To me, the most disturbing aspect of the Paris attack was the US massacre method

[morningfog]

Aside from the suicide bombing, the method of attack was all too familiar to us in the states. Only here, it is usually a lone gunman with interpersonal failings.

Not to be too callous morbid, but the body count per attacker in Paris (if it were indeed 8) is less than the body count for the single shooters in Newtown, Aurora and Virginia Tech.

Here, we live through the almost routine mass shootings. The pattern is the same. Heavily armed and ammoed, including automatic rifles arriving unannounced to a heavily populated and enclosed area.

In Paris, there were at least 8 of them in coordination. I shudder to think what could be done here with the widely accessible arsenal.

[hack89]

2. Automatic weapons are extremely rare in America

But then you knew that.

[Recursion]

6. No, there are very few automatic weapons in the US outside of military and law enforcement

And no new ones have been available to civilians since IIRC 1986. They have been used in IIRC 2 homicides and 1 bank robbery (in which only the robbers and a dog were killed) since the early 1950s. There have been some high-profile accidents at gun ranges, recently, and there's definitely some room for safety regulation improvement there.

Automatic weapons are simply not a problem in the US...

[Duckhunter935]

34. Yes you are right

You failed and were called on it.

[hack89]

9. Semi-automatic weapons are common. Automatic weapons are extremely rare. Nt

[99th_Monkey]

84. More than a few semi-automatics can be easily converted to full

Automatic.

Google it .. There are YouTube instruction videos.

[Duckhunter935]

88. not anything manufactured after 1986 as

you have to put material back into the receiver. now you can do the rubber band or shoestring but that is stupid and you have little to no control. Of course that will work on any semi-auto even if it does not look scary. And if you get caught with any parts to make a full auto or have converted one there is some serious jail time for that federal firearms offense. If it were really that easy, it would be common and those weapons would show up used in crimes. Must not be as they are not.

[hack89]

94. Yet they never seem to be used in crimes

Google that.

[Abouttime]

97. Ban semi-auto weapons

And mass shootings will become much harder to do. It's an elegantly simple solution.

[hack89]

98. A solution grounded in legal, cultural and political reality

Might actually be passed. A ban like you desire is not going to happen.

[Abouttime]

100. 2 more justices on the Supreme Court

And the 2nd amendment will be interpreted as written, gun control is coming we can do it through the courts, just as with marriage equality. Ammosexuals are so 20th century, this is a new century, times have changed. The majority of our country is fed up with so called 'gun rights'
We are ready for a change and we want a safe society free from gun violence. 10 or 20 years from now things will be different, we as a country are ready to give up our so called 'right to bear arms' for safe streets, schools, and workplaces. Face it, society changes, people are sick of guns.

[hack89]

101. The 2A allows most, if not all, of the gun control you want

AWBs, registration, UBCs, magazine size limits, licensing, training requirements, storage requirements, etc are all perfectly constitutional right now. Lets not forget that the Sandy Hook shooter's rifle was registered and legal under CT's AWB.

The reason we don't strict gun control is that here is no widespread public support for it.

[Travis_0004]

11. Number of automatic weapons manufactured for the civillian market since 1987. . . . .

0

[Duckhunter935]

27. Which makes the ones available

Super expensive 20k plus if you can find one at all

[Hoyt]

36. Like your semiautos can't blast away at 60+ rounds per minute. But you knew most

of our gun fanciers train to do just that, and some modify their weapons to make it even easier.

[hack89]

40. Just pointing out some basic facts. That's all.

Not a big deal.

[Recursion]

47. Yep. And further restricting *automatic* weapons won't help that

That's kind of the point people are making, yeah?

[Hoyt]

62. Restricting semi-autos would. As would changing the perception of yahoo gun fanciers.

[Recursion]

67. Indeed it would. If the party ever got off its ass and got behind that I would support it.

However, I don't support laws that leave semi-automatics legal but regulate what shape of grip they can have, and whether or not they can have a bayonet lug. (If there's ever a rash of bayonet deaths in the US I'll re-think that second part.)

[Hoyt]

78. I agree with that, although I do question the sanity of those who are attracted to rifles with

bayonet lugs, etc.

[Recursion]

79. The guys who trick out their ARs use them to hold flashlights

I'm not part of the AR "culture" or whatever you want to call it, but I get that it's essentially the Linux of firearms and that people who like to tinker with stuff love it.

For that matter, we could go California's route and still allow that rifle model but simply mandate that the magazine be fixed.

