Mike Myers appeared on Colbert in a Sabres sweater...

[Sabres Fan in NS]

15 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

You don't think I know this?  I live in Texas.

I believe I also read that something like 90% of Americans *don't* own a gun (might be a different number; going of my increasingly leaky memory here).  The point is that the people who own guns own a LOT of them, and the vast majority of people don't own guns.

A quick Google outs the percentage of gun owners at around 30%.

Problem is I don't think that the 3 perps in the most recent cases are included in those numbers.

If I were to guess I would think that the 30% even is low.  If you are real gun nut you will likely own many and will probably not want everyone to know that you have them and perhaps many of them.

[Zamboni]

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- 32% of U.S. adults say they personally own a gun, while a larger percentage, 44%, report living in a gun household. Adults living in gun households include those with a gun in their home or anywhere on their property.

Gallup has tracked both metrics of gun ownership annually since 2007, showing no clear increase or decrease in gun ownership over that time.

 

https://news.gallup.com/poll/264932/percentage-americans-own-guns.aspx

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/09/13/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/

https://americangunfacts.com/gun-ownership-statistics/

Both sexes, all political spectrums, all sexual orientations, all races, all ages own guns in the US. The criminals will get guns and use them even if tomorrow all guns are banned in the United States. Banning any and all guns from US citizens is a fantasy solution. I think a combination of many ideas from clear minded, common sense, compromising lawmakers is the only thing that well lesson The frequency of this type of thing happening… It will never 100% prevent it no matter what happens. Too many sick and driven people in the world. At least that’s how I see it.

The amount of people that illegally possess (unregistered) guns in the United States is freaking staggering from what I remember. i’m looking for that information now, if it’s even out there. Because it’s not really tracked. I remember reading a couple articles about that a year or two ago.

Edited May 25, 2022 by Zamboni

[MattPie]

24 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

Both sexes, all political spectrums, all sexual orientations, all races, all ages own guns in the US. The criminals will get guns and use them even if tomorrow all guns are banned in the United States. Banning any and all guns from US citizens is a fantasy solution. I think a combination of many ideas from clear minded, common sense, compromising lawmakers is the only thing that well lesson The frequency of this type of thing happening… It will never 100% prevent it no matter what happens. Too many sick and driven people in the world. At least that’s how I see it.

The amount of people that illegally possess (unregistered) guns in the United States is freaking staggering from what I remember. i’m looking for that information now, if it’s even out there. Because it’s not really tracked. I remember reading a couple articles about that a year or two ago.

So now that we have the "there's no 100% perfect solution" parade done, let's start talking about ways we can mitigate it. It's not impossible to make it harder for people to acquire guns shoot up kids, it just isn't. The reasonable (IMHO) stuff as already been suggested here and start with that. Then we can start with how people get to that point (hopelessness) and start working on that too.

"It can't be perfect so why try" is quitter talk.

[Zamboni]

Just now, MattPie said:

So now that we have the "there's no 100% perfect solution" parade done, let's start talking about ways we can mitigate it. It's not impossible to make it harder for people to acquire guns shoot up kids, it just isn't. The reasonable (IMHO) stuff as already been suggested here and start with that. Then we can start with how people get to that point (hopelessness) and start working on that too.

"It can't be perfect so why try" is quitter talk.

Did you just put words in my mouth about not trying? I hope not. Let’s not get angry with each other. That’s silly. 👍🏼

 

[Doohicksie]

35 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

Did you just put words in my mouth about not trying?

No, that's pretty much what I read too.

Edited May 25, 2022 by Doohickie

[K-9]

1 hour ago, Doohickie said:

You don't think I know this?  I live in Texas.

I believe I also read that something like 90% of Americans *don't* own a gun (might be a different number; going of my increasingly leaky memory here).  The point is that the people who own guns own a LOT of them, and the vast majority of people don't own guns.

I’m well aware you live in Texas and that you know better than anybody just what kind of evil you’re dealing with when it comes to Abbott, Cruz, and that entire Texas tyranny. I was merely saying that the word “irrational” didn’t suffice when describing what kind of hope you’d need to think they’d do a damn thing to try to fix this uniquely American issue. 

