Might also be that some carry as a matter of self-protection and habit, and just don't disarm when they go into a hospital--maybe don't even think of it.
Not that there aren't people who use guns to express dissatisfaction with health care providers, employers, etc. Just that, if *all* gun carriers were inclined to use their guns that way, there'd be many, many more incidents.
Not defending going around carrying a gun. But I doubt that all the gun carriers stopped at that hospital were there to use them.
FWIW, YMMV.
But every gun toter is Schroedinger's Murderer. You don't know if they're the proverbial good guy or the proverbial bad guy, that is until they open fire. Keeping guns out of places like hospitals and courthouses obviates that worry.
Yes. It's just that the story post to which I responded seemed to me to have at least a subtext of "this is the main way Americans complain and solve their problems". It's one way; but most people don't. I think Stercus Tauri (poster) is American. This may just be the first time he's dealt with a security metal detector. And I may have read something into it, though I didn't necessarily think ST meant to indicate that.
Apologies if I misunderstood. Might chalk it up to the cold morphing into bronchitis I've been dealing with.
I've been through various metal detectors. E.g., we have them at City Hall, and you have to go through them even to vote. Decades back (early 80s?), the mayor and our first openly gay supervisor* were assassinated. IIRC, by another supervisor. And Dianne Feinstein, now a senator in Congress, found them and broke the news. Then she became mayor. I don't know when the metal detector was put in, but that's one of the main reasons.
Many public/state schools have security metal detectors. Lots of other places, too--I think our local IRS office may. (For non-US folks: IRS handles federal taxes. Not exactly a popular agency.)
Yes, it's a scary feeling to know that guns can be carried in just about anywhere. I don't like that at all. And there's no way to know who's going to do what. I just doubt that all the people who try to enter a hospital with guns are *necessarily* thinking about communicating that way with someone there.
*We have a board of supervisors rather than a city council.
GK I'm sure you know metal detectors are certainly not limited to the United States, and are not a new thing at all. We do not currently have them in hospitals, but there is a big push to improve the safety of doctors, nurses and other workers there. A couple of people have been murdered by disgruntled people under the influence, and many have suffered injuries and abuse. My former union mainly represents people like orderlies in hospitals (I switched to one which did our recent Agreement, more social and community services). I am still on their facebook, and they regularly agitate for more security in out hospitals.
After I stopped being a lawyer, medical detectors were introduced in courts, and Mrs Toad often complains that you have to factor time in the line in to get to your court on time. They are mostly looking for knives, but guns too of course. I am very happy with this because Mandy works with clients in difficult circumstances, dealing with domestic violence offenders and kids matters in family law. We live an hour away from her work specifically so she is unlikely to meet clients or (worse) their spouses in the supermarket. People are at their worst when dealing with this stuff
Stercus Tauri (and anyone else) is free to tell the world their nationality and where they live, or similar information about family members, if they feel that's relevant and they want to. There's no need for anyone else to supply that information.
Yes. It's just that the story post to which I responded seemed to me to have at least a subtext of "this is the main way Americans complain and solve their problems". It's one way; but most people don't. I think Stercus Tauri (poster) is American. This may just be the first time he's dealt with a security metal detector. And I may have read something into it, though I didn't necessarily think ST meant to indicate that.
FYI... He's a UK citizen currently living in Canada and is married to an American. He has encountered many metal detectors over his lifetime, but that was the first one in a hospital..
But every gun toter is Schroedinger's Murderer. You don't know if they're the proverbial good guy or the proverbial bad guy, that is until they open fire. Keeping guns out of places like hospitals and courthouses obviates that worry.
For hospitals, I think it doesn't actually matter whether you're a good buy or a bad guy. What happens when you go to hospital? You probably take some clothes off, you probably get moved from room to room by an orderly, perhaps you get to wear one of those attractive hospital gowns with your arse on display, and perhaps you get some "interesting" medication.
If you are a good guy with a gun, how do you keep your gun under positive control in those conditions?
Statistics for 2/6/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 25
Total injuries: 30
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
But every gun toter is Schroedinger's Murderer. You don't know if they're the proverbial good guy or the proverbial bad guy, that is until they open fire. Keeping guns out of places like hospitals and courthouses obviates that worry.
