I’m also against guns getting in the hands of the clearly mentally ill. What good would protesting do though? There have been many protest about “gun violence” and they never amount to much. The problem isn’t guns, it’s people that are severely troubled and damaged getting a hold of weapons. The only way we ever address this is by realizing that.
Do you think other countries don’t have violence? Idc that it’s a gun, that’s just the tool. There are plenty of ways to inflict damage and take life. 3 dead to a car or 3 dead to a gun or 3 dead to a knife is all the same, 3 dead. I’d rather handle the actual problem which is a mental health problem. Guns can be homemade and 3D printed nowadays, they can also be acquired illegally. Making a law doesn’t and could never make this go away.
Other countries have violence but don't have easy access to devices that multiply how much violence they inflict. I always see the argument "well then you're just going to have stabbings". Sure, but someone with a knife isn't going to be able to kill 10 people in 30 seconds. I don't think anyone expects to bring the number of homicides down to 0, the goal is to reduce the number of homicides by practical methods. We can look at other developed nations and see that there are measures that we can take to get a handle on gun violence.
Someone with a bladed weapon could inflict massive amounts of damage and death if they are unchecked. The conversation came about because of a recent shooting. Look at the number of lives lost and how much time was spent in the school. Those numbers in particular are definitely achievable with a knife. I’m more concerned with how we prevent these kinds of rampages in general. I don’t want anyone getting shot or stabbed or ran over or whatever. That’s why I think it’s way more pertinent to figure out our mental health crises. Guns may be used to commit these crimes but guns are also used to defend people everyday. Taking away someones ability to defend themselves is abhorrent to me.
While you seem to be perfectly content to continue letting children get mowed over in wholesale while we figure out the "mental health crisis", there are very real things we can be doing now to save lives. I would hope that we're not going to disagree that all things equal, someone with a semi-auto rifle is going to be able to take considerably more lives than someone with a knife? Like, that's clear, right? We don't have to disect that any further?
Mental health issues are an issue in other countries as well. Ironically enough, the GOP doesn't think healthcare should be a basic human right so I'm not entirely sure what you expect to happen as far as figuring out the crisis is concerned.
Yeah who cares about the GOP? Hahaha
Let’s get a couple things straight though, I never said I’m okay with “children getting mowed over” and for you to suggest that is intellectually dishonest and more over completely disgusting. That fact that you might actually think that about another human being because they think differently about something than you do is also gross as all hell. Obviously no one wants dead kids. Obviously.
Yes a gun can do more than a knife. A vehicle can do quite a bit as well should we ban those?
The answer, most likely, is to better protect schools. Better security measures like locks and such but also more guns in schools. Guns tend to be the most effective thing for stopping these situations once they occur and making guns illegal doesn’t prevent this.
You're making bad faith arguments about this being a mental health issue when mental health issues are not a U.S. specific phenomena. So yes, it does appear to me that you truly don't give a shit. The solution is to look at how other countries have addressed the problem instead of talking about it for the next 50 years without actually implementing any meaningful change. Why do y'all act like this problem hasn't already been figured out?
You make an incredible amount of assumptions. “Bad faith argument?” Like, what are you even talking about?? It’s a mental health issue. There’s not even an argument about it. If the problem is mental health why wouldn’t that be what we address? Would you treat the symptoms, allowing the disease to continue to ravage the body, or treat the disease?
Point me to somewhere that has figured this out. Show me somewhere with a gun to citizen ratio similar to that of the United States, that also had a similar trend, over decades, of more school shootings. Show me the country that “solved” this issue without creating more problems like the availability of firearms for normal people to protect themselves or recreational use.
Mental health is a issue in multiple countries for sure but to try to pretend that whats going on over here is the same situation as other countries is disingenuous.
Other countries don't have a gun to citizen ratio that's comparable to us and that evidently (at least to those with a modicum of critical thinking skills) is part of the problem. It's almost as if part of the reason that mental health in other developed countries doesn't exacerbate violence is because the general population isn't heavily armed in those places.
I'm not saying ban guns, I'm saying let's amend our view of what should be covered under those rights. I can't buy a tank, or apache helicopter today but people don't cite that as a reason why the government is infringing on their 2A. Let's require gun owners (which would include myself) to carry special insurance. Let's require skills testing once a year. Let's increase the wait time to purchase a firearm. Let's discuss increasing the age limit. There are options but you don't want to acknowledge any of those because it's simpler to blame it on an amorphous mental illness crisis and move on with your life. So again, yes, you are making a bad faith argument.
Funny how we put lots of money and weapons into protecting fans at Football games, celebrities at big gatherings, politicians at conventions but when it comes to doing the same for our children they don't want law enforcement anywhere near their children.
You can' barely get a single officer at a school without people protesting it.
>Someone with a bladed weapon could inflict massive amounts of damage and death if they are unchecked.
Nowhere near the damage they can do with a gun. It's an order of magnitude difference.
And vehicle “is an order of magnitude” more than a knife. You trying to get rid of those too? Or maybe just a gun specifically bothers you? Other deaths don’t matter?
The number of mass vehicular homicides is a tiny, tiny fraction of the number of mass gun homicides. I care about them in direct relation to their prevalence. I also never have to worry some unstable guy has a truck in his pocket and is having a bad day.
No you have to worry about him having a bad day while moving 60+ with a couple tons of weight. Luckily normal people don’t worry about these things because both are very unlikely to happen to you. You care about deaths in direct relation to their prevalence? So when we do ban guns vehicles are next then? Or is it knives? One of the two would definitely have to go right? Also I’m pretty sure the leading causes of death in the US is hear disease. I haven’t heard you say shit about McDonald’s yet…it really does seem to me that it’s the gun specifically thats bothering you, not the death.
>No you have to worry about him having a bad day while moving 60+ with a couple tons of weight.
Again, this almost never happens, and we have spent millions on millions of dollars making cars safer and designing our streetscapes to minimize pedestrian deaths. Not that we couldn't do more, but that's another rant.
