Again, and again, and again

[jebartle]

Tulsa, OK, hospital, 4 killed.....what is the answer to these Killings

[ElDiabloJoe]

Tulsa, OK, hospital, 4 killed.....what is the answer to these Killings
Oh Geez, that's easy. You're not gonna like the answer though:

1. Two-parent homes for raising children;
2. A stay-at home parent;
3. Put away "participation trophies" and teach kids that heartbreak and losing are life lessons and doing so gracefully is important;
4. Return to discipline. Kids are your responsibility to society, NOT your new cuddly best friend for you to pamper and indulge;
5. Return to a shared moral code. In the past, it was Christianity and regular church attendance;
6. Return to community norms. No more, "but it's their culture to be rude" excuses. Abide by community standards or face social ostracism;
7. A return to accountability and personal responsibility for one's actions and behaviors.

[dewilson58]

Oh Geez, that's easy. You're not gonna like the answer though:

1. Two-parent homes for raising children;
2. A stay-at home parent;
3. Return to discipline. Kids are your responsibility to society, NOT your new cuddly best friend for you to pamper and indulge;
4. Return to a shared moral code. In the past, it was Christianity and regular church attendance;
5. Return to community norms. No more, "but it's their culture to be rude!" Abide by community standards or face social ostracism;
6. A return to accountability and personal responsibility for one's actions and behaviors.

:boom:

[MartinSE]

Oh Geez, that's easy. You're not gonna like the answer though:

1. Two-parent homes for raising children;
2. A stay-at home parent;
3. Put away "participation trophies" and teach kids that heartbreak and losing are life lessons and doing so gracefully is important;
4. Return to discipline. Kids are your responsibility to society, NOT your new cuddly best friend for you to pamper and indulge;
5. Return to a shared moral code. In the past, it was Christianity and regular church attendance;
6. Return to community norms. No more, "but it's their culture to be rude" excuses. Abide by community standards or face social ostracism;
7. A return to accountability and personal responsibility for one's actions and behaviors.

And do you have any suggestions for how to accomplish that? Because, while most people will agree those would be wonderful things to do, it doesn't help the walking dead people that will be murdered next week, and those the next week, etc etc etc.

We need suggestions of actions we can take now to help the situation.

[Tom&JenC]

Oh Geez, that's easy. You're not gonna like the answer though:

1. Two-parent homes for raising children;
2. A stay-at home parent;
3. Put away "participation trophies" and teach kids that heartbreak and losing are life lessons and doing so gracefully is important;
4. Return to discipline. Kids are your responsibility to society, NOT your new cuddly best friend for you to pamper and indulge;
5. Return to a shared moral code. In the past, it was Christianity and regular church attendance;
6. Return to community norms. No more, "but it's their culture to be rude" excuses. Abide by community standards or face social ostracism;
7. A return to accountability and personal responsibility for one's actions and behaviors.

The above is all true. The people who destroyed society in the first place now claim to be able to solve this problem. They are sickening.

[MrFlorida]

Violent movies, violent video games, kids today are desensitized, blood and guts mean nothing to them.

[ThirdOfFive]

Tulsa, OK, hospital, 4 killed.....what is the answer to these Killings
It has been proven that the majority of these incidents are copycat. These two quotes are excerpted from Center4Research (Alex Pew, Lauren Goldbeck, Caroline Halsted, and Diana Zuckerman, PhD, National Center for Health Research)

"Studies indicate that the more media attention a shooter gets, the more likely the event will inspire a future mass shooter...

"As long as the media continue to focus their news stories on the attacker, it is likely that these copycats will continue.[13] Dr. Adam Lankford of the University of Alabama has conducted several key studies of the media coverage of mass shootings and the motivations of the shooters. For example, he found that between 2010 and 2017, some mass shooters got more media attention in the month following the attack than the most famous celebrities, such as Brad Pitt."

Media have been hyperbolizing over what Salvator Ramos did in Texas nonstop since it happened. Information, misinformation and disinformation have been assailing us night and day. We've had pictures of teddy bears and weeping parents popping up ad nauseam. Pundits and political types have been commandeering any and every microphone and/or camera they can find to contribute their two cents' worth.

It doesn't take much for this kind of national hysteria to set off some alienated kid or adult with imaginary axes to grind and motivate him to seek the same kind of national attention, in the same kind of way, as the shooter(s) at Columbine, Uvalde, etc. did it. Yet we continue shriek our horror day and night. And all we're doing is adding fuel to the fire.

There is news, and there is hysteria. News informs. Hysteria motivates, often motivating the precise kind of people who would consider doing these types of things. Yet we continue to eat it up, and demand more of it.

How much responsibility do WE share?

[golfing eagles]

Oh Geez, that's easy. You're not gonna like the answer though:

1. Two-parent homes for raising children;
2. A stay-at home parent;
3. Put away "participation trophies" and teach kids that heartbreak and losing are life lessons and doing so gracefully is important;
4. Return to discipline. Kids are your responsibility to society, NOT your new cuddly best friend for you to pamper and indulge;
5. Return to a shared moral code. In the past, it was Christianity and regular church attendance;
6. Return to community norms. No more, "but it's their culture to be rude" excuses. Abide by community standards or face social ostracism;
7. A return to accountability and personal responsibility for one's actions and behaviors.

Well said!!!! Bravo!!! :bigbow::bigbow::bigbow:

[ThirdOfFive]

Oh Geez, that's easy. You're not gonna like the answer though:

1. Two-parent homes for raising children;
2. A stay-at home parent;
3. Put away "participation trophies" and teach kids that heartbreak and losing are life lessons and doing so gracefully is important;
4. Return to discipline. Kids are your responsibility to society, NOT your new cuddly best friend for you to pamper and indulge;
5. Return to a shared moral code. In the past, it was Christianity and regular church attendance;
6. Return to community norms. No more, "but it's their culture to be rude" excuses. Abide by community standards or face social ostracism;
7. A return to accountability and personal responsibility for one's actions and behaviors.
Excellent!

I'd add one thing. Respect.

[golfing eagles]

Excellent!

I'd add one thing. Respect.

And I'd remove 1 thing---defiance (of everything---parents, police, government, etc.)

[retiredguy123]

Oh Geez, that's easy. You're not gonna like the answer though:

1. Two-parent homes for raising children;
2. A stay-at home parent;
3. Put away "participation trophies" and teach kids that heartbreak and losing are life lessons and doing so gracefully is important;
4. Return to discipline. Kids are your responsibility to society, NOT your new cuddly best friend for you to pamper and indulge;
5. Return to a shared moral code. In the past, it was Christianity and regular church attendance;
6. Return to community norms. No more, "but it's their culture to be rude" excuses. Abide by community standards or face social ostracism;
7. A return to accountability and personal responsibility for one's actions and behaviors.
To expand on No. 7, people with long criminal records should be in prison, not on the streets.

[Topspinmo]

To expand on No. 7, people with long criminal records should be in prison, not on the streets.

Add one, serial killers if convicted put to death.

[DonH57]

Oh Geez, that's easy. You're not gonna like the answer though:

1. Two-parent homes for raising children;
2. A stay-at home parent;
3. Put away "participation trophies" and teach kids that heartbreak and losing are life lessons and doing so gracefully is important;
4. Return to discipline. Kids are your responsibility to society, NOT your new cuddly best friend for you to pamper and indulge;
5. Return to a shared moral code. In the past, it was Christianity and regular church attendance;
6. Return to community norms. No more, "but it's their culture to be rude" excuses. Abide by community standards or face social ostracism;
7. A return to accountability and personal responsibility for one's actions and behaviors.

Bingo !

Spot on but some in our society don't want to openly admit it.

[tophcfa]

Oh Geez, that's easy. You're not gonna like the answer though:

1. Two-parent homes for raising children;
2. A stay-at home parent;
3. Put away "participation trophies" and teach kids that heartbreak and losing are life lessons and doing so gracefully is important;
4. Return to discipline. Kids are your responsibility to society, NOT your new cuddly best friend for you to pamper and indulge;
5. Return to a shared moral code. In the past, it was Christianity and regular church attendance;
6. Return to community norms. No more, "but it's their culture to be rude" excuses. Abide by community standards or face social ostracism;
7. A return to accountability and personal responsibility for one's actions and behaviors.

#8 - get rid of social media

[rrtjp]

Oh Geez, that's easy. You're not gonna like the answer though:

1. Two-parent homes for raising children;
2. A stay-at home parent;
3. Put away "participation trophies" and teach kids that heartbreak and losing are life lessons and doing so gracefully is important;
4. Return to discipline. Kids are your responsibility to society, NOT your new cuddly best friend for you to pamper and indulge;
5. Return to a shared moral code. In the past, it was Christianity and regular church attendance;
6. Return to community norms. No more, "but it's their culture to be rude" excuses. Abide by community standards or face social ostracism;
7. A return to accountability and personal responsibility for one's actions and behaviors.

Well said and I agree with you 100%

[juneroses]

A study of mass shooters:

Two Professors Found What Creates a Mass Shooter. Will Politicians Pay Attention? - POLITICO (https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/05/27/stopping-mass-shooters-q-a-00035762)

[gatorbill1]

#8 - get rid of social media

you are on social media?

[tophcfa]

you are on social media?

Your correct, TOTV is the only social media I have ever used. So far, no wack job mass murders have sought out instant rock star status through TOTV “old retired people” media. And despite a lot of complaining, no one has gone postal over dog poop, bad parking, poor golf conditions, increased happy hour prices, or having to share the MMP’s with various users.

[dewilson58]

And despite a lot of complaining, no one has gone postal over dog poop, bad parking, poor golf conditions, increased happy hour prices, or having to share the MMP’s with various users.

Avocado did go postal over the Property Tax increase.

:1rotfl:

[golfing eagles]

Avocado did go postal over the Property Tax increase.

:1rotfl:

And then disappeared. Johnny One Note?????????:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[Michael G.]

Oh Geez, that's easy. You're not gonna like the answer though:

1. Two-parent homes for raising children;
2. A stay-at home parent;
3. Put away "participation trophies" and teach kids that heartbreak and losing are life lessons and doing so gracefully is important;
4. Return to discipline. Kids are your responsibility to society, NOT your new cuddly best friend for you to pamper and indulge;
5. Return to a shared moral code. In the past, it was Christianity and regular church attendance;
6. Return to community norms. No more, "but it's their culture to be rude" excuses. Abide by community standards or face social ostracism;
7. A return to accountability and personal responsibility for one's actions and behaviors.

We would have to stop the world and restart again to accomplish this.

Don't know about any of you people, but I'm a senior citizen looking for my eternal life
someplace else.

[dewilson58]

We would have to stop the world and restart again to accomplish this..

Wrong, as with anything............to move forward, you have to take a first step.

[tophcfa]

Avocado did go postal over the Property Tax increase.

:1rotfl:

Naaaa, he didn’t kill anyone, he just got more upset than most.

[MartinSE]

Wrong, as with anything............to move forward, you have to take a first step.

See, some of us consider that moving backward not forward. As with many things moving forward can be painful. The industrial revolution was the start of all the things listed, should we return to pre-industrialization? That was a lovely bucolic time.

[Spalumbos62]

you are on social media?

Problem is...how do you get back to this??

Can't change the divorce rate, with the current divorce rate you'll always
have a one parent home.

And in my opinion with such high divorce rate leads to trophy for all....bc the one parent household is always competing against the other parent, daddy got you this...well I'm gonna get you this better thing. In addition their is resulting guilt that the child is hurting mentally from the split...hence the trophy isssue...Oh no, you did great, you're the best, you made an excellent effort, heres a trophy.

Religion issue...well that's a tough one. I do believe, yes allot pulled away in almost defiance, but things within the catholic church was a major factor.

Yea, respect...well we all know that starts at home. Here's a conundrum...my grandkids are allowed to sit at the dining room chair with their feet on the seat, drives me nuts...at my house when they sit on a counter stool that way....its not allowed..."get you feet off the seat".....you can not imagine the looks....first the grandkids at me....mean grandma...then over to their parent, like I'm speaking another language...then the parent will "explain " well, they are used to doing......
I dont really care....
Anyway, sorry to go on...but I guess we gotta get the feet out of the seat...so to speak.

[Blueblaze]

Well, I wish we could live the world ElDiabloJoe suggests, but here's a couple of things we could actually do now.

1. Re-open the insane asylums and make it possible to once again commit dangerous lunatics, like we used to do back before we had mass-murders by dangerous lunatics every other month.

2. Make Big Tech apply the same powerful algorithms they use to detect people pointing out that the Covid Vaccines don't work, to detecting the ravings of the next murderous lunatic, as he documents in detail on-line his plans to commit mass murder.

Just a couple of alternative common-sense ideas, since everyone seems to have a "common sense" plan these days to remove 400 million guns, which might be a little more difficult than simply locking up the lunatics.

[dewilson58]

See, some of us consider that moving backward not forward. As with many things moving forward can be painful. The industrial revolution was the start of all the things listed, should we return to pre-industrialization? That was a lovely bucolic time.
Nonsense.
Congrats.................................the worst post of 2022 award.

[retiredguy123]

Well, I wish we could live the world ElDiabloJoe suggests, but here's a couple of things we could actually do now.

1. Re-open the insane asylums and make it possible to once again commit dangerous lunatics, like we used to do back before we had mass-murders by dangerous lunatics every other month.

2. Make Big Tech apply the same powerful algorithms they use to detect people pointing out that the Covid Vaccines don't work, to detecting the ravings of the next murderous lunatic, as he documents in detail on-line his plans to commit mass murder.

Just a couple of alternative common-sense ideas, since everyone seems to have a "common sense" plan these days to remove 400 million guns, which might be a little more difficult than simply locking up the lunatics.
I agree with No. 1. But, I don't see how your No. 2 would acccomplish much unless you are going to deny people their legal due process. I don't like red flag laws because they allow people, who are not part of the justice system, to take away legal rights without any due process. They take away your rights, and then you are guilty until you can prove that you are innocent.

The problem with "common sense" ideas is that there will never be universal agreement on what constitutes common sense, especially in today's world.

[jimjamuser]

Oh Geez, that's easy. You're not gonna like the answer though:

1. Two-parent homes for raising children;
2. A stay-at home parent;
3. Put away "participation trophies" and teach kids that heartbreak and losing are life lessons and doing so gracefully is important;
4. Return to discipline. Kids are your responsibility to society, NOT your new cuddly best friend for you to pamper and indulge;
5. Return to a shared moral code. In the past, it was Christianity and regular church attendance;
6. Return to community norms. No more, "but it's their culture to be rude" excuses. Abide by community standards or face social ostracism;
7. A return to accountability and personal responsibility for one's actions and behaviors.
Funny, no mention of the guns used. Like that is not part of the problem?

[Stu from NYC]

We can discuss this over and over until the cows come home and not sure what will ever be accomplished.

[golfing eagles]

Funny, no mention of the guns used. Like that is not part of the problem?

It's not, unless you are referring to those guns that float through the air until they get to a school or movie and then fire themselves.

[jimjamuser]

Oh Geez, that's easy. You're not gonna like the answer though:

1. Two-parent homes for raising children;
2. A stay-at home parent;
3. Put away "participation trophies" and teach kids that heartbreak and losing are life lessons and doing so gracefully is important;
4. Return to discipline. Kids are your responsibility to society, NOT your new cuddly best friend for you to pamper and indulge;
5. Return to a shared moral code. In the past, it was Christianity and regular church attendance;
6. Return to community norms. No more, "but it's their culture to be rude" excuses. Abide by community standards or face social ostracism;
7. A return to accountability and personal responsibility for one's actions and behaviors.
With respect to point #2 ) In the 1960s and prior years, couples had large numbers of children because infant mortality was high - many children did not make it to adulthood. Today medical science has changed and many couples have one or two children. With fewer children to supervise and cook for, the woman has more time to work and have a useful career. She is not "barefoot and pregnant" as often due to improved medical science.
........In the 1960s and prior years, the US middle class was one of the strongest in the world. Today the US middle class is one of the weakest in the 1st world. Today the US has the 1st world's greatest wealth disparity between rich and
poor with little or no middle class. That causes the need for BOTH parents to work. So, today couples do NOT have the luxury of a "stay-at-home parent". They wish that they did.
........In the 1960s and prior years, labor unions were strong and insured that workers got FAIR wages for their work plus hospitalization and other benefits. Today labor unions are practically nonexistent, which means that BOTH parents MUST work in any family in the bottom 80% of US society.
........In about the 1980s, outsourcing to 1st the US South, then Mexico, and now today to China - has caused a
further decrease in worker's wages, further wealth disparity, further destruction of the middle class, and further tearing of the US social fabric - which has resulted in increased suicides, increased drug addiction, increased crime, increased proliferation of man-killing long guns and pistols, and finally increased MASS MURDERS.

[jimjamuser]

The above is all true. The people who destroyed society in the first place now claim to be able to solve this problem. They are sickening.
It might be NICE to know exactly WHO are these people that have destroyed society? And WHEN and HOW did they accomplish this HUGE undertaking.? And are other 1st world democratic nations affected or NOT? AS is - there is NO meat on those bare bones.

[Papa_lecki]

Tulsa, OK, hospital, 4 killed.....what is the answer to these Killings

There are that many killed EVERY weekend in Philadelphia, Chicago, New York.
I don’t recall you starting a thread for them.

In the 23 weeks since 1/1, philadelphia has had more than 200 homicides.

Almost (if not all of them) have been committed by prohibited possessors and probably illegal guns.

[Blueblaze]

I agree with No. 1. But, I don't see how your No. 2 would acccomplish much unless you are going to deny people their legal due process. I don't like red flag laws because they allow people, who are not part of the justice system, to take away legal rights without any due process. They take away your rights, and then you are guilty until you can prove that you are innocent.

The problem with "common sense" ideas is that there will never be universal agreement on what constitutes common sense, especially in today's world.

We may never be able to agree on "common sense", but maybe we could agree on "do-able".

There are 400 million "assault rifles" in private hands, but only a few thousand potential mass murderers. Removing either from society would require a constitutional amendment, or what we usually do -- simply ignore the Constitution. The obvious choice seems like simple math.

The beauty of it is, the lunatics actually use Big Tech to tell us who they are -- if we could just get Big Tech to imagine that an 18-year old kid who says he's going to use his new AR to murder his grandma and then shoot up the grade school down the street is at least as dangerous as a Mom who doesn't want to shoot up her kid with a vaccine that doesn't appear to actually prevent people from getting Covid!

But if you say that's not "common sense", I guess I'm out of ideas.

[jimjamuser]

Violent movies, violent video games, kids today are desensitized, blood and guts mean nothing to them.
That IS possibly true. But, it is happening that way in ALL other G-7 countries and they do NOT have a significant GUN problem like the US does.

[jimjamuser]

#8 - get rid of social media
#9 eliminate TV channels that spew propaganda and hate!

[golfing eagles]

#9 eliminate TV channels that spew propaganda and hate!

Like ABC, NBC, CBS, and MSNBC?????

[jimbomaybe]

See, some of us consider that moving backward not forward. As with many things moving forward can be painful. The industrial revolution was the start of all the things listed, should we return to pre-industrialization? That was a lovely bucolic time.

Protect the status of the "experts" who have taken us here in the name of a better society , suggesting going back to preindustrial era avoids the point

[mike234]

quit saying it is a mental health issue. lives should not depend on some mental person, forgetting to take his or her pill in the morning.....they belong in jail.

[jimjamuser]

A study of mass shooters:

Two Professors Found What Creates a Mass Shooter. Will Politicians Pay Attention? - POLITICO (https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/05/27/stopping-mass-shooters-q-a-00035762)
This is a good article. I noticed that 35 Billion dollars would be needed to provide enough school counselors. I would be willing to have my property taxes raised to accomplish this. But, the question is, how many other people here would?

