20 victims reported at Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so deeply offended by the mainstream reporting on this attacker as "she." I don't know how any woman can continue supporting this utter fallacy.

You can be offended all you want. The reality in 2025 is that she is a woman.

Accept it or be a weirdo hater. Your choice.

We don’t need to be respectful of a psychotic murderer.

I’m happy referring to this monster freak as “it”.

[Anonymous]

Tablet is reporting that the shooter appear to have been an adherent of The Order of Nine Angles, a far-right Satanist group that combines with occult with neo-Nazi ideology.

https://www.instagram.com/p/DN5pa7oDo09/

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/nine-angles-nazi-satanism

This group is actively radicalizing young men online.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so deeply offended by the mainstream reporting on this attacker as "she." I don't know how any woman can continue supporting this utter fallacy.

You can be offended all you want. The reality in 2025 is that she is a woman.

Accept it or be a weirdo hater. Your choice.

There is nothing weird about it. You cannot really believe it is okay for men with mental illness to shield themselves by acting out the most demeaning parodies of women and insisting we all get on board with it. The whole thing is so offensive to women that I am in utter shock and dismay everyday at how weak and maladjusted women on the left have become. I consider myself a progressive who fights for women's rights. Why don't you? Why are you okay with men prancing around acting out weird fantasies and considering themselves women just because they act frilly and feminine. Please show me one transwoman who acts like a strong, intelligent woman, respectful of all of us. You can't. And this person is simply not a woman.

You are over reacting. Most trans people are living quiet lives that affect you not one bit. You have fallen for the GOP over-hype of this issue.

I haven't fallen for anything. This is my personal feeling when I see how out of hand the issue has become. When men stage exaggerated performances of “womanhood” on social media, pretending they need tampons or reducing femininity to long hair and false eyelashes, it feels offensive. Womanhood is not something to be parodied or reduced to a costume. What troubles me most is that women on the left, afraid of appearing unempathetic or “not woke,” have fallen for these displays, rather than questioning how they diminish and caricature women’s real experiences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Big Pharma is a big problem here not guns. Majority of these shooters are on SSRI’s or recently, puberty blockers. Nobody wants to call out the elephant in the room:
Big Pharma

It is insane to me how among the listed side effects for SSRIs - drugs given for severe depression - are suicidal thoughts and suicidal behavior! What are the point of these poisonous things???

It’s also dumb that teens can’t vape or smoke until 18 or drink till they’re 21 because alcohol is considered a mind altering drug yet they can take SSRI’s or completely change their gender with puberty blockers while underage.

Teens are already mentally not all the way there so imagine with medication

You can’t drink until 21 but you can buy a gun at 18.

Guns should require a safety class and test (like driving lessons) that come with a cost and parental and medical provider sign-off before anyone gets close to having the privilege to buy a gun.

This is the solution! A start. Banning firearms is the end goal, but this is what we do as soon as we have a real leader in the USA. Or even on state level in states with sensible lawmakers.

Why not just start with the end goal? Don’t you even care about all the people who will still die getting from your “start point” to the end goal? What about them? Don’t they matter? You’re willing to sacrifice them to incremental progress?

That’s F’d up.

Firearms cannot be banned. Not lawfully. Not practically. It is a reality-denying confabulation to insist on magical solutions while ignoring the root causes of psychopathy and criminal violence.

They actually can be banned but Republicans refuse to allow it.

“Banned” like illicit narcotics and all the other contraband in which the country is, and has long been, awash? There is a federal “ban” on marijuana. Illegitimate and unprescribed fentanyl is “banned” everywhere. We all know how that’s worked out.

Do you think we are idiots that don’t know other nations don’t have our gun violence issues?

“Gun violence” is a handy rhetorical buzzword for criminal misuse of firearms.

I didn’t call anybody any names. If somebody feels like they’re an idiot when the error of what purports to be their reasoning becomes evident, that feeling would be for them to examine.