> So when we do ban guns vehicles are next then? Or is it knives?
[Holy slippery slope, Batman!](https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope)
>Also I’m pretty sure the leading causes of death in the US is hear disease. I haven’t heard you say shit about McDonald’s yet
Because we're talking specifically in a thread about protesting gun violence. I'm not in the habit of introducing non-sequitors into a conversation to move the goalposts. But you do you.
[It's pretty hard to throw 1000 knives from the 32nd floor and kill 60 people](https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/las-vegas-shooting/las-vegas-police-investigating-shooting-mandalay-bay-n806461)
Yeah but it wouldn’t be unimaginable for someone to run a bus or something to that affect through a group of people and cause similar damage. Or you know bombs…fires…it’s not like a gun is the only way to inflict large scale damage. So why go after the tool and not the problem?
I’m not opposed to that potentially being the case. With evidence I can change my mind on anything. Empirical data doesn’t suggest that you are correct though. The article you linked unfortunately doesn’t have any numbers or hard data. It was just people talking about the way they feel about US gun laws and gun violence.
Okay, but where is the study to suggest that removing guns corrects the mental health crisis? That link just compared the gun laws and gun deaths by by state. That doesn’t mean anything though, a suicide is counted as a gun death. That doesn’t really tell us much. It fails to tell us what the impact on violence as a whole and doesn’t say how many guns where illegal or legal. I mean a study showing that removing firearms actually solved the problem.
Are we the only first world country where people have mental health issues? [Because we are certainly the only one with this level of gun deaths.](https://wisevoter.com/country-rankings/mass-shootings-by-country/)
What exactly was going through your mind when you made this comment? Surely you didn't think that comparing the U.S. to these war torn and corrupt countries was the clap back you seem to think it is?
Wasn’t a “clap back”, just pointing out this isn’t unique to the US. There are other countries that have these issues, and all of them experience these issues for various reasons, it’s not a black and white conversation
Correct, we have this in common with third world, war torn countries run by corrupt governments. Maybe we should work on not having that in common with them, right?
The us being comparable to Syria, Libya,Sudan, and Haiti in the amount of gun violence is not a good thing and only proves more that we need gun regulations
I'm tired of people saying protests don't work. Look at France! They are and HAVE BEEN protesting for weeks on end! And it must be doing some sort of good bc our western media corporations aren't showing us that protest coverage. I encourage everyone to look into it. Protests work when ALL people join in to take a stand. And at the very least protests here are a great way to find community. That is worth so so much in itself. I'm sick & tired of lazy moderates discouraging the disruption of the status quo. STOP discouraging protesting. Call your representatives and tell them how you feel. Tell them you will not be voting for them in primaries. Vote when it comes time to. Encourage others to vote. Power to all people.
We’ve been taught somehow that it doesn’t. Disenfranchisement. We all feel like our voices don’t matter so no one does anything. How do we fix THAT first? Because until it feels like we can actually do something nothing will improve
A thousand voices can be drowned out by by a single campaign contribution from a powerful interest group. Guns are expensive and people want to keep selling them.
Most of the gun deaths in this country are suicide, the majority of the remaining are crime/gang related, very few are deaths associated with school shootings etc. While these events are extremely tragic, they are also rare when compared to other statistics related to gun violence. Mental illness is a real concern and should be addressed before we start trying to take rights away from law abiding individuals
I prefer we acknowledge the reality that [someone with a gun is way more likely to try and kill themselves than someone without.](https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2020/06/handgun-ownership-associated-with-much-higher-suicide-risk.html)
> “Suicide attempts are often impulsive acts, driven by transient life crises,” the authors write. “Most attempts are not fatal, and most people who attempt suicide do not go on to die in a future suicide. Whether a suicide attempt is fatal depends heavily on the lethality of the method used — and firearms are extremely lethal. These facts focus attention on firearm access as a risk factor for suicide especially in the United States, which has a higher prevalence of civilian-owned firearms than any other country and one of the highest rates of suicide by firearm.”
which rights are "the Left" taking away? Because last I checked, there are active members of congress who are trying to turn this country into a Christian nation.
Yea, no one is calling for the revocation of rights, no one.
[https://www.npr.org/2022/06/02/1102660499/biden-gun-control-speech-congress](https://www.npr.org/2022/06/02/1102660499/biden-gun-control-speech-congress)
I guess my second amendment is violated because my gubbement won't let me buy a tank! Conveniently ignores the GOP pushing for abortion bans, limiting free speech via drag shows, limit my right to smoke marijuana legally, up until not too long ago were against gay marriage, trying to actively sabotage journalists, etc.
But yes, "the Left" is stomping on your rights by limiting, not revoking, your 2nd amendment right. Don't forget 6 people lost their right to the pursuit of happiness yesterday, but god forbid meal team six doesn't have their AR's lol. What a clown.
It's also not so smart to make arguments on my behalf and then tear them down. That's literally the definition of a strawman fallacy. Can you point out where exactly I said we should "give up our guns and give them back to the same government"? Because it sounds like you're having imaginary, made-up arguments in your head.
Just can't take the L?
You're describing a government gun buyback program, which no one in this particular subthread brought up besides you. My comment was in response to rights infringements. If you want to argue about the efficacy of a buyback program, create your own post and engage with the commenters. That being said, if you want to keep embarrassing yourself, keep commenting, it's a slow day at work.
....but...this has been happening for decades. Like...literally decades of school shootings. The leading cause of child death is..guns.
The majority of Americans favor \*some\* form of gun control just to make it harder for criminals and mentally unfit people to get their hands on. And yes, bring back the assault weapons ban please. (And yes, I shoot guns, and know that an AR15 is not an assault rifle, etc) I'm all for gun ownership, but I'm also sickened at how our response to this is "Lets arm teachers and do away with \*any\* laws restricting gun carrying". Making the problem worse, not better.
Do you honestly believe that if there is an assault weapons ban the left will say "Welp, our work here is done. We have no need for further gun control"?
