10 if you include the killer; yet another lone loon.Originally Posted by BBC
How many gun massacres in the US is that so far?
This year?
Obama saying such shootings are now routine.
How completely depressing.
Yet Another Gun Massacre (Renamed ...)
10 if you include the killer; yet another lone loon.
How many gun massacres in the US is that so far?
This year?
Obama saying such shootings are now routine.
How completely depressing.
Last edited by Timbuk2; 12-03-2015 at 07:58 AM.
40th school shooting this year, 141st since Sandyhook (including on campus suicides)
We are a country full of unmitigated poverty, mental illness, rage, and dissatisfaction In general. Throw in 24/7 media coverage and easy to access firearms, what exactly are people expecting to change?
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
And we have it much better than most of the world. :0
I blame the entitlement generation. Kids are told all of their life that they are special (they aren't), they are smart (not everyone can be smart), that they can be anything they want to be (possibly but only with hard work and then in some cases not even then). Basically people are growing up thinking the world owes them something and when life isn't an unmitigated success they react badly.
What?that's just retarded
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
It's really not that out there. I think there is something narcissistic -- and perhaps generationalll narcissistic -- about these attacks. Obviously the perpetrators exist on a spectrum of sanity and mental competence, but there are plenty who seem to merely be unhappy with how live is treating them and lashing out at a world they think should be treating them better.
Ironically, many of them have sufficient affluence to purchase multiple firearms. Go figure.
It looks like we're now getting faux outrage by Christians for being targeted by one crazy person who happened to hold anti-Christian beliefs. Meanwhile, the same left that was willing to declare the existence of a war against African Americans by white supremacists is conveniently ignoring the current idiot's beliefs. Is it asking too much for these people to maintain a modicum of consistency?
Hope is the denial of reality
To be clear, actual narcissism is a disorder. That said, I must admit I can't recall many of these shooters being perfectly normal people who were just peeved by how things weren't just as perfect as they had been led to expect by their loving parents. I think that maybe if Lewk is accidentally right about 5% of these shooters he is in fact wrong.
Anyway, we should all be blaming 4chan for this latest tragedy.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Everyone must declare their victimhood so they can see which rung they are assigned to on the Grievance Stack.
Last edited by Veldan Rath; 10-07-2015 at 12:47 PM.
Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita
Obama has shown tremendous cowardice here mouthing platitudes about how 'something must be done' time and again about guns but without trying to actually do anything like attempting to abolish the second amendment.
Of course it won't be easy or even possible to do it, but until you try nothing is. Obama was quite happy to be compared to prior presidents who dared speak the unspeakable and do the undoable but he's not a shade on them. He's fighting easy fights only, and then everything else is meaningless empty platitudes.
Probably won't happen here in my lifetime; Americans all wanna be cowboys.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/...kHK?li=AAa0dzB
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
Well, none of the shooters are normal. Otherwise all us Merikans would be dead in a non-stop shootout.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/04/us...dont-kill.html
Similar to how Obama somehow gets credit for advancing gay rights in any context besides the military.
Hope is the denial of reality
Trying to abolish the second amendment in a country where very few want to abolish the second amendment? It's a non-starter.
Article today points to an answer to the latter question.
Why do some mass shootings make the news and some don't?
Last week, a gunman killed nine people at a community college in Oregon. Several hours later, another man shot three in Florida. Only one made international news.
Walter "Buzz" Terhune was a Vietnam veteran who moved to Florida to care for his elderly parents. He loved kids, helping other veterans and participating in civic life in tiny Inglis, a commercial fishing town near Florida's west coast.
Terhune didn't know Otis Ray Bean, but that didn't stop the 68-year-old from coming to Bean's aid when he was shot across the street from where Terhune was getting cash at a bank.
The shooter then turned his weapon on Terhune, then his estranged wife, then himself.
"It was so like him to go to save somebody else," says Lea Terhune, Walter's sister. "Buzz would not run the other way."
Walter Terhune stumbled into what would turn out to be one of two mass killings in the US on 1 October. The first occurred several hours earlier, 3,000 miles away in Roseburg, Oregon, when a 26-year-old man opened fire inside a classroom at Umpqua Community College. He wounded dozens and killed at least nine people before he shot himself.
Like many other Americans, Wendy Harvey was following the news from her home in Steamboat Spring, Colorado, when she got a call from a relative saying her uncle Buzzy had also been involved in a shooting. She was at home with her son at the time.
"It's a hard conversation to tell your six-year-old that his favourite uncle just got shot and killed," she says. "Oregon is going on and all of a sudden you hear from Florida that it's your uncle. It can happen to anyone."
Both incidents would be classified as "active shooter" incidents - defined as "an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people" - and also could both be considered "mass killings", defined by one federal statute as three or more people killed.
But Oregon has overshadowed what happened in Inglis, with no national media attention devoted to the latter. It is in part a matter of timing - Oregon happened first - and a matter of numbers. The Oregon shooting had more than three times as many casualties.
Still, says Harvey, this paints a disturbing portrait of gun violence in the US today.
"It's become such the norm," she says. "That's a sad state of affairs if someone kills three people and it's just not that big of a deal."
According to local news reports in Florida, 57-year-old Walter Tyson went to the unpainted wooden house across from Inglis's city hall to confront his estranged wife Patricia and her new boyfriend, Bean. Tyson was armed. Witnesses said Terhune had tried to stop Tyson by telling him he was shooting close to a park where children were playing.
