Elementary school shooting gun control pissing contest

[Queequeg]

Merithyn, I don't give a shit if qualified, sane people want to own elephant guns or massive shotguns.  The problem is that this guy was, judging by his actions, insane and almost certainly sociopathic.  Now, there was today a very similar incident in a Chinese grade school, but because the crazed asshat only had a knife he wasn't able to actually kill anyone.   The difference here isn't asshat but what the asshat had in his hands at the time of his attempted massacre.


But the idea that policy criticism is inappropriate now is, frankly, beyond me.  Why were we able to talk about FEMA funding and competence after Katrina but can't talk about gun control when a madman guns down 30 people?  This is the exact right time to have this discussion.  People are being slaughtered.  People are going to continue being slaughtered as long as any asshat hell bent on slaughtering as many people as he can before he dies can get his hands on a weapon capable of killing 20 people within minutes. 

[mongers]

For the record, the reaction to the 1996 Dunblane primary school massacre was the banning of all handguns larger than .22 cal.

That may work for scotland, but the US..... eh. It would take a herculean effort just to collect and enforce at this point. Not to mention the 2nd Amend issue.

I don't doubt it, we all know, no change will happen as a result of this massacre. I just thought it interesting that it took us 18 months to decide on our response to that outrage.

And the response was a UK wide one, enacted by parliament, Scotland was only relevant because it was the scene of the crime and if he'd lived he'd have been convicted under Scottish laws.

True, I think the estimate of POWs in the US is 270 Million. I think it's higher.

Yeah it's might even be a couple of orders of magnitude different; I'd almost be surprised if our large handgun and subsequent complete handgun ban resulting in more than a million weapons being affected amongst a population of 56 million people.

edit;
seems like it's out by yet another order of magnitude, a bit of googling suggest at the time in Great Britain there were about 57,000 people affected by the larger than .22 cal hand gun ban.

So that's about one in a thousand people vs what in the US  now ?

[11B4V]

Most people I know own more than a few.

[Queequeg]

Also, Merithyn, I know how much you appreciate being able to feel morally superior to people, but I lost my cousin in a mass shooting incident in Utah in 2007.  Put a fucking sock in it.  You don't have any right to claim a more legitimate reaction to this than the one I had. 

[merithyn]

Merithyn, I don't give a shit if qualified, sane people want to own elephant guns or massive shotguns.  The problem is that this guy was, judging by his actions, insane and almost certainly sociopathic.  Now, there was today a very similar incident in a Chinese grade school, but because the crazed asshat only had a knife he wasn't able to actually kill anyone.   The difference here isn't asshat but what the asshat had in his hands at the time of his attempted massacre.


But the idea that policy criticism is inappropriate now is, frankly, beyond me.  Why were we able to talk about FEMA funding and competence after Katrina but can't talk about gun control when a madman guns down 30 people?  This is the exact right time to have this discussion.  People are being slaughtered.  People are going to continue being slaughtered as long as any asshat hell bent on slaughtering as many people as he can before he dies can get his hands on a weapon capable of killing 20 people within minutes.

Because you started the discussion with ZERO information on what kind of weapon this particular madman had in his hand. You heard "gun" and went ballistic. You flew off the handle at the idea of a rifle on the scene, without any idea that it had never actually been IN THE SCHOOL. You STILL have no idea whether he had obtained the gun via legal or illegal methods.

Katrina - we knew what it was. We knew how it happened. We knew what to expect. You cannot claim the same, and to try is just assinine.

[merithyn]

Also, Merithyn, I know how much you appreciate being able to feel morally superior to people, but I lost my cousin in a mass shooting incident in Utah in 2007.  Put a fucking sock in it.  You don't have any right to claim a more legitimate reaction to this than the one I had.

I'm not saying that I did. I'm saying that if you really want change like you claim, your methods leave a lot to be desired.

[grumbler]

I will admit to a certain amount of irrational rage today, but I don't think anything is lost by waiting until the dead are buried to start this discussion.

I agree with pretty much the rest of your post. I don't know how often these killers give off warning signs, perhaps it's more often than I thought.

My most frequent nightmare since Columbine is a school shooting nightmare.  I agree that nothing is lost by rationale and calm reflection, but it is hard to resist absurd reactions like GF's "Extensive. Gun. Control." that started the discussion.

