Do you think mass shootings will ever end in the US?

[Puppystarfish23]

I understand the UK has its own issues and its not a prefect country either but it really pains me to see nearly every other day there's some kind of mass shooting over in the US.

I'm actually a gun owner myself which is really rare for a woman like me in the UK but is never dream of hurting someone unless I had no choice and I know what what im meant to do in a emergency too.

My heart breaks whenever I hear stories like this especially when it involves valuable people and children. I'm a very empathetic person to the point it makes me want to cry but the more and more it happens in the US the more its desensitised and normalised to the point people think its okay to make jokes. How can you make joked about children being hunted down with a gun and murdered.

I feel like this has effected me a lot more after having my own experiences of losing a young loved one in my family not in the same cumstances but it could have been prevented by the government.

Im very interested in ture crime and I watched a documentary on a very famous school shooting in the US which I will not name but it broke my heart. These kids weren't far off leaving school and staring a new stage in there life for it to be taken like that so cruelly. One victim was a young man with learning disabilities and he didn't know what was going on and what to do and he was killed.

It's so terrible and I feel like it will never end

[nolabels]

Once the general concept of personal responsibility returns to the world, and it eventually will, it has to, instead of allowing selfish self-entitlement to reign unchecked over society, then maybe in a generation or so after that change takes place, when those who are still of that socially ill mindset are gone, I can see a return to a time where mass shootings will again be a rarity.

Important to me, and to all of us, to say this here and now, there's a new leader who is now on the scene who I believe is eminently capable of driving forward that concept of personal responsibility, and who has solutions to bring about the needed changes, which will help everyone in the country be able to stand up and say that they're proud to be Americans, that they're in the world to make it a better place, instead of tearing it down at every turn.

That new leader is the 2024 U. S. presidential candidate, Vivek Ramaswamy, the first-generation son of Indian immigrants to the U. S.

He makes it a point to remind us of the ideals upon which the U. S. was founded. The man is extremely intelligent and can speak to any subject with an eye to help all Americans to be the best that they can be.

He's an extremely successful businessman, trained in biology as well as law, who has stepped away from his lucrative biotech career in a bid to save his beloved country.

Though his presence on national media has so far been a bit limited, maybe because he's a political outsider, he's all over YouTube. If anyone would take a bit of time to listen to him, I'm sure that they would be impressed. Once he gets on the debate stage, I believe that he's going to light the political scene on fire.

He doesn't write speeches. He speaks from the heart.

Here's a link to a speech from 2021 that I think encapsulates his views:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/a5gwJ382dIw

He's a wealthy man and is self-funding his campaign to a great degree. He says that he needs a specific number of individual donations to his campaign to be able to make it to the debate stage. He's asking for repeat small donations, as small as a dollar, in order to get that number of individual donations to where it needs to be. He has his website set up to make that an easy thing for supporters to do. It is very easy to do.

He has my full support.

I believe he is the only candidate who is capable of getting us on the proper course, which will eventually lead to a vast reduction in mass shootings.

I believe that his election is crucial to our country's turnaround.

Vivek Ramaswamy for president in 2024!!!

[Kaneki05]

In a country that actively promotes them and hands them out like pancakes? No lol. And you'll hear people complain about mental health, but that's not the issue it's a separate issue for sure but if a insane person wants to kill they are gonna do it with anything.
The real issue is the promoting, the supply, the marketing, and culture, everything that within America makes them think it's okay to shoot someone because that's what gun rights are right? Obviously not but what are impressible people gonna think? Exactly that. And there are literal Americans who think it's okay to shoot someone just cause they are on your property.

Just like cigs it all comes down to how they are supplied, imagine if cigs had a culture around them actively promoting they healthy and good oh... wait... that's exactly how they happened. And no shocker tons of people smoke, and still today even with awareness just due to the culture now around it.
Now Vapes are arguably overtaking cigs again thanks to marketing and this don't mean the marketing is lying, it's not a lie that Vaping is better for you than Cigs but still it's the marketing that leads to them been used by many not that fact, so even if they were lying people would do it anyway.

This is of course all the same for alcohol. So if ya want to blame anything it's marketing and yes the 2nd amendment for many years has been a great tool for that marketing so yes that amendment it's self is a major problem.
The founding farthers did not make that amendment expecting or planning marketing in the future. The context has 100% changed and I would doubt any of them would agree with the 2nd amendment should be left as it is today.

[nolabels]

Hands them out like pan cakes?
Where?
I'm getting in line if this is true.

[purplepoppy]

No. The main political difference between the two countries is in the uk both sides can sit down and debate an issue based on current evidence and come to a compromise.

But in the US they're tied to a 200 year old constitution that stagnates progress plus half the country isn't willing to budge an inch, it's political suicide for a republican to even suggest gun control.

Sadly the only way shootings will end is when one happens that's so horrific if changes peoples minds. I believe the gun lobby actually welcomes regular small scale mass shootings because they desensitize the public for when the big ones occur.

