4 ms·

Mass shootings in America are not an easy problem to fix. If 0.00005% of the population decides to spend the last 20 minutes of their life going on a murder sp

Mass shootings in America are not an easy problem to fix. If 0.00005% of the population decides to spend the last 20 minutes of their life going on a murder spree, there's not much you can do, at least in the context of America. Guns are prolific in the US: between 2000 and 2010, 2,000,000 AR15s alone were manufactured for domestic use. Deciding on a set of laws to control that number of firearms to end these arbitrary events is not simple, and perhaps not feasible with how many citizens regard firearm ownership a right. California has some of the strictest gun laws, but has been victim to more mass shootings than other states (of course depends on the definition of mass shooting). America Uncovered (from Chris Chappel of China Uncensored) does a relatively good unbiased video on the topic https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hAtLnTyimT0 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hAtLnTyimT0 [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/25/us/25shooters.html https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/25/us/25shooters.html [2] https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/dec/17/how-many-ar15-rifles-sold https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/dec/17/how-ma...

blattimwind 9y ago
I didn't say anything about gun control or other measures that might be employed to control issues such as regular shootings. I only said shootings don't seem to be considered a problem that needs fixing by (presumably) a majority of the society you live in. On a societal scale just because there is a differential across different societies does not mean that one is wrong and the other is correct. They might just be different. For some people, for example, it is obvious that you can't compare median European culture to American culture (in as much as American and central Chinese culture do not compare, to cite another, perhaps more obvious and common example), for they are vastly different even if superficially similar and sharing some set of values. Since these societies do not compare, assuming measures to control issues transfer between societies is foolish. I.e. assuming that gun control would work in America based on gun control working in other places is nothing but a non-sequitur in my mind. Again, and just to reiterate, I am not arguing for some set of regulation or another that (presumably) your society should enact or not. I merely observe differences and of course see things in a certain light and tend to rank and order things a certain way, after all, I know in which society I want to live, and I know in what society I would never want to live. (clarification: when I write "America" I specifically mean the United States thereof)
maxerickson 9y ago
It will take decades and billions of dollars to meaningfully reduce the amount of guns in the US. We should get started asap.
- TheAdamAndChe 9y ago
  This would do more harm than good IMO. There is a large proportion of the population that does not want this done, and would actively fight against any attempt to remove their constitutional right to bear arms. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. I think focusing on mental health and inequality/poverty alleviation is a more viable option in our country than weapons removal.
  - maxerickson 9y ago
    I think the method matters. Building support for amending the Constitution and then doing that would undermine the argument about arms being a constitutional right. Of course that could happen in parallel with policies that fit into current law and have a more immediate impact.
    - TheAdamAndChe 9y ago
      > Building support for amending the Constitution and then doing that would undermine the argument about arms being a constitutional right. My point is that this isn't possible. There is _not_ popular support for these kind of changes, and if you think there is, I implore you to spend some time talking to people from the Midwest. There absolutely would be armed resistance to these kinds of changes, assuming an amendment could be passed(which it can't). You've got to be practical and realistic with legislation. Would it be better if there were no guns? Maybe, but the reality is that millions of people in the US have guns, and millions of people will always have guns. We've got to learn to work around that.
      - maxerickson 9y ago
        I live in the Midwest and understand the challenge. The first step to passing an amendment is obviously creating the conceptual space for that to happen, and gee look where we are.
DuskStar 9y ago
From my perspective, I'd rather have someone spending the last 20 minutes of their life on a shooting spree than spending the last couple of days cooking up some AMFO, renting a truck from U-Haul, and causing some serious issues. A lot of people seem to assume that the fallback from a rifle (for the purposes of a killing spree) is a kitchen knife or something - I don't think this is universally accurate.

blattimwind 9y ago

I didn't say anything about gun control or other measures that might be employed to control issues such as regular shootings. I only said shootings don't seem to be considered a problem that needs fixing by (presumably) a majority of the society you live in. On a societal scale just because there is a differential across different societies does not mean that one is wrong and the other is correct. They might just be different. For some people, for example, it is obvious that you can't compare median European culture to American culture (in as much as American and central Chinese culture do not compare, to cite another, perhaps more obvious and common example), for they are vastly different even if superficially similar and sharing some set of values. Since these societies do not compare, assuming measures to control issues transfer between societies is foolish. I.e. assuming that gun control would work in America based on gun control working in other places is nothing but a non-sequitur in my mind. Again, and just to reiterate, I am not arguing for some set of regulation or another that (presumably) your society should enact or not. I merely observe differences and of course see things in a certain light and tend to rank and order things a certain way, after all, I know in which society I want to live, and I know in what society I would never want to live. (clarification: when I write "America" I specifically mean the United States thereof)

maxerickson 9y ago

It will take decades and billions of dollars to meaningfully reduce the amount of guns in the US. We should get started asap.

TheAdamAndChe 9y ago
This would do more harm than good IMO. There is a large proportion of the population that does not want this done, and would actively fight against any attempt to remove their constitutional right to bear arms. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. I think focusing on mental health and inequality/poverty alleviation is a more viable option in our country than weapons removal.
- maxerickson 9y ago
  I think the method matters. Building support for amending the Constitution and then doing that would undermine the argument about arms being a constitutional right. Of course that could happen in parallel with policies that fit into current law and have a more immediate impact.
  - TheAdamAndChe 9y ago
    > Building support for amending the Constitution and then doing that would undermine the argument about arms being a constitutional right. My point is that this isn't possible. There is _not_ popular support for these kind of changes, and if you think there is, I implore you to spend some time talking to people from the Midwest. There absolutely would be armed resistance to these kinds of changes, assuming an amendment could be passed(which it can't). You've got to be practical and realistic with legislation. Would it be better if there were no guns? Maybe, but the reality is that millions of people in the US have guns, and millions of people will always have guns. We've got to learn to work around that.
    - maxerickson 9y ago
      I live in the Midwest and understand the challenge. The first step to passing an amendment is obviously creating the conceptual space for that to happen, and gee look where we are.

DuskStar 9y ago

From my perspective, I'd rather have someone spending the last 20 minutes of their life on a shooting spree than spending the last couple of days cooking up some AMFO, renting a truck from U-Haul, and causing some serious issues. A lot of people seem to assume that the fallback from a rifle (for the purposes of a killing spree) is a kitchen knife or something - I don't think this is universally accurate.