Shooting at Texas High School

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
23,951
30,469
1,743
Australia
Here is the round about argument again. I said I don't see the USA a culturally, economically, and governmentally the same or similar enough to the countries you cite to where differences in those 3 categories can be so easily dismissed.

I fully admit that I do lean toward the 2A than away. I don't believe that "common sense gun control" is as common sense as those who advocate do. I am more of a pragmatist than an idealogue.

There are solutions that can lessen the impact of these events that are uncontroversial, but are being blocked. Removing even a portion of the mass of guns from circulation isn't realistic in our lifetimes. Period. It just won't happen. We need to harden schools. It sucks that it has come to this but it is the lowest hanging fruit. 1) control points of entry and 2) install metal detectors. We do this at airports, courthouses etc. Post 9-11 it sucked, but airports have adjusted and in some cases have turned into shopping malls. The exaggeration that this would turn our schools into prisons is just that.

Banning ARs is divisive for questionable results. For the past couple of years, all rifle homicides average about 300 or so out of a population of 300 million and between an estimated 5-10 million ARs (not including other rifles) in circulation. I feel sorry for those 300 or so people but this is not a serious problem.

I would be open to universal background checks, but as usual the devil is in the details. If the goal is truly to stop people who shouldn't have guns, either 1) open up NICS to nonFFL dealers or 2) reduce FFL reporting requirements for these transactions. As I understand it, FFL dealers must log a transactions they facilitate (form 4473). The records they keep are open to inspection at anytime by the ATF and must be surrendered when they leave the business. To me (and many others) this is a defacto registry tracking the transfer of all firearms both through public(FFL sale) and private sales. Eliminate this record keeping and I could support it screening all buyers through NICS.

The problem is gun deaths/violence. One side sees the root cause as guns/2A. The other doesn't. I recognize that guns are related (can't have gun violence without guns, and why I dismissed your curved lcd TV comment earlier). I just wish people would get over the hyperbole and look at solutions that might have a shot in hell of actually happening and making a difference.
If the US had formed and the forefathers did not create a 2nd amendment, what do you think would be our situation regarding gun violence today?
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
23,951
30,469
1,743
Australia
Question--is anyone familiar with European / Canadian / Austalian, etc. laws regarding mental health. We have a LOT of severely mentally ill people in the US and generally can't force them to take meds and can't force them into treatment. Do other 1st world counties take this same approach?
As I work in Australia I am quite knowledgeable of the law, at least in NSW under that mental health act. It is much more protective of the rights of the mentally ill than what I have dealt with in the US. No, under most circumstances they cannot force them to take meds without a community treatment order from the courts. Access is somewhat easier in Australia but still not great.
 

sc5mu93

WeaselMonkey
A/V Subscriber
Oct 18, 2006
8,427
7,472
1,743
Fairfield, CT
If the US had formed and the forefathers did not create a 2nd amendment, what do you think would be our situation regarding gun violence today?
You quoted my entire post, and this is your response? Okay. Not very useful at illustrating any point or proposed solution/problem.

Answer: Highly speculative and I have no idea. The USA would not be the place we live in today in more ways than just gun violence. Hell, the USA could be a failed state. Or the USA could have conquered and enslaved the world.
 

wrenhal

Territorial Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
6,219
3,248
743
48
Sorry, but things you said like:
- the basis for a "gun control argument" when I have specifically said many times I am not making a gun control argument
-"I don't find the European comparison persuasive" when I was comparing to OECD (Canada, Korea, Aus, NZ, Japan are not Europe) and you could not give a single reason why it isn't persuasive
- Doesn't matter what I say, you are not listening (based on the fact you are arguing against things I'm not even saying)

makes you sound like an ideologue. I spend a fair amount of time in Australia explaining the importance of the 2nd amendment despite its downsides. The ideologues here sound exactly like you. They made up their mind that the US must just outlaw guns and nothing I say to explain why not matters.

The US is the only economically advanced country with a 2nd amendment. It is the only economically country with gun death rates anywhere close to ours. The idea that those two things are just a mere coincidence just is not realistic.
Here is the round about argument again. I said I don't see the USA a culturally, economically, and governmentally the same or similar enough to the countries you cite to where differences in those 3 categories can be so easily dismissed.

I fully admit that I do lean toward the 2A than away. I don't believe that "common sense gun control" is as common sense as those who advocate do. I am more of a pragmatist than an idealogue.

