America is the only rich democracy that features the routine mass slaughter of its citizens with guns. Why does this happen? The data show a really clear picture: It's the guns. Yes, it's that simple.



https://brianklaas.substack.com/p/its-the-guns


https://www.science.org/content/article/guns-kill-more-us-kids-cancer-emergency-physician-aims-prevent-those-firearm-deaths

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2022-us-gun-violence-world-comparison/

Let us know when you get that done.

1. Is there an escalating issue with deaths by gun in this country (US)? Given there were more than 600 mass shootings in '22 and 300 shootings in K-12 schools and a death/100,000 on par with the worst in history do you deny that there is a gun related violence problem in the US?

2. If so what is your suggestion to lessen this escalating carnage?

3. If you don't see an escalating issue with deaths by gun, why?

It's about time we see someone like Alec Baldwin get charged along with the armourer. People need to be held accountable. There are no accidents when it comes to unintentional gun discharges. Only negligence.

IMO, people shouldn't have guns unless they are willing to put in the time to get proper training and practice. There have been many OPd about incidents where I suspect lack of training and planning played a key role in someone's demise or in getting them in legal hot water.

I personally don't see the need to have something like an AR 15 for home defense.

Uvalde, TX. If only Huu Can Tran had spent more time at the range those 20 people in Monterry wouldn't have been shot. Are you fucking serious?

We do agree on two things tho . . . The AR 15 is worthless for anything but killing a lot of people and we need to get real about guns. Untill gun owners recognize their dependence on their guns for identity and seek help we're stuck with more than a mass shooting a day. Almost 2 per day in '22.

You say and act like you care but you are unable to provide evidence that you actually do. Which government officials have you contacted in the past week or month about gun control? How much money have you donated in the past month to gun control organizations? How many times have you been arrested for engaging in peaceful civil disobedience? Can you provide links to Letters to The Editors of local newspapers where you wrote about gun control?


It's easy to talk tough on social media while hiding behind a fake name. The people who really care about issues that are important to them are out there actually dong something. Follow the examples of Gandhi, MLK, Malcom X and so many others. These people were willing to put their lives on the line fighting for their cause which proves that their rhetoric was legit and not just bullshit. Their walk matched their talk. Does yours?

Instead of attacking others, why not talk about what you're doing in dealing with gun control?

I have not 'attacked you' but since you asked I have on multiple occasions talked about what I am doing. I attend, participate in and provide photographic coverage of gun violence events. https://andyshanks.smugmug.com/Acitvism Of my meager income I donate to MDA, Giffords and Everytown--a $ few hundred a year to each. When I can and in keeping with TOS I fund raise for those organizations on DU. I do on occasion contact my congress critters: Ted Cruz, John Cornyn and Kay Granger at the fed level (like that's a productive use of my time). Pete Geren is my state rep and does not take my calls. Neither does my state senator.

I asked you a straight forward question: "If [there is an escalation in gun violence] what is your suggestion to lessen this escalating carnage?"

You answered "IMO, people shouldn't have guns unless they are willing to put in the time to get proper training and practice." That was your answer to gun violence. Sorry if your answer makes you look . . . I can't complete that without risking a hide.

I am not hiding behind a fake name. I am AndyS and my full name is in my sig line as part of my website. AndyShanks.smugmug.com My location: State, city and zip, are in my profile. I don't have an imaginary screen name because I am not ashamed of who I am or what I stand for.

So, Snowflake, I walk the walk. Care to join me or ya' just wanna be offended by imaginary attacks?

You are making about the same amount of effort doing what you are as I do in preparing to adapt to climate change. We are both on limited income (SSDI for me) and we both spend several hundred dollars on our projects.

We are both the same as far as level of commitment to the issues we deem most important. You with gun control and me with adapting to fast approaching catastrophic climate change.

BTW, what is your ultimate goal? Do you think you'll achieve it?

As for not answering your question fully, gun control or reducing gun violence. isn't a top priority for me. For me personally, gun safety and training is important and I do work on that. But nothing close to the effort I put into adapting to climate change

For those who claim gun control and reducing gun violence is extremely important, then go do something about it. Whether one fails or succeeds is pretty much up to them .

equivalency?

