The Thread Where We Discuss Guns and Gun Control

Soon we wont even have kids... we will just be raising sentient laptops...
My brain had actually spun off to the laptop choosing what case it would get, and legislation protecting the right of the laptop to choose. I mean, if you can't afford the case it wants, you aren't entitled to a sentient helper, like those with a bright future will have, and then I wandered off into the weeds.
 
Meanwhile

1684091193807.png
 
And this was in the NYT today. Normalization of gun violence is well underway

A Gun-Filled America Is a World of Fear and Alienation​


Another week, another shooting.
This one was in Allen, Texas — a city about 25 miles north of Dallas — where a gunman killed at least eight people and injured at least seven others before he was killed by a police officer. He used, as is standard these days, an AR-15-style rifle. Some of the victims were children.

The frequency of mass shootings in the United States means there is a ritual, of sorts, associated with each occurrence. Republican politicians offer “thoughts and prayers,” Democratic politicians condemn those offering only “thoughts and prayers,” and their respective allies in the media trade barbs over gun control. On Twitter, Megyn Kelly, a former Fox News anchor, took part in the ritual with a series of tweets castigating gun control proponents for focusing on, well, gun control. “Serious q for gun control advocates: you’ve failed to effect change,” she said. “Pls face it. You can’t do it, thx to the 2A. We’re all well aware you don’t like that fact, but fact it is. What’s next? Must we just stay here sad, concerned, lamenting? Could we possibly talk OTHER SOLUTIONS?”
Kelly argues that instead of focusing our attention on the proliferation of high-powered rifles, we should try these “other solutions” that would keep guns away from the mentally ill and minimize destruction from mass shootings when they do occur: “Mental health interventions (smthg real, not the BS we now do), greater willingness to lock ppl up (w/protocols in place for civil libs) who are deemed to be threats, fortification of soft targets, coordination of media response to not lionize shooters, etc.”

Apparently, the debate over gun control is over — “it’s done,” Kelly says — and so the only thing left to do is shape our society in a way that leaves life compatible with the mass proliferation of firearms. You might say that I’m picking on Kelly, whose most noteworthy contribution to American political discourse was her forceful argument that Santa Claus, the fictional avatar of Christmas, is white. But even if Kelly isn’t especially relevant, she is prominent, noteworthy and emblematic of conservative rhetoric in the wake of mass shootings. Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas, to give another example, also jumped immediately to mental health and mental illness in the wake of the slaughter in Allen. “One thing we can observe very easily is that there has been a dramatic increase in the amount of anger and violence that’s taking place in America,” Abbott, a Republican, said in an interview with Fox News on Sunday. “And what Texas is doing, in a big-time way, we’re working to address that anger and violence by going to its root cause, which is addressing the mental health crisis behind it.”

After another recent shooting — the attack at a private Christian school in Nashville that killed three adults and three children — Gov. Bill Lee, a Republican, announced a plan to help place armed police officers at every school in Tennessee. “We have an obligation, I have an obligation, to do what I can and work together with leaders across this community to address people’s concerns and to protect our kids in whatever way we can,” he said. Experts on mental health and mental illness have said, repeatedly, that it is inaccurate to assert or imply that these issues are primarily responsible for the rise of mass shootings in the United States. And in a 2018 report on mass shooters from 2000 to 2013, the F.B.I. pushed back on the idea that mental illness causes mass shootings: “Absent specific evidence, careful consideration should be given to social and contextual factors that might interact with any mental health issue before concluding that an active shooting was ‘caused’ by mental illness. In short, declarations that all active shooters must simply be mentally ill are misleading and unhelpful.”

There’s been less said about the similarly prevalent idea that we could prevent mass shootings by, in Kelly’s words, hardening the “soft targets” of American life. Not only is this as wrongheaded as the rhetoric concerning mental health and mass shootings, but it also works to normalize a disturbing vision for American society. What is a “soft target”? It is a school or a mall or a church or a gym. It is a library, a movie theater, a grocery store or anywhere people gather to live their lives. What would it mean to “harden” those targets, most of which have already been targeted at one point or another? It would mean additional police officers and armed security; metal detectors and reinforced doors designed to bar entry; heightened scrutiny for visitors; and even mandatory checks for identification.
To harden our soft targets is, in other words, to turn the entire country into an airport security line. And far from a free society, this hardened America would be a continental version of Baghdad’s Green Zone, each checkpoint or guard a visible reminder that we’ve organized our entire lives around the prospect of instant death by lethal violence. We’re already halfway there. It is normal, at many synagogues and Jewish community centers, to have armed security guards. It is normal, at many schools, to have metal detectors. It is normal to drill young children for when a shooter appears — to train first and second and third graders to run and hide or play dead.

And of course, there are those who already live in a garrison state of sorts. For some Americans, it is a garrison of their own making: gated communities manned by armed guards. For others, it is more akin to a surveillance state, one of constant police presence and contact. Either way, it is a world of fear and alienation, where people live in a state of heightened awareness, even anxiety. It is not a world of trust or hope or solidarity or any of the values we need to make democracy work as a way of life, much less a system of government.

Which might be the point for conservatives who want that world — who want, in a sense, that “polite society.” Because what will survive are hierarchy and force and the power to make others bend to your will. And if they refuse? If they insist on their right to live free of fear?

Well, that’s what the guns are for.
 
Stuck with that dreaded election system..Reps vs. Democrats, block vs. block and all they do is..block change for good.
Peoples even vote for idiots like Trump just cos they are in that block.
 
And this was in the NYT today. Normalization of gun violence is well underway

A Gun-Filled America Is a World of Fear and Alienation​


Another week, another shooting.
This one was in Allen, Texas — a city about 25 miles north of Dallas — where a gunman killed at least eight people and injured at least seven others before he was killed by a police officer. He used, as is standard these days, an AR-15-style rifle. Some of the victims were children.

The frequency of mass shootings in the United States means there is a ritual, of sorts, associated with each occurrence. Republican politicians offer “thoughts and prayers,” Democratic politicians condemn those offering only “thoughts and prayers,” and their respective allies in the media trade barbs over gun control. On Twitter, Megyn Kelly, a former Fox News anchor, took part in the ritual with a series of tweets castigating gun control proponents for focusing on, well, gun control. “Serious q for gun control advocates: you’ve failed to effect change,” she said. “Pls face it. You can’t do it, thx to the 2A. We’re all well aware you don’t like that fact, but fact it is. What’s next? Must we just stay here sad, concerned, lamenting? Could we possibly talk OTHER SOLUTIONS?”
Kelly argues that instead of focusing our attention on the proliferation of high-powered rifles, we should try these “other solutions” that would keep guns away from the mentally ill and minimize destruction from mass shootings when they do occur: “Mental health interventions (smthg real, not the BS we now do), greater willingness to lock ppl up (w/protocols in place for civil libs) who are deemed to be threats, fortification of soft targets, coordination of media response to not lionize shooters, etc.”

Apparently, the debate over gun control is over — “it’s done,” Kelly says — and so the only thing left to do is shape our society in a way that leaves life compatible with the mass proliferation of firearms. You might say that I’m picking on Kelly, whose most noteworthy contribution to American political discourse was her forceful argument that Santa Claus, the fictional avatar of Christmas, is white. But even if Kelly isn’t especially relevant, she is prominent, noteworthy and emblematic of conservative rhetoric in the wake of mass shootings. Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas, to give another example, also jumped immediately to mental health and mental illness in the wake of the slaughter in Allen. “One thing we can observe very easily is that there has been a dramatic increase in the amount of anger and violence that’s taking place in America,” Abbott, a Republican, said in an interview with Fox News on Sunday. “And what Texas is doing, in a big-time way, we’re working to address that anger and violence by going to its root cause, which is addressing the mental health crisis behind it.”

After another recent shooting — the attack at a private Christian school in Nashville that killed three adults and three children — Gov. Bill Lee, a Republican, announced a plan to help place armed police officers at every school in Tennessee. “We have an obligation, I have an obligation, to do what I can and work together with leaders across this community to address people’s concerns and to protect our kids in whatever way we can,” he said. Experts on mental health and mental illness have said, repeatedly, that it is inaccurate to assert or imply that these issues are primarily responsible for the rise of mass shootings in the United States. And in a 2018 report on mass shooters from 2000 to 2013, the F.B.I. pushed back on the idea that mental illness causes mass shootings: “Absent specific evidence, careful consideration should be given to social and contextual factors that might interact with any mental health issue before concluding that an active shooting was ‘caused’ by mental illness. In short, declarations that all active shooters must simply be mentally ill are misleading and unhelpful.”

There’s been less said about the similarly prevalent idea that we could prevent mass shootings by, in Kelly’s words, hardening the “soft targets” of American life. Not only is this as wrongheaded as the rhetoric concerning mental health and mass shootings, but it also works to normalize a disturbing vision for American society. What is a “soft target”? It is a school or a mall or a church or a gym. It is a library, a movie theater, a grocery store or anywhere people gather to live their lives. What would it mean to “harden” those targets, most of which have already been targeted at one point or another? It would mean additional police officers and armed security; metal detectors and reinforced doors designed to bar entry; heightened scrutiny for visitors; and even mandatory checks for identification.
To harden our soft targets is, in other words, to turn the entire country into an airport security line. And far from a free society, this hardened America would be a continental version of Baghdad’s Green Zone, each checkpoint or guard a visible reminder that we’ve organized our entire lives around the prospect of instant death by lethal violence. We’re already halfway there. It is normal, at many synagogues and Jewish community centers, to have armed security guards. It is normal, at many schools, to have metal detectors. It is normal to drill young children for when a shooter appears — to train first and second and third graders to run and hide or play dead.

And of course, there are those who already live in a garrison state of sorts. For some Americans, it is a garrison of their own making: gated communities manned by armed guards. For others, it is more akin to a surveillance state, one of constant police presence and contact. Either way, it is a world of fear and alienation, where people live in a state of heightened awareness, even anxiety. It is not a world of trust or hope or solidarity or any of the values we need to make democracy work as a way of life, much less a system of government.

Which might be the point for conservatives who want that world — who want, in a sense, that “polite society.” Because what will survive are hierarchy and force and the power to make others bend to your will. And if they refuse? If they insist on their right to live free of fear?

Well, that’s what the guns are for.
I actually feel dumber after reading that.
 
And this was in the NYT today. Normalization of gun violence is well underway

A Gun-Filled America Is a World of Fear and Alienation​


Another week, another shooting.
This one was in Allen, Texas — a city about 25 miles north of Dallas — where a gunman killed at least eight people and injured at least seven others before he was killed by a police officer. He used, as is standard these days, an AR-15-style rifle. Some of the victims were children.

The frequency of mass shootings in the United States means there is a ritual, of sorts, associated with each occurrence. Republican politicians offer “thoughts and prayers,” Democratic politicians condemn those offering only “thoughts and prayers,” and their respective allies in the media trade barbs over gun control. On Twitter, Megyn Kelly, a former Fox News anchor, took part in the ritual with a series of tweets castigating gun control proponents for focusing on, well, gun control. “Serious q for gun control advocates: you’ve failed to effect change,” she said. “Pls face it. You can’t do it, thx to the 2A. We’re all well aware you don’t like that fact, but fact it is. What’s next? Must we just stay here sad, concerned, lamenting? Could we possibly talk OTHER SOLUTIONS?”
Kelly argues that instead of focusing our attention on the proliferation of high-powered rifles, we should try these “other solutions” that would keep guns away from the mentally ill and minimize destruction from mass shootings when they do occur: “Mental health interventions (smthg real, not the BS we now do), greater willingness to lock ppl up (w/protocols in place for civil libs) who are deemed to be threats, fortification of soft targets, coordination of media response to not lionize shooters, etc.”

Apparently, the debate over gun control is over — “it’s done,” Kelly says — and so the only thing left to do is shape our society in a way that leaves life compatible with the mass proliferation of firearms. You might say that I’m picking on Kelly, whose most noteworthy contribution to American political discourse was her forceful argument that Santa Claus, the fictional avatar of Christmas, is white. But even if Kelly isn’t especially relevant, she is prominent, noteworthy and emblematic of conservative rhetoric in the wake of mass shootings. Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas, to give another example, also jumped immediately to mental health and mental illness in the wake of the slaughter in Allen. “One thing we can observe very easily is that there has been a dramatic increase in the amount of anger and violence that’s taking place in America,” Abbott, a Republican, said in an interview with Fox News on Sunday. “And what Texas is doing, in a big-time way, we’re working to address that anger and violence by going to its root cause, which is addressing the mental health crisis behind it.”

After another recent shooting — the attack at a private Christian school in Nashville that killed three adults and three children — Gov. Bill Lee, a Republican, announced a plan to help place armed police officers at every school in Tennessee. “We have an obligation, I have an obligation, to do what I can and work together with leaders across this community to address people’s concerns and to protect our kids in whatever way we can,” he said. Experts on mental health and mental illness have said, repeatedly, that it is inaccurate to assert or imply that these issues are primarily responsible for the rise of mass shootings in the United States. And in a 2018 report on mass shooters from 2000 to 2013, the F.B.I. pushed back on the idea that mental illness causes mass shootings: “Absent specific evidence, careful consideration should be given to social and contextual factors that might interact with any mental health issue before concluding that an active shooting was ‘caused’ by mental illness. In short, declarations that all active shooters must simply be mentally ill are misleading and unhelpful.”

There’s been less said about the similarly prevalent idea that we could prevent mass shootings by, in Kelly’s words, hardening the “soft targets” of American life. Not only is this as wrongheaded as the rhetoric concerning mental health and mass shootings, but it also works to normalize a disturbing vision for American society. What is a “soft target”? It is a school or a mall or a church or a gym. It is a library, a movie theater, a grocery store or anywhere people gather to live their lives. What would it mean to “harden” those targets, most of which have already been targeted at one point or another? It would mean additional police officers and armed security; metal detectors and reinforced doors designed to bar entry; heightened scrutiny for visitors; and even mandatory checks for identification.
To harden our soft targets is, in other words, to turn the entire country into an airport security line. And far from a free society, this hardened America would be a continental version of Baghdad’s Green Zone, each checkpoint or guard a visible reminder that we’ve organized our entire lives around the prospect of instant death by lethal violence. We’re already halfway there. It is normal, at many synagogues and Jewish community centers, to have armed security guards. It is normal, at many schools, to have metal detectors. It is normal to drill young children for when a shooter appears — to train first and second and third graders to run and hide or play dead.

And of course, there are those who already live in a garrison state of sorts. For some Americans, it is a garrison of their own making: gated communities manned by armed guards. For others, it is more akin to a surveillance state, one of constant police presence and contact. Either way, it is a world of fear and alienation, where people live in a state of heightened awareness, even anxiety. It is not a world of trust or hope or solidarity or any of the values we need to make democracy work as a way of life, much less a system of government.

Which might be the point for conservatives who want that world — who want, in a sense, that “polite society.” Because what will survive are hierarchy and force and the power to make others bend to your will. And if they refuse? If they insist on their right to live free of fear?

Well, that’s what the guns are for.
I (think I) agree with most of what's written here. I'm interested in that FBI report - "A Study of the Pre-Attack Behaviors of Active Shooters in the United States." I hadn't heard of that before, but I guess I'd always wondered, in the back of my mind, what sort of mental illnesses or other behaviors can legally or ethically trigger some kind of intervention before an attack. I know some states are trying these "red flag" laws. I'm not sure if the results of those experiments are in yet. Megan Kelly, what a sweetheart, evidently advocates for imprisoning people before they commit the crime? Seriously, what does she mean, "greater willingness to lock ppl up who are deemed to be threats"? Second Amendment rights are sacrosanct, but locking more people up would be okay? We already incarcerate more of our citizens than almost every other country in the world (and therefore demonstrate, if not prove, the ineffectiveness of a punitive/deterrent system, because I don't think our crime rates are correspondingly lower than other countries). How many more people would she have us imprison, and on what grounds? And I'm curious what Greg Abbott means when he says, "we're working to address that anger and violence by going to its root cause." I'm curious what exactly Texas is doing.

These are partially-rhetorical questions. I kind of assume these people either aren't thinking it through very far, or aren't being honest about their intentions and objectives, and are just paying lip-service to the whole thing.

I do agree with Kelly on one thing, though: We (probably) can't do anything about gun violence while we have the 2nd Amendment, at least not in its current form.
 
Serbia Collects Thousands of Weapons in Amnesty After Mass Shootings
Authorities in Serbia on Sunday displayed stacks of guns and cartons of hand grenades from the thousands of weapons, including antitank rocket launchers, that they said people handed over since back-to-back mass shootings stunned the Balkan nation.
The government declared a one-month amnesty period for citizens to surrender unregistered weapons as part of a crackdown on guns following the two shootings in two days this month that left 17 people dead, many of them children. President Aleksandar Vucic, whose government has faced public pressure in the wake of the separate shootings at a Belgrade school and in two villages, accompanied top police officials to view the assortment of arms arrayed near the town of Smederevo.

Officials said residents had turned over about 13,500 items since the amnesty opened on May 8. Serbia has tens of thousands of weapons brought in from the battlefields of the 1990s wars in the Balkans.
—Associated Press
IMAGES

ajax-request.php
zoom_in.png

OLIVER BUNIC/ AGENCE
FRANCE- PRESSE/ GETTY
 
And I'm curious what Greg Abbott means when he says, "we're working to address that anger and violence by going to its root cause." I'm curious what exactly Texas is doing.
He just cut $200 million from the state budget of mental health services.
 
Megan Kelly, what a sweetheart, evidently advocates for imprisoning people before they commit the crime? Seriously, what does she mean, "greater willingness to lock ppl up who are deemed to be threats"? Second Amendment rights are sacrosanct, but locking more people up would be okay?

I really enjoyed the phrasing there: "with protections for civil libs", as if due process is just an afterthought, needed to keep busybodies happy, and not a fundamental principle.
 
Seriously, what does she mean, "greater willingness to lock ppl up who are deemed to be threats"? Second Amendment rights are sacrosanct, but locking more people up would be okay? We already incarcerate more of our citizens than almost every other country in the world (and therefore demonstrate, if not prove, the ineffectiveness of a punitive/deterrent system, because I don't think our crime rates are correspondingly lower than other countries). How many more people would she have us imprison, and on what grounds?
The irony (probably more like dishonesty) here is that if the government was really engaged in some sort of dystopian thoughtcrime policy to disarm and/or lock-up "threats"... ostensibly the potential, gun-wielding violent killers, before they potentially commit a shooting... Megan Kelly and those who share her line of thinking, would be the first ones complaining about government oppression, overreach and anti-gun/2A conspiracies, because the ones getting "locked-up" would be, at least in part, their gun-loving, gun-owning supporters.
 
The irony (probably more like dishonesty) here is that if the government was really engaged in some sort of dystopian thoughtcrime policy to disarm and/or lock-up "threats"... ostensibly the potential, gun-wielding violent killers, before they potentially commit a shooting... Megan Kelly and those who share her line of thinking, would be the first ones complaining about government oppression, overreach and anti-gun/2A conspiracies, because the ones getting "locked-up" would be, at least in part, their gun-loving, gun-owning supporters.

Wish I could like this post twice. Want to lock people up for precrimes, start with the dudes stockpiling dozens of AR-15s.

Disclaimer for when Farm Boy quotes this post: I do not actually want to lock people up for precrimes; take that up with MegYN (not Megan) Kelly.
 
Wish I could like this post twice. Want to lock people up for precrimes, start with the dudes stockpiling dozens of AR-15s.

Disclaimer for when Farm Boy quotes this post: I do not actually want to lock people up for precrimes; take that up with MegYN (not Megan) Kelly.
But they don't want that of course... not really. Megan Kelly and those who share her position absolutely don't want to lock up the folks purchasing, stockpiling, collecting guns, posting and consuming far-right, alt-right, white-nationalist content on the internet. So the position is inherently (and probably intentionally) disingenuous. Its nothing more than misdirection and subterfuge, trying to suggest something, anything, other than gun-control.

It reminds me of when conservatives on TV/radio rail against welfare and "entitlement" programs and rally their base to go along with that message... all the while realizing that their lower income constituents and rural constituents are the ones receiving the most from these same types of programs that they are condemning.
 
Its nothing more than misdirection and subterfuge, trying to suggest something, anything, other than gun-control.

It is this, but it's also just that they get off on human suffering and want more people locked up on general principle, and it also gives them a little thrill to say these kinds of "politically incorrect" things. Because let's be real, Megyn Kelly and her audience know exactly what kind of people you need to lock up if you want to "deal with" crime.
 
Serbia Collects Thousands of Weapons in Amnesty After Mass Shootings
Authorities in Serbia on Sunday displayed stacks of guns and cartons of hand grenades from the thousands of weapons, including antitank rocket launchers, that they said people handed over since back-to-back mass shootings stunned the Balkan nation.
The government declared a one-month amnesty period for citizens to surrender unregistered weapons as part of a crackdown on guns following the two shootings in two days this month that left 17 people dead, many of them children. President Aleksandar Vucic, whose government has faced public pressure in the wake of the separate shootings at a Belgrade school and in two villages, accompanied top police officials to view the assortment of arms arrayed near the town of Smederevo.

Officials said residents had turned over about 13,500 items since the amnesty opened on May 8. Serbia has tens of thousands of weapons brought in from the battlefields of the 1990s wars in the Balkans.
—Associated Press
IMAGES

ajax-request.php
zoom_in.png

OLIVER BUNIC/ AGENCE
FRANCE- PRESSE/ GETTY
Much like Australia after we had a couple of shootings decades ago, except we didn't have so many from a recent war.

Somehow NRA etc keeps saying we are 'oppressed ' now that we have had our guns 'taken away '. Actually there are plenty of guns here, but not great bloody machine guns at 'Grog and Grocery '.
 
Why is America so gunsexual I have no idea. This is my NO.1 reason why I consider America to be overrated crappy nation.
I would rather live in Canada or Australia over America.
America is only good for entertainment it makes.
 
What's wrong with duck guns? Hunting equipment is the thing people constantly say they're fine with. Also, store is probably both pretty general in somewhere pretty small if this is its mix of product. Cabellas this is not. It seems pretty busy, and if it wasn't safe, blue flannel man probably wouldn't have brought his daughter.

Given the reactions, in going to guess you're getting class based response, mostly.
 
What's wrong with duck guns? Hunting equipment is the thing people constantly say they're fine with. Also, store is probably both pretty general in somewhere pretty small if this is its mix of product. Cabellas this is not. It seems pretty busy, and if it wasn't safe, blue flannel man probably wouldn't have brought his daughter.

Given the reactions, in going to guess you're getting class based response, mostly.

I think it's a bit funny that they're placed above the liquor like that is all

Edit: though maybe it makes sense to put the age-restricted items together.
 
Back
Top Bottom