Posted on May 24, 2023
Counting the massacres in US since Uvalde shooting
706
36
11
8
8
0
On 24 May 2022, a gunman entered Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas and killed 21 people. In the year that has followed, at least 600 other mass shootings have taken place across the country.
The Gun Violence Archive defines a mass shooting as an incident where four or more people are killed or injured from gunfire, excluding the gunman.
The Gun Violence Archive defines a mass shooting as an incident where four or more people are killed or injured from gunfire, excluding the gunman.
Counting the massacres in US since Uvalde shooting
Posted from bbc.com
Firearms and Guns
Violence
Uvalde
Children
Posted 11 mo ago
Responses: 7
7
7
0
SFC John D.
Absolutely agree.
If the focus was on dealing with criminals and domestic violence, then that would have a marked impact to 80 to 88 percent of those mass shootings (https://www.hsdl.org/c/abstract/?docid=787620). However, that's ignored because it doesn't fit the narrative.
"Ban Assault Weapons!" is a rallying cry often heard. If you point out that using the definition of an "assault rifle" that was in the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban, that only 14 percent of those defined as such were used in mass public shootings, it is ignored since it doesn't fit the narrative.
If you point out that banning "Assault Weapons" didn't have any significant effect on lowering homicide rates (https://rockinst.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/3-28-19-Firearm-Laws-Homicide-Deaths-Brief.pdf), it is ignored since it doesn't fit the narrative.
If the focus was on dealing with criminals and domestic violence, then that would have a marked impact to 80 to 88 percent of those mass shootings (https://www.hsdl.org/c/abstract/?docid=787620). However, that's ignored because it doesn't fit the narrative.
"Ban Assault Weapons!" is a rallying cry often heard. If you point out that using the definition of an "assault rifle" that was in the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban, that only 14 percent of those defined as such were used in mass public shootings, it is ignored since it doesn't fit the narrative.
If you point out that banning "Assault Weapons" didn't have any significant effect on lowering homicide rates (https://rockinst.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/3-28-19-Firearm-Laws-Homicide-Deaths-Brief.pdf), it is ignored since it doesn't fit the narrative.
Summary - Homeland Security Digital Library
Search over 250,000 publications and resources related to homeland security policy, strategy, and organizational management.
(1)
(0)
4
4
0
Before anyone complains about American mainstream media, BBC is British. The arguments of needing less restrictions and more good guys with guns are not logical from their perspective.
(4)
(0)
MSG Thomas Currie
You are right. Obviously the British Broadcasting Company is British and their opinion is that guns are only something you beg America to send you each time you get into a war (shortly before begging Americans to come use guns to defend you).
(2)
(0)
4
4
0
This continues to break my heart. I wish that they ban purchase of all assault weapons. And BTW as per my own clinical research, tho combatants are highly trained to kill they disdain killing other humans. They do as a result of defensive and affiliative aggression. When their tour ends, they come home and are haunted by the ghosts of those they kill.
Rich
Rich
(4)
(0)
MSG Thomas Currie
I'm curious, exactly what do you think is an "assault weapon" and why do you suppose that banning weapons based on what they look like would reduce the number of crazy people? Seriously, can you answer either of those questions (preferably without parroting lies and cherry-picking skewed statistics).
(1)
(0)
MSG Thomas Currie
That's a reasonable question, PV2 Larry Sellnow, and I might be more inclined to consider it from someone who didn't choose to start out by insulting me by deliberately misspelling my name while it was right in front of him.
If you are concerned about "mentally unstable" people legally obtaining firearms perhaps you should take that up with the liberals who insist that there is no such thing as dangerous mental illness and that all these poor misunderstood individuals should be 'mainstreamed' to live "normal productive lives" in the community without restriction nor supervision.
If you are concerned about "mentally unstable" people legally obtaining firearms perhaps you should take that up with the liberals who insist that there is no such thing as dangerous mental illness and that all these poor misunderstood individuals should be 'mainstreamed' to live "normal productive lives" in the community without restriction nor supervision.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google