Mother and Child Shot at P and 10th NW

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"This is a horrible story and one which should teach everyone to be very careful."

It is a horrible story, but instead of teaching people to be "very careful," it should instead serve as evidence for banning hanguns in the United States like Australia has done.

fixed that for you

[Anonymous]

Yeah, so here's the thing about the gun argument. Guns proliferate in other communities, but they don't seem to share in the violence that overtakes some cities/communities. Simply saying "GUNS" is simplistic and doesn't come close to identifying deep problems that you probably don't want to discuss anyway.

Also, Australia. Yeah, an island nation that would be pretty easy to seal off from illegal weapons. The USA, not so much. Not to be cliche, but it really applies: when you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. That's just how it is with porous borders and many, many guns in circulation. It's a pipedream if you think we could outlaw guns and get rid of "gun violence" at the same time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, so here's the thing about the gun argument. [b]Guns proliferate in other communities, but they don't seem to share in the violence that overtakes some cities/communities. Simply saying "GUNS" is simplistic and doesn't come close to identifying deep problems that you probably don't want to discuss anyway.[b]

Also, Australia. Yeah, an island nation that would be pretty easy to seal off from illegal weapons. The USA, not so much. Not to be cliche, but it really applies: when you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. That's just how it is with porous borders and many, many guns in circulation. It's a pipedream if you think we could outlaw guns and get rid of "gun violence" at the same time.

+1. Yep. There are plenty of communities with lots of guns, but not all of them are as violent as DC. So there is something else going on, but I think people are afraid to have that conversation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, so here's the thing about the gun argument. [b]Guns proliferate in other communities, but they don't seem to share in the violence that overtakes some cities/communities. Simply saying "GUNS" is simplistic and doesn't come close to identifying deep problems that you probably don't want to discuss anyway.[b]

Also, Australia. Yeah, an island nation that would be pretty easy to seal off from illegal weapons. The USA, not so much. Not to be cliche, but it really applies: when you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. That's just how it is with porous borders and many, many guns in circulation. It's a pipedream if you think we could outlaw guns and get rid of "gun violence" at the same time.

+1. Yep. There are plenty of communities with lots of guns, but not all of them are as violent as DC. So there is something else going on, but I think people are afraid to have that conversation.

Absolutely correct.... and absolutely *desperate* to avoid that unpleasant conversation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, so here's the thing about the gun argument. [b]Guns proliferate in other communities, but they don't seem to share in the violence that overtakes some cities/communities. Simply saying "GUNS" is simplistic and doesn't come close to identifying deep problems that you probably don't want to discuss anyway.[b]

Also, Australia. Yeah, an island nation that would be pretty easy to seal off from illegal weapons. The USA, not so much. Not to be cliche, but it really applies: when you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. That's just how it is with porous borders and many, many guns in circulation. It's a pipedream if you think we could outlaw guns and get rid of "gun violence" at the same time.

+1. Yep. There are plenty of communities with lots of guns, but not all of them are as violent as DC. So there is something else going on, but I think people are afraid to have that conversation.

Absolutely correct.... and absolutely *desperate* to avoid that unpleasant conversation.

So instead we get lots of posts about too many guns (which is not something that will change anytime soon - just no chance) and how we all need to MYOB and STFU when we leave the inside of our house. The former is ineffectual and the latter - over time - actually contributes to an increase, not a decrease, in violent crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, so here's the thing about the gun argument. [b]Guns proliferate in other communities, but they don't seem to share in the violence that overtakes some cities/communities. Simply saying "GUNS" is simplistic and doesn't come close to identifying deep problems that you probably don't want to discuss anyway.[b]

Also, Australia. Yeah, an island nation that would be pretty easy to seal off from illegal weapons. The USA, not so much. Not to be cliche, but it really applies: when you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. That's just how it is with porous borders and many, many guns in circulation. It's a pipedream if you think we could outlaw guns and get rid of "gun violence" at the same time.

+1. Yep. There are plenty of communities with lots of guns, but not all of them are as violent as DC. So there is something else going on, but I think people are afraid to have that conversation.

A lot of it is drugs. I'd bet anything this monster was out of his mind from drug use.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, so here's the thing about the gun argument. [b]Guns proliferate in other communities, but they don't seem to share in the violence that overtakes some cities/communities. Simply saying "GUNS" is simplistic and doesn't come close to identifying deep problems that you probably don't want to discuss anyway.[b]

Also, Australia. Yeah, an island nation that would be pretty easy to seal off from illegal weapons. The USA, not so much. Not to be cliche, but it really applies: when you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. That's just how it is with porous borders and many, many guns in circulation. It's a pipedream if you think we could outlaw guns and get rid of "gun violence" at the same time.

