What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Days Since Last Shooting II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

Instead of going that far, how about we understand WHY the laws are not effective? Why do we always need to bail out and pretend that we have to go whole hog in banning or releasing things.
Because they don't want anything done because these shooting haven't affected them in any way.

And Handy: NYC was done for religious reasons. TX was done because the guy was mentally off.
Yeah someone's been watching Faux News recently... hook line and sinker good lord.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

But here's the thing, the assault weapons ban really didn't work. That's the sad thing. It didn't. Every credible independent study that looked at it was unable to find any statistical support to suggest it had any impact at all.

I think the reason for that is that while from a public newsworthiness standpoint events like Texas and Vegas are huge, they are statistically insignificant. My guess, and it's purely a guess, is that way more people died from gunshot wounds in the time period between the Las Vegas shooting and Texas shooting than died in those two shootings combined. I think we average something like 30-35 gun homicides a day in this country. I suspect the huge majority of them have nothing to do with assault weapons or high capacity magazines in weapons.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. We give way, way too much coverage to these people who commit these crimes and to the events themselves. If you are a sick, depressed or depraved individual and you want to go out with a big bang, gaining yourself worldwide infamy, a mass shooting is the way to go, and these guys know it.

So how do you explain the low point in mass shootings during the assault weapons ban, then? https://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-a-tures/did-the-assault-weapons-b_b_9740352.html

What cause the low point DURING the ban years? We went from 2.05/year over the 20 years prior, 1.6/year for the 10 years of it, and over 4/year since it ended. (the numbers are the # of shootings of more than 5 people at once, not 4).

What other factors besides the availability of more effective mass killing machines caused the shooting rate to more than double?
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

When every article is confirming NYC guy yells out "God is great," and he said he was proud of the attack b/c of radicalization...

And the TX guy had domestic issues, violent tendencies, etc, those point to mental issues.

So, might want to read some more articles about the incident.

So are you saying that nominal Islam would make people go out and kill non Muslims?

Or is it a group of mentally unstable people manipulating other mentally unstable people to go and kill people?

The reality is that they are exactly the same thing- something mentally made them decide to go and kill as many people as possible. It's non-normal for a human to kill another human, especially when not in direct conflict.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

So the guy hated women, can that not be considered terrorism when that's used as the motivation to kill a bunch of people?

There are many reasons for people to not be happy with their life. Every once in awhile, an individual is willing to act out and kill others as a result. Although that's not normal, it is not insane either - its just an overreaction to their anger. And to justify that pent up anger, they are attracted to some platform that gives them excuses for having that anger and lashing out. That's the will part...

...and then there's the means part. They get access to a weapon that makes the killing easy. And its done.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

So how do you explain the low point in mass shootings during the assault weapons ban, then? https://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-a-tures/did-the-assault-weapons-b_b_9740352.html

What cause the low point DURING the ban years? We went from 2.05/year over the 20 years prior, 1.6/year for the 10 years of it, and over 4/year since it ended. (the numbers are the # of shootings of more than 5 people at once, not 4).

What other factors besides the availability of more effective mass killing machines caused the shooting rate to more than double?
How would I explain it? Chance. Variance. However you might phrase it. I'm sure we have statistical wizards here who can give you a more mathematical explanation.

It would be like a situation where we reduce the speed limit from 70 mph to 55 mph, but then in the first six months we see an increase in car accident deaths. Do we say there is "cause and effect" there? I don't think so. It's simply variance.

Again, I don't ask you to believe me. I'm sure that with ten minutes spent on google you can find actual statistical studies done on the subject. By statistical studies I'm not counting a blog post that says, "gee, during the ten years the assault weapon ban was in place we had fewer shootings of more than 5 people at a time." I'm no statistician, but I don't think that would pass a lot of peer review on the topic.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

<img src="https://media.tenor.com/images/12a17503079fabbbf3cda2a5daea0b3e/tenor.gif" />

You'll have to take that one up with the people who said it:

Nina Rose Nava, who went to school with the gunman, wrote on Facebook: 'In (sic) in complete shock! He was always talking about how people who believe in God we're stupid and trying to preach his atheism.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...y-outcast-preached-atheism.html#ixzz4xlQtc5gD

But interested...is your broader point that an atheist couldn't possibly commit mass murder? Or you don't have one.
 