Other nations, as has been repeatedly and exhaustively discussed in this and other threads, are not the same as the United States. There are places in the world where essentially every home has a fully automatic, machine gun, battle rifle, weapon of war, AK pattern rifle. They have plenty of internecine violence but nobody is shooting up schools.

It is delusional to believe that firearms can be magically “disappeared” from the United States, never to reappear. Continuing to posit that as a “solution” to unlawful criminal violence committed with firearms distracts from the real problem of criminal psychopaths and their psychopathic criminal misconduct.

In any event, the point of my post was that paper “bans” may briefly feel satisfying, but that there is a long way between what’s on paper and what’s actually happening in reality.

It's not delusional. We're spending billions and billions and billions of dollars on building concentration camps in swamps. That could go a long long way towards getting rid of a lot of ridiculous weaponry. We have a lot of money. What are we going to do with it?

Just stop with your comparisons to 6 million Jews being imprisoned and killed. Seriously, get a hold of yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an elementary school teacher, it broke my heart to see the kids being interviewed and struck me how they were not at all surprised that this happened to them. Our kids are growing up expecting to go through an active shooter situation at school.

We are breeding the next generation of domestic terrorists.

+1 How can this be the world we leave to our children?

It's only the "world" in the US. Other civilized countries don't have this issue.

I've told my kids who have dual citizenship with a European country to seriously think about moving there if they have kids. The US is a horrible place to raise children.

My friend moved to Portugal with her family, including little kids. They never ever worry about school shootings, or shootings anywhere.

If you think other civilized countries in the world don’t have this problem you are ill informed. It might not be guns in Europe but there are now frequent mass killings using vehicles and knives.

Sydney, Australia mall killings April 2024. Man uses knife to kill 6 people and injure 12.

Norway July 2011. Man sets off bomb in Oslo killing 7 then goes to an island where there was a youth camp and killed 69 people there.

Germany 6 dead, 200 injured in Dec 2024 Christmas market attack. 2016 Christmas market attack in Germany killed 12.

China 2023 man uses knife to kill 6 children in a kindergarten.

China 2024 man uses knife to
Kill 8 and injure 17.

Portugal Sept 2014. 12 year old boy wearing a bulletproof vest stabs six children ages 11-14 at his school.

Austria June 2025 school shooting. 21 year old shoots and kills 9 at a school.

2002 Germany school shooting kills 17.

Jokela Germany school shooting in 2007 kills 9.

Finland school shooting 2008 kills 10. Gunman was inspired by 2007 German killing.

May 2023 school shooting in Serbia kills 10.

Chech Republic Dec 2023 school shooting 15 dead

Swedish school shooting 2025 former student kills 10.

I don’t think it should be legal to have the type and variety of guns that are available in the US but I no longer believe in banning guns. It’s too late.

I think the internet should be massively censored instead. Online chat rooms of people discussing violence and people being able to look up details of previous school shootings should not be allowed. Media coverage of school shoutings should be censored with no details given of shooter besides sex and age. No names or photos available. This recent school shooter wrote about being inspired by Sandy Hook.

It’s a perverse cycle. Parents want their kids to have a phone in case of a school shooting but the internet on those phones are deadly.

What your argument fails to take into account here is that, while yes other countries do have large scale attacks as well, they are isolated AND FAR LESS FREQUENT than the mass shootings perpetrated in the US. To the extent that crime is easier to commit, the more frequently it will be committed. Guns are everywhere in the US, and it’s so much easier for some dude to pull the trigger a bunch of times than to grab a knife and run around in a rampage. Think about it. Think hard. Most twenty something male would-be killers are not going to get up close and personal with a knife to a bunch of school children. They’re too cowardly and it’s too personal of a crime. But a gun takes the personal out of it, and the guns are everywhere. Thus, the guns have to go. All of them.

I like how none of the gun advocates have responded to this one. It’s just really stumped them. Guns are easy, knives are not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Big Pharma is a big problem here not guns. Majority of these shooters are on SSRI’s or recently, puberty blockers. Nobody wants to call out the elephant in the room:
Big Pharma

It is insane to me how among the listed side effects for SSRIs - drugs given for severe depression - are suicidal thoughts and suicidal behavior! What are the point of these poisonous things???

