Another Mass Shooting in Texas

 

I have no idea what the solution is.

I mean, I do: intact Families and a culture that does not promote despair and rage.

But since that is not on the table, I have no idea. Taking away guns from citizens has never been shown to work in this nation. That seems to be all that is ever proposed.

Guns have always been in the hands of the people. Mass shootings are a sign of sickness in America as much as theft of AC parts. In the great depression, people did not rob infrastructure. We are sick and dying as a society.

Not enough people believe in anything but getting what is good for themselves or in hurting others because of their pain. It is the Republic of Rome in its last days.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 233 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    The availability of the tools typically used in mass murders (primarily guns) do not seem to have increased enough in the 25 years that mass murders have been “a thing” to explain the apparent increase in such mass murders. So, apparently the tools are not the real problem. Trying to address mass murders by trying to control the tools is likely to affect mass murders only at the margins, if at all.

    The real problem must therefore be something other than the tools (guns). Apparently something in the people. I have lots of potential causes in mind. But, they are numerous, and they’ve been growing for over a half a century, destroying much of the personal and social strengths that enabled a strong society. So we have the highly unsatisfying situation that there is no single solution to the problem of mass murder, and rebuilding in people and in society what we have taken more than a half a century to destroy will not come quickly.

    By the way, as to the guns in particular, over the time that mass murders have become more common, other types of violent crime have decreased (well, up until three years ago). Some people credit an increase in the availability of guns as a contributor to this decrease in violent crime. So consideration is required whether, even if reducing the availability of guns did reduce the number of mass murders, whether such moves might have an unintended consequence of leading to an increase in other types of violent crime, and whether that tradeoff is warranted.

    Yes, and disarming women would seem to be especially unwise.

    • #61
  2. GlenEisenhardt Member
    GlenEisenhardt
    @

    Michael Minnott (View Comment):
    The “gubment” is instrumental to our current state of affairs.  Part of the state’s quest for power over its citizens is to replace the family and morality with itself and its technocratic dictates.

    Lack of direction in the government is responsible for our state of affairs. The government doesn’t have to do things it does but it does because the limited government crowd isn’t interested in running the government or limiting it either. They’re con artists. 

    • #62
  3. Jimmy Carter Member
    Jimmy Carter
    @JimmyCarter

    What is it about “shall not be infringed” do Y’all not get?

     

    It ain’t gun laws We have to enforce or need to create, it’s culture. 

    • #63
  4. Charles Mark Member
    Charles Mark
    @CharlesMark

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that. 

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss. 

    • #64
  5. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that.

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss.

    I’ve lived in Japan for decades.  Japanese gun laws work because they are in Japan.  They also have an annual visit by the police to verify household lists, and they have the right to enter and look about as they please.

    Thanks, but no thanks.

    • #65
  6. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that.

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss.

    What specific new laws do you recommend?

    • #66
  7. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that.

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss.

    What specific new laws do you recommend?

    I’d go with “enforce all the old laws, damnit!”

    • #67
  8. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that.

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss.

    What specific new laws do you recommend?

    I’d settle for repealing a whole bunch of laws and enforcing some existing ones.

    • #68
  9. Full Size Tabby Member
    Full Size Tabby
    @FullSizeTabby

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that.

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss.

    Comparisons across different countries is difficult because of different cultures and histories. The United States has had violence in its culture from its origins as frontier settlements in a sparsely populated land. History and associated traditions different from many other countries, especially many other “Western” countries. 

    One of the reasons I do not see a connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” is that we in the United States have had ready access to guns for a very long time (300+ years) before “mass shootings” became a thing. 

    • #69
  10. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    BDB (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that.

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss.

    What specific new laws do you recommend?

    I’d settle for repealing a whole bunch of laws and enforcing some existing ones.

    Have you seen Congress talking to the ATF guy about the gun stabilizer gadget? They are about to outlaw them or make you register them. They have sold about 10 million of them. 

    • #70
  11. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that.

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss.

    Comparisons across different countries is difficult because of different cultures and histories. The United States has had violence in its culture from its origins as frontier settlements in a sparsely populated land. History and associated traditions different from many other countries, especially many other “Western” countries.

    One of the reasons I do not see a connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” is that we in the United States have had ready access to guns for a very long time (300+ years) before “mass shootings” became a thing.

    It wouldn’t be difficult to argue that one of the main causes comes from a lot of the “diversity” that other countries – such as Japan – don’t have.

