Texas governor: 15 killed in school shooting; gunman dead

[bendejo]

On 5/27/2022 at 5:14 AM, morrobay said:

And they also say so and so was on the radar.

[ . . . ]

A series of political assassinations in the US started in the 1960s.  After the incident law enforcement always said the same thing about the assassin:

 

JFK (1963): "we've known about this guy"

RFK (1968): "we've known about this guy"

MLK (1968): "we've known about this guy"

George Wallace (1972, injured but not killed): "we've known about this guy"

Then came the gals who went after Gerry Ford, Guess what they said.

 

I was in grade school when JFK was shot, but even at age 11 I had to wonder "if you know about what this guy is up to . . ."

 

[Hummin]

11 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Why are American kids so prone to going on shooting rampages ?

Unfortunately  bullying, social isolation and speech impediments happen to kids the World over .

   Why is it that its just American kids who seem to take the option of murdering other school kids ?

Quite e different violent culture been cultivated to long over there and available guns

[bendejo]

18 hours ago, Jingthing said:

It's not like she's any kind of NRA shill and hunting is a big thing in Minnesota.

 

Senator Klobuchar’s Plan for Gun Violence Prevention | by Amy Klobuchar | Medium

Wow, a paper!  Who says the Dems never get anything done? 

 

Connecting yourself to the gun lobby for $4,000 ?  Melania spends more than that on a single trip to the shoe store.  Bad judgement.

I know you want to keep the GOP at bay, but there's better to choose from.

 

 

[SunnyinBangrak]

12 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Why are American kids so prone to going on shooting rampages ?

Unfortunately  bullying, social isolation and speech impediments happen to kids the World over .

   Why is it that its just American kids who seem to take the option of murdering other school kids ?

Unfortunately the irrational and highly political response to this dreadful crime will lead to even more division and will make the chance of another repeat event more likely. The correct response would be for all Americans to come together and condemn the shooters actions. Perhaps some way to support mental health charities? The response to the recent Waukesha car massacre was much more appropriate, everybody agreed it was a terrible event and made efforts to get on with life as quickly as possible and not fan the flames with divisive political moves. 

 

In my opinion America has a culture problem, not a gun problem. And it is getting worse.

[mikebike]

42 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

In my opinion America has a culture problem, not a gun problem. And it is getting worse.

Like everything else, it is NOT an either/or. It is both. You can argue about degree of each, but not deny that the two are inextricably intertwined 

[Bkk Brian]

Its a pity the politicians don't listen to the American people a little more, the majority want tighter controls on guns. Unfortunately that does not filter through to policy and law. Hopefully things will change.

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Its a pity the politicians don't listen to the American people a little more, the majority want tighter controls on guns. Unfortunately that does not filter through to policy and law. Hopefully things will change.

Don't hold your breath.

 

 

[steven100]

They say having a gun in your house makes it safer from burglaries ....

 

hmmm ....   I would much rather live in a town with no guns than one with guns. 

[Phoenix Rising]

18 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

The AR-15 .223  bullet is common size among hunting rifles. State laws regulate the magazine capacity for guns. Modified, custom high capacity magazines are available. Handguns use smaller bullet but is the weapon of choice used in a majority of mass shootings. 

 

So where do you start? And where does it end? Folks know if any one harsh gun law passes it's just the beginning. Again, there's 400 million guns out there.

All the more reason to start ASAP.

[Phoenix Rising]

19 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

People throw the term "gun legislation" around, but what would that entail ? Are we going to ban AR-15s? And if so, why? Well maybe because they're scary looking, or because they carry the name assault weapon or maybe because they're semi-automatic.  And what about the millions already in the public hands? Now let's say we are able to ban AR15's what's next? 

 

Well regular hunting rifles uses the same ammo and come in semi-auto models and are just as deadly. Handguns are the weapon of choice for most mass shooters. What about them?

 

400 million guns already in use in the USA. That's a staggering amount, what kind of gun legislation would make them go away.

 

A term our VP likes to use is "root cause". What is the root cause of school shootings? 

