tl:dr - 50% of the guns in the US are owned by 3% of the population. And they are predominantly white, male, scared, and angry.
And that's why you see people tag themselves with 3% or III% etc... The question is how many of them are real, how many are trolls, and how many are propaganda farm accounts. If this were 2015, I'd have guessed most aren't real. That the amount of 3%ers in that 3% are a small fraction. Now, I don't know what to believe but the angry and scared are obvious and the white male is implied. They say patriot. I would say walking a razor thin line toward terrorist. They promote their political views by threat of violence. See the Bundy park takeover and pardoning.
If 3% of the population owns 50% (or about 200M) guns, that means that 27% of the population owns the other 50%. For whatever that's worth. (As a completely unrelated aside, does the top wealthiest 3% hold more or less than 50% of the nation's wealth?)
Something to consider about a guy who owns 300 rifles: he can only shoot one at a time.
Re: Shootings
Posted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 1:25 pm
by msteelers
LawBeefaroni wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2019 9:15 amTo me it boils down to the fact that society has changed. How and why I don't know. But you used to be able to walk into a hardware store and buy a rifle. You could order guns through the mail and there were no background checks. It seems like one out of four grandfathers has a story about the first rifle they bought through the Sears or Montgomery Ward catalog. And yet there wasn't mass carnage. Granted there weren't many AR15 type rifles either. But effectiveness of firearms is only part of what changed.
It's another conversation about what it is that changed, is it cultural, social, moral... but we have laws banning predatory lending and all sorts of malfeasance that didn't exist 50+ years ago. Why? Because they became necessary in our society to protect people from other people. Whatever the reason today, people are randomly killing other people. Video games (doubtful), social media/media (possible), whatever it is, it's happening. We can try to do something or we can say, well, we didn't have this problem 60 years ago and we didn't need the laws back then so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
I thought your post was well done and I agree with large parts of it, but I feel like this section needs to be pushed back against. I don't think it's accurate to say that society has changed for the worse. It's believed that the murder rate has been steadily falling since colonial times. We had a big spike in murders and violent crime in the 80's, but numbers have been falling again since the 90s.
Overall, it's clear that society is getting better. There will always be criminals and we will always have challenges that need to be addressed, but we are better now than we have ever been. But... never before has it been so easy for an individual to cause so much carnage in a short period of time. The Dayton shooter killed 9 people and injured several others in just 30 seconds! It's not possible for police to respond better than they did there, and still the shooter was able to do severe damage.
I was interviewing our sheriff this morning and I asked him about how difficult it is to monitor all of these threats that they receive online to try and prevent this from happening. His direct quote was "Herculean and impossible". Just in our county with a low crime rate, he said they are tracking 100 individuals who have been reported to them. They don't have the manpower to possibly monitor these guys in any meaningful way, so the best thing they can do is train to respond quickly and end the threat as soon as possible. But if the perfect response still ends with 9 dead and dozens more injured? That's not an acceptable outcome.
It seems clear to me that the level of deadliness for our current weapons is far greater than what we as a society can tolerate.
Re: Shootings
Posted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 1:31 pm
by Isgrimnur
msteelers wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2019 1:25 pm
I was interviewing our sheriff this morning and I asked him about how difficult it is to monitor all of these threats that they receive online to try and prevent this from happening. His direct quote was "Herculean and impossible". Just in our county with a low crime rate, he said they are tracking 100 individuals who have been reported to them. They don't have the manpower to possibly monitor these guys in any meaningful way, so the best thing they can do is train to respond quickly and end the threat as soon as possible. But if the perfect response still ends with 9 dead and dozens more injured? That's not an acceptable outcome.
Short of a police state with thought crime prosecution, it is impossible. The police do not have the job of preventing crime. The Supreme Court affirmed in 2005 that there is no Constitutional duty for the police to protect someone that had a protective order. They certainly don't have one to protect Reveler#3742 in Dayton.
Re: Shootings
Posted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 1:43 pm
by Smoove_B
In another lifetime I was tasked with coming up with emergency response plans that included ways to deal with a shooter on a college campus. This would have been circa 2004/5, in what might as well been a different era. Regardless, after meetings and discussions with various police and responding agencies, the best they could offer was to have drills and plans to shelter in place in the hopes that the perpetrator runs out of ammo or kills themselves before police arrive. The faculty/staff wanted reassurances that someone with a gun on campus would be handled quickly; it's just not possible. In the last 15+ years it's worse, not better.
