Interactive Map - Mass Gun Murders Since 2005

[cantbeserious]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/14/mass-shootings-around-the-us-amp_n_2303432.html

[red dog 1]

1. When assholes are outlawed, only outlaws will have assholes.

Last edited Sat Dec 15, 2012, 02:17 PM - Edit history (1)

Here's how I feel about the National Rifle Association:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021977742/

[cantbeserious]

2. That Is A Non Responsive Reply To A Tragedy And Facts

Are you suggesting that all gun owners are similarly insensitive?

That is an indefensible position.

The Young Turks Get It Right In The Following Video.

[link:

|

[DrDan]

3. Cenk is spot-on - time NOW to talk about it . . . and START TO FIX IT

[red dog 1]

6. The NRA's slogan is: "Guns Don't Kill People, People Do"..

..and I was merely satirizing that bullshit slogan.

Sandy Hook was a horrible tragedy....those innocent children were slaughtered by a gun nut and we need Congressional action on real gun control NOW.

No..not all gun owners are insensitive; but the fucking NRA is.

Lighten up...I'm on your side.

[YllwFvr]

9. was he a gun nut?

Did he own guns? Was he an nra member? I havent heard that. What news station said that

[red dog 1]

12. "Did he own guns..Was he an NRA member?"..He used 3 guns to kill 20 kids..

..If that isn't a description of a "gun nut" then you tell me what is.

Did he own guns? No..but his mother did, and that's where he got the 3 guns he used to kill the 20 children .so, technically, I guess SHE was the "gun nut" because they were her guns, right?

Who cares whether or not he was a member of the NRA...I never said he was.

The NRA is one of the most powerful lobbying groups in Washington, and they are against ANY kind of gun control..including the assault weapons ban.

You are obviously a gun owner, let me ask you.....are you against the reinstatement of the Assault Weapons Ban....Yes or No.

[gejohnston]

13. very simple

no, he stole them from his mother, after he murdered her
I seriously doubt it
actually, AARP and the oil companies are. The NRA can motivate a lot of grassroots.

[red dog 1]

18. Apparently, the banking industry is the most powerful lobby

.in Washington

AUCTION 2012: HOW THE BANK LOBBY OWNS WASHINGTON
Huffington Post, Jan 30, 2012

In May, 2009, ..Senator Dick Durbin famously told a radio host,
"And the banks -- hard to believe in a time when we're facing a banking crisis that many of the banks created -- are still the most powerful lobby on Capital Hill.
And they frankly own the place."

Sorry, I was unable to find a working link to this article
If you want to read the entire article, which is pretty long, you can Google:
"Auction 2012: How The Bank Lobby Owns Washington"

Thanks for correcting me about the NRA being the most powerful lobby in Washington; I revised that comment.

[YllwFvr]

17. just because he fired a gun

Doesnt mean he is a gun nut.
As you say, he was a mentally disturbed individual and he did what he did to cause harm. There has been school bombings for the same effect.

I wouldnt call her a gun nut either without more information.

I oppose a new awb if it would be a mirror of the last one.

[holdencaufield]

21. Define "Gun Nut" ...

... if it is defined as a "nut who has a gun" then, yes -- he was clearly insane and he had at least one firearm.

On the other hand, if, as I suspect, you define "Gun Nut" as anyone who owns a gun then I don't agree.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

5. Something Tells Me You Have Nothing to Worry About

[red dog 1]

7. Read my response to cantbeserious..(# 6)

[fightthegoodfightnow]

4. WOW

Thanks for posting.

Sad.

[red dog 1]

8. Thanks for posting this.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said yesterday:
"Now is not the time to talk about gun control", which is bullshit!

Now IS the time to talk about gun control, and a good first step is to reinstate the Assault Weapons Ban.

[YllwFvr]

10. no assault weapon was used

By any defintion of the phrase

[red dog 1]

11. "No assault weapon was used, by any definition of the phrase"?

At least 100 rounds were fired, according to witnesses.

