Stoneman survivor speaks out

[YellowKing]

I'm not so sure about that. Unlike the 1st graders, these survivors have the ability to speak out and take action. They are already planning a march on Washington. I think these kids might start something. I think it's unfortunate the pressure has to be on them to do so, but they might be the best opportunity there is.

One of the very few positives to come out of the Trump presidency is a seeming willingness by a lot of folks to stop putting up with other people's bullshit. I think many folks who thought things would never get *that* bad suddenly realized that why yes, they can - and even worse than you ever imagined.

These marches and protests may be the catalyst that produces just enough of a cultural shift to make things happen. Sort of like the #MeToo movement - even though that hype has died down, I guarantee you that doesn't mean it's an open market for guys to creep on women again.

[malchior]

If we don't slide into autocracy the good news is that the Boomers' grandchildren are looking like much better people as a generation. These kids give me hope that things will change for the better eventually.

[Remus West]

I’m sure those Olympic competitors in the biathlon and those competing in the Summer Games in rifle, pistol, skeet and trap will be glad to know that their weapons’ only purpose is to kill things.

You bring up an excellent point. Olympic competitors from countries with draconian gun laws and no incidence of children being gunned down in schools clearly have no problem competing at an Olympic level.

Edit: Friends of ours are now reporting in from the services and funerals of murdered children. We know one family that had 3 funerals. No one should ever have to bury their children.

On top of that, I don't care if you are not actively using the gun to kill things, that is its only purpose. The rifle, pistol, skeet, and trap competitions are all methods of training/practicing to kill things. Just because you are not using it to kill at the moment doesn't mean it wasn't made for killing.

[GungHo]

So outside of the 'you'll pass gun restriction legislation over my dead body' folks(and as I live in Texas that's essentially everyone I've ever known) it seems like the rest of us agree we have a gun problem. But my question has always been 'what do we do about it?' We simply can't 'go get the guns' like they did in Australia(and I assume in other countries) and I'm skeptical as to whether or not 'gun control' that doesn't actually control any guns will do anything.
I have lots of family living in California and most of them are borderline gun nuts(my brother in law absolutely is) and they each have what any rational person would describe as an arsenal. And CA has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country.
Personally I'm all for requiring background checks on every sale, increasing wait times, getting rid of ridiculous shit like bump stocks(which are a lot of fun to shoot btw) and I'd love to see some sort licensure that requires you to demonstrate at least basic non-incompetence.
But I just can't possibly see how any of that would ever get passed while the NRA exists.
Actually I think the problem is even more fundamental than that in that we have congressmen whose sole job in life appears to be getting re-elected. And until that changes, lobbyists will continue to rule our country. And the NRA is just about the biggest and baddest

[Chaz]

I'd love to start with something like bringing guns in line with cars, in that every gun nationally has to be registered, users must be licensed and tested, re-tested regularly (I think this should be a car thing too), and insured. Want to have a whole lot of guns/cars? Cool, as long as you can carry the insurance on them all.

That'd be a start, and since we (mostly) all accept those restrictions for cars, it shouldn't be a huge sell to apply them to guns.

Of course, the answer to this is inevitably "there's no right to drive in the Constitution, but there is a right to bear arms!" And while I can sort of agree that things get dicey when you start applying licensing restrictions to Constitutional rights, I can get past it since I still can't yell fire in a crowded theater.

[Rip]

I'd love to start with something like bringing guns in line with cars, in that every gun nationally has to be registered, users must be licensed and tested, re-tested regularly (I think this should be a car thing too), and insured. Want to have a whole lot of guns/cars? Cool, as long as you can carry the insurance on them all.

That'd be a start, and since we (mostly) all accept those restrictions for cars, it shouldn't be a huge sell to apply them to guns.

Of course, the answer to this is inevitably "there's no right to drive in the Constitution, but there is a right to bear arms!" And while I can sort of agree that things get dicey when you start applying licensing restrictions to Constitutional rights, I can get past it since I still can't yell fire in a crowded theater.

Don't worry, you can't carry your gun in a crowded theater either.

[Daehawk]

Doubt you'd be able to make criminals get insurance on their stolen or illegal weapons. But as long as the normal guy at home in the middle of the night gets shot while holding his baseball bat thats ok by anti gunners? Im not a gun nut but I do like guns and think people should be able to own them. But I come from a gun family in a gun state.

