Now, to put this thing back on track, I will repeat myself again:
quote
Originally posted by williegoat:
Obviously one has to be mentally ill to commit such an evil act, but here is something else to think about:
The Buffalo and Uvalde murderers were both 18 years old. From the age of 12 to 16 (think about the influences on your life during those years) America was full of hope and promise. There was world peace and a booming economy. When they were just about ready to enter adulthood, the door was slammed in their face; Covid, war, a devastated economy.
quote
Originally posted by williegoat:
These rampage killers are predominately “angry young males”.
What creates angry young males?
Two major factors are:
1) The lack of respectable adult male role models Without a father figure, these kids look to their peers for guidance. This leads to violent youth gangs, and lost children respect the gang leaders. Read “Lord of the Flies”.
2) No coping skills When kids never face defeat (everybody gets a trophy), we end up with “sore losers”.
Both of these problems are a direct result of ill informed, leftist policy. See LBJ’s “Great Society”.
From child psychology to gun control, the more Leftists try to fix things, the worse they get.
Here is some advice: Every time a leftist says we need fewer guns, it is the signal to buy more guns.
How about we face the problem instead of trying to blame a piece of hardware or an entire nation.
Why are these school massacres only occurring in the US?
Other countries have all dealt with COVID.
Other counties are facing economic uncertainty.
Other countries have politicians that segments of the population detest.
Other countries have "spoiled" youth who've never had to face corporal punishment.
Other countries have had a whole generation exposed to first-person shooter games.
Other countries have mentally sick individuals living on the streets.
Other countries have rampant drug use, both legal and otherwise.
Other countries have legalized abortion. (Only mention that bizarre point as it was brought up Here.)
So I repeat... Why are these school massacres only occurring in the US?
It's well past time to be addressing the elephant in the room... far too easy access to firearms in the US.
No, I'm not suggesting that your gun(s) be taken away... but damn, at least have the rules and regulations tightened up in regards to who can legally purchase them.
So, this is where Patrick first came into this thread, back on Page One.
He's not singling out the United States as any kind of "evil empire." This is where many people are "at", including many of williegoat's fellow Americans.
I don't think that changes to gun laws at either the state or national level can be the only response to this, but I do think, based on some reporting that I saw earlier today, that there could be some changes at the national level involving the systems of background checks on gun purchases, and the so called "red flag" laws and policies. Relatively small changes, overall, to the arcane and intricate (and largely unfathomable) Rube Goldberg patchwork of national and state laws, regulations, customs and practices that impinge upon the flow of firearms and perhaps even ammunition (and perhaps even bullet resistant body armor) through the body politic. (So to speak.)
Gun Safety Law Factoid: There are six states—Florida, Washington, Vermont, California, Illinois and Hawaii—that have restricted the legal purchase of those proverbial "long" guns to persons of age 21 or older.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 05-27-2022).]
How about we face the problem instead of trying to blame a piece of hardware...
In the wrong hands, that "piece of hardware" can be catastrophic in its implementation.
You've accused me of being a "troll" more than once in this thread, of not discussing a "solution". From my very first post in this thread...
quote
Originally posted by Patrick:
No, I'm not suggesting that your gun(s) be taken away... but damn, at least have the rules and regulations tightened up in regards to who can legally purchase them.
"Facing the problem" includes investigating certain options that some people, for personal reasons, may not be entirely comfortable doing.
[This message has been edited by Patrick (edited 05-27-2022).]
What changed? Liberals/Progressives got in power. Nancy Pelosi doesn't like the border wall but, wants her work place and home surrounded by a wall and armed security. Just one example.
Personal responsibility left town. It's not the tool but the mental midget using it at fault. ------------------ Rams Intelligent people speak because they have something to say, fools speak because they have to say something. Consider that before telling anyone what's on your mind.
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 05-27-2022).]
I never volunteered and I wasn't drafted. But I wonder if it's at all common for people in the armed services to refer to their military rifles and sidearms as "tools."
