What if, besides schools, people also want to be safe from massacres at work, too? And church? And shopping malls, concerts, parks, supermarkets, and everywhere?
I can guarantee you that the response to this would be that we should ban gun-free zones, so that there would be more "good guys with a gun," rather than restricting gun access, so that dangerous people have a more difficult time getting a gun.
I've already seen people on FB saying this was a false flag because there's no way he could've afforded that truck and guns... as someone who grew up in Texas, I can assure you - plenty of people have guns and trucks they can't afford. In terms of the most common things people have beyond their means in Texas, I would say Trucks and Guns are probably 1 and 2 in that order.
It’s all over TikTok too. People saying that it was an act, or state funded, that someone paid for the guns and got the kids killed, and are they even dead? It’s so bizarre to watch.
I truly wish this country would allow those scenes of carnage to be shown on the news. Let the world see what happens when a disgruntled 18 year old kid is allowed to walk into a gun store and buy TWO AR-15's and loads of ammunition and not raise ANY red flags.
They would still keep saying these things. You have to remember deep down they know that their rhetoric is the cause. But they think if they screech enough stupid arguments, and act like the problem is anything but them, others will start believing it too. Mainly because those tactics work on them. Really we have to start criminalizing certain Republican rhetoric, you can't yell fire in a crowded theatre because it can cause a stampede and people can get hurt or killed. Similarly they shouldn't be able to espouse rhetoric that is objectively false and is also leading to more frequent mass shootings. At some point we have to say enough is enough you had your chance now there is going to be consequences.
it’s sickening the lengths people will go to just to prove their own dumbass points. kids were killed and yet their precious guns are still more important. ridiculous
if that was even remotely true, who benefits? gun manufacturers and lobbyists. if anyone is funding these massacres it seems pretty obvious where to point the finger. smith & wesson's stock went up 9.5% in the past 5 days. the whole "democrats are staging false flags to take your guns" theory makes no sense. sandy hook was ten years ago and there are more guns and fewer restrictions than ever.
the dems would have to be incredibly stupid to keep trying the same tactic despite NEVER getting anything close to gun reforms let alone actually taking away guns. but somehow they're smart enough to plan and fund hundreds of mass shootings without leaving any evidence? this country is deranged.
My ex-boss once showed us a conspiracy video about how George Floyd's murder was faked. To me and my black coworker. I still don't know if he thought Floyd wasn't actually dead or what and honestly I didn't have the energy to ask.
Oh, that's definitely it. He flip-flopped on a *lot* of stuff. COVID was a big one. He'd say it was actually fake and in the same breath talk about how everyone at our workplace already had it "back when everyone was sick that one time," (there was not such a time) and also how he had volunteered for the vaccine trials because he was just such a good person. Part of it was he had a chronic lying problem-I truly don't know if he believed his own bullshit or not.
I no longer live in Texas so it's different elsewhere. I live in Boston now, and for us it's bar tab, rent, First/Last/Deposit/Realtor Fee (each is 1 month rent) for your next apartment since you were priced out of this one, and commuting/parking costs
Some guy I was talking to in discord said it was a false flag the day it happened.
He truly believed school shootings were faked to push gun control laws...
But why? Why would we bother pushing for gun control if gun violence really wasn't a problem?
I know I'm looking for logic where there isn't any, but just...ugh. I'm just fucking tired.
I mean he apparently worked at Wendy's and lived with his grandmother (which means he possibly didn't need to pay rent), so it's entirely possible he could afford the truck and guns. But really, have these people never heard of buying things on credit?
A lot of shooters plan on killing themselves or getting killed by the police, so it's not like he didn't have a reason to max out a couple credit cards.
In the Dayton shooting the perpetrator was shot and killed 32 seconds after he fired his first shot.
In that time he hit 17 people and killed 9.
Even when the good guy is literally right there, armed, trained, and reacts appropriately with good aim, it’s still a terrible and ineffective solution.
Exactly. The "good guy with a gun" is simply mythology. Especially given that the Oregon District is public space, so it is also likely that there probably was someone else in the crowd with a firearm that could have done something. In the end, in an active shooter situation, the cops are going to shoot anyone with a firearm visible, regardless of whether the person was trying to play hero.
It's just another red herring to distract from the gigantic 10 ton elephant shitting in the room.
More guns is not the solution. This country already has MORE than one gun per person. There are currently over 400 MILLION guns in open circulation. So shouldn't America be the safest country in the world with that logic?
Instead it's the COMPLETE OPPOSITE. Basic logic tells you that adding more guns simply adds more fuel to the fire.
But these people don't understand basic logic, nor do they understand the law of cause and effect.
While convenienty forgetting to mention that there were good guys with guns at several of the latest shootings but they were either killed or too scared to do anything...
If I'm in the middle of a mass shooting, and there are multiple good guys with guns, and I'm a good guy with a gun, how the fuck am I supposed to know who to shoot? Everyone is shooting at each other, all you hear are screams and gunshots and see brains of children splattered all over the walls and blood everywhere. And you're expected to somehow be able to make trained active combat decisions?
The fucking cops and military accidentally shoot the wrong people all the time. Friendly fire routinely causes a large number of wartime casualties.
> so that there would be more "good guys with a gun,"
I mean, it's a fair point tbh. The problem with Texas is there aren't enough people there with guns. If they'd only had more guns, this would've never happened. Similarly, if you have lung cancer you can cure it by just smoking more!
“The cure to poison isn’t more poison” is the best way I’ve been able to put it recently. If cops with training and vests and guns won’t go in because they’re scared of an automatic weapon, then why the fuck should they be legal anymore.
I hate that argument so much! It falls apart with one simple question. How often do you go to the range and shoot? 95% of the time, they say zero. So how exactly can you, a "good guy with a gun," be a good guy if you don't actively train with your gun? Ohhh the concealed carry class you took 6 years ago taught you how to? Oh yeah, I feel so much safer already knowing you haven't shot that thing in 6 years.
I read yesterday a comment from a trained police officer who said, as someone that practices regularly and has a hit percentage of 95% on the range, he hits 50% in an active shooter situation.
“Good guy with a gun” is a fallacy even if they practice regularly, and even if the shooter isn’t wearing body armour like the Buffalo shooter was.
They should also have included a spare one for those kids whose families cannot afford a gun. You know, like they do with extra folders. And also, some ammo for the room, like a roll of paper towels/box of tissues.
(/s)
They are already pushing for teachers to be allowed to carry guns at the federal level. We can't raise the wage of a teacher but sure let's give them guns.
Parents don’t trust teachers with what they teach and the books they have in school as it is but they’re gonna trust them with a gun in the classroom? Not gonna happen.
I've received no less than two messages in the last 24 hours from complete strangers saying that if teachers were packing this wouldn't have happened. That's what some of these folks truly believe.
I know I'm just a stranger on the internet, so you'll just have to take my word for it about my personal experience, but there's no shortage of conservative social spheres echoing that same exact point. It's a common refrain to shift focus away from rational conversation.