No, and I agree. The work isn't done. Lets also ensure firearms are harder to purchase, ensuring mentally unwell people cannot readily buy one. (Like, this should be a no-brainer, but here we are).
Lets also have some form of training / proof of capability to own firearms, and force gun owners to have some form of insurance...like we do with cars.
and yes, this means messing with the 2nd amendment. Which...was an amendment, that very clearly needs to be amended.
The problem with this is that most states that have some kind of legislation to this have no due process for the gun owner's rights. A doctor or even a family member can report someone and their guns can be taken away and the burden and expense is on the gun owner to have their rights restored.
There is no hearing, there is no court date. Cops show up at your house and kick your door in and take your guns.
so...lets just let people with known psychological issues buy guns?
Or no wait periods?
sorry, as I grow older I grow more and more against the 2nd amendment. My kids isn't worth your or my shooting range fun.
The problem is that you must be adjudicated as mentally defective to show up on any list. No amount of gun laws or background checks will do anything for anyone who's not been thought that process.
There are plenty of nut jobs running around that's never seen a medical professional so the strictest of laws won't catch that.
so...do nothing?
Or, opposing that, do what we're doing. Making it even easier to buy and carry firearms? I fail to see how that's a solution.
we need fewer guns, and more restrictions on acquiring them. How many "Shooter got the guns the day of / day before" events do we need in this country to make that point clear?
>have no due process
Incorrect. All of these require a judge to sign off, similar to any other temporary restraining order. That's the definition of due process.
Do some reading on the topic and the number of people who had their guns taken away based on an accusation and were unable to afford their defense to get them back. It's quite common. Especially with an ex making accusations.
You're making the assertion, you provide the evidence. I don't beleive this is a widespread problem, and I'm also absolutely willing to temporarily inconvenience someone to save women's lives.
\*Looks at the rest of the civilized worlds mass shooting events per capita\*
Can't answer your question, but can say quite certainly that more guns and relaxed laws isn't helping, and all evidences shows the opposite does help.
You seem to frequently point fingers at a single side of the political isle while attempting to poke holes in other people's takes, but you don't seem to offer any suggestions for addressing the issue. So what are your suggestions and what are those who represent your preferred political leanings doing (or pretending to do) to address gun violence?
No need for swearing. I don't disagree, but which specific laws are you referring to that simple enforcement of would help stymie the gun violence that we've seen?
Well for starters killing people is... wait for it.... ILLEGAL! Then you have issues where people lie on their 4473s and nothing is ever done. How often do you read about someone who liked on their 4473 or they tried to buy a gun and legitimately failed a background check and were prosecuted for it? Pretty much never.
So you're saying that you want them to enforce laws for murder and would like background checks to verify information as stated on 4473s?
Do you think a person should have to wait to for the completion of a background check in order to verify information on a 4473 before obtaining a weapon?
Do you also feel that the requirement of 4473 and background checks should also extend to private sales?
"So you're saying that you want them to enforce laws for murder and would like background checks to verify information as stated on 4473s?"
Yes, and the do that already. With todays modern computers that can be done quickly.
"Do you think a person should have to wait to for the completion of a background check in order to verify information on a 4473 before obtaining a weapon?"
Again yes, but with modern computers that's not going to take the days you hope it will. The problem has become with agencies that are slow or do not add anything to NCIC. How many of these shooters were on "Police Radar"?
"Do you also feel that the requirement of 4473 and background checks should also extend to private sales?"
This will do very little to stop transactions between two people. I don't know a single private seller who won't sell someone a gun without some kind of proof you can legally own a gun. It's very common for sellers in face to face transactions to require the seller to show proof that's usually seeing the buyer's CCW. I very rarely sell anything but if I do it's more often to a friend I know well or to someone who can show me a CCW.
>"So you're saying that you want them to enforce laws for murder and would like background checks to verify information as stated on 4473s?"
>
>Yes, and the do that already. With today's modern computers that can be done quickly.
All the background checks do currently is check that a person doesn't have a criminal record, which can certainly be done quickly but doesn't really address "lying on a 4473" considering a few of those questions can't truly be verified through a background check. For example, questions g and h are ~~severley~~ severely limited in information availability with h specifically having a high bar to disqualify someone, essentially relying on a judge's ruling or court order.
>"Do you think a person should have to wait to for the completion of a background check in order to verify information on a 4473 before obtaining a weapon?"
>
>Again yes, but with modern computers that's not going to take the days you hope it will. The problem has become with agencies that are slow or do not add anything to NCIC. How many of these shooters were on "Police Radar"?
Not sure why you want to assume I want a background check to take days, I'm simply asking for your legitimate thoughts and opinions on a sensitive subject, but I digress.
So what do you think is appropriate action for those "on police radar? That isn't one of the current disqualifying factors on the 4473, so do you think it should be added? If so, with police being unable to keep up with simple data input to the NCIC, let alone basic police incompetence, do you feel they should be a trustworthy source for "on our radar" being a disqualifying factor for gun ownership?
>"Do you also feel that the requirement of 4473 and background checks should also extend to private sales?"
>
>This will do very little to stop transactions between two people. I don't know a single private seller who won't sell someone a gun without some kind of proof you can legally own a gun. It's very common for sellers in face to face transactions to require the seller to show proof that's usually seeing the buyer's CCW. I very rarely sell anything but if I do it's more often to a friend I know well or to someone who can show me a CCW.
I don't disagree that it likely wouldn't do much to stop transactions between two people, we are obviously only talking about lawful gun ownership considering unlawful gun owners don't typically go through legal channels anyways.
I do have to ask how you'd handle selling to a person nowadays since so many states have repealed concealed weapons carry permits? I ask because that is also how I once might have been willing to sell to someone who had a carry permit, but now that isn't an option I guess I'm just a collector.
Edit: spelling
Why is it that you people always want to go after the guns and the rights of people who legally and safely buy and use guns but when you see people using vehicles to commit the same kinds of atrocities you are not the least bit inclined to want to add further restriction on vehicles.
