When guns were easier to get we had fewer mass murders. What has changed?

Question

These tragic mass murders we have had in the past 10-15 years have come despite more gun control, background checks, etc. They happen in England and other countries too which totally ban guns. So I don't think guns are the main problem here.

Fifty or 100 years ago you could buy a gun with no questions asked but there were fewer mass murders like we have today.

So what in our society or culture is precipitating the increase in mass murders? I am asking about incidents like Columbine and VT, not domestic violence or violent crime (I think that might be another issue).

Answer 1

It has nothing to do with the availability of firearms. It has to do with a culture that worships violence, makes folk heroes out of criminals, and shows violence with NO consequenses on television or film.
That's the problem. You don't find that in European nations. And in fact, you won't find them to be sexually repressed like people in the USA are either. That might have something to do with it.

Answer 2

Yoda nailed part of it right off the bat. I mean, when's the last time you heard about a mass murder in Sweden? And we can be aggressive!

Another part of it is simply the lack of facilities and funds to treat people with mental illnesses and other issues. In California, Reagan closed all the state mental hospitals to save money back when he was governor. Guess where all the nutjobs went? Not jail. It's not a crime to be crazy. They're out on the streets with the rest of us. Since many states do not report mental health status due to lack of funds, a Federal background check wouldn't necessarily show someone ineligible for gun ownership. This was the case with the VA Tech shooter.

I think we need to close some of the cracks in our gun control system. Require the states to report ineligible people to the Federal government so that they aren't able to obtain guns. While this won't stop all whackjobs from hurting others, it just might minimize the damage they can do in such a short amount of time.

~Morg~

Answer 3

Gun crime rates have been falling since the 1990s?
Homocides have been dropping in the USA since the 1990's along with a increase of gun sales. To levels of the 1960's Which were prior to the "Gun Control Act of 1968" and prior to the Liberal attitudes of Lyndon Johnson "Great Society." Which by the way started our welfare state.

Please take notice that population has increased, gun ownership has increased as well as gun sales. there was also a increase of homocide rates during Clintons so called assault weapons ban and since the ban fell so has the homocide rate.


http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/hm...

http://www.ellsworthamerican.com/archive...

Answer 4

There are two reasons for the rise in violent crime rates since the advent of gun control. Partly it's as you might expect: gun control laws strip guns only from people who obey them. They don't take guns away from criminals. The effect of gun control is to shift the balance of firepower sharply to the criminal's favor, and the criminal consequently becomes more avid and bold in his depredations.

"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book, 1775.

The other part of the problem is the racial darkening of the U.S. population. It is a statistically provable fact (see the links below) that non-Whites, except certain Asian groups, commit violent and property crimes more frequently than Whites do. Blacks have a per capita rate for murder perpetration that is nearly ten times higher than that for Whites. For Latinos, the ratio is three times higher. Since the United States has been deluged with Blacks and Mexicans, a rise in the murder rate is to be expected.

And occasionally an Asian goes murderously berserk, even though this behavior isn't as common among Asians as it is among Blacks and Mestizos. Cho isn't the only Asian mass murderer of the recent past. Another was Chai Vang, who murdered several people in a woods in Wisconsin.

By the way, you can add Australia to the list of countries which have had increases in violent crimes since a ban on guns was legally imposed on lawful citizens. It seems likely that there are ulterior political motives for these gun-bans, since no amount of evidence showing the detrimental effect of gun control laws will ordinarily persuade a legislative body to repeal them.

Answer 5

I don't think guns are the problem. The crazies who buy the guns are the problem. Instead of more gun control there should be more "crazy control". Stop all that sugar coating by telling the person that you are just different and you need to try and build yourself up mentally. If they are a threat lock their *** up give them medications. There should be less gun control so we can protect ourselves from all these crazy bastards that feel life has spit on them and who are jealous of people they don't even know.

Answer 6

Look up the Mustard/Lott report, University of Chicago and you will see that gun laws have absolutely nothing to do with prevention of mass murders. In fact, the fewer gun laws, the better behaved the bad guys are. They don't want to get shot by law abiding citizens any more than we do by them.

What is different? More permissive parents, more permissive schools, more permissive government, more hamstrung law enforcement, more judges making laws instead of enforcing them... the way they ought to.. (Can you say liberals?)

Answer 7

"bearing on the Sandyhook shooting, isn't it a fact that there could have been far fewer deaths if the wrongdoer purely had a pitchfork instead of semi-computerized firearms?" >>>this is precise, there could even have been greater deaths if he have been armed with a machete than a pitch fork. that's a pointless loaded question, analagous to asserting being run over by a motor vehicle is worse than being run over by a bike. "If weapons have been banned, those perpetrators does not be waiting to get such uncomplicated accessibility to those weapons, could they?" >>>that's a pointless fact because of the fact the 2d fact is an obvious logical effect of the 1st. of direction it may be 'much less uncomplicated' to get a gun in the event that they have been banned. it may additionally be much less uncomplicated to drinkchronic and kill somebody if alcohol develop into banned. The argument ignores that it may nonetheless be 'not that confusing' to acquire a weapon in spite of the undeniable fact that "the united kingdom cost for gun murders is decrease than 50 in step with 300 and sixty 5 days. isn't that an wonderful argument for all international locations to undertake a similar stringent rules that we've for gun possession?" >>>>Why concentration on gun homicide purely? uk not often has the international's lowest homicide cost or the international's lowest crime cost. many international locations with much less draconian and crazed anti-gun rules have decrease homicide and decrease crime expenditures than the united kingdom.

Answer 8

Because of the brainwashed masses.I just got an answer deleted for defending the bill of rights.Americans,by and large,simply do not want freedom.They want the government to provide everything for them.

Answer 9

I think it has nothing to do with gun control and everything to do with society. Way back when, if you had a problem with someone, you dealt with them. Now it's all about "let's do this correctly...be nice...play fair..."

Answer 10

People are more prone to snap today because of abuse or stress in their lives or within the Country and the World..