Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

  1. Welcome to the 12ozProphet Forum...
    You are currently logged out and viewing our forum as a guest which only allows limited access to our discussions, photos and other forum features. If you are a 12ozProphet Member please login to get the full experience.

    If you are not a 12ozProphet Member, please take a moment to register to gain full access to our website and all of its features. As a 12ozProphet Member you will be able to post comments, start discussions, communicate privately with other members and access members-only content. Registration is fast, simple and free, so join today and be a part of the largest and longest running Graffiti, Art, Style & Culture forum online.

    Please note, if you are a 12ozProphet Member and are locked out of your account, you can recover your account using the 'lost password' link in the login form. If you no longer have access to the email you registered with, please email us at [email protected] and we'll help you recover your account. Welcome to the 12ozProphet Forum (and don't forget to follow @12ozprophet in Instagram)!

Las Vegas Shooting and the Gun Debate

Discussion in 'Channel Zero' started by misteraven, Oct 2, 2017.

  1. misteraven

    misteraven Administrator

    Joined: May 7, 1999 Messages: 8,761 Likes Received: 307
    No doubt an extremely loaded topic. Likely, many of you already know what side of the debate I fall on, but in the interest of intelligent debate that'll hopefully lead to a worthwhile thread, I figured I'd drop this in here and see where it goes.

    Being honest, I don't know a lot about what happened in Las Vegas other than a white male apparently setup a sniper position of some sort and fired on a crowd gathered at a concert. I believe the death toll is at about 50 souls, which makes this the largest shooting tragedy in United States history.

    Perhaps someone more informed than I can chime in as to whether or not there's been any sort of specific motive uncovered, whether the shooter acted solo, what type of fire arm it was and whether it was legal for him to posses. (Not that I really trust the news in any meaningful way).

    In any case, nothing so far understood about this has me changing my stance, which can in basic terms be summarized as I do not believe you can eradicate evil, let alone legislate it away. Which is to say that when you analyze countries that have disarmed their populace, you see no meaningful reduction in violent crime or murder.

    Obviously its a complex subject that likely has no real answer, let alone resolution beyond the fact that humans have been killing each other since the dawn of time and though there are many contributing factors for why that is, I honestly don't think we'll ever find a solution for the evils of this world. As such, I feel compelled to do my best to guard against it as best as I'm able.

    Thoughts, opinions? Sound off (but keep it intelligent and insightful please).
     
  2. One Man Banned

    One Man Banned Dirty Dozen Crew

    Joined: Jan 9, 2013 Messages: 10,521 Likes Received: 1,717
    Pun intended?
     
    misteraven likes this.
  3. One Man Banned

    One Man Banned Dirty Dozen Crew

    Joined: Jan 9, 2013 Messages: 10,521 Likes Received: 1,717
    In times of crisis and trauma people will reach for what they can control, and with evil being seemingly limitless and unpredictable they'll focus on the weapon(s).

    Root of the issue is the idea of it being a human right to possess arms but at the same time not everyone is competent in terms of mental health or otherwise to own or operate such.

    Horrible thing that happened.
     
  4. misteraven

    misteraven Administrator

    Joined: May 7, 1999 Messages: 8,761 Likes Received: 307
    Oh, no doubt that most often people will grasp for low hanging fruit. Interesting to see that people don't view political response in these situations as pandering regardless of what side of the debate you fall. Crazy to me that anyone gives a shit about the talking heads, especially the politicians that always seem to run out to the first pulpit they can for the purposes of pushing whatever narrative that their consultants say will most resonate with their particular base. It's not even a secret or a conspiracy at this point, but rather an opportunity to push through an agenda that can only happen when people are blinded by emotion.

    From the horses mouth, though its been repeated by many politicians. Believe Winston Churchill was credited with being on the record first.

    "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before." as spoken by Rahm Emanuel (Obama's former Chief of Staff).

     
  5. misteraven

    misteraven Administrator

    Joined: May 7, 1999 Messages: 8,761 Likes Received: 307
    Problem with this is similar to the "terrorist" watch list: There's no due process in place for most circumstances of this. I assume it's purposely designed as such, but point is that you can be identified as such, often without being informed of it, with few if any methods to dispute it. Instead your rights are stripped and that's just how it goes. Its similar to the BATF wait period debate... It can be used to circumvent a persons rights with little, if any, reasonable recourse.

