Is There A Reason Why Those Most Ignorant Of Firearms Have So Much Sway?

[Mikej]

Why don't we just start with actually giving people jail sentences for commiting crimes? And then do another count in 10 years or so?

 

[nwslopoke]

As far as the opposing party's (auto corrected, should say "original poster") theory that anti-gunners ignorant about guns have "so much sway" goes, I think many of us have lost perspective. The AWB passed with bipartisan support 30 years ago. Since it's expired the country has witnessed some pretty horrific "mass shootings"—I mean freaking awful mass casualties of innocent strangers and lots of children, at the hands of monsterous loons—some committed with higher capacity box magazine fed semiautomatic rifles that are easy to demonize, AND STILL the chance of similar legislation being passed today is 0%. With that, the Supremes have clarified that the 2nd amendment applies to individuals thereby clarifying peoples' right to bear arms, and a pile of states have repealed laws requiring a license to carry concesled. From the perspective of the Gifford's Center and Everytown USA, the pro-gun control folks are asking the same question "how do they gave so much sway" about the pro-2A folks.

Those that are anti-gun and hold sway are simply ignorant because why would someone who thinks that a hobby/sport/method of defense is dangerous and unnecessary know a lot about the subject, beyond the negatives. A silly example might be that there are large numbers of folks on this forum who out of hand would refuse to become vegetarian because—yuck!—and don't know the first thing about vegetarian cooking. It's sort of like that, but people die so public policy is involved.

My opinion is that the cat's out of the bag. Even if pro-gun control folks had the political support to do what Australia has done, they can't. The surge in popularity and availability of the AR platform rifle/pistol following the expiration of the ban has created an entire new firearms industry that has it's own political allies and PR machine. The competition in that industry has pushed the entry level price of a good basic AR from about $1200 to about $600 and as low as $399 for budget rifles (pre-pandemic I think I saw ATI poly lower rifles for like $359). The cool factor of these weapons, enhanced by FPS games and movies surely helped drive demand and my guess is demand has also been fueled by large numbers of soldiers returning from combat deployments who are completely familiar and comfortable with the platform making it an obvious HD and sporting choice for them. The manufacturers have also made it (or perhaps embraced) owning guns and AR's in particular a culture war/ political issue, probably also prompting some sales to guys who in the past would be more inclined to purchase a 12 gauge than an AR.

At this point we have way too many firearms, box magazine fed semi-auto rifles, "high capacity" magazines", and "high capacity" semiautomatic handguns in circulation in private hands for the government to be able to afford to legally take them off the streets—assuming the owners wouldn't rebel. Remember the government also can't take legally acquired property without paying compensation, which is why states always grandfather newly regulated firearms related items which always includes some dumb aspirational voluntary destruction/turn in method for owners to get rid of the now illegal to anyone else items of property. Moreover the highest court in the land is skeptical of the constitutionality of firearms regulation and would probably strike down legislation like the 1994 AWB.

So now millions of us are well armed. I think something firearms enthusiasts should be asking is "how do we stop the more horrific headline grabbing gun violence?" I don't mean normal crime related gun violence (btw, I think the term "mass shooting" really should exclude gang, drug or property related crime shootings), because that's always going to happen. I mean crazy goes to school and kills 15 people or disgruntled DV perp ex husband kills wife kids and extended family type shootings. Clearly a capable motivated crazy can kill dozens by other means (vehicle, arson, explosives, knives), but it's foolish to claim access to firearms doesn't make it easier. Personally, I don't believe outlawing certain firearms based on improved ergonomic characteristics and even limiting magazine capacity would help much.

I disagree. It's hard to make a parallel comparison to the 2A and that's awesome. Very few things are as explicit as the 1st & 2nd Amendments. No one is threatening to fine, jail or shoot vegetarians for their choices. Also the AWB more over, the AR15 is a convenient scapegoat. I lived through the 90s and people going "postal" with hand guns. 9mm specifically, along with all sorts of killer 9mm bullets. Again, no one bothered to learn facts.

