Politics Gun violence in CT

honestly, i think the anti-psychotic drugs are causing much of this. these are powerful drugs that rival illegal drugs. not everyone responds to them the same and the cure can be worse than the disease. most of the mass shooters are on these drugs. the other problem is if you 'go off the meds' as they say, it can cause severe adverse mental health problems which might make someone snap.

these drugs are being over prescribed and not monitored well enough considering their potency.

 

if you step back and think what's happening, its pretty interesting...it's a shifting in the cultural space within which certain tolerances for violence were routine. now those tolerances are changing. it's almost a hive mind phenomenon---how a collective response takes shape, what it looks like.

what's interesting is that it's happening. what's alarming is that it's driven by (a) a pretty extreme instance of collateral damage (with respect to the previously tolerated levels of violence) and (b) by saturation television coverage.

but it is nonetheless interesting to think about what this is and to watch the various ways in which people are struggling to frame or contain it.

 

A friend of mine who used to support the NRA sent them a few question back in the late 90's. Their replies pissed him off to the point he stopped his membership (I was surprised he even could since I assumed he had a lifetime membership.) He got repeated calls and mailing that he needed to renew his membership and regardless of how many times he told them to "pound sand" they called or mailed him again. He finally eneded up sending them this-

While he still loves guns and is a member of the SAF and another Maryland group he can't stand the NRA. I think he hits the nail on hte head with the NRA solely interested in getting money and really could care less about gun owners. They care about the almighty dollar, nothing more and nothing less.
uns and supports

 

I would suggest that the greatest barrier to a comprehensive solution is the ideology extremism of today's conservative policymakers (urged on by the conspiracy driven talking heads) who not only oppose reasonable gun control measures but oppose any government role in improving mental health services, early childhood education programs, economic disparity and income inequality...

And whose only solution is bringing more guns and God into the equation.
--- merged: Dec 19, 2012 at 11:40 AM ---
The latest example, Newt Gingrich on radio this morning

"When you have an anti-religious, secular bureaucracy and secular judiciary seeking to drive God out of public life, something fills the vacuum...."​

 

remember when the violence sky rocketed after the last assault weapon ban lifted in 04?

oh that's right it didn't.

 

Assault weapons equipped with high capacity ammunition magazines have become the weapon of choice in mass shootings.

Newtown, Aurora, Tucson, Ft Hood, VA Tech....
--- merged: Dec 19, 2012 at 2:26 PM ---
BTW, since you last posted, another child in the US was killed by a gun.

One child every three hours.

 

oh yes think of the children. because banning these itmes would end the violence. gun crimes happen where guns are already banned or illegal to carry. the correlation is astounding.

this retarded argument just goes round and round. the criminals are the ones commiting the crimes, they are already owning guns illegally. banning them will accomplish nothing. hell there's already waiting period and background checks and the crime just keeps on coming. if obama was at all worried about gun violence he wouldn't ship assault weapons to mexican drug cartels, but he wants to block me from owning them? the hell with that.

 

Or this retarded argument...."guns dont kill people, criminals kill people"

And lets be clear. Your Second Amendment rights are not unlimited, even with the Supreme Court decision in Heller.

Reasonable gun control for the purposes of public safety is not an infringement on the rights of law abiding people.

 

people are fussing way to much about assault rifles and high cap mags. look at all the hoops breivik jumped through to kill 60 people. he tried to get weapons illegally then when he couldn't, he did the whole join a gun club etc. to get the required permits.

these wouldnt of even been included in the assault weapons ban. a simple ruger mini 14, a .308 and a glock if i remember correctly.

of course he did it in the least likely place to get shot back at.

 

During the federal assault weapons ban, the Virginia StatePolice saw a clear decline in the percentage of crime gunswith large capacity magazines, reaching a low of 10%in 2004.. After Congress failed to renew the ban, that percentage steadily climbed; by 2010, nearly 22% of crimeguns in Virginia had large capacity magazines.



Va. data show drop in criminal firepower during assault gun ban - The Washington Post

 

As far as I'm concerned, if you're determined to shoot up a building full of people you should jump through some fucking hoops. Because hoops are funny, some people jump through them while others don't. If your argument is that we shouldn't bother with hoops because the enjoyment of people who like playing with these weapons is significant enough to offset the ease with which people can, indeed, walk into a building and kill dozens of people within minutes...then just say it.

 

A country with half the gun-related deaths (per capita) that the USA enjoys? And around 3% of the gun-related murders (per capita). Who would want that?

 

you are arguing high cap mags result in more gun violence.

showing that more guns had high cap mags after the ban lifted doesn't correlate to increased violence. by your argument you would expect to see an increase in gun violence after 04. this graph doesn't tell much really.
--- merged: Dec 19, 2012 at 3:09 PM ---

what about them exactly?

 

It shows you quite clearly that the assault weapon ban had an effect of taking these weapons off the streets.

And the revocation of the ban had an effect of putting them back on the streets.