Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/14 21:01:38


Post by: Breotan


https://www.cbsnews.com/live/?ftag=CNMe94798

Current news has at least 20 injured. CBS has updated their banner to report at least 14 injured + numerous fatalities.

Local CBS affiliate stating that a suspect is in custody, being transferred to local jail. No reports of other shooters.

Multiple reports refer to the shooter as a former student as opposed to a current student.



School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/14 23:21:50


Post by: Mario


What is there to say? It sucks and it's just frustrating to watch how mass shooting are a constant thing in the US (40 in 2018 alone). Apparently schools over there have emergency drills for that, like it's an earthquake or other unavoidable natural catastrophe. There's not much to discuss (no US politics), it's just something that happens in the USA.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/14 23:28:52


Post by: Breotan


More details trickling out but there is a lot of conflicting information floating around so it's hard to sort out what's fact and what's inaccurate.

The latest reports are saying 14 injured and 7 dead.




School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/14 23:38:23


Post by: Howard A Treesong


Devastating for those caught up in it, the number of these shootings already this year is staggering, this drawing attention for being the worst.

But sadly we know the way this will play out politically. More finger pointing, demands for gun control, a lot of puff in the media, accusations on both sides of using the incident for political means, and somewhere along the line conspiracy theories involving ‘professional crisis actors’ that make it all more insufferable for the victims. Ultimately nothing will change.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/14 23:41:33


Post by: CptJake


News just said 17 dead.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/14 23:52:29


Post by: DarkTraveler777


Mario wrote:
There's not much to discuss (no US politics), it's just something that happens in the USA.


This is sadly the truth. Most of us won't remember the school name after a week or two either, because another incident will occur and occupy our attention.



School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/14 23:59:58


Post by: Breotan


Feth like this NEVER happened when I was growing up.

I truly hope the shooter gets the OZ/Shawshank treatment before he gets the needle.



School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 00:09:26


Post by: Ouze


Thoughts and prayers, obviously.

 Breotan wrote:
Feth like this NEVER happened when I was growing up.


Yes it did. It was less common, and you were less aware of it because 24 hour news didn't report it in realtime, but there have been school shootings in this country since the 1800s. If you're 42, then there have been about 85 school shootings from when you were born until you turned 18.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 00:47:33


Post by: BaronIveagh


 Breotan wrote:
Feth like this NEVER happened when I was growing up.


It never happened at the school at least when i was growing up. I was stabbed a few times, but never shot.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 00:57:08


Post by: stanman


 Breotan wrote:
Feth like this NEVER happened when I was growing up.



90+ year old school massacre's is still the deadliest and was done with bombs, so yeah this stuff has been happening for a long time.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/1927-bombing-remains-americas-deadliest-school-massacre-180963355/



School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 01:02:42


Post by: Breotan


 stanman wrote:
 Breotan wrote:
Feth like this NEVER happened when I was growing up.

90+ year old school massacre's is still it's deadliest and was done with bombs, so yeah this stuff has been happening for a long time.

"when I was growing up" does not include events 90+ years ago. I'm old but not that old.

Frazzled, on the other hand...




School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 01:46:45


Post by: sebster


 Ouze wrote:
Yes it did. It was less common, and you were less aware of it because 24 hour news didn't report it in realtime, but there have been school shootings in this country since the 1800s. If you're 42, then there have been about 85 school shootings from when you were born until you turned 18.


The awareness of it is actually part of the problem, sort of. In the wake of Robin Williams suicide and the saturation media coverage that followed, the rate of suicide is estimated to have increased 10%. People suffering from violent compulsions are triggered by outside stimulus. For much the same reason, the modern spree of shootings started with Columbine, and the media and social focus that followed. This doesn't mean attacks shouldn't be reported, but newsrooms should be aware of the impact of some types of coverage, and show responsibility in what they report. Focusing on the shooter, not the victims, going in to specific act by act details of the attack - these things can help trigger the next attacker.

The other part is, of course, the guns. Both the guns and the media coverage operate as powerful triggers to get mentally unwell people to tip over in to acting on their violent fantasies.

I mean, it should be obvious. Take an unwell person, put him in a room with a tv broadcasting continuous coverage of past school massacres, and put a small armoury of guns in the corner of the room. Everyone knows on a basic, instinctive level that guy is a lot more likely to act on his violent fantasies, compared to a guy who has minimal contact with guns, in an environment with little violent media.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 02:05:41


Post by: BrotherGecko


 sebster wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
Yes it did. It was less common, and you were less aware of it because 24 hour news didn't report it in realtime, but there have been school shootings in this country since the 1800s. If you're 42, then there have been about 85 school shootings from when you were born until you turned 18.


The awareness of it is actually part of the problem, sort of. In the wake of Robin Williams suicide and the saturation media coverage that followed, the rate of suicide is estimated to have increased 10%. People suffering from violent compulsions are triggered by outside stimulus. For much the same reason, the modern spree of shootings started with Columbine, and the media and social focus that followed. This doesn't mean attacks shouldn't be reported, but newsrooms should be aware of the impact of some types of coverage, and show responsibility in what they report. Focusing on the shooter, not the victims, going in to specific act by act details of the attack - these things can help trigger the next attacker.

The other part is, of course, the guns. Both the guns and the media coverage operate as powerful triggers to get mentally unwell people to tip over in to acting on their violent fantasies.

I mean, it should be obvious. Take an unwell person, put him in a room with a tv broadcasting continuous coverage of past school massacres, and put a small armoury of guns in the corner of the room. Everyone knows on a basic, instinctive level that guy is a lot more likely to act on his violent fantasies, compared to a guy who has minimal contact with guns, in an environment with little violent media.


At this point I don't think TV has anything to do with school shootings. Most school shooters probably pay almost no attention to the 24 hour cable news cycle. They do have a plethora of unmatched forums on the internet that glorify these things as well as instigate them.

For children these days, the internet has far greater influence.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 02:25:29


Post by: Relapse


Self edited


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 03:35:09


Post by: djones520


So it sounds like another break down of the system then anything else. At least we haven't gotten into the bugaboo about guns yet...

But every kid interviewed has basically said they've been waiting for a whole year for this to happen, from the person who did it.

No one was surprised.

That seems like a pretty clear freaking problem there.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 03:41:35


Post by: Ouze


 djones520 wrote:
So it sounds like another break down of the system then anything else. At least we haven't gotten into the bugaboo about guns yet...


Well, you know it's coming.

Spoiler:
Major shooting event happens

condolences to family

questions about shooting

details about shooting

condolences to family

thoughts and prayers

why do americans love guns so much

it's too soon to politicize it, you ghouls

if he's brown, speculate he's a radical muslim & ask if islam is compatible with the west

if he's white, call him a lone wolf and discuss mental health

off topic political stuff

first warning

thoughts and prayers

fake info

hey man, that was fake info

we need to ban guns like Australia

the US is not like Australia

they have way more guns in Finland and this doesn't happen

the US has a violent culture

semantic argument over definition of assault rifle

off topic political stuff

second warning

we need to ban guns

if you banned guns, then people would just use something else

lots of people get killed by bees and hammers

NRA donates money to republicans

off topic political stuff

rudeness

memes

thread locked


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 03:43:07


Post by: djones520


 Ouze wrote:
 djones520 wrote:
So it sounds like another break down of the system then anything else. At least we haven't gotten into the bugaboo about guns yet...


Well, you know it's coming.

Spoiler:
Major shooting event happens

condolences to family

questions about shooting

details about shooting

condolences to family

thoughts and prayers

why do americans love guns so much

it's too soon to politicize it, you ghouls

if he's brown, speculate he's a radical muslim & ask if islam is compatible with the west

if he's white, call him a lone wolf and discuss mental health

off topic political stuff

first warning

thoughts and prayers

fake info

hey man, that was fake info

we need to ban guns like Australia

the US is not like Australia

they have way more guns in Finland and this doesn't happen

the US has a violent culture

semantic argument over definition of assault rifle

off topic political stuff

second warning

we need to ban guns

if you banned guns, then people would just use something else

lots of people get killed by bees and hammers

NRA donates money to republicans

off topic political stuff

rudeness

memes

thread locked


We really need to build some official Dakka bingo cards.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 04:04:20


Post by: tneva82


 Ouze wrote:
Thoughts and prayers, obviously.

 Breotan wrote:
Feth like this NEVER happened when I was growing up.


Yes it did. It was less common, and you were less aware of it because 24 hour news didn't report it in realtime, but there have been school shootings in this country since the 1800s. If you're 42, then there have been about 85 school shootings from when you were born until you turned 18.


There\s enough shooting incidents in america that there's been more casualties in past half a century inside US than US soldiers have died in al the wars(including civil war) in America's history combined. So yeah if you are like 50 years or less you have lived through cases like these. Before it was just less in news. How many kids in old days read news papers all that much? How many sees news these days from twitter/facebook/whatever without even deliberately searching for news?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 04:25:07


Post by: Mitochondria


This gak is terrible.

He pulled a fire alarm and waited until the halls filled up or something.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 05:08:02


Post by: sebster


 BrotherGecko wrote:
At this point I don't think TV has anything to do with school shootings. Most school shooters probably pay almost no attention to the 24 hour cable news cycle. They do have a plethora of unmatched forums on the internet that glorify these things as well as instigate them.

For children these days, the internet has far greater influence.


Fair point. I think though, that a lot of internet stuff is secondary media, taking info and points of view started on tv. Not all of it, of course, but a big enough chunk that tv coverage drives impacts internet coverage.

But I'm not a teenager and haven't been one for a long time, so they could be getting their internet stuff from new, original sources that I don't even know about. Happy to admit ignorance there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Ouze wrote:
Well, you know it's coming.

Spoiler:
Major shooting event happens

condolences to family

questions about shooting

details about shooting

condolences to family

thoughts and prayers

why do americans love guns so much

it's too soon to politicize it, you ghouls

if he's brown, speculate he's a radical muslim & ask if islam is compatible with the west

if he's white, call him a lone wolf and discuss mental health

off topic political stuff

first warning

thoughts and prayers

fake info

hey man, that was fake info

we need to ban guns like Australia

the US is not like Australia

they have way more guns in Finland and this doesn't happen

the US has a violent culture

semantic argument over definition of assault rifle

off topic political stuff

second warning

we need to ban guns

if you banned guns, then people would just use something else

lots of people get killed by bees and hammers

NRA donates money to republicans

off topic political stuff

rudeness

memes

thread locked


That was perfect. And not just a perfect summary of gun debates. It was the perfect post. The post all posts should aspire to being. Even that is maybe selling it short, because it was perfect beyond just being a post. It is perhaps the level of perfection that everything should aspire towards. Next time your favourite plays a great game of ballfootergame, you can say it was great, but how perfect was it compared to Ouze's Feb 15th 2018 post on the discussion that follows after some US mass shootings.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 05:57:19


Post by: Breotan


 sebster wrote:
 BrotherGecko wrote:
For children these days, the internet has far greater influence.

Fair point. I think though, that a lot of internet stuff is secondary media, taking info and points of view started on tv. Not all of it, of course, but a big enough chunk that tv coverage drives impacts internet coverage.

But I'm not a teenager and haven't been one for a long time, so they could be getting their internet stuff from new, original sources that I don't even know about. Happy to admit ignorance there.

I think social media is a stronger influence than television. People put all sorts of things on Facebook and/or Youtube for their friends (and hopefully others) to see. Then there's all the selfie posing that winds up on Snapchat and Imgur.

On the other hand, the whole Tide pod stupidity was a combination of YouTube idiocy followed by News coverage.

I wonder how many of these recent shooters are wishing for their deeds to go viral and make them famous.




School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 06:31:59


Post by: sebster


 Breotan wrote:
I wonder how many of these recent shooters are wishing for their deeds to go viral and make them famous.


Probably the same share as we saw in the wave of copycats that followed Columbine. Which is to say it probably wasn't the only reason in any case, but there probably wasn't any case where it wasn't one of the reasons.


LATE EDIT - missed out the word 'reason'.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 07:06:17


Post by: Steelmage99


The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting different results.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 07:17:49


Post by: Luciferian


These kids may not watch much mainstream media but of course they know their actions will be extensively covered by it. That has to be part of the motivation. People like this are usually extremely isolated; they either have no one to express themselves to or they don't know how. This is an extremely effective way to get some attention, as horrible as that is.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 08:19:14


Post by: sebster


 Luciferian wrote:
These kids may not watch much mainstream media but of course they know their actions will be extensively covered by it.


Agreed. Ultimately whether the media is tv or the internet is irrelevant*, the underlying dynamic of wanting to get their anger recognized and their power acknowledged is there - whether that recognition is realised through a news report or a bunch of youtube channels or whatever else doesn't really matter.




*I mean its irrelevant to the issue of kids being driven by the need for greater recognition. In terms of the original point raised by BrotherGecko, that tv media's responsbility doesn't matter so much when the kids aren't watching tv, the point was fair.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 08:42:39


Post by: Peregrine


 Ouze wrote:
Thoughts and prayers, obviously.


/thread

With the ridiculous US politics ban that's all you can say on the subject. Thoughts and prayers, how sad it is, might as well just lock the thread now since nothing of substance can be said without breaking forum rules.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 11:52:41


Post by: Laughing Man


Oh, another one. Yawn. Tune in tomorrow for shooting number 41.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 13:31:50


Post by: sirlynchmob


 Peregrine wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
Thoughts and prayers, obviously.


/thread

With the ridiculous US politics ban that's all you can say on the subject. Thoughts and prayers, how sad it is, might as well just lock the thread now since nothing of substance can be said without breaking forum rules.


apparently thoughts and prayers are accelerating the cycle, 18 shootings this year is beyond horrible, that's 3 a week. thoughts and prayers really just seems to be code for 'blood for the gun god'. the lives of the children are meaningless to the gun owners who think their right to a gun outways the uncountable lives lost to mass shootings. It's amazing isn't it, nothing gets done year after year to address the issue, and the violence keeps getting worse every year.




School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 13:39:57


Post by: Frazzled


 Breotan wrote:
 stanman wrote:
 Breotan wrote:
Feth like this NEVER happened when I was growing up.

90+ year old school massacre's is still it's deadliest and was done with bombs, so yeah this stuff has been happening for a long time.

"when I was growing up" does not include events 90+ years ago. I'm old but not that old.

Frazzled, on the other hand...




When I was growing up, hyenadon packs were the problem.
To the topic. I do not know what to do. Reports are he was cray cray on the internet and had been reported. But then what. Police can't imprison you for what you might do. Forced stays at medical facilities are extremely difficult and temporary.
Make the guns illegal and they are still out there, plus it harms everyone else.

We live on school row ( elementary, Jr high, and high in a mile of each other). Police roam freely and respond within two minutes. But if the BG pops the fire alarm it's chaos and a mass shooting is easy.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 13:53:14


Post by: Herzlos


 Luciferian wrote:
These kids may not watch much mainstream media but of course they know their actions will be extensively covered by it. That has to be part of the motivation. People like this are usually extremely isolated; they either have no one to express themselves to or they don't know how. This is an extremely effective way to get some attention, as horrible as that is.


Since we're talking about mental health, I can assume the shooter was white?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 14:13:09


Post by: kronk


Herzlos wrote:


Since we're talking about mental health, I can assume the shooter was white?


Probably.

He was currently enrolled in an alternative school at the age of 19. They keep saying he was expelled from the school where the shooting happened, but it's likely expulsion (forget second word of the term), which is removal from the original school following an incident(s) and placement in a school with the facilities to handle emotional disabilities. With him being 19 and still enrolled, that's extremely likely.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 14:37:53


Post by: Iron_Captain


Oh look... It is yet another school shooting. What a crazy country...
Maybe they should send American school kids to the frontlines of the Syrian civil war. They'd probably be safer there. This is just sad.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 14:38:18


Post by: Kanluwen


Herzlos wrote:
 Luciferian wrote:
These kids may not watch much mainstream media but of course they know their actions will be extensively covered by it. That has to be part of the motivation. People like this are usually extremely isolated; they either have no one to express themselves to or they don't know how. This is an extremely effective way to get some attention, as horrible as that is.


Since we're talking about mental health, I can assume the shooter was white?

Correct. There has been a concerted effort by certain people on Twitter to point at his name as being Hispanic and trying to claim he was a DACA recipient though, because y'know...reasons.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 15:34:10


Post by: BobtheInquisitor


Clearly "no guns for anyone" is off the table, but it seems like there must be a number of strategies or risk mitigation techniques between that and "guns for everyone" that are not being investigated or even discussed.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 15:43:26


Post by: jmurph


 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Clearly "no guns for anyone" is off the table, but it seems like there must be a number of strategies or risk mitigation techniques between that and "guns for everyone" that are not being investigated or even discussed.


How dare you politicize such a tragic event! (Am I doing this right?)

Seriously though, realistic regulations are generally what is discussed but invariably get torched by those screaming BUT THE 2ND AMENDMENT!!!!! Then everyone forgets about it and nothing happens. Except that in the meantime rifle/bump stock/mags/whatever sales jump through the roof.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 15:48:22


Post by: Captain Joystick


 Peregrine wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
Thoughts and prayers, obviously.


/thread

With the ridiculous US politics ban that's all you can say on the subject. Thoughts and prayers, how sad it is, might as well just lock the thread now since nothing of substance can be said without breaking forum rules.


Thats pretty much it.

This is America's 18th school shooting this year. It's not the first, it's not going to be the worst.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 16:22:52


Post by: Easy E


 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Clearly "no guns for anyone" is off the table, but it seems like there must be a number of strategies or risk mitigation techniques between that and "guns for everyone" that are not being investigated or even discussed.


Maybe we should just give in and give guns to everyone. It is the path of least resistance now.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 16:27:32


Post by: Nostromodamus


Well here comes the gun regulation stuff.

Next we’ll see the pro-gun side’s arguements.

Nobody will agree and the thread will be locked.

May as well euthanize the thread now, save everyone some grief.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 16:34:19


Post by: daedalus


 Ouze wrote:
 djones520 wrote:
So it sounds like another break down of the system then anything else. At least we haven't gotten into the bugaboo about guns yet...


Well, you know it's coming.

Spoiler:
Major shooting event happens

condolences to family

questions about shooting

details about shooting

condolences to family

thoughts and prayers

why do americans love guns so much

it's too soon to politicize it, you ghouls

if he's brown, speculate he's a radical muslim & ask if islam is compatible with the west

if he's white, call him a lone wolf and discuss mental health

off topic political stuff

first warning

thoughts and prayers

fake info

hey man, that was fake info

we need to ban guns like Australia

the US is not like Australia

they have way more guns in Finland and this doesn't happen

the US has a violent culture

semantic argument over definition of assault rifle

off topic political stuff

second warning

we need to ban guns

if you banned guns, then people would just use something else

lots of people get killed by bees and hammers

NRA donates money to republicans

off topic political stuff

rudeness

memes

thread locked


I'm going to wipe the coffee off my monitor, print this out, and then never need to read dakka again.

In the wake of this tragedy, and in spite of the fact that we all know we'll not learn a single other thing from this thread, at least it has caused you to provide us with this post. Thank you, sir. And I mean that most sincerely.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 16:35:12


Post by: nels1031


 Captain Joystick wrote:
 Peregrine wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
Thoughts and prayers, obviously.


/thread

With the ridiculous US politics ban that's all you can say on the subject. Thoughts and prayers, how sad it is, might as well just lock the thread now since nothing of substance can be said without breaking forum rules.


Thats pretty much it.

This is America's 18th school shooting this year. It's not the first, it's not going to be the worst.


Not to downplay the seriousness of the situation or the tragedy in a few of the cases listed below, but I feel we need to put into perspective the "18 school shootings" that has cropped up in this thread a few times:

Spoiler:
A summary :

Twice, someone shot themselves on school grounds; one incident, on January 3, featured a man shooting himself in a former school’s parking lot; on January 10 a teen killed himself in an Arizona elementary school bathroom.

Four times, a bullet was fired through a school or dorm’s window: on January 4, a gunshot was fired at a high school in Seattle through an office window; no one was hurt. On January 10, a shot was fired shattering a California State University classroom window. No injuries were reported. The same day, in Texas, a bullet was accidentally fired through a classroom wall at the Grayson College Criminal Justice Center. No one was injured. On January 15, a bullet traveled through a residential hall’s dorm room. No injuries were reported.


On January 25, a Mobile, Alabama, high school student fired a gun on campus. No one was injured. On January 26, in Dearborn, Michigan, shots were fired from a car in a parking lot; no injuries were reported.

On February 5, in Maplewood, Minnesota, a third-grader pulled the trigger on a cop's gun. No one was injured. On February 8, in New York, a shot was fired inside Metropolitan High School. No one was injured.

Here are the cases where someone was injured other than the shooter:

January 22, Italy, Texas: a teenage girl was wounded by shots from a semi-automatic handgun. The same day, in Gentilly, Louisiana, a 14-year-old boy was injured in a shooting. February 1, Los Angeles, California: five children were injured in an accidental shooting. February 5, Maryland: a teenager was shot and injured outside of a high school.

The fatalities:

January 20, Winston-Salem, North Carolina: A football player was shot and killed. January 23, Benton, Kentucky: Two people were killed and another 15 were shot at Marshall County High School. January 31, a fight broke out at a Pennsylvania high school; a 32-year-old man was shot and later died.




School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 17:07:16


Post by: Grey Templar


 jmurph wrote:
 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Clearly "no guns for anyone" is off the table, but it seems like there must be a number of strategies or risk mitigation techniques between that and "guns for everyone" that are not being investigated or even discussed.


How dare you politicize such a tragic event! (Am I doing this right?)

Seriously though, realistic regulations are generally what is discussed but invariably get torched by those screaming BUT THE 2ND AMENDMENT!!!!! Then everyone forgets about it and nothing happens. Except that in the meantime rifle/bump stock/mags/whatever sales jump through the roof.


Unless a proposed law would have stopped this kid from getting a gun then further regulation is pointless unless your sole goal is to infringe on civil and human rights.

It is almost certain that him possessing a gun was illegal due to his mental health issues and possibly age, not to mention likely being stolen. IE: no change is necessary because the law was already broken. Making further laws which do nothing only infringes on the rights of innocent people. It doesn't solve any problems.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 17:19:56


Post by: Easy E


I just watched a few of the live feeds from students on social media during the attack. That is some horrifying stuff.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 17:22:26


Post by: Grey Templar


 Easy E wrote:
I just watched a few of the live feeds from students on social media during the attack. That is some horrifying stuff.


Yeah. And at the same time it makes you really wonder.

''Oh, there is this terrifying life and death situation going on! Better put it on Facebook!"


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 17:27:21


Post by: feeder


 Grey Templar wrote:
 Easy E wrote:
I just watched a few of the live feeds from students on social media during the attack. That is some horrifying stuff.


Yeah. And at the same time it makes you really wonder.

''Oh, there is this terrifying life and death situation going on! Better put it on Facebook!"


It's when things like this happen that I realize my kids live in an entirely different world than I did when I was in school. Always connected to everyone all the time.

It's not a exactly facepalm moment. That's just how (some) kids relate to the world these days.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 17:29:26


Post by: DarkTraveler777


 Grey Templar wrote:
 Easy E wrote:
I just watched a few of the live feeds from students on social media during the attack. That is some horrifying stuff.


Yeah. And at the same time it makes you really wonder.

''Oh, there is this terrifying life and death situation going on! Better put it on Facebook!"


That is the world we live in now, and have for some time. Isn't that how Russia's vacationing soldiers got outed in Ukraine a few years back? Posting gak on social media that allowed GPS tracking to confirm their locations? Not sure why you are surprised at this aspect of the story.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 17:29:47


Post by: Desubot


 Grey Templar wrote:
 Easy E wrote:
I just watched a few of the live feeds from students on social media during the attack. That is some horrifying stuff.


Yeah. And at the same time it makes you really wonder.

''Oh, there is this terrifying life and death situation going on! Better put it on Facebook!"


Reminds me of a recent thing i saw about some cosco robbers that smashed and grabbed a bunch of jewlery. the news said everyone was in a panic and running away but in reality there was a ton of people just standing around with their phones out.




School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 17:30:57


Post by: Kanluwen


 Grey Templar wrote:
 Easy E wrote:
I just watched a few of the live feeds from students on social media during the attack. That is some horrifying stuff.


Yeah. And at the same time it makes you really wonder.

''Oh, there is this terrifying life and death situation going on! Better put it on Facebook!"

No, it really doesn't "make you wonder".

Facebook Live(which is likely what they were "putting it on Facebook" with) is a live streaming app; kinda/sorta like Skype. It was likely an attempt by the kids to try to tell their loved ones or friends about a really crummy situation they were put in.

I mean, I don't hear you complaining about the people on the hijacked flights in 2001 calling their friends & family.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 17:38:22


Post by: DarkTraveler777


 Kanluwen wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
 Easy E wrote:
I just watched a few of the live feeds from students on social media during the attack. That is some horrifying stuff.


Yeah. And at the same time it makes you really wonder.

''Oh, there is this terrifying life and death situation going on! Better put it on Facebook!"

No, it really doesn't "make you wonder".

Facebook Live(which is likely what they were "putting it on Facebook" with) is a live streaming app; kinda/sorta like Skype. It was likely an attempt by the kids to try to tell their loved ones or friends about a really crummy situation they were put in.

I mean, I don't hear you complaining about the people on the hijacked flights in 2001 calling their friends & family.


But, but, kids these days, man!


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 17:48:12


Post by: sirlynchmob


 Desubot wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
 Easy E wrote:
I just watched a few of the live feeds from students on social media during the attack. That is some horrifying stuff.


Yeah. And at the same time it makes you really wonder.

''Oh, there is this terrifying life and death situation going on! Better put it on Facebook!"


Reminds me of a recent thing i saw about some cosco robbers that smashed and grabbed a bunch of jewlery. the news said everyone was in a panic and running away but in reality there was a ton of people just standing around with their phones out.




that's actually the smart thing to do though, eye witness testimony is the most unreliable, but show the cops the video of the guy so they can see what happened and post his picture to ID the guy. Confronting the robbers could escalate the situation til you or random bystanders get hurt or killed.



School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 17:55:22


Post by: Howard A Treesong


 nels1031 wrote:
.
...
On February 5, in Maplewood, Minnesota, a third-grader pulled the trigger on a cop's gun. No one was injured.


Dear god.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 17:57:51


Post by: Desubot


sirlynchmob wrote:
 Desubot wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
 Easy E wrote:
I just watched a few of the live feeds from students on social media during the attack. That is some horrifying stuff.


Yeah. And at the same time it makes you really wonder.

''Oh, there is this terrifying life and death situation going on! Better put it on Facebook!"


Reminds me of a recent thing i saw about some cosco robbers that smashed and grabbed a bunch of jewlery. the news said everyone was in a panic and running away but in reality there was a ton of people just standing around with their phones out.




that's actually the smart thing to do though, eye witness testimony is the most unreliable, but show the cops the video of the guy so they can see what happened and post his picture to ID the guy. Confronting the robbers could escalate the situation til you or random bystanders get hurt or killed.



Oh forgot to mention one of the guys was armed. i will need to dredge it up later.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 18:18:39


Post by: WrentheFaceless


 Ouze wrote:
 djones520 wrote:
So it sounds like another break down of the system then anything else. At least we haven't gotten into the bugaboo about guns yet...


Well, you know it's coming.

Spoiler:
Major shooting event happens

condolences to family

questions about shooting

details about shooting

condolences to family

thoughts and prayers

why do americans love guns so much

it's too soon to politicize it, you ghouls

if he's brown, speculate he's a radical muslim & ask if islam is compatible with the west

if he's white, call him a lone wolf and discuss mental health

off topic political stuff

first warning

thoughts and prayers

fake info

hey man, that was fake info

we need to ban guns like Australia

the US is not like Australia

they have way more guns in Finland and this doesn't happen

the US has a violent culture

semantic argument over definition of assault rifle

off topic political stuff

second warning

we need to ban guns

if you banned guns, then people would just use something else

lots of people get killed by bees and hammers

NRA donates money to republicans

off topic political stuff

rudeness

memes

thread locked


Sad but true


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 18:44:07


Post by: Easy E


 Grey Templar wrote:
 Easy E wrote:
I just watched a few of the live feeds from students on social media during the attack. That is some horrifying stuff.


Yeah. And at the same time it makes you really wonder.

''Oh, there is this terrifying life and death situation going on! Better put it on Facebook!"


What would you propose they do while on lockdown with a gunman running around?

I am genuinely curious.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 18:46:35


Post by: nels1031


 Easy E wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
 Easy E wrote:
I just watched a few of the live feeds from students on social media during the attack. That is some horrifying stuff.


Yeah. And at the same time it makes you really wonder.

''Oh, there is this terrifying life and death situation going on! Better put it on Facebook!"


What would you propose they do while on lockdown with a gunman running around?

I am genuinely curious.


Back in my day, we'd sharpen our pencils and prepare for glory.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 19:09:49


Post by: Kanluwen


Without wanting to get super political, a white nationalist militia in Tallahassee has now claimed that the shooter "participated in paramilitary drills" with them.


Edit: I don't know why, but I typed "Tennessee" instead of "Tallahassee". Apologies.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 19:11:51


Post by: BrotherGecko


 Luciferian wrote:
These kids may not watch much mainstream media but of course they know their actions will be extensively covered by it. That has to be part of the motivation. People like this are usually extremely isolated; they either have no one to express themselves to or they don't know how. This is an extremely effective way to get some attention, as horrible as that is.


I think this is a bad misconception of how modern communities exist. This kid was likely not isolated at all an there are hundreds of communities that actively encourage this stuff. Closed Facebook groups, subreddits (incels/braincels, conspiracy, the_donald..etc etc), websites, discord, 4chan, 8chan, there are hundreds of places.

Stop by Incels.me and you will see people glorifying this kid to martyr status.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 19:14:24


Post by: feeder


 BrotherGecko wrote:
 Luciferian wrote:
These kids may not watch much mainstream media but of course they know their actions will be extensively covered by it. That has to be part of the motivation. People like this are usually extremely isolated; they either have no one to express themselves to or they don't know how. This is an extremely effective way to get some attention, as horrible as that is.


I think this is a bad misconception of how modern communities exist. This kid was likely not isolated at all an there are hundreds of communities that actively encourage this stuff. Closed Facebook groups, subreddits (incels/braincels, conspiracy, the_donald..etc etc), websites, discord, 4chan, 8chan, there are hundreds of places.

Stop by Incels.me and you will see people glorifying this kid to martyr status.


Yeah, nobody is isolated in this ultra-connected world. Some people are isolated from reality, but not from other severely unwell people.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 19:22:22


Post by: Luciferian


I've seen this guy's Instagram, and he is no tactical genius to say the least. His intelligence is very low and he doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to firearms - he talks about putting scopes on shotguns and things like that. Obviously, you don't need training of any sort to shoot defenseless people, though.

He also posted pictures of animals he'd killed, along with the requisite "posing in a bandanna with knives and firearms like you're a badass". He is a person of very low cognitive ability who has behavioral issues.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 BrotherGecko wrote:
 Luciferian wrote:
These kids may not watch much mainstream media but of course they know their actions will be extensively covered by it. That has to be part of the motivation. People like this are usually extremely isolated; they either have no one to express themselves to or they don't know how. This is an extremely effective way to get some attention, as horrible as that is.


I think this is a bad misconception of how modern communities exist. This kid was likely not isolated at all an there are hundreds of communities that actively encourage this stuff. Closed Facebook groups, subreddits (incels/braincels, conspiracy, the_donald..etc etc), websites, discord, 4chan, 8chan, there are hundreds of places.

Stop by Incels.me and you will see people glorifying this kid to martyr status.


That doesn't mean they're not isolated when it comes to real-life relationships and interactions. I mean, obviously they are or they wouldn't be forming communities like that in the first place.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 19:45:12


Post by: oldravenman3025


 Kanluwen wrote:
Without wanting to get super political, a white nationalist militia in Tennessee has now claimed that the shooter "participated in paramilitary drills" with them.




I have my doubts about that claim since the kid was hispanic.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 19:46:37


Post by: WrentheFaceless


 oldravenman3025 wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
Without wanting to get super political, a white nationalist militia in Tennessee has now claimed that the shooter "participated in paramilitary drills" with them.




I have my doubts about that claim since the kid was hispanic.


He was adopted by a Hispanic family, he himself is white


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 19:48:18


Post by: Kanluwen


 Kanluwen wrote:
Herzlos wrote:
 Luciferian wrote:
These kids may not watch much mainstream media but of course they know their actions will be extensively covered by it. That has to be part of the motivation. People like this are usually extremely isolated; they either have no one to express themselves to or they don't know how. This is an extremely effective way to get some attention, as horrible as that is.


Since we're talking about mental health, I can assume the shooter was white?

Correct. There has been a concerted effort by certain people on Twitter to point at his name as being Hispanic and trying to claim he was a DACA recipient though, because y'know...reasons.

I literally addressed this in my first post in the thread too.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 19:51:16


Post by: oldravenman3025


 WrentheFaceless wrote:
 oldravenman3025 wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
Without wanting to get super political, a white nationalist militia in Tennessee has now claimed that the shooter "participated in paramilitary drills" with them.




I have my doubts about that claim since the kid was hispanic.


He was adopted by a Hispanic family, he himself is white




I stand corrected. However, that very fact would still make him "tainted" in the minds of most white nationalists, particualrly those of a supremacist bent.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 19:51:27


Post by: Kanluwen


 WrentheFaceless wrote:
 oldravenman3025 wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
Without wanting to get super political, a white nationalist militia in Tennessee has now claimed that the shooter "participated in paramilitary drills" with them.




I have my doubts about that claim since the kid was hispanic.


He was adopted by a Hispanic family, he himself is white

And more than that, if it truly isn't the case...what possible reason would a white nationalist militia have to lay claim to an attack like this?

Edit Note:
This is not meant to be promoting any conspiracy theories or whatever. Just reporting that a white nationalist militia claimed the shooter is "one of them". They talked about how he was involved in paramilitary drills with them.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 19:53:07


Post by: feeder


Cruz is his adopted father's name AFAIK.

Also, the leader of the group said he was a member.

White power and thinkin' real good tend to not go hand in hand.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 19:55:56


Post by: kronk


From Feeder's article:

It doesn't sound like they are claiming responsibility, just that he was a part of their group. Whether that was in the past or currently I wasn't clear on.

(PARKLAND, Fla.) — The leader of a white nationalist militia says Florida school shooting suspect Nikolas Cruz was a member of his group and participated in paramilitary drills in Tallahassee.

Jordan Jereb told The Associated Press on Thursday that his group wants Florida to become its own white ethno-state. He said his group holds “spontaneous random demonstrations” and tries not to participate in the modern world.

Jereb said he didn’t know Cruz personally and that “he acted on his own behalf of what he just did and he’s solely responsible for what he just did.”

He also said he had “trouble with a girl” and he believed the timing of the attack, carried out on Valentine’s Day, wasn’t a coincidence.

Nineteen-year-old Cruz has been charged with 17 counts of premeditated murder in the shooting.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 20:00:32


Post by: oldravenman3025


 feeder wrote:
Cruz is his adopted father's name AFAIK.

Also, the leader of the group said he was a member.

White power and thinkin' real good tend to not go hand in hand.




Which still doesn't mean the kid was a member. This claim could be a case of some irl troll or a 1488 wannabe "militia" wanting attention. You see similar behavior from Islamic fundie groups and leftist "revolutionaries", claiming responsibility for crap they had nothing to do with for air time.

Because smaller white nationalist groups tend to be riddled with old school (read: bitter, aging) white supremacists, his parentage (even if adopted) makes the kid a pariah in their minds.

And don't underestimate the intelligence of these people or groups. That's a recipe for disaster.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 20:03:30


Post by: Luciferian


I don't take issue with associating him with a white nationalist group - I take issue with the notion that he received any kind of effective training.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 20:04:48


Post by: Xenomancers


 WrentheFaceless wrote:
 oldravenman3025 wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
Without wanting to get super political, a white nationalist militia in Tennessee has now claimed that the shooter "participated in paramilitary drills" with them.




I have my doubts about that claim since the kid was hispanic.


He was adopted by a Hispanic family, he himself is white

Just to clear up the demographics here. Hispanic is not a race - it is a geographic descriptor. It essentially means descending from the people of spain - much like the term European means you come from Europe. In other words - most Hispanics are white. Some are black.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 20:07:52


Post by: Kanluwen


 oldravenman3025 wrote:
 feeder wrote:
Cruz is his adopted father's name AFAIK.

Also, the leader of the group said he was a member.

White power and thinkin' real good tend to not go hand in hand.




Which still doesn't mean the kid was a member. This claim could be a case of some irl troll or a 1488 wannabe "militia" wanting attention. You see similar behavior from Islamic fundie groups and leftist "revolutionaries", claiming responsibility for crap they had nothing to do with for air time.

So what you're saying is that this group needs to be crushed, completely, for even claiming it?

I can get behind this.

Because smaller white nationalist groups tend to be riddled with old school (read: bitter, aging) white supremacists, his parentage (even if adopted) makes the kid a pariah in their minds.

Smaller white nationalist groups aren't targeting young adults for membership. They trend towards being far more insular whereby "familial" membership is common and they don't recruit outside of those who they feel prove themselves.

They're closer to criminal organizations and enterprises in that regard.

And don't underestimate the intelligence of these people or groups. That's a recipe for disaster.

By that same vein, cease thinking of them as "white supremacist" groups. Many of them are nothing of the sort, making "allowances" for people as long as they share similar political beliefs.

