Interesting Twist

[farmerjan]

Shooting to kill instead of taking someone like this into custody. I don't care who, what, when, where, or WHY they did it. Shoot 'em if they are shooting people down in these places. Too bad someone didn't have a carry permit and shot this dumb sorry piece of crap when he first started shooting. I don't care who his parents are/were, what their beliefs are. We have got to stop mollycoddling all these nut jobs. If they are caught in the act, shoot them dead. It will stop some of it. The Boston bombers, that were caught should have been shot too. I have no sympathies for them and I do feel sorry for their families in the sense of being related and "tainted" by their horrific actions. Because they might be decent upright people. I won't paint them with a wide brush. But we have got to stop finding excuses for them.

 

[Son of Butch]

300+ million people in USA
If 1% hold radical views = 3 million
If 10% of the 1% (some experts say 20%) have mental health issues = 300,000
IF only 1% with both, radical view and mental health issue, act out = 3,000

 

[cowrancher75]

gun ownership all time high



gun deaths all time low




you hear about it more because of the internet. mass shootings have been going down the last few decades.

 

[Caustic Burno]

I am really getting tired of hearing my thoughts and prayers go out to the victims. Everyone always says it is not the gun but the nut that has it. Now how will we know who the nut is with our system we have now. After the first purchaser that buys the gun then we know who bought it but do we know what that person does with it. Does that person really give a crap as what happens after he has his money in his pocket. At the time we have a hodge podge set of gun laws across America one state has stringent laws and the next state hardly has any. In fact this carnage will go on as long as guns can be freely sold by private individuals. Time to have a registration of guns and a transfer of title to the next person buying the gun that way you could maybe tell if the next buyer is unstable. Yes I have guns and the last time I fired a gun was to put a cow down that was paralyzed. The Mexican President told our President he would try and stop the drugs if America would stop the flood of guns coming to Mexico. There are more guns in the public than there are citizens in the Country. Is there really a place that a person needs the high capacity magazines to protect the home or to hunt with.

That argument holds no validity again go to the Boston Bombers, 9/11, the Austin bomber, Bath Michigan to the UofT shooting in the 60's (bolt action rifle). Everything from a box cutter to a pressure cooker to commit mass murder has been used. This is a case were there is a will there is a way for the sociopath.

Do you have any thoughts on how to prevent this in the future.

Have no idea and neither does anyone else. Cain slew Able and off to the races humans went. Mass killings are nothing new. It's more of a math problem IMO we haven't stop radicalism ever. More people more problems. Go read the book the River War.
We loose 300 or more a day to traffic accidents and it doesn't spark the emotional outrage. How many of those were innocent lives? Over a 100 people a day from drugs again no outrage.
So my question is the outrage over the method? Cause it's certainly not about the people.

 

[hurleyjd]

Automobiles are being made safer every day highways are being upgraded to handle the traffic flow that is increasing. People are getting treatment for drug abuse and deadly drugs being taken down and off the street each day. Guns are made more lethal and deadly all of the times. Magazines invented to shoot hundreds of times without reloading bump stocks are some things that are happening. Responsible gun ownership is one thing irresponsible gun marketing is another that needs looked into. What holds us back is that second amendment in the constitution. But the second amendment could be amended and will be some day in the future.

 

[shaz]

Here's an idea, stop mentioning the shooter's name in the media so they can't have their 15 minutes of fame.

 

[Caustic Burno]

Automobiles are being made safer every day highways are being upgraded to handle the traffic flow that is increasing. People are getting treatment for drug abuse and deadly drugs being taken down and off the street each day. Guns are made more lethal and deadly all of the times. Magazines invented to shoot hundreds of times without reloading bump stocks are some things that are happening. Responsible gun ownership is one thing irresponsible gun marketing is another that needs looked into. What holds us back is that second amendment in the constitution. But the second amendment could be amended and will be some day in the future.

