Parkland FL HS shooting, shooter arrested, 17 dead

[UKMikey]

Got tired of reading every post, just want a review of the fake news...

18 mass shootings and him being a white supremacist. Did I miss anything?

He wasn't a Dreamer or a member of Antifa either.

 

[TexRex]

I don't want to sound like a broken record, but a deadlock in legal reform is another reason why I like to look outside of the government for solutions. This could apply to those guns falling through the cracks. Supposedly a nation wide and government enforced solution could impact every gun produced from this point on, unless it's not passed. Leaving it up to individuals to apply safety measures to weapons lets people opt out, but it also lets people apply them without the need to get everyone (or a lot of people) to agree on a solution.

Oh absolutely, and I hope my insistence on not limiting proposals didn't come off as insisting a limited proposal isn't worthwhile--any gun that can only be used in the home to defend the home is one that can't be used in a school, a church, a nightclub, a movie theater, a music festival, etc etc etc...regardless of who is using it.

Why is the line drawn where it is? Enough people agreed on that line. That's not to say that you can't have a line, but it's pretty much always going to be arbitrary.

That's my point. Why's the line there at all when what's on one side of it isn't that much less deadly than what's on the other side? The line means even less when what's permitted can easily be modified to narrow the gap further.

 

[Dotini]

Here's a proposal for a new law that would raise the minimum age from 18 to 21 for the purchase of a long gun. Pistols are already subject to this restriction.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/sen-feinstein-introducing-bill-raise-075036864.html

 

[Dennisch]

The thoughts and prayers meme is a really disrespectful meme that isn't helpful.

You know what also is disrespectful and not helpful at all?

Not doing **** about the **** situation the USA got itself into. It seems that pretty much every single organisation in charge of anything related to guns has failed at one or more of the shootings.

Want change to happen? Put your foot down as a state, or country and say enough is enough. But that will not happen because 2nd amendment, and it won't happen in the next couple of days because the victims and their close ones should be allowed to grieve in peace. And next week a new moron will shoot a bunch of kids.

There are too many morons and sickos in the USA with guns, legal or illegal, who are not responsible enough to own them and yet have no problem getting hold of a weapon.

It's absolutely ridiculous and there is no excuse for such a developed country like the USA to have 3rd world situations almost every other day.

 

[zzz_pt]

Why do people who live in other countries worry so much about the price americans pay for freedom? As I eluded to earlier in the thread more of us die each year from food poisoning than from mass shootings, it's like tenfold or so.

I wonder if that's what the parents of those kids think. Freedom... seriously. What a joke. You're not paying any price. You lost as much as I did. Some kids / people might/will end up hostages of their health bills for the rest of their lives. Nice freedom hum?

Disarmament is happening in Brazil, according to Wikipedia. And despite that, Brazil stood at 21.2 in 2014, much worse than the US. You can take your conclusions, or do your own research.

So, are we really comparing the USA to Brazil? Why stop there? Why not comparing it to 3rd world countries? Brazil (and other south american countries) have problems with guns that come directly from the USA (legally and illegally). They don't appear out of nowhere in Brazil.

Killing is not illegal*, hunting or self-defense, doesn't matter. I've purchased several guns for the sole purpose of being capable of lawfully killing another human being in self defense (or in defense of my family) if the dire need arises.
*in all circumstances, just like vehicle use is not illegal in all circumstances
Edit:
We've been over this. Why am I seeing the same defeated arguments made by the same people?

I wonder if the the parents of those children who were killed also think the same and also had guns to protect their loved ones.

I also wonder how many people are killed in self-defence in the USA by common citizens (not police, for obvious reasons) and how many innocent people and children die despite having (or their parents) guns themselves.

I have this idea, and I can be wrong, that having a gun is most often than not rather useless because the people who plan mass shootings are not thinking about going into places where they think people might have guns on them (either because it's a gun-free zone or a cinema, or a concert or a school).

Isn't it more a placebo affect, that of buying a gun to feed the idea that one can escape being shot (or defend one's loved ones)? I'm not saying there aren't people who actually use their guns if those situations happen but how often do they happen? Is there any data on that?

 

[Northstar]

I have this idea, and I can be wrong, that having a gun is most often than not rather useless because the people who plan mass shootings are not thinking about going into places where they think people might have guns on them (either because it's a gun-free zone or a cinema, or a concert or a school).

If anything that is the idea behind carrying a gun. The best way to stop a shooting is to prevent the potential perp from even trying.

Granted I do worry that in the event someone does try a shooting where there are armed people they won't have the slightest idea how to react in a high stress situation and only make things worse. That is why despite being fine with people having guns I feel there should be much more required training to own one and even more for a carry permit.

 

[zzz_pt]

If anything that is the idea behind carrying a gun. The best way to stop a shooting is to prevent the potential perp from even trying.

I agree with the second sentence. I don't think the best way to achieve it though is to carry a gun. Mass shootings, or gun violence in general, are way lower in other developed countries and their citizens have less guns. The best way to prevent these incidents is by having stricter gun regulation and, overall, less guns distributed.

Granted I do worry that in the event someone does try a shooting where there are armed people they won't have the slightest idea how to react in a high stress situation and only make things worse. That is why despite being fine with people having guns I feel there should be much more required training to own one and even more for a carry permit.

That's a good reason not to have more guns, instead of less guns. Because humans will fail under pressure and the more humans have guns on a particular place, the higher the chances of more than one of do something stupid or precipitated.

 

[Northstar]

I agree with the second sentence. I don't think the best way to achieve it though is to carry a gun.

Seems at odds with what you said before.

I have this idea, and I can be wrong, that having a gun is most often than not rather useless because the people who plan mass shootings are not thinking about going into places where they think people might have guns on them (either because it's a gun-free zone or a cinema, or a concert or a school).

Mass shootings, or gun violence in general, are way lower in other developed countries and their citizens have less guns.

Those other countries also don't have the gang violence that we do. That's a big reason our murder rates are so high and gun regulation won't make a bit of difference because gangs don't tend to care about government laws.

The best way to prevent these incidents is by having stricter gun regulation

As we've seen with a couple incidents lately, you can have the strictest gun control possible and it won't make a bit of difference if people don't do their jobs.

and, overall, less guns distributed.

True, but unfortunately the cat is already out of the bag.

That's a good reason not to have more guns, instead of less guns. Because humans will fail under pressure and the more humans have guns on a particular place, the higher the chances of more than one of do something stupid or precipitated.

Rigorous training like I suggested would help with both those things. Having to go through classes and training to get a gun will cause fewer people to want one so there would be fewer guns and at the same time make it so those that do carry may have a legitimate chance of actually doing something to stop an active shooter.

 

[Omnis]

You know what also is disrespectful and not helpful at all?

Not doing **** about the **** situation the USA got itself into. It seems that pretty much every single organisation in charge of anything related to guns has failed at one or more of the shootings.

Want change to happen? Put your foot down as a state, or country and say enough is enough. But that will not happen because 2nd amendment, and it won't happen in the next couple of days because the victims and their close ones should be allowed to grieve in peace. And next week a new moron will shoot a bunch of kids.

There are too many morons and sickos in the USA with guns, legal or illegal, who are not responsible enough to own them and yet have no problem getting hold of a weapon.

It's absolutely ridiculous and there is no excuse for such a developed country like the USA to have 3rd world situations almost every other day.

Tell that to the FBI. There is nothing political about not following up on a warning for a threat. You don't need political grandstanding to hold investigators accountable for failing to investigate.

 

[Dennisch]

Tell that to the FBI. There is nothing political about not following up on a warning for a threat. You don't need political grandstanding to hold investigators accountable for failing to investigate.

Yeah, this time it's the FBI who screwed up. Look at the older cases, almost all of them have mental issues. KNOWN by at least a psychologist or psychiatrist. If someone's brain is out of wack, local authorities need to know about it so that proper steps can be taken. But as it seems, yet again, and acknowledged by many, nobody at the authorities seems to give a damn .

 

[Danoff]

I have this idea, and I can be wrong, that having a gun is most often than not rather useless because the people who plan mass shootings are not thinking about going into places where they think people might have guns on them (either because it's a gun-free zone or a cinema, or a concert or a school).

Isn't it more a placebo affect, that of buying a gun to feed the idea that one can escape being shot (or defend one's loved ones)? I'm not saying there aren't people who actually use their guns if those situations happen but how often do they happen? Is there any data on that?

We've gone through this in similar threads. Depending on how the survey is conducted, guns are used in self-defense approximately 70,000 - 4,700,000 times per year in the US. As best I can tell the US annual gun homicide is about 8,000. About 14,000 total murders (including non-gun murders, this is older data), I'm having trouble finding how often per year a gun is used in any crime.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use

 

[phillgt2002]

"Thoughts and Prayers" is pretty much the same as the shruggie emoji ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

All because doing something about the situation would take too much work.

Guns are cool, fun, or whatever, but this **** is not acceptable. The fact that people would "die" for their "right to bear arms" is ****ing stupidity at its finest, then they get mad when they're mocked for their negligence.

If you can't handle the stiff criticism, don't support stupid **** and take the "guns don't kill people, _____ do!" route.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Lucas]

I didn't want to start a thread and spark a discussion for just one comment, but I wanted to let it out anyhow: what is going on in America when it comes to school shootings? I don't think "guns" is the only answer. The usual depictions I get on TV and films about high school life is an environment where, if you are an outcast, people constantly pick on you.

It's a depiction of course, but it comes from American TV and films themselves. There has to be at least some truth to it, and I just don't see that happen over here, in our schools.

In Argentina at least, the most recent gun-related incidents in schools have been kids/teenagers carrying their (usually policeman) father's gun into school to show it off to their classmates, and accidentally having one shot gone off and possibly hurting or killing one of their buddies. A far cry from the "I'm going to kill everyone" mentality found in American school shootings.

 

[Danoff]

"Thoughts and Prayers" is pretty much the same as the shruggie emoji ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

All because doing something about the situation would take too much work.

Guns are cool, fun, or whatever, but this **** is not acceptable. The fact that people would "die" for their "right to bear arms" is ****ing stupidity at its finest, then they get mad when they're mocked for their negligence.

If you can't handle the stiff criticism, don't support stupid **** and take the "guns don't kill people, _____ do!" route.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Dying for human rights is not stupid, it recognizes that there is something more valuable than your life - freedom. It's kinda the basis of the US, and it should serve as the basis of morality for all of humanity. How you live your life is more important than whether you're living it anymore. I could go into a whole discussion about whether or not dying for the right to bear arms is actually what's going on, and talk about the many issues that you just glossed over in your post, but the bottom line is that you're throwing stones in the wrong direction.

If you think that dying for human rights is stupid. Consider the following scenario. You need an organ transplant. Your neighbor has a healthy organ that you need and is the same blood type. If you murder your neighbor you'll live. Do you kill them? That's the moral question. If you answer yes, you're not moral. If you answer no, you're dying for human rights.

I didn't want to start a thread and spark a discussion for just one comment, but I wanted to let it out anyhow: what is going on in America when it comes to school shootings? I don't think "guns" is the only answer. The usual depictions I get on TV and films about high school life is an environment where, if you are an outcast, people constantly pick on you.

It's a depiction of course, but it comes from American TV and films themselves. There has to be at least some truth to it, and I just don't see that happen over here, in our schools.

In Argentina at least, the most recent gun-related incidents in schools have been kids/teenagers carrying their (usually policeman) father's gun into school to show it off to their classmates, and accidentally having one shot gone off and possibly hurting or killing one of their buddies.

I don't know. I think some of our teenagers are looking to it as a way to give their life some kind of meaning. Not sure... but maybe outside of the US you would actually do something about someone who had threatened to shoot up a school and demonstrated dangerous tendencies in psychiatric evaluations. In the US we send them out the door to the gun shop across the street.

 

[TexRex]

If you think that dying for human rights is stupid.

That isn't what I read...

The fact that people would "die" for their "right to bear arms" is ****ing stupidity at its finest, then they get mad when they're mocked for their negligence.

Given the post's overall cynical bent I read "people" as a reference to innocents and "their," (the first one), as referring to the sociopaths who gun them down.

But hey...maybe I'm the one who's off the mark.

 

[Danoff]

That isn't what I read...


Given the post's overall cynical bent I read "people" as a reference to innocents and "their," (the first one), as referring to the sociopaths who gun them down.

But hey...maybe I'm the one who's off the mark.

Take a look again...

The fact that people would "die" for their "right to bear arms" is ****ing stupidity at its finest

How do you read anything else? Keep reading further to see that "they, their, etc" refers to the people with rights."Their" refers to people. If he meant something else there are quite a few changes needed to that sentence.

 

[Joey D]

Apparently the Governor of Kentucky has gone full potato and started blaming video games and movies for school shootings.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...-blames-violent-video-games-movies/344336002/

What puzzles me here is that I'm actually seeing a lot of this in social media right now. If you think about, these are the same people that shout from the rooftops not to blame the gun in a situation like this, but in the next breath want to blame media? If it's not the gun's fault, it certainly isn't the fault of the media you consume either because at the end of the day, they're both just objects.

How long before someone of power steps in and intelligently says "instead of banning things, why don't we figure our what makes someone want to mass shooting and then address that?"

 

[MatskiMonk]

How long before someone of power steps in and intelligently says "instead of banning things, why don't we figure our what makes someone want to mass shooting and then address that?"

It's a topic for a different thread perhaps, but I personally do believe that these days we're giving young people too much access to things before they can put them in life context.

Also, not trying to be edgy but wanting to kill people en masse is not that difficult to imagine, but it's likely quite a long way a long a mental and emotional journey... which to be frank, until we can isolate specific brain chemistry or genetic markers that cause it, I believe we're unlikely to be able to do anything about.

 

[Liquid]

Just for what it's worth whenever people mention Australia, Australia is not just "an island", it is a continental landmass in its own right; Australia is more than 2/3rds the size of Europe.

What is unique about the Australian continent is that the Commonwealth of Australia is the only country on the continental mainland, unlike the 50+ countries of multiethnic and multicultural Europe, and unlike Europe and Asia or the two halves of America, the single country-continent is surrounded by water on all sides far away from almost anywhere else and thus able to control imports and its maritime borders without encroaching on another jurisdiction.

I'm not suggesting either way that Australia's gun laws are good or successful, I'm just pointing out that there are reasons why Australia finds it easier to regulate or restrict the flow of guns into the country and it is a luxury not found in almost any other HDI-topping, prosperous country.

 

[Happyjuice]

Great video by Colin Noir

 

[Joey D]

I was with him right up until he said arm teachers. I do not agree with arming teachers at all unless they can properly demonstrate they know how to fire a weapon in a crowded room and hit the person they're trying to hit all while under extreme pressure. Unless they're properly trained, letting them have a gun is just a disaster waiting to happen. Also, they'd have to demonstrate they have the ability to keep track of a gun and know how to subdue a student if they made a grab for the firearm (which unless they were a former cop or in the military, I'm guessing they don't know).

There's also a huge liability with teachers having guns too. Accidents do occur and a city would be sued into oblivion if that happened.

Armed guards and metal detectors? Sure why not, seems reasonable enough assuming the guards aren't rent-a-cops. Or just station a police officer in schools, when I was in high school we always had a sheriff deputy there.

 

[Happyjuice]

I was with him right up until he said arm teachers. I do not agree with arming teachers at all unless they can properly demonstrate they know how to fire a weapon in a crowded room and hit the person they're trying to hit all while under extreme pressure. Unless they're properly trained, letting them have a gun is just a disaster waiting to happen. Also, they'd have to demonstrate they have the ability to keep track of a gun and know how to subdue a student if they made a grab for the firearm (which unless they were a former cop or in the military, I'm guessing they don't know).

There's also a huge liability with teachers having guns too. Accidents do occur and a city would be sued into oblivion if that happened.

Armed guards and metal detectors? Sure why not, seems reasonable enough assuming the guards aren't rent-a-cops. Or just station a police officer in schools, when I was in high school we always had a sheriff deputy there.

They would be properly trained and put through their paces I’m sure. I would have the community vote and they can even offer the option where parents can pay for it because ultimately it usually comes down to economics at the school board level.

 

[Joey D]

They would be properly trained and put through their paces I’m sure.

I'm not so sure. Teachers barely have enough resources at their disposal to actually teach effectively. Where would the money come from to train them?

 

[SlipZtrEm]

I was with him right up until he said arm teachers. I do not agree with arming teachers at all unless they can properly demonstrate they know how to fire a weapon in a crowded room and hit the person they're trying to hit all while under extreme pressure. Unless they're properly trained, letting them have a gun is just a disaster waiting to happen. Also, they'd have to demonstrate they have the ability to keep track of a gun and know how to subdue a student if they made a grab for the firearm (which unless they were a former cop or in the military, I'm guessing they don't know).

Why train them though? It's not like the average person who can buy a gun has to go through any real training.

There's also a huge liability with teachers having guns too. Accidents do occur and a city would be sued into oblivion if that happened.

Good point. I also wonder about any potential situations where teachers abuse their position of power. It already happens with morally-questionable student-teacher relationships — how much worse could that be when a teacher is armed?

Or what happens when a teacher snaps?

Armed guards and metal detectors? Sure why not, seems reasonable enough assuming the guards aren't rent-a-cops. Or just station a police officer in schools, when I was in high school we always had a sheriff deputy there.

I remember cops being around my high school fairly regularly too. I do imagine that'd cover a lot of the same ground as the proposal of arming teachers.

I'm not so sure. Teachers barely have enough resources at their disposal to actually teach effectively. Where would the money come from to train them?

Maybe the NRA could redirect funds from politicians to the teachers? 💡

 

[Happyjuice]

They should have training. Tons of teachers have recently- voluntarily signed themselves up for courses and concealed carry- a lot of it has been offered for free. Too bad the media doesn’t talk or show videos of all the concealed carry hero’s that arise regularly down there. Mass shooting cowards have a funny way of popping up mostly in gun free zones.
Hope they do something to help the problem.

 

[TexRex]

Hope they do something to help the problem.

Like throw more guns at it...

 

[Happyjuice]

Good guys with guns sexy rexy

 

[TexRex]

Even if you omit the leftward leaning tendency of educators, why would they be expected to support a largely conservative agenda from those who don't support them?

 

[Happyjuice]

Having the option for properly trained guards and security, and being given the option to defend yourself and students with proper training and tools, I would imagine becomes non partisan quickly- especially if you or your colleagues have been in a helpless situation like that before.
I’m not a fan of any govt ramming agendas down our throats. I think being given a choice for a well rolled out and thorough security protocol designed by first responders- not politicians would be a good start

 

[Sanji Himura]

I was with him right up until he said arm teachers. I do not agree with arming teachers at all unless they can properly demonstrate they know how to fire a weapon in a crowded room and hit the person they're trying to hit all while under extreme pressure. Unless they're properly trained, letting them have a gun is just a disaster waiting to happen. Also, they'd have to demonstrate they have the ability to keep track of a gun and know how to subdue a student if they made a grab for the firearm (which unless they were a former cop or in the military, I'm guessing they don't know).

There's also a huge liability with teachers having guns too. Accidents do occur and a city would be sued into oblivion if that happened.

Armed guards and metal detectors? Sure why not, seems reasonable enough assuming the guards aren't rent-a-cops. Or just station a police officer in schools, when I was in high school we always had a sheriff deputy there.

I agree to a point. Handing out guns like candy is just begging for trouble. However, assuming that number of teachers are armed in proportion to either the number of buildings in the school (like three per building)or in proportion to the student population, then costs will be lowered in both training and safety.