Is suggesting policy to address tragedy directly after tragedies happen inappropriate?

[mrjurrs]

I’m not a gun guy either. I’ve been shooting a few times and mostly found it to be an expensive and not so entertaining hobby. Maybe a handgun for the house one day but it’s not a priority for me. I totally understand where you’re coming from but as we see here there’s a lot of “that won’t do anything” that goes on with these discussions so we always land on nothing being done. I personally think it would be helpful to analyze this particular shooting and figure out what may have prevented it. You’d say if he didn’t have an assault rifle it wouldn’t have been as bad. I’ll say if he wanted to kill as many he could have just as easily with a few handguns and extra magazines. The idea of “just do something” comes off as a little knee jerk to me but I also understand the desire. I’m always cautious to not confuse activity with accomplishment.

It's absolutely knee jerk. But look at the history. As you said, the default action has been do nothing. That is proven to not work. Thankfully, now that we are beginning to see the government doing research on gun violence one thing is clear. In areas where there are more guns, there is more gun violence. Just do something...it can't be worse than our current situation. A red flag law might have been enough to stop this.

 

[ttwtt78640]

It's absolutely knee jerk. But look at the history. As you said, the default action has been do nothing. That is proven to not work. Thankfully, now that we are beginning to see the government doing research on gun violence one thing is clear. In areas where there are more guns, there is more gun violence. Just do something...it can't be worse than our current situation. A red flag law might have been enough to stop this.

Locked doors at that school and less than a one hour delay before LEOs entered and ‘neutralized’ the mass shooter inside that school (allowing medical care to be given to the surviving victims) might have been enough to stop this and/or save many lives. One can lose a lot of blood from an otherwise survivable gunshot wound in an hour.

 

[mrjurrs]

Locked doors at that school and less than a one hour delay before LEOs entered and ‘neutralized’ the mass shooter inside that school (allowing medical care to be given to the surviving victims) might have been enough to stop this and/or save many lives. One can lose a lot of blood from an otherwise survivable gunshot wound in an hour.

How well does a locked door work when there are large windows everywhere. A couple of rounds and that window is a door.

The school I'm most familiar with has about 60 outside entrance doors.

The only good thing about this event is that it puts a final nail in the 'good guy with a gun' would stop these events. They haven't, they didn't, and they won't.

 

[ApersonLIKEallOFyou]

It's absolutely knee jerk. But look at the history. As you said, the default action has been do nothing. That is proven to not work. Thankfully, now that we are beginning to see the government doing research on gun violence one thing is clear. In areas where there are more guns, there is more gun violence. Just do something...it can't be worse than our current situation. A red flag law might have been enough to stop this.

My two cents are that if we are to do something in the name of this tragedy then it should be something that could/would have stopped it. “Just do something” isn’t likely to gain much traction.

 

[Winston]

My two cents are that if we are to do something in the name of this tragedy then it should be something that could/would have stopped it. “Just do something” isn’t likely to gain much traction.

you don't think restricting firearms would help?

 

[ApersonLIKEallOFyou]

you don't think restricting firearms would help?

Yes I do. By definition it would obviously help. But I keep hearing “just do something.” That’s not a productive suggestion.

 

[Winston]

Yes I do. By definition it would obviously help. But I keep hearing “just do something.” That’s not a productive suggestion.

that sounds like it's a remark made for rhetorical effect moreso than advisory merit

 

[wist43]

It's taken decades of leftist policies attacking the family to push our society into this position.

The only remedy is to reverse those policies - but of course that will never happen.

Welfare, abortion, feminism, divorce, premature sexualization of kids, etc, are all staples of the Democratic Party - and they are the root of the problem.

Destroy the family?? You will destroy that society.

The decline of family and morality is directly correlated to the rise in school drop outs, teen pregnancy, illegitimate births, crime, murder, lack of employable skills, and the hopelessness that underlies it all.

But those of you on the left see none of it!! Your solution to the problems you created with bad government policy is to create more bad government policy.

 

[Felis Leo]

Well..?

My thoughts are no. Absolutely not.

Should we wait 6-8 weeks after hurricanes to think about weather proofing cities?

No.

No. Proposing political solutions (i.e. policy) in the wake of horrific tragedies to prevent future horrific tragedies is not wrong. What is inappropriate is simply attacking others in a vituperative manner to score partisan points.

See common examples: "You Republicans allow these mass shootings to happen by not passing common sense gun legislation! You must love dead children!" or "You Democrats let rioters loose to burn down your cities and terrify law-abiding citizens while telling the police to do nothing! You must want destruction and chaos to reign!"

 

[Felis Leo]

Yes. Knee-jerk reaction to serious situation is usually a bad idea ("inappropriate")

There is a natural human instinct to react hastily to a threat or danger. In the jungle, this is essential to survival.

However in Law, we must take a deep breath and use critical thinking to determine the best course of action on important matters.

When it comes to making a real concerted effort to keep guns out of the hands of the openly bloodthirsty, the mentally disturbed or the insane, I do not think our nation has been "measured" in the slightest. Doing nothing other than (1) yelling at each other or (2) crossing our fingers or praying that our loved ones aren't the victims of a mass shooting event at a school, grocery store or other public venue is not a measured response.

