The Texas School Shooting

[BlkGS]

I was maybe 19 or 20 years old when I bought my AR15 and 30 round magazines. I walked into a gun store, picked my gun, my accessories, and my 30 round preban magazines. The next day I picked up my things. I don't think the majority of non-firearm owners understand how easy it is to buy.

I believe in the 2nd amendment and understand both the left and right arguments. Left- Do more extensive background checks and licensure. Right- Do more for mental health people because we know America is FULL of crazies. Here's a crazy idea: Do both! I don't think America has woken to the fact that we don't need to be polarized on every ****ing issue.

My friend said to me last week "you wouldn't believe how many people at my job believe that Sandy Hook is a conspiracy. It's ****ing stupid". I didn't think much of that conversation until I spoke with another "friend" who has a concealed carry permit for his business. It's nearly impossible to get that in NY. He didn't hesitate to tell me "wasn't sandy hook a conspiracy theory?" and he begun to tell me that the Texas school shooting is a conspiracy by the government. I didn't have nice words for him and told him that he's an idiot. Wtf???? This is exactly the people that we DONT want to have guns.

Lastly, my anecdotal evidence, take from it what you want. Brazil doesn't have mass shooting problems and it's difficult to get a gun. I think it's just for people in law enforcement or people who can prove they need it (think, concealed carry permit rules of USA but applied to every brazilian firearm). It's rare for a Brazilian to have a firearm and I think that most aren't comfortable with them. It seems like a good idea to imitate the Brazilian laws until you see that the criminals have access to illegal firearms. But the criminals typically kill each other and aren't shooting up schools.

Surely there is something that we can do to alleviate this problem. There's a lot of smart people in this country. Now only if smart people elected smart public officials...

We have places in the US where gun ownership is difficult. The majority of mass shootings are from those places, because they're gang related gun violence that gets lumped in.

 

[BlkGS]

So, let me make the argument that guns increase the number of dead.

Guns are tools, they allow the operator to more quickly harm others as compared to when they don't have a gun. Same as a drill allows the operator to make more holes, more quickly than if they had to be made by hand. Shovel vs backhoe. It's a tool that makes the operator much faster at the task

(agree or disagree? If we don't agree here we must reconcile that. I don't think this is controversial. A gun makes it faster and easier to kill more people as compared to when I don't have a gun on me, agreed?. It's ok if you don't agree, please explain why)

Given this, and the erratic be and mentally disturbed nature of these rogue actors, the gun allows them to be much more effective at the task than if they were not available.
(Say, with a knife or chain saw, they could attack only 1 or 2 vs 20 on a similar event)
Agreed? If not why?



Having established a gun makes it easier to kill more people quickly.... What's the fix? If any?

Are we willing to give up the benefits of having accessible weapons available legally? There are none at my house, but I'm not unhappy a likely robber has doubts in my area because I'm in a Houston neighborhood full of people with small arsenals in their home. If the Chinese try to invade they are screwed.

Australia transitioned to fewer weapons, it's an invasive process that relies on trust of the government and willingness to lose freedom on exchange for security... pretty much confiscating majority of legal weapons. Not really a decision embedded in the DNA of our country.

People kill people, but if we don't accept that guns help people kill people much faster, we are not clearly hearing the argument. Whether it's something that the government has the willingness and power to address is another matter.

And, assuming the government could pull it off,(total confiscation as a fix) it would get much worse before it got better, as for a time while illegal guns were hunted down, law abiding citizens would return to the disadvantaged position of confronting crime with no weapons, as they would have been legally returned, and we are back to only the bad guys being armed, at least until all their weapons are also confiscated(in theory)

Solution? No idea.

If you look at most of the really big number mass killings, it's not a lone gunman type deal. Usually it's explosives, vehicles, or chemical agents.

I will agree that a gun can increase the lethality of an attacker. But it's far from the only means. The monster in this case could have just as easily waited for the children to be leaving class and run them down with his car.