 

 

 

Nutters with easy access to weapons capable of killing a large number of people in a short amount of time. Mass shootings is a uniquely American problem and unless you believe that US people are way more crazy than people in comparable countries the one big difference is the prevalence of guns in the US.

[Phoenix Rising]

16 hours ago, ozimoron said:

And the rest is self evident. He felt alienated which led to resentment and culminated in violence. It could so easily have been prevented.

Don't know about that but if it had been hard for him to get his hands on assault weapons some or all of those dead kids might still be alive.

[onthedarkside]

An off-topic trolling post and several ensuing replies have been removed.

 

 

[KanchanaburiGuy]

3 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

The correct response would be for all Americans to come together and condemn the shooters actions. 

Can you cite a couple of examples of Americans who DON'T condemn the shooter's actions, please? 

 

Cuz I've never known any who don't or wouldn't, and I've spent 59 of my 64 years surrounded by 'em! 

 

-----------------

 

You see, it's not a question of whether Americans condemn this shooter............ or the one before........... or the one before that............ or the one before that. Trust me when I say that ALL Americans condemn them! 

 

The question that is in play here is not about one shooting and one tragedy............ or even ten. The questions that are in play here are BIGGER THAN THAT. 

 

Questions of Liberty and Freedom should never be taken lightly. One, nor ten, nor even a hundred incidents........ should be enough to toss Liberty and Freedom aside!

 

The thing that was unique about the American Experiment that began roughly two and a half centuries ago was the determination to allow THE GOVERNED  to decide what shape and form their government would take.

 

Before that time---and in most places, even, since that time---the form and process of government has been determined either by an elite class.......... by military might............or both. 

 

It was........... and remains........... a radical concept to let THE GOVERNED............. decide for themselves! 

 

So, any time someone says "There ought to be a law!".............. what they are saying is............. 

 

The government ought to become more powerful.............. and the governed ought to become less powerful!

 

............. And that's the exact opposite of being on the road to Liberty and Freedom! 

 

----------------

 

So, even while ALL Americans condemn this shooter and the tragedy that occurred on this one bad day in Texas............ some of us remember that, despite this tragedy, there are BIGGER QUESTIONS IN PLAY. 

 

And some of us remember that getting the answers to these Bigger Questions WRONG.......... is how you wind up with Hitler in Germany, Stalin in the USSR, and Mao in China. 

 

When the governed abdicate their responsibility to control the shape and form of the government to the government............ Liberty and Freedom STOP being a driving force behind decision making. Indeed, they probably stop being important, at all! 

 

And......... as history has shown us time and time again............ the consequence of THAT............ can be ten thousand time worse..........  than any one bad day in Texas could ever be! 

 

Cheers! 

[KanchanaburiGuy]

4 hours ago, steven100 said:

They say having a gun in your house makes it safer from burglaries ....

 

hmmm ....   I would much rather live in a town with no guns than one with guns. 

The burglar would love it if you lived in a town with no guns, too. 

 

----------------

 

In this bad ol' world there are predators and prey. Relinquishing one's standing as a predator to voluntarily become prey............. isn't how our species survived so long! 

 

????????????

 

The best defense against predators Is not to become prey.......... but to become BETTER PREDATORS! 

 

????????????

 

Cheers! 

 

(Of course, it'd be great if we could teach predators how not to be predators. But, well........ Lol) 

Edited May 28, 2022 by KanchanaburiGuy

[EVENKEEL]

2 hours ago, Phoenix Rising said:

Nutters with easy access to weapons capable of killing a large number of people in a short amount of time. Mass shootings is a uniquely American problem and unless you believe that US people are way more crazy than people in comparable countries the one big difference is the prevalence of guns in the US.

Well these last two shootings the shooters were nutters.

[KhunLA]

7 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Well these last two shootings the shooters were nutters.

Nutter = anyone shooting to kill someone without a valid reason.

Last 2 ... how about the last 10+k per year in the USA

 

[Phoenix Rising]

23 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Well these last two shootings the shooters were nutters.

The point being?

[KanchanaburiGuy]

15 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Well these last two shootings the shooters were nutters.

