Originally Posted by The Grey Badger

Guns are cheap and are bought by individuals who choose to buy them, with their own money. Mental health care is expensive and there is no choice about it - if you need it, you need it. And it is paid for by either the patient's family, who may not be able to pay for it, or by the taxpayers.

The latter fact makes some people very upset since they don't think the taxpayers should pay for benefits to individuals. I can't recall what their answer is to the argument that untreated mental illness can negatively affect society, but in practice, the answers seem to be either prison for the things they do while insane, or being shot by the police.

I would like to hear the solutions proposed by those on these boards who so believe, since I am ignorant of what they are.

I can't speak to your "When did you stop beating your wife?" style formulation, but the question I would ask you is whether or not school shooters and other rampage killers are likely to seek help in the first place. Because the one thing we know, thanks to the F.B.I. Behavioral Science Unit's extensive research on the phenomenon of mass murder, is that there aren't any specific signs to look for. (This is something you can easily verify with a little research on your own--each case is very different; to the extent that there are "red flags", they tend to appear as such in hindsight.) With no signs, it's not like people are going to figure out who these shooters are before they start pulling the trigger, so the question becomes, "How likely are they to seek help in the first place?"

See, you're making the claim that these guys aren't getting help because they can't afford it and nobody's willing to pick up the tab. However, that may not be the case at all. Even in cases where such murderers or their families can afford it, they may not seek help. In cases where these murderers can't afford it, there may be a system in place where they can get help (it could even be as simple as calling 911) and it might not cost them a cent.

As a result, determining whether or not these killers are likely to seek help might be sort of relevant to what you're asking.

Originally Posted by Deb C

That is a national average. If you look at a state by state basis there is a clear trend of higher rates of violence the farther south you go. Rates of violent crime in Minnesota are as low as in Canada or Western Europe, 1 incident per 100,000 people. Meanwhile, rates in the parts of the Deep South are as high as 20 per 100,000 people. Minnesota's gun laws are fairly lax, and concealed-carry is legal. It's not the guns, it's the culture. The parts of the US that are in the Deep South and Greater Appalachia have a violent honor culture, rural white southerners are far more likely than rural white Northerners to perpetrate violent crimes or be the victim of them.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Kind of relates to what I'm saying in my argument with kinser.

St. John's Wort is an SSRI just like Prozac, and has the same side effects, so no, your argument has no point.

Originally Posted by Odin

That is a national average. If you look at a state by state basis there is a clear trend of higher rates of violence the farther south you go. Rates of violent crime in Minnesota are as low as in Canada or Western Europe, 1 incident per 100,000 people. Meanwhile, rates in the parts of the Deep South are as high as 20 per 100,000 people. Minnesota's gun laws are fairly lax, and concealed-carry is legal. It's not the guns, it's the culture. The parts of the US that are in the Deep South and Greater Appalachia have a violent honor culture, rural white southerners are far more likely than rural white Northerners to perpetrate violent crimes or be the victim of them.

The above style charts are also generally cherry picked to reflect the propaganda the chart maker wishes to project. I haven't been following the gun debate for the last decade or so, but last time I checked there were lots of nations that had much higher murder rates than the United States. They just somehow didn't end up on the charts put out be people with a gun control agenda. There is a small grey note on the bottom right of the chart saying the chart does not include Estonia and Mexico. Can anyone guess why these countries were excluded? Has anyone heard of Mexico's gun, drug and gang problems?

Also, many countries that have gun problems do not report gun crime rates to the UN agency tracking such things. It's just bad publicity. There is nothing to be gained from reporting gun problems, and much to loose. Thus, the international data base comparisons are incomplete and biased towards the gun control message.

Also, the murder rates for most races in the United States are right in line with Europe. It is black on black crime that is much higher than the norm for civilized countries. Black on Black murder rates are so high that they pull the national average for all races way out of line. Last time I checked, the black on black murder rate was 16 times higher than white. The problem is cultural and economic, not gun policy, but the gun control people never want to bring that aspect of the gun problem forward. They want the easy Prohibition style magic pony answer, not a serious attempt to alleviate poverty and urban gangs.

