Mass killings

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

No, relying on government to fix this problem is where liberty gets butt fucked.

.

Ok. So who is going to fix it and when?
When does this become a problem the govt should address then?
I believe my liberty to move around freely and safely is being hindered. The general welfare of our society is being impacted as well.

And that was the same problem you had 50 years ago or 100 years ago, or in 1776 or 1066.

Does anyone take personal responsibility for their security?

.

And that was the same problem you had 50 years ago or 100 years ago, or in 1776 or 1066.

Does anyone take personal responsibility for their security?

I've never had that problem until now. None of us have. I've never had to think about the possibility of avoiding large public gatherings before.

Who is going to fix this and when?

You have always had that problem. You were just ignorant of the threat.

.

Nonsense. Paranoid nonsense.

What? Now or back then?

.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

It isn't just health insurance.

Sen. Creigh Deeds settles wrongful death lawsuit in son's suicide

That is a fuck up by the mental health provider and a gap in laws.

You went from denying Defiant1's point to confirming it.

.

It was because we would not fund enough facilities.

Funding facilities is a different issue. Has nothing to do with socialized medicine.

.

You have to be able to cover the treatment somehow.

Again, did this shooter NOT get treatment because he had no means to pay for it?

.

Did he need it? Do muslim terrorists need it as well?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

That is a fuck up by the mental health provider and a gap in laws.

You went from denying Defiant1's point to confirming it.

.

It was because we would not fund enough facilities.

Funding facilities is a different issue. Has nothing to do with socialized medicine.

.

You have to be able to cover the treatment somehow.

Again, did this shooter NOT get treatment because he had no means to pay for it?

.

Did he need it? Do muslim terrorists need it as well?

I can't say.

All I can say is that banning a certain class of weapons will not change anything.

.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Right now we live in a nightmarish society. But it’s OUR society; surely we can vote—or if necessary, violently shove—our way out of this ugly, intolerable situation! Only the most irresponsible, cowardly GENERATION would just let it continue. Those kids and other human brethren getting massacred are YOURS.

Time to make it a number one voting booth priority; if your Congressional representatives in the House and Senate won’t put a stop to it, get rid of them until we have a Congress that will get the job done—including a veto override as necessary. If we can’t do that, we don’t deserve our Constitution.

It’s really that simple, granted that it couldn’t just happen overnight: time to clarify and ultimately rectify that way-out-of-date Second Amendment—and to hell with the NRA, which today struggles to justify private ownership of military weaponry whose only legitimate purpose is to allow combat soldiers and law enforcement personnel to kill as many bad guys as possible as quickly as people—as distinguished from just making them available to anyone with enough money to buy one or indeed as many as they can afford, no questions asked.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

While we have always had weapons, we have not always had mass shootings. It is not our second amendment that is the problem. We have always had the second amendment, we have not always had mass shootings.
We need to take our children back. This is a parent/teacher/preacher problem. 1, 2 or all 3 could solve this problem.
Outraged that 9 people and 26 more were wounded? 4 people dead and 43 wounded in Chicago and we call that Sat. night.
Try teaching our children about the sanctity of life instead of pretend pronouns for their penises. Teach our children the Golden Rule instead of how to abort a fetus. Take away Grand Theft Auto, and substitute with positive real life experiences instead.
This is not a gun problem. Our youth are the problem.

White male youth especially.

I'm sorry, I mis-spoke. 7 dead in Chicago this weekend and 46 wounded. So, white, male, terrorist, hate criminal vs Saturday In the Park?

Let's make Chicago and Baltimore the litmus test for the solution to this problem. Ban guns in Chicago. No background checks necessary, because no guns allowed. Ban all guns in Chicago and Baltimore, and let's see if the solution works....

 

[blackhawk]

Something maybe everyone should consider.
Steve Hilton: After every mass shooting we replay the same unhelpful loop

With that being said. What do you believe would be helpful?

For starters stop focusing so much on the type of gun used and focus on why so many late teens to early 20s people feel the need to do this. The gun control part is important but it’s only a part we need to realize this is a complex problem with no simple ten second soundbite solutions.

The type is absolutely relevant. It seems to be the "tool" of choice. Why is that? Because that is what it's designed for.

These "kids" do it because the equipment needed is readily available. It's not just kids. The Vegas shooter was no kid. No doubt why his attack was more devastating.

So you think if you just ban semi automatic rifles that will stop it? It’s that type of oversimplified thinking that solves nothing and is a great example of that ten second soundbite thinking. We have had guns in the country for a long time and they could be purchased more easily back in the 60s and 70s than they can today now granted those back then could not do the damage the ones today can even so mass shootings were rare and school shootings unheard of. So clearly something has changed between then and now and until that is addressed nothing is going to be solved.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Right now we live in a nightmarish society. But it’s OUR society; surely we can vote—or if necessary, violently shove—our way out of this ugly, intolerable situation! Only the most irresponsible, cowardly GENERATION would just let it continue. Those kids and other human brethren getting massacred are YOURS.

Time to make it a number one voting booth priority; if your Congressional representatives in the House and Senate won’t put a stop to it, get rid of them until we have a Congress that will get the job done—including a veto override as necessary. If we can’t do that, we don’t deserve our Constitution.

It’s really that simple, granted that it couldn’t just happen overnight: time to clarify and ultimately rectify that way-out-of-date Second Amendment—and to hell with the NRA, which today struggles to justify private ownership of military weaponry whose only legitimate purpose is to allow combat soldiers and law enforcement personnel to kill as many bad guys as possible as quickly as people—as distinguished from just making them available to anyone with enough money to buy one or indeed as many as they can afford, no questions asked.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Here is an idea. How about we start teaching very young children, and continue to teach them right tup through adulthood, to tolerate people they disagree with?

Oh, no. That would be acquiescing to the dreaded "PC culture". It's best to induce butthurt and " liberal tears".

You's have a point, but it is the dreaded "PC culture" that brought us the intolerance to begin.

That is some backwards assed logic there.

What you call PC, I call civility. It's being respectful of others feelings about their beliefs and ideas. Calling people wetbacks, fags, thugs, etc....especially for the purpose of illiciting a response is not a belief or an idea. It's malignant behavior. Uncivil behavior.

You see, that is where you are exactly backward.

You see, if someone says, "That wetback...".

What is more tolerant. Telling them they cannot use that language, or just pointing out that they're comment is wrong and hurtful, yet not hating the person and just moving on with the conversation?

Tolerant means you disagree with the person's words, actions, or beliefs. It does not mean you shut them down for using language or words you disagree with.

No one should be tolerant of uncivil behavior.
It's repugnant and offensive. Especially when done deliberately. It's the very definition of incivility.

in·ci·vil·i·ty
/ˌinsəˈvilədē/
Learn to pronounce
noun

1. rude or unsociable speech or behavior.
   "absenteeism and incivility were not tolerated"
   synonyms: rudeness, discourtesy, discourteousness, impoliteness, lack of politeness; More
   
   • an impolite or offensive comment.
     plural noun: incivilities

Earlier you were suggesting tha we teach our children how that type of behavior should be acceptable.
I teach them the opposite. It's never acceptable behavior. It's uncouth behavior. Maludjusted behavior.

 

[Darkwind]

Here is an idea. How about we start teaching very young children, and continue to teach them right tup through adulthood, to tolerate people they disagree with?

Oh, no. That would be acquiescing to the dreaded "PC culture". It's best to induce butthurt and " liberal tears".

You's have a point, but it is the dreaded "PC culture" that brought us the intolerance to begin.

That is some backwards assed logic there.

What you call PC, I call civility. It's being respectful of others feelings about their beliefs and ideas. Calling people wetbacks, fags, thugs, etc....especially for the purpose of illiciting a response is not a belief or an idea. It's malignant behavior. Uncivil behavior.

You see, that is where you are exactly backward.

You see, if someone says, "That wetback...".

What is more tolerant. Telling them they cannot use that language, or just pointing out that they're comment is wrong and hurtful, yet not hating the person and just moving on with the conversation?

Tolerant means you disagree with the person's words, actions, or beliefs. It does not mean you shut them down for using language or words you disagree with.

No one should be tolerant of uncivil behavior.
It's repugnant and offensive. Especially when done deliberately. It's the very definition of incivility.

in·ci·vil·i·ty
/ˌinsəˈvilədē/
Learn to pronounce
noun

1. rude or unsociable speech or behavior.
   "absenteeism and incivility were not tolerated"
   synonyms: rudeness, discourtesy, discourteousness, impoliteness, lack of politeness; More
   • an impolite or offensive comment.
     plural noun: incivilities

Earlier you were suggesting tha we teach our children how that type of behavior should be acceptable.
I teach them the opposite. It's never acceptable behavior. It's uncouth behavior. Maludjusted behavior.

Shall I put you down on the FBI list of possible mass shooters then?

 

[Defiant1]

Making it illegal to report shootings would help. By anyone.

Making it illegal to report shootings would help. By anyone.

Huh?

If it's not reported in the news or on social media your emotions can't be triggered.

If it's not reported in the news or on social media your emotions can't be triggered

LOL...
So sweeping it under the rug is "helpful".

Well, let's see.
This past weekend a person in Missouri stole a truck trailer rig and while evading police across two counties he caused several accidents, fleeing from all but the last.
In the course 3 people were killed and many more were injured.
Pretty close to the Garlic shooting.
Not in the news, no outrage.

Not domestic terrorism either.

Domestic terrorism, lol
That's a joke.

Were you hunkered down all weekend?
When did the mall reopen?
Hell I bet if they had taped off the bodies and reopened the Walmart people would have been shopping.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Here is an idea. How about we start teaching very young children, and continue to teach them right tup through adulthood, to tolerate people they disagree with?

Oh, no. That would be acquiescing to the dreaded "PC culture". It's best to induce butthurt and " liberal tears".

You's have a point, but it is the dreaded "PC culture" that brought us the intolerance to begin.

That is some backwards assed logic there.

What you call PC, I call civility. It's being respectful of others feelings about their beliefs and ideas. Calling people wetbacks, fags, thugs, etc....especially for the purpose of illiciting a response is not a belief or an idea. It's malignant behavior. Uncivil behavior.

You see, that is where you are exactly backward.

You see, if someone says, "That wetback...".

What is more tolerant. Telling them they cannot use that language, or just pointing out that they're comment is wrong and hurtful, yet not hating the person and just moving on with the conversation?

Tolerant means you disagree with the person's words, actions, or beliefs. It does not mean you shut them down for using language or words you disagree with.

No one should be tolerant of uncivil behavior.
It's repugnant and offensive. Especially when done deliberately. It's the very definition of incivility.

in·ci·vil·i·ty
/ˌinsəˈvilədē/
Learn to pronounce
noun

1. rude or unsociable speech or behavior.
   "absenteeism and incivility were not tolerated"
   synonyms: rudeness, discourtesy, discourteousness, impoliteness, lack of politeness; More
   • an impolite or offensive comment.
     plural noun: incivilities

Earlier you were suggesting tha we teach our children how that type of behavior should be acceptable.
I teach them the opposite. It's never acceptable behavior. It's uncouth behavior. Maludjusted behavior.

And, an armed society makes a polite society.

.

 

[Darkwind]

Oh, no. That would be acquiescing to the dreaded "PC culture". It's best to induce butthurt and " liberal tears".

You's have a point, but it is the dreaded "PC culture" that brought us the intolerance to begin.

That is some backwards assed logic there.

What you call PC, I call civility. It's being respectful of others feelings about their beliefs and ideas. Calling people wetbacks, fags, thugs, etc....especially for the purpose of illiciting a response is not a belief or an idea. It's malignant behavior. Uncivil behavior.

You see, that is where you are exactly backward.

You see, if someone says, "That wetback...".

What is more tolerant. Telling them they cannot use that language, or just pointing out that they're comment is wrong and hurtful, yet not hating the person and just moving on with the conversation?

Tolerant means you disagree with the person's words, actions, or beliefs. It does not mean you shut them down for using language or words you disagree with.

No one should be tolerant of uncivil behavior.
It's repugnant and offensive. Especially when done deliberately. It's the very definition of incivility.

in·ci·vil·i·ty
/ˌinsəˈvilədē/
Learn to pronounce
noun

1. rude or unsociable speech or behavior.
   "absenteeism and incivility were not tolerated"
   synonyms: rudeness, discourtesy, discourteousness, impoliteness, lack of politeness; More
   • an impolite or offensive comment.
     plural noun: incivilities

Earlier you were suggesting tha we teach our children how that type of behavior should be acceptable.
I teach them the opposite. It's never acceptable behavior. It's uncouth behavior. Maludjusted behavior.

And, an armed society makes a polite society.

.

More importantly, a truly tolerant society means a living society.

When we say, "I cannot tolerate that happening" you are really saying that you are prepared to take action to stop it.

Very much like the mass shooting we have had over the past 20 years.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Ok. So who is going to fix it and when?
When does this become a problem the govt should address then?
I believe my liberty to move around freely and safely is being hindered. The general welfare of our society is being impacted as well.

And that was the same problem you had 50 years ago or 100 years ago, or in 1776 or 1066.

Does anyone take personal responsibility for their security?

.

And that was the same problem you had 50 years ago or 100 years ago, or in 1776 or 1066.

Does anyone take personal responsibility for their security?

I've never had that problem until now. None of us have. I've never had to think about the possibility of avoiding large public gatherings before.

Who is going to fix this and when?

You have always had that problem. You were just ignorant of the threat.

.

Nonsense. Paranoid nonsense.

What? Now or back then?

.

What did I respond to?
Not once in my life have I ever thought that I could find myself involved in an "active shooter" event. Not until quite recently. I find myself now constantly aware of exits and my position relative to them.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Oh, no. That would be acquiescing to the dreaded "PC culture". It's best to induce butthurt and " liberal tears".

You's have a point, but it is the dreaded "PC culture" that brought us the intolerance to begin.

That is some backwards assed logic there.

What you call PC, I call civility. It's being respectful of others feelings about their beliefs and ideas. Calling people wetbacks, fags, thugs, etc....especially for the purpose of illiciting a response is not a belief or an idea. It's malignant behavior. Uncivil behavior.

You see, that is where you are exactly backward.

You see, if someone says, "That wetback...".

What is more tolerant. Telling them they cannot use that language, or just pointing out that they're comment is wrong and hurtful, yet not hating the person and just moving on with the conversation?

Tolerant means you disagree with the person's words, actions, or beliefs. It does not mean you shut them down for using language or words you disagree with.

No one should be tolerant of uncivil behavior.
It's repugnant and offensive. Especially when done deliberately. It's the very definition of incivility.

in·ci·vil·i·ty
/ˌinsəˈvilədē/
Learn to pronounce
noun

1. rude or unsociable speech or behavior.
   "absenteeism and incivility were not tolerated"
   synonyms: rudeness, discourtesy, discourteousness, impoliteness, lack of politeness; More
   • an impolite or offensive comment.
     plural noun: incivilities

Earlier you were suggesting tha we teach our children how that type of behavior should be acceptable.
I teach them the opposite. It's never acceptable behavior. It's uncouth behavior. Maludjusted behavior.

And, an armed society makes a polite society.

.

Obviously not.

The only reason you feel the need to be armed is because there's so many guns out there.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

It was because we would not fund enough facilities.

Funding facilities is a different issue. Has nothing to do with socialized medicine.

.

You have to be able to cover the treatment somehow.

Again, did this shooter NOT get treatment because he had no means to pay for it?

.

Did he need it? Do muslim terrorists need it as well?

I can't say.

All I can say is that banning a certain class of weapons will not change anything.

.

Sure it will. It will change the tactics and effectiveness of these type of attacks.

 

[pknopp]

Funding facilities is a different issue. Has nothing to do with socialized medicine.

.

You have to be able to cover the treatment somehow.

Again, did this shooter NOT get treatment because he had no means to pay for it?

.

Did he need it? Do muslim terrorists need it as well?

I can't say.

All I can say is that banning a certain class of weapons will not change anything.

.

Sure it will. It will change the tactics and effectiveness of these type of attacks.

Oklahoma City was pretty effective.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Something maybe everyone should consider.
Steve Hilton: After every mass shooting we replay the same unhelpful loop

With that being said. What do you believe would be helpful?

For starters stop focusing so much on the type of gun used and focus on why so many late teens to early 20s people feel the need to do this. The gun control part is important but it’s only a part we need to realize this is a complex problem with no simple ten second soundbite solutions.

The type is absolutely relevant. It seems to be the "tool" of choice. Why is that? Because that is what it's designed for.

These "kids" do it because the equipment needed is readily available. It's not just kids. The Vegas shooter was no kid. No doubt why his attack was more devastating.

So you think if you just ban semi automatic rifles that will stop it? It’s that type of oversimplified thinking that solves nothing and is a great example of that ten second soundbite thinking. We have had guns in the country for a long time and they could be purchased more easily back in the 60s and 70s than they can today now granted those back then could not do the damage the ones today can even so mass shootings were rare and school shootings unheard of. So clearly something has changed between then and now and until that is addressed nothing is going to be solved.

So you think if you just ban semi automatic rifles that will stop it?

Derp...
It will certainly stop attacks with semi automatic rifles of the type banned. The type most effective and chosen by the shooters.

 

[Darkwind]

You's have a point, but it is the dreaded "PC culture" that brought us the intolerance to begin.

That is some backwards assed logic there.

What you call PC, I call civility. It's being respectful of others feelings about their beliefs and ideas. Calling people wetbacks, fags, thugs, etc....especially for the purpose of illiciting a response is not a belief or an idea. It's malignant behavior. Uncivil behavior.

You see, that is where you are exactly backward.

You see, if someone says, "That wetback...".

What is more tolerant. Telling them they cannot use that language, or just pointing out that they're comment is wrong and hurtful, yet not hating the person and just moving on with the conversation?

Tolerant means you disagree with the person's words, actions, or beliefs. It does not mean you shut them down for using language or words you disagree with.

No one should be tolerant of uncivil behavior.
It's repugnant and offensive. Especially when done deliberately. It's the very definition of incivility.

in·ci·vil·i·ty
/ˌinsəˈvilədē/
Learn to pronounce
noun

1. rude or unsociable speech or behavior.
   "absenteeism and incivility were not tolerated"
   synonyms: rudeness, discourtesy, discourteousness, impoliteness, lack of politeness; More
   • an impolite or offensive comment.
     plural noun: incivilities

Earlier you were suggesting tha we teach our children how that type of behavior should be acceptable.
I teach them the opposite. It's never acceptable behavior. It's uncouth behavior. Maludjusted behavior.

And, an armed society makes a polite society.

.

Obviously not.

The only reason you feel the need to be armed is because there's so many guns out there.

Obviously not? Wow, really?

It is the very bottom line of why these shootings happen. The person who flips out does so because they have an agenda against people they simply cannot tolerate.

I rarely go about armed, though I have a CC permit. When I do go armed, I have specific reasons and they have little to do with people. Well, with most people.

Maybe you should learn that yours is not the only opinion in the world. You should learn that people can and do disagree with you. Mostly, you should learn that you don't have to actually do anything other than making an argument for your opinion and then let it go. You'll live longer and the world will be a little bit safer.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

You have to be able to cover the treatment somehow.

Again, did this shooter NOT get treatment because he had no means to pay for it?

.

Did he need it? Do muslim terrorists need it as well?

I can't say.

All I can say is that banning a certain class of weapons will not change anything.

.

Sure it will. It will change the tactics and effectiveness of these type of attacks.

Oklahoma City was pretty effective.

As well as a one off.

 

[Darkwind]

Something maybe everyone should consider.
Steve Hilton: After every mass shooting we replay the same unhelpful loop

With that being said. What do you believe would be helpful?

For starters stop focusing so much on the type of gun used and focus on why so many late teens to early 20s people feel the need to do this. The gun control part is important but it’s only a part we need to realize this is a complex problem with no simple ten second soundbite solutions.

The type is absolutely relevant. It seems to be the "tool" of choice. Why is that? Because that is what it's designed for.

These "kids" do it because the equipment needed is readily available. It's not just kids. The Vegas shooter was no kid. No doubt why his attack was more devastating.

So you think if you just ban semi automatic rifles that will stop it? It’s that type of oversimplified thinking that solves nothing and is a great example of that ten second soundbite thinking. We have had guns in the country for a long time and they could be purchased more easily back in the 60s and 70s than they can today now granted those back then could not do the damage the ones today can even so mass shootings were rare and school shootings unheard of. So clearly something has changed between then and now and until that is addressed nothing is going to be solved.

So you think if you just ban semi automatic rifles that will stop it?

Derp...
It will certainly stop attacks with semi automatic rifles of the type banned. The type most effective and chosen by the shooters.

It won't.

 

[pknopp]

Again, did this shooter NOT get treatment because he had no means to pay for it?

.

Did he need it? Do muslim terrorists need it as well?

I can't say.

All I can say is that banning a certain class of weapons will not change anything.

.

Sure it will. It will change the tactics and effectiveness of these type of attacks.

Oklahoma City was pretty effective.

As well as a one off.

You argued for changing tactics.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Oh, no. That would be acquiescing to the dreaded "PC culture". It's best to induce butthurt and " liberal tears".

You's have a point, but it is the dreaded "PC culture" that brought us the intolerance to begin.

That is some backwards assed logic there.

What you call PC, I call civility. It's being respectful of others feelings about their beliefs and ideas. Calling people wetbacks, fags, thugs, etc....especially for the purpose of illiciting a response is not a belief or an idea. It's malignant behavior. Uncivil behavior.

You see, that is where you are exactly backward.

You see, if someone says, "That wetback...".

What is more tolerant. Telling them they cannot use that language, or just pointing out that they're comment is wrong and hurtful, yet not hating the person and just moving on with the conversation?

Tolerant means you disagree with the person's words, actions, or beliefs. It does not mean you shut them down for using language or words you disagree with.

No one should be tolerant of uncivil behavior.
It's repugnant and offensive. Especially when done deliberately. It's the very definition of incivility.

in·ci·vil·i·ty
/ˌinsəˈvilədē/
Learn to pronounce
noun

1. rude or unsociable speech or behavior.
   "absenteeism and incivility were not tolerated"
   synonyms: rudeness, discourtesy, discourteousness, impoliteness, lack of politeness; More
   • an impolite or offensive comment.
     plural noun: incivilities

Earlier you were suggesting tha we teach our children how that type of behavior should be acceptable.
I teach them the opposite. It's never acceptable behavior. It's uncouth behavior. Maludjusted behavior.

Shall I put you down on the FBI list of possible mass shooters then?

Why would you do that?