Mass shooting at California Garlic Fest

[aztek]

@RoofGardeneryea we do, a 19 years old italian -iraninan. other than that nothing really, no hateful posts ,on SM no red flags, 

Edited July 31, 2019 by aztek

[Dark_Grey]

1 minute ago, aztek said:

entire new zeland has half of population of my city alone, and very low population density, it is also an island, they never had gun problems to begin with, neither did Australia, (their entire gun ban was a result to 1 gang shooting basically) and if you look at the stats violent crimes went up after confiscation. 

It goes to show how little thought is put in to anti-gun arguments beyond feelings. Everything is about feelings when it comes to manipulating public opinion. "Why can't America get rid of guns? It worked for that tiny Scandinavian country! I don't understand why countries are different! Grrr!" Never a mention of black market guns, or increases in violent crimes and home invasions, etc. 

The thing is, most people are just not very invested in any one topic. That's my big revelation for 2019. Arguing politics has generally become a waste of time because most people do not actually care. Most people are not willing to look up source material, FBI statistics, demographic statistics and so on. I can't fault them for that but it's becoming more obvious every day that the vast majority aren't coming to the table with much more than their feelings cause again, most people are just not that invested in any of this. Hence why bite-sized talking points are so easily swallowed and repeated, yet rarely considered or researched. I keep meaning to put up a poll on UM to get some stats on how many users here are bothering to look in to any topic beyond reading the headlines. Even if you "win" an argument on immigration or gun control because you have the facts, what did you accomplish? Chances are, the other party is just going to close Google Chrome and move on with their day without giving the topic a second thought. You see a lot of "hit and run" comments online by people who want to get a jab in without really giving a crap either way.

[RoofGardener]

1 minute ago, aztek said:

@RoofGardeneryea we do, a 19 years old italian -iraninan. other than that nothing really, no hateful posts ,on SM no red flags, 

Ahhh... Italian.. that might explain it. Perhaps he was upset with the quality - or the price - of the Garlic on offer ? 

[Dark_Grey]

Just now, aztek said:

yea we do, a 19 years old italian -iraninan. other than that nothing really, no hateful posts ,on SM no red flags, 

The really weird part is that we have a 19 year old kid with barely any social media presence. Whether or it was all scrubbed or not remains to be seen

[Gunn]

7 minutes ago, Dark_Grey said:

It goes to show how little thought is put in to anti-gun arguments beyond feelings. Everything is about feelings when it comes to manipulating public opinion. "Why can't America get rid of guns? It worked for that tiny Scandinavian country! I don't understand why countries are different! Grrr!" Never a mention of black market guns, or increases in violent crimes and home invasions, etc. 

The thing is, most people are just not very invested in any one topic. That's my big revelation for 2019. Arguing politics has generally become a waste of time because most people do not actually care. Most people are not willing to look up source material, FBI statistics, demographic statistics and so on. I can't fault them for that but it's becoming more obvious every day that the vast majority aren't coming to the table with much more than their feelings cause again, most people are just not that invested in any of this. Hence why bite-sized talking points are so easily swallowed and repeated, yet rarely considered or researched. I keep meaning to put up a poll on UM to get some stats on how many users here are bothering to look in to any topic beyond reading the headlines. Even if you "win" an argument on immigration or gun control because you have the facts, what did you accomplish? Chances are, the other party is just going to close Google Chrome and move on with their day without giving the topic a second thought. You see a lot of "hit and run" comments online by people who want to get a jab in without really giving a crap either way.

Probably about right and also gun control has been a topic of discussion since the late 1960's here in the U.S. In all that time, anti-gun proponents have not accomplished very much with their arguments. And I think they know as well as we do, the 2nd Amend will still be around and U.S. citizens will still have the natural right and freedom to purchase and own a gun for a long time to come. Or I should say, at least very little will change in our or their lifetime.

 

4 minutes ago, Dark_Grey said:

The really weird part is that we have a 19 year old kid with barely any social media presence. Whether or it was all scrubbed or not remains to be seen

I have a feeling that was mostly his problem, his social life.

