Mass Shootings/Gun Control Reform Thread

[gounion]

I support red flag laws as long as we can figure out a way to work thru due process concerns. I am not certain we have figured out how to implement the red flag laws already on the books. Seems like concerns are being raised but are either not reported, reported and ignored, or not routed properly so they can be actioned.

Secondly, as you and I have discussed on previous occasions, instead of banning “assault weapons”, create a “class” for them that requires a longer waiting period and a more thorough background check and a requirement that the weapon cannot be transferred to any other owner except thru a licensed dealer where the recipient of the transfer has to go thru the same background checks. I’m sure it will get some pushback, but it’s not a “ban”. Further most gun owners will find it reasonable.

Lots of things gun owners find reasonable but the NRA and GOP don’t.

[carmenjonze]

Michael Harriot
@michaelharriot

Never forget that Bill O’Reilly literally comes from the whitest place in America, built using government handouts that only allowed people to live there if they agreed to keep Black people out of their town.





[.Quote Tweet]
Ron Filipkowski
@RonFilipkowski

Bill O’Reilly loses his mind after IL Gov Pritzker’s press conference in Highlands Park after the shooting. “You won’t stop crime, drug crime, drug gangs, because they are minority gangs!”

[VIDEO]

https://twitter.com/michaelharriot/stat ... 1796508672
_________

Sounds like Glennfs.

[carmenjonze]

I support red flag laws as long as we can figure out a way to work thru due process concerns. I am not certain we have figured out how to implement the red flag laws already on the books. Seems like concerns are being raised but are either not reported, reported and ignored, or not routed properly so they can be actioned.

Secondly, as you and I have discussed on previous occasions, instead of banning “assault weapons”, create a “class” for them that requires a longer waiting period and a more thorough background check and a requirement that the weapon cannot be transferred to any other owner except thru a licensed dealer where the recipient of the transfer has to go thru the same background checks. I’m sure it will get some pushback, but it’s not a “ban”. Further most gun owners will find it reasonable.

The problem is not limited to just guns or some imaginary need to appeal to "gun owners."

F. "gun owners".

Your colonizer communities have a male violence problem that you guys pass on from generation to generation.

[ZoWie]

We can pass all the laws we want, and in many cases it's not a bad thing to do so. However, as long as messed up kids are encouraged by their subculture to consider these weapons glamorous or as a viable solution to typical adolescent insecurities and urges, we will have this type of crime by this type of person. It's a subset of toxic masculinity.

[JoeMemphis]

We can pass all the laws we want, and in many cases it's not a bad thing to do so. However, as long as messed up kids are encouraged by their subculture to consider these weapons glamorous or as a viable solution to typical adolescent insecurities and urges, we will have this type of crime by this type of person. It's a subset of toxic masculinity.

I don’t disagree. I grew up around firearms. Everybody hunted. I drove to high school everyday with a 12 gauge behind the seat as I often went hunting after school. We didn’t worry about folks settling their differences with a gun. The thought didn’t enter our minds. That’s what’s changed in our society. People blame the availability of weapons, but we had weapons and ready access to weapons as well.

So I don’t know how to change the culture. We have lost respect for others and the value of human life. I guess about all we can reasonably do is pass laws which make it more difficult for folks who have these kinds of issues to get their hands on a weapon.

[Libertas]

This is you, this is you gunners...you are responsible for this but if the kid needs food, shelter, clothes, education, healthcare, you will say no.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/highland-par ... 54077.html

Highland Park victims Kevin and Irina McCarthy leave behind toddler who must 'navigate life as an orphan'

NBC News


Irina McCarthy's father, Michael Levberg, told the Chicago Sun-Times that Kevin died protecting his son.

"He had Aiden under his body when he was shot," Levberg told the newspaper. Hours later, when Levberg picked up Aiden at the Highland Park police station, the little boy told him: "Mommy and Daddy are coming soon."s

If you dont worship the NRA and act like children wanting your toy, this does not happen.

