Just for funsies:

No. In rough order of development:

Rifles are a long-barreled gun with a rifled barrel. Comes from the transition from smoothbores to rifled barrels. Fire one round per pull of the trigger.

Carbines are short-barreled rifles, sometimes firing less powerful ammunition. M1 from WWII, and the M4 these days - M4 can be full auto, but the short barrel tends to put it in the "Carbine" designation.

Machine guns were the early fully-automatic weapons, that continuously fired by holding the trigger down. Ma Duece, the MG42 from WWII, etc.

Submachine guns are machineguns that fire pistol ammunition, so they generally have less kick which made them controllable enough to carry, not have to get mounted. Tommy Gun, Schmeisser MP-40, MP5, etc.

Automatic rifles are shrunk machine guns that can fire from a bipod with a magazine, not belt-fed like most machine guns. Then you get things like the SAW that put the belt in a magazine and are more portable than the machineguns but fire like them. BAR is the most famous and original prototype, and the current SAW is considered one but you have the blurred line towards "Light Machinegun".

Assault rifles are the cross-breed, that fire full automatic with rifle rounds like machine guns do. 3-round burst modes were introduced because you can't fire more rounds than that accurately from something like that. AK-47, M-16, etc.

Things like barrel length, size of round, and firing modes tend to be the key differentiators, but there are also lots of hybrids that can make classification tricky. For example, is an AR-15 really an assault rifle, when the whole point of an assault rifle was the automatic fire for suppression that a regular rifle could not do? And an Uzi is not a machinegun.

That's why it's more important to talk about the specifics you are worried about, such as how many rounds can you fire before reloading. But even if you limit magazine size, that just asks for the shooter to carry more guns - most of these guys are already doing that.

Well said.

So the vast majority of people, and the vast majority of this board, is or has been mentally ill? Alcoholism or abusing drugs is often a sign of underlying mental illness, but the idea that anyone who has a couple drinks or some marijuana is mentally ill is ridiculous.

I'd say you could diagnose more than half this board with some degree of some mental illness, yes.

As you could over half the general population IMO.

There are about 90 traffic deaths per day in the USA. In 2013, there were just under 33,000 traffic deaths for the entire year.

So far this year, there have been 379 deaths in "mass shootings" across the United States.

Yes, many of them likely by illegal guns, but many also not. So this idea that one day of traffic deaths = one decade of rampage shooting deaths is wrong.

Not to mention the over 40,000 incidents of gun violence that aren't mass shootings that occur every year... of which there is a death rate that is about 1/3 of the traffic death rate. Just over 10,000 people this year alone.

A lot of those people probably still would've died if there was a ban on guns. But how many would not? Is there a number that would warrant action?

Your idea that gun control is a slippery slope that will lead to authoritarian banning is exactly the kind of thinking that prevents anything from happening. I know that I am naive, but wouldn't trying something be better than just writing off our inability to act to the Constitution whenever this comes up?

I think smoking cigarettes is disgusting, I don't understand why people chose to start doing it, but I'm not going to call them crazy or mentally ill. Heck, caffeine is a drug that is technically abused by millions of Americans every day. At a certain point calling everyone mentally ill means no one is mentally ill and it's counterproductive.

I came across this today, which is quite interesting:

Homicide | Harvard Injury Control Research Center | Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health

Of course it's nigh on impossible to get rid of guns in the US, but there is a definite linkage it seems.

That provision of the constitution is more valuable than all of those lives, or 10x those lives, or 1000x those lives.

And that's the bottom line.

It is a right that provides more weight to all of the others.

I think "gun availability" is less of the issue, but culture isn't easily measured. I don't think guns are markedly harder to get in all of New England than they are in all of The South, but there's large cultural differences. There's a culture where guns are considered normal in the south, or the west, or in inner cities (even those up here like Roxbury, Springfield etc).

I don't think that makes us any less likely to have a school shooting because those are the acts of deranged individuals, but that list of "mass shootings" is a completely different animal. I only checked the first 2 Massachusetts ones, but I'm sure they'd all be the same areas - Roxbury, Dorchester, Mattapan, Springfield, maybe Worcester or Lynn. Lumping those in with school or workplace shootings is a mistake imo, as is pretending that there's any statewide (let one national) law that will be effective for both.

I struggle every year how to approach the gun topic in my government class. My opinion does not ever come up, but just presenting the issue is complicated.

