Just starting a thread on today's US mass shooting https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 79614.html

Will be interesting to see what comes out regarding motivations of the shooter.

Really no point, it’s basically a daily thing now. It would take up too much space on this site.

There was also a shooting at an upscale market in downtown LA over the weekend. Fun and games in the good ‘ol USA

Clutch101 wrote:

Really no point, it’s basically a daily thing now. It would take up too much space on this site.

I had a post deleted yesterday for suggesting a general "today's mass shooting in the USA" thread. It seems that the mods prefer individual threads on each new horror.

Oh dear, how sad, never mind.

Apparently the suspect is a 68yo Asian who lives in Vegas...

I gave up, US has totally gone mad and insane.

Yup too insane. The missus already decided Japan is better/safer long term.

The shootings will continue until morale improves.

Reminded of that old Onion article:

'No Way To Prevent This,' Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens

Aaron747 wrote:

There was also a shooting at an upscale market in downtown LA over the weekend. Fun and games in the good ‘ol USA

That one wasn't a mass shooting, it was one and done.

Wonder why anybody would target Seizure World for a potential mass shooting? The people that live there… are nearly dead as it is.

When I was younger, I went there for Sunday service when I visited my grandma. Then we’d stop at the adjacent Hometown Buffet., or the grocery store across the street in later years. I would have never expected to see something like that happen there in my lifetime…

He will probably claim that God told him to do it.

Thoughts and prayers - God Bless the Second Amendment above all else

The bad guy with a gun was stopped by the good guy(s) with the hog tie.

California churchgoers hog-tie gunman after deadly attack
https://www.france24.com/en/americas/20 ... dly-attack

I thought California had strict gun laws?

TriJets wrote:

I thought California had strict gun laws?

Thought the shooter was from Vegas? Do they check for firearms crossing State lines?

Gun violence and regulation is a Federal issue, not a State issue - its time a certain Amendment gets amended.

TriJets wrote:

I thought California had strict gun laws?

Obviously laws are meaningless when nearby states don't have same and/or black market is alive and well. Dems still don't understand laws are pointless unless you're going to massively expand the ATF. They have what 2500 agents? That's less than the Dallas PD has officers.

Aaron747 wrote:

TriJets wrote:

I thought California had strict gun laws?

Obviously laws are meaningless when nearby states don't have same and/or black market is alive and well. Dems still don't understand laws are pointless unless you're going to massively expand the ATF. They have what 2500 agents? That's less than the Dallas PD has officers.

ATF has 5000 employees TOTAL...and yes, 2500 number is about correct.

Meanwhile Chicago PD has ~12k officers and Chicago is still a mess (The recent move of violence up to The Loop and "nice" neighborhood certainly doesn't help the reputation).

And finally, yes, the shooter is from Vegas (and is also Chinese/Taiwanese), 68yo, and shot a bunch of people that are 66-92yo. The shooting sounds like targeted rather than random either way, whatever "beef" is going on...

Sure doesn't fit the stereotype that you would expect.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ma ... -rcna29021

Well, certainly didn't have "China-Taiwan tension" on my list of reason of a planned mass shooting in USA. Dude drive all the way to LA basin just to shoot a bunch of Taiwanese? Like seriously? And I guess he picked a Taiwanese church instead of, let say, a 99 Ranch just b/c he may shoot some mainlanders in the latter place?

RIP to Dr. Cheng, who died a hero charging the gunman.

TriJets wrote:

I thought California had strict gun laws?

Yes, and its gun death rate is the 7th lowest in the country.

But don't let that get in the way of your narrative.

Aaron747 wrote:

TriJets wrote:

I thought California had strict gun laws?

Obviously laws are meaningless when nearby states don't have same and/or black market is alive and well. Dems still don't understand laws are pointless unless you're going to massively expand the ATF. They have what 2500 agents? That's less than the Dallas PD has officers.

And the GOP will set themselves on fire rather than expand the ATF (or IRS--which is also intentionally hobbled)

TriJets wrote:

I thought California had strict gun laws?

When your “gotcha!” Moment goes horribly wrong

johns624 wrote:

Sure doesn't fit the stereotype that you would expect.

That's the beautiful thing about America! You might not grow up to one day become a millionaire or get elected President. But one thing is for sure, no matter your age, creed, gender, or ethnic origin, you, too, can grab a firearm and go postal. We may not have democratized anything else, but we've democratized violence. My country, 'tis of thee...

