Yet another school shooting.

[Lathum]

But books are dangerous...

[flere-imsaho]

It's easier to amass a large number of firearms in this country than reasonable quantities of effective nasal decongestant.

[Atocep]

But books are dangerous...

We have to protect kids from being groomed, we have to protect them from hearing about racism, we have to protect them from wearing masks, we have to protect them from books, we have to protect them from the lgtbq agenda, but we don't have to do fuck all about them getting shot in schools.

[RainMaker]

I can only assume the pro-life groups have spoken up about the leading cause of death among children in this country.

[larrymcg421]

Beto probably won't win, but earned a donation from me.

[RainMaker]

<samp class="EmbedCode-container"><code class="EmbedCode-code"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">DPS Director Steve McGraw said twice that the cops were the ones who barricaded the shooter into a classroom. <br><br>That contradicts previous statements by other DPS spox, who said the gunman barricaded himself and immediately began shooting kids. <a href="https://t.co/OZO4JOJcwk">https://t.co/OZO4JOJcwk</a></p>&mdash; Tess Owen (@misstessowen) <a href="https://twitter.com/misstessowen/status/1529567655245537281?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 25, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </code></samp>

[stevew]

I have a lot of questions about this time line. was he even targeting the school?

[Atocep]

I have a lot of questions about this time line. was he even targeting the school?

I just told my wife not 5 minutes ago that while some timeline discrepancies are expected in the immediate aftermath of a tragedy, there's obvious desire by some of the people reporting info to frame this as "good guys with guns prevented a larger tragedy" and that I have a feeling an investigation is going tear that narrative apart.

[Atocep]

I guess when you stand up to the gun lobby and actually try something based on research it can work.

https://qz.com/1216653/britain-ended-the-horror-of-school-shootings-after-one-single-massacre/?utm_source=YPL

[NobodyHere]

I have a lot of questions about this time line. was he even targeting the school?

This story says yes

Uvalde school shooter texted a teenaged girl 'Ima go shoot up a(n) elementary school' before massacre (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/uvalde-school-shooter-texted-a-teenaged-girl-ima-go-shoot-up-a-n-elementary-school-before-massacre/ar-AAXGzkk?li=BBnb7Kz)

[Atocep]

I take back saying the right isn't doing anything to protect school children.

Fox News Guest Suggests 'Ballistic Blankets' To Stop Children Getting Shot (https://www.newsweek.com/ballistic-blankets-children-shot-maureen-oconnell-fox-news-school-uvalde-texas-1709955)

[RainMaker]

I just told my wife not 5 minutes ago that while some timeline discrepancies are expected in the immediate aftermath of a tragedy, there's obvious desire by some of the people reporting info to frame this as "good guys with guns prevented a larger tragedy" and that I have a feeling an investigation is going tear that narrative apart.

Yup. They already got caught lying about the body armor.

[RainMaker]

I take back saying the right isn't doing anything to protect school children.

Fox News Guest Suggests 'Ballistic Blankets' To Stop Children Getting Shot (https://www.newsweek.com/ballistic-blankets-children-shot-maureen-oconnell-fox-news-school-uvalde-texas-1709955)

The other suggestion making the rounds is having only one door in and out of the school which seems like a terrible fucking idea when the cops inevitably flee from the scene when they see a shooter.

[tarcone]

Go Steve Kerr!

We need an Amazing Grace and Chuck type movement to end this BS.

[Atocep]

The other suggestion making the rounds is having only one door in and out of the school which seems like a terrible fucking idea when the cops inevitably flee from the scene when they see a shooter.

Every class should be just be in an Armored Personnel Carrier. Problem solved.

[RainMaker]

Two teachers gave their life protecting those kids as the cops cowered and hid.

[tarcone]

Every class should be just be in an Armored Personnel Carrier. Problem solved.

Shit yeah. I went to a couple classes in Jr. High in a trailer back in the late 70s.

[QuikSand]

Even if there were not human weaknesses/flaws with the "good guys" we want to give the guns to make this problem go away, there are other weaknesses in that argument:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The Dayton, Ohio shooting occurred right in front of cops and only lasted 32 seconds before the shooter was fatally shot. In those 32 seconds, he killed 9 and wounded 17. Yet jackasses here try to argue more guns is the answer.</p>&mdash; Trevor Chamberlain (@TCAllTheDanios) <a href="https://twitter.com/TCAllTheDanios/status/1529579662766231553?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 25, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

(countless variations on that message floating around, I assume they connect to actual facts but have no direct research to say so)

[NobodyHere]

Two teachers gave their life protecting those kids as the cops cowered and hid.

You should join the police and show them how it's done.

[Atocep]

Even if there were not human weaknesses/flaws with the "good guys" we want to give the guns to make this problem go away, there are other weaknesses in that argument:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The Dayton, Ohio shooting occurred right in front of cops and only lasted 32 seconds before the shooter was fatally shot. In those 32 seconds, he killed 9 and wounded 17. Yet jackasses here try to argue more guns is the answer.</p>&mdash; Trevor Chamberlain (@TCAllTheDanios) <a href="https://twitter.com/TCAllTheDanios/status/1529579662766231553?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 25, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

(countless variations on that message floating around, I assume they connect to actual facts but have no direct research to say so)


9 died and 17 wounded but it could have been so much worse...

[RainMaker]

You should join the police and show them how it's done.

Nah, lets funnel some more money to those pussies to do jack shit when some 8 year olds are being slaughtered.

[cuervo72]

I like how Abbott wears a little fake sheriff costume for these press conferences

Was one of the first things I noticed.

[NobodyHere]

Nah, lets funnel some more money to those pussies to do jack shit when some 8 year olds are being slaughtered.

Those officers shot and killed the murderer while you were hiding behind your keyboard.

[RainMaker]

Those officers shot and killed the murderer while you were hiding behind your keyboard.

No, a Border Patrol agent shot and killed the guy after 3 officers hid for AN HOUR as someone slaughtered a 4th grade class. It was two unarmed teachers who bravely shielded kids from gunfire.

When push came to shove, the folks that never shut the fuck up about the thin blue line hid in the parking lot for backup. They let him enter the school and then patiently waited as elementary school kids had their heads blown off. Those children's blood is on those boots you lick.

[RainMaker]

Dazzling performance by the boys in blue!

https://apnews.com/article/uvalde-texas-school-shooting-44a7cfb990feaa6ffe482483df6e4683


“Go in there! Go in there!” nearby women shouted at the officers soon after the attack began, said Juan Carranza, 24, who saw the scene from outside his house, across the street from Robb Elementary School in the town of Uvalde. Carranza said the officers did not go in.


Javier Cazares, whose fourth grade daughter, Jacklyn Cazares, was killed in the attack, said he raced to the school when he heard about the shooting, arriving while police were still massed outside the building.


Upset that police were not moving in, he raised the idea of charging into the school with several other bystanders.


“Let’s just rush in because the cops aren’t doing anything like they are supposed to,” he said. “More could have been done.”

[NobodyHere]

No, a Border Patrol agent shot and killed the guy after 3 officers hid for AN HOUR as someone slaughtered a 4th grade class. It was two unarmed teachers who bravely shielded kids from gunfire.

When push came to shove, the folks that never shut the fuck up about the thin blue line hid in the parking lot for backup. They let him enter the school and then patiently waited as elementary school kids had their heads blown off. Those children's blood is on those boots you lick.

...said the keyboard warrior

[RainMaker]

...said the keyboard warrior

I did as much as the local law enforcement from behind my keyboard 2000 miles away.

[NobodyHere]

Law enforcement went and killed the murderer

[cuervo72]

It's amazing how many guys are shown by the news on the scene with guns. So, either they didn't enter or they were just there after the fact?

[RainMaker]

Chilling article about the guy in DC who tried to pull a Vegas style shooting on a school. By some miracle, no one was killed.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/05/12/edmund-burke-spencer-school-shooting/

[RainMaker]

<samp class="EmbedCode-container"><code class="EmbedCode-code"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Angel Garza, whose ten year old daughter Amerie was murdered, holding her photo to his heart:<br><br>&quot;How do you look at this girl and shoot her? Oh, my baby. How do you shoot my baby?&quot; <a href="https://t.co/TKGDp81Pze">pic.twitter.com/TKGDp81Pze</a></p>&mdash; Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) <a href="https://twitter.com/brianstelter/status/1529622137174204416?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 26, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </code></samp>

[RainMaker]

One of the most disturbing things I've ever seen. Those cries.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">This video make so much more sense now. The cops literally stopped parents from helping their kids. <a href="https://t.co/zhQfUjlpjd">pic.twitter.com/zhQfUjlpjd</a> <a href="https://t.co/DqgZUH3uCC">https://t.co/DqgZUH3uCC</a></p>&mdash; Matt Novak (@paleofuture) <a href="https://twitter.com/paleofuture/status/1529652093354536961?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 26, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[PilotMan]

Let's see what can I add.... hmm...

All part of God's plan in the end I guess. ��‍♂️

No point in going against that. He was probably using the gunman to punish the evil unbelievers. Or maybe the gunman remembered, before he got into the school, that all things are possible through God.

[GrantDawg]

Yet, the police chief admitted the officers went in and got their own kids out while the shooter was still active. They stayed outside for an hour while waiting for the SWAT team, and it was Border Patrol that actually did something. That whole police force stood their and let kids bleed out.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Lathum]

Yet, the police chief admitted the officers went in and got their own kids out while the shooter was still active. They stayed outside for an hour while waiting for the SWAT team, and it was Border Patrol that actually did something. That whole police force stood their and let kids bleed out.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

If this is accurate they should all be charged with one count of manslaughter per death

[albionmoonlight]

We know that the cops fucked up big time because we still don't know their names.

Normally when something like this happens and the cops actually do their jobs (or at least don't actively stop civilians from trying to help), the local media and politicians are putting them in front of a camera and demanding that we all worship the all-powerful armed agents of the state--blessed be their names.

Now? Crickets.

Texas will do its best to cover everything up. I hope that the Feds can find a way to get jurisdiction to investigate so that we can eventually learn what actually happened. And, if appropriate, punish those whose negligence made this so much worse than it needed to be.

[Swaggs]

One of the thing that I read, that is sticking with me, is that Americans need to see what the inside of those classrooms look like and what those poor children's bodies look like after incidents like this. Instead of showing cute pictures and videos of these kids playing and offering prayers for their families, show America what the inside of the rooms looked like, with their little bodies and blood. If we are a tough enough nation to have more guns than people and it is appropriate to show aborted fetuses, then show parents and grandparents and young people what it looks like after an automatic rifle tears through the body of child.

[QuikSand]

I detest that idea, but maybe its time has come. I don't know.

[Ksyrup]

God forbid, this ever happens to someone I love (and my wife is a sub and my older daughter is a teacher), I'll be the first to say - politicize the FUCK out of it. Because "thoughts and prayers" is, itself, a politicized response. That's one side's political position on the issue of gun violence.

[QuikSand]

Also, it's important that we all understand that these various calls for changes in cops and doors and whatever else -- all this is scripted theater, the people saying these things do not actually want them. It is merely the agreed-to talking point among gun defenders, they realize they look stupid and owned if they simply say "gun laws won't solve the problem" so instead they agree to pivot to nonsense, in an attempt to make this a both-sides situation where two reasonable groups of people simply have different views on how to solve the problem we all agree needs to be solved.

It's nonsense, it's evil, and it should be understood as such by everyone who is pissed off.

[Lathum]

Texas school shooting shows why arming teachers wouldn&#x27;t have worked (https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/texas-school-shooting-shows-why-arming-teachers-wouldn-t-have-n1295693?fbclid=IwAR2GN4VoUbV11PBvpLYUtcLyuII0Rof_aODmjwxFLD2zmNzx9LdVFgFwMy0)

[larrymcg421]

Arming teachers is such a ridiculously fucking stupid idea for a number of reasons. The article above is a great example. However, let's also think of the danger of now hundreds of guns in a school and the potential for a teacher to get disarmed (if this happens to officers, why wouldn't happen to teachers?). Finally, if this really is mainly a mental health problem (Arrested Development: "It isn't"), then do you think there are no teacher with mental health problems? And now you've just armed all of them.

I also love how we just don't have enough money for textbooks, facilities, or teacher salaries, but suddenly we have a ton of money to train and arm every teacher, or a ton of money to redesign every school with one entrance.

[albionmoonlight]

Also, it's important that we all understand that these various calls for changes in cops and doors and whatever else -- all this is scripted theater, the people saying these things do not actually want them. It is merely the agreed-to talking point among gun defenders, they realize they look stupid and owned if they simply say "gun laws won't solve the problem" so instead they agree to pivot to nonsense, in an attempt to make this a both-sides situation where two reasonable groups of people simply have different views on how to solve the problem we all agree needs to be solved.

It's nonsense, it's evil, and it should be understood as such by everyone who is pissed off.

This is a good point. When someone tries to engage you with "Arm the teachers" or other such nonsense, realize that they are basically indicating to you that they think you are an idiot. Life is too short to spend your time in discussion with people who have such contempt for your intelligence.

Just politely end the conversation.

[NobodyHere]

I detest that idea, but maybe its time has come. I don't know.

If you want to swing the needle this would probably be the most effective method.

There's no doubt in my mind that showing pictures of the aftermath would produce a Ray Rice effect.

[QuikSand]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Mitch McConnell: ‘Get Your Crying Done Now Because We’re Not Passing Shit’ <a href="https://t.co/rzw3qTQOtx">https://t.co/rzw3qTQOtx</a> <a href="https://t.co/AUFYCGrBf6">pic.twitter.com/AUFYCGrBf6</a></p>&mdash; The Onion (@TheOnion) <a href="https://twitter.com/TheOnion/status/1529836014629531650?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 26, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[stevew]

One of the thing that I read, that is sticking with me, is that Americans need to see what the inside of those classrooms look like and what those poor children's bodies look like after incidents like this. Instead of showing cute pictures and videos of these kids playing and offering prayers for their families, show America what the inside of the rooms looked like, with their little bodies and blood. If we are a tough enough nation to have more guns than people and it is appropriate to show aborted fetuses, then show parents and grandparents and young people what it looks like after an automatic rifle tears through the body of child.

I remember reading obits of the Vegas shooting victims and I could only get about 1/3 of the way thru because of how it humanized the tragedy so much more. And yeah it’s time to start showing pictures and videos of this stuff.

[Lathum]

Arming teachers is such a ridiculously fucking stupid idea for a number of reasons. The article above is a great example. However, let's also think of the danger of now hundreds of guns in a school and the potential for a teacher to get disarmed (if this happens to officers, why wouldn't happen to teachers?). Finally, if this really is mainly a mental health problem (Arrested Development: "It isn't"), then do you think there are no teacher with mental health problems? And now you've just armed all of them.

I also love how we just don't have enough money for textbooks, facilities, or teacher salaries, but suddenly we have a ton of money to train and arm every teacher, or a ton of money to redesign every school with one entrance.

All of this.

I copied the article from a friends facebook wall and commented that the article could have been one sentence, because it is a stupid fucking idea...

[PilotMan]

Arm the kids...all of them....it's the only sane thing to do.

[PilotMan]

Seriously though I'll share what I shared to FB today (with a little crossover from my other post in the dumbass thread):

https://theconversation.com/a-quest-for-significance-gone-horribly-wrong-how-mass-shooters-pervert-a-universal-desire-to-make-a-difference-in-the-world-183199 (https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftheconversation.com%2Fa-quest-for-significance-gone-horribly-wrong-how-mass-shooters-pervert-a-universal-desire-to-make-a-difference-in-the-world-183199)

Read that. It's not long; but here's the critical part of it if you don't:

The mainstream narrative that most of us follow promises significance and social worth as rewards for hard work, notable achievements and social service.