[highdesert50]

18 minutes ago, aztek said:

so get some courage and change yours, why do you think it is my beliefs that need to be changed?  I strongly believe that it is you who need to change yours.  not to mention owning guns is a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT, not entitlement

Perhaps it is because I have lived in such extremes as to have deal with on-site trauma and death that I have such respect for life. Indeed, those experiences and dealing with trauma survivors have changed my beliefs. Life is very precious, particularly that of the young. Yet, it is not about me. It's about preserving our society and especially our youth. Yes, you have the right to own guns in the US as do many other countries. But, there is a difference. Most countries have very stringent controls for owning guns. Why? How about ... there are more people who complete suicide with guns in the US than by any other means. And, suicide is the second leading cause of death for 10 to 34 year olds. As for you, I never asked you to change your beliefs. Examine them ... decide what's best for ... your grandchildren. It's not always about me.

[Dark_Grey]

2 minutes ago, Gunn said:

Probably about right and also gun control has been a topic of discussion since the late 1960's here in the U.S. In all that time, anti-gun proponents have not accomplished very much with their arguments. And I think they know as well as we do, the 2nd Amend will still be around and U.S. citizens will still have the natural right and freedom to purchase and own a gun for a long time to come. Or I should say, at least very little will change in our or their lifetime.

 

I have a feeling that was mostly his problem, his social life.

Loneliness is a modern epidemic in America yet the number of mass shootings is still pretty low. We are missing a few puzzle pieces 

[aztek]

1 minute ago, highdesert50 said:

Perhaps it is because I have lived in such extremes as to have deal with on-site trauma and death that I have such respect for life.

you are not the only one who seen things,  i grew up on Coney island in 70s and 80s,  i have seen plenty of kids shot, stabbed, slashed with razors..., but you know what i have not seen, an armed person be a victim as much, actually almost never, unless shot by cops during shootout. 

other countries never had 250+ year old gun culture, they do not have about a billion of guns in citizens hands, their violent crimes are not much different than ours, they may have less gun  murders, but they use other means, see stats on Australia, see how armed home invasions, and violent crime WENT UP after gun ban,  see how arson replaced guns, you really need to familiarize yourself with actual numbers, stats and consequences , cuz now it does not seem like you have anything other than hallmark speech

  they also do not honor peoples ability to defend themselves,  not really a good example to go  by. 

 

[highdesert50]

1 hour ago, aztek said:

so get some courage and change yours, why do you think it is my beliefs that need to be changed?  I strongly believe that it is you who need to change yours.  not to mention owning guns is a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT, not entitlement, and not wanting to be a victim is exactly why i'm keeping them. 

i'm curious how are you planing to not become a victim with no means of protecting yourself????  or you keep yours but preach to others to lose theirs?

Sorry, forgot to respond to your latter comment. This is indeed a good question. I made a choice not to live in fear. This does mean that I ignored critical scene size-up when responding to an incident. I do remain vigilant to my environment, but not hyper-vigilent. That makes a difference in quality of life and better allows the body to sustain itself over the years as the sympathetic system is not constantly at work. I also practice positive-coping skills and have developed a social support system to deal with the challenges of high risk professions -- this is consistent with the recommendations of the WHO 2014 Suicide Prevention Report. To answer your other question as whether I discourage others to 'lose theirs.' No, rather I work with others to deal with such issues as fear, particularly so when dealing with such issues as PTSD which tends to isolate people.

[aztek]

Just now, highdesert50 said:

Sorry, forgot to respond to your latter comment. This is indeed a good question. I made a choice not to live in fear. This does mean that I ignored critical scene size-up when responding to an incident. I do remain vigilant to my environment, but not hyper-vigilent. That makes a difference in quality of life and better allows the body to sustain itself over the years as the sympathetic system is not constantly at work. I also practice positive-coping skills and have developed a social support system to deal with the challenges of high risk professions -- this is consistent with the recommendations of the WHO 2014 Suicide Prevention Report. To answer your other question as whether I discourage others to 'lose theirs.' No, rather I work with others to deal with such issues as fear, particularly so when dealing with such issues as PTSD which tends to isolate people.

so if you had a gun you'd be living in fear?

[highdesert50]

34 minutes ago, aztek said:

so if you had a gun you'd be living in fear?

