YASST: 3 kids + 3 adults dead in latest school shooting...

Page 24 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
71,774
5,851
126
God damn you all let the trolls derail the shit out of threads.

Just like their GOP leaders, they have completely changed the discussion and we're no longer talking about the children who were murdered and how to prevent it in the future.
It is obvious how begin to reduce it. We need better methodologies to keep guns our of the hands of irresponsible and mentally ill people. There are many things we can do on that front that won't require a constitutional amendment that may, if ever, take many many years for a sufficient change in what the culture as a whole believes. We can't even get a constitutional amendment for the rights of women. How does that make sense?

All efforts to ban guns will lead to more arms being sold. The more sold the more in the hands of incompetent and otherwise dangerous people. It's gun nuts, not the most mentally stable people, who will most be threatened that way. And they can own thousands of rounds to take care of things when the Zombie Marching Moron Democrats come to take away their guns.

Secondly, we can outlaw mass media attention to school shooting and other mass shootings. These vultures feel off of and stoke fear as a way to sell eyeballs to advertisers by acquiring national ratings. They thrive by playing on outrage. And Americans get their fix by watching. We are all so outraged by evil which shows how really really good we are.

And most important of all is our love of the system that produces violence in the first place, competitive capitalism where all you need to do to win is to become emotionally dead and defeat everybody in your path, a world full of monsters filled with self satisfied glee. The mental illness the structure of our society creates is why people are driven to kill and since we are all deeply infected with the same disease and the same need to deny it, we will never address the real issue. We are full of fear which produces violence because we live in constant threat the machine we have created and worship will grind us under.

The real facts are that when push comes to shove we don't want to change anything. For that reason we seek a scapegoat. Too many guns. I wonder why.

So light your torches and form up into a mob. Time to go after those evil witchy guns.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
71,774
5,851
126
Yup a selfish society that won't change for the benefit of the next generation. And funny how the rest of the civilized world does fine without this gun fetish.
Do they have a constitutional right to bear arms? Do we? What you dismiss as a fetish others see as an inalienable right. You can't just self righteously dismiss reality by calling it names like fetish. Are you a Republican with a gift for rationalization?
 

purbeast0

No Lifer
Sep 13, 2001
52,648
5,550
126
Do they have a constitutional right to bear arms? Do we? What you dismiss as a fetish others see as an inalienable right. You can't just self righteously dismiss reality by calling it names like fetish. Are you a Republican with a gift for rationalization?
Who gives a shit?

It's an amendment to the constitution. Amend it again. Problem solved.

It was written over 2 centuries ago. Technology and guns and life has changed quite a bit since then.

EDIT:

And banning assault rifles and/or all/any semi automatic weapons doesn't infringe on anyone's 2A rights. The gun nutters can still purchase and use guns.
 
Last edited:

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
71,774
5,851
126
To borrow from the late great George Carlin, conservatives want rights. For the rest of us they deem them as privileges. Something they have been trying to take away. AKA voting rights.
I believe their efforts will be doomed to failure just is the left's efforts to outlaw firearms. Both are possible but if so a long way off from today. Deal with what is.
 

eelw

Diamond Member
Dec 4, 1999
8,516
3,840
136
Do they have a constitutional right to bear arms? Do we? What you dismiss as a fetish others see as an inalienable right. You can't just self righteously dismiss reality by calling it names like fetish. Are you a Republican with a gift for rationalization?
Lol human decency needs to be in the constitution? No wonder the US is worse than a shithole country.
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
37,360
17,566
146
I disagree with some of the overly broad statements. The GOP isn't off the rails although some are extreme, just as on the Dems side (The Squad for instance). My opinions have nothing to do with "The Black Guy" you are so fond of referencing all the time. Obama was a million times better than the "White Guy and Helper" (Biden / Kamala) we have now they both suck. They are both out to just undo everything Trump, damn the outcome. See Border, Oil, Economics, selling off our Oil Reserves...

The Dems also love to maintain keeping the African Americans beholden to them by offers of aid programs and reparations etc. I don't know why you would continue voting for them. I know why many do as it is the perpetual promise that the Government is here to help, when in fact they don't give a shit as long as they get the votes.

We disagree with one another and that is Okay. You do you and I'll do me.

An yes, the group of minorities that trump created another cool phrase for. Great example of your tribalism. How dare they want america for all Americans!

Denial isn’t a good look dude
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
19,879
18,325
136
Yeah I haven't really engaged with that guy in a minute because I know he's hopelessly terrible. And I let myself slip for a moment. I'm not usually naive like a lot of people are. These people are irredeemable deplorables and he's proved that yet again.
 

Pohemi

Diamond Member
Oct 2, 2004
7,731
8,746
146
Do they have a constitutional right to bear arms?
Only Mexico and Guatemala have constitutions which include the right to own personal firearms. Mexico has ONE gun shop in the entire country, and it's run by the Army.

