Fundamental to our discussion is the position that for you the number of deaths from gun related violence is acceptable simply because of J Scalia's amendment to the Constitution. I find the number unacceptable and therefore believe, since we as humans have a seemingly infinite imagination, we can devise a methodology which would reduce that number within the constraints imposed by J Scalia. Universal background checks is the simplest paradigm to ensure some modicum of reduction in those numbers. It is not the panacea which would eliminate unnecessary deaths. It is however a statement of belief that there are some folks who envision a better future. It is nothing but a weak elegy for those who have lost loved ones.
correlation between psychotropic drugs and mass murders
Looking for scapegoats doesn't advance anyone's understanding of these tragedies.
The reason I suspect no one wanted to pursue is the data is small and understudied, underfunded, and at this time mostly speculative.
or the more relevant question, why do people behave as they do? After studying humans for 58 years I have come to the conclusion, I can not predict what some people will do in any particular situation (non-scientific).
As to the proverbial target rich environments (high population density venues which would include all of your sites plus police stations etc) the Giffords shooter had a beef with her personally .... the Columbine shooters had a beef with the school ... etc (and sorry of the details are slightly in error as I do not follow this kind of thing) ... following the motivations of the perpetrators in these cases the site selection was personal and did not include police stations ... I'll let you think about the possibilities
Are you suggesting that we ignore ...
I don't ignore anything but it would appear you have ignored and tried to rebut every possible suggestion which may reduce gun related deaths
soft targets should not be hardened?
This is apparently the only response from the NRA ... more guns.
I have not seen a study which indicates that arming more folks in high density areas deters a determined perpetrator. You got a study in mind or it is the appeal of a superficial statement?
Why do you suppose it is that the vast majority of people who own guns never commit a gun related crime?
You really didn;t ask that question???
Follow this ... the vast number of Americans do not commit crimes ... among that number of people (unless reality is skewed) there are people who own guns ... therefore the vast number of gun owners do not commit crimes (obviously we made an assumption about distribution of gun owners in the general population but it is the point which is important)
So more generally we should be asking why the vast number of American s don't commit crimes?
wouldn't it also be important to determine why some people commit gun crimes
why yes it would, but you only offered speculation
It is unfortunate that the NRA has tied the hands of everyone who wants to do research, so the data is old and may not be valid.
A background check does not prevent a law-abiding citizen from buying, keeping, or bearing a firearm but it may prevent one person from committing some heinous, unnecessary crime. Would it be worthwhile to enact a piece of legislation which may save a single life? You be the judge.