[carmenjonze]

I don’t disagree. I grew up around firearms. Everybody hunted. I drove to high school everyday with a 12 gauge behind the seat as I often went hunting after school. We didn’t worry about folks settling their differences with a gun.

Yes, you guys had other forms of mass murder and lynchmobbery.

The thought didn’t enter our minds. That’s what’s changed in our society. People blame the availability of weapons, but we had weapons and ready access to weapons as well.

So I don’t know how to change the culture.

Stop raising your sons to be white entitled mass murderers.

Problem solved.

We

have lost respect for others and the value of human life. I guess about all we can reasonably do is pass laws which make it more difficult for folks who have these kinds of issues to get their hands on a weapon.

When have conservative whites ever respected others or value human life?

Ever?

For you guys, the "value" was in how much munny you could get for selling people's little kids down the river, or how much munny you could amass by stealing people's land right out from under them. All with the aid and assistance of the government you all claim to hate so much.

Today, "pro life" means force the 10-year-old to bear the product of sexual abuse and violence. Your culture is the most perverted, backwards, and Orwellian in this whole country. Yet you wonder why this culture is the way it is right now. :problem:

[Libertas]

Speaking of land ownership:

"it is absurd to allow any individual person or corp or entity other than a collective (government etc) to own part of earth."

I am a fan of a show called "The Secret of Skinwalker Ranch," about a 512 acre ranch in Utah that has a history of UFO's or UAP's and other crazy stuff. The research being done there now is fascinating.

But it is a perfect example of how stupid it is to allow ownership of earth. A rich LAND OWNER and Mormon owns the place. Now I am happy he is doing this research because it is entertaining for me and who knows what might come of it, but that ANYBODY but especially people like this can own EARTH is absurd.

The alternative is leasing land to families over multiple generations and all land is owned by a government or collective of citizenry.

Crazy? Then what are you gonna do when the GOP takes over and sells Waikiki Beach and Yellowstone to Exxon?

[ProfX]

We can pass all the laws we want, and in many cases it's not a bad thing to do so. However, as long as messed up kids are encouraged by their subculture to consider these weapons glamorous or as a viable solution to typical adolescent insecurities and urges, we will have this type of crime by this type of person. It's a subset of toxic masculinity.

I don't know what people are struggling with, and we can speculate till the cows come home.

My guess is there are people who are struggling with toxic masculinity, adolescent insecurities and urges all over the world, visiting the darkest parts of the interwebz, and who glamorize weapons all over the planet. But these mass shootings only happen with the frequency they do in the U.S.

We can debate what is and is not changed in our culture. To me, the obvious answer to what makes the U.S. exceptional in this area (all ironies intended) is the availability of weapons. I'm all for increasing resources to counseling for troubled people. But people are struggling with mental health all over the planet, and yet the mass shootings mostly (yes, I know, they happen occasionally elsewhere in the world) happen here.

Joe's idea is fine. All I know is if we keep handing out hunting-human weapons to troubled youth like Pop Tarts, yes, this will keep happening.

[JoeMemphis]

I don't know what people are struggling with, and we can speculate till the cows come home.

My guess is there are people who are struggling with toxic masculinity, adolescent insecurities and urges all over the world, visiting the darkest parts of the interwebz, and who glamorize weapons all over the planet. But these mass shootings only happen with the frequency they do in the U.S.

We can debate what is and is not changed in our culture. To me, the obvious answer to what makes the U.S. exceptional in this area (all ironies intended) is the availability of weapons. I'm all for increasing resources to counseling for troubled people. But people are struggling with mental health all over the planet, and yet the mass shootings mostly (yes, I know, they happen occasionally elsewhere in the world) happen here.

Joe's idea is fine. All I know is if we keep handing out hunting-human weapons to troubled youth like Pop Tarts, yes, this will keep happening.

This debate has been going on for as long as I can remember. Little has been done. I highly doubt banning weapons will get much traction in todays legislative environment so I think the best we can hope for is some incremental change. Not giant steps but smaller steps around certain controls where both sides might be able to reach a compromise.

