Incomprehensible mass shooting happens again

[blackangst1]

Have you offered any solutions?

I have in other similar threads. More focus on mental health, and persnal firearms safety and responsibility training.

Just read this opinion piece, and I like his thoughts on this:

So I would like to see experiments with age-based impediments rather than full restrictions — allowing would-be gun purchasers 25 and under the same rights of ownership as 40- or 60-year-olds, but with more substantial screenings before a purchase. Not just a criminal-background check, in other words, but some kind of basic social or psychological screening, combining a mental-health check, a social-media audit and testimonials from two competent adults — all subject to the same appeals process as a well-designed red-flag law.

Ross Douthat: A simple, practical way to keep guns from young men who shouldn’t have them (msn.com)

 

[HomerJS]

I have in other similar threads. More focus on mental health, and persnal firearms safety and responsibility training.

Just read this opinion piece, and I like his thoughts on this:


Ross Douthat: A simple, practical way to keep guns from young men who shouldn’t have them (msn.com)

Raising the age to 21 for all guns and red flag laws are a good start. I would also like to see psych screenings for anyone getting a gun license. The Uvalde and Buffalo shooter would have been ID'ed by that type of screening.

The mentally ill or people with anger issues should not have guns. Republicans have never done anything to separate the mental ill from guns.

We need universal background checks for ALL gun transfers. Gift or sale.

 

[blackangst1]

Raising the age to 21 for all guns and red flag laws are a good start. I would also like to see psych screenings for anyone getting a gun license. The Uvalde and Buffalo shooter would have been ID'ed by that type of screening.

The mentally ill or people with anger issues should not have guns. Republicans have never done anything to separate the mental ill from guns.

We need universal background checks for ALL gun transfers. Gift or sale.

Possession of Firearms by People With Mental Illness (ncsl.org)
Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d), it is unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.”

Most states also have their own laws.

 

[HomerJS]

Possession of Firearms by People With Mental Illness (ncsl.org)
Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d), it is unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.”

Most states also have their own laws.

It needs to be more then diagnosed mental illness. People who settle disputes with physical violence should not be granted a license. Psych screenings would catch that.

As part of a background check association with groups know for crime and violence don't get guns. (Proud Boys, Hells Angels) as examples

 

[HomerJS]

Of course, Republicans blame black people. He isn't the only one of the years labeling people of color
Blake Masters Blames Gun Violence on 'Black People, Frankly' - Rolling Stone

 

[Jaskalas]

Regardless of your flawed argument in selling it, the Assault Weapons Ban is symbolic rather than practical.

You keep saying that, yet I showed you the chart showing gun deaths going down after the '94 assault weapons ban

The data to support what I said has been found in P&N gun topics in past years.
It stood without contest.

Now read an updated article regarding 2020 firearm deaths.

Rifles – the category that includes guns sometimes referred to as “assault weapons” – were involved in 3% of firearm murders.​

THREE PERCENT​

Ring a bell? Rifles are inconsequential next to the problem at large. Rifles may be a weapon of choice for sickos, but Handguns get the job done. If you still question this, I SAY AGAIN, Virginia Tech. You don't need a bulky rifle to slaughter rooms full of kids. Doesn't make it any easier. Hell, probably makes it harder to sneak through. You fixate on assault weapons at the peril of future classrooms.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

The data to support what I said has been found in P&N gun topics in past years.
It stood without contest.

Now read an updated article regarding 2020 firearm deaths.

Rifles – the category that includes guns sometimes referred to as “assault weapons” – were involved in 3% of firearm murders.​

THREE PERCENT​

Ring a bell? Rifles are inconsequential next to the problem at large. Rifles may be a weapon of choice for sickos, but Handguns get the job done. If you still question this, I SAY AGAIN, Virginia Tech. You don't need a bulky rifle to slaughter rooms full of kids. Doesn't make it any easier. Hell, probably makes it harder to sneak through. You fixate on assault weapons at the peril of future classrooms.

I've yammered about this on more than one conversation on this forum. Any time you start probing into the intent of the individual, arguments tend to spiral off into wild directions. Is it to protect children from being shot? Better ways to do that. Protect them from dying? Better ways to do that. Protect them from fear? Better ways to do that. Fighting the 2A has, historically, been a waste of time.

Maybe things will change, but I doubt it.

 

[Fenixgoon]

The data to support what I said has been found in P&N gun topics in past years.
It stood without contest.

Now read an updated article regarding 2020 firearm deaths.