[LawBeefaroni]

Because we value having the ability to kill our neighbors more than the freedom to not worry about being killed by them.

To some, it's the same thing. You may say that's nonsense but it's still how many people think. Take their guns and you take their ability to defend themselves and their family, in their mind. Ignore that fundamental notion and you'll never really have a meaningful discussion with the other side on this topic.

[milo]

My point is that there isn't a meaningful discussion to be had here.

We have already collectively decided that it is absolutely acceptable* that thousands of people die from gun violence each year. We have put in place rules that ensure that we cannot ever undo that decision. We are explicitly reminded of this fact each time a new batch of innocents is murdered. We are repeatedly told that making the opposite decision would have been and continues to be much worse for everyone. What is there left to talk about?

*Oh, sure. Some people will disingenuously complain that they are unhappy with the outcomes that result from the choice we made. So what?

[GreenGoo]

Doubt you'd be able to make criminals get insurance on their stolen or illegal weapons. But as long as the normal guy at home in the middle of the night gets shot while holding his baseball bat thats ok by anti gunners? Im not a gun nut but I do like guns and think people should be able to own them. But I come from a gun family in a gun state.

Let's try it for a few years and see how the numbers turn out, ok? Isn't that the number crunchers' logic? Isn't that Kurth's and Noxiousdog's point re:car accidents?

How about just allow for gathering and analyzing gun violence stats? That would be a great start.

[LawBeefaroni]

My point is that there isn't a meaningful discussion to be had here.

We have already collectively decided that it is absolutely acceptable* that thousands of people die from gun violence each year. We have put in place rules that ensure that we cannot ever undo that decision. We are explicitly reminded of this fact each time a new batch of innocents is murdered. We are repeatedly told that making the opposite decision would have been and continues to be much worse for everyone. What is there left to talk about?

*Oh, sure. Some people will disingenuously complain that they are unhappy with the outcomes that result from the choice we made. So what?

It's not impossible. I need a license to buy a firearm. I need a license to buy ammo. I need 16 hours of class and State Police approval to CCW. I have to wait 72 hours after purchase for a handgun and 24 for a rifle before I can take it home. Amazingly I'm a US citizen residing in the US and I can't just load up on and/or carry firearms whenever the notion strikes me. Same for everyone else in my state. No civil war yet.

Now I'm sure that's not enough but the point is that stricter regulations aren't impossible.

[Daehawk]

Stats are fine. But taking things away for temporary reasons means usually permanent results.

Also...

http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/child ... ild-safety

In 2016 kids under 13 that were killed in auto accidents were 723. What else can be done to save those lives? Take away and ban cars? Theres laws in places for seat belts and bumps and licenses. Yet 723 kids died. Not counting the bikers or the pedestrians or adults.

Me Id love to have a AR15. But do I or anyone else need one? No. Id be fine with removing them completely even as a gun lover except that starts us down the slope to full removal of all guns. Also I refuse to call an AR15 an assault rifle. It is semi fire only with no burst and no full auto. That is not an assault rifle to me. Its simply a semi auto rifle. Its looks are completely separate.

Id be fine with 1 shotgun 1 pistol and 1 rifle per person or so many per family. And I do love my guns. I see no need to stock up on guns other than the threat of losing them. You dont need 500 guns to defend your home. But Im poor. My guns are family keepsakes and handmedowns. I could not afford insurance. Heck my guns are so old to not even need registering.

[Daehawk]

Now I'm sure that's not enough but the point is that stricter regulations aren't impossible.

And none of that would have kept that guy from getting a gun...or the Vegas guy.

[LawBeefaroni]

Now I'm sure that's not enough but the point is that stricter regulations aren't impossible.

And none of that would have kept that guy from getting a gun...or the Vegas guy.

Here are the FOID requirements. No idea how either murderer would have fared. (Note the the FOID is just the first step to legally acquiring a firearm here.)

I have not been convicted of any Felony under the laws of this or any other jurisdiction.

I have not been adjudicated as a mental defective.

I have not been a patient in a mental institution or any part of a medical facility for the treatment of mental illness within the past 5 years.

I am not intellectually disabled or developmentally disabled.

I have not within the past year (preceding the date of this application) used or been addicted to any controlled substance or narcotics in violation of state or federal law.

