In reply to Ian F (Forum Supporter) :
Yes. It's how this country works. Only wants to move when there is a bonafide super crisis. Thousands of kids being shot per year dosent met the threshold. So We will have to wait for more.
I have a major difficulty in keeping my posts short.
I know that "wall 'o text" makes people tune out.
So, if I want to contribute anything useful, I have a responsibility to change my approach.
Ok, everybody just please stop and take a deep breath. Maybe several.
1
2
3
We agree that there is a problem in the USA and this specific problem being discussed is about firearms.
1) There are people legally buying firearms that shouldn't be able to buy firearms. Discuss how to possibly prevent this.
I have to work.
To be edited and continued
Noddaz said:Ok, everybody just please stop and take a deep breath. Maybe several.
1
2
3
We agree that there is a problem in the USA and this specific problem being discussed is about firearms.
1) There are people legally buying firearms that shouldn't be able to buy firearms. Discuss how to possibly prevent this.
I have to work.
To be edited and continued
Well, in a relatively short timeframe, the country has generally embraced the idea that the word n****r is no longer acceptable. I see no reason why any ambiguous threat of committing homicide (either online or face to face) shouldn't regarded as worthy of investigation and immediately reported to authorities. It seems to me that in a lot of these mass killings there were actionable signs.
Would that help?
Noddaz said:There are people legally buying firearms that shouldn't be able to buy firearms. Discuss how to possibly prevent this.
The most effective and possibly least burdensome things we can do are:
Universal background checks or FFL transfer on all firearms, even private sale.
Waiting period of X time for any firearms purchase- possibly while the background check is run.
A "Must Pass" requirement for background checks.
We should also consider flexible Red Flag laws which have a clearly defined expiration period and clear method for the return of private property. These Red Flag laws would be reported on a national level and be included in background checks (for a fail) while they are active.
Fueled by Caffeine said:In reply to Ian F (Forum Supporter) :
Yes. It's how this country works. Only wants to move when there is a bonafide super crisis. Thousands of kids being shot per year dosent met the threshold. So We will have to wait for more.
I understand and appreciate your concerns. Although my kids are now adults, I am a parent of 2 myself.
But hyperbole doesn't help your cause and makes it easy to dismiss you:
The Washington Post said:
The Post has found that at least 185 children, educators and other people have been killed in [school shootings since Columbine], and another 369 have been injured.
Columbine was 23 years ago. Even counting the 369 injuries as deaths gives an average of 24 per year in that time.
In reply to Duke :
There's a difference between shot and killed or injured. There absolutely have been thousands of kids shot, and most if not all of them are going to need years of therapy to be even half way recovered.
In reply to Javelin :
That was why I counted the injuries as deaths.
If you only count school shooting deaths, the number is 8 per year average. And even that is assuming that all deaths were children, which also isn't true.
[edit for your edit] How do you get shot without getting injured? That seems highly unlikely.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/local/school-shootings-database/
Over 311,000 kids have been present in the line of fire at school shootings since Columbine.
In reply to Javelin :
That is the same article I linked. And if we're arguing semantics, there is a difference between at school that day and in the line of fire.
Shootings are a problem. I am not arguing that point. But radically overstating your case does not make people more likely to be motivated in your direction. It makes them more likely to write off your points as invalid.
I am very much in agreement with Duke that hyperbole doesn't help the cause. Too many children have been shot, but that number is not thousands. Lets be honest about that number.
Brett_Murphy (Agent of Chaos) said:Noddaz said:There are people legally buying firearms that shouldn't be able to buy firearms. Discuss how to possibly prevent this.
The most effective and possibly least burdensome things we can do are:
Universal background checks or FFL transfer on all firearms, even private sale.
Waiting period of X time for any firearms purchase- possibly while the background check is run.
A "Must Pass" requirement for background checks.
We should also consider flexible Red Flag laws which have a clearly defined expiration period and clear method for the return of private property. These Red Flag laws would be reported on a national level and be included in background checks (for a fail) while they are active.
Bolded above, Maryland has this. All sales are now done through an FFL. I personally do not have a problem with this.
And I personally agree with the rest of your post as well.
Thank you for your reply.
Duke said:In reply to Javelin :
That is the same article I linked. And if we're arguing semantics, there is a difference between at school that day and in the line of fire.
Shootings are a problem. I am not arguing that point. But radically overstating your case does not make people more likely to be motivated in your direction. It makes them more likely to write off your points as invalid.
As a person who was at school the day a shooting happened that was not "in the line of fire", I can politely tell you that you are wrong. Being present the day one of more of your friends, classmates, and teachers gets injured or killed absolutely victimizes you regardless of how close the bullets whizzed by your head.
Dehumanizing victims in the point of so-called semantics because you can't accept the ugly truth is wrong.
In reply to Duke :
Yeah. I'm not posting hyperbole. Last year was the first time that guns overtook car accidents as the leading cause of death in the US. 5600 kids were injured last year due to firearms. Probably includes suicides and other true root causes. 1500+ died
buuutt let me repeat guns are now the #1 cause of death among kids not car accidents.
https://www.npr.org/2022/05/28/1101307932/texas-shooting-uvalde-gun-violence-children-teenagers
Fair. Yes I read that initial statement as "shot at school". Yes, thousands of kids are shot per year.
In reply to ProDarwin :
Understandable. This problem is bigger than being shot at school. Much bigger.
ProDarwin said:Fair. Yes I read that initial statement as "shot at school". Yes, thousands of kids are shot per year.
My understanding was that the discussion was about school shootings. My mistake, apparently.
Duke said:ProDarwin said:Fair. Yes I read that initial statement as "shot at school". Yes, thousands of kids are shot per year.
My understanding was that the discussion was about school shootings. My mistake, apparently.
As the person that started this thread, that is not what the thread is about. At no point did I mention school shootings
Steve_Jones said:Duke said:ProDarwin said:Fair. Yes I read that initial statement as "shot at school". Yes, thousands of kids are shot per year.
My understanding was that the discussion was about school shootings. My mistake, apparently.
As the person that started this thread, that is not what the thread is about. At no point did I mention school shootings
Understandable. I think I got it mixed up in my head with this post from Fueled by Caffine on the previous page:
Fueled by Caffeine said:
but seriously we need to keep trying new and better things until we stop having piles of dead berkeleying kids inside berkeleying schools. Making schools into fortresses Could be one answer but it won't be a cheap or good one.
I'm in agreement that is not what the thread is about, but things detour over the course of 25 pages.
Back to your regularly scheduled thread.
In reply to ProDarwin :
Agreed. I didn't say I thought the thread was about school shootings. I said I thought the discussion was about school shootings, based on that same post and various responses.
Today's toll:
3 people shot and killed at a manufacturing facility in Maryland.
Police killed an intruder trying to get into a school in Alabama. He was shot to death after resisting and trying to take the officer's gun.
In reply to stuart in mn :
I recently read an article interviewing two people in the DoJ's research arm, and their conclusion is that mass shooters are suicidal. They feel that all of their problems are other peoples' fault, from thought processes that feed on each other more and more, until they rationalize that there is only one way out and they may as well take out as many people as they can on their way out.
Deterrents like armed teachers etc. will not stop them because they welcome the idea of dying. It is basically suicide by cop on a grander scale.
In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :
If that's the case, it makes me wonder what the Israeli policy on securing schools might be.
Brett_Murphy (Agent of Chaos) said:Noddaz said:There are people legally buying firearms that shouldn't be able to buy firearms. Discuss how to possibly prevent this.
The most effective and possibly least burdensome things we can do are:
Universal background checks or FFL transfer on all firearms, even private sale.
Waiting period of X time for any firearms purchase- possibly while the background check is run.
A "Must Pass" requirement for background checks.
We should also consider flexible Red Flag laws which have a clearly defined expiration period and clear method for the return of private property. These Red Flag laws would be reported on a national level and be included in background checks (for a fail) while they are active.
I agree on the waiting period, but I think UBC will be completely ineffective. First, HIPAA will prevent any mental health from being included, and second, a high percentage of these killers have zero record which would prevent the purchase. If you circumvent HIPAA and get access to mental health, then people like me who see a therapist and have a label of depression might be excluded unneccessarily, while anyone who hasn't seen a therapist (and therefore not labeled as anything) get a pass just because no one has thrown any red flags YET.
In so many of these mass shootings, the deep investigations into the shooter hasn't turned up anything at all that would have stopped the sale even if UBC had been in place.
Question, let's say a person makes a threat about doing a mass shooting, it gets reported, it gets investigated by law enforcement. Law enforcement finds the person who made the threats has guns. With current regulations what can they do about that? Is the threat itself a crime? Can guns be confiscated at that point?
You'll need to log in to post.
