Ways to prevent mass shootings?

[Quasar]

So with the recent shooting in Oregon I have been thinking of possible ways to prevent mass shootings.

I am a gun rights advocate, I do not own one but I still support our second amendment rights.

I have been seeing a lot of posts on social media from people from countries where guns are outlawed or restrictions are so tight that guns basically don't exist, the posts have been bashing Americans and gun rights advocates essentially calling us "Stupid" or "Ignorant"

 

Now I know some people on this forum will have the same opinion of us but I want to know collectively some ways you think we could prevent shootings in America, whether it be banning guns, or to have procedures in the case of a shooting that are better than what we have now.

 

I am not sure if this is all of America but in California we have a procedure in the case of an intruder or shooter on campus called a "Code Red" what we do in this procedure is either get under our desks or huddle into a corner quietly hoping for the best, the teachers put up a type of privacy screen so that the shooter can't see inside.

 

The supposed "Logic" behind this is to act like know one is at the school so the shooter turns away, but any sane person would know that this is really stupid and we are basically waiting for death, instead of defending ourselves we await potential death.

 

Also i really don't want this whole thread to turn into "BAN GUNS" or "DON'T BAN GUNS"

I would like to discuss potential ways of preventing mass shooting, either by defending ourselves or gun regulations, really any way to prevent incidents like this.

 

[Doktor Avalanche]

Eliminate Gun-Free Zones. Institute National Carry/Conceal.

We only hear about the atrocities but never the incidents when the attempted shooter was nullified before anyone was harmed, except of course the attempted shooter.

[Moon Man]

I would be more worried about the gang violence than mass shootings. Mass shootings kill relatively few people each year compared to gang violence. Gang violence is responsible for something like 80% of gun homicides a year. Mass shootings amount to something like 100 to 150 or so deaths on average a year. It is more likely for you to get killed by a shark than to be a victim of a mass shooting. The only reason they are made out to be such a big deal, is due to the media attention that it receives..

[Solomon]

...It is more likely for you to get killed by a shark than to be a victim of a mass shooting. The only reason they are made out to be such a big deal, is due to the media attention that it receives..

There have been 17 fatal shark attacks in the USA (including Hawaii) this century. In the same time period, there have been 341 fatalities in US mass shootings.

[The Governor]

Eliminate Gun-Free Zones. Institute National Carry/Conceal.

We only hear about the atrocities but never the incidents when the attempted shooter was nullified before anyone was harmed, except of course the attempted shooter.

As we all know, if there is a good guy with a gun, and a bad guy with a gun, fate always falls on the good guy and he is always able to take out the bad guy.

 

By the way, in a hypothetical scenario where everyone is openly carring a gun, and you start hearing gunshots, how are you supposed to tell who is shooting? A large amount of scared and paranoid people with guns doesn't exactly sound like a good thing to me.

[Dwemyrn]

This was 49 miles away from where I live and I don't believe we should ban guns. (Live in Oregon fairly close.) I thought it was rather ridiculous that the response was Obama talking about gun control within hours of it happening. That pissed me off..

 

Edit: Not a conservative or liberal before you try to pinpoint me somewhere based on an opinion.

Edited October 8, 2015 by Ashwyn Traverse

[Rozalia]

You can't in the situation America is in. If in the past gun ownership had been restricted and owning weapons frowned upon heavily by society (Britain/Japan/so on) then that'd be something. In America guns are incredibly prevalent already so reversing that is difficult if not impossible. 

 

A mass confiscation will get some of the weapons but with so many it's inevitable many would be missed. As such perhaps the banning of possession of firearms + the government buying back turned in firearms for a period of time would be better as that promotes the people to get rid of the weapons themselves. 

[Dwemyrn]

I think this is a decent idea on how to go about it.