Newark727 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Sure doesn't fit the stereotype that you would expect.

That's the beautiful thing about America! You might not grow up to one day become a millionaire or get elected President. But one thing is for sure, no matter your age, creed, gender, or ethnic origin, you, too, can grab a firearm and go postal. We may not have democratized anything else, but we've democratized violence. My country, 'tis of thee...

No discrimination here in good ole ‘Murica!! Anyone can grab a piece and start pew pewing anywhere!

ACDC8 wrote:

TriJets wrote:

I thought California had strict gun laws?

Thought the shooter was from Vegas? Do they check for firearms crossing State lines?

Gun violence and regulation is a Federal issue, not a State issue - its time a certain Amendment gets amended.

They do not check for firearms crossing state lines. Just another example of a "gun free zone" becoming a soft target. It is almost as if criminals don't pay attention to gun laws.

TriJets wrote:

It is almost as if criminals don't pay attention to gun laws.

Was the weapon the shooter used illegally obtained?

ACDC8 wrote:

TriJets wrote:

It is almost as if criminals don't pay attention to gun laws.

Was the weapon the shooter used illegally obtained?

Haven't seen any speculation about that either way. Given the huge amount of gun crime committed by criminals who obtain their guns illegally, I'm not so sure that it matters.

TriJets wrote:

I'm not so sure that it matters.

It matters because there seems to be this ongoing trend in the US where citizens with no previous criminal history practising their "Constitutional Right" by picking up legally obtained weapons and shoot up people watching a movie, walking down the street, going to a concert, picking up a jug of milk, going to school.

Up here in Canada, where we do have some gun control, we still have our targeted shootings, we still have gun crime, but the one thing we don't have are mass shootings on an almost daily basis. This constant excuse of criminals and race has seriously gotten so old its not even a smoke screen anymore.

ACDC8 wrote:

TriJets wrote:

I'm not so sure that it matters.

It matters because there seems to be this ongoing trend in the US where citizens with no previous criminal history practising their "Constitutional Right" by picking up legally obtained weapons and shoot up people watching a movie, walking down the street, going to a concert, picking up a jug of milk, going to school.

Up here in Canada, where we do have some gun control, we still have our targeted shootings, we still have gun crime, but the one thing we don't have are mass shootings on an almost daily basis. This constant excuse of criminals and race has seriously gotten so old its not even a smoke screen anymore.

We don't have mass shootings on an almost daily basis here either if you exclude gang violence. I agree that these rampages are a problem here but with 400 million guns and 350 million people there's really not much to be done about it.

TriJets wrote:

I agree that these rampages are a problem here but with 400 million guns and 350 million people there's really not much to be done about it.

400 million guns for 350 million people - and really not much can be done about it?

Right.

ACDC8 wrote:

TriJets wrote:

I agree that these rampages are a problem here but with 400 million guns and 350 million people there's really not much to be done about it.

400 million guns for 350 million people - and really not much can be done about it?

Right.

Glad we agree.

TriJets wrote:

ACDC8 wrote:

TriJets wrote:

I'm not so sure that it matters.

It matters because there seems to be this ongoing trend in the US where citizens with no previous criminal history practising their "Constitutional Right" by picking up legally obtained weapons and shoot up people watching a movie, walking down the street, going to a concert, picking up a jug of milk, going to school.

Up here in Canada, where we do have some gun control, we still have our targeted shootings, we still have gun crime, but the one thing we don't have are mass shootings on an almost daily basis. This constant excuse of criminals and race has seriously gotten so old its not even a smoke screen anymore.

We don't have mass shootings on an almost daily basis here either if you exclude gang violence. I agree that these rampages are a problem here but with 400 million guns and 350 million people there's really not much to be done about it.

Why would you exclude gang shootings? They’re still shootings.

That the problem shouldn’t even be tackled because it’s so far gone is quite disheartening. Admitting the problem is the first step though. I feel for the people who get killed in their 1000s every year, but it seems Americans should just accept that their lives don’t mean enough for anyone to do anything about it.

MrHMSH wrote:

TriJets wrote:

ACDC8 wrote:

It matters because there seems to be this ongoing trend in the US where citizens with no previous criminal history practising their "Constitutional Right" by picking up legally obtained weapons and shoot up people watching a movie, walking down the street, going to a concert, picking up a jug of milk, going to school.

Up here in Canada, where we do have some gun control, we still have our targeted shootings, we still have gun crime, but the one thing we don't have are mass shootings on an almost daily basis. This constant excuse of criminals and race has seriously gotten so old its not even a smoke screen anymore.

