19 Children and 2 Adults Killed In Texas Elementary School Mass Shooting.

[AUDynasty 585]

12 minutes ago, autigeremt said:

No we should be “resigned” to attacking the root cause of the problem and not a symptom. Once again the left is lazy as hell and the right is beholden. It’s not Gun Control we should be after it’s people control. 
 

pass your laws…..government has proven it can’t control that either 

The United States has produced 288 mass shootings in this year alone. The second? Mexico with just eight. How do you account that the U.S. has 36 times more mass shootings over our neighboring country?

At the very least, we can ban AR-15 guns right now.

Requiring a universal background check would be something. Are you okay with letting things as it stands right now? C'mon.

[aubiefifty 16,766]

lets be clear here the right is the problem. the republicans are the problem. this crap has been going on way too long. dems have pretty much always been for better gun control and legislation. WHO always stops it? and be honest. i understand some do not want a right taken away. but if you cannot protect the young and the old do we deserve it? praying makes us feel better and absolves of guilt. there are many things that can be done but it is going to be a long and hard road to do so. if it ever gets done. and if you are not willing to compromise to lower or stop this mess then YOU are part of the problem. in the mean time now kids will never feel safe in school again and if you guys think that is not gonna trigger a ton of issues. and what about the people that witness this mess? they will never be the same. what about the mothers? what about the parents telling their kids school will be safe here. i wonder if they cry out for their mother or father when they lay on the floor dying? and what really enrages me is all the folks on the right making fun of the school kids who tried to stand up and get something done. they were crucified in the press. have you people forgotten about that? i hope the names of the fifty pols that refuse to move gun legislation forward get highlighted here. they should be charged accessories to murder. and those fighting any gun laws or restrictions have blood on their hands as well. this crap should have been handled years ago. ask a cop how they feel about todays fun laws. i mean you guys are pro police right? they have been thrown under the bus as well. this is sad and the way we handle this is ugly. many of you could care less and we know it. i just wish you guys had to view the dead bodies and then have to sit down and discuss to the parents why they do not want to enact on any meaningful changes. this is a crap show and you can denie it all you want but at the end of the day kids are dying.

[AUDynasty 585]

My God. This just breaks my heart.

[CoffeeTiger 5,102]

15 minutes ago, autigeremt said:

You’re right. Government has a great track record at keeping these out of the wrong hands. But we can sure as hell send that kid off to die in battle with one of these so you can feel better. 

 

What does that have to do with anything? 

Yeah, the military industrial complex and our war lobby sucks and is bad too, but that has nothing to do the ease of which regular civilians can buy weapons and use them to commit mass murder on innocent American civilians.  

Last I checked, nobody was joining the military and going through boot camp, weapons training, and deployment just to have access to weapons that they could similarly get in their hometown on a Saturday evening with no training or restrictions. We'd be a lot better off if a person DID have to actually join the military or something like a..i don't know.... 'well regulated militia' to have access to these weapons...but alas. 

[CoffeeTiger 5,102]

 

 

36 minutes ago, autigeremt said:

No we should be “resigned” to attacking the root cause of the problem and not a symptom. Once again the left is lazy as hell and the right is beholden. It’s not Gun Control we should be after it’s people control. 
 

pass your laws…..government has proven it can’t control that either 

 

 

"The left is so lazy with it's proposed solutions and calls to action." 

 

Meanwhile, Republican congressmembers are literally throwing their hands in the air and saying "Eh, nothing we can do."

 

 

 

[johnnyAU 3,630]

I am not a gun enthusiast, but I know several and they are by far the safest, most responsible when it comes to ownership. However, I am fairly ignorant of the requirements/laws. 

I have never actually purchased a firearm, but you'd think some sort of background check and waiting period would universally acceptable. This could much more stringent for weapons like the AR-15, but shouldn't be impossible.

How about if any weapons are used in a violent crime that are licensed to you, even if not used by you, then you are also responsible? (Granted that likely already exists, but just in case it does not...)

In addition, why not have the requirement of passing some safety training for first time purchasers?

