3 people dead including the shooter. this is on the front page of CNN. i guess somebody went into the mall and started firing an assault rifle at people. multiple others were wounded. this happened literally like 5 minutes from my house. [url=http://www.katu.com/news/local/Shooting-Clackamas-Town-Center-183077691.html] link to news article
The criminals who own those business are mega rich and they employ a lot of people so they'll also use this excuse not to stop their criminal activities and they have many well paid scumbag lobbyists.
As I said, I get that the politicians have to think about the donations their parties receive, but ultimately if gun policy was unpopular enough, the issue would at least be on the political agenda.
It just seems so odd to me. Whenever something like this happens, all the headlines read that America has to do some soul searching, or that it has lost its innocence (whatever the hell that means), but eventually these things simply blow over until the next maniac locks and loads.
To put it into perspective I'll quote a small paragraph of the article I previously posted. It makes for grim reading:
''In the US, the total of firearm homicides in 2011 was eleven thousand, one hundred and one, and this year is on track to be even higher. Look at it this way: if the Connecticut attack was the only shooting yesterday, then the day's death toll would actually be below the US average. More people die from firearm homicide every year than the total number of US military casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001. More than twice as many people die from firearm homicide as in 11 September and Pearl Harbour combined. 31 people every day die on average from a firearm-related homicide. This doesn't count accidental deaths. Just murder.''
11 thousand per year! Even per capita that is a horrificly high murder rate for a supposedly civilised country. Does it really reassure Americans knowing that the high price they pay for this unnecessary freedom? I'm from the UK, and although there is the issue of knife crime, even the slums of London/Manchester and co are much safer places to live than their American counterparts.
As the Nicky Woolf puts it,''Guns don't kill people. People kill people. Guns just make it exponentially easier.''
Watching another person mow down innocents is quite a motivator. I'd sooner turn the gun on myself than run in fear.
Vermont and New Hampshire, the states with what are considered the most lax gun laws, have the lowest murder rates of the contiguous US.
Is it also a coincidence too that the two states have the 7th and 15th highest per capita GDP per state in the US? On the other hand, the state with the highest murder rate, the DoC, has such a high rate because many of the guns in DoC were imported from neighbouring states due to the strict gun laws. This shows that yes, the people themselves want to commit the crime, but they did so only because there were guns available in neighbouring states.
Furthermore the data is skewed. It does not show for instance that although the District of Columbia comes out top - with 16 firearms murders per 100,000 man, woman and child in the state, it has been on a steady decline There were 99 firearms murders in DC in 2010, down 12% on 2009.
Or the fact that in many states with strict laws, gun crimes are made possible by guns imported from states with lax laws? Trace data made available by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) indicates that the majority of crime guns traced in Massachusetts originate from states with lax gun laws. From 2011, 669 of the 1,020 firearms for which ATF was able to determine a source state came from outside of Massachusetts.
The Mayors Against Illegal Guns study also found that 10 U.S. states sold 57 percent of all firearms used in crimes in other states last year. It concludes that the 10 worst offenders per capita, led by Mississippi, West Virginia and Kentucky, supplied nearly half the 43,000 guns traced to crime scenes in other states last year. A stateâs gun laws are only as good as the weakest link in the national chain. And those three states mentioned have extremely lax gun laws.
It just seems so odd to me. Whenever something like this happens, all the headlines read that America has to do some soul searching, or that it has lost its innocence (whatever the hell that means), but eventually these things simply blow over until the next maniac locks and loads.
Exactly. What the hell is the use of issuing more prayers in your official statements than actually doing something?
I'm from the UK, and although there is the issue of knife crime, even the slums of London/Manchester and co are much safer places to live than their American counterparts.
Amen. I felt quite safe there last week, knowing at least I have a far lesser chance of being shot up.
Exactly. What the hell is the use of issuing more prayers in your official statements than actually doing something?
I had a thought; that due to the gravity of grief, sadness and national sympathy that (rightfully) emerges after these tradgedies, it gives politicians in particular a perfect excuse to pontificate rather than be proactive.
But the real reason I think goes deeper than that, down to the gun culture that seems so ingrained in American society.
Amen. I felt quite safe there last week, knowing at least I have a far lesser chance of being shot up.
Don't get me wrong, the UK can be a very dangerous place. In the rougher parts of big cities you need to be very careful. There is a long standing violent culture, probably in large part due to social acceptance of binge drinking starting at a young age. In terms of violent crime we have actually surpassed South Africa and the United States. Yet the fact our murder rate remains so much lower I think is a ****ing indictment of the argument that culture plays a major role in the number of gun related murders in the US. Ie., if the UK is actually more violent, why do we have a far lower number of gun related murders, even when measured on a per capita basis?
It's a no brainer. Again, ''Guns don't kill people. People kill people. Guns just make it exceptionally easier.'' Anyone that thinks otherwise is fooling themselves.
Apologies in advance for the DP, but I just clocked Morgan Freeman's rather astute observations on the shooting:
''You want to know why. This may sound cynical, but here's why.
It's because of the way the media reports it. Flip on the news and watch how we treat the Batman theater shooter and the Oregon mall shooter like celebrities. Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris are household names, but do you know the name of a single victim of Columbine? Disturbed
people who would otherwise just off themselves in their basements see the news and want to top it by doing something worse, and going out in a memorable way. Why a grade school? Why children? Because he'll be remembered as a horrible monster, instead of a sad nobody.