You don't stop evil intent by changing what their tool is.

 

[I_squared_r]

We have places in the US where gun ownership is difficult. The majority of mass shootings are from those places, because they're gang related gun violence that gets lumped in.

Difficult compared to what exactly? There's no state that gun ownership is difficult. And why exactly are we comparing "ease of gun ownership" to states that have problems? Its wiser to compare to other countries who don't have a problem.

 

[Beachbummer]

If you look at most of the really big number mass killings, it's not a lone gunman type deal. Usually it's explosives, vehicles, or chemical agents.....

You don't stop evil intent by changing what their tool is.

Why not? If the best tool is unavailable to the perpetrator, deaths definitely go down. Not sure I grasp this argument. Better evil with knife and machete vs gun with large magazine. No? Perhaps not stopping, but certainly slow'em down? Make the fight more reachable to those unarmed?

Not sure I am persuaded by your first point. Do you have data to back that up? Specially in deaths in schools, guns have been the primary method of mass killing over the last few years that I can remember. If you have info otherwise please share it to help me be on the same page.

 

[BlkGS]

Difficult compared to what exactly? There's no state that gun ownership is difficult. And why exactly are we comparing "ease of gun ownership" to states that have problems? Its wiser to compare to other countries who don't have a problem.

States like New York, California, Cities like Chicago.... These are known as the most restrictive in gun ownership in the US. They also represent the majority of mass shootings, because the vast majority are gang related. They get performed with illegally acquired guns, and rarely result in any meaningful arrests because even the victims of the shootings won't cooperate, because they're typically involved in the gang violence.

The mass shooting statistics are very misleading as a result. People act like they're talking about tragedies like this school shooting when they talk about mass shootings, but really, that overwhelming majority are gun fights between rival gangs in LA or Chicago or wherever. The (most restrictive in the country) gun control those places are doing does not end up reducing this violence.

 

[BigN8]

Our oldest is 10. There was a couple of victims of this atrocity that were 10.

I had to get up and physically change the channel and take the wife for a walk it hit her so heavily. Once the tears dried up, and she got all the "they were just kids" out of her system, her first comment was "Why the fuck are all the stupid people still in charge?"......and she hit the nail on the head IMO.

We can argue until we're blue in the face about how to make it happen, but any step at removing this level of lethality from the hands of JQPublic needs to happen. And if you one second you think some level of second amendment rights bullshit response is adequate you can fuck right off. There is no amount of lives that are worth anyone owning anything this side of a bolt action rifle.

I've said my thoughts and will leave it at that. This is such a hot button issue for me, I'm not gonna engage any further. I like you guys too much.

I wish it were as easy as just outlawing those style weapons. Unfortunately it's not. That is the option that has the best optics to the voting masses. This kid was a ticking time bomb. His fuse was lit many years ago by his family and his classmates. One could almost say his classmates that bullied him could be partially to blame. They were the match that lit the dynamite. This kid was crazy and enraged. He could have walked in there with 3 pump style shotguns and a couple shotgun shell belts around his torso and done the same damage in a barricaded classroom.

The harder option and the one that requires more work is, let's do a better job of securing our schools. Let's outlaw games like Call of Duty. Everyone of these kids seems like there is a story of how they all sat around and played Call of Duty. You say we don't need AR-15's to hunt?? I say we don't need realistic kill everybody you see style video games that desensitizes these kids by watching that horror over and over. And, not just watching, but actually committing......no simulating the killing. Let's pay more attention to bullying and do a better job of teaching our kids to accept people how they are. Social media??? That shit just needs to go away period. Here's a link to an article describing this psycho's past. It's pretty clear he was going to do something crazy eventually.