[Sweeeeet Ronny D]

The first step is stop treating these gunmen like celebrities, and giving them the attention they so desperately want.  So media, dont release thier picture, dont release the name, 

[Dwemyrn]

The first step is stop treating these gunmen like celebrities, and giving them the attention they so desperately want.  So media, dont release thier picture, dont release the name, 

Except in this case the guy I believe took his own life after so he isn't receiving the attention as a live being. I believe the first step would be more of stop trying to take away the guns from the citizens, because criminals will acquire them whether they are confiscated or not, obviously a convict isn't going to give a shit about illegally acquiring a gun, especially if he plans on killing people and himself. He gets off scott free when he kills himself and you enabled him to have an easier time doing so because you confiscated the guns of the citizens and now they are defenseless till law enforcement gets there, but law enforcement could get there late and there would be more casualties then there would normally have been because you disarmed a citizen who could have easily stopped the situation themselves.

Edited October 8, 2015 by Ashwyn Traverse

[Doktor Avalanche]

As we all know, if there is a good guy with a gun, and a bad guy with a gun, fate always falls on the good guy and he is always able to take out the bad guy.

 

By the way, in a hypothetical scenario where everyone is openly carrying a gun, and you start hearing gunshots, how are you supposed to tell who is shooting? A large amount of scared and paranoid people with guns doesn't exactly sound like a good thing to me.

Mass shootings are pretty easy to spot. Robberies are pretty easy to spot. Attempted school shootings are pretty easy to spot.

 

Are you assuming people are going to target one person and shoot them outright? What is the difference between implementing what I stated  as opposed to today?

[Rozalia]

Except in this case the guy I believe took his own life after so he isn't receiving the attention as a live being. I believe the first step would be more of stop trying to take away the guns from the citizens, because criminals will acquire them whether they are confiscated or not, obviously a convict isn't going to give a shit about illegally acquiring a gun, especially if he plans on killing people and himself. He gets off scott free when he kills himself and you enabled him to have an easier time doing so because you confiscated the guns of the citizens and now they are defenseless till law enforcement gets there, but law enforcement could get there late and there would be more casualties then there would normally have been because you disarmed a citizen who could have easily stopped the situation themselves.

 

Logically that should mean Britain/Japan should have high gun crime too, yet they don't. Ultimately the main roadblock is culture which in America is "one of guns". Change the culture and every other measure will start being significantly more effective. 

[stetonic]

You where given the right to bear arms over 200 years ago when the weapon of choice was a single shot musket.Maybe if you said you can keep your guns but you have to use a musket and not an assault rifle.It would be a lot harder to have a mass shooting and seeing as how you want to live in the past this would be a fitting solution.

[Bollocks]

I think it's a amazing these mass shootings occur on a regular basis and absolutely nothing is done about it. It's simply not a crisis big enough to institute political change. Hell, even when a bunch of kids died at Sandy Hook, the bill that came after died in Congress despite the general outrage and grief. 

 

I do wonder how big the crisis event would have to be to institute change. 

[The Governor]

Mass shootings are pretty easy to spot. Robberies are pretty easy to spot. Attempted school shootings are pretty easy to spot.

 

Are you assuming people are going to target one person and shoot them outright? What is the difference between implementing what I stated as opposed to today?

The problem with implementing what you stated is what I said before. Once again, do you believe that fate always sides with good people who owns guns? And that everyone who owns a gun is some kind of dead-eye shot gunslinger from a western? In a shooting people get panicky, when people get panicky they get scared and paranoid. Mass amounts of paranoid people with guns isn't a good thing

 

The picture Ashwyn Traverse posted seems like a much better idea.

Edited October 8, 2015 by The Governor

[Solomon]

I want to dispel something that all the Europeans constantly say to Americans: Get rid of the guns.

We can never get rid of the guns in America. It's simply too ingrained in our culture and there are simply too many of them.

Any attempt to disarm the nation would be seen as a way to control the populace and there might even be open revolts against the government.

Not only that, but we border Mexico, which has a high crime rate. We'd only be feeding the cartels who would now make a huge profit from the arms trafficking that they already make so much off of.

You are disagreeing with the view, not dispelling it.

 

If you look at the past, some people said that slavery would never be abolished and that women would never be given the vote but those things both happened. It can be a long process and education is not always enough. In some cases, you have to wait for older generations to die and be replaced by younger people who are more able to accept change.

 

Regarding crime in Mexico, around 70% of the firearms confiscated in Mexico in the last decade were from the US.