It’s also dumb that teens can’t vape or smoke until 18 or drink till they’re 21 because alcohol is considered a mind altering drug yet they can take SSRI’s or completely change their gender with puberty blockers while underage.

Teens are already mentally not all the way there so imagine with medication

You can’t drink until 21 but you can buy a gun at 18.

Guns should require a safety class and test (like driving lessons) that come with a cost and parental and medical provider sign-off before anyone gets close to having the privilege to buy a gun.

This is the solution! A start. Banning firearms is the end goal, but this is what we do as soon as we have a real leader in the USA. Or even on state level in states with sensible lawmakers.

Why not just start with the end goal? Don’t you even care about all the people who will still die getting from your “start point” to the end goal? What about them? Don’t they matter? You’re willing to sacrifice them to incremental progress?

That’s F’d up.

Firearms cannot be banned. Not lawfully. Not practically. It is a reality-denying confabulation to insist on magical solutions while ignoring the root causes of psychopathy and criminal violence.

We can work within the 2a and some states already do with success.

The Gifford Foundation and Everytown for Gun Safety both have really good resources about changing state laws within the limits of the constitution. Minnesota does prohibit the possession of fully automatic guns -- in another state, the killer might have murdered dozens of kids in the same time span. The fact that there are so many survivors who were shot but not killed is also a result of the weapon available to the murderer -- it wasn't like the Uvalde situation.

Tell us you don’t have the slightest clue about firearms or firearms law without using those words . . . Oh, you just did.

The exact model(s) of firearm(s) this demented psychopath used haven’t been announced (or I haven’t seen the information). The firearm criminally misused at Uvalde reportedly was a semiautomatic rifle, not a machine gun.

Nobody can know why, despite expending a reportedly significant amount of ammunition, this particular wretch managed to hit relatively few of the fish in a barrel he was targeting, but the fact that he reportedly stayed outside and shot through what were probably at least semi-opaque stained glass windows would be a good bet for starters.

Lawfully owned machine guns are essentially never used in crimes.

Yup -- I trust the experts at places like Everytown and Giffords to learn about the morbid arcane differences between these guns. BTW, I come from a gun owning family. My dad owned a pistol and regularly went target shooting, and previously owned a hunting rifle back when he did that. My nephews own hunting rifles and regularly hunt, as did my uncle. My dad was an NRA member until the NRA went super crazy with Charlton Heston in the 1980s and he had to end his membership because he wouldn't be associated with those nutjobs. None of my family members who own guns are opposed to things like background checks, waiting periods, mandatory safety and training classes, trigger locks, mandated storage laws, registration/tracking of ownership, and none of them own crazy military style weapons that rip flesh apart like an AR-15 style weapon (which aren't legal in Minnesota).

None of the things you listed would have prevented, deterred or slowed in the slightest the diseased criminal murderer in this case once he decided on his course of action.

As for the “AR15 style weapon” (which appears to be regulated but lawful to purchase and possess in MN), it’s terminal ballistics (whatever they may be) are the result of its caliber, not its design, and would be the same from a single shot weapon as from a semiauto. Such effects are not unique to that caliber (typically considered a “varmint” round for, e.g., groundhogs), and your relatives’ various hunting firearms very likely are chambered in larger, more powerful calibers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Big Pharma is a big problem here not guns. Majority of these shooters are on SSRI’s or recently, puberty blockers. Nobody wants to call out the elephant in the room:
Big Pharma

It is insane to me how among the listed side effects for SSRIs - drugs given for severe depression - are suicidal thoughts and suicidal behavior! What are the point of these poisonous things???

It’s also dumb that teens can’t vape or smoke until 18 or drink till they’re 21 because alcohol is considered a mind altering drug yet they can take SSRI’s or completely change their gender with puberty blockers while underage.

Teens are already mentally not all the way there so imagine with medication

You can’t drink until 21 but you can buy a gun at 18.

Guns should require a safety class and test (like driving lessons) that come with a cost and parental and medical provider sign-off before anyone gets close to having the privilege to buy a gun.