[Keefelane66]

It might be NICE to know exactly WHO are these people that have destroyed society? And WHEN and HOW did they accomplish this HUGE undertaking.? And are other 1st world democratic nations affected or NOT? AS is - there is NO meat on those bare bones.
Only in the U.S. can you get shot in school, go to the supermarket get shot, go the hospital, get shot again, recover, then go to church — only to get shot once more.

[jimjamuser]

We would have to stop the world and restart again to accomplish this.

Don't know about any of you people, but I'm a senior citizen looking for my eternal life
someplace else.
The US is the only one of the G-7 that has a HUGE mass murder issue. Their children do NOT have tobe frightened to go to school. And Canada is working on a method to prevent 99% of all GUN crime, while still allowing for legitimate hunting and target practice. I guess that the northern attitudes make Canada smarter than the US and Mexico!

[GpaVader]

No pun intended but there is no Silver Bullet for the solution to this. The genie is out of the bottle and will continue to slip through our fingers if attempt to put him back in.

Let's just say you ban all guns - that might stop NEW guns from getting on the street but then how do you collect all the guns that are out there and how many will die in the effort of trying to collect them?

Sorry I don't have the link, but I read someplace where after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, the reason they didn't start invading the US was because they knew we were armed and would resist. Switzerland issues everyone a rifle and you don't hear about mass shooting there. The issue isn't just the tool but the person wielding it.

Now do I have a solution, sorry no. Wish I did... Do I think making background checks mandatory for any automatic weapon purchase is a good idea, as long as it includes a mental health check with that and a way for people to challenge if it has been set.

Just my 2 cents worth.

[jimjamuser]

Well, I wish we could live the world ElDiabloJoe suggests, but here's a couple of things we could actually do now.

1. Re-open the insane asylums and make it possible to once again commit dangerous lunatics, like we used to do back before we had mass-murders by dangerous lunatics every other month.

2. Make Big Tech apply the same powerful algorithms they use to detect people pointing out that the Covid Vaccines don't work, to detecting the ravings of the next murderous lunatic, as he documents in detail on-line his plans to commit mass murder.

Just a couple of alternative common-sense ideas, since everyone seems to have a "common sense" plan these days to remove 400 million guns, which might be a little more difficult than simply locking up the lunatics.
I agree with both #1 and #2.

[jimjamuser]

We can discuss this over and over until the cows come home and not sure what will ever be accomplished.
If "the cows were coming home" in Australia, then the little children would NOT be afraid to go to school !!!!!

[jimjamuser]

It's not, unless you are referring to those guns that float through the air until they get to a school or movie and then fire themselves.
Well, "switchblade" drones can almost do that. I hear that the NRA is proposing those for CIVILIAN US use.

[golfing eagles]

Well, "switchblade" drones can almost do that. I hear that the NRA is proposing those for CIVILIAN US use.

They need them for hunting 😂😂😂

[MartinSE]

I just watched the Chief of Police in Tulsa giving the timeline.

Less than 10 minutes after the 911 call, police were on the second floor of the Doctors office building where the shooting took place. The scene (2nd floor) was described as a complicate place for the officers and posed particular problems. THEY were yelling, "Tulsa Police". A minute later the shooter shoot himself.

Well trained, well disciplined. less than 10 minutes. Not a hour later some officers ignore orders and go in - like in Texas. Fast response is the top priority in training for these situations. And in Tulsa it worked.

BTW: Not that it matters. The shooter was not happy with the outcome of a surgery he had a week or so before, so on the 29th he purchase a semi-automatic hand gun (.40 Cal) and on the day of the shooting he purchase an AR-15 style weapon. 30 casings of 0.223 were found on the scene, and 8(? something like that) casing of .40 found on the scene. He left a letter saying he was going to kill the doctor and anyone that got into his way. It took him almost 40 rounds to accomplish his goal. I guess others ( like patients and doctors) got in his way.

EDITED to remove comment about facts that some found offensive. Facts are facts, unless you don't like them I guess.

[jimjamuser]

We may never be able to agree on "common sense", but maybe we could agree on "do-able".

There are 400 million "assault rifles" in private hands, but only a few thousand potential mass murderers. Removing either from society would require a constitutional amendment, or what we usually do -- simply ignore the Constitution. The obvious choice seems like simple math.

The beauty of it is, the lunatics actually use Big Tech to tell us who they are -- if we could just get Big Tech to imagine that an 18-year old kid who says he's going to use his new AR to murder his grandma and then shoot up the grade school down the street is at least as dangerous as a Mom who doesn't want to shoot up her kid with a vaccine that doesn't appear to actually prevent people from getting Covid!

But if you say that's not "common sense", I guess I'm out of ideas.
Slick deflection to Covid.

[Papa_lecki]

Seeing how popular Shooters World is, I would guess TV has a high per capita gun ownership rate and a very low per capita homicide rate.

Are the guns in The Villages different, that they don’t kill people, like the do in Detroit?

[jimjamuser]

Like ABC, NBC, CBS, and MSNBC?????
Keep guessing, you are getting warm.........hint UK ownership.

[golfing eagles]

Seeing how popular Shooters World is, I would guess TV has a high per capita gun ownership rate and a very low per capita homicide rate.

Are the guns in The Villages different, that they don’t kill people, like the do in Detroit?

Maybe. The guns are old, their muzzle velocity has slowed down, the bullets are softer and the trigger is rusty 😂😂😂

[jimjamuser]

quit saying it is a mental health issue. lives should not depend on some mental person, forgetting to take his or her pill in the morning.....they belong in jail.
Yes, there should be a mental health test......every 2 years. ?????? I wonder how many here in TV Land would pass. I remember a tennis player here that definitely would NOT pass. And one of my neighbors, I have serious doubts about.

[jimjamuser]

They need them for hunting 😂😂😂
The deer better watch out......meat prices are skyrocketing!

[Kenswing]

I just watched the Chief of Police in Tulsa giving the timeline.

Less than 10 minutes after the 911 call, police were on the second floor of the Doctors office building where the shooting took place. The scene (2nd floor) was described as a complicate place for the officers and posed particular problems. THEY were yelling, "Tulsa Police". A minute later the shooter shoot himself.

Well trained, well disciplined. less than 10 minutes. Not a hour later some officers ignore orders and go in - like in Texas. Fast response is the top priority in training for these situations. And in Tulsa it worked.

BTW: Not that it matters. The shooter was not happy with the outcome of a surgery he had a week or so before, so on the 29th he purchase a semi-automatic hand gun (.40 Cal) and on the day of the shooting he purchase an AR-15 style weapon. 30 casings of 0.223 were found on the scene, and 8(? something like that) casing of .40 found on the scene. He left a letter saying he was going to kill the doctor and anyone that got into his way. It took him almost 40 rounds to accomplish his goal. I guess others ( like patients and doctors) got in his way.

And one last point. And I am NOT saying this is why there was so much difference between the two shootings. But, the victims in Texas were poor minority children, and the victims in Tulsa were rich white guys. Uvalde is city with a population of 16,000 with a police force that reflects that number. Tulsa has a population of 400,000. Who do you expect to have a better trained and staffed police department?

Then your race baiting at the end is just sick!

[MartinSE]

Uvalde is city with a population of 16,000 with a police force that reflects that number. Tulsa has a population of 400,000. Who do you expect to have a better trained and staffed police department?

Then your race baiting at the end is just sick!

I drew no conclusions OTHER than I said the Tulsa Police were better trained.

I drew NO conclusions in my observation of differences in the victims. My statement was true. In Uvalde nothing happened until a Childs father arrived and went in.

You can draw any conclusions you want, please do not attribute your opinions to my comment. Draw your own conclusions.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Christianity - oh yeah. That's a good one. The religion that did the whole "convert or die" thing back during the Crusades. The thing that had Englanders rushing to the New World to escape persecution because their version of Christianity wasn't the "right kind."

Christianity - the #1 religion in Oklahoma, where over 75% of the population is some denomination or another of Christian.

Here's some clues: the majority of mass shooters in the USA were NOT athiests. Lack of universal background checks made it easier for them to get more guns and more ammo. Having universal background checks would likely not have stopped most of them. But it would've made it harder for them to get.

I'm not for a weapons ban - banning weapons doesn't stop weapons from being sold. But I am in favor of halting the manufacture of semi-automatics and retail sales. In other words - any currently in circulation should still be allowed to be in circulation. But from now on - any (semi-automatics) made will be for the military and the police, via contract. So there's 100% accountability in the chain of distribution.

I'm also for the clips that hold lots of rounds being restricted (not banned) to military/police use only. I don't know how many rounds, but certainly no one needs more than a couple of bullets to hit their target if they're properly trained.

I'm also for mandatory training and licensing, just as we do for driving motor vehicles.

[MartinSE]

Yes, there should be a mental health test......every 2 years. ?????? I wonder how many here in TV Land would pass. I remember a tennis player here that definitely would NOT pass. And one of my neighbors, I have serious doubts about.

Wait, didn't we just dump all the mentally ill out? Who was it that defunded the mental health institutions. Oh, now I remember. The ones calling shooters crazy and blaming mental health for all the deaths. The ones that didn't "fix" that when they controlled 3 branches of government. And yet, here they all are again blaming mental health, but not willing to fund it. And still, they couldn't wait to go into recess and NOT propose a mental health funding bill, that they say is the problem.

[justjim]

Prior to 2004 there was a ban on “Assault weapons” but it expired. Were things better then? Just asking….

[Number 10 GI]

Christianity - oh yeah. That's a good one. The religion that did the whole "convert or die" thing back during the Crusades. The thing that had Englanders rushing to the New World to escape persecution because their version of Christianity wasn't the "right kind."

Christianity - the #1 religion in Oklahoma, where over 75% of the population is some denomination or another of Christian.

Here's some clues: the majority of mass shooters in the USA were NOT athiests. Lack of universal background checks made it easier for them to get more guns and more ammo. Having universal background checks would likely not have stopped most of them. But it would've made it harder for them to get.

I'm not for a weapons ban - banning weapons doesn't stop weapons from being sold. But I am in favor of halting the manufacture of semi-automatics and retail sales. In other words - any currently in circulation should still be allowed to be in circulation. But from now on - any (semi-automatics) made will be for the military and the police, via contract. So there's 100% accountability in the chain of distribution.

I'm also for the clips that hold lots of rounds being restricted (not banned) to military/police use only. I don't know how many rounds, but certainly no one needs more than a couple of bullets to hit their target if they're properly trained.

I'm also for mandatory training and licensing, just as we do for driving motor vehicles.

I agree with testing.

Let's set up tests to determine if a person is intelligent enough to vote in elections.

Test to determine if a person is literate and knowledgeable enough of a subject to post on social media and in newspaper letters to the editor.

As to driver's licenses, we need to have annual mandatory evaluations of ability to drive for anyone over 55 years old.

Let's require education and licensing for marriage and child rearing. Nearly as many children are maimed or killed by child abusers as with firearms.
Forty to fifty percent of marriages end in divorce which creates serious emotional problems for children.

Require intelligence tests for jury members.

[Djean1981]

Oh Geez, that's easy. You're not gonna like the answer though:

1. Two-parent homes for raising children;
2. A stay-at home parent;
3. Put away "participation trophies" and teach kids that heartbreak and losing are life lessons and doing so gracefully is important;
4. Return to discipline. Kids are your responsibility to society, NOT your new cuddly best friend for you to pamper and indulge;
5. Return to a shared moral code. In the past, it was Christianity and regular church attendance;
6. Return to community norms. No more, "but it's their culture to be rude" excuses. Abide by community standards or face social ostracism;
7. A return to accountability and personal responsibility for one's actions and behaviors.
Amen!

[Badger 2006]

Like ABC, NBC, CBS, and MSNBC?????

Spot on!

[Dave951]

Social media and violent video games that kids have access too

[jimjamuser]

Christianity - oh yeah. That's a good one. The religion that did the whole "convert or die" thing back during the Crusades. The thing that had Englanders rushing to the New World to escape persecution because their version of Christianity wasn't the "right kind."

Christianity - the #1 religion in Oklahoma, where over 75% of the population is some denomination or another of Christian.

Here's some clues: the majority of mass shooters in the USA were NOT athiests. Lack of universal background checks made it easier for them to get more guns and more ammo. Having universal background checks would likely not have stopped most of them. But it would've made it harder for them to get.

I'm not for a weapons ban - banning weapons doesn't stop weapons from being sold. But I am in favor of halting the manufacture of semi-automatics and retail sales. In other words - any currently in circulation should still be allowed to be in circulation. But from now on - any (semi-automatics) made will be for the military and the police, via contract. So there's 100% accountability in the chain of distribution.

I'm also for the clips that hold lots of rounds being restricted (not banned) to military/police use only. I don't know how many rounds, but certainly no one needs more than a couple of bullets to hit their target if they're properly trained.

I'm also for mandatory training and licensing, just as we do for driving motor vehicles.
A 5 round magazine in a bolt action would be enough for hunting and home defense.

[jimjamuser]

Prior to 2004 there was a ban on “Assault weapons” but it expired. Were things better then? Just asking….
After 2005 mass shootings went up.

[Woodbear]

I just picked up four 32 round magazines to fit my handguns and PCC. Great price, almost half of what the local gun shops would have charged to ship in. I love this state

[Calisport]

1. Regain law and order.

[MrChip72]

Oh Geez, that's easy. You're not gonna like the answer though:

1. Two-parent homes for raising children;
2. A stay-at home parent;
3. Put away "participation trophies" and teach kids that heartbreak and losing are life lessons and doing so gracefully is important;
4. Return to discipline. Kids are your responsibility to society, NOT your new cuddly best friend for you to pamper and indulge;
5. Return to a shared moral code. In the past, it was Christianity and regular church attendance;
6. Return to community norms. No more, "but it's their culture to be rude" excuses. Abide by community standards or face social ostracism;
7. A return to accountability and personal responsibility for one's actions and behaviors.

I actually thought you were joking/sarcastic with this response, but I guess not.

Check how many other G7 countries had multiple mass shootings this week? Zero. Same as last week.

For point #1, didn't a couple of the last mass shooters get their AR-15's from their two-parent homes as birthday or Christmas gifts?

You can say with a straight face that guns have nothing to do with the problem?

[Woodbear]

I actually thought you were joking/sarcastic with this response, but I guess not.

Check how many other G7 countries had multiple mass shootings this week? Zero. Same as last week.

For point #1, didn't a couple of the last mass shooters get their AR-15's from their two-parent homes as birthday or Christmas gifts?

You can say with a straight face that guns have nothing to do with the problem?

Guns have nothing to do with the problem. Did you blame Uhaul for the Oklahoma City Bombing? Was Porsche responsible for Paul Pelosi driving drunk and causing an accident. The shooter was the only person responsible

[Eg_cruz]

Violent movies, violent video games, kids today are desensitized, blood and guts mean nothing to them.
100% agree

[dewilson58]

A 5 round magazine in a bolt action would be enough for hunting and home defense.

Nope.

Home owner is going to be nervous & scared.......not going to be aiming the best......15 shots will do a much better job. Just like police, keep shooting until the bad guy is down.

[jimbomaybe]

I agree with testing.

Let's set up tests to determine if a person is intelligent enough to vote in elections.

Test to determine if a person is literate and knowledgeable enough of a subject to post on social media and in newspaper letters to the editor.

As to driver's licenses, we need to have annual mandatory evaluations of ability to drive for anyone over 55 years old.

Let's require education and licensing for marriage and child rearing. Nearly as many children are maimed or killed by child abusers as with firearms.
Forty to fifty percent of marriages end in divorce which creates serious emotional problems for children.

Require intelligence tests for jury members.
Excellent idea, long overdue ,, I will of course be in charge of making the decision as to the criteria and have both criminal and civil authority to enforce the needed measures

[MartinSE]

21 more mass shootings since the Texas School shooting just 11 days ago, and not a new idea, suggestion, just same old complains about how "someone" destroyed our country and we need to ban all AR-15s. Both sides stuck. Repeating the same mantras since this got going for real over 20 year ago.

Round and round. Hating and not trusting while our children, grandchildren, and neighbors die. Everyone has their own favorite theory and is sticking to it by god.

[jebartle]

Like ABC, NBC, CBS, and MSNBC?????

Never a fan of broad brush descriptions of anything, a liberal could include Fox, which in sheer numbers of news media bias would speak for itself.

[Bay Kid]

What is making people going so crazy this year in our country. Could it be??? Our country has lost all morals. Lies are the norm. Police are bad. Druggies are heroes. Legal drugs are over used. God is bad. And so on and on.

[ElDiabloJoe]

It is interesting to note the multiple references to "G-7 Countries." Why be so selective? While it is true that the U.S. seems to hold the vast majority of mass incidents, let's not pretend they have not occurred in Canada, France, Finland, Norway, Brazil, Etc. either.

It is notable that the U.S. culture creates the globe's majority of mass media and direct-injects (some would call brainwashes) violent video games, Hollywood movies, T.V. shows, and "gangster" style music imagery and lyrics directly into hormone-bathed American teen-aged brains.

However, no one is taking Blizzard Entertainment, MGM, or Sony to task for these mass casualty incidents. I wonder why the focus is on the darling of the right, the hated item of the left - the firearm?

Here's the list:

Timeline of Worldwide School and Mass Shootings (https://www.infoplease.com/us/crime/timeline-of-worldwide-school-and-mass-shootings)

[Kenswing]

A 5 round magazine in a bolt action would be enough for hunting and home defense.

Yeah right. If you miss with your first shot, any home invader would be upon you before you could cycle your second. Where as if you had a semiautomatic pistol you could fire off 10 rounds. Even if you missed it would give even the most hardened criminal reason to pause. I can’t believe you post this stuff.

[Kenswing]

Guns have nothing to do with the problem. Did you blame Uhaul for the Oklahoma City Bombing? Was Porsche responsible for Paul Pelosi driving drunk and causing an accident. The shooter was the only person responsible

Next they’ll want to ban the knife and fork in order to stop obesity.

[MartinSE]

I am glad everyone is having so much fun - knives and forks are next, et al. Kind of reminds me of Nero fiddling while Rome burned.

I sincerely hope your grandchildren are not next on the hit list parade.

[Kenswing]

I am glad everyone is having so much fun - knives and forks are next, et al. Kind of reminds me of Nero fiddling while Rome burned.

I sincerely hope your grandchildren are not next on the hit list parade.
Do you really think that posting hundreds of times on a community forum is going to change anything? It might make you feel better but it accomplishes nothing. If you truly want to make a difference and do more than just preach, why aren’t you standing in the doorway of your representative’s office? Maybe start a foundation for the elimination of gun violence and lobby the powers that be. But no, you’d rather be here lecturing us.

[jebartle]

Do you really think that posting hundreds of times on a community forum is going to change anything? It might make you feel better but it accomplishes nothing. If you truly want to make a difference and do more than just preach, why aren’t you standing in the doorway of your representative’s office? Maybe start a foundation for the elimination of gun violence and lobby the powers that be. But no, you’d rather be here lecturing us.

Nothing else is working, have to start somewhere, congress is doing nothing, how many mass shootings will it take, yipsters.

[rsimpson]

Bingo !

Spot on but some in our society don't want to openly admit it.

Agree with all, but in the mean time, secure our schools.

[jebartle]

Do you really think that posting hundreds of times on a community forum is going to change anything? It might make you feel better but it accomplishes nothing. If you truly want to make a difference and do more than just preach, why aren’t you standing in the doorway of your representative’s office? Maybe start a foundation for the elimination of gun violence and lobby the powers that be. But no, you’d rather be here lecturing us.