Last edited:
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

<img src="https://media.tenor.com/images/12a17503079fabbbf3cda2a5daea0b3e/tenor.gif" />

Just remember, when atheists kill they are doing it cause they are atheists. When Christians kill they are doing it DESPITE their religion.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

Just remember, when atheists kill they are doing it cause they are atheists. When Christians kill they are doing it DESPITE their religion.

And when Muslims kill it is because it's in the Quran.

Yeah. Handy's long since left the ranch on that one.

Edit: the guy was an atheist shooting church goers. It doesn't mean that atheism has anything to do with this. The guy was a radical who was been decades in the making.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

But interested...is your broader point that an atheist couldn't possibly commit mass murder?

My point is atheists don't "preach," at least in the sense of preaching the Word. Certainly we can get up and pontificate endlessly and not be fun at parties, same as everybody else about every subject. But I interpreted your remark as you falling into the fallacy that atheism is "just another faith," which has been refuted here many times by myself and others.

Now, to your barb: anybody can commit mass murder. First, anybody can be insane, but that's boring.

Second, anybody can be sane but seduced by an ideology.

Atheism is typically a healthy antidote to ideological fanaticism. An atheist living in a theist society can hardly fail to notice the perils of being on the wrong end of socially- and institutionally-transmitted blindness and ignorance. But atheists, while on the whole (certainly not one-for-one) likely smarter or at least more curious than theists, do not escape the unpleasantness at the bottom half of the bell curve. The more limited ones can have the silicon chip inside their head switched in much the same way as a religious fanatic would, and like him decide the gene pool needs some chlorine.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

OK...you win. He was an atheist killing church goers because of atheism. Does that make you feel better?

Most people want that to be true because then it makes more sense. Just as most people want the Christian shooting up the mosque to be doing it for religious reasons. We monkeys really, really want sh-t to make sense.

The irony here given your usual boring sniping, is, you're right. Mass murderers with "reasons" are, by definition, warping whatever it is they have claimed as a reason, whether it's Buddha, Allah, Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, trees, mushrooms, or Isadora Duncan. You are absolutely right: the killer is the gun; the ideology is the bullet. It's not the other way around. Until we really absorb that we'll never, for example, effectively counter terrorism.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

A decade is a much larger sample than six months though...
Congrats. You got me.

Look, I realize in today's world reading a HuffPost blog entry or someone's tweet constitutes gospel. So rather than locate actual studies that no one here will read, how about I just link to Wiki and you can decide whether you want to follow the links to the actual studies, or just believe Wiki over HuffPost.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

Ok, let's look at it from a different angle:

Is there a "greater cause" behind the motives for these terrorist acts?

NYC, Boston, OKC, SC....you have extreme religious beliefs/groups, anti-government movement, and a racial war behind those acts.

LV and TX, you have someone with some personal issues going on, no real bigger cause behind the acts.

And trix, I don't watch Faux News, so you can stop that little narrative.
 
Re: Days Since Last Shooting II

My point is atheists don't "preach," at least in the sense of preaching the Word. Certainly we can get up and pontificate endlessly and not be fun at parties, same as everybody else about every subject. But I interpreted your remark as you falling into the fallacy that atheism is "just another faith," which has been refuted here many times by myself and others.

Now, to your barb: anybody can commit mass murder. First, anybody can be insane, but that's boring.

Second, anybody can be sane but seduced by an ideology.

Atheism is typically a healthy antidote to ideological fanaticism. An atheist living in a theist society can hardly fail to notice the perils of being on the wrong end of socially- and institutionally-transmitted blindness and ignorance. But atheists, while on the whole (certainly not one-for-one) likely smarter or at least more curious than theists, do not escape the unpleasantness at the bottom half of the bell curve. The more limited ones can have the silicon chip inside their head switched in much the same way as a religious fanatic would, and like him decide the gene pool needs some chlorine.

Not true. The one thing in common with all atheists is that they don't believe in God. And they do 'preach' that all the time. And no, atheism is not any more 'healthy' than anything in life it tries to cure.

Case in point...would you say that you never post in the religion thread? Afterall, why would you...you don't believe in God. In reality, you post there more than any other poster including the religious - in the current religion thread alone, over 85 of 340 come from you or about 25% of all posts. 25% of the posts advancing anti religious messages. Doesn't sound particularly healthy.

In the end, atheists can and do commit murder just like anyone else. We have a pretty sad example.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top