There are other countries that allow personal ownership and possession of firearms, they simply don't have constitutions.

I'm curious what combination of variables led us to the gun culture we've developed, because it isn't one single, simple reason that got us here. Perfect storm of rampant capitalism and marketing, fetishizing of military and LE, macho bro masculinity, notions of "American exceptionalism", etc.

And yes, those are all mental illness related of course. I still find it jaw-dropping that the US has nearly 50% of the privately held guns on the planet. The more guns are in circulation, the better the chance for them to end up in the hands of the unstable.
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
19,879
18,325
136
Who gives a shit?

It's an amendment to the constitution. Amend it again. Problem solved.

It was written over 2 centuries ago. Technology and guns and life has changed quite a bit since then.

EDIT:

And banning assault rifles and/or all/any semi automatic weapons doesn't infringe on anyone's 2A rights. The gun nutters can still purchase and use guns.

Once a gun nut fetishist, it's impossible to reach them. Their identity has become one with actual guns. Trying to limit anything about guns is like trying to rip a testicle off to them. They honestly prefer the complete fucked up situation we are in this country with gun violence and mass shootings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: purbeast0

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
71,774
5,851
126
Who gives a shit?

It's an amendment to the constitution. Amend it again. Problem solved.

It was written over 2 centuries ago. Technology and guns and life has changed quite a bit since then.
I think the courts give a shit so anybody in the executive branch will have to follow suit. You, however, are entitled to imagine your 'who gives a shit' contains some important meaning. Try not to get all hopped up on rage. If you want to reduce child killings you are going to have to get real. If I could see into the future and know with absolute certainty who will use a firearm to kill an innocent person, I would probably do what I think you would do in a similar position.
Lol human decency needs to be in the constitution? No wonder the US is worse than a shithole country.
The US has great qualities and terrible ones. I am neither a nationalist nor do I reflexively reject everything about a country because it has flaws. Your comment is silly. Have you never noticed how far behind the law is to changing norms. Stab yourself in the eye if it makes you feel better.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
71,774
5,851
126
Only Mexico and Guatemala have constitutions which include the right to own personal firearms. Mexico has ONE gun shop in the entire country, and it's run by the Army.

There are other countries that allow personal ownership and possession of firearms, they simply don't have constitutions.

I'm curious what combination of variables led us to the gun culture we've developed, because it isn't one single, simple reason that got us here. Perfect storm of rampant capitalism and marketing, fetishizing of military and LE, macho bro masculinity, notions of "American exceptionalism", etc.

And yes, those are all mental illness related of course. I still find it jaw-dropping that the US has nearly 50% of the privately held guns on the planet. The more guns are in circulation, the better the chance for them to end up in the hands of the unstable.
Indeed. Better put than what I said.
 

Zor Prime

Senior member
Nov 7, 1999
888
475
136
God damn you all let the trolls derail the shit out of threads.

Just like their GOP leaders, they have completely changed the discussion and we're no longer talking about the children who were murdered and how to prevent it in the future.
lol. I troll for entertainment time to time and since I'm not looking for new friends it works for me.

I already made known what I think the States should do, even said I'm cool for dramatic change even at the County level. That could be some real utopian shit, letting people in their respective localities decide.

Some people here don't think heightened police presence would be a bonus or isn't feasible due to X, Y or Z reason. That baffles me, but whatever. People are entitled to their thoughts and opinions.

The core of the problem is mental health, anyway. We shouldn't need heightened police presence, I admit it's a bandaid at best. I do not find man to be inherently evil across the board. I do find some to be that way, but they're an exception to the rule and there isn't many, comparatively. An issue is when they do get into positions of power where their sphere of influence is widened. To another end of man being evil, it usually entails them having had various experiences to where they ended up that way.

I suspicion the path of least resistance in getting lower senseless deaths with guns accomplished would be to get guns out of the hands of people with mental dysfunctions, ailments. And people who commit acts of violence. Of course anyone with a mental impairment wouldn't think that's a good idea and fight tooth and nail to counter such a thing, nor the violent offenders.

Question would be what criteria would be met fulfilling the requirement of having firearms taken away. Almost 10% of Americans are 'depressed,' well that's a mental issue so they've gotta have their guns taken away for starters. Then people who have committed acts of violence. So on and so forth. All sorts of shit would have to be rewrote and voted for. Eventually after a period of time most should probably be allowed to have their rights restored provided they're playing ball with the rest of society and aren't receiving mental healthcare or doing unwarranted violent shit.

But none of this will be done. Democrats and Republicans as parties need pushed off a cliff and rebuilt from the ground up or 'heaven forbid,' viable alternatives come to light.

