Another Fucking Mass Shooting At US School

[Swammerdami]

Her claim was that ducks are better protected than children in Texas. Hunting ducks is allowed if you use the right weapon. Hunting children is not allowed with any weapon, including bow and arrow and other non-firearms. This isn't difficult to understand. If understanding is your goal.

Are you being deliberately dense? If obedience to law could be taken for granted, why do shotguns have to be physically altered to ensure obedience to duck-hunting rules? Wouldn't it make more sense to leave the shotguns fully capable and in ideal condition for their well-organized purpose: Fending off the Redcoats with muskets who might suddenly appear at any time on the streets of a place like Uvalde?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Let's look at the deadliest massacres in the US.

9 massacres involved the deaths of 20 or more people. 6 involved semi-automatic rifles. That'd be 2/3's.

And if we look at the mass murders of 10 or more people since 2010, 11 of those 16 tragedies involved semi-automatic rifles. That'd be greater than 2/3's.

Can we please at least try to prevent a large percentage of massacres? I mean, stopping one massacre that'd scar the lives of 10 or 20 families directly and dozens more indirectly... I mean isn't that worth doing? Are we seriously going to say no because of paranoia?

And why should we suppose that would be the result? Remove the best tool for the job and the result is the use of a lesser tool, not stopping things entirely.

Apply that bullshit logic to any and all safety requirements. People still die in space shuttle disasters. People still die in race cars. And a boatload of money goes into safety for that. So why even bother then?

This 'either it works 100% or we don't do it' excuse for allowing America's conservative inertia for not stepping in the way of mass killings is tragically pathetic.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The entire fucking supply chain is exempt from liability, from the manufacturers to the murderers, from the laundered Russian influence-buying "donor" cash to the teen who just wants to go out with a bang... it all works together.
Such a thing of beauty.

And how about liability for car makers for all the auto accidents?

The second we start talking about restricting access to semi-automatic weapons because of ACCIDENTAL mass killing, your reply would actually be on-topic.

Personally, I can't imagine bleeding out, helpless to help my 10 year old students as some killer is pumping bullets into them with ease via a semi-automatic that makes fleeing in a confined space impossible... and any attempt to have tried to prevent the killer's access to that weapon was an argument like the one above.

I can't imagine having my own daughter ripped away from me, and then reading the above and not being filled with rage.

 

[Elixir]

The entire fucking supply chain is exempt from liability, from the manufacturers to the murderers, from the laundered Russian influence-buying "donor" cash to the teen who just wants to go out with a bang... it all works together.
Such a thing of beauty.

And how about liability for car makers for all the auto accidents?

Seriously, Loren?
Accidents now? Try again.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The really lucky people are the alt-right, conservative, libertarians. They have managed to survive all of this. I don't know how parents of these children survive these tragedies without at least a few of them becoming consumed by rage. The parents of the slain children have some base level of humanity, even amongst an unspeakable level of despair, that still manages to be more human and moral than the alt-right, conservative, libertarians that continue to present America with these mass killings.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Her claim was that ducks are better protected than children in Texas. Hunting ducks is allowed if you use the right weapon. Hunting children is not allowed with any weapon, including bow and arrow and other non-firearms. This isn't difficult to understand. If understanding is your goal.

Are you being deliberately dense? If obedience to law could be taken for granted, why do shotguns have to be physically altered to ensure obedience to duck-hunting rules? Wouldn't it make more sense to leave the shotguns fully capable and in ideal condition for their well-organized purpose: Fending off the Redcoats with muskets who might suddenly appear at any time on the streets of a place like Uvalde?

We don't need to be defending a poorly waged argument by Rep. Talib, when her imagery can be presented in a much better and more effective manner. Let's keep our sticks on the ice here.

 

[ZiprHead]

Let's look at the deadliest massacres in the US.

9 massacres involved the deaths of 20 or more people. 6 involved semi-automatic rifles. That'd be 2/3's.

And if we look at the mass murders of 10 or more people since 2010, 11 of those 16 tragedies involved semi-automatic rifles. That'd be greater than 2/3's.