For hospitals, I think it doesn't actually matter whether you're a good buy or a bad guy. What happens when you go to hospital? You probably take some clothes off, you probably get moved from room to room by an orderly, perhaps you get to wear one of those attractive hospital gowns with your arse on display, and perhaps you get some "interesting" medication.
If you are a good guy with a gun, how do you keep your gun under positive control in those conditions?
Could it be used to take your temperature? Cut down on the cost of thermometers?
Its relatives friends and patients that attack hospital staff physically and verbally. In Australia, employers have an obligation to provide a safe workplace. Metal detectors are a good idea in my book.
Statistics for 2/7/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One in Waco, TX: 1 dead, 3 injured
Total deaths: 35
Total injuries: 37
Children under 12 killed: Two: a 4-y.o. in New Jersey and a 1-y.o. in Louisiana; in both cases, boys playing with guns.
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Statistics for 2/8/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One in Houston, TX: 1 dead, 3 injured
Total deaths: 30
Total injuries: 49
Children under 12 killed: One: a 5-y.o. in Milwaukee, Wisconsin dead of gunshot wound; no further details available right now.
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Statistics for 2/9/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One in Youngstown, OH: 3 dead, 2 injured
Total deaths: 24
Total injuries: 72
Children under 12 killed: One: a 3-y.o. girl in Pittsburgh PA dead due to accidental discharge by gun in possession of individual not legally permitted to own gun.
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Statistics for 2/11/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 20
Total injuries: 41
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
US SHOOTINGS REPORT 2/11/20
Statistics for 2/10/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One in Dover, DE: 1 dead, 4 injured
Total deaths: 35
Total injuries: 74
Children under 12 killed: One: a 5-y.o. boy in Naples, FL; shot by father who killed himself.
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Statistics for 2/12/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 21
Total injuries: 46
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
This isn't quite the right place for this - but scroll to the bottom to listen to an old fella who's been there.
"Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us."
Not bloody likely in USA.
I think it is the right place @mark_in_manchester. American shootings are rather, yawn, who cares as they are so routine. Jesus must need a blood sacrifice by gun porn on a daily basis of Americans. It's much more worthy to note non-routine deaths. There's no mercy in America about it, Jesus even likes guns in churches there. Have mercy indeed. Until the people there become interested in mercy Jesus will be alleged to support the gun fuckers. One nation under Gun.
NP, your message is incredibly inaccurate and insulting. It also indicates that you take not a blind bit of notice about what our shipmates say and do. I have learned since being here that a large number of Americans want gun reform, and are as sick of the endless run of gun related violence as the rest of us. People are organising, and anti-gun politicians are getting elected.
I'm sorry mate, but your post is very ugly.
Just as an aside, I have been having problems with anger management in RL. I'm proud of myself for not going off at you NP. Yay me!
There is a saying that we either are making something happen or we are letting it happen. There is a whole lot of letting terrible things happen in the US. We need to work harder to make different things happen.
--FWIW: many people have worked hard on gun reform. Unfortunately, the gun lobby has deep pockets, and many Congress critters and other politicians have mansions there.
There's been gun control, at various times and in various ways--e.g., assault weapons illegal by federal law. Unfortunately, it was allowed to run out--more than once, IIRC. (Similar situation with weighted, metal lawn darts, which have accidentally killed people. Made illegal several times, but...)
--This is maybe not in the main lane of this convo; but I'm in an unloading mood, and it's relevant:
When I was a kid, there were gun safety ads on TV. (Probably around the same time that safety belt ads came out.) I think they probably did good. They did in my household. There were rifles stored in a mind-bogglingly stupid way: right at the opening of a frequently-used clothes closet, leaning against the wall, with ammunition right by them. Don't know if they were loaded. But they had to be moved to get to certain things, and I often had to do that. (Not my closet, but there were things I had to get.)
Those safety promos came on ahead of a visit by much younger relatives. Fortunately, I was never the sort to play with dangerous things or take them apart. But I was worried about the kids. So I told the grownups in the household about the ads and my concerns. They were totally gobsmacked--it had truly never occurred to them. So the guns were moved to the far back corner of the closet while the kids were there. And were later put back in their usual spot.
These were good, decent people--but they really, truly didn't get it. Not survivalists, not gun nuts, not even Republicans*. I think they were afraid. I don't know whether they'd had past reasons to protect themselves. But it's one example of how hard it is to straighten this out in an everyday family.