No doubt. 

 

But being a nutter isn't against the law. 

 

So, if you want to do something about them, you have to be able to prove they poses a threat to themselves or others. Not just talk about. Not even just threaten. But pose an ACTUAL threat to themselves or others. 

 

Now, I had a heart attack when I was 38. Naturally, as part of that, I did some perilous studying. One of the things I learned is this: In 25% of cases, the first sign......... the FIRST sign............ that someone has a heart problem...... is death. (I was a little shocked to learn it was that high.)

 

Now, I would bet that most of the time with these nutters, the FIRST sign that they pose ACTUAL threat to go in and shoot up a school........... is them going in and shooting up a school! 

 

Yeah, there might have been some things said or done beforehand. But in this world of Freedom of Speech and Liars and Braggarts and social media making people "Stars"............ how can we ever........... EVER........... hope to accurately, fairly, and legally.......... separate the wheat from the chaff? 

 

Simply put............. until the "thought police" becomes a real thing and we have the means to definitively know a real threat from simple braggadocio(sp?).......... we're going to have to face the reality that the FIRST sign that someone TRULY wants to shoot up a school........... may be them shooting up a school! 

 

Cheers! 

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

6 minutes ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

Simply put............. until the "thought police" becomes a real thing and we have the means to definitively know a real threat from simple braggadocio(sp?).......... we're going to have to face the reality that the FIRST sign that someone TRULY wants to shoot up a school........... may be them shooting up a school! 

 

Cheers! 

 

 

Some truth in that but also some truth in those people not being able to shoot that school up had it not been so easy to get guns in the first place.

[olfu]

All these shooting misleading as all them done by men. Why?

Yes, ask yourself what you been doing in your tender age and what you wanted be doing. Contradiction and frustration non-resolved.

[smutcakes]

31 minutes ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

No doubt. 

 

But being a nutter isn't against the law. 

 

So, if you want to do something about them, you have to be able to prove they poses a threat to themselves or others. Not just talk about. Not even just threaten. But pose an ACTUAL threat to themselves or others. 

 

Now, I had a heart attack when I was 38. Naturally, as part of that, I did some perilous studying. One of the things I learned is this: In 25% of cases, the first sign......... the FIRST sign............ that someone has a heart problem...... is death. (I was a little shocked to learn it was that high.)

 

Now, I would bet that most of the time with these nutters, the FIRST sign that they pose ACTUAL threat to go in and shoot up a school........... is them going in and shooting up a school! 

 

Yeah, there might have been some things said or done beforehand. But in this world of Freedom of Speech and Liars and Braggarts and social media making people "Stars"............ how can we ever........... EVER........... hope to accurately, fairly, and legally.......... separate the wheat from the chaff? 

 

Simply put............. until the "thought police" becomes a real thing and we have the means to definitively know a real threat from simple braggadocio(sp?).......... we're going to have to face the reality that the FIRST sign that someone TRULY wants to shoot up a school........... may be them shooting up a school! 

 

Cheers! 

 

 

So why does it mostly only happen in the US?

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, smutcakes said:

So why does it mostly only happen in the US?

Guns

[gargamon]

I saw a very illuminating article interviewing a couple of people that study mass shooters. They state that these shooters believe they have been wronged somehow and it's so bad they decide to take out as many of the supposed offenders as possible. A major point they make is that these shootings are essentially "suicide by cop", so once you realize this, it becomes obvious that arming everyone will make it worse.

 

Here's  the link: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/05/27/stopping-mass-shooters-q-a-00035762

[Jingthing]

14 minutes ago, gargamon said:

I saw a very illuminating article interviewing a couple of people that study mass shooters. They state that these shooters believe they have been wronged somehow and it's so bad they decide to take out as many of the supposed offenders as possible. A major point they make is that these shootings are essentially "suicide by cop", so once you realize this, it becomes obvious that arming everyone will make it worse.

 

Here's  the link: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/05/27/stopping-mass-shooters-q-a-00035762

If there had been effective red flag laws in effect this guy would have been blocked.

