Mass Shooting Incidents in the United States

[_Ed_]

Wow!

[Ausage]

It's quite scary how often I hear/read the word "liberal" used as a derogatory term. The very first comment is a simple dismissal of the entire article because Jason is an "Alpha Liberal", like the leader of a hungry wolfpack on the prowl for the jugulars of innocent sheep.

[vic_orthdox]

It's quite funny too that the original meaning refers to the rights of the individual, which seems to be the cornerstone of the right in USA politics.

[Spikey]

gun owners have benefited quite a bit from liberalism in the last couple of decades...

[Howe_zat]

It's quite funny too that the original meaning refers to the rights of the individual, which seems to be the cornerstone of the right in USA politics.

You could say the same thing for the "democrat" and "republican" parties. What the words actually mean is forgotten and irrelevant.

[Howe_zat]

Against gun control personally. It would take an amendment and no one is strong enough to go against the gun lobby - too many Americans have guns and see it as a fundamental right.

Even democrats have abandoned it as an issue.

I'm not quite following you here - you're against gun control because it's not popular?

[silentstriker]

?

No. I was just saying there won't be any stricter gun laws because gun laws aren't popular.

[Fusion]

Jason Alexander’s amazing gun rant - Salon.com

Jason Alexander just became my new hero.

[howardj]

Being against gun control is part of getting your American citizenship though isn't it?

I find it interesting that you get the 'right to bear arms' argument from many American citizens when the constitution they refer to was drafted back in the 1700's. Am pretty sure they weren't aware semi-automatic weapons would be invented back then. Let alone used on their own citizens whenever anyone got a text message they didn't like.

The number of gun-related spree killings we've had in Australia since we introduced gun control in 1996 is 0. In America there have been 11 in the same period. I realise there are some other fundamental differences at play, but in my opinion the right to bear arms argument is caveman stuff. Just totally lacks common sense.

I agree it would be difficult to wind back things in a country where people have the potential to own multiple firearms with relative ease. Had a chat to a bloke a few years back from Miami who had 9 guns in his house...am pretty sure he only had two arms.

The problem as I see it is there are a reasonably large number of irresponsible/stupid people in every population. When you give them access to guns you can't be sure they'll put them in a place where people who shouldn't get them aren't able to access them. Then add laws that make it pretty easy for most people to buy a gun and 'wa la'.

Edit: On the other hand, I might have to go back and flick through our equivalent of the constitution to see what I might be able to get away with according to the laws of a hundred-odd years ago.

Agree so much with post especially the reliance on the 17th Century constitution as though that's actually an argument in favour.

Gun laws are like the DRS - no they won't make things perfect and bad things will still occur, but it's just about minimising the risk.

Moreover, with public policy, it's the weighing up of competing interests - I would have thought the minimisation of this sort of tragedy happening is a far greater public good than people being able to go dear hunting, go to the rifle range etc.

[silentstriker]

Agree so much with post especially the reliance on the 17th Century constitution as though that's actually an argument in favour.

Gun laws are like the DRS - no they won't make things perfect and bad things will still occur, but it's just about minimising the risk.

Moreover, with public policy, it's the weighing up of competing interests - I would have thought the minimisation of this sort of tragedy happening is a far greater public good than people being able to go dear hunting, go to the rifle range etc.

You are right, it is indeed the weighting of competing interests, but I would say the majority of people would much rather be able to go hunting or go to the range.

[Burgey]

You are right, it is indeed the weighting of competing interests, but I would say the majority of people would much rather be able to go hunting or go to the range.

Until one of their family members gets shot at a cinema.

[silentstriker]

Very true. 'Tis always the case though, with anything. Victims and their families will almost always ask for tougher rules. It may not necessarily be the right thing to do though, as far as society is concerned. Maybe in this case they are right...

[Jono]

They definitely are right here though. Its not a coincidence that the US has more shootings than other countries with comparable populations but tougher gun laws.

Its a no brainer, but many Americans are just absolutely crazy on this issue.

[Jono]

Legend.

Not a fan of many things Howard did but his stance on guns following Port Arthur was incredibly commendable. Especially considering the backlash he got from the Nationals.

[Burgey]

Not a fan of many things Howard did but his stance on guns following Port Arthur was incredibly commendable. Especially considering the backlash he got from the Nationals.

Yep, it was the best thing his government did.

Not that the list of accomplishments is exactly breath taking.