|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On May 19 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:
Its kind of telling that this thread only gets like 20 posts for the latest shooting. Its almost so routine now that nobody is even surprised anymore.
Fuck this.
What do you expect? It's a complicated problem and all the possible partial solutions are too expensive for how rarely this really happens. More teachers for more time/student, psychologists at schools, better gun controls, no-reporting-policies, all of that costs money.
Alternatively the politicians hold some speeches, proclaim absurd "hardliner"-ideas to gather some conservative voters, the media races for the fastest coverage while shitting on everyone's emotions and the schools continue their high pressure low care model because that's inexpensive and produces efficient cogwheels for the economy, so the economy is happy and so are the parents once the child found a job. So everyone with influence gets what they wish for, which means that this will just continue for the next 100 years.
|
On May 19 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:
Its kind of telling that this thread only gets like 20 posts for the latest shooting. Its almost so routine now that nobody is even surprised anymore.
Fuck this.
I used to post things about how we're letting shootings go unremarked on, but nobody here seems to care. There's a decent number of people who find the situation outrageous, but bringing up the idea of stricter gun control gets the same set of responses.
The current incident involved a shotgun and a revolver. No semi-automatics or anything. The guns belonged to the shooter's father and were presumably obtained legally.
We could try making it harder for people to get guns, but that gets shot down by the 10 year old super broad interpretation of the second amendment.
We could try mandating that people keep their guns locked up, but that gets shot down by the self defense argument.
What I currently think to be the best step would be creating a national gun registry, and holding people accountable for crimes committed with guns registered to them. It would hurt the black market and incentivize gun owners to not be lax about their guns.
But of course, the NRA would call a national gun registry the first step in the government seizing all guns, so that's also dead in the water.
There is no argument based in reason or logic that I can make on this forum to persuade people to change their minds and support stronger gun control measures that haven't been made multiple times already.
I'm reduced to cheering on on the teens who've survived school shootings and are taking the fight to the government and NRA. Their numbers are going to keep increasing until action gets taken.
|
On May 19 2018 08:36 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:
Its kind of telling that this thread only gets like 20 posts for the latest shooting. Its almost so routine now that nobody is even surprised anymore.
Fuck this. I'd prefer the majority of posts happen after a breathing period and once more facts have come out. I don't find it any more substantial to hear sentiments akin to "thoughts and prayers" or "#NeverAgain" or gun control or armed teachers in greater quantity.
Of course, the classic "Now isn't the time to talk about gun control," argument.
When is the time to talk about gun control? Mass shootings and school shootings happen so frequently that there you could always call for a breathing period. We know all of the facts we need to know.
The shooter had access to guns. They belonged to his father. We don't need to know his motives to start discussing the fact that either we call the dead an acceptable cost of our current level of gun control or we start discussing ways to change the gun control laws so that teens can't take their parents guns to school and kill people. Preferably, we change the laws in a more robust fashion that doesn't just cover this case.
|
On May 19 2018 08:08 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
I just watched a video where Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick suggested schools should have fewer entrances in order to prevent mass shootings, as a response to today's shooting.
What the fuck. Bottleneck the students even more, so that more of them are around a shooter? Not to mention the fact that it's such a fire/ safety hazard, it's literally illegal.
It's not illegal. Preventing exits is illegal. Controlling entry into a building is not. His idea is to limit the number of ways of entry into a school so that searches can be done, this is already done in many schools across the nation where metal detectors, etc. are put into place.
On May 19 2018 08:42 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:
Its kind of telling that this thread only gets like 20 posts for the latest shooting. Its almost so routine now that nobody is even surprised anymore.
Fuck this. I used to post things about how we're letting shootings go unremarked on, but nobody here seems to care. There's a decent number of people who find the situation outrageous, but bringing up the idea of stricter gun control gets the same set of responses. The current incident involved a shotgun and a revolver. No semi-automatics or anything. The guns belonged to the shooter's father and were presumably obtained legally. We could try making it harder for people to get guns, but that gets shot down by the 10 year old super broad interpretation of the second amendment. We could try mandating that people keep their guns locked up, but that gets shot down by the self defense argument. What I currently think to be the best step would be creating a national gun registry, and holding people accountable for crimes committed with guns registered to them. It would hurt the black market and incentivize gun owners to not be lax about their guns. But of course, the NRA would call a national gun registry the first step in the government seizing all guns, so that's also dead in the water. There is no argument based in reason or logic that I can make on this forum to persuade people to change their minds and support stronger gun control measures that haven't been made multiple times already. I'm reduced to cheering on on the teens who've survived school shootings and are taking the fight to the government and NRA. Their numbers are going to keep increasing until action gets taken.
Part of the issue is that the NRA remains a constant force along with its active base even during times where no mass shootings have occurred, meanwhile gun activists seemingly only happen to show up when a mass shooting occurs, and not when they are needed most (which is really during key swing elections). It creates a perception that the gun activists don't really care about reasonable/sensible gun control, rather that they are just trying to drive home an emotional agenda.
You can check most swing elections for this. The NRA's power contrary to popular opinion is with their voter base that is energetic and willingness to go vote during key swing elections. Not 'buying politicians' despite most Team Liquid wannabe politicians would lead you to believe.
|
On May 19 2018 08:47 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 08:36 Danglars wrote:On May 19 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:
Its kind of telling that this thread only gets like 20 posts for the latest shooting. Its almost so routine now that nobody is even surprised anymore.
Fuck this. I'd prefer the majority of posts happen after a breathing period and once more facts have come out. I don't find it any more substantial to hear sentiments akin to "thoughts and prayers" or "#NeverAgain" or gun control or armed teachers in greater quantity. Of course, the classic "Now isn't the time to talk about gun control," argument. When is the time to talk about gun control? Mass shootings and school shootings happen so frequently that there you could always call for a breathing period. We know all of the facts we need to know. The shooter had access to guns. They belonged to his father. We don't need to know his motives to start discussing the fact that either we call the dead an acceptable cost of our current level of gun control or we start discussing ways to change the gun control laws so that teens can't take their parents guns to school and kill people. Preferably, we change the laws in a more robust fashion that doesn't just cover this case.
Are there any possible legal consequences for his father?
|
On May 19 2018 08:52 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 08:47 Kyadytim wrote:On May 19 2018 08:36 Danglars wrote:On May 19 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:
Its kind of telling that this thread only gets like 20 posts for the latest shooting. Its almost so routine now that nobody is even surprised anymore.
Fuck this. I'd prefer the majority of posts happen after a breathing period and once more facts have come out. I don't find it any more substantial to hear sentiments akin to "thoughts and prayers" or "#NeverAgain" or gun control or armed teachers in greater quantity. Of course, the classic "Now isn't the time to talk about gun control," argument. When is the time to talk about gun control? Mass shootings and school shootings happen so frequently that there you could always call for a breathing period. We know all of the facts we need to know. The shooter had access to guns. They belonged to his father. We don't need to know his motives to start discussing the fact that either we call the dead an acceptable cost of our current level of gun control or we start discussing ways to change the gun control laws so that teens can't take their parents guns to school and kill people. Preferably, we change the laws in a more robust fashion that doesn't just cover this case. Are there any possible legal consequences for his father?
From my understanding of the law, no. Not strictly from having his guns taken by his son, even if he just left them and their ammunition lying around on the kitchen table.
|
On May 19 2018 08:47 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 08:36 Danglars wrote:On May 19 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:
Its kind of telling that this thread only gets like 20 posts for the latest shooting. Its almost so routine now that nobody is even surprised anymore.
Fuck this. I'd prefer the majority of posts happen after a breathing period and once more facts have come out. I don't find it any more substantial to hear sentiments akin to "thoughts and prayers" or "#NeverAgain" or gun control or armed teachers in greater quantity. Of course, the classic "Now isn't the time to talk about gun control," argument. When is the time to talk about gun control? Mass shootings and school shootings happen so frequently that there you could always call for a breathing period. We know all of the facts we need to know. The shooter had access to guns. They belonged to his father. We don't need to know his motives to start discussing the fact that either we call the dead an acceptable cost of our current level of gun control or we start discussing ways to change the gun control laws so that teens can't take their parents guns to school and kill people. Preferably, we change the laws in a more robust fashion that doesn't just cover this case.