I'm not a hunter and have never been one. On a few occasions, I've been with hunters. My memories aren't perfect, but I can't imagine that they ever referred to their deer rifles as "tools." They probably didn't ever call them "weapons", either. Just "guns", or "rifles."
Calling what became the Uvalde perpetrator's murder weapon a "tool"... that's a euphemism if there ever was one.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 05-27-2022).]
The way I see it, there were three opportunities to prevent the Uvalde murders.
The the kid had a miserable family life. I am not sure it could even be called family life. Somewhere along the way, someone should have recognized this. Maybe the schools should have seen it. I have been through training to recognize drug abuse, school faculty should have something similar.
The next opportunity for intervention came after the many overt warning signs, threats, social media posts, etc.
The last chance (and this is controversial) seems to be a breakdown in safety protocol at the school and possibly a lack of training of the initial responding officers. Because the story is still fluid and we must rely on news reports, I could be way off base on this one. We shall see.
The way I see it, there were three opportunities to prevent the Uvalde murders.
The the kid had a miserable family life. I am not sure it could even be called family life. Somewhere along the way, someone should have recognized this. Maybe the schools should have seen it. I have been through training to recognize drug abuse, school faculty should have something similar.
A **** -ton-lot of us did without turning into mass murderers. I could tell of abuse that wouldn't even be called abuse, downright torture.
quote
Originally posted by williegoat:
The next opportunity for intervention came after the many overt warning signs, threats, social media posts, etc.
Possibly, but for some they are just "rough around the edges" and have a dark sense of humor. Threats need to be taken in context (IE: defensive or offensive.)
quote
Originally posted by williegoat: The last chance (and this is controversial) seems to be a breakdown in safety protocol at the school and possibly a lack of training of the initial responding officers. Because the story is still fluid and we must rely on news reports, I could be way off base on this one. We shall see.
BINGO !!!!.....but it seems to be going around. So does generalized stupidity. This one was in Toronto today.
So the guy was shot because he had a pellet gun? I read several articles and could not find out what he did. All of the articles said that people were scared because he had a pellet gun, so the cops shot him. That can't be it, can it?
The way I see it, there were three opportunities to prevent the Uvalde murders.
The the kid had a miserable family life. I am not sure it could even be called family life. Somewhere along the way, someone should have recognized this. Maybe the schools should have seen it. I have been through training to recognize drug abuse, school faculty should have something similar.
The next opportunity for intervention came after the many overt warning signs, threats, social media posts, etc.
The last chance (and this is controversial) seems to be a breakdown in safety protocol at the school and possibly a lack of training of the initial responding officers. Because the story is still fluid and we must rely on news reports, I could be way off base on this one. We shall see
.
It's worth noting that the last of those opportunities required a good man with a gun to stop a bad man with one.
The solution to the school shootings is 5 simple words. MANDATORY ARMED SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICERS
I don't have any of mine on display here at this place (even though its legal with a trigger lock) because if somebody sees them through the window I got a swat team kicking down the door. One of the few downsides of ground floor.
People have been conditioned to go mental in panic at just the sight of something that looks like one.
I don't have any of mine on display here at this place (even though its legal with a trigger lock) because if somebody sees them through the window I got a swat team kicking down the door. One of the few downsides of ground floor.
People have been conditioned to go mental in panic at just the sight of something that looks like one.
This is what the left wants for America.
I watched this Youtube video from CBC news: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrNg662L-yk This is the first comment: "The recent horrendous shootings and mass murders in American schools have put everyone on high alert. Erring on the side of caution is understandable. Maybe not right but understandable. Nobody should be walking around with a gun on display. A bb gun is not visually recognisable as a bb gun."
"Erring on the side of caution is understandable." This is the mindset that I am fighting against. What they are saying is: If someone worries you, the government should kill him. I don't see how anyone can think this is civilized.
This was on my signature line for a very long time.
Isn't it strange that after a bombing, everyone blames the bomber, his upbringing, his environment, his culture, his mental state but … after a shooting, the problem is the gun?
For some unremembered reason I changed it to something else but, it is still accurate and the truth. Consider our current tragedy and tell me the left isn't doing the exact same thing now.
