FN Herstal Firearms banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
A lot of misinformation about this issue has prevented a solution. What's needed is a comprehensive legal, political, educational and public relations approach. This might be the key.

Otis McDonald fought the City of Chicago all the way to the Supreme Court and won the right to keep a handgun in his home. In other words, he established the right of an individual to conceal a handgun in a gun-free zone. This landmark decision has arguably transformed the concept of gun-free zones from a public policy issue to a civil rights issue. It's the foundation of a strategy to break through the gridlock:

https://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/second-amendment-gun-legislation-discussion/466426-how-solve-mass-shooting-problem.html

I believe Otis McDonald deserves a posthumous Presidential Medal of Freedom. There would be no better time for the award ceremony than during the nationally televised address described in step five. If his victory were to be cited as the key to solving the mass shooting problem, it would be a game changer. The expressions on the faces in the mainstream media would be like nothing we've seen since the 2016 election.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,337 Posts
There isn't a "Mass Shooting Problem", it's such a statistical rarity it doesn't even rank as a cause of death in the CDC top 100. It's out there in the statistical weeds with Killer Bees, and Lighting Strikes.

The USA ranks 125th for intentional homicide, 80-90% of US homicide victims have criminal arrest records and are killed by perps nearly identical to themselves. Less than 1/10th of 1% of gun owners will ever commit any form of violent crime and less than 1/10 of 1% of that 1/10th of 1% will commit a "Mass Shooting".

View attachment 131995
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
However small the problem is statistically, it is huge for the families affected and potentially for the rest of us. The left wing propagandists will keep using it to chip away at our rights unless we solve it and turn the tables on them. The strategy at the link I provided is how to do it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
748 Posts
Stopping mass shootings is simple. Do not let liberals buy guns and all the shootings stop. More than 90% of all mass shootings done by registered Democrats
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
1,754 Posts
Mass shootings are a big problem only because the Main Stream Media makes them look like a big problem.

To understand, put it in perspective of other similar dangers that we pay zero attention to; in 2018 there were 387 deaths attributed to mass shootings.

That is about the same number of deaths reported every year due to toasters, and no one reports it, and no one cares to solve it.
Also the same as house wiring kills, but that's just a risk we live with and don't think about.
Also space heaters. Yet we use them.
Falling out of bed kills 450.
Swimming pools kill twice as many as mass shootings (about 750 per year), just for the benefit of some Summer fun.
Bicycles kill 2x as many as mass shootings, any yet everyone just buys one for their kids.

Texting and driving kills 6,000 - that's 15x
Alcohol kills 90,000 per year, including people who kill themselves drinking, as well as innocents who are killed by drunk drivers.
Obesity kills 300,000 per year.
Tobacco kills 500,000.

So my point is that people die from stuff all the time, and in our lives we need to focus on the big stuff. 'Big' should be measured by the real impact on us, combined with some sense on knowing what to do about it, and a measure of the practicality of imposing a limit. Regrettably, deaths in mass shootings are an insignificant statistical blip. It would take huge resources to address; resources that could be much better spent addressing issues that would deliver greater results.

Imposing a 21 year old age limit to own a cel phone would save way more people than getting rid of mass shootings, and would be easier to implement since cel phones are already registered.... but the convenience is so high we would rather live with the cost. Banning alcohol was already tried, but the corresponding increase in crime, plus the fact that the population preferred to live with the demons of alcohol than save those 90,000 people, means it didn't work. Imagine if we put as much effort into banning tobacco as we do on banning assault weapons. OMG, it would have over 1000x the impact on saving lives!

Bottom line: people die from stuff all the time. We need to make choices about where to best invest our resources to save lives, and we need to be cognizant of the cost, and effectiveness of the proposed solutions. Addressing mass shootings by any of the proposed legislation does not meet that test.

Personally, I think the biggest contributor to mass shootings is social media. Whack jobs used to wither and die in isolation, because they did not fit into society. Now, whack jobs can find other whack jobs on the internet, and get validation that their twisted views have merit, and are ultimately goaded on to committing their crimes by others pushing them, or by dreams of post-mortem fame. So if you want to address mass shootings in an effective manner, start a movement to ban the internet. After all, we had guns but no mass shootings before the internet. So it's not the guns.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
ShootingSight is right that social media (in other words: attitude and psychology) has a lot to do with the problem. Something this complex has many contributing factors, but a big driver is the whack job element, like there are too many Lee Harvey Losers running around. A big related contributing attitude/psychology factor is the "legalization" of abortion, which trains generations to think that killing helpless victims by the millions is OK. School shootings used to be unthinkable, even to the craziest looney bin residents. But after one generation of Roe v. Wade, we get Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris raised under its uncivilized attitudes thinking "why not go ahead" with their nutty uncivilized ideation. With several thousand innocent babies being murdered every business day, it becomes easy for mental defectives to think casual butchery is OK for these innocents, so why not others? Brian Rohrbough, who lost a son at Columbine, independently came to the same realization and explained it well at a talk I heard him give at the Columbine Memorial in 2008.

