Jump to content

Active shooter thread

Hugo Stiglitz

By Hugo Stiglitz
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Anastasis

Anastasis 23476

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Satchel said:

An answer to my question would be cool. Watching a local news story detailing the murder of a 15 year old honor student shot to death in his home as he slept. The result of an unrelated drive by. If only police had fewer weapons…

If only we had more cops working to prevent violent crime and less operating as tax collectors on the toll roads.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 13.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

4th&Five
4th&Five

Fuck off. You vote for this shit. Explain that to your kids. 

Pancho
Pancho

3rd leg of my move from Houston to the Bay Area, and I made it to LA.   I’m just now catching up on the news in my hotel.  I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again—I don’t have kids, but this e

royiv
royiv

WTF world are we living in when people are having a discussion about survival rates of certain rounds? People are being terrorized by gun violence and we're discussing which bullet has worse/better ch

Posted Images

Satchel

Satchel 6949

Posted
Posted
Just now, Anastasis said:

If only we had more cops working to prevent violent crime and less operating as tax collectors on the toll roads.  

Wayward cop are clearly our only problems when it comes to unchecked gun violence. Defund guns for cops! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6949

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

Think I already addressed the original question. If you want to reduce the number of guns on the street, the most effective means would be to disarm the police.

I didn’t ask about how one goes about achieving a reduced number of guns on the street. Stop pretending not to know that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23476

Posted
Posted
Just now, Satchel said:

I didn’t ask about how one goes about achieving a reduced number of guns on the street. Stop pretending not to know that.

Sorry.  Please clarify for me.  Do you want greater number of guns "in the street" or fewer number of guns "in the street"? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neonmoon

Neonmoon 38130

Posted
Posted
40 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Three more police officers shot today in Houston. That makes a total of four in Houston alone. Does this mean we don’t have enough guns on the streets?

 

35 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

If you want to reduce the number of guns on the street, the most effective means would be to disarm the police.

image.gif.59a2ab3c1f442b35fdf6c6164144596a.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23476

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Which do you think would help prevent shootouts like the one we saw in Houston today?

What was the perps history? Did he have a history of violence? A history of crimes involving firearms?

If you really want to unpack the answers to the questions you are asking, it is going to require some effort, so brace yourself.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6949

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

What was the perps history? Did he have a history of violence? A history of crimes involving firearms?

If you really want to unpack the answers to the questions you are asking, it is going to require some effort, so brace yourself.  

It’s a closed question. Which one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6949

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

So not down for the effort.  I understand. 

A closed question is designed in part to confirm information. It is not asked as a way to explore options. Mine was a simple closed question. Now, here’s a open one: why are you having difficulty answering a very simple closed question?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23476

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Satchel said:

A closed question is designed in part to confirm information. It is not asked as a way to explore options. Mine was a simple closed question. Now, here’s a open one: why are you having difficulty answering a very simple closed question?

Because it is simple and reflects simple thinking. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23476

Posted
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Why are you unable to answer a question you consider naive?

 

I am not sure that you even know what angle you are trying to take here.

If you have a position on how to address gun violence and the prevalence of guns in our society, articulate it. 

My suggestion is that we start with disarming the police and go from there. 

Edited by Anastasis
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hayden_horn

hayden_horn 11365

Posted
Posted

what the fuck is going on in here?

i can't tell who is being serious and who is trolling.

i agree with disarming the police and getting them out of traffic enforcement (more or less with some caveats) but i can't tell if anastasis actually believes this or he's making some kind of meta point here. 

shootings against police are definitely up. however, my favorite line from the article @Anastasis quoted was this:

Quote

Leaders are calling for an end to the rise in violent crime.

well, yeah, no fucking shit.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23476

Posted
Posted
47 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

i agree with disarming the police and getting them out of traffic enforcement (more or less with some caveats) but i can't tell if anastasis actually believes this or he's making some kind of meta point here. 

whynotboth.gif

Absolutely believe in disarming the police. Although if we were talking pragmatic policy, I'd settle for a sweet spot of very deep arms reductions with some remaining limited capabilities.  Maybe let them keep certain firearms in locked storage compartments in their trunks with access requiring a remote approval.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hayden_horn

hayden_horn 11365

Posted
Posted
Just now, Anastasis said:

whynotboth.gif

Absolutely believe in disarming the police. Although if we were talking pragmatic policy, I'd settle for a sweet spot of very deep arms reductions with some remaining limited capabilities.  Maybe let them keep certain firearms in locked storage compartments in their trunks with access requiring a remote approval.

 

this did not work out so well in the watchmen series.

/nospoiler

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23476

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

There’s no real, good faith discourse is the correct answer.

Our political system does not thrive on good faith discourse. 

There has been plenty of that on this particular topic on this board in the past. Most reasonable people can actually find room to agree. 

And it is all wasted energy because our politics are totally dysfunctional. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6949

Posted
Posted

For police, the huge number of guns in America also means that every single call is treated as if someone involved could be armed — and that an otherwise nonviolent wellness check, mental health call, or traffic stop could turn into a deadly encounter. US law generally allows police to use force because they merely perceive a threat, and the many firearms in civilian hands give police officers a reason to believe they’re in danger.

“It’s Schrödinger’s gun: It’s always there, but it’s not there until you see it,” Michael Sierra-Arévalo, a sociologist at the University of Texas Austin, told me. “That cost is borne by two parties: It’s borne by the public, when police make mistakes, and it’s borne by police themselves, when they’re attacked by firearms.”

Guns complicate any efforts to reform police

The US has more civilian-owned firearms than any country on Earth. There are about 120 guns for every 100 people, according to 2018 data from the Small Arms Survey. Yemen, in second place, has about 53 guns per 100 people. Canada has about 35 per 100, England and Wales — where police are often unarmed — have nearly five per 100, and Japan has fewer than one per 100.

A long line of research has connected more guns to more gun violence, including police shootings. The issue is not that America has more crime or violence than other developed countries, but that guns make it much easier for an event to escalate from a merely criminal offense to a deadly encounter. For police, this reality makes them more guarded, and, potentially, more likely to shoot unnecessarily.

https://www.vox.com/22740719/police-reform-gun-violence-firearms

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23476

Posted
Posted (edited)

Satchel, probably: "Good shoot. Esp the two late fliers at the end. It's really too bad that cops have to live in constant fear for their life. They just want to get home to their families at the end of the day."

Edited by Anastasis
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6949

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Satchel, probably: "Good shoot. Esp the two late fliers at the end. It's really too bad that cops have to live in constant fear for their life, and they just want to get home to their families at the end of the day."

Why are you putting word in my mouth?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...