The politicians knew they would never get a handgun ban so they made up something most of the population didn't care about and called it a victory. Interesting for me, during that time Mac 10s, Tec 9s, Uzis were more popular on the streets than AR15s and I believe unaffected the ban. I saw several of those types but never saw an M16 outside of my USAF or National Guard duty. I don't recall when I saw or touched my first AR15. Maybe 2011. Thats from ending all services around 98-99.

I strongly disagree that current politicians would pass on the opportunity for a new federal AWB or turn in. That's the Golden Apple of, look what I did. Zero to do with public safety. Never has been. It's what career politicians need to bookend their worthless decades in office.

 

[bradsteen]

I think something firearms enthusiasts should be asking is "how do we stop the more horrific headline grabbing gun violence?"

In my opinion...

We live in a society that glorifies violence, but that doesn't teach its children when violence is appropriate and when it is not. Impressionable young minds are inundated with violent forms of entertainment (movies, video games, etc) without context or balance, and the media acts as a megaphone to amplify every violent act that happens in real life. So why are we surprised that violence is on the rise?

"We" as firearms enthusiasts are already putting in significant efforts to address firearm-related violence. We educate people about guns, reinforce the importance of safe handling and sound judgement, answer questions, correct common misconceptions, and generally demonstrate to non-gun folks that guns aren't the scary evil things they've been lead to believe, but are actually essential tools for personal protection, self reliance, and preservation of freedom.

We could probably be a bit more organized, a bit more polished in our approach, and invest a bit more time and effort into public awareness campaigns that are focused on the issue instead of the politics to be inclusive of those so who identify with different political affiliations than our own. These efforts indirectly help address the violence issue by working to destigmatize firearms and improve the general public's understanding of firearms and their legitimate purposes in our society. This will in turn help us frame the national debate around actually addressing the violence problem instead of blaming inanimate objects for the actions of their users.

"We" as a society need to address the root causes of violence, not the mechanisms through which it is conducted. In my opinion those are namely:

• Inability to diagnose, treat, and manage mental health conditions that cause a person to be a risk to themselves or others
• Inability of many people to control their emotions, manage conflict, take responsibility for their actions, and channel aggression into productive outlets
• Lack of education, in schools and in the home, on topics like conflict resolution, empathy, situational awareness (so they can identify when a person may be a risk to themselves or others), critical thinking & cost/benefit analysis (so people learn to ask "are my actions worth the consequences" before giving in to knee-jerk impulses), and lawful use of force (when is using force OK, and when is it not)
• Amplification of violent acts by the media, creating infamy for the perpetrator and inspiring copycats
• Use of violent rhetoric by politicians, media personalities, and others to fan the flames of political discourse and promote fear / rage in their constituents or followers
• Lack of self-reliance, self-confidence, and introspection, resulting in people identifying as victims and failing to recognize the role their own actions play in their individual circumstances

If as a nation we were to invest our energy addressing these items (and a number of others) instead of blaming guns, I suspect we would see a dramatic reduction in violence across the board, both gun-related and not.

But our politicians won't do that. Call me jaded, but I suspect many find firearm-related violence is a convenient straw man - each party blames the policies of the other, and both use it to drum up fear and rage in their bases. They keep everyone focused on those things so that few will pay attention to the graft, corruption, negligence, and abuse of power that they exhibit. Also, it's so much easier to pretend they're working hard when everyone is emotionally charged and nobody's holding them accountable for delivering the results they promised. When nothing changes they blame the system and the other party, and drum up support to "keep up the fight".

Consequently it is very difficult to affect change in this sort of environment. Facts are irrelevant to the rabid anti-gun folks. It's basically a religion in its own right, with a prophesized end state (stopping gun violence) that will never be realized, and the followers clinging blindly to their faith in spite of mountains of evidence that demonstrate the sheer impossibility of their position. For a group that considers themselves advocates of science and reason, the pure and unapologetic ignorance they demonstrate when it comes to guns would be hilarious if it weren't focused like a laser on trampling our constitutionally protected rights, and as a result impairing our ability to protect ourselves and our families.