Yet there exist alternative narratives that offer tempting shortcuts to fame and glory. These identify an alleged villain, scheme or conspiracy that threaten one’s group – race, nation, or religion. The mortal danger being invoked calls for brave heroes willing to sacrifice all on the altar of the cause.

A striking example of such a narrative is the so-called “white replacement theory” that Gendron allegedly embraced. It is the idea that progressive leftists are planning to flood the country with people of color, aiming to disempower the white population and destroy its values and way of life.

The sense of existential danger this theory invokes fuels blind hatred against the alleged usurpers, and presumed conspirators, a loathing that overrides all restraints. It unleashes the rawest, most primordial impulses of which the human reptilian brain is capable. Murderous rage and mayhem are often the result.

----

And then there's this shockingly similar statement from a Republican state representative in Kentucky on why he was beaten in his primary by a more extreme candidate...and you can take that and apply it to the national political conversation. He said: “It’s all about getting people mad and angry. And making them feel like they’re getting screwed when they’re not,” Koenig said.

It's psychology people, and I'm not talking about the psychology as in crazy people and mental illness, I'm talking about how humans respond to stimuli and how they react to a feeling of feeling challenged and attacked. Shooters respond the same way...so do, lets say....people who feel cheated...and encourage other people to take up arms and fight on their behalf. It all means something. We're all wired essentially the same way. The psychological power of propaganda was used to drive the Germans into WW2, and it's used by Russia and China to dictate their desired spin to their public to garner support. It's dangerous and it's all ultimately connected via psychology. The guns are just the tool, an all too easy tool that extract catastrophic consequences on those of us who follow cultural idea that 'striving for our dreams' promises significance social worth as rewards for hard work, notable achievements and social service.

[thesloppy]

I "love" how many conservatives want to immediately pivot to mental health when the topic of gun control comes up, without even acknowledging that they're wholly responsible for that failure too.

[QuikSand]

It's a playtested deliberate maneuver. "Crazy people. What can you do?" Shrug and move on. Nobody is to blame. Nothing to see here.

It's cynical and sadly effective.

[Ksyrup]

Holy shit. The husband of one of the teachers who was murdered suffered a fatal heart attack. They have four kids.

[thesloppy]

Holy shit. The husband of one of the teachers who was murdered suffered a fatal heart attack. They have four kids.

That is tragic

[Kodos]

Jesus. So awful.

[RainMaker]

Arming teachers is such a ridiculously fucking stupid idea for a number of reasons. The article above is a great example. However, let's also think of the danger of now hundreds of guns in a school and the potential for a teacher to get disarmed (if this happens to officers, why wouldn't happen to teachers?). Finally, if this really is mainly a mental health problem (Arrested Development: "It isn't"), then do you think there are no teacher with mental health problems? And now you've just armed all of them.

I also love how we just don't have enough money for textbooks, facilities, or teacher salaries, but suddenly we have a ton of money to train and arm every teacher, or a ton of money to redesign every school with one entrance.

Arming teachers is incredibly dumb but it would also be the only chance kids might have during a shooting since the cops are mostly acting as accomplices at this point.

[Ksyrup]

I, for one, think it would be a terrible idea to arm pedophilia groomers. But that's just me.

[RainMaker]

There is another video.

<samp class="EmbedCode-container"><code class="EmbedCode-code"><iframe id="twitter-widget-0" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" class="" style="position: static; visibility: visible; width: 0px; height: 0px; display: block; flex-grow: 1;" title="Twitter Tweet" src="https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&features=eyJ0ZndfZXhwZXJpbWVudHNfY29va2llX2V4cGlyYXRpb24iOnsiYnVja2V0IjoxMjA5NjAwLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X3NlbnNpdGl2ZV9tZWRpYV9pbnRlcnN0aXRpYWxfMTM5NjMiOnsiYnVja2V0IjoiaW50ZXJzdGl0aWFsIiwidmVyc2lvbiI6bnVsbH0sInRmd190d2VldF9yZXN1bHRfbWlncmF0aW9uXzEzOTc5Ijp7ImJ1Y2tldCI6InR3ZWV0X3Jlc3VsdCIsInZlcnNpb24iOm51bGx9fQ%3D%3D&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=true&id=1529709651297652736&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fforums.operationsports.com%2Ffofc%2Fnewreply.php%3Fdo%3Dpostreply%26t%3D90787&sessionId=588d3a5afb84ea0d9e9734d633b2fc658db49b89&theme=light&widgetsVersion=c8fe9736dd6fb%3A1649830956492&width=550px" data-tweet-id="1529709651297652736" frameborder="0"></iframe>
Video of Uvalde parents with cops -- "y'all keep fighting with us, go fight that mfer!" pic.twitter.com/icDG2J595a (https://t.co/icDG2J595a)
— ✨TheStarsAtNight ✨ (@Star5AtNight) May 26, 2022 (https://twitter.com/Star5AtNight/status/1529709651297652736?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </code></samp>

I was wrong about them not doing anything. They did in fact prevent parents from rushing in to save their kids. Three cops did tackle and detain a parent in the first video. Also one cop was on guard ready to taze any parent who was willing to save the kids.


https://i.imgur.com/pLN5lMy.jpg<iframe scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/widget_iframe.bbd13993eb53d3a11ac08f5e8cf9d6a4.html?origin=https%3A%2F%2Fforums.operationsports.com" title="Twitter settings iframe" style="display: none;" frameborder="0"></iframe>

[RainMaker]

<samp class="EmbedCode-container"><code class="EmbedCode-code"><iframe id="twitter-widget-0" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" class="" style="position: static; visibility: visible; width: 550px; height: 760px; display: block; flex-grow: 1;" title="Twitter Tweet" src="https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&features=eyJ0ZndfZXhwZXJpbWVudHNfY29va2llX2V4cGlyYXRpb24iOnsiYnVja2V0IjoxMjA5NjAwLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X3NlbnNpdGl2ZV9tZWRpYV9pbnRlcnN0aXRpYWxfMTM5NjMiOnsiYnVja2V0IjoiaW50ZXJzdGl0aWFsIiwidmVyc2lvbiI6bnVsbH0sInRmd190d2VldF9yZXN1bHRfbWlncmF0aW9uXzEzOTc5Ijp7ImJ1Y2tldCI6InR3ZWV0X3Jlc3VsdCIsInZlcnNpb24iOm51bGx9fQ%3D%3D&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1529890793456078848&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fforums.operationsports.com%2Ffofc%2Fshowthread.php%3Ft%3D90787%26page%3D42&sessionId=b2e3294cf02d79bd82240b5aa5a6d01858372269&theme=light&widgetsVersion=c8fe9736dd6fb%3A1649830956492&width=550px" data-tweet-id="1529890793456078848" frameborder="0">


https://i.imgur.com/YPvFVnn.jpg</iframe></code></samp>
<samp class="EmbedCode-container"><code class="EmbedCode-code">https://i.imgur.com/YPvFVnn.jpg <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </code></samp><iframe scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/widget_iframe.bbd13993eb53d3a11ac08f5e8cf9d6a4.html?origin=https%3A%2F%2Fforums.operationsports.com" title="Twitter settings iframe" style="display: none;" frameborder="0"></iframe><iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: medium none;" title="Twitter analytics iframe" frameborder="0"></iframe><iframe scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/widget_iframe.bbd13993eb53d3a11ac08f5e8cf9d6a4.html?origin=https%3A%2F%2Fforums.operationsports.com" title="Twitter settings iframe" style="display: none;" frameborder="0"></iframe><iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: medium none;" title="Twitter analytics iframe" frameborder="0"></iframe><iframe scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/widget_iframe.bbd13993eb53d3a11ac08f5e8cf9d6a4.html?origin=https%3A%2F%2Fforums.operationsports.com" title="Twitter settings iframe" style="display: none;" frameborder="0"></iframe><iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: medium none;" title="Twitter analytics iframe" frameborder="0"></iframe><iframe scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/widget_iframe.bbd13993eb53d3a11ac08f5e8cf9d6a4.html?origin=https%3A%2F%2Fforums.operationsports.com" title="Twitter settings iframe" style="display: none;" frameborder="0"></iframe><iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: medium none;" title="Twitter analytics iframe" frameborder="0"></iframe>

[Atocep]

Something we don't hear about is how personal firearms are treated on military installations. Generally speaking, our military are some of the most experienced and proficient people in the country when it comes to guns.

It's open to variation based on based commander policy, but every military installation I've worked at, lived on, served on, ect has been the same. No concealed carry. Guns are not allowed to be stored in the barracks under any circumstances. Guns are not allowed to be stored in base housing under any circumstances. Any personal firearms owned by military members living on post (barracks or housing) must be registered and stored with a base armorer. In order to use the firearm you have to arrange ahead of time to check it out and you check it back in when you're done.

We trust a random 18 year old with a gun more than we trust our military servicemembers.

[BYU 14]

That is a great point

[HerRealName]

That mom drove 40 miles, was arrested/detained for some amount of time, convinced another cop to let her go, jumped a fence, and rescued her kids faster than the time it took for law enforcement to finally act? They better make her Sherriff.

[HerRealName]

dola, it sure feels like we're being fed lie after lie instead of the usual FoW.

Uvalde gunman wasn't confronted before entering school, police say (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/texas/article/uvalde-gunman-texas-officer-17201339.php)

[RainMaker]

40% of the town's budget goes to those pussies.

[Edward64]

Law enforcement went and killed the murderer

Keyboard warrior indeed.

[albionmoonlight]

I realize that the Beto thing was a political act for him.

But I wonder if by throwing a monkey wrench into the works, he made it easier for the lies to start to unravel.

Big test for the media coming up. Are they going to be police stenographers or journalists?

[Edward64]

Yet, the police chief admitted the officers went in and got their own kids out while the shooter was still active. They stayed outside for an hour while waiting for the SWAT team, and it was Border Patrol that actually did something. That whole police force stood their and let kids bleed out.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

I did not read about LEO getting out their own kids first. I can see that they got out a group of kids which contained their own kids but you are implying they purposely got their own kids out first. If true, yeah those guys are assholes and something should be done.

From what I've read, they had enough LEO to go in earlier. Article I read said it took 40 min from the initial shooting before CBP took the frakker out. That is too long IMO even accounting for initial confusion. But then an article said below. Wonder what "engaged" means here.

McCraw commended the officers who engaged the shooter before the tactical unit entered, saying they saved lives by keeping him "pinned down" at his location.

I do want to know an accurate timeline, who said what, who gave the initial order, was the frakker negotiating etc. before final judgement but yeah, does look like the LEOs should have done a better job.

[albionmoonlight]

dola: very anecdotal here, but I am starting to see some right wingers on social media start to dip their toes into the "One bad apple" pool and starting to criticize the Uvalde police in a "If these officers screwed up, then these officers need to be replaced." The fact that there is anything other than Worship The Blue, Blessed Be Their Holy Names coming out of the right means that these particular officers/department may take the fall for all of bad policing everywhere since the beginning of time.

[Edward64]

How about we try and find out. For fucks sake, I'm so tired of this line of thinking. CLEARLY doing NOTHING is not helping so how about we fucking try something.

Let me be clear. In general, I agree with BYU's proposals. I'm not saying don't do it. I am saying, in addition to more restrictions (not elimination), do other things also.

[Edward64]

That mom drove 40 miles, was arrested/detained for some amount of time, convinced another cop to let her go, jumped a fence, and rescued her kids faster than the time it took for law enforcement to finally act? They better make her Sherriff.

Had a chuckle even in the horrendous context.

I think LEOs shouldn't be faulted in stopping parents from going in. One goes, others may do the same and then the confusion will get worse. The fault is LEOs not going in earlier than the 40 min.

But honestly, if it was me and my kids, I sure as heck would have done the same thing if I saw LEOs not really taking action. Taze me, I can live with trying, I would have a hard time living if I didn't try.

[Edward64]

Still in Asia right now. Had dinner with friends last night and we talked about the gun craziness in the US. I could add some background & context to their questions and concerns, but yeah, we all agreed the US is screwed up here.

[RainMaker]

Keyboard warrior indeed.

Lick those boots for those cowards who sat in a parking lot handcuffing and pepper spraying parents who wanted to save their kids. Just lap it all up.

[Edward64]

Lick those boots for those cowards who sat in a parking lot handcuffing and pepper spraying parents who wanted to save their kids. Just lap it all up.

Feel free to immigrate. May I suggest the Nordics. There's lots willing to take your slot here (legally).

[Edward64]

One of the thing that I read, that is sticking with me, is that Americans need to see what the inside of those classrooms look like and what those poor children's bodies look like after incidents like this. Instead of showing cute pictures and videos of these kids playing and offering prayers for their families, show America what the inside of the rooms looked like, with their little bodies and blood. If we are a tough enough nation to have more guns than people and it is appropriate to show aborted fetuses, then show parents and grandparents and young people what it looks like after an automatic rifle tears through the body of child.

Interesting idea but it will victimize the parents of the dead also. They shouldn't have to live with that.

Maybe after the bodies are removed I can live with.

Don't know. I do agree something like that will make an impact to the undecided, not committed etc. but don't think it'll make that much of a difference to the true believers (won't happen to me and my family).

[RainMaker]

dola: very anecdotal here, but I am starting to see some right wingers on social media start to dip their toes into the "One bad apple" pool and starting to criticize the Uvalde police in a "If these officers screwed up, then these officers need to be replaced." The fact that there is anything other than Worship The Blue, Blessed Be Their Holy Names coming out of the right means that these particular officers/department may take the fall for all of bad policing everywhere since the beginning of time.

It's because this story is going to be really bad when it's over. There are multiple videos of the police restraining parents who are trying to rush into a school to save their child from being executed.

On top of that, they have changed their story for like the 5th time. Now they are saying the shooter wasn't confronted after saying he was yesterday.

<samp class="EmbedCode-container"><code class="EmbedCode-code"><iframe id="twitter-widget-0" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" class="" style="position: static; visibility: visible; width: 507px; height: 320px; display: block; flex-grow: 1;" title="Twitter Tweet" src="https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&features=eyJ0ZndfZXhwZXJpbWVudHNfY29va2llX2V4cGlyYXRpb24iOnsiYnVja2V0IjoxMjA5NjAwLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X3NlbnNpdGl2ZV9tZWRpYV9pbnRlcnN0aXRpYWxfMTM5NjMiOnsiYnVja2V0IjoiaW50ZXJzdGl0aWFsIiwidmVyc2lvbiI6bnVsbH0sInRmd190d2VldF9yZXN1bHRfbWlncmF0aW9uXzEzOTc5Ijp7ImJ1Y2tldCI6InR3ZWV0X3Jlc3VsdCIsInZlcnNpb24iOm51bGx9fQ%3D%3D&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1529905218443431948&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fforums.operationsports.com%2Ffofc%2Fnewreply.php%3Fdo%3Dpostreply%26t%3D90787&sessionId=2e2fb9f89881027fbc824953b63acf34ad6b4f8e&theme=light&widgetsVersion=c8fe9736dd6fb%3A1649830956492&width=550px" data-tweet-id="1529905218443431948" frameborder="0"></iframe>
<script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

</code></samp><samp class="EmbedCode-container"><code class="EmbedCode-code">Then you have the story that whoever came in did the one thing you are not supposed to do when breaching a building and got a kid killed.

