Another Fucking Mass Shooting At US School

[Derec]

73 people shot by white people is hardly two or three.

You can't even read your own source, as bad as it was to begin with.
Sad.

 

[Derec]

It was the redlining wut done it.

Maybe Mayor Lightfoot should promise blacks in Chicago $5M per person like San Francisco is idiotically doing ...

 

[Derec]

You still can't reveal where the source data is for that crap you posted.

Neither have you. Except, your screengrab really was crap.

 

[Derec]

More black perps than victims. It's not that different in the US. Twice as many whites are killed by blacks than vice versa.
And yet the media is painting the opposite narrative.

 

[Derec]

- stronger sentences against anyone caught carrying a gun (so the price for carrying one around is too high to risk doing it)

It is the "progressive" Dems like Foxx and Lightfoot who are going easy on gun criminals. And the lefty judge who acquitted Ruben Roman (the 21 year old who was shooting at cars with 13 year old Adam Toledo).

 

[Derec]

and Chicago is not really any worse, per capita, than a lot of small cites and towns that don't keep such accurate statistics. I once lived in such places.

That is true. What makes Chicago special is that it is the third largest US city, and it has a very high crime rate. Not as high a murder rate as say St. Louis (voted out a moderate Dem prosecutor and elected a "progressive" after Ferguson riots) or Detroit. But those cities are not nearly as big as Chiraq.

 

[Derec]

So Derec, IF (a big if I know) the existing gun laws are enforced will you please stop bleating about guns being confiscated?

I am not bleating. There are people who suggest banning guns for private use, or at least for self-defense.

And why your obsession with AR-15s or derivatives? Most of your posts seem have you shoe-horning in the word AR-15.

Not my obsession. I am responding to either people on here, or in the news (such as Biden or β) obsessing over AR15s.
In this case I was responding to Elixir's statement in #1,822.

I'm more interested in how the US came to be a rat's nest of cowardly weenies holed up in their shitty houses with AR15s and thousands of rounds of ammunition because they are terrified of "others".

I'm done here, until the next right wing terrorist attack.

 

[Derec]

I have.
Have you?
No?

You are, as usual, wrong.

As usual you are reading about guns and fooling yourself into thinking you know all about them.

I don't know all, but I would bet I know more than you. I know enough to be more afraid of some thug with a nine than of a weenie with an AR15.

 

[Derec]

Illinois bans semi-auto firearms. Gov sez it will save “hundreds of lives”.

Semi-auto firearms? Or certain semi-auto rifles?
If former, it might save that many, until it gets declared unconstitutional.
If latter, it's an exaggeration. There are hundreds of rifle homicides per year in all of US, and only a small fraction of those would be in Illinois. And not all rifles are semi-auto, and not all semi-auto rifles are "assaulty". Not to mention that criminals will not necessarily abide by this law anyway.

Will gun deaths go down in Illinois?

Most likely not. Prosecuting and convicting gun criminals like Ruben Roman would do much more good than going after non-criminals who own rifles.

If it only saves ONE life, is it worth it?

Definitely not. Would you consider banning cars capable of driving more than 50mph? "If it saves ONE life", right? Or two. Or ten. Would have saved two in Athens just the other day, most likely.

Have Illinois residents lost their freedumb?

Dismissing people's legitimate concerns about personal freedoms as "freedumb" is the hallmark of a totalitarian.

 

[Derec]

We don't actually know what happened and why, only what the police have commented to the press.

A newer article about the Goshen shooting.
6 Shot Dead, Including Mother and Baby, at California Home

Details about the crime were sketchy, but in a later interview Sheriff Boudreaux told The Los Angeles Times that a deputy responding to the call found the infant cradled in the arms of her 16-year-old mother in a ditch outside the home. Both had been shot in the head.

Pretty cold-blooded.

Sheriff Boudreaux said that his office executed a search warrant at the property last week, seizing guns, marijuana and methamphetamine. He told The Los Angeles Times that he believed the attack was connected to a drug cartel.
“This was not your run-of-the-mill, low-end gang member,” Sheriff Boudreaux told the newspaper, adding that the “manner and swiftness” of the killings suggested the men were experienced in murder. Many of the victims had been shot in the head, including the older woman, who was found in a bed inside the home, he said.