On that note... *steps off of soapbox*

 

[orygun]

Speaking of the cat being out of the bag .
It's simple to anyone with a brain that what created the popularity of highly visible mass casualty attacks is the ATTENTION that is paid to them.
Tools , location, and victim types are not going to be hard to guess when a nut job decides to go get their 15 minutes. Our society created the perfect scenario for a loser to get on TV

Agreed. I've always been of the opinion that any mass shooter should not be mentioned by name, ever. I think that notoriety is a factor in their actions.

Its pretty simple, the majority of society does not want to take responsibility for their personal safety. Society has a [slight] liberal bias naturally, so when it comes to things of difficulty its easier to rely on social policies to provide your needs (911).

And that's the same dimwits saying, "Defund the police!" Their minds change when it's them that need assistance.

 

[Koda]

So now millions of us are well armed. I think something firearms enthusiasts should be asking is "how do we stop the more horrific headline grabbing gun violence?" I don't mean normal crime related gun violence (btw, I think the term "mass shooting" really should exclude gang, drug or property related crime shootings), because that's always going to happen. I mean crazy goes to school and kills 15 people or disgruntled DV perp ex husband kills wife kids and extended family type shootings. Clearly a capable motivated crazy can kill dozens by other means (vehicle, arson, explosives, knives), but it's foolish to claim access to firearms doesn't make it easier. Personally, I don't believe outlawing certain firearms based on improved ergonomic characteristics and even limiting magazine capacity would help much.

We have been asking for better mental health care, even the NRA has been asking for this for years. Gun advocates have bees saying for years to enforce the laws we currently have. And it falls on deaf ears from the Democrat majorities who push for more gun control. Meanwhile, the same party defunds police, gives crimnial amnesty to rioters, and releases violent offenders.
Theres no more fingers to point at gun rights supporters anymore. Weve compromised everything to the point these infringements are now entering prohibitions.

Access to firearms doesnt mean its easy, we do have background checks. Its already illegal for felons. Theres nothing anyone can do about first time offenders but the mental health clues are always there and nothings been done.

 

[MichaelH]

We have been asking for better mental health care, even the NRA has been asking for this for years. Gun advocates have bees saying for years to enforce the laws we currently have. And it falls on deaf ears from the Democrat majorities who push for more gun control. Meanwhile, the same party defunds police, gives crimnial amnesty to rioters, and releases violent offenders.
Theres no more fingers to point at gun rights supporters anymore. Weve compromised everything to the point these infringements are now entering prohibitions.

Access to firearms doesnt mean its easy, we do have background checks. Its already illegal for felons. Theres nothing anyone can do about first time offenders but the mental health clues are always there and nothings been done.

Not entirely true in my opinion. ,There is HUGE disconnect in interests of the politicians who are pro-gun rights and parrot the calls for beter mental health care access following a mass shooting, that, in practice, doesn't jive with the other part of their anti-tax, small government, shrink the social safety net base. This is where single issue voting falls apart because nine times out of ten they will vote against any measure to raise revenue to fund mental health care or require employers or health insurance carriers to cover mental health care. Frankly, I think liberals who are concerned about gun violence believe it's easier to try to regulate guns than get Americans to tax themselves to pay for mental health care. The mass shooting trend started long before calls to defund the police and decriminalizing drug crimes.

I'm sure we could debate for hours how important some aspects of a social safety net / or lack thereof also contributes to positive or negative mental health of individuals in society. I tend to think the mass shooting thing also has a ton to do with media and society at large giving people twisted messages of who are winners and losers in society, and the failure of society to endorse the idea that it's fine to NOT be special and that normal working folks aren't losers. People who believe that their lives have value are less likely to throw it away by doing the unthinkable.

 

[Xaevian]

In my opinion...

We live in a society that glorifies violence, but that doesn't teach its children when violence is appropriate and when it is not. Impressionable young minds are inundated with violent forms of entertainment (movies, video games, etc) without context or balance, and the media acts as a megaphone to amplify every violent act that happens in real life. So why are we surprised that violence is on the rise?

"We" as firearms enthusiasts are already putting in significant efforts to address firearm-related violence. We educate people about guns, reinforce the importance of safe handling and sound judgement, answer questions, correct common misconceptions, and generally demonstrate to non-gun folks that guns aren't the scary evil things they've been lead to believe, but are actually essential tools for personal protection, self reliance, and preservation of freedom.

