Senate Gun Control

The reason for the shooting doesn’t matter. The ease of buying weapons is the problem.

 

Know what your kids need? Dalek body armour. Mobile, doesn't have to be worn by the wearer. Just send your kids to school in a mobile mini-tank.

 

How long before someone walks into a gun store, shooting range, gun show, or NRA convention and shoots the place up? What will be the narrative then?

We have conservatives blaming liberals for open borders, failed gun laws, gun-free zones, a false narrative about how "they are going to take our precious guns away", etc. We have liberals blaming conservatives for a lack of action on guns, support for NRA, religiously worshipping a misinterpreted second amendment, etc. And NO ONE, ANYWHERE has called for solidarity and discussion that involves people from all spectrums. Sadly, our failed nation doesn't act like that. There is no common desired effort to offer solutions. There is only attack, attack, and attack. This may be the only nation in the world hell bent on self-destruction. And this may be the only nation in the world with the mindset that death of innocent civilians, young and old, is the price to pay for "freedom".

 

So there's reports that apparently the shooter in Texas was bullied; which is a common theme among these mass shooters. You'll continue hearing the Conservatives and yes Liberals advocate for better Mental Health treatment. That's all fine and dandy, but at end of the day, we all know that it's not going to solve the shooting problem in America. If he had issues, HE SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ABLE TO PURCHASE THOSE GUNS. It's not rocket science. There's reports that he texted a picture with the guns to a friend of his just days before the massacre. I'm sorry, but I don't think a handful of sessions with a psychiatrist or psychoanalyst would've helped him.

 

Bullying is a red herring all the way back to Columbine. The shooters in that case weren't in fact bullied and were actually vicious racists who bullied others. Kids who are bullied are far more likely to harm themselves in response.

 

There's a reason that never happens. These psychopaths go after defenseless people. People never expecting to come under attack. Shoppers, worshippers, and as in this case, when the psychopath is particularly depraved, school children. Gun buyers and gun enthusiasts might not necessarily be expecting to come under attack (but then why own a firearm?), but they can fight back. That's not an argument against gun reform, that's simply a fact as to why it would never happen at those places. There needs to be reform. Preferably a thorough new assault weapons ban. Stop the unchecked sale of semi automatic rifles and machine-pistol style weapons.

 

There have been a few shootings at gun stores (usually robberies), but every gun store I've ever been in has an armed staff, gun on their hip and ready. They are quick to draw and shoot. There's also just not enough targets at gun stores for the usual shooters to bother targeting. Another problem is motivation. Who would shoot up a gun store? Someone mad at gun violence? Not likely to use a gun, then. Shooting ranges are also often sparsely populated...by people wielding guns. Same lack of motive applies to NRA conventions, but I can believe that mass fire from many sources, in all directions, could happen if the attendees were to think an active shooting was in progress.

Given the number of shootings we've had, if they were going to happen in these places with any frequency, they would have already. Even if gun friendly places started suffering mass shootings, I'm pretty sure gun nuts wouldn't change their stance. I mean, they haven't changed their stance in response to schoolchildren being shot.

People in favor of gun control have asked for solidarity in the past. It's fallen on deaf ears. There can be no solidarity from people who just have zero interest in genuine discussion on gun control, much less ever actually allowing serious attempts at gun control. There's no common desired effort for solutions because one side doesn't want any solutions other than more guns.

I'm not interested in discussion, either, because gun nuts only participate in bad faith, and in the last few years have even given up on their bad faith arguments in favor of no discussion at all as well. Both sides realize discussion is pointless. When, as you say, one side simply believes mass death is the price to pay for freedom, there can be no solidarity or solutions because that side sees the situation as acceptable.

 

They are however pretty much unrelated

 

Conservatives would love this, as it means boys and girls can't touch each other and be tempted to sin in defiance of Biblical sexuality.

Bingo! You've solved two problems with one piece of body armor: the risk of being shot and the filthy, horrible, disgusting, Satan-driven desire to mate. I'm surprised some of the Mega Churches haven't started promoting this idea to their congregations yet.

 

Something popped into my head today when I saw this figure about Texans purchasing over a million guns last year or maybe it was so far this year, I forget. But I was like, "Wow, that's a lot of guns and yet look at all the shootings not being stopped by a "good guy with a gun." Do we have stats on how many shootings have actually been stopped by a "good guy with a gun?" Because I'm starting to think that whole justification for easily available guns MIGHT KIND OF BE BULL****.

 

@CT-867-5309 I agree about the def ears. Sadly, that is why I say our nation is simply unable to resolve this.
@Darth Chiznuk you are totally correct about mental health BUT how do we even identify those that need it and how do we force them to receive it? We can't simply round up every loner or person that acts "differently" and sign them up forcibly for mental health treatment. Most of these perpetrators didn't show any signs or at least not enough to raise red flags.

 

They're unrelated wrt mass shootings but they are related when it comes to suicide, the main cause of gun deaths in the US.

 

I think that happened in the late 90s and early 00s. The narrative was the same strategy of deflection and stalling until the call for reform has passed.

 

I HATE the "it's not guns fault, it's people"!!! Yeah-it's PEOPLE that should NOT have guns that DO have guns! And they usually get them LEGALLY!!!

But then it comes to my previous question. How can we identify people who should not have guns (mental health, aggression, criminal records, etc.) beforehand? The criminal record issue should never be a question. If a person has a record of mental illness and aggression, that shouldn't be an issue. But what if the person has not ever been on the radar?

 

The latest statistic from the NRA is that, on average, eleventy trillion crimes are stopped by a gun every day.

 

Nothing will stop mass shootings in the quantity we have them on besides banning guns such as the AR.

 

AR's should have been banned a LONG time ago and heavily enforced. Of course we need to support that ban. The next question becomes.....what do we do about the millions already in circulation?

 

Outlawing the manufacture and sale of more automatic and semi-automatic weapons for civilian purchase immediately will stop more weapons going into circulation. The millions sold will still be out there but they will become more expensive to acquire. Also they will breakdown over time so their will be less of them. Over years and decades it will make a difference.

 

buybacks, or just grandfather those. The problematic pattern in these shootings seems to be freshly sold rifles. Not the ones in circulation. Sometimes its parental negligence in child-safing their firearms (which is also a massive problem when it comes to suicides and accidents) but almost 100% of the time, the weapon is legally purchased. Stop the sale, kill the pattern.

This is a problem that 1st amendment absolutists want their communities to believe can only be tackled all at once, but it can be approached step by step.

Step 1: Bar the sale of semi automatic rifles.

We can debate where to go from there, semi auto rifles can still be owned, but that first step in tackling this massacre problem is that and that alone.

 

There was an AR ban in DC. The SCOTUS struck it down.

 

Oh yes absolutely. I meant mass shootings.

 

Governor Turd Sandwich of Texas main response today? "Hey it could been worse!"



Happy Beto brought his A-Game and slammed dunk the SOB even though regrettably it won't matter come November:

 

Yeah, the law enforcement officials only killed the shooter AFTER he was able to massacre the elementary school.

Knowing Texas, they'll probably pin a medal on those cops who shot him; like they're "heroes".

 

Honestly, I do not think it is at all coincidental that even though handguns represent the vast majority of homicides with known weapons (2015 to 2019, the FBI records on homicides have over 6,000 people killed by handguns every year and 200-400 killed by rifles) the entire focus is on rifles and rifles are both a small portion of gun homicides that appear to be a group where the victims are much more likely to be white.

For that broad a statement (as opposed to someone representing a specific threat, like because they're acting out violently), be aware you're encouraging people with mental health issues to avoid seeking help.

I doubt that it'll go anywhere, since it gets difficult starting with the premise of it. For example, the Giffords Law Center covers that generally speaking, "good guys" aren't allowed to be carrying guns at elementary schools in Texas. Which isn't to argue that therefore it would've helped, but rather that schools aren't a test of shootings being stopped by a "good guy with a gun" when the laws are that they can't have the guns there. It doesn't actually test the question.