There are solutions that can lessen the impact of these events that are uncontroversial, but are being blocked. Removing even a portion of the mass of guns from circulation isn't realistic in our lifetimes. Period. It just won't happen. We need to harden schools. It sucks that it has come to this but it is the lowest hanging fruit. 1) control points of entry and 2) install metal detectors. We do this at airports, courthouses etc. Post 9-11 it sucked, but airports have adjusted and in some cases have turned into shopping malls. The exaggeration that this would turn our schools into prisons is just that.

Banning ARs is divisive for questionable results. For the past couple of years, all rifle homicides average about 300 or so out of a population of 300 million and between an estimated 5-10 million ARs (not including other rifles) in circulation. I feel sorry for those 300 or so people but this is not a serious problem.

I would be open to universal background checks, but as usual the devil is in the details. If the goal is truly to stop people who shouldn't have guns, either 1) open up NICS to nonFFL dealers or 2) reduce FFL reporting requirements for these transactions. As I understand it, FFL dealers must log a transactions they facilitate (form 4473). The records they keep are open to inspection at anytime by the ATF and must be surrendered when they leave the business. To me (and many others) this is a defacto registry tracking the transfer of all firearms both through public(FFL sale) and private sales. Eliminate this record keeping and I could support it screening all buyers through NICS.

The problem is gun deaths/violence. One side sees the root cause as guns/2A. The other doesn't. I recognize that guns are related (can't have gun violence without guns, and why I dismissed your curved lcd TV comment earlier). I just wish people would get over the hyperbole and look at solutions that might have a shot in hell of actually happening and making a difference.
Open juvenile records to the nics. Stop programs like promise from interfering in normal police duties. Fire incompetent cops that don't do their duty like the sheriff's in Broward. I want to say open mental health info, but that becomes very subjective and I'm not sure that would help, but cops should be able to use mental health information as a piece of an investigative puzzle when there are reports like what happened before the parkland shooting.

Sent from my Moto G Play using Tapatalk
 
Nov 8, 2007
3,113
1,081
1,743
Bartlesville
We desperately need a leader in this country to stand up against fatherless homes. Until America values a two parent in-home upbringing of our children this garbage will continue to happen. I'm not taking any 2nd amendment side here.

According to the US Census, 31% of children live in a one-parent home. CNN's Dom Lemon (who is black) stated 71% of black children are born out of wedlock. THIS is were we stop the mass shootings. There's been a lot of anti-masculinity in the news lately, but men need to take responsibility. Men have to raise their children. Men have to be better husbands and keep their promises.

This is an excerpt from this article:

As noted above, Roof’s parents divorced even before he was born. Not only were Adam Lanza’s parents divorced, but he hadn’t seen his father in the two years before the Sandy Hook shooting. Jeff Weise, the 16-year-old school shooter who killed ten people, came from a depressingly broken home: his parents separated before birth and both his parents were dead before he was even a teenager. The list goes on. From Charleston Churches to the Boston Marathon, the victims change but the narrative remains the same: unstable homes produce unstable individuals. All that remains to be seen is whether we decide to keep destabilizing American homes, or wake up and give our kids the upbringing they deserve.
So building upon this point (which I think is VERY valid) and the point that there is a "cultural" difference between us and our other economic peers.

Let's compare some stats to Australia, since they get thrown into the gun control debate a lot.

Australia divorce rate: 18%
USA divorce rate: 50% (varies from year to year 48-51% from the info I could find)

Australia single parent households: 24%
USA single parent households: 36%
 

kaboy42

Territorial Marshal
May 2, 2007
7,134
8,059
1,743
How will disarming me make our schools safer?
"They" want to disarm E.V.E.R.Y.B.O.D.Y!


~4 months ago, I wouldn't have said that. ~4 months ago I didn't care for the NRA and sure as hell didn't want to send them ANY of my money. ~4 months ago I scoffed at A LOT of my fellow gun-owning friends that I thought were getting a little crazy with the "conspiracy theories" of "they" won't stop until the 2A is completely abolished. Wiped from the records.


In ~4 months... things have changed substantially. I'm now in the "do not give in one single inch to the gun control groups" crowd. Because, they aren't going to stop... until the 2A is completely abolished and you and I lose our right to defend ourselves. :cursing:
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
62,829
46,326
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
"They" want to disarm E.V.E.R.Y.B.O.D.Y!


~4 months ago, I wouldn't have said that. ~4 months ago I didn't care for the NRA and sure as hell didn't want to send them ANY of my money. ~4 months ago I scoffed at A LOT of my fellow gun-owning friends that I thought were getting a little crazy with the "conspiracy theories" of "they" won't stop until the 2A is completely abolished. Wiped from the records.


