@witchymom culpable liability. ...rich General Electric executive divorced gun nut TEACHER mom knowing full well his son was playing shoot em up video games and discharging assault rifle for years as a minor with mom at rifle range ...like giving street drugs to a child

@NFAguy53 that is irrelevant to the fact that the adult brother and father knew for years the mentally ill kid should not be playing with guns owned by his gun nut mom

@NFAguy53 her house should be sold and all money go equally to every bullet victim estate

@witchymom sounds like you did the best thing

I agree 100%!

It is blown way out of proportion by emotional reporting. Firstly the numbers stress all shootings including justifiable shootings by police and suicide. For your consideration: [jpfo.org]

@dahermit An interesting read from Jews for Guns. Are you advocating the inevitability of these deaths? That they would occur even if bows and arrows, knives and slings were used?

@FrayedBear The deaths are likely inevitable inasmuch as there are 315 million or so guns in the U.S. at present...no one needs to used knives and slings. Not even the most avid anti-gun entities suggest that everyone turn in their guns...they advocate instead for more insipid laws that cannot possibly work. Furthermore, when police shootings and suicides are subtracted from the 30,000 or so deaths the anti-gun people claim, the 5,000 or so deaths are not statistically significant and pale in comparison to the deaths vis medical mistakes and drug overdoses, thus death by gun becomes an irrational fear.

@dahermit You are deliberately missing the point. About 23 years ago Australia was deweaponised following the Port Arthur mass shooting attributed to one person - the same as the Vegas shooting. It has since been identified that it was physically impossible for one person to have done it but the government is hardly likely to hold enquiry into its own culpability!
I suggest that you discard your dissonance and start from the premise that one death is one too many and needs to be rectified.

@witchymom "Emotional reporting" = gratuitous reports, days after the fact, candlelight vigils, reports on the anniversary, etc. All identify future shooters of the impact such shootings made on society those targets made. Thus, they now know which targets pay the greatest dividend in public impact.

@FrayedBear Apples and oranges. Australia never had the huge number of guns that we do. When gun owners say "...from my cold dead hands..." take them at their word...they will not give them up. As for the Vegas shooting and if there was one or more person involved is just speculative on your part. As for just "...saving one person..." that is a trite platitude of the anti-gun rhetoric ...there are thousands that could be saved by means other than gun control if that is your legitimate concern.

@dahermit Australia never had and still doesn't have the level of homicides and injuries from guns that USA has. It is very disingenuous of Jews for Guns not to mention the number of injuries occurring. As for trite platitudeyou still do not seem to understand what I have said which to rephrase boils down to "in a society that harmoniously and progressively shares the locale no deaths occur from shootings, stabbing or other forms of violence. In other words you are living in a totally fucked up society. That is the problem not guns."

@FrayedBear "...you are living in a totally fucked up society. That is the problem not guns." I agree with that.

@dahermit thank goodness for that. I thought that we were disagreeing. 8)

"At this point it seems like it's become a cultural phenomenon..." Exactly...driven by excessive, emotional, and gratuitous reporting which leaves no doubt which targets will engender the maximum societal impact. Candlelight vigils and crying victims on the nightly news for days logically have an impact on would-be shooters who feel bullied and/or disenfranchised.

@dahermit - in America. I don't hear of it particularly happening in Europe, South Korea, India etc.

@FrayedBear You don't hear about it because murders in other countries generally do not strike news directors as particularly newsworthy. In truth, the USA murder rate is not even in the top ten despite the "prevalence of guns." Take a look at this link for an eye-opener: [pri.org]

@dahermit ok I will take S.America from my list. What common factor exists between the countries in red? But how do you expext me to take the map seriously when it shows America the same colour as Iceland which has had an average murder rate of less than 0.00055% of population since 2001?

@NFAguy53 That's tighter gun control.

@FrayedBear It's a very low resolution analysis, the stats are far too coarse to be taken seriously.

@FrayedBear If you think that the map is incorrect do your own internet search(es), using: "Murder rate by county". It should provide you with several other sources of data.

"Western" country? Are you suggesting that peoples from counties with very high homicide rates in Africa, Eastern Europe, Central and South America are somehow less civilized or generally inferior to those people in "western" countries? Why would you specify "western" countries?

@dahermit I did Iceland is the same colour as America- one death vs. Eleven thousand!
I also note that the U.S. Bureau of stats mentions 17250 in 2016. South Africa coloured bright red on your map is reported to have 17750.

@Rufus_Maximus Please see my reply to dahermit above.

@dahermit I limit the comment to western countries because in Africa, Asia and so on there are wars, significant differences of legal definition (take northern Turkey, where honour killing is not prosecuted as murder) or a lack of statistics (China, for instance, do not release full murder or execution statistics). It is to achieve parity.

