In a nation where lawmakers continue their refusal to do anything that would curb the occurrence of mass shootings and overall gun violence, it appears that an online streaming service on Sunday afternoon captured live the sound of multiple gun shots during a competitive video-gaming event at a large downtown complex in Jacksonville, Florida.
Well what else would you expect? How many more of these mass shootings will America have in the future? Answer: TOO DAMN MANY!
Ah, where has your head been for the last 45-50 years? In the basement gunsafe along with your old college textbooks? Try looking up the definition of syllogism and apply it liberally to almost every mass shooting or mass murder since, oh I don’t know, … start with Charles Starkweather or Richard Spence and work forward. They’re mostly unhinged and really damaged people. Just sayin’.
If gun free zones promote gun violence, then why is such violence so rare in the UK, Europe, Australia, Canada and other largely gun-free places?
The common denominator is Guns.
I suppose we really haven’t grown intellectually very much from being Neanderthals.
What is the definition of a “gun free zone”. Or, for statistical study (as in science) is there any agreed upon definition used by a majority of statisticians for a “gun free zone?”
For example, was Umpqua Community College a gun free zone when the mass shooter murdered 9?
So is income inequality which leads to national budget cuts in health and human services: preventive medical services and a strong health safety net from pre-natal to end-of-life contacts catches a lot of potential volatile situations before they arise. It’s always about the $$$.
What are your priorities?
No they are not. See for example:
As noted in the first line of that report: “…violent crime incidents has fallen from its 1995 peak of 3.8 million to 1.3 million.”
IF they are, neoliberal austerity measures have probably contributed to the problem.
The UK has been on this downward austerity trajectory ever since “iron lady” Thatcher took over nearly four decades ago.
Although I don’t know how the Brits currently view Thatcher’s reign and influence, Murkins love her more today than they ever have, just like they love Ronny Raygun more today than they ever have.
“And our thoughts and prayers …”
The report in the Guardian was based on police reports which are notoriously bad for determining trends in overall violent crime. The consistently taken crime data from the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) that I pointed to above is taken as the gold standard in looking at overall violent crime trends (it even says that in the report from the Office of National Statistics that the Guardian is referring to - see end of section 1 and table 2). Now if you just want to restrict your attention to the most severe crime like murder, then the police data is reasonable to look at for trends over long stretches of time but not single year-over-year changes. Why is that?
- Because such crimes are severe, the police do have a high probability of hearing about them and
- because severe crimes are rare, changes in rates are highly volatile. For example, the 2017 report the Guardian pointed to showed a 15% rise in serious knife attacks - but the 2018 report shows only a 2% change. Looking over the last two decades the downward trend with recent stabilization is pretty clear.
You can find the latest version of that report at
To these geniuses that have found their calling and logic lately to be on the is site.
I am suggesting a very basic shooter scenario.
There has yet to an instant where an active shooter has been killed by non law enforcement conceal and carry licensed gun owner. Is that correct?
Let us say that in the darkness of the video game arcade, where maybe twenty five people were playing, some of who had never met each other before, there are four such individuals.
You hear shots being fired.
You are a very intelligent, trained active shooter neutralizer, and you immediately respond by revealing your weapon and shoot the guy dead.
Someone playing the game realizes, later than you do, what is going on, and is also licensed, and only sees you with a gun shooting, not what you are shooting at, and takes you out .
Yeah, idiot, so there is no “logic” behind gun laws? Then please explain to me why after yet another mass shooting in Tasmania in 1996 the Australian government passed effective gun laws that even their conservative prime minister supported and since then there have been no similar shootings and people are very satisfied with the results? Got an answer to that one, you NRA shill?
It sickens me to hear these gunnut scum who like Bill O’Reilly stated that the horrific Las Vegas Massacre was “the price we pay for our freedoms”. The mind just boggles at the obscenity of that bullshit. I hate the NRA and I hope their financial troubles bring them to ruin.
Actually, in this particular case the millennial snowflake was eliminated from the competition. He obvoously did not receive a partcipation trophy and it prolly triggered him.
And of course I predict the media will somehow try to turn this around to blame video games as a cause for violence, again, even though evidence supports the opposite. But hey whatever it takes to let the NRA and gun manufacturers off the hook.
I don’t know… Sutherland Springs church shooting is the most recent one that comes to mind.
Surely a tiny proportion of the population dying and being injured in mass shootings is a small price to pay for the safety and security that easy access to firearms provides.
The world’s greatest democracy and society can’t be wrong on this can it? (Just as it knows that having the nation’s executive government in the hands of an indirectly elected individual, a Constitution that can’t be changed by the direct vote of the populace and the conduct and the administration of elections by partisan officials of the ‘two-party’ system are the envy of the world.)
Good! Don’t let the door hit your pistol-packing arse.