I am convinced that these things don't come out of the blue.  Columbine didn't, Virginia Tech didn't, and I'd bet this one didn't.  The problem is the disconnect between people recognizing a threat and anyone taking meaningful action on it.  The presumption currently is that Joe Shmoe has the right to carry incredibly lethal firepower until someone can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he doesn't.  That assumption has no basis in the second amendment or anywhere else, IMO.  The state has a reasonable power to restrict the ability of its citizens to inflict grievous bodily harm on each other when it has a reasonable suspicion that said citizen may have the desire to do so.  It has to be on an individual level to pass constitutional muster, but the suspicion is going to be individual  pretty much by definition.

[Queequeg]

Oh, fucking horse shit.  We knew that a madman had a gun.  That's a policy failure right there, and the fact that he was able to do this on substantial scale indicated that he wasn't firing a fucking muzzle-loader. 

[crazy canuck]

Merri, shut up and stop being a half of the Languish Power Idiot Couple.

Wow, where did that come from?

[merithyn]

My most frequent nightmare since Columbine is a school shooting nightmare.  I agree that nothing is lost by rationale and calm reflection, but it is hard to resist absurd reactions like GF's "Extensive. Gun. Control." that started the discussion.

I am convinced that these things don't come out of the blue.  Columbine didn't, Virginia Tech didn't, and I'd bet this one didn't.  The problem is the disconnect between people recognizing a threat and anyone taking meaningful action on it.  The presumption currently is that Joe Shmoe has the right to carry incredibly lethal firepower until someone can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he doesn't.  That assumption has no basis in the second amendment or anywhere else, IMO.  The state has a reasonable power to restrict the ability of its citizens to inflict grievous bodily harm on each other when it has a reasonable suspicion that said citizen may have the desire to do so.  It has to be on an individual level to pass constitutional muster, but the suspicion is going to be individual  pretty much by definition.

This, to me, seems absolutely fair.

[Jacob]

Merri, shut up and stop being a half of the Languish Power Idiot Couple.

Wow, where did that come from?

Poland.

[Malthus]

Oh, give us a break with this sanctimonious bullshit.  This is no tragic accident, this is a predictable and oft-repeated consequence of a tragically stupid policy we have with regards to guns.  While the radical gun nuts whose idiocy kills other people "respectfully think about the victims of this tragedy" so that they don't have to think about the murderous consequences of their policies, people like myself are thinking about the victims of tomorrow's tragedy.  Today's victims are already dead, tomorrow's victims don't have to be.

You can fuck right off. You're not going to fix it this week. Let people grieve and get over the shock. Then, if you haven't forgotten about it in a few days we can work toward a rational solution.

I am a bit puzzled as to how a discussion on languish about gun control - an obvious issue raised whenever something like this happens - prevents people who need to grieve from grieving.

Also, how does preventing public discourse about a potential solution help anyone?

My own take is that if people want to discuss a public policy issue as a result of a tragedy that's fine.

If people have pre-existing axes to grind, and take said tragedy as an excuse to grind said axes, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

You mean like every other political issue?  Something bad happens, it catches people's attention and there is political discussion.  I guess we shouldn't be talking about Syria in a political discussion cause someone might be using it have an excuse to grind an axe.

You appear to have misconstrued my argument.

If there is a tragedy in Syria, and the Israeli government uses that as an excuse for why Israel needs to keep the Golan Heights, that leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Here's a better example of an asswipe using the tragedy to push for their own agenda:

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/huckabee-schools-place-of-carnage-because-we-systematically

[merithyn]

Oh, fucking horse shit.  We knew that a madman had a gun.  That's a policy failure right there, and the fact that he was able to do this on substantial scale indicated that he wasn't firing a fucking muzzle-loader.

Really? So you know - when the police still have no clue - that this man had the gun legally? Maybe you should let the cops in on that little tidbit. As for the "substantial scale", he shot little kids. Babies. What do you think was going to happen? They were going to swarm him to get the handguns away from him? Once the six (yes, only six) adults were killed and he was in a room alone with 20 kids, he could stand there and reload and reload and reload as much as he wanted. It didn't require a massive gun to do what he did, as is obvious by the fact that he didn't have massive guns.

So no, you didn't - and still don't - have enough information to start screaming for policy changes when you don't know what the fuck happened.

[merithyn]

Merri, shut up and stop being a half of the Languish Power Idiot Couple.

Wow, where did that come from?

Martinus. You're surprised?

[11B4V]

Being an LEO, you just cant get to the scene fast enough. Sadly when it starts, people are dying until you do.

Those first few responding LEO's today, were their local cops. Can you imagine the absolute helplessness hearing that dispatched over the radio. You are automatically reactive.