Gun control
I think that the Gun control thread got lost when the old politics thread got moved.
1 The rest of the world looks at the
I don't doubt the bolded is true. That said, I suspect that percentage of homicides in that category are less than 1% of all homicides.
Do you have data for this?
I cannot find data for all of the US during any period of time.
However there was a study done in 30 US states from 2016 through 2022 where there were 5,743 total murders & suicides. Of those 3,125 were murders and 2,618 were suicides for an annual average of 446 murders by 374 people who then committed suicide. Of those murders 88.9% were done by guns. So the total murders by guns over those 7 years was 2,812.5 by people who then committed suicide. The annual number of people murdered by guns by people who then committed suicide is 396.5
There is no way of knowing if this data is truly 60% (30 states / 50 states) of all murders in the US and the study did not indicate the overall number of homicides in those states... But I am going to assume that it is more or less the case...
In those 7 years there were a total of 88,985 murders committed by guns in the US. If we divide that by 7 we get 12,712.1 (avg murders by gun per year in the US). If we multiply that by 60% we get 7,627.3 (hopefully close to the number of murders in the 30 states in the study). The annual % of murder by guns by people who then commit suicide is about 5.2%
There are two articles that discuss this. Here is article #1 and here is article #2
I cannot find data for all of the US during any period of time.However there was a study done in 30 US states from 2016 through 2022 where there were 5,743 total murders & suicides. Of those 3,125 were murders and 2,618 were suicides for an annual average of 446 murders by 374 people who then committed suicide. Of those murders 88.9% were done by guns. So the total murders b
Thanks for your research on that.
5%+ is much higher than I thought.
You are welcome!
Oddly I thought it would be much higher than 5%. I am actually relieved that it is as low as 5% because it means that more than 95% of people who commit suicide are actually not doing something horrible before they kill themselves.
I am sad though that so many people are committing suicide by gun. Interestingly in Israel they disallowed army and police officers to have guns at home over the weekends (when they weren't working) and it reduced suicides. The reality of gun ownership is that people can do a spontaneous thing when they are depressed and it can't be undone.
They just released a new photo of a person of interest in the Brown shooting. There is obviously no way to know for sure from a blurry photo, but that looks a lot more like the body of middle-aged person than a young person.
And he's wearing a mask, proving that there are special circumstances where MAGA will don a mask.
FBI is doing a great job for being led by a podcaster - like exactly how you would think they would do if a podcaster was appointed director.
The alleged shooter was a 48 year old man. It appears that he killed the MIT professor as well.
It all seems incredibly unlikely but whatever I guess. We are completely at the mercy of the machine
The president is doing billion dollar mergers between social media companies and nuclear fusion companies days after a top fusion scientist was assassinated by the same guy who perpetrated a conspiracy laden shooting at Brown an hour and a half away
edit: its the type of **** that happens in Russia where we chuckle sensibly and say good thing that could never happen here
It all seems incredibly unlikely but whatever I guess. We are completely at the mercy of the machineThe president is doing billion dollar mergers between social media companies and nuclear fusion companies days after a top fusion scientist was assassinated by the same guy who perpetrated a conspiracy laden shooting at Brown an hour and a half awayedit: its the type of **** tha
What seems incredibly unlikely? What reason do you have to believe that this MIT professor was a financial threat to TAE?
The official story is that the guy went to brown, did a non targeted shooting, then went straight to this guys house and assassinated the guy based on a 20 year old vendetta from Argentina
That seems unlikely to me
The only reason I have to believe they are connected at all is because its a niche subject that doesn't show up in the news. The merger would have been questionable if the guy wasn't just assassinated. Questionable morally, ethically, and from a business sense. By all accounts, TAE is pretty good and DJT is an abject piece of ****. So when you start adding everything together none of it really makes sense on its own, but as a closely tied string of events it really doesn't make any sense.
The official story is that the guy went to brown, did a non targeted shooting, then went straight to this guys house and assassinated the guy based on a 20 year old vendetta from ArgentinaThat seems unlikely to meThe only reason I have to believe they are connected at all is because its a niche subject that doesn't show up in the news. The merger would have been questionable i
I still don't understand. How did the murder of the MIT professor make the merger any more or less questionable?