Texas gunman was bullied as a child, grew increasingly violent, friends say

Salvador Rolando Ramos suffered from a fraught home life and lashed out violently against peers and strangers recently and over the years, friends and relatives said.

www.startribune.com

Shooter 'made terrifying threat after losing at violent video game'

TEXAS shooter Salvador Ramos may have revealed his chilling plans to kill children in a callous school shooting online after LOSING at the violent video game Dead by Daylight, a gamer claimed. The …

www.the-sun.com

 

[I_squared_r]

States like New York, California, Cities like Chicago.... These are known as the most restrictive in gun ownership in the US. They also represent the majority of mass shootings, because the vast majority are gang related. They get performed with illegally acquired guns, and rarely result in any meaningful arrests because even the victims of the shootings won't cooperate, because they're typically involved in the gang violence.

The mass shooting statistics are very misleading as a result. People act like they're talking about tragedies like this school shooting when they talk about mass shootings, but really, that overwhelming majority are gun fights between rival gangs in LA or Chicago or wherever. The (most restrictive in the country) gun control those places are doing does not end up reducing this violence.

As my previous post, restrictive compared to what? Compared to the rest of the world, there are no restrictive states in the USA.

 

[BlkGS]

Why not? If the best tool is unavailable to the perpetrator, deaths definitely go down. Not sure I grasp this argument. Better evil with knife and machete vs gun with large magazine. No? Perhaps not stopping, but certainly slow'em down? Make the fight more reachable to those unarmed?

Not sure I am persuaded by your first point. Do you have data to back that up? Specially in deaths in schools, guns have been the primary method of mass killing over the last few years that I can remember. If you have info otherwise please share it to help me be on the same page.

Yes, guns are the main method of killings in schools currently. But that's only because it's the currently available tool. We're there to be no guns or bullets, evil people would just shift how they perpetrate evil. Instead of shooting people, they'd make IEDs out of household items or pressure cookers, or release poisons into ventilation systems.

If you look overseas, their acts of violence like this typically involve vehicles being used to run down crowds of hundreds of people. It doesn't reduce the lethality for them to be using a vehicle vs a gun, if anything it increases it. They aren't then limited by ammo, they're only limited by propulsion. The lethality of a person with their foot to the floor through a crowd of people is absurdly high, and then they have an easy escape vehicle.

Like I've said before, solve the root cause, not the method of tragedy.

 

[BlkGS]

I wish it were as easy as just outlawing those style weapons. Unfortunately it's not. That is the option that has the best optics to the voting masses. This kid was a ticking time bomb. His fuse was lit many years ago by his family and his classmates. One could almost say his classmates that bullied him could be partially to blame. They were the match that lit the dynamite. This kid was crazy and enraged. He could have walked in there with 3 pump style shotguns and a couple shotgun shell belts around his torso and done the same damage in a barricaded classroom.

The harder option and the one that requires more work is, let's do a better job of securing our schools. Let's outlaw games like Call of Duty. Everyone of these kids seems like there is a story of how they all sat around and played Call of Duty. You say we don't need AR-15's to hunt?? I say we don't need realistic kill everybody you see style video games that desensitizes these kids by watching that horror over and over. And, not just watching, but actually committing......no simulating the killing. Let's pay more attention to bullying and do a better job of teaching our kids to accept people how they are. Social media??? That shit just needs to go away period. Here's a link to an article describing this psycho's past. It's pretty clear he was going to do something crazy eventually.

Texas gunman was bullied as a child, grew increasingly violent, friends say

Salvador Rolando Ramos suffered from a fraught home life and lashed out violently against peers and strangers recently and over the years, friends and relatives said.

www.startribune.com

Shooter 'made terrifying threat after losing at violent video game'

TEXAS shooter Salvador Ramos may have revealed his chilling plans to kill children in a callous school shooting online after LOSING at the violent video game Dead by Daylight, a gamer claimed. The …

www.the-sun.com

Exactly, this monster should have been flagged and stopped in SO MANY places before this tragedy.

We need better systems to catch these time bombs before they can cause a tragedy, whatever the means of it may be.

