LogFAQs > #896292674

Blbmbr666 posted...

MaverickXeo posted...

Blbmbr666 posted...

There definitely need to be changes to law around firearms.

That said, people need to fucking learn that assault rifle and 'assault weapon' are two different things. 'Assault weapon' is a stupid term that needs to be dropped.

A change is society is more useful than a change to firearm laws.

It's probably going to take multiple changes in a few different areas to actually 'fix' this issue.

I'm personally of the belief that mental health is a larger cause than the guns themselves, but it's much easier to start with a very simple licensing test for rifles than to overhaul mental health industries.

The only problem is that even with a licensing test for guns... people who use guns for shootings/etc are not the 'legal' owners nor have they obtained the weapon legally.

This can provide more insight:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/national/mass-shootings-in-america/?utm_term=.ec2674ba931d

At least 167 of mass shooters weapons were obtained legally and 49 were obtained illegally. Its unclear how 76 weapons were acquired.

So basically, at least 50 shootings would've still occurred. However, the 167 weapons were not shown if it was the 'legal' owner of the gun or not.

The vast majority were between the ages of 20 and 49. More than half 88 of them died at or near the scene of the shooting, often by killing themselves.

This shows that there is a pretty large change that most of these perpetrators suffer from some form of mental illness.

In the 50 years before the Texas tower shooting, there were just 25 public mass shootings in which four or more people were killed, according to author and criminologist Grant Duwe. Since then, the number has risen dramatically, and many of the deadliest shootings have occurred within the past few years.

This shows that something has 'changed' in the last few decades. Weapons have always had the same sort of 'laws' so why is the change occurring now?
---

--- MaverickXeo ---