Mass shooting in Orlando - Politics

[Chu Gai]

<snip>

The idea of legally being able to buy the fire-power to allow one person acting alone to execute "the biggest terrorist act since 911" seems insane to me. FWIW, my ex-marine friend thinks he could have carried out this massacre equally well with the semi-automatic version. However, I know I would have a lot more confidence if I had the automatic version in my hands.

Well, afaik, his weapons were semi-automatic. He also had two firearms licenses and as a condition passed background checks, safety, and training requirements some which needed to be done annually. He was employed for a number of years with the same security company which does most of its business with Homeland Security. While there were investigations prompted by comments from coworkers, Disney, and the like, the FBI closed the investigations. Was that a matter of thoroughness, a reluctance by the administration to take such matters with seriousness because he was Muslim, lack of manpower, I just don't know.

Of note, the overwhelming amount of murders are not committed by rifles.

 

[Chu Gai]

It's sounding more and more like our government dropped the ball.
Disney security officials told the FBI they believe Mateen visited Disney World on April 26 to conduct surveillance, a law enforcement official told CNN.
(This happened after the FBI investigated him twice)

Mateen's wife also was with him on the Disney World visit. Federal authorities have questioned Salman, who told them, according to a law enforcement official, that her husband had talked about a jihadist attack but she denied knowing he planned to attack the gay club.

More than a month after that Disney World trip, Mateen and his wife visited Pulse and Disney Springs -- an entertainment and shopping complex -- apparently to scout out the locations, a law enforcement official said. Authorities believe he was conducting surveillance, based on information learned in interviews.

I recently read an interview with a former assistant director of the FBI who said the agency, in order to do a more thorough job of monitoring the amount of people deserving of such attention, is woefully understaffed. They would require thousands more. So, yeah the ball was dropped and I also wonder if they're being thwarted from doing good police work because of political correctness. You know, singling out a demographic and then having that demographic bitch and moan publicly.

 

[GO-NAD!]

I wonder if ISIL is now thinking they jumped the gun by claiming a gay man as one of their own...

 

[Steve81]

Well, afaik, his weapons were semi-automatic. He also had two firearms licenses and as a condition passed background checks, safety, and training requirements some which needed to be done annually.

More to the point, you could take away every gun and it would still be relatively easy to acquire the materials needed for an individual to commit the worst terror attack since 9/11. You don't need a gun to commit arson, or to home brew TATP and make a bomb. The only viable way to prevent terror attacks is to remain vigilant and if you see something (like your husband is beating you, appears to be planning some kind of massacre), say something. That's the price of freedom.

 

[everettT]

Common sense gun control is championed by most all responsible gun owners. Before any new law's should be debated we need to enforce the current laws. This is a problem not only with firearms, but drugs, immigration, banking, insurance, employment, etc. Reactionary responses are just political pandering. Then that pandering gets parroted to the point of lunacy.

 

[lsiberian]

More to the point, you could take away every gun and it would still be relatively easy to acquire the materials needed for an individual to commit the worst terror attack since 9/11. You don't need a gun to commit arson, or to home brew TATP and make a bomb. The only viable way to prevent terror attacks is to remain vigilant and if you see something (like your husband is beating you, appears to be planning some kind of massacre), say something. That's the price of freedom.

We are the only developed country that has so many mass shootings. All the other ones have legit gun control.

 

[herbu]

It is not "common sense" if the left and right don't agree. This has become a term people use to convince others that anyone who disagrees doesn't have it.

 

[everettT]

We are the only developed country that has so many mass shootings. All the other ones have legit gun control.

I would consider that parroting, where is the proof that the USA has a mass murder problem that is related to guns? Other countries have mass murders as they are not isolated to the US.

 

[Chu Gai]

We are the only developed country that has so many mass shootings. All the other ones have legit gun control.

Once you normalize the populations, it paints a different picture. Weapons are comparatively easy to obtain in Europe due in part to open borders and the plethora of weapons coming from former Soviet bloc countries.

 

[Steve81]

We are the only developed country that has so many mass shootings. All the other ones have legit gun control.

I'm not opposed to sensible gun control at all. By in large, I agree with the Democrat platform on gun control:

We recognize that the individual right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans' Second Amendment right to own and use firearms. We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation. We understand the terrible consequences of gun violence; it serves as a reminder that life is fragile, and our time here is limited and precious. We believe in an honest, open national conversation about firearms. We can focus on effective enforcement of existing laws, especially strengthening our background check system, and we can work together to enact commonsense improvements—like reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole—so that guns do not fall into the hands of those irresponsible, law-breaking few.

The only real caveat I have is the assault weapons ban, inasmuch as I feel the definition of an assault weapon isn't up to snuff. Most of it seems aimed at banning scary looking weapons versus considering their performance attributes. That is to say, while this and this look similar, they're very different weapons. One could be well suited for the kind of attack seen in Orlando. The other is mostly useful for shooting cans and squirrels.