In ~4 months... things have changed substantially. I'm now in the "do not give in one single inch to the gun control groups" crowd. Because, they aren't going to stop... until the 2A is completely abolished and you and I lose our right to defend ourselves. :cursing:
And that's why I joined the NRA.
 

kaboy42

Territorial Marshal
May 2, 2007
7,134
8,059
1,743
Yes, more laws... That's the answer! :facepalm:

From the Dixon, Illinois school shooting that a hero school resource officer stopped and the media pretty much ignored...


As a convicted felon, accused Dixon shooter’s mother should not have had gun
Posted 7:36 PM, May 18, 2018, by Meghan Dwyer, Updated at 07:59PM, May 18, 2018

The suspect in the school shooting in Dixon Illinois appeared in court for the first time Friday.

19-year-old Matthew Milby pleaded not guilty.

Prosecutors say he took a rifle to Dixon High School on Wednesday morning and shot at a school resource officer who returned fire.
Milby's family packed the courtroom and shouted words of encouragement.


Related Story
Teen accused in Dixon High School shooting pleads not guilty



Now questions are arising about how Milby’s mother bought the gun in the first place. WGN Investigates has confirmed Julie Milby is a convicted felon who should not have been allowed to legally purchase a gun. The Illinois State Police has confirmed Julie Milby purchased the 9-mm semi-automatic rifle her son brought to school Wednesday. But court records in Florida show her criminal history should have been a red flag on a background check.

On Wednesday Julie Milby told reporters, “There’s no justification for what he’s done. And he will take full responsibility for that.”
She also claimed she didn’t know how he got the gun.
“We don’t have guns,” she said at the time. “I don’t have any guns in the house.” Yet state police say it was her gun and she purchased it in 2012.
How she got it is still unclear.

A review of court records shows Julie Milby, previously known as Julie Mitchell, was convicted of felony battery and felony resisting an officer with violence in Osceola County, Florida in 1991.The Florida Department of Law Enforcement says because of that conviction she would not have been able to get a gun from a licensed dealer in the state of Florida.
Julie Milby did not answer her door Friday when WGN Investigates arrived.

Her attorney Tom Murray told WGN he believes she bought the gun in Illinois, legally, and with a FOID card. But he did not know about her 1991 felony convictions. Illinois State Police won’t specify how she got the gun, or whether they ran a proper background check, because the case is still under investigation. But in Illinois a felony conviction anywhere in the country disqualifies someone from getting a FOID card, which you need to buy a gun in Illinois. When running a background check on Julie Milby, numerous felony convictions are shown. Someone in Florida stole her identity at one point. That individual claimed to be Julie when arrested. However, Florida officials say that happened after her 1991 felony convictions. Florida officials say all of those cases still should have shown up on a background check for a gun, though, because they have not been officially removed from her record.

Milby also has an extensive arrest record in Lee County, Illinois. None of those cases, however, include felony convictions.
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
23,951
30,469
1,743
Australia
You quoted my entire post, and this is your response? Okay. Not very useful at illustrating any point or proposed solution/problem.

Answer: Highly speculative and I have no idea. The USA would not be the place we live in today in more ways than just gun violence. Hell, the USA could be a failed state. Or the USA could have conquered and enslaved the world.
I'm not sure why you keep writing your idea of what solutions are when that isn't even what I asked you about. Look back at what I asked you, it has absolutely nothing to do with proposed solutions. I feel like you have just gone into "standard gun control debate mode version 2.27" no matter what I say.

I do not desire to revoke the second amendment. I also do not believe that the majority of what is proposed will do any good. So, no matter how many ways you write it, I don't have much response. But, I find the idea that the US is the only economically advanced country with 2nd amendment rights and is by far the most armed country and it is just a mere coincidence that we are also the ones that have this issue makes absolutely no sense. And, when that argument is made, I feel it shows a bias so strong that the person has lost rational judgment on the subject. Exactly like the people on the other side that are convinced that if the government just banned guns life would go on exactly the same except less gun crime. It just isn't realistic, it is wishful thinking.

