Mass Shootings in the US

Last Friday, 12.00pm, lunchtime, in Fort Worth:

Investigators say one of the suspects said they decided to break in after noticing a video game console through a window. Once inside police say that one of the suspects admitted to investigators that he shot Gutierrez in the back of the head.

Gutierrez, 31, was shot in the neck and head, according to the Tarrant County Medical Examiner’s office.


What you need to consider is that the two miscreants have been charged with capital murder and are respectively 13 and 14 years old.

What led to their arrest was the stop and search of a totally different person later in the day who was found to be in possession of a pistol and silencer - the items used in the crime. The two have been linked to gang activity and I wouldn't be surprised if it was their initiation into the gang and they were expected to shoot and kill someone if disturbed - which is why there were probably two shots, one each.

Story if you are intersted: Two Boys, 13 and 14, Arrested in Fort Worth Murder
 
So all these high school shootings, have any of them ever been instigated by girls? Or is it just boys who get so angry they feel they have to resort to firearms? Those teenage males who are going through puberty, trying to find their way in society and establish their own identity.

Of course if you took the firearms away from angst ridden hormone fueled teenage boys then they can't shoot up classmates.
 
So all these high school shootings, have any of them ever been instigated by girls? Or is it just boys who get so angry they feel they have to resort to firearms? Those teenage males who are going through puberty, trying to find their way in society and establish their own identity.

Of course if you took the firearms away from angst ridden hormone fueled teenage boys then they can't shoot up classmates.
Almost all spree shooters are male, regardless of age. It's very rare for females to do it.
 
I did some quick digging on this, apart from the female who inspired Bob Geldof to write "I don't like Mondays" back in 1979, they have indeed been predominantly male.

However I also discovered that fatal shootings have been recorded in the US since 1840, we just didn't tend to hear about it apparently

List of school shootings in the United States - Wikipedia
Largest mass killing in a US school was a bombing in Bath, Michigan back in 1927

44 dead, 58 wounded

Slate’s Use of Your Data
 
I don't think it's emotive.

Guns were originally designed as weapons. That some choose to use them in a different capacity doesn't alter that fact.
Which guns? All of them? That would be incorrect.

The illogical thing is describing them as tools.
Don’t think anyone was. ‘Sporting equipment’ would be appropriate for those designed as such.

A spade is a tool, even though it can be used as a weapon.
although if you modify it to make it more effective as a weapon, then it is a weapon.

A spear is a weapon that can be used as a tool. But even if nobody used a spear to kill anybody in the past decade, and only ever uses them for target practise or uses them as tools to dig holes, they are still weapons and designed as such.
Is an Olympic- spec javelin a weapon, or sporting equipment?
 
I don't dismiss anyone on here just because they don't agree with me. You talk about logic but you don't see it in the design and development of the gun as a weopon of war, or a tool for hunting or at a stretch self defence. you continue to say that isn't the objects primary focus. To me the seems a little delusional.
If you can hold up a gun that has been designed as a weapon, then I might agree with you that it was designed to kill. I could just as easily go and find a gun that has been designed to put holes in targets at a distance. My example could be lethal at a mile or barely able to break skin at twenty paces.

But it doesn’t matter, I thought you said?

The thing about this subject is that it's very emotive on both sides. The image of dead children being killed at a school is bound to raise an emotional response for some. Whilst the thought that this will prompt controls or confiscation on something some people hold as an intrinsic right, is also bound to provoke a furious response.

I'm not sure how you could take the emotion out of either view.
Difficult , I’ll grant you, but necessary. Decisions made under the influence of strong emotion are rarely well thought out.

Ok consider this unemotionally and logically. We have shootings with three major components. A gun, a shooter and a victim (shootee ??). Can we remove the victim, well in a normal society I can't see how. Can we remove the shooter, yes if we are prepared to thoroughly regulate who can have access to a gun, something we seemingly can't achieve. Can we reduce the level of gun distribution and the types of guns and ammunition available to the public.
Not immediately, and not easily. Can you achieve your aims without leaving a fairly large number of people unemployed, I defended and feeling disenfranchised? Would it actually reduce spree killings*. Are there other root causes that you should be looking at?
For me that is the easiest option.
So you take the easiest option rather than the one which is right? It would be easier to do away with due process and just run lynch mobs, but we keep to the rule of law because it is the right and fair (or at least as close as we can get) thing to do.
 
Which guns? All of them? That would be incorrect.


Don’t think anyone was. ‘Sporting equipment’ would be appropriate for those designed as such.

although if you modify it to make it more effective as a weapon, then it is a weapon.


Is an Olympic- spec javelin a weapon, or sporting equipment?
I can't muster the effort required to become embroiled in a pedantic type argument and probably don't possess the wit, so I'll bow out. Just posted to let you know you're not being ignored.
 
Then you can’t tell me how graphic the new systems are compared to the Nintendo we started out with.
If that were a factor, the countries with the greatest exposure to these games would have the highest rates of violent crime instead of the lowest.
 
Why... that would mean the other 50% of the population voted opposite of you and not the vast tracts of unpopulated land which don't get a vote even in the electoral college.

Which is why democracy was invented.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top