Texas shooting.
-
So Red Flag Laws.. as David French proposes...
In a nation of 330MM, red flag laws might prevent some crimes.
That is of course extremely important, but also presumably unknowable.School shootings / mass shootings are statistically minuscule but present a very high degree of damage with a very low rate of occurrence and likelihood.
So I’m inclined to support red flag laws, as a matter of due process for removing rights in the public interest, but it’s not going to stop the next event that happens.
wrote on 27 May 2022, 15:21 last edited by@Ivorythumper said in Texas shooting.:
So Red Flag Laws.. as David French proposes...
In a nation of 330MM, red flag laws might prevent some crimes.
That is of course extremely important, but also presumably unknowable.School shootings / mass shootings are statistically minuscule but present a very high degree of damage with a very low rate of occurrence and likelihood.
So I’m inclined to support red flag laws, as a matter of due process for removing rights in the public interest, but it’s not going to stop the next event that happens.
Sure. But as noted, it'll be impossible to judge the efficacy. And I wonder if we'd hear about unjust applications of this law. Those sorts of stories would not be pursued by media outlets in favor of these laws. Maybe we'd just never hear about the downside.
-
@Ivorythumper said in Texas shooting.:
@Doctor-Phibes said in Texas shooting.:
@89th said in Texas shooting.:
Thousands are killed every year by other drivers who are drunk. This is significantly higher than those killed by active shooters (average of 3 per month). If we want to save lives, it would be logical to require breathalyzers in all vehicles...would have much more of an impact on saving lives than background checks or waiting periods when buying guns.
I seem to think at least one person on TNCR has said the current drink driving laws are overly restrictive and that they can drive perfectly safely when they're over the limit.
Not sure what that has to do with the point.
Neither am I, other than that there's always somebody who thinks that laws are unnecessary or overly restrictive, because hey, they've never killed anybody.
wrote on 27 May 2022, 15:22 last edited by Horace@Doctor-Phibes said in Texas shooting.:
@Ivorythumper said in Texas shooting.:
@Doctor-Phibes said in Texas shooting.:
@89th said in Texas shooting.:
Thousands are killed every year by other drivers who are drunk. This is significantly higher than those killed by active shooters (average of 3 per month). If we want to save lives, it would be logical to require breathalyzers in all vehicles...would have much more of an impact on saving lives than background checks or waiting periods when buying guns.
I seem to think at least one person on TNCR has said the current drink driving laws are overly restrictive and that they can drive perfectly safely when they're over the limit.
Not sure what that has to do with the point.
Neither am I, other than that there's always somebody who thinks that laws are unnecessary or overly restrictive, because hey, they've never killed anybody.
It's not as if the opinion that "we should have tougher DUI penalties" is based on some legal weighing of crime and punishment. It's just axiomatic to most that "we should have tougher DUI penalties". It is actually possible to rationally conclude that the penalties are too severe, at some point. Not that that's my conclusion, but I would hear the discussion.
-
@Ivorythumper said in Texas shooting.:
So Red Flag Laws.. as David French proposes...
In a nation of 330MM, red flag laws might prevent some crimes.
That is of course extremely important, but also presumably unknowable.School shootings / mass shootings are statistically minuscule but present a very high degree of damage with a very low rate of occurrence and likelihood.
So I’m inclined to support red flag laws, as a matter of due process for removing rights in the public interest, but it’s not going to stop the next event that happens.
Sure. But as noted, it'll be impossible to judge the efficacy. And I wonder if we'd hear about unjust applications of this law. Those sorts of stories would not be pursued by media outlets in favor of these laws. Maybe we'd just never hear about the downside.
wrote on 27 May 2022, 15:23 last edited by@Horace said in Texas shooting.:
@Ivorythumper said in Texas shooting.:
So Red Flag Laws.. as David French proposes...
In a nation of 330MM, red flag laws might prevent some crimes.
That is of course extremely important, but also presumably unknowable.School shootings / mass shootings are statistically minuscule but present a very high degree of damage with a very low rate of occurrence and likelihood.
