Thank GOD we had enough guns to throw off the oppressive rule of the British Fucktards....

I'll preemptively respond to the anti-gun posts which are sure to emerge later in this thread:

First, let's propose some possible "solutions" to America's gun control "question":

- Federal assault weapons ban
Rebuttal: So-called "assault weapons" are only used in two percent of gun-related crimes. This figure does not differentiate between legally owned "assault weapons" and illegally owned "assault weapons". If illegally owned "assault weapons" were to be excluded from the survey, then the number would be even lower than two percent. Therefore, even in an ideal world without a black market or the existence of millions of extant civilian "assault weapons", you would only be "solving" two percent of the issue. Also, it is worth noting that mass murderers generally prefer pistols or (more rarely) illegally obtained rifles. For example, the Virginia Tech shooter was armed with two pistols (IIRC)

- Nationwide background checks
Rebuttal: The Tuscon shooter passed a background check. The Aurora shooter passed a background check. The Virginia Tech shooter passed *two* background checks. Background checks do nothing except make it more difficult for convicted felons to legally purchase firearms, which they are already prohibited from doing. Furthermore, most reputable firearms dealers will conduct a quick background check on any purchases. Background checks do NOT prevent or inhibit a mentally distressed person from purchasing a firearm, and would therefore be an ineffective deterrent to mass murderers.

- Nationwide registration
Rebuttal: Firearm registration is merely an investigative tool. It only helps solve the crime after the fact, and even then only if the firearm is later recovered. Furthermore, any proposed national registration would be met with fierce and overwhelming resistance from the firearms community, for obvious reasons. It would not be a deterrent to mass murderers.

- Nationwide "high capacity" magazine bans
Rebuttal: Limiting magazine size does not eliminate a shooter's ability to reload quickly or to carry numerous smaller magazines. Competitive shooters can reload in a fraction of a second. There are hours of YouTube videos out there that proves how fast some guys can reload. Magazine restrictions might be a slight handicap for a mass murderer, but nevertheless is not an effective deterrent.

- Nationwide gun ban
Rebuttal: Unconstitutional, unenforceable, and would almost certainly result in a second revolution or civil war.
______________

Many of you Europeans/non-Americans on here are unaware of the sheer scale of gun culture in the United States. There are probably over 300 million extant civilian firearms of all types in the United States, including millions and millions of semi-automatic rifles and pistols. Furthermore, the right of an individual to bear arms for historically lawful purposes is explicitly protected by both our Constitution and legal precedent. Tens of thousands of individuals are employed by the firearms industry. In practical terms, it is simply impossible to "ban" firearms as most countries did post-WWII through the end of the 20th century.

Assumption: the law will jot change until the culture does.

Gunfighter, any suggestions to chance the culture - by which i don't necessarily mean the levels of gun ownership - Switzerland and Canada have similar levels of gun ownership with vastly lower gun related deaths.

Jamiet, I'm going to answer your question here, ie. mass shootings in the US.

1.) I don't know. If I did, I'd be in some sort of government position enacting it. No one else knows either. But, I do know that the right way doesn't start with breaking the Constitution. That would lead to civil war. There is no doubt about that. Things would get nasty very fast. And proposing changing the Constitution is great, but it will not happen likely in this century. The majority needed to change that Amendment would be absolutely impossible in the forseeable future, and even if that happened, it would still lead to mass violence on an unprecedented level in the US.

2.) I don't think the problem is gun ownership (^^^ See orathaic, ie. Switzerland and Canada). It is cultural. I also see that it seems like the majority of these mass murderers are mentally ill (Adam Lanza, James Holmes, and this new guy appears to have been on psychiatric drugs). Therefore it is not a problem of keeping guns away from everybody, but from the mentally unstable.

Republican Presidential Candidates Rick Santorum and Lindsey Graham (Who represents South Carolina in the Senate) have both attempted to portray this as an anti-Christian hate crime, rather than an anti-black crime, in an attempt to blame liberals for the crime.

Assholes. The kid wore clothes with flags from Apartheid South Africa. He TOLD the woman he left alive that he was doing it because blacks were "taking over the country". He was a racist.

BTW, he owned the gun because his father thought it would be a good idea to give his obviously sociopathic son who had no friends, no job, and spent all his time alone in his room a .45 caliber handgun for his birthday. Brilliant move, dad.

This is the one topic that I always get baited into responding to...

