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?
Like, I'll keep on voting and pushing for us to do the most basic, obvious stuff, but... yeah.
Yeah, but I still hold out hope, however unreasonable it may be, that if we could get enough of the right people in the right positions, we could make some changes that would actually help. Because most of America has emphatically not decided that killing children was bearable, but our political system is not designed to actually listen to what most people want when change doesn't suit those who profit off it.
Yeah, but I still hold out hope, however unreasonable it may be, that if we could get enough of the right people in the right positions, we could make some changes that would actually help. Because most of America has emphatically not decided that killing children was bearable, but our political system is not designed to actually listen to what most people want when change doesn't suit those who profit off it.
First you'd have to change the system so it doesn't work like that. But to do that you'd have to change the people who profit from the system. But to do that you'd have to change the system..
QED - we're boned.
Even mentally ill mass shooters think the current ease of access to firearms is ridiculous.
The man who fatally shot five co-workers at a Louisville bank in April wrote in his journal that he wasn’t sure if his mental health struggles would preclude him from purchasing a gun. Later, after acquiring a gun just days before carrying out the mass shooting, he remarked that buying it was “so easy” , calling the transaction “ridiculous”.
The journal writings by Connor Sturgeon were contained in a 64-page report released on Tuesday by Louisville police, in which authorities say they have now closed the investigation into the actions of the 25-year-old who also died that day after being shot by police .
Sturgeon wrote that it “was so easy” to purchase the assault rifle, a Radical Firearms RF-15, from a Louisville gun store, according to the police file. He bought the rifle, 120 rounds of ammunition and four magazine cartridges for $700 six days before the shooting, and the process took about 45 minutes, he said.
“Seriously, I knew it would be doable but this is ridiculous,” he wrote.
So even though his brain wasn't working correctly, it still worked better than the people that think the existing laws are enough to prevent this from happening.
Saw this and thought "I wonder if the death count will be high enough to make this thread"? I think the fact that I thought that shows the state of gun violence in the US
Oh no, 100% same. I put it in here, but as I did my genuine first thought was "I wonder if the body count will be big enough for anyone to pay attention this time?"
Moreover, my floor is like, 7-9, which is insane. I feel reasonably justified as thinking a mass shooting that kills 6 people is "not hugely newsworthy," and that is patently deranged.
CNN says at least 3 dead. Which, again, means this will barely be news by tomorrow morning.
Pages