Recommend
3 
 Thumb up
 Hide
51 Posts
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Who Really Wants to have a Discussion? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
United States
St. Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb


So I posted the above video in one of Tripp's threads, so it might not have gotten much traction. I think he does have a point.

And there is this blog: Understanding St. Louis: Homicides 2005-2012
Quote:

The premise of the Chicago item was that killings there followed that city's racial divides. The St. Louis map would seem to show very much the same. Race, income and educational attainment are closely aligned in neighborhoods across the city. The divide is so great, that in the "near homicides" neighborhoods (the 20 in which there were 20+ homicides over this period), the average homicide rate is estimated at 57 per 100,000 residents, while the rate in the "not near homicides" neighborhoods (the 20 that saw 0 or 1 total homicides) is estimated at 1 per 100,000 residents. There are more than two St. Louis's, but there are certainly two incredible extremes in the city. Still, the most stark numbers may be the victims. Of the 567 homicides from 2008 to 2011, for which the race of the victim is available in the SLMPD annual reports, 502 are listed as black, while 64 were white. Over that period, 89% of those killed in the city were black. In a city that's very nearly 50/50 black/white, those 64 homicides would give an annual murder rate of ~10/100,000 for white residents and ~78/100,000 black residents.


Here is the map below. There is one for Chicago, which is linked in the above blog.



And there was this article in the local paper, which I found interesting. I think the article is worth reading, but some key points which I guess just reinforce what we already know:

Quote:

Prompted by that 2008 shooting, Blackburn, Frank and other investigators took a more encompassing approach. They searched the database for guns — seized or otherwise in police hands — linked to first-degree murders. They identified 19. One weapon, a .40-caliber semiautomatic handgun, was responsible for five murders and a nonfatal assault.


Quote:

Over 4½ months, the team painstakingly pulled more than 1,000 police reports and other records, narrowing the focus to 17 guns and 15 people who could be connected in some way to them. The targets — the so-called “most active shooters” — were men who had been repeatedly arrested for violent crimes or drugs, but seldom spent much time behind bars.


Quote:

The victims were not only rival drug dealers, although the bulk of the shootings were driven by gang turf battles and drug-sale disputes.


Now, some will simply only see the fact that guns were used and that they are justified in calling for tighter control on guns. The Mayor of Chicago comes to mind, believing tighter gun laws is an important "first step".


Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Personally, I think enforcement of existing laws is a better use of time than creating new ones. But that's just me.

But the problem, which I think is a lot deeper then simply arbitrarily banning someone you don't like or understand, so why aren't we talking about that?

Why instead are we talking about 20 dead kids, as an appeal to emotion. We see it in every thread. 26 people died that day. Do we not care about the six adults who gave their lives?

Why aren't our elected officials actually talking about the problem instead of reacting like the good governor of NY, who was simply trying to stir up emotion with this:

Quote:

“I know that the issue of gun control is hard. I know that it’s political. I know it’s controversial,” the governor said, his voice rising with every word. “I say to you, forget the extremists! It’s simple: no one hunts with an assault rifle! No one needs 10 bullets to kill a deer! Too many innocent people have died already! End this madness now!”


Ignoring the fact that he used assault rifle when I'm sure he meant assault weapon, some people do use assault weapons to hunt. Whether they're using a 10-round, 20-round, or 30-round magazine I don't know. Most states have a limited on magazine size for hunting, and I don't know if that would apply to downloading magazines (such as putting only 5 rounds in a 30-round magazine).

Of course he is right, too many innocent people have died already. But are they really willing to have a serious discussion on how to the stop the violence?

Are you?

http://www.assaultweapon.info/
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
フィル
Australia
Ashfield
NSW
flag msg tools
designer
badge
I've got an 808 and a 303 and a record collection like the ABC
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You've posted this video many times now. Why start yet another identical gun control thread?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
St. Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
sbszine wrote:
You've posted this video many times now. Why start yet another identical gun control thread?


1) I'm pretty sure I've only posted this video in one over thread, which I mentioned. So I wouldn't consider twice "many." YMMV.

