Mass shooting at El Paso Walmart/and also Dayton OH

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

13 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

This is just a touchy subject my friend. We should be praying for the victims

 

But gun control won't help the problem because criminals can get guns anywhere on the black market

 

They're criminal's they break the law and that's a fact. They will get their hands on whatever they want

 

There is no easy or right answer because this is too big of a hot button issue

 

Sad but true 

 

 

 

Walmart worker's son threatened to 'shoot up' a Florida Walmart store and said he was inspired by recent deadly shootings (WMT)

[DC Tom]

1 hour ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

In his first formal statement on the deadly mass shootings in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, over the weekend, President Trump on Monday condemned the “evil” and “wicked” attacks that killed 29 people and injured more than 50 others.

 

The president also condemned “racism, bigotry and white supremacy” while blaming the internet, video games and “mental illness” for the massacres.

 

At least Metallica and D&D are finally off the hook.

[GoBills808]

1 hour ago, T&C said:

I never got the guns kill angle... there is a 9mm 6' from me right now and I'm pretty sure it isn't going to jump up and start killing us. I'd have to go with the internet, video games, and mental illness.

 

Here, this might help your confusion- try killing someone with a Playstation. Maybe sneak up on them and hit them over the head with it or wrap the cords around their neck. Use the controllers like a bolas. Throw the CD at em. 

 

Then take your 9 and try shooting someone in the face. That's the 'guns kill angle'.

[Buffalo716]

3 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

 

Sad but true 

 

 

 

Walmart worker's son threatened to 'shoot up' a Florida Walmart store and said he was inspired by recent deadly shootings (WMT)

 

 

See, a guy like him should lose all his rights to a firearm

 

Clearly unstable and could possibly hurt alot of people... But if he was really committed he could go the black market route and still procure one

 

Which is why criminals are the problem. Because law abiding citizens don't do ***** like this

 

I would still take his gun rights away tho because taking a nuts guns rights away is not infringing the 2nd amendment from law abiding citizens

[GoBills808]

3 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

At least Metallica and D&D are finally off the hook.

 

IIRC it was Marilyn Manson originally

[Buffalo716]

Just now, GoBills808 said:

 

Here, this might help your confusion- try killing someone with a Playstation. Maybe sneak up on them and hit them over the head with it or wrap the cords around their neck. Use the controllers like a bolas. Throw the CD at em. 

 

Then take your 9 and try shooting someone in the face. That's the 'guns kill angle'.

You can kill someone with bare hands, a pencil, a pen, knife, cords even

 

Mentally unstable people pulling the trigger of a gun killed People, there are 20-30 million if not more law abiding gun owners to a few crazies

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

3 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

 

Here, this might help your confusion- try killing someone with a Playstation. Maybe sneak up on them and hit them over the head with it or wrap the cords around their neck. Use the controllers like a bolas. Throw the CD at em. 

 

Then take your 9 and try shooting someone in the face. That's the 'guns kill angle'.

From here on out, i"m gonna make the same offer to anti-gunners:

 

You give up your first amendment rights, I'll give up my second.

 

Deal?

 

[GoBills808]

Just now, Buffalo716 said:

You can kill someone with bare hands, a pencil, a pen, knife, cords even

 

Mentally unstable people pulling the trigger of a gun killed People, there are 20-30 million if not more law abiding gun owners to a few crazies

 

I'm one of them, but I'm sick of hearing how 'guns don't kill people'...yeah, they do. That's what the majority of them used in these shootings were designed for.

[Gugny]

6 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

At least Metallica and D&D are finally off the hook.

 

3 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

 

IIRC it was Marilyn Manson originally

 

Actually, I'm pretty sure Judas Priest was before either of these.  Actually went to trial, accused of subliminally telling two boys to commit suicide.

[GoBills808]

Just now, Joe in Winslow said:

From here on out, i"m gonna make the same offer to anti-gunners:

 

You give up your first amendment rights, I'll give up my second.

