Mass Shooting Allen, TX Outlet Mall - May 6, 2023

RPG's? I believe you actually can own an automatic weapon, so there's that. So tell me, what happens when the much maligned 'assault weapon' is banned forever, then the psychos shoot up schools/malls with handguns, does that really make anyone feel better and what now?

 

Federal Assault Weapons Ban - Wikipedia

This is at a minimum worth discussing. Findings were inconclusive although seemingly insignificant regarding overall homicide rates however there was a massive increase in mass shootings since the ban was lifted.

I'm not interested in skewing data or arguments and I'll readily accept correlation does not equal causation because there are so many things that have changed regarding social media and social interaction that closely follow the same timeline of the sunset of the ban until now. But at a minimum it's worth discussing. Don't want to revisit bans? Then let's talk about restrictions or any number of policies that can make certain type of high capacity mags or weapons at least harder to get and maintain.

I'm pro hunting. I'm pro personal and home defense. I've yet to see a homeowner stave off an attack during some Hollywood movie type 10 minute shootout requiring multiple reloads. Some will still commit murder using handguns, knives, cars etc but right now we are facilitating them through a particular weapon style and ease of access.

There is a picture of a little girl with her brains spilling out next to her in a pile of bodies. They were freaking shopping at an outlet mall. Obviously it takes a sick individual behind the gun to do that but we make it as easy as possible at the moment for someone like that POS to do that.

 

Rocket Propelled Grenade.

That's not the discussion. If you're unwilling to admit there are already limits on the 2nd Amendment then you aren't interested in an actual discussion, as you said you were.

Where people would like to draw that line is debatable, but it can be drawn. Clearly, it's been done already

 

Is loneliness a problem government can solve?

 

So we can't own a grenade launcher and that's the big limit on 2a? Ok I guess.

 

You think that's the only big limit on the 2nd Amendment? I thought you said you wanted an honest discussion.

 

Not sure, but I certainly wouldn't be shocked there. But that is it's own piece of information suggesting that gun owners are pawning off some of the costs of their gun ownership on the rest of us. If asking them to pay for the risks that they are taking on for other people is prohibitively expensive, then why should they just be able to not pay for those risks to others?

 

I'm pretty sure no one want to see pictures of dead children every day on the news but these things aren't spur of the moment acts of violence...these sick bleeps plan this shit out, even write long manifestos about it. Maybe you are correct about the current weapon of choice but take that one off the table and another one will emerge.

 

The likelihood of being caught is pretty low. So many guns around and so few records. My goal would be to make illegal guns a lot harder to obtain due to a lower supply of them, raising their price. I doubt more prison time would have a huge effect. I don't think there are too many people that are okay with serving 2 years in prison but not 5, for example.

 

This is an evolutionary process man. Gotta try things and adapt. Right now we are doing nothing different. Again, that doesn't mean grab guns. We will never end homelessness. We will never end mental illness. We will never end drunk driving, but we install measures to facilitate assistance for those that need help and in some cases regulate to prevent ease of action.

 

Yeah, I suppose you can address both but the generalizations in THFSG skew waaaay to the 'the gun nutters don't care about people being killed, thoughts and prayers, shithole country, see you next mass murder' crowd. It is what it is.

 

1. The left doesn't want to do anything about mental health and only wants to focus on guns.
Here's a Congressional bill about mental health that every Democrat voted in favor of and all but one Republican voted against.

2. The left has no respect for the constitution.
The (arguably) most popular Republican governor and future presidential candidate is currently being sued for violating the first amendment.

3. The left wants to put limits on what guns we're allowed to own.
This has already existed in our history and it has been reported that Ronald Reagan's support directly led to the bill getting the necessary votes to pass.

4. The left doesn't want to have an honest conversation.

Scene

 

When given the option of a handgun or an AR-15 style assault rifle, this shooter joined a high proportion of the others in choosing an AR-15. Almost like it is a better tool. The military thinks so as well. They don't send infantry out there with just a handgun but rather give them rifles.

Perhaps revealed preference here suggests that the psycho utilizing a handgun would be less effective and kill fewer people, which seems like a positive outcome.

 

This comment demonstrates you don't understand what it means.

 

He did not claim the limits stop at grenade launchers. It is a strawman fallacy to misrepresent or exaggerate someone else's argument in order to make it easier to attack.

 

You can own a fully automatic weapon but it’s very difficult to do so and they also no longer make them. It’s a significant limitation on 2nd amendment rights. Not sure why we can’t do the same with assault weapons.

 

Yes it is but it will be less efficient than an AR-15. It’s about mitigation.

 

Constitutional originalism = musket

 

If your goal is to kill more people, in a shorter time from a greater distance, the assault rifle is the way to go. Remove the assault rifles from the equation and the average deaths to civilians and law enforcement may very well go way down. If so, it would be an incremental benefit in the fight against needless deaths to ban them.

To answer your question, if studies show that the severity of mass shootings diminished after banning, I would "feel better" about our decision to do so... because lives were saved.

 

If a crazy is shooting up a mall I’m in, I would hope they have a handgun vs an assault rifle that is literally designed to kill large number of human beings effectively and fast. And prefer them using a knife over a handgun. And a club over a knife. And their fists over a club. Or prefer they just hope I choke to death on a bite of steak vs using their fists.
each of these can be deadly. But it’s utterly ridiculous and illogical to say since all of these are deadly they all should be treated the same. and this is the basis of the maga approach of laissez faire to mass killings.