[Discussion] Mass Shooting at Uvalde Elementary School

[fattyflattie 4636]

10 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

This is blatantly false. 2 people died in that McDonald's shooting, 7 wounded. 21 people (19 children) died in Uvalde, not including the shooter, and another 17 were injured. Last I checked, 2 isn't 50% of 21. And 9 isn't 50% of 38.  

Mass shootings count gunshot victims, no deaths, per its definition. Are you only concerned with death, or victims of gun violence? 
 

6 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

That's not what I said and I'm negging for the misquote. 

I quoted and bolded your quote? But thanks for the neg.  

Your bolded quote sounds extremely familiar, to the point of changing two words made it the exact argument pro-gun advocates have been saying for a decade plus.  “You can’t even enforce the laws currently on the books, and you want to add more?”  

[aggie08 21380]

Fucking fatty. Every time that I think he might be turning a corner, he goes on an inane rant.

It's disheartening too because he's who we're all most depending on in this battle. The responsible gun owner in the "middle" who's going to finally say enough and demand (through his actions and his vote, not just sharing what he'd hypothetically like to see happen) from his elected leaders the need for more common sense guns laws. But, alas, forest, trees, etc.

Edited May 31, 2022 by aggie08

[Dahobbs 17420]

3 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Mass shootings count gunshot victims, no deaths, per its definition. Are you only concerned with death, or victims of gun violence? 

(1) By what definition? The most common ones focus on the death of 4 or more individuals, not including the shooter.

(2) I gave you the total victim number, and 9 isn't 50% of 38; and

(3) Who fucking cares about the definition? Do you really think 19 dead children is in the same universe of tragedy as 2 dead in the McDonald's shooting? How fucking disingenuous and dishonest are you going to be? 

Edited May 31, 2022 by Dahobbs

[fattyflattie 4636]

Just now, aggie08 said:

Fucking fatty. Every time that I think he might be turning a corner, he goes on an inane rant.

It's disheartening too because he's who we're all most depending on in this battle. The responsible gun owner in the "middle" who's going to finally say enough and demand (through his words and his vote, not just sharing what he'd hypothetically like to see happen) from his elected leaders the need for more common sense guns laws. But, alas, forest, trees, etc.

I don’t see what’s insane about any rant?  You either want to stop gun violence completely, or you don’t. If you want to only stop tragedies like Ulvalde and Parkland and Buffalo, that’s fine. But they are very different situations that the violence the country sees literally every day.  People want to use the stats from the daily violence then focus on the most tragic events that happen much less often.  They are very different things in almost every aspect. 

[fattyflattie 4636]

Just now, Dahobbs said:

Do you really think 19 dead children is in the same universe of tragedy as 2 dead in the McDonald's shooting? How fucking disingenuous and dishonest are you going to be? 

Of course not. I also don’t completely brush off 11 people being shot. Did the  9 people that were wounded but didn’t die just not happen in your mind? Do you think their lives are not affected because they didn’t die? 

[Dahobbs 17420]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

I don’t see what’s insane about any rant?  You either want to stop gun violence completely, or you don’t. If you want to only stop tragedies like Ulvalde and Parkland and Buffalo, that’s fine. But they are very different situations that the violence the country sees literally every day.  People want to use the stats from the daily violence then focus on the most tragic events that happen much less often.  They are very different things in almost every aspect. 

I want to stop both. The proposed new laws/regulations address both. You still haven't explained why you think that the additional restrictions wouldn't reduce other gun violence death. You've just announced it so. 

But, you're absolutely right. Let's make all guns illegal. That would definitely reduce all gun deaths. I'm totes cool with that, but I've been trying to compromise with folks like you. However, you seem to view compromise as just a weakness to attack, then wonder why no one wants to try and compromise with you anymore. 

[aggie08 21380]

Good lord, dude. Yep, we're all suggesting that we should only focus on mass shootings and ignore everything else. You caught us.

You're above this disingenuous, misdirection crap. Be better. 

Also, inane =/= insane.

