9 Dead in Dayton....

queencitybuckeye Senior Member
8,068 posts 121 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Aug 6, 2019 11:36 AM
posted by geeblock

I think the gun issue part is that it’s too easy to get them. U can’t buy cigarettes until 21 but can get an ar-15 at 18. That doesn’t make sense to me 

I'm for a single age of adult status. If you have to be 21 to drink and smoke, I'm OK with that being the age to purchase a firearm as well. That said, the minimum age for military service needs to be 21 also. You are an adult or you are not an adult.

O-Trap Chief Shenanigans Officer
18,909 posts 140 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Aug 6, 2019 11:39 AM
posted by geeblock


Tell me he actually said this.

geeblock Member
1,123 posts 0 reps Joined May 2018
Tue, Aug 6, 2019 11:40 AM

Obv jk but I found it funny 

O-Trap Chief Shenanigans Officer
18,909 posts 140 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Aug 6, 2019 11:47 AM
posted by geeblock

Obv jk but I found it funny 

It's hilarious, but it's sad that I could see some politician actually saying that.

geeblock Member
1,123 posts 0 reps Joined May 2018
Tue, Aug 6, 2019 12:03 PM

He did say that video games are what’s causing these shootings which is idiotic in itself. There is zero evidence that these guys even played video games and also there is more scientific evidence to show no link between video games and shootings than there is to show a link between the two 

Heretic Son of the Sun
20,517 posts 204 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Aug 6, 2019 12:08 PM

Personally, I'd think it'd be a better idea to just ban politicians, since they tend to be fucking idiots whose main "contribution" to society is divisive rhetoric and a single-minded will to use their posts to enrich themselves.

gut Senior Member
18,369 posts 117 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Aug 6, 2019 1:35 PM
posted by Heretic

Personally, I'd think it'd be a better idea to just ban politicians, since they tend to be fucking idiots whose main "contribution" to society is divisive rhetoric and a single-minded will to use their posts to enrich themselves.

I'm convinced most of them aren't actually that stupid and they're just saying what their consituents need to hear to keep voting for them.

like_that 1st Team All-PWN
29,228 posts 321 reps Joined Apr 2010
Tue, Aug 6, 2019 1:49 PM
posted by Heretic

Personally, I'd think it'd be a better idea to just ban politicians

Say no more fam. 

gut Senior Member
18,369 posts 117 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Aug 6, 2019 2:01 PM
posted by O-Trap

Oh, I think you're probably right.  So what is it that makes males who have the same exact access to firearms as women so much more likely to not show empathy or to display acts of violence, particularly in America, where this discrepancy is significantly wider than in other countries?

I think the main cause is a failure to succeed and failure to be accepted in society.  Maybe women like that just kill themselves, instead?

 

As for being mostly white.....if they were black they'd already be in jail, amirite?

O-Trap Chief Shenanigans Officer
18,909 posts 140 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Aug 6, 2019 2:13 PM
posted by gut

I think the main cause is a failure to succeed and failure to be accepted in society.  Maybe women like that just kill themselves, instead?

 

As for being mostly white.....if they were black they'd already be in jail, amirite?

Well, the majority are indeed white, but looking at it again, it seems like the rate at which gunman are non-Hispanic whites is fairly close to the ratio of the population as a whole that is non-Hispanic white.

Failure to succeed or be accepted in society could be it, sure.  It's just bizarre that the same access to guns, the same laws, the same cities/geography, and the same culture and subcultures result in such a lopsided problem.

Fab4Runner Tits McGee
6,997 posts 64 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Aug 6, 2019 2:14 PM
posted by gut

I think the main cause is a failure to succeed and failure to be accepted in society.  Maybe women like that just kill themselves, instead?

 

As for being mostly white.....if they were black they'd already be in jail, amirite?

This is based only on my life experience, so obviously feel free to disagree, but I don't think women are as bad at accepting failure or rejection as men. Obviously this isn't true for every single woman or man, but it's the general rule from what I've seen. 

O-Trap Chief Shenanigans Officer
18,909 posts 140 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Aug 6, 2019 2:17 PM
posted by Fab4Runner

This is based only on my life experience, so obviously feel free to disagree, but I don't think women are as bad at accepting failure or rejection as men. Obviously this isn't true for every single woman or man, but it's the general rule from what I've seen. 