    I mentioned it in another comment not that long ago, I should have kept a copy but didn’t…

    I’m reminded again of a story where a government official from Norway, I think it was, was visiting the US and for some reason included a tour of some prison facility, maybe in New York?  He was accompanied by a US counterpart and possibly some officials from the prison.  The Norwegian thought it was terrible how the US prison recidivism rate was so high, compared to Norway.  The US official replied “Our recidivism rate is very low too, for Norwegians.” 

    • #71
  12. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    And isn’t it true that if you exclude large democrat-controlled/mostly-black cities etc, the US actually has a very low death rate from guns?

    • #72
  13. E. Kent Golding Moderator
    E. Kent Golding
    @EKentGolding

    W Bob (View Comment):

    Psychiatric meds are the likely culprit. Both SSRIs and benzos have suicide warnings on them. And for SSRIs the suicide warnings are for the age group that usually commits these massacres. If you’re suicidal or homicidal, what holds you back from acting on your urge is fear, which is lessened by these meds. If you research all the info on these shootings, buried deep down in the footnotes you’ll usually see the shooter was on one of these type of meds. The shooting the other day in that hospital was done by a guy who was in withdrawal from lorazepam. These massacres really got rolling in the 90s after SSRIs became widely used.

    So maybe restrict these medications further ?

    • #73
  14. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    kedavis (View Comment):

    And isn’t it true that if you exclude large democrat-controlled/mostly-black cities etc, the US actually has a very low death rate from guns?

    It’s 2% of the counties, and usually about 10 blocks within those counties. You subtract that out and counties dominated by Scotch-Irish heritage, and we are less violent than Europe.

    • #74
  15. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    TBA (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    What I hate most is that the ONLY solution that people seem to never think of is to pass more gun control laws. After all, if only it was illegal to shoot people then these tragedies wouldn’t happen. Maybe we need to make mass shootings illegal? In a country like ours, how can a mass shootings still be legal? It’s time we passed a law that makes .ass shooting illegal…wait, I’ve just been handed a note. Mass shooting ARE illegal already? Then how can they be happening?

    [snip]

    But the truth is, there is no way to “get rid of guns” without blowing up both the second and the fourth amendments to the Constitution.

    Might as well trim out some of the older amendments to make room for the rights to gender, healthcare, and an indexed living wage.

    A “living wage” is a very elastic standard.  

    • #75
  16. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    BDB (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that.

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss.

    What specific new laws do you recommend?

    I’d settle for repealing a whole bunch of laws and enforcing some existing ones.

    Decades ago a the authors of a study — yet another one — concluded that it was not the severity of the punishments, but rather the certainty of the punishments that determined deterrence. How many of these mass shooters have escaped punishment? 

    • #76
  17. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Randy Weivoda (View Comment):

    Also in Texas today, a motorist drove into several pedestrians killing seven of them. You don’t need firearms to commit mass murder.

    Of course, they’re trying to take away individual transportation too.

    Driving an electric vehicle makes you more virtuous, or so we are told.  A gas or diesel fueled car or truck is as evil as an AR-15 or AK-47.  An EV is like a Nerf gun.  

    • #77
  18. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    kedavis (View Comment):

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):
    + the decline of institutions that foster family and community +

    Gee, how did this happen? We could fix it at gunpoint, so to speak.

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):
    + availability of guns

    What does this mean?

    Just that the availability of firearms is a factor in the frequency and deadliness of these incidents. If it were more difficult for these people to get guns, there would be fewer mass shootings. Not zero, of course, but fewer. And if they can’t get a gun and are still bent to kill a bunch of people, they’re less likely to kill as many with whatever other weapon they can find.

    Some kind of IED could easily kill more people, not fewer.

    Oklahoma City.

    • #78
  19. Charles Mark Member
    Charles Mark
    @CharlesMark

    BDB (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that.

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss.

    I’ve lived in Japan for decades. Japanese gun laws work because they are in Japan. They also have an annual visit by the police to verify household lists, and they have the right to enter and look about as they please.

    Thanks, but no thanks.

    I never woke up in the morning wishing I owned a gun. I never went to bed at night worrying that some randomer might decide to empty his gun in a school or shopping mall. I wouldn’t want to change that. 

    • #79
  20. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):
    + the decline of institutions that foster family and community +

    Gee, how did this happen? We could fix it at gunpoint, so to speak.

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):
    + availability of guns

    What does this mean?

    Just that the availability of firearms is a factor in the frequency and deadliness of these incidents. If it were more difficult for these people to get guns, there would be fewer mass shootings. Not zero, of course, but fewer. And if they can’t get a gun and are still bent to kill a bunch of people, they’re less likely to kill as many with whatever other weapon they can find.

    It’s extremely difficult to legally get a gun in NYS, yet gun crimes happen there with great frequency.

    It’s extremely difficult to legally get a gun in Chicago, yet that city has earned the nickname “Chiraq” due to all the gunfire and gun crime. There was also a “mass shooting” there a few months ago.

    It’s not as great a factor as you may think.

    Legal or otherwise, the availability is a problem. I’m not suggesting a gun control legislation solution. But logically, if you have these other problems – the violent culture, the mental health problems, declining institutions – the relative availability of firearms, through legal or illegal means, is not good.

    Again, to be clear, this doesn’t mean some gun confiscation idea is the way to go. That won’t work and would turn millions of law abiding good people into criminals, aside from being unconstitutional. But let’s not act like it’s not a problem.

    More guns equals less crime.

    Outlaw gun free zones.

    Prosecute straw purchasers. This will never happen of course..

    Make sure the NICS system is filled.

    Here’s a thought – make people who were part of the NICS system who fail partially liable or at least ban them from government jobs or contracts. 

    • #80
  21. Charles Mark Member
    Charles Mark
    @CharlesMark

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that.

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss.

    What specific new laws do you recommend?

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that.

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss.

    What specific new laws do you recommend?

    Maybe a change in mind-set first, with respect. 

    • #81
  22. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    TBA (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):
    + the decline of institutions that foster family and community +

    Gee, how did this happen? We could fix it at gunpoint, so to speak.

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):
    + availability of guns

    What does this mean?

    Just that the availability of firearms is a factor in the frequency and deadliness of these incidents. If it were more difficult for these people to get guns, there would be fewer mass shootings. Not zero, of course, but fewer. And if they can’t get a gun and are still bent to kill a bunch of people, they’re less likely to kill as many with whatever other weapon they can find.

    It’s extremely difficult to legally get a gun in NYS, yet gun crimes happen there with great frequency.

    It’s extremely difficult to legally get a gun in Chicago, yet that city has earned the nickname “Chiraq” due to all the gunfire and gun crime. There was also a “mass shooting” there a few months ago.

    It’s not as great a factor as you may think.

    Legal or otherwise, the availability is a problem. I’m not suggesting a gun control legislation solution. But logically, if you have these other problems – the violent culture, the mental health problems, declining institutions – the relative availability of firearms, through legal or illegal means, is not good.

    Again, to be clear, this doesn’t mean some gun confiscation idea is the way to go. That won’t work and would turn millions of law abiding good people into criminals, aside from being unconstitutional. But let’s not act like it’s not a problem.

    More guns equals less crime.

    Outlaw gun free zones.

    Prosecute straw purchasers. This will never happen of course..

    Make sure the NICS system is filled.

    Here’s a thought – make people who were part of the NICS system who fail partially liable or at least ban them from government jobs or contracts.

    I forget all of the details, but it’s impossible to force them to do this. The guy that did that Texas church shooting, which was the largest mass shooting in a church, was not supposed to be able to buy a gun. The Air Force literally put thousands of names in after that. 

    • #82
  23. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):
    Just that the availability of firearms is a factor in the frequency and deadliness of these incidents. If it were more difficult for these people to get guns, there would be fewer mass shootings. Not zero, of course, but fewer. And if they can’t get a gun and are still bent to kill a bunch of people, they’re less likely to kill as many with whatever other weapon they can find.

    Using that logic there must have been a real spate of these kinds of shooting in the 1920s when there were no gun control laws and guns were even more available than they are today. But there were fewer. Instead the worst massacre of that period was a bombing. Which by the way killed more people than the shootings in Nashville, Louisville, Allen – and today’s automobile mass killing in Brownsville – combined.

    Is it good for a lunatic to have access to guns or is that bad? That’s all I’m saying. Im all for non-lunatics having as many guns as they want. Again, if you have these other factors, as we do now but perhaps didn’t in the 20’s or other eras, easy access to guns is not ideal.

    No one has any specific policy solutions.

    Lock up lunatics? 

    • #83
  24. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that.

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss.

    What specific new laws do you recommend?

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that.

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss.

    What specific new laws do you recommend?

    Maybe a change in mind-set first, with respect.

    99% of gun control conversations go this way.

    • #84
  25. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    TBA (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    D.A. Venters (View Comment):
    Just that the availability of firearms is a factor in the frequency and deadliness of these incidents. If it were more difficult for these people to get guns, there would be fewer mass shootings. Not zero, of course, but fewer. And if they can’t get a gun and are still bent to kill a bunch of people, they’re less likely to kill as many with whatever other weapon they can find.

    Using that logic there must have been a real spate of these kinds of shooting in the 1920s when there were no gun control laws and guns were even more available than they are today. But there were fewer. Instead the worst massacre of that period was a bombing. Which by the way killed more people than the shootings in Nashville, Louisville, Allen – and today’s automobile mass killing in Brownsville – combined.

    Is it good for a lunatic to have access to guns or is that bad? That’s all I’m saying. Im all for non-lunatics having as many guns as they want. Again, if you have these other factors, as we do now but perhaps didn’t in the 20’s or other eras, easy access to guns is not ideal.

    No one has any specific policy solutions.

    Lock up lunatics?

    That is a very interesting subject. Supposedly, in 1960, we had 500,000 people locked up for mental problems. The country was much smaller then. Now it’s like 100,000.

    • #85
  26. Charles Mark Member
    Charles Mark
    @CharlesMark

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that.

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss.

    Comparisons across different countries is difficult because of different cultures and histories. The United States has had violence in its culture from its origins as frontier settlements in a sparsely populated land. History and associated traditions different from many other countries, especially many other “Western” countries.

    One of the reasons I do not see a connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” is that we in the United States have had ready access to guns for a very long time (300+ years) before “mass shootings” became a thing.

    The places where mass shootings take place are rarely frontier settlements in sparsely populated areas. I respect the historical origins of gun-rights, and I recognise the attachment of people to what they see as fundamental rights protected by the Constitution. None of that changes the reality that mad and bad people find it all too easy to get their hands on lethal weapons. 

    • #86
  27. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that.

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss.

    Comparisons across different countries is difficult because of different cultures and histories. The United States has had violence in its culture from its origins as frontier settlements in a sparsely populated land. History and associated traditions different from many other countries, especially many other “Western” countries.

    One of the reasons I do not see a connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” is that we in the United States have had ready access to guns for a very long time (300+ years) before “mass shootings” became a thing.

    The places where mass shootings take place are rarely frontier settlements in sparsely populated areas. I respect the historical origins of gun-rights, and I recognise the attachment of people to what they see as fundamental rights protected by the Constitution. None of that changes the reality that mad and bad people find it all too easy to get their hands on lethal weapons.

    So put the restrictions on the mad and bad people, and leave the rest of us alone.

    • #87
  28. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Randy Weivoda (View Comment):

    Also in Texas today, a motorist drove into several pedestrians killing seven of them. You don’t need firearms to commit mass murder.

    Of course, they’re trying to take away individual transportation too.

    Driving an electric vehicle makes you more virtuous, or so we are told. A gas or diesel fueled car or truck is as evil as an AR-15 or AK-47. An EV is like a Nerf gun.

    It certainly makes you easier to control.  

    • #88
  29. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that.

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss.

    Comparisons across different countries is difficult because of different cultures and histories. The United States has had violence in its culture from its origins as frontier settlements in a sparsely populated land. History and associated traditions different from many other countries, especially many other “Western” countries.

    One of the reasons I do not see a connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” is that we in the United States have had ready access to guns for a very long time (300+ years) before “mass shootings” became a thing.

    The places where mass shootings take place are rarely frontier settlements in sparsely populated areas. I respect the historical origins of gun-rights, and I recognise the attachment of people to what they see as fundamental rights protected by the Constitution. None of that changes the reality that mad and bad people find it all too easy to get their hands on lethal weapons.

    So put the restrictions on the mad and bad people, and leave the rest of us alone.

    You mean the deplorables, the bitter clingers, the Catholics and constitutional nut-jobs?   

    • #89
  30. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    I live in a country where it is very hard to acquire a gun legally. If a constitutional amendment equivalent to the Second Amendment were to be proposed here, I would vote against it. I might even campaign for a No vote. Thankfully, one of the things I don’t have to worry about in any meaningful way, is a risk that my kids’ school or college, or workplaces (or my workplace) will be shot up by some freak. I like that.

    I agree with almost every GOP core principle. But the refusal to recognise the connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” (in the proper sense of the phrase) leaves me at a loss.

    Comparisons across different countries is difficult because of different cultures and histories. The United States has had violence in its culture from its origins as frontier settlements in a sparsely populated land. History and associated traditions different from many other countries, especially many other “Western” countries.

    One of the reasons I do not see a connection between ready access to guns and “mass shootings” is that we in the United States have had ready access to guns for a very long time (300+ years) before “mass shootings” became a thing.

    The places where mass shootings take place are rarely frontier settlements in sparsely populated areas. I respect the historical origins of gun-rights, and I recognise the attachment of people to what they see as fundamental rights protected by the Constitution. None of that changes the reality that mad and bad people find it all too easy to get their hands on lethal weapons.

    And if their misadventures were more likely to be fatal, there would become fewer of these misadventures, by hook AND by crook.  

    • #90
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.