Mass Shooting at Annunciation Catholic Church/School in Minneapolis

dogs4thewin said:

no but they kill 10,000s a year as well and can actually kill more than guns if done in the "right place" Same with drugs which funny enough the "drug war" has failed so badly it is not EVEN funny.

Click to expand...

Guns are designed to hurl small bits of metal to supersonic speeds.
It seems that there’s a limited number of applications for such devices.

RileyG said:

Yup. It needs to be treated like a mental health issue without the so called trans community bigotry because someone believes their lifestyle is wrong and/or can cause problems. I refuse to bow down to this lunacy. It’s only becoming so common because our mental health crisis in America continues to worsen and worsen.

Click to expand...

Yes. Some articles linking transgender identity to past sexual abuse and other serious issues.

Prevalence of Sexual Assault in a Cohort of Transgender and Gender Diverse Individuals - PMC (sexual violence)

Transgender and Gender Diverse Patients Are Diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder More Frequently Than Cisgender Patients Regardless of Personality Pathology - PubMed (borderline personality disorder)

Psychiatric Diagnoses Among Transgender and Gender Diverse Patients Compared to Cisgender Patients (ptsd and bpd)

Personality Disorders and Personality Profiles in a Sample of Transgender Individuals Requesting Gender-Affirming Treatments - PMC (general personality disorders)

This is not a fluke. Every transgender person I have ever met has suffered some kind of sexual abuse, serious physical abuse, or neglect as a child. Each one also suffered from severe anxiety or depression. This is not to say that every single transgender person is similarly impacted, but it does seem to be a theme.

"There appears to be only one group that the shooter didn't hate, one group of people who the shooter admired -- the group were the school shooters and mass murderers that are notorious in this country," Thompson said.

"More than anything, the shooter wanted to kill children, defenseless children. ... The shooter wanted to watch children suffer," Thompson said.

JosephZ said:

I agree with a lot of what you said, but I don't think it would take as long to see positive results. I went to the Everytown Research site and found the article below. Based on past performance and future projections, noticeable reductions in gun deaths would start to be noticed within a few years if tighter gun control was initiated at the federal level and matched the gun laws found in states that currently have the strictest gun policies in the country.

New Data, Same Conclusion: Smart Gun Laws Save Lives

Today, Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund released its 2024 state Gun Law Rankings, which once again show a clear correlation between states with strong gun laws and lower rates of gun violence. Here are three key takeaways:

Our eight “National Leaders” [California, New York, Illinois, Connecticut, Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Maryland] have a rate of gun violence nearly three times lower than the 14 “National Failures.” [Kansas, Missouri, New Hampshire, Kentucky, Alaska, Arizona, Oklahoma, Wyoming, South Dakota, Georgia, Montana, Idaho, Mississippi, and Arkansas]

If every state had the same gun death rate as our National Leaders, we could have saved more than 137,000 lives over the past decade. That’s more people than can fit in the largest football stadium in America.

Looking ahead, if every state in the country had the gun violence rates of our National Leaders, we could save 298,000 lives in the next decade—three giant football stadiums of lives saved.

While the National Leaders weren’t immune to national gun violence trends, the data shows that states that thoughtfully strengthened their laws over the years consistently saw lower death rates, with a 36 percent reduction in gun deaths since 1990.

View attachment 369220

In 1990, the gun death rate among children and teenagers was nearly the same in both states with strong and weak laws. In the following years, that trajectory took a sharp turn, and the states that implemented the strongest gun laws reduced the rate of gun deaths among children and teenagers by 58 percent. But, following a broad national decline, states with the weakest laws have gone in a different direction, experiencing an 18 percent increase. As a result, children and teenagers are half as likely to die by guns in the states with the strongest laws compared to the states with the weakest ones.

Click to expand...

With regards to their statement:
Our eight “National Leaders” [California, New York, Illinois, Connecticut, Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Maryland] have a rate of gun violence nearly three times lower than the 14 “National Failures.” [Kansas, Missouri, New Hampshire, Kentucky, Alaska, Arizona, Oklahoma, Wyoming, South Dakota, Georgia, Montana, Idaho, Mississippi, and Arkansas]

If every state had the same gun death rate as our National Leaders, we could have saved more than 137,000 lives over the past decade. That’s more people than can fit in the largest football stadium in America.

Looking ahead, if every state in the country had the gun violence rates of our National Leaders, we could save 298,000 lives in the next decade—three giant football stadiums of lives saved.


...there are a few issues with the way they're presenting the data.