</code></samp><samp class="EmbedCode-container"><code class="EmbedCode-code"><iframe id="twitter-widget-1" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" class="" style="position: static; visibility: visible; width: 507px; height: 583px; display: block; flex-grow: 1;" title="Twitter Tweet" src="https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-1&features=eyJ0ZndfZXhwZXJpbWVudHNfY29va2llX2V4cGlyYXRpb24iOnsiYnVja2V0IjoxMjA5NjAwLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X3NlbnNpdGl2ZV9tZWRpYV9pbnRlcnN0aXRpYWxfMTM5NjMiOnsiYnVja2V0IjoiaW50ZXJzdGl0aWFsIiwidmVyc2lvbiI6bnVsbH0sInRmd190d2VldF9yZXN1bHRfbWlncmF0aW9uXzEzOTc5Ijp7ImJ1Y2tldCI6InR3ZWV0X3Jlc3VsdCIsInZlcnNpb24iOm51bGx9fQ%3D%3D&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1529696393115279360&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fforums.operationsports.com%2Ffofc%2Fnewreply.php%3Fdo%3Dpostreply%26t%3D90787&sessionId=2e2fb9f89881027fbc824953b63acf34ad6b4f8e&theme=light&widgetsVersion=c8fe9736dd6fb%3A1649830956492&width=550px" data-tweet-id="1529696393115279360" frameborder="0"></iframe>
<script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

And finally, in today's press conference, they couldn't confirm that they didn't kill any of the kids.

Like I said, they're on their 4th or 5th version of the story with some blatant lies thrown in. Each passing minute the stories get worse and worse about their performance. And seeing videos of parents being detained for trying to save their kid is one of the most gut-wrenching things you could possibly witness as a parent.

With all that said, they'll throw these guys under the bus because it's too obvious. Similar to the George Floyd situation where it's on video and you just can't defend it. And with each passing minute it's more and more clear they were trying to cover up their horrific actions. There are going to be people who rushed to their defense who are going to look even dumber when this is over.
</code></samp><samp class="EmbedCode-container"><code class="EmbedCode-code"></code></samp><iframe scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/widget_iframe.bbd13993eb53d3a11ac08f5e8cf9d6a4.html?origin=https%3A%2F%2Fforums.operationsports.com" title="Twitter settings iframe" style="display: none;" frameborder="0"></iframe><iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: medium none;" title="Twitter analytics iframe" frameborder="0"></iframe><iframe scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/widget_iframe.bbd13993eb53d3a11ac08f5e8cf9d6a4.html?origin=https%3A%2F%2Fforums.operationsports.com" title="Twitter settings iframe" style="display: none;" frameborder="0"></iframe><iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: medium none;" title="Twitter analytics iframe" frameborder="0"></iframe>

[Swaggs]

Interesting idea but it will victimize the parents of the dead also. They shouldn't have to live with that.

Maybe after the bodies are removed I can live with.

Don't know. I do agree something like that will make an impact to the undecided, not committed etc. but don't think it'll make that much of a difference to the true believers (won't happen to me and my family).

I’ve thought about this and, while it is impossible to put myself in the shoes of those parents, I feel like there wouldn’t be a whole lot left to make me feel more victimized if that happened to my family. I want more outrage and, again, if it we are all okay with seeing aborted fetuses to prove a point, I don’t see this as much different as far as being extremely personal and raw.

[Edward64]

Just a thought. It's obvious that politicians and government lack the "will" to make significant changes.

I wonder if wealthy donors can make a difference. Think like Gates Foundation. It does great things for specific causes in the world. Seems that like-minded multi-billionaires could fund a continuous campaign and also support like minded candidates. Plan for the long term and maybe in 20-30 years the right candidates will get elected, mentally unstable (and parents of) will get more aid that they need etc.

Studies will have to be done on what can be done to change the mindset, culture, and stuff like that. Needs to be super rich. Can't be thinking about ROI, more of leaving a long lasting public legacy.

I'd also add ... I think studies a while ago show there is no (significant?) linkage between shootings and violent computer games. Intuitively, this seems wrong to me. I can't help but feel violent computer games reinforces/glorifies that "something" in an unstable person's mind. Unsure what should be done but think we should look into it again.

[Edward64]

I’ve thought about this and, while it is impossible to put myself in the shoes of those parents, I feel like there wouldn’t be a whole lot left to make me feel more victimized if that happened to my family. I want more outrage and, again, if it we are all okay with seeing aborted fetuses to prove a point, I don’t see this as much different as far as being extremely personal and raw.

Respectfully disagree. Seeing my dead child in pics over and over again, popping up during anniversaries etc. in perpetuity would be too much for me.

No joking, I can see myself shooting someone for that insensitivity and the hurt it would cause me and my family. It would be that raw and personal to me. I would go out of my mind.

[Ksyrup]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Texas Police Lieutenant Says Cops Were Reluctant to Engage Gunman Because ‘They Could’ve Been Shot’<a href="https://t.co/Af393QBrpC">https://t.co/Af393QBrpC</a></p>&mdash; Mediaite (@Mediaite) <a href="https://twitter.com/Mediaite/status/1529969734048878592?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 26, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[Swaggs]

Respectfully disagree. Seeing my dead child in pics over and over again, popping up during anniversaries etc. in perpetuity would be too much for me.

No joking, I can see myself shooting someone for that insensitivity and the hurt it would cause me and my family. It would be that raw and personal to me. I would go out of my mind.

And I’m not trying to challenge that feeling of yours (I’d feel it, too, if it were me) or be disrespectful either, but why should anyone beyond you or your family care that it is too raw or personal for you? Having my young children need to go through live shooter drills and lockdowns (like my middle schooler had today because someone walked through their campus taking a shortcut) is raw and personal to me and directly impacting my and my family’s life today and I doubt that is stressing you out a whole lot while you are on your vacation.

If all these school children are regularly threatened and frightened and inconvenienced, because there is essentially a lottery-like system where once a month or quarter there is a school shooting with multiple casualties, I am absolutely comfortable with you being made uncomfortable and going out of your mind and being hurt over this. And again, nothing personal - I hate that someone would have to have this experience, but I can tolerate it in the same way I hate but tolerate seeing things like soldiers being sent overseas or families going through illnesses like cancer or people struggling in poverty or whatever other horrible things we have to tolerate if we live long enough. Maybe the thought of it would be enough to drive you and other people that feel strongly enough about it to affect change (even if it feels impossible or takes a generation to see the effects).

[thesloppy]

Respectfully disagree. Seeing my dead child in pics over and over again, popping up during anniversaries etc. in perpetuity would be too much for me.

No joking, I can see myself shooting someone for that insensitivity and the hurt it would cause me and my family. It would be that raw and personal to me. I would go out of my mind.


This sounds pretty naive to me, considering we've had 27 school shootings in the 21 weeks of 2022. The grieving parents of the last 25 years are already forced to re-live this shit every week & we do nothing about it.

[RainMaker]

I don't think photos would do anything. Most of the country has made up their mind on where they stand on school shootings. Not going to persuade anyone.

[RainMaker]

18 minutes are missing from the police scanner archive which goes well with this.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">As an ex prosecutor from Uvalde, I can say based on my past interactions with Uvalde PD, you will never know the truth about what went down in that school until every inch of video tape is released to the press.</p>&mdash; Sara Spector (@Miriam2626) <a href="https://twitter.com/Miriam2626/status/1529985370166906889?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 27, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[Atocep]

Republicans really seem to be trying to rally behind the idea of one entrance/one exit to each school. They have to be the only people on the planet that could look at 1 school shooting per week on average and conclude the problem is too many doors.

I mean, seriously, could there be a worse solution proposed this problem?

[RainMaker]

Republicans really seem to be trying to rally behind the idea of one entrance/one exit to each school. They have to be the only people on the planet that could look at 1 school shooting per week on average and conclude the problem is too many doors.

I mean, seriously, could there be a worse solution proposed this problem?

Can't the shooter just lock the door and do whatever he wants? Kids would have nowhere to escape to. I know it's just a deflection but this is the best these morons could muster up?

[Atocep]

I don't think photos would do anything. Most of the country has made up their mind on where they stand on school shootings. Not going to persuade anyone.

Republicans were more than ready to act when they thought it was an illegal that crossed the border or a transgender person. As soon as they realized that was right wing fake news they ran out of ideas.

[thesloppy]

It is so exhausting & absurd to watch the same elected motherfuckers who were willing to spew so much spittle about the sanctity of babies' lives mere days ago immediately shrug off any & all action to protect school kids.

[RainMaker]

Republicans were more than ready to act when they thought it was an illegal that crossed the border or a transgender person. As soon as they realized that was right wing fake news they ran out of ideas.

They weren't going to act on any issue. They were just looking to deflect from the issue by using bigotry.

[Swaggs]

I don't think photos would do anything. Most of the country has made up their mind on where they stand on school shootings. Not going to persuade anyone.


I’m not trying to equate the magnitude and you may be right and probably are, but I think about how watching 9/11 unfold live, on television, told such a impactful story in a way that reporting and recounting probably would not have done justice. That led to the Patriot Act and Bush having an unbelievably high approval rating because it was so visually horrifying and, in my opinion, because it seemed like something that could happen anywhere at anytime (for a little while, at least).

I’m not trying to argue or push people that I like on here into being uncomfortable or trying to see things my way - I haven’t even fully processed all of this. Hell - I can’t even watch the parents talk about it right now. I just think it is one of those things that we want to be blind to and not think about (like war, or how the meat I eat is processed, or how my sneakers and iPhone are made in Asia, etc.) that might change our behaviors if we didn’t have the option or privilege to be able to look away from it. Not a mountain I’m trying to die on, but just expanding on the idea of it in the presence of people whose opinions interest me and I largely respect

[Ksyrup]

Republicans really seem to be trying to rally behind the idea of one entrance/one exit to each school. They have to be the only people on the planet that could look at 1 school shooting per week on average and conclude the problem is too many doors.

I mean, seriously, could there be a worse solution proposed this problem?

So basically the solution is to turn the school into the Orlando nightclub shooting, or the Paris shooting, or the Great White RI fire. One main entrance/exit, lock all the rest of the doors.

[PilotMan]

There are plenty of answers out there. Plenty of solid ideas that are common sense. Arguing about bullshit doors, or bulletproof blankets are just what Quick said, the stuff that just delays and distracts until it blows over and nothing gets done.

Solutions | Everytown | Everytown (https://www.everytown.org/solutions/)

[Swaggs]

So basically the solution is to turn the school into the Orlando nightclub shooting, or the Paris shooting, or the Great White RI fire. One main entrance/exit, lock all the rest of the doors.

The Great White fire came to mind to me, too. Good point. Make things less safe from a fire safety standpoint, but at least it doesn’t have to impact gun control.

[RainMaker]

Authorities investigating if retired federal agent knew of Buffalo mass shooting plans in advance | Local News | buffalonews.com (https://buffalonews.com/news/local/authorities-investigating-if-retired-federal-agent-knew-of-buffalo-mass-shooting-plans-in-advance/article_bd408f18-dd39-11ec-be53-df8fdd095d6f.html)

[CrimsonFox]

Republicans really seem to be trying to rally behind the idea of one entrance/one exit to each school. They have to be the only people on the planet that could look at 1 school shooting per week on average and conclude the problem is too many doors.

I mean, seriously, could there be a worse solution proposed this problem?

then everyone would die in fires :(

[MrBug708]

So basically the solution is to turn the school into the Orlando nightclub shooting, or the Paris shooting, or the Great White RI fire. One main entrance/exit, lock all the rest of the doors.

Most schools kind of already have that, it just depends on how serious they are about keeping them locked at various times throughout the day. But a school isn't an enclosed theater either. But maybe, being in California, it's different here since we rarely have schools with indoor hallways. Everything is open, so it's not really a similar situation as described that way. But if someone wanted to inflict as much hurt at schools, I'm surprised someone hasn't shown up at dropoff/pickup. Our school has anywhere from 100-200 kids at various release times.

[Edward64]

Republicans really seem to be trying to rally behind the idea of one entrance/one exit to each school. They have to be the only people on the planet that could look at 1 school shooting per week on average and conclude the problem is too many doors.

I mean, seriously, could there be a worse solution proposed this problem?

FWIW the one entry/exit doesn’t mean that all other doors are locked so you can’t get out if there is an active shooter. Alarms go off but you are still able to exit wherever. Source my wife’s school, her school already has this one entry/exit
process already.

[Edward64]

This sounds pretty naive to me, considering we've had 27 school shootings in the 21 weeks of 2022. The grieving parents of the last 25 years are already forced to re-live this shit every week & we do nothing about it.

Relive via words is not comparable to relive with explicit pics of your loved one sprawled on the ground.

Maybe it’s just me but there is a world of difference IMO.

[flere-imsaho]

I think LEOs shouldn't be faulted in stopping parents from going in.

It makes sense for LEOs to stop parents going into the school if other LEOs are already in the school hunting the shooter.

In this case, however, that wasn't happening. The parents were attempting to do what the LEOs refused to do. So, it makes no sense. Well, actually it makes perfect sense if you assume these cops were bullies and cowards, who felt much safer menacing people who couldn't fight back than doing the hard thing and attempting to protect the lives of innocents.

If you sign up to be a police officer, you sign up to putting your life on the line. It's literally part of the job, and it's why they get those big funerals, paraded out at sports events, thin blue line, big pensions, etc....

This PD (again, it was CBP who finally stormed the school) are a bunch of fucking cowards.

[cuervo72]

Our kids' elementary school had one main entrance which was on a buzzer system, but there were a number of doors out (gym, cafeteria, etc.). Our HS had more doors in but they were typically locked (or on card access).

Of course the elementary school was also overcrowded and had a number of mobile classrooms outside of the school...

[Edward64]

It makes sense for LEOs to stop parents going into the school if other LEOs are already in the school hunting the shooter.

In this case, however, that wasn't happening. The parents were attempting to do what the LEOs refused to do. So, it makes no sense. Well, actually it makes perfect sense if you assume these cops were bullies and cowards, who felt much safer menacing people who couldn't fight back than doing the hard thing and attempting to protect the lives of innocents.

If you sign up to be a police officer, you sign up to putting your life on the line. It's literally part of the job, and it's why they get those big funerals, paraded out at sports events, thin blue line, big pensions, etc....

This PD (again, it was CBP who finally stormed the school) are a bunch of fucking cowards.

I don't disagree if it happened the way it's being reported right now. There's bound to be some confusion as far as who said what, who did or did not do what etc. So am willing to let the full story come out before final judgement.

But it does seem (some) LEO didn't do their job that they signed up for (e.g. serve and protect).

[flere-imsaho]

I dunno, the videos are pretty damning, and the repeated changes in story from the local PD.

I don't think we're at the "there's some confusion" stage. I think we're at the "there would need to be some pretty strong evidence to overturn the conclusions that are quickly falling into shape".

[QuikSand]

This whole absurd business of "no way to stop nutcases with guns coming to schools to shoot up kids, so we'll do THIS instead" smacks of these stories where someplace is overrun with rats so they decide to bring in a bunch of bobcats or something to eat the rats... and then bobcats take over and start eating babies and such.

It's like a dumb horror film, you can see the terrible decision taking shape, everyone agrees it's terrible, and... there they go.