[KanchanaburiGuy]

3 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

Some truth in that but also some truth in those people not being able to shoot that school up had it not been so easy to get guns in the first place.

Agreed. But as my very first post in this thread attempted to clarify, that ship has sailed. It's too late.

 

As things stand, there are already SO MANY guns, that even the most draconian measures to eliminate them............ will still leave anyone who truly wants to get their hands on one............ still able to do so. 

 

You can't make nearly 400 million guns magically disappear. And no amount of banning and confiscating will get rid of enough to matter.

 

I estimate (guesstimate?) that if the best conceivable banning and confiscating efforts were instituted........... in the end there'd STILL be between 2 million and 10 million guns out there floating around. 

 

Sounds like a lot, I know. But as a percentage, it's tiny. 

 

And you know what? 

 

If 2 million guns are still out there........... (A 99.5% success rate!)............. anyone who truly wants a gun........... will still find a way to get one! 

 

So it's not really that you're wrong. It's just you are wasting your time talking about a solution that......... even in our wildest dreams........... could never actually solve anything! 

 

I mean, wasn't there a major shooter not too long ago who stole his weapon(s) from his mom's locked gun cabinet........... something like that? 

 

The guns are out there. Nearly 400 million of 'em. It's simply too late to believe we'll ever get the number down to the point where a person CAN'T get what they want,  just by using a little creativity! 

 

Honestly, it's the "War on Drugs," all over again. And here we are, what, 30-35 years later? ........... And anyone in America can get pretty much any drugs they want.......... whenever and wherever they want them!

 

In prison, want drugs.? No problem! ????????????

 

Easy access to guns is a dead issue. If it hadn't been a store, it would have been a street corner, or a friend or family member's house, or a neighbor's. If it hadn't been an "assault rifle," it would have been hand guns. If it hadn't been local, he'd've taken a drive. 

 

Face it..........  easy was a convenience. But if he truly wanted them, he'd have gotten his hands on some kind of gun.......... in a less-convenient way. 

 

Because I think it's reasonable to assume...........

 

He didnt shoot up an elementary school because the guns were easy to get ahold of. He shot up an elementary school because he was determined to do so!

 

Cheers! 

Edited May 28, 2022 by KanchanaburiGuy

[Bkk Brian]

12 minutes ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

Easy access to guns is a dead issue. If it hadn't been a store, it would have been a street corner, or a friend or family member's house, or a neighbor's. If it hadn't been an "assault rifle," it would have been hand guns. If it hadn't been local, he'd've taken a drive. 

 

Face it..........  easy was a convenience. But if he truly wanted them, he'd have gotten his hands on some kind of gun.......... in a less-convenient way. 

 

Because I think it's reasonable to assume...........

 

He didnt shoot up an elementary school because the guns were easy to get ahold of. He shot up an elementary school because he was determined to do so!

 

Cheers! 

No, easy access to guns is never a dead issue, that's denial talking. Where there is a will there is a way and the majority of Americans have that will and want tighter controls. I'm very happy that I side with that majority and despise those who think nothing can be done about such a catastrophic home grown problem.

[heybruce]

10 hours ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

The burglar would love it if you lived in a town with no guns, too. 

 

----------------

 

In this bad ol' world there are predators and prey. Relinquishing one's standing as a predator to voluntarily become prey............. isn't how our species survived so long! 

 

????????????

 

The best defense against predators Is not to become prey.......... but to become BETTER PREDATORS! 

 

????????????

 

Cheers! 

 

(Of course, it'd be great if we could teach predators how not to be predators. But, well........ Lol) 

No, burglars like to steal guns.  They especially like to steal guns from unlocked cars.  Just do a search on the words "gun stolen unlocked car" and you will get plenty of links.  It's so common it only makes local news sources, if that.  And these are only the stolen guns that are reported.

 

How do the guns rights people feel about laws requiring people to properly secure their weapons when not in use? 

[heybruce]

10 hours ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

The burglar would love it if you lived in a town with no guns, too. 