CNN's article says that if the body count "holds up", this will rank as the second deadliest shooting behind Virginia Tech, as if statistics somehow make one shooting worse than another. Then they post a video interview of third-graders for all the details of what they saw and heard while the shootings were happening. Fox News has plastered the killer's face on all their reports for hours. Any articles or news stories yet that focus on the victims and ignore the killer's identity? None that I've seen yet. Because they don't sell. So congratulations, sensationalist media, you've just lit the fire for someone to top this and knock off a day care center or a maternity ward next.
You can help by forgetting you ever read this man's name, and remembering the name of at least one victim. You can help by donating to mental health research instead of pointing to gun control as the problem. You can help by turning off the news."
A small adendum. I rather think his last point is a little naive. Everyone knows mentally ill people need help. But it doesn't take a genius to work out that guns + nutters is a volatile combination. And preventing public access to firearms would clearly help things in this regard. But other than that I have to say, his thoughts on the influence of the media are very well expressed. I realise that Bruce Almighty was only a film, but with comments like this could he really be divine?
Don't get me wrong, the UK can be a very dangerous place. In the rougher parts of big cities you need to be very careful. There is a long standing violent culture, probably in large part due to social acceptance of binge drinking starting at a young age. In terms of violent crime we have actually surpassed South Africa and the United States. Yet the fact our murder rate remains so much lower I think is a ****ing indictment of the argument that culture plays a major role in the number of gun related murders in the US. Ie., if the UK is actually more violent, why do we have a far lower number of gun related murders, even when measured on a per capita basis?
Was in Cambridge, so not so bad. But it was relative.
But the people are starting to care. Public opinion is starting to hold more weight.
i dont think the public has any say in the government spending. beside is the public not willing to sacrifice the way they live now. and that will be needed to lower the debt fast.
Wikipedia has a spreadsheet that covers the number of murders in a country, and the rate at which they happen (don't know if this is per day or per capita), The US, despite how you make it out, is clearly not the most violent country out there.
There is a small link that downloads the original pdf at the top right of the spreadsheet.
Wikipedia has a spreadsheet that covers the number of murders in a country, and the rate at which they happen (don't know if this is per day or per capita), The US, despite how you make it out, is clearly not the most violent country out there.
Notice how the most violent nations are in Africa and Latin America, two very destablized continents?
Notice then that amongst First World nations, America is at 4.2, whilst Canada is at 1.6, France at 1.1, Germany 0.8, Japan 0.3, Australia 1.0, Italy 0.9, the UK 1.2, Spain 0.8?
Also, if you look at the gun homicides per capita, the US is the top of the ''Western'' World.
Wikipedia has a spreadsheet that covers the number of murders in a country, and the rate at which they happen (don't know if this is per day or per capita), The US, despite how you make it out, is clearly not the most violent country out there.
Well considering it's per 100.000 people, I don't think it works for each country. Serbia's lower than the US, by a lot, but that's just because it has about 30 times less people and land.
What's the big deal about the shooting? Why is the murder of 20 children in the US sensationalized, while the random murder/kidnapping/etc. of some poor children in Asia or Africa go unnoticed? There is no reason to ignore the children that are disappearing here on a day-to-day basis. And I'm talking about Indonesia, which isn't even half bad compared to other places in Asia, yet alone Africa or South American countries.
Serbia's lower than the US, by a lot, but that's just because it has about 30 times less people and land.
it's per 100.000 people. so it doesn't matter how many their live. it's calculated down or up to 100.000 people anyway.
if 1 county has 1.000.000 people and their total is 200. a other country has 100.000.000 people and their total is 20.000. then they both have a rate of 20 per 100.000
there is nothing wrong whit this way of comparing.
Notice then that amongst First World nations, America is at 4.2, whilst Canada is at 1.6, France at 1.1, Germany 0.8, Japan 0.3, Australia 1.0, Italy 0.9, the UK 1.2, Spain 0.8?
Don't forget that the Canadian towns closest to the US have the highest rate of crimes, Toronto especially. Also when I lived in Montreal, I noticed many pimps had a New York state license plate so...
I move away from the gun regulation debate because I am drawn to the thought that I would rather deal with my issues in a peaceful way rather than finding a crowd of innocent. If anyone has read Catcher in the Rye I like the image in that book of the children in the field of rye and the antihero thinking he has to stop the children from falling over the edge. It is difficult to stop every child from 'falling over the edge'. Can the USA provide enough care for the emotionally fragile to prevent these shooting sprees from happening? The potential damage being done by mental illness is a clear and present danger. I think that One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest asylums are a poor solution. I'd like to see more care given to our emotional wellbeing as a preventitive measure. Perhaps those who want marajuana legalised have something, or emotional stress could be added to the medicinal reasons for using pot.
Thanks, there's not much we can do and I won't stop going to the movies with my GF because some potential unstable coward could be shooting at us in the back. It could happen at work, while driving, or watching TV at home so people can't stop leaving but it makes you wonder why this is happening so often. I hope my GF will finally realize that moving to Canada could be a great alternative.