*Yes, I know not all Republicans are gun owners, nor vice versa. And not all gun owners--maybe most--aren't gun nuts.
--I don't know what can be done that has a chance of working, that hasn't already been done.
Maybe more gun safety promos? I saw a few, after many, many years of not seeing any. (In the wake of a school shooting, maybe.) Then they went away again.
As far as actually stopping gun deaths, particularly accidental ones, particularly those of kids, regular airing of common-sense safety ads, with simple, creative, memorable approaches, might make a big difference. It did with safety belts, though it took a lonnnggg time to really get deeply rooted in the culture. I don't know how ads like that are brought about, but it's got to be a lot easier than facing down the gun lobby, NRA, and 2nd amendment.
I was waiting for the anniversary to post about this (and will do so, with addenda), but once again: the US House passed, with bi-partisan support, two bills in late February 2019 which, if passed and signed into law, would make restrictive changes to background checks, sales, and other aspects of current gun legislation. Not a panacea, not a sweeping solution, but changes that, by making it a little harder to procure guns, might reduce the sheer volume of gun violence here.
These two bills sit, gathering dust, on Mitch McConnell's desk.
NP, while I understand and sympathize with your anger, what exactly would you have us do? Polls suggest that the overwhelming majority of Americans favor restrictions on gun sales and on expanding background checks and many of us are every bit as angry and frustrated as you are. We cannot vote legislators in or out of office except when they're up for election. (Mitch McCaonnell is up for re-election in 2020; interested US Shippies may want to contribute to his Democratic opponent's campaign: Amy McGrath) Tantruming may temporarily relieve our feelings, but it doesn't alter the legislative realities.
Those US Shippies rumbling about the President having too much power may want to turn some attention to the power wielded by the Senate President.
Statistics for 2/13/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 18
Total injuries: 46
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Golden Key your post reminded me of visiting my uncle and Aunt when I was a child. I opened a kitchen cupboard and saw his rifle. It was the first one I had ever seen and I was a bit scared. Aunty said, "Don't worry, The other things needed to make it work are in different places" but she was a bit vague as to where they were. Later, long after he handed it in as part of a firearms amnesty I discovered that the bolt had been kept in a locked shed and the ammo at the top of the wardrobe in the bedroom. Aunty of course knew where they were, but she wasn't going to tell a child.
Now gun safes are compulsory, and people wanting to renew their gun licenses have to have a reason for holding one, Self defence is not a valid reason.
Thx for your post. I'm glad you were kept safe, and that gun safes came into use. Years ago, there was an "Oprah" (?) segment about household gun safety. There were several parents, all of whom thought their guns were put away where their kids couldn't find them. (Some guns were taken apart and stored in separate places, IIRC.) So, without the parents around, the kids were told to find the guns, and were filmed. They all found them. Parents were shocked.
Re guns not allowed for self-defense:
Are there any exceptions to that? E.g. someone who's fled an abusive spouse/partner? If not, what are people with seriously dangerous circumstances supposed to do?
Are there any exceptions to that? E.g. someone who's fled an abusive spouse/partner? If not, what are people with seriously dangerous circumstances supposed to do?
In most of the civilized world, people trust the policing to be done by police.
And if the police routinely don't make it to an active situation in time, and/or don't take it seriously when they get there? Or if they're not civilized themselves?
I'm not saying guns are great and everyone should have them. I neither have nor want them. But, in a dangerous, messed-up worlds, sometimes there are grave situations where they're the only method of resolution and/or protection likely to have any chance of working. E.g., if I knew someone who'd left a violent ex who used to beat the crap out of them, whose ex didn't care about restraining orders or the cops...and I found out they had a gun for self-protection...I wouldn't tell them to get rid of it. I wouldn't be the one getting beaten or worse. I might suggest that they get some basic safety and use training, and make sure they get a license. But I would probably also refer them to an anti-domestic violence organization, which would most likely know good ways to do all that, and what to do if those things didn't work.
When setting absolute rules, laws, and policies, there are often exceptions that the makers and others with strong opinions don't (want to) consider. IMVHO, those rules, laws, and policies can't be truly fair or effective if those exceptions aren't acknowledged and part of the planning.