As far as mental health is concerned, I wish I knew what the solution was. Social media and the 24/7 access to information from anywhere surely has given significant rise the issues. Having kids of my own coming of age right as smart phones were becoming popular was eye-opening for us as parents. Scary stuff.

 

[icanthearyou 4,462]

A society that is actively producing extreme inequality, one in which corporate welfare exceeds social welfare, is going to have problems.  When you inject advanced weaponry, you will have death.

I wish my Republican friends would admit, social programs are not socialism.  Social programs are investments in our society.  They pay dividends.  They promote a more peaceful and prosperous existence.

Do you want to build outstanding schools or maximum security prisons?

If you truly want a better society, you have to structurally build it.  The idea of dumping guns into a fractured society and then, locking up millions of people is self defeating. 

If you truly wish to solve the problem, you have to prevent crime, not merely punish crime.  An expanding prison system is a continuous drain on society.  Let's move the money to social programs that prevent crime.  Let's genuinely promote harmony, not confrontation and contention.

 

[GoAU 1,600]

50 minutes ago, AUDynasty said:

So, are we resigned to accepting a ritual sacrifice by lottery with guns? And to tell these grieving parents that it's just a cost of living in America? Kids will continue to die, with inaction? Sharing these tweets or messages of "Thoughts and prayers"?

There is a bill -- H.R. 8 -- that would require an universal background check for every gun sale. Are you in favor of that? And what about legislation on supporting and funding mental health issues? 

The point is that we cannot continue to live like this. This year, so far, has witnessed more kids killed in schools than cops have been killed in the line of duty. Let that sink in.  

Ridiculous.

No, nor one is “resigning” to anything, but abandoning our Constitution and individual liberty is short sighted, lazy, and would also be ineffective.  
 

Regarding HR 8 - how exactly would private party sales be enforced without creating a national registry?  You are aware that these checks have failed on numerous occasions as well?   For example Hunter Biden….

14 minutes ago, AUDynasty said:

The United States has produced 288 mass shootings in this year alone. The second? Mexico with just eight. How do you account that the U.S. has 36 times more mass shootings over our neighboring country?

At the very least, we can ban AR-15 guns right now.

Requiring a universal background check would be something. Are you okay with letting things as it stands right now? C'mon.

The main problems with these “statistics is the intellectual dishonesty behind them.  Suicides, accidents, and defensive shootings are all lumped in.  Heck, even the term Mass Shooting is redefined frequently to fit a narrative. 
 

Banning AR-15s will fix nothing.  Go ahead and admit your intent will just be to ban all guns - whether one at a time or all at once, your end state doesn’t change. 

9 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

lets be clear here the right is the problem. the republicans are the problem. this crap has been going on way too long. dems have pretty much always been for better gun control and legislation. WHO always stops it? and be honest. i understand some do not want a right taken away. but if you cannot protect the young and the old do we deserve it? praying makes us feel better and absolves of guilt. there are many things that can be done but it is going to be a long and hard road to do so. if it ever gets done. and if you are not willing to compromise to lower or stop this mess then YOU are part of the problem. in the mean time now kids will never feel safe in school again and if you guys think that is not gonna trigger a ton of issues. and what about the people that witness this mess? they will never be the same. what about the mothers? what about the parents telling their kids school will be safe here. i wonder if they cry out for their mother or father when they lay on the floor dying? and what really enrages me is all the folks on the right making fun of the school kids who tried to stand up and get something done. they were crucified in the press. have you people forgotten about that? i hope the names of the fifty pols that refuse to move gun legislation forward get highlighted here. they should be charged accessories to murder. and those fighting any gun laws or restrictions have blood on their hands as well. this crap should have been handled years ago. ask a cop how they feel about todays fun laws. i mean you guys are pro police right? they have been thrown under the bus as well. this is sad and the way we handle this is ugly. many of you could care less and we know it. i just wish you guys had to view the dead bodies and then have to sit down and discuss to the parents why they do not want to enact on any meaningful changes. this is a crap show and you can denie it all you want but at the end of the day kids are dying.