[K-9]

1 hour ago, Zamboni said:

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- 32% of U.S. adults say they personally own a gun, while a larger percentage, 44%, report living in a gun household. Adults living in gun households include those with a gun in their home or anywhere on their property.

Gallup has tracked both metrics of gun ownership annually since 2007, showing no clear increase or decrease in gun ownership over that time.

 

https://news.gallup.com/poll/264932/percentage-americans-own-guns.aspx

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/09/13/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/

https://americangunfacts.com/gun-ownership-statistics/

Both sexes, all political spectrums, all sexual orientations, all races, all ages own guns in the US. The criminals will get guns and use them even if tomorrow all guns are banned in the United States. Banning any and all guns from US citizens is a fantasy solution. I think a combination of many ideas from clear minded, common sense, compromising lawmakers is the only thing that well lesson The frequency of this type of thing happening… It will never 100% prevent it no matter what happens. Too many sick and driven people in the world. At least that’s how I see it.

The amount of people that illegally possess (unregistered) guns in the United States is freaking staggering from what I remember. i’m looking for that information now, if it’s even out there. Because it’s not really tracked. I remember reading a couple articles about that a year or two ago.

Would it surprise you to learn that the majority of gun owners are in favor of banning assault rifles and other sensible gun laws? That’s been the case for decades, too. 

[Zamboni]

29 minutes ago, K-9 said:

Would it surprise you to learn that the majority of gun owners are in favor of banning assault rifles and other sensible gun laws? That’s been the case for decades, too. 

Not at all. It’s smart. As long as “assault rifles” is very exact and specific, I’d probably be totally for that law. At the same time can we pass legislation that says if a (now illegal) assault rifle is used in ANY crime you instantly get life in prison without the possibility of parole? OR if the criminal kills with it, they get the death penalty that gets carried out within 2-3 years of being convicted? Something that has some major teeth (punishment). Compromise give and take legislation. Just Possession of the (now illegal) assault rifle gets you 15 years in prison without the possibility of parole. Again, something that has major teeth. Compromising on both sides can work.

44 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

No, that's pretty much what I read too.

Well I typed what I meant. And I didn’t type that. Sorry if some want to take it that way. 😔

Edited May 25, 2022 by Zamboni

[SwampD]

1 hour ago, Zamboni said:

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- 32% of U.S. adults say they personally own a gun, while a larger percentage, 44%, report living in a gun household. Adults living in gun households include those with a gun in their home or anywhere on their property.

Gallup has tracked both metrics of gun ownership annually since 2007, showing no clear increase or decrease in gun ownership over that time.

 

https://news.gallup.com/poll/264932/percentage-americans-own-guns.aspx

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/09/13/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/

https://americangunfacts.com/gun-ownership-statistics/

Both sexes, all political spectrums, all sexual orientations, all races, all ages own guns in the US. The criminals will get guns and use them even if tomorrow all guns are banned in the United States. Banning any and all guns from US citizens is a fantasy solution. I think a combination of many ideas from clear minded, common sense, compromising lawmakers is the only thing that well lesson The frequency of this type of thing happening… It will never 100% prevent it no matter what happens. Too many sick and driven people in the world. At least that’s how I see it.

The amount of people that illegally possess (unregistered) guns in the United States is freaking staggering from what I remember. i’m looking for that information now, if it’s even out there. Because it’s not really tracked. I remember reading a couple articles about that a year or two ago.

I’m sorry, but IMO, this is argument is a complete crock of *****. Yes, criminals will still get guns, but criminals are not the ones committing these mass murders.

The typical disaffected 18 yo isn’t tapped into his local underground network in order to get automatic weapons when he’s angry. These broken humans are getting their weapons legally, because its so easy. Take away that avenue and they may just go on a bender and wake up with only a bad headache.

[Weave]

2 minutes ago, SwampD said:

I’m sorry, but IMO, this is argument is a complete crock of *****. Yes, criminals will still get guns, but criminals are not the ones committing these mass murders.

The typical disaffected 18 yo isn’t tapped into his local underground network in order to get automatic weapons when he’s angry. These broken humans are getting their weapons legally, because its so easy. Take away that avenue and they may just go on a bender and wake up with only a bad headache.