This is the solution! A start. Banning firearms is the end goal, but this is what we do as soon as we have a real leader in the USA. Or even on state level in states with sensible lawmakers.

Why not just start with the end goal? Don’t you even care about all the people who will still die getting from your “start point” to the end goal? What about them? Don’t they matter? You’re willing to sacrifice them to incremental progress?

That’s F’d up.

Firearms cannot be banned. Not lawfully. Not practically. It is a reality-denying confabulation to insist on magical solutions while ignoring the root causes of psychopathy and criminal violence.

They actually can be banned but Republicans refuse to allow it.

“Banned” like illicit narcotics and all the other contraband in which the country is, and has long been, awash? There is a federal “ban” on marijuana. Illegitimate and unprescribed fentanyl is “banned” everywhere. We all know how that’s worked out.

Do you think we are idiots that don’t know other nations don’t have our gun violence issues?

“Gun violence” is a handy rhetorical buzzword for criminal misuse of firearms.

I didn’t call anybody any names. If somebody feels like they’re an idiot when the error of what purports to be their reasoning becomes evident, that feeling would be for them to examine.

Other nations, as has been repeatedly and exhaustively discussed in this and other threads, are not the same as the United States. There are places in the world where essentially every home has a fully automatic, machine gun, battle rifle, weapon of war, AK pattern rifle. They have plenty of internecine violence but nobody is shooting up schools.

It is delusional to believe that firearms can be magically “disappeared” from the United States, never to reappear. Continuing to posit that as a “solution” to unlawful criminal violence committed with firearms distracts from the real problem of criminal psychopaths and their psychopathic criminal misconduct.

In any event, the point of my post was that paper “bans” may briefly feel satisfying, but that there is a long way between what’s on paper and what’s actually happening in reality.

NP.

+1000

This post sums it up so well. So many societal problems far, far beyond shootings, could be addressed and helped if we took mental health as seriously as other countries do.

A good start is to bring back the in-patient mental hospitals to help the ones most in-need in our country. We never should have eliminated those facilities. Reform, yes, but not the wholesale closure which we implemented.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Media is reporting the suicidal shooter was:

“Robin Westman, who is in his early 20s,”

News outlets keep referring to a “20-minute YouTube video shared on his YT account hours before the shooting”

What was in the video? Is it still up?

It's just schizophrenic nonsense.
You can't lock someone up for being nuts in America. They have to either commit a crime or tell a healthcare provider that they are planning to commit a crime (or suicide). And then you can get them 72 hours in a hospital.
This needs to change. We have people who are a danger to society and we are just waiting for these ticking time bombs to go off. Often even their own parents are begging for help.
I will happily pay more taxes for this and I am GOP.

This is so tragic. We need to be able to put people with severe mental disabilities like schizophrenia in protective care.

Honestly Democrats could win their way back to power by making re-institutionalization of the mentally ill part of their platform. It overlaps with their generalized concern about health care access anyway and would generate tons of jobs for the liberal types who like the caring professions. Talking about gun control hasn’t gotten them anywhere. Re-institutionalization is common sense and attractive to moderates.

Who’s gonna staff these clinics??

How did they staff crazy houses, group homes, and psych wards back then? pp is right. You didn’t see this type of thing in the past because crazy people or problem teens were institutionalized early away from polite society

DP. Do you realize there’s already a massive shortage of mental health care providers in this country? The inpatient pediatric mental health facility in my city has a nine month waiting list.

Supply and demand. You can train with an associate’s degree for some nursing and medical assistant jobs. Liberals who would have majored in some silly humanities degree Will major in health care related stuff instead and actually get jobs so they don’t have to beg for us to pay back their student loans for worthless degrees.

You’re suggesting that someone with an associates degree can care for people so mentally ill that they must be institutionalized? Do you have any idea how much you’d have to pay to have the numbers or kind of providers needed for a place like that - the answer is more than we have, so it will be poorly paid and staffed by low quality staff and there will be neglect and abuse like crazy just like it was in the old days.

