Mass Shooting & Gun Violence | Mississippi gun death rate twice that of Haiti

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 593
  • Views: 11K
  • Politics 
2ManyBlueCups said:
The problem is that people are arrested for serious gun crimes (including shooting people with those illegal guns) and bond out immediately while waiting for a trial that may be 3 years away. They face no consequences for their actions so they continue to commit crimes involving guns. If someone is incarcerated they are unable to shoot someone outside of a nightclub.
Click to expand...
Is there any evidence that something like that happened in this case? If so what's the point? How many shootings are performed by someone who is already out on bail for another shooting? My guess is a tiny fraction, well under one percent. The idea that most gun crime results from serial criminals who keep shooting people while they await trial is silly.

As for bonding out - is it your belief that people should be incarcerated for years before they've been convicted of a crime? That's pretty frightening IMO. If anything we keep too many people held before an actual conviction.
 
rodoheel said:
Is there any evidence that something like that happened in this case? If so what's the point? How many shootings are performed by someone who is already out on bail for another shooting? My guess is a tiny fraction, well under one percent. The idea that most gun crime results from serial criminals who keep shooting people while they await trial is silly.

As for bonding out - is it your belief that people should be incarcerated for years before they've been convicted of a crime? That's pretty frightening IMO. If anything we keep too many people held before an actual conviction.
Click to expand...
Apparently the shootings involved Glock switches, which are already illegal. Unfortunately, when people face zero consequences for carrying and using illegal weapons, things like this happen.

I posted pages back about a man in Durham who was arrested after stealing a car and getting into a police chase. When he crashed and was arrested, police found an illegal gun in the car. The perp in question was a convicted felon who had already bonded out and was awaiting trial for shooting someone. Talk to anyone involved in the justice system and you’ll see that this is not uncommon. If Diddy can be held without bond, why can’t actual murderers or people who shoot other people?
 
2ManyBlueCups said:
Apparently the shootings involved Glock switches, which are already illegal. Unfortunately, when people face zero consequences for carrying and using illegal weapons, things like this happen.

I posted pages back about a man in Durham who was arrested after stealing a car and getting into a police chase. When he crashed and was arrested, police found an illegal gun in the car. The perp in question was a convicted felon who had already bonded out and was awaiting trial for shooting someone. Talk to anyone involved in the justice system and you’ll see that this is not uncommon. If Diddy can be held without bond, why can’t actual murderers or people who shoot other people?
Click to expand...
How do you suggest we better police the possession of illegal guns? It's not like people are waiving them around publicly. Police can't randomly search people's cars and residences and person for illegal weapons without suspicion. IMO you have to deal with things like that at the source - with harsher penalties for the people who manufacture and sell things like that. But Republicans and their judicial allies consistently oppose and undermine such laws - see, for example, the Supreme Court striking down the bump stock ban.

Your idea of "harsher enforcement" simply isn't realistic. It is very difficult to know that a person possesses an illegal weapon until they use it. Suggesting that prosecuting people for murder after the fact simply is not a real attempt to deal with the epidemic of gun violence we have. You have to actually attempt to keep dangerous and illegal weapons from getting to people in the first place, not just rely on post-hoc criminal punishment.

Edit: and again, the idea that blanket holding of criminal suspects without bond (which is like some Nazi police state stuff) is any kind of big-picture solution is laughable. Again, I'm confident that no more than a tiny fraction of gun deaths are attributable to shooters who are out on bail.
 
Rock said:
You should let JD Vance know that.

PS. Seems like a bizarre take. Every shooter is mentally ill, full stop.
Click to expand...
I don't actually agree that every shooter is mentally ill.

I believe that is a negative for people who are actually mentally ill and have troubles or challenges controlling their thoughts.

Some of these idiots are fully aware of what they are doing, it shows from the multiple steps it takes to plan, purchase the equipment (Guns), and take the actions.

I believe that declaring all of them mentally ill makes it easier to follow JD's ignorant assertions that it is a part of life.
 
TarSpiel said:
Sorta got me curious...I found this video, which I thought was interesting...