Nothing else is working, have to start somewhere, congress is doing nothing, how many mass shootings will it take, yipsters. Vote these congressman OUT.

[MartinSE]

Do you really think that posting hundreds of times on a community forum is going to change anything? It might make you feel better but it accomplishes nothing. If you truly want to make a difference and do more than just preach, why aren’t you standing in the doorway of your representative’s office? Maybe start a foundation for the elimination of gun violence and lobby the powers that be. But no, you’d rather be here lecturing us.

I can't help but wonder how you KNOW for CERTAINTY what I am doing. If I mention ANYTHING I do, they you and others jump p up and scream virtual signaling.

I do NOT ever initiate hundreds of posts. I am answering or responding to hundreds of posts that I disagree with. I know it seriously upsets you to have someone post something you disagree with . I am sorry my posts upset you so much, maybe you would be happier if you blocked me?

I believe conversation can help people come to an understand of each other, but I do know that with some people they are so invested in their beliefs that don't bother to try to understand the other persons beliefs. I for one have changed a lot of my views on this topic. One for example, is I have come to believe that banning AR-15s will not significantly change the situation. My coming to that change is thanks in part to posters here that take the time to actually address the issue and say why it doesn't and won't work. I am still willing to accept banning AR-15s as a test/attempt to see how it works, but I personally no longer believe it will make a significant difference. See, that is how discussions work. If you are totally not interested in anything that anyone says that might disagree with what you believe to be true. Then why do you continue to post your one liner zingers? Just to get all the cheering from others that believe as you do? That would be sad, posting to get approval clicks while children are dying.

I see very few contributions from you that suggest what can be done, but a LOT of posts from you dis'ing other posters for quality, quality, and accuracy. Lots of "negative vibes".

[MartinSE]

Nothing else is working, have to start somewhere, congress is doing nothing, how many mass shootings will it take, yipsters. Vote these congressman OUT.

Thank you, I posted the same thing, but as usual with my I took 20 times as many words as you posted so well and succinctly.

[MartinSE]

It is interesting to note the multiple references to "G-7 Countries." Why be so selective? While it is true that the U.S. seems to hold the vast majority of mass incidents, let's not pretend they have not occurred in Canada, France, Finland, Norway, Brazil, Etc. either.



No other 1st world country has had over 20 mass shootings in past two weeks since the Texas school shooting. That is why the selective. The G-7 are most like us. Every country is different but comparing NYNY to a village in the Amazon, is not going to produce many insights into OUR problems.

Numerous studies have shown the incidence of mental illness in shooters is no higher than the general population. So, 11% of 300 million people is 33 million. Let's round it down to 15 million to element toddlers, a feeble oldsters. So, why is it that only a little over 200 of them are involved in mass shooting? I am all in favor of helping the mentally ill. I would NEVER suggest locking them away in an insane asylum (disgusting term) but would vote for funding to building state of the art mental health facilities. I would also agree to a mental health exam for fire arm licensing.

No one has said they NEVER occur in other countries. I am others have said, they do not happen at the frequency in other countries that they do here. 20 in the past 10 days. 2 School shootings per month on average. And on and on. It brings nothing to an argument to go all black and white. Everything or nothing, everyone does, or no one does.

I am 100% in favor of strongly enforced universal background checks. It will NOT solve the problem, it will help.

I am 100% in favor of cool down delays. It will NOT solve the problem, it will help.

I am 100% in favor of more stringent domestic violence punishment and being convicted of it being a reason to deny ownership of guns.

Lots of things we can do, but one party refuses to do anything.
Lots of things we can do, But one party refuses to offer any legislation.

Lots of things we CAN do, but for 20 years we have DONE nothing that has helped. It is just getting worst.

[MartinSE]

Yeah right. If you miss with your first shot, any home invader would be upon you before you could cycle your second. Where as if you had a semiautomatic pistol you could fire off 10 rounds. Even if you missed it would give even the most hardened criminal reason to pause. I can’t believe you post this stuff.

So, is arming the teacher going to help.

Let's see, if a shooter is going into a class room and knows the teacher might be packing, who are they going to unload a whole clip on before the teacher can demonstrate their precise quick draw. Of course we all know teachers would NEVER miss and hit a student. And a teacher will never have their back to the door while writing on a blackboard.

But, if that is what enough people want to try, then let's try it. I am ALL in on coming up with things that we can try. Are you?

And before we do I think it would be wise to define some criteria for success - things like how many teachers lose the quick draw contest, how many innocent students are teachers allowed to shoot before we change our minds. Just asking.

[Chi-Town]

Do you really think that posting hundreds of times on a community forum is going to change anything? It might make you feel better but it accomplishes nothing. If you truly want to make a difference and do more than just preach, why aren’t you standing in the doorway of your representative’s office? Maybe start a foundation for the elimination of gun violence and lobby the powers that be. But no, you’d rather be here lecturing us.

Hate to say this but it kinda sounds like a lecture.

[jimbomaybe]

Do you really think that posting hundreds of times on a community forum is going to change anything? It might make you feel better but it accomplishes nothing. If you truly want to make a difference and do more than just preach, why aren’t you standing in the doorway of your representative’s office? Maybe start a foundation for the elimination of gun violence and lobby the powers that be. But no, you’d rather be here lecturing us.

Sadly your detractors are right,,, there are people who believe that alien abduction is a reasonable explanation disappearance of that air liner in the Pacific some time back, people who believe that a Zombie Apocalypses is possible, single digits but still, an even larger percentage think you can change your gender even switch back and forth, normal behavior, the mental state of our society is such that we can no longer be trusted with weapons

[Chi-Town]

I'm in favor of bringing back the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act. Never should have elapsed.

[davefin]

Oh Geez, that's easy. You're not gonna like the answer though:

1. Two-parent homes for raising children;
2. A stay-at home parent;
3. Put away "participation trophies" and teach kids that heartbreak and losing are life lessons and doing so gracefully is important;
4. Return to discipline. Kids are your responsibility to society, NOT your new cuddly best friend for you to pamper and indulge;
5. Return to a shared moral code. In the past, it was Christianity and regular church attendance;
6. Return to community norms. No more, "but it's their culture to be rude" excuses. Abide by community standards or face social ostracism;
7. A return to accountability and personal responsibility for one's actions and behaviors.


YES, YES, YES, exactly what ElDiabloJoe said!

[Kenswing]

So, is arning the teacher doing to help.

Let's see, if a shooter is going into a class room and knows the teacher might be packing, who are they going to unload a whole clip on before the teacher can demonstrate their precise quick draw. Of course we all know teachers would NEVER miss and hit a student. And a teacher will never have their back to the door while writing on a blackboard.

But, if that is what enough people want to try, then let's try it. I am ALL in on coming up with things that we can try. Are you?

And before we do I think it would be wise to define some criteria for success - things like how many teachers lose the quick draw contest, how many innocent students are teachers allowed to shoot before we change our minds. Just asking.
Hmmm. Not sure what rebutting that a 5 round bolt action rifle is adequate for home protection has to do with arming teachers.

My thoughts on arming teachers are mixed. Do I think you should take the average teacher, send them through a firearms class and give them a gun? No I don’t. Do I feel that if someone has life experience with firearms in a stressful environment, such as former LEO or military, which there are some who left those professions to become teachers? Then I think it’s something to consider.

I think hardening the target is something concrete that we can do now. Where we moved from they had converted the schools to single entry. They also had a Resource Officer(s) that was basically a Deputy Sheriff with a different patch on his/her uniform.

So yes there are things we can do now and many school districts have already taken action.

[Kenswing]

Hate to say this but it kinda sounds like a lecture.
I guess it does. :1rotfl:

[cswett5234]

It seems like the shooters all want their 15-minutes of fame and the media caters to them. First thing they do is to interview all his friends, family, classmates, we learn about his interests, social media posts, red flags that were missed, where he lives, his manifesto if he had one...MAKES THEM FAMOUS!

STOP IT! Just say there was an unidentified shooter and keep him anonymous until it's time for their trial (or identifying their body).

(putting my soapbox away now, thanks for listening to my rant, I feel better)

Clint

[justjim]

It is interesting to note the multiple references to "G-7 Countries." Why be so selective? While it is true that the U.S. seems to hold the vast majority of mass incidents, let's not pretend they have not occurred in Canada, France, Finland, Norway, Brazil, Etc. either.

It is notable that the U.S. culture creates the globe's majority of mass media and direct-injects (some would call brainwashes) violent video games, Hollywood movies, T.V. shows, and "gangster" style music imagery and lyrics directly into hormone-bathed American teen-aged brains.

However, no one is taking Blizzard Entertainment, MGM, or Sony to task for these mass casualty incidents. I wonder why the focus is on the darling of the right, the hated item of the left - the firearm?

Here's the list:

Timeline of Worldwide School and Mass Shootings (https://www.infoplease.com/us/crime/timeline-of-worldwide-school-and-mass-shootings)


Nobody is going after firearms that are used for hunting or home defense unless you believe some Entertainers on television. It was Eisenhower (I liked Ike) who was quoted “I dislike those on the far right and left who throw rocks at those of us in the middle.”

[Taltarzac725]

Nobody is going after firearms that are used for hunting or home defense unless you believe some Entertainers on television. It was Eisenhower (I liked Ike) who was quoted “I dislike those on the far right and left who throw rocks at those of us in the middle.”

Nicely put. WE working together need to take practical steps to stop these shootings from happening again and again. My former Villages' neighbors lost their granddaughter in the Parkland shooting. She was the last student murdered. He shot through another student to kill her-- ending both their lives. They moved to be closer to one of their kids. Losing their granddaughter tore them apart and still does probably with each of these new tragedies. And we just keep creating more victim families to deal with this trauma. PRACTICAL solutions. Whatever works while keeping with the values of the US Constitution. I do not think that the Founding Fathers would have wanted a weapon of war in anyone's hands except for those fighting in wars.

[rsimpson]

Which school, A or B, is attacked by a deranged, cowardly, gunman?
School A: Gun Free Zone, unlocked doors, random security presence, no armed teachers allowed
School B: One point of entry – door locked, armed security on regular staff, some teachers armed (if trained and comfortable to carry)

[MartinSE]

Hmmm. Not sure what rebutting that a 5 round bolt action rifle is adequate for home protection has to do with arming teachers.

Sorry, my reply got onto the wrong post, I guess I need more practice :)

My thoughts on arming teachers are mixed. Do I think you should take the average teacher, send them through a firearms class and give them a gun? No I don’t. Do I feel that if someone has life experience with firearms in a stressful environment, such as former LEO or military, which there are some who left those professions to become teachers? Then I think it’s something to consider.

I can 100% agree with this position. I am concerned that arming teachers will result in the shooter targeting the teachers first in ALL cases regardless of if the teacher is armed. But, I can certainly compromise and go along with a test of that and see how it works.

I think hardening the target is something concrete that we can do now. Where we moved from they had converted the schools to single entry. They also had a Resource Officer(s) that was basically a Deputy Sheriff with a different patch on his/her uniform.

I can completely agree with this one with out hesitation. I do not believe it will solve the root cause, but it will almost certain result in a major reduction of school shootings.


So yes there are things we can do now and many school districts have already taken action.

I completely agree with you on this one also.

So, as we can see there are things we can do now that both sides can agree on (most of my liberal friends also agree with your list. These are the same things we could have done 20 years ago, and haven't. These are the same things we could do now and aren't.

I also expect we can both agree that banning one specific weapon or type won't work. And banning an entire class or all weapons are not going to happen. There is no practical or workable way to do that. And suggesting it just results in a distraction from doing what we can.

Maybe we need to get our electors to listen to you and me or throw them out and replace them with someone that does. From where I stand neither side (electors) is interested in doing these things.

Thank you for you post, it was constructive and pointed out a mistake I made. I appreciate your reply.

[MartinSE]

Hate to say this but it kinda sounds like a lecture.

Me or him?

If me, I am simply posting my position on other peoples posts. It's called a conversation. I certainly do not want to sound like a lecture, but I also don't want to do drive by one liner posts that contribute nothing related to the topic of the thread.

I KNOW I sometimes wonder off topic, we all do at times.

I usually say, "this is my opinion" or something to that effect, and I do not claim to have knowledge without specifying the provenance of that information.

If you feel I am "lecturing" please PM me with an example of why. If it is simply because I posted 100 replies to posts that I disagree the position or the content, well, that is called a discussion in my world.

[MartinSE]

It seems like the shooters all want their 15-minutes of fame and the media caters to them. First thing they do is to interview all his friends, family, classmates, we learn about his interests, social media posts, red flags that were missed, where he lives, his manifesto if he had one...MAKES THEM FAMOUS!

STOP IT! Just say there was an unidentified shooter and keep him anonymous until it's time for their trial (or identifying their body).

(putting my soapbox away now, thanks for listening to my rant, I feel better)

Clint

No need to apologize. I am sure most people can agree with most of what you said.

Media, sadly, is in it for the money. Back "in the day" news was a public service. Today it is a major money making profit center for each and every media outlet.

Since there is no longer a publicly funded media - like the BBS in Britain or PBS used to be here, we are left with for profit media (news). And well, it shows. Money is God to almost all for profit companies. How what they do impacts peoples lives is of little importance to them, only what makes the most money. If they are public companies they are required by law to do/say what makes the most money, or they can be sued by stock holders. There is no law allowing stock holders to sue them for lying just to make money.

I don't know how to solve that.

We could go to a socialist society and heavily regulate or completely control news media, or we can live with what capitalism gives us and vote with our dollars. Or the last option (it seems to me) is a Democratic Socialism that regulates all for profit companies to some degree depending on how their actions impact society.

We seem to need to make a decision ... or not.

[MartinSE]

Which school, A or B, is attacked by a deranged, cowardly, gunman?
School A: Gun Free Zone, unlocked doors, random security presence, no armed teachers allowed
School B: One point of entry – door locked, armed security on regular staff, some teachers armed (if trained and comfortable to carry)

Excellent question, even though I don't think you posted it as a question.

Here is a study by Rand (link below) that shows there is not enough evidence to say if gun-free zones help or not.

It does point out that gun-free zones do help control access with guns, by providing (generally) entry screening to keep bad guys with guns from getting in to the area.

But your two options are not the only two. I suggest a third.

3. Locked doors (auto lock in closing), Trained and armed security guards at single point of entry, locked class rooms with supervisor overrides, and possibly some armed teachers, no unauthorized guns allowed in the area.

Letting "others" come in with guns is more likely, in my opinion, to cause more problems in an active shooter situation than they will help. Since "others" are not required in many states to be qualified and trained to use their weapons in active shooter situations. there is no way to know if the "other" is trained and capable of dealing with finding themselves in that situation.

The Effects of Gun-Free Zones | RAND (https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/gun-free-zones.html)

(Metaphor: Would you be in favor of letting anyone bring their car into a NASCAR race? Or is it a good idea to have races be a consumer car/driver free zone?)

EDIT: If the school was NOT gun-free, then the shooter in Texas could have just walked into the front door with two AR-15s. He has a right to open carry. So, All the locked docks and security could not legally stop him from entering unless they had credible evidence that he was a danger. How do you KNOW which open carrying citizen is not crazy?

[MartinSE]

Nicely put. WE working together need to take practical steps to stop these shootings from happening again and again. My former Villages' neighbors lost their granddaughter in the Parkland shooting. She was the last student murdered. He shot through another student to kill her-- ending both their lives. They moved to be closer to one of their kids. Losing their granddaughter tore them apart and still does probably with each of these new tragedies. And we just keep creating more victim families to deal with this trauma. PRACTICAL solutions. Whatever works while keeping with the values of the US Constitution. I do not think that the Founding Fathers would have wanted a weapon of war in anyone hands except for those fighting in wars.

Thank you, I think this is one of the more concise and practical posts here. Better than mine for sure.

[ThirdOfFive]

It seems like the shooters all want their 15-minutes of fame and the media caters to them. First thing they do is to interview all his friends, family, classmates, we learn about his interests, social media posts, red flags that were missed, where he lives, his manifesto if he had one...MAKES THEM FAMOUS!

STOP IT! Just say there was an unidentified shooter and keep him anonymous until it's time for their trial (or identifying their body).

(putting my soapbox away now, thanks for listening to my rant, I feel better)

Clint
PREE---cisely! It has been demonstrated time and again that the majority of these shootings are copycat.

And man! Are those AR-15s SCARY lookin'! You tote one of those into a school and you're gonna get INSTANT respect, not to mention your name and face on every major news medium in the country for at LEAST two weeks. Gotta use the gun that is getting the most negative attention to guarantee that type of "coverage".

So go ahead, media. Pour on the breathless outrage and over-the-top hysteria. Motivate even more of these loonytune kids to do the same thing. Because that is EXACTLY what is happening.

[ThirdOfFive]

It seems like the shooters all want their 15-minutes of fame and the media caters to them. First thing they do is to interview all his friends, family, classmates, we learn about his interests, social media posts, red flags that were missed, where he lives, his manifesto if he had one...MAKES THEM FAMOUS!

STOP IT! Just say there was an unidentified shooter and keep him anonymous until it's time for their trial (or identifying their body).

(putting my soapbox away now, thanks for listening to my rant, I feel better)

Clint


Deleted.

[MartinSE]

PREE---cisely! It has been demonstrated time and again that the majority of these shootings are copycat.

And man! Are those AR-15s SCARY lookin'! You tote one of those into a school and you're gonna get INSTANT respect, not to mention your name and face on every major news medium in the country for at LEAST two weeks. Gotta use the gun that is getting the most negative attention to guarantee that type of "coverage".

So go ahead, media. Pour on the breathless outrage and over-the-top hysteria. Motivate even more of these loonytune kids to do the same thing. Because that is EXACTLY what is happening.

Actually, I don't think I have seen the Texas school shooters face on TV. Maybe, once, but I am not sure. I see. LOT of the children that died faces.

I guess we watch different media.

So, what do you suggest to solve it? Do we put more regulations on the media? How does that fit with the constitution?

Not arguing, I am interested in your thoughts on those.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Hmmm. Not sure what rebutting that a 5 round bolt action rifle is adequate for home protection has to do with arming teachers.

My thoughts on arming teachers are mixed. Do I think you should take the average teacher, send them through a firearms class and give them a gun? No I don’t. Do I feel that if someone has life experience with firearms in a stressful environment, such as former LEO or military, which there are some who left those professions to become teachers? Then I think it’s something to consider.

I think hardening the target is something concrete that we can do now. Where we moved from they had converted the schools to single entry. They also had a Resource Officer(s) that was basically a Deputy Sheriff with a different patch on his/her uniform.

So yes there are things we can do now and many school districts have already taken action.

Teachers are not being paid to shoot intruders. It's not their job. If you want them to serve as bodyguards to their students then you need to pay them accordingly. Your taxes will go up, also accordingly. Maybe even enough that the state will need to impose a state income tax. Which of course will mean janitors and nurses and other non-teacher employees in those schools will also need a raise, because now some of their income is being sucked into taxes.

Giving teachers guns and requiring that they teach less, protect more, is not the answer.

The answer is not simple. But the solution would be to reduce the risk. To reduce the risk of a teacher ever having to decide whether or not to draw their gun on someone. A teacher shouldn't ever be held responsible for that. So how about reducing the risk that they would be.

The police, trained to do their jobs and protect the public, weren't able to prevent these shootings. Teachers should not be responsible to do what the police weren't able to do.

[MartinSE]

Giving teachers guns and requiring that they teach less, protect more, is not the answer.

I pretty much agree with everything you said. I would go along with arming teachers, assuming they receive the same training as police officers are given for active shooter situations. And other shooting training. Of course we would have to pay for that training, which is not teaching.

But, whether they are armed or not, anything we do at the school will impact the teachers to some degree. Any lock down procedures. And active shooter situation procedures the teachers have to be trained for to protect the children, etc.

But, until we have a real solution, I am willing to meet the "other side" half way in trying to implement things that might/should help. This is one they feel strongly about. As long as the teachers are not required to carry weapons I can see letting it happen.

BUT, Not the way Ohio is. 24 hours of training? Not with my child in that teachers class. With 24 hours of training that teacher is more likely a danger to the children. Give them the same training that any one else is given for these situations.

[MartinSE]

The police, trained to do their jobs and protect the public, weren't able to prevent these shootings. Teachers should not be responsible to do what the police weren't able to do.

I watched an ex CIA/FBI agent yesterday discussing this. She has had 4,000 hours of situational training and is now a teacher in a public school. She said she would rather NOT be put into that situation.

[jimjamuser]

What is making people going so crazy this year in our country. Could it be??? Our country has lost all morals. Lies are the norm. Police are bad. Druggies are heroes. Legal drugs are over used. God is bad. And so on and on.
Agreed, lots of lies...........on the media that I don't watch.

[ThirdOfFive]

Actually, I don't think I have seen the Texas school shooters face on TV. Maybe, once, but I am not sure. I see. LOT of the children that died faces.

I guess we watch different media.

So, what do you suggest to solve it? Do we put more regulations on the media? How does that fit with the constitution?

Not arguing, I am interested in your thoughts on those.
I think the problem is that media is being used for social engineering purposes, which is flat-out wrong. Kids being shot and killed in school, insofar as overall gun deaths go, aren't even a blip on the radar. America averages something like 33,000 gun deaths each year from all causes. This year 24 kids have been killed by gunfire at school and this year is a sad exception--numbers year by year since the late 1990's are usually far lower, often in the single digits. It is a fact that a school kid is statistically in more danger of being killed by lightning than killed at school. By far the greatest number of gun deaths, 58% on average per year, is suicide. Homicides are at 37.2% per year (numbers provided by Brittanica ProCon) and it is a safe bet to assume that the overwhelming number of those are criminal-related, drug and gang disputes mainly. Legal intervention and unintentional deaths come in at 1.2% and 1.3%.

Every student killed is a tragedy. I get that. But what we are seeing is shameless. It is my belief (borne out by several studies) that media overhype is the primary cause of copycat killings, and it is anyone's guess just how many of these dead kids would still be alive if it wasn't for what media is doing.

Let's be honest. This is about GUNS, not kids. We have elected senators and representatives who represent us. Using media to try to force an issue via over-the-top emotion instead of the legislative system is doing no one any favors, least of all our kids.

What can be done? Nothing, until we can be honest with ourselves. The gun "debate" solves nothing: people are entrenched on one side or the other and no statistic, or argument, is going to change that. On a personal level I try to avoid media that pushes the emotional hyperbole but that is nearly impossible: we are saturated with it. The irony is that school deaths by gunfire are actually DOWN since the 1990s, but you'd never know that from what we see, hear and read today.

We can all start by being honest, with ourselves at least. Far too few of us are.

[ThirdOfFive]

Actually, I don't think I have seen the Texas school shooters face on TV. Maybe, once, but I am not sure. I see. LOT of the children that died faces.

I guess we watch different media.

So, what do you suggest to solve it? Do we put more regulations on the media? How does that fit with the constitution?

Not arguing, I am interested in your thoughts on those.

Deleted by writer (duplicate post)

[jimjamuser]

Yeah right. If you miss with your first shot, any home invader would be upon you before you could cycle your second. Where as if you had a semiautomatic pistol you could fire off 10 rounds. Even if you missed it would give even the most hardened criminal reason to pause. I can’t believe you post this stuff.
Note that I used the word "enough". Meaning, that IF the SEMI-AUTO MAN-KILLERS and high capacity pistols were not sold to Civilians, then in general, the US would have fewer MASS MURDERS. Home invasion would probably depend more on how FAST a homeowner woke up than the action or caliber of his weapon.

[jimjamuser]

Sorry, my reply got onto the wrong post, I guess I need more practice :)



I can 100% agree with this position. I am concerned that arming teachers will result in the shooter targeting the teachers first in ALL cases regardless of if the teacher is armed. But, I can certainly compromise and go along with a test of that and see how it works.



I can completely agree with this one with out hesitation. I do not believe it will solve the root cause, but it will almost certain result in a major reduction of school shootings.



I completely agree with you on this one also.

So, as we can see there are things we can do now that both sides can agree on (most of my liberal friends also agree with your list. These are the same things we could have done 20 years ago, and haven't. These are the same things we could do now and aren't.

I also expect we can both agree that banning one specific weapon or type won't work. And banning an entire class or all weapons are not going to happen. There is no practical or workable way to do that. And suggesting it just results in a distraction from doing what we can.

Maybe we need to get our electors to listen to you and me or throw them out and replace them with someone that does. From where I stand neither side (electors) is interested in doing these things.

Thank you for you post, it was constructive and pointed out a mistake I made. I appreciate your reply.
Australia banned a certain class of weapon....semi-autos and it worked for them. And they are a democracy much like the US

[MartinSE]

I think the problem is that media is being used for social engineering purposes, which is flat-out wrong. Kids being shot and killed in school, insofar as overall gun deaths go, aren't even a blip on the radar. America averages something like 33,000 gun deaths each year from all causes. This year 24 kids have been killed by gunfire at school and this year is a sad exception--numbers year by year since the late 1990's are usually far lower, often in the single digits. It is a fact that a school kid is statistically in more danger of being killed by lightning than killed at school. By far the greatest number of gun deaths, 58% on average per year, is suicide. Homicides are at 37.2% per year (numbers provided by Brittanica ProCon) and it is a safe bet to assume that the overwhelming number of those are criminal-related, drug and gang disputes mainly. Legal intervention and unintentional deaths come in at 1.2% and 1.3%.

Every student killed is a tragedy. I get that. But what we are seeing is shameless. It is my belief (borne out by several studies) that media overhype is the primary cause of copycat killings, and it is anyone's guess just how many of these dead kids would still be alive if it wasn't for what media is doing.

Let's be honest. This is about GUNS, not kids. We have elected senators and representatives who represent us. Using media to try to force an issue via over-the-top emotion instead of the legislative system is doing no one any favors, least of all our kids.

What can be done? Nothing, until we can be honest with ourselves. The gun "debate" solves nothing: people are entrenched on one side or the other and no statistic, or argument, is going to change that. On a personal level I try to avoid media that pushes the emotional hyperbole but that is nearly impossible: we are saturated with it. The irony is that school deaths by gunfire are actually DOWN since the 1990s, but you'd never know that from what we see, hear and read today.

We can all start by being honest, with ourselves at least. Far too few of us are.

Thank you. That was very insightful.

I will take issue partially with the media is doing the social engineering. The media, in my opinion, is simply focused on running stories that will make them money. Sadly, they have to fill 24x7 streaming. Used to only have to fill 3 or 4 hours a day, now they have to come up with 168 hours of "news". sigh. So, they put out snippets with inflammatory headlines - all trying to get your attention to click. They get paid by the click and how long you stay to watch. They appear to have little regard for the consequences of their streaming, as long as they make money.

Keep in mind that to maximize profit, they need to focus their articles on THEIR base. Sort of like politicians. The Media picked a base to market to and have to feed that base articles the base will click to see and watch. It is a vicious cycle. I expect CNN has no business plan to try to take Fox watchers, and Fox has no plan to try and take CNN watchers. Each focuses on doing everything possible to capture their views attention.

That said, I feel it is a safe bet that some articles are "encouraged" by various outside (not part of the media company) interests. This is true of all media Fox and CNN. I am fairly sure it is a safe bet that some politicians have contacts that they "suggest" stories to, and the media runs with them so they can get "insider" stories in return.

In addition, even back in the day when Howard K Smith et al, actually had NEWS shows, that told the NEWS. politicians "played" the media - things like releasing bad news on Fridays. etc.

I get a lot of my new from BBC and other world news sources, for exactly those reasons.

Now, is social engineering being pushed. I don't know, could be. But, I doubt seriously that any of the major news outlets (CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, OAN, NewsMax, et all) would put a social engineering piece over profit. But, I am also sure they will "fill" in that extra 144 hours they have to fill with social engineering that their particular audience wants to hear.

[MartinSE]

Australia banned a certain class of weapon....semi-autos and it worked for them. And they are a democracy much like the US

Well, gun violence went down after they were banned. There is no doubt correlation. I am not sure if it was causation. Might be. Hard to say, there are too many unknown variables.

I have no problem trying it, but I don't feel we should stop trying anything else until we can get everyone onboard for that too. That is a poison pill in any bill proposed.

My suggestion (one sent to my congress critter) is to only propose single topic legislation for addressing the "gun violence" issues. Start with the shoe-in's. Universal Background checks (70% to 90% of Americans can/do support that) That should be a single topic bill and passed into law. Also, school hardening - some forms. That is not as big a shoe-in as background checks, but generally acceptable.

The omnibus laws to cover everything are doomed. And the worse part is the politicians promoting them KNOW they are not going to pass, so to me the only reason to ever submit them instead of single topic bills is to score political points.

Let's do what we can do. Let's leave the things we can't do on the table and continue to try to find compromises that will get them passed. But, an old saying in program management is "Don't let perfection be the enemy of good enough", I would say in this topic, that could be changed to "Don't let perfection be the enemy of doing ANYTHING for 20 years".

[jimjamuser]

I think the problem is that media is being used for social engineering purposes, which is flat-out wrong. Kids being shot and killed in school, insofar as overall gun deaths go, aren't even a blip on the radar. America averages something like 33,000 gun deaths each year from all causes. This year 24 kids have been killed by gunfire at school and this year is a sad exception--numbers year by year since the late 1990's are usually far lower, often in the single digits. It is a fact that a school kid is statistically in more danger of being killed by lightning than killed at school. By far the greatest number of gun deaths, 58% on average per year, is suicide. Homicides are at 37.2% per year (numbers provided by Brittanica ProCon) and it is a safe bet to assume that the overwhelming number of those are criminal-related, drug and gang disputes mainly. Legal intervention and unintentional deaths come in at 1.2% and 1.3%.

Every student killed is a tragedy. I get that. But what we are seeing is shameless. It is my belief (borne out by several studies) that media overhype is the primary cause of copycat killings, and it is anyone's guess just how many of these dead kids would still be alive if it wasn't for what media is doing.

Let's be honest. This is about GUNS, not kids. We have elected senators and representatives who represent us. Using media to try to force an issue via over-the-top emotion instead of the legislative system is doing no one any favors, least of all our kids.

What can be done? Nothing, until we can be honest with ourselves. The gun "debate" solves nothing: people are entrenched on one side or the other and no statistic, or argument, is going to change that. On a personal level I try to avoid media that pushes the emotional hyperbole but that is nearly impossible: we are saturated with it. The irony is that school deaths by gunfire are actually DOWN since the 1990s, but you'd never know that from what we see, hear and read today.

We can all start by being honest, with ourselves at least. Far too few of us are.
The reason why the Robb Elementary Massacre has gotten so much media attention is that it involves high numbers of very young children. This increases the emotions and the need to analyze the details of how and why it happened. It shatters the idea that children are SAFE in school. Parents of young children want to make a calculation as to how safe or unsafe THEIR children are at their school. They are getting that information from the main TV channels.
..........Another reason why the Robb Elementary shooting captured a large audience is that there were so many mistakes committed by those in charge of the situation. And the local and Texas State spokespeople kept changing their stories and even stating incorrect facts early on in the investigation. Incorrect following of KNOWN Police procedures may have caused excessive, unnecessary children's deaths. So many mistakes were made and people across the US demanded that those MISTAKES be acknowledged to help prevent future mistakes in future mass murder events. So, the bottom line is that in this case maximum media attention was WARRANTED.
........ The main difference with the Tulsa shooting is that it was resolved QUICKLY by police, without mistakes.

[jimjamuser]

[QUOTE=ThirdOfFive;2102251]I think the problem is that media is being used for social engineering purposes, which is flat-out wrong. Kids being shot and killed in school, insofar as overall gun deaths go, aren't

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Using Australia as the example is a bad idea. Their social system is different from ours, as is their culture. Americans suffer from Tall Poppy Syndrome - where we are taught that standing out in a crowd is a good thing. Attention-seeking is celebrated. In Australia, people want to just be, and not focus their energy on being noticed.

Australians are more likely to experience first-hand other parts of the globe. Americans generally don't leave their own hemisphere. Only 1/6 of Americans have ever travelled abroad. 1/3 of Australians have.

Australian culture embraces the concept of fair play, while Americans will likely "do whatever it takes" to get a jump on their competition.

These cultural differences are significant enough to have an impact on the acceptability of stricter gun control measures.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

double-posted, n/t

[MartinSE]

Let's be honest. This is about GUNS, not kids. We have elected senators and representatives who represent us. Using media to try to force an issue via over-the-top emotion instead of the legislative system is doing no one any favors, least of all our kids.

Hmm, well, hmm. Yes, it is about guns. And it is also about kids. It is about crime, violence drive by shootings, church shootings random killings, just yesterday a family of five was killed in their home, with a gun, by an escaped prisoner.

There is no one thing. No silver bullet. It is very complicated.

And, yes, we have legislators, and have had for over 20 years and what have they done? One side proposes something, the other side blocks it. Then the other side is in office and we just repeat the same process. Over and over. And then it goes silent and nothing is done at all for a while, until something happens and brings it all back to the surface - boiling over public emotions on both sides, and politicians, being the clever slime balls that are, jump in with both feet stirring that boiling pot of anger and angst. We all yell at each other our assigned dog whistles (both sides) and again nothing happens.

Once upon a time one child was Kidnapped in March 1932. In June a federal law was passed to address kidnappings. Less than 3 months. We have been arguing about this for 20 years now, no agreement, no solutions, no mitigating laws. Just a lot of arguing. While children die every couple weeks.

[ThirdOfFive]

Thank you. That was very insightful.

I will take issue partially with the media is doing the social engineering. The media, in my opinion, is simply focused on running stories that will make them money. Sadly, they have to fill 24x7 streaming. Used to only have to fill 3 or 4 hours a day, now they have to come up with 168 hours of "news". sigh. So, they put out snippets with inflammatory headlines - all trying to get your attention to click. They get paid by the click and how long you stay to watch. They appear to have little regard for the consequences of their streaming, as long as they make money.

Keep in mind that to maximize profit, they need to focus their articles on THEIR base. Sort of like politicians. The Media picked a base to market to and have to feed that base articles the base will click to see and watch. It is a vicious cycle. I expect CNN has no business plan to try to take Fox watchers, and Fox has no plan to try and take CNN watchers. Each focuses on doing everything possible to capture their views attention.

That said, I feel it is a safe bet that some articles are "encouraged" by various outside (not part of the media company) interests. This is true of all media Fox and CNN. I am fairly sure it is a safe bet that some politicians have contacts that they "suggest" stories to, and the media runs with them so they can get "insider" stories in return.

In addition, even back in the day when Howard K Smith et al, actually had NEWS shows, that told the NEWS. politicians "played" the media - things like releasing bad news on Fridays. etc.

I get a lot of my new from BBC and other world news sources, for exactly those reasons.

Now, is social engineering being pushed. I don't know, could be. But, I doubt seriously that any of the major news outlets (CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, OAN, NewsMax, et all) would put a social engineering piece over profit. But, I am also sure they will "fill" in that extra 144 hours they have to fill with social engineering that their particular audience wants to hear.
Well, as H.L. Mencken said, "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public". That also goes for American media. Especially for American media. The days of Howard K. Smith and Uncle Walter (the most trusted man in America) Cronkite are ancient history. News "reporting" today is more on the level of National Enquirer bilge than it is responsible reporting.

My own personal opinion is that media inevitably reflect the politics of the medium in question. You can see that in the reporting, especially in how words are used. Two mediums might be reporting the same story in virtually the same manner. Let's say that, for the sake of example, the story is about a person nearing the end of his career in the public eye. One story refers to the person as a "venerable statesman", the other as an "aging politician". Those are the ONLY two words that are different. I don't know about you but the first gives me the impression of, say, a Winston Churchill. The second? Teddy Kennedy. We both have the same information, but our emotional reaction may be decidedly different based on those words.

There are numerous other examples of how our emotions are channeled. Media is dangerously expert at it. There are a lot of obvious ones. The ones that are really scary though are the ones that we CAN'T spot. It is why, like you, I get most of my news from foreign sources.

...or just shut news out altogether.

[Woodbear]

Next they’ll want to ban the knife and fork in order to stop obesity.

I blame the spork for my over-indulgence

[Number 10 GI]

Actually, I don't think I have seen the Texas school shooters face on TV. Maybe, once, but I am not sure. I see. LOT of the children that died faces.

I guess we watch different media.

So, what do you suggest to solve it? Do we put more regulations on the media? How does that fit with the constitution?

Not arguing, I am interested in your thoughts on those.

You are advocating restrictions on the 2nd Amendment, how does that fit with the constitution? In case everyone has forgotten the right to bear arms is a "Right" just like the 1st and the others.

[Number 10 GI]

Agreed, lots of lies...........on the media that I don't watch.

I watch all kinds of media so I can hear/read all points of view. There are 2 sides to every story and allows an open minded person to assess all the information provided in order to come to a fact based conclusion at to what is the truth. Maybe you need to give it a try.

[Number 10 GI]

Australia banned a certain class of weapon....semi-autos and it worked for them. And they are a democracy much like the US

The United States government is a representative republic, not a democracy. Your civics class should have covered this. Believe me you wouldn't want to live in a pure democracy where majority rule decided everything.

[Number 10 GI]

Using Australia as the example is a bad idea. Their social system is different from ours, as is their culture. Americans suffer from Tall Poppy Syndrome - where we are taught that standing out in a crowd is a good thing. Attention-seeking is celebrated. In Australia, people want to just be, and not focus their energy on being noticed.

Australians are more likely to experience first-hand other parts of the globe. Americans generally don't leave their own hemisphere. Only 1/6 of Americans have ever travelled abroad. 1/3 of Australians have.

Australian culture embraces the concept of fair play, while Americans will likely "do whatever it takes" to get a jump on their competition.

These cultural differences are significant enough to have an impact on the acceptability of stricter gun control measures.

Thank you OBB! No countries are alike socially. Trying to compare the U.S. to another country is like comparing grapes and watermelons. Too many variables.

[Number 10 GI]

It is a pretty well established fact that criminals don't get their guns legally. There are criminal enterprises that provide guns to criminals in this country and in probably every other country in the world. Criminals know who these suppliers are because a gun is a tool of their trade. They have no problem obtaining a gun.

There are smugglers that routinely smuggle illegal firearms into Mexico, and Central and South America, many of which are full automatic firearms. China is one of the biggest sources for these firearms per the ATF and FBI. You can ban the AR15 or any other gun there is and criminal organizations will provide them to who ever has the money to buy them. The latest cowardly child murderer legally bought two high end AR15 rifles that retail for over $2,000 each so he could have easily paid the inflated price a smuggler would charge.
So how would a ban on certain guns or universal background checks prevent this cowardly child murderer from getting what he needed? Just like in any podunk farm town in the most remote areas of fly-over country, you can get any illegal drug your addiction desires and the junkies know where to get them. The same will be with guns.

We have a violence problem in this country that we better acknowledge and do the things necessary to change that instead of useless emotion based knee jerk reactions.