"He talks to vets a lot that have PTSD and all these things. He feels like he can talk to them and relate to them," says Harvey. "I'm sure in his head he thought he could talk to this person."
According to the FBI, the number of "active shooter" incidents rose in frequency between 2000 and 2013. It reported that there were an average of 16.4 active shooter events each year between 2007 to 2013, compared to an average of 6.4 incidents from 2000 to 2006.
While there is no universally accepted definition of a "mass shooting", using the federal statute that defines it as three or more killed shows that they are also on the rise. (Other measures of incidents of mass violence exclude ones that began as a domestic dispute, or ones where the victims knew one another.)
There have been more "mass shootings" than days of the year so far in 2015.
Well that's fine, isn't it? Just I fear he means "that I deem unconstitutional"...I will refuse to participate in, nor tolerate enforcement actions against citizens that are deemed unconstitutional.
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
Changing our abolishing the constitution on the gun issue isn't really possible at the moment.
Not like he's done completely nothing though:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-21049942
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...-proposal.html
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
Any bum can propose legislation. What has he done to get it passed? Has he twisted the arms of moderate Democrats to get them on board? Has he made a convincing and consistent case to the public? Has he directed his proxies to do the same? Has he offered concessions and carrots to moderate Republicans to at least consider his views?
Hope is the denial of reality
I don't know. Has he not done that? Besides, what carrots and concessions would weigh up against NRA and voter support? To get to moderate republicans who are probably already under attack from the right but should be persuaded to go against one of their party's big talking points? Look, I'm not saying he has done great things, but is this his fault? Gun legislation seems frankly unlikely to improve much in your country, and I don't think that's the president's fault but the population's. And RandBlade is then pissed that the president hasn't tried to change the fucking constitution against both congressional and public support? Please. At least try to be realistic.
And he did some executive orders, so that's not nothing I suppose, though I obviously have no idea whether that's a bare minimum he can do (legally or politically) or something substantial.
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
Aren't shootings down since the 1990s?
I'm obviously biased as I"m a gun owner, my wife is also, we both have concealed carry permits, and we both go the range to practice on the regular.
Having a sister and a brother in law who are cops, and hearing their stories also definitely biases our opinions.... plus I'm still doing the fraud investigation thing (and most fraud is perpetuated by organized crime).
I'll be damned if I'm going to leave the protection of myself, my future children and my property to the police who aren't always around. Hell, I'd even protect my neighbors, or a stranger if I was able.
I love that this is how american politics are graded. Not on the merit or need of a certain bill, but how much someone is blowing others to get it passed.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Are you serious? We should judge people on good intentions instead of actual actions?
Hope is the denial of reality
some of the stuff is little more than "better training" lip service, but some of this stuff can change how criminal cases, weapons, and the mentally ill are handled. The whitehouse created this and proposed this. If he puts into action what he can, and lays the rest at congress' feet, thats acting. If congress decides to not act because the whitehouse didn't give them enough sugar, that goes back to my original statement.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
How much of that which is not lip service would be struck down by the SCOTUS due to the second amendment?
The only one I see that there could be any issue with is "Maximizing enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime." and thats only is the enforcement goes overboard. But thats one of the lip service lines anyway.
The congress ones at the top of the list are already, or have been, done in some fashion. These seem to expand or tighten those rules. for example, i'd compare the armor pricing with hollow point ban that the SCOTUS let stand over the summer.
Last edited by Ominous Gamer; 10-07-2015 at 12:02 AM.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Yes, Timbuk...this is depressing.
We've either become numb to all the gun deaths, or skeptical that things will change/improve. I agree with Obama's statement that the press/media needs to publish facts that actually inform and educate people, instead of giving carte blanche press coverage to politicians who repeat falsehoods and propaganda.
Mandating background checks, with a nationally connected data base, and closing gun-show or pawn shop loopholes are logical parts of gun safety regulation.....and that doesn't mean "repealing the 2nd Amendment", no matter how hard the NRA tries to say so.
Yes, Timbuk...this is depressing.
We've either become numb to all the gun deaths, or skeptical that things will change/improve. I agree with Obama's statement that the press/media needs to publish facts that actually inform and educate people, instead of giving carte blanche press coverage to politicians who repeat falsehoods and propaganda.
Mandating background checks, with a nationally connected data base, and closing gun-show or pawn shop loopholes are logical parts of gun safety regulation.....and that doesn't mean "repealing the 2nd Amendment", no matter how hard the NRA tries to say so.
GGT, would you agree that this already exist for car sales? There is a national database that tracks cars being sold in the US?
How again would any of those measures have prevented this tragedy?Mandating background checks, with a nationally connected data base, and closing gun-show or pawn shop loopholes are logical parts of gun safety regulation.....and that doesn't mean "repealing the 2nd Amendment", no matter how hard the NRA tries to say so.
You know the political situation in the US better than me - do you think Obama has any realistic chance of getting significant gun control legislation passed?
When the sky above us fell
We descended into hell
Into kingdom come
Significant: not really. Some kind of progress? Probably. Has Obama expended enough political capital for us to know for sure? No.
Hope is the denial of reality
It would take Obama attempting to in order to move the Overton window and let it become possible. If everyone waited until change was already possible "realistically" then the US would still have slavery let alone civil rights.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
