Recent mass shootings in the U.S.

Watch
-Imperator-
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#81
Report 3 weeks ago
#81
(Original post by QE2)
1. Yes it has (in the recent past).
Facepalm.
(Original post by QE2)
2. If it is necessary now, why the reluctance?
Because depriving people of some of the activities they enjoy because it is necessary is sad? (e.g. lockdowns)

(Original post by QE2)
If we look far enough into the past we can always find a change in trends. Hardly makes for reasonable argument though.
What? The change in trends is precisely what I'm interested in!
(Original post by QE2)
Also, the problem with many offences is changes in the way in which they are classified, reported and recorded, so it is difficult to draw any conclusions.
That has only changed more recently.
(Original post by QE2)
However, murders are a constant in that respect, and they fell after WW2, not reaching 1945 levels for nearly 30 years.
If you look at 5-year rolling averages, they exceed war levels a few years earlier than that. The increase in homicides during war surely needs little explanation, though. (Also homicides =/= murders). Anyway, knife crime is a subset of all violent crime, not just homicide.

(Original post by QE2)
Still no rational argument for people to keep high-velocity, high-capacity, rapid-fire, assault-style rifles in the home.
I literally said I would reluctantly support a ban.
0
reply
Ascend
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#82
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#82
Not really worth making a thread on this so putting it here for relevance:

In 2020 America experienced a terrible surge in murder. Why?

The plague year proved brutal for Chicago, already a violent city even by American standards. Murders increased by 56% from 2019—nearly three times as many victims as in all of Italy. As crime data from 2020 are compiled, one thing has become clear: American cities saw the biggest rise in homicides in decades, currently estimated at 30% in a single year. That would be the highest annual increase in more than 50 years. In New York City, murders were up by 45%. In the Bay Area around San Francisco, they rose by 36%. In Washington, dc, they climbed by 19%. Our analysis of preliminary data from the fbi suggests that it is not just a big-city phenomenon. Small towns and even rural counties experienced smaller yet sizeable increases in murder rates (see chart).
America benefited from decades of what researchers termed the “great crime decline”—the violent-crime rate was cut nearly in half from 1993 to 2019. If that 30% rise in city murders in 2020 were to hold nationwide, it would return America to a homicide rate last experienced in 1998. “It’s like 20 years of crime decline and violence decline has just disappeared,” says John Roman, a criminologist at norc, a research institute at the University of Chicago.
(the article asks the question but does not provide adequate answers)
0
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#83
Report 3 weeks ago
#83
(Original post by -Imperator-)
Facepalm.
What? The change in trends is precisely what I'm interested in!
The issue with gun controls is a current one. Not sure what the distant past has to do with the measures that are needed today.
It's like saying plastic micro particle pollution wasn't an issue 100 years ago.

Because depriving people of some of the activities they enjoy because it is necessary is sad? (e.g. lockdowns)
Keeping high-velocity, rapid-fire, high-capacity firearms in the home is not "an activity" that is of any benefit to anyone.
It is interesting that despite exactly the same argument applying to drug use, most people in favour of free access to guns are opposed to free access to drugs.

That has only changed more recently.
It has always been an issue as long as there have been records of crime figures. 100 years ago, a wife getting a bit of a slap would never be recorded as a crime.

If you look at 5-year rolling averages, they exceed war levels a few years earlier than that. The increase in homicides during war surely needs little explanation, though. (Also homicides =/= murders). Anyway, knife crime is a subset of all violent crime, not just homicide.
The records show that the number of homicides in the UK in 1945 was 495. This number was not reached again until 1974.
The number of homicides during the war did not differ greatly from the pre-war trend, so by that specific and unchanging measure, post war physical violence did not increase. As I explained, the changes in crime classifications and reporting means that violence in general is hard to objectively quantify.
But remind me again where this was supposed to be going. We shouldn't increase gun controls because other violent crime has increased?

I literally said I would reluctantly support a ban.
"Reluctantly" means that you would prefer people to have easy access to those weapons and to keep them in the home - but you can provide an argument for them having that access.
0
reply
-Imperator-
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#84
Report 3 weeks ago
#84
(Original post by QE2)
It is interesting that despite exactly the same argument applying to drug use, most people in favour of free access to guns are opposed to free access to drugs.
There's no "good" way of taking heroin.

(Original post by QE2)
The number of homicides during the war did not differ greatly from the pre-war trend, so by that specific and unchanging measure, post war physical violence did not increase. As I explained, the changes in crime classifications and reporting means that violence in general is hard to objectively quantify.
But remind me again where this was supposed to be going. We shouldn't increase gun controls because other violent crime has increased?
And as I said, changes to violent crime classifications have only come in more recent decades. That there has been surge in violent crime from WW2 onwards is an undeniable fact. I was bringing this up to show that it's not mere access to weaponry that leads people to commit crimes. There has been a deterioration in behaviour.
0
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#85
Report 3 weeks ago
#85
(Original post by -Imperator-)
There's no "good" way of taking heroin.
1. Of course there is.
2. There is no "good" way of shooting someone in a school or supermarket.

And as I said, changes to violent crime classifications have only come in more recent decades. That there has been surge in violent crime from WW2 onwards is an undeniable fact. I was bringing this up to show that it's not mere access to weaponry that leads people to commit crimes. There has been a deterioration in behaviour.
Ok, if you accept that people are generally more violent than they were, why should't it be more difficult to obtain weapons that make the violence far more lethal? A violent person with a high-velocity, high-capacity, rapid-fire, assault-style rifle is way more deadly than a violent person with a knife.

We keep coming back to the same place - there is literally no justification for anyone to keep high-velocity, high-capacity, rapid-fire, assault-style rifles in the home.
0
reply
-Imperator-
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#86
Report 3 weeks ago
#86
(Original post by QE2)
2. There is no "good" way of shooting someone in a school or supermarket.
Try again and you'll find the appropriate comparison.

(Original post by QE2)
Ok, if you accept that people are generally more violent than they were, why should't it be more difficult to obtain weapons that make the violence far more lethal? A violent person with a high-velocity, high-capacity, rapid-fire, assault-style rifle is way more deadly than a violent person with a knife.
How many times do I have to tell you that I would support gun control for the US?

(Original post by QE2)
We keep coming back to the same place - there is literally no justification for anyone to keep high-velocity, high-capacity, rapid-fire, assault-style rifles in the home.
It would be fine for people to keep rifles at home if gun violence weren't so prevalent.
0
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#87
Report 3 weeks ago
#87
(Original post by -Imperator-)
Try again and you'll find the appropriate comparison.
The comparison was between easy access to and legality of guns and drugs, in the context of mass shootings of civilians by ordinary people using legally owned guns.
Therefore using school and supermarket shootings is entirely appropriate. If you disagree, feel free to explain why.

How many times do I have to tell you that I would support gun control for the US?
*sigh*
You said you would support stricter controls "reluctantly". I am trying to establish why you would rather there not be stricter controls.

It would be fine for people to keep rifles at home if gun violence weren't so prevalent.
Did you really just say that? lol!
0
reply
-Imperator-
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#88
Report 3 weeks ago
#88
(Original post by QE2)
You said you would support stricter controls "reluctantly". I am trying to establish why you would rather there not be stricter controls.
Once more, let me quote myself verbatim from a previous comment: "Because depriving people of some of the activities they enjoy because it is necessary is sad?"

(Original post by QE2)
Did you really just say that? lol!
Just as it used to be fine to let young people carry knives around.

Please don't bother answering yet again unless you have actually something new to ask/say. I'm tired of answering the exact same questions in every post.
0
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#89
Report 3 weeks ago
#89
(Original post by -Imperator-)
Once more, let me quote myself verbatim from a previous comment: "Because depriving people of some of the activities they enjoy because it is necessary is sad?"
Do you "reluctantly" support drug control laws? What about drink-driving or underage sex laws?
The issue isn't about "enjoyment" but "causing harm". Really not that difficult.

Just as it used to be fine to let young people carry knives around.
If the weapon is not there, it cannot be used against anyone. QED.
Do you propose allowing people to keep guns until they shoot someone, and only then take it away? It is the potential for harm that is the issue, not whether it will definitely be used.

Please don't bother answering yet again unless you have actually something new to ask/say. I'm tired of answering the exact same questions in every post.
I'll keep asking then until you provide satisfactory responses.
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#90
Report 3 weeks ago
#90
(Original post by -Imperator-)
There's no "good" way of taking heroin.
In fairness, there is, if youre having a child, for example, odds are youll be given it :lol:
0
reply
-Imperator-
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#91
Report 1 week ago
#91
(Original post by QE2)
It is the potential for harm that is the issue, not whether it will definitely be used.
Nope, I'm a utilitarian. If we knew that people wouldn't use guns/knives for crime, there would be no problem with letting people use them. It's a shame that the situation has deteriorated.
0
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#92
Report 1 week ago
#92
(Original post by -Imperator-)
Nope, I'm a utilitarian. If we knew that people wouldn't use guns/knives for crime, there would be no problem with letting people use them. It's a shame that the situation has deteriorated.
If we knew that they wouldn't be used for harm, then they would have no potential to harm in that context.
It is the lack of knowledge of the potential outcome that is the issue.

This is why giving a gun to a highly-trained and vetted police firearms expert during his active shift is reasonable, but giving several to a conspiracy theorist to keep at home so he can defend himself against some unspecified threat is not.
Last edited by QE2; 1 week ago
0
reply
Ascend
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#93
Report Thread starter 4 days ago
#93
Indianapolis: 8 dead, more injured in shooting at FedEx facility near the airport

Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department officers responded to 8951 Mirabel Road on a report of shots fired just after 11 p.m. Thursday.

When they arrived, they found an "active shooter incident," Cook said. Police believe the alleged shooter has died by suicide. Cook said officials do not believe there is an active threat to the community. It is unknown if the shooter was a FedEx employee or what his motive was.
0
reply
QE2
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#94
Report 3 days ago
#94
I noticed that some articles were quoting a witness as saying the shooter had "an automatic rifle". Lucky he didn't say it on here, or he would have been in for it!
0
reply
Ascend
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#95
Report Thread starter 3 days ago
#95
(Original post by QE2)
I noticed that some articles were quoting a witness as saying the shooter had "an automatic rifle". Lucky he didn't say it on here, or he would have been in for it!
:laugh:
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

What factors affect your mental health the most right now?

Anxiousness about lockdown easing (144)
4.87%
Uncertainty around my education (434)
14.68%
Uncertainty around my future career prospects (332)
11.23%
Lack of purpose or motivation (410)
13.87%
Lack of support system (eg. teachers, counsellors, delays in care) (137)
4.63%
Impact of lockdown on physical health (179)
6.06%
Loneliness (255)
8.63%
Financial worries (109)
3.69%
Concern about myself or my loves ones getting/having been ill (121)
4.09%
Exposure to negative news/social media (135)
4.57%
Lack of real life entertainment (159)
5.38%
Lack of confidence in making big life decisions (261)
8.83%
Worry about missed opportunities during the pandemic (280)
9.47%

Watched Threads

View All