Yes in fact the murder rates were so high prior to 1992 that state legislators did do something about it, legalizing gun carry and protecting lawful gun owner's rights. Since then murder and violent crime have fallen to their lowest levels since 1981.
If the question is between more or less freedom, it is apparent at least to me that we should err on the side of more freedom. Governments that decide on less freedom usually decide to do other horrible things as a result. At least in the US it was an excellent decision to allow responsible people to protect themselves and helped create a much safer and secure society as evidenced by our relatively low rates of violent crime among populous Western countries.
You think that with more than 10% unemployment and massive underemployment there are not equally bad ghettos today?
Besides, mass shootings don't seem to be closely related to poverty. These shooters are sociopaths who are not equipped to interface with people in everyday society, so it is next to impossible for them to acquire the help and support they would need to get better and not 'snap'. I personally think mass murders are unavoidable, because they occur in all countries regardless of the laws. The purpose of this thread is to discuss that.
Well, you are only citing murder rates. Not mass shootings in your statistics. Remember that due to the incestuous people in places such as Texas. And the massive influx of McDonalds especially in our number one obese cities...
Some people have pretty f'd up brains. Just a theory of course.
I think realistically the problem is more or less that we try to make these people "normal" when we actually need to address it and give them special attention, they won't be normal otherwise.
but as reasonable people who can see through media hype, we both know that is not true. Or are you the type of person who cares about the way things seem rather than the way they are?
BMX you're going to need to be more explicit with your insults, trust me that I can handle some name-calling without stooping to that level myself.
I certainly can. A mass shooting is one where four or more people are killed in a single attack according to the FBI. There have been about 60 of these attacks since the 1982, all highly publicized giving the killer maximum media exposure and rewarding the next sociopath with the same celebrity treatment. Maybe if the news outlets gave heroes with guns the same adoration that they give murderers the world would have a different perception.
These thwarted mass shootings received not even a fraction of the media attention that successful mass murderers did:
Interesting to note that far-left magazine Mother Jones recently reported that no armed civilian has ever stopped a mass shooting. Of course their only pool of data was a list of all successful mass shootings. Great journalism.
In fact there has been no increase or decrease in mass shootings since 1980. That means that all laws both restricting or liberalizing guns have had zero affect on this particular type of crime. Laws in other countries like Norway specifically, which are much stricter have not prevented mass shootings. Nothing can absolutely prevent sociopaths from acting out their rage to kill except vigilant citizens and police.
I think the media glorification of mass murderers in the name of entertainment is the biggest factor which drives sociopaths to want the same attention that they never received in life. 15 minutes of fame is now more like 15 weeks of fame.
Old news, yes Sandy hook gets a ref in batman, as does Aroura.
What's more interesting than major news sites going " ooooh, look at this silly conspiracy theory, lets all laugh at it...." Is the fact that the warrants are being suppressed for another 90 days because it may put witnesses at risk and tip off other suspects to the police investigation
Hmmm, I thought the 'official' story was 'sole gunman'
But this story doesn't make your brainwashing media.
Lets distract the stupid from picking up on this story.
After all, as in the Donier case, you can't allow facts to get in the way of the 'official' fairy story.
No, he wasn't arrested, apparently he was a 'parent who heard the shooting and ran around the school to apprehend the shooters'......
Yeah, right.
His name is 'Chris Manfredonia', a fact he stated repeatedly on audio of the event, apparently that name was a 'safe' word with the cops who never actually arrested him.
And all parents who visit a school wear camo to 'make pancakes'
And Adam's kill streak is outstanding, never ever been matched, ever. Usually you get people wounded, not all gunshot's are fatal, here, not only were virtually all shot's fatal, they didn't even allow ambulances or paramedics near the scene.
Let's look at the video and eyewitness reports, as well as actual facts, rather than media facts.