Eventually the RUN, HIDE, FIGHT guidance was published but that was pretty much the early advice they provided to us as well.
LawBeefaroni wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2019 9:15 amTo me it boils down to the fact that society has changed. How and why I don't know. But you used to be able to walk into a hardware store and buy a rifle. You could order guns through the mail and there were no background checks. It seems like one out of four grandfathers has a story about the first rifle they bought through the Sears or Montgomery Ward catalog. And yet there wasn't mass carnage. Granted there weren't many AR15 type rifles either. But effectiveness of firearms is only part of what changed.
It's another conversation about what it is that changed, is it cultural, social, moral... but we have laws banning predatory lending and all sorts of malfeasance that didn't exist 50+ years ago. Why? Because they became necessary in our society to protect people from other people. Whatever the reason today, people are randomly killing other people. Video games (doubtful), social media/media (possible), whatever it is, it's happening. We can try to do something or we can say, well, we didn't have this problem 60 years ago and we didn't need the laws back then so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
I thought your post was well done and I agree with large parts of it, but I feel like this section needs to be pushed back against. I don't think it's accurate to say that society has changed for the worse. It's believed that the murder rate has been steadily falling since colonial times. We had a big spike in murders and violent crime in the 80's, but numbers have been falling again since the 90s.
Overall, it's clear that society is getting better. There will always be criminals and we will always have challenges that need to be addressed, but we are better now than we have ever been. But... never before has it been so easy for an individual to cause so much carnage in a short period of time. The Dayton shooter killed 9 people and injured several others in just 30 seconds! It's not possible for police to respond better than they did there, and still the shooter was able to do severe damage.
I was interviewing our sheriff this morning and I asked him about how difficult it is to monitor all of these threats that they receive online to try and prevent this from happening. His direct quote was "Herculean and impossible". Just in our county with a low crime rate, he said they are tracking 100 individuals who have been reported to them. They don't have the manpower to possibly monitor these guys in any meaningful way, so the best thing they can do is train to respond quickly and end the threat as soon as possible. But if the perfect response still ends with 9 dead and dozens more injured? That's not an acceptable outcome.
It seems clear to me that the level of deadliness for our current weapons is far greater than what we as a society can tolerate.
Agreed that it is far too easy for someone with little to moderate training to kill so many so fast.
But it also takes a lack of egard for anyone else's life and that seems to be different. Or more common at least. In mass shootings, domestic violence, gang "spray and prays", all over. It's like life is some kind of fantasy. Or game or I'm not sure what. My friend calls it a software virus. It's like a mental health issue but not at he individual level. At the societal level.
Edit: But yeah, that's not getting solved any time soon if it even exists so we have to do what we have to do in the meantime.
msteelers wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2019 1:25 pm
I was interviewing our sheriff this morning and I asked him about how difficult it is to monitor all of these threats that they receive online to try and prevent this from happening. His direct quote was "Herculean and impossible". Just in our county with a low crime rate, he said they are tracking 100 individuals who have been reported to them. They don't have the manpower to possibly monitor these guys in any meaningful way, so the best thing they can do is train to respond quickly and end the threat as soon as possible. But if the perfect response still ends with 9 dead and dozens more injured? That's not an acceptable outcome.
Short of a police state with thought crime prosecution, it is impossible. The police do not have the job of preventing crime.
Yeah, but a lot of people don't realize that. They think that just by being on law enforcements radar that means that anytime one of these would be shooters makes a move they will be arrested.
The Supreme Court affirmed in 2005 that there is no Constitutional duty for the police to protect someone that had a protective order. They certainly don't have one to protect Reveler#3742 in Dayton.
That's... disheartening. It also seems to fly in the face of what's happening here in Florida in the fallout of the Parkland shooting.
The former Broward County sheriff’s deputy whom President Donald Trump called a “coward” for his response to the tragedy at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School was arrested Tuesday and charged with multiple counts, including child neglect.
Scot Peterson, 56, was taken into custody after an administrative hearing at the sheriff’s headquarters. Following a 15-month investigation by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement Peterson was arrested on seven counts of child neglect, three counts of culpable negligence and one count of perjury. At the time of the Parkland shootings, Peterson owned a home in suburban Boynton Beach.
