interested in blood guts killing violence intimidation loud noises aggression via remote control destruction death firearms?

Vacation in Europe A LOT?

Occasionally. Much more often Canada. Just easier.

(/way offtopic)

 

[JoeB131]

The criminals in Europe can get guns just as easily as Americans can, but they don't use them because of cultural differences in their criminals......

Now you are getting into the border of the absurd.

and some of those countries hey have huge crime rates

No industrial Democracy has the crime rates we have. And in Norway, "Texas" has become slang for crazy.

.rape is already a huge problem in Sweden and it is going to spread to the other European countries..

OH NOES, SCARY BROWN PEOPLE!!!!

In 2012, Sweden had 66 cases of reported rapes per 100,000 population, according to the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (Brå).[234] This was unequivocally the biggest number reported to the UNODC in 2012.[235] However, widely differing legal systems, offence definitions, terminological variations, recording practices and statistical conventions makes any cross-national comparison on rape statistics difficult,[236][237][238][239] which is why the UNODC itself caution against using their figures


In short. what would qualify as "rape" in Sweden wouldn't qualify as rape in the US.

The majority of rapes in the United States go unreported. According to the American Medical Association (1995), sexual violence, and rape in particular, is considered the most under-reported violent crime.[270] Some of the most common reasons given by victims for not reporting rapes are when the victim considers it a personal or private matter, and the fear of reprisal from the assailant.[271] Under reporting affects the accuracy of this data.

So essentially, you REALLY can't make your case with murder, because we are murdering people by the truckload while other countries, meh, not so much.

But you can take a crime like rape, where there are different definitions of what constitutes rape, and how often it is reported due to cultural issues.

Hey, maybe we have less reported rapes because you have politicians who use terms like "Legitimate rape" and "Gift from God" Rape to minimize how serious a crime it is.

 

[JoeB131]

They killed the unarmed civilians.......who had no way to stop the murder.......you guys sure do like your mass murder, genocide and ethnic cleansing.....

every case you've cited occured after a long civil war that one side lost... So no, not really.

They had a total fighting chance, and the winners killed the losers.

 

[2aguy]

The criminals in Europe can get guns just as easily as Americans can, but they don't use them because of cultural differences in their criminals......

Now you are getting into the border of the absurd.

and some of those countries hey have huge crime rates

No industrial Democracy has the crime rates we have. And in Norway, "Texas" has become slang for crazy.

.rape is already a huge problem in Sweden and it is going to spread to the other European countries..

OH NOES, SCARY BROWN PEOPLE!!!!

In 2012, Sweden had 66 cases of reported rapes per 100,000 population, according to the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (Brå).[234] This was unequivocally the biggest number reported to the UNODC in 2012.[235] However, widely differing legal systems, offence definitions, terminological variations, recording practices and statistical conventions makes any cross-national comparison on rape statistics difficult,[236][237][238][239] which is why the UNODC itself caution against using their figures


In short. what would qualify as "rape" in Sweden wouldn't qualify as rape in the US.

The majority of rapes in the United States go unreported. According to the American Medical Association (1995), sexual violence, and rape in particular, is considered the most under-reported violent crime.[270] Some of the most common reasons given by victims for not reporting rapes are when the victim considers it a personal or private matter, and the fear of reprisal from the assailant.[271] Under reporting affects the accuracy of this data.

So essentially, you REALLY can't make your case with murder, because we are murdering people by the truckload while other countries, meh, not so much.

But you can take a crime like rape, where there are different definitions of what constitutes rape, and how often it is reported due to cultural issues.

Hey, maybe we have less reported rapes because you have politicians who use terms like "Legitimate rape" and "Gift from God" Rape to minimize how serious a crime it is.

So essentially, you REALLY can't make your case with murder, because we are murdering people by the truckload while other countries, meh, not so much.

Total gun murders in 2014....8,124.....total guns in the United States, over 320 million....

So.....8,124 gun murders in a country of over 320 million people...

Which leaves 319,991,876 million guns that were not used to commit murder.....

And again....criminals in Europe get guns whenever they want or need them....it is the normal, law abiding Europeans...the non criminals, who can't get guns.