And that’s basically it.  You draw a line in the sand today.  Tomorrow nothing changes.  But after tomorrow, slowly but surely the number of assault weapons decrease, and so do the opportunities for ***** bags to get access.  In a generation the number of these weapons are half as ownership sunsets naturally.  In 2 generations its over.

Had we continued the assault weapon ban that sunsetted in 2004 we’d be halfway there already.

[Zamboni]

1 minute ago, SwampD said:

I’m sorry, but IMO, this is argument is a complete crock of *****. Yes, criminals will still get guns, but criminals are not the ones committing these mass murders.

The typical disaffected 18 yo isn’t tapped into his local underground network in order to get automatic weapons when he’s angry. These broken humans are getting their weapons legally, because its so easy. Take away that avenue and they may just go on a bender and wake up with only a bad headache.

The moment they carry a gun in the school, they are criminals. The moment they carry a gun in a school and pull the trigger they are criminals with the intent to kill.

So yes criminals are carrying out these mass murders. You see it one way I see it the other. So be it. 
 

and it’s a mix of getting the guns illegally and in the “underground network “ AND getting the guns legally in the states that allow it. it’s not 100% one-way or 100% the other way. you see it one way and I see it the other. So be it.

and I’m not arguing anything… And I’m not belittling your or anyones opinion. I’m giving peoples opinions what it deserves. Respect. Sure I can go down an ugly Road and do name calling that does nothing. But I personally don’t want to go down that road.

Do people seriously not have the ability anymore to give an opinion without name calling the other opinion? 😔

[SwampD]

2 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

The moment they carry a gun in the school, they are criminals. The moment they carry a gun in a school and pull the trigger they are criminals with the intent to kill.

So yes criminals are carrying out these mass murders. You see it one way I see it the other. So be it. 
 

and it’s a mix of getting the guns illegally and in the “underground network “ AND getting the guns legally in the states that allow it. it’s not 100% one-way or 100% the other way. you see it one way and I see it the other. So be it.

and I’m not arguing anything… And I’m not belittling your or anyones opinion. I’m giving peoples opinions what it deserves. Respect. Sure I can go down an ugly Road and do name calling that does nothing. But I personally don’t want to go down that road.

Do people seriously not have the ability anymore to give an opinion without name calling the other opinion? 😔

Criminals are criminals and mass murderers are mass murderers. There is a difference and you know that.

And I didn’t call you anything. I said that the argument you made, which I’ve heard a thousand times before, is a crock of *****. If that is too strong of language, then I’ll say that it is disingenuous, at best.

[Zamboni]

A 2017 review found that there was no evidence that ban had a significant effect on firearm homicides.

A 2014 study found no impacts on homicide rates with an assault weapon ban.[29] A 2014 book published by Oxford University Pressnoted that "There is no compelling evidence that [the ban] saved lives."

A 2013 study showed that the expiration of the FAWB in 2004 "led to immediate violence increases within areas of Mexico located close to American states where sales of assault weapons became legal. The estimated effects are sizable... the additional homicides stemming from the FAWB expiration represent 21% of all homicides in these municipalities during 2005 and 2006."

In 2013, Christopher S. Koper, a criminology scholar, reviewed the literature on the ban's effects and concluded that its effects on crimes committed with assault weapons were mixed due to its various loopholes. He stated that the ban did not seem to affect gun crime rates, and suggested that it might have been able to reduce shootings if it had been renewed in 2004.

There’s a lot more info in the link below.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban

 

I want this crap to stop as much as the next person… I truly do. But I really think that it needs to be a combination of several things… And not just a broad sweeping Generalization that is ignorantly politically charged. And something that is long lasting and multipronged. And not ONLY the taking away of a gun. In part? Yes. The only answer? No.

9 minutes ago, SwampD said:

Criminals are criminals and mass murderers are mass murderers. There is a difference and you know that.

And I didn’t call you anything. I said that the argument you made, which I’ve heard a thousand times before, is a crock of *****. If that is too strong of language, then I’ll say that it is disingenuous, at best.

I find nothing disingenuous about calling a criminal a criminal the moment they walk into a school with a gun. Once they pull that trigger and kill more than one person… Then they would be considered a mass murdering criminal. at least that’s how I see it. And I don’t find anything disingenuous about that statement at all. Agree to disagree I guess.