Peterson was on duty as a school resource officer Feb. 14, 2018, when a gunman opened fire at the high school, killing 17 students and employees and wounding 17 others. On Tuesday, he was booked at the Broward County Main Jail.
“The FDLE investigation shows former Deputy Peterson did absolutely nothing to to mitigate the MSD shooting that killed 17 children, teachers and staff and injured 17 others,” FDLE Commissioner Rick Swearingen said in a prepared statement. “There can be no excuse for his complete inaction and no question that his inaction cost lives.”
According to a charging document from the Broward County State Attorney’s Office, Peterson positioned himself between two buildings located about 75 feet from the shooting scene.
During the time that Peterson remained between the buildings, the gunman, Nikolas Cruz, killed four students who were under the age of 18 and wounded three others, the charging document said. One teacher and an adult student were killed, and another teacher was injured during the same timeframe.
As the school resource officer, Peterson was responsible for protecting Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School and its occupants, including students of minor age.
Granted, people certainly think about high school students differently than people drinking at a bar at night. Maybe the law does too. But it shouldn't. If it's legally required that Peterson run in to a school to engage a shooter, the law should require other officers to also run into a bar/Walmart/wherever.
Re: Shootings
Posted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:30 pm
by malchior
There is not a difference between "venues". More so that ruling said there isn't a constitutional duty to protect in regards to being sued directly for failing to act. However, cowardice or dereliction of duty often is a basis to terminate employment. That seems like the right balance being that civilian service is different than say military service.
I'm not sure that I agree with the 'never been easier' idea, either. It used to be far easier to get more deadly weapons. Fully automatic firearms used to be available over the counter, for example, and nobody had heard of a background check.
Violent crime has been dropping for decades. And yet this one form has been increasing lately. The only things that make sense for me was that 1) walking into a public place and mowing down the masses as a way to be heard was likely something that never occurred to people before. It just wasn't a thing. Then someone did it, and people started thinking, 'what if?' 2) The social internet, where ideas and attitudes that would previously have gotten someone shunned can now find support. And 3), more recently, the nation has become a very, very hostile place toward people that can be identified as 'other.' Differing opinions have gone from being something you argued with someone about to something you hate someone about. Trump has accelerated it, but it's been on the rise for quite a few years.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that guns aren't the issue. I just don't think that anything has changed in regards to guns specifically that can account for the rash of high profile mass shootings that really took off with... Virginia Tech, probably.
Re: Shootings
Posted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 8:41 pm
by msteelers
Blackhawk wrote:I'm not sure that I agree with the 'never been easier' idea, either. It used to be far easier to get more deadly weapons. Fully automatic firearms used to be available over the counter, for example, and nobody had heard of a background check.
I’m not a “gun guy”, so I may be wrong, but it’s my understanding that modern ar15s and the rest of that style of weapon are so easy to use that even a relative amateur can accurately and quickly put a ton of rounds onto a target. That seems to be the difference here.
Re: Shootings
Posted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 9:28 pm
by RuperT
By “style of weapon”, do you mean a magazine fed semi auto? If so, a Ruger Mini-14 is IMO fully as deadly, and has been around just as long (and was more common with a standard sports gun appearance;I recall AR15s as being a more niche weapon prior to the late 90s, possibly with exposure in Counterstrike, The Matrix et al?). I wouldn’t say that it’s harder to use either; they’re all just point and clickclickclickclick, assuming you have the arm and grip strength of a 10 year old and one eye.
Outlawing removable magazines as a design is the only way to effectively attack semi auto rifles themselves, I think.
Under the proposed legislation, players will have to press a sequence of buttons to have their character present I.D. – even in the case of private sales.
“Gun sales without a background check in Vice City will soon be a thing of the past.”
Critics of the proposed restrictions say they will have little effect in practice.
“Most players just rob the gun store anyway, so how will this change anything?”
Blackhawk wrote:I'm not sure that I agree with the 'never been easier' idea, either. It used to be far easier to get more deadly weapons. Fully automatic firearms used to be available over the counter, for example, and nobody had heard of a background check.
I’m not a “gun guy”, so I may be wrong, but it’s my understanding that modern ar15s and the rest of that style of weapon are so easy to use that even a relative amateur can accurately and quickly put a ton of rounds onto a target. That seems to be the difference here.
This is true but what do you mean by "modern." They're pushing 60 years old.
