The General Terrorist Rampage Thread

[Mr. Orange]

What has changed over the years since say the mid 90s, the access to guns or the American culture?



And yes I am stopping the conversation at that since we can't talk about what needs to be talked about.

An honest answer of what has changed since the mid 90s is the internet. Online radicalization and people staying indoors instead of going out and meeting others and being social. Hate filled message boards, violent pornography, and first person shooters are pushing sociopaths to darker places. (This is my opinion).

EDIT: See post below. Access to guns as well.

 

[AZ_]

What has changed over the years since say the mid 90s, the access to guns or the American culture?



And yes I am stopping the conversation at that since we can't talk about what needs to be talked about.

Access to guns, definitely.

 

[Hurl Bruce]

No more easy target zones. No more making the shooters famous like the Daily Wire is doing. No more destruction of American values and family life. A a huge portion of these stories shooters are lonely, angry, bitter, rejected, fatherless, and directionless young men.

You don't think it's an issue that lonely, angry, bitter, rejected, fatherless, and directionless young men can get an assault rifle without jumping through a series lengthy background checks/evaluations?

 

[Hurl Bruce]

The Virginia Tech shooter killed 33 people with only handguns, and the Fort Hood shooter killed 13 with handguns. The Luby's Cafeteria shooter killed 24 people with handguns. The Navy Yard shooter killed 13 with a shotgun and a handgun. The Binghamton shooter killed 14 with handguns

I got the date from the two sites I put at the bottom, but I didn't see anything about what kind of weapons are most likely to be used in shootings with 10+ casualties. There aren't a whole lot of mass shootings with 10 or more casualties (still more than there should be, of course), so I just googled a few of them on this list. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/florida-school-shooting-ranks-among-americas-deadliest/


http://www.firearmsid.com/feature articles/0900guic/guns used in crime.htm

https://everytownresearch.org/gun-violence-by-the-numbers/

Imagine what damage they could have done with an AR-15.

I can't believe the thought of being "glad" that a terrorist ONLY used a handgun to murder people pops into my head.

 

[MediumBaller]

@Cassity14's question got me thinking so I decided to do a little more research. I don't really understand what the definition of an "assault weapon" is, because both the AR15 and many handguns are semi-automatic. From my brief research it kinda seems like a made up term that doesn't have a solid definition. For the purpose of this I'll be basing it on how the guns look. If it looks like a handgun, I'll call it a handgun. If it looks like an assault rifle I'll refer to it as an assault weapon. If you're knowledgeable on guns feel free to correct me. @gourimoko @King Stannis @The Human Q-Tip

The CBS article I linked earlier describes the 18 most deadly mass shootings in US history. I wanted to look and see the type of guns used in each.

Las Vegas, Nevada - Route 91 Festival - 58 dead. October 1, 2017
Assault weapons

Orlando, Florida - Pulse nightclub - 49 dead. June 12, 2016
Assault weapons

Blacksburg, Virginia - Virginia Tech - 32 dead. April 16, 2007
Handguns

Newtown, Connecticut - Sandy Hook Elementary School - 27 dead. Dec. 14, 2012
Assault weapons

Sutherland Springs, Texas - First Baptist Church - 26 dead. Nov. 5, 2017
Assault weapons

Killeen, Texas - Luby's Cafeteria - 23 dead. Oct. 16, 1991
Handguns

San Ysidro, California - McDonald's - 21 dead. July 18, 1984
Handguns and shotgun

Parkland, Florida - Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School - 17 dead. Feb. 14, 2018
Assault weapons

Austin, Texas - University of Texas - 16 dead. Aug. 1, 1966
Had a whole slew of weapons. Sniper, M1 Carbine, shotgun, handgun, knife

San Bernardino, California - 14 dead. Dec. 12, 2015
Assault weapons

Edmond, Oklahoma - 14 dead. Aug. 20, 1986
Handguns

Fort Hood, Texas - 13 dead. Nov. 5, 2009
Handguns

Littleton, Colorado - Columbine High School - 13 dead. April 20, 1999
Bunch of guns. Shotgun, sawed off shotgun, handgun, hi-point carbine

Binghamton, New York - 13 dead. April 3, 2009
Handguns

Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania - 13 dead. Sept. 25, 1982
Assault weapons

Camden, New Jersey - 13 dead. Sept. 6, 1949
Handgun

Aurora, Colorado - Movie theater - 12 dead. July 20, 2012
Assaults weapons

Washington, D.C. - Navy Yard - 12 dead. Sept. 16, 2013
Shotgun and handgun

It appears that a majority of the 18 shootings involved "assault weapons", but I think this shows that people armed with only handguns are more than capable of carrying out mass shooting attacks.