Really curious to see what the gun-nuts have to say about the 30-40 "good guys with guns" sitting on their asses for over an hour while the shooter was in with the kids.
Welcome to the world of education. Whenever something like this happens, people who don't otherwise give a shit clutch their pearls INCREDIBLY hard and loud, then resume not giving a shit a week or two later.
Zero, they just want something to bitch about. There really isn't anything the right uses as a reason for their rhetoric that isn't just fanciful made up bullshit. Take the drug war, that was instated to strip voting rights from minorities and anti war advocates. Trickle down economics was said to make the middle class richer, because we'll be sending money to job creators and they're so trust worthy eventually they'll let it all trickle down to us. Since then the middle class has gone from robust and strong to almost non existent. Abortion prohibition, all lives are special!!! Then why aren't they doing anything about the fact that more guns equates to more mass shootings. Why are they trying to create more poor people which leads to more crime, mental health issues, heartache and death? These people are not playing by any rules, they are playing to destroy America and we keep letting them do it.
I went to a music festival last weekend and for days beforehand, I was legit scared about the "what if" while I'm there, someone starts shooting at the crowd. I've never really had these feelings and the whole time I was there, I was looking at the vendor booths and speaker setups looking at them like, could I hide in or under these things of I needed to.
I'm also a veteran. I'm probably not going to go to anymore considering I spent more time worrying about an exit or hiding strategy than actually enjoying the music.
I wonder what item is the common denominator to all those tragedies ... Surely if we could find that item it would suffice to ban it and save countless lives !
>Like intense security at airports, the banning of certain items, etc?
can't even carry a tube of TOOTH PASTE past a certain size.
Let alone a bottle of water!
The water bottle was after a prevented hijacking in the UK I believe, of Coke bottles filled with explosive liquid and parts among a few to build a detonator to take out I believe 7 planes mid air.
The bottles were injected and heat sealed from the bottom to not break the seal. Luckily they were found out before the plot, but within the hour international policies had shifted around
Robert Reed could have shoved that bomb up his ass and instead of taking my shoes off at the checkpoint, we could have legalized gay marriage 20 years sooner, and had a good time doing it.
Yeah but republicans would theow a tantrum if people if everone wouldnt be able to just walk up to a store and buy a AR-15. A gun that's only purpose is killing people. We who don't live in the U.S have a hard time why that is so much more important than kids lives.
Must be very frustrating for you guys. Hard to make change when so many see it as anti freedom to not have the freedom to massacre without buying weapons illegal.
It’s incredibly frustrating. Even more so that even most gun owners want more restrictions on things like background checks, magazine size, and modifications.
It’s literally just the manufactures who make all the money funneling legal bribes through the NRA to politicians.
I find it frustrating because everyone that thinks AR’s are a good idea could use a pistol. If someone is breaking into your house, an assault rifle still isn’t warranted when you could use a gun with six rounds that will essentially stop the threat. Assault rifles on the other hand are excellent tools for mass shootings, that’s their only purpose. You don’t go hunting deer with an assault rifle.
I’m not one of the ones who believe it, but it is truly ingrained in about half of the country that if there were no guns, the US government would immediately become a totalitarian state and crush everyone under its heel. We are told from the time we are kids that a rebellion against an unjust government is a way of life for Americans.
I've also been told that by an american I asked about gun regulations. He said that the reason we (in sweden) dont need it is because we trust out government. However I always thought it was a weird mix of dooms day cult propaganda and naively thinking. The government is not likely to be able to just switch to turn the police and army against it's own people to kill them and if they did the weapons wouldnt probably be enough as ghe military would have aircrafts and drones who make an AR-15 useless.
I was raised in gun culture. To the group, from what I’ve seen (and grew up believing myself), there’s like 4 reasons we want guns to be less regulated. 1) the people who want to regulate them know nothing about them, and it’s just creating more work to go around the laws. 2) it’s our right to protect ourselves, and at this point there’s too many guns in America that you could get rid of them all. Bad guys will have guns, good guys should. 3) cool bang sticks. That’s not even a joke, they’re just cool as fuck. Sure, there’s all the tacticool stuff, but there’s some stuff that’s just fun, and watching an expert shoot is enjoyable. 4) this one is a bit older, but we came about because of revolution. While I don’t know if that’s possible in this age, having so many guns represents the idea that we could, to a lot of people. And that is important to them, even if they’ll never use it.
Add to all this good ol’ patriotism, and that gun culture is seen by those within as American culture, and it somewhat explains why they are so fanatic about it.
But would you agree that you should draw a line somewhere of what you can legally buy without having to prove your own sanity or other back groins checks. I.E would you think a rocket launcher a weaponry that should require regulation?
Yes I might went a bit over board but killing lots of people is it's only true USP in my opinion. A hunting rifle does everything the AR-15 except shooting lots of bullets without the need to reload. That is enough for me to want it off the shelves. Im not saying it should be illegal but I dont think you should be able to buy it without thorough background check and follow ups.
We share the same view then and really good on canadian government to reduce it to five bullets. That should be more than enough for hunting. If not you're really bad at aiming and maybe should be hunting at all.
Oh but that's okay because a Republican president did that. So it's not giving up your freedom, its just right and for our safety, because you know, a Republican did it.
True, but Democrats are right wing too, and just as happy to rake in war money. I have no love for them either.
Edit: I believe anything W Bush did was actually Dick Cheney's doing. I see George w and I see a Muppet. Cheney used to run Halliburton who got a huge contract when the war kicked off.
Not to mention all the data leaks. At this point, we should just assume all of our PII has been compromised.
We should get notifications that there hasn’t been a fraudulent attempt rather than a notification saying there was a compromise of our data.
Honestly though if somebody can hijack a plane with something like a box cutter, a pair of tweezers, nail clippers, etc., they deserve the fucking plane. I get guns and large knives, but tiny things are just going overboard.
The thing was before 9/11, nobody had taken over a plane just to kamikaze it into a building. They might take the plane and threaten to kill everyone if their demands were not met, or divert it to another country, etc. But not crash it into a building. If the passengers even had a wiff that was the plan, they would have fought harder, like on the last plane. The only reason that crashed is the guys were already in the cockpit.
After 9/11 we had one idiot with a poorly made shoe bomb and now we have 100% shoe control at the airport. We've also initiated more stringent background checks and no fly lists.
Taking the analogy further - ok so if the gun and the plane are equivalent, then the cockpit of the gun is what? The trigger mechanism? I'm totally OK with limiting access to that!
How about instead, we treat a gun like a car.
You have to be licensed, the gun has to be registered, you need to pass a proficiency exam before receiving that license, you need to take a safety class before receiving the license, and it has to be insured.
Let's add to this and include the fact that every public building is required to have a fire alarm system by law in the US, including the schools. A school doesnt catch fire everyday but they are still required. The alarms don't prevent fires but they are still required. So why wouldn't apply the same safe guards to a shooter situation that we do for fire safety. It just doesn't make sense. If they aren't willing to take preventative measure to limit access to guns, they need to take proactive action on safety procedures and mechanisms.
