Can we talk about the mass shootings in America?

[Tacenda]

On 5/27/2022 at 7:59 AM, Amulek said:

My wife and I have been heavily involved in our kids' elementary school for years now, and I can say with some degree of authority that there are a ton of teachers (not to mention administrators) that I wouldn't trust to be anywhere near a gun.

However, there are also a couple of teachers in our school who happen to be either former military or who are currently part of the reserves. I wouldn't be opposed to allowing teachers who have had experience with weapons training and military discipline to have access to guns in the event of an emergency.

 

Not even the cops felt they could handle going up against an AR gun...time to ban them already.

[Robert F. Smith]

8 hours ago, The Nehor said:

.......................

I just explained why they would not have been able to keep them. You just repeated your assertion. ...................

Yes, and you just repeated your false assertion.  Great.  Machiavelli actually rules, and a very naive Ukrainian govt lost out for its people.

8 hours ago, The Nehor said:

That is not the “lying press”. The definition does vary a little by media outlet but the general definition is a shooting incident that kills or fatally wounds three or four (depending on database or outlet) people, usually not including the shooter. Yes, it includes some incidents of gang violence. This is known.

We are up to 27 school shootings this year last I checked. Who knows if I missed one in the last few days?

The lying press actually claims 214 mass shootings in 2022.  School shootings are actually quite rare, and police generally respond to them too late and then stand around while everyone bleeds out.

8 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I suggest a review of 2nd amendment jurisprudence. The primary advocates for the 2nd Amendment were the Southern States who felt they needed constitutional protection for their slave patrol militias. The first time the Supreme Court ruled that the 2nd Amendment guaranteed the right for individual to own a firearm was the Heller case way back at the beginning of US history back in *checks notes* 2008? Ironically Thomas Jefferson’s draft for Virginia’s constitution included the right for all free men to bear arms. This was taken out as it meant free Blacks would be allowed weapons.

Follow the court cases. The Second Amendment was never considered to be a right to each individual to have weapons until the end of last century and Supreme Court Justices and attorney generals issued a few warnings.

You enjoy rewriting history.   Both in 1689, and 1789, the right to keep and bear arms was considered an individual right, and the definition of militia at that time included all able bodied males 16 years and up.  An entire town would march as a militia unit under command of the town captain.  A sense of community actually existed in those times.

8 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Chief Justice Warren Burger, appointed by Nixon:

In 1992 six former federal attorney generals issued a statement:

Burger and those attorneys general likewise rewrote history.

8 hours ago, The Nehor said:

You are not wrapping yourself in the Constitution. You are wrapping yourself in the NRA’s post-leadership coup distortion of it. This interpretation of the Second Amendment is largely a modern invention pushed by a specific lobby. You aren’t fighting on the side of the Founders. You are backing the mendacious ploys and propaganda blitz of the gun lobbyists. The Cincinnati Revolt at the NRA was the beginning of real energy saying that the 2nd amendment said we get to have guns no matter what. It was propaganda and historical revisionism. And it worked. We now find ourselves helpless to prevent mass shootings because of some slogans that caught on. The blood of thousands is on the hands of those in the secret combination that perpetuated this fraud.

The corrupt and venal NRA is built on a foundation of yokels and lies having nothing to do with our Constitution.  Their policy, like that of their opponents, is not built on jurisprudence but on money-grubbing Machiavellianism.  The will to power -- so you are not far wrong in use of the term "secret combination."  Too bad you can't get your facts straight.

Edited May 29, 2022 by Robert F. Smith

[provoman]

Have not read everything, but I do not see this as a "weapon" issue.  I think it is more of a mental health issue.

On May 14, 2022, there was a mass shooting in Milwaukee, I believe handguns were involved.
On May 20, 2022, there was a mass shooting in Chicago, based on two articles, it seems the firearm was a handgun; pure speculation but I suspect the gun had an illegal modification. (Handgun allegedly used) (gun had a switch to fire automatically)

535 of 1184 killed or injured in mass shootings in the United States in 2022 happened in 18 States that rank in the top 21 States with the strictest gun laws. 

gunviolencearchive documents mass shootings

strictest-gun-laws-by-state 2022

[provoman]

On 5/26/2022 at 11:22 PM, The Nehor said:

Oh look, we must have hit a time warp back into the 90s.