If the intent is to use the gun for self-defense, then I have my personal reservations -- this is reflective of my beliefs. There are other means of self-defense that are more effective for a non-LEO than using a firearm where a high degree of accuracy is needed in an uncontrolled setting. Because most people are adverse to killing someone, there is typically some hesitation along with the effects of the body dumping endorphins etc for 'fight or flight' -- even practiced LEOs have issues with this leading to diminished accuracy. Secondly, there are the mental consequences of killing someone -- this is a variable yet important consideration. Thirdly, if I am in an incident where multiple people are involved, then how does LE distinguish me from the bad guy? Fourthly, my gun may be used against me or someone close to me. Or, I could use it on myself in a moment of despair -- e.g. first responders have the highest incidence of on-job suicide. Finally, there are some fairly powerful irritants that don't require accuracy, are non-lethal hence no hesitation, and can allow one time to escape.

[highdesert50]

1 hour ago, aztek said:

so if you had a gun you'd be living in fear?

Just a clarification ... should have been ... this does not mean I ignored critical scene size-up.

[aztek]

9 minutes ago, highdesert50 said:

Just a clarification ... should have been ... this does not mean I ignored critical scene size-up.

so is it yes or no?  

Edited July 31, 2019 by aztek

[aztek]

50 minutes ago, highdesert50 said:

If the intent is to use the gun for self-defense, then I have my personal reservations -- this is reflective of my beliefs. There are other means of self-defense that are more effective for a non-LEO than using a firearm where a high degree of accuracy is needed in an uncontrolled setting. Because most people are adverse to killing someone, there is typically some hesitation along with the effects of the body dumping endorphins etc for 'fight or flight' -- even practiced LEOs have issues with this leading to diminished accuracy. Secondly, there are the mental consequences of killing someone -- this is a variable yet important consideration. Thirdly, if I am in an incident where multiple people are involved, then how does LE distinguish me from the bad guy? Fourthly, my gun may be used against me or someone close to me. Or, I could use it on myself in a moment of despair -- e.g. first responders have the highest incidence of on-job suicide. Finally, there are some fairly powerful irritants that don't require accuracy, are non-lethal hence no hesitation, and can allow one time to escape.

such as? please tell me, i'm really curious how an 100lb female can protect herself against 200lb drugged up violent rapist..

 guns work just fine for none leo, about 1 million times a year,  they also show they are better trained than cops,  actually statistic shows just about anyone is better with guns than cops, civies are also more careful about using guns, unlike cops who always get away with mistakenly shooting someone, civies do not,  you seem to be stock on fallacy that cops can handle firearms better than civilian gun owners, well it is a fallacy as well.  i see nothing factual in your beliefs. i do see you are not a gun owner material.  so congrats on right choice to leave guns to those who are not afraid of them

Edited July 31, 2019 by aztek

[highdesert50]

1 hour ago, aztek said:

such as? please tell me, i'm really curious how an 100lb female can protect herself against 200lb drugged up violent rapist..

 guns work just fine for none leo, about 1 million times a year,  they also show they are better trained than cops,  actually statistic shows just about anyone is better with guns than cops, civies are also more careful about using guns, unlike cops who always get away with mistakenly shooting someone, civies do not,  you seem to be stock on fallacy that cops can handle firearms better than civilian gun owners, well it is a fallacy as well.  i see nothing factual in your beliefs. i do see you are not a gun owner material.  so congrats on right choice to leave guns to those who are not afraid of them

Well, consider that petite female dealing with let's say an individual on PCP. As you know about 2/3 of the victims of sexual assault know the perpetrator. If she were to use a handgun, she might hesitate because of the familiarity. She would also have to inflict a fatal shot simply because the aggressor does not feel pain. If she were to use an irritant, a lachrymatory agent, she would not have to worry about accuracy yet the aggressor's eyes would tear and swell shut, breathing could be labored, the pain would obviously be of no consequence, yet she could escape.

With regard to LE, though I am not a LEO, I do have experience doing POST (peace officer safety training) and have worked with a number of academies. I am unsure as to how you define training. I do know that the training involves a lot more than just handling a gun. A great deal of time is spent on scene size-up, training with scenarios that could occur within the domain of the agency, cross-agency interactions, mass casualties, crowd control, communication, people's rights, etc. The attrition rate at academies can be upward to thirty percent. For those that graduate, there is a probationary period that may be years in length. These individuals are not without flaws, but they are trained professionals who can work as a team. Though I may speak for myself, I would much prefer the career peace officer to a well-intentioned vigilante.

