The Thread Where We Discuss Guns and Gun Control

[Birdjaguar]

American stereotypes supported events in the news.

 

[Farm Boy]

Careful with those.

 

[Birdjaguar]

The white guy shot the kid (in the head) through his front door window, then when the kid was lying on the porch, he opened the door and shot him again in the arm. The kid got up and ran and it took him three tries from houses on the street to get help.

 

[9gkj548hkm20vk79dj689bnj4]

I'm just going to guess: The homeowner was white and the teenager was not white, am I correct?

you'd think the news would be carrying it if that wasn't the case? they write stories for stupid people.
Edit: *international news now apparently*

 

[Farm Boy]

The white guy shot the kid (in the head) through his front door window, then when the kid was lying on the porch, he opened the door and shot him again in the arm. The kid got up and ran and it took him three tries from houses on the street to get help.

Yup. Stinks. MIL answered the door for a man who had been shot once. Bad night all around. Most notably for him, obviously.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

One wonders what kind of gun he was shot with, if he
was able to run away after being shot in the head twice.

I suspect senile dementia is as relevant as racism.

It's like you're incapable of ever acknowledging bigotry as being a major motivating factor

 

[Farm Boy]

It was a .32 revolver. He's up on two felony charges for the moment. The man does not look spry for his years.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

It was a .32 revolver. He's up on two felony charges for the moment. The man does not look spry for his years.

So what? There's too many freaks like him who are trigger happy and desperate to roleplay dirty harry, this isn't even the first case of a black person, a kid no less, being shot at for simply being at the wrong house, if someone shoots you in the head they're not doing it to incapacitate you, they're doing it to kill you

 

[Arwon]

Maybe stop shooting at people for being near your house jesus christ this shouldn't be hard

A man has been charged with second-degree murder in the US after he allegedly shot and killed a 20-year-old woman as the car she was in mistakenly drove up the man's driveway.

 

[Farm Boy]

So what? There's too many freaks like him who are trigger happy and desperate to roleplay dirty harry, this isn't even the first case of a black person, a kid no less, being shot at for simply being at the wrong house, if someone shoots you in the head they're not doing it to incapacitate you, they're doing it to kill you.

Everyone is saying the dude probably tried to kill a black kid for being black. Even the post you responded to before mine. The cops are saying it, the prosecutor is saying it, I'm saying it. The shooter looks like he's not all there. If we want some takeaway there, it might be in giving nuclear codes to people in their 80s? I don't know what "so what" you're looking for. Maybe he'll make it through the trial, maybe he won't?

The revolver was a .32 caliber. We still have the kid for the moment, we might still lose him. Seems like a white woman was killed for being a white woman in New York, according to Arwon's link. Then again, the lighting was bad, maybe she looked black?

 

[Cloud_Strife]

We've got another weirdo here desperate to excuse the attempted murder of a kid, it's like you can't help yourself, regardless of how repugnant it is

 

[Farm Boy]

I was wondering when you were just going to decide to make up something insane to put in my mouth. The foreplay was getting tedious.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

I was wondering when you were just going to decide to make up something insane to put in my mouth. The foreplay was getting tedious.

It was a .32 revolver. He's up on two felony charges for the moment. The man does not look spry for his years.

Everyone is saying the dude probably tried to kill a black kid for being black. Even the post you responded to before mine. The cops are saying it, the prosecutor is saying it, I'm saying it. The shooter looks like he's not all there. If we want some takeaway there, it might be in giving nuclear codes to people in their 80s? I don't know what "so what" you're looking for. Maybe he'll make it through the trial, maybe he won't?

The revolver was a .32 caliber. We still have the kid for the moment, we might still lose him. Seems like a white woman was killed for being a white woman in New York, according to Arwon's link. Then again, the lighting was bad, maybe she looked black?

This you bro?

 

[Farm Boy]

Those are indeed words I said. It's your takeaway from the entire conversation that's a gaslight. We've played this game too many times for it to still be amusing.

 

[Kyriakos]

Going to a driveway by mistake, while looking for another person's house= shot to death

While outright banning guns isn't going to happen, there should be psychological evaluation before you are allowed to carry. And regular (every couple of years) checks that it is still valid/renewed.

There's also the already mentioned incident where a black kid was shot (not killed) due to knocking on the wrong door.

 

[EgonSpengler]

Maybe stop shooting at people for being near your house jesus christ this shouldn't be hard

Going to a driveway by mistake, while looking for another person's house= shot to death

While outright banning guns isn't going to happen, there should be psychological evaluation before you are allowed to carry. And regular (every couple of years) checks that it is still valid/renewed.

Some states, I'm not sure how many, are experimenting with these "red flag" laws. I'm not sure how well they're working yet, but I think they're a worthy experiment. For me, someone wanting a gun for self-defense or for home-defense in the absence of any demonstrable threat should constitute a "red flag" all by itself. A person who is experiencing some kind of generalized anxiety, so much so that they feel they need to be ready to shoot someone, without any reasonable threat should be the last person to have a gun. It could even be at the level of a diagnosable disorder that they need treatment for. In these two instances, it's not being reported that either shooter had a history of being attacked, or of their home being broken into, or that they lived in a violent neighborhood. And yet this 84-year-old man answered a knock at his door with a gun in his hand. That's not normal. Even if he hadn't fired, the mere fact that he had the gun is a sign of something, to me: Either his neighborhood looked like a Walter Hill movie, or he believed that it did.