Click to expand...

What is the point of that device?

I've read multiple times that a bullet being fired without the gun barrel to direct the force has almost no deadly power.

I recall reading about an officer who claimed to have dropped a shell for his pistol and it went off causing damage. It was proven to be a lie and that he had actually fired the gun when he should not have.
 
rodoheel said:
How do you suggest we better police the possession of illegal guns? It's not like people are waiving them around publicly. Police can't randomly search people's cars and residences and person for illegal weapons without suspicion. IMO you have to deal with things like that at the source - with harsher penalties for the people who manufacture and sell things like that. But Republicans and their judicial allies consistently oppose and undermine such laws - see, for example, the Supreme Court striking down the bump stock ban.

Your idea of "harsher enforcement" simply isn't realistic. It is very difficult to know that a person possesses an illegal weapon until they use it. Suggesting that prosecuting people for murder after the fact simply is not a real attempt to deal with the epidemic of gun violence we have. You have to actually attempt to keep dangerous and illegal weapons from getting to people in the first place, not just rely on post-hoc criminal punishment.

Edit: and again, the idea that blanket holding of criminal suspects without bond (which is like some Nazi police state stuff) is any kind of big-picture solution is laughable. Again, I'm confident that no more than a tiny fraction of gun deaths are attributable to shooters who are out on bail.
Click to expand...

The problem is that police bust people with illegal weapons (illegally modified weapons, such as the Glock switches used in Birminghan, or stolen weapons, or felons in possession of a weapon illegally) all the time. Nothing happens. The person bonds out within hours and simply buys or steals another illegal gun. If the police catch you doing one of the three things I mentioned above, it is pretty cut and dry. Hold them without bond for 90 days, have their trial start within 90 days and sentence them accordingly. It is hard to deter gun crime when there are often literally no consequences for committing gun crime. Again, Diddy can be held for months without bond for nonviolent crime why can't people who literally murder other people face the same consequences?
 
UNCatTech said:
I don't actually agree that every shooter is mentally ill.

I believe that is a negative for people who are actually mentally ill and have troubles or challenges controlling their thoughts.

Some of these idiots are fully aware of what they are doing, it shows from the multiple steps it takes to plan, purchase the equipment (Guns), and take the actions.

I believe that declaring all of them mentally ill makes it easier to follow JD's ignorant assertions that it is a part of life.
Click to expand...
I can't remember if I already replied about this or just thought about the reply and never sent it but under the broad definitions of mental illness, I don't think there is an argument that can be made that anyone who would take someone else's life outside of a few limited exceptions like a law-enforcement situation or being drafted in a war, if you choose to murder someone, you are mentally ill in some manner.
 
rodoheel said:
. . .. Edit: and again, the idea that blanket holding of criminal suspects without bond (which is like some Nazi police state stuff) is any kind of big-picture solution is laughable. Again, I'm confident that no more than a tiny fraction of gun deaths are attributable to shooters who are out on bail.
Click to expand...
In re pre-trial detention w/o bail: Are we talking about compensated pre-trial detention if not-convicted and credit for time served if convicted? Because if we are talking about compensated pre-trial detention following a dismissal or not-guilty verdict at a rate of, let's say $50,000 a month, I'm OK with that.
 
2ManyBlueCups said:
The problem is that police bust people with illegal weapons (illegally modified weapons, such as the Glock switches used in Birminghan, or stolen weapons, or felons in possession of a weapon illegally) all the time. Nothing happens. The person bonds out within hours and simply buys or steals another illegal gun. If the police catch you doing one of the three things I mentioned above, it is pretty cut and dry. Hold them without bond for 90 days, have their trial start within 90 days and sentence them accordingly. It is hard to deter gun crime when there are often literally no consequences for committing gun crime. Again, Diddy can be held for months without bond for nonviolent crime why can't people who literally murder other people face the same consequences?
Click to expand...
That is not "the problem." Again, your entire premise is built on the idea that the majority of gun crime is committed by people who have already been arrested for another crime and are out on bail. I am confident that's not the case; in fact I'm confident that no more than a small fraction of gun crime is committed by people who have already been arrested and are out on bail. Instead of addressing or caring about the larger issues underlying gun crime, you're focusing all of your attention on a niche issue and pretending that it's the biggest problem. And your proposed solution is laughably unrealistic; capital murder trials happening within 90 days? Are you kidding? Some forensic evidence may not even be ready within 90 days. And you are essentially basing this all on an assumption that runs counter to the fundamental principles of our justice system; you are assuming that people arrested by the police are guilty, when in fact as every 4th grader knows they are presumed to be innocent until proven guilty.

