America's Gun Violence

PJPOWER

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

PJPOWER said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

The New York bike lane mass murder results in cement barriers installed to prevent another incident like this. This was just one time.

Tylenol bottles got tampered with and there is an immediate response to safeguard the public with tamper proof product.

9-11 occurred and there is an immediate escalation in airport security... not to mention the Patriot Act.

I could go on.

My point is (if it isn't obvious)... guns are immune to any measure aimed at making the public safer. To boot... these are items specifically designed to kill things. The gun industry and its lobbyists and lapdogs have a stranglehold on the American public- where only a small portion is resistant to change efforts. 

I guess you haven’t tried to walk into an elementary school lately?  Around here, anyways, schools ramped up their security after the school shootings. Most schools now make sure doors are locked with access only given through the front offices and two locked doors before being able to actually access anywhere that the students are.  There have been a lot of safety measures implemented due to past gun violence in movie theatres, churches, schools.  Many (not all of course) churches actually have “teams” of people that they have asked to conceal carry or have hired armed security.  The problem is that the sociopathic lunatics hit the softest targets that they can find.  I guarantee Las Vegas hotels are going to be implementing more security measures.  To say that nothing is being done is an overstatement.  You just don’t see them because the things you want done are not happening because they are untenable.

Untenable? No.

I'd say the things I'd like to see done make too much sense and for a country that hasn't exhibited a ton of sensibility lately... that's asking too much.

I love the 'safeguards' you speak of though. What's next? Body armour for kids going to school? Just as long as you get to shoot shit at the landfill, eh? Lol

Untenable, yes.  
Oddly enough, decking kids out in body armor (an absurd idea) is probably more realistic than trying to get rid of people “shooting shit in a landfill”.  I’ve said it numerous times, you are going to be waiting a very long time before any kind of government intervention that makes a difference takes place...if ever.  That is not my opinion, that is reality.  I think it is time for people to start thinking about what else can be done.  But I digress, people around here obviously hate the words “personal change” or “personal responsibility”.  Maybe some day a magical fairy wizard will make guns and violence disappear and the world will become a John Lennon pipe dream...but I’m going to encourage more people to get their CCWs and practice as often as possible and education themselves on safety until that day comes.  Maybe liberals could market a bulletproof “man bun” or something in the meantime, haha.  That would be time better spent than all of the “let’s act mad and call gun owners nuts and make guns go away” stupidness.

PJPOWER

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

The New York bike lane mass murder results in cement barriers installed to prevent another incident like this. This was just one time.

Tylenol bottles got tampered with and there is an immediate response to safeguard the public with tamper proof product.

9-11 occurred and there is an immediate escalation in airport security... not to mention the Patriot Act.

I could go on.

My point is (if it isn't obvious)... guns are immune to any measure aimed at making the public safer. To boot... these are items specifically designed to kill things. The gun industry and its lobbyists and lapdogs have a stranglehold on the American public- where only a small portion is resistant to change efforts. 

I guess you haven’t tried to walk into an elementary school lately?  Around here, anyways, schools ramped up their security after the school shootings. Most schools now make sure doors are locked with access only given through the front offices and two locked doors before being able to actually access anywhere that the students are.  There have been a lot of safety measures implemented due to past gun violence in movie theatres, churches, schools.  Many (not all of course) churches actually have “teams” of people that they have asked to conceal carry or have hired armed security.  The problem is that the sociopathic lunatics hit the softest targets that they can find.  I guarantee Las Vegas hotels are going to be implementing more security measures.  To say that nothing is being done is an overstatement.  You just don’t see them because the things you want done are not happening because they are untenable.

but those solutions aren't tackling the problem. it's like forcing a rape victim to wear a chastity belt or to stay home entirely instead of dealing with the rapist and the culture of sexual assault. 

They may not be tackling the whole problem, but I guarantee you that some of these safeguards have prevented news stories.  Many schools have routine police dogs randomly sniffing parking lots and lockers.  You will hear a news story every now and then about how someone “tried” to bring a gun to school, but was caught.  Not everything is preventable, but there has been several plans prevented by increased awareness and security.  
Your analogy is interesting, but is no real comparison. How are rapes prevented?  Are penises banned?  Are people educated about how to avoid being assaulted?  I’m all about finding ways of reducing the “culture of violence”, what are some politically tenable ways of doing so?  Banning guns is (at least currently) political untenable.  If you want to wait around for politicians to “fix things”, then you are going to be waiting a very very long time...