@Gunfighter06 If a national gun ban of some sort was enacted, it could only be enacted by an amendment to the Constitution. So, that would mean a vast majority of the country was in favor of it, which would likely preclude a civil war.

However, if a nationwide gun ban was somehow unilaterally rammed down the country's throat, there still wouldn't be a civil war. A "war" is not feasible against the modern might of the United States military.

@ erik

That's assuming that the military would remain loyal to the government. The military's loyalty is with the Constitution, not politicians. Furthermore, the military has a higher rate of firearm ownership than the general public, and would therefore be especially sympathetic to the pro-2A side of an issue.

BTW, in practice, the Second Amendment only applies to white people. Black people who open carry tend to get killed by white people who open carry in this country. Black people who look at bb guns in Wal-Mart tend to get killed by white people who open carry in this country.

Erik, you underestimate the will of gun owners. Even if the "civil war" is drone strikes on citizens, many people I know will die defending that right. But it would be much more divided than that. Entire states would secede on these premises. The military would be split, the National Guard would be split. It would be terrible. Not least because you have 300 million potential fighters (and a vast majority would side with the pro-gun side).

Okay, let's stop this tangent rant that will go nowhere.

Any ideas on how to change the culture, as was said before? Because I certainly don't have any. Though it'd be nice for the NRA and other pro-gun lobbies to start pro-actively working to fix this instead of putting up the publicity wall and talking points.

This is a part of US culture: gawker.com/somber-jon-stewart-delivers-scathing-monologue-about-ch-1712464655

And the salon has an article claiming it is not about craziness.

soulascriptura.com/2015/06/allies-the-time-for-your-silence-has-expired

@ goldfinger and orathaic

I dispute your assertion that "gun culture" is at fault or is in need of change/reform/mitigation. I am quite proud of American gun culture, even in dark hours such as this one. A heavily armed populace is nothing to be ashamed of. For example, guns are almost as widespread in Switzerland (and are an integral part of Swiss national defense) as they are in the United States, and Switzerland does not have nearly the same crime issues as the US.

Liberals are quick to point out the NRA as a powerful/evil "gun lobby", but in reality the NRA merely represents the legitimate concerns and interests of a distinctly American industry and, more importantly, its consumer base. Personally, I think the NRA is a bunch of spineless hypocrites (which is why I support/maintain membership in the Gun Owners of America), but I digress.
___

However, I realize that my defense of American gun culture does nothing to address the perceived issues at hand. Therefore, I posit that the American mental health system is to blame (of course, after acknowledging that the killer is ultimately responsible for his actions). There is a *massive* stigma against mental health in the US. It is very difficult to maintain relationships if you tell people that you see a shrink. Seeing a shrink is often falsely viewed as a sign of weakness. We could also be experiencing the after-effects of deinstitutionalization in addition to an over-reliance on psychopharmacological treatment.

In short, if it were as easy to see a shrink as it was to see a medical doctor or a dentist, then we would have very few (if any) mass murders.

In a psychology class years ago, we suggested that mental health professionals should push for everyone to have a "mental health" check-up once a year. Most of us have a physical every year. Why not go in for a "mental" every year? A fifteen minute conversation with a shrink probably could have prevented this whole thing.
___

The shooter's father should also be held criminally liable. He knowingly provided a gun to an unstable person. .45 caliber pistols are designed to stop anything on two legs and most things on four legs. They are NOT designed to resolve psychological issues.
____

One thing about this incident that interests me: This was a bona fide example of violent racism/hate crime, yet the left is getting ensnared in the gun control issue once again. They have every right to scream "racism" from the rooftops this time, as they falsely did for other incidents (Ferguson), but they are remaining silent (except for a few people advocating for this to be prosecuted as a hate crime, which I believe it is).

FFS, the kid had an old Rhodesian flag patch on his jacket. I'll bet good money that he had some sort of loose affiliation with a white supremacist group as well (a regular on their sick forums at the very least). A real, no-bullshit case of racism alive and well, yet the left is too busy railroading innocent police officers. I digress once again.

"A "war" is not feasible against the modern might of the United States military."

Tell that to the North Koreans, Vietnamese, Afghans, and Iraqis. The US military can certainly turn cities to ashes and obliterate armies in the field in days, but enforcing its will on a people it intends to dominate has proved to be an objective too far.

"Black people who open carry tend to get killed by white people who open carry in this country. Black people who look at bb guns in Wal-Mart tend to get killed by white people who open carry in this country."