We don't have mass shootings on an almost daily basis here either if you exclude gang violence. I agree that these rampages are a problem here but with 400 million guns and 350 million people there's really not much to be done about it.

Why would you exclude gang shootings? They’re still shootings.

That the problem shouldn’t even be tackled because it’s so far gone is quite disheartening. Admitting the problem is the first step though. I feel for the people who get killed in their 1000s every year, but it seems Americans should just accept that their lives don’t mean enough for anyone to do anything about it.

Gang shootings aren't typically included because they often involve other gang members being shot and are easy to avoid if you aren't involved in a gang. Additionally, when people picture a "mass shooting", they typically picture something like what happened in Buffalo rather than two gangs shooting each other at 3am outside an illegal nightclub.

The fact of the matter is that guns are here to stay and criminals are already well armed. When seconds count the police are minutes (or hours) away so normal people want to be able to protect themselves and their families.

TriJets wrote:

The fact of the matter is that guns are here to stay and criminals are already well armed. When seconds count the police are minutes (or hours) away so normal people want to be able to protect themselves and their families.

And this mentality right here, is the very reason you're in this mess in the first place.

ACDC8 wrote:

TriJets wrote:

The fact of the matter is that guns are here to stay and criminals are already well armed. When seconds count the police are minutes (or hours) away so normal people want to be able to protect themselves and their families.

And this mentality right here, is the very reason you're in this mess in the first place.

That's not just a mentality...it is a reality. I've posted the numbers here before...250,000 Americans are victims of violent home invasions annually. When seconds count, the police are minutes away. I've had personal experience with this, sadly, and am glad that my wife was armed and able to scare our wannabe intruder off.

ACDC8 wrote:

TriJets wrote:

I agree that these rampages are a problem here but with 400 million guns and 350 million people there's really not much to be done about it.

400 million guns for 350 million people - and really not much can be done about it?

Right.

Thankfully they keep the same perspective when it comes to abortion

TriJets wrote:

Gang shootings aren't typically included because they often involve other gang members being shot and are easy to avoid if you aren't involved in a gang. Additionally, when people picture a "mass shooting", they typically picture something like what happened in Buffalo rather than two gangs shooting each other at 3am outside an illegal nightclub.

The fact of the matter is that guns are here to stay and criminals are already well armed. When seconds count the police are minutes (or hours) away so normal people want to be able to protect themselves and their families.

These views synergise perfectly with 'all lives matter' and 'pro-life' viewpoints.

The fact of the matter is that more guns make America a more dangerous place with needless loss of life, and though we are sad about it, we implicitly accept that people like you don't want to do anything about it, and this is why there are so many awful attempts to justify it, deflect from it and not debate it. At the end of the day though, your people are dying by the thousands every year, not ours. If you really care about people's lives and wellbeing, then doing nothing about the huge losses of life every year seems incredibly out of touch to me.

ACDC8 wrote:

TriJets wrote:

I agree that these rampages are a problem here but with 400 million guns and 350 million people there's really not much to be done about it.

400 million guns for 350 million people - and really not much can be done about it?

Right.

As the evergreen Onion article puts it:

‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens.

https://twitter.com/TheOnion/status/1526219331503284224

TriJets wrote:

That's not just a mentality...it is a reality. I've posted the numbers here before...250,000 Americans are victims of violent home invasions annually.

And you're honestly trying to convince people that having 400 million guns in the US isn't part of the reason?'

Wasn't it Johnson Administration that said that the use of firearms was the leading cause of violence and death in the USA? And that was 50 years ago. While the rest of the developed World learns to adapt and evolve when issues arrive, your Country keeps arguing over a stupid piece of paper as if its set in stone and in the mean time, more and more people die every year and you continue to shrug your shoulders as if owning a gun is the only answer.

MrHMSH wrote:

TriJets wrote:

Gang shootings aren't typically included because they often involve other gang members being shot and are easy to avoid if you aren't involved in a gang. Additionally, when people picture a "mass shooting", they typically picture something like what happened in Buffalo rather than two gangs shooting each other at 3am outside an illegal nightclub.

The fact of the matter is that guns are here to stay and criminals are already well armed. When seconds count the police are minutes (or hours) away so normal people want to be able to protect themselves and their families.

These views synergise perfectly with 'all lives matter' and 'pro-life' viewpoints.