 

[Rickster71]

We are the only developed country that has so many mass shootings. All the other ones have legit gun control.

How did the "legit gun control" help in Paris or London? They used bombs in the Brussels airport.
Criminals don't follow laws, since the beginning of time they never have.
Murder is already against the law... what New Law would a criminal suddenly follow?

 

[Chu Gai]

Have any of the democrats who are signing on to that position piece stated how that would have prevented Orlando, Sandy Hook, Ft. Hood, etc.? Now Hillary has said that if you're under FBI investigation you shouldn't be able to buy a gun with no questions asked. apparently though, if you're under FBI investigation it's quite alright to run for the highest office in the land.

 

[Steve81]

Have any of the democrats who are signing on to that position piece stated how that would have prevented Orlando, Sandy Hook, Ft. Hood, etc.?

As you've mentioned before, background checks are only as good as the data available to vet people purchasing firearms. That's part of "strengthening our background check system" in my view.

 

[lsiberian]

I would consider that parroting, where is the proof that the USA has a mass murder problem that is related to guns? Other countries have mass murders as they are not isolated to the US.

You just posted the proof. 38 > 1 or 2. 1 or 2 is an arguably rare incidence 38 is not.

 

[lsiberian]

How did the "legit gun control" help in Paris or London? They used bombs in the Brussels airport.
Criminals don't follow laws, since the beginning of time they never have.
Murder is already against the law... what New Law would a criminal suddenly follow?

How would gun ownership help in those situations? We are talking about shooting not bombings.

 

[everettT]

You just posted the proof. 38 > 1 or 2. 1 or 2 is an arguably rare incidence 38 is not.

If you follow the link and you are familiar with statistics, you will see that the US isn't alone in mass murder, which was your post. When numbers are verified , talking points are either correct or incorrect and in this case the rhetoric regarding the US being the only country with this occurance is incorrect. Per capita the totals are sad but not unique.

 

[GO-NAD!]

How did the "legit gun control" help in Paris or London? They used bombs in the Brussels airport.
Criminals don't follow laws, since the beginning of time they never have.
Murder is already against the law... what New Law would a criminal suddenly follow?

I think the important distinction between Paris & London and most mass shootings, is that those were definitely terrorist attacks. I would suggest that the vast majority of mass shootings in the US are committed by insane people without an obvious political message. If background checks were properly conducted, many of those might be weeded out. But, that could possibly be accomplished by existing laws, if sufficient resources were dedicated to that.

I think a huge factor in explaining the discrepancy between mass shooting incidents in the US and other developed countries would be that firearms are so readily accessible in the US. ALL firearms start out as legal, but when there are so many in the market, the opportunities for ending up in the wrong hands become so much more numerous. So, perhaps further gun control measures would be case of shutting the barn door after the horses are gone.

I'd like to think that Americans are no more murderous than other developed countries' citizens, so how can we explain the out-of-proportion gun crime rates?

 

[GO-NAD!]

The only real caveat I have is the assault weapons ban, inasmuch as I feel the definition of an assault weapon isn't up to snuff. Most of it seems aimed at banning scary looking weapons versus considering their performance attributes. That is to say, while this and this look similar, they're very different weapons. One could be well suited for the kind of attack seen in Orlando. The other is mostly useful for shooting cans and squirrels.

Up here, semi-automatic rifles are restricted weapons if the barrel is less than 18.5" and/or the stock can be folded/telescoped so that the overall length is less than 26" and can still be fired. As a restricted firearm, you would require an enhanced licence and you would need an ATT - Approval To Transport. That would allow you to take it from home to a range, gunsmith, gun show, etc. You aren't permitted to hunt with a restricted firearm - and why would you, anyway? NO other stops are permitted while transporting. So, God help you, if you should stop for gas and someone walking by should notice it in your vehicle and call the cops. It wouldn't be long before you were surrounded by a SWAT team.

 

[markw]

You just posted the proof. 38 > 1 or 2. 1 or 2 is an arguably rare incidence 38 is not.

Again, you need to take in account the total populations involved, not just the gross number of shootings. You need to correspond that with the overall population. That's called "normalization". .

In other words, the column labelled "per 1,000,000" is the only valid comparison, not the gross figures.

 

[Steve81]

I'd like to think that Americans are no more murderous than other developed countries' citizens, so how can we explain the out-of-proportion gun crime rates?

For overall gun violence various factors come into play, i.e. demographics, economics, education, drug abuse, etc. A local example for me is comparing Arlington, Virginia with Washington, DC. Our nation's capital is well known for its homicide rate: 162 in 2015, and so far 50 in 2016 going by a map provided by the Washington Post. Arlington has two blips on the map for 2016, one of which is a stabbing, the other a 2 year old being left alone in a car. Gun laws are relatively permissive in Arlington, and while the population is less than DC, it's not by *that* much.