• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Another day, another active shooter - Virginia Beach

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
No but there will be less and less shootings as time goes on and more guns are taken away as opposed to more and more guns being available and more shootings occurring.

I hope you realize how utterly retarded your argument is as your logic basically boils down to, laws are pointless.


We have lots of gun control laws on the books now but we still have mass shootings and murders so we might as well do the ban and confiscate. That's the only way to significantly reduce gun violence. If we are going to go down the path of the UK we might as well ban knives also since that's the next weapon of choice for criminal attacks.
 
No but there will be less and less shootings as time goes on and more guns are taken away as opposed to more and more guns being available and more shootings occurring.

I hope you realize how utterly retarded your argument is as your logic basically boils down to, laws are pointless.

Laws are not pointless. They are great for punishing people after the fact. But when we are talking about people snapping and killing people they have no effect. Look at the death penalty for example that doesn't deter people. When people reach that level of madness, the law doesn't matter.
 
Ask the Boston marathon bomber what his thoughts are on gun control. Crazy people going to kill, guns, bombs, knives it really doesn't matter. There's a lot more to the problem than a surplus of guns. People get creative. What might slow down is immediate 'temporary insanity' murder/suicides because of time passing, but I expect what will mostly happen is just people dying differently, not less. There's a shit load of unhappy people in this country who like to lash out because people don't agree with them.

There needs to be stricter regulations of some sort, not really clear on what that would actually be that would help. Without search and seizure you can't control what gun owners do with their guns (meaning parents owning guns and their kids taking them). Stricter background checks don't seem to do any good because people can snap at any time.

Let's say they ban guns entirely, our country is probably too lazy to fight a revolution if the government becomes a dictatorship anyway so it probably wouldn't matter. They'd just complain about it on social media while they still could. Make them cost an insane amount of money where only the rich can buy them, you really have the same problem, the rich are in control and the masses are at their will...much like we already are today.



If we ban and confiscate guns then what are we going to do if Trump becomes our dictator? Aren't some people here worried about that?
 
Just to piggyback on the culture point. I think alot of Americans have a strong spirit of self-determination. We want to 'do it' ourselves. Tie this with the very personal feelings about self-defense and you have this great gun debate. I do think something has changed with the mental health of people. My understanding from older people were that even teenagers back in the day had rifles/shotguns in trucks at school and there didn't seem to have a problem with people going on shooting rampages. Are we getting less mental health treatment these days? Are the drugs people are on setting them off? I don't know but I think something is different. Also, hello to all the haters out there who can't seem to read an opposing opinion without downvoting it. lol

I think that is the key I'm trying to point out. People having guns at the ready is not a new thing. They've ALWAYS been there. Sure there are more powerful guns now that shoot more bullets at a faster rate, but that's really not the point. The question is WHY does it seem like it is happening more? No ones answered that question, they just blame it on the guns as a 'please do something' angle. The whole 'well when someone can kill 50 people with a knife' mentality is a cop out. It means you aren't actually interested in figuring out the actual problem. Ask yourself why someone would want to kill a bunch of people anyway rather than focus on how they did it. Is only killing 3 any better than 10? What is an acceptable number of deaths so that those people can feel comfy knowing they 'won'? Do you move on from there to knives? How about cars? They kill way more people every year here. This isn't Austrailia. Go around the world (first world countries) and you'll see those people are way happier than the average American.

Here's a status on the mental health of this country compared to the world. Something to be proud of.
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2016-09-14/the-10-most-depressed-countries

I also believe that the constant addiction and onslaught of news feeds sensationalizing things such as this is making everyone paranoid AF. Add to that the gang / lynchmob that so many people eagerly jump into and you have a recipe for disaster.
 
Last edited:
Didn't he also have a suppressor, so people were unable to tell how close the shooter was?



https://abcnews.go.com/US/suspected...d-personal-reasons-massacre/story?id=63449625
Virginia Beach Police Chief James Cervera told ABC News that the suppressor does not eliminate the sound of gunfire, but he could not say whether the use of the device had any impact on the death toll in Building 2 of the Virginia Beach Municipal Center.


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...un-suppressor-sign-planned-attack/1322858001/
While a suppressor muffles the sound of gunfire, gun rights advocates and law enforcement experts said the use of one likely did not determine the deadliness of Friday's shooting but could be a sign that the suspect carefully planned the attack

Some gun experts say factors other than the suppressor, such as the shooter’s familiarity with the building and even his military background, played a greater role in the tragedy.
 
he had large capacity magazines so he could shoot longer uninterrupted, if he had to reload more frequently fewer people might have been killed.



