Mass Killings - You Get What You Want in Society

[oldtimer]

No offense taken of course.  Your spidey sense is way off.

[Jeff Matthews]

It has never been considered treason to be a socialist.

 

 

Joseph McCarthy.  Technically, you might be right, but we were taught that essentially, he and his ilk had substantial power and were on a witch-hunt against Marxists alleged to be in the US.

[Bella]

I've often wondered about where freedom of speech ends and treason begins. We are a Republic. Could it not be argued that actively promoting socialism/communism/whateverism is an attempt to overthrow our established form of government? 

 

But I digress. That is a topic for another thread.

[Islander]

 

 

7 pages of posts so far, and at least we have one solid point to conclude:  

 

Gun-free zones cause mass murders.

 

Wow.    That "conclusion" makes it clear common sense has no place in this discussion.

 

 

You missed the sarcasm.

 

 

Thanks for clarifying that.  I'm glad I took another look and found your post.  The way things were going, it did look like a serious post.

[Taz]

Clearly a large portion of our members here and the public at large are completely unable to have a debate about something that is statistically fact.

Gun free zones don't cause murders- if you guys can't continue a logical debate... By reading and seeing that mass murderers don't pick their targets / location because of the location or absense of guns. They pick the location/people as targets because it has significance to them. Their old school, their workplace, A religion they hate, Girls that wouldn't date them, bullies, etc.

I can't continue to argue with people who are too dense to even listen.

I asked for any statistics or cases where a good guy with a gun stopped a mass murder...

I did however provide multiple articles that show that isn't possible.. Because they do not exist.

Guns, by trained professionals to respond were the saving grace in each instance.

So.... I'm bowing out of this "debate" Because it's making my eyeball get a headache from stupidity, arrogance, and the inability for factual dialogue to take place.

Bye

 

That's also wrong.... DoD members actively engaged in security and law enforcement ShALL BE ARMED.

Walk up to a military installation and tell me they don't carry guns...

See... We aren't working with the facts here.

Still here?  Thought you said "So.... I'm bowing out of this "debate" Because it's making my eyeball get a headache from stupidity, arrogance, and the inability for factual dialogue to take place."

 

 

Hello! Long time lurker. This topic has caused me to create an account and chime in. Firstly, I have much sorrow in my heart for the mass-shootings and deaths that have plagued our country for the last few years. It is clear that something has gone wrong. What is not clear is how we address this problem.

I'd like to start off by pointing out first that the Right to self defense is not negotiable. Period. And in this country that Right is afforded to all able bodied Men of age. So any talk to eliminate or curtail that basic human right should be off the table. Seriously, who would argue against self defensive measures?

When you are being assaulted what is the first reaction? Defense. Stop/mitigate/limit the damage. We aren't doing any of that. Instead we are bickering and arguing about guns. Which, as I just stated, is this nations chosen and well documented form of self-defense. So they aren't going away. If you want to be productive in this dilemma, provide a logical solution. All else is noise and frankly, a diversion that is keeping us from getting to the point where we can move forward with a solution to our problems. Help, or get out of the way so that we can start saving lives.

You might be arguing about guns. But that want the premise of the thread. The country is creating more sociopathic killers than statistics would predict for a rich country. The question is why is this happening, and of course how do we change it. We have an extraordinary tolerance for school shootings. What are we doing wrong?

 

 

 

 

Ft. Hood shooting. Military base... Hmm I wonder if there are any trained marksmen there with access to weapons? Damn.... If only a good guy with access to a gun was there on a MILITARY BASE!!!

they shot his *** as soon as they could or more would have died. Thank god the good guys had guns

this is ludicrous- gun nuts still skip over the point. I thought good guys with guns on site would prevent the shootings?

I thought gun free zones were the problem?!

Here "good guys with guns" were there and it did NOT prevent anything. Whatever the hell that is? Show me two guys with guns... Who's the good guy?

Have you ever served in the military? I'm guessing not as there are standing orders on separate storage of arms and ammunition at military bases. You will not see people serving there carrying around loaded rifles, etc..