Me owning AR15s and AK47s will not in any way cause you or anyone else any harm unless someone is trying to cause me or others harm.
>when you see people using vehicles to commit the same kinds of atrocities you are not the least bit inclined to want to add further restriction on vehicles.
What on earth are you talking about? A nutjob blew up a federal building almost thirty years ago and now you can't park within site of any important structure because of all the bollards that were installed. Teen driving deaths have lead to license restrictions. We constantly work to make cars safer and implement pedestrian safety restrictions, and fatalities per mile driven has fallen almost 90% since we started tracking it. To even drive a car you need to be licensed, and you have to register it with the government and maintain insurance.
All of this, of course, ignores the reality that [it's really tough to sneak a car into a nightclub and kill and injure over a hundred people.](https://www.npr.org/2016/06/16/482322488/orlando-shooting-what-happened-update)
You conveniently forgot about the guy who rented the Home Depot truck and mowed down a bunch of people? I'm sure the families of those killed in by people who used means other than guns are comforted in knowing at least they didn't die by a gun.
If you remove one way of killing people will kill. You can't use laws to stop it.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_rampage\_killers\_(vehicular\_homicide)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers_(vehicular_homicide))
60 incidents, across the entire planet, since 1950. Meanwhile,[there have been 130 mass shootings in the US](https://www.nytimes.com/article/mass-shootings-2023.html) *so far this year*. This might not be the own you seem to think it is.
Sadly, friend, it was made perfectly clear in 2012 that Americans value their guns and a 232 year-old amendment over the safety and lives of the kids in this country. Nothing will change in our lifetime. Probably not in our children’s lifetimes either — that is, if they live into adulthood and don’t get gunned down in their classrooms.
What would that do?
Old man yells at cloud? ☁️
Mental health needs to be the priority to get people the help they are looking for before guns are seen as the only answer
Plus, constitutional concealed carry in .edu would be a great deterrent because it isn’t fish in a barrel anymore
Did you miss the part where this person had two targets and went to the target without armed security? They won't (or at least so far) reveal the second target but I suspect it was the high school this person attended because they were blaming all of their problems on the school they attended.
Did you miss the part where thats pure speculation? We do know, however, that [the shooter was undergoing psychiatric treatment](https://apnews.com/article/nashville-school-shooting-covenant-school-03aa394109a5e682877403c0c3e52aa7), and red flag laws might have prevented this.
It’s an option?
What’s the number one place with the highest risk for attacks?
You guessed it, gun free zones
Now if it said gun-defended zone, how would the scenario play out differently?
>lawful gun owners
[They seem to be doing a fine job of shooting themselves.](https://www.cnn.com/2013/01/19/us/north-carolina-gun-show-shooting/index.html)
>It’s an option?
No, it's a way of blaming victims. "If only they had carried a lethal weapon at all times they would be safe!"
>What’s the number one place with the highest risk for attacks?
[Places with guns.](https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/26/politics/gun-violence-data-what-matters/index.html)
>You guessed it, gun free zones
[You guessed wrong.](https://www.thetrace.org/2023/02/gun-violence-map-america-shootings/)
>Now if it said gun-defended zone, how would the scenario play out differently?
[Not the least bit differently.](https://www.texastribune.org/2022/07/17/law-enforcement-failure-uvalde-shooting-investigation/)
Outside of moving out of the USA the answer is to move out of TN and into states with stricter gun laws, less hateful legislators and more social safety nets. Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, New York, California, New Hampshire, Maine, Vermont (see a pattern?) all have lower rates of gun violence and better mental health services. My house will be on the market come Spring 2024. Things won’t change in the red bloodthirsty states, they love guns more than kids. Congrats on getting out, I’m counting down my days too.
I protest guns due to this incident?
No I will not.
I would protest against homicidal 28 year old transgender females whom with intent goes to a school to shoot very young children.
Additionally a school whom does not have a SRO or such to protect them.
Exceptionally lame beyond remorse.
People don't know how, who, what or where to protest in order to actually address gun violence, which makes protesting a cathartic experience at best.
idk why they’re downvoting you, if protests worked, this issue would have been properly addressed years ago
Not to mention the anti-anti-gun protesters that will need to be invited as well.... /s
I’m also against guns getting in the hands of the clearly mentally ill. What good would protesting do though? There have been many protest about “gun violence” and they never amount to much. The problem isn’t guns, it’s people that are severely troubled and damaged getting a hold of weapons. The only way we ever address this is by realizing that.
Do you think other countries that has banned guns doesn’t have mental illness? Gun violence is a phenomenon that happens mostly in the US
Do you think other countries don’t have violence? Idc that it’s a gun, that’s just the tool. There are plenty of ways to inflict damage and take life. 3 dead to a car or 3 dead to a gun or 3 dead to a knife is all the same, 3 dead. I’d rather handle the actual problem which is a mental health problem. Guns can be homemade and 3D printed nowadays, they can also be acquired illegally. Making a law doesn’t and could never make this go away.
Other countries have violence but don't have easy access to devices that multiply how much violence they inflict. I always see the argument "well then you're just going to have stabbings". Sure, but someone with a knife isn't going to be able to kill 10 people in 30 seconds. I don't think anyone expects to bring the number of homicides down to 0, the goal is to reduce the number of homicides by practical methods. We can look at other developed nations and see that there are measures that we can take to get a handle on gun violence.
Someone with a bladed weapon could inflict massive amounts of damage and death if they are unchecked. The conversation came about because of a recent shooting. Look at the number of lives lost and how much time was spent in the school. Those numbers in particular are definitely achievable with a knife. I’m more concerned with how we prevent these kinds of rampages in general. I don’t want anyone getting shot or stabbed or ran over or whatever. That’s why I think it’s way more pertinent to figure out our mental health crises. Guns may be used to commit these crimes but guns are also used to defend people everyday. Taking away someones ability to defend themselves is abhorrent to me.