[Rozalia]

I want to dispel something that all the Europeans constantly say to Americans: Get rid of the guns.

We can never get rid of the guns in America. It's simply too ingrained in our culture and there are simply too many of them.

Any attempt to disarm the nation would be seen as a way to control the populace and there might even be open revolts against the government.

Not only that, but we border Mexico, which has a high crime rate. We'd only be feeding the cartels who would now make a huge profit from the arms trafficking that they already make so much off of.

 

Hence why I said you got to change the culture and confiscation can be made easier by having a period where the government buys the guns you hand in at good rates. 

 

As for Mexico... build a great... big... wall.

 

[Doktor Avalanche]

The problem with implementing what you stated is what I said before. Once again, do you believe that fate always sides with good people who owns guns? And that everyone who owns a gun is some kind of dead-eye shot gunslinger from a western? In a shooting people get panicky, when people get panicky they get scared and paranoid. Mass amounts of paranoid people with guns isn't a good thing

 

The picture Ashwyn Traverse posted seems like a much better idea.

Meh. We disagree. People who own and carry now are not trigger happy nor panicky. Realize that Carry/Conceal is already implemented in many States already and we do not see your assertion happening, not even on a broad scale. And why do you assume mass amounts of paranoid people would be carrying/concealing anything? In order to be on the Carry/Conceal list you have to have gun safety courses anyways. That nullifies the paranoid, bumbling depiction of uneducated handling of paranoid fools with guns on a broad stroke you are painting.

 

Fate happening on the side of good? No, but it sides with the majority in an extreme situation where armed assailants against an armed population exist. Do you think if carry/conceal nationwide is going to create the Wild West gunfights on every street corner? Is everyone going to go out and buy a gun to stick in their pocket after the law gets implemented? Do you think criminal who intend to cause harm are going to get a carry/conceal license? In a situation where a weapon in your hands is the difference between saving your life or waiting for the Police to arrive, usually ten minutes after an event- to tag your body because you were not allowed to defend yourself, which would you choose? All I am saying is to give people the chance to defend themselves.

Carry/Conceal is in my State. No one even knows or notices when they visit me from out of State. To be honest no one cares. Other States, it is the same mindset- no one cares. If this was Nationwide, guess what? No one would notice or care, except idiots would think twice before puling a gun out to rob someone in broad daylight. The only people who do care about the Carry/Conceal Implementation are the people who are pondering criminal intent.

[Doktor Avalanche]

That's a good idea actually..

I would still keep a firearm in my house for protection and another for hunting though.

I also don't believe it's in the best interest of the people to completely disarm a nation. For in the event of a hostile invasion or takeover everyday citizens can fight back. (albeit probably with poor results and heavy casualties.)

There are always gun buy back happening from the local Police Departments but they do not advertise because it is frowned upon by the public in most cases, as seen in previous years.

 

The purpose overall is to protect yourself, your rights, your property and your life. It does not matter if it were muskets or not, the Founding Fathers established this mindset for people to defend themselves, yes- even from their own government. That was one of the original intentions for the right to bear arms. Self defense also being the largest factor. Since that time we have limited the amount of weapons a citizen can own hence the lack of Howitzers owned by civilians. Though, how awesome would it be to go to a range and fire off an old WWII Howitzer at a bunch of water jugs propped up on a hill!!??

[The Governor]

Meh. We disagree. People who own and carry now are not trigger happy nor panicky. Realize that Carry/Conceal is already implemented in many States already and we do not see your assertion happening, not even on a broad scale. And why do you assume mass amounts of paranoid people would be carrying/concealing anything? In order to be on the Carry/Conceal list you have to have gun safety courses anyways. That nullifies the paranoid, bumbling depiction of uneducated handling of paranoid fools with guns on a broad stroke you are painting.

 

Fate happening on the side of good? No, but it sides with the majority in an extreme situation where armed assailants against an armed population exist. Do you think if carry/conceal nationwide is going to create the Wild West gunfights on every street corner? Is everyone going to go out and buy a gun to stick in their pocket after the law gets implemented? Do you think criminal who intend to cause harm are going to get a carry/conceal license? In a situation where a weapon in your hands is the difference between saving your life or waiting for the Police to arrive, usually ten minutes after an event- to tag your body because you were not allowed to defend yourself, which would you choose? All I am saying is to give people the chance to defend themselves.

