Mass shooting in Buffalo NY. (1 Viewer)

[Dago]

Still takes more effort and far less effective than click, click, boom.

Also, let's use the molotov cocktail example. How many are you gonna carry around, light, and throw at people? How much damage will you do? Deaths v injuries.

More effort = less likely.

Not saying impossible.

if all you can do is see this situation, then you are missing the big picture. Someone with that much hate in their soul is going to find a way.

Pressure cooker bombs full of ball bearings are actually quite easy to make and you would obviously choose your target differently based on the weapon you are using.

Saying that it wouldn't be as bad because a homemade bomb wouldn't do as much damage IN THIS SITUATION is a bit obtuse. People have used small homemade bombs on American soil before and they did just as much of not more damage. You don't use the same tactics for a pressure cooker bomb

Plus what are you going to do, not if but when, cartels south of texas start pumping out guns and sending them across the border? Hell China would sell them dirt cheap to the cartels just like they already do with the chemicals to make fentanyl

And in all this cherry picking of statistics involving countries that banned guns, why ignore that there are several countries with large gun ownership whose murder rates are more than 75% lower than that of the US?

I do support stronger gun laws, but the idea that banning guns will somehow stop people like this is ridiculous

 

[itztime]

Still takes more effort and far less effective than click, click, boom.

Also, let's use the molotov cocktail example. How many are you gonna carry around, light, and throw at people? How much damage will you do? Deaths v injuries.

More effort = less likely.

Not saying impossible.

Douse the place with gas, trap them and light it on fire. It’s not inconceivable and pretty low effort with gas cans, bottles and a lighter….. cheaper than a gun and ammo.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

if all you can do is see this situation, then you are missing the big picture. Someone with that much hate in their soul is going to find a way.

Pressure cooker bombs full of ball bearings are actually quite easy to make and you would obviously choose your target differently based on the weapon you are using.

Saying that it wouldn't be as bad because a homemade bomb wouldn't do as much damage IN THIS SITUATION is a bit obtuse. People have used small homemade bombs on American soil before and they did just as much of not more damage. You don't use the same tactics for a pressure cooker bomb

Plus what are you going to do, not if but when, cartels south of texas start pumping out guns and sending them across the border? Hell China would sell them dirt cheap to the cartels just like they already do with the chemicals to make fentanyl

And in all this cherry picking of statistics involving countries that banned guns, why ignore that there are several countries with large gun ownership whose murder rates are more than 75% lower than that of the US?

I do support stronger gun laws, but the idea that banning guns will somehow stop people like this is ridiculous

So, theoretically, if it was just as easy to kill lots of people with a pressure cooker bomb as it is with guns, then you'd see just as many pressure cooker mass casualty events as you do mass casualty events with guns. But we don't. When someone wants to go out and kill a bunch of people, they almost always choose guns. That suggests that when people want to kill others they believe they have a better chance with guns than pressure cooker bombs.

Guns are very efficient tools for killing people. That's what they are designed for.. requires not a lot of training, and are readily and cheaply available.

Over a large population you can lower homicides by raising the costs of committing a homicide and by providing better alternatives to homicide. Part of raising the cost is making it more difficult to do so. There is some percentage of homicides that occur because it is relatively easy to do so with not enough barriers in the way. Get angry, buy a gun for very little money, and go shoot people.

So, sure, there are definitely cases where someone is determined enough to kill despite all obstacles, but over 300 million people and 25000 homicides, some percentage would not occur if it was harder to do so.

Right now for every person in the US there are 1.2 guns. That's twice the number of the next highest country (the Falkland Islands, and then Yemen). Basic economics - more supply = lower cost. Guns are crazy cheap and easy to get here.

However, we do have the 2nd Amendment, and the way it's interpreted means gun control is difficult, so it's not likely going to happen.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

Douse the place with gas, trap them and light it on fire. It’s not inconceivable and pretty low effort with gas cans, bottles and a lighter….. cheaper than a gun and ammo.

People are just going to be standing around while some random person walks around pouring gasoline? Over a huge area, and then walk outside and somehow bar the door to prevent people from leaving?

If it were easier and cheaper than guns, then why do more homicides occur with guns than with mass gasoline incendiary events?

 

[itztime]

People are just going to be standing around while some random person walks around pouring gasoline? Over a huge area, and then walk outside and somehow bar the door to prevent people from leaving?

If it were easier and cheaper than guns, then why do more homicides occur with guns than with mass gasoline incendiary events?

Pick your event, would the grocery be ideal? No, would a church be an easier target, not hard to find one, nobody is standing around to quote you “some random person pours gas”? Where there is a will there is a way. As one of the posters said, a person with that much hatred, you aren’t stopping. Gas is more attainable that a gun, but something tells me this dude wanted the light shined on him.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

Pick your event, would the grocery be ideal? No, would a church be an easier target, not hard to find one, nobody is standing around to quote you “some random person pours gas”? Where there is a will there is a way. As one of the posters said, a person with that much hatred, you aren’t stopping. Gas is more attainable that a gun, but something tells me this dude wanted the light shined on him.

Yes, where there is a will there is a way... most of the time. But if it's easier to use gas and a lighter, why are people choosing to use guns to commit homicide?