Especially when universal support for the change effort isn't there.

You're part of the problem whether you care to admit it or not.

Maybe I am, but I doubt it.  You are definitely not part of any kind of solution though...as much as you really really want to be.

PJPOWER

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

The New York bike lane mass murder results in cement barriers installed to prevent another incident like this. This was just one time.

Tylenol bottles got tampered with and there is an immediate response to safeguard the public with tamper proof product.

9-11 occurred and there is an immediate escalation in airport security... not to mention the Patriot Act.

I could go on.

My point is (if it isn't obvious)... guns are immune to any measure aimed at making the public safer. To boot... these are items specifically designed to kill things. The gun industry and its lobbyists and lapdogs have a stranglehold on the American public- where only a small portion is resistant to change efforts. 

I guess you haven’t tried to walk into an elementary school lately?  Around here, anyways, schools ramped up their security after the school shootings. Most schools now make sure doors are locked with access only given through the front offices and two locked doors before being able to actually access anywhere that the students are.  There have been a lot of safety measures implemented due to past gun violence in movie theatres, churches, schools.  Many (not all of course) churches actually have “teams” of people that they have asked to conceal carry or have hired armed security.  The problem is that the sociopathic lunatics hit the softest targets that they can find.  I guarantee Las Vegas hotels are going to be implementing more security measures.  To say that nothing is being done is an overstatement.  You just don’t see them because the things you want done are not happening because they are untenable.

but those solutions aren't tackling the problem. it's like forcing a rape victim to wear a chastity belt or to stay home entirely instead of dealing with the rapist and the culture of sexual assault. 

They may not be tackling the whole problem, but I guarantee you that some of these safeguards have prevented news stories.  Many schools have routine police dogs randomly sniffing parking lots and lockers.  You will hear a news story every now and then about how someone “tried” to bring a gun to school, but was caught.  Not everything is preventable, but there has been several plans prevented by increased awareness and security.  
Your analogy is interesting, but is no real comparison. How are rapes prevented?  Are penises banned?  Are people educated about how to avoid being assaulted?  I’m all about finding ways of reducing the “culture of violence”, what are some politically tenable ways of doing so?  Banning guns is (at least currently) political untenable.  If you want to wait around for politicians to “fix things”, then you are going to be waiting a very very long time...

my analogy was focusing on the wrong way to respond to the problem. on the topic of rape/sexual assault, education on both sides is the answer; protection and respect. 

banning certain types can be part of the answer, but also education. the constitution says nothing about "the right to bear ANY arms you can get your hands on/can be invented". it would be perfectly legal and constitutional to ban everything but handguns and rifles. you can still protect your home and shoot your antique cans.

politically untenable? maybe. But the polls show otherwise. The overwhelming majority of americans support tighter restrictions, but the lawmakers aren't listening to their voters, they are listening to who lines their pockets. and then you'll say "then vote for someone who has that as their platform". that's the problem. there needs to be a collective that stand up and say "ENOUGH!". so far there aren't enough people who are courageous enough to start that. 

Hell, I support tighter restrictions too.  But, when a person skirts some of the restrictions already in place because of human error in reporting him, what “tenable” restriction would stop them?  Maybe something 50 years from now....

mace1229

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

mcgruff10 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Gun lovers- once again getting absolutely slaughtered in the gun control debate- have resorted to taunting with nothing else to go with.

Basically... 'na na na boo boo' when confronted with 'look at all other developed countries and the success they have had with gun legislation'... or any of the other quality points that are irrefutable.

Fortunately, for them, their country doesn't educate its citizens very well and kowtows to big business that preys on the 'uneducated' with fear tactics that promote their product and boost their profit margins- reducing the poor, helpless waifs to quivering bowls of jello hiding behind their doors: fearing a government takeover, home invasions, and young black men in hoodies drinking slurpees.

Even though they do (and spikes in sales following any public outcry indicate such)... they do not have to fear that the governments are taking their guns. This isn't happening so rest easy on that one!

I wouldn't say gun lovers are getting slaughtered in any sort of debate; I'd say we are just having the same conversation for the 50th time.  You guys make your points and no matter what you don't change your mind and vice versa.  

I also disagree that we do not educate our citizens well; just because they have a different opinion than you doesn't mean our education system is bad.  