Edited May 31, 2022 by aggie08

[Dahobbs 17420]

2 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Of course not. I also don’t completely brush off 11 people being shot. Did the  9 people that were wounded but didn’t die just not happen in your mind? Do you think their lives are not affected because they didn’t die? 

What the fuck are you talking about? Good god. 

[Dahobbs 17420]

1 minute ago, aggie08 said:

Good lord, dude. Yep, we're all suggesting that we should only focus on mass shootings and ignore everything else. You caught us.

You're above this disingenuous, misdirection crap. Be better. 

Clearly he isn't. 

[fattyflattie 4636]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

You still haven't explained why you think that the additional restrictions wouldn't reduce other gun violence death. You've just announced it so. 

Have I?  I’m pretty sure I agreed with it, and was the first quote behind him. I offered up additional things I thought would help. I’d kindly ask for some receipts, where I stated they wouldn’t work, or that I’m against further regs. 
 

3 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

But, you're absolutely right. Let's make all guns illegal. That would definitely reduce all gun deaths. I'm totes cool with that, but I've been trying to compromise with folks like you. However, you seem to view compromise as just a weakness to attack, then wonder why no one wants to try and compromise with you anymore. 

That won’t happen in my grandkids lifetimes. Luckily, I’m of of the means to be able to enjoy them abroad, if it came to that.  

[Captainant 27311]

32 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Instead of adding additional laws, you should look to actually enforcing existing laws. 
 

Sounds pretty much spot on to what 2nd proponents have been saying for years.  

The shooter acquired his gun while fully complying with all the gun laws on the books. That's the fucking problem you dense fucking troglodyte. 

eNfOrCiNg ExIsTiNg LaWs wouldn't have done dick to prevent 19 children from being gunned down in their fucking classroom. Can we at least live on the same fucking plane of reality for a fucking minute?

[wildcat09 29187]

8 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

Good lord, dude. Yep, we're all suggesting that we should only focus on mass shootings and ignore everything else. You caught us.

You're above this disingenuous, misdirection crap. Be better. 

Also, inane =/= insane.

No he's not.

[fattyflattie 4636]

6 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

Good lord, dude. Yep, we're all suggesting that we should only focus on mass shootings and ignore everything else. You caught us.

You're above this disingenuous, misdirection crap. Be better. 

Also, inane =/= insane.

First, I’m not the one conflating mass shooting with mass killing.  For a holier than thou lawyer fuck, @Dahobbs needs to get that right.  Hint, one focuses on deaths, and the other encapsulates all gun violence.  
 

second, that is my phone. I understand the difference. 
 

 

[fattyflattie 4636]

1 minute ago, Captainant said:

The shooter acquired his gun while fully complying with all the gun laws on the books. That's the fucking problem you dense fucking troglodyte. 

eNfOrCiNg ExIsTiNg LaWs wouldn't have done dick to prevent 19 children from being gunned down in their fucking classroom. Can we at least live on the same fucking plane of reality for a fucking minute?

True. How would have it affected Sutherland Springs?  

[Captainant 27311]

4 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

True. How would have it affected Sutherland Springs?  

Well you'll need to take that up with the USAF to ask why they chose to not share the domestic violence conviction with the NICS system. That's less of a law enforcement error and more of an administrative error, because the NICS system approved the purchase fully complying with the law. And in my opinion, strong evidence that the existing system has too many gaps that need some additional mechanism to address.

We shouldn't be basing our laws and policy on the assumption that everything is going to 100% work 100% of the time. Because things never do - us meatsacks are involved. And if you don't want to see more small children get fucking murdered in classrooms it may be time to think of some additional mechanisms and policies that can reduce the overall risk of someone dangerous slipping through, and reduce the impact of when that failure does occur. 

Edited May 31, 2022 by Captainant

[Brisketexan 104465]

20 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Well I for sure am more concerned with the mentally unstable people who decide to show up to a crowd and start shooting than I am with some assholes that pick fights and then escalate all the way up to shooting one another, or gangs shooting each other. Even though it happens less often. 
 

it’s easy to not be able to not be in those situations. 
 

it’s less easy to not be in a crowd. 