[stevew]

Our kids' elementary school had one main entrance which was on a buzzer system, but there were a number of doors out (gym, cafeteria, etc.). Our HS had more doors in but they were typically locked (or on card access).

Of course the elementary school was also overcrowded and had a number of mobile classrooms outside of the school...

My daughter’s school is set up like that. It’s right next to the police station also. But if somebody wanted to get in, all they have to do is shoot out some windows or something. I’m pretty confident there would be a police response within 1 to 2 minutes, but given the Dayton thing, 20 kids could die in that amount of time.

[cuervo72]

I mean, the reality is that if you have such a gun and have the will and no qualms about being caught or killed, you can shoot a lot of people. It's not that difficult. Schools just happen to be popular targets because that's where most of these shooters spent a lot of time.

[BYU 14]

This is not getting any better for local law enforcement in Uvalde

Border Patrol Tactical Team Was Ordered to Hold Back Before Confronting the Gunman (https://www.yahoo.com/news/border-patrol-tactical-team-ordered-170904118.html)

[JPhillips]

If they really thought no one was living in the classroom(which is dubious given the sounds of gunfire) what was the plan? We're they going to starve him out? It would seem like a believe that there was only the shooter would provide you greater impulse to storm the room.

[RainMaker]

If they really thought no one was living in the classroom(which is dubious given the sounds of gunfire) what was the plan? We're they going to starve him out? It would seem like a believe that there was only the shooter would provide you greater impulse to storm the room.

They're lying. There were countless calls from kids in the school to 911 begging for help. A witness says a child was killed when the police called out asking if anyone needed help. We know that one child died later at the hospital which means they were alive in the classroom.

Cops are blaming "cyber gaming" for the shooting.

[RainMaker]

<samp class="EmbedCode-container"><code class="EmbedCode-code"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="und" dir="ltr"><a href="https://t.co/KxrGUwN90R">https://t.co/KxrGUwN90R</a> <a href="https://t.co/1AkncB5SlY">pic.twitter.com/1AkncB5SlY</a></p>&mdash; Cody Baier, Certified Bleach Demon (@LordShmeckie) <a href="https://twitter.com/LordShmeckie/status/1530025562911162375?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 27, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </code></samp>

[GrantDawg]

Even my hardcore gun-loving, cop apologist former BIL on Facebook is saying the police really screwed the pooch on this one. There really isn't a satisfying defense for their actions here. Reports are saying the even tried to stop Border Patrol from going in. I mean, WTF?

[RainMaker]

If only someone could have told them kids were alive in the classroom.

<samp class="EmbedCode-container"><code class="EmbedCode-code"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Student calls to 911:<br>12:03—whispered she's in room 112<br>12:10—said multiple dead<br>12:13—called again<br>12:16—says 8-9 students alive<br>12:19—student calls from room 111<br>12:21—3 shots heard on call<br>12:36—another call<br>12:43—asks for police<br>12:47—asks for police<a href="https://t.co/CzkuF1llq1">https://t.co/CzkuF1llq1</a></p>&mdash; Mike Baker (@ByMikeBaker) <a href="https://twitter.com/ByMikeBaker/status/1530238057454047232?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 27, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </code></samp>

[Ben E Lou]

Even my hardcore gun-loving, cop apologist former BIL on Facebook is saying the police really screwed the pooch on this one. There really isn't a satisfying defense for their actions here. Reports are saying the even tried to stop Border Patrol from going in. I mean, WTF?Haven't been in OT for a while, but just popping in to emphasize a comment my wife made yesterday morning, that this is all headed toward the following from Fox News and it will be the primary right-wing talking point fairly soon:



"The bottom line is that Officers Jose Gonzalez and Carlos Flores did not follow protocol, and Vice Principal Isabella Garcia was supposed to check the doors while this murderer was outside for 12 minutes, and she failed at her duty as well. That's why these kids are dead."


(And oh YES, they will say their names pretty much every time, assuming they are Latino-sounding.)

[flere-imsaho]

Sounds about right, Ben.

[BYU 14]

So I finally had a chance to talk to my son in law enforcement this morning (He is in Italy and ahead 8 hours, so it took a while to catch up)

Coincidentally he also conducted an active shooter drill just last week where he is at and the protocol he gave me pretty much matches what the Texas Director of Public Safety is saying now.

In that situation, you don't wait to establish perimeter and access points, you identify where the threat is, then go in and neutralize that threat....immediately.

The obvious thing here is how woefully unprepared for this situation this police force was. In addition to their own incompetence, they made the Border Patrol tactical unit stand down, and local police had authority in that scenario, unless the tactical team was local department SWAT, in which case they can decide to go in or not. (Also curious local SWAT was not on scene when the Border Patrol team got there, though they may not have had an official SWAT team.)

He assumed, which is also along my lines of thinking, that they have likely never practiced this situation. It is a small town 15 K population, with little violent crime, an aging, complacent police force and commanders woefully lacking in tactical training/experience.

It was a perfect recipe for disaster and they will rightfully (hopefully) be held to high accountability for this, as there is never an excuse to botch a situation of this magnitude so badly.

More importantly, since our politicians are, as usual, going to do jack shit about this, is I hope departments across the country take note of this and allocate resources to preparing for and drilling this scenario. Because, we know this will not be the last time.

[CrimsonFox]

I watched the local cop give a news brief about how they didn't have such and such complete so didn't go in....i'm like WTF....just go all bruce willis and take him out? You got a vest? GO!

[RainMaker]

So I finally had a chance to talk to my son in law enforcement this morning (He is in Italy and ahead 8 hours, so it took a while to catch up)

Coincidentally he also conducted an active shooter drill just last week where he is at and the protocol he gave me pretty much matches what the Texas Director of Public Safety is saying now.

In that situation, you don't wait to establish perimeter and access points, you identify where the threat is, then go in and neutralize that threat....immediately.

The obvious thing here is how woefully unprepared for this situation this police force was. In addition to their own incompetence, they made the Border Patrol tactical unit stand down, and local police had authority in that scenario, unless the tactical team was local department SWAT, in which case they can decide to go in or not. (Also curious local SWAT was not on scene when the Border Patrol team got there, though they may not have had an official SWAT team.)

He assumed, which is also along my lines of thinking, that they have likely never practiced this situation. It is a small town 15 K population, with little violent crime, an aging, complacent police force and commanders woefully lacking in tactical training/experience.

It was a perfect recipe for disaster and they will rightfully (hopefully) be held to high accountability for this, as there is never an excuse to botch a situation of this magnitude so badly.

It is a small town but they did have a SWAT team with all the fancy equipment and gear. They also had extensive training in active shooters, including at schools. In fact, they had toured that exact school just 2 months ago during training. Their budget was the largest percent of the municipal budget.

The school district had also doubled their security spending over the past 4 years. This included full-time armed resource officers who no one can figure out where they were during the shooting (the Police said they didn't have that information).

Here is the SWAT team cosplaying with their weapons.


https://i.imgur.com/nwFuRBJ.jpg
More importantly, since our politicians are, as usual, going to do jack shit about this, is I hope departments across the country take note of this and allocate resources to preparing for and drilling this scenario. Because, we know this will not be the last time.

Resources were allocated and preparations were made.

[BYU 14]

Well, what you add only makes it more egregious then, though to be fair there is a difference in practical tactical training and play acting scenarios. Who knows what these guys were doing, because it certainly didn't lead to the desired mitigation here.

[PilotMan]

They would have been in there in a heartbeat if it was a 'black' man or an 'illegal'. No fucking questions asked. I'm with Cube on this one.

[flere-imsaho]

At every turn, this gets even worse.

[Ksyrup]

(And oh YES, they will say their names pretty much every time, assuming they are Latino-sounding.)

Not just the cops, the victims. Trump made sure to read off their names. You know the reason. And then he danced at the end of his speech.

[cuervo72]

the primary right-wing talking point

I think you mean "official Republican."

[Atocep]

This is the border patrol agent that stopped the shooter. He was part of the group that broke orders from the local police and broke off from evacuating kids to take the shooter out.

https://i.imgur.com/yNGvtZ0.jpg

[QuikSand]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">I have spent the past few days researching the training of Uvalde officers, including the tactics they were expected to use to halt school shooters. <br><br>The documents are jarring. Here’s a thread of our findings so far.<br><br>1/9</p>&mdash; Mike Baker (@ByMikeBaker) <a href="https://twitter.com/ByMikeBaker/status/1530357140191186944?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 28, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Really tough read...

I guess it's just going to reinforce pre-existing beliefs, though. If you're for gun control, you see this as a damning indictment of the "good guys with guns" argument. And if you're against gun control, I suppose you'll find this to be evidence that we need more GGWG, more training for GGWG, fewer doors, or other such things... that Uvalde was a unique failure, not a real indictment of our overall approach to guns and school security.

[QuikSand]

Yeah, that leads me to my latest gripe with this... with so much focus on the cops not going in to get the bad guy, we might end up with a collective sense that that was the real takeaway from Uvalde... that police might fail in the critical moment, despite weapons and training.

No, the real takeaway was that on his 18th birthday, a walking red flag of a kid was able to buy two unbelievably overpowered weapons of war and literally thousands of rounds of ammunition without anyone knowing about it, immediately making his poorly formed, idle pre-18 plans to do something awful suddenly very realistic and obtainable.

If in this country that kid had to go through extensive training, background checking, and so forth to obtain a simple handgun or rifle, of the sort one might want to help defend one's home or to hunt for sport... there is simply no chance that he "finds a way" to commit the atrocity he did, on the scale he did. Another obscene talking point from the bought and paid for 2A defenders.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Yeah, that leads me to my latest gripe with this... with so much focus on the cops not going in to get the bad guy, we might end up with a collective sense that that was the real takeaway from Uvalde... that police might fail in the critical moment, despite weapons and training.

No, the real takeaway was that on his 18th birthday, a walking red flag of a kid was able to buy two unbelievably overpowered weapons of war and literally thousands of rounds of ammunition without anyone knowing about it, immediately making his poorly formed, idle pre-18 plans to do something awful suddenly very realistic and obtainable.

If in this country that kid had to go through extensive training, background checking, and so forth to obtain a simple handgun or rifle, of the sort one might want to help defend one's home or to hunt for sport... there is simply no chance that he "finds a way" to commit the atrocity he did, on the scale he did. Another obscene talking point from the bought and paid for 2A defenders.

Perfectly stated.

[Ben E Lou]

Yeah, that leads me to my latest gripe with this... with so much focus on the cops not going in to get the bad guy, we might end up with a collective sense that that was the real takeaway from Uvalde... that police might fail in the critical moment, despite weapons and training.

No, the real takeaway was that on his 18th birthday, a walking red flag of a kid was able to buy two unbelievably overpowered weapons of war and literally thousands of rounds of ammunition without anyone knowing about it, immediately making his poorly formed, idle pre-18 plans to do something awful suddenly very realistic and obtainable.

If in this country that kid had to go through extensive training, background checking, and so forth to obtain a simple handgun or rifle, of the sort one might want to help defend one's home or to hunt for sport... there is simply no chance that he "finds a way" to commit the atrocity he did, on the scale he did. Another obscene talking point from the bought and paid for 2A defenders.To be clear, this was precisely my wife's point--that it would probably be a successful strategy for deflecting the discussion.

[Ben E Lou]

"The bottom line is that Officers Jose Gonzalez and Carlos Flores did not follow protocol, and Vice Principal Isabella Garcia was supposed to check the doors while this murderer was outside for 12 minutes, and she failed at her duty as well. That's why these kids are dead."Apparently Hannity had a former Israeli Special Ops guy on his show last night who said that Chief Pedro Arredondo needs to resign.

Uvalde CISD police leadership needs to go, Natsec expert says | Fox News (https://www.foxnews.com/media/uvalde-cisd-police-leadership-needs-resign-natsec-expert)


(I mean, he does, but here we go...)

[Lathum]

The NRA Country Concert Has Been Canceled Says Performer Jacob Bryant - Rolling Stone (https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-country/nra-country-concert-canceled-uvalde-1360193/?fbclid=IwAR1_tqVT3lYTYg7ZM4ZvR1zjPzwcHeT8_gsgldBhq2O0mmiWu7SNYjWdGWs)

[Austin90]

It's... rather disheartening that we have a thread for school shootings ongoing for 7 years...

[Edward64]

Good read.

Two Professors Found What Creates a Mass Shooter. Will Politicians Pay Attention? - POLITICO (https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/05/27/stopping-mass-shooters-q-a-00035762)
Peterson and Densley also compiled detailed life histories on 180 shooters, speaking to their spouses, parents, siblings, childhood friends, work colleagues and teachers. As for the gunmen themselves, most don’t survive their carnage, but five who did talked to Peterson and Densely from prison, where they were serving life sentences. The researchers also found several people who planned a mass shooting but changed their mind.

Their findings, also published in the 2021 book, The Violence Project: How to Stop a Mass Shooting Epidemic, reveal striking commonalities among the perpetrators of mass shootings and suggest a data-backed, mental health-based approach could identify and address the next mass shooter before he pulls the trigger — if only politicians are willing to actually engage in finding and funding targeted solutions.
The making of a monster.

There’s this really consistent pathway. Early childhood trauma seems to be the foundation, whether violence in the home, sexual assault, parental suicides, extreme bullying. Then you see the build toward hopelessness, despair, isolation, self-loathing, oftentimes rejection from peers. That turns into a really identifiable crisis point where they’re acting differently. Sometimes they have previous suicide attempts.

What’s different from traditional suicide is that the self-hate turns against a group. They start asking themselves, “Whose fault is this?” Is it a racial group or women or a religious group, or is it my classmates? The hate turns outward. There’s also this quest for fame and notoriety.
Not just gun control but also address mental health.

POLITICO: So, what are the solutions?

Densley: There are things we can do right now as individuals, like safe storage of firearms or something as simple as checking in with your kid.

Peterson: Then we really need resources at institutions like schools. We need to build teams to investigate when kids are in crisis and then link those kids to mental health services. The problem is that in a lot of places, those services are not there. There’s no community mental health and no school-based mental health. Schools are the ideal setting because it doesn’t require a parent to take you there. A lot of perpetrators are from families where the parents are not particularly proactive about mental health appointments.

[tarcone]

Ban guns. Create a militia system backed by the federal government that gives people that want to be trained long guns.

They can hunt or just do practice.

Im done

[GrantDawg]

Good read.

Two Professors Found What Creates a Mass Shooter. Will Politicians Pay Attention? - POLITICO (https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/05/27/stopping-mass-shooters-q-a-00035762)

The making of a monster.


Not just gun control but also address mental health.
And absolutely on point. Large resources need to go into mental healt care, especially in the teen years. There should be social workers, therapist, and at least one doctor on staff in every school. Of course, that is never going to happen.

[Fidatelo]

Preface: I'm Canadian so I don't fully know what your laws are or how they vary federally or by state. Maybe my idea is already in place and does nothing or something. Anyways...



I feel like a good first step might be some kind of graduated licensing system similar to driving. When you turn 18 you can start using a gun with a bunch of restrictions: type of gun, ammo, locations, times, etc. Then as you get older and your record stays clean and maybe you pass a couple of firearms courses you slowly gain additional access. Maybe it take 5-10 years without any infractions before you are given carte blanche. It doesn't prevent citizens from arming and defending themselves, creating militias, or otherwise being allowed to bear arms, it just puts up some reasonable barriers to going from 0 to 6000 rounds of ammo and a machine gun on your 18th birthday.

