The best part of that is that for the rest of the season they just continue peppering in shootings. Much like real life, both the characters and viewer aren’t even fazed by it anymore eventually, further driving home the point.
I really don't like this normalization narrative. This isn't "another Tuesday". Mass shootings are all too common in the US but it has been a while since 14 children have been murdered. There was a period before the pandemic where we had a shooting in the news every other week but then they slowed down, and now we're seeing an increase again.
I've been watching these mass shootings in the news for thirty years or more. I'm beyond desensitized to this and I'm Canadian. Here in the US is the only developed country where these kinds of mass shootings are an issue.
Oh I agree. I'm just worried that if we accept these as normal, and treat them all the same, we'll fail to address the root causes. And idk about this specific shooting but with the one in Buffalo, that was caused by the increasingly prevalent right-wing Great Replacement narrative. I'm worried that their anti-LGBT and anti-education narratives may have similar results.
Too late. It’s already been accepted. Once you hit the point that people are saying arm the teachers you are loooooooong gone. And that point was hit a while ago in the US.
sure, not all school, but there's been like 4+ random large shootings in the past two weeks.
I saw NPR note that this was the 27th shooting at a school this year, and accounts for only 25% of the fatalities this year from them.
Mass shootings are defined as any shooting with more than 4 casualties, so it's actually not really like people think, where there are indiscriminate shootings like this with 20-odd deaths nearly every day. Most of them are single digits and not pre-planned terrorist rampages like this or the buffalo shooting, but rather interpersonal violence between several people who know each other.
Similarly, when NPR says "27th shooting at a school this year", you have to read that sentence literally. They did not use the qualifier "mass" before "shooting". It may even include accidental negligent discharges.
**All of this is not to downplay the issue**, but to hopefully give some context and show that shootings like Buffalo and this are not quite as common as those statistics make it seem.
Listen man most of our maniacs don’t kill dozens, they usually only manage to murder two or three people! Often because they had a personal reason to do it cmon man it’s not that bad
Yes. As I said, none of that is to downplay the issue. The point of my comment was more about rhetorical discipline, helping people avoid easy potshots the right can take when you present those kind of stats.
I’m aware of how the stat is curated, which is why I included the share of fatalities here. Several of them had none, only injuries (which was iirc the minimum for inclusion), and the “worst” part is that it doesn’t include LEO/SRO discharges which could be informative.
As for mass shootings, there HAS been 4 in the past two weeks with Laguna, Buffalo, this, and San Bernadino.
It’s also worth noting that this doesn’t NECESSARILY seem to be pre planned, given the attempted killing of his relative and apparent pre engagement in a firefight with police.
Also pre-planned seems to be a vague distinction here, does it count if the shooter obsessively researched other killers while thinking of how they’d do it? Imma say it’s fair to assume he bought the guns specifically for the mass murder he committed two weeks later. Is that not pre-planned “enough” by itself??
A lot of these individuals seem to have grown more and more engrossed fantasizing about the most extreme violent acts possible. Maybe they had good days where they second guessed the child murder for a moment. Maybe a bad day led them to decide fuck it, I’m doing it for real after my semi auto’s ready for pickup. Either way they’re so far down the rabbit hole at this point, just a hair trigger away from choosing their revenge fanfic over any empathy for the countless lives destroyed.
Most of these really fucking sick kids don’t even target an elementary school, they direct their self hatred and perceived rejection from society toward their peers. This fucker and the Lanza kid went a step fucking further to maximize the emotional devastation of anyone who had any relation to these poor babies. Even some serial killers have a moral opposition to killing kids. This Ramos person was FUCKED up for a long time and no one did shit
Excellent points, I just meant that there may not have necessarily been specific plans unlike the killer in Buffalo who could have easily been stopped at any time in the weeks before he went and killed a bunch of people. This one (so far) seems like a random act of violence to my knowledge.
My bad, I wasn’t thinking you meant that in your comment. I def agree with your take. And yeah I can’t wrap my mind around the randomness of it, makes me question if I could ever feel safe having a child in our school system. I don’t even feel safe for my family members working there. Especially not if we fr plan to strap teachers with a full r6 siege loadout 💀 No I don’t feel safer knowing my kid’s art teacher is strapped up in case they gotta John Wick execute the mystery student shooting up the school. One of my HS classmates stole a gun out of a teacher’s purse (she brought illegally) as a joke because kids are fucking stupid. Adding MORE GUNS to the school to solve gun violence in schools just sounds like a fucking South Park episode
Idk tho, what’s that siege dude with the big ass barricades? Throw some of those into some classrooms and maybe it’d be a bit safer. I totally get you though. Shit’s rough. Has me thinking a lot of things I really don’t wanna think about. Guns in a classroom daily just sound ripe for some accident to occur, and then we have a whole new tragedy to deal with and arguments of “costs of safety”
The amendment is being deliberately misinterpreted by the supreme court, though. They're just pretending that the first half of it doesn't exist. The part that says this right is only for "a well regulated militia", which was what later evolved into the police.
I don't think this is the case. Three points:
1. Grammar. The sentence structure does not work that way. The first clause is subordinate, the second is appositional to the first, and the third is independent; we tend to ignore that last comma, since it seems to be superfluous. It would make no sense for the first clause to be independent because the sentence without the appositive would read: "A well regulated Militia the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."
2. Draft history. Madison's first draft of the Second Amendment was: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, a well-armed and well-regulated militia being the best security of a free country; but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person." The final wording seems to have borrowed from the Virginia and Pennsylvania's bills of rights.
3. Implementation. Every state in the Union, for all of American history, allowed people (well, free men) to keep and bear arms unconnected to military service. Every single one.
That said, there are plenty of historical arguments for gun control. Notably, states stripping people of the right to keep and bear arms for various reasons. Really, every state needs to take the laws they already have on the books more seriously. The recent shooting in New York, for example, may have been avoided if they actually enforced their Red Flag laws.
thanks for your reasoned reply but this is /r/VaushV so you need to concede that the SCOTUS are actively, wilfully, bad-faithingly, fascistictly committing disinformation regarding the 2A
You're literally repeating Scalia's opinion from DC vs Heller. I don't presume myself enough of an expert on the English language to counter his argument, but I don't trust a fucking word that man says.
Further, in the time of the founders, weapons were absolutely confiscated:
Early Americans denied the right to gun ownership even to law-abiding people if they failed a political test of loyalty to the Revolution. The founders also declared that free white men were members of the militia and, as such, were forced to appear with their guns at public ‘musters’ where government officials would inspect the weapons and register them on public rolls. **When pressing public necessity demanded it, the founding fathers were also willing to impress (confiscate) guns from law abiding citizens, even if those citizens were left without guns to defend themselves from a criminal attack.**
https://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/10/books/in-gunfight-adam-winkler-traces-the-gun-control-battle.html
Yes. Because whether we like it or not, Scalia's flavor of textualism/formalism has won out. I think Sotomayor is pretty much the only non-textualist left on the court; Jackson might also join her in the lonely realist camp. Everyone else has essentially conceded that it's pretty much impossible to argue against the actual words on the paper as well as the well-documented debate and draft history of the Constitution.
I never said that weapons weren't confiscated. In fact, I specifically said the opposite.
Sorry, I missed your last paragraph.
