Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now, It is Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
I edited my previous post, to take out some personal pomposity.
I think that everyone here is of good will, and that this is ultimately true of the country as well. Therefore, no matter how things may look at any one time, I think that eventually a good resolution will be achieved.
But it really is a problem right now, and will be until then, whatever that resolution is.
If so, what about the 99% of violent crime that isn't school shootings by deranged young males? I mean, nine people, yes that's awful, but that's a typical weekend in Chicago.
The mass shootings that get all the attention represent a tiny portion of all violent crime in this country, and your chances of being in one are infinitesimally small. In fact gun homicides in general, according to the Pew Center, have decreased nearly 50% since 1993, as of a few years ago. And most gun deaths (not homicides, just deaths) are by suicide.
In most violent crime, there is some kind of relationship between perpetrator and victim, or at least the circumstances of their meeting are not totally chance (like a drug deal). But it's only when about five or more innocent people are killed by a crazy stranger do people start wringing their hands and talking about solutions, and honestly I think a lot of it is just window dressing. Why do we assign so much importance to these random, unlikely events? And I do it too--it was the Virginia Tech shooting that motivated me to start carrying a gun and get training in how to shoot a pistol.
Don't get me wrong, these shootings are awful, but they are highly random and quite frankly not the biggest problem, not even close statistically, if you want to talk about reducing gun deaths in this country. For these reasons (and others), I'm skeptical when people want to use events like this to advance gun control laws.
Money make ya handsome
The following 3 users say Thank You to Pariah Carey for this post:
Trading: Primarily Energy but also a little Equities, Fixed Income, Metals and Crypto.
Posts: 4,935 since Dec 2013
Thanks Given: 4,248
Thanks Received: 9,928
Pointless if you continue to allow "private sales" exempt from all laws and checks.
I know this is the rallying cry for everybody who carries guns to justify it but in reality this is a very rare occurrence. The news is NOT full of stories of people who are saved from a crazy by somebody with a CHL
I had an interesting conversation with somebody (maybe even here at BMT/gfutures.io but I can't find it) where a pro-gun advocate was making the argument about protecting his family. The truth is your family is more likely to get hurt/killed by a drunk driver or a texting driver than any situation where you havinig a gun could help them. If the pro-gun group, spent half as much effort on preventing dui/dwi/texting as they do protecting their gun rights the US would be a considerably safer place. But we all know that won't happen.
How do we pay for that? Your talking about hiring hundreds of thousands of people. Maybe a tax on guns, or ammo or CHLs?
Because it's so easy to get a gun, even legally, without having to go through the checks.
I enjoy a good gun conversation. I was brought up in a country that doesn't have guns so I maybe not surprisingly I find the US's lack of gun policy amazing. Even more amazing is what @bobwest says's here. The US is one of the few places these senseless killings happen so regularly and its meet with indifference. People really seem more concerned about the gun laws than the deaths these senseless shootings bring. I'm not sure what the solution is, and maybe gun control isn't the solution, but surely something needs to be done to stop this.
There are more people killed in these random unlikely events then there are by terrorism in the US.
The following 3 users say Thank You to SMCJB for this post:
It is for sure viral in USA and some other countries...
Those who are a bit farther away may see it more pragmatic **:
There seems only one way to get rid of this armed disease.
Just give away as many weapons to people - without registering (as is today).
BUT
1) Take ALL ammunition out of the markets...
Even around the country.
2) Give people who need to shoot as a hobby the chance in some protected places where
ammunition is given, controlled and on exit every not shot piece has to be returned.
That works well - and will help people with gun passion to follow their hobby.
For sure it prevents from evil done by some drugged persons without thinking to shoot
innocent people.
Of course this takes ONE generation at least to step into new levels.
One could start today at least.
GFIs1
who believes the same could be done on army level as well...
Why should soldiers play Thief and Police in real life? There are well done games today...
**Things listed here work in Europe and especially Switzerland - where every soldier has his military weapon
at home - quite well...
But one could learn - yes?
The following user says Thank You to GFIs1 for this post:
I am sorry but this stat that has been passed around and this quote is utter BS. These mass shootings are acts of terrorism. And until the are treated as such they will continue.
Terrorism | Define Terrorism at Dictionary.comnoun
1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.
Especially doesn't imply only political motives.
I am sure we can agree that these acts are meant to terrorize?
Terrorize | Define Terrorize at Dictionary.comverb (used with object), terrorized, terrorizing.
1. to fill or overcome with terror.
2. to dominate or coerce by intimidation.
3. to produce widespread fear by acts of violence, as bombings.
The following user says Thank You to tturner86 for this post:
