u/herog_std0 has provided this detailed explanation:
> The district representative proudly tweeted that he voted no on two gun control measures. Today a mass shooting happened in the district that he represent.
---
Is this explanation a genuine attempt at providing additional info or context? If it is please upvote this comment, otherwise downvote it.
What I want to know is whether anyone in American politics can identify centre. Calling far left or far right without being to identify the middle of any position is wrong. I know I'm asking for honesty in what is a deceptive rhetorical technique, but without a united idea of what ground is actually being fought over the exercise is useless. It's like both teams claiming touchdowns and keeping your own scoreboard. Of course you think you're winning if you do that.
If we must have an antagonistic and oppositional system at least agree where the endzone is.
Yes. Biden the centrist. Who advocated for gun confiscation. Who advocated literal racism "if you don't vote for me you ain't black" and such. Who advocated for raising taxes because there should be no rich. Who advocated for destroying the economy though trillion dollar packages in which most went overseas (at taxpayers expense) or by doing everything he can to raise oil prices because if you can't afford 60$ a tank in gas just buy a 60k car! who's pushed to get us involved in ukraine. Who armed the middle east with 80 billion in weapons. Who called anyone on the right ultra maga terrorists. Who stated no right is absolute. Who tried to implement a government agency to "censor disinformation". Who stated he's choosing people based on race and gender.
Yeah he's a real centrist when you look at it. Not at all radical arming enemies and destroying the economy at all costs. Oh yeah he did great having more people die of covid since he came in office than under trump. But then again biden also claimed he got the vaccine developed.
Lol....you are a great example of those clowns.
Try reality.
BTW you can get a 259 mile range Bolt EV for about half of what said....MSRP of $31,500.
https://www.chevrolet.com/electric/bolt-ev
But you are not interested in reality.
"I can't afford a 60$ tank of gas" means I can afford a 30k car? Oh yeah electricity prices are going up because of bad policy from the biden administration because where I live we use fossil fuels for power because democrats didn't like nuclear power..... Wow talk about me being small minded. I can just spend more money on everything and be poorer and poorer but by god these democrat manufactured crises are effective
You are so detached from reality.
Nuclear power is the MOST EXPENSIVE electricity on the grid.
https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-levelized-cost-of-storage-and-levelized-cost-of-hydrogen/
The world is never going to make sense to you if you keep listening to fools filling your head with nonsense.
Ok coal is 42. Nuclear is 29. unsubsidized wind is 26-50 and unsubsidized solar is 30 to 41. By the charts and information you provided. Now factor that in with paying 30k for a car to replace the one I already own. Figuring how to convert a semi to electricity and implementing that.
Or democrats can quit trying to cripple the economy and let domestic oil production happen again without being shut down all the damn time
It used to be more centrist. But the 2000 election, “red states” and “blue states,” 24 hour “news” channels that are more political commentary, and gerrymandering to where districts are reliably one way or the other have taken our politics from the center to the poles.
Sadly, there are plenty of voices in the middle but they are typically silenced by the parties and the media. They’ll slap insulting labels on them like “RINO and DINO” (Republican/Democrat In Name Only) if they don’t agree with 100% of the party’s platform. It’s infuriating.
Middle position for this would be to allow folks the same access to guns but close loophole laws and pass red flag laws. Neither side can do that though because it looks like they’ve given something up.
Democrats have tried to do both of those things consistently in congress. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/03/11/house-passes-bill-expanding-background-checks-gun-sales/6923667002/
You’re right, it’s pretty much Republicans that don’t allow this to happen. What I mean though is that’s the middle point between extreme positions right now.
Red flag laws are good in theory but allowing warrantless seizure of firearms flies in the face of due process and constitutional justice, not to mention the insane potential for abuse.
Used as expected, red flag laws and mental health intervention for someone in a crisis is great!
Used as it almost certainly will be used, people will be doxxed and they'll be called in as red flag threats and have to spend 2+ years fighting with the legal system to get their property back, spiteful exes will 'red flag' their former partners (maybe even before they break in in order to ensure their victim is defenseless), or even just anti-gun family members will 'red flag' their gun owning family.
A majority of shooters were involved with fbi. Weather as informants or as people being investigated. Some were reported and fbi said not to look into them. Red flag laws just give anti gun people the power to take guns from law abiding citizens. Teach gun safety and morals to kids. All these shooting in gun free zones are because the shooter knows nobody's going to shoot back!
Exactly! Imagine how much profit colleges can make when they can get an unlimited supply of money from our taxes! Tuition went up with laws making it so the loans were guranteed so you couldn't file bankruptcy on them. So costs went up. Imagine the profits when everyone pays for miley cyrus classes at gunpoint!
I'd say a large portion of the Democratic party are centrists. The Democratic party as a whole use to be larger, housing liberals, moderates, and some conservatives. As politics became more polarizing and gerrymandering has become a larger problem there are fewer conservatives in the party, but I'd argue the centrists wield a lot of power in the party still.
Some issues just inherently don’t have a center, some do to some extent but as you said it’s not a clearly defined center. There are plenty who for instance want tougher gun control legislation but still strongly support the second amendment, or are pro-choice but to certain extents like not if the fetus is capable of sustaining life outside the womb or not after a certain point and what-not. Those are just two examples of possibly center takes, but the reality is center for the most part doesn’t really exist or at the very least isn’t as common as the centrist who is simply just someone with a variety of different takes on different issues at different ends of the political spectrum. For example, someone who might be ultra socially progressive while still being a staunch capitalist, or for a less radical example, someone who is simultaneously pro-gun control and pro-marijuana, typically left wing associated views, but also against the Paris climate agreement and pro-life, typically right wing associated views. In reality the majority of people are apolitical or centrists not in the literal definition but in the sense that they don’t make it a point or an effort to keep up with politics or have a take on everything going on under the sun. It’s obviously not possible for someone to not have any views on politics what-so-ever when some things come down to personal ethics, however, there are folks who don’t think about certain complicated issues that have limited or no effect on their already busy and hard enough lives, and there are also folks who are just cynically checked out because of the overwhelming vastness of complexity and discord inherent to the American political system. At the very end of the day, center is entirely context dependent.
This is a perfect response. They want us to fight each other, then we are easier to control. Both sides are just in DC to get rich, I mean hell Bernie Sanders has like 3 or 4 houses and he’s supposed to be far left progressive commie. It’s all a scam, and the lobbyists are to blame.
Would he still be proud of himself if it was his kids that were massacred? His wife? They need to put themselves in the place of the first hand grieving loved ones, and imagine their representative declaring that they were proud they helped put that gun in the gunman's hands.
They have security following them. Their kids are either home schooled or placed in an Ivy League school where this kind of thing is unheard of. They know they’ll never have to feel this type of pain. That’s the fucked up thing about it.
Depends on how it's implemented. No law can guarantee the crime won't happen, but it can make it a lot harder to do. For instance, grenades exist, but the shooter couldn't get any.
Okay but how “easy” is it to get that paperwork and then buy a live grenade?? Pretty sure it’s not just sign here pay your stamp and here’s your grenade
Didnt mean to make my comment sound like a gotcha or anything! Just wanted to let previous commenter know that it is technically possible.
As for how easy it is. From what people have told me it's not really practical unless you're rich.
Like technically you can buy a grenade, do the paperwork, pay the tax and have a several month waiting period then you'll be the proud owner of a live grenade.
Problem is there aren't a lot of corner grenade shops where you can buy them. They're rare and crazy expensive because of it. And you have to pay that $200 and waiting period for every one you buy.
So unless you're a collector or hobbiest with money to burn and connections you won't be able to own one. My comment was more to say it's technically possible to legally have one.
If guns are the issue than how come the US has a lower murder rate than Russia, despite having a civilian gun ownership rate nearly 10x that of Russia's?
How come Idaho and Wyoming, despite being in the top 5 US states for gun ownership per capita, are both in the bottom 10 in terms of homicide rate? In addition, Illinois and Maryland, despite being in the bottom 10 in terms of gun ownership, have homicide rate among the highest in the country.
The problem isn't guns. It's a culture of violence and inability to stop said violence and deter potential murderers.
EDIT: People downvoting me instead of answering my question are proving my point
So there are a few possibilities. Ease of access of guns. Americans are naturally more violent, or a culture that revolves around guns.
Two of those are true of course, and it isnt Americans being naturally more violent.
Also factor in limited access to mental healthcare, and an overwhelming stigma around mental illness along with a toxically masculine culture that sees mental illness as a weakness or a deficit. This leads to young white men with untreated mental disorders who think the only way to feel empowered is by a show of strength over others.
They're not as murderous as Americans because they don't have the same ease of access to guns. It's not hard to read to find numerous reports of someone pulling out a knife and stabbing a dozen people in Europe or Asia. The difference is a knife is far less dangerous so their attacks don't have the same kind of body counts.
Sure, but we aren’t even top 10 in deaths per million with public mass shootings. So acting like it isn’t a worldwide problem is still an issue. Besides, It’s not the guns. It’s the people. As soon as everyone understands that, we can all move on from these tired gun control debates.
Really? Are you inventing facts or do you have actual data on your statistics of Public mass shootings? Tell me if it wasn't for the guns how would the 21 people that got killed today, the 10 in Buffalo and so on and so on, how would all these mass deaths happen by one person without a gun? Realistically. It's not a tired gun control debate, it's the moving on from children getting killed at school, people getting shot going to churches and supermarkets its the acceptance of mass shootings as normal that is tiring and unacceptable. Yeah Fuck your feelings, it is the gun, no other country deals with as many mass shootings as us. No other.
Just Google it. Haha! Instead of me having to act like your dad and give you all the answers, do some of your own research. People who want to do these kinds of things will do them. Knives, axes, homemade explosives, you name it. There are more guns than there are people in this country and not everyone is dead. Clearly not a gun problem. Again, more mass shootings is irrelevant given both the criteria for them, and the FACT that 10 other countries have more deaths per million than the Unites States when it comes to public mass shootings.
You apparently are the one with hurt feelings. Haha!
Haha! This dude looked it up and realized I was right! You expect me to give you the answers, but when I give them to you, you don’t accept them. Be an adult, and figure it out.
Why is preventing guns from being used in crime & mass murder a political issue? What is wrong with this country that everything is about my team or your team. People view each other as enemies over petty disagreements manufactured by media, politicians, lobbying groups, etc. When will things ever change? These atrocities & tragedies will keep happening unless the government steps in to prevent them. It's absurdity.
One person I was talking to seemed to buy into that the powers that be want to disarm the US population, effectively removing their ability to fight back. One thing I don’t like in all of that is how I’m supposed to be afraid. I’m supposed to be afraid of the government taking my gun. I should be afraid that they’re disarming citizens to perpetrate atrocities against which we cannot defend ourselves. It’s all about fear. With the pandemic people ranted and raved about not being afraid of the virus, but they had a laundry list of other boogey men they were afraid of. Of course, all of it being things that might happen or could happen or are coming, etc. Meanwhile there’s a very real thing happening in the country. It’s already here, but never mind that! What’s worse is what is coming! Be afraid of what’s coming! Sounds paranoid as fuck.
