• 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!

Mass shootings are more likely at...

Where is it most likely for there to be a mass shooting

  • Police station

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • National guard base

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Gun show

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • NRA national matches

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • School/college campus

    Votes: 21 65.6%

  • Shopping mall

    Votes: 4 12.5%

  • Other (specify)

    Votes: 7 21.9%
  • Total voters
    32
Goobieman said:
Now you;re just being silly.
Click to expand...

Actually, he's being accurate. This is one of the worst polls ever. Most people don't have the information to answer the question accurately, so you're relying upon public perceptions, which vary greatly from reality. Beyond that, a mass shooting is the worst place to make the case that expanded gun ownership would prevent these crimes, because most mass shooters HOPE TO BE KILLED.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Actually, he's being accurate. This is one of the worst polls ever. Most people don't have the information to answer the question accurately, so you're relying upon public perceptions, which vary greatly from reality.
Click to expand...
Public perception is quite relevant when the discussion revolves around same.

In any case, the intent of the poll was to discuss why mass shootings happen only where there are people that do not have guns. Not surprisingly, there were two sides, one that says the presence of guns has nothing to do with it, and the other that says it does.

The side that argues the presence of guns has nothing to do with it was asked to exaplin why, if the reasons they supplied was accurate, why it was that the law of averages hasn't yet caught up to the places that do have all those people with guns. That explaination hasnt been forthcoming.

Beyond that, a mass shooting is the worst place to make the case that expanded gun ownership would prevent these crimes, because most mass shooters HOPE TO BE KILLED.
Click to expand...
Sure. After they do what they set out to do.
Is it more or less likely that they will be able to accomplish their goal in an area that has a large number of people that have guns and know how to use them?
If it is less likely, then aren't these people going to stay away from those places that have all those people with all those guns?
That sure seems to be how things have played out so far...
 
Goobieman said:
In any case, the intent of the poll was to discuss why mass shootings happen only where there are people that do not have guns.
Click to expand...

But there ARE guns present in schools. I already discussed this.

That's the problem. Mass shootings DO happen in places where people are armed. That's why the poll is logically flawed. Statistically speaking, the presence of guns does not deter mass shootings the way guns may deter more predatory/opportunistic types of crimes.

I think it's great to argue gun rights. But we should do so without using false information or assumptions.

Do guns deter crime? Absolutely. Do guns deter mass shootings (a very specific type of crime with a very specific, ideologically motivated perpetrator)? No. They don't.

/discussion.
 
Last edited:
American said:
How come no one picked NRA or gun shows?
Click to expand...
Beats me.
Maybe because people understand that the presence of guns, even a large number of them, both in terms of raw numbers as well as per capita, is NOT a contributing factor to a mass shooting?
 
Catz Part Deux said:
But there ARE guns present in schools. I already discussed this.
Click to expand...
Really?
When was the last mass shooting that happened in a school where there was a concentration of people with guns.

The presence of guns does not deter mass shootings
Click to expand...
Then explain why there has eve rbeen a mass shooting at a gun show or th National Matches.
 
Goobieman said:
Really?
When was the last mass shooting that happened in a school where there was a concentration of people with guns.
Click to expand...

There were ARMED school resource officers in most of the school shootings in the past 10 years. The exception was the shooting at the Amish school in Pennsylvania.

Then explain why there has eve rbeen a mass shooting at a gun show or th National Matches.
Click to expand...

Are you f'ing kidding me?
 
Goobieman said:
Beats me.
Maybe because people understand that the presence of guns, even a large number of them, both in terms of raw numbers as well as per capita, is NOT a contributing factor to a mass shooting?
Click to expand...

And here I thought it was because liberals weren't in charge there. :roll:
 
Last edited:
Catz Part Deux said:
There were ARMED school resource officers in most of the school shootings
Click to expand...

Never once have I heard that. Show it to be true.

Are you f'ing kidding me?
Click to expand...
No. If the reason the has not been a mass shooting at a gun show or the national matches is NOT because of the presence of all those people with guns, then what is it?
 
American said:
How come no one picked NRA or gun shows?
Click to expand...

Because that is where the target the mass killers are after are least likely to be. Places with large concentrations of people very day are going to be more likely to have the targets of a crazed gunman that occasional events, and you can be more confident all your targets are there.
 
Redress said:
Because that is where the target the mass killers are after are least likely to be.
Click to expand...
How can you possibly know that?
ANYONE can be a target for a kook looking to shoot a group of people -- there's no way you can argue that these people are LEAST likely to be at a gun show or rifle match.

For you to know that, you'd have to know that the targets of these people don't frequent gun shows or shoot at th enational matches - and you;d have to know this in a specific, not general sense.
 
Goobieman said:
Never once have I heard that. Show it to be true.
Click to expand...

