Author Topic: Another school shooting - elementary school  (Read 22675 times)

JLee

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7512
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #150 on: May 26, 2022, 02:22:48 PM »
I can't help but wonder if the 1934/1986 acts didn't exist and everyone had automatic weapons today, if the gun crowd's argument would be the same as it is now. "Good luck changing the Constitution!"  Yet, we do have the 1934/1986 acts.
No need to imagine, or even remember back that far. In late 2017 the NRA was supporting gun control regulation *gasp* and a Republican president implemented a ban via executive order *double gasp*

lol I forgot about that, you're right!

jambongris

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 431
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #151 on: May 26, 2022, 03:40:47 PM »
The New York Review - Our Moloch

This came out after Sandy Hook but since nothing has changed it’s still prescient.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23129
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #152 on: May 26, 2022, 03:51:59 PM »
The New York Review - Our Moloch

This came out after Sandy Hook but since nothing has changed it’s still prescient.

It's really the unchanging nature of mass gun murders in the US that is the most frustrating to hear time and time and time again.

jambongris

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 431
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #153 on: May 26, 2022, 03:56:10 PM »
The New York Review - Our Moloch

This came out after Sandy Hook but since nothing has changed it’s still prescient.

It's really the unchanging nature of mass gun murders in the US that is the most frustrating to hear time and time and time again.
The Onion just reposts the same article each time it happens with the names and locations changed. It’s apt and depressing and confounding to those of us on the outside looking in.

‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1866
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #154 on: May 26, 2022, 04:37:53 PM »
Quote from: Washington Post
But on Fox News, Cruz slammed what he called “political posturing” from Democrats like O’Rourke after the attack in Uvalde. He told host Jesse Watters that he wants schools to install bulletproof doors and bulletproof glass to help prevent shootings.
“Have one door into and out of the school and have that one door, armed police officers at that door,” Cruz argued. “If that had happened, if those federal grants had gone to this school, when that psychopath arrived, the armed police officers could have taken him out and we would have 19 children and two teachers still alive.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/26/ted-cruz-uvalde-shooting-america-guns/

Ted Cruz has put out a proposal.  Surely he must know it wouldn't pass muster with fire codes.  Somehow I don't think he's being serious about preventing these incidents.

Right.  It's "political posturing" when Democrats want to do something to prevent further tragedies, but Ted Cruz just has to mention "those federal grants" and what should have been done with them, because we have to blame Biden somehow for not turning every Texas school into a fortress.

To be fair, O’Rourke was certainly politically posturing to try to regain some relevance, and Ted Cruz is a heartless, despicable political opportunist. Both can be true.

FrugalToque

  • Global Moderator
  • Pencil Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 863
  • Location: Canada
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #155 on: May 26, 2022, 06:48:16 PM »
Quote from: Washington Post
But on Fox News, Cruz slammed what he called “political posturing” from Democrats like O’Rourke after the attack in Uvalde. He told host Jesse Watters that he wants schools to install bulletproof doors and bulletproof glass to help prevent shootings.
“Have one door into and out of the school and have that one door, armed police officers at that door,” Cruz argued. “If that had happened, if those federal grants had gone to this school, when that psychopath arrived, the armed police officers could have taken him out and we would have 19 children and two teachers still alive.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/26/ted-cruz-uvalde-shooting-america-guns/

Ted Cruz has put out a proposal.  Surely he must know it wouldn't pass muster with fire codes.  Somehow I don't think he's being serious about preventing these incidents.

Right.  It's "political posturing" when Democrats want to do something to prevent further tragedies, but Ted Cruz just has to mention "those federal grants" and what should have been done with them, because we have to blame Biden somehow for not turning every Texas school into a fortress.

To be fair, O’Rourke was certainly politically posturing to try to regain some relevance, and Ted Cruz is a heartless, despicable political opportunist. Both can be true.

Can't argue with that.  All protesting is, in a sense, posturing, trying to get attention.

MasterStache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2912
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #156 on: May 26, 2022, 07:10:06 PM »
Quote from: Washington Post
But on Fox News, Cruz slammed what he called “political posturing” from Democrats like O’Rourke after the attack in Uvalde. He told host Jesse Watters that he wants schools to install bulletproof doors and bulletproof glass to help prevent shootings.
“Have one door into and out of the school and have that one door, armed police officers at that door,” Cruz argued. “If that had happened, if those federal grants had gone to this school, when that psychopath arrived, the armed police officers could have taken him out and we would have 19 children and two teachers still alive.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/26/ted-cruz-uvalde-shooting-america-guns/

Ted Cruz has put out a proposal.  Surely he must know it wouldn't pass muster with fire codes.  Somehow I don't think he's being serious about preventing these incidents.

Right.  It's "political posturing" when Democrats want to do something to prevent further tragedies, but Ted Cruz just has to mention "those federal grants" and what should have been done with them, because we have to blame Biden somehow for not turning every Texas school into a fortress.

To be fair, O’Rourke was certainly politically posturing to try to regain some relevance, and Ted Cruz is a heartless, despicable political opportunist. Both can be true.

Yep, but he's not wrong. The one thing he said that rings true time and time again. "This was totally predictable." It was true during the last shooting, and the one before that, and before that rinse and repeat. It's totally predictable it will happen again. It's totally predictable the one person in this thread defending this child murders right to purchase a firearm and the next child murder's right to purchase a firearm because they themselves are scared shitless about losing their own attachment to a firearm. It's totally predictable that gun nuts lie, deflect and offer no real viable solutions. It's totally predictable they don't give a shit about children's lives. Oh except the unborn, that's right. Once you're born, well good luck, it's a dog eat dog world and right now you better be able to defend yourself at 6 and 7 years old. Otherwise, tough shit. Cuz I needs muh guns. 

NaN

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 458
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #157 on: May 26, 2022, 08:21:59 PM »
The concept of shooting up a school, event, church, or other public establishment is a virus that is endemic in the minds of society such that any mentally ill individual that snaps and goes off the rails has a way-too-large chance of ending up towards this unimaginable behavior. It is not just a mental health problem, even though it is a huge part. It is not just a gun problem, even though it is also a huge part. This concept exists in the world and like a coronavirus it almost seems impossible to erase.

But this is what has to be mitigated. Not just mental health improved. Not just gun bans, etc. We have to approach this as an illness.

Trying to remove this concept from all mentally deranged individual is practically impossible, but starting services is a huge start. If Republicans can get on board with providing mental health services then that is a huge win itself1. But even if mental health services started in full earnest today it would take years, if not decades, to make a dent. As even the Texas Governor (or one of his other members at the podium2) said it is possible even mental health counseling to this individual might have only been effective if it was started many months ago.

And so then what? Should we just sit around and do nothing? Wait for the next one like we do now?

Like during the pandemic when mass gatherings and many other things were prohibited, the approach to mass shootings should be similar. We didn't just wait around for the next super spreader event. Thus, I hate to say it, but new gun ownership should be slowed down, if not completely paused, to allow for mental health services to work and to prevent more mass shootings. Further, we should increase resources on prosecuting existing gun owners if their gun is used in a mass shooting, like how the couple in Michigan is being charged. It should be known - "Our country is ill. Keep your gun but keep it safe. Let's stop these shootings." This should come from both parties but surprisingly it does not.

If someone is not comfortable with that responsibility then maybe the NRA can help the industry figure out a local 'gun storage locker' business concept. If theaters, restaurants, cruise lines, etc. can be impacted by a virus then why can't a gun industry be impacted by a mass shooting epidemic? Fine, in good Old American way, let's bail them out during this pause. Whatever it takes to stop school shootings.

After a few years, hopefully by the combination of mental health improvements and gun restrictions we get back to a situation where a mass shooting is not a go-to outlet for an mentally unwell individual. And look, I hear it already, "you say pause, but you really just want a permanent ban! You will trick us!"  I don't think we will get to any normalcy without restricting guns in the same way we could not stop many more COVID deaths without restricting mass gatherings. Were these mass gathering restrictions the total answer? No. But with everything else (masks, vaccines, isolation, etc.) it adds up. Are they permanent? No. So there is precedent taking these draconian steps and returning to some normalcy. I think we could do this with gun restrictions as well.