Originally Posted by Deb C

I assume that means:

"last year, handguns killed....."

Originally Posted by Deb C

One thing to watch on the above is that the population of the United States is considerably larger than the population of the other countries. In terms of whatever it is that the Brady Bunch is counting per million population...

• Spain 1.3
• Australia 1.5
• Germany 2.4
• Canada 5.8
• United States 30

The above uses the CIA Factbook population numbers.

This is bad enough, but when one looks at any statistics put out by propagandists you have to be very careful. Assume that the presentation has been skewed for emotional impact.

Originally Posted by B Butler

One thing to watch on the above is that the population of the United States is considerably larger than the population of the other countries. In terms of whatever it is that the Brady Bunch is counting per million population...

• Spain 1.3
• Australia 1.5
• Germany 2.4
• Canada 5.8
• United States 30

The above uses the CIA Factbook population numbers.

This is bad enough, but when one looks at any statistics put out by propagandists you have to be very careful. Assume that the presentation has been skewed for emotional impact.

I do find it interesting that when it comes to shining a light on gun violence, any numbers that don't fit the war mentality are considered propaganda for emotional impact. Let's trust our militaristic CIA before we trust a non-profit organization trying to prevent gun violence.

While our country pushes war for profit, has kill lists, and desensitizes the population with the killing of innocent people in other countries by calling it collateral damage, there's not a peep out of those who have a love affair with weapons.

The U.S. has by far the highest civilian gun ownership, the loosest gun laws, and the most guns deaths. Among the world’s 23 wealthiest countries, 80 percent of all gun deaths are American deaths and 87 percent of all kids killed by guns are American kids.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headline...an-experience/








According to the Children’s Defense Fund, in the 44 years since Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King were shot to death, bullets have ended the lives of more than one million people — including 12 in Aurora, Colo., who came together at midnight, just looking to cheer for a superhero.

5 Lies The Gun Lobby Tells You


Sadly, it's time for another refresher.

MYTH #1: More guns don’t lead to more murders. A survey by researchers at the Harvard University School of Public Health found strong statistical support for the idea that, even if you control for poverty levels, more people die from gun homicides in areas with higher rates of gun ownership . And despite what gun advocates say, countries like Israel and Switzerland don’t disprove the point .

More details about the lies the gun lobby generates:

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-pol...obby-tells-you

Originally Posted by B Butler

The above style charts are also generally cherry picked to reflect the propaganda the chart maker wishes to project. I haven't been following the gun debate for the last decade or so, but last time I checked there were lots of nations that had much higher murder rates than the United States. They just somehow didn't end up on the charts put out be people with a gun control agenda. There is a small grey note on the bottom right of the chart saying the chart does not include Estonia and Mexico. Can anyone guess why these countries were excluded? Has anyone heard of Mexico's gun, drug and gang problems?

Were it not for the American appetite for hard drugs, Mexico would not have the violent crime that it does.

Also, many countries that have gun problems do not report gun crime rates to the UN agency tracking such things. It's just bad publicity. There is nothing to be gained from reporting gun problems, and much to loose. Thus, the international data base comparisons are incomplete and biased towards the gun control message.

Are you safer in Toronto or Chicago?

Also, the murder rates for most races in the United States are right in line with Europe. It is black on black crime that is much higher than the norm for civilized countries. Black on Black murder rates are so high that they pull the national average for all races way out of line. Last time I checked, the black on black murder rate was 16 times higher than white. The problem is cultural and economic, not gun policy, but the gun control people never want to bring that aspect of the gun problem forward. They want the easy Prohibition style magic pony answer, not a serious attempt to alleviate poverty and urban gangs.