Yet, we have wandered too far from topic. That we keep in mind ... In 2016, 64% of global firearm-related deaths were homicides; 27% were suicides, and 9% were accidental injuries. United States has the second highest mortality rate by firearm -- 37,200. United States is the second highest in suicide by gun ... Source: The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) an independent global health research center at the University of Washington. And, if that doesn't disturb us, suicide is the second leading cause of death for 10-14 year olds (CDC).

Decide.

 

 

[aztek]

22 minutes ago, highdesert50 said:

Well, consider that petite female dealing with let's say an individual on PCP. As you know about 2/3 of the victims of sexual assault know the perpetrator. If she were to use a handgun, she might hesitate because of the familiarity. She would also have to inflict a fatal shot simply because the aggressor does not feel pain. If she were to use an irritant, a lachrymatory agent, she would not have to worry about accuracy yet the aggressor's eyes would tear and swell shut, breathing could be labored, the pain would obviously be of no consequence, yet she could escape.

With regard to LE, though I am not a LEO, I do have experience doing POST (peace officer safety training) and have worked with a number of academies. I am unsure as to how you define training. I do know that the training involves a lot more than just handling a gun. A great deal of time is spent on scene size-up, training with scenarios that could occur within the domain of the agency, cross-agency interactions, mass casualties, crowd control, communication, people's rights, etc. The attrition rate at academies can be upward to thirty percent. For those that graduate, there is a probationary period that may be years in length. These individuals are not without flaws, but they are trained professionals who can work as a team. Though I may speak for myself, I would much prefer the career peace officer to a well-intentioned vigilante.

Yet, we have wandered too far from topic. That we keep in mind ... In 2016, 64% of global firearm-related deaths were homicides; 27% were suicides, and 9% were accidental injuries. United States has the second highest mortality rate by firearm -- 37,200. United States is the second highest in suicide by gun ... Source: The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) an independent global health research center at the University of Washington. And, if that doesn't disturb us, suicide is the second leading cause of death for 10-14 year olds (CDC).

Decide.

 

 

she may freeze or she may not, in any case with a gun she has more chances than without,  shot to the head ends life period, high or not,  mace is a tricky thing you may be affected more than the person you are spraying, it also has less effect on a person on drugs,  you also do not use it indoors, so again gun wins

we can all see the result of their training in real world, it sucks big time,  yet we do not see civilians shooting dozens of rounds at 1 guy point blank , on buisy street, and  hitting several bystanders,  but cops do it,  so again real world shows cops can't shoot straight, we actually had  stats posted before that brakes it down,

yea numbers look about right,  but i see nothing wrong with it,

more than half of gun deaths are suicides, fast painless way to end their own life,  also as japan shows gun availability and suicide rates are not related at all.  that would leave about 15-17k,  police accounts for about 1200-1500 a year,  gang on gang violence takes about 500-600 a year in each major cities, which we have about a dosen or even more, Baltimore, Chicago, Detroit, st. Louis Newark.......... gangsters killing gangsters is a wonderful thing,  so that amounts to roughly 10k, the rest is about 5000-7000 kills,  justified shootings and crimes, as well as accidents which we have about 600-700 a year,   with 330mil people we have we have , rate  comes to 1-1,5. which is very low.  

see, if you actually scrutinize numbers you see real picture, which is much better than msm wants us to believe.

I already made my choice, and i stand by it. 

 

Edited July 31, 2019 by aztek

[RavenHawk]

21 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

So is the right to self determination and if our society determines that 2A needs to go away they will make it so.

That is a head shaker.  Without the 2A, there cannot be self-determination.  Don’t confuse a police state with self-determination.  That term refers to a free people.  A people that have gotten rid of their right to bear arms will not be free for much longer.  It’s similar to running around with scissors.  Eventually, you’re going to trip and fall and hurt yourself.  As long as there are enough people that study the origins of the Founding Fathers and Founding Documents, society will determine that the 2A will need to stay.  As Americans age (even illegals) they become more Conservative as the rule.  The Progs have to counter that with bringing in more and more illegals, but they can never bring in enough to usurp the Constitution.

 

Im not saying I want it to be, Im just being a realist - unpopular ideas eventually lose and the demographic shifts in our society away from rural towards urban living are guaranteeing that eventually the 2A will be an unpopular idea if something doesnt change.