2) The video is part of it, with the blog/map, and then the article about tracking guns through shell casings.

3) I haven't really seen anything identical to any other thread here, unless you're referring to the common theme of "guns". I'm pretty sure it has been alluded to that the problems are deeper, but why post in a thread about "Banning Assault Weapons", just so it can get lost. Not to mention this isn't about gun control, but rather the deeper problems that no one seems to want to actually talk about.

Thank you for your response
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
フィル
Australia
Ashfield
NSW
flag msg tools
designer
badge
I've got an 808 and a 303 and a record collection like the ABC
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
COMPNOR wrote:
sbszine wrote:
You've posted this video many times now. Why start yet another identical gun control thread?


1) I'm pretty sure I've only posted this video in one over thread, which I mentioned. So I wouldn't consider twice "many." YMMV.

Hmmm... maybe someone else has also been posting it? Did you get it from Drew or BJ or someone?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad
United States
Denver
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
We will bury you
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It makes me wish that Shapiro used these facts when chatting with Piers - instead of trying to out dick another dick.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The reason is simple, it's not about stopping all gun deaths. It's about stopping the ones we can stop.
9 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorge Montero
United States
St Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
badge
I'll take Manhattan in a garbage bag. With Latin written on it that says "It's hard to give a shit these days"
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Given that you mention random shit like 'I'd rather enforce existing laws than create new ones', I don't think you are ready for a real discussion yourself.

America is in no way ready to analyze a situation that is mostly about poverty and the culture that surrounds it. St Louis is not ready to talk about the differences north and south of Delmar. So all you'll get is outrage when middle class white kids get killed. The rest of the murder statistics? Irrelevant.
15 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Born To Lose, Live To Win
United States
South Euclid
Ohio
flag msg tools
badge
Metal Undivided, Chaos For All
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
hibikir wrote:
America is in no way ready to analyze a situation that is mostly about poverty and the culture that surrounds it. St Louis is not ready to talk about the differences north and south of Delmar. So all you'll get is outrage when middle class white kids get killed. The rest of the murder statistics? Irrelevant.


This is the truth, in the same way that many American's only care about missing people if they are pretty blonde girls, most of the people having knee-jerk outrage about gun-control don't care about black men shooting each other in poor areas. They only care that mentally damaged white men with high-capacity weapons are kept away from their children.

There are two areas of affect here, "normal" gun murders of the poor and abnormal gun murders of the affluent. You can make gun control regulation that seeks to address one or both areas. Since the media is pretty much harping on the one area that scares the affluent, using statistics from the area that affects the poor isn't going to gain much traction.

There are only two areas of action, whether you like them or don't.
1) Change things so mentally ill people are identified and neutralized as threats before they act.
2) Reduce the availability of weapons to mentally ill people that can kill multiple people in a very short time frame so that when the ill person does act the severity is lessened.

Now there are numerous definitions embedded in those two areas of action that need to be hashed out and agreed upon before anything meaningful can be done. Existing laws, enforced and not enforced, don't really address these areas, they address criminals using guns for regular crime. They are usually designed as deterrents to "rational" criminals from acquiring and using guns in crime. That doesn't fit this particular area of gun crime. These people committing mass-murders are extremely irrational and don't respond to rational risk-reward evaluations.
6 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
TheChin! wrote:
hibikir wrote:
America is in no way ready to analyze a situation that is mostly about poverty and the culture that surrounds it. St Louis is not ready to talk about the differences north and south of Delmar. So all you'll get is outrage when middle class white kids get killed. The rest of the murder statistics? Irrelevant.


This is the truth, in the same way that many American's only care about missing people if they are pretty blonde girls, most of the people having knee-jerk outrage about gun-control don't care about black men shooting each other in poor areas. They only care that mentally damaged white men with high-capacity weapons are kept away from their children.

There are two areas of affect here, "normal" gun murders of the poor and abnormal gun murders of the affluent. You can make gun control regulation that seeks to address one or both areas. Since the media is pretty much harping on the one area that scares the affluent, using statistics from the area that affects the poor isn't going to gain much traction.

There are only two areas of action, whether you like them or don't.
1) Change things so mentally ill people are identified and neutralized as threats before they act.
2) Reduce the availability of weapons to mentally ill people that can kill multiple people in a very short time frame so that when the ill person does act the severity is lessened.

Now there are numerous definitions embedded in those two areas of action that need to be hashed out and agreed upon before anything meaningful can be done. Existing laws, enforced and not enforced, don't really address these areas, they address criminals using guns for regular crime. They are usually designed as deterrents to "rational" criminals from acquiring and using guns in crime. That doesn't fit this particular area of gun crime. These people committing mass-murders are extremely irrational and don't respond to rational risk-reward evaluations.
Sorry I disagree, I think that those people do regard the killing of poor blacks just as bad. The difference is that something meaningful can be done about the mentally deranged taking guns from family member and using them on people.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Born To Lose, Live To Win
United States
South Euclid
Ohio
flag msg tools
badge
Metal Undivided, Chaos For All
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
Sorry I disagree, I think that those people do regard the killing of poor blacks just as bad. The difference is that something meaningful can be done about the mentally deranged taking guns from family member and using them on people.


The media is a good indicator here, if people cared about the poor-on-poor crime, it would make headlines/newscasts as that would increase ratings. It rarely does and when it does make it, it is a short blurb. It's only when someone from the middle/upper class gets whacked that the outrage meter gets bumped. Sure there are community leaders for these poor areas that are constantly at work trying to end gun crime in the poor context, but they have a tough row to hoe and not much help from the media or the legislature. Until a school shooting happens the majority of voters are content to ignore the issue until they can hear gunshots in their own neighborhood. Even then, they probably would move before they seek to help the poor with this issue.

In any case, I don't think the willpower is there to help the poor, so the only realistic goal at this point in time is laws that address the concerns I mentioned. If we can implement something that also lessens violence for the poor, that would be great, but the initiative will quickly run out of steam (as it usually does) if that is one of, or the main thrust.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
TheChin! wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
Sorry I disagree, I think that those people do regard the killing of poor blacks just as bad. The difference is that something meaningful can be done about the mentally deranged taking guns from family member and using them on people.


The media is a good indicator here, if people cared about the poor-on-poor crime, it would make headlines/newscasts as that would increase ratings. It rarely does and when it does make it, it is a short blurb. It's only when someone from the middle/upper class gets whacked that the outrage meter gets bumped. Sure there are community leaders for these poor areas that are constantly at work trying to end gun crime in the poor context, but they have a tough row to hoe and not much help from the media or the legislature. Until a school shooting happens the majority of voters are content to ignore the issue until they can hear gunshots in their own neighborhood. Even then, they probably would move before they seek to help the poor with this issue.

In any case, I don't think the willpower is there to help the poor, so the only realistic goal at this point in time is laws that address the concerns I mentioned. If we can implement something that also lessens violence for the poor, that would be great, but the initiative will quickly run out of steam (as it usually does) if that is one of, or the main thrust.
I agree that people don't care until it affects them, but that is not the same as saying it's a poor Vs well off issue. The fact is that there are so many (one off) killings that simply put there is too much new. ON fact you only have to look at the new year shooing to see hat every shooting is reported, but only the stand out ones get national coverage. It's the same with road accidents.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Born To Lose, Live To Win
United States
South Euclid
Ohio
flag msg tools
badge
Metal Undivided, Chaos For All
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
I agree that people don't care until it affects them, but that is not the same as saying it's a poor Vs well off issue. The fact is that there are so many (one off) killings that simply put there is too much new. ON fact you only have to look at the new year shooing to see hat every shooting is reported, but only the stand out ones get national coverage. It's the same with road accidents.


Well, it's not exactly a class warfare issue, that's true, but it is two separate issues. One issue (poor on poor gun violence) is not a high priority for the people it doesn't affect (in this case the non-poor) and the other (mentally ill on innocent) is a high priority for the non-poor. It's not a case of group of people having animosity towards the other, just apathy. If we want real change in the gun violence in the U.S., trying to tap that apathy isn't going to get us anywhere.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Born To Lose, Live To Win
United States
South Euclid
Ohio
flag msg tools
badge
Metal Undivided, Chaos For All
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
bjlillo wrote:

Those aren't the only two areas of action.


