Mass shooting in Uvalde Texas...

[HappyDays]

25 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

Fine. I’d be willing to allow ex military and ex law enforcement access to semi automatics. That’s my concession. 
 

Now find me one single person from the other side willing to budge even one inch.

 

Some of these shootings are committed by ex-military though. I think it's weird you're willing to accept that concession, but not more standard ones like stronger background checks, waiting periods, red flag laws, age limits, etc.

[nedboy7]

288 school shootings in the United States between 2009 and 2018—the country with the second-most school shootings during that period, Mexico, experienced only eight shootings during that same time period.

 

the infatuation with fire arms in this country is a mental disease. 

[GoBills808]

5 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Some of these shootings are committed by ex-military though. I think it's weird you're willing to accept that concession, but not more standard ones like stronger background checks, waiting periods, red flag laws, age limits, etc.

Are you somehow missing my point? If it wasn’t clear already: since you insist on continuing to propose ridiculous half measures that nobody thinks will work, I’d make the waiting period 100 years. 
 

 

[HappyDays]

 

Quote

One girl inside the room reportedly bled for an hour after she was shot. She died at a hospital. It is unknown if that hour might have saved her life.

 

What is the point of having a massive police budget if this is the response?

[Just Jack]

Just now, HappyDays said:

 

 

What is the point of having a massive police budget if this is the response?

 

The right lawyer is going to bankrupt that department. 

[K-9]

26 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

 

What is the point of having a massive police budget if this is the response?

That’s a twist because in case after case of police shootings the claim is they shot because they were “in fear for their life.” It’s a universal defense. 

[LeviF]

2 hours ago, nedboy7 said:

288 school shootings in the United States between 2009 and 2018—the country with the second-most school shootings during that period, Mexico, experienced only eight shootings during that same time period.

 

the infatuation with fire arms in this country is a mental disease. 

Famously free of gun crime Mexico. 

[SoTier]

On 5/25/2022 at 12:06 PM, mjt328 said:

 

I think it's important to separate the different kinds of "gun violence" in order to get a better handle on the solution.

People tend to throw ALL the gun numbers into a giant pot, when different cases may require a different remedy.

 

For instance, 97% of gun violence in America is done with handguns.  Not the high-powered rifles everyone is concerned about.

Around 80% of gun violence is done with illegally-obtained firearms, where existing laws were already ignored and disregarded.

The vast majority of gun violence is confined to a small number of large urban cities (New York, Chicago, Baltimore, etc.).

Also, most people don't realize that FBI gun violence statistics usually include suicide, which account for bout two-thirds of cases.

 

Gun violence is a huge problem in America.  No doubt.

But incidents like Uvalde and Buffalo don't even account for a tiny sliver of that.  Even if you take away suicide (which is clearly a mental-health issue), most of the gun problems in America stem from street violence poor in poor inner-cities, committed by criminals with illegally obtained weapons.  Banning certain rifles and installing extra background checks will do absolutely nothing to stop any of that.  This country would still have (by far) the worst gun violence numbers in the entire world.

 

 

 

I didn't mention  "gun violence" in general, but the distinctly American form domestic terrorism of mass shootings.   Statistics can be found to "prove" whatever some advocate wants to prove just by picking the right dataset, and you are being disingenuous by deflecting my argument.  

 

Gun violence is so rampant in the US in 2021 that about 53 Americans die because of it every single day, so dismissing instances of mass murder as "a tiny sliver" of "gun violence" is a deliberate attempt to whitewash the recurring problem of heavily armed gunmen murdering random strangers, including school children, because the gunmen are dissatisfied with some aspect of their lives.   Moreover, most instances of mass murder of random individuals who happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time are committed  by 1 or 2 heavily armed angry white males who easily and legally acquire rapid fire semiautomatic military style guns, not by criminals wielding illegal weapons.   Making it more difficult for guns with the sole purpose of killing the most people in the shortest time to get into the hands of angry, disturbed and/or distraught individuals would most definitely reduce the number people killed by mass killers.    It's hard to kill 10 people in a supermarket or 19 students and teachers in just a few minutes without a gun capable of rapidly firing 15 or 30 or more bullets without reloading.

[Andy1]

The fact that cops were afraid to enter the school because they were out gunned by the killer is proof that assault weapons should be very difficult to obtain. They are now unable to do their job to keep society safe. Law enforcement organizations need to speak out and be part of the solution to this problem. Cops shouldn’t have to face killers with weapons of war when they are armed with pistols. 

[LeGOATski]

1 hour ago, Andy1 said:

The fact that cops were afraid to enter the school because they were out gunned by the killer is proof that assault weapons should be very difficult to obtain. They are now unable to do their job to keep society safe. Law enforcement organizations need to speak out and be part of the solution to this problem. Cops shouldn’t have to face killers with weapons of war when they are armed with pistols. 

I know some police depts are simply arming themselves with automatic rifles that they keep in their SUV or truck. They have to apply for extra training on it and once they pass they get to carry it in their vehicle.

 

Regular police officers, I mean, outside of SWAT.

[PetermansRedemption]

14 hours ago, nedboy7 said:

288 school shootings in the United States between 2009 and 2018—the country with the second-most school shootings during that period, Mexico, experienced only eight shootings during that same time period.

 

the infatuation with fire arms in this country is a mental disease. 

I kind of get where you were going with this, but it misses the mark IMO. Shouldn't use a country that has 1/3rd the population of the US yet has two to three times the total amount of homicides in any given year. 