It seems to me there are 3 main pro-gun groups/approaches:

1. Protection from bad guys
2. Protection from the government
3. Tradition, hobby, etc

As for my opinion:
Number 1 seems to do more harm than good. From family violence, suicide, mistakes/accidents, etc.

I agree with number 2 in so far as I do not think the institution that has the most irresponsible history of gun abuse is the best one to decide if I'm responsible.

Number 3 also seems reasonable, and similar to many other countries.

I forgot the word schools, sorry. Assumed it from the thread title.

What does gun control mean? How are we going to get the guns out of the places where the most gun deaths occur - mostly places where some of the strictest gun control laws proposed already exist?

I'd say the easiest way to get guns out of the places where the most gun deaths occur (the home) would be to disabuse people of the macho fantasy that owning a gun makes them a big, bad crime-stopper. In actuality, one is orders of magnitude more likely to use one to commit suicide (or worse, to have some kid in the home use it to accidentally kill themselves) than to stop a random home invasion.

I don't know many people at all that keep a gun in the house, and know all the stats that say you're as likely to kill a family member as an intruder, but I think there is something to the idea that the potential for a homeowner to have a gun does act as a deterrent to some people who would commit home invasions. It's strictly a hypothetical anyway, but if you ban home gun ownership (or self-defense inside the home), without getting all the guns away from criminals of course there would be some who would take advantage of that.

A big one out here is protection from animals, especially protection of pets and livestock. I guess it's not really "a pro-gun groups/approach" that's very vocal, but that's the main utility of guns for a lot of people in rural areas, especially those that aren't really "gun people" normally.

I promised myself I'd stay out of gun topics on this board but....... :D

1. Agree. Ratio of people saved because they had again vs. number of people killed through accidents/intentional incidents involving legal guns is a bit out of wack for this to hold much water with me.

2. This one in particular is the one that makes no sense to me, more so than the others. Having weapons to protect me against my own government is the kind of thing I would probably think of if I lived in Sierra Leone. Do I trust my government? Not really. Do I think having a rifle would do me any good if push came to shove - to the point where point #1 is worth forgetting? No. Chances of me taking up arms against my own government, 0.0000000000001%. Chances of me being shot by a legal firearm, much higher.

3. I have a problem with 'tradition'... just because something has happened for a long time, doesn't make it a good idea. I don't have a problem with 'hobby' though. Australia's gun laws get a lot of press, but you can still own a gun to hunt, a gun if you own a farm, etc. It's just very difficult and there are a lot of checks involved.

Campus Shooting Came After Fight Between Two Groups of Students - ABC News

There was a shooting at Northern Arizona University last night (at around 1 AM). It looks like two groups of people got in an argument at a frat house and an 18-year old had a gun and opened fire on one of the groups. He killed one student and injured three others.

I've usually been pretty libertarian when it comes to the gun issue, but I think there has to be a way to start addressing this issue without taking hunting rifles, shotguns and "one round per shot" handguns from lawful people. I honestly don't know the exact solution, but for the first time I'm atleast open to the discussion.

We need more cops with aggressive search & seizure capabilities. Get into the homes and take the guns by force if necessary. It's the only way to get them all.

Turn your first sentence into legislation. Done.

Yeah this sucks. My alma mater.

Acknowledging that not all guns are created equal is key.

IMO, Step One is obtaining agreement on what are legitimate reasons to own a gun. Things probably flow in a relatively straightforward manner from there.

Of course, Step One is not exactly easy.... :D

Acknowledging that not all people are created equal is also key.

:thumbsup:

Beyond that, I don't particularly belong in this thread. Have fun! Be productive!

Who the fuck brings a gun to a college party?

Not unheard of. I mean, wasn't that the whole thing at Auburn a few years back? (the shooting(s) at the apartment complex?) Also, it's not all that unusual for someone to fire off a few rounds at a frat party around here, just not usually at someone. I've heard that mentioned more than once just from hearing stuff from Greek row.

someone who is embarrassed to bring a knife?

I could be wrong, I'm no doctor, but I'll side with the science. So whatever that says is good with me.

Depends what neighborhood they grew up in. Might've been ingrained since birth to always be ready to fight at a partay.

Former Marine agrees to 15-year sentence after jury deadlocks in deputy shooting | Tampa Bay Times

So this dude is got enough mental issues for me to say he needs to go away. But after 10-years in....prison....this dude is going to go back out on to the streets? I'm sure that will end well...