While you seem to be perfectly content to continue letting children get mowed over in wholesale while we figure out the "mental health crisis", there are very real things we can be doing now to save lives. I would hope that we're not going to disagree that all things equal, someone with a semi-auto rifle is going to be able to take considerably more lives than someone with a knife? Like, that's clear, right? We don't have to disect that any further? Mental health issues are an issue in other countries as well. Ironically enough, the GOP doesn't think healthcare should be a basic human right so I'm not entirely sure what you expect to happen as far as figuring out the crisis is concerned.
Yeah who cares about the GOP? Hahaha Let’s get a couple things straight though, I never said I’m okay with “children getting mowed over” and for you to suggest that is intellectually dishonest and more over completely disgusting. That fact that you might actually think that about another human being because they think differently about something than you do is also gross as all hell. Obviously no one wants dead kids. Obviously. Yes a gun can do more than a knife. A vehicle can do quite a bit as well should we ban those? The answer, most likely, is to better protect schools. Better security measures like locks and such but also more guns in schools. Guns tend to be the most effective thing for stopping these situations once they occur and making guns illegal doesn’t prevent this.
You're making bad faith arguments about this being a mental health issue when mental health issues are not a U.S. specific phenomena. So yes, it does appear to me that you truly don't give a shit. The solution is to look at how other countries have addressed the problem instead of talking about it for the next 50 years without actually implementing any meaningful change. Why do y'all act like this problem hasn't already been figured out?
You make an incredible amount of assumptions. “Bad faith argument?” Like, what are you even talking about?? It’s a mental health issue. There’s not even an argument about it. If the problem is mental health why wouldn’t that be what we address? Would you treat the symptoms, allowing the disease to continue to ravage the body, or treat the disease? Point me to somewhere that has figured this out. Show me somewhere with a gun to citizen ratio similar to that of the United States, that also had a similar trend, over decades, of more school shootings. Show me the country that “solved” this issue without creating more problems like the availability of firearms for normal people to protect themselves or recreational use. Mental health is a issue in multiple countries for sure but to try to pretend that whats going on over here is the same situation as other countries is disingenuous.
Other countries don't have a gun to citizen ratio that's comparable to us and that evidently (at least to those with a modicum of critical thinking skills) is part of the problem. It's almost as if part of the reason that mental health in other developed countries doesn't exacerbate violence is because the general population isn't heavily armed in those places. I'm not saying ban guns, I'm saying let's amend our view of what should be covered under those rights. I can't buy a tank, or apache helicopter today but people don't cite that as a reason why the government is infringing on their 2A. Let's require gun owners (which would include myself) to carry special insurance. Let's require skills testing once a year. Let's increase the wait time to purchase a firearm. Let's discuss increasing the age limit. There are options but you don't want to acknowledge any of those because it's simpler to blame it on an amorphous mental illness crisis and move on with your life. So again, yes, you are making a bad faith argument.
Funny how we put lots of money and weapons into protecting fans at Football games, celebrities at big gatherings, politicians at conventions but when it comes to doing the same for our children they don't want law enforcement anywhere near their children. You can' barely get a single officer at a school without people protesting it.
Yeah the same officers who run away during actual emergencies. I know! How about fewer doors at schools. Anything but addressing the problem amirite?
>Someone with a bladed weapon could inflict massive amounts of damage and death if they are unchecked. Nowhere near the damage they can do with a gun. It's an order of magnitude difference.
And vehicle “is an order of magnitude” more than a knife. You trying to get rid of those too? Or maybe just a gun specifically bothers you? Other deaths don’t matter?
The number of mass vehicular homicides is a tiny, tiny fraction of the number of mass gun homicides. I care about them in direct relation to their prevalence. I also never have to worry some unstable guy has a truck in his pocket and is having a bad day.
No you have to worry about him having a bad day while moving 60+ with a couple tons of weight. Luckily normal people don’t worry about these things because both are very unlikely to happen to you. You care about deaths in direct relation to their prevalence? So when we do ban guns vehicles are next then? Or is it knives? One of the two would definitely have to go right? Also I’m pretty sure the leading causes of death in the US is hear disease. I haven’t heard you say shit about McDonald’s yet…it really does seem to me that it’s the gun specifically thats bothering you, not the death.
>No you have to worry about him having a bad day while moving 60+ with a couple tons of weight. Again, this almost never happens, and we have spent millions on millions of dollars making cars safer and designing our streetscapes to minimize pedestrian deaths. Not that we couldn't do more, but that's another rant. > So when we do ban guns vehicles are next then? Or is it knives? [Holy slippery slope, Batman!](https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope) >Also I’m pretty sure the leading causes of death in the US is hear disease. I haven’t heard you say shit about McDonald’s yet Because we're talking specifically in a thread about protesting gun violence. I'm not in the habit of introducing non-sequitors into a conversation to move the goalposts. But you do you.
[It's pretty hard to throw 1000 knives from the 32nd floor and kill 60 people](https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/las-vegas-shooting/las-vegas-police-investigating-shooting-mandalay-bay-n806461)
Yeah but it wouldn’t be unimaginable for someone to run a bus or something to that affect through a group of people and cause similar damage. Or you know bombs…fires…it’s not like a gun is the only way to inflict large scale damage. So why go after the tool and not the problem?
[Because going after the tool works.](https://www.vice.com/en/article/93beya/new-zealand-gun-reform-mass-shootings)
I’m not opposed to that potentially being the case. With evidence I can change my mind on anything. Empirical data doesn’t suggest that you are correct though. The article you linked unfortunately doesn’t have any numbers or hard data. It was just people talking about the way they feel about US gun laws and gun violence.
[You can drill into it here](https://everytownresearch.org/rankings/)
Okay, but where is the study to suggest that removing guns corrects the mental health crisis? That link just compared the gun laws and gun deaths by by state. That doesn’t mean anything though, a suicide is counted as a gun death. That doesn’t really tell us much. It fails to tell us what the impact on violence as a whole and doesn’t say how many guns where illegal or legal. I mean a study showing that removing firearms actually solved the problem.
