Stunned by massacre, U.S. students demand tighter gun controls

[Jingthing]

This push back is different.

I think it's about the politics and demographics of the Parkland area mixed with utter moral bankruptcy of the reaction from the fake president "trump."  

Whether the RESULTS will be different this time is another matter.

The smart money would always be on NO results based on history.

But kudos to the kids for trying.

They have a LOT of support!

So you never know.

At the very least, they are keeping HOPE alive, even though so many of their classmates are murdered. 

[Jingthing]

Another hopeful sign.

 

 

"Major Republican Donor Won’t Support Candidates Who Don’t Back an Assault Weapons Ban"

 

 

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/02/major-republican-donor-wont-support-candidates-who-dont-back-assault-weapons-ban.html

 

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 

 

 

[Cory1848]

2 hours ago, DM07 said:

Armed guards and teachers!

What could possibly go wrong!

Oh...wait...here is something: toddlers and children, caught in the crossfire of a shooter, a teacher and an armed guard!

Or this here: the armed guard, shooting the teacher, because he can not identify clearly, where the actual threat is located and just fires at a source of firing!

...with little children in the crossfire...again...

 

You dumb gun- nuts are so deluded and occupied with jerking off over your fantastic second amendment, you don't even see just how pathetic and ridiculous you are!

But wait -- Soon, some cops will show up, too. They’ll be looking for someone with a gun -- but so many people will now meet that description! Is that just a teacher, or is it a perp? Who the heck knows??!! Add generous amounts of caffeine to the mix, and, as they like to say in some “Second Amendment” circles, we’ll just let God sort ’em out later. Happy hunting!

[Sir Dude]

Yes, some further gun laws probably wouldn't be a bad thing in the US, like restricting certain sections of people to certain sections of weapons and making waiting times to acquire guns longer would be good etc. However, current and previous presidents have and will continue to fail to get this voted through into law as many of their law abiding constituents are having none of it (not just the evil NRA etc.)....it's a non-starter really, and to change or amend the constitution now is pretty much impossible due to the support needed to do so.

 

As an aside, even though this is an emotional issue, it is glaring how the young now "demand" so much to be implemented (regardless of the impracticalities and sensitivities of it) from statues being torn down, speakers banned from uni campuses that they disagree with, along with this entitled idea of we need our safe spaces and are intolerant of anything we don't like now because we don't want to listen to anyone non-comforming to our stance etc., as we can't debate without getting contemptuous or violent...so much for freedom of speech. The snowflakes having a cry on social media and starting a hash tag on Twitter isn't going to change anything (despite that sounding a little brutal)...as the honest truth is that US people love their guns too much and it is highly unlikely anything is going to change on this one anytime soon. The NRA and the gun supporters know they just have to ride-it-out and when the news cycle has had enough and moves on...it goes quiet.

 

Please take this post as an overall comment rather than cherry-picking a sentence to let loose at....many nuances at play.

[Cory1848]

31 minutes ago, Sir Dude said:

Yes, some further gun laws probably wouldn't be a bad thing in the US, like restricting certain sections of people to certain sections of weapons and making waiting times to acquire guns longer would be good etc. However, current and previous presidents have and will continue to fail to get this voted through into law as many of their law abiding constituents are having none of it (not just the evil NRA etc.)....it's a non-starter really, and to change or amend the constitution now is pretty much impossible due to the support needed to do so.

 

As an aside, even though this is an emotional issue, it is glaring how the young now "demand" so much to be implemented (regardless of the impracticalities and sensitivities of it) from statues being torn down, speakers banned from uni campuses that they disagree with, along with this entitled idea of we need our safe spaces and are intolerant of anything we don't like now because we don't want to listen to anyone non-comforming to our stance etc., as we can't debate without getting contemptuous or violent...so much for freedom of speech. The snowflakes having a cry on social media and starting a hash tag on Twitter isn't going to change anything (despite that sounding a little brutal)...as the honest truth is that US people love their guns too much and it is highly unlikely anything is going to change on this one anytime soon. The NRA and the gun supporters know they just have to ride-it-out and when the news cycle has had enough and moves on...it goes quiet.

 

Please take this post as an overall comment rather than cherry-picking a sentence to let loose at....many nuances at play.

Again, a majority of Americans favor putting greater restrictions on guns, so what you call a “non-starter” actually stands a chance of getting started, if enough pressure is put on legislators. As for your lambasting of young people, I’m sixty years old and firmly believe that young people have a great deal to teach us, all the time -- for one thing, they are not so set in their ways or so cynically detached as to write off much-needed changes as “pretty much impossible.”