 

----------------

 

In this bad ol' world there are predators and prey. Relinquishing one's standing as a predator to voluntarily become prey............. isn't how our species survived so long! 

 

????????????

 

The best defense against predators Is not to become prey.......... but to become BETTER PREDATORS! 

 

????????????

 

Cheers! 

 

(Of course, it'd be great if we could teach predators how not to be predators. But, well........ Lol) 

Yet somehow limiting access to guns works well in many democracies that have low crime rates and don't have insurrections following elections.

[heybruce]

5 hours ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

Agreed. But as my very first post in this thread attempted to clarify, that ship has sailed. It's too late.

 

As things stand, there are already SO MANY guns, that even the most draconian measures to eliminate them............ will still leave anyone who truly wants to get their hands on one............ still able to do so. 

 

You can't make nearly 400 million guns magically disappear. And no amount of banning and confiscating will get rid of enough to matter.

 

I estimate (guesstimate?) that if the best conceivable banning and confiscating efforts were instituted........... in the end there'd STILL be between 2 million and 10 million guns out there floating around. 

 

Sounds like a lot, I know. But as a percentage, it's tiny. 

 

And you know what? 

 

If 2 million guns are still out there........... (A 99.5% success rate!)............. anyone who truly wants a gun........... will still find a way to get one! 

 

So it's not really that you're wrong. It's just you are wasting your time talking about a solution that......... even in our wildest dreams........... could never actually solve anything! 

 

I mean, wasn't there a major shooter not too long ago who stole his weapon(s) from his mom's locked gun cabinet........... something like that? 

 

The guns are out there. Nearly 400 million of 'em. It's simply too late to believe we'll ever get the number down to the point where a person CAN'T get what they want,  just by using a little creativity! 

 

Honestly, it's the "War on Drugs," all over again. And here we are, what, 30-35 years later? ........... And anyone in America can get pretty much any drugs they want.......... whenever and wherever they want them!

 

In prison, want drugs.? No problem! ????????????

 

Easy access to guns is a dead issue. If it hadn't been a store, it would have been a street corner, or a friend or family member's house, or a neighbor's. If it hadn't been an "assault rifle," it would have been hand guns. If it hadn't been local, he'd've taken a drive. 

 

Face it..........  easy was a convenience. But if he truly wanted them, he'd have gotten his hands on some kind of gun.......... in a less-convenient way. 

 

Because I think it's reasonable to assume...........

 

He didnt shoot up an elementary school because the guns were easy to get ahold of. He shot up an elementary school because he was determined to do so!

 

Cheers! 

Perhaps, but laws making it illegal to handle a gun in an irresponsible manner would make it easier for the police to justify taking the guns of irresponsible idiots.  It also might make marginal idiots put a little thought into how well they handle and store their weapons. 

 

Laws with stiff penalties against carrying a weapon while under the influence might make some people think twice about their "constitutional carry" rights before going out for drinks.  It wold also make it easier for police to arrest a drunk before he uses the gun he is carrying.

 

Laws requiring people to have gun safety training and a rigorous background check before acquiring a gun, and to have a permit showing they have had the training and background checks, would make it easier for police to arrest the people and confiscate the weapons of people who shouldn't have weapons.  That is how gun-happy Switzerland keeps their gun crime rate far below the US.

 

Laws requiring prosecution for criminal negligence whenever a person uses the "I didn't think it was loaded" excuse, and some high visibility prosecutions of grieving gun owners who accidently/idiotically shot a family member, might make more people realize that guns aren't toys and must be handled responsibly at all times.

 

I agree that guns will never be eliminated in the US.  But I would like to see laws limiting access to people who have shown they have training and not yet demonstrated they are irresponsible idiots or dangerously unstable.  I would also like it to be easier for police to confiscate weapons in the possession of unqualified idiots. 

[kbelyeu]

On 5/25/2022 at 7:07 AM, Phoenix Rising said:

The 2nd amendment must be removed from the US constitution and semi-automatic weapons must be banned. All banned weapons must be handed in against compensation from the government.

That, as a minimum, should be the first step in weaning the US public off weapons of war.

Never going to happen without a civil war.