 

if need be, make soft targets into hard targets. If that’s what it’s going to take. In part… If that’s what it’s going to take to help in keeping people safer. And I stress… As part of a multiprong solution. 

Edited May 25, 2022 by Zamboni

[SwampD]

4 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

A 2017 review found that there was no evidence that ban had a significant effect on firearm homicides.

A 2014 study found no impacts on homicide rates with an assault weapon ban.[29] A 2014 book published by Oxford University Pressnoted that "There is no compelling evidence that [the ban] saved lives."

A 2013 study showed that the expiration of the FAWB in 2004 "led to immediate violence increases within areas of Mexico located close to American states where sales of assault weapons became legal. The estimated effects are sizable... the additional homicides stemming from the FAWB expiration represent 21% of all homicides in these municipalities during 2005 and 2006."

In 2013, Christopher S. Koper, a criminology scholar, reviewed the literature on the ban's effects and concluded that its effects on crimes committed with assault weapons were mixed due to its various loopholes. He stated that the ban did not seem to affect gun crime rates, and suggested that it might have been able to reduce shootings if it had been renewed in 2004.

There’s a lot more info in the link below.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban

 

I want this crap to stop as much as the next person… I truly do. But I really think that it needs to be a combination of several things… And not just a broad sweeping Generalization that is ignorantly politically charged. And something that is long lasting and multipronged. And not ONLY the taking away of a gun. In part? Yes. The only answer? No.

I find nothing disingenuous about calling a criminal a criminal the moment they walk into a school with a gun. Once they pull that trigger and kill more than one person… Then they would be considered a mass murdering criminal. at least that’s how I see it. And I don’t find anything disingenuous about that statement at all. Agree to disagree I guess.

 

if need be, make soft targets into hard targets. If that’s what it’s going to take. In part… If that’s what it’s going to take to help in keeping people safer. And I stress… As part of a multiprong solution. 

Whatever. I guess it was that teacher’s own fault that she wasn’t carrying her own handgun to protect herself.

And please stop pretending that you want a solution, multipronged or not.

[Weave]

5 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

A 2017 review found that there was no evidence that ban had a significant effect on firearm homicides.

A 2014 study found no impacts on homicide rates with an assault weapon ban.[29] A 2014 book published by Oxford University Pressnoted that "There is no compelling evidence that [the ban] saved lives."

A 2013 study showed that the expiration of the FAWB in 2004 "led to immediate violence increases within areas of Mexico located close to American states where sales of assault weapons became legal. The estimated effects are sizable... the additional homicides stemming from the FAWB expiration represent 21% of all homicides in these municipalities during 2005 and 2006."

In 2013, Christopher S. Koper, a criminology scholar, reviewed the literature on the ban's effects and concluded that its effects on crimes committed with assault weapons were mixed due to its various loopholes. He stated that the ban did not seem to affect gun crime rates, and suggested that it might have been able to reduce shootings if it had been renewed in 2004.

There’s a lot more info in the link below.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban

 

I want this crap to stop as much as the next person… I truly do. But I really think that it needs to be a combination of several things… And not just a broad sweeping Generalization that is ignorantly politically charged. And something that is long lasting and multipronged. And not ONLY the taking away of a gun. In part? Yes. The only answer? No.

I find nothing disingenuous about calling a criminal a criminal the moment they walk into a school with a gun. Once they pull that trigger and kill more than one person… Then they would be considered a mass murdering criminal. at least that’s how I see it. And I don’t find anything disingenuous about that statement at all. Agree to disagree I guess.

And look what has happened in the years since the ban sunsetted in 04.  We likely would have, at worst, maintained the trend that was flat in 04.  Instead we are 2x to 3x the mass shootings since the ban sunsetted.

[Zamboni]

1 minute ago, SwampD said:

Whatever. I guess it was that teacher’s own fault that she wasn’t carrying her own handgun to protect herself.

And please stop pretending that you want a solution, multipronged or not.

WTF?? Do you ***** know me? Do  you ***** know I don’t wanna solution? What the ***** are you talking about don’t be an ***** to me.