Eh? Where are all these stories about shootouts in the streets between (non-police) gun owners? The man who was murdered at Walmart for picking up a BB gun was killed by police officers (who, so far as I know, gun-grabbers aren't pushing to disarm), not a citizen who was open carrying. I think you're confusing "open carry" with "police murderers", which *is* a big problem - one that would not at all be affected by citizen disarmament.

There was a huge recent shootout not involving police in Waco.

"One thing about this incident that interests me: This was a bona fide example of violent racism/hate crime, yet the left is getting ensnared in the gun control issue once again. They have every right to scream "racism" from the rooftops this time, as they falsely did for other incidents (Ferguson), but they are remaining silent (except for a few people advocating for this to be prosecuted as a hate crime, which I believe it is)."

Why not both? You must be listening to conservative media which tells its consumers what liberals believe.

Racism is the root cause. Guns are the catalyst to violent action.

"There was a huge recent shootout not involving police in Waco."

Actually, many of the non-police witnesses claim it was the police doing most (or all) of the shooting.

Link?
Of the one this thread is about?
It can be tricky to tell all the incidents apart..

Not exactly pro-gun, but to be fair, a massacre happened in Norway too, which is an "other advanced country". That was one incident while the USA has a lot more though, so there's that.

Anybody else notice that when they are shot down in a place of worship, during a Bible study, they are "people"; but when one is complaining about his neighbor's lawn decorations he's a "Christian"?

Why not,

"Nine Christians are killed by a psycho?"

@gunfighter "Therefore, I posit that the American mental health system is to blame (of course, after acknowledging that the killer is ultimately responsible for his actions). There is a *massive* stigma against mental health in the US."

I posit that blaming mental health for gun crime adds to the stigma, which delays or stops people with mental health problems from seeking help and actually has a negative effect on individuals.

I'm not averse to gun ownership per-say but I entirely view it as part of the current system which is problematic in the US. As you point out, gun ownership is not so problematic in Switzerland ( though not much else is equal, so it's not that useful a comparison ) but i accept it is a part of your culture. Along with hero worship of violent sports men (ie the sanitised forms of violence you see in professional sports) and of soldiers who go out and kill other humans (despite this being contrary to the commandments of Moses)

All parts of American culture which are a part of this gun violence epidemic.

Today they are showing the killer on national tv (even in ireland) which is something we've heard time and again gives copy-cat killer more reason to go out and repeat these crimes - now i'm not against freedom of speech, but the media should be held responsible for spreading images of violent offenders who will then be worshipped by others.

For what it's worth, since Roof may face the death penalty for this act of terrorism, I would like to state for the record that I am against his execution. Just as I am against the execution of Tsarnaev. Some of the victims' families have already extended forgiveness and mercy to Roof - proof of their true Christianity. They have said they hope he repents, they have said they pray "God has mercy on his soul."

Remember that. Remember that forgiveness is the only antidote to hatred.

What does forgiveness entail in this case? Exoneration?

"Why not,

"Nine Christians are killed by a psycho?""

Because they were targeted for being Black, not being Christian. End of discussion

No, it entails true justice. Rehabilitation, and, if impossible, humane treatment at least. This is not the Wild West, nor is it Apartheid South Africa or a slave plantation, whatever this man's fantasies may have been.

Anyone who views this crime as a general attack on Christians/Christianity is either willfully ignorant or just plain stupid, but that's what the Conservative Right banks on.

It's because they risk angering the bigoted/racist members of their party if they admit anything about race.

@Crazy A "Anybody else notice that when they are shot down in a place of worship, during a Bible study, they are "people"; but when one is complaining about his neighbor's lawn decorations he's a "Christian"?"

Of course, that is the inherent bias you will always see in both media and this forum. "Christian" is a term of derision...."Christians" are people to be mocked, insulted, etc. They are not to be mourned, because all ill that falls upon them is of their own creation, is it not? THAT would be the general attitude of many in these forums.

So my suggestion to you, Crazy Anglican -- when you see posts that you think are attacking Christians as a group -- inform the mods.

It is time we clean up these forum of all the left-wing/athiest hate.

[email protected]

This is the email you use when you feel that there is targeted hate speech against groups and individuals. I have recently decided that I am on a mission to clean up the hypocritical left-wing/atheist-derived hate on this site. I would encourage you to join me.
Of course -- it is the inherent bias of both the media, and this forum. Attacking Chris