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

Another Fucking Mass Shooting At US School

...I said getting rid of guns entirely is a pipe dream. I also said I think the US should adopt laws like comparable countries (again I use comparable loosely) that don't have issues with gun violence as we do. I thought that insinuated that I thought it would help decrease gun violence in the US. I didn't say that was a pipe dream.

I should have been more careful to acknowledge what you actually said, so I'm glad you clarified that. You are right, of course, and the only problem I have with what you said was that the larger debate over guns quite often focuses on this straw man that gun control advocates ultimately have this pipe dream, even though you very carefully did not say that. Now the gun control debate is in slippery slope territory, because the "pipe dream" isn't a serious position taken by most gun control advocates. However, those who fear gun control as a slippery slope believe that it is. So why even bring it up? That's a talking point for people who oppose gun control.
 
UNPREPARED AND OVERWHELMED | South Florida Sun Sentinel | Sun Sentinel
"Two decades after Columbine and five years after Sandy Hook, educators and police still weren’t ready for Parkland."
Dec. 28, 2018
A gunman with an AR-15 fired the bullets, but a series of blunders, bad policies, sketchy training and poor leadership helped him succeed. Information reported over 10 months by the South Florida Sun Sentinel reveals 58 minutes of chaos on campus marked by no one taking charge, deputies dawdling, false information spreading, communications paralyzed and children stranded with nowhere to hide.

To be sure, a number of teachers and police officers performed heroically. But an examination of the day’s events reveals that the Sheriff’s Office and school district were unprepared for the crisis.


The New York Times on Instagram: “The New York Times reached out to all 50 Senate Republicans on Wednesday and Thursday to ask whether they would support two measures…”
The New York Times reached out to all 50 Senate Republicans on Wednesday and Thursday to ask whether they would support two measures already passed by the House to strengthen background checks for gun buyers. Within hours of the shooting at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, Senate Democrats moved quickly to clear the way for possible votes on the two bills.

The legislation would expand criminal background checks to would-be purchasers on the internet and at gun shows, and give the FBI more time to investigate gun buyers flagged by the instant background check system.
  • Open or undecided: 4
  • Opposed or leaning no: 14
  • Declined to answer or deflected: 32
with the responses of several of them.
 
The idea that you can completely eliminate guns is dumb. The idea that you need to, in order to eliminate the vast majority of shootings, is even dumber.

If your boat is sinking, bailing out the vast majority of the water is a good idea even if you understand that you can never get rid of it all.

Getting rid of all guns is a strawman. It’s never going to happen, and it doesn’t need to happen.
The problem is that you imagine that getting guns out of society is an even process. In reality, though, you'll be disarming the law abiding but doing little about the criminals. You'll probably reduce mass shootings--but you'll increase other crime because you've deprived people of the ability to protect themselves. Less dramatic but probably more victims.
 
The idea that you can completely eliminate guns is dumb. The idea that you need to, in order to eliminate the vast majority of shootings, is even dumber.

If your boat is sinking, bailing out the vast majority of the water is a good idea even if you understand that you can never get rid of it all.

Getting rid of all guns is a strawman. It’s never going to happen, and it doesn’t need to happen.
The problem is that you imagine that getting guns out of society is an even process. In reality, though, you'll be disarming the law abiding but doing little about the criminals. You'll probably reduce mass shootings--but you'll increase other crime because you've deprived people of the ability to protect themselves. Less dramatic but probably more victims.

Loren, that argument would make sense if there were substantial evidence that gunowners actually use their guns much for self-protection. The main value in gun ownership seems to be the feeling of empowerment and security that it gives people who fear all the random violence that they see in the news. So they are naturally disinclined to give up gun ownership and are willing to believe all sorts of nonsense to justify their need for them. The problem isn't that we disarm law abiding citizens. It is that we don't require those who feel a need to own a gun go through the process of learning to use and store it properly, not to mention registering it with the police and buying insurance to cover death and injuries caused by improper use.

Crime has been on the increase, even though the US population is much better armed than that of any other developed nation. Reducing the amount of guns owned by the public by the public is not going to increase it, because the vast majority of weapons used in crime got into use first through a legal purchase. They may be stolen or not, but they were originally legal.
 
Senator Ted Cruz on Twitter: "The elites in society have the loudest megaphone when it comes to gun control.
They live in gated neighborhoods and have private security. (vid link)" / Twitter

then
Mehdi Hasan on Twitter: "Cruz is a graduate of Princeton and Yale, a lawyer, a senator, the multimillionaire husband of a Goldman Sachs executive, who sends his kids to an exclusive school, but sure, let’s listen to him on ‘elites’!" / Twitter
A mistake. TC is a graduate from Harvard Law School, not Yale. So that makes him even more elite.