The most recent high-profile murder spree where the perp(s) used bombs (or a bomb) as their murder weapon was the Boston Marathon bombing in 2013.
Then there was the Nashville bombing in 2020, although I had to think a bit longer to remember that one. (That perp only murdered or suicided himself, although he injured people and destroyed significant property.)
Bombs vs. Guns as the murder weapons of choice for America's menagerie of miscellaneously-motivated murderers is a sharply dissimilar comparison. It's like Kumquats vs. Oranges, in terms of commonality. (When's the last time you had a Kumquat? An Orange, or Orange Juice? Include slices used as garnishes, or twists, or zest. Flavors, glazes and sauces.) And that's why the preceding remark from "Rams" is not all that overwhelming or forceful in its logic.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 05-28-2022).]
Isn't it strange that after a bombing, everyone blames the bomber, his upbringing, his environment, his culture, his mental state but … after a shooting, the problem is the gun.........
The the kid had a miserable family life. I am not sure it could even be called family life. Somewhere along the way, someone should have recognized this. Maybe the schools should have seen it. I have been through training to recognize drug abuse, school faculty should have something similar.
In an earlier post, I suggested that one contributing factor in these incidents is the lack of respectable adult male role models. This seems to be the case in the Uvalde murders.
There should be some kind of mechanism in place, maybe within the school system, to identify potential problems before they get out of hand. The kid needed help long before he became dangerous. There should be “counselors” who could step in and provide the necessary adult guidance. This is where people who claim to care about the children could show that they are sincere.
quote
The next opportunity for intervention came after the many overt warning signs, threats, social media posts, etc.
This is when the authorities should have been involved. When the kid says that he wants to kill everybody, someone needs to knock on his door. We do that when someone threatens the president. Is Joe Biden’s life more important than the children who were killed?
-In summary- I am not saying that every kid who grows up in less than ideal circumstances will become a killer, but I know that there are people who have the experience to identify those who might. As another member is fond of saying, “Nip it in the bud.”
I am not saying that every threat will be followed through, but if we can investigate everybody who was in DC on January 6th, we can certainly investigate a kid who says he is going to commit mass murder.
We need to get our priorities in order. The recent incidents in Buffalo and Uvalde were far worse than anything that took place in DC on Jan 6th. The worst thing on that day was when the U.S. government used a gun to execute an unarmed citizen. This is unacceptable.
Don’t blame the U.S. citizens, don’t blame the gun. You are only contributing to the problem.
Fix the system that has been perverted by decades of failed leftist policy, or get the F**K out of the way and let the adults handle it.
Under state law, the young man who killed 19 children and two teachers at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, was entitled to his guns. He bought his AR-platform rifles legally for his 18th birthday. He had no criminal record. He was, until the moment he shot his grandmother, a law-abiding citizen, the kind of person we are supposed to trust with high-powered firearms.
But this gets to the fundamental problem with the conservative idea that the only people with guns we have to worry about are the “bad guys.” It’s the idea that, as Senator Ted Cruz of Texas put it last year, after a gunman killed 10 people at a grocery store in Boulder, Colo.: “You go after violent criminals, you go after felons, you go after fugitives, you go after those with serious mental illness, you stop them from getting guns. And when they try to illegally buy a firearm from you, lock them up and put them in jail.”
To the conservatives who posit a sharp distinction between “good guys with guns” and “bad guys with guns,” law-abidingness is an inherent trait of a class of individuals. It is an ontological category; some people have it, others don’t. Any form of gun control is verboten in this worldview because it could interfere with the ability of a “good guy” — of a “law-abiding citizen” — to obtain that to which he is entitled.
This is not how the world works. People are law-abiding until the moment they are not. They are “good guys” with guns until their circumstances and their choices make them “bad guys” with guns. And from the perspective of the person who sells guns and ammunition, there’s no way to know whether a law-abiding customer will, at some point, become a criminal.
