• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Another Fucking Mass Shooting At US School



This is his take home from yet another mass shooting. What a fucking charmer.

It's always too soon to discuss guns, but never too soon to attack the LGBT community.

As to this shorter I am disappointed in all of the posters to recently comment.

"They". "Them".

The shooter had contexts wherein they preferred "he/him" pronouns, so if you can't bring yourself to use them, or are confused on whether you should given a lack of public transition you can always instead choose to be agnostic rather than being disrespectful. Even if they deserve very little respect after a murder/suicide run, they do not deserve disrespect in this way.

This is, of course, going to be used by the media to demonize trans people. It's already happening.

Not to mention this throws a whole wrench in the sex essentialist viewpoints that imply that someone needs to be born with a penis to be a violent sack of shit.
 
If reports are accurate about her known mental health issues and parents wanting her to have no guns...

Red Flag laws have BIG potential for misuse, but this would have been the right use case.
Actually she texted a friend about her intentions. The friend reported the issue to the police, They didn;t take it seriously.
This is about stuff that happened well before the day of the shooting.
 
If reports are accurate about her known mental health issues and parents wanting her to have no guns...

Red Flag laws have BIG potential for misuse, but this would have been the right use case.
Actually she texted a friend about her intentions. The friend reported the issue to the police, They didn;t take it seriously.
I wonder how many such reports the police get everyday? They probably cannot respond to all of them. The crying wolf problem.
 

This is, of course, going to be used by the media to demonize trans people. It's already happening.
If the shooting had been done by a white republican then it would be used to demonise said demographic. Unfortunately no suprises there.
Normally, it is done by people who intend to kill their peers because their peers do not immediately know and fight for the immediate desires of the shooter, despite the fact society does not have magical powers that yield that information free of active communication, and despite the fact that while people owe others the freedom to act as they see fit, that right ends abruptly where someone else right to live as they see fit extends.

Usually, the demand asked for is unreasonable: that peers pay special attention without call or reason or interest to them, both platonic and romantic.

Sometimes the demand asked for is reasonable: simply that some folks not be allowed to consistently bully them.

Sometimes the demand might be to have access to hormones and teachers that are willing to refrain from assigning gender on them, and this is certainly a reasonable demand.

The issue is that they make these demands at gunpoint with manifestos, and murder, and blood, and that is an issue of culture, and altogether too often an element growing as a cancer, metastasized by the presence of a gun, and spread as a meme among young, primarily masculine leaning groups. This is NOT reasonable. Violence in this way is not reasonable.

A fight over this in the halls of congress with legislation is reasonable. A gunfight with the people who come to drag you away from your parents or to take your medication? That's reasonable. A protracted war against a regime that will take away the kids of folks who don't have the means to fight for them? Totally reasonable.

A fight with your classmates who had nothing to do with that, while having never even discussed situations of bullying and abuse with your parents or school officials? That's madness, ill-informed ill-advised madness that will only end in lives lost and causes that you champion attacked.

There are more correct battle grounds, and the blood of the sacrifices made of the lives of others will not serve as ink to write any of the words they wish.

The way to terminate that cycle remains not in demonizing those whose demands are reasonable, but depriving them of unreasonable means to pursue them at ages too immature to even start to understand how.

And I suppose in teaching them which demands are unreasonable to make, namely based on the consent of others to participate and their utter lack of obligation to do so.
 
The meaning of the Helms trans pride flag is, of course, common and easily learned knowledge.
Maybe so, but I had not seen that particular flag before, or at least have not noticed it. Certainly not these versions with guns and threatening messages.
If you were actually curious, rather than looking for an excuse to repeat a dumb joke you got from somewhere,
Why do you think I got it from somewhere? I noticed the curious color scheme myself. I don't know how old you are, but I am old enough to have used PCs with a CGA card.
Also, I thought it was pretty funny, and not at all dumb.
to post in the hilarious thread on that funny school shooting you seem to find so amusing.
The shooting itself is hardly amusing. But often humor is a good way to deal with tragedy.
 
Here you go. Yes, she had assault weapons and a hand gun
Only one was an "assault weapon". A short-barreled AR15 with a pistol brace. She also had a Sub 2000, which shoots pistol ammo like the 9x19mm, so not exactly a powerful rifle. And she had a Smith and Wesson M&P Shield, same type of gun found on Manuel "Tortugita" Teran in Atlanta.

Note that all the carnage she inflicted could easily have been done using just the handgun.
 
Yeah, it’s highly unlikely that she would use a rifle when a handgun is so much more convenient. 🙄
Rifles, esp. powerful rifles like AR15, MCX or AK47, do offer advantages of range and power, but in close quarters handguns are indeed much more convenient. Much lighter and wieldier, esp. in tight quarters.

In reality she could easily have killed these six people with the handgun and left the rifles at home.
 
So there’s no need for AR-15s, it would seem you agree.
No particular need to ban them either.
In a free society, things should be allowed unless there are sufficient reasons to ban them. Not be banned unless some overriding "need" is demonstrated.
 
Are. you serious? I've yet to hear any large group of people say that their goal is to ban all guns.
And yet we see that sentiment on this very forum.
So let's get ordinary handguns off the street too.

The majority of people, including gun owners, want much tighter gun regulation. Of course this won't stop all murders. Of course, there will still be illegally owned guns.
I would welcome sensible gun laws. The problem is that Dems are too obsessed with banning AR15s to spend their political capital on anything sensible.
Also, we need to enforce existing laws. Felons in possession of firearms should not be released own recognizance. That's fauxgressive lunacy.
Harris County Releasing Felons Possessing Firearms on Personal Recognizance ‘30 to 40 Times a Month’
No gun laws can be effective if not enforced.

But, we need to start somewhere to lesson the impact of gun shootings, especially school shootings.
First step should be enforcing existing laws. Not give gun criminals a pass in the name of "equity".
I do not think banning so-called "assault weapons" would accomplish much, and therefore are not a good step, first of otherwise. Red flag laws would accomplish more, but safeguards are needed against abuse.

For example, how did a 6 year old have access to a gun that was used to shoot his teacher? Why? Can't we do something to keep guns out of the hands of children and teenagers if we really try?
Those parents should be held responsible for not securing their firearms. Civilly and criminally.
 
Last edited:
Guns kill.
No, bullets kill.
No, it's a "mental illness" problem.
No, it's Guns.
No, bullets.
Mental illness.
Guns.
Bullets.
Mental illness.

Stop. You're all wrong. According to this opinion
Guns don't kill Americans — Republicans do.

We’re the only developed country in the world that unconditionally allows civilians to own military-style assault weapons, that allows “open carry,” and that lets gun manufacturers openly buy politicians (thanks, Republicans on the Supreme Court).

As a consequence, we’re also the only country in the world where the leading cause of death for children is being blown apart by bullets.

Today is the 87th day of the year. So far, we’ve had over 130 mass shootings. Yesterday’s was the 33rd school shooting. This is not happening in any other developed country in the world.
...
There are two simple reasons why Republicans want America drenched in guns and the deaths they bring.

The first is that they’ve been taking piles of money from explicit peddlers of death: the NRA and gun manufacturers. This form of corrupt political bribery was legalized by 5 Republicans on the Supreme Court in 1978 and doubled-down on with Citizens United: it’s not just corrupting politics in America, it is killing our children.

The second is that there’s a substantial part of the violent white racist GOP base that is actively arming in preparation for a civil racial war in America, egged on by multiple Republican members of Congress.

These America-hating legislators — these sick, twisted bastards — delight in posing their white families with military assault weapons and posting the pictures on social media, their way of telling Black people and “liberals” what’s coming.

Last weekend in Waco, Donald Trump ran clips on a giant screen of his January 6th mob assaulting and killing people, producing three dead police officers, as he and his followers stood with their hands over their hearts singing a version of the national anthem that was interspersed with quotes from Trump himself.

The leading Republican candidate for president and his followers were literally celebrating the deaths they had caused, while calling for an end to our form of democratic republican government.

If that bloody mass murderer Vladimir Putin wanted to kill a few hundred thousand Americans, for example, he couldn’t have done better. We’ve lost more Americans to guns in just the past three years than Putin has lost on the battlefield in Ukraine.
Read the entire article. A few excerpts don't do it justice.
 
So there’s no need for AR-15s, it would seem you agree.
No particular need to ban them either.
In a free society, things should be allowed unless there are sufficient reasons to ban them. Not be banned unless some overriding "need" is demonstrated.
When they’re that intrinsically dangerous we do.
 
When they’re that intrinsically dangerous we do.
So are all firearms. As well as kitchen knives for that matter.
If you don’t worry about matters of degree then yes you are right. Even sidewalks can kill. But those of who want to have a reasonable conversation are desiring to negotiate where the lines are drawn. there may indeed be, as you put it, “sufficient reasons” to ban them.
 
If you don’t worry about matters of degree
I do, of course. Which is why I always mention that so-called "assault weapons" are rarely used to commit homicides compared with good old-fashioned handguns and even compared with the even more old-fashioned "hands, fists and feet".
weapons.png

Then there is the issue of substitution. If AR15s were banned, and the would-be shooter could not get their hands on one illegally, do you think they would just give up? Stayed home and taken up scrapbooking? Or would they just get a different firearm? Harris and Klebold did their school shooting in 1999, dab-smack in the middle of the so-called "assault weapon" ban, and yet were able to kill 13 and wound 21. And what about Audrey? If she did not have access to an AR15 derivative due to a ban, she could have just gone with the SUB-2000 and the M&P Shield, or she could have taken another handgun or non-assaulty rifle.

then yes you are right. Even sidewalks can kill.
True.

scaled.AP359711654398_1.jpg

Which is why Z was justified in using deadly force.
But those of who want to have a reasonable conversation are desiring to negotiate where the lines are drawn. there may indeed be, as you put it, “sufficient reasons” to ban them.
I disagree. Focusing on people rather than on the types of guns the Dems love to hate would bear much more fruit. Unfortunately, Dems are wasting precious political capital trying to ban AR15s.
First step should be enforcing gun laws already on the books.
 
Last edited:
Anyway, no point in rehashing the same argument over and over. If you have read my posts you will know that I do not find the “they will find another way to kill so why ban this way” argument compelling in the least. This logic is only used by conservatives for guns it seems.

Why are hand grenades banned? Why fully automatic machine guns? Why ban abortions in one state since women can go to another state and get one? Why ban woke books at school when a child can read one at the library or at home?

Why should anything be illegal at all if the criminals don’t obey the law?
 
Stop. You're all wrong. According to this opinion
Guns don't kill Americans — Republicans do.
Putin stooge Thom Hartmann? Really?

And partisan bickering will not help matters here. You need to win over Republicans in order to pass meaningful reform. Demonizing them like this is not going to accomplish anything.
"Partisan bickering"? Have you taken leave?

The GOP is now officially the party of greed, lies and hatreds. Even right-wingers like Liz Cheney are bailing out. America's only hope is its complete destruction.
 
Back
Top Bottom