My bigger problem is that worrying about mass shootings is simply nibbling around the edges of the real problems, which are

1. Non-mass shootings, and
2. (even moreso) suicide

both of which are overwhelmingly done with handguns, which I think we should limit more than we do. And for that matter the Constitutional argument for a handgun is much weaker than for a rifle. It's like having a transportation safety conversation driven entirely by plane crashes that ignores the much deadlier problem of auto crashes.

[NutmegYankee]

96. They make damn fine hunting rifles.

I prefer the Mauser Kar98 but the Mosin–Nagant is another fine and inexpensive choice. They all still have the bayonet lugs from their previous service.

[Hoyt]

105. Yeah, but most people do not hunt, unless you include people as prey. And who needs a Hi Cap

Magazine for hunting?

[Comrade Grumpy]

102. I'll bet they're extremely rare in Europe, too.

Somehow, in this gun-loving country of ours, I suspect there are more than a few floating around.

[hack89]

103. They exist - heavily regulated and taxed.

more to the point, though, is that they are not used in crimes.

[Duckhunter935]

14. Full auto weapons are very rare

And expensive as no more could be produced and sold to the public after 1986. They are almost never used in crime at all. And I would like to see one fire 30 rounds a second, that is three times the rate of fire of a full auto M-16. Please get your facts right before you make outrageously stupid comments.

[Hoyt]

39. How many rounds per minute can you blast away with your gunz?

[Duckhunter935]

42. I do not rapid fire

Not good for the weapon and I go more for accuracy at the paper plate target.

[hack89]

3. There have been no mass shootings in America with automatic weapons

You need to check your facts.

[hack89]

7. Give me a link. You will quickly see your error. Nt.

[hack89]

20. No mention of automatic weapons there. Nt

[Duckhunter935]

25. He is wrong and he knows it

They hate pesky facts

[hack89]

28. Yes.

On edit: a short thread on military bases.

[Duckhunter935]

23. Funny, but it just proves you were wrong

And are not polite enough to accept the fact that the other poster was right and thank him.

[GP6971]

50. You're linking to a post that has nothig to do with the discussion????

Places named after Confederate Historical Figures in the United States ???

Really? Are you enjoying your stay?

[Duckhunter935]

57. My guess is he is trying to get a hide on one of us

[GP6971]

77. Probably

My guess is they're a returnee

[Recursion]

81. Or cranking up the post count until he can OP (nt)

[Duckhunter935]

90. well he is done in this thread

as he now has a hide. I did not alert on it.

[GP6971]

73. Here is your link

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026964430

[Recursion]

80. You linked to a post about places in the US named after Confederate generals

If there's a connection to this discussion, it's not obvious to a lot of us.

[Recursion]

8. Earth. None of the mass shootings in the past several decades have used automatic weapons (nt)

[Duckhunter935]

16. I live on earth

You must be on a different one as his facts are correct. I am sure you will be able to correct us with a link. But as you are incorrect, you will not be able to do that.

[morningfog]

10. Semi-autos. The point remains. Dozens dead is dozens fucking dead.

[Travis_0004]

12. Sounds like France should ban guns. . . . . .

[hack89]

13. Ok. Nt

[Duckhunter935]

19. Not really, it's called being factual

[Recursion]

41. FFS if you care about gun legislation you should learn this very basic difference

Seriously, this is absurd. I'm for a lot more gun control than a lot of the "gun" part of this board is, but this is exactly the attitude that makes me throw up my hands and say it's no good trying to come up with anything because the most impassioned voters can't even be bothered to learn what they are legislating about. (Side question: is there any other subject about which you prefer to legislate from a position of ignorance?)

Back when I was volunteering for Obama in 2008 I was actually called to my face "mentally ill" because I didn't think the assault weapons ban was a good idea. Once the interlocutor was finally forced (by our district manager, in fact) to look up what the assault weapons ban actually did he came to the conclusion that he didn't support it either. But he had still called me "mentally ill" for the same position he took once he read the damn bill.

[Duckhunter935]

45. I know just how you feel

[Recursion]

51. I am morally certain you have no idea what the assault weapons ban did

It did not limit any weapons based on their rate of fire. None.

It took the fastest firing class of weapons (semi-automatics with detachable magazines) and regulated what their grips can be shaped like and whether or not they can have bayonet lugs.

Why do you care about that?

[Duckhunter935]

65. Bayonet lugs

Are very important to some, I guess. Like him or her.

[Recursion]

86. Moral certainty is between practical certainty and apodeictic certainty

I associate the term with Aquinas, though I believe he borrowed it from ibn Rushid.