You're more than welcome to try to talk down at me on this subject; but hate groups are not what you're making them out to be.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 20:18:25


Post by: Inquisitor Lord Bane


 kronk wrote:
From Feeder's article:

It doesn't sound like they are claiming responsibility, just that he was a part of their group. Whether that was in the past or currently I wasn't clear on.

(PARKLAND, Fla.) — The leader of a white nationalist militia says Florida school shooting suspect Nikolas Cruz was a member of his group and participated in paramilitary drills in Tallahassee.

Jordan Jereb told The Associated Press on Thursday that his group wants Florida to become its own white ethno-state. He said his group holds “spontaneous random demonstrations” and tries not to participate in the modern world.

Jereb said he didn’t know Cruz personally and that “he acted on his own behalf of what he just did and he’s solely responsible for what he just did.”

He also said he had “trouble with a girl” and he believed the timing of the attack, carried out on Valentine’s Day, wasn’t a coincidence.

Nineteen-year-old Cruz has been charged with 17 counts of premeditated murder in the shooting.



Didn't know him personally, but knew he had issues with a girl?

"Well I didn't know him personally, and he acted on his own"
*spits chewing tobacco juice*
"But I know he had girl problems, mmhmm"

No, this seems like the guy wanted 5 minutes on TV to spread his flavor of white supremacy, and figured this was the best route. If the kid had any sort of proper training, there would be more than 17 people dead. Most people think of white militias as fat dudes trying to be tacti-cool, but they do take their drills seriously.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 20:29:31


Post by: Howard A Treesong


He wouldn’t be the first to go shooting because of his problems with girls.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 20:31:50


Post by: tneva82


 Easy E wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
 Easy E wrote:
I just watched a few of the live feeds from students on social media during the attack. That is some horrifying stuff.


Yeah. And at the same time it makes you really wonder.

''Oh, there is this terrifying life and death situation going on! Better put it on Facebook!"


What would you propose they do while on lockdown with a gunman running around?

I am genuinely curious.


I would consider hiding be safer option to trying to take video of the gunmen. If you can see gunmen enoiugh to take video reverse is also true and he's looking for somebody to shoot. Not good proposition for hopes of making out alive.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 20:33:18


Post by: reds8n







I wonder what they meant by "lone wolf activists" eh ..??

https://twitter.com/willsommer/status/964217365490790402

delightful people it would seem.

Still least you'll get that Tide Pod related legislation passed sharpish.





School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 20:37:16


Post by: Luciferian


I would just like to point out that that graphic is lacking in coherency what the group itself is probably lacking in melanin.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 21:30:17


Post by: Xenomancers


Why would anyone post "clandestine" command structure on twitter? Obviously a crazy person. Also why use wordage like "cell" which is associated with terrorism? That's not a great way to draw in recruits..."hey you want to be a terrorist?".


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 22:04:36


Post by: oldravenman3025


 Kanluwen wrote:
 oldravenman3025 wrote:
 feeder wrote:
Cruz is his adopted father's name AFAIK.

Also, the leader of the group said he was a member.

White power and thinkin' real good tend to not go hand in hand.




Which still doesn't mean the kid was a member. This claim could be a case of some irl troll or a 1488 wannabe "militia" wanting attention. You see similar behavior from Islamic fundie groups and leftist "revolutionaries", claiming responsibility for crap they had nothing to do with for air time.

So what you're saying is that this group needs to be crushed, completely, for even claiming it?

I can get behind this.

Because smaller white nationalist groups tend to be riddled with old school (read: bitter, aging) white supremacists, his parentage (even if adopted) makes the kid a pariah in their minds.

Smaller white nationalist groups aren't targeting young adults for membership. They trend towards being far more insular whereby "familial" membership is common and they don't recruit outside of those who they feel prove themselves.

They're closer to criminal organizations and enterprises in that regard.

And don't underestimate the intelligence of these people or groups. That's a recipe for disaster.

By that same vein, cease thinking of them as "white supremacist" groups. Many of them are nothing of the sort, making "allowances" for people as long as they share similar political beliefs.

You're more than welcome to try to talk down at me on this subject; but hate groups are not what you're making them out to be.





Crushed? Not as long as they do nothing more than shoot off their mouths. When they start crossing over into more dangerous territory, then it's time of law enforcement to act.


Some are indeed run similarly to actual criminal enterprises, being money racketts.Others are havens for attention whores, made up of edgelords wanting their fifteen minutes of fame. Some are both. Sooner or later, the Feds will come down on them for running some sort of fraud charges or RICO violations. You saw that happen with gangs of crooks LARPing as "patriot groups" back in the 1990's, like The Freeman group in Montana.

There is a difference between "white supremacy" and "white seperatism", in general, despite the cross membership in groups, and both sharing some views in common. Most modern white nationalist groups are seperatists, or of an identitarian bent, not supremacists. And I've made no claim to the contrary. It's among modern white nationalist groups that you will see alliances (for want of a better term) with non-white civic nationalists and alt-rightists, since those groups are not generally racist in the traditional (i.e. dictionary definition, not in the post-modernist bull ) sense.

There are actual white supremacist groups calling themselves "separatists" and will have no truck with minorities (ethnic or racial) and whites associated with them. Not all of them died out back in the early 2000s when the big dogs like the Aryan Nations and Tom Metzger's White Aryan Resistance (WAR) fell out of vogue, or were bought down by lawsuits. They just tend to avoid the public limelight.

And I haven't made hate groups out to be anything other than what they actually are. I have a law enforcement and corrections background, and "Security Threat Groups" (STGs), as they are called in North Carolina LE parlance, were one area they focused on, especially after the proliferation of gangs in our State since the late 1980's, and the 9/11 attacks. Hate groups also fall into that category. Prisons were especially notorious for recruitment for STGs, with many memebers of these groups being locked up. The Klan and Nation of Islam especially liked recruiting cons and ex-cons at one time.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 22:15:12


Post by: skyth


Cell is also associated with freedom fighters and the resistance, which is what these people think of themselves as.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 22:22:10


Post by: Frazzled


 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Clearly "no guns for anyone" is off the table, but it seems like there must be a number of strategies or risk mitigation techniques between that and "guns for everyone" that are not being investigated or even discussed.


The same or similar firearms were freely available from the 1930s to the 1980s and this did not happen. We need to analyze what changed.The internet? Mass media? lack of fathers in the picture? drugs? mental health system changes? We need to identify what has occurred.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 22:28:21


Post by: BobtheInquisitor


 Frazzled wrote:
 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Clearly "no guns for anyone" is off the table, but it seems like there must be a number of strategies or risk mitigation techniques between that and "guns for everyone" that are not being investigated or even discussed.


The same or similar firearms were freely available from the 1930s to the 1980s and this did not happen. We need to analyze what changed.The internet? Mass media? lack of fathers in the picture? drugs? mental health system changes? We need to identify what has occurred.


I'm pretty sure stuff like this always happened. However, with our current information technology and 24 hour news, we hear about each attack immediately, and the coverage probably pushes a few more over the edge from contemplation into action.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 22:33:26


Post by: Luciferian


Media infamy is unquestionably one of the motivating factors for doing this kind of thing. Throw into that higher depression and suicide rates among young males and so many other variables. A lot has changed, really.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 22:34:37


Post by: Frazzled


 skyth wrote:
Cell is also associated with freedom fighters and the resistance, which is what these people think of themselves as.


You are not wrong. The mentality is just
I imagine the FBI has these geniuses pretty well lit up.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 22:34:52


Post by: Ouze


 Frazzled wrote:
The same or similar firearms were freely available from the 1930s to the 1980s and this did not happen. We need to analyze what changed.The internet? Mass media? lack of fathers in the picture? drugs? mental health system changes? We need to identify what has occurred.


There were approximately 121 school shootings in the timeframe you describe.

I think the argument you want is "these were less common back in the day", because while they always happened the pace has significantly increased in the last... 10 years or so. There have been nearly as many shootings from 2000-2018 as there have been from 1900-2000.





School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 22:35:21


Post by: Togusa


Until we get serious about Mental Health in the US, this will continue.



School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 22:37:12


Post by: Frazzled


 Luciferian wrote:
Media infamy is unquestionably one of the motivating factors for doing this kind of thing. Throw into that higher depression and suicide rates among young males and so many other variables. A lot has changed, really.


Then we should focus on that. I don't understand why there isn't a Manhatten Project about this going on. Everyone immediately dives into their pro/anti gun Purple Team Green Team mentality. No reason this can't be fixed. we stopped the Klan, went to the Moon, and tamed Chupacabra.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 22:39:27


Post by: Luciferian


 Togusa wrote:
Until we get serious about Mental Health in the US, this will continue.



What does that mean, though? Where exactly is the problem (or problems) and how do we address them? It's a pretty damn complex issue. Why isn't there research being done on this topic aside from just a gun control vs. gun rights angle? If anyone knows of some I'd love to take a look at it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Frazzled wrote:
 Luciferian wrote:
Media infamy is unquestionably one of the motivating factors for doing this kind of thing. Throw into that higher depression and suicide rates among young males and so many other variables. A lot has changed, really.


Then we should focus on that. I don't understand why there isn't a Manhatten Project about this going on. Everyone immediately dives into their pro/anti gun Purple Team Green Team mentality. No reason this can't be fixed. we stopped the Klan, went to the Moon, and tamed Chupacabra.


Man, you ninja'd me. That's exactly what I was thinking.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 22:44:55


Post by: Ouze


 Luciferian wrote:
What does that mean, though? Where exactly is the problem (or problems) and how do we address them? It's a pretty damn complex issue. Why isn't there research being done on this topic aside from just a gun control vs. gun rights angle? If anyone knows of some I'd love to take a look at it.


We're not allowed to talk about it on this forum.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 22:46:39


Post by: Kanluwen


 Togusa wrote:
Until we get serious about Mental Health in the US, this will continue.


This is, to put it gently, a nonstarter.

If it were simply "mental health" issues, you'd have a lot more instances of these kinds of things worldwide--just without firearms.
And even if it were simply "mental health" issues, one would think that the person blaming "mental health" for it shouldn't have reversed legislation intended to keep firearms from the mentally ill.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 22:50:38


Post by: Luciferian


That doesn't cover it, though. Sorry, I'm going to break the rules, but President Obama had the CDC conduct a study on gun violence toward the end of his administration. In any case, the CDC isn't the only entity that can do such research.

Still, there just isn't any research I know of about things aside from the gun politics part of it. What about the mental health part? It seems like no one on either side really cares about understanding or solving the problem aside from what's politically expedient.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 23:02:01


Post by: Easy E


tneva82 wrote:
 Easy E wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
 Easy E wrote:
I just watched a few of the live feeds from students on social media during the attack. That is some horrifying stuff.


Yeah. And at the same time it makes you really wonder.

''Oh, there is this terrifying life and death situation going on! Better put it on Facebook!"


What would you propose they do while on lockdown with a gunman running around?

I am genuinely curious.


I would consider hiding be safer option to trying to take video of the gunmen. If you can see gunmen enoiugh to take video reverse is also true and he's looking for somebody to shoot. Not good proposition for hopes of making out alive.


None of the videos were of the shooter, and they were not trying to track him down to video. They were simply filming what was happening to them. They were in lock down in classrooms.



School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 23:34:10


Post by: Ouze


 Luciferian wrote:
That doesn't cover it, though. Sorry, I'm going to break the rules, but President Obama had the CDC conduct a study on gun violence toward the end of his administration. In any case, the CDC isn't the only entity that can do such research.


Well, as much as I'd like to go into that with you,
Spoiler:


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 23:49:01


Post by: Luciferian


Should we just start with the thinly veiled barbs and passive aggressiveness phase then?

In seriousness, does anyone know of any research conducted on the specific issue of lone-wolf mass shootings?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/15 23:54:33


Post by: daedalus


 Ouze wrote:
 Luciferian wrote:
That doesn't cover it, though. Sorry, I'm going to break the rules, but President Obama had the CDC conduct a study on gun violence toward the end of his administration. In any case, the CDC isn't the only entity that can do such research.


Well, as much as I'd like to go into that with you,
Spoiler:


Man, US Politics seems so alluring at first, but then you go off to college and it just dawns on you how unbearably bipolar it was. Then you spend some time at college and meet exotic new foreign politics threads!


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 00:20:57


Post by: Alpharius


Seems like there's a bit too much US Politics in here.

It could cause the thread to get locked, and it *will* get some users an OT ONLY ban too, if it continues.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 00:30:02


Post by: Luciferian


My bad, it's really hard to discuss this without referring to US politics. I'll remove myself from the thread.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 01:03:56


Post by: CptJake


Maybe the "white supremacist" was as accurate as "DACA recipient"

“We are still doing some work, but we have no known ties between the ROF, Jordan Jereb or the Broward shooter,” a Leon County Sheriff’s Office spokesman told the Tallahassee Democrat. The sheriff’s office has arrested Jereb at least four times since January 2014 and has been monitoring ROF’s membership, The Associated Press reported.

By Thursday evening, Jereb appeared to be backing down from his claim.

“There was a misunderstanding because we have MULTIPLE people named Nicholas in ROF,” a user named @JordanJereb posted on Gab, a social media platform popular among fascists and racists. “Are you really going to blame ME for the lying jew media? We know they are liars. feth em,” the user wrote. (HuffPost messaged the user, who had posted about ROF months before Wednesday’s shooting, but was not immediately able to confirm his identity.)

HuffPost has not found evidence that Cruz was affiliated with ROF — or that he had even interacted with anyone in the group. Jereb did not respond to repeated requests for proof of Cruz’s involvement with ROF. Cruz’s Facebook and Instagram were taken down after the shooting. On one of his since-deleted Instagram profiles, Cruz’s Twitter avatar wore a “Make America Great Again” hat and he shared pictures of an assortment of guns and knives.

The FBI and the Broward County Sheriff’s Office, which is investigating the shooting, declined to comment.

The existing reporting on the supposed ties between Jereb and Cruz is inconsistent. Jereb told the Miami Herald he has never personally met Cruz. But ABC reported that three former classmates of Cruz identified him as part of the ROF. The former classmates claimed that Cruz was “often seen with Jereb.” Jereb’s last address listed in public records is in Tallahassee, 430 miles from where the shooting took place. ABC didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on how it verified the identities of Cruz’s former classmates.

A spokesman for the ADL, which first reported the supposed tie between the ROF and Cruz, told HuffPost on Thursday that “it is for law enforcement to 100% confirm that he was a part of this group.”

“Given what we found today and the timing of the case, there is no doubt the information raises a red flag and should be investigated further,” the spokesman said.

Subscribe to the Politics email.
How will Trump's administration impact you?


As reports of Cruz’s supposed link to ROF appeared in the media, members of an “alt-right” white supremacist forum claimed the entire story was an attention-grab by Jereb, or possibly a hoax aimed at tricking media outlets into pushing a false narrative.

Jereb already comes across as a caricature of a Florida white nationalist, and he has been seeking attention for his views for years. “Jereb was a weird character even in the extremist underworld to which he so badly wanted to belong,” the Southern Poverty Law Center, which monitors hate groups, wrote in 2014. Most white supremacists avoid the SPLC, but Jereb “wanted desperately to be mentioned in these pages,” the group wrote. “He flooded us with pleas for attention.”

The SPLC has not been able to confirm any ties between Cruz and ROF, Heidi Beirich, the director of the group’s intelligence project, told HuffPost. “It may seem odd that Jereb would bring attention to his group by claiming a connection to Cruz, but Jereb has always been somewhat of a publicity seeker,” Beirich said.

In 2016, Jereb was arrested for allegedly threatening a high-ranking staffer of Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R). The Tallahassee Democrat reported at the time that Jereb was “known to ride a bike through neighborhoods wearing para-military garb. He has filmed numerous run-ins with law enforcement.”

On Thursday afternoon, members of The Right Stuff, a white supremacist forum, claimed that the story of Cruz being tied to ROF was false. “Started out as an inside joke until Jordan Jereb literally told the media that it was true and that he was affiliated with a school shooter,” a TRS user posting under the name “Jordan Fash” wrote.

Fash posted screenshots of an ABC reporter messaging a user named “Ethan” on Instagram asking for information about Cruz. Ethan told the reporter that Cruz was an ROF member. “It was common knowledge he did rallies with ROF, I frequently saw him conversing with Jordan Jereb in person,” the user said.

The ABC reporter declined to comment. ABC didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on how it reported its story.

It didn’t take long for other far-right extremists to latch onto a possible reporting flub as a way to attack the entirety of the mainstream media. Cameron Padgett, the campus fixer for Richard Spencer’s college speaking engagements, tweeted that the media “will do anything to smear white people.”

In his quotes to the media, Jereb elevated anti-feminist and anti-Semitic views, and claimed that Cruz “probably used that training [with ROF] to do what he did.”

There tends to be an information vacuum after a mass shooting, and trolls and propagandists often take advantage of the confusion in order to promote their own interests. After the shooting at a Texas church last year, right-wing conspiracy theorists were quick to claim that their political enemies — everyone from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to anti-fascist protesters — were somehow connected to the shooter. Trolls will also routinely claim that Sam Hyde, a real-life comedian, is behind a mass shooting before the real shooter has been identified. In the immediate aftermath of a shooting, it’s easy for false information to spread rapidly.

In 1999, Bill White, a former leader of the National Socialist Movement, injected himself into the conversation surrounding the Columbine High School massacre by suggesting that shooters Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold might have visited White’s extremist website before the rampage. White, who identified as an anarchist at the time, managed to garner national attention for his obscure website, which urged kids to build bombs, blow up schools and slaughter football players.

Ashley Feinberg contributed reporting.

Do you have information you want to share with HuffPost? Here’s how.

Jessica Schulberg
Foreign Affairs Reporter, HuffPost

Christopher Mathias
National Reporter, HuffPost

Dana Liebelson
Reporter, HuffPost
Luke O’Brien
Senior Reporter, HuffPost
Suggest a correction
MORE:
Gun Violence School Shootings White Supremacists Extremism

AdChoices
TRENDING
Officials Haven’t Found Evidence Linking Florida Shooting Suspect To White Supremacists (UPDATE)
Trump Says Florida Students Should Have Done More To Prevent Deadly Shooting
Amy Schumer Marries Boyfriend Chris Fischer After Just Months Of Dating
A Federal Appeals Court Just Said Trump’s Tweets Show He’s An Anti-Muslim Bigot
What Trump Will Do To Savings Accounts
Sponsored by Bankrate
Ryan Reynolds’ Valentine’s Day Gift To Blake Lively Is Just So Him
NEWS ON HUFFINGTON POST


https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/evidence-linking-alleged-shooter-to-white-supremacist-group-is-unraveling_us_5a860d74e4b004fc3190630c


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 01:31:00


Post by: daedalus


I can't believe Schumer married him. Oh. My. God.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 02:06:28


Post by: sebster


 nels1031 wrote:
Not to downplay the seriousness of the situation or the tragedy in a few of the cases listed below, but I feel we need to put into perspective the "18 school shootings" that has cropped up in this thread a few times:

Spoiler:
A summary :

Twice, someone shot themselves on school grounds; one incident, on January 3, featured a man shooting himself in a former school’s parking lot; on January 10 a teen killed himself in an Arizona elementary school bathroom.

Four times, a bullet was fired through a school or dorm’s window: on January 4, a gunshot was fired at a high school in Seattle through an office window; no one was hurt. On January 10, a shot was fired shattering a California State University classroom window. No injuries were reported. The same day, in Texas, a bullet was accidentally fired through a classroom wall at the Grayson College Criminal Justice Center. No one was injured. On January 15, a bullet traveled through a residential hall’s dorm room. No injuries were reported.


On January 25, a Mobile, Alabama, high school student fired a gun on campus. No one was injured. On January 26, in Dearborn, Michigan, shots were fired from a car in a parking lot; no injuries were reported.

On February 5, in Maplewood, Minnesota, a third-grader pulled the trigger on a cop's gun. No one was injured. On February 8, in New York, a shot was fired inside Metropolitan High School. No one was injured.

Here are the cases where someone was injured other than the shooter:

January 22, Italy, Texas: a teenage girl was wounded by shots from a semi-automatic handgun. The same day, in Gentilly, Louisiana, a 14-year-old boy was injured in a shooting. February 1, Los Angeles, California: five children were injured in an accidental shooting. February 5, Maryland: a teenager was shot and injured outside of a high school.

The fatalities:

January 20, Winston-Salem, North Carolina: A football player was shot and killed. January 23, Benton, Kentucky: Two people were killed and another 15 were shot at Marshall County High School. January 31, a fight broke out at a Pennsylvania high school; a 32-year-old man was shot and later died.


How is that defense of anything? Six weeks in to the year and all that stuff has happened on American school grounds? How can you not see how absurd this is?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 oldravenman3025 wrote:
I stand corrected. However, that very fact would still make him "tainted" in the minds of most white nationalists, particualrly those of a supremacist bent.


Meh. The KKK takes in Catholics these days. The recruiting standards of racists have dipped a lot since the glory days. They're so splintered now, and so desperate for members that any disaffected loon will find some group that'll take him, if he really wants.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 oldravenman3025 wrote:
And don't underestimate the intelligence of these people or groups. That's a recipe for disaster.


True, but note there's a difference between intelligence and coherent thinking. Lots of really crazy factions have their share of intelligent people, in fact intelligence is often needed to come up with creative ways to explain away basic facts about the world.

So its true all at once that many of these people are intelligent, and its also true they believe some staggering dumb, self-contradictory nonsense.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Togusa wrote:
Until we get serious about Mental Health in the US, this will continue.


This is the great American myth. That somehow the US is unique in having a flawed mental health system. But mental health sucks everywhere. But gun violence, and particularly mass shootings, are way more common in the US than anywhere else in the developed world.

Somehow despite having crappy mental health systems, we don't have anything close to the same problem with shootings. So why would the US, distinct from the rest of the world because it has so many guns in private hands, also be distinct from the rest of the world in the number of shootings and murders it has. Why is that?

Could it possibly be that maybe, just maybe... having loads of guns everywhere means they tend to get used a lot more? Could that be a thing?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Luciferian wrote:
What does that mean, though? Where exactly is the problem (or problems) and how do we address them? It's a pretty damn complex issue. Why isn't there research being done on this topic aside from just a gun control vs. gun rights angle? If anyone knows of some I'd love to take a look at it.


Recent budget proposals put up on healthcare proposed significant cuts to mental health. We don't have to talk about the politics of that (indeed we are banned from doing so on this forum), but note one thing from the following debate - there was not one single person anywhere who said 'don't cut mental health because its the problems with mental health that are causing our problems with gun violence'. No-one made that argument, because everyone knows that it's total bs. Mental health is only raised as a way to deflect from the real problem causing the US to have so many shootings.

It's the same reason that, as Ouze notes, research in to gun violence was banned in the mid-90s. Because the reality of what is actually driving the American murder rate is clear, but lots of people don't want to admit it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Luciferian wrote:
That doesn't cover it, though. Sorry, I'm going to break the rules, but President Obama had the CDC conduct a study on gun violence toward the end of his administration. In any case, the CDC isn't the only entity that can do such research.


First up, it wasn't late in his term, he did it in 2013. Second of all, unfortunately you know the Breitbart version, not the actual version of what happened - Obama lifted the CDC absolute ban on gun violence, he didn't direct any specific research. Congress shot down each research topic proposed by CDC.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 03:14:02


Post by: whembly


 sebster wrote:
 nels1031 wrote:
Not to downplay the seriousness of the situation or the tragedy in a few of the cases listed below, but I feel we need to put into perspective the "18 school shootings" that has cropped up in this thread a few times:

Spoiler:
A summary :

Twice, someone shot themselves on school grounds; one incident, on January 3, featured a man shooting himself in a former school’s parking lot; on January 10 a teen killed himself in an Arizona elementary school bathroom.

Four times, a bullet was fired through a school or dorm’s window: on January 4, a gunshot was fired at a high school in Seattle through an office window; no one was hurt. On January 10, a shot was fired shattering a California State University classroom window. No injuries were reported. The same day, in Texas, a bullet was accidentally fired through a classroom wall at the Grayson College Criminal Justice Center. No one was injured. On January 15, a bullet traveled through a residential hall’s dorm room. No injuries were reported.


On January 25, a Mobile, Alabama, high school student fired a gun on campus. No one was injured. On January 26, in Dearborn, Michigan, shots were fired from a car in a parking lot; no injuries were reported.

On February 5, in Maplewood, Minnesota, a third-grader pulled the trigger on a cop's gun. No one was injured. On February 8, in New York, a shot was fired inside Metropolitan High School. No one was injured.

Here are the cases where someone was injured other than the shooter:

January 22, Italy, Texas: a teenage girl was wounded by shots from a semi-automatic handgun. The same day, in Gentilly, Louisiana, a 14-year-old boy was injured in a shooting. February 1, Los Angeles, California: five children were injured in an accidental shooting. February 5, Maryland: a teenager was shot and injured outside of a high school.

The fatalities:

January 20, Winston-Salem, North Carolina: A football player was shot and killed. January 23, Benton, Kentucky: Two people were killed and another 15 were shot at Marshall County High School. January 31, a fight broke out at a Pennsylvania high school; a 32-year-old man was shot and later died.


How is that defense of anything? Six weeks in to the year and all that stuff has happened on American school grounds? How can you not see how absurd this is?

It's absurd... but, not in the way you think. Those numbers comes from the anti-gun group Everytown for Gun Safety which uses some dubious methods to pad the numbers. I think the number ought to be *squints at the data* five school shootings this year.

That's bad enough as it is without need to, ahem, stretch the truth a bit... and, it makes these sort of conversation difficult because you're dealing with one side of the argument using embellished figures.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Togusa wrote:
Until we get serious about Mental Health in the US, this will continue.


This is the great American myth. That somehow the US is unique in having a flawed mental health system. But mental health sucks everywhere. But gun violence, and particularly mass shootings, are way more common in the US than anywhere else in the developed world.

Somehow despite having crappy mental health systems, we don't have anything close to the same problem with shootings. So why would the US, distinct from the rest of the world because it has so many guns in private hands, also be distinct from the rest of the world in the number of shootings and murders it has. Why is that?

Could it possibly be that maybe, just maybe... having loads of guns everywhere means they tend to get used a lot more? Could that be a thing?

It's a thing... but, please don't harp on it being the only/major reason. If it were so... then, we'd be fethed 10-ways till Sunday with the totally number of firearms per capita.

However, *we* do have major problems with mental health in the US. Both in terms of accessibility (since it's not really a money maker), legal framework and in terms of social stigma.

Just lookup the rules to involuntary commit someone, or even involuntarily *remove* someone's 2nd Amendment right. It's a tall order man...

Better mental health isn't the end-all panacea as this is a complicated issue... but it sure as hell legal need reform/better funding/public acceptance.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Luciferian wrote:
That doesn't cover it, though. Sorry, I'm going to break the rules, but President Obama had the CDC conduct a study on gun violence toward the end of his administration. In any case, the CDC isn't the only entity that can do such research.


First up, it wasn't late in his term, he did it in 2013. Second of all, unfortunately you know the Breitbart version, not the actual version of what happened - Obama lifted the CDC absolute ban on gun violence, he didn't direct any specific research. Congress shot down each research topic proposed by CDC.

The research very specifically stated more study is needed. But, don't kid yourself... the bulk of the findings didn't fit the desired narrative so it was dropped like it was hawt. Then, I think you're right Congress did pass some rider to prevent further studies by the CDC.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 03:16:54


Post by: Mitochondria


We aren't going to get rid of the guns.

Any discussion or "what-if" that starts with that premise is dead in the water.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 03:23:54


Post by: nels1031


 sebster wrote:

How is that defense of anything?


Let me preface this by saying that I'm all for some stricter gun laws in a few select cases, despite being deep red conservative on the majority of issues facing my nation.

Not defending anything, just pointing out that it is spin and uses suspect stats and incidents. It really moves the goal posts of what is and isn't a school shooting. The organization that folks get these stats from has been debunked by the Washington Post quite a few times.

 sebster wrote:
Six weeks in to the year and all that stuff has happened on American school grounds?


Yep.

But like I said, put them into perspective compared to this mass casualty event. Obviously any number outside of 0 is unacceptable, but using sketchy methodology to track these events and push a narrative that doesn't hold up to just a whiff of scrutiny hurts the cause of people who wish to have a meaningful conversation about how to combat these events.

 sebster wrote:
How can you not see how absurd this is?


How can you not see how absurd it is to lump this event into a man killing himself in a school parking lot well after school hours? EDIT: The school in question had been closed down for the better part of the year. Tragic for sure, but there are levels to this, my dude. And very few of the listed incidents come close to the level that people think of when they see the words "school shooting".

Here's another:

A month ago, for example, a group of college students were at a meeting of a criminal-justice club in Texas when a student accidentally fired a real gun, rather than a training weapon. The bullet went through a wall, then a window. Though no one was hurt, it left the student distraught.


Absurd is lumping that in with this incident. Which is part of the "18 school shootings".

Here's some reading on it:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/no-there-havent-been-18-school-shooting-in-2018-that-number-is-flat-wrong/2018/02/15/65b6cf72-1264-11e8-8ea1-c1d91fcec3fe_story.html?utm_term=.9fbd0d47b6e2


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 03:44:39


Post by: sirlynchmob


 nels1031 wrote:
 sebster wrote:

How is that defense of anything?


Let me preface this by saying that I'm all for some stricter gun laws in a few select cases, despite being deep red conservative on the majority of issues facing my nation.

Not defending anything, just pointing out that it is spin and uses suspect stats and incidents. It really moves the goal posts of what is and isn't a school shooting. The organization that folks get these stats from has been debunked by the Washington Post quite a few times.


The spin is from the pro gun guys, the question is simple, was a gun shot at school? yes, ergo it was a school shooting. the goal post moving is when the usual people look at the data and go "well some weren't mass shootings so those don't count"

elementary kids getting ahold of a gun, getting it into a school and killing themselves is a school shooting and indicitive of the problem at hand. Kids getting easy access to weapons.








School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 03:48:19


Post by: Grey Templar


sirlynchmob wrote:
 nels1031 wrote:
 sebster wrote:

How is that defense of anything?


Let me preface this by saying that I'm all for some stricter gun laws in a few select cases, despite being deep red conservative on the majority of issues facing my nation.

Not defending anything, just pointing out that it is spin and uses suspect stats and incidents. It really moves the goal posts of what is and isn't a school shooting. The organization that folks get these stats from has been debunked by the Washington Post quite a few times.


The spin is from the pro gun guys, the question is simple, was a gun shot at school? yes, ergo it was a school shooting. the goal post moving is when the usual people look at the data and go "well some weren't mass shootings so those don't count"

elementary kids getting ahold of a gun, getting it into a school and killing themselves is a school shooting and indicitive of the problem at hand. Kids getting easy access to weapons.


A dude committing suicide in a parking lot after hours is not a shooting. A negligent discharge is not a shooting. Etc...


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 03:55:04


Post by: nels1031


sirlynchmob wrote:

The spin is from the pro gun guys, the question is simple, was a gun shot at school? yes, ergo it was a school shooting.


Nope, thats not even true, as per the article I linked from WashPo, the website that the numbers have been pulled from already removed one of the more dubious "school shootings" that they listed initially in the 18.

Ergo, not 18 school shootings this year. I'd wager more will get removed as their already debunked methodology gets scrutinized more.

Look, its a serious issue, and I get that people get passionate about it, but arguing with skewed facts is disingenuous and a disservice to the victims.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 04:00:37


Post by: sebster


 whembly wrote:
It's absurd... but, not in the way you think. Those numbers comes from the anti-gun group Everytown for Gun Safety which uses some dubious methods to pad the numbers. I think the number ought to be *squints at the data* five school shootings this year.

That's bad enough as it is without need to, ahem, stretch the truth a bit... and, it makes these sort of conversation difficult because you're dealing with one side of the argument using embellished figures.


They were 18 shootings that took place on school grounds. The only stretching of the truth would be by people trying re-invent 'school shooting' to mean something other than 'shooting' at a 'school', in order to drag the number down to 5. But as you note, whether it is 5 or 18, jesus fething christ it is bad.

It's a thing... but, please don't harp on it being the only/major reason. If it were so... then, we'd be fethed 10-ways till Sunday with the totally number of firearms per capita.


Of course it isn't the only thing that causes shootings. But it is the singular thing that causes the difference between US murder rates and murder rates in other developed countries.

However, *we* do have major problems with mental health in the US.


Everyone does mate.

The research very specifically stated more study is needed. But, don't kid yourself... the bulk of the findings didn't fit the desired narrative so it was dropped like it was hawt. Then, I think you're right Congress did pass some rider to prevent further studies by the CDC.


No, the research said no such thing. It was a meta-study of previous research, and its only finding was that previous research was inadequate and couldn't be used in support of any conclusion.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 04:02:12


Post by: sirlynchmob


 Grey Templar wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
 nels1031 wrote:
 sebster wrote:

How is that defense of anything?


Let me preface this by saying that I'm all for some stricter gun laws in a few select cases, despite being deep red conservative on the majority of issues facing my nation.

Not defending anything, just pointing out that it is spin and uses suspect stats and incidents. It really moves the goal posts of what is and isn't a school shooting. The organization that folks get these stats from has been debunked by the Washington Post quite a few times.


The spin is from the pro gun guys, the question is simple, was a gun shot at school? yes, ergo it was a school shooting. the goal post moving is when the usual people look at the data and go "well some weren't mass shootings so those don't count"

elementary kids getting ahold of a gun, getting it into a school and killing themselves is a school shooting and indicitive of the problem at hand. Kids getting easy access to weapons.


A dude committing suicide in a parking lot after hours is not a shooting. A negligent discharge is not a shooting. Etc...


so a 3rd grader getting to a cops sidearm and firing off a round isn't a shooting it's just negligent? you've been spinning so long you're obviously dizzy.

What is not in dispute is gun violence’s pervasiveness and its devastating impact on children. A recent study of World Health Organization data published in the American Journal of Medicine that found that, among high-income nations, 91 percent of children younger than 15 who were killed by bullets lived in the United States.
And the trends are only growing more dire.


Those under 15 are getting their guns from those so called "responsible gun owners"

the trend is obvious:
a shooting happens
nothing gets done
more guns get sold
more shootings happens

I still hold all gun owners complicit in every shooting because of their desire to ensure nothing gets done.






Automatically Appended Next Post:
 nels1031 wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:

The spin is from the pro gun guys, the question is simple, was a gun shot at school? yes, ergo it was a school shooting.


Nope, thats not even true, as per the article I linked from WashPo, the website that the numbers have been pulled from already removed one of the more dubious "school shootings" that they listed initially in the 18.

Ergo, not 18 school shootings this year. I'd wager more will get removed as their already debunked methodology gets scrutinized more.

Look, its a serious issue, and I get that people get passionate about it, but arguing with skewed facts is disingenuous and a disservice to the victims.


the disservice to the victims is 20 years of doing absolutely nothing to prevent them from happening and actually making it easier for people to get more and more deadly weapons and accessories.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 04:08:32


Post by: sebster


 nels1031 wrote:
Let me preface this by saying that I'm all for some stricter gun laws in a few select cases, despite being deep red conservative on the majority of issues facing my nation.

Not defending anything, just pointing out that it is spin and uses suspect stats and incidents. It really moves the goal posts of what is and isn't a school shooting.


The real spin comes from people trying to downplay the number, because they don't like the reality of what that number means.

Obviously any number outside of 0 is unacceptable, but using sketchy methodology to track these events and push a narrative that doesn't hold up to just a whiff of scrutiny hurts the cause of people who wish to have a meaningful conversation about how to combat these events.


If Everytown, or anyone using their stat was attempting to claim it was 18 incidents that were all spree killers like in Florida, then sure. But I haven't seen that. And believe me, I've just decided to leave twitter alone for a few days because I'm bored shitless of the leftwing anti-gun tweets that have clogged up my feed, so if anyone was trying to claim that those 18 incidents were all like Florida, I would have seen it.

How can you not see how absurd it is to lump this event into a man killing himself in a school parking lot well after school hours? EDIT: The school in question had been closed down for the better part of the year. Tragic for sure, but there are levels to this, my dude. And very few of the listed incidents come close to the level that people think of when they see the words "school shooting".


The school was closed down, so this one I'll grant you. So we're down to 17 school shootings in just over 6 weeks.

A month ago, for example, a group of college students were at a meeting of a criminal-justice club in Texas when a student accidentally fired a real gun, rather than a training weapon. The bullet went through a wall, then a window. Though no one was hurt, it left the student distraught.


Of course that belongs in the list. Accidental weapons discharge is not fething okay, and it could have killed someone. A bullet went flying through a wall and out a window. Of course it belongs on the list.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 04:15:53


Post by: nels1031


 sebster wrote:

The school was closed down, so this one I'll grant you. So we're down to 17 school shootings in just over 6 weeks.


Progress! Now look at the others, some of which didn't even happen on school grounds.

 sebster wrote:
Of course that belongs in the list. Accidental weapons discharge is not fething okay, and it could have killed someone. A bullet went flying through a wall and out a window. Of course it belongs on the list.


We'll agree to disagree.

Anyway, I've capped my self imposed daily OT thread posting limit, so I'll leave you here. Enjoy!


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 04:25:06


Post by: Grey Templar


 nels1031 wrote:


 sebster wrote:
Of course that belongs in the list. Accidental weapons discharge is not fething okay, and it could have killed someone. A bullet went flying through a wall and out a window. Of course it belongs on the list.


We'll agree to disagree.

Anyway, I've capped my self imposed daily OT thread posting limit, so I'll leave you here. Enjoy!


Indeed. An accidental discharge is definitely not ok. But it is an entirely different thing than somebody showing up with the express purpose of murdering other people.

Just like somebody accidentally killing someone with a car is different than somebody deliberately running someone down with one.