According to the current US President the mass-murder that occurred on that horrific day at that base was merely 'workplace violence'.

Again--- it was workplace violence... The shooting was a place of significance to the shooter. Guns Being present on a military base did not sway his decision.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

 

I thought the subject of the thread was

Mass Killings - You Get What You Want in Society

As stated by the OP.

 

Personally I don't think anyone here wants

Mass Killings

To DUI****** discussion is a start.  Getting criminals off the hook is not a solution for any of societies problems.

Although the money may be good.

Edited October 6, 2015 by Taz

[Islander]

 

 

 

 

Hello! Long time lurker. This topic has caused me to create an account and chime in.  Firstly, I have much sorrow in my heart for the mass-shootings and deaths that have plagued our country for the last few years. It is clear that something has gone wrong. What is not clear is how we address this problem. 

 

I'd like to start off by pointing out first that the Right to self defense is not negotiable. Period. And in this country that Right is afforded to all able bodied Men of age. So any talk to eliminate or curtail that basic human right should be off the table. Seriously, who would argue against self defensive measures?

 

When you are being assaulted what is the first reaction? Defense. Stop/mitigate/limit the damage. We aren't doing any of that. Instead we are bickering and arguing about guns. Which, as I just stated, is this nations chosen and well documented form of self-defense. So they aren't going away. If you want to be productive in this dilemma, provide a logical solution. All else is noise and frankly, a diversion that is keeping us from getting to the point where we can move forward with a solution to our problems. Help, or get out of the way so that we can start saving lives.

Well I am listening? What is the solution?

Welcome to the forum!

 

Thank You!  I was hoping you would tell me. 

 

Well, as I said, we are being assaulted, so let's devise a defense to at least mitigate the damage. I think we could all agree that schools seem to be the favorite target right now. So let's devise a defense to keep our children safe, shall we? I propose immediate defensive measures to include additional police resources. Yes, defend the schools with armed guards. Permanently? Perhaps no. But at least until we can get our footing and identify what our issues are so that we can eventually work towards a workable solution. How do we fund this effort? Well our government spends billions on needless crap every year. I'm sure we can rummage up a few billion to finance this program. 

 

Some might see armed guards at our schools as a drastic action. I would like to point out that we guard our courthouses with armed guards and metal detectors. We guard our state legislative buildings with armed guards. We guard our airports. Heck, I've even seen police officers sitting in their cars at road construction sites.  Now tell me, are our children any less valuable than these people? My child certainly is not.

 

It's a start. It's not necessarily the final result. And frankly, it's better than what we are doing now. 

sounds bout right. welcome

It is simple. Arm the kids. Teach them gun safety and marksmanship in grades 1, 2 and 3. Start arming them in 4th, 5th and 6th. Instead of fire drills, you conduct shooter drills. By the time they are in Jr. and high school it would be the last place a crazy gunman would show up. They will have to concentrate on churchs, movie theaters and old folks homes. Kids who did well in marksmanship can get jobs sitting in churches, theaters and retirement homes ready to pounce.

It is a win-win. Keeps gun makers employed, kids learn learn math skills re: balastics, creates jobs, and the top shooters can compete against other schools. I think you could probably fund the whole thing by cutting just a sport or two.

In Texas our solution in this last legislature was to arm teachers and allow folks to openly carry guns on their person. They need to think bigger in my opinion.

 

 

Win-win?  Kids in classes and playgrounds wearing sidearms?  Would they be permitted to wear their sidearms during sports activities as well as in class?  You don't want your kids to only be safe some of the time; they deserve to be safe all the time, right?  Pistol-packing football players start to sound like a good idea at that point.

 

After-school rumbles would be really serious.  And in class, what teacher would give a load of homework while looking at the pistols on her students' desks?

