260 Mass Shootings 160 Days, When Will it be Too Much?

animeproblem

Super Anarchist
1,035
214
Seattle
Forget arming the teachers. You are going about this all wrong. Just arm all the kids. Problem solved.
Of course! I can see it now, every classroom with it's own armory with racked ARs & pistols ready to grab at moments notice, & now that I think about it we might want every school to have a shooting range to get the little tykes nice & competent.
 

Marty Gingras

Mid-range Anarchist
So since I'm being asked to explain hypotheticals as they pertain to rights..... would the rest of you calling for bans and heavy regulation answer this question in all honesty and seriousness:

Let's say we could get away with an outright ban of all non-hunting guns but yet the rates of school violence and in particular school shootings remained unabated given all the guns still in circulation or through black-market smuggling or whatever. But no matter what, let's say after a couple of decades of this ban - not much has changed and it's gotten even worse. Let's further say that all the social scientists and experts and whatnot came out and said they guarantee you that we could cut the number of these murders and events in half or more almost overnight if we heavily regulated who could use the internet and outright banned social media. That children could ONLY access the internet through an approved and licensed terminal that their parents had to apply for. And all other use of the interwebz by adults was highly regulated. But it would massively reduce the death toll if we implemented this.

Would you support it? Why or why not? And please don't try to argue whether you think it would work or not. That's not the point. You have to accept the premise that it will work to drastically reduce death, but at what cost?

I honestly don't expect honest or serious answers and I'm not holding my breath. But I'd like to be pleasantly surprised.
That's a good hypothetical. It speaks to weighing the militia's plausible benefits against its assorted costs and the sort of error we are willing to make. The militia's escalating costs include the lives we've been talking about for a few decades as a trade-off for a benefit (successfully fending off a tyrannical government) that most people consider implausible. Thus, there is no real downside to disbanding the militia aside from some additional chance we'd lose the country to a tyrannical government. I'd be OK with your hypothetical banning social media and regulating internet use, but only in exchange for a major crackdown on illegally-possessed guns. The combination of social media/internet plus non-hunting guns is a pox...
 

Ishmael

52,261
12,124
Fuctifino
That's a good hypothetical. It speaks to weighing the militia's plausible benefits against its assorted costs and the sort of error we are willing to make. The militia's escalating costs include the lives we've been talking about for a few decades as a trade-off for a benefit (successfully fending off a tyrannical government) that most people consider implausible. Thus, there is no real downside to disbanding the militia aside from some additional chance we'd lose the country to a tyrannical government. I'd be OK with your hypothetical banning social media and regulating internet use, but only in exchange for a major crackdown on illegally-possessed guns. The combination of social media/internet plus non-hunting guns is a pox...

The tyrannical government will walk in the front door, not sneak in the back way. It's happening right now.

The potential for far-right Republicans to reshape the election systems of major battleground states is growing much closer to reality.

As the halfway point nears of a midterm year that is vastly friendlier to Republicans, the party’s voters have nominated dozens of candidates for offices with power over the administration and certification of elections who have spread falsehoods about the 2020 presidential contest and sowed distrust in American democracy.

The only way to restore trust, these candidates say, is by electing them.

In Michigan, Pennsylvania and now Nevada, Republican voters have elevated candidates who owe their political rise to their amplification of doubts about Joe Biden’s victory, and who are now vying in elections for governor, secretary of state and attorney general — offices that will hold significant sway over the administration of the 2024 presidential election in critical swing states.

The rise of election deniers is far from over. Primary contests coming later this month in Colorado and in early August in Arizona and Wisconsin will provide more clarity on the depth of Republican voters’ desire to rally behind candidates devoted to the false idea that the 2020 election was stolen from former President Donald Trump.

With Republicans widely predicted to make gains in November, it is possible that 2023 will bring newly installed far-right officials willing to wield their influence to affect election outcomes and a possible Supreme Court ruling that could give state legislatures unchecked power over federal elections. Even some Republican candidates and officials who for a time defended the 2020 results as legitimate have begun to question whether Biden’s victory was on the level.

https://news.yahoo.com/far-republicans-press-closer-power-122035869.html
 

Burning Man

Super Anarchist
10,596
2,102
Back to the desert
& now that I think about it we might want every school to have a shooting range to get the little tykes nice & competent.
We used to have that in many schools in the US. And kids would bring their guns to school to shoot after school. And strangely no one shot up their classmates and teachers.

Hmmmm....... I wonder what's changed between then and now????
 

Raz'r

Super Anarchist
62,198
5,442
De Nile
We used to have that in many schools in the US. And kids would bring their guns to school to shoot after school. And strangely no one shot up their classmates and teachers.

Hmmmm....... I wonder what's changed between then and now????
I grew up in hicksville, and there were no gun ranges at the school(s).

Maybe that was a southern thing.
 

Burning Man

Super Anarchist
10,596
2,102
Back to the desert
I grew up in hicksville, and there were no gun ranges at the school(s).