Rifles – the category that includes guns sometimes referred to as “assault weapons” – were involved in 3% of firearm murders.​

THREE PERCENT​

Ring a bell? Rifles are inconsequential next to the problem at large. Rifles may be a weapon of choice for sickos, but Handguns get the job done. If you still question this, I SAY AGAIN, Virginia Tech. You don't need a bulky rifle to slaughter rooms full of kids. Doesn't make it any easier. Hell, probably makes it harder to sneak through. You fixate on assault weapons at the peril of future classrooms.

And yet they are an outlier when it comes to which firearms are used in mass shootings (or at least the school variety).

Which suggests there are two different mechanisms at play when it comes to which firearms are being used for which types of homicide.

 

[Zorba]

I've yammered about this on more than one conversation on this forum. Any time you start probing into the intent of the individual, arguments tend to spiral off into wild directions. Is it to protect children from being shot? Better ways to do that. Protect them from dying? Better ways to do that. Protect them from fear? Better ways to do that. Fighting the 2A has, historically, been a waste of time.

Maybe things will change, but I doubt it.

Seems like you are arguing for a full ban. "Well, if you take my ARs, I'll just use my semi-auto handgun. Checkmate libs."

Right, wrong, or indifferent there is a difference in a school being shot up and gang killings or DV killings. Although waiting periods, better and universal background checks, and red flag laws would also help with DV killings.

But go ahead and tell us how to do all of those things for kids better, without any new gun control. I'm guessing it'll be similar to the guy that claimed I wasn't thinking right about "school hardening" then never came back to explain. I'm guessing it just comes down to you think a hundred school kids a year is an acceptable cost.

 

[brycejones]

And yet they are an outlier when it comes to which firearms are used in mass shootings (or at least the school variety).

Which suggests there are two different mechanisms at play when it comes to which firearms are being used for which types of homicide.

Yes, but it’s also a great example of why we can’t have a meaningful discussion about guns because suddenly we are fighting over technicalities and not dealing with the larger problem of how lose as many people every day to gun violence as Ukraine does in a full on war with Russia.

Guns are the fucking problem and I am so tired of the deflections from that. (Not saying you were doing that)

 

[brycejones]

Seems like you are arguing for a full ban. "Well, if you take my ARs, I'll just use my semi-auto handgun. Checkmate libs."

Right, wrong, or indifferent there is a difference in a school being shot up and gang killings or DV killings. Although waiting periods, better and universal background checks, and red flag laws would also help with DV killings.

But go ahead and tell us how to do all of those things for kids better, without any new gun control. I'm guessing it'll be similar to the guy that claimed I wasn't thinking right about "school hardening" then never came back to explain. I'm guessing it just comes down to you think a hundred school kids a year is an acceptable cost.

30k plus Americans a year has been deemed an acceptable cost.

 

[kage69]

The data to support what I said has been found in P&N gun topics in past years.
It stood without contest.

Now read an updated article regarding 2020 firearm deaths.

Rifles – the category that includes guns sometimes referred to as “assault weapons” – were involved in 3% of firearm murders.​

THREE PERCENT​

Ring a bell? Rifles are inconsequential next to the problem at large. Rifles may be a weapon of choice for sickos, but Handguns get the job done. If you still question this, I SAY AGAIN, Virginia Tech. You don't need a bulky rifle to slaughter rooms full of kids. Doesn't make it any easier. Hell, probably makes it harder to sneak through. You fixate on assault weapons at the peril of future classrooms.

And yet mass shootings tripled after the assault weapons ban was lifted. A country this size that has what, average of 1 mass shooting a day now? 3% equals a lot of Americans that should still be alive. Any attention to battle rifles is fixating on them according ammosexuals, and again, this isn't a zero sum game - rifles and pistols both need to be kept from people who have no business having them.

Assault rifles were used in the last dozen or so mass shootings. They are not inconsequential, might not want to say that around parents who are genuinely worried.

 

[dlerious]

Lots of data at the Gun Violence Archive.

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/

 

[ivwshane]

Raising the age to 21 for all guns and red flag laws are a good start. I would also like to see psych screenings for anyone getting a gun license. The Uvalde and Buffalo shooter would have been ID'ed by that type of screening.

The mentally ill or people with anger issues should not have guns. Republicans have never done anything to separate the mental ill from guns.

We need universal background checks for ALL gun transfers. Gift or sale.

While mental screening sounds like a good idea, I’m guessing that in practice it would be about as effective as some states and their “training requirements” which are a complete joke.

 

[kage69]

While mental screening sounds like a good idea, I’m guessing that in practice it would be about as effective as some states and their “training requirements” which are a complete joke.

This. Also lack of enforcement of what is on the books. There are many deceased females here in the States who got that way because their dirtbag felon boyfriend never had his iron collected by ATF or local police acting for them. Just falls through the cracks, followed by a collective 'Oh well' if discovered.

