back to article Blood spilled from another US high school shooting has yet to dry – and video games are already being blamed

Once again, a mass murderer has opened fire at a school in America – this one is Santa Fe High School in Texas – and video games are already being blamed. Rather than, oh, say, gun control, or the lack thereof. Details are still coming in. The attack happened just a few hours ago. At this stage, it appears nine students and …

  1. Florida1920 Silver badge

    Early information

    Is that the shooter used his father's guns. The father was presumably not a victim of mental-health issues. He probably missed the signs that his kid was about to go off the rails. Texas is a very pro-gun state, so good luck getting its citizens to prevent their kids from taking a pistol or shotgun out for a ride. As the kid was only 17, he couldn't legally buy a handgun. But how can you absolutely prevent a messed-up kid from raiding the gun save?

    Please don't say, "Ban all guns," or something akin to that. It may have worked in the UK and parts of the Commonwealth, but it isn't going to happen in the U.S.

    Maybe if the perps got less spectacular coverage, the wannabes would be less inclined to try to outdo them. The recent spike in shootings looks an awful lot like a few losers trying to get their names in the news.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Early information

      "But how can you absolutely prevent a messed-up kid from raiding the gun safe?"

      Don't give him the key?

      1. bombastic bob Silver badge

        Re: Early information

        Don't forget this (alleged) perpetrator also (allegedly) made BOMBS. If he's willing to do that, he's willing to engage in all *KINDS* of different illegal activity to do what he wants to do.

        These kinds of people have a name: criminals. And no law in the world will stop them (but in most cases, it probably deters them). But the law CAN incarcerate them. And so it shall.

        To the best of my knowledge, it was illegal for a 17 year old kid to even possess/transport firearms. It was illegal to bring them to school. It was also illegal to shoot people and plant bombs around the area.

        Having laws against these things did not STOP them from happening. However, it DOES allow the courts to put this (alleged) perpetrator in JAIL, following proper legal procedings. And THAT should prevent him from doing it again, as well as sending a clear message to any OTHER potential perp out there... unless he gets off on a technicality, or slap-on-wrist sentencing for being "underage", and then gets out of prison to rinse/repeat.

        (but this happened in Texas, so they'll throw the book at him)

        1. Dave Harvey

          Re: Early information

          @bombastic bob

          "These kinds of people have a name: criminals. And no law in the world will stop them (but in most cases, it probably deters them)."

          Except that our laws in the UK do (contrary to myths from the NRA) massively reduce shootings, simply because they reduce the availability of guns to casual criminals. Sure, the drug gangs have a few, but the average kid like this one simply could get his hands on one, as his father wouldn't have any for him to steal.

          Which of course is why you need PROPER gun rules, which simply, as in most civilised countries, would ban ANYONE outside the military/law enforcement from owning ANY gun which can fire more than one or two shots without a manual reload. As is often pointed by the NRA and their gun-selling friends, simply banning some people from getting guns is useless - a more comprehensive solution is needed.

        2. JohnG Silver badge

          Re: Early information

          "Having laws against these things did not STOP them from happening."

          True but statistics show that countries with laws limiting access to guns by means of licensing have gun crimes/deaths/homicide rates orders of magnitude lower than the USA. In this respect, the USA is an anomaly among developed wealthy countries, having gun crime/death/homicde rates on par with poor developing countries in Africa and South America.

          1. Jamie Jones Silver badge

            Re: Early information

            Armed security guards in the schools is the only solution.

            I've been coming to this site for 5 years.

            That is the worst and most stupid post I've ever read. Even the Youtube-comments pondscum trolls aren't usually that moronic.

            1. Jamie Jones Silver badge
              Facepalm

              Re: Early information

              I've been coming to this site for 5 years

              Actually, that's wrong. My first post was 11 years ago.... Time flies when you're an old fart like me :-(

            2. Jove Bronze badge

              Re: Early information

              So in the time it takes the local Police to respond to an incident within a school, how many kids are you prepared to loose before you consider losses are too high?

              What alternative practical arrangement are you going to make to protect individuals during the first response window?

      2. Jove Bronze badge

        Re: Early information

        It is not a single kid - it is pretty much all of the younger generations over there - it just needs the right stimulus very virtually anyone of them to kick-off. Not that it is much different over here either - another 10 years and we will have whole lost generations of morons.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Early information

      Any responsible gun owner who doesn't keep guns in a safe where children - including many teenagers - can't get them and their ammunition freely *is not* a responsible owner, and he or she has a serious mental issue called "gun addiction & worshiping".

      1. Suricou Raven

        Re: Early information

        Look at it from the gun owner's perspective. Gun safes are great if you have a gun for sport or hunting, but a lot of people who buy guns value them a weapons for personal defence. A gun safe ruins that - if you anticipate having to fend off a home invasion, you won't have time for getting to the safe, fumbling with the lock in the dark, unpacking and carefully loading the ammunition. You want that gun ready and loaded in a place you can grab it, like a bedside drawer. Grab gun, flick safety, defend family.

        Or, you know, you could just sneak out the back and call the police rather than declaring yourself judge, jury and executioner. But that doesn't satisfy people's craving for independence or their hero fantasy.

        1. Charles 9 Silver badge

          Re: Early information

          Can't sneak out the back if the intruder's already inside. Could see you and want no witnesses. And if you're upstairs, that'll be one of the first places they check, cornering you. And that's not assuming they're directly out for you like in a rape.

          1. TheVogon Silver badge

            Re: Early information

            "Can't sneak out the back if the intruder's already inside."

            Let's hope you dont own any guns then. As US studies have shown they are far more likely to be used against you than for you get the chance to use them defensively.

            1. Charles 9 Silver badge

              Re: Early information

              "Let's hope you dont own any guns then. As US studies have shown they are far more likely to be used against you than for you get the chance to use them defensively."

              Really? Show the proof, then? How can the gun get taken away from you if you're holding it?

        2. Not also known as SC Silver badge

          Re: Early information

          @SRaven

          "but a lot of people who buy guns value them a weapons for personal defence. "

          Which isn't necessary a bad thing. I don't think people are calling for guns to be banned but controlled. Does a home owner need a loaded assault rifle at hand 24 hours a day to protect themselves from a home invader or would a hand gun suffice (never having held anything bigger than a .22 target pistol and that was 30 years ago this is a genuine question)? What is wrong with assault / hunting rifles being kept in locked safe and a hand gun readily available?

          I imagine that hand guns kill people a lot less quickly than assault rifles so restricting access to them would help reduce the death toll of a school shooter.

          1. TheVogon Silver badge

            Re: Early information

            "Which isn't necessary a bad thing"

            Yes it is. Thats not a legitimate reason to own a gun in most countries. You need a competent and well trained police force with some well trained armed officers.

          2. Anonymous Cow Herder

            Re: Early information

            A step in the right direction

        3. Blank Reg Silver badge

          Re: Early information

          The guns for self defence is mainly for the delusional. You or someone in your family are more likely to be killed or injured by your gun than the chances of you needing to use it for self defense.

          If you really feel that you need a gun for self defence then either you're paranoid and you don't really need a gun, or you live in a shithole and you should consider moving elsewhere.

        4. Jamie Jones Silver badge

          Re: Early information

          Google "Jim Jeffries gun control youtube"

        5. werdsmith Silver badge

          Re: Early information

          if you anticipate having to fend off a home invasion,

          The problem with using guns to fend off home invasions is that if an intruder expects a resident of a target home to have a gun, then they need to bring a gun with them to carry out the burglary.

          So the desperate smackhead who wants to grab a few easy to carry items of value to sell for his next score, now has to open fire when he encounters anybody in the home.

          He could even take care of the residents before they wake.

          1. tom dial Silver badge

            Re: Early information

            Many years ago, around 1955, my parents' house was burgled while we were there. The police told us at the time that they considered burglaries of occupied houses especially serious because those burglars, as against those who took care to choose homes that appeared at least temporarily vacant, quite often were armed and presumed prepared to their guns if challenged.

            This was in an inner ring suburb of a major city in which gun ownership was uncommon.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Early information

        Lock up the father too, for allowing the kid access to the guns. He is also responsible for the behaviour of his children under the age of 18.

      3. Old one

        Locking up guns not the solution

        Just search "teen uses gun to stop burgler" to see exactly why "locking up" all guns from teens etc is not a good solution.

        Being an old folk I remember gun racks and rifles in the back windows of trucks in the school parking lot. Going out shooting was a semi common place after school activity but no one even considered SHOOTING someone they had a problem with. Fist fights yes but guns never.

        So what has changed? Violence in video format has become too glorified and in many case instilled at younger ages as kids compete to get better scores. The violence is also mitigated by a reset button that starts over with all the same players alive again. Be it movies or games or TV that the dead aren't really and come back next week to fight again seems to have removed the consequence of actual death even to those who have faced it in their neighborhood.

        I wish I had a simple 20 word solution to the current problem. Florida was a kid bullied and TX was a kid rejected by a girl and then she apparently humiliated him in the class he killed her and 9 others. It seems that in most cases its a desperate revenge for how the shooter believes he has been treated like VA shooter of 32. maybe instead of soft comfort rooms these people need a "let the anger out room" where they punch the hell out of bags or some other let the pressure out relief.... I used to take a short piece of 2X4 and beat the he33 out of it with a hammer.... worked for me.

        1. Anonymous Cow Herder

          Re: Locking up guns not the solution

          I'm not sure exactly how old you are, but gun homicide in the US has been high since the 1970s. It hit a horrific peak in the mid 1990s but its always been pretty high.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: spectacular coverage

      Kids are dead, what exactly do you expect the mass media to do? I hate mass media with a passion but on this they are doing the right thing probably because they have no choice.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: spectacular coverage

        > [...] what exactly do you expect the mass media to do?

        Show some restraint. Don't glorify the killer. Report on people who resolved grievances without going on a rampage.

        There are many things the mass media should be doing to help. Sadly they can't see past ratings.

        1. Captain Obvious

          Re: spectacular coverage

          I wish I could upvote you a million times as I have been saying this forever!

        2. Mark 85 Silver badge

          Re: spectacular coverage

          That might help. I read somewhere about the theory that it's now a numbers game like the more kills the better.

          News is a big part of the problem. Does one's news feed need to be filled by any single story be it politics or a shooting?

          I can go along with "controls" such as mandatory gun safe locked down and the only access by the owner. I'd love to own an M1 and an M14 but I don't. Same for a .45 pistol. Memory of the military But... kids visiting, a target for burglary, so I don't. Assault weapons weren't used in this case but probably should be banned In my eyes they really are not useful even for home defense or anything other than target shooting. It's their abuse that's the problem.

          The catch with banning assault weapons is collecting them. Perhaps a huge license fee, inspections like they do for machine guns. Yes, you can own a machine gun legally here in the States. Pay the application fee (non refundable as I recall), let the government do the background checks, the site security checks, etc. and then there's a yearly license fee. The problem will still be the illegal ones out there.

          Making something illegal doesn't stop it and that is crux of the problem.

          1. NerryTutkins

            Re: spectacular coverage

            Europe was awash with guns after WW2, but somehow managed to remove them from society and become some of the safest countries in the world.

            Making something illegal does not stop it happening, but are you proposing legalizing rape and murder? This is not a reason not to have laws. If the laws were never broken, you'd not need them in the first place.

            The problem in the US I think is the focus on the big school massacres. The belief that gun deaths are because of mentally ill kids, and that somehow if you can keep an eye on their facebook or stop them playing video games, you'd solve the problem. But the fact is, the vast majority of gun deaths result from the kind of disputes that happen routinely throughout the world - domestic arguments, neighbours rowing over trivial things, road rage, etc. in Europe might result in fisticuffs and someone getting a black eye, but in the US the same red mist ends up with guns drawn and people getting shot. They are not pre-meditated attacks, they're routine disputes which turn deadly only because of the ease of access to firearms.

      2. Zola

        Re: spectacular coverage

        > what exactly do you expect the mass media to do?

        Watch this Charlie Brooker video featuring a forensic psychiatrist and decide if global wall-to-wall coverage of every mass shooting in America is really the best and only option available to the media outlets.

        Mental health issues, inadequate gun control, and the instant "fame" from mass news coverage is a powerful and dangerous combination but at least one of those factors could be addressed fairly quickly, although we know it won't be either of the first two.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: spectacular coverage

          Mental health issues, inadequate gun control, and the instant "fame" from mass news coverage is a powerful and dangerous combination but at least one of those factors could be addressed fairly quickly, although we know it won't be either of the first two.

          Media coverage of such events is often appalling. For the news channels each mass shooting is good for at least a few days wall to wall coverage, "justifying" their existence.

          Here in the UK we used to have a problem with IRA terrorists phoning in bomb warnings on the London Underground. There was a spate of these, fake. Lots of disruption. Cue a bunch of media coverage (though this was the early 1990s so it wasn't as saturated as it is today).

          We sorted it out by banning reporting of these events. The problem soon went away, despite censorship being undemocratic...

          The US constitution seems to be true cause of lots of problems, perhaps it should be changed.

      3. robidy

        Re: spectacular coverage

        Mass media always have a choice in the west.

        The problem is all too often they chose money (i.e. ratings) over balanced reporting.

    4. Simple Si

      Re: Early information

      "But how can you absolutely prevent a messed-up kid from raiding the gun save [safe]?"

      Perhaps by not having one - along with the gun that goes inside.

      I'm truly sorry to hear this has happened again, but history will repeat itself again unless something changes, either the law on availability or further restrictions to firearm capability which might help reduce the death toll in future shootings.

      The UK, in particular London, have had problems with high knife crime - banning knives would not be practical but guns are a different beast.

      1. Robert Helpmann?? Silver badge
        Childcatcher

        Re: Early information

        The UK, in particular London, have had problems with high knife crime - banning knives would not be practical but guns are a different beast.

        The genie is already out of the bottle and it isn't going back. The US is never going to be rid of guns. My take on politicians of all stripes who bring that up is they are trying to get out the base using scare tactics because they know this, no matter how sincere they are on the subject.

        Your statement, Simple Si, points to one thing that seems pretty important: the weapons are not the core issue, it's the violence that needs to be addressed. Easy access to guns makes the scope so much greater than it might be otherwise (until kids learn some basic chemistry and we shift from school shootings to school bombings), but why the hell are people resorting to this level of violence? What are the underlying causes that lead people to do these horrible things? I doubt there a single cause. Gang violence, poverty, teens looking to commit suicide by going out in a blaze of glory because teens, mental health issues (of which "teen" might be a subset), a culture that glorifies violence in many forms - how many of these are addressed by the groups fighting over gun rights? How many of them have been addressed successfully or even in part?

        Icon not just because of my handle this time.

    5. Florida1920 Silver badge

      Re: Early information

      "9 thumbs down"

      Wow, I've hit a nerve. Some people have been trying to further regulate guns in the U.S. for more than 60 years. I've seen it myself. Anyone who thinks there's a quick and easy 'fix' is deluded. My post was simply a statement of fact. Meanwhile, the media are swarming all over the Texas school, so the shooter has gotten all the fame and glory he craved. Somewhere in America, the next "troubled youth" is laying plans to out-do him. Having a free press doesn't mean they have to try to out-do themselves glorifying these creeps.

      1. 45RPM Silver badge

        Re: Early information

        You’re kidding yourself, I’m afraid - there has been no serious attempt to regulate gun ownership in the US. The NRA simply won’t stand for it.

        Truth it, there are sound reasons for permitting licensed ownership of rifles and shotguns (essential tools for farmers and hunters), provided that those weapons are demonstrably securely stored when not it use.

        There is no excuse for permitting private use of pistols and semi or fully automatic weapons. They’re dangerous, they kill (as has tragically been seen again today) and they have no practical purpose outside the military.

        1. wallyhall

          Re: Early information

          45RPM - agreed.

          I can’t comment on America’s culture, much less Texas’. But this is clearly a tradegy of significant proportion.

          As a Brit, living close to the US air bases (Mildenhall and Lakenheath) and being a generation of the internet - inevitably I’ve been told I’ve “given up my freedom” and “lost my rights” etc by not having laxer gun laws / greater “gun rights” here in the UK.

          Again - I am categorically not commenting on Texas. For me however, these tragic events continue to remind me that I have a very special right and a very special freedom: the right and freedom to send kids to school without any realistic expectation of them seeing a gun, much less being shot by one.

          My deepest condolences to the families of those killed or otherwise hurt.

          1. Jove Bronze badge

            Re: Early information

            It is not far off the point were we will need guns in London to protect ourselves from the anarchy on our streets brought about the political correctness of the liberal left.

        2. Adrian 4 Silver badge

          Re: Early information

          Regulate ammunition supplies.

          For personal protection,. you don't need more than one reload. If it takes more than that you've lost.

          For agriculture (most likely a shotgun), licences and appropriate storage can handle it.

          For target shooting, the shooting range can control it.

          For gun-nuts with a huge cache 'because' - prosecute.

          Avoid a rampager having a big enough cache to shoot more than a few rounds and the problem will be less.

          1. Ochib

            Re: Early information

            "Regulate ammunition supplies.

            For personal protection,. you don't need more than one reload. If it takes more than that you've lost."

            If I go to the gun range to shoot, I will be shooting more than one reload, On average you would use 100-200 rounds for practice 1-2 times a week. Where would I store the rounds?

            1. werdsmith Silver badge

              Re: Early information

              If I go to the gun range to shoot, I will be shooting more than one reload, On average you would use 100-200 rounds for practice 1-2 times a week. Where would I store the rounds?

              In a safe at the shooting range.

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Early information

              Easy, most ranges make you buy your rounds from them. Buy them at the range, when you run out get more. I'm sure they can come up with a frequent shooter card, so you can just have a card to give you another box when you come in next.

        3. L05ER

          Re: Early information

          The Brady bill.

          Good thing you exposed how stupid you are so I don't have to address anything else you said...

        4. Old one

          Really powerfull

          People & media love to blame the NRA not allowing stricter gun laws and even some confiscation of certain types of weapons but have you REALLY looked at the numbers?

          NRA membership is about 5M out of 365M Americans. So 5M of 220M eligible voters is 2.27% of the population tells the Congress and all state legislators what laws to pass..... It ain't the 1% but not much more. Not there is speculation that there are more than 300M guns of all types in private ownership in the US -- some go back a couple hundred years when there were no questions about who could own one. pretty hard to believe that all 300M guns are in the hands of just NRA members as that would be 60 guns for each member. So most likely thee are a lot of non-NRA members as gun owners and also believe in their rights under the 2nd. Otherwise the 97% of the population would have radically changed the laws and called for a change to the 2nd.

