5 dead, 16 hospitalized in mass shooting at Highland Park Fourth of July parade, shooter being sought

[multivita-man]

Just cutting and pasting:

Anyone with intent to do harm or commit crimes ignores such laws. They only place the law-abiding at a greater disadvantage...it makes the entire rest of the country a vulnerable 'gun free zone'. Which only the law-abiding respect.

Even repealing the 2A wouldnt work, and Prohibition and The War on Drugs are strong evidence. Not only that, they created more crime.

That's just a copout. Criminals don't respect any laws - that's why they're called criminals. But we still have the legal tools to deal with them.

There's a major difference between mind-altering substances and firearms. There is a lot more demand for the mind-altering substances than there is for possessing and owning firearms. Addiction to substance, or simply the desire to occasionally intoxicate one's self, is much more widespread than the desire to shoot a pistol or rifle.

We actually could substantially reduce firearms related homicides - if we actually wrote laws with teeth and also - and I think more importantly - took measures to reduce the number of circulating guns that are available. We wouldn't see the results right away - might take 5 to 10 years but we'd see the results. Sorry, but other countries have done this, so I don't buy that it can't be done. It's just not easily done, and it's even more difficult when we have a court that has basically decided to interpret the Constitution however it pleases.

 

[Lursa]

So, you are for ignoring the Supreme court ruling that says you cannot put them away? He hadn't committed a violent crime previously and there was no evidence he was a danger to himself or others previous to the shooting.

Pathways and legal guidelines can be created for probable cause and due process. Behaviors, diagnoses, and other factors can be developed for professionals and LE to use.

Loading…

www.seattle.gov

Extreme risk protection orders in King County, Washington: the epidemiology of dangerous behaviors and an intervention response - Injury Epidemiology

Background Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) laws are a promising gun violence prevention strategy. ERPO laws allow specific categories of people (law enforcement in all states, family in most) to petition a court to request that an individual be temporarily prohibited from purchasing and...

injepijournal.biomedcentral.com

"Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) laws are a promising gun violence prevention strategy. ERPO laws allow specific categories of people (law enforcement in all states, family in most) to petition a court to request that an individual be temporarily prohibited from purchasing and possessing firearms because that individual is behaving dangerously and at risk of violence, either to themselves or others. In 2017 Washington State’s ERPO law took effect. King County developed a comprehensive approach to implementing the ERPO law. The early experience of King County offers important insight into how early adopters of these laws are incorporating EPROs into their approach to gun violence prevention."​

 

[Geoist]

Do u know what semiauto means ???

Yes, I do.

 

[Maidenrules29]

Hence, whenever people die, particularly from an active shooter situation, and the response is callous "there is nothing we can do about it".... (which is not a true statement)

You took my quote out of context. The "nothing we can do about it" referred only to the fact that we cannot take the AR-15’S out of circulation. MAYBE if the DOJ sponsored a VOLUNTARY buyback of AR-15's, some citizens may turn theirs in to be destroyed, thinking they are helping solve the mass shooting problem, even if it is only to keep them from getting stolen. That's really one of the only ways to help. So there IS that, but how many do you think would be turned in? The only other way is to increase the methods in which we try to get illegal guns out of the hands of criminals besides the ones we currently use, which would involve trampling on the poor criminal's rights and have the lefties and the ACLU screaming bloody murder. What would be your plan to start getting rid of AR-15’S and then I along with others on this board will chime in with whether your plan is realistic or not.

 

[Lursa]

That's just a copout. Criminals don't respect any laws - that's why they're called criminals. But we still have the legal tools to deal with them.

Previously posted:

It's not the same as the old cliche, 'well if the criminals are going to break the laws anyway, why have laws against murder, rape, theft?' Here's why: in those cases, there are no restrictions on regular citizens UNLESS they are going to break the law, to do actual harm. The ones for guns are all pre-emptive...and restrict all citizens whether they're going to commit a crime or not.​

--and--

Robbing banks harms others, it takes property, it may harm individuals there. Robbery in general, murder, rape, battery, etc all do harm and no one has the right to do those things to others to begin with. No one does those things without doing that harm, so we create laws to punish those acts.​

​

Legal gun owners are not doing anyone any harm by owning, carrying guns. It's wrong to create laws punishing (further restricting) us from doing something just because some people are afraid that "something might happen." We're not living in the Minority Report.​

This is why it's not the same, including this from today:

Anyone with intent to do harm or commit crimes ignores such laws. They only place the law-abiding at a greater disadvantage...it makes the entire rest of the country a vulnerable 'gun free zone'. Which only the law-abiding respect.​

​

Even repealing the 2A wouldnt work, and Prohibition and The War on Drugs are strong evidence. Not only that, they created more crime.​

​

Do you believe that people dont have the right to determine their own/families risks and circumstances for their own needs and protections? If not, why do you believe the govt has the right to decide that for us? How can strangers know better than the individuals? Are gun owners' lives of less value, to you or to society?

 

[NolanVoyd]

That's a nice list. And?

First. That wasnt a list.

And?

And it directly refutes your points in #994.

 

[Maidenrules29]

These guys commonly plan...many expect/plan to die and so they are living thru, getting gratification out of, the planning and fantasizing.

And because of this long-term planning they have months of internet browsing history and chat correspondence that their parents could be going through if they were at all involved in their kid's lives. Sometimes I think the internet may be one of the worst inventions in the history of mankind.

 

[CharloTexan]

How?

Let's talk it out.

 

[Josie]

Let's talk it out.

That was the point of the "How?"