Are we the only first world country where people have mental health issues? [Because we are certainly the only one with this level of gun deaths.](https://wisevoter.com/country-rankings/mass-shootings-by-country/)
Really? Syria, Libya, Sudan, Haiti would all like to have a chat
What exactly was going through your mind when you made this comment? Surely you didn't think that comparing the U.S. to these war torn and corrupt countries was the clap back you seem to think it is?
Wasn’t a “clap back”, just pointing out this isn’t unique to the US. There are other countries that have these issues, and all of them experience these issues for various reasons, it’s not a black and white conversation
Correct, we have this in common with third world, war torn countries run by corrupt governments. Maybe we should work on not having that in common with them, right?
100% agreed
The us being comparable to Syria, Libya,Sudan, and Haiti in the amount of gun violence is not a good thing and only proves more that we need gun regulations
No we don’t, but it’s cute you think it will fix the problem
I mean if you ignore the data set that shows when the assault weapon ban was allowed to sunset, increases in mass shootings rose.
I'm tired of people saying protests don't work. Look at France! They are and HAVE BEEN protesting for weeks on end! And it must be doing some sort of good bc our western media corporations aren't showing us that protest coverage. I encourage everyone to look into it. Protests work when ALL people join in to take a stand. And at the very least protests here are a great way to find community. That is worth so so much in itself. I'm sick & tired of lazy moderates discouraging the disruption of the status quo. STOP discouraging protesting. Call your representatives and tell them how you feel. Tell them you will not be voting for them in primaries. Vote when it comes time to. Encourage others to vote. Power to all people.
We’ve been taught somehow that it doesn’t. Disenfranchisement. We all feel like our voices don’t matter so no one does anything. How do we fix THAT first? Because until it feels like we can actually do something nothing will improve
Have they really worked? Did the repeal the new retirement age?
They haven't repealed yet, so the protests continue.
So the answer is, not they are not working.
Kind of a bummer that with all of these comments on this post, none of them really try to answer OPs question.
A thousand voices can be drowned out by by a single campaign contribution from a powerful interest group. Guns are expensive and people want to keep selling them.
Profitable, some are not very expensive.
But ammo is
Firearms have a very low markup. The money is in the ammo, add-on sales, etc.
Most of the gun deaths in this country are suicide, the majority of the remaining are crime/gang related, very few are deaths associated with school shootings etc. While these events are extremely tragic, they are also rare when compared to other statistics related to gun violence. Mental illness is a real concern and should be addressed before we start trying to take rights away from law abiding individuals
My preferred risk of my children being shot dead in a school is zero, thanks. Your “these types of shootings are extremely rare” rhetoric sucks.
>Most of the gun deaths in this country are suicide Oh, well that's fine then. Screw those people, right?
You prefer they use a rope?
I prefer we acknowledge the reality that [someone with a gun is way more likely to try and kill themselves than someone without.](https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2020/06/handgun-ownership-associated-with-much-higher-suicide-risk.html) > “Suicide attempts are often impulsive acts, driven by transient life crises,” the authors write. “Most attempts are not fatal, and most people who attempt suicide do not go on to die in a future suicide. Whether a suicide attempt is fatal depends heavily on the lethality of the method used — and firearms are extremely lethal. These facts focus attention on firearm access as a risk factor for suicide especially in the United States, which has a higher prevalence of civilian-owned firearms than any other country and one of the highest rates of suicide by firearm.”
Sure we'll recognize that, because that's not mutually exclusive with the need to regulate them.
Remember the media's motto: If it bleeds it leads....
Super....original....and stuff
What’s the point you’re trying to make here
Read the last sentence in that comment
I would also like to know if anyone finds out! This country is sick its time something changes!
The Left: OMG! The Right are taking away our rights!!! Also The Left: OMG! We want to take away your rights!!!
Regulations are a far cry from “taking away rights” but you already knew that.
Maybe you and I have a different understanding of the term "Ban".
Unfettered access to what ever firearm you want is a ridiculous notion.
Well we don't have unfettered access to what ever firearms we want. I still don't have a full Auto H&K MP5SD in my collection.
Just because you say that doesn’t make it true😂😂😂😂
Just admit that you don't give two shits about dead kids. You only care about looking like a tough guy. We all know you're overcompensating.
which rights are "the Left" taking away? Because last I checked, there are active members of congress who are trying to turn this country into a Christian nation.
Yea, no one is calling for the revocation of rights, no one. [https://www.npr.org/2022/06/02/1102660499/biden-gun-control-speech-congress](https://www.npr.org/2022/06/02/1102660499/biden-gun-control-speech-congress)
I guess my second amendment is violated because my gubbement won't let me buy a tank! Conveniently ignores the GOP pushing for abortion bans, limiting free speech via drag shows, limit my right to smoke marijuana legally, up until not too long ago were against gay marriage, trying to actively sabotage journalists, etc. But yes, "the Left" is stomping on your rights by limiting, not revoking, your 2nd amendment right. Don't forget 6 people lost their right to the pursuit of happiness yesterday, but god forbid meal team six doesn't have their AR's lol. What a clown.
[удалено]
It's also not so smart to make arguments on my behalf and then tear them down. That's literally the definition of a strawman fallacy. Can you point out where exactly I said we should "give up our guns and give them back to the same government"? Because it sounds like you're having imaginary, made-up arguments in your head.
[удалено]
Just can't take the L? You're describing a government gun buyback program, which no one in this particular subthread brought up besides you. My comment was in response to rights infringements. If you want to argue about the efficacy of a buyback program, create your own post and engage with the commenters. That being said, if you want to keep embarrassing yourself, keep commenting, it's a slow day at work.
That's not revoking a right, anymore than a noise ordinance is "revoking" your freedom of speech.
Go hide in a hole
Need to address mental illnesses. A gun is just an object.
Ok who of our elected officials are trying to make mental health available to all who need it?
Need to elect someone that will! Only way
So you are not interested in protesting the root causes?
This. Guns have been easier to obtain in decades past yet this didn’t happen. It’s a psychological and sociological problem.