But all of this is likely a pipe dream.

[1] And an example of Republican mental health track record, check out the state of New Mexico's former governor Susana Martinez. She gutted mental health organizations in the state to claim some victory over corruption, which was found out to be a total fabrication. Since then the state has suffered from huge problems that resulted in the complete dismantling of existing services to promote contracting out the service to Arizona, which was completely overpaid, incompetent, and resulted in a net-negative in services (i.e. ripping away years of established patient-therapist relationships and starting new). The party does not have a good history on improving mental health services.
[2] This event was best summarized in a comment on Reddit: "Gov Abbot and crew accuses Beto of political grandstanding from a grandstand with a bunch of politicians."
[3] Consider all the railing against Obamacare and government sponsored anything I can't imagine any Republican being on board with pushing health services.

« Last Edit: May 26, 2022, 09:32:43 PM by NaN »

fuzzy math

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1726
  • Age: 42
  • Location: PNW
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #158 on: May 26, 2022, 08:45:05 PM »
Shaun King has a video on instagram of parents at the school begging the police to go in and stop the shooter. Apparently they waited over 45 minutes and only went in because many of the parents were armed and were going to do it themselves if the police did not intervene.
Fucking awful. The whole thing. I have a 4th grader whose last day was today. All the kiddos killed were 4th graders. They had just gotten their end of the year awards.

The shooter did legally purchase his weapon, a 28 day ban would have held him off only for this school year because school would have been out. Given his mental status, I think he would have gone to a mall, theatre, grocery store or where ever else he could have found after ultimately waiting his prescribed time. The dude was a ticking time bomb.

OzzieandHarriet

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1181
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #159 on: May 26, 2022, 10:10:22 PM »
If 100 or so police officers, supposedly trained and armed to the teeth, cannot manage to stop one skinny teenager* with ONE of these guns in less than an hour, these guns are too dangerous and should be banned.

LAWN DARTS were banned in 1997 after just a few incidents where children were injured or killed.

*I read an interview today with a woman who gave the shooter a ride a few months ago because a friend was the mother’s boyfriend or something and asked her to pick the kid up. She said he was very small and slight and looked more like 14 than 18, and would barely talk to her.

ministashy

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 233
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #160 on: May 27, 2022, 12:56:46 AM »
Shaun King has a video on instagram of parents at the school begging the police to go in and stop the shooter. Apparently they waited over 45 minutes and only went in because many of the parents were armed and were going to do it themselves if the police did not intervene.
Fucking awful. The whole thing. I have a 4th grader whose last day was today. All the kiddos killed were 4th graders. They had just gotten their end of the year awards.

The shooter did legally purchase his weapon, a 28 day ban would have held him off only for this school year because school would have been out. Given his mental status, I think he would have gone to a mall, theatre, grocery store or where ever else he could have found after ultimately waiting his prescribed time. The dude was a ticking time bomb.

I didn't think I could get any more angry about this than I already was, but the news that police sat on their thumbs for an HOUR while the shooter was busy killing kids in the classroom he'd barricaded himself makes me positively incandescent.  They had the training, the weapons, and the duty, and they failed to act.  Each and every officer who was on the scene and failed to enter should be fired and sued to within an inch of their life.

An unarmed mother evaded police, jumped the fence and charged into that school and got her two kids out (after previously being put in handcuffs by those same police because she was yelling at them to do something).  Those officers are fucking cowards, and I hope they're pilloried as such.

As for the 28 day waiting period- maybe he would have gotten the guns, and gone on to shoot up innocents somewhere else.  Maybe he would have gone home and decided that 15 minutes of carnage and revenge wasn't worth ruining his life over.  Maybe he would have touched some grass, decided to get out of that one horse town and make a better life for himself away from his family.  We'll never know, will we?

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8827
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #161 on: May 27, 2022, 02:27:45 AM »
Shaun King has a video on instagram of parents at the school begging the police to go in and stop the shooter. Apparently they waited over 45 minutes and only went in because many of the parents were armed and were going to do it themselves if the police did not intervene.
Fucking awful. The whole thing. I have a 4th grader whose last day was today. All the kiddos killed were 4th graders. They had just gotten their end of the year awards.

The shooter did legally purchase his weapon, a 28 day ban would have held him off only for this school year because school would have been out. Given his mental status, I think he would have gone to a mall, theatre, grocery store or where ever else he could have found after ultimately waiting his prescribed time. The dude was a ticking time bomb.

I didn't think I could get any more angry about this than I already was, but the news that police sat on their thumbs for an HOUR while the shooter was busy killing kids in the classroom he'd barricaded himself makes me positively incandescent.  They had the training, the weapons, and the duty, and they failed to act.  Each and every officer who was on the scene and failed to enter should be fired and sued to within an inch of their life.

An unarmed mother evaded police, jumped the fence and charged into that school and got her two kids out (after previously being put in handcuffs by those same police because she was yelling at them to do something).  Those officers are fucking cowards, and I hope they're pilloried as such.

As for the 28 day waiting period- maybe he would have gotten the guns, and gone on to shoot up innocents somewhere else.  Maybe he would have gone home and decided that 15 minutes of carnage and revenge wasn't worth ruining his life over.  Maybe he would have touched some grass, decided to get out of that one horse town and make a better life for himself away from his family.  We'll never know, will we?
Why should the police care more than the politicians and the people who vote for them care?  Why should they go into a situation where they know they are outgunned because politicians and the people who vote for those politicians put their personal power and personal prejudices first over caring about kids being shot at school?  Why should they be the ones to risk death to try to make up for every else's failures?

I don't blame the poor buggers.  I blame America.

RetiredAt63

  • CMTO 2023 Attendees
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *
  • Posts: 20747
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #162 on: May 27, 2022, 04:06:56 AM »
Why should the police care more than the politicians and the people who vote for them care?  Why should they go into a situation where they know they are outgunned because politicians and the people who vote for those politicians put their personal power and personal prejudices first over caring about kids being shot at school?  Why should they be the ones to risk death to try to make up for every else's failures?


Isn't that part of the job description?

And how can a bunch of police officers be outgunned by one kid? 
« Last Edit: May 27, 2022, 04:55:18 AM by RetiredAt63 »

Undecided

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1237
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #163 on: May 27, 2022, 04:21:14 AM »
Shaun King has a video on instagram of parents at the school begging the police to go in and stop the shooter. Apparently they waited over 45 minutes and only went in because many of the parents were armed and were going to do it themselves if the police did not intervene.
Fucking awful. The whole thing. I have a 4th grader whose last day was today. All the kiddos killed were 4th graders. They had just gotten their end of the year awards.

The shooter did legally purchase his weapon, a 28 day ban would have held him off only for this school year because school would have been out. Given his mental status, I think he would have gone to a mall, theatre, grocery store or where ever else he could have found after ultimately waiting his prescribed time. The dude was a ticking time bomb.

I didn't think I could get any more angry about this than I already was, but the news that police sat on their thumbs for an HOUR while the shooter was busy killing kids in the classroom he'd barricaded himself makes me positively incandescent.  They had the training, the weapons, and the duty, and they failed to act.  Each and every officer who was on the scene and failed to enter should be fired and sued to within an inch of their life.

An unarmed mother evaded police, jumped the fence and charged into that school and got her two kids out (after previously being put in handcuffs by those same police because she was yelling at them to do something).  Those officers are fucking cowards, and I hope they're pilloried as such.

As for the 28 day waiting period- maybe he would have gotten the guns, and gone on to shoot up innocents somewhere else.  Maybe he would have gone home and decided that 15 minutes of carnage and revenge wasn't worth ruining his life over.  Maybe he would have touched some grass, decided to get out of that one horse town and make a better life for himself away from his family.  We'll never know, will we?
Why should the police care more than the politicians and the people who vote for them care?  Why should they go into a situation where they know they are outgunned because politicians and the people who vote for those politicians put their personal power and personal prejudices first over caring about kids being shot at school?  Why should they be the ones to risk death to try to make up for every else's failures?