Scruffy... I'm certainly not going to change my mind. Your country has a problem. The problem isn't 'mental health' as it relates to mass murder every week or so. All countries have 'mental health' problems. Not all countries feature mass murders on a seemingly daily basis.

The distinguishing trait your country possesses over other countries is its eagerness to allow widespread access to exceptional guns many of which are outstanding in their capacity to kill. 

To your second point... we can agree to disagree then.

Exhibit A: http://nypost.com/2013/10/08/us-adults-are-dumber-than-the-average-human/

Exhibit B: https://globalnews.ca/news/3535819/chocolate-milk-brown-cows-survey/

Exhibit C: Donald Trump. Is America great again yet?

I've see that chocolate milk survey before. I don't buy the results.
I know a lot of adults, and I don't think a single one of them believes chocolate milk is made from brown cows. Maybe my 3-year-old son might, maybe.
My assumption is it is one of those 100 question surveys put together and threw in a couple weird questions like that, and most people probably didn't even read it. I know I've filled out surveys and about 5 questions into it I stopped reading.
As much doubt as I have about that 7%, to believe that 50% of American adults have no idea how chocolate milk is made all but proves my suspicions. You mean, half of America has never put some Hershey syrup into a glass of milk ans stirred it?
I'm just not buying it. This survey was probably designed to trick people or take advantage of their lack of cooperation in an attempt to poke fun at the results. But I don't buy it as being legitimate results for a second.
That being said, our education is far from the best, and no one needs a poorly conducted survey to prove it.

PJPOWER

tbergs said:

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

The New York bike lane mass murder results in cement barriers installed to prevent another incident like this. This was just one time.

Tylenol bottles got tampered with and there is an immediate response to safeguard the public with tamper proof product.

9-11 occurred and there is an immediate escalation in airport security... not to mention the Patriot Act.

I could go on.

My point is (if it isn't obvious)... guns are immune to any measure aimed at making the public safer. To boot... these are items specifically designed to kill things. The gun industry and its lobbyists and lapdogs have a stranglehold on the American public- where only a small portion is resistant to change efforts. 

I guess you haven’t tried to walk into an elementary school lately?  Around here, anyways, schools ramped up their security after the school shootings. Most schools now make sure doors are locked with access only given through the front offices and two locked doors before being able to actually access anywhere that the students are.  There have been a lot of safety measures implemented due to past gun violence in movie theatres, churches, schools.  Many (not all of course) churches actually have “teams” of people that they have asked to conceal carry or have hired armed security.  The problem is that the sociopathic lunatics hit the softest targets that they can find.  I guarantee Las Vegas hotels are going to be implementing more security measures.  To say that nothing is being done is an overstatement.  You just don’t see them because the things you want done are not happening because they are untenable.

but those solutions aren't tackling the problem. it's like forcing a rape victim to wear a chastity belt or to stay home entirely instead of dealing with the rapist and the culture of sexual assault. 

They may not be tackling the whole problem, but I guarantee you that some of these safeguards have prevented news stories.  Many schools have routine police dogs randomly sniffing parking lots and lockers.  You will hear a news story every now and then about how someone “tried” to bring a gun to school, but was caught.  Not everything is preventable, but there has been several plans prevented by increased awareness and security.  
Your analogy is interesting, but is no real comparison. How are rapes prevented?  Are penises banned?  Are people educated about how to avoid being assaulted?  I’m all about finding ways of reducing the “culture of violence”, what are some politically tenable ways of doing so?  Banning guns is (at least currently) political untenable.  If you want to wait around for politicians to “fix things”, then you are going to be waiting a very very long time...

If only there was a national penis background check in order to make us a safer country....Going off that analogy, you are right, you can't ban penises, but there are a lot of restrictions and laws about their use that are well enforced  

And yet, rape and sexual assault still happens?

Halifax2TheMax

Nothing can be done.

tbergs

Your comments would be more relevant if it was an all out gun ban that was being requested. A few on here wish that, but it's not going to happen. Where your argument loses relevancy is when you won't compromise on the amount, type and restrictions on usage for certain types. Such things as limiting magazine capacity, firing rate and weapons available to the public. I think we can both improve our security measures while also limiting the threat. Isn't that compromising? Right now, only the anti-gun side has to compromise because it's the gun owners/advocates dictating their behavior.