The Mini-14 is literally a mini M14 that uses .223 instead of the M14s 7.62 NATO. The AR15 is the civilian version of the M16 (or more accurately, the M16 is the military version of the AR15). Aside from incremental improvements in components, these firearms have been around since the '60s.
Re: Shootings
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:23 am
by msteelers
So there haven't been any changes, improvements, or updates at all to these weapons since the 60s? I've heard the AR15 referred to as "adult legos" because of how customizable they are with various components that can be purchased. All of the components available now are exactly the same as the components available in the 60s? I find it hard to believe that such a big industry would have zero advancements over half a century.
Re: Shootings
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:30 am
by Smoove_B
The Picatinny Rail system (way to go NJ) does just that - allows owners to swap in and out all kinds of add on gear. Nothing (that I'm aware of) that would change ROF. Sure, sights might be different (modern) and flashlights more powerful, but the actual gun (AFAIK) is unchanged from release. If you've never held an AR-15 it's frightening in how much it doesn't feel like holding what you'd expect a gun to feel like. It does (to me) feel very much like a toy. Prior to using one I'd only fired .22 rifles (classic, wood bolt-action) and M1 Garands. The AR-15 feels like a plastic pretend gun (to me) in comparison, but it's absolutely deadly accurate.
The tone was set on their first date, she said, when Betts showed her a video of last year’s Pittsburgh synagogue shooting and narrated it play-by-play. Later, he steered conversations to talk about world tragedies and his suicidal thoughts.
“He trusted me with so much of his darkness that I forgot most of it,” Johnson wrote, adding that she brushed off much of what she heard. Talking about serial killers made sense as it was a theme in a Sinclair community college psychology class they both were taking.
A captivation with disaster and violence was offset by the sweetness of a “perfect gentleman” and joking about a desire to hurt others was seen as the coping tool of a man grappling with illness.
Johnson said she and Betts bonded over mental illness.
He told her he had bipolar disorder and might also have obsessive-compulsive disorder.
And she said he confided that while he loved guns, he didn’t believe those with mental illnesses should be allowed to have them.
Betts’ high school classmates said he was once suspended for compiling lists of students he wanted to rape or kill. And Johnson’s recounting of her relationship with him revealed two moments that stood out as “red flags”.
In March or April, on the road in Illinois for a gig with his heavy-metal band, she said a drunk and slurring Betts called her and said something about how “he wanted to hurt a lot of people”.
...
That time, Johnson said, he tried to downplay it as a joke, but she knew it wasn’t. When she pushed him to explain, she said he spoke of “uncontrollable urges to do things”, including a time he set fire to an abandoned building. She said she knew she had to break things off, unable “to be his therapist”.
Re: Shootings
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:49 am
by malchior
The AR-15 feels like a plastic pretend gun (to me) in comparison, but it's absolutely deadly accurate.
The accuracy is one part of the equation. Another big part is the lethal effects of the rounds themselves. They are far deadlier than handgun rounds. As we used to say in engineering school, velocity is the squared term when kinetic energy is computed and the bullet leaves the barrel three times faster than a comparable handgun round. As the link above mentions, it shatters and destroys organs versus damaging them and is a big part of why these mass killings have higher fatality rates both in absolute numbers and percentage of the injured who die.
It wasn't to fool anyone of Hispanic origin. Especially since they called him that since he was a small child - they just happened to live somewhere where that diminutive was common. He is such a sociopathic piece of race baiting shit.
Re: Shootings
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:56 am
by Archinerd
Smoove_B wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:47 amHoly shit.
It's all part of the healing process.
We are now in the "Redirect Blame to political opponents and Libtard Media" Stage of grief.
Re: Shootings
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:25 pm
by Blackhawk
msteelers wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:23 am
So there haven't been any changes, improvements, or updates at all to these weapons since the 60s? I've heard the AR15 referred to as "adult legos" because of how customizable they are with various components that can be purchased. All of the components available now are exactly the same as the components available in the 60s? I find it hard to believe that such a big industry would have zero advancements over half a century.
Very few of them affect performance. A huge percentage of them are just cosmetic penis enlargers, and a significant number actually make the firearm less effective, not more. Firearms are at their deadliest when they are at their most efficient. Adding bulk that makes you look like G.I. Joe hurts more than it helps.