 

We discredit youth only at our peril. Look to the late 1960s and early 1970s, when Nixon’s “silent majority” dismissed the youth of the period as drug-addled and oversexed. As it turns out, however, the student activists were quite right: after the Tonkin Gulf, Nixon’s preelection interference with the Vietnam peace talks, Watergate, etc., the nation’s leaders WERE in fact a pack of crooks and liars, and it was the children’s parents who had scales covering their eyes. Silent majority indeed.

 

I will quickly “cherry-pick” a few words you use. I assume, by “snowflake,” you’re referring to liberals in general (or, people who favor restrictions on guns). However, earlier, you talk about not wanting to disturb “sensitivities” -- and here it seems as though you’re referring to the sensitivities of gun fetishists who don’t want their guns taken away, and that these sensitivities must be taken into account.

 

Who, then, are the “snowflakes,” really?

[Sir Dude]

Wrong on many things on that post...just take things at face value rather than assume anything man and seems you assume much in that post. OK, guess we are done here then. I couldn't possibly comment further as it will get deleted...might as well leave your and my comment up man.

[Cory1848]

2 minutes ago, Sir Dude said:

Wrong on many things on that post...just take things at face value rather than assume anything man and seems you assume much in that post. OK, guess we are done here then. I couldn't possibly comment further as it will get deleted...might as well leave your and my comment up man.

?? -- You too, Dude. Whatever.

[wabothai]

9 hours ago, twig said:

Well, by the same "sane" logic, if you don't like the realities of US history of civilian gun ownership and Bill of Rights, you are welcome to move to many places where the local armed gang that rules over you reserves the right to own guns only for themselves.

 

Don't go to the US or live there, just as you wouldn't with Afghanistan or Somalia.

 

Those who stay in the US and want to keep their existing rights, shouldn't have to leave to keep them. Seems to me that those who don't like those existing rights should leave.

Oh, you are one of those.....try to figure it out.

[Lokie]

I can understand the right to bear arms as written by your founding fathers but it can not be right that jo public can go and buy semi-automatic assault weapons, especially someone who is not even eligible to vote in your country or consume alcohol?

 

It is indefensible, only law enforcement and the military should have access to these weapons to serve and protect the people - nobody else has any business to have them nor use them period. Your children are being cut down in your schools and yet the powers that be still argue the toss?

[dunroaming]

14 minutes ago, Cory1848 said:

We discredit youth only at our peril. Look to the late 1960s and early 1970s, when Nixon’s “silent majority” dismissed the youth of the period as drug-addled and oversexed.

Well I was there although on the other side of the pond and we were certainly drug fuelled and oversexed, I am delighted to say .  We also were revolutionary and changed many things.  It was our world that these people were screwing up and we wanted to change that.

 

Hopefully now the young people will do the same because as sure as eggs is eggs we are screwing up their future today.

[wabothai]

9 hours ago, Jonnapat said:

Students v NRA , NO chance!

You just wait and see.

[dunroaming]

1 minute ago, wabothai said:

You just wait and see.

And that just shows what a corrupt, screwed up country the USA have become.  Shame on you America. 

[wabothai]

1 minute ago, dunroaming said:

And that just shows what a corrupt, screwed up country the USA have become.  Shame on you America. 

Yeah, a country full of gun loving red necks, cowboys, crackers and rambos, the 45 lovers.

[Sir Dude]

I'm sure if they introduced a few reasonable gun laws (which I'm not against) then it would help, but the lunatics would still find other ways to explode at society and do damage when so inclined. Maybe not quite so much damage if they restricted the tools a little, but it would still be a periodic run-away happening.

Many in modern society that wander around most countries have mild to serious mental problems.....just a case of when and how they explode. They are driving your taxi, teaching your children, running the bank, manging your condo apartment or whatever....lol. The truth is that society is full of nutjobs...everywhere in every country. Yes, restrict gun ownership a bit and as much as you can, but there are many who oppose that in the US...just reality.

As an aside...more people are killed in Chicago each year than in all of these uni incidents put together plus the US military for a given year. Maybe these students should be campaigning for safer cities....and making gun ownership illegal will do nothing to stem the criminals from using  them.

 

[Cory1848]

2 minutes ago, wabothai said:

Yeah, a country full of gun loving red necks, cowboys, crackers and rambos, the 45 lovers.

 

7 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

And that just shows what a corrupt, screwed up country the USA have become.  Shame on you America. 

I'm American, and I talk to friends back home pretty frequently; they describe life there under the current regime as "surreal." (When civic life plays out entirely on the level of the surreal, that can breed great artistic creativity and innovation -- as in Weimar Germany, for instance --  so perhaps there's a silver lining here, however modest!) 

 

[Moonlover]

3 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Another hopeful sign.