PJPOWER

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

The New York bike lane mass murder results in cement barriers installed to prevent another incident like this. This was just one time.

Tylenol bottles got tampered with and there is an immediate response to safeguard the public with tamper proof product.

9-11 occurred and there is an immediate escalation in airport security... not to mention the Patriot Act.

I could go on.

My point is (if it isn't obvious)... guns are immune to any measure aimed at making the public safer. To boot... these are items specifically designed to kill things. The gun industry and its lobbyists and lapdogs have a stranglehold on the American public- where only a small portion is resistant to change efforts. 

I guess you haven’t tried to walk into an elementary school lately?  Around here, anyways, schools ramped up their security after the school shootings. Most schools now make sure doors are locked with access only given through the front offices and two locked doors before being able to actually access anywhere that the students are.  There have been a lot of safety measures implemented due to past gun violence in movie theatres, churches, schools.  The problem is that these individuals hit the softest targets that they can find.  I guarantee Las Vegas hotels are going to be implementing more security measures.  To say that nothing is being done is an overstatement.  You just don’t see them because the things you want done are not happening because they are untenable.

Vegas hotels made immediate changes.  Apparently the shooter had refused linen service for a few days so that he could stockpile his arsenal and prepare for the slaughter.

Now the hotels are requiring that staff visit rooms daily to avoid similar situations.

There you have it.  Thinking outside of the “ban guns” box.  Learn the behaviors and weed these shit-fucks out.  

mace1229

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

The New York bike lane mass murder results in cement barriers installed to prevent another incident like this. This was just one time.

Tylenol bottles got tampered with and there is an immediate response to safeguard the public with tamper proof product.

9-11 occurred and there is an immediate escalation in airport security... not to mention the Patriot Act.

I could go on.

My point is (if it isn't obvious)... guns are immune to any measure aimed at making the public safer. To boot... these are items specifically designed to kill things. The gun industry and its lobbyists and lapdogs have a stranglehold on the American public- where only a small portion is resistant to change efforts. 

I guess you haven’t tried to walk into an elementary school lately?  Around here, anyways, schools ramped up their security after the school shootings. Most schools now make sure doors are locked with access only given through the front offices and two locked doors before being able to actually access anywhere that the students are.  There have been a lot of safety measures implemented due to past gun violence in movie theatres, churches, schools.  The problem is that these individuals hit the softest targets that they can find.  I guarantee Las Vegas hotels are going to be implementing more security measures.  To say that nothing is being done is an overstatement.  You just don’t see them because the things you want done are not happening because they are untenable.

Vegas hotels made immediate changes.  Apparently the shooter had refused linen service for a few days so that he could stockpile his arsenal and prepare for the slaughter.

Now the hotels are requiring that staff visit rooms daily to avoid similar situations.

I've heard those changes. I honestly dont see them sticking.
I've stayed 2-3 nights in a hotel and left the "do not disturb" sign up the whole time. I don't need fresh sheets and towels every single day. In fact, many hotels now say they won't replace sheets and towels unless you specifically request it to save on water and energy. So what is the point of having a stranger come into my room when I potentially have some valuables in there? And especially a place like vegas where people are more likely to be out at night and be sleeping in during the day when those maids come around.
I just saw that policy change as a way to respond and put up a front of change, but it wont last. I give it a few months and they stop following through with that daily check.

PJPOWER

tbergs said:

Your comments would be more relevant if it was an all out gun ban that was being requested. A few on here wish that, but it's not going to happen. Where your argument loses relevancy is when you won't compromise on the amount, type and restrictions on usage for certain types. Such things as limiting magazine capacity, firing rate and weapons available to the public. I think we can both improve our security measures while also limiting the threat. Isn't that compromising? Right now, only the anti-gun side has to compromise because it's the gun owners/advocates dictating their behavior.

Several around here on the “pro-gun” side have mentioned those very things.   But how are you going to gain compromise by insulting or belittling people?  You are right in that the weight is on the anti-gun people.  “Gun nuts” do not compromise with people that call them “gun nuts” and probably never will.  That would be a good step in the right direction, erase some of the derogatory terms from your language and the needle may move (even in the slightest” towards compromise. If you really want compromise, you cannot begin with insulting or angering those you want to compromise with.  Some self-control is probably going to need practiced...

tbergs

PJPOWER said:

tbergs said:

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

The New York bike lane mass murder results in cement barriers installed to prevent another incident like this. This was just one time.

