Another Mass Shooting in the U.S.
- Thread starter essguy_
- Start date
It's 30 years old.
Has it been republished more recently?
Times have changed in the last 30 years.
As an American I believe we are coming apart at the seams ! It's been getting worse each year, and now it seems like a weekly event.
The death count seems to be going up too, almost as if one guy is trying outdo the other guy before him
Crime has been trending down for decades. There are more mass shooters than before so this gives the impression that society is more violent now. Things used to be much worse.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwi858rGRPg0lFFVycFvvWA
I'm guessing lots of kids among the victims.
Sickening!!
I have been for a while now, and so are many people in the U.S. Unless it's over 15 fatality mark, it barley makes the front page these days.
If the shooter is psychotic he should not be hold
criminally responsible if he is in Canada provided
that he has missed his medication.
Not sure how accurate this is, but here ya go.
EDIT: its from Boston Globe, so probably accurate
https://twitter.com/BostonGlobe/status/927276093425553409
EDIT: its from Boston Globe, so probably accurate
https://twitter.com/BostonGlobe/status/927276093425553409
Depending upon the state there already is significant gun control legislation. For example Illinois has some of the strictest legislation yet gun crime is an epidemic in Chicago. Furthermore, a very small percentage of gun murders are committed using legally purchased firearms. There are no official stats (or they won't tell us if there are) but we're talking less than 5%. So given that tell me why you think "serious" gun control legislation is required?
I’m guessing you meant antipsychotic.
And I assume you were trying to say “should be on antipsychotic meds.”
I've been to gunshows and even public ranges in the U.S. One easy "control" (quotation marks because it's not really a control, just a hurdle) is to eliminate the gunshow loophole. Another easy "control" is to require background checks in every jurisdiction. Lastly, another control is to require simple education on safe gun handling. The last isn't to prevent mass shooting, it's to prevent accidental shootings. Anybody who has ever been to a gunshow in the U.S. or even spent time at a public range (even private ranges have their problems - just ask any range safety officer) will see many examples of simple cluelessness in the safe handling of a weapon. And that's for gun owners who bother to go to a range. Many (maybe the majority) of gun owners and hunters think they can just pull out their weapon and be proficient in it with no practice time. Not knowing simple range etiquette and safety (eg: never muzzle sweeping, not knowing how to safe your weapon, not knowing how to maintain your weapon) - all of this could be covered in a simple required course. NONE of these requirements would take away any second amendment rights.
