Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-08-2018, 10:07 AM
 
1,702 posts, read 1,261,229 times
Reputation: 1652

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
When everyone is armed on their person in some way.
Then the only one harmed is the person that did another wrong, or they get shot too.
The random crap will end. It will become targeted, to the individual that they have a beef and Murder is Murder, with self defense, argued in court.
I don’t understand. The shooter was throwing fog bombs and killed him self. How was anybody supposed to defend themselves against that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-08-2018, 10:08 AM
 
21,474 posts, read 10,572,809 times
Reputation: 14124
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigiri View Post
The answer is common sense.

Tell you what. Look at 20 of the biggest mass shootings in the last couple of years and see when the shooter purchased the gun. Dollars to donuts most of them were purchased fairly recently. Just as how "counting to ten" can keep an angry person from striking, so is it with most forms of violence. You change history just by saying "no, not now, you have to jump through these hoops first" to a person like the Parkland Shooter or the Pulse Shooter.

Common sense then tells you that you WOULD keep your kids and family safer to regulate NOW. Seems simple enough.

Also, keep this in mind. When they made Pot, Heroin, Cocaine, LSD and many other things "controlled", there were vast quantities already out there and the means to make and get almost unlimited amounts were still in force. Yet they "controlled and regulated" the market.

The "mentally ill" thing is just one more excuse. It doesn't change a thing. Tens of millions of people are mentally ill and there is absolutely no way of sussing them out without a total Police State (and even then).

The sad fact is that many people - even many reading this - are OK with the trade-off of sacrificing 10's of thousands of our citizens for their perceived "rights". Period.

The brave people who are standing up to this are changing some things around the edges. But there is no way that is going to solve the problem. Americans don't solve problem anymore - we just make more of them.
I agree with most of this, but the "counting to ten" approach would probably help in a lot of types of gun violence except these mass shootings. These guys don't just get angry one day and go buy a gun and start shooting. They carefully plan them. It's just not going to work on someone like that. We'll find that this guy probably created lots of disturbances and there were red flags everywhere, just like the Parkland shooter, or the Sulphur Springs shooter, or the Pulse shooter, or any number of them.

We need to start taking these red flags seriously if they are happening with someone we know. The police can't do it. The gun shop owner is totally unaware of it unless there's a criminal record. The only people who can help with these situations are the ones closest to these people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2018, 10:09 AM
 
Location: in my imagination
13,608 posts, read 21,394,406 times
Reputation: 10111
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigiri View Post
This is the obvious reasoning.

They became "a thing" due to the NRA and the buying of Politicians.

I went to military school, shot rifles at camp and even did some skeet shooting. But I grew out of it and pursued hobbies that didn't involve more and more killing power. Now I'm taking Archery lessons.

Sometimes winning is losing. The gun nuts won.
so you are taking lessons to kill more silently? I mean why would anyone want to to shoot a bow & arrow other than to be able to kill with more silence......
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2018, 10:10 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
1,081 posts, read 548,816 times
Reputation: 964
Quote:
Originally Posted by lisanicole1 View Post
I have no idea. He seemed to have passed a psych exam after his neighbors called the cops because he was throwing himself against walls and screaming in his home and they were scared he was going to harm himself. Not someone who sounds like they should be legally owning a gun.
You are right, it doesn't sound like someone who should be legally owning a gun. However, was any of this proven out and ruled on in a court of law?

This is where we get to the nuts and bolts of restricting rights. We need to go beyond hearsay and really get down to what constitutes removing someone rights. There are laws restricting violent offenders from purchasing firearms; was he a violent offender (prior to this incident?) Would you be alright with you being convicted on hearsay alone?

The church shooting in Texas; yes he was a violent offender and the Air Force failed to put him in the system as such. Failure of the system in place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2018, 10:12 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
1,081 posts, read 548,816 times
Reputation: 964
Quote:
Originally Posted by katygirl68 View Post
...

We need to start taking these red flags seriously if they are happening with someone we know. The police can't do it. The gun shop owner is totally unaware of it unless there's a criminal record. The only people who can help with these situations are the ones closest to these people.
You mean it really does take a village?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2018, 10:12 AM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,738,058 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by LS Jaun View Post
How did the Terrorist and his unvetted wife get their guns.
Easy enough. He was a citizen with no criminal or mental health record.

His boyhood pal, a US citizen and convert to radical Islamic ideology bought guns for him as they plotted various acts of terrorism.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2018, 10:13 AM
 
2,258 posts, read 1,137,597 times
Reputation: 2836
Quote:
Originally Posted by CtrlEsc View Post
We have always had violent individuals in our society. The difference now is that we sensationalize it and replay it over and over on a 24/7 news cycle and use it to score political points.

The NRA has very little power over the government. You give it to much credit. Pharmaceuticals spent $240 million on lobbying in 2016, Insurers spent $157 million on lobbying in 2016, Planned Parenthood spent $38 million in 2016, while the NRA spent $3.2 million in 2016. Comparatively, the NRA spends very little on lobbying. Many firearm owners do NOT belong to the NRA. It's the threat of losing rights that influences votes, not the NRA.
What youre omitting is that the violent individuals were not performing mass shootings at this high a rate in early society.
I believe this article that describes the growing trend for mass shootings as the riot effect. It gives the disgruntled men the ok to do these mass shootings, because they see other people do it, and they make the previous shooters to be idols.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...ds-of-violence

The NRA has big power over votes, and even if people arent members, they will still go along with the propaganda the NRA spreads that people are trying to take away the guns. The NRA has also pushed the passing of laws that keep the government from efficiently locating guns that were linked to crimes, as well as the studies for gun crimes.

The real problem seems to be preventing these guys from thinking they have nothing to lose.
But if people continue to isolate guys like this and dont help them avoid being awkward, these guys will choose to want to get revenge. Its not a mental health issue, most of these guys are perfectly sane. They just focus on the wrong thing after they perceive being wronged for so long.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2018, 10:13 AM
 
3,841 posts, read 1,978,664 times
Reputation: 1906
Quote:
Originally Posted by CtrlEsc View Post
You are right, it doesn't sound like someone who should be legally owning a gun. However, was any of this proven out and ruled on in a court of law?

This is where we get to the nuts and bolts of restricting rights. We need to go beyond hearsay and really get down to what constitutes removing someone rights. There are laws restricting violent offenders from purchasing firearms; was he a violent offender (prior to this incident?) Would you be alright with you being convicted on hearsay alone?

The church shooting in Texas; yes he was a violent offender and the Air Force failed to put him in the system as such. Failure of the system in place.
There is really no solid right answer. That's probably why nothing has been done. Everything is a fine line. Also, we are expecting government agencies to properly do their job which is laughable. Just look at the child protection services. How many kids have had CPS show up at the house due to a tip and cleared, only to have the child killed the next day?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2018, 10:14 AM
 
46,951 posts, read 25,990,037 times
Reputation: 29442
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarabchuck View Post
The NRA doesn't even crack the top 50 contributers to US politics.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...h-to-lawmakers
Deflection already? As I said, it's your prerogative to overlook their complicity. Some consider that sort of loyalty commendable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2018, 10:16 AM
 
8,312 posts, read 3,927,691 times
Reputation: 10651
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
Give it time and there will be claims here that it was a false flag and that the victims aren't really dead they are craigslist actors

Interesting you mention that. Look for the posters that have used the term "false flag" in a serious way; it's a very special subset. Once upon a time I would have thought your statement ludicrous, but I would not be surprised if someone tried to make that case.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:03 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top