Tylenol bottles got tampered with and there is an immediate response to safeguard the public with tamper proof product.

9-11 occurred and there is an immediate escalation in airport security... not to mention the Patriot Act.

I could go on.

My point is (if it isn't obvious)... guns are immune to any measure aimed at making the public safer. To boot... these are items specifically designed to kill things. The gun industry and its lobbyists and lapdogs have a stranglehold on the American public- where only a small portion is resistant to change efforts. 

I guess you haven’t tried to walk into an elementary school lately?  Around here, anyways, schools ramped up their security after the school shootings. Most schools now make sure doors are locked with access only given through the front offices and two locked doors before being able to actually access anywhere that the students are.  There have been a lot of safety measures implemented due to past gun violence in movie theatres, churches, schools.  Many (not all of course) churches actually have “teams” of people that they have asked to conceal carry or have hired armed security.  The problem is that the sociopathic lunatics hit the softest targets that they can find.  I guarantee Las Vegas hotels are going to be implementing more security measures.  To say that nothing is being done is an overstatement.  You just don’t see them because the things you want done are not happening because they are untenable.

but those solutions aren't tackling the problem. it's like forcing a rape victim to wear a chastity belt or to stay home entirely instead of dealing with the rapist and the culture of sexual assault. 

They may not be tackling the whole problem, but I guarantee you that some of these safeguards have prevented news stories.  Many schools have routine police dogs randomly sniffing parking lots and lockers.  You will hear a news story every now and then about how someone “tried” to bring a gun to school, but was caught.  Not everything is preventable, but there has been several plans prevented by increased awareness and security.  
Your analogy is interesting, but is no real comparison. How are rapes prevented?  Are penises banned?  Are people educated about how to avoid being assaulted?  I’m all about finding ways of reducing the “culture of violence”, what are some politically tenable ways of doing so?  Banning guns is (at least currently) political untenable.  If you want to wait around for politicians to “fix things”, then you are going to be waiting a very very long time...

If only there was a national penis background check in order to make us a safer country....Going off that analogy, you are right, you can't ban penises, but there are a lot of restrictions and laws about their use that are well enforced  

And yet, rape and sexual assault still happens?

Yes, and so will gun violence as long as guns exist. But do you think rape prevention is better or worse than it was 20 - 30 years ago because of the laws, education and cultural awareness around it or that solely being more prepared and educating women has changed that?

Gern Blansten

tbergs said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

The New York bike lane mass murder results in cement barriers installed to prevent another incident like this. This was just one time.

Tylenol bottles got tampered with and there is an immediate response to safeguard the public with tamper proof product.

9-11 occurred and there is an immediate escalation in airport security... not to mention the Patriot Act.

I could go on.

My point is (if it isn't obvious)... guns are immune to any measure aimed at making the public safer. To boot... these are items specifically designed to kill things. The gun industry and its lobbyists and lapdogs have a stranglehold on the American public- where only a small portion is resistant to change efforts. 

I guess you haven’t tried to walk into an elementary school lately?  Around here, anyways, schools ramped up their security after the school shootings. Most schools now make sure doors are locked with access only given through the front offices and two locked doors before being able to actually access anywhere that the students are.  There have been a lot of safety measures implemented due to past gun violence in movie theatres, churches, schools.  The problem is that these individuals hit the softest targets that they can find.  I guarantee Las Vegas hotels are going to be implementing more security measures.  To say that nothing is being done is an overstatement.  You just don’t see them because the things you want done are not happening because they are untenable.

Vegas hotels made immediate changes.  Apparently the shooter had refused linen service for a few days so that he could stockpile his arsenal and prepare for the slaughter.

Now the hotels are requiring that staff visit rooms daily to avoid similar situations.

Another thing prone to human error or laziness. And honestly, if the hotel patron offers to slip the maid staff a $20 to leave them alone that day, what do you think they're going to do? Either way, unless someone has all their guns (insert other destructive murderous devices) laid out on the bed, how would the staff even see it. Put it in the closet or shove somewhere else. Yes, it would be hard to hide dozens of guns, but not a handful and that's more than enough. Unless they are going to turn a hotel lobby in to an airport check point, it doesn't change anything.

