More mass shootings. Unbelievably heartbreaking. The "solutions'' that are being discussed to prevent these shootings, seem to be reactive, and not necessarily hitting the core problem. For starters, there seems to be too much power behind the gun lobbyists, to really bring about the change that is needed. I think that the conversation in the US needs to shift to...how can we change American culture? What are your thoughts/ideas? https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/04/us/three-shootings-el-paso-mississippi-gilroy/index.html
That's the $64,000 question. Gun control is just one part (probably an important part) of the solution. But larger issues are: -a society where a brand of toxic masculinity is held up as the ideal; where the pinnacle of male culture is the alpha male, whose anger and armaments makes him someone not to be messed with. -a society where "others" are demonized and made a target of hate by politicians. Mexicans are rapists. Refugees are drug mules. Muslims are terrorists. Small child refugees are "props" used to defraud the immigration system. Victims of mass shootings are "antifa crisis actors." What's the harm in killing such evil people? -a society where fear is both a political and marketing tool. Gun companies want everyone afraid enough to buy many expensive guns to "protect themselves"; fear is the most important product coming out of their marketing department. And politicians feed on that fear, saying "my opponent wants to make you HELPLESS against thieves and rapists!" -a society where conflict and domination is the preferred method of interaction. Winning sports team "dominate" their opponents. A political opponent who does not slander and libel their opponent is "weak."
Excellent points! ^^ I can't help but think that all of your points are contributing to these tragedies. The demonizing and profiling of certain minority groups, seems to be stemming from this current administration, for sure. How do you and I (and many others) clearly view this as a problem, and yet many see targeting/profiling as a ''right?'' Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
It is sad to say but I find it increasingly hard to take these American mass shootings seriously any more. US society has shown it considers them an acceptable price for freedom to own guns. How they reach that conclusion I don’t really understand, but they have forfeited any calls on my sympathy.
That’s kind of sad that you feel that way. Many members on this site reside in or travel to the US, or have family/friends who live in the US. You wouldn’t have sympathy if they lost their lives in a US mass shooting? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Agreed.changing the American culture though is not easy, with your powerful gun lobby. Perhaps what you people need sadly is another mass shooting, but this time of Senators and their families. Having it hit close to home, may prompt others in the American government to finally dismantle this stinking gun lobby and cut off its head. Yes sad of course but after so many mass shootings and the head up your arse attitude of your politicians, what else is there?
The gun lobby is a problem but the people who support the gun lobby still populate most of the states. Eventually gun ownership will decline (as people die natural deaths) and then maybe something can be done regarding the gun culture. The current problem is more like airliner crashes, when they happen it's dramatic and a lot of lives are lost but it's still the safest way to travel. When you look at shootings, they are tragic and dramatic but most gun deaths are suicides and most gun owners don't do anything illegal. Which makes gun control laws difficult to enact given the current culture.
That is not true. The gun lobby's power is in the money donated to members of Congress (mostly Republican). A minimum gun control bill has passed the house, but McConnell won't take it up and his caucus is willing to go along with him.
And the gun manufacturers. And the Russian political ratfuckers. And a few billionaire ideologues. And so forth. compare: http://thebernreport.com/russia-funding-nra/ https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/11/nra-russia-money-guns-516804 https://shareblue.com/nra-russian-funding-ron-wyden/ And notice this little issue: https://www.quora.com/How-much-of-the-NRA-s-funding-comes-from-private-citizens-vs-gun-manufacturers According to that guy, who seems to know, regular NRA members do not fund the NRA gun lobby at all. Which brings up the question of who does.
Maybe the US needs to pass laws limiting the contact lobbyists can have with politicians, along with restrictions on campaign donations and other back-scratching favours. If nothing else, there needs to be a healthy environment for discussing such issues; allowing private money to overrule democratic will impedes the whole process. Only when every vote on gun rights and controls counts equally, can there be any hope for a rational discussion based on the wishes of the people.
Most countries ban automatic rifles...but, the US is one of the few countries, where they're legal. This is interesting: http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/gun-violence-by-country/
Actually, as a Canadian living in a country that's not known for much gun violence or gun-toting in general, it's shockingly easy here to legally obtain high-powered assault rifles with all the latest customizations, just like the movie action heros get. I think you can buy grenades and RPG's on the consumer market too (or at least the Biker Gangs have no trouble getting them). However there are lots and lots of restrictions and controls on who can own such weapons and how they can be obtained and for what purposes, you can't just buy one because you don't like your neighbour across the street, and you need a lot of credible people to vouch for you.
I've wondered about Canada, actually. I remember reading about a mass shooting that happened in Toronto last year. This article discusses how there is rising gun violence in Canada, and what lawmakers are trying to do. It seems that Canada doesn't have open carry laws, which is different than the US, and I've always thought that open carry is part of the problem. Hmm. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...hter-laws-are-a-tough-sell-idUSKBN1KY2CQ?il=0
If mass shootings become a consistent problem in Canada with no apparent resolution, I'm pretty confident a solid majority of the country will support cracking down and tightening the screws further, we don't just accept it like we accept floods and tornadoes where we can't really do anything about it. I think in many of the recent incidents occurring in Canada, better monitoring of dangerous individuals' internet posts and threats, accompanied by firm pre-emptive action, would go a long way to preventing most of this stuff.
Yes, totally agree about the social media monitoring, especially. Often times many of these shooters post warnings and messages on their social media accounts, and no one takes it seriously. I'm not sure how FB and IG could moderate something like that, but it seems like it largely goes ignored. I can't help but think that the only saving grace for the US will be to repeal the second amendment, sooner or later.
You mean to suggest that a document written by a small group of people with a limited understanding of science and society 250 years ago is less than perfect? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Well as a foreigner you have my support and best wishes on that issue, but I can't wait until all the self-appointed, unelected constitutional lawyers show up to give you an earful. In the meantime, I think the US courts' interpretation of constitutional law is generally reasonable enough to permit laws criminalizing any form of violent threat whether written or verbal, and legalizing pre-emptive intervention by law enforcement and/or mental health officials. It should also be a crime not to report such threats to relevant authorities when they appear to be even remotely serious, so that people are both motivated to be pro-active on this issue and penalized when they demonstrate some form of complicity. I've been threatened with violence by random strangers in public before and not only do I make it clear to them that I'm not scared of what they might try to do and that I will defend myself as needed, but I inform them that already they've committed a crime by threatening me, and I could choose to call the cops on them right then and there; it shuts them right the hell up every time.
I haven't done the necessary research but I think if I did, I would find that the recent shootings, including Christchurch are predominately linked to and encouraged by extremist sentiment expressed by those in power. Extremist views such as those expressed by your current POTUS encouraging extreme white right wing supremacist attitudes and activities. I would speculate that behind every recent shooting will be one of those souvenir caps with Trump writen on it (metaphorically and literally).. somewhere in the shooters possessions.
Mod Note What? Is this sort of rhetoric really necessary? Perhaps people should refrain from advocating or hoping for the mass murder of others for the sake of policy. I get it, it is an emotive issue. People have strong opinions. But when you get to the point where you believe the solution is more mass murder to prove a point, then perhaps you should take a step back and start re-evaluating your life's choices..
Perhaps, but I don’t. In a democracy people to a large degree are in control of choices like this, about the sort of risks they want society to tolerate. I’ve reached the point at which I now just shrug my shoulders when I read of yet another of these incidents.