It's not as simple as the US not being sufficiently civilized. And, from what I've heard, people in other countries--even "civilized" ones--don't necessarily trust their cops or have good experiences with them. Immigrants and travelers often bring all of that with them.
Respectfully, I think there's much more to the situation (whether in the US or elsewhere) than your statement implies.
Are there any exceptions to that? E.g. someone who's fled an abusive spouse/partner? If not, what are people with seriously dangerous circumstances supposed to do?
In most of the civilized world, people trust the policing to be done by police.
Perhaps they are more trustworthy there. Ask ten black people in America if they trust the police.
I'm not sure that police are less trusted in the USA than elsewhere. I started with the opposite assumption, but after looking at some studies on the internet, it looks like the situation is the same in the USA as elsewhere: That despite police bashings and murders, despite the disproportionate targeting of minorities, most people still trust the police to act honestly, appropriately and in a timely manner. Please note that my patience when researching stuff is very low. I'm not systematic but I am lazy.
So what I don't understand is why people trust the police, but still need a gun to feel safe.
Please note that the whole reason for this post has been undermined by my stupid research. I hate it when facts get in the way of a good argument.
Are there any exceptions to that? E.g. someone who's fled an abusive spouse/partner? If not, what are people with seriously dangerous circumstances supposed to do?
In the UK self-defence has never been a valid reason to own a gun, in the century since such laws were introduced. The laws governing self-defence do allow someone in immediate concern for their safety, or the safety of others, to use what is available - so, a gun owned for another reason can be used in self-defence, much as you could use the cricket bat you own because you play cricket, a hammer in your tool kit or a kitchen knife.
Generally, people will rely on the rule of law. A restraining order to keep an abusive spouse/partner at a safe distance will be enforced by the police and courts. And, the community (eg: organisations like Women's Aid who will protect the vulnerable by re-housing and doing what they can to maintain that new residence secret).
Carrying a gun for protection from violence is like carrying a doughnut for protection from diabetes. Yes, there are specific circumstances where it could conceivably be a benefit, but those distracting shiny exceptions are buried in the overwhelming contrary reality.
If the effort put into and against the "my cold dead hands" were instead folded into having police that actually "serve and protect", everyone would be much, much better off.
I am as responsible as everyone else in the US for this problem, you touchy little fucks. I meant "civilized" to mean non-war-torn settings. And I totally grok sympathizing with those who have legitimate fears which they want firearms to address. But is an arms race against other citizens really winnable? The very ubiquitous presence of weapons is what makes the police scared, and therefore needing to be fighting fire with literal fire.
The only real answer is systematic reduction in access to weapons. Period. Not total elimination, because that's reactionary bullshit, but regulation back into at least the same levels as the rest of the civilized world.
I'm not sure that police are less trusted in the USA than elsewhere. I started with the opposite assumption, but after looking at some studies on the internet, it looks like the situation is the same in the USA as elsewhere: That despite police bashings and murders, despite the disproportionate targeting of minorities, most people still trust the police to act honestly, appropriately and in a timely manner. Please note that my patience when researching stuff is very low. I'm not systematic but I am lazy.
So what I don't understand is why people trust the police, but still need a gun to feel safe.
Please note that the whole reason for this post has been undermined by my stupid research. I hate it when facts get in the way of a good argument.
I was speaking specifically about black people. "Most people" in this country are white, so a phrase about "most people" may be completely irrelevant.
Yeah, I realise that MT. I forgot to add that I had an idea, I think from Ohher's stats that she posted some time ago, that the vast majority of gun owners are from the majority culture in America, and that one of the points of the 2nd Amendment was to allow whites to be armed against black Americans. I'm sure I picked up that last idea from here.
So the whites are the ones who both trust the police and claim the right to own guns for self defence. I guess I'm answering my own question. The guns are to protect themselves from blacks, who are both criminals and out for revenge. Is that where this idea that the police are insufficient protection comes from?
Please note that I regard my white Australian history as just as brutal and racist as South Africa and the southern USA, and our minorities as just as oppressed and targeted by law enforcement.
No exceptions, Golden Key, for the reasons Alan outlined. NZ laws mostly reflect those of the UK on which they are based.
After I was raped in my own home the thought of getting a gun never entered my mind. I chose not to go to the police either as the perpetrator's father was a cop, and I knew it wouldn't end well for me. (I found out later he wasn't the most upright of cops with allegations of planting illegal drugs, which the son had himself hinted at).