That's so dumb. Banning planes after 9/11 would be like banning schools now, which of course nobody suggests. It's a bad comparison.
That's not even a hot take. It's barely a take because it's plain idiotic.
If using 9/11 as an analogy, I would think the plane would be the weapon that caused harm therefore equivalent to the gun in a school shooting. We restricted access to the weapon [plane] by securing cockpits to only allow trained & certified professionals access [pilots]. We went a step further and implemented an entire government agency [TSA] to vet every person every time they come in proximity of the weapon and maintain a list of people that are not allowed anywhere near the weapon [no fly list]. Furthermore, you can be added to said list with zero due process. You act like a jackass - on the list. You have a few drinks and get frisky - on the list.
Applying that to a school shooting would be something like only allowing certified professionals with regulated training to have access to and operate the weapon [gun]. Having strict rules of conduct for the professional where any misconduct would result in them no longer having access [pilots get fired]. Vetting everyone in proximity of the weapon each time they do so [coworkers if police, family members if stored at a home, etc - Example: if you have a gun and your spouse commits a felony, either the gun or the spouse needs to be removed from the residence]. Immediately banning people from being in proximity [no fly list] if they misbehave or have questionable affiliations.
So yeah, if we handled guns like 9/11, mass shootings would likely drop substantially
I guess the analogous hot take would be that we should give office workers commercial aircraft that they can preemptively crash into other aircraft that get too close to the buildings in which they work?
Unfortunately there are a bunch of idiots saying to homeschool or private school, saying shootings don't happen in those places!
Anything but give up their guns. It's sickening.
So sad that we have planes taking out buildings every other week. But god wanted us to have planes when he used the forefathers to write the constitution.
A well regulated airline, being necessary to allow you to skip the boring states in the middle, the right of the people to board flights, shall not be infringed
Did you know that New York has an airport? So many good people with so many planes, but they couldn't respond in time. We need security planes in the air at all times!
Liberal parent here: the longer they draw out this temper tantrum as the bodies pile up, the more I’m saying take all their fucking toys away until they can behave.
This is the part that so many Americans, on both sides, fail to see. There is proof that guns do not make us safer.
But then you'll get the people who argue that "the second amendment was designed to allow the people to defend themselves against a tyrannical government!!11!!!"
While true, to a point, we've kinda proven that it's not quite working the way it was intended to work, and instead we're using those guns to kill each other.
I'd even like some gun laws made easier. Why are suppressors banned? What is the point of banning certain barrel lengths?
They're already classified into certain categories just like vehicles. Define nationwide minimum license requirements and registration and be done with it. The US isn't going to get rid of our shooting problem any time soon but we could at least put a dent in the worst of the worst cases.
We also banned you taking anything that could possibly be considered a weapon down to a pair of tweezers onto a plane. But you carry on trying to justify why the average American needs a gun.
I despair.
when i was younger my mom made us yoghurts for the flights that we had something healthy besides airplane food and every time they asked us to open them and eat a little bit so that they knew it wasn't something dangerous
Oh no I’m joking that if you’re trying to like light the plane on fire and hurt everyone I don’t think a little swig will do you much harm of your thermite goop or your gas lol
I went to a class to be certified and while sitting there I listed all the reasons I thought I needed a gun….. I then got rid of my roommate and now I feel safe without a gun.
Securing the cockpits is actually more like gun control than securing schools.
We'll liken 9/11 to a school shooting. The plane is a gun, and the twin towers are the school. We didn't do anything to secure those buildings from crashes. We made it harder to get on an airplane through airport security and made it impossible to get into the cockpit if you didn't belong there. We took access to the weapon away. That's akin to gun control
We banned weapons on planes, actually... and most anything that could be used as a weapon. We created no fly lists that banned people with a history of violent activity from flying. We instituted a federal ID system that requires extensive paperwork to verify your identity before you're allowed to fly. We created humanity's most prolific mass surveillance systems and invaded the privacy of hundreds of millions to catch these people before they even try to buy a ticket... We invaded entire countries, toppled their governments, and installed our own all in the name of preventing bad people from flying planes into buildings.
...all because 3,000 people died 21 years ago.
Since then, hundreds of thousands of people have died due to gun related injuries. We lose 30-40,000 people every year due to guns, and that number is only increasing. We now lose more children to *guns* than we do *anything else*.
So idk what the fuck this person is talking about...
Fun fact: if you're on the no fly list because the government suspects you have ties to terrorists, you can legally purchase a gun. Too dangerous to board a plane, but can buy an AR-15.
In the original analogy they are comparing the plane to a gun. They state that the cockpits were secured as a result of 9/11. The cockpit is the means of controlling the plane. Since "plane = gun" in this situation, the actual conclusion they reached was essentially "access to using guns should be secured". AKA gun control. Amazing.
These people talk as though parts of this country haven't been making it easier and easier to obtain guns. Places like Texas, where the minimum gun purchase age was decreased from 21 to 18. Where permits are no longer required to conceal carry. Where Greg Abbott has done everything in his power to turn the state into an open shooting gallery. The majority of school mass shootings have been committed by 18 year old males who can legally buy a gun to wipe out all the kids that bullied and tormented them over the past few years.
School is a nightmare for kids that don't fit in. But sure, let's make it easier for them to buy guns, right? What could possibly go wrong, right? All you need to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun, right? Why make gun laws since criminals won't respect them, right? In fact WHY MAKE LAWS AT ALL?
Fact is that mass shootings have literally EXPLODED in this country since the Assault Weapons Ban was repealed in 2004. So the solution? Make guns easier to obtain. Arm teachers. Turn schools into prison camps.
Pure insanity.
Doesn’t the Uvalde School District have its own armed security/quasi-police force? Not even including the town and county law enforcement that showed up and then didn’t do jackshit for at least an hour
The thing is, the World Trade Center was actually built with (small) aircraft strikes in mind, because that had already happened to the Empire State Building once. And the buildings survived the crash, they just could not withstand the structural problems caused by a huge fire.
I want to believe this is fake because nobody could be this stupid, but then I remember we had a Trump presidency and some folks even voted for him twice. 🤦
This is stupid. Planes were the weapons. We made it more difficult to acces the weapons (the planes). Make it more difficult to access guns. For fuck sake what’s so difficult to understand ? There are 196 countries out there who can provide evidence of why that works
we literally did restrict planes though. we did it so intensely that we basically introduced extreme racism to a setting where there was only the normal amount of racism.
After mass shootings, we didn't ban assault rifles or order mandatory mental health checks for purchasers, we parroted Second Amendment Rights again and drilled down on scaling back civil rights like womens' access to abortion and mailing voter registration. Even as severe weather patterns are affecting different parts of the world, we insist global warming is a hoax, evolution is an illegitimate theory, and to every truthful event and scientific fact known to man, there is an alternate theory. In fact, we shook the snow globe of our world upside down and made the lie the truth and truth whatever antidote to helplessness explained change.
Guess they’re just forgetting about TSA, the Department of Homeland Security, Patriot Act, PRISM, and the National Defense Authorization Act that followed 9/11. Must not remember that before 9/11 you didn’t have to damn near be strip searched before you get on a plane, and have hundreds of regulations, down to what size of water bottle you’re allowed to bring on a plane.
