Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!
  1. Hi there... Can you please quickly check to make sure your email address is up to date here? Just in case we need to reach out to you or you lose your password. Muchero thanks!

At least 16 people dead and suspect at large after multiple incidents in area of Lewiston, Maine

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by G8tas, Oct 25, 2023.

  1. GatorBen

    GatorBen Premium Member

    6,394
    1,077
    2,968
    Apr 9, 2007
    Okay? The statement is true, but I’m not sure what relevance it has to any point either of us made.

    I said that in the context of someone else noting that 9mm pistols make up a large majority of gun deaths, and as I noted that’s less about sheer numbers of guns than it is how most gun deaths actually occur (criminal gun deaths are primarily street crime, and there aren’t many people carrying rifles of any kind around on the streets).
     
  2. BigCypressGator1981

    BigCypressGator1981 GC Hall of Fame

    6,707
    1,374
    3,103
    Oct 11, 2011
    I responded to ridge when he said “9 mm and shotguns are used to kill more people each year than the AR15” and my response was, well no shit more people own 9mm and shotguns than ARs and you trotted out your misleading stat suggesting that AR-15s are just as common - to which I say again, by percentage of people who own them no they are not.
     
  3. BigCypressGator1981

    BigCypressGator1981 GC Hall of Fame

    6,707
    1,374
    3,103
    Oct 11, 2011
    More people commit crimes with 9mm and shotguns because more people own those guns than do ARs
     
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. GatorBen

    GatorBen Premium Member

    6,394
    1,077
    2,968
    Apr 9, 2007
    The AR hasn’t really “taken the Glock’s place” in any meaningful way. Handguns are still the primary driver of gun deaths, ARs have just taken the place of pistols in gun control pushes (for the first 27 years of its existence the Brady Center and Brady Campaign were the “National Council to Control Handguns” and the “Center to Prevent Handgun Violence”).

    Why did that change occur? Because mass shootings (and school shootings in particular), while representing a very small fraction of actual gun deaths, invoke a more emotional response, and are far easier to “sell” as a gun control movement and get people to perceive as a threat to themselves or loved ones than the more random seeming (but far more likely) threat of being killed in a one or two off handgun shooting.
     
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 1
  5. GatorBen

    GatorBen Premium Member

    6,394
    1,077
    2,968
    Apr 9, 2007
    Wait, I thought we were arguing about something I said tonight, not something I posted (and you agreed with) like eight hours ago. :D

    In any event, I agree with you that more people own handguns. I don’t think the data backs that up on shotguns though.

    But the primary driver via-a-vis handguns and rifles isn’t what people own, it’s how people get killed with guns. Outside of mass shootings (which are a very small fraction of gun deaths), rifles are very rarely used in killings. That’s largely because of what they are - even people who own lots of rifles generally aren’t carrying rifles around with them, while pistols are designed for the express purpose of being carried around.
     
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2023
  6. WC53

    WC53 GC Hall of Fame

    4,994
    1,025
    2,088
    Oct 17, 2015
    Old City
    All the articles on mental health and warning signs coming out now.
     
  7. apkgator

    apkgator GC Hall of Fame

    10,509
    2,119
    3,238
    Apr 3, 2007
    I would agree the mass shootings evoke a more visceral response even though they are a small % of actual gun deaths. But IMO that is a somewhat justified response...by and large a school, a mall, a bowling alley are completely innocent people (often children) whereas much of the handgun shootings are sometimes bad guy vs bad guy/gun vs gun. Still tragic,but as you say "one or two off" and at least from a perception standpoint the victims may have been actively engaging in the incident.
    But ultimately there is really no realistic path (at least in the short term) for the removal of handguns or shotguns. There is a viable path to limit or reduce the weaponry that is generally utilized in mass shootings. At this point it's worth a try
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. tampagtr

    tampagtr VIP Member

    17,626
    2,872
    1,618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Exactly. Well said
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. exiledgator

    exiledgator Gruntled

    11,253
    2,007
    3,128
    Jan 5, 2010
    Maine
    I haven't been reading this thread, so SIAP:

    In Card's case - the Army reported him as a danger to commit mass murder. His family reported him as dangerous. He was then committed.

    After release from the mental hospital - he assaulted Army personnel after they told him to stop saying he was going to shoot up the base.

    A county sherriff did a wellness check weeks before the shootings. He knocked on the door, then left, but believed that card was home.

    If Card was involuntarily committed - by law, he should have had all his guns taken away. It's unknown yet if his committment was voluntary or not... The amount of time it's taking for us to learn this makes me think it was involuntary.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  10. tampagtr

    tampagtr VIP Member

    17,626
    2,872
    1,618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Precedent for 3rd party criminal liability

     
  11. rivergator

    rivergator Too Hot Mod Moderator VIP Member

    35,713
    1,807
    2,258
    Apr 8, 2007
    60 days doesn't seem long enough
     
    • Agree Agree x 1