Mass shooting at Orlando gay nightclub [50 dead, 53 injured]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Public opinion in the US is unprepared to accept gun control. In my opinion it will take (regrettably) a generational change before enough of America could accept gun control.

And that change will not happen as long as one side of the issue has a large, well funded advocacy group, and the other doesn't. It will take gun control advocates organizing, getting funding, and sticking with it for decades before there is a realistic chance for any action.

How many generations though? It's probably not something that's going to happen in our life times unless there's a medical breakthrough that vastly increases out life spans, something else that just throws out everything in our constitution is probably more likely to happen before we have what would be required to change the second amendment.

It would be interesting to see what the Swiss are doing to have such a high gun ownership while also having such a small homicide rate.

I'm going to guess a wider access to health care and probably mental health treatment, maybe less economic stress? Also most men get conscripted into service where they can then later keep their rifle and I imagine they would have some mental health screenings.


I could've saved some time and just posted the Wiki link that I just skimmed through.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland
 
Cultural differences like... The Second Amendment and lack of sound gun control laws? What other cultural differences are you talking about?

So the US doesn't count just because it doesn't fit your narrative?

Hundreds of years worth of rather open access to guns, glorification of violence, massive gang problems, etc. is my guess.
 
I proved that more firearms does not = more homicides, there's no direct corelation.

That's like saying open water has nothing to do with drowning.

All this is showing is that gun control laws have a huge impact on the number of homicides.

Do you have separate charts for hunting rifles, hand guns, and assault rifles?
 
Essentially stricter gun laws WILL help reduce the incidence of gun violence but it won't eliminate them entirely. The Lee Rigby murder, Charlie Hebdo massacre and recent attacks in Belgium are proof of this.
Just fyi, but the attacks in belgium were with self made TATP explosives - not guns.
 
Cultural differences like... The Second Amendment and lack of sound control laws? What other cultural differences are you talking about?
The fact that most of Europe have a ton of socialist values ingrained into their society.

Equality and poverty drives crime.

I could've included Czech republic which has their own 2nd amendment right here in Europe, here is the numbers:

Czech republic-
Firearms per 100 people: 16.3
Homicides per 100.000 people: 0.7

That's like saying open water has nothing to do with drowning.

All this is showing is that gun control laws have a huge impact on the number of homicides.

Do you have separate charts for hunting rifles, hand guns, and assault rifles?

Maybe it's a language barrier (English is not my primary), but I have no idea what you're saying or asking here.
 
So how many more have to die?

US has a clear disease, and it's called gun culture. It's ok if you think the problem is mental health, but there a lot of countries where they have those problems and we don't have this shit happening everyday, so guess what is the difference.

So again, how many lives left to die, until change begins?
 
don't forget our spectacular number of accidental gun deaths. also suicides attempted with a gun are far more likely to succeed.

guns are a huge problem here i don't know how you can deny it. how many dead is too much? like is there a number even you gun nuts would balk at?
 
I really wish authorities just STFU until they're 100% sure of what they're saying.

The 24 hour rolling news media asking constant questions and demanding answers doesn't help matters. CNN keeps switching between "terrorist" and "suspected terrorist". There's a lot of speculation and rumours right now so it'll probably be a while before anything of substance and fact emerges. San Bernardino was much like this.
 
Basically said gay people need to understand that Islamists hate them and to stop trying to go against the right wing, or else more atrocities like this will happen. He's blathering on now and literally just said peaceful Muslims are "afraid" and "that they need to understand they need to work with us and that if they refuse to work with us then I'm afraid that perhaps some of the darker elements of our nature may take hold of our actions". Sweet merciful Christ!

I need to see some footage of this later. That's almost too shitty to be believed.
 
America is a sad place.

That Obama video where he explains that while they can stop suspected terrorists from flying, they can't stop them buying a ton of guns, really says it all.
 
Fucking awful. Sitting in the parking lot of Home Depot and heard on the radio parents breaking down because they don't know the status of their children. I can't walk in like this.

Excuse the stupid question, but what's the reason they distinguish "domestic" terrorism from just "terrorism?" Arent the motives typically the same?
 
don't forget our spectacular number of accidental gun deaths. also suicides attempted with a gun are far more likely to succeed.

guns are a huge problem here i don't know how you can deny it. how many dead is too much? like is there a number even you gun nuts would balk at?

It's only a problem if it's bad guys from other countries murdering them , if it's Americans killing Americans that seems to be ok.
 
This has gotten exhausting, honestly. Over a dozen people dead, and we're having the reflexive gun control argument. Not that the argument isn't worth having, it just feels like we're watching the 6th straight-to-video entry in a tired franchise at this point. You can pretty much chart the timeline of huge shooting -> internet gun control arguments -> nothing happens. It gets tiresome to see so much fervor to change our laws and a disconnect with the complete lack of action that's taken afterward. It is so painstakingly obvious that the ease with which a person can acquire guns in the US contributes to the number of shooting deaths just like the availability of clothes contributes to the number of people who aren't naked, and yet nothing is fixed. I think it would require a shooting of this scale on a daily basis to really get enough people to stand up and demand tighter laws. The morbidity of that is pretty crushing, really.
 
