• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who or What is most responsible for the mass shootings

Who or What is most responsible for the mass shootings

  • Total voters
    64
0bserver92 said:
All the above because all of them cause issues.
Click to expand...

What he said. the OP should be a percentage of blame not who. Nothing is linear. There is no easy answer to this or anything else. its layered.
 
The shooter, and ONLY the shooter.

You can't blame other people when one person decides to go evil. We're all ultimately and solely responsible for the choices we make.
 
spanky said:
Except Adam might have to do his dirty work with a cumbersome Bowie knife.
Click to expand...

No, a broad sword, long sword, katana, dai Katana, etc would trump a Bowie Knife. When I visited the Philippines, they made all kinds of knifes and swords from old automobile leaf springs, not complicated to do. The curvature and shape of a Bowie would actually make it harder to make. True, the are more readily available. And then you have all kinds of bows.

No, even without the Chinese invention of gun powder (assuming someone else didn't invent it), we would still have lots of ways to kill each other.

A well trained and practiced swordsman can probably actually kill/injure more people per minute than most people can with a gun, even with a semi-auto. He just has to get closer is all and he doesn't have to stop and reload. Anyone up for Kendo classes?

Interesting that in our society we have the term "Axe-Murderer" but not "gun-murderer". hmm.
 
DVSentinel said:
No, a broad sword, long sword, katana, dai Katana, etc would trump a Bowie Knife. When I visited the Philippines, they made all kinds of knifes and swords from old automobile leaf springs, not complicated to do. The curvature and shape of a Bowie would actually make it harder to make. True, the are more readily available. And then you have all kinds of bows.

No, even without the Chinese invention of gun powder (assuming someone else didn't invent it), we would still have lots of ways to kill each other.

A well trained and practiced swordsman can probably actually kill/injure more people per minute than most people can with a gun, even with a semi-auto. He just has to get closer is all and he doesn't have to stop and reload. Anyone up for Kendo classes?

Interesting that in our society we have the term "Axe-Murderer" but not "gun-murderer". hmm.
Click to expand...

I think we mostly agree on this issue but I will take a little of your analysis to umbrage.

Give me two semi auto .45s with 25 round clips I'll take on ten of your Katana wielding, soon to be fertilizer heroes.
 
amarrados5.JPG
 
TurtleDude said:
Vote now-I am hearing lots of lefties blaming the NRA rather than the killers
Click to expand...

How can you ask who is most responsible and then allow for multiple votes? Most means more than half. Only one choice can be MOST.
 
haymarket said:
How can you ask who is most responsible and then allow for multiple votes? Most means more than half. Only one choice can be MOST.
Click to expand...

feel free to pick only one choice then
 
All of the above and then some.

A culture that glorifies gun violence will spawn gun violence.
 
CriticalThought said:
All of the above and then some.

A culture that glorifies gun violence will spawn gun violence.
Click to expand...

several senior LEOs suggested the best thing to do is not give these massacres or their perpetrators massive coverage because that inspires others. Of course when many in the media hate the NRA and gun rights, that advice will fall on deaf ears
 
"Most responsible" doesn't leave room for multiple options, so I specified the shooter -- nobody is more responsible for the actions of an adult than said adult.

That said, the way society looks at mental illness in general and the way we "care" for people with mental illness is disgusting and needs to change.

If we're going to address this kind of violence definitively we need to attack it from multiple angles at once -- and the main thrust needs to be the perception and treatment of mental illness.
 
TurtleDude said:
several senior LEOs suggested the best thing to do is not give these massacres or their perpetrators massive coverage because that inspires others. Of course when many in the media hate the NRA and gun rights, that advice will fall on deaf ears
Click to expand...

This will also help -- that's exactly why local stations around here don't cover bomb threats, which keeps the number way down.
 
TurtleDude said:
several senior LEOs suggested the best thing to do is not give these massacres or their perpetrators massive coverage because that inspires others. Of course when many in the media hate the NRA and gun rights, that advice will fall on deaf ears
Click to expand...

Yeah...I don't generally give a crap what law enforcement officers have to say because I've met enough corrupt ones to know their opinion isn't worth much more than any other individuals.

That said, the media does play a huge role, but it goes full circle because the media is simply a business providing its consumers with what they want. Trying to blame the media for how people use what is reported is no different than blaming gun manufactures for how guns are used.
 
CriticalThought said:
Yeah...I don't generally give a crap what law enforcement officers have to say because I've met enough corrupt ones to know their opinion isn't worth much more than any other individuals.