 

[Cassity14]

The Virginia Tech shooter killed 33 people with only handguns, and the Fort Hood shooter killed 13 with handguns. The Luby's Cafeteria shooter killed 24 people with handguns. The Navy Yard shooter killed 13 with a shotgun and a handgun. The Binghamton shooter killed 14 with handguns

I got the date from the two sites I put at the bottom, but I didn't see anything about what kind of weapons are most likely to be used in shootings with 10+ casualties. There aren't a whole lot of mass shootings with 10 or more casualties (still more than there should be, of course), so I just googled a few of them on this list. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/florida-school-shooting-ranks-among-americas-deadliest/


http://www.firearmsid.com/feature articles/0900guic/guns used in crime.htm

https://everytownresearch.org/gun-violence-by-the-numbers/

Good. Now we have relevant information. Our next step is to look at the context behind every situation and ask if we can judge them all equally, what actions can be taken to help prevent multiple of the above, etc.

My issue when the general public gets into conversations about 'shootings' is that every shooting has its own unique set of context, and many aren't willing to dig deeper.

How did these shooters kill people? How far away were people being shot from? How long did each incident last? What was the emergency response (if there was one) to the situation?

VA Tech is a particularly egregious example because they implemented the most basic, flawed lockdown procedure possible. So many people died that day because they closed doors that couldn't be locked from the inside and hid in a corner, waiting to die. Obviously we can't blame the gun for the deaths there.

In this area, especially in schools, we've seen improvement. One would argue that one incident spurred a lot of change in policy regarding the way an active shooter situation is handled. There are better trainings happening and people are generally more prepared. 20 years ago, this guy in Florida would have killed 3x as many people, IMO.

I'm not familiar with the context behind a lot of the ones you've listed. I'm assuming they are older incidents? Were assault style weapons even available? Regardless, I need to look into them.

I don't think anyone here is arguing that one change is going to magically fix everything, and I find it disingenuous for anyone to claim that "shootings will still happen" in response to a proposed change. Of course they will, but that doesn't take away validity from proposals to limit them.

However, with further regard to context, let's look at Las Vegas. Can that shooter do even half the harm he did if he were only armed with a pistol? Of course not.

Access to assault styled weapons decreases the amount of skill needed with a firearm to kill others, furthers the effective range of the shooter, often gives them access to more shots between reload times, and ultimately exacerbates already-harmful situations. Does anyone disagree with that? If so, why? And if we can all agree on that, what is the pro to outweigh the risks of making them available?

 

[MediumBaller]

Imagine what damage they could have done with an AR-15.

I can't believe the thought of being "glad" that a terrorist ONLY used a handgun to murder people pops into my head.

I'm not sure what you mean. The data shows that people are capable of carrying out mass shootings when they're only equipped with handguns. I'm not "glad" that they only used a handgun. It just seems that a big part of the argument for banning "assault weapons" is that it would stop people from being able to carry out these mass shootings, but past history suggests otherwise.

 

[Cassity14]

@Cassity14's question got me thinking so I decided to do a little more research. I don't really understand what the definition of an "assault weapon" is, because both the AR15 and many handguns are semi-automatic. From my brief research it kinda seems like a made up term that doesn't have a solid definition. For the purpose of this I'll be basing it on how the guns look. If it looks like a handgun, I'll call it a handgun. If it looks like an assault rifle I'll refer to it as an assault weapon. If you're knowledgeable on guns feel free to correct me. @gourimoko @King Stannis @The Human Q-Tip

The CBS article I linked earlier describes the 18 most deadly mass shootings in US history. I wanted to look and see the type of guns used in each.

Las Vegas, Nevada - Route 91 Festival - 58 dead
Assault weapons

Orlando, Florida - Pulse nightclub - 49 dead
Assault weapons

Blacksburg, Virginia - Virginia Tech - 32 dead
Handguns

Newtown, Connecticut - Sandy Hook Elementary School - 27 dead
Assault weapons

Sutherland Springs, Texas - First Baptist Church - 26 dead
Assault weapons

Killeen, Texas - Luby's Cafeteria - 23 dead
Handguns

San Ysidro, California - McDonald's - 21 dead
Handguns and shotgun

Parkland, Florida - Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School - 17 dead
Assault weapons

Austin, Texas - University of Texas - 16 dead
Had a whole slew of weapons. Sniper, M1 Carbine, shotgun, handgun, knife

San Bernardino, California - 14 dead
Assault weapons

Edmond, Oklahoma - 14 dead
Handguns

Fort Hood, Texas - 13 dead
Handguns

Littleton, Colorado - Columbine High School - 13 dead
Bunch of guns. Shotgun, sawed off shotgun, handgun, hi-point carbine

Binghamton, New York - 13 dead
Handguns

Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania - 13 dead
Assault weapons

Camden, New Jersey - 13 dead
Handgun

Aurora, Colorado - Movie theater - 12 dead
Assaults weapons

Washington, D.C. - Navy Yard - 12 dead
Shotgun and handgun

It appears that a majority of the 18 shootings involved "assault weapons", but I think this shows that people armed with only handguns are more than capable of carrying out mass shooting attacks.

Thanks for doing this.