[Toonces]

Personally, I'd rather see them error on the side of depriving someone's due process for a few days than having people murdered because that due process seemed like too much of a hardship.

If they feel in imminent danger, call the police.

I cannot see an instance in which it's an undue burden to have to wait up to a week before purchasing an assault-style weapon.

Of course, I live in an area where one is less likely to need lethal protection from everyone else needing lethal protection. Need a gun for self-defense? I guess that's true if everyone else has a gun. Seems an odd way to run a CIVILization.

[Motor City]

Well we can see the future of leaving weapons of war available to the public. More orphans and widows more terror born of deadly selfishness and self righteous hypocrisy and cult of incrementalism.

Highland Park rallied to help toddler after his parents were killed. Now they've raised $2 million

Also more declarations of heroism that could have been avoided.

[ZoWie]

Oh come on, everyone knows that the culture glamorizes these weapons. It's toxic masculinity in a positive feedback loop. Just look at what currently passes for music videos, and of course there's a whole underground for them on the Internet. We're one of the few cultures that teaches kids that it's cool to possess a weapon of war in peaceful society just to show your manhood. It's certainly not to have a well-regulated militia. We have one of those. They keep their weapons locked up in armories.

[ProfX]

Sometimes though you need your irony detector on.

I think it's a good time to watch this video again.

This is America.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYOjWnS4cMY

I think it does the opposite of "glamorizing" our gun fetishism.

I'm not disagreeing that the video is saying it's core to our culture. The question has been for how long. As I keep saying, there is that cute animated video in Bowling for Columbine that says ... centuries.

Widespread availability of semi-autos and high-cap mags, though, was a late 20th century phenomenon ... and of course, uncuriously enough, also when mass shootings started to peak.

[ZoWie]

I'm not talking about guns, I'm talking about one particular variety of especially deadly semi-automatic rifle that was illegal for civilians to possess until the Republican Party took money from the NRA, and was wined and dined by gun industry lobbyists AND known Russian intelligence agents, and put them back on the streets. Mass shootings happened, but they were not a Thing until this legalization, which is completely a whitenat Republican cause aided covertly or not so covertly by foreign intelligence services seeking to destabilize the US by any means necessary.

I'm done siding with the white supremacists, wannabe soldiers, incels, mental cases, foreign agents, media whores, repressed screen writers, "artists" who think they're making a statement, race-war urban stress victims, net trolls, and money grubbers that keep too many of our kids strung out on this fantasy that they become real men by walking into a store at age 18 and walking out with enough firepower to shoot up a town. Sure I know it's a tiny minority. That tiny minority is rendering the rest of a great nation uninhabitable. Something has to change.

[ProfX]

The discussion also has to include the manufacturers, and the advertising they use.



I know, I know, liability for them has also been taken off the table.

[ZoWie]

The ad that you reproduce above is definitely the tip that defines the iceberg. That is where the problem started, with gun industry propaganda, exploitation of male insecurity, and influence peddling, and it spread from there. America always had guns, kids always learned to hunt and/or target shoot in their teens, and firearms were always around. What changed? Your ad is a good clue. The video in Bowling for Columbine is another clue, but it goes more to why Americans never really lived well enough together for trust and social norms to stop this particular antisocial behavior.

[JoeMemphis]

Personally, I'd rather see them error on the side of depriving someone's due process for a few days than having people murdered because that due process seemed like too much of a hardship.

If they feel in imminent danger, call the police.

I cannot see an instance in which it's an undue burden to have to wait up to a week before purchasing an assault-style weapon.

Of course, I live in an area where one is less likely to need lethal protection from everyone else needing lethal protection. Need a gun for self-defense? I guess that's true if everyone else has a gun. Seems an odd way to run a CIVILization.

As for due process, I think there should be a process where a judge can authorize the police to take firearms/weapons from an individual pending a hearing on the facts. Of course the hearing needs to be timely.