The optics of a top fusion scientist being assassinated and two days later the president is merging a social media company and a nuclear fusion company
I dunno, maybe you don't see anything odd about the events, or the timing of the events. I clearly disagree
The optics of a top fusion scientist being assassinated and two days later the president is merging a social media company and a nuclear fusion company
I dunno, maybe you don't see anything odd about the events, or the timing of the events. I clearly disagree
The merger of TAE and a Trump media company of course seems weird. I have no idea why TAE would want to merge with a Trump company other than the promise of favorable treatment by the government, which of course would be entirely on brand for Trump. But the contemporaneous murder of a scientist who happened to work in the same field as TAE seems coincidental, especially when there is no reason to believe that TAE was impacted positively or negatively by this guy's death.
The optics of a top fusion scientist being assassinated and two days later the president is merging a social media company and a nuclear fusion company
I dunno, maybe you don't see anything odd about the events, or the timing of the events. I clearly disagree
Seems like we’re seeing a pattern of highly intelligent but socially awkward individuals lashing out from a kind of extreme envy toward those they see as succeeding through social or political savvy rather than intellect.
Seems like we’re seeing a pattern of highly intelligent but socially awkward individuals lashing out from a kind of extreme envy toward those they see as succeeding through social or political savvy rather than intellect.
I don't understand this comment as it applies to the murder of this MIT scientist. Who is lashing out?
I don't understand this comment as it applies to the murder of this MIT scientist. Who is lashing out?
The killer:
As investigators work to learn more about Claudio Neves Valente and understand what prompted his violent rampage, former classmates and colleagues in Portugal are describing him as a talented but egotistical failed academic who could have been motivated by professional jealousy.
It's a mental health problem!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Trump administration sent shockwaves through the U.S. mental health and drug addiction system late Tuesday, sending hundreds of termination letters, effective immediately, for federal grants supporting health services.
Did you guys hear? The Trump administration is now anti-gun. They're all saying you can't just take your gun anywhere you like, and especially not to a protest gathering.
And you thought it was the Democrats who were going to try to take away your guns!
I pretty sure the this has been true in the US for a long-time. You can probably google it but airplanes, airports, schools, sporting arenas. hospitals and certain cities have been gun free zones for probably since before they became magnets for mass killers.
I don’t see any harm in bringing a gun to a protest unless your plan is to attack officers.
Did trump also say he wants to take away guns or did you confuse gun free zones and gun ownership?
Trump said "You can't have guns. You can't walk in with guns" when referring to the killing of Alex Pretti.
FBI Director Kash Patel and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem each also said something similar.
I pretty sure the this has been true in the US for a long-time. You can probably google it but airplanes, airports, schools, sporting arenas. hospitals and certain cities have been gun free zones for probably since before they became magnets for mass killers. I don’t see any harm in bringing a gun to a protest unless your plan is to attack officers. Did trump also say he wants
Does this mean all the 2Atards that keep insisting to arm teachers in schools now want gun-free zones?
Trump said "You can't have guns. You can't walk in with guns" when referring to the killing of Alex Pretti.
FBI Director Kash Patel and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem each also said something similar.
It isn't super clear on what he means. I hope you aren't suggesting he is saying we should take all guns from everyone. I think the most reasonable explanation of what he is saying is that it is incredible stupid to have a gun on you when you are doing what pretti did in those two videos.
Does this mean all the 2Atards that keep insisting to arm teachers in schools now want gun-free zones?
I was simply stating a law. I no way was I supporting or suggesting it is a good law.
It isn't super clear on what he means. I hope you aren't suggesting he is saying we should take all guns from everyone. I think the most reasonable explanation of what he is saying is that it is incredible stupid to have a gun on you when you are doing what pretti did in those two videos.
How do you think countries get disarmed? You gotta take them from a small subset of people first (say, protestors) and then spread it further as you gain more power and the citizens lose power. We all learned that from the 2Atards. Now y'all are doing the bidding for gun control Democrats, lmao.
If this plays out like they want it to, I assume they're going to come for all guns at some point, right?
Note: I am not predicting this nor do I think it will happen, but speculating on what the end goal may be.
It isn't super clear on what he means. I hope you aren't suggesting he is saying we should take all guns from everyone. I think the most reasonable explanation of what he is saying is that it is incredible stupid to have a gun on you when you are doing what pretti did in those two videos.
Nope, he's saying that people who disagree with him shouldn't have guns.
I don't think Trump is going to start taking anyone's guns away. Just showing the hypocrisy. He didn't seem to think there was anything incredibly stupid about people who supported him having guns at protests.
