Allegra Escorts Collective

And today's mass shooting 11 dead in Virginia Beach Municipal Complex

Grimnul

Well-known member
May 15, 2018
1,480
28
48
There is no simple solution. America has a gun culture. It’s part of their identity. It probably shouldn’t be, but it is. Trying to get guns out of the U.S. is like trying to get beef, or football, or Coca Cola out of the U.S. It’s so entrenched in their society that it’d be incredibly difficult to make any meaningful change even if people wanted it, which they don’t. Add in the NRA and the second amendment, and you just have a quagmire.

I’d say the first thing to do is make sentences for any crime committed where the perpetrator has a gun much harsher. Maybe an automatic double sentence, or ten extra years, something that hurts. That won’t stop a lot of these mass shootings, since most of these shooters plan to die in the attack anyway, but it would help with other gun crimes. Probably stop selling guns at Walmart. I mean yeah, some criminals will still be able to get them, but let’s make them work for it at least. Make it as difficult and inconvenient as possible. Right now, they basically hand the things out like candy in a lot of states.

The big thing is the culture, though. There are many countries that have a lot of guns. Some that have more guns per capita than the U.S. There are a lot more guns here than people realize. Yet here and in many of these other countries, gun violence is far less common. This suggests to me that guns, in and of themselves, are not necessarily the problem. It’s the cowboy culture. The Diehard culture. Charles Bronson’s character extrajudicially murders a bunch of people (who, granted, deserved it) in Death Wish, and he’s regarded as a hero. That’s not a healthy mindset. Vigilantes are not heroes, and yet they’re glamorized and held up as role models in American culture. The idea of a person who was wronged exacting bloody revenge is viewed as cathartic and almost romantic. It’s a difficult puzzle. I’m not sure there is a solution at this point. Honestly, I don’t expect anything to change. I think this is just how it is. Americans just value their guns more than they value human life and if a few thousand people have to die each year because of that, it’s an acceptable cost I guess.
 

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
51,394
9,967
113
Toronto
What do you want people to say?
It is what needs to be done to prevent stuff like this that is important, not what is said after.

If something significant is done, there would be less to comment on. But the Americans love their guns and by not taking action they are tacitly accepting these outcomes. They are basically saying that our right to have guns is more important to us than these deaths.
 

poorboy

Well-known member
Aug 18, 2001
1,264
101
63
Are you seriously blaming Obama for an increase in gun sales? LOL

Correlation is not causation. All of the crazies started buying guns the moment he got elected. Can't have a black president you know...end of times and all that.

I truly believe its stupid to blame any president for this insanity. Insane people do insane things. That has nothing to do with presidents. But lawmakers have a duty to protect society. They can do so by trying to ensure that crazy people have less access to guns. May not have helped in this case, but could have saved lives in the past and in the future.
The colour of Obama had nothing to do with skyrocketing gun sales under his presidency. The continuous attempts to introduce greater gun control drove gun sales.

The fear of Clinton getting into office also drove gun sales.

As soon as Trump was elected and people learned that no new federal gun legislation was going to be rammed down their throats, sales softened.

Remington went into bankruptcy protection. Olympic Arms closed down, Federal Ammunition made layoffs. Guns in the U.S. are the cheapest they've ever been in living people's memory because there is no fear of any widespread restrictions.

Those are the facts.

Americans want their guns. It's a $43 billion industry in the U.S.
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,969
2,893
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
In January, Virginia GOP killed bill to ban sales of large-capacity magazines

A Virginia bill designed to ban sales of large-capacity magazines similar to those used by the Virginia Beach gunman died in committee in January on a party-line vote.

The fate of the legislation, SB1748, was so widely expected that the outcome drew virtually no public attention. For more than 20 years, Republicans and a few rural Democrats in the General Assembly have killed almost every measure aimed at restricting gun ownership.

The GOP blocked a major push for gun control after the 2007 Virginia Tech shootings, where 33 people died. They chose instead to respond to that shooting by joining Democrats to enact mental-health reforms.

Although there are signs that public opinion has been shifting in favor of gun control in Virginia, the state has a history of support for gun rights symbolized by the location in Fairfax of the headquarters of the National Rifle Association.

Each year, Democrats propose multiple gun-control measures, such as strengthening background checks, limiting handgun purchases to one per month and allowing localities to regulate guns in public buildings. They call these “common-sense” measures to save lives.

Each year, Republican majorities in one or both chambers of the legislature vote them down, usually in committee. GOP legislators say their goal is never to infringe on people’s Second Amendment rights.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.ec19566aa045
 

Darts

Well-known member
Jan 15, 2017
23,042
11,220
113
It's no consolation but the lefties can't accuse the gunman of being a "white nationalist" or a "white supremacist".
 

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
51,394
9,967
113
Toronto
It's no consolation but the lefties can't accuse the gunman of being a "white nationalist" or a "white supremacist".
Consolation to whom? 12 innocent people die and you are looking for consolation for the raving, repugnant right who support guns and the expected outcomes? You guys are sick.
 

poorboy

Well-known member
Aug 18, 2001
1,264
101
63
The guy had a silencer.

Why do they sell those?
It's not a silencer, it's a suppressor. Silencer is a propaganda media term to demonize it. In the U.S. they are a legal NFA tax stamp item.