 

You seem to think that crazy gunmen look for a place to indulge their hobby or make a statement, so they pick a school because there will be nobody there with a firearm.  No, they pick a school because they don't like way the people at that particular school treated them, that's why.  They don't care who is armed, because they'll still manage to shoot at least a few before getting killed.  They might even see armed guards as a bit of a challenge, something to make their last minutes of life a bit more interesting, or to make them seem a little more heroic in their own minds, or those of the idiots who support them online.

 

Suicidal mass murderers don't expect to walk away, and don't care.  The vast majority of mass shootings occur at schools, colleges, or workplaces, and the killers are people who attended or worked there, and really hated some of their teachers, fellow students or co-workers.

Edited October 6, 2015 by Islander

[Travis In Austin]

It has never been considered treason to be a socialist. Then and now we have candidates for office all the way up to the presidency on a socialist ticket. Freedom of speech is in the Bill of Rights. Check it out.

That's the problem these days. Science and math are the core subjects. It shoukd be English and history.

They would know who Eugene Debs was. Wait, didn't he get ten years for sedition during WW I?

[oldtimer]

Oh yeah he did.  But not for being a socialist.  And his sentence was commuted fairly shortly thereafter, which of course the students of history would know.

[oldtimer]

 

 

 

 

 

Hello! Long time lurker. This topic has caused me to create an account and chime in.  Firstly, I have much sorrow in my heart for the mass-shootings and deaths that have plagued our country for the last few years. It is clear that something has gone wrong. What is not clear is how we address this problem. 

 

I'd like to start off by pointing out first that the Right to self defense is not negotiable. Period. And in this country that Right is afforded to all able bodied Men of age. So any talk to eliminate or curtail that basic human right should be off the table. Seriously, who would argue against self defensive measures?

 

When you are being assaulted what is the first reaction? Defense. Stop/mitigate/limit the damage. We aren't doing any of that. Instead we are bickering and arguing about guns. Which, as I just stated, is this nations chosen and well documented form of self-defense. So they aren't going away. If you want to be productive in this dilemma, provide a logical solution. All else is noise and frankly, a diversion that is keeping us from getting to the point where we can move forward with a solution to our problems. Help, or get out of the way so that we can start saving lives.

Well I am listening? What is the solution?

Welcome to the forum!

 

Thank You!  I was hoping you would tell me. 

 

Well, as I said, we are being assaulted, so let's devise a defense to at least mitigate the damage. I think we could all agree that schools seem to be the favorite target right now. So let's devise a defense to keep our children safe, shall we? I propose immediate defensive measures to include additional police resources. Yes, defend the schools with armed guards. Permanently? Perhaps no. But at least until we can get our footing and identify what our issues are so that we can eventually work towards a workable solution. How do we fund this effort? Well our government spends billions on needless crap every year. I'm sure we can rummage up a few billion to finance this program. 

 

Some might see armed guards at our schools as a drastic action. I would like to point out that we guard our courthouses with armed guards and metal detectors. We guard our state legislative buildings with armed guards. We guard our airports. Heck, I've even seen police officers sitting in their cars at road construction sites.  Now tell me, are our children any less valuable than these people? My child certainly is not.

 

It's a start. It's not necessarily the final result. And frankly, it's better than what we are doing now. 

sounds bout right. welcome

It is simple. Arm the kids. Teach them gun safety and marksmanship in grades 1, 2 and 3. Start arming them in 4th, 5th and 6th. Instead of fire drills, you conduct shooter drills. By the time they are in Jr. and high school it would be the last place a crazy gunman would show up. They will have to concentrate on churchs, movie theaters and old folks homes. Kids who did well in marksmanship can get jobs sitting in churches, theaters and retirement homes ready to pounce.

It is a win-win. Keeps gun makers employed, kids learn learn math skills re: balastics, creates jobs, and the top shooters can compete against other schools. I think you could probably fund the whole thing by cutting just a sport or two.

In Texas our solution in this last legislature was to arm teachers and allow folks to openly carry guns on their person. They need to think bigger in my opinion.

 

 

Win-win?  Kids in classes and playgrounds wearing sidearms?  Would they be permitted to wear their sidearms during sports activities as well as in class?  You don't want your kids to only be safe some of the time; they deserve to be safe all the time, right?  Pistol-packing football players start to sound like a good idea at that point.