@Rufus_Maximus But you also seem to have eliminated the other "Western" countries that have way more murders than the U.S. Namely Mexico, Columbia, Nicaragua, Brazil, etc. all of which restrict the private ownership of guns. What I think you mean (and you may dispute this) is that among the Caucasian, civilized countries of the world, there are significant fewer shootings than in the U.S.

Another thing to consider if you compare the U.S. to other "western" counties is social conditions in those other western counties. People are better off (higher standard of living via socialistic factors) in most of those other western counties as indicated by their lower suicide rates. For instance, the USA ranks 48 in suicides whereas Norway ranks 102, Denmark 105, Netherlands 98, and Germany 105. In other words, those other western counties take better care of their people, reducing stress and the tendency to turn to violence to cope with poverty.

A fact that is likely irrelevant inasmuch as the shootings were conducted by angry/bullied youths...which is likely more of a factor than the area they happened in. Also, New Jersey (Sandy Hook) is NOT a gun friendly state. Also consider the extent which modern media publicises the school and other shootings, which in my opinion almost assures that they will be repeated...consider the Bath Michigan Massacre...relative unpublicised and NEVER Repeated. Have you never even heard of it have you? While school shootings and other mass shootings are publicised ad nausium, they are relatively rare and involve way fewer victims than the major causes of death...overdoses and medical mistakes which take many times more lives in the U.S., but are not good fodder for the news outlets.

Not only corporate lobbying, just all lobbying. If politicians need information they should put some effort in finding it themselves. It's worse than bribing. It's actually the same but than hidden in an accepted dress. 40 years in a state penitentiary (not those private ones where they make money with that kind of slavery, which should stop too, by the way).

"No one needs an assault (semi-automatic) weapon." The Second Amendment was for the purpose of enabling a civilian population to act as a military in response to an unspecified eventuality (foreign or domestic). If that "eventuality" involved an unspecified military action against the U.S., it would logically be facing "assault weapons, including grenade launchers, machine guns and mortars in that, that is what is used by modern armies. If one cannot live with the idea of civilians having military weapons, one should properly change the Constitution. If one changes the Constitution via interpretation de jour, then one opens a can of worms. Consider how the late Bush administration changed the meaning of the Fifth Amendment (torture) to "advanced interrogation techniques" allowing persons who had not been convicted of a crime, to be so tortured (if you do not think that is torture, research how many detainees died while subjected to "advanced interrogation techniques".

@dahermit Why do you think they're called amendments?

@Paul628 I am sure that you know what you mean, but I have no idea what you are implying by such brevity. Why don't you explain it to me?

@dahermit Well, what do you think the 2nd amendment is? It was ratified in 1791 after The Constitution was written. Not one person back then could have possibly imagined the modern automatic weapons we have today, let alone someone using one to fire into a crowd of innocent people.

@Paul628 I know what the Second Amendment is. If you would read my previous posts in this thread you would understand also. Wheather or not a person would have understood what a modern weapon is from the 1790's, is a moot point...they did not need modern weapons because their weapons matched those of potential threats. The only thing that will counter a modern weapon is another modern weapon. I could give you a half dozen scenarios where privet citizens may be called upon to form into militias to participate in warfare. If you cannot, you live in a dream world. The U.S.A. will not last forever (everything is in flux and always has been)...no governmental entity ever has...unless you can show me some Etruscians or Carthaginians. If and when our country fades away, the unarmed populace will be subjected to atrocities. Hutu/Tutsi, Serb/Muslim, the failed State of Mexico mean anything to you?

@dahermit The fear-mongering you're doing right now is the reason there are so many guns out there to be used by some maniac in a hotel.

@Paul628 "Maniac in a hotel"? That must be like the destruction of the twin towers and part of the Pentagon - the work of bin Laden and aeroplanes.

@FrayedBear Conspiracy?

@Paul628 What fear mongering. What I said is true. The fact that there could someday be a threat to the U.S. has nothing to do with that guy in the hotel. Please consider giving up platitudes ("fear mongering" ) and present a logical argument to support your position.

@Paul628 (((((8)))))) Planned

@dahermit Fear mongering = Making people paranoid about a threat to the US to the point that they buy guns. A lot of guns.
Making guns, especially the ones the Vegas shooter used so readily available has everything to do with it.

If you don't think all of the mass shootings in the US aren't a threat to the country you're wrong.

The "good guy with a gun" mentality isn't working. If someone with an auto rifle walks into a school, theater, nightclub, and opens up on the crowd, anyone carrying won't get a shot off before someone is hurt or injured. Possibly the hero himself.

@Paul628 "good guy with a gun" mentality isn't working. Who said it was?

@dahermit No one I guess...you win.