Now, your answer to this is finally getting somewhere. Yes, I agree, without us having a 2nd amendment, our history could be very. very different. I think enslaving the world is unrealistic, but certainly, a failed state from external invasion or a different civil war is possible. Or maybe just a domineering government that holds back our freedom/ingenuity/drive. Not a chance I want to take. So, yea, I think the evidence is overwhelming that the 2nd amendment is why we have the gun problems. But, I would not be willing to risk the alternative.
 

oks10

Territorial Marshal
Sep 9, 2007
7,262
6,354
1,743
Yukon, OK
I do not desire to revoke the second amendment. I also do not believe that the majority of what is proposed will do any good. So, no matter how many ways you write it, I don't have much response. But, I find the idea that the US is the only economically advanced country with 2nd amendment rights and is by far the most armed country and it is just a mere coincidence that we are also the ones that have this issue makes absolutely no sense. And, when that argument is made, I feel it shows a bias so strong that the person has lost rational judgment on the subject. Exactly like the people on the other side that are convinced that if the government just banned guns life would go on exactly the same except less gun crime. It just isn't realistic, it is wishful thinking.
I don't believe it is a coincidence either and I also don't believe that makes it the "cause" of these things. (Can't tell for sure what your stance is in that regard.) It's obviously a factor but the 2nd amendment didn't cause these guns to jump up into the kids hands and start firing. The solution to this problem needs to be found using basic problem solving. Identify the root cause and solve it. If you don't fix the root cause then you're still going to have the same problem but everyone just wants to put a band-aid on it...
 

sc5mu93

WeaselMonkey
A/V Subscriber
Oct 18, 2006
8,427
7,472
1,743
Fairfield, CT
I'm not sure why you keep writing your idea of what solutions are when that isn't even what I asked you about. Look back at what I asked you, it has absolutely nothing to do with proposed solutions. I feel like you have just gone into "standard gun control debate mode version 2.27" no matter what I say.
The response was to address your previous "makes you sound like a ideologue" comment. I presented solutions that are pragmatic in that it is give and take from both sides. I am not talking about banning anything or arming teachers to the teeth. Just apply lessons learned in common security necessary areas as well as implemented universal background checks while maintaining privacy.


Now, your answer to this is finally getting somewhere. Yes, I agree, without us having a 2nd amendment, our history could be very. very different. I think enslaving the world is unrealistic, but certainly, a failed state from external invasion or a different civil war is possible. Or maybe just a domineering government that holds back our freedom/ingenuity/drive. Not a chance I want to take. So, yea, I think the evidence is overwhelming that the 2nd amendment is why we have the gun problems. But, I would not be willing to risk the alternative.
I don't disagree that the 2A is probably a factor (and I conceded it previously in regard to the gun violence vs gun ownership chart - hence why it is more relevant than curved lcd tvs and gun violence). I just don't believe it is the ROOT of the problem.
 
Oct 30, 2007
2,454
2,250
1,743
If the US had formed and the forefathers did not create a 2nd amendment, what do you think would be our situation regarding gun violence today?
I can't imagine our founding fathers denying Americans the right to protect themselves against a tyrannical government after fighting the revolutionary war. Early settlers wouldn't have been able to push west without any way to hunt or protect themselves against Native Americans. We probably never would've made the Louisiana purchase or pushed to the west coast. Our country would probably be a fraction of it's current size, assuming it existed at all. Without a well armed public population, I'm not sure the British wouldn't have tried again to overthrow the colonies.

It's hard to imagine our country without the 2nd amendment. I'm not even sure it would exist without it.
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
23,951
30,469
1,743
Australia
I don't disagree that the 2A is probably a factor (and I conceded it previously in regard to the gun violence vs gun ownership chart - hence why it is more relevant than curved lcd tvs and gun violence). I just don't believe it is the ROOT of the problem.
I guess I see it as the root of the problem because it is the difference. Other places have mental health, economic probs, broken homes, etc. Other than the 2nd amendment, nobody has ever explained another reason that isn't also everywhere else. What is the ROOT? And, if that thing is present elsewhere, why isn't it causing the same problem there?
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
23,951
30,469
1,743
Australia
I don't believe it is a coincidence either and I also don't believe that makes it the "cause" of these things. (Can't tell for sure what your stance is in that regard.) It's obviously a factor but the 2nd amendment didn't cause these guns to jump up into the kids hands and start firing. The solution to this problem needs to be found using basic problem solving. Identify the root cause and solve it. If you don't fix the root cause then you're still going to have the same problem but everyone just wants to put a band-aid on it...
That is just it, I do think it is the root cause. And I base that on the fact that we are the only ones with it, and we are the only ones with the problem (in the 1st world, stable government, etc )

I don't think we should fix the root cause. I think we should accept that the root cause is a big part of who we are and why were are here. I think we should work on the other things we can improve.

