Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

retrofade

Today's mass shooting is.............

Recommended Posts

On 5/25/2022 at 8:47 AM, bornontheblue said:

Agree. 

But we need to focus on what we can get done. 

Congress is not going to substantially change gun laws. Texas and other red states are not going to substantially change gun laws. Arming teachers is foolish.  Yelling and screaming at each other and calling Republicans terrorists does nothing to protect kids. 

We can find the money and get bipartisan support for massive increases in school security. We have the technology and resources to make zoned layers of security at all schools. With the innermost and most protected zone being in contact with children. 

 

 

 

And that will do what?  You going to start putting fully armed troops in battle gear at each school?   This school had armed security but the shooter had a bullet proof vest and massively greater firepower.   
 

your solution is a poorly thought out excuse to try to offer something.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2022 at 9:51 AM, renoskier said:

no shit...I wish folks would focus on magazine size/limits rather the the gun

or focus on banning semi-automatic guns in general instead of hyper focusing on assault rifles. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2022 at 8:47 AM, bornontheblue said:

Agree. 

But we need to focus on what we can get done. 

Congress is not going to substantially change gun laws. Texas and other red states are not going to substantially change gun laws. Arming teachers is foolish.  Yelling and screaming at each other and calling Republicans terrorists does nothing to protect kids. 

We can find the money and get bipartisan support for massive increases in school security. We have the technology and resources to make zoned layers of security at all schools. With the innermost and most protected zone being in contact with children. 

 

 

 

I do not like this idea. Moar guns is not working. And turning schools into armed fortresses — or worse, functioning prisons — will have consequences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2022 at 9:53 AM, NVGiant said:

So, I'm not pro-gun control. Background checks are fine, but generally there are way too many guns in this country to put the genie back in the bottle, even if we tried. And we're not going to try, so it's more productive to find an alternative. But while I'm not particularly pro-gun control, I'm fervently anti-gun fetishism. I want people to choose not to have guns rather than using the law to restrict them. Unless a critical mass happens where the country collectively decides to amend the constitution, I think this is the best way. I understand that this is more than just an uphill climb. It's probably not possible.

Anyways, if fewer guns aren't the answer and/or impossible, what is the solution? Not just for these horrific events, but in the daily violence we see all over the country? Better public support for mental health would likely help in certain circumstances, like Newtown. But probably wouldn't have saved the folks in Buffalo. (And maybe not these kids, either. Not sure we know enough about the shooter yet.) And certainly not in, to use one poster's favorite city, Baltimore or even those mean streets of Chicago.

Other than to shift the culture's acceptance of guns and gun violence, I don't have an answer.

 

@smltwnrckr  See!  It's complicated!  It really would take a huge cultural change in the US and I don't know what it would take to make that happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2022 at 9:18 AM, Akkula said:

If the military or police wouldn't trust someone had the psychological profile to safely and responsibly be entrusted with a firearm then they have no business having a firearm in civilian life.  Nobody should be handed a firearm at 18 without at least a 30 day time period for the government to evaluate a first time application.  It is +++++ing nutty that we hand over weapons so quickly to people.  That isn't a well regulated militia.  

Furthermore, perhaps we should mandate ALL people who become of age must register to own a firearm and must have  background check done....UNLESS they opt out for any reason to gun ownership.    This will prevent the gun nuts from trying to torpedo a gun owner registry like they always do with their paranoid delusions.  If everyone is on the list and has to get a background check then there is no list the feds have on who has a gun...only a list of those who declined to do the required check.  Hopefully those who opt out will be a very high number.

Tell us what kind of criteria govt would use to vet someone on your registry list?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2022 at 9:57 AM, sactowndog said:

And that will do what?  You going to start putting fully armed troops in battle gear at each school?   This school had armed security but the shooter had a bullet proof vest and massively greater firepower.   
 

your solution is a poorly thought out excuse to try to offer something.   

No you fool. You can make interior zones of safety at schools without making it look like a a battle zone or a prison. Make it so NOBODY can just randomly walk  into a school and get anywhere near children. This can effectively be done with physical barriers instead of numerous armed  guards. 

Yelling and screaming and telling other posters they are responsible for dead children is accomplishing what? You are a moron!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2022 at 8:51 AM, renoskier said:

no shit...I wish folks would focus on magazine size/limits rather the the gun

Fair point.  Why I have switched from saying semi-automatic to military grade weapons.   I think that more accurately captures a number of factors 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2022 at 10:00 AM, NVGiant said:

I do not like this idea. Moar guns is not working. And turning schools into armed fortresses — or worse, functioning prisons — will have consequences.