Did you notice I didn't call the murderer a "shooter" like the "if it bleeds it leads" sensationalism oriented media label them. I called him a cowardly child murderer because Shooter gives the connotation of a skilled assassin like in violent video games. The crime he committed should be called what it is, the act of a deranged coward. The medial feeds these evil people's need for recognition and in my opinion should be condemned as well as the killer.

[Number 10 GI]

Oops, double post, deleted.

[MartinSE]

Well, as H.L. Mencken said, "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public". That also goes for American media. Especially for American media. The days of Howard K. Smith and Uncle Walter (the most trusted man in America) Cronkite are ancient history. News "reporting" today is more on the level of National Enquirer bilge than it is responsible reporting.

My own personal opinion is that media inevitably reflect the politics of the medium in question. You can see that in the reporting, especially in how words are used. Two mediums might be reporting the same story in virtually the same manner. Let's say that, for the sake of example, the story is about a person nearing the end of his career in the public eye. One story refers to the person as a "venerable statesman", the other as an "aging politician". Those are the ONLY two words that are different. I don't know about you but the first gives me the impression of, say, a Winston Churchill. The second? Teddy Kennedy. We both have the same information, but our emotional reaction may be decidedly different based on those words.

There are numerous other examples of how our emotions are channeled. Media is dangerously expert at it. There are a lot of obvious ones. The ones that are really scary though are the ones that we CAN'T spot. It is why, like you, I get most of my news from foreign sources.

...or just shut news out altogether.

I agree with everything you said, my only possible difference is the why. I believe they do that to make money. Period.

But, I wasnt on their email list, so I can’t say for sure.

[MartinSE]

It is a pretty well established fact that criminals don't get their guns legally. There are criminal enterprises that provide guns to criminals in this country and in probably every other country in the world. Criminals know who these suppliers are because a gun is a tool of their trade. They have no problem obtaining a gun.

There are smugglers that routinely smuggle illegal firearms into Mexico, and Central and South America, many of which are full automatic firearms. China is one of the biggest sources for these firearms per the ATF and FBI. You can ban the AR15 or any other gun there is and criminal organizations will provide them to who ever has the money to buy them. The latest cowardly child murderer legally bought two high end AR15 rifles that retail for over $2,000 each so he could have easily paid the inflated price a smuggler would charge.
So how would a ban on certain guns or universal background checks prevent this cowardly child murderer from getting what he needed? Just like in any podunk farm town in the most remote areas of fly-over country, you can get any illegal drug your addiction desires and the junkies know where to get them. The same will be with guns.

We have a violence problem in this country that we better acknowledge and do the things necessary to change that instead of useless emotion based knee jerk reactions.

Did you notice I didn't call the murderer a "shooter" like the "if it bleeds it leads" sensationalism oriented media label them. I called him a cowardly child murderer because Shooter gives the connotation of a skilled assassin like in violent video games. The crime he committed should be called what it is, the act of a deranged coward. The medial feeds these evil people's need for recognition and in my opinion should be condemned as well as the killer.

Pretty much agree with you, but most mass shootings are not by criminals… I don’t think, the one in Texas obviously wasn’t.

[MartinSE]

The United States government is a representative republic, not a democracy. Your civics class should have covered this. Believe me you wouldn't want to live in a pure democracy where majority rule decided everything.

Uh, better check you sources. A representative republic IS a democracy.

[MartinSE]

You are advocating restrictions on the 2nd Amendment, how does that fit with the constitution? In case everyone has forgotten the right to bear arms is a "Right" just like the 1st and the others.

Pretty easy. One of the most famous conservative justices of The SCOTUS said every right can have limits. Everyone, and he was saying that in a discussion about gun control.

Also, the division of the 2nd into two rights instead of being one right is a very modern invention (2008) and never the intent of the founders.

[Number 10 GI]

Uh, better check you sources. A representative republic IS a democracy.

No it isn't.

Citizensfb.com

"Key Takeaways: Republic vs. Democracy
Republics and democracies both provide a political system in which citizens are represented by elected officials who are sworn to protect their interests.
In a pure democracy, laws are made directly by the voting majority leaving the rights of the minority largely unprotected.
In a republic, laws are made by representatives chosen by the people and must comply with a constitution that specifically protects the rights of the minority from the will of the majority.
The United States, while basically a republic, is best described as a “representative democracy.”

[MartinSE]

You are advocating restrictions on the 2nd Amendment, how does that fit with the constitution? In case everyone has forgotten the right to bear arms is a "Right" just like the 1st and the others.

Oh, and, I did not say anything about gun control in my post that you replied to, so, could you please point out where I advocated restrictions? Or are you just lumping me in with everyone else you disagree with?

[MartinSE]

///

[Number 10 GI]

Pretty much agree with you, but most mass shootings are not by criminals… I don’t think, the one in Texas obviously wasn’t.

Doesn't change the fact that if someone needs a gun to commit an act of violence and can't get it legally, they will be able to get from an illegal source.

We have a higher rate of gun deaths vs other industrialized countries, but we also have a higher rate of deaths by other means. Why is that? As I have stated numerous times on these threads about guns, we have a violence problem and it doesn't take a rocket scientist or even the IQ of a stupid chimpanzee to see that. Yet this country won't address that fact or make any attempt to fix the problem.

[Number 10 GI]

This has been debunked many times. There is NO pure democracy, had

Then why are you using the term "Democracy"? The definition is pretty well defined by dictionaries and other sources as to what that form of government entails.

[MartinSE]

[QUOTE=Number 10 GI;2102332]No it isn't.

Citizensfb.com

"Key Takeaways: Republic vs. Democracy
Republics and democracies both provide a political system in which citizens are represented by elected officials who are sworn to protect their interests.
In a pure democracy, laws are made directly by the voting majority leaving the rights of the minority largely unprotected.
In a republic, laws are made by representatives chosen by the people and must comply with a constitution that specifically protects the rights of the minority from the will of the majority.
The United States, while basically a republic, is best described as a “representative democracy.”[/QUOTE

Your own reference says it is a democracy, a representative democracy. The are many form of democracy, one one pure and there never has been a pure, except maybe Greece.

This idea if the US being a republic and not a democracy is recent and intended to support restricting peoples right to vote. You can research that yourself, my posts are always too long. But, check any clas on forms of government and you will find representative republic is a FORM of democracy, or as your own reply says a representative democracy.

Did you know that not all forms of democracy allow voting? Demarchcy is a form of democracy with representative chosen by sortition.the same way we pick jurors today, by random lottery.

[MartinSE]

///

[MartinSE]

Doesn't change the fact that if someone needs a gun to commit an act of violence and can't get it legally, they will be able to get from an illegal source.



I agree completely, but this thread is about mass murders and school shootings. Few if any of those obtain the guns illegally. Some, but few.

[MartinSE]

Then why are you using the term "Democracy"? The definition is pretty well defined by dictionaries and other sources as to what that form of government entails.

Democracy is a category, there are many forms, we are one.

For instance I could say I drive a compact, I could say I drive a car, I could say I drive a compact car.

All mean the say, unless we are in a discussion with academics about specific forms of governments,

And we are in a discussion of mass shootings and murdering children in class while you want to debate the precise usage of a form of government.

That is a sad commentary, and explains a lot about why we have not been about to solve this problem in over 20 years…

[MartinSE]

Then why are you using the term "Democracy"? The definition is pretty well defined by dictionaries and other sources as to what that form of government entails.

Sorry. The forum has issues today, you will see if you look back that I deleted that post, which I started, it saved it, and decided it was too off topic and confrontational. So, I deleted it.

I apologize for it getting posted before I finished it.

[Woodbear]

An oldie but a goodie.........

[Papa_lecki]

I agree completely, but this thread is about mass murders and school shootings. Few if any of those obtain the guns illegally. Some, but few.

Don’t school shooting ALWAYS occur in a “GUN FREE ZONE”?
And murder is illegal.

So, without talking about illegally obtaining the weapon or prohibited possessors, the shooter already commits two felonies, but they will follow new gun laws?
Totally makes sense.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Don’t school shooting ALWAYS occur in a “GUN FREE ZONE”?
And murder is illegal.

So, without talking about illegally obtaining the weapon or prohibited possessors, the shooter already commits two felonies, but they will follow new gun laws?
Totally makes sense.

Using that logic, we should remove stop lights at intersections, and speed limits on interstates. And let's get rid of property lines, all they do is dare people to trespass.

Legalize (not just decriminalize) all drugs. No more prescriptions needed. If you want antibiotics, go ahead and buy some. If you want opioids, they're yours for the taking.

Minimal government right? That's the American way. So let's do this. Or are y'all just pretending because you have your mind set on one specific thing and can't let go? Have you doubled down SO hard, that your ego won't allow you to say "y'know what - maybe it's time for a change since the way it's been happening for the past 20 years isn't working all that great afterall?"

[PugMom]

:boom:

:clap2::clap2::clap2:

[Tvflguy]

Would YOU put a sign on your front door. “Gun/free Zone”. Hmm.

[jimjamuser]

I think the problem is that media is being used for social engineering purposes, which is flat-out wrong. Kids being shot and killed in school, insofar as overall gun deaths go, aren't even a blip on the radar. America averages something like 33,000 gun deaths each year from all causes. This year 24 kids have been killed by gunfire at school and this year is a sad exception--numbers year by year since the late 1990's are usually far lower, often in the single digits. It is a fact that a school kid is statistically in more danger of being killed by lightning than killed at school. By far the greatest number of gun deaths, 58% on average per year, is suicide. Homicides are at 37.2% per year (numbers provided by Brittanica ProCon) and it is a safe bet to assume that the overwhelming number of those are criminal-related, drug and gang disputes mainly. Legal intervention and unintentional deaths come in at 1.2% and 1.3%.

Every student killed is a tragedy. I get that. But what we are seeing is shameless. It is my belief (borne out by several studies) that media overhype is the primary cause of copycat killings, and it is anyone's guess just how many of these dead kids would still be alive if it wasn't for what media is doing.

Let's be honest. This is about GUNS, not kids. We have elected senators and representatives who represent us. Using media to try to force an issue via over-the-top emotion instead of the legislative system is doing no one any favors, least of all our kids.

What can be done? Nothing, until we can be honest with ourselves. The gun "debate" solves nothing: people are entrenched on one side or the other and no statistic, or argument, is going to change that. On a personal level I try to avoid media that pushes the emotional hyperbole but that is nearly impossible: we are saturated with it. The irony is that school deaths by gunfire are actually DOWN since the 1990s, but you'd never know that from what we see, hear and read today.

We can all start by being honest, with ourselves at least. Far too few of us are.
Let's say that it is correct that a small % of children are KILLED at school (or going to school) by GUNS. That % does NOT mean that the problem of shootings in schools is insignificant. People need to think about these shootings as DOMESTIC TERRORISM. Today about 100% of all school children have been traumatized by what they saw happen at Robb Elementary. And parents and ALL US citizens will shudder and feel UNSAFE as they just drive past schools for a long time - the TERRORISM perpetrated within that classroom is a SCAR on the psyche of ALL American citizens.
..........What happened at the Robb Elementary calls into QUESTION the ability of the Government and local Police EVERYWHERE to protect the US population from MASS MURDERERS wielding specialized high capacity weapons of war. The outright TERROR PROJECTS beyond a small Texas town, beyond Texas, and ultimately throughout the whole US. Children and parents from Pittsburgh to Portland now know that as far as GUNS go the US still has a frontier mentality - solve your problems with a GUN.
..........And the shooting in Tulsa has proven that no one is safe from the GUN culture anywhere! There was NOT even a WAITING PERIOD for that shooter to possibly come to his senses!

[jimjamuser]

Teachers are not being paid to shoot intruders. It's not their job. If you want them to serve as bodyguards to their students then you need to pay them accordingly. Your taxes will go up, also accordingly. Maybe even enough that the state will need to impose a state income tax. Which of course will mean janitors and nurses and other non-teacher employees in those schools will also need a raise, because now some of their income is being sucked into taxes.

Giving teachers guns and requiring that they teach less, protect more, is not the answer.

The answer is not simple. But the solution would be to reduce the risk. To reduce the risk of a teacher ever having to decide whether or not to draw their gun on someone. A teacher shouldn't ever be held responsible for that. So how about reducing the risk that they would be.

The police, trained to do their jobs and protect the public, weren't able to prevent these shootings. Teachers should not be responsible to do what the police weren't able to do.
That last sentence was very good at summing up the probably, majority opinion on teachers carrying GUNS in the classroom. I agree, but ONLY in an IDEAL world. I am sure that in Australia and other G-7 countries that there is no NEED for teachers to have GUNS. Unfortunately, the US is an OUTLIER in this respect (and NOT in a good way).
.........The US is saturated with too many GUNS. It IS a desperate situation that requires a DESPERATE answer. So, until US society changes to be more like the other 1st world countries, perhaps it will be necessary for the Principal and other volunteer teachers to ARM themselves. Schools should perhaps exaggerate how many teachers have volunteered to carry. Not the greatest solution, but maybe one that is necessary until people in the US evolve to a point where they refuse to try to solve their problems with GUNS.

[jimjamuser]

Using Australia as the example is a bad idea. Their social system is different from ours, as is their culture. Americans suffer from Tall Poppy Syndrome - where we are taught that standing out in a crowd is a good thing. Attention-seeking is celebrated. In Australia, people want to just be, and not focus their energy on being noticed.

Australians are more likely to experience first-hand other parts of the globe. Americans generally don't leave their own hemisphere. Only 1/6 of Americans have ever travelled abroad. 1/3 of Australians have.

Australian culture embraces the concept of fair play, while Americans will likely "do whatever it takes" to get a jump on their competition.

These cultural differences are significant enough to have an impact on the acceptability of stricter gun control measures.
Excellent post. Kudos!

[jimjamuser]

Well, as H.L. Mencken said, "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public". That also goes for American media. Especially for American media. The days of Howard K. Smith and Uncle Walter (the most trusted man in America) Cronkite are ancient history. News "reporting" today is more on the level of National Enquirer bilge than it is responsible reporting.

My own personal opinion is that media inevitably reflect the politics of the medium in question. You can see that in the reporting, especially in how words are used. Two mediums might be reporting the same story in virtually the same manner. Let's say that, for the sake of example, the story is about a person nearing the end of his career in the public eye. One story refers to the person as a "venerable statesman", the other as an "aging politician". Those are the ONLY two words that are different. I don't know about you but the first gives me the impression of, say, a Winston Churchill. The second? Teddy Kennedy. We both have the same information, but our emotional reaction may be decidedly different based on those words.

There are numerous other examples of how our emotions are channeled. Media is dangerously expert at it. There are a lot of obvious ones. The ones that are really scary though are the ones that we CAN'T spot. It is why, like you, I get most of my news from foreign sources.

...or just shut news out altogether.
I feel that Facebook is FAR more dangerous than any TV channel. Even a TV channel that I avoid.

[ThirdOfFive]

Would YOU put a sign on your front door. “Gun/free Zone”. Hmm.
Heh.

Minnesota became a "shall issue" state about 20 years or so ago. Many people, including my wife and myself, got our carry permits at that time. As you can imagine the issue was very political right up to the time it passed. Some few businesses even went so far as to put up those "No Guns Allowed On These Premises" signs.

The signs came down right quick when it became obvious that THOSE business were the ones being targeted by the bad guys.

[ThirdOfFive]

I feel that Facebook is FAR more dangerous than any TV channel. Even a TV channel that I avoid.
Agree completely.

"Social media". The ultimate oxymoron.

[ThirdOfFive]

I feel that Facebook is FAR more dangerous than any TV channel. Even a TV channel that I avoid.
Agree completely.

"Social media". The ultimate oxymoron.

[Papa_lecki]

Doesn't change the fact that if someone needs a gun to commit an act of violence and can't get it legally, they will be able to get from an illegal source.

We have a higher rate of gun deaths vs other industrialized countries, but we also have a higher rate of deaths by other means. Why is that? As I have stated numerous times on these threads about guns, we have a violence problem and it doesn't take a rocket scientist or even the IQ of a stupid chimpanzee to see that. Yet this country won't address that fact or make any attempt to fix the problem.

Half the US gun deaths occur in 100 cities, where about 25% of the population lives. It’s definitely a violence problem, and a lack of respect for life. (Data is from 2015 - it might be more skewed now - I know in Phila gun deaths are up about 100% since 2015, probable the same in most cities)

Here’s the research
Want to fix gun violence in America? Go local. | US gun control | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/jan/09/special-report-fixing-gun-violence-in-america)

[jimjamuser]

You are advocating restrictions on the 2nd Amendment, how does that fit with the constitution? In case everyone has forgotten the right to bear arms is a "Right" just like the 1st and the others.
Actually, the 2nd Amendment said that STATE militiamen were entitled to "bear" their arms. Their arms were black powder muskets that were single shot and required a long time to reload and malfunctioned often. They had an accuracy range of about 50 meters. Nothing in the 2nd Amendment said that "individuals" should "bear arms". That is just the NRA's convenient interpretation.
..........Today's arms shoot with each trigger pull for a possible rate of fire of 45 shots per minute with little recoil and accuracy out to about 500 meters.
............The 2nd Amendment was purposely written ambiguously for its long-ago time. It did NOT come down from GOD and written in stone, like MANY WOULD LIKE US TO BELIEVE.

[Papa_lecki]

Using that logic, we should remove stop lights at intersections, and speed limits on interstates. And let's get rid of property lines, all they do is dare people to trespass.

Legalize (not just decriminalize) all drugs. No more prescriptions needed. If you want antibiotics, go ahead and buy some. If you want opioids, they're yours for the taking.

Minimal government right? That's the American way. So let's do this. Or are y'all just pretending because you have your mind set on one specific thing and can't let go? Have you doubled down SO hard, that your ego won't allow you to say "y'know what - maybe it's time for a change since the way it's been happening for the past 20 years isn't working all that great afterall?"

I figure, by my logic, you put a stop sign AND a red light at the intersection. Most people will stop. But even with both, there will be those who blow through the intersection.
More laws don’t mean people will automatically follow the laws.

We have laws, but I can still go into south central LA, south Chicago, west Philly and buy a gun illegally.
I almost guarantee, you can not get a gun illegally in The Villages, because most residents follow the law.

[biker1]

No, it is actually the Supreme Court's interpretation in 2008.

Actually, the 2nd Amendment said that STATE militiamen were entitled to "bear" their arms. Their arms were black powder muskets that were single shot and required a long time to reload and malfunctioned often. They had an accuracy range of about 50 meters. Nothing in the 2nd Amendment said that "individuals" should "bear arms". That is just the NRA's convenient interpretation.
..........Today's arms shoot with each trigger pull for a possible rate of fire of 45 shots per minute with little recoil and accuracy out to about 500 meters.
............The 2nd Amendment was purposely written ambiguously for its long-ago time. It did NOT come down from GOD and written in stone, like MANY WOULD LIKE US TO BELIEVE.

[jimjamuser]

The United States government is a representative republic, not a democracy. Your civics class should have covered this. Believe me you wouldn't want to live in a pure democracy where majority rule decided everything.
Actually, I would prefer to live in a pure democracy. I would prefer that ordinary citizens voted on every issue. It would be preferable to laws being passed by lobbyists for rich organizations (like the GUN makers and the NRA). With the electronics technology that we currently have and verification capability, we could probably vote CONSTANTLY on current issues. That would be a TRUE majority-rules-type of government and would eliminate the incredible CORRUPTION in Washington and in the States.
.........All important issues would be decided by the majority of the people - NOT by a Supreme Court that was controlled by who died when and what administration made the most appointments during their term. No need for lifetime appointments. Just put ALL important issues up to a US-wide election, majority rules!

[jimjamuser]

It is a pretty well established fact that criminals don't get their guns legally. There are criminal enterprises that provide guns to criminals in this country and in probably every other country in the world. Criminals know who these suppliers are because a gun is a tool of their trade. They have no problem obtaining a gun.

There are smugglers that routinely smuggle illegal firearms into Mexico, and Central and South America, many of which are full automatic firearms. China is one of the biggest sources for these firearms per the ATF and FBI. You can ban the AR15 or any other gun there is and criminal organizations will provide them to who ever has the money to buy them. The latest cowardly child murderer legally bought two high end AR15 rifles that retail for over $2,000 each so he could have easily paid the inflated price a smuggler would charge.
So how would a ban on certain guns or universal background checks prevent this cowardly child murderer from getting what he needed? Just like in any podunk farm town in the most remote areas of fly-over country, you can get any illegal drug your addiction desires and the junkies know where to get them. The same will be with guns.

We have a violence problem in this country that we better acknowledge and do the things necessary to change that instead of useless emotion based knee jerk reactions.

Did you notice I didn't call the murderer a "shooter" like the "if it bleeds it leads" sensationalism oriented media label them. I called him a cowardly child murderer because Shooter gives the connotation of a skilled assassin like in violent video games. The crime he committed should be called what it is, the act of a deranged coward. The medial feeds these evil people's need for recognition and in my opinion should be condemned as well as the killer.
One must be careful when knocking the media because ALL the world's dictators' 1st steps were controlling the media.
.........Agreed that we have a VIOLENCE problem in the US!
..........Disagreed that ALL CRIMINALS do NOT acquire their GUNS legally. The shooters at Robb Elementary and Tulsa BOTH bought guns legally - and without a waiting period in the Tulsa case. GUNS can be acquired by anyone legally with the money to pay for them at any GUN SHOW. Gun accessibility is just too EASY!

[haysus7]

Maybe start by being kind and trying your best

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

I figure, by my logic, you put a stop sign AND a red light at the intersection. Most people will stop. But even with both, there will be those who blow through the intersection.
More laws don’t mean people will automatically follow the laws.

We have laws, but I can still go into south central LA, south Chicago, west Philly and buy a gun illegally.
I almost guarantee, you can not get a gun illegally in The Villages, because most residents follow the law.

Seriously? You can't even get them to follow the local rules, and you think they're all following the actual law? They don't stop at stop signs. They drive their non-LSV golf carts on and across 466A. They drink and drive. They text and drive. They drive while on their cell phones. They violate the deed restrictions with their too-tall shrubs and too-many garden gnomes. They park non-handicap-plaque cars in handicap spaces. They jaywalk. And yes - you can absolutely buy a gun illegally in the Villages.

They have bar brawls. They steal from each other. They rob from each others' homes. They sell visitor passes to locals for personal profit. They get arrested for assault. They are on the sex offender list. And all this is just the ones that actually get reported. I can only imagine how many don't get reported.

I mean - do you really not know that there are criminals living in the Villages?

[jimjamuser]

Doesn't change the fact that if someone needs a gun to commit an act of violence and can't get it legally, they will be able to get from an illegal source.

We have a higher rate of gun deaths vs other industrialized countries, but we also have a higher rate of deaths by other means. Why is that? As I have stated numerous times on these threads about guns, we have a violence problem and it doesn't take a rocket scientist or even the IQ of a stupid chimpanzee to see that. Yet this country won't address that fact or make any attempt to fix the problem.
There is kind of a logical fallacy somewhere in this post. I agree with the statement that the US has more violence that other G-7 nations. It is a fact that we are the most incarcerated industrialized nation. So, we must be the most violent. And we are likely VERY bad at rehabilitation of criminals. If we subtracted out the incarcerations for non-violent drug possession and drug dealers, we might be more in line with other G-7 nations as to the numbers in prison. Even so, I would still assume that the US is at the top of a list of countries for total violence.
.........as to the reason for all this US violence........there would probably be so many factors that it would fill a book.
..........back to the logical fallacy of the post.........If the US has the status of MOST violent nation..........would NOT it be logical that the US as a most violent nation would WANT to have the MOST GUN control to offset that violence.
...........When you combine US propensity for violence with EXTREME availability of GUNS - you have a RECIPE for a
DISASTER - like the last 2 weeks of MASS MURDERS in schools and hospitals.
...........If a person wanted to lower GUN crime without limiting the availability of the criminals and mass murderers to get their wea[ons of choice, the AR-15 style 223 rifle and the high capacity pistols - then the alternative would be to pay MORE taxes for MORE and BETTER qualified and trained Police personnel. And also do NOT sell body armor to civilians.

[jimjamuser]

Would YOU put a sign on your front door. “Gun/free Zone”. Hmm.
A crazy homeowner might put up a sign like that as a TRAP for a criminal.

[Taltarzac725]

Now that is an action that should help. It is from June 2, 2022. Prohibited Man Arrested for Possessing Guns & Ammunition | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (https://www.atf.gov/news/pr/prohibited-man-arrested-possessing-guns-ammunition?fbclid=IwAR1jHbuLFtBIF5LgkomEbYc-xjlqIjMRdwD-OQdG-FwH0hmFrbTFoJ1Y24s)

From ATF-Los Angeles: “Operations-West Bureau’s LAPD/ATF Gun Violence Reduction Task Force arrests a convicted felon & seizes 2 AR-type pistols, a 9 mm gun, suppressor, 2 body armor plates, drugs w/fentanyl and a cache of magazines & ammunition.”

[ElDiabloJoe]

Would YOU put a sign on your front door. “Gun/free Zone”. Hmm.

Or the equal "Come victimize me!" sign, the Co-exist sticker. That just tells me the occupant of the car/home will let me do as I want if they feel sorry for me or I am in a traditionally under-represented group. Heck, the Co-exist sticker guy probably won't even call the cops on me.

I heard a lawyer one time talking about having his car stolen. It was found, severely damaged, about 4 blocks from where it was stolen. The lawyer's reaction? "That guy must have needed it (the car) more than I did." Really? No, that guy took your property and went for a joyride that ended poorly and cost the lawyer money." The thief did not NEED the car to get to a job, or bring food home to his family or take them to urgent medical care.

Some people just insist on being victims, and then some even more exceptional ones advertise they want to be victims (Gun free zone / co-exist stickers). Those signs/stickers just tell me the possessor is a moron.

[ElDiabloJoe]

...
I am 100% in favor of strongly enforced universal background checks. It will NOT solve the problem, it will help.
...

Does this "100% in favor..." comment of yours apply to drivers' licenses and voting registration also? If not, why not?

[jimjamuser]

Does this "100% in favor..." comment of yours apply to drivers' licenses and voting registration also? If not, why not?
I believe that the 2020 election was the safest in history.

[kcrazorbackfan]

Oh Geez, that's easy. You're not gonna like the answer though:

1. Two-parent homes for raising children;
2. A stay-at home parent;
3. Put away "participation trophies" and teach kids that heartbreak and losing are life lessons and doing so gracefully is important;
4. Return to discipline. Kids are your responsibility to society, NOT your new cuddly best friend for you to pamper and indulge;
5. Return to a shared moral code. In the past, it was Christianity and regular church attendance;
6. Return to community norms. No more, "but it's their culture to be rude" excuses. Abide by community standards or face social ostracism;
7. A return to accountability and personal responsibility for one's actions and behaviors.

👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍

[Lindsyburnsy]

Tulsa, OK, hospital, 4 killed.....what is the answer to these Killings
Stop easy access to guns and start up the ban again on AR type weapons that blast people to smithereens in seconds. This doesn't happen in other countries and it shouldn't happen in the U.S.

[Lindsyburnsy]

So, we can cure all this violence by going backward in time to the 1950s? No thank you.

[Michael G.]

Agree completely.

"Social media". The ultimate oxymoron.

"Talk of the Villages? is social media. :boom:
What's on your mine?

[Michael G.]

I mean - do you really not know that there are criminals living in the Villages?

Nope, there is none.
I know for sure because someone here said this is the safest place to live.
Check with the developer offices and all the visitor centers.
Not happening.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Or the equal "Come victimize me!" sign, the Co-exist sticker. That just tells me the occupant of the car/home will let me do as I want if they feel sorry for me or I am in a traditionally under-represented group. Heck, the Co-exist sticker guy probably won't even call the cops on me.

I heard a lawyer one time talking about having his car stolen. It was found, severely damaged, about 4 blocks from where it was stolen. The lawyer's reaction? "That guy must have needed it (the car) more than I did." Really? No, that guy took your property and went for a joyride that ended poorly and cost the lawyer money." The thief did not NEED the car to get to a job, or bring food home to his family or take them to urgent medical care.

Some people just insist on being victims, and then some even more exceptional ones advertise they want to be victims (Gun free zone / co-exist stickers). Those signs/stickers just tell me the possessor is a moron.

The co-exist sticker means the person displaying it is open-minded and acknowledges that "other" is not a dirty word. Variety is the spice of life. Enjoy your white bread with unsalted butter.

[ThirdOfFive]

Actually, the 2nd Amendment said that STATE militiamen were entitled to "bear" their arms. Their arms were black powder muskets that were single shot and required a long time to reload and malfunctioned often. They had an accuracy range of about 50 meters. Nothing in the 2nd Amendment said that "individuals" should "bear arms". That is just the NRA's convenient interpretation.
..........Today's arms shoot with each trigger pull for a possible rate of fire of 45 shots per minute with little recoil and accuracy out to about 500 meters.
............The 2nd Amendment was purposely written ambiguously for its long-ago time. It did NOT come down from GOD and written in stone, like MANY WOULD LIKE US TO BELIEVE.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The word "State", as used above, refers to the nation. Every right in the Bill of Rights protects the American people against Government overreach or oppression. It would be illogical to believe that only one of those ten rights, the Second Amendment, does not.

[ThirdOfFive]

Half the US gun deaths occur in 100 cities, where about 25% of the population lives. It’s definitely a violence problem, and a lack of respect for life. (Data is from 2015 - it might be more skewed now - I know in Phila gun deaths are up about 100% since 2015, probable the same in most cities)

Here’s the research
Want to fix gun violence in America? Go local. | US gun control | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/jan/09/special-report-fixing-gun-violence-in-america)
Excellent post! It is getting harder and harder to find objective research or ungarnished facts online. Much appreciated.

[MrFlorida]

Mandatory 20 year jail sentence for anybody comiting a crime with a gun, these outlaws have no fear, make an example out of them.

[ThirdOfFive]

Mandatory 20 year jail sentence for anybody comiting a crime with a gun, these outlaws have no fear, make an example out of them.
One of the biggest problems, in my opinion, is that it seems most of the time, when a crime is committed with a gun, the crime (usually in reduced form) is consequated but the criminal act of using a gun in the commission of the crime(s) is not, usually either dropped or plea-bargained away. For myself I would like to see it made mandatory that whenever a crime is committed with a gun, that fact alone should result in an additional ten years tacked on to the sentence for the commission of the crime, no exceptions.

[jimbomaybe]

So, we can cure all this violence by going backward in time to the 1950s? No thank you.
I don't think anyone would advocate turning the clock back to the 50s across the board , but when you have a problem that you did not have before it seems logical and insightful to examine what changes were made and how to make corrections/ adjustments, we learn from mistakes, unintended consequences

[golfing eagles]

Actually, the 2nd Amendment said that STATE militiamen were entitled to "bear" their arms. Their arms were black powder muskets that were single shot and required a long time to reload and malfunctioned often. They had an accuracy range of about 50 meters. Nothing in the 2nd Amendment said that "individuals" should "bear arms". That is just the NRA's convenient interpretation.
..........Today's arms shoot with each trigger pull for a possible rate of fire of 45 shots per minute with little recoil and accuracy out to about 500 meters.
............The 2nd Amendment was purposely written ambiguously for its long-ago time. It did NOT come down from GOD and written in stone, like MANY WOULD LIKE US TO BELIEVE.

Wrong and wrong. That's NOT what the 2nd amendment states or means. At the time it was written, we did not have a standing army. "Militias" were raised when a call went out for volunteers, many of whom were just farmers and frontiersman. That "militia" did not have an arsenal to hand out guns, the volunteers had to bring their own. Therefore, INDIVIDUALS were guaranteed the right to "bear arms", not just "state militiamen". In 1787, unless you were a city dweller, a gun was a necessity---hunting for food, protection against whomever, etc. Even 100 years later in the "wild west", the 2 most heinous crimes (punishable by hanging) were horse theft and gun theft, because without either you had a very short life expectancy. As Obi Wan Kenobi siad to Anikan Skywalker in Star Wars episode 2 after retrieving his light saber---"This weapon is your life"

Full disclosure----I've never even held a gun in my hand.

[ThirdOfFive]

Wrong and wrong. That's NOT what the 2nd amendment states or means. At the time it was written, we did not have a standing army. "Militias" were raised when a call went out for volunteers, many of whom were just farmers and frontiersman. That "militia" did not have an arsenal to hand out guns, the volunteers had to bring their own. Therefore, INDIVIDUALS were guaranteed the right to "bear arms", not just "state militiamen". In 1787, unless you were a city dweller, a gun was a necessity---hunting for food, protection against whomever, etc. Even 100 years later in the "wild west", the 2 most heinous crimes (punishable by hanging) were horse theft and gun theft, because without either you had a very short life expectancy. As Obi Wan Kenobi siad to Anikan Skywalker in Star Wars episode 2 after retrieving his light saber---"This weapon is your life"

Full disclosure----I've never even held a gun in my hand.
Good points.

Another point that could be made, in relation to the ones in this post, regards the actual weapons themselves. People sometimes state that the Second Amendment was written to reflect the arms of the time, muzzle-loading muskets, shotguns, the ubiquitous "Brown Bess" British musket which was used by the British (and some of the opposing colonists as well). True enough. But what ISN'T mentioned is the fact that a lot of the colonists used the Pennsylvania Rifle, which was a far superior weapon to the Brown Bess. The Bess was accurate to maybe 50 yards. After that it was anyone's guess as to where the ball was going. The Pennsylvania Rifle, on the other hand, was accurate to several hundreds of yards beyond that.

The point is that, at the time the Second Amendment was written, the American colonists possessed a weapon that was in many ways SUPERIOR to the best the British armies had.

[jimbomaybe]

One of the biggest problems, in my opinion, is that it seems most of the time, when a crime is committed with a gun, the crime (usually in reduced form) is consequated but the criminal act of using a gun in the commission of the crime(s) is not, usually either dropped or plea-bargained away. For myself I would like to see it made mandatory that whenever a crime is committed with a gun, that fact alone should result in an additional ten years tacked on to the sentence for the commission of the crime, no exceptions.
A lot of things are involved, you do a felony and five other crimes in connection, arrested and charges accordingly , your attorney and the States Attorney could very well agree that you take a plea on one or more, the others are dropped, lots of good reason to do so, for one, even if found guilty on all five many times the judge will have all the sentences for all five to run consecutively, all at the same time rather than concurrently , one after the other, quantity discount for the criminality inclined

[jimjamuser]

Stop easy access to guns and start up the ban again on AR type weapons that blast people to smithereens in seconds. This doesn't happen in other countries and it shouldn't happen in the U.S.
Great post. The UK and now Canada banned assault-style rifles and ALL handguns. The UK's gun crime dropped to near ZERO. And their children in schools and adults in church or ANY GATHERING do NOT have to feel FEAR like in the US.
.........And I enjoyed seeing the word "smithereens" used. Cute word and was more popular many years ago.
..........However, ballistically speaking, a high-velocity cartridge like the 223 does NOT blow up when it hits a target. High velocity will produce a VERY expanded wound channel in soft tissue. It could be (?) thought of as an explosion, but that is technically incorrect. However, several children at the Robb Elementary shooting had expanded exit wounds so SEVERE that their faces were unrecognizable to their parents.
...........Canada and the UK have done the right thing by concentrating on the GUN as the main factor to prevent MASS shootings - which in the US are happening at a rate of 1 or 2 every week. Prayers and thoughts are a distractor to a solution for the problem. Mental health is a distractor from the solution. The UK brought its GUN crime to almost zero, without changing its mental health outreach program. The US is the outlier with respect to GUN crime among 1st world nations.

[jimjamuser]

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The word "State", as used above, refers to the nation. Every right in the Bill of Rights protects the American people against Government overreach or oppression. It would be illogical to believe that only one of those ten rights, the Second Amendment, does not.
I don't have a problem with the right to "bear arms". When the 2nd amendment was written "arms" were single shot. I would be fine with single-shot arms. I have a problem with 30 round magazines. The only person that NEEDS a 30-round magazine is a person that is going to shoot into a crowd. (that happened this weekend with one drive-by MASS shooting
and several similar shootings into crowds) Would a hunter or person defending their home NEED a 30-round magazine?..........answer NO! Their home might be intruded by one or two people, but NOT by a CROWD, Only a DOMESTIC TERRORIST needs a 30-round Mag.
...........The US is getting tired of baby killers and the answer is to look at what Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the UK have done!

[jebartle]

Recent conversation about school shootings garnered a response, "because of all the foreigners being allowed in our country",??????????, my response, a blank stare!!!!

[jimjamuser]

I don't think anyone would advocate turning the clock back to the 50s across the board , but when you have a problem that you did not have before it seems logical and insightful to examine what changes were made and how to make corrections/ adjustments, we learn from mistakes, unintended consequences
The changes that happened since1950 are that the population of the US doubled and the tax money for everything from roads to mental health did NOT keep pace - also better public schools and a bigger and better Police Force did NOT keep pace. To that, add the change in the emphasis of the NRA and the GUN makers toward semi-auto military-style rifles with a higher profit margin and away from bolt-action hunting-type rifles. Add the change toward Civilian body armor and man-killing 30 round magazines.

[jimjamuser]

Wrong and wrong. That's NOT what the 2nd amendment states or means. At the time it was written, we did not have a standing army. "Militias" were raised when a call went out for volunteers, many of whom were just farmers and frontiersman. That "militia" did not have an arsenal to hand out guns, the volunteers had to bring their own. Therefore, INDIVIDUALS were guaranteed the right to "bear arms", not just "state militiamen". In 1787, unless you were a city dweller, a gun was a necessity---hunting for food, protection against whomever, etc. Even 100 years later in the "wild west", the 2 most heinous crimes (punishable by hanging) were horse theft and gun theft, because without either you had a very short life expectancy. As Obi Wan Kenobi siad to Anikan Skywalker in Star Wars episode 2 after retrieving his light saber---"This weapon is your life"

Full disclosure----I've never even held a gun in my hand.
Interesting full disclosure........not even a semi-auto 9 iron? Full disclosure I have never held a light saber.
........Interesting History lesson. As to the "Wild West"........I remember reading that many people did not even carry a gun. And there was even a FAMOUS sheriff that did not carry a gun.
.........As to the 2nd Amendment - There was a Constitution expert on TV that said that the 2nd was PURPOSELY written in an ambiguous manner so as to please BOTH the Federalists and the States Rights types. Like a lot of things, when you try to please 2 opposing factions you just end up with an ambiguous, watered-down statement, which can have different interpretations.
..........I really don't care too much about "nit-picking" the meaning of the 2nd amendment (no mention of INDIVIDUAL). I only discussed it because so many here bring it up like GOD chiseled it out of stone.
..........The NRA and the Gun makers have a vested interest in interpreting the 2nd amendment to suit themselves - because big, GIANT profits and sums of money are involved. They use America's fascination with the rugged individualism and machismo of the wild west days to create a propaganda-like need for their high-profit wares.
............I feel that even the whole Constitution is a VERY old document that may NOT be relevant today.
............I feel that the Supreme Court represents 1/3 of the power of the US Government and is held in the hands of 9 UNELECTED members the get appointed for a LIFETIME (I disagree) based on WHO DIED and WHEN (during which Parties control). Seems like a STUPID system to me!