11 hours ago, Andy1 said:

The fact that cops were afraid to enter the school because they were out gunned by the killer is proof that assault weapons should be very difficult to obtain. They are now unable to do their job to keep society safe. Law enforcement organizations need to speak out and be part of the solution to this problem. Cops shouldn’t have to face killers with weapons of war when they are armed with pistols. 

I think it more points to an extreme cowardice on the part of this police department. Law enforcement around the country is trained to engage the threat immediately. The fact that this department couldn't find one competent scene commander for about an hour is inexcusable. Heads will roll for this one. Civil lawsuits are certain to follow. The mayor should already be preparing to fire the entirety of the police departments leadership. Compare this town to the response that Buffalo PD had, on scene within 2 minutes and entering immediately. One department should be hailed as heroes, the other should be fired for dereliction of duty. 

[nedboy7]

12 hours ago, LeviF said:

Famously free of gun crime Mexico. 

 

Drug cartel crime makes much more sense to me than random school shootings. 

11 hours ago, Andy1 said:

The fact that cops were afraid to enter the school because they were out gunned by the killer is proof that assault weapons should be very difficult to obtain. They are now unable to do their job to keep society safe. Law enforcement organizations need to speak out and be part of the solution to this problem. Cops shouldn’t have to face killers with weapons of war when they are armed with pistols. 

 

Most police departments are absolutely in agreement for some type of gun control.  But you know.  NRA, money and corrupt politicians. 

 

You know in the end none of this would happen if kids were trained in combat starting at age 4 and every kid was armed with a semi-auto for school hours. 

Edited May 27, 2022 by nedboy7

[HappyDays]

21 minutes ago, PetermansRedemption said:

Civil lawsuits are certain to follow.

 

Sue them for what? The Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly that the police have no legal duty to protect anybody. Even though our tax dollars fund their salaries they don't legally owe us anything back. Keep that in mind in any discussion about police power in the future.

[shrader]

13 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

 

What is the point of having a massive police budget if this is the response?

 

Watch the full clip at that link.  The officer says that the responding police and more people inside could get shot if they go in.  I have absolutely no issue with what he said.  Sadly the guy is going to get crucified by an army of people who only read the headline.  Now maybe they were a bit slow, I don't know the exact time lines, but they can't just go in guns blazing.

[HappyDays]

1 minute ago, shrader said:

 

Watch the full clip at that link.  The officer says that the responding police and more people inside could get shot if they go in.  I have absolutely no issue with what he said.  Sadly the guy is going to get crucified by an army of people who only read the headline.  Now maybe they were a bit slow, I don't know the exact time lines, but they can't just go in guns blazing.

 

After Columbine the policy on how police respond to mass shootings changed nationwide. More people died at Columbine than should have because of the slow emergency response. The standard now is that they're supposed to engage the situation right away. And most Americans have the expectation that police officers have a duty to put their lives on the line in times of need - this is supposedly why we give them so much power over us and excuse them when they accidentally shoot the wrong person. I for one have no illusions about the obligations of police officers to American citizens, but many people are now having that illusion shattered. And this begs the question why does this town spend 40% of their budget on the police department if it can't be trusted to handle a real emergency?

[ALF]

5 minutes ago, shrader said:

 

Watch the full clip at that link.  The officer says that the responding police and more people inside could get shot if they go in.  I have absolutely no issue with what he said.  Sadly the guy is going to get crucified by an army of people who only read the headline.  Now maybe they were a bit slow, I don't know the exact time lines, but they can't just go in guns blazing.

 

Was the classroom where the killer was on the first floor with window access ?  Sorry did not watch that clip.

[PetermansRedemption]

5 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

After Columbine the policy on how police respond to mass shootings changed nationwide. More people died at Columbine than should have because of the slow emergency response. The standard now is that they're supposed to engage the situation right away. And most Americans have the expectation that police officers have a duty to put their lives on the line in times of need - this is supposedly why we give them so much power over us and excuse them when they accidentally shoot the wrong person. I for one have no illusions about the obligations of police officers to American citizens, but many people are now having that illusion shattered. And this begs the question why does this town spend 40% of their budget on the police department if it can't be trusted to handle a real emergency?

40% without one iota of a competent leader. Isn’t that crazy. And it was the border patrol that eventually went in? Unless that part of the story was a lie too (since this town can’t seem to get any part of the story correct). 

[shrader]

8 minutes ago, ALF said:

 

Was the classroom where the killer was on the first floor with window access ?  Sorry did not watch that clip.

 

That's not specifically mentioned there, but there was mention of bringing in snipers.

 

Edit: And the clip in the link is just a segment of the full interview, so maybe it was mentioned at another point.

Edited May 27, 2022 by shrader

[shrader]

13 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

After Columbine the policy on how police respond to mass shootings changed nationwide. More people died at Columbine than should have because of the slow emergency response. The standard now is that they're supposed to engage the situation right away. And most Americans have the expectation that police officers have a duty to put their lives on the line in times of need - this is supposedly why we give them so much power over us and excuse them when they accidentally shoot the wrong person. I for one have no illusions about the obligations of police officers to American citizens, but many people are now having that illusion shattered. And this begs the question why does this town spend 40% of their budget on the police department if it can't be trusted to handle a real emergency?

 

Is that the policy when someone is pinned down in one spot like it sounds with the classroom?  It sounds like something more in line with when the shooter is on the move. 

[aristocrat]

Uvalde is a town of 16000 people how many cops do they even have on their force?  Buffalo is a decent size city with a sizeable police force that can respond very quickly. Uvalde I imagine had to call in all off duty and surrounding areas for help.  That needs to be considered