 

Deal?

 

 

I own five firearms, and I actually use them on a fairly regular basis. They're just tools. I have no personal attachment to them.

 

And I consider the first amendment a good deal more important than the second. No need to conflate the two.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Just now, GoBills808 said:

 

I own five firearms, and I actually use them on a fairly regular basis. They're just tools. I have no personal attachment to them.

 

And I consider the first amendment a good deal more important than the second. No need to conflate the two.

 

They're both constitutionally protected rights.

 

The anti-gunners have less than no right to demand the curtailing of one without an equal curtailing of the other.

 

[ExiledInIllinois]

3 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

From here on out, i"m gonna make the same offer to anti-gunners:

 

You give up your first amendment rights, I'll give up my second.

 

Deal?

 

Sure... First was never really cracked up to what it is hyped. They can still shut things down in times of crisis.

 

How about revising the 2nd.  In times of crisis, can be infringed.

 

Now... Don't get cute with me.  LoL...

 

???

1 minute ago, GoBills808 said:

 

I own five firearms, and I actually use them on a fairly regular basis. They're just tools. I have no personal attachment to them.

 

And I consider the first amendment a good deal more important than the second. No need to conflate the two.

What the hell you hunting Davey Crockett?  Pineapples on the Lower 40?  Putting Old Yeller down behind the woodshed?

1 minute ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

They're both constitutionally protected rights.

 

The anti-gunners have less than no right to demand the curtailing of one without an equal curtailing of the other.

 

First can still be infringed on.

[GoBills808]

Just now, Joe in Winslow said:

 

They're both constitutionally protected rights.

 

The anti-gunners have less than no right to demand the curtailing of one without an equal curtailing of the other.

 

 

I think we can look at the Bill of Rights and subsequent amendments individually. That's how it was created.

3 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

 

What the hell you hunting Davey Crockett?  Pineapples on the Lower 40?  Putting Old Yeller down behind the woodshed?

 

 

Varmints in the veggies, hogs for smoked meat, BB gun for rats in the warehouse. Oh and I got a slingshot for trespassers and hippies ??

[Buffalo716]

7 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Sure... First was never really cracked up to what it is hyped. They can still shut things down in times of crisis.

 

How about revising the 2nd.  In times of crisis, can be infringed.

 

Now... Don't get cute with me.  LoL...

 

???

What the hell you hunting Davey Crockett?  Pineapples on the Lower 40?  Putting Old Yeller down behind the woodshed?

First can still be infringed on.

Because a nation without the ability to protect itself will not stay a nation for long. Our founders agreed on that

 

History repeats itself and the second amendment is to not let tyranny back into the US, which is fully possible

[DC Tom]

15 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

 

Actually, I'm pretty sure Judas Priest was before either of these.  Actually went to trial, accused of subliminally telling two boys to commit suicide.

 

I think you're right.

 

I just remember Lars Ulrich testifying.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

21 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

 

IIRC it was Marilyn Manson originally

nope

it started in the 40's or 50s with 

REFER MADNESS 

 

[ExiledInIllinois]

17 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

 

I think we can look at the Bill of Rights and subsequent amendments individually. That's how it was created.

 

Varmints in the veggies, hogs for smoked meat, BB gun for rats in the warehouse. Oh and I got a slingshot for trespassers and hippies ??

Remind me to never visit The Big Island! 

 

???

6 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

nope

it started in the 40's or 50s with 

REFER MADNESS 

 

Who were they referring too?

 

That's all we need is a refer epidemic on our hands!  I hate getting 3rd & 4th opinions!!!!

11 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

Because a nation without the ability to protect itself will not stay a nation for long. Our founders agreed on that

 

History repeats itself and the second amendment is to not let tyranny back into the US, which is fully possible

That's how it's been interpreted with the majority on the SCOTUS since the late 1990s.

