To quote Dan Hodges....... In retrospect Sandy Hook marked the end of the US gun control debate. Once America decided killing children was bearable, it was over.
As some have probably already said...........until America changes its gun laws, the status quo will continue. Piers Morgan said, that if a terrorist had done this, new laws would have been brought in asap, however, being that it was a white American male, nothing will change..........how true, how sad.
Sky News says what made this seemingly normal citizen act in this way? He was far from normal. The entire family knew. They are lying. Has anyone seen the interview with his brother? 'He's just a guy!' Everybody knows when something is wrong. The family knew that something wasn't right. The shooter was Stephen Paddock ... his father was a career bank robber in the 1960's ... please log in to view this image http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/0...-lived-colorful-life-crime-and-deception.html Stephen Paddock, despite having no specific job ( Accountant? ) he had 27 residences. He disappeared for six months at a time and would come back to Vegas to gamble 10,000 - 30,000 dollars a night. Two shooting platforms that I mentioned earlier ... please log in to view this image please log in to view this image Here's his dad's colourful past ... http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/0...-lived-colorful-life-crime-and-deception.html please log in to view this image please log in to view this image He was a product of his upbringing, the mass murderer was a chip off the old block. All three brothers grew up learning how to survive being on the run. So the dad taught the boys how to be impossible to find, how to leave no trace, and how to deceive. And dad was a suicidal psychopath.
“What gun laws does Nevada have? Nevada has some of the least stringent gun laws in the United States. People are allowed to carry weapons and do not have to register themselves as a gun-owner. Background checks are done when people buy guns, but they are also allowed to sell them privately.” from the BBC.
The U.S. Constitution: "AMENDMENT II A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Not sure how much of this is you or how much is Sky Ninesy, but the logical conclusion is we have to track/monitor everyone who has a parent with a mental illness and a criminal record. You do have a higher chance of being schizophrenic or bipolar (or depressed/suicidal) if you have a family history of it, but it’s by no means inevitable. With psychopathy and sociopathy I would assume it’s the same, but it appears to be an unproven link so far. Fact is a certain percentage of the population will always have a mental health problem. In times of personal or societal stress the percentage goes up. But with personality disorders, such as psychopathy, the percentage is stable at about 1%, and most of these never commit a violent crime. They just become CEOs. We don’t have a diagnosis or motive for Stephen Paddock, who lived an odd but apparently crime free life for 64 years, but we do have the traditional urge to somehow explain what he did and find a reason/something to blame for it. Of course US gun laws don’t help, but someone bent on committing an atrocity will find a way. Timothy McVeigh killed 168 with weed killer. The gun laws in Europe didn’t stop Bataclan (though thankfully they do make it more difficult). I don’t accept the defeatist line that the gun laws in the US will never change. The structure of Congress, where low population, rural states have just as much influence as big urban centres, doesn’t help, but if they go at it state by state, like with gay marriage (who would have thought that possible in the US?), there could be movement. Several states have relatively strict permit systems, and a few have no (state) constitutional right to keep arms. Patience. Which is no solace for the killed and injured I know.
US commentator on the radio today said that the US was not like Canada or Australia that negotiated their way out of the British Empire. The US had to rely on guns to beat the British, and of course, they celebrate that on July 4 each year. This is at the base of the American psyche and the importance of the right to bear arms. For evil British overlords, read evil US federal government. But we started it...
Careful, Goldie - admissions that (sometimes) your country did bad things in the past can get you accused of not being a patriot. I've always assumed that the Second Amendment was put in at a time when the newly-independent country needed a way to legitimise militia organisations keeping their weapons and their status as militia - in case there ever was a need to fight another war. Clearly not appropriate now - as the US military doesn't need a militia to help it in times of crisis. So, the original purpose seems to have been usurped. But I am assuming. Does anyone with proper knowledge of American history at this period actually know why they discussed this and put it in their Constitution? I'm interested but lazy - and that's what the Internet is for, right?
I think the problem is that the Second Amendment is open to interpretation Dipper. The rational way to look at it is as you say, the right to bear arms was intended for rapid raising of a militia to defend the state, in a time where this made sense. But now it is read as the right to defend yourself from the state, especially as the state has a standing army. It is possible to change the constitution of course. Prohibition of alcohol was enshrined as the 18th Amendment, then repealed. Bit trickier with the first ten amendments which were collectively agreed at the same time as the Bill of Rights in 1791, which have a kind of mythic resonance with many Americans. Nearly all the other amendments in the Bill of Rights are still entirely valid, it’s a remarkable piece of work, like the US Constitution itself.
Here's a bit from Wiki: "The Second Amendment was based partially on the right to keep and bear arms in English common law and was influenced by the English Bill of Rights of 1689. Sir William Blackstone described this right as an auxiliary right, supporting the natural rights of self-defense, resistance to oppression, and the civic duty to act in concert in defense of the state." 1689 being relevant in England as the period when the Catholic King James II was overthrown in the Glorious (and mostly bloodless) Revolution So it's our fault again....damn...
Meanwhile, in related news the atrocities in Vegas were not the only mass shooting in the US. At the very same time, another shooting was taking place in a town in Kansas, where - after an argument outside a restaurant - three people aged 22-24 were shot dead, and another two seriously injured. And this event - which would have dominated the press anywhere else - hasn't even registered on any radar. America has a problem.
Doesn’t count as a mass murder. 5 deaths excluding the prepatrator required for that. 273 mass murder incidents in the US. This year. Remarkably though the homicide rate is well down on 15 years ago and much lower than in the 70s and 80s, though it’s been rising the last couple of years 6.8 deaths per 100,000 in 2016. And yet I spend about 8 weeks in the US every year and never feel less than perfectly safe. I just don’t go to places where the locals say ‘don’t go there’. And I avoid arguing with law enforcement officers. Probably naive on my part.
actually, 4 people killed or injured counts. However, even the fact we are debating the level at which the word 'mass' comes into effect is chilling and highlights the utterly abhorrent situation over there.
