• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Air Force faces scrutiny for failure to report domestic violence (Texas church shooting)

Underseer

Contributor
Joined
May 29, 2003
Messages
11,413
Location
Chicago suburbs
Basic Beliefs
atheism, resistentialism
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/air-force-domestic-violence_us_5a031ae9e4b06ff32c94f7d7

Every time there is a mass shooting, Republicans try to change the subject by talking about the state of mental health care in America (ironic because they don't want to spend money on mental health care for American citizens). This is of course a red herring. Crazy people are no more likely to commit acts of violence, but are more likely to be victims of violence.

A history of domestic violence is the single best predictor of these things.

Which is why people are raising a stink about how the military reports (or doesn't report) incidents of domestic violence.

You want to prevent mass shootings without banning guns? Then the single best thing you can do is get and keep guns out of the hands of wife-beaters.
 
You want to prevent mass shootings without banning guns?
wow what a double negative that sentence is, lol.

preventing mass shootings is literally physically impossible without banning guns, so... bill o'rielly was actually totally factually correct, though he meant it in a really smug and douchebag way: mass shootings are the price we pay for the 2nd amendment, and that's just the way it is.
 
I think an investigation is in order as to this failure.

Perhaps this failure is just an example of "white male privilege". After all, can you imagine a woman getting the same treatment from any branch of the armed forces? (P.S. this is satire).
 
It was pointed out on the news days ago that he already shouldn't have been able to own any guns.

So the story is gun control laws failed, but a neighbor who happened to be an NRA instructor armed with an AR-15 put a stop to it.
 
It was pointed out on the news days ago that he already shouldn't have been able to own any guns.

So the story is gun control laws failed, but a neighbor who happened to be an NRA instructor armed with an AR-15 put a stop to it.
Yeah, that's one big gripe about gun control is that it seems to largely punish the innocent while the criminals keep slipping through.
 
You want to prevent mass shootings without banning guns?
wow what a double negative that sentence is, lol.

preventing mass shootings is literally physically impossible without banning guns, so... bill o'rielly was actually totally factually correct, though he meant it in a really smug and douchebag way: mass shootings are the price we pay for the 2nd amendment, and that's just the way it is.

Well, mass shootings are incredibly rare in places like the United Kingdom and Australia (chosen as examples because I am familiar with their gun laws) and in neither country are guns banned, which rather suggests that preventing mass shootings is perfectly possible without banning guns.
 
You want to prevent mass shootings without banning guns?
wow what a double negative that sentence is, lol.

preventing mass shootings is literally physically impossible without banning guns, so... bill o'rielly was actually totally factually correct, though he meant it in a really smug and douchebag way: mass shootings are the price we pay for the 2nd amendment, and that's just the way it is.

Funny how America is the only industrialized nation that has all of these mass shootings.

- - - Updated - - -

It was pointed out on the news days ago that he already shouldn't have been able to own any guns.

So the story is gun control laws failed, but a neighbor who happened to be an NRA instructor armed with an AR-15 put a stop to it.

What did he actually stop? Nearly everyone in that church was shot.

How can you possibly make that argument with a straight face? Do you really think we are that stupid?

- - - Updated - - -

wow what a double negative that sentence is, lol.

preventing mass shootings is literally physically impossible without banning guns, so... bill o'rielly was actually totally factually correct, though he meant it in a really smug and douchebag way: mass shootings are the price we pay for the 2nd amendment, and that's just the way it is.

Well, mass shootings are incredibly rare in places like the United Kingdom and Australia (chosen as examples because I am familiar with their gun laws) and in neither country are guns banned, which rather suggests that preventing mass shootings is perfectly possible without banning guns.

Please try not to bring facts into this. You'll trigger the snowflakes.
 
So the existing laws already said he couldn't have a gun. Thank you for pointing that out Underseer. Now we both agree that this was a failure of law enforcement and now a failure of that absurd concept of "gun culture".
 
So the existing laws already said he couldn't have a gun. Thank you for pointing that out Underseer. Now we both agree that this was a failure of law enforcement and now a failure of that absurd concept of "gun culture".

I don't know if you've ever lived in Texas but I did for a few years. Guns have a prominent place in the local culture, and Texas laws don't just support their use in non-life threatening situations, they encourage it.

Texans in general are the most pro-gun fanatics I've ever met, and I live in a state where nearly everyone has gun.
 
So the existing laws already said he couldn't have a gun. Thank you for pointing that out Underseer. Now we both agree that this was a failure of law enforcement and now a failure of that absurd concept of "gun culture".

I don't know if you've ever lived in Texas but I did for a few years. Guns have a prominent place in the local culture, and Texas laws don't just support their use in non-life threatening situations, they encourage it.

Texans in general are the most pro-gun fanatics I've ever met, and I live in a state where nearly everyone has gun.

And the laws in his jurisdiction demonstrate how fanatically pro-gun Texas is by not allowing him to have one. It was a cascade failure of failure to enforce existing laws.
 
This is somewhat like the Sandy Hook shooting, where that perpetuator also used guns that weren't legally his, instead they were his murdered mother's guns.
 
Every time there is a mass shooting, Republicans try to change the subject by talking about the state of mental health care in America (ironic because they don't want to spend money on mental health care for American citizens).

Only if the perpetrator is a white Christian. Come to think of it, this may finally be a rational reason to keep brown people out of America. It would mean a higher ration of white christian mass shootings, and therefore could mean more attention and maybe just maybe more funding to mental health care for the American people. I'm joking if you can't tell.
 
Back
Top Bottom