Edited August 5, 2019 by ExiledInIllinois

[bdutton]

1 hour ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

 

Playing video games does not make a mass murderer.   (I've been playing shoot em ups for 30 years ...  no murders so far)

 

I confess to not have followed these stories closely, but I think this has more to do with automatic weapons other than a 9 mm handgun.  

 

this is true.  

 

Actions are needed and not further platitudes like "Prayers and Wishes" and "we need to do something". 

 

 

 

 

 

Re-posting this from the PPP thread on the same topic:

 

In the early 1970's there was a shift in treating mental illness with incarceration in mental institutions to prescribing powerful psychotropic drugs on an out patient process.

 

The media has become increasingly polarized along political extremes.  Very little if any honest news organizations exist because it isn't profitable to do any honest reporting of news.

 

 

Violence in media has increased substantially (video games, TV, Movies and even in radio).  You used to get an X rating if you had any nudity or language in movies. 

 

With the introduction of cable/satellite tv, the reach of the FCC to control content, and an increased tolerance by consumers for violence and language means violent content is much more prevalent leading to a desensitizing to the violence.

 

The Internet (an with it social media) has created a sense of anonymity to human interactions online.  We would almost never say some of the things we say on an internet forum like this to people face to face.  This in turn creates the false sense of superiority over people online.  Both sides of the political/social spectrum are guilty of this.

 

Also, the term of mass shooting is frequently misused (for political reasons) by the media.  More people are killed in Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit... etc... on any given weekend that there are with the rare (albeit increasing) occurrence of a mass shooting like the one of El Paso.

 

The only thing that has never changed is the function of a firearm.  You could buy an AR-15 and a thousand rounds of ammo for it over mail order and have it delivered to your home with no background checks and no waiting period before the 1968 Firearm act.  Yet the number of mass shootings with rifles (or in general) in those days was extremely rare.

 

The problem is/was never about the availability and function of any given type of firearm.

 

In summary, I think its the combination of increased psychotropic drugs to treat mental illness, decreased sensitivity to violent media content, media whiping up the radicals with sensationalized and biased reporting among others.

[stony]

13 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

Because a nation without the ability to protect itself will not stay a nation for long. Our founders agreed on that

 

History repeats itself and the second amendment is to not let tyranny back into the US, which is fully possible

I think this a pretty ambiguous way of interpreting the 2nd Amendment in the modern context.  

[section122]

14 hours ago, Bills2ref said:

That is where the problem lies. How do you fix the issue?

 

You can easily see why this hot button issue will likely never be solved. You would need a country unified on the cause. You would need a political party completely in control of the senate, the house, and the presidency. Then you would need a rather liberal Supreme Court interpretation of the 2nd amendment. 

 

Here is my solution to this and I admit that it probably won't totally solve the issue but would help imo.  The media is a bigger culprit in this than probably any other issue.  There is so much race baiting and hatred towards anyone who dares to think different spun by "news" networks.  Until the media stops creating boogeymen this issue will never go away.

 

1.  Medicare for All.  People that are mentally well do not go on mass shooting sprees.  Medicare for all would allow people that can't get treatment to do so.  It would help parents that can't afford to pay for psych help for their troubled children to provide it.  

 

2.  More stringent background checks on all gun purchases.  We can never ban guns, it won't happen.  I'm left leaning and I admit it just would never work.  What we can do though is pay attention to who is getting guns.  The issue with this is relying on the background checks to be thorough and actually completed which I don't really trust the government to do.  If you buy a gun, you should have to pass a background check period.  

 

3.  Ban mentioning the name of the shooter.  Stop giving them fame.  That is a huge motivator for some of these idiots.  It should be illegal to report who is responsible for these acts.  Let them be nameless and faceless and forgotten.  Report on the incident, report any heroic acts, leave the murderer out of it.  

 

These 3 things to me would be a step in the right direction.  Unfortunately I agree that this can't be solved.  If you ban guns, bombs can be made easily and readily.  Addressing the weapon treats the symptom and not the cause.  Mental health needs to be taken much more seriously in this country!