[Lathum]

Preface: I'm Canadian so I don't fully know what your laws are or how they vary federally or by state. Maybe my idea is already in place and does nothing or something. Anyways...



I feel like a good first step might be some kind of graduated licensing system similar to driving. When you turn 18 you can start using a gun with a bunch of restrictions: type of gun, ammo, locations, times, etc. Then as you get older and your record stays clean and maybe you pass a couple of firearms courses you slowly gain additional access. Maybe it take 5-10 years without any infractions before you are given carte blanche. It doesn't prevent citizens from arming and defending themselves, creating militias, or otherwise being allowed to bear arms, it just puts up some reasonable barriers to going from 0 to 6000 rounds of ammo and a machine gun on your 18th birthday.

nope. Violate ma second amendment rights!! Murica!!!

[HerRealName]

Preface: I'm Canadian so I don't fully know what your laws are or how they vary federally or by state. Maybe my idea is already in place and does nothing or something. Anyways...



I feel like a good first step might be some kind of graduated licensing system similar to driving. When you turn 18 you can start using a gun with a bunch of restrictions: type of gun, ammo, locations, times, etc. Then as you get older and your record stays clean and maybe you pass a couple of firearms courses you slowly gain additional access. Maybe it take 5-10 years without any infractions before you are given carte blanche. It doesn't prevent citizens from arming and defending themselves, creating militias, or otherwise being allowed to bear arms, it just puts up some reasonable barriers to going from 0 to 6000 rounds of ammo and a machine gun on your 18th birthday.

This makes complete sense. This is the current situation:

This 13-year-old tried to buy porn, lottery tickets, and a gun. Guess which one he got. - Vox (https://www.vox.com/2016/6/16/11954662/13-year-olds-can-buy-guns-omg)

[QuikSand]

there's a story making the rounds today from last night - a jackass with an AR-15 started shooting at a group of people at an outdoor party in Charleston WV but was killed by an armed partygoer, before he could kill anyone

look for this to make a super helpful talking point in the days ahead for the forces of "see there's not a real problem with too many nutjobs with assault weapons"

i'm glad nobody was hurt, of course, but am preemptively saddened by how effective this will prove to be

[flere-imsaho]

Really tough read...

If I ignored one of our clearly-written SOPs at work in the manner that these cops ignored their clearly-written training, I'd likely be fired and could also be fined and potentially face criminal prosecution.


If in this country that kid had to go through extensive training, background checking, and so forth to obtain a simple handgun or rifle, of the sort one might want to help defend one's home or to hunt for sport... there is simply no chance that he "finds a way" to commit the atrocity he did, on the scale he did. Another obscene talking point from the bought and paid for 2A defenders.

Really, we're asking for nothing more arduous than what kids have to go through to get a driving license. Even less arduous than what we ask teenage girls to go through to obtain an abortion in, say, Texas.

[Atocep]

This makes complete sense. This is the current situation:

This 13-year-old tried to buy porn, lottery tickets, and a gun. Guess which one he got. - Vox (https://www.vox.com/2016/6/16/11954662/13-year-olds-can-buy-guns-omg)

My pro gun friends tell me this isn't possible and always list off the stuff they have to do in order to legally buy a gun.

[HerRealName]

My pro gun friends tell me this isn't possible and always list off the stuff they have to do in order to legally buy a gun.

It likely varies by state but the loophole is alive and in use in Texas and many other states. The non-licensed gun dealers aren't required to do any kind of background checks or even ask any questions. They may ask for an id but they may not.

I went to one with my FiL and his brother a few years back. It was depressing.

[BYU 14]

My pro gun friends tell me this isn't possible and always list off the stuff they have to do in order to legally buy a gun.

If they go to a licensed gun dealer in their private shop, sure. My last one, consisted of me waiting roughly 20 minutes after filling out the paperwork and showing ID.

Answering an ad for a private gun sale, I was asked on the phone, "you don't have a criminal record right?" Guy then said depending on when I could meet him, he would meet me or send his son, no clue how old his kid was. Didn't get it because he wasn't going to come down much cheaper than a brand new one.

I have never been to a gun show, but from what I have heard, the video showing the kid getting one is pretty much on point.

So, in two of the three 'legal' gun buying options the opportunity exists to get a loophole weapon.

[Ben E Lou]

It likely varies by state but the loophole is alive and in use in Texas and many other states. The non-licensed gun dealers aren't required to do any kind of background checks or even ask any questions. They may ask for an id but they may not.

I went to one with my FiL and his brother a few years back. It was depressing.If a kid is even remotely resourceful, going to a show isn't necessary. Some of y'all are aware of this: a niece of mine committed suicide a few years ago with a gun. She was very liberal politically, as are both of her parents, so it's not like she was running around immersed in knowledge of gun culture and how to get one easily. But when she decided she wanted to end her life, she bought a gun in a private sale through sort of a "craigslist for guns" web site. As best as anyone can tell, from the time she made first contact with the seller until the time she fired the shot was about 3 hours. She was 19, but there's no reason to believe the seller checked her ID or anything like that. I just checked, and the site is still there. Beyond all of the handguns, there are tons of rifles (yes, including AR-15s) and even multiple AK-47s and AK-74s (all the ones I checked claimed to be semiautomatic...maybe for legal reasons???) for sale here right here in Greensboro, and there are listings in all 50 states.


My assumption is that the general public isn't up in arms about sites like this because all of the other methods are so easy that no high-profile killer has gone this route, and therefore it's not all that well-known that you can do this. But it certainly appears to be the easiest way to avoid any sort of checks whatsoever.

[HerRealName]

Sorry for your loss, that's just awful.

The thing that shocked me the most about the gun show was the people selling guns out of the back of their trucks in the parking lot. You didn't even need to pay the 5 or 10 dollars to go inside, just walk around the parking lot and pretty much everything was available.

[RainMaker]

<samp class="EmbedCode-container"><code class="EmbedCode-code"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Meet the TX man who’s making customized caskets for each of the 19 young victims and two teachers from the school shooting in <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Uvalde?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Uvalde</a>. Trey Ganem visited with the families last week so each casket is personalized to include each child's interests.<br><br>��: SoulShine Industries <a href="https://t.co/eeoOZHcrfF">pic.twitter.com/eeoOZHcrfF</a></p>&mdash; John-Carlos Estrada (@Mr_JCE) <a href="https://twitter.com/Mr_JCE/status/1531625547104673794?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 31, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </code></samp>

[Ksyrup]

Among the things they appear to have lied about - blaming a teacher for leaving a door propped open.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The Uvalde Police Department and the Uvalde ISD police force are no longer cooperating with the <a href="https://twitter.com/TxDPS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@TxDPS</a> investigation into the massacre at Robb Elementary and the state’s review of police response, multiple law enforcement sources told <a href="https://twitter.com/ABC?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ABC</a> <br>w/ <a href="https://twitter.com/JoshMargolin?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@JoshMargolin</a></p>&mdash; Aaron Katersky (@AaronKatersky) <a href="https://twitter.com/AaronKatersky/status/1531741990026629131?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 31, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[albionmoonlight]

I thought that the law enforcement position was "if you've got nothing to hide, then why aren't you talking?"

Of course, it is pretty clear that they have a hell of a lot to hide, so at least they aren't being inconsistent.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Just a little sidebar: is it getting much play that the school police chief had just been elected to the local city council there? And that now his swearing in ceremony has been at least delayed?

(I saw that in an AP article about the tensions in the town, just wondered if that was widely known or a largely unmentioned)

[BYU 14]

Just a little sidebar: is it getting much play that the school police chief had just been elected to the local city council there? And that now his swearing in ceremony has been at least delayed?

(I saw that in an AP article about the tensions in the town, just wondered if that was widely known or a largely unmentioned)

I had seen that before in an article, (his election) but it was mentioned almost as an afterthought

[QuikSand]

STAY PISSED OFF

[RainMaker]

I did see this. Seems like they felt it would be in poor taste right after the shooting. Although I'm guessing he might want to disappear for a while and might not take the position after all. Seems like they've all lawyered up.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/30/us/uvalde-city-council-pete-arredondo-swearing-in-postponed/index.html

[RainMaker]

Guess he did get sworn in.

<samp class="EmbedCode-container"><code class="EmbedCode-code"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">BREAKING: Uvalde ISD Chief Pete Arredondo was officially sworn in as a city council member today, Mayor Don McLaughlin confirms in a statement. This comes hours after DPS said he is not responding to a request for a followup interview. <a href="https://t.co/yKG1ed68AE">pic.twitter.com/yKG1ed68AE</a></p>&mdash; Tony Plohetski (@tplohetski) <a href="https://twitter.com/tplohetski/status/1531810874524160000?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 1, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </code></samp>

[CrimsonFox]

my foggy eyes and foggy brain read the title of this thread as "Yes! Another school shooting."

I really think some people feel that way

[CrimsonFox]

<samp class="EmbedCode-container"><code class="EmbedCode-code"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Meet the TX man who’s making customized caskets for each of the 19 young victims and two teachers from the school shooting in <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Uvalde?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Uvalde</a>. Trey Ganem visited with the families last week so each casket is personalized to include each child's interests.<br><br>��: SoulShine Industries <a href="https://t.co/eeoOZHcrfF">pic.twitter.com/eeoOZHcrfF</a></p>&mdash; John-Carlos Estrada (@Mr_JCE) <a href="https://twitter.com/Mr_JCE/status/1531625547104673794?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 31, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </code></samp>

this breaks my heart. :( it's so beautiful :(
:cry:

[BYU 14]

Having a 'discussion' with a Magahead on this today, who simultaneously rages against the inhumanity of abortion, while basically refusing to acknowledge the loss of school children is in that same category, pivoting instead to the Ukraine war as justification that citizens need AR-15s.

It reminds of an analogy I heard from a friend of mine that having these talks with some people is like playing chess with a Pigeon.

It flies in with a lot of noise, knocks over all the chess pieces, craps on the board, then flies away to its flock squawking about ‘victory.’

[Brian Swartz]

Interestingly that's what the opinions of a number of people in this thread read like to me.

I think we can have a relatively small impact with a number of the proposals that have been made, and we definitely should. But to really move the needle I think it would be necessarily to essentially disarm America wholesale. That's one of the few things that has a chance (unlikely, but possible) to actually start a civil war if it were attempted.

[molson]

I was sitting directly facing a big TV with Fox News on during a dive bar gathering last night - we non-confrontationally asked the bartender if we could switch it to "sports" (I'm sure there was something on), but they told us it was "stuck" on Fox News.

I think that's the first time I've ever actually watched Fox News. They were talking for a while with a guy with the heading "The Link Between Marijuana and Mass Shootings" on the screen. I caught something about how marijuana USED to be relatively harmless, but now consists of new strains that turn people into mass shooters. So that was enlightening. And then the commercials were mostly about prostates, and also a free Kid's Trump comic/activity book. I wanted to order one and sent it to someone's house but it felt like a dangerous rabbit hole list to go on.

[Kodos]

I would have walked out when told the TV was stuck on Fox “News.”

[stevew]

yeah, I'm out too. I got a job somewhere where they had OAN on in the break room. And Thankfully that didn't work out.

[bhlloy]

Interestingly that's what the opinions of a number of people in this thread read like to me.

I think we can have a relatively small impact with a number of the proposals that have been made, and we definitely should. But to really move the needle I think it would be necessarily to essentially disarm America wholesale. That's one of the few things that has a chance (unlikely, but possible) to actually start a civil war if it were attempted.

You don’t think mandatory background checks, closing the loopholes for private sales, increasing the penalties for providing access to firearms illegally used in crime and requiring more significant checks for owning an assault weapon significantly moves the needle? Or is that too far down the line of disarming America?

[Brian Swartz]

I think those are good ideas. When I say disarming America, I mean making it illegal to own guns period, handguns included. I think that's what it would take to make a major impact.

Those other measures will help, but I think most of the shootings still happen even with those in place.

[PilotMan]

Too many people speed. We constantly have speeding, no matter the limit, people always speed, and speeding claims lots of innocent lives every year. The only thing that will keep people from speeding is to have total control over their cars and physically prevent them from exceeding the limit. Anything else is pointless.

[bhlloy]

Yeah, we will just have to disagree. There will still be shootings and the US will still lead the world in gun crime, sure. But there is no way in my mind we wouldn’t massively cut down on these kind of mass casualty events with those steps.

[RainMaker]

Starting to think they shot one of the kids.

<samp class="EmbedCode-container"><code class="EmbedCode-code"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">NEW - Journalists will face arrest, charges if caught reporting while on Uvalde Consolidated Independent School District property<a href="https://t.co/U8fgEjFlZJ">https://t.co/U8fgEjFlZJ</a></p>&mdash; Anna Giaritelli (@Anna_Giaritelli) <a href="https://twitter.com/Anna_Giaritelli/status/1532081283915988992?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 1, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </code></samp>

[Edward64]

I think those are good ideas. When I say disarming America, I mean making it illegal to own guns period, handguns included. I think that's what it would take to make a major impact.

Those other measures will help, but I think most of the shootings still happen even with those in place.

The (realistic) goal is to reduce the senseless violence (and suicides) as banning all guns is unrealistic (civil war indeed).

Mass shootings are a small fraction of gun deaths.

Before taking all guns away from law abiding citizens, let's see if we can stop all/most gun violence from non-law abiding people first. Then propose taking away all guns. My question is why take away the right/privilege from law abiding citizens first?

Definitely okay with more controls, do think it will make a difference (unsure the definition of "major impact" though). Not okay with "making it illegal to own guns period". But if that is what you want to propose, then start with non-law abiding people first, see where we are in 3-5 years, and if that is a resounding success, then let's talk about the Canada option.

[Edward64]

There will still be shootings and the US will still lead the world in gun crime, sure.

Glad to say the US is not #1 here.

Gun deaths in the U.S.: 10 key questions answered | Pew Research Center (https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/03/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/)
How does the gun death rate in the U.S. compare with other countries?
The gun death rate in the U.S. is much higher than in most other nations, particularly developed nations. But it is still far below the rates in several Latin American countries, according to a 2018 study of 195 countries and territories by researchers at the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington.

The U.S. gun death rate was 10.6 per 100,000 people in 2016, the most recent year in the study, which used a somewhat different methodology from the CDC. That was far higher than in countries such as Canada (2.1 per 100,000) and Australia (1.0), as well as European nations such as France (2.7), Germany (0.9) and Spain (0.6). But the rate in the U.S. was much lower than in El Salvador (39.2 per 100,000 people), Venezuela (38.7), Guatemala (32.3), Colombia (25.9) and Honduras (22.5), the study found. Overall, the U.S. ranked 20th in its gun fatality rate that year.

[PilotMan]

Ahh yes, the US is behind 3rd world, somewhat unstable countries that we're at least partly responsible for destabilizing due to ....wait for it.....guns.

[Edward64]

We can debate how much culpability the US has here. But nevertheless, we are #20 baby.

Interestingly, the article also said US gun deaths have decreased as a % of population. The high was back in 1974? This kinda surprised me, article didn't state any reasons for this.

While 2020 saw the highest total number of gun deaths in the U.S., this statistic does not take into account the nation’s growing population. On a per capita basis, there were 13.6 gun deaths per 100,000 people in 2020 – the highest rate since the mid-1990s, but still well below the peak of 16.3 gun deaths per 100,000 people in 1974.