Edited May 25, 2022 by Zamboni

[SwampD]

1 minute ago, Zamboni said:

WTF?? Do you ***** know me? Do you have to you ***** know I don’t wanna solution? What the ***** are you talking about don’t be an ***** to me.

I do know you. I’ve met hundreds of you.

[Zamboni]

3 minutes ago, Weave said:

And look what has happened in the years since the ban sunsetted in 04.  We likely would have, at worst, maintained the trend that was flat in 04.  Instead we are 2x to 3x the mass shootings since the ban sunsetted.

Thank you for that data… And thank you for not being an ***** to me!

I like everyone want a solution… But it has to be multipronged and not just ignorantly one item. Like a lot of politicians and media seem to want to point at.

1 minute ago, SwampD said:

I do know you. I’ve met hundreds of you.

No you don’t ***** know me so ***** off. You don’t wanna have a conversation you just wanna point fingers like the typical ***** on TV

Edited May 25, 2022 by Zamboni

[SwampD]

1 minute ago, Zamboni said:

Thank you for that data… And thank you for not being an ***** to me!

I like everyone want a solution… But it has to be multipronged and not just ignorantly one item. Like a lot of politicians and media seem to want to point at.

No you don’t ***** know me so ***** off. You don’t wanna have a conversation you just wanna point fingers like the typical ***** on TV

I don’t watch TV.

[Weave]

1 minute ago, Zamboni said:

Thank you for that data… And thank you for not being an ***** to me!

I like everyone want a solution… But it has to be multipronged and not just ignorantly one item. Like a lot of politicians and media seem to want to point at.

Of ocurse it needs to be multuipronged, but it needs to start with denied access.  There is no way around it.  Access is the root cause.  Access needs to be the primary change.

[Zamboni]

Just now, SwampD said:

I don’t watch TV.

You also don’t want to have a genuine conversation you just wanna point fingers. The most low hanging fruit disingenuous crap there is. Have a ***** conversation. You don’t know me. And I’m not going to claim to know you. So don’t be so damn ignorant towards me.

[Zamboni]

1 minute ago, Weave said:

Of ocurse it needs to be multuipronged, but it needs to start with denied access.  There is no way around it.  Access is the root cause.  Access needs to be the primary change.

Absolutely! Denying access would be awesome. And as all the law abiding citizens are not able to get those assault rifles anymore (which is fine). i’m sure you can answer this question because you seem like a smart guy… How are the criminals going to still be able to have those rifles on the street. Because they will, absolutely they will?

The answer definitely is not… “They will not have access to those”

[SwampD]

Just now, Zamboni said:

You also don’t want to have a genuine conversation you just wanna point fingers. The most low hanging fruit disingenuous crap there is. Have a ***** conversation. You don’t know me. And I’m not going to claim to know you. So don’t be so damn ignorant towards me.

Again, who have i pointed fingers at? Certainly not you. You have no control over who gets guns or not.

I’ll ask this question, is there a difference between actual criminals who can get guns if they are made illegal, and cracked people who want to get them to commit mass murders?

My impression is that you think there is not.

[Zamboni]

Criminals who can get illegal guns.

“Cracked” people (I assume you mean mentally disturbed) Who get a gun to commit a mass murder.

 

There are a few assumptions here but I’ll go with my answer…

One of them need to be caught before they acquire a gun. especially since they are “cracked “which means that they have already been (assuming) diagnosed and determined as mentally disturbed. Of course should be watched carefully. And hopefully leave Clues through social media and other things like personal interaction, before they require any gun or commit any acts of mass murder or even one murder or major crime.

So is there a difference in this crude hypothetical, unnuanced and uncontextualized example? Yes there is a difference.

 

 

You don’t ***** know me

[Weave]

10 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

Absolutely! Denying access would be awesome. And as all the law abiding citizens are not able to get those assault rifles anymore (which is fine). i’m sure you can answer this question because you seem like a smart guy… How are the criminals going to still be able to have those rifles on the street. Because they will, absolutely they will?

The answer definitely is not… “They will not have access to those”

They will have their access greatly diminished over time.  None of this will change quickly.  And none of this swill be perfect.  We don't need perfect.  We need better than what it is now.