Just fyi, but the attacks in belgium were with self made TATP explosives - not guns.

That was actually my entire point, that you're still going to get non gun attacks by crazies. The Lee Rigby murder took place on the streets of London with ordinary knives.
 
America is a sad place.

That Obama video where he explains that while they can stop suspected terrorists from flying, they can't stop them buying a ton of guns, really says it all.
Of all things you choose this.

You have no problem with "suspects" as in there's no evidence, if there was they'd be in jail, being restricted from their civil activities like flying?

Thoughts are not a crime, I know some want it to be, but hopefully that belongs in the past.
 
Did you look up the numbers I posted, they literally prove that less firearms is not = less homicides.

The U.K have 1/20th of the firearms of Switzerland but have double the amount of homicides.

In Europe the vast majority of gun deaths are suicides.

Switzerland does not count because military service is mandatory and the assault rifles are stored at home. so most swiss adult men have an assault rifle at home.
however, it's illegal to store ammunition at home, but the weapons are still in the statistics. it's sad that gun nuts in the US keep bringing this up.

more weapons absolutely equal more death, period.
 
Another reason for sure.

The point I was making, and that I unfortunately have to keep on making.

More firearms does not = more homicides.

The U.S is a case in of itself because it has so many other issues that Europe is without.

the presence of said problems is more than enough of a reason to have less guns around.

it's really simple....people decide in terms of how "cheap" something is..and this includes every kind of currency,from money itself,to effort,time,pain etc.

if someone wants to kill someone,but has to do it with a spoon,no matter how much he hates the guys,he is gonna think twice before doing it,if he has a gun it doesn't really take much to pass from thoughts to action.

So while the presence of guns might not be the cause,it would sure as hell help...much like the evolution of ovens helped reducing the suicide rate in England, because before people only needed to stuck their head in them and wave their goodbye to life with a sweet merciful death,but with that being not a possibility anymore,they had to be more creative,put more effort,and thus the suicide rate declined despite ovens not being the reason why those people were attempting suicide in the first place.

also,especially with things like purchasing ammo..as a non-US citizien,it baffles me how someone can amass large quantity of ammunition without any kind of regulation...I can understand you wanting a gun to protect yourself,but i have an harder time understand the need for thousands of bullets purchased..i think you should have some kind of regulation and registraton on that,so that if someone is amassing large quantites of ammunitions,you can at least check what he plans to do with those.
 
That was actually my entire point, that you're still going to get non gun attacks by crazies. The Lee Rigby murder took place on the streets of London with ordinary knives.

Oh ofcourse - people with ill intent will always find their ways. On the other hand, I'm sure Belgium would be a lot more unsafe if people were allowed to carry guns.
 
It's really fun when we try to build our argument around things completely unrelated to the travesty that happened here.

Tell me how many of these "mass shootings" involved people unrelated to gang/crime and then we can start having a talk about the problem of these "mass shootings".

If it seems cold, maybe it is, but I have a harder time feeling sorry for criminals getting theirs. I know there's often innocent bystanders and collateral damage, and that's really sad, but I don't think it helps anybody to disingenuously report that events like what happened here, happens every day.
So what's the magic number of dead Americans you need to see before you're willing to talk about this problem? Just let me know so I can keep tabs on it. Once we got that number then maybe the right will stop being sniveling cowards hiding behind 300 year old laws to keep their toys like a fucking five year old. "Bu-bu-but you told me I could have it!"
 
Another mass shooting in America, how am I not surprised.

RIP to the victims, hopefully your country will learn and more people won't have to suffer.
 
Switzerland does not count because military service is mandatory and the assault rifles are stored at home. so most swiss adult men have an assault rifle at home.
however, it's illegal to store ammunition at home, but the weapons are still in the statistics. it's sad that gun nuts in the US keep bringing this up.

more weapons absolutely equal more death, period.
If you're looking for excuses to exclude Switzerland so be it, try to compare Norway or Sweden then, also high gun ownership and very low homicide rates.

I know it hurts having your core beliefs proven wrong, but it's a little childish to 1. call me a gun nut and 2. claim something contrary to facts.
 
People on twitter looked up the shooter's voter registration information and published his address online. Hope he didn't live with anyone else. Also lots of idiocy over him being a registered democrat.
 
If you're looking for excuses to exclude Switzerland so be it, try to compare Norway or Sweden then, also high gun ownership and very low homicide rates.

I know it hurts having your core beliefs proven wrong, but it's a little childish to 1. call me a gun nut and 2. claim something contrary to facts.

I don't know why you call this an excuse. is it really not obvious that guns without ammunition are less dangerous than a kitchen knife?
 
NBC had a statement from the suspect's father. Apologetic and in shock, but commented nothing to do with religion. Did say that his son was 'disgusted' by two men kissing a couple months back.
 
Another mass shooting in America, how am I not surprised.

RIP to the victims, hopefully your country will learn and more people won't have to suffer.

Its crazy that everyone is allowed to own a device that makes it simplicity itself to kill someone. On some sort of bizarre trust provision that they be a good boy and don't use it to kill a ton of people?

Its the perfectly sane man of today with his handgun, could be the unhinged maniac of tomorrow who guns down a supermarket crowd.
 
The fact that most of Europe have a ton of socialist values ingrained into their society.

Equality and poverty drives crime.

I could've included Czech republic which has their own 2nd amendment right here in Europe, here is the numbers:

Czech republic-
Firearms per 100 people: 16.3
Homicides per 100.000 people: 0.7
I think you should compare the firearms ownership by both total homicide rate and homicide by firearms rate. You can clearly see there's a homicide by firearms is clearly a larger component of total homicide when there is firearm ownership is higher in the countries you selected (as expected). Contrary to your exclusion, the US fits in fine when making such a comparison.

Relevant comparisons:
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/c...an_firearm_possession/10,50,69,177,178,194,49
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compare/192/rate_of_homicide_any_method/10,50,69,177,178,194,49
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compare/192/rate_of_gun_homicide/10,50,69,177,178,194,49

Your argument seems to be that the homicide rate will remain unchanged but the means of homicide will change if there were less firearms. None of the data you've presented demonstrates that. You'd have to compare a country before and after gun control laws were enacted.

EDIT: Your Czech Republic homicide rate differs to the data on the Gun Policy site, where it is similar to Australia, which also has similar levels of gun ownership.
 
I've omitted the U.S. because it's the odd one out, there's so many cultural and societal differences that it's not meaningful to compare.

I didn't mention gun control because it wasn't a part of what I wanted to prove.

I proved that more firearms does not = more homicides, there's no direct corelation.

There can be a bunch of other reasons that means less homicides, but it has nothing to do with firearms.
Yes, and I regularly see news of a single person killing several + injuring even more armed with a kitchen knife. How would all these mass shootings (more than 1 a day in your beautiful country) happen if not for the easy access to guns ?
60% of murders in the USA involve firearms, you mean to tell me that if guns were banned it wouldn't change anything ? Bullshit.
 
I don't know why you call this an excuse. is it really not obvious that guns without ammunition are less dangerous than a kitchen knife?
Since you insist on getting humiliated here's some numbers on Switzerland (without accounting for all the other countries I provided)

There's about 3400000 civilian guns in Switzerland, 324484 of those are government firearms.

It's not illegal to store ammo at home in Switzerland, and 3 million of these guns are privately owned firearms.
I think you should compare the firearms ownership by both total homicide rate and homicide by firearms rate. You can clearly see there's a homicide by firearms is clearly a larger component of total homicide when there is firearm ownership is higher in the countries you selected (as expected). Contrary to your exclusion, the US fits in fine when making such a comparison.

Your argument seems to be that the homicide rate will remain unchanged but the means of homicide will change if there were less firearms. None of the data demonstrates that. You'd have to compare a country before and after gun control laws were enacted.
The claim is that more firearms = more homicides, if that can't be seen in overall homicide statistics then what?

I've proven that countries that have almost 1 gun for every 3 people in the nation have less than 1 homicide per 100.000 people. If you still think that guns = more homicides then I don't know what to tell you.

A real problem, and I'm not going to deny this, is suicides increase with higher firearm ownership.
 
The sick thing about this tragedy is that it's going to be used by the right to try to ban and restrict muslims within the US.
 
NBC had a statement from the suspect's father. Apologetic and in shock, but commented nothing to do with religion. Did say that his son was 'disgusted' by two men kissing a couple months back.

Sounds like leaning towards a hate crime. Maybe a mixture of both.
 
Fucking awful. Sitting in the parking lot of Home Depot and heard on the radio parents breaking down because they don't know the status of their children. I can't walk in like this.

Excuse the stupid question, but what's the reason they distinguish "domestic" terrorism from just "terrorism?" Arent the motives typically the same?

Some reporter just mentioned the FBI is defining these types of attacks as "domestic terror" to denote there is some type of international terrorist influence involved. Think of the San Bernadino shootings and foreign influence, I think that's what they're aiming for now.
 
Some reporter just mentioned the FBI is defining these types of attacks as "domestic terror" to denote there is some type of international terrorist influence involved. Think of the San Bernadino shootings and foreign influence, I think that's what they're aiming for now.

That's literally the opposite of what domestic terrorism is supposed to mean though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom