Even I with all my F$U Hole hatred am sad about today’s events. Prayers for the FSU and Tallahassee community. There is no place in the world for these actions.
No, don’t think so. A black kid shot four students at a Dallas high school earlier this week and no Too Hot thread was ever started (much less one 25 pages long). No matter the shooter’s skin color, what happened in both shootings was tragic and prayers to all the victims and their families. No need to make it worse by making idiotic assumptions.
In your opinion, does the observed fact that the perp's parent was an SRO and not a patrol officer, sheriff's deputy, etc. matter? For disclosure, I'm asking this wrt the fact that the perp obtained a gun from its parent.
In Leon County SROs are deputy sheriffs, but I don’t think it really makes a difference in my mind. I’m assuming she probably still has her LEO certifications, etc., I was more just noting that it’s another really weird aspect of this story that the “school shooter” (if we call a shooting at a college that) is the child of a school resource officer who would presumably be one of the first people in line to respond to a school shooting.
drinking is not a fundamental constitutional right. The right to defend yourself through the keeping and bearing of arms is a fundamental constitutional right, and most Americans are not in favor of repealing that constitutional right. There is a big difference there. I could argue that 18-20 year old voters do a hell of a lot of damage to this country through their choices at the ballot box, but they are adults in the eyes of this country and thus entitled to that right. And fwiw, the AR-15 is likely MORE protected than the handguns used in the overwhelming majority of mass shootings if you want to go the militia clause route. Or heck, since you want to disenfranchise classes of people from their rights, let’s just ban black males from purchasing handguns. Most of your gun violence will go away, statistically speaking. How does that sit with you? I am being facetious, but I think you get the point. training requirements will only serve to make a right into a privilege, and will not stop a mass shooting like this. It would likely result in having better-trained deranged lunatics, though. people know that straw purchases are illegal, and we have federal laws that punish straw purchasers. The form 4473 that you fill out every time you purchase a firearm from an FFL says as much, and you have to answer a question affirming that you are not committing a straw purchase. Problem is it is very hard to enforce, and generally only applied after someone has committed some sort of crime with a gun they should not have had, and the penalty does not seem to be a deterrent. and as far as parents securing their weapons, you can train people on it, and the Sandy Hook mom even knew about proper storage. The issue is that parents have a hard time seeing their kids as deranged, and to some extent it may not always be their fault as deranged kids can often pretend to be quite normal. I empathize with them. In some cases, the kids might fool everyone. It’s also not abnormal for parents of trustworthy teens and young adults to give their older children access for purposes of defense of their home. We’ve seen stories of teens who picked up their parents weapons to fend off home intruders, especially when you have households where the parents work and the children are at home. There are far more of those type of stories than there are stories of mass shootings. Add to that the fact that even if you did pass safe storage laws, how are you actually going to enforce them other than punitively against parents infrequently and after the fact with the full benefit of hindsight? aside from parents with direct knowledge that their teens had a kill list or something like that, I find the idea of holding them criminally responsible for the actions of their children who are being charged as adults to be tough to do in good conscience. you may think so, but try actually examining the counterpoints. Your dislike of guns is not sufficient reason to violate civil rights.
Hay muchas palabras, que bueno, senor! Ya, we've all seen or heard the Jim Jeffries clip and we know where you're coming from: "I like guns, mate!" You may have noticed that our armed constitutional militia was "well-regulated" ? Or even that .... the Constitution can be amended? But it's pretty clear that when a nation pairs the largest amount of public firearms in an industrialized nation with a lack of sensible, uniform regulation, we'll end up with huge amounts of firearm deaths and violence. Awaiting your next 6 pages to explain that what we see isn't what we see and changing it would be racist and/or exclusionary. Thanks in advance!
If we want to end this kind of mass shooting we either need to control access to guns or provide better access to better mental health care.
Hmm. Local U gets shot up by maga boy and we are on page 8. If this were a minority shooter we'd be on page 28 by now.
So when will this Administration parade a school shooting victim's parents at the White House like they do for their illegal immigrant roundup? They are all about keeping Americans safe, right? If only the right showed the same concern for mass shootings, especially at schools, that they do for immigration...
It is absolutely tragic The inaction by the government to solve this exclusive to America problem is also tragic. I would argue more tragic as we are just setting ourselves up for future tragedies The thoughts and prayers remarks from politicians has been a substitute to real action for entirely too long. Everyone knows the T&Ps remarks are directed at those politicians and not the victims. The feigned outrage is transparent.
Honestly, it's not even an either/or. I would love to see more people talk about this aspect of things regardless of how much controlling access to guns is talked about. Often times you get threads like this and this suggestion becomes a trigger and folks turn it into an either/or...it's not. "Better mental health care" is something that should be talked about even on a bigger scale than how it related to mass shootings (or even if people believe it doesn't at all). Just my two bits. Go GATORS! ,WESGATORS
Agree 100%^. Unfortunately, mental health is also the latest excuse of the right to ignore any and all relevant actions. It's a mental health issue and a gun proliferation issue and a gun regulation issue. Has been for decades.
The problem is three-fold: 1. Many of the people suggesting "better mental healthcare" don't really mean it. They are often the folks that, in any other context, would dismiss or disparage mental healthcare, often because it is seen as weakness and not manly enough. Mental illness is a weakness, so anybody going to mental health providers is weak, is the logic, and that causes them to associate it with a lack of masculinity, triggering all sorts of emotional reactions (largely fear or shame-based). 2. Because of the fact that they have no background in mental healthcare and, in fact, are often reluctant or even outright opposed to mental healthcare, "better mental healthcare" never gets defined. 3. Even the simplest version of "better mental healthcare," increased access, is generally rejected as socialized medicine (see earlier in the thread for an example). As such, the "better mental healthcare" thing is more accurately viewed as a deflection than a true proposal.
It's definitely something that would cost more money, but the more I live, the more I see that people process things differently, and some folks really struggle with things that others don't seem to struggle with. Not all of those struggles turn into something dangerous, but often those struggles lead to suffering and people don't know how to deal with it. Go GATORS! ,WESGATORS
That is absolutely true. You don't need to convince me of the need for more pervasive mental healthcare resources. The problem is that the people suggesting it don't really want it. Like I said, many view any need for mental healthcare as weakness and their reactions arise from the emotional part of their brain, specifically fear and shame. Look how often people here equate mental illness to something that should cause people to feel shame (I am happy to link any of a number of threads using mental illness as a pejorative). That is why you never see any real proposal.
Mental healthcare whatevs. What would have triggered this mythical solution for this case? The disturbing rhetoric he used at his club meetings was verbatim what is said all the way to the top in his own party. He was just repeating what every R politician says everyday. This “mental healthcare” scam is inherently nonsensical and is a default fail in order to maintain the status quo.
Plus is perpetuates the stereotype that those with mental illness are dangerous. They are more likely to be the victim of violence, not the other way around.
That's a loaded question, but it's certainly worth exploring; from CNN: At least two parts to every incident like this: means and reason. These are not islands that we have to choose between, they're typically both worth exploring. And if nothing is found on a given island, nothing is lost and we can still learn from having explored. Put another way, exploring the why doesn't need to exist in exclusion of exploring the how. That's a false dilemma. Go GATORS! ,WESGATORS