 

 

"Major Republican Donor Won’t Support Candidates Who Don’t Back an Assault Weapons Ban"

 

 

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/02/major-republican-donor-wont-support-candidates-who-dont-back-assault-weapons-ban.html

 

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 

 

 

Coming from a country, the UK, where it is not possible to obtain permission to own, even a 22 handgun, the notion that this sponsor deems it appropriate to ban assault weapons sounds ludicrous in the extreme!

 

What the heck would anyone, in a civilized society, want an assault weapon for?

[dunroaming]

4 minutes ago, Cory1848 said:

 

I'm American, and I talk to friends back home pretty frequently; they describe life there under the current regime as "surreal." (When civic life plays out entirely on the level of the surreal, that can breed great artistic creativity and innovation -- as in Weimar Germany, for instance --  so perhaps there's a silver lining here, however modest!) 

 

Of course there is a silver lining, we all need to believe that.  I also speak to American friends in the USA and they are all dumbstruck by what is happening there.  But they are good people, real Americans who will keep fighting to get their country back!

[speedtripler]

14 hours ago, FreddieRoyle said:

RIP to all the victims, it will have been a terrifying experience never to be forgotten. BUT, this is why children are not given the vote. Responding in an emotional tizzy after such an experience is the mentality that leads us to lynch mobs. I believe(after all we have this drummed into our heads after each terror attack) that we must all stand together in solidarity with the victims, and let cooler heads decide on the legalities of weapon ownership. A quick look south of the border shows us in Mexico guns are much more strongly prohibited and yet the country carries on in what seems like an eternal shootemup.

 I note several schools in Texas have teachers that carry firearms all the time. These schools have not had one of these events. Could this in fact be the answer? Properly vetted and armed teachers.

No, armed teachers will not prevent this

People who plan to shoot up schools usually have good weapons and sometimes wear bulletproof jackets 

You can't expect to arm teachers to deal with that and teach at the same time

[stevenl]

20 minutes ago, Sir Dude said:

I'm sure if they introduced a few reasonable gun laws (which I'm not against) then it would help, but the lunatics would still find other ways to explode at society and do damage when so inclined. Maybe not quite so much damage if they restricted the tools a little, but it would still be a periodic run-away happening.

Many in modern society that wander around most countries have mild to serious mental problems.....just a case of when and how they explode. They are driving your taxi, teaching your children, running the bank, manging your condo apartment or whatever....lol. The truth is that society is full of nutjobs...everywhere in every country. Yes, restrict gun ownership a bit and as much as you can, but there are many who oppose that in the US...just reality.

As an aside...more people are killed in Chicago each year than in all of these uni incidents put together plus the US military for a given year. Maybe these students should be campaigning for safer cities....and making gun ownership illegal will do nothing to stem the criminals from using  them.

 

Nonsense, making it more difficult to obtain guns will of course effect criminals using them.

[richard_smith237]

1 minute ago, Moonlover said:

Coming from a country, the UK, where it is not possible to obtain permission to own, even a 22 handgun, the notion that this sponsor deems it appropriate to ban assault weapons sounds ludicrous in the extreme!

 

What the heck would anyone, in a civilized society, want an assault weapon for?

 

Come on... Don't you consider it your right to be able to defend yourself ???...   if someone came into my home I want the capacity to defend myself... if that means cutting them in half with an assault weapon so be it...  In fact the Government should make some laws permitting us this right, laws which are fixed in stone - We can stand by them, a set of rules for society to live by and standby...   A Constitution to live by and standby... a Constitution which protects our rights, one which the Government can't change because, well, that would just be unconstitutional...  unless it suits the Government in which case it can be changed 27 times (so far)...  

 

Erm yes... the whole argument against Gun control is so galactically idiotic, so inhumane, so very wrong the attitudes of those in support of permitting Guns is simply alien... 

 

This is not Pandora's box, it can be closed... It will take years, a few generations even... the prolific use of, availability and ownership of guns in the US is the problem... that and the fact that its impossible to safely Police a few hundred million people some of whom are nutjobs and believe it their right to carry and use a gun for their own screwed up agenda... 

 

This is such a Polarising issue and I simply cannot understand why or even how...  I do like to see and recognise the opinions of others, however, this subject is where I fall short in the potential understanding of (some of) my fellow man... There is no place for guns in the hands of the Public in any civilised society. 

 

 

[sirineou]

11 hours ago, ELVIS123456 said:

Guns dont kill people - people using guns do.

Cars dont kill people - people driving cars do.

Trucks dont kill people - people driving trucks do.

Cigarettes dont kill people - people smoking cigarettes do.

 

The problem is people. Not guns, cars, trucks, cigarettes, etc etc etc.

The issue is to manage the people, not to hate the guns.

