In the news

Surely to a lot of americans/ those of a more authoritarian type, the main reason this isn't sensible policing is because shooting him in the head is another option?

Interesting that there has been a few seemingly successful "have a go heroes". Astounded me the number of americans that had commented about wishing they had their firearms with them at the Vegas shooting. Like firing at a guy with your handgun, whilst he's holed up in a 32nd storey room with multiple assault rifles was going to have much of an effect.

You can shoot down a helicopter from a speedboat with a handgun. I saw it on Spectre.

Just as the car lobby fund movies that glamourise speeding and aggressive driving, so the gun lobby fund movies that fetishise guns. Red Dawn featured those bumper stickers that say "You can have my gun when you prise it from my cold dead hands". A sentiment sent up brilliantly in Men In Black.

I was fairly close to mentioning the influence of Hollywood in that last comment. Hadn't realized the gun lobby actively funds these things, though it makes a lot of sense.

Lol, might not have been a one off then!

I thought that cold dead hands quote was from a Charlton Heston speech at the NRA.

so the gun lobby fund movies that fetishise guns

do they? such as?

Surely to a lot of americans/ those of a more authoritarian type, the main reason this isn't sensible policing is because shooting him in the head is another option?

Interesting that there has been a few seemingly successful "have a go heroes". Astounded me the number of americans that had commented about wishing they had their firearms with them at the Vegas shooting. Like firing at a guy with your handgun, whilst he's holed up in a 32nd storey room with multiple assault rifles was going to have much of an effect.

At a hotel that was 1,200 feet away horizontally and 450 feet vertically, at night, and every shot that was not on target might have gone into a room with innocent residents.

The chance of hitting the shooter himself is vanishingly small, the chances of shooting someone else are very high.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/02/25/hollywoods-hypocritical-love-hate-relationship-with-guns/

The area I live in in Manchester is called Chorlton. There was a local amateur footy team that called themselves Chorlton Heston. The club badge was a copy of the BSA rifles logo, and the motto was 'Cold Dead Hands'

#CSB

http://thefederalist.com/2016/02/25/holl­ywoods-hypocritical-love-hate-relationsh­ip-with-guns/

ok i skimmed through that and couldn't find any specific references to the NRA funding movies. Liam Neeson is a hypocrite, but they're movies. The bullets aren't real.

The NRA blog lists a top ten of "classic firearms" movies which , I shit you not, includes The Deer Hunter

https://www.nrablog.com/articles/2016/9/7-classic-firearms-movies/

They also have a load of famous movie guns in their museum including, and again this is for realz, Javier Bardem's silenced shotgun from No Country for Old Men. Because assassins r cool!

If what people see in films doesn't influence them I guess product placement doesn't work?

It's so bizarre seeing this horrible american ritual played out after every shooting.
First there is the shock and grief of the incident and inevitably some Democrats start talking about trying to introduce some basic gun control measures, like background checks, smaller clips etc. Republicans say that now is not the time to politicise this incident and we should focus of grieving for the dead and injured. The NRA stays quiet for a few days until the headlines and initial trauma of the incident has blown over, then will come out all guns blazing about how the US needs less gun control. Then the scare tactics start about how the government is coming to take your guns, gun sales go through the roof and a backlash against any form of gun control starts. Before you know it, the incident has been forgotten and no action gets taken.

Every single time.

the chances of shooting someone else are very high.

Which is why those someone elses need to have access to semi-automatic weapons. To defend themselves from the people defending themselves.

I'd never thought about it like that. Very interesting read, where'd you find it?

Surely "Stayin Alive" is far more important in those parts

Listen to the LVPD radio scanner from the night - officers complain that civilians from the concert have tried to break into their squad cars to steal the shotguns locked to the dash. Call goes out channel wide reminding officers to lock their cars once they exit them..

More Guns- More Dead People
Less Guns- Less Dead People

The correlation seems pretty strong, and it doesn't seem like there's much of a struggle to prove causation either.

1 Attachment

From this btw

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/2/16399418/us-gun-violence-statistics-maps-charts

https://twitter.com/Maryellen

If you took USA out of that graphic and replotted with appropriate axes, it wouldn't look like that much of a correlation.

Which is why those someone elses need to have access to semi-automatic weapons. To defend themselves from the people defending themselves.

Surely they'd be safer with fully automatic weapons?

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/12/gun-rhetoric-vs-gun-facts/

Yes guns influence the outcome...it's not clear if more guns is more deaths or if violence drive gun purchases...

I googled the source it's seems low in bias so may make a good read.

I guess the fewer guns ship has sailed...112 guns per 100 people in the USA.

But what if the brown people have automatics too?

Best to equip oneself with a damn minigun just in case.