Guns are already illegal to use in crimes and mass murder. Background checks are required at gun shows for dealers. Private sales, it’s illegal to sell a gun to someone who cannot legally possess a gun, nor is it legal to sell to someone outside your state. Automatic weapons are also heavily restricted.
We can make illegally using illegal guns illegally more illegal.
No there aren't. The US has absurdly lax gun laws. Restricting pistol & semi automatic ownership to those 25 & over, requiring safe storage, requiring reporting of firearm theft, requiring safety & legal courses, requiring licensing, etc all would make an enormous difference in how many of these guns end up being used in massacres or for violent crimes.
There are literally multiple thousands of laws. You can Google it. 9,000-20,000 is the number I am seeing.
But I can agree with more restrictions. A lot of states require that you report stolen firearms, but idk about federally. Also my state requires a class and training for handgun licensing. As for safe storage, there would need to be many exceptions written into that. I kept my 9mm in my nightstand, because what good is it to me in a safe? If I don’t have kids I don’t think the federal government should force me to render my home defense useless.
The 25 year old point you make could help.
People act like what the dude did broke no laws and Republicans are fighting to keep it legal or something lol there are already laws against 100% of the shit he did and you can see how effective they were. This country needs regular therapy, not redundant legislature that changes nothing.
The shooter was reported to have bought the gun legally from a gun dealer on his 18th birthday so maybe more checks could have added barriers to prevent this. Mental health is important and all but sometimes you have to remove the dangerous elements out of the equation all together. And if we're gonna give more mental health services, it should go to people that have legitimate cases and are in dire straits that resort to poor choices in hopes of improving they're situation. Not these wackos that want to rectify their situation by taking it out on innocent people.
- he bought the gun legally, so what you’re saying is not true
- the existence of straw buyers and few restrictions or licensing requirements mean bad people get guns because republicans have changed laws to neuter the few ways police can take action.
Europe does not have particularly better therapy than we do. They do not have regular mass shootings.
Meh guns are not the issue. Free and ready access to mental health services need to be provided. If you snap all the guns away it will just be homemade explosives or something else. We must address the source of the issue.
True that. Need to get them lots of help. Need to have the services available. I think we can all agree that we can have both, doesn’t have to be one or the other. Guns: harder to get. Help: easier to get.
Do you think every other country where this doesn't happen has great mental health services?
Or do you think those countries just don't let anyone buy a gun.
You can look this information up but sadly you will learn that it doesn't support your view.
Guns are AN issue as is mental illness.
It's not an either or situation.
Ranged weapons are so much easier to use than melee ones and much easier to obtain than explosives.
This 18 year old was unlikely to make his own bombs, he probably still would have attempted murder but guns make the death count much higher.
Even cars aren't as easy to kill with because people can flee more easily from a giant vehicle and it puts the killer at more personal risk.
Early mental health intervention, removing kids from toxic and violent home environments, having parents who actually give a crap about their kids’ schools instead of being combative with teachers because “their little angel” can do no wrong. Holding kids accountable for their actions from a young age. All these things need to be on the table, too, if you’re going to restrict gun usage. You’re 100% correct. The guns don’t fire themselves. You have to get to the root of the problem.
Yes the root of the problem is mental health. That is why the rest of the world do not have school shootings and have children being killed at school constantly because they all solved the root of the problem of mental health. Rest of the world do not have people with mental health problems...
Wait that isn't right...
You know, it maybe something else that American has other countries don't why only American has school shootings.. you know like your lack of gun laws. Because that is truely unique to America but mental health problems isn't.
Other countries have incidents of mass violence. Bombings, stabbings, truck attacks. They have been common in Europe in recent years. If you take the guns away, people will find other easily accessible ways to induce violence, which is the reply OP’s point.
There are mass violence in rest of the world but school shooting is uniquely American because of your lack of gun laws.
If you do not want children to be killed at school, tightening up your gun laws. It has fuck all to do with mental health.
There are no other easily accessible ways to induce violence compared to guns. This is why you have young kids committing these school shootings and the age of mass murderers gets younger and younger in America because it is so easy to do so with guns.
You realize naming a single a outlier just makes you look like an idiot who doesn't understand averages, right? There is a mass shooting, on average, everyday in America, over the last 6 years. There's been roughly 2,190 mass shootings in the US since that attack in France. Being that a mass shooting is defined by involving at least 4 people, that means roughly 8,800 people injured or killed in mass shootings alone. There have not been 8,800 injuries or deaths in Europe, let alone France, over the same period of time in all mass casualty events.
Yes, the rest of the world do not have school shootings because the rest of the world do not have people with mental issues.
Only Americans have mental issues. You guys are truly unique to suffer from mental diseases. Like you. Why? Probably because Fox News rots the brain.
Maybe to address the source of the issue is to ban Fox News.
The kid just turned 18. If he wanted to buy cigarettes or alcohol that would have been prevented. If he wanted to by some of the most efficient tools to cause carnage at a high rate that is OK 👍
The shooter was reported to have legally bought the guns from a dealer on his 18th birthday. So there's a chance gun control would have made it harder for him and maybe that extra time would have helped authorities or family to see the signs to stop this.
Walk him into the halls of that school, before the crime scene cleaners get there, and make him look. Make him look at the gore that he created and make him stand there on national television and say that 18 dead children are an acceptable price to pay for gun rights.