Well, let's talk about the types of gun violence, and what MOST Americans are most concerned about (listing in no particular order):

 

Type 1: criminal-on-criminal violence.  This is the most common way to be the victim of third-party gun violence.  Drug deal gone bad, gang revenge killing, mob hit, all that stuff.  Yes, there are occasions when the victims are innocent (murder during a mugging, etc.), but that is a very low percentage.  Almost all of these cases of gun violence are a direct result of being involved in other criminal activity.  So, MOST Americans realize that they can avoid this type of gun violence by not engaging in other criminal activity.   And yes, there is some bystander risk (see some victims on 6th street), but the numbers just aren't that large.  So, I'd presume that most of us around here aren't terribly worried about this one, individually (aside from our bigger concerns about overall crime and such, and sure, the social risk of bystander harm, which is horrifying when it happens).

Type 2: suicide.  This is one of the leading causes of gun death, and almost always happens with a gun already in the home.  In my mind, this is perhaps the #1 reason that guns should be locked in a safe, with only one (stable) person with the key.  In my home, that person is me (yeah, stable is debatable).  But that's definitely because I have kids who are young, emotional, and have even struggled with depression at times.  We should be more concerned about this than we are -- it's low-hanging fruit, and offers a great ROI.

Type 3: accidents (either in the home or in the field).  For "at home," see the para above, that's the best way.  As for "in the field," good safety training and practices goes a long way.  Texas Hunter Safety covers it.  SOME accidents will still happen, nothing's perfect.  But this is another low-hanging fruit thing: keep your guns locked up, require gun safety courses.  Most people aren't too worried about this one, but they should be more worried than we are.  If we placed a greater emphasis on gun safety, that would certainly prevent a good number of needless deaths.

Type 4: domestic/spouse/acquaintance violence.  Husband shoots wife, jealous lover shoots rival, two friends have a beef, that sort of thing.  There's some "sudden passion" risk in here (so, if someone didn't have immediate access to a gun, maybe a shooting would be prevented).  In many cases, these are known risks (history of domestic violence).  Americans do have some general concern about this, because many of us know first or secondhand someone who has been a victim of such violence.  In any case, these are situations where the victim knows the shooter well, and there is usually some personal history behind it. This does involve mental health some -- in fact, most "mental health" violence is in the home/among family and such (a fair amount of domestic violence has overlap with mental illness of the bad actor). There are many mechanisms that could be in play to reduce this risk (Domestic Violence Orders, etc.).

Type 5: Random shootings.  These are what most people mean when they say "mass shooting" -- Uvalide, El Paso Wal-Mart, Buffalo, Tree of Life Synagogue, Parkland, workplace shootings, etc.  And these actually scare Americans quite a bit precisely because they're functionally random, and can't be avoided by actions the victim would take -- like not being involved in other crimes, keeping their guns locked away safely, etc.  It's the terrifying element of the "bolt out of the blue" nature of them, as well as the high number of casualties each incident can involve.  Whether it is driven by racial hatred (Buffalo, El Paso), actual mental illness, broken young people with not-yet-developed brains who are incapable of dealing with strong and frustrating emotions (likely Parkland and Uvalde, also people who are broken socially (think "incels")), people who are incapable of dealing with workplace disappointment, we see these as being beyond our control.  We can't control when some shitheel just snaps, or at least it feels like we can't (we actually CAN do things that help stop these things, like good HR training to spot warning signs, monitoring students for troubling behavior and, oh, I don't know, we could stop promulgating bullshit racial animus ideas like "replacement theory" that are destined to foment stochastic terrorism).

