[Discussion] Mass Shootings - Yeah, we need a thread just for this...

This year is the deadliest year ever in terms of mass shootings. In a political climate of polarization, it becomes harder to suss out legitimate information from the misinformation propagated by those with political agendas. Complicating this more is the continual resistance of 2nd amendment advocates to allow for political talk surrounding these massacres. This will involve political discussion to see if there are ways we can all agree might be good ways to prevent mass shootings.

This discussion should involve the details of any current, or future mass shooting, and how they compare to past mass shootings. How are they the same? How are they different? Do gun laws have an impact? Does the race of the shooter affect how we treat them? What makes one a hate crime and one an act or terrorism? Are these shootings the price of freedom?

The Heller decision makes "well regulated militia" a tough argument to make, and makes "baby steps" harder.

To me, the trick is to use repealing t he 2nd as an avenue to pass gun control measures that would work. It can't be sold as a way to ban all guns. Other countries do not have a second amendment, but gun ownership still exists.

Australia enacted strict gun laws, but a recent stat I saw showed that they still have 40 guns per 100 citizens, ranking just behind the US (okay far from just behind) where we have 100 guns per 100 citizens. But mass hooting in Australia stopped. If we can pass those kinds of laws in the US while maintaining the 2nd, fine. But seriously, have you ever listen or read arguments about gun control?

Jayhawker wrote:

To me, the trick is to use repealing t he 2nd as an avenue to pass gun control measures that would work.

Except any effective gun control measure that might be passed would have its Constitutionality challenged, likely successfully.

The only way to repeal the 2nd Amendment is to literally turn the public's opinion against guns and gun ownership.

It wouldn't be easy, but it would be possible. Every mass murder and militia member tromping about in camos and a tricked out AR-15 will make it that much easier to do.

I would also hope that a generation of kids that grew up doing active shooter drills might be more inclined to actually do something about the problem our generations have foisted upon them.

I sat through an active shooter drill in a second grade class a few years ago. Starting in kindergarten, kids are now taught that we created a world in which a shooter killing kids in school is predictable enough that we have to train them how to react. That's the world my daughter grew up in.

It makes me sick to my stomach.

Jayhawker wrote:

To me, the trick is to use repealing t he 2nd as an avenue to pass gun control measures that would work. It can't be sold as a way to ban all guns. Other countries do not have a second amendment, but gun ownership still exists.

Australia enacted strict gun laws, but a recent stat I saw showed that they still have 40 guns per 100 citizens, ranking just behind the US (okay far from just behind) where we have 100 guns per 100 citizens. But mass hooting in Australia stopped. If we can pass those kinds of laws in the US while maintaining the 2nd, fine. But seriously, have you ever listen or read arguments about gun control?

I long for the day when mass hootings are a bigger problem than mass shootings.

Ban owls.

If the NRA get's what they want by literally legally "bribing" our politicians why isn't someone with a conscience creating an organization to out bid them?

JeremyK wrote:

If the NRA get's what they want by literally legally "bribing" our politicians why isn't someone with a conscience creating an organization to out bid them?

Gerrymandering, and identity politics.

Nevermind

JeremyK wrote:

If the NRA get's what they want by literally legally "bribing" our politicians why isn't someone with a conscience creating an organization to out bid them?

Not a bad idea but it will take a long time. The NRA didn't get this power in one election cycle it took 20 + years. So reversing it will take a least that long

Stele wrote:

Ban owls.

No, BaRn owls.

farley3k wrote:
JeremyK wrote:

If the NRA get's what they want by literally legally "bribing" our politicians why isn't someone with a conscience creating an organization to out bid them?

Not a bad idea but it will take a long time. The NRA didn't get this power in one election cycle it took 20 + years. So reversing it will take a least that long

They exist, but they don't spend nearly as much as gun rights groups do.

Gun rights interests have given about $41.9 million to candidates, parties and outside spending groups since 1989, with 89 percent of the funds contributed to candidates and parties going to Republicans. And in the 2012 and 2014 election cycles, they let loose another $48 million (at least) in outside spending.

The NRA has provided the lion's share of the funds, having contributed $22.9 million since 1989. During the 2016 election cycle, it further opened its coffers to make $54.3 million in outside expenditures, up from $27 million during the 2014 cycle.

Gun control interests, by comparison, have been a blip on the radar screen. They've given $4.2 million since 1989; 96 percent of their contributions to parties and candidates have gone to Democrats.

But they did unleash $8.6 million in outside spending during the 2014 election cycle, nine times as much as they spent during the 2010 and 2012 cycles combined. Americans for Responsible Solutions, founded by former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-Ariz.) and her husband, Mark Kelly, was behind $8.2 million of those independent expenditures. Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's Everytown for Gun Safety spent $390,000.

Those figures don't include $5.6 million in outside spending by Independence USA PAC, a super PAC backed by Bloomberg that he says supports "candidates and causes that will help protect Americans from the scourge of gun violence, improve our schools, and advance our freedoms." The money went to support federal candidates who were in favor of gun control and attack one who wasn't; the group had 100 percent success rate. Bloomberg gave a total of $28 million to outside spending groups during the 2014 cycle, of which $17 million went to Independence USA PAC.