The media claims there was only 1 shooter, Adam Lanza, but if you look closely at all the details revealed by the media, we see that there was actually a 2nd and possibly third shooter. Children told the media that the cops had arrested someone on the ground in front of the school. And video, as well as audio, shows the police chasing down a man wearing cammo pants into the nearby forest where they apprehended him. We have to ask why these questions not being explored and answered? These are big inconsistencies and they have to be taken seriously and looked at.
Robbie Parker, father of Emilie Parker who was allegedly shot, there is a video of him prior to the interview he does with the media where he is seen laughing and having a great time right before the interview. Literally seconds before he goes on air, he gets in character and begins hyperventilating to bring on his sadness. He even asks as he is moving up to the mic, as if it’s a real set, “Are we ready to start?” While some suggest that everyone deals with death differently and Robbie may be dealing with it in his own way, why would he purposely change character and appear extremely sad just in time for the interview? Why not stay “normal?”
Another note on the Robbie Parker story is the fact that the Parker family had created a Facebook donation page the morning of the shooting before anything had happened. They speak of the loss of their daughter and then hours later talk about how the school is in lockdown and they don’t know if Emilie is safe or not.
The McDonald family is another family that allegedly lost a 7 year old child that day. In a CNN interview not long after the shooting, they are seen in character with very jovial and up beat attitudes that very likely would not reflect that they had just lost a child. While we can’t ever suggest how someone should or shouldn’t act, you be the judge, does this resonate with you as being two people who have just lost their child? Once again, in this case we realize this cannot be a factual point, however it is important to note.
One of the most interesting pieces that cannot be denied is that fact that not only was the Facebook page commemorating Victoria Soto’s death created 4 days before the shooting, but so was the website the page was promoting to help fund victims. The Sandy Hook victims fund website was also created 3 days before the shooting happened.
The Arlington Devils website released the “How to talk to your kids about the Sandy Hook shooting” manual 4 days before the shooting happened. After word of this got out they later changed the date on the article but still did it wrong and changed it from Dec 10th to Dec 13th, which is still 1 day prior to the shooting. This type of manual would likely be something that comes out weeks after the shooting, not before or right after.
The media aired video of the Sandy Hook school and shooting but used video that was not of Sandy Hook School.We also have to question the fact that there is not a single picture or video clip of students being evacuated, being outside the school or anything. Is this truly possible when there would be media everywhere and these days virtually everyone has access to cameras on their phone. No children, and not even any ambulances or emergency crew there at the scene to help anyone out. Just cops and pedestrians.
There are quite a few people that think this shooting was a hoax - or a set-up by the gun grabbers. Too many coincidences.
I'd like to think that the gun grabbers wouldn't stoop so low, but history isn't in their favor. They exploit and spin everything. You have to dig through their "statistics" and "facts" to get to the truth of things. Almost as bad as you do with Creationists. Of course the loud mouth wing-nuts like Ted Nugent, doesn't help either. Who would really want to give a guy like that a gun?
I still think the shooter was genuine. but I also suspect that certain facts and actual events will be spun in the gun grabbers' favor.
They talk about the psycho using a bushmaster (AR-15 clone).
I find that interesting seeing that they found that rifle in the trunk of his car.
They have a video of the cops digging through his car. in the video, it looks like they pull out some sort of long gun and a shotgun.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I dunno, if they do get stupid and enact gun control laws here, I guess it'll just be another stupid law they made up that I break.
If you really want to see a glaring example of gun control vs non gun control, drive down I-10 in El Paso. On that stretch of the highway, you see EL Paso on one side, all nice and relatively quiet. Look the other way across the Rio Grande, you see Juarez, Mexico. Mexico has some of the strictest gun laws in the world. You see police activity all over the place.
Of course the gun grabbers like to point out that it's due to the U.S. liberal gun laws. What they aren't getting is that since the guns are illegal, all it is doing is hampering the average citizen. And they also fail to realize the real reason Mexico put those laws in place wasn't to protect the people from criminals. It was to protect the Government against revolt.
Sorry, i dont think decapitations and head shots are fixable.
Also, there were firefighters etc who responded, but there is not much they could do except cover childrens eyes.
Also, maybe you can convince my neighbors that their nephew is still alive?