          1. Jamie Jones Silver badge

            Re: Really powerfull

            People & media love to blame the NRA not allowing stricter gun laws and even some confiscation of certain types of weapons but have you REALLY looked at the numbers?

            NRA membership is about 5M out of 365M Americans.

            You conveniently forgot to mention the bribes (*cough* donations)

            92% of Americans want to keep net neutraility.... How's that working out?

            1. Jove Bronze badge

              Re: Really powerfull

              More than two-thirds also want to retain the right to own guns.

      2. Dave Harvey

        Re: Early information

        @Florida 1920:

        Sorry to say this, but that pathetic combination of defeatism (nothing can be done) and American exceptionalism (nothing can be done because we're AMERICAN) is exactly where the problem lies.

        Contrary to the mantra of the gun manufacturers (for whom the NRA is simply their mouthpiece), the USA does have a perfectly good mechanism to amend the constitution (e.g. the 21st amendment reversing the disastrous 18th), so perhaps it's time for do the same for the 2nd (or at least clarify it back to its obvious original purpose top allow State militias), and bring the USA back into the realms of civilised countries.

        Those (like you) who argue against the possibility of fixing the gun problem aren't merely discussing the problem, you ARE the problem, and we can only hope that as/when your generation is replaced by your descendants, then perhaps sanity will eventually prevail.

        Yes, I know this is close to a personal attack, and I dislike them in general as much as anyone else, but this is a much wider issue, affecting a significant number of your compatriots, and it's time that arrogant Americans were told just how stupid their ridiculous views are when viewed from any other perspective.

        1. Florida1920 Silver badge

          Re: Early information

          @Dave Harvey

          One point constantly raised when discussing the U.S.'s "gun problem" is a comparison with the UK, Canada, Australia, or all three. Maybe because we all sort of speak the same language. The U.S. fought a war to get out of the Commonwealth. We don't have a monarchy, but we have two legislative bodies. It's easy to blame the NRA and claim the NRA is the problem. The NRA is a membership organization. Yes, they lobby the legislature, just like Big Oil and Big Agriculture. So, is the problem the NRA or the laws regarding lobbying? If the majority of Americans want more gun control, they have a method to get it. It's called "voting." I can remember anti-gun campaigns dating back 60 years. Simply stating the obvious doesn't make me part of the problem. The Texas shooter, BTW, didn't use one of those dreaded "assault rifles" (a term invented by the anti-gun movement); he used a shotgun and a revolver. Should his father be charged for letting him get to them? Maybe, but good luck with that in Texas.

          The U.S. is in a hell of a mess. The president is a gangster, and 40% of the population still supports him. Unfortunately, a significant portion of that 40% are pro-gun. Wishful thinking for simple solutions isn't going to work. You aren't going to solve one part of American cultural dysfunction without solving most of the other parts. As I said, I only stated the obvious. If the majority of Americans rose up and demanded Congress get rid of the entire Trump regime, I might see some hope on the gun front. You don't cure disease by treating the symptoms. School shootings are only the symptom of a much larger problem engulfing the U.S.

          1. 45RPM Silver badge

            Re: Early information

            @Florida1920

            The mechanism of voting is temporarily broken in America, as it is in much of the rest of the world.

            The problem is that the other half of the voting equation is marketing - most people can’t be bothered to investigate the issues for themselves so they will either default to tribal partisanship or go along with whichever campaign is glossiest and triggers a rush of endorphins.

            The NRA is very good at marketing - so of course people buy guns and sign up. It doesn’t, however, follow that the less sexy option of not owning a gun can’t become sexy (the marketing just has to be done right). For example, seat belts and airbags aren’t sexy - but would you buy a car without them (before they were well marketed you probably wouldn’t have wasted your money on a car with them…). Similarly, in the 1970s and even the 1980s most people didn’t have (or want) a computer - but now the damn things are everywhere, and are even seen as being fashion statements by some people…

            …which is a problem because all these computers have enabled social media which allows, for the first time in a century, unscrutinised marketing. In the traditional media, if you lie then you get your wrists slapped and you have to publish a retraction. In this brave new world if you lie then you get Trump and Brexit. Marketing, done right, can help rid us of the scourge of guns and knives. But we do need effective scrutiny.

            1. tom dial Silver badge

              Re: Early information

              "The mechanism of voting is temporarily broken in America, as it is in much of the rest of the world." Is this a comment on the fact that voting outcomes are what (usually) a majority want and not what a minority want? (The electoral college is a special case that solved a political problem in 1789 and for which a rational case still may be made despite the fact that the intent behind it largely has been destroyed).

              Again, is the NRA successful because they induce people to love and acquire firearms, or because a very large number of people already believe, correctly, that they have a right to do so and willingness to join - and fund - the NRA to advocate for them, in accordance with their first amendment right "peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances?"

              Is contemporary social media an extension of the self-appointed institutional "press" or is it a vast expansion of the old fashioned and effective rumor mill that was done largely outside of any formal control? (My answer: a bit of each.) And is its content really greatly different from attacks on Thomas Jefferson or Grover Cleveland (for example) in their presidential campaigns?

            2. aquaman

              Re: Early information

              https://youtu.be/IVfzvhRhmgI

            3. Jove Bronze badge

              Re: Early information

              "The mechanism of voting is temporarily broken in America, as it is in much of the rest of the world."

              That opinion is no doubt due to the voting systems that have worked so well are currently delivering leadership that you disagree with. The so call new voting systems are less effective, encourage partisan politics, corruption, and rigid systems that harder still to over turn - see Italy, Ireland, Metropolitan Councils (those that use partial re-election mechanisms) and any for or proportional representation that gives seats to loosers that then act without any consideration to the wishes of the electorate.

              Amending the USA constitution and legislation on gun laws is not going to fix the current problem unless you give answers to how they will be enforced.

          2. Dave Harvey

            Re: Early information

            @Florida1920:

            I actually agree with much of what you say - especially about the gangster in the White House, but there are a few things to take issue with:

            1) War of independence: This was nearly 250 years ago, with different weapons, and I can assure you that we (the UK) have absolutely no wish to invade you again, and if anyone tried, then I'm sure that your military would manage perfectly well without assistance from the general population! So really, this is a crazy excuse for "exceptionalism" - you're now no different from any other country, and you need to "get over" what happened centuries ago.

            2) NRA: I laugh when I see the NRA described as a "membership" organisation - the membership fees are tiny and barely cover the cost of the admin, and the vast majority of the money is sourced from the gun and ammunition manufacturers, and we all know that he who pays the piper calls the tune!

            3) Lobbying: Here we can 100% agree, the lobbying system in the US is totally screwed, and when combined with a dumb, impressionable electorate (38% of whom are so stupid that they believe that the earth is < 10,000 old!), this does effectively allow votes simply to be bought through advertising. Of course, the fact that the Supreme Court effectively legalised political corruption recently via 2 rulings (Citizens United & McDonnell) makes that even easier!

            4) I made no mention in my most of "assault weapons" or even of school shootings - the problem is ALL privately held guns, and as you rightly say, the school shootings are the tip of a huge iceberg of avoidable deaths.

            5) Yes, of course the Dad should be charged - I'm not an expert on Texas law, but some variety of negligent homicide would seem most appropriate - if nothing else it might persuade a few more parents to take better control of their guns (who knows, it might even cut the crazy number of shootings of and by toddlers!).

          3. anthonyhegedus Silver badge

            Re: Early information

            The solution is on the face of it, simple - increased gun control. However, before that happens, it would require a sea-change in attitudes. This is beginning to happen, but it's a cultural thing. Here in the UK it seems quite an obvious move. After the Dunblane massacre (where a number of young children were shot dead), nobody (except for Prince Philip, I seem to remember!) objected to very much increased gun control (and we already had some pretty strict rules). Perversely enough,here in the UK it is legal to own a semi-automatic "assault rifle" - if you can prove you need one. But it is not legal to own a revolver or any type of handgun. But in America, the prevailing attitude to guns as being a "right" needs to change before anything much will ever happen.

            I hope it's soon. Far from being seen as the "world's policeman", it's gone to being the world's "joke country" and with all these loonies who think owning a gun is a good idea, it'll soon become the world's dangerous and to be avoided joke country.

            1. Is It Me

              Re: Early information

              @ anthonyhegedus

              The only semi-automatics that can be owned in the UK are .22.

              Also there are some options for handguns, either as "muzzle loaders" or as "long barreled" pistols.

              All of these still require that you can demonstrate a need to your local police licensing teams, and have suitable secure storage that only the licensed users can access.

          4. DaveTheForensicAnalyst

            Re: Early information

            @Florida1920

            "dreaded "assault rifles" (a term invented by the anti-gun movement);"

            Sorry mate, you're wrong on that one, not every term is an anti-NRA/Anti-gun dig. The term Assault Rifle was coined by the military after it moved from high velocity long range weapons, to lower velocity "Assault Weapons" duly named because of their specific ease of use during the "Assault" phase of a section/platoon level attack, and also "Assaulting" stronghold buildings during Fighting In a Built-Up Area (FIBUA), the weapons are better at assaulting due to their lower velocity/higher fire-rate ratio, meaning the depth of round penetration is more controllable whilst still capable of providing a sustained rate of fire to manage the enemy during the final phase of a fire-fight.

            I do, however, utterly agree that the US is in "a hell of a mess", and being not a native of the US, can not truly imagine how desperate a people must be when out of 325.7 Million people, they could only come down to Hilary Clinton, or Donald Trump as their presidential candidates. From the outside, it makes for a grim irony that your former presidents have Library's named after them, when the level of reading of their own history is clearly so limited, if they haven't already learned that allowing your children to die because of a constitutional right, written in the 1700s when the weapons of the day were the Blunderbuss musket (let's face it, you didn't have the Harpers Ferry musket until after the constitution was ratified), then I feel they are unlikely to learn for a long time coming.

            Maybe after a few of these nutter kids, end up breaking in the the NRA headquarters, trump tower, or even at a sitting of congress some more of your politicians will sit up and take note, but whilst the NRA are "lobbying" (see "throwing shed-loads of money at politicos) I doubt it will make a blind bit of difference.

          5. heyrick Silver badge

            Re: Early information

            "Should his father be charged for letting him get to them? Maybe, but good luck with that in Texas."

            I think that there says all that needs to be said...

          6. Alan Johnson

            Re: Early information- anti-gun paranoia on display

            "The Texas shooter, BTW, didn't use one of those dreaded "assault rifles" (a term invented by the anti-gun movement);"

            Gun control paranoia showing here. The term Assault rifle was not invented by the anti-gun movement but by Adolf Hitler 'Sturmgewehr' for the first assault rifles which were created in WW2 and this has been the common term for this sort of weapon ever since. I claim an exception for this comment to Godwin's law that it is relevant and accurate.

        2. Jove Bronze badge

          Re: Early information

          Dribble. Perhaps you should spend some time in country before mouthing off. legislation will not work, it will just mean arms will pour in across the borders. There are no simple solutions, but as to blame you want to thank the liberals and the individualism movements from the 50s and 60s for this - that is the root of the problem.

        3. Jove Bronze badge

          Re: Early information

          Sure you can change legislation, but who are you going to get to enforce it for you? You might also want to consider the starting point, and whether the polls are an accurate reflection of public opinion or just another case of public manipulation by the liberal left.

      3. Geoffrey W Silver badge

        Re: Early information

        Well, Mr Florida1920, if you and your like are unwilling to do anything about guns other than take pot shots at straw men, then you'd better get used to this happening again, and again, and again, and accept that other countries are going to look at you with disgust, and that your death toll is going to rise a lot higher than your thumbs down count is going to go. Hope it never happens to you and yours.

        1. Jove Bronze badge

          Re: Early information

          And how would you deal with the civil war that will break out given that the likes of you have been working to undermine state and police forces that you will rely on over a period of years to make a ban work.

      4. NerryTutkins

        Re: Early information

        After the regular US massacres where AR15s are used, we get the normal corrections from gun nuts insisting it's not an assault rifle. And they're right.

        But why don't shooters use assault rifles? We assume they're better for killing people, because the military have them. And they're fully automatic. But the perps don't arm themselves with M16s... instead they go in with the semi-auto, lower calibre AR15. Why?

        It's because it turns out the US does have some regulations. It seems to be very hard to get hold of fully auto assault rifles, hence shooters arm themselves with the inferior AR15.

        And so this proves two things.

        Firstly, gun control works. That's why shooters end up using AR15s instead of the superior M16 the military uses. The argument that bad guys won't take any notice of the law doesn't stand up. If that were true, they'd all have M16s. The problem is, gun control works, so much as they might prefer to have them, they simply cannot get hold of them.

        Secondly, there is no constitutional problem with enacting more gun control. There is clearly no problem in the US banning certain types of guns (M16s), or making them incredibly hard to get hold of, to the point where there are very few of them in circulation. So it's simply a matter of where to draw the line.

        The problem is really that there are too many people in the US who are wedded to the idea of owning guns, who feel safer, even if they're living in a country 5 times more dangerous than Europe, and politicians who have political and economic connections to the gun industry.

        1. Spikehead

          Re: Early information

          @NerryTutkins

          The M16 uses a 5.56 NATO cartridge. The AR15 is available in anything from .17 rimfire up to a .50 Beowulf. Yes, AR15 is only semi-auto but can be chambered for much more powerful cartridges.

          The AR-15 inferior? The M16 is based on the AR15 (it was the original rifle offered to the military), with the only difference being the M16 having a select fire receiver (and the AR15 now available in more calibres).

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Early information

          Secondly, there is no constitutional problem with enacting more gun control.

          Absolutely correct. It's somehow been decided in the U.S.A. that people convicted of "felony" crimes, such as money laundering, unauthorized use of a computer, etc., are no longer entitled to possess firearms at all.

          So, either (1) they are somehow not part of "the people",

          or (2) the second amendment CAN be regulated.

      5. Why Not?
        Stop

        Re: Early information

        Unfortunately you seem to have hit a vein of stupidity our American cousins seem obsessed with.

        Any normal person on being told you are twice as likely to be shot by a Toddler than killed by a terrorist would think Holy Ship its time for gun law reform. Some Americans think "I need to pop out and buy an assault rifle".

        https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/08/trump-muslim-terrorists-gun-violence-america-deaths

        Honestly guns should only be carried by the specially trained minority of law enforcement (if you give them to all cops being non white seems to up your risks substantially) and the Military preferably well trained as well.

        There is some sense in those that target shoot or manage land having single shot arms for targets, foxes or rats.

        We have had > 60 knife deaths this year and questions are being asked in the house, For you that's a bad week in Texas for gun crime.

        Please lobby for gun control, your population deserve it. Now we are related by marriage I think I have to say something :)

      6. Jove Bronze badge

        Re: Early information

        Unfortunately you have cut across the Snowflake narrative so they have to swamp you with negative feedback to signal their collective, moronic agenda disapproval. Just hang in there, few if any of them will be able to string a sentence together.

      7. heyrick Silver badge

        Re: Early information

        "Wow, I've hit a nerve."

        Triple figure downvotes on the first post, and getting there with this one. The thing is, maybe you think that...

        "Some people have been trying to further regulate guns in the U.S. for more than 60 years."

        Sure, some people might have been, but is there any actual serious attempt to talk about gun control? Even before the scapegoat of video games was dragged out as "justification", there were the usual calls to arm the teachers. You don't get rid of a gun problem by introducing even more guns to people unlikely to be trained in, or wanting to have, use of weapons.

        "Anyone who thinks there's a quick and easy 'fix' is deluded."

        Certainly. It's going to take a lot more dead children to change the mindset of the powerful lobby known as the NRA.

        1. Jove Bronze badge

          Re: Early information

          "Anyone who thinks there's a quick and easy 'fix' is deluded.

          > Certainly. It's going to take a lot more dead children to change the mindset of the powerful lobby known as the NRA."

          ... and public opinion; It is about 3 to one in no bans on hand-guns - so put forward all the legislation you want, you will not get sufficient support to take guns off of the general public.

          We are also getting nearer the point in the UK were the general public will be calling for the right to own guns for self protection.

          1. Anonymous Cow Herder

            Re: Early information

            "We are also getting nearer the point in the UK were the general public will be calling for the right to own guns for self protection."

            No we aren't you f**king troll

    6. TheVogon Silver badge

      Re: Early information

      "Please don't say, "Ban all guns," "

      How about licensing guns with a requirement for basic firearms safety training, and a gun safe with a yearly police inspection required to get a gun license - like the UK does. And ban assault rifles - they simply have no legitimate civilian use.

      1. Apple][Guy

        Re: Early information

        AR-15 style rifles make excellent rifles for shooting nuisance animals, such as wild feral pigs, Coyotes, and Antelope jackrabbits.

      2. Ochib

        Re: Early information

        "assault rifles " are banned. However there is no such weapon

    7. TheVogon Silver badge

      Re: Early information

      " But how can you absolutely prevent a messed-up kid from raiding the gun save?"

      Use one of these?

      https://www.safe.co.uk/Categories/gun-cabinets/lock-biometric-lock/1.html

    8. steviebuk Silver badge

      Re: Early information

      Invest in a quality gun safe with the parent only have the key and not leaving it in a place where the kid can get it. If you leave it in a certain place, move it each week in case the kid has worked out where the key is.

      1. ZanzibarRastapopulous Silver badge

        Re: Early information

        > Invest in a quality gun safe with the parent only have the key and not leaving it in a place where the kid can get it. If you leave it in a certain place, move it each week in case the kid has worked out where the key is.

        LoL What kind of a retard would be stopped by that?

        Safes are great against burglars, but when you live with them day in day out for years they will get to it.

    9. Anonymous Coward
      Big Brother

      Re: Early information

      "Please don't say, "Ban all guns," or something akin to that. It may have worked in the UK and parts of the Commonwealth,"

      That's the thing though.

      It hasnt worked here, not even a bit.

      I know the constant propaganda tells you we have very little gun violence here because of it, but the actual fact of the matter is that we have never really had a problem with gun violence to start with, even when guns were widely available to the public.

      And the levels of violent gun crime are at similar levels as they have always been.

      And lets face it the UK has banned just about everything to the point where it is a meme.

      'Oi M8, you got a licence for that!'

      Hasn't stopped London from having more murders than New York.

      And there are countries in Europe that have plenty of guns in their population, and virtually no gun crime.