The fact of the matter is that more guns make America a more dangerous place with needless loss of life, and though we are sad about it, we implicitly accept that people like you don't want to do anything about it, and this is why there are so many awful attempts to justify it, deflect from it and not debate it. At the end of the day though, your people are dying by the thousands every year, not ours. If you really care about people's lives and wellbeing, then doing nothing about the huge losses of life every year seems incredibly out of touch to me.

The guns are not going anywhere. As I said, there are over 400 million guns out there. You could outlaw guns tomorrow and the criminals would have no issue finding firearms to use. All gun control does it make it harder for law abiding citizens to protect themselves.

I'd happily give up my guns the moment every single criminal was disarmed first. There's no way for that to happen, though.

ACDC8 wrote:

TriJets wrote:

That's not just a mentality...it is a reality. I've posted the numbers here before...250,000 Americans are victims of violent home invasions annually.

And you're honestly trying to convince people that having 400 million guns in the US isn't part of the reason?'

Wasn't it Johnson Administration that said that the use of firearms was the leading cause of violence and death in the USA? And that was 50 years ago. While the rest of the developed World learns to adapt and evolve when issues arrive, your Country keeps arguing over a stupid piece of paper as if its set in stone and in the mean time, more and more people die every year and you continue to shrug your shoulders as if owning a gun is the only answer.

The Constitution isn't a "stupid piece of paper"....it defines and protects our rights, and keeps us from becoming North Korea. You don't have to like it, but frankly I don't care if you don't. It is not going anywhere.

MrHMSH wrote:

TriJets wrote:

Gang shootings aren't typically included because they often involve other gang members being shot and are easy to avoid if you aren't involved in a gang. Additionally, when people picture a "mass shooting", they typically picture something like what happened in Buffalo rather than two gangs shooting each other at 3am outside an illegal nightclub.

The fact of the matter is that guns are here to stay and criminals are already well armed. When seconds count the police are minutes (or hours) away so normal people want to be able to protect themselves and their families.

These views synergise perfectly with 'all lives matter' and 'pro-life' viewpoints.

The fact of the matter is that more guns make America a more dangerous place with needless loss of life, and though we are sad about it, we implicitly accept that people like you don't want to do anything about it, and this is why there are so many awful attempts to justify it, deflect from it and not debate it. At the end of the day though, your people are dying by the thousands every year, not ours. If you really care about people's lives and wellbeing, then doing nothing about the huge losses of life every year seems incredibly out of touch to me.

Problem is what is the cause of these losses of life.
Like in this case, is removing gun from the element going to solve the issue? I don't think so, given there are tons of cases in China where gasoline, knife, trucks, chemicals, are being used independently or in combination, in order to carry out attack against a group of unspecific people, to express their hatred against things they don't like in the society, ranging from corrupt police to personal relationship affairs.
Given the level of preparedness in this specific attack, I doubt the attacker changing their weapon from gun to something else would result in less fatality or injury of victims.

Thoughts and prayers... bla bla...

Right says you have laws enforce them. No changes whatsoever over my dead body to an AMENDMENT to the constitution. I have a right to keep any kind of weapon, stuff you.

Moderates / left say - well the laws don't work so they need changing. You won't spend extra money on mental health, you won't put in place more stringent background checks, you won't limit ammo clip sizes or reduce what guns people can own, where or what they can buy.

Rest of the world looks on in part disbelief part amusement that the self proclaimed "Greatest country in the world" can't / won't solve the issue. Meanwhile years go by, more and more dead and.... nothing. NOBODY in this day and age needs anything other than a single shotgun or whatever for hunting or home protection if you live in the middle of nowhere. If you live in a city in the US, then you don't need one for any reason, just like you don't in any other civilised country in the world. If you feel you do, then you have a serious issue with your policing and society. You wanna shoot and own guns for fun, fine no issue- go to a licensed range. Keep them locked up. But you don't need 10 and you don't need automatic rifles.

Drugs, poverty all play a part but you won't get anywhere unless you change the law. There is no other answer - if there was others would have found it. You would have found it.

So either accept this will happen regularly (in which case do we need a new thread every time?!) or do something.

Reinhardt wrote:

Thoughts and prayers... bla bla...

Right says you have laws enforce them. No changes whatsoever over my dead body to an AMENDMENT to the constitution. I have a right to keep any kind of weapon, stuff you.

Moderates / left say - well the laws don't work so they need changing. You won't spend extra money on mental health, you won't put in place more stringent background checks, you won't limit ammo clip sizes or reduce what guns people can own, where or what they can buy.