The most vociferous supporters of permissive gun laws seem to believe that an armed society will be, for the most part, self-regulating. That we will be able to keep weapons out of the hands of the wrong people and insofar as we can’t, a law-abiding citizen will be there, with a gun, to stop the bad guys, whenever and wherever they appear.
But people don’t exist on such a strict binary. And when we allow for the unlimited proliferation of weapons, we guarantee that when the switch flips, people will die.
If that is the cost of freedom — if our liberty demands the occasional massacre — then conservatives ought to make that case.
Under state law, the young man who killed 19 children and two teachers at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, was entitled to his guns. He bought his AR-platform rifles legally for his 18th birthday. He had no criminal record. He was, until the moment he shot his grandmother, a law-abiding citizen, the kind of person we are supposed to trust with high-powered firearms.
But this gets to the fundamental problem with the conservative idea that the only people with guns we have to worry about are the “bad guys.” It’s the idea that, as Senator Ted Cruz of Texas put it last year, after a gunman killed 10 people at a grocery store in Boulder, Colo.: “You go after violent criminals, you go after felons, you go after fugitives, you go after those with serious mental illness, you stop them from getting guns. And when they try to illegally buy a firearm from you, lock them up and put them in jail.”
To the conservatives who posit a sharp distinction between “good guys with guns” and “bad guys with guns,” law-abidingness is an inherent trait of a class of individuals. It is an ontological category; some people have it, others don’t. Any form of gun control is verboten in this worldview because it could interfere with the ability of a “good guy” — of a “law-abiding citizen” — to obtain that to which he is entitled.
This is not how the world works. People are law-abiding until the moment they are not. They are “good guys” with guns until their circumstances and their choices make them “bad guys” with guns. And from the perspective of the person who sells guns and ammunition, there’s no way to know whether a law-abiding customer will, at some point, become a criminal.
The most vociferous supporters of permissive gun laws seem to believe that an armed society will be, for the most part, self-regulating. That we will be able to keep weapons out of the hands of the wrong people and insofar as we can’t, a law-abiding citizen will be there, with a gun, to stop the bad guys, whenever and wherever they appear.
But people don’t exist on such a strict binary. And when we allow for the unlimited proliferation of weapons, we guarantee that when the switch flips, people will die.
If that is the cost of freedom — if our liberty demands the occasional massacre — then conservatives ought to make that case.
This is not a gun issue. Keep saying the same thing over an over but it does not change the facts.
This young man was systematically turned into the monster that killed those kids. He didn't wake up one day like this, this was an erosion of his soul. Broken family, no one wanted him. Bullied and abused at school and once again no one paid attention. Father was absent and when he was there he was a horrible role model. Mother was a drug abuser, could not take care of the child so off to the grandmothers. Friends stopped hanging out with him and abandoned him when he started down this path of violence. The signs were there but no one was paying attention to this kid.
The school system was not following policy, the door was propped open and he came into the school without anyone challenging him. There was an active shooter in the vicinity with documented 911 calls and the school was not locked down. He had already shot his grandmother, wrecked his truck and then shot a two more people as he fled the now wrecked truck. Walked to the school while the cops were going to where the two men he shot at.
Once inside he.... well you know what he did, I can't make myself write it.
During this time there are several on going 911 calls, kids as well as adults. But by now its too late to lock down the school. As the cops started arriving its been said that the order to stand down and secure the school was given. That order came from the Chief of police. The border patrol agent was off duty and getting a hair cut. He arrived with a barrowed shotgun from the barber. I am not positive but I suspect he was the one that ended this.
There will be a lot of spin and damage control, a lot of "if he did not have a gun" but lets not lose focus. While the cops were outside they were told to stand down. They were told that the kid had killed everyone in the room and was barricaded in and no further threat. From what I read this was not the truth, and during this time there were still kids inside the school on the phone with 911.
In the days and weeks we are going to see them focus on the Gun, lay sole blame on the shooter and once again those that let this happen will go back to doing the same thing and create more walking time bombs. They failed this kid, they failed the kids that he killed and the cops failed the people they swore an oath to protect. This is not a gun issue, this is a people issue. The ones that just wanted to let this kid age out of their responsibility and go home.
