Florida High School Shooting

[soundforbjt]

What about the local and state cops who were called to the house 39 times over 6 years? WTF is with just throwing the FBI under the bus at every opportunity? Yes, they screwed up but damn, the school and the local enforcement had a MUCH better read on him than the FBI

Trump will never fault police or soldiers (with the exception of their spouses and parents).

 

[UNCjigga]

Entertainment, cool. Maybe find another hobby?

Whoa! A false equivalence in a gun discussion? *gasp!*

You have yet to explain why you do not want 2A repealed. You have yet to explain why you need your gun(s). If you don't think that matters, then fine, but calling me dumb because you refuse to articulate an argument speaks for itself.

2A repeal is nothing more than a liberal fantasy, and even entertaining it as a solution in 2018 distracts from the immediate need to have a real debate, and propose real bipartisan solutions that have more than a snowball's chance in Hell of passing.

 

[rise]

Trump will never fault police or soldiers (with the exception of their spouses and parents).

True story there. And then you have posters embracing the same twistted thinking espoused by this pos pres.,

 

[jackstar7]

2A repeal is nothing more than a liberal fantasy, and even entertaining it as a solution in 2018 distracts from the immediate need to have a real debate, and propose real bipartisan solutions that have more than a snowball's chance in Hell of passing.

I would agree with you normally, but there might actually be a social tipping point coming. Trump is certainly helping the cause by blaming the FBI and looking like an idiot amidst what is a national tragedy.

 

[FIVR]

What about the local and state cops who were called to the house 39 times over 6 years? WTF is with just throwing the FBI under the bus at every opportunity? Yes, they screwed up but damn, the school and the local enforcement had a MUCH better read on him than the FBI

What is the deal with people constantly jumping in to defend the FBI when they mess up? Why can't the top US law enforcement agency, which constantly asks US citizens to give up their civil liberties for "security", be held to account when they are repeatedly warned about a violent white supremacist planning a mass killing? This is not the first or second time this has happened, where the FBI have had been warned or had open investigations into people who ended up successfully committing attacks.


The constant hand-holding and excuse-making by mainstream media for US law enforcement and especially the FBI is disgusting. If they are to be given all these powers to violate our constitutional rights, then they better use them to good account.

 

[FIVR]

I mean come on, this kid had an instagram chatroom where he talked about committing these very acts. He shot animals in his backyard. There were videos of him shooting in his boxers in his backyard. The FBI was too busy with Hillary's emails to infiltrate it though.


"Make sure to vote for backdoors into your iPhones and androids because otherwise, the FBI can't do their jobs! Children die if we can't get total access to your daughters nude selfies!" - the FBI probably

 

[HomerJS]

What is the deal with people constantly jumping in to defend the FBI when they mess up? Why can't the top US law enforcement agency, which constantly asks US citizens to give up their civil liberties for "security", be held to account when they are repeatedly warned about a violent white supremacist planning a mass killing? This is not the first or second time this has happened, where the FBI have had been warned or had open investigations into people who ended up successfully committing attacks.


The constant hand-holding and excuse-making by mainstream media for US law enforcement and especially the FBI is disgusting. If they are to be given all these powers to violate our constitutional rights, then they better use them to good account.

Yellow flag, personal foul lying in a thread...

Nobody here is excusing the FBI for failing to notify their local offices about this guy. What I am saying is even if they had Florida law and federal law makes it too easy for anyone to obtain guns. Doctors are not allowed to question patents about gun violence, the CDC can't do research on gun violence.

What could the FBI do absent this guy failing to violate any federals laws to date?

 

[Jhhnn]

Actually, today young people are more likely to be conservative than they have been in many decades. Liberalism has become the de facto standard for a while and is now getting stale and out dated. People are sick of the everybody gets a trophy, shut down speech that they disagree with liberals and the pendulum is swinging. Trump was a symptom, and my guess is the ride will get even bumpier in the future.

http://time.com/4909722/trump-millennials-igen-republicans-voters/

https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/...americans-gen-z-may-be-most-conservative-wwii

https://www.cnn.com/2016/09/07/health/millennials-conservative-generations/index.html

https://capitalresearch.org/article/the-conservative-millennial-no-longer-a-myth/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ashley...ats-should-be-losing-sleep-over-generation-z/

Yes, decades of relentless right wing agitprop have been effective. Modern conservatives don't even blink when they're standing shoulder to shoulder with Russian agent provocateurs or while the GOP facilitates top down class warfare looting of the Treasury.

The mindlessness of it all should disturb any thinking American.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Entertainment, cool. Maybe find another hobby?
.