    As for competency... That becomes even more muddled. Truth be told, most cops can't shoot. This I know from experience having taken as many classes as I have, but anyone can see the news and wonder how in places like NYC, you'll see dozens of shots fired, several bystanders hit and usually not even the subject they we're aiming for. Likewise when you see that many municipalities will have some arbitrary bullshit like 200 rounds a year as the standard that police need to maintain for their firearms qualifications. But fact in this subset of the argument on 2A is that its considered a fundamental right, similar in nature to the freedom of speech, which I have no doubt has likely led to more violence and death than firearms. I'd have to say that trying to legislate stupidity is almost as fruitless as legislating evil.
     
  6. Brink

    Brink Junior Member

    Joined: Mar 28, 2012 Messages: 192 Likes Received: 58
    Personally, I feel like at this point I'v become very desensitized to the entire idea behind mass shootings, due to it being unfortunately common at this point. Motive wise it seems like there are just a bunch of deranged people who know that for a while, their names will be plastered across every major news station. The sensationalist media spurs these people to commit such horrendous crimes, as they fully know it will garner attention.

    In terms of these events being related to gun laws, I think its a fair point. Naturally you can go back and forth about the prospect of legalizing weaponry for average citizens, but I think its a much more complex issue then what people are trying to make this sort of event into. Its tough to think logically when emotions are still running high at this point.
     
    TPWF2021 likes this.
  7. misteraven

    misteraven Administrator

    Joined: May 7, 1999 Messages: 8,761 Likes Received: 307
    This one, from I know so far, seems a bit unusual in that most of the time the shooter isn't particularly strategic about it. Most seem to be super soft targets (generally a school or other gun free zone) that are obviously packed with vulnerable people that are almost exclusively unarmed. As bad as the blood shed is, if the gun man were well trained, they'd certainly be far higher and almost always seem to end in a suicide. In this case, it seems the gun man was pretty well positioned to carry out as heavy a casualty as would be possible with little chance for interruption. I suppose he could have just as easily driven a u-haul through crowds on the strip or if he really wanted to inflict damage, rig a u-haul (or himself) to blow up within throngs of people like they do in most other countries. We've been very fortunate to not have much of that in this country or other types of IED's for that matter.

    Again, not a lot you can do about that type of evil. But to circle back... In the case of the Orlando attack (which I personally don't really buy the official narrative of), a single armed person beyond the gun man could have ended that situation fairly quickly and most likely saved a bunch of lives including their own. When it comes down to it and you're that person cowering in the bath room while some lunatic is ranting just beyond your hiding place shooting people randomly, does it make sense to have a means to fight back (and have an efficient tool to help equalize the situation) or would you rather rely on the police to come (and hopefully) save you?
     
  8. One Man Banned

    One Man Banned Dirty Dozen Crew

    Joined: Jan 9, 2013 Messages: 10,521 Likes Received: 1,717
  9. Hua Guofang

    Hua Guofang Dirty Dozen Crew

    Joined: Oct 29, 2013 Messages: 1,668 Likes Received: 334
    Raven, I'm traveling with work at the moment and can't be bothered writing long replies in the phone and I'm not inclined to get into the whole restrictions debate as it's all been said before. However I do have issue with what you've said about the potential shooter Iin the bathrooms in the nightclub but will save that response for when I get back to a keyboard.

    Interestingly enough, I'm at a large international defense conference. I never feel comfortable around these kinds of gigs, a lot of it is often dudes in suits pedaling death.

    The Vegas shooter was an amateur, these guys are the pros

    IMG_5792.JPG

    IMG_5793.JPG

    IMG_5795.JPG

    IMG_5796.JPG

    IMG_5797.JPG
     
    TPWF2021 likes this.
  10. theprotester

    theprotester Moderator Crew

    Joined: Dec 8, 2006 Messages: 10,696 Likes Received: 786
    America is the only developed country this happens in. It happened in Australia once, 35 were killed. What changed? Gun laws. How many massacres have occurred since then? Zero.

    It would be fine if those that don't want any changes would just pony up and say they're prepared to have hundreds of their countrymen die each decade as the price of having freedom of gun ownership.

    I don't have to agree or disagree, I'm not a product of your environment. But I am able to look at the reality.
     