When I saw them at UMass it was football players from the south or drug dealers from Springfield/Holyoke. Although from what I knew no one ever actually fired shots and most of the time they weren't even loaded, just used for the occasional pistol-whipping or to pull out if someone showed a knife.
You're not a scientist either but that doesn't stop you from being extremely skeptical of the public claims surrounding climate change. You really think there are fewer agendas and less money to be made in the psychology/pharmacology field?

Not exactly. I am extremely skeptical of the solutions being presented when no scientific fact has been established yet. As of right now, we are 99% in agreement that humans *may* have some influence on climate. Outside of the obvious--developing nations are over-populating--we still aren't entirely sure...and I'll grant that we can do something now, but we don't know how much we should throw at it.

To put it in a language you could probably understand better. We know that the Middle East is a problem. We don't know exactly why, but the consensus is that it needs to be fixed. So we throw money at it. We know more would help, but we aren't sure exactly how it helps, how much is needed, or how long we would need to spend it to see positive results. When we threw ungodly amounts of money at it through two wars, we saw some change, but we had to bail because our economy was tanking. The Liberals, aren't interested in a 10-year war against Global Warming...they want every last cent to go towards it indefinitely. We could very well sink our economy chasing after a fantasy (fixing Climate Change)...that's what I'm skeptical about. Not the scientific research that broadly states that "humans are at least somewhat responsible".

Sorry to go off-topic.

Sorry for going off-topic, not sorry for being really condescending!

He's a Red Sox fan...it almost happens naturally. :)

There were so many basement type classrooms in our school and I always familiarized myself with the exits almost out of second nature. Like anyone with violence in their heart could have barricaded this certain doorway and ran up a huge body count if they hit the one wing where this room I always had class in was in. Maybe I'm just hyper aware or something.

I'm gonna bump this one because today in KY there was another school shooting. This one saw 2 killed and 17 injured when a 15 yr old opened fire during classroom change.

I wonder if Bevin will propose mandatory guns for every student to combat the 2nd amendment threat that shooting will (possibly...fuck no, they gave up trying long ago) bring.

I've got 2 in HS, and even though they are 4.5 hours away, it's still my state and it leaves me feeling just a bit more uneasy.

Maybe we should ban schools so this doesn't happen again.

I mean guns aren't going to get touched in any meaningful way.

dola,

I just wonder what was going on in the kid's life that he felt that he needed to shoot up a school and guaranteeing himself life in prison or an early grave.

Trust me, it does me too. Crazy times for us school admins.

Marshall County is about 3 hours from here and way out in SW KY, so I don't know anything first-hand, but it's only about an hour from where Caitlin goes to college and she has a teammate from Paducah, which is close by. Not sure if this info is going to ultimately come out as the truth, but what they are hearing is the shooter is a bullied band member who targeted athletes.

I have become one of those people who sees one of these stories and just says Ok. I never thought I will be this indifferent about school shootings.

Me either. It's not even top billing in the news any longer. They simply happen and we move on. USA Today has it as one of the higher up stories, and had a notification for it yesterday. CNN has it buried behind a literal mountain of trump. Fox doesn't even have it on their lead page, but they do have a story about a teacher stripping and chasing kids. It's not a lead on Reuters either. It's just one more day in the life of a high school kid in the USA.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/23/u...-shooting.html

another one?
looks bad

https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/...474078423.html

At least 20 injured. If only we could reach these people before they do this.

Shooter at large after gunfire at Florida high school-police

Hopefully injuries are just from running away and not bullets. The school shootings really mess me up.

I had to open my big mouth :(

I wanted to throw up when I saw this thread bumped.

I dislike congressman saying things at this point

Congressman said there are numerous fatalities. And that lots still inside. They showed someone being put in the back of a police car. I really don't think they know much yet.

Shooter is a student and is in custody.

My BIL worked about 20 minutes South in another HS. Said this school is in an upper socio-economic area.

It can happen anywhere.

I was scrolling Twitter and what I'm guessing was a Snapchat video taken from inside a classroom started autoplaying, with numerous shots ringing out. God almighty.

Just another state sponsored shooting. Meaning if the govt gave a fuck, something would have been done by now. Now it's accepted and always someone else's fault.

My nephew goes to college in Tampa but went to high school in Broward. When I told him about today's shooting, his reaction was similar to the reaction I gave my parents when discussing students smoking weed in the bathroom. This is now normalized behavior.

What law did you want passed that this shooter wouldn't break?

How about anything that makes progress toward the goal of ending school or public shootings? Anything?

The sheriff sure likes the word 'horrific'

Do we outlaw violent video games? Those can be part of the problem.
Get rid of violent movies? Those,, also, are part of the problem.