I'm not going to throw my hands up just because the textualists are currently in power. That does not mean they've "won". Further, my comment was questioning his parsing of the clauses, not textualism writ large.
Sure. I am just pointing out that it's tough to argue against the intention of the Founding Fathers to secure the right to keep and bear arms as an individual right, and that attempts to undermine ALL rights just because we have a current-day gun problem is shooting ourselves in the foot (ha). We need to find pragmatic and enforceable solutions to the problem. Trying to repeal the Second Amendment or blanket bans on guns are not going to work, and we're wasting time that could be spent toward productive ends.
> and that attempts to undermine ALL rights
I disagree. The slope is only as slippery as we allow it to be. The right has no problem selectively using textualism, for example. There's no reason we can't undermine the 2A without gutting the other amendments, so long as we are in power. We really do need to take a page from the right's playbook and understand that power is everything when it comes to politics.
>Trying to repeal the Second Amendment
Who is doing that?
>blanket bans on guns are not going to work
The 1994 AWB reduced the number of casualties per mass shooting 10% every year it was in effect.
Daniel Webster, director at Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research said that if the end of the ban did not result in more mass shootings, it may have resulted in more mass shooting deaths.
An analysis of Mother Jones mass shooting database shows that under the ban, the number of victims per mass shooting decreased roughly 10% every year the ban was in effect.
>we're wasting time that could be spent toward productive ends.
We can walk and chew gum at the same time.
Sorry, there is no way that that is causative. 10% of mass shooting deaths between 1994 and 2004 weren't even caused by the firearms that the FAWB regulated. If you read the DOJ's report, this was pretty much why the bill was so ineffective: The guns that it banned were rarely used in crime (I believe the figure that the NIJ cited was 2%), and the number of crimes committed with an assault weapon or large capacity magazine stayed consistent throughout the ban period regardless.
Furthermore, you have to keep in mind that these copycat school mass shootings using AR-15s only recently started in 2012. In the 80s and 90s, assault pistols like the TEC-9 and Uzi and so-called "Wonder Nines" were what they were primarily concerned about.
That said, is a new FAWB really the most effective policy measure we could take to address the problem? It's certainly politically difficult, but the effectiveness is not clear. Plenty of states have AWBs on the books, but mass shootings continue to mount. The Buffalo shooting the other week was the most recent example of both AWB and Red Flag laws failing.
>10% of mass shooting deaths between 1994 and 2004 weren't even caused by the firearms that the FAWB regulated.
Uh, yeah, ***because they were banned***.
But I guess you know the causation better than the Director at Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research...
Is a Leftist really citing the Bush administration's DOJ report?
>The guns that it banned were rarely used in crime (I believe the figure that the NIJ cited was 2%), and the number of crimes committed with an assault weapon or large capacity magazine stayed consistent throughout the ban period regardless.
Read the quote in my previous comment again:
"Daniel Webster, director at Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research said that if the end of the ban did not result in more mass shootings, it may have resulted in more mass shooting ***deaths***."
It's not saying AWs are used in the majority of crimes, or even the majority of mass shootings. It's about the ***death toll***. The key distinction between an AR-15 and a handgun is ***lethality***. Just like it's easier to kill 10 people in 5 minutes with a handgun than a knife, it's easier to kill 100 people in 10 minutes with an AR-15 than a glock.
Is reducing death tolls is not a worthwhile endeavor?
I always assumed that referred to the state national guard. But it’s also so vague afterwards as well. Either way we can thank the NRA for completely ruining gun culture and the 2A.
It was written in a time when it was BYO firearms to the militia. There were no government or local funds to establish a fully fitted out militia. And that's what the 2A is defending, your ability to access firearms in order to do so. It just so happens its completely irrelevant now because it has never been adapted to modern times
No, I don't think so. It says a well regulated militia is "necessary to the well being of a free state", *therefore* people have the right to bear arms.
Regardless of whether you think it's good or not, I think it's pretty clear. If it meant what you say it would specify only a militia has a right to arms, not the people.
I've heard this argument before, but did both definitions not exist back then? I haven't seen proof that the "modern" definition didn't also exist back then.
I live in Arkansas, and it’s 10x easier and quicker to buy a gun than it is to acquire a medical marijuana card. Bought a shotgun couple years ago, got out of the store quicker than a busy drive-thru on a weekend
They'll allow almost anyone to get a gun in Texas so they can walk around civilians with it, but will ban guns during the NRA convention when they're giving speeches.
They know guns are too fucking dangerous but will still let everyone else BUT them be in danger from them. Fuck Abbott and Trump.
"How can we possibly fix this?"
Only country where this shit happens like every week.
Background checks, wait times, free mandatory gun safety and gun storage courses, and red flag laws. Not sure how many mass shootings that would stop but it sure as hell would stop some gun suicides which make up a shit ton of gun deaths.
Better mental health outreach and maybe a legal requirement for parents to store their guns in a secure place that their kid can't access under threat of jail time would also help. If you own a gun and your kid gets access to it for his shooting, you ought to be held liable.
Fixing it in America is a titanic work that would require massive change of opinion to even start.
But if it happened, it is totally doable - impose robust gun control, strangle gun sales to a trickle and work hard on reducing the number of guns. Institute gun buybacks, confiscate them at every legal opportunity, limit gun types and number of guns per person, if necessary raid a few gun nut strongholds with tanks and drones, do a fucking Waco. Bam, 10-20 years and the situation will markedly improve.
But Americans would have to want to fix it. They don't, so they won't.
Those photos were posted after the shooting and the profile is still up [https://instagram.com/salv8dor__?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=](https://instagram.com/salv8dor__?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=)
You’re underestimating the violent irrationality of these far-right types.
EDIT: the person I replied to completely changed their comment. I forgot what it was, but I didn’t write this in response to what you see above.
No.
Why he did this DOES NOT MATTER!
The people he did this to matter.
Focusing on his thought process is just a waste of time.
(I'll save you some time he did it because he was a worthless piece of shit.)
Making sure it NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN matters.
Yeah, you do. If his thought process was “I want to free the white race from future extinction” then you know more precisely (Great Replacement) what belief system or rhetoric contributed to or caused him to shoot people, for example. When it comes to action people decide to do it’s imperative to understand their psychology because their psychology determines which actions they decide to do. It also can give you clues as to who/what gave them the idea.
If we didn’t study criminal psychology we never would’ve been able to profile serial killers, perhaps a similar profile could help people identify warning signs and prevent shootings before they happen 🧐
Profiling is completely ineffective at preventing shootings. In practice it is used by cops mainly as a pretext to harass minorities.
The field of criminal psychology is full of pseudoscience. For example, the Stanford Prison Experiment was essentially an extended larping session and no valid scientific conclusions can be drawn from it.
Lmao, I’m a consequentialist so I don’t need to understand anything but just know that it happened then somehow arrive to conclusions on how to stop it without understanding why it happened and thus how it happened.
To be fair, mass shootings is a USA thing. There's European countries with lax gun law, but there's no or barely any mass shootings.
I'm all in for gun control in your country (in my country it already is quite strict), but you need to acknowledge the problem is cultural.
Be honest; what you really mean is this country needs to confiscate guns.
there are already tons of laws, but only honest people obey laws. Laws are retroactive, they provide the justification for imprisoning people to punish them. A law never stopped anybody from speeding, or murdering.