Can we please at least try to prevent a large percentage of massacres? I mean, stopping one massacre that'd scar the lives of 10 or 20 families directly and dozens more indirectly... I mean isn't that worth doing? Are we seriously going to say no because of paranoia?

And why should we suppose that would be the result? Remove the best tool for the job and the result is the use of a lesser tool, not stopping things entirely.

Making perfect the enemy of the good.

 

[steve_bank]

Around here threats against schools and attempts to enter schools has been ongoing since the Texas event.

Chicago and Detroit black neighborhoods were plagued with inoocent kids killed in crime and drive by shootings between gangs. No one ever made anything ovr that. Don't know about today, kids could not play on the streets. The only serious focused reporting I remember was a one time town hall in a neighborhood by FOX.

The scope of the problem with includes mental health ofk ids and adults as well makes prevention difficult.

Can schools force any kind of mental screening on all kids? That would surely end up in court. I heard someone say there should be one mental health worker per 200 students.

That appears to say all our kids are all fucked up and need constant psychological monitoring.

Where does parental responsibility caome into all this? Maybe peop should be screened before being allowed to have kids?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Around here threats against schools and attempts to enter schools has been ongoing since the Texas event.

Chicago and Detroit black neighborhoods were plagued with inoocent kids killed in crime and drive by shootings between gangs. No one ever made anything ovr that. Don't know about today, kids could not play on the streets.

Actually, for the umpteenth time, there are countless organizations dedicated to trying to deal with gangs and gang related violence.

That appears to say all our kids are all fucked up and need constant psychological monitoring.

Where does parental responsibility caome into all this? Maybe peop should be screened before being allowed to have kids?

Because parents have children that are all the same?

Fuck, where do you people get these ridiculous ideas from?! Parents can be negligent, yes. Are they always in these cases? No.

What an anecdotal example?

I got detention a couple times (talking too much) through out middle and high school, was never suspended, made honor roll, etc...
As an emerging teen my sister held a knife to the throat of a friend she used to have, got suspended from school, barely graduated (and really that was a bare technicality based on the school she needed to go to). Same parents.

Or we could look at Joe Biden and his deceased son Beau verses Hunter. Same parents.

Can we get back to the part of the conversation about how letting people have access to dangerous weapons who shouldn't have access to dangerous weapons is the main driver of these crimes... not scapegoats.

 

[laughing dog]

This 'either it works 100% or we don't do it' excuse for allowing America's conservative inertia for not stepping in the way of mass killings is tragically pathetic.

The above along with the “slippery slope” idiocy is all that the NRA dittoheads have. The NRA has an additional and much more effective ammo - loads of cash, most of which is not rubles.

The dealers of death and their drooling dupes will continue to prevail until the US public as a group have had enough of their obsession with firearms and shooting stuff and the living.

Background checks will be only as effective as the information in the databases. Apparently there are known mentally unstable people who would pass those checks because their illness has not been sent to the database. This doesn’t mean background checks are not a good idea.

Also, while there are plenty of federal gun laws and regulations in place, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives is persistently under funded in order to hamper its enforcement. So, at the federal level the passage of more laws must include enforcement resources or else it is just more kabuki theatet.

 

[TomC]

I'm personally sick to death how arms dealers... I'm sorry, gun shops, are completely and utterly without any liability when selling weapons to a person that then murders a bunch of people.

If we ended that ridiculous waiver of liability, arms dealers would be a lot more careful who they sell to.

^THAT

The entire fucking supply chain is exempt from liability, from the manufacturers to the murderers, from the laundered Russian influence-buying "donor" cash to the teen who just wants to go out with a bang... it all works together.
Such a thing of beauty.
[/QUOTE]

Ironic isn't it?

According to Texan state law, at the time of the Uvalde massacre, someone can sue the Uber driver who took your daughter to an abortion clinic. They can sue for $10K, and cannot be countersued.

But they can't sue the guy who sold Ramos the weapons.
Tom

 

[ZiprHead]

There is going to be March For Our Lives rallies tomorrow in over 400 cities across the country.

March For Our Lives

Join the movement.

marchforourlives.com

 

[bilby]

Let's look at the deadliest massacres in the US.