Re: Shootings
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:27 pm
by LawBeefaroni
msteelers wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:23 am
So there haven't been any changes, improvements, or updates at all to these weapons since the 60s? I've heard the AR15 referred to as "adult legos" because of how customizable they are with various components that can be purchased. All of the components available now are exactly the same as the components available in the 60s? I find it hard to believe that such a big industry would have zero advancements over half a century.
I did say this:
Aside from incremental improvements in components,
So yeah, now you have red dot sights, adjustable stocks, and tacticool add-ons but the round, ROF, and overall form factor has not changed significantly.
Pic rails and Mag Lok handguards, these allow people to snap on parts like "Lego" but the internal components, the lower and upper receiver and bolt are largely the same. You want an LMT upper and a Bushmaster lower? Yeah you can do it but is still just a semi auto AR15. Maybe you shave a few ounces here or there but it's more like people insisting on aftermarket steering wheels or rims for their cars than anything else.
Flashlights, bipods, BUIS, AR scopes, vertical foregrips, none of these things make much of a difference if you want to shoot a bunch of unarmed people at close range. Arguably a red dot sights may make a bit of difference but not enough to say this wasn't possible 60 years ago.
Re: Shootings
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:31 pm
by malchior
Another take is that the major "improvement" since the 60s is cost of ownership has drastically dropped making them far more accessible (costs are hard to pin down but anecdotally between 50% and 60% cheaper than the 80s). Also I don't have "data" to back it but I'd be surprised if the ammo wasn't of better quality and metallurgy improvements have stability/weight advantages that improve accuracy/performance for fire on target which is how I interpreted what Smoove_B said.
Re: Shootings
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:54 pm
by LawBeefaroni
malchior wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:31 pm
Another take is that the major "improvement" since the 60s is cost of ownership has drastically dropped making them far more accessible (costs are hard to pin down but anecdotally between 50% and 60% cheaper than the 80s). Also I don't have "data" to back it but I'd be surprised if the ammo wasn't of better quality and metallurgy improvements have stability/weight advantages that improve accuracy/performance for fire on target which is how I interpreted what Smoove_B said.
Cheaper for sure.
However, I don't think the .223 cartridge has gotten significantly more lethal; it was always highly effective at killing. In fact, it was noted for it's gruesome effects in Viet Nam. It goes just beyond just velocity and mass equations. There is something unique about it's size and shape when combined with it's kinetic energy.
The report describes, with grisly detail, how the AR-15, chambered with the same .223 ammunition that it uses today, not only killed VC soldiers but decapitated and dismembered them:
LawBeefaroni wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:54 pmHowever, I don't think the .223 cartridge has gotten significantly more lethal; it was always highly effective at killing. In fact, it was noted for it's gruesome effects in Viet Nam. It goes just beyond just velocity and mass equations. There is something unique about it's size and shape when combined with it's kinetic energy.
I was more hazarding a guess that the rounds would be of higher quality - less misfires/cause less jams (ammo fouling the weapon)/etc. I actually expect they are more expensive then they were then because metals cost more now.
Re: Shootings
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 1:25 pm
by Smoove_B
When asked to comment on the similarities between what the El Paso shooter's manifesto indicated and Trump's rhetoric:
Wikipedia wrote:OANN is known for downplaying threats posed to the United States by Russia. According to a former OANN producer, on his first day at OANN he was told, "Yeah, we like Russia here." One of OANN's reporters, Kristian Brunovich Rouz, simultaneously works for the Russian propaganda outlet Sputnik; when Rouz runs segments on OANN that relate to Russia, OANN does not disclose that he also works for a Russian state-owned media.[
Earlier in the day, Trump's Press Sec barred reporters from the hospital visit, declaring that it was "not a photo op."
Re: Shootings
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 5:58 pm
by Alefroth
Barf. What were those badges he was holding?
Re: Shootings
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:11 pm
by malchior
They turned a massacre into a campaign ad. I am beyond disgusted with this piece of garbage and all his enablers. There better be a reckoning after all this.
Earlier in the day, Trump's Press Sec barred reporters from the hospital visit, declaring that it was "not a photo op."
Everybody’s seems so happy that a bunch of people just died, don’t they? I bet it was doubly fun for Trump and the pool boy’s girlfriend his wife to go laugh it up over even more deaths down in Texas. Red letter day for him, huh?
That whole klan are just pieces of shit America needs to wipe off its shoes...hopefully using McConnell’s face when doing so.