[Nikki1989]

Not with the mentality of the average US citizen, it won't.

[Snakeyes7]

Figure out why these shooters are making the conscious decision to shoot people. This really isn't that difficult to figure out but way too many idiots think the guns have a mind of their own, which is the only way their logic would make sense.

All you have to do is ask what these shooters have in common but people are too dumb or unreluctant to rock the boat to ask this very simple question.

How much of these mass shootings happen anyway? Half of these gun deaths are suicides and a massive portion of the rest are gang violence, figure out the rest.

[goaded]

The idea that people think "guns have a mind of their own" is a straw man. The obvious fact is that people are occasionally suicidal, homicidal, or both, and being able to easily access firearms makes tragedies far more likely.

"According to the suits against SIG Sauer, some 150 people claim to have suffered injuries, or frightening near misses, when their department-issued P320 went off on its own." nypost.com/.../

[Snakeyes7]

@goaded half of the gun deaths are suicides. If you successfully take the guns away, then the suicidal people will just hang themselves.

If someone were to be homicidal, they will use other means like cars, knives, fire. Are you going to ban those too?

As for the suit with SIG Sauer, clearly the gun was not normal nor was it intended to go off on its own because there wouldn't be a suit against them. Using this as an excuse to ban guns is like banning cars because a tiny percentage of them blew up when started.

[goaded]

You're beating that poor straw man again! Easy access to firearms makes it easier to kill people (including yourself). Simple as. There are also a lot of "accidental" shootings.

Unless the USA has a vastly disproportionate number of people who feel the need to kill people (which I have to say is a distinct possibility), the murder rate would not be many times higher than in Europe, Australia, or Canada. To paraphrase Reagan: it's the guns, stupid.

The SIG Sauer guns going off by themselves was just a fun fact. IIRC, there's a Remington rifle that goes off when a mouse sneezes as well.

[Snakeyes7]

@goaded Banning guns isn't going to stop them from existing. Criminals (the government for example) don't care about what's legal to own or not. The law abiding citizens will be disarmed and will be sitting ducks to the criminals (ie the govt) who will still have guns. All you would be doing is protecting criminals (including the government) from their victims and the crap that happens in places like NYC proves this. There's a reason Venezuela went to utter shit just a couple years if not less after they did what you wanted, among many other things.

The US also used to have school gun clubs and the Boy Scouts learned to shoot guns (at least when I was in it) and yet somehow mass shootings are a recent phenomenon. It is not the gun and Reagan can kiss my ass.

Again, you can have car accidents but no one is clamoring to ban cars, I don't know the actual statistics but I would imagine vehicular manslaughter probably happens more often than these accidental shootings.

Also again, guns are not designed to go off on their own, the fact that there are lawsuits over them when it happens proves this. You don't buy them to have them accidentally go off.

[goaded]

Yawn. NYC is one of the safest cities in the US. The homicide rate there is 5.80, high for a civilised country, but below dozens of US cities.

7 US cities make it into the top 50 homicide rate cities in the world, none of them are in Europe. en.wikipedia.org/.../List_of_cities_by_murder_rate

[Snakeyes7]

@goaded I made no statement regarding the safety in NYC. I'm talking about what happened with when crime does happen in the cities, people get punished for defending themselves and it's not just NYC, it's many states in the New England area that punishes you for defending yourself against your aggressors.

[goaded]

Most places the standard is reasonable or appropriate levels of force. Shooting someone for knocking at your door is not reasonable. (The NRA, aiui, used to teach gun owners responsible gun ownership and safety, now they spend their time encouraging people to become gun owners and don't give a damn who dies because of it.)

[Snakeyes7]

@goaded Yeah, that's why shooting someone for no reason is already illegal everywhere. Some places make it illegal to shoot someone no matter what reason you have, they don't give a shit if you were fighting for your life.

I don't give a shit about the NRA, we never needed it. Citizens used to be able to own their own warships and yet somehow mass shootings have become an issue within the last couple decades. It's not the guns.

[goaded]

It is the guns, because it's really hard to shoot people without one.

It's not "no reason" that's the problem, it's that "I was scared" is treated as a valid reason to shoot someone.

[Snakeyes7]

@goaded Yeah, that is a "no reason" situation unless the shooter is able to prove there was something to be afraid of, like a weapon.

[Snakeyes7]

@goaded So banning them is your solution? Good luck getting them out of the hands of criminals who never intended on doing what you want anyway.

[goaded]

George Zimmerman. Unarmed Trayvon Martin didn't get to put his side of the argument, being dead, and all.

You'd probably call it a gun ban, I'd call it reasonable restrictions on deadly weapons, starting with things that 80% of the country (including a vast majority of gun owners). Maybe even re-starting the law that was in force from 1994-2004, whose most effective component was the limit on magazine sizes. Surely it gets boring, firing 100 rounds from a single magazine at a target, and hunters who need a dozen shots to kill their prey are crap hunters.

