Just so People can be irresponsible with their weapons
“As a nation we have to ask, when in God’s name are we going to stand up to the gun lobby? When in God’s name are we going to do what has to be done?” Biden asked. “Why are are willing to live with this carnage?"
Though I feel terrible for the victims, I am kind of happy it happened in Texas. At least NY tries to stop this insanity, where Texas seems to be interested in enabling gun crimes across the country.
38 comments:
Anybody whose first instinct in this tragedy is to seek a political advantage is simply despicable. Want a simple solution? How about eliminating those "gun free zones"? How many gun laws did the shooter violate before violating the law against murder?
As I said... This happened in Texas... They reap what they sow...
So Jerry, your answer to someone bringing a gun onto school property and killing 21 people is to remove the federal law that bans guns on school property? We have a problem unique to our country when compared to the entire planet the solution from you is more guns? My god. I seriously have no hope for the future of this country when there's so many like you. How the right can preach pro-life and more guns while we have a mass shooting weekly is just beyond my ability to comprehend.
Drewbie,
Apparently the gun lobby's logic is that all the 8 year olds should be carrying derringers.
Like that is going to stop a armored adult carrying ar15s... :-(
Note: the carnage was reduced by an armed citizen forcing the madman to drop his ammunition and "hole up" in a single room, and was finally stopped from further carnage by an armed and very conveniently nearby law officer, with a gun.
Drewbie, I mean exactly that. If we have a law that says you can't bring a gun onto school property, then school shootings cannot possibly happen, right? The following truth should be self-evident: you cannot eliminate evil through legislation.
Oh, and "once a week"? More kids are killed in Chicago every week. Despite the strict gun laws there.
The fundamental point to be made about mass school shootings is that they are extraordinarily rare. If we use the FBI’s definition of a “mass shooting” incident, i.e., one where four or more people are killed, this is the pattern of mass school shootings in the 21st century:
2022: 1
2021: 1
2020: 0
2019: 0
2018: 2
2017: 1
2016: 0
2015: 1
2014: 1
2013: 1
2012: 2
2011: 0
2010: 0
2009: 0
2008: 1
2007: 1
2006: 1
2005: 1
2004: 0
2003: 0
2002: 0
2001: 0
2000: 0
Jerry,
You really have no clue... Or sources.
Another interesting source
One more to chase Jerry's rabbit
John, I must have a clue, because you do not. Look through Mother Jones (not as good as the FBI, source-wise) list and pick out ONLY SCHOOL shootings. You will come up, I think, with something closely matching the FBI. Unless you want to claim the FBI is not a credible source?
Give us your link to your FBI source then...
And how many dead children are okay when they are in the care of our local community schools?
I am pretty sure we are far above the number that I am comfortable with.
Though it seems these most recent dead kids are an acceptable number to you?
Great. You have identified the problem-- people are killing people, sometimes with guns. But I still have several questions: 1) What gun law, existing or proposed, would have prevented the Uvalde shooter? 2) How many gun laws or related laws (trespass, etc.) did he actually violate, NOT counting the laws against murder? 3) How many mass shootings have been prevented by the laws already on the books? 4) Why is the first request from Uvalde for a mental health facility rather than for gun control? 5) Do you believe there is evil in the world, or can we just pass some magic law in Congress (never mind God's law) to prevent insane killers from killing?
6) In short, what is a realistic, workable, legislative solution for that doesn't penalize 330 million people, yet targets only one exceedingly rare occasional criminal event?
Media and politicians always ask "why" things like this happen, apparently in the belief that "we must do something." By and large, the only reason is because, as The Shadow says, "who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men." Heck, I would be happy just to know what evil, twisted logic was in this madman's mind at the time.
The correct number of dead children is zero. Ban abortion now.
Jerry,
In this case, preventing an 18 year old from buying 2 assault rifles and a bunch of ammunition would have been enough.
As long as we make it easy for evil people to get equipment with which they can commit mass murder. Our society is complicit.
Remember... "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”... And doing nothing is something you are very good at. :-O
Abortion does not kill children... Nice attempt to divert... Now you are equating happy 10 years old with loving friends and families to some half baked cells attached in a woman's uterus. Do you real believe the silliness you write?
"1) What gun law, existing or proposed, would have prevented the Uvalde shooter?"