Tanger on Twitter: "@mehdirhasan I never understood that part of the GOP rhetoric. Those at the lectern telling you to rise up against the "Elite" are, themselves, part of the "Elite". THEY (the GOP) are not one of u. THEY have vacay homes, extensive investment portfolios, they have govt-funded benefits plans." / Twitter


That aside, gun-control advocates don't seem willing to address the issue of self-protection. So I will. I recommend passive methods, like helmets and body armor, and low-lethality weapons, like baseball bats and Tasers. I also recommend learning unarmed self-defense. Low-lethality weapons are good because they are more forgiving of accidents and mistakes.

How Do Stun Guns Work? Are Tasers Regulated Like Guns? | CriminalDefenseLawyer.com
Stun guns and Tasers have been widely used by police for some time now, but they've also become popular consumer items for self-defense. Most people in the United States are allowed to have stun guns and Tasers, especially in the wake of court decisions finding that these weapons are covered under the Second Amendment's right to bear arms. Still, there are often permit requirements and other restrictions on who can buy stun guns and Tasers, where they can be carried, and when they can be used.
 
Samuel Sinyangwe on Twitter: "Legislators responded to the 2018 Parkland school shooting by hiring police officers in every elementary, middle and high school in Florida. It didn’t make students safer. Instead, it led to this: (links)" / Twitter
There are now more police officers in Florida’s schools than nurses -- report - The Washington Post
noting
The Cost of School Policing | ACLU of Florida | We defend the civil rights and civil liberties of all people in Florida, by working through the legislature, the courts and in the streets.
The authors of “The Cost of School Policing: What Florida’s students have paid for a pretense of security,” said there is “little consistent evidence” that the presence of law enforcement led to a drop in the number of student behavioral incidents, indicating that school-based law enforcement officers “were not necessarily making schools safer.”

...
  • The percentage of youth arrests happening at school hit a five-year high of 20 percent.
  • The number of students expelled from school increased 43 percent.
  • For the first time ever, there are more police officers working in Florida schools — 3,650 — than there are school nurses, who number 2,286.
  • The number of police officers in schools is more than double the number of school social workers (1,414) and school psychologists (1,452).
  • Schools reported more than four times as many incidents of using physical restraints on students.
 
That's the sort of thing that makes it hard for me to take seriously Republicans who call for more mental-health resources.

Given their track record, the only way that they would support expansion of mental-health resources is if some oligarch offers to help finance their careers for doing so.
 
If they are rapid fire, they are. Sorry. If you cannot "hunt" without a rapid fire magazine, you shouldn't hunt. I'm over trying to be 'reasonable' on this issue.

Machine guns, i.e. guns with a fully automatic firing system where the gun keeps firing as long as you hold the trigger down have been illegal since the 80's. You can still buy a machine gun today that was made before the ban, but they are priced out of reach of most people, and there is a shitload of paperwork to go through to become licensed.

A Colt Single Action Army revolver made 150 years ago can be a "rapid fire" gun in the hands of an experienced shooter. Likewise for a lever action rifle from that same period, or a 100 year old 1911 pistol. None of these guns are fully automatic, you have to release and activate the trigger every time you want to fire the gun. Even the simplest bolt-action rifle can be a rapid-fire weapon in the right hands. There is also no such thing as a rapid fire magazine - the rate at which a non- fully automatic gun can be fired is a function of both the mechanism that ejects the spent casing and loads a fresh round in the chamber, and the skill of the shooter. We could ban high-capacity magazines for these guns (except the revolver of course), but again, an experienced shooter can drop an empty magazine and insert a fresh magazine in the well in very little time, to the point where it makes a discussion about magazine capacity largely moot.

Just adding some context to what you said. Understanding the fundamentals of how guns work might make you a better advocate for your cause. I see no way to ban the kinds of guns I mention in the previous paragraph (some of which are of great historical significance) without a Constitutional amendment, and that is not going to happen anytime soon. America does not have the will to make it happen, no matter how many innocents are killed. For fuck's sake, approximately 75 million people voted for Trump in the last election, despite being fully aware of just how colossal a fucktard he is.
 
I'm just gonna paste in something I just said on the social media:

When my daughter was 18, she was struggling. Her bio-dad had skipped out on her literally the day she was born. Her mom's boyfriend before I got in the picture was an impossibly abusive person. I tried to make it work with her mom, but we got divorced when she was 12 and I'm sure that having her temporarily stable family fall apart hurt her immensely. I am so proud of her for working through all the shit she's been through to come out on the other side as a good person and a great mother herself.

The kid who did this terrible thing was just 18. The Buffalo shooter was 18. The The Oxford, Michigan shooter was only 15.

What is the difference? Where did these kids get the idea that gunning down a bunch of innocent people with an assault...sorry "sporting" rifle was the answer? How did they get those weapons? Forget the locked or unlocked door. Forget the failed police response. How did these kids get it into their head that this was the right course of action, and how did they get the weapons they used?