Carry/Conceal is in my State. No one even knows or notices when they visit me from out of State. To be honest no one cares. Other States, it is the same mindset- no one cares. If this was Nationwide, guess what? No one would notice or care, except idiots would think twice before puling a gun out to rob someone in broad daylight. The only people who do care about the Carry/Conceal Implementation are the people who are pondering criminal intent.

Hmm, alright. You've made some good points. Not much left I have to say on the matter. I just don't believe Open Carry/Conceal will instantly fix the mass shooting problem we have. It's was nice debating with you though.

[Robert Ap Ioan]

I wonder if the firearms issue is primarily a social issue?

 

In most countries, the UK included, guns are primarily in the hands of criminals. Most shootings in the UK are related to gang-related issues so we have to ask why are people attracted to the gang life? I assume that most people who post on these forums are of a similar social status to myself - in UK terms middle class (not poor but not millionaires) and have little reason to need/desire to join a gang. Our parents/families live quite comfortably and have worked hard to provide the lifestyle we have. The problem is that to make money requires money in the first place, if you don't have a car I should imagine that getting a job in the US would be quite difficult.

We are living in an age where the gap between rich and poor is growing. I know people who work hard, long hour jobs and such, and yet are relying on food banks to pay their families. For people in that situation a life of crime must be very tempting. Most gang members don't come from money.

 

Another social issue might be what I would class as a social paranoia. There seems to be a narrative of "I need my gun to protect me". Who is this gun protecting you from? Most thieves want your TV, your car and your money; Murder isn't usually their prime purpose, in fact murder is usually seen as mighty inconvenient. Most thefts take place either when the homeowner is out of the house or asleep. Thieves tend to work to avoid the homeowner.

Something that an American friend, now living in England, said made me think. He said "one of the differences between the USA and Britain is that in Britain I know all my neighbours, in America I don't know most of my neighbours". In Britain if we see our neighbours we chat to them, we are nosy and ask how their life is going, we build a sense of community and thus we look out for one another. If someone is having mental issues in the UK it would be more likely to be noticed.

 

 

I thought it was rather ridiculous that the response was Obama talking about gun control within hours of it happening. That pissed me off..

 

Now as a Brit I don't get this! We are not allowed handguns because they were the biggest contributor to massacres in the UK, we banned them and the shootings stopped. We have banned shotguns with magazines after the Dunblane school killings, you can only have double barrel shotguns that only hold two cartridges. The time taken to reload a shotgun decreases the chance of someone committing a massacre such as Oregon. Our laws have really dealt with gun crime and we, the majority, really can not understand why Americans are so resistant to changes that will help save lives. I am not saying ban firearms outright, I have used a firearm on the range and it was fun, but control the use of the firearm. If you have a firearm license in the UK you have to give the police information as to where the firearm is going to be used and how it is to be used. I think this is fair.

[Moreau]

America doesn't need weapons or millitary at all

You have JOHN CENA and CHUCK NORRIS

[Doktor Avalanche]

If they ban guns I'll just walk around with a sword.

Sadly, already outlawed.

[Arthur Wellington]

Fact is that in countries that have outlawed guns the death-rate has dropped drasticly. I dont think each owner of a gun in America is a potential killer but even if a small percentage of the population will use guns in a wrong way (what always is the case, many peeps are nuts), do the benefits outway the downsides? To me, its not just a statistic problem, school in the USA should be safe places of learning. In the Netherlands, our middle schools dont have avoid-getting-shot training or protocols. I believe civilzation should move more and more towards a point where the monopoly on violence is in the hands of the government.

[Solomon]

If they ban guns I'll just walk around with a sword.

And that is in another reason why guns will be much more restricted in the USA sooner or later. The physical and psychological differences in separation between pulling a trigger and swinging a sword or stabbing with a knife are well understood/researched, and certainly why non-firearms murder rates in developed countries, including the USA, are similar. Most people, when given a little bit more time to think about it and when faced with the prospect of having to get close to the victim will back off. Evolution being sensible again?