I guess my point was that immediate changes get made....rather than doing nothing

tbergs

PJPOWER said:

tbergs said:

Your comments would be more relevant if it was an all out gun ban that was being requested. A few on here wish that, but it's not going to happen. Where your argument loses relevancy is when you won't compromise on the amount, type and restrictions on usage for certain types. Such things as limiting magazine capacity, firing rate and weapons available to the public. I think we can both improve our security measures while also limiting the threat. Isn't that compromising? Right now, only the anti-gun side has to compromise because it's the gun owners/advocates dictating their behavior.

Several around here on the “pro-gun” side have mentioned those very things.   But how are you going to gain compromise by insulting or belittling people?  You are right in that the weight is on the anti-gun people.  “Gun nuts” do not compromise with people that call them “gun nuts” and probably never will.  That would be a good step in the right direction, erase some of the derogatory terms from your language and the needle may move (even in the slightest” towards compromise. If you really want compromise, you cannot begin with insulting or angering those you want to compromise with.  Some self-control is probably going to need practiced...

I don't know who mentioned it earlier, maybe Mace, but everyone keeps focusing on the comments on the extreme sides of both views. I am pretty sure I haven't been derogatory or called anyone in here a gun nut. Do gun nuts exist, yes. Do anti gun nuts exist, yes. Who cares. Do you agree with some of the things mentioned about gun restrictions. I haven't seen you positively endorse or suggest any changes besides how people refer to your sides view. It seems every chance you get you are celebrating the use of a gun when it suits your agenda like it's a notch on the chalkboard for why anti-gun advocates need to shut-up. Why are we focusing on the edges when there are plenty of those in the middle who understand it a complex issue that must be addressed in steps?

HughFreakingDillon

PJPOWER said:

tbergs said:

Your comments would be more relevant if it was an all out gun ban that was being requested. A few on here wish that, but it's not going to happen. Where your argument loses relevancy is when you won't compromise on the amount, type and restrictions on usage for certain types. Such things as limiting magazine capacity, firing rate and weapons available to the public. I think we can both improve our security measures while also limiting the threat. Isn't that compromising? Right now, only the anti-gun side has to compromise because it's the gun owners/advocates dictating their behavior.

Several around here on the “pro-gun” side have mentioned those very things.   But how are you going to gain compromise by insulting or belittling people?  You are right in that the weight is on the anti-gun people.  “Gun nuts” do not compromise with people that call them “gun nuts” and probably never will.  That would be a good step in the right direction, erase some of the derogatory terms from your language and the needle may move (even in the slightest” towards compromise. If you really want compromise, you cannot begin with insulting or angering those you want to compromise with.  Some self-control is probably going to need practiced...

nor does making jokes about making a bulletproof man bun. But oh, we're the only side that has to remain cordial during the discussion. 

tbergs

Gern Blansten said:

tbergs said:

Gern Blansten said:

PJPOWER said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

The New York bike lane mass murder results in cement barriers installed to prevent another incident like this. This was just one time.

Tylenol bottles got tampered with and there is an immediate response to safeguard the public with tamper proof product.

9-11 occurred and there is an immediate escalation in airport security... not to mention the Patriot Act.

I could go on.

My point is (if it isn't obvious)... guns are immune to any measure aimed at making the public safer. To boot... these are items specifically designed to kill things. The gun industry and its lobbyists and lapdogs have a stranglehold on the American public- where only a small portion is resistant to change efforts. 

I guess you haven’t tried to walk into an elementary school lately?  Around here, anyways, schools ramped up their security after the school shootings. Most schools now make sure doors are locked with access only given through the front offices and two locked doors before being able to actually access anywhere that the students are.  There have been a lot of safety measures implemented due to past gun violence in movie theatres, churches, schools.  The problem is that these individuals hit the softest targets that they can find.  I guarantee Las Vegas hotels are going to be implementing more security measures.  To say that nothing is being done is an overstatement.  You just don’t see them because the things you want done are not happening because they are untenable.

Vegas hotels made immediate changes.  Apparently the shooter had refused linen service for a few days so that he could stockpile his arsenal and prepare for the slaughter.

Now the hotels are requiring that staff visit rooms daily to avoid similar situations.

Another thing prone to human error or laziness. And honestly, if the hotel patron offers to slip the maid staff a $20 to leave them alone that day, what do you think they're going to do? Either way, unless someone has all their guns (insert other destructive murderous devices) laid out on the bed, how would the staff even see it. Put it in the closet or shove somewhere else. Yes, it would be hard to hide dozens of guns, but not a handful and that's more than enough. Unless they are going to turn a hotel lobby in to an airport check point, it doesn't change anything.