While I am OK with banning large capacity magazines for long guns and handguns it doesn't take much practice to perform a fast-reload especially if you have military experience where you are under pressure to reload your weapon..
 
It's hard to imagine a suppressor not having at least some effect on the shooting, if not necessarily the death toll. At least one report had people saying it sounded like a nail gun from construction work. Would you report a shooting if you heard a "click click click" instead of the characteristic "pop pop pop" of an unsuppressed pistol?
 
It's hard to imagine a suppressor not having at least some effect on the shooting, if not necessarily the death toll. At least one report had people saying it sounded like a nail gun from construction work. Would you report a shooting if you heard a "click click click" instead of the characteristic "pop pop pop" of an unsuppressed pistol?

I agree with this. It was exactly why it was used.
 
I think that is the key I'm trying to point out. People having guns at the ready is not a new thing. They've ALWAYS been there.

Actually, it kind of is a new thing. The number of firearms per capita has doubled in the last 40 years, and that number is increasing fast. The number of guns per capita is expected to double again in just 5 more years. As of 2018 American civilians owned nearly half of all the guns on the planet while being only 5% of the worlds population, and that includes all the worlds militaries.

Until 1939 most guns were actually illegal in the United States. Pretty much anything that was not a hunting rifle was heavily restricted, in exactly the same way that machine guns are now (and based on the same SCOTUS ruling that still allows machine guns to be banned.)

Sure there are more powerful guns now that shoot more bullets at a faster rate, but that's really not the point.
It somewhat is the point. We have always had shootings, it is just in the past the damage that those shootings could accomplish was limited by the technology they could use. Firearms are a force multiplier, and we are allowing larger multipliers, so we get larger numbers.

The question is WHY does it seem like it is happening more? No ones answered that question, they just blame it on the guns as a 'please do something' angle.

Our population is denser. More people = more opportunity. There is your answer on why it happens more frequently.

The whole 'well when someone can kill 50 people with a knife' mentality is a cop out. It means you aren't actually interested in figuring out the actual problem. Ask yourself why someone would want to kill a bunch of people anyway rather than focus on how they did it.
Because some people kill. That has always been the case, across every culture in every time period, in every country. When you get a large enough population you include some people that will decide to kill. Some percent of them will decide that they want to die, and that they want to kill off as many people that they feel wronged them in the process. There is literally no way to stop that. It is a fundamental feature of human psychology. All we can do is limit the amount of damage they are capable of doing. That is why we say that people with knifes don't kill 50 people.

Is only killing 3 any better than 10?
Yes, by 7 lives. Once we accept that we can't stop 100% of people from deciding that they want to go out in a blaze of terror the only real solution is to work on limiting how many they can take with them when they do.
 
It's hard to imagine a suppressor not having at least some effect on the shooting, if not necessarily the death toll. At least one report had people saying it sounded like a nail gun from construction work. Would you report a shooting if you heard a "click click click" instead of the characteristic "pop pop pop" of an unsuppressed pistol?
Unless he was using subsonic ammo, that shouldn't have had much effect. It's still gonna be loud.
 
Actually, it kind of is a new thing. The number of firearms per capita has doubled in the last 40 years, and that number is increasing fast. The number of guns per capita is expected to double again in just 5 more years. As of 2018 American civilians owned nearly half of all the guns on the planet while being only 5% of the worlds population, and that includes all the worlds militaries.

Until 1939 most guns were actually illegal in the United States. Pretty much anything that was not a hunting rifle was heavily restricted, in exactly the same way that machine guns are now (and based on the same SCOTUS ruling that still allows machine guns to be banned.)


It somewhat is the point. We have always had shootings, it is just in the past the damage that those shootings could accomplish was limited by the technology they could use. Firearms are a force multiplier, and we are allowing larger multipliers, so we get larger numbers.



Our population is denser. More people = more opportunity. There is your answer on why it happens more frequently.


Because some people kill. That has always been the case, across every culture in every time period, in every country. When you get a large enough population you include some people that will decide to kill. Some percent of them will decide that they want to die, and that they want to kill off as many people that they feel wronged them in the process. There is literally no way to stop that. It is a fundamental feature of human psychology. All we can do is limit the amount of damage they are capable of doing. That is why we say that people with knifes don't kill 50 people.


Yes, by 7 lives. Once we accept that we can't stop 100% of people from deciding that they want to go out in a blaze of terror the only real solution is to work on limiting how many they can take with them when they do.