The minute that Natural Rights become unpopular is the moment that we have lost our country.  That gets pretty real.  The unrestricted right to bear arms is sacrosanct.  The problem is not with the 2A.  It is an issue with human behavior.  An overreaching government bent on taking away rights is complicit in encouraging the anger.

 

Exactly why the need to change NOW before its too late.

It’s that “Fundamental Change” thingy, eh?  Making such a change NOW will lead us one step closer to enslavement.  Then you’ll see more death than any mass shooting ever seen.

 

You missed the point. I mean they arent as needed in the every day lives of Americans

No, you missed the point.  You don’t need to be actively engaged in a shootout with the bad guy for it to be needed.  Just having it available is the need, the deterrent.  Having it ready to go.  No government can move against the populace as long as they are armed.

 

as less and less Americans work land, own large swaths of land, tend to animals or live in dangerous game territory etc. They simply arent used as tools like they used to be.

It’s true that they are less needed to defend against most animals, except in the case of the animal called Man.  They are still used as tools as they have always been used.

 

Im not saying thats reason to get rid of them but I am taking a realistic look at societal perceptions. It is those perceptions that eventually lead to legislation.

You’re not saying it in so many words.  And those perceptions are driven by those that would like nothing more than to usurp the Constitution.  So that they no longer have to pretend.  A few years ago, when there was still a Democratic Party, no Democrat would dare espouse what they freely do in the open now.  They are desperate because they are losing power.

[highdesert50]

38 minutes ago, aztek said:

she may freeze or she may not, in any case with a gun she has more chances than without,  shot to the head ends life period, high or not,  mace is a tricky thing you may be affected more than the person you are spraying, it also has less effect on a person on drugs,  you also do not use it indoors, so again gun wins

we can all see the result of their training in real world, it sucks big time,  yet we do not see civilians shooting dozens of rounds at 1 guy point blank , on buisy street, and  hitting several bystanders,  but cops do it,  so again real world shows cops can't shoot straight, we actually had  stats posted before that brakes it down,

yea numbers look about right,  but i see nothing wrong with it,

more than half of gun deaths are suicides, fast painless way to end their own life,  also as japan shows gun availability and suicide rates are not related at all.  that would leave about 15-17k,  police accounts for about 1200-1500 a year,  gang on gang violence takes about 500-600 a year in each major cities, which we have about a dosen or even more, Baltimore, Chicago, Detroit, st. Louis Newark.......... gangsters killing gangsters is a wonderful thing,  so that amounts to roughly 10k, the rest is about 5000-7000 kills,  justified shootings and crimes, as well as accidents which we have about 600-700 a year,   with 330mil people we have we have , rate  comes to 1-1,5. which is very low.  

see, if you actually scrutinize numbers you see real picture, which is much better than msm wants us to believe.

I already made my choice, and i stand by it. 

 

Thanks for the opportunity to debate, aztek.

[RavenHawk]

On 7/30/2019 at 7:55 PM, Tatetopa said:

We have had quite a few discussions on this site about that.   I once thought that rifles and pistols were about self protection and hunting.  I was schooled that the Second Amendment is about overthrowing the government when you think it is out of line. 

It is the right and duty of every American citizen to overthrow the government when it becomes [too] despotic.  Under Obama, it was just one mishap away.  But what is more important than being able to overthrow a tyrannical government is being armed well enough to thwart any attempt by a wannabe tyrannical government from running amok.  That is the check to tyranny.

 

Some people on this site believe they will  solve the countries problems by taking up arms when they have too much that they disagree with..

I don’t know anyone who believes that.  The use of the bullet is only necessary when the ballot fails.  But taking up arms will not solve human behavior, i.e. preventing someone from violating the 2A.

 

 It seems like America is a lot more like Afghanistan than Australia in that respect. I think  attempts at some rational  approach to gun control will  enhance that last stand mentality. 

The Prog agenda is not a rational approach.  The first thing from their mouths is how to take guns away.  I like how they try to tie gun control to Obamacare so that they can setup subjective lists of people deemed unable to own firearms.  Why don’t they speak of establishing gun safety courses all through school, teaching respect of firearms and lives?

 

Some portion of the population is willing to sacrifice other people's children  and maybe even  their own family members  for that unrestricted right to bear arms..  I don't think that will change soon.