Rest of the world looks on in part disbelief part amusement that the self proclaimed "Greatest country in the world" can't / won't solve the issue. Meanwhile years go by, more and more dead and.... nothing. NOBODY in this day and age needs anything other than a single shotgun or whatever for hunting or home protection if you live in the middle of nowhere. If you live in a city in the US, then you don't need one for any reason, just like you don't in any other civilised country in the world. If you feel you do, then you have a serious issue with your policing and society. You wanna shoot and own guns for fun, fine no issue- go to a licensed range. Keep them locked up. But you don't need 10 and you don't need automatic rifles.

Drugs, poverty all play a part but you won't get anywhere unless you change the law. There is no other answer - if there was others would have found it. You would have found it.

So either accept this will happen regularly (in which case do we need a new thread every time?!) or do something.

You ignore the fact that most crime and most gun crime is concentrated in urban areas in the United States. Telling people who live in the areas at greatest risk for crime that they don't need a way to defend themselves is out of touch. Telling the single mom with a restraining order out against her violent boyfriend that she can't own a handgun to protect herself and her children is out of touch. Disarm the criminals first and then we can start talking about gun control.

TriJets wrote:

Reinhardt wrote:

Thoughts and prayers... bla bla...

Right says you have laws enforce them. No changes whatsoever over my dead body to an AMENDMENT to the constitution. I have a right to keep any kind of weapon, stuff you.

Moderates / left say - well the laws don't work so they need changing. You won't spend extra money on mental health, you won't put in place more stringent background checks, you won't limit ammo clip sizes or reduce what guns people can own, where or what they can buy.

Rest of the world looks on in part disbelief part amusement that the self proclaimed "Greatest country in the world" can't / won't solve the issue. Meanwhile years go by, more and more dead and.... nothing. NOBODY in this day and age needs anything other than a single shotgun or whatever for hunting or home protection if you live in the middle of nowhere. If you live in a city in the US, then you don't need one for any reason, just like you don't in any other civilised country in the world. If you feel you do, then you have a serious issue with your policing and society. You wanna shoot and own guns for fun, fine no issue- go to a licensed range. Keep them locked up. But you don't need 10 and you don't need automatic rifles.

Drugs, poverty all play a part but you won't get anywhere unless you change the law. There is no other answer - if there was others would have found it. You would have found it.

So either accept this will happen regularly (in which case do we need a new thread every time?!) or do something.

You ignore the fact that most crime and most gun crime is concentrated in urban areas in the United States. Telling people who live in the areas at greatest risk for crime that they don't need a way to defend themselves is out of touch. Telling the single mom with a restraining order out against her violent boyfriend that she can't own a handgun to protect herself and her children is out of touch. Disarm the criminals first and then we can start talking about gun control.

Absolutely - they must be disarmed, but in order to do that, you need to legalize/regulate urban drug networks and dismantle transnational gun smuggling within and into/out of the US. That would require steps at the federal level conservatives are unlikely to ever support and many states will cry 10th amendment foul over. On the left the ACLU would probably oppose criminal gun seizures too.

c933103 wrote:

MrHMSH wrote:

TriJets wrote:

Gang shootings aren't typically included because they often involve other gang members being shot and are easy to avoid if you aren't involved in a gang. Additionally, when people picture a "mass shooting", they typically picture something like what happened in Buffalo rather than two gangs shooting each other at 3am outside an illegal nightclub.

The fact of the matter is that guns are here to stay and criminals are already well armed. When seconds count the police are minutes (or hours) away so normal people want to be able to protect themselves and their families.

These views synergise perfectly with 'all lives matter' and 'pro-life' viewpoints.

The fact of the matter is that more guns make America a more dangerous place with needless loss of life, and though we are sad about it, we implicitly accept that people like you don't want to do anything about it, and this is why there are so many awful attempts to justify it, deflect from it and not debate it. At the end of the day though, your people are dying by the thousands every year, not ours. If you really care about people's lives and wellbeing, then doing nothing about the huge losses of life every year seems incredibly out of touch to me.

Problem is what is the cause of these losses of life.
Like in this case, is removing gun from the element going to solve the issue? I don't think so, given there are tons of cases in China where gasoline, knife, trucks, chemicals, are being used independently or in combination, in order to carry out attack against a group of unspecific people, to express their hatred against things they don't like in the society, ranging from corrupt police to personal relationship affairs.
Given the level of preparedness in this specific attack, I doubt the attacker changing their weapon from gun to something else would result in less fatality or injury of victims.