I never said anything about moar guns . 

You can do it without making it look like a prison. Try to be more creative about this. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I would like to see, and it will not happen, is:

1. A ban on the manufacture and sale of all auto (already banned I believe?) and semi auto weapons. Today.

2. Classification of possession of and/or manufacture of ghost guns as an act of domestic terrorism.

3. A Federal "buy back" program for any firearm for 10% above current market value (not to apply to ghost guns). No questions asked as to the ownership of the weapon. If you are a gun owner you are responsible for securing your firearm from theft.

4. A ban on high-capacity magazines.

5. For purchase of firearms: Mandatory background checks to include psychological profile (this may have to be something government provided due to liability), proof of successful completion of a firearms safety course.

 

I await the multitude of reasons as to why this can't happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/24/2022 at 8:09 PM, RSF said:

Sadly, thats nothing new.

 

Getting under our desk for the 'Russians are bombing us' drill was a regular occurence even in the 70s.

 

Of course we were too young and dumb to realize a school desk isnt much protection from an ICBM...

I wouldn't put those two things in the same category to be honest.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2022 at 10:01 AM, sactowndog said:

Fair point.  Why I have switched from saying semi-automatic to military grade weapons.   I think that more accurately captures a number of factors 

Like what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2022 at 9:02 AM, bornontheblue said:

I never said anything about moar guns . 

You can do it without making it look like a prison. Try to be more creative about this. 

 

Maybe we can have the TSA run it. I know I always feel safe when they swipe my 5 oz. shampoo bottle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2022 at 9:03 AM, SharkTanked said:

What I would like to see, and it will not happen, is:

1. A ban on the manufacture and sale of all auto (already banned I believe?) and semi auto weapons. Today.

2. Classification of possession of and/or manufacture of ghost guns as an act of domestic terrorism.

3. A Federal "buy back" program for any firearm for 10% above current market value (not to apply to ghost guns). No questions asked as to the ownership of the weapon. If you are a gun owner you are responsible for securing your firearm from theft.

4. A ban on high-capacity magazines.

5. For purchase of firearms: Mandatory background checks to include psychological profile (this may have to be something government provided due to liability), proof of successful completion of a firearms safety course.

 

I await the multitude of reasons as to why this can't happen.

The only issue with that is you’re now also banning almost all handguns. 

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2022 at 8:42 AM, HR_Poke said:

I think you are equating a political solution and a societal solution here.  It's a complicated issue that doesn't have a simple answer.

What's the difference between a political solution and a societal solution, though?

I've always looked at gun rights in a context of other rights. I don't own a gun. I have no interest in owning one, outside of possibly getting a shotgun for emergency home defense... though I never pulled the trigger on that one, so to speak. 

Individual gun rights have expanded in recent decades in accordance with a broader expansion of constitutional rights for individuals in this country. Thus, I have always been concerned about chipping away at gun rights largely because of the implications for the other rights that I, frankly, exercise more in my own personal life. And for a while, there seemed to be a broad coalition that included many on the right who were willing to live in that world... that, even if they were morally opposed to certain people having certain rights, they bought into at least the basic notions of pluralism and equal protection under the law and a marketplace of ideas and America as an idea and all these sorts of things. 

In that world, I am more than happy and willing to participate in backing @bornontheblue has said in the last couple pages - that school shootings are still exceedingly rare, that anti-gun politicians use warped and manipulated statistics and hyperbole to pass laws that largely won't prevent these still rare and freak tragedies, and that using outlier events to pare back constitutional rights is a bad, bad thing. And I would be happy to add onto that, and point out that these sorts of things can also be blamed on other constitutional rights, like the first and fourth amendment, as well as others... rights that people hint at paring back when they talk about hate speech and not using the name of the murderer and mental health being the problem and all that. So while it may sound callused to state in a time like this, one must point out that all individual rights make the rest of us less safe, by definition, and the whole societal and political experiment here is to find the balance of where to protect and where to impose power and restrictions.

But now, the most successful legal movement of my lifetime - one that is deeply political, and not even that popular - is about to result in completely taking a constitutional right away from half the population -- something that I bet, even 5 years ago, you thought was unlikely to impossible. And what do those legal scholars in that movment have to say about moral obligations to limit individual access to guns, ammo, armor, etc? Where is the federalist society on this one?

The most successful nationwide educational reform movement in my lifetime is banning books based on the hyperbolic statements from self-admitted liars and histrionic performances by craven censors -- liars and censors who I guaran-f**king-tee everyone on this board will respond somewhere on the range of shrug to posting a picture of them with a rifle in front of an eagle on Facebook when asked what to do about guns in this country.