No one is denying it will be expensive. What I’m saying is that I (a Republican) and many others will pay higher taxes for this. So the jobs can be higher paying and subsidized or whatever. Better use of my taxes than whatever else bloated fed gov bureaucracies could be doing.

Oh sure! Republicans will certainly agree to pay higher taxes so that democrats can solve a social problem.

I’m surrounded by effing morons.

The Republican party cut mental health funding including for schools.

I am so tired of hearing them yell about our mental health issues and pull the plug on addressing them.

If you want to scream mental health, put your tax money and votes toward it. Otherwise STFU.

For the last time. Addressing mental health doesn’t matter if left wingers bully psychology associations into declassifying disorders such as gender dysmorphia and treating mental illnesses like the shooter had as something to be celebrated, not treated.

DP. Are you advocating for institutionalizing all people who identify as trans?

NP. The world would be a safer place if they were institutionalized for their mental illness. Instead, we celebrate it like it’s something to be proud of.

That’s why we ended up with groups like transtifa.

Then what do we do about all of the mass shooters who aren’t trans? (That would be most of them.)

+1 The solution is to not allow males to own guns since the vast majority of mass shooters are male.

Still wouldn’t have helped here because the murderer was “female”.

+1

We’ve all had “trans women ARE women!” unrelentingly beaten into our heads for the last 3-4 years. Fine. You win. This shooter IS a woman. Period. End of discussion.

Ok cool. You win. The shooter was a woman. Does that make you feel better? Can we talk about gun control now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Big Pharma is a big problem here not guns. Majority of these shooters are on SSRI’s or recently, puberty blockers. Nobody wants to call out the elephant in the room:
Big Pharma

It is insane to me how among the listed side effects for SSRIs - drugs given for severe depression - are suicidal thoughts and suicidal behavior! What are the point of these poisonous things???

It’s also dumb that teens can’t vape or smoke until 18 or drink till they’re 21 because alcohol is considered a mind altering drug yet they can take SSRI’s or completely change their gender with puberty blockers while underage.

Teens are already mentally not all the way there so imagine with medication

You can’t drink until 21 but you can buy a gun at 18.

Guns should require a safety class and test (like driving lessons) that come with a cost and parental and medical provider sign-off before anyone gets close to having the privilege to buy a gun.

This is the solution! A start. Banning firearms is the end goal, but this is what we do as soon as we have a real leader in the USA. Or even on state level in states with sensible lawmakers.

Why not just start with the end goal? Don’t you even care about all the people who will still die getting from your “start point” to the end goal? What about them? Don’t they matter? You’re willing to sacrifice them to incremental progress?

That’s F’d up.

Firearms cannot be banned. Not lawfully. Not practically. It is a reality-denying confabulation to insist on magical solutions while ignoring the root causes of psychopathy and criminal violence.

They actually can be banned but Republicans refuse to allow it.

“Banned” like illicit narcotics and all the other contraband in which the country is, and has long been, awash? There is a federal “ban” on marijuana. Illegitimate and unprescribed fentanyl is “banned” everywhere. We all know how that’s worked out.

Do you think we are idiots that don’t know other nations don’t have our gun violence issues?

“Gun violence” is a handy rhetorical buzzword for criminal misuse of firearms.

I didn’t call anybody any names. If somebody feels like they’re an idiot when the error of what purports to be their reasoning becomes evident, that feeling would be for them to examine.

Other nations, as has been repeatedly and exhaustively discussed in this and other threads, are not the same as the United States. There are places in the world where essentially every home has a fully automatic, machine gun, battle rifle, weapon of war, AK pattern rifle. They have plenty of internecine violence but nobody is shooting up schools.

It is delusional to believe that firearms can be magically “disappeared” from the United States, never to reappear. Continuing to posit that as a “solution” to unlawful criminal violence committed with firearms distracts from the real problem of criminal psychopaths and their psychopathic criminal misconduct.

In any event, the point of my post was that paper “bans” may briefly feel satisfying, but that there is a long way between what’s on paper and what’s actually happening in reality.