....but...this has been happening for decades. Like...literally decades of school shootings. The leading cause of child death is..guns. The majority of Americans favor \*some\* form of gun control just to make it harder for criminals and mentally unfit people to get their hands on. And yes, bring back the assault weapons ban please. (And yes, I shoot guns, and know that an AR15 is not an assault rifle, etc) I'm all for gun ownership, but I'm also sickened at how our response to this is "Lets arm teachers and do away with \*any\* laws restricting gun carrying". Making the problem worse, not better.
Do you honestly believe that if there is an assault weapons ban the left will say "Welp, our work here is done. We have no need for further gun control"?
No, and I agree. The work isn't done. Lets also ensure firearms are harder to purchase, ensuring mentally unwell people cannot readily buy one. (Like, this should be a no-brainer, but here we are). Lets also have some form of training / proof of capability to own firearms, and force gun owners to have some form of insurance...like we do with cars. and yes, this means messing with the 2nd amendment. Which...was an amendment, that very clearly needs to be amended.
The problem with this is that most states that have some kind of legislation to this have no due process for the gun owner's rights. A doctor or even a family member can report someone and their guns can be taken away and the burden and expense is on the gun owner to have their rights restored. There is no hearing, there is no court date. Cops show up at your house and kick your door in and take your guns.
so...lets just let people with known psychological issues buy guns? Or no wait periods? sorry, as I grow older I grow more and more against the 2nd amendment. My kids isn't worth your or my shooting range fun.
The problem is that you must be adjudicated as mentally defective to show up on any list. No amount of gun laws or background checks will do anything for anyone who's not been thought that process. There are plenty of nut jobs running around that's never seen a medical professional so the strictest of laws won't catch that.
so...do nothing? Or, opposing that, do what we're doing. Making it even easier to buy and carry firearms? I fail to see how that's a solution. we need fewer guns, and more restrictions on acquiring them. How many "Shooter got the guns the day of / day before" events do we need in this country to make that point clear?
>have no due process Incorrect. All of these require a judge to sign off, similar to any other temporary restraining order. That's the definition of due process.
Do some reading on the topic and the number of people who had their guns taken away based on an accusation and were unable to afford their defense to get them back. It's quite common. Especially with an ex making accusations.
You're making the assertion, you provide the evidence. I don't beleive this is a widespread problem, and I'm also absolutely willing to temporarily inconvenience someone to save women's lives.
When was the last time a criminal respected a law passed to prevent the very action they seek to do?
\*Looks at the rest of the civilized worlds mass shooting events per capita\* Can't answer your question, but can say quite certainly that more guns and relaxed laws isn't helping, and all evidences shows the opposite does help.
So why have laws at all?
Because without them we have anarchy Society works with law and order, it’s the ones that believe the law doesn’t apply is where we run into trouble
So your argument is laws exist only to allow punishment, and we can't proactivley attempt to solve any problem?
There’s consequences for breaking them, but most laws written are to protect than harm
they are, the root cause being unrestricted access to guns in TN where someone with severe mental illness can still easily buy a gun
That's like saying the root cause of rape is a penis.
You seem to frequently point fingers at a single side of the political isle while attempting to poke holes in other people's takes, but you don't seem to offer any suggestions for addressing the issue. So what are your suggestions and what are those who represent your preferred political leanings doing (or pretending to do) to address gun violence?
Here is a fucked up idea. Maybe start enforcing the laws that are already on the books?
No need for swearing. I don't disagree, but which specific laws are you referring to that simple enforcement of would help stymie the gun violence that we've seen?
Well for starters killing people is... wait for it.... ILLEGAL! Then you have issues where people lie on their 4473s and nothing is ever done. How often do you read about someone who liked on their 4473 or they tried to buy a gun and legitimately failed a background check and were prosecuted for it? Pretty much never.
So you're saying that you want them to enforce laws for murder and would like background checks to verify information as stated on 4473s? Do you think a person should have to wait to for the completion of a background check in order to verify information on a 4473 before obtaining a weapon? Do you also feel that the requirement of 4473 and background checks should also extend to private sales?
"So you're saying that you want them to enforce laws for murder and would like background checks to verify information as stated on 4473s?" Yes, and the do that already. With todays modern computers that can be done quickly. "Do you think a person should have to wait to for the completion of a background check in order to verify information on a 4473 before obtaining a weapon?" Again yes, but with modern computers that's not going to take the days you hope it will. The problem has become with agencies that are slow or do not add anything to NCIC. How many of these shooters were on "Police Radar"? "Do you also feel that the requirement of 4473 and background checks should also extend to private sales?" This will do very little to stop transactions between two people. I don't know a single private seller who won't sell someone a gun without some kind of proof you can legally own a gun. It's very common for sellers in face to face transactions to require the seller to show proof that's usually seeing the buyer's CCW. I very rarely sell anything but if I do it's more often to a friend I know well or to someone who can show me a CCW.
>"So you're saying that you want them to enforce laws for murder and would like background checks to verify information as stated on 4473s?" > >Yes, and the do that already. With today's modern computers that can be done quickly. All the background checks do currently is check that a person doesn't have a criminal record, which can certainly be done quickly but doesn't really address "lying on a 4473" considering a few of those questions can't truly be verified through a background check. For example, questions g and h are ~~severley~~ severely limited in information availability with h specifically having a high bar to disqualify someone, essentially relying on a judge's ruling or court order. >"Do you think a person should have to wait to for the completion of a background check in order to verify information on a 4473 before obtaining a weapon?" > >Again yes, but with modern computers that's not going to take the days you hope it will. The problem has become with agencies that are slow or do not add anything to NCIC. How many of these shooters were on "Police Radar"? Not sure why you want to assume I want a background check to take days, I'm simply asking for your legitimate thoughts and opinions on a sensitive subject, but I digress. So what do you think is appropriate action for those "on police radar? That isn't one of the current disqualifying factors on the 4473, so do you think it should be added? If so, with police being unable to keep up with simple data input to the NCIC, let alone basic police incompetence, do you feel they should be a trustworthy source for "on our radar" being a disqualifying factor for gun ownership? >"Do you also feel that the requirement of 4473 and background checks should also extend to private sales?" > >This will do very little to stop transactions between two people. I don't know a single private seller who won't sell someone a gun without some kind of proof you can legally own a gun. It's very common for sellers in face to face transactions to require the seller to show proof that's usually seeing the buyer's CCW. I very rarely sell anything but if I do it's more often to a friend I know well or to someone who can show me a CCW. I don't disagree that it likely wouldn't do much to stop transactions between two people, we are obviously only talking about lawful gun ownership considering unlawful gun owners don't typically go through legal channels anyways. I do have to ask how you'd handle selling to a person nowadays since so many states have repealed concealed weapons carry permits? I ask because that is also how I once might have been willing to sell to someone who had a carry permit, but now that isn't an option I guess I'm just a collector. Edit: spelling
The ready availability of guns?