Maybe that was a southern thing.
It was. Not all schools had it. But some did and it was not uncommon back in the 50s and 60s. Even schools that didn't have "ranges" still had shooting teams and kids brought guns to school. Even outside of that, in most rural places in the US when I went to school, HS kids would have rifles and shotties in the back window of their pickem up truck on school premises so they could go deer hunting after school. No one shot up schools then even though a gun was a parking lot walk away from the building.

Hmmm, I wonder what changed between then and now?
 

Alan H

Super Anarchist
3,350
763
SF Bay Area
It doesn't fucking matter what changed between then and now. I cannot fathom why you can't figure this out. It just....I can't even.
SOMETHING changed. Wow. Ya think? Do you know exactly what it was? Do I? Does anybody? NO.


You can pitch your favorite guess all day long, dude, that doesn't mean that you know. And it doesn't mean that you have THE SOLUTION. While we pontificate and argue and the experts chime in, and sleazebag senators address the NRA, and you write another post saying that it's ~The Internet~ and ~Social Media~ but Senator Cruz thinks it's "Mental Health" and my neighbor Mary says it's because kids don't respect their elders any more.. another 800+ people die, every week.
Go on, propose another solution; Mental Health. Nobody gets to access the internet without passing a government mandatory mental health test...wtf....let's argue about it. Let's spend another week on it. Let's let congress dither and fight and piss around for another year over the funding for your solution...or Ted Cruz's solution... or Mary's solution... and then let's spend a couple of years implementing your solution.
Meanwhile, another 800+ people die, every week.

Funny, they don't die because people have knives or hand grenades or rolling pins.
 

Alan H

Super Anarchist
3,350
763
SF Bay Area
But wait...WAIT!

The militia will save us! ...or buy us time until our good friends from Sierra Leone come and save us.

=================
I just can not fathom the mindset of people who would rather let thousands of people die, to save their precious. I cannot understand how people are perfectly happy to let hundreds, thousands of people die and insist that we solve the killing people problem by solving every other impossible, intractable, complicated, not-understood social problem first. Instead of dealing with the implements that enable killling every single day, no...no no! We must solve enormous, huge, bafflingly confusing social issues, because Don't Touch My Fucking GUN!
 
Last edited:

basketcase

Fuck you second amendment
4,041
1,023
a long way from home
You want the solution to this problem? Take away all of the fucking guns. Each and every last fucking one. Melt them into a fucking dog shit shaped blob. Then... If someone whinges about needing one for home defense, give them a tazer and a glass of water. If someone whinges about wanting to target shoot, give them an airsoft. Don't like it? Fuck yourself. Fuck yourself dry. And fuck you second amendment.
 

Raz'r

Super Anarchist
62,198
5,442
De Nile
It was. Not all schools had it. But some did and it was not uncommon back in the 50s and 60s. Even schools that didn't have "ranges" still had shooting teams and kids brought guns to school. Even outside of that, in most rural places in the US when I went to school, HS kids would have rifles and shotties in the back window of their pickem up truck on school premises so they could go deer hunting after school. No one shot up schools then even though a gun was a parking lot walk away from the building.

Hmmm, I wonder what changed between then and now?
Oh, I had a gun in the car on occasion, and during season would grab the gun and dog, hit the back field for pheasants and the duck pond for, well, ducks. What's changed? I dunno, maybe parents didn't let the messed up kids have guns? Of course, our high school had the 3 kids who killed that couple with dad's 30.06, but you say that didn't happen too often. I wonder.
 

Burning Man

Super Anarchist
10,596
2,102
Back to the desert
It doesn't fucking matter what changed between then and now. I cannot fathom why you can't figure this out. It just....I can't even.
SOMETHING changed. Wow. Ya think? Do you know exactly what it was? Do I? Does anybody? NO.


You can pitch your favorite guess all day long, dude, that doesn't mean that you know. And it doesn't mean that you have THE SOLUTION. While we pontificate and argue and the experts chime in, and sleazebag senators address the NRA, and you write another post saying that it's ~The Internet~ and ~Social Media~ but Senator Cruz thinks it's "Mental Health" and my neighbor Mary says it's because kids don't respect their elders any more.. another 800+ people die, every week.
Go on, propose another solution; Mental Health. Nobody gets to access the internet without passing a government mandatory mental health test...wtf....let's argue about it. Let's spend another week on it. Let's let congress dither and fight and piss around for another year over the funding for your solution...or Ted Cruz's solution... or Mary's solution... and then let's spend a couple of years implementing your solution.
Meanwhile, another 800+ people die, every week.

Funny, they don't die because people have knives or hand grenades or rolling pins.
Ahhh, the old standby…. I don’t know what the problem is but let’s DO SOMETHING!!!

A common standard in problem solving and crisis management is to look at what’s changed from a previous condition where there was no crisis or problem to the current state where there is obviously a crisis level problem. Because until you ID what’s changed, you have no idea how to tackle the problem.