How about stop with the low level personal slights? How about an apology for calling me a hypocrite?

And I think you agree that when it comes to how much effort and dedication we put into towards achieving our goals which we deem most important, we are the same.

What successes have you had?

As I said in my first reply to you, I don't care if you get tight controls placed on guns. Go ahead and get it done.


I suggested that you follow the examples of Malcom X, Gandhi, MLK and others. People who were willing to risk their lives and freedom fighting, by peaceful means, for what they believed in. Why should I apologize for that? Great accomplishments often require great sacrifices.

All you claim is a few hundered dollars contributed to somewhere?

Throughout the 2022 session, state lawmakers and governors enacted at least 51 gun safety laws. But that’s not all: They also blocked 95% of the gun lobby’s agenda, including hundreds of attempts by the gun lobby to weaken gun laws. Everytown

Read this: https://momsdemandaction.org/about/victories/ It's too long to cut/paste.

How, exactly do you suggest I put risk my life?

You called me a hypocrite. Apologize or stfu.

Edit to add:

Never mind. What can be expected from a loud mouth self appointed expert that hides behind a fake name to claim great things on a discssion board.

You're giving them exactly what they want, and putting yourself and your loved ones at risk.

If there weren't so many guns, would there be so many dead people?

Banning all semiautos wouldn't bother me a bit.

Requiring extensive training in order to get and keep a gun would probably be a good idea. Right now its up to the individual to determine how much training they get. The required training many states have in order to get a concealed pistol license is absolute minimalist. When I took the training a few years ago, there were people in my class that didn't know how to load their own guns but they still got their license.

Mandating a waiting period is also okay. 3 days, 3 weeks, or even 3 months.

This is because Republicans are running the country, thanks in large part to the Democrats' irrational and emotional proposals on gun laws.

The mass shootings are easy enough to explain. You see, it's become normalized.

The media doesn't really report on suicides because they're afraid of normalizing it, of inspiring others to commit suicide. For example, the news doesn't report a tally of people that committed suicide by jumping from a particular bridge anymore, as they noticed that there were more jumpers as the tally approached milestones (e.g., 100).

The same media completely saturates news coverage with mass shootings, though. We marinate in it using social media, conventional media, and in-person social gatherings. So of course there are copycats.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2019/08/06/748767807/mass-shootings-can-be-contagious-research-shows

And then we normalize it further, with mass shooter drills at our schools just to hammer home into our kids' skulls that getting dumped by your middle-school crush is a perfectly normal and expected reason to bring a gun to school and blow a few random classmates away. The kids bringing guns to school are the ones that have been through these drills since kindergarten, and now we're reaping the results.

But, hey, you keep talking about mass shootings all the time.

Keep talking about banning assault weapons, too, so we can have Trump in the White House again in 2024 while boosting gun sales (again) over the next couple of years. After all, you've only costs of three presidential terms and six SCOTUS justices since 2000; surely you can add to the count before the decade is out.

I still don't think we understand why Americans are so help bent on shooting each other.

and carry. Statistics show that Stand your Ground laws increase homicide. The same is true for 'constitutional carry'. The same is true for the number of guns per capita.

Every single measurement of gun violence and the increase of homicide from established norms is linked to the availability of guns.

Yet you don't understand how Americans shoot each other?

You can lead a horse to water but . . .

True the AWB expired, but homicides by AWB were and are a tiny amount contribution to the statistics.

I think more states have universal background check requirements than ever before.

Stand Your Ground Laws have nothing to do with the availability of guns.

Concealed carry laws have loosened up considerably, but its what the people want.

Having said that, universal background checks and raising the Federal age for rifles could really help.

My point is that we had even easier access to firearms in the past and we didn't see the mass shootings and overall gun-related homicide rates we do now. Something has changed with the American public with regard killing fellow citizens.

Federal laws on buying new firearms are as strict as ever.
The take away is NOT STRICT ENOUGH.

True the AWB expired, but homicides by AWB were and are a tiny amount contribution to the statistics.
Yes, and toddlers shooting each other is a small contribution as are mass shootings and so if we discount each segment of artificially defined category we arrive at no problem at all! Define it away and problem solved!