To address the issue of mass murders by the mentally ill, they are.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
St. Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
sbszine wrote:
COMPNOR wrote:
sbszine wrote:
You've posted this video many times now. Why start yet another identical gun control thread?


1) I'm pretty sure I've only posted this video in one over thread, which I mentioned. So I wouldn't consider twice "many." YMMV.

Hmmm... maybe someone else has also been posting it? Did you get it from Drew or BJ or someone?


I saw it an e-mail that came to me.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Born To Lose, Live To Win
United States
South Euclid
Ohio
flag msg tools
badge
Metal Undivided, Chaos For All
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
bjlillo wrote:

So eliminating freedoms of law-abiding citizens and imprisoning the mentally ill before they do any harm are the only two possibilities you can think of?


Hyperbole.

TheChin! wrote:
Now there are numerous definitions embedded in those two areas of action that need to be hashed out and agreed upon before anything meaningful can be done.


"eliminating" and "imprisoning" are the worst case scenarios and not necessarily the right solutions. There are many steps between here and there and there is no need to go to extremes. If we "really want to have a discussion", we have to stop talking in hyperbole and be realistic.

I'm planning (and have been shopping) to buy a gun and don't want my right to buy one to be eliminated. I do want the whole process of buying and selling weapons to be controlled and constrained so that only responsible people acquire weapons. The capability of the weapon should dictate just how controlled and constrained the procurement of it is.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
St. Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
hibikir wrote:
Given that you mention random shit like 'I'd rather enforce existing laws than create new ones', I don't think you are ready for a real discussion yourself.

America is in no way ready to analyze a situation that is mostly about poverty and the culture that surrounds it. St Louis is not ready to talk about the differences north and south of Delmar. So all you'll get is outrage when middle class white kids get killed. The rest of the murder statistics? Irrelevant.


Believing in the enforcement of current laws is random shit? Do you really think every single law on the books is being enforced like it should?

I agree with your second part, which makes everything sadder.

slatersteven wrote:
TheChin! wrote:
hibikir wrote:
America is in no way ready to analyze a situation that is mostly about poverty and the culture that surrounds it. St Louis is not ready to talk about the differences north and south of Delmar. So all you'll get is outrage when middle class white kids get killed. The rest of the murder statistics? Irrelevant.


This is the truth, in the same way that many American's only care about missing people if they are pretty blonde girls, most of the people having knee-jerk outrage about gun-control don't care about black men shooting each other in poor areas. They only care that mentally damaged white men with high-capacity weapons are kept away from their children.

There are two areas of affect here, "normal" gun murders of the poor and abnormal gun murders of the affluent. You can make gun control regulation that seeks to address one or both areas. Since the media is pretty much harping on the one area that scares the affluent, using statistics from the area that affects the poor isn't going to gain much traction.

There are only two areas of action, whether you like them or don't.
1) Change things so mentally ill people are identified and neutralized as threats before they act.
2) Reduce the availability of weapons to mentally ill people that can kill multiple people in a very short time frame so that when the ill person does act the severity is lessened.

Now there are numerous definitions embedded in those two areas of action that need to be hashed out and agreed upon before anything meaningful can be done. Existing laws, enforced and not enforced, don't really address these areas, they address criminals using guns for regular crime. They are usually designed as deterrents to "rational" criminals from acquiring and using guns in crime. That doesn't fit this particular area of gun crime. These people committing mass-murders are extremely irrational and don't respond to rational risk-reward evaluations.
Sorry I disagree, I think that those people do regard the killing of poor blacks just as bad. The difference is that something meaningful can be done about the mentally deranged taking guns from family member and using them on people.