[Yes, smoking weed would disqualify an applicant. Of course they could lie but they'd be committed another crime. And they'd have to lie on the NIX check too. That's a federal felony IIRC]

[Chaz]

Saying "we shouldn't have that law because criminals will break it" is basically saying that we shouldn't have any laws because criminals will break them.

Yes, lots of kids are killed in car crashes too. That's why we have LOTS of laws about safety features in cars, laws for car seats, and so on. And you know what? It's working. From that same site you linked, the trend has been mostly down since 1975. It's still too high, let's work on lowering it further. You know what we shouldn't do? Shrug and say "well, guess there's nothing to be done."

The home defense thing keeps coming up. Is that honestly a thing that a lot of people are scared about? I mean, sure, I lock my doors at night, but I'm not actually afraid that someone's going to break into my house trying to kill me to the point that I'd need a gun to fight off this potential murderer. I've lived in the boonies, I've lived in the city, and in the suburbs, and I've never been afraid enough to buy a gun to protect myself with. What's causing people to be that scared?

[Daehawk]

I also live in the boonies sorta....more the used to be boonies...and we had a home invasion down the road here and they nearly beat the guy to death. Had another a couple miles away. Ya I worry about it but Im set for them.

[Zaxxon]

The home defense thing keeps coming up. Is that honestly a thing that a lot of people are scared about? I mean, sure, I lock my doors at night, but I'm not actually afraid that someone's going to break into my house trying to kill me to the point that I'd need a gun to fight off this potential murderer. I've lived in the boonies, I've lived in the city, and in the suburbs, and I've never been afraid enough to buy a gun to protect myself with. What's causing people to be that scared?

Not only that scared, but in most cases having a gun in your house is highly unlikely to actually help you defend your home, unless you sit at home all prepared to fire at all times.

I know the Jim Jefferies skit is divisive, but his description of a regular person (ie not a person who regularly trains with a gun, has no children in the home, etc) using a gun for home defense is spot-on, IMO.

[Chaz]

So if home defense is the main reason to own a gun, then obviously, your home is a fortress already, right? Bars on the windows, reinforced doors with deadbolts, security system, all that, right? The gun is just the last line of defense in case someone gets through all that?

Because it seems like if you're mostly concerned with someone breaking into your house, you'd want to first make it harder for that to happen, so that you'd never need to use that gun to kill someone. Hell, maybe you wouldn't even need it? Also, bars on the windows and good locks also don't come with a risk of accidentally killing someone, so that's a nice bonus. You did all that stuff first before you bought the gun to defend yourself with, right?

[GungHo]

The home defense thing keeps coming up. Is that honestly a thing that a lot of people are scared about? I mean, sure, I lock my doors at night, but I'm not actually afraid that someone's going to break into my house trying to kill me to the point that I'd need a gun to fight off this potential murderer. I've lived in the boonies, I've lived in the city, and in the suburbs, and I've never been afraid enough to buy a gun to protect myself with. What's causing people to be that scared?

Not only that scared, but in most cases having a gun in your house is highly unlikely to actually help you defend your home, unless you sit at home all prepared to fire at all times.

I know the Jim Jefferies skit is divisive, but his description of a regular person (ie not a person who regularly trains with a gun, has no children in the home, etc) using a gun for home defense is spot-on, IMO.

I know CPR even though Ive never had cause to use it(outside of my job, Im a flight medic so... ) nor do I reasonably expect to, but I'm prepared. I know about 50 different knots(well maybe not so many anymore, but I did learn them all in Boy Scouts once upon a time) and I only ever use about 2 of them. We also have an alarm system that in nearly 15 years of home ownership has gone off exactly once, and that was for carbon monoxide detection(the door to the garage got left open when my wife pulled the car in). My 10 month old son wears a pulse oximeter every night to bed; I don't really think anything is going to happen to him but...if it does, we're prepared. That type of mentality, I think, is what motivates some people. I know those examples arent perfect corollaries for owning a gun, but I dont think being prepared is the same thing as being afraid.
I absolutely agree that a culture of fear does exist, largely perpetrated by the Republicans in this country and I know a lot of people that have bought into it.

As for training, I couldnt agree more. And that is something I personally struggle with; I know my wife and I dont shoot enough even though we try to go at least once a month, I know that's not adequate. It's not enough to take safety classes or even have a CCL. All you have to do is look at all of the cops that mess up in situations where they draw their weapons; and they train infinitely more as well as better, than I do. That part of the problem is tough, though I still would rather own a gun than be in a position where I wish I had.