 

[itztime]

So, theoretically, if it was just as easy to kill lots of people with a pressure cooker bomb as it is with guns, then you'd see just as many pressure cooker mass casualty events as you do mass casualty events with guns. But we don't. When someone wants to go out and kill a bunch of people, they almost always choose guns. That suggests that when people want to kill others they believe they have a better chance with guns than pressure cooker bombs.

Guns are very efficient tools for killing people. That's what they are designed for.. requires not a lot of training, and are readily and cheaply available.

Yes, where there is a will there is a way... most of the time. But if it's easier to use gas and a lighter, why are people choosing to use guns to commit homicide?

Just a thought but maybe it’s the fact of control? With a gun they can control every human life they suck the breath out of, watching the torture of the very thing they hate, rather than a mass one stop shop action. We are dealing with crazies here and control is a huge factor.

 

[St. Widge]

Who says that the government didn't monitor them well enough to know? They may have known and either condoned it, or just didn't care because of who the potential victims were.

I mean, the thought did cross my mind that part of the issue is that "some of those that work forces are the same that burn crosses", but I didn't necessarily want to open that can of worms and decided to go with the idea that it's a failure not intentional ignorance.

 

[Dago]

So, theoretically, if it was just as easy to kill lots of people with a pressure cooker bomb as it is with guns, then you'd see just as many pressure cooker mass casualty events as you do mass casualty events with guns. But we don't. When someone wants to go out and kill a bunch of people, they almost always choose guns. That suggests that when people want to kill others they believe they have a better chance with guns than pressure cooker bombs.

Guns are very efficient tools for killing people. That's what they are designed for.. requires not a lot of training, and are readily and cheaply available.

Over a large population you can lower homicides by raising the costs of committing a homicide and by providing better alternatives to homicide. Part of raising the cost is making it more difficult to do so. There is some percentage of homicides that occur because it is relatively easy to do so with not enough barriers in the way. Get angry, buy a gun for very little money, and go shoot people.

So, sure, there are definitely cases where someone is determined enough to kill despite all obstacles, but over 300 million people and 25000 homicides, some percentage would not occur if it was harder to do so.

Right now for every person in the US there are 1.2 guns. That's twice the number of the next highest country (the Falkland Islands, and then Yemen). Basic economics - more supply = lower cost. Guns are crazy cheap and easy to get here.

However, we do have the 2nd Amendment, and the way it's interpreted means gun control is difficult, so it's not likely going to happen.

we live in a copycat society
do you really think that these hate groups are going to say "Whoa....this is too difficult now so let's all sing Kumbaya" or do you think they are more likely to just change tactics?

And again....unless someone can provide a logical, reasonable way to round up all those guns and to prevent them coming in from our border with Mexico then talking about banning guns will only negatively affect law abiding citizens.

I, for one, will never be helpless in a situation where I get to watch someone put the barrel of a gun against my head while another piece of sheet puts one against a loved ones temple and tells me they are going to blow their head off while I watch.

 

[Dago]

I mean, the thought did cross my mind that part of the issue is that "some of those that work forces are the same that burn crosses", but I didn't necessarily want to open that can of worms and decided to go with the idea that it's a failure not intentional ignorance.

Wouldn't surprise me....the powers that be will do anything to keep us divided and at each other's throats

 

[Sailorsaint]

I mean, the thought did cross my mind that part of the issue is that "some of those that work forces are the same that burn crosses", but I didn't necessarily want to open that can of worms and decided to go with the idea that it's a failure not intentional ignorance.

It may have been reluctance more than anything. With all the pressure put on law enforcement lately, what would have been the blow back if they went in early and ended up in a firefight at the guys house?

 

[Bayouboy]

The banning guns thing will never happen in this country. If Sandy Hook didn't change ANYTHING, what event will????

 

[St. Widge]

It may have been reluctance more than anything. With all the pressure put on law enforcement lately, what would have been the blow back if they went in early and ended up in a firefight at the guys house?

I mean, that's their job and it's not really those kinds of things that have lead to law enforcement getting bad publicity lately. It's excessive use of force, biased policing, an us against them attitude toward the public in general, and targeting minorities that has been the issue. And, frankly, the fact that this guy posted what he was doing to do along with when and where, and law enforcement did nothing about it makes it look even more suspect in term so of biased policing and targeting minorities. I doubt many would have an issue if they went in to arrest this guy and it resulted in a firefight after people saw what he posted on 4Chan. These are the things we need Police for and this is clear probably cause with exigent circumstances. Yet, they did nothing either because they somehow did not know about it or because they didn't care.

 

[SystemShock]

So, theoretically, if it was just as easy to kill lots of people with a pressure cooker bomb as it is with guns, then you'd see just as many pressure cooker mass casualty events as you do mass casualty events with guns. But we don't. When someone wants to go out and kill a bunch of people, they almost always choose guns. That suggests that when people want to kill others they believe they have a better chance with guns than pressure cooker bombs.

I don't want to put words in @Dago 's mouth, but I think that what he's saying is that, even if guns are easier to use than pipe/pressure cooker bombs, in the absence of guns, if someone wanted to perpetrate a mass killing, pipe/pressure cooker bombs are not so hard to make that it'd deter someone from using them.