New York Times - Gun Control Laws wont fix Mass Shootings[W:313]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/22/u...prod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share

The findings are dispiriting to anyone hoping for simple legislative fixes to gun violence. In more than half the 130 cases, at least one assailant was already barred by federal law from having a weapon, usually because of a felony conviction, but nonetheless acquired a gun. Including those who lacked the required state or local permits, 64 percent of the shootings involved at least one attacker who violated an existing gun law.

Of the remaining assailants, 40 percent had never had a serious run-in with the law and probably could have bought a gun even in states with the strictest firearm controls. Typically those were men who killed their families and then themselves.

Only 14 shootings involved assault rifles, illustrating their outsize role in the gun debate. Nearly every other assailant used a handgun. That is in line with a federal study that concluded that reviving a 1994 ban on assault weapons and ammunition feeding devices that hold more than 10 rounds would have a minimal impact, at best, on gun violence.

Click to expand...

jonny5 said:

Title is mine, not theirs. But is basically the conclusion they came to when they reviewed proposed laws vs mass shootings.

Sure, they might stop a few specific incidences, but they will also cause unnecessary harm by preventing some law abiding citizens from defending themselves. And criminals will ignore them altogether and find another way.

Better argument - New York Times Examines Mass Shootings and Gun Laws; Their Findings "Dispiriting to Anyone Hoping for Simple Legislative Fixes to Gun Violence" - Hit & Run : Reason.com

Click to expand...

danielpalos said:

Should we ask Kentucky Colonels for leadership advice?

Click to expand...

TurtleDude said:

WTH does Kentucky colonels have to do with this topic?

Click to expand...

danielpalos said:

Leadership advice.

Click to expand...

TurtleDude said:

edify us as to what you know about the Kentucky colonels. My late father was one. He was inducted into that group in a rather strange way. He was a top college tennis player. KY had a state championship and it was open. He lived 10 minutes from KY and they accepted his entry and he won it. The Mayor of Louisville handed out the trophy and noted something seemed wrong about a "Yankee" from Ohio being the Ky state champion but they figured if they made him a KY colonel it would be OK. So they did. A good group but I don't think they have anything to do with gun issues. after all, they aren' t a military group

Click to expand...

danielpalos said:

So, we can't ask Kentucky Colonels for leadership advice, but we can blame black males, for a lack of leadership?

Click to expand...

danielpalos said:

So, we can't ask Kentucky Colonels for leadership advice, but we can blame black males, for a lack of leadership?

Click to expand...

danielpalos said:

Should we ask Kentucky Colonels for leadership advice?

Click to expand...

danielpalos said:

So, we can't ask Kentucky Colonels for leadership advice, but we can blame black males, for a lack of leadership?

Click to expand...

TurtleDude said:

I'm not blaming black males as a group for anything. Some black males are thugs. some are decorated war heroes who died or were maimed saving their comrades. Some black males are police officers or firefighters who died or were maimed trying to save fellow citizens. Some black males are good fathers and civic leaders. I blame individuals for doing crappy things. Not "black males"

Click to expand...

BretJ said:

I am a Kentucky Colonel. You are free to ask me for leadership advice. It seems you personally need some.

Click to expand...

danielpalos said:

Should we ask Kentucky Colonels for leadership advice?

Click to expand...

Common Sense 1 said:

I would not worry about Kentucky Colonels... Maybe some other advice/help?

MasterPO wrote: Twilight light zone and I agree!

Click to expand...

danielpalos said:

sure thing, my good Colonel;

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on
Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

Since, well regulated militia are necessary to the security of a free State and the People may not Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms;

doesn't that make any crime problems with guns, a leadership failure of the "Colonels General" of the Regiments of State Militias?

Click to expand...

LaylaWindu said:

Is there anybody that actually thinks "Gun Control Laws WILL fix Mass Shootings" and how because I don't know of anyway they could.

Click to expand...

danielpalos said:

I agree the that fantastical right wing, has nothing but repeal instead of better solutions at lower cost.

Click to expand...

TurtleDude said:

gun control laws aren't even intended to do anything to control crime

its to pander to weak minded voters and to punish people who oppose liberal policies

Click to expand...

Crimefree said:

That would be state and your fantastical falsification of the basis of your delusion is exposed. Simply the constitution, specifically the 2A is and will always be state

Your special pleading to fabricated lies and falsification of evidence is a plea due to ignorance and exclusion of reality. It is a plea to fallacy.

There are no crime problems with guns. That is special pleading to fallacy. Guns cannot commit crime. It is physically impossible for guns to commit crime.

Click to expand...

Crimefree said:

A better solution would be using empirically proven data to reduce crime by addressing the causes of crime which all are social. By removing the huge waste on useless gun laws which have not solved or prevented one crime and spending the money on proven measures.

It is common cause that there is no evidence to support levels of firearm ownership as a cause of crime. Neither you or anyone else has presented repeatable evidence of such a relationship ever in the history of this world.

Click to expand...

danielpalos said:

guns are used in crimes.

Click to expand...

jonny5 said:

Title is mine, not theirs. But is basically the conclusion they came to when they reviewed proposed laws vs mass shootings.



Sure, they might stop a few specific incidences, but they will also cause unnecessary harm by preventing some law abiding citizens from defending themselves. And criminals will ignore them altogether and find another way.

Better argument - New York Times Examines Mass Shootings and Gun Laws; Their Findings "Dispiriting to Anyone Hoping for Simple Legislative Fixes to Gun Violence" - Hit & Run : Reason.com

Click to expand...

TurtleDude said:

what does this have to do with anything in this thread?

Click to expand...