I'm sure we could come up with another type or two, but this seems to cover 95% of gun violence.  So, the questions are -- if we want to reduce gun violence and gun deaths -- what measures can we reasonably take to address any, some, or all of these categories?  Talking about a measure that is mostly aimed at one Type as a solution to another Type may not make sense.  Or, it may help a good bit for a couple of types (e.g., if there are guns in the home, having them locked away with the key hidden or combo known only to an adult will prevent both suicides and an angry kid from getting dad's gun and going on a rampage).  But we also need to account for what actually concerns people the most.  For all the "but Chicago!" rejoinders, it's not an effective one because most people don't give much of a shit if two dirtbags off each other in a gang shooting.  Concern is about risk and control.  My family is wildly unlikely to ever be victimized by Chicago gang shootings.  They are more likely to be the victims of random gun violence.  They are also more likely (because our household has guns) to be victims of an accident or suicide.  So, our focus is on the things we can control, and are reasonably concerned about.  Understanding these things, we can then have a more targeted and rational discussion about gun policy.

[fattyflattie 4636]

Great post @Brisketexan  I’d like to add, as someone who was affected by #3 (shot by someone else) and was literal millimeters from bleeding out in a field, Hunter safety isn’t enough.  Need a refresher, or something, for those that don’t get out as often as they think they do. 

[Dahobbs 17420]

53 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Have I?  I’m pretty sure I agreed with it, and was the first quote behind him. I offered up additional things I thought would help. I’d kindly ask for some receipts, where I stated they wouldn’t work, or that I’m against further regs. 

You said I must not care about the Chicago McDonald's shooting because I hadn't proposed any changes that would address that type of gun violence. I simply pointed out that the changes I suggested would in fact reduce that type of gun violence (e.g., by making it harder to get guns and giving adequate time for proper checks to be run). I really don't know what about my posts set you off so. We seem to agree about quite a bit based on your comment to Brisket's post.  

As to the original discussion, increasing gun violence related punishments (by itself) is exceedingly unlikely to have any substantial impact on gun violence. Doing so may make us feel better, but it isn't really a solution to the problem itself. Heavy punishment already exists and is given out regularly. New laws that make it more difficult to acquire firearms and better enforcement (not the same as more punishment) is going to be more effective. That said, keep in mind, a lot of our existing laws are hard to enforce by design. And even enforced, don't really do much to substantially curb gun distribution and gun violence. Age limit restrictions  and waiting periods are much easier to enforce. Individual to individual transfer may still be problematic, but a robust license system for every firearm combined with the new restrictions traditionally sales will make that less of an issue. 

[Eskimohorn 5610]

Its not complicated. Have laws that resemble industrialized nations that have less violence and gun violence. do anything else by any of those countries.

Now what could be done on the Federal level, what could pass? nothing. You’d have to end the senate filibuster, remove money from politics, and add real judges to the Supreme Court. Not sure which could come first.

You also need to ban foreign ownership of media, restore fairness doctrine, and crackdown on domestic terror groups.

[DDD Dad 14167]

16 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Whatever it does, the prefatory phrase is damn near impossible to read as a limitation or condition on the mandatory phrase.

Warren Burger and I both disagree with you.

[Pods 7522]

fatty is unintentionally making a strong case for restrictions on handguns. 

[Captainant 27311]

Also wow whaddyaknow - the pigs lied about the door to deflect more blame onto teachers!

[SA Express News link if twitter ain't your thing] From the article:

Quote

 

“She saw the wreck,” Flanary said. “She ran back inside to get her phone to report the accident. She came back out while on the phone with 911. The men at the funeral home yelled, ‘He has a gun!’ She saw him jump the fence, and he had a gun so she ran back inside.

“She kicked the rock away when she went back in. She remembers pulling the door closed while telling 911 that he was shooting. She thought the door would lock because that door is always supposed to be locked.”

Messages were left Tuesday seeking comment from the Texas Department of Public Safety.

A law enforcement source familiar with the investigation said surveillance video and audio verifies the employee removed the rock holding the door open and closed it.

“She slammed it shut,” said the source, who requested anonymity because the source does not have authority to speak with the media.

Both Flanary and the source said a person exiting through the door might not be able to tell if it was locked.

The source said investigators are trying to determine if the door was unlocked earlier or if its lock was not working because the gunman used the same door to get into the school, go down the hallways and into adjacent rooms 111 and 112. The rooms were full of fourth-graders, where he took advantage of a delayed police response and shot and killed his victims.