Its disgusting and makes me sick thinking how everyone in this kids life let this happen.
Jake is absolutely right, and his post made me think of something else.
Why don't we put cameras in every classroom? If something like this is happening, the police could see inside and respond accordingly. An added benefit would be that both students and teachers might just think twice before engaging in questionable activity.
Cameras are cheap nowadays. They are almost ubiquitous. Public schools are public.
So, American values have been carved in stone (so to speak) since 1776? Okay, fine.
Yes, that's correct. They are written on paper and stored in the National Archives building at the Smithsonian on the National Mall.
quote
Originally posted by Patrick: I still can't help think then that American values may differ from Americans' values.
You can think all you want. But if the country truly felt the way YOU think they felt, then that amendment would have been overturned. The Constitution is a living document, meaning that it can be amended. To pass an amendment to the U.S. Constitution (including one that overrules a prior amendment), would require ratification by 3/4ths of the states. We are a Republic, not a Democracy, which means that 10 billion people living in California's slums cannot institute laws that affect the other 49 states. It would literally require ratification from the individual senates from at least 3/4ths of the states in the union. That is unlikely to ever happen unless there is a colossal sea-change of opinion in the United States. Our culture is one that was born out of rebellion... that is our national identity. Canada, for example... (correct me if I'm wrong), was still a territory of England until like the mid 1990s. Matter of fact, you still have to swear an oath to Queen Elizabeth 2nd if you file for Canadian citizenship.
The United States is totally different. We swear an oath to uphold the constitution ... e.g. those "VALUES" that I speak of. We are effectively pledging an oath to ourselves, and the construct that guarantees that our rights are inalienable.
The oath I took:
"I 82-T/A [At Work], do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well; and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
The pledge my daughter takes every morning in school:
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
Pledging allegiance to the flag, is pledging allegiance to uphold the values of the United States that are defined in our Constitution.
The additional pledge my daughter took every morning when she lived in Texas:
"Honor the Texas flag; I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one and indivisible."
[This message has been edited by 82-T/A [At Work] (edited 05-28-2022).]
Mag locks would be even better and can be activated from a button. (they will not do anything if some ass hat props open a door)
Why was the school not in lock down? There was the 911 call from the grandmothers shooting and the 911 call from where he wrecked his truck. I want to know why the doors were not locked, how sad would it be if this could have all been avoided by a door bolt.
I hope the right people are paying attention to this incident. I hope those that were charged with the care of this community are held accountable to the oath or at the very least the job description. I'm out, going to go spend some time out in the world. Wish me luck.
The killer in Buffalo was a racist. Why did he choose a grocery store in New York, instead of a Black Panther clubhouse?
For those who are a bit slow on the uptake or simply uninformed, the killer said that he chose his target because "NY has heavy gun laws".
rinselberg asked: "If that is the cost of freedom — if our liberty demands the occasional massacre — then conservatives ought to make that case."
I will ask, If the lives of those in Buffalo are the cost of disarmament, if safety demands an occasional massacre, then the left should make that case.
Oh, and the answer to rinselberg's question is that "the occasional massacre" is not the cost of freedom. It is the direct result of evading the issue, obfuscating the solution in the interest of promoting a political agenda.
As I have said, face the problem instead of taking the easy way out.
The truth about what REALLY happened is starting to come out. If it's true they waited over an hour to respond (and especially if they really did only save their own kids), that entire police force should be executed, by firing squad. Cowardice on this scale hasn't been seen since the French surrendered in World War II. We've known since Columbine almost 25 years ago that every second counts, and you don't stand around outside waiting for someone to come do your job for you.
The most recent high-profile murder spree where the perp(s) used bombs (or a bomb) as their murder weapon was the Boston Marathon bombing in 2013.
Then there was the Nashville bombing in 2020, although I had to think a bit longer to remember that one. (That perp only murdered or suicided himself, although he injured people and destroyed significant property.)