I grew up in the generation of violent video games. I grew up with grand theft auto, postal, counterstrike, all the violent shooters and whatnot. We had saw and hostel that were truly films about torture and dismemberment. It ABSOLUTELY desensitized kids to this stuff. It makes it so these actions aren't shocking to them anymore, they're just part of a game.

Factor in the violence in TV, movies, social media, music... Kids these days are surrounded by it, ignoring the reality that social media algorithms will identify kids with even a muted interest in it and then inundate them with that content.

I'm not saying we need to ban these things, but we absolutely need to have better parents that are involved and if they do allow their kids to have these games, take an active role in their kids lives and put into context the horror that these games are depicting.

 

[Jim_in_Delaware]

My heart breaks for all the families that lost a loved one in this incident.

I don't prescribe to the thought, "guns don't kill people, people kill people." In this instance it is "people with guns that kill other people." IMHO, the fault lies with both the killer and the guns he used.

I don't know what the answer is, but am astounded by the graph in post #13 that shows a firearm-related injury is now the leading cause of death among children and adolescents.

Jim

 

[Taylorman]

I’m in the same boat as @2kwik4u with my oldest being 10. Two younger as well. To say this hit me hard is an understatement. I can’t put into words how angry, sad and fearful I feel. I own guns, including an AR 15 style assault rifle. I am not a hunter nor do I spend much time using my firearms in general. I own them for personal protection and they mostly stay locked in a safe. I’ve been asked before why I own an “assault rifle”? It’s purely defensive. Those weapons are extremely powerful and versatile. If there’s a chance I may have to defend myself and my family against one then I want to have one to even the playing field. With that said, I’d happily turn it in today if they were outlawed. There really isn’t a valid reason to have that type of weapon in society. I’m all for the 2nd amendment but anyone that thinks an “assault” weapon will protect them from government tyranny is a complete moron. There are no civilian weapons that can compete with the firepower of our military. So, again, there is zero reason for “assault” weapons in the hands of civilians.

We also need to be realistic as a society. These weapons exist. Outlawing them won’t take them off the street. While I’d turn mine in many would not. Calling for legislative changes won’t fix this problem by itself. Those that say people are the problem are right. Weapons don’t fire themselves. If anyone thinks mass violence is only a gun problem read about GB’s knife attack issues. If you think the US is the only country with a mass violence problem you’re not paying attention. It’s a global problem. There are evil people that do evil things in every country. I support sensible gun reform - no “assault” weapons, stronger background checks mandatory nationwide, nationwide conceal carry standards, even using technology to monitor social media posts (although the subjectivity and potential for abuse on this one is a concern), amongst other sensible actions. I’m also not naive enough to think that alone will stop mass violence. We need better access to behavioral health. Clearly the kid in TX had issues. He idolized a killer in a Netflix documentary and wanted that level of notoriety according to reports I’ve read. That’s not how mentally well people think. We also need better social services for kids like the TX shooter who are living in traumatic situations and being cared for by unwell adults. Kids in those situations are a high risk to lash out and commit violent crimes. They need help and guidance to get them on the right path and work through the issues created by their situation. Could this have been stopped if we had social services that stepped in years ago and been able to place him in a better, more stable situation? We’ll never know but it’s certainly a possibility. However, it could be argued that he would’ve been worse off with today’s social services intervention options. The normalizing of violence through entertainment like video games, movies, TV, and music certainly has an impact and needs to be addressed. I would expect that most rationale adults would agree that exposing a mentally unstable person to violence as “entertainment” is an unwise thing. It’s not an easy problem to solve but it’s one we need to be mindful of as a society.

The bottom line here is we need a wholistic approach to make an impact. Cowards will always be cowardly and target the weak and innocent. As a society we need to protect our children better. All options should be on the table but let’s not be naïve about where guns sit in the hierarchy of this problem. If, magically, all guns were removed knives or other weapons replace them as the instrument of violence. Sure, it’s valid to argue that a knife in this kids hands would’ve resulted in fewer deaths. It’s possible but it’s also possible he’d skip the knife and just build a bomb or several. Then more would’ve died. This isn’t a simple problem with a simple answer. Taking a single threaded approach isn’t the answer many think it is.

 

[King]

IMHO, all sides should stop trying to; attack, address, solve, fix, debate, "Gun Violence". It's too divisive and political. Everyone runs back to their political, and sometimes ideological, camps and dig in for the latest battle in the larger war of "Gun Violence vs. 2nd Amendment Rights" The word Gun is the problem, that's where everyone goes their separate ways on this and nothing ever gets done. Violence on the other hand, by its self is not divisive at all, everyone can agree that Violence is a bad thing and should be ; attacked, addressed, solved, fixed, and debated. At the end of the day isn't it violence that's the problem?

 

[BlkGS]

I’m in the same boat as @2kwik4u with my oldest being 10. Two younger as well. To say this hit me hard is an understatement. I can’t put into words how angry, sad and fearful I feel. I own guns, including an AR 15 style assault rifle. I am not a hunter nor do I spend much time using my firearms in general. I own them for personal protection and they mostly stay locked in a safe. I’ve been asked before why I own an “assault rifle”? It’s purely defensive. Those weapons are extremely powerful and versatile. If there’s a chance I may have to defend myself and my family against one then I want to have one to even the playing field. With that said, I’d happily turn it in today if they were outlawed. There really isn’t a valid reason to have that type of weapon in society. I’m all for the 2nd amendment but anyone that thinks an “assault” weapon will protect them from government tyranny is a complete moron. There are no civilian weapons that can compete with the firepower of our military. So, again, there is zero reason for “assault” weapons in the hands of civilians.

We also need to be realistic as a society. These weapons exist. Outlawing them won’t take them off the street. While I’d turn mine in many would not. Calling for legislative changes won’t fix this problem by itself. Those that say people are the problem are right. Weapons don’t fire themselves. If anyone thinks mass violence is only a gun problem read about GB’s knife attack issues. If you think the US is the only country with a mass violence problem you’re not paying attention. It’s a global problem. There are evil people that do evil things in every country. I support sensible gun reform - no “assault” weapons, stronger background checks mandatory nationwide, nationwide conceal carry standards, even using technology to monitor social media posts (although the subjectivity and potential for abuse on this one is a concern), amongst other sensible actions. I’m also not naive enough to think that alone will stop mass violence. We need better access to behavioral health. Clearly the kid in TX had issues. He idolized a killer in a Netflix documentary and wanted that level of notoriety according to reports I’ve read. That’s not how mentally well people think. We also need better social services for kids like the TX shooter who are living in traumatic situations and being cared for by unwell adults. Kids in those situations are a high risk to lash out and commit violent crimes. They need help and guidance to get them on the right path and work through the issues created by their situation. Could this have been stopped if we had social services that stepped in years ago and been able to place him in a better, more stable situation? We’ll never know but it’s certainly a possibility. However, it could be argued that he would’ve been worse off with today’s social services intervention options. The normalizing of violence through entertainment like video games, movies, TV, and music certainly has an impact and needs to be addressed. I would expect that most rationale adults would agree that exposing a mentally unstable person to violence as “entertainment” is an unwise thing. It’s not an easy problem to solve but it’s one we need to be mindful of as a society.

The bottom line here is we need a wholistic approach to make an impact. Cowards will always be cowardly and target the weak and innocent. As a society we need to protect our children better. All options should be on the table but let’s not be naïve about where guns sit in the hierarchy of this problem. If, magically, all guns were removed knives or other weapons replace them as the instrument of violence. Sure, it’s valid to argue that a knife in this kids hands would’ve resulted in fewer deaths. It’s possible but it’s also possible he’d skip the knife and just build a bomb or several. Then more would’ve died. This isn’t a simple problem with a simple answer. Taking a single threaded approach isn’t the answer many think it is.