As a parent (I hate that cliche' phrase) I still think about things I could have done better for my kid. Should I have got her into therapy earlier? Should I have been there more when she was rebelling? Should I have said "I love you" more often?

Never once did I ever think "you know what she needs? An AR-15."
When I lived in Georgia it was very common to buy your kid a hunting weapon when he turned 14. Kids who are 14 don't know what they are holding in their hands.
 
Jeff Tiedrich
@itsJeffTiedrich
#BREAKING: Well-Regulated Militia Opens Fire In Robb Elementary School in Uvalde TX; Cheap Thoughts And Useless Prayers Now Being Rushed To The Scene ... more on this soon-to-be-forgotten-and-then-repeated story as it develops ...
 
Often it was conservative governments that did so.


Good on you to acknowledge that conservative governments can do something you applaud. Its called conserving life. And "conservative" governments in the US are often a parody of what a conservative government is really like.
 
It's straight forward. Judd believes guns aren't the problem it's people. I disagree with him on that. It's both people and guns in my opinion. Guns are designed to kill. The act of killing is something that needs to be done in some situations and guns make the job easier (aka level the battle field). Guns also make the job easier for people who chose to misuse them. I'd prefer there to be no guns but that is a pipe dream so I prefer we adopt laws like comparable (term used loosely) countries that don't have issues with gun violence like America does.
You are correct that it is both guns and people. Guns are the expression of hatred, anger etc. They do not cause it. Reduce the amount of guns and the body count will drop accordingly. You haven't solved the hatred, anger issue but it is a start.

Looking from Australia I am always astounded at how much you Yanks hate each other. I cannot understand it.
Why do you shoot first and ask questions later?
Why is a gun the first response for so many of you?
 
The idea that you can completely eliminate guns is dumb. The idea that you need to, in order to eliminate the vast majority of shootings, is even dumber.

If your boat is sinking, bailing out the vast majority of the water is a good idea even if you understand that you can never get rid of it all.

Getting rid of all guns is a strawman. It’s never going to happen, and it doesn’t need to happen.
The problem is that you imagine that getting guns out of society is an even process. In reality, though, you'll be disarming the law abiding but doing little about the criminals. You'll probably reduce mass shootings--but you'll increase other crime because you've deprived people of the ability to protect themselves. Less dramatic but probably more victims.
The problem is that you imagine stuff, so you assume that others are just imagining stuff too.

I am not making a theoretical argument; I am saying what has actually happened in countries where guns became less common due to changes in regulation.

In reality, you end up disarming the criminals. It’s an indirect process, so you find it hard to imagine. But it happens regardless of the failures of your imagination.

By the way, having a gun has almost zero impact on a law abiding person’s ability to defend themselves. So the effect there is almost zero.
 
To put the tragedy in perspective, the same day as the Uvalde massacre there were (statistically) 53 other gun murders and 66 gun suicides. That doesn't even include accidental gun killings, killings by cops, nor the many shootings that cause maiming or coma but not death. As horrid as such a tragedy is, it's just "the tip of the iceberg" of a more general problem.

80% of murders in the U.S. involve a firearm. The U.S. murder rate has fluctuated over time: It was even higher than now in the 1970's and circa 1990; dropped sharply during the Clinton prosperity; and rose sharply during the Trump era. (These trends might not be caused by White House incumbency, but the strong correlations are still interesting and mnemonic.)

Other places have American movies and entertainment. Other places have higher population densities.

Nowhere else has your daft second amendment, and nowhere else has significant numbers of school shootings.

It’s not fucking difficult to see where the problem comes from.

You repealed the eighteenth amendment; Now either repeal the second, or stop pretending to care.
I agree that America's gun culture, and its fetish for the Second Amendment, are a big part of the problem. America has more privately-owned guns than people; almost half of white male adults own a gun. The demographics may be interesting: White Americans with a college degree are much less likely to own a gun than those without a degree. (For non-whites, the correlation to education disappears.) Republicans are a whopping 2.5 times as likely to own a gun as Democrats!

Availability of guns certainly correlates with gun violence. The three states with most guns per capita are Montana, Wyoming and Alaska. The three states with most suicides per capita are Montana, Wyoming and Alaska. (Most successful suicides are by gun. Non-gun suicide attempts often result in survival and second thoughts.) This perfect correlation does not extend to murder: The seven states with highest murder rate are Louisiana, Missouri, Mississippi, Arkansas, South Carolina, Alabama, Tennessee. (Not exactly the list of states where QOPAnon accuses liberals of filling youth with CRT or anti-God anger. :-) )

But, as other posters have mentioned, mental illness is another reason that America is dysfunctional compared with other developed countries. By many measures, including suicides and drug-related deaths, the U.S. does worse than other Western democracies. This is due partly to healthcare: in Europe free counseling or treatments are readily available. This is not the case in the U.S. and even some "good" insurance plans may not pay for mental health treatment.