 

[balloonshark]

It needs to be more then diagnosed mental illness. People who settle disputes with physical violence should not be granted a license. Psych screenings would catch that.

As part of a background check association with groups know for crime and violence don't get guns. (Proud Boys, Hells Angels) as examples

I have a great idea on how to get started. People should be able to turn in dash cam videos of idiots using their vehicles as weapons. These jerks are brake checking, stopping in the middle of the road and getting out of their cars to fight someone and swerving towards others. These people don't have the temperament to drive and shouldn't be permitted to own or drive a car, let alone own a firearm.

 

[Lezunto]

Of course, racist politicians such as GOP Arizona Senate Candidate Blake Masters are going to blame only Black people for gun violence. Because they know the news media and racial bomb throwers on talk radio and cable TV shows will swallow their garbage whole.

But folks who think as Blake Masters will always ignore the drug and criminal gang shootings among Whites, the growing hate and racism of White youth which can seen in countless videos on the Internet.

They will never mention the increasing sex trafficking in White communities, the White intra-family massacres and the never ending spree killings and mass shootings committed by addle-brained White men.

They will concentrate only the shootings of inner city Blacks which are always and loudly condemned by law abiding Black residents.

What? You mean you missed all the anti-gun violence marches, the countless speeches or gun buybacks and the demands of Blacks and Latinos for more police in their neighborhoods?

So this latter day Strom Thurmond/Lester Maddow knucklehead Blake Masters simply wants to get elected. Which is why Robert Byrd was a member of the KKK briefly. But spent the rest of his public life trying to live it down.

Think Trump-loving Blake Masters will ever apologize for his biased bullchit?

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Seems like you are arguing for a full ban. "Well, if you take my ARs, I'll just use my semi-auto handgun. Checkmate libs."

Right, wrong, or indifferent there is a difference in a school being shot up and gang killings or DV killings. Although waiting periods, better and universal background checks, and red flag laws would also help with DV killings.

But go ahead and tell us how to do all of those things for kids better, without any new gun control. I'm guessing it'll be similar to the guy that claimed I wasn't thinking right about "school hardening" then never came back to explain. I'm guessing it just comes down to you think a hundred school kids a year is an acceptable cost.

It may be hard to accept, but we consider a hundred school-aged kids a year as an acceptable cost for all sorts of things.

 

[Fenixgoon]

It may be hard to accept, but we consider a hundred school-aged kids a year as an acceptable cost for all sorts of things.

such as...?
and which one of those things have the same effects as stochastic terrorism in the form of mass-shootings?

 

[Zorba]

It may be hard to accept, but we consider a hundred school-aged kids a year as an acceptable cost for all sorts of things.

Generally more important things than making 18 year old incels feel like they don't have a micro penis.

But go on, tell us all the things we accept randomly killing 20 kids at a time. I'm guessing pretty much all of them serve a greater public good than "I like shooting my murder toy."

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

such as...?
and which one of those things have the same effects as stochastic terrorism in the form of mass-shootings?

Not gonna go listing all the ways in which children die in this country that don't get the same attention, because it's not necessary, we already know them. I agree with you, terrorism is fucked up. We had a whole goddamned war on it though and it's only gotten worse. My point remains, there's a lot of ways people, children included, die that we accept as a part of modern society. It'll only get worse as time goes on, because things are only going to be getting worse on this planet. I just want people to be honest with themselves and others as to what they want. Don't say you want to protect children, because there's more ways that children die than banning guns will resolve. Don't say you want to protect children from guns if your only concern is school shootings, because the vast majority of children die from guns outside of school shootings. Don't say you want to protect 'children' from terrorism if you aren't going to pick up a rifle, head to Ukraine, and start shooting orcs, because there's a lot more children suffering from terrorism over there than here, on our glass houses on our shining hill.

Now, if you want to feel absolved for the sin of being unable to protect children in what you perceive to be your tribe, I can understand that feeling, but it may not necessarily be something within your control, and that has to be acceptable too.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Not gonna go listing all the ways in which children die in this country that don't get the same attention, because it's not necessary, we already know them. I agree with you, terrorism is fucked up. We had a whole goddamned war on it though and it's only gotten worse. My point remains, there's a lot of ways people, children included, die that we accept as a part of modern society. It'll only get worse as time goes on, because things are only going to be getting worse on this planet. I just want people to be honest with themselves and others as to what they want. Don't say you want to protect children, because there's more ways that children die than banning guns will resolve. Don't say you want to protect children from guns if your only concern is school shootings, because the vast majority of children die from guns outside of school shootings. Don't say you want to protect 'children' from terrorism if you aren't going to pick up a rifle, head to Ukraine, and start shooting orcs, because there's a lot more children suffering from terrorism over there than here, on our glass houses on our shining hill.