[Kraken]

Yes, lots of kids are killed in car crashes too. That's why we have LOTS of laws about safety features in cars, laws for car seats, and so on. And you know what? It's working. From that same site you linked, the trend has been mostly down since 1975. It's still too high, let's work on lowering it further. You know what we shouldn't do? Shrug and say "well, guess there's nothing to be done."

Self-driving cars are supposed to make collisions nearly obsolete in the fairly near future. Is anybody even working on self-shooting guns?

[Daehawk]

Yes, lots of kids are killed in car crashes too. That's why we have LOTS of laws about safety features in cars, laws for car seats, and so on. And you know what? It's working. From that same site you linked, the trend has been mostly down since 1975. It's still too high, let's work on lowering it further. You know what we shouldn't do? Shrug and say "well, guess there's nothing to be done."

Self-driving cars are supposed to make collisions nearly obsolete in the fairly near future. Is anybody even working on self-shooting guns?

Had them for years.

https://newatlas.com/korea-dodamm-super ... ret/17198/

This is all a plot by machines to disarm us humans for an easy kill off.

[Holman]

Yes, lots of kids are killed in car crashes too. That's why we have LOTS of laws about safety features in cars, laws for car seats, and so on. And you know what? It's working. From that same site you linked, the trend has been mostly down since 1975. It's still too high, let's work on lowering it further. You know what we shouldn't do? Shrug and say "well, guess there's nothing to be done."

Self-driving cars are supposed to make collisions nearly obsolete in the fairly near future. Is anybody even working on self-shooting guns?

Cars don't kill people; people kill people.

Therefore driver's licenses and car insurance are tyranny.

[noxiousdog]

Saying "we shouldn't have that law because criminals will break it" is basically saying that we shouldn't have any laws because criminals will break them.

Yes, lots of kids are killed in car crashes too. That's why we have LOTS of laws about safety features in cars, laws for car seats, and so on. And you know what? It's working. From that same site you linked, the trend has been mostly down since 1975. It's still too high, let's work on lowering it further. You know what we shouldn't do? Shrug and say "well, guess there's nothing to be done."

The home defense thing keeps coming up. Is that honestly a thing that a lot of people are scared about? I mean, sure, I lock my doors at night, but I'm not actually afraid that someone's going to break into my house trying to kill me to the point that I'd need a gun to fight off this potential murderer. I've lived in the boonies, I've lived in the city, and in the suburbs, and I've never been afraid enough to buy a gun to protect myself with. What's causing people to be that scared?

It depends on where you live. Part of it is irrational fear. Part of it is the neighborhoods. Chicago Example

[Smoove_B]

So above and beyond the fact that the Florida House voted down a weapons ban and instead decided to declare pornography as a health risk, the optics on finding out the Florida Teachers' Pension fund is invested in the gun industry is rather depressing.

All of this is surreal.

[Isgrimnur]

I hesitate to think what the Boomer die-off is going to do to that state. Of which my parents now will be part of.

[LawBeefaroni]

So above and beyond the fact that the Florida House voted down a weapons ban and instead decided to declare pornography as a health risk, the optics on finding out the Florida Teachers' Pension fund is invested in the gun industry is rather depressing.

All of this is surreal.

The fact that they had $500K worth of American Outdoors isn't really that unusual. Yes, the fund should sell it now but the portfolio is undoubtedly under outside management and is constructed by an algorithm. The list of holdings is over 750 pages long. They have 4 times as much invested in Ace Hardware Indonesia. Its a miniscule percentage of their huge basket of investments.

Oh, and they also have ~$500K in Strum Ruger. Again not unusual but I'm sure will make for some good outrage.

With 216 institutional holders holding over 40m shares, I bet a lot of us have some money in American Outdoors and/or RGR.


If they take steps to sell (and it looks there is a big selloff today), this shouldn't be that surreal.

[Smoove_B]

Right, that's why I said the optics. I completely understand the Teachers did not actively (or individually) pick a gun manufacturer to invest in. However, it still looks really bad and I would hope moving forward that fund managers are being instructed (when appropriate) to avoid investments like this. If for no other reason than it looks bad.