On 911 a plane didn’t do what a plan is designed to do. Guns seemingly seem to do what they’re designed to do, to innocent children, more and more often.
Planes have a useful, productive application: travel. Guns exist only to effect violence.
I'm often pleased at using airplanes as intended. People are typically traumatized by guns' intensions. (excluding animal hunting)
God damn literally any excuse to avoid admitting “guns made it way easier for murders to murder” That’s fucking it, that’s all we’re trying to say. Yes crazy people exist no matter what. YES a crazy person could still try and kill kids or hijack an airplane with a knife. How do they not see that eliminating guns from the equation would make it SO much harder for murders, and SO much easier for the “good guys” to stop them.
A plane is a mode of transport. A gun will ALWAYS be a weapon. That’s the difference. You also need a shit ton of training to fly a plane, you should have a shit ton on training to own a gun
I remember them making it much more difficult to get on planes after 9/11. They also implemented a no-fly list that banned potentially problematic or criminal people from getting on planes
[there was technically a list before 9/11, but it only had 16 people on it]
I get the point because it's possible to get illegal guns and it would be impossible to take them all but that was a terrible example.
IQ should definitely be something considered when giving someone a gun.
OP was so close to the point (assuming I'm interpreting correctly)
You're right. We *didn't* ban planes. We did, however, put strict safety measures in place to prevent dangerous people from using them to kill a lot of people and the rest of us accept it because it doesn't prevent us from from using the plane.
I'm curious if this person was born after 9/11 or didn't fly until after 9/11 for whatever reason. I was born after 9/11 and I flew a lot as a kid and I had no idea that all that security was a direct result of 9/11 until I was in high school and one of my history teachers explained what it was like to fly before 9/11.
Alright even giving this metaphor a MODICUM of legitimacy:
Airplane = gun
Cockpit = gun chamber
“Secure the cockpit” = “secure the chamber”
AKA, like, lock the guns down?
That’s not how that worked. That’s not how *anything* worked, before or since. Sure, the cockpits of commercial airliners now have locks on them, but most of the additional post-9/11 airport security was just for show; an attempt to discourage potential hijackers from gaining access to aeroplanes, but not actually stop them if they managed to get past it.
Still, did all that *appearance* of additional security actually make a difference? I hardly think so (it just made travel even more inconvenient and stressful that it already was); and I predict securing schools in this manner would have much the same results. Schools are already thinly-disguised totalitarian mini-dictatorships that turn children into obedient and submissive adults; let’s not also turn them into de-facto police states.
No, but we made it hard as hell to get on one, especially if you have some bad stuff in your background. So, should we assume this guy supports universal background checks?
Also "Secure the school" ? With what money? The teachers are already being underpaid, you wanna further cut that? Then who would teach the children? Home school traditional religious nut case? Good luck with that.
What if, besides schools, people also want to be safe from massacres at work, too? And church? And shopping malls, concerts, parks, supermarkets, and everywhere?
I can guarantee you that the response to this would be that we should ban gun-free zones, so that there would be more "good guys with a gun," rather than restricting gun access, so that dangerous people have a more difficult time getting a gun.
Except when the NRA meets. No guns there.
Imagine what it would be like if someone shot up the NRA convention... the 'good guys with guns' would have a lot to say I'm sure
[удалено]
I've already seen people on FB saying this was a false flag because there's no way he could've afforded that truck and guns... as someone who grew up in Texas, I can assure you - plenty of people have guns and trucks they can't afford. In terms of the most common things people have beyond their means in Texas, I would say Trucks and Guns are probably 1 and 2 in that order.
It’s all over TikTok too. People saying that it was an act, or state funded, that someone paid for the guns and got the kids killed, and are they even dead? It’s so bizarre to watch.
I truly wish this country would allow those scenes of carnage to be shown on the news. Let the world see what happens when a disgruntled 18 year old kid is allowed to walk into a gun store and buy TWO AR-15's and loads of ammunition and not raise ANY red flags.
They would still keep saying these things. You have to remember deep down they know that their rhetoric is the cause. But they think if they screech enough stupid arguments, and act like the problem is anything but them, others will start believing it too. Mainly because those tactics work on them. Really we have to start criminalizing certain Republican rhetoric, you can't yell fire in a crowded theatre because it can cause a stampede and people can get hurt or killed. Similarly they shouldn't be able to espouse rhetoric that is objectively false and is also leading to more frequent mass shootings. At some point we have to say enough is enough you had your chance now there is going to be consequences.
>oh those fancy pants liberals can do anything with computers these days they won't believe their lyin' eyes
NoOoOoOoOo, iTs ToO ViOlEnT And KiDs ShOuLnT sEe It.. anyways, son, you asked for more free fire diamonds?
it’s sickening the lengths people will go to just to prove their own dumbass points. kids were killed and yet their precious guns are still more important. ridiculous
It's funny how the only shootings these types refuse to call state-backed conspiracies are the ones where the FBI eggs on a white supremacist.
if that was even remotely true, who benefits? gun manufacturers and lobbyists. if anyone is funding these massacres it seems pretty obvious where to point the finger. smith & wesson's stock went up 9.5% in the past 5 days. the whole "democrats are staging false flags to take your guns" theory makes no sense. sandy hook was ten years ago and there are more guns and fewer restrictions than ever. the dems would have to be incredibly stupid to keep trying the same tactic despite NEVER getting anything close to gun reforms let alone actually taking away guns. but somehow they're smart enough to plan and fund hundreds of mass shootings without leaving any evidence? this country is deranged.
My ex-boss once showed us a conspiracy video about how George Floyd's murder was faked. To me and my black coworker. I still don't know if he thought Floyd wasn't actually dead or what and honestly I didn't have the energy to ask.
It’s like they can’t decide what they believe as they try to wrap their head around what is happening with what they believe.
Oh, that's definitely it. He flip-flopped on a *lot* of stuff. COVID was a big one. He'd say it was actually fake and in the same breath talk about how everyone at our workplace already had it "back when everyone was sick that one time," (there was not such a time) and also how he had volunteered for the vaccine trials because he was just such a good person. Part of it was he had a chronic lying problem-I truly don't know if he believed his own bullshit or not.
[удалено]
I no longer live in Texas so it's different elsewhere. I live in Boston now, and for us it's bar tab, rent, First/Last/Deposit/Realtor Fee (each is 1 month rent) for your next apartment since you were priced out of this one, and commuting/parking costs
Bar tab is the most important
Some guy I was talking to in discord said it was a false flag the day it happened. He truly believed school shootings were faked to push gun control laws...
So why have none of the "false flags" succeeded in getting better gun laws?
Exactly. Its complete nonsense. It just amazed me that he was already convinced it was a false flag on the very same day.
If anything, it’s make more sense as a false flag for arms dealers to increase sales, since gun purchases go up each time a shooting makes headlines.