So no. An accidental discharge of a firearm does not belong on any list of Shootings. It belongs on a list with things like car accidents, drowning deaths, and other accidental deaths that might have an aspect of negligence to them. They do not belong with premeditated murder incidents.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 05:59:20


Post by: sebster


 nels1031 wrote:
We'll agree to disagree.


No, we won't, there is no disagreement possible. Because the word school has a meaning. The word shooting has a meaning. Put them together... it's got a meaning. And that meaning means a gun being shot at a place where kids go to school. Which is what happened in 17 of those incidents.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Grey Templar wrote:
Indeed. An accidental discharge is definitely not ok. But it is an entirely different thing than somebody showing up with the express purpose of murdering other people.


The word used was shooting. Which by definition includes accidental discharges, shots fired in to the air, anything like that. This is just a simple matter of basic fething dictionary use.

So no. An accidental discharge of a firearm does not belong on any list of Shootings. It belongs on a list with things like car accidents, drowning deaths, and other accidental deaths that might have an aspect of negligence to them. They do not belong with premeditated murder incidents.


Incidents of accidentally shooting a gun on school grounds belongs on a list of shootings on school grounds. Because it is a shooting, on school grounds.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 12:12:49


Post by: Steve steveson


To save quibbling over points I suggest revising the number to "at least 10". Once you remove anything where the school is incidental or accidental that's the number I get, which is more than one a week whilst schools have been open this year.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 12:17:59


Post by: ZebioLizard2



No, we won't, there is no disagreement possible. Because the word school has a meaning. The word shooting has a meaning. Put them together... it's got a meaning. And that meaning means a gun being shot at a place where kids go to school. Which is what happened in 17 of those incidents.
That however is disingenuous because that is not how people use those words together mean. While logically that is the conclusion one might reach, it is not however how the public uses it. Whereupon School Shooting is used to identify a mass shooting attack on school grounds. This is the common terminology used rather then "School Killings" which would make it more accurate but as a result if one says there's been 18 school shootings people will identify that as "There has been 18 mass shooting incidents upon school grounds"

Given the terminology used and how people enjoy spinning things, it is highly unlikely that the terminology is going to change as a result because people know that people will not identify the usage you just stated.

So yes there is disagreement because those two words together mean a different terminology then what you've stated in the public consciousness. To the point where several posters here were confused by that usage.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 12:43:48


Post by: Xenomancers


 Togusa wrote:
Until we get serious about Mental Health in the US, this will continue.


What can you do though? This kid even had treatment and it didn't help him. I guess you could make the treatment mandatory kind of like prison - I don't know how well that would go over though.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 13:30:25


Post by: Steve steveson


It's very difficult to say it didn't help. One of the major issues around mental health is that doctors and health officials struggle to deal with the fact that one size does not fit all.

I don't know for sure in the US, but in the UK it is a major issue. If I break my leg the same treatment will work for me as it will for you. It will also work for my brother, the homeless person sleeps rough in the car park behind my office, Bill Gates, Samuel L Jackson, Brigitte Bardot and the woman at the local McDonalds.

Mental Health is rather more difficult. What works for my OCD and related issues may not work for another person with OCD, or another mental health problem.

Also, if I break my leg you can tell what it is. Mental health conditions are far more complex to identify. Then you need to add in to it that one of the problems with mental health issues is that people often don't want to be treated, or struggle with treatment, for a variety of reasons. Feeling hopeless, because of the illness, so see it as pointless, disorganisation due to the illness (difficulty sequencing, or having the energy). The side effects of the treatments. The fact that the improvements are not visible.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 13:45:21


Post by: Prestor Jon


 sebster wrote:
 nels1031 wrote:
We'll agree to disagree.


No, we won't, there is no disagreement possible. Because the word school has a meaning. The word shooting has a meaning. Put them together... it's got a meaning. And that meaning means a gun being shot at a place where kids go to school. Which is what happened in 17 of those incidents.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Grey Templar wrote:
Indeed. An accidental discharge is definitely not ok. But it is an entirely different thing than somebody showing up with the express purpose of murdering other people.


The word used was shooting. Which by definition includes accidental discharges, shots fired in to the air, anything like that. This is just a simple matter of basic fething dictionary use.

So no. An accidental discharge of a firearm does not belong on any list of Shootings. It belongs on a list with things like car accidents, drowning deaths, and other accidental deaths that might have an aspect of negligence to them. They do not belong with premeditated murder incidents.


Incidents of accidentally shooting a gun on school grounds belongs on a list of shootings on school grounds. Because it is a shooting, on school grounds.


You're arguments aren't very good here at all. There is ample room for disagreement as evidenced by the fact that multiple people disagree with you. You may not want them to disagree with you but you don't control their ability to disagree with you.

Your semantic argument is insultingly obtuse. There are multiple incidents on that list of 18 "school shootings" with several significant differences from the most current school shooting in Florida. Simply because they all involve the discharge of a firearm does not make them all the same. By your logic we should use the old adage of "apples and oranges" because while apples and oranges are obviously very different they are both fruit and are therefore the same.

If we've already reached this level of discourse then it's probably best for the thread to get locked.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 13:51:11


Post by: Ouze


Well, it's probably best for the thread to have gotten locked from the very beginning since literally no original argument ever happens. The only twist is instead of a semantic argument about what an assault rifle is, we're having a semantic argument about what a school shooting is, as if it matters in any way since by any definition there have been >10 in like, 2 months.

These threads are as tedious as they are predictable


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 14:13:10


Post by: Rosebuddy


 Ouze wrote:
Well, it's probably best for the thread to have gotten locked from the very beginning since literally no original argument ever happens. The only twist is instead of a semantic argument about what an assault rifle is, we're having a semantic argument about what a school shooting is, as if it matters in any way since by any definition there have been >10 in like, 2 months.

These threads are as tedious as they are predictable


It's pointless to post school shooting threads to a discussion forum where discussion of US politics is banned, because no discussion is then possible. All you could post is variations of "that's bad".


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 14:14:16


Post by: nels1031


 sebster wrote:

No, we won't, there is no disagreement possible. Because the word school has a meaning.


Nah. We definitely disagreeing.

What most reasonable people, particularly in America, think of when they hear school shooting:

A school shooting is a mass shooting attack on an educational institution, such as a school or university. School shootings have sparked a political debate over gun violence, zero tolerance policies, and gun control.


 sebster wrote:
The word used was shooting. Which by definition includes accidental discharges, shots fired in to the air, anything like that. This is just a simple matter of basic fething dictionary use.
.


Thats fething basic for sure. ‘Basic’ in the Urban Dictionary sense.

I got carjacked last week. I took my car in for warranty work, they had to use a jack to lift my car up to get under a part of the engine. Thats totally the same as the car jacking that occurred tuesday, where a 69 year old woman was killed inChicago. Or does the combining of those two words make it have different meanings when used in a different context? Was my mechanic a carjacker? Sure, in a very literal sense, but in the context of popular culture? nope.

The true numbers of school shootings are tragically high enough to be shameful, no need to embellish the stats using flawed methodology. I’ve seen you in other threads mock folks who stick to their guns (thats a saying that has a different meaning based on context btw, don’t get literal and think dakka has an active shooter situation) for the sake of “Mah Narrative!” and now, here you are doing the same my dude.


Edit: all bout the thread lock mentioned above.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 14:16:08


Post by: djones520


That moment when you're watching a RAW vs a RAI argument in OT.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 14:34:05


Post by: Easy E


 djones520 wrote:
That moment when you're watching a RAW vs a RAI argument in OT.


This really needs some sort of Gif to go with it.... but I am fresh out! :(

However, we can also see why, in this very thread; nothing will change in the near future. Maybe this one was different, but not enough to break through. If Sandy Hook didn't chang ethe game, then nothing will.

Can anyone think of a nightmare scenario that would change the game on this topic?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 14:37:48


Post by: Ouze


Rosebuddy wrote:
It's pointless to post school shooting threads to a discussion forum where discussion of US politics is banned, because no discussion is then possible. All you could post is variations of "that's bad".


Yes, this is true.

 Easy E wrote:
Can anyone think of a nightmare scenario that would change the game on this topic?


No. When the US tolerated 20 dead kindergartners with no significant changes is when we decided as a nation we're OK with this.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 15:06:17


Post by: Prestor Jon


 Xenomancers wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
Until we get serious about Mental Health in the US, this will continue.


What can you do though? This kid even had treatment and it didn't help him. I guess you could make the treatment mandatory kind of like prison - I don't know how well that would go over though.


There are steps that could be taken but there is no simple answer because it's not a simple problem.

Every first world country is dealing with societal issues that are making people unhealthy. Look at the shooter in this case, he was 19, was adopted out of a broken home, his adopted father died while he was still young, his adoptive mother died last year at 68 (so she was basically old enough to be has grandma so even with her best efforts there was bound to be relatability issues between them), he had acted violently in school and was ultimately expelled, for a limited time in the past he received some form of treatment for his mental health issues, everyone who's been interviewed about him has claimed that he was obviously depressed, he was living in a friend's house apparently enrolled in a GED program, as an adult with a clean criminal record he purchased and owned a rifle. Looking at that description it's clear that this was a troubled, violent teenager who was a possible threat to those around him. So what should have been done about that?

When we are confronted with this type of person our society frequently chooses from 3 options, 1) ignore them, 2) medicate them 3) incarcerate them. All of those responses come with their own host of problems.

He was a legal adult so it's difficult to get him involuntarily committed. If he wanted to pursue treatment on his own, what treatment options are available and how would they be paid for?

He had a clean criminal record so what law could have been in place to prevent him from purchasing a rifle? He wasn't under the care of a psychiatrist or psychologist, he wasn't taking medication, he had never been convicted of a crime. Should the state of Florida pass a law that equates being expelled from HS with being convicted of a felony in regards to loss of rights and legal consequences?

Violent crime isn't increasing, armed assaults and murder by firearm aren't increasing but the particular crime of mass shootings are going up. Why? The US has always had access to firearms and gun crime but we've never had the crime of mass shootings occur at the present rate. What is it about our society that is causing this particular anomaly?

Here are some thoughts on it:
Spoiler:
A rampage shooting has never happened in an urban ghetto, for example; in fact, indiscriminate attacks at schools almost always occur in otherwise safe, predominantly white towns. Around half of rampage killings happen in affluent or upper-middle-class communities, and the rest tend to happen in rural towns that are majority-white, Christian, and low-crime.”
“A rampage shooting has never happened in an urban ghetto, for example; in fact, indiscriminate attacks at schools almost always occur in otherwise safe, predominantly white towns. Around half of rampage killings happen in affluent or upper-middle-class communities, and the rest tend to happen in rural towns that are majority-white, Christian, and low-crime.”
“It may be worth considering whether middle-class American life—for all its material good fortune—has lost some essential sense of unity that might otherwise discourage alienated men from turning apocalyptically violent.”
“In effect, humans have dragged a body with a long hominid history into an overfed, malnourished, sedentary, sunlight-deficient, sleep-deprived, competitive, inequitable, and socially-isolating environment with dire consequences.”
“As affluence and urbanization rise in a society, rates of depression and suicide tend to go up rather than down. Rather than buffering people from clinical depression, increased wealth in a society seems to foster it.”
“First agriculture, and then industry, changed two fundamental things about the human experience. The accumulation of personal property allowed people to make more and more individualistic choices about their lives, and those choices unavoidably diminished group efforts toward a common good. And as society modernized, people found themselves able to live independently from any communal group. A person living in a modern city or a suburb can, for the first time in history, go through an entire day—or an entire life—mostly encountering complete strangers. They can be surrounded by others and yet feel deeply, dangerously alone. The evidence that this is hard on us is overwhelming. Although happiness is notoriously subjective and difficult to measure, mental illness is not. Numerous cross-cultural studies have shown that modern society—despite its nearly miraculous advances in medicine, science, and technology—is afflicted with some of the highest rates of depression, schizophrenia, poor health, anxiety, and chronic loneliness in human history. As affluence and urbanization rise in a society, rates of depression and suicide tend to go up rather than down. Rather than buffering people from clinical depression, increased wealth in a society seems to foster it.”
“The findings are in keeping with something called self-determination theory, which holds that human beings need three basic things in order to be content: they need to feel competent at what they do; they need to feel authentic in their lives; and they need to feel connected to others. These values are considered “intrinsic” to human happiness and far outweigh “extrinsic” values such as beauty, money, and status.”
“We are not good to each other. Our tribalism is to an extremely narrow group of people: our children, our spouse, maybe our parents. Our society is alienating, technical, cold, and mystifying. Our fundamental desire, as human beings, is to be close to others, and our society does not allow for that.”
“Modern society has perfected the art of making people not feel necessary. It’s time for that to end.”
“It’s revealing, then, to look at modern society through the prism of more than a million years of human cooperation and resource sharing. Subsistence-level hunters aren’t necessarily more moral than other people; they just can’t get away with selfish behavior because they live in small groups where almost everything is open to scrutiny.”
“A wealthy person who never had to rely on help and resources from his community is leading a privileged life that falls way outside more than a million years of human experience. Financial independence can lead to isolation, and isolation can put people at a greatly increased risk of depression and suicide. This might be a fair trade for a generally wealthier society- but a trade it is.”
“This fundamental lack of connectedness allows people to act in trivial but incredibly selfish ways. Rachel Yehuda pointed to littering as the perfect example of an everyday symbol of disunity in society. “It’s a horrible thing to see because it sort of encapsulates this idea that you’re in it alone, that there isn’t a shared ethos of trying to protect something shared,” she told me. “It’s the embodiment of every man for himself. It’s the opposite of the military.”
“If you want to make a society work, then you don’t keep underscoring the places where you’re different—you underscore your shared humanity,” she told me. “I’m appalled by how much people focus on differences. Why are you focusing on how different you are from one another, and not on the things that unite us?”

https://www.amazon.com/Tribe-Homecoming-Belonging-Sebastian-Junger/dp/1455566381



School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 15:10:25


Post by: nels1031


 Ouze wrote:
No. When the US tolerated 20 dead kindergartners with no significant changes is when we decided as a nation we're OK with this.


I feel thats another statement that doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. I guess its a divergence about what constitutes “significant changes”?

According to Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence:

Since the tragedy at Sandy Hook, more than 210 new smart gun laws have been enacted in 45 states and DC.


Also (same source) :

And, perhaps even more importantly, the gun violence prevention movement has consistently defeated gun lobby–sponsored legislation that would allow hidden, loaded weapons into public spaces like schools, government buildings, and even bars, as well as many other similarly dangerous bills. While the gun lobby achieves some wins each year, an overwhelming majority of its legislative efforts fail. Defensive victories, like stopping bad bills from advancing through the legislature, are a significant part of the progress the Law Center and our allies make each year.






School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 15:16:17


Post by: Nostromodamus


I think a good indicator of a thread being done is when people are disagreeing about whether they agree to disagree.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 15:18:22


Post by: kronk


 Xenomancers wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
Until we get serious about Mental Health in the US, this will continue.


What can you do though? This kid even had treatment and it didn't help him. I guess you could make the treatment mandatory kind of like prison - I don't know how well that would go over though.




Edit: The only thing I can find on his going to another school is that he was enrolled in an adult education center to get his GED. I can't find that he was placed in an special school for his emotional issues.

"Obviously, he'd lost his mom. But they helped him get a job at a Dollar Tree store. They got him going to an adult education so he could try to get his GED and he seemed to be doing better," Lewis said.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/15/us/florida-high-school-shooting/index.html


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 15:19:40


Post by: Prestor Jon


 Ouze wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
It's pointless to post school shooting threads to a discussion forum where discussion of US politics is banned, because no discussion is then possible. All you could post is variations of "that's bad".


Yes, this is true.

 Easy E wrote:
Can anyone think of a nightmare scenario that would change the game on this topic?


No. When the US tolerated 20 dead kindergartners with no significant changes is when we decided as a nation we're OK with this.


Connecticut passed significant new laws that increased gun regulations in that state beyond what was already in place and they were already one of the stricter states in that regard. So did the state of New York. There was no Federal action on the matter but I don't see why it would have been reasonable to expect any. The murder of 20 children at Sandy Hook was tragic but it wasn't a national emergency that required the Federal govt to take some sort of dramatic action. The federal govt couldn't have made murdering your mother and stealing her rifle more illegal. Nor could the Feds have forced states to prevent gun sales to adults who were otherwise qualified to make a lawful gun purchase from doing so because they had offspring being treated for mental health problems living in their home. It was a local crime and it generated a response by the local government. It was handled appropriately.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 15:33:20


Post by: Vaktathi


 Easy E wrote:
 djones520 wrote:
That moment when you're watching a RAW vs a RAI argument in OT.


This really needs some sort of Gif to go with it.... but I am fresh out! :(

However, we can also see why, in this very thread; nothing will change in the near future. Maybe this one was different, but not enough to break through. If Sandy Hook didn't chang ethe game, then nothing will.

Can anyone think of a nightmare scenario that would change the game on this topic?
Well, in an attempt to avoid discussing the exact politics of the issue, I'm going to attempt to talk about the electorate, hopefully without directly taking a side, though my personal biases are probably known here anyway.

There is a small but active section of the US electorate that votes on guns and almost nothing but guns (or a subset of issues that are tied so closely together as to be indistinguishable). They organize, they advocate, they donate & fundraise, they engage in citizen activism, they boycott, they donate, they speak out. They contact their representatives, they comment on ATF proposals in droves, etc. Most importantly, these people show up to vote reliably and consistently, they step up and do their part and make their voice heard loud and clear in the democratic process, as it currently exists. They can and will engage in recall efforts against candidates that push agendas they disagree with (such as Colorado's magazine limit). The firearms community in general is highly politicized and active.

Their opposition tends to treat guns as a seasonal issue, something that pops up once in a while, but otherwise plays 2nd fiddle, it's something people may feel strongly about, but not so strongly about to make themselves single issue voters over, practically nobody is going to cease support of a candidate because they're not tough enough on guns if they tick the other social boxes, and they aren't going to wage recall campaigns over failures to enact more gun control legislation. People will sign petitions, make facebook posts condemning X organization or group of legislators, decry the situation and how nothing is done, but comparatively, there's practically nobody voting on pro-gun-control stances as energized single issue voters (in a relative sense at least).

So while lots of social pressure exists to do *something*, even if nobody can agree on exactly what, all the primary communications channels to decision makers and government on the issue are dominated by one side, and the electoral consequences largely swing only one way.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 15:46:33


Post by: Prestor Jon


 Vaktathi wrote:
 Easy E wrote:
 djones520 wrote:
That moment when you're watching a RAW vs a RAI argument in OT.


This really needs some sort of Gif to go with it.... but I am fresh out! :(

However, we can also see why, in this very thread; nothing will change in the near future. Maybe this one was different, but not enough to break through. If Sandy Hook didn't chang ethe game, then nothing will.

Can anyone think of a nightmare scenario that would change the game on this topic?
Well, in an attempt to avoid discussing the exact politics of the issue, I'm going to attempt to talk about the electorate, hopefully without directly taking a side, though my personal biases are probably known here anyway.

There is a small but active section of the US electorate that votes on guns and almost nothing but guns (or a subset of issues that are tied so closely together as to be indistinguishable). They organize, they advocate, they donate & fundraise, they engage in citizen activism, they boycott, they donate, they speak out. They contact their representatives, they comment on ATF proposals in droves, etc. Most importantly, these people show up to vote reliably and consistently, they step up and do their part and make their voice heard loud and clear in the democratic process, as it currently exists. They can and will engage in recall efforts against candidates that push agendas they disagree with (such as Colorado's magazine limit). The firearms community in general is highly politicized and active.

Their opposition tends to treat guns as a seasonal issue, something that pops up once in a while, but otherwise plays 2nd fiddle, it's something people may feel strongly about, but not so strongly about to make themselves single issue voters over, practically nobody is going to cease support of a candidate because they're not tough enough on guns if they tick the other social boxes, and they aren't going to wage recall campaigns over failures to enact more gun control legislation. People will sign petitions, make facebook posts condemning X organization or group of legislators, decry the situation and how nothing is done, but comparatively, there's practically nobody voting on pro-gun-control stances as energized single issue voters (in a relative sense at least).

So while lots of social pressure exists to do *something*, even if nobody can agree on exactly what, all the primary communications channels to decision makers and government on the issue are dominated by one side, and the electoral consequences largely swing only one way.


I don't disagree with your synopsis but I think you also need to remember how easily our Federal legislature lets low populous states like Idaho and Wyoming cancel out heavily populated states like California and New Jersey. The gun culture in Idaho and Wyoming is never going to let their Federal Senators vote for gun control laws whereas the restrictive gun control atmosphere in CA and NJ would never let their Senators vote against gun control laws. Our Federalism is designed to negate the tyranny of the majority so millions of anti gun voters in states with low gun ownership rates and restrictive laws really can't affect Federal legislation on the matter.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 15:48:55


Post by: Howard A Treesong


 Ouze wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
It's pointless to post school shooting threads to a discussion forum where discussion of US politics is banned, because no discussion is then possible. All you could post is variations of "that's bad".


Yes, this is true.

 Easy E wrote:
Can anyone think of a nightmare scenario that would change the game on this topic?


No. When the US tolerated 20 dead kindergartners with no significant changes is when we decided as a nation we're OK with this.


How prevalent is the conspiracy theory of ‘crisis actors’? Is it just an internet meme or is there genuine belief these shootings are staged?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 15:49:45


Post by: Ouze


It's a very small, very fringe belief.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 15:49:59


Post by: Prestor Jon


 Easy E wrote:
 djones520 wrote:
That moment when you're watching a RAW vs a RAI argument in OT.


This really needs some sort of Gif to go with it.... but I am fresh out! :(

However, we can also see why, in this very thread; nothing will change in the near future. Maybe this one was different, but not enough to break through. If Sandy Hook didn't chang ethe game, then nothing will.

Can anyone think of a nightmare scenario that would change the game on this topic?


What is the change you'd like to see? It would be easier to deal with that question working backwards from the effect to the cause.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 15:53:04


Post by: kronk


I would like to see fewer shootings at schools.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 15:56:10


Post by: XuQishi


A rampage shooting has never happened in an urban ghetto, for example; in fact, indiscriminate attacks at schools almost always occur in otherwise safe, predominantly white towns. Around half of rampage killings happen in affluent or upper-middle-class communities, and the rest tend to happen in rural towns that are majority-white, Christian, and low-crime.”


Well, people with no actual, life-threatening problems have time to make some for themselves and for others. Some get depressed, some turn to religion, some invent their religion (a lot of civil movements like environmentalism do indeed share religious traits with a saviour figure, a tendency towards asceticism, dietary laws, an apocalyptic vision etc.), some bully people, and some, often bullied ones, fly completely off the rail and kill people. If they don't have guns, they use a knife or drive a car into a gathering or build a bomb or whatever. Guns just make it a little easier.
In Germany we once had a dude who ran amok with a flame thrower he built himself and a spear.

I guess it doesn't happen in ghettos because people there get enough violence every day as is, also poor people have other problems to worry about.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 16:06:31


Post by: Ouze


XuQishi wrote:
In Germany we once had a dude who ran amok with a flame thrower he built himself and a spear.


I'm conflicted now, because while that is obviously bad, it's also obviously kind of awesome.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 16:07:50


Post by: jmurph


Yeah, pointing out that these mass shooting don't happen in urban ghettos really illustrates the problem in even addressing the issue, but not in a good way. Poor areas have a much higher rate of gun violence, but do not prompt near the reaction that these school shootings in more affluent, predominately white areas do. So we get these knee jerks reactions, while we have thousands of children getting shot and killed (an average of 19 per day!) and it barely makes a ripple. And then people get hung up on the semantics of it all so they don't have to look at the real issues, including the fact that as gun ownership has increased so has the rate of the shootings (shocker). It's bonkers.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 16:17:23


Post by: Prestor Jon


 jmurph wrote:
Yeah, pointing out that these mass shooting don't happen in urban ghettos really illustrates the problem in even addressing the issue, but not in a good way. Poor areas have a much higher rate of gun violence, but do not prompt near the reaction that these school shootings in more affluent, predominately white areas do. So we get these knee jerks reactions, while we have thousands of children getting shot and killed (an average of 19 per day!) and it barely makes a ripple. And then people get hung up on the semantics of it all so they don't have to look at the real issues, including the fact that as gun ownership has increased so has the rate of the shootings (shocker). It's bonkers.


The context of the quote about the lack of urban mass shootings was pointing out that people in low income urban areas typically have large interpersonal support networks and connectedness in contrast to the often isolating conditions of the suburbs. Urban areas tend to large groups of people who know each other and interact on a regular basis and help each other. Oftentimes those groups are organized along national, ethnic, familial or geographic lines or some combination thereof. Even criminal gangs provide support for each other. In contrast in suburban communities it can much easier to consider people who may live in your neighborhood or go to your school as complete strangers, dehumanize them and murder them en masse.

Of course this doesn't invalidate your point, that there is a more dispersed number of gun deaths in urban areas that are largely ignored by the media and society because it happens in an area and to a group of people that most of us don't pay much attention to anyway and don't readily identify with.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 17:02:55


Post by: Vaktathi


Prestor Jon wrote:
 Vaktathi wrote:
 Easy E wrote:
 djones520 wrote:
That moment when you're watching a RAW vs a RAI argument in OT.


This really needs some sort of Gif to go with it.... but I am fresh out! :(

However, we can also see why, in this very thread; nothing will change in the near future. Maybe this one was different, but not enough to break through. If Sandy Hook didn't chang ethe game, then nothing will.

Can anyone think of a nightmare scenario that would change the game on this topic?
Well, in an attempt to avoid discussing the exact politics of the issue, I'm going to attempt to talk about the electorate, hopefully without directly taking a side, though my personal biases are probably known here anyway.

There is a small but active section of the US electorate that votes on guns and almost nothing but guns (or a subset of issues that are tied so closely together as to be indistinguishable). They organize, they advocate, they donate & fundraise, they engage in citizen activism, they boycott, they donate, they speak out. They contact their representatives, they comment on ATF proposals in droves, etc. Most importantly, these people show up to vote reliably and consistently, they step up and do their part and make their voice heard loud and clear in the democratic process, as it currently exists. They can and will engage in recall efforts against candidates that push agendas they disagree with (such as Colorado's magazine limit). The firearms community in general is highly politicized and active.

Their opposition tends to treat guns as a seasonal issue, something that pops up once in a while, but otherwise plays 2nd fiddle, it's something people may feel strongly about, but not so strongly about to make themselves single issue voters over, practically nobody is going to cease support of a candidate because they're not tough enough on guns if they tick the other social boxes, and they aren't going to wage recall campaigns over failures to enact more gun control legislation. People will sign petitions, make facebook posts condemning X organization or group of legislators, decry the situation and how nothing is done, but comparatively, there's practically nobody voting on pro-gun-control stances as energized single issue voters (in a relative sense at least).

So while lots of social pressure exists to do *something*, even if nobody can agree on exactly what, all the primary communications channels to decision makers and government on the issue are dominated by one side, and the electoral consequences largely swing only one way.


I don't disagree with your synopsis but I think you also need to remember how easily our Federal legislature lets low populous states like Idaho and Wyoming cancel out heavily populated states like California and New Jersey. The gun culture in Idaho and Wyoming is never going to let their Federal Senators vote for gun control laws whereas the restrictive gun control atmosphere in CA and NJ would never let their Senators vote against gun control laws. Our Federalism is designed to negate the tyranny of the majority so millions of anti gun voters in states with low gun ownership rates and restrictive laws really can't affect Federal legislation on the matter.
Aye, nothing about the issue is one dimensional, its a product of many factors in many ways.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 17:23:45


Post by: BobtheInquisitor


 Easy E wrote:
 djones520 wrote:
That moment when you're watching a RAW vs a RAI argument in OT.


This really needs some sort of Gif to go with it.... but I am fresh out! :(

However, we can also see why, in this very thread; nothing will change in the near future. Maybe this one was different, but not enough to break through. If Sandy Hook didn't chang ethe game, then nothing will.

Can anyone think of a nightmare scenario that would change the game on this topic?



If there was a Brevik style massacre at the NRA Jr and RNC JR camp, and perhaps in congress while in session, that might just tip things a bit. Maybe.
I am not advocating anything, but trying to think of a scenario that might affect the people who lobby for and write laws.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 17:40:15


Post by: ChargerIIC


 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
 Easy E wrote:
 djones520 wrote:
That moment when you're watching a RAW vs a RAI argument in OT.


This really needs some sort of Gif to go with it.... but I am fresh out! :(

However, we can also see why, in this very thread; nothing will change in the near future. Maybe this one was different, but not enough to break through. If Sandy Hook didn't chang ethe game, then nothing will.

Can anyone think of a nightmare scenario that would change the game on this topic?



If there was a Brevik style massacre at the NRA Jr and RNC JR camp, and perhaps in congress while in session, that might just tip things a bit. Maybe.
I am not advocating anything, but trying to think of a scenario that might affect the people who lobby for and write laws.


You know there was a shooting attack on the GOP's baseball game last year, right? It didn't change the politics much.

Of course, using politics to regulate evil is never going to be an issue of quick fixes. It's a round hole with a terribly inefficient square peg. You'll get it to fit -mostly- eventually, but not without a LOT of hammering and more than a few broken square pegs along the way.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 17:44:29


Post by: BobtheInquisitor


Yeah, I know. That's why I used the qualifiers that I did.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 17:44:46


Post by: AdeptSister


 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
 Easy E wrote:
 djones520 wrote:
That moment when you're watching a RAW vs a RAI argument in OT.


This really needs some sort of Gif to go with it.... but I am fresh out! :(

However, we can also see why, in this very thread; nothing will change in the near future. Maybe this one was different, but not enough to break through. If Sandy Hook didn't chang ethe game, then nothing will.

Can anyone think of a nightmare scenario that would change the game on this topic?



If there was a Brevik style massacre at the NRA Jr and RNC JR camp, and perhaps in congress while in session, that might just tip things a bit. Maybe.
I am not advocating anything, but trying to think of a scenario that might affect the people who lobby for and write laws.


Nope. A congressional GOP baseball practice was attacked by a crazed liberal with a rifle and that did not change anything. Country musical lovers were massacred with legal weapons that had devices to get around automatic weapon laws (bump stocks). I do not see there being any new federal legislation coming. As people mentioned, research is limited and actively being stopped. Activities to expand mental health coverage is also being actively stopped. This status quo is acceptable.

We as a nation shrug and just wait for the next killing and hope it is not us.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 18:10:50


Post by: Spetulhu


 Xenomancers wrote:
What can you do though? This kid even had treatment and it didn't help him. I guess you could make the treatment mandatory kind of like prison - I don't know how well that would go over though.


Aye, I don't think forced treatment for everyone will fly in the US. Every civil liberty organisation will be up in arms about that, and few if any lawmakers would dare risk their re-election on it. But it can be done under certain emergency conditions, IIRC if the patient is suicidal. I even recall some dirty cops in, eh, New York? dragging the colleague who wanted to report them into a psych ward so he'd be locked up while they worked on making the evidence go away.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 18:14:24


Post by: feeder


What about a law that prevents people from storing a gun in the same residence as someone who is barred from owing one? So if your severely unwell adult son is living in your home, you need to store your gun somewhere else?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 18:16:27


Post by: XuQishi


Poor areas have a much higher rate of gun violence, but do not prompt near the reaction that these school shootings in more affluent, predominately white areas do.


As an outsider: isn't this mostly gang related stuff or - if you want to say so - criminals killing criminals? It wouldn't be much of a wonder if most people were quite indifferent about that.

How does someone his age afford a rifle? Aren’t they expensive?


I've read that you can get AR-15 clones for less than 500 dollars. That's half an iPhone X.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 18:20:35


Post by: ChargerIIC


 Howard A Treesong wrote:
https://www.buzzfeed.com/amphtml/briannasacks/authorities-were-called-to-alleged-florida-school-shooter?

How does someone his age afford a rifle? Aren’t they expensive?


Yes - but given how many 18 year olds have dropped $1000 on their miniatures collections I doubt it's out of place for one to drop that kind of cash on any other purchase. THere seem to be conflicting reports about where he got the rifle - some say it was bought it from a gunshop (probably a used one, going anywhere from $750+) or from the leader of his White Supremeist organization - who has claimed to have sold him a used AR-15 (in which case the sale was probably part of the kid's recruitment and could have been dirt cheap).


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 18:24:28


Post by: Howard A Treesong


Ok, I thought AR-15s cost a good bit more than that. Sounds like this ‘kid’ had quite a collection of firearms, worrying it’s so easy for someone so young and deranged to acquire all these.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 18:25:34


Post by: ChargerIIC


XuQishi wrote:
Poor areas have a much higher rate of gun violence, but do not prompt near the reaction that these school shootings in more affluent, predominately white areas do.


As an outsider: isn't this mostly gang related stuff or - if you want to say so - criminals killing criminals? It wouldn't be much of a wonder if most people were quite indifferent about that.



Having grown up in a high-gang area I can tell you that a lot of gang shootings don't necessarily strike or are even aimed at active gang members. They just tend to not take place at schools, where mutliple gangs are represented (and might consider it an attack against them) and it's hard to get away. A gang-sponsored party is the traditional choice, since noone is in a position to pursue and shooting a relative or friend of an opposing gang member is just as good as the actual target.

It depresses me how I much I experienced and now know this crap. At least my kids won't have a freakin' clue what I'm talking bout. I live in hippie country now, where they sit around and tut about what's to be done about those 'other' people.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 18:28:46


Post by: XuQishi


Thanks for the info, that was helpful.
Gangs aren't much of a thing here and the few that exist tend to - if at all - kill mostly each other and then mostly with knives, which is their problem, not anybody else's.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 18:37:30


Post by: Vaktathi


 Howard A Treesong wrote:
https://www.buzzfeed.com/amphtml/briannasacks/authorities-were-called-to-alleged-florida-school-shooter?

How does someone his age afford a rifle? Aren’t they expensive?
sort of? In 2013, youd be lucky to find any AR under $1200.

Now?

Currently they are actually at historically low prices as a result of panic buying dying down and the Hillary bubble bursting. AR's are cheaper than they have ever been.

You can get a decently made name brand Ruger AR15 for...$450? You can buy an AR15 Lower Receiver (the controlled part that needs a background check and that everything plugs into) for like $50 and then throw in all your own components over time into whatever configuration you want, basically just like a PC.

That said, AK's are...historically expensive now interestingly.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 18:59:50


Post by: feeder


FTFY posts are so 2010. Gawd.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 19:12:08


Post by: jmurph


XuQishi wrote:
Thanks for the info, that was helpful.
Gangs aren't much of a thing here and the few that exist tend to - if at all - kill mostly each other and then mostly with knives, which is their problem, not anybody else's.


Don't sweat it; gangs are very common in the United States, but very poorly understood by most people outside of their spheres. Unfortunately, gang violence rarely stays neatly contained and, even if it does, it is still an enormous human cost.

Probably the best recent stuudy we have on childhood firearm fatalities is based on a CDC study of the years 2002-2014 published in Pediatrics in 2017 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2017/06/15/peds.2016-3486
Alot of child injury/death cases are related to intimate partner violence or being caught in a separate criminal incident. Suicides are also a growing problem. Interestingly, the rates of firearm homicides are higher in many Southern and Midwestern states, some of the same areas where firearm ownership is highest. Playing with firearms is the leading cause of unintentional gun deaths.

Perhaps the most disturbing finding was that firearms are the 3rd leading cause of death overall among US children aged 1 to 17 years, and the 2nd leading cause of injury, second only to automobiles. International studies indicate that 91% of firearm deaths of children aged 0 to 14 years among all high-income countries worldwide occur in the United States. Approximately 19 children a day die or are medically treated in an ED for a gunshot wound in the United States That's shockingly bad.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 19:12:42


Post by: Frazzled


 Xenomancers wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
Until we get serious about Mental Health in the US, this will continue.


What can you do though? This kid even had treatment and it didn't help him. I guess you could make the treatment mandatory kind of like prison - I don't know how well that would go over though.


News this morning had him shooting at the neighbors chickens, torturing animals etc. Thats classic serial killer behavior.
I wonder if some of these guys would have become serial killers but went the mass shooter route.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Steve steveson wrote:
It's very difficult to say it didn't help. One of the major issues around mental health is that doctors and health officials struggle to deal with the fact that one size does not fit all.

I don't know for sure in the US, but in the UK it is a major issue. If I break my leg the same treatment will work for me as it will for you. It will also work for my brother, the homeless person sleeps rough in the car park behind my office, Bill Gates, Samuel L Jackson, Brigitte Bardot and the woman at the local McDonalds.

Mental Health is rather more difficult. What works for my OCD and related issues may not work for another person with OCD, or another mental health problem.

Also, if I break my leg you can tell what it is. Mental health conditions are far more complex to identify. Then you need to add in to it that one of the problems with mental health issues is that people often don't want to be treated, or struggle with treatment, for a variety of reasons. Feeling hopeless, because of the illness, so see it as pointless, disorganisation due to the illness (difficulty sequencing, or having the energy). The side effects of the treatments. The fact that the improvements are not visible.

I am on some sites with a lot of LEO commenters. I queried them once and they universally said they routinely deal with mentally ill at least once a day up to like 50% of the time (depending on the poster). It was both enlightening and terrifying.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

No. When the US tolerated 20 dead kindergartners with no significant changes is when we decided as a nation we're OK with this.


Well since Sunderland at church we unofficially have at least one armed usher/other around for every service.
The schools here have been hardened up. all of them install bullet proof glass, and there's always at least on PoPo car sitting in the park behind the three schools or cruising the main drag in front of the three schools.

