TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Gun Control and Regulations

Go To

NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#526: Aug 25th 2019 at 7:44:27 PM

That's... literally not what you said. Archon said "the same licensing standard", and you agreed. Now you're saying that different licensing standards would apply to different types. Which is it?

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#527: Aug 26th 2019 at 3:18:26 AM

Well, I mean, if we’re licensing by which weapons are the most dangerous then handguns should have the highest licensing standard, not semi-auto rifles. They’re by far the most commonly used in crime, the easiest to accidentally shoot yourself or someone else with, and the most dangerous for children.

What I was referring to before was that if the category you want to legislate on is “self loading magazine fed” that category is so massive that you may as well apply it to everything.

They should have sent a poet.
NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#528: Aug 26th 2019 at 4:44:29 AM

Which is more dangerous depends on if you're talking about per-incident (ie, mass shootings) or collectively (ie, statically overall). The weapon of choice for mass shootings is semi-automatic rifles, preferably with large-capacity magazines. But as you point out, handguns are responsible for the lion's share of gun crime in general.

"Self-loading, magazine fed" is a bit of an odd category because it's two unrelated things. "Self-loading" means "semi-automatic, select fire, or fully automatic" while "magazine fed" includes almost everything except the very low end (eg, revolvers or single-shot break barrel) and the very high end (eg, belt-fed heavy machine guns) of the performance spectrum. I feel like De Marquis probably meant removable magazines, since those can be rapidly reloaded with a large number of rounds, while fixed magazines are generally reloaded one round at a time and usually have a small capacity anyway. "Magazine fed" would include relatively innocuous things like pump-action shotguns and lever-action rifles, which are popular for hunting but have virtually zero use in either mass shootings or gun crime more generally.

(Of course, even "removable magazine" isn't a sure-fire way to get what De Marquis seems to be aiming for, since you end up with things like the M1 Garand, which has a fixed internal magazine, but is fed by an en-bloc clip to much the same effect as a removable magazine. This is why it's really important to make sure you specify exactly what you want to regulate when you're writing legislation — any odd exceptions like that create exploitable loopholes that limit the effectiveness of the regulation.)

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
eagleoftheninth Shop all day, greed is free from a dreamed portrait, imperfect Since: May, 2013 Relationship Status: With my statistically significant other
Shop all day, greed is free
#529: Aug 26th 2019 at 4:54:16 AM

I'm pretty sure that what's being discussed here is weapons that are both self-loading and magazine-fed.

One day, we will read his name in the news and cheer.
archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#530: Aug 26th 2019 at 5:25:32 AM

Handguns are the most commonly used weapon in mass shootings as well. [1] Rifles are more common in mass shootings than in general crime, but still represent a minority of the weapons used.

The focus on military-style rifles seems to be a bit of a red herring when it comes to discussions of gun control. They’re “dangerous” in the academic sense, but in terms of use in crime they’re significantly safer than handguns.

My point here is that we’re focusing on the wrong part of the problem. Sure, semi-auto rifles should be regulated, but the gun control conversation in the US seems to be centered exclusively around military style rifles simply because they’re easy punching bags.

They should have sent a poet.
eagleoftheninth Shop all day, greed is free from a dreamed portrait, imperfect Since: May, 2013 Relationship Status: With my statistically significant other
Shop all day, greed is free
#531: Aug 26th 2019 at 5:43:34 AM

In Rural Utah, Preventing Suicide Means Meeting Gun Owners Where They Are

A gun show might not be the first place you would expect to talk about suicide prevention — especially in a place like rural northeast Utah, where firearms are deeply embedded in the local culture.

But one Friday at the Vernal Gun & Knife Show, four women stood behind a folding table for the Northeastern Counseling Center with exactly that in mind.

Amid a maze of tables displaying brightly varnished rifle stocks, shotguns and the occasional AR-15 assault-style rifle, they waited, ready to talk with show attendees.

"Lethal access to lethal means makes a difference. Suicide attempts by any other means are less lethal," says one of the women, Robin Hatch, a prevention coordinator with Northeastern Counseling for nearly 23 years.

Utah has one of the highest rates of death by suicide in the U.S. And 85% of firearm deaths in the state are suicides. According to Utah's health department, suicide rates can vary widely depending on where you are. For example, the suicide rate in northeast Utah is 58% higher than the rest of the state.

