56 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

Toomey-Manchin was the weakest token effort you could imagine after Sandy Hook. All it did was expand background checks. It was filibustered in the Senate by Republicans. 

How do you "compromise" with that? After the last major mass school shooting, House Republicans were trying to tie concealed carry reciprocity (meaning the state with the weakest CCW laws get to dictate who can carry nationally, essentially) passed. Where is the middle ground between "more guns, everywhere, all the time" and "literally anything to control guns"? What's the big money, big political force anti-gun lobby comparable to the NRA?

Looking back at that vote, other than a couple Senators, it was a mostly straight down party line vote, just like every other important bill it seems.  Then maybe it shouldn't have brought it for vote yet if it was obviously gonna be filibustered.

I don't know where the middle ground is given how many guns are already out there, you can't just pull an Australia in this country and take away all guns.  But instead we just keep repeating this voting cycle, where one side is a majority, passes some laws, the voters get pissed and make the other side majority, then they vote in different laws, rinse and repeat. 

2 minutes ago, raBBit said:

 

One person died in Charlottesville and the person was attacking someone's car. It's not a tragedy. It's scumbag on criminal death. No one cares about these white surpremacists. They wield no power whatsoever and are virtually nonexistent. The only reason people know about them is because left wingers are obsessed with bringing them because it fits there "everyone is racist" narrative.

Watch the video. Some chubby, lonely and demented kid is driving his car in an alley when a bunch of protesters started attacking his car. He gets scared and a protester died. This isn't exactly the Nice attack.

 

Holy shit you're actually straight-up defending him and attacking the victim.

 

Go back to 4chan with your buddy.

1 minute ago, raBBit said:

Republicans who aren't in office in all of the major cities are suppose to be the ones stopping it? 

One person died in Charlottesville and the person was attacking someone's car. It's not a tragedy. It's scumbag on criminal death. No one cares about these white surpremacists. They wield no power whatsoever and are virtually nonexistent. The only reason people know about them is because left wingers are obsessed with bringing them because it fits there "everyone is racist" narrative.

Watch the video. Some chubby, lonely and demented kid is driving his car in an alley when a bunch of protesters started attacking his car. He gets scared and a protester died. This isn't exactly the Nice attack.

Now do you states are the best sample here?

I never said anything about states. Check out cities and come back.

You never said cities. You said areas. 

5 minutes ago, raBBit said:

 

Now do you states are the best sample here?

I never said anything about states. Check out cities and come back.

 

It's a dumb tangent, but your argument makes zero sense anyway. Strange how you completely avoided addressing that. Something something doesn't fit the narrative.

 

In case you missed it, 2019's comment and the report I linked are about ideologically driven violence. Saying "well blue cities have higher rates" has nothing at all to do with that. Violence committed by right-wing extremists for right-wing ideological reasons, like the murderer you keep downplaying at Charlottesville or Dylan Roof or a number of other examples, has been on the rise for years. Where is the comparable left-wing violence that 2019 is so afraid of if he was doxxed? A guy getting booed out of Cheesecake Factory?

Edited May 18, 20187 yr by StrangeSox

5 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

Holy shit you're actually straight-up defending him and attacking the victim.

 

Go back to 4chan with your buddy.

There are more members of white supremacist groups than MS-13 In this country. 

5 minutes ago, RockRaines said:

Schools can not afford basic supplies or payroll for their teachers, where is this money going to come from?

Have a political rep advocate for it! A much easier sell than changing gun control laws, an effort that has failed for decades despite numerous tragedies. Again, try something different if we're not satisfied with the change in gun laws. Try a different angle to prevent/limit the problem. Why continue to focus (solely) on an issue that has zero chance of changing in the short term. Why not try something that actually has a chance?

11 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

If Toomey -Manchin couldn't pass after Sandy Hook, what sort of compromise do you imagine could ever be reached?

Not on gun control obviously. But maybe some of the other measures people are talking about: funding for security at schools and such.

10 minutes ago, RockRaines said:

Schools can not afford basic supplies or payroll for their teachers, where is this money going to come from?

Since the poiliticians won't fund gun control maybe they will create a special fund for school improvements

3 minutes ago, ptatc said:

Not on gun control obviously. But maybe some of the other measures people are talking about: funding for security at schools and such.

Quote

Officials at a school district where a shooting occurred Friday sent a letter to parents and staff in the wake of the Parkland shooting detailing their security measures.

Authorities respond to a school shooting at Santa Fe High School in Texas on May 18, 2018. (Credit: KTRK via CNN)

The Santa Fe Independent School District sent the letter on Feb. 16, two days after 17 people were killed at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.

On Friday, a shooter or shooters opened fire at Santa Fe High School southeast of Houston, killing up to 10 people. Two people, believed to be students, were detained.

"As we reflect over the disturbing event and tragic loss of lives in the Florida High School this week, our hearts are extended to the families and loved ones of the many individuals affected," the February letter from the superintendent, Leigh Wall, reads. "We are sensitive to concerns surrounding school safety and want to reassure you of the preparedness of our students and staff regarding our district Crisis Management Plan and the safety measures that are in place in the Santa Fe ISD."

The letter goes on the detail safety measures throughout the district, which includes two elementary schools, a junior high and Santa Fe High School. The measures include visitor tracking systems, security vestibule entrances, security cameras and an emergency warning and announcement system.

The district has seven full time and five part time officers "all trained in current nationally standardized protocols to respond to emergency and active shooter situations," the letter states. All employees of the district participate in drills throughout the year.

The letter ends with a reminder to parents and students to report safety concerns to the school district's police department.

Sigh.

11 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

 

It's a dumb tangent, but your argument makes zero sense anyway. Strange how you completely avoided addressing that. Something something doesn't fit the narrative.

 

In case you missed it, 2019's comment and the report I linked are about ideologically driven violence. Saying "well blue cities have higher rates" has nothing at all to do with that. Violence committed by right-wing extremists for right-wing ideological reasons, like the murderer you keep downplaying at Charlottesville or Dylan Roof or a number of other examples, has been on the rise for years. Where is the comparable left-wing violence that 2019 is so afraid of if he was doxxed? A guy getting booed out of Cheesecake Factory?

Antifa broke a couple windows and turned over a garbage can and we may never hear the end of it.

 

12 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

Yea but here you are arguing that the slippery slope led to an extremely smart safety measure with belts like thats a bad thing.   If the slippery slope with gun control leads to a guy losing his guns because he has a history of mental illness or anger issues, i really dont see what the problem is.  

 

And thats the crux here, 2A people want full and unfettered control of their weapons with zero checks or balances, and thats just not anything i can understand.   Dangerous things need to have safety measures for everyone.  

I agree with this.

 

Just because you don't see a problem with the "slippery slope of gun control" doesn't mean that those you do don't have justifiable concerns.

 

Why up until a couple years ago, was there no need for metal detectors and armed guards and locked doors at schools? There were mentally ill people back then.  

Fix the cause of the problem. Locking the door and buying a metal detector is maybe a start. Might save a life or 2, but this needs to stoop.

Edited May 18, 20187 yr by Dick Allen

The problem is now these schools are opening up the door to lawsuits. They get immunity, but not for willful and wanton conduct.

8 minutes ago, RockRaines said:

There are more members of white supremacist groups than MS-13 In this country. 

Have any of these recent shootings been committed by members of white supremacist groups?

 

they seem to be more personal than ideological.

8 minutes ago, Jenksismyhero said:

Have a political rep advocate for it! A much easier sell than changing gun control laws, an effort that has failed for decades despite numerous tragedies. Again, try something different if we're not satisfied with the change in gun laws. Try a different angle to prevent/limit the problem. Why continue to focus (solely) on an issue that has zero chance of changing in the short term. Why not try something that actually has a chance?

We had better control a couple of decades ago.  Its not impossible.

I agree something has to be done, but its more than adding some locks to schools.  Mass shootings are happening everywhere.  If its not the gun itself, you need to work on making sure the politicians reflect what the people want, which is more common sense control over who owns these weapons.

My disgust with all politicians just grows by the day.  We put these people in place to be representatives of the people and they are anything but.  Its sickening.

5 minutes ago, ptatc said:

I agree with this.

 

Just because you don't see a problem with the "slippery slope of gun control" doesn't mean that those you do don't have justifiable concerns.

 

People who are upset with more vetting and certification for owning a gun are exactly the people who shouldnt own a gun.  More laws wouldnt impact me in the slightest with mine.

Just now, RockRaines said:

We had better control a couple of decades ago.  Its not impossible.

I agree something has to be done, but its more than adding some locks to schools.  Mass shootings are happening everywhere.  If its not the gun itself, you need to work on making sure the politicians reflect what the people want, which is more common sense control over who owns these weapons.

However, the politicians don't seem to want to act. If the politicians won't do anything, can something else be done?

 

Just now, RockRaines said:

My disgust with all politicians just grows by the day.  We put these people in place to be representatives of the people and they are anything but.  Its sickening.

The ones who are in office and in power are representing their constituents quite well in this case.

4 minutes ago, ptatc said:

Have any of these recent shootings been committed by members of white supremacist groups?

 

they seem to be more personal than ideological.

Specifically the school shootings I don't think so, but other shootings and violence absolutely.

this topic I posted back in February:

A little while back, Dylan Roof. There were some anti-government extremists who murdered a cop during the original Cliven Bundy stuff. There have been planned parenthood shooters. Just yesterday it was reported that the Las Vegas shooter had been talking about FEMA camps and the government coming to take his guns.

From PBS last year:

U.S. sees 300 violent attacks inspired by far right every year

Just now, ptatc said:

However, the politicians don't seem to want to act. If the politicians won't do anything, can something else be done?

Vote their asses out.

Just now, RockRaines said:

People who are upset with more vetting and certification for owning a gun are exactly the people who shouldnt own a gun.  More laws wouldnt impact me in the slightest with mine.

I fully agree with this. I don't have a problem with it personally.

My entire point is that when people say, "the slippery slope" complaint won't happen in this case. i think they are wrong. Once the barrier of gun control is broken down, the regulations will be much greater then these. 

1 minute ago, BigSqwert said:

 

god I hate to think this way, but tactically, what a setup for a shooter that would be. You get position and either you have a stampede when you take your first shot, or you have all of your targets trapped, or funneled into a single area.