[RainMaker]

Ahh yes, the US is behind 3rd world, somewhat unstable countries that we're at least partly responsible for destabilizing due to ....wait for it.....guns.

The bar doesn't get much lower.

And we have another....

<samp class="EmbedCode-container"><code class="EmbedCode-code"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Tulsa police say man with rifle opened fire at medical building, causing multiple injuries and fatalities. &quot;At this time, we can confirm the shooter is dead&quot;</p>&mdash; BNO News (@BNONews) <a href="https://twitter.com/BNONews/status/1532135351808143360?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 1, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> </code></samp>

[albionmoonlight]

"Members of the Oklahoma media and government officials are asking for patience as they confirm the race and political leanings of the shooter and victims before formulating their official response . . ."

[Brian Swartz]

Too many people speed. We constantly have speeding, no matter the limit, people always speed, and speeding claims lots of innocent lives every year. The only thing that will keep people from speeding is to have total control over their cars and physically prevent them from exceeding the limit. Anything else is pointless.

Nobody said anything else is pointless. I actually specifically said otherwhise multiple times. It's hilarious that you have as much of a problem with the way I post here, and then engage in such blatant misrepresentations.

[Ksyrup]

Too many doors on a hospital, I assume.

[cuervo72]

"Members of the Oklahoma media and government officials are asking for patience as they confirm the race and political leanings of the shooter and victims before formulating their official response . . ."

On the anniversary of the Tulsa massacre? Yeah, we'll see.

[BYU 14]

Too many doors on a hospital, I assume.

Only answer is to have one entrance, then arm all nurses and doctors. If you can give somebody a tetanus shot, you can give them a gun shot.

Sarcasm aside it is shaping up to be a long summer.

[Brian Swartz]

Before taking all guns away from law abiding citizens, let's see if we can stop all/most gun violence from non-law abiding people first. Then propose taking away all guns. My question is why take away the right/privilege from law abiding citizens first?

I think we have enough information based on having different laws in different places at different times to conclude that a lot of gun violence is going to remain regardless of the lesser measures. It's not a matter of trying other things first, it's a matter of what level of gun violence we are ready to accept as a nation. As your rightly point out, mass shootings are small compared to the larger picture. It's also true that in the 90s the homicide rate was almost twice what it is now.

If we say 'you know, if we could stop the upward trend in mass shootings or maybe even reduce the current amount somewhat' and we'd be happy with that, yes policies like background checks have a shot at making that happen.

If we want to get anywhere remotely close to where other major industrialized nations are around the world, we just need to have a lot fewer guns in circulation, or have a far more moral population.

[PilotMan]

Nobody said anything else is pointless. I actually specifically said otherwhise multiple times. It's hilarious that you have as much of a problem with the way I post here, and then engage in such blatant misrepresentations.

Did I quote you? Did I say it was about you at all?

[Edward64]

I think we have enough information based on having different laws in different places at different times to conclude that a lot of gun violence is going to remain regardless of the lesser measures. It's not a matter of trying other things first, it's a matter of what level of gun violence we are ready to accept as a nation. As your rightly point out, mass shootings are small compared to the larger picture. It's also true that in the 90s the homicide rate was almost twice what it is now.

If we say 'you know, if we could stop the upward trend in mass shootings or maybe even reduce the current amount somewhat' and we'd be happy with that, yes policies like background checks have a shot at making that happen.

If we want to get anywhere remotely close to where other major industrialized nations are around the world, we just need to have a lot fewer guns in circulation, or have a far more moral population.

I'm not opposed to having less guns in the population.

I was just disagreeing with your "illegal to own all guns period" statement. In retrospect, I'm not sure if you are really advocating for that or it was just a rhetorical proposal?

Nevertheless, my key point to that statement is start with the non-law abiding people first before taking away *all* guns from law abiding citizens.

Some can say the root of this problem is too many guns out there. On the face of it, I agree and okay with additional restrictions. But isn't the real root of the problem too many guns being used by criminal elements and those with mental health challenges? and not, as a whole, law abiding citizens (there are admittedly exceptions)?

[Edward64]

Did I quote you? Did I say it was about you at all?

You didn't quote me but pretty clear your response was to my post about US being #20.

[Brian Swartz]

Did I quote you? Did I say it was about you at all?

The inference seemed obvious and still does. I apologize if I concluded incorrectly.

[Edward64]

The inference seemed obvious and still does. I apologize if I concluded incorrectly.

Oh. Ditto for me also then.

[GrantDawg]

You're so vain. I bet you think this post is about you.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Edward64]

I’m pretty sure Brian ain’t no Warren Beatty (?)

[Brian Swartz]

Of that you can be certain. I most definitely am not.

[miami_fan]

Sorry I am popping in and out of this conversation and I have not been keeping up with every detail of the shooter. Wasn't the shooter a law abiding citizen right up to the point that he shot his grandmother? As far as I know, he did not have a criminal history and bought the guns legally. This is where I agree with Brian. I don't know what gun control proposals solve that.

It is also why I also find the take the guns away from the non law abiding citizens first argument so troubling. Provided that everything I said is correct, he was law abiding. He was "one of the good guys." Whether we like it or not if you own a gun (which I do), a member of OUR community was the monster, not the mysterious bad guys down the road. We protected his right to purchase and own his guns. He betrayed that trust and gunned down children. Similar to what is demanded of others when we ask the question "What about Chicago?" (Yes I know this is not usually a serious question but still.), what are we law abiding gun owing citizens willing to do to ensure we are not enabling bad actors within our gun owning community?

[Lathum]

How about instead of focusing on the fact he purchased those guns legally we focus on why it is legal for him to purchase a weapon and an overwhelming amount of ammo capable of murdering 19 school children in 90 seconds?

There is literally no reason for anyone to own such a weapon, and "because it is his right" is not a valid reason.

[Fidatelo]

As far as I know, he did not have a criminal history and bought the guns legally. This is where I agree with Brian. I don't know what gun control proposals solve that.


What about this one (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc/showpost.php?p=3368507&postcount=2132) from last page?

I feel like a good first step might be some kind of graduated licensing system similar to driving. When you turn 18 you can start using a gun with a bunch of restrictions: type of gun, ammo, locations, times, etc. Then as you get older and your record stays clean and maybe you pass a couple of firearms courses you slowly gain additional access. Maybe it take 5-10 years without any infractions before you are given carte blanche. It doesn't prevent citizens from arming and defending themselves, creating militias, or otherwise being allowed to bear arms, it just puts up some reasonable barriers to going from 0 to 6000 rounds of ammo and a machine gun on your 18th birthday.

[Lathum]

Tulsa hospital shooting: number of wounded not known after four killed | Oklahoma | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jun/02/tulsa-shooting-hospital-oklahoma?CMP=twt_gu&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium#Echobox=1654171941-1)


Just a blip on the radar. Of course he used a rifle and handgun so the pro gun morons will use this as a defense for why we should just allow all guns to be out there.

[cuervo72]

Sorry I am popping in and out of this conversation and I have not been keeping up with every detail of the shooter. Wasn't the shooter a law abiding citizen right up to the point that he shot his grandmother? As far as I know, he did not have a criminal history and bought the guns legally. This is where I agree with Brian. I don't know what gun control proposals solve that.

It is also why I also find the take the guns away from the non law abiding citizens first argument so troubling. Provided that everything I said is correct, he was law abiding. He was "one of the good guys." Whether we like it or not if you own a gun (which I do), a member of OUR community was the monster, not the mysterious bad guys down the road. We protected his right to purchase and own his guns. He betrayed that trust and gunned down children. Similar to what is demanded of others when we ask the question "What about Chicago?" (Yes I know this is not usually a serious question but still.), what are we law abiding gun owing citizens willing to do to ensure we are not enabling bad actors within our gun owning community?

Yes, I love this every time it comes out of the mouth of someone like Abbott. He wasn't yet a "bad guy!" He may not have been a good kid or person, but he appeared to be "law-abiding."

(Of course what "law-abiding" really means is white, but I think that's been covered and we all pretty much know this.)

[Ksyrup]

The Jordan Klepper "good guy with a gun" bit is great. I knew it was easy in some states to get a conceal carry permit, but I didn't realize you don't even need to be a citizen of the state issuing it or how many states it transfers to.

[Lathum]

The Jordan Klepper "good guy with a gun" bit is great. I knew it was easy in some states to get a conceal carry permit, but I didn't realize you don't even need to be a citizen of the state issuing it or how many states it transfers to.

This is so good. He’s amazing.

[BYU 14]

The Jordan Klepper "good guy with a gun" bit is great. I knew it was easy in some states to get a conceal carry permit, but I didn't realize you don't even need to be a citizen of the state issuing it or how many states it transfers to.

Here is how easy it is in Arizona. Buy a gun, put it in your pocket, you are good to go.

You can still get a CCR here, but when it is not required why bother. I was talking about this with my wife last night. I used to semi-mock people that toted their guns everywhere with them. Since last year I am one of them as I almost always carry my .380 because it is easy to conceal.

It is disturbing that I feel I need to do this.

[BYU 14]

Just watched that good guy with a gun, it is awesome

[Edward64]

Sorry I am popping in and out of this conversation and I have not been keeping up with every detail of the shooter. Wasn't the shooter a law abiding citizen right up to the point that he shot his grandmother? As far as I know, he did not have a criminal history and bought the guns legally. This is where I agree with Brian. I don't know what gun control proposals solve that.

It is also why I also find the take the guns away from the non law abiding citizens first argument so troubling. Provided that everything I said is correct, he was law abiding. He was "one of the good guys." Whether we like it or not if you own a gun (which I do), a member of OUR community was the monster, not the mysterious bad guys down the road. We protected his right to purchase and own his guns. He betrayed that trust and gunned down children. Similar to what is demanded of others when we ask the question "What about Chicago?" (Yes I know this is not usually a serious question but still.), what are we law abiding gun owing citizens willing to do to ensure we are not enabling bad actors within our gun owning community?

Although I did not explicitly say it in all my posts, I did refer to the problem in the bolded section as including non-law abiding and also with mental health challenges.

Some can say the root of this problem is too many guns out there. On the face of it, I agree and okay with additional restrictions. But isn't the real root of the problem too many guns being used by criminal elements and those with mental health challenges? and not, as a whole, law abiding citizens (there are admittedly exceptions)?

I will still contend the "argument" still holds. What is the % of gun deaths (excluding mental health which I include suicides) is done by law abiding citizens up to that point of senseless killing? Dunno but I'm sure it's a small compared to criminal elements.

Should that small fraction of law abiding citizens actors (up to that point of senseless killing) result in the elimination of all guns as Brian proposed? And why not start with the bad actors (which there are many) first.

Specific to your question on what law abiding citizens with guns do to help stop the senseless killings? Definitely eliminate the background check loopholes (e.g. gun shows) and support the enactment of what (I think) we all agree are sensible steps (reduce magazine size, provide more mental health support, require periodic training etc.).

[Edward64]

Here is how easy it is in Arizona. Buy a gun, put it in your pocket, you are good to go.

You can still get a CCR here, but when it is not required why bother. I was talking about this with my wife last night. I used to semi-mock people that toted their guns everywhere with them. Since last year I am one of them as I almost always carry my .380 because it is easy to conceal.

It is disturbing that I feel I need to do this.

FWIW, I feel no need to carry a weapon on me. I'm perfectly okay leaving them at home locked up. I guess if the lights go out for a long period of time, I would carry one but I am not usually in an environment where I feel the need.

Out of curiosity, what is your rationale?

[flere-imsaho]

If there were fewer guns in circulation, would more or less guns be available for use by "criminal elements"?

If penalties existed for having insufficient security for you gun, would there be more or less guns available for use by "criminal elements"?

If the penalties for illegally selling guns and/or if the "gun show loophole" was closed, would there be more or less guns available for use by "criminal elements"?

If the only guns available for sale had limited magazines and fire rates, would there be fewer casualties in mass shooter events?

[Edward64]

How about instead of focusing on the fact he purchased those guns legally we focus on why it is legal for him to purchase a weapon and an overwhelming amount of ammo capable of murdering 19 school children in 90 seconds?

There is literally no reason for anyone to own such a weapon, and "because it is his right" is not a valid reason.

Specific to your criteria of "purchase a weapon ... capable of murdering 19 school children in 90 seconds?". That would eliminate most semi-automatic weapons (e.g. we'll be left with bolt weapons). So not just "assault weapons" but regular hunting rifles too.

On the other criteria about ammo. The shooter had about 1,600 rounds on him or in the car. I have 2,000+ ammo in the house. Not because I need it but because I buy them on sale and want them readily available when I go shoot (2-4 times a year) vs stopping by a Dicks Sporting which may not have it when I need it. Yeah, someone with 50K of rounds is probably a survivalist and possibly not seeing things clearly, but I would propose 2,000+ rounds is reasonable.

[Lathum]

The "more mental health" is such a bullshit attempt at a solution. Not one person who promotes it can explain why other countries have virtually no mass shootings. Do they not have mentally ill people? Do they have significantly better access to mental health?

This country obviously could do better regarding peoples mental well being, especially with homeless, vets, addicts, etc...but thats not the solution to these shootings. It is the guns. Period.

[Lathum]

Specific to your criteria of "purchase a weapon ... capable of murdering 19 school children in 90 seconds?". That would eliminate most semi-automatic weapons (e.g. we'll be left with bolt weapons). So not just "assault weapons" but regular hunting rifles too.

On the other criteria about ammo. The shooter had about 1,600 rounds on him or in the car. I have 2,000+ ammo in the house. Not because I need it but because I buy them on sale and want them readily available when I go shoot (2-4 times a year) vs stopping by a Dicks Sporting which may not have it when I need it. Yeah, someone with 50K of rounds is probably a survivalist and possibly not seeing things clearly, but I would propose 2,000+ rounds is reasonable.

Legitimate question, there are hunting rifles capable of killing 19 kids in 90 seconds? If so, why?

As for the amount of ammo you keep. Too damn bad. We live in a society where we all have to sacrifice for the greater good. I would love to drive 140 miles on the Garden State Parkway but I can for the safety of myself and other citizens.

[Edward64]

If there were fewer guns in circulation, would more or less guns be available for use by "criminal elements"?

If there were fewer guns in circulation in the hands of criminal elements, there would be less guns.

If there were fewer guns in circulation by law abiding citizens, I think there is negligible impact to how many guns criminal elements would have unless you foresee criminal elements stealing guns from law abiding citizens (which I'm sure happens but does that really move the dial?)

So work on the criminal elements first.

If penalties existed for having insufficient security for you gun, would there be more or less guns available for use by "criminal elements"?

I'm not sure I understand this question. Can you rephrase or provide more context to the intent of your question.

How I'm reading this is it would only make a difference if you suppose criminal elements would steal alot of guns from law abiding citizens to make a difference. I don't think that happens so I would answer negligible but unsure if I understand your question.

If the penalties for illegally selling guns and/or if the "gun show loophole" was closed, would there be more or less guns available for use by "criminal elements"?

Good question. Welcome any stats that anyone has.

If the only guns available for sale had limited magazines and fire rates, would there be fewer casualties in mass shooter events?

Absolutely on fire rates. If all we had were bolt-action rifles, it would be a lot slower to reload and fire. On limited magazines, possibly. A shooter that trained can probably swap out magazines pretty quickly.

I would ask you the question I've been asking. Why not start with criminal elements (and mental health) first before eliminating all/most guns from law abiding citizens?

Based on your line of questioning, I'm thinking you believe if we started with criminal elements first, they would steal the guns they want from law abiding citizens?