Gun control will not solve the economic distress that so many Americans endure. But that said there are some white subcultures infamous for violence, especially with firearms. If we want a fully civil society we had better address poverty as intently as we have avoided addressing it through the 3T. "Poor people are expendable losers" is not an excuse.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

No Kepi, the blame is clear, and could not be clearer. As I have said before, the kind of shooting that happened in Connecticut today, as well as in Clackamas Co. Oregon two days ago, and in Aurora CO, Tuscon AZ, etc. etc. etc., is something we can expect to happen more and more often, as long as the Republicans and DINOs control the agenda of this country. Just as every Republican is equally responsible for every hurricane, tornado, flood, drought, mass species extinction brought about by global warming, just as they are responsible for the economic recession and inequality that hurts so many people, so they are just as responsible for these shootings as if they pulled the trigger themselves. And so is everyone who opposes gun control.

America is a very primitive and violent country, enslaved and ensnared by backward, cynical ideologies that keep us in the dark ages while other countries advance. As long as we keep our heads in the sand, and do not pay attention to reality, we will continue to suffer these tragedies. This is the fourth turning. We will confront the results of being shackled with these ideologies every day now, from now on. Things will only get worse until we change. America must take responsibility for voting and acting correctly in our politics and our thinking, or we will continue to suffer a long, slow, painful, self-inflicted death.

I haven't donated to the Brady Campaign in a while, but I made a small donation today in honor of today's victims.

You can express your condolences here:
http://www.wearebetterthanthis.org/index.cfm

http://www.bradycampaign.org/

Except, you know, for the very obvious context that a normal person can purchase far more componants for easy to render explosives far more cheaply than they can purchase fire arms.

We're very lucky the weapons of choice have been knives and guns and not explosives in these events. There is absolutely no way you can prevent attacks by blocking methodology, because the most effective means in an industrialized society are extremely cheap, and can be found under most sinks and manufactured with no oversight or scruitiny and nor do we want oversight and scruitiny on them.

This is a fundamental issue of will and desire. The problem isn't that we have produced people with the means to do terrible acts, as people will always have the means, it's that we have forged within them the will to do terrible acts.

Originally Posted by B Butler

They want the easy Prohibition style magic pony answer, not a serious attempt to alleviate poverty and urban gangs.

Let's call guns what they really are, weapons.

I am not proposing prohibition of weapons, just reforming the ease with which they are obtained and super sized. Not to mention a much needed look at a system and mentality that promotes solving our problems with bullets and bombs.

Originally Posted by Deb C

I do find it interesting that when it comes to shining a light on gun violence, any numbers that don't fit the war mentality are considered propaganda for emotional impact. Let's trust our militaristic CIA before we trust a non-profit organization trying to prevent gun violence.

The numbers I generated in the earlier post came from a very stupid spreadsheet of my own making. There were some unlabeled numbers from a non-profit divided by populations of countries provided by the CIA. I know the Brady numbers were generated as part of a propaganda public relations release. I know the numbers were cooked as they say so in the fine print on the bottom of the propaganda. The CIA fact book? I am scratching my head trying to figure out why the CIA would fudge population numbers in a reference work intended for public release. I think the suggestion that they fudge population numbers for the sake of a hypothetical possibility that someone would divide them into numbers from another source pretty silly.

Are you familiar with the CIA Factbook? Here's the US entry. I use it to pick up surface level information about any given country much like I use the Internet Movie Data Base to pick up information about the entertainment industry. One can google "CIA Factbook Spain" or most any other country to get a similar page for any other country. They are not totally above making comments about a given nation. There was one point and one country where the form of government was listed as "coup d'etat". Thing is, as the last several changes in government were by coup, they might just have been being truthful.

It was just the easiest tool available where I knew there would be population numbers. Feel free to get population numbers from other sources, and see if you get a different result.

Originally Posted by Deb C

Let's call guns what they really are, weapons.

I am not proposing prohibition of weapons, just reforming the ease with which they are obtained and super sized. Not to mention a much needed look at a system and mentality that promotes solving our problems with bullets and bombs.

What do you know about the ease and size of firearms Deb? Ever purchased one?

Originally Posted by Copperfield

What do you know about the ease and size of firearms Deb? Ever purchased one?