This is just a classic conservative response to problems like this - eschew any solution to the underlying problem, stick your head in the sand, and assume that everything can be handled by simply being harder on the criminals you believe are so easy to identify and jail without even a trial.

How about harsher criminal penalties for manufacturing and selling illegal weapons? How about authorizing more extensive civil liability for the people who manufacture and sell illegal weapons when those weapons are used in crimes? How about actually making it harder to buy a gun legally, through waiting periods and stricter background checks among other things? (Contrary to another of your unfounded assumptions, most gun crimes aren't committed using stolen weapons.) How about harsher penalties for violations of those laws?

At least show some freaking curiosity about all of this. You can't just be content to assume without any evidence that based on a few news articles you have identified the major cause of gun violence and know a simple solution for stopping it.
 
2ManyBlueCups said:
99.5% of society handles guns just fine.
Click to expand...
I know it’s not illegal, generally speaking, but I don’t consider selling/buying guns privately a responsible practice and there are a lot of people who do it. Private transactions that circumvent the background checks are a big part of the problem. Require all transfers of firearms to go through an FFL holder and keep a registry of ownership and things would get noticeably better.
 
UNCatTech said:
What is the point of that device?

I've read multiple times that a bullet being fired without the gun barrel to direct the force has almost no deadly power.

I recall reading about an officer who claimed to have dropped a shell for his pistol and it went off causing damage. It was proven to be a lie and that he had actually fired the gun when he should not have.
Click to expand...
1727032021990.gif
 
2ManyBlueCups said:
The problem is that people are arrested for serious gun crimes (including shooting people with those illegal guns) and bond out immediately while waiting for a trial that may be 3 years away. They face no consequences for their actions so they continue to commit crimes involving guns. If someone is incarcerated they are unable to shoot someone outside of a nightclub.
Click to expand...
You have no idea if that’s remotely relevant here.
 
Y’all are trying to reason with Bo.
aGDevil2k said:
What's the % of Americans that don't own a gun?
Click to expand...
“Thirty-two percent of US adults say they personally own a gun, while a larger percentage, 44%, report living in a gun household.”

So almost half of all households in the US own a gun. I have two shotguns I inherited when my father died 40 years ago. They have been moved all over the country but I’ve never owned any shotgun shells.
 
Rock said:
I can't remember if I already replied about this or just thought about the reply and never sent it but under the broad definitions of mental illness, I don't think there is an argument that can be made that anyone who would take someone else's life outside of a few limited exceptions like a law-enforcement situation or being drafted in a war, if you choose to murder someone, you are mentally ill in some manner.
Click to expand...
What about all these members of the military and leadership who murder?
 
farce© said:
Y’all are trying to reason with Bo.

“Thirty-two percent of US adults say they personally own a gun, while a larger percentage, 44%, report living in a gun household.”

So almost half of all households in the US own a gun. I have two shotguns I inherited when my father died 40 years ago. They have been moved all over the country but I’ve never owned any shotgun shells.
Click to expand...
Same here, except one from my grandfather and one from my wife's great-grandfather. No way would I ever attempt to fire either one. I keep hoping they turn out to be valuable antiques. But before that value comes about, I think the ratio of guns to people in the US is going to have to drop to somewhere south of 1.2 to 1.

Aside: In my first attempt to Goggle that number, I typed gums instead of guns. So just for the record, the general accepted number a gums per person in the US is 2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top