I'm actually more concerned about UT. I've never seen a PoPo there and homeless roam around annoying or occasionally robbing/murdering students.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 19:50:01


Post by: Prestor Jon


 feeder wrote:
What about a law that prevents people from storing a gun in the same residence as someone who is barred from owing one? So if your severely unwell adult son is living in your home, you need to store your gun somewhere else?


Current Federal law only bans gun ownership to people who have "been adjudicated as a mental defective OR have you ever been committed to a mental institution" that's question f. on ATF form 4473. If you want to extend that to an adult that is "severely unwell" you'd have to legally define "severely unwell." I'm not sure treating mentally unwell people like convicted felons is going to help resolve our mental health issues as a nation.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 19:57:07


Post by: sirlynchmob


 Frazzled wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
It's pointless to post school shooting threads to a discussion forum where discussion of US politics is banned, because no discussion is then possible. All you could post is variations of "that's bad".


Yes, this is true.

 Easy E wrote:
Can anyone think of a nightmare scenario that would change the game on this topic?


No. When the US tolerated 20 dead kindergartners with no significant changes is when gun owners and the NRA decided as a nation we're OK with this.


fixed that for you. The nation is not ok with it, just a certain 1/2 seems to be ok with it and fight against measures to fix it.

And as we're discussing this one, yet another mass shooting at a school just took place.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4030124/washington-state-highline-college-gunfire/?utm_source=AM980London&utm_medium=Facebook



What is your proposal? This is not a criticism but a question.


IMO drastic times call for drastic measures, put a halt on the sale of guns and ammunition while the second amendment is reworked or revoked. We need national gun laws, and treat guns like cars. registered, and licensed and insured. Disband the NRA and confiscate their assets and the profits from gun manufacturers to pay for the medical treatments of victims. like we did with big tobacco. the price in lives is to damn high so some people can own guns and falsely belief they're now safe. Because those with guns are still far more likely to use them on themselves or family members than to have it anywhere near a crime, let alone stop one.

Don't reply with the nonsense of if you outlaw guns then only outlaws will have guns, because as it is now the outlaws have all the guns they want, no questions asked and there has yet to be any good guys with guns stopping any of the shootings.

*please don't ban me but this is highly on topic here*
Spoiler:
Stop trump from weakening the few gun control measures that work
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/trump-nra-gun-safety-background-checks_us_5a84abdee4b0774f31d1b770
So even more people who shouldn't have guns can now buy them even if they would normally fail a background check.


this madness needs to stop, and the NRA and their paid puppets in Washington need to stop using these tragedies as commercials. More tragedies equates directly to more gun sales, and more guns leads to more tragedies. Ask yourself, is having a gun in your house worth the lives of these children and the thousands more who will die this year?

IMO no, #repealthesecond yes you have the right to defend yourself, but in exercising that right you are enabling these tragedies and if you are a member of the NRA you are directly responsible for them. The NRA is all about gun sales these days, no matter who they're sold to.



School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 19:58:01


Post by: Prestor Jon


https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-statement-on-the-shooting-in-parkland-florida/layout_view



FBI Statement on the Shooting in Parkland, Florida
On January 5, 2018, a person close to Nikolas Cruz contacted the FBI’s Public Access Line (PAL) tipline to report concerns about him. The caller provided information about Cruz’s gun ownership, desire to kill people, erratic behavior, and disturbing social media posts, as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting.

Under established protocols, the information provided by the caller should have been assessed as a potential threat to life. The information then should have been forwarded to the FBI Miami Field Office, where appropriate investigative steps would have been taken.

We have determined that these protocols were not followed for the information received by the PAL on January 5. The information was not provided to the Miami Field Office, and no further investigation was conducted at that time.

FBI Director Christopher Wray said:

“We are still investigating the facts. I am committed to getting to the bottom of what happened in this particular matter, as well as reviewing our processes for responding to information that we receive from the public. It’s up to all Americans to be vigilant, and when members of the public contact us with concerns, we must act properly and quickly.

“We have spoken with victims and families, and deeply regret the additional pain this causes all those affected by this horrific tragedy. All of the men and women of the FBI are dedicated to keeping the American people safe, and are relentlessly committed to improving all that we do and how we do it.”




Automatically Appended Next Post:
sirlynchmob wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
It's pointless to post school shooting threads to a discussion forum where discussion of US politics is banned, because no discussion is then possible. All you could post is variations of "that's bad".


Yes, this is true.

 Easy E wrote:
Can anyone think of a nightmare scenario that would change the game on this topic?


No. When the US tolerated 20 dead kindergartners with no significant changes is when gun owners and the NRA decided as a nation we're OK with this.


fixed that for you. The nation is not ok with it, just a certain 1/2 seems to be ok with it and fight against measures to fix it.

And as we're discussing this one, yet another mass shooting at a school just took place.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4030124/washington-state-highline-college-gunfire/?utm_source=AM980London&utm_medium=Facebook



What is your proposal? This is not a criticism but a question.


IMO drastic times call for drastic measures, put a halt on the sale of guns and ammunition while the second amendment is reworked or revoked. We need national gun laws, and treat guns like cars. registered, and licensed and insured. Disband the NRA and confiscate their assets and the profits from gun manufacturers to pay for the medical treatments of victims. like we did with big tobacco. the price in lives is to damn high so some people can own guns and falsely belief they're now safe. Because those with guns are still far more likely to use them on themselves or family members than to have it anywhere near a crime, let alone stop one.

Don't reply with the nonsense of if you outlaw guns then only outlaws will have guns, because as it is now the outlaws have all the guns they want, no questions asked and there has yet to be any good guys with guns stopping any of the shootings.

*please don't ban me but this is highly on topic here*
Spoiler:
Stop trump from weakening the few gun control measures that work
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/trump-nra-gun-safety-background-checks_us_5a84abdee4b0774f31d1b770
So even more people who shouldn't have guns can now buy them even if they would normally fail a background check.


this madness needs to stop, and the NRA and their paid puppets in Washington need to stop using these tragedies as commercials. More tragedies equates directly to more gun sales, and more guns leads to more tragedies. Ask yourself, is having a gun in your house worth the lives of these children and the thousands more who will die this year?

IMO no, #repealthesecond yes you have the right to defend yourself, but in exercising that right you are enabling these tragedies and if you are a member of the NRA you are directly responsible for them. The NRA is all about gun sales these days, no matter who they're sold to.



You do realize that your solution isn't just impractical and highly unlikely to ever come to fruition but some of it is actually illegal, right?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 20:02:31


Post by: kronk


Prestor Jon wrote:
https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-statement-on-the-shooting-in-parkland-florida/layout_view



FBI Statement on the Shooting in Parkland, Florida
On January 5, 2018, a person close to Nikolas Cruz contacted the FBI’s Public Access Line (PAL) tipline to report concerns about him. The caller provided information about Cruz’s gun ownership, desire to kill people, erratic behavior, and disturbing social media posts, as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting.

Under established protocols, the information provided by the caller should have been assessed as a potential threat to life. The information then should have been forwarded to the FBI Miami Field Office, where appropriate investigative steps would have been taken.

We have determined that these protocols were not followed for the information received by the PAL on January 5. The information was not provided to the Miami Field Office, and no further investigation was conducted at that time.

FBI Director Christopher Wray said:

“We are still investigating the facts. I am committed to getting to the bottom of what happened in this particular matter, as well as reviewing our processes for responding to information that we receive from the public. It’s up to all Americans to be vigilant, and when members of the public contact us with concerns, we must act properly and quickly.

“We have spoken with victims and families, and deeply regret the additional pain this causes all those affected by this horrific tragedy. All of the men and women of the FBI are dedicated to keeping the American people safe, and are relentlessly committed to improving all that we do and how we do it.”




Oh snap!

I wonder how many calls they get a day?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 20:05:08


Post by: djones520


So the FBI failed to act on a tip that this was a probably danger to happen. The local police had been called in on this kid 36 times over the last four years. A psychiatric examination of the kid, that found self cutting and a fascination with firearms assessed he was not a danger. Many students and teachers at the school felt this kid was a danger.

Yet everyone is blaming the guns, and completely ignoring how everything about the system had already failed in the first place.

It's almost like some people have an agenda, and don't really want to get to the root of the matter behind these instances.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 20:06:16


Post by: skyth


Prestor Jon wrote:
https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-statement-on-the-shooting-in-parkland-florida/layout_view



FBI Statement on the Shooting in Parkland, Florida
On January 5, 2018, a person close to Nikolas Cruz contacted the FBI’s Public Access Line (PAL) tipline to report concerns about him. The caller provided information about Cruz’s gun ownership, desire to kill people, erratic behavior, and disturbing social media posts, as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting.

Under established protocols, the information provided by the caller should have been assessed as a potential threat to life. The information then should have been forwarded to the FBI Miami Field Office, where appropriate investigative steps would have been taken.

We have determined that these protocols were not followed for the information received by the PAL on January 5. The information was not provided to the Miami Field Office, and no further investigation was conducted at that time.

FBI Director Christopher Wray said:

“We are still investigating the facts. I am committed to getting to the bottom of what happened in this particular matter, as well as reviewing our processes for responding to information that we receive from the public. It’s up to all Americans to be vigilant, and when members of the public contact us with concerns, we must act properly and quickly.

“We have spoken with victims and families, and deeply regret the additional pain this causes all those affected by this horrific tragedy. All of the men and women of the FBI are dedicated to keeping the American people safe, and are relentlessly committed to improving all that we do and how we do it.”




Automatically Appended Next Post:
sirlynchmob wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
It's pointless to post school shooting threads to a discussion forum where discussion of US politics is banned, because no discussion is then possible. All you could post is variations of "that's bad".


Yes, this is true.

 Easy E wrote:
Can anyone think of a nightmare scenario that would change the game on this topic?


No. When the US tolerated 20 dead kindergartners with no significant changes is when gun owners and the NRA decided as a nation we're OK with this.


fixed that for you. The nation is not ok with it, just a certain 1/2 seems to be ok with it and fight against measures to fix it.

And as we're discussing this one, yet another mass shooting at a school just took place.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4030124/washington-state-highline-college-gunfire/?utm_source=AM980London&utm_medium=Facebook



What is your proposal? This is not a criticism but a question.


IMO drastic times call for drastic measures, put a halt on the sale of guns and ammunition while the second amendment is reworked or revoked. We need national gun laws, and treat guns like cars. registered, and licensed and insured. Disband the NRA and confiscate their assets and the profits from gun manufacturers to pay for the medical treatments of victims. like we did with big tobacco. the price in lives is to damn high so some people can own guns and falsely belief they're now safe. Because those with guns are still far more likely to use them on themselves or family members than to have it anywhere near a crime, let alone stop one.

Don't reply with the nonsense of if you outlaw guns then only outlaws will have guns, because as it is now the outlaws have all the guns they want, no questions asked and there has yet to be any good guys with guns stopping any of the shootings.

*please don't ban me but this is highly on topic here*
Spoiler:
Stop trump from weakening the few gun control measures that work
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/trump-nra-gun-safety-background-checks_us_5a84abdee4b0774f31d1b770
So even more people who shouldn't have guns can now buy them even if they would normally fail a background check.


this madness needs to stop, and the NRA and their paid puppets in Washington need to stop using these tragedies as commercials. More tragedies equates directly to more gun sales, and more guns leads to more tragedies. Ask yourself, is having a gun in your house worth the lives of these children and the thousands more who will die this year?

IMO no, #repealthesecond yes you have the right to defend yourself, but in exercising that right you are enabling these tragedies and if you are a member of the NRA you are directly responsible for them. The NRA is all about gun sales these days, no matter who they're sold to.



You do realize that your solution isn't just impractical and highly unlikely to ever come to fruition but some of it is actually illegal, right?


Since he's talking about amending the Constitution, I'm not sure what part would be illegal.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 20:08:01


Post by: yellowfever


Of course he does, he just doesn't care.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 20:09:26


Post by: feeder


Prestor Jon wrote:
 feeder wrote:
What about a law that prevents people from storing a gun in the same residence as someone who is barred from owing one? So if your severely unwell adult son is living in your home, you need to store your gun somewhere else?


Current Federal law only bans gun ownership to people who have "been adjudicated as a mental defective OR have you ever been committed to a mental institution" that's question f. on ATF form 4473. If you want to extend that to an adult that is "severely unwell" you'd have to legally define "severely unwell." I'm not sure treating mentally unwell people like convicted felons is going to help resolve our mental health issues as a nation.


Yeah, that's what I meant by "severely unwell", not just your average magaphile.

If you have someone in your home who is legally barred from owning a firearm, you are required to store your firearms elsewhere.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 20:11:38


Post by: sirlynchmob


yellowfever wrote:
Of course he does, he just doesn't care.


I do care though, see I care about the people not your gun.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 20:17:04


Post by: Frazzled


IMO drastic times call for drastic measures, put a halt on the sale of guns and ammunition while the second amendment is reworked or revoked. We need national gun laws, and treat guns like cars. registered, and licensed and insured. Disband the NRA and confiscate their assets and the profits from gun manufacturers to pay for the medical treatments of victims. like we did with big tobacco. the price in lives is to damn high so some people can own guns and falsely belief they're now safe. Because those with guns are still far more likely to use them on themselves or family members than to have it anywhere near a crime, let alone stop one.

Don't reply with the nonsense of if you outlaw guns then only outlaws will have guns, because as it is now the outlaws have all the guns they want, no questions asked and there has yet to be any good guys with guns stopping any of the shootings.


Lets unpack this a little bit.

IMO drastic times call for drastic measures, put a halt on the sale of guns and ammunition while the second amendment is reworked or revoked.

This would require a Constitutional Convention or ratification of 2/3s of the states I believe. That would take no small effort.

Disband the NRA and confiscate their assets and the profits from gun manufacturers to pay for the medical treatments of victims.

This violates the First Amendment at multiple levels and would require a Constitutional Convention or ratification of 2/3s of the states. Do you really think its a good idea to eliminate the First Amendment?

This also violates the 4th Amendment (convention yada yada). Do you really want the government to be able to seize assets for no crime?

EDIT: While I would use my best legal efforts to oppose a repeal of the 2nd Amendment, attempts to repeal the 4th and the 1st will immediately lead to war, of the shooting blowing everything up total war variety.

EDIT 2: I appreciate your honesty.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 20:18:25


Post by: Prestor Jon


 skyth wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:
https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-statement-on-the-shooting-in-parkland-florida/layout_view
Spoiler:



FBI Statement on the Shooting in Parkland, Florida
On January 5, 2018, a person close to Nikolas Cruz contacted the FBI’s Public Access Line (PAL) tipline to report concerns about him. The caller provided information about Cruz’s gun ownership, desire to kill people, erratic behavior, and disturbing social media posts, as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting.

Under established protocols, the information provided by the caller should have been assessed as a potential threat to life. The information then should have been forwarded to the FBI Miami Field Office, where appropriate investigative steps would have been taken.

We have determined that these protocols were not followed for the information received by the PAL on January 5. The information was not provided to the Miami Field Office, and no further investigation was conducted at that time.

FBI Director Christopher Wray said:

“We are still investigating the facts. I am committed to getting to the bottom of what happened in this particular matter, as well as reviewing our processes for responding to information that we receive from the public. It’s up to all Americans to be vigilant, and when members of the public contact us with concerns, we must act properly and quickly.

“We have spoken with victims and families, and deeply regret the additional pain this causes all those affected by this horrific tragedy. All of the men and women of the FBI are dedicated to keeping the American people safe, and are relentlessly committed to improving all that we do and how we do it.”




Automatically Appended Next Post:
sirlynchmob wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
It's pointless to post school shooting threads to a discussion forum where discussion of US politics is banned, because no discussion is then possible. All you could post is variations of "that's bad".


Yes, this is true.

 Easy E wrote:
Can anyone think of a nightmare scenario that would change the game on this topic?


No. When the US tolerated 20 dead kindergartners with no significant changes is when gun owners and the NRA decided as a nation we're OK with this.


fixed that for you. The nation is not ok with it, just a certain 1/2 seems to be ok with it and fight against measures to fix it.

And as we're discussing this one, yet another mass shooting at a school just took place.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4030124/washington-state-highline-college-gunfire/?utm_source=AM980London&utm_medium=Facebook



What is your proposal? This is not a criticism but a question.


IMO drastic times call for drastic measures, put a halt on the sale of guns and ammunition while the second amendment is reworked or revoked. We need national gun laws, and treat guns like cars. registered, and licensed and insured. Disband the NRA and confiscate their assets and the profits from gun manufacturers to pay for the medical treatments of victims. like we did with big tobacco. the price in lives is to damn high so some people can own guns and falsely belief they're now safe. Because those with guns are still far more likely to use them on themselves or family members than to have it anywhere near a crime, let alone stop one.

Don't reply with the nonsense of if you outlaw guns then only outlaws will have guns, because as it is now the outlaws have all the guns they want, no questions asked and there has yet to be any good guys with guns stopping any of the shootings.

*please don't ban me but this is highly on topic here*
[spoiler]Stop trump from weakening the few gun control measures that work
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/trump-nra-gun-safety-background-checks_us_5a84abdee4b0774f31d1b770
So even more people who shouldn't have guns can now buy them even if they would normally fail a background check.


this madness needs to stop, and the NRA and their paid puppets in Washington need to stop using these tragedies as commercials. More tragedies equates directly to more gun sales, and more guns leads to more tragedies. Ask yourself, is having a gun in your house worth the lives of these children and the thousands more who will die this year?

IMO no, #repealthesecond yes you have the right to defend yourself, but in exercising that right you are enabling these tragedies and if you are a member of the NRA you are directly responsible for them. The NRA is all about gun sales these days, no matter who they're sold to.

[/spoiler]

You do realize that your solution isn't just impractical and highly unlikely to ever come to fruition but some of it is actually illegal, right?


Since he's talking about amending the Constitution, I'm not sure what part would be illegal.


Amending the constitution is the part that is impractical and highly unlikely, the illegal part is disbanding the NRA, seizing their assets and seizing profits from gun manufacturers. The Federal govt didn't seize the assets or profits of the Tobacco Industry, state AGs sued tobacco companies in court, won the case and were awarded monetary compensation as part of the judgement.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 20:22:25


Post by: ChargerIIC


sirlynchmob wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
It's pointless to post school shooting threads to a discussion forum where discussion of US politics is banned, because no discussion is then possible. All you could post is variations of "that's bad".


Yes, this is true.

 Easy E wrote:
Can anyone think of a nightmare scenario that would change the game on this topic?


No. When the US tolerated 20 dead kindergartners with no significant changes is when gun owners and the NRA decided as a nation we're OK with this.


fixed that for you. The nation is not ok with it, just a certain 1/2 seems to be ok with it and fight against measures to fix it.

And as we're discussing this one, yet another mass shooting at a school just took place.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4030124/washington-state-highline-college-gunfire/?utm_source=AM980London&utm_medium=Facebook



What is your proposal? This is not a criticism but a question.


IMO drastic times call for drastic measures, put a halt on the sale of guns and ammunition while the second amendment is reworked or revoked. We need national gun laws, and treat guns like cars. registered, and licensed and insured. Disband the NRA and confiscate their assets and the profits from gun manufacturers to pay for the medical treatments of victims. like we did with big tobacco. the price in lives is to damn high so some people can own guns and falsely belief they're now safe. Because those with guns are still far more likely to use them on themselves or family members than to have it anywhere near a crime, let alone stop one.

Don't reply with the nonsense of if you outlaw guns then only outlaws will have guns, because as it is now the outlaws have all the guns they want, no questions asked and there has yet to be any good guys with guns stopping any of the shootings.

*please don't ban me but this is highly on topic here*
Spoiler:
Stop trump from weakening the few gun control measures that work
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/trump-nra-gun-safety-background-checks_us_5a84abdee4b0774f31d1b770
So even more people who shouldn't have guns can now buy them even if they would normally fail a background check.


this madness needs to stop, and the NRA and their paid puppets in Washington need to stop using these tragedies as commercials. More tragedies equates directly to more gun sales, and more guns leads to more tragedies. Ask yourself, is having a gun in your house worth the lives of these children and the thousands more who will die this year?

IMO no, #repealthesecond yes you have the right to defend yourself, but in exercising that right you are enabling these tragedies and if you are a member of the NRA you are directly responsible for them. The NRA is all about gun sales these days, no matter who they're sold to.



Can you imagine how many people you'd have to shoot while implementing this? We'd have martial law in a week, just to handle the fallout.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 20:24:29


Post by: kronk


 skyth wrote:


Since he's talking about amending the Constitution, I'm not sure what part would be illegal.


I'll bite.

1) put a halt on the sale of guns and ammunition while the second amendment is reworked or revoked.

You can't halt the sale of guns and ammunition until AFTER the second amendment is reworked or revoked.


2) Disband the NRA

Amendment I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

3) and confiscate their assets and the profits from gun manufacturers to pay for the medical treatments of victims.

You can't seize assets without just cause and must go through a civil or criminal trial to do so.

4) like we did with big tobacco.

You glossed over the part where 15 (or so) states sued them to pay for medical treatment. They settled, of course, but it took the states Attorney's General to do so.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 20:24:32


Post by: Frazzled





Can you imagine how many people you'd have to shoot while implementing this? We'd have martial law in a week, just to handle the fallout.


I would proffer that would start a second Civil War and much of the nation seceding.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 20:24:55


Post by: Ouze


 djones520 wrote:
So the FBI failed to act on a tip that this was a probably danger to happen. The local police had been called in on this kid 36 times over the last four years. A psychiatric examination of the kid, that found self cutting and a fascination with firearms assessed he was not a danger. Many students and teachers at the school felt this kid was a danger.

Yet everyone is blaming the guns, and completely ignoring how everything about the system had already failed in the first place.


Nothing he did was illegal until he started shooting. What was the FBI supposed to do?

That's where the structural problem is - since firearm ownership is a constitutional right, it's very hard to prevent someone, even someone who very obviously shouldn't have them; from getting them.

My wife's family has a lot of mental illness in it. Her brother is schizophrenic, and when he stops taking his medication, as is his wont, you really can't do anything about it at all. We've done a lot of legwork but it's nearly impossible to have someone taken into protective or mental custody if they're even slightly lucid, sometimes.



School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 20:25:14


Post by: sirlynchmob


 Frazzled wrote:
IMO drastic times call for drastic measures, put a halt on the sale of guns and ammunition while the second amendment is reworked or revoked. We need national gun laws, and treat guns like cars. registered, and licensed and insured. Disband the NRA and confiscate their assets and the profits from gun manufacturers to pay for the medical treatments of victims. like we did with big tobacco. the price in lives is to damn high so some people can own guns and falsely belief they're now safe. Because those with guns are still far more likely to use them on themselves or family members than to have it anywhere near a crime, let alone stop one.

Don't reply with the nonsense of if you outlaw guns then only outlaws will have guns, because as it is now the outlaws have all the guns they want, no questions asked and there has yet to be any good guys with guns stopping any of the shootings.


Lets unpack this a little bit.

IMO drastic times call for drastic measures, put a halt on the sale of guns and ammunition while the second amendment is reworked or revoked.

This would require a Constitutional Convention or ratification of 2/3s of the states I believe. That would take no small effort.

Disband the NRA and confiscate their assets and the profits from gun manufacturers to pay for the medical treatments of victims.
This violates the First Amendment at multiple levels and would require a Constitutional Convention or ratification of 2/3s of the states. Do you really think its a good idea to eliminate the First Amendment?

This also violates the 4th Amendment (convention yada yada). Do you really want the government to be able to seize assets for no crime?

and since just taking the profits from the gun compansies is causing issues, let's just freeze them til it's work out.


Like I said, we did it for the tobacco companies, multiple times, it can be done without a convention for the NRA. And we still have our FIrst amendment.

the government currently seizes assets for no crimes, see eminent domain.

You're right though, my plan would take significant effort and a lot of work, but all things worth doing usually do. Let's remember the current plan though, do nothing, make getting guns easier, and wonder why gun violence is getting worse.



School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 20:40:39


Post by: Prestor Jon


sirlynchmob wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:
IMO drastic times call for drastic measures, put a halt on the sale of guns and ammunition while the second amendment is reworked or revoked. We need national gun laws, and treat guns like cars. registered, and licensed and insured. Disband the NRA and confiscate their assets and the profits from gun manufacturers to pay for the medical treatments of victims. like we did with big tobacco. the price in lives is to damn high so some people can own guns and falsely belief they're now safe. Because those with guns are still far more likely to use them on themselves or family members than to have it anywhere near a crime, let alone stop one.

Don't reply with the nonsense of if you outlaw guns then only outlaws will have guns, because as it is now the outlaws have all the guns they want, no questions asked and there has yet to be any good guys with guns stopping any of the shootings.


Lets unpack this a little bit.

IMO drastic times call for drastic measures, put a halt on the sale of guns and ammunition while the second amendment is reworked or revoked.

This would require a Constitutional Convention or ratification of 2/3s of the states I believe. That would take no small effort.

Disband the NRA and confiscate their assets and the profits from gun manufacturers to pay for the medical treatments of victims.
This violates the First Amendment at multiple levels and would require a Constitutional Convention or ratification of 2/3s of the states. Do you really think its a good idea to eliminate the First Amendment?

This also violates the 4th Amendment (convention yada yada). Do you really want the government to be able to seize assets for no crime?

and since just taking the profits from the gun compansies is causing issues, let's just freeze them til it's work out.


Like I said, we did it for the tobacco companies, multiple times, it can be done without a convention for the NRA. And we still have our FIrst amendment.

the government currently seizes assets for no crimes, see eminent domain.

You're right though, my plan would take significant effort and a lot of work, but all things worth doing usually do. Let's remember the current plan though, do nothing, make getting guns easier, and wonder why gun violence is getting worse.



States won lawsuits against the Tobacco companies because they sued the companies for deliberately hiding material facts about their product (that it was addictive and caused cancer) and the trial proved that the companies did in fact do that. What is it that you think gun manufacturers are hiding from the public? Everybody knows guns shoot bullets and are very dangerous lethal weapons. You can't just sue gun manufacturers for selling guns, that's not illegal and even if Congress made gun sales and gun ownership illegal the manufacturers would still be immune from post facto prosecution.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Ouze wrote:
 djones520 wrote:
So the FBI failed to act on a tip that this was a probably danger to happen. The local police had been called in on this kid 36 times over the last four years. A psychiatric examination of the kid, that found self cutting and a fascination with firearms assessed he was not a danger. Many students and teachers at the school felt this kid was a danger.

Yet everyone is blaming the guns, and completely ignoring how everything about the system had already failed in the first place.


Nothing he did was illegal until he started shooting. What was the FBI supposed to do?

That's where the structural problem is - since firearm ownership is a constitutional right, it's very hard to prevent someone, even someone who very obviously shouldn't have them; from getting them.

My wife's family has a lot of mental illness in it. Her brother is schizophrenic, and when he stops taking his medication, as is his wont, you really can't do anything about it at all. We've done a lot of legwork but it's nearly impossible to have someone taken into protective or mental custody if they're even slightly lucid, sometimes.



Regardless of the 2nd amendment the bigger issue is that it is very difficult for the State to involuntarily commit somebody or force them to take medication. That in and of itself is not a bad thing, it should be difficult for the State to imprison people against their will or to alter their bodies against their will. Nobody wants to live under conditions where telling somebody you're depressed can get you locked up. We've created a society that manufacturers a certain number of mentally ill people. Is sweeping these people under the rug by rounding them up and locking them away the best answer? Are just going to keep on trucking as a society and involuntarily commit another crop of mentally ill people every year? That sounds like dealing with a symptom not a cause.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 20:58:03


Post by: Vaktathi


 skyth wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:
https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-statement-on-the-shooting-in-parkland-florida/layout_view



FBI Statement on the Shooting in Parkland, Florida
On January 5, 2018, a person close to Nikolas Cruz contacted the FBI’s Public Access Line (PAL) tipline to report concerns about him. The caller provided information about Cruz’s gun ownership, desire to kill people, erratic behavior, and disturbing social media posts, as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting.

Under established protocols, the information provided by the caller should have been assessed as a potential threat to life. The information then should have been forwarded to the FBI Miami Field Office, where appropriate investigative steps would have been taken.

We have determined that these protocols were not followed for the information received by the PAL on January 5. The information was not provided to the Miami Field Office, and no further investigation was conducted at that time.

FBI Director Christopher Wray said:

“We are still investigating the facts. I am committed to getting to the bottom of what happened in this particular matter, as well as reviewing our processes for responding to information that we receive from the public. It’s up to all Americans to be vigilant, and when members of the public contact us with concerns, we must act properly and quickly.

“We have spoken with victims and families, and deeply regret the additional pain this causes all those affected by this horrific tragedy. All of the men and women of the FBI are dedicated to keeping the American people safe, and are relentlessly committed to improving all that we do and how we do it.”




Automatically Appended Next Post:
sirlynchmob wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
It's pointless to post school shooting threads to a discussion forum where discussion of US politics is banned, because no discussion is then possible. All you could post is variations of "that's bad".


Yes, this is true.

 Easy E wrote:
Can anyone think of a nightmare scenario that would change the game on this topic?


No. When the US tolerated 20 dead kindergartners with no significant changes is when gun owners and the NRA decided as a nation we're OK with this.


fixed that for you. The nation is not ok with it, just a certain 1/2 seems to be ok with it and fight against measures to fix it.

And as we're discussing this one, yet another mass shooting at a school just took place.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4030124/washington-state-highline-college-gunfire/?utm_source=AM980London&utm_medium=Facebook



What is your proposal? This is not a criticism but a question.


IMO drastic times call for drastic measures, put a halt on the sale of guns and ammunition while the second amendment is reworked or revoked. We need national gun laws, and treat guns like cars. registered, and licensed and insured. Disband the NRA and confiscate their assets and the profits from gun manufacturers to pay for the medical treatments of victims. like we did with big tobacco. the price in lives is to damn high so some people can own guns and falsely belief they're now safe. Because those with guns are still far more likely to use them on themselves or family members than to have it anywhere near a crime, let alone stop one.

Don't reply with the nonsense of if you outlaw guns then only outlaws will have guns, because as it is now the outlaws have all the guns they want, no questions asked and there has yet to be any good guys with guns stopping any of the shootings.

*please don't ban me but this is highly on topic here*
Spoiler:
Stop trump from weakening the few gun control measures that work
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/trump-nra-gun-safety-background-checks_us_5a84abdee4b0774f31d1b770
So even more people who shouldn't have guns can now buy them even if they would normally fail a background check.


this madness needs to stop, and the NRA and their paid puppets in Washington need to stop using these tragedies as commercials. More tragedies equates directly to more gun sales, and more guns leads to more tragedies. Ask yourself, is having a gun in your house worth the lives of these children and the thousands more who will die this year?

IMO no, #repealthesecond yes you have the right to defend yourself, but in exercising that right you are enabling these tragedies and if you are a member of the NRA you are directly responsible for them. The NRA is all about gun sales these days, no matter who they're sold to.



You do realize that your solution isn't just impractical and highly unlikely to ever come to fruition but some of it is actually illegal, right?


Since he's talking about amending the Constitution, I'm not sure what part would be illegal.
much as many dont like the NRA, unilaterally seizing it, breaking it up, and confiscating its assets would very much be illegal on multiple different levels, even if the 2nd amendment was repealed.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 21:17:05


Post by: Frazzled




Like I said, we did it for the tobacco companies, multiple times, it can be done without a convention for the NRA. And we still have our FIrst amendment.





Apologies but that is not accurate.
1. The tobacco companies made a large settlement as they were charged with knowingly selling a harmful product. To be comparable, the gun makers would have to sell products that they knew had technical problems that made them unsafe to use.

the government currently seizes assets for no crimes, see eminent domain.

Eminent domain is related to land, not the monetary assets of private groups (NRA) or companies.

You're right though, my plan would take significant effort and a lot of work, but all things worth doing usually do. Let's remember the current plan though, do nothing, make getting guns easier, and wonder why gun violence is getting worse.

Your plan violates the basic tenants of three of the Bill of Rights. Its not a thins "worth doing," unless your intent is to start a war that kills millions (if we use Civil War numbers adjusted to current populations).

Could you mayhaps modify your proposal to one that doesn't do that?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 21:17:57


Post by: Ouze


Prestor Jon wrote:
Regardless of the 2nd amendment the bigger issue is that it is very difficult for the State to involuntarily commit somebody or force them to take medication. That in and of itself is not a bad thing, it should be difficult for the State to imprison people against their will or to alter their bodies against their will. Nobody wants to live under conditions where telling somebody you're depressed can get you locked up.


I agree, but I also feel obliged to point out that as it lays now, nothing is keeping my brother in law from buying as many firearms as he wants to despite him very definitely not being a person who should own them. This goes back to the point about how the FBI was tipped off but did nothing - what could they have done if he hadn't committed a crime yet?

I don't know what the solution is but it's a real problem. I don't agree with Sirlynchmobs exact approach but I also think our current interpretations of 2nd amendment is very problematic. Since there is no will to change it, this is not a problem that is going to be fixed and I can't really see anything changing that.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 21:40:28


Post by: CptJake


Prestor Jon wrote:
 skyth wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:
https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-statement-on-the-shooting-in-parkland-florida/layout_view
Spoiler:



FBI Statement on the Shooting in Parkland, Florida
On January 5, 2018, a person close to Nikolas Cruz contacted the FBI’s Public Access Line (PAL) tipline to report concerns about him. The caller provided information about Cruz’s gun ownership, desire to kill people, erratic behavior, and disturbing social media posts, as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting.

Under established protocols, the information provided by the caller should have been assessed as a potential threat to life. The information then should have been forwarded to the FBI Miami Field Office, where appropriate investigative steps would have been taken.

We have determined that these protocols were not followed for the information received by the PAL on January 5. The information was not provided to the Miami Field Office, and no further investigation was conducted at that time.

FBI Director Christopher Wray said:

“We are still investigating the facts. I am committed to getting to the bottom of what happened in this particular matter, as well as reviewing our processes for responding to information that we receive from the public. It’s up to all Americans to be vigilant, and when members of the public contact us with concerns, we must act properly and quickly.

“We have spoken with victims and families, and deeply regret the additional pain this causes all those affected by this horrific tragedy. All of the men and women of the FBI are dedicated to keeping the American people safe, and are relentlessly committed to improving all that we do and how we do it.”




Automatically Appended Next Post:
sirlynchmob wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
It's pointless to post school shooting threads to a discussion forum where discussion of US politics is banned, because no discussion is then possible. All you could post is variations of "that's bad".


Yes, this is true.

 Easy E wrote:
Can anyone think of a nightmare scenario that would change the game on this topic?


No. When the US tolerated 20 dead kindergartners with no significant changes is when gun owners and the NRA decided as a nation we're OK with this.


fixed that for you. The nation is not ok with it, just a certain 1/2 seems to be ok with it and fight against measures to fix it.

And as we're discussing this one, yet another mass shooting at a school just took place.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4030124/washington-state-highline-college-gunfire/?utm_source=AM980London&utm_medium=Facebook



What is your proposal? This is not a criticism but a question.


IMO drastic times call for drastic measures, put a halt on the sale of guns and ammunition while the second amendment is reworked or revoked. We need national gun laws, and treat guns like cars. registered, and licensed and insured. Disband the NRA and confiscate their assets and the profits from gun manufacturers to pay for the medical treatments of victims. like we did with big tobacco. the price in lives is to damn high so some people can own guns and falsely belief they're now safe. Because those with guns are still far more likely to use them on themselves or family members than to have it anywhere near a crime, let alone stop one.

Don't reply with the nonsense of if you outlaw guns then only outlaws will have guns, because as it is now the outlaws have all the guns they want, no questions asked and there has yet to be any good guys with guns stopping any of the shootings.

*please don't ban me but this is highly on topic here*
[spoiler]Stop trump from weakening the few gun control measures that work
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/trump-nra-gun-safety-background-checks_us_5a84abdee4b0774f31d1b770
So even more people who shouldn't have guns can now buy them even if they would normally fail a background check.


this madness needs to stop, and the NRA and their paid puppets in Washington need to stop using these tragedies as commercials. More tragedies equates directly to more gun sales, and more guns leads to more tragedies. Ask yourself, is having a gun in your house worth the lives of these children and the thousands more who will die this year?

IMO no, #repealthesecond yes you have the right to defend yourself, but in exercising that right you are enabling these tragedies and if you are a member of the NRA you are directly responsible for them. The NRA is all about gun sales these days, no matter who they're sold to.

[/spoiler]

You do realize that your solution isn't just impractical and highly unlikely to ever come to fruition but some of it is actually illegal, right?


Since he's talking about amending the Constitution, I'm not sure what part would be illegal.


Amending the constitution is the part that is impractical and highly unlikely, the illegal part is disbanding the NRA, seizing their assets and seizing profits from gun manufacturers. The Federal govt didn't seize the assets or profits of the Tobacco Industry, state AGs sued tobacco companies in court, won the case and were awarded monetary compensation as part of the judgement.


Halting all gun and ammo sales until the 2nd Amendment is amended to his satisfaction would be illegal as well. No way that holds up in court.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 21:42:03


Post by: Frazzled


 Ouze wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:
Regardless of the 2nd amendment the bigger issue is that it is very difficult for the State to involuntarily commit somebody or force them to take medication. That in and of itself is not a bad thing, it should be difficult for the State to imprison people against their will or to alter their bodies against their will. Nobody wants to live under conditions where telling somebody you're depressed can get you locked up.


I agree, but I also feel obliged to point out that as it lays now, nothing is keeping my brother in law from buying as many firearms as he wants to despite him very definitely not being a person who should own them. This goes back to the point about how the FBI was tipped off but did nothing - what could they have done if he hadn't committed a crime yet?

I don't know what the solution is but it's a real problem. I don't agree with Sirlynchmobs exact approach but I also think our current interpretations of 2nd amendment is very problematic. Since there is no will to change it, this is not a problem that is going to be fixed and I can't really see anything changing that.


Here's where legislation can be made. If a person has been reported as being mentally ill, then their firearms can be temporarily seized or removed to another person until it is adjudicated that that person is mentally healthy, sufficient to own firearms. This would require court adjudication with a right for the person to have counsel and contest.

Similarly, if they are reported as being mentally ill, then they go on the NICS do not sell them firearms list. Further the law would require police, mental health, insurance etc professionals to report this.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 21:51:30


Post by: daedalus


 Frazzled wrote:

Here's where legislation can be made. If a person has been reported as being mentally ill, then their firearms can be temporarily seized or removed to another person until it is adjudicated that that person is mentally healthy, sufficient to own firearms. This would require court adjudication with a right for the person to have counsel and contest.

Similarly, if they are reported as being mentally ill, then they go on the NICS do not sell them firearms list. Further the law would require police, mental health, insurance etc professionals to report this.


What is mental illness though? What does it mean before someone is considered mentally ill? Can someone stop being mentally ill? What does that take?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 22:00:31


Post by: jmurph


Yeah, the issue is that current SC has veered from previous precedent holding in Heller that an individual right to possess firearms. The basically overturned 70 years of precedent, but did not go so far as to say that the right was unlimited and did give some examples of presumptively lawful limitations including laws that prohibit firearm possession by felons and the mentally ill, forbid firearm possession in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings; and Impose conditions on the commercial sale of firearms.

The NRA has been a big player in expanding gun ownership (not surprising as they are an organization representing weapon manufacturer interests),and have had a focused well funded campaign that has reaped huge dividends, but that still doesn't mean they can unilaterally be squelched. Rather, it is indicative of the constant values struggle in an open society- how do you combat the massive monetary interests that profit at the expense of the citizenry? Especially when large segments of the citizenry support them? But that gets back into politics, doesn't it?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 22:05:56


Post by: Frazzled


 daedalus wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:

Here's where legislation can be made. If a person has been reported as being mentally ill, then their firearms can be temporarily seized or removed to another person until it is adjudicated that that person is mentally healthy, sufficient to own firearms. This would require court adjudication with a right for the person to have counsel and contest.

Similarly, if they are reported as being mentally ill, then they go on the NICS do not sell them firearms list. Further the law would require police, mental health, insurance etc professionals to report this.


What is mental illness though? What does it mean before someone is considered mentally ill? Can someone stop being mentally ill? What does that take?


These can be defined. After all a version of it is on the NICS test.
Further, California has a version of that.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 22:07:59


Post by: daedalus


I'm not opposed to the notion. They're just tricky questions to be answered. Particularly the last two.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 22:11:11


Post by: Prestor Jon


 Ouze wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:
Regardless of the 2nd amendment the bigger issue is that it is very difficult for the State to involuntarily commit somebody or force them to take medication. That in and of itself is not a bad thing, it should be difficult for the State to imprison people against their will or to alter their bodies against their will. Nobody wants to live under conditions where telling somebody you're depressed can get you locked up.


I agree, but I also feel obliged to point out that as it lays now, nothing is keeping my brother in law from buying as many firearms as he wants to despite him very definitely not being a person who should own them. This goes back to the point about how the FBI was tipped off but did nothing - what could they have done if he hadn't committed a crime yet?

I don't know what the solution is but it's a real problem. I don't agree with Sirlynchmobs exact approach but I also think our current interpretations of 2nd amendment is very problematic. Since there is no will to change it, this is not a problem that is going to be fixed and I can't really see anything changing that.


I don't want your brother to own firearms either if his mental illness makes him a danger to himself and/or others. However, regardless of how the 2nd amendment is interpreted by the courts barring somebody from exercising their rights and freedom simply for being ill has a host of legal obstacles to clear.

Our justice system is based on allowing the State to punish people for crimes they have committed. If you chose to do X then the State can charge with a crime, put you on trial and punish you if you get convicted. That is the system we have in place for stripping rights, including 2A rights, from people. You have your day in court you get adjudicated as mentally defective and you lose your 2A rights and can be involuntarily committed. You have your day in court and you are convicted of a felony, you lose your 2A rights and can be imprisoned. If you go to a psychiatrist and are diagnosed with a mental illness such as schizophrenia you haven't actually done anything wrong, you just have an illness.

You and your brother in law are both adult US citizens, residing in the US, with clean criminal records so we need to find a more justifiable reason for the State to deprive your brother in law of his rights and diminish his personhood other then him having a mental illness. He didn't do anything that caused him to be mentally ill that would justify punishing him for it, being schizophrenic is just who he is. The State shouldn't criminalize who you are the State should only criminalize what you choose to do. I really don't trust the Federal govt to handle that kind of slippery slope issue because it requires much more than an oversimplified one size fits all solution.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 22:19:19


Post by: Frazzled


 daedalus wrote:
I'm not opposed to the notion. They're just tricky questions to be answered. Particularly the last two.

Oh of course. As a Bill of Rights Advocate I understand completely. But a form of this that protects the rights of the person while following constitutional muster and court precedent can be made. Everyone is focused on their two camps and calling each other names.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 22:43:29


Post by: BaronIveagh


Rosebuddy wrote:

It's pointless to post school shooting threads to a discussion forum where discussion of US politics is banned, because no discussion is then possible. All you could post is variations of "that's bad".


That's Bad. Both the ban on politics and the school shooting. But if if happened in England and someone shot up a school yelling 'HEIL BREXIT!' that would be bad, but perfectly acceptable to discuss the political side of it.

The mods are English. Go Figure.

That said, I think that there should be a better look into WHY this seems to happen in the US pretty much exclusively. It's not guns, there are other countries with large scale private ownership of guns who don't have mass shootings anything like the US.

So what causes it?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 22:45:53


Post by: Ouze


Prestor Jon wrote:
I really don't trust the Federal govt to handle that kind of slippery slope issue because it requires much more than an oversimplified one size fits all solution.


So again, the thought is that when the people who know you best know you have impaired judgement and should not own firearms, your right to own firearms trumps that, which circles back to the earlier question: what was the FBI supposed to do? You're going to see the FBI thrown under the bus a lot in the next few days over their failure to act on the tip but there was no meaningful action they could have taken. You know the state can't take action on that; it would have to be at the federal level. But I agree that as the constitution is currently interpreted, this is how it lays.

Prestor Jon wrote:
He didn't do anything that caused him to be mentally ill that would justify punishing him for it, being schizophrenic is just who he is. The State shouldn't criminalize who you are the State should only criminalize what you choose to do.


A person who is mentally ill by definition can't make rational choices in their behavior. No right is unlimited and society would be unworkable if it were, so I'm going to have to disagree with you: I think established mental illness is definitely something that should preclude you from owning firearms. Yes, I know there are add on questions there but that is the base ideal I am comfortable with.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Howard A Treesong wrote:
How prevalent is the conspiracy theory of ‘crisis actors’? Is it just an internet meme or is there genuine belief these shootings are staged?


To circle back to this again, there are externalities helping to change that. Of course.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 23:07:29


Post by: Mario


For all the people worrying about constitutional amendments:
https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/the-freedom-of-an-armed-society/
Arendt offers two points that are salient to our thinking about guns: for one, they insert a hierarchy of some kind, but fundamental nonetheless, and thereby undermine equality. But furthermore, guns pose a monumental challenge to freedom, and particular, the liberty that is the hallmark of any democracy worthy of the name — that is, freedom of speech. Guns do communicate, after all, but in a way that is contrary to free speech aspirations: for, guns chasten speech.

This becomes clear if only you pry a little more deeply into the N.R.A.’s logic behind an armed society. An armed society is polite, by their thinking, precisely because guns would compel everyone to tamp down eccentric behavior, and refrain from actions that might seem threatening. The suggestion is that guns liberally interspersed throughout society would cause us all to walk gingerly — not make any sudden, unexpected moves — and watch what we say, how we act, whom we might offend.

As our Constitution provides, however, liberty entails precisely the freedom to be reckless, within limits, also the freedom to insult and offend as the case may be. The Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld our right to experiment in offensive language and ideas, and in some cases, offensive action and speech. Such experimentation is inherent to our freedom as such. But guns by their nature do not mix with this experiment — they don’t mix with taking offense. They are combustible ingredients in assembly and speech.

I often think of the armed protestor who showed up to one of the famously raucous town hall hearings on Obamacare in the summer of 2009. The media was very worked up over this man, who bore a sign that invoked a famous quote of Thomas Jefferson, accusing the president of tyranny. But no one engaged him at the protest; no one dared approach him even, for discussion or debate — though this was a town hall meeting, intended for just such purposes. Such is the effect of guns on speech — and assembly. Like it or not, they transform the bearer, and end the conversation in some fundamental way. They announce that the conversation is not completely unbounded, unfettered and free; there is or can be a limit to negotiation and debate — definitively.



School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 23:16:46


Post by: BaronIveagh


Mario wrote:
For all the people worrying about constitutional amendments:
https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/the-freedom-of-an-armed-society/
Arendt offers two points that are salient to our thinking about guns: for one, they insert a hierarchy of some kind, but fundamental nonetheless, and thereby undermine equality. But furthermore, guns pose a monumental challenge to freedom, and particular, the liberty that is the hallmark of any democracy worthy of the name — that is, freedom of speech. Guns do communicate, after all, but in a way that is contrary to free speech aspirations: for, guns chasten speech.

This becomes clear if only you pry a little more deeply into the N.R.A.’s logic behind an armed society. An armed society is polite, by their thinking, precisely because guns would compel everyone to tamp down eccentric behavior, and refrain from actions that might seem threatening. The suggestion is that guns liberally interspersed throughout society would cause us all to walk gingerly — not make any sudden, unexpected moves — and watch what we say, how we act, whom we might offend.

As our Constitution provides, however, liberty entails precisely the freedom to be reckless, within limits, also the freedom to insult and offend as the case may be. The Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld our right to experiment in offensive language and ideas, and in some cases, offensive action and speech. Such experimentation is inherent to our freedom as such. But guns by their nature do not mix with this experiment — they don’t mix with taking offense. They are combustible ingredients in assembly and speech.

I often think of the armed protestor who showed up to one of the famously raucous town hall hearings on Obamacare in the summer of 2009. The media was very worked up over this man, who bore a sign that invoked a famous quote of Thomas Jefferson, accusing the president of tyranny. But no one engaged him at the protest; no one dared approach him even, for discussion or debate — though this was a town hall meeting, intended for just such purposes. Such is the effect of guns on speech — and assembly. Like it or not, they transform the bearer, and end the conversation in some fundamental way. They announce that the conversation is not completely unbounded, unfettered and free; there is or can be a limit to negotiation and debate — definitively.



And yet, the need to defend one's self from Tyranny, or simply one's neighbors, still exists. It comes up again and again in the courts that the duty of the police is NOT to save you. Some truly shocking cases have taken place where, for example, the police stood by and let a man be stabbed to half to death on a subway without intervening. Where response times are so long that the police do little better than come to pick up the bodies. To depend on the police for your safety is the height of folly.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/16 23:30:31


Post by: feeder


 BaronIveagh wrote:
Mario wrote:
For all the people worrying about constitutional amendments:
https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/the-freedom-of-an-armed-society/
Arendt offers two points that are salient to our thinking about guns: for one, they insert a hierarchy of some kind, but fundamental nonetheless, and thereby undermine equality. But furthermore, guns pose a monumental challenge to freedom, and particular, the liberty that is the hallmark of any democracy worthy of the name — that is, freedom of speech. Guns do communicate, after all, but in a way that is contrary to free speech aspirations: for, guns chasten speech.

This becomes clear if only you pry a little more deeply into the N.R.A.’s logic behind an armed society. An armed society is polite, by their thinking, precisely because guns would compel everyone to tamp down eccentric behavior, and refrain from actions that might seem threatening. The suggestion is that guns liberally interspersed throughout society would cause us all to walk gingerly — not make any sudden, unexpected moves — and watch what we say, how we act, whom we might offend.

As our Constitution provides, however, liberty entails precisely the freedom to be reckless, within limits, also the freedom to insult and offend as the case may be. The Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld our right to experiment in offensive language and ideas, and in some cases, offensive action and speech. Such experimentation is inherent to our freedom as such. But guns by their nature do not mix with this experiment — they don’t mix with taking offense. They are combustible ingredients in assembly and speech.

I often think of the armed protestor who showed up to one of the famously raucous town hall hearings on Obamacare in the summer of 2009. The media was very worked up over this man, who bore a sign that invoked a famous quote of Thomas Jefferson, accusing the president of tyranny. But no one engaged him at the protest; no one dared approach him even, for discussion or debate — though this was a town hall meeting, intended for just such purposes. Such is the effect of guns on speech — and assembly. Like it or not, they transform the bearer, and end the conversation in some fundamental way. They announce that the conversation is not completely unbounded, unfettered and free; there is or can be a limit to negotiation and debate — definitively.



And yet, the need to defend one's self from Tyranny, or simply one's neighbors, still exists. It comes up again and again in the courts that the duty of the police is NOT to save you. Some truly shocking cases have taken place where, for example, the police stood by and let a man be stabbed to half to death on a subway without intervening. Where response times are so long that the police do little better than come to pick up the bodies. To depend on the police for your safety is the height of folly.


Indeed, a cadre of American poets once famously opined that 911 is a joke.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 00:15:49


Post by: BaronIveagh


 feeder wrote:

Indeed, a cadre of American poets once famously opined that 911 is a joke.


Police response time to my parents house is half an hour. I once called 911 to report my car being stolen up in Salamanca. It took the police two hours to drive three blocks. When I asked 'WTF?' I was told I called in the middle of shift change and no one could be bothered.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 00:18:42


Post by: sirlynchmob


 Frazzled wrote:


Like I said, we did it for the tobacco companies, multiple times, it can be done without a convention for the NRA. And we still have our FIrst amendment.





Apologies but that is not accurate.
1. The tobacco companies made a large settlement as they were charged with knowingly selling a harmful product. To be comparable, the gun makers would have to sell products that they knew had technical problems that made them unsafe to use.

the government currently seizes assets for no crimes, see eminent domain.

Eminent domain is related to land, not the monetary assets of private groups (NRA) or companies.

You're right though, my plan would take significant effort and a lot of work, but all things worth doing usually do. Let's remember the current plan though, do nothing, make getting guns easier, and wonder why gun violence is getting worse.

Your plan violates the basic tenants of three of the Bill of Rights. Its not a thins "worth doing," unless your intent is to start a war that kills millions (if we use Civil War numbers adjusted to current populations).

Could you mayhaps modify your proposal to one that doesn't do that?


Sure, just repeal the second and ban all guns.

but think about this for a bit
unless your intent is to start a war that kills millions (if we use Civil War


people are willing to go to war, killing more people to protect their guns, yet will do absolutely nothing and even argue againt doing anything to save children.

sure it's easy to pick apary my idea, but I also noticed no one answered my question directly, but they answered none the less. their guns mean more than the lives of children and thus I hold all gun owners as being complicit in all school shootings.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 00:19:18


Post by: Ouze


 BaronIveagh wrote:
Police response time to my parents house is half an hour. I once called 911 to report my car being stolen up in Salamanca. It took the police two hours to drive three blocks. When I asked 'WTF?' I was told I called in the middle of shift change and no one could be bothered.


I believe it. Where I live there is no local police department - we have to depend on the county sheriff. The last time we called 911, they took 40 minutes to show up.

I definitely am not an anti-gun person by any measure.

sirlynchmob wrote:
their guns mean more than the lives of children and thus I hold all gun owners as being complicit in all school shootings.


That's more than a little silly. It's possible to be a firearm owner and also support at least some gun control measures - not everyone is a Sith lord on the topic. I dont think you'd find many people on this forum protesting a ban on bump stocks, for example, were it to have happened.




School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 00:41:59


Post by: BaronIveagh


 Ouze wrote:
I dont think you'd find many people on this forum protesting a ban on bump stocks, for example, were it to have happened.


No, I believe in banning these. I'm a fairly good shot and I can't hit gak with one. Only use is mass casualty events. Ditch them.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 00:46:18


Post by: CptJake


sirlynchmob wrote:

people are willing to go to war, killing more people to protect their guns, yet will do absolutely nothing and even argue againt doing anything to save children.

sure it's easy to pick apary my idea, but I also noticed no one answered my question directly, but they answered none the less. their guns mean more than the lives of children and thus I hold all gun owners as being complicit in all school shootings.




I hold you and your ilk as complacent in every school shooting because you put these poor kids into environments where there are few people trained and equipped to protect them.


Look at Israeli schools...


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 00:46:55


Post by: Breotan


What point is it to put the onus on mental health evaluation and intervention if the people charged with such duties don't do their job? I ask because I'm seeing a lot of reports that police were called about this guy, the FBI failed to investigate after being called in January, there were many posts on social media, and this guy had disciplinary action taken against him in high school eventually requiring his expulsion. There's even a report that this guy was taking meds prescribed by a psychiatrist.

And still nobody did anything. His guns were never confiscated. He was info was never forwarded to the ATF. What is the point of asking for some sort of new gun law if the people charged with enforcing laws aren't doing it in the first place?

This isn't a case of "nobody knew". There were warning signs all over the place. Many even had those blue "K-Mart special" flashing lights on them.

The more that comes out about this, the angrier I get. 17 people are dead due to something so entirely fething preventable.



School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 00:59:26


Post by: Prestor Jon


sirlynchmob wrote:
Spoiler:
 Frazzled wrote:


Like I said, we did it for the tobacco companies, multiple times, it can be done without a convention for the NRA. And we still have our FIrst amendment.





Apologies but that is not accurate.
1. The tobacco companies made a large settlement as they were charged with knowingly selling a harmful product. To be comparable, the gun makers would have to sell products that they knew had technical problems that made them unsafe to use.

the government currently seizes assets for no crimes, see eminent domain.

Eminent domain is related to land, not the monetary assets of private groups (NRA) or companies.

You're right though, my plan would take significant effort and a lot of work, but all things worth doing usually do. Let's remember the current plan though, do nothing, make getting guns easier, and wonder why gun violence is getting worse.

Your plan violates the basic tenants of three of the Bill of Rights. Its not a thins "worth doing," unless your intent is to start a war that kills millions (if we use Civil War numbers adjusted to current populations).

Could you mayhaps modify your proposal to one that doesn't do that?


Sure, just repeal the second and ban all guns.

but think about this for a bit
unless your intent is to start a war that kills millions (if we use Civil War


people are willing to go to war, killing more people to protect their guns, yet will do absolutely nothing and even argue againt doing anything to save children.

sure it's easy to pick apary my idea, but I also noticed no one answered my question directly, but they answered none the less. their guns mean more than the lives of children and thus I hold all gun owners as being complicit in all school shootings.


Wow, dude, when you strawman you really ball out. Please enlighten me as to how exactly my ownership of guns directly contributed to the recent school shooting in Florida? I’m not in Florida, neither are my guns and I have no plans to murder children so how exactly does that contribute to a specific individual choosing to shoot up a school? If giving up my guns actually meant that no child in the US would ever die of gun violence I’d consider it but that’s a faulty premise on its face. I know where my guns are, I know what my intentions are, I know neither myself nor my guns are a threat to schoolchildren so I’m going to hang onto them and vote accordingly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Ouze wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:
I really don't trust the Federal govt to handle that kind of slippery slope issue because it requires much more than an oversimplified one size fits all solution.


So again, the thought is that when the people who know you best know you have impaired judgement and should not own firearms, your right to own firearms trumps that, which circles back to the earlier question: what was the FBI supposed to do? You're going to see the FBI thrown under the bus a lot in the next few days over their failure to act on the tip but there was no meaningful action they could have taken. You know the state can't take action on that; it would have to be at the federal level. But I agree that as the constitution is currently interpreted, this is how it lays.

Prestor Jon wrote:
He didn't do anything that caused him to be mentally ill that would justify punishing him for it, being schizophrenic is just who he is. The State shouldn't criminalize who you are the State should only criminalize what you choose to do.


A person who is mentally ill by definition can't make rational choices in their behavior. No right is unlimited and society would be unworkable if it were, so I'm going to have to disagree with you: I think established mental illness is definitely something that should preclude you from owning firearms. Yes, I know there are add on questions there but that is the base ideal I am comfortable with.


If your brother in law is dangerous enough to need to be involuntarily commmitted then the State should be able to prove that in court. I don’t think empowering relatives or doctors to have people locked up against their will is worth it. If somebody like your BiL is willing to take his meds and swears to do so to a judge then he should be allowed to live his life. If he is caught not taking his meds then the cops should be able to take him into custody put him back in court and have the judge commit him.

That’s what I would have liked to have seen the FBI do. Reach out to local law enforcement find out the cops had been called to respond to Cruz 36 times and review those incidents and reports to see if there was enough evidence to take him into custody for a mental competency evaluation. If I walked down the street and started shooting at my neighbor’s chickens or goats I would likely be arrested because that’s illegal. I’m pretty confident it’s illegal in Florida too and that’s only 1 of the 36 reasons the cops responded to Cruz.

The FBI should have followed their protocol, investigated the report, reviewed what local law enforcement had done and determined if more could be and needs to be done.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 01:35:35


Post by: Kanluwen


 CptJake wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:

people are willing to go to war, killing more people to protect their guns, yet will do absolutely nothing and even argue againt doing anything to save children.

sure it's easy to pick apary my idea, but I also noticed no one answered my question directly, but they answered none the less. their guns mean more than the lives of children and thus I hold all gun owners as being complicit in all school shootings.




I hold you and your ilk as complacent in every school shooting because you put these poor kids into environments where there are few people trained and equipped to protect them.

There was an armed deputy on the compass at the Florida shooting. He purportedly had said he never actually encountered the shooter.

The idea that you need to have armed security guards in school is ridiculous.

Look at Israeli schools...


I can't tell whether or not your original post was meant to be sarcastic/snarky, but if it was meant to be serious and you think this is legitimately a compelling argument...you're wrong on so many levels.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 02:10:49


Post by: CptJake


 Kanluwen wrote:
 CptJake wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:

people are willing to go to war, killing more people to protect their guns, yet will do absolutely nothing and even argue againt doing anything to save children.

sure it's easy to pick apary my idea, but I also noticed no one answered my question directly, but they answered none the less. their guns mean more than the lives of children and thus I hold all gun owners as being complicit in all school shootings.




I hold you and your ilk as complacent in every school shooting because you put these poor kids into environments where there are few people trained and equipped to protect them.

There was an armed deputy on the compass at the Florida shooting. He purportedly had said he never actually encountered the shooter.

The idea that you need to have armed security guards in school is ridiculous.

Look at Israeli schools...


I can't tell whether or not your original post was meant to be sarcastic/snarky, but if it was meant to be serious and you think this is legitimately a compelling argument...you're wrong on so many levels.


Only 1 guard? Makes my point there were few (in this case exactly 1) people trained and equipped, doesn't it.

And my point is exactly as serious as sirlynchmob blaming all gun owners for each school shooting. If folks like him didn't force our kids into unsafe environments it wouldn't be an issue.



School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 02:15:22


Post by: Kanluwen


 CptJake wrote:

Only 1 guard? Makes my point there were few (in this case exactly 1) people trained and equipped, doesn't it.

And your point being "Let's put more guns into the school!" somehow decreases the danger?


And my point is exactly as serious as sirlynchmob blaming all gun owners for each school shooting. If folks like him didn't force our kids into unsafe environments it wouldn't be an issue.

IT'S A FREAKING SCHOOL!

Do you somehow think kids would magically be safer only being homeschooled? That somehow, magically, every teacher being armed means there will never be anything bad to happen to a school ever?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 04:03:03


Post by: Ouze


Putting more guns in schools by adding guards or arming teachers sounds like sidestepping the problem.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 04:26:49


Post by: Frazzled


 Ouze wrote:
 BaronIveagh wrote:
Police response time to my parents house is half an hour. I once called 911 to report my car being stolen up in Salamanca. It took the police two hours to drive three blocks. When I asked 'WTF?' I was told I called in the middle of shift change and no one could be bothered.


I believe it. Where I live there is no local police department - we have to depend on the county sheriff. The last time we called 911, they took 40 minutes to show up.

I definitely am not an anti-gun person by any measure.

sirlynchmob wrote:
their guns mean more than the lives of children and thus I hold all gun owners as being complicit in all school shootings.


That's more than a little silly. It's possible to be a firearm owner and also support at least some gun control measures - not everyone is a Sith lord on the topic. I dont think you'd find many people on this forum protesting a ban on bump stocks, for example, were it to have happened.




Wait, I'm NOT a Sith Lord? But I have a degree from Count Dookie's Jedi school and Beauty Academy!


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 04:44:44


Post by: BaronIveagh


 Kanluwen wrote:

IT'S A FREAKING SCHOOL!


Kan, you and I obviously had two very different school experiences. Maybe because they sent people from the GGR Juvenile Correction Facility to our high-school, or maybe you just lived in one of those nice places where you don't have at least one fight on your way to school each day. I can say that I can get behind the idea of teachers with guns. I might not have gotten stabbed in the lunch room in 12th grade if the lunch monitor was armed.

This guy had the ultimate cover Kan, he was a former student. Even if the guards had seen him, they might not have thought anything of it before it was too late. He even used it to sneak out of the school and leave. Thank God he wasn't smart enough to have a get away car nearby.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Frazzled wrote:

Wait, I'm NOT a Sith Lord? But I have a degree from Count Dookie's Jedi school and Beauty Academy!


I hereby dub thee Darth Weinerdog!


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 04:53:34


Post by: Mitochondria


As a matter of fact, I do value my guns more than the lives of children, or you, or anyone.

The is literally no scenario in which me giving up my guns is going to happen.

You might not get it and that is fine.

I might be called silly or crazy or a loon

I will just shake my head and wonder why you do not understand.

I firmly believe in gun control. If there is a gun in the room, I want to be in control of it.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 04:58:43


Post by: LordofHats


Prestor Jon wrote:


If your brother in law is dangerous enough to need to be involuntarily commmitted then the State should be able to prove that in court. I don’t think empowering relatives or doctors to have people locked up against their will is worth it. If somebody like your BiL is willing to take his meds and swears to do so to a judge then he should be allowed to live his life. If he is caught not taking his meds then the cops should be able to take him into custody put him back in court and have the judge commit him.

That’s what I would have liked to have seen the FBI do. Reach out to local law enforcement find out the cops had been called to respond to Cruz 36 times and review those incidents and reports to see if there was enough evidence to take him into custody for a mental competency evaluation. If I walked down the street and started shooting at my neighbor’s chickens or goats I would likely be arrested because that’s illegal. I’m pretty confident it’s illegal in Florida too and that’s only 1 of the 36 reasons the cops responded to Cruz.

The FBI should have followed their protocol, investigated the report, reviewed what local law enforcement had done and determined if more could be and needs to be done.


I think one of the most absurd things to happen in shootings of the recent past is the poor guy who went and turned himself in because he knew he was dangerous, and law enforcement (the FBI if I remember right?) not only just let him go but gave him back his gun. The guy basically waved his hands in the air screaming "help me I think I might hurt someone" and no one did a damn thing. Now that's not automatically their fault cause I don't think policy let them do anything to the guy but I think that there is an indication that the system failed and has failed a few times now.

How messed up is it that a twitter post prank can get a guy killed by a SWAT team because of an argument over a video game, but a man turning himself in saying "I'm dangerous" or other people screaming "this guy needs help" only warrants a "there's nothing we can do?" That's fethed up.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 09:55:06


Post by: AlmightyWalrus


Mitochondria wrote:
As a matter of fact, I do value my guns more than the lives of children, or you, or anyone.

The is literally no scenario in which me giving up my guns is going to happen.

You might not get it and that is fine.

I might be called silly or crazy or a loon

I will just shake my head and wonder why you do not understand.

I firmly believe in gun control. If there is a gun in the room, I want to be in control of it.


You need help. That level of paranoia isn't healthy.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 10:03:50


Post by: LordofHats


Gotta admit though.

"If there is a gun in the room I want to be in control of it."

That's one hell of a tag line. Shorten that baby up a bit, slap it on some bumper stickers and you could make a mint XD


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 10:44:50


Post by: Howard A Treesong


Mitochondria wrote:
As a matter of fact, I do value my guns more than the lives of children, or you, or anyone.


I guess it’s easier when it’s other people’s children.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 11:49:36


Post by: A Town Called Malus


 Luciferian wrote:
Media infamy is unquestionably one of the motivating factors for doing this kind of thing. Throw into that higher depression and suicide rates among young males and so many other variables. A lot has changed, really.


Not really. Bonnie and Clyde were incredibly famous at the time of their crimes, same with Dillinger.

The media has always made killers famous, that has not changed at all.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 11:51:33


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


At the end of the day I don't blame people who don't care about school shootings enough to give up their guns. In the past 6 years since Sandy Hook there been 239 school shootings resulting in 138 deaths.

That *sounds* horrible, but by my quick maths/googling there's 77 million students in the USA, 56 million of which are between kindergarten and 12th grade. That's only 1 in every 2.4 million on a yearly basis.

Is it terrible when a kid dies? Of course. But I don't blame anyone for feeling it's not a big enough number to give up the right to own guns. Compare that to car accidents, which I believe is about 1000 dead kids a year, which rounds out to about 1 in 70k.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 12:11:14


Post by: A Town Called Malus


Rosebuddy wrote:

It's pointless to post school shooting threads to a discussion forum where discussion of US politics is banned, because no discussion is then possible. All you could post is variations of "that's bad".


I'd just like to highlight that this was posted over 2 pages ago and nobody seems to have considered the possibility of a school shooting thread about an incident outside of the USA. I think that warrants some thought and introspection.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 12:22:47


Post by: Rosebuddy


 Frazzled wrote:



Can you imagine how many people you'd have to shoot while implementing this? We'd have martial law in a week, just to handle the fallout.


I would proffer that would start a second Civil War and much of the nation seceding.


If the only way to put an end to regular mass shootings would mean or outright be civil war then perhaps it's only a question of when.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 12:30:42


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


Rosebuddy wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:



Can you imagine how many people you'd have to shoot while implementing this? We'd have martial law in a week, just to handle the fallout.


I would proffer that would start a second Civil War and much of the nation seceding.


If the only way to put an end to regular mass shootings would mean or outright be civil war then perhaps it's only a question of when.
I hope not. Last time the Muricans decided to civil war it out there was 620,000 casualties, or roughly 2% of the population (which would be 6 million at today's US population).

Without checking I'd guess that's more than has been killed by firearms outside of wars in the USA since forever.

Americans have proved through their history is that they aren't afraid to kill a whole bunch of other Americans.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 12:32:14


Post by: AlmightyWalrus


AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:



Can you imagine how many people you'd have to shoot while implementing this? We'd have martial law in a week, just to handle the fallout.


I would proffer that would start a second Civil War and much of the nation seceding.


If the only way to put an end to regular mass shootings would mean or outright be civil war then perhaps it's only a question of when.
I hope not. Last time the Muricans decided to civil war it out there was 620,000 casualties, or roughly 2% of the population (which would 6 million at today's US population).

Without checking I'd guess that's more than has been killed by firearms outside of wars in the USA since forever.


Yes, but only by a factor of four, counting since 1968. Let that sink in for a bit.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 12:40:07


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:



Can you imagine how many people you'd have to shoot while implementing this? We'd have martial law in a week, just to handle the fallout.


I would proffer that would start a second Civil War and much of the nation seceding.


If the only way to put an end to regular mass shootings would mean or outright be civil war then perhaps it's only a question of when.
I hope not. Last time the Muricans decided to civil war it out there was 620,000 casualties, or roughly 2% of the population (which would 6 million at today's US population).

Without checking I'd guess that's more than has been killed by firearms outside of wars in the USA since forever.


Yes, but only by a factor of four, counting since 1968. Let that sink in for a bit.
True, but that includes suicides and if guns didn't exist homocides wouldn't completely disappear, so it's not like that many people would have been saved had guns not been around.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also if pro gun Americans are civil warring against anti gun Americans, my money is on the ones with all the guns


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 12:46:14


Post by: A Town Called Malus


AllSeeingSkink wrote:
True, but that includes suicides and if guns didn't exist homocides wouldn't completely disappear, so it's not like that many people would have been saved had guns not been around.


Successful suicides can be drastically reduced by introducing simple barriers to overcome. Such as fences on bridges, maximum purchases of medication in one transaction etc.

If you have access to a gun in the house, it is incredibly easy to commit suicide. This is why suicide rates for houses with guns are much higher than those without, as houses without firearms have to use more difficult methods which naturally allow for more time for the person to reconsider or be saved after the attempt.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 12:59:25


Post by: AlmightyWalrus


 A Town Called Malus wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:
True, but that includes suicides and if guns didn't exist homocides wouldn't completely disappear, so it's not like that many people would have been saved had guns not been around.


Successful suicides can be drastically reduced by introducing simple barriers to overcome. Such as fences on bridges, maximum purchases of medication in one transaction etc.

If you have access to a gun in the house, it is incredibly easy to commit suicide. This is why suicide rates for houses with guns are much higher than those without, as houses without firearms have to use more difficult methods which naturally allow for more time for the person to reconsider or be saved after the attempt.


This is mentioned in every gun thread, and yet the argument about suicides not counting because "they'd just find another way" pops up in every new thread on the subject. It's quite fascinating.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 13:19:28


Post by: Howard A Treesong


 A Town Called Malus wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:
True, but that includes suicides and if guns didn't exist homocides wouldn't completely disappear, so it's not like that many people would have been saved had guns not been around.


Successful suicides can be drastically reduced by introducing simple barriers to overcome. Such as fences on bridges, maximum purchases of medication in one transaction etc.

If you have access to a gun in the house, it is incredibly easy to commit suicide. This is why suicide rates for houses with guns are much higher than those without, as houses without firearms have to use more difficult methods which naturally allow for more time for the person to reconsider or be saved after the attempt.


That’s because suicide is often a heat of the moment decision. It you snap them out of it in that moment they won’t follow through and getting them help is easier for future. As you say, a fence on a bridge can prevent someone long enough for the moment to pass, or if you talk someone away from a railway platform. The problem with having a gun to hand is that you can very quickly follow through on suicidal thoughts without the pause for reflection.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 13:22:25


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:
True, but that includes suicides and if guns didn't exist homocides wouldn't completely disappear, so it's not like that many people would have been saved had guns not been around.


Successful suicides can be drastically reduced by introducing simple barriers to overcome. Such as fences on bridges, maximum purchases of medication in one transaction etc.

If you have access to a gun in the house, it is incredibly easy to commit suicide. This is why suicide rates for houses with guns are much higher than those without, as houses without firearms have to use more difficult methods which naturally allow for more time for the person to reconsider or be saved after the attempt.


This is mentioned in every gun thread, and yet the argument about suicides not counting because "they'd just find another way" pops up in every new thread on the subject. It's quite fascinating.
I never said that, I think suicides absolutely SHOULD be considered for the reasons Malus said.... BUT I don't think they should be included raw and need to be considered separately. The USA does not have an exceptionally high suicide rate, I'm sure it'd drop further if guns were removed, but of the 20k or so suicides a year that might drop to, what, 19k? 18k? 16k? 10k? Who knows.

At the moment the US has a lower suicide rate than ye olde Sweden, and is kind of middle of the road compared to most European and other 1st world countries.

Hell, the Australian teen suicide rate absolutely dwarfs the US school shooting massacre rate.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 13:35:25


Post by: Frazzled


 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Mitochondria wrote:
As a matter of fact, I do value my guns more than the lives of children, or you, or anyone.


I guess it’s easier when it’s other people’s children.

Well in his defense, I can't stand kids either. Well, I
Would expand that to...people in general.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 14:08:31


Post by: Relapse


 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:
True, but that includes suicides and if guns didn't exist homocides wouldn't completely disappear, so it's not like that many people would have been saved had guns not been around.


Successful suicides can be drastically reduced by introducing simple barriers to overcome. Such as fences on bridges, maximum purchases of medication in one transaction etc.

If you have access to a gun in the house, it is incredibly easy to commit suicide. This is why suicide rates for houses with guns are much higher than those without, as houses without firearms have to use more difficult methods which naturally allow for more time for the person to reconsider or be saved after the attempt.


This is mentioned in every gun thread, and yet the argument about suicides not counting because "they'd just find another way" pops up in every new thread on the subject. It's quite fascinating.


Japan has the highest per capital suicide rate in the world as well as the strictest gun laws.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 14:10:06


Post by: AlmightyWalrus


Relapse wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:
True, but that includes suicides and if guns didn't exist homocides wouldn't completely disappear, so it's not like that many people would have been saved had guns not been around.


Successful suicides can be drastically reduced by introducing simple barriers to overcome. Such as fences on bridges, maximum purchases of medication in one transaction etc.

If you have access to a gun in the house, it is incredibly easy to commit suicide. This is why suicide rates for houses with guns are much higher than those without, as houses without firearms have to use more difficult methods which naturally allow for more time for the person to reconsider or be saved after the attempt.


This is mentioned in every gun thread, and yet the argument about suicides not counting because "they'd just find another way" pops up in every new thread on the subject. It's quite fascinating.


Japan has the highest per capital suicide rate in the world as well as the strictest gun laws.


Which only means that there's more factors at play than gun availability. Doesn't take away from the fact that it's easier to spontaneously kill yourself with a gun than without one.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 16:17:26


Post by: Relapse


 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Relapse wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:
True, but that includes suicides and if guns didn't exist homocides wouldn't completely disappear, so it's not like that many people would have been saved had guns not been around.


Successful suicides can be drastically reduced by introducing simple barriers to overcome. Such as fences on bridges, maximum purchases of medication in one transaction etc.

If you have access to a gun in the house, it is incredibly easy to commit suicide. This is why suicide rates for houses with guns are much higher than those without, as houses without firearms have to use more difficult methods which naturally allow for more time for the person to reconsider or be saved after the attempt.


This is mentioned in every gun thread, and yet the argument about suicides not counting because "they'd just find another way" pops up in every new thread on the subject. It's quite fascinating.


Japan has the highest per capital suicide rate in the world as well as the strictest gun laws.


Which only means that there's more factors at play than gun availability. Doesn't take away from the fact that it's easier to spontaneously kill yourself with a gun than without one.


Which is my point. If someone wants to kill themselves, they most likely will irrespective of gun availability. There will be outliers who might reconsider if they don’t have a gun available, but taking away everyone’s guns or severely curtailing their rights is a bit bigger price to pay then it’s worth.
I say this in light of people’s lives which have been saved because they had a gun at hand.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 17:10:49


Post by: djones520


 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Which only means that there's more factors at play than gun availability.


God... if only people would start using this line in regards to the US...


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 17:36:53


Post by: yellowfever


 djones520 wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Which only means that there's more factors at play than gun availability.


God... if only people would start using this line in regards to the US...


Doesn't fit the narrative.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 17:38:41


Post by: BobtheInquisitor


Relapse wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Relapse wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:
True, but that includes suicides and if guns didn't exist homocides wouldn't completely disappear, so it's not like that many people would have been saved had guns not been around.


Successful suicides can be drastically reduced by introducing simple barriers to overcome. Such as fences on bridges, maximum purchases of medication in one transaction etc.

If you have access to a gun in the house, it is incredibly easy to commit suicide. This is why suicide rates for houses with guns are much higher than those without, as houses without firearms have to use more difficult methods which naturally allow for more time for the person to reconsider or be saved after the attempt.


This is mentioned in every gun thread, and yet the argument about suicides not counting because "they'd just find another way" pops up in every new thread on the subject. It's quite fascinating.


Japan has the highest per capital suicide rate in the world as well as the strictest gun laws.


Which only means that there's more factors at play than gun availability. Doesn't take away from the fact that it's easier to spontaneously kill yourself with a gun than without one.


Which is my point. If someone wants to kill themselves, they most likely will irrespective of gun availability. There will be outliers who might reconsider if they don’t have a gun available, but taking away everyone’s guns or severely curtailing their rights is a bit bigger price to pay then it’s worth.
I say this in light of people’s lives which have been saved because they had a gun at hand.


Suicide doesn't work that way. Something as simple as a fence keeping people from jumping off a bridge, even a fence that can be scaled with just a bit of effort, reduces the suicide rate. That holds true even if there are other bridges to jump off in town that have no fences. Not having a gun at hand probably prevents a lot of suicides, although it is I possible to estimate any numbers.

Not trying to argue against your bigger point. Just wanted to clear up the idea that people who are going to commit suicide will find some other way when the research indicates many (most?) of them actually won't.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 18:21:05


Post by: AlmightyWalrus


 djones520 wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Which only means that there's more factors at play than gun availability.


God... if only people would start using this line in regards to the US...


There are more factors at play in the US than just the availability of guns.

There, happy? Can we go back to discussing the variable of guns now please?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 18:37:18


Post by: BaronIveagh


 A Town Called Malus wrote:

I'd just like to highlight that this was posted over 2 pages ago and nobody seems to have considered the possibility of a school shooting thread about an incident outside of the USA. I think that warrants some thought and introspection.


Good luck. I started a thread on the FBI handing out warrants in a world wide election fraud operation, and had it locked because it's US Politics.

That and, there's not much to talk about. Malus, this is, as far as I can find, very much a nearly US only thing.

Frankly, I'd like to see a thread about Moderation and have them explain this to us, because this ban is reaching the point of absurdity.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 djones520 wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Which only means that there's more factors at play than gun availability.


God... if only people would start using this line in regards to the US...


I have, many, many times, and posters ignore it. But Walrus says it and OOOOHHHH suddenly it's important!


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 19:03:30


Post by: oldravenman3025


 djones520 wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Which only means that there's more factors at play than gun availability.


God... if only people would start using this line in regards to the US...





They won't. There are other political and social engineering aspects at play.


People like to preach that mass murder and mass shootings are purely an American phenomena, that doesn't happen in more "enlightened" societies. What they tend to forget is that out of the top ten worst "lone wolf" mass shootings in history, only three of them happned in the U.S. And only three were carried out by white males that fit the profile of a mass shooter. Out of the top twenty, eight were American. Out of your top ten "team killer" shootings, only one out the ten took place in the U.S., and only one of the perps was a U.S. born citizen.

If mass killings happen in places in the world where gun availability to private citizens is prohibited, or heavily restricted, that is a damning indictment on the effectiveness of gun laws to "prevent" such happenings.

Also, across all levels of government in the United States, there are over 20,000 firearms laws and regulations on the books. If that many hasn't prevented mass shootings, then what good are more going to do?

The answer is:NOTHING. It's as the two posts quoted above accurately point out. There are other issues at play. Issues that cannot be solved just by empty promises and half-assed legislation to keep the votes coming. They are issues that nobody has the will to carry out because of the outrage and lawsuits from civil libertarians and advocacy groups generating bad press.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 19:20:04


Post by: Prestor Jon


 BaronIveagh wrote:


Good luck. I started a thread on the FBI handing out warrants in a world wide election fraud operation, and had it locked because it's US Politics.

That and, there's not much to talk about. Malus, this is, as far as I can find, very much a nearly US only thing.

Frankly, I'd like to see a thread about Moderation and have them explain this to us, because this ban is reaching the point of absurdity.


The van is easy to understand. US politics threads require more moderation than any other thread on the board. The mods are unpaid volunteers and don’t want to spend an inordinate amount of time policing one OT thread that isn’t related to the purpose of the site. DakkaDakka isn’t my website when I post here I realize that I’m playin in somebody else’s sandbox and I need to respect their rules. If the mods and owners of Dakka decide US politics isn’t worth having in the OT then that’s fine with me. There’s a million other sites I can go discuss US politics. If I want to hear what a Dakka member thinks on a particular US politics subject I can PM them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 oldravenman3025 wrote:
 djones520 wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Which only means that there's more factors at play than gun availability.


God... if only people would start using this line in regards to the US...





They won't. There are other political and social engineering aspects at play.


People like to preach that mass murder and mass shootings are purely an American phenomena, that doesn't happen in more "enlightened" societies. What they tend to forget is that out of the top ten worst "lone wolf" mass shootings in history, only three of them happned in the U.S. And only three were carried out by white males that fit the profile of a mass shooter. Out of the top twenty, eight were American. Out of your top ten "team killer" shootings, only one out the ten took place in the U.S., and only one of the perps was a U.S. born citizen.

If mass killings happen in places in the world where gun availability to private citizens is prohibited, or heavily restricted, that is a damning indictment on the effectiveness of gun laws to "prevent" such happenings.

Also, across all levels of government in the United States, there are over 20,000 firearms laws and regulations on the books. If that many hasn't prevented mass shootings, then what good are more going to do?

The answer is:NOTHING. It's as the two posts quoted above accurately point out. There are other issues at play. Issues that cannot be solved just by empty promises and half-assed legislation to keep the votes coming. They are issues that nobody has the will to carry out because of the outrage and lawsuits from civil libertarians and advocacy groups generating bad press.


Yeah I mean think about all those awesome the government could do if it wasn’t for those meddlesome civil liberties and their stupid dog too!


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 19:23:58


Post by: ScarletRose


Also, across all levels of government in the United States, there are over 20,000 firearms laws and regulations on the books. If that many hasn't prevented mass shootings, then what good are more going to do?


Wow, what a totally disingenuous point that doesn't take into account how many of those laws are actually meaningful and not just about proper spelling on firearm store licensing or that sort of minutia.

There's already a law against murder, so why bother having more laws am I right?



School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 19:47:08


Post by: Tannhauser42


 BaronIveagh wrote:

Frankly, I'd like to see a thread about Moderation and have them explain this to us, because this ban is reaching the point of absurdity.



Been done already, Nuts & Bolts subforum.
It didn't end well, because some people simply can't behave when it comes to US Politics.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 20:34:07


Post by: Rosebuddy


 oldravenman3025 wrote:
If mass killings happen in places in the world where gun availability to private citizens is prohibited, or heavily restricted, that is a damning indictment on the effectiveness of gun laws to "prevent" such happenings.


It's not that mass killings never happen anywhere else, it's that the US is the only place where school shootings happen regularly. Attacks against schools or workplaces in other countries do happen sometimes too but don't tend to involve firearms so the bodycount is lower.

Additionally, the amount of gun regulations is less useful than the kind because the gun lobby spends a lot of money on making sure that gun regulation is as fragmented, legalistic and silly as possible so they can keep saying that gun regulation is dumb.



So, like, Japan having a higher suicide rate than the US despite much lower access to guns is because of a set of problem that current Japanese society has which wouldn't be helped much at all by a similar level of gun access as the US. The US also has more problems that contribute to its uniquely American form of mass killings but guns are certainly one part of it.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 21:30:37


Post by: DEZOAT


I have major question here , but before I start . I deliver milk to all kind places such as schools ,stores , Nursing home and Hospitals in the great state of Michigan in the USA. One biggest topic at work with my fellow coworker is HOW THE HELL DID THIS SCUM BAG GET INTO THE SCHOOL SO FAST! Now I think thing done here in Michigan bit different then other states. We driver sale men go to three type of doors 1. 90% of the time is the front door which is foyer with door right or left to the office which is lock , they buzz you in. 2. 5% of the time is Receiver door which have a buzzer with a camera if it works? 3. 5 % of the time is Kitchen door it may be a glass door or metal door peep hole to see who there. We still have a hard time getting into the school even when they know who you are, but this scum bag got in petty fast and about 2:00 pm time which is petty hard get in the school it all front door. Then this is the state of Florida they do thing different then we do. I know the FBI drop a major ball on this by not follow the lead on the shooter from what I read and heard on tv. Just so you know I have been to some 300 schools to big and small , big city to rural area so I know what I'am talking about when it come to schools.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 22:12:39


Post by: Overread


Are the schools really that tight or is it only a handful of formal entry points which are like that? Hard for me to imagine such a secure almost prison-like approach to school construction from the schools I've been too (granted in the UK not the USA).

Even the more secure schools would have multiple entry points where you could gain entry fairly easily; or even jump the wall.

Over here I'd wager the only ones that would be super secure would be those designed for socially difficult/dangerous students, and then more to keep the students in than anything else.

And, once you breach the outer parts most schools would be easy to move almost where-ever you wanted. Enter during class time and chances are you could move with impunity for a significant time.


Plus as a former student chances are he knew any weakpoint to enter. A door that has a broken lock; a firedoor with no attached alarm; a fire escape that has windows unlocked; a window left open etc.... Unless the school is designed like a prisons?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 22:37:10


Post by: Spetulhu


DEZOAT wrote:
90% of the time is the front door which is lock , they buzz you in. 5% of the time is Receiver door which have a buzzer with a camera if it works? 5 % of the time is Kitchen door it may be a glass door or metal door peep hole to see who there. We still have a hard time getting into the school even when they know who you are, but this scum bag got in petty fast and about 2:00 pm time which is petty hard get in the school it all front door.


I've never heard of keeping schools locked before, but I've never been to an American school either. Yes, the kitchen/receiver doors would be locked, but not anything else.

Still, with hundreds or thousands of pupils they must be free to move at least somewhat easily. You'd need more security staff than teachers if you actually checked every single person every single time. I guess the guy was the right age, wore the right clothes and trailed a group of students so he could walk in without being challenged. Or as a former student he knew the route the cool boys take in order to sneak out for a smoke and back in.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 22:44:49


Post by: nels1031


I’m going to make a sweeping generalization based on my experiences, but I generally found that the better the school and the neighborhood its in, the less secure it is.

Meanwhile I can go to a gak school in west Baltimore in a gak neighborhood, and it would look like a fairly decent min-security prison.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 23:07:42


Post by: Mario


AllSeeingSkink wrote:At the end of the day I don't blame people who don't care about school shootings enough to give up their guns. In the past 6 years since Sandy Hook there been 239 school shootings resulting in 138 deaths.

That *sounds* horrible, but by my quick maths/googling there's 77 million students in the USA, 56 million of which are between kindergarten and 12th grade. That's only 1 in every 2.4 million on a yearly basis.

Is it terrible when a kid dies? Of course. But I don't blame anyone for feeling it's not a big enough number to give up the right to own guns. Compare that to car accidents, which I believe is about 1000 dead kids a year, which rounds out to about 1 in 70k.
Can those people who don't care also add up the injured, permanently disabled, property damage (always a big one when protestors destroy a few windows and thrash can), mental trauma, and so on. How about the medical cost of it all and how it impacts the victims?

People also insist that guns are there for their own safety but burglaries and home invasions also only happen to a tiny number of househulds, that's why having a gun in the house is overall more dangerous than not having one. Because more accidents with guns happen in those houses than people get killed by invaders. Turn the argument around onto the whole self-defence and home protection argument and you could as well say that the 2nd amendment is not really needed because it only affects such a small number of people.

I'm really curious where everyone would put the number: At which point would it be worth considering doing something, besides: nothing at all and never? What's the number of injured/disabled/dead people (or percentage of the population), or overall damage to the GDP and other "externalities".

According to Wikipedia on 9/11 "2,996 people were killed (including 19 terrorists) and more than 6,000 others wounded" and that was enough for the USA to start a war (with even more civilian deaths), suspend civil liberties in interesting ways, add more and more invasive searches on airports and find creative ways to describe all of this as not conflicting with the constitution. Trillions of dollars for feel safe from terrorists while destabilising the middle east even more and fostering an breeding ground for more radicalisation.

What would be the number where people could look at other developed countries and maybe imagine that life is possible without so many guns and that those people over there are not living in some dystopian hellhole with a tyrant on top. That's a completely hypothetical question because we've already heard (in older threads) all the arguments about how nearly impossible it would be to get rid of the 2nd amendment.

People worry about (islamic) terrorism, which kills an even smaller amount of people in the US, and are willing to give up all kinds of rights to fight that (and spend billions). What's the number of gun deaths that would be needed concede that some gun rights restrictions might actually work?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 23:09:58


Post by: stanman


Clearly the school wasn't located in a gun free zone as that would have prevented all of this.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 23:20:13


Post by: Relapse


Mario wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:At the end of the day I don't blame people who don't care about school shootings enough to give up their guns. In the past 6 years since Sandy Hook there been 239 school shootings resulting in 138 deaths.

That *sounds* horrible, but by my quick maths/googling there's 77 million students in the USA, 56 million of which are between kindergarten and 12th grade. That's only 1 in every 2.4 million on a yearly basis.

Is it terrible when a kid dies? Of course. But I don't blame anyone for feeling it's not a big enough number to give up the right to own guns. Compare that to car accidents, which I believe is about 1000 dead kids a year, which rounds out to about 1 in 70k.
Can those people who don't care also add up the injured, permanently disabled, property damage (always a big one when protestors destroy a few windows and thrash can), mental trauma, and so on. How about the medical cost of it all and how it impacts the victims?

People also insist that guns are there for their own safety but burglaries and home invasions also only happen to a tiny number of househulds, that's why having a gun in the house is overall more dangerous than not having one. Because more accidents with guns happen in those houses than people get killed by invaders. Turn the argument around onto the whole self-defence and home protection argument and you could as well say that the 2nd amendment is not really needed because it only affects such a small number of people.

I'm really curious where everyone would put the number: At which point would it be worth considering doing something, besides: nothing at all and never? What's the number of injured/disabled/dead people (or percentage of the population), or overall damage to the GDP and other "externalities".

According to Wikipedia on 9/11 "2,996 people were killed (including 19 terrorists) and more than 6,000 others wounded" and that was enough for the USA to start a war (with even more civilian deaths), suspend civil liberties in interesting ways, add more and more invasive searches on airports and find creative ways to describe all of this as not conflicting with the constitution. Trillions of dollars for feel safe from terrorists while destabilising the middle east even more and fostering an breeding ground for more radicalisation.

What would be the number where people could look at other developed countries and maybe imagine that life is possible without so many guns and that those people over there are not living in some dystopian hellhole with a tyrant on top. That's a completely hypothetical question because we've already heard (in older threads) all the arguments about how nearly impossible it would be to get rid of the 2nd amendment.

People worry about (islamic) terrorism, which kills an even smaller amount of people in the US, and are willing to give up all kinds of rights to fight that (and spend billions). What's the number of gun deaths that would be needed concede that some gun rights restrictions might actually work?



According to the CDC, 88,000 people a year die from alcohol related causes. About 11,000 of these are from drunk drivers, which is just about the number of people killed in gun related crime. 2 out of three domestic abuse cases are alcohol related, and when you add in divorces, physical and mental debilities cased by alcohol along with job loss and other miscellaneous problems, gun violence is pretty much dwarfed.
Why is it then that the news media harps on about guns and pretty much by comparison ignores alcohol?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 23:23:14


Post by: LordofHats


To be fair, I think the only thing that might be harder to get rid of than guns is booze. We will never surrender our booze


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 23:36:22


Post by: DEZOAT


OK ! Inner City schools have metal detector and security guard. The door will be chained up. OK some of our school routes have about 25 to 32 schools a day and some where about 500 to 700 cases of half pints of milk 50 to a case. Again Doors are lock to keep people from getting in but they not lock from getting out. So kids can get out with no problem. Its getting back in you have go to the front door where office is. Maybe the state of Michigan take security more seriously then other states. The funny thing the well to do school have alot more security then the inner city school go figure there.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 23:42:41


Post by: Overread


DEZOAT wrote:
Again Doors are lock to keep people from getting in but they not lock from getting out. So kids can get out with no problem. Its getting back in you have go to the front door where office is.


Surely that's a weak point. If there are doors that students can just walk out of then what's to stop them just holding the door for someone to get back in. Sure it might keep a stranger out, but a former student sneaking back in; or heck just someone dressed right and looking the right age might just shout out "hey hold the door for me" and get back in (it would be a small school where everyone knew everyone).



School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/17 23:53:17


Post by: Prestor Jon


Mario wrote:
Spoiler:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:At the end of the day I don't blame people who don't care about school shootings enough to give up their guns. In the past 6 years since Sandy Hook there been 239 school shootings resulting in 138 deaths.

That *sounds* horrible, but by my quick maths/googling there's 77 million students in the USA, 56 million of which are between kindergarten and 12th grade. That's only 1 in every 2.4 million on a yearly basis.

Is it terrible when a kid dies? Of course. But I don't blame anyone for feeling it's not a big enough number to give up the right to own guns. Compare that to car accidents, which I believe is about 1000 dead kids a year, which rounds out to about 1 in 70k.
Can those people who don't care also add up the injured, permanently disabled, property damage (always a big one when protestors destroy a few windows and thrash can), mental trauma, and so on. How about the medical cost of it all and how it impacts the victims?

People also insist that guns are there for their own safety but burglaries and home invasions also only happen to a tiny number of househulds, that's why having a gun in the house is overall more dangerous than not having one. Because more accidents with guns happen in those houses than people get killed by invaders. Turn the argument around onto the whole self-defence and home protection argument and you could as well say that the 2nd amendment is not really needed because it only affects such a small number of people.

I'm really curious where everyone would put the number: At which point would it be worth considering doing something, besides: nothing at all and never? What's the number of injured/disabled/dead people (or percentage of the population), or overall damage to the GDP and other "externalities".

According to Wikipedia on 9/11 "2,996 people were killed (including 19 terrorists) and more than 6,000 others wounded" and that was enough for the USA to start a war (with even more civilian deaths), suspend civil liberties in interesting ways, add more and more invasive searches on airports and find creative ways to describe all of this as not conflicting with the constitution. Trillions of dollars for feel safe from terrorists while destabilising the middle east even more and fostering an breeding ground for more radicalisation.

What would be the number where people could look at other developed countries and maybe imagine that life is possible without so many guns and that those people over there are not living in some dystopian hellhole with a tyrant on top. That's a completely hypothetical question because we've already heard (in older threads) all the arguments about how nearly impossible it would be to get rid of the 2nd amendment.


People worry about (islamic) terrorism, which kills an even smaller amount of people in the US, and are willing to give up all kinds of rights to fight that (and spend billions). What's the number of gun deaths that would be needed concede that some gun rights restrictions might actually work?


If additional Federal regulations on gun ownership that I thought were reasonable were proposed I’d support them regardless of the number of deaths attributed to gun violence. If extreme impractical unreasonable pie in the sky wishlisting is what is proposed then I’m not going to agree with it no matter the circumstances.

There isn’t a scenario that could happen that’s going to convince me that gun ownership is bad. I’m always going to support our 2A rights. There could be a shooting in the schools our kids go to, or if any or all of our kids died in a school shooting I’m not going to stop owning firearms and I’m not going to demand that my friends, neighbors and fellow citizens give up their guns either. I don’t understand this obsession with the people who aren’t the problem.

I’d also be happy if Congress repealed a good 90% or more of the Patriot Act but that’s just like my opinion man.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 00:23:41


Post by: yellowfever


Prestor Jon wrote:
Mario wrote:
Spoiler:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:At the end of the day I don't blame people who don't care about school shootings enough to give up their guns. In the past 6 years since Sandy Hook there been 239 school shootings resulting in 138 deaths.

That *sounds* horrible, but by my quick maths/googling there's 77 million students in the USA, 56 million of which are between kindergarten and 12th grade. That's only 1 in every 2.4 million on a yearly basis.

Is it terrible when a kid dies? Of course. But I don't blame anyone for feeling it's not a big enough number to give up the right to own guns. Compare that to car accidents, which I believe is about 1000 dead kids a year, which rounds out to about 1 in 70k.
Can those people who don't care also add up the injured, permanently disabled, property damage (always a big one when protestors destroy a few windows and thrash can), mental trauma, and so on. How about the medical cost of it all and how it impacts the victims?

People also insist that guns are there for their own safety but burglaries and home invasions also only happen to a tiny number of househulds, that's why having a gun in the house is overall more dangerous than not having one. Because more accidents with guns happen in those houses than people get killed by invaders. Turn the argument around onto the whole self-defence and home protection argument and you could as well say that the 2nd amendment is not really needed because it only affects such a small number of people.

I'm really curious where everyone would put the number: At which point would it be worth considering doing something, besides: nothing at all and never? What's the number of injured/disabled/dead people (or percentage of the population), or overall damage to the GDP and other "externalities".

According to Wikipedia on 9/11 "2,996 people were killed (including 19 terrorists) and more than 6,000 others wounded" and that was enough for the USA to start a war (with even more civilian deaths), suspend civil liberties in interesting ways, add more and more invasive searches on airports and find creative ways to describe all of this as not conflicting with the constitution. Trillions of dollars for feel safe from terrorists while destabilising the middle east even more and fostering an breeding ground for more radicalisation.

What would be the number where people could look at other developed countries and maybe imagine that life is possible without so many guns and that those people over there are not living in some dystopian hellhole with a tyrant on top. That's a completely hypothetical question because we've already heard (in older threads) all the arguments about how nearly impossible it would be to get rid of the 2nd amendment.


People worry about (islamic) terrorism, which kills an even smaller amount of people in the US, and are willing to give up all kinds of rights to fight that (and spend billions). What's the number of gun deaths that would be needed concede that some gun rights restrictions might actually work?


If additional Federal regulations on gun ownership that I thought were reasonable were proposed I’d support them regardless of the number of deaths attributed to gun violence. If extreme impractical unreasonable pie in the sky wishlisting is what is proposed then I’m not going to agree with it no matter the circumstances.

There isn’t a scenario that could happen that’s going to convince me that gun ownership is bad. I’m always going to support our 2A rights. There could be a shooting in the schools our kids go to, or if any or all of our kids died in a school shooting I’m not going to stop owning firearms and I’m not going to demand that my friends, neighbors and fellow citizens give up their guns either. I don’t understand this obsession with the people who aren’t the problem.

I’d also be happy if Congress repealed a good 90% or more of the Patriot Act but that’s just like my opinion man.


In my personal experience the people that hate guns are typically the ones willing to give up rights in the assumption that others will keep them safe.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 00:38:45


Post by: Spetulhu


Prestor Jon wrote:
If additional Federal regulations on gun ownership that I thought were reasonable were proposed I’d support them regardless of the number of deaths attributed to gun violence. If extreme impractical unreasonable pie in the sky wishlisting is what is proposed then I’m not going to agree with it no matter the circumstances.


Aye, it needs to be reasonable. We too have people wanting tighter gun laws, even if gun violence is very low and you are required to jump through several hoops in order to get a gun at all. You basically have to prove you need it for something, be that hunting or target shooting. CCWs for personal protection, bodyguard work or security is almost unheard of. A security company can in theory get guns and allow licensed employees to carry them on work, but that's for very specific contracts like guarding a priceless artifact or foreign dignitary. Most guns here are long guns for hunting, then pistols for certain shooting sports. Only criminal bikers and drug dealers (often the same) usually get illegal guns, whether that's stolen or smuggled or both. I've done security work for 20 years and never saw a gun, and exactly one guy I had a run-in with had a knife on him. He attacked me with his bare hands instead of using the knife. Guns also have to be locked up in a gun safe, or disassembled so that the bolt is stored apart from the rest, all to make it hard for a random burglar to steal a functioning gun.

And still there's people proposing idiotic solutions to the rare case where someone takes his dad's gun to kill someone, or a suicidal lunatic kills his family before killing himself. Like forcing you to store your guns outside the home, for example in a safe at the gun club or shooting range you go to! Oh what a brilliant idea! Now criminals looking to steal guns can go straight for it instead of looting random homes hoping to find something useful! Finland isn't a large country, but shooting ranges are still usually located a bit off from habitation to reduce the noise pollution. Even if you install alarms on the range closest to me it would take the police 15-20 minutes to get there, and that's in the south with small distances. We'd have to make these gun store facilities into real bunkers (or post armed guards 24/7) in order to keep them safe, and no one is going to pay for that.

Unless society turns into some sort of scifi dystopia thing where no one ever can have a gun unless they're police one has to accept some compromises. Denying guns to people with mental issues is surely a reasonable thing to do.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 00:49:44


Post by: -Loki-


Prestor Jon wrote:
There could be a shooting in the schools our kids go to, or if any or all of our kids died in a school shooting I’m not going to stop owning firearms and I’m not going to demand that my friends, neighbors and fellow citizens give up their guns either. I don’t understand this obsession with the people who aren’t the problem.


Wow.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 00:54:04


Post by: Frazzled


Well this went off the rails. Thank me to close it methinks.

Remember wherever you go, there you are.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 01:10:29


Post by: AdeptSister


The survivors are starting to get political:

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/02/parkland-shooting-teen-survivor-tweets-righteous-anger/553634/


Spoiler:
The Righteous Anger of the Parkland Shooting’s Teen Survivors
Students have mourned and rallied the public after the massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High that left 17 dead.
ROBINSON MEYER

Something was different about the mass shooting this week in Parkland, Florida, in which 14 students and three adults were killed.
It was not only the death toll. The mass murder at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High became the deadliest high-school shooting in American history (edging out Columbine, which killed 13 in 1999).
What made Parkland different were the people who stepped forward to describe it. High-school students—the survivors of the calamity themselves—became the voice of the tragedy. Tweets that were widely reported as coming from the students expressed grief for the victims, pushed against false reports, and demanded accountability.

Javi @Javier_Lovera__
We are too young to be losing friends like this.
12:02 PM - Feb 15, 2018

On television, on social media, they were unignorable. Many of them called for legislation to address the violence.
“We are children. You guys are the adults. Work together, come over your politics, and get something done,” David Hogg, a student who survived the killing, told CNN.

Another student was more pithy:

mieke eoyang
✔@MiekeEoyang
OMG, teen from #MarjoryStonemanDouglas on @npr just now, “I’m not a Russian computer, so I can’t vote” but will push elected officials on gun control.
5:13 PM - Feb 16, 2018

As the death toll rose, survivors leapt into the debate. When President Trump tweeted his condolences to the victims, and then said that neighbors and classmates should always report “bad and erratic behavior ... to authorities,” one student responded directly to him:

She later deleted that tweet and said:

sarah // #NEVERAGAIN@sarahchad_
@realDonaldTrump hello I’m the 16 year old girl who tweeted you that I didn’t want your condolences, I wanted gun control, and went viral because of it. I heard you are coming to my community soon. I would love for you to hear my opinions on gun control in person.

- a survivor
1:46 PM - Feb 16, 2018

When the conservative pundit Tomi Lahren demanded that “the left ... let the families grieve for even 24 hours before they push their anti-gun and anti-gun-owner agenda,” the same survivors, who knew the victims, responded in kind:

kyra@longlivekcx
A gun has killed 17 of my fellow classmates. A gun has traumatized my friends. My entire school, traumatized from this tragedy. This could have been prevented. Please stfu tomi https://twitter.com/tomilahren/status/963978544295505922
12:48 AM - Feb 15, 2018


carly@car_nove
I was hiding in a closet for 2 hours. It was about guns. You weren't there, you don't know how it felt. Guns give these disgusting people the ability to kill other human beings. This IS about guns and this is about all the people who had their life abruptly ended because of guns. https://twitter.com/tomilahren/status/963978544295505922
8:00 AM - Feb 15, 2018


nikki@nikta04
it is actually about guns you witch from hell https://twitter.com/tomilahren/status/963978544295505922
8:02 AM - Feb 15, 2018

It all seems like a new phenomenon. After Sandy Hook, the victims’ parents became their de facto advocates, a role they still hold. And in the wake of a mass shootings that targets adults, usually victims’ husbands, wives, parents, or adult children speak for them. But this is the largest high-school shooting in the social-media age—so it centers on adolescents, who can discuss and understand the tragedy as adults but who are as blameless for it as children.

Of course, not all teens may get the same hearing. Stoneman Douglas is a mostly white school in a mostly upper-middle-class area. From John Hughes on down, the white suburban teenager is a cherished figure in American culture, and that may give their pleas heightened visibility—even, perhaps, across party lines. That’s not a cut against the Douglas kids at all, but merely a note that the press and the public may not regard all high schoolers rallying against gun violencewith the same seriousness.
It’s easy to look at the conversation over the past few days and conclude that teens must be getting savvier about the news. The televised political culture ofCrossfire and Meet the Press is basically Deep History for many of today’s high schoolers, who would likely cite the election of Barack Obama as one of their earliest historical memories.

The current cohort came to heightened political awareness during the 2016 election, meaning they have watched the logic of Twitter absorb the presidency while adopting and adjusting the language of Twitter—and Snapchat and Instagram—for themselves. They bicker about the intersectional politics of young-adult novels on Tumblr; they trade in a constantly shifting visual culture of memes and half-remembered Vines.

Their lives have been drenched in media, and they have made much of that media themselves. They are used to telling their story. And when their story suffered a catastrophe, they told it.
But media savvy alone doesn’t explain what the kids have done. Hogg, the Douglas student who talked to CNN, is also a student journalist. With keen reportorial instinct, he interviewed his fellow students while the shooting was taking place—in a closet, in a classroom, while the school remained on lockdown. In the brief video he captured, a female student whose name was not given appeared to see the shooting as a political event—even before it ended.
“I don’t really think there’s anything new to say, but there shouldn’t have to be,”she told Hogg. “Because if you looked around this closet and saw everyone just hiding together, you would know that this shouldn’t be happening anymore, and that it doesn’t deserve to happen to anyone.”
This is what astonished and confronted me while watching Stoneman Douglas High’s speakers for the dead. Even as the shooting was happening, many of them talked about it not as an inexplicable catastrophe, not as an unforeseeable tragedy, but as something that just happens. A car crash, not an earthquake. It was something they had trained for, something they had perhaps visualized in their head once or twice before. And since it was almost normal, it was preventable—and thus political.
Those students understand that they live in a country that they have very little power to change—a country where, several times a year, a school for children becomes a charnel house. So when that hideous transformation struck their school, they already knew what they wanted to do. That girl in the closet, talking to her classmate, anticipated the next several days of talking points without knowing whether she would get to see those days at all. These assorted Florida teenagers knew the contours of the gun debate so well that they were rebutting NRA talking points just after emerging from their safe zones. Now, a few days later, their insistence on their own authority has gummed up the works of the otherwise clichéd national debate. Their calls for action may not lead to any imminent change in policy. But they have given the country a striking symbol of what—and who—we’re really talking about when we have these debates. And they will not be the last victims to face a loaded assault rifle and think: This is preventable. I must politicize this.

Which is a tragedy. Even as they endure the restrictions of childhood, these high schoolers have adopted the frustrated and realist politics of adults. And it’s clear that was true before the first shot went off, before the first ambulance arrived, before the first newspaper listed their friends on its front page. They are teenagers in the United States in 2018, which means that they have been preconditioned to grow up fast.


https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/02/florida-shooting-survivor-emma-gonzalez-to-trump-we-call-bs.html?via=recirc_recent

Spoiler:
Florida Shooting Survivor Emma Gonzalez to Trump: “We Call BS
By MATTHEW DESSEM

Emma Gonzalez, a senior at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School who survived Wednesday’s mass shooting, gave a blistering speech at an anti-gun rally on Saturday about the politicians complicit in the murder of her classmates. It was yet another reminder that the teenagers and children who grew up in the shadow of school shootings (and the 150,000 who survived one) are more practical—and less tolerant of empty rhetoric—than the adults who are supposed to protect them. Gonzalez had no use for crocodile tears from President Trump, who was in Florida on Friday to offer his condolences (and, reportedly, to drop by a Studio 54 theme party at Mar-a-Lago):

If the president wants to come up to me and tell me to my face that it was a terrible tragedy, and how it should never have happened, and maintain telling us how nothing is going to be done about it, I’m going to happily ask him how much money he received from the National Rifle Association. But hey, you want to know something? It doesn’t matter, because I already know: $30 million. … To every politician who is taking donations from the NRA, shame on you!

Gonzalez’s grief and righteous fury electrified the crowd, which broke into chants of “Shame on you.” She was especially incensed at Trump’s attempts to attribute the shooting to mental illness, given that the president specifically acted to make it easier for mentally ill people to purchase guns:

In February of 2017, one year ago, President Trump repealed an Obama-era regulation that would have made it easier to block the sale of firearms to people with certain mental illnesses. … I don’t need to be a psychologist to know that repealing that regulation was a really dumb idea. Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa was the sole sponsor of this bill to stop the FBI from performing background checks on people adjudicated to be mentally ill, and now he’s stating for the record, “Well, it’s a shame that the FBI isn’t doing background checks on these mentally ill people.” Well, duh: You took that opportunity away last year! The people in government who we voted into power are lying to us. And us kids seem to be the only ones who notice and are prepared to call BS.

Gonzalez then led the crowd in a spirited call and response, running through a pretty comprehensive list of lies and excuses from the gun lobby and their lackeys.

Companies trying to make caricatures of the teenagers nowadays, saying that all we are is self-involved and trend-obsessed, and hushing us into submission when our message doesn’t reach the ears of the nation? We are prepared to call BS!
Politicians who sit in their gilded House and Senate seats funded by the NRA, telling us nothing could have ever been done to prevent this: We call BS!
They say that tougher gun laws do not decrease gun violence: We call BS!
They say a good guy with a gun stops a bad guy with a gun: We call BS!
They say guns are just tools like knives and are as dangerous as cars: We call BS!
They say that no laws could have been able to prevent the hundreds of senseless tragedies that have occurred: We call BS!
That us kids don’t know what we’re talking about, that we’re too young to understand how the government works: We call BS!


It’s easy for adults to use a speech like this as an excuse for complacency: Any version of “the kids will save us” that doesn’t end with “from the gun-loving death cult we tolerated and nurtured for decades and thus bear special responsibility for confronting,” is, well, BS. But it’s heartening to see that the old lies aren’t working.



School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 01:20:09


Post by: Prestor Jon


 -Loki- wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:
There could be a shooting in the schools our kids go to, or if any or all of our kids died in a school shooting I’m not going to stop owning firearms and I’m not going to demand that my friends, neighbors and fellow citizens give up their guns either. I don’t understand this obsession with the people who aren’t the problem.


Wow.




I’ve had friends and relatives wreck their lives with alcoholism and my wife was in a car wreck due to a drunk driver but I’m still a social drinker. I’ve lost friends to car accidents but my family and I still drive cars daily. If somebody in my family got shot why would I suddenly decide not t own guns anymore? The only person(s) I would be angry at and want to prevent from owning guns would be the one who was shooting/murdering innocent people. I’d still have my guns and I’d want anyone else who is also lawfully able to own guns to have whatever guns they wanted. If somebody I care about got stabbed I wouldn’t be angry with knife owners.

Gun control legislation fails to pass in the US when it is primarily affects the tens of millions of gun owners who didn’t do anything wrong. Why would I ever tolerate being punished for a crime that was committed by somebody else?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 01:27:12


Post by: Prestor Jon


 AdeptSister wrote:
The survivors are starting to get political:

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/02/parkland-shooting-teen-survivor-tweets-righteous-anger/553634/


Spoiler:
The Righteous Anger of the Parkland Shooting’s Teen Survivors
Students have mourned and rallied the public after the massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High that left 17 dead.
ROBINSON MEYER

Something was different about the mass shooting this week in Parkland, Florida, in which 14 students and three adults were killed.
It was not only the death toll. The mass murder at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High became the deadliest high-school shooting in American history (edging out Columbine, which killed 13 in 1999).
What made Parkland different were the people who stepped forward to describe it. High-school students—the survivors of the calamity themselves—became the voice of the tragedy. Tweets that were widely reported as coming from the students expressed grief for the victims, pushed against false reports, and demanded accountability.

Javi @Javier_Lovera__
We are too young to be losing friends like this.
12:02 PM - Feb 15, 2018

On television, on social media, they were unignorable. Many of them called for legislation to address the violence.
“We are children. You guys are the adults. Work together, come over your politics, and get something done,” David Hogg, a student who survived the killing, told CNN.

Another student was more pithy:

mieke eoyang
✔@MiekeEoyang
OMG, teen from #MarjoryStonemanDouglas on @npr just now, “I’m not a Russian computer, so I can’t vote” but will push elected officials on gun control.
5:13 PM - Feb 16, 2018

As the death toll rose, survivors leapt into the debate. When President Trump tweeted his condolences to the victims, and then said that neighbors and classmates should always report “bad and erratic behavior ... to authorities,” one student responded directly to him:

She later deleted that tweet and said:

sarah // #NEVERAGAIN@sarahchad_
@realDonaldTrump hello I’m the 16 year old girl who tweeted you that I didn’t want your condolences, I wanted gun control, and went viral because of it. I heard you are coming to my community soon. I would love for you to hear my opinions on gun control in person.

- a survivor
1:46 PM - Feb 16, 2018

When the conservative pundit Tomi Lahren demanded that “the left ... let the families grieve for even 24 hours before they push their anti-gun and anti-gun-owner agenda,” the same survivors, who knew the victims, responded in kind:

kyra@longlivekcx
A gun has killed 17 of my fellow classmates. A gun has traumatized my friends. My entire school, traumatized from this tragedy. This could have been prevented. Please stfu tomi https://twitter.com/tomilahren/status/963978544295505922
12:48 AM - Feb 15, 2018


carly@car_nove
I was hiding in a closet for 2 hours. It was about guns. You weren't there, you don't know how it felt. Guns give these disgusting people the ability to kill other human beings. This IS about guns and this is about all the people who had their life abruptly ended because of guns. https://twitter.com/tomilahren/status/963978544295505922
8:00 AM - Feb 15, 2018


nikki@nikta04
it is actually about guns you witch from hell https://twitter.com/tomilahren/status/963978544295505922
8:02 AM - Feb 15, 2018

It all seems like a new phenomenon. After Sandy Hook, the victims’ parents became their de facto advocates, a role they still hold. And in the wake of a mass shootings that targets adults, usually victims’ husbands, wives, parents, or adult children speak for them. But this is the largest high-school shooting in the social-media age—so it centers on adolescents, who can discuss and understand the tragedy as adults but who are as blameless for it as children.

Of course, not all teens may get the same hearing. Stoneman Douglas is a mostly white school in a mostly upper-middle-class area. From John Hughes on down, the white suburban teenager is a cherished figure in American culture, and that may give their pleas heightened visibility—even, perhaps, across party lines. That’s not a cut against the Douglas kids at all, but merely a note that the press and the public may not regard all high schoolers rallying against gun violencewith the same seriousness.
It’s easy to look at the conversation over the past few days and conclude that teens must be getting savvier about the news. The televised political culture ofCrossfire and Meet the Press is basically Deep History for many of today’s high schoolers, who would likely cite the election of Barack Obama as one of their earliest historical memories.

The current cohort came to heightened political awareness during the 2016 election, meaning they have watched the logic of Twitter absorb the presidency while adopting and adjusting the language of Twitter—and Snapchat and Instagram—for themselves. They bicker about the intersectional politics of young-adult novels on Tumblr; they trade in a constantly shifting visual culture of memes and half-remembered Vines.

Their lives have been drenched in media, and they have made much of that media themselves. They are used to telling their story. And when their story suffered a catastrophe, they told it.
But media savvy alone doesn’t explain what the kids have done. Hogg, the Douglas student who talked to CNN, is also a student journalist. With keen reportorial instinct, he interviewed his fellow students while the shooting was taking place—in a closet, in a classroom, while the school remained on lockdown. In the brief video he captured, a female student whose name was not given appeared to see the shooting as a political event—even before it ended.
“I don’t really think there’s anything new to say, but there shouldn’t have to be,”she told Hogg. “Because if you looked around this closet and saw everyone just hiding together, you would know that this shouldn’t be happening anymore, and that it doesn’t deserve to happen to anyone.”
This is what astonished and confronted me while watching Stoneman Douglas High’s speakers for the dead. Even as the shooting was happening, many of them talked about it not as an inexplicable catastrophe, not as an unforeseeable tragedy, but as something that just happens. A car crash, not an earthquake. It was something they had trained for, something they had perhaps visualized in their head once or twice before. And since it was almost normal, it was preventable—and thus political.
Those students understand that they live in a country that they have very little power to change—a country where, several times a year, a school for children becomes a charnel house. So when that hideous transformation struck their school, they already knew what they wanted to do. That girl in the closet, talking to her classmate, anticipated the next several days of talking points without knowing whether she would get to see those days at all. These assorted Florida teenagers knew the contours of the gun debate so well that they were rebutting NRA talking points just after emerging from their safe zones. Now, a few days later, their insistence on their own authority has gummed up the works of the otherwise clichéd national debate. Their calls for action may not lead to any imminent change in policy. But they have given the country a striking symbol of what—and who—we’re really talking about when we have these debates. And they will not be the last victims to face a loaded assault rifle and think: This is preventable. I must politicize this.

Which is a tragedy. Even as they endure the restrictions of childhood, these high schoolers have adopted the frustrated and realist politics of adults. And it’s clear that was true before the first shot went off, before the first ambulance arrived, before the first newspaper listed their friends on its front page. They are teenagers in the United States in 2018, which means that they have been preconditioned to grow up fast.


https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/02/florida-shooting-survivor-emma-gonzalez-to-trump-we-call-bs.html?via=recirc_recent

Spoiler:
Florida Shooting Survivor Emma Gonzalez to Trump: “We Call BS
By MATTHEW DESSEM

Emma Gonzalez, a senior at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School who survived Wednesday’s mass shooting, gave a blistering speech at an anti-gun rally on Saturday about the politicians complicit in the murder of her classmates. It was yet another reminder that the teenagers and children who grew up in the shadow of school shootings (and the 150,000 who survived one) are more practical—and less tolerant of empty rhetoric—than the adults who are supposed to protect them. Gonzalez had no use for crocodile tears from President Trump, who was in Florida on Friday to offer his condolences (and, reportedly, to drop by a Studio 54 theme party at Mar-a-Lago):

If the president wants to come up to me and tell me to my face that it was a terrible tragedy, and how it should never have happened, and maintain telling us how nothing is going to be done about it, I’m going to happily ask him how much money he received from the National Rifle Association. But hey, you want to know something? It doesn’t matter, because I already know: $30 million. … To every politician who is taking donations from the NRA, shame on you!

Gonzalez’s grief and righteous fury electrified the crowd, which broke into chants of “Shame on you.” She was especially incensed at Trump’s attempts to attribute the shooting to mental illness, given that the president specifically acted to make it easier for mentally ill people to purchase guns:

In February of 2017, one year ago, President Trump repealed an Obama-era regulation that would have made it easier to block the sale of firearms to people with certain mental illnesses. … I don’t need to be a psychologist to know that repealing that regulation was a really dumb idea. Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa was the sole sponsor of this bill to stop the FBI from performing background checks on people adjudicated to be mentally ill, and now he’s stating for the record, “Well, it’s a shame that the FBI isn’t doing background checks on these mentally ill people.” Well, duh: You took that opportunity away last year! The people in government who we voted into power are lying to us. And us kids seem to be the only ones who notice and are prepared to call BS.

Gonzalez then led the crowd in a spirited call and response, running through a pretty comprehensive list of lies and excuses from the gun lobby and their lackeys.

Companies trying to make caricatures of the teenagers nowadays, saying that all we are is self-involved and trend-obsessed, and hushing us into submission when our message doesn’t reach the ears of the nation? We are prepared to call BS!
Politicians who sit in their gilded House and Senate seats funded by the NRA, telling us nothing could have ever been done to prevent this: We call BS!
They say that tougher gun laws do not decrease gun violence: We call BS!
They say a good guy with a gun stops a bad guy with a gun: We call BS!
They say guns are just tools like knives and are as dangerous as cars: We call BS!
They say that no laws could have been able to prevent the hundreds of senseless tragedies that have occurred: We call BS!
That us kids don’t know what we’re talking about, that we’re too young to understand how the government works: We call BS!


It’s easy for adults to use a speech like this as an excuse for complacency: Any version of “the kids will save us” that doesn’t end with “from the gun-loving death cult we tolerated and nurtured for decades and thus bear special responsibility for confronting,” is, well, BS. But it’s heartening to see that the old lies aren’t working.



Yeah they’ve been interviewing student survivors for several days now. It’ll be interesting to see if it results in any new legislation in Florida.

Brandon Minoff, a student at a Florida high school shooting on Wednesday, was interviewed by MSNBC's Brian Williams from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. Williams asked the kid what he would do about school shooting if he were a lawmaker.

Minoff instantly replied, "gun-wise, I don't think there's any way to prevent it. You outlaw guns, just creates higher demand for it."

"So what was your reaction when you heard that it was him?" Williams asked.

"I wasn't surprised, but it was kind of unfortunate to hear," the high school senior answered.

"If you were a lawmaker, an adult in a decision-making position, how would you stop, do you think, the kind of thing that happened today? A kid who had been thrown out, comes back with a weapon, and takes out whatever grievance he's been walking around with in his head?" Williams asked.

"Gun-wise, I don't think there's any way to prevent it," Minoff said. "You outlaw guns, just creates higher demand for it."

"I think it has to do with mental health, though," he said. "If he's been expelled three different times, from three different schools, I think he should be helped out."


https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/02/15/student_to_brian_williams_banning_guns_just_creates_a_higher_demand_wont_prevent_school_shootings.html


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 03:13:59


Post by: sirlynchmob


 CptJake wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
 CptJake wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:

people are willing to go to war, killing more people to protect their guns, yet will do absolutely nothing and even argue againt doing anything to save children.

sure it's easy to pick apary my idea, but I also noticed no one answered my question directly, but they answered none the less. their guns mean more than the lives of children and thus I hold all gun owners as being complicit in all school shootings.




I hold you and your ilk as complacent in every school shooting because you put these poor kids into environments where there are few people trained and equipped to protect them.

There was an armed deputy on the compass at the Florida shooting. He purportedly had said he never actually encountered the shooter.

The idea that you need to have armed security guards in school is ridiculous.

Look at Israeli schools...


I can't tell whether or not your original post was meant to be sarcastic/snarky, but if it was meant to be serious and you think this is legitimately a compelling argument...you're wrong on so many levels.


Only 1 guard? Makes my point there were few (in this case exactly 1) people trained and equipped, doesn't it.

And my point is exactly as serious as sirlynchmob blaming all gun owners for each school shooting. If folks like him didn't force our kids into unsafe environments it wouldn't be an issue.



You're the one putting your kids in unsafe conditions, you brought a gun into the house, and greatly increased their chances of getting shot.

You need to let go of that nonsense that more guns makes us safer, if that was in anyway true the US would be the safest place on earth. Yet clearly it's not. As gun ownership rises so do the mass shootings and all other gun crimes.





School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 03:21:45


Post by: Ahtman


There is more to gun control than all or nothing and treating it in such a manner is disingenuous and short sighted, but that isn't what will stop the US from having that conversation. We'll just let a minority shout and scream like children and pretend that the only possible option is absolute freedom or banning all guns, even though that is a false dichotomy.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 03:22:49


Post by: sirlynchmob


Relapse wrote:
Mario wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:At the end of the day I don't blame people who don't care about school shootings enough to give up their guns. In the past 6 years since Sandy Hook there been 239 school shootings resulting in 138 deaths.

That *sounds* horrible, but by my quick maths/googling there's 77 million students in the USA, 56 million of which are between kindergarten and 12th grade. That's only 1 in every 2.4 million on a yearly basis.

Is it terrible when a kid dies? Of course. But I don't blame anyone for feeling it's not a big enough number to give up the right to own guns. Compare that to car accidents, which I believe is about 1000 dead kids a year, which rounds out to about 1 in 70k.
Can those people who don't care also add up the injured, permanently disabled, property damage (always a big one when protestors destroy a few windows and thrash can), mental trauma, and so on. How about the medical cost of it all and how it impacts the victims?

People also insist that guns are there for their own safety but burglaries and home invasions also only happen to a tiny number of househulds, that's why having a gun in the house is overall more dangerous than not having one. Because more accidents with guns happen in those houses than people get killed by invaders. Turn the argument around onto the whole self-defence and home protection argument and you could as well say that the 2nd amendment is not really needed because it only affects such a small number of people.

I'm really curious where everyone would put the number: At which point would it be worth considering doing something, besides: nothing at all and never? What's the number of injured/disabled/dead people (or percentage of the population), or overall damage to the GDP and other "externalities".

According to Wikipedia on 9/11 "2,996 people were killed (including 19 terrorists) and more than 6,000 others wounded" and that was enough for the USA to start a war (with even more civilian deaths), suspend civil liberties in interesting ways, add more and more invasive searches on airports and find creative ways to describe all of this as not conflicting with the constitution. Trillions of dollars for feel safe from terrorists while destabilising the middle east even more and fostering an breeding ground for more radicalisation.

What would be the number where people could look at other developed countries and maybe imagine that life is possible without so many guns and that those people over there are not living in some dystopian hellhole with a tyrant on top. That's a completely hypothetical question because we've already heard (in older threads) all the arguments about how nearly impossible it would be to get rid of the 2nd amendment.

People worry about (islamic) terrorism, which kills an even smaller amount of people in the US, and are willing to give up all kinds of rights to fight that (and spend billions). What's the number of gun deaths that would be needed concede that some gun rights restrictions might actually work?



According to the CDC, 88,000 people a year die from alcohol related causes. About 11,000 of these are from drunk drivers, which is just about the number of people killed in gun related crime. 2 out of three domestic abuse cases are alcohol related, and when you add in divorces, physical and mental debilities cased by alcohol along with job loss and other miscellaneous problems, gun violence is pretty much dwarfed.
Why is it then that the news media harps on about guns and pretty much by comparison ignores alcohol?


Who's ignoring the alchohol? new laws are still being passed and car fatalities are trending downwards because of it. the newest law to be passed is if your bartender lets you drive off knowing you're drunk, he's also liable. gun related crimes relate to 30,000 deaths yearly, and no one adds in all the accidental shootings that just wound someone which comes in at 80,000 a year.

people who commit domestic abuse are also magnitudes more likely to kill their partner, hence why they need to be stripped of their guns. Guns and alcohol don't mix, we put breathalysers on cars to keep them from starting, we should take the guns away from people arresting for alcohol related crimes as well.

But Americas is a large country, they can tackle more than one issue at a time, they research diseases that only affect 1 person after all, yet for some reason those who are pro gun sales also tend to be against studies into gun related issues.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 03:34:47


Post by: Prestor Jon


sirlynchmob wrote:
Spoiler:
Relapse wrote:
Mario wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:At the end of the day I don't blame people who don't care about school shootings enough to give up their guns. In the past 6 years since Sandy Hook there been 239 school shootings resulting in 138 deaths.

That *sounds* horrible, but by my quick maths/googling there's 77 million students in the USA, 56 million of which are between kindergarten and 12th grade. That's only 1 in every 2.4 million on a yearly basis.

Is it terrible when a kid dies? Of course. But I don't blame anyone for feeling it's not a big enough number to give up the right to own guns. Compare that to car accidents, which I believe is about 1000 dead kids a year, which rounds out to about 1 in 70k.
Can those people who don't care also add up the injured, permanently disabled, property damage (always a big one when protestors destroy a few windows and thrash can), mental trauma, and so on. How about the medical cost of it all and how it impacts the victims?

People also insist that guns are there for their own safety but burglaries and home invasions also only happen to a tiny number of househulds, that's why having a gun in the house is overall more dangerous than not having one. Because more accidents with guns happen in those houses than people get killed by invaders. Turn the argument around onto the whole self-defence and home protection argument and you could as well say that the 2nd amendment is not really needed because it only affects such a small number of people.

I'm really curious where everyone would put the number: At which point would it be worth considering doing something, besides: nothing at all and never? What's the number of injured/disabled/dead people (or percentage of the population), or overall damage to the GDP and other "externalities".

According to Wikipedia on 9/11 "2,996 people were killed (including 19 terrorists) and more than 6,000 others wounded" and that was enough for the USA to start a war (with even more civilian deaths), suspend civil liberties in interesting ways, add more and more invasive searches on airports and find creative ways to describe all of this as not conflicting with the constitution. Trillions of dollars for feel safe from terrorists while destabilising the middle east even more and fostering an breeding ground for more radicalisation.

What would be the number where people could look at other developed countries and maybe imagine that life is possible without so many guns and that those people over there are not living in some dystopian hellhole with a tyrant on top. That's a completely hypothetical question because we've already heard (in older threads) all the arguments about how nearly impossible it would be to get rid of the 2nd amendment.

People worry about (islamic) terrorism, which kills an even smaller amount of people in the US, and are willing to give up all kinds of rights to fight that (and spend billions). What's the number of gun deaths that would be needed concede that some gun rights restrictions might actually work?



According to the CDC, 88,000 people a year die from alcohol related causes. About 11,000 of these are from drunk drivers, which is just about the number of people killed in gun related crime. 2 out of three domestic abuse cases are alcohol related, and when you add in divorces, physical and mental debilities cased by alcohol along with job loss and other miscellaneous problems, gun violence is pretty much dwarfed.
Why is it then that the news media harps on about guns and pretty much by comparison ignores alcohol?


Who's ignoring the alchohol? new laws are still being passed and car fatalities are trending downwards because of it. the newest law to be passed is if your bartender lets you drive off knowing you're drunk, he's also liable. gun related crimes relate to 30,000 deaths yearly, and no one adds in all the accidental shootings that just wound someone which comes in at 80,000 a year.

people who commit domestic abuse are also magnitudes more likely to kill their partner, hence why they need to be stripped of their guns. Guns and alcohol don't mix, we put breathalysers on cars to keep them from starting, we should take the guns away from people arresting for alcohol related crimes as well.

But Americas is a large country, they can tackle more than one issue at a time, they research diseases that only affect 1 person after all, yet for some reason those who are pro gun sales also tend to be against studies into gun related issues.


Your 30,000 gun crime deaths stat is bulked out with 20,000 suicides by forearm. It’s very difficult to restrict people’s access to their own guns and it’s difficult for a layman salesperson to diagnose somebody as suicidal when they walk in to buy a gun. Domestic violence/abuse convictions already lead to a revocation of 2A rights.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 04:08:00


Post by: sirlynchmob


It's like you're saying we should have background checks and wait times on all gun sales, I agree.

Oh and also fund the organisation so they can do it properly.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 04:29:07


Post by: Mitochondria


Prestor Jon wrote:
Mario wrote:
Spoiler:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:At the end of the day I don't blame people who don't care about school shootings enough to give up their guns. In the past 6 years since Sandy Hook there been 239 school shootings resulting in 138 deaths.

That *sounds* horrible, but by my quick maths/googling there's 77 million students in the USA, 56 million of which are between kindergarten and 12th grade. That's only 1 in every 2.4 million on a yearly basis.

Is it terrible when a kid dies? Of course. But I don't blame anyone for feeling it's not a big enough number to give up the right to own guns. Compare that to car accidents, which I believe is about 1000 dead kids a year, which rounds out to about 1 in 70k.
Can those people who don't care also add up the injured, permanently disabled, property damage (always a big one when protestors destroy a few windows and thrash can), mental trauma, and so on. How about the medical cost of it all and how it impacts the victims?

People also insist that guns are there for their own safety but burglaries and home invasions also only happen to a tiny number of househulds, that's why having a gun in the house is overall more dangerous than not having one. Because more accidents with guns happen in those houses than people get killed by invaders. Turn the argument around onto the whole self-defence and home protection argument and you could as well say that the 2nd amendment is not really needed because it only affects such a small number of people.

I'm really curious where everyone would put the number: At which point would it be worth considering doing something, besides: nothing at all and never? What's the number of injured/disabled/dead people (or percentage of the population), or overall damage to the GDP and other "externalities".

According to Wikipedia on 9/11 "2,996 people were killed (including 19 terrorists) and more than 6,000 others wounded" and that was enough for the USA to start a war (with even more civilian deaths), suspend civil liberties in interesting ways, add more and more invasive searches on airports and find creative ways to describe all of this as not conflicting with the constitution. Trillions of dollars for feel safe from terrorists while destabilising the middle east even more and fostering an breeding ground for more radicalisation.

What would be the number where people could look at other developed countries and maybe imagine that life is possible without so many guns and that those people over there are not living in some dystopian hellhole with a tyrant on top. That's a completely hypothetical question because we've already heard (in older threads) all the arguments about how nearly impossible it would be to get rid of the 2nd amendment.


People worry about (islamic) terrorism, which kills an even smaller amount of people in the US, and are willing to give up all kinds of rights to fight that (and spend billions). What's the number of gun deaths that would be needed concede that some gun rights restrictions might actually work?


If additional Federal regulations on gun ownership that I thought were reasonable were proposed I’d support them regardless of the number of deaths attributed to gun violence. If extreme impractical unreasonable pie in the sky wishlisting is what is proposed then I’m not going to agree with it no matter the circumstances.

There isn’t a scenario that could happen that’s going to convince me that gun ownership is bad. I’m always going to support our 2A rights. There could be a shooting in the schools our kids go to, or if any or all of our kids died in a school shooting I’m not going to stop owning firearms and I’m not going to demand that my friends, neighbors and fellow citizens give up their guns either. I don’t understand this obsession with the people who aren’t the problem.

I’d also be happy if Congress repealed a good 90% or more of the Patriot Act but that’s just like my opinion man.


I am in complete agreement with you.

I don't blame inanimate objects.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 04:37:18


Post by: Asherian Command




A possible amendment is to require it so that people have to be 21 or older to obtain a rifle (like do with handguns). Then having stricter laws and a Regulated task force that helps investigations that the FBI cannot always go to (AKA the ATF and expanding their domain and jurisidiction).

While also disallowing people from buying a ton of ammo all at once without reasoning or a work order or something. (IE good reason)

Also better background checks that check for mentality stability and possible a permit that permits you to use guns. (Which I think already exists) Adding you to a list of guns. (like do with cars) and also having a list of what is sold. Not stupid or authortarian, and not 'MY RIGHTS!" problem. Just us looking at and making a concious decision to prevent it instead of doing nothing and throwing the hot potato around.

There is a half way point instead of outright banning guns.

It is pertient and acceptable to look at solutions. Not plug our ears in and say some pretty terrible things. Its an inanimate object placing so much self worth and so much appericiation into it is kind of erm short sighted. Especially with the talk "Even if my kids die it wouldn't change my opinions!"

I call for a thread lock


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Ouze wrote:
Thoughts and prayers, obviously.

 Breotan wrote:
Feth like this NEVER happened when I was growing up.


Yes it did. It was less common, and you were less aware of it because 24 hour news didn't report it in realtime, but there have been school shootings in this country since the 1800s. If you're 42, then there have been about 85 school shootings from when you were born until you turned 18.


We've had 15 alone in 2018. (45 / 15, 18 is reported, three were misfires, 15 were actual shootings)
o.o

Edit : I am a little tired of seeing children dying from something that could be prevented. I do think the kids standing up for themselves to politicans and saying these things is awe inspiring and I really do hope these kids will drive that either now or when they become adults.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 05:05:54


Post by: Mitochondria


All of those measures are rife with opportunities for someone to have their civil rights trampled.

Sheesh, even having a registration list is asking for it to be abused.

I do think it is nice that some people are asking for a thread lock when no one breaking any rules or being rude.

Guns and gun ownership are not the problem.

It is as much a lie to say we have had 45 school shootings in 2018 as it is to say we have had 18 school shootings in 2018. Both numbers are lies meant to elicit a fearful response.

We are all living in the safest time period ever in recorded history.

Resorting to hysterics will not change that.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 05:12:19


Post by: Asherian Command


Mitochondria wrote:
All of those measures are rife with opportunities for someone to have their civil rights trampled.

Sheesh, even having a registration list is asking for it to be abused.

I do think it is nice that some people are asking for a thread lock when no one breaking any rules or being rude.

Guns and gun ownership are not the problem.


Erm like? Having your car registered?

You do know that you are put into a giant repository of car owners in the us right? And anyone with the right access can find exactly where you live based on your drivers liscense or your car's id. Thats not bad, thats okay. Like if it gets stolen it will be reported and if someone finds it they can return directly to you.

Putting guns in that same category of responsibility is not a 'civil rights' violation. If anything its sensible: like if your gun breaks you could have insurance for it or the like, or you could join the Militia and they have records that you own a weapon. And what type of gun and all that. Instead of seeing it as "BUT MY PRIVACY". There is no such thing in the internet age as 'privacy'. You've already given that right up when you logged onto facebook.

Guns are a problem being allowed by people who are not fully developed to have access to. People circumvent rules all the time, but if people go around those systems they should be punished we already have laws prohibiting kids below 21 years old from owning handguns, not much of a stretch for rifles.

US politics always gets mean no matter what because people are so stringent and so far into their beliefs.

We are all living in the safest time period ever in recorded history.

Resorting to hysterics will not change that.


Off-topic, no barring on conversation.

Hysterics isn't what I am saying. Its called pathos and ethos. IE empathy and sympathy for the situation, look at the circumstances, 17 people died.

17 beautiful people. 3 of whom put their lives of others in-front of their own:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/15/us/florida-school-victims.html

As gunshots echoed through the high school, a geography teacher, Scott Beigel, 35, paused to usher stragglers into his classroom before locking the door, only to be shot and killed himself as the shooter strode by.

A parent, Jennifer Zeif, credited Mr. Beigel for saving her son’s life. Her son, Matthew, 14, had been the last one to slip inside the class, just ahead of Mr. Beigel. Seconds later, the room filled with a smoky haze, Matthew said, and he turned to see his teacher lying near the door, pale and bleeding.

“Mr. Beigel could have passed Matthew up and gone in the classroom first,” Ms. Zeif said. “In that case, Matthew would have been the one in the doorway.”

On Thursday, as officials identified 17 people killed in the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., some of the victims, like Mr. Beigel, were remembered for having tried to spare others in the moments of chaos that unfolded inside the school.
Photo
Scott Beigel.

Aaron Feis, a popular football coach who was killed, also had tried to protect students, officials said. “He was that kind of guy,” said Jack Fris, a former football player at the school.

Friends said they were not surprised that Mr. Beigel, a much-beloved figure at a Pennsylvania summer camp that he attended and later helped to run, had put his students’ safety above his own.

“Thousands of people at Camp Starlight looked up to Scott,” said Grant Williams, 33, an emergency room nurse who worked with Mr. Beigel at the camp for several summers and was mourning long-distance with former camp counselors and campers on Thursday. “He was someone you strive to be like,” said another former Starlight counselor.

At the Florida high school, teachers and students were among the dead. There was a soccer player, a student nicknamed Guac and a trombonist in the marching band. Eight of the victims were girls and young women; nine were boys and men. They ranged from 14 years old to 49.

These are some of their stories.
Alyssa Alhadeff
Photo
Alyssa Alhadeff.

Alyssa Alhadeff, 14, had played competitive soccer since she was 3 years old. Like any athlete, she had her ups and downs. But when her club, Parkland, faced off against the rival team from Coral Springs on Feb. 13, she was at the top of her game.

“Her passing was on, her shooting was on, her decision-making was on,” her mother, Lori Alhadeff, recalled. With her outgoing personality, Alyssa had a wide circle of friends at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. She placed first in a debate tournament, was taking Algebra 2 and Spanish 3, and was honing her skills as an attacking midfielder. The score at what was to be her last time on the soccer field was 1-0, Parkland.

“I was so proud of her,” her mother said. “I told her it was the best game of her life.”
Martin Duque Anguiano
Photo
Martin Duque Anguiano.

Martin Duque Anguiano, a 14-year-old freshman, was “a very funny kid, outgoing and sometimes really quiet,” his brother, Miguel Duque, wrote on a GoFundMe page for funeral expenses.

“He was sweet and caring and loved by all his family,” Miguel wrote. “Most of all he was my baby brother.”
Nicholas Dworet

Nicholas Dworet, a promising high school swimmer, took a recruiting visit to the University of Indianapolis a few weeks ago. After a group dinner, he pulled the coach aside and said he wanted to compete there after he graduated this spring.

“He was an instant part of our family,” said Jason Hite, the university’s swim coach. Mr. Hite said Nicholas, 17, had received an academic scholarship and planned to study physical therapy.
Photo
Nicholas Dworet. Credit via Reuters

University officials and a youth swim team in Florida said Nicholas was among those killed on Wednesday. A post on the Facebook page for TS Aquatics, the Florida club where he swam, described Nicholas as an amazing person who had been “on a major upswing in his life.”

Nicholas had improved academically and athletically since starting high school, Mr. Hite said, and his mentors in Florida “felt like the best was still to come for him.”

“We were going to continue to groom him to be a future leader for our team,” Mr. Hite said.

Mr. Hite said he sent Nicholas a text message on Wednesday afternoon after hearing about the shooting at his school. He got no response.

“The saddest thing to me is how much life this kid had and how hard he had worked to change directions and change paths,” Mr. Hite said. “He was really going in the right direction and he had really created some opportunities for himself.”
Aaron Feis
Photo
Aaron Feis.

At Stoneman Douglas, Mr. Feis was known to all — an assistant football coach and a security monitor. But he too had graduated from the school, played on the football team, and knew exactly what it was like to be a student in these halls.

So he was seen as someone who looked out for students who got in trouble, those who were struggling, those without fathers at home. “They said he was like another father,” Mr. Feis’s grandfather, Raymond, recalled. “He’d go out of his way to help anybody.”

School officials said that Mr. Feis, 37, did the same on Wednesday. When there were signs of trouble, they said, he responded immediately to help. “When Aaron Feis died, when he was killed — tragically, inhumanely — he did it protecting others; you can guarantee that,” said Scott Israel, the sheriff of Broward County.

“I don’t know when Aaron’s funeral is,” Sheriff Israel said. “I don’t know how many adults are going to go, but you’ll get 2,000 kids there.”

In Parkland, Austin Lazar, a student, recalled his former coach as cheery and selfless. “He always put everybody before himself.”

Mr. Feis was married, his family said, and had a daughter, Arielle.
Jaime Guttenberg
Photo
Jaime Guttenberg. Credit via Associated Press

Jaime Guttenberg, 14, danced nonstop. Sometimes she went on for hours, her aunt, Ellyn Guttenberg, said. Jaime was warm, too, always taking Ms. Guttenberg’s son, who has special needs, under her wing.

Jaime’s Facebook page, now memorialized, shows photos of her dancing, hanging out with friends, enjoying the beach and snuggling a dog.

Her father, Fred Guttenberg, posted this on Facebook: “I am broken as I write this trying to figure out how my family gets through this.”
Christopher Hixon
Photo
Christopher Hixon. Credit Susan Stocker/South Florida Sun Sentinel

Christopher Hixon, 49, the school’s athletic director, was a well-known figure in Florida high school sports. One man, Jose Roman, posted on social media that Mr. Hixon was “a great coach and an awesome motivator” when he was a freshman athlete years ago.

Mr. Hixon was named athletic director of the year in 2017 by the Broward County Athletics Association.
Luke Hoyer
Photo
Luke Hoyer.

Luke Hoyer, 15, spent last Christmas with his extended family in South Carolina, where he bowled, joined in a big holiday meal and swapped stories with relatives.

A cousin, Grant Cox, who was at the Christmas gathering said the family had been told by the police that Luke, a freshman at Stoneman Douglas, was among those killed on Wednesday.

Mr. Cox said Luke was a basketball player who was ambitious about the sport and admired N.B.A. stars like LeBron James and Stephen Curry.

“I know Luke loved his family,” Mr. Cox said. “I know he did. He had a huge heart.”

“He was quiet, but a very happy individual,” he said.
Cara Loughran
Photo
Cara Loughran

Cara Loughran, 14, loved the beach. She adored her cousins. And she was an excellent student, her family said.

“We are absolutely gutted,” by her death, her aunt, Lindsay Fontana, wrote in a Facebook post. “While your thoughts are appreciated, I beg you to DO SOMETHING. This should not have happened to our niece Cara and it cannot happen to other people’s families.”
Gina Montalto

Gina Montalto, 14, was identified in local news accounts as a member of her school’s winter color guard team.
Photo
Gina Montalto. Credit via Associated Press

Andy Mroczek, who has worked as a choreographer at Stoneman Douglas, posted a tribute to Gina on Facebook. “We lost a beautiful soul tonight,” he wrote.
Joaquin Oliver
Photo
Joaquin Oliver.

People often spelled Joaquin Oliver’s first name wrong, so he went with a snappy nickname: Guac.

He played basketball in the city recreational league — his jersey number was 2 — and he loved to write, filling a notebook with poetry, said Julien Decoste, a close friend of Joaquin’s and a fellow senior at Stoneman Douglas.

“Guac and I always wanted to graduate together and prove everyone wrong, that we would be successful together,” Julien said.

On Tuesday, Joaquin, 17, asked Julien to help out at his next basketball game, which was scheduled for Thursday.

“I’ll be there,” Julien texted his friend. “Good looks brotha,” Joaquin responded.

On Wednesday, as he hid inside a closet during the shooting, Julien texted Joaquin to check in.

“You good?” Julien texted. “Bro I need you to answer me please.”
Alaina Petty
Photo
Alaina Petty.

Alaina Petty, 14, had helped do cleanup work in Florida after Hurricane Irma, her family said in a statement, and she was an active member of a volunteer group with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

“Her selfless service brought peace and joy to those that had lost everything during the storm,” the family’s statement said. “While we will not have the opportunity to watch her grow up and become the amazing woman we know she would become, we are keeping an eternal perspective.”

Alaina was also a member of the Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps, her family said.
Meadow Pollack
Photo
Meadow Pollack.

Meadow Pollack, 18, was a senior at the high school who was planning to go to Lynn University in Boca Raton, Fla., next year, according to her father, Andrew Pollack, who said his daughter was among the dead.

“She was just unbelievable,” Mr. Pollack said. “She was a very strong-willed young girl who had everything going for her.”

Mr. Pollack described his daughter as smart, beautiful and caring. She worked at her boyfriend’s family’s motorcycle repair business.

“She just knew how to get what she wanted all the time,” Mr. Pollack said. “Nothing could ever stop her from what she wanted to achieve.”
Helena Ramsay
Photo
Helena Ramsay.

Helena Ramsay, 17, was smart, kindhearted and thoughtful, her relative, Curtis Page, wrote on Facebook.

“Though she was somewhat reserved, she had a relentless motivation towards her academic studies, and her soft warm demeanor brought the best out in all who knew her,” he said, later adding: “She would have started college next year.”
Alex Schachter
Photo
Alex Schachter.

Alex Schachter, 14, played the trombone in the Stoneman Douglas marching band, and was proud to have participated in winning a state championship last year. A freshman at the high school, he often played basketball with friends and was “a sweetheart of a kid,” his father, Max Schachter, said. Earlier this week, the two had discussed which classes Alex would take next semester.

Mr. Schachter said Alex had loved his mother, who died when he was five years old. His older brother also attends Stoneman Douglas and survived the shooting. Alex “just wanted to do well and make his parents happy,” his father said.
Carmen Schentrup
Photo
Carmen Schentrup

Carmen Schentrup, a 2018 National Merit Scholarship semifinalist, was the smartest 16-year-old that her cousin, Matt Brandow, had ever met, he said in a Facebook post.

“I’m in a daze right now,” he wrote.
Peter Wang
Photo
Peter Wang.

Peter Wang, 15, a freshman, helped his cousin, Aaron Chen, adjust when he settled in Florida.

“He was always so nice and so generous,” Aaron, 16, said, adding that even though Peter was younger he had worked to be sure Aaron didn’t get bullied when he first arrived.

Peter was last seen in his gray uniform for the Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps, or J.R.O.T.C., on Wednesday. On Thursday, Aaron and another cousin said the authorities had informed the family that Peter was among those killed in the shooting.

“He was the kid in school who would be friends with anyone,” said the other cousin, Lin Chen, 24. “He didn’t care about popularity.”


Each of these people are gone, their voice silenced by a terrible individual who wanted fame from media, who wanted to feel important in our society as our media does they sensationalized it. This isn't some false equalivence or thoughts or prayers BS. We discuss this like adults, we look at the problem. if a bridge falls apart you blame the engineers, if a killer goes on a rampage you blame the shooter, but you also blame the circumstances leading up to that event. IE : The FBI, Politicans, and ease of access of weaponry to a known threat or at risk person.

Sometimes we have to give up our liberties so susie down the road doesn't need to wear kevlar to school.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 05:56:40


Post by: Mitochondria


Feel free to surrender your liberties.

I feel you are wrong to do so, but you are welcome to.

I like how you brushed aside my point of the safest period of history as off topic.

Then right on to the appeal to emotion. Bravo sir.

Those deaths as tragic as they are, are simply statistically insignificant.

I am not for rolling back everyone's rights because occasionally bad things happen.

The killer was caught, he will be punished. That is justice.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 06:17:09


Post by: Asherian Command


statistically insignificant.


So is this argument.

Then right on to the appeal to emotion. Bravo sir.


When one ignores the merits of an argument and forgets what the discussion is even about you lose sight of its true meaning. If the 'safest era' shtick is used more sure. It is the safest time to be alive. But it is the largest political uncertainty in decades. Along with the rise of a White Supremacist who shot up a school. 'safest' Not as much. Couple years ago, I would agree but right now. No it is not the 'safest it has ever been'.

