Have we become used to or immune to mass shootings?
 

Or only those in schools? Very surprised to see nothing about the school shooting in KY. :/

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42797684

Maybe because they don't have a catchy hashtag!

Obviously the mainstream press is covering up the shooting to protect the Trump administration. ;)

One of the Foxes, or CNNs talked about it for about 45 seconds.

Not enough bodies I suppose.

All part of the brainwashing. For the same reason so many even today will start smoking cigarettes. Adult logic is not longer relevant. Emotions are the response. It will only be news when consumers start buying 155 mm howitzers for their personal protection.

In the old west, very few had guns. Today, the myths even claim everyone back then had guns. They didn't. But emotions - not reality - are relevant.

Emotions now say mass shootings are their problem.

Its population control. Now that the cops are saving the burglar drug addicts from overdose there has to be some regulated death control.[emoji379]

Is it possible that news outlets have finally started to take on board the advice of experts not to give the public notoriety that so many mass shooters are looking for when they do this?

This wasn't a mass shooting, nor a school shooting, just you average everyday shooting that happened to take place at a school. And the kid was probably white, probably Christian, run of the mill hillbilly. It's just unfortunate the other kids weren't armed or had it in their backpack. Nothing to see here. :rolleyes:

Instead we should arm all students with Stihl saws. Stihl makdes a good saw for that. Then kids need not go running down the highway in winter - need not potentially die from colds.

Best is to always arm everyone. Especially with tools designed to remove arms. History has repeatedly proven that.

Those already wearing black in support of #MeToo are all set for this.

Now, regardless of their emotions, would those tools be hand tools, or, arm tools?

:p:

Sorry, I couldn't help m'self.

:D

I'm pretty sure we're good with that and with the Russians funding politicians through the NRA. No big wup, it's all good, no discussion needed.

Better is advise from Fredy Kruger or Leatherface.

:D

Unless you have evidence that they were also sexually harassed, it doesn't make the priority cut.

Totally no big deal--no need to be a "Chicken Little" when everything is normal and fine.

and they get younger. 12

But, but, it was an accident.

Several times. :rolleyes:

The police say it was an accident and she was booked on suspicion of negligent discharge of a firearm.

.

Republicans are being woefully short-sighted, just like they were with healthcare. When 90% of the country agrees that something is a problem, then the other guys are going to pass the laws they want to pass as soon as they get back into power. The smartest thing Congress could do right now is pass an immediate ban on AR-15s. They wouldn't lose a single voter over it in November, because they've already lost everyone except their hardcore base anyway. 2018 is a write-off for them. But if they don't do anything, AGAIN, the Dems will pass much more than an assault ban when they inevitably win a majority of seats this fall.

I'll tell you something else, too: I believe guns will become completely illegal in my lifetime. Because 3D printing is soon going to make any kind of partial restriction meaningless. They'll have to ban them entirely, including possession and dissemination of the patterns, in order to have any hope of controlling the criminals. Obviously there will still be a black market, but it'll be like child pornography: the kind of thing you go to jail just for owning.

The cost would be lives. Many lives. It would be generations before ya made up the difference in saved lives.

Didja know, this year is the first year that millennials aged 18 and up outnumber boomers?

This shooting is different. You can feel it. The number of teens who filmed it with their phones, the number of teens responding directly to bullshit "thoughts and prayers" politicians about what they saw with their own eyes. Mark my words, they're going to turn out in record numbers to vote.

Rubio is done for.

Also, by the way: www.draintheNRA.com. Find out what corporations are in bed with them. The boycotts are starting.

Record numbers won't be enough. It's still going to be only those directly involved and a few others within their realm of influence. The vast majority will be apathetic. They'll be out of school and preoccupied with making a living figuring it's now someone else's problem. That's the way their parents have raised them.

As for boycotts, the prognosis isn't any better this time than for the last few dozen times it's been done.

I'm glad to say farewell to the boomers. The millennials I know are very connected with each other in a way that we don't get. They know that organizations like the NRA and the GOP stand between their generation and what they see as sensible solutions to generational problems. I have one very politically engaged kid and one who hates politics but they both vote every time.

I used to buy the whole 2nd Amendment and libertarian line and it took me an embarrassingly long time to figure out they are just a smoke screens for the most reactionary elements in our society.

Finishing Population Wars after setting it aside for too long, evolutionary biology has a lot to say about our politics and it is not an endorsement of survival of the fittest. Assimilation and accommodation more accurately describe survival.

Stream on consciousness off ramp... The GOP controlled house is going after Pappy Bushes' American's with Disabilities Act again.

Teen, stopped before his rampage, journaled about planning his school shooting

I think a lot of them study the previous ones, and this guy did:

I hope that these types do not figure out any way other than guns to kill large numbers of people, because if they do, that will just become the new way.

Re: The Florida School shooter

Can we please get this motherfucker's picture and name off of every tv channel and webpage?

Absolutely. A complete blackout from here on.

I just wish this could be treated as a public health issue.

There would still be anti-vaxers. :(

Many decades ago, the NRA got laws passed to ban medical research into gun violence.

The guy is too young to buy a beer. It is illegal for him to buy a 9 mm pistol. But it was completely legal for him to buy a rifle whose only purpose is to kill many people quickly.

And laws do not require his purchased to be in a database where cops could associate 39 calls for police with a guy who owns an assault rifle.

In short, NRA opposition to anything that would harm sales even makes it impossible to deal with a mental health issue.

A gun literally changes the mindset of the person. But even research into that had been banned many decades ago.

From facts and how so many think, no where near not enough school kids have died yet. We need far more violence long before this problem will be considered. The changed mindset associated with holding a loaded gun is that massive.

But he's a Canadian so he doesn't understand. :p:

Public school students need to make friends among Catholic school students so they can borrow their patron saints to watch over them; 'cause, you know, the parents and schools aren't cutting it. :bolt:

On a serious note they had patron saints on staff Aaron Feis and Scott Beigel.

Patron Saint of Guns.

Fake news, created out of whole cloth by 4chan, spread by AP, ABC, ADL

Reported by Politico:

How white nationalists fooled the media about Florida shooter

It's been ages since I was on 4chan, but at the time I was there, they weren't white nationalists, just youngsters looking for vaguely anti-social laughs. They would gladly tell you they were white nationalists if it was funny to them, just like young people will sometimes use the n word in order to test their own boundaries and/or rile things up.

my 2009 thread where 4chan ordered pizzas delivered to the asshat who claimed his kid was in a balloon, and watched on national media as Papa John's arrived at the house - it was all for the lulz.

my 2009 thread where 4chan hacked the Time Most Influential People poll to read "MARBLECAKE ALSO THE GAME" down the left-hand side

Should Trump deport his base?

https://www.uts.edu.au/sites/default/files/121017.pdf


https://www.snopes.com/did-shooters-...ture-maga-hat/

Nawwww, Trump should close the schools that failed to protect the children and reassign the children to other schools that don't have that record of failure and Trump should consider removing any remaining children from the custody of parents whose gross personal security negligence failed to protect one of theirs.

As for the hat, there's an old saying: Patriotism, the last refuge of a scoundrel, it has no bearing on those who sport the motto and do good by it. Any inference that it does comes from just another scoundrel.

From CBS News on 17 Feb 2018:
Apparently another few thousand kids must die before we will even consider a solution and sane leaders.

The rule adversely affected Americans with disabilities who depended on Social Security Disability payments. It potentially enabled their rights to be abridged without a court order just because they're disabled.

From Wikipedia:

[BOLD MINE]

Boards, commissions, or other lawful authority get to effectively rescind privileges; but, not rights and certainly not because some administrative rule says they can.

It was an ill conceived rule, a typical knee jerk reaction by emotional sheeple trying, in their hysteria, to find a panacea by including provisions for bypassing the courts and eliminating due process.

How would you propose the bill be written differently?

In the absence of a previous court ruling, the Social Security Administration would submit its information to a court which would decide, after affording the subject legal representation and deliberation, if a report should be made to the Attorney General for inclusion in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

The Executive branch shouldn't have unilateral control over what rights people have and especially not for those who are among the most vulnerable of citizens ... the disabled.

Wow. Massive bureaucracy so that nothing happens.

The law was created after Seung-Hui Cho created his Virginia Tech massacre. He was known with mental problems. But bureaucracy made it impossible to protect Virginia Tech students.

The law said a government agency that knows of people who should not have a gun must report that name to a central database - the NICS. No problem. If information is wrong, then the list is appealed in court. Some 4000 did appeal and had their names removed from the list for various reasons include a restoration of mental health. Something approaching 2 million (if I remember that number) had their names remain on that list.

NRA will chip away at protection. So the Donald said the Social Security Administration cannot report (what is maybe 75,000) mentally ill people to that list. All part of a process to increase sales - which is the only purpose of that industry organization.

He used the word 'disability'. That is NRA word spinning. Only disability reported to the NICS is mental illness - people who should not be sold assault weapons. That 'disability' can no longer be reported since a self proclaimed genius wants more massacres.

That is an awfully broad brush we're waving about there. There are many different kinds of mental illness.

In cases of mass shootings, while mental illness may be a factor it's rarely the determining factor.

You can be mentally ill or unstable without being wicked - and you can be plenty wicked without being mentally ill.

Not to mention that administratively taking away people's Constitutional rights and making them go to court to prove that they should have them is bass ackwards and not what this country is about. Fear will make the weak try to do that though.

Only broad brush was the simple summary of a more complex law that Trump want to continue to destroy. Only discussed is an extemely limited restriction - an almost no restriction. If anything better could exist, then it would have been proposed here. Nothing was because no better solution exists except those that eliminate so many more loopholes.

Nobody needs a gun the minute he feels he needs it. Filters sometimes slow that purchase. No problem for anyone - ever. Worse, anyone who needs a gun can go to gun shows where restrictions are bypassed. The problem is too few filters and restrictions. So we need to eliminate them all?

In a local convention center, what was the largest show they ever had? The gun show one day after Sandy Hook. Guns were not purchased to protect their kid' schools. Fears that assault weapons would finally be restricted increases sales among the emotional who need military weapons.

This Cruz kid could not by alcohol and could not buy an 9 mm handgun. Without trivial restrictions compromised, he can immediately buy an assault rifle - no questions asked.

Cho apparently had mental illness. But laws said he had every right to buy assault weapons, oversized magazines, and all the munitions he wanted. Because we must not learn who is danagerous? We have not yet killed enough (thousands of) kids yet. How many thousands must die before some finally admit we have no where near enough demands for responsibility.

You can be mentally ill and not be wicked? Fine. Then remove laws that have restricted research. NRA successfully got this research banned decades ago.

Who did Trump protect? The mentally ill. Anyone wonder why?

Trump obviously believes your rights should be protected.

Trump has a long history of trampling on other's right. Trump is only now advocating the banning of bum stocks because his popularity (due to so many assault rifles) is threatened. Trump does not care about anyone but himself and his kids.

He has even demonstrated less respect for his wives.

Just wondering when he will trade this one in for a newer model.

That interpretation implies that every potential gun owner would be forced to actively prove their competence before purchasing (as it is in Japan, for example.) The proposed mental health laws in this case are only taking away Constitutional rights from those who have already gone out of their way to prove themselves unfit. We also have Constitutional rights to life and freedom, but we routinely take those away when the situation warrants it.

That's your non sequitur extrapolation, not my implication.

[BOLD MINE]

Not "only", that's why this:

Those are subject to oversight, that mental health rule was not. This country has a history of insufficient oversight in the management of those with mental illness.

So, what was the mental illness for which Cruz should have had his Constitutional rights taken away preemptively?

If we can have commissions or boards make these determinations, then why not school boards to nip these people in the bud before they're even old enough to figure out how to get into trouble. Maybe they should also be barred from ever voting because they might want to vote for someone like Trump!.

This country has a history of intentionally subverting research into better oversight - because research into gun violence would only hurt profits.

If honestly addressing this problem, then your every post should be screaming for research into gun violence. Why not? Only those who love the profits generated by massacres are not screaming for research and solutions.

The kid could not even buy a beer. And could not even buy a 9 mm pistol. But had every right to buy a gun that only has one purpose - massacre people.

We even ban people from their constitutional right to vote. But protect their right to buy hardware that is designed to maximize the death of other people.

Because gun violence is a red herring. The problem is people violence. Until those who like you let fear filter their perceptions while grasping at scapegoats and panaceas come to terms with that, we'll just keep Trump in the White House. :cool:

But there was oversight, via committee. Just like there is oversight in the committee of epilepsy specialists that currently says whether I'm legally allowed to have a drivers license. And yes, I'm fine with people with a diagnosis of autism being preemptively put on a no-guns list. They can appeal.

FYI, school districts are not legally allowed to make diagnoses now, nor will it ever be in their best interest to do so: a kid with a diagnosis is eligible for services the schools don't want to pay for. They go out of their way to keep a diagnosis off the school record, even when the parent has one from a doctor.

Apples and oranges, a right vs a privilege. I've already covered the difference in legitimate oversight between the two and your circular argument is not favorably considered.

It's dandy, that you're fine with this. It's swell that others are not. We'll see at the polls just like last time. :cool:

Sweet dreams.