 

[2aguy]

The criminals in Europe can get guns just as easily as Americans can, but they don't use them because of cultural differences in their criminals......

Now you are getting into the border of the absurd.

and some of those countries hey have huge crime rates

No industrial Democracy has the crime rates we have. And in Norway, "Texas" has become slang for crazy.

.rape is already a huge problem in Sweden and it is going to spread to the other European countries..

OH NOES, SCARY BROWN PEOPLE!!!!

In 2012, Sweden had 66 cases of reported rapes per 100,000 population, according to the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (Brå).[234] This was unequivocally the biggest number reported to the UNODC in 2012.[235] However, widely differing legal systems, offence definitions, terminological variations, recording practices and statistical conventions makes any cross-national comparison on rape statistics difficult,[236][237][238][239] which is why the UNODC itself caution against using their figures


In short. what would qualify as "rape" in Sweden wouldn't qualify as rape in the US.

The majority of rapes in the United States go unreported. According to the American Medical Association (1995), sexual violence, and rape in particular, is considered the most under-reported violent crime.[270] Some of the most common reasons given by victims for not reporting rapes are when the victim considers it a personal or private matter, and the fear of reprisal from the assailant.[271] Under reporting affects the accuracy of this data.

So essentially, you REALLY can't make your case with murder, because we are murdering people by the truckload while other countries, meh, not so much.

But you can take a crime like rape, where there are different definitions of what constitutes rape, and how often it is reported due to cultural issues.

Hey, maybe we have less reported rapes because you have politicians who use terms like "Legitimate rape" and "Gift from God" Rape to minimize how serious a crime it is.

So essentially, you REALLY can't make your case with murder, because we are murdering people by the truckload while other countries, meh, not so much.

8,124 people murdered with guns....about 70% of those victims were criminals themselves engaged in crime....

that is about 162 people per state.....out of 320 million people...

The problem with Europe..they don't murder people by the truckload....when Europe, Russia, China, Japan...murder people....

They do it by the Train load................

 

[Little-Acorn]

Violence only begets more violence.

No, people who think they know better how you should live, than you do... and who want to disarm you so they can force their will on you (that is, modern liberals) beget more violence.

When the victims try to fight back and refuse disarmament, the resulting violence is not the victims' fault. It's still the liberals' fault, who tried to coerce them in the first place.

And the best way to reduce mass shootings, is still allowing everyone to carry. Most people still won't bother. But a few will. And the criminal knows that when he wants to shoot up a shopping mall or school, knows that a few adults in the crowd are probably carrying... and he won't know which ones they are. But he knows it's unlikely he'll be able to rack up the huge body counts he wants, to get weeks of lurid headlines after he's dead. And so he often will change his mind and not try. Without a shot being fired.

You can never eliminate all mass shootings 100%. But this is the best way to reduce them.

And the liberals are dead set against it. Even though they know the methods they are pushing, don't work.

 

[Contumacious]

After their militaries were defeated because they prepared for the last war, while Germany created a military for the next war, the civilian populations were unarmed in the face of occupation….they had ignored the reasons you need an armed population….

Reason for guns...criminals, the dangerously mentally ill, government inability to protect, government murder

Guy, the only reason you have a gun is because you are a scared little man with a tiny dick.
.

I HAVE AN ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO LIFE AND DEFEND THE SAME.

BUT IF I BUY A FIREARM THEN YOU ARE GOING TO CLAIM THAT "I AM SCARE LITTLE MAN WITH A TINY DICK"

SINCE I DO NOT GIVE A SHIT ABOUT WHAT YOU CLAIM TO BELIEVE I WILL OWN FIREARMS .


.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Am I saying you can't have a gun unless you're in a militia? No.
Am I saying the constitutional standing for you to have a gun isn't there? You betcha.

None of this is found anywhere in the Constitution..

 

[M14 Shooter]

The word Militia is there for a reason.
Awk! Polly want a cracker?

Is this liberal fanatic still trying to pretend guns are only for militias?
And ignoring the fact that this line was completely debunked just a few minutes ago?
Herr Goebbels would be proud.

