An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be
-
We need a strategy that captures the imagination of people cross-societally, like what happened with the quit-smoking campaign. We are seeing that addressing one cause, when the causes are many, or holding one entity responsible for the solution, whether Congress or NRA or studying chicken entrails, is cosmetic. We put something in place, cops in schools, and dust off our hands -- there, all fixed -- and go on with our lives, until there's another shooting. A lot of outrage and agony and finger pointing and what have you all over again. . . and nothing changes.
We need a society-wide commitment. An example off the top of my head: Employers supporting time off for employees to volunteer in schools to patrol or stand guard or what have you. Three days a month for three hours.
Encouraging local get-togethers the way book clubs or Neighborhood Watch groups work now around the gun issue -- that is, study, recommend, and bring the recommendations to local and national politicians. Op-eds, put social media to use. Make noise.
WWII things like when people planted Victory Gardens.
And so on. Until there is a purposeful and determined resolution so steeped in the population that no one political stance has the power to shut it down.
Letting George do it isn't working. When we salve our consciences by letting George do it, let's face it foursquare, we are condemning some of our children to a cruelly unfair early death.
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
@Mik said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
That's not helpful.
No but it's exactly where we're at.
Something is not a choice, although I will grant you that nothing can be.
The fallacy here is that they can be prevented.
What's a reasonable number to live with? Despite the crazy shit I've heard here lately I'd say we're still way too high.
What's your suggestion?
@Horace said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
@Aqua-Letifer said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
@Mik said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
That's not helpful.
No but it's exactly where we're at.
Something is not a choice, although I will grant you that nothing can be.
The fallacy here is that they can be prevented.
What's a reasonable number to live with? Despite the crazy shit I've heard here lately I'd say we're still way too high.
What's your suggestion?
I gave it in the other thread: adopt Japan's screening process. Yes, that's insane. But either we give the NRA lobby aneurisms through action or the liberals aneurisms over inaction. My opinion, which means nothing, is to go with the former.
Please love yourself.
-
@Horace said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
@Aqua-Letifer said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
@Mik said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
That's not helpful.
No but it's exactly where we're at.
Something is not a choice, although I will grant you that nothing can be.
The fallacy here is that they can be prevented.
What's a reasonable number to live with? Despite the crazy shit I've heard here lately I'd say we're still way too high.
What's your suggestion?
I gave it in the other thread: adopt Japan's screening process. Yes, that's insane. But either we give the NRA lobby aneurisms through action or the liberals aneurisms over inaction. My opinion, which means nothing, is to go with the former.
@Aqua-Letifer said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
I gave it in the other thread: adopt Japan's screening process. Yes, that's insane. But either we give the NRA lobby aneurisms through action or the liberals aneurisms over inaction. My opinion, which means nothing, is to go with the former.
*Aneurysm...
Carry on.
-
It would be constitutionally impossible to pass laws even remotely similar to Japan's. In any event, you are dealing with two massively different cultures.
-
It would be constitutionally impossible to pass laws even remotely similar to Japan's. In any event, you are dealing with two massively different cultures.
@Mik said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
It would be constitutionally impossible to pass laws even remotely similar to Japan's. In any event, you are dealing with two massively different cultures.
Which is exactly the dilemma I said we were in. Anything effective would be considered insane and "against our culture." Anything the gun lobby could swallow would do sweet fuck all to lower the numbers. So I choose radical change. It's not like that's never happened.
-
@Mik said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
It would be constitutionally impossible to pass laws even remotely similar to Japan's. In any event, you are dealing with two massively different cultures.
Which is exactly the dilemma I said we were in. Anything effective would be considered insane and "against our culture." Anything the gun lobby could swallow would do sweet fuck all to lower the numbers. So I choose radical change. It's not like that's never happened.
@Aqua-Letifer said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
Anything effective would be considered insane and "against our culture." Anything the gun lobby could swallow would do sweet fuck all to lower the numbers. So I choose radical change. It's not like that's never happened.
(Disclaimer - I own this many firearms: 0)
But it's not the "culture." It's the law and the constitution as reaffirmed by SCOTUS. You may disagree, but that's what it really is.
Changing "the culture" is a multi-generational thing. How you gonna do that?
School shootings, horrific as they are, comprise a small-ish percentage of firearm deaths. The conversation needs to be bigger, and it's not. The conversation is reactionary, sadly.
I agree that "the culture" needs to be changed, however.
And while that happens, I'll take a double of unobtanium.