Are we going to talk about the dangers of Dungeons & Dragons again too?

Presently a certain group is being blamed for cultivating the environment for these horrific acts.  Yet, there is a genre of music that glorifies firearm use, so who is really cultivating an environment of firearm use?  If we look at the mass shootings in the past few weeks (gunviolencearchive), it is almost as though shooting a firearm is a "normal" option for a dispute.

[The Nehor]

7 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes, and you just repeated your false assertion.  Great.  Machiavelli actually rules, and a very naive Ukrainian govt lost out for its people.

You think the newly independent Ukraine could have repurposed and rebuilt their missile system before foreign powers acted to intervene. The term “rogue nuclear state” would have been thrown around. Russia could have invaded with the US giving its tacit blessing. You don’t understand geopolitics at all if you think Ukraine holding on to their nukes was an option. The same idiotic pundits clucking their tongues at Ukraine’s naïveté at giving up nukes would have been encouraging military action to secure the nuclear weapons back then.

It wasn’t a reasonable option. Insisting it was is naïveté.

[The Nehor]

7 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The lying press actually claims 214 mass shootings in 2022.  School shootings are actually quite rare, and police generally respond to them too late and then stand around while everyone bleeds out.

There were that many mass shootings. School shootings are a subset of those. The other mass shootings are also a problem.

7 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

You enjoy rewriting history.   Both in 1689, and 1789, the right to keep and bear arms was considered an individual right, and the definition of militia at that time included all able bodied males 16 years and up.  An entire town would march as a militia unit under command of the town captain.  A sense of community actually existed in those times.

No, it was considered to be the right of the state to maintain militias and designate people who would explicitly be armed to serve in that function. It was not a general “everyone is in the militia” and can arm themselves as they wish. That would be historical revisionism.

7 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Burger and those attorneys general likewise rewrote history.

No, they remembered it. They knew the history of the 2nd amendment and how it applied in their lifetime and saw this recently made up interpretation as the perversion it is.

The militias were an actual thing and kept records of who was armed and they would even come to the person’s home to make sure their weapon was being maintained and their powder was stored properly. Imagine the furor that would incite if the government wanted to come inspect your weapon.

In the 19th century many states had prohibitions for concealed carry and many cities prohibited guns in the city. Federal government was largely silent. FDR stepped up gun control due to shootings at the time and tried to establish a national registry but the bill was watered down. The primary defense against the bill was that in rural areas with little police presence people needed firearms. No appeal to the 2nd Amendment since there was no understanding of it as an individual right. If there were such an understanding why did these politicians not use it? The NRA was asked to testify before Congress and their President was asked if the 2nd amendment had any bearing on the question. The response: “I have not given it any study from that point of view.”

7 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The corrupt and venal NRA is built on a foundation of yokels and lies having nothing to do with our Constitution.  Their policy, like that of their opponents, is not built on jurisprudence but on money-grubbing Machiavellianism.  The will to power -- so you are not far wrong in use of the term "secret combination."  Too bad you can't get your facts straight.

It was originally a mostly harmless and patriotic institution. My grandfather was involved in his youth but he cut ties after the leadership coup that turned it from a club for sport shooting and hunting safety into a political lobby and grifting organization.

My facts are correct or at least mostly are. I can tell the difference between someone who is looking to understand history and use this to inform their views and those who have views and whose study of history is just an attempt to hunt down supporting arguments. The former recognize each other. The latter assume everyone uses history as they do.

[Fether]

The best answer to this is something we cannot just implement. We need people living the principles of the gospel (particularly the family proclamation).

the next best thing is to arm teachers, more security, and make high capacity weapons harder to get.

I wonder how much safety we could have provided to schools with the same money we sent to Ukraine.

[Chum]

25 minutes ago, Fether said:

the next best thing is to arm teachers,

The point of which is to generate an actual war zone, staffed by people who are not soldiers and never chose to be soldiers. Forcing educators into responsibility will instill long-term resentment among them (as testified by actual educators) which makes them worse educators. Couple with trauma-inducing shooter drills, it's a sound way to broadly degrade school for everyone.