Practical certainty (a concept dating back to Plato's notion of "pistis" in the Republic) is what, say, a craftsman who has not studied theory has: he knows that if he makes a right triangle with legs 3 and 4 feet long, he needs a hypotenuse that is 5 feet long, just because that's what he's always needed.

Apodeictic certainty is the certainty a geometer has after proving the pythagorean theorem and then calculating the length of the hypotenuse of that triangle.

Moral certainty is a somewhat later concept that is between the two. It is informed by both experience and theory. It is more certain than pure induction but less certain than pure deduction. ibn Rushid introduced it I believe to contrast moral philosophers with theologians (whom he claimed had apodeictic certainty).

I'm still not sure why the word "rubric" bothers you so much, though I doubt you'll actually say why...

[Duckhunter935]

54. So you prefer bans on cosmetic features

Remove the bayonet lug or the adjustable stock and that firearm is so much less dangerous it is now legal.

[Duckhunter935]

75. And once again the fail

Is very strong with you.

[Lizzie Poppet]

56. It's been done. It did fuck-all to lower crime rates.

Those weapons are so rarely used in crime that any action taken regarding them won't move the needle much at all. The overwhelming majority of gun crimes are committed with handguns. The vast majority of suicides? Yep: handguns.

[Duckhunter935]

60. You know the rifle used in Sandy Hook

Was fully AWB compliant, right?

[Duckhunter935]

68. Just wanted to see if you actually

Where aware of the that crucial fact.

[Duckhunter935]

17. I would not be surprised

If the ones used by the terrorists were indeed fully automatic AK types that are illegal in France.

[deathrind]

22. North Hollywood 97...

[Recursion]

59. Yep. Bank robbery in which only the robbers were killed. And a dog.

Civilians often don't get this, but automatic weapons are actually pretty bad at killing people in most situations. They cannot be aimed well. Militaries use them not to kill people for the most part but to make people take cover.

[deathrind]

104. It...

Pretty much a debunks the notion that automatic's are rare.

Yes- the police and civilians in the area that day are very lucky those two were not good shots. But than again automatic weapons are not about pin point accuracy. It's more about quantity over quality.

[Recursion]

106. No, the fact that that's the only crime they've been used in proves they are rare

If they were common you would see them used all the time, rather than in one crime in the past 50 years.

[gratuitous]

24. The difference

Automatic weapon, you just hold the trigger and the weapon will fire several times.

Semi-automatic, you have to pull the trigger once for each shot. According to John Cole at Balloon Juice, his military experience taught him that a semi-automatic weapon can still fire off a lot of shots in a very short time. I will take his word for it.

[Duckhunter935]

31. Yes they can

And so can a bolt action, look up "mad minute". Not to mention pump action.

[Travis_0004]

37. Or this

?t=52s

[Duckhunter935]

49. Impressive

[gratuitous]

58. The difference

The difference between proficiency with a semi-automatic and a bolt action weapon is a heck of a lot of practice. Rapidly firing a bolt action weapon requires a great deal of practice integrating several distinct and separate maneuvers; rapidly firing a semi-automatic takes proficiency in flicking your finger.

[msongs]

29. the 30,000 people killed by USA gun owners aren't too concerned about such quibbles nt

[Duckhunter935]

32. 2/3 of which are suicides

So I think they got exactly what they wanted as it is self inflicted.

[Duckhunter935]

71. They matter

But they made a choice. I am for choice.

[beevul]

91. When you lump them all into 'gun violence'...

When you lump them all into 'gun violence', which does a great disservice to suicides, that is PRECISELY the message you convey - that people who kill themselves don't matter.

Plus it also makes very plain that you care far more about the means (gun control) than the ends (reducing gun violence).

[Recursion]

35. Well if they want the actual guns that are killing them addressed, they should be

Listen to yourself.

"OK, fine, X killed this person rather than Y. But he doesn't care about that quibble, and if you point out that X killed him rather than Y, you must be a Y-humping Y-nut who doesn't care about deaths."

We're literally saying, "it was not this kind of gun that kills people, but that kind", and that's factually correct, and it pisses you off when people say it?

[Recursion]

44. For a 24-count poster you've really got derailing down pat

I would figuratively say it by making an analogy about, say, forks and knives. But that's not what I did.

[marions ghost]

46. I think that's why you see mostly numbness from America

in response to the Paris massacres.

We have our own brand of domestic terrorists wreaking havoc all over the place, and NOTHING is done.

Thanks for saying this. We need to realize how the wanton barbarism in this country is similar to that other barbarism over there...