Goebbels understood that 'the big lie" theory applied to the people who disseminate it as well as those who hear it.

Goebbels would be proud of his best apprentice; you.

Ironic, given that YOU have lied so often about this that you believe it.

 

[candycorn]

Violence only begets more violence.

No, people who think they know better how you should live, than you do... and who want to disarm you so they can force their will on you (that is, modern liberals) beget more violence.

When the victims try to fight back and refuse disarmament, the resulting violence is not the victims' fault. It's still the liberals' fault, who tried to coerce them in the first place.

And the best way to reduce mass shootings, is still allowing everyone to carry. Most people still won't bother. But a few will. And the criminal knows that when he wants to shoot up a shopping mall or school, knows that a few adults in the crowd are probably carrying... and he won't know which ones they are. But he knows it's unlikely he'll be able to rack up the huge body counts he wants, to get weeks of lurid headlines after he's dead. And so he often will change his mind and not try. Without a shot being fired.

You can never eliminate all mass shootings 100%. But this is the best way to reduce them.

And the liberals are dead set against it. Even though they know the methods they are pushing, don't work.

Total nonsense.

If more guns made the public safer, the US would have the safest society by far since, by far, we have the highest number of guns in the hands of citizenry of any 1st world nation.

Instead, we have, by far, the highest homicide rate of any developed nation.

Meanwhile, nations that have passed strict gun control efforts have very few shootings compared to the United States.

Its vividly clear that they are doing something right and we are doing something wrong.

Those are the facts and they are not in dispute.

 

[2aguy]

Violence only begets more violence.

No, people who think they know better how you should live, than you do... and who want to disarm you so they can force their will on you (that is, modern liberals) beget more violence.

When the victims try to fight back and refuse disarmament, the resulting violence is not the victims' fault. It's still the liberals' fault, who tried to coerce them in the first place.

And the best way to reduce mass shootings, is still allowing everyone to carry. Most people still won't bother. But a few will. And the criminal knows that when he wants to shoot up a shopping mall or school, knows that a few adults in the crowd are probably carrying... and he won't know which ones they are. But he knows it's unlikely he'll be able to rack up the huge body counts he wants, to get weeks of lurid headlines after he's dead. And so he often will change his mind and not try. Without a shot being fired.

You can never eliminate all mass shootings 100%. But this is the best way to reduce them.

And the liberals are dead set against it. Even though they know the methods they are pushing, don't work.

Total nonsense.

If more guns made the public safer, the US would have the safest society by far since, by far, we have the highest number of guns in the hands of citizenry of any 1st world nation.

Instead, we have, by far, the highest homicide rate of any developed nation.

Meanwhile, nations that have passed strict gun control efforts have very few shootings compared to the United States.

Its vividly clear that they are doing something right and we are doing something wrong.

Those are the facts and they are not in dispute.

Actually, those nations were already less violent and had less gun violence before the confiscations and gun control...

And as more Americans own and carry guns our gun murder rate has gone down, not up......and after the confiscation in Britain violent crime increased.....they are twice as violent as the United States....

And again.....Europe murdered 12 million innocent men, women and children....all unarmed and helpless....so Europe isn't a model we should follow...

And again, 70% of all gun murder victims had criminal records and were shot committing crimes.....90% of shooters had at least one criminal conviction and 70% had at least 4....so normal people aren't shooting people....you have a criminal culture in America driven by the entertainment industry that you don't see over in Europe.

And Australia, Britain and Europe are getting more violent, not less violent...they are importing violent populations into their relatively non violent cultures...so their crime rates will be sky rocketing very soon....

 

[2aguy]

Violence only begets more violence.

No, people who think they know better how you should live, than you do... and who want to disarm you so they can force their will on you (that is, modern liberals) beget more violence.

When the victims try to fight back and refuse disarmament, the resulting violence is not the victims' fault. It's still the liberals' fault, who tried to coerce them in the first place.

And the best way to reduce mass shootings, is still allowing everyone to carry. Most people still won't bother. But a few will. And the criminal knows that when he wants to shoot up a shopping mall or school, knows that a few adults in the crowd are probably carrying... and he won't know which ones they are. But he knows it's unlikely he'll be able to rack up the huge body counts he wants, to get weeks of lurid headlines after he's dead. And so he often will change his mind and not try. Without a shot being fired.

You can never eliminate all mass shootings 100%. But this is the best way to reduce them.

And the liberals are dead set against it. Even though they know the methods they are pushing, don't work.

Total nonsense.

If more guns made the public safer, the US would have the safest society by far since, by far, we have the highest number of guns in the hands of citizenry of any 1st world nation.

Instead, we have, by far, the highest homicide rate of any developed nation.

Meanwhile, nations that have passed strict gun control efforts have very few shootings compared to the United States.

Its vividly clear that they are doing something right and we are doing something wrong.

Those are the facts and they are not in dispute.

and another thing....according to bill clinton and the study he commissioned, Americans use guns to stop violent criminal attack and save lives 1.5 million times a year......

so....

Gun murder in 2014.... 8,124

Guns used to stop crime..... 1..5 million, according to bill clinton

So guns, by far, stop more crime and save more lives than they take.....

And remember as well......European criminals and Australian criminals can get guns whenever they want them....it is as easy for them to get guns as it is for American criminals to get guns...they just don't use them as much...but they use them when the want to use them and they have had confiscation and extreme gun control in Europe...and it hasn't worked either.....

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Violence only begets more violence.

No, people who think they know better how you should live, than you do... and who want to disarm you so they can force their will on you (that is, modern liberals) beget more violence.

When the victims try to fight back and refuse disarmament, the resulting violence is not the victims' fault. It's still the liberals' fault, who tried to coerce them in the first place.

And the best way to reduce mass shootings, is still allowing everyone to carry. Most people still won't bother. But a few will. And the criminal knows that when he wants to shoot up a shopping mall or school, knows that a few adults in the crowd are probably carrying... and he won't know which ones they are. But he knows it's unlikely he'll be able to rack up the huge body counts he wants, to get weeks of lurid headlines after he's dead. And so he often will change his mind and not try. Without a shot being fired.

You can never eliminate all mass shootings 100%. But this is the best way to reduce them.

And the liberals are dead set against it. Even though they know the methods they are pushing, don't work.

Total nonsense.

If more guns made the public safer, the US would have the safest society by far since, by far, we have the highest number of guns in the hands of citizenry of any 1st world nation.

Instead, we have, by far, the highest homicide rate of any developed nation.

Meanwhile, nations that have passed strict gun control efforts have very few shootings compared to the United States.

Its vividly clear that they are doing something right and we are doing something wrong.

Those are the facts and they are not in dispute.

Do you really want to lower our homicide rate.......really lower it? Then I'll tell you what you do:

Forget about the stupid guns, they are going to be here no matter what law you make. It's a losing argument as most anti-gunners know. What you do is petition your Congress people to speed up the death penalty process. There is no reason somebody who is sentenced to execution be on our prison rolls for 15 to 20 years.

What we need to do is have all appeals exhausted within 5 months or less of sentencing. Then the execution is made public and televised; maybe pay-per-view or something.

That will reduce homicides greatly because it becomes more of a reality to a criminal. Are you really worried about what's going to happen to you in 20 years from today? Well neither am I nor most people. That's why the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime.

 

[2aguy]

Violence only begets more violence.

No, people who think they know better how you should live, than you do... and who want to disarm you so they can force their will on you (that is, modern liberals) beget more violence.

When the victims try to fight back and refuse disarmament, the resulting violence is not the victims' fault. It's still the liberals' fault, who tried to coerce them in the first place.

And the best way to reduce mass shootings, is still allowing everyone to carry. Most people still won't bother. But a few will. And the criminal knows that when he wants to shoot up a shopping mall or school, knows that a few adults in the crowd are probably carrying... and he won't know which ones they are. But he knows it's unlikely he'll be able to rack up the huge body counts he wants, to get weeks of lurid headlines after he's dead. And so he often will change his mind and not try. Without a shot being fired.

You can never eliminate all mass shootings 100%. But this is the best way to reduce them.