Here is an analogy. We have a lot of deaths from automobile accidents. The root cause? The fact that we drive automobiles. We could easily solve automobile deaths by getting rid of automobiles. But, we want/need them to the point that having them is worth knowing that a certain number of people are going to get killed by them. We also do seat belts, airbags, crumple zones, engineered guardrails, no drunk driving to limit the deaths. But, while all those things help, they are still not the root cause.
 

wrenhal

Territorial Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
6,219
3,248
743
48
I don't disagree that the 2A is probably a factor (and I conceded it previously in regard to the gun violence vs gun ownership chart - hence why it is more relevant than curved lcd tvs and gun violence). I just don't believe it is the ROOT of the problem.
I guess I see it as the root of the problem because it is the difference. Other places have mental health, economic probs, broken homes, etc. Other than the 2nd amendment, nobody has ever explained another reason that isn't also everywhere else. What is the ROOT? And, if that thing is present elsewhere, why isn't it causing the same problem there?
So get rid of the 2nd amendment, then what? Common sense knife control? Pipe control? Where does it stop?

Edit:. Apologies. I did just see your next response. But my question stands. How do we get the people to stop demanding that the 2A be abolished?

Sent from my Moto G Play using Tapatalk
 

jakeman

Unhinged Idiot
A/V Subscriber
Apr 4, 2005
6,355
6,555
1,743
Limbo
That is just it, I do think it is the root cause. And I base that on the fact that we are the only ones with it, and we are the only ones with the problem (in the 1st world, stable government, etc )

I don't think we should fix the root cause. I think we should accept that the root cause is a big part of who we are and why were are here. I think we should work on the other things we can improve.

Here is an analogy. We have a lot of deaths from automobile accidents. The root cause? The fact that we drive automobiles. We could easily solve automobile deaths by getting rid of automobiles. But, we want/need them to the point that having them is worth knowing that a certain number of people are going to get killed by them. We also do seat belts, airbags, crumple zones, engineered guardrails, no drunk driving to limit the deaths. But, while all those things help, they are still not the root cause.
agree 100%

Without being flippant, it pretty much boils down to "it's the cost of living in a free society". Saying that to say this, I agree most gun related deaths are for the most part tragic, and I don't think we as a society should just throw up our hands and claim, "well, we live in a free society and people are gonna get shot, so screw it, there is nothing that can be done". It's an issue, and we need to be taking some kind of action to reduce gun related deaths, and school shooting are at the top of my list, but abolishing the 2A isn't the answer everyone thinks. I absolutely disagree with limiting law abiding citizens' 2A rights or access to what are currently legal small arms. I don't know what the answer is, that's above my pay grade, but I'm not willing to acquiesce to limiting the 2A in order to secure the answer, whatever it may be.

I do have a solution to drunk driving, and I'm not sure why it hasn't been implemented yet. Every car, I mean all of them, have an interlock device installed that prevents the car starting or continuing with a failed blow.

All that takes is money, and not a tremendous amount of it in relation to the cost of alcohol related driving costs in this country. With the drunk driving related deaths at or around ~10,000 lives a year and the cost of alcohol related crashes being in the mid double digit billions, it seems to be well worth the cost to me. I mean other than the fact that we live in a free society. That's a lot of money and deaths. That should be worth the trade off to give up a little freedom, right?

Anyway, I don't know how similar those 2 things actually are, but I'm not sure most law abiding citizens without any alcohol related offenses would stand for having the government demand that in order to register or insure a car that it has to have an interlock device. I could be wrong, and driving is a privilege and not a creator endowed right.

I don't know, I don't have all the answers. I'm like most other folks, all I have is questions.


https://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/impaired_driving/index.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=NIwf3d7hP9g
 

kaboy42

Territorial Marshal
May 2, 2007
7,134
8,059
1,743
That is just it, I do think it is the root cause. And I base that on the fact that we are the only ones with it, and we are the only ones with the problem (in the 1st world, stable government, etc )

I don't think we should fix the root cause. I think we should accept that the root cause is a big part of who we are and why were are here. I think we should work on the other things we can improve.

Here is an analogy. We have a lot of deaths from automobile accidents. The root cause? The fact that we drive automobiles. We could easily solve automobile deaths by getting rid of automobiles. But, we want/need them to the point that having them is worth knowing that a certain number of people are going to get killed by them. We also do seat belts, airbags, crumple zones, engineered guardrails, no drunk driving to limit the deaths. But, while all those things help, they are still not the root cause.
I like this ^^^^^^^. Buuuut... I disagree that the 2A (or gun ownership) is THE root cause.