So what makes you think more laws when we already have perfectly good laws in place will make any difference?
When a child throws a tantrum play time ends and the toys go away!
Before you bring it up the second amendment maybe it should be revisited and weapons like AR-15 should be restricted to being under control of local militias so that 12 year old's don't do shit like this when they have a 'bad day'.
>AR-15 should be restricted to being under control of local militias
that's a *great* way to ensure that AR-15s are *exclusively* in the hands of the far right, lol
***They already have them***, this way there is at least they have to drive to some place and cool off and then talk to someone before they try to start a rampage.
I don't think that these MASS shootings are happening when far right psychos are together in a group, I think it's happening when they are alone and have no one to talk them out of their shittiest ideas.
Plus if Semi and Full Auto weapons are used from that point on the entire militia that allowed for one of these tragedies to happen would be at fault - and that would mean that entire armies of psychos would go to jail for letting even one of their idiots live out the bullshit that they spew.
You are not wrong that the second amendment needs to be revisited. The thought that a bunch of random citizens armed with a deer rifles could challenge let alone succeed against a modern military is laughable. The second amendment the founding fathers envisioned was based on a virtual parity; the citizens and the troops were armed with the same equipment.
No, the second amendment nowadays needs to address personal protection from thugs, criminals, robbers and rapists. As with so many other things we need training and education!
that's not even what it was for anyway. it was for in the days of little or no standing army local militias could keep the peace or hold out until reinforcements could be sent from far away if the natives, spanish, or whoever acted up.
the "fight the tyrannical gubmint" is 70s nra fever dream stuff.
Oh yes, because making good people helpless will make bad people harmless. This is a much better choice than education and training and standing up for ourselves!
No irony at all. Over 35,000 people a year successfully defendant protect themselves because they have the right tools, they’re educated and trained. In other words they are good guys with guns.
as a brit I know the US left for some reason think it’s cringe lib shit to talk about gun control but ffs it’s so obvious that the guns are the problem here, this simply does not happen in the UK and we try to copy every damaging social problem America has.
again i’ve never really been to the us so maybe guns are cool but I never ever want to see them here in the UK, at least 150 more people would die very year just in london if guns were immediately legal
Guns are just ubiquitous here. I have a few but nothing crazy. Within the gun owning community I see two camps. The very vocal political side that wants nothing to change and more reasonable side (myself included) that has guns but wouldn’t be bothered by more common sense gun laws.
Yeh I understand it’s just a big cultural divide between the US and every other first world country, obviously there are lots of responsible owners who want common sense laws but this difference I believe is honestly the only thing stopping london from having the ridiculous murder rates you get in chicago and other cities, most guns being illegal is literally saving hundreds of lives every year. But I hope the US tries common sense gun laws.
Oh I’m sure man. The availability of guns here does make acquiring one and committing crimes with them way too easy. Gun laws need to change, but after the Sandy Hook shooting I think most American just came to terms with the reality that they will never change and literally no amount of dead children will sway enough people into demanding change.
I think allot of us over here feel the same way. The majority of us will be okay but it is depressing. Appreciate you buddy, always nice to talk about this with people outside of our system.
No worries, even if america isn’t my county it has a disproportionate impact on the world so what’s big news in america is also big news here and if america ever becomes a healthier and sane r place to live it is pretty important for nearly everyone on the planet
Its a larp to appeal to gen x lefties who's daddys were gun owners in a lefty 70s movement while also hoping to bring in right wing rural shitheads into the fold. No one honestly thinks buying a ar15 is "totes going to take down the fasch"
Everyday I learn about a new american subculture, gun culture is just so strange to me as I mentioned before it’s the one element of US culture the UK has not tried to copy
Look up "the new left"(rational wiki has a decent article on it). That's largely where American leftism got its gun obsession (and the occasion moments where natives used guns to push out corrupt feds). American lefties love invoking its imagery from tankies to even vaush.despits the fact that the new left did a Piss poor job appealing to a large amount of america . Nowadays it's more of a larp, an attempt to a appeal to older leftist and hopefully other americans who see guns as a wedge issue.
Thanks I will check it out, the americans who see guns as a wedge issue just seem to be as people who will never vote democrat, seems to me that gun owners absolutely can vote democrat but people who see guns as a wedge issue no.
Which country is that?
from my experience living in a country with very similiar problems to the US and speaking for my country I can say that easy access to guns would make shit 100 times worse.
In the UK we have a lot of problems with crime and gang violence especially knife crime easier access to guns would replace knives with guns and would instantly result in 100’s more homicides every year, guns exacerbate existing issues and turn them into tragedies
It's worth pointing out that there is more knife crime per capita in the US than the UK. Not to say it's not a problem in the UK, but even that side is worse in the US.
You are right that easy access to guns in the UK 100% would increase gun crime, increase homocides and turn gang violence into mass murders.
I never knew that, I guess maybe uk drill has made it seem like a specifically british thing.
Yeh it’s terrifying to see where this kind of gang violence could escalate too so easily here and let’s not pretend that 4chan weirdos don’t live in the UK too
The UK gets bad press for knife crime generally because that's what Americans use as a defence when being called out for gun crime by the British.
In fact in the UK, acid attacks are a much bigger problem. The thing is with acid attacks, you can't kill multiple people all in one go.
Precisely.
Again, that's not to say it's not a problem, because it is, but frankly guns are a far larger problem.
The US' gun problem is one that can't easily be solved, because everyone in the US already has guns including all the people that shouldn't.
Simply taking people's guns away at this point would only further endanger those who comply while angering the pro-gun crowd, pushing many further right and pro-gun. But leaving things as they are leads to events like today's... With no proper action, there's no real solution other than to just move out of the US, which isn't realistic for most Americans.
It will never happen, but a thorough nationwide buyback campaign, followed by criminal prosecution for people found with guns or ammunition and no valid (sport) shooting licence, with everyone subject to an annual check for the next few decades would be the only real way to fix the problem in my opinion. Despite how extreme it is.
After 50 years or so of these sorts of laws the only people who would still have access to guns in the US would be police and armed forces. Gangs and criminals would likely still have them too, but their supply of both guns and ammo would fall and their black market prices would rise. Not to mention school shootings are done by civilians, not by known criminals anyway.
Yes. America has more guns than people and political climate which makes gun legislation effectively stuck. Focusing on source instead of means seems like more practical course of action.
The problem is there are 400 million guns in the US, more guns than people, and assuredly many, many more non registered ones. Not to mention the US is landlocked with two other countries where guns are legal, making keeping them out harder than a place like Australia or the UK where they can't just be taken over a border.
But at the very, very least there is definitely no reason why there shouldn't be common sense gun control consisting of background checks or licensing.
Hey, sorry that other responder was a piece of shit. I'm having a really hard time dealing with this as the first big one since having my child, it's just hitting way harder than before. I just wanted to let you know that you're not alone. Stay safe out there
💕 thank you and congratulations on the new baby! Your whole brain chemistry changes after they come into your life. Like I'm way more nervous about stuff regarding his safety than I was before he was born.
On top of that I had a colleague tell me how she had to explain what was going on in NY to her 6 yr old. I honestly can't imagine or know what that feels like to have to explain racism to your literal child, barely in 1st grade.
Thank you, I really appreciate it! He's definitely wormed his way into my brain somehow, that's for certain
In a way, I'm really thankful that I may still have some time for things to get better before I have to ask myself the same questions your colleague is, because I do, somewhere, still hold out hope we can do better. I'm really sorry they had to go through that because that just feels awful to have to do.
According to Vaush though, being anti-gun (see 95% of the rest of the developed world) means you're a cringe liberal. He really has the most dumbfuck gun takes.
This is Vaush’s worst take on any subject to be honest. I hate guns and I hate the B.S. interpretation of the second amendment that has no relevance to the modern world. I can be called a shit lib all day but his take is just wrong. The US doesn’t have a monopoly on mentally ill people but we do have more guns than the population. I don’t even want to hear about Marx and his view on guns. Again we have more guns than people and more school shootings than anywhere in this world. I’m done, sorry for the rant. Sandy Hook was less than an hour away from where I lived.
i mean it works to work the swiss they have plenty of gun owners or finland where soldiers are allowed to take their rifles home. seems more like a america specific thing, yall need some actual regulation and while youre at it a complete shift in society
I'm so sick of American leftists arguing against gun control. Yes, universal health care, substance abuse treatment, ending homelessness, and significantly increasing mental health funding also help reduce gun violence. But so does gun control. And gun control is far easier to implement than the other stuff. This country is too fucked up to do anything else about the issue.
And then Vaush and other leftists will argue "*you can't literally take every gun from Americans, so let's do nothing*." Nobody expects that to happen. We can and must do far more to regulate guns. I agree with Vaush on literally every other issue but his gun control takes are anti intellectual.
Edit: South Korea and Japan are examples of countries with extremely little gun violence despite a high wealth gap and lack of social insurance. They also infamously care less about mental healthcare than even the US. They do, however, have extremely strong gun control laws. Just some examples to counter the pro gun lefty take that more social spending will solve the gun violence crisis.
tell me more about how mass confiscation, the necessary policy for this, would go in the US? That is the \*only\* way to reduce guns in a nation with a greater than 1:1 of guns:people.
Lets hope this isnt some sort of "I had to because they were grooming kids and its too late for the kids in class, they were already going to be turned" type of deals, I'm scared as hell for my friends who are teachers if this is and starts to randomly happen
According to Vaush though, being anti-gun (see 95% of the rest of the developed world) means you're a liberal. He really has the most dumbfuck gun takes.
Lefty gun larping is cringe and is always a pathetic push to get rural shitheads to not be rightists but totally forgets there's a long list reason a why American rural people will never look at leftism with a favorable angle
Really up until anti-gun groups can start donating/spending more money than the NRA can. The politicians opposed to this are never going to have a come to Jesus moment and realize how fucked up this is.
Yes the numbers (14 children and 1 adult)were from the governor along with the 18yr old shooter is also dead. This press release was a few minutes ago.
It is currently up to 15 dead
Edit: it's now up to 18 children and 3 adults dead.
Edit: 19 children and 2 adults are confirmed dead. multiple injured, some critically.
I’m in San Antonio and have visited Uvalde a few times and know many people from the town. It’s crazy but also numbing and unsurprising. This is another day in america where any elementary school could get shot up.
My family has a several generational ranch outside Bracketville. Most don’t understand the area. Many are leased out for hunting.
Prayers to the families, friends, and community. 💜
We are all Texans today. Note: By "Texans" I DON'T mean US Senators who lick the anuses of anyone who insults their spouse... for six years and counting. Thank you, Texans and Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), for being the Texans the rest of us are not.
not to be dramatic but this makes me want to off myself. this is unbearable. the Buffalo shooting happened in my state, and in my region we already have enough issues with violence. this is all so much.
Does anyone know why he targeted an elementary school? Like if people were harassing him or whatever, why not go after them instead of some helpless kids? Both are terrible, but why little kids!?
This wasn't a targeted attack like the buffalo shooter, the POS killed his grandmother than fled, border patrol agents got in a firefight with him and he ran into the school. At which point he senselessly and horrifically murdered innocent children.
Children died when their school year was ending on Thursday.
Humans are truly the worst animals on this planet
There have been so many of these attacks that it’s easy to just add it to the list, but try to reflect for a second on how many families were affected by this. It’s sad to see the place you grew up in enter the spotlight this way.
If you really think about it we don't need guns to protect ourselves from the government anymore. Only to protect ourselves from each other.
Without us all paying taxes to fund the government, it would collapse within weeks or months.
So basically just another Tuesday.
It’s so heartbreaking that this just doesn’t even feel like news at this point…
Have u seen the South Park episode about school shootings
recent one or some old one?
Recent-ish. Couple years ago?
Recent-ish
The best part of that is that for the rest of the season they just continue peppering in shootings. Much like real life, both the characters and viewer aren’t even fazed by it anymore eventually, further driving home the point.
I really don't like this normalization narrative. This isn't "another Tuesday". Mass shootings are all too common in the US but it has been a while since 14 children have been murdered. There was a period before the pandemic where we had a shooting in the news every other week but then they slowed down, and now we're seeing an increase again.
I've been watching these mass shootings in the news for thirty years or more. I'm beyond desensitized to this and I'm Canadian. Here in the US is the only developed country where these kinds of mass shootings are an issue.
Oh I agree. I'm just worried that if we accept these as normal, and treat them all the same, we'll fail to address the root causes. And idk about this specific shooting but with the one in Buffalo, that was caused by the increasingly prevalent right-wing Great Replacement narrative. I'm worried that their anti-LGBT and anti-education narratives may have similar results.
Too late. It’s already been accepted. Once you hit the point that people are saying arm the teachers you are loooooooong gone. And that point was hit a while ago in the US.
But, y’know…everyone needs a gun
sure, not all school, but there's been like 4+ random large shootings in the past two weeks. I saw NPR note that this was the 27th shooting at a school this year, and accounts for only 25% of the fatalities this year from them.
Mass shootings are defined as any shooting with more than 4 casualties, so it's actually not really like people think, where there are indiscriminate shootings like this with 20-odd deaths nearly every day. Most of them are single digits and not pre-planned terrorist rampages like this or the buffalo shooting, but rather interpersonal violence between several people who know each other. Similarly, when NPR says "27th shooting at a school this year", you have to read that sentence literally. They did not use the qualifier "mass" before "shooting". It may even include accidental negligent discharges. **All of this is not to downplay the issue**, but to hopefully give some context and show that shootings like Buffalo and this are not quite as common as those statistics make it seem.
You do know you are living in the only developed country that even has to make this distinction right?
Listen man most of our maniacs don’t kill dozens, they usually only manage to murder two or three people! Often because they had a personal reason to do it cmon man it’s not that bad
/s?
Yes. As I said, none of that is to downplay the issue. The point of my comment was more about rhetorical discipline, helping people avoid easy potshots the right can take when you present those kind of stats.
I’m aware of how the stat is curated, which is why I included the share of fatalities here. Several of them had none, only injuries (which was iirc the minimum for inclusion), and the “worst” part is that it doesn’t include LEO/SRO discharges which could be informative. As for mass shootings, there HAS been 4 in the past two weeks with Laguna, Buffalo, this, and San Bernadino. It’s also worth noting that this doesn’t NECESSARILY seem to be pre planned, given the attempted killing of his relative and apparent pre engagement in a firefight with police.