Missed the point. One does not need an AR15 with a 50 round drum of armor piercing rounds and a bump stock to have fun at a shooting range. In fact most in my area wouldn’t allow that crap.
A person who wants to target shoot can certainly wait a couple of weeks to be approved to buy the gun.
A person who target shoots can certainly have a brief discussion with the local police about gun safety, what classes have been completed and what classes are recommended

 

[SlowSpyder]

Maybe we need gun control laws that aren't designed to fail? I'm all for common sense solutions that don't necessarily involve a ban. This can be done while discouraging cheap imports of Chinese and East European designs in favor of American manufacturers. We have a well regulated three-tier distribution system to control alcohol sales...why not guns? We put limits on cigarette advertising and all sorts of controls against marketing to kids, why not with guns? We have mandatory licensing, registration and insurance for motor vehicles...why not for guns? Why are we so afraid to even let states or municipalities try something new?

What the anti gun proliferation crowd really wants to know is why every call for debate is met by pro-NRA types as an attack on 2A, or "Omagerd they comin' to get yer guns!!!!"

We have lots of restrictions on guns already. Let's keep these numbers in mind:

Tobacco: Almost a half a million people die per year. Up to 53,800 of those are from second hand smoke, completely innocent people. Also, 2300 of those deaths are children due to SIDS, FAR more than every child's homicide caused by a mass shooting or other firearms related homicide combined. Tobacco is in a league of its own when it comes to killing us. And I agree, there are already regulations, taxes and advertising limitations. But let's not pretend that this killer isn't easy to get, addicts many of those that try it, and is very widespread with minimal effort today to do anything significant more to stop it, we accept these numbers of deaths by it.

Alcohol kills 88,000 people a year. People die at almost the same rate due to drunk driving as they do to firearms homicides (10,800 drunk driving deaths I didn't get the break down of how many of those were innocent people vs. the drunk driver, but I'm sure it is a non trivial amount of innocent victims). What are the real limitations on alcohol? Some places don't sell it after certain hours and generally speaking you must be 21 years old to buy it. No one is looking for mandatory breathalyzers to start all cars, looking into background checks of dependency and past alcohol related incidents when purchasing booze, nobody is looking to limit alcohol potency, or really do anything that would limit the rights of all that celebrate the 21A... nothing near the scale of what many of you would have done with guns. You seem fairly reasonable and would have to admit that's true, despite alcohol killing far more people.

Guns, as shown above, kill around 11,000 innocent victims of homicide and a further ~505 due to accidents / carelessness. If we include firearms suicides, we'd add another 21000+. I know I jumped around for sources and even years, but I assume the numbers today are in the same ballpark and the same point can be made. That is that guns do significantly less harm than other things that kill us in far greater numbers. There have already been numerous restrictions put on my 2A rights put in place. When we talk about cigarettes here, I'm often told that the conversation has already been had on it, use is declining and restrictions are in place, and we live with it killing half a million people a year, over 50000 innocent victims of 2nd hand smoke, and more kids killed by the hundreds than by firearms. But they ignore that violent crimes on the whole have also significantly decreased over the last few decades.

To me guns have already been restricted more than enough. Guns are in the hands of 100,000,000 Americans, and the anti 2A-left would see all of their rights harmed (or for many they'd like the 2A eliminated). Also, see my sig, guns can save lives but getting real data on that is difficult. Guns are overly scrutinized, the media magnifies things every time a shooting occurs, but the reality is they simply do not harm society nearly as much as portrayed. The coverage to body count ratio just doesn't compare to anything else. For me the conversation has been had, I am not giving up more of my 2A rights, not in light of how little damage guns actually do compared to other things anti-2A'ers give zero fucks about.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

We have lots of restrictions on guns already. Let's keep these numbers in mind:

Tobacco: Almost a half a million people die per year. Up to 53,800 of those are from second hand smoke, completely innocent people. Also, 2300 of those deaths are children due to SIDS, FAR more than every child's homicide caused by a mass shooting or other firearms related homicide combined. Tobacco is in a league of its own when it comes to killing us. And I agree, there are already regulations, taxes and advertising limitations. But let's not pretend that this killer isn't easy to get, addicts many of those that try it, and is very widespread with minimal effort today to do anything significant more to stop it, we accept these numbers of deaths by it.

Alcohol kills 88,000 people a year. People die at almost the same rate due to drunk driving as they do to firearms homicides (10,800 drunk driving deaths I didn't get the break down of how many of those were innocent people vs. the drunk driver, but I'm sure it is a non trivial amount of innocent victims). What are the real limitations on alcohol? Some places don't sell it after certain hours and generally speaking you must be 21 years old to buy it. No one is looking for mandatory breathalyzers to start all cars, looking into background checks of dependency and past alcohol related incidents when purchasing booze, nobody is looking to limit alcohol potency, or really do anything that would limit the rights of all that celebrate the 21A... nothing near the scale of what many of you would have done with guns. You seem fairly reasonable and would have to admit that's true, despite alcohol killing far more people.