And the liberals are dead set against it. Even though they know the methods they are pushing, don't work.

Total nonsense.

If more guns made the public safer, the US would have the safest society by far since, by far, we have the highest number of guns in the hands of citizenry of any 1st world nation.

Instead, we have, by far, the highest homicide rate of any developed nation.

Meanwhile, nations that have passed strict gun control efforts have very few shootings compared to the United States.

Its vividly clear that they are doing something right and we are doing something wrong.

Those are the facts and they are not in dispute.

Do you really want to lower our homicide rate.......really lower it? Then I'll tell you what you do:

Forget about the stupid guns, they are going to be here no matter what law you make. It's a losing argument as most anti-gunners know. What you do is petition your Congress people to speed up the death penalty process. There is no reason somebody who is sentenced to execution be on our prison rolls for 15 to 20 years.

What we need to do is have all appeals exhausted within 5 months or less of sentencing. Then the execution is made public and televised; maybe pay-per-view or something.

That will reduce homicides greatly because it becomes more of a reality to a criminal. Are you really worried about what's going to happen to you in 20 years from today? Well neither am I nor most people. That's why the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime.

Also....have prosecutors and judges take gun crimes seriously....they don't seem to get the point that the felon caught in possession of a gun today is the felon using a gun to murder when he is released from prison.....they are letting gun crimes out in less than 3 years......look any shooter...look in the news story to see if they had a previous criminal record...then ask yourself why they are out walking around and not in jail....

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Violence only begets more violence.

No, people who think they know better how you should live, than you do... and who want to disarm you so they can force their will on you (that is, modern liberals) beget more violence.

When the victims try to fight back and refuse disarmament, the resulting violence is not the victims' fault. It's still the liberals' fault, who tried to coerce them in the first place.

And the best way to reduce mass shootings, is still allowing everyone to carry. Most people still won't bother. But a few will. And the criminal knows that when he wants to shoot up a shopping mall or school, knows that a few adults in the crowd are probably carrying... and he won't know which ones they are. But he knows it's unlikely he'll be able to rack up the huge body counts he wants, to get weeks of lurid headlines after he's dead. And so he often will change his mind and not try. Without a shot being fired.

You can never eliminate all mass shootings 100%. But this is the best way to reduce them.

And the liberals are dead set against it. Even though they know the methods they are pushing, don't work.

Total nonsense.

If more guns made the public safer, the US would have the safest society by far since, by far, we have the highest number of guns in the hands of citizenry of any 1st world nation.

Instead, we have, by far, the highest homicide rate of any developed nation.

Meanwhile, nations that have passed strict gun control efforts have very few shootings compared to the United States.

Its vividly clear that they are doing something right and we are doing something wrong.

Those are the facts and they are not in dispute.

Do you really want to lower our homicide rate.......really lower it? Then I'll tell you what you do:

Forget about the stupid guns, they are going to be here no matter what law you make. It's a losing argument as most anti-gunners know. What you do is petition your Congress people to speed up the death penalty process. There is no reason somebody who is sentenced to execution be on our prison rolls for 15 to 20 years.

What we need to do is have all appeals exhausted within 5 months or less of sentencing. Then the execution is made public and televised; maybe pay-per-view or something.

That will reduce homicides greatly because it becomes more of a reality to a criminal. Are you really worried about what's going to happen to you in 20 years from today? Well neither am I nor most people. That's why the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime.

Also....have prosecutors and judges take gun crimes seriously....they don't seem to get the point that the felon caught in possession of a gun today is the felon using a gun to murder when he is released from prison.....they are letting gun crimes out in less than 3 years......look any shooter...look in the news story to see if they had a previous criminal record...then ask yourself why they are out walking around and not in jail....

For the simple fact they don't have any room in those jails.

This has been the complaint of Chicago law enforcement and law enforcement across the country. They nab a guy illegally carrying a gun and the court lets them out in three or four months. That's a walk in the park for a career criminal.

Judges are pressured by the justice system to keep prison sentencing down. Why we don't build more prisons is beyond me. But as far as a judge is concerned, a person carrying a firearm is not a violent offense, therefore priorities are given to violent offenders.