[Puppystarfish23]

@goaded this discussion has been going on for more then a week

[Snakeyes7]

@goaded Yeah it'll begin with "reasonable restrictions" and then the rest will be gradually taken away so that the morons who aren't paying attention won't notice. Again, good luck getting everyone to comply with that.

Anytime the government says something it is doing for safety reasons, always remember that Hitler literally said the same shit about his act of making the Jews disappear. That's why I always have suspicion with these "reasonable restrictions."

It's cute that you think that the only reason someone would buy a gun is to hunt (human or otherwise) and couldn't possibly be for self defense.

[goaded]

@Puppystarfish23 Sorry about that. It's partly because of the time difference. I'll pack it in, if it's bothering you. The ironic thing is that people think they "need" guns to protect themselves from people with guns. Not to mention massive magazines, in case they're attacked by hundreds of people at the same time. It's nuts.

[goaded]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-m7NkBEFnY

[Amur8711]

I am a very strong 2nd Amendment (gun rights) supporter. It also sickness me how many mass shootings and other crime happens. It frustrates me that the solutions that us gun right supports give get ignored and installed they push for more gun control, meanwhile we been trying the gun control route for 4 decades now and there has been so significant change with them.

The definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

How about we try the 2A (gun rights) route for once!

The quickest thing we can do is first harden our schools so they are not so venerable to attacks and also do away with "Gun Free Zones". Why? They are the target to 90% of all mass shootings.

[Puppystarfish23]

Agreed if someone wants to kill people they will do it regardless of gun control they will find a way.

If I'm totally honest I don't all of these gun attacks are real and are just the media and government trying to stage some of it so they take peoples freedom.

I'm not saying there isn't a lot if real mass shootings going off but I think media is trying to push but there is so other people will do copy chat murders and they can eventually take peoples guns which will eventually take peoples freedom

[Amur8711]

I don't believe the act themselves are fake, I believe the government has pain individuals to do some of these shooting or they pay people to make a big deal about one they didn't have anything to do with. Because "never let a tragedy go to waist "

[ImalwaysrightOK]

Only when we take access to mental health more seriously. We need to stop ostracizing people for needing mental health help.

[Puppystarfish23]

Yeah I've noticed in the US mental health is even harder to get help for because health care isn't free over there and a lot of people don't care for there mental health like they do with their physical health especially when there's a bill at the end of it

[ImalwaysrightOK]

It's pretty difficult even with insurance. There's simply not enough mental health providers for the amount of people in need especially post COVID. Also, if people could get offline and talk to other people, things would be better too, less isolation.

[Puppystarfish23]

Agreed 100%

[BoopBoopBeep]

More people died in Chicago than every mass shooting combined. It plays big on the news, but I'm more worried about being caught in the crossfire of a gang shooting than stuck in a mass shooting. At least in case of the former there's typically only one target to take out, vs gang shootings which could be a whole carload.

[John_Doesnt]

You would have to convince a bunch of religious hicks to put down their guns. I wouldn't say it's impossible, but it's unlikely you'll convince the majority of a group of ignorant people that their religion is wrong while at the same time convincing a very rich & powerful organization to stop profiting from supplying weapons of war. So the mass shootings will probably never end.

[LiamJHayden]

Probably not, which only makes me more insistent upon keeping my CCW. There might be 1 out of every 1000 people, if that, who could both beat me in a fight and run faster than I can, but my being stronger, better trained, and faster doesn't mean much if I am using fists and feet and the other person is using bullets.

[MementoMori777]

No.. but guns are still the solution

[inhua]

no because people will continue to address the wrong issues

[mommymommymommy]

As long as health care keeps going up, and getting harder to get, the more gun attacks that will happen.

There's a correlation between the two. I GUARANTEE IT

[AviatorTom]

Mass killings in many countries have been happening for centuries. They will never end.

[exitseven]

It will end when the real causes are identified and addressed.:hint, it is not too many guns.

[Kingofkings1992]

No, they will not come to an end. It’s a humanity problem, not a gun problem. Humans are way better better at messing things up than they are fixing things.

[msc545]

People in the US are mostly devoid of empathy.

[rebeliouse]

na usa built on wild west so its in their nature.

wow god your pretty shame u dont follow me

[Puppystarfish23]

Yes so pretty but a man already got there before you, along time ago

[rebeliouse]

lucky him still i get to chat to u though

[rebeliouse]

follow me?

[Puppystarfish23]

Your not that different in age to my parents

[rebeliouse]

@Puppystarfish23
so whats age anyway just different point of view about things

[Puppystarfish23]

Your a creep

[Agape93]

Of course it will. Everything ends eventually.

[riverrat3]

Not if the NRA has anything to say about it

[jimmy2]

Probably not