Nashville college freshman Jillian Ludwig dies after being hit by a stray bullet at a local park
The alleged gunman, Shaquille Taylor, had previously been released for incompetence to stand trial in a separate shooting.
You're viewing a single thread.
"There is no way to prevent this" says only country where this happens regularly.
Also, "It's too soon after this tragedy to politicize it."
No, that is 12 hour later. 24 hours later it is too soon after the next day's tragedy.
Whoawhaowhao you can't use political words yet. Everyone knows only once you have all "thoughts and prayers" lined up and fill 2.2 football fields, divided by 2 minus 15 eagles worth of words, can you then even mention politics.
At 8 football fields you can bring up 2A. But what would the world be like if we started changing "amendments". We'd have to make the word amendment a synonym of change or something, that would be crazy.
Since these things happen on a daily basis, it's always too soon. Funny how that works.
“If only she had a gun, this would have been prevented.”
Their answer is always 'more guns will solve this'.
Happens all the time in other nations.
Sure it does. In Yemen, Venezuela, El Salador, Serbia etc.. you mean?
Sorry, I meant developed nations
Yeah, you can google it if you want to see for yourself.
The other guy did and came back with a good comment.
I think he meant that you made an unsubstantiated claim and left it to others to do the work to discredit.
No they didn't.
lol when was the last time a stray bullet randomly hit someone in any other developed country?
450+ million guns, you're not stopping gang violence like this which is the mass majority of all of our gun crime, by banning guns from lawful citizens. Dudes like this are already barred. Why don't you ask, why out system let him out.
Says man from only country where this happens regularly.
Plenty of other countries haven't banned guns from lawful citizens and dont have this problem.
Ok, man from perfect country. How would you personally solve this problem of gun violence? Would you form a posse and roundup all of the crazed lunatics out there who would dare to try and protect their families with a firearm? Would you raid the houses of anyone who may or may not have owned a gun in the past and search under the floorboards?
Seriously I want to know. How would you help all of these mentally ill people who seem to think that guns are toys, or just deeply want to harm other people?
You don't need me to tell you that. You wouldn't believe me anyway. There are plenty of professionals who have studied and acquired factual data of how other "perfect countries" do it and the differences. From the differences the solutions become very clear.
It's about restricting access, not banning. There's no one size fits all solution because nothing is perfect so you pick your poison. Find a country where this doesn't happen every day (so any developed country), look a the way they do things and pick the one you prefer to support - they all have upsides and downsides. What you have isn't working though.
Every country that has basically an effective ban, also has safety nets for the people, doesn't have a gang problem like we do, and focuses on education and not locking everyone up. They also never had 450+ million firearms in civilian hands. So please share with the class how you think you could pull it off without having all those safety nets in place.
How about having all those safety nets in place and regulated guns? Just an idea...
I'm fine with adding in the safety nets, they'll do 100xs more than any regulation you put in place will do. I'm not ok giving over a monopoly on force to people like the current Republicans. Why any of you think that's a good idea is just insane.
How does regulating guns so this sort of thing doesn't happen again give Republicans a monopoly on force?
You think the only way to even out the odds is to keep guns in the hands of dangerously mentally ill people? Really?
Because the only way for shit like this to not happen in your world of gun regulation, requires a total ban.
And a total ban gives whoever is in charge of the government a monopoly on force.
People like you will call Republicans nazis and fascist...then want to remove any force multiplier from civs and then pray they don't get elected. You're naive at best and ignorant at worse.
Wtf are you going to do here, go out shooting them or some bullshit? You really think you have any chance against the feds regardless of what side you swing for? That sounds pretty crazy to me. So let's get real and understand your guns are for recreation not safety against tyranny.
Friendly reminder that this guy mayoi is a troll. He's baiting you. Or trying to. His bait has been pretty uninspired lately
Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq all want a word with your complete lack of how wars are fought now.
Also your neighbor is a gun owner, so when they bomb his house your shit is getting pushed in as well.
That’s an exaggeration. The US has a better safety net than a lot of countries with much less gun death and violence. Education could better for a rich country, but is not bad. I am all for locking fewer people up, but that’s not the reason there’s gun violence.
This is always the argument against improving anything in the US. “We’re too special!” It’s just not true. Background checks, wait times, permit requirements, concealed carry restrictions, domestic violence restrictions, etc. These have all been empirically shown to reduce gun deaths in the US.