100%

I'm not a gun guy, I don't get the appeal.. Indonrecognize that we aren't going to get rid of guns, there are too many if them out there, and even an authoritarian regime would meet massive losses attempting to recover all the guns, were that to happen.

I also totally agree with your point about your puny weapons not being able to resist the government. I work on products every day that would make your head spin. If people knew half the capability that our soldiers have, they'd understand. Suffice to say, the lethality and capability the US war fighter is equipped with today makes every single weapon you could own irrelevant. Truly, I can't understate how much more equipped they are than civilians. That's just talking dismounted soldiers, not even discussing the capability of UAV drones, or other war vehicles.

This shooter had body armor on. How that's legal for sale to civilians is beyond me. It should be EXCLUSIVELY for military and LEO uses, with every single piece tracked.

We need to be realistic about this, and put the kids first. We can't allow this to be a polarized, politicized issue. This has to be an activity we take together as people, looking at the real causes of the issues, not just doing lip service to it to advance our "cause".

 

[Murf'n'surf]

Reopen mental hospitals and lock people up that have issues. We can't rely on pharmaceuticals to prevent people from going over the line.

Why do troubled people perform mass killings? Because they get notoriety from our media. The media needs to stop sensationalizing these types of things.

 

[RNYCLV]

QUOTE: Lastly, my anecdotal evidence, take from it what you want. Brazil doesn't have mass shooting problems and it's difficult to get a gun. I think it's just for people in law enforcement or people who can prove they need it (think, concealed carry permit rules of USA but applied to every brazilian firearm). It's rare for a Brazilian to have a firearm and I think that most aren't comfortable with them. It seems like a good idea to imitate the Brazilian laws until you see that the criminals have access to illegal firearms. But the criminals typically kill each other and aren't shooting up schools.


SIDE NOTE I have worked with Brazilian LE for years, the political nature of the higher level officials and public day trading of cash flow into agencies completely jeopardizes any sense of non-corrupts. The LE structure is more than flawed, money buys power in Brazil.

You do realize there was a mass shooting in the Favela the exact same day as the Texas shooting with 11 dead, this coming after a raid were illegal guns were found, this all coming from a gang shoot out killing 26 a month earlier and another two weeks prior with another 23? I am not getting into any arguments but sadly these events happen all over the world daily. In my line of work we deal with governments all throughout the world. Those scary places and those seen as completely safe. UK, bans semi automatic firearms and sees a dramatic increase in violent crime, blunt force instrumental crime, stabbing increased by 300% and vehicular by over 100%. Those who wish to harm will find a way. Its truly alarming. Speaking from a side who agrees with conversations on both sides of the firearms argument and with working in the industry. I completely and wholeheartedly believe that the system for a civilian purchasing is completely flawed. The introduction of HIPAA rules law has greatly decreased law enforcements ability to prevent valid FFL holders from denying those with diagnosed or suspected mental health issues, these laws also prevent them from allowing drug related offenses to be posted to Background checks unless they fall under felony status. The fight for increased background checks wont eliminate these issues, allowing this information to be seen during a firearms screening would prevent a good portion, (not all) from being approved for purchasing. The lack of proof of training is a huge things as well, some states but not all require an 8 hour minimum firearms safety class and shooting proficiency test before you can legally obtain a license to carry. All states require a hunters safety course to get a license however there is no background screening on those. There are states that have a (cool down) period some are 1 day and others 3, these laws were put into place to help curb impulse purchasing for crime of self harm. This has proven effective yet will not solve all issues. There are states that require purchase permits, these have to be purchased from local/state LE and presented to a valid FFL holder before the purchase of a firearm can take place, these limit the amount of firearms purchased. There are also states that limit capacity on magazines, allowing a limited amount of round. These have not been proven to be effective as people who want more will find a way to get them. Back to the original statement, people who want to commit crimes will do so. There is one key point that is not in any state as of yet and must become a requirement, a mental health check. I am not saying that this is the sole issue or that is will curb any or all issues, but can it hurt? If a person has to provide a urine same to get welfare benefits or to get a DEA regulated prescription would any legal law abiding citizen object the a mental health screening? Of course you will get the argument of (the government is already too involved) but its a matter of public health and safety to yourself.