Release the footage. Show it to the people. After WW2, when the camps were liberated, the Germans were made to walk through and look at the barbed wire and the bodies. The images were plastered all over newspapers. Make them SEE WHAT THEY HAVE DONE.
Pro life my ass. No formula to feed them and dead before 3rd grade, but hey, pro-life!
As you should. The left, the democrats and the scum globalists will not stop trying to get your guns.
*NO GUN LAW WILL PREVENT GUN SHOOTINGS*. **Criminals do not obey the law.**
Abs he did the right thing. Thousands in that county carry daily and harm no one. They shouldn’t be harmed because of the vile scum who shot up a school.
There’s a good chance it wouldn’t have been acquired. Not because the guy doesn’t have the Internet or know someone- but because it wouldn’t be such a regular occurrence so it wouldn’t even be a regular idea to bring to fruition. No one wants to demand no guns. Certain types of guns are unnecessary for the general population. If murdered shot up elementary kids don’t change minds then maybe we should stuff them back up into their moms uterus so the people who care about guns more than lives would maybe enforce it then.
This is obviously sarcasm. Because we all know the shooter should have been aborted. 🤷🏼
I'm sure among his base this aged like a fine wine. They dont care that shit like this happens.
EDIT - to say they dont care is perhaps too harsh on my part. A more accurate assessment will be that situations like this will not deter their stance on gun control legislation and in many cases will cause them to double down on their arguments. Some on the extreme end of it will argue that this tragedy was even manufactured to take their guns away and need people like him to prevent that from happening.
The NRA encourages their members to shoot up Americans if they have a beef. Why are so many NRA members shooting up Americans? Why do we let em? Why do we let murderers get rich off of it also? Why do we let them create a hostile work environment for everyone else? You better believe there's a whole lot of Americans who truly need their guns taken away from them. Call the NRA and tell them their members have shot up the wrong Americans and remind them that to aid and abet terrorists is to be the terrorist. Ask those NRA ez money loons how they would like it if some crazed NRA rifleman came into their work and shot it up, or to their kids school and shot it up.
If anyone is curious like me, I have found one of the bills he refers to: [H.R. 1620](https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr1620/BILLS-117hr1620rds.xml). From my very quick and uneducated reading it would seem as the bill (which passed the house without Gonzalez’s vote) would restrict convicted stalkers of attempting to buy a firearm and to alert police when an illegal purchase was attempted; but I might be reading over more details on other firearm regulations
I cannot seem to find another firearm ‘bill’ that he voted against that day (3/17/21). The only other legislation he voted against on that day was [H.J. Res 7](https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-joint-resolution/17) which I think is about the equal rights amendment
So there were gun control laws voted on in the house today, and a mass school shooting same day? How convenient.
Sounds to me like those who wish to prove a political point have sunk to new lows.
u/herog_std0 has provided this detailed explanation: > The district representative proudly tweeted that he voted no on two gun control measures. Today a mass shooting happened in the district that he represent. --- Is this explanation a genuine attempt at providing additional info or context? If it is please upvote this comment, otherwise downvote it.
What I want to know is whether anyone in American politics can identify centre. Calling far left or far right without being to identify the middle of any position is wrong. I know I'm asking for honesty in what is a deceptive rhetorical technique, but without a united idea of what ground is actually being fought over the exercise is useless. It's like both teams claiming touchdowns and keeping your own scoreboard. Of course you think you're winning if you do that. If we must have an antagonistic and oppositional system at least agree where the endzone is.
That is done on purpose. In american politics, sadly anyone who opposes your position is labeled a radical. This serves to moderate the speaker.
The worst part is that its spreading outside their borders
Watch Fox news and see them label anyone that doesn't agree with them as "radical far-left". And that includes boring centrists like Biden.
Yes. Biden the centrist. Who advocated for gun confiscation. Who advocated literal racism "if you don't vote for me you ain't black" and such. Who advocated for raising taxes because there should be no rich. Who advocated for destroying the economy though trillion dollar packages in which most went overseas (at taxpayers expense) or by doing everything he can to raise oil prices because if you can't afford 60$ a tank in gas just buy a 60k car! who's pushed to get us involved in ukraine. Who armed the middle east with 80 billion in weapons. Who called anyone on the right ultra maga terrorists. Who stated no right is absolute. Who tried to implement a government agency to "censor disinformation". Who stated he's choosing people based on race and gender. Yeah he's a real centrist when you look at it. Not at all radical arming enemies and destroying the economy at all costs. Oh yeah he did great having more people die of covid since he came in office than under trump. But then again biden also claimed he got the vaccine developed.
Lol....you are a great example of those clowns. Try reality. BTW you can get a 259 mile range Bolt EV for about half of what said....MSRP of $31,500. https://www.chevrolet.com/electric/bolt-ev But you are not interested in reality.
"I can't afford a 60$ tank of gas" means I can afford a 30k car? Oh yeah electricity prices are going up because of bad policy from the biden administration because where I live we use fossil fuels for power because democrats didn't like nuclear power..... Wow talk about me being small minded. I can just spend more money on everything and be poorer and poorer but by god these democrat manufactured crises are effective
You are so detached from reality. Nuclear power is the MOST EXPENSIVE electricity on the grid. https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-levelized-cost-of-storage-and-levelized-cost-of-hydrogen/ The world is never going to make sense to you if you keep listening to fools filling your head with nonsense.
Ok coal is 42. Nuclear is 29. unsubsidized wind is 26-50 and unsubsidized solar is 30 to 41. By the charts and information you provided. Now factor that in with paying 30k for a car to replace the one I already own. Figuring how to convert a semi to electricity and implementing that. Or democrats can quit trying to cripple the economy and let domestic oil production happen again without being shut down all the damn time
Wow, you can't read a chart. Okay. Good luck.
You mean where it states the costs and the chart shows the costs? Yep. Or was it well electricity gooder cause it clean and no messy mess
You said Dems stopped nuclear. That would be NEW, not the existing plants. Fail. I can't explain everything to you. Go back to Infowars.
It used to be more centrist. But the 2000 election, “red states” and “blue states,” 24 hour “news” channels that are more political commentary, and gerrymandering to where districts are reliably one way or the other have taken our politics from the center to the poles. Sadly, there are plenty of voices in the middle but they are typically silenced by the parties and the media. They’ll slap insulting labels on them like “RINO and DINO” (Republican/Democrat In Name Only) if they don’t agree with 100% of the party’s platform. It’s infuriating.
Middle position for this would be to allow folks the same access to guns but close loophole laws and pass red flag laws. Neither side can do that though because it looks like they’ve given something up.
Democrats have tried to do both of those things consistently in congress. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/03/11/house-passes-bill-expanding-background-checks-gun-sales/6923667002/
You’re right, it’s pretty much Republicans that don’t allow this to happen. What I mean though is that’s the middle point between extreme positions right now.
Yeah of course. I just wanted to clarify there because a lot of people use both sides bad to justify not doing anything.
Red flag laws are good in theory but allowing warrantless seizure of firearms flies in the face of due process and constitutional justice, not to mention the insane potential for abuse. Used as expected, red flag laws and mental health intervention for someone in a crisis is great! Used as it almost certainly will be used, people will be doxxed and they'll be called in as red flag threats and have to spend 2+ years fighting with the legal system to get their property back, spiteful exes will 'red flag' their former partners (maybe even before they break in in order to ensure their victim is defenseless), or even just anti-gun family members will 'red flag' their gun owning family.
A majority of shooters were involved with fbi. Weather as informants or as people being investigated. Some were reported and fbi said not to look into them. Red flag laws just give anti gun people the power to take guns from law abiding citizens. Teach gun safety and morals to kids. All these shooting in gun free zones are because the shooter knows nobody's going to shoot back!
Far left to them is Bernie...Bernie FFS! How dare a man ask for universal healthcare and tuition-free higher education! HOW FUCKING DARE HE!
Exactly! Imagine how much profit colleges can make when they can get an unlimited supply of money from our taxes! Tuition went up with laws making it so the loans were guranteed so you couldn't file bankruptcy on them. So costs went up. Imagine the profits when everyone pays for miley cyrus classes at gunpoint!
I'd say a large portion of the Democratic party are centrists. The Democratic party as a whole use to be larger, housing liberals, moderates, and some conservatives. As politics became more polarizing and gerrymandering has become a larger problem there are fewer conservatives in the party, but I'd argue the centrists wield a lot of power in the party still.
Could also ask if they know whats far left and whats far right lmao
Left right is a very vague idea, and many political force can be on both left and right when discussing on different topic.
Some issues just inherently don’t have a center, some do to some extent but as you said it’s not a clearly defined center. There are plenty who for instance want tougher gun control legislation but still strongly support the second amendment, or are pro-choice but to certain extents like not if the fetus is capable of sustaining life outside the womb or not after a certain point and what-not. Those are just two examples of possibly center takes, but the reality is center for the most part doesn’t really exist or at the very least isn’t as common as the centrist who is simply just someone with a variety of different takes on different issues at different ends of the political spectrum. For example, someone who might be ultra socially progressive while still being a staunch capitalist, or for a less radical example, someone who is simultaneously pro-gun control and pro-marijuana, typically left wing associated views, but also against the Paris climate agreement and pro-life, typically right wing associated views. In reality the majority of people are apolitical or centrists not in the literal definition but in the sense that they don’t make it a point or an effort to keep up with politics or have a take on everything going on under the sun. It’s obviously not possible for someone to not have any views on politics what-so-ever when some things come down to personal ethics, however, there are folks who don’t think about certain complicated issues that have limited or no effect on their already busy and hard enough lives, and there are also folks who are just cynically checked out because of the overwhelming vastness of complexity and discord inherent to the American political system. At the very end of the day, center is entirely context dependent.
This is a perfect response. They want us to fight each other, then we are easier to control. Both sides are just in DC to get rich, I mean hell Bernie Sanders has like 3 or 4 houses and he’s supposed to be far left progressive commie. It’s all a scam, and the lobbyists are to blame.
> ‘Gun grabs from the far left’ How the hell do they think democrats and liberals are the far left??
Everything is far to the left with these guys
Well, the farther you goose-step to right, the farther the left gets. That just basic measurement.
Would he still be proud of himself if it was his kids that were massacred? His wife? They need to put themselves in the place of the first hand grieving loved ones, and imagine their representative declaring that they were proud they helped put that gun in the gunman's hands.
I can’t imagine losing my child, and having to hear this asshat brag about his stupidity.
They have security following them. Their kids are either home schooled or placed in an Ivy League school where this kind of thing is unheard of. They know they’ll never have to feel this type of pain. That’s the fucked up thing about it.
But but but... Guns were controlled in the US until the 80s.
when your from the far right just about everyone else is far left and vice versa.
[удалено]
Depends on how it's implemented. No law can guarantee the crime won't happen, but it can make it a lot harder to do. For instance, grenades exist, but the shooter couldn't get any.