Shit, you could be right.  Maybe we (as in "the entirety of culture") do a better job helping and allowing women to grow in an emotionally healthy way.

gut Senior Member
18,369 posts 117 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Aug 6, 2019 2:29 PM
posted by Fab4Runner

This is based only on my life experience, so obviously feel free to disagree, but I don't think women are as bad at accepting failure or rejection as men. Obviously this isn't true for every single woman or man, but it's the general rule from what I've seen. 

I think there may be more societal pressure/expectation on males.  I suspect that may be changing, or eventually will.  But I think there are definitely biological/physiological differences not purely driven by the ability.

LOL, doubt I'd agree with women handling failure/rejection better.  Differently, sure.  Better, not so sure.

gut Senior Member
18,369 posts 117 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Aug 6, 2019 2:33 PM
posted by O-Trap

Shit, you could be right.  Maybe we (as in "the entirety of culture") do a better job helping and allowing women to grow in an emotionally healthy way.

Men/Boys are far more likely to externalize or act out their frustrations.  I think it's at least, in part, an affect of being raised in a patriarchal society.

O-Trap Chief Shenanigans Officer
18,909 posts 140 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Aug 6, 2019 2:37 PM

While "better" is a value term, and thus subject to some interpretation, I daresay I doubt there'd be too many people who consider alternatives to mass murder anything other than better.

It might be said, too, that the societal pressure you're referencing lends itself to an inability to handle failure.

I wonder, as well, if some of it isn't expectations and/or how to cope with disenfranchisement or unmet expectations.  If it does indeed have something to do with that, then it would follow that shooters like these are basically an extreme type of snowflake, so unable to cope with the world around them that they oppose it with violent aggression.

gut Senior Member
18,369 posts 117 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Aug 6, 2019 2:53 PM
posted by O-Trap

If it does indeed have something to do with that, then it would follow that shooters like these are basically an extreme type of snowflake, so unable to cope with the world around them that they oppose it with violent aggression.

Except for possibly the Vegas shooter, when have you ever heard that one of these shooters was a good guy?  Almost always socially inept loners.  And the few political motivated ones seem to be self-radicalized rather than some long-time active zealot.

O-Trap Chief Shenanigans Officer
18,909 posts 140 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Aug 6, 2019 3:00 PM
posted by gut

Except for possibly the Vegas shooter, when have you ever heard that one of these shooters was a good guy?  Almost always socially inept loners.  And the few political motivated ones seem to be self-radicalized rather than some long-time active zealot.

Right.  Seems like they're all isolated, and they fall into either deluding themselves into taking murderous measures, or they fall into believing the world around them is devoid of value, and they just want to go out in a blaze of fear and fame.

Neither one has a healthy means of handling the world not being the way they think it ought to, though certainly, one might be less self-focused than the other.

QuakerOats Senior Member
11,701 posts 66 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Aug 6, 2019 3:13 PM
posted by justincredible

Your numbers don't add up. We've had 250 this year alone. :rolleyes:

 

That’s if you define it as 3 or more dead.  If you take the weekends in Chicago and Baltimore out of the equation, the number of ‘mass shootings’ is probably more like 6 - 8.

Fab4Runner Tits McGee
6,997 posts 64 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Aug 6, 2019 3:14 PM
posted by gut

I think there may be more societal pressure/expectation on males.  I suspect that may be changing, or eventually will.  But I think there are definitely biological/physiological differences not purely driven by the ability.

LOL, doubt I'd agree with women handling failure/rejection better.  Differently, sure.  Better, not so sure.

Okay, but like...we don't beat the shit out of men who reject us, or sexually assault or rape men who reject us, or murder our exes when they won't take us back or commit mass shootings when someone rejects us nearly as often as men do. So I'm gonna stick with my opinion. 🤷🏼‍♀️

O-Trap Chief Shenanigans Officer
18,909 posts 140 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Aug 6, 2019 3:18 PM
posted by QuakerOats

 

That’s if you define it as 3 or more dead.  If you take the weekends in Chicago and Baltimore out of the equation, the number of ‘mass shootings’ is probably more like 6 - 8.

Nah.  The 250+ this year counts any event in which four people are injured in a single event.  This ends up including a lot of gang violence, domestic disputes, and on-the-spot violence without premeditation.  There's value in that metric, but it seems disingenuous to call all of those "mass shootings," because we don't include those kinds of events when we think of, or use, the term "mass shooting."

The 3+ dead from a single event is the stipulation used among federal bodies when they compile statistics.  By that metric, there have been, as mentioned, 114 mass shootings in the last 37 years.

Login

Register

Already have an account? Login