6 killed at private Christian School in Nashville

[HondurasKeiser]

Gun deaths are not just going up because there are more shootings. They are going up because guns are getting more deadly on average. Today a higher percentage of shootings are with high powered rifles with large magazines like the AR as well as automatic handguns like 9 mm with extended magazines. Shooters are spraying more high-powered bullets today than 10-20 years ago. Not just school shootings like yesterday. But gang shootings on the street. When there are twice as many shots fired in an incident, more people get killed and injured.

I agree with this. Yet conservative Americans must simply believe that these deaths are not a high enough to out weight the security that they feel that these guns provide them, and they believe that it is their constitution-given right -or even duty- to have them. And I get it. When a principle is on the line, it needs to be held, even in the face of high costs. I don't share this particular principle, but I have others, and I wouldn't violate my values and principles either.

I view it kind of like speed limits. we can make cars that can go 220 mph and it would perhaps be cool and even useful if we could drive at those speeds on the interstate. Driving from Portland to Seattle might take 1 hour instead of 3. But we don't do that because of safety and no one wants to be driving around on public highways with crazies zooming past at 200 mph. It makes everyone else more unsafe. We don't ban cars, but we restrict their potential for safety and basic civilization reasons.

But with guns we don't really do any of that. Weapons keep getting more and more powerful and higher capacity. You can get 30 and 50 round capacity magazines for AR-15s. You can get 30 round magazines for Glock 9mm handguns. And they will both fire as fast as you can pull the trigger. by comparison the 30-06 rifle I learned to hunt with was a bolt action with 5 round magazine. It was a deadly weapon but you had to chamber each round individually. Shooting 30 people like in Newtown CT would be vastly more difficult.

I view restrictions on the highest capacity deadliest weapons more like speed limits. It is a common sense way to make our public spaces safer. And if there are special reasons for certain people to have the highest capacity deadliest weapons we figure out how to allow restricted access to them so psychotic 18 year olds cant just buy them no questions asked. Just like we have people driving NASCAR and Indy cars in restricted settings but we don't allow them on our streets.

This seems reasonable.

[RZehr]

Gun deaths are not just going up because there are more shootings. They are going up because guns are getting more deadly on average. Today a higher percentage of shootings are with high powered rifles with large magazines like the AR as well as automatic handguns like 9 mm with extended magazines. Shooters are spraying more high-powered bullets today than 10-20 years ago. Not just school shootings like yesterday. But gang shootings on the street. When there are twice as many shots fired in an incident, more people get killed and injured.

I agree with this. Yet conservative Americans must simply believe that these deaths are not a high enough to out weight the security that they feel that these guns provide them, and they believe that it is their constitution-given right -or even duty- to have them. And I get it. When a principle is on the line, it needs to be held, even in the face of high costs. I don't share this particular principle, but I have others, and I wouldn't violate my values and principles either.

I view it kind of like speed limits. we can make cars that can go 220 mph and it would perhaps be cool and even useful if we could drive at those speeds on the interstate. Driving from Portland to Seattle might take 1 hour instead of 3. But we don't do that because of safety and no one wants to be driving around on public highways with crazies zooming past at 200 mph. It makes everyone else more unsafe. We don't ban cars, but we restrict their potential for safety and basic civilization reasons.

But with guns we don't really do any of that. Weapons keep getting more and more powerful and higher capacity. You can get 30 and 50 round capacity magazines for AR-15s. You can get 30 round magazines for Glock 9mm handguns. And they will both fire as fast as you can pull the trigger. by comparison the 30-06 rifle I learned to hunt with was a bolt action with 5 round magazine. It was a deadly weapon but you had to chamber each round individually. Shooting 30 people like in Newtown CT would be vastly more difficult.

I view restrictions on the highest capacity deadliest weapons more like speed limits. It is a common sense way to make our public spaces safer. And if there are special reasons for certain people to have the highest capacity deadliest weapons we figure out how to allow restricted access to them so psychotic 18 year olds cant just buy them no questions asked. Just like we have people driving NASCAR and Indy cars in restricted settings but we don't allow them on our streets.

We do that. I don’t know that there is a law that says my car must be limited to a maximum speed capability, only a law that says I cannot use my cars excess speed capability, right?
AR’s could very easily be made to shoot fully automatic. But we have laws that restrict, or govern if you will, the speed capability of a firearm. The shooting speed is regulated. And, the semi-auto function has been here for decades. The only thing newish, is the capacity - which you did mention.
It is rather noteworthy how many people used to have guns and yet we didn’t have these mass shootings. Most people didn’t have semi-autos, but then neither did the cops. So I don’t believe that the existence of the semi-auto and magazines caused it (although I agree that it probably makes it much, much worse. The only pause I have with agreeing totally, is the fact that these shooter generally end up killing very few in comparison to their potential firepower).

