Mass school shooting in US again

[Andyregs]

So your conclusion is, I am the problem. My conclusion is, if I have a conclusion, that there is a deeper problem than the guns themselves, even if the decision was taken to introduce the sort of drastic controls that you would propose.

 

Or my conclusion is that people who refuse to do anything about the problem are the problem. Your solution is.....? You haven’t suggested a solution.

People have always tried to hurt each other. You look back to earlier times as though they were a safer time, when they weren’t. People were lynched for the colour of their skin and you had a war because some people didn’t want to give up their slaves.

Yes try to deal with the cause, but refusing to put in methods to reduce shootings because you want a way of stopping something that man has done since the dawn of time (but you don’t know how to do this) is nonsense. A cop out of the discussion and an excuse to keep the status quo. And that has been the problem in the USA. There’s a shooting and everyone says we should do something. Thoughts and prayers are offered as though that cleans their hand from taking NRA money. The thoughts and prayers surprisingly do nothing, and so we wait for the next shooting having done nothing.

I’ll also add that improving funding in education and combatting crippling poverty would be a start to reducing crime in general. Yet the same people who don’t want gun laws don’t like this either.

[Andyregs]

It's all part of the binary culture war isn't it.

 

Gun ownership

Benghazi

Hillary's emails

Fox News

Pepe memes

etc.

 

But what’s important to republicans seems to be narrowing down now. Because they have shown that their ‘family values’ stance wasn’t worth that much to them. Just seems that it’s guns and gays.

[Tone]

Or my conclusion is that people who refuse to do anything about the problem are the problem. Your solution is.....? You haven’t suggested a solution.

People have always tried to hurt each other. You look back to earlier times as though they were a safer time, when they weren’t. People were lynched for the colour of their skin and you had a war because some people didn’t want to give up their slaves.

Yes try to deal with the cause, but refusing to put in methods to reduce shootings because you want a way of stopping something that man has done since the dawn of time (but you don’t know how to do this) is nonsense. A cop out of the discussion and an excuse to keep the status quo. And that has been the problem in the USA. There’s a shooting and everyone says we should do something. Thoughts and prayers are offered as though that cleans their hand from taking NRA money. The thoughts and prayers surprisingly do nothing, and so we wait for the next shooting having done nothing.

I’ll also add that improving funding in education and combatting crippling poverty would be a start to reducing crime in general. Yet the same people who don’t want gun laws don’t like this either.

 

I am no more obliged to provide a solution than you are. We were discussing the reason why there is a problem.

Don’t divert the discussion to historical racial matters or, even more so, to the cause of the Civil War (the background to which you clearl don’t understand). Nor should you introduce education funding (again, you clearly do not understand) or poverty, which exists but is so complex a subject, it would need a whole new discussion.

Perhaps, for a solution to the matter we should listen to the message conveyed to 1.9 billion people by Bishop Curry, during the Royal Wedding? Check it out.

[SuperValiant1876]

Possible solution where Americans get to keep their beloved guns. How about if your guns are not kept securely and end up being used in shootings like recently then the legal owner of the gun gets imprisoned for life. So if some young psycho wants to use his dads gun for shooting a school up it puts the onus on the owner to keep them fully secure at all times.

How about NO semi automatic machine guns at all and people can still own one shot rifles and pistols for hunting. Would that work Tone?

 

Or they can just keep on with the only solution to gun shootings being more guns.

[Tone]

Possible solution where Americans get to keep their beloved guns. How about if your guns are not kept securely and end up being used in shootings like recently then the legal owner of the gun gets imprisoned for life. So if some young psycho wants to use his dads gun for shooting a school up it puts the onus on the owner to keep them fully secure at all times.

How about NO semi automatic machine guns at all and people can still own one shot rifles and pistols for hunting. Would that work Tone?

 

Or they can just keep on with the only solution to gun shootings being more guns.

 

That could be a start of a serious discussion. The responsibility of parents, in this and other cases, is very important.

[Santa]

But what’s important to republicans seems to be narrowing down now. Because they have shown that their ‘family values’ stance wasn’t worth that much to them. Just seems that it’s guns and gays.

You can easily dismiss any facts or evidence that doesn't fit your world view. This is the psychology that Mercer, Bannon and the Cambridge Analytica people understand. People who preach family values can stick their fingers in their ears and ignore that the President bribed an adult actress.

[Andyregs]

I am no more obliged to provide a solution than you are. We were discussing the reason why there is a problem.

Don’t divert the discussion to historical racial matters or, even more so, to the cause of the Civil War (the background to which you clearl don’t understand). Nor should you introduce education funding (again, you clearly do not understand) or poverty, which exists but is so complex a subject, it would need a whole new discussion.

Perhaps, for a solution to the matter we should listen to the message conveyed to 1.9 billion people by Bishop Curry, during the Royal Wedding? Check it out.

 

I mentioned those examples because you seem to think we live in a time that is unique compared to better times in the past, and that just isn’t true.

I can suggest what I like thanks, which is more than thoughts and prayers and listening to a Bishop you suggest, or the usual, it’s complicated let’s do nothing. (And by all means tell me the civil war wasn’t linked to slavery.)

I’m not diverting any discussion, I’m saying that America needs to control guns because people keep getting killed. Doing that doesn’t mean you can’t deal with the causes as well.

I will admit that the bishops message was a good one, and his message about gay marriage in America would be a good place for the Christian right in America to start. However what about those that don’t want to love? What then? Because currently they have access to guns.

Finally, you may not feel obligated to offer a solution. I’d say it is, along with all other Americans.

[Andyregs]

Possible solution where Americans get to keep their beloved guns. How about if your guns are not kept securely and end up being used in shootings like recently then the legal owner of the gun gets imprisoned for life. So if some young psycho wants to use his dads gun for shooting a school up it puts the onus on the owner to keep them fully secure at all times.

How about NO semi automatic machine guns at all and people can still own one shot rifles and pistols for hunting. Would that work Tone?

 

Or they can just keep on with the only solution to gun shootings being more guns.

 

I agree they should be held responsible , but What if the gun owner wants to kill people?

[Tone]

I agree they should be held responsible , but What if the gun owner wants to kill people?

 

What if a car owner wants to kill people?

 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/05/20/man-drives-suv-into-north-carolina-restaurant-killing-2-police-call-it-domestic-incident.html

[SuperValiant1876]

I agree they should be held responsible , but What if the gun owner wants to kill people?

 

If the gun owner cannot get access to semi-automatic machine guns (due to a gun amnesty and then semis being made illegal) and only has access to one shot then reload guns then the damage caused would be much less. Obviously no damage at all should be the end goal but that seems such an unlikely solution in a gun barmy country. But make the punishments so harsh that the onus is put on owners. I don't know the stats but it seems like a fair few of these school shootings have been carried out by students using their parents guns.

[SuperValiant1876]

What if a car owner wants to kill people?

 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/05/20/man-drives-suv-into-north-carolina-restaurant-killing-2-police-call-it-domestic-incident.html

 

I wouldn't have thought a car could get into a school and do the damage an AR15/AK47 could but I am happy to be shown otherwise.

[Paul6754]

Interesting article.

 

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11995626

[Jacko51]

Perhaps, for a solution to the matter we should listen to the message conveyed to 1.9 billion people by Bishop Curry, during the Royal Wedding? Check it out.

 

Tone, what Bishop Curry said is indeed the solution to a considerable number of our problems. But in the short term, it simply will not happen. It hasn't in the last 2,000 years so the chances of it changing the world in the near future are somewhat limited. So what we have to do is to look at the underlying reasons why the USA has far more mass killings than the UK or any other country in Europe. There are social problems which exist in all these countries. There are racial issues, there are significant problems of ineffective parenting in all as well. But surely the key reason in the US is the ready availability of huge numbers of lethal weapons. I'm afraid I cannot see why they are necessary. If you don't need one, why does anyone else? Just because you have a constitutional right to own a gun doesn't mean you have to. Just because that constitutional right exists, doesn't mean that those guns must be readily available military grade assault weapons. Until the politicians have the balls to stand up to the NRA, your problems will not begin to be solved.

[Tone]

If you don't need one, why does anyone else?

 

I don't hunt.

 

I don't live in one of the many parts of the USA which are remote, wild and of a nature that many who have not travelled the country understand. Your life and property can be vulnerable to beast as well as man.

 

I don't live in Detroit, Chicago's South Side, Oakland, CA, St. Louis, or one of many dangerous cities.

 

Neither would I choose to, of course.

[Andyregs]

What if a car owner wants to kill people?

 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/05/20/man-drives-suv-into-north-carolina-restaurant-killing-2-police-call-it-domestic-incident.html

 

My god you’re really going there with the Republican grasping at straws argument. If you seriously can’t see the difference between a car and a high calibre assault weapon then hats laughable. However I don’t think you are that daft, so you can only be purposely scraping whatever ridiculous excuses together you can to defend this nonsense. A gun is designed to kill as efficiently as possible. A car isn’t. It isn’t rocket science. You’re defending the right for anyone to have the ability to kill a lot of people very quickly. You will say you aren’t, but if you don’t think people should have that capability, then you don’t think those guns should be allowed. I’ve already shown the difference a gun can make between two school attacks in the uk.