I don't blame the poor buggers.  I blame America.

I don’t understand this at all. Why did they choose to become police officers? What do you mean they were outgunned? The US has been militarizing the police for decades.

I’m genuinely not sure I understand you. They should be the ones to risk death because that’s exactly the deal they signed up for. Fourth graders did not.

Really, maybe I’ve misunderstood you,

MasterStache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2912
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #164 on: May 27, 2022, 05:31:52 AM »
Not a fan of MSM and rarely if ever turn it on, but Lawrence sums this up as well as I could. And I say Kudos to Beto, political posturing or whatever.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1pd7FcQ7tI
« Last Edit: May 27, 2022, 05:34:20 AM by MasterStache »

FrugalToque

  • Global Moderator
  • Pencil Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 863
  • Location: Canada
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #165 on: May 27, 2022, 05:54:53 AM »
Not a fan of MSM and rarely if ever turn it on, but Lawrence sums this up as well as I could. And I say Kudos to Beto, political posturing or whatever.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1pd7FcQ7tI

This is something I didn't know.

According to the governor there, the gunman in this case actually ran into two police officers outside the school.  They "engaged" him, but for some reason, the 2+ good guys with guns didn't stop him.

If two (or more) trained police officers couldn't stop the guy, how are we supposed to solve this problem by arming teachers, principals etc.?  I suppose we could flood the whole school with guns and hope that someone can shoot the next gunman properly, but I suspect that having that many guns lying around would lead to more "accidents" than lives saved.

MasterStache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2912
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #166 on: May 27, 2022, 06:02:30 AM »
Not a fan of MSM and rarely if ever turn it on, but Lawrence sums this up as well as I could. And I say Kudos to Beto, political posturing or whatever.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1pd7FcQ7tI

This is something I didn't know.

According to the governor there, the gunman in this case actually ran into two police officers outside the school.  They "engaged" him, but for some reason, the 2+ good guys with guns didn't stop him.

If two (or more) trained police officers couldn't stop the guy, how are we supposed to solve this problem by arming teachers, principals etc.?  I suppose we could flood the whole school with guns and hope that someone can shoot the next gunman properly, but I suspect that having that many guns lying around would lead to more "accidents" than lives saved.

It's quite telling how Cruz's proposals are immediately rebuked by Abbott's description of what transpired. More information is coming out and it's just straight up F'd up. Sounds like the most inept police department. Here is some more on the latest.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOIvRoVO4RM

These people are so freaking lost. They can't even get their stories straight. Abbott will hold absolutely zero of them accountable. He has an NRA convention to attend.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2022, 06:13:53 AM by MasterStache »

FIRE Artist

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1070
  • Location: YEG
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #167 on: May 27, 2022, 06:14:54 AM »
Shaun King has a video on instagram of parents at the school begging the police to go in and stop the shooter. Apparently they waited over 45 minutes and only went in because many of the parents were armed and were going to do it themselves if the police did not intervene.
Fucking awful. The whole thing. I have a 4th grader whose last day was today. All the kiddos killed were 4th graders. They had just gotten their end of the year awards.

The shooter did legally purchase his weapon, a 28 day ban would have held him off only for this school year because school would have been out. Given his mental status, I think he would have gone to a mall, theatre, grocery store or where ever else he could have found after ultimately waiting his prescribed time. The dude was a ticking time bomb.

These types of shootings are suicidal acts, so I assume that like suicide, it might be thought of in advance but the decision to act is temporal and situational, so a delay in access to guns should prevent many of these kinds of shooting events.  I assume that like normal suicide (where one simply offs themselves instead of creating a suicide by cop situation, the individual doesn’t simply find another time or way if their preferred method of offing themselves is not available to them.  I am using Malcolm Gladwell (can’t remember which book) as my reference here.  Of course I am no expert, but a delayed event isn’t likely worse and could be significantly better or avoided. 

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8827
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #168 on: May 27, 2022, 06:32:27 AM »
Why should the police care more than the politicians and the people who vote for them care?  Why should they go into a situation where they know they are outgunned because politicians and the people who vote for those politicians put their personal power and personal prejudices first over caring about kids being shot at school?  Why should they be the ones to risk death to try to make up for every else's failures?


Isn't that part of the job description?

And how can a bunch of police officers be outgunned by one kid?
It's part of the job description if you are in the military and at war.  Not otherwise - which is why police who do put themselves in harms way get bravery awards for going beyond their duty.

And as to how they can be outgunned, police carry hand guns, the "kid" (who was in fact a legal adult) had an assault weapon designed for military use.

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8827
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #169 on: May 27, 2022, 06:34:26 AM »
Shaun King has a video on instagram of parents at the school begging the police to go in and stop the shooter. Apparently they waited over 45 minutes and only went in because many of the parents were armed and were going to do it themselves if the police did not intervene.
Fucking awful. The whole thing. I have a 4th grader whose last day was today. All the kiddos killed were 4th graders. They had just gotten their end of the year awards.

The shooter did legally purchase his weapon, a 28 day ban would have held him off only for this school year because school would have been out. Given his mental status, I think he would have gone to a mall, theatre, grocery store or where ever else he could have found after ultimately waiting his prescribed time. The dude was a ticking time bomb.

I didn't think I could get any more angry about this than I already was, but the news that police sat on their thumbs for an HOUR while the shooter was busy killing kids in the classroom he'd barricaded himself makes me positively incandescent.  They had the training, the weapons, and the duty, and they failed to act.  Each and every officer who was on the scene and failed to enter should be fired and sued to within an inch of their life.

An unarmed mother evaded police, jumped the fence and charged into that school and got her two kids out (after previously being put in handcuffs by those same police because she was yelling at them to do something).  Those officers are fucking cowards, and I hope they're pilloried as such.

As for the 28 day waiting period- maybe he would have gotten the guns, and gone on to shoot up innocents somewhere else.  Maybe he would have gone home and decided that 15 minutes of carnage and revenge wasn't worth ruining his life over.  Maybe he would have touched some grass, decided to get out of that one horse town and make a better life for himself away from his family.  We'll never know, will we?
Why should the police care more than the politicians and the people who vote for them care?  Why should they go into a situation where they know they are outgunned because politicians and the people who vote for those politicians put their personal power and personal prejudices first over caring about kids being shot at school?  Why should they be the ones to risk death to try to make up for every else's failures?

I don't blame the poor buggers.  I blame America.

I don’t understand this at all. Why did they choose to become police officers? What do you mean they were outgunned? The US has been militarizing the police for decades.

I’m genuinely not sure I understand you. They should be the ones to risk death because that’s exactly the deal they signed up for. Fourth graders did not.

Really, maybe I’ve misunderstood you,
The only people who sign up to risk death are the military in wartime.  Anyone else who puts themselves at risk of death does so beyond their duty and will be in line for a bravery award for going above and beyond.

The fourth graders didn't sign up to face death from an AR-15.  Every adult in America signed up on their behalf.

OtherJen

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5267
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #170 on: May 27, 2022, 06:43:20 AM »
Why should the police care more than the politicians and the people who vote for them care?  Why should they go into a situation where they know they are outgunned because politicians and the people who vote for those politicians put their personal power and personal prejudices first over caring about kids being shot at school?  Why should they be the ones to risk death to try to make up for every else's failures?


Isn't that part of the job description?

And how can a bunch of police officers be outgunned by one kid?
It's part of the job description if you are in the military and at war.  Not otherwise - which is why police who do put themselves in harms way get bravery awards for going beyond their duty.

And as to how they can be outgunned, police carry hand guns, the "kid" (who was in fact a legal adult) had an assault weapon designed for military use.

Given that even many small-town police units in the US have SWAT teams and military gear, I'd argue that they have begun to view themselves as a type of military at war. Militarization Of Police 'Ramped Up' After 9/11, 'Rise Of The Warrior Cop' Author Says (WBUR, Sept. 9, 2021)


Undecided

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1237
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #171 on: May 27, 2022, 07:16:19 AM »
Shaun King has a video on instagram of parents at the school begging the police to go in and stop the shooter. Apparently they waited over 45 minutes and only went in because many of the parents were armed and were going to do it themselves if the police did not intervene.
Fucking awful. The whole thing. I have a 4th grader whose last day was today. All the kiddos killed were 4th graders. They had just gotten their end of the year awards.

The shooter did legally purchase his weapon, a 28 day ban would have held him off only for this school year because school would have been out. Given his mental status, I think he would have gone to a mall, theatre, grocery store or where ever else he could have found after ultimately waiting his prescribed time. The dude was a ticking time bomb.

I didn't think I could get any more angry about this than I already was, but the news that police sat on their thumbs for an HOUR while the shooter was busy killing kids in the classroom he'd barricaded himself makes me positively incandescent.  They had the training, the weapons, and the duty, and they failed to act.  Each and every officer who was on the scene and failed to enter should be fired and sued to within an inch of their life.

An unarmed mother evaded police, jumped the fence and charged into that school and got her two kids out (after previously being put in handcuffs by those same police because she was yelling at them to do something).  Those officers are fucking cowards, and I hope they're pilloried as such.

As for the 28 day waiting period- maybe he would have gotten the guns, and gone on to shoot up innocents somewhere else.  Maybe he would have gone home and decided that 15 minutes of carnage and revenge wasn't worth ruining his life over.  Maybe he would have touched some grass, decided to get out of that one horse town and make a better life for himself away from his family.  We'll never know, will we?
Why should the police care more than the politicians and the people who vote for them care?  Why should they go into a situation where they know they are outgunned because politicians and the people who vote for those politicians put their personal power and personal prejudices first over caring about kids being shot at school?  Why should they be the ones to risk death to try to make up for every else's failures?

I don't blame the poor buggers.  I blame America.

I don’t understand this at all. Why did they choose to become police officers? What do you mean they were outgunned? The US has been militarizing the police for decades.

I’m genuinely not sure I understand you. They should be the ones to risk death because that’s exactly the deal they signed up for. Fourth graders did not.

Really, maybe I’ve misunderstood you,
The only people who sign up to risk death are the military in wartime.  Anyone else who puts themselves at risk of death does so beyond their duty and will be in line for a bravery award for going above and beyond.

The fourth graders didn't sign up to face death from an AR-15.  Every adult in America signed up on their behalf.

No, they’re always talking about it (really, I just looked at “National Police Support Fund” and American Enterprise Institute commentary), how they’re taking a tremendous risk every day because yada-yada and so they should have bloated pensions after 20 years. They say they need body armor, APCs, drones, etc., for what exactly?

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8827
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #172 on: May 27, 2022, 07:20:38 AM »
Shaun King has a video on instagram of parents at the school begging the police to go in and stop the shooter. Apparently they waited over 45 minutes and only went in because many of the parents were armed and were going to do it themselves if the police did not intervene.
Fucking awful. The whole thing. I have a 4th grader whose last day was today. All the kiddos killed were 4th graders. They had just gotten their end of the year awards.

The shooter did legally purchase his weapon, a 28 day ban would have held him off only for this school year because school would have been out. Given his mental status, I think he would have gone to a mall, theatre, grocery store or where ever else he could have found after ultimately waiting his prescribed time. The dude was a ticking time bomb.

I didn't think I could get any more angry about this than I already was, but the news that police sat on their thumbs for an HOUR while the shooter was busy killing kids in the classroom he'd barricaded himself makes me positively incandescent.  They had the training, the weapons, and the duty, and they failed to act.  Each and every officer who was on the scene and failed to enter should be fired and sued to within an inch of their life.

An unarmed mother evaded police, jumped the fence and charged into that school and got her two kids out (after previously being put in handcuffs by those same police because she was yelling at them to do something).  Those officers are fucking cowards, and I hope they're pilloried as such.

As for the 28 day waiting period- maybe he would have gotten the guns, and gone on to shoot up innocents somewhere else.  Maybe he would have gone home and decided that 15 minutes of carnage and revenge wasn't worth ruining his life over.  Maybe he would have touched some grass, decided to get out of that one horse town and make a better life for himself away from his family.  We'll never know, will we?
Why should the police care more than the politicians and the people who vote for them care?  Why should they go into a situation where they know they are outgunned because politicians and the people who vote for those politicians put their personal power and personal prejudices first over caring about kids being shot at school?  Why should they be the ones to risk death to try to make up for every else's failures?

I don't blame the poor buggers.  I blame America.

I don’t understand this at all. Why did they choose to become police officers? What do you mean they were outgunned? The US has been militarizing the police for decades.

I’m genuinely not sure I understand you. They should be the ones to risk death because that’s exactly the deal they signed up for. Fourth graders did not.

Really, maybe I’ve misunderstood you,
The only people who sign up to risk death are the military in wartime.  Anyone else who puts themselves at risk of death does so beyond their duty and will be in line for a bravery award for going above and beyond.

The fourth graders didn't sign up to face death from an AR-15.  Every adult in America signed up on their behalf.

No, they’re always talking about it (really, I just looked at “National Police Support Fund” and American Enterprise Institute commentary), how they’re taking a tremendous risk every day because yada-yada and so they should have bloated pensions after 20 years. They say they need body armor, APCs, drones, etc., for what exactly?
Quite possibly so they don't get killed by untrained and potentially psychopathic or metally ill members of the public who can buy military grade weapons and protective gear and wander around in public with them without any questions being asked.

Undecided

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1237
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #173 on: May 27, 2022, 07:54:24 AM »
Shaun King has a video on instagram of parents at the school begging the police to go in and stop the shooter. Apparently they waited over 45 minutes and only went in because many of the parents were armed and were going to do it themselves if the police did not intervene.
Fucking awful. The whole thing. I have a 4th grader whose last day was today. All the kiddos killed were 4th graders. They had just gotten their end of the year awards.

The shooter did legally purchase his weapon, a 28 day ban would have held him off only for this school year because school would have been out. Given his mental status, I think he would have gone to a mall, theatre, grocery store or where ever else he could have found after ultimately waiting his prescribed time. The dude was a ticking time bomb.

I didn't think I could get any more angry about this than I already was, but the news that police sat on their thumbs for an HOUR while the shooter was busy killing kids in the classroom he'd barricaded himself makes me positively incandescent.  They had the training, the weapons, and the duty, and they failed to act.  Each and every officer who was on the scene and failed to enter should be fired and sued to within an inch of their life.

An unarmed mother evaded police, jumped the fence and charged into that school and got her two kids out (after previously being put in handcuffs by those same police because she was yelling at them to do something).  Those officers are fucking cowards, and I hope they're pilloried as such.

As for the 28 day waiting period- maybe he would have gotten the guns, and gone on to shoot up innocents somewhere else.  Maybe he would have gone home and decided that 15 minutes of carnage and revenge wasn't worth ruining his life over.  Maybe he would have touched some grass, decided to get out of that one horse town and make a better life for himself away from his family.  We'll never know, will we?
Why should the police care more than the politicians and the people who vote for them care?  Why should they go into a situation where they know they are outgunned because politicians and the people who vote for those politicians put their personal power and personal prejudices first over caring about kids being shot at school?  Why should they be the ones to risk death to try to make up for every else's failures?

I don't blame the poor buggers.  I blame America.

I don’t understand this at all. Why did they choose to become police officers? What do you mean they were outgunned? The US has been militarizing the police for decades.

I’m genuinely not sure I understand you. They should be the ones to risk death because that’s exactly the deal they signed up for. Fourth graders did not.

Really, maybe I’ve misunderstood you,
The only people who sign up to risk death are the military in wartime.  Anyone else who puts themselves at risk of death does so beyond their duty and will be in line for a bravery award for going above and beyond.

The fourth graders didn't sign up to face death from an AR-15.  Every adult in America signed up on their behalf.

No, they’re always talking about it (really, I just looked at “National Police Support Fund” and American Enterprise Institute commentary), how they’re taking a tremendous risk every day because yada-yada and so they should have bloated pensions after 20 years. They say they need body armor, APCs, drones, etc., for what exactly?
Quite possibly so they don't get killed by untrained and potentially psychopathic or metally ill members of the public who can buy military grade weapons and protective gear and wander around in public with them without any questions being asked.

OK; that’s quite a bit less than the standard of service and risk they hold themselves out as bearing, but I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that it’s another example of delusional self-image.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23129
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #174 on: May 27, 2022, 07:56:24 AM »
It's like the US is trying to fill a bathtub, but a few years back the supreme court decided that plugging a tub is a form of censoring free speech.

"We just need to focus on more water from the tap!"
"The problem is that we're filling with a mix of hot and cold.  What if we just tried cold only?"
"What if we called some extra professional plumbers in to watch the water go in the tub?"
"Maybe we can put rocks in the tub so there's less volume to fill!"
"What if we knocked additional holes in the tub?  I bet that would make things fill up faster!"

Stop being intentionally stupid America.  Go with the obvious solution that has worked in every other country that has tried it.  And maybe stop throwing up a revisionist interpretation of the constitution to act as roadblock.

Just Joe

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6721
  • Location: In the middle....
  • Teach me something.
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #175 on: May 27, 2022, 08:40:11 AM »
No, he's saying in the past, gun lovers were racists and the NRA has a historical track record of trying to keep guns away from black people they considered threatening. But then he speculates the ways in which that has changed. Thanks in part to the large financial incentives to sell more guns since those days.

BIG overlap between NRA members and white conservatives who would limit other people's freedoms.

FrugalToque

  • Global Moderator
  • Pencil Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 863
  • Location: Canada
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #176 on: May 27, 2022, 09:25:35 AM »
How come it's always the guns at fault, but never the parents who birthed and were supposed to raise these kids?

The gun collector, shooting enthusiast, NRA member, old white guy that gets talked about isn't doing the killing, unstable kids are.

It's not the "guns at fault".  It's always the people shooting the guns.

But the problem is, those people have an easy time getting guns that can kill lots of other people.
In contrast, a guy wanted to go on an anti-Canada rampage back in 2014, but all he could find was this ancient Winchester 94 and he shot two people instead of the dozens he could have otherwise killed.

When we start talking about "shooting enthusiasts, NRA members and old white guys", we're talking about the people who won't limit the ability of the rampagers to get the more dangerous weapons.

I also don't get the "enthusiast" angle.  Like, dude, I used to be a lawn dart enthusiast, but whatever, they're dangerous so they're out.

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7335
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #177 on: May 27, 2022, 09:30:51 AM »
"Guns don't kill people, people kill people" and other similar phrases are thought-terminating clichés. They are engineered to end debate and quell cognitive dissonance.

Cultish language at work.


FrugalToque

  • Global Moderator
  • Pencil Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 863
  • Location: Canada
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #178 on: May 27, 2022, 09:41:28 AM »
"Guns don't kill people, people kill people" and other similar phrases are thought-terminating clichés. They are engineered to end debate and quell cognitive dissonance.

More accurately:
"People, with easy access to guns designed to kill people, kill people."

RetiredAt63

  • CMTO 2023 Attendees
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *
  • Posts: 20747
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #179 on: May 27, 2022, 10:10:18 AM »
"Guns don't kill people, people kill people" and other similar phrases are thought-terminating clichés. They are engineered to end debate and quell cognitive dissonance.

More accurately:
"People, with easy access to guns designed to kill people, kill people."

And handguns are totally designed to kill people.  You don't go deer-hunting with a hand gun.  Of course most people don't go hunting with a semi-automatic rifle either, and farmers don't use them for coyote control.  At least the hunters/farmers I have known don't use them.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/03/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/
For 2020:
More people in the US died from gun suicides (54%) than gun murders (43%).
Hand guns were used in 59% of the gun murders.
A quick search didn't give % hand guns for suicides but I would guess it is even higher, because it is a lot easier to kill yourself with a hand gun than a long gun.

From my Canadian perspective it would seem that even though long guns get used in the mass shootings and make the headalines, to save the most lives it would make sense to start with hand guns.  They are not useful for a well organized militia, they are not useful for hunting/pest control, they are primarily meant to kill people.  The stories about children finding a hand gun in Mommy's purse or Daddy's bedside table and killing someone demonstrate their lethality.






Just Joe

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6721
  • Location: In the middle....
  • Teach me something.
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #180 on: May 27, 2022, 10:56:08 AM »
I would love to see a study of the families of victims of mass shootings.  Surely they are representative of the general public and many have been supporters of gun ownership.  Do their views change after losing a family in these shootings?  Or do they find ways to rationalize keeping their viewpoint?

That may be the only way to change gun culture - to have enough people lose a family member that the balance starts to shift.

Wouldn't this be similar to COVID and vaccines?

Some folks able to change their POV, some other folks remain locked into a trajectory that can only end in death.

OtherJen

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5267
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #181 on: May 27, 2022, 11:37:33 AM »
I would love to see a study of the families of victims of mass shootings.  Surely they are representative of the general public and many have been supporters of gun ownership.  Do their views change after losing a family in these shootings?  Or do they find ways to rationalize keeping their viewpoint?

That may be the only way to change gun culture - to have enough people lose a family member that the balance starts to shift.

Wouldn't this be similar to COVID and vaccines?

Some folks able to change their POV, some other folks remain locked into a trajectory that can only end in death.

The problem with that analogy is that the people most at risk of COVID complications can at least take measures to mitigate risk: masking, home grocery delivery, shopping at off times vaccination, etc., and those measures both reduce the risk of catching the virus and of exposure to a large enough viral titer to cause severe complications. There are also much better treatments available now than 2 years ago, so survival probabilities are higher.

Short of wearing body armor, there's not much someone can do if they're trapped in a room with someone who pulls out a gun and starts shooting at close range.

HPstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2859
  • Age: 37
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #182 on: May 27, 2022, 12:05:37 PM »
If 100 or so police officers, supposedly trained and armed to the teeth, cannot manage to stop one skinny teenager* with ONE of these guns in less than an hour, these guns are too dangerous and should be banned.

LAWN DARTS were banned in 1997 after just a few incidents where children were injured or killed.

*I read an interview today with a woman who gave the shooter a ride a few months ago because a friend was the mother’s boyfriend or something and asked her to pick the kid up. She said he was very small and slight and looked more like 14 than 18, and would barely talk to her.

Again, lawn darts... not protected by the constitution.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23129
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #183 on: May 27, 2022, 12:14:50 PM »
If 100 or so police officers, supposedly trained and armed to the teeth, cannot manage to stop one skinny teenager* with ONE of these guns in less than an hour, these guns are too dangerous and should be banned.

LAWN DARTS were banned in 1997 after just a few incidents where children were injured or killed.

*I read an interview today with a woman who gave the shooter a ride a few months ago because a friend was the mother’s boyfriend or something and asked her to pick the kid up. She said he was very small and slight and looked more like 14 than 18, and would barely talk to her.

Again, lawn darts... not protected by the constitution.

There's no wording in the constitution that protects the right of civilians with no links to a militia to buy firearms unrestricted either.  So, seems pretty comparable.

YttriumNitrate

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1836
  • Location: Northwest Indiana
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #184 on: May 27, 2022, 12:17:20 PM »
Of course most people don't go hunting with a semi-automatic rifle either, and farmers don't use them for coyote control.  At least the hunters/farmers I have known don't use them.
I believe the AR style rifles are one of the preferred weapons for hunting invasive hogs.

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1866
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #185 on: May 27, 2022, 12:34:58 PM »
"Guns don't kill people, people kill people" and other similar phrases are thought-terminating clichés. They are engineered to end debate and quell cognitive dissonance.

More accurately:
"People, with easy access to guns designed to kill people, kill people."

And handguns are totally designed to kill people.  You don't go deer-hunting with a hand gun.  Of course most people don't go hunting with a semi-automatic rifle either, and farmers don't use them for coyote control.  At least the hunters/farmers I have known don't use them.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/03/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/
For 2020:
More people in the US died from gun suicides (54%) than gun murders (43%).
Hand guns were used in 59% of the gun murders.
A quick search didn't give % hand guns for suicides but I would guess it is even higher, because it is a lot easier to kill yourself with a hand gun than a long gun.

From my Canadian perspective it would seem that even though long guns get used in the mass shootings and make the headalines, to save the most lives it would make sense to start with hand guns.  They are not useful for a well organized militia, they are not useful for hunting/pest control, they are primarily meant to kill people.  The stories about children finding a hand gun in Mommy's purse or Daddy's bedside table and killing someone demonstrate their lethality.

Handguns are totally designed for lethality. However, that same principle makes them great for self-defense. The example I mentioned earlier was a guy jogging with a handgun who kept himself from being mugged or worse by simply pulling it out when confronted by a group of young men.

The overlap between what can be used for offense and what can be used for defense is certainly there. From a morality standpoint, imo, self-defense is the biggest justifiable reason to say that people should be allowed to choose to have guns, and in many situations, hand guns are the best choice in that regard.

NaN

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 458
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #186 on: May 27, 2022, 12:43:50 PM »
"Guns don't kill people, people kill people" and other similar phrases are thought-terminating clichés. They are engineered to end debate and quell cognitive dissonance.

More accurately:
"People, with easy access to guns designed to kill people, kill people."

And handguns are totally designed to kill people.  You don't go deer-hunting with a hand gun.  Of course most people don't go hunting with a semi-automatic rifle either, and farmers don't use them for coyote control.  At least the hunters/farmers I have known don't use them.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/03/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/
For 2020:
More people in the US died from gun suicides (54%) than gun murders (43%).
Hand guns were used in 59% of the gun murders.
A quick search didn't give % hand guns for suicides but I would guess it is even higher, because it is a lot easier to kill yourself with a hand gun than a long gun.

From my Canadian perspective it would seem that even though long guns get used in the mass shootings and make the headalines, to save the most lives it would make sense to start with hand guns.  They are not useful for a well organized militia, they are not useful for hunting/pest control, they are primarily meant to kill people.  The stories about children finding a hand gun in Mommy's purse or Daddy's bedside table and killing someone demonstrate their lethality.

Handguns are totally designed for lethality. However, that same principle makes them great for self-defense. The example I mentioned earlier was a guy jogging with a handgun who kept himself from being mugged or worse by simply pulling it out when confronted by a group of young men.

The overlap between what can be used for offense and what can be used for defense is certainly there. From a morality standpoint, imo, self-defense is the biggest justifiable reason to say that people should be allowed to choose to have guns, and in many situations, hand guns are the best choice in that regard.

Why are guns so synonymous with self-defense? If a group of armed thugs with AR15 smash into my house I'm probably done for. Further, if I am out on a street about to be mugged, why is the gun the self-defense go to? The guy you mentioned who was jogging and showed his gun could have just as easily showed his gun to a bunch of young men with their own guns. Sure, they did not. But I don't think the lack of guns will increase muggings nor decrease. I think they'd stay about the same.

chemistk

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1739
  • Location: Mid-Atlantic
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #187 on: May 27, 2022, 12:49:57 PM »
"Guns don't kill people, people kill people" and other similar phrases are thought-terminating clichés. They are engineered to end debate and quell cognitive dissonance.

More accurately:
"People, with easy access to guns designed to kill people, kill people."

And handguns are totally designed to kill people.  You don't go deer-hunting with a hand gun.  Of course most people don't go hunting with a semi-automatic rifle either, and farmers don't use them for coyote control.  At least the hunters/farmers I have known don't use them.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/03/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/
For 2020:
More people in the US died from gun suicides (54%) than gun murders (43%).
Hand guns were used in 59% of the gun murders.
A quick search didn't give % hand guns for suicides but I would guess it is even higher, because it is a lot easier to kill yourself with a hand gun than a long gun.

From my Canadian perspective it would seem that even though long guns get used in the mass shootings and make the headalines, to save the most lives it would make sense to start with hand guns.  They are not useful for a well organized militia, they are not useful for hunting/pest control, they are primarily meant to kill people.  The stories about children finding a hand gun in Mommy's purse or Daddy's bedside table and killing someone demonstrate their lethality.

Handguns are totally designed for lethality. However, that same principle makes them great for self-defense. The example I mentioned earlier was a guy jogging with a handgun who kept himself from being mugged or worse by simply pulling it out when confronted by a group of young men.

The overlap between what can be used for offense and what can be used for defense is certainly there. From a morality standpoint, imo, self-defense is the biggest justifiable reason to say that people should be allowed to choose to have guns, and in many situations, hand guns are the best choice in that regard.

Why are guns so synonymous with self-defense? If a group of armed thugs with AR15 smash into my house I'm probably done for. Further, if I am out on a street about to be mugged, why is the gun the self-defense go to? The guy you mentioned who was jogging and showed his gun could have just as easily showed his gun to a bunch of young men with their own guns. Sure, they did not. But I don't think the lack of guns will increase muggings nor decrease. I think they'd stay about the same.

It's the same justification that people give for wanting to driver larger vehicles - it's a mind of escalation and a willful ignorance of societal level risk statistics. The sense of self preservation is rooted in a fear that some unknown other, in a situation that's otherwise in your control, may be able to overpower you because they've brought the superior weapon to the table.

It's also absolutely got roots in long-held racist beliefs, which only adds to the fear because people love to generalize that someone with less than them and who looks different from them is coming to get them.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23129
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #188 on: May 27, 2022, 01:00:04 PM »
"Guns don't kill people, people kill people" and other similar phrases are thought-terminating clichés. They are engineered to end debate and quell cognitive dissonance.

More accurately:
"People, with easy access to guns designed to kill people, kill people."

And handguns are totally designed to kill people.  You don't go deer-hunting with a hand gun.  Of course most people don't go hunting with a semi-automatic rifle either, and farmers don't use them for coyote control.  At least the hunters/farmers I have known don't use them.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/03/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/
For 2020:
More people in the US died from gun suicides (54%) than gun murders (43%).
Hand guns were used in 59% of the gun murders.
A quick search didn't give % hand guns for suicides but I would guess it is even higher, because it is a lot easier to kill yourself with a hand gun than a long gun.

From my Canadian perspective it would seem that even though long guns get used in the mass shootings and make the headalines, to save the most lives it would make sense to start with hand guns.  They are not useful for a well organized militia, they are not useful for hunting/pest control, they are primarily meant to kill people.  The stories about children finding a hand gun in Mommy's purse or Daddy's bedside table and killing someone demonstrate their lethality.

Handguns are totally designed for lethality. However, that same principle makes them great for self-defense. The example I mentioned earlier was a guy jogging with a handgun who kept himself from being mugged or worse by simply pulling it out when confronted by a group of young men.

The overlap between what can be used for offense and what can be used for defense is certainly there. From a morality standpoint, imo, self-defense is the biggest justifiable reason to say that people should be allowed to choose to have guns, and in many situations, hand guns are the best choice in that regard.

In a defensive scenario, a gun can be used to:
- kill someone
- threaten to kill someone

In Canada if you execute someone who was trying to steal your stuff, rob your home, or even someone who was trying to pick a fist fight with you that would be viewed as excessive force and you would probably end up in jail.  If the 'threaten to kill someone' part fails, you can't really use the firearm . . . as it's designed for killing so there's no way to use it without excessive force.  That makes it a shitty defensive weapon.  It's also why you're not allowed to own a gun in Canada for 'defense'.  Guns aren't defensive.

I realize that this is very different in the US, where blowing a teenager away for walking in a hoodie while carrying skittles is perfectly legal.

Different laws, different outcomes.

Hand guns are a great choice for killing someone.  They're a shitty option to provide defense.

NaN

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 458
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #189 on: May 27, 2022, 01:07:06 PM »
"Guns don't kill people, people kill people" and other similar phrases are thought-terminating clichés. They are engineered to end debate and quell cognitive dissonance.

More accurately:
"People, with easy access to guns designed to kill people, kill people."

And handguns are totally designed to kill people.  You don't go deer-hunting with a hand gun.  Of course most people don't go hunting with a semi-automatic rifle either, and farmers don't use them for coyote control.  At least the hunters/farmers I have known don't use them.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/03/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/
For 2020:
More people in the US died from gun suicides (54%) than gun murders (43%).
Hand guns were used in 59% of the gun murders.
A quick search didn't give % hand guns for suicides but I would guess it is even higher, because it is a lot easier to kill yourself with a hand gun than a long gun.

From my Canadian perspective it would seem that even though long guns get used in the mass shootings and make the headalines, to save the most lives it would make sense to start with hand guns.  They are not useful for a well organized militia, they are not useful for hunting/pest control, they are primarily meant to kill people.  The stories about children finding a hand gun in Mommy's purse or Daddy's bedside table and killing someone demonstrate their lethality.

Handguns are totally designed for lethality. However, that same principle makes them great for self-defense. The example I mentioned earlier was a guy jogging with a handgun who kept himself from being mugged or worse by simply pulling it out when confronted by a group of young men.

The overlap between what can be used for offense and what can be used for defense is certainly there. From a morality standpoint, imo, self-defense is the biggest justifiable reason to say that people should be allowed to choose to have guns, and in many situations, hand guns are the best choice in that regard.

In a defensive scenario, a gun can be used to:
- kill someone
- threaten to kill someone

In Canada if you execute someone who was trying to steal your stuff, rob your home, or even someone who was trying to pick a fist fight with you that would be viewed as excessive force and you would probably end up in jail.  If the 'threaten to kill someone' part fails, you can't really use the firearm . . . as it's designed for killing so there's no way to use it without excessive force.  That makes it a shitty defensive weapon.  It's also why you're not allowed to own a gun in Canada for 'defense'.  Guns aren't defensive.

I realize that this is very different in the US, where blowing a teenager away for walking in a hoodie while carrying skittles is perfectly legal.

Different laws, different outcomes.

Hand guns are a great choice for killing someone.  They're a shitty option to provide defense.

^^ This. For individual self-defense - guns are terrible. For large militias designed to kill people for whatever political reason - perfect.

RetiredAt63

  • CMTO 2023 Attendees
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *
  • Posts: 20747
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #190 on: May 27, 2022, 01:09:16 PM »
Of course most people don't go hunting with a semi-automatic rifle either, and farmers don't use them for coyote control.  At least the hunters/farmers I have known don't use them.
I believe the AR style rifles are one of the preferred weapons for hunting invasive hogs.

We don't have feral hogs here.  Please keep them there.

There are places where we have polar bears.  People leave their cars unlocked so others can seek refuge.  And yes polar bears are very dangerous, tourist guided tours have to have someone with a gun with them.

Actually Canadians have a lot of guns.  Mostly long guns.  So it isn't just the guns, it is the attitudes.

NaN

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 458
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #191 on: May 27, 2022, 01:10:23 PM »
The 911 call transcript announced during the press conference is the most horrific thing ever. It should be played out loud in the halls of Congress and every state legislator hall every day until something is passed.

edit: Further, play it real time, starting from nothing from when the gunmen entered the school.  I want to see Ted Cruz sit in silence and imagine what was happening for that entire hour as each 911 call is played at the same time interval.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2022, 01:18:06 PM by NaN »

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7335
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #192 on: May 27, 2022, 01:28:03 PM »
The 911 call transcript announced during the press conference is the most horrific thing ever. It should be played out loud in the halls of Congress and every state legislator hall every day until something is passed.

edit: Further, play it real time, starting from nothing from when the gunmen entered the school.  I want to see Ted Cruz sit in silence and imagine what was happening for that entire hour as each 911 call is played at the same time interval.

Psh. Cruz wouldn't imagine that. He'd just go to his happy place, where the ka-ching! of cash registers is the soundtrack to his campaign's mounting bank balance, courtesy of the NRA.

NaN

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 458
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #193 on: May 27, 2022, 01:37:39 PM »
The 911 call transcript announced during the press conference is the most horrific thing ever. It should be played out loud in the halls of Congress and every state legislator hall every day until something is passed.

edit: Further, play it real time, starting from nothing from when the gunmen entered the school.  I want to see Ted Cruz sit in silence and imagine what was happening for that entire hour as each 911 call is played at the same time interval.

Psh. Cruz wouldn't imagine that. He'd just go to his happy place, where the ka-ching! of cash registers is the soundtrack to his campaign's mounting bank balance, courtesy of the NRA.

Ah, yes, that's likely. Ted Cruz seems actually quite similar to Shooter McGavin in character.

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1866
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #194 on: May 27, 2022, 01:46:28 PM »
"Guns don't kill people, people kill people" and other similar phrases are thought-terminating clichés. They are engineered to end debate and quell cognitive dissonance.

More accurately:
"People, with easy access to guns designed to kill people, kill people."

And handguns are totally designed to kill people.  You don't go deer-hunting with a hand gun.  Of course most people don't go hunting with a semi-automatic rifle either, and farmers don't use them for coyote control.  At least the hunters/farmers I have known don't use them.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/03/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/
For 2020:
More people in the US died from gun suicides (54%) than gun murders (43%).
Hand guns were used in 59% of the gun murders.
A quick search didn't give % hand guns for suicides but I would guess it is even higher, because it is a lot easier to kill yourself with a hand gun than a long gun.

From my Canadian perspective it would seem that even though long guns get used in the mass shootings and make the headalines, to save the most lives it would make sense to start with hand guns.  They are not useful for a well organized militia, they are not useful for hunting/pest control, they are primarily meant to kill people.  The stories about children finding a hand gun in Mommy's purse or Daddy's bedside table and killing someone demonstrate their lethality.

Handguns are totally designed for lethality. However, that same principle makes them great for self-defense. The example I mentioned earlier was a guy jogging with a handgun who kept himself from being mugged or worse by simply pulling it out when confronted by a group of young men.

The overlap between what can be used for offense and what can be used for defense is certainly there. From a morality standpoint, imo, self-defense is the biggest justifiable reason to say that people should be allowed to choose to have guns, and in many situations, hand guns are the best choice in that regard.

Why are guns so synonymous with self-defense? If a group of armed thugs with AR15 smash into my house I'm probably done for. Further, if I am out on a street about to be mugged, why is the gun the self-defense go to? The guy you mentioned who was jogging and showed his gun could have just as easily showed his gun to a bunch of young men with their own guns. Sure, they did not. But I don't think the lack of guns will increase muggings nor decrease. I think they'd stay about the same.

It's the same justification that people give for wanting to driver larger vehicles - it's a mind of escalation and a willful ignorance of societal level risk statistics. The sense of self preservation is rooted in a fear that some unknown other, in a situation that's otherwise in your control, may be able to overpower you because they've brought the superior weapon to the table.

It's also absolutely got roots in long-held racist beliefs, which only adds to the fear because people love to generalize that someone with less than them and who looks different from them is coming to get them.

Why are guns synonymous with self-defense?...Because you can use them to defend yourself. Why is training on how to defend yourself by learning fighting techniques or the like treated as self-defense? Because you can defend yourself. You can also beat someone to death without provocation. That's an option too.

You can what if things to death. Guns are synonymous with self-defense because you can use them to defend yourself. If someone attacks you or is trying to hurt you, you can keep them from hurting you with a gun. We can discuss whether or not statistically guns reduce or increase murders/assaults, etc, and there's points on both sides for this (but you didn't bring any up to discuss - just that I'm ignoring "societal level risks"). However, your hypothetical of, well, the bad guys could have had guns too is just as good as my hypothetical of guns as a deterrent and the fact that I've been to gun shows and never felt the least bit scared because everyone had one - the deterrent perspective. It's all just perspectives. And I can tell you, again, I know of two situations where it did in fact help. If we're talking anecdotes, those are mine and my experiences, not hypotheticals.



In a defensive scenario, a gun can be used to:
- kill someone
- threaten to kill someone

In Canada if you execute someone who was trying to steal your stuff, rob your home, or even someone who was trying to pick a fist fight with you that would be viewed as excessive force and you would probably end up in jail.  If the 'threaten to kill someone' part fails, you can't really use the firearm . . . as it's designed for killing so there's no way to use it without excessive force.  That makes it a shitty defensive weapon.  It's also why you're not allowed to own a gun in Canada for 'defense'.  Guns aren't defensive.

I realize that this is very different in the US, where blowing a teenager away for walking in a hoodie while carrying skittles is perfectly legal.

Different laws, different outcomes.

Hand guns are a great choice for killing someone.  They're a shitty option to provide defense.

I may be misunderstanding you, so if what I am typing below is a misrepresentation, please let me know. I know nothing of Canda's laws for guns, so I won't speak to them. I think that it's a huge assumption on your part, though, that using a gun on someone that broke into your house is valuing stuff over life. You have no idea what the person who broke in will do - and of course if they're attacking you, they're attacking you, so you really don't know what's going to happen. I've heard of a situation like what you're calling out where someone came upon someone driving off with their stolen stuff and shot them in their car. That is valuing their things over the person's life and a totally different situation.

There's no way I know of to parse your and Nan's perspective on guns as defense other than to say it's simply incorrect. If someone comes at you to attack you and you use a gun, it's used in defense by the definition of the actual word. It's an escalation, certainly, but it's defense - I mean it just is. If someone breaks down your door, you don't know what they're going to do. I find no moral justification in not assuming they're going to hurt me or my family; therefore I see no reason why using guns would not be defense. If someone broke into your house and you hit them with a ball bat, you would be defending yourself and also escalating force. It's not as likely to be lethal, but the premise is the same.

All of this to say, I'm not a violent person at all. I've never even gotten in a fight in my life. I don't fantasize about any of these. It makes me sick to think of. I don't know if I would be able to fight with a baseball bat much less a gun in a situation like this. I, however, firmly believe that it's morally justifiable to do so.

NaN

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 458
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #195 on: May 27, 2022, 02:10:24 PM »
I think this is the fundamental problem with guns in America. Guns are advertised as 'defensive' weapons. Just look at the gun manufacturer of the gun used in the Uvalde shooting; they are named "Daniel Defense". They are advertised as the 'best' defensive weapons. But are they really? No.

@Wolfpack Mustachian , I am not saying using a gun in those situations is not an act of self-defense. But guns are meant, as @GuitarStv says, to do way more than just defending - they are meant to kill when used. And it seems Canada has established even the act of killing in self-defense is a higher bar than in America.


HPstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2859
  • Age: 37
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #196 on: May 27, 2022, 02:24:09 PM »
If 100 or so police officers, supposedly trained and armed to the teeth, cannot manage to stop one skinny teenager* with ONE of these guns in less than an hour, these guns are too dangerous and should be banned.

LAWN DARTS were banned in 1997 after just a few incidents where children were injured or killed.

*I read an interview today with a woman who gave the shooter a ride a few months ago because a friend was the mother’s boyfriend or something and asked her to pick the kid up. She said he was very small and slight and looked more like 14 than 18, and would barely talk to her.

Again, lawn darts... not protected by the constitution.

There's no wording in the constitution that protects the right of civilians with no links to a militia to buy firearms unrestricted either.  So, seems pretty comparable.

Buying unrestricted and banning is not comparable

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23129
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #197 on: May 27, 2022, 02:54:47 PM »
If 100 or so police officers, supposedly trained and armed to the teeth, cannot manage to stop one skinny teenager* with ONE of these guns in less than an hour, these guns are too dangerous and should be banned.

LAWN DARTS were banned in 1997 after just a few incidents where children were injured or killed.

*I read an interview today with a woman who gave the shooter a ride a few months ago because a friend was the mother’s boyfriend or something and asked her to pick the kid up. She said he was very small and slight and looked more like 14 than 18, and would barely talk to her.

Again, lawn darts... not protected by the constitution.

There's no wording in the constitution that protects the right of civilians with no links to a militia to buy firearms unrestricted either.  So, seems pretty comparable.

Buying unrestricted and banning is not comparable

There's no wording in the constitution that protects the right of civilians with no links to a militia to buy firearms at all.  The modern interpretation of the second amendment is pretty radically different from what is actually written in the document.

MasterStache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2912
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #198 on: May 27, 2022, 03:00:25 PM »

In a defensive scenario, a gun can be used to:
- kill someone
- threaten to kill someone

In Canada if you execute someone who was trying to steal your stuff, rob your home, or even someone who was trying to pick a fist fight with you that would be viewed as excessive force and you would probably end up in jail.  If the 'threaten to kill someone' part fails, you can't really use the firearm . . . as it's designed for killing so there's no way to use it without excessive force.  That makes it a shitty defensive weapon. It's also why you're not allowed to own a gun in Canada for 'defense'.  Guns aren't defensive.

I realize that this is very different in the US, where blowing a teenager away for walking in a hoodie while carrying skittles is perfectly legal.

Different laws, different outcomes.

Hand guns are a great choice for killing someone.  They're a shitty option to provide defense.

I may be misunderstanding you, so if what I am typing below is a misrepresentation, please let me know. I know nothing of Canda's laws for guns, so I won't speak to them. I think that it's a huge assumption on your part, though, that using a gun on someone that broke into your house is valuing stuff over life. You have no idea what the person who broke in will do - and of course if they're attacking you, they're attacking you, so you really don't know what's going to happen. I've heard of a situation like what you're calling out where someone came upon someone driving off with their stolen stuff and shot them in their car. That is valuing their things over the person's life and a totally different situation.

See bolded. Being a shitty self defense weapon isn't the same as not being for self defense. There are always anecdotes. There are plenty of anecdotes as well of people shooting family members and friends accidentally or even intentionally as they thought they were an intruder. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/albertsamaha/good-guys-with-guns-shoot-wrong-people-in-seconds-of-panic

Statistically speaking, a hand gun being used for self defense is a rarity. Thankfully! I hate to think what sort of country we would be living in if every fight, stolen car, stolen stereo, trespassing instance or whatever ended in a shootout.

I'll give you real world scenario that happened to us. My step-son is on the autism spectrum. He sometimes struggles to understand basic knowns that neurotypical kids and adults do. For instance, one day he went into an abandoned house thinking because it was abandoned that no one lived in it or owned it. There was barely anything left in the house but he found a couple small coins and took them. With your line of thinking had the homeowner/property owner happen to pay a visit at that time he could have shot and killed my step-son claiming self defense. I mean he's trespassing and taking stuff. Is that reasonable? Sure seems shitty to me.   
« Last Edit: May 27, 2022, 03:27:21 PM by MasterStache »

Samuel

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 771
  • Location: the slippery slope
Re: Another school shooting - elementary school
« Reply #199 on: May 27, 2022, 03:11:18 PM »
I think this is the fundamental problem with guns in America. Guns are advertised as 'defensive' weapons. Just look at the gun manufacturer of the gun used in the Uvalde shooting; they are named "Daniel Defense". They are advertised as the 'best' defensive weapons. But are they really? No.

They're advertised as defensive weapons because that is the only legal use of them, outside of recreation. Offensive vs. defensive use is entirely dependent on the circumstances and whether the person has a legally reasonable belief they are in serious danger. Showing a gun in your waistband is either legal self defense or criminal brandishing depending on the specific circumstances. Same with actually firing a gun at someone. Many a legal gun owner has gone to jail for getting these kinds of decisions wrong.