So, contrary to what you wrote earlier, they did find drugs at the house.
And another article:
6 victims of Goshen deadly shooting identified: ‘It’s shocking to the nation’
Most of the victims have the same last name, Parraz. So it might well be that some of the victims were not involved in criminal activity.

Regarding the history of law enforcement at the home, deputies say that on January 3 they conducted a parole compliance check on this home. They say it’s a known home to the Sheriff’s Office as gang activity has routinely occurred in the past. During the compliance check deputies saw shell casings outside of the home. When asked to enter the residence deputies were denied entry – so they obtained a search warrant.
Deputies say that during the search of the home, they found Eladio Parraz, who already had felony convictions, was in possession of ammunition, a felon in possession of a firearm, a felon in possession of a short barrel rifle, a felon in possession of an assault weapon, had a loaded weapon, was in possession of a firearm, and possession of a controlled substance. However, Parraz was able to bail out of jail four days later.

A bail for a laundry list of crimes like that? With felony priors and being on parole?
Those California judges are way too soft.

I wonder if the fact that police confiscated Don Eladio's arsenal played a role in the massacre. I.e. they might have been able to fight them off otherwise.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

We don't actually know what happened and why, only what the police have commented to the press.

A newer article about the Goshen shooting.
6 Shot Dead, Including Mother and Baby, at California Home

Details about the crime were sketchy, but in a later interview Sheriff Boudreaux told The Los Angeles Times that a deputy responding to the call found the infant cradled in the arms of her 16-year-old mother in a ditch outside the home. Both had been shot in the head.

Pretty cold-blooded.

Sheriff Boudreaux said that his office executed a search warrant at the property last week, seizing guns, marijuana and methamphetamine. He told The Los Angeles Times that he believed the attack was connected to a drug cartel.
“This was not your run-of-the-mill, low-end gang member,” Sheriff Boudreaux told the newspaper, adding that the “manner and swiftness” of the killings suggested the men were experienced in murder. Many of the victims had been shot in the head, including the older woman, who was found in a bed inside the home, he said.

So, contrary to what you wrote earlier, they did find drugs at the house.
And another article:
6 victims of Goshen deadly shooting identified: ‘It’s shocking to the nation’
Most of the victims have the same last name, Parraz. So it might well be that some of the victims were not involved in criminal activity.

Does it normally take surnames for you to draw conclusions like that as opposed to, say, a 6 month old infant shot in the head?

 

[Elixir]

I don't know all,

Thats an understatement. Your ignorance is well documented, right here.

but I would bet I know more than you.

And you would lose - AGAIN. Pity the admins won’t allow you to pay for your errors any more.

 

[Toni]

I think that the number of deaths and injuries caused by semiautomatic firearms ( hand guns and long guns) is more than adequate reason t place very struck restrictions on their ownership and availability. Much the same way that fentanyl should be severely restricted.

What do you consider "very struck[sic] restrictions", and how do you propose such restrictions will pass constitutional muster?
Also, what is your opinion of revolvers?

Yes people get hold of fentanyl illegally and sometimes die from it. That is not a reason to make it legal.

It is also not a reason to withhold it from people who need it.

Same thing with guns.

They are not exactly analogous. And I would welcome stricter requirements for gun ownership. When your side starts talking about level of onerous regulation that is tantamount to a de facto ban for personal use, that's where we part ways.

1. A very real and very large part of the problem is contained in the words: your side. There should be no ‘sides.’ It should just be working together towards a common goal—in this case responsible gun ownership.

2. What is your idea of responsible stricter gun regulations?

3. Oh No! Derec caught me in another uncorrected typo!!!

Derec, I’m a terrible typist. I’ve always been a terrible typist. Software that autocorrects makes that worse as much as it corrects actual typos. I don’t see this improving so you can lay off any time now.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Not quite seeing the humor.

You got the part about "baby and its teenage mother murdered", right?

But this isn't really a mass shooting. One house was targeted--that is almost always a drug rip regardless of the death toll. Unfortunately, an innocent was in the middle of it (the woman was probably with one of the targets--you choose to live with scum, sometimes bad things happen.)