Bombs vs. Guns as the murder weapons of choice for America's menagerie of miscellaneously-motivated murderers is a sharply dissimilar comparison. It's like Kumquats vs. Oranges, in terms of commonality. (When's the last time you had a Kumquat? An Orange, or Orange Juice? Include slices used as garnishes, or twists, or zest. Flavors, glazes and sauces.) And that's why the preceding remark from "Rams" is not all that overwhelming or forceful in its logic.
So, logic is your strong suit? If there's ever a situation where someone you care about had/has to depend on your logic to save them. Good luck with that. Let us know how that works out for you and them.
quote
Originally posted by williegoat:
Jake is absolutely right.
Absolutely!
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 05-28-2022).]
I don't think it's the people who go online on message boards like this, to express their support for "gun rights", that ever (hardly ever) turn their guns into criminal weapons.
Was this Uvalde perp an NRA member? Did he ever do anything personally to support "gun rights"? I think they're mostly like that. The school campus murderers and their ilk.
Which has given me an idea.
How about creating a special class of firearms for "2A buffs"..?
So you want to have what the progressive and liberal media have been calling "weapons of war"..? Semiautomatic rifles with detachable magazines and the other features that are popular with America's Mass Murder Shooters?
Here's the requirements for a legal purchase from a federally licensed firearms dealer:
The applicant must be age 35 or older, and submit proof that they are have been living on their own for at least a full year prior, and are not financially dependent on their parents or anyone else for their housing and other living requirements.
The applicant must submit proof of online activity (online forums, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram; etc.) and have a solid track record of pro "2A" and "gun rights" commentaries.
Otherwise, for those who do not qualify on these criteria for this special class of firearms... only more basic or "Plain Jane" kinds of firearms. A "Biden model" shotgun. A semiautomatic rifle without a detachable magazine, or detachable but no more than 10-rounds per magazine, round size and velocity limitations... whatever kinds of firearms that are not "weapons of war."
Just as everyone is talking about two mass murders, here is what is being swept under the rug from last week: Testimony by Robert Mook during the Sussman trial has been very revealing. I will let you look it up for yourself.
Now, flash back to another three day weekend in the summer of another election year. James Comey made a statement regarding Hillary Clinton and by the next day, the whole country was talking about two high profile police shootings.
Now, go back to my original post on the first page of this thread.
So you want to have what the progressive and liberal media have been calling "weapons of war"..? Semiautomatic rifles with detachable magazines and the other features that are popular with America's Mass Murder Shooters?
Here's the requirements for a legal purchase from a federally licensed firearms dealer:
The applicant must be age 35 or older, and submit proof that they are have been living on their own for at least a full year prior, and are not financially dependent on their parents or anyone else for their housing and other living requirements.
The applicant must submit proof of online activity (online forums, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram; etc.) and have a solid track record of pro "2A" and "gun rights" commentaries.
Otherwise, for those who do not qualify on these criteria for this special class of firearms... only more basic or "Plain Jane" kinds of firearms. A "Biden model" shotgun. A semiautomatic rifle without a detachable magazine, or detachable but no more than 10-rounds per magazine, round size and velocity limitations... whatever kinds of firearms that are not "weapons of war."
Problem solved.
So, no support for the Constitution and apparently one that asks "Not what you can do for your country but, what your country can do for you? You want to take away other's Constitutional Rights and hope the police will respond in time to defend you? You didn't or haven't done much (if anything) to serve or preserve the US as a freedom light of the world?
There are times when one has to take a stand ya know. It would appear you've led a blessed and protected life that someone provided. Those 19 kids and 2 teachers might have still been breathing had someone been prepared to defend them. Apparently, that person would not be you. So, IMHO there's still a big problem. It appears that you believe that replacing the current laws with your proposal will keep "Bad Guys" from committing such crimes. Just curious but how many gang members or "Bad Guys" do you think got their weapons legally or have a permit to carry?
Maybe not in your neighborhood but, most folks can go buy or steal a gun from a relative or neighbor when they go nuts. Your proposal is pure
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 05-28-2022).]