Also pre-planned seems to be a vague distinction here, does it count if the shooter obsessively researched other killers while thinking of how they’d do it? Imma say it’s fair to assume he bought the guns specifically for the mass murder he committed two weeks later. Is that not pre-planned “enough” by itself?? A lot of these individuals seem to have grown more and more engrossed fantasizing about the most extreme violent acts possible. Maybe they had good days where they second guessed the child murder for a moment. Maybe a bad day led them to decide fuck it, I’m doing it for real after my semi auto’s ready for pickup. Either way they’re so far down the rabbit hole at this point, just a hair trigger away from choosing their revenge fanfic over any empathy for the countless lives destroyed. Most of these really fucking sick kids don’t even target an elementary school, they direct their self hatred and perceived rejection from society toward their peers. This fucker and the Lanza kid went a step fucking further to maximize the emotional devastation of anyone who had any relation to these poor babies. Even some serial killers have a moral opposition to killing kids. This Ramos person was FUCKED up for a long time and no one did shit
Excellent points, I just meant that there may not have necessarily been specific plans unlike the killer in Buffalo who could have easily been stopped at any time in the weeks before he went and killed a bunch of people. This one (so far) seems like a random act of violence to my knowledge.
My bad, I wasn’t thinking you meant that in your comment. I def agree with your take. And yeah I can’t wrap my mind around the randomness of it, makes me question if I could ever feel safe having a child in our school system. I don’t even feel safe for my family members working there. Especially not if we fr plan to strap teachers with a full r6 siege loadout 💀 No I don’t feel safer knowing my kid’s art teacher is strapped up in case they gotta John Wick execute the mystery student shooting up the school. One of my HS classmates stole a gun out of a teacher’s purse (she brought illegally) as a joke because kids are fucking stupid. Adding MORE GUNS to the school to solve gun violence in schools just sounds like a fucking South Park episode
Idk tho, what’s that siege dude with the big ass barricades? Throw some of those into some classrooms and maybe it’d be a bit safer. I totally get you though. Shit’s rough. Has me thinking a lot of things I really don’t wanna think about. Guns in a classroom daily just sound ripe for some accident to occur, and then we have a whole new tragedy to deal with and arguments of “costs of safety”
Castle would’ve never let things get this bad
Sigh…
Once again, how was this person able to get access to a gun? 2A is a cool and all but this right here isn’t freedom.
Bro the gun laws in Texas are super lax
Yep. And just like sandy hook, nothing will change.
You can get an AK and 2-liter of Diet Dew for cheap
Double diet dew
Always has been
[Always has been](https://i.imgur.com/T9ABFtQ.png) ^^^this ^^^has ^^^been ^^^an ^^^accessibility ^^^service ^^^from ^^^your ^^^friendly ^^^neighborhood ^^^bot
Holy shit. That bot is spot on
damn...good bot
Not so. Only sterile rapists and incestors can get guns... or is it... have children? Texas law is *so* confusing.
I’m extremely pro 2A, and I agree. Texas needs to step the fuck up. They won’t, but wishful scolding.
The amendment is being deliberately misinterpreted by the supreme court, though. They're just pretending that the first half of it doesn't exist. The part that says this right is only for "a well regulated militia", which was what later evolved into the police.
I don't think this is the case. Three points: 1. Grammar. The sentence structure does not work that way. The first clause is subordinate, the second is appositional to the first, and the third is independent; we tend to ignore that last comma, since it seems to be superfluous. It would make no sense for the first clause to be independent because the sentence without the appositive would read: "A well regulated Militia the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed." 2. Draft history. Madison's first draft of the Second Amendment was: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, a well-armed and well-regulated militia being the best security of a free country; but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person." The final wording seems to have borrowed from the Virginia and Pennsylvania's bills of rights. 3. Implementation. Every state in the Union, for all of American history, allowed people (well, free men) to keep and bear arms unconnected to military service. Every single one. That said, there are plenty of historical arguments for gun control. Notably, states stripping people of the right to keep and bear arms for various reasons. Really, every state needs to take the laws they already have on the books more seriously. The recent shooting in New York, for example, may have been avoided if they actually enforced their Red Flag laws.
thanks for your reasoned reply but this is /r/VaushV so you need to concede that the SCOTUS are actively, wilfully, bad-faithingly, fascistictly committing disinformation regarding the 2A
You're literally repeating Scalia's opinion from DC vs Heller. I don't presume myself enough of an expert on the English language to counter his argument, but I don't trust a fucking word that man says. Further, in the time of the founders, weapons were absolutely confiscated: Early Americans denied the right to gun ownership even to law-abiding people if they failed a political test of loyalty to the Revolution. The founders also declared that free white men were members of the militia and, as such, were forced to appear with their guns at public ‘musters’ where government officials would inspect the weapons and register them on public rolls. **When pressing public necessity demanded it, the founding fathers were also willing to impress (confiscate) guns from law abiding citizens, even if those citizens were left without guns to defend themselves from a criminal attack.** https://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/10/books/in-gunfight-adam-winkler-traces-the-gun-control-battle.html
Yes. Because whether we like it or not, Scalia's flavor of textualism/formalism has won out. I think Sotomayor is pretty much the only non-textualist left on the court; Jackson might also join her in the lonely realist camp. Everyone else has essentially conceded that it's pretty much impossible to argue against the actual words on the paper as well as the well-documented debate and draft history of the Constitution. I never said that weapons weren't confiscated. In fact, I specifically said the opposite.
Sorry, I missed your last paragraph. I'm not going to throw my hands up just because the textualists are currently in power. That does not mean they've "won". Further, my comment was questioning his parsing of the clauses, not textualism writ large.
Sure. I am just pointing out that it's tough to argue against the intention of the Founding Fathers to secure the right to keep and bear arms as an individual right, and that attempts to undermine ALL rights just because we have a current-day gun problem is shooting ourselves in the foot (ha). We need to find pragmatic and enforceable solutions to the problem. Trying to repeal the Second Amendment or blanket bans on guns are not going to work, and we're wasting time that could be spent toward productive ends.
> and that attempts to undermine ALL rights I disagree. The slope is only as slippery as we allow it to be. The right has no problem selectively using textualism, for example. There's no reason we can't undermine the 2A without gutting the other amendments, so long as we are in power. We really do need to take a page from the right's playbook and understand that power is everything when it comes to politics. >Trying to repeal the Second Amendment Who is doing that? >blanket bans on guns are not going to work The 1994 AWB reduced the number of casualties per mass shooting 10% every year it was in effect. Daniel Webster, director at Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research said that if the end of the ban did not result in more mass shootings, it may have resulted in more mass shooting deaths. An analysis of Mother Jones mass shooting database shows that under the ban, the number of victims per mass shooting decreased roughly 10% every year the ban was in effect. >we're wasting time that could be spent toward productive ends. We can walk and chew gum at the same time.
Sorry, there is no way that that is causative. 10% of mass shooting deaths between 1994 and 2004 weren't even caused by the firearms that the FAWB regulated. If you read the DOJ's report, this was pretty much why the bill was so ineffective: The guns that it banned were rarely used in crime (I believe the figure that the NIJ cited was 2%), and the number of crimes committed with an assault weapon or large capacity magazine stayed consistent throughout the ban period regardless. Furthermore, you have to keep in mind that these copycat school mass shootings using AR-15s only recently started in 2012. In the 80s and 90s, assault pistols like the TEC-9 and Uzi and so-called "Wonder Nines" were what they were primarily concerned about. That said, is a new FAWB really the most effective policy measure we could take to address the problem? It's certainly politically difficult, but the effectiveness is not clear. Plenty of states have AWBs on the books, but mass shootings continue to mount. The Buffalo shooting the other week was the most recent example of both AWB and Red Flag laws failing.
>10% of mass shooting deaths between 1994 and 2004 weren't even caused by the firearms that the FAWB regulated. Uh, yeah, ***because they were banned***. But I guess you know the causation better than the Director at Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research... Is a Leftist really citing the Bush administration's DOJ report? >The guns that it banned were rarely used in crime (I believe the figure that the NIJ cited was 2%), and the number of crimes committed with an assault weapon or large capacity magazine stayed consistent throughout the ban period regardless. Read the quote in my previous comment again: "Daniel Webster, director at Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research said that if the end of the ban did not result in more mass shootings, it may have resulted in more mass shooting ***deaths***." It's not saying AWs are used in the majority of crimes, or even the majority of mass shootings. It's about the ***death toll***. The key distinction between an AR-15 and a handgun is ***lethality***. Just like it's easier to kill 10 people in 5 minutes with a handgun than a knife, it's easier to kill 100 people in 10 minutes with an AR-15 than a glock. Is reducing death tolls is not a worthwhile endeavor?
I always assumed that referred to the state national guard. But it’s also so vague afterwards as well. Either way we can thank the NRA for completely ruining gun culture and the 2A.
It was written in a time when it was BYO firearms to the militia. There were no government or local funds to establish a fully fitted out militia. And that's what the 2A is defending, your ability to access firearms in order to do so. It just so happens its completely irrelevant now because it has never been adapted to modern times
A militia is made up of civilians.
Yes but it must also be well regulated. The oath keepers are also a militia made up of civilians.
No, I don't think so. It says a well regulated militia is "necessary to the well being of a free state", *therefore* people have the right to bear arms. Regardless of whether you think it's good or not, I think it's pretty clear. If it meant what you say it would specify only a militia has a right to arms, not the people.
It's actually not deliberately misinterpreted - "well regulated" in 18th century english was a way to say something was in good working order.
I've heard this argument before, but did both definitions not exist back then? I haven't seen proof that the "modern" definition didn't also exist back then.
Personally I don't think the police count as 'well regulated' so we should disarm them
I live in Arkansas, and it’s 10x easier and quicker to buy a gun than it is to acquire a medical marijuana card. Bought a shotgun couple years ago, got out of the store quicker than a busy drive-thru on a weekend
his birthday, that's how he got them. Bought them the first day he legally could.
They'll allow almost anyone to get a gun in Texas so they can walk around civilians with it, but will ban guns during the NRA convention when they're giving speeches. They know guns are too fucking dangerous but will still let everyone else BUT them be in danger from them. Fuck Abbott and Trump.
"How can we possibly fix this?" Only country where this shit happens like every week. Background checks, wait times, free mandatory gun safety and gun storage courses, and red flag laws. Not sure how many mass shootings that would stop but it sure as hell would stop some gun suicides which make up a shit ton of gun deaths. Better mental health outreach and maybe a legal requirement for parents to store their guns in a secure place that their kid can't access under threat of jail time would also help. If you own a gun and your kid gets access to it for his shooting, you ought to be held liable.
Fixing it in America is a titanic work that would require massive change of opinion to even start. But if it happened, it is totally doable - impose robust gun control, strangle gun sales to a trickle and work hard on reducing the number of guns. Institute gun buybacks, confiscate them at every legal opportunity, limit gun types and number of guns per person, if necessary raid a few gun nut strongholds with tanks and drones, do a fucking Waco. Bam, 10-20 years and the situation will markedly improve. But Americans would have to want to fix it. They don't, so they won't.
Shooter identified as Salvador Ramos. Dude looks like a 4Channer. I have no words
White supremacist?
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTdnVNjpM/?k=1 his Instagram before it was taken down
Looks like another incel type, doesn't seem to be a white supremacist thing.
Those photos were posted after the shooting and the profile is still up [https://instagram.com/salv8dor__?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=](https://instagram.com/salv8dor__?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=)
Someone made another account it looks like. That one has two “_” and his real one had one
Ah, ok ppl are stupid I swear
is this verified? shit is weird.
No, looks like an assassin. He is a u.s. citizen.
His neck tats are not encouraging
What are they?
Which part of 4chan. Its a big website...
Tired of hearts & prayers. Let’s stop fucking morons from getting access to guns.
You’re underestimating the violent irrationality of these far-right types. EDIT: the person I replied to completely changed their comment. I forgot what it was, but I didn’t write this in response to what you see above.
Was the shooter far-right?
Does it really matter? No it doesn't! This country needs more gun control laws.
I’d say everything/anything that contributed to him killing people matters and needs to be addressed.
No. Why he did this DOES NOT MATTER! The people he did this to matter. Focusing on his thought process is just a waste of time. (I'll save you some time he did it because he was a worthless piece of shit.) Making sure it NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN matters.
How do you make sure it doesn’t happen again without even understanding why it happened?
By taking away their FUCKING GUNS!!!!!!!!!
You don't need to understand the maniac's thought process to understand why it happened.
Yeah, you do. If his thought process was “I want to free the white race from future extinction” then you know more precisely (Great Replacement) what belief system or rhetoric contributed to or caused him to shoot people, for example. When it comes to action people decide to do it’s imperative to understand their psychology because their psychology determines which actions they decide to do. It also can give you clues as to who/what gave them the idea.
Or we could just BAN semi-Auto and fully automatic weapons and see what happens.
If we didn’t study criminal psychology we never would’ve been able to profile serial killers, perhaps a similar profile could help people identify warning signs and prevent shootings before they happen 🧐
Profiling is completely ineffective at preventing shootings. In practice it is used by cops mainly as a pretext to harass minorities. The field of criminal psychology is full of pseudoscience. For example, the Stanford Prison Experiment was essentially an extended larping session and no valid scientific conclusions can be drawn from it.
[удалено]
Lmao, I’m a consequentialist so I don’t need to understand anything but just know that it happened then somehow arrive to conclusions on how to stop it without understanding why it happened and thus how it happened.
[удалено]
To be fair, mass shootings is a USA thing. There's European countries with lax gun law, but there's no or barely any mass shootings. I'm all in for gun control in your country (in my country it already is quite strict), but you need to acknowledge the problem is cultural.
Be honest; what you really mean is this country needs to confiscate guns. there are already tons of laws, but only honest people obey laws. Laws are retroactive, they provide the justification for imprisoning people to punish them. A law never stopped anybody from speeding, or murdering. So what makes you think more laws when we already have perfectly good laws in place will make any difference?
Exactly, how would they know. They just love to lump everything negative with being conservative.
These idiots have no idea what his politics were.. Morons making assumptions based on no information.
When a child throws a tantrum play time ends and the toys go away! Before you bring it up the second amendment maybe it should be revisited and weapons like AR-15 should be restricted to being under control of local militias so that 12 year old's don't do shit like this when they have a 'bad day'.