Depends what you consider a mass shooting.

Also, your utter lack of empathy for the victims is astounding. You know almost nothing about these people, but are certain they deserved to die? Even a 16 year old girl and her baby, because she "should have known better" than to live in a house ravaged by police and gang violence? Who was shot in the head while trying to run away with her child?

I am objecting to her being considered an innocent. She chose to be in the situation. The kid is definitely an innocent.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

But this isn't really a mass shooting.

As I said before, depends on your definition. There are various definitions used (which leads to some confusion) and only some require the shooting to be indiscriminate and in a public place.
Since you've ignored the chart I posted upthread, here it is again.

I think the key factor here is "indiscriminate". Note how only about 1% of "mass shootings" are public/indiscriminate. That says the vast majority are gangland or domestic (and in practice they're almost all the former.) The indiscriminate shootings pose a risk to everyone, the gangland ones rarely harm anyone outside the gangs. People typically are much more concerned about threats that are indiscriminate vs threats to those who chose to be in the situation. You want to climb Annapurna, that's your business, you're taking the risk. You put one round in a revolver, spin the cylinder and shoot a random passerby, society should stop you pronto. The fact that the former activity carries a higher fatality rate is irrelevant, it's the latter that should be (and is) banned.

 

[Politesse]

Not quite seeing the humor.

You got the part about "baby and its teenage mother murdered", right?

But this isn't really a mass shooting. One house was targeted--that is almost always a drug rip regardless of the death toll. Unfortunately, an innocent was in the middle of it (the woman was probably with one of the targets--you choose to live with scum, sometimes bad things happen.)

Depends what you consider a mass shooting.

Also, your utter lack of empathy for the victims is astounding. You know almost nothing about these people, but are certain they deserved to die? Even a 16 year old girl and her baby, because she "should have known better" than to live in a house ravaged by police and gang violence? Who was shot in the head while trying to run away with her child?

I am objecting to her being considered an innocent. She chose to be in the situation. The kid is definitely an innocent.

The execution of two children is not less of a tragedy because you feel one of them was either dating, or just the daughter of, the "wrong person". You don't have to be "innocent" to deserve better than to be murdered in the street by a criminal gang.

 

[Derec]

Thats an understatement. Your ignorance is well documented, right here.

Pales in comparison to yours.
You could not even interpret the screenshot you posted!

 

[Derec]

I think the key factor here is "indiscriminate". Note how only about 1% of "mass shootings" are public/indiscriminate.

Not 1%. More like 22%. Using the same casualty definition (4 or more killed), there were 27 any/any mass shootings and 6 public/indiscriminate ones.

That says the vast majority are gangland or domestic (and in practice they're almost all the former.) The indiscriminate shootings pose a risk to everyone, the gangland ones rarely harm anyone outside the gangs.

I understand that indiscriminate shootings carry a greater psychological fear. Btw, innocent people are frequently victims in gang shootings due to stray bullets.

 

[Derec]

1. A very real and very large part of the problem is contained in the words: your side. There should be no ‘sides.’ It should just be working together towards a common goal—in this case responsible gun ownership.

There perhaps shouldn't be, but there are. I agree with your goal as stated here, but we differ in what that entails and how to achieve it.

2. What is your idea of responsible stricter gun regulations?

First off, enforce current gun laws. Do not release gun criminals with a slap on the wrist just to show off your "progressive" bona fides.
After that, things like gun licensing would be useful. You have to demonstrate knowledge and skill in operating a firearm safely, similar to how we license people to operate cars.

Derec, I’m a terrible typist. I’ve always been a terrible typist. Software that autocorrects makes that worse as much as it corrects actual typos. I don’t see this improving so you can lay off any time now.

 

[Derec]

Does it normally take surnames for you to draw conclusions like that as opposed to, say, a 6 month old infant shot in the head?

The presence of an infant (10 months, not six) in itself does not say anything about the mother's relationship to others in the house. Or the adults' relationships to each other. She could have been in her baby daddy's house (and she working for/with him) for all we knew initially. Instead, it turned out to be her uncle's.