Well? That’s a much better deal than gun control got.
The punishment will be death by suicide by cop.
Do you have a cite for this statement?
According to this Mother Jones database, there were 23 mass shootings from 1990 to 1999. From 2000 to 2009, there were 20 mass shootings. There was one in 2010 and 3 in 2011. It’s not until 2012 that the frequencies dramatically increase.
CNN began broadcasting in 1980. Fox News and MSNBC both began in 1996. In 2011, Facebook became the world’s most popular social media site, and it has remained at #1 ever since.
As others have stated, if the original premise of the OP is true, the blame should probably be placed on social media, rather than broadcast media. And good luck controlling that.
The name of a rape victim isn’t newsworthy. The name of a killer is, since we want to know if he did it out of terrorism, or bigotry, or mental illness. We want to know how he got his weapons and some of us want to use that information to keep others like him from getting weapons.
And when they do survive, like the El Paso shooting, the charges become part of the public record. Unless you want to live in a place where those charged vanish.
Plus, gee I’ve never seen nudity or heard swearing on TV. The FCC must be doing a great job. Or maybe it’s just that I don’t get HBO.
If
They
Do
so
The
FBI
finds
them
and
arrests
them.
:rolleyes:
Chicago and California, and other areas. Of course, the answer to this is “It didn’t work, so obviously we need more Gun control!”. Which is pretty much the definition of insanity, right?
Why? How can you, a private citizen use that information? The answer is- you can’t.
And since you simply ignore that fact that scientists have taken that very information and decided that the media is the chief culprit- you wouldn’t listen anyway.
I’m quite confident that if I posted a statement of intent claiming credit to my favorite incel/nazi fourm immediately before grabbing my tote full of endorsed-by-republicans guns and heading out, the FBI would not find me and stop me.
Not your decision to make.
I am about as sick of this misstatement as I am of your repeatedly saying that gun control was tried and it failed. “Scientists” haven’t said any such thing, as has been repeatedly pointed out to you-SOME scientists and others that you have poorly cherry-picked back up your theory with major caveats, so at most what you have is the start of an idea, not an established fact.
Would it be insane if it was tried at the same national level as your project?
If we find that the killers used loopholes in gun laws to get their guns, we can vote out anyone opposing the closing of the loopholes.
“Scientists” support creationism also. You still haven’t told us how the information isn’t going to get out on social media (the posting by the killer could be an hour before he did it, so your comment on the FBI is ridiculous) or the non-regulated news. So even if the “scientists” were right, it wouldn’t matter.
I just don’t understand why you love guns more than people’s lives.
The Gilroy shooter had to get his gun in Nevada.
Because I am deeply uncomfortable with the idea that someone I know - or that someone else knows - could just vanish and no one knows why and When they’re reported as a missing person the cops just say “don’t hold your breath.”
Anyhow, if we’re not going to ban guns, then we should ban white men from owning them.
The Christchurch shooter was Australian, but couldn’t get the type of gun he wanted in Australia, so he went to New Zealand.
We are inclined to repeatedly ask you the same questions because you so clearly and obviously wish to avoid answering them. You make assertions which don’t stand up to scrutiny, but repeat them ad nauseam, then play the, ‘I’m rubber, you’re glue’, game. You use the word “science” as a shield, but you either don’t understand what you cite or bother to read it yourself to make sure it actually supports your argument in the way you wish it would. When people accept some part of your argument, you don’t move on, instead you just continue to bang on how that one time you made a good point. Honestly, engaging in debate with you is exhausting and futile.
So, you care more about knowing the info that you do about saving thousands of lives?
Indeed, gun control has been tried and failed, California is a perfect example.
Those researchers* are *scientists, and do you have any counter-cites saying they are wrong? Do you also deny climate change?
And it’s not “my” theory, it’s that of many noted scientists.
You can find that out without knowing the names.
I have, no less than four times.
I just dont understand why you love to know the names more than peoples lives.
If it didnt work in the most populous state in the Union, not to mention a good half dozen others, yes it is insanity to assume it will somehow, magically work if we just double down.
Well, when I ask “Since gun control has tied and failed in the uSA, so whats the next step” and the answer is always “Double down with more gun grabbing!” I have some doubts as to the planning ability there.
I haven’t made assertions here, I have quoted scientific papers with assertions.
I dont know what these noted scientists will propose if their idea doesnt work, why dont you ask them? However, I assume they would treat any silly "what if’ question like that with the attention it deserves.
Maybe you could ask all the climate change scientists what will they do if cutting CO2 emissions doesnt work.