Until the mosque attacks last year it wasn't common to see armed police on the streets here. Many patrols had access to firearms in their cars though. The sight of armed police on the streets after the attacks didn't make me feel any safer, it just reminded me that there are lunatics of all kinds everywhere.
Yeah, I realise that MT. I forgot to add that I had an idea, I think from Ohher's stats that she posted some time ago, that the vast majority of gun owners are from the majority culture in America, and that one of the points of the 2nd Amendment was to allow whites to be armed against black Americans. I'm sure I picked up that last idea from here.
So the whites are the ones who both trust the police and claim the right to own guns for self defence. I guess I'm answering my own question. The guns are to protect themselves from blacks, who are both criminals and out for revenge. Is that where this idea that the police are insufficient protection comes from?
Please note that I regard my white Australian history as just as brutal and racist as South Africa and the southern USA, and our minorities as just as oppressed and targeted by law enforcement.
The whites with guns are saying, "You should get a gun. Do you want to wait till the police get there? That's not going to help you when the boogey man is at your door." (paraphrase) These aren't people with a high view of the police. Until of course the cops kill a black man for doing nothing, then they are heroes.
Statistics for 2/14/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One: 6 injured in Chicago, IL
Total deaths: 33
Total injuries: 62
Children under 12 killed: One: 6 y.o. boy in Midland, VA
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
US SHOOTINGS REPORT 2/16/20
Statistics for 2/15/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One: 4 injured in New Orleans, LA
Total deaths: 22
Total injuries: 63
Children under 12 killed: One: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Yeah, I realise that MT. I forgot to add that I had an idea, I think from Ohher's stats that she posted some time ago, that the vast majority of gun owners are from the majority culture in America, and that one of the points of the 2nd Amendment was to allow whites to be armed against black Americans. I'm sure I picked up that last idea from here.
So the whites are the ones who both trust the police and claim the right to own guns for self defence. I guess I'm answering my own question. The guns are to protect themselves from blacks, who are both criminals and out for revenge. Is that where this idea that the police are insufficient protection comes from?
Please note that I regard my white Australian history as just as brutal and racist as South Africa and the southern USA, and our minorities as just as oppressed and targeted by law enforcement.
The whites with guns are saying, "You should get a gun. Do you want to wait till the police get there? That's not going to help you when the boogey man is at your door." (paraphrase) These aren't people with a high view of the police. Until of course the cops kill a black man for doing nothing, then they are heroes.
AIUI, sometimes black cops kill black suspects, in the same sort of circumstances as when white cops do it.
That's wayyy above my pay grade. But, presuming it's done wrongly, it might be that either the black cops absorb the attitudes of the white cops; or they're in the terrible situation of needing to know the white cops will "have their backs" in dangerous situations--which might not happen if the black cops don't go along with what's going on.
Carrying a gun for protection from violence is like carrying a doughnut for protection from diabetes. Yes, there are specific circumstances where it could conceivably be a benefit, but those distracting shiny exceptions are buried in the overwhelming contrary reality.
If the effort put into and against the "my cold dead hands" were instead folded into having police that actually "serve and protect", everyone would be much, much better off.
I am as responsible as everyone else in the US for this problem, you touchy little fucks. I meant "civilized" to mean non-war-torn settings. And I totally grok sympathizing with those who have legitimate fears which they want firearms to address. But is an arms race against other citizens really winnable? The very ubiquitous presence of weapons is what makes the police scared, and therefore needing to be fighting fire with literal fire.
The only real answer is systematic reduction in access to weapons. Period. Not total elimination, because that's reactionary bullshit, but regulation back into at least the same levels as the rest of the civilized world.
I will say that if you’re in urban St. Louis, it doesn’t matter what race you are, the police ain’t coming. Certainly not in less than an hour. Which leaves you totally on your own.
We dealt with it by being way too poor to have anything worth stealing, plus strategically located broomsticks and knives. But in that place I understand the wish to keep a gun.
I guess in my country it is unlikely that a burglar or any petty criminal would have a gun. So other options for self defence are more viable, such as barking like a dog. Crims have guns, but they are usually gangsters who mostly just shoot each other.