 

[Lexicus]

I can't see any justification for that statement...Do you doubt that he was really shot?

Anyway no need to wonder. It was a .32 caliber pistol. Those have been known to kill people just fine. And he was shot once in the head. The other shot was in his arm.

Charges filed in shooting of Kansas City teen who rang wrong doorbell​

"He was confronted by a man who told him, ‘Don’t come back around here,’” and then the man “immediately fired his weapon," attorney Lee Merritt said.


https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...-ralph-yarl-opening-fire-teens-atto-rcna80033

Good that they did end up charging the psycho anyway

 

[Arwon]

Some states, I'm not sure how many, are experimenting with these "red flag" laws. I'm not sure how well they're working yet, but I think they're a worthy experiment. For me, someone wanting a gun for self-defense or for home-defense in the absence of any demonstrable threat should constitute a "red flag" all by itself. A person who is experiencing some kind of generalized anxiety, so much so that they feel they need to be ready to shoot someone, without any reasonable threat should be the last person to have a gun. It could even be at the level of a diagnosable disorder that they need treatment for. In these two instances, it's not being reported that either shooter had a history of being attacked, or of their home being broken into, or that they lived in a violent neighborhood. And yet this 84-year-old man answered a knock at his door with a gun in his hand. That's not normal. Even if he hadn't fired, the mere fact that he had the gun is a sign of something, to me: Either his neighborhood looked like a Walter Hill movie, or he believed that it did.

I suspect a significant problem is there's a whole industry (industries?) devoted to getting these people amped up, including the NRA, some of the news outlets, a major political party, a big online ecosystem. And it's pushing some people into full-blown crises, which are specifically centred around firearms, generalised paranoia, racial panic, etc.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Some states, I'm not sure how many, are experimenting with these "red flag" laws. I'm not sure how well they're working yet, but I think they're a worthy experiment. For me, someone wanting a gun for self-defense or for home-defense in the absence of any demonstrable threat should constitute a "red flag" all by itself. A person who is experiencing some kind of generalized anxiety, so much so that they feel they need to be ready to shoot someone, without any reasonable threat should be the last person to have a gun. It could even be at the level of a diagnosable disorder that they need treatment for. In these two instances, it's not being reported that either shooter had a history of being attacked, or of their home being broken into, or that they lived in a violent neighborhood. And yet this 84-year-old man answered a knock at his door with a gun in his hand. That's not normal. Even if he hadn't fired, the mere fact that he had the gun is a sign of something, to me: Either his neighborhood looked like a Walter Hill movie, or he believed that it did.

The shooter is probably going to raise the state's "stand-your-ground" defense, so the fact that his response to the situation was unreasonable is going to be a key factor.

Good that they did end up charging the psycho anyway

It seems important to me, that in this particular situation, folks don't overlook the fact that the shooter's behavior was an unacceptable response to the situation, but without trying to excuse his actions as a result of some sort of mental infirmity. So "crazy" in the colloquial sense... that he shouldn't remotely be responding in that way... and "crazy" in the colloquial sense... that he either should be trying to move past/set aside the kind of sentiments that caused him to answer his door in that fashion, or at a minimum, shouldn't be acting on whatever unreasonable emotions led him to act that way... but not "crazy" in the clinical/medical sense... where his actions get excused/dismissed/diminished as the unfortunate, but unavoidable result of mental illness. His actions indicate that his mind was certainly "troubled", but not because he is old or otherwise mentally handicapped, but rather, because his mental response to the situation was unreasonable, unacceptable, and inexcusable.

 

[EgonSpengler]

I suspect a significant problem is there's a whole industry (industries?) devoted to getting these people amped up, including the NRA, some of the news outlets, a major political party, a big online ecosystem. And it's pushing some people into full-blown crises, which are specifically centred around firearms, generalised paranoia, racial panic, etc.

Very much so:

Some public service announcements from the National Rifle Association:

Spoiler :

The shooter is probably going to raise the state's "stand-your-ground" defense, so the fact that his response to the situation was unreasonable is going to be a key factor.

Don't even get me started on Stand Your Ground laws. Whoops, too late...

The short version: Stand Your Ground laws are a disaster that increase violence.
The long version: Journal of the American Medical Association, 21 February 2022 - "Analysis of 'Stand Your Ground' Self-defense Laws and Statewide Rates of Homicides and Firearm Homicides"

In this cohort study assessing 41 US states, SYG laws were associated with an 8% to 11% national increase in monthly rates of homicide and firearm homicide. State-level increases in homicide and firearm homicide rates reached 10% or higher for many Southern states, including Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and Louisiana.

Increases in violent deaths varied across states, with the largest increases (16.2% to 33.5%) clustering in the South (eg, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana).

US-wide analyses report either no associations or small increases in homicide associated with enacting SYG laws; single-state analyses, which almost exclusively evaluated Florida’s SYG law, identify substantial increases in homicide (24% to 27%).

I'm intrigued by the differences between states. Unless we're to assume that people in these Southern states are just more violent than people in these other states, there must be something at play that accounts for the difference.

Associations of SYG laws with violent deaths differed by state (Figure 3). Large increases for homicide and firearm homicide rates were associated with the enactment of SYG laws in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, and Missouri. These increases ranged from 16.2% to 33.5%, with firearm homicides typically showing larger increases than total homicides. SYG laws were not significantly associated with changes in homicides or firearm homicides rates in a handful of states, including Arizona, Indiana, Michigan, Nevada, Oklahoma, Texas, and West Virginia.