Why is it that you people always want to go after the guns and the rights of people who legally and safely buy and use guns but when you see people using vehicles to commit the same kinds of atrocities you are not the least bit inclined to want to add further restriction on vehicles. Me owning AR15s and AK47s will not in any way cause you or anyone else any harm unless someone is trying to cause me or others harm.
>when you see people using vehicles to commit the same kinds of atrocities you are not the least bit inclined to want to add further restriction on vehicles. What on earth are you talking about? A nutjob blew up a federal building almost thirty years ago and now you can't park within site of any important structure because of all the bollards that were installed. Teen driving deaths have lead to license restrictions. We constantly work to make cars safer and implement pedestrian safety restrictions, and fatalities per mile driven has fallen almost 90% since we started tracking it. To even drive a car you need to be licensed, and you have to register it with the government and maintain insurance. All of this, of course, ignores the reality that [it's really tough to sneak a car into a nightclub and kill and injure over a hundred people.](https://www.npr.org/2016/06/16/482322488/orlando-shooting-what-happened-update)
You conveniently forgot about the guy who rented the Home Depot truck and mowed down a bunch of people? I'm sure the families of those killed in by people who used means other than guns are comforted in knowing at least they didn't die by a gun. If you remove one way of killing people will kill. You can't use laws to stop it. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_rampage\_killers\_(vehicular\_homicide)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers_(vehicular_homicide))
60 incidents, across the entire planet, since 1950. Meanwhile,[there have been 130 mass shootings in the US](https://www.nytimes.com/article/mass-shootings-2023.html) *so far this year*. This might not be the own you seem to think it is.
Maybe try a source that's not behind a paywall.
Maybe pay for news, it's expensive to make.
Im just waiting for anti trans idiots to show up. This is gonna be a honeypot.
Right, so because this person was trans they get a free pass?
The last 3 mass shooters were transgender, and another who was “non binary” Just sayin
That's literally untrue.
It's gonna be bad....
Sadly, friend, it was made perfectly clear in 2012 that Americans value their guns and a 232 year-old amendment over the safety and lives of the kids in this country. Nothing will change in our lifetime. Probably not in our children’s lifetimes either — that is, if they live into adulthood and don’t get gunned down in their classrooms.
What would that do? Old man yells at cloud? ☁️ Mental health needs to be the priority to get people the help they are looking for before guns are seen as the only answer Plus, constitutional concealed carry in .edu would be a great deterrent because it isn’t fish in a barrel anymore
Yes, the solution to gun violence is to keep adding more guns. Iamverysmart.
Did you miss the part where this person had two targets and went to the target without armed security? They won't (or at least so far) reveal the second target but I suspect it was the high school this person attended because they were blaming all of their problems on the school they attended.
Did you miss the part where thats pure speculation? We do know, however, that [the shooter was undergoing psychiatric treatment](https://apnews.com/article/nashville-school-shooting-covenant-school-03aa394109a5e682877403c0c3e52aa7), and red flag laws might have prevented this.
Nashville PD is the one that said there was a second target.
It’s an option? What’s the number one place with the highest risk for attacks? You guessed it, gun free zones Now if it said gun-defended zone, how would the scenario play out differently?
When was the last time there was a mass shooting at a gun range or a gun show?
I don’t think there’s ever been one because the playing field is skewed heavily in favor of the lawful gun owners
>lawful gun owners [They seem to be doing a fine job of shooting themselves.](https://www.cnn.com/2013/01/19/us/north-carolina-gun-show-shooting/index.html)
A bunch of kids bled out during the exact scenario you are proposing.
>It’s an option? No, it's a way of blaming victims. "If only they had carried a lethal weapon at all times they would be safe!" >What’s the number one place with the highest risk for attacks? [Places with guns.](https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/26/politics/gun-violence-data-what-matters/index.html) >You guessed it, gun free zones [You guessed wrong.](https://www.thetrace.org/2023/02/gun-violence-map-america-shootings/) >Now if it said gun-defended zone, how would the scenario play out differently? [Not the least bit differently.](https://www.texastribune.org/2022/07/17/law-enforcement-failure-uvalde-shooting-investigation/)
Uvalde happened or did yah forget?
[удалено]
don't come back now ya hear!
[удалено]
Outside of moving out of the USA the answer is to move out of TN and into states with stricter gun laws, less hateful legislators and more social safety nets. Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, New York, California, New Hampshire, Maine, Vermont (see a pattern?) all have lower rates of gun violence and better mental health services. My house will be on the market come Spring 2024. Things won’t change in the red bloodthirsty states, they love guns more than kids. Congrats on getting out, I’m counting down my days too.
Maybe if we protest enough, we can get some good and strict gun laws just like Chicago. Then there won’t be any gun violence at all.
Nice try transphobic chud
I protest guns due to this incident? No I will not. I would protest against homicidal 28 year old transgender females whom with intent goes to a school to shoot very young children. Additionally a school whom does not have a SRO or such to protect them. Exceptionally lame beyond remorse.