Let's start at "Not before 24 hours after a national tragedy."
If you want to politicize dead kids while their families have only begun to grieve, that one's on you. This would be different if you expect another school shooting this week, so you tell me if the time for legislative action has to be an emergency session of Congress or the Texas legislature.
|
On May 19 2018 08:57 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 08:52 Dan HH wrote:On May 19 2018 08:47 Kyadytim wrote:On May 19 2018 08:36 Danglars wrote:On May 19 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:
Its kind of telling that this thread only gets like 20 posts for the latest shooting. Its almost so routine now that nobody is even surprised anymore.
Fuck this. I'd prefer the majority of posts happen after a breathing period and once more facts have come out. I don't find it any more substantial to hear sentiments akin to "thoughts and prayers" or "#NeverAgain" or gun control or armed teachers in greater quantity. Of course, the classic "Now isn't the time to talk about gun control," argument. When is the time to talk about gun control? Mass shootings and school shootings happen so frequently that there you could always call for a breathing period. We know all of the facts we need to know. The shooter had access to guns. They belonged to his father. We don't need to know his motives to start discussing the fact that either we call the dead an acceptable cost of our current level of gun control or we start discussing ways to change the gun control laws so that teens can't take their parents guns to school and kill people. Preferably, we change the laws in a more robust fashion that doesn't just cover this case. Are there any possible legal consequences for his father? From my understanding of the law, no. Not strictly from having his guns taken by his son, even if he just left them and their ammunition lying around on the kitchen table.
There are laws in place regarding child negligence in regards to proper storage / firearm access. This is a definitively false statement.
|
On May 19 2018 06:07 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 02:48 Slydie wrote:I read an article in Norwegian about how the school shooters in the states inspire each other, similar to how "The sorrows of young Werther" by Goethe inspired young men unhappily in love. en.wikipedia.orgIf this holds true, the most efficient method to make these horrible events happen again is to make them extremely visible in the media. Some shooters have even became media "heroes" as their videos have gone viral. I am all for gun control and spending resources on finding potential shooters before they act, but this problem requires a long battle on many fronts! The main issue is and should remain gun control. But if we're going to look at secondary issues I'd look at the whole white supremacist/nazi thing before I look at media coverage. Just a thought.
looking at all 3 works fine though. and people tend to underfocus on the media effects. ofc i've been pushing this line (avoid sensationalizing things and talking about them so much) for ages now.
|
Speaking of media and gun violence, how about a couple of CSI episodes where the cops needlessly shoot a bunch of people who have not really done much of anything wrong and show the consequences in the families who are hurt by that?
|
Every other tragedy gets politicized and uses as a reason to change policy. Folks call for deportations the instant a single illegal immigrant is linked to a murder. And I’ve been informed I need to respect and their anger and outrage when that happens. I don’t see any problem with guns owners rights advocates doing the same after these shooting.
|
On May 19 2018 09:19 Plansix wrote:
Every other tragedy gets politicized and uses as a reason to change policy. Folks call for deportations the instant a single illegal immigrant is linked to a murder. And I’ve been informed I need to respect and their anger and outrage when that happens. I don’t see any problem with guns owners rights advocates doing the same after these shooting.
And then you wonder why you can't win over the moderate conservatives over when it comes to the gun control arguments? If you're going to be unreasonable, why should they ever budge an inch? Like Danglers said, we need more facts before we start making judgments on whether this was a gun violence issue or something else like mental health. The kid clearly could have caused far more casualties considering he had pressure cookers and pipe bombs ready, all which are much more lethal in a smaller confined radius like a school classroom. Before we start making absolute judgement calls on anything, let's try and understand what his motives were, what led up to this, before we start trying to say 'we need to do something.'
Just half assing measures isn't going to do anything, the old federal assault weapons ban was basically worthless.
|
On May 19 2018 08:21 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 08:08 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
I just watched a video where Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick suggested schools should have fewer entrances in order to prevent mass shootings, as a response to today's shooting.
What the fuck. Bottleneck the students even more, so that more of them are around a shooter? Not to mention the fact that it's such a fire/ safety hazard, it's literally illegal. His idea was that we put Good Guys With Guns (TM) at the few entrances left and poof, safety.
