It's not? While handguns are most prevalent in all mass shootings (for obvious reasons), 4 of the 5 deadliest incidents involved assault rifles.
I’m curious, what sacrifice are you willing to make to reduce gun violence? It seems to me people are quite willing to have other people sacrifice, but typically less willing to do so themselves. This seems to be human nature in almost any issue. The problem with your imagined parents-of-dead-child scenario is that you could phrase something like that for any issue. I remember when we first moved here years ago reading in the newspaper were local health officials forced a child to be vaccinated to go to school and the child had a reaction and died. Two years later, they took the family’s second child and forced it to be vaccinated for school and that child died. Can you imagine telling those parents “it’s OK. Most children need vaccinations and they are safe for most people.” Nobody who supports the right to keep and bear arms thinks it’s OK that children are slaughtered. Nobody!
River said the AR15 was the weapon of choice for people hoping to kill lots of people… It clearly isn’t. You even mention that the 9mm is the weapon of choice for mass shootings. Are you going to argue that those mass shooters were hoping NOT to kill lots of people by choosing a 9mm pistol?
No... that's a logical fallacy. I think you know that. I have no inside information on how many people the shooters "hoped" to kill. I'm stating that those shooters that killed the most were using assault rifles (with complementary handguns). Are you going to argue that people "hoping" to kill lots of people chose handguns over assault rifles? Or was their choice limited by access? Nothing fruitful will come out this exchange.
Whether or not an argument is weak depends on how it is being applied. Davis made a statement that seemed to say that all gun owners are children who need to grow up. That’s 75 million people being painted with a broad brush with no evidence to back it up. I don’t know all 75 million people, what of the people I do know who own guns, they are responsible, non-violent people. There’s a gray area between anecdotal evidence and empirical evidence. What is anecdotal to you is empirical to me. It’s what I have measured. An objective person could count the number of people I know who owned guns and look up whether any of those people have ever used guns in a violent crime. The findings of that objective person would be empirical, and match my “anecdotal” evidence.
I'll give up the gun I own, just purchased last fall. I'll deal with increased security in schools and other buildings. Just get rid of guns and the problem is almost completely solved.
I don't think this is correct. You're going to need to review the definitions of "empirical" and "objective." For example, are your findings generalizable to the larger population? And yes, I did paint people with guns with a broad brush. Keep in mind, I own a 12 gage pump, so I'll include myself in there. What I'm talking about, though, has to do with folks who staunchly resist any attempt at gun control, esp. those who need these semi auto war guns so they can play G.I. Joe. Is that unfair? I don't give a rip.
I applaud you for being willing to make a sacrifice that actually affects you. It seems to me that some of these mass shooters buy their assault rifles recently before the shooting. I could go with something like a 30-day waiting period in purchasing those. I do not own an assault rifle, but I value the opportunity to get one, if I so desired. One thing I am willing to sacrifice his action movies and television with gun violence. I know some people have mentioned studies which show that watching violence doesn’t necessarily lead to violence, but we’ve had such a fundamental shift in our culture with violence becoming acceptable behavior among large numbers of people. The constantly watching gun violence, especially with assault weapons, can’t be helping. I love action movies, but I’m willing to give those up if it will help change our culture.
I took your advice and looked up “empirical,” just to be certain: Empirical 1 originating in or based on observation or experience 2 relying on experience or observation alone often without due regard for system and theory 3 capable of being verified or disproved by observation or experiment Definition of EMPIRICAL I appreciate your posts, but I don’t think stereotyping people is useful. Like I said, I do not own an assault rifle. The people I do know who own what are colloquially called “assault rifles” are not GI Joe types. They don’t strut around bragging about their guns. They don’t drive pick-ups with a gun mounted in the rear window. They aren’t macho people. They’re just nice, respectable people who enjoy shooting that type of gun.