"Congress approved a ban on assault weapons in 1994. The prohibition, which expired in 2004, did not eliminate them, but restricted their features, limiting magazine capacity to 10 rounds and regulating pistol grips, bayonet attachments and flash suppressors" (CNN 12/14/2012)


Do the American people want gun control?

A survey conducted by CNN/ORC International in August shortly after the deadly mass shooting earlier this year in Aurora, Colorado found that 76 percent of those surveyed believe "there should be some restrictions on owning guns." (CNN)


Obama supported a platform while running for president in 2008 that included reinstating the assault weapons ban, but has largely avoided the issue of gun control during his first term.

OBAMA REMAINS COMMITTED TO ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN, WHITE HOUSE SAYS
Washington (CNN) - The White House said President Barack Obama supports reinstatement of a federal ban on assault weapons - a position he took in the 2008 campaign but failed to press during his first term.
"It does remain a commitment of his," presidential spokesman Jay Carney told reporters as the nation reeled from a mass shooting in Connecticut that mainly killed school children.

http://www.bayoubuzz.com/top-stories/item/207281-obama-remains-commited-to-assault-weapons-ban-white-house

[gejohnston]

14. first paragraph has nothing to do with the second

how many rounds he might have fired has nothing to do with magazine capacity. He probably had several magazines.

There are restrictions on owning guns, have been since the 1930s.

[red dog 1]

15. OK..I was wrong; and you are right..he probably had several magazines,

so an assault weapons ban would have not prevented him from killing his mother and taking her 3 handguns to the school and killing the 26 innocent people, including the 20 innocent children.

But one fact remains....a good first step toward real gun control is the reinstatement of the Assault Weapons Ban, regardless of the fact that it wouldn't have prevented yesterday's tragedy.

It's something Obama can do NOW; and according to polls, it's something the American people would support.

[YllwFvr]

20. I would think

If people really wanted to make a difference they would ban hand guns. Almost every crime involving a gun is with a hand gun.

Rifles of any kind are very rare.

So since nearly every mass shooting is with pistols amd most crimes in general, how will banning assault rifles make any real difference?

Ok some say they are military weapons and who cares what the definition of an assault rifle is etc etc.

I dont get why people harp on them so much. People choose hand guns because they can be concealed. Why all the attention on them??

Perhaps its something Obama can do now but its not a ban that will make any difference. It didnt matter before and it wont now. Whats the purpose?

[YllwFvr]

16. red dog

Thank you for the very well put argument. I noticed you cited to support your side. Its good to see someone reply without resorting to name calling.

Its my personal belief that a poll taken shortly after something like this would be skewed but perhaps not.
I would point out that poll does state people believed there should be some restrictions. Thats pretty open.

I was saying that, while an ar15 was stolen, the shooter chose not to use it. There could be any number of reasons why, but I merely stated it wasnt used.

The mags used by cho were ten and fifteen round mags according to Wikipedia
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Tech_massacre
My own service pistol has a higher capacity and that is standard sized, not high cacity. He reloaded many times. I personally practice reloading often and it can be done pretty quick.

I never really understood the capacity argument. Either way even with a renewed awb the mags currently owned would be legal. I was just getting interested in firearms when it was in full force and the larger magazines were still readily available, the prices were just higher.
I think there are too many now.

Thanks again for the decent reply.

[red dog 1]

19. Thank you for yours.

[bobclark86]

22. I guess it doesn't matter

that the homicide rate in the U.S. is at its lowest since the 1960s...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States

That doesn't mean something needs to change, but it is something to keep in mind. Prevalence of guns and murder rates do not correlate. Poverty and poor mental health systems and murder do, however.

[gejohnston]

23. emotion trumps logic

nobody wants to hear about logic and facts especially if it comes from "those people". I wouldn't be surprised if Josh Sugarmann isn't celebrating now that he might have his tipping point.

[amandabeech]

24. Looking at the map by year,

it looks like 2005-2007 had relatively few mass murder incidents.

2008-2011 it looks really bad.

I'm wondering if the woeful economic situation for everyone, but particularly young men who are having a hard time getting a decent start in the job market, is pushing some troubled folks right over the edge.

[ManiacJoe]

25. That is certainly a possibility for the adult shooters.