The killer was caught, he will be punished. That is justice.

Que next shooting same premise, same response, same punishments, lack of responsibility. Que up thoughts and prayers. Rinse, Repeat. Same thing of a systematic problem that continues to happens.

This has happened 15 times, some of the deadliest shootings have happened in the last two years. Miami, California, and las vegas. All these shootings yet the "Safest time".


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 06:28:25


Post by: Relapse


sirlynchmob wrote:
Relapse wrote:
Mario wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:At the end of the day I don't blame people who don't care about school shootings enough to give up their guns. In the past 6 years since Sandy Hook there been 239 school shootings resulting in 138 deaths.

That *sounds* horrible, but by my quick maths/googling there's 77 million students in the USA, 56 million of which are between kindergarten and 12th grade. That's only 1 in every 2.4 million on a yearly basis.

Is it terrible when a kid dies? Of course. But I don't blame anyone for feeling it's not a big enough number to give up the right to own guns. Compare that to car accidents, which I believe is about 1000 dead kids a year, which rounds out to about 1 in 70k.
Can those people who don't care also add up the injured, permanently disabled, property damage (always a big one when protestors destroy a few windows and thrash can), mental trauma, and so on. How about the medical cost of it all and how it impacts the victims?

People also insist that guns are there for their own safety but burglaries and home invasions also only happen to a tiny number of househulds, that's why having a gun in the house is overall more dangerous than not having one. Because more accidents with guns happen in those houses than people get killed by invaders. Turn the argument around onto the whole self-defence and home protection argument and you could as well say that the 2nd amendment is not really needed because it only affects such a small number of people.

I'm really curious where everyone would put the number: At which point would it be worth considering doing something, besides: nothing at all and never? What's the number of injured/disabled/dead people (or percentage of the population), or overall damage to the GDP and other "externalities".

According to Wikipedia on 9/11 "2,996 people were killed (including 19 terrorists) and more than 6,000 others wounded" and that was enough for the USA to start a war (with even more civilian deaths), suspend civil liberties in interesting ways, add more and more invasive searches on airports and find creative ways to describe all of this as not conflicting with the constitution. Trillions of dollars for feel safe from terrorists while destabilising the middle east even more and fostering an breeding ground for more radicalisation.

What would be the number where people could look at other developed countries and maybe imagine that life is possible without so many guns and that those people over there are not living in some dystopian hellhole with a tyrant on top. That's a completely hypothetical question because we've already heard (in older threads) all the arguments about how nearly impossible it would be to get rid of the 2nd amendment.

People worry about (islamic) terrorism, which kills an even smaller amount of people in the US, and are willing to give up all kinds of rights to fight that (and spend billions). What's the number of gun deaths that would be needed concede that some gun rights restrictions might actually work?



According to the CDC, 88,000 people a year die from alcohol related causes. About 11,000 of these are from drunk drivers, which is just about the number of people killed in gun related crime. 2 out of three domestic abuse cases are alcohol related, and when you add in divorces, physical and mental debilities cased by alcohol along with job loss and other miscellaneous problems, gun violence is pretty much dwarfed.
Why is it then that the news media harps on about guns and pretty much by comparison ignores alcohol?


Who's ignoring the alchohol? new laws are still being passed and car fatalities are trending downwards because of it. the newest law to be passed is if your bartender lets you drive off knowing you're drunk, he's also liable. gun related crimes relate to 30,000 deaths yearly, and no one adds in all the accidental shootings that just wound someone which comes in at 80,000 a year.

people who commit domestic abuse are also magnitudes more likely to kill their partner, hence why they need to be stripped of their guns. Guns and alcohol don't mix, we put breathalysers on cars to keep them from starting, we should take the guns away from people arresting for alcohol related crimes as well.

But Americas is a large country, they can tackle more than one issue at a time, they research diseases that only affect 1 person after all, yet for some reason those who are pro gun sales also tend to be against studies into gun related issues.


As I said, by comparison, the news media ignores alcohol related deaths and carnage, unless you know of something on one of the major news servers that reports alcohol related deaths as often as they do gun related deaths.
As was pointed out earlier, the 30,000 deaths you said were from murder is not true. The FBI puts the number at around 11,000-12,000. This, as I said is comparable to the number of people killed by drunk drivers. The rest of the gun deaths are accidents or suicides.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 06:45:03


Post by: Dreadwinter


Mitochondria wrote:
All of those measures are rife with opportunities for someone to have their civil rights trampled.

Sheesh, even having a registration list is asking for it to be abused.


Explain how being on a list can be abused. I am on many governments lists. Registration for my vehicle, voting registration, licenses and certificates.

At what point does the abuse begin?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 06:46:10


Post by: ZebioLizard2


 Dreadwinter wrote:
Mitochondria wrote:
All of those measures are rife with opportunities for someone to have their civil rights trampled.

Sheesh, even having a registration list is asking for it to be abused.


Explain how being on a list can be abused. I am on many governments lists. Registration for my vehicle, voting registration, licenses and certificates.

At what point does the abuse begin?


A while ago, and it sparked outrage.

https://www.cnn.com/2012/12/25/us/new-york-gun-permit-map/index.html


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 07:12:24


Post by: LordofHats


 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
 Dreadwinter wrote:
Mitochondria wrote:
All of those measures are rife with opportunities for someone to have their civil rights trampled.

Sheesh, even having a registration list is asking for it to be abused.


Explain how being on a list can be abused. I am on many governments lists. Registration for my vehicle, voting registration, licenses and certificates.

At what point does the abuse begin?


A while ago, and it sparked outrage.

https://www.cnn.com/2012/12/25/us/new-york-gun-permit-map/index.html


I'm unclear how a newspaper being an absolute ass with public records is the fault of public records, especially when the problem is easily remedied with small adjustments to privacy laws. And as assholish as that decision is ("people have a right to know" being stretch to the absolute limit on that one eh?) it's not really abusive. Just supremely creepy and rude.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 07:23:45


Post by: Dreadwinter


 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
 Dreadwinter wrote:
Mitochondria wrote:
All of those measures are rife with opportunities for someone to have their civil rights trampled.

Sheesh, even having a registration list is asking for it to be abused.


Explain how being on a list can be abused. I am on many governments lists. Registration for my vehicle, voting registration, licenses and certificates.

At what point does the abuse begin?


A while ago, and it sparked outrage.

https://www.cnn.com/2012/12/25/us/new-york-gun-permit-map/index.html


An outside source being idiots has what to do with the government abusing lists?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 07:50:38


Post by: Relapse


 Dreadwinter wrote:
 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
 Dreadwinter wrote:
Mitochondria wrote:
All of those measures are rife with opportunities for someone to have their civil rights trampled.

Sheesh, even having a registration list is asking for it to be abused.


Explain how being on a list can be abused. I am on many governments lists. Registration for my vehicle, voting registration, licenses and certificates.

At what point does the abuse begin?


A while ago, and it sparked outrage.

https://www.cnn.com/2012/12/25/us/new-york-gun-permit-map/index.html


An outside source being idiots has what to do with the government abusing lists?


Perhaps because the government had a list put together that ended up making people targets, regardless of who misused it? It's not really hard to see that.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 07:59:06


Post by: Asherian Command


Relapse wrote:
 Dreadwinter wrote:
 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
 Dreadwinter wrote:
Mitochondria wrote:
All of those measures are rife with opportunities for someone to have their civil rights trampled.

Sheesh, even having a registration list is asking for it to be abused.


Explain how being on a list can be abused. I am on many governments lists. Registration for my vehicle, voting registration, licenses and certificates.

At what point does the abuse begin?


A while ago, and it sparked outrage.

https://www.cnn.com/2012/12/25/us/new-york-gun-permit-map/index.html


An outside source being idiots has what to do with the government abusing lists?


Perhaps because the government had a list put together that ended up making people targets, regardless of who misused it? It's not really hard to see that.


Targets of what? And would anyone care if it was made public "This person owns a gun." Like it would be like "this person owns a hummer." or "This person owns a Mini-Van." At that point who cares? Okay so you have a gun, your on a list which gives you the benefit of "If my gun is stolen it can be returned because of the item number." Or helk if it is lost or damaged you have insurance for it. etc. ITs for security and its also a personal benefit as well.

Its not a "Big brother knows who owns guns and who doesn't."

It would also allow for survey people to see the wide range of opinions and have a more accurate census of how many people in the us owns a gun. Thats not scary at all.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 08:14:08


Post by: LordofHats


Relapse wrote:
Perhaps because the government had a list put together that ended up making people targets, regardless of who misused it? It's not really hard to see that.


That's an issue of implementation, not of existence. It's not really hard to see that.

Really the dick part of it isn't that a list exists it's that a newspaper decided to publish the list with a map for flimsy reasons that reek more of "feth gun owners" than anything useful which is the newspapers fault not the government's. And as absurd as the defense of that rather dickish move is, there is a point to some of it. Houses, land, vehicles, and any number of other things that are "valuable" or "make people targets" are also matters of public record. No one jumps out to defend sex offenders from being publicly listed for all to see time served or not. Why should firearms licensing be granted exception simply because gun owners don't like it? I don't like my credit being determined by third parties I have no say in and whose methods are fundamentally cryptic, but that's the world we live in. I'm not sure there's a solid argument for making license/permit holding some special exemption.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 09:21:59


Post by: A Town Called Malus


 LordofHats wrote:


That's an issue of implementation, not of existence. It's not really hard to see that.


But the assumption is that such laws will always be badly implemented.

Which is possibly true due to lobbying by the NRA and other pro-gun political lobbying groups. If they can't block legislation they'd happily make it awful and open to abuse to point at it as evidence it is bad later and get it, and probably other legislation, repealed.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 09:31:58


Post by: Dreadwinter


Relapse wrote:
 Dreadwinter wrote:
 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
 Dreadwinter wrote:
Mitochondria wrote:
All of those measures are rife with opportunities for someone to have their civil rights trampled.

Sheesh, even having a registration list is asking for it to be abused.


Explain how being on a list can be abused. I am on many governments lists. Registration for my vehicle, voting registration, licenses and certificates.

At what point does the abuse begin?


A while ago, and it sparked outrage.

https://www.cnn.com/2012/12/25/us/new-york-gun-permit-map/index.html


An outside source being idiots has what to do with the government abusing lists?


Perhaps because the government had a list put together that ended up making people targets, regardless of who misused it? It's not really hard to see that.


So a mistake was made and now we can never ever take that risk again?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 11:33:29


Post by: Just Tony


Asherian Command wrote:
Relapse wrote:
 Dreadwinter wrote:
 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
 Dreadwinter wrote:
Mitochondria wrote:
All of those measures are rife with opportunities for someone to have their civil rights trampled.

Sheesh, even having a registration list is asking for it to be abused.


Explain how being on a list can be abused. I am on many governments lists. Registration for my vehicle, voting registration, licenses and certificates.

At what point does the abuse begin?


A while ago, and it sparked outrage.

https://www.cnn.com/2012/12/25/us/new-york-gun-permit-map/index.html


An outside source being idiots has what to do with the government abusing lists?


Perhaps because the government had a list put together that ended up making people targets, regardless of who misused it? It's not really hard to see that.


Targets of what? And would anyone care if it was made public "This person owns a gun." Like it would be like "this person owns a hummer." or "This person owns a Mini-Van." At that point who cares? Okay so you have a gun, your on a list which gives you the benefit of "If my gun is stolen it can be returned because of the item number." Or helk if it is lost or damaged you have insurance for it. etc. ITs for security and its also a personal benefit as well.

Its not a "Big brother knows who owns guns and who doesn't."

It would also allow for survey people to see the wide range of opinions and have a more accurate census of how many people in the us owns a gun. Thats not scary at all.


https://www.theblaze.com/news/2013/01/13/house-identified-on-ny-papers-gun-map-burglarized-and-the-robbers-went-straight-for-the-guns

LordofHats wrote:
Relapse wrote:
Perhaps because the government had a list put together that ended up making people targets, regardless of who misused it? It's not really hard to see that.


That's an issue of implementation, not of existence. It's not really hard to see that.

Really the dick part of it isn't that a list exists it's that a newspaper decided to publish the list with a map for flimsy reasons that reek more of "feth gun owners" than anything useful which is the newspapers fault not the government's. And as absurd as the defense of that rather dickish move is, there is a point to some of it. Houses, land, vehicles, and any number of other things that are "valuable" or "make people targets" are also matters of public record. No one jumps out to defend sex offenders from being publicly listed for all to see time served or not. Why should firearms licensing be granted exception simply because gun owners don't like it? I don't like my credit being determined by third parties I have no say in and whose methods are fundamentally cryptic, but that's the world we live in. I'm not sure there's a solid argument for making license/permit holding some special exemption.


You realize you just lumped gun owners in with sex offenders, right?

Dreadwinter wrote:
Relapse wrote:
 Dreadwinter wrote:
 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
 Dreadwinter wrote:
Mitochondria wrote:
All of those measures are rife with opportunities for someone to have their civil rights trampled.

Sheesh, even having a registration list is asking for it to be abused.


Explain how being on a list can be abused. I am on many governments lists. Registration for my vehicle, voting registration, licenses and certificates.

At what point does the abuse begin?


A while ago, and it sparked outrage.

https://www.cnn.com/2012/12/25/us/new-york-gun-permit-map/index.html


An outside source being idiots has what to do with the government abusing lists?


Perhaps because the government had a list put together that ended up making people targets, regardless of who misused it? It's not really hard to see that.


So a mistake was made and now we can never ever take that risk again?


Once again:

https://www.theblaze.com/news/2013/01/13/house-identified-on-ny-papers-gun-map-burglarized-and-the-robbers-went-straight-for-the-guns

If this sort of gak can happen, imagine what OTHER things could happen with something as simple as a registry. The number of electronic devices in my house isn't collated on a data sheet for everyone to access, so why should any other valuables? Especially valuables that are in high demand on the black market.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 11:39:20


Post by: Dreadwinter


So if a car is stolen, we should no longer have to register our vehicles?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 12:04:56


Post by: Just Tony


Did someone break into your garage bypassing all other valuables simply to get said car? Don't be obtuse.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 12:08:48


Post by: AllSeeingSkink


Honestly if it's that easy for the general public to get vehicle registration info, I'm all for vehicle registration lists being abolished too. It's a gak idea to have information like car listings and gun listings easily available to the public, I'd hazard a guess that it'd cause a big increase in thefts of such items.

A big part of the security of my valuable collectable vehicle is simply not many people know it's there. Obviously neighbours and friends and whatnot do, but the whole bloody country doesn't know.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 12:11:03


Post by: Dreadwinter


 Just Tony wrote:
Did someone break into your garage bypassing all other valuables simply to get said car? Don't be obtuse.


Are you really going to say that has never happened?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 12:18:50


Post by: Just Tony


There's a difference between someone seeing an unlocked car outside someone's house and some top dollar chop shop sending a repo crew to specific houses to get Lamborhinis. Once again, don't make false equivalencies to foster to your political viewpoints.

I don't pretend the government is incarcerating law abiding gun owners, don't pretend that people wouldn't take advantage of a weapon registry.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 12:22:23


Post by: Prestor Jon


Why does anyone think Federal registration is possible or legal? When you register your car it’s in a state database not a national one. There is no Federal DMV or Federal voter rolls etc, it’s all done at the state level that’s how federalism works.

A majority of states already have exceptions to the Federal age minimums for firearms ownerships. Plenty of states allow minors to own guns with parental permission or as transfers. Some states have no age limit at all for long guns.

States can try to set up firearm registries, Connecticut tried to set up an “assault rifle” registry after Sandy Hook and it’s failed to become a complete and accurate list to this day and Connecticut hasn’t even tried to enforce it.

Maybe Florida will pass some kind of firearm registration law we’ll see but Congress is unlikely to pass such a thing anytime soon.

Canada tried to implement a national registry and it was so unpopular that it was abandoned.

The Federal government operates the No Fly List and they have made numerous mistakes with it and refused to fix them.

The Federal government maintains the database of NSA surveillamce and has illegally misused it on multiple documented instances.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 12:27:32


Post by: ZebioLizard2


It is also much more difficult to steal a car as you'd require either A: The key, or B: The ability to properly hotwire. If it's in the garage they'll need to get it open as well.

There's also the issue that going in the criminals know you are armed, and as a result their actions may be far more hostile as a result. If a criminal goes in knowing you have guns, there is the possibility they will be far more willing to quickly take down people rather then attempting the old "Smash and grab"

Guns also can be quite lucrative to sell, given some prices as well.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 12:52:40


Post by: CptJake


sirlynchmob wrote:
 CptJake wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
 CptJake wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:

people are willing to go to war, killing more people to protect their guns, yet will do absolutely nothing and even argue againt doing anything to save children.

sure it's easy to pick apary my idea, but I also noticed no one answered my question directly, but they answered none the less. their guns mean more than the lives of children and thus I hold all gun owners as being complicit in all school shootings.




I hold you and your ilk as complacent in every school shooting because you put these poor kids into environments where there are few people trained and equipped to protect them.

There was an armed deputy on the compass at the Florida shooting. He purportedly had said he never actually encountered the shooter.

The idea that you need to have armed security guards in school is ridiculous.

Look at Israeli schools...


I can't tell whether or not your original post was meant to be sarcastic/snarky, but if it was meant to be serious and you think this is legitimately a compelling argument...you're wrong on so many levels.


Only 1 guard? Makes my point there were few (in this case exactly 1) people trained and equipped, doesn't it.

And my point is exactly as serious as sirlynchmob blaming all gun owners for each school shooting. If folks like him didn't force our kids into unsafe environments it wouldn't be an issue.



You're the one putting your kids in unsafe conditions, you brought a gun into the house, and greatly increased their chances of getting shot.

You need to let go of that nonsense that more guns makes us safer, if that was in anyway true the US would be the safest place on earth. Yet clearly it's not. As gun ownership rises so do the mass shootings and all other gun crimes.





My kids, while at home, are as safe as you can be on a rural property. We (myself, wife, and Son2) have all used guns to kill poisonous snakes which were in areas where they endangered us or our animals. I've used them to kill other predators (coyotes and feral dogs for example). In over 30 years no one on my property has had a negligent discharge or any accident with a fire arm. My storage solution works for my family.

There is no proof a rise in gun ownership causes more mass shootings. In fact, as gun ownership has risen violent crime has decreased except in certain cities. Correlation does not equate to causation. Even you are smart enough to know this.

In this particular shooting, a trained and armed guard at each entrance to the school stops the even from occurring. Is that The Answer to preventing all school shootings? Nope, I don't claim it is, but your insistence that millions of law abiding citizens are directly responsible for every school shooting is just fething stupid. That attitude guarantees that the millions of law abiding citizens will correctly tell you to feth yourself when you come up with your solutions which 1: never would have actually prevented the event and 2: the solutions themselves are not legal.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 12:56:26


Post by: Bromsy


I fail to see what a list of gun owners would do to prevent someone from killing a legal gun owner and taking their weapons ala Sandy Hook. Also, throwing around "Mental Illness" as a bar to owning guns is hopelessly, laughably vague. Schizophrenia, depression, anxiety, what exactly are you talking about? And if someone takes medication, do we still not let them have guns? If someone overcomes their depression or whatever, they then have to go to a court to prove they should be able to exercise their rights again?

As if mental illness isn't stigmatized enough.

Legislation should not be based on emotion. It should also only be enacted if there is a chance to accomplish it's goal. I have yet to hear any suggested form of legislation short of full confiscation that would meaningfully change the number of gun deaths in the US, which is unworkable for a number of reasons and would still likely take decades to show any results regardless.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 12:56:37


Post by: CptJake


 Asherian Command wrote:

While also disallowing people from buying a ton of ammo all at once without reasoning or a work order or something. (IE good reason)


Define 'good reason' and how you put a system in place to verify a 'good reason' exists.

For example, bulk ammo is cheaper. When I shoot, I go through several magazines from each gun I take out, so can easily blow through 500-1000 rounds each time I shoot. Why should I be forced to buy ammo in boxes of 20 rounds when a crate of 1000 is a lot cheaper? What purpose does that serve?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 13:18:29


Post by: AlmightyWalrus


If there is nothing that can change your mind on a subject you aren't arguing in good faith anymore; you're just a zealot. The ability to change your opinion when presented with new evidence is the foundation of being reasonable.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 13:21:14


Post by: Mitochondria


I like how pro gun control advocates refuse to lump ladder deaths, car deaths, and gun deaths together because, in their mind, guns are inherently more dangerous than a car or a ladder.


But....

When it becomes time to discuss registration lists, they really enjoy lumping cars, ladders, and guns together, because they are just equivalent consumer products. Right? Right?

Any list maintained by the government can and will be abused.

Hell even the 911 and law enforcement organizations can be misused, a la "swatting".


Police routinely raid the wrong homes while serving warrants. No, I don't think I want such paragons of capability to know what I own, whether it be an Xbox or a gun.

The point still stands that all of us are less likely to die in a violent manner than ever before in history. Despite these horrific instances of crimes.

You cannot stop the evil of humanity.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 13:26:21


Post by: Steve steveson


Legislation isn’t the issue. It’s culture. The question that needs to be asked is not “how do we stop the guns being in peoples hands”, because 1) it won’t happen any time soon and 2) anything short of “no guns at all ever” would change much. Even if you had a UK or Japan style system where gun permits required lots of proof of need and training I would bet a large number of the people who currently own guns in the US would go through that process and continue as they are, only moaning bitterly every few years when it needs renewing.

Gun ownership is not low in the UK because of laws but culture. It’s not that difficult to get a shotgun in the UK, and the prime issue with getting a rifle is having somewhere to shoot as there are few rangers, which is not an issue in the US. It’s culture. People don’t generally hunt, and even target shooting is viewed with suspicion by many people.

The question that needs to be asked IMO is why people are driven to attack schools and why they use a gun for it. My guess would be the status of the gun in some places and an attitude of machismo and belief in “might is right” that pervades some cultures within the US. I think some gun laws are symptomatic of this, but not the cause.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 13:27:44


Post by: Prestor Jon


 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
If there is nothing that can change your mind on a subject you aren't arguing in good faith anymore; you're just a zealot. The ability to change your opinion when presented with new evidence is the foundation of being reasonable.


What new evidence is being presented? This thread has the same statistics and proposals as every other thread on a US school shooting has had.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 13:30:45


Post by: jouso


 CptJake wrote:


For example, bulk ammo is cheaper. When I shoot, I go through several magazines from each gun I take out, so can easily blow through 500-1000 rounds each time I shoot. Why should I be forced to buy ammo in boxes of 20 rounds when a crate of 1000 is a lot cheaper? What purpose does that serve?


Easy: control and awareness by the authorities.

Back when I competed at the national level I burned through tons of rounds. I know for sure the cops were aware and asked to the shop and people at the club. I'm sure available info was gathered.

No red flags were raised, so I did not receive a friendly visit at home to double check, but I know of people who did (one who had guns stolen from him twice).





School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 13:35:39


Post by: AlmightyWalrus


Prestor Jon wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
If there is nothing that can change your mind on a subject you aren't arguing in good faith anymore; you're just a zealot. The ability to change your opinion when presented with new evidence is the foundation of being reasonable.


What new evidence is being presented? This thread has the same statistics and proposals as every other thread on a US school shooting has had.


You made an absolute statement, I'm pointing out the absurdity of that absolute statement. You didn't say that there was nothing in this thread that could change your mind, you said there was nothing, full stop, that could. Stop moving the goalposts and own your mistake.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 13:42:07


Post by: Rosebuddy


Mitochondria wrote:
I like how pro gun control advocates refuse to lump ladder deaths, car deaths, and gun deaths together because, in their mind, guns are inherently more dangerous than a car or a ladder.


Ladders are useful tools. The point of them is to allow you to reach places you couldn't reach unaided. Their fundamental purpose is peaceful. Cars are inefficient means of transportation and a society absolutely should be structured so as to minimise the amount of cars needed. It's safer and more efficient to have a robust system of public transportation. Cars, nonetheless, are meant for transportation. A gun is inherently more dangerous than a car or a ladder because it was designed to kill people. A gun is a weapon. You can fall from a ladder or run someone over with a car but those are incidental events arising from the nature of physical reality and not something intended when the items in question were first invented. We're not talking about school ladderings here, are we?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 13:57:58


Post by: Prestor Jon


 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
If there is nothing that can change your mind on a subject you aren't arguing in good faith anymore; you're just a zealot. The ability to change your opinion when presented with new evidence is the foundation of being reasonable.


What new evidence is being presented? This thread has the same statistics and proposals as every other thread on a US school shooting has had.


You made an absolute statement, I'm pointing out the absurdity of that absolute statement. You didn't say that there was nothing in this thread that could change your mind, you said there was nothing, full stop, that could. Stop moving the goalposts and own your mistake.


No I haven’t, I’ve been deliberately specific and what wouldn’t convince me agree to specific proposals like repealling the 2nd amendment and become a proponent for confiscation guns from people. If you think I’ve stated an absolutist position that nothing could convince to support any type of additional firearm regulation laws then you’ve either mistaken me for a diffeeent poster or misread my posts.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 14:15:40


Post by: Tannhauser42


 Steve steveson wrote:


The question that needs to be asked IMO is why people are driven to attack schools and why they use a gun for it. My guess would be the status of the gun in some places and an attitude of machismo and belief in “might is right” that pervades some cultures within the US. I think some gun laws are symptomatic of this, but not the cause.


I've always believed that it's the attitude people have towards guns that is the problem. Gun ownership may be at an all time high, but respect for guns is at an all time low. Just look at how many people refer to their guns as toys, and you'll understand what I mean.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 14:16:12


Post by: Relapse


 Asherian Command wrote:
Relapse wrote:
 Dreadwinter wrote:
 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
 Dreadwinter wrote:
Mitochondria wrote:
All of those measures are rife with opportunities for someone to have their civil rights trampled.

Sheesh, even having a registration list is asking for it to be abused.


Explain how being on a list can be abused. I am on many governments lists. Registration for my vehicle, voting registration, licenses and certificates.

At what point does the abuse begin?


A while ago, and it sparked outrage.

https://www.cnn.com/2012/12/25/us/new-york-gun-permit-map/index.html


An outside source being idiots has what to do with the government abusing lists?


Perhaps because the government had a list put together that ended up making people targets, regardless of who misused it? It's not really hard to see that.


Targets of what? And would anyone care if it was made public "This person owns a gun." Like it would be like "this person owns a hummer." or "This person owns a Mini-Van." At that point who cares? Okay so you have a gun, your on a list which gives you the benefit of "If my gun is stolen it can be returned because of the item number." Or helk if it is lost or damaged you have insurance for it. etc. ITs for security and its also a personal benefit as well.

Its not a "Big brother knows who owns guns and who doesn't."

It would also allow for survey people to see the wide range of opinions and have a more accurate census of how many people in the us owns a gun. Thats not scary at all.


Home invasions and burglaries are kind of a thing, in case you didn't know.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 14:16:20


Post by: sirlynchmob


 CptJake wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
 CptJake wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:
 CptJake wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:

people are willing to go to war, killing more people to protect their guns, yet will do absolutely nothing and even argue againt doing anything to save children.

sure it's easy to pick apary my idea, but I also noticed no one answered my question directly, but they answered none the less. their guns mean more than the lives of children and thus I hold all gun owners as being complicit in all school shootings.




I hold you and your ilk as complacent in every school shooting because you put these poor kids into environments where there are few people trained and equipped to protect them.

There was an armed deputy on the compass at the Florida shooting. He purportedly had said he never actually encountered the shooter.

The idea that you need to have armed security guards in school is ridiculous.

Look at Israeli schools...


I can't tell whether or not your original post was meant to be sarcastic/snarky, but if it was meant to be serious and you think this is legitimately a compelling argument...you're wrong on so many levels.


Only 1 guard? Makes my point there were few (in this case exactly 1) people trained and equipped, doesn't it.

And my point is exactly as serious as sirlynchmob blaming all gun owners for each school shooting. If folks like him didn't force our kids into unsafe environments it wouldn't be an issue.



You're the one putting your kids in unsafe conditions, you brought a gun into the house, and greatly increased their chances of getting shot.

You need to let go of that nonsense that more guns makes us safer, if that was in anyway true the US would be the safest place on earth. Yet clearly it's not. As gun ownership rises so do the mass shootings and all other gun crimes.





My kids, while at home, are as safe as you can be on a rural property. We (myself, wife, and Son2) have all used guns to kill poisonous snakes which were in areas where they endangered us or our animals. I've used them to kill other predators (coyotes and feral dogs for example). In over 30 years no one on my property has had a negligent discharge or any accident with a fire arm. My storage solution works for my family.

There is no proof a rise in gun ownership causes more mass shootings. In fact, as gun ownership has risen violent crime has decreased except in certain cities. Correlation does not equate to causation. Even you are smart enough to know this.

In this particular shooting, a trained and armed guard at each entrance to the school stops the even from occurring. Is that The Answer to preventing all school shootings? Nope, I don't claim it is, but your insistence that millions of law abiding citizens are directly responsible for every school shooting is just fething stupid. That attitude guarantees that the millions of law abiding citizens will correctly tell you to feth yourself when you come up with your solutions which 1: never would have actually prevented the event and 2: the solutions themselves are not legal.


This is why I hold all gun users complicit. any attempt to solve the gun problems is met with nonsense like your posting. We can't have background checks because idiots like you care more for your gun and threaten to go off killing people in a revolution. Canadas gun laws would have stopped over 1/2 the school shootings, that alone is a great place to start. so saying gun laws won't stop these is just rediculous and you stating that kind of absurdities makes you part of the problem hence complicit.

if gun owners are so law abiding, then why are they so afraid of rational gun laws? what are they hiding? let's remember almost all mass shooters we're law abiding gun owners until they started shooting people.

A armed guard at every entrance? So a country that won't pay teachers decent wages, can't afford office supplies for the schools, cut funding to the point of over crowding schools, will somehow find the money to hire that many guards?

you'd think just opening more schools and reducing class sizes would be a much better use of the money.

sure violent crimes are decreasing yet gun crimes are increasing. America is the proof that more guns directly equates to more gun shootings, because anyone with a desire to go on a shooting spree can get an arsenal of weapons over lunch, then go off shooting people. no questions asked, no red flags going off.



School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 14:19:31


Post by: ZebioLizard2


if gun owners are so law abiding, then why are they so afraid of rational gun laws?
People in this thread have advocated for both the repeal of the second amendment and for people to have their weaponry taken by force.. Rational you say?


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 14:24:16


Post by: Relapse


Rosebuddy wrote:
Mitochondria wrote:
I like how pro gun control advocates refuse to lump ladder deaths, car deaths, and gun deaths together because, in their mind, guns are inherently more dangerous than a car or a ladder.


Ladders are useful tools. The point of them is to allow you to reach places you couldn't reach unaided. Their fundamental purpose is peaceful. Cars are inefficient means of transportation and a society absolutely should be structured so as to minimise the amount of cars needed. It's safer and more efficient to have a robust system of public transportation. Cars, nonetheless, are meant for transportation. A gun is inherently more dangerous than a car or a ladder because it was designed to kill people. A gun is a weapon. You can fall from a ladder or run someone over with a car but those are incidental events arising from the nature of physical reality and not something intended when the items in question were first invented. We're not talking about school ladderings here, are we?


By that definition, alcohol, which is not a useful tool, but causes eight times the number of deaths as gun related homicides, should be subject to far stricter controls than guns.



School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 14:24:46


Post by: sirlynchmob


 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
if gun owners are so law abiding, then why are they so afraid of rational gun laws?
People in this thread have advocated for both the repeal of the second amendment and for people to have their weaponry taken by force.. Rational you say?


That just my opinion, there are many rational gun laws that have been proposed and rejected by the NRA who funds politicians to make sure they don't happen.

You'd think after the vegas shooting that banning any conversion kits to allow weapons to fire like a automatic weapon would be a easy thing to ban, but yet not even that little thing could get passed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Relapse wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
Mitochondria wrote:
I like how pro gun control advocates refuse to lump ladder deaths, car deaths, and gun deaths together because, in their mind, guns are inherently more dangerous than a car or a ladder.


Ladders are useful tools. The point of them is to allow you to reach places you couldn't reach unaided. Their fundamental purpose is peaceful. Cars are inefficient means of transportation and a society absolutely should be structured so as to minimise the amount of cars needed. It's safer and more efficient to have a robust system of public transportation. Cars, nonetheless, are meant for transportation. A gun is inherently more dangerous than a car or a ladder because it was designed to kill people. A gun is a weapon. You can fall from a ladder or run someone over with a car but those are incidental events arising from the nature of physical reality and not something intended when the items in question were first invented. We're not talking about school ladderings here, are we?


By that definition, alcohol, which is not a useful tool, but causes eight times the number of deaths as gun related homicides, should be subject to far stricter controls than guns.



you mean like holding bar tenders legally responsible for drunk drivers?

sobriety check points?

not being able to purchase until 21?

losing your licence for drunk driving and horrendous legal fines and fees

alcohol is subjected to stricter controls than guns.

Shooters aren't even held responsible for the hospital bills of their victims.

but I guess since the laws against driving drunk don't stop drunk drivers, we should repeal all those laws as well, it's the same rational gun users spew.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 14:37:40


Post by: AlmightyWalrus


Prestor Jon wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
If there is nothing that can change your mind on a subject you aren't arguing in good faith anymore; you're just a zealot. The ability to change your opinion when presented with new evidence is the foundation of being reasonable.


What new evidence is being presented? This thread has the same statistics and proposals as every other thread on a US school shooting has had.


You made an absolute statement, I'm pointing out the absurdity of that absolute statement. You didn't say that there was nothing in this thread that could change your mind, you said there was nothing, full stop, that could. Stop moving the goalposts and own your mistake.


No I haven’t, I’ve been deliberately specific and what wouldn’t convince me agree to specific proposals like repealling the 2nd amendment and become a proponent for confiscation guns from people. If you think I’ve stated an absolutist position that nothing could convince to support any type of additional firearm regulation laws then you’ve either mistaken me for a diffeeent poster or misread my posts.


Please.

Prestor Jon wrote:


There isn’t a scenario that could happen that’s going to convince me that gun ownership is bad. I’m always going to support our 2A rights.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 14:39:33


Post by: Prestor Jon


Alcohol is not subject to stricter controls than firearms. ANYONE over the age of 21 can buy whatever alcohol they ant in whatever quantity they want. Convicted felons can buy alcohol, people who have been adjudicated as mentally defective can buy alcohol, people who have been convicted of drunk driving can buy alcohol, people who have committed domestic violence can buy alcohol. There is no background check required to purchase alcohol. Being actively enrolled in state mandated substance abuse programs doesn’t prevent people from buying alcohol.

Victims of gun crimes can sue the perpetrator in civil court just like the victims of other crimes. If OJ had used a gun instead of a knife he wouldn’t have been immune to civil litigation.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 14:43:38


Post by: Kanluwen


 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
if gun owners are so law abiding, then why are they so afraid of rational gun laws?
People in this thread have advocated for both the repeal of the second amendment and for people to have their weaponry taken by force.. Rational you say?

Please directly quote them then.

The only mention I can think of having seen of "weaponry taken by force" had to do with the idea that requiring people to surrender specific types of firearms would likely end up having to involve force given the attitudes some people have towards their firearms.

And if we really want to talk about "rationality", I can point to a few posters who keep bringing up the arguments of alcohol versus firearms as causes of death whilst ignoring the factors involved.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 14:47:10


Post by: Prestor Jon


 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
If there is nothing that can change your mind on a subject you aren't arguing in good faith anymore; you're just a zealot. The ability to change your opinion when presented with new evidence is the foundation of being reasonable.


What new evidence is being presented? This thread has the same statistics and proposals as every other thread on a US school shooting has had.


You made an absolute statement, I'm pointing out the absurdity of that absolute statement. You didn't say that there was nothing in this thread that could change your mind, you said there was nothing, full stop, that could. Stop moving the goalposts and own your mistake.


No I haven’t, I’ve been deliberately specific and what wouldn’t convince me agree to specific proposals like repealling the 2nd amendment and become a proponent for confiscation guns from people. If you think I’ve stated an absolutist position that nothing could convince to support any type of additional firearm regulation laws then you’ve either mistaken me for a diffeeent poster or misread my posts.


Please.

Prestor Jon wrote:


There isn’t a scenario that could happen that’s going to convince me that gun ownership is bad. I’m always going to support our 2A rights.


How do you extrapolate my supposed complete support for no gun regulation whatsoever from that post? Guns are already regulated and I’m ok with most of the regulations on the books currently. Stating my belief that the right for people to own firearms is a key foundational right that shouldn’t be revoked doesn’t mean that I’m a proponent of wholly unregulated gun ownership that is a complete misinterpretation on your part.

In a previous gun thread d-USA and I were in agreeement on supporting new regulation that would require companies that host gun shows should be required to have a FFL because gun shows are de facto pop up gun stores and that such regulation wouldn’t affect the right for private individuals to continue to conduct private sales on their own as long as they aren’t doing so under the umbrella of a gun show.

You seem to want to limit the debate to only be between you and people that can be persuaded to agree with your personal interpretation of “reasonable” gun regulations.


School shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL @ 2018/02/18 14:52:06


Post by: Relapse


The thing I get from this thread is that there is a huge double standard between guns and alcohol, which causes far more death and trouble in people’s lives than guns.
For some illogical reason, many people hate guns because, “gun kill”, yet have nowhere near the same problem with something that kills 8 time’s the number of people as gun related homicides. Even if you lumped in all the other people killed by guns, it would still be dwarfed by alcohol related deaths.