That said, the media does play a huge role, but it goes full circle because the media is simply a business providing its consumers with what they want. Trying to blame the media for how people use what is reported is no different than blaming gun manufactures for how guns are used.
Click to expand...

its a chicken or the egg issue with the media and "what the public wants
 
TurtleDude said:
several senior LEOs suggested the best thing to do is not give these massacres or their perpetrators massive coverage because that inspires others. Of course when many in the media hate the NRA and gun rights, that advice will fall on deaf ears
Click to expand...

an unreasonable expectation

like refusing to broadcast news of 9/11 for fear it might be imitated
 
TurtleDude said:
its a chicken or the egg issue with the media and "what the public wants
Click to expand...

No, it's always what the public wants. The public wants more guns then gun manufacturers will make more guns. The public wants more movies, TV shows, news reporting, and video games featuring gun violence then that is what the media will provide. It is simple economics. The public provides the demand and the businesses provide the supply. All you are doing is trying to blame the media the same way others try to blame the gun manufacturers. The real problem is with the public. Why do we have a public that has such an insatiable thirst for guns and violence? When are we going to have enough?
 
justabubba said:
an unreasonable expectation

like refusing to broadcast news of 9/11 for fear it might be imitated
Click to expand...

there is a difference between broadcasting it and spending hours and hours and hours on it. I tuned into a black urban station today and though most of the comments were the usual leftwing psychobabble I expected, one guy noted that in Chicago, 30-40 black youth get killed each month in shootings and barely merit a blurb on the 12 page of the paper
 
CriticalThought said:
No, it's always what the public wants. The public wants more guns then gun manufacturers will make more guns. The public wants more movies, TV shows, news reporting, and video games featuring gun violence then that is what the media will provide. It is simple economics. The public provides the demand and the businesses provide the supply. All you are doing is trying to blame the media the same way others try to blame the gun manufacturers. The real problem is with the public. Why do we have a public that has such an insatiable thirst for guns and violence? When are we going to have enough?
Click to expand...

you can want to own guns and not want violence.
 
TurtleDude said:
you can want to own guns and not want violence.
Click to expand...

A gun is a weapon. It is, by its very nature, an instrument of violence. If you want one, then you want if for its capacity to inflict violence. Whether it is for hunting or defense, you own it for its ability to create violence when needed. It is naive to assume that a person would want a gun for any other reason.
 
CriticalThought said:
A gun is a weapon. It is, by its very nature, an instrument of violence. If you want one, then you want if for its capacity to inflict violence. Whether it is for hunting or defense, you own it for its ability to create violence if needed. It is naive to assume that a person would want a gun for any other reason.
Click to expand...

you are lying now.

you obviously are clueless about the thousands of children who are in NRA or 4H rifle clubs or HS and college varsity rifle teams.

so I am considering your posts to be based on ignorance or just outright dishonest. I spent a summer as a Resident Athlete at the USO training center preparing for the (later cancelled by jimmy carter) 1980 games as a shooter. your moronic claim about why I had a perazzi shotgun is just that-moronic
 
Our local HS has a shooting range in the basement but it isn't used for that anymore. JROTC used to use it.
 
TurtleDude said:
you are lying now.

you obviously are clueless about the thousands of children who are in NRA or 4H rifle clubs or HS and college varsity rifle teams.

so I am considering your posts to be based on ignorance or just outright dishonest. I spent a summer as a Resident Athlete at the USO training center preparing for the (later cancelled by jimmy carter) 1980 games as a shooter. your moronic claim about why I had a perazzi shotgun is just that-moronic
Click to expand...

The fact that you got that offended by the implication should probably tell you something.

You may buy a gun to use as a paperweight but that doesn't change what it is. How you use your gun doesn't change its capacity to inflict violence or kill. No matter how badly you want to pretend it isn't true, a gun is a WEAPON.
 
CriticalThought said:
The fact that you got that offended by the implication should probably tell you something.

You may buy a gun to use as a paperweight but that doesn't change what it is. How you use your gun doesn't change its capacity to inflict violence or kill. No matter how badly you want to pretend it isn't true, a gun is a WEAPON.
Click to expand...

This goes in the list of moronic babblings about guns. that is as stupid as saying fencers buy foils to skewer people.

YOu pretty much proved your posts are not to be taken seriously with that idiocy. the purpose of a rifle is to place a bullet accurately on a target. for some people that might mean a human. to some that might mean an animal, and to many others it might mean a steel gong or a piece of paper. your claim is dismissed as idiocy
 
The shooters are solely responsible for their actions.
 
Critical Thought claims this guy's rifle is a weapon and he bought it to KILL

USAs-Matt-Emmons-misses-final-in-air-rifle-6R1V7UUL-x-large.jpg
 
and he claims that 5 time olympic medalist Kim Rhode (who set the WR and won the gold medal a few months ago) bought her Perazzi to KILL

Kim-Rhode-wins-to-make-US-history.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom