Yet another school shooting.

[RainMaker]

Calling it mental illness is a cop out. His manifesto quotes phrases routinely put out by the President and his biggest supporters. The guy made a calculated decision to drive 9 hours to an area with Hispanic people.



Then you have Trump smirking at the insinuation of shooting immigrants. For a young impressionable person, he was doing what he was told to.

Trump to a rally crowd in Florida in May: "How do you stop these people" from crossing the border?

Rally attendee: "Shoot them!"

Crowd laughs. Trump smirks.

Trump: "That's only in the panhandle you can get away with that stuff. Only in the panhandle." pic.twitter.com/2tYIUBPJbv

— Robert Maguire (@RobertMaguire_) August 4, 2019

[Atocep]

Yeah I largely agree. Mental health is an obvious issue in all or at least most of these shootings, but it's also a tactic the right uses to distract from gun control discussion.

The fact is we're not the only country with mental health issues, but we're the only country that has mass shootings at this rate and we continue to blame everything but the tools responsible.

[tarcone]

I hate to say this but we need to change the title of this thread to "yet another mass shooting" and get rid of school.

As bad as school shootings are, they are infinitely worse than just the run of the mill mass shootings in this country.

What a sad post.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by molson

"Hate crime" is kind of misleading, they're often just an additional intent element added to an existing crime to enhance the sentence or enhance the seriousness of the charge. No crime punishes JUST motive, but many criminal statutes have a required intent element - intent to permanently deprive, intent to cause injury, etc.

In this case, I think it's probably a death penalty predicate, something a jury has to find in addition to the committed crime in order to impose death. Of course, there's probably a bunch of predicates here, but prosecutors will generally charge with all the crimes and enhancements and predicates that the evidence can support, you never know what gets fucked up by a bad jury instruction or a piece of evidence that should have been excluded. And it'd be weird here if they randomly excluded that predicate which obviously applies.

This is much more your area of expertise than mine. I just don't like the idea of some actions being worse than others based on motive. Shooting someone in the face should have the same punishment as shooting someone in the face because they don't like their race or gender or sexuality or religion.

[panerd]

Can we at some point blame ourselves?

I agree we need an assault rifle ban, I think politicians and friends and family (especially of the younger shooters) need to be held to the fire, but at the end of the day guess what feeds this shit? Our desire (mine included) to read all about it, to read the fucking crazy manifestos, the talk about the killer and not the victims. Tarcone brought this up a few weeks ago, maybe even in this thread...

5 people killed in St. Louis apartment; suspect sought | FOX 4 Kansas City WDAF-TV | News, Weather, Sports

Nobody cared about this on here. It ran on the bottom of CNN for half a day and locally here in St. Louis almost the same coverage. We didn't care 5 people are dead from a "mass shooting".

At Least 3 Killed, Dozens Wounded In Weekend Shootings Across Chicago – CBS Chicago
Syria war: 'World shrugs' as 103 civilians killed in 10 days - BBC News

We don't care about this stuff above, it's not a situation we are going to find ourselves in.

We care about these shootings because those people in El Paso or Dayton at the bar might have been us. We are selfish assholes, we are not concerned about homicides or gun violence (or at least not the kind that killed the people above) but are definitely scared about being killed or our families being killed. Let's at least be honest about this.

[End Broadcast News like rant]

And I am not calling any of you out any more than I am calling myself out. Why have I been on this thread throughout the day? Why do I read the CNN, Daily Beast, etc articles? I don't know the answer but it sure as fuck is the reason some of the people end up doing crazy stuff like this instead of just offing themselves in the woods somewhere. Because I do eat it all up and I can't understand why!

[NobodyHere]

Neil's going to get some flak for this one even though I agree with his sentiment.

In the past 48hrs, the USA horrifically lost 34 people to mass shootings.

On average, across any 48hrs, we also lose…

500 to Medical errors
300 to the Flu
250 to Suicide
200 to Car Accidents
40 to Homicide via Handgun

Often our emotions respond more to spectacle than to data.

— Neil deGrasse Tyson (@neiltyson) August 4, 2019

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Neil's going to get some flak for this one even though I agree with his sentiment.

In the past 48hrs, the USA horrifically lost 34 people to mass shootings.

On average, across any 48hrs, we also lose…

500 to Medical errors
300 to the Flu
250 to Suicide
200 to Car Accidents
40 to Homicide via Handgun

Often our emotions respond more to spectacle than to data.

— Neil deGrasse Tyson (@neiltyson) August 4, 2019

All the other stuff he lists we actively try to prevent.

[RainMaker]

The Dayton gunman had a 100-round drum magazine on his AR-15. This is why he was able to shoot 35 people in 20 seconds.

RT if you believe weapons designed to kill people quickly have no place on our streets. Then text MITCH to 90975 to demand action. pic.twitter.com/LbMaWRbcdj

— Giffords (@GiffordsCourage) August 4, 2019

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

All the other stuff he lists we actively try to prevent.

They also get zilch in terms of media coverage.

[HerRealName]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Neil's going to get some flak for this one even though I agree with his sentiment.

In the past 48hrs, the USA horrifically lost 34 people to mass shootings.

On average, across any 48hrs, we also lose…

500 to Medical errors
300 to the Flu
250 to Suicide
200 to Car Accidents
40 to Homicide via Handgun

Often our emotions respond more to spectacle than to data.

— Neil deGrasse Tyson (@neiltyson) August 4, 2019

This is the strategy the 8chan'ers lay out:

[RainMaker]

No, they all get media attention.

If you can't figure out why a terrorist walking into a store and slaughtering innocent people to advance a belief the President espoused daily get attention, I don't know what to tell you.

But I think you know that and are just deflecting because the beliefs of these individuals line up with the party you support.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by HerRealName

This is the strategy the 8chan'ers lay out:

Pretty standard fare. Also throw in a dash of mental health and video games to complete the trifecta.

Also all these same people who can't understand why it gets media attention were crying that the media wouldn't give enough attention to Islamic terrorism a few years ago. If this guy carried out the attack in the name of ISIS, they'd want nothing but wall to wall coverage.

[Atocep]

Apparently only white people in the US play violent video games.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

No, they all get media attention.

If you can't figure out why a terrorist walking into a store and slaughtering innocent people to advance a belief the President espoused daily get attention, I don't know what to tell you.

But I think you know that and are just deflecting because the beliefs of these individuals line up with the party you support.

That was kind of Neil's point, that we'll respond to spectacle instead of scientific data.


Also tell me which party you think I support?

[QuikSand]

Can this possibly be legit?

Nick Penzenstadler on Twitter: "This is what a 100-round drum magazine looks like from the Dayton shooting. Authorities say he had a .223-cal rifle with this attached:… https://t.co/ciIEQrrqYS"

I don't claim to be a gun expert, and really don't want to have someone scold me for not being one... but wow, that looks like a bit more than a citizen might need for hunting or hoe defense or whatever it is we're all itchy trying to defend the right to do.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

That was kind of Neil's point, that we'll respond to spectacle instead of scientific data.

We respond to all those things he listed. There are billions spent in medical research and vaccines to cover the flu. Car companies and government agencies are constantly improving safety features in car. The medical community makes changes all the time to prevent errors. And suicide has been talked about incessantly, especially after a famous celebrity commits it. The idea that these are topics the public ignores is comical.

What we don't respond to is gun violence. We're not even allowed to research it by law. The only response we see is gun manufacturers using a mass murder as a marketing tool.

As for the news, they cover unique events. Someone dying from the flu isn't news because it's a part of life that we do our best to avoid. If the flu spikes in a year, it is covered because that is a unique event. I don't know why this is hard to understand.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

Can this possibly be legit?

Nick Penzenstadler on Twitter: "This is what a 100-round drum magazine looks like from the Dayton shooting. Authorities say he had a .223-cal rifle with this attached:… https://t.co/ciIEQrrqYS"

I don't claim to be a gun expert, and really don't want to have someone scold me for not being one... but wow, that looks like a bit more than a citizen might need for hunting or hoe defense or whatever it is we're all itchy trying to defend the right to do.

Yes, the Aurora theater shooter used one as well. Luckily his jammed or it would have been much worse.

And no one would use it for hunting or home defense. They weigh down the rifle too much and make it less accurate. Their only practical purpose in the real world is for massacres.

[QuikSand]

Incidentally... I'm semi-buying the subtle chatter that Trump could make a hero move on gun issues, come out strongly in favor of some series of "reasonable" reforms, and change the debate. Even if his motivation is merely to distract from the association between his racist ideologies and those of the recent shooter(s)... he's so ideologically unmoored, it's oddly conceivable he's the exact guy to break out of this stalemate. Wouldn't that be something.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

Incidentally... I'm semi-buying the subtle chatter that Trump could make a hero move on gun issues, come out strongly in favor of some series of "reasonable" reforms, and change the debate. Even if his motivation is merely to distract from the association between his racist ideologies and those of the recent shooter(s)... he's so ideologically unmoored, it's oddly conceivable he's the exact guy to break out of this stalemate. Wouldn't that be something.

This is where him surrounding himself with sycophants instead of competent people and watching TV all day instead of learning about the Presidency hurts him.

Even if he wanted, for whatever reason, to take action here, I don’t think he has the structures in place to allow him to do it. He’s at the mercy of the people under him, and I can’t imagine they will allow him to do anything to change the status quo here.

[EagleFan]

Texas really dropped the ball on this one. An open carry state, and one of the easiest open carry states I believe. Where was that "good guy with a gun" we are always hearing about that will stop these things?

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

We respond to all those things he listed. There are billions spent in medical research and vaccines to cover the flu. Car companies and government agencies are constantly improving safety features in car. The medical community makes changes all the time to prevent errors. And suicide has been talked about incessantly, especially after a famous celebrity commits it. The idea that these are topics the public ignores is comical.

What we don't respond to is gun violence. We're not even allowed to research it by law. The only response we see is gun manufacturers using a mass murder as a marketing tool.

Gun control groups spent millions in the 2018 elections and even outspent the NRA. Laws such as raising the minimum age to buy a gun or red flag laws are being passed. You're simply ignoring facts. And it's a misnomer to say that you're not allowed to research gun violence, only that the CDC can't fund it. I will say the Dickey amendment should be overturned. I think Dickey does too.

As for the news, they cover unique events. Someone dying from the flu isn't news because it's a part of life that we do our best to avoid. If the flu spikes in a year, it is covered because that is a unique event. I don't know why this is hard to understand.

Again, that's Neil's point. Spectacles will get covered while the things that are more likely to kill you will get ignored.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

Incidentally... I'm semi-buying the subtle chatter that Trump could make a hero move on gun issues, come out strongly in favor of some series of "reasonable" reforms, and change the debate. Even if his motivation is merely to distract from the association between his racist ideologies and those of the recent shooter(s)... he's so ideologically unmoored, it's oddly conceivable he's the exact guy to break out of this stalemate. Wouldn't that be something.

Seems to me what happened yesterday plays well to his base. Why would he do a 180 now?

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Gun control groups spent millions in the 2018 elections and even outspent the NRA. Laws such as raising the minimum age to buy a gun or red flag laws are being passed. You're simply ignoring facts. And it's a misnomer to say that you're not allowed to research gun violence, only that the CDC can't fund it. I will say the Dickey amendment should be overturned. I think Dickey does too.

None of those would prevent these mass shootings. Especially when you have just as many laws being passed to make it easier to acquire and carry guns.

In Ohio the Governor recently signed a bill that made more types of guns legal. They are coming close to removing the law that requires mandatory training for concealed carry. In Texas, everything that shooter did until the point he started firing was completely legal.

As for the CDC, it's a big deal when the part of our government that is in charge of looking out for public health can't research a major cause of death.

[Ben E Lou]

There are many things we need to do on gun safety, including requiring liability insurance to own/purchase a firearm (like we do to own a car). It would probably cost an average hunter $5 a year, but if you have a history of hate crimes it would be cost prohibitive. Commonsense.

— John Delaney (@JohnDelaney) August 4, 2019






I can't believe he's trying to say what it sounds like on the surface, but can't figure out what else he might be trying to say.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Texas really dropped the ball on this one. An open carry state, and one of the easiest open carry states I believe. Where was that "good guy with a gun" we are always hearing about that will stop these things?

I have no idea if true but allegedlyThe property owner has stated that it's gun free zone

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Texas really dropped the ball on this one. An open carry state, and one of the easiest open carry states I believe. Where was that "good guy with a gun" we are always hearing about that will stop these things?

Wondering that myself. How many people were carrying handguns in the Walmart or close by. Suggest we wait, the full story will probably come out in next couple weeks.

May be a situation where we may need to open carry an AR-15 to meet the AK-47 threat.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

YAnd no one would use it for hunting or home defense. They weigh down the rifle too much and make it less accurate. Their only practical purpose in the real world is for massacres.

Or for fun at a gun range.

But yes, agree. No good reason for civilians to have one.

I think CA law is no mag with more than 10 bullets? I like the regular 30 in a mag but can't imagine a need for more than that.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

There are many things we need to do on gun safety, including requiring liability insurance to own/purchase a firearm (like we do to own a car). It would probably cost an average hunter $5 a year, but if you have a history of hate crimes it would be cost prohibitive. Commonsense.

— John Delaney (@JohnDelaney) August 4, 2019






I can't believe he's trying to say what it sounds like on the surface, but can't figure out what else he might be trying to say.

I've seen this idea a lot on liberal forums. The idea is to raise the price of gun ownership beyond the reach of most Americans.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

None of those would prevent these mass shootings. Especially when you have just as many laws being passed to make it easier to acquire and carry guns.

In Ohio the Governor recently signed a bill that made more types of guns legal. They are coming close to removing the law that requires mandatory training for concealed carry. In Texas, everything that shooter did until the point he started firing was completely legal.

As for the CDC, it's a big deal when the part of our government that is in charge of looking out for public health can't research a major cause of death.

I think we have to play the long game here similar to reduction in smoking over the past 20-30 years.

The gun-control or anti-gun groups need to organize into one big organization/PAC like the NRA. Use donations from the plenty of gun control billionaires and do campaigns for kids, mental health awareness, weaken the NRA somehow etc.

Over a period of time, hopefully we'll move the dial to more gun control (but not elimination).

So my question is - why aren't these things happening, being driven by the Dems/Liberals? It's probably not due to lack of funds, my guess its a lack of collective will to get this done because many Dems/Libs know there is too strong of a 2A base in their current constituencies? So its a long game with the Millennials and Gen Z but requires constant positive reinforcement.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Texas really dropped the ball on this one. An open carry state, and one of the easiest open carry states I believe. Where was that "good guy with a gun" we are always hearing about that will stop these things?

I don't know about inside the Walmart but PFC Glendon Oakley did have a Glock 9mm on him when he was rescuing the children. It stuck with me during his interview when he said he had his permit more than once. As to why he did not come in guns a blazing? I will let him explain.

"That's what you do," he told Task & Purpose. "You pull your gun, you find cover, and you figure out what to do next."

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

I have no idea if true but allegedlyThe property owner has stated that it's gun free zone

Think that's for the mall, not the Walmart. Walmart's policy since they loosened laws in Texas is that employees can ask to see your permit and ask you to leave if you don't have it. Some guy from Open Carry Texas had a fit a year back or so when they asked him for his permit. It was Walmart's way around picking a side in the debate.

Regardless, there were people armed in the store. The one guy who got kids to safety was armed. But playing hero is more for tough talk on the internet and not real life. Using your handgun to go up against a guy with that firepower and body armor is probably not going to go well for you.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

Can this possibly be legit?

Nick Penzenstadler on Twitter: "This is what a 100-round drum magazine looks like from the Dayton shooting. Authorities say he had a .223-cal rifle with this attached:… https://t.co/ciIEQrrqYS"

I don't claim to be a gun expert, and really don't want to have someone scold me for not being one... but wow, that looks like a bit more than a citizen might need for hunting or hoe defense or whatever it is we're all itchy trying to defend the right to do.

I watch a fair amount of gun content on YouTube. It interests me but I own 0 guns. It’s most certainly real. A lot of this type of shit exists that’d shock you.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

That was kind of Neil's point, that we'll respond to spectacle instead of scientific data.


Also tell me which party you think I support?

Idk if you support the Republican Party, but based off your posts in the political threads I'd say you're either anti-Democrat or you're a troll. I fall in the same category, but I'll call a spade a spade.

And yeah, I have no idea why NDT would choose to tweet that. I don't think he's a big gun rights supporter and it's not the first time he's made an esoteric point in the wrong place, but he has to be smart enough to understand that's not the time and place for that.

Originally Posted by molson

"Hate crime" is kind of misleading, they're often just an additional intent element added to an existing crime to enhance the sentence or enhance the seriousness of the charge. No crime punishes JUST motive, but many criminal statutes have a required intent element - intent to permanently deprive, intent to cause injury, etc.

In this case, I think it's probably a death penalty predicate, something a jury has to find in addition to the committed crime in order to impose death. Of course, there's probably a bunch of predicates here, but prosecutors will generally charge with all the crimes and enhancements and predicates that the evidence can support, you never know what gets fucked up by a bad jury instruction or a piece of evidence that should have been excluded. And it'd be weird here if they randomly excluded that predicate which obviously applies.

Originally Posted by JPhillips

This is much more your area of expertise than mine. I just don't like the idea of some actions being worse than others based on motive. Shooting someone in the face should have the same punishment as shooting someone in the face because they don't like their race or gender or sexuality or religion.

Plus, you know, it's Texas. I doubt they need to worry about juries or the state supreme court being ready to throw out a death penalty conviction due to sentiment or a technicality.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

But playing hero is more for tough talk on the internet and not real life. Using your handgun to go up against a guy with that firepower and body armor is probably not going to go well for you.

I agree but all you ever hear when these things lead to talk about gun control is how "a good guy with a gun" is what will prevent these things instead of gun control. Maybe now people will see how unrealistic that stance is.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I think we have to play the long game here similar to reduction in smoking over the past 20-30 years.

The gun-control or anti-gun groups need to organize into one big organization/PAC like the NRA. Use donations from the plenty of gun control billionaires and do campaigns for kids, mental health awareness, weaken the NRA somehow etc.

Over a period of time, hopefully we'll move the dial to more gun control (but not elimination).

So my question is - why aren't these things happening, being driven by the Dems/Liberals? It's probably not due to lack of funds, my guess its a lack of collective will to get this done because many Dems/Libs know there is too strong of a 2A base in their current constituencies? So its a long game with the Millennials and Gen Z but requires constant positive reinforcement.

I think it’s incorect to say these things aren’t happening. Everytown and Moms Demand Action have had their numbers swell in recent years. They have had success in getting some gun safety laws enacted on a state level. The NRA has been hit with scandals, lack of funding, and closed down NRATV in recent years.

On the national level, nothing is going anywhere because Republicans control the Senate (and Presidency) and have no interest in passing bills with anything resembling gun control because their constituents don’t believe in compromising an iota on this.

[PilotMan]

The demise of the NRA is greatly exaggerated. Their demise hasn't been because of Everytown, scandal or opposing legislation, but because they actually succeeded in getting everything they wanted. They don't have anything left to fight for. Until the pendulum swings back the other way, they'll wither, but make no mistake, as it comes back, it'll raise again, with every bit the fervor it ever had.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

I agree but all you ever hear when these things lead to talk about gun control is how "a good guy with a gun" is what will prevent these things instead of gun control. Maybe now people will see how unrealistic that stance is.

These scenes are so chaotic that almost every mass shooting starts off with reports of multiple shooters. The idea that somehow random untrained civilians are going to have the wherewithal to spot the threat among people running, alarms blazing, and bullets ricocheting off everywhere is odd. Even cops struggle in these situations and they are trained heavily in responding to these threats.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JAG

I think it’s incorect to say these things aren’t happening. Everytown and Moms Demand Action have had their numbers swell in recent years. They have had success in getting some gun safety laws enacted on a state level. The NRA has been hit with scandals, lack of funding, and closed down NRATV in recent years.

On the national level, nothing is going anywhere because Republicans control the Senate (and Presidency) and have no interest in passing bills with anything resembling gun control because their constituents don’t believe in compromising an iota on this.

One of the issues is a minority of people control the country. As long as we have undemocratic systems like the Senate and Electoral College, this will always be an issue. And that's not even talking about the dumb filibuster rule.

[RainMaker]

Kind of an interesting take. Whatever you think about the laws, these guys all have similar backgrounds. I don't know if its technology or something else in society that has changed.

Studies show millennial/young men are the loneliest generation (high rate of having zero friends or no close friends), skyrocketing rates of suicide, by far most violent demographic in America. Not a group that garners a ton of sympathy in the media but problem demands inquiry.

— Lee Fang (@lhfang) August 5, 2019

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

And yeah, I have no idea why NDT would choose to tweet that.

Because every now and then he has to remind everyone he's smarter than they are. He was a reddit hero, of sorts, until there were far too many first hand accounts of how much of a jackass he really is to ignore.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

One of the issues is a minority of people control the country. As long as we have undemocratic systems like the Senate and Electoral College, this will always be an issue. And that's not even talking about the dumb filibuster rule.

Wait, what? We can all hate on how the Senate demographics favors the Republican Party if you hate Republicans, but we're here because politicians pander to idiots. Direct elections or voting on issues would probably be worse, and I've thought for years now the answer is moar f*cking elitism. YMMV.

