Reporter and Cameraman Murdered on Live TV

[mad1]

I'm sorry I have never heard of these presenters (where Im from) but I wish to say that I find it tragic to have happened, and RIP to the two that were shot.....lives stolen....


terrible

[BEAL]

I'm sure we'll find anything else to talk about besides the underlying issue, guns.

We'll talk generally about mental health, race....but not the actual object that was used to kill.

[bono_212]

The underlying issue of the gun issue, or at least it's best friend, though, IS healthcare.

[deep]

the only thing I can say with 100% certainty is:

People are fucked up.


and this will be another national Rorschach test
everything said about it, the people involved, etc will tell us little about those things but will reveal many things about the people making the remarks.

[KoDVooDo]

A few observations:

That he had a gun is not what caused the crime. The gun was a tool to carry out the crime. Take away one tool and he would have found another.

Looks like they didn't notice the shooter until it was too late, and their initial reaction was to flee. It wouldn't have made a difference if the victims were armed. The shooter could have picked up the extra guns afterwards, and had more tools to kill.

"Get him help"? What a joke. There's an old saying: you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. If he didn't want help it wouldn't have mattered if someone "got him help". Add to that you really can't lock up everyone who is angry. Some of the comments I hear sound suspiciously like the plot from Minority Report, with the precrime bureau.

Anyway, I guess I'm not offering any real solutions to the problem, just observations. I don't think guns or mental health are the issues (though ease of access is part of it. Why do we need a competency test to get a driver's license but not a gun?). I don't believe in god. But I do value human life, and feel that respect for human life is what's missing.

Sent from my SPH-L720T using U2 Interference mobile app

[Bluer White]

Originally Posted by deep

the only thing I can say with 100% certainty is:

People are fucked up.

Well put.

[bono_212]

Originally Posted by KoDVooDo

A few observations:

That he had a gun is not what caused the crime. The gun was a tool to carry out the crime. Take away one tool and he would have found another.

Looks like they didn't notice the shooter until it was too late, and their initial reaction was to flee. It wouldn't have made a difference if the victims were armed. The shooter could have picked up the extra guns afterwards, and had more tools to kill.

"Get him help"? What a joke. There's an old saying: you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. If he didn't want help it wouldn't have mattered if someone "got him help". Add to that you really can't lock up everyone who is angry. Some of the comments I hear sound suspiciously like the plot from Minority Report, with the precrime bureau.

Anyway, I guess I'm not offering any real solutions to the problem, just observations. I don't think guns or mental health are the issues (though ease of access is part of it. Why do we need a competency test to get a driver's license but not a gun?). I don't believe in god. But I do value human life, and feel that respect for human life is what's missing.

Sent from my SPH-L720T using U2 Interference mobile app

Ladies and Gentlemen...we have arrived.

[deep]

Originally Posted by Bluer White

Well put.

come on,
you can't just call this an ink splatter

what do you see?? what do you see??

[PhilsFan]

Originally Posted by KoDVooDo

That he had a gun is not what caused the crime. The gun was a tool to carry out the crime. Take away one tool and he would have found another.

How much more deadly are guns than ANY other weapon? Get out of here with this nonsense.

Originally Posted by KoDVooDo

Looks like they didn't notice the shooter until it was too late, and their initial reaction was to flee. It wouldn't have made a difference if the victims were armed. The shooter could have picked up the extra guns afterwards, and had more tools to kill.

Good point, arming victims is not a reasonable response to gun violence.

Originally Posted by KoDVooDo

"Get him help"? What a joke. There's an old saying: you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. If he didn't want help it wouldn't have mattered if someone "got him help". Add to that you really can't lock up everyone who is angry. Some of the comments I hear sound suspiciously like the plot from Minority Report, with the precrime bureau.

Plenty of people are resistant to get help before they get it.

Originally Posted by KoDVooDo

Anyway, I guess I'm not offering any real solutions to the problem, just observations. I don't think guns or mental health are the issues (though ease of access is part of it. Why do we need a competency test to get a driver's license but not a gun?). I don't believe in god. But I do value human life, and feel that respect for human life is what's missing.

Then guns ARE the problem. Ease of access to guns IS a gun problem. That's the whole point.

[Bluer White]

Originally Posted by deep

come on,
you can't just call this an ink splatter

what do you see?? what do you see??

It's an unfolded quesadilla, obviously

[deep]

wrong

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by deep

the only thing I can say with 100% certainty is:

People are fucked up.

and in the US, they have easy access to guns.

it seems this guy purchased a gun in June. he likely passed a background check.

instead of saying, "nothing could have stopped this," shouldn't we be saying, "clearly our laws aren't stringent enough and the so-called 'rights' of citizens to bear arms is a threat to public health and safety and therefore the only reasonable response is to gradually tighten and restrict access to all guns the way they did in Australia after Port Arthur and Scotland after Dunblane."

more guns, more crime.

[Bluer White]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

I blame the NRA most of all. But also regular law-abiding gun owners. And the guns themselves.

Could you please elaborate on blaming the NRA and "regular law-abiding gun owners" for Mr. Flanagan's actions this morning?

[LemonMelon]

Unequivocally, the worst aspect of shootings is that people die in them.

Second worst is, in the aftermath, watching "regular law-abiding gun owners" jump through hoops to justify the status quo and prevent meaningful change.

[The_Pac_Mule]

I blame the NRA most of all. But also regular law-abiding gun owners. And the guns themselves.

A few thoughts from a "regular law abiding gun owner."

First, get off your high horse. I find it disgusting that rather than blame the mother fucker who did this, most anti second-amendment people will blame absolutely everyone and everything else before the person themselves. I take it personally that you believe I bear any responsibility for this.

I also like to drink alcohol, and I also like to drive my car, though never at the same time of course. Does being a responsible drinker make me responsible for all the thousands of DUI fatalities?

This also assumes that all responsible gun owners don't believe that there needs to be changes. But the issue is mental health, and the broken mental health system in this country and the broken background check system. And let's also not forget the many laws and regulations already in place that simply aren't enforced.

Most of the people I hear saying how we need to ban guns in this country ironically also feel like we need to end the war on drugs and rather spend our resources addressing the underlying issues of poverty and drug addiction (which I totally agree with). Our streets are flooded with both illegal drugs and illegal guns, yet when it comes to gun violence, somehow the same logic doesn't apply and banning them will simply solve the problem and make it all go away. (Even more ironic since a lot of the root causes of gun violence are the same as rampant drug abuse) Instead of addressing the root causes, they jump straight to the guns, because somehow guns are what makes people commit these terrible acts.

If you want to straight up ban guns, you're going to have to amend the Constitution and remove the 2nd amendment. I'm not a big fan of the NRA because of they're often extreme stance that puts guns owners in a bad light. But I also acknowledge that if it wasn't for them, myself and others would have lost their rights to own firearms long ago.

So if you want to take away anything from what I just said, it's that both sides of the debate need to take a step to find common ground. I think gun owners would be far less resistant to legislation to revamp background checks if legislators weren't also always trying to also ban black scary looking semi auto rifles and magazines that can hold more than a few bullets. With a better, universal and enforced background check system, as well as fixing the broken health care system and combating poverty and gang culture in inner cities, things like this would become rare.

Just my two cents.

[PhilsFan]

Well that post appears to have proven Irvine's point.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[The_Pac_Mule]

Yeah? How so?

[bono_212]

Who said ban guns?

[LemonMelon]

Nobody in this conversation. It's a convenient strawman.

[The_Pac_Mule]

That was only one small piece of what I said. But regardless, I added it because that is what it seems Irvine would like to see.

"clearly our laws aren't stringent enough and the so-called 'rights' of citizens to bear arms is a threat to public health and safety"

What would you guys like to see then specifically that differs from what I was saying with fixing and enhancing the background check system?