As for having a weapon for personal protection, that’s personal preference. I wouldn’t advise someone either way. I personally own weapons. I used to carry. I don’t carry any longer.

[gounion]

As for due process, I think there should be a process where a judge can authorize the police to take firearms/weapons from an individual pending a hearing on the facts. Of course the hearing needs to be timely.

As for having a weapon for personal protection, that’s personal preference. I wouldn’t advise someone either way. I personally own weapons. I used to carry. I don’t carry any longer.

What do you think would be judicially justifiable reason to take weapons from someone that hasn't committed a crime?

Think about some of the recent mass murderers that had no record. To be clear - most of the recent mass murderers had no previous record.

[ZoWie]

We're not talking about protection, or weapons in general. We're talking about a phenomenon largely peculiar to this country where a few adolescent white males get hooked on the idea of shooting up the town/school/workplace/whatever. OK, the occasional disgruntled employee or political wannabe terrorist does the same thing once in a while, but that doesn't mean the society isn't sick. Even a cursory peek at the Internet underworld that eggs these kids on will tell you that it is, and the illness is serious.

[JoeMemphis]

What do you think would be judicially justifiable reason to take weapons from someone that hasn't committed a crime?

Think about some of the recent mass murderers that had no record. To be clear - most of the recent mass murderers had no previous record.

Generally there is a combination of behaviors/characteristics that might would justify such a move. They don’t necessarily need to be crimes. It’s a public safety issue. The individual should still have due process right to make a case and be heard by a judge.

[gounion]

Generally there is a combination of behaviors/characteristics that might would justify such a move. They don’t necessarily need to be crimes. It’s a public safety issue. The individual should still have due process right to make a case and be heard by a judge.

Well, in your view, what would those be?

My point is, that many would say if you haven't committed a crime, you can't have your "rights" to own a gun taken away based on what you "might" do.

So I'm interested in hearing what you, as a conservative, think would be just cause.

[ZoWie]

Turns out this kid had plenty of evidence beyond the dark web. Another obviously deranged and dangerous individual fell through the cracks.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62068500

A man accused of opening fire on a 4 July parade near Chicago contemplated a second attack on the day of the deadly shooting, authorities say.

According to police, the 21-year-old suspect drove to Wisconsin after the shooting, which left seven dead and dozens more wounded.

...

Three other firearms were also found at his home. Police said the suspect had two prior contacts with law enforcement but was still able to purchase five guns in the past year.

In April 2019, police were called to the suspect's home one week after he reportedly attempted to take his own life. And in September 2019, police were called by a family member who said he had made violent threats to "kill everyone".

[JoeMemphis]

Well, in your view, what would those be?

My point is, that many would say if you haven't committed a crime, you can't have your "rights" to own a gun taken away based on what you "might" do.

So I'm interested in hearing what you, as a conservative, think would be just cause.

I don’t have a list on me. I would think it would include things posted on social media, statements made to friends and families, encounters with police, personal circumstances, access to weapons etc. If a judge is presented with enough evidence that leads them to believe you might be a threat to yourself or others, then I think that would justify the temporary removal of weapons until such time as the individual no longer presents a threat.

[ZoWie]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/06/us/richm ... index.html

A tip from a 'hero citizen' thwarted a mass shooting planned for July 4 celebration in Richmond, Virginia, police say

(CNN)One phone call saved countless lives and prevented a potential mass shooting during July 4 celebrations in Richmond, Virginia, the police chief and mayor said Wednesday.

...

The same day as the tip, police went to a residence at the 1000 block of Columbia Ave. where they found the weapons and ammunition. In total, police found two assault rifles, one handgun and 223 rounds of ammunition at the home, Smith said.

One man was arrested Friday and police put surveillance on a second person, who was arrested Tuesday, the chief said. Both suspects have been charged with being non-citizens in possession of a firearm.

"They were planning to, actually, shoot up our Fourth of July celebration," Smith said. "We know what their intent is but we don't have their motive, we do know that they lived at the same location."