Maybe put those safety nets in place? Offer buy-backs on firearms, or a grace period to turn in unregistered firearms with no questions? Crack down on fraudulent "theft" and loss reports? Modernize the firearms database? Create incentives for law enforcement to execute red-flag laws? Require a higher level of training and responsibility to own a firearm?
Literally doing the bare minimum and just effectively enforcing the laws on the books would make a huge improvement, but we can't even do that because republicans like to whip up the base with the idea that their right to own an AR-15 is going to stop the liburl gubment from takin awah mah rites!
This has been proven to be untrue by other countries who have done the same in the past.
No it hasn't, no one in the history of the world has had this many firearms in civilian hands. Even when Australia took the firearms, only 60% turned in their 1mil total firearms in civ hands.
And gun deaths have dropped enormously ever since.
Australia never had a firearm problem to begin with. This is pants on head stupid take. If you have 100 deaths from firearms a year and removing access to the already small amount in civ hands and gun deaths drop to 50.... everyone now says firearms removed from people dropped by 50% when it was already so low it was a rounding error to begin with.
No, we just had the largest massacre of private citizens by a single shooter in recorded history, (still hasn't been beaten despite how often Americans try, they must really hate us being better than them at something involving guns), and numerous others before it, and none after it. But tell me again how you know nothing about Australia, it's history, or gun control.
Uhh...no you didn't, but ok.
You also did not have high violence involving firearms prior to port author. They also were already trending down prior to the 97 ban and forced confiscation.
https://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi269
Suicides, just like the USA, make up the majority of your firearm deaths. You're homicides via firearms are a joke per year, our gangs alone do that in a month in a single city.
But yes, I'm the one who knows nothing about Australia and it's gun history....lol sounds like you need to study your own history before nosing into ours.
"Nothing Works!" says only country where this happens regularly.
I might buy this argument if other countries also had the same problem. But the fact is that stricter gun laws do work, and the U.S. is very unique in having this issue thanks to our insistence on the 2nd ammendment being infallible.
That's stupid. If it were illegal to carry guns around, far fewer crooks would carry guns. They'd be harder to get and they'd have to balance the risk of being caught with a gun.
Lol what??? It's already illegal for criminals to carry. That's why they do it, they're criminals. We now have more states with CC than ever before, and we actually have lower crime now than we did back in the 70/80s when CC wasn't allowed.
You can also ask why there are so many guns freely floating around that someone like this was capable of obtaining one despite being barred.
Maybe if someone is so dangerous that they are barred from owning a gun they belong in a cage...
How about we just get rid of "private sale" exceptions to background checks in states like Tennessee to slow the tide of guns flowing into the black market?
In Tennessee, one has to buy liquor from the government, but can buy a gun (including semi-auto rifles) from a random person in a parking lot. No questions asked.
I know a person who actually obtained a handgun this way. In a parking lot of a bar on Florida, from a seller who was in his lunch break as an electrician... I'll let those details sink in for anyone safety oriented.
O noooo, a bar parking lot...the humanity....did this someone you know go on to become a serial killer? Or do you still know them and they're a normal person.
Most firearms are semi-auto.... what's your point? You clearly don't know much about firearms with a statement like that.
You can do this in pretty much every state as well. Private sales are legal basically in the entire USA.
I'm so tired of this brain dead take. The amount of guns on the street and gang violence is directly related to how easy it is to aquire them.
whistling noises
gang violence like this which is the mass majority of all of our gun crime
Source?
The most recent stats I could find for gang-related deaths (gun or not) was 2012, when there were 2,363 reported out of a national total of 12,765 homicides.
That is known gang violence, where police %100 know it's gang related. If they do not know the source, they label it as unknown. The estimate is around 80-85% are gang and drug related violence. This isn't some unknown thing.
With 8,855 firearm murders in 2012, 2,363 is a significant part of that.
The 2,363 figure also includes non-firearm murders—I was looking for directly-comparable stats.
But in any case, it isn’t anywhere near a “mass majority”.
You don’t know what you are talking about. It’s not a good look
No I absolutely do know what I'm talking about, but the lot of you all don't have a clue. You sit in your white privilege ivory towers and think only the police should have a monopoly on force...and at the same time wanting to defund them as well. You make no sense.
Marx has the answer. Change material conditions, so there is less crime, thus less need for prisons. But no one wants to read.
You mean no one wants a tankie shithole for a country...
Yes, no one wants to read. This “accident” didn’t happen in a Marxist-Leninist country.