I've never purchased a weapon. However, I do know that the Bushmaster was used to kill those innocent children and adults in the Sandy Hook massacre.





That is an example of how some weapon lovers super size their collections.

There's no mechanical difference between that and a hunting rifle.

Originally Posted by Kepi

There's no mechanical difference between that and a hunting rifle.

Weapons used in killing spree

The primary murder weapon:

— Bushmaster AR-15 rifle, a civilian version of the military’s M-16 and a model commonly seen at marksmanship competitions. It’s similar to the weapon used in a recent shopping mall shooting in Oregon. Two men convicted in a series of sniper killings in the Washington, D.C.-area in 2002 also used a Bushmaster .223-caliber rifle that they fired from the trunk of a car at randomly picked victims. Lanza was carrying multiple 30-round magazines, police said, though higher capacity ones are available.

Also found in the school near Lanza’s body:

— Glock 10 mm: A larger and more powerful weapon than the widely popular 9 mm, it is in many respects similar to the 9 mm. It is a lightweight and comparatively affordable weapon that is often used for target shooting and for personal protection. Lanza killed himself with a shot to the head from this pistol, according to a state official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the source was not authorized to disclose details of the investigation.

— Sig Sauer 9 mm: Considered an upper-tier, quality product, it’s comparatively expensive, and its range of uses includes elite military and police units.

http://www.lohud.com/viewart/20121216/NEWS/121216002/Weapons-used-killing-spree

Originally Posted by Deb C

I've never purchased a weapon. However, I do know that the Bushmaster was used to kill those innocent children and adults in the Sandy Hook massacre.





That is an example of how some weapon lovers super size their collections.

Yes, I own one so I am very familiar with it. I use it to hunt animals all the time. What makes it "super sized" Deb? Caliber? Capacity? Barrel length? Do you know any of the specifications for an AR-15 rifle (Bushmaster is the name of a manufacturer).

You know that a person killed innocent children. You know next to nothing about the tool he used. You are willing to punish a lot of other people for the crime. That says a lot about you Deb.

Originally Posted by Copperfield

You know that a person killed innocent children. You know next to nothing about the tool he used. You are willing to punish a lot of other people for the crime. That says a lot about you Deb.

No, it says something about YOU that you have a gun under your bed, and that you want a gun.

The shooter had far more firepower than anyone should be permitted to have. That is clear on the news. I'm sure he had more guns and ammo than you have copperfield.

Originally Posted by Copperfield

You know that a person killed innocent children. You know next to nothing about the tool he used. You are willing to punish a lot of other people for the crime. That says a lot about you Deb.

It doesn't concern you that you use a a version of an M-16 to kill animals? They must be pretty scary creatures for you to have to use such a weapon.

It wasn't a *tool* that massacred innocent human beings, it was a high powered rifle.

I'll see if I can post some stats on this issue. First, I put together a list of the US states with the most firearm murders, robberies and assaults. I multiplied the murder number by 10 and then added the robbery and assault numbers, as of 2010 (FL 2011). Gun violence is more than just murders. The percentage of firearm murders with murders overall is fairly constant, so I didn't include that. The USA average is 67%. I used this website:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datab...crime-us-state

Then I compared this total number with the gun control law ranking, from 1 to 100, given each state by the Brady Campaign. Blue states were almost always ranked highest, with some exceptions such as Vermont. It is also true sometimes that tough gun laws exist in the blue states where they are the most needed. So make of it what you will. I should also check on the number of firearms owned per capita in each state; maybe I'll add that later.