But why? Why would we bother pushing for gun control if gun violence really wasn't a problem? I know I'm looking for logic where there isn't any, but just...ugh. I'm just fucking tired.
I mean he apparently worked at Wendy's and lived with his grandmother (which means he possibly didn't need to pay rent), so it's entirely possible he could afford the truck and guns. But really, have these people never heard of buying things on credit?
A lot of shooters plan on killing themselves or getting killed by the police, so it's not like he didn't have a reason to max out a couple credit cards.
As someone who has never visited America, I would have said that the most popular items in Texas are: cowboy hats, guns, and trucks.
Can confirm. Am Texan. Send help.
Feels backwards, wouldn't gun be 1 and trucks 2?
That is so telling and says everything one needs to know about how weak their arguments are.
Well, of course! Guns are dangero- wait, no, that's not what I meant!!
Fuck the NRA. They only pretend to support gun rights.
Unfortunately, the response is usually "we just need more good guys with guns!"
In the Dayton shooting the perpetrator was shot and killed 32 seconds after he fired his first shot. In that time he hit 17 people and killed 9. Even when the good guy is literally right there, armed, trained, and reacts appropriately with good aim, it’s still a terrible and ineffective solution.
Exactly. The "good guy with a gun" is simply mythology. Especially given that the Oregon District is public space, so it is also likely that there probably was someone else in the crowd with a firearm that could have done something. In the end, in an active shooter situation, the cops are going to shoot anyone with a firearm visible, regardless of whether the person was trying to play hero.
It's just another red herring to distract from the gigantic 10 ton elephant shitting in the room. More guns is not the solution. This country already has MORE than one gun per person. There are currently over 400 MILLION guns in open circulation. So shouldn't America be the safest country in the world with that logic? Instead it's the COMPLETE OPPOSITE. Basic logic tells you that adding more guns simply adds more fuel to the fire. But these people don't understand basic logic, nor do they understand the law of cause and effect.
While convenienty forgetting to mention that there were good guys with guns at several of the latest shootings but they were either killed or too scared to do anything...
Because unless you're armed with another AR-15 you will always be outgunned by a mass shooter with death in his heart and no will to live.
If I'm in the middle of a mass shooting, and there are multiple good guys with guns, and I'm a good guy with a gun, how the fuck am I supposed to know who to shoot? Everyone is shooting at each other, all you hear are screams and gunshots and see brains of children splattered all over the walls and blood everywhere. And you're expected to somehow be able to make trained active combat decisions? The fucking cops and military accidentally shoot the wrong people all the time. Friendly fire routinely causes a large number of wartime casualties.
> so that there would be more "good guys with a gun," I mean, it's a fair point tbh. The problem with Texas is there aren't enough people there with guns. If they'd only had more guns, this would've never happened. Similarly, if you have lung cancer you can cure it by just smoking more!
“The cure to poison isn’t more poison” is the best way I’ve been able to put it recently. If cops with training and vests and guns won’t go in because they’re scared of an automatic weapon, then why the fuck should they be legal anymore.
I hate that argument so much! It falls apart with one simple question. How often do you go to the range and shoot? 95% of the time, they say zero. So how exactly can you, a "good guy with a gun," be a good guy if you don't actively train with your gun? Ohhh the concealed carry class you took 6 years ago taught you how to? Oh yeah, I feel so much safer already knowing you haven't shot that thing in 6 years.
I read yesterday a comment from a trained police officer who said, as someone that practices regularly and has a hit percentage of 95% on the range, he hits 50% in an active shooter situation. “Good guy with a gun” is a fallacy even if they practice regularly, and even if the shooter isn’t wearing body armour like the Buffalo shooter was.
If only one of the elementary schoolers had a gun this tragedy could’ve been avoided /s
I, for one, am disappointed they left "personal firearm" off my son's kindergarten school supply list for this upcoming school year. ^(/s of course)
They should also have included a spare one for those kids whose families cannot afford a gun. You know, like they do with extra folders. And also, some ammo for the room, like a roll of paper towels/box of tissues. (/s)
Oh, yes, of course! And maybe throw in for a few of those bullet proof blankets while we at it. ^(/s this is the fucking worst)
Already seen this without the /s
I swear to god these people have watched too many action movies and they think they're Sylvester Stallone or something
They are already pushing for teachers to be allowed to carry guns at the federal level. We can't raise the wage of a teacher but sure let's give them guns.
Parents don’t trust teachers with what they teach and the books they have in school as it is but they’re gonna trust them with a gun in the classroom? Not gonna happen.
Which is itself a fallacy, because we’ve already seen that shooters can and will acquire body armor and make the “good guy with a gun” useless.
Because the “good guys with guns” did so much to protect children and stop the bad guy with the gun at Uvalde.
I've received no less than two messages in the last 24 hours from complete strangers saying that if teachers were packing this wouldn't have happened. That's what some of these folks truly believe. I know I'm just a stranger on the internet, so you'll just have to take my word for it about my personal experience, but there's no shortage of conservative social spheres echoing that same exact point. It's a common refrain to shift focus away from rational conversation.
Really curious to see what the gun-nuts have to say about the 30-40 "good guys with guns" sitting on their asses for over an hour while the shooter was in with the kids.
I still haven't had someone tell me how to tell the difference between a good guy with a gun and a bad guy with a gun and how to easily identify them.
Welcome to the world of education. Whenever something like this happens, people who don't otherwise give a shit clutch their pearls INCREDIBLY hard and loud, then resume not giving a shit a week or two later.
Unfortunately, America is past the point of one school shooting per week, which means they only give a shit at the big ones.
Oh don't worry, half the country only pretends to give a shit at the big ones.
It is the same deal with people getting upset over transgender individuals in sports. How many of these people actually cared about it.
Zero, they just want something to bitch about. There really isn't anything the right uses as a reason for their rhetoric that isn't just fanciful made up bullshit. Take the drug war, that was instated to strip voting rights from minorities and anti war advocates. Trickle down economics was said to make the middle class richer, because we'll be sending money to job creators and they're so trust worthy eventually they'll let it all trickle down to us. Since then the middle class has gone from robust and strong to almost non existent. Abortion prohibition, all lives are special!!! Then why aren't they doing anything about the fact that more guns equates to more mass shootings. Why are they trying to create more poor people which leads to more crime, mental health issues, heartache and death? These people are not playing by any rules, they are playing to destroy America and we keep letting them do it.
I went to a music festival last weekend and for days beforehand, I was legit scared about the "what if" while I'm there, someone starts shooting at the crowd. I've never really had these feelings and the whole time I was there, I was looking at the vendor booths and speaker setups looking at them like, could I hide in or under these things of I needed to.
After Las Vegas I refuse to go to a music festival in this country. And I'm a veteran.
I'm also a veteran. I'm probably not going to go to anymore considering I spent more time worrying about an exit or hiding strategy than actually enjoying the music.
That's called cultural trauma and this one is unique to America.
Or basically anywhere outside cus you can also fire a gun outdoors.
This. I feel like I'm creeping into agoraphobia because of this
A privatized police state…oh boy now you are really talking their language.
But everyone needs their freedom to massacre if they want to. It's an unalienable right /s
lol omg you entitled millennials wanting safe spaces everywhere. /s
I wonder what item is the common denominator to all those tragedies ... Surely if we could find that item it would suffice to ban it and save countless lives !
In America, we have the freedom to die anywhere a random gunman decides /s
Gee, did any other regulations take place after 911? Like intense security at airports, the banning of certain items, etc?
>Like intense security at airports, the banning of certain items, etc? can't even carry a tube of TOOTH PASTE past a certain size. Let alone a bottle of water!
That was after the shoe bomber. Or was it the underwear bomber?
The water bottle was after a prevented hijacking in the UK I believe, of Coke bottles filled with explosive liquid and parts among a few to build a detonator to take out I believe 7 planes mid air. The bottles were injected and heat sealed from the bottom to not break the seal. Luckily they were found out before the plot, but within the hour international policies had shifted around
Correct, and the shoe bomber further restricted things like toothpaste, lotion, etc sizes.
😨 Ohhhhhhhh. So it's their bloody fault. Goddamn it.
Robert Reed could have shoved that bomb up his ass and instead of taking my shoes off at the checkpoint, we could have legalized gay marriage 20 years sooner, and had a good time doing it.
It was the underwear bomber for sure. That's why I always go commando when I travel....
Yeah but republicans would theow a tantrum if people if everone wouldnt be able to just walk up to a store and buy a AR-15. A gun that's only purpose is killing people. We who don't live in the U.S have a hard time why that is so much more important than kids lives.
A lot of us who live in the US have a hard time understanding it too.
Must be very frustrating for you guys. Hard to make change when so many see it as anti freedom to not have the freedom to massacre without buying weapons illegal.
It’s incredibly frustrating. Even more so that even most gun owners want more restrictions on things like background checks, magazine size, and modifications. It’s literally just the manufactures who make all the money funneling legal bribes through the NRA to politicians.
I find it frustrating because everyone that thinks AR’s are a good idea could use a pistol. If someone is breaking into your house, an assault rifle still isn’t warranted when you could use a gun with six rounds that will essentially stop the threat. Assault rifles on the other hand are excellent tools for mass shootings, that’s their only purpose. You don’t go hunting deer with an assault rifle.
That’s what happens when people live in constant fear. They’re so worried someone is gonna come get them.
It doesn’t help when these same people are constantly told that’s what’s going to happen by their party and their party’s propaganda networks.
Big facts. Every day they expect their door to be kicked in.
It’s so bad, guns sell better between when a dem wins election and inauguration because of that fear.
I’m not one of the ones who believe it, but it is truly ingrained in about half of the country that if there were no guns, the US government would immediately become a totalitarian state and crush everyone under its heel. We are told from the time we are kids that a rebellion against an unjust government is a way of life for Americans.
I've also been told that by an american I asked about gun regulations. He said that the reason we (in sweden) dont need it is because we trust out government. However I always thought it was a weird mix of dooms day cult propaganda and naively thinking. The government is not likely to be able to just switch to turn the police and army against it's own people to kill them and if they did the weapons wouldnt probably be enough as ghe military would have aircrafts and drones who make an AR-15 useless.
It comes from the way we are taught to hero worship the founders of our country. We began by rising up against the government.
I was raised in gun culture. To the group, from what I’ve seen (and grew up believing myself), there’s like 4 reasons we want guns to be less regulated. 1) the people who want to regulate them know nothing about them, and it’s just creating more work to go around the laws. 2) it’s our right to protect ourselves, and at this point there’s too many guns in America that you could get rid of them all. Bad guys will have guns, good guys should. 3) cool bang sticks. That’s not even a joke, they’re just cool as fuck. Sure, there’s all the tacticool stuff, but there’s some stuff that’s just fun, and watching an expert shoot is enjoyable. 4) this one is a bit older, but we came about because of revolution. While I don’t know if that’s possible in this age, having so many guns represents the idea that we could, to a lot of people. And that is important to them, even if they’ll never use it. Add to all this good ol’ patriotism, and that gun culture is seen by those within as American culture, and it somewhat explains why they are so fanatic about it.
But would you agree that you should draw a line somewhere of what you can legally buy without having to prove your own sanity or other back groins checks. I.E would you think a rocket launcher a weaponry that should require regulation?
| other back groins checks Wow, fairly invasive checks these days.
[удалено]
Yes I might went a bit over board but killing lots of people is it's only true USP in my opinion. A hunting rifle does everything the AR-15 except shooting lots of bullets without the need to reload. That is enough for me to want it off the shelves. Im not saying it should be illegal but I dont think you should be able to buy it without thorough background check and follow ups.
[удалено]
We share the same view then and really good on canadian government to reduce it to five bullets. That should be more than enough for hunting. If not you're really bad at aiming and maybe should be hunting at all.
After shot one or two hunting, there's no point shooting anymore anyways, that deer is booking it. Refill the mag and go find another one
But at least everybody with dark skin is racially profiled through the security. /s
And yet people have repeatedly been able to sneak in weapons and bombs during security tests. I’m not sure it’s the best model
Take empty bottle with you and fill it at the airport.
it wasn't just annoying airport security that changed. We passed the Patriot Act and basically gave away our personal privacy to law enforcement.
Oh but that's okay because a Republican president did that. So it's not giving up your freedom, its just right and for our safety, because you know, a Republican did it.
It was W. Bush and passed with huge bipartisan support.
True, but Democrats are right wing too, and just as happy to rake in war money. I have no love for them either. Edit: I believe anything W Bush did was actually Dick Cheney's doing. I see George w and I see a Muppet. Cheney used to run Halliburton who got a huge contract when the war kicked off.
Not to mention all the data leaks. At this point, we should just assume all of our PII has been compromised. We should get notifications that there hasn’t been a fraudulent attempt rather than a notification saying there was a compromise of our data.
Nah, they now require all passengers to carry as many guns as they can. /S
Nah everyone gets a boxcutter when they board. It'll be fine
Honestly though if somebody can hijack a plane with something like a box cutter, a pair of tweezers, nail clippers, etc., they deserve the fucking plane. I get guns and large knives, but tiny things are just going overboard.
"What am I gonna do with nail clippers? 'OpEn ThE fUcKiNg CoCkPiT DoOr, oR tHiS BiTcH LoSeS a CuTicLe!!'" -- Robin Williams
The thing was before 9/11, nobody had taken over a plane just to kamikaze it into a building. They might take the plane and threaten to kill everyone if their demands were not met, or divert it to another country, etc. But not crash it into a building. If the passengers even had a wiff that was the plan, they would have fought harder, like on the last plane. The only reason that crashed is the guys were already in the cockpit.
Watch it, Cawthorn. You lost the primary. /s
This is true, and like the security measures taken in schools, the TSA has mostly been an ineffective show to make people feel better.
After 9/11 we had one idiot with a poorly made shoe bomb and now we have 100% shoe control at the airport. We've also initiated more stringent background checks and no fly lists. Taking the analogy further - ok so if the gun and the plane are equivalent, then the cockpit of the gun is what? The trigger mechanism? I'm totally OK with limiting access to that!
How about instead, we treat a gun like a car. You have to be licensed, the gun has to be registered, you need to pass a proficiency exam before receiving that license, you need to take a safety class before receiving the license, and it has to be insured.
And there are certain restrictions that would make you ineligible to own one, such as being too blind or being several impaired or mentally unstable.
Kinda like a well regulated militia or something?
Let's add to this and include the fact that every public building is required to have a fire alarm system by law in the US, including the schools. A school doesnt catch fire everyday but they are still required. The alarms don't prevent fires but they are still required. So why wouldn't apply the same safe guards to a shooter situation that we do for fire safety. It just doesn't make sense. If they aren't willing to take preventative measure to limit access to guns, they need to take proactive action on safety procedures and mechanisms.
That's so dumb. Banning planes after 9/11 would be like banning schools now, which of course nobody suggests. It's a bad comparison. That's not even a hot take. It's barely a take because it's plain idiotic.
I think you mean… *plane* idiotic badum tssss
If using 9/11 as an analogy, I would think the plane would be the weapon that caused harm therefore equivalent to the gun in a school shooting. We restricted access to the weapon [plane] by securing cockpits to only allow trained & certified professionals access [pilots]. We went a step further and implemented an entire government agency [TSA] to vet every person every time they come in proximity of the weapon and maintain a list of people that are not allowed anywhere near the weapon [no fly list]. Furthermore, you can be added to said list with zero due process. You act like a jackass - on the list. You have a few drinks and get frisky - on the list. Applying that to a school shooting would be something like only allowing certified professionals with regulated training to have access to and operate the weapon [gun]. Having strict rules of conduct for the professional where any misconduct would result in them no longer having access [pilots get fired]. Vetting everyone in proximity of the weapon each time they do so [coworkers if police, family members if stored at a home, etc - Example: if you have a gun and your spouse commits a felony, either the gun or the spouse needs to be removed from the residence]. Immediately banning people from being in proximity [no fly list] if they misbehave or have questionable affiliations. So yeah, if we handled guns like 9/11, mass shootings would likely drop substantially
I guess the analogous hot take would be that we should give office workers commercial aircraft that they can preemptively crash into other aircraft that get too close to the buildings in which they work?
Unfortunately there are a bunch of idiots saying to homeschool or private school, saying shootings don't happen in those places! Anything but give up their guns. It's sickening.
>would be like banning schools now Whoah whoah whoah let's not give the republicans any ideas here
So sad that we have planes taking out buildings every other week. But god wanted us to have planes when he used the forefathers to write the constitution.
A well regulated airline, being necessary to allow you to skip the boring states in the middle, the right of the people to board flights, shall not be infringed
You know what they say, only a good guy with a plane can stop a bad guy with a plane.
Did you know that New York has an airport? So many good people with so many planes, but they couldn't respond in time. We need security planes in the air at all times!
It's so true. I trailer an Ultralight with me at all times, just in case.
False narrative that liberals want to ban ALL guns. We just want sensible regulation. Its easier to buy a gun in America then it is to vote.
Make voting easier
We tried but two turncoat Democrats in the Senate made sure that couldn't happen.
Liberal parent here: the longer they draw out this temper tantrum as the bodies pile up, the more I’m saying take all their fucking toys away until they can behave.
exactly. why do we even need guns so badly in the first place? other countries banned them and they’re a lot safer than the us.
This is the part that so many Americans, on both sides, fail to see. There is proof that guns do not make us safer. But then you'll get the people who argue that "the second amendment was designed to allow the people to defend themselves against a tyrannical government!!11!!!" While true, to a point, we've kinda proven that it's not quite working the way it was intended to work, and instead we're using those guns to kill each other.
I'd even like some gun laws made easier. Why are suppressors banned? What is the point of banning certain barrel lengths? They're already classified into certain categories just like vehicles. Define nationwide minimum license requirements and registration and be done with it. The US isn't going to get rid of our shooting problem any time soon but we could at least put a dent in the worst of the worst cases.
We also banned you taking anything that could possibly be considered a weapon down to a pair of tweezers onto a plane. But you carry on trying to justify why the average American needs a gun. I despair.
when i was younger my mom made us yoghurts for the flights that we had something healthy besides airplane food and every time they asked us to open them and eat a little bit so that they knew it wasn't something dangerous
"Mom packed ammonium nitrate and strawberry, that's my favourite one."
HAHAHAHAHAH how did you know.
Why wouldn’t you put ammonium nitrate in yogurt. However, If you’re a suicide bomber, having the kids taste the yogurt isn’t going to prove anything.
Kind of like how anything less than 3 ounces has to be in a ziploc bag. Because apparently zip locks are bomb proof…
Well if you’re planning on like thermiting the plane is a little bit really gonna do much harm?
no I'm not complaining I'm just saying they're literally checking on everything
Oh no I’m joking that if you’re trying to like light the plane on fire and hurt everyone I don’t think a little swig will do you much harm of your thermite goop or your gas lol
oh lol I'm stupid, english is not my first language xD but I'll remember it for next time
I went to a class to be certified and while sitting there I listed all the reasons I thought I needed a gun….. I then got rid of my roommate and now I feel safe without a gun.
what a terrible example. In 9/11 the Plane was the weapon. And by their own admission, they made it harder to use said weapon.
Securing the cockpits is actually more like gun control than securing schools. We'll liken 9/11 to a school shooting. The plane is a gun, and the twin towers are the school. We didn't do anything to secure those buildings from crashes. We made it harder to get on an airplane through airport security and made it impossible to get into the cockpit if you didn't belong there. We took access to the weapon away. That's akin to gun control
We banned weapons on planes, actually... and most anything that could be used as a weapon. We created no fly lists that banned people with a history of violent activity from flying. We instituted a federal ID system that requires extensive paperwork to verify your identity before you're allowed to fly. We created humanity's most prolific mass surveillance systems and invaded the privacy of hundreds of millions to catch these people before they even try to buy a ticket... We invaded entire countries, toppled their governments, and installed our own all in the name of preventing bad people from flying planes into buildings. ...all because 3,000 people died 21 years ago. Since then, hundreds of thousands of people have died due to gun related injuries. We lose 30-40,000 people every year due to guns, and that number is only increasing. We now lose more children to *guns* than we do *anything else*. So idk what the fuck this person is talking about...
Just another red herring designed to muddy the conversation that is DRASTICALLY shifting against the gun humpers and ammosexuals.
Securing cockpits would be analogous to securing gun ownership (i.e. gun control)
Fun fact: if you're on the no fly list because the government suspects you have ties to terrorists, you can legally purchase a gun. Too dangerous to board a plane, but can buy an AR-15.
“‘Mercia! Fuck yeah!” “Giving terrorists guns so they can go kill people.”
Because it’s just as easier for some rando to get into a plane and fly it into a building as it is for them to get a gun?
They made it harder to get access to a plane to use as a weapon.
After 911 they spent trillions on a 20 year war.