No, I'd say he is spot on. Towards the end of summer there was this pretty white girl, college graduate murdered in broad daylight in the Central West End. That story gained all kinds of traction, with the St. Louis city mayor posturing about wanting tighter gun laws. A few weeks back before the white girl, a black girl was killed. Just graduated high school, but she was sitting in a car in a bad neighborhood, after midnight. Her story certainly wasn't worth talking about.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Morgan Dontanville
United States
Charlottesville
VA
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Plate of Shrimp.
badge
Here we are folks, the dream we all dream of.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The video is entirely myopic.

It doesn't account for the decrease in unwanted children, lead regulation, the rise of crack and meth, and frankly the enactment of actual gun control (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
St. Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
TheChin! wrote:
bjlillo wrote:

So eliminating freedoms of law-abiding citizens and imprisoning the mentally ill before they do any harm are the only two possibilities you can think of?


Hyperbole.

TheChin! wrote:
Now there are numerous definitions embedded in those two areas of action that need to be hashed out and agreed upon before anything meaningful can be done.


"eliminating" and "imprisoning" are the worst case scenarios and not necessarily the right solutions. There are many steps between here and there and there is no need to go to extremes. If we "really want to have a discussion", we have to stop talking in hyperbole and be realistic.

I'm planning (and have been shopping) to buy a gun and don't want my right to buy one to be eliminated. I do want the whole process of buying and selling weapons to be controlled and constrained so that only responsible people acquire weapons. The capability of the weapon should dictate just how controlled and constrained the procurement of it is.


Who is to judge that? Why should buying a six shot revolver be any different than a six-shot semi-automatic? Does an AR-style rifle chambered in .22LR more capable than a Swiss K-31 bolt action rifle? Should the process for purchasing that .22LR require more than that K-31?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
COMPNOR wrote:
hibikir wrote:
Given that you mention random shit like 'I'd rather enforce existing laws than create new ones', I don't think you are ready for a real discussion yourself.

America is in no way ready to analyze a situation that is mostly about poverty and the culture that surrounds it. St Louis is not ready to talk about the differences north and south of Delmar. So all you'll get is outrage when middle class white kids get killed. The rest of the murder statistics? Irrelevant.


Believing in the enforcement of current laws is random shit? Do you really think every single law on the books is being enforced like it should?

I agree with your second part, which makes everything sadder.

slatersteven wrote:
TheChin! wrote:
hibikir wrote:
America is in no way ready to analyze a situation that is mostly about poverty and the culture that surrounds it. St Louis is not ready to talk about the differences north and south of Delmar. So all you'll get is outrage when middle class white kids get killed. The rest of the murder statistics? Irrelevant.


This is the truth, in the same way that many American's only care about missing people if they are pretty blonde girls, most of the people having knee-jerk outrage about gun-control don't care about black men shooting each other in poor areas. They only care that mentally damaged white men with high-capacity weapons are kept away from their children.

There are two areas of affect here, "normal" gun murders of the poor and abnormal gun murders of the affluent. You can make gun control regulation that seeks to address one or both areas. Since the media is pretty much harping on the one area that scares the affluent, using statistics from the area that affects the poor isn't going to gain much traction.

There are only two areas of action, whether you like them or don't.
1) Change things so mentally ill people are identified and neutralized as threats before they act.
2) Reduce the availability of weapons to mentally ill people that can kill multiple people in a very short time frame so that when the ill person does act the severity is lessened.

Now there are numerous definitions embedded in those two areas of action that need to be hashed out and agreed upon before anything meaningful can be done. Existing laws, enforced and not enforced, don't really address these areas, they address criminals using guns for regular crime. They are usually designed as deterrents to "rational" criminals from acquiring and using guns in crime. That doesn't fit this particular area of gun crime. These people committing mass-murders are extremely irrational and don't respond to rational risk-reward evaluations.
Sorry I disagree, I think that those people do regard the killing of poor blacks just as bad. The difference is that something meaningful can be done about the mentally deranged taking guns from family member and using them on people.


