Agreed. But that doesn't mean no action should be taken on any single aspect of it, just because "it is complex".
I agree. I've already suggested actions should be taken to strengthen measures to keep guns away from persons with mental health issues. Which brings the question what types / severity of mental health issues. I leave that to experts.
However, anyone thinking any one approach/action is going to eliminate mass murder by firearm - isn't reality based.
As I said earlier - this is a complex multi-faceted problem. There are no easy answers. Anyone proposing an easy answer that addresses only one aspect of the problem is a fool, IMO.
Agreed. But that doesn't mean no action should be taken on any single aspect of it, just because "it is complex".
As I said earlier - this is a complex multi-faceted problem. There are no easy answers. Anyone proposing an easy answer that addresses only one aspect of the problem is a fool, IMO.
From the linked article - ""How the Media Inspires Mass Shooters" :
"Since the 1980s, forensic investigators have found examples of mass killers emulating their most famous predecessors. Now, there is growing evidence that the copycat problem is far more serious than is generally understood. Ever since the 1999 massacre at Coloradoâs Columbine High School, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has been studying what motivates people to carry out these crimes."
Wrong. It simply contradicts the narrative that its really just the rightwingnuts that go around killing people indiscriminately with guns.
Actually I'll amend my response. Yes, I did expect the pro-gun narrative to focus on the trans nature of the perpertrator, as they did full-bore.
No, I don't think all mass-shooters are perpertrators.
I do, as Proclivities pointed out agree that the right-wing-nuts ignore and actively deflect the role of guns, especially high-capacity, rapid-fire weapons in mass killings.
Huh ? Not perpetrators ? Then what ? What are you talking about ? You lost me.
noun plural noun: perpetrators a person who carries out a harmful, illegal, or immoral act.
Still, I remember sleepless nights I had in PHX back in the 90s, keeping my tennis-racket under the bed, just in case. It also was the reason my wife rather went back to Europe.. a shame to yours? - I guess not.
It hasn't been a matter of right or left that folks shoot each other all along. Or, has it? Narrative back and forth, guns in the hands of (all) the people should be forbidden, imo. Simply cannot understand the fascination gun-nation.
I think it has to be seen as a fracture in the social fabric. People who feel the need to own a gun basically have an underlying mistrust about society - that it is not going to be there for them when they need it. They suspect society could turn hostile towards them and they need to protect themselves (and their families).
To put this another way, why do they have so little faith in the basic goodwill of society?
Is it because they themselves have little inclination to contribute to social cohesion? Is it because their definition of society is selective and excludes marginal groups who might one day take their revenge? Blacks, gays, etc.
Whatever it is, there is a fundamental rift in US society. Maybe it goes back to the civil war. Maybe slavery. Maybe whatever. But this rift has been and is still being milked to great effect for political gain. Kind of frightening to see. And when you amplify these fears, you stoke precisely the underlying motivation to buy a gun.
Wrong. It simply contradicts the narrative that its really just the rightwingnuts that go around killing people indiscriminately with guns.
Actually I'll amend my response. Yes, I did expect the pro-gun narrative to focus on the trans nature of the perpertrator, as they did full-bore. No, I don't think all mass-shooters are right-wing-nuts perpertrators . I do, as Proclivities pointed out agree that the right-wing-nuts ignore and actively deflect the role of guns, especially high-capacity, rapid-fire weapons in mass killings.
Nothing. Only by doing away with the 2nd and confiscation. Treat everyone like children. Irresponsible, uncontrollable and helpless. But then what of the needs of the responsible ? .
“Mental health issues are more the common denominator.” So what is your proposal regarding this “common denominator?” Or are you saying there is nothing that can be done — which appears to be what you are saying?
I didn't say “Mental health issues are more the common denominator.” I said that death was the common denominator.
Let's just cut to the chase, shall we ? Your side, your leaders want to ban guns entirely. The talk about compromises is a pretense. I keep hearing that "you don't need" guns for this or that. Or we, the people, do not need guns. The government is here to protect you. Well your side doesn't want any police, so who will protect us ? Defund the police came from your leaders, not mine.
Tell the people, the ordinary land owners and ranchers who live on our wide open southern border they don't need guns. They go through daily encounters with illegal migrants and cartel employees who are heavily armed and have no respect for life. The government ain't doing anything to protect our border, let alone the citizens who live along the border. And in the cities such as Chicago and others where murder by gangs and criminals is common place, the police have been neutered and unable to even protect themselves.
You can say that you are willing to compromise, but your leaders are not and they control you because you elect and keep reelecting them. And you wonder how we got to where we are today. There is big money in promoting racism and pretending to mitigate the problems that are created by them in the first place. That is the root of it. Money and power and ultimately control. Make us defenseless and dependent on a dysfunctional government that will never solve any problems, just create more so they can say that you need us so we can fix what we broke under the guise of "unintended consequences." Bullpuckey.
Wrong. It simply contradicts the narrative that its really just the rightwingnuts that go around killing people indiscriminately with guns.
The narrative (if there is one) would be that right-wing nuts are then ones who see no need to do anything about people being indiscriminately killed with guns. It's not that right-wing types are more often the ones doing the shooting.
Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth
Posted:
Mar 28, 2023 - 1:08pm
kurtster wrote:
Wrong. It simply contradicts the narrative that its really just the rightwingnuts that go around killing people indiscriminately with guns.
That is not a prevailing or pervasive narrative. I, for example, have never posited that. Nor would I. It is not a narrative that I hear when I am discussing mass shootings with people I know. By contrast, there is a narrative that those who adamantly oppose restrictions on guns tend to be more from the conservative side of the spectrum. That, however, does not equate with these shooters being more likely to be from the right end of the spectrum. These shooters often are people with grievances, against certain individuals, groups, or institutions or with society at large. How or why any one of them reaches that point of no return is varied and perplexing.
Exactly. As soon as I heard the perpetrator was trans I knew where the pro-gun dialogue would go. Itâs never about the guns, itâs always the scapegoat.
Big mistake.
The Covenant School: Nashville Private Christian School
Wrong. It simply contradicts the narrative that its really just the rightwingnuts that go around killing people indiscriminately with guns.
It hasn't been a matter of right or left that folks shoot each other all along. Or, has it? Narrative back and forth, guns in the hands of (all) the people should be forbidden, imo. Simply cannot understand the fascination gun-nation.
Exactly. As soon as I heard the perpetrator was trans I knew where the pro-gun dialogue would go. It’s never about the guns, it’s always the scapegoat.
Wrong. It simply contradicts the narrative that its really just the rightwingnuts that go around killing people indiscriminately with guns.
oh for crying out loud, can you people stop this victimisation of the transgender community already? As perpetrators of mass killings they are underrepresented, I believe. I'll let someone else crunch the numbers if they are that desperate to push an entirely fictional narrative on the lines of correlation must equal causation blah blah.
It is patently obvious that this anti-trans trope is just the next wave of scapegoating, whipping up hysteria about a marginalised group for purely political reasons. It's pretty transparent and also pretty damn disgusting behaviour. If you want to curry political support, try arguing on the basis of merit or performance or some other metric that actually matters. We deserve better. But so do you.
Now, get rid of assault weapons. Sure it's not going to solve the cause of the problem, but it demonstrably reduces the scale of it.
Crikey, is it that difficult?
Exactly. As soon as I heard the perpetrator was trans I knew where the pro-gun dialogue would go. Itâs never about the guns, itâs always the scapegoat.
Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth
Posted:
Mar 28, 2023 - 12:38pm
NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
oh for crying out loud, can you people stop this victimisation of the transgender community already? As perpetrators of mass killings they are underrepresented, I believe. I'll let someone else crunch the numbers if they are that desperate to push an entirely fictional narrative on the lines of correlation must equal causation blah blah.
It is patently obvious that this anti-trans trope is just the next wave of scapegoating, whipping up hysteria about a marginalised group for purely political reasons. It's pretty transparent and also pretty damn disgusting behaviour. If you want to curry political support, try arguing on the basis of merit or performance or some other metric that actually matters. We deserve better. But so do you.
Now, get rid of assault weapons. Sure it's not going to solve the cause of the problem, but it demonstrably reduces the scale of it.
Crikey, is it that difficult?
+1
We knew it was surely coming, though, and not just talking about this forum.