I think more states have universal background check requirements than ever before.
Whoopie shit! Our 'background check is a joke. 40% of reporting agencies don't bother 'cause it's voluntary. It isn't a background check because it doesn't look at your background only half of your criminal record, not social media or employers or family. It's a fucking joke.

Stand Your Ground Laws have nothing to do with the availability of guns.
Availability of guns has everything to do with using a gun to stand your ground. You're not stupid so don't expect me to be stupid.

Concealed carry laws have loosened up considerably, but its what the people want.
No, it's not. It's what the gun lobby wants. In Texas before the "Constitutional carry" (it's not Constitutional) was passed polls showed 80% voters opposed and the same for law enforcement.

Having said that, universal background checks and raising the Federal age for rifles could really help.
I've addressed background checks above and throwing your "it's a tiny % of gun violence" back at ya' age for rifles is a pittance. I'll take it if I can get it but it's not a real fix.

My point is that we had even easier access to firearms in the past and we didn't see the mass shootings and overall gun-related homicide rates we do now. Something has changed with the American public with regard killing fellow citizens.
Your point is misplaced and mere diversion. It's no more difficult nor easier to get a gun today than any other time. There's just a lot more of them to get. Never has there been more guns than people than now.

As long as that's your goal, nothing will change.

Sy, I gotta say you've said some really ridiculous things but this is head and shoulders above the rest.

Haven't you noticed that?

had such Omnipotent power!!

However AWBs seem pretty popular. Had a national ban for 10 years and have several at the state level. But don't let facts get in your way . . .

So?

Doesn't make them true, or correct. The fact that information-poor people have an opinion doesn't mean they're correct. Opinions are like bellybuttons; everybody has them.

It's quite simple: if you think an AWB will lower the murder rate, the violent crime rate, or the mass-shooting rate, you're wrong. I don't care how much you "sincerely" believe it, you're wrong. I don't particularly care that you're wrong, but the issue is that you can't keep your wrongness to yourself. You insist on infecting people with it, joining the chorus of people that are wrong BUT ALSO HAVE POLITICAL POWER TO ADVANCE THE WRONGNESS.

Let's face it, the only logical reasons to be in favor of AWBs are either:

To open the door to more gun-control legislation after the AWB fails to deliver on any of the promises that were made about it;

Undermine the credibility of the Democrats on non-gun issues by making them say stupid and untrue things about guns and thus tilting the voters towards Republicans;

Or to push gun owners to vote Republicans to defend their guns.

"It's no more difficult nor easier to get a gun today than any other time."

Prior to 1968, guns were mail order. Send in a money order, get your gun in the mail. Go to your local hardware store, buy a gun, take it home. No paperwork, no wait time.

There's Guns.com FFS.

And because there are more gun dealers than McDonalds and Starbucks who the fuck needs a hardware store?

You CAN NOT purchase firearms through the mail, and have them delivered to your front door, other than through the Civilian Marksmanship Program, which is vetted by the US Government. You can't go to Hillbilly Bob's Gun Store's website, pay for an AR-15, and have it sent to your front door. Not since 1968. You have to have a firearm sent to a local FFL, and go through the normal purchase requiem for your state at that FFL. Which means, filling out a 4473, wait times, if applicable, and receipt of a go/no go on the background check. If you know, FOR A FACT, that Guns.com is selling firearms to individuals without going through the process, then REPORT THEM! IT'S ILLEGAL!

"And because there are more gun dealers than McDonalds and Starbucks who the fuck needs a hardware store?"
You missed the WHOLE POINT. Prior to 1968, you didn't NEED a gun dealer. Your local hardware store had guns in stock. No paperwork involved. No muss, no fuss. If you search, you'll see that a certain popular President's assassin used a MAIL ORDER rifle to commit his deed. This, and other incidents, led to passage of the 1968 gun control act, which forbade selling of mail order arms to the public, and starting the current dealer system we use today.