No one has used critical thinking. The Democrats who propose weapons bans of X, Y or Z scary weapon of the day are not using critical thinking skills. Nor are the Republicans in Congress who have stopped any sensible legislation such as Red Flag Laws or mental healthcare reforms using any critical thinking skills. Practically everybody has been a partisan actor or a moral coward working in bad faith and uninterested in looking for solutions that both safeguard Second Amendment Rights AND promote public safety. And that is because most of them are self-dealing, self-serving scumbags and not public servants, who are rich and can afford the highest levels of security for themselves and their loved ones paid for with lobbyist money. The rest of us must suffer knowing that monsters are able to legally procure weaponry even while publicly announcing to the world what they intend to do, and nothing is done to stop them until it is too damn late.

 

[Noodlegawd]

Well..?

My thoughts are no. Absolutely not.

Should we wait 6-8 weeks after hurricanes to think about weather proofing cities?

No.

Kind of. Not that we should wait, but why stop before the problem is addressed? It goes to show just how seriously the people suggesting the policy really take it if they abandon their efforts 2 weeks after each tragedy.

 

[Cardinal]

Well..?

My thoughts are no. Absolutely not.

Should we wait 6-8 weeks after hurricanes to think about weather proofing cities?

No.

Well considering that policy is how thing’s happen…

My favorite response came from Ted Cruz, who told a reporter not to politicize the shooting. A Senator…a politician…telling somebody not to politicize something.

 

[SkyChief]

. . . No one has used critical thinking. . .

Correct.

This is why I always vote Libertarian,

Each of the Two Parties have ulterior motives, and generally wrong in their calculus regarding most issues. Trump was a good leader, but a poor statesman.

Biden is both a poor leader, AND a poor statesman - - He is a total failure on every level.

Americans are aware of these things. Will we see competent leadership in 2024?

Nope. we will most likely get another dumb-ass, Two-Party flunkee.

This maddening cycle will continue until the awakening happens. And then a third-party person will be called on to get our country back on course.

I'm old and will not witness it, but hopefully our children will.

 

[jpevans]

My two cents are that if we are to do something in the name of this tragedy then it should be something that could/would have stopped it. “Just do something” isn’t likely to gain much traction.

How's 'bout a ban on Assault style rifles, the former Assault weapons ban showed a 17% drop in crimes with assault rifles crimes. The ban did sunset after 10 years.
Barring that make it 21 years old to purchase one. That would have prevented this one, prob'ly anyway.

 

[Winston]

Well considering that policy is how thing’s happen…

My favorite response came from Ted Cruz, who told a reporter not to politicize the shooting. A Senator…a politician…telling somebody not to politicize something.

That old line. I’m going to tell Cruz he’s a spineless wheezebag with the blood of kids on his hands while kneeling for the anthem

 

[coyote505]

Taking up the subject soon after the event is OK. Making DECISIONS on it at that point is Not. In the law, there is an old saying "Hard cases make bad law". The emotion of the moment clouds the judgement needed to make wise policy. Of course this is what the extremists count on, and why they push so hard for it.

 

[mrjurrs]

My two cents are that if we are to do something in the name of this tragedy then it should be something that could/would have stopped it. “Just do something” isn’t likely to gain much traction.

I would have agreed with you the first time students were murdered in classrooms. Now I'll take anything that shows the federal govt gives one shite about protecting us from gun violence. What could have stopped this outcome? Remove the style of weapon from the equation. There is no need for weapons used by the military, that are meant to kill people, to be in civilian possession imo.

 

[ApersonLIKEallOFyou]

I would have agreed with you the first time students were murdered in classrooms. Now I'll take anything that shows the federal govt gives one shite about protecting us from gun violence. What could have stopped this outcome? Remove the style of weapon from the equation. There is no need for weapons used by the military, that are meant to kill people, to be in civilian possession imo.

I haven’t paid as close attention as I should to this one (haven’t had the time TBH) but from I have heard didn’t the shooter lock himself in a room with the kids and everything took place in that room?

 

[mrjurrs]

I haven’t paid as close attention as I should to this one (haven’t had the time TBH) but from I have heard didn’t the shooter lock himself in a room with the kids and everything took place in that room?

He did. And the police outside waited for staff to unlock the door.

 

[ApersonLIKEallOFyou]

He did. And the police outside waited for staff to unlock the door.

It turns my stomach to even think of this, but in close quarters, in a locked room with unarmed children, do you think an AR-15 is what it takes to commit the evil act? Given the supposed time frame we keep hearing about, he likely could have done what he did with a revolver, or a knife.

 

[mrjurrs]

It turns my stomach to even think of this, but in close quarters, in a locked room with unarmed children, do you think an AR-15 is what it takes to commit the evil act? Given the supposed time frame we keep hearing about, he likely could have done what he did with a revolver, or a knife.

Could have...didn't.

Do you think the police would have waited an hour to gain entrance if the shooter had a revolver or a knife?

 

[ApersonLIKEallOFyou]

Could have...didn't.

Do you think the police would have waited an hour to gain entrance if the shooter had a revolver or a knife?

You said they waited for someone to unlock the door but now are implying they were afraid of the gun. Are you saying they waited on the door being unlocked as a stall tactic?

 

[molten_dragon]

It depends on how it's being done. Respectfully is okay, crassly is not.

 

[mrjurrs]

You said they waited for someone to unlock the door but now are implying they were afraid of the gun. Are you saying they waited on the door being unlocked as a stall tactic?

Are you saying that a locked door stops police from gaining entrance when they want to come in?

 

[ApersonLIKEallOFyou]

Are you saying that a locked door stops police from gaining entrance when they want to come in?

Definitely not. I'm no hero but if I'm standing outside a door seeing or hearing what was going on in there I would like to think I would find a way through it.