[Trent Steel]

However, it still looks really bad and I would hope moving forward that fund managers are being instructed (when appropriate) to avoid investments like this. If for no other reason than it looks bad.

Only if it doesn't make money. Anything else is irrelevant.

[Smoove_B]

For those keeping track, Florida legislators voted down anything to do with guns, but declared pornography a health risk and are now trying to require that all schools post a "In God we trust" banner.

That's the takeaway from this shooting, apparently.

Rep. Kimberly Daniels, a Jacksonville Democrat and sponsor of the bill, cited the recent shootings at a Florida high school during her closing speech on the bill. Seventeen people were killed last week at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland.

Daniels said that God is the "light" and "our schools need light in them like never before."

I'd humbly suggest that if you take your head out of your ass it won't be nearly as dark.

[msteelers]

For those keeping track, Florida legislators voted down anything to do with guns, but declared pornography a health risk and are now trying to require that all schools post a "In God we trust" banner.

That's the takeaway from this shooting, apparently.

Rep. Kimberly Daniels, a Jacksonville Democrat and sponsor of the bill, cited the recent shootings at a Florida high school during her closing speech on the bill. Seventeen people were killed last week at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland.

Daniels said that God is the "light" and "our schools need light in them like never before."

I'd humbly suggest that if you take your head out of your ass it won't be nearly as dark.

They were on track to pass the bill weeks before the school shooting. The disgusting thing is that this is pushed by the Democrats. I expect this nonsense from Republicans, but the Democrats in the Florida legislature are almost as bad. They are pushing this bill, and another one that saves and in many ways expands the predatory payday loan industry in the state.

[LawBeefaroni]

Their god needs a banner to show where to direct this will? I thought that's what prayers were for.

I guess the sick irony of kids' bodies under such a banner the next time this happens will make for infamous Instagrams.


Looks like Arkansas is on the cutting edge of school security too.

FAYETTEVILLE, Ark. (KNWA) – A recently-passed law requiring Arkansas schools to put up “In God We Trust” posters went into effect on Monday.

Rep. Jim Dotson, R-Bentonville, gave the Bentonville School Board framed copies of the poster on Monday evening.

[Zaxxon]

Daniels said that God is the "light" and "our schools need light in them like never before."

[Carpet_pissr]

Daniels said that God is the "light" and "our schools need light in them like never before."

Says a BLACK, elitist liberal. FAKE!!

[Skinypupy]

Dana Loesch claims people were rushing the stage and screaming "burn her" at the CNN town hall.

NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch claimed at CPAC she feared for her life at the CNN town hall on gun violence attended by grieving students and parents from Parkland, Florida, where 17 students and adults were killed at a high school in the country’s latest assault rifle mass shooting.

“You heard that town hall last night, they cheered the confiscation of firearms,” Loesch told conservatives at CPAC the next morning. “And it was over 5K people. I had to have a security detail to get out. I wouldn’t have been able to exit that if I did not have a private security detail. There were people rushing the stage and screaming burn her. And I came there to talk solutions.”

If only there were a multiple TV cameras which could corroborate her claim. Alas.

[Isgrimnur]

Because when people want to kill someone these days, they revert to a 17th-century Salem mentality.

[Holman]

She's lucky it was a gun-free zone, I guess?

[Jag]

She's lucky it was a gun-free zone, I guess?

Trump slams gun-free zones at schools in CPAC speech

Meanwhile in the CPAC lobby...

[Isgrimnur]

I think they'd be hard-pressed to find a large-enough venue that would permit them to allow the attendees to carry.

[Papa Smurph]

I think they'd be hard-pressed to find a large-enough venue that would permit them to allow the attendees to carry.

1. I wonder why that is? Maybe it's because guns kill people and the venues want to be a safe environment?

2. I don't think the NRA is stupid enough to have an open-carry conference. Someone says something rude to the wrong person and a gun is pulled and fired. And then other people start shooting because of that. If half the attendees got out alive it would be a miracle.

3. If owning a gun is more important to you than the lives of others, esp. children, you are fucked up. I have shot guns since I was 8 or 9, but I don't own one because I don't want to kill people. Guns kill. Any other opinion isn't an opinion... it's stupidity.

[Fitzy]

Guns kill. Any other opinion isn't an opinion... it's stupidity.

Only a Sith deals in absolutes.