[Edward64]

The "more mental health" is such a bullshit attempt at a solution. Not one person who promotes it can explain why other countries have virtually no mass shootings. Do they not have mentally ill people? Do they have significantly better access to mental health?

This country obviously could do better regarding peoples mental well being, especially with homeless, vets, addicts, etc...but thats not the solution to these shootings. It is the guns. Period.

You are focused on these mass shootings. I am focused on gun deaths. The majority of gun deaths are suicides and hence the mental health aspect.

I am not an expert on this subject but there are plenty of other countries (that don't have easy access to guns) leading the US on suicides per capita. In other words, they find other ways. This indicates to me that our suicide challenge is not guns but mental health.

[Edward64]

Legitimate question, there are hunting rifles capable of killing 19 kids in 90 seconds? If so, why?

Because its not specifically the rifle like the big bad AR15 vs a hunting rifle like a Remington. It is the "action" of the weapons typically semi-automatic (not full automatic is very limited from what I know).

Essentially a semi-automatic is one trigger pull, one shot until magazine is empty. A bolt-action is one trigger pull, one shot, manually rechamber and rinse and repeat.

I'm thinking these were developed before the craziness we have now and there is not enough will power to try make everything bolt-action.

I'd ask you same question as I've ask Flere. Why not start with criminal elements (and mental health) first before eliminating all/most guns from law abiding citizens?

As for the amount of ammo you keep. Too damn bad. We live in a society where we all have to sacrifice for the greater good. I would love to drive 140 miles on the Garden State Parkway but I can for the safety of myself and other citizens.

So give me a # of bullets you believe is reasonable to keep at home?

[BYU 14]

FWIW, I feel no need to carry a weapon on me. I'm perfectly okay leaving them at home locked up. I guess if the lights go out for a long period of time, I would carry one but I am not usually in an environment where I feel the need.

Out of curiosity, what is your rationale?

It is the climate here, and I am by no means a timid guy, or ill equipped to handle myself. But all the martial arts/combat sport training in the world doesn't help you against an unstable individual with a gun. The political climate here is far from stable and a shockingly high number of people buy into the BS espoused by people like Kelli Ward, Paul Gosar, Kari Lake etc.

Because of that, I generally, at least have a gun in my car. I rarely carry it on my person outside of my car, but in some circumstances I do. It may be somewhat paranoid, but I don't ever want to be in a situation where I can't protect my family and I would rather that by on equal footing with someone, vs just stepping in front of someone with a gun and taking 3 to the chest while my family looks for cover.

In the long run the odds of this ever happening to me or my family are small, but with the craziness it has gotten like brushing my teeth. I can brush them once a day and the odds of getting a cavity may be small, but why not brush them 2 or 3 times and make it smaller. Strange analogy I know, but it just gives me a greater feeling of security.

[molson]

You can still get a CCR here, but when it is not required why bother. I was talking about this with my wife last night. I used to semi-mock people that toted their guns everywhere with them. Since last year I am one of them as I almost always carry my .380 because it is easy to conceal.



I took the CCW class just because it's the formalized gun safety class, and I had no experience with weapons at the time. I have a semi-automatic handgun, but I don't carry it anywhere.

I shoot things in the desert with friends. I don't really feel I'm in danger at home, though, I do work in criminal law so maybe I should. I take it on trips to the rural parts of the state.

The more practical purpose that has dawned on me over the last few years is that I think there is a significantly greater than zero chance that the U.S. will go through some temporary or indefinite breakdown of society in our lifetimes - whether caused by climate change, economic collapse, political unrest/coup, terrorism, or a pandemic more deadly than COVID. If the grocery store trucks stop moving, it really wouldn't take very long for things to get ugly. (Edit: Not necessarily a Mad Max scenario, but just a drastic reduction of available resources creating localized situations were crime is many times more prevalent and severe).

If COVID was just twice as deadly, that might have brought us to that place. I'm not a full-on prepper or anything, but, I've thought more about being prepared for emergencies, and that includes at having a couple of reliable firearms and a good amount of ammo. And ammo was almost impossible to find for most of 2020, and what you could find was way more expensive than usual. Once there's an emergency, even a lower-level emergency, it's too late to stock up.

I'd happily comply with any gun control legislation regulating that ownership.

[BYU 14]

I will answer your ammo question as well Edward.

I never have more than 200-300 at a time. When I go to the gun range, I typically shoot 200 rounds, and don't feel the need to overstock. On my way home from the range, I stop at my local gun store and replace the rounds I just expended.

I don't feel the need for more than this because that is the amount I go through and if, god forbid, I ever had to fire on a home intruder, if the 15 round mag in my 9mm isn't enough to neutralize the threat, I need more training.

In my option high volume ammo purchases should absolutely be one of the red flags and by that I mean anything over 500 rounds in a specified period.

[Atocep]

I'd ask you same question as I've ask Flere. Why not start with criminal elements (and mental health) first before eliminating all/most guns from law abiding citizens?


We've been pouring money into trying to stop criminal elements since the 80s and it hasnt made a dent. On the other than, mass shootings dropped 43% after the assault weapon ban in the 90s and has risen over 240% since Bush allowed it to expire.

More than 99.99 percent of flyers were and are law abiding citizens yet in the aftermath of 9/11 it was decided that we could lose some clear rights (as opposed to the murkiness of 2a) in order to make flying safer and those additional airport security measures have close to a 70% approval the last I saw.

[molson]

There's been a modest uptick the last few years, but before that, violent crime pretty much fell off a cliff in the U.S. The peak was the early 90s, and murder/violent crimes dropped by half by around 2010, and then stayed steady until the last couple of years (but still way below where we were most of the last century).

We haven't done well on mass shootings, obviously, but I think we've done really well with violent crime generally. Lots of different possible reasons for that, which one someone wants to give the most credit to probably depends on their political leanings.

[albionmoonlight]

Lots of different possible reasons for that, which one someone wants to give the most credit to probably depends on their political leanings.

My personal view is non-political. Lead is a potent neurotoxin. We used to pump it into the air. Then we decided to stop. And then crime went down.

So chalk one up for don't deliberately give your citizens brain damage.

[molson]

Yup, the timing on the lead paint thing is very compelling. We did something smart!

[NobodyHere]

We've been pouring money into trying to stop criminal elements since the 80s and it hasnt made a dent. On the other than, mass shootings dropped 43% after the assault weapon ban in the 90s and has risen over 240% since Bush allowed it to expire.


The murder rate has dropped in half since 1980.

[Atocep]

The murder rate has dropped in half since 1980.

Gun related deaths, both by suicide and murder haven't changed all that much since the 70s. We did have a bit of a drop from 2000 through about 2015 and it's steadily risen since then. But in the early 70s we were at about 5.2 deaths by gun murder per 100k and we're at 6.2 per 100k now.

Gun deaths in the U.S.: 10 key questions answered | Pew Research Center (https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/03/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/)

It took 1 girl dying while playing lawn darts to get them banned in the US. 9/11 completely changed airport security permanently. It took 1 guy failing to blow up a plane with his shoes to get security again changed at airports.

The last major gun control legislation passed by congress was in '94.

[miami_fan]

I will still contend the "argument" still holds. What is the % of gun deaths (excluding mental health which I include suicides) is done by law abiding citizens up to that point of senseless killing? Dunno but I'm sure it's a small compared to criminal elements.


I do not know either. I would love to know. Where do you draw the line between from law abiding citizens who causes a gun death which ends up being a crime and a criminal element who causes a gun death which ends up being a crime? Why are we not excluding mental health issues on whatever the criminal element side? Those have to count for something as well right? To be fair, I don't know where those lines are drawn either.

Should that small fraction of law abiding citizens actors (up to that point of senseless killing) result in the elimination of all guns as Brian proposed? And why not start with the bad actors (which there are many) first.


The "elimination of all guns" is way too much of a dog whistle for me to even discuss. Should the actions of a few cost the rest of us? Well as others have already said, that is what we do in this country. Be thankful if you have not been caught up in one of those situation. Your suggestions are great. Unfortunately, all of those are accompanied by that dog whistle I mentioned before.

[Ksyrup]

I've seen pretty clear data that in the time after the assault weapon ban was lifted in 2004, mass killings have skyrocketed. It seems like we have a couple of different problems - what I'll call "run of the mill" incidents (mainly, crimes or limited escalated confrontations) where a gun is used and results in injuries and possibly a couple of deaths, and then mass casualty events where it appears the shooting is the main purpose and are either planned or result from an escalated confrontation where both the main subject and others (collateral damage) are intended to be killed (Tulsa shooting would be a good example of the latter - killed the targeted doctor and anyone in his way).

We have to tackle each problem, but they are different. Here's one of the data sets on mass killings related to the assault weapon ban:

The Assault Weapon Ban Saved Lives - Legal Aggregate - Stanford Law School (https://law.stanford.edu/2019/10/15/the-assault-weapon-ban-saved-lives/)

Edited to note that the data points for actual deaths end in 2019 and estimate another 5 years of deaths for the current decade they are measuring. It seems as if the 2014-2024 estimate is likely going to be low if we continue on our current trajectory.

[QuikSand]

Right, the hidden part of this story is that LOTS of gun deaths are of a couple variants that we either can't or won't really resolve to care about:

-inner city, mostly drug-related, mostly black-on-black gun violence that is mostly perceived as contained to certain areas where we just don't go

-suicides, seemingly disproportionately among veterans, where the presence of a gun just magnifies the likelihood that a bout of depression or grief becomes fatal

Both sad, both also related to the ubiquitous guns-everywhere culture.

But the only button that you can press to get anywhere on this is dead kids. So, press the F out of that button, and don't let up after it's been out of the headlines for a week or so.

[Lathum]

You are focused on these mass shootings. I am focused on gun deaths. The majority of gun deaths are suicides and hence the mental health aspect.

I am not an expert on this subject but there are plenty of other countries (that don't have easy access to guns) leading the US on suicides per capita. In other words, they find other ways. This indicates to me that our suicide challenge is not guns but mental health.

OK, but that is a different topic. The thread subject and topic is school shootings, and mass shootings, not suicide by guns. Totally different topic.

[Lathum]

So give me a # of bullets you believe is reasonable to keep at home?

One clip. If you can't defend yourself with that you need more training.

Regarding ammo for hunting 20-30 rounds. If you can't kill something with that try bow hunting.

People want to shoot for sport at ranges, etc...keep the ammo there under very strict regulations ala certain prescription meds.

[flere-imsaho]

In my option high volume ammo purchases should absolutely be one of the red flags and by that I mean anything over 500 rounds in a specified period.

It's quite the commentary on this country that you can be red flagged for buying too much of a particular type of common nasal decongestant, but not ammunition.

One clip. If you can't defend yourself with that you need more training.

Regarding ammo for hunting 20-30 rounds. If you can't kill something with that try bow hunting.

I grew up in a hunting community, including people who did it on a semi-subsistence basis (like they didn't have to supplement with game, but it made their budget go a lot further). Everyone hunted with bolt action rifles. It was considered a mark of pride to take down your quarry in one shot. Not to mention that if you had to pump multiple rounds into the animal, it becomes harder to turn it into food.

The hunting argument is, and has always been, a red herring.

[flere-imsaho]

Based on your line of questioning, I'm thinking you believe if we started with criminal elements first, they would steal the guns they want from law abiding citizens?

The point of my rhetorical questions was that the guns are the problem, not the criminal elements. You literally do any of the things my questions suggest (and indeed other countries have done so) and the potentcy of the actions completed by the criminal elements (including mass shooters) is reduced. It's literally that simple.

[cuervo72]

Florida girl, 10, fatally shoots woman who got in fight with her mother (https://www.tampabay.com/news/florida/2022/06/01/florida-girl-10-fatally-shoots-woman-who-got-in-fight-with-her-mother/)

Guns don't kill people, 10-year-olds kill people!

[Edward64]

Gun related deaths, both by suicide and murder haven't changed all that much since the 70s. We did have a bit of a drop from 2000 through about 2015 and it's steadily risen since then. But in the early 70s we were at about 5.2 deaths by gun murder per 100k and we're at 6.2 per 100k now.


According to that article (which I had posted earlier myself) it indicates the peak for both murders and suicides (per capita) were in the 70s. I'm not sure if I'm missing something?

While 2020 saw the highest total number of gun deaths in the U.S., this statistic does not take into account the nation’s growing population. On a per capita basis, there were 13.6 gun deaths per 100,000 people in 2020 – the highest rate since the mid-1990s, but still well below the peak of 16.3 gun deaths per 100,000 people in 1974.
The gun murder and gun suicide rates in the U.S. both remain below their peak levels. There were 6.2 gun murders per 100,000 people in 2020, below the rate of 7.2 recorded in 1974. And there were 7.0 gun suicides per 100,000 people in 2020, below the rate of 7.7 measured in 1977.

[Edward64]

My personal view is non-political. Lead is a potent neurotoxin. We used to pump it into the air. Then we decided to stop. And then crime went down.

So chalk one up for don't deliberately give your citizens brain damage.

The Freakanomics book economist said it was because of legalization of abortion in 1973.

They did a followup and still came to same conclusions. Interestingly, they also mentioned lead and concluded it also contributed.

Abortion and Crime, Revisited - Freakonomics (https://freakonomics.com/podcast/abortion-and-crime-revisited/)

[Edward64]

OK, but that is a different topic. The thread subject and topic is school shootings, and mass shootings, not suicide by guns. Totally different topic.

Oh com'on. Like we all keep to the thread topic without any tangents?

When I responded to Brian, I stated below in response to his "banning all guns". You can see my reference to mental health and broader gun debate. So I believe that I set the stage for my part of the discussion.

The (realistic) goal is to reduce the senseless violence (and suicides) as banning all guns is unrealistic (civil war indeed).

Mass shootings are a small fraction of gun deaths.

Before taking all guns away from law abiding citizens, let's see if we can stop all/most gun violence from non-law abiding people first. Then propose taking away all guns. My question is why take away the right/privilege from law abiding citizens first?

Definitely okay with more controls, do think it will make a difference (unsure the definition of "major impact" though). Not okay with "making it illegal to own guns period". But if that is what you want to propose, then start with non-law abiding people first, see where we are in 3-5 years, and if that is a resounding success, then let's talk about the Canada option.

[Edward64]

The point of my rhetorical questions was that the guns are the problem, not the criminal elements. You literally do any of the things my questions suggest (and indeed other countries have done so) and the potentcy of the actions completed by the criminal elements (including mass shooters) is reduced. It's literally that simple.

I respectfully disagree.

But getting back to Lathum's post and my response (immediately above) we may be talking about related but 2 different things. I am talking about overall gun deaths and not just specific mass shootings.

If talking about overall gun deaths, its pretty clear to me its both criminal elements and availability of guns (and for suicides, mental health).

[Edward64]

One clip. If you can't defend yourself with that you need more training.

Regarding ammo for hunting 20-30 rounds. If you can't kill something with that try bow hunting.

People want to shoot for sport at ranges, etc...keep the ammo there under very strict regulations ala certain prescription meds.

We'll agree to disagree here.

I will answer your ammo question as well Edward.

I never have more than 200-300 at a time. When I go to the gun range, I typically shoot 200 rounds, and don't feel the need to overstock. On my way home from the range, I stop at my local gun store and replace the rounds I just expended.

I don't feel the need for more than this because that is the amount I go through and if, god forbid, I ever had to fire on a home intruder, if the 15 round mag in my 9mm isn't enough to neutralize the threat, I need more training.