In the 2016 cycle, gun control groups accounted for $3 million in outside spending versus $54.9 million from gun rights organizations, including $54.3 million from the NRA.

One of the advantages the NRA has is that if you are a gun owner you are almost forced to be a member. I used to be a gun owner (I grew up in the culture) and if I wanted to join a gun club (for the shooting range and storage) or even sometimes to buy a weapon I had to become a member. Then you face a mountain of propaganda, you are on their mailing list, you get the magazines, mailings etc.

Bloomberg's organization can not do that. There is no mechanism to be forced to join an organization like there is with the NRA.

As a result they are flush with cash and they make it easy to access that cash; we will grade everyone and if you get a good grade you get a handout. Voting wise the NRA has little power, they have maybe 5 million single issue voters but they will vote Republican regardless. It is the money that makes them powerful - that is why when people say 80% of gun owners want sensible gun laws it does not matter because more likely than not they are giving to the NRA anyway.

Here is the other problem. There is no group to represent those 80% or so that want sensible gun laws. There should be an organization that needs to be clear; you have the right to own your weapon but a) believe in sensible gun laws and b) discussion of gun control is not a non-starter. It needs infrastructure and funding enough make up for what a lawmaker will lose when the NRA yanks their easy money away (with an alternative rating system).

Second there needs to be a strong voter force to say we will only vote or donate to candidates that have a NRA "F" rating (which is something that I'm starting to see).

Thoughts and Prayers - the game!

https://www.thoughtsandprayersthegam...

farley3k wrote:

Thoughts and Prayers - the game!

https://www.thoughtsandprayersthegam...

Devastating and accurate.

Jayhawker wrote:

I would also hope that a generation of kids that grew up doing active shooter drills might be more inclined to actually do something about the problem our generations have foisted upon them.

I sat through an active shooter drill in a second grade class a few years ago. Starting in kindergarten, kids are now taught that we created a world in which a shooter killing kids in school is priceable enough that we have to train them how to react. That's the world my daughter grew up in.

It makes me sick to my stomach.

It only just struck me that active-shooter drills are this generation's "duck and cover" drills.

wordsmythe wrote:
Jayhawker wrote:

I would also hope that a generation of kids that grew up doing active shooter drills might be more inclined to actually do something about the problem our generations have foisted upon them.

I sat through an active shooter drill in a second grade class a few years ago. Starting in kindergarten, kids are now taught that we created a world in which a shooter killing kids in school is priceable enough that we have to train them how to react. That's the world my daughter grew up in.

It makes me sick to my stomach.

It only just struck me that active-shooter drills are this generation's "duck and cover" drills.

They are. But unlike the former, they can actually save a life.

I hate that my sons have to do them, but they are a necessary evil until we get more than thoughts and prayers.

Flintheart Glomgold wrote:

Here is the other problem. There is no group to represent those 80% or so that want sensible gun laws. There should be an organization that needs to be clear; you have the right to own your weapon but a) believe in sensible gun laws and b) discussion of gun control is not a non-starter. It needs infrastructure and funding enough make up for what a lawmaker will lose when the NRA yanks their easy money away (with an alternative rating system).

No one should have a right to own a firearm. People should have the ability to own one, but it should be treated as a privilege and great responsibility has to be continually and repeatedly earned.

And that firearm should be something reasonable. Reasonable not being an AR-15 with every tacticool accessory, a bump stock, and an extended magazine with armor piercing ammunition. No civilian should ever be given that level of firepower.

IMAGE(https://scontent.ford1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/27857764_10214279224872051_7193386334785793005_n.jpg?oh=84138daf1d40f51c9fb3c17252b71b7e&oe=5B09DB91)

In response to the whole "Why didn't god stop the school shooting? Because god isn't allowed in schools" meme, my friend just wrote "no, schools are just god's special snuff film".

NathanialG wrote:

IMAGE(https://scontent.ford1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/27857764_10214279224872051_7193386334785793005_n.jpg?oh=84138daf1d40f51c9fb3c17252b71b7e&oe=5B09DB91)

Oh my god that’s depressing. My 6th grader practices active shooter drills every other month but they are taught to hide and be quiet. I don’t know what they are taught to do once the kids around them start dying.

At the end of the day, I have no hope that anything will change. This is the price we pay as a country for our gun rights and frankly I think most are resigned to it. We are going to have a mass shooting every few months just like we’re going to have some people die in car accidents. There will be some lip service about how awful it is but by next week, it will be forgotten and no policies will have been passed, no new laws will have been enacted.

Unless the shooter is an illegal or a Muslim. Then you will see a call for action.

I wonder.

NRA has been so successful with money and lobbying.

Surely those who don't want guns can also fund and lobby action against it?

Bfgp wrote:

I wonder.

NRA has been so successful with money and lobbying.

Surely those who don't want guns can also fund and lobby action against it?

Gun control groups do. But it's not like they get kickbacks from children's coffin manufacturers like the NRA gets from gun manufacturers. Nor can gun control groups count on a steady revenue stream from people who want to pay an annual membership fee not to get shot. Nor can they use those non-existent membership rolls to fundraise additional 'mad' money that can be used to buy off politicians.