A) They've basically hand-picked the states that fit the narrative they want to project, and ignored the others

Examples: Vermont & Maine (that have "constitutional carry" where you don't even need a permit to carry)


B) Perhaps it's just clumsy phrasing on their part, but they're using "gun death rate" and "gun violence rate" interchangeably. Which, they're two different things, and some facets aren't mitigated by gun laws.

For instance, a suicide (if a gun is the tool used) is a "gun death", but not "gun violence"... on the flipside, if someone shoots and grazes me in the leg to steal my cell phone, that's "gun violence", but it doesn't result in a death.


Three of their "failure" states (Alaska, Wyoming, Montana) have the 3 of the highest suicide rates in the nation.

And they're calling New Hampshire a failure, but New Hampshire has a homicide rate that's one of the lowest in the nation (1.4...basically on-par with Canada and England). Same with Idaho. The overwhelming majority of the gun deaths in those states are suicides, which as we discussed, aren't guaranteed to be "deaths that wouldn't have happened". That would be a rather bold assumption on their part.

So it's really homicides and gun assaults that should be the central focus of the conversation.

That's not to be callous or dismissive to people dealing with depression who are suicidal. But we can't strip rights and privileges away from people based on what suicidal people may do (given that they'll often just pivot to the next easiest method if the first easiest isn't available)

To describe it in real world terms, if I were homicidal (toward a particular person or people), making sure I didn't get the gun would likely change the trajectory of things... however, if I were suicidal, there's a solid chance that denying me gun access won't ultimately change outcome. I'd just reach for the bottle of sleeping pills instead of the gun.



In reality, it's the times guns are used against other people that I'm primarily concerned about...again, not to sound harsh, but the suicides shouldn't be part of the pubic policy discussion with regards to gun control.

So the fact that Everytown is classifying Alaska and Wyoming as "failures" but Illinois and NJ as "successes", shows they're using some selective/creative math.

RileyG said:

Maybe we have a mental health crisis now that caused so many mass shootings?

Click to expand...

Don't rule out contagion. One mentally ill person sees another grab their 15 minutes of fame in a school shooting and decides they can seize a little of that infamy for themselves. We got the snowball going downhill.

ThatRobGuy said:

But we can't strip rights and privileges away from people based on what suicidal people may do (given that they'll often just pivot to the next easiest method if the first easiest isn't available)

Click to expand...

Most other methods of suicide require a lot more work and planning than simply shooting yourself. I'm on my way to bed, so I don't really have time to try to dig up the research again right now, but it's been shown that a significant percentage of suicides are impulsive and that the more steps and actions required, the more likely the person is to change their mind.

dogs4thewin said:

If the problem were guns we would have A LOT more shootings.

Click to expand...

A lot more than...who? Australia has guns and I was going to say that you have a massively bigger problem than we do. But it's not even possible to compare them.

At what point to do you think 'Hey, this is as bad as I will accept'? Because you're obviously not there yet. And to stay away from from large numbers where they can be considered as just a statistic, let's check the daily deaths of children from firearms in the US. It's 12. Each day. Tell me how high it needs to be before a nationwide agreement on gun control is required.

Give me a figure. If 12 isn't enough then tell me how many.

Aldebaran said:

I'm pointing out that the gun is always what is looked at first and foremost when these shootings happen.
This guy was clearly mentally unstable and hate-filled.

Click to expand...

Can we have your ideas on keeping guns out of the hands of mentally unstable people?

caffeinated.hermit said:

Yes. Some articles linking transgender identity to past sexual abuse and other serious issues.

Prevalence of Sexual Assault in a Cohort of Transgender and Gender Diverse Individuals - PMC (sexual violence)

Transgender and Gender Diverse Patients Are Diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder More Frequently Than Cisgender Patients Regardless of Personality Pathology - PubMed (borderline personality disorder)

Psychiatric Diagnoses Among Transgender and Gender Diverse Patients Compared to Cisgender Patients (ptsd and bpd)

Personality Disorders and Personality Profiles in a Sample of Transgender Individuals Requesting Gender-Affirming Treatments - PMC (general personality disorders)

This is not a fluke. Every transgender person I have ever met has suffered some kind of sexual abuse, serious physical abuse, or neglect as a child. Each one also suffered from severe anxiety or depression. This is not to say that every single transgender person is similarly impacted, but it does seem to be a theme.

Click to expand...

The prevailing attitudes of the general population (and especially among social-conservatives) seem to be bordered on one side by a desire to dissuade young people from the fact that they find themselves to be one of the unlucky zero point six percent of the population who (for whatever reason) are transgender; the other border, making sure that these same people have to live even tougher lives than just being transgender.