Oh look, it's that weird phenomenon again where outsiders comment deeply on the things Americans usually don't want to talk about amongst themselves.

Aaron747 wrote:

TriJets wrote:

Reinhardt wrote:

Thoughts and prayers... bla bla...

Right says you have laws enforce them. No changes whatsoever over my dead body to an AMENDMENT to the constitution. I have a right to keep any kind of weapon, stuff you.

Moderates / left say - well the laws don't work so they need changing. You won't spend extra money on mental health, you won't put in place more stringent background checks, you won't limit ammo clip sizes or reduce what guns people can own, where or what they can buy.

Rest of the world looks on in part disbelief part amusement that the self proclaimed "Greatest country in the world" can't / won't solve the issue. Meanwhile years go by, more and more dead and.... nothing. NOBODY in this day and age needs anything other than a single shotgun or whatever for hunting or home protection if you live in the middle of nowhere. If you live in a city in the US, then you don't need one for any reason, just like you don't in any other civilised country in the world. If you feel you do, then you have a serious issue with your policing and society. You wanna shoot and own guns for fun, fine no issue- go to a licensed range. Keep them locked up. But you don't need 10 and you don't need automatic rifles.

Drugs, poverty all play a part but you won't get anywhere unless you change the law. There is no other answer - if there was others would have found it. You would have found it.

So either accept this will happen regularly (in which case do we need a new thread every time?!) or do something.

You ignore the fact that most crime and most gun crime is concentrated in urban areas in the United States. Telling people who live in the areas at greatest risk for crime that they don't need a way to defend themselves is out of touch. Telling the single mom with a restraining order out against her violent boyfriend that she can't own a handgun to protect herself and her children is out of touch. Disarm the criminals first and then we can start talking about gun control.

Absolutely - they must be disarmed, but in order to do that, you need to legalize/regulate urban drug networks and dismantle transnational gun smuggling within and into/out of the US. That would require steps at the federal level conservatives are unlikely to ever support and many states will cry 10th amendment foul over. On the left the ACLU would probably oppose criminal gun seizures too.

And even if those measures were taken, it would still take generations for the effects to be truly felt. Unfortunately, I just don't see anyone having the political appetite for it. Politicians want instant gratification because they are up for reelection in a year or two, not twenty.

TriJets wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

TriJets wrote:

You ignore the fact that most crime and most gun crime is concentrated in urban areas in the United States. Telling people who live in the areas at greatest risk for crime that they don't need a way to defend themselves is out of touch. Telling the single mom with a restraining order out against her violent boyfriend that she can't own a handgun to protect herself and her children is out of touch. Disarm the criminals first and then we can start talking about gun control.

Absolutely - they must be disarmed, but in order to do that, you need to legalize/regulate urban drug networks and dismantle transnational gun smuggling within and into/out of the US. That would require steps at the federal level conservatives are unlikely to ever support and many states will cry 10th amendment foul over. On the left the ACLU would probably oppose criminal gun seizures too.

And even if those measures were taken, it would still take generations for the effects to be truly felt. Unfortunately, I just don't see anyone having the political appetite for it. Politicians want instant gratification because they are up for reelection in a year or two, not twenty.

Indeed - we haven't solved this stuff precisely because those with a brain in politics knows it requires multigenerational commitment nobody will stick around for.

What I find funny and ironic is that at the same time if an American or multiple Americans are killed anywhere outside the U.S. it can become a diplomatic incident. While if is shot in the good old U.S. its an everyday occurence.

TriJets wrote:

The guns are not going anywhere. As I said, there are over 400 million guns out there. You could outlaw guns tomorrow and the criminals would have no issue finding firearms to use. All gun control does it make it harder for law abiding citizens to protect themselves.

I'd happily give up my guns the moment every single criminal was disarmed first. There's no way for that to happen, though.

Very few are suggesting guns are outlawed, what most of us are calling for is tighter regulations. It wouldn't prevent the mass shootings and absurdly high gun homicide rate, but doing something about it would be a drastic step up from: 'the problem is so bad it's not even worth bothering to try'.

Take the time to remember: the ('developed') countries with tighter regulations do not compare even remotely to the US with regards to mass shootings and overall deaths. That should be an indication at the very least that more guns don't make a country safer, if that was the case the US would be the safest, rather than comfortably the worst of 'developed' countries.