Yeah, sure, but say someone starts a collection tin in every school. Pretty sure a lot of people would fund resistance for their kids.

I’ve just got to get this said. I work in schools. Every widely publicized shooting shakes us deeply. And yet what I hear even from the staff whose lives are on the line: this isn’t a gun problem, it’s a social problem. And I just want to scream! They say violence starts with lonely, disconnected, isolated students— but without a gun the worst the student aiming for violence can do it harm a small handful of people with fists or sharp objects. And they can be tackled by any adult and it’s over.

Guns are absolutely THE problem of shootings. A gun takes a person’s violent outburst and makes it a tragedy. Fists fight in the courtyard where bloody noses and broken bones are the outcome have become killing sprees with more than a dozen fatalities.

Every single violent death at school is too many. Every child shot, every staff hero, every cowering scream is too much. Our 5-year-olds should not fear for their lives. Period. Not at home. Not at school. Not with mommy and daddy at the mall.

I’ve been reassigned to a brand new building. I saw my office last week. And honest— really honestly — my first thought was this this is the perfect room to hide and gather students during a shooting.

That’s what this gun-culture has done. I think about survivability before functionality. And that wasn’t even in the wake of a shooting. It was days before the Florida tragedy.

And yet even now, I get a mass email from a staff member saying how guns are not the problem and we just all need to spend 3-4 hours alone in our classrooms pouring over student sociability to ensure every child feels welcome and feels a sense of belonging.

That’s great. Let’s do that. Let’s make sure every student is as loved as possible. AND let’s take the damn guns away!

Actually, I’m totally for Paleocon’s list. You want to own a gun? Cool. But you are criminally liable for EVERY act perpetrated with that gun. You want to have something for target practice? Awesome. But you are as required to maintain and update licensing and registration as you are with your vehicle. You love the deer hunt? Great. Required liability insurance in case of an accident or purposeful mishap — just like with a vehicle.

I live in a deep republican state. No one cares how I vote because it’s lost in the sea of red. But I’m done voting for anyone who is against gun legislation. I work in schools and classrooms, and I put my life on the line every day. Because every day is a chance for a shooting at my school. Your right to have a gun does not trump my right to stay alive. “Life” is the first listed inalienable right.

Okay. Rant over. Glad to have this place to scream in frustration and futility, because the republican echo chamber of my community is so aggravating.

A few years back, my company had a big layoff that got folks pretty emotional. During that time, someone who suspected he was on the list brought a pistol to work. He was let go on the spot for the obvious code of conduct violation. During his exit interview he insisted it was “for his protection in case someone else did something”.

We have open floor plans in all our buildings. Even the conference rooms are glassed in and lack locking doors. The tornado shelters are the restrooms which also lack locks.

I asked the safety and security folks what our active shooter plan was. They never answered my email.

I live and work in North Carolina. Folks advertise ar 15’s for sale to one another on the company email list.

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/LjWiU07.png)

....I'm going back to bed.

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/iOhPEqF.jpg)

My new hope for the future is the generation that went to school in the post-Columbine era. They're growing up doing lockdown and active shooter drills, and knowing that unlike the possible-but-probably-won't-happen-to-anyone threat of the atomic age's duck and cover drills, school shootings happen constantly, and there's a real possibility that one happens at their school, and that the GOP and a portion of the country are refusing to do anything about it. I hope this generation gets old enough to vote, and stays pissed off enough to say "you know what? No."

That's my hope, anyway. There's also a real chance that they grow up watching their government and country say that their deaths are an acceptable price to pay for gun rights, and lose faith in the whole thing. I can't say I'd blame them, because I'm kind of there.

OG_slinger wrote:
Flintheart Glomgold wrote:

Here is the other problem. There is no group to represent those 80% or so that want sensible gun laws. There should be an organization that needs to be clear; you have the right to own your weapon but a) believe in sensible gun laws and b) discussion of gun control is not a non-starter. It needs infrastructure and funding enough make up for what a lawmaker will lose when the NRA yanks their easy money away (with an alternative rating system).

No one should have a right to own a firearm. People should have the ability to own one, but it should be treated as a privilege and great responsibility has to be continually and repeatedly earned.

And that firearm should be something reasonable. Reasonable not being an AR-15 with every tacticool accessory, a bump stock, and an extended magazine with armor piercing ammunition. No civilian should ever be given that level of firepower.

I agree with that - but that takes repealing the 2nd Amendment in the US which is more difficult to do. If that happens I'm supporting it but right now the bar is trying to stop the legalization of silencers.

I think a good start is using insurance. Anyone who sells a firearm need to have insurance and maintain liability for the weapons they sell. If you are selling a firearm you will think hard about who you are selling to if you are partially liable. I also think that the government (local through a federal program) should have a permanent buy back program. When I got rid of my firearms I had most of them destroyed (I sold my hunting rifles to an uncle who I know is responsible); but that cost me to throw away a lot of money which was a very difficult decision.

Once again though, the NRA needs to be defeated because they opposed all of those.