- 1,683
- Houston, TX
- The_TetsuKobura
School shooting in Texas (shooter arrested)
- Thread starter HenrySwanson
- 355 comments
- 14,264 views
- 29,452
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
Mental health advocacy is an ongoing thing. Fun fact, National Children's Mental Health Awareness Day was a little over a week ago.
It's clear why these rallies you speak of are focused on guns, as guns are most visible as iconography in the aftermath of a significant gun violence event. It's easy to see why people want change, particularly when some of what's already on the books is at odds with other things already on the books.
You ask why people aren't orchestrating gatherings to address mental health, but I want to know why the current administration isn't pushing legislation to its benefit (instead of detriment). See, as a Democrat, that's a means of effecting change in a meaningful way that I am all for.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
I'm curious to know how any kind of mental health reform that's likely to get put into legislation would have changed anything that happened in this particular situation.
- 29,452
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
I'm not aware that information regarding this individual's mental health history has been made public, but apparently mental health is still the issue. I wouldn't be surprised if it becomes clear that it was in this case, but apparently it's more prudent to talk about it as though it's known to have been.
Something we do know, however...with absolute certainty...is that the perpetrator in this event used a gun.
- 7,432
- Fort Collins, CO
- Koios1031
- koios1031
Far from it actually. But thank you for insulting me. Even though, from what I can tell, you said basically the same things I said.
The only thing I don't agree on is the fact that focusing on guns isn't the solution. The reason I said that is because I don't think the gun woke up one morning and thought to itself "I'm going to manipulate some doofus to shoot up a school today". This isn't science fiction. The gun is just a tool. A dangerous one, yes. But a tool nonetheless. The world today has proven that a gun isn't the only way to terrorize and kill. It just as easily with the car parked in front of your house. Or a machete. What makes those attacks so different then this tragedy? Not much. Not much at all. They are all done by sick people. What's stopping the next school killer from using a truck? Nothing. Hell, they are easier to get than guns. Then what will you say? At least it wasn't with a gun so it's fine?
The problem lies with the act. Not the tool. Plain and simple.
It more than likely is Nazi. The chances of it are great. But it still has the possibility of not being that. Can you tell me exactly why it has to be a Nazi symbol just because it's worn with a hammer and sickle? I mean come on. It could just be a statement of disobedience. Unless you're friend with this guy and have talked to him about it, it's not fair to jump to conclusions. Not to him, screw him.
Last edited:
Danoff
Premium
- 33,610
- Mile High City
Uhhh... I'm not so sure about that actually. It looks at the very least as though the number of people who are willing to kill is dropping (possibly as standard of living increases). Meanwhile one cannot argue that a lack of availability of guns is causing the crime decrease.
- 528
- United Kingdom
- PD_ApexPredator
- 7,432
- Fort Collins, CO
- Koios1031
- koios1031
Of course the tool makes the task easier. That's what make it a tool. But it doesn't mean the focus should be on them. It should be on the user and their reasons.
You agreed that if guns are taken away, the violence would still be there in one fashion or another @_ApexPredator. You have said that you're pro gun. But yet you argue that the focus needs to be on guns and not the problem.
Please do me a favour and make up your mind on which side your on.
You agreed that if guns are taken away, the violence would still be there in one fashion or another @_ApexPredator. You have said that you're pro gun. But yet you argue that the focus needs to be on guns and not the problem.
Please do me a favour and make up your mind on which side your on.
Last edited:
- 6,047
- Simcoeace
Uhhh... I'm not so sure about that actually. It looks at the very least as though the number of people who are willing to kill is dropping (possibly as standard of living increases). Meanwhile one cannot argue that a lack of availability of guns is causing the crime decrease.
There remain pockets of extreme gang & drug related violence, but overall the crime rate & homicide rate have dropped dramatically in the US since 1990. This is perhaps an indication of less societal unrest & alienation in general. However, mass shootings - particularly school shootings - have increased & these kinds of shootings garner a lot of public & media attention (for understandable reasons).
A study recently published in Scientific American concludes:
"In less than 18 years, we have already seen more deaths related to school shootings than in the whole 20th century. One alarming trend is that the overwhelming majority of 21st-century shooters were adolescents, suggesting that it is now easier for them to access guns, and that they more frequently suffer from mental health issues or limited conflict resolution skills."
There may be no one solution to this growing problem, but more effective gun regulation is surely part of the answer.
- 29,452
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
Paddock didn't use a truck either, in spite of all those people leaving themselves exposed for hours.
Nobody would have anticipated a large vehicle barrelling through the crowd at 10:05pm. Given the fact that it was10:05 at night and as dark as one would expect for that time, it may well have been difficult to use firearms to full potential, what with the diminutive nature of the rounds, but the cab of a new Mitsubishi Fuso is 89 inches wide.
But no, he deemed the killing capacity of his guns to be sufficient.
- 24,612
- Anoka, MN
- 29,452
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
What does what you're talking about have to do with the topic for which this thread was created?What does any of that have to do with what we are talking about?
This kid didn't use a truck, or a machete, or a bomb...he used a GUN.
If you open a door, you have to expect somebody's going to walk through it.
- 29,452
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
It's related to this incident by way of having been perpetrated with a firearm despite any number of possible implements.I was asking what that particular incident had to do with this one.
Apologies for seeking clarification, I won't let it happen again.
Apparently that's all that's necessary.
- 26,545
- Houston, Texas, USA
- JMarine25
As a native Houstonian, this truly is a somber and discomforting time for us here. It makes me feel fortunate I didn't have to experience something as threatening and horrible as this experience when I was a grade school student as well as being a college student. This is just a terrible situation no matter how you look at it.
- 24,612
- Anoka, MN
It's related to this incident by way of having been perpetrated with a firearm despite any number of possible implements.
Apparently that's all that's necessary.
James Fields Jr however did chose a car.
Again, apologies for asking for clarification. Hopefully you can find it in your heart to forgive such a horrific offense.
McLaren
Premium
- 45,196
- Texas
That's a bit interesting. Here I was reading the tool of choice was an AR b/c of its ease, but now that a shotgun and a .38 revolver are the murder weapons in this specific shooting, the terminology is using the generic term of guns.
UKMikey
Premium
- 17,478
- Grea'er Laandan
- UKMikeyA
- UKMikeyA
The poster I replied to was talking about school shootings being replaced by school vehicular homicide sprees and then went on to ask what would people blame then as if it had already happened. If I may ask for clarification, when has this happened at a school in the past?
The methodology sounds completely different to me so it seems strange to think that one method would supplant the other without some solid reason. Until it does people are being asked to argue against a hypothetical occurrence.
Last edited:
- 528
- United Kingdom
- PD_ApexPredator
I was arguing that even if guns were banned, they wouldn't suddenly disappear, and yes, violence will exist in the world whether or not a gun is used; but I think it's silly not to concede that it's far easier to murder a class of school children with a gun than it is a machete.
I think it's irresponsible to be pro gun and not argue that their proliferation ought to be the focus of unfortunate incidents such as this.
- 22,550
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
As far as I'm unaware of that is has at a school, but it has happened in a larger scope. If schools are some how sacred and get their own little bracket in relation to violence I'm also unaware of it as well. The fact is be it a shcool, mall, festival outing, club, stadium, church, federal building. People have, will and can perpetrate mass killing with various tools. The fact people are willing to cherry pick that to fit their narrative is concerning, as if we just focus on the schools and only worry about the other areas when they come up or just ignore them to argue this one place...
Not how the world works, and probably why @Northstar brought it up the way he did.
UKMikey
Premium
- 17,478
- Grea'er Laandan
- UKMikeyA
- UKMikeyA
If you're asking us to ignore the type of venue chosen or the method used to kill people then I'm not the only one selectively looking at part of the truth. The fact is that people will continue to list schools separately from wide open public venues and shootings differently from cars, possibly because they don't want to group armed loners with terrorism. Perhaps they have an agenda of their own. If there's a good reason to redefine these attacks as mass killings and not school shootings, or to change the title of this thread accordingly, then perhaps we should hear it.
In the meantime I don't think the copycat spree killers who commit the kind of crime under discussion in this thread are going to read about nine people being killed in a crowded school in India and leave their guns at home. I think they're aiming for Parkland or Santa Fé numbers and find concealed weapons better at carrying these out.
As such, I don't think incidents like that are going to lead to those places installing the kind of bollards and traffic calming measures outside the venues that have been introduced at scenes of mass vehicular homicide in the past. By concentrating on metal detectors and bag searches instead I don't think they're cherrypicking or ignoring the problem.
Last edited:
- 7,432
- Fort Collins, CO
- Koios1031
- koios1031
Of course using a gun is easier. I agree. Of course violence would still occur if guns are striped away. I agree with nearly everything you've said. Expect on the focus of guns as the problem. I think it's silly to focus on the guns Gun control laws wouldn't have done a thing to stop this. It was his father's gun. His father could possible still get a gun and his son could still steal one no matter if the laws were stricter or not. Maybe we need to focus on gun safes. Or the reasoning behind why this kid felt like it was the right to walk into his art class and do what he did. The gun isn't the problem. I think it's silly for anyone to focus on the gun. The gun just isn't the problem. The kid wanting to kill his peers is the problem.
SestoScudo
(Banned)
- 3,000
- Australia
- Decepticon 47
- 11,136
- Sweden
- eran0004
Because the hammer and the sickle is a symbol for communism, which makes nazism the only reasonable interpretation of the meaning of the cross. There are no alternative interpretations that make sense.
I fully agree that it’s probably a statement of disobedience, since no nazi or communist would wear the symbol of the other.
BobK
Premium
- 7,020
- Massachusetts, USA
Clearly you're not an American.
Similar threads
