Florida High School Shooting

[K1052]

The next time a drunk driver hits and kills a minivan full of people, I think we should outlaw whatever car he was driving.
Then we should sue the manufacturer.

Only if the driver was smoking.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

There is a degree of ridiculousness, but the problem is that the argument in the image loses all credibility with its last sentence. It jumps from a sensible "don't confuse appearance with function" argument to the classic NRA-backed false claim: that the guns are never the problem.

Again, the picture was all I was trying to get across, I didn't even read the text. Having said that, I happen to agree that pointing at the gun is a waste of time, but I understand that not everyone thinks the way I do.

 

[mdram]

It jumps from a sensible "don't confuse appearance with function" argument to the classic NRA-backed false claim: that the guns are never the problem.

so without people a gun will commit mass murder?

 

[zinfamous]

You're both welcome to climb that hill, but it's a steep one, and I'd wager we have a full, comprehensive mental health reform moonshot program before you get semi-auto rifles banned in any state. You'll probably have states leave the union before 2A gets repealed.

Typically, such states that would do this are net moochers from public welfare, anyway (subsidized education, healthcare costs (from all the bullets they have to patch up, I guess), so probably no big loss for the US.

I kid...mostly.

 

[brycejones]

Only if the driver was smoking.

And then we should sue the Dr. that was present at that person's birth.

 

[SMOGZINN]

fully endorse full mental health screening of all young adults, even beyond simply to buy firearms.

But what are you okay doing with that screening? Does Delusional disorder constitute a reason to take away their guns? Any Delusion? Does depression? How about Borderline Personality Disorder? Which disorders do we target? Because almost no one is diagnosed as a danger to themselves and others until after they have already done something to warrant it, and then it is to late.

comprehensive mental health reform moonshot program

At one time we had decent mental health reform. The Republicans under Ronald Reagan dismantled it.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Typically, such states that would do this are net moochers from public welfare, anyway (subsidized education, healthcare costs (from all the bullets they have to patch up, I guess), so probably no big loss for the US.

I kid...mostly.

Understood, however divide only weakens us. Strength through unity, and all that jazz. I'd much rather find a solution more palatable to everyone than drive ourselves to divorce court.

 

[1sikbITCH]

I thought there were pictures of him wearing Antifa shirts. If we are going the political route. Very little is known right now about the kid other than him having mental health treatments in the past.

Sure pal. If he wasn't white he would not get that consideration. Hispanics are automatically illegals, Muslims are automatically terrorists, blacks are gang members, and all of those folks and any white race traitors are automatically "the left" to you folks. Dismissed.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

But what are you okay doing with that screening? Does Delusional disorder constitute a reason to take away their guns? Any Delusion? Does depression? How about Borderline Personality Disorder? Which disorders do we target? Because almost no one is diagnosed as a danger to themselves and others until after they have already done something to warrant it, and then it is to late.



At one time we had decent mental health reform. The Republicans under Ronald Reagan dismantled it.

I have no idea, that's why i support a true, no shit, Apollo/Manhattan project level governmental commitment to this. I would love to see an administration rip out 10% of the defense budget for 5 years and dedicate it specifically to mental health reform. I'd like the US to become a shining beacon of mental health awareness.

 

[zinfamous]

Understood, however divide only weakens us. Strength through unity, and all that jazz. I'd much rather find a solution more palatable to everyone than drive ourselves to divorce court.

Well, the only way that starts to happen is for the US to recognize the NRA as a domestic terrorist organization and to vote out the entirety of Republican leadership. Then real work gets done.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Well, the only way that starts to happen is for the US to recognize the NRA as a domestic terrorist organization and to vote out the entirety of Republican leadership. Then real work gets done.

That'd pretty much be the start of my 'I have a dream' speech.

 

[interchange]

I mean, they do buy the wooden ones. I sold hundreds of those suckers when I worked at Wal-Mart. Some people want the scary black military lookin' ones, some want nice polished wood, some don't care and just want something cheap to shoot squirrels/rabbits/small deer with. But if someone decides he's ready to lose his shit, if he walks into a gun store and only sees wood stock firearms I seriously doubt he's gonna say 'welp, guess I'll just not kill people instead, won't be as cool now, oh well'.

Go ahead and compile a list of mass shootings and break them down by weapon used (wooden rifle vs military stylized rifle) and compare that to total gun sales of each type.

The data makes that last sarcastic remark you made actually sound really really credible. As I said, don't try to use logic. Unless you can tell my why these events are logical.

 

[purbeast0]

Because a semi-automatic AR is a rifle styled with bits all over it and painted black. Usually has a magazine that holds a handful more than a stock/unmodified hunting rifle of equivalent caliber. It's just a goddamned rifle.

EDIT: Here, ignore all the gun nutter garbage, the picture is the point I'm trying to make:

So you can put a 30 round clip in that gun that is pictured first?

Serious question too.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Go ahead and compile a list of mass shootings and break them down by weapon used (wooden rifle vs military stylized rifle) and compare that to total gun sales of each type.

The data makes that last sarcastic remark you made actually sound really really credible. As I said, don't try to use logic. Unless you can tell my why these events are logical.