Yes, I think there would be fewer shootings, and fewer fatalities, if all ARs were banned. But how much fewer, I don’t know.

[RZehr]

The whole of society seems to be rotting at its core. And with a rotten values system.

Agreed. Here is Exhibit 1 supporting what you are saying.

I would choose something else as Exhibit 1. I think these shootings are merely one proof of the rotting, among other things.

[temporal1]

This seems reasonable.

Speaking as a person who (hates) guns, never owned one, likely never will, i am not trusting of or sold on these sorts of “reasonable” ideas.

To begin, my nearby neighbor, Chicago. Strict gun laws, off the charts gun violence.
Then, our neighbor, Canada. Creeping (or leaping) incrementalism.

CANADA / “A comprehensive strategy to address gun violence and strengthen gun laws in Canada: BILL C-21, An Act to amend certain Acts and to make certain consequential amendments (firearms)”
On this page:
National "freeze" on handguns
New "red and yellow flag" laws and expanded licence revocation
Combatting firearms smuggling and trafficking
Prohibiting mid-velocity 'replica' airguns
Coming into Force chart for Bill C-21
Bill C-21: An Act to amend certain Acts and to make certain consequential amendments (firearms) and regulatory amendments, to advance the national 'freeze' on handguns, are part of a comprehensive strategy to address gun violence and strengthen gun control in Canada.
https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/cntr ... 21-en.aspx

As for the chart on the former page, Exhibit 1, reflecting higher gun violence in the U.S., maybe Soloist could help with pertinent questions, for instance, how does gun OWNERSHIP compare? Considering countries listed, i would guess U.S. gun ownership (legal and not) would be many times higher than 5 .. i’m suggesting more statistics might paint another picture. i don’t know. (i doubt noisy others know, either.)

i compare it to swim lessons.
water can be hazardous, ignorance is the central hazard. swim lessons are common and accepted, from the youngest ages.

why not return gun safety education to young people, make it the standard, not the exception?
also compare with driving instruction and safety.

Education and respect. Not ignorance and fear.

There’s a lot to read on Canada’s dubious gun laws. Canada demonstrates: Don’t trust politicians.
https://www.google.com/search?q=canada+ ... e&ie=UTF-8

[Ken]

Yes, I think there would be fewer shootings, and fewer fatalities, if all ARs were banned. But how much fewer, I don’t know.

The red line is when the assault weapons ban was allowed to expire due to intense lobbying by the NRA.

[temporal1]

hmm.
it appears things were stable until obama was elected.
it was reported he/his policies/rhetoric increased gun sales. looks like he really did turn up the heat.

his two terms did nothing to deter Chicago’s gun violence, which was part of the “hope+change” many hoped he would initiate.
including me. hopes dashed.

2016 / Thomas Sowell - Worst President Ever / -4min

[Josh]

Yes, I think there would be fewer shootings, and fewer fatalities, if all ARs were banned. But how much fewer, I don’t know.

The red line is when the assault weapons ban was allowed to expire due to intense lobbying by the NRA.

… yet before 1994, what you call “assault weapons” were not banned.

Before 1987, fully automatic machine guns were still available for sale to civilians.

Ken, can you explain why there were a lot fewer mass shootings back then?

[Ken]

hmm.
it appears things were stable until obama was elected.
it was reported he/his policies/rhetoric increased gun sales. looks like he really did turn up the heat.

Seriously?

Also your argument is that LEGAL gun sales are the problem?

[temporal1]

… yet before 1994, what you call “assault weapons” were not banned.

Before 1987, fully automatic machine guns were still available for sale to civilians.

Ken, can you explain why there were a lot fewer mass shootings back then?

I would choose something else as Exhibit 1. I think these shootings are merely one proof of the rotting, among other things.

.. Idea: Be picky about where you direct questions.

[Ken]

Before 1987, fully automatic machine guns were still available for sale to civilians.

Ken, can you explain why there were a lot fewer mass shootings back then?

How about you do some research on how many fully automatic machine guns were in the hands of American civilians pre-1987. And then compare that number to the number of assault rifles in the hands of American civilians today.

Then get back to us with your findings.