I apologize for getting into this topic, I truly feel for the families involved, all of them. I wish no disrespect to anyone's opinions or personal connection to the event. I truly despise where this industry has gone and the ways manufactures purposely try to find verbiage mistakes, and legal grey areas to make money. Its become a profiteering enterprise instead of a sportsman's industry on the civilian side and on my side its become a political chess match seeing who can create distain in area to profit another. I used to be extremely proud of my work and who I worked with, now I wake up everyday praying I don't see headlines like the title of this post. I swear in my professional life I do everything to uphold my personal beliefs and maintain integrity for my family. I wish there were ways to curb the violence and these tragedies. Sadly I see no end in sight, not by banning firearms, magazines, or ammunition. Dealing with the people I deal with all you get to see regularly is that people inherently always find a way to do harm to others when they want to. Until we can figure out who and how to help them, we may never stop these events from happening. I hope I didn't get myself banned here too, I've enjoyed so much reading and communicating with you all. Sorry for this being so long and I hope it came across in the right way.

 

[ripler]

Rosa Parks didn't need to sit in front of the bus she had a right too. So if I go out tonight and get drunk Get a car accident and kill someone do we blame Dodge, Jim bean, the bar tender or just maybe the person who got behind the wheel of a truck? So should we ban Ram trucks? Jim bean? Or close all bars down? I have alot of guns and none of them have jumped out of my gun safe and killed anyone on their own. And I have been to a few of those "scary places too". If you don't think they have shootings over there you're blind or just plain ignorant. We just have media coverage.

Bad analogy. You had to prove you were competent to drive a vehicle in the first place to legally drive a vehicle. You had to take a test to prove you knew the laws, have an eye exam, go through months of driving training with your learner's permit, take a driving test to prove you knew how to drive and then you were issued a drivers license. What do you have to do to buy a gun besides pass a background check?

 

[Beachbummer]

Yes, guns are the main method of killings in schools currently. But that's only because it's the currently available tool. We're there to be no guns or bullets, evil people would just shift how they perpetrate evil. Instead of shooting people, they'd make IEDs out of household items or pressure cookers, or release poisons into ventilation systems.

If you look overseas, their acts of violence like this typically involve vehicles being used to run down crowds of hundreds of people. It doesn't reduce the lethality for them to be using a vehicle vs a gun, if anything it increases it. They aren't then limited by ammo, they're only limited by propulsion. The lethality of a person with their foot to the floor through a crowd of people is absurdly high, and then they have an easy escape vehicle.

Like I've said before, solve the root cause, not the method of tragedy.

If you look overseas,as you suggest, you will find the rate of homicide is MUCH LOWER in many other places where guns are not broadly available and more tightly controlled. (France and the UK for example) There are good arguments to why we don't have that level of restriction in the US, but if we were capable of removing guns, based on all available evidence, it makes perfect logical sense that homicide counts would go down.

Do you agree if had the will and desire and magically all ammunition stopped working overnight the homicide rate would go down? Only crappier tools would remain to do the deed.

(Whether we think doing that is good or bad is a different conversation.)

 

[ripler]

I wish it were as easy as just outlawing those style weapons. Unfortunately it's not. That is the option that has the best optics to the voting masses. This kid was a ticking time bomb. His fuse was lit many years ago by his family and his classmates. One could almost say his classmates that bullied him could be partially to blame. They were the match that lit the dynamite. This kid was crazy and enraged. He could have walked in there with 3 pump style shotguns and a couple shotgun shell belts around his torso and done the same damage in a barricaded classroom.