These people exist, to pretend they don’t could be seen as heartlessness.

seeking.IAM said:

Don't rule out contagion. One mentally ill person sees another grab their 15 minutes of fame in a school shooting and decides they can seize a little of that infamy for themselves. We got the snowball going downhill.

Click to expand...

There’s only about a million and a half of them, most are just trying to figure out how well this life is going to suit them…you know, “normal”.

How’s about we don’t give in to anxiety of what this tiny, often marginalized group of people might do!?

How’s about we help them keep such horrendous thoughts at bay?
By not making their lives any harder than any of the rest of the 99.4% have it?

Valletta said:

If you really want to save lives, how about banning motor vehicles?

Click to expand...

What saves more lives than you can imagine is that vehicles and driving are very heavily regulated. And I don't see anyone complaining about that.

These are Australian rules: You have to be above a certain age before you can drive a car. You can't get a licence until you pass a test. You have to show that you are physically and mentally capable of driving. If you fail then you have to wait until you do another. You have to show that you've had a certain amount of instruction. Once you pass your test you are limited as to the type of car you can drive and what speed you drive it at. The car has to be examined each year for roadworthiness. There are a boatload of restrictions on where you can drive, how fast you can drive, safety precautions that you must take and rules and regulations that you must follow each and every time you use the car. You can be stopped and questioned about your driving if it appears you are not following the rules and regs and you can be randomly stopped to make sure you are not using the car under the influence. You can have your licence revoked and your car taken from you if you break the rules. You have to have insurance in case you hurt someone with your car. You are not allowed to let someone drive it who isn't licensed for the type of vehicle. You are limited as to what changes you can make to the standard car. You are limited to 25mph near schools and in a fair proportion of city and suburban streets.

Perhaps I've missed a few others, but you get the idea. Cars are simply a means to get from A to B. But they are extremely dangerous. Even small cars at quite low speeds can cause a lot of damage (and I have the scars to prove that). So it has obviously been determined that driving one has to be strongly regulated. It's obviously common sense.

But when it comes to something that has been specifically designed to kill people then common sense rules and regulations apparently don't apply.

Valletta said:

So your primary goal is not to save lives? How about half way,, would you accept a maximum 35 mph speed limit on all roads? That would save many lives. The manufacturers could limit the maximum speed.

Click to expand...

It's 25mph on quite a few suburban roads and some main roads into the city. The better the roads, the greater the number of lanes, the less pedestrians there are, the higher is the maximum speed. 35mph around suburbia is too fast.

To use your analogy, you appear to be suggesting that road rules aren't needed. That the higher death toll would be acceptable for you to have free reign to do what you wanted on the road.

dogs4thewin said:

so you vote to save no lives?

Click to expand...

I vote that no live is saved.

JosephZ said:

In California below are the features of assault-style weapons:
A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that does not have a fixed magazine but has any one of the following:

• A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon.
• A thumbhole stock.
• A folding or telescoping stock.
• A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
• A flash suppressor.
• A forward pistol grip.

A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches.
A semiautomatic pistol that does not have a fixed magazine but has any one of the following:

• A threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer.
• A second handgrip.
• A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel that allows the bearer to fire the weapon without burning the bearer's hand, except a slide that encloses the barrel.
• The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.

Magazines on all guns are limited to 10 rounds.

Click to expand...

CA gun owners responded with mod-kits to comply with the CA regs. The modified weapons are still capable in the hands of a maniac to do significant harm. See: 2020 Ultimate Guide to Compliant Featureless AR-15 Rifles

The problem imo is not micromanaging the weapon's configuration but managing the maniacs.

o_mlly said:

The problem imo is not micromanaging the weapon's configuration but managing the maniacs.

Click to expand...

If you were in charge of such things, how would be you go about managing the maniacs?

dogs4thewin said:

I am all or nothing type you save as many as you can or NONE at all.

Click to expand...

(staff edit)

I guess paramedics and doctors and nurses should give up and let all the saveible people die as well as the saveible child shooter victims?

dogs4thewin said:

There have always been people ( at least for quite a while who have crossdressed you cannot really ban things like that (particularly as bans have history of failing anyway.

Click to expand...

As I said - eradicate it from public life.

If you have a sexual fetish that you want to indulge - do so in the comfort of your own home with the shades drawn like a normal person.

If your sexual fetish somehow involves the public - then a padded cell is your destination.