I'm up for backing gun rights as part of a larger, more comprehensive defense of rights in this country... since I've always assumed we do the whole rights thing better than anywhere else. We invented the first amendment after all. But now it feels like increasingly we are being told we have to pick and choose them based on some pretty simplistic ideological stances like Guns = Good, Other Rights = bad, unless they're for the people with guns. 

Again, I am happy to be talked out of this. But it seems to be the direction we are going.

Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2022 at 8:48 AM, mugtang said:

I don’t know how any sane person could lump you in with convert.  You don’t write walls of text and still fail to actually say anything of substance. 

true...slappy does use fewer words to say nothing of substance :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2022 at 8:48 AM, THEUniversityofNevada said:

There is very little empathy in this country for people outside their immediate circle.

and the only folks in their immediate circle share the same beliefs :shrug: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2022 at 9:01 AM, bornontheblue said:

No you fool. You can make interior zones of safety at schools without making it look like a a battle zone or a prison. Make it so NOBODY can just randomly walk  into a school and get anywhere near children. This can effectively be done with physical barriers instead of numerous armed  guards. 

Yelling and screaming and telling other posters they are responsible for dead children is accomplishing what? You are a moron!

I’m the fool :lol:

Your physical barriers aren’t doing shit against an assailant armed with a bullet proof vest and multiple assault type weapons.  Not to mention they are enormously expensive and would break the budget of most school districts further impairing education.   
 

Come back when you have a half way thought through solution.   
 

as for HHMB given his statement and repeated assertions military style weapons aren’t a problem my shot was well deserved.  

So you admit it is a solution in search of a problem, right?  Since by your own admission in this thread it would do nothing to limit homicides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2022 at 10:07 AM, smltwnrckr said:

What's the difference between a political solution and a societal solution, though?

I've always looked at gun rights in a context of other rights. I don't own a gun. I have no interest in owning one, outside of possibly getting a shotgun for emergency home defense... though I never pulled the trigger on that one, so to speak. 

Individual gun rights have expanded in recent decades in accordance with a broader expansion of constitutional rights for individuals in this country. Thus, I have always been concerned about chipping away at gun rights largely because of the implications for the other rights that I, frankly, exercise more in my own personal life. And for a while, there seemed to be a broad coalition that included many on the right who were willing to live in that world... that, even if they were morally opposed to certain people having certain rights, they bought into at least the basic notions of pluralism and equal protection under the law and a marketplace of ideas and America as an idea and all these sorts of things. 

In that world, I am more than happy and willing to participate in backing @bornontheblue has said in the last couple pages - that school shootings are still exceedingly rare, that anti-gun politicians use warped and manipulated statistics and hyperbole to pass laws that largely won't prevent these still rare and freak tragedies, and that using outlier events to pare back constitutional rights is a bad, bad thing. And I would be happy to add onto that, and point out that these sorts of things can also be blamed on other constitutional rights, like the first and fourth amendment, as well as others... rights that people hint at paring back when they talk about hate speech and not using the name of the murderer and mental health being the problem and all that. So while it may sound callused to state in a time like this, one must point out that all individual rights make the rest of us less safe, by definition, and the whole societal and political experiment here is to find the balance of where to protect and where to impose power and restrictions.

But now, the most successful legal movement of my lifetime - one that is deeply political, and note even that popular - is about to result in completely taking a constitutional right away from half the population -- something that I bet, even 5 years ago, you thought was unlikely to impossible. And what do those legal scholars have to say about moral obligations to limit individual access to guns, ammo, armor, etc? 

The most successful nationwide educational reform movement in my lifetime is banning books based on the hyperbolic statements from self-admitted liars and histrionic performances by craven censors -- liars and censors who I guaran-f**king-tee everyone on this board will respond somewhere on the range of shrug to posting a picture of them with a rifle in front of an eagle on Facebook when asked what to do about guns in this country.

I'm up for backing gun rights as part of a larger, more comprehensive defense of rights in this country... since I've always assumed we do the whole rights thing better than anywhere else. We invented the first amendment after all. But now it feels like increasingly we are being told we have to pick and choose them based on some pretty simplistic ideological stances like Guns = Good, Other Rights = bad, unless they're for the people with guns. 

Again, I am happy to be talked out of this. But it seems to be the direction we are going.

It seems like you are hyper focused on the two main issues that affect you or stir up the most ire in your world and willing to give up other rights to defend those two?

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...