The harder option and the one that requires more work is, let's do a better job of securing our schools. Let's outlaw games like Call of Duty. Everyone of these kids seems like there is a story of how they all sat around and played Call of Duty. You say we don't need AR-15's to hunt?? I say we don't need realistic kill everybody you see style video games that desensitizes these kids by watching that horror over and over. And, not just watching, but actually committing......no simulating the killing. Let's pay more attention to bullying and do a better job of teaching our kids to accept people how they are. Social media??? That shit just needs to go away period. Here's a link to an article describing this psycho's past. It's pretty clear he was going to do something crazy eventually.

Texas gunman was bullied as a child, grew increasingly violent, friends say

Salvador Rolando Ramos suffered from a fraught home life and lashed out violently against peers and strangers recently and over the years, friends and relatives said.

www.startribune.com

Shooter 'made terrifying threat after losing at violent video game'

TEXAS shooter Salvador Ramos may have revealed his chilling plans to kill children in a callous school shooting online after LOSING at the violent video game Dead by Daylight, a gamer claimed. The …

www.the-sun.com

Video games do have ratings just like movies, Call of Duty has a M rating which is 17+, so parents must purchase the game for younger kids. I play M rated video games and run into very young kids playing these games. There is also a feature on Xbox where you can report a gamer if you feel like they are a threat to themselves or someone else, I'm not sure what happens if you report someone though.

It seems like everyone of these young kids committing these mass shootings all have the same background and all of the warning signs are there, but no one does anything about it. And 100% social media is a cesspool and needs to be done away with.

 

[I_squared_r]

QUOTE: Lastly, my anecdotal evidence, take from it what you want. Brazil doesn't have mass shooting problems and it's difficult to get a gun. I think it's just for people in law enforcement or people who can prove they need it (think, concealed carry permit rules of USA but applied to every brazilian firearm). It's rare for a Brazilian to have a firearm and I think that most aren't comfortable with them. It seems like a good idea to imitate the Brazilian laws until you see that the criminals have access to illegal firearms. But the criminals typically kill each other and aren't shooting up schools.


SIDE NOTE I have worked with Brazilian LE for years, the political nature of the higher level officials and public day trading of cash flow into agencies completely jeopardizes any sense of non-corrupts. The LE structure is more than flawed, money buys power in Brazil.

You do realize there was a mass shooting in the Favela the exact same day as the Texas shooting with 11 dead, this coming after a raid were illegal guns were found, this all coming from a gang shoot out killing 26 a month earlier and another two weeks prior with another 23? I am not getting into any arguments but sadly these events happen all over the world daily. In my line of work we deal with governments all throughout the world. Those scary places and those seen as completely safe.

For sure there are mass shootings in the favelas. The brazilian government doesn't even have control of the favelas and there's a lot of gang violence there. I should clarify my previous post that mass shootings in Brazil are almost limited to gang violence, its not some punk 18 year old kid who decides to buy a gun and kill innocent children.

 

[seanmclean]

I didn't want to engage this thread but...

Bad analogy. You had to prove you were competent to drive a vehicle in the first place to legally drive a vehicle. You had to take a test to prove you knew the laws, have an eye exam, go through months of driving training with your learner's permit, take a driving test to prove you knew how to drive and then you were issued a drivers license. What do you have to do to buy a gun besides pass a background check?

Cool. What other CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS do we want to add means and competency tests to? Voting? Yeah, that sounds good. Why do YOU deserve a right to privacy? etc, ad nauseum. Last I checked there is no constitutional guarantee of the right to drive a vehicle on public roads. I am a staunch defender of the 2A, along with the rest of our rights. If you want to change that, there is a means to do so, just like every other time we have amended the constitution.


The administration of this forum really needs to decide whether we want to allow political discussions or not, and enforce it heavily. This used to be the fun place on the internet where we could all shoot the shit about our boats. I find myself here far less often because of the content and conduct being permitted, and that's fine, no one will miss me. Its a shame for the future of this place though.