I guess my point was that immediate changes get made....rather than doing nothing

Yes, I know. Not trying to pick it apart, but we as humans often avoid the root cause of problems and find some partial or temporary fix because we can't tackle a complex problem as a group. It's just depressing that we have to celebrate extra measures like mandatory housekeeping checks at hotels like it makes a difference because we can't solve the real problem. 

PJ_Soul

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

The New York bike lane mass murder results in cement barriers installed to prevent another incident like this. This was just one time.

Tylenol bottles got tampered with and there is an immediate response to safeguard the public with tamper proof product.

9-11 occurred and there is an immediate escalation in airport security... not to mention the Patriot Act.

I could go on.

My point is (if it isn't obvious)... guns are immune to any measure aimed at making the public safer. To boot... these are items specifically designed to kill things. The gun industry and its lobbyists and lapdogs have a stranglehold on the American public- where only a small portion is resistant to change efforts. 

I guess you haven’t tried to walk into an elementary school lately?  Around here, anyways, schools ramped up their security after the school shootings. Most schools now make sure doors are locked with access only given through the front offices and two locked doors before being able to actually access anywhere that the students are.  There have been a lot of safety measures implemented due to past gun violence in movie theatres, churches, schools.  Many (not all of course) churches actually have “teams” of people that they have asked to conceal carry or have hired armed security.  The problem is that the sociopathic lunatics hit the softest targets that they can find.  I guarantee Las Vegas hotels are going to be implementing more security measures.  To say that nothing is being done is an overstatement.  You just don’t see them because the things you want done are not happening because they are untenable.

but those solutions aren't tackling the problem. it's like forcing a rape victim to wear a chastity belt or to stay home entirely instead of dealing with the rapist and the culture of sexual assault. 

They may not be tackling the whole problem, but I guarantee you that some of these safeguards have prevented news stories.  Many schools have routine police dogs randomly sniffing parking lots and lockers.  You will hear a news story every now and then about how someone “tried” to bring a gun to school, but was caught.  Not everything is preventable, but there has been several plans prevented by increased awareness and security.  
Your analogy is interesting, but is no real comparison. How are rapes prevented?  Are penises banned?  Are people educated about how to avoid being assaulted?  I’m all about finding ways of reducing the “culture of violence”, what are some politically tenable ways of doing so?  Banning guns is (at least currently) political untenable.  If you want to wait around for politicians to “fix things”, then you are going to be waiting a very very long time...

PJPOWER

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

tbergs said:

Your comments would be more relevant if it was an all out gun ban that was being requested. A few on here wish that, but it's not going to happen. Where your argument loses relevancy is when you won't compromise on the amount, type and restrictions on usage for certain types. Such things as limiting magazine capacity, firing rate and weapons available to the public. I think we can both improve our security measures while also limiting the threat. Isn't that compromising? Right now, only the anti-gun side has to compromise because it's the gun owners/advocates dictating their behavior.

Several around here on the “pro-gun” side have mentioned those very things.   But how are you going to gain compromise by insulting or belittling people?  You are right in that the weight is on the anti-gun people.  “Gun nuts” do not compromise with people that call them “gun nuts” and probably never will.  That would be a good step in the right direction, erase some of the derogatory terms from your language and the needle may move (even in the slightest” towards compromise. If you really want compromise, you cannot begin with insulting or angering those you want to compromise with.  Some self-control is probably going to need practiced...

nor does making jokes about making a bulletproof man bun. But oh, we're the only side that has to remain cordial during the discussion. 

Again, the anti-gun crowd are the ones with the burden of trying to win hearts and minds .  Gun owners pretty much have what they want in regards to gun control.  How are you going to sway them into a cordial conversation?

tbergs

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

tbergs said:

Your comments would be more relevant if it was an all out gun ban that was being requested. A few on here wish that, but it's not going to happen. Where your argument loses relevancy is when you won't compromise on the amount, type and restrictions on usage for certain types. Such things as limiting magazine capacity, firing rate and weapons available to the public. I think we can both improve our security measures while also limiting the threat. Isn't that compromising? Right now, only the anti-gun side has to compromise because it's the gun owners/advocates dictating their behavior.

Several around here on the “pro-gun” side have mentioned those very things.   But how are you going to gain compromise by insulting or belittling people?  You are right in that the weight is on the anti-gun people.  “Gun nuts” do not compromise with people that call them “gun nuts” and probably never will.  That would be a good step in the right direction, erase some of the derogatory terms from your language and the needle may move (even in the slightest” towards compromise. If you really want compromise, you cannot begin with insulting or angering those you want to compromise with.  Some self-control is probably going to need practiced...

nor does making jokes about making a bulletproof man bun. But oh, we're the only side that has to remain cordial during the discussion. 

Again, the anti-gun crowd are the ones with the burden of trying to win hearts and minds .  Gun owners pretty much have what they want in regards to gun control.  How are you going to sway them into a cordial conversation?

Apparently, it will take one of these incidents that rocks them to their core, or at least the organizations they are lining the pockets of in their favor. Big oil and the gun lobby. Both have what they want and control the people who could force change, which is why nothing really changes. 

PJPOWER

tbergs said:

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

tbergs said:

Your comments would be more relevant if it was an all out gun ban that was being requested. A few on here wish that, but it's not going to happen. Where your argument loses relevancy is when you won't compromise on the amount, type and restrictions on usage for certain types. Such things as limiting magazine capacity, firing rate and weapons available to the public. I think we can both improve our security measures while also limiting the threat. Isn't that compromising? Right now, only the anti-gun side has to compromise because it's the gun owners/advocates dictating their behavior.

Several around here on the “pro-gun” side have mentioned those very things.   But how are you going to gain compromise by insulting or belittling people?  You are right in that the weight is on the anti-gun people.  “Gun nuts” do not compromise with people that call them “gun nuts” and probably never will.  That would be a good step in the right direction, erase some of the derogatory terms from your language and the needle may move (even in the slightest” towards compromise. If you really want compromise, you cannot begin with insulting or angering those you want to compromise with.  Some self-control is probably going to need practiced...

nor does making jokes about making a bulletproof man bun. But oh, we're the only side that has to remain cordial during the discussion. 

Again, the anti-gun crowd are the ones with the burden of trying to win hearts and minds .  Gun owners pretty much have what they want in regards to gun control.  How are you going to sway them into a cordial conversation?

Apparently, it will take one of these incidents that rocks them to their core, or at least the organizations they are lining the pockets of in their favor. Big oil and the gun lobby. Both have what they want and control the people who could force change, which is why nothing really changes. 

I doubt that.  You have contradicted points of view.  One side believes fewer firearms are the answer and the other believes being armed prevents you from being a victim.  All that an incident like you mentioned would do is solidify stances and drive even further wedges...as we are seeing now.  I keep seeing that last sentence “which is why...”.  There are a LOT of reasons why legislation isn’t happening, but change doesn’t require legislation.

HughFreakingDillon

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJPOWER said:

tbergs said:

Your comments would be more relevant if it was an all out gun ban that was being requested. A few on here wish that, but it's not going to happen. Where your argument loses relevancy is when you won't compromise on the amount, type and restrictions on usage for certain types. Such things as limiting magazine capacity, firing rate and weapons available to the public. I think we can both improve our security measures while also limiting the threat. Isn't that compromising? Right now, only the anti-gun side has to compromise because it's the gun owners/advocates dictating their behavior.

Several around here on the “pro-gun” side have mentioned those very things.   But how are you going to gain compromise by insulting or belittling people?  You are right in that the weight is on the anti-gun people.  “Gun nuts” do not compromise with people that call them “gun nuts” and probably never will.  That would be a good step in the right direction, erase some of the derogatory terms from your language and the needle may move (even in the slightest” towards compromise. If you really want compromise, you cannot begin with insulting or angering those you want to compromise with.  Some self-control is probably going to need practiced...

nor does making jokes about making a bulletproof man bun. But oh, we're the only side that has to remain cordial during the discussion. 

Again, the anti-gun crowd are the ones with the burden of trying to win hearts and minds .  Gun owners pretty much have what they want in regards to gun control.  How are you going to sway them into a cordial conversation?

by speaking slowly and using small words. 

I kid. 

Honestly, at this point, that's not what's necessary. The gun control crowd are in the minority. people want change and that's, in my mind, undeniable. it's engaging the politicians who are willing to stand up to the gun lobby.