Now, if you want to feel absolved for the sin of being unable to protect children in what you perceive to be your tribe, I can understand that feeling, but it may not necessarily be something within your control, and that has to be acceptable too.

make me benevolent dictator of the USA for the rest of my life and i'll be happy to ban all semi-automatic firearms, legalize recreational drugs, provide money for drug abuse prevention and addiction recovery instead of law enforcement, invest hundreds of billions into our black communities that have been purposefully ignored for nearly a century (more than that really..but let's go with post-WW2), and incentivize domestic manufacturing including clean energy initiatives.

over 40 years (my average remaining lifespan), i can almost guarantee you that would result in a lot of change for the positive. but this is a democratic republic (...sort of), so no dictatorship for me.

i'm not sure why you think i'm only concerned about "my tribe". we can walk and chew bubblegum - we can support our allies overseas AND address domestic issues as well. 50% of congress simply doesn't want to.


and if you can't give me a single low-hanging fruit of what we consider acceptable loss of children's lives, then i'm going to have to assume you don't actually have any good examples. at the end of the day, it's a risk-benefit analysis. does the benefits of hundreds of millions of firearms outweigh the risks associated with them?

i don't doubt that some number of children are hurt or killed through mundane activities every year. it's a matter of do the benefits outweigh the risks. do the benefits of sporting activities outweigh the risks associated with injury and death? just about everyone will agree that the answer is yes. a key element to that though is that other people playing sports doesn't put you at risk. you can either choose to play the sport and accept the risk associated with it or not. it is solely a personal choice. when other people own guns though, there is a risk to you, not just the gun-owner. much like covid, it's not just about the risk to the individual "i don't care about catching covid" but the risk to society as well - "i don't want to spread covid" and analagously -"i don't want someone else to be a victim of gun violence"

 

[gothuevos]

Unfortunately this is the cost of living, "part and parcel" of residing in the US. Will not change in our lifetimes.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

make me benevolent dictator of the USA for the rest of my life and i'll be happy to ban all semi-automatic firearms, legalize recreational drugs, provide money for drug abuse prevention and addiction recovery instead of law enforcement, invest hundreds of billions into our black communities that have been purposefully ignored for nearly a century (more than that really..but let's go with post-WW2), and incentivize domestic manufacturing including clean energy initiatives.

over 40 years (my average remaining lifespan), i can almost guarantee you that would result in a lot of change for the positive. but this is a democratic republic (...sort of), so no dictatorship for me.

i'm not sure why you think i'm only concerned about "my tribe". we can walk and chew bubblegum - we can support our allies overseas AND address domestic issues as well. 50% of congress simply doesn't want to.

Yep, often times this is how dramatic governmental changes happen... the stagnation, corruption, and paralysis of the senate gives rise to the populist 'benevolent' dictator, a la ancient Rome. We almost had that with Trump, thankfully he was incompetent.

'We' (as in the US Govt) can yes, individuals not as much. My point of that rambling was that the individual calls for change when A Thing affects them personally, but they're usually lying to themselves as to what they want. The actual definition of what people are asking for is 'I want children in the US to not die from things we generally consider to be random terroristic activities' which is a super narrow and fairly useless ideal to glom on to. What they really want is to not feel useless in a society that they increasingly feel useless in, whether that feeling is legitimate or not.

 

[Zorba]

Yep, often times this is how dramatic governmental changes happen... the stagnation, corruption, and paralysis of the senate gives rise to the populist 'benevolent' dictator, a la ancient Rome. We almost had that with Trump, thankfully he was incompetent.

'We' (as in the US Govt) can yes, individuals not as much. My point of that rambling was that the individual calls for change when A Thing affects them personally, but they're usually lying to themselves as to what they want. The actual definition of what people are asking for is 'I want children in the US to not die from things we generally consider to be random terroristic activities' which is a super narrow and fairly useless ideal to glom on to. What they really want is to not feel useless in a society that they increasingly feel useless in, whether that feeling is legitimate or not.

I'm sure you feel that we should just completely ignore other forms of terrorism too, right?

But yes, kids die in car accidents. So we've made cars safer, created seat belt laws, mandated car seats, then booster seats, etc. Plus cars serve a purpose of allowing kids to interact with their world.

Yes, kids die from cancer, so we've invested billions in research and treatment.

But kids die of guns and we get "yeah kids die, let's go put more guns in schools!"

You're argument is basically like the guy on here that used to always say as long as anyone was exposed to secondhand smoke, nothing about guns could be done.