10 years post-Columbine, a new education landscape : Schools : Boulder Daily Camera

Many of today's high school students, who were in their first years of school when the shootings happened April 20, 1999, hardly recall a time without video cameras mounted outside and police cars parked on school grounds. Security is just part of going to class, said Gigi Mesch, a sophomore at Boulder's Fairview High School who was in first grade when Harris and Klebold open fire in Columbine.
Click to expand...


No. If the reason the has not been a mass shooting at a gun show or the national matches is NOT because of the presence of all those people with guns, then what is it?
Click to expand...

Mass shooters tend to target specific populations and/or victims. They are motivated by feelings of shame, rage, and isolation. The killings are both personal and impersonal. The killings are targeted to locations and specific victims.
 
Goobieman said:
For you to know that, you'd have to know that the targets of these people don't frequent gun shows or shoot at th enational matches - and you;d have to know this in a specific, not general sense.
Click to expand...

A mass murderer MIGHT at some point target a gun show, but it would be to kill a certain group of emotionally-associated people. Whether they were armed or not would not deter the personality type that commits these crimes.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
10 years post-Columbine, a new education landscape : Schools : Boulder Daily Camera
Click to expand...
OK, this is a little disingenous -- "cannot hardly recall a time without video cameras mounted outside and police cars parked on school grounds" is hardly proof of a continued, obvious armed presence.

Mass shooters tend to target specific populations and/or victims. They are motivated by feelings of shame, rage, and isolation. The killings are both personal and impersonal. The killings are targeted to locations and specific victims.
Click to expand...
Yes... and so, why dont these killers some after people at rifle matches?
Because people who to a gun shows and rifle matches dont piss people off?
 
Catz Part Deux said:
A mass murderer MIGHT at some point target a gun show, but it would be to kill a certain group of emotionally-associated people. Whether they were armed or not would not deter the personality type that commits these crimes.
Click to expand...
Support this statement.
Where has it been tried?
 
Goobieman said:
How can you possibly know that?
ANYONE can be a target for a kook looking to shoot a group of people -- there's no way you can argue that these people are LEAST likely to be at a gun show or rifle match.

For you to know that, you'd have to know that the targets of these people don't frequent gun shows or shoot at th enational matches - and you;d have to know this in a specific, not general sense.
Click to expand...

I am not talking about a particular kook, but kooks in general. For a particular kook, you would be basically right, but for kooks in general, large masses of population are more likely to have the target.

I would also point out that you would have to know that people did not target gun shows because of the presence of guns to actually make a correlation.

Edit: oops, gun show, not bun show
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
I am not talking about a particular kook, but kooks in general. For a particular kook, you would be basically right, but for kooks in general, large masses of population are more likely to have the target.
Click to expand...
So, you're trying to explain it away as a law of averages?

How do you know the law of averages escludes gun shows and rifle matches from being a location of a mass hsooting? Do you know how many people frequent these places/events each year?

I really do not understand why it is so hard fro some to simply admit that the reason mass shooting dont happen in the places I mentioned might very well be, even just in part, because the killer knows that his target(s) or somone nearby might shoot back.
 
Goobieman said:
So, you're trying to explain it away as a law of averages?

How do you know the law of averages escludes gun shows and rifle matches from being a location of a mass hsooting? Do you know how many people frequent these places/events each year?

I really do not understand why it is so hard fro some to simply admit that the reason mass shooting dont happen in the places I mentioned might very well be, even just in part, because the killer knows that his target(s) or somone nearby might shoot back.
Click to expand...

Because there is zero evidence of it.
 
Redress said:
Because there is zero evidence of it.
Click to expand...
Says he who is arguing 'law of averages' without any idea just how many people go to gun shows or rifle matches.
 
Goobieman said:
Says he who is arguing 'law of averages' without any idea just how many people go to gun shows or rifle matches.
Click to expand...

I can guarantee it is much smaller than those who attend school. One is a group of almost everyone under the age of 18, and a significant portion of those over that age to 22ish, and some even beyond that. I live near MSU, which has about 40 thousand(IIRC) people on campus every day most days of the year, and that is just one school out of thousands in the state(though admittedly the largest).
 
Redress said:
I can guarantee it is much smaller than those who attend school.
Click to expand...
That only means it it less likely. It doesn't explain why there have been ZERO instances.

Anyone at any time at any place can be a target; there is a reason why the killers do not choose to engage their targets where there are also large numbers of guns.
 
Goobieman said:
That only means it it less likely. It doesn't explain why there have been ZERO instances.
Click to expand...

So you admit now that it is statistically more likely at schools than gun shows now?

Anyone at any time at any place can be a target; there is a reason why the killers do not choose to engage their targets where there are also large numbers of guns.
Click to expand...

Prove it. Offer one real shred of evidence that the reason is that there are guns.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom