Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Quite a bit different to confiscate a weapon from someone shooting at you after you apprehend them than to go into homes all across the country to collect weapons people wont turn in.
Who's going to search millions of American homes to confiscate weapons. Not enough courts to issue all those search warrants, much less people to conduct the searches.
Or, perhaps the FBI was spending more time and resources trying to bs their way out of the corruption they were involved in over the past say 7 or so years instead of following up on leads with this current punkazz who shot up the school.
AHA! 35,000 people work for the FBI, not all of them are agents, but surely one of them could have responded to the notification by the friend of said punkazz?
NO.
What? Why not? Because the friend did not mention the violation of any Federal Law. **
Wanting to shoot up a school is a problem for the local sheriff and police, not the FBI or US Marshals.
Why did this alert and the online post in the shooter's name not get passed on to the sheriff, then?
That was due to a multilayered bureaucracy that failed us. Terribly.
Now THAT is something the POTUS can fix by directive to DOJ and FBI.
Even if he does, you will probably never hear about it. @The Real Donald Trump should get off Twitter and log on to CD.
** From the FBI site:
"The FBI has a range of legal authorities that enable it
to investigate federal crimes and threats to national security, as well as to gather intelligence and assist other law enforcement agencies." FAIL
I like it. Did you come up with this framework yourself? Big fan of critical thinking, but of course when politics and/or political differences tend to "bend" critical thinking toward one agenda or another, problems tend to get "solved" (or not) in ways not always so rational or satisfying...
Seems like a curriculum from a conservative university to me, eh? Liberal university would shout down anyone with such a proposal as racist or something . . .
No, the last thing we need is a society in which guns are demonized and violence is glorified.
How many shootings like this do you see happening in rural areas? There's a reason that it's rare to see rural kids doing this kind of crap. They're taught from an early age that guns, while they are a common tool, are also a dangerous tool. They're taught to use them safely, and not to use them in a way that is dangerous to other people.
Stop pretending that the age of the perpetrator has any damn thing to do with the crime. It doesn't. His mental state, his emotional state, and the complete lack of discipline in his life have far more to do with this horrific act than his age does. In rural areas, kids as young as 12 (some even younger) are capable of responsibly handling a firearm to bring food to the table or to get rid of vermin that are damaging crops and livestock.
Guns aren't evil, they aren't a bad influence, and they aren't in any way responsible for the incident in Parkland. Guns are a tool, and like any tool are perfectly safe when used in a responsible manner.
Rather than focusing on the tool that was used irresponsibly, how about you look at the society which encourages kids to be irresponsible and do something about that? In the long run, changes to society will have a much greater overall and lasting effect than some arbitrary decision about what guns can be purchased or how old someone should be before they can handle a firearm.
This isn't a problem brought about by firearms, or by the NRA, or by the 2nd Amendment. It's a problem brought about by a society in which children are not parented, not educated, and not expected to face the consequences of their own actions. A society in which police are vilified and criminals are defended or excused for their actions because "society made them that way." A society in which people who think like you would rather look at what the person used to commit their crime than at what the motivation was for the crime and what steps could have actually prevented it.
Much you write I can agree with. "Guns aren't evil," for example, but I doubt that is really what gun control advocates think. Gun enthusiasts always want to represent this argument, and it works to a point, but the real issue has far more to do with whether we think guns can think or be evil all on their own...
What I am more curious to establish as true or false is this notion about crime and/or safety in rural areas. Have you got a reference or data that validates your claims? I've read much that may suggest otherwise.
"Now it’s true that the risk of homicide is greater in big cities than it is in the countryside. But the study, which analyzed 1,295,919 deaths from injury between 1999 and 2006, found the rate of dying from an unintentional injury is over 15 times higher than that of homicide for the population as a whole. Whether you live in rural areas or the city, you’re much less likely to die from a gunshot wound — either from someone else or self-inflicted — than you are in a simple accident. Especially car crashes, which make up the bulk of unintentional injury deaths — motor-vehicle-injury-related deaths occurred at a rate that is more than 1.4 times higher than the next leading cause of death.
The study doesn’t attempt to explain why injury death is more common in rural areas than large urban ones, but some of the statistics are telling. The risk of firearm-related death showed no difference across the rural-urban spectrum for the population as a whole, but varied when divided up by age — firearm deaths were significantly higher for children and people ages 45 and older, while for people ages 20 to 44, the risk of firearm deaths were much higher in urban areas. I’d wager some of that comes down to differences in gun ownership: more households have firearms in rural areas than in urban ones, and sadly, too many gun owners keep their firearms where their children can reach them. The result can be tragic. At the same time, the bulk of victims killed by homicide are young men, according to FBI statistics. And they are more likely to be shot and killed in the cities."
The absolute last thing we need is a bunch of immature hormone saturated kids walking around with any kind of a weapon!
You've just got to be kidding!...I hope....
All kinds of boyfriends, girlfriends, teachers, administrators, classmates, and parents would end up in the ER with riddled bodies!
The person you quoted was saying give kids weapons. They were suggesting gun safety etc. And, by law it does happen in my State prior to a kid under 16 for hunting..
You are very naive to how the world works.
Teach a kid safety, respect, that all guns are loaded if found, how to shoot ( so you dont shoot one if you find one in a house ((hence learn safety)), and many other things.
Kinda like teaching a kid how to use a condom, seems taboo at first till you realize cost of abortions.
If you aren't familiar with juvenile psychology, then you're clueless.
If you've ever raised children and observed both them and their friends react in a variety of social situations, then you should know very well what I'm stating here.
Sometimes kids lose it for no apparent reason, only to state later that they had no idea what possessed them to do so. Now you wanna place a firearm into their hands...I don't think so!
Not sure it's just kids who lose their cool in the heat of the moment, but I hear you! No need to put guns in their hands too...
We wouldn't be talking about this right now and there'd be no dead kids if (in this case) the FBI had done it's job and followed it's own procedures.
This shooting is NOT a failure of any gun law,school procedure or anything else other than a LEO failure.
What exactly do you think the FBI could have done? Do you think they could have arrested him, if so - what would the charges have been? This is the comment he made that caused people to call the FBI "Im going to be a professional school shooter," That's not grounds for detaining him, committing him, nothing. And there's nothing the FBI could have done to keep him from buying a weapon based on that. Are you aware that local law enforcement had contact with this guy 39 times?
Maybe they could have done something if the NRA didn't fight every effort to expand background checks and keep crazy people from buying guns. Maybe it's time for LE and the FBI to make people like Cruz ineligible to buy a weapon . But for now that's not allowed, the only things that can prevent you from buying a gun is a felony conviction, domestic violence arrest or a civil commitment for a mental disorder. The FBI should have followed up, but their follow up would not have done anything to change the outcome of this tragedy.
This is a very simple critical thinking framework:
• Identify the problems. — “What’s the real question we’re facing here?”
• Define the context. — “What are the facts & circumstances that frame this problem?”
• Enumerate choices. — “What are our most plausible three or four options?”
• Analyze options. — “What is our best course of action, all things considered?”
• List reasons explicitly. — “Let’s be clear: Why we are making this particular choice?”
• Self-correct. — “Okay, let’s look at it again. What did we miss?”
One way to sidestep this framework is to refuse to identify the problems.
To state the obvious, it's not helpful if the objective is problem-solving.
Excellent. A quick search leads me to believe you are Paul-Elder. I claim my 5 pounds. Yes, I know . . .
Seems like a curriculum from a conservative university to me, eh? Liberal university would shout down anyone with such a proposal as racist or something . . .
Thanks for pointing out how politics tends to corrupt critical thinking, but I would certainly not point in either direction as if the other side is innocent of that corruption.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Who failed us?
Yes, I know . . . 