Because it is far more important than that.  It’s not just about the 2A.  We are talking about a fundamental right.  Fundamental rights are more important than all our children.  Because without those fundamental rights, what hope does the future of our children amount to?

 

Yes I do.  Some of the same people are law and order supporters, so one would presume they  are in favor of more focused state oversight and intervention. 

Not oversight, but focused on fairness and justice (not social justice).  To not only “establish Justice, “ but also “insure domestic Tranquility”.

 

People have a right to say what they want, and to bear arms, but there in not much in the Constitution to prevent surveillance of suspicious individuals. 

Actually it does and I just mentioned it.  If the government broadens its definition of *suspicious individuals*, then it will cause an unrest in the domestic tranquility.

 

That might become what websites you visit and what comments you make or other indications of your mental health  rather than what you look like or how you drive a car.

Someone visiting a website is not an indicator of one’s character or mental health.  It’s very common to peruse sites that you usually don’t visit to keep tabs of what is there.  It’s important to know what is out there.  Progs would want to count that as a mental defect so that can be used as a means to confiscate guns.

 

Some people very much fear socialism, communism, progressiveness, and liberalism.  They are much opposed to more of that philosophy in our government.   For some at least that philosophy is not out of date.  

Firstly, BRD’s comment is totally laughable.  Venezuela is the most current example.  Tyrants and Socialism are alive and well in today’s world.

 

It should be feared.  Not in the sense of hopelessness but with vigilance.  It is imperative that it is confronted, always confronted.  The Constitution is based on the premise that the individual has control over their own rights (life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness).  The premise of Socialism is based in submission to the state.  Giving up your natural rights for those deemed suitable by the state.  The current DNC debates are clear proof that it is not out of date.

[+Desertrat56]

I wish you weren't so polarized.  You and I have some things in common and could meet for tea or coffee and have nice converstaions except that your polarization (mind numbed) towards hating what you think is democrat/liberal is an obstacle.

I agree with the edited version of what you said.  We do need progressives but we also need rationalization and the understanding that everything sanctioned by the Democratic party AND the Republican party is by design to keep us at odds with each other so we are more easily manipulated so they can take our resources, pass legislation to take away our rights, etc.  All for the love of money and power.  We need to take that power back and as long as you blame one side or the other you are part of the problem, allowing yourself to be manipulated to think emotionally rather than rationally.  There is going to be a big change and I would prefer it be graceful rather than chaotic and polarized with citizen against citizen instead of unified against the despots who run our lives, which is what it is looking like now.

It is not the progressives that are organizing taking our guns away, they are just the zombies spouting the fear that has been put into them by it.  If they are high up federal politicians, then they are working for status quo, not progress.  If you remember, this battle has been going on since the 80's with the "attempt on Reagan's life" and the Brady bill. 

 

8 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

It is the right and duty of every American citizen to overthrow the government when it becomes [too] despotic.  ... But what is more important than being able to overthrow a tyrannical government is being armed well enough to thwart any attempt by a wannabe tyrannical government from running amok.  That is the check to tyranny.

I don’t know anyone who believes that.  The use of the bullet is only necessary when the ballot fails.  But taking up arms will not solve human behavior, i.e. preventing someone from violating the 2A.

 The Prog agenda is not a rational approach.  The first thing from their mouths is how to take guns away.  I like how they try to tie gun control to Obamacare so that they can setup subjective lists of people deemed unable to own firearms.  Why don’t they speak of establishing gun safety courses all through school, teaching respect of firearms and lives?

 Because it is far more important than that.  It’s not just about the 2A.  We are talking about a fundamental right.  Fundamental rights are more important than all our children.  Because without those fundamental rights, what hope does the future of our children amount to?

 Not oversight, but focused on fairness and justice (not social justice).  To not only “establish Justice, “ but also “insure domestic Tranquility”.

 If the government broadens its definition of *suspicious individuals*, then it will cause an unrest in the domestic tranquility.

 Someone visiting a website is not an indicator of one’s character or mental health.  It’s very common to peruse sites that you usually don’t visit to keep tabs of what is there.  It’s important to know what is out there. 