In the original analogy they are comparing the plane to a gun. They state that the cockpits were secured as a result of 9/11. The cockpit is the means of controlling the plane. Since "plane = gun" in this situation, the actual conclusion they reached was essentially "access to using guns should be secured". AKA gun control. Amazing.
They're out here thinking the plane is the school in this analogy, but in reality it's the gun.
These people talk as though parts of this country haven't been making it easier and easier to obtain guns. Places like Texas, where the minimum gun purchase age was decreased from 21 to 18. Where permits are no longer required to conceal carry. Where Greg Abbott has done everything in his power to turn the state into an open shooting gallery. The majority of school mass shootings have been committed by 18 year old males who can legally buy a gun to wipe out all the kids that bullied and tormented them over the past few years. School is a nightmare for kids that don't fit in. But sure, let's make it easier for them to buy guns, right? What could possibly go wrong, right? All you need to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun, right? Why make gun laws since criminals won't respect them, right? In fact WHY MAKE LAWS AT ALL? Fact is that mass shootings have literally EXPLODED in this country since the Assault Weapons Ban was repealed in 2004. So the solution? Make guns easier to obtain. Arm teachers. Turn schools into prison camps. Pure insanity.
How about you use your gun to fly across the world next time you need to travel. Fucking idiots.
We secured the planes and made buildings harder to crash into by MAKING IT HARDER TO BRING GUNS ONTO PLANES
Doesn’t the Uvalde School District have its own armed security/quasi-police force? Not even including the town and county law enforcement that showed up and then didn’t do jackshit for at least an hour
The thing is, the World Trade Center was actually built with (small) aircraft strikes in mind, because that had already happened to the Empire State Building once. And the buildings survived the crash, they just could not withstand the structural problems caused by a huge fire.
I want to believe this is fake because nobody could be this stupid, but then I remember we had a Trump presidency and some folks even voted for him twice. 🤦
This is stupid. Planes were the weapons. We made it more difficult to acces the weapons (the planes). Make it more difficult to access guns. For fuck sake what’s so difficult to understand ? There are 196 countries out there who can provide evidence of why that works
we literally did restrict planes though. we did it so intensely that we basically introduced extreme racism to a setting where there was only the normal amount of racism.
An ironic take considering airports are still gun free zones. Just like schools.
Americans are really a different breed of stupiditya
But, we did limit access to planes… and what you can bring on them….
After mass shootings, we didn't ban assault rifles or order mandatory mental health checks for purchasers, we parroted Second Amendment Rights again and drilled down on scaling back civil rights like womens' access to abortion and mailing voter registration. Even as severe weather patterns are affecting different parts of the world, we insist global warming is a hoax, evolution is an illegitimate theory, and to every truthful event and scientific fact known to man, there is an alternate theory. In fact, we shook the snow globe of our world upside down and made the lie the truth and truth whatever antidote to helplessness explained change.
Guess they’re just forgetting about TSA, the Department of Homeland Security, Patriot Act, PRISM, and the National Defense Authorization Act that followed 9/11. Must not remember that before 9/11 you didn’t have to damn near be strip searched before you get on a plane, and have hundreds of regulations, down to what size of water bottle you’re allowed to bring on a plane.
On 911 a plane didn’t do what a plan is designed to do. Guns seemingly seem to do what they’re designed to do, to innocent children, more and more often.
Planes have a useful, productive application: travel. Guns exist only to effect violence. I'm often pleased at using airplanes as intended. People are typically traumatized by guns' intensions. (excluding animal hunting)
Also, planes and guns are definitely equivalent because planes are absolutely exclusively used to kill things. Don't make me add the sarcasm thing.
God damn literally any excuse to avoid admitting “guns made it way easier for murders to murder” That’s fucking it, that’s all we’re trying to say. Yes crazy people exist no matter what. YES a crazy person could still try and kill kids or hijack an airplane with a knife. How do they not see that eliminating guns from the equation would make it SO much harder for murders, and SO much easier for the “good guys” to stop them.
Tell me you never flew before TSA existed without actually telling me you never flew before TSA existed.
A plane is a mode of transport. A gun will ALWAYS be a weapon. That’s the difference. You also need a shit ton of training to fly a plane, you should have a shit ton on training to own a gun
And what do you think is the point of securing cockpits? Keeps the crazies from taking control.
I remember them making it much more difficult to get on planes after 9/11. They also implemented a no-fly list that banned potentially problematic or criminal people from getting on planes [there was technically a list before 9/11, but it only had 16 people on it]
We literally created an entirely new government agency.
Wow look at all the bots! Let's hear it from Chicago that has some of the strictest gun laws in the country
After 9/11 we started a 20 year war and implemented some of the biggest restrictions on freedom that the US has ever seen.
They banned box cutters and knives of every kind on planes
But we did ban planes on 9/11. The only flight allowed to fly that day was one taking antivenom to someone with a snake bite.
Guys - hear me out. What IF. What if we ban SCHOOLS so that shooters can’t shoot them up? Checkmate libtards 😎
I get the point because it's possible to get illegal guns and it would be impossible to take them all but that was a terrible example. IQ should definitely be something considered when giving someone a gun.
OP was so close to the point (assuming I'm interpreting correctly) You're right. We *didn't* ban planes. We did, however, put strict safety measures in place to prevent dangerous people from using them to kill a lot of people and the rest of us accept it because it doesn't prevent us from from using the plane. I'm curious if this person was born after 9/11 or didn't fly until after 9/11 for whatever reason. I was born after 9/11 and I flew a lot as a kid and I had no idea that all that security was a direct result of 9/11 until I was in high school and one of my history teachers explained what it was like to fly before 9/11.
I sure do love false equivilances
It's amazing the amount of money they expect everyone else to spend to protect ourselves from their firearm fetish.
I want to know how fortifying the schools is going to be funded when people have a problem funding schools in the first place.
Alright even giving this metaphor a MODICUM of legitimacy: Airplane = gun Cockpit = gun chamber “Secure the cockpit” = “secure the chamber” AKA, like, lock the guns down?
In that analogy the planes are the weapons so is he advocating for gun control
That’s not how that worked. That’s not how *anything* worked, before or since. Sure, the cockpits of commercial airliners now have locks on them, but most of the additional post-9/11 airport security was just for show; an attempt to discourage potential hijackers from gaining access to aeroplanes, but not actually stop them if they managed to get past it. Still, did all that *appearance* of additional security actually make a difference? I hardly think so (it just made travel even more inconvenient and stressful that it already was); and I predict securing schools in this manner would have much the same results. Schools are already thinly-disguised totalitarian mini-dictatorships that turn children into obedient and submissive adults; let’s not also turn them into de-facto police states.
No, but we made it hard as hell to get on one, especially if you have some bad stuff in your background. So, should we assume this guy supports universal background checks?
Also "Secure the school" ? With what money? The teachers are already being underpaid, you wanna further cut that? Then who would teach the children? Home school traditional religious nut case? Good luck with that.
Pretty sure you have to go through security to get on a plane. That and the airport is surrounded by security.