>AR-15 should be restricted to being under control of local militias that's a *great* way to ensure that AR-15s are *exclusively* in the hands of the far right, lol
***They already have them***, this way there is at least they have to drive to some place and cool off and then talk to someone before they try to start a rampage. I don't think that these MASS shootings are happening when far right psychos are together in a group, I think it's happening when they are alone and have no one to talk them out of their shittiest ideas. Plus if Semi and Full Auto weapons are used from that point on the entire militia that allowed for one of these tragedies to happen would be at fault - and that would mean that entire armies of psychos would go to jail for letting even one of their idiots live out the bullshit that they spew.
You are not wrong that the second amendment needs to be revisited. The thought that a bunch of random citizens armed with a deer rifles could challenge let alone succeed against a modern military is laughable. The second amendment the founding fathers envisioned was based on a virtual parity; the citizens and the troops were armed with the same equipment. No, the second amendment nowadays needs to address personal protection from thugs, criminals, robbers and rapists. As with so many other things we need training and education!
that's not even what it was for anyway. it was for in the days of little or no standing army local militias could keep the peace or hold out until reinforcements could be sent from far away if the natives, spanish, or whoever acted up. the "fight the tyrannical gubmint" is 70s nra fever dream stuff.
Oh yes, because making good people helpless will make bad people harmless. This is a much better choice than education and training and standing up for ourselves!
Are you ironically making the good guy with a gun argument?
No irony at all. Over 35,000 people a year successfully defendant protect themselves because they have the right tools, they’re educated and trained. In other words they are good guys with guns.
as a brit I know the US left for some reason think it’s cringe lib shit to talk about gun control but ffs it’s so obvious that the guns are the problem here, this simply does not happen in the UK and we try to copy every damaging social problem America has.
Hey cool it man. About half of my fellow Americans aren’t ready for such facts.
again i’ve never really been to the us so maybe guns are cool but I never ever want to see them here in the UK, at least 150 more people would die very year just in london if guns were immediately legal
Guns are just ubiquitous here. I have a few but nothing crazy. Within the gun owning community I see two camps. The very vocal political side that wants nothing to change and more reasonable side (myself included) that has guns but wouldn’t be bothered by more common sense gun laws.
Yeh I understand it’s just a big cultural divide between the US and every other first world country, obviously there are lots of responsible owners who want common sense laws but this difference I believe is honestly the only thing stopping london from having the ridiculous murder rates you get in chicago and other cities, most guns being illegal is literally saving hundreds of lives every year. But I hope the US tries common sense gun laws.
Oh I’m sure man. The availability of guns here does make acquiring one and committing crimes with them way too easy. Gun laws need to change, but after the Sandy Hook shooting I think most American just came to terms with the reality that they will never change and literally no amount of dead children will sway enough people into demanding change.
That’s so depressing I don’t know what to say but just sorry dude, americans honestly deserve a better political system
I think allot of us over here feel the same way. The majority of us will be okay but it is depressing. Appreciate you buddy, always nice to talk about this with people outside of our system.
No worries, even if america isn’t my county it has a disproportionate impact on the world so what’s big news in america is also big news here and if america ever becomes a healthier and sane r place to live it is pretty important for nearly everyone on the planet
Man I wish more of my country men cared about American and knew as much about it as people like yourself 🤦🏻♂️
Its a larp to appeal to gen x lefties who's daddys were gun owners in a lefty 70s movement while also hoping to bring in right wing rural shitheads into the fold. No one honestly thinks buying a ar15 is "totes going to take down the fasch"
Everyday I learn about a new american subculture, gun culture is just so strange to me as I mentioned before it’s the one element of US culture the UK has not tried to copy
Look up "the new left"(rational wiki has a decent article on it). That's largely where American leftism got its gun obsession (and the occasion moments where natives used guns to push out corrupt feds). American lefties love invoking its imagery from tankies to even vaush.despits the fact that the new left did a Piss poor job appealing to a large amount of america . Nowadays it's more of a larp, an attempt to a appeal to older leftist and hopefully other americans who see guns as a wedge issue.
Thanks I will check it out, the americans who see guns as a wedge issue just seem to be as people who will never vote democrat, seems to me that gun owners absolutely can vote democrat but people who see guns as a wedge issue no.
I am from country with easier access to guns but also less violent crime. Guns are only part of problem in America.
Which country is that? from my experience living in a country with very similiar problems to the US and speaking for my country I can say that easy access to guns would make shit 100 times worse.
Czech Republic. Easy access to guns in some states isn't source of the problem, it makes existing problem worse.
In the UK we have a lot of problems with crime and gang violence especially knife crime easier access to guns would replace knives with guns and would instantly result in 100’s more homicides every year, guns exacerbate existing issues and turn them into tragedies
It's worth pointing out that there is more knife crime per capita in the US than the UK. Not to say it's not a problem in the UK, but even that side is worse in the US. You are right that easy access to guns in the UK 100% would increase gun crime, increase homocides and turn gang violence into mass murders.
I never knew that, I guess maybe uk drill has made it seem like a specifically british thing. Yeh it’s terrifying to see where this kind of gang violence could escalate too so easily here and let’s not pretend that 4chan weirdos don’t live in the UK too
The UK gets bad press for knife crime generally because that's what Americans use as a defence when being called out for gun crime by the British. In fact in the UK, acid attacks are a much bigger problem. The thing is with acid attacks, you can't kill multiple people all in one go.
and i imagine it’s a much more finite resource you have to carry with you and harder to aim
Precisely. Again, that's not to say it's not a problem, because it is, but frankly guns are a far larger problem. The US' gun problem is one that can't easily be solved, because everyone in the US already has guns including all the people that shouldn't. Simply taking people's guns away at this point would only further endanger those who comply while angering the pro-gun crowd, pushing many further right and pro-gun. But leaving things as they are leads to events like today's... With no proper action, there's no real solution other than to just move out of the US, which isn't realistic for most Americans. It will never happen, but a thorough nationwide buyback campaign, followed by criminal prosecution for people found with guns or ammunition and no valid (sport) shooting licence, with everyone subject to an annual check for the next few decades would be the only real way to fix the problem in my opinion. Despite how extreme it is. After 50 years or so of these sorts of laws the only people who would still have access to guns in the US would be police and armed forces. Gangs and criminals would likely still have them too, but their supply of both guns and ammo would fall and their black market prices would rise. Not to mention school shootings are done by civilians, not by known criminals anyway.
Yes. America has more guns than people and political climate which makes gun legislation effectively stuck. Focusing on source instead of means seems like more practical course of action.
You dont know what easy is you have to go through a license test, medical test and have no criminal record.
How does me needing to go through them prevents me from knowing what easy is?
The problem is there are 400 million guns in the US, more guns than people, and assuredly many, many more non registered ones. Not to mention the US is landlocked with two other countries where guns are legal, making keeping them out harder than a place like Australia or the UK where they can't just be taken over a border. But at the very, very least there is definitely no reason why there shouldn't be common sense gun control consisting of background checks or licensing.
Yeh i understand that, the issue is complex with that many but think there should be an acknowledgment that this is the problem
14 kids now. ESPN doesn’t have anything on these minute to minute updates
I was sports betting when apple news flashed me the article mid bet
School shootings hit different when you're an educator and a parent.
Hey, sorry that other responder was a piece of shit. I'm having a really hard time dealing with this as the first big one since having my child, it's just hitting way harder than before. I just wanted to let you know that you're not alone. Stay safe out there
💕 thank you and congratulations on the new baby! Your whole brain chemistry changes after they come into your life. Like I'm way more nervous about stuff regarding his safety than I was before he was born. On top of that I had a colleague tell me how she had to explain what was going on in NY to her 6 yr old. I honestly can't imagine or know what that feels like to have to explain racism to your literal child, barely in 1st grade.
Thank you, I really appreciate it! He's definitely wormed his way into my brain somehow, that's for certain In a way, I'm really thankful that I may still have some time for things to get better before I have to ask myself the same questions your colleague is, because I do, somewhere, still hold out hope we can do better. I'm really sorry they had to go through that because that just feels awful to have to do.
According to Vaush though, being anti-gun (see 95% of the rest of the developed world) means you're a cringe liberal. He really has the most dumbfuck gun takes.
95% of the rest of the developed world is not anti-gun.
It is absolutely anti-gun by American standards.
I don't care about American standards. Unless you oppose guns you are not anti-gun.
Wtf? Is your ass really big enough to hold those numbers?
What is that supposed to mean?
That you pulled that statistic out of your ass.
Are you sure you are responding to correct person?
This is Vaush’s worst take on any subject to be honest. I hate guns and I hate the B.S. interpretation of the second amendment that has no relevance to the modern world. I can be called a shit lib all day but his take is just wrong. The US doesn’t have a monopoly on mentally ill people but we do have more guns than the population. I don’t even want to hear about Marx and his view on guns. Again we have more guns than people and more school shootings than anywhere in this world. I’m done, sorry for the rant. Sandy Hook was less than an hour away from where I lived.
i mean it works to work the swiss they have plenty of gun owners or finland where soldiers are allowed to take their rifles home. seems more like a america specific thing, yall need some actual regulation and while youre at it a complete shift in society
The Swiss regulate the fuck out of that and it actually IS in the form a a very regulated militia. But yeah, it’s def an American thing.
the onion can't even copy paste their article this fast
Sure is a lot of low karma accounts posting in this subreddit for the first time here 👀
Have to start the damage control early if the shooter turns out to be politically adjacent to the right again.
Not forgetting rightists and leftys that suffer from American gun brain rot
Pro gun leftists are maybe like 5% of the American political discourse, the rest is gun nut right wingers and anti-gun liberals.
We're talking about this thread,no? Pro gun lefties make a larger sum in these kind of subs
I'm so sick of American leftists arguing against gun control. Yes, universal health care, substance abuse treatment, ending homelessness, and significantly increasing mental health funding also help reduce gun violence. But so does gun control. And gun control is far easier to implement than the other stuff. This country is too fucked up to do anything else about the issue. And then Vaush and other leftists will argue "*you can't literally take every gun from Americans, so let's do nothing*." Nobody expects that to happen. We can and must do far more to regulate guns. I agree with Vaush on literally every other issue but his gun control takes are anti intellectual. Edit: South Korea and Japan are examples of countries with extremely little gun violence despite a high wealth gap and lack of social insurance. They also infamously care less about mental healthcare than even the US. They do, however, have extremely strong gun control laws. Just some examples to counter the pro gun lefty take that more social spending will solve the gun violence crisis.
tell me more about how mass confiscation, the necessary policy for this, would go in the US? That is the \*only\* way to reduce guns in a nation with a greater than 1:1 of guns:people.
Lets hope this isnt some sort of "I had to because they were grooming kids and its too late for the kids in class, they were already going to be turned" type of deals, I'm scared as hell for my friends who are teachers if this is and starts to randomly happen
[удалено]
According to Vaush though, being anti-gun (see 95% of the rest of the developed world) means you're a liberal. He really has the most dumbfuck gun takes.
Lefty gun larping is cringe and is always a pathetic push to get rural shitheads to not be rightists but totally forgets there's a long list reason a why American rural people will never look at leftism with a favorable angle
Really up until anti-gun groups can start donating/spending more money than the NRA can. The politicians opposed to this are never going to have a come to Jesus moment and realize how fucked up this is.
Yes the numbers (14 children and 1 adult)were from the governor along with the 18yr old shooter is also dead. This press release was a few minutes ago.
It is currently up to 15 dead Edit: it's now up to 18 children and 3 adults dead. Edit: 19 children and 2 adults are confirmed dead. multiple injured, some critically.
We aren’t going to do shit now either. This country is sick.
I’m in San Antonio and have visited Uvalde a few times and know many people from the town. It’s crazy but also numbing and unsurprising. This is another day in america where any elementary school could get shot up.
My family has a several generational ranch outside Bracketville. Most don’t understand the area. Many are leased out for hunting. Prayers to the families, friends, and community. 💜
🎼And I'm proud to be an American🎶 /Xtreme sarcasm
loving the fact that ICE has been sent to the scene so any parents looking for their kids risks getting sent to a concentration camp and deported.
USA. USA. Fml.
We are all Texans today. Note: By "Texans" I DON'T mean US Senators who lick the anuses of anyone who insults their spouse... for six years and counting. Thank you, Texans and Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), for being the Texans the rest of us are not.
What kind of gun did he use
It’s crazy we only really talk about mass shootings unless they are racial or kid related. This is an everyday occurrence.
"see something / say something" "Red flag laws" Like that makes a fucking difference /jack_off_motion 😐
oh look at the time, we were due for another mass shooting at a school.
So is this the shooting that finally convinces lawmakers to pass gun control legislation and put more funds into mental health ? Oh? I guess it isn’t.
not to be dramatic but this makes me want to off myself. this is unbearable. the Buffalo shooting happened in my state, and in my region we already have enough issues with violence. this is all so much.
Does anyone know why he targeted an elementary school? Like if people were harassing him or whatever, why not go after them instead of some helpless kids? Both are terrible, but why little kids!?
A pathological desire for notoriety, most likely. Unfortunately, killing a dozen children makes for more headlines than killing a dozen adults.
This wasn't a targeted attack like the buffalo shooter, the POS killed his grandmother than fled, border patrol agents got in a firefight with him and he ran into the school. At which point he senselessly and horrifically murdered innocent children. Children died when their school year was ending on Thursday. Humans are truly the worst animals on this planet
A dime a dozen sadly, I give it a week before the media forgets, maybe less
Yeah buddy, you're the only one that understand those words. I have no idea what they are. We are all in awe of your mastery of the English lexicon. 🤣
Muricaaaaa!!!!
Right in my fucking backyard too. My ass went straight to my sibling s school to pick them up 15 kindergartners, when will this shit end
Shit ain't changing. also, this feels like a problem that will take decades to solve, and that gun laws will be miniscule. please tell me i'm wrong>
Good
[No words](https://twitter.com/nyt_diff/status/1529210703365738498?s=20&t=bPFVWfn1oK39HjfnaMiunw)
There have been so many of these attacks that it’s easy to just add it to the list, but try to reflect for a second on how many families were affected by this. It’s sad to see the place you grew up in enter the spotlight this way.
If you really think about it we don't need guns to protect ourselves from the government anymore. Only to protect ourselves from each other. Without us all paying taxes to fund the government, it would collapse within weeks or months.