Ongoing Mass Shootings Thread pt 2

[Caleb8844]

The ACLU is now joining the ranks of those urging a "No" vote on this terror watch list bill.

They must not have heard their "We Shall Overcome" rendition.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right

 

[digitize]

Serious question from someone who has no love for guns or the Second Amendment: would the sort of "common sense"-style reforms that the Democrats have been proposing actually reduce the sort of mass murders that have inspired said reform ideas? I have some sympathy towards Republican arguments that laws preventing acquisition of firearms by people who fail background checks and/or are on the terrorist watch list won't be helpful when there are shooters who pass background checks and aren't on the terrorist watch list (see: Orlando).

I worry that the only gun law that will stop this sort of mass shooting is one that severely restricts what sorts of firearms are legal at all - e.g. an assault weapons ban. I would have no issue with such a ban, but it's obviously politically impossible right now. I worry that all of what the Democrats are doing adds up to meaningless posturing, even if I'm fundamentally sympathetic to their cause.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Oregoropa]

Seems like both sides are coming with pre-packaged wishlists in bundled bills. Wish they could pass one common sense paragraph as a show of good faith.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[LuckyNumber7]

Serious question from someone who has no love for guns or the Second Amendment: would the sort of "common sense"-style reforms that the Democrats have been proposing actually reduce the sort of mass murders that have inspired said reform ideas? I have some sympathy towards Republican arguments that laws preventing acquisition of firearms by people who fail background checks and/or are on the terrorist watch list won't be helpful when there are shooters who pass background checks and aren't on the terrorist watch list (see: Orlando).

I worry that the only gun law that will stop this sort of mass shooting is one that severely restricts what sorts of firearms are legal at all - e.g. an assault weapons ban. I would have no issue with such a ban, but it's obviously politically impossible right now. I worry that all of what the Democrats are doing adds up to meaningless posturing, even if I'm fundamentally sympathetic to their cause.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

I think I'm nearly in the same boat as you. Though these measures can't hurt, I sort of can't help but imagine it's not really doing down the right path to answers.

 

[Popmartijn]

Serious question from someone who has no love for guns or the Second Amendment: would the sort of "common sense"-style reforms that the Democrats have been proposing actually reduce the sort of mass murders that have inspired said reform ideas? I have some sympathy towards Republican arguments that laws preventing acquisition of firearms by people who fail background checks and/or are on the terrorist watch list won't be helpful when there are shooters who pass background checks and aren't on the terrorist watch list (see: Orlando).

Yes, some mass shootings will still not be prevented. Some might. How many possible deaths saved per year is the tipping point for you to allow a bit more control to happen?

I worry that all of what the Democrats are doing adds up to meaningless posturing, even if I'm fundamentally sympathetic to their cause.

Why is that a worry? It is what is happening. There will be no gun control measures passed. So the Republicans can be branded as doing nothing, blocking meaningful government and helping terrorists get guns. And the Republicans will try to brand the Democrats as taking away Second Amendment rights. And so all of this will soon fade away again, until the next mass shooting. And then it'll fade away even further.

 

[Galeongirl]

lest we forget nothing bad actually happens with these measures passing... there's no people getting killed because they can't get their (semi)automatic gun. So it may not be the perfect solution, but it can't hurt to try.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

lest we forget nothing bad actually happens with these measures passing... there's no people getting killed because they can't get their (semi)automatic gun. So it may not be the perfect solution, but it can't hurt to try.

this is how i feel. i know here in america, my views are more extreme than almost everyone else. but i'm also willing to compromise and simply restrict guns rather than ban them altogether (the latter being what i'd prefer, but again i know that would never happen and most would disagree with me). it's one of the few positions where i cannot understand the other side, at least on some points. for example, the issue of mandatory background checks: really? this is a no-no? republicans are always "well if you've got nothing to hide, what's the problem?" regarding stuff like nsa, police checks, and the like. but a background check on people buying guns is so wrong? yes it won't prevent every shooting, but if it prevents even one, then it would be doing its job.

 

[corianderstem]

I really wish they weren't hitching their wagons to the "No Fly No Buy" bill. The 'no fly' list is deeply problematic.

But I know there is at least one other bill they're trying to vote on, and I dig that they're trying something resembling anything to force action.

I'm also confused by the Repubs response. Don't want them to get such a show? Why not just do the vote right away? Want a vote? Fine, let's vote. NO. Okay, great. Let's move on.

 

[Oregoropa]

I think John Lewis (one of the vocal sit-in) members was on the no-Fly list


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[corianderstem]

That's fucked up.

 

[deep]

that is a second or even third reason why he should not be permitted to own an assault weapon

 

[BVS]

I really wish they weren't hitching their wagons to the "No Fly No Buy" bill. The 'no fly' list is deeply problematic.

But I know there is at least one other bill they're trying to vote on, and I dig that they're trying something resembling anything to force action.

I'm also confused by the Repubs response. Don't want them to get such a show? Why not just do the vote right away? Want a vote? Fine, let's vote. NO. Okay, great. Let's move on.

Yeah, it's baffling. I guess its easier to vacation than vote no

Not that I've actually read either bill, probably pretty much like most of them, but from what most of the media is reporting; the Rep version of the no fly bill seems more reasonable. Maybe just compromise on the time period?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[the iron horse]

I think John Lewis (one of the vocal sit-in) members was on the no-Fly list


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

I just heard that mentioned on the news. He has been on the No-Fly
list for five years. He has also been trying to get off of it for fives years. There are problems with the NF list.

Lewis must have just discovered the "gun issue" because a reporter checking his congressional record found nothing about any past concerns.

I'm still waiting to hear discussions and investigations on how the FBI failed in keeping the Orlando murderer on their radar and how that blind spot can be opened.

Russia warned the FBI twice about Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and Tamerlan Tsarnaev
the two Boston terrorists.

 

[BVS]

Lewis must have just discovered the "gun issue" because a reporter checking his congressional record found nothing about any past concerns.

Was this "journalist" a Breitbart employee? Because he's given a grade of F by the NRA as far back as the late 90s.


As far as the FBI issue, I asked you back a few pages; what would you suggest?

Can you imagine the resources, the hours, and the issues of rights when following someone for months or years and they're not doing anything illegal? And their suspicious activity stops? How do you suggest we the federal government keep tabs on them?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Irvine511]

I just heard that mentioned on the news. He has been on the No-Fly

list for five years. He has also been trying to get off of it for fives years. There are problems with the NF list.



Lewis must have just discovered the "gun issue" because a reporter checking his congressional record found nothing about any past concerns.



I'm still waiting to hear discussions and investigations on how the FBI failed in keeping the Orlando murderer on their radar and how that blind spot can be opened.



Russia warned the FBI twice about Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and Tamerlan Tsarnaev

the two Boston terrorists.

You draw an excellent comparison at the end. The Boston terrorists killed 3 people with their homemade explosive. 49 people were ended by a semi-automatic in Orlando.

I'm sure the FBI dropped the ball, but do you not see a huge difference in the death toll? Why focus on the FBI when the most obvious difference was the presence or absence of a semiautomatic.

 

[Bluer White]

I'm still waiting to hear discussions and investigations on how the FBI failed in keeping the Orlando murderer on their radar and how that blind spot can be opened.

Russia warned the FBI twice about Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and Tamerlan Tsarnaev
the two Boston terrorists.

You make an interesting point, with no easy solutions. Interactions between the FBI and DOJ play a role. There's a lot to balance.

Orlando Shooting: Why the FBI Dropped Omar Mateen

 

[the iron horse]

You draw an excellent comparison at the end. The Boston terrorists killed 3 people with their homemade explosive. 49 people were ended by a semi-automatic in Orlando.

I'm sure the FBI dropped the ball, but do you not see a huge difference in the death toll? Why focus on the FBI when the most obvious difference was the presence or absence of a semiautomatic.

Irvine511: Thanks for your reply. One note a the firearm this killer used. He could have used a variety of different types of firearms and inflicted the same horrific results.

The Oklahoma City bombing was a domestic terrorist bomb attack on the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995. Carried out by Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols killed

168 people and injured more than 680 others with bombs in Oklahoma City. Planes were used on 9/11.

Why is this current discussion centered on an inanimate object?
These horrific events have never been about the weapons used.
It's about evil being unleashed by evil people.

Why are we not upset that our oh-so-great and oh-so wise leaders are not raising hell about how this guy was dropped off the watch list by the FBI.
The FBI could have easily notified the state of Florida to alert them immediately if this guy’s name came up on a background check.


Bluer White just made a good point and a link.

“You make an interesting point, with no easy solutions. Interactions between the FBI and DOJ play a role. There's a lot to balance.”

 

[Irvine511]

Irvine511: Thanks for your reply. One note a the firearm this killer used. He could have used a variety of different types of firearms and inflicted the same horrific results.



The Oklahoma City bombing was a domestic terrorist bomb attack on the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995. Carried out by Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols killed



168 people and injured more than 680 others with bombs in Oklahoma City. Planes were used on 9/11.



Why is this current discussion centered on an inanimate object?

These horrific events have never been about the weapons used.

It's about evil being unleashed by evil people.



Why are we not upset that our oh-so-great and oh-so wise leaders are not raising hell about how this guy was dropped off the watch list by the FBI.

The FBI could have easily notified the state of Florida to alert them immediately if this guy’s name came up on a background check.





Bluer White just made a good point and a link.



“You make an interesting point, with no easy solutions. Interactions between the FBI and DOJ play a role. There's a lot to balance.”

It's about bad people having access to weapons designed to cause quick, easy death. And in the case of semi automatics, quick easy mass death.

The OK City example is good to bring up -- no one thinks gun safety measures will end violence or prevent all "evil" acts from ever occurring. But what gun safety will do is reduce the rate of gun crime as well as reduce the lethality of gun crime when it does occur. The simple truth about these inanimate objects is that the more of them that exist the more likely they are to be used to cause human death. More guns means more gun crime. American society is no more or less filled with "evil" than Japanese society or Australian society or German society. The reason why their rates of death via firearm is a fraction of ours is because their evil people have a much more difficult time accessing weapons designed to kill people, and the firearms available are much less deadly.

Cars are inanimate objects. Yet people die behind the wheel every day. But we have drastically reduced automobile fatalities by requiring driver education, recertification, age limits at the lower and upper end, registration, insurance, air bags, anti-lock breaks, seat belts, speed limits. Roads are improved all the time with safety in mind.

We should treat guns the same way. We know that when there are more guns more people will be killed by guns. They present a health risk, especially to American women who are 11x more likely to be killed by a gun than their counterparts in other developed nations. Likewise, doctors should ask their patients if they have firearms in the home, home insurance rates should go up if you own a firearm (they do if you own a Pitt bull).

It's about safety. These inanimate objects make "evil" people far more deadly. Let's do what we can to make us all safer.

 

[nbelcik]

Irvine511: Thanks for your reply. One note a the firearm this killer used. He could have used a variety of different types of firearms and inflicted the same horrific results.



The Oklahoma City bombing was a domestic terrorist bomb attack on the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995. Carried out by Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols killed



168 people and injured more than 680 others with bombs in Oklahoma City. Planes were used on 9/11.



Why is this current discussion centered on an inanimate object?

These horrific events have never been about the weapons used.

It's about evil being unleashed by evil people.

16 years after the OKC bombings, restrictions were placed on the amount of fertilizer that people can buy at one time. The ATF had been advocating for these restrictions since the bombing. You also can't have box cutters on planes anymore. Hell, some guy tried to put a bomb in a shoe and now we have to take off our shoes at the airport. It is about the means used to carry out attacks.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/02/nation/la-na-ammonium-nitrate-20110803


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Irvine511]

16 years after the OKC bombings, restrictions were placed on the amount of fertilizer that people can buy at one time. The ATF had been advocating for these restrictions since the bombing. You also can't have box cutters on planes anymore. Hell, some guy tried to put a bomb in a shoe and now we have to take off our shoes at the airport. It is about the means used to carry out attacks.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/02/nation/la-na-ammonium-nitrate-20110803


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

I also can't buy lawn darts because some kid died somewhere once.

 

[BVS]

Irvine511: Thanks for your reply. One note a the firearm this killer used. He could have used a variety of different types of firearms and inflicted the same horrific results.

But he couldn't have used bolt action hunting rifle, or a shotgun, or even a handgun. Stop pretending all guns are the same. Stop perpetuating the lie that an AR 15 or a sig sauer mcx are the same as a hunting rifle and it's just an aesthetic issue. Stop stop stop.

Having a modular gun that can be pieced together in a matter of a minute allows you to conceal this weapon, you can't do that with a hunting rifle or shotgun. And don't tell me there's no difference between a gun that can take a 30 round magazine that can be ejected and replaced within seconds and a top loader, shotgun, or even a handgun. The amount of damage done in the amount of time, and the range of accuracy are all significant factors. Stop pretending otherwise.

Cars are regulated, chemicals are regulated; as a society we protect our citizens by trying to minimize the harm that inanimate objects can do. Stop pretending otherwise. When we regulate cars does anyone yell "they're taking away our cars"? No, because as a society we are smarter than that. Now why can't the right be that smart?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

I also can't buy lawn darts because some kid died somewhere once.

The NLDA is underfunded

 

[the iron horse]

I also can't buy lawn darts because some kid died somewhere once.

We usually plant about two acres of sweet corn. Before the Oklahoma bombing we were able to buy, at a low price, ammonium nitrate as a fertilizer.
It was used by most farmers and is a great side dressing for corn. Corn is a heavy feeder and needs nutrient dense foods to grow.

Not long after the bombing our local feed and seed store stopped selling it. I'm not sure if it is even used or regulated on farms that grow thousands of acres.

 

[Irvine511]

Ok.

 

[BEAL]

It's about bad people having access to weapons designed to cause quick, easy death. And in the case of semi automatics, quick easy mass death.

The OK City example is good to bring up -- no one thinks gun safety measures will end violence or prevent all "evil" acts from ever occurring. But what gun safety will do is reduce the rate of gun crime as well as reduce the lethality of gun crime when it does occur. The simple truth about these inanimate objects is that the more of them that exist the more likely they are to be used to cause human death. More guns means more gun crime. American society is no more or less filled with "evil" than Japanese society or Australian society or German society. The reason why their rates of death via firearm is a fraction of ours is because their evil people have a much more difficult time accessing weapons designed to kill people, and the firearms available are much less deadly.

Cars are inanimate objects. Yet people die behind the wheel every day. But we have drastically reduced automobile fatalities by requiring driver education, recertification, age limits at the lower and upper end, registration, insurance, air bags, anti-lock breaks, seat belts, speed limits. Roads are improved all the time with safety in mind.

We should treat guns the same way. We know that when there are more guns more people will be killed by guns. They present a health risk, especially to American women who are 11x more likely to be killed by a gun than their counterparts in other developed nations. Likewise, doctors should ask their patients if they have firearms in the home, home insurance rates should go up if you own a firearm (they do if you own a Pitt bull).

It's about safety. These inanimate objects make "evil" people far more deadly. Let's do what we can to make us all safer.

I don't know if you could state it any better. We have countless examples of every day tools, items, objects, that when proven harmful to the public, measures are taken to make them and/or us safer.

These discussions cannot happen because both sides (and I'll say it, mostly the NRA/GOP) resort to extremes. It is fear mongering at it's best and worst. Guns will be taken away, imminent threats against your safety from "bad" guys and terrorists. You are not safe, best to arm yourself if you want to survive.

There was a decent article shared by NPR yesterday about the history of concealed carry in this country. The history of politicians and the NRA discussing what a bad idea it would be to have citizens carrying weapons out in every day life. How it goes against the intention of gun ownership, and sportsmanship. Even the GOD Ronald Reagan was against it.

But over time the NRA used fear to manipulate the laws, and now you can carry your firearm in all 50 states. Some openly.

I fear that we've gone too far down this path to EVER return to common sense laws. Does the AR15 need to be outlawed? I'm not so sure as there may be steps to make it less deadly, along with other automatic weapons and handguns.

It's just so sad that feelings have now replaced facts in any discussion. We legislate from our gut, and not from reason and logic.

 

[PhilsFan]

I for one can't believe Iron Horse is posting inaccurate and/or irrelevant things at every turn in this discussion.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

[youtube]LORVfnFtcH0[/Youtube]

I love this.

 

[Galeongirl]

We usually plant about two acres of sweet corn. Before the Oklahoma bombing we were able to buy, at a low price, ammonium nitrate as a fertilizer.
It was used by most farmers and is a great side dressing for corn. Corn is a heavy feeder and needs nutrient dense foods to grow.

Not long after the bombing our local feed and seed store stopped selling it. I'm not sure if it is even used or regulated on farms that grow thousands of acres.

So? What's stopping you from getting it elsewhere, or using a different type of fertiliser that works just as well? There's plenty of alternatives available that cannot be crafted in dangerous bombs.

Just like there are plenty of alternatives to semiautomatic guns that don't massacre 50 people in a few minutes.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

We usually plant about two acres of sweet corn. Before the Oklahoma bombing we were able to buy, at a low price, ammonium nitrate as a fertilizer.
It was used by most farmers and is a great side dressing for corn. Corn is a heavy feeder and needs nutrient dense foods to grow.

Not long after the bombing our local feed and seed store stopped selling it. I'm not sure if it is even used or regulated on farms that grow thousands of acres.

Do you now have to walk 50 miles barefoot in the snow with your AK to go get a bag? Cause that would be heartbreaking.