We could probably be a bit more organized, a bit more polished in our approach, and invest a bit more time and effort into public awareness campaigns that are focused on the issue instead of the politics to be inclusive of those so who identify with different political affiliations than our own. These efforts indirectly help address the violence issue by working to destigmatize firearms and improve the general public's understanding of firearms and their legitimate purposes in our society. This will in turn help us frame the national debate around actually addressing the violence problem instead of blaming inanimate objects for the actions of their users.

"We" as a society need to address the root causes of violence, not the mechanisms through which it is conducted. In my opinion those are namely:

• Inability to diagnose, treat, and manage mental health conditions that cause a person to be a risk to themselves or others
• Inability of many people to control their emotions, manage conflict, take responsibility for their actions, and channel aggression into productive outlets
• Lack of education, in schools and in the home, on topics like conflict resolution, empathy, situational awareness (so they can identify when a person may be a risk to themselves or others), critical thinking & cost/benefit analysis (so people learn to ask "are my actions worth the consequences" before giving in to knee-jerk impulses), and lawful use of force (when is using force OK, and when is it not)
• Amplification of violent acts by the media, creating infamy for the perpetrator and inspiring copycats
• Use of violent rhetoric by politicians, media personalities, and others to fan the flames of political discourse and promote fear / rage in their constituents or followers
• Lack of self-reliance, self-confidence, and introspection, resulting in people identifying as victims and failing to recognize the role their own actions play in their individual circumstances

If as a nation we were to invest our energy addressing these items (and a number of others) instead of blaming guns, I suspect we would see a dramatic reduction in violence across the board, both gun-related and not.

But our politicians won't do that. Call me jaded, but I suspect many find firearm-related violence is a convenient straw man - each party blames the policies of the other, and both use it to drum up fear and rage in their bases. They keep everyone focused on those things so that few will pay attention to the graft, corruption, negligence, and abuse of power that they exhibit. Also, it's so much easier to pretend they're working hard when everyone is emotionally charged and nobody's holding them accountable for delivering the results they promised. When nothing changes they blame the system and the other party, and drum up support to "keep up the fight".

Consequently it is very difficult to affect change in this sort of environment. Facts are irrelevant to the rabid anti-gun folks. It's basically a religion in its own right, with a prophesized end state (stopping gun violence) that will never be realized, and the followers clinging blindly to their faith in spite of mountains of evidence that demonstrate the sheer impossibility of their position. For a group that considers themselves advocates of science and reason, the pure and unapologetic ignorance they demonstrate when it comes to guns would be hilarious if it weren't focused like a laser on trampling our constitutionally protected rights, and as a result impairing our ability to protect ourselves and our families.

On that note... *steps off of soapbox*

That is pretty astute.

 

[Koda]

Not entirely true in my opinion. ,There is HUGE disconnect in interests of the politicians who are pro-gun rights and parrot the calls for beter mental health care access following a mass shooting, that, in practice, doesn't jive with the other part of their anti-tax, small government, shrink the social safety net base. This is where single issue voting falls apart because nine times out of ten they will vote against any measure to raise revenue to fund mental health care or require employers or health insurance carriers to cover mental health care. Frankly, I think liberals who are concerned about gun violence believe it's easier to try to regulate guns than get Americans to tax themselves to pay for mental health care. The mass shooting trend started long before calls to defund the police and decriminalizing drug crimes.

I'm sure we could debate for hours how important some aspects of a social safety net / or lack thereof also contributes to positive or negative mental health of individuals in society. I tend to think the mass shooting thing also has a ton to do with media and society at large giving people twisted messages of who are winners and losers in society, and the failure of society to endorse the idea that it's fine to NOT be special and that normal working folks aren't losers. People who believe that their lives have value are less likely to throw it away by doing the unthinkable.

(bold emphasis mine)
About a year or so ago Gov Desantis created a law that created a social program that funded setting up men with fatherless sons from single parent families. The liberals lauded the efforts while they attempted to indoctrinate our children in schools with liberal ideologies that include the idea that men and women have no gender roles. The big disconnect in todays generation is a lack of parenting and parents being involved with their children rather than letting the schools and social media raise them. Desantis did more for "gun violence" with that policy of his adding value to lives than any gun control measure will ever accomplish.