If you have seen the film Animal Kingdom, that's loosely based on a crime family called the Pettingills, notorious cop killers, among other things. The Pettingills and those like them attack police, rivals and each other, but also rob banks and other businesses. Shooting civilians is bad for their business though, as was shooting police as it turned out.
LC, I use that 'looking poor' excuse to never wash my car or do the gardening.
Statistics for 2/16/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One: 1 dead, 4 injured in Hartford, CT
Total deaths: 40
Total injuries: 90
Children under 12 killed: One: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Comments
But every gun toter is Schroedinger's Murderer. You don't know if they're the proverbial good guy or the proverbial bad guy, that is until they open fire. Keeping guns out of places like hospitals and courthouses obviates that worry.
Apologies if I misunderstood. Might chalk it up to the cold morphing into bronchitis I've been dealing with.
I've been through various metal detectors. E.g., we have them at City Hall, and you have to go through them even to vote. Decades back (early 80s?), the mayor and our first openly gay supervisor* were assassinated. IIRC, by another supervisor. And Dianne Feinstein, now a senator in Congress, found them and broke the news. Then she became mayor. I don't know when the metal detector was put in, but that's one of the main reasons.
Many public/state schools have security metal detectors. Lots of other places, too--I think our local IRS office may. (For non-US folks: IRS handles federal taxes. Not exactly a popular agency.)
Yes, it's a scary feeling to know that guns can be carried in just about anywhere. I don't like that at all. And there's no way to know who's going to do what. I just doubt that all the people who try to enter a hospital with guns are *necessarily* thinking about communicating that way with someone there.
*We have a board of supervisors rather than a city council.
FWIW, YMMV, etc.
After I stopped being a lawyer, medical detectors were introduced in courts, and Mrs Toad often complains that you have to factor time in the line in to get to your court on time. They are mostly looking for knives, but guns too of course. I am very happy with this because Mandy works with clients in difficult circumstances, dealing with domestic violence offenders and kids matters in family law. We live an hour away from her work specifically so she is unlikely to meet clients or (worse) their spouses in the supermarket. People are at their worst when dealing with this stuff
[edited by Alan Cresswell]
Alan
Ship of Fools Admin
For hospitals, I think it doesn't actually matter whether you're a good buy or a bad guy. What happens when you go to hospital? You probably take some clothes off, you probably get moved from room to room by an orderly, perhaps you get to wear one of those attractive hospital gowns with your arse on display, and perhaps you get some "interesting" medication.
If you are a good guy with a gun, how do you keep your gun under positive control in those conditions?
Statistics for 2/6/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 25
Total injuries: 30
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
Could it be used to take your temperature? Cut down on the cost of thermometers?
(:votive:)
Statistics for 2/7/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One in Waco, TX: 1 dead, 3 injured
Total deaths: 35
Total injuries: 37
Children under 12 killed: Two: a 4-y.o. in New Jersey and a 1-y.o. in Louisiana; in both cases, boys playing with guns.
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
Statistics for 2/8/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One in Houston, TX: 1 dead, 3 injured
Total deaths: 30
Total injuries: 49
Children under 12 killed: One: a 5-y.o. in Milwaukee, Wisconsin dead of gunshot wound; no further details available right now.
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
Statistics for 2/9/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One in Youngstown, OH: 3 dead, 2 injured
Total deaths: 24
Total injuries: 72
Children under 12 killed: One: a 3-y.o. girl in Pittsburgh PA dead due to accidental discharge by gun in possession of individual not legally permitted to own gun.
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
Statistics for 2/11/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 20
Total injuries: 41
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
US SHOOTINGS REPORT 2/11/20
Statistics for 2/10/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One in Dover, DE: 1 dead, 4 injured
Total deaths: 35
Total injuries: 74
Children under 12 killed: One: a 5-y.o. boy in Naples, FL; shot by father who killed himself.
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
What a horrible thing. God rest the souls of the slain.
Statistics for 2/12/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 21
Total injuries: 46
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
"Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us."
Not bloody likely in USA.
I think it is the right place @mark_in_manchester. American shootings are rather, yawn, who cares as they are so routine. Jesus must need a blood sacrifice by gun porn on a daily basis of Americans. It's much more worthy to note non-routine deaths. There's no mercy in America about it, Jesus even likes guns in churches there. Have mercy indeed. Until the people there become interested in mercy Jesus will be alleged to support the gun fuckers. One nation under Gun.