There are many that could have potentially helped. An "assault weapons ban" or moving the age limit to 21 would have prevented him from buying the AR-15 legally. Given that there were multiple police calls to his family's home and people seemed to have concerns about his behavior, a "red flag" law might have allowed people to raise those concerns and prevent him from buying his weapons legally. Bans on high-capacity magazines would have forced the shooter to reload more frequently -- which has proven to be useful in other mass shootings (for instance, bystanders were able to tackle the Gabby Giffords shooter when he attempted to reload, the Aurora movie theater shooter jammed his gun while trying to reload, and some kids at Sandy Hook were able to escape while the shooter was reloading). If Texas had accepted the Medicaid expansion as part of the Affordable Care Act, it might have been easier for his family to get him the mental health care he appeared to be in need of (not a gun law, I realize). None of these are foolproof, obviously. But raising the level of difficulty is important and potentially life-saving here.
"5) Do you believe there is evil in the world, or can we just pass some magic law in Congress (never mind God's law) to prevent insane killers from killing?"
Just because laws are broken doesn't meant that there isn't any utility in having laws in the first place.
"The correct number of dead children is zero. Ban abortion now."
When it comes to regulating guns, there's no "magic law". When it comes to regulating women, let 'er rip.
Sean, thanks for the detail; permit me a few quibbles. 1) the kid did not buy two "assault weapons." He bought two semi-automatic hunting rifles. 2) Moving the age to buy a rifle to 21 is under consideration in Congress, but most criminals do not buy their guns, and if they do it's a handgun. 3) No evidence that the kid had high-capacity magazines, and the SRO forced him to abandon most of his ammunition. 4) Mental health care was not available in Uvalde, but one of the first things they requested when asked. 5) I had not heard about the police calls, but if true, yes, red flags could have been raised, but there were no guns in the house to confiscate at the time. I'm curious what a "yellow flag" law is.
"Just because laws are broken doesn't meant that there isn't any utility in having laws in the first place." Laws cannot make up for moral and society "guardrails" on behavior.
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." -- John Adams
Maybe that's the problem?
Sean,
Excellent rational responses. Maybe Jerry has a point... It is pointless to have abortion laws since the woman can use a hanger? :-(
Jerry,
If the Assault weapon ban was still in place, they would have been included in the definition and likely would not be readily available to the "evil" people that you seem to support arming.
The police walked back their statement. There was no confrontation.
Worse yet... For some reason the officers sat outside instead of immediately confronting the killer...
So much for armed people taking out a random killer.
It seems to me that the police were very negligent in taking an hour before confronting the shooter. I expect officers to risk their lives in an attempt to rescue children.
There have been 27 school shootings this year. There have been 119 school shootings since 2018, when Education Week began tracking such incidents. The highest number of shootings, 34, occurred last year. There were 10 shootings in 2020, and 24 each in 2019 and 2018.
"4) Mental health care was not available in Uvalde, but one of the first things they requested when asked"
The mayor asked for more mental health care resources, but it's not as if none were available.
Like, for instance, this:
Uvalde County Mental Health Center
or:
Services - Uvalde Memorial Hospital
or:
South Texas Rural Health Services
And, again, if we're going to put the blame solely on mental health instead of looking at guns, you have to look at what the Republican leadership in the state of Texas (and nationally) hasn't done to provide mental health resources. In Texas, they didn't expand Medicaid, and just last month cut funding for mental health by over $200M. Republicans nationwide are attacking SEL programs in schools which are designed to build resilience and empathy among kids. If you're not going to do anything about the gun issue, then it's time to actually step up to the plate and do something about what you say the problem actually is.
Laurie, you may be right, but the FBI says there have been only a few MASS school shootings. And again, "As of 2020, there are 130,930 recorded number of K-12 schools in the United States of America (U.S.A)." While tragic in the extreme, such incidents are extremely unlikely. While perhaps they can be reduced, most political solutions are unlikely to have the desired result of reducing such incidents to zero. Particularly if you consider the far more likely undesirable side effects, like kids living in fear.
That said, I just learned today that there was NOT an SRO present, that the gunman entered through an unlocked back door, and that the police did indeed wait too long to actively engage (on scene in 4 minutes, almost an hour elapsed before killing the shooter). [Still waiting for the twisted "logic" in the killer's mind of why that school, that classroom.] So, a bit of school "hardening," (proposed many times, blocked by Democrats), School Resource Officers (ending gun-free zones so teachers with special training can carry), better police training and plans (99.99% of which will never be used), maybe raise the age to buy a gun-- any gun-- to 21 for what little good that will do, and some really reasonable "yellow flag" law would all seem reasonable political responses, but will be blocked by Democrats again and again. As for an "assault weapons ban," I point out again that the young man did not HAVE an "assault weapon" by the political definition, and the ban we had was dropped after having an undetectable effect on crime. Thus it is with all "knee-jerk" legislative actions, and they should be avoided in this case as well. Let's at least figure out what actually happened first.
Sean, I won't argue with you about the need, only I must point out that the Uvalde County Facility is almost two hours away, in Kerrville. I'm also curious as to WHY we have the need? And, if a kid is so far gone he shoots his grandmother in the face, is there any course of treatment possible?
"I must point out that the Uvalde County Facility is almost two hours away, in Kerrville."
No, my link clearly shows it is at 328 Crystal City Hwy, Uvalde, TX 78801
"I'm also curious as to WHY we have the need?"
Just admit you don't want to do anything.
The Uvalde School District literally had its own police department. The police had literally done exercises in the school in recent months. Raising a force of armed officers to post in every K-12 school around the country would be a force the size of the Marines. (and what are we going to do about all the other "soft" targets?) It's impossible to harden schools to a level required to stop this unless you're going to do something about guns.
That is the crazy part about folks who want to arm teachers and police?
The Las Vegas shooting showed how easy it is for a person with a semi-automatic rifle to kill quickly while people can do nothing about it. :-(
If you you turn the schools into a fortress... Then they will just go after the parking lots, playgrounds, school events...
I think you have it correct. Conservatives just value guns more than children, church goers, grocery shoppers, theater goers, etc.
You're all wrong. Conservatives have a sense of proportionality. It has been proposed that the US could spend $250M and radically "harden" every school. But Uvalde was only one school in 130,000, and supposedly other, far cheaper and far more effective and targeted measures would have prevented that tragedy. I have suggested several, and would even accept "expanded background checks" so long as, as Manchin insists, it excludes private transfers (which is essentially the law today). And it won't matter! Conservatives value freedom more than knee-jerk, feel-good, more-harm-than-good legislation.
I repeat. "I'm also curious as to WHY we have the need [for mental health facilities]?" No answers?
Maybe this is more accurate then...
Conservatives just value guns, gun ownership anonymity and freedom from responsibility / liability more than children, church goers, grocery shoppers, theater goers, etc.
I mean my recommendations are pretty mild and the Jerry's of the world balk at them.
Jerry,
Why is private sale anonymity and being free to own an unregistered weapon important to you?
I mean that pretty well defines the concept of black market gun sales?
"It has been proposed that the US could spend $250M and radically "harden" every school. But Uvalde was only one school in 130,000"
That's less than $2,000 per school.
Decimal point off. Should be $20,000 per school. Too much for a few door locks. Not enough for a full-time SRO, probably.
And why do you need to slander all conservatives just to have an honest discussion about what is "reasonable" and what is not? I do NOT want to own a registered weapon, for example, because then thieves (or government) know where to go. I DO want to be able to gift my son or grandson my treasured old deer rifle. And the "gun show/ internet loophole" doesn't exist. Most all of these sales go through licensed FF dealers and background checks. And to the subject at immediate hand, the Uvalde shooter LEGALLY purchased his guns and passed the background check. Once again, you're swatting a mosquito with an MLRS. And I see nothing in your proposal that would reduce the incidence of such evil.
"black market gun sales" would be criminals selling to criminals, the source of most guns used in crime. Criminals commit crimes. If you can't prevent crime in general, you can't prevent crime with guns, either. Try another tack.
Have you not noticed, or must I again point out that (/sarc on) since those "no guns allowed on these premises" signs have gone up, not a single liquor store or convenience store has experienced an armed robbery? And since those "gun free zones" have gone up around schools, we haven't had a single school shooting? (/sarc off)
To address an issue through the political process, is nothing like using an issue for political advantage. It's not about who we elect, it is about what our elected officials do.
--Hiram
GUN LAWS SAVE LIVES
HOW DOES YOUR STATE COMPARE
Laurie, I like this seemingly unsubstantiated assertion, from your highly biased cite: "States with stronger gun laws have fewer gun deaths." Uh-huh. Like New York or Chicago?
I saw a complaint from Laurie Lightfoot of Chicago, that "most of the guns used in these shootings come in from out of state." Yes, of course, Chicago's strict gun laws do not permit their sourcing locally, but those guns do not walk across the state line by themselves! People who intend to violate the laws of God and of Man by committing murder will acquire the tools to do so, regardless of those other laws. Statistics say that something like 90% of guns used in crime are obtained illegally (and most certainly USED illegally). And if we are talking about Uvalde again, I am told that more people are killed by "hands and feet" than by all rifles combined. As for "AR-15" it is a style; it is NOT an "assault rifle," and it is the most common hunting gun in the US. Millions of them have not shot up a single school this year, or any year.
I think Jerry has once again proven that he does not care about reducing violence and saving the lives of innocent people.
He is more interested in keeping gun transfers off the books because of an insane fear that some government personnel are going to come for his guns.
I think I will end this pointless discussion with these images.
Post a Comment