Guns, as shown above, kill around 11,000 innocent victims of homicide and a further ~505 due to accidents / carelessness. If we include firearms suicides, we'd add another 21000+. I know I jumped around for sources and even years, but I assume the numbers today are in the same ballpark and the same point can be made. That is that guns do significantly less harm than other things that kill us in far greater numbers. There have already been numerous restrictions put on my 2A rights put in place. When we talk about cigarettes here, I'm often told that the conversation has already been had on it, use is declining and restrictions are in place, and we live with it killing half a million people a year, over 50000 innocent victims of 2nd hand smoke, and more kids killed by the hundreds than by firearms. But they ignore that violent crimes on the whole have also significantly decreased over the last few decades.

To me guns have already been restricted more than enough. Guns are in the hands of 100,000,000 Americans, and the anti 2A-left would see all of their rights harmed (or for many they'd like the 2A eliminated). Also, see my sig, guns can save lives but getting real data on that is difficult. Guns are overly scrutinized, the media magnifies things every time a shooting occurs, but the reality is they simply do not harm society nearly as much as portrayed. The coverage to body count ratio just doesn't compare to anything else. For me the conversation has been had, I am not giving up more of my 2A rights, not in light of how little damage guns actually do compared to other things anti-2A'ers give zero fucks about.

Cool story Bro

 

[SlowSpyder]

Cool story Bro

Based on what I've seen of your posts, your reply lives up to the expectations I would have for you replying to that post. Luckily for me I wasn't speaking to you and hope I can get more substance in reply from the poster I was speaking to.

 

[HomerJS]

We have lots of restrictions on guns already. Let's keep these numbers in mind:

Tobacco: Almost a half a million people die per year. Up to 53,800 of those are from second hand smoke, completely innocent people. Also, 2300 of those deaths are children due to SIDS, FAR more than every child's homicide caused by a mass shooting or other firearms related homicide combined. Tobacco is in a league of its own when it comes to killing us. And I agree, there are already regulations, taxes and advertising limitations. But let's not pretend that this killer isn't easy to get, addicts many of those that try it, and is very widespread with minimal effort today to do anything significant more to stop it, we accept these numbers of deaths by it.

Alcohol kills 88,000 people a year. People die at almost the same rate due to drunk driving as they do to firearms homicides (10,800 drunk driving deaths I didn't get the break down of how many of those were innocent people vs. the drunk driver, but I'm sure it is a non trivial amount of innocent victims). What are the real limitations on alcohol? Some places don't sell it after certain hours and generally speaking you must be 21 years old to buy it. No one is looking for mandatory breathalyzers to start all cars, looking into background checks of dependency and past alcohol related incidents when purchasing booze, nobody is looking to limit alcohol potency, or really do anything that would limit the rights of all that celebrate the 21A... nothing near the scale of what many of you would have done with guns. You seem fairly reasonable and would have to admit that's true, despite alcohol killing far more people.

Guns, as shown above, kill around 11,000 innocent victims of homicide and a further ~505 due to accidents / carelessness. If we include firearms suicides, we'd add another 21000+. I know I jumped around for sources and even years, but I assume the numbers today are in the same ballpark and the same point can be made. That is that guns do significantly less harm than other things that kill us in far greater numbers. There have already been numerous restrictions put on my 2A rights put in place. When we talk about cigarettes here, I'm often told that the conversation has already been had on it, use is declining and restrictions are in place, and we live with it killing half a million people a year, over 50000 innocent victims of 2nd hand smoke, and more kids killed by the hundreds than by firearms. But they ignore that violent crimes on the whole have also significantly decreased over the last few decades.

To me guns have already been restricted more than enough. Guns are in the hands of 100,000,000 Americans, and the anti 2A-left would see all of their rights harmed (or for many they'd like the 2A eliminated). Also, see my sig, guns can save lives but getting real data on that is difficult. Guns are overly scrutinized, the media magnifies things every time a shooting occurs, but the reality is they simply do not harm society nearly as much as portrayed. The coverage to body count ratio just doesn't compare to anything else. For me the conversation has been had, I am not giving up more of my 2A rights, not in light of how little damage guns actually do compared to other things anti-2A'ers give zero fucks about.

Deaths due to heart disease 614K
Deaths due to cancer 591K

So why to we need cancer research??

You should be happy. Nothing will happen with gun control and the cycle will continue

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Based on what I've seen of your posts, your reply lives up to the expectations I would have for you replying to that post. Luckily for me I wasn't speaking to you and hope I can get more substance in reply from the poster I was speaking to.

Cool story Bro

 

[SlowSpyder]

Deaths due to heart disease 614K
Deaths due to cancer 591K

So why to we need cancer research??

