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. philo Member
    philo
    @philo

    Charles Mark (View Comment):
    …the attachment of people to what they see correctly recognize as fundamental rights protected by the Constitution.

    Fixed it for you. You’re welcome.

    • #91
  2. philo Member
    philo
    @philo

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    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.

    There are roughly 20X more deaths due to traffic accidents in the US than even the heavily padded data for “mass shootings.” How much do you worry every time you get into a car? How far are you willing to go to change that?

    Rationalizers will rationalize.

    • #92
  3. MWD B612 "Dawg" Member
    MWD B612 "Dawg"
    @danok1

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    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.

    That’s your country, and I’m happy for you, that you can live in a way you feel blessed. I sincerely mean that.

    But that’s not the country we here in the States live in.

    • #93
  4. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (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.

    99% of people talking like this have no idea of what they are saying. They don’t study anything.

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):
    Maybe we need to make mass shootings illegal?

    The ones that make the news like this are statistically nothing. Worrying about rifles is a waste of time.

    Wipeout gun free zones.

    Prosecute straw purchasers. People that knock themselves out for law school don’t want to do this, but nobody has any better ideas.

    Easier said than done, but make sure the NICS system is full. The church shooter in Texas, recently never should have been able to purchase a handgun. The Air Force didn’t fill up the NICS system. They literally added thousands of names after that incident.

    NICS is a bandaid for politicians to delay or avoid addressing the sick culture. To avoid a burden, they shift it onto law abiding citizens.

    What legislation do you recommend?

    We already have laws against murder. We need to address the sick culture. Politicians won’t do it and prefer to attack gun owners.

    • #94
  5. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (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.

    99% of people talking like this have no idea of what they are saying. They don’t study anything.

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):
    Maybe we need to make mass shootings illegal?

    The ones that make the news like this are statistically nothing. Worrying about rifles is a waste of time.

    Wipeout gun free zones.

    Prosecute straw purchasers. People that knock themselves out for law school don’t want to do this, but nobody has any better ideas.

    Easier said than done, but make sure the NICS system is full. The church shooter in Texas, recently never should have been able to purchase a handgun. The Air Force didn’t fill up the NICS system. They literally added thousands of names after that incident.

    NICS is a bandaid for politicians to delay or avoid addressing the sick culture. To avoid a burden, they shift it onto law abiding citizens.

     

    What legislation do you recommend?

    We already have laws against murder. We need to address the sick culture. Politicians want do it and prefer to attack gun owners.

    I don’t see what the problem is with the NICS program.

    • #95
  6. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    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.

    Sounds reasonable. We could add another question to the NICS paperwork : “20. Do you intend to shoot innocent people?” That should do it.

    • #96
  7. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (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.

    One really needs to address the illegal means of getting firearms. Almost all “gun violence” is committed by those who, right now, are prohibited by law from possessing firearms. Sure, some of these “mass shootings” are done by people who are not prohibited, but these are not even a rounding error in terms of gun crimes committed in the U.S.

    So what ideas do you have to stop, or at least slow down, the acquisition of firearms by prohibited persons?

    Mass shootings are happening now that we require background checks. The country did better before we started having government permission. it isn’t the guns.

    • #97
  8. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    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.

    What defines a “lunatic”? And why should I trust the government to decide what classifies one as a “lunatic”? Asking for my MAGA friends.

    • #98
  9. Charles Mark Member
    Charles Mark
    @CharlesMark

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    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.

    That’s your country, and I’m happy for you, that you can live in a way you feel blessed. I sincerely mean that.

    But that’s not the country we hear in the States live in.

    My country knows only too well the damage caused by gunmen. Our strict laws derive from bitter experience. 

    • #99
  10. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    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 country do you live in that is free of crime and murder? If not free of these things, why do you not defend yourself and your loved ones? Btw. Mass shootings are a problem in gun-free zones. Elsewhere, armed citizens terminate the threat.

    • #100
  11. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    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.

    Different strokes and all that. I guess you’ve never had to use a gun in self-defense?

    I now live in a state where concealed carry is considered a constitutional right; no permit needed. I never worry about someone emptying his/her gun on strangers. An armed society is a polite society because potential aggressors never know when they might attack someone who is “walking heavy”. 

    • #101
  12. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    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.

    Japan is also an island, has strict border control, and a different culture. Our problem is cultural

    • #102
  13. MWD B612 "Dawg" Member
    MWD B612 "Dawg"
    @danok1

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    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.

    That’s your country, and I’m happy for you, that you can live in a way you feel blessed. I sincerely mean that.

    But that’s not the country we hear in the States live in.

    My country knows only too well the damage caused by gunmen. Our strict laws derive from bitter experience.

    Again, that’s your country (which ever one it is). Again, I happy for your situation.

    In the U.S. our own laws come from our own bitter experience. Those we thought were own countrymen, though an ocean away, tried to seize our own weapons. The weapons needed to defend our homes and communities. Thus our constitutionally-protected right to keep and bear arms.

    • #103
  14. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    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.

    This comment makes no sense. We have home invasions in many communities, robberies, gang violence, and mentally ill folks shooting people. Are you suggesting that if we disarm, those criminals will become law-abiding citizens? Or are you suggesting we should disarm and become victims?  

     

    • #104
  15. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (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.

    99% of people talking like this have no idea of what they are saying. They don’t study anything.

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):
    Maybe we need to make mass shootings illegal?

    The ones that make the news like this are statistically nothing. Worrying about rifles is a waste of time.

    Wipeout gun free zones.

    Prosecute straw purchasers. People that knock themselves out for law school don’t want to do this, but nobody has any better ideas.

    Easier said than done, but make sure the NICS system is full. The church shooter in Texas, recently never should have been able to purchase a handgun. The Air Force didn’t fill up the NICS system. They literally added thousands of names after that incident.

    NICS is a bandaid for politicians to delay or avoid addressing the sick culture. To avoid a burden, they shift it onto law abiding citizens.

     

    What legislation do you recommend?

    We already have laws against murder. We need to address the sick culture. Politicians want do it and prefer to attack gun owners.

    For well over a century, if the question was “revolver”, the answer was “Smith & Wesson”, or so I’ve heard. I think mine must be lacking motivation. I mean it’s right there, free to move about, and not once has it picked up those nearby “Critical Defense” .357 Magnum cartridges and loaded itself, to say nothing of going out on the streets looking for trouble. It’s so lazy I don’t even lock up the ammo. Of course, there are no kids or liberals sharing the residence. 

    • #105
  16. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    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.

    Some denials are mistakes.

    • #106
  17. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    philo (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):
    …the attachment of people to what they see correctly recognize as fundamental rights protected by the Constitution.

    Fixed it for you. You’re welcome.

    Why do we have to explain a human right?

    • #107
  18. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    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.

    Democrats turned them loose- said it was cruel to lock them up.

    • #108
  19. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    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.

    They find it easy to get them in Australia, too.

    • #109
  20. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    philo (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    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.

    There are roughly 20X more deaths due to traffic accidents in the US than even the heavily padded data for “mass shootings.” How much do you worry every time you get into a car? How far are you willing to go to change that?

    Rationalizers will rationalize.

    • #110
  21. 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.

    No, they’re “gun free zones.”

    • #111
  22. W Bob Member
    W Bob
    @WBob

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    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 ?

    SSRIs aren’t controlled substances. And they’re handed out like candy. Benzos are level 4 controlled substances, and there’s been a crackdown on them over the last few years because they contributed to many opioid deaths. 

    • #112
  23. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (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.

    99% of people talking like this have no idea of what they are saying. They don’t study anything.

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):
    Maybe we need to make mass shootings illegal?

    The ones that make the news like this are statistically nothing. Worrying about rifles is a waste of time.

    Wipeout gun free zones.

    Prosecute straw purchasers. People that knock themselves out for law school don’t want to do this, but nobody has any better ideas.

    Easier said than done, but make sure the NICS system is full. The church shooter in Texas, recently never should have been able to purchase a handgun. The Air Force didn’t fill up the NICS system. They literally added thousands of names after that incident.

    NICS is a bandaid for politicians to delay or avoid addressing the sick culture. To avoid a burden, they shift it onto law abiding citizens.

     

    What legislation do you recommend?

    We already have laws against murder. We need to address the sick culture. Politicians want do it and prefer to attack gun owners.

    I don’t see what the problem is with the NICS program.

    It doesn’t work if the data is not input.

    • #113
  24. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    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.

    That’s your country, and I’m happy for you, that you can live in a way you feel blessed. I sincerely mean that.

    But that’s not the country we hear in the States live in.

    My country knows only too well the damage caused by gunmen. Our strict laws derive from bitter experience.

    You sure that things didn’t get better possibly due to some other political accord?  Or are the same gunman-inspiring tensions still simmering, but with loads of angry terrorists kicking rocks and moaning about how very ‘ard it is to get a gun?  Nobody knows how to build a bomb?   Will no one rid me of these inturbulent laymen!

    • #114
  25. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    kedavis (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (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.

    99% of people talking like this have no idea of what they are saying. They don’t study anything.

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):
    Maybe we need to make mass shootings illegal?

    The ones that make the news like this are statistically nothing. Worrying about rifles is a waste of time.

    Wipeout gun free zones.

    Prosecute straw purchasers. People that knock themselves out for law school don’t want to do this, but nobody has any better ideas.

    Easier said than done, but make sure the NICS system is full. The church shooter in Texas, recently never should have been able to purchase a handgun. The Air Force didn’t fill up the NICS system. They literally added thousands of names after that incident.

    NICS is a bandaid for politicians to delay or avoid addressing the sick culture. To avoid a burden, they shift it onto law abiding citizens.

     

    What legislation do you recommend?

    We already have laws against murder. We need to address the sick culture. Politicians want do it and prefer to attack gun owners.

    I don’t see what the problem is with the NICS program.

    It doesn’t work if the data is not input.

    It also doesn’t work because it can’t predict the future.

    • #115
  26. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    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 ?

    That is stupid. 

    It is like noticing that people in seatbelts die in car crashes therefore we should eliminate seatbelts 

    We give people who are unstable medications. The more we do that, the more likely it is someone who is unstable will be on meds. 

    • #116
  27. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    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 ?

    That is stupid.

    It is like noticing that people in seatbelts die in car crashes therefore we should eliminate seatbelts

    We give people who are unstable medications. The more we do that, the more likely it is someone who is unstable will be on meds.

    While there is an important point there (equivalent to survivorship bias), the selection bias argument is weakened to the degree that SSRIs and such are overprescribed, particularly among youth.  

    Seeing as how I believe that ADD/ADHD etc is ridiculously overdiagnosed by our feminized youth apparatus, you can see how I also believe the meds are overprescribed.  

    • #117
  28. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    BDB (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    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 ?

    That is stupid.

    It is like noticing that people in seatbelts die in car crashes therefore we should eliminate seatbelts

    We give people who are unstable medications. The more we do that, the more likely it is someone who is unstable will be on meds.

    While there is an important point there (equivalent to survivorship bias), the selection bias argument is weakened to the degree that SSRIs and such are overprescribed, particularly among youth.

    Seeing as how I believe that ADD/ADHD etc is ridiculously overdiagnosed by our feminized youth apparatus, you can see how I also believe the meds are overprescribed.

    Overprescribed? I have seen SSRIs help a lot of people over the years. I have 30 years of experience in the field. 

    • #118
  29. Charles Mark Member
    Charles Mark
    @CharlesMark

    BDB (View Comment):

    philo (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):
    …the attachment of people to what they see correctly recognize as fundamental rights protected by the Constitution.

    Fixed it for you. You’re welcome.

    Why do we have to explain a human right?

    The right to bear arms is in the Constitution. That doesn’t make it a human right and I don’t recognise it as such. 

    I have made a simple point – that a society where guns are rare is safer than one where they are plentiful and easily obtained. I know the USA and Ireland are different. I know that Ireland has gun crime, but at a vastly lower level, and mostly involving criminals killing other criminals. When an innocent is killed or injured, it is seen as an enormous outrage,  not a trigger for politicking and finger-pointing on all sides. How many people spent time today poring over social media hoping that the shooter was or was not of a particular skin colour? Because that it has come down to – is it “a white supremacist”, an immigrant, or maybe a transgender person? And then the different sides report or do not report the facts, based on their political leanings. And this goes round and round, with a heightened siege mentality on one side, and an arrogant dismissal of legitimate concerns about safety on the other. And more innocents die.  

    If you fail to see a problem, you’re never going to solve it. 

     

    • #119
  30. Charles Mark Member
    Charles Mark
    @CharlesMark

    BDB (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    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.

    That’s your country, and I’m happy for you, that you can live in a way you feel blessed. I sincerely mean that.

    But that’s not the country we hear in the States live in.

    My country knows only too well the damage caused by gunmen. Our strict laws derive from bitter experience.

    You sure that things didn’t get better possibly due to some other political accord? Or are the same gunman-inspiring tensions still simmering, but with loads of angry terrorists kicking rocks and moaning about how very ‘ard it is to get a gun? Nobody knows how to build a bomb? Will no one rid me of these inturbulent laymen!

    Flippancy is a poor form of debate about serious matters. 

    • #120
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.