So I’m inclined to support red flag laws, as a matter of due process for removing rights in the public interest, but it’s not going to stop the next event that happens.
Sure. But as noted, it'll be impossible to judge the efficacy. And I wonder if we'd hear about unjust applications of this law. Those sorts of stories would not be pursued by media outlets in favor of these laws. Maybe we'd just never hear about the downside.
Anyone who challenges the personal application of such a law with be branded a nutter. It becomes a form a kafkatrapping.
-
@Ivorythumper said in Texas shooting.:
@Doctor-Phibes said in Texas shooting.:
@89th said in Texas shooting.:
Thousands are killed every year by other drivers who are drunk. This is significantly higher than those killed by active shooters (average of 3 per month). If we want to save lives, it would be logical to require breathalyzers in all vehicles...would have much more of an impact on saving lives than background checks or waiting periods when buying guns.
I seem to think at least one person on TNCR has said the current drink driving laws are overly restrictive and that they can drive perfectly safely when they're over the limit.
Not sure what that has to do with the point.
Neither am I, other than that there's always somebody who thinks that laws are unnecessary or overly restrictive, because hey, they've never killed anybody.
wrote on 27 May 2022, 17:17 last edited by Copper@Doctor-Phibes said in Texas shooting.:
@Ivorythumper said in Texas shooting.:
@Doctor-Phibes said in Texas shooting.:
@89th said in Texas shooting.:
Thousands are killed every year by other drivers who are drunk. This is significantly higher than those killed by active shooters (average of 3 per month). If we want to save lives, it would be logical to require breathalyzers in all vehicles...would have much more of an impact on saving lives than background checks or waiting periods when buying guns.
I seem to think at least one person on TNCR has said the current drink driving laws are overly restrictive and that they can drive perfectly safely when they're over the limit.
Not sure what that has to do with the point.
Neither am I, other than that there's always somebody who thinks that laws are unnecessary or overly restrictive, because hey, they've never killed anybody.
ME!
That was me!
Did I say the laws are unnecessary? I don't think so.
But I probably said that decades ago I drove after drinking many, many times. And never hurt a soul. And never damaged any property.
I can't and don't do it any more, but that has nothing to do with laws.
There it is, I said it.
And I believe the answer was along the lines of shut up.
-
wrote on 27 May 2022, 17:39 last edited by
One of my issues with current DUI laws are the penalties do not discern between .08 and .25. The havoc wreaked in one's life is the same. Drivers on the very low end of that are not the biggest issue. Per this article:
"Hardcore drunk drivers continue to wreak havoc on our nation’s road accounting for nearly 70% of drunk driving fatalities, where there is a known alcohol-test result for the driver - a trend that has remained relatively unchanged for more than a decade."
-
wrote on 27 May 2022, 17:40 last edited by
Man the Uvalde police really screwed the pooch.
-
wrote on 27 May 2022, 17:46 last edited by
@jon-nyc said in Texas shooting.:
Man the Uvalde police really screwed the pooch.
Yes, cnn and fox are both raking them over the coals. Almost, but not quite, coming right out and calling them yellow.
-
wrote on 27 May 2022, 17:48 last edited by
AOC blames men
https://www.foxnews.com/media/aoc-patriarchy-masculinity-texas-school-shooting
Ocasio-Cortez called out America's "patriarchal society" and masculinity "rooted in the subjugation of other people" on the day after the attack.
-
wrote on 27 May 2022, 17:49 last edited by Mik
So does my niece. And not just men, white men. She posted this. There is so much fallacious there that one scarcely knows where to start.
-
wrote on 27 May 2022, 17:55 last edited by Catseye3
"Ocasio-Cortez called out America's "patriarchal society" and masculinity "rooted in the subjugation of other people" on the day after the attack."
Other people.
^
-
wrote on 27 May 2022, 18:33 last edited by
HOUSTON (Reuters) - A group of protesters angered over the shooting deaths of Texas elementary school students converged Friday outside the gun-lobby National Rifle Association’s annual convention in Houston.