The point is: GUNZ have not changed. They haven’t gotten any more lethal. They don’t shoot faster or carry more rounds or have nuclear ripped bullets. Access to Gunz, despite lies, is more difficult now than ever before. AR-15s have been around for civilian use since the 70s at a min.

So you can yell DO SOMETTHING all fucking day long. But the reason gun owners oppose your solutions is because they know it is not the guns or the access that’s changed and your (collective your) refusal to acknowledge much less address the causal factors that ARE different tells them you are not serious and simply only want feel good high visibility things so you can say you did something. Sorry, that dog won’t hunt.
 

Burning Man

Super Anarchist
10,596
2,102
Back to the desert
Oh, I had a gun in the car on occasion, and during season would grab the gun and dog, hit the back field for pheasants and the duck pond for, well, ducks. What's changed? I dunno, maybe parents didn't let the messed up kids have guns? Of course, our high school had the 3 kids who killed that couple with dad's 30.06, but you say that didn't happen too often. I wonder.
I thought it was the gun itself that causes kids to shoot up schools. Yet you had a gun in the school parking lot a few steps away and it never occurred to you to murder your classmates. Why was that?
 

Raz'r

Super Anarchist
62,198
5,442
De Nile
Ahhh, the old standby…. I don’t know what the problem is but let’s DO SOMETHING!!!

A common standard in problem solving and crisis management is to look at what’s changed from a previous condition where there was no crisis or problem to the current state where there is obviously a crisis level problem. Because until you ID what’s changed, you have no idea how to tackle the problem.

The point is: GUNZ have not changed. They haven’t gotten any more lethal. They don’t shoot faster or carry more rounds or have nuclear ripped bullets. Access to Gunz, despite lies, is more difficult now than ever before. AR-15s have been around for civilian use since the 70s at a min.

So you can yell DO SOMETTHING all fucking day long. But the reason gun owners oppose your solutions is because they know it is not the guns or the access that’s changed and your (collective your) refusal to acknowledge much address the causal factors that ARE different tells them you are not serious and simply only want feel good high visibility things so you can say you did something. Sorry, that dog won’t hunt.
Yeah, that's wrong on the face of it.
My Rem model 742 .308 was a pretty awesome deer killer. But, it had a 4 round magazine, which wasn't the easiest thing to swap out, and it wasn't all that light. Had some kick to it as well. And it wasn't heavy, meaning, you could carry it all day, but it wasn't the lightest thing around either.

Y'all talk about how the AR-15 lookalikes are sweet shooting - well, that lower recoil allows you to squeeze off a bunch more rounds on target. Add in high capacity magazines that slam in and out, and you've got a more lethal machine.

Basically, we're comparing a design used to kill deer, where accuracy in brush, etc was key, and at most you'd get a 2nd shot off, vs killing people, where you need a whole lot of rounds in quick succession, so you want to stay on target.

So, yes, the weapons are more lethal. At least when it comes to killing people en masse
 

Raz'r

Super Anarchist
62,198
5,442
De Nile
I thought it was the gun itself that causes kids to shoot up schools. Yet you had a gun in the school parking lot a few steps away and it never occurred to you to murder your classmates. Why was that?
guns don't "cause" anything. They are inanimate objects. Guns certainly facilitate mass killings however. Or have you forgotten our Toolz conversations?

Y'all know I've been a moderate gun guy on the forums, but since the nutz have gone full retard, I'm not sure there is any real answer other than an Australian-model ban.
 

Alan H

Super Anarchist
3,350
763
SF Bay Area
No. Just no. NO.Guns haven't changed. First of all, yes they have. Back in the glorious days you remember, Summer of '72 you couldn't buy hellfires and bump stocks and the AR-15 wasn't for sale on every street corner. You couldn't buy handguns with 40 round magazines on the street. Yes, they DO shoot faster and they DO carry more rounds.

Secondly, all the lovely suggestions that you and your buddies have about internet access, mental health, social media, churchgoing, too much sugar in our diets, and whatever.... are intractable, complicated, probably just as constitutionally illegal as confiscating guns, and probably ultimately ineffectual. Maybe they'll work. Maybe they won't. YOU DON"T KNOW. I don't know. Nobody knows what the root causes of "the problem" are. Something changed in society. No shit, Sherlock.

Sure, people pull triggers. But if they didn't have triggers, there wouldn't be triggers to pull and the killing would stop....or at least slow down.
And THEN, when people don't die at the rate of 800+ per week, we can work on the solutions to those social problems.
 

Alan H

Super Anarchist
3,350
763
SF Bay Area
But now it DOES occur to people to murder their classmates.
So we can either work on the problem of getting people to stop thinking about that...

Or we can take away the tool that enables them to murder their classmates.

Which one of those is going to result in fewer dead classmates in the shortest amount of time?
 




Top