9 massacres involved the deaths of 20 or more people. 6 involved semi-automatic rifles. That'd be 2/3's.

And if we look at the mass murders of 10 or more people since 2010, 11 of those 16 tragedies involved semi-automatic rifles. That'd be greater than 2/3's.

Can we please at least try to prevent a large percentage of massacres? I mean, stopping one massacre that'd scar the lives of 10 or 20 families directly and dozens more indirectly... I mean isn't that worth doing? Are we seriously going to say no because of paranoia?

And why should we suppose that would be the result? Remove the best tool for the job and the result is the use of a lesser tool, not stopping things entirely.

Says the person who repeatedly tells us (in other contexts) not to let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

 

[Swammerdami]

This article outlines a common-sense approach to reducing or eliminating mass shootings in schools. He achieves this by embracing American values, and NOT with pansy-wansy liberal solutions like psychiatry. Since he carefully considers the details of his plan, it wouldn't do him justice to excerpt from this intelligent and well-articulated solution.

 

[ZiprHead]

I love Katie P.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Vast majority of gun homicides are perpetrated by handguns, not rifles of any kind. And scary "assault weapons" are a subset of rifles.
Even when we limit ourselves to "mass shootings", handguns predominate.

I have never understood this "reasoning": Handguns kill more people than long guns, so there's no point in banning assault rifles.

Do semi-automatic pistols kill more than revolvers? Then we should never ban wheel guns.

Suppose that there are fewer killings in February than in any other month. Does that mean murder should be legal in February?

I'll save Derec a rejoinder by reminding gun-obsessed of the Slippery Slope! Slippery Slope! Slippery Slope!!!!

The D's want to make a tiny dent in the murder rate by upping the assault weapon age to 21, but this is of course just posturing: such a measure cannot pass in Amerikka. But if the incoming QOPAnon class has a spasm of sanity might the age be pushed to 19? Slippery Slope!! Perhaps Amerikkans should pre-empt that now by removing ALL age restrictions on gun purchases.

The issue is using people killed by "assault rifles" as evidence for banning them despite the fact that most gun kills are handguns. It's exposing a problem with the argument.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The entire fucking supply chain is exempt from liability, from the manufacturers to the murderers, from the laundered Russian influence-buying "donor" cash to the teen who just wants to go out with a bang... it all works together.
Such a thing of beauty.

And how about liability for car makers for all the auto accidents?

Seriously, Loren?
Accidents now? Try again.

The point is we don't sue manufacturers for the misuse of their products.

 

[TomC]

The point is we don't sue manufacturers for the misuse of their products.

Another point is that shooting people with those weapons isn't misuse. It's exactly what the weapons were designed to accomplish. Mass shootings of human beings.

Not elk hunting or tree trimming or any other nonsense. What Ramos did was use the weapon exactly as it was designed to function.

That's completely different from a car accident.

That's not hard to understand.
Tom

 

[RVonse]

This shooting will probably fade from public consciousness even more quickly than Sandy Hook, which made a big splash.

Well the shooter wasn’t white so I do expect the story to fade rather quickly. Or a weird narrative about white oppression starting this young man on his path to death and destruction.

The reason it will fade quickly without even interrupting a republican lawmaker's lunch is because the victims weren't white.

aa

Race isn't an issue. The Las Vegas massacre involved a country music festival. The Church shooting... that was Texas too, killed over 20 people (white people). Nothing from the GOP.

Republicans sat down and crafted 2 bi-partisan bills with democrats after Sandy Hook (I know, they were both defeated - but at least they tried). I promise, this group of republicans does not see an american tragedy. They are probably still wondering how all those kids got out of the separation camps at the border.

aa

Irregardless what side you happen to be with the issue of buying firearms.....if you want it to be more difficult to purchase a firearm it will have to be more difficult to buy a politician. Congress is run by money and not talk.

 

[laughing dog]

The issue is using people killed by "assault rifles" as evidence for banning them despite the fact that most gun kills are handguns. It's exposing a problem with the argument.

Since the argument is that banning assault weapons should reduce the killings due to assault weapons, the only problem exposed by your response is your knee jerk regurgitation of NRA bullsit.