[Papa_lecki]

I don't have a problem with the right to "bear arms". When the 2nd amendment was written "arms" were single shot. I would be fine with single-shot arms. I have a problem with 30 round magazines.

Um….
I have discovered,” Belton wrote to Congress on April 11, 1777, “an improvement, in the use of Small Armes, wherein a common small arm, may be maid to discharge eight balls one after another, in eight, five or three seconds of time.”

And Washington agreed to it. In May 1777, he authorized Belton to make 100 of his rapid-fire muskets — but the plan fell apart before it even began, when Belton asked for what was deemed “unreasonable compensation” for his work.

Belton Flintlock: One of the first semi-automatic weapons may have been invented by a friend of Ben Franklin - On top of Philly news (https://billypenn.com/2018/02/16/a-philly-friend-of-ben-franklin-may-have-invented-one-of-the-first-semi-automatic-weapons/)

You can also google the “knock volley gun”

Does the 2nd Amendment only apply to the quill and scroll? Because the type writer, laptop and twitter weren’t invented in 1776.

[jimjamuser]

Good points.

Another point that could be made, in relation to the ones in this post, regards the actual weapons themselves. People sometimes state that the Second Amendment was written to reflect the arms of the time, muzzle-loading muskets, shotguns, the ubiquitous "Brown Bess" British musket which was used by the British (and some of the opposing colonists as well). True enough. But what ISN'T mentioned is the fact that a lot of the colonists used the Pennsylvania Rifle, which was a far superior weapon to the Brown Bess. The Bess was accurate to maybe 50 yards. After that it was anyone's guess as to where the ball was going. The Pennsylvania Rifle, on the other hand, was accurate to several hundreds of yards beyond that.

The point is that, at the time the Second Amendment was written, the American colonists possessed a weapon that was in many ways SUPERIOR to the best the British armies had.
I believe that the Pennsylvania rifle had rifling grooves cut into the barrel to induce spin (like a thrown football) for the purpose of increased accuracy and range as opposed to the smoothbore muskets. The British were used to warfare where 2 armies marched toward each other at around 50 yards - so smoothbore muskets were fine at that distance and cheaper to produce and loaded easily.
..........A Pennsylvania rifle was like a sniper rifle today. A soldier in the Colonial army could shoot the Pa. rifle and retreat into dense woods.

[jimjamuser]

A lot of things are involved, you do a felony and five other crimes in connection, arrested and charges accordingly , your attorney and the States Attorney could very well agree that you take a plea on one or more, the others are dropped, lots of good reason to do so, for one, even if found guilty on all five many times the judge will have all the sentences for all five to run consecutively, all at the same time rather than concurrently , one after the other, quantity discount for the criminality inclined
Also, the US has the highest % of incarcerated people. So, maybe there is NOT enough rehabilitation going on in US prisons. The US may see a criminal as a "throw-away" resource, while other countries may see a criminal as a"renewable" resource.

[Taltarzac725]

It varies a lot by state as to how much rehabilitation is successful. How Atrocious Prisons Conditions Make Us All Less Safe | Brennan Center for Justice (https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/how-atrocious-prisons-conditions-make-us-all-less-safe)

Also, the US has the highest % of incarcerated people. So, maybe there is NOT enough rehabilitation going on in US prisons. The US may see a criminal as a "throw-away" resource, while other countries may see a criminal as a"renewable" resource.

[SickTime]

Oh Geez, that's easy. You're not gonna like the answer though:

1. Two-parent homes for raising children;
2. A stay-at home parent;
3. Put away "participation trophies" and teach kids that heartbreak and losing are life lessons and doing so gracefully is important;
4. Return to discipline. Kids are your responsibility to society, NOT your new cuddly best friend for you to pamper and indulge;
5. Return to a shared moral code. In the past, it was Christianity and regular church attendance;
6. Return to community norms. No more, "but it's their culture to be rude" excuses. Abide by community standards or face social ostracism;
7. A return to accountability and personal responsibility for one's actions and behaviors.
I Agree with This. Until we figure out how to do everything on the list, I would suggest hiring armed security in all schools. If that is to costly for your school district then give Teachers who want to be trained in the use of weapons and be trained in "active shooter" an incentive to want to be able to save their own lives as well as the students. there are many solutions along this line. Stop blaming the gun and start protecting our children. Just my opinion of course.

[ThirdOfFive]

I Agree with This. Until we figure out how to do everything on the list, I would suggest hiring armed security in all schools. If that is to costly for your school district then give Teachers who want to be trained in the use of weapons and be trained in "active shooter" an incentive to want to be able to save their own lives as well as the students. there are many solutions along this line. Stop blaming the gun and start protecting our children. Just my opinion of course.
Good point. It has always been interesting that the anti-gun people reject ANY answer or solution that does NOT ban (this time around, anyway) "assault" weapons.

The irony is that they could ban all sales of AR-15 -type weapons and it would make absolutely no difference at all in these crackpots committing these shootings. AR-15s have the shock value when seen but there are other, more efficient weapons (if you're looking for a more "efficient" way to kill a bunch of people) that are perfectly legal and in the hands of millions of people. Just one example: the Federal Government unloaded hundreds of thousands of M1 Carbines after WW II, a semi-auto that comes stock with a 20-round cartridge but 30 round cartridges are available: KCI makes them and they are cheap. You can do even more damage with the M1 Carbine than with the AR-15 especially at close ranges: the bullet is twice as heavy as that fired from the AR style weapons and they come in all sorts of configurations. Hornady makes a 115-grain hollow-point "critical defense" round, and there are rounds similar to that that are excellent deer-killers. And that is only ONE example of a readily-available means of causing mayhem that would outdo the AR-15 - type weapons. There are many others.

The more I think of it, the more it seems that the children are the pawns here. Banning AR-15 type weapons won't protect them. So why not take the steps that DO protect them?

[Woodbear]

I don't have a problem with the right to "bear arms". When the 2nd amendment was written "arms" were single shot. I would be fine with single-shot arms. I have a problem with 30 round magazines. The only person that NEEDS a 30-round magazine is a person that is going to shoot into a crowd. (that happened this weekend with one drive-by MASS shooting
and several similar shootings into crowds) Would a hunter or person defending their home NEED a 30-round magazine?..........answer NO! Their home might be intruded by one or two people, but NOT by a CROWD, Only a DOMESTIC TERRORIST needs a 30-round Mag.
...........The US is getting tired of baby killers and the answer is to look at what Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the UK have done!


According to the misguided, the First Amendment would only pertain to the public square and letterpress printing. The Founding Fathers could never have envisioned TV, Radio or the Internet. Next time someone wants to cry about the second amendment, please respond via inkwell pen.

[Bay Kid]

Guns? No. We have way too many crazy people. The devil is in control.

[ElDiabloJoe]

The co-exist sticker means the person displaying it is open-minded and acknowledges that "other" is not a dirty word. Variety is the spice of life. Enjoy your white bread with unsalted butter.
See what you did there? You just made it personal. Thanks for the personal attack, that's what people do when they lose the logical argument and try to "win" on emotion and vitriol.

Your insinuation that I eat unsalted-buttered white bread is akin to calling me a "cracker." It is a racist inference indicating you may possess a racist perspective. Perhaps reflect on that a bit before making such an opinionated and vitriolic remark. I'm here to help you self-help yourself into a better person. You're welcome.

[Wyseguy]

Tulsa, OK, hospital, 4 killed.....what is the answer to these Killings

I so much want to have a serious discussion about this, but society today is not conducive to open, frank discussions.

[ElDiabloJoe]

I believe that the 2020 election was the safest in history.

A.) Your response did not answer the quoted question from post #168;
B.) Please tell me you're joking? All the muling, all the ballot harvesting, all the lost ballots found in conservative areas by the side of the freeway?

[Wyseguy]

And do you have any suggestions for how to accomplish that? Because, while most people will agree those would be wonderful things to do, it doesn't help the walking dead people that will be murdered next week, and those the next week, etc etc etc.

We need suggestions of actions we can take now to help the situation.

Martin, can you come up with any plan that would achieve the goals set up in the prior post?

[ElDiabloJoe]

That IS possibly true. But, it is happening that way in ALL other G-7 countries and they do NOT have a significant GUN problem like the US does.
Wait! I though you just said these things rarely happen in G-7 countries? Did you see what happened in Germany today? Probably wasn't mentioned on CNN. It isn't in their top 4 front-page stories under the "World" column or anywhere else on their front page that I could find.

Two Left Dead in Supermarket Shooting in Germany (https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2022/06/07/two-dead-in-supermarket-shooting-in-germany/)

[Taltarzac725]

That is probably a domestic violence crime. Man fatally shoots woman, then himself at German supermarket, police say (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/europe/2-dead-shooting-german-supermarket-police-say-rcna32292)

Wait! I though you just said these things rarely happen in G-7 countries? Did you see what happened in Germany today? Probably wasn't mentioned on CNN. It isn't in their top 4 front-page stories under the "World" column or anywhere else on their front page that I could find.

Two Left Dead in Supermarket Shooting in Germany (https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2022/06/07/two-dead-in-supermarket-shooting-in-germany/)

[Wyseguy]

See what you did there? You just made it personal. Thanks for the personal attack, that's what people do when they lose the logical argument and try to "win" on emotion and vitriol.

Your insinuation that I eat unsalted-buttered white bread is akin to calling me a "cracker." It is a racist inference indicating you may possess a racist perspective. Perhaps reflect on that a bit before making such an opinionated and vitriolic remark. I'm here to help you self-help yourself into a better person. You're welcome.

It is horrible how that other person just attacked you. No one deserves to be bullied like that.

[jimjamuser]

Good point. It has always been interesting that the anti-gun people reject ANY answer or solution that does NOT ban (this time around, anyway) "assault" weapons.

The irony is that they could ban all sales of AR-15 -type weapons and it would make absolutely no difference at all in these crackpots committing these shootings. AR-15s have the shock value when seen but there are other, more efficient weapons (if you're looking for a more "efficient" way to kill a bunch of people) that are perfectly legal and in the hands of millions of people. Just one example: the Federal Government unloaded hundreds of thousands of M1 Carbines after WW II, a semi-auto that comes stock with a 20-round cartridge but 30 round cartridges are available: KCI makes them and they are cheap. You can do even more damage with the M1 Carbine than with the AR-15 especially at close ranges: the bullet is twice as heavy as that fired from the AR style weapons and they come in all sorts of configurations. Hornady makes a 115-grain hollow-point "critical defense" round, and there are rounds similar to that that are excellent deer-killers. And that is only ONE example of a readily-available means of causing mayhem that would outdo the AR-15 - type weapons. There are many others.

The more I think of it, the more it seems that the children are the pawns here. Banning AR-15 type weapons won't protect them. So why not take the steps that DO protect them?
You are saying that NOTHING can be done to prevent MASS shootings and murders because if the AR-15 style rifle was banned then another model of rifle could take its place. That is ALL incorrect because Australia and New Zealand HAVE already (since about 1985) SOLVED their MASS MURDER problem - and look no further than Canada which is currently SOLVING its GUN murder PROBLEM. So, that PROVES that what you wrote IS incorrect. The US IS the only 1st world nation with a mass GUN murder problem. And the PROBLEM is going to get WORSE as the summer continues.
..........The whole idea that US Citizens should be able to own UNLIMITED types of GUNS is a mindset that is NOT shared by the UK and all other western nations. Their citizens do NOT have to FEAR gathering ing groups like for adults at church or for children at school. They ELIMINATED all those fears by simply banning certain CLASSES of GUNS. It instantly dropped their GUN crimes to near ZERO. In those nations, GUNS were NOT eliminated, just the types of GUNS most likely to be used to shoot up a large crowd or do drive-by shootings.
........As to the M1 carbine being a BETTER man-killer than the AR-15. Just NOT true. The M1 carbine IS a GOOD man-killer, but not as good as the AR-15. The M1 carbine is a military weapon designed to have low recoil so that it was easy for a soldier to get used to the recoil and become proficient with it. The AR-15 has even lower recoil......advantage AR-15. The M1 carbine uses a LOW-VELOCITY pistol cartridge that limits its effective range due to bullet drop to about 200 yards. The AR-15 uses a HIGH-VELOCITY rifle cartridge with an effective range of 550 yards with less bullet drop. ........advantage AR-15 again! The high-velocity of the AR as compared to the M-1 causes a greater WOUND channel in soft human tissue. Again advantage AR-15 as a MILITARY man-killing weapon of war.
..........BOTH the AR-15 and the M1 carbine are banned by ALL the civilized nations of the world except the US for use by CIVILIANS.

[MartinSE]

I so much want to have a serious discussion about this, but society today is not conducive to open, frank discussions.

Don't even try, you will be attacked. Ask me how I know.

[MartinSE]

Martin, can you come up with any plan that would achieve the goals set up in the prior post?

I posted numerous plans in both this and the other previous thread. I was accused of spamming them threads with nonsense. And no discussion, only attacks, many personal. In fact, half of my points were those promoted by conservatives. I learned a lot about gun control here, but you see I am a liberal, so nothing I say, even when I agree with conservatives gets any attention other to be attacked.

[MartinSE]

You are saying that NOTHING can be done to prevent MASS shootings and murders because if the AR-15 style rifle was banned then another model of rifle could take its place. That is ALL incorrect because Australia and New Zealand HAVE already (since about 1985) SOLVED their MASS MURDER problem - and look no further than Canada which is currently SOLVING its GUN murder PROBLEM. So, that PROVES that what you wrote IS incorrect. The US IS the only 1st world nation with a mass GUN murder problem. And the PROBLEM is going to get WORSE as the summer continues.
..........The whole idea that US Citizens should be able to own UNLIMITED types of GUNS is a mindset that is NOT shared by the UK and all other western nations. Their citizens do NOT have to FEAR gathering ing groups like for adults at church or for children at school. They ELIMINATED all those fears by simply banning certain CLASSES of GUNS. It instantly dropped their GUN crimes to near ZERO. In those nations, GUNS were NOT eliminated, just the types of GUNS most likely to be used to shoot up a large crowd or do drive-by shootings.
........As to the M1 carbine being a BETTER man-killer than the AR-15. Just NOT true. The M1 carbine IS a GOOD man-killer, but not as good as the AR-15. The M1 carbine is a military weapon designed to have low recoil so that it was easy for a soldier to get used to the recoil and become proficient with it. The AR-15 has even lower recoil......advantage AR-15. The M1 carbine uses a LOW-VELOCITY pistol cartridge that limits its effective range due to bullet drop to about 200 yards. The AR-15 uses a HIGH-VELOCITY rifle cartridge with an effective range of 550 yards with less bullet drop. ........advantage AR-15 again! The high-velocity of the AR as compared to the M-1 causes a greater WOUND channel in soft human tissue. Again advantage AR-15 as a MILITARY man-killing weapon of war.
..........BOTH the AR-15 and the M1 carbine are banned by ALL the civilized nations of the world except the US for use by CIVILIANS.

"THEY" know all that, "THEY" don't care. You are wasting your pixels.

[Wyseguy]

Also, the US has the highest % of incarcerated people. So, maybe there is NOT enough rehabilitation going on in US prisons. The US may see a criminal as a "throw-away" resource, while other countries may see a criminal as a"renewable" resource.

Perhaps we need to be more aware and selective as to who is coming into the US. Local and State governments tend not to provide incarceration rates for illegal immigrants. What we do have is a study and report prepared by the DOJ/DHS in 2018.
Immigrants accounted for more than 30 percent of the federal prison population. Let us take care of our fellow citizens who are dealing with homelessness, hunger, poverty, before we allow others to enter illegally.

[MartinSE]

Perhaps we need to be more aware and selective as to who is coming into the US. Local and State governments tend not to provide incarceration rates for illegal immigrants. What we do have is a study and report prepared by the DOJ/DHS in 2018.
Immigrants accounted for more than 30 percent of the federal prison population. Let us take care of our fellow citizens who are dealing with homelessness, hunger, poverty, before we allow others to enter illegally.

According to CATO research:

(All immigrants refers to illegal and legal)

"All immigrants have a lower criminal incarceration rate and there are lower crime rates in the neighborhoods where they live, according to the near-unanimous findings of the peer-reviewed evidence. Since 1911, large nationwide federal immigration commissions have asked whether immigrants are more crime-prone than native-born Americans and each one of them answered no, even when the rest of their reports unjustifiably blamed immigrants for virtually every problem in the United States. From the 1911 Immigration Commission, also known as the Dillingham Commission, to the 1931 Wickersham Commission, and 1994’s Barbara Jordan Commission, each has reported that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than native-born Americans."

That was from 2018, since you referenced a 2018 data. There are more recent studies that show the same. In 2019 these numbers were released: At least 13% of the federal prison population, and 30% of the Federal Marshalls detention are illegal aliens. Federal Marshall's don't hold many other types of prisoners.

[jimjamuser]

A.) Your response did not answer the quoted question from post #168;
B.) Please tell me you're joking? All the muling, all the ballot harvesting, all the lost ballots found in conservative areas by the side of the freeway?
Sorry, all those allegations of voter fraud were INTENSELY looked into and DISPROVED. Even the then-Attorney General Bill Barr stated that there was NO significant voter fraud in the 2020 election. As I stated previously......the 2020 election was the most FRAUD-FREE election in modern history!
..........If someone wants to disagree about this, they should disagree with Bill Barr, not me!

[jimjamuser]

I so much want to have a serious discussion about this, but society today is not conducive to open, frank discussions.
Yes, today we have polarized sides and group tension. Russia has done this around the world for the last 20 years. Besides oil, Russia exports propaganda. Notice how the GUN issue has divided the US.

[jimjamuser]

That is probably a domestic violence crime. Man fatally shoots woman, then himself at German supermarket, police say (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/europe/2-dead-shooting-german-supermarket-police-say-rcna32292)
It RARELY happens in the other G-7 nations AS COMPARED to the US.

[jimjamuser]

"THEY" know all that, "THEY" don't care. You are wasting your pixels.
Yes, people here like to break other people's pixels!

[jimjamuser]

Perhaps we need to be more aware and selective as to who is coming into the US. Local and State governments tend not to provide incarceration rates for illegal immigrants. What we do have is a study and report prepared by the DOJ/DHS in 2018.
Immigrants accounted for more than 30 percent of the federal prison population. Let us take care of our fellow citizens who are dealing with homelessness, hunger, poverty, before we allow others to enter illegally.
I agree!

[jimjamuser]

According to CATO research:

(All immigrants refers to illegal and legal)

"All immigrants have a lower criminal incarceration rate and there are lower crime rates in the neighborhoods where they live, according to the near-unanimous findings of the peer-reviewed evidence. Since 1911, large nationwide federal immigration commissions have asked whether immigrants are more crime-prone than native-born Americans and each one of them answered no, even when the rest of their reports unjustifiably blamed immigrants for virtually every problem in the United States. From the 1911 Immigration Commission, also known as the Dillingham Commission, to the 1931 Wickersham Commission, and 1994’s Barbara Jordan Commission, each has reported that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than native-born Americans."

That was from 2018, since you referenced a 2018 data. There are more recent studies that show the same. In 2019 these numbers were released: At least 13% of the federal prison population, and 30% of the Federal Marshalls detention are illegal aliens. Federal Marshall's don't hold many other types of prisoners.
The overriding problem is that our TOTAL infrastructure and government services can NOT adequately handle our TOTAL population. No wonder we have polarization and groups hating other groups. And that hatred leading to GUN violence and that FEAR driving up GUN sales. We have just emerged from the inability to solve the Covid crisis due to nationwide polarization. There is a Covid surge in Florida right now and it is being ignored by our so-called leaders.
............Increased GUN sales are NOT going to make for a peaceful summer, just the opposite!

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Perhaps we need to be more aware and selective as to who is coming into the US. Local and State governments tend not to provide incarceration rates for illegal immigrants. What we do have is a study and report prepared by the DOJ/DHS in 2018.
Immigrants accounted for more than 30 percent of the federal prison population. Let us take care of our fellow citizens who are dealing with homelessness, hunger, poverty, before we allow others to enter illegally.

Who's going to do all the landscaping work then? Who will flip the burgers at the fast food joints? Also - if you <allow> people to enter, then they're not entering illegally. That is a logical fallacy. If you allow them, then they're here with permission. That makes their entry legal, not illegal.

Meanwhile, immigrants do most of the grunt work in this country, because most American citizens refuse to do it. You want tomatoes for under $8/lb? Then accept that it's probably a Mexican picking the tomato off the vine at agricultural wages (which is sub-minimum).

At least they're willing to do the work.

[golfing eagles]

217 posts. Somebody needs to shoot this thread.

[MartinSE]

The overriding problem is that our TOTAL infrastructure and government services can NOT adequately handle our TOTAL population. No wonder we have polarization and groups hating other groups. And that hatred leading to GUN violence and that FEAR driving up GUN sales. We have just emerged from the inability to solve the Covid crisis due to nationwide polarization. There is a Covid surge in Florida right now and it is being ignored by our so-called leaders.
............Increased GUN sales are NOT going to make for a peaceful summer, just the opposite!


All true, but not because we can't, but because a group has been trying to "starve the beast" since the 1950's.

And at this point, there is no way to collect all the guns, so with ONLY 400 million in circulation no matter what we do right now, it is not going to be peaceful anytime soon. And there is a good chance, some want more violence - I know Putin will be thrill to watch us kill each other.

[MartinSE]

Who's going to do all the landscaping work then? Who will flip the burgers at the fast food joints? Also - if you <allow> people to enter, then they're not entering illegally. That is a logical fallacy. If you allow them, then they're here with permission. That makes their entry legal, not illegal.

Meanwhile, immigrants do most of the grunt work in this country, because most American citizens refuse to do it. You want tomatoes for under $8/lb? Then accept that it's probably a Mexican picking the tomato off the vine at agricultural wages (which is sub-minimum).

At least they're willing to do the work.

Farmers have repeatedly tried to hire American's to do the field work, and they typically last a day or two. You are right. Who will work the fields. But, the good news is, if not no one does the prices of food will skyrocket, and well, all the people here will have more things to bitch about.

[jimbomaybe]

Farmers have repeatedly tried to hire American's to do the field work, and they typically last a day or two. You are right. Who will work the fields. But, the good news is, if not no one does the prices of food will skyrocket, and well, all the people here will have more things to bitch about.

Perhaps some sort of migrant worker program , come to the US for a short stay , leave when the seasonal work is done , take your pay back to your home country, brings much needed money there, I think if the problems of abusing that sort of system could be worked out it could benefit all parties, but then it works out better politically just to be very non selective as to who comes into our country

[MartinSE]

Perhaps some sort of migrant worker program , come to the US for a short stay , leave when the seasonal work is done , take your pay back to your home country, brings much needed money there, I think if the problems of abusing that sort of system could be worked out it could benefit all parties, but then it works out better politically just to be very non selective as to who comes into our country

Yes, there was a work visa program, I don't know if it still exists.

The main problem with our current system (in my not so humble opinion) is the court system is almost completely underfunded. The result is people come here and claim asylum, which is legal, and they get scheduled for a hearing usually 2 or 3 years later. Since we also don't have housing for a couple of million people waiting for their hearing, they are released and instructed to come back on their hearing date.

We need an overhaul of the court system, so someone comes in, they have 1 week to prepare their case, and they get a hearing. If they can stay they are given asylum, if their claim is denied they should be deported.

The problem with that is that it might actually work, but then the politicians would lose that talking point at the next election.

Just like the mass shooting issue. It could be fixed, but it won't be. That is another talking point politicians can run on. They have to keep us hating each other in order to stay in office.

[jimjamuser]

Who's going to do all the landscaping work then? Who will flip the burgers at the fast food joints? Also - if you <allow> people to enter, then they're not entering illegally. That is a logical fallacy. If you allow them, then they're here with permission. That makes their entry legal, not illegal.

Meanwhile, immigrants do most of the grunt work in this country, because most American citizens refuse to do it. You want tomatoes for under $8/lb? Then accept that it's probably a Mexican picking the tomato off the vine at agricultural wages (which is sub-minimum).

At least they're willing to do the work.
Actually, there is a machine that can pick tomatoes. It is a large capital expense that the land owners are reluctant to pay because they have cheap human labor. But, if they did make that capital investment, in the long term tomatoes would be cheaper to the consumer.
..........The US is on the verge of using A.I. and robotics to transform just about all industries - even McDonalds'. So, if the US government was planning ahead, it would want to restrict immigration to the legal variety and mainly "rocket -scientist-types".

[jimjamuser]

217 posts. Somebody needs to shoot this thread.
Then the question becomes, is it better to shoot it with a semi-automatic rifle or a bolt-action? Or beat it to death with a pitching wedge?

[MartinSE]

Actually, there is a machine that can pick tomatoes. It is a large capital expense that the land owners are reluctant to pay because they have cheap human labor. But, if they did make that capital investment, in the long term tomatoes would be cheaper to the consumer.
..........The US is on the verge of using A.I. and robotics to transform just about all industries - even McDonalds'. So, if the US government was planning ahead, it would want to restrict immigration to the legal variety and mainly "rocket -scientist-types".

If you are interested in real information about AI and its impact on the labor force, I highly recommend Stanford University's HAI program. You can go to their site or just go to Youtube and search. It is an international program that discusses current events and trends and predictions on when and where and how much various employment positions will be affected.

It also has discussions with leaders in major employment industries on what can be done to minimize the impact on existing employees.

LOTS of good information, but don't look for sound bites. Most discussions are hours long.

[MartinSE]

And why is it some want threads closed that are still in line with the rules?

If you don't like a thread you don't have to click on it. If there are a lot of posts, it would seem to me that means some people still find it interesting. If you don't like a poster, you can block them.

[jimjamuser]

All true, but not because we can't, but because a group has been trying to "starve the beast" since the 1950's.

And at this point, there is no way to collect all the guns, so with ONLY 400 million in circulation no matter what we do right now, it is not going to be peaceful anytime soon. And there is a good chance, some want more violence - I know Putin will be thrill to watch us kill each other.
Well, Australia found a way to collect all the semi-auto rifles. I saw a TV clip in the 80s of rifles on a conveyor belt going to a shredder. Then their MASS MURDERS dropped to about zero. So, I know that it can be done........and Australia is a lot like the US. And Canada is planning to ban all pistols and military-style semi-automatic rifles. I will be curious to see HOW they do it.
........."starve the beast" means to decrease the size of state and federal government. For what purpose? So, that the rich top 10% can pay lower taxes and eat more caviar while the middle and lower classes ACTUALLY ARE the BEASTS that get starved.........often literally! As the classes struggle against one another, America becomes weaker and less patriotic. And RUSSIA loves it!

[jimjamuser]

Farmers have repeatedly tried to hire American's to do the field work, and they typically last a day or two. You are right. Who will work the fields. But, the good news is, if not no one does the prices of food will skyrocket, and well, all the people here will have more things to bitch about.
Legal US citizens would do hard work IF (and only if) they are adequately paid. Also, safe working conditions are necessary. Many farm employers get greedy and take advantage of their illegal workers by paying them lower than US citizens will work for and exposing them to unnecessarily dangerous and unhealthy conditions.
..........The employers are the problem, not the potential workers!

[jimjamuser]

If you are interested in real information about AI and its impact on the labor force, I highly recommend Stanford University's HAI program. You can go to their site or just go to Youtube and search. It is an international program that discusses current events and trends and predictions on when and where and how much various employment positions will be affected.

It also has discussions with leaders in major employment industries on what can be done to minimize the impact on existing employees.

LOTS of good information, but don't look for sound bites. Most discussions are hours long.
Thanks!

[MartinSE]

Legal US citizens would do hard work IF (and only if) they are adequately paid. Also, safe working conditions are necessary. Many farm employers get greedy and take advantage of their illegal workers by paying them lower than US citizens will work for and exposing them to unnecessarily dangerous and unhealthy conditions.
..........The employers are the problem, not the potential workers!

Well, partially. The issue is "adequately paid". Try working in the sun in southern CA or southern FL bent over for 8 hours, carrying heavy loads. It is hard physical work. Farmers would have to pay a lot more to get Americans to give up their unemployment and work the fields. The price of food would skyrocket.

On the other hand, being a liberal and being in favor of fair liberal wages, I agree with you, that the farm workers (actually everyone) should be paid better, even potentially a "living wage" for the area. Of course, there are consequences for paying higher wages, that being shoppers have to pay higher prices to cover it. BUT, for farm goods, I think I read the other day that $0.15 of every dollar of the retail price of food goes to the farmer. So, assuming farm workers make up half of the farmer's burdened cost ( and it is NOT that high ), that only comes to $0.08 per dollar retail price, doubling what the workers are paid would only increase retail food prices - or an 8% increase in food prices at the retail store. 8% is a serious increase in food costs, but it is one time and not "sky rocketing".

Sadly, most companies when faced with increased production costs pass on more than the increase to the consumer - you know might as well make a little extra - just look a the fossil fuel industry for an example.

[dewilson58]

King Rambler & Queen Rambler enjoy cutting and pasting lots of information to impress themselves...................not impressing anyone else.

:jester:

[Topspinmo]

you are on social media?


Why need to get rid of it we could be doing something better….:)

[Topspinmo]

Legal US citizens would do hard work IF (and only if) they are adequately paid. Also, safe working conditions are necessary. Many farm employers get greedy and take advantage of their illegal workers by paying them lower than US citizens will work for and exposing them to unnecessarily dangerous and unhealthy conditions.
..........The employers are the problem, not the potential workers!

They found a way round that with all the assistance programs.

[Topspinmo]

It RARELY happens in the other G-7 nations AS COMPARED to the US.


Rarely like we rarely here about it.

[Topspinmo]

Who's going to do all the landscaping work then? Who will flip the burgers at the fast food joints? Also - if you <allow> people to enter, then they're not entering illegally. That is a logical fallacy. If you allow them, then they're here with permission. That makes their entry legal, not illegal.

Meanwhile, immigrants do most of the grunt work in this country, because most American citizens refuse to do it. You want tomatoes for under $8/lb? Then accept that it's probably a Mexican picking the tomato off the vine at agricultural wages (which is sub-minimum).

At least they're willing to do the work.

Allowing like ignoring immigration laws. Funny how some laws are enforced and others aren’t when it fitted agenda.

Migrant workers can get green card and have for nearly century no need to enter illegally.

[Topspinmo]

See what you did there? You just made it personal. Thanks for the personal attack, that's what people do when they lose the logical argument and try to "win" on emotion and vitriol.

Your insinuation that I eat unsalted-buttered white bread is akin to calling me a "cracker." It is a racist inference indicating you may possess a racist perspective. Perhaps reflect on that a bit before making such an opinionated and vitriolic remark. I'm here to help you self-help yourself into a better person. You're welcome.

Report her.

[Topspinmo]

It is horrible how that other person just attacked you. No one deserves to be bullied like that.

IMO couple on TOTV than never get banned

[Topspinmo]

I believe that the 2020 election was the safest in history.

Naturally you would. But I bet have different view on 2016 right.

[Topspinmo]

Nope.

Home owner is going to be nervous & scared.......not going to be aiming the best......15 shots will do a much better job. Just like police, keep shooting until the bad guy is down.

Nope I only need 1 shot. Besides bolt action rifle not good home defense weapon. Shotgun works much better.

Police don’t keep pumping round now they will be charged with excessive force and murder.

[CRUZN]

tulsa, ok, hospital, 4 killed.....what is the answer to these killings

intensive screenings, raise the age to purchase a gun, no sale of assult weapons (use only for law enforcement and military)

[dewilson58]

intensive screenings, raise the age to purchase a gun, no sale of assult weapons (use only for law enforcement and military)

assault weapons are not for sale now, assault-style weapons are for sale

significant difference

[dewilson58]

Nope I only need 1 shot. Besides bolt action rifle not good home defense weapon. Shotgun works much better.

Police don’t keep pumping round now they will be charged with excessive force and murder.

The opportunities for shotguns are few.

Police training is still, shoot until the threat is gone.

[jimjamuser]

Well, partially. The issue is "adequately paid". Try working in the sun in southern CA or southern FL bent over for 8 hours, carrying heavy loads. It is hard physical work. Farmers would have to pay a lot more to get Americans to give up their unemployment and work the fields. The price of food would skyrocket.

On the other hand, being a liberal and being in favor of fair liberal wages, I agree with you, that the farm workers (actually everyone) should be paid better, even potentially a "living wage" for the area. Of course, there are consequences for paying higher wages, that being shoppers have to pay higher prices to cover it. BUT, for farm goods, I think I read the other day that $0.15 of every dollar of the retail price of food goes to the farmer. So, assuming farm workers make up half of the farmer's burdened cost ( and it is NOT that high ), that only comes to $0.08 per dollar retail price, doubling what the workers are paid would only increase retail food prices - or an 8% increase in food prices at the retail store. 8% is a serious increase in food costs, but it is one time and not "sky rocketing".

Sadly, most companies when faced with increased production costs pass on more than the increase to the consumer - you know might as well make a little extra - just look a the fossil fuel industry for an example.
Most "so-called" farmers are NOT small farmers. They are more like factory farmers or small Corporations. They have business risks like crop failures, but they can take out crop insurance to mitigate against a really bad year. I know several farmers who harvest their crops in an AIR CONDITIONED huge piece of specialized harvesting equipment. Some large factory farmers use GPS technology to steer their harvesting equipment It can be pretty high-tech. For farmers like that much of their costs are in advanced, specialized equipment and the loans and interest expense to buy them. They would also have high diesel fuel costs.
..........So, their labor costs might be fairly low and their PROFITS fairly high. With such an operation a few SKILLED WORKERS could get raises and yet pass little or nothing in the way of costs along to the consumer.

[MartinSE]

Most "so-called" farmers are NOT small farmers. They are more like factory farmers or small Corporations. They have business risks like crop failures, but they can take out crop insurance to mitigate against a really bad year. I know several farmers who harvest their crops in an AIR CONDITIONED huge piece of specialized harvesting equipment. Some large factory farmers use GPS technology to steer their harvesting equipment It can be pretty high-tech. For farmers like that much of their costs are in advanced, specialized equipment and the loans and interest expense to buy them. They would also have high diesel fuel costs.
..........So, their labor costs might be fairly low and their PROFITS fairly high. With such an operation a few SKILLED WORKERS could get raises and yet pass little or nothing in the way of costs along to the consumer.

Here is a Pew Research Center breakdown of who does what (2020) and if the "illegals" are going jobs Americans don't want. 7.6 million undocumented in the US. BTW, the IRS also shows undocumented pay a significant amount on income tax, SS, and Medicare taxes which they will never collect on, and so contribute to ours.

Most Americans say immigrants mainly fill jobs US citizens don’t want | Pew Research Center (https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/06/10/a-majority-of-americans-say-immigrants-mostly-fill-jobs-u-s-citizens-do-not-want/)

[dewilson58]

king rambler & queen rambler enjoy cutting and pasting lots of information to impress themselves...................not impressing anyone else.

:jester:

again.

[MartinSE]

///

[ThirdOfFive]

You are saying that NOTHING can be done to prevent MASS shootings and murders because if the AR-15 style rifle was banned then another model of rifle could take its place. That is ALL incorrect because Australia and New Zealand HAVE already (since about 1985) SOLVED their MASS MURDER problem - and look no further than Canada which is currently SOLVING its GUN murder PROBLEM. So, that PROVES that what you wrote IS incorrect. The US IS the only 1st world nation with a mass GUN murder problem. And the PROBLEM is going to get WORSE as the summer continues.
..........The whole idea that US Citizens should be able to own UNLIMITED types of GUNS is a mindset that is NOT shared by the UK and all other western nations. Their citizens do NOT have to FEAR gathering ing groups like for adults at church or for children at school. They ELIMINATED all those fears by simply banning certain CLASSES of GUNS. It instantly dropped their GUN crimes to near ZERO. In those nations, GUNS were NOT eliminated, just the types of GUNS most likely to be used to shoot up a large crowd or do drive-by shootings.
........As to the M1 carbine being a BETTER man-killer than the AR-15. Just NOT true. The M1 carbine IS a GOOD man-killer, but not as good as the AR-15. The M1 carbine is a military weapon designed to have low recoil so that it was easy for a soldier to get used to the recoil and become proficient with it. The AR-15 has even lower recoil......advantage AR-15. The M1 carbine uses a LOW-VELOCITY pistol cartridge that limits its effective range due to bullet drop to about 200 yards. The AR-15 uses a HIGH-VELOCITY rifle cartridge with an effective range of 550 yards with less bullet drop. ........advantage AR-15 again! The high-velocity of the AR as compared to the M-1 causes a greater WOUND channel in soft human tissue. Again advantage AR-15 as a MILITARY man-killing weapon of war.
..........BOTH the AR-15 and the M1 carbine are banned by ALL the civilized nations of the world except the US for use by CIVILIANS.

Some points regarding the quoted post:

1. Bullet drop and range is not a factor as mass shootings such as the recent one in Texas are point-blank.

2. The AR-15 is not a "MILITARY man-killing weapon of war". The original model was produced by Colt and It was produced solely for the civilian market. Once Colt's patent expired the model was made available by several other companies: the one used in the Uvalde shooting, for example, was manufactured by Daniel Defense located in Georgia.

3. The .223 was never a round used by the U.S. Military. The .223 round is manufactured for sale to the civilian market, not the Military. The military round, 5.56 NATO, which is utilized by the American Military in the M4/M4A1 rifle. The rounds LOOK similar but in reality the 5.56 NATO has far better ballistic performance. Even if a civilian owner of an AR-15 obtained some 5.56 ammo, it won't work in a .223.

[Number 10 GI]

Farmers have repeatedly tried to hire American's to do the field work, and they typically last a day or two. You are right. Who will work the fields. But, the good news is, if not no one does the prices of food will skyrocket, and well, all the people here will have more things to bitch about.

There is already a system in place that addresses this problem. Temporary work permits where workers come to the country and work during the harvest season and then go back home when finished.

[MartinSE]

There is already a system in place that addresses this problem. Temporary work permits where workers come to the country and work during the harvest season and then go back home when finished.

Thank you, I was aware there was such a program, I didn't know if it was still in effect. And yes, that program helps. If anything it should be expanded to offer those fleeing here for asylum a possible way to come in work and leave while waiting for their asylum hearing.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

There is already a system in place that addresses this problem. Temporary work permits where workers come to the country and work during the harvest season and then go back home when finished.

Yeah that's great, except the process to get that permit is not simple, and they still have to get past the border - and past all the angry anti-immigrant people who demand that they go back to their own country. It's also a problem because many farmers aren't all that fussy about who picks the oranges off their trees. They hire a contractor, who hires a guy with a truck, who loads up a bunch of people at a designated stop and brings them in for the day. Then delivers them back to that designated stop at the end of the day. The farmer doesn't know, and doesn't want to know, and doesn't care if the worker is documented or not. They only care that the worker gets the quota required.