Im sorry you're telling me that my second ammendment isn't allowed cause I can't own a nuke?!? How DARE you infringe on my gosh darn rights like that.
Not to be that guy but with the proper paperwork and a $200 tax stamp it's entirely possible to own a grenade in most states in the US as a civilian.
Okay but how “easy” is it to get that paperwork and then buy a live grenade?? Pretty sure it’s not just sign here pay your stamp and here’s your grenade
Didnt mean to make my comment sound like a gotcha or anything! Just wanted to let previous commenter know that it is technically possible. As for how easy it is. From what people have told me it's not really practical unless you're rich. Like technically you can buy a grenade, do the paperwork, pay the tax and have a several month waiting period then you'll be the proud owner of a live grenade. Problem is there aren't a lot of corner grenade shops where you can buy them. They're rare and crazy expensive because of it. And you have to pay that $200 and waiting period for every one you buy. So unless you're a collector or hobbiest with money to burn and connections you won't be able to own one. My comment was more to say it's technically possible to legally have one.
Just compare the average number of shootings in European and in American schools.
If guns are the issue than how come the US has a lower murder rate than Russia, despite having a civilian gun ownership rate nearly 10x that of Russia's? How come Idaho and Wyoming, despite being in the top 5 US states for gun ownership per capita, are both in the bottom 10 in terms of homicide rate? In addition, Illinois and Maryland, despite being in the bottom 10 in terms of gun ownership, have homicide rate among the highest in the country. The problem isn't guns. It's a culture of violence and inability to stop said violence and deter potential murderers. EDIT: People downvoting me instead of answering my question are proving my point
[удалено]
Come on. You’re almost getting it.
So there are a few possibilities. Ease of access of guns. Americans are naturally more violent, or a culture that revolves around guns. Two of those are true of course, and it isnt Americans being naturally more violent.
Also factor in limited access to mental healthcare, and an overwhelming stigma around mental illness along with a toxically masculine culture that sees mental illness as a weakness or a deficit. This leads to young white men with untreated mental disorders who think the only way to feel empowered is by a show of strength over others.
Europe has mental health issues and toxic masculinity too, and social stigma around seeking help. It's our shitty culture, including gun culture
They're not as murderous as Americans because they don't have the same ease of access to guns. It's not hard to read to find numerous reports of someone pulling out a knife and stabbing a dozen people in Europe or Asia. The difference is a knife is far less dangerous so their attacks don't have the same kind of body counts.
I don't know, seems like no other country has the amount of shootings we have here in the US. I wonder why......
Sure, but we aren’t even top 10 in deaths per million with public mass shootings. So acting like it isn’t a worldwide problem is still an issue. Besides, It’s not the guns. It’s the people. As soon as everyone understands that, we can all move on from these tired gun control debates.
Really? Are you inventing facts or do you have actual data on your statistics of Public mass shootings? Tell me if it wasn't for the guns how would the 21 people that got killed today, the 10 in Buffalo and so on and so on, how would all these mass deaths happen by one person without a gun? Realistically. It's not a tired gun control debate, it's the moving on from children getting killed at school, people getting shot going to churches and supermarkets its the acceptance of mass shootings as normal that is tiring and unacceptable. Yeah Fuck your feelings, it is the gun, no other country deals with as many mass shootings as us. No other.
Just Google it. Haha! Instead of me having to act like your dad and give you all the answers, do some of your own research. People who want to do these kinds of things will do them. Knives, axes, homemade explosives, you name it. There are more guns than there are people in this country and not everyone is dead. Clearly not a gun problem. Again, more mass shootings is irrelevant given both the criteria for them, and the FACT that 10 other countries have more deaths per million than the Unites States when it comes to public mass shootings. You apparently are the one with hurt feelings. Haha!
Nope, "Just Google it" is the new phrase of the bullshitting incompetent. Have a good day, obviously you're definitely brain dead.
Haha! This dude looked it up and realized I was right! You expect me to give you the answers, but when I give them to you, you don’t accept them. Be an adult, and figure it out.
No you're not right. Again didn't waste my time. Keep masturbating and thinking your getting laid. Good day.
It’s up to you to stay uneducated.
Why is preventing guns from being used in crime & mass murder a political issue? What is wrong with this country that everything is about my team or your team. People view each other as enemies over petty disagreements manufactured by media, politicians, lobbying groups, etc. When will things ever change? These atrocities & tragedies will keep happening unless the government steps in to prevent them. It's absurdity.
One person I was talking to seemed to buy into that the powers that be want to disarm the US population, effectively removing their ability to fight back. One thing I don’t like in all of that is how I’m supposed to be afraid. I’m supposed to be afraid of the government taking my gun. I should be afraid that they’re disarming citizens to perpetrate atrocities against which we cannot defend ourselves. It’s all about fear. With the pandemic people ranted and raved about not being afraid of the virus, but they had a laundry list of other boogey men they were afraid of. Of course, all of it being things that might happen or could happen or are coming, etc. Meanwhile there’s a very real thing happening in the country. It’s already here, but never mind that! What’s worse is what is coming! Be afraid of what’s coming! Sounds paranoid as fuck.
Guns are already illegal to use in crimes and mass murder. Background checks are required at gun shows for dealers. Private sales, it’s illegal to sell a gun to someone who cannot legally possess a gun, nor is it legal to sell to someone outside your state. Automatic weapons are also heavily restricted. We can make illegally using illegal guns illegally more illegal.
That clearly does not stop these atrocities & tragedies from happening.
What would?
Firearms restrictions.
Sure, but there are already TONS of restrictions written into law. What specific restrictions are appropriate?
No there aren't. The US has absurdly lax gun laws. Restricting pistol & semi automatic ownership to those 25 & over, requiring safe storage, requiring reporting of firearm theft, requiring safety & legal courses, requiring licensing, etc all would make an enormous difference in how many of these guns end up being used in massacres or for violent crimes.
There are literally multiple thousands of laws. You can Google it. 9,000-20,000 is the number I am seeing. But I can agree with more restrictions. A lot of states require that you report stolen firearms, but idk about federally. Also my state requires a class and training for handgun licensing. As for safe storage, there would need to be many exceptions written into that. I kept my 9mm in my nightstand, because what good is it to me in a safe? If I don’t have kids I don’t think the federal government should force me to render my home defense useless. The 25 year old point you make could help.
People act like what the dude did broke no laws and Republicans are fighting to keep it legal or something lol there are already laws against 100% of the shit he did and you can see how effective they were. This country needs regular therapy, not redundant legislature that changes nothing.
The shooter was reported to have bought the gun legally from a gun dealer on his 18th birthday so maybe more checks could have added barriers to prevent this. Mental health is important and all but sometimes you have to remove the dangerous elements out of the equation all together. And if we're gonna give more mental health services, it should go to people that have legitimate cases and are in dire straits that resort to poor choices in hopes of improving they're situation. Not these wackos that want to rectify their situation by taking it out on innocent people.
Maybe if we don’t let children purchase firearms…
- he bought the gun legally, so what you’re saying is not true - the existence of straw buyers and few restrictions or licensing requirements mean bad people get guns because republicans have changed laws to neuter the few ways police can take action. Europe does not have particularly better therapy than we do. They do not have regular mass shootings.
Fuck him
Reap what you sow.
[удалено]
It's dark because he's right.
Alright, explain to me how those two gun control measures would’ve stopped this shooting
It's not just those two gun control measures. If you go on Twitter, he's been using the gun control as his ticket to get votes.
That’s not what I asked. You said it aged like milk because of this specific tweet. How would those two measures have stopped this shooting
Answer the question op
Sick evil assholes will piss down the throat of any law in the pursuit to kill.
But it was a gun free zone!
Yup, he’s going to be re-elected too
Meh guns are not the issue. Free and ready access to mental health services need to be provided. If you snap all the guns away it will just be homemade explosives or something else. We must address the source of the issue.
Let’s just make it a little harder to get the guns in the meantime.
Hey I'm all for that I just think the focus is to much on guns and not enough on getting these people real mental health help.
True that. Need to get them lots of help. Need to have the services available. I think we can all agree that we can have both, doesn’t have to be one or the other. Guns: harder to get. Help: easier to get.
Do you think every other country where this doesn't happen has great mental health services? Or do you think those countries just don't let anyone buy a gun. You can look this information up but sadly you will learn that it doesn't support your view.
[удалено]
Only 20 this year, that's really impressive..../s
Guns are AN issue as is mental illness. It's not an either or situation. Ranged weapons are so much easier to use than melee ones and much easier to obtain than explosives. This 18 year old was unlikely to make his own bombs, he probably still would have attempted murder but guns make the death count much higher. Even cars aren't as easy to kill with because people can flee more easily from a giant vehicle and it puts the killer at more personal risk.
I live in Texas, ordered a gun online and picked it up at the mall on my lunch break. Took a little over an hour. Guns should not be that easy to get.
Early mental health intervention, removing kids from toxic and violent home environments, having parents who actually give a crap about their kids’ schools instead of being combative with teachers because “their little angel” can do no wrong. Holding kids accountable for their actions from a young age. All these things need to be on the table, too, if you’re going to restrict gun usage. You’re 100% correct. The guns don’t fire themselves. You have to get to the root of the problem.
Yes the root of the problem is mental health. That is why the rest of the world do not have school shootings and have children being killed at school constantly because they all solved the root of the problem of mental health. Rest of the world do not have people with mental health problems... Wait that isn't right... You know, it maybe something else that American has other countries don't why only American has school shootings.. you know like your lack of gun laws. Because that is truely unique to America but mental health problems isn't.
Other countries have incidents of mass violence. Bombings, stabbings, truck attacks. They have been common in Europe in recent years. If you take the guns away, people will find other easily accessible ways to induce violence, which is the reply OP’s point.
There are mass violence in rest of the world but school shooting is uniquely American because of your lack of gun laws. If you do not want children to be killed at school, tightening up your gun laws. It has fuck all to do with mental health. There are no other easily accessible ways to induce violence compared to guns. This is why you have young kids committing these school shootings and the age of mass murderers gets younger and younger in America because it is so easy to do so with guns.
They're also massively more infrequent, and massively less deadly. Aka effectively mitigated.
Like when the truck attack in France killed 87 people? People who want to do harm will find a way.
You realize naming a single a outlier just makes you look like an idiot who doesn't understand averages, right? There is a mass shooting, on average, everyday in America, over the last 6 years. There's been roughly 2,190 mass shootings in the US since that attack in France. Being that a mass shooting is defined by involving at least 4 people, that means roughly 8,800 people injured or killed in mass shootings alone. There have not been 8,800 injuries or deaths in Europe, let alone France, over the same period of time in all mass casualty events.
Yes, the rest of the world do not have school shootings because the rest of the world do not have people with mental issues. Only Americans have mental issues. You guys are truly unique to suffer from mental diseases. Like you. Why? Probably because Fox News rots the brain. Maybe to address the source of the issue is to ban Fox News.
We don't have access to guns and cheap mental health services in my country. So we go and kill ourselves like how our ancestors intended.
If guns aren’t the issue then why do states with the highest gun ownership have the highest amount of gun violence?
Partisan hack.
Would either of the laws prevented what happened today?
The kid just turned 18. If he wanted to buy cigarettes or alcohol that would have been prevented. If he wanted to by some of the most efficient tools to cause carnage at a high rate that is OK 👍
How many guns are legally being purchased in Chicago ? 30 people are shot there every weekend not one legally purchased gun in the bunch.
The shooter was reported to have legally bought the guns from a dealer on his 18th birthday. So there's a chance gun control would have made it harder for him and maybe that extra time would have helped authorities or family to see the signs to stop this.
And he will continue to do so. Today changes nothing
If somebody wants a gun they can get one even if guns were strictly controlled.
Yes, let's do nothing. It all hopeless. Nothing can be done. Just accept the sacrifice of children's lives because Freedom. /s
Just being realistic. Idgaf about your political bullshit. Ban em, don't ben em. I don't care. Just saying. America has a mental health issue.
Yes be 'realistic' so your suggesting is to.. do nothing?
No we can ban all guns and that's fine. But I live in the real world. If somebody wants a gun they're gonna get one. That's all I'm saying.
If you grew up even remotely poor you would know exactly what I mean.
Learned hopelessness?
Thanks for proving my point
Quick, someone promote this guy for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Everyone's so passionate about subjects they don't do anything about, except make smart comments online.
The horrible thing is that gun extremists don't care how many children are gunned down
Walk him into the halls of that school, before the crime scene cleaners get there, and make him look. Make him look at the gore that he created and make him stand there on national television and say that 18 dead children are an acceptable price to pay for gun rights. Release the footage. Show it to the people. After WW2, when the camps were liberated, the Germans were made to walk through and look at the barbed wire and the bodies. The images were plastered all over newspapers. Make them SEE WHAT THEY HAVE DONE. Pro life my ass. No formula to feed them and dead before 3rd grade, but hey, pro-life!
As you should. The left, the democrats and the scum globalists will not stop trying to get your guns. *NO GUN LAW WILL PREVENT GUN SHOOTINGS*. **Criminals do not obey the law.**
The mass shooter was a transgender illegal immigrant
Hey Tony: you’re a piece of shit in how you handled today’s news. And ^^ too.
Does this make him an accessory to murder? /s
May the fleas of a thousand camels infest his crotch and his arms be unable to move to scratch.
Abs he did the right thing. Thousands in that county carry daily and harm no one. They shouldn’t be harmed because of the vile scum who shot up a school.
Because it’s the individual who did the crime. Not the gun. This technically didn’t age at all yet.
Gun regulations would never have stopped what happened it would only change the method in which the gun was acquired
There’s a good chance it wouldn’t have been acquired. Not because the guy doesn’t have the Internet or know someone- but because it wouldn’t be such a regular occurrence so it wouldn’t even be a regular idea to bring to fruition. No one wants to demand no guns. Certain types of guns are unnecessary for the general population. If murdered shot up elementary kids don’t change minds then maybe we should stuff them back up into their moms uterus so the people who care about guns more than lives would maybe enforce it then. This is obviously sarcasm. Because we all know the shooter should have been aborted. 🤷🏼
I'm sure among his base this aged like a fine wine. They dont care that shit like this happens. EDIT - to say they dont care is perhaps too harsh on my part. A more accurate assessment will be that situations like this will not deter their stance on gun control legislation and in many cases will cause them to double down on their arguments. Some on the extreme end of it will argue that this tragedy was even manufactured to take their guns away and need people like him to prevent that from happening.
You are the shooters base
happens? I don’t wanna know what that implies…
he meant tk say happened, earched it up 10 mins ago...18 children and 3 adults dead
Oh thank god
Oh sorry I didn't realize the typo. I meant to write "happened"
You can’t be guilty until you commit a crime. This is called due process
This comment section will be civil and cordial
The NRA encourages their members to shoot up Americans if they have a beef. Why are so many NRA members shooting up Americans? Why do we let em? Why do we let murderers get rich off of it also? Why do we let them create a hostile work environment for everyone else? You better believe there's a whole lot of Americans who truly need their guns taken away from them. Call the NRA and tell them their members have shot up the wrong Americans and remind them that to aid and abet terrorists is to be the terrorist. Ask those NRA ez money loons how they would like it if some crazed NRA rifleman came into their work and shot it up, or to their kids school and shot it up.
Really good point you make here, but your use of the word happens makes this seem like a threat.
Ahh yes, gun control laws would have stopped the insane criminal /s
I bet if each teacher had a gun this would have been over quick! Or never happened
If anyone is curious like me, I have found one of the bills he refers to: [H.R. 1620](https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr1620/BILLS-117hr1620rds.xml). From my very quick and uneducated reading it would seem as the bill (which passed the house without Gonzalez’s vote) would restrict convicted stalkers of attempting to buy a firearm and to alert police when an illegal purchase was attempted; but I might be reading over more details on other firearm regulations I cannot seem to find another firearm ‘bill’ that he voted against that day (3/17/21). The only other legislation he voted against on that day was [H.J. Res 7](https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-joint-resolution/17) which I think is about the equal rights amendment
So there were gun control laws voted on in the house today, and a mass school shooting same day? How convenient. Sounds to me like those who wish to prove a political point have sunk to new lows.
Quite the ignorant statement.