You should be happy. Nothing will happen with gun control and the cycle will continue

Except you have to make the numbers 500,000 vs. 33,000 and add the reality that the 33,000 issue gets 10x the attention and time spent on it, it politically polarizes and draws far more attention from those that would want to limit the constitution than its actual cost to society has earned it. Other than that, good analogy.

 

[Jhhnn]

What about the local and state cops who were called to the house 39 times over 6 years? WTF is with just throwing the FBI under the bus at every opportunity? Yes, they screwed up but damn, the school and the local enforcement had a MUCH better read on him than the FBI

This whole "Well, the FBI should have done something!" routine is utterly dishonest. Do something? Like what, exactly? I can't imagine how many thousands of other Americans exhibit the same sort of mental problems as the shooter. I think there's a whole different kind of mental disorder involved in the insistence that firearms exceptionally suitable only for mass murder be available at all.

 

[jackstar7]

Missed the point. One does not need an AR15 with a 50 round drum of armor piercing rounds and a bump stock to have fun at a shooting range. In fact most in my area wouldn’t allow that crap.
A person who wants to target shoot can certainly wait a couple of weeks to be approved to buy the gun.
A person who target shoots can certainly have a brief discussion with the local police about gun safety, what classes have been completed and what classes are recommended

Here's my question on that. If a social movement leads to a mass majority saying we're banning guns, would you be cool switching to a bow and arrow or another hobby? Or would you fight to the literal death to hold onto your guns (as several in this thread have implied they would)?

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Here's my question on that. If a social movement leads to a mass majority saying we're banning guns, would you be cool switching to a bow and arrow or another hobby? Or would you fight to the literal death to hold onto your guns (as several in this thread have implied they would)?

Not sure I’m just being realistic. There are far too many guns in the US to all disappear, there are far too many people who own guns or want to own a gun for them to simply be banned.

 

[jackstar7]

Not sure I’m just being realistic. There are far too many guns in the US to all disappear, there are far too many people who own guns or want to own a gun for them to simply be banned.

I'm not sure that's true. Time will tell.

 

[Puffnstuff]

You have yet to explain why you do not want 2A repealed. You have yet to explain why you need your gun(s). If you don't think that matters, then fine, but calling me dumb because you refuse to articulate an argument speaks for itself.

You are a troll and I will no longer feed you not to mention the fact that you cannot grasp how laws and the 3 branches of government work.

 

[jackstar7]

You are a troll and I will no longer feed you not to mention the fact that you cannot grasp how laws and the 3 branches of government work.

Oh brother. Methinks he doth protest too much.

I know that at this moment a new amendment to undo 2A is unlikely. I do not think that is a permanent situation. I think stomachs are being turned when it comes to guns and long-term they will be exiled from society for the net-negative that they bring.

I'm sorry you think I'm trolling. I'm really not. You think current legal apparatus has it largely covered (with room for improvements). I disagree and think fear and giggles aren't going to sustain the number of gun-buyers that the manufacturers rely on to sustain their business and that will not improve things from a marketing perspective. It will get more desperate and disgusting.

 

[umbrella39]

Cool story Bro

One bought and paid for...

 

[glenn1]

Here's my question on that. If a social movement leads to a mass majority saying we're banning guns, would you be cool switching to a bow and arrow or another hobby? Or would you fight to the literal death to hold onto your guns (as several in this thread have implied they would)?

If you’re going to send in the government to disarm “those who would fight to the literal death” then to me you might as well be the kid shooting up a school. “Comply or die” doesn’t make a compelling argument for your cause or the progressive movement in general.

 

[Puffnstuff]

One bought and paid for...

It never ceases to amaze me how people like to scream repeal 2a every time something bad happens but you don't hear them doing the same when there's an auto accident or other life taking tragedy. Others can't seem to understand that the legislative branch is failing to perform their duty to craft laws that address our current problems.

We need a firearms act that closes the loopholes to ownership for people who aren't supposed to purchase or possess a gun. Every aspect of gun ownership needs to be reviewed such as with the mental health perspective, ghost guns, private sales and the gifting of guns to persons who would not otherwise be able to purchase one for themselves.

 

[jackstar7]

If you’re going to send in the government to disarm “those who would fight to the literal death” then to me you might as well be the kid shooting up a school. “Comply or die” doesn’t make a compelling argument for your cause or the progressive movement in general.

I have no intention of making people choose their guns or their life. That choice will be theirs to make if laws are passed. IF they choose to fight the government, that's not my fault, dummy. If the will of the majority is such that the laws are changed, then compliance with that law is a personal choice for those that would rather reject society as a whole to continue to maintain their strong sexual relationship with their guns.

I'm sure people will resist and be outraged. I doubt many would actually fire on law enforcement over the issue. And if they do, they are the same as any other criminal wanting suicide by cop.