I do agree with you there is a disconnect with conservative politicians who wont fund social mental health programs, they shoot themselves in their own foot (pun intended here... ). Socialized healthcare isnt something conservatives support typically, until one gets laid off...

 

[Cavedweller]

The AWB passed with bipartisan support 30 years ago. Since it's expired the country has witnessed some pretty horrific "mass shootings"—I mean freaking awful mass casualties of innocent strangers and lots of children, at the hands of monsterous loons—some committed with higher capacity box magazine fed semiautomatic rifles that are easy to demonize, AND STILL the chance of similar legislation being passed today is 0%.

Because the AWB accomplished nothing. The same firearms were available during the "ban" with mostly cosmetic changes made to comply with the law. There were mass shootings of the type you describe during as well as after the "ban."

I think something firearms enthusiasts should be asking is "how do we stop the more horrific headline grabbing gun violence?"

How about we stop the headline grabbing, and focus on the real problem?

I don't mean normal crime related gun violence (btw, I think the term "mass shooting" really should exclude gang, drug or property related crime shootings), because that's always going to happen.

So the unpublicized day to day slaughter of innocents in the inner cities (Chicago, Philadelphia, D.C. et al.), 40, 50, 60, every single weekend is normal and "always going to happen?" Move on folks, nothing to see here. No need to try and stop this.

It may be normal for you. I don't consider it normal at all. Because it seems to be the usual thing in recent years, does that make it acceptable?

I mean crazy goes to school and kills 15 people or disgruntled DV perp ex husband kills wife kids and extended family type shootings.

This type of incident is rare compared to that which you call "normal." So, where would preventive efforts save more lives?

Personally, I don't believe outlawing certain firearms based on improved ergonomic characteristics and even limiting magazine capacity would help much.

Which is exactly what the AWB did, and it didn't help.

 

[MichaelH]

I'm not gonna endorse bagging on the trans kids or their parents wanting them to not get bullied at school, but I think the big-brother style program you're reporting on sounds great. That's the sort of thing that can totally make a difference if the kid isn't already too damaged when the positive intervention starts. I can imagine Parkland not happening if the shooter had anyone in his life treating him like he mattered.

 

[Koda]

I'm not gonna endorse bagging on the trans kids or their parents wanting them to not get bullied at school, but I think the big-brother style program you're reporting on sounds great. That's the sort of thing that can totally make a difference if the kid isn't already too damaged when the positive intervention starts. I can imagine Parkland not happening if the shooter had anyone in his life treating him like he mattered.

agree and this shows that the solutions to "gun violence" including school and mass shootings can be found if we work on social programs but gun control measures do nothing to fix the root cause of the problems. Note: this is something that gun rights activists have been saying for way more years than the current trend in school and mass shootings.

 

[3MTA3]

I don't get the fixation on the increase in the number if mass shootings since the expiration of the AWB. Rifles, including skeery black ones, are used in 14% of mass shootings. What about the other 86%?

This graph* in particular shows no relationship between the AWB and deaths in mass shootings. They have been on an increasing trend but as you can see deaths during the AWB fit the trend both before and after.



* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shootings_in_the_United_States

 

[Jay Walk]

Truth, it is of no use to the committed gun controller.

 

[MichaelH]

Because the AWB accomplished nothing. The same firearms were available during the "ban" with mostly cosmetic changes made to comply with the law. There were mass shootings of the type you describe during as well as after the "ban."

How about we stop the headline grabbing, and focus on the real problem?

So the unpublicized day to day slaughter of innocents in the inner cities (Chicago, Philadelphia, D.C. et al.), 40, 50, 60, every single weekend is normal and "always going to happen?" Move on folks, nothing to see here. No need to try and stop this.

It may be normal for you. I don't consider it normal at all. Because it seems to be the usual thing in recent years, does that make it acceptable?

This type of incident is rare compared to that which you call "normal." So, where would preventive efforts save more lives?



Which is exactly what the AWB did, and it didn't help.