(SYFROYH)
"My point is that we had even easier access to firearms in the past and we didn't see the mass shootings and overall gun-related homicide rates we do now. Something has changed with the American public with regard killing fellow citizens."

(You)
"Your point is misplaced and mere diversion. It's no more difficult nor easier to get a gun today than any other time. There's just a lot more of them to get. Never has there been more guns than people than now."

Enjoy your day.

... is an evil society.

stored guns but one common denominator "GUNS"

They were doing a booming business on a Wednesday afternoon. I can’t imagine customers thinning out on the weekends.

I saw a young mother with 3 small children buying an assault rifle. They were very pleased and excited about the purchase. I saw other young adults shopping for assault rifles. I was distressed.

Assault weapons are made to kill PEOPLE-a lot of them. What s the fascination and purpose?

We are not a nation of murderers. What’s the cause of all this violence and fascination with violence.

*shrug* Self-defense guns are purchased with the intention of killing violent attackers... you know, people.

There's a pretty large overlap between "features good for self-defense" and "features good for sport shooting".

If it helps sooth your conscience, handguns are used to murder people 19x more than rifles.

Not a gunner, but I've owned three.

Gotta ask a few questions.
Are we, any more than usual, in for what rethugs call a "thinning the herd" year?

And do you think we're in a slow roll suicidal civil war?
Is fear of other Americans really that bad now?
(Looking at the gun violence archive numbers, which I hate doing, but do anyway.) Also wondering why suicide death numbers are higher than the intentional malice death numbers.

Asking because I figure gunners have their ear to the ground more than most of us. And feds don't usually tell the public what or if they know.

Thanks for reading, Andy.

More than usual? Yes, the death rate has been climbing every year since 2014 with some exceptions. But supose it hasn't, do you find the 'usual' acceptable and if so why?

Fear among gunners is pretty rampant. I'm not afraid of guns I'm petrified of people so paranoid that they can't leave their house without a loaded gun on them. Gunners fear 'the other', losing their support totem and other people with guns.

Suicide numbers are higher because guns are really good at killing. Only one in 10 attempts at suicide by other means succeeds and only one in ten survivors go on to complete suicide later. Not true of guns. It is a very permanent solution to an often temporary situation.

Hope that answers your questions.

Heck no, I don't think the 'usual' is acceptable whatsoever.

As for your other much appreciated answers, they confirm my views. I'm still wondering, however, if you think the constant increase in gun sales, mass shootings, or any other factors, show that we find this country in a state of low grade civil war.

I don't know what a civil war would look like, but this feels close. There must be one or two common threads of belief that run through these mass murders; they can't all be 'personal' in motive.

ideology. Most are domestic in nature and the remaining are 'lone wolf' attacks.

However given that the FBI has been on high alert for most of the last decade for domestic terror from the far right and the gun culture has made sure military grade weaponry is so easily available I can see a serious threat forming. Add in the fact that the after market is providing full auto conversions (illegal) for as little as $50 so all local police are totally out-gunned things could get serious quickly.

The Jan 6 coup attempt postponed it somewhat by unraveling the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys and making their membership lists available to the Feds. Their Command and Control has been decimated. However there are hundreds of 'militias' and thousands of wanna'be soldiers out there. A Bin Laden type figure could consolidate enough of them to orchestrate a serious threat. Although there is some infiltration of law enforcement and the military I believe it small enough to not be a serious threat . . . a major disruption at local levels, but capably dealt with in-ranks.

The gun culture and the Roberts court has made the 2nd amendment a suicide pact.

The negative impact on mental health was predicted in 2020. The isolation and societal impact on people with the most life's changes hit those the worst. Slow motion PTSD.

And far more conservatives died than liberals, because far more liberals got the covid vaccine.

We're in a Cold Civil War. We've been in one for a while, but the increasing polarization of politics means it might get a bit warmer. It would probably look like the Syrian Civil War as a worse-case scenario, but the clashes between Irish Protestants and Irish Catholics are also a possibility; constant low-level domestic insurgencies as liberals and conservatives are forced to take ideological sides and group together for mutual defense and support. The boundaries between ideologies do not run along geographic lines anymore; we're all mixed together. We're also facing the (hopefully) last gasps of the Christian Nationalists, but that's part of the polarization issue.

Gun-related suicide numbers are always higher than gun-related homicide numbers, if memory serves. A third of households own at least one gun, so the pool of people with easy access to a gun is about a hundred million people. Guns are the preferred method of suicide for men, probably because it's faster, more certain, and more painless than other methods.

Middle-aged, rural men are particularly prone to suicide by gun, I think, because they have a tougher time dealing with the fact that their wives leave them because they're tired of being treated like shit, their jobs generally suck more with fewer opportunities for change, and their kids have left the house and moved on to more interesting parts of the country.

The number of gun-owners with potential suicidal depression is far larger than the number of gun-owners that are career criminals, so that's part of it as well.

Last edited Sun Feb 12, 2023, 02:28 PM - Edit history (1)

The psychological aspects you describe are what I've been trying to learn. So thank you for your lengthy post.

I'm glad we have a part of DU that pays close attention to the use of these tools, their manufacture, and after markets. To me it's important to know just how the greatest armed populace in the world is affected by mass quantities of these durables across time.

I wonder about gun culture. This seems like the only country (I'm not well traveled, but have traveled a lot outside the U.S.) that has such a thing. I'll have to read up on that, and read more on guns.

Last edited Sun Feb 12, 2023, 03:06 PM - Edit history (1)

...is that it scares non-gun-owning people who then seek to discourage this culture by regulating guns or types of guns into oblivion... which does generally work. It hasn't worked with recreational drugs, rap music, erotica (porn, if you prefer), death metal, etc. Yeah, there can be adjustments (anti-drunk-driving efforts are fairly successful) but there is about 30 to 40 percent of the country that will (legally) own guns, even if the types of guns are heavily restricted.

The increasing urbanization of America as well as advances in technology led to a shift in tastes for guns; people were buying guns for self-defense instead of hunting, probably fueled by the rising crime rates in the period from the 60's to about 1990. So the hunting-orientated bolt-action rifle was superseded by the tactically-orientated semi-automatic rifle.

Then there was a series of high-profile mass shootings and the associated nationwide saturation coverage. Satellite trucks and portable television cameras meant that a live feed from "Action News Team Whatever" was readily available to everybody with an ABC, CBS, or NBC local affiliate... and cable TV means even people living in rural areas had the images on their screens. What was a local tragedy became a national tragedy that garnered plenty of eyeballs and the associated ratings... as well as copycats.

Two California assemblymen decided the problem was military-looking guns so they decided to ban... whatever "military" looks like, I guess. New Jersey and Connecticut followed suit a couple of years later. Bill Clinton and the 1992 DNC decided this was a great idea, and made it a plank in the party's platform, where it has been ever since.

The idea was and is inherently stupid, of course, but Democrats were trying (in my opinion) to have what Republicans have a lot of: simplistic but reality-challenged messaging on a complex issue that gets out voters and wins elections. Republican examples include "abortion kills babies", "gays are recruiting your schoolkids", "drill baby drill", "build the wall", etc.

Naturally, it was a disaster for Democrats. Gun owners saw through the bullshit; they could still have AR-15s and AK-47s but they had to take off the features that made them "assault weapons". Things like a protruding pistol grip, or a buttstock quickly adjusted in length or folded up. AR-15 with pistol grip AND telescoping stock is an illegal assault weapon, AR-15 with pistol grip OR telescoping stock is a legal sporting weapon. And if you think I'm exaggerating...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban#Definition_of_assault_weapon

There were historic Congressional losses in 1994 (Newt Gingrinch) and the historically left-dominated House began to seesaw between Democrats and Republicans every couple of elections. Bush won election in Florida by 537 votes out of millions cast; 269 gun owners voting for Gore instead of Bush (or simply 538 not bothering to vote) gives Gore a victory and three SCOTUS justices. Trump lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton by nearly three million votes but perhaps 80,000 votes in three states, if they had gone to her, puts her in the White House and takes away Trump's SCOTUS picks.



Democrats generally refuse to admit it was a political mistake; the first thing that happens after a mass shooting (even one with handguns) is a new and expanded Federal AWB because it will "save lives"... somehow. Or "military weapons don't belong on the streets", even as tens of millions of civilians and most cops carry handguns that are (or were) issued by dozens of militaries around the world. For example, Glocks were originally made for the Austrian army and are now also the sidearm of choice of dozens of armies and thousands or tens of thousands of police forces.

Of course, assault-weapon bans have no effect on either the overall crime rate or on mass shootings. It's pretty obvious it was supposed to be a pandering response to those issue that opened the door for future gun restrictions. It was the equivalent of addressing highway fatalities by banning "assault cars"... cars that had after-market airfoils, extremely low-profile tires, tinted windows, or lowered suspensions.

Obviously, banning "assault cars" would do nothing statistically noticeable to the highway fatality rate, and banning "assault weapons" didn't do anything statistically noticeable to the murder rate. However when banning assault weapons doesn't do what the (usually Democratic) politicians promise, the result is, of course, an even STRICTER ban. Which of course feeds into the "Democrats are coming for your guns" talking point.

It isn't that much of a stretch to think of AWBs to be the perpetual excuse for more guns laws. They are the gift that keeps on giving if your ultimate goal is to make legal gun ownership a rarely-extended privilege instead of a civil right.

So a lot of gun owners have reacted to this by buying AR-15s and the like in states where they are legal. The media attention catapulted awareness of the AR-15 in particular to new heights, and it turns out that people like having AR-15s above and beyond simply "stigginit" to liberals. The rifle is reliable, accurate, comfortable, ergonomic, lightweight, and easy to customize with accessories and optics. It is also available in a variety of chamberings to broaden its appeal for hunting, competition, and self-defense.

Of course, some gun owners have gone as crazy FOR guns as some people have against guns, and have hyped themselves up into a religious frenzy of them, to the point that they pose on Facebook and Instagram with their guns and promising "Second Amendment solutions" to issues. Some of them, again, are also forming their own militias... the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers are two examples.

And with Republicans beating Democrats in the governor's mansions and legislatures across the country, concealed-carry of handguns has become far more widespread. States that didn't issue permits now issue them, states that did issue permits made it easier to get permits, and some states have gone to permitless carry.

As a result, handgun and rifle sales have soared, and threads of future bans only make them go higher. Ironically, the anti-gun faction of the DNC is boosting sales of the guns they most want to ban: handguns and tactical rifles.




I mean, look at the graph: shotgun sales are flat, rifle and handgun sales are up. Look especially at the runup to the 2016 election.

Yes, I did notice that runup to 2016. The militias, rwnj's and 'left behinders' were probably prepping for what tfg presented as some new anti-government populist "revolution" dream.

Also, this link is the only one I've seen on gun culture that's not a blog. Its graphics need updating, but it's still helpful, though not as 'on the ground' helpful as your essay.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_culture_in_the_United_States

Again, thank you for your hard work on gun culture history, kris.

I haven't had an accident in my current car. I can't state unequivocally that I will NEVER EVER have an accident.

I can state unequivocally that having a gun in the home adds a variable that homes without guns do not have.

Not to say I know how you store or care for your guns and ammunition. I suspect that like my guns yours are secured in a safe with the ammunition stored elsewhere. I can't and won't say that never under any circumstances will one of my guns ever harm someone.

The best we can do is the best we can do but we are mere mortals and not infallible.

I think that is a fair basis for my claim. I treat all weapons and tools with respect. Maintain them and store them properly. I work at maintaining proper mental attitudes and respect for my fellow man.

I think that is a fair basis for my claim. I treat all weapons and tools with respect. Maintain them and store them properly. I work at maintaining proper mental attitudes and respect for my fellow man.

never is a long time. No one knows what the future holds.

I certainly hope you are right and wish you all the best.

It's just that I am not Omnipotent and know it.

Give the number of people who own guns and never use them to harm others, the odds are on my sides

Like you I do all I can to mitigate that variable but it IS a vvariable and 'Odds' indicates a gamble. It is a fine point but it is a point to be recognized.

As I said, Never is a long time and such certainty belies reality.

Anyway, enough of this and have a great day!