The USA average score is 114.85

Ranked from the most violent to the least:
1. DC 515.23 not ranked
2. Tennessee 238.34 8
3. Delaware 229.14 13
4. South Carolina 217.51 8
5. Louisiana 201.62 2
6. Missouri 195.63 4
7. Florida 182.75 3
8. Michigan 180.09 25
9. Texas 158.12 4
10. Arkansas 156.21 4
11. Nevada 155 5
12. Georgia 152.47 8
13. New Mexico 145.74 4
14. Maryland 138.72 45
15. North Carolina 136.94 16
16. Arizona 134.36 0
17. Oklahoma 133.17 2
18. Pennsylvania 127.69 26
19. California 127.59 81
20. Alaska 124.98 0
21. Mississippi 118.53 4
22. Kansas 117.62 4
23. Ohio 113.53 7 (nearest USA average)
24. New Jersey 97.42 72
25. Virginia 92.1 12
26. Kentucky 90.67 2
27. Wisconsin 89.57 3
28. Connecticut 82.96 58
29. Alabama 78.1 14
30. Massachusetts 73.13 65
31. Colorado 72.76 15
32. Nebraska 71.26 5
33. Rhode Island 62.4 44
34. Washington 60.1 15
35. New York 51.17 62
36. Minnesota 49.11 14
37. Indiana 47.38 4
38. Montana 42.6 2
39. Utah 41.43 0
40. Oregon 40.27 15
41. West Virginhia 36.99 4
42. Illinois 36.17 35
43. Idaho 34.75 2
44. Iowa 34.68 7
45. South Dakota 29.55 4
46. Wyoming 28.1 4
47. New Hampshire 26.16 6
48. Hawaii 25.94 50
49. Maine 17.11 7
50. Vermont 13.16 6
51. North Dakota 11.15 2

Originally Posted by Copperfield

Yes, I own one so I am very familiar with it. I use it to hunt animals all the time. What makes it "super sized" Deb? Caliber? Capacity? Barrel length? Do you know any of the specifications for an AR-15 rifle (Bushmaster is the name of a manufacturer).

You know that a person killed innocent children. You know next to nothing about the tool he used. You are willing to punish a lot of other people for the crime. That says a lot about you Deb.

I've given up the notion of real gun "control" in the US, but wouldn't more stringent licensing, perhaps gun owner's insurance, limits on how many rounds can be bought and stockpiled? Limits of some kind? In the UK (and yes, their laws are far, far stricter), from what I've read, you need to have a background check on everyone in the household, including mental health.

It's not going to stop nutjobs, but maybe they can do less damage. I do not believe in the perfect being the enemy of the good. The vast majority of gun owners are responsible (and I know many. An old friend was a competition skeet shooter).

But don't you think having the ability to strafe a room full of 6 and 7 year-olds in that short a time needs to be looked at? It's not like hunting game or honing a skill with target shooting.

Originally Posted by Odin

That is a national average. If you look at a state by state basis there is a clear trend of higher rates of violence the farther south you go. Rates of violent crime in Minnesota are as low as in Canada or Western Europe, 1 incident per 100,000 people. Meanwhile, rates in the parts of the Deep South are as high as 20 per 100,000 people. Minnesota's gun laws are fairly lax, and concealed-carry is legal. It's not the guns, it's the culture. The parts of the US that are in the Deep South and Greater Appalachia have a violent honor culture, rural white southerners are far more likely than rural white Northerners to perpetrate violent crimes or be the victim of them.

What's the rate in St.Paul/Minneapolis? What's the rate in Chicago? What's the rate in LA?

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

No, it says something about YOU that you have a gun under your bed, and that you want a gun.

The shooter had far more firepower than anyone should be permitted to have. That is clear on the news. I'm sure he had more guns and ammo than you have copperfield.

Actually I can guarantee that he didn't.

Most of mine stay locked up. I have just enough available on-demand to deal with would be intruders.

Originally Posted by Deb C

It doesn't concern you that you use a a version of an M-16 to kill animals? They must be pretty scary creatures for you to have to use such a weapon.

It wasn't a *tool* that massacred innocent human beings, it was a high powered rifle.

Not at all. Woodchucks and other rodents can be crafty buggers. I take it you have never seen one up close. It's the teeth, you understand.

And no, it was most decidely a person who masacred innocent human beings. I have yet to see a rifle or handgun jump up and chase down children on its own. How about you?