This rant and assigning the blame to the right is silly.  I will admit the dems have been for gun control for a long time, but also pathetically weak on enforcing laws already on the books, dealing with crime and securing the border.  If you want to save kids lives, how about getting tough on drugs again, securing our borders from the drug traffickers, and addressing the opioid and fentanyl crisis- you’d have a much bigger impact.  Look at the crime rates and left leaning areas when compared to the right and tell me who is protecting people more.   
 

All the cops I know are in favor of more, not less gun ownership.  But stop pretending like you care what the police say, the libs have been demonizing them  for years.  
 

4 minutes ago, AUDynasty said:

My God. This just breaks my heart.

“Military style” is pandering with political motive.  Any firearm can create wounds of that type.  As a matter of fact hunting rifles or shotguns at that range could produce wound just as, and likely more, significant.   
 

 

[AU9377 4,927]

42 minutes ago, autigeremt said:

You’re right. Government has a great track record at keeping these out of the wrong hands. But we can sure as hell send that kid off to die in battle with one of these so you can feel better. 

You can send him off to battle because he is in the armed forces.  I trust that the U.S. military won't be stopping by an elementary school and killing a classroom full of 9 year olds.  Yes, some people will get their hands on these that shouldn't have them, but it won't be a disturbed 18 year old that shoots his grandmother and then does this.  People will still do horrible things.  As a society, we have to address that.  However, to pretend that reducing the number of these weapons is not part of the solution is just preposterous. 

This happens HERE in the United States.  This doesn't happen in Australia, Canada, Japan, France, Italy, Germany or any other civilized country on the planet.  The kid can't buy a beer because we don't trust that he has the judgment to drink responsibly, yet we let him buy those guns?  Justify that, please.

[GoAU 1,600]

4 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

A society that is actively producing extreme inequality, one in which corporate welfare exceeds social welfare, is going to have problems.  When you inject advanced weaponry, you will have death.

I wish my Republican friends would admit, social programs are not socialism.  Social programs are investments in our society.  They pay dividends.  They promote a more peaceful and prosperous existence.

Do you want to build outstanding schools or maximum security prisons?

If you truly want a better society, you have to structurally build it.  The idea of dumping guns into a fractured society and then, locking up millions of people is self defeating. 

If you truly wish to solve the problem, you have to prevent crime, not merely punish crime.  An expanding prison system is a continuous drain on society.  Let's move the money to social programs that prevent crime.  Let's genuinely promote harmony, not confrontation and contention.

 

This is something I could definitely get behind.  There is a lot we can do and would support an investment in the right kinds of programs.   
 

[CoffeeTiger 5,102]

4 minutes ago, johnnyAU said:

I am not a gun enthusiast, but I know several and they are by far the safest, most responsible when it comes to ownership. However, I am fairly ignorant of the requirements/laws. 

I have never actually purchased a firearm, but you'd think some sort of background check and waiting period would universally acceptable. This could much more stringent for weapons like the AR-15, but shouldn't be impossible.

How about if any weapons are used in a violent crime that are licensed to you, even if not used by you, then you are also responsible? (Granted that likely already exists, but just in case it does not...)

In addition, why not have the requirement of passing some safety training for first time purchasers?

As far as mental health is concerned, I wish I knew what the solution was. Social media and the 24/7 access to information from anywhere surely has given significant rise the issues. Having kids of my own coming of age right as smart phones were becoming popular was eye-opening for us as parents. Scary stuff.

 

 

Very good post. 

The reality is that a vast majority of gun owners are responsible and safe in their use and ownership of firearms. The unfortunate reality is that due to the nature of guns, all it takes in one person with bad intentions to cause a large amount of death and destruction with them. That's one of the big debates we have every time there is a school or mass shooting. 

"Why should responsible gun owners have to have any limits/restrictions/inconvenience placed on them due to the actions of this other bad person?". That's the primary excuse  we get whenever this stuff happens on why more gun laws or regulations can't be passed or considered in America. They then pretend that guns have nothing to do with shootings, and that's just a people problem, which is obviously faulty logic, but it's just the circle of tragedy, inaction, more tragedy that our country is trapped in. 

 

You'd be unfortunately wrong on many of your assumptions though.  universal background checks and waiting periods are far from universally accepted. In fact those laws are only in place in a few of the more liberal states in America. A majority of America doesn't require background checks for private gun purchases, and waiting period laws are only a thing in 10 States currently. 

If you voluntarily give your gun to someone who then commits a crime then you can be held criminally liable, but if your gun is stolen (even if you are negligent and don't secure or lock up your weapon and make it easily stolen) and that gun is used for a crime then you are generally not held liable. That is why gun theft is such a common problem in America and why it's a problem that gun owners generally aren't legally required to protect, or secure their firearms from theft.  

 

Any type of required training or liability laws or gun ownership registry is strictly opposed by Republicans and the gun lobby. The entire gun lobby propaganda campaign has been to manipulate Americans into believing that the 2nd Amendment is intended to guarantee easy access to guns for just about anyone who wants one. Any laws or restrictions that would encroach on this idea is flagged as tyrannical and as the government trying to take away all our guns. 

It's a sad, vicious, never ending cycle. 

[autigeremt 6,600]

21 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

 

 

 

 

"The left is so lazy with it's proposed solutions and calls to action." 

 

Meanwhile, Republican congressmembers are literally throwing their hands in the air and saying "Eh, nothing we can do."

 

 

 

Your “solutions” won’t work in this bent society.

[GoAU 1,600]

2 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

You can send him off to battle because he is in the armed forces.  I trust that the U.S. military won't be stopping by an elementary school and killing a classroom full of 9 year olds.  Yes, some people will get their hands on these that shouldn't have them, but it won't be a disturbed 18 year old that shoots his grandmother and then does this.  People will still do horrible things.  As a society, we have to address that.  However, to pretend that reducing the number of these weapons is not part of the solution is just preposterous. 

This happens HERE in the United States.  This doesn't happen in Australia, Canada, Japan, France, Italy, Germany or any other civilized country on the planet.  The kid can't buy a beer because we don't trust that he has the judgment to drink responsibly, yet we let him buy those guns?  Justify that, please.

This is an area I could see compromise on. The 18 & 21 year age requirements seem haphazard at best.  Perhaps for those that are in the military the age for drinking & buying guns is when you enlist, for all others it’s 21?

Or, make booze, tobacco, firearms and voting all 21?   We seem to have an issue with kids “growing up” these days anyway.  
 

The military seems to speed up the process and is why I made my first suggestion 

[AU9377 4,927]

3 minutes ago, GoAU said:

No, nor one is “resigning” to anything, but abandoning our Constitution and individual liberty is short sighted, lazy, and would also be ineffective.  
 

Regarding HR 8 - how exactly would private party sales be enforced without creating a national registry?  You are aware that these checks have failed on numerous occasions as well?   For example Hunter Biden….

The main problems with these “statistics is the intellectual dishonesty behind them.  Suicides, accidents, and defensive shootings are all lumped in.  Heck, even the term Mass Shooting is redefined frequently to fit a narrative. 
 

Banning AR-15s will fix nothing.  Go ahead and admit your intent will just be to ban all guns - whether one at a time or all at once, your end state doesn’t change. 

This rant and assigning the blame to the right is silly.  I will admit the dems have been for gun control for a long time, but also pathetically weak on enforcing laws already on the books, dealing with crime and securing the border.  If you want to save kids lives, how about getting tough on drugs again, securing our borders from the drug traffickers, and addressing the opioid and fentanyl crisis- you’d have a much bigger impact.  Look at the crime rates and left leaning areas when compared to the right and tell me who is protecting people more.   
 

All the cops I know are in favor of more, not less gun ownership.  But stop pretending like you care what the police say, the libs have been demonizing them  for years.  
 

“Military style” is pandering with political motive.  Any firearm can create wounds of that type.  As a matter of fact hunting rifles or shotguns at that range could produce wound just as, and likely more, significant.   
 

 

The 2nd Amendment reads..."A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is clearly stated.  That purpose is to ensure the existence of a Militia in order to provide for the safety of a free State.  The British, prior to the American Revolution had enforced a law that required all firearms be turned over to the King's forces.  That is what the founders were intent on never happening.