I don't 100% agree with everything you said, but well stated. I had made a couple edits when you had posted this, so please take a moment to read the link I provided.
 
Actually, it kind of is a new thing. The number of firearms per capita has doubled in the last 40 years, and that number is increasing fast. The number of guns per capita is expected to double again in just 5 more years. As of 2018 American civilians owned nearly half of all the guns on the planet while being only 5% of the worlds population, and that includes all the worlds militaries.

Until 1939 most guns were actually illegal in the United States. Pretty much anything that was not a hunting rifle was heavily restricted, in exactly the same way that machine guns are now (and based on the same SCOTUS ruling that still allows machine guns to be banned.)


It somewhat is the point. We have always had shootings, it is just in the past the damage that those shootings could accomplish was limited by the technology they could use. Firearms are a force multiplier, and we are allowing larger multipliers, so we get larger numbers.



Our population is denser. More people = more opportunity. There is your answer on why it happens more frequently.


Because some people kill. That has always been the case, across every culture in every time period, in every country. When you get a large enough population you include some people that will decide to kill. Some percent of them will decide that they want to die, and that they want to kill off as many people that they feel wronged them in the process. There is literally no way to stop that. It is a fundamental feature of human psychology. All we can do is limit the amount of damage they are capable of doing. That is why we say that people with knifes don't kill 50 people.


Yes, by 7 lives. Once we accept that we can't stop 100% of people from deciding that they want to go out in a blaze of terror the only real solution is to work on limiting how many they can take with them when they do.

I don't think that's right.
 
Unless he was using subsonic ammo, that shouldn't have had much effect. It's still gonna be loud.

It's not even so much the loudness (though it will still be quieter) as the sound. If it doesn't sound like an obvious gunshot, will you report it?
 
Just to piggyback on the culture point. I think alot of Americans have a strong spirit of self-determination. We want to 'do it' ourselves. Tie this with the very personal feelings about self-defense and you have this great gun debate. I do think something has changed with the mental health of people. My understanding from older people were that even teenagers back in the day had rifles/shotguns in trucks at school and there didn't seem to have a problem with people going on shooting rampages. Are we getting less mental health treatment these days? Are the drugs people are on setting them off? I don't know but I think something is different. Also, hello to all the haters out there who can't seem to read an opposing opinion without downvoting it. lol




Lots of opinions out there on the cause of mass shootings. I thought this was a good one from an FBI veteran. It covers a lot of bases. In my view, "Middle class" young people, as opposed to lower and upper class, have changed dramatically in the past 20+ years. They have ADHD, anxiety, depression, anger, Aspergers and other mental issues much more than earlier generations and are taking mind altering medication in record numbers. Is part of it because of both parents working, divorced parents, eating fast/canned/frozen food with preservatives because their parents don't have time to cook good, wholesome, fresh cooked meals at home? Is it computer gaming starting at a young age? Social media? Talk to a young person or a parent of a kid about their experience in middle school in the past 20 years. It's a fucking war zone. The kids at this age are ruthless, hateful and defiant. How many kids have 504 and IEPs for "special education" needs?

https://thehill.com/opinion/crimina...otings-to-stop-lets-talk-cause-not-motivation
Want mass shootings to stop? Let’s talk cause, not motivation

Once again in this weary year, Americans go to dance, or go to worship, or just to school, and they’re gunned down. From our oldest citizens to our youngest, no one is safe, it seems, and the question keeps getting asked: Can anything be done to stop this?

The short answer is “yes,” there is quite a bit that could be done, but many sensibilities would be ruffled if certain paths were headed down. So, in the meantime, the exploiters move in to control the conversation and regular Americans continue to die doing regular things.


Indignation and outrage is huffed by well-landscaped media smoothies. One went so far, after the Tree of Life synagogue shooting, to declare that white men are the "biggest terror threat" in this country and that “something” must be done about "them." Are those World War II Japanese-American internment camps still available? Such deep thinkers with, sadly, such big microphones.

After each horrific shooting, our predictable politicos begin elbowing each other under the basket on gun control. It’s an easy photo op that lets them look serious without having to do anything to actually help end all these senseless shootings. Our little ones are being slaughtered in their classrooms. Let’s argue tougher background checks and magazine capacities. That should fix it. Logical ideas such as hardening our schools are met with hand-wringing.