Besides the lack of treatment, are there other reasons for the poorer mental health in America? Lack of a "safety net" is certainly a problem, as is the deliberate fomenting of anger by traitors and saboteurs like Rupert Murdoch, Tucker Carlson or Donald Trump. Do the following stats provide a hint?
mhanational.org said:
Outpatient mental health service use in the past year was highest for adults reporting two or more races (8.8 percent), white adults (7.8 percent), and American Indian or Alaska Native adults (7.7 percent), followed by black (4.7 percent), Hispanic (3.8 percent), and Asian (2.5 percent) adults

This number represented 21.0% of all U.S. adults. The prevalence of AMI [any mental illness] was higher among females (25.8%) than males (15.8%). Young adults aged 18-25 years had the highest prevalence of AMI (30.6%) compared to adults aged 26-49 years (25.3%) and aged 50 and older (14.5%).
(The low number for blacks might partly reflect lack of access to outpatient mental health service.)

The Charleton Heston quote. 'IYou can have my gun when you pry it from my cold dead fingers'.

That pretty much explains our gun problems.
Heston was interviewed in Michael Moore's famous documentary. Asked why he wanted to own a gun, Heston replied "because I can." Asked why Canada had less of a murder problem, Heston referred to U.S.'s "ethnic diversity." Sensing this was a wrong answer, Heston terminated the interview soon after. :-)

What is the point of new laws if the old ones are not enforced? It’s a straw man that conservatives don’t want to get illegal guns off the streets. But if local judges and prosecutors are lenient on criminals using guns, what do you expect? ACAB! Abolish prisons! Bail reform! Okay.
:confused2: Do you just cut-and-paste this whenever there's a gun tragedy? Try again, next week, on the next massacre — maybe the comment will be relevant then. This murderer thought that the old law about waiting until 18th birthday was enforced. Having already threatened gun violence and shown mental illness, a background check should have stopped his purchase.
 
The liars are already coming out of the woodwork. A photograph is making the rounds on Truth Social and other social media showing the shooter to be a transsexual! Another social media lie is the claim that ABC News altered a photograph of the shooter to make him appear more Caucasian.

Before long we'll be hearing that the massacre was a "false flag" operation, or didn't happen at all. Most Repugs sentient enough to vote at all will realize these are lies; but they become disillusioned with ALL news, turn against information and rational thought, and will just vote for whoever's illicit sex life they envy most.
 
The liars are already coming out of the woodwork. A photograph is making the rounds on Truth Social and other social media showing the shooter to be a transsexual! Another social media lie is the claim that ABC News altered a photograph of the shooter to make him appear more Caucasian.

All that may not be true, but what is true (as I have seen it myself) the CNN was very interested in speculating about the shooter being a "white supremacist" because the school was mostly hispanic. After the identity of the shooter was revealed as being "Salvador Ramos" they immediately lost all interest in the identity of the shooter.

Or look at the Korean hair salon attack. It was committed by a black perp, and so the media is downplaying his identity unlike in cases where the perp is white.
One congresswoman (Joyce Beatty) even claimed that the attack was perpetrated by a "white supremacist".
Ohio Democratic rep. blames white supremacy for Dallas Korean hair salon shooting

That MSM and many politicians are interested in blaming everything on whitey is not a conspiracy theory.

Before long we'll be hearing that the massacre was a "false flag" operation, or didn't happen at all.
How is that different than left wingers claiming "false flag" whenever #BLMers or Antifa torch a building?
Pox on both extremes!
 
How did the "good guy with a gun" work out this time?
The good guys with a gun got the perp eventually. But I agree the police were too hesitant to act. There should certainly be consequences to those responsible.

What is definitely irresponsible is far left politicians like AOC and Tiffany Caban using this tragedy to push their "defund the police" agenda (see tweets posted upthread by lpetrich)
 
How did the "good guy with a gun" work out this time?

What is definitely irresponsible is far left politicians like AOC and Tiffany Caban using this tragedy to push their "defund the police" agenda (see tweets posted upthread by lpetrich)
Dander's up!

When a brown and black shirted mob with guns stand around based on an unverified presumption during a crisis situation something needs to happen to those who are funded to Protect and Serve.

I've seen too many fat uniformed mid forties armed to the teeth badged and decorated hate filled faces waddling with peni, er, gun drawn sniffing around indigent, helpless, poor, minority, drunk and drugged citizens threateningly to argue with anyone who sez these people are largely a waste of money.

If one can't see money wasted in these cowboys and cowgirls one needs to consult their civics lessons.

Oh wait. We can't teach our developing citizens responsibility and duty any more because that is gumvnmint interference in our freedoms.
 
Back
Top Bottom