The quote from miami_fan underscores the issue. People are desensitized to violence. And that is a United States thing. This country has always been violent. We treat violence like France treats sex.

Im not sure there is anything you can do. Unless you are able to entirely change the culture of this country.

So glad you asked.

It is always hard to talk about specific incidents and I'm not sure it is the best policy to react to specific incidents. But hey, most of us take our shoes off at the airport now!

When you look at it from a broader perspective, the most effective way to reduce gun violence is to have background checks for all gun sales, including private gun sales arranged through the internet or at gun shows. Data shows (and we actually have this because there are about 20 states and DC that have these laws) that background checks for all gun sales reduce gun deaths by up to 50% across the board. This includes suicides, which in many states account for more than half of gun deaths. It includes domestic violence related shootings and it includes officer involved shootings. Would background checks stop every shooting? No, but they have proven hugely effective.

There are lots of other smaller things we can do around permitting and training requirements that also show positive impact.

We can also try to get rid of bad laws like Stand Your Ground laws and Permitless Carry laws which show an uptick in gun deaths.

Or we can do nothing. Offer thoughts. Offer prayers. And keep reading about individual incidents that when added together become a scourge on our nation. We really don't have to live this way. But we choose to do so.

This is largely a myth. Kids across the globe play the same video games and see the same movies yet don't have access to guns in the same way Americans do.

20 injury 1 dead

While I applaud it too, I've come to the sad realization that I've seen others make: if it didn't happen after Sandy Hook, it's never going to happen.

Even with Americans with access to guns, the violence rate has dropped while the popularity of video games has increased the past 30 years.

Fair point, but relative to peer nations we are away off the benchmark.

I get the discouragement, but there is incremental progress. Even in 2016 when Trump was elected, four ballot measures across the country related to background checks or permitting passed. In 2017, Virginia voters for Northam ranked gun safety as the #2 issue in the campaign. It's not a taboo issue anymore. There is still a steep hill to climb--the NRA has had a huge head start and financial advantage--but incremental change is occurring (though obviously not at the federal level).

Maybe our country just isn’t as civilized as we have been led to believe?

holy fuck....17 dead. another sandy hook. I really didn't think there'd be such a staggering death count after the early reports.

The news is saying that the shooter was an expelled student who had made previous threats against other students.

St. Valentine's Day Massacre 2.0 I guess.

Looks like we got off relatively easy in KY a few weeks ago. Awful.

My parents lived in Coral Springs for about 5 years in the early 90s. My brother went to Taravella, a HS close by. I remember when Stoneman Douglas opened. This shit is beginning to be like cancer - it's so prevalent, everyone will soon be touched by a mass shooting one way or another.

Not sure if its the "most effective" but agree on background checks on gun show and private sales (e.g. there are already background checks needed except in those 2 circumstances I think).

Don't think I agree with getting rid of Stand Your Ground laws. If I understand this correctly, there is no doubt I should be able to shoot any intruder in/outside my house that I think is a threat.

I think its playing the long game. Its educating the younger generation to be more aware of threats, possible threatening behavior, have the frank discussion and show impact of these killings to victim's families.

(It seems this kid threw up a bunch of warning signs and the other kids knew about it. More to come if this was reported to authorities and if & why they failed to act)

Definitely make gun ownership harder to come by (its way too easy). As a law abiding citizen, don't take away my ability to acquire guns but do make sure that I'm law abiding, not mentally unstable etc. and educated & trained to use the weapons.

No.

Absolutely.

If I kill a Halloween trick-or-treater by mistake, let me be judged and pay for my crime if found guilty.

That does nothing for the dead kid or the dead kid's family.

Outside your home you have way too much chance to be wrong about actions and intentions. I think is a threat is a license to kill for damn near any reason.

Don't dispute that. That is why my comments also included more gun controls, more checks, more education and training.

Will there still be mistakes, yes. Then let that person be judged and pay for the crime.

So if I shoot your kid it's all okay because I'll go on trial?

There are a multitude of legal reasons for a stranger to be on your property. You feeling threatened by one of them is no reason to give you a license to kill.

Isn't that how the legal system works?

If my kid was acting in a threatening manner where you felt justified in shooting, yes.

If it turns out you were wrong, I will enjoy thinking about all the close relations you'll have with other inmates.

I can kill your child, but it will all be okay because you'll fantasize about me being raped.

Jesus.

Its interesting how your logic has progressed on this discussion.