Past that, the effect of having kids constantly stare at a gun instead of the lesson will be to ceaselessly send the message that that their violent death is imminent. Again, it's probably the opposite outcome we should be striving for.

Edited May 29, 2022 by Chum

[Fether]

6 minutes ago, Chum said:

The point of which is to generate an actual war zone, staffed by people who are not soldiers, never chose to be soldiers. The resentment this will instill among educators (as testified by actual educators) can't make them better educators.

Past that, the effect of having kids constantly stare at a gun instead of the lesson will be to ceaselessly send the message that that their violent death is imminent.

It seems your vision of this is teachers walking around with AKs strapped over their shoulders.

When I say “arm teachers”, I guess what I mean is to permit and encourage concealed carry. Even pay for the lessons and permits and require a certain number of hours of training a year. My mom works as a counselor at a school and she has a concealed handgun. I would be very happy to learn that 20% of school employees have a concealed weapon.

Edited May 29, 2022 by Fether

[Chum]

4 minutes ago, Fether said:

It seems your vision of this is teachers walking around with AKs strapped over their shoulders.

My vision is a handgun strapped to their hip. Remembering that the idea here is to force guns onto non-gun people. If they're allowed to set it down, walk-away's will be a regular occurrence.

[Chum]

7 minutes ago, Fether said:

what I mean is to permit and encourage concealed carry.

Where does one conceal in a blouse or t-shirt?

[Fether]

11 minutes ago, Chum said:

My vision is a handgun strapped to their hip. Remembering that the idea here is to force guns onto non-gun people. If they're allowed to set it down, walk-away's will be a regular occurrence.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting we force non-gun owners to get guns. I may be wrong though. 
 

All I want is encouragement and systems in place for school employees to have the cost of permits and training to be covered.

10 minutes ago, Chum said:

Where does one conceal in a blouse or t-shirt?

if you had any experience in it, the answer would be clear. My dad carries a somewhat large handgun everywhere he goes under his shirt. I didn’t know about this until about 6 months ago when we were at a gun range and he pulled it out. My mom carries her gun in a purse.

Edited May 29, 2022 by Fether

[longview]

17 minutes ago, Chum said:

My vision is a handgun strapped to their hip. Remembering that the idea here is to force guns onto non-gun people. If they're allowed to set it down, walk-away's will be a regular occurrence.

Force people to carry?  That is ridiculous.  Never heard that stated anywhere!  If teachers don't want to carry, then let the other 20% step forward and get lots of training.

I agree with @Fether that it makes sense to go concealed.  It is very advantageous to keep criminals guessing.  There are products act like pockets that go above the underwear but out of sight between underwear and outer pants (or dress).  Here is a picture - - - (there are other variations)

[Chum]

10 minutes ago, longview said:

Force people to carry?  That is ridiculous.  Never heard that stated anywhere! 

The proposal was to arm teachers.

1 hour ago, Fether said:

the next best thing is to arm teachers,

Arming teachers implies getting guns where they aren't now.  We already have states that allow teachers to carry and those teachers choose to not carry. Allowing teachers to choose doesn't seem to get guns into our classrooms.

20 minutes ago, longview said:

There are products act like pockets that go above the underwear but out of sight between underwear and outer pants (or dress). 

I would need gun people who are experienced in this type of deployment, to validate a setup that assures a gun could never become visible under the many types of teacher+classroom conditions. I'm am skeptical that any one photo can well represent that.

[Fether]

10 minutes ago, Chum said:

I would need gun people who are experienced in this type of deployment, to validate a setup that assures a gun could never become visible under the many types of teacher+classroom conditions. I'm am skeptical that any one photo can well represent that.

Do you need more?

 

[Chum]

7 minutes ago, Fether said:

Do you need more?

I see an extraordinarily large white space. 

Besides being skeptical of 1pic=IRL, I am also skeptical of extraordinarily large posts.

edit: so whatever Big Thing was, I can't say I needed it, nevertheless even more Big Thing.

Edited May 29, 2022 by Chum

[Fether]

5 minutes ago, Chum said:

I see an extraordinarily large white space. 

Besides being skeptical of 1pic=IRL, I am also skeptical of extraordinarily large posts.

edit: so whatever Big Thing was, I can't say I needed it, nevertheless even more Big Thing.