... -
HOUSTON (Reuters) - A group of protesters angered over the shooting deaths of Texas elementary school students converged Friday outside the gun-lobby National Rifle Association’s annual convention in Houston.
...wrote on 27 May 2022, 18:46 last edited by@Axtremus said in Texas shooting.:
HOUSTON (Reuters) - A group of protesters angered over the shooting deaths of Texas elementary school students converged Friday outside the gun-lobby National Rifle Association’s annual convention in Houston.
...Not surprised. Only surprised if it doesn't get a little crazy.
-
wrote on 27 May 2022, 20:37 last edited by
I'll bet most of those NRA people had nothing to do with the shooting.
-
wrote on 27 May 2022, 21:09 last edited by
Now the Texas authorities and the Uvalde police are saying they screwed up.
It makes one wonder. If trained LEOs could not stop this, how would a minimally trained teacher.
-
Now the Texas authorities and the Uvalde police are saying they screwed up.
It makes one wonder. If trained LEOs could not stop this, how would a minimally trained teacher.
wrote on 27 May 2022, 21:11 last edited by@Mik said in Texas shooting.:
Now the Texas authorities and the Uvalde police are saying they screwed up.
Open yer checkbooks...
It makes one wonder. If trained LEOs could not stop this, how would a minimally trained teacher.
Wait, what? Wait. That's exactly what the cops did, because Brave Sir Robin.
-
wrote on 27 May 2022, 21:13 last edited by
-
wrote on 27 May 2022, 21:24 last edited by
Elementary school kids apparently do more active shooter drills than police forces do. There's no way the Uvalde cops were prepared for this by any forethought. This will be a learning moment for law enforcement organizations across the country. I would have assumed they didn't need this lesson.
-
So does my niece. And not just men, white men. She posted this. There is so much fallacious there that one scarcely knows where to start.
wrote on 28 May 2022, 03:43 last edited by@Mik said in Texas shooting.:
So does my niece. And not just men, white men. She posted this. There is so much fallacious there that one scarcely knows where to start.
How is this worse than blaming it on trans-sexuals?
-
@Mik said in Texas shooting.:
So does my niece. And not just men, white men. She posted this. There is so much fallacious there that one scarcely knows where to start.
How is this worse than blaming it on trans-sexuals?
wrote on 28 May 2022, 10:22 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes said in Texas shooting.:
@Mik said in Texas shooting.:
So does my niece. And not just men, white men. She posted this. There is so much fallacious there that one scarcely knows where to start.
How is this worse than blaming it on trans-sexuals?
The trans sexual thing appears to have gone away with some fact checking. That’s why it’s not as bad. Because it was falsifiable. This gentlelady”s opinion on the other hand is religious and not falsifiable. And of course mainstream adjacent, it not entirely mainstream.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in Texas shooting.:
@Mik said in Texas shooting.:
So does my niece. And not just men, white men. She posted this. There is so much fallacious there that one scarcely knows where to start.
How is this worse than blaming it on trans-sexuals?
The trans sexual thing appears to have gone away with some fact checking. That’s why it’s not as bad. Because it was falsifiable. This gentlelady”s opinion on the other hand is religious and not falsifiable. And of course mainstream adjacent, it not entirely mainstream.
wrote on 28 May 2022, 10:57 last edited by jon-nyc@Horace Actually it is falsifiable. Blacks commit the overwhelming majority of mass shootings (>70%) despite being only 13% of the population.
At least as defined by ‘4 or more people shot’.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/23/us/americas-overlooked-gun-violence.html
It just is covered differently. Think of all the headlines like “8 people were shot in Chicago this weekend in two separate incidents involving firearms, including a young girl….”
Another difference is that the lone white crazy guy sticks around and finishes off the wounded and is often prepared to confront police. The typical black shooter intends to lie low at grandma’s until everything blows over, so he runs at the first sign of sirens.
Generalizing of course but that’s how it nets out in aggregate.