It is imperative that it is confronted, always confronted.  The Constitution is based on the premise that the individual has control over their own rights (life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness).  The premise of Socialism is based in submission to the state.  Giving up your natural rights for those deemed suitable by the state.  The current DNC debates are clear proof that it is not out of date.

 

[Raptor Witness]

A kid like this could easily have picked a school, but he didn't. I wonder why?  Why choose a target so close to home? 

My sympathies for all the victims and their families. Children killing children are the most heartbreaking of cases like this. Rather than ask why, or how, we might try asking .... why is death preferable to life for so many citizens of the most prosperous nation on earth? 

The jungle has become concrete and steel, but the hearts of human beings is exactly the same.

Edited August 1, 2019 by Raptor Witness

[+Desertrat56]

38 minutes ago, Raptor Witness said:

A kid like this could easily have picked a school, but he didn't. I wonder why?  Why choose a target so close to home? 

My sympathies for all the victims and their families. Children killing children are the most heartbreaking of cases like this. Rather than ask why, or how, we might try asking .... why is death preferable to life for so many citizens of the most prosperous nation on earth? 

The jungle has become concrete and steel, but the hearts of human beings is exactly the same.

Maybe that was the point, a target close to home.

[Tatetopa]

12 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

It should be feared.  Not in the sense of hopelessness but with vigilance.  It is imperative that it is confronted, always confronted.  The Constitution is based on the premise that the individual has control over their own rights (life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness).  The premise of Socialism is based in submission to the state.  Giving up your natural rights for those deemed suitable by the state.  The current DNC debates are clear proof that it is not out of date.

Data mining makes me uncomfortable too, yet  it is happening on a large scale.  Advertisers know what sights we visit, who we talk to and what comments we post, it might be more valuable to preventing deaths than selling us body gel.  Google can also track how many times you visit a sight and what you access including related sights and search words.  There is a distinguishable difference between stumbling onto a sight and looking at one in curiosity versus delving deep into it and leaving comments.

I respect the Second Amendment, and know many hold it more dear than I.  I have been a hunter, I used rifles and  a shotgun that's all.  I have not considered overthrowing a government, but, it is written right there in the Constitution isn't it?

On the other hand I have not seen it put so starkly, that it is  more important than all of our children.

In other words, you have no solutions to mentally disturbed individuals going on shooting sprees.  Does that not also affect domestic tranquility?

[aztek]

4 hours ago, Raptor Witness said:

A kid like this could easily have picked a school, but he didn't. I wonder why?  Why choose a target so close to home? 

My sympathies for all the victims and their families. Children killing children are the most heartbreaking of cases like this. Rather than ask why, or how, we might try asking .... why is death preferable to life for so many citizens of the most prosperous nation on earth? 

The jungle has become concrete and steel, but the hearts of human beings is exactly the same.

maybe he has no bad memories and experiences in school,  he was not bullied, prbly could stand up fro himself, had no problem getting girls, was not a dork, that no one wanted to socialize with. if you look at school shooters many were not having a good time in school. 

maybe he flipped, and wanted to kill someone here and now, and this was an opportunity at the time

[Black Red Devil]

23 hours ago, highdesert50 said:

Thanks for the opportunity to debate, aztek.

Thank him as much as you want but he's telling you porkies just to justify his violent habit so he can keep his toys and above all, he's showing a complete lack of concern for a problem that is regularly killing kids.  Australia hasn't a gun or crime problem on the same scale the US has.  In fact before gun control took affect in the 90's Australia had a high rate of crime in percentage compared to other western nations.  Here, figures from the Institute of Criminology from 1988.  Just look at the first graph.

Nowadays the US has 4 times higher the crime rate (not only guns) that Australia and most other western countries have.  link  The US is 99th in the world (Australia 164th similar with France, UK, Portugal, Netherlands etc.), preceded by Central/South American and African tin pot corrupt dictatorships infested by criminal lord barons who rule over uneducated and poverty stricken populations.  Then again, you're better than Russia, run by the one and only supreme world dictator.

I know you didn't compare, but he did.  The US has the problem, he's trying to put other western nations in the same pot so he can justify why it's necessary to keep his toys.  Puzzling how these toys are so necessary in defending against murderers and yet when these mass shootings occur, despite the numerous guns you have circulating around, nobody ever cuts down the shooter/s.  Only when the police come does the shooter get killed or kill himself.