No, I'd say he is spot on. Towards the end of summer there was this pretty white girl, college graduate murdered in broad daylight in the Central West End. That story gained all kinds of traction, with the St. Louis city mayor posturing about wanting tighter gun laws. A few weeks back before the white girl, a black girl was killed. Just graduated high school, but she was sitting in a car in a bad neighborhood, after midnight. Her story certainly wasn't worth talking about.
Provide some names so we can check.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
St. Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Megan Boken

Aniya Cook

For more, you can google those two names.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Born To Lose, Live To Win
United States
South Euclid
Ohio
flag msg tools
badge
Metal Undivided, Chaos For All
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
bjlillo wrote:
Why would you want a gun if the only course of action against a deranged, mentally ill person bent on a murderous rampage is through government intervention?


Well, for two reasons, the fun of target shooting and because there are people with guns already and mentally ill people can still easily acquire guns. Additionally, a home invader doesn't need a gun to be a physical danger to my wife and daughter. A gun equalizes any physical inequality between us and them. Again, these are two separate issues. Me owning a gun is not going to help a elementary school from being shot up. A mentally ill school shooter isn't going to choose to come to my house instead of a target rich environment. That is what we really should be talking about getting a handle on.

Any legislation invoked to limit the mentally ill will not affect my ability (presumably I'm mentally sound) to ultimately get a gun of my own. it may cost more, it may take a few more days of red tape, but in the end I am confident I will be found acceptable. I am OK with that as long as that process ends up with someone else who is mentally ill (or even a convicted violent criminal) having a harder time getting a weapon capable of mass destruction.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
COMPNOR wrote:
Megan Boken

Aniya Cook

For more, you can google those two names.


I note that your article says the two killings were very different. To judge we need two cases where the shootings were similar enough to be identical.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=a+black+girl+was+killed.++...

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=a+black+girl+was+killed.++...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
St. Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
COMPNOR wrote:
Megan Boken

Aniya Cook

For more, you can google those two names.


I note that your article says the two killings wee very different. To judge we need two cases where the shootings were similar enough to be identical.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=a+black+girl+was+killed.++...

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=a+black+girl+was+killed.++...


......?

The point was white crime is newsworthy. Black crime isn't. So I'm not quite sure what you're saying. Megan was a pretty white girl who was probably going places, murdered in broad daylight. Aniya probably would have gone places, but was sitting in a car after dark in a bad part of town.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
COMPNOR wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
COMPNOR wrote:
Megan Boken

Aniya Cook

For more, you can google those two names.


I note that your article says the two killings wee very different. To judge we need two cases where the shootings were similar enough to be identical.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=a+black+girl+was+killed.++...

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=a+black+girl+was+killed.++...


......?

The point was white crime is newsworthy. Black crime isn't. So I'm not quite sure what you're saying. Megan was a pretty white girl who was probably going places, murdered in broad daylight. Aniya probably would have gone places, but was sitting in a car after dark in a bad part of town.
NO, the point is that someone being shot in a crowded shopping street is more newsworthy then some shot after dark. Did Trayvon Martinget no news coverage? NO, so are black boys more newsworthy then white college girls?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Born To Lose, Live To Win
United States
South Euclid
Ohio
flag msg tools
badge
Metal Undivided, Chaos For All
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
COMPNOR wrote:

Who is to judge that? Why should buying a six shot revolver be any different than a six-shot semi-automatic? Does an AR-style rifle chambered in .22LR more capable than a Swiss K-31 bolt action rifle? Should the process for purchasing that .22LR require more than that K-31?


These are some of the questions we need to hash out in a rational discussion. I think the question of caliber is probably a non-starter until you get to the range that can defeat defense vests. It would seem, and I think trained forensics and ballistics experts should verify, that a weapons average shots-per-minute is a more telling statistic for mass-murder capability. That stat should not only include the weapons trigger pull speed and rounds in the weapon, but reloading time. It could also be modified by a conceal-ability factor (much like sawed-off shotguns are regulated now). Again, it doesn't have to be prohibition, just regulation and restriction.

Always keep in mind that is in addition to fixing/bolstering the identification of the mentally ill and other criteria the legal system has determined justifies denying gun ownership (violent crime convictions, terrorist links, etc).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.