They reduce ear damage to the user, and greatly reduce noise pollution.

They are 100% legal in some European countries so that hunters don't disturb livestock and other citizens.

They are also used by the RCMP in carbine training because instructors were loosing hearing despite wearing double ear protection.

The USMC was making an effort to equip several high frequency deployed units with them so they could better communicate on the battlefield, and to reduce their number one compensation claim, hearing loss.


https://www.quora.com/Which-European-country-allows-to-buy-a-gun-suppressor

Most European countries allow the usage and ownership of a gun suppressor, to some extent. I would categorize these countries into three pools:
Countries which don't require licensing at all, meaning suppressors are over the counter.

Countries which do allow suppressors, but require licensing. Typically these countries require a reason for the ownership to grant a license. This could be for hunting, and so the license will be granted if you are a licensed hunter. My country, Denmark, falls under this category, however a suppressor license is very easy to get and you usually receive the paperwork for it a couple of days after the application was sent in online.

Countries which require licensing and a special reason/occupation to allow ownership. This could be that you are working for the public sector as Ranger in the forest and therefore sometimes have the need to put down wounded animals without scaring users of the forest or other animals. The license would be dependent on your licensing as a hunter and your contract with the state, meaning if you lose your job you lose the license for the suppressor.

In most European countries it is considered rude not to shoot with a suppressor. Those countries who currently don't allow ownership or usage are about to do so. Suppressor do NOT silence the sound completely, but only reduce (you still need hearing protection) to achieve a more comfortable, safe sound level.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,358
6,673
113
Were you born this hateful and bigoted towards the U.S. James? Just curious...
Because now is not the time to discuss guns. If only people in the building were allowed to carry guns.

It's sad that these type of events are so common that the response has the same tired talking points.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,358
6,673
113
Why?

Prevention isn't that hard: Less guns

Doesn't matter why they are mad/crazy, just have less guns available.
Less guns wouldn't have prevented it, just likely kept the number of victims and severity of injuries down.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,358
6,673
113
...

My last statement was that any efforts to take away guns could likely result in civil war, which is an unsuccessful outcome.
Except a majority of Americans support greater restrictions on guns. Things like universal background checks would do nothing to law abiding gun owners but the NRA pushed paranoia has the hard core thinking that it is all a plot by the government to facilitate tyranny.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,358
6,673
113
The colour of Obama had nothing to do with skyrocketing gun sales under his presidency. ....
Very little in the US has nothing to do with race. Yes being a Democrat played a role and yes, so did supporting stricter rules on gun purchases but so is fear of a black planet (90's hip hop reference just to incite the gun crew).
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,358
6,673
113
It's not a silencer, it's a suppressor. ...
And who needs it for a hand gun?

I'd get a sheep farmer wanting a suppressor on their rifle for dealing with coyotes or MAYBE hunting but a hand gun is not effective for any other purpose than 'self defence' and in those situations there is no need to keep quiet.
 

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
51,394
9,967
113
Toronto
It's not a silencer, it's a suppressor. Silencer is a propaganda media term to demonize it.
BS. They've been called silencers for over 50 years, before there were so many mass shootings and public outcry against guns.

Suppressor is a propaganda gun lover term used to deflect and confuse.

Typical raving righties technique.
 

poorboy

Well-known member
Aug 18, 2001
1,264
101
63
And who needs it for a hand gun?

I'd get a sheep farmer wanting a suppressor on their rifle for dealing with coyotes or MAYBE hunting but a hand gun is not effective for any other purpose than 'self defence' and in those situations there is no need to keep quiet.
You wouldn't ask that question if you have used a handgun or lived near a range.

There's not reason anyone needs a Rolls Royce or multiple flat screen televisions, but people buy them.

A suppressor in no way increases the lethality of any firearm anyway, so why are you so upset about it?
 

poorboy

Well-known member
Aug 18, 2001
1,264
101
63
BS. They've been called silencers for over 50 years, before there were so many mass shootings and public outcry against guns.

Suppressor is a propaganda gun lover term used to deflect and confuse.

Typical raving righties technique.
Silencer is a false term. You can't silence a projectile. You can only reduce the noise level. You should still be wearing ear protection when using one as it leaves most guns equipped with one louder than an ambulance siren. That's far from silent.

If you've read up on the subject, you'd learn that suppressors are an item that are becoming LESS restrictive in Europe and are 100% legal in the United States. Their use is INCREASING because of the benefits of less hearing damage to the shooter and less noise pollution.
 

poorboy

Well-known member
Aug 18, 2001
1,264
101
63
Except a majority of Americans support greater restrictions on guns. Things like universal background checks would do nothing to law abiding gun owners but the NRA pushed paranoia has the hard core thinking that it is all a plot by the government to facilitate tyranny.
Polls are not accurate. If they were, Trump would not be President.

What Americans say and what they want are two different things. It wouldn't be a $43 billion dollar industry if it wasn't what they wanted. The vast majority of that is civilian sales. Law enforcement and military sales aren't as large as you might think they are. They may use them a lot , but they don't buy firearms all that often. The average civilian owned firearm has less than 500 rounds through it.
 
Toronto Escorts