In the meantime, a wounded nation (yes, we all feel this) is sliding into a dark place wondering if any space is safe … and if we’re next … and if we should arm ourselves … and if it’s even worth going to that — fill in the blank — concert, church service, restaurant, movie, workplace.

Americans look to law enforcement for more than it can deliver. “Please, officer, figure out who might become a shooter and stop them ahead of time.” That normally can’t be done, either practically or constitutionally. It is not illogical to presume that some law enforcement encounters with disturbed individuals may have dissuaded a pending violent act but, as we saw with the Borderline Bar shooter this past week, prior police contact is not necessarily enough to derail evil.

Law enforcement professionals are deeply affected by these crazed shootings as well. You can hear it in the now-familiar parking lot press conferences with statements such as “worst crime scene I’ve ever seen, and I’ve seen many” delivered with cracking voices belonging to the toughest of men. The media mouths and politicians don’t seem truly interested in what law enforcement sees in front of them; instead, they’re off peddling their own agendas which have to do with ratings and votes, not stopping these shootings.

If we want a chance at ending this shooting madness, this is what law enforcement professionals would point out:

Notoriety. Shooters shoot because of internal anger over self-perceived deficiencies. But we tend to get distracted by the forced focus on motivations such as racism and jihadism, anti-this and phobia of that — so valued for their political usefulness. But those are just manifestations of the weak, the way they act out and grasp at self-importance; they are not the cause. The self-perceived weakling, consistently the profile of a mass shooter, ultimately wants what he believes he’s been cheated out of his whole life: attention. (The Borderline Bar shooter reportedly posted to Instagram — while murdering in the bar.)


And mass shootings do get a lot of attention; they are, frankly, cable-ratings gold. Many of us now know from memory the names of the Sandy Hook and Parkland and Las Vegas shooters. And that’s the point. Weakling, wannabe shooters want to be part of that perverse notoriety. That’s their primary motivator. If news coverage was ratcheted way back and the shooter’s name and image were never published, mass shootings would greatly diminish, if not end. But that’s a hard path to tread.

Illness. While nearly all mass shooters are weak personalities, not all weak personalities act out violently. The difference normally is an infection of severe emotional or mental illness. Law enforcement professionals with long careers will attest to a sense that the body of disturbed individuals is increasing, year over year, in this country. Academics will have their chin-rubbing theories as to why, but cops see what they see every day: growing substance abuse, porn saturation, abused children and women, foolish decisions, the hopelessness and despair all of that generates.

We seem paralyzed to deal with mental illness the way the mentally ill need us to do. Out of a sort of fashionable false-compassion advanced in the late 1970s, we default to a risky hands-off attitude; just ask the excrement-paved cities of San Francisco and Seattle — some compassion, that. As mental illness grows, law enforcement and mental health professionals intersect more, and it’s often bumpy. Truly compassionate steps could be taken to better protect the mentally ill from societal neglect, and to protect us. But that, too, is a difficult path.

Family. Law enforcement professionals know well that the bulk of the clientele of our penitentiaries do not come from healthy two-parent families. Absent or abusive fathers create most of our criminals. Today, 40 percent of children in America are born out of wedlock — in the ’70s, it was around 10 percent ... tick, tick, tick. Are we willing to re-stigmatize these behaviors for the safety of our society? Doesn’t seem so, but this is a major cause of violent behaviors. Again, a difficult pathway.

Those down in the policing trenches have tactile familiarity with the causes of massive violence. The pathway to begin to actually combat these causes is fairly well illuminated, but narrow and difficult. Shall we start down it together? Oh, wait, this other path over here is wider and easier — on it, we can ban some bump stocks and have blaming contests and harrumph along with the media shouters and politicians during wall-to-wall coverage of yet another dispiriting shooting; everyone can shelter in their self-righteous place along the way.

That path, however, will have more and more bodies on it.

Kevin R. Brock, former assistant director of intelligence for the FBI, was an FBI special agent for 24 years and principal deputy director of the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC). He is a founder and principal ofNewStreet Global Solutions, which consults with private companies and public-safety agencies on strategic mission technologies.



A good article on the increase of 504 plans and IEPs.
The Increasing Number of 504 Plans and the Mental Health Epidemic
 
I don't 100% agree with everything you said, but well stated. I had made a couple edits when you had posted this, so please take a moment to read the link I provided.