 

After-school rumbles would be really serious.  And in class, what teacher would give a load of homework while looking at the pistols on her students' desks?

 

You seem to think that crazy gunmen look for a place to indulge their hobby or make a statement, so they pick a school because there will be nobody there with a firearm.  No, they pick a school because they don't like way the people at that particular school treated them, that's why.  They don't care who is armed, because they'll still manage to shoot at least a few before getting killed.  They might even see armed guards as a bit of a challenge, something to make their last minutes of life a bit more interesting, or to make them seem a little more heroic in their own minds, or those of the idiots who support them online.

 

Suicidal mass murderers don't expect to walk away, and don't care.  The vast majority of mass shootings occur at schools, colleges, or workplaces, and the killers are people who attended or worked there, and really hated some of their teachers, fellow students or co-workers.

 

It seems like a "modest proposal" to me westie.

[Travis In Austin]

What I don't understand is why is everyone focused on the mass killings and not everything else, which is way worse? Mass shootings are a drop in the bucket to all other types yet it is what everybody is afraid of. And the thing is, short of confisgation, you're not going to stop somebody who wants to do this. The cat is already out of the bag. Assault weapon bans don't stop anything.

I agree. I think the media has a lot to do with it. There's no media sensation when a large city has 200 murders a year. But a psychotic shooter gets notoriety from a mass shooting. The mass shootings are just a small fraction of the murders in this country.

About 1% isn't it? Then what's the problem? Why is it news? If you define a mass shooting as one in which four or more are shot in one incident we average more than one a day. Seems like it would be no big deal.

It either isn't a problem or is a problem with apparently no solution. No one has posted, unless I missed it, a solution.

Well that may be overly simplistic. Restoring the family unit and banning abortion have been suggested as having a correlation. That Professor from the University of Alabama seems to suggest that one of the motivators is notoriety, at least based on some of the titles of his publications, none of which I read.

Is there a problem? It is Taz's town, maybe we should ask him. Is there a problem? The Sheriff there didn't think so, it is the cost of doing business in a free society according to him. Maybe that is just the answer.

How about a ban on naming the perpetrator of any mass shooting?

[oldtimer]

You've been taking button pushing lessons from BigStew....

[Jim Naseum]

It has never been considered treason to be a socialist.

Joseph McCarthy. Technically, you might be right, but we were taught that essentially, he and his ilk had substantial power and were on a witch-hunt against Marxists alleged to be in the US.

You mean communists, not Marxists, I'm sure.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

[Jim Naseum]

I've often wondered about where freedom of speech ends and treason begins. We are a Republic. Could it not be argued that actively promoting socialism/communism/whateverism is an attempt to overthrow our established form of government?

But I digress. That is a topic for another thread.

No.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

[Jim Naseum]

Clearly a large portion of our members here and the public at large are completely unable to have a debate about something that is statistically fact.

Gun free zones don't cause murders- if you guys can't continue a logical debate... By reading and seeing that mass murderers don't pick their targets / location because of the location or absense of guns. They pick the location/people as targets because it has significance to them. Their old school, their workplace, A religion they hate, Girls that wouldn't date them, bullies, etc.

I can't continue to argue with people who are too dense to even listen.

I asked for any statistics or cases where a good guy with a gun stopped a mass murder...

I did however provide multiple articles that show that isn't possible.. Because they do not exist.

Guns, by trained professionals to respond were the saving grace in each instance.

So.... I'm bowing out of this "debate" Because it's making my eyeball get a headache from stupidity, arrogance, and the inability for factual dialogue to take place.

Bye

That's also wrong.... DoD members actively engaged in security and law enforcement ShALL BE ARMED.

Walk up to a military installation and tell me they don't carry guns...

See... We aren't working with the facts here.

Still here? Thought you said "So.... I'm bowing out of this "debate" Because it's making my eyeball get a headache from stupidity, arrogance, and the inability for factual dialogue to take place."

Hello! Long time lurker. This topic has caused me to create an account and chime in. Firstly, I have much sorrow in my heart for the mass-shootings and deaths that have plagued our country for the last few years. It is clear that something has gone wrong. What is not clear is how we address this problem.

I'd like to start off by pointing out first that the Right to self defense is not negotiable. Period. And in this country that Right is afforded to all able bodied Men of age. So any talk to eliminate or curtail that basic human right should be off the table. Seriously, who would argue against self defensive measures?

When you are being assaulted what is the first reaction? Defense. Stop/mitigate/limit the damage. We aren't doing any of that. Instead we are bickering and arguing about guns. Which, as I just stated, is this nations chosen and well documented form of self-defense. So they aren't going away. If you want to be productive in this dilemma, provide a logical solution. All else is noise and frankly, a diversion that is keeping us from getting to the point where we can move forward with a solution to our problems. Help, or get out of the way so that we can start saving lives.

You might be arguing about guns. But that want the premise of the thread. The country is creating more sociopathic killers than statistics would predict for a rich country. The question is why is this happening, and of course how do we change it. We have an extraordinary tolerance for school shootings. What are we doing wrong?

Ft. Hood shooting. Military base... Hmm I wonder if there are any trained marksmen there with access to weapons? Damn.... If only a good guy with access to a gun was there on a MILITARY BASE!!!

they shot his *** as soon as they could or more would have died. Thank god the good guys had guns

this is ludicrous- gun nuts still skip over the point. I thought good guys with guns on site would prevent the shootings?

I thought gun free zones were the problem?!

Here "good guys with guns" were there and it did NOT prevent anything. Whatever the hell that is? Show me two guys with guns... Who's the good guy?

Have you ever served in the military? I'm guessing not as there are standing orders on separate storage of arms and ammunition at military bases. You will not see people serving there carrying around loaded rifles, etc..

According to the current US President the mass-murder that occurred on that horrific day at that base was merely 'workplace violence'.

Again--- it was workplace violence... The shooting was a place of significance to the shooter. Guns Being present on a military base did not sway his decision.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

I thought the subject of the thread was

Mass Killings - You Get What You Want in Society

As stated by the OP.

Personally I don't think anyone here wants

Mass Killings

To DUI****** discussion is a start. Getting criminals off the hook is not a solution for any of societies problems.

Although the money may be good.

No, of course no one wants mass killings. But, they want the system that is producing so many sociopaths. They are unwilling to take any steps to solve that problem. If they didn't like what they had, they would change it.

Because the "gun" is the only point of focus for people, they don't dig any deeper. We are churning out lots of young male sociopaths, and the cause isn't guns.

The cause of mental illness so serious as to create sociopathy isn't found in an object, like s gun. The use of guns in these cases is a consequence of the sociopathy.

Hypothesis:

1. It starts with poisonous food. Our chemical laden food, loaded with sugar and preservatives is unhealthy at least, and possibly so dangerous as to create disease.

2. Very low quality health care. And virtually zero mental health care. Because of insurance rules, children with early MH problems are usually denied care. Early problems, untreated become bigger. It can be argued that American children get the worst health care of any children in similarly wealthy countries.

3. Poor education systems. Does that really need explanation?

4. Technological isolation. All modern technologies are increasing our ability to silo. Nearly all these young sociopaths demonstrated clear anti social, loner characteristics. They had secret stashes of weapons in the home. They live secret lives online. All made possible with technology. This could be called an unintentional consequence.

5. Stress. Like never before, modern society places stress on younger and younger children. Adulthood is being forced on very young kids.

Mix that all together, and out comes another sociopath. Now, you can add the ease of getting guns, and you have your next school shooter.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

Edited October 6, 2015 by jo56steph74

[Jim Naseum]

Hello! Long time lurker. This topic has caused me to create an account and chime in. Firstly, I have much sorrow in my heart for the mass-shootings and deaths that have plagued our country for the last few years. It is clear that something has gone wrong. What is not clear is how we address this problem.

I'd like to start off by pointing out first that the Right to self defense is not negotiable. Period. And in this country that Right is afforded to all able bodied Men of age. So any talk to eliminate or curtail that basic human right should be off the table. Seriously, who would argue against self defensive measures?

When you are being assaulted what is the first reaction? Defense. Stop/mitigate/limit the damage. We aren't doing any of that. Instead we are bickering and arguing about guns. Which, as I just stated, is this nations chosen and well documented form of self-defense. So they aren't going away. If you want to be productive in this dilemma, provide a logical solution. All else is noise and frankly, a diversion that is keeping us from getting to the point where we can move forward with a solution to our problems. Help, or get out of the way so that we can start saving lives.

Well I am listening? What is the solution?

Welcome to the forum!

Thank You! I was hoping you would tell me.

Well, as I said, we are being assaulted, so let's devise a defense to at least mitigate the damage. I think we could all agree that schools seem to be the favorite target right now. So let's devise a defense to keep our children safe, shall we? I propose immediate defensive measures to include additional police resources. Yes, defend the schools with armed guards. Permanently? Perhaps no. But at least until we can get our footing and identify what our issues are so that we can eventually work towards a workable solution. How do we fund this effort? Well our government spends billions on needless crap every year. I'm sure we can rummage up a few billion to finance this program.

Some might see armed guards at our schools as a drastic action. I would like to point out that we guard our courthouses with armed guards and metal detectors. We guard our state legislative buildings with armed guards. We guard our airports. Heck, I've even seen police officers sitting in their cars at road construction sites. Now tell me, are our children any less valuable than these people? My child certainly is not.

It's a start. It's not necessarily the final result. And frankly, it's better than what we are doing now.

sounds bout right. welcome

It is simple. Arm the kids. Teach them gun safety and marksmanship in grades 1, 2 and 3. Start arming them in 4th, 5th and 6th. Instead of fire drills, you conduct shooter drills. By the time they are in Jr. and high school it would be the last place a crazy gunman would show up. They will have to concentrate on churchs, movie theaters and old folks homes. Kids who did well in marksmanship can get jobs sitting in churches, theaters and retirement homes ready to pounce.

It is a win-win. Keeps gun makers employed, kids learn learn math skills re: balastics, creates jobs, and the top shooters can compete against other schools. I think you could probably fund the whole thing by cutting just a sport or two.

In Texas our solution in this last legislature was to arm teachers and allow folks to openly carry guns on their person. They need to think bigger in my opinion.

I assume this was in jest. I hope so. But, in case it is not in jest....

I wouldn't want to train young kids to kill people. Teaching 7 year old how to kill another human may be the most heinous crime against humanity that I can imagine. The "Boy Soldiers" of the Congo comes to mind. I'm sure this was just sarcasm.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

[Jim Naseum]

What I don't understand is why is everyone focused on the mass killings and not everything else, which is way worse? Mass shootings are a drop in the bucket to all other types yet it is what everybody is afraid of. And the thing is, short of confisgation, you're not going to stop somebody who wants to do this. The cat is already out of the bag. Assault weapon bans don't stop anything.

I agree. I think the media has a lot to do with it. There's no media sensation when a large city has 200 murders a year. But a psychotic shooter gets notoriety from a mass shooting. The mass shootings are just a small fraction of the murders in this country.

About 1% isn't it? Then what's the problem? Why is it news? If you define a mass shooting as one in which four or more are shot in one incident we average more than one a day. Seems like it would be no big deal.

It either isn't a problem or is a problem with apparently no solution. No one has posted, unless I missed it, a solution.

Well that may be overly simplistic. Restoring the family unit and banning abortion have been suggested as having a correlation. That Professor from the University of Alabama seems to suggest that one of the motivators is notoriety, at least based on some of the titles of his publications, none of which I read.

Is there a problem? It is Taz's town, maybe we should ask him. Is there a problem? The Sheriff there didn't think so, it is the cost of doing business in a free society according to him. Maybe that is just the answer.