Making guns illegal will not solve the mass shooting problem in USA.

 

Controlling who has access to guns will help - a lot.

Not one mass shooting killer is an NRA member, that I am aware of, and 99.9% of legal gun owners do not commit mass shootings.

Most mass shooting killers had 'mental issues' that people knew about.

Bring back legal detaining and mental health assessment of anyone suspected of being a danger to others/themselves - that will help.

Making guns illegal will not help.

Having armed guards in schools will help. They have armed guards in banks, why not in schools.

=

deleted!

I misunderstood your post 

The vast majority of people getting killed by guns get killed at home , So why not have armed guards at home ?

 

[Cory1848]

13 minutes ago, sirineou said:

deleted!

I misunderstood your post 

The vast majority of people getting killed by guns get killed at home , So why not have armed guards at home ?

 

Each year, armed American toddlers -- who chance upon loaded guns carelessly left out by their brain-dead, gun-owning parents -- kill twice as many Americans as Islamic terrorists do. I suppose this gets into Darwin Awards territory ...

[dunroaming]

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

Come on... Don't you consider it your right to be able to defend yourself ???...   if someone came into my home I want the capacity to defend myself...

If you are using an assault rifle you are not defending yourself, you are declaring war!  To keep using the excuse that you need an arsenal of weapons to "defend" yourself is beyond ridiculous.  Do you really think that we are that naïve?

[sirineou]

9 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

If you are using an assault rifle you are not defending yourself, you are declaring war!  To keep using the excuse that you need an arsenal of weapons to "defend" yourself is beyond ridiculous.  Do you really think that we are that naïve?

I personally ascribe to the mutual destruction deterrence theory and recommend we all carry PNDs

(Personal Nuclear Devices)  they could come in stylish colors and designs that would fit people lifestyles and personalities. For the Thai wife I recommend a stylish  "Hello Kitty" motif.

[vogie]

[stevenl]

8 hours ago, dunroaming said:

If you are using an assault rifle you are not defending yourself, you are declaring war!  To keep using the excuse that you need an arsenal of weapons to "defend" yourself is beyond ridiculous.  Do you really think that we are that naïve?

Please re-read the complete post you are replying to.

[AsianAtHeart]

On 2/19/2018 at 6:34 AM, webfact said:

'to every politician who is taking donations from the NRA, shame on you.' 

NRA is one thing.  Big Pharma is another.  The latter needs far greater scrutiny, as virtually every single one of the mass shootings on record in the past two decades has been carried out by someone on drugs, most notably the SSRI drugs.  With so many people taking drugs affecting their brain chemistry, it's a wonder we don't have even more of these horrendous events.  But the list of those benefiting from the pharmaceutical industry's profits is longer than stock market traders . . . congress, government, media, medical schools, doctors, and the list goes on.  This is why everyone is led to believe that the human body needs drugs, vaccines, etc. to cure every ailment.  The drug makers should be held to account for these side effects resulting in violence.

[AsianAtHeart]

11 hours ago, vogie said:

The keyword in the above is "school."  There have been other mass shootings in the UK.  Of course, the UK has also experienced bombings, vehicular assaults, etc.  Can we ban bombs, vehicles, knives, bricks, wine bottles, and, er, .... fists?

 

I always chuckle a bit to think of airport security checking for fists.

[watcharacters]

On 2/19/2018 at 8:30 AM, Becker said:

Emotional tizzy?? What a disgusting description. Even for a man-child supporter that's low!

 

"BUT, this is why children are not given the vote."

And the election of the man-child should probably lead to some form of basic knowledge test before so-called adults are allowed to vote to prevent the "non-geniuses" from yet again making a mockery of an election.

 

ATTENTION:

New  proposal aims at changing the teaching educational requirements from four to five years.

 

Four years of pure education courses and one year of weapons training.

 

 

 

[Credo]

It seems the students are getting some support from the medical community.   The American Psychiatric Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics and four other medical associations issued a joint statement Friday urging comprehensive action by Trump and Congress, including labeling gun violence a national public health epidemic.

 

Trump focus on mental health after school shooting denounced

 

Frustration is mounting in the medical community as the Trump administration again points to mental illness in response to yet another mass shooting.

"The concept that mental illness is a precursor to violent behavior is nonsense," said Dr. Louis Kraus, forensic psychiatry chief at Chicago's Rush University Medical College. "The vast majority of gun violence is not attributable to mental illness."

Nikolas Cruz, the 19-year-old charged with killing 17 people on Valentine's Day at his former high school in Parkland, Florida has been described by students as a loner with troubling behavior who had been kicked out of school. His mother recently died and Cruz had been staying with family friends.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/doctors-blast-trumps-mental-illness-focus-fight-violence-171839946--politics.html