As for your conclusion at the bottom, I agree that any weapon is capable of this in the right hands. I firmly believe, however, that an assault weapon can be effectively used to kill a lot of people by more people.

At the risk of sounding insensitive, I would compare it to hitting with a metal bat compared to a wooden bat.

 

[MediumBaller]

Good. Now we have relevant information. Our next step is to look at the context behind every situation and ask if we can judge them all equally, what actions can be taken to help prevent multiple of the above, etc.

My issue when the general public gets into conversations about 'shootings' is that every shooting has its own unique set of context, and many aren't willing to dig deeper.

How did these shooters kill people? How far away were people being shot from? How long did each incident last? What was the emergency response (if there was one) to the situation?

Not sure on this. Those are interesting questions though so I think I'm gonna read up more on the shootings this evening when I'm not as busy. I hadn't heard of a number of the ones on the list.

VA Tech is a particularly egregious example because they implemented the most basic, flawed lockdown procedure possible. So many people died that day because they closed doors that couldn't be locked from the inside and hid in a corner, waiting to die. Obviously we can't blame the gun for the deaths there.

In this area, especially in schools, we've seen improvement. One would argue that one incident spurred a lot of change in policy regarding the way an active shooter situation is handled. There are better trainings happening and people are generally more prepared. 20 years ago, this guy in Florida would have killed 3x as many people, IMO.

Ahh okay that makes sense. I had wondered how he was able to kill so many people with only a coupe of handguns.

I'm not familiar with the context behind a lot of the ones you've listed. I'm assuming they are older incidents? Were assault style weapons even available? Regardless, I need to look into them.

I'll go back and add dates for the ones I listed. Some are older but other lesser known ones were within the last 15 years or so.

I don't think anyone here is arguing that one change is going to magically fix everything, and I find it disingenuous for anyone to claim that "shootings will still happen" in response to a proposed change. Of course they will, but that doesn't take away validity from proposals to limit them.

I would support increasing the minimum age for purchasing assault weapons. I think I read that it's 18 right now? That seems too low for me. 18 year olds are too impulsive, imo, to be allowed to purchase these guns.

However, with further regard to context, let's look at Las Vegas. Can that shooter do even half the harm he did if he were only armed with a pistol? Of course not.

Access to assault styled weapons decreases the amount of skill needed with a firearm to kill others, furthers the effective range of the shooter, often gives them access to more shots between reload times, and ultimately exacerbates already-harmful situations. Does anyone disagree with that? If so, why? And if we can all agree on that, what is the pro to outweigh the risks of making them available?

I agree with all of this.

 

[KI4MVP]

I'm not sure what you mean. The data shows that people are capable of carrying out mass shootings when they're only equipped with handguns. I'm not "glad" that they only used a handgun. It just seems that a big part of the argument for banning "assault weapons" is that it would stop people from being able to carry out these mass shootings, but past history suggests otherwise.

how many of those handgun incidents were semi-automatic? You started your post taking about the issue those have, but then ignored it later in the same post. It would be helpful to add that piece of information in.

The big issue is the combination of being able to fire rapidly, have lots of rounds, and have the ability to rapidly reload. Did they ever even do anything about the bump stocks after Vegas, which turn semi-automatic weapons into fully automatic weapons?

 

[MediumBaller]

how many of those handgun incidents were semi-automatic? You started your post taking about the issue those have, but then ignored it later in the same post. It would be helpful to add that piece of information in.

Most, if not all, of the handguns used were semi-automatic. I'll add that in here in a little bit.

 

[Hurl Bruce]

I'm not sure what you mean. The data shows that people are capable of carrying out mass shootings when they're only equipped with handguns. I'm not "glad" that they only used a handgun. It just seems that a big part of the argument for banning "assault weapons" is that it would stop people from being able to carry out these mass shootings, but past history suggests otherwise.

I just see incidents where handguns were involved and extrapolate what the damage could have been if the gunman used a higher powered weapon. It's scary to think that those incidents could have been worse.

 

[Cavatt]

Raise the age to buy a gun to 35 like being President. Most violent criminals are 18-28 or so.

 

[Whittaker]

A political actor whose top priority is appearing reasonable to his opponents has already lost. The only truly reasonable position to one's opponent is, by definition, his own.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

I don't recall the last time one of these shootings was carried out by an actual assault weapon (which are illegal to sell), but instead they often get carried out by similar weapons (which are legal to sell) that can effectively be converted into assault weapons.

How about we star by fixing that problem, so we aren't selling weapons that can inflict mass casualties with minimal reload time.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-skelton-florida-shooting-gun-control-20180219-story.html

Just as a matter of verbiage moving forward.

"Assault Rifles" are what the military uses. They are capable of firing more than one round with a single pull of the trigger. Either full automatic, or "burst" fire. The vast majority of people can't buy one.

"Assault weapons" are an ill-defined category of weapons that sort of "look" military, but fire only in semi-automatic mode. And just to cover all bases, I don't think anyone here disputes that possessing or selling a device intended to let such weapons simulate automatic fire should illegal.