I'm sorry mate, but your post is very ugly.
Just as an aside, I have been having problems with anger management in RL. I'm proud of myself for not going off at you NP. Yay me!
--FWIW: many people have worked hard on gun reform. Unfortunately, the gun lobby has deep pockets, and many Congress critters and other politicians have mansions there.
There's been gun control, at various times and in various ways--e.g., assault weapons illegal by federal law. Unfortunately, it was allowed to run out--more than once, IIRC. (Similar situation with weighted, metal lawn darts, which have accidentally killed people. Made illegal several times, but...)
--This is maybe not in the main lane of this convo; but I'm in an unloading mood, and it's relevant:
When I was a kid, there were gun safety ads on TV. (Probably around the same time that safety belt ads came out.) I think they probably did good. They did in my household. There were rifles stored in a mind-bogglingly stupid way: right at the opening of a frequently-used clothes closet, leaning against the wall, with ammunition right by them. Don't know if they were loaded. But they had to be moved to get to certain things, and I often had to do that. (Not my closet, but there were things I had to get.)
Those safety promos came on ahead of a visit by much younger relatives. Fortunately, I was never the sort to play with dangerous things or take them apart. But I was worried about the kids. So I told the grownups in the household about the ads and my concerns. They were totally gobsmacked--it had truly never occurred to them. So the guns were moved to the far back corner of the closet while the kids were there. And were later put back in their usual spot.
These were good, decent people--but they really, truly didn't get it. Not survivalists, not gun nuts, not even Republicans*. I think they were afraid. I don't know whether they'd had past reasons to protect themselves. But it's one example of how hard it is to straighten this out in an everyday family.
*Yes, I know not all Republicans are gun owners, nor vice versa. And not all gun owners--maybe most--aren't gun nuts.
--I don't know what can be done that has a chance of working, that hasn't already been done.
Maybe more gun safety promos? I saw a few, after many, many years of not seeing any. (In the wake of a school shooting, maybe.) Then they went away again.
As far as actually stopping gun deaths, particularly accidental ones, particularly those of kids, regular airing of common-sense safety ads, with simple, creative, memorable approaches, might make a big difference. It did with safety belts, though it took a lonnnggg time to really get deeply rooted in the culture. I don't know how ads like that are brought about, but it's got to be a lot easier than facing down the gun lobby, NRA, and 2nd amendment.
Time for someone else to talk.
These two bills sit, gathering dust, on Mitch McConnell's desk.
NP, while I understand and sympathize with your anger, what exactly would you have us do? Polls suggest that the overwhelming majority of Americans favor restrictions on gun sales and on expanding background checks and many of us are every bit as angry and frustrated as you are. We cannot vote legislators in or out of office except when they're up for election. (Mitch McCaonnell is up for re-election in 2020; interested US Shippies may want to contribute to his Democratic opponent's campaign: Amy McGrath) Tantruming may temporarily relieve our feelings, but it doesn't alter the legislative realities.
Those US Shippies rumbling about the President having too much power may want to turn some attention to the power wielded by the Senate President.
You can fuck off any time now.
Statistics for 2/13/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 18
Total injuries: 46
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
Now gun safes are compulsory, and people wanting to renew their gun licenses have to have a reason for holding one, Self defence is not a valid reason.
Thx for your post.
Re guns not allowed for self-defense:
Are there any exceptions to that? E.g. someone who's fled an abusive spouse/partner? If not, what are people with seriously dangerous circumstances supposed to do?
Thx.
In most of the civilized world, people trust the policing to be done by police.
And if the police routinely don't make it to an active situation in time, and/or don't take it seriously when they get there? Or if they're not civilized themselves?
I'm not saying guns are great and everyone should have them. I neither have nor want them. But, in a dangerous, messed-up worlds, sometimes there are grave situations where they're the only method of resolution and/or protection likely to have any chance of working. E.g., if I knew someone who'd left a violent ex who used to beat the crap out of them, whose ex didn't care about restraining orders or the cops...and I found out they had a gun for self-protection...I wouldn't tell them to get rid of it. I wouldn't be the one getting beaten or worse. I might suggest that they get some basic safety and use training, and make sure they get a license. But I would probably also refer them to an anti-domestic violence organization, which would most likely know good ways to do all that, and what to do if those things didn't work.