 

[Goredho 17302]

17 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

I've got terrible news for you about the Democrats... they don't give a fuck, either.

Presidency
The Senate
The House

And what are they doing? Jack Fucking Shit

The money is in the fight, not the win.

[aggie08 21380]

8 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Also wow whaddyaknow - the pigs lied about the door to deflect more blame onto teachers!

[SA Express News link if twitter ain't your thing] From the article:

Hey man, let he who has never taken the opportunity to blame a dead elementary school teacher throw the first stone.

[Jshep34 2303]

When you think it'd couldnt get any worse, local police say hold my beer. I said it before I wouldn't blame any parent for going psycho on any of the cops.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[hobbes2702 12771]

4 hours ago, aggie08 said:

Good lord, dude. Yep, we're all suggesting that we should only focus on mass shootings and ignore everything else. You caught us.

You're above this disingenuous, misdirection crap. Be better. 

Also, inane =/= insane.

Dude no he isn’t. How many times does have to prove that he’s a liar on top of all the other disgusting shit he spews on this site. He’s not even a troll, he’s just a awful human 

[BurntOrange&White 39486]

X-posting

 

 

[wildcat09 29187]

They shot kids or refused to stop the gunman while he shot/killed more and they were in position to stop him. That's the only reasonable inference from their behavior.

[BurntOrange&White 39486]

3 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

They shot kids or refused to stop the gunman while he shot/killed more and they were in position to stop him. That's the only reasonable inference from their behavior.

@4th and 5had some interesting stuff he heard 

[Captainant 27311]

4 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

They shot kids or refused to stop the gunman while he shot/killed more and they were in position to stop him. That's the only reasonable inference from their behavior.

Inb4 all their bodycams malfunction and they oopsie poopsie the footage

[BurntOrange&White 39486]

3 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Inb4 all their bodycams malfunction and they oopsie poopsie the footage

Apparently school cameras may have it all on video

[hobbes2702 12771]

6 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

@4th and 5had some interesting stuff he heard 

Link?

[BurntOrange&White 39486]

1 minute ago, hobbes2702 said:

Link?

Here are the two post:

 

 

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4965]

Other news is reporting that there is video in which dispatchers can be heard advising of the kids inside. I wouldn't be surprised if the hot mike thing was a lie to cover up their cowardice.

[tbone_ 14020]

Other news is reporting that there is video in which dispatchers can be heard advising of the kids inside. I wouldn't be surprised if the hot mike thing was a lie to cover up their cowardice.

As disgusting as all of this is, it’s just distracting from the real problem

[cmontexas 3242]

I got sent down here for work so I went by the memorial. I left a blubbering mess

 

[BurntOrange&White 39486]

11 minutes ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

Other news is reporting that there is video in which dispatchers can be heard advising of the kids inside. I wouldn't be surprised if the hot mike thing was a lie to cover up their cowardice.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/full-victims-video-appears-show-texas-911-dispatchers/story?id=85077976&cid=social_fb_abcn&fbclid=IwAR1EMz0z1_UgNuEOLYnyiwWBM1JPy8K1058X6gSwBEJyrLRTzIZg_Gq3qLE&fs=e&s=cl
 

here you go

[Pods 7522]

27 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

https://abcnews.go.com/US/full-victims-video-appears-show-texas-911-dispatchers/story?id=85077976&cid=social_fb_abcn&fbclid=IwAR1EMz0z1_UgNuEOLYnyiwWBM1JPy8K1058X6gSwBEJyrLRTzIZg_Gq3qLE&fs=e&s=cl
 

here you go

Quote

Video obtained by ABC News, taken outside Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, as last week's massacre was unfolding inside, appears to capture a 911 dispatcher alerting officers on scene that they were receiving calls from children who were alive inside the classroom that the gunman had entered -- as law enforcement continued to wait nearly an hour and a half to enter the room.