I posted a bunch of links to YouTube videos  of people with concealed weapons. I’ll try to post it again

[Chum]

1 minute ago, Fether said:

I posted a bunch of links to YouTube videos  of people with concealed weapons. I’ll try to post it again

Can you make your point w/o overwhelming force?

[Fether]

@Chum

https://youtu.be/r-lSUoazYvM

https://youtu.be/J82uYS2LTiA

https://youtu.be/zMW-m4KvzBw

https://youtu.be/hAlZ8HrGbRU

https://youtu.be/pSunncGgjW4

https://youtu.be/UGN4OSmX2Rc

https://youtu.be/jK_PS0mZUhA

https://youtu.be/Bd8I9Hrsz3o

https://youtu.be/8Cu0MNtRqIg

 

[Fether]

1 minute ago, Chum said:

Can you make your point w/o overwhelming force?

All the videos are extraordinarily short.

[Chum]

2 minutes ago, Fether said:

All the videos are extraordinarily short.

I kind of have an aversion to YT for anything but music. Just tell me what your point was and I'll imagine the videos support it.

[Fether]

13 minutes ago, Chum said:

I kind of have an aversion to YT for anything but music. Just tell me what your point was and I'll imagine the videos support it.

My point is it is extremely easy to conceal carry without people seeing.

Im confused. You did t like the 1pic=IRL… but you also dont like multiple videos explaining the same thing? 
 

It seems more like you are refusing to do even the most minimal investigation because it goes against your belief.

Edited May 29, 2022 by Fether

[Chum]

9 minutes ago, Fether said:

Im confused. You did t like the 1pic=IRL… but you also dont like multiple videos explaining the same thing?  It seems more like you are refusing to do even the most minimal investigation because it goes against your belief.

That's not an unreasonable conclusion. They're actually unrelated things that came together here.

A single pic can be like art, conveying different meanings to different people. Here I think even you could agree one pic can be a strong hint but is unlikely to address all facets.

For the video posts, I have two different revulsion in play. The first are super ginormous posts. Some, like the Wall-O-Text are a like my cat barfing at 3am. It's a project dumped on me that I never wanted.  In the case of your ginormous post, it was a mystery at first but that's why my instinct is to flee.

The thing about video instruction is I strongly dislike video (and podcasts) info because they're a clunky time-suck. I can read text faster. If I need to go back and forth to understand, text is massively easier. I comprehend text better. And in the vast majority of cases, whatever the video is showing me can be done as well or better with a few stills - which I am more likely to process better.

Text is the reason I come to forums.

But I am not trying to be obstinate. It's why I offered to forfeit the point by going ahead and just imagining your videos support it.

[Fether]

9 minutes ago, Chum said:

That's not an unreasonable conclusion. They're actually unrelated things that came together here.

A single pic can be like art, conveying different meanings to different people. Here I think even you could agree one pic can be a strong hint but is unlikely to address all facets.

For the video posts, I have two different revulsion in play. The first are super ginormous posts. Some, like the Wall-O-Text are a like my cat barfing at 3am. It's a project dumped on me that I never wanted.  In the case of your ginormous post, it was a mystery at first but that's why my instinct is to flee.

The thing about video instruction is I strongly dislike video (and podcasts) info because they're a clunky time-suck. I can read text faster. If I need to go back and forth to understand, text is massively easier. I comprehend text better. And in the vast majority of cases, whatever the video is showing me can be done as well or better with a few stills - which I am more likely to process better.

Text is the reason I come to forums.

But I am not trying to be obstinate. It's why I offered to forfeit the point by going ahead and just imagining your videos support it.

So do you accept that a concealed carry is a practical and excellent solution to your concern of students seeing guns?

[Chum]

14 minutes ago, Fether said:

So do you accept that a concealed carry is a practical and excellent solution to your concern of students seeing guns?

No. I accept the possibility that invisible carry can exist in many adult-dominant settings.  Unless those videos are years long documentations of thousands of people working intensively with PreK-12 children they can't well represent teacher reality. They just can't

Every age kid has a way of throwing wrenches into whatever adults think they have covered. Every age does it differently and every adult who works with kids regularly thinks "Well, I didn't see that coming."