      But they are often overlooked, (And by overlooked, I mean purposely ignored because they go against the main propaganda points) because its easier to blame 'things' than 'people'

      Because you cant blame people or groups of people for their actions, because people being held responsible is apparently a bad thing.. for reasons..

      That said I do have to wonder though how many of these kids, surrounded, influenced (indoctrinated?) in 'celebrity culture', would of even thought to do these things, if the media didnt go out of their way to make sure that they would be household names, I mean CNN had supposedly taken screenshots of his facebook pages minutes after it happened ffs.

      1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        Re: Early information

        "I mean CNN had supposedly taken screenshots of his facebook pages minutes after it happened ffs."

        Although I take your point re the facebook pages screenshotting, that's can also be seen as grabbing it while it's there. It's highly likely that those sorts of pages etc. will be taken down rather quickly in these sorts of situations. But I have little doubt the prime motivation was so they could use them in the breaking news sections.

      2. JohnG Silver badge

        Re: Early information

        "Hasn't stopped London from having more murders than New York."

        In a one month snapshot. When looking at annual figures for 2017, New York had 3.4 homicides per 100,000 people, whereas London only had 1.2 homicides per 100,000 people.

        "I know the constant propaganda tells you we have very little gun violence here because of it, but the actual fact of the matter is that we have never really had a problem with gun violence to start with, even when guns were widely available to the public."

        Gun control in the UK started in 1903 and became succesively tighter over the last 100 years. Guns have not been readily available in the UK in living memory.

        1. Jove Bronze badge

          Re: Early information

          "but the actual fact of the matter is that we have never really had a problem with gun violence to start with"

          That is incorrect.

      3. TheVogon Silver badge

        Re: Early information

        "It hasnt worked here, not even a bit."

        Yes it has.

        "And the levels of violent gun crime are at similar levels as they have always been."

        Which is at one of the lowest levels in the world.

        "Hasn't stopped London from having more murders than New York."

        For one period of 60 days ever. New York has way more than London over any statistically significant time period.

        1. Jove Bronze badge

          Re: Early information

          ""It hasnt worked here, not even a bit."

          Yes it has.

          "And the levels of violent gun crime are at similar levels as they have always been."

          Which is at one of the lowest levels in the world."

          That is a somewhat conceited stance, and is the usual selective manipulation of statistics to support the agenda signalling.

          We do not have ready access to guns in the UK, so the savages are using acid and machetes. Include those numbers and the UK comes much higher up in the rankings of violet deaths in USA cities.

          1. Anonymous Cow Herder

            Re: Early information

            "We do not have ready access to guns in the UK, so the savages are using acid and machetes. Include those numbers and the UK comes much higher up in the rankings of violet deaths in USA cities."

            Nowhere near

      4. DavCrav Silver badge

        Re: Early information

        "Hasn't stopped London from having more murders than New York."

        Sorry, I'm going to have to shout at this point.

        PLEASE STOP REPEATING THIS. IT IS FALSE.

        There were two months with slightly higher figures. New York is at an all-time low, London is at an all-time high. The 2018 running total has New York higher than London, those months were statistical aberrations. And we are calling the London murder rate an 'epidemic', because it's still lower than New York's but not by as much as usual.

      5. Mooseman Bronze badge

        Re: Early information

        "It hasnt worked here, not even a bit."

        Name one school shooting since 1996 in the UK. Can you? No. Proof, I think, that you are talking nonsense. Gun crime is roughly the same, yes, which is a very low level , roughly 50-60 people a year ( the dunblane year was the highest on record at 84). Compare this to the USA in say 2014 when there were more than 8000 gun homicides.

        We had one mass shooting in 2010. That's it. Next stupid argument please?

      6. Anonymous Cow Herder

        Re: Early information

        @ooFie

        I think you've been a little more than biased with your data. Generally, the number of gun related homicides per capita tracks the number of guns per capita. The fit isn't perfect but it certainly does not make your point. The US actually has a low number of homicides compared to the number of guns in circulation, but that seems to be because they hit a saturation point quite some time ago.

        UK had pretty good gun controls before the hand gun ban and so the fact that it did't reduce much (It actually halved from 1000 in 1993 to around 50 in 2010) should not be evidenced as a failure. For a bit of balance, the gun homicide rate in the US is on a general decline since the peak of the mid 1990s, but in my opinion, the numbers are still shockingly high.

    10. ShelLuser

      Always from the same school?

      Is it only me who can't help but notice that it's almost every time someone from the same school who is responsible for this kind of horrific action? And am I the only one wondering what led up to all this?

      For all I know the kid could have been bullied for most of his time at school and eventually snapped and decided to take things to extremes. That would definitely tell you something about the mental state of the shooter, but it would also reveals quite a bit about the school they attended. However, the 'why' part is usually fully ignored, even though you could increase your chances of trying to prevent stuff like this from happening if you did pay some attention to that too. Just make sure you're not treating this as some kind of twisted 'excuse' but to find ways where you might improve on things.

      I can't help but get the impression that instead of walk outs from school to protest against gun violence it might be a much better idea to organize a walk IN: trying to band together and to make sure that all students are pretty much on the same level. Especially where mutual respect for each other is concerned.

      1. Jamie Jones Silver badge

        Re: Always from the same school?

        For all I know the kid could have been bullied for most of his time at school and eventually snapped and decided to take things to extremes.

        A fellow student said that the shooter ALWAYS wore a dirty old long trenchcoat, and smelled badly, and was often mocked/teased for it.

        {Source: https://youtu.be/EZpUUFEZ3t8)

        I know you aren't using this as an excuse - but many people will - it's a diversionary topic - Growing up, there were kids like that in my school. I'm sure everyone here was in school with someone similar. There were presumably also kids who were being abused, kids mocked for their sexuality, kids from broken homes etc.etc.etc. - didn't make them mass murderers though.

        1. Jamie Jones Silver badge

          Re: Always from the same school?

          Incidentally, one person was killed and another injured at another school shooting incident in Georgia on the same day. Georgia school shooting: One killed, two injured.

          I bet hardly anyone knows about this. One school death won't make the headlines....

          1. Jove Bronze badge

            Re: Always from the same school?

            "Incidentally, one person was killed and another injured at another school shooting incident in Georgia on the same day. Georgia school shooting: One killed, two injured."

            Probably in a constituency that the Democrats won 2016.

            1. Anonymous Cow Herder

              Re: Always from the same school?

              "Incidentally, one person was killed and another injured at another school shooting incident in Georgia on the same day. Georgia school shooting: One killed, two injured."

              "Probably in a constituency that the Democrats won 2016."

              Did you just make a witty comment about a high school shooting?

              Are you actually drunk or crazy?

    11. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Instead of fixing the problem...

      There is a solution here, but the democrats refuse to embrace it. You think you can live in a cotton candy colored world, but that is not reality. Violence will always exist. You can put a lock on a knife, a club, a rock...

      Armed security guards in the schools is the only solution. That or make the schools akin to a high security prison with constantina line gates and 100% pat downs prior to entering the building.

      Oh yeah, better get rid of the Science labs as well - explosives in the making...

      "Harry: And how is theory supposed to prepare us for what's out there?

      Umbridge: There is nothing out there dear. Who would you imagine would want to attack children like yourself?

      Harry: Oh, I don't know, maybe Lord Voldemort?"

      1. hplasm Silver badge
        Facepalm

        Re: Instead of fixing the problem...

        "Umbridge: There is nothing out there dear. Who would you imagine would want to attack children like yourself?"

        Harry: Oh, I don't know, maybe nutters with guns?

      2. heyrick Silver badge

        Re: Instead of fixing the problem...

        "Armed security guards in the schools is the only solution."

        Fat lot of good having an armed guard did the kids in Florida...

    12. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Early information

      You should add ......This information is brought to you by the NRA.

    13. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Early information

      "Maybe if the perps got less spectacular coverage, the wannabes would be less inclined to try to outdo them. The recent spike in shootings looks an awful lot like a few losers trying to get their names in the news."

      A new approach to rival the stupidity of blaming video games - "if we all ignore it, maybe it will go away".

      Alternatively, instead of banning guns, perhaps there could be an exception that you can own a musket. Instead of semi-automatic weapons, perhaps a gun where it takes you a few minutes and a helluva lot of effort to reload it yourself.

      The constitution calls for a right to bear arms. I don't see anyone rallying for their own ICBMs, so pretty much every gun advocate agrees with limits on the 2nd amendment.

      1. Charles 9 Silver badge

        Re: Early information

        Don't be so sure about yhat. People DO own actual tanks, and there are some who aspire to missile launchers and portable bombs. Still can do a lot, but much more man-portable.

    14. Voland's right hand Silver badge

      Re: Early information

      Please don't say, "Ban all guns,

      Try the father as an accessory to murder of 10 people. And give him the same tariffas to someone who gives a hitman a gun to kill 10 people.

      That should give other parents some food for thought.

    15. ukgnome Silver badge

      Re: Early information

      Fine - keep your guns. No really - I don't care about them.

      For for the love of cod and chips lock up your ammo.

      You see if the guns don't have ammo then they are really crap bats.

    16. Multivac

      Re: Early information

      I read your comment:

      "Please don't say, "Ban all guns," or something akin to that. It may have worked in the UK and parts of the Commonwealth"

      And thought it really needed a little correction:

      "Please don't say, "Ban all guns," or something akin to that. It may have worked everywhere else in the world."

      1. Jove Bronze badge

        Re: Early information

        "I read your comment:

        "Please don't say, "Ban all guns," or something akin to that. It may have worked in the UK and parts of the Commonwealth"

        And thought it really needed a little correction:

        "Please don't say, "Ban all guns," or something akin to that. It may have worked everywhere else in the world."

        So what about places like Thailand?

    17. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Early information

      Incarcerate the owner of the guns (i.e. the "responsible" parent). That ought to focus minds.

    18. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Early information

      Please don't say, "Ban all guns," or something akin to that.

      Ok. Pocket-Nukes! Equip everyone with a 100 kT device small enough to fit in a back-pack. Anyone pisses anyone off or threaten anyone with anything, the offended party can push their button and everyone around are history. There could be a slogan: "Don't bring a gun to a nuke-fight, get your own tactical nuke Today. Before it is Banned! It's the only way to be Safe!!".

    19. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Early information

      Here's The Onion link:

      https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1826142891

      Please notice it's the same headline as last time. And the time before that. And the time before that.

  2. LDS Silver badge

    If it were videogames...

    ... at least all other developed countries with a comparable use of video games should have a comparable level of mass murderers in schools.

    It doesn't happen - probably because teenagers outside US are not heavily armed, nor their families - so it looks the problem is not in videogames...

    Of course we have our issues, like teachers attacked by students and parents - at least barehanded, thus no fatalities. Even criminals here rarely use assault rifles, albeit there are still many crime-related murders, especially among organized crime members.

    I think foxes should ask to rename the channel Dumbass News - it's ruining fox reputation as a smart animal...

    1. TheVogon Silver badge

      Re: If it were videogames...

      "I think foxes should ask to rename the channel Dumbass News - it's ruining fox reputation as a smart animal..."

      Faux News?

    2. veti Silver badge

      Re: If it were videogames...

      What saddens me is that Fox News hosts apparently think it's appropriate to take their moms to McDonald's for a mother's day dinner.

      Perhaps if Fox paid a bit better, they might be able to attract some people with a working brain to the job.

    3. Spike

      Re: If it were videogames...

      OK, but doesn't Canada have comparable levels of both firearms and video games?

      Should they not be equal then?

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I hope he's an Animal Crossing player just to fuck up that stupid argument.

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge

      He was obviously traumatised by Mr Resetti.

    2. d3vy Silver badge

      It will be that Marilyn manson wot dun it.

      I really hope he listened to nothing but Genesis.

      1. Geoffrey W Silver badge

        There's violence in Genesis - The Battle of Epping Forest for one, where Bob the Nob gets smacked in the gob...dangerous stuff.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I guess we’ll just have to send thoughts and prayers

    The victims won’t be getting anything else.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I guess we’ll just have to send thoughts and prayers

      https://www.thoughtsandprayersthegame.com/

      1. handleoclast Silver badge

        Re: I guess we’ll just have to send thoughts and prayers

        https://www.thoughtsandprayersthegame.com/

        Now linkified.

        Obviously, it can't do any good because it's a video game and it's video games wot cause the mass shootings. So you'll just have to keep playi

        Logic error detected at line 13.5.

        1. Jamie Jones Silver badge

          Re: I guess we’ll just have to send thoughts and prayers

          The solution is simple:

          Ban all guns.

          Period.

          Zero tollerance.

          No excuses.

          Any problems? When the gun-nuts complain? Simply offer them our "thoughts and prayers" which they obviously will accept as a viable solution.

  5. Kev99 Bronze badge

    It's not video games. Witness the number of shootings in Canada, England, and Downunder. IT's because of two things.

    First, the courts mistakenly ruling every Tom Dickhead and Hairy can have a gun even the US constitution only mentions "a WELL regulated militia..." (emphasis added).

    Second, it's the sensationalist news media, including you, Vultureman, who insist on plastering a LOCAL event across the world.

    1. Voland's right hand Silver badge

      gun even the US constitution only mentions "a WELL regulated militia..." (emphasis added).

      You missed half of the problem. The above sentences finishes with "has the right to bear arms".

      It does not say "Has the right bear arsenals".

      1. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge

        But an aresnal isn't required.

        1. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge
          Facepalm

          But an aresnal isn't required.

          Neither is an arsenal.

      2. Grikath Silver badge

        It also helps that the arms of the day consisted of stuff you could possibly fire every 30 seconds, if well trained, had an accuracy of a well-aimed baseball, and a penetration power that could literally be defeated by a pack of wet paper. All the other arms were more....intimate... shall we say.

        The modern stuff...... wellllll.....

        1. tom dial Silver badge

          In the eighteenth century, people in the US had the best firearms they could afford. As they did in the nineteenth century, and the twentieth, and as they do now, subject generally to the laws in effect at the time. The argument, so called, that the second amendment protects ownership of flintlock muskets and pistols probably is not intended seriously, but even if not is rubbish.

      3. Jove Bronze badge

        "You missed half of the problem. The above sentences finishes with "has the right to bear arms".

        It does not say "Has the right bear arsenals".

        Is that a legal interpretation? How can you have the first without the latter?

  6. YourNameHere

    Its not the guns, its the people.

    These same people want the people who do the smallest amount of drugs thrown in jail. They want the drug dealers put away for life and their ability to vote removed. But they don't blame that on games. However, if a kid unloads a gun on a school ground or out of a building killing tens of people, then its, well okay... Just don't take away our guns. Its my right to be able to kill a bunch of people when I want... Its the only thing that makes me feel like a man since I am lacking on other ways...

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    America - Was that one of the shit hole countries Trump was talking about?

    America needs to wake the fuck up and get itself sorted.

    I know, I know, that's unfair. America has already decided dead teenagers piled a mile high is a fair price to pay so gun murder apologists can have their toys and second amendment rights.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It really is stunning

    how tragedy after tragedy unfolds, yet five million NRA members can hold 350 million hostages just to get what THEY want. A majority of Americans are for stricter gun control, background checks, mental heath screening, etc., but here we are, and will likely remain, for the foreseeable future.

    1. Boris the Cockroach Silver badge
      IT Angle

      Re: It really is stunning

      Quote

      yet five million NRA members can hold 350 million hostages just to get what THEY want. A majority of Americans are for stricter gun control, background checks, mental heath screening.

      The heart of the problem is that congressional districts are now so gerrymandered that the primary threat to a sitting congress critter is not the opposing party, but his/her own party.

      Suppose a republican congresscritter makes a speach advocating some sort of gun control.

      You can be sure that the NRA et al will be calling every republican voter in the district to support their candidate to unseat the current guy.

      and its usually the dedicated political people who vote in the primaries that throw out the reasonable candidates and replace them with idiots like..... trump for example

      "A well regulated milita" well they had a supreme court ruling that the militia is the citzens of the USA, so lets do the first 3 words....

      1. tom dial Silver badge

        Re: It really is stunning

        Fixation on the "power" of the NRA is a distraction and an excuse. The NRA has, at bottom, the power of speech, combined with the funding necessary to support the advocacy staff, provided largely by voluntary membership dues. Their influence - the weight incumbents and those who would like to replace them assign to their advocacy - results from the perception, probably correct, that the NRA "speaks for" a large number of voters, combined with a similar perception of the logic of their arguments. Failure to recognize this, which also is true of most successful lobbying, is delusional, magical thinking.

        For the record, I am not and never was an NRA member or supporter and do not and never have owned a gun.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: It really is stunning

      Horse-hockey. There might be 5M NRA members at most, but recent surveys show that between 45M and 50M households (not individuals, but households with multiple occupants each) own at least one gun (in a nation w/330M men, women and children). And, no one who owns a gun takes that ownership lightly. That is, there is a helluva lot more support for gun-ownership in the US than the NRA membership, and its lobby, as the opponents of gun ownership would like everyone to believe (and apparently have convinced most commentators here). If that were so, gun control would have been voted in long ago. There are many different reasons for people demanding to own personal weapons and to see that as a right, as well as a lack of trust in law enforcement and elected representatives to act competently and responsibly should that right be compromised.

      1. Tom 38 Silver badge

        Re: It really is stunning

        And, no one who owns a gun takes that ownership lightly.

        Quite bold to talk for 50 million households - it seems at least one of those households didn't care too much, and left the guns available for other members of the household to borrow without them without noticing. I would call that "taking it lightly".

        1. Charles 9 Silver badge

          Re: It really is stunning

          Do we have proof of this? Or was it a case, like with Sandy Hook, of a determined by quiet adversary studying the situation, planning it out, and then seizing control at just the wrong moment? It's hard to hide something from someone dead set on getting it, especially when he lives with you.

    3. Jove Bronze badge

      Re: It really is stunning

      "A majority of Americans are for stricter gun control, background checks, mental heath screening, etc"

      ... but they are not in favour preventing the public from owning firearms.

      Even then, if you do get changes to the legislation, how are you going to enforce it with a country that has porous borders to the South across which organised criminals are able to ship substantial quantities of narcotics and weapons?

      Suggesting changes to legislation is just massaging your own ego unless you prepared to go out yourself and take the guns off of the people (without access to a gun of course).

  9. Lee D Silver badge

    Britain has the same video games as the US.

    No school shootings in 22 years.

    However we banned private handgun ownership 22 years ago because of a school shooting.

    Something tells me there's some kind of correlation there that they're missing.

    1. Franco Silver badge

      Exactly what I was going to say Lee.

      We had a mass shooting in the UK at Hungerford in 1987 and gun laws were adjusted accordingly, and then again after the Dunblane massacre in 1996. We've only had one mass shooting in the UK since, in Cumbria in 2010.

      Who in the hell can self-justify that it is legitimate to need to own automatic weapons simply because it's in a law that was written in 1791?

      1. frank ly Silver badge

        "Here at El Reg, we have one top-class rifle shooter who practices his art in the UK, ..."

        I thought all firearms (except licensed shotguns for farmers, hunters and gamekeepers) were banned in the UK? Didn't the Hungerford shooter use an AK47?

        1. Bronek Kozicki Silver badge

          @frank ly firearms are not banned in the UK. They are regulated. You need checks, permit, training and reason to own one. For shotguns, the sufficient reason is sport or shooting vermin. Reasons for owning a rifle are also rather relaxed. On the other hand, self-defence is not considered to be a valid reason, for any type of weapon. Also, UK does have firing ranges where one can train even without the necessary permit (subject to club membership).

          Obviously, that kind of legislation severely limits the number of firearms which can be legally sold to a civilian population, which is the one and only reason why NRA would never allow it in the USA. All these lives lost in the vicious cycle of the homicides, fatal accidents and mass shootings are for one reason only: profit of weapon producers. Which is why any argument in defence of NRA and the 2nd amendment comes out as defending the indefensible, at best.

          1. Spikehead

            @Bronek Kozicki

            You do not need a reason to own a shotgun. A shotgun licence is a "shall issue" if there are no reasons not to. There is no limit on how may you can own once you have a licence, no limit on the amount of ammunition, and you do not have to prove they are being used regularly.

            A firearm licence (rifles, shotguns that can hold more than 3 shells) are "may issue" and you need to have a reason to own them, belong to a rifle club and regularly use them. You have to state which calibres you wish to own, are limited to buying only what you've asked for and are limited on the amount of ammunition you can hold.

            1. werdsmith Silver badge

              You do not need a reason to own a shotgun. A shotgun licence is a "shall issue" if there are no reasons not to.

              I have to show my clay pigeon club membership and prove my attendance to renew. They won't renew my licence if my reason is just because I fancy owning one.

              I also have to show my double-locked steel cabinet secured to a structural wall. And have a clean house when the police firearms officer randomly turns up to interview me.

              And if they police firearms guy turns up the gun better be under lock if I'm not actively cleaning/maintaining it, or transporting it somewhere.

        2. TheVogon Silver badge

          "I thought all firearms (except licensed shotguns for farmers, hunters and gamekeepers) were banned in the UK? Didn't the Hungerford shooter use an AK47?"

          Rifles are also permitted. Not military or semi auto though.

          1. Ochib

            "I thought all firearms (except licensed shotguns for farmers, hunters and gamekeepers) were banned in the UK? Didn't the Hungerford shooter use an AK47?"

            Rifles are also permitted. Not military or semi auto though."

            You can shoot an AR-15 in the UK, however it needs to be converted to bolt-action. The University of Texas tower shooting ( 16 people (including one unborn child) dead and 31 injured) was with a bolt action riffle.

        3. Jamie Jones Silver badge

          "Here at El Reg, we have one top-class rifle shooter who practices his art in the UK, ..."

          I thought all firearms (except licensed shotguns for farmers, hunters and gamekeepers) were banned in the UK? Didn't the Hungerford shooter use an AK47?

          A popular misconception.

          And yeah, if you google reg hack "Gareth Corfield" you'll find lots of shooting related pics of him.

          There are legal shooting ranges and clubs all over the UK - some even have semi-automatics - even AR-15's. [ http://www.thetunnel.co.uk/shooting-experiences ]

          There is of course, trained supervision. I guess in the UK, our arms are available to the "well trained militia"

    2. Jove Bronze badge

      "Britain has the same video games as the US."

      Perhaps if you travelled to the USA and visited a few of their stores you might not make such a ridiculous comparison.

      These shootings are now part of the natural selection in the USA; pretty much the same as for any of those of the receiving end in a large number of locations around the world - they were just guilty of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

      You can also apply the same rules to London with all the machete killings we have - all due to too much Political Correctness and Left-Wing Agenda.

      Dear Reg please stop filing this kind of dribble; it does not belong in the Reg.

      1. Jamie Jones Silver badge

        Re: "Britain has the same video games as the US."

        all due to too much Political Correctness and Left-Wing Agenda.

        *ding-ding* cuck alert!

        Also, the rest of your post makes no sense, yet you call the Reg article "dribble"?

        If yoy ever decide to move to America, I'm sure you'd get a job at fox.

        1. Jove Bronze badge

          Re: "Britain has the same video games as the US."

          Well given your lack of command of the English language I'll take your comments to be part of the tide of sponsored agenda-signalling. How is the weather over there?

          P.S.

          I have lived in several places in the States over extended periods so I know a little of the background and the scale of the problem, which is more than can be said for the Snowflake dribble spouted on here.

    3. Jove Bronze badge

      "Britain has the same video games as the US.

      No school shootings in 22 years.

      However we banned private handgun ownership 22 years ago because of a school shooting."

      They do not need guns in the UK now that the Liberal Leftists have emasculated the Police and the Law Courts. The scum and savages do what they want in the UK backed by a media that only publishes stories that fit with their liberal agenda.

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Yep, knew I should never have played Carnival and how it would turn me into a gun wielding maniac.

    Nice theory NRA to take the heat of the fact real guns kill people just like the Texas University shooting in 1966 before the advent of video games.

    1. tfewster Silver badge
      Facepalm

      I play violent video games. I also have mental health problems. And work with some Americans who piss me off constantly. But I've never felt the urge to fly to the US, buy a gun and shoot them.

      I'm only a sample of 1, but maybe, just maybe, it's access to guns that's the problem?

      (I've never gone on a rampage with a knife either, but that's probably because I'd get my arse kicked).

      Not AC, because I'm quite comfortable with who I am.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        >Not AC, because I'm quite comfortable with who I am.

        AC because who I am doesn't matter, it's what people say that matters.

        If your really that comfortable with who you are then you'd also publish your real name, address and telephone number.

      2. Jove Bronze badge

        "I play violent video games. I also have mental health problems. And work with some Americans who piss me off constantly. But I've never felt the urge to fly to the US, buy a gun and shoot them.

        I'm only a sample of 1, but maybe, just maybe, it's access to guns that's the problem?

        (I've never gone on a rampage with a knife either, but that's probably because I'd get my arse kicked)."

        ... but it does not stop your Yankee co-workers pissing in your Tea while you are not looking.

  11. This post has been deleted by its author

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

  12. Jay Lenovo

    Pong gave birth to my Wrath

    Most "violent" video game players I know, are happier to attack the sofa with a box of pizza, than even leave the house.

    A school's working social scene isn't always friendly for the obligated participants. Maybe schools should just let "I'm feeling violent today", be an excused absence and follow up with some prescribed help.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Fortnite video game Virtual-Gun mows down 20 In Texas

    That's how crazy Foxnews' claim is! We live in a surreal 'Onion' like world.

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It's not video games, it's the gun culture of the USofA. Plain and simple.

    1. DiViDeD Silver badge

      I think it may be deeper than just 'gun culture'. Merkins have many attitudes which seem odd to European minds. Apart from the '2 places in life - 1st and nowhere' attitude that their culture seems to happily ascribe to, many merkins I have known over the years (WARNING: anecdotal content) have shared the firmly held belief that:

      1. If you take away our guns, only criminals will have guns and we'll all be murdered in our beds

      2. Because I have a gun, I am less likely to suffer a home invasion than someone without one (the inference being that the number of people wishing me harm is 'anyone who is not me or part of my immediate circle, and I'm not too sure about some of them')

      Just what I've observed.

  15. mrobaer
    Unhappy

    $0.02 from a gunless veteran

    I believe the gun owners should be held criminally liable to some extent due to their negligence when it comes to not having secured their weapons.

    Guns are a very polarizing subject, without a doubt. These senseless shootings are an absolute tragedy. I think everyone understands that. It bothers me that it's only a 'problem' that deserves national attention when children are shot. What about all the other shooting victims? This is where the media does have some role in glamorizing these killers. Also, what about all the other children killed in automobile accidents? Yes, vehicles kill more children than guns do. We give children the privilege to drive at 16 years old (younger on farms) and the privilege to hunt at 12 years old. Is this too young?

    There has to be more than just bandage solutions to these problems. Putting metal detectors at schools will surely help stop the shootings inside the schools. But I fear that will just change the venue to other places more public where the desired target group frequents.

    I believe this is a moral issue that has to be dealt with in every home. Somehow doing horrible things is becoming acceptable in the minds of our children. There has to be something influencing this.

    It also goes without saying that our healthcare system is failing many mentally ill people. I've seen it rapidly decline in my area over the last 15 years or so.

    1. Mark 85 Silver badge

      Re: $0.02 from a gunless veteran

      I quite agree and I'll add this... It's only the white shooters (schools?) getting the attention. A higher percentage of blacks are killed by gunfire than whites. Yet the media and those who bemoan the shootings ignore this. It's just as big a tragedy yet buried somewhere around page 5 in most papers. I should point out, that most of the guns used there are pistols at close range and non-registered (many are stolen guns). Some cities it's so bad the cops don't regularly patrol so as not be targets.

      It is a mess out there... black, white... we're killing ourselves. The big question is "why?". Solve that question and maybe the killings will drop.

      1. Charles 9 Silver badge

        Re: $0.02 from a gunless veteran

        Probably because most of those killings are gang-related: criminal-on-criminal. Guess what? The public has been turning a blind eye to crooks whacking each other even during the Roarin' 20's.

      2. mrobaer

        Re: $0.02 from a gunless veteran

        I live in a town with a population just under 52,000 and it's rather diverse. I believe we've had less than 10 homicides by firearms in the last 10 years. The most recent that I can remember was a domestic case of murder suicide. Most were robberies, one was an actual 'hit' organized by a wife and her lover to kill her husband. With the exception of the murder/suicide, they all received about the same amount of local media coverage. The vitriol of a couple of the victims' lifestyles was very shocking. When it came to light that they were either a drug deal gone bad, or someone robbing a known dealer, it's like the 'vocal' public turned on the victim. I can see how that might be similar around the country, and why such stories don't "gain traction" in the news.

        1. Charles 9 Silver badge

          Re: $0.02 from a gunless veteran

          Like I said, if it's crooks whacking each other, the public turns a blind eye because it's one less thing for the cops to worry about.

        2. Allan George Dyer Silver badge

          Re: $0.02 from a gunless veteran

          @mrobaer: "I live in a town with a population just under 52,000 and it's rather diverse. I believe we've had less than 10 homicides by firearms in the last 10 years."

          My town has also had less than 10 homicides by firearms in the last 10 years. Population: about 7 million.

          1. mrobaer
            WTF?

            7 million people, less than 10 gun deaths in 10 years?

            Please, do share the name of that 'town' of 7 million people!

            1. Allan George Dyer Silver badge

              Re: 7 million people, less than 10 gun deaths in 10 years?

              Hong Kong.

              city: a large town {Cambridge Dictionary]

              1. Charles 9 Silver badge

                Re: 7 million people, less than 10 gun deaths in 10 years?

                Large cultural difference. Plus having mainland China next door probably has an effect on criminal activity (it's something you can probably do in the Far East, but remember people in the US don't trust the government).

                1. Allan George Dyer Silver badge

                  Re: 7 million people, less than 10 gun deaths in 10 years?

                  @Charles 9 - Sure, there's a massive cultural difference, so it might be worth looking into the differences. Cultures can change, look at sexism, sexuality and racism over the last 50 years, if enough people want the change.

                  I wouldn't lump the whole Far East together, there are big regional differences. As for trusting Governments, plenty of examples of... uh forcible leadership change.

                  The China mainland's effect on crime in HK is complicated.

                  I'm not saying HK is perfect, just that you're missing an opportunity for comparison if you dismiss it with "large cultural difference".

                  Note: I was inadvertanly misleading with the HK gun homicide figures for the past decade, I checked: the most recent gun homicide in HK was 2006. Fortunately 0 < 10, so my claim was technically accurate.

                  1. Jove Bronze badge

                    Re: 7 million people, less than 10 gun deaths in 10 years?

                    "I wouldn't lump the whole Far East together, there are big regional differences. As for trusting Governments, plenty of examples of... uh forcible leadership change."

                    You will also more than likely be fooling yourself. For a start, the Triad "Economy" was last estimated to be bigger than that of the EU.

                2. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: 7 million people, less than 10 gun deaths in 10 years?

                  remember people in the US don't trust the government

                  Yes, that's the thing, isn't it? If the USA is the World's Greatest Democracy (TM), then you'd think the people put some faith in the government. If it truly is representative democracy of "We The People", then basically the people don't trust themselves.

                  That actually shows in the mindset about gun ownership - "I need guns to defend myself against criminals," means "I fundamentally distrust my fellow countrymen."

                  Yes, there are criminals in every country, but compare the high gun ownership rate in the USA with the high proportion of the population that is incarcerated, and trace it back to the "punishment and vengeance, not rehabilitation" approach to criminal justice.

                  For a nation that seems to like to think of themselves as "Christian", they're pretty much guided by base fear and old-testament wrath-type thinking.

                  1. Charles 9 Silver badge

                    Re: 7 million people, less than 10 gun deaths in 10 years?

                    "That actually shows in the mindset about gun ownership - "I need guns to defend myself against criminals," means "I fundamentally distrust my fellow countrymen.""

                    They do. The greatest fear is the Day of the Jack boot when the government gets usurped. Someone with enough power can cast ANY government aside. Plus on the matter of home defense, many times the cops arrive too late. Minutes away when it's often a matter of seconds.

                3. Jove Bronze badge

                  Re: 7 million people, less than 10 gun deaths in 10 years?

                  "Plus having mainland China next door probably has an effect on criminal activity"

                  Oh dear. Do a little background reading before engaging mouth.

              2. mrobaer
                Facepalm

                Re: 7 million people, less than 10 gun deaths in 10 years?

                Well then, aren't I the fool for not knowing what a city is. =(

                By the way, the "wtf' icon was for the town population, not the murder rate. I was really curious to know where this safer city was. =)

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: $0.02 from a gunless veteran

        A higher percentage of blacks are killed by gunfire than whites. Yet the media and those who bemoan the shootings ignore this. It's just as big a tragedy yet buried somewhere around page 5 in most papers

        It's because they are so damn frequent that it's business as usual. Ten getting killed at a school at the same time, is, however deemed newsworthy.

        A real danger comes as accepting these mass shooting as, also, normal, and therefore not newsworthy.

        I live in a major U.S. city where several people are killed by guns in separate incidents every weekend. Am I aware this is happening? yes. Do I accept it as "normal"? Yes, sadly.

      4. Jove Bronze badge

        Re: $0.02 from a gunless veteran

        "A higher percentage of blacks are killed by gunfire than whites. Yet the media and those who bemoan the shootings ignore this. It's just as big a tragedy yet buried somewhere around page 5 in most papers."

        Plenty of coverage of Baltimore if you care to take a look. The problem is that many of those killings, if not the majority are Black-on-Black.

  16. Codysydney

    With the way video games are going, they could help here. If you had to grind for an hour to get a bullet, or pay $1 per golden bullet every time you fired, people would stand a better chance of escape.

  17. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Only Military??

    "There is no excuse for permitting private use of pistols and semi or fully automatic weapons. They’re dangerous, they kill (as has tragically been seen again today) and they have no practical purpose outside the military."

    Really? Only the Military should have pistols and semi-automatics? Nobody else?

    What about police?

    What about private security guards?

    What about private citizens for personal security?

    Did you really argue that no private use of (any) pistols? Even six-shooter revolvers, which are not semi-auto?

    And how do you plan on implementing such a proposition?

    1. Grikath Silver badge

      Re: Only Military??

      Police.. maybe.. But YMMV in large parts of Europe, where quite a few officers are not ever armed with *guns*.

      All the others... nope.. If you need a gun to feel "secure", *YOU* are the problem..

    2. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Re: Only Military??

      The Founding Fathers DIDN'T TRUST militaries.

      1. israel_hands

        Re: Only Military??

        The Founding Fathers DIDN'T TRUST militaries.

        So fucking what? Their opinion on militaries is fucking irrelevant to the modern day. Primarily because they're all fucking dead and so haven't had a chance to revise their hallowed opinions in light of recent events.

        And anyway, with the amount of money that's been spunked into the US military* it doesn't matter how many tooled up rednecks you've got roaming the countryside. Trust them or not, the modern US military is not going to get stopped by amateurs with access to AR15s and bump-stocks.

        If only you yanks weren't so fucking scared of everything maybe you could step back and see that in an actual civilised country there's no need for everyone to go around armed. Because civilisation tends to imply that people don't randomly try and murder each other.

        *The irony of the US military being so powerful is that it's driven by the same pathetic fear that keeps you all so beholden to the idea of gun ownership. Then again, your government (and by extension the arms companies that fund so many politicians) want you scared, because you're more likely to do stupid things...

        1. d3vy Silver badge

          Re: Only Military??

          @israel_hands

          I always like the "I need a gun to protect me from the government" line.

          You've got a semi auto rifle and a few thousand rounds of ammo. The government has the whole us army behind it... I'm pretty sure they're better equipped.

          1. gnasher729 Silver badge

            Re: Only Military??

            "You've got a semi auto rifle and a few thousand rounds of ammo. The government has the whole us army behind it... I'm pretty sure they're better equipped."

            A bomb dropped from 100 meters height, doesn't matter what weapons you have.

            1. MJI Silver badge

              Protect from government

              Well we have the following

              Elections, can get rid of.

              A Monarch, able to dissolve if required. Don't think ever used.

              A military sworn to alliegance to said Monarch NOT government. So if government tried it on military would say no and their head would dissolve the government.

              Perhaps it will become civilised over there if you rejoined the Commonwealth. Perhaps you could even have a President who is also a Royal!

            2. Charles 9 Silver badge

              Re: Only Military??

              "A bomb dropped from 100 meters height, doesn't matter what weapons you have."

              How come no amount of bombing could stop the Ho Chi Minh Trail?

          2. Charles 9 Silver badge

            Re: Only Military??

            "You've got a semi auto rifle and a few thousand rounds of ammo. The government has the whole us army behind it..."

            Oh? Explain Vietnam, Somalia, and why it took so long in Afghanistan and Iraq?

    3. TheVogon Silver badge

      Re: Only Military??

      "What about police?"

      Specialist well trained and evaluated police, sure.

      What about private security guards?

      Nope. Not required. Except very specific exceptions like the special forces guards of visiting dignatories.

      What about private citizens for personal security?

      Nope several studies in the US have shown that owning a gun decreases your personal safety.

    4. tom dial Silver badge

      Re: Only Military??

      Guns are dangerous. That includes the revolver and shotgun reported to have been used at Santa Fe High School. It may be inconvenient to the arguments gun control advocates make about "assault rifles," but it is a fact.

    5. d3vy Silver badge

      Re: Only Military??

      "Really? Only the Military should have pistols and semi-automatics? Nobody else?

      What about police?

      >> Only in certain cases not day to day.

      What about private security guards?

      >> no.

      What about private citizens for personal security?

      >> Again. No.

      "

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Can't deny reality

    While few people want to admit it, violent videos in fact do desensitize young people to death. The military uses violent videos to desensitize young recruits who may soon be in real combat. While violent videos may not be the root cause of violence, it certainly can be a contributing factor to violence for young under developed minds.

    The fact that the author of this story thinks that gun control can prevent violent incidents shows a complete lack of reasoning. Guns are a convenient device for some people to commit violence. As history has shown when guns are not easily available evil people will use IEDs, poison, knives, cars, planes, etc. to kill innocent people. You can't eliminate all of the devices that people can use to kill or injure other people. Some of the most horrific violence has been in countries with the most stringent gun laws so more gun laws are not likely to in any meaningful manner reduce violence in society.

    To ignore history is to repeat it. Dealing with mentally unstable and evil people before they kill is the only practical means to reduce violence. Some folks do not understand that you can not legislate evil out of society.

    1. Francis Boyle Silver badge

      "evil people"

      Well, there's your problem.

      The problem is not and has never been about evil people. The people who use guns to kill people aren't movie villains with eevil plans. They're very ordinary people who have gone off the rails due to delusional thinking or clearly diagnosable mental illness the health system can't or won't treat. They're even very ordinary men who carry a gun to feel tough, then use it when it turns out they're not tough enough to control their anger. It's even ordinary toddlers who find a gun in their mother's handbag and think it's a nice toy.

      The only real evil is the willingness to condemn other people as evil. Everything else follows from that.

      1. Charles 9 Silver badge

        Re: "evil people"

        Not necessarily a gun. Just a feeling of being cornered or dead-ended and developing a need to lash out and/or take others with him. Note there have been plenty of massacres where guns weren't involved (Bath Township, Oklahoma City, 9/11). And plenty of mayhem can be had with just a car...or a gas can and a match...

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: training...

        Media, society, and including the subset computer games, do teach solutions to problems. They do reinforce the ideas of solutions to problems.

        Mainly they present violence as the solutions.

        Yes, other things can contribute more, such as family violence, social violence, isolation etc. So it's down to individuals, to help individuals, we need to talk to them about how they view violence in computer games, how the react to it.

        Personally, I've turned off films and games, not because I don't know it's pretend, but because I know somewhere, there are real people suffering such crimes and violence. Why would I want to watch such events replayed out in front of me?

        That is a question people need to ask themselves.

        1. Charles 9 Silver badge

          Re: training...

          To vent. Ever heard of catharsis?

    2. mattcang

      Re: Can't deny reality

      I cannot upvote this enough!!! Glad someone had the ability to put reason into these comments....

      For all those saying guns are the problem, why not ban knives, lighters, bats, cars, and anything else used to kill people? Cigarettes and alcohol kill more people than guns!

      The person who kills another like in these school shootings has a mental issue. It's possible that this person has been aided by desensitization because of movies, TV and violent video games. Can we go more to the root of the problem please?? How easy is it to say 'take the guns'? What's next...take the knives? Takes the bats and rocks and sticks? How about we regulate the use of video games and hold parents liable for what their children take in? How about we invest more money into mental health care? How about we tie responsibility of child to parent? Stop glorifying killers, conduct stronger background checks, enforce existing laws....

      Have you seen the behavior of kids nowadays in school? I would not want anyone I care about to be a teacher in the USA. IT IS ALL ABOUT PARENTS TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR CHILDREN!!! You want to cut down on ALL violence? Get the parents to do their JOB!! SMH

      1. Charles 9 Silver badge

        Re: Can't deny reality

        I wish we could tie responsibility of the child to the parent, but that smacks too much of a Bill of Attainder: a no-no under the Constitution. And without that, how are you going to force parents to take responsibility? Require a license?

        1. Tom 38 Silver badge

          Re: Can't deny reality

          I could totally believe that in the US you will be required to have a license to procreate sooner than you will be required to have a license to buy a gun.

  19. Trey Pattillo

    Please help spread this....

    Zero $ for doing nothing NRA check to congress-critters. https://ibb.co/ngOC5o

    Would someone with more “social media” status than me, none — anti-social, please get the below rewrite of Sound of Silence by Simon & Garfunkel to the #nevermore and #amarch4life and especially today’s Sante Fe disaster. We all must “hammer” the congress-critters to get this fixed.

    By the way, in the 1920’s after Al Capone and crew shot up Chicago and New York, congress out lawed machine guns [tommy gun], so what are they waiting on.

    I do have this in the Creative Commons licensing and anyone is welcome to record & send it out, my music skills are worse that social media.

    Thanks, wap3.

    The Sound of Corruption

    Hello, liar our old friend

    We've come to vote you out again.

    'Cause corruption softly was creeping

    Left its seeds while you were dreaming.

    And the vision that was planted in your brain

    Still remains

    With in the halls of corruption.

    In restless halls you walked alone

    made of polished granite stone

    'Neath the halo of a desk lamp

    You turned your life to the cold and damp

    When your eyes were blinded by the flash of a media light

    That split the night

    And touched your vision of corruption.

    And in the naked light you saw

    10 million people, maybe more

    Voters talking loudly, protesting

    You hear without listening

    People writing laws that voters never knew

    none of you

    Disturb the sound of corruption.

    "Fools", said I, "You do not know

    corruption like a cancer grows,

    Hear our protest we might teach you

    Take our petition we might reach you"

    But our words, like silent teardrops fell

    And echoed in the wells of corruption

    And the voters bowed and prayed

    To the phony gods they made

    And the sign flashed out its warning

    In the words that it was forming

    And the sign said "The words of the prophets are

    Written in history's walls

    And tenement halls

    And whispered for defeat of corruption."

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    When commenting on Fox News remember that it is not actually a "news channel"; in the US there are different licences for various kinds of TV channel - Fox is not licenced as a news channel as it doesn't meet the requirements (presumably because it doesn't want to).

    1. Andrew Williams

      It's a long time since ANY media did journalism

      Mostly it's just spin to fit the outlet's prevailing narrative.

    2. Solmyr ibn Wali Barad

      It's a pity then that any jackass can name their channel as "*News" without having a news license.

  21. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    There is a very easy way to stop these crimes that does not require changing the constitution, nor does it punish all all abiding gun owners.

    The next time one of these events occurs, where the shooter is caught red handed with no doubts as to his identity, that evening stage a public hanging of the perpetrator that is broadcast on every media and internet outlet.

    Once people see there are immediate consequences for their actions, all of these shootings will stop.

    But of course this guy and all the rest of them instead are given free room and board for the rest of their lives as a consequence of their actions, and the media, politicians and the public cannot figure out why individuals continue to commit these acts.....

    1. chuckufarley

      You mean like how...

      ...down voting is supposed to stop people from posting illogical nonsense without thinking it through first?

    2. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Won't work. They'll just adopt Blaze-of-Glory tactics like blowing themselves up or staging a shootout with the cops.

      Worse, someone could be crafty enough to FRAME someone else enough the public is left with no doubt yet misdirected all the same.

    3. DiViDeD Silver badge

      @AC Re: Hang the Buggers

      "Once people see there are immediate consequences for their actions, all of these shootings will stop."

      Yes indeed. That has worked very well for us in the past. We made even small thefts capital crimes and you know what? All crime in Britain disappeared overnight. Australia emptied as the original convicts died off and nobody dared commit a crime to replace them, hangmen joined the dole queues all over the country....

      Or was it the time when the phrase 'you might as well get hung for a sheep as a lamb' first used?

  22. tfewster Silver badge
    Facepalm

    Most shooters die at the scene. Did that that deter anyone? Or suicide bombers?

    Quite apart from the lynch-mob mentality.

    1. DiViDeD Silver badge

      Perhaps a better approach might be to ask the question 'what would make a person so desperate that they are prepared to die in a suicide attack?'

      Because, let's face it, that's how most of these things end.

      Incidentally, I was unaccountably depressed to hear the newsreader lead this story with the words 'In the latest US mass shooting at a school', as though it's not even worth getting outraged about.

      But then again, what was the last school shooting you heard of? And which country did it happen in?

  23. a_yank_lurker Silver badge

    Random Babblings

    What I have seen with too news events in general is the 'news' outlets (on cable in particular) have to fill time. So they grab some babbling moron who knows absolutely nothing about the particular situation to pontificate about it live. Often the ponitifications are shown to be wrong once the details finally emerge a few days later as they usually do. These details usually also show a more complicated situation than the babbling blowhards ever imagined. Also, the media is prone to latch on to 'official' sources who may know very little who also spout off random nonsense and spread rumors. None of this specific to this situation but a general observation of media behavior, particularly of the TV channels.

    About this situation, other than it happened and several were killed and more injured, I doubt much is really known by the investigators at the time of this post. And I doubt any of the pontificators on your favorite new outlet really knows anything about the situation other than the barest facts. Certainly they do not why this tragedy occurred and at this point the investigators may not really know either. I understand they have the shooter in custody so the investigators can interview him to find out why. But getting clear answers takes time and effort by the investigators.

    Making intelligent policy to prevent these from happening requires avoiding knee jerk reactions by all. How did he get the guns? Several possible answers and depending on the actual answer is there a way to prevent someone like him from getting them in future. In a couple of recent mass killings, the shooter was not entered into the database due various administrative stupidities as required by law and was thus able to buy them legally. Where the guns stolen? Do not know but that raises another set questions. Where the guns legally owned by a relative? Again, this raises a different set of questions. At this point, there are more questions than answers. Why did he do it? The answer here is also not obvious but important in possibly stopping future events. Was he a known problem that was ignored? Was there a recent traumatic event that triggered this? Answers these types of questions point to different issues and possible solutions. Again more questions than answers. And I do not have the answers to these questions and I may not have raised the pertinent question for this case.

  24. Sergey 1

    Guns in the hands of stupid people

    And why are we shouting "gun control" instead of "stupid control"?

    Why are stupid rights more important than gun rights?

    Same stupid can drive a car, quite legally!

    1. Mark 85 Silver badge

      Re: Guns in the hands of stupid people

      Same stupid can drive a car, quite legally!

      And the news stories about someone running down numbers of people all at once should generate an outcry also...

    2. Dave Harvey

      Re: Guns in the hands of stupid people

      The whole problem is summed up by the phrase "gun rights" - and anyone who uses it simply doesn't understand the scale and nature of the problem.

      Citizens don't have a right own nuclear bomb, or a nerve gas, or even multiple psycho-active substances, so why should owning any sort of lethal weapon be regarded as a "right"? Just because a corrupt Supreme Court (voting along partisan lines, with the majority having been installed by NRA supported presidents) chooses to ignore the first half of the second amendment, doesn't mean that thousands of people per year should die as a resulting a stupid and unintended "right"!

      1. Charles 9 Silver badge

        Re: Guns in the hands of stupid people

        "Citizens don't have a right own nuclear bomb, or a nerve gas, or even multiple psycho-active substances, so why should owning any sort of lethal weapon be regarded as a "right"?"

        Care to state just where in the law (especially the Constitution) such weapons are prohibited to private parties?

        "...chooses to ignore the first half of the second amendment..."

        Let's read that amendment in its entirety, then:

        A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

        According to the usage of the word in 1790 (the time this was written), something that was "regulated" was maintained, organized, prepared, etc. IOW, by your own logic, those words support the NRA in the need to keep the militia prepared for any eventuality. As for the "individual" thing, recall that a militia can be a militia of one AND their intention was that every able-bodied adult male (about 18 to 45) were to be in some militia. Also, they are ANTI-military; that's why they wanted the militias to be the backbone of American defense.

        Lastly, consider the overriding tone of the Bill of Rights. The main theme was to protect the citizen by limiting the government. About the only time the Bill of Rights limits citizens directly is in the 7th Amendment, and that's because it covers civil disputes: a necessarily citizen-vs-citizen thing. Seen that way, the Second Amendment is empowering the citizen by limiting the government's ability to disarm it.

      2. Jove Bronze badge

        Re: Guns in the hands of stupid people

        "Just because a corrupt Supreme Court"

        Would that claim stand-up in Court? Your interpretations do not make them facts - but if you want to go back to the Inquisition ...

    3. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Re: Guns in the hands of stupid people

      As a comedian once said, "You can't fix Stupid." Plus there's the whole inaliable right to life and liberty thing. How would you deal with that?

  25. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "...background checks for firearms ownership..."

    A background check to buy a gun is a bit like imposing a breathalyzer test to buy a car.

    In the USA, when people go insane, they don't go to the gun store. They've already been there sixteen times in the past year. When their mind goes, they just walk to the next room where there's already a stash, purchased while they were still sane.

  26. chuckufarley

    The fine print* says...

    ...that Fox News is in the entertainment business. They can say what ever they want if they think someone will find it entertaining. They have no obligation to be honest or to have a social conscious. Ed Murrow spins in his grave at relativistic speeds every time they broadcast. Of course they are attacking video games. Video games are their competition.

    *This post is for enlightenment purposes only. El Reg doesn't give a crap about my opinions and would ban me from Teh Interwebs for life if they read this. If I ran for Public Orifice I would be shot for too much of the truthiness. That bit about Ed Murrow spinning at relativistic speeds is most likely not true, but someone should check just in case.

  27. sanmigueelbeer Silver badge
    Happy

    Just the fact that so many kids are awash in video games

    Is this a direct quote from the NRA or is he trying to look after his retirement future by getting nominated into the NRA Board of Directors?

  28. Baldrickk Silver badge

    Thursday:

    This article

    A woman who slung an assault-style rifle across her shoulder for her graduation photos in the US has sparked a fierce debate over personal freedom, student protests and white privilege.

    Bennett, who later posted the photographs on Twitter, says she was protesting against a university policy that prohibited students, professors and employees from carrying "lethal weapons" on campus - but allows "guests" to possess them on school grounds (but not in buildings).

    Me: "Oh, nice way to protest against people bringing guns to a school I guess"

    Nope, she was protesting against not being allowed guns at the school.

    Friday:

    This article.

    Sigh.

    A fairly good video on the subject of gun control

  29. sanmigueelbeer Silver badge

    Some people have been trying to further regulate guns in the U.S. for more than 60 years.

    The people who are for gun regulation are called "targets". The who are against it are called the "shooters".

    The shooters are mostly the upper echelon of US society. They are the rich and the well connected. And then add the basket-case system in the US called the upper and lower house. Uh-huh. Sure.

    We are currently focused on people who have purchased a gun legally. What about those who are circulating in the black market? How do one "regulate" the black market?

    Gun regulation -- that ship has sailed and has made it to the promised land (and it ain't coming back).

    Americans need to think about the next step: If you want to be safe, travel in a bullet-proof vehicle with side-firing flamethrowers (like in South Africa), bulletproof vests, ballistics headgear and a good medical/life insurance.

    1. Boo Radley

      Black Market Guns

      We have plenty of gun laws already which aren't enforced.

      I have bipolar disorder, and probably could not legally buy a gun. However, for less than $100 I could buy a nice semiautomatic pistol anywhere here from a private owner, in fact, just last week a friend brought one to my home to show to me. And the idiot managed to shoot himself while showing me.

      The point is, making guns less legal or illegal won't stop criminals or crazy people getting access to them. But if guns ARE illegal, the criminals WILL still have them, and the rest of us will be less able to protect ourselves.

      Somewhere I lost my train of thought...

    2. Mark 85 Silver badge

      The shooters are mostly the upper echelon of US society. They are the rich and the well connected.

      Go visit certain neighborhoods in Chicago after dark, preferably on a Friday or Saturday. It sounds like a major firefight there.

      1. Charles 9 Silver badge

        Gangs have connections to the black market, so they count.

  30. diadomraz

    RE: Criminals will still own guns

    I see this argument frequently on many gun control discussions. Yes - you cannot regulate the black market and a determined criminal can obtain a gun pretty easy. However criminals don't do mass school shootings - they are shooting mostly at other criminals, sometimes at the police and rarely at some bystanders.

    Gun laws won't prevent somebody like Breivik in Norway to legally acquire guns but may act as a deterrent for a disgruntled teenager.

    1. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Re: RE: Criminals will still own guns

      Then explain the notorious suicide rates in gun-light countries like Japan and South Korea. Point is, take one means away and they'll just switch to another. Remember, plenty of massacres didn't use guns.

    2. Francis Boyle Silver badge

      Re: RE: Criminals will still own guns

      I followed a link above and ended up at the wikipedia page List of massacres in Australia. Interesting in that in the list includes just one mass shooting with 10 people killed before 1981 that wasn't part of the frontier wars. Then from 1981 to 1996 something like 120 died in mass shootings (that includes the 35 people murdered at Port Arthur). Then John Howard (of whom I'm personally no fan) found the courage to act. In the next 15 years there were still mass shootings because of course criminals can still get guns, but fewer than 25 people were shot down by spree killers. That's a massive turnaround. So guess what - I'm happy to live in a country were only criminals have guns.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: RE: Criminals will still own guns

        Until someone commits a car-ram massacre or uses a homemade bomb. Then what?

        1. gnasher729 Silver badge

          Re: RE: Criminals will still own guns

          The good thing about homemade bombs is that they often go off in the home of the person who made them.

          1. Charles 9 Silver badge

            Re: RE: Criminals will still own guns

            I don't know about that. Ask the IRA, Ted Kaczynski, or Terry Nichols (his partner's already dead so can't talk).

          2. Jove Bronze badge

            Re: RE: Criminals will still own guns

            "The good thing about homemade bombs is that they often go off in the home of the person who made them."

            Utterly crass.

      2. Jove Bronze badge

        Re: RE: Criminals will still own guns

        "... So guess what - I'm happy to live in a country were only criminals have guns."

        Would that include Ciudad Juárez in Mexico?

    3. Jove Bronze badge

      Re: RE: Criminals will still own guns

      "However criminals don't do mass school shootings ..."

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Iguala_mass_kidnapping

  31. FuzzyWuzzys Silver badge

    Too complex for black and white

    Computer games, music, youtube videos, Tony Blair, etc, anything can contribute to a persons instability, then give them access to a tool of violence and they have a better chance of making their "scream" heard. You can never point you finger at one thing and say "There! That thing there made little Johnny go to the gun cabinet.", it's simply too complex. Given today's complex and pressured lifestyles, especially among teenagers and young people with the myriad of social pressures in their lives, any combination so things can trip someone and make them find a solution to their frustration. We pray it never happens to our own children but every single human being on this planet has it inside them to do exactly that poor wretch did yesterday, it just takes the right combinaiton of triggers and the blue touchpaper is lit.

    1. andyp-random-number

      Re: Too complex for black and white

      Couldn't agree more. The problem has elements of all of the above, plus other things not listed. My kids have had very little access to video games but as they get older they are getting access to more violent games more often. I can see that after hours of playing the most violent games their behaviour gets considerably worse compared to normal, but, they also have bad behaviour for other reasons, like when tired, and when hungry and when stressed and definitely when they have had too much sugar. Subject them to more of anything that alters their brain and thinking and their behaviour gets worse. So, video games do make a difference, but on a par with other things. We try to limit our kids to all these things and in doing so can see the difference they make when they are exposed. Sugar, or high energy stuff, plays a huge role in behaviour as well as lack of sleep.

      Most modern kids (and adults) are having more and more sugar, screwed up body clocks for lack of sleep, blue light from screens, screwed up chemical composition of their blood due to poor diet and exercise (yes, exercise makes a difference, just go for a run and see how different you feel), more stress and more of all bad things. Put all this together and behaviour changes, for everyone (more road rage etc).

      Now simply give another outlet to violence, guns, and guns will be used with violence.

      The same kind of thing can be seen with the internet and the feeling of being anonymous, that extra thing (the net) in our lives gives us another outlet for abuse and you get trolls and hate coming out in another direction. Internet isn't the cause and neither are guns but they do play a role.

      The general society, bad eating, lack of sleep and stress are behind all of this.

  32. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I am old enough to remember the hysteria when Mortal Kombat 1 was released.

    Plenty of parental hysteria and political storm in a teacup. All over red pixels and unrealistic fatality moves.

  33. Wensleydale Cheese Silver badge

    So WTF is wrong with the US school system?

    There MUST be something wrong with the US school system if so many feel they need to go and shoot the places up.

    WTF is it?

    1. Tannin

      Re: So WTF is wrong with the US school system?

      It has guns in it.

    2. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Re: So WTF is wrong with the US school system?

      Ever thought it's less the schools and more the homes and neighborhoods? Schools just happen to be where they congregate the most.

    3. Chozo

      Re: So WTF is wrong with the US school system?

      Every education system has its issues however in this context it's more basic with schools being one of the three classical soft targets where you are unlikely to encounter any immediate armed resistance.

    4. Trollslayer Silver badge

      Re: So WTF is wrong with the US school system?

      Bullying and abuse by staff is accepted.

      At Columbine the sports 'jocks' even got away with rape because the staff persuaded the police to ignore them.

      In this case the kid wasn't good at sports so the sports staff bullied and abused him giving the green light for other pupils to do the same.

      It has been noted that he didn't shoot at pupils he liked.

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: So WTF is wrong with the US school system?

      Occam's Razor.

      Poor parenting, also with many kids not having one parent.

  34. theloon

    Hopes, prayers, and blah blah blah

    Sadly, it's just a clock reset until the next one. After this many incidents and no change it is clear the US legislative bodies will do nothing.

  35. Trollslayer Silver badge
    Flame

    No one is asking why he did it

    There is a bullying culture there amongst the staff and particularly the sports staff.

    Exactly the same happened at Columbine including persuading the local police not to investigate two rapes carried out by their favourites sports pupils.

    Fix the culture or face the penalties.

    1. Jove Bronze badge

      Re: No one is asking why he did it

      You may want to familiarise yourself with the term "alleged" to avoid problems in the future.

  36. DougS Silver badge
    Angel

    I guess only US kids play video games

    Where are all the school shootings in the UK, parents must do a much better job of preventing their kids from playing violent video games over there!

    1. Andrew Williams

      Well, in the UK it's all about being stabbed.

      At least 36 people have been fatally stabbed - and 62 overall killed - in London since the beginning of the year.

      Met Police records show 37, 443 recorded knife offences and 6,694 recorded gun offences across the UK in the year up to September 2017.

      In London, the problem was even more pronounced than the rest of the country, with 12,980 knife crimes taking place in the capital - 2,452 more than the equivalent year.

      Four teenagers were stabbed to death in London on New Year's Eve alone, and 22 were killed in March - meaning the capital now has a higher murder rate than New York.

      1. DougS Silver badge

        Re: Well, in the UK it's all about being stabbed.

        And how many of those stabbings were in schools? If school shootings in the US are caused by video games, they should cause a similar trend of violence in UK schools. And there aren't too many video games where stabbing is an option versus shooting.

        Besides, it is pretty hard for one person to stab dozens of people and a lot easier to fend him off in a school (start throwing books, chairs, globes, whatever is handy at him since he can't stab people when he's defending himself from attack)

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Well, in the UK it's all about being stabbed.

          I believe the Assassins' Creed series encourages you to get up close and personal. And there was also the Hitman series which rewarded stealth.

      2. Jove Bronze badge

        Re: Well, in the UK it's all about being stabbed.

        Just to add: what are called knives in the media are generally actually ceramic machetes or jungle knives, not your average household knife or flick-blade.

        In London, the key problem is the political-correctness has under-mined policing which resulted in a run-away problem - nothing to do with these soft-arsed floating about.

  37. GIRZiM

    F*CK off... I LIKE guns!

    Part 1

    Part 2

  38. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Ah yes, the same old "facts"...

    Firstly video games. What came out of Columbine and later shootings is not that video games "cause" mass shootings but FPS video game proficiency by the shooters seems to have greatly increased the number and severity of casualties per round fired. So number of mass shooting incidences has not changed much over the last five decades, nor the mix of weapons used, the only thing has changed since the mid 90's is that the shooter is killing / injuring far more people per rounds fired. Due to FPS video game experience. This was covered in great detail at the time by that great bastion of gun rights and noted NRA shill the New York Times.

    Regulation and number of incidents. Pure hokum. No meaningful statistical correlation between regulation and number / severity of incidents. There is a strong correlation between severity of incidents and "gun free zones". About an equal number start in gun free / non gun free zones but those incidents in "gun free zones" tend to have very high casualty rates. Unless there happens to be someone with a gun on hand. You dont tend to hear about the mass shooter attempts that start in non "gun free zones" because they usually end very quickly. With far few casualties. So not news.

    Now the one really really interesting mass shooting phenomenon that I've seen no one in the media pay the slightest bit of attention to, because it does not fit the politically motivated narrative, is German school mass shootings over the last few decades. Depending on how you do the numbers it very much looks like the average German high/middle school student of the last 25 years had a slightly high risk of been shot in a school shooting than your average US high school student. Funny how you never hear media stories about all those knuckle dragging gun toting Germans. It only seems to be American gun owners who are libeled that way.

    So here is the short version for all you clueless Brits and Europeans about guns in the US. Scott Adams had the best summary. Its all politics. Nothing more. Basically Democrats uses guns to kill each other and commit crime. Republics use guns to hunt and to protect themselves from Democrats. Thats why its the Dems who scream bloody murder about "gun control' and the Reps push back so hard.

    Or how about the parts of the US with the strictest gun control / lowest gun ownership rates have the highest gun crime rates, and the parts with the least gun control / highest gun ownership rates have the lowest gun crime rates. Or that concealed carry cities are far safer to walk about in than no carry cites. Nope, never hear about that because it does not fit the media narrative.

    And finally. In 90% plus of all recent school shooting the authorities were well aware of the shooter before the shooting. Usually had multiple very specific warning and chose to do absolutely nothing about it. This had absolutely nothing to do with "gun rights" or the fearsome power of the NRA but had everything to do with the utter incompetence, corruption and general uselessness of most public school administration. Think of the absolute worst, most incompetent, mind numbingly stupid civil service jobsworth you have ever dealt with, I'm thinking DHSS office in say Tower Hamlets / Camden Borough Council in the 1980's, and that will only start to give you an idea of the typical public school administrator in US urban areas.

    Thats the real reason why there are so many school shooting nowadays. In previous generations the perps would have been expelled / in juvenile hall / in prison long before they ever got a chance to start gunning down school students. For that change in policy the public school administrators, and the politicians who control them, are totally to blame. So its really their fault and their fault alone.

    1. Francis Boyle Silver badge

      Wow

      So much dog-whistling here it's like being at a sheepdog competition.

    2. MonkeyCee Silver badge

      Re: Ah yes, the same old "facts"...

      "Depending on how you do the numbers it very much looks like the average German high/middle school student of the last 25 years had a slightly high risk of been shot in a school shooting than your average US high school student."

      Um., you really have to fuck with the numbers to achieve anything like that.

      Germany (pop ~80 million) has had about 54 victims of school shootings in the last 60 years. So roughly one death per year. Adjusting to the USA population, that's 4 per year.

      Or if you want to pick on the last ~15 years, there have been two school shootings, 16 casualties a time. Or two per year, which for the USA would be 8 a year. Maybe 9 with rounding.

      With a school shooting less than once a decade, the only way you could conclude that German schoolkids are more at risk of school shootings than American ones is to take an absurdly small sample.

      " Funny how you never hear media stories about all those knuckle dragging gun toting Germans."

      That's because violent crime isn't nearly the same sort of levels as the USA. Because they have a school shooting roughly once every 10 years, and they *do* make the headlines when it happens.

      The USA just had two school shootings on the same day.

      Germany has roughly twice the annual crime rate of the USA (79 vs 41 per 1000 people), yet has an intentional homicide rate much more in keeping with the first world (0.81 vs 4.7). Oh, and the rape rate is quite a lot higher in the USA too, roughly three times.

      "In previous generations the perps would have been expelled"

      Isn't that what happened in some of these cases? Kid gets expelled or "graduates", then goes back and shoots the place up. Parkland was certainly an ex-student, so I'm not what would be gained by locking people for being weird.

      "Thats why its the Dems who scream bloody murder about "gun control' and the Reps push back so hard."

      Bollocks. You're right it's all political, but as pointed out elsewhere in the comments, it's entirely internal. It's been made into a virtue signalling contest by both sides, so it's more about proving you're the reddest* republican or the bluest democrat to your own party, and motivating your own side. It's also why you won't get especially nuanced thoughts on other deliberately divisive topics (abortion, sexuality, gay marriage), since it's less about finding agreement, it's about getting elected in the first place.

      * is it only me, or is it weird that everywhere else has red = socialist/communist and blue = conservative but the USA has it the wrong way around?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Ah yes, the same old "facts"...

        Ah, another innumerate. Try looking at actual number of students rather than using some irreverent proxy like total pop.

        As for the rest of your rant. Typical ignorant Brit Bolloxology. One thing I've got used to over the decades is explaining to cluesless Americans, invariably Ivy League types who read the NYT, that they really have nt the slightest clue about either the UK or Europe despite all the "traveling" they might have done there. And then explaining to clues Brits that everything they read and see about the US is complete bilge. Partisan hack work. Especially the stuff they see in the US media. Daily life in the real US bears as much similarity to what the average Brit has seen or read about the US as Midsomer Murders has to modern contemporary Britain. Or Mrs Browns Boys has to living in Dublin. By this stage the BBC Ten O Clock News is as much a work of fiction as any of those programs. It ceased being a news programs back in the early 80's. Back when it went out at 9. When it went all Reagan Derangement Syndrome and has never recovered since.

        Everything to do with media reporting of guns in the US is politics and as such is lies. To one degree or other. Just like everything to do with media reporting of the NHS in the UK is politics and just as big a pack of lies. How many people does the NHS kill every year compared with the medical system in say France. As many as are killed by guns (non suicide) in the US? Possibly. If the NHS such a great system why has not other country copied it? Because its crap perhaps. See. The world is a lot more complicated than you very ill informed monochrome one.

        Let me raise my middle finger (patched up by the NHS when I was a kid) in that universal sign of American friendship. Have a nice day. (Which when actually used in the US is almost always sarcastic and really means F.O and Die).

        But I'm sure you knew that already.

  39. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I'm sure Trump will sort this out. Clearly teachers need RPG's.

  40. Anonymous Coward
    Devil

    and video games are already being blamed. Rather than, oh, say, the Media glorifying every deranged gun man as quickly as they possibly can, making sure they become a household name within minutes.

    FTFY

  41. Voidstorm
    FAIL

    Oxymoronic...

    The kind of kid that can't differentiate between the fictional world of games and the real world is the core issue.

    So the tired old trope about videogames shoots its own foot right out of the gate.

    The *kids themselves* are the problem, not the guns, knives, explosives or whatever else they get their hands on to commit mayhem. Including their hands.

    Of course Mummy and Daddy's precious angel isn't fucking unhinged, oh no! /sarcasm

    There's the problem right there : parents not being attentive to their kids going insane, with utter ignorance of a problem under their noses.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Oxymoronic...

      So what do you propose: requiring a license to have kids?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Oxymoronic...

      : parents not being attentive to their kids going insane, with utter ignorance of a problem under their noses.

      Sorry, who was going to pay for therapy sessions/medications? The universal health care system?

      Yeah, thought not. The US "solution" to mental health issues is incarceration {increasingly in a private prison}.

      Maybe the kids are not insane yet. Maybe it's just that Dad is in jail for a minor drug offense and Mom works two minimum wage jobs just to help send one of the kids to a community college

  42. The Boojum

    Re: "concerns over its debts owed to private equity parent, Rutland Partners"

    Video games don't kill people. People kill people.

  43. Mystic Megabyte Silver badge
    Unhappy

    Not a good thing

    ISTM that the pro-gun lobby are happy when these massacres happen. All the schoolkids will grow up to be paranoid and buy more guns. Marketing at its best?

  44. Anonymous South African Coward Silver badge

    Just want to say this :

    If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      So legalize killing of anyone with a gun and the problem will be solved.

    2. gnasher729 Silver badge

      "If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns."

      That's roughly what we have in the UK. But not many outlaws have guns, because guns are rare enough that the police will come down very, very heavy on anyone with a gun. A gun doesn't improve your chances of committing a crime without being caught in the UK, quite the opposite.

      1. codejunky Silver badge

        @ gnasher729

        "But not many outlaws have guns, because guns are rare enough that the police will come down very, very heavy on anyone with a gun"

        Not quite. When there is an amnesty or the police report on what they have collected over the year it is usually quite impressive. There were a few daylight shootings in an area not far from where I used to live where a couple of gangs took exception to each other. Mostly we dont seem to care as long as they kill each other until they kill someone not in a gang.

        Gangs having learned that transport and use of knives and guns are best done by minors who wont get punished the same.

        As we tend not to have guns we instead have a knife problem. An issue that nearly hit our family as my grandparents home was broken into and the attackers helped themselves to a knife in the kitchen before proceeding. The good news was that it was xmas and they were at my parents. I really do not like to think of what could have been.

  45. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Foxnews

    "The perpetrators are usually people with mental health issues, or substance addictions"

    Ah, it was a white American then. (No mention of gang violence). Foxnews aint no BBC.

    1. Jove Bronze badge

      Re: Foxnews

      "Foxnews aint no BBC."

      No of course not; the BBC is in the old Pravda camp.

  46. Rino

    It is not games it is lack of Gun education

    I am a big gamer and I play with my kids yes I watch what they play but I took my kids to shoot to learn about guns early so they understand guns are not toys. If each child was taught about guns then they would be less likely to use them or to cause an accident because of them. I am military or was and I have been around firearms most my life, if I draw I shoot with intent, kids that don't know or have never experienced it are often the ones that cause accidents but blaming a game is a no go in my book. The kid shot the kid is to blame he had intent yes there could be factors but to blame anything other than who deserves it, is bull... Could we use more gun control, would it help, NO I don't think so I have 2 within arms reach but they are locked and I don't have the need to use it. The gun owner is partly to blame but the kid should of known it is no game, please note education about guns is big with me and where dose education begin?, at home. Still I think the shooter was to blame, now I don't know all the facts but guns don't load their selves nor do they aim and shoot their selves.

  47. JohnG Silver badge

    I find it interesting to compare guns and cars. I haven't of any significant number of Americans who would argue against the requirements to drive e.g. pass a driving test, have an eye test, hold a driving licence, have their car(s) registered. As I understand it, the limitations of public transport in the USA make car ownership a necessity for most. The same cannot be said for guns - few Americans could legitimately claim that gun ownership is vital to their everyday life. Despite this, the same people who agree with driving tests, licenses and vehicle regisatrations will argue that unlicensed and unregistered gun ownership is essential. I have even heard this argument from Americans who have subsequently acknowledged that they didn't actually own any guns.

    1. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Problem is, cars and other forms of transportation aren't in the Constitution. Guns are as the last resort. And before you counter with nukes, explain Vietnam, Somalia, Afghanistan, and Iraq and why it couldn't happen here, too?

  48. John H Woods Silver badge

    Don't Panic, Fellow Commentards

    Video games are off the hook. The problem is too many doors!

  49. Jove Bronze badge

    Agenda

    Why is this retarded Snowflake crap even appearing in the Reg? Is it now staffed by Owen Jones clones?

    1. hplasm Silver badge
      Meh

      Re: Agenda

      "Why is this retarded Snowflake crap even appearing in the Reg? Is it now staffed by Owen Jones clones?"

      It's a dorkcatcher - and it sees that it works, eh? We'll let you out later.

      1. Jove Bronze badge

        Re: Agenda

        "It's a dorkcatcher - and it sees that it works, eh? We'll let you out later."

        Kiddie dribble.

  50. wrangler

    Your opinions on what should and shouldn't be, regarding gun control legislation in the U.S., disregards the legal context of what is and isn't constitutional there. It also disregards the fact that guns can't be regulated away, any more than illegal drugs. And a call for stricter background checks should start with an analysis of current background checks, which is something I've never seen from advocates of this position.

    Do you really want to start a discussion on how two words, "gun control", will or will not solve all the school shootings, and violent deaths? Take a look at the school shootings in Canada, the London murder rate compared to U.S. cities, the lives saved by self-defense with guns, and get back to me.

    How about sticking to what you're good at?

  51. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    the souce

    Fox News.....an oxymoron?

  52. Gambler

    I AM a Texan AND I own multiple firearms and types(yes, even one of those vilified "Assault Weapons") . I own a gun safe and store them in it. I am not a whack job for doing so either. The media is THE PROBLEM is this equation. They splatter the evening news with these stories and hover over the sites in helicopters recording live for hours at each and every shooting, giving the unstable morons the notoriety they crave. I don't see the point in having a full automatic weapon because they consume alot of ammunition. I was raised to respect guns for the fact that they can cause harm and you did not go near it unless told to as a kid. I use my weapons to HUNT and not to KILL PEOPLE. I am trained and come from a military family going back two generations.

    For the record the parents should be held accountable as their children are minors. The first question you should ask your self is "Why am I wanting to get a gun, and am I prepared to face the music if I pull the trigger?" If the answer is unclear in ANY WAY, put the gun back and seek another means of resolution, preferably involving the Police. This is the way it SHOULD WORK, but sadly it does not. I am one of the MAJORITY of RESPONSIBLE gun owners that has been raped and vilified by the press because of a very few bad apples and I do not apologize for doing something that is PERFECTLY LEGAL ACCORDING TO THE LAW OF THE LAND.

    By the way I have a family member that DIED IN THE ALAMO DURING THE TEXAS REVOLUTION and they could not have done that without firearms. If I look far enough back(and I have not) I probably have a family member in the American Revolution too.

    We just approved open carry in Texas and I feel safer than ever on the streets where I drive and live because criminals are RUNNING SCARED in Texas. The Mexican Cartels tread lightly because they are in fear of their lives when they cross the Texas border. The Police scare them and the general populace is armed to the teeth, so they keep a real low profile here. Armed citizens works and deters crime. The liberal news media cannot find any news stories but negative ones because they WANT TO SELL COMMERCIAL AIRTIME ON THEIR CHANNELS! You simply can't seem to get peoples attention without BIG SCARY HEADLINES. The news needs to INFORM and NOT ENTERTAIN. They have become a for profit business and have ruined the balanced model they started out with.

  53. tom dial Silver badge

    Roughly 99.9% (+~0.1%/-~.2%) of so called assault rifles in the US are used for target shooting or varmint/small game hunting. Contrary to an often expressed opinion, these are legitimate civilian uses. By current reports, the Santa Fe High School killings used a revolver and a shotgun (possibly shortened illegally), rather than an assault rifle, however defined.

    Roughly speaking, the US media and those who refuse to accept the plain historical meaning of the second amendment (and the corresponding part of the English 1689 Bill of Rights) classify as "assault rifle" any self-reloading rifle that uses detachable magazines and has a pistol grip or any of several other mostly cosmetic characteristics that make it look like a military issue weapon. The most common variants, chambered for .223 or 5.6 mm ammunition, generally are unsuitable for hunting large game like deer due their low power, and are prohibited for that use in a number of states. At close range, like many other firearms, they make terrible wounds sometimes described in gory detail in articles, but they probably are not materially different from other weapons that deliver comparable kinetic energy. Limiting legal magazine capacity might have a minor effect, but it is worth keeping mindful that with practice it takes under two seconds to change a magazine. Banning these weapons is largely a waste of effort.

    Meaningfully licensing gun ownership, with a similarly meaningful requirement for safety training, is unquestionably a good idea, but is unlikely to affect the occurrence rate of these awful rampage shootings other than, perhaps, making those who undertake them more skilled at their self-assigned task. The result of safety training failures is, if I remember correctly, in the order of 500 per year, some of which would occur even with a strict, frequent, and well-implemented training requirement. Classroom instruction, no matter how thorough, tends to evaporate over time.

    Gun safes are widely used by responsible firearm owners, apparently including the parents of the of the Santa Fe High School shooter, and are, I think required in some jurisdictions. Biometric locks, suggested in one post, might be helpful, although there are numerous reports of methods by such things they can be and have been circumvented. It is not clear that more effort in this direction is likely to be very beneficial.

    More extensive and thoroughly implemented checks preliminary to buying guns also is a worthy effort, but probably wouldn't improve things by much. Like credit checks, they will yield nothing for individuals with no history, and will not prevent those with no known history of bad behavior from acquiring weapons under whatever other control regime may exist. In the context of the US constitution, there also are due process issues related to abridgment of rights. A ban on firearms acquisition by "mental cases" or those on terrorist watch lists would be likely to be overturned by the courts unless backed by a requirement for specific evidence for each case. Psychiatrists also would object on the grounds that the great majority of their patients are not a threat to themselves or others. And while they generally are limited by professional confidentiality standards, they may and in some cases are required to report dangerous patients, but that is a judgment based on inexact knowledge and certainly will miss some cases in both directions.

    To a first approximation, there are somewhat more than 30,000 firearm deaths annually in the US. About 2/3 of these are suicides, which some would argue exercise a fundamental and inalienable human right. Around 500 are accidental or by children playing with unattended or "found" weapons. Of the remaining 9,500 - 10,000, the great majority are related one way or another to what might be considered "ordinary" criminal activity of various kinds, including some family blowups that sometimes are classified as "mass shootings".

    A small number, probably averaging around 100 - 200 per year, can by some standards be reasonably placed in the category of these school killings, the Las Vegas massacre last year, and others. It is not clear that these can be ended or significantly reduced by any actions short of repealing the second amendment and enacting seriously restrictive laws that result in confiscation (presumably with compensation) of nearly all privately owned firearms. In the US that is unlikely to happen any time soon, if ever.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      About the only way I'd see it happening is if such a gun incident directly threatened the US government itself, such as a shooter somehow getting past the metal detectors and so on in the Capitol or White House and gunning down some Congresspeople or even the President. Only when the mere presence of guns becomes an existential threat will people be forced to reconsider the Second Amendment (and even then the NRA can counter with Day of the Jackboot threats and point out that the threat of nukes didn't do much in Vietnam and so on).

  54. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Got a problem with U.S. gun laws?

    Move to the U.K.. You would find it a much better fit to your way of thinking.

  55. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge

    Now it turns out he was a football player.

    Ban football.

    1. hplasm Silver badge
      Happy

      Ahem...

      Now it turns out he was a handegg player.

      Ban handegg.

      FTFY.

  56. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Think who you vote for next time.

    The only time I ever felt safe when handling a weapon was when no-one else had anything to challenge me which was normally on a range. If idiots couldn't access guns they couldn't cause this havoc, cost and pain. These idiots choose innocent victims and "safe zones" for them to carry out their deeds, we don't allow easy access to explosives for this reason so what's the difference? It seems the NRA uses the innocent citizens of USA for target practice.

    1. tom dial Silver badge

      Re: Think who you vote for next time.

      It would be interesting to know how many NRA members have engaged in a spree shooting or, indeed, NRA members are more likely than non-members to use firearms unlawfully. I might be wrong, but my guesses are "very few: and "no," respectively.

  57. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Video games

    It does seem to me that there is nothing healthy about a society in which thousands of pretend murders are committed every day in the name of entertainment, be that video games, cinema or what.

    Its certainly true that the vast majority of the population who own videogames don't go out in the real world and renact their, frankly, sick fantasies. However the same is true of guns. In sports psychology visualisation is a powerful tool. But if the spree shooters are just doing what they have visualised on screen a thousand times, and this makes it easier for them to commit the horrors... Folk should be asking the question, both of guns and violent games, to what extent does your freedom to own and use these things justify enabling these crimes by the unbalanced and fanatic?

    It does seem to me that the arguments for restricting or not restricting violent video games, especially the first person shooter style, are scarily similar to the same arguments about guns. I think its legitimate to be pro or anti control of both, but to be anti guns and pro video games seems inconsistent.

    1. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Re: Video games

      Oh? What about the catharsis argument? That acting out fantasies like this acts like a release, making it less likely you'll commit the acts in real life? Last I checked, there's no conclusive evidence that one or the other is dominant, making the whole thing a wash.

    2. MJI Silver badge

      Re: Video games

      I play shooter video games.

      So why haven't I been running around shooting lots of violent aliens in the face?

      Done both Dishonoured and Dishonoured 2 with no kills as it was more fun evading and no fun killing innocent civilians.

  58. IGnatius T Foobar ✅

    Typical claptrap from a San Francisco writer

    Blaming the culture of violence fomented by violent video games and violent movies makes more sense than blaming the weapon, despite what our writer from San Francisco seems to think.

    1. Jove Bronze badge

      Re: Typical claptrap from a San Francisco writer

      Partially right; in the case of the USA it is more to do with the Liberals and Left undermining Central Government with all their scare stories using Vietnam and the Nixon era to justify this anarchy and trash culture.

    2. tom dial Silver badge

      Re: Typical claptrap from a San Francisco writer

      Actual evidence that violent video games lead to objectively antisocial behavior seems to be somewhere between rare and nonexistent. Statistical correlation, which may exist, would not establish a causal connection. It seems likely enough that those who become spree shooters exhibit much the same video game behavior as the far more numerous (by at least 4 orders of magnitude) gaming population who do not.

      The New Yorker has an interesting piece from a couple of years ago that touches on this.

      (https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/10/19/thresholds-of-violence)

  59. Chas E. Erath

    Something has changed

    Let me start by saying that I was born and raised in the US. Also let me say that I'm not opposed to gun control - I don't own a gun, and have never shot a gun (go figure, I'm almost 50). Also, I don't understand how over-the-top some people get about the idea of gun control (drinking the NRA cool-aid, so to speak...?)

    At any rate - since colonial times, guns have always been accessible in the US. And so - the availablity of guns hasn't changed, and can't be the issue, therefore. The lethality of guns has changed - which is an important point - but still, school shootings are a somewhat modern thing.

    So I have to ask, what's changed? I don't believe it's video games, or movies - I mean, we all played shoot-em-ups as kids - whether it was a video game, a movie, or just pretend (out in the back yard with our friends).

    So something has changed. But I dont' know what it is...blah, blah, blah... (That is to say, I don't have an answer.)

    1. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Re: Something has changed

      Culture has changed. Life has changed: gotten a lot harder, more stressful. Opportunity is disappearing, more people feel dead-ended, competition more fierce (much as Asian countries before us--and their high suicide rates). In general, people are getting more desperate.

    2. Jove Bronze badge

      Re: Something has changed

      "So I have to ask, what's changed?"

      Neoliberalism and the false moves engineered from events in the 50s and 60s which have lead to an undermining of authorities and the an excess of individualism.

  60. Dodgy Geezer Silver badge

    Funnily enough...

    ..and video games are already being blamed. Rather than, oh, say, gun control, or the lack thereof....

    ...I think the comment about video games deserves a little more consideration rather than simply laughing at it...

    That's not to say that violent video games cause mass shootings. They don't. You might as well think that Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment causes axe murdering. But they are an indicator into the attitude of the culture that generates them.

    Mere possession of guns doesn't cause mass murdering either - though it is true that if you make guns impossibly hard to get hold of you will probably limit occurrances, or change them to machete attacks. Look at the Swiss - lots of guns and few massacres.

    The problem for the Americans is that they have a culture of using guns to settle arguments. They look back to their pioneering Western days, and have this image of good and bad - white hats and black hats. The hero has to shoot the villain. While Europeans have a nuanced view of living together and are prepared to accomodate others - or look for ways in which opposing groups can live together (an attitude brought on by their history of interminable internecine warfare), the Americans are not inclined to 'live and let live'. In America 'a man's got to do what a man's got to do', and defend his rights.

    It is this attitude which results in people with real or imagined slights taking a gun to a school or a mall and shooting people. You will see the same attitude in American action films and videos. They don't cause violence, but they are a reflection of a society which sees violence as a suitable way to settle a quarrel. Gun control is simply addressing a symptom. Ideally, you should go for the cause...

    1. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Re: Funnily enough...

      Bit it's hard to go for the cause when culture is the cause: particularly a culture fostered by history. Remember why people came to America. Most came to escape oppression, and the US was founded on the heels of conflict with the homeland. IOW, distrust of government and rebellion are part of its identity.

  61. Wzrd1

    Then, the Texas Lieutenant Governor came out with a howler

    He proceeded to blame an excess of doors in schools and promise an examination of the problem.

    Apparently, he never heard the term emergency exit or of fire.

    On the subject of licensing, that turns an enumerated right into an administratively denied privilege. So, the US states shan't be licensing firearms any time soon for that very reason.

    But, firearms owners should be held responsible for failing to secure their firearms. All of mine are under lock and key.

    Home defense is accomplished with quality locks, not a superior volume of fire. Defense from harmful vermin was with a single .22 LR rifle, as alligators and cottonmouths are both common in the area we're now moving away from. We'll be moving back to my home state, where the most dangerous thing about are black bears and mother in laws and only the latter being a truly dangerous creature.

    Oddly, I had a very nice and adoring mother in law, who is now deceased.

  62. ukgnome Silver badge

    Yet again we come to learn that America is morally bankrupt.

    Seems that nothing can be done, absolutely nothing.

    Well except try and ban video games because sometime fantasy can cross over into reality and that's when it all goes shit.

    I personally remember the terror of the joust, all those folk stealing emu and then riding them, trying to bash the other people off. And let's not forget the time that plumber came round and ate mushrooms.It took ages to clear up that mess.

    Let's not hide behind the bullshit - this has everything to do with weapons that are easy to get hold of. Everything to do with weapons and ammo stored together in an easy to get to place. This isn't about video games.

    1. Jove Bronze badge

      "Yet again we come to learn that America is morally bankrupt."

      Have you, and all the Little-Islanders that regularly attack the USA ever wondered what USA citizens think of the kind of UK that you represent?

  63. MJI Silver badge

    One question to ask with lots of answers

    How did the killer get his hands on the gun cabinet keys?

    Our neighbour shoots and not even his wife knows where the keys are as stipulated by law.

    1. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Re: One question to ask with lots of answers

      Probably stole them. And the Sandy Hook killer killed his own mother to get to that gun locker.

      1. Charles 9 Silver badge

        Re: One question to ask with lots of answers

        Guardian, I meant. Point is, security by obscurity is essentially siege warfare: given time, the attacker wins. No defense stands up against a sufficiently determined adversary. And these mass killers tend to plan a lot.

  64. CrispyD

    A well regulated militia

    The first 4 words of the second amendment may provide a solution. Suppose each gun club represents a formal militia, licensed to train and support members in the use of various classes of weapons (handguns, shot-guns, semi and fully automatic, bolt-action etc).

    Each US citizen is given an option at, say, 17. Either opt-in to a militia or opt-out. If you opt in the militia is responsible for accepting you, training you and assisting you in keeping weapons and ammo safe. If you opt-out you still pay a fee, used to subsidise the militias on a per-capita basis. Only militia are authorised to sell weapons. If you are rejected by all militia you are exempt from the opt-out fee, but you can't legally purchase a weapon.

    The militia, not the individuals, are responsible for the weapons supplied. If a weapon is miss-used the militia can face revocation of the license to supply that class of weapon, or in extreme cases criminal charges.

    So, the government does not prohibit individuals from holding weapons - the people do. The militia are empowered and encouraged to ensure the safe use and storage of weapons, with a strong peer-support element. Opt-out citizens could not be accused of leaving the defence of the nation to the opt-ins' because they will subsidising the militias.

    1. Timmy B Silver badge

      Re: A well regulated militia

      Except, CrispyD, that the point of the militia and the second amendment is to stop government tyranny. You can hardly have the government controlling the militia that was envisioned to control them.

      As an aside - nobody ever mentions the between 500 thousand and 3 million uses of a firearm in the US that save a life or prevent further violence.

      1. CrispyD

        Re: A well regulated militia

        Ah, but that was exactly my point. The government don't regulate anything - the militia do, but within a sensible framework. The militia remain entirely independent (as they should be).

        1. Timmy B Silver badge

          Re: A well regulated militia

          What about people that don't want to be in the militia but still want to hunt, or need to control animals, or just want to become a proficient target shooter?

          1. CrispyD

            Re: A well regulated militia

            The second amendment doesn't suggest that target shooting, hunting or animal control are "necessary to the security of a free State". A well regulated militia is. The second is compelling the population to organise into militia, and prohibiting the state from banning the tools (guns) a militia would need in times of crisis.

            As a compromise, you could say a .22 bolt action rifle could be held without militia membership, but I think exceptions generally brake rules rather then improve them.

      2. Aladdin Sane Silver badge

        Re: A well regulated militia

        between 500 thousand and 3 million uses of a firearm in the US that save a life or prevent further violence.

        Would these uses be necessary if guns weren't readily available?

        1. Timmy B Silver badge

          Re: A well regulated militia

          "Would these uses be necessary if guns weren't readily available?"

          They're supposedly not readily available to criminals. They seem to get them. Even here in the UK.

  65. Alan Johnson

    Attitude to Bullying a Factor

    It is too early in this case to say anything but was bullying a factor to go alongside gun culture and lack of gun control?

    When I lived in the states there seemed to be not just a tolerance of extensive bullying in schools but a tacit approval and encouragement of it in popular culture, and perhaps even in the teaching staff especially in the sporting area. Kids should be taught to be independant and stand up for themselves but they also need to be taugh to respect others and I did not see that.

    Many of the mass murders seem to have been performed by bullied, socially awkward teenager who have become desperate, That is no excuse or justification but I am surprise dthat this is not more ideally discussed as a factor. Perhaps there is a wish not to be seen to justify the attacks or blame some of the victims. The gun culture excaserbates this becaus of the message that the way to stand up for yourself, gain power and respect is to use a gun which is ubiquitous in the US.

  66. Aladdin Sane Silver badge
    1. Charles 9 Silver badge

      ALSO says a nation FOUNDED on distrust and rebellion. Such that defiance is celebrated and in our cultural blood (Southern Pride, the Wild West, the independence of the Mountain Men, etc.). Also recall incidents like 9/11 and Oklahoma City, where no guns were used. If someone really wants to raise hell, he'll find a way in spite of God, Man, or the Devil.

      1. Aladdin Sane Silver badge

        Doesn't mean that you should make it easy for them to do so.

        1. Charles 9 Silver badge

          Point is, it's ALREADY too easy. That bus left the depot long ago, unless you REALLY want to close up all the land borders (not taking into account smugglers already regularly go BY SEA).

  67. EnviableOne Bronze badge
    Boffin

    The NRA are a JOKE

    This is an edited version of a previous post, but if the US media can trot out the same old story every time .....

    on average 100 US citizens own 101 guns this is a bit on the skewed side as 3% of the population own over half the guns (at least 17 each) and 57% of housholds don't own one.

    the NRA has 5 million members (or less than 1% of the population.)

    7.7 million Americans own over 40 guns, so theres at least 2.7million people who own over 40 guns who arent NRA members.

    So how do they claim to speak for US gun owners?

    No other nation owns anywhere near as many guns as the US the next closest are Serbia 58.21 guns per 100 people and Yemen 54.8, the world average including these is 10.2 (canada 30.8, AUS 24.1, UK 6.2)

    Oh and all this second ammendment stuff is really a reach, here it is in all its glory:

    "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"

    so its basically saying that the individual states have the power to retain an armed force that can be used to defend the freedom of the people and this will not be infringed by the forming of the United States. the NRA et all like to forget the first part of it.

    The NRA try to whip up the gun owners by saying gun regulations will remove their right to own any, but even talking to NRA confrence delegates or Trump supporters, they accept that some people shouldn't have guns, and that some controlls are nessacary.

    These are my suggestions:

    limit legal arms to Hunting rifles and Handguns, except where stored secureley at a licenced gun club, that is inspected and controlled.

    Mandatory check on applicants for mental illness, violent convictions or other relevant crimes.

    Mandatory training on safe use and storage

    That will not impinge the averge gun user, apart from the time to carry out checks, but but any sensible person will build that into their scheduling.

    1. Timmy B Silver badge

      Re: The NRA are a JOKE

      "limit legal arms to Hunting rifles and Handguns, except where stored secureley at a licenced gun club, that is inspected and controlled."

      so - you're allowing people to keep the guns most used in crime - handguns? You also realise that in terms of capability and function dome hunting rifles are exactly the same as "assault rifles" don't you? What about shotguns?

      You also ignore the statistic that though the US has high gun ownership each gun is far les likely to be used - the vast vast vast majority of gun owners are totally law abiding and fine. Why should their ownership rights change?

  68. RobertLongshaft

    Like a dog chasing its tale.

    The issue is not guns - see Switzerland.

    The issue is not games - see anywhere else in the world

    The issue is the prevalence of anti depressants given to children who's brains have not fully formed. Big pharma ensures you never hear about the fact 98% of mass shootings are carried out by individuals prescribed or taking anti depressants.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      "The issue is the prevalence of anti depressants given to children who's brains have not fully formed. Big pharma ensures you never hear about the fact 98% of mass shootings are carried out by individuals prescribed or taking anti depressants."

      And yet the US is constantly scalped for prescription drug prices. How does that josh?

    2. Timmy B Silver badge

      "Big pharma ensures you never hear about the fact 98% of mass shootings are carried out by individuals prescribed or taking anti depressants"

      And I wonder what presidential candidate took money from big pharma and which one didn't (hint - the one that did didn't win)….

  69. Jove Bronze badge

    As expected; lots of negative agenda signalling with the thumbs-down, but still nothing more than conceited posturing and not a single attempt at suggesting a viable solution.

    You are the ones that are going to be clicking the like-button as the world goes down the pan, and all because you have swallowed the liberal leftist doctrines that have undermined the state for the sake of degenerate individualism.

    1. Timmy B Silver badge

      "As expected; lots of negative agenda signalling with the thumbs-down, but still nothing more than conceited posturing and not a single attempt at suggesting a viable solution."

      I'm going to court downvotes - but my suggestion is.... wait for it... do nothing. Keep the legislation as it is. There are millions of legal gun owners in the US and a teeny tiny fraction of them commit crimes.

      In the UK far more people are killed by dangerous driving in cars than guns each year and even cows get pretty close - are we asking for more restrictions on car (or cow) ownership? no - because we recognise that this is a tiny minority and the rules work for the vast majority. I know it's different countries but the idea's the same.

      That's my suggestion anyway.....

      1. Mooseman Bronze badge

        "In the UK far more people are killed by dangerous driving in cars than guns each year and even cows get pretty close - are we asking for more restrictions on car (or cow) ownership?"

        Ah, the usual stupid argument in favour of no gun control. OK lets do this yet again - cows are animals, they kill people by accident. they don't burst into schools and stampede classrooms with intent to kill. Cars kill people by accident, with a very very few exceptions of terrorist incidents nobody deliberately drives at pedestrians. More people are killed in their bathrooms than die by guns in the UK if it comes to pointless statistics. What you are missing, quite deliberately and quite foolishly with this ridiculous argument, is that in the UK we have fairly strict gun control and as a consequence gun deaths are VERY LOW, which allows you to make comparisons with cow deaths. Can you make the same comparison in the USA? No. Cows and cars are not designed to kill. Guns are.

        1. Timmy B Silver badge

          no - mooseman - try again. I specifically said people killed by cars being driven in a dangerous way - death by dangerous driving - an avoidable way. People drive drunk - drive when they are incapable - drive in a reckless way. I purposely said it that way. It isn't a pointless statistic. There is a difference between an accident and someone killing whilst committing a crime. Read what I said not what you think I said.

          You are less likely to be killed by any particular gun in the US than in the UK. In that each gun held is far less likely to kill you in the US.

          1. Charles 9 Silver badge

            By any particular gun, yes, but you also have to account for the fact there are a literal crapton of them in the US, and this strictly through legitimate domestic gun factories like Smith & Wesson and Remington, to say nothing of all the black market channels made possible by having such a ginormous border length (including, unlike in the UK, a lot of land border).

  70. Andrew Barr

    Right to bear arms

    Not going to block this one, but does that include the ammunition. Could they ban the sale of certain ammunition?

  71. Jove Bronze badge

    One for the Snowflakes and the Agenda-Signallers

    Where do Russia and Venezuela stand in relation to the USA in the league table for homicide rates?

  72. Jove Bronze badge

    Business leaders

    If Business Leaders took sometime to read the comments made on this article they would accelerate the export of IT jobs to distant shores.

    1. Tom 38 Silver badge

      Re: Business leaders

      Did you know there were 288 posts on this topic (289 now), and you've posted 37 of them, or ~13%. Don't shoot me, but does this topic hit a nerve?

      1. Jove Bronze badge

        Re: Business leaders

        "Did you know there were 288 posts on this topic (289 now), and you've posted 37 of them, or ~13%. Don't shoot me, but does this topic hit a nerve?"

        The fact that is article appears in the Reg is the point of contention. Posts demonstrate the shallowness of the discussions around such a topic and the ignorance of those spouting childish dribble without any knowledge or experience on the subject apart from media manipulation. Good enough?

        1. Mooseman Bronze badge

          Re: Business leaders

          spouting childish dribble ....

          Yet you use the term "snowflakes" and expect people to treat you seriously?

          In answer to your question, the USA ranks lower than most of South America in terms of gun homicides. Whoop. that's really impressive for a country that considers itself so civilised and advanced. It also ranks higher than Bolivia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Nicaragua and Peru. What's your point?

          In the American Journal of Medicine a 2016 study said :

          "Americans are 10 times more likely to be killed by guns than people in other developed countries, a new study finds.

          Compared to 22 other high-income nations, the United States' gun-related murder rate is 25 times higher. And, even though the United States' suicide rate is similar to other countries, the nation's gun-related suicide rate is eight times higher than other high-income countries, researchers said.

          The study was published online Feb. 1 in The American Journal of Medicine.

          "Overall, our results show that the U.S., which has the most firearms per capita in the world, suffers disproportionately from firearms compared with other high-income countries," said study author Erin Grinshteyn, an assistant professor at the School of Community Health Science at the University of Nevada-Reno. "These results are consistent with the hypothesis that our firearms are killing us rather than protecting us," she said in a journal news release.

          The review of 2010 World Health Organization data also revealed that despite having a similar rate of nonlethal crimes as those countries, the United States has a much higher rate of deadly violence, mostly due to the higher rate of gun-related murders.

          The researchers also found that compared to people in the other high-income nations, Americans are seven times more likely to die from violence and six times more likely to be accidentally killed with a gun.

          "More than two-thirds of the homicides in the U.S. are firearm homicides and studies have suggested that the non-gun homicide rate in the U.S. may be high because the gun homicide rate is high," Grinshteyn said.

          "For example, offenders take into account the threat posed by their adversaries. Individuals are more likely to have lethal intent if they anticipate that their adversaries will be armed," she explained.

          Even though it has half the population of the other 22 nations combined, the United States accounted for 82 percent of all gun deaths. The United States also accounted for 90 percent of all women killed by guns, the study found. Ninety-one percent of children under 14 who died by gun violence were in the United States. And 92 percent of young people between ages 15 and 24 killed by guns were in the United States, the study found."

          So, guns are killing more Americans than any other high income country, and violence is disproportionately high. Well done.

          1. Timmy B Silver badge

            Re: Business leaders

            "So, guns are killing more Americans than any other high income country, and violence is disproportionately high. Well done."

            But when you look at the number of guns, the number of gun owners and the populace as a whole any particular gun is far less likely to kill you in the US than in Japan - a country with perhaps the strictest regulation in the world.

            I'll simplify my thinking for you. Given 100 people in the US and 100 in Japan. In the US 10 have 20 guns and in Japan 2 have 2 guns. In the US two people commit murders and in Japan one does - three people die. This means that 50% of the gun owners in Japan have killed and 50% of the guns have far worse than the percentages for the US - clearly strict gun licencing has failed. Yes - more people have died in the US but gun owners are overall acting far more responsibly even with more lax regulation.

            1. John Savard Silver badge

              Re: Business leaders

              Fewer people are being killed in Japan, so the Japanese legislation is saving lives.

              Clearly, though, there is room for further improvement in Japan, particularly as it would be harder to argue in Japan that stricter gun legislation would penalize mostly innocent gun owners!

            2. Mooseman Bronze badge

              Re: Business leaders

              "I'll simplify my thinking for you"

              Well, yes that's simple thinking alright. You are happily avoiding the sizeable pachyderm in the corner - Japan's gun laws have restricted gun deaths to virtually single figures. USA gun deaths in 2015 were 13,286 people. Your argument holds no water at all, sorry.

        2. Tom 38 Silver badge

          Re: Business leaders

          The fact that is article appears in the Reg is the point of contention.

          The article is on the register because, once again, an American goes nuts and kills a bunch of people, and once again their politicians line up to blame software developers. That's a cut and dry IT angle right there.

          1. Charles 9 Silver badge

            Re: Business leaders

            The IT angle is politics. If US politics were even a slight bit less corrupt than in other parts of the world, serious, honest discussion for solutions would already be in play. Read this, then read all the Facebook articles again, and you'll see the connection. The same political system is perpetuation both problems. Worse, the populace appears complacent if not complicit to the whole debacle. The problem transcends politics and goes to the whole American mindset. It's almost as if the only solution to either problem is to destroy America's core and start all over, and it's probably going to take more than a nuke from orbit to do the job.

          2. Jove Bronze badge

            Re: Business leaders

            "The article is on the register because, once again, an American goes nuts and kills a bunch of people, and once again their politicians line up to blame software developers. That's a cut and dry IT angle right there."

            Certainly not. This is just hijacking of the media to propagate a distorted factional point of view.

            1. Mooseman Bronze badge

              Re: Business leaders

              "This is just hijacking of the media to propagate a distorted factional point of view."

              what, that guns don't kill people?

  73. MNDaveW

    God Save Daddy Warbucks

    It's all about protecting the profitability of the firearms industry over protecting the lives of children. The Second Amendment was created in an age where the U.S had no standing army and a good percentage of citizens lived on frontier farms and needed the ability to protect themselves and their property.

    The founding fathers (and their constituents) felt it was reasonable to ensure that all citizens (read white land owning males) should be able to own flint lock muskets. Something else might be appropriate today but the Second Amendment is insane.

    Perhaps its replacement (in addition to other sane conditions) would predicate gun ownership on the ability to demonstrate your guns cannot be taken or used by a child without your permission. That seems reasonable.

    1. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Re: God Save Daddy Warbucks

      Thomas Jefferson and so on (who insisted on the Bill of Rights) ALSO felt the government could take those rights away (the whole Day of the Jackboot thing) without some assurances (remember, they JUST came off fighting their motherland). That's why ALL the Amendments are meant to restrict those in power (usually the government, but the 7th limits connected citizens in civil disputes). It wasn't insane; they were writing from firsthand experience.

      1. MNDaveW

        Re: God Save Daddy Warbucks

        In 1783 the Second Amendment made damn good sense. In 2018 the Second Amendment (as it was written) is insane.

        1. Charles 9 Silver badge

          Re: God Save Daddy Warbucks

          I actually think it makes even more sense. The Day of the Jackboot actually seems closer than ever. And before you counter with the whole "overwhelming force" thing, why didn't this work too well in most of America's more recent conflicts like Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq?

          1. MNDaveW

            Re: God Save Daddy Warbucks

            The military response that the Second Amendment would provide was where the US (which had no standing Army) would defend itself from a foreign invader (the war of 1812).

            So, what you are saying is that some foreign entity will defeat the US military and then fall victim to hoards of disgruntled teens that have liberated their parents' easily accessible AR-15s?

            My improved scenario is that a sane society like Australia or Canada will invade while the disgruntled teens are unconcerned because they are in their basements planning the next school shooting. Then, the new government will make assault weapons unavailable to idiots and we might get health care coverage that isn't shameful for a change, to boot.

            1. Charles 9 Silver badge

              Re: God Save Daddy Warbucks

              "The military response that the Second Amendment would provide was where the US (which had no standing Army) would defend itself from a foreign invader (the war of 1812)."

              From an invader, period. That's why the words "against all enemies, foreign and domestic" in the Oath of Allegiance. They knew well about domestic threats since they were essentially one in the Revolutionary War.

          2. Mooseman Bronze badge

            Re: God Save Daddy Warbucks

            "why didn't this work too well in most of America's more recent conflicts like Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq?"

            Because in Vietnam the NVA were being armed and funded by the Chinese military, not using small calibre sidearms. The US army was also fighting the wrong kind of warfare, totally unsuited to removing a determined guerrilla force. In Afghanistan its the same - except they armed the insurgents themselves. Iraq? Armed by the Saudis and Iran. We aren't talking about Bubba-Joe and his cousins with a bunch of hunting rifles here.

            1. Charles 9 Silver badge

              Re: God Save Daddy Warbucks

              Actually we are. You forget the home town advantage AND the issue that Americans would be fighting other Americans. You're likely to divide the Armed Forces with such an approach, and guess where a good chunk of them could be going?

              Plus, what about the Somalis?

  74. kbutler.toledo
    Angel

    you got it wrong!

    The Texas Twit who was crying about video games being the cause of the recent school shooting was a little outdated. His aides clarified his comments with corrections.

    Recently, the Pope told a gay man "God made you like this... God loves you like this." and the loosey-leu governor meant that the pope was to blame for the Texas massacre.

    Hey just ask all the other gun nutz!

  75. John Savard Silver badge

    Aside from guns

    Well, we do now have a cause, and it's not video games: it's sexism. Or, more specifically, the idea on the part of some men that they have a right that women should yield to them.

    I think that if politicians could resist the tactics of the NRA, the American people would be willing to restrict semi-automatic weapons, but I'm not sure that they would be willing to severely restrict handguns. (Actually, I suspect most Americans would happily vote for a law that banned black people from owning handguns, but the Supreme Court wouldn't let that one fly for a second. Maybe a law that banned handgun ownership for anyone with a criminal record - presumably they already have one, but it just would need to be expanded a bit, or given more effective enforcement.)

    And Canada didn't have a gun violence problem before 1968, when legislation was brought in to classify handguns as restricted weapons - and to require secure storage of firearms. So we didn't have a gun violence problem before any gun control legislation was brought in that would have been applicable to this particular event.

    Some restrictions on gun ownership in the U.S. are long overdue, but it has other social problems that will give it a higher crime rate than, oh, say Sweden, even if that happens. They have, after all, serious problems of inequality in income, exacerbated by racial inequality. Those aren't being addressed either. And people who aren't being sufficiently well protected by the police are going to want to have guns of their own. So it isn't just one problem.

    Maybe after most black people move into the middle class, then work on gun control will be effective.

  76. Eduard Coli

    2nd agenda

    A lot of this is caused by constant hazing and because localities want to keep the crime rate down.

    If you are different in a US high school you get hazed.

    Before social media it ended when you went home but since US students are stuck to their mobes, and/or SnapTweetingFacebooking there is constant hazing on already stressed kids.

    It has also been shown that in at least 2 cases the FBI was notified about a possible shooter and ignored it (like 9/11) and local authorities were trying to get the arrest record down and told police to ignore calls about a potential shooter.

    1. Mooseman Bronze badge

      Re: 2nd agenda

      "A lot of this is caused by constant hazing "

      This isn't exclusive to the USA. Yet again, easy access to firearms is. Stop making excuses for gun obsessed idiots.

  77. EnviableOne Bronze badge

    The Only difference that makes sense

    The US has almost twice the amount of firearms per capita of any other nation, and atleast 4 times as many as any other devloped nation.

    In other countries, there was one Sandy hook type event and legislation was passed, and it never happened again.

    Until Americans Grow Up and accept the Facts, nothing will change.

    Afterall, the nation was formed by those that couldnt hack the change going on in europe and moved rather than evolve.

    Europe has been evolving for 250 ish years since then, attitudes have been enlightend, evidence is required, blind faith is no longer a justification.

  78. Jove Bronze badge

    And there you have it; an article with a political agenda just throws up that the readers, and most certainly not the journalists, of the The Register are up to task of even discussing the topic of gun related crime without signalling their opposition to the USA, their comprehensive lack of engagement of the real world, their disregard for the realities on the leftist side of the curtain, the authorities that would have to implement their legislative fantasies, or of any other practical means of resolving real-world problems. There is more to the discussion that the dribble you happily gobble down.

    1. Mooseman Bronze badge

      "signalling their opposition to the USA"

      So...disagreeing with you is opposing an entire country? Lack of engagement? Really? Your post displays all the qualities we have come to expect from gun apologists - petty insults, condescension and total refusal to consider that their love affair with firearms is in any way responsible for the annual death toll in the tens of thousands in the USA. Go ahead, compare gun deaths with cars, cows, squirrels if you like. It doesn't make any difference - what you are doing is simply burying your head in the sand and hiding your selfishness and masturbatory obsession behind nationalistic flag waving. Just like your beloved "leader"

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019