Using the 5 Whys method, there's no way that the 2A is the "root" cause of "gun" violence. Some BODY (man) has to pull the trigger.

Just like a group of Muslims (man) have to actually pick up the stones and throw them to stone an adulterer. OR a man drives a truck through a crowded street indiscriminately killing every one he can. OR a lunatic Chinese man (man) has to actually grab a knife and stab children. OR a cult leader (man) mixes poison in the drinks given to his followers. OR a sexual predator (man) breaks in to a single woman's apartment, rapes her and then strangles her to death.

And I'm not saying "man" is the root cause. You can drill down much deeper if you keep asking "why?". Mental health, broken/fatherless homes, value/moral deterioration, dead beat parents, digital harassment/bullying, religious motivations, drug related, etc... those are root causes. The gun is just a tool. A very effective tool nonetheless, but just a tool. Take the gun out of the equation and a person hell-bent on revenge/harm/murder will just find another way. My examples above prove that.
 

oks10

Territorial Marshal
Sep 9, 2007
7,262
6,354
1,743
Yukon, OK
That is just it, I do think it is the root cause. And I base that on the fact that we are the only ones with it, and we are the only ones with the problem (in the 1st world, stable government, etc )

I don't think we should fix the root cause. I think we should accept that the root cause is a big part of who we are and why were are here. I think we should work on the other things we can improve.

Here is an analogy. We have a lot of deaths from automobile accidents. The root cause? The fact that we drive automobiles. We could easily solve automobile deaths by getting rid of automobiles. But, we want/need them to the point that having them is worth knowing that a certain number of people are going to get killed by them. We also do seat belts, airbags, crumple zones, engineered guardrails, no drunk driving to limit the deaths. But, while all those things help, they are still not the root cause.
I respect but your opinion but I disagree with what you're determining to be the root cause. I work for a company that makes valves so as part of our manufacturing system, we identify failures and bottlenecks and then determine the root cause so we can prevent/reduce the occurrence of those. Using the log that you've applied to your automobile scenario, the root cause of our problems would be "we make valves". I mean, all of our problems are a result of the fact that we make valves, right? You're jumping past what's actually CAUSING the problem and instead just pointing at a common component, regardless of if it actually causes a problem or not. Millions of people make it home every night after driving (and millions of personal firearms manage to not shoot anybody). If the fact that "people drive" (or "people have guns") was the root cause then we would have a MUCH larger death count to show for it. You and I might just have a different opinion on what "root cause" means.
 
Last edited:

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
23,951
30,469
1,743
Australia
I respect but your opinion but I disagree with what you're determining to be the root cause. I work for a company that makes valves so as part of our manufacturing system, we identify failures and bottlenecks and then determine the root cause so we can prevent/reduce the occurrence of those. Using the log that you've applied to your automobile scenario, the root cause of our problems would be "we make valves". I mean, all of our problems are a result of the fact that we make valves, right? You're jumping past what's actually CAUSING the problem and instead just pointing at a common component, regardless of if it actually causes a problem or not. Millions of people make it home every night after driving (and millions of personal firearms manage to not shoot anybody). If the fact that "people drive" (or "people have guns") was the root cause then we would have a MUCH larger death count to show for it. You and I might just have a different opinion on what "root cause" means.
Yep, different opinion.

If every country had guns and limiting them was not even a concept then I would agree with you.

If other countries figured out how to live pretty much without valves but we said, "We don't care, we are going to keep making valves whether we need them or not and whether they fail or not" then clearly making valves is the root problem.
Guns are not a common component, except in the US, and in violent third world failed states.

A heart attack occurs when a plaque lining a blood vessel dislodges and a clot forms. The root cause is the fact that a plaque is there. Now, with modern diets and sedentary lifestyle, nearly all of us have some plaque. So, since we all have it, you could say that the root cause of a heart attack is the dislodging of the plaque. If we could keep it stable there would be very few heart attacks. And that is exactly what we try to do. But, the honest root cause is that the plaque is even there. None of us are going to go back to walking/running 15 miles a day in search of grubs/nuts/berries and if we are lucky kill a bit of meat. But, if we did, the root cause is gone.
Same with guns. The US will never get rid of civilian owned guns. But if we did, the root cause is gone.