Dead innocent victims are everywhere. Are we outraged, or just numb?

[Recursion]

64. I think terrorism is a really good rubric for understanding US mass shootings

Or, actually, I'd reverse that: US mass shootings, to the extent that we understand them, are a pretty good rubric for understanding modern nihilistic terrorism (as opposed to stuff like LTTE/IRA/ETA where there's a specific nationalist goal). If we asked the same questions about mental health, media consumption, and ego about "terrorists" that we do about "mass shooters" I think we might find a lot of the same answers.

[Recursion]

76. OK, that's a gratuitous claim that I can equally gratuitously deny

I'm curious what about "rubric" makes you roll your eyes?

Terrorists are not like American gun nuts.

In a lot of ways they are: young narcissistic single men who feel they have been denied their rightful chance to contribute to society. Economically marginalized but still on the grid (the "average" AQ suicide operative had a college degree but lived in a country with no jobs requiring a college degree; a similar point could be made about many US mass shooters). In both cases the attack is a response to the narcissistic injury, which speaks to the need to do something spectacular.

[marions ghost]

82. I'm talking about

the effect of random violence by homegrown domestic terrorists on the American public. How it numbs people so that the normal human emotions of empathy and outrage are no longer felt. We as a nation have failed to understand the psychological toll of doing nothing in the face of random violence and the obscene proliferation of weapons across the country. It kills social cohesion and leads to chaos eventually.

I'm talking about the way we allow this kind of terrorism in our own country and yet make a show of outrage when others carry it out on innocent victims in Paris. There's a disconnect there.

[Recursion]

83. There's a lot of outrage about mass shootings here, too

If we're numb to anything it's the much much deadlier "background noise" of non-mass shootings and suicides.

[marions ghost]

85. Nah

not anymore...

Numbness prevails in response to all of it now. Outrage is the result of still having feelings.

Nothing is done. So people just observe, and feel very little. A natural adaptation to being surrounded by violence.

[Recursion]

87. Lots of stuff is done. I know this isn't GD-P, but look at O'Malley after Sandy Hook

He successfully passed a firearms safety law in Maryland that required fingerprinting, licensing, and safety training, and banned 45 types of weapons.

Now, if you look up the thread, you'll see I'm more or less "meh" about many of the particular bans (some simply have to be re-sold under a different name, some need their external shape changed, etc.), but something was actually done.

[marions ghost]

89. The perception is that

very little to nothing has been done. Congratulations to MD for doing the minimum. But everybody knows, if they would admit it--that we the Public are just supposed to just live with random killers having easy access to weapons in America. That is the clear message. We are just supposed to wait for the next one to happen.

No Lives really Matter in America.

[Recursion]

52. It could also be called the Norwegian massacre method (nt)

[LeftyMom]

92. It actually resembles pretty strongly the Mumbai attack in 2008.

The only targeted and timed multi-site attacks I can think of in the US are organized crime related and targeting other people in that world.

[mnhtnbb]

93. As of Nov 8--312 days into 2015--there have been 325 mass shootings in the US

according to the list kept on mass shootings. (A mass shooting is defined as three or more victims wounded and/or killed, not
including the gunman).

http://shootingtracker.com/wiki/Mass_Shootings_in_2015

[melman]

95. Pretty bogus to cite "body count per attacker" in a coordinated terrorist attack

Come on.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

99. Yes, the similarities are striking

a lone gunman, alienated, alone, probable emotional issues, gets guns from a dealer or a parent, then ...

No, wait, that doesn't look anything like the Paris attack.

Maybe if France would not let terrorists have automatic weapons ...

[Unscene]

107. I thought the same...

... and wrote an entire piece based around it. You can read it here

I was thinking about high school shooters when I wrote,

"random acts of faceless violence are a consequence of being part of a faceless system. The system is to blame for that, itself, for making it easy (or even desirable) to achieve such gruesome 'fame'."

"...think of all those little kids who'll grow up surrounded by that atmosphere of fear and mistrust, where the only way to express anything is by whipping out a gun in a public place, and firing till you get taken down in a blaze of 'glory'."

so I reckon you're on the right track. They're definitely all part of the same dysfunctional type. The biggest difference between them is:

1) When a lone gunman shoots up a high school full of innocent teens, private gun ownership doesn't get banned

2) When a lone terrorist kills someone (or even attempts to) human rights get suspended across the country and/or martial law ensues.

That's because the lawmakers identify with person 1) and not person 2). It's also because they can earn more money by persecuting 2) and letting 1) go on unchecked.