I'm very certain they are chosen due to how they make the carrier feel, but to counter your argument, I'll posit one: why aren't they illegally obtaining big scary black automatic weapons, like M-4's? They'd be far more effective (there's your logical angle) as well as nice and scary (there's your illogical angle). They can't easily though, so they default to the next rung down, scary looking semi-autos. If those weren't there, what's next? Non-scary semi-autos. You still fall into the trap of banning them categorically rather than individually.

 

[mdram]

Go ahead and compile a list of mass shootings and break them down by weapon used (wooden rifle vs military stylized rifle) and compare that to total gun sales of each type.

The data makes that last sarcastic remark you made actually sound really really credible. As I said, don't try to use logic. Unless you can tell my why these events are logical.

its already combiled if you search for it

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

So you can put a 30 round clip in that gun that is pictured first?

Serious question too.

Yeah, beyond just being able to make them, I'm confident I could find someone who just sells clips for common firearm types.
Feel free to go nuts:
https://gunmagwarehouse.com/all-magazines/rifles

 

[mdram]

So you can put a 30 round clip in that gun that is pictured first?

Serious question too.

30round mags are available

 

[Commodus]

Again, the picture was all I was trying to get across, I didn't even read the text. Having said that, I happen to agree that pointing at the gun is a waste of time, but I understand that not everyone thinks the way I do.

The "don't look at the gun" argument always falls flat to me because the US is the only country in the world where mass murders happen on a regular basis, and it's the only country which romanticizes and enshrines gun ownership to such a degree. Virtually every other developed country looks at the US and wonders why it perpetually refuses to implement the solutions that worked for them.

 

[emperus]

Yep... Because partisanship is clearly the path forward.

I'm ok with not allowing private sales in the roughly 30 states that still allow them. Always have been. Lets be clear that doing away with private sales addresses what many call the gun show loophole - This is universal background checks.

I'm ok with mandated firearm safety training and even permitting to even own one along with a prescribed renewal of that training. Shit, we require it for hunters already... While that can be argued away as not the same it is indeed pretty similar.

I'm ok with ZERO strike rules on those who commit crimes with firearms. The amount of criminal recidivism in regard to gun crime is ridiculous.

I'm ok with charging the parent/owner of a firearm used by a child that causes harm or death in an accidental or intentional way to also be charged with accessory murder.

I'm ok with failure to report a stolen/lost weapon that if traced back to you in the commission of crime results in charges.

I'm ok if people are charged or lose their ownership rights if they have a firearm lost or stolen that was not secured in any way (properly).

I'm ok if you've been charged with domestic violence that you lose your guns and ability to purchase... Some states already have this.

I'm ok with AR's and other types considered military styled only being sold to the public that do not actually accept what today are considered standard or high capacity magazines. At that point they become no different than any other hunting or target focused firearm.


Now...That is actually some middle ground and I bet you don't see it that way... and keep in mind that is a snapshot. There are certainly a lot of things we can do and should do all at once that address the issue of who can own/retain or buy a firearm that still preserves the 2A for most people. The gun fanatics would paint me a gun grabber and left wing. The gun control crowd would paint me a gun nut.

To make my point, please tell me which one of those proposals the GOP would support.

 

[Flapdrol1337]

Virtually every other developed country looks at the US and wonders why it perpetually refuses to implement the solutions that worked for them.

Well, we all kind of know why. The firearms industry has a powerful propaganda agency called the NRA.

 

[OutHouse]

Magazines damnit

 

[K1052]

Magazines damnit

Well, unless it's a Garand.

 

[Commodus]

so without people a gun will commit mass murder?

Please don't try the reductio ad absurdam argument. You know full well what I mean: that the lethality and accessibility of some guns contributes to incidents like this. It's difficult to completely prevent people from killing en masse, but you don't have to make it easy for them.

 

[mdram]

Please don't try the reductio ad absurdam argument. You know full well what I mean: that the lethality and accessibility of some guns contributes to incidents like this. It's difficult to completely prevent people from killing en masse, but you don't have to make it easy for them.

so you agree than it is a people problem

 

[SMOGZINN]

I have no idea, that's why i support a true, no shit, Apollo/Manhattan project level governmental commitment to this. I would love to see an administration rip out 10% of the defense budget for 5 years and dedicate it specifically to mental health reform. I'd like the US to become a shining beacon of mental health awareness.

And you think my ideas are unrealistic? There is no way we will rip even a penny from military spending.

The problem is that It would be expensive and even if we allocated enough money to do this it is not something we could do in 5 years. It is something we would have to keep on-going forever. We have to not only identify the reasons these things happen, we have to do something about them. That will require changes to our society. That will require advertising to educate people. It will require institutional changes to things like welfare. It will require us to tackle major sociological issues that are basically built into our society. And in the end we are still going to find that the guns are a part of the problem. They are one thing that encourages violent solutions.

We will have to do something about the people identified as needing help, many of who will require a lifetime of support. This will require major investment in the infrastructure to care for them. Money to pay for care for those that can't or won't pay. Money to pay to get people educated in the form of educational grants for mental health professions so we have people do to the jobs. Money to run the systems that ensure that the systems are working.

This is not something we can do in 5 years. This is something that will take decades to even put in place once we actually commit to doing it. What are the odds that Republicans won't decide that all this is to expensive, just like they did last time we did this?