+1. Yep. There are plenty of communities with lots of guns, but not all of them are as violent as DC. So there is something else going on, but I think people are afraid to have that conversation.

A lot of it is drugs. I'd bet anything this monster was out of his mind from drug use.

In addition to rampant drug use, the shooter probably grew up in a community that had lots of gunplay, teen pregnancy, and parents who aren’t adequately caring for their children or leaving the job to others. Does anyone disagree? Does anyone want to offer any theories on why these phenomena are prevalent?

[Anonymous]

PCP is my guess. We could turn resources to ending PCP distribution and use since it makes people crazier than other drugs. Crazed drug addict is a blanket term but some drugs do make you violent and hallucinate while others don't. PCP and meth come to mind.

DC has a high level of PCP use.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PCP is my guess. We could turn resources to ending PCP distribution and use since it makes people crazier than other drugs. Crazed drug addict is a blanket term but some drugs do make you violent and hallucinate while others don't. PCP and meth come to mind.

DC has a high level of PCP use.

Sadly there is no appetite in DC for the kind of law enforcement it would take to do anything about this. Obviously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PCP is my guess. We could turn resources to ending PCP distribution and use since it makes people crazier than other drugs. Crazed drug addict is a blanket term but some drugs do make you violent and hallucinate while others don't. PCP and meth come to mind.

DC has a high level of PCP use.

Sadly there is no appetite in DC for the kind of law enforcement it would take to do anything about this. Obviously.

That needs to change. It's a type of bandaid harm reduction but PCP is bad news. Meth too because they mess with your mind. Even if this guy wasn't on it, the woman who threw her dead infant in the trash last week was because she admitted it. The other thing is people who are violent need to be contained. There is usually a history of problem behavior before the incident that makes the news.

Not the perfect answer because there isn't one but it's more concrete than debating guns endlessly. It ok to have some harsh restrictions if you're going to hurt other people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PCP is my guess. We could turn resources to ending PCP distribution and use since it makes people crazier than other drugs. Crazed drug addict is a blanket term but some drugs do make you violent and hallucinate while others don't. PCP and meth come to mind.

DC has a high level of PCP use.

I’m the one earlier in the thread who thinks I saw him near Safeway on 17tg yesterday (I saw him about 3 hours before the police posted his picture unfortunately) but I noticed the guy because he looked super out of it on drugs and I could almost feel the evil in his gaze. Agree, could be on PCP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PCP is my guess. We could turn resources to ending PCP distribution and use since it makes people crazier than other drugs. Crazed drug addict is a blanket term but some drugs do make you violent and hallucinate while others don't. PCP and meth come to mind.

DC has a high level of PCP use.

Sadly there is no appetite in DC for the kind of law enforcement it would take to do anything about this. Obviously.

That needs to change. It's a type of bandaid harm reduction but PCP is bad news. Meth too because they mess with your mind. Even if this guy wasn't on it, the woman who threw her dead infant in the trash last week was because she admitted it. The other thing is people who are violent need to be contained. There is usually a history of problem behavior before the incident that makes the news.

Not the perfect answer because there isn't one but it's more concrete than debating guns endlessly. It ok to have some harsh restrictions if you're going to hurt other people.

It won’t change unfortunately. In the current political climate, increasing law enforcement efforts like that is a non-starter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PCP is my guess. We could turn resources to ending PCP distribution and use since it makes people crazier than other drugs. Crazed drug addict is a blanket term but some drugs do make you violent and hallucinate while others don't. PCP and meth come to mind.

DC has a high level of PCP use.

And guess what- they all start with simple drugs like pot

[Anonymous]

The despair propaganda here is over the top.
Anytime you hear people say “we can do nothing, let’s give up”, you should stop listening to them.
That’s an attitude for losers.
Americans are a can-do people.

We CAN ban guns. We CAN increase enforcement of violent crime. We can do lots of things if we don’t just give up like sad sacks— if we are active and work for them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The despair propaganda here is over the top.
Anytime you hear people say “we can do nothing, let’s give up”, you should stop listening to them.
That’s an attitude for losers.
Americans are a can-do people.

We CAN ban guns. We CAN increase enforcement of violent crime. We can do lots of things if we don’t just give up like sad sacks— if we are active and work for them

Just FYI: If you advocate for this, BLM supporters will come after you as a racist.