The mom's and anti-gun folks are focusing on the relatively rare school/mall/ store shooting. Lets be honest only the moms who live in poor inner city Chicago/Philadelphia/D.C. care about that gun violence and some of them blame the guns for their kids using them on others and then getting shot in retaliation: it's easier to blame the gun than your own kid's accountability. I'd also wager 90% of those shootings were committed by someone not allowed to have a gun. If we're being honest the recent spike in street crime shooting coincides neatly with the pandemic buying spree where every available firearm in America was purchased by folks who normally wouldn't have: my theory is that a large number or that record number of firearms purchases have been stolen and started hitting the streets.

I don't get the fixation on the increase in the number if mass shootings since the expiration of the AWB. Rifles, including skeery black ones, are used in 14% of mass shootings. What about the other 86%?

This graph* in particular shows no relationship between the AWB and deaths in mass shootings. They have been on an increasing trend but as you can see deaths during the AWB fit the trend both before and after.

View attachment 1342124

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shootings_in_the_United_States

That's in part because the definition of "mass shooting" is a bit too inclusive. Four people injured? When two dudes with a beef confront each other draw their bubblegumty sigmas and shoot at each other, if each participant is hit once but everyone lives, as I understand the definition, that is a mass shooting. Clearly that's NOT what the public thinks of when they hear mass shooting or hears when stats come out about the increase in mass shootings. Again suburban parents are less concerned about urban criminal on criminal crime and more concerned about events like Newtown, Parkland, Oxford and Uvalde. Only one of those front page events involved a handgun. Rifles are a bit more accurate and hydrostatic shock created wound cavities make them more lethal, but in a crowded place at close range, a pistol and a few magazines can create just as many victims. Thats why I think bans or regulation of ergonomically superior rifle improvements is dumb. I mean how many lives has CA saved by banning the flash hider or adjustable stock?

 

[orygun]

Most of the drug packing, street shooters arrested in Po(r)tland are already felons. The laws don't seem to bother them...

KGW news team was on the way to do a story and saw two men fighting at a gas station's convenience store. Neither of them bothered to call the cops until one pulled a gun and shot the other. (SMH) When the police arrested the shooter he was not only packing the gun, he had pockets full of drugs. Not surprising to me.

 

[Koda]

The mom's and anti-gun folks are focusing on the relatively rare school/mall/ store shooting. Lets be honest only the moms who live in poor inner city Chicago/Philadelphia/D.C. care about that gun violence and some of them blame the guns for their kids using them on others and then getting shot in retaliation: it's easier to blame the gun than your own kid's accountability.

lack of accountability is way higher than the media tells. And in some cases the whole country erupts in violent protest if an officer is involved in a criminal death. How are we supposed to prevent violent crime when half the country, our Democrat politicians, and the media isn't holding the actual cause of the crime accountable?

And I find it highly odd and deceitful that the moms and anti-gun groups majorly focus on the rare "mass" shootings (with definitions they deceitfully manipulate to inflate the numbers)

 

[orygun]

@Koda , you forgot to mention the state and local governments allowing protests in the name of "Freedom of Speech", while it's just a cover for destruction.

 

[nwslopoke]

I can imagine Parkland not happening if the shooter had anyone in his life treating him like he mattered.

Or if all those government agencies that actually contacted him or were informed about him (see something, say something) actually did their jobs including the first stand at the door and watch cop,17 people would still be alive.

This kid planned and plotted. He has a brother that really seemed to care. There are hundreds of thousands of people on the streets everyday living like animals that somehow manage not to mass murder people.

 

[Koda]

@Koda , you forgot to mention the state and local governments allowing protests in the name of "Freedom of Speech", while it's just a cover for destruction.

That would require typing out a whole page to show. But I didnt exactly forget, its why I included our Democrat politicians... if anyone wants to take that bait we can go down that rabbit hole.

 

[Mikej]

With a question like "What can WE do" I think MichaelH voted for measure 114. Because "We need to do something", and, "It's a step in the right direction", and "If it saves one life". And using buzz terms like "Gun Violence" is a dead giveaway.
We already do all we can. We are law abiding gun owners. I would comfortably wager the great majority of us are some of the most honest, responsible people on earth. The elite elected's are the total failures. Take your question to them. But don't hold your breath waiting for an answer.