How about a ban on naming the perpetrator of any mass shooting?

It's news because like all terrorist acts it traumatizes whole communities. Unlike gang shootings where people might assume perp and victim are both criminals, we like to assume our students and teachers are innocents, and should not deserve cold blooded murder.

Terrorism always shocks and horrifies. Yeah, that's the meaning of it. So, these are not insignificant acts.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

[Taz]

 

 

What I don't understand is why is everyone focused on the mass killings and not everything else, which is way worse? Mass shootings are a drop in the bucket to all other types yet it is what everybody is afraid of. And the thing is, short of confisgation, you're not going to stop somebody who wants to do this. The cat is already out of the bag. Assault weapon bans don't stop anything.

I agree. I think the media has a lot to do with it. There's no media sensation when a large city has 200 murders a year. But a psychotic shooter gets notoriety from a mass shooting. The mass shootings are just a small fraction of the murders in this country.

About 1% isn't it? Then what's the problem? Why is it news? If you define a mass shooting as one in which four or more are shot in one incident we average more than one a day. Seems like it would be no big deal.

It either isn't a problem or is a problem with apparently no solution. No one has posted, unless I missed it, a solution.

Well that may be overly simplistic. Restoring the family unit and banning abortion have been suggested as having a correlation. That Professor from the University of Alabama seems to suggest that one of the motivators is notoriety, at least based on some of the titles of his publications, none of which I read.

Is there a problem? It is Taz's town, maybe we should ask him. Is there a problem? The Sheriff there didn't think so, it is the cost of doing business in a free society according to him. Maybe that is just the answer.

How about a ban on naming the perpetrator of any mass shooting?

 

 

All I ask is for Volunteer non disclosure of perpetrator and future perpetrators.  I asked for it here, and I have asked for it from news agency's.

Tonight while the news was on.  2 programs that mentioned the tragedy and did not name the shooter.

Will it help?  I don't know.  But I can't see any harm.

 

"Is there a problem? It is Taz's town, maybe we should ask him. Is there a problem? The Sheriff there didn't think so, it is the cost of doing business in a free society according to him. Maybe that is just the answer."

 

Never seen the present gun laws to cause increased violence around here.  It don't worry me when I see people openly carrying their sidearms.  I've done the same at outdoor concerts.  Only 1 time did someone get concerned.  And they gave me a staff badge.  Like all communities we do have violence.  And occasionally murders.  There have been murders since the time of Cain and Able.  They still adversely affect families and communities.  And yes, when someone commits such a heinous act it is a problem.  I don't care if it is in my community or yours.  Random acts of violence are very difficult to prevent.  And if you do something that prevents a tragedy, where is the Proof that a tragedy was prevented.

 

The Sheriff has my full support in his actions in this case.  I don't see a problem with the way the Sheriffs department  does business most of the time. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hello! Long time lurker. This topic has caused me to create an account and chime in. Firstly, I have much sorrow in my heart for the mass-shootings and deaths that have plagued our country for the last few years. It is clear that something has gone wrong. What is not clear is how we address this problem.

I'd like to start off by pointing out first that the Right to self defense is not negotiable. Period. And in this country that Right is afforded to all able bodied Men of age. So any talk to eliminate or curtail that basic human right should be off the table. Seriously, who would argue against self defensive measures?

When you are being assaulted what is the first reaction? Defense. Stop/mitigate/limit the damage. We aren't doing any of that. Instead we are bickering and arguing about guns. Which, as I just stated, is this nations chosen and well documented form of self-defense. So they aren't going away. If you want to be productive in this dilemma, provide a logical solution. All else is noise and frankly, a diversion that is keeping us from getting to the point where we can move forward with a solution to our problems. Help, or get out of the way so that we can start saving lives.

Well I am listening? What is the solution?

Welcome to the forum!

Thank You! I was hoping you would tell me.

Well, as I said, we are being assaulted, so let's devise a defense to at least mitigate the damage. I think we could all agree that schools seem to be the favorite target right now. So let's devise a defense to keep our children safe, shall we? I propose immediate defensive measures to include additional police resources. Yes, defend the schools with armed guards. Permanently? Perhaps no. But at least until we can get our footing and identify what our issues are so that we can eventually work towards a workable solution. How do we fund this effort? Well our government spends billions on needless crap every year. I'm sure we can rummage up a few billion to finance this program.

Some might see armed guards at our schools as a drastic action. I would like to point out that we guard our courthouses with armed guards and metal detectors. We guard our state legislative buildings with armed guards. We guard our airports. Heck, I've even seen police officers sitting in their cars at road construction sites. Now tell me, are our children any less valuable than these people? My child certainly is not.

It's a start. It's not necessarily the final result. And frankly, it's better than what we are doing now.

sounds bout right. welcome

It is simple. Arm the kids. Teach them gun safety and marksmanship in grades 1, 2 and 3. Start arming them in 4th, 5th and 6th. Instead of fire drills, you conduct shooter drills. By the time they are in Jr. and high school it would be the last place a crazy gunman would show up. They will have to concentrate on churchs, movie theaters and old folks homes. Kids who did well in marksmanship can get jobs sitting in churches, theaters and retirement homes ready to pounce.

It is a win-win. Keeps gun makers employed, kids learn learn math skills re: balastics, creates jobs, and the top shooters can compete against other schools. I think you could probably fund the whole thing by cutting just a sport or two.

In Texas our solution in this last legislature was to arm teachers and allow folks to openly carry guns on their person. They need to think bigger in my opinion.

I assume this was in jest. I hope so. But, in case it is not in jest....

I wouldn't want to train young kids to kill people. Teaching 7 year old how to kill another human may be the most heinous crime against humanity that I can imagine. The "Boy Soldiers" of the Congo comes to mind. I'm sure this was just sarcasm.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk

 

 

Teaching kids to kill people is not the answer.  But I strongly encourage teaching kids to be able to defend themselves.

My Daughter learned to shoot at 5 years of age.  I believe my son was 6.  While in grade school they could shot nickel sized groups at 100 yards.

 

One time my kids were home alone and someone keep calling and hanging up.  When we got home both kids were in our bedroom, in the corner where I kept my guns.  They knew better then to touch the guns.  But if someone had broken in and approached the kids I'm sure they would have defended themselves.  I'm also sure that this would have caused mental health issues for them.

 

My kids had their own firearms from Grade school own.  Gifts from myself and other family members.

 

Some people will probably think it wrong that I taught the kids to shoot at such an early age. Or that I allowed them to have their own firearms.  But I have never been sorry I did.  The kids learned to respect firearms at an early age.  Never got into any trouble with their firearms, or mine.

Edited October 6, 2015 by Taz

[joessportster]

Ft. Hood shooting. Military base... Hmm I wonder if there are any trained marksmen there with access to weapons? Damn.... If only a good guy with access to a gun was there on a MILITARY BASE!!!

Ever Been on a us military base ??  The guns are all locked up in the armory, the only people walking around with weapons or access are the Military Police or the armorer.  A snide no knowledge remark of how the Military base works does nothing to support your position, on the contrary it makes you look like a zealot with an ax to grind in support of your agenda no matter the cost  

[Paducah Home Theater]

I think it is incorrect to say it's always schools. No, it's been school buildings, outside college campuses, churches, military bases, movie theaters, shopping malls, concerts, and even outdoor basketball courts in inner cities, although since it's black on black crime you never hear about those.

[rebuy]

For Readers of "Mother Jones" news and others--Just quit trying to change our country.

If you don't like America--There are Places like England where you can live in Gun Free Countries.

Of course so many Murders are committed with knives in England that they have Knife Sale Restictions.

This will Not be that place---

The article is from the Uber Liberal Post

I'm done too --  No one is forcing you to live here--

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/10/03/do-civilians-with-guns-ever-stop-mass-shootings/?tid=pm_opinions_pop_b

Edited October 6, 2015 by rebuy