The Constitution in the Preamble plainly specifies the ultimate purpose of the federal government is to secure the blessings of liberty to our ourselves AND our Posterity (with our lesser ourselves not capitalized), and abortion clearly does the opposite of what the Preamble specifies. No wonder selfish manipulators who refuse to adhere to the Constitution's civilized standards for our Posterity also have no trouble disregarding the Second Amendment. Part of the strategy of aspiring dictators is to disregard this part of the Constitution so that that part of the Constitution can be trampled next. It's like boiling a frog one degree at a time, but more obvious if you stop to think about their strategy: to enslave We the People through contrived inculcated ignorance of what is actually going on. They promote the attitiude and psychology of violence and chaos because that provides a good excuse for clamping down on the peasants. Killing babies promotes violence and chaos. Disarming the peasants promotes violence and chaos, and more excuses for more gun confiscations.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
I’m as pro life as anyone, I have/ raised ten kids. However, abortion doesn’t have anything to do with mass shootings. If anything, right or wrong, it prevents the birth of unwanted kids that people can’t afford or raise. You need to look at broader problems, lack of moral guidance, lack of decent jobs for people with limited skills, and a media that creates demand for things the average working class person can’t afford. There are no easy answers.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
1,754 Posts
The biggest factor is that you need to be mentally unbalanced. After that, other things are aggravating factors, at best. We don't have a lack of decent jobs compared to the rest of the world; between 3.5% unemployment and the highest living standard on the planet, lots of 'normal' people survive just fine. Demand for luxuries you cannot afford has always been there. No matter how rich you are, there are always things you cannot afford.

Lack of moral guidance might have some merit as a contributing factor, though I'd rephrase it as 'lack of parenting'.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Regrettably, deaths in mass shootings are an insignificant statistical blip. It would take huge resources to address; resources that could be much better spent addressing issues that would deliver greater results.

Bottom line: people die from stuff all the time. We need to make choices about where to best invest our resources to save lives, and we need to be cognizant of the cost, and effectiveness of the proposed solutions. Addressing mass shootings by any of the proposed legislation does not meet that test.
I provided a link to a step by step analysis of the problem and it looks like you didn't bother to read it. It identifies the cause, the solution, why legislation is NOT the answer, how Otis McDonald transformed it into a civil rights issue and how President Trump can leverage it to turn the tables on the Democrats and the media. Not only would it NOT take huge resources, it would

Save lives and prevent catastrophic injuries.
Save money by eliminating the need for armed guards and structural upgrades.
Save time by eliminating the need for active shooter drills.
Stop scaring the crap out of school children.
Protect the rights of legal gun owners.
Answer the question that should be asked on any public policy issue: what would Thomas Sowell do?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,337 Posts
Solution: future punks seeing current punks mowed down by gun-packing citizens.
I agree with the sentiment but I have managed to intercept idiots doing dirt on multiple occasions and I usually rush them with my weapon drawn and then take all of their weapons and burglary tools and tell them to get lost or get dead. I'm ready to kill them if their weapon swings my direction but when I come on strong and see the instant terror in their eyes I feel confident issuing commands and divesting their of their tools of criminality while giving them a few "Gilligan slaps from the Skipper".

I have a pretty good stash of cheap crowbars, bolt cutters, box knives and 3 handguns I have taken off of village idiots that thought they could make a move on my property back when I lived in the city.

I'm sure the "close call" at the hands of the stocky white guy with a gun changed at least one or two lives without anyone needing to be "mowed down" but I definitely on the same page.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
I agree with the sentiment but I have managed to intercept idiots doing dirt on multiple occasions and I usually rush them with my weapon drawn and then take all of their weapons and burglary tools and tell them to get lost or get dead. I'm ready to kill them if their weapon swings my direction but when I come on strong and see the instant terror in their eyes I feel confident issuing commands and divesting their of their tools of criminality while giving them a few "Gilligan slaps from the Skipper".

I have a pretty good stash of cheap crowbars, bolt cutters, box knives and 3 handguns I have taken off of village idiots that thought they could make a move on my property back when I lived in the city.

I'm sure the "close call" at the hands of the stocky white guy with a gun changed at least one or two lives without anyone needing to be "mowed down" but I definitely on the same page.
Seems like we’re talking about two different things. I’m talking about sick freaks seeing on TV that the tables are turning on mass shooters. The deterrent factor for mass shootings. I think you’re talking about criminals in general, right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
560 Posts
I think a big problem is how we (media) obsess over those sick freaks. I refuse to be terrorized. Being in fear of and talking about the sickos all the time I would think is exactly what that type of person wants and encourages other weak minds who're desperate for the same thing.

Also how much of our society has never seen, been around or operated firearms I think is an issue. Too many people see a gun and immediately think of violence/ danger. A person who grows up in a house with a kitchen doesn't think of murder when they see a kitchen knife, and I think the same is true of guns. My teenage daughter and I have discourse on this often (when she spends too much time at school with kids who've never lived with guns she doesn't want our younger son to know about guns).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Muddy

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
I honestly think, looking in the minds of a lot of the shooters we’ve seen, that they’re sick people who probably have been influenced by violence in movies and video games. While I’m all for freedom of speech and freedom to fantasize over violence, I think it’s a problem that needs to be addressed.

The real hypocrisy is to hear Hollywood elites try to grab guns and rail against 2A, then turn around and makes millions killing people with guns on TV. Idiots.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top