When setting absolute rules, laws, and policies, there are often exceptions that the makers and others with strong opinions don't (want to) consider. IMVHO, those rules, laws, and policies can't be truly fair or effective if those exceptions aren't acknowledged and part of the planning.
It's not as simple as the US not being sufficiently civilized. And, from what I've heard, people in other countries--even "civilized" ones--don't necessarily trust their cops or have good experiences with them. Immigrants and travelers often bring all of that with them.
Respectfully, I think there's much more to the situation (whether in the US or elsewhere) than your statement implies.
Perhaps they are more trustworthy there. Ask ten black people in America if they trust the police.
So what I don't understand is why people trust the police, but still need a gun to feel safe.
Please note that the whole reason for this post has been undermined by my stupid research. I hate it when facts get in the way of a good argument.
Generally, people will rely on the rule of law. A restraining order to keep an abusive spouse/partner at a safe distance will be enforced by the police and courts. And, the community (eg: organisations like Women's Aid who will protect the vulnerable by re-housing and doing what they can to maintain that new residence secret).
If the effort put into and against the "my cold dead hands" were instead folded into having police that actually "serve and protect", everyone would be much, much better off.
I am as responsible as everyone else in the US for this problem, you touchy little fucks. I meant "civilized" to mean non-war-torn settings. And I totally grok sympathizing with those who have legitimate fears which they want firearms to address. But is an arms race against other citizens really winnable? The very ubiquitous presence of weapons is what makes the police scared, and therefore needing to be fighting fire with literal fire.
The only real answer is systematic reduction in access to weapons. Period. Not total elimination, because that's reactionary bullshit, but regulation back into at least the same levels as the rest of the civilized world.
I was speaking specifically about black people. "Most people" in this country are white, so a phrase about "most people" may be completely irrelevant.
So the whites are the ones who both trust the police and claim the right to own guns for self defence. I guess I'm answering my own question. The guns are to protect themselves from blacks, who are both criminals and out for revenge. Is that where this idea that the police are insufficient protection comes from?
Please note that I regard my white Australian history as just as brutal and racist as South Africa and the southern USA, and our minorities as just as oppressed and targeted by law enforcement.
After I was raped in my own home the thought of getting a gun never entered my mind. I chose not to go to the police either as the perpetrator's father was a cop, and I knew it wouldn't end well for me. (I found out later he wasn't the most upright of cops with allegations of planting illegal drugs, which the son had himself hinted at).
Until the mosque attacks last year it wasn't common to see armed police on the streets here. Many patrols had access to firearms in their cars though. The sight of armed police on the streets after the attacks didn't make me feel any safer, it just reminded me that there are lunatics of all kinds everywhere.
The whites with guns are saying, "You should get a gun. Do you want to wait till the police get there? That's not going to help you when the boogey man is at your door." (paraphrase) These aren't people with a high view of the police. Until of course the cops kill a black man for doing nothing, then they are heroes.
Statistics for 2/14/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One: 6 injured in Chicago, IL
Total deaths: 33
Total injuries: 62
Children under 12 killed: One: 6 y.o. boy in Midland, VA
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
US SHOOTINGS REPORT 2/16/20
Statistics for 2/15/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One: 4 injured in New Orleans, LA
Total deaths: 22
Total injuries: 63
Children under 12 killed: One: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
but aren't some of them police themselves?
That's wayyy above my pay grade. But, presuming it's done wrongly, it might be that either the black cops absorb the attitudes of the white cops; or they're in the terrible situation of needing to know the white cops will "have their backs" in dangerous situations--which might not happen if the black cops don't go along with what's going on.
YMMV, FWIW, etc.
That would be mercy.
We dealt with it by being way too poor to have anything worth stealing, plus strategically located broomsticks and knives. But in that place I understand the wish to keep a gun.
If you have seen the film Animal Kingdom, that's loosely based on a crime family called the Pettingills, notorious cop killers, among other things. The Pettingills and those like them attack police, rivals and each other, but also rob banks and other businesses. Shooting civilians is bad for their business though, as was shooting police as it turned out.
LC, I use that 'looking poor' excuse to never wash my car or do the gardening.
Statistics for 2/16/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One: 1 dead, 4 injured in Hartford, CT
Total deaths: 40
Total injuries: 90
Children under 12 killed: One: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.