Let's agree to disagree and not waste anymore cpu cycles.

Let's be fair to the authorities. The kid can throw up all the warning signs in the world. We don't take those threats seriously until after the fact. Remember those threats are supposedly just words.

Not really feeling like debating the whole guns thing again. I prefer to get an early start on celebrating some of the heroes.

Reports say Stoneman Douglas assistant football coach stepped in front of bullets | Miami Herald

I wonder how many kids throw up warning signs and how many resources it would take to mitigate them all.

Something needs to be done. My libertarian view points on the federal government don’t carry the company line on this shit. I will however point out a huge problem with “they should have prevented it”

I am a middle school teacher and ever since Jonesboro and Columbine I have thought in my head “this kid wouldn’t surprise me” etc. I have probably said this about 10-15 kids over the years. Obviously none of them have shot up the school. What exactly would the solution be? Lock them all up for being weird? I mean we are taking thousands of kids right? Obviously most of these shooters are going to be outcasts and picked on. I just think there is a lot we can do t help them but this falls on the shooter and not the school if they kicked him out and he came back to murder people. Fuck him.

Nothing will be done because most of the country does not care. The rest find perverse pleasure in these events because it allows them spew hatred toward others which they revel in.

Sandy Hook was the test. We didn't care that elementary school students had their brains blown out. This isn't even a blip on the radar anymore. It's a sick country with a sick culture. There's no coming back from that.

Would you like me to say most proven impact?

It varies by state but private gun sales not subject to background check make up about 35% of gun sales. In Minnesota where I live it is slightly higher.



I am not sure if you're stating this correctly. The Castle doctrine has always allowed you to defend yourself in your home. Stand Your Ground extends the Castle Doctrine to any place and eliminates a duty to retreat. In non-Stand Your Ground states, you have a duty to retreat if there is a safe way to escape a threat. In Stand Your Ground States, there is no duty to retreat if you subjectively perceive a threat. What we see in Stand Your Ground states is an increase in gun deaths, no deterrence on crime and a disproportionate impact on communities of color (in terms of increased gun deaths).


No problem with any of this, but like with video games, we see approximately the same rate of mental illness and other factors as peer nations. It comes back to access.


Agreed.

Seems sensible to me. These are logical, acceptable changes that aren't Ban All Guns type reactions that get nowhere with a good portion of the population.

waitwhat? 17 dead? I thought it was 1 dead and 20 injured?

Never trust early reports

+1. Very well said.

Early this week they installed intruder door bars in my school. Was not at all taken lightly- strange, awful and scary times...

Shocking news. I am not sure a lot of people in the U.S. appreciate how unusual and crazy it seems for your children to be shooting each other to a Western European. Blaming video games is laughable. Look at your gun laws. End of story. Just reading a story about arming teachers in Colorado. Yeah why not give them an rpg too. How about addressing the root cause!

18th school shooting this year apparently. In 55 calendar days. With holidays and weekends, that’s basically one every other day. There definitely isn’t a problem though, and nothing can be possibly be done about it.

There needs to be a 10 step equivalent here, but it’s difficult to see how many shootings will need to occur before people see that there is an issue. And nothing will happen until that acknowledgement takes place.

My thoughts are that guns caused this and my prayers to God are to get rid of guns.

that was the early report. They really knew nothing except that a sheriff and a congressmen said "many casualties". Then it went to 1 and 20....not till many hours later that they actually gave a count.

This is a report about the shooter.

The stories told by classmates about him are very disturbing...

Nikolas Cruz Named as Alleged Florida School Shooter | Time

Even as a gun owner/enthusiast, I'd fully support a system for like the one Canada has.



Long video, but worth a watch if you're interested in what sensible gun control can look like.

How about start by raising our children right? You know, in a 2 parent home.

Maybe teach them the difference between right and wrong?

Teach them there are consequences, both positive and negative.

I would love to see data on gun deaths caused by people that were taught these things compared to those that werent.

It all starts at home.

Maybe your 2 parent home sucks.

I'm not sure exactly what you're postulating here other than lets do a better job at raising or kids.

Is it government or societal requirements for 2 parent households? Do we need to take a play from the Amish and shun those who divorce?

Government mandated parenting classes where kids are later examined and if they don't pass the parents are punished?

I can't see you supporting anything like this.

There's a sad fact in aviation that every regulation comes from someone's death. Why can't we get somewhere with the same concept when it comes to guns? Progress has to start with incremental steps. But simply it has to start.