Quote Originally Posted by Irving View Post
I don't think it would. Larger community = more crime. That metric alone will drive numbers so much that any other metric will be almost undetectable.
Explains increase in volume but not rate. It might make mass shootings more likely (volume of people) in cities.

There are mass shootings level casualties every weekend in Chicago that get ignored.

Denver had 59 homicides last year and is on track for slightly more this year. Shocking in aggregate.

Homicide rate (100K) in 2016 for Denver was 8.22. Go into Westminster and it drops to 3.51. Why are you ~2.5x more likely to be murdered in Denver? Some cities aren't even in the data because they have zero homicides!

http://www.cpr.org/news/story/a-dive...ta-in-5-charts

Quote Originally Posted by Zundfolge View Post
Thing is you can write all the laws to prevent "bad/dangerous people" from legally acquiring and/or possessing guns but that won't stop anyone.

The only government based solution to the problem is for government to get out of the way of the people being armed whenever and wherever they wish.

Yes, it's more guns that will make us safer. Not less (because the only "less guns" you get with the law is less guns in the hands of good people).
Yeah, I'm struggling to understand how society could have identified this nutter and prevented him from getting a gun. You have more ridiculous cases like Holmes where he is screaming he's insane, making threats, and even his therapist knew it (contacted LE).

This one, I'm not sure. I'm worried any criteria other than we have now would infringe on the rights of people who aren't a problem and never will be.