It's not delusional. We're spending billions and billions and billions of dollars on building concentration camps in swamps. That could go a long long way towards getting rid of a lot of ridiculous weaponry. We have a lot of money. What are we going to do with it?

Just stop with your comparisons to 6 million Jews being imprisoned and killed. Seriously, get a hold of yourself.

We are spending billions and billions of dollars on so-called Mass deportation. And we spend many many billions of dollars on any manner of programs. If we decide we want to spend billions to get rid of weapons then we decide that. That is allowed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tablet is reporting that the shooter appear to have been an adherent of The Order of Nine Angles, a far-right Satanist group that combines with occult with neo-Nazi ideology.

https://www.instagram.com/p/DN5pa7oDo09/

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/nine-angles-nazi-satanism

This group is actively radicalizing young men online.

Please just stop trying to make this a right-wing issue. This freak was all over the map--just a very mentally ill person that clearly had no capacity for understanding or differentiating anything at all. The only thing to care about are the Catholic victims who were targeted by a complete and utter freak.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am so deeply offended by the mainstream reporting on this attacker as "she." I don't know how any woman can continue supporting this utter fallacy.

I'm deeply offended that children were murdered in a church and people like you want to talk about pronouns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Big Pharma is a big problem here not guns. Majority of these shooters are on SSRI’s or recently, puberty blockers. Nobody wants to call out the elephant in the room:
Big Pharma

It is insane to me how among the listed side effects for SSRIs - drugs given for severe depression - are suicidal thoughts and suicidal behavior! What are the point of these poisonous things???

It’s also dumb that teens can’t vape or smoke until 18 or drink till they’re 21 because alcohol is considered a mind altering drug yet they can take SSRI’s or completely change their gender with puberty blockers while underage.

Teens are already mentally not all the way there so imagine with medication

You can’t drink until 21 but you can buy a gun at 18.

Guns should require a safety class and test (like driving lessons) that come with a cost and parental and medical provider sign-off before anyone gets close to having the privilege to buy a gun.

This is the solution! A start. Banning firearms is the end goal, but this is what we do as soon as we have a real leader in the USA. Or even on state level in states with sensible lawmakers.

Why not just start with the end goal? Don’t you even care about all the people who will still die getting from your “start point” to the end goal? What about them? Don’t they matter? You’re willing to sacrifice them to incremental progress?

That’s F’d up.

Firearms cannot be banned. Not lawfully. Not practically. It is a reality-denying confabulation to insist on magical solutions while ignoring the root causes of psychopathy and criminal violence.

We can work within the 2a and some states already do with success.

The Gifford Foundation and Everytown for Gun Safety both have really good resources about changing state laws within the limits of the constitution. Minnesota does prohibit the possession of fully automatic guns -- in another state, the killer might have murdered dozens of kids in the same time span. The fact that there are so many survivors who were shot but not killed is also a result of the weapon available to the murderer -- it wasn't like the Uvalde situation.

Tell us you don’t have the slightest clue about firearms or firearms law without using those words . . . Oh, you just did.

The exact model(s) of firearm(s) this demented psychopath used haven’t been announced (or I haven’t seen the information). The firearm criminally misused at Uvalde reportedly was a semiautomatic rifle, not a machine gun.

Nobody can know why, despite expending a reportedly significant amount of ammunition, this particular wretch managed to hit relatively few of the fish in a barrel he was targeting, but the fact that he reportedly stayed outside and shot through what were probably at least semi-opaque stained glass windows would be a good bet for starters.

Lawfully owned machine guns are essentially never used in crimes.

Semi-Automatic rifles are dangerous and we should ban them. We should outlaw them. We should invest a lot of money in buying back a lot of the ones that are out there. And we should be able to walk around in this country, the entire country, without worrying about anyone getting gunned down with a semi-automatic rifle.

I suspect you don’t have a clue what differentiates semi-automatic rifles from any other kind, and couldn’t articulate for money what makes them “dangerous” in comparison to other firearm types.

One cannot “buy back” something one did not sell