I'm all for added security in schools; I'm just annoyed at the oversimplified solution that he's offering.
On May 19 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:
Its kind of telling that this thread only gets like 20 posts for the latest shooting. Its almost so routine now that nobody is even surprised anymore.
Fuck this.
It's basically become so commonplace that many people are desensitized, including students (like in Plansix's video post). It's awful.
On May 19 2018 08:52 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 08:08 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
I just watched a video where Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick suggested schools should have fewer entrances in order to prevent mass shootings, as a response to today's shooting.
What the fuck. Bottleneck the students even more, so that more of them are around a shooter? Not to mention the fact that it's such a fire/ safety hazard, it's literally illegal. It's not illegal. Preventing exits is illegal. Controlling entry into a building is not. His idea is to limit the number of ways of entry into a school so that searches can be done, this is already done in many schools across the nation where metal detectors, etc. are put into place.
I don't know how many entrances/ exits he wanted to reduce the number to, but it's actually illegal to have not enough exits. There are building/ fire/ safety codes that have to be met, especially based on the number of people who could be in the building at any given time, in case they need to leave the building quickly during an emergency.
On May 19 2018 09:01 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 08:57 Kyadytim wrote:On May 19 2018 08:52 Dan HH wrote:On May 19 2018 08:47 Kyadytim wrote:On May 19 2018 08:36 Danglars wrote:On May 19 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:
Its kind of telling that this thread only gets like 20 posts for the latest shooting. Its almost so routine now that nobody is even surprised anymore.
Fuck this. I'd prefer the majority of posts happen after a breathing period and once more facts have come out. I don't find it any more substantial to hear sentiments akin to "thoughts and prayers" or "#NeverAgain" or gun control or armed teachers in greater quantity. Of course, the classic "Now isn't the time to talk about gun control," argument. When is the time to talk about gun control? Mass shootings and school shootings happen so frequently that there you could always call for a breathing period. We know all of the facts we need to know. The shooter had access to guns. They belonged to his father. We don't need to know his motives to start discussing the fact that either we call the dead an acceptable cost of our current level of gun control or we start discussing ways to change the gun control laws so that teens can't take their parents guns to school and kill people. Preferably, we change the laws in a more robust fashion that doesn't just cover this case. Are there any possible legal consequences for his father? From my understanding of the law, no. Not strictly from having his guns taken by his son, even if he just left them and their ammunition lying around on the kitchen table. There are laws in place regarding child negligence in regards to proper storage / firearm access. This is a definitively false statement.
I don't know the laws on this, but I intuitively agree with you here that the owner of the firearm should share some responsibility if there's sufficient negligence surrounding how easily the student obtained the gun.
|
And this, Aveng3r, is why I stopped posting about shootings.
|
On May 19 2018 09:22 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 09:19 Plansix wrote:
Every other tragedy gets politicized and uses as a reason to change policy. Folks call for deportations the instant a single illegal immigrant is linked to a murder. And I’ve been informed I need to respect and their anger and outrage when that happens. I don’t see any problem with guns owners rights advocates doing the same after these shooting. And then you wonder why you can't win over the moderate conservatives over when it comes to the gun control arguments? If you're going to be unreasonable, why should they ever budge an inch? Like Danglers said, we need more facts before we start making judgments on whether this was a gun violence issue or something else like mental health. The kid clearly could have caused far more casualties considering he had pressure cookers and pipe bombs ready, all which are much more lethal in a smaller confined radius like a school classroom. Before we start making absolute judgement calls on anything, let's try and understand what his motives were, what led up to this, before we start trying to say 'we need to do something.' Just half assing measures isn't going to do anything, the old federal assault weapons ban was basically worthless.
The fact that the kid used a gun makes it a gun violence issue, by definition.
The fact that the kid shot up his school also makes it a mental health issue, by definition.
There may be other issues relevant to this tragedy as well, and we should definitely collect more evidence to find out more information, but every school shooting automatically falls into at least those first two categories.
|
On May 19 2018 09:22 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 09:19 Plansix wrote:
Every other tragedy gets politicized and uses as a reason to change policy. Folks call for deportations the instant a single illegal immigrant is linked to a murder. And I’ve been informed I need to respect and their anger and outrage when that happens. I don’t see any problem with guns owners rights advocates doing the same after these shooting. And then you wonder why you can't win over the moderate conservatives over when it comes to the gun control arguments? If you're going to be unreasonable, why should they ever budge an inch? Like Danglers said, we need more facts before we start making judgments on whether this was a gun violence issue or something else like mental health. The kid clearly could have caused far more casualties considering he had pressure cookers and pipe bombs ready, all which are much more lethal in a smaller confined radius like a school classroom.
I don’t need to, they already support robust background checks, empowering judges to remove guns from high risk people and ending gun show loopholes. Why do I need to win people over on policies that are already popular and proven reduce gun related deaths?
My real opponent is the pro gun sale NRA. I don’t need to win them over. I just need to help build a national lobby of equal size and influence. Like Moms who demand action, who have passed laws like the ones above in several states.
This isn’t a debate, it’s about organizing a better lobby than the NRA.
|
On May 19 2018 09:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 08:21 Nebuchad wrote:On May 19 2018 08:08 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
I just watched a video where Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick suggested schools should have fewer entrances in order to prevent mass shootings, as a response to today's shooting.
What the fuck. Bottleneck the students even more, so that more of them are around a shooter? Not to mention the fact that it's such a fire/ safety hazard, it's literally illegal. His idea was that we put Good Guys With Guns (TM) at the few entrances left and poof, safety. I'm all for added security in schools; I'm just annoyed at the oversimplified solution that he's offering. Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:
Its kind of telling that this thread only gets like 20 posts for the latest shooting. Its almost so routine now that nobody is even surprised anymore.
Fuck this. It's basically become so commonplace that many people are desensitized, including students (like in Plansix's video post). It's awful. Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 08:52 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 08:08 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
I just watched a video where Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick suggested schools should have fewer entrances in order to prevent mass shootings, as a response to today's shooting.
What the fuck. Bottleneck the students even more, so that more of them are around a shooter? Not to mention the fact that it's such a fire/ safety hazard, it's literally illegal. It's not illegal. Preventing exits is illegal. Controlling entry into a building is not. His idea is to limit the number of ways of entry into a school so that searches can be done, this is already done in many schools across the nation where metal detectors, etc. are put into place. I don't know how many entrances/ exits he wanted to reduce the number to, but it's actually illegal to have not enough exits. There are building/ fire/ safety codes that have to be met, especially based on the number of people who could be in the building at any given time, in case they need to leave the building quickly during an emergency. Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 09:01 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 08:57 Kyadytim wrote:On May 19 2018 08:52 Dan HH wrote:On May 19 2018 08:47 Kyadytim wrote:On May 19 2018 08:36 Danglars wrote:On May 19 2018 08:10 Aveng3r wrote:
Its kind of telling that this thread only gets like 20 posts for the latest shooting. Its almost so routine now that nobody is even surprised anymore.
Fuck this. I'd prefer the majority of posts happen after a breathing period and once more facts have come out. I don't find it any more substantial to hear sentiments akin to "thoughts and prayers" or "#NeverAgain" or gun control or armed teachers in greater quantity. Of course, the classic "Now isn't the time to talk about gun control," argument. When is the time to talk about gun control? Mass shootings and school shootings happen so frequently that there you could always call for a breathing period. We know all of the facts we need to know. The shooter had access to guns. They belonged to his father. We don't need to know his motives to start discussing the fact that either we call the dead an acceptable cost of our current level of gun control or we start discussing ways to change the gun control laws so that teens can't take their parents guns to school and kill people. Preferably, we change the laws in a more robust fashion that doesn't just cover this case. Are there any possible legal consequences for his father? From my understanding of the law, no. Not strictly from having his guns taken by his son, even if he just left them and their ammunition lying around on the kitchen table. There are laws in place regarding child negligence in regards to proper storage / firearm access. This is a definitively false statement. I don't know the laws on this, but I intuitively agree with you here that the owner of the firearm should share some responsibility if there's sufficient negligence surrounding how easily the student obtained the gun.
Just pointing out, many schools already limit the number of entries into a school already, it is only illegal when there are not a set number of doors depending on capacity of the school. You are still allowed to for security purposes to limit the number of 'usable' doors and also to use things such as metal detectors and drug dogs. Schools actually have a very high leniency with the law when it comes to safety issues, the real problem is the same people who advocate for more school safety, are the same assholes who also drastically cut and reduce school general funding in general.
On May 19 2018 09:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 09:22 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:19 Plansix wrote:
Every other tragedy gets politicized and uses as a reason to change policy. Folks call for deportations the instant a single illegal immigrant is linked to a murder. And I’ve been informed I need to respect and their anger and outrage when that happens. I don’t see any problem with guns owners rights advocates doing the same after these shooting. And then you wonder why you can't win over the moderate conservatives over when it comes to the gun control arguments? If you're going to be unreasonable, why should they ever budge an inch? Like Danglers said, we need more facts before we start making judgments on whether this was a gun violence issue or something else like mental health. The kid clearly could have caused far more casualties considering he had pressure cookers and pipe bombs ready, all which are much more lethal in a smaller confined radius like a school classroom. Before we start making absolute judgement calls on anything, let's try and understand what his motives were, what led up to this, before we start trying to say 'we need to do something.' Just half assing measures isn't going to do anything, the old federal assault weapons ban was basically worthless. The fact that the kid used a gun makes it a gun violence issue, by definition. The fact that the kid shot up his school also makes it a mental health issue, by definition. There may be other issues relevant to this tragedy as well, and we should definitely collect more evidence to find out more information, but every school shooting automatically falls into at least those first two categories.
And I would agree with both statements, but simply painting it simply as 'gun violence' only issue is a load of nonsense and you know it. Based on the facts coming out, it's clear that this student had some severe mental issues that were quietly swept under the rug. Do I think gun accessibility is an issue in this country? Yes. I certainly do. But that's not the only issue playing out here.
|
United States41991 Posts
Given how ineffective the airport security theatre is I don't see why we need to roll the same thing out across the nation's schools. It'd make more sense to treat the school shootings as a kind of "freedom tithe", a price we pay for the right to have guns in a society. Just accept that the price of guns is school shootings and move on imo.
|
Or just pass the laws that Vermont passed and give law enforcement the tools(court orders) remove guns from households when there is clear signs of risk. The problem is that police could find clear evidence of a potential shooting, but have no ability to intervene in some states.
|
On May 19 2018 09:31 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2018 09:22 superstartran wrote:On May 19 2018 09:19 Plansix wrote:
Every other tragedy gets politicized and uses as a reason to change policy. Folks call for deportations the instant a single illegal immigrant is linked to a murder. And I’ve been informed I need to respect and their anger and outrage when that happens. I don’t see any problem with guns owners rights advocates doing the same after these shooting. And then you wonder why you can't win over the moderate conservatives over when it comes to the gun control arguments? If you're going to be unreasonable, why should they ever budge an inch? Like Danglers said, we need more facts before we start making judgments on whether this was a gun violence issue or something else like mental health. The kid clearly could have caused far more casualties considering he had pressure cookers and pipe bombs ready, all which are much more lethal in a smaller confined radius like a school classroom. I don’t need to, they already support robust background checks, empowering judges to remove guns from high risk people and ending gun show loopholes. Why do I need to win people over on policies that are already popular and proven reduce gun related deaths? My real opponent is the pro gun sale NRA. I don’t need to win them over. I just need to help build a national lobby of equal size and influence. Like Moms who demand action, who have passed laws like the ones above in several states. This isn’t a debate, it’s about organizing a better lobby than the NRA.
Except the funny part is that the NRA is seemingly always able to amass a plethora of votes in key swing elections while the opposition is not able to do so. And I'm not definitely saying that the other side doesn't care, but they seemingly only care when a mass shooting occurs, not looking at the overall high number of firearm related homicides that stem from gang violence and handguns.
MADD (Mothers against Drunk Driving) were able to get legislation through because they were able to win a large number of key votes on both sides of the aisle. If you're not willing to do that, you're not going to make any changes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