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
Anything effective would be considered insane and "against our culture." Anything the gun lobby could swallow would do sweet fuck all to lower the numbers. So I choose radical change. It's not like that's never happened.
(Disclaimer - I own this many firearms: 0)
But it's not the "culture." It's the law and the constitution as reaffirmed by SCOTUS. You may disagree, but that's what it really is.
Changing "the culture" is a multi-generational thing. How you gonna do that?
School shootings, horrific as they are, comprise a small-ish percentage of firearm deaths. The conversation needs to be bigger, and it's not. The conversation is reactionary, sadly.
I agree that "the culture" needs to be changed, however.
And while that happens, I'll take a double of unobtanium.
@George-K said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
@Aqua-Letifer said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
Anything effective would be considered insane and "against our culture." Anything the gun lobby could swallow would do sweet fuck all to lower the numbers. So I choose radical change. It's not like that's never happened.
(Disclaimer - I own this many firearms: 0)
But it's not the "culture." It's the law and the constitution as reaffirmed by SCOTUS. You may disagree, but that's what it really is.
Changing "the culture" is a multi-generational thing. How you gonna do that?
I don't care. Fuck the culture. All of it. Let's fundamentally change the law.
School shootings, horrific as they are, comprise a small-ish percentage of firearm deaths. The conversation needs to be bigger, and it's not. The conversation is reactionary, sadly.
Fine, let's make it broader. As broad as possible.
I agree that "the culture" needs to be changed, however.
And while that happens, I'll take a double of unobtanium.
The Australian "culture" changed real damn fast in 1996. The point is, after Tasmania, enough pro-gun advocates agreed enough was enough for change of some kind to happen. "Culture" is not as immutable as we like to believe.
And anyway, fuck 'em. Guns are too much trouble than they're worth at this point. That's how I feel and no I don't care how impractical that is. I'm not about to go storm the Capitol over the issue (I'll leave that to the Trumpists and the libtards), but Horace asked me what my suggestion was and that's what it is: model Japan. Which, whatever.
-
@George-K said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
@Aqua-Letifer said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
Anything effective would be considered insane and "against our culture." Anything the gun lobby could swallow would do sweet fuck all to lower the numbers. So I choose radical change. It's not like that's never happened.
(Disclaimer - I own this many firearms: 0)
But it's not the "culture." It's the law and the constitution as reaffirmed by SCOTUS. You may disagree, but that's what it really is.
Changing "the culture" is a multi-generational thing. How you gonna do that?
I don't care. Fuck the culture. All of it. Let's fundamentally change the law.
School shootings, horrific as they are, comprise a small-ish percentage of firearm deaths. The conversation needs to be bigger, and it's not. The conversation is reactionary, sadly.
Fine, let's make it broader. As broad as possible.
I agree that "the culture" needs to be changed, however.
And while that happens, I'll take a double of unobtanium.
The Australian "culture" changed real damn fast in 1996. The point is, after Tasmania, enough pro-gun advocates agreed enough was enough for change of some kind to happen. "Culture" is not as immutable as we like to believe.
And anyway, fuck 'em. Guns are too much trouble than they're worth at this point. That's how I feel and no I don't care how impractical that is. I'm not about to go storm the Capitol over the issue (I'll leave that to the Trumpists and the libtards), but Horace asked me what my suggestion was and that's what it is: model Japan. Which, whatever.
@Aqua-Letifer said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
I don't care. Fuck the culture. All of it. Let's fundamentally change the law.
How. Details of how that would happen. No firearms? Only long guns? How about hammers (which kill more people than rifles)?
That last comment was snarky, but I'm serious. HOW DO YOU CHANGE THE LAW? Which law? In which state?
"Culture" is not as immutable as we like to believe.
I live in Chicago. Try harder.
And anyway, fuck 'em. Guns are too much trouble than they're worth at this point. That's how I feel and no I don't care how impractical that is.
So, the hell with the law. Your response is just "fuck 'em." Not helpful, and not practical.
I understand your rant. However, without real suggestions on how to change law, culture, personality, sadly, all it really is is a rant.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
I don't care. Fuck the culture. All of it. Let's fundamentally change the law.
How. Details of how that would happen. No firearms? Only long guns? How about hammers (which kill more people than rifles)?
That last comment was snarky, but I'm serious. HOW DO YOU CHANGE THE LAW? Which law? In which state?
"Culture" is not as immutable as we like to believe.
I live in Chicago. Try harder.
And anyway, fuck 'em. Guns are too much trouble than they're worth at this point. That's how I feel and no I don't care how impractical that is.
