Another shooting

[ajohn]

Perhaps I should have mentioned the political implications of gun ownership at this level - electoral votes.

 

[Dork Lard]

I see that our US Constitution experts are alive & kicking.

Do we have any mental health experts? A social psychologist perhaps?

 

[JP_]

However, "The right of people to bear arms" is difficult to misconstrue, no?

Laws can be changed. We used to have the right to carry a sword, but try that today!

 

[Robbox]

It seems clear to me that the FBI is failing miserably to keep on top of extremists in US society.

 

[wobs]

Normally, I'd put the link up of Jim Jefferies routine about gun issues in the US. Really funny and informative if you haven't seen it.

But don't currently have access to YT, so here is an article about what Biden has actually done about the issue:

Biden’s executive actions tackle a small part of America’s enormous gun problem

Biden announced six executive actions meant to curb gun violence in America.

www.vox.com

Obviously not enough, and they need to get AR-15s (and similar) out of circulation.

 

[JP_]

It seems clear to me that the FBI is failing miserably to keep on top of extremists in US society.

That has little to do with this. This does not appear to be any form of extremism. The problem is, an angry, ****ed off person could easily grab some automatic weapons and start shooting people.

There are angry people all over the world. Only in America can one so easily get hold of a small arsenal of deadly weapons.

They just need to ban guns. But they are crazy, so that will never happen.

Expect more kids to get their brains blown out while colouring in rainbows.

 

[diy_fun_uk]

I'm not going to post any images or links to the guns he bought, however to me any system that legally allows a member of the public, let alone an 18 year old, to buy guns of this type is at best a (very) flawed system.

Before the usual suspects jump down my throat, no, I'm not therefore saying I think it's right for an 18 year old to own any type of gun, neither do I think it's right for the ordinary public to own guns unless they have a job/career that legally necessitates it.

Unfortunately, some will come out saying the solution is more, not less, guns. They will assert this wouldn't have happened if the school was patrolled by armed security guards. They might even lobby for new laws that dictate this, as oppose to considering options around less guns. This is the warped mentality wider US society has to deal with, combined with political aspects.

 

[Robbox]

That has little to do with this. This does not appear to be any form of extremism. The problem is, an angry, ****ed off person could easily grab some automatic weapons and start shooting people.

There are angry people all over the world. Only in America can one so easily get hold of a small arsenal of deadly weapons.

They just need to ban guns. But they are crazy, so that will never happen.

Expect more kids to get their brains blown out while colouring in rainbows.

I was not specifically referring to this shooter, however, on 4chan and other forums, there is a strong current of 'white replacement' theory. This did influence the Buffalo, NY shooting. If the FBI was really on top of these forums, these atrocities could be prevented.
With respect to the USA and gun control, this horse left the stable years ago and has gone totally feral. Very, very sad indictment on US society that individual responsibility is so absent.

 

[diy_fun_uk]

It seems clear to me that the FBI is failing miserably to keep on top of extremists in US society.

The best governments and security agencies in the world can't be expected to know about every single actual or potential terrorist, especially those that appear from nowhere with no previous involvement in illegal activity.

 

[Ihavenojob]

The problem is, an angry, ****ed off person could easily grab some automatic weapons and start shooting people.

The same angry ****ed of person could get a car/truck/van and go and mow down a lot of people, or get a large kitchen knife and start hacking at innocent people. A criminal or psychopath intent on doing harm will usually find a way.

 

[ajohn]

Obviously not enough, and they need to get AR-15s (and similar) out of circulation.

The fact that he was elected while saying that shows there are some sensible US gun owners. Also magazines that hold more ammunition than anyone is really likely to need for any civilian purpose. Any form of magazine allows more rapid shooting to some extent.

Getting laws passed though. Tricky as ownership levels are high. A gun owner is likely to own several. As with Canada ownership levels probably vary across the country. Senators want to get re elected. US politics is influenced in several areas by the same thing. Even religion. Bible belts for instance.

If they tried to introduce UK style handgun regulations I'd guess they'd have no chance. Single shot and a min barrel length. The general licensing laws used here - maybe.

 

[Odds]

The meaning can suggest a different reason for owning a gun
A militia is generally an army or some other fighting organization of non-professional soldiers, citizens of a country, or subjects of a state, who may perform military service during a time of need

Personally I can understand people who want to own a gun. I enjoy target shooting. The USA is rather different as guns are much easier to buy. They feature more in crime which may encourage people to own them for protection. The gun lobby turns incidents such as this one on it's head. The answer is to arm people so they can shoot people who are doing things like this.

The share of American households owning at least one firearm has remained relatively steady since 1972, hovering between 37 percent and 47 percent. In 2021, about 42 percent of U.S. households had at least one gun in their possession.

The meaning of a militia appears to have changed since the 18th century when it was a body of men armed to support the government against foreign intervention to the 21st century meaning of the term where a body of men take up arms against their government.

When you begin arming Joe Public with assault rifles i think you've lost all common sense.

 

[ajohn]

When you begin arming Joe Public with assault rifles i think you've lost all common sense.

As a shooter I don't see it all as simple as that. Guns can kill. One type of shooting I have shot long ago in a competition is limited time with a target that is only shown for a limited time as well. 10 shots. Single shot gun so load aim fire. The target comes and goes. Maybe 1 used for aiming 2nd to fire. It doesn't take all that many seconds between shots. This to hit the centre of a playing card from 25yds.

Changes in this area mean that it will take a bit longer for each kill. The most effective change really is a ban on handguns. The USA have I believe banned SLR's - self loading rifles. The next bullet loads itself. Without this the the bolt has to be pulled back and pushed forwards to load the next bullet. Take the magazine away and the bolt has to be pulled back which ejects the cartridge case , next bullet pushed in and the bolt pushed forwards again.

A report just said that the USA has an average of 10 mass shooting a week. 200 so far this year. Seems this one used a hand gun but may have had a rifle. Also it seems Texas's gun laws are weaker than some other states. Mass may mean more than one person. No details. Hand guns were highlighted. They showed some one target shooting with an automatic pistol, self loading in other words. Variation of that sort of target shooting used to happen in the UK. It can't any more as they are banned even revolvers. I have shot a small automatic pistol when they were legal. The magazine could be emptied in under 10sec with careful trigger timing. Too expensive ammunition wise for me. Walmart discount the most popular killer bullet in the USA. In the movies we see people with hand guns and pockets full of magazines. Could that attract the wrong sort of person? It's easy to see why that sort of gun could prove popular even if the person owning them is ok.

 

[transam]

Well the way see it unless there is some masse ban on fire arms

These types of incidents will only encourage more people to
Arm themselves ( imo)

Blimey if I lived in the states I would
Own a gun

The place is full of armed fruit cakes
Under those circumstances best to have a gun and not need it
Than not have a gun and need one

 

[securespark]

You cannot use that as a reason without putting the whole sentence into context.

'The right of the people to bear arms...' is contingent upon them being a member of a militia --- and a state of war whereby the nation calls upon them to fulfill their duty, according to the terms of the second amendment.

It is easy to misconstrue, apparently.

So, I'd it basically saying you can only bear arms as a soldier in times of war?