Nice work. Now let's consider the notion of empirical evidence in relation to a hypothesis. If the hypothesis was: Gun owners who phatgator is familiar with do not use their guns to commit violent crimes. Then you might be able to claim that you have empirical evidence. I don't believe, however, that this was the topic at hand. If you were to hypothesize that: Gun owners do not use guns to commit violent crimes And then you attempt to use your own circle of familiar people as empirical evidence, you run into problems of generalizability. Keep in mind, also that this was not my claim. I know most gun owners don't go out and hunt children. I am simply willing to say that we don't need these killing machines because too many bad apples (trying to be kind) have ruined the privilege of gun ownership for all.
This issue doesn’t have a resolution. Especially since a large majority of gun-owners are actually responsible. Tragedy will have to strike every single one of those individuals in order to change their minds and have everyone on the same page.
It’s a fair question, but I do think the fact that mental illness causes (or greatly contributed to) many of them should be considered.
Certainly the most visible ones have been. But statistically you are more likely to be bludgeoned by a hammer than murdered with a rifle. Ive posted the data from the FBI on this board several times.
You are correct that hammers are the most common instrument for homicides but this discussion is more specific to mass shootings.... Ridge challenged river's assertion with the fact that most mass shootings involve handguns. This doesn't quite hold water because it conflates the most common weapon with the most preferred. The average scotch drinker would prefer a 25 yo scotch but more frequently drink something younger. We know the most "successful" mass shooters tend to prefer assault rifles. We don't know why others chose a less efficient tool to attempt to kill "lots of people". Is it preference or access? I posit that most potential perpetrators would choose an assault rifle over handguns or hammers if the goal is to inflict maximum casualties. But I'm speculating.
I would not confidently conclude “most gun owners are responsible”, it’s fair to say only a small % have incidents or their irresponsibility leads to a tragic accident or homicide. That doesn’t mean they are all “responsible”, it just means their foolishness hasn’t cost them yet. A gun accident requires not just foolishness, but also an intersection with other events. For every 1 loaded gun left lying around for that toddler to blow their sisters brains out, there’s probably 1000 similar incidents of “gun left lying around” that didn’t result in any tragedy and nothing happens. These people might still be categorized as “responsible gun owners”, that is, until they are not. I think the majority of Americans are morons, thus it is impossible to believe a “large majority” could be trusted as “responsible”, especially without certification and whatnot to prove at least basic competencies. Even that probably only ensures “responsibility” so much as a drivers license makes one a good driver, although better to have a floor than not.
We can easily measure what gun is used most for mass shootings. We cannot measure the why. That is true. However, since it could be that most mass shooters prefer 9mm for any of the many reasons they are used or they could prefer the Ar-15 for any of the many reasons. We do not know and cannot measure. You can assume but that doesn’t change anything. With the data we can measure and with no emotional or preference attached to that data it is clear that the 9mm is the gun most mass shooters use.
This is another post that does not want to use the actual day that we have, something that can be analyzed. Instead it is based on probables, maybes, could he’s, and opinions. How do you argue a side that is based on the shifting sands - of well I think, I believe, most people are morons, etc.. When speaking about gun, gun laws, gun control, we need to make arguments that can be backed up. 75 million gun owners (legal) and a minute amount face gun issues. 75 million legal gun owners and a even smaller amount are murders/mass shooters. Fbi I data backs that up. In fact almost all data bases on gun violence and gun owners back that up.
No, the data doesn’t back that up. We *do* have a gun homicide problem, a gun accident problem, and a gun suicide problem. The country has been saturated with guns. I’m not sure “but only a tiny fraction of the total guns are involved in crimes” is much of an argument in an environment flooded with 9 figures of guns, it’s actually quite nonsensical considering the proportion to the population and that people do odd things like “collect” guns. You are in effect saying “not really a problem until there are millions of murders”, which is a sick pov. Even in cases where an incident happens, an owner with a large “collection” would skew those numbers per incident. Now I would concede most mass shooters don’t seem to be serious gun collectors, from my observation of these stories most tend to acquire their weapons (legally!?) right before the shooting, or they steal it from a relative. This is why the solutions to this actually shouldn’t be that hard, barriers to entry, liability on owners who don’t properly store/handle guns. Unfortunately GOP politicians are 100% set on making it *easier* for criminals and mass shooters to acquire whatever they seek.