Problem with excuses it only satisfies those making them.
When the second is, you will no longer be a citizen but a subject. That is along the same political thinking of Hitler get the religion and the guns. Only members of NAZI party and government officials didn't have to be permitted. Scary in my book. I guess history does repeat itself. You might be right about the second in the future. There will be our third Civil War. I wonder how many deaths that one will result in. Now I will agree on one thing with you the black rifle attracts the nut. I can't attribute that to one specific thing.
Maybe we should make a law against murder.
I think Israel has come closer than anyone in the art of profiling.
Dang that slippery slope that violates that Bill of Rights again.

 

[sstterry]

I think Israel has come closer than anyone in the art of profiling.
Dang that slippery slope that violates that Bill of Rights again.

Profiling on having terroristic tendencies or mental instability is not unconstitutional.

 

[hurleyjd]

Every time we watch TV news and search the internet for stories the manipulators are out to sway our minds.I suppose that my attitudes and philosophy is not actually mine but what I was taught by my parents and peers along they way as I was brought up and probable still so. After all it took along time for people to be convinced that the sun does not revolve around the earth. Roman Catholic Church locked up any one that had an original thought and theory otherwise some were burned at the stake. After the fall of the roman empire and the taking over of a lot of territory by the Islam Religion did the Muslim Scientist and mathematicians advance a theory that the earth revolved around the sun. Galileo was put under house arrest by the Roman Catholic Church for proving that the sun was stationary and the earth and planets revolved around it. Now I know this is not about the original subject of gun control but only about why I think we may not have an original thought because of what we were exposed to and learned from. Here is an article that might explain what I am posting about.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-neuroscientist-explains-how-politicians-and-the-media-use-fear-to-make-us-hate-without-thinking-2019-07-18?siteid=yhoof2&yptr=yahoo

 

[Caustic Burno]

I think Israel has come closer than anyone in the art of profiling.
Dang that slippery slope that violates that Bill of Rights again.

Profiling on having terroristic tendencies or mental instability is not unconstitutional.

Well that is where you and the SCOTUS disagree. The fourteenth has been used by the court as a broad brush for privacy.

Hurley it's a simple are you willing to die to infringe the second cause that's what it will come down to.

 

[sstterry]

Well that is where you and the SCOTUS disagree. The fourteenth has been used by the court as a broad brush for privacy.

It is only unconstitutional if the profiling is based on race or any other protected class. Terrorism and mental instability are not protected classes.

 

[hurleyjd]

I think Israel has come closer than anyone in the art of profiling.
Dang that slippery slope that violates that Bill of Rights again.

Profiling on having terroristic tendencies or mental instability is not unconstitutional.

Well that is where you and the SCOTUS disagree. The fourteenth has been used by the court as a broad brush for privacy.

Hurley it's a simple are you willing to die to infringe the second cause that's what it will come down to.

No I am not going to die I will join the well regulated militia that is part of the second amendment. Which side will you be on the gun nuts side.

 

[Caustic Burno]

Profiling on having terroristic tendencies or mental instability is not unconstitutional.

Well that is where you and the SCOTUS disagree. The fourteenth has been used by the court as a broad brush for privacy.

Hurley it's a simple are you willing to die to infringe the second cause that's what it will come down to.

No I am not going to die I will join the well regulated militia that is part of the second amendment. Which side will you be on the gun nuts side.

I think the gun nut is going to try and join a well regulated militia. I highly doubt he gets in if there is a question and answer test .

 

[Caustic Burno]

Well that is where you and the SCOTUS disagree. The fourteenth has been used by the court as a broad brush for privacy.

It is only unconstitutional if the profiling is based on race or any other protected class. Terrorism and mental instability are not protected classes.

So how is the government going to decide if you're a loose screw without invading your privacy if you haven't committed an offense yet?
Careful where you go here got to remember what Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

 

[sstterry]

Well that is where you and the SCOTUS disagree. The fourteenth has been used by the court as a broad brush for privacy.

It is only unconstitutional if the profiling is based on race or any other protected class. Terrorism and mental instability are not protected classes.

So how is the government going to decide if you're a loose screw without invading your privacy if you haven't committed an offense yet?
Careful where you go here got to remember what Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

And therein lies the question.