 

[Lursa]

Pandora's Box, we opened it, and can't close it. We became the most powerful country on Earth, but also our own worst enemy.

Very sadly, I do believe it will get worse before it gets better.

 

[Integrityrespec]

When it was reported by Ben Collins that a photo of him online draped in a MAGA flag told me all I need to know.

I seem to recall a kook who shot up a baseball practice and almost killed a Congressman in the melee. The shooter was a left wing Bernie supportor. Tells me all I need to know. The left is a bunch of killers trying to overthrow our government system by eliminating the repuclicans in Congress.

 

[Lycanthrope]

I rest my case regarding your 'opinion.' Defeatist and focused only on a bandaid that would only punish the law-abiding.

And it's probably obvious, but I disagree with the bold.

Says the person who consistently refuses to acknowledge the role guns and their ubiquity/accessibility play in American gun violence.

 

[Lursa]

First. That wasnt a list.

And?

And it directly refutes your points in #994.

No it didnt, it was a list of 'na huhs.' Feel free to address them with some argument.

 

[Lursa]

Says the person who consistently refuses to acknowledge the role guns and their ubiquity/accessibility play in American gun violence.

Where did I do that? Quote it, in context.

Then I'll repost my quote where I posted to you my solutions re: guns.

 

[HIP56948]

It's not splitting hairs. It is north of Chicago and a very upscale town......this is not about Chicago's inner-city gun violence. BTW the shooter is a young white male.

Amen. One of my dumb-ass Fox News watching idiot neighbors kept saying that and I finally got my phone out, google maps and showed him that
it's not close to the inner city at all. His response was "That's not what I heard"
I just walked back to my house and smoked a big one..... No, I had to or just scream.

 

[multivita-man]

Do you believe that people dont have the right to determine their own/families risks and circumstances for their own needs and protections?

To an extent, yes, but that right isn't absolute, and public safety is a thing. It is possible to allow homeowners and citizens to defend themselves on one hand while protecting public safety on the other. It is possible to do more to ensure that guns don't end up in the hands of people who shouldn't have them and without violating the rights of law-abiding people.

Should we just condition ourselves to accept a mass murder event every weekend, and that there's really not much we can do about it because your freedumz are being threatened?

 

[NolanVoyd]

No it didnt, it was a list of 'na huhs.' Feel free to address them with some argument.

That was an argument. With facts. It directly refutes what you said in 994.

 

[Lursa]

And because of this long-term planning they have months of internet browsing history and chat correspondence that their parents could be going through if they were at all involved in their kid's lives. Sometimes I think the internet may be one of the worst inventions in the history of mankind.

He wasnt a kid.

And IMO the responsibility falls on anyone who did read his social media at this point. It's not like we havent been facing this, addressing this, discussing red flags and potential for violence, for at least a few years now.

"See something, say something" is not that hard. And we do have people that do and then the ball gets dropped again. This process needs more support and structure...and repercussions on LE and social services when they drop the ball. But as I wrote, the guidelines and structure need to be there for them.

 

[Lutherf]

Says the person who consistently refuses to acknowledge the role guns and their ubiquity/accessibility play in American gun violence.

Guns don't cause violence. Violent people cause violence. Work on solving THAT problem and then we can start talking about guns.

 

[Lursa]

To an extent, yes, but that right isn't absolute, and public safety is a thing. It is possible to allow homeowners and citizens to defend themselves on one hand while protecting public safety on the other. It is possible to do more to ensure that guns don't end up in the hands of people who shouldn't have them and without violating the rights of law-abiding people.

Should we just condition ourselves to accept a mass murder event every weekend, and that there's really not much we can do about it because your freedumz are being threatened?

Thank you for answering my questions.

Did I adequately address your comments on 'making laws?' Yes, no, and why? Because your reply doesnt really reflect it and I would consider it when replying to your questions.

 

[Lycanthrope]

Where did I do that? Quote it, in context.

then I'll repost my quote where I posted to you my solutions re: guns.

You want to play that childish game?

Quote, in context, where I have said addressing guns was the only legitimate response to gun violence, and that it would resolve the issue utterly as you have consistently alleged in your responses to me.

Meanwhile you have flatly refused to acknowledge that easy accessibility to firearms has had anything to do with gun violence.

 

[Lycanthrope]

Guns don't cause violence. Violent people cause violence. Work on solving THAT problem and then we can start talking about guns.

Guns are the means by which violent people commit gun violence.

 

[multivita-man]

Very sadly, I do believe it will get worse before it gets better.

Because we're reacting to these events as though they are just acts of God when in reality, they're acts of people - and people working in concert can actually do something about it if we would just stop being so paranoid.

I think this issue, like so many others, reveals a fundamental problem with American politics. Americans on one hand participate in democratic government, but they don't trust the outcomes of elections. We have these kinds of paranoid debates, imagining all kinds of slippery slopes to 1984 while forgetting that we're one election away from preventing things from going too far in one direction or the other. Politics has become zero-sum to us - if our side loses a debate or an election, the other side will take it all away.

Our very real problem this country has, though, is that there's actually one side that really and truly is trying to take it all away - and it's not the side that supports gun rights.

 

[Rexedgar]

Guns don't cause violence. Violent people cause violence. Work on solving THAT problem and then we can start talking about guns.

How many Lawn Dart fatalities are we experiencing?

 

[Lursa]

That was an argument. With facts. It directly refutes what you said in 994.

They were facts (I guess) but otherwise they were not applied to directly refute my posts.

THey were observations, not supported with solutions or recognition of the differences and legal and social realities here in America.

Otherwise, here's my counterargument to your list: "We're not other countries."