IMO the quickest methodology for resolution after a brief learning curve would be to put a gun in the hand of everybody. Someone breaks the peace it would handle itself pretty quick. Violence isn't the answer but I'm not a pacifist either, some violence for prolonged, enduring peace is worth the price tag, IMO. Of course, that isn't going to happen, either.

Nothing is going to happen. Not in our lifetime. So, enjoy talking about it. Have fun, get your entertainment value.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Pohemi

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
57,413
11,260
126
Lol human decency needs to be in the constitution? No wonder the US is worse than a shithole country.
It's an appalling joke that people behave as though the only possible interpretation of the 2nd amendment is "everybody can have all the guns all the time and also carry them on their person anywhere and everywhere they go (except at Republican conventions)", and that interpretation is not to be challenged.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
71,774
5,851
126
EDIT:

And banning assault rifles and/or all/any semi automatic weapons doesn't infringe on anyone's 2A rights. The gun nutters can still purchase and use guns.

What is an assault rifle? Why would you want to ban millions of 22 rifles with millions of them inherited from parents and so many of which are collectors items to boot. You sound like you have become gun nutty? You don't seem to have any idea what the hell you are taking about sort of like a crack-pot full of irrational ideas he's never thought through or would care to. Get a grip. Your views on guns have become tangled in politics and so you're ideas show all the signs of you're having become a partisan nut case, sort of like some of those wackos on the right who think children should carry arms to school.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
71,774
5,851
126
It's an appalling joke that people behave as though the only possible interpretation of the 2nd amendment is "everybody can have all the guns all the time and also carry them on their person anywhere and everywhere they go (except at Republican conventions)", and that interpretation is not to be challenged.
What's that belief held by, 90% of the population?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: hal2kilo

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
19,879
18,325
136
What is an assault rifle? Why would you want to ban millions of 22 rifles with millions of them inherited from parents and so many of which are collectors items to boot. You sound like you have become gun nutty? You don't seem to have any idea what the hell you are taking about sort of like a crack-pot full of irrational ideas he's never thought through or would care to. Get a grip. Your views on guns have become tangled in politics and so you're ideas show all the signs of you're having become a partisan nut case, sort of like some of those wackos on the right who think children should carry arms to school.

Before you have sex, do you have to touch at least one of your guns in a suggestive way before you can perform?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Pohemi

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
57,413
11,260
126
What's that belief held by, 90% of the population?
Most U.S. adults want to see gun laws made stricter and think gun violence is increasing nationwide, according to a new poll that finds broad public support for a variety of gun restrictions, including many that are supported by majorities of Republicans and gun owners.

The poll by the University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy and The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research shows 71% of Americans say gun laws should be stricter, including about half of Republicans, the vast majority of Democrats and a majority of those in gun-owning households.

Roughly half of Americans (53%) favor stricter gun laws

In fact, according to a Public Policy Polling survey, 83 percent of gun owners support expanded background checks on sales of all firearms, including 72 percent of all NRA members.
(It logically follows that universal background checks would be used to prevent as many people from owning guns)

The most recent polling, conducted June 10-12, found 68% of voters back stricter gun laws, up from 64% from June 4-5, 65% right after the Uvalde shooting on May 25, and 60% after the Buffalo shooting on May 16.

That’s the highest share of support Morning Consult has recorded in polling dating back to 2015, surpassing the previous record of 66% set in 2019, after mass shootings in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio.

No, I don't agree that 90% of the US population holds with your belief.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
71,774
5,851
126





(It logically follows that universal background checks would be used to prevent as many people from owning guns)



No, I don't agree that 90% of the US population holds with your belief.
Jesus, you’re amazing. The number of people who would support the sosition you provided would be almost nobody at all, not 90%. Check your sarcasm meter.

I have made it quite clear that most people are for rational ways to eliminate gun violence. The argument is over what different people on the political spectrum regard as rational. Democrats supporting banning guns for their own so called reasons throw gas on the rate of gun sales because of, well you know, stupidity.
 

quikah

Diamond Member
Apr 7, 2003
4,046
636
126
Secondly, we can outlaw mass media attention to school shooting and other mass shootings. These vultures feel off of and stoke fear as a way to sell eyeballs to advertisers by acquiring national ratings. They thrive by playing on outrage. And Americans get their fix by watching. We are all so outraged by evil which shows how really really good we are.

So infringing the 1st amendment is OK?
 

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
82,854
17,364
136
So infringing the 1st amendment is OK?
Its already been established NONE of the amendments are absolute, particularly the bill of rights.
They all have exceptions.
Threats are not covered by the first amendment. Neither is malicious libel or slander.
Deliberately spreading dangerous speech can be criminal. The old standby is shouting FIRE in a crowded movie theater when there is no fire. You cause a panic, people get hurt, you CAN be held accountable.
I don't know how silencing nutjobs or their reporters would qualify though. I am betting the Supreme Court wound not uphold it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo