Once again, a school, a shooter....and we do the drill yet again.....

[ShirikiUtundu]

So the solution would be expand access to and affordability of mental healthcare and perhaps improving the ratio of guidance counselors to students to better support individual students that might be at risk? Great, lets do that!

But it's so much easier to point out all the problems and fix zero of them!

 

[jalapeno_pretzel]

Do you guys see how much common ground there is? I come from a totally different position, but I agree with taxman that there should be Universal Background checks, and I agree with VandVsmama that there should be better access to mental health care and student counseling services! And, I believe there are many out there that would agree. So why can't we get some of those things that have wide agreement and support accomplished?

 

[sam_gordon]

So why can't we get some of those things that have wide agreement and support accomplished?

Just my opinion, but the folks who actually have some power to do something spend too much time listening to the outliers because they're too concerned about losing the power they have.

 

[sam_gordon]

@MrsPete touched on the problem with these numbers. They count all shootings on school property, and if you read the one-line descriptions attached, they're not generally what we think of as school shootings. They're a student shot in the parking lot by a stray bullet and a kid who was expelled seeking revenge against a specific staff member and drug/gang disputes and even accidental discharges. In the 90s, there are a couple of incidents prior to Columbine that foreshadow the kind of mass shooting events that have become so sadly common, but practically every shooting before that and most (by number of incidents, not victim count) now stem from targeted violence.

I get that and don't dispute it. Problems are going to happen when you classify anything. IIRC a "mass shooting" is when four or more people die. But was it a "gang" shootout? Or did someone want their 15 minutes of fame?

The WHY is very important after these incidents. If we can figure out the WHY, we may be able to stop them. However, many times (most?), we never get to a "why".

 

[jalapeno_pretzel]

Well, I just wrote both my senators with the proposals that taxman, VandVsmama, and I share in common - of the universal background checks and the mental healthcare improvements. Seriously, this thread has me feeling a tiny bit more optimistic that there could possibly be some changes that many would agree on and could at least put a small dent in the problem. I mean sure, it will be too little for some and too much for others, but isn't compromise what we need in order to get things done?

 

[mrodgers]

Maybe you are in one of the states I listed that closed the gun show loophole and all sales at gun shows require background checks?

It sounds like your main objection to closing this loophole is that I have used the standard terminology of 'gun show loophole' while you very correctly note that this is a loop hole of all private gun sales - not only those conducted at gun shows (in many states). Maybe if it is called 'private gun sales background check loophole' it would be more correct and comprehensive.

"Gun show loophole" is only a standard terminology in the obvious feeding of the narrative to you. Along with the "majority agree" comment you've made in many of your posts, it is clear why discussions can not happen honestly. Goal post move noted. Continue with the narrative fed to entice your feelz. I'm out.

 

[jalapeno_pretzel]

"Gun show loophole" is only a standard terminology in the obvious feeding of the narrative to you. Along with the "majority agree" comment you've made in many of your posts, it is clear why discussions can not happen honestly. Goal post move noted. Continue with the narrative fed to entice your feelz. I'm out.

Lol, moving the goalposts. It seems like you are more interested in terminology than in solving the problem. Closing the gunshow loophole/private sales loophole/universal background checks are all basically equivalent things to me

 

[mrodgers]

Lol, moving the goalposts. It seems like you are more interested in terminology than in solving the problem. Closing the gunshow loophole/private sales loophole/universal background checks are all basically equivalent things to me

Exactly. Things that are not the same things are equivalent to you. Can't have an honest conversation like that when you talk of one thing, then when called out on it, state you were talking another thing. That is moving the goalpost.

I am interested in solving the problem. I'm attempting to solve a problem, which is misinformation. Can't solve problem X when you're talking about Y.

Others on the other hand are talking solutions that won't help the problem, such as you are attempting to do. I came in to correct information about the discussion of the problem.

 

[kdonnel]

Lol, moving the goalposts. It seems like you are more interested in terminology than in solving the problem. Closing the gunshow loophole/private sales loophole/universal background checks are all basically equivalent things to me

Terminology is important as it shows you know what you are really against or for.

When I hear someone talk about the gunshow loophole I assume they have not taken the time to learn when a 4473 form is required. If they had they would be asking to stop private sales as there is no such thing as a gunshow loophole. I assume they are just repeating what they have heard and have not taken the time to learn the facts and form a true opinion.

There is so much misinformation thrown around by both sides that greatly devalues their arguments.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

It's come out that the gun was taken for safety concerns from the shooters home on October 12th.

They're looking into how he got it back.

I thought it was a different gun.

Absolutely. It's part availability of guns, part mental illness, part lack of parenting and social media. It's part violence on TV, in video games and music. It's lots of anger and disconnectedness from others.

Agree.

I like that the media hasn't been announcing shooter's names lately -- some sick, twisted people see infamy as a positive.

This latest shooter had a list of other school shooter’s names and wanted to be one of them.

I did not mean that T&P don't help, in fact, I said that if they help *you* then by all means, go for it. But let's not act under the false impression that they are the solution in any way. Thinking good thoughts is not going to stop mass shootings.

We see it differently, then, and that’s ok. I happen to think that kindness can effect change.

 

[Moliphino]

Once again, it's a mental health problem.

It's not ONLY a mental health problem.

 

[Aladora]

We see it differently, then, and that’s ok. I happen to think that kindness can effect change.

We do see it differently in a way. I think that while kindness can effect *some* change, it is not a solution to the problem that seems to be endemic at this time. Kindness to those who have gone through a tragedy can help those effected by it but that does not mean that kindness changes anything except feelings.

To go back to my cancer analogy, keeping a positive outlook helped me and those around me deal with what I was going through but it did not have any effect on the cancer itself. The thing that did have an effect on the cancer was proven therapies such as surgery to remove the cancer and chemotherapy to ensure that all cancerous cells were destroyed.

Not sure if that makes sense but there you have it.

 

[jalapeno_pretzel]

Exactly. Things that are not the same things are equivalent to you. Can't have an honest conversation like that when you talk of one thing, then when called out on it, state you were talking another thing. That is moving the goalpost.

I am interested in solving the problem. I'm attempting to solve a problem, which is misinformation. Can't solve problem X when you're talking about Y.

Others on the other hand are talking solutions that won't help the problem, such as you are attempting to do. I came in to correct information about the discussion of the problem.

Terminology is important as it shows you know what you are really against or for.

When I hear someone talk about the gunshow loophole I assume they have not taken the time to learn when a 4473 form is required. If they had they would be asking to stop private sales as there is no such thing as a gunshow loophole. I assume they are just repeating what they have heard and have not taken the time to learn the facts and form a true opinion.

There is so much misinformation thrown around by both sides that greatly devalues their arguments.

OK, y'all have totally clarified it for me. What I am in favor of is not closing the gunshow loophole, which doesn't exist. I am in favor of Universal Background checks - which is the same term that taxman used, regardless of type of sale. Is that better?

 

[jalapeno_pretzel]

I am interested in solving the problem. I'm attempting to solve a problem, which is misinformation. Can't solve problem X when you're talking about Y.

So, I'm curious, how would you solve problem X? (the issue of lots of mass shootings).

 

[mrodgers]

OK, y'all have totally clarified it for me. What I am in favor of is not closing the gunshow loophole, which doesn't exist. I am in favor of Universal Background checks - which is the same term that taxman used, regardless of type of sale. Is that better?

Firearm dealers are not individuals, thus do not have individual constitutional rights. Individuals do have constitutional rights. That is why there are rules for businesses, the firearm dealers, and not for private sale. You have the constitutional right to purchase and sell honestly between two individual parties. I have been trying to find explanation of something that I can not come up with the correct wording to look for it. I believe, but could be wrong, we have the constitutional right to commerce. Thus my explanation for why you need a background check to purchase from a dealer but not in a private sale.

These are my thoughts and may not be true, which is why I am trying to find information to back that up for me. I don't want to argue something I remember seeing a long time ago. If true, then it violates not one, and not one person's constitutional right, but two constitutional rights of 2 parties.

 

[mrodgers]

So, I'm curious, how would you solve problem X? (the issue of lots of mass shootings).

I don't know. I see it as a mental health problem. A parenting problem. A single parent problem. A broken home problem. A missing father figure problem. Many many problems. There may not be a solution. The government just can not violate someone's rights because someone else may do or has done something.

What I do know is, going into a school or any venue and shooting people is against the law and people are doing it, so why would anyone think making another law will solve the problem?

The only solution you have come up with is to change the constitution which requires 2/3rds majority. You know that won't happen, so you want to circumvent the constitution to violate law abiding citizens' constitutional rights to make it feel good.

 

[jalapeno_pretzel]

I don't know. I see it as a mental health problem. A parenting problem. There may not be a solution. The government just can not violate someone's rights because someone else may do something.

What I do know is, going into a school or any venue and shooting people is against the law and people are doing it, so why would anyone think making another law will solve the problem?

In that case, I see that there is in fact common ground that we share! And that like VandVsmama and me, perhaps you would also be in favor of making mental healthcare more affordable, available, and accessible, and expanding funding for school guidance counselors. Maybe providing more resources to parents who are worried that their kids might be exhibiting problem behaviors that could lead to something tragic. Let's do just those things and analyze the results of the changes!

 

[CdnCarrie]

I don't know. I see it as a mental health problem. A parenting problem. A single parent problem. A broken home problem. A missing father figure problem. Many many problems. There may not be a solution. The government just can not violate someone's rights because someone else may do or has done something.

What I do know is, going into a school or any venue and shooting people is against the law and people are doing it, so why would anyone think making another law will solve the problem?

The only solution you have come up with is to change the constitution which requires 2/3rds majority. You know that won't happen, so you want to circumvent the constitution to violate law abiding citizens' constitutional rights to make it feel good.

Then why aren't there this level of mass shootings in other countries. Are you saying American parenting is worse than then the rest of the world?

The bolded is just a straw arguement because you don't agree with gun control.

 

[jalapeno_pretzel]

The only solution you have come up with is to change the constitution which requires 2/3rds majority. You know that won't happen, so you want to circumvent the constitution to violate law abiding citizens' constitutional rights to make it feel good.

I see you edited your post to add this. And this is untrue. Starting with VandVsmama's statement about mental health, I agreed with her and said I would fully support making mental healthcare more affordable and accessible, and increasing the number of school guidance counselors. I'm in favor of MANY approaches, but if this is the only one that most can get behind, then let's do it already!!

 

[sam_gordon]

Then why aren't there this level of mass shootings in other countries. Are you saying American parenting is worse than then the rest of the world?

I'm curious. Did you intentionally not bold where @mrodgers also mentioned mental health? Don't most other countries have different (I'm not going to use "better" because that's subjective) types of health care? Instead of focusing on the parent/family issue, maybe the health care issue? Or, wait for it, MULTIPLE issues? Do you think it could be MULTIPLE things that are allowing this to happen?

Can people not admit the US is different from other countries, in LOTS of things? Many of which can factor into the number of shootings?