By the way, those AR style guns are much easier to use than shotguns and rifles.  They have very little recoil compared to either and they don't require time consuming reloading.  That reloading time provides some degree of an opportunity to stop a shooting of this magnitude.

[autigeremt 6,600]

43 minutes ago, AUDynasty said:

The United States has produced 288 mass shootings in this year alone. The second? Mexico with just eight. How do you account that the U.S. has 36 times more mass shootings over our neighboring country?

At the very least, we can ban AR-15 guns right now.

Requiring a universal background check would be something. Are you okay with letting things as it stands right now? C'mon.

We have background checks. Red Flag laws didn’t help New York. Time after time we see that the laws didn’t work but by Damn let’s create more. Laziness 

[icanthearyou 4,462]

8 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

You can send him off to battle because he is in the armed forces.  I trust that the U.S. military won't be stopping by an elementary school and killing a classroom full of 9 year olds.  Yes, some people will get their hands on these that shouldn't have them, but it won't be a disturbed 18 year old that shoots his grandmother and then does this.  People will still do horrible things.  As a society, we have to address that.  However, to pretend that reducing the number of these weapons is not part of the solution is just preposterous. 

This happens HERE in the United States.  This doesn't happen in Australia, Canada, Japan, France, Italy, Germany or any other civilized country on the planet.  The kid can't buy a beer because we don't trust that he has the judgment to drink responsibly, yet we let him buy those guns?  Justify that, please.

Hard to believe you would have to explain that to a functioning adult. 

You did it well.  Thank you.

[AU9377 4,927]

2 minutes ago, GoAU said:

This is an area I could see compromise on. The 18 & 21 year age requirements seem haphazard at best.  Perhaps for those that are in the military the age for drinking & buying guns is when you enlist, for all others it’s 21?

Or, make booze, tobacco, firearms and voting all 21?   We seem to have an issue with kids “growing up” these days anyway.  
 

The military seems to speed up the process and is why I made my first suggestion 

That would be an amazing step forward.   I would consider someone that has had military training to be much more entitled to own an AR than some random kid.

[autigeremt 6,600]

1 minute ago, AU9377 said:

The 2nd Amendment reads..."A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is clearly stated.  That purpose is to ensure the existence of a Militia in order to provide for the safety of a free State.  The British, prior to the American Revolution had enforced a law that required all firearms be turned over to the King's forces.  That is what the founders were intent on never happening.

By the way, those AR style guns are much easier to use than shotguns and rifles.  They have very little recoil compared to either and they don't require time consuming reloading.  That reloading time provides some degree of an opportunity to stop a shooting of this magnitude.

For the laymen shooter yes. 

[GoAU 1,600]

1 minute ago, AU9377 said:

The 2nd Amendment reads..."A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is clearly stated.  That purpose is to ensure the existence of a Militia in order to provide for the safety of a free State.  The British, prior to the American Revolution had enforced a law that required all firearms be turned over to the King's forces.  That is what the founders were intent on never happening.

By the way, those AR style guns are much easier to use than shotguns and rifles.  They have very little recoil compared to either and they don't require time consuming reloading.  That reloading time provides some degree of an opportunity to stop a shooting of this magnitude.

The militia in the writing of the constitution was referring to the general population.  
 

I am well aware of how an AR-15 works. As much as you’d like to think that it is the only magazine fed, semi automatic firearm in existence, it isn’t. 

[autigeremt 6,600]

2 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

Hard to believe you would have to explain that to a functioning adult. 

You did it well.  Thank you.

nice shot at me mr facepalm 

[icanthearyou 4,462]

1 minute ago, autigeremt said:

We have background checks. Red Flag laws didn’t help New York. Time after time we see that the laws didn’t work but by Damn let’s create more. Laziness 

The laws in place have been unduly influenced or, outright dictated by the gun lobby.  Of course they will not be effective.

Your argument is lazy.  Worse, it is simply inhumane. 

[autigeremt 6,600]

4 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

The laws in place have been unduly influenced or, outright dictated by the gun lobby.  Of course they will not be effective.

Your argument is lazy.  Worse, it is simply inhumane. 

So Democrats creating the laws and passing the laws have no moral compass? Noted…….

[AU9377 4,927]

8 minutes ago, GoAU said:

The militia in the writing of the constitution was referring to the general population.  
 

I am well aware of how an AR-15 works. As much as you’d like to think that it is the only magazine fed, semi automatic firearm in existence, it isn’t. 

I know it isn't, but perfect cannot be the enemy of good if we are ever going to make progress.  We had an assault weapons ban in this country until a few years ago. I believe it expired in 2004.  It barred magazines that held more than 10 rounds by civilians.  It prohibited the manufacture or sale for civilian use of certain semi-automatic weapons.  Nobody was walking around in 2003 feeling as though they couldn't defend themselves.  That ban was constitutional then and would clearly be today.

We have got to stop making everything about the letter next to someone's name on a ballot.  THAT is killing this country.  We are all Americans and we all need to do all we can to make this country a place worthy of leaving for future generations.  Instead, too many seem content with getting all they can and leaving the place debt ridden and some modern version of the wild West.

Edited May 25, 2022 by AU9377

[icanthearyou 4,462]

2 minutes ago, autigeremt said:

So Democrats creating the laws and passing the laws have no moral compass? Noted…….

Please, stop it.  You are making yourself more foolish by the moment.  You know, neither party, no politician, makes laws in a vacuum.

You know the economic and political forces at work.

 

[aubiefifty 16,766]

9 minutes ago, GoAU said:

No, nor one is “resigning” to anything, but abandoning our Constitution and individual liberty is short sighted, lazy, and would also be ineffective.  
 

Regarding HR 8 - how exactly would private party sales be enforced without creating a national registry?  You are aware that these checks have failed on numerous occasions as well?   For example Hunter Biden….

The main problems with these “statistics is the intellectual dishonesty behind them.  Suicides, accidents, and defensive shootings are all lumped in.  Heck, even the term Mass Shooting is redefined frequently to fit a narrative. 
 

Banning AR-15s will fix nothing.  Go ahead and admit your intent will just be to ban all guns - whether one at a time or all at once, your end state doesn’t change. 

This rant and assigning the blame to the right is silly.  I will admit the dems have been for gun control for a long time, but also pathetically weak on enforcing laws already on the books, dealing with crime and securing the border.  If you want to save kids lives, how about getting tough on drugs again, securing our borders from the drug traffickers, and addressing the opioid and fentanyl crisis- you’d have a much bigger impact.  Look at the crime rates and left leaning areas when compared to the right and tell me who is protecting people more.   
 

All the cops I know are in favor of more, not less gun ownership.  But stop pretending like you care what the police say, the libs have been demonizing them  for years.  
 

“Military style” is pandering with political motive.  Any firearm can create wounds of that type.  As a matter of fact hunting rifles or shotguns at that range could produce wound just as, and likely more, significant.   
 

 

first off i am a gun owner. and you are wrong about cops and guns. i have heard them state how much more dangerous their job is now so enough with that unless you have a link. those school kids are just as important as babies. as for the border less folks are coming across than ever before in our history. as far as demonizing cops we are for doing the right thing like not murdering someone that does not have a gun. i have family that were in law enforcement civilian and military.if you go to the control room in anniston popo department you will see an american flag with a blue stripe on it that i gifted them when they were under a lot of heat.  you can come up with all the lame  excuses you want but you just cannot compare mass murder to other things. the fact is your choice does not trump the rights everyday citizens to keep from getting their ass shot off everytime you leave the house. all i can see is a selfish person who does not care what happens to others as long as they get to keep a certain type of gun. and before you continue to sling mistruths about my family you should ask first. i will tell you. again i am a gun owner but we need real laws that are steps forward in protecting folks. is it hard for you to try to seek a solution other than basically calling someone a liar and watching kids get murdered in cold blood. it is going to happen over and over again until something is done. so you are basically saying you are ok with that? can you really have it both ways? come on man. tell me your number of children deaths before you realize you could have been trying to find a solution?