Originally Posted by Atocep

Because every now and then he has to remind everyone he's smarter than they are. He was a reddit hero, of sorts, until there were far too many first hand accounts of how much of a jackass he really is to ignore.

My dad is ok at the astrophysicism thing, NDT was apparently over for a cocktail party or two before I was old enough to care, and my parents throw shade at him for being a dilettante who never discovered anything and "just takes ideas real scientists talk about and articulates them well for the masses", but he's a try hard blowhard not a jackass. The #MeToo allegations against him were ridiculous, and despite "the real scientists" reservations, yeah a guy who can communicate ideas effectively to the general public is pretty valuable. Sometimes like this he does feel himself and it's basically a heat check I guess.

Originally Posted by polamalu43

And it seems as though Republicans will be leaning on the Electoral College more heavily than ever before. If you actively try to make your small state as bad a place to live as possible for anyone who's not a rich, old white person (e.g. by continuing to cut education funding or rejecting Medicaid expansion from a healthcare plan that was first proposed by a Republican governor for no reason other than to try to sabotage the first black president, which has caused at least 15,000 preventable deaths nationwide) that's a pretty easy way to make your state's electorate more solidly Republican.

People will either die or move away order to have some chance at education or health care or just to not be as overtly discriminated against, and when they do that their vote doesn't count for as much and you can accuse people who vote for Democrats of living in a liberal bubble (make sure to show off that electoral map where more of the land area is red for extra 'trolling the libs' points!). And then of course on top of all that you've got extreme gerrymandering, purging voter rolls, racist voter ID laws, and partisan administration of the census in an attempt to tip the scales even further.

Man, these Russian bots are getting more specific.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Wait, what? We can all hate on how the Senate demographics favors the Republican Party if you hate Republicans, but we're here because politicians pander to idiots. Direct elections or voting on issues would probably be worse, and I've thought for years now the answer is moar f*cking elitism. YMMV.

What is elite about making everyone's vote equal? It's elite to give more voting power to certain citizens over others.

The reason even popular policies like background checks can't get passed is because the Senate is controlled by a minority of the population. The Presidency is also controlled by a minority of the population. This allows unpopular ideas to remain.

This country is heavily in favor of background checks, raising the minimum age, and banning of the AR-15. But as long as someone in Wyoming's vote is 70 times as effective as one in California, the minority sets the rules.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by JAG

I think it’s incorect to say these things aren’t happening. Everytown and Moms Demand Action have had their numbers swell in recent years. They have had success in getting some gun safety laws enacted on a state level. The NRA has been hit with scandals, lack of funding, and closed down NRATV in recent years.

It may be happening but doesn't seem to be happening much. A sustained TV/movie and other social media campaign would be fantastic.

Originally Posted by JAG

On the national level, nothing is going anywhere because Republicans control the Senate (and Presidency) and have no interest in passing bills with anything resembling gun control because their constituents don’t believe in compromising an iota on this.

The Republicans do bear majority blame because of the unwillingness to pass legislation and also their embrace of the NRA. But the Dems are not blameless here -- what did Obama and Dem controlled Congress do in his first 2 years?

[panerd]

Sounds like the Ohio man was suspended twice in high school. Once for a rape list and another time for a kill list. Seems like that could be a starting point in not being able to purchase a weapon?

Very unusual though with his sister being a victim and apparently him being with her that night and then being denied entry into a bar. (Not sure if they were driving around with that gun and body armor in her car or if he had a stash of it somewhere) Might not be as random as some of the other ones.

[SirFozzie]

And.. Trump says "Why not gun legislation (tied to immigration so I get my wall and keep those OTHER people out)".

Ye gads.

[JPhillips]

He also tweets that it's the media's fault.

[NobodyHere]

Well cloudflare has pulled it's support from 8chan, taking the site down.

[JPhillips]

The President's speech was an extended play version of "Thoughts and Prayers."

[bronconick]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Well cloudflare has pulled it's support from 8chan, taking the site down.

Went right to the guy who owns Gab, I believe. Probably already back up

[Edward64]

I take it Lee's post is trying to draw a correlation between millennial/young men, loneliest generation, easy access to hate speech, desensitized by violent video games & movies etc.

... but all the mass shooting are (mostly?) by white young adults and disenchanted middle age men. Black, brown and yellow all experience the same thing. Sure those other groups do violence too but specifically for mass shootings due to hate, bullying, mental health etc. (vs criminal activities) ... what explains that?