  11. misteraven

    misteraven Administrator

    Joined: May 7, 1999 Messages: 8,761 Likes Received: 307
    Not true at all... France has had several mass shootings, as has Germany and Sweden amongst others. In fact the ones in France and Sweden both have had higher death tolls than even this recent one in Vegas as horrible as it was despite very strict gun laws if not outright bans on firearms.

    Truth be told, this discussion shouldn’t really be about ‘shooting’ but rather mass murder. Calling out the tool used to carry it out only takes the focus off the true subject which is that there are people out there that want to commit mass murder. But since this will undoubtedly lead to huge debates here about ‘sensible’ new gun laws, I figured I’d open up the discussion.

    Reality is that making it about guns helps people feel a little safer, the belief being if we can control the guns, we can control the violence even though there are many examples where it simply has shown this to not be the case. Again, look at France and then compare it to neighboring Switzerland which actually has a higher per capita firearms ownership rate than the United States due to how their military service works and hadn’t had similar tragedies that I’m aware of.

    Not to mention that both Brazil and Mexico are industrialized, have virtually zero tolerance towards private gun ownership, yet are amongst the most violent countries on earth.

    But also interesting is that mass shootings are a fairly new phenomenon that seems to be accelerating (along with lots of other forms of terrorism / mass murder). Though the number of guns as a whole has increased in the United States, per capita gun ownership has actually gone down quite a bit. This would lend itself towards investigating (or at least questioning) Other cultural and psychological changes that have occurred that might explain it. I’d think that the erosion of the nuclear family could be a subject for critical analysis in this regard. In fact considering where these events generally take place makes me wonder if it might be actually the result of the population in general actually being more disarmed then they once were. These events almost always happen in a super soft target areas (most often gun free zones like schools). Perhaps there were less mass shootings back before because the assumption could be it wouldn’t go very far with so many people being potentially armed? I don’t know but it’s more plausible an idea to me than thinking we might make new laws that would somehow make the violence go away when so many other countries are trying and failing at exactly that.

    All this being said, admittedly I don’t know a lot about Australia, but I don’t recall it ever having a particularly violent history or all that much issue with gun related crimes. You said it only happened once, so hard to judge if causation equals correlation in that instance. It does, however, bring to mind how the UK followed Australia’s lead and saw gun crime go down, while violent crime as a whole actually rise.
     
    KILZ FILLZ likes this.
  12. Brink

    Brink Junior Member

    Joined: Mar 28, 2012 Messages: 192 Likes Received: 58
    The thing is, while the person behind the tool is to blame, the intended purpose for a firearm is to kill. When examining terrorist attacks that occur due to, say, a van hitting a large crowd, it is solely the intent of the terrorist, and by no means the fault of the tool.

    Personally, I'm a fan of firing ranges, and many of the responsible gun owners that I'v been around have been 100% about safety when using a firearm. However, with such frequent attacks on the public, I think now is the time to really take a look at gun control. Now, mind you, completely disarming citizens is not a logical approach to the problem; yet, clearly there are steps that need to be taken to ensure the mental state of the potential owner.
     
  13. Hua Guofang

    Hua Guofang Dirty Dozen Crew

    Joined: Oct 29, 2013 Messages: 1,668 Likes Received: 334
    Raven, I think you need to revise your thinking on gun laws in Mexico and Brazil mBrazil has very permissive gun laws, I've been in many houses in Brazil that had many legally owned rifles, shotguns and hand guns.

    Mexico restricts some calibres but it is 100% untrue that either country has near zero tolerance or even something resembling such a policy.
     
  14. theprotester

    theprotester Moderator Crew

    Joined: Dec 8, 2006 Messages: 10,696 Likes Received: 786
    Yeah no point continuing this.

    You can wall up that text as much as you like you won't change my perception of the facts.

    Australia had about 15 mass shootings in the 20 years leading up to the last one. Then the laws changed. Haven't had one since. Whether this applies to America not I don't really care, but it doesn't matter what metric, or imperial if you must, that you use - people stopped dying.
     
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2017
  15. theprotester

    theprotester Moderator Crew

    Joined: Dec 8, 2006 Messages: 10,696 Likes Received: 786
    Definitely concede to your point re the French terror attack.

    Foreign nationals inflicting a terror attack somehow feels different to me.
     
Top