In my option high volume ammo purchases should absolutely be one of the red flags and by that I mean anything over 500 rounds in a specified period.

I dunno about you but I couldn't easily find 5.56 or 9mm last year (and other years also), even online unless you want the cheap eastern bloc ones. With that said, no problem with flagging me for more attention/checks if I buy lots of ammo. Most law abiding citizens don't have anything to hide except for those militia affiliated.

The catalyst for me buying my first weapon was the mess that was Katrina. It took way too long for that situation to get stabilized. Low odds, but I can easily see other Katrina like incidents happening in my lifetime. So yeah, I would like more than 200-300 rounds at any given time.

I'll admit that I do stock up ammo also for the zombie apocalypse but that's because I'm a big zombie fan :)

[thesloppy]

I am the opposite of a prepper. If our society ever devolves to the point that I need to regularly consider shooting my neighbors I would rather take the bullet.

[Edward64]

I am the opposite of a prepper. If our society ever devolves to the point that I need to regularly consider shooting my neighbors I would rather take the bullet.

They might take a leg first and save the rest for freshness (that was a great and intense TWD episode). Not a given that you or your family will die easy if the SHTF.

[NobodyHere]

I am the opposite of a prepper. If our society ever devolves to the point that I need to regularly consider shooting my neighbors I would rather take the bullet.

I think I shall be locking my doors if you're around.

[thesloppy]

I'm right behind you!!

[BYU 14]

I dunno about you but I couldn't easily find 5.56 or 9mm last year (and other years also), even online unless you want the cheap eastern bloc ones. With that said, no problem with flagging me for more attention/checks if I buy lots of ammo. Most law abiding citizens don't have anything to hide except for those militia affiliated.


And that is a reasonable response/expectation, because being a responsible gun owner, you should have nothing to worry about. But it poses another question. If you buy 1000 rounds and Johnny Crazy Guy buys 100 with the intent to go shoot up a church, how do you investigate and monitor both of you? Scour social media for signs of derangement? There is no way to tie into a mental health database now, and since there are no gun licenses it is not flagged that way/ Do you provide a drivers license so the sale can be reported and enable a criminal background check? (Since you could have a record and an illegal gun)

It's a slippery slope and under the current laws next to impossible to flag effectively.

[NobodyHere]

I'm right behind you!!

That's quite unnerving.

[Edward64]

And that is a reasonable response/expectation, because being a responsible gun owner, you should have nothing to worry about. But it poses another question. If you buy 1000 rounds and Johnny Crazy Guy buys 100 with the intent to go shoot up a church, how do you investigate and monitor both of you? Scour social media for signs of derangement? There is no way to tie into a mental health database now, and since there are no gun licenses it is not flagged that way/ Do you provide a drivers license so the sale can be reported and enable a criminal background check? (Since you could have a record and an illegal gun)

It's a slippery slope and under the current laws next to impossible to flag effectively.

I actually thought mental health was reported in the background check database. Not specifics with details but more of a general 'decline'. If it's not tied, why can't it be. Seems like a logical thing to do.

I actually believe there is technology to scour the internet and probably some AI to flag whatever needs to be flagged for everyone. But I doubt either a Rep/Dem owned congress (or President) would pass that. I would not support this either unless there was already cause for concern. Do we really want big brother looking over our shoulders without valid concern? Nope.

Specifically for ammo and quantity bought. I think there are ways to capture that info. The bigger issue I see is even with "limits to buying ammo and checks" ... Let's say I start off with your proposed 300 round limit per 3 or 6 months (?), there's nothing to stop me from storing up and eventually hit my 2000 ammo goal anyway. I don't see a practical way to monitor ammo usage.

Honestly, don't think restricting ammo purchases will help that much. I think even though that frakkin kid had like 1,600+ rounds total, he had 315 in the actual school.

The suspect had purchased 1,657 total rounds of ammunition – 315 rounds were found inside the school, said Steven McCraw, the director of the Texas Department of Public Safety.

But yeah, definitely other things that others have said - longer wait periods, closing gun show loop holes, limiting magazine capacity, banning products like the bump stock, mandatory training, mandatory gun safes etc. Not very hot on banning all semi-automatic weapons and reverting to bolt action though!

[Edward64]

That's quite unnerving.

In more than one way!

[NobodyHere]

In more than one way!

STOP SELLING YOUR PROSTITUION RING!!!


I really can't afford it

[Edward64]

We've been pouring money into trying to stop criminal elements since the 80s and it hasnt made a dent. On the other than, mass shootings dropped 43% after the assault weapon ban in the 90s and has risen over 240% since Bush allowed it to expire.

More than 99.99 percent of flyers were and are law abiding citizens yet in the aftermath of 9/11 it was decided that we could lose some clear rights (as opposed to the murkiness of 2a) in order to make flying safer and those additional airport security measures have close to a 70% approval the last I saw.

FWIW, from a Snopes article. This is specific to mass shootings and not overall gun deaths in general. I do not know how to reconcile your stats with Snopes but likely some different definitions, assumptions etc.

In Gun Debate, Both Sides Have Evidence to Back Them Up | Snopes.com (https://www.snopes.com/news/2021/04/02/in-gun-debate-both-sides-have-evidence-to-back-them-up/)
Specifically, we examined the effects of four different types of gun control legislation: background checks; assault weapons bans; high-capacity magazine bans; and “extreme risk protection order” or “red flag laws” that let a court determine whether to confiscate the guns of someone deemed a threat to themselves or others.

We found that background check requirements, assault weapons bans and high-capacity magazine bans each reduce the number of mass shootings in the United States – but only by a small amount. For instance, enacting a statewide assault weapons ban decreases the number of mass shootings in the state by one shooting every six years. And none of the four types of gun control legislation correlate with fewer total mass shooting deaths.

And laws that remove an individual’s right to own firearms if that individual poses a risk to the community do not affect the number of mass shooting events.

From Politifact. From what I gather correlation is not same as causation.

PolitiFact | Joe Biden said mass shootings tripled when the assault weapon ban ended. They did (https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/may/25/joe-biden/joe-biden-said-mass-shootings-tripled-when-assault/)
Several studies find that mass shooting deaths fell slightly in the decade of the federal assault weapon ban, and then rose dramatically in the decade that followed.

New research suggests that limits on large-capacity magazines play a key role.

No strong evidence shows that the ban’s presence or its end caused the change in mass shooting deaths, but many studies find a correlation.

[RainMaker]

The point of my rhetorical questions was that the guns are the problem, not the criminal elements. You literally do any of the things my questions suggest (and indeed other countries have done so) and the potentcy of the actions completed by the criminal elements (including mass shooters) is reduced. It's literally that simple.

We all know its guns. We know what the data says. It is like you said, literally that simple.

People like to have guns. Whether it's a hobby or compensating for something, they want them. And a classroom of 8 year olds being murdered every so often is a perfectly acceptable trade-off for them to fill that need. It's just that most are too cowardly to say that last part.

[Brian Swartz]

The "elimination of all guns" is way too much of a dog whistle for me to even discuss. Should the actions of a few cost the rest of us? Well as others have already said, that is what we do in this country. Be thankful if you have not been caught up in one of those situation. Your suggestions are great. Unfortunately, all of those are accompanied by that dog whistle I mentioned before.

FWIW, I'm the one who brought up gun elimination, and I didn't do so as a dog whistle. It's a serious proposal. Not one that I personally advocate, but it is what I think is required to get to a level of violence that many would consider acceptable.

I think this is just another example of why it's hard to have substantive discussions on a lot of issues. We just assume people can't be serious about what they're saying or that if they are, it's not worth discussing. But I wasn't being the least bit disingenous. I think that's what it takes if you want to get US violent attacks to a level near what they are in other major industrialized nations. Or we can leave some level of guns out there and accept a higher level for the reasonably foreseeable fuure.

[Edward64]

TBF I wasn’t sure if you were serious or just a rhetorical exercise. This is not something that will pass realistically so thought it was the latter.

[Brian Swartz]

Point taken, but I think a lot of the other proposals brought up won't pass either. I just brought it up in response to a discussion about what would actually be effective.

[bhlloy]

Ok, I’ll bite. Why is that narrow definition the thing we need to aim for? Who is asking for that? And assuming that is what many/most people are asking for (which I’ll disagree with) aren’t there other steps that can at least be a step in the right direction and can help limit the chances where somebody can kills tens of people in a couple of minutes?

For the record I think you are right, if the only goal is “reduce US violent attacks to a level near what they are in other major industrialized nation” then yeah, considering almost every nation that would fall into that category only allows private gun ownership for a very limited and tightly controlled section of the population that kinda goes without saying.

But again who is saying that, and why is that the thing we have to do today or not at all? It just feels like you are trying to paint a massively nuanced issue with a wide brush and then saying “well if we can’t do this obviously massively unrealistic thing, guess we are stuck where we are”

[Brian Swartz]

Multiple people on this forum have said that should be our goal over time. Statistics are often cited not just here but other places in public debate comparing our level of violence to that of other countries. It seems self-evident that the point of those comparisons is to say it's wrong for the US not to be at that level.

aren’t there other steps that can at least be a step in the right direction and can help limit the chances where somebody can kills tens of people in a couple of minutes?

Absolutely. There are definitely voices in the public realm that are saying basically do nothing but I don't agree with them and I don't think any of them are represented on this forum.

What I do say, is that ideas like background checks, limiting mass ammo purchases, all the others that have come up will still end up with us much closer to where we are now than to that kind of goal. That doesn't mean do nothing. It does mean that if that's what we do we're also choosing to have a very elevated level of gun violence by comparison to other nations, just perhaps a somewhat less elevated level than we currently have. That's particularly true since the gun culture in America has always been an outlier, so even with identical laws we'd still end up with more people choosing to arm themselves by comparison.

'We shouldn't do anything' and 'these steps are good, but won't get anywhere near the goal' are much different statements. My perception is they are being badly conflated.

[Fidatelo]

Earlier in this thread:

miami_fan: "As far as I know, he did not have a criminal history and bought the guns legally. This is where I agree with Brian. I don't know what gun control proposals solve that."

me: points directly to a previous post of my own with reasonable idea that could potentially do just that.

miami_fan (and all other advocates here): crickets

[flere-imsaho]

We control access to other things as a matter of course in this country. Due to the fact that people used to buy cases of Sudafed in order to make meth, everyone is now restricted in how much pseudophedrine they can purchase at one time, and purchases are tracked. (e.g. you can only have XX rounds of ammunition in your possession at any given time - sorry the mass shooters ruined it for you)

Texas itself has some significant controls.

To get an abortion in Texas you must observe a 24-hour waiting period, undergo a medical imaging procedure, and if you are under 18, have parental consent.

To get a learners' permit for driving in Texas you must pass a number of requirements and are not allowed to operate the device without adult supervision. Once you pass an exam and accrue sufficient time operating the device, you are allowed a provisional licence (until 18) that places restrictions on your usage of that device.

The claim that common sense gun control measures are logistically unworkable is, and has always been, untrue.

[flere-imsaho]

FWIW, from a Snopes article. This is specific to mass shootings and not overall gun deaths in general. I do not know how to reconcile your stats with Snopes but likely some different definitions, assumptions etc.

It's because the AWB was a federal law affecting all states and the Snopes article (which is really a re-printed article from The Conversation) addresses state laws.

The weakness with state laws is that they only affect that state. Illinois & Chicago, for instance, can restrict guns all they want, but it's trivially easy to go over the border to Wisconsin or Indiana to get guns if you really need them.

All of which to say, again, is that it's the guns, and specifically the widespread availability of guns, which is the problem. The root problem.

[miami_fan]

FWIW, I'm the one who brought up gun elimination, and I didn't do so as a dog whistle. It's a serious proposal. Not one that I personally advocate, but it is what I think is required to get to a level of violence that many would consider acceptable.

I think this is just another example of why it's hard to have substantive discussions on a lot of issues. We just assume people can't be serious about what they're saying or that if they are, it's not worth discussing. But I wasn't being the least bit disingenous. I think that's what it takes if you want to get US violent attacks to a level near what they are in other major industrialized nations. Or we can leave some level of guns out there and accept a higher level for the reasonably foreseeable fuure.

I was not saying that you were being disingenuous. What I am meant is that 30 years of having discussions about gun control has taught me that the quickest way to end that conversation is to say that phrase. It is the reason why we have not had any movement on this issue because any actions would be a step down the road to the "elimination of guns." While you were not doing it, we all know how that phrase been used to prevent any and all gun controls. If I believed that all options were on the table not just on this board but in the national debate, then sure let's have the discussion. But that is not the case. Eliminating guns has been brought up before numerous times. It is used as a dog whistle. This is not new. So for me, in an effort to actually have meaningful debate on this issue, I choose not to use what I believe is a dog whistle with people who have made it perfectly clear that the elimination of guns is a real fear and a hard no. If you can have that discussion seriously and have it not delve into chaos, by all means carry on. I am telling you I can't.

[Kodos]

Here's an easy way to help. Jack the prices of ammo and guns way up. Tax the hell out of them. I'm thinking $10 per bullet. $100 per bullet for bullets that can be used in semi-automatic guns. Whatever guns cost now, make them 500% more expensive. Plow the additional tax money into mental health.

[miami_fan]

Earlier in this thread:

miami_fan: "As far as I know, he did not have a criminal history and bought the guns legally. This is where I agree with Brian. I don't know what gun control proposals solve that."

me: points directly to a previous post of my own with reasonable idea that could potentially do just that.

miami_fan (and all other advocates here): crickets

Sure. I am game. We could try that. Whenever we get to a point where we are willing to try something, we can add yours to the list. My question is if we are ever going to get to that point.

[NobodyHere]

Here's an easy way to help. Jack the prices of ammo and guns way up. Tax the hell out of them. I'm thinking $10 per bullet. $100 per bullet for bullets that can be used in semi-automatic guns. Whatever guns cost now, make them 500% more expensive. Plow the additional tax money into mental health.

This would immediately be struck down as unconstitutional. You can't tax a right into oblivion.

[Kodos]

I didn't know you were a legal scholar. With great power comes great expense.

[flere-imsaho]

My question is if we are ever going to get to that point.

Oh, we're never going to get to that point. I have no illusions about that.

This would immediately be struck down as unconstitutional. You can't tax a right into oblivion.

SCOTUS seemed just fine with Florida's poll tax.

[NobodyHere]

SCOTUS seemed just fine with Florida's poll tax.

Because it's not a poll tax? Florida is following what the voters approved which includes felons completing all terms of their sentence before they can vote again.

Personally think that every US citizen should be allowed to vote regardless of criminal status.

[QuikSand]

This would immediately be struck down as unconstitutional. You can't tax a right into oblivion.

Even if you're solidly anti-gun and anti-ammo, this is almost certainly correct.

[Kodos]

Maybe we can tax them on the level that we tax cigarettes.

[Kodos]

FWIW, I do realize that this is just another idea that has no chance of happening.

[NobodyHere]

FWIW:

https://casetext.com/case/murphy-v-guerrero

Basically a federal district court shut down a $1000 tax on imported handguns.

[albionmoonlight]

Maybe we can tax them on the level that we tax cigarettes.

The problem with that analogy is that there is no constitutional prohibition to just banning tobacco.

A better analogy would be to taxes on newspapers, cost of permits for holding public demonstrations, etc.

The answer (and please understand this is outside of my area of expertise) is that you could do small but not punitive taxes.