Suicide by gun is a particular problem: The rate in rural areas is double that in urban areas, according to state officials.

A major factor is the easy access to firearms in Utah — and the grim fact that suicide attempts involving guns have a higher mortality rate than by other means.

This was the first time Hatch and her colleagues at Northeastern Counseling were doing outreach at a gun show.

As the auditorium filled with firearm sellers and hunters, the counselors stacked their folding tables with neat piles of free cable locks that thread into a gun to prevent rounds from being loaded, and water-resistant gun socks screen-printed on the outside with the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline number.

The idea behind distributing both devices is to slow a person down during a moment of crisis. "Anything that we can do to get people off track a little bit, thinking something different," Hatch explains. "We believe that will help make a difference in our suicide rates."

Unpredictable employment adds stress

The northeast corner of Utah is home to oil and gas fields, cattle ranches and the Uintah and Ouray Reservation.

Health experts say factors contributing to the high suicide rates in the area include limited access to mental health services in rural communities and the unpredictability of the ranching and oil and gas industries. The boom-bust cycles, along with physical and mental stress, take a toll on workers.

"Injuries and accidents, keeping your job, having a job tomorrow. It's so up and down," says Val Middleton, a former oil and gas safety instructor at Uintah Basin Technical College in Vernal. "The guys don't eat right typically. No exercise, hard work, long hours, no sleep. That's what adds up. The divorce rate is high, really high. The family life is low."

Add high gun ownership and the risks are increased.

Dee Cairoli is a pastor at Roosevelt Christian Assembly in a neighboring town. He also works part time as an NRA concealed-carry handgun instructor. When hosting classes, Cairoli explains how gun owners can intervene if another gun owner shows signs of a mental health crisis.

"I've done it a couple of times as a pastor where I've gone to somebody's house and said, 'Look, maybe you need to listen to me for a minute. I know what I'm talking about. I promise I'll keep it in my [gun] safe, but let me have your gun.' "

Cairoli speaks with authority. When he was 15, his father killed himself with a gun.

"It was very tragic, but I never hated the gun. I never blamed the gun. I knew that it was just his desperate moment and that he had just chosen that," Cairoli says.

He believes that personal tragedy, along with the credibility he brings as a gun user and local pastor, allows people in crisis to trust him.

Not Just A Rural Issue

How to talk about suicide with guns isn't just an issue in rural parts of Utah. It's a topic that state Rep. Steve Eliason of Sandy, a suburban city near Salt Lake, also tackles. Eliason has sponsored legislation focused on firearms, suicide prevention and mental health services. It is personal for him, too.

"I've lost three extended family members to suicide. All firearm suicides. Young men," Eliason says.

This year, he worked on bills to fund firearm safety and suicide prevention programs, supply gun locks, create new mental health treatment programs and expand crisis response in rural Utah.

Eliason describes these issues as nonpartisan, but with Utah's proud gun culture, he's also careful with his approach. He describes advice he got from a politically liberal friend in public health about how to bring together opposing perspectives about firearms.

"Obviously, there's kind of two schools of thought on firearms," he says. "Those two schools of thought, if they were circles, they would overlap into a small oval — that oval is the culture of safety. And she says, 'I would recommend that you dwell within that oval.' That's what I've tried to do."

That perspective led to the Utah legislature appropriating money to fund a study from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, in consultation with the Utah Shooting Sports Council. That study spurred discussions about the problem of firearms and suicide and formed the basis of at least one of Eliason's 2019 bills, to expand access to gun locks.

Like Eliason's work at the state policy level, Hatch's suicide prevention work in her community depends on relationships and trust.

Hatch's table at the gun show was less busy than others. But the women gave out hundreds of gun locks and gun socks over the course of the day. And attendees said having them there was a fitting way to bring up the subject of suicide and firearms.

"You need to know your community, and you need to address it in a way that your community will accept it," Hatch says.

One day, we will read his name in the news and cheer.
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#532: Aug 31st 2019 at 1:16:42 PM

Former Marine said he’d ‘slaughter’ antifa. The FBI, using Oregon’s new red flag law, took his guns away – Law enforcement agents also had Shane Kohfield committed to a veterans’ hospital in Portland. He spent the next 20 days there.

https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2019/08/an-ex-marine-said-hed-slaughter-antifa-the-fbi-using-oregons-new-red-flag-law-took-his-guns-away.html

Shane Kohfield stood outside the home of Portland’s mayor in July wearing body armor and a “Make America Great Again” baseball cap, a large knife strapped to one shoulder and a copy of his concealed weapons permit displayed on the other.

Using a loudspeaker, he warned the right-wing activists who turned out to condemn the city’s handling of recent violent demonstrations that they needed to protect themselves against their anti-fascist, or antifa, rivals.

“If antifa gets to the point where they start killing us, I’m going to kill them next,” Kohfield, 32, said. “I’d slaughter them and I have a detailed plan on how I would wipe out antifa.”

That threat pushed the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task to take a series of extraordinary steps against Kohfield, including temporary seizure of a cache of his firearms under Oregon’s new “red flag” law aimed at preventing gun violence, The Oregonian/OregonLive has learned.

The task force also had the ex-Marine committed to a veterans’ hospital in Portland. He spent the next 20 days there.

The moves came as city officials and law enforcement prepared for potentially violent clashes Aug. 17 during a right-wing rally and counterprotests planned in downtown Portland that had become inflamed with incendiary political rhetoric nationwide. Police worried that they would end in catastrophe.

Though Kohfield wasn’t accused or charged with any crimes, police took no chances and prevented him from attending the rally as he repeatedly had promised to do on social media after his confrontation at Mayor Ted Wheeler’s house.

The episode shows that federal law enforcement may be beginning to take a more aggressive tack toward potential political threats, said Michael German, a retired FBI agent and fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School.

Later in the article:

Kohfield, who spoke with The Oregon Live, suffers from bipolar disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder, medical records show.

He returned home Tuesday from the VA hospital and maintains he never planned to hurt or maim other people. But he understands why he alarmed police.

“I looked unhinged. I looked dangerous and have the training to be dangerous,” said Kohfield, who lives with his father in Canby and receives disability payments for physical and psychological injuries he sustained during two tours of duty in Iraq.

By leveling vicious warnings, Kohfield said, he hoped to deter others from causing physical harm.

“I figured that the key to de-escalating the situation was to not be the most violent person in the room,” he said. “It was to be the scariest person in the room.”

A supporter of President Donald Trump, Kohfield said he isn’t affiliated with Patriot Prayer, the Proud Boys or other right-wing groups that have organized marches and demonstration throughout Portland over the last 2 ½ years, some that have devolved into bloody brawls and riots.

His protest activity, he said, has been limited to the event outside the mayor’s house and a right-wing rally last fall in downtown Portland, both organized by local conservative activist Haley Adams.

“I was watching on the news that city of Portland did nothing to protect the people against antifa,” Kohfield said. “I figured I’d show up to protect these people.”

Edited by sgamer82 on Aug 31st 2019 at 2:20:32 AM

TitanJump Since: Sep, 2013 Relationship Status: Singularity
#533: Sep 1st 2019 at 1:57:05 AM

About the epidemic of mass shootings in america.

Solution: Dismantle the Gun Lobby and start over from scratch with writing the gun laws.

Since the current system is clearly not working to keep this tragedy from happening again and again at this point...

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#534: Sep 1st 2019 at 2:02:01 AM

[up]That's rather easier said than done. You act as if nobody has tried to do that already or isn't still trying to do it.

It's just kind of hard to do when they can always fall back on the 2nd Amendment.

Things might change once people who have lived with the fear of mass shootings and school shootings in the USA are old enough to run for office and/or vote.

And it's not like the gun lobby is invincible. Heck, the NRA is suffering a lot of problems right now, what with them losing money and members.

Edited by M84 on Sep 1st 2019 at 5:05:43 PM

Disgusted, but not surprised
TitanJump Since: Sep, 2013 Relationship Status: Singularity
#535: Sep 1st 2019 at 2:12:49 AM

[up] I know... it's just...

...tiring to listen on the never-ending "thoughts and prayers" speech whenever one of these shootings happen.

That said, it's supposed to be a democracy, yet the voices of the many are drowned out by the wallets of the few with alarming ease.

To imagine the amount of lives that will be wasted until the victims of the gun violence get old enough to vote and the lifespans of the "pro-gun" faction to wither away and silence, doesn't help much in terms of encouragement either.

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#536: Sep 1st 2019 at 2:13:54 AM

[up]It's not the wallets of a few. The real power of the NRA wasn't about tossing cash. It was about riling up grassroot angry gun nuts to vote. They also stirred up fears of "taking away yer guns!" which convinced even reasonable gun owners to be afraid of losing their guns.

Most people being for gun control doesn't matter as much if not enough of them vote for it. The angry gun nuts may be outnumbered, but they are passionate about guns and thus always vote — thanks in large part to being egged on by the NRA.

And as I already pointed out, the NRA is struggling right now.

Edited by M84 on Sep 1st 2019 at 5:18:25 PM

Disgusted, but not surprised
TitanJump Since: Sep, 2013 Relationship Status: Singularity
#537: Sep 1st 2019 at 2:23:30 AM

[up] Why though?

Why is it that people are treasuring the "power to kill" (because that's the only purpose of firearms, to kill life in any of its forms) more than "life of the innocents" when it comes to guns?

I don't get it.

And what happens if the fall of the NRA isn't enough to permit a change in the gun-laws? What then?

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#538: Sep 1st 2019 at 2:27:57 AM

[up]We have gun owners on OTC who will be happy to educate you on why being able to own guns is important.

For the record, most gun owners actually DO support the need for gun regulation. The problem is that we don't really have any clue how to even begin to regulate guns in a way that actually would prevent mass shootings.

Our current regulations actually do a pretty good job of reducing most gun violence in the USA that is not mass shooting related. Overall, gun violence is down.

Shit, statistics indicate that there isn't even a truly significant rise in mass shootings either. At least, not until the last few years (and even that's debatable). What has risen is increased media coverage of mass shootings. There was a time once in the USA when people didn't hear about every single mass shooting. Nowadays, one can find out about a mass shooting that happened on the other side of the USA within seconds on Twitter.

Edited by M84 on Sep 1st 2019 at 5:28:55 PM

Disgusted, but not surprised
TitanJump Since: Sep, 2013 Relationship Status: Singularity
#539: Sep 1st 2019 at 2:29:42 AM

[up] By all means, point me towards these people and I'll have a listen on their message regarding this topic.

Thank you for sharing this.

Edited by TitanJump on Sep 1st 2019 at 11:30:55 AM

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#540: Sep 1st 2019 at 2:31:59 AM

[up]I'm not going to name them. If they want to inform you, they'll do it. Or you can post an open question about it right here on this forum.

Disgusted, but not surprised
TitanJump Since: Sep, 2013 Relationship Status: Singularity
#541: Sep 1st 2019 at 2:36:01 AM

[up] got it.

Question: "Why is it so important to own guns in the first place as a civilian, again?"

Edited by TitanJump on Sep 1st 2019 at 11:36:18 AM

archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#542: Sep 1st 2019 at 3:32:28 AM

[up] There are more than a few reasons someone might want to own a gun. Right off the bat the most obvious is as a hobby, for some people shooting and working on guns is something they do for fun. There are shooting sports, such as hunting or three-gun, which are very popular in the US and Europe. There’s also self defense, though not the “good guy with a gun” version the NRA sells to people. Even in heavily regulated states like New York it’s possible to get a carry permit if you can articulate a genuine need. In rural areas, which the US has a lot of, it’s possible that police officers might not be able to respond to an emergency call in a reasonable time frame, or you might encounter an aggressive animal.

Most gun owners, as pointed out above, are not unhinged militia types stockpiling arms in their garages. Most gun owners have one or two guns, and most of them support increased gun control too. The problem is a very vocal minority of extremists and the politicians backing them, and the fact that currently gun ownership is considered a right in the US, making it difficult to regulate at times.

They should have sent a poet.
TitanJump Since: Sep, 2013 Relationship Status: Singularity
#543: Sep 1st 2019 at 3:34:41 AM

[up] Isn't it expensive to get involved with guns?

Edited by TitanJump on Sep 1st 2019 at 12:35:09 PM

archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#544: Sep 1st 2019 at 3:56:14 AM

[up] It can be, though it depends. The average firearm is in the $300-$1000 range. High-end firearms can be a few thousand dollars or more, some transferable machine guns run for tens of thousands of dollars.

They should have sent a poet.
Imca (Veteran)
#545: Sep 1st 2019 at 4:45:24 AM

Why is it that people are treasuring the "power to kill" (because that's the only purpose of firearms, to kill life in any of its forms)

Riiight, lets completely ignore sport shooting, lets also ignore that various kinds of weapons are important agricultural tools, lets move past the fact that the nation I come from has issues with the gun regulations making it hard for fucking construction companies to operate (Most industrial fastening equipment when you get down to it is almost indistinguishable from a firearm)

Its crap like this that answers your own question, most gun owners are actually 100% fine with restrictions, and trying to keep the guns out of the hands of malicious individuals, but when it starts becoming things like that, or things like the "assault weapons ban" which is entirely focused on what makes fire arms scary and not what makes them deadly, you loose them and they go back to voting the other way.

The best methods to take with these kinds of situations are also the simplest ones.

1) Mandatory Firearm Safety Courses to get a License.
2) Switch to Licensees in the first place, which can then take the place of a background check which would be done as part of the liscencing process, this can be pitched as making it easier for some one who has proven themselfs responsible to buy more or trade additional fire arms since they wont have to deal with that step, but rather importantly it allows....
3) Closing the gun-show loophole, by making guns a licensed product rather then one where the individual selling them is required to do the leg work, you can easily make it absolutely necicery to verify that the person you are selling too is licensed, and thus has passed the mandatory safety courses.

These may not sound like big steps, but in essence if you go through with them, you end up getting a system that looks not unlike what Australia has at the end of the day, and they managed to go from "Gun Culture and Problems" to "Still Liking Guns, but Much less Problems"

Personally I continue to argue that the US should copy our system, and limit Ammo acquisition to prevent hoarding, requiring you to return your brass to get new cartridges (Documenting what exactly you spent the ammo on is a bit extreme, and can safely be dropped), but that kind of system I am pretty sure isn't feasible for the US.... As in it would never pass and be accepted.

[up] I actually think that I spent more on ammo then I did on any thing else back when I did target shooting, that's a cost that a lot of entering people tend to overlook. ._.;

Edit: You know what I am going to take a crack at this from the politics thread while I am at it too.

Wouldn't "bulletproof" articles then be just a waste of money when up against an assault rifle?

And if the forces involved are that strong, a kindergartner's body won't stand a chance even with protection on his/her back...

They seriously should just ban "military-grade" weaponry from ever reaching civilian hands...

Civilians can't own assault rifles, or well more accurately they cant own MOST assault rifles, there was a very narrow period of years they were made before the US barred adding automatic weapons to the NFA registry in 1986, but ones made prior to that are transferable... which essentially limits you to the M16A1, some AK models, and the prototypes from the tail end of WWII for the assault rifle family... most of which are way more valuable for there collection value then any kind of use as a weapon, those things will go for thousands of dollars each... not exactly what you want to use in a crime.

The reason for this is that all "Assault Rifles" are automatic, it is literally part of the definition...

It must be capable of selective fire. It must have an intermediate-power cartridge: more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle or battle rifle Its ammunition must be supplied from a detachable box magazine It must have an effective range of at least 300 metres (330 yards)

And to add onto that no purpose built automatic weapons have been used in crimes in decades, it turns out what when people have to jump through the legal hoops of owning one, they tend to want it for some legitimate purpose or collection.

So that question is coming from a bad point in the first place.

Second, bulletproof things DO hold up after more then one shot, there just "compromised" after the first shot, meaning that there rated protection can no longer be guaranteed.... Basically your supposed to dispose of them as soon as you can and replace them.... Much like a motorcycle helmet if you have ever had to deal with them, there good once, they will save you even if you impact the ground multiple times over the course of your collision, but you don't want to go through it again.

Third, Military Grade Weaponry is already banned from the civilian market in the cases of extreme stuff like Rocket Launchers and Machine Guns, and on the riffle end of things? Well a good chunk of the civilian stuff is actually higher powered rounds then what the military uses... for a reason... Killing a human is much easier then killing the game animals that humans tend to eat, so the military stuff tends to fire smaller bullets that carry less energy, but are able to be carried more of.... Instead of the big bullets that will take down the animal you are hunting in one shot, minimizing its suffering.

Basically there is a lot of misinformation here, and it is easy to see why but like I hope this helps clear some things up.... Stuff needs to be done, but blind panic is just going to burn the needed bridges to get it done.

Edit Edit: To give you an idea of how expensive it is to get an Assault Rifle, I looked up how much a transferable M-16s start at 25,000 and go up to 30,000 transferable AK's start at $30,000 and spike at over $100,000... that's not a joke, a Chinese AK-47 will cost you more then a house....

Which uhhhhh.....

If I am being honest I was expecting $8-9,000 on the Chinese AK, not $132,500.

Edited by Imca on Sep 1st 2019 at 5:11:49 AM

archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#546: Sep 1st 2019 at 5:09:42 AM

[up] Luckily ammo has been pretty cheap in the US for a while. It definitely racks up fast though!

I’ll also add to that explainer that the term “military grade” is a little misleading. In fact, it doesn’t actually mean anything as far as the power of a weapon is concerned. Mil-spec or mil-grade just means that a certain weapon conforms to the purchasing standards laid out by the DoD. Mil-spec ARs are actually considered pretty midrange as far as rifles are concerned, though their features make them attractive for bulk buyers. A mil-spec AR isn’t more powerful than a regular one. In fact, some of the more powerful rifle rounds commonly available in the US aren’t mil-spec at all.

Edited by archonspeaks on Sep 1st 2019 at 5:10:30 AM

They should have sent a poet.
Imca (Veteran)
#547: Sep 1st 2019 at 5:14:25 AM

That last point is kinda what I was trying to make really, I think the most common hunting rounds are a bit more potent then 5.56 NATO... Or is .223 actually used to hunt in the states?

I am used to that being the various 7mm rounds as the base line hunting cartridges.

Edited by Imca on Sep 1st 2019 at 5:15:26 AM

archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#548: Sep 1st 2019 at 5:25:06 AM

[up] .223 is considered more of a varmint round but you do see it being used for hunting. In my experience the most common hunting rounds are .30-06 and .308, followed by things like .243 and .270. 6mm AR cartridges have seen a pretty explosive rise in popularity for hunting recently, though.

A 6.5 Creedmoor AR is exclusively a civilian weapon, but is significantly more powerful than a “military grade” AR.

Edited by archonspeaks on Sep 1st 2019 at 5:40:55 AM

They should have sent a poet.
fruitpork Since: Oct, 2010
#549: Sep 1st 2019 at 5:30:33 AM

The fact that guns are an expensive hobby doesn’t really phase me. Crack Is Cheaper exists among many other hobbies.

sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#550: Sep 1st 2019 at 6:32:32 AM

Shit, statistics indicate that there isn't even a truly significant rise in mass shootings either. At least, not until the last few years (and even that's debatable). What has risen is increased media coverage of mass shootings. There was a time once in the USA when people didn't hear about every single mass shooting. Nowadays, one can find out about a mass shooting that happened on the other side of the USA within seconds on Twitter.
Not strictly related but I thought it interesting to share:

This increase in coverage reached a point where the hosts of a True Crime podcast I listen to, The Last Podcast on the Left, had to debate on whether or not to postpone/cancel a recent episode on America's first known mass shooter, Howard Unruh, in the wake is the shootings at the Garlic Festival, Dayton, El Paso, and others that didn't make headlines.

The episode had been planned and worked on for weeks before. When it was just the first shooting, they were going to go ahead because they believed, cynically by their own admission, that it would be forgotten by the time the episode came around. When so many others happened in quick succession, they ultimately decided to go ahead because, to paraphrase host Marcus Parks, if they waited until there were no mass shootings before releasing an episode on a mass shooter, they were never going to release an episode on a mass shooter.

Another part of their reason is there fact that the show's premise is to actively mock people like serial killers and cult leaders and "these assholes are as deserving of the same scorn and derision we give the serial killers we cover."

Edited by sgamer82 on Sep 1st 2019 at 9:24:10 AM


Total posts: 683
Top