I have gone back and read you edit, and you are right. We have a mental health crisis in the United States, and it is exasperating the problem. It must be one of the keystones that we build any successful strategy on. This is a complex problem and we are going to have to address it on multiple fronts. We need to address mental health, we need to address us treating addiction as a crime instead of a medical condition, we are going to need to address the weapons we have available, we are going to have to address the failing financial safety net, we are going to have to address the social isolation that our technology and work/life balance is causing. All of these things are a piece of this puzzle, and none of them are going to be solved overnight no matter what we do. It is all going to be a long term project that we are going to have to enact in steps.


I don't think that's right.

Very well, what do you think is wrong. We can definitely have a conversation about this. If you find some factual error in what I said I am most willing to address it.

The thing is I am a gun owner. I own 2 pistols, a good hunting rifle, and a shotgun. I still go back to the small town in Texas my family lives in several times a year and shoot with my cousins. I'm a pretty damn good shot with a pistol or rifle. The point is I'm no stranger to guns. I just understand that our society is changing. When the 2A was written populations density was a person every few miles. The conditions that it was written for has drastically changed.
 
It's hard to imagine a suppressor not having at least some effect on the shooting, if not necessarily the death toll. At least one report had people saying it sounded like a nail gun from construction work. Would you report a shooting if you heard a "click click click" instead of the characteristic "pop pop pop" of an unsuppressed pistol?

Most people wouldn't know the sound of a gun. Movies make us believe guns sound one way when they usually sound another. And in an enclosed area the sound will bounce around. Click click click is a movie interpretation of what a suppressor sounds like. Real life it provides for muffling. The design was to confuse an enemy engaged in war that knew what a gun sounded like. But it doesn't silence the gun.

A .45 is effing loud. But in a building full of walls it would definitely sound different from afar than up close.
 
I have gone back and read you edit, and you are right. We have a mental health crisis in the United States, and it is exasperating the problem. It must be one of the keystones that we build any successful strategy on. This is a complex problem and we are going to have to address it on multiple fronts. We need to address mental health, we need to address us treating addiction as a crime instead of a medical condition, we are going to need to address the weapons we have available, we are going to have to address the failing financial safety net, we are going to have to address the social isolation that our technology and work/life balance is causing. All of these things are a piece of this puzzle, and none of them are going to be solved overnight no matter what we do. It is all going to be a long term project that we are going to have to enact in steps.



All social media apps should be converted to a paid subscription service for anyone under the age of 17(?) and they have to prove they have a job. Make the cost high enough that the kids have to have a job to participate. I know it's far fetched but it would be a better model than the one we have to stop some of this social media madness with the kids.
 
Put yourself in their place.
Its a friday.
Your borde.
You have more guns in your closet than the US Army.
So, what would you do?
And that is why we go through this every other week.
He "snapped." I read the Wikipedia treatment an hour ago. On the surface he was completely normal. The only warning signs were some physical confrontations he'd had recently, for which he was evidently chastised. But on Friday, he seemed completely normal to "witnesses." But his internal thoughts and feelings were festering. First sign was an email resignation. Then the brew in his head boiled over, he got out a few of the guns and big magazines he'd been accumulating and had his murderous day.

I'll say it again. We need to get guns out of people's hands. The NRA is the political/lobbyist wing of the gun manufacturers and they are YOUR ENEMY.
I don't think drug violence accounts for hardly any of these mass shootings. Might help poor neighborhoods and such, to an extent, but the issue is far larger than your proposed solution. Average Joe has guns. Average Joe is freaking crazy.
Yup!
 
Yep. And even worse, nobody even seems to call for stronger gun laws anymore when something like this happens. Just seems pointless because the NRA and 2nd amendment fanatics are so firmly entrenched.
Dude, I have been calling for stronger gun laws since before it became common. I used to get a ton of flack when I announced my positions on firearm ownership. Not now. My position hasn't changed. I don't care who you are, what you do, how you're trained. Even if you have access to guns, you shouldn't be allowed to "own" them. You might, under certain circumstances be allowed temporary access to them. That's how I think it should be. That if you are a hunter, in the military, security or law enforcement. Yeah, it will take a sea change in mentality, but we'll get our sanity back. How about it?
 
So violent crime overall is down but spree killings are way up, IMO media and being an instant celebrity is the primary driver, the tools themselves have always been around maybe not as many however if you were so motivated 30 40 50 years ago the ability was there
 
So violent crime overall is down but spree killings are way up, IMO media and being an instant celebrity is the primary driver, the tools themselves have always been around maybe not as many however if you were so motivated 30 40 50 years ago the ability was there
We need to adjust. Eliminate access to guns. There's no other way given where we are.
 
Back
Top