"Child is advising he is in the room, full of victims," the dispatcher can be heard saying in the video. "Full of victims at this moment."

An ABC News analysis of the video shows that was at approximately 12:13 p.m. -- about 40 minutes after the gunman entered the school.

"Is anybody inside of the building at this...?" the dispatcher asked.

Minutes later, the dispatcher says again: "Eight to nine children."

 

[Eskimohorn 5610]

As disgusting as all of this is, it’s just distracting from the real problem

Yep, like in Parkland, b-team cops tend to pucker up and freeze up in chaotic situations.

Anyway, shooters can make their own entryway quickly. Force their way in past “security”.

High school and college shooters can absolutely circumvent security because they see it everyday and have the right to enter.

Even A-Team security in Vegas and Dallas became victims when well-armed shooters from fixed positions took pot-shots.

[Pig Bellmont 8679]

Jesus. The details are awful. Those law enforcement on the scene have the blood of children on their hands and inflicted so much unnecessary trauma on the survivors. I couldn’t imagine living with myself if I was outside the building and waited around 

[BurntOrange&White 39486]

36 minutes ago, Eskimohorn said:

Yep, like in Parkland, b-team cops tend to pucker up and freeze up in chaotic situations.

Anyway, shooters can make their own entryway quickly. Force their way in past “security”.

High school and college shooters can absolutely circumvent security because they see it everyday and have the right to enter.

Even A-Team security in Vegas and Dallas became victims when well-armed shooters from fixed positions took pot-shots.

I read an article that the uvalde pd was a 30 year vet who just won a city council seat or something of that nature.

[Jshep34 2303]

The commanding officer was supposed to be sworn in to city council today. Ceremony is on hold but he will still be on council

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[chainsaw 9831]

17 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I read an article that the uvalde pd was a 30 year vet who just won a city council seat or something of that nature.

Lots of failing upwards goes on in law enforcement

[Ghost of LL 15348]

13 hours ago, Jshep34 said:

The commanding officer was supposed to be sworn in to city council today. Ceremony is on hold but he will still be on council

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 

Oh, no--it's far crazier than that.  They swore him in during a secret meeting of the City Council on Monday.  And if you're like "but wait, GOLL--there can't be a 'secret' City Council meeting under Texas law," you'd be dead right.  The Open Meetings Act requires meetings to be posted 72 hours in advance and open to the public.  And, by the way, there are criminal penalties for violating the OMA.

[1978horn 880]

1 hour ago, Ghost of LL said:

Oh, no--it's far crazier than that.  They swore him in during a secret meeting of the City Council on Monday.  And if you're like "but wait, GOLL--there can't be a 'secret' City Council meeting under Texas law," you'd be dead right.  The Open Meetings Act requires meetings to be posted 72 hours in advance and open to the public.  And, by the way, there are criminal penalties for violating the OMA.

They had them all come in separately so they wouldn't have a quorum and therefore no need for 72 hours advance notice.

[Ghost of LL 15348]

50 minutes ago, 1978horn said:

They had them all come in separately so they wouldn't have a quorum and therefore no need for 72 hours advance notice.

Oh, a walking quorum--I love those.  There's no grist for the litigation mill there.

It's just all such small-town sloppiness.  And generally it is sloppiness.  But when the international spotlight gets shinned on it, it sure looks like something more nefarious.

[CowboyFred 1151]

On 5/30/2022 at 1:54 PM, po elvis said:

Or don’t prop open a door.

 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13391]

I know personal interests and lawyers get involved but you would think the school district police chief (& now city council member) would have delayed joining the city council.  We'll never know how many children could have been saved if he wasn't incompetent but the general assumption is the number would have been greater than 0. 

Personally if I was that guy I would be seeking help to ensure I don't kill myself. I wouldn't be attending city council meetings and refusing to fully cooperate with the investigation.

[midtown 3341]

This will only add to the argument that citizens need guns to protect themselves when you have scenarios where the police won't do their job.   Unless of course you are an unarmed african american. 

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4965]

And it's going to be much more difficult for many of them to arm themselves.