So, the hell with the law. Your response is just "fuck 'em." Not helpful, and not practical.
I understand your rant. However, without real suggestions on how to change law, culture, personality, sadly, all it really is is a rant.
I honestly don’t think there’s a solution that is workable. There’s no way the US is going to accept doing what pretty much the rest of the world does in one form or another.
The idea of turning schools into Checkpoint Charlie is equally dreadful. Kids shouldn’t be subjected to military security to go to school.
-
I honestly don’t think there’s a solution that is workable. There’s no way the US is going to accept doing what pretty much the rest of the world does in one form or another.
The idea of turning schools into Checkpoint Charlie is equally dreadful. Kids shouldn’t be subjected to military security to go to school.
@Doctor-Phibes said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
I honestly don’t think there’s a solution that is workable.
Yes, there is. It is, as @Aqua-Letifer said, changing the culture. This is, as I said, a multigenerational thing. Look no farther than the bangers on twitter, facebook, IG, etc. This shit is ALL over that media.
Rap - a culture of violence to a great extent. Good luck with that.
As I said, the shooting of dozens of innocent children is a horrible tragedy, but, at the end of the day (and I hate that phrase), is it really worse than the pregnant mom who was shot in the uterus that I took care of? We're arguing about price.
To continue, what part of "The culture" needs to change? @Jolly said that he went to school with a gun, pretty much every day. Until the early 1960s, this was pretty common.
What changed?
Why?
I don't pretend to know. I just bow my head, and shake it. Sad as fuck as to how this has gone.
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
I don't care. Fuck the culture. All of it. Let's fundamentally change the law.
How. Details of how that would happen. No firearms? Only long guns? How about hammers (which kill more people than rifles)?
That last comment was snarky, but I'm serious. HOW DO YOU CHANGE THE LAW? Which law? In which state?
"Culture" is not as immutable as we like to believe.
I live in Chicago. Try harder.
And anyway, fuck 'em. Guns are too much trouble than they're worth at this point. That's how I feel and no I don't care how impractical that is.
So, the hell with the law. Your response is just "fuck 'em." Not helpful, and not practical.
I understand your rant. However, without real suggestions on how to change law, culture, personality, sadly, all it really is is a rant.
@George-K said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
How. Details of how that would happen. No firearms? Only long guns? How about hammers (which kill more people than rifles)?
That last comment was snarky, but I'm serious. HOW DO YOU CHANGE THE LAW? Which law? In which state?
A federal license to own any firearm, which can only be obtained through a background check, neighbor interviews, a reason to own one that the government deems appropriate and a training course at least as rigorous as getting a fucking driver's license. If that's impractical I don't give a fuck. If that's legally impossible then we change whatever laws we need to in order to make it happen anyway. If we have to repeal the 2nd in order to make this happen then let's do it tomorrow.
What the hell does it matter? Effective solutions are insane. Reasonable compromises will lead to absolutely nothing. So you're either for crazy ideas or for watching the next one on the news. Anything else is delusional.
So, the hell with the law. Your response is just "fuck 'em." Not helpful, and not practical.
I understand your rant. However, without real suggestions on how to change law, culture, personality, sadly, all it really is is a rant.
What I'm saying "fuck 'em" to is anyone who has a problem with increasing gun regulations. I don't care what they think. And they should do the same with me because it's not like my opinions mean anything here.
Please love yourself.
-
@George-K said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
How. Details of how that would happen. No firearms? Only long guns? How about hammers (which kill more people than rifles)?
That last comment was snarky, but I'm serious. HOW DO YOU CHANGE THE LAW? Which law? In which state?
A federal license to own any firearm, which can only be obtained through a background check, neighbor interviews, a reason to own one that the government deems appropriate and a training course at least as rigorous as getting a fucking driver's license. If that's impractical I don't give a fuck. If that's legally impossible then we change whatever laws we need to in order to make it happen anyway. If we have to repeal the 2nd in order to make this happen then let's do it tomorrow.
What the hell does it matter? Effective solutions are insane. Reasonable compromises will lead to absolutely nothing. So you're either for crazy ideas or for watching the next one on the news. Anything else is delusional.
So, the hell with the law. Your response is just "fuck 'em." Not helpful, and not practical.
I understand your rant. However, without real suggestions on how to change law, culture, personality, sadly, all it really is is a rant.
What I'm saying "fuck 'em" to is anyone who has a problem with increasing gun regulations. I don't care what they think. And they should do the same with me because it's not like my opinions mean anything here.
@Aqua-Letifer first of all, I'm playing Devil's advocate here in your thoughts.
any firearm, which can only be obtained through a background check, neighbor interviews, a reason to own one that the government deems appropriate and a training course at least as rigorous as getting a fucking driver's license.
SCOTUS has affirmed that owing a firearm is a right, not a privilege, unlike a license to drive a car. Change the law/constitution. Until you do that, irrelevant.
If we have to repeal the 2nd in order to make this happen then let's do it tomorrow.
Exactly, and good luck. Nice thought, but it's not practical, and it's not going to happen.
Effective solutions are insane. Reasonable compromises will lead to absolutely nothing.
Because criminals gotta criminal. The vast majority of gun deaths are by illegally obtained weapons. "This is a 'gun-free' zone" is laughable on its face.
What I'm saying "fuck 'em" to is anyone who has a problem with increasing gun regulations.
What regulations will work? With over 300 million guns out there, how you plan to do that? Again, see Chicago. The genie is out of the bottle. Not getting back in.
-
Change the law/constitution.
Sounds good.
Exactly, and good luck. Nice thought, but it's not practical, and it's not going to happen.
I think it could. Not today, but maybe tomorrow.
What regulations will work?
Only the most radical ones is how I see it.
-
Change the law/constitution.
Sounds good.
Exactly, and good luck. Nice thought, but it's not practical, and it's not going to happen.
I think it could. Not today, but maybe tomorrow.
What regulations will work?
Only the most radical ones is how I see it.
@Aqua-Letifer said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
Change the law/constitution.
Sounds good.
Exactly, and good luck. Nice thought, but it's not practical, and it's not going to happen.
I think it could. Not today, but maybe tomorrow.
What regulations will work?
Only the most radical ones is how I see it.
Agreed - and it's not going to happen. Do you have an alternative?
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
Change the law/constitution.
Sounds good.
Exactly, and good luck. Nice thought, but it's not practical, and it's not going to happen.
I think it could. Not today, but maybe tomorrow.
What regulations will work?
Only the most radical ones is how I see it.
Agreed - and it's not going to happen. Do you have an alternative?
@George-K said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
@Aqua-Letifer said in An illustration of how difficult preventing mass shootings will be:
Change the law/constitution.
Sounds good.
Exactly, and good luck. Nice thought, but it's not practical, and it's not going to happen.
I think it could. Not today, but maybe tomorrow.
What regulations will work?
Only the most radical ones is how I see it.
Agreed - and it's not going to happen. Do you have an alternative?
Only other radical ones. The dilemma holds.
-
If you are going to go to the trouble of changing the culture, why not try an approach that we have seen work?
Get married before having children.
Come home every night and take care of your family.
Go to church on Sunday. Or at least join your community somewhere even if it is a children's soccer game.
Give your children the gift of discipline.
That is no more difficult than confiscating personal property and locking down the schools. And it is so much nicer.
Using vulgar language and ranting doesn't help anything.
-
Ten years ago, The Kraut:
(3) The Culture
We live in an entertainment culture soaked in graphic, often sadistic, violence. Older folks find themselves stunned by what a desensitized youth finds routine, often amusing. It’s not just movies. Young men sit for hours pulling video-game triggers, mowing down human beings en masse without pain or consequence. And we profess shock when a small cadre of unstable, deeply deranged, dangerously isolated young men go out and enact the overlearned narrative.
If we’re serious about curtailing future Columbines and Newtowns, everything — guns, commitment, culture — must be on the table. It’s not hard for President Obama to call out the NRA. But will he call out the ACLU? And will he call out his Hollywood friends?
The irony is that over the last 30 years, the U.S. homicide rate has declined by 50 percent. Gun murders as well. We’re living not through an epidemic of gun violence but through a historic decline.
Except for these unfathomable mass murders. But these are infinitely more difficult to prevent. While law deters the rational, it has far less effect on the psychotic. The best we can do is to try to detain them, disarm them and discourage “entertainment” that can intensify already murderous impulses.
But there’s a cost. Gun control impinges upon the Second Amendment; involuntary commitment impinges upon the liberty clause of the Fifth Amendment; curbing “entertainment” violence impinges upon First Amendment free speech.
That’s a lot of impingement, a lot of amendments. But there’s no free lunch. Increasing public safety almost always means restricting liberties.
We made that trade after 9/11. We make it every time the Transportation Security Administrationinvades your body at an airport. How much are we prepared to trade away after Newtown?