It is not an invasion of privacy to monitor known hate sites, or any other public site for that matter, for "manifestos" such as the El Paso shooter posted (once you post something online, you loose your reasonable expectation of privacy). It is also not an invasion of privacy to follow up on leads received from the general public.

It would be a violation of the 4th to hack and monitor private emails and messages without a court-ordered warrant. Think analogous to wiretap. Constitutional law is still trying to catch up to the new technologies.

Edit: I want to add that the Patriot Act gave the government wide latitude to use National Security Letters without court oversite to monitor phone conversations and computer and banking records for keywords and suspicious transactions. I am vehemently opposed to that. (A lot of that Act has now been sunsetted)

A lot of folks tend to make a distinction between foreign terrorist acts and domestic terrorist acts. I do not see the difference. Radical Islamic or White Nationalist, they should be treated the same.

 

[Caustic Burno]

It is only unconstitutional if the profiling is based on race or any other protected class. Terrorism and mental instability are not protected classes.

So how is the government going to decide if you're a loose screw without invading your privacy if you haven't committed an offense yet?
Careful where you go here got to remember what Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

And therein lies the question.

It is not an invasion of privacy to monitor known hate sites, or any other public site for that matter, for "manifestos" such as the El Paso shooter posted (once you post something online, you loose your reasonable expectation of privacy). It is also not an invasion of privacy to follow up on leads received from the general public.

It would be a violation of the 4th to hack and monitor private emails and messages without a court-ordered warrant. Think analogous to wiretap. Constitutional law is still trying to catch up to the new technologies.

Edit: I want to add that the Patriot Act gave the government wide latitude to use National Security Letters without court oversite to monitor phone conversations and computer and banking records for keywords and suspicious transactions. I am vehemently opposed to that. (A lot of that Act has now been sunsetted)

A lot of folks tend to make a distinction between foreign terrorist acts and domestic terrorist acts. I do not see the difference. Radical Islamic or White Nationalist, they should be treated the same.

You left off BLM as they are just as much a terrorist group as the above mentioned as Antifa. The slippery slope you get on when you start lumping people to groups. What next the Southern Baptist as there are people that adamantly think they are nuts.
Let's take the Austin bomber he didn't use social media.
My question is how intrusive are you willing to let the government be?
You mentioned the Patriot Act what a joke that should have never passed.
The Americans should have protested vehemently against it.

 

[sstterry]

You left off BLM as they are just as much a terrorist group as the above mentioned as Antifa. The slippery slope you get on when you start lumping people to groups. What next the Southern Baptist as there are people that adamantly think they are nuts.
Let's take the Austin bomber he didn't use social media.
My question is how intrusive are you willing to let the government be?
You mentioned the Patriot Act what a joke that should have never passed.
The Americans should have protested vehemently against it.

While I agree about Antifa, I am not aware of any BLM folks shooting up crowds of people. I agree with you about groups. But, groups are not the biggest concern. It is the lone wolf shooter (or bomber) that poses the real threat because they are so hard to identify.

For the record, and I have said this before, I am not for the "assault rifle" ban. A semi-automatic long gun is the same as any "assault" rifle. The assault rifles just looks scarier to some folks. The damage is the same.

What I am for is a ban on high capacity magazines. The Ohio shooter got off 41 shots in less than a minute (he had was using 100 round magazines). Police got to him after about 60 seconds. If he had to stop and reload after 5 shots, a lot of the carnage could have been prevented. I have yet to see a good argument as to why high capacity magazines should be legal.

 

[Caustic Burno]

As I agree why do you need a 100 round magazine. A person proficient on an 8 round 1911 could do the same.
We can discuss this Ad nauseam we still haven't addressed the real issues of mental illness.

 

[sstterry]

I am not sure we can, without an overhaul of the healthcare system, and I don't believe that would have stopped either of these two shooters. (And no I am not for the Medicare for all crap).

 

[Caustic Burno]

I am not sure we can, without an overhaul of the healthcare system, and I don't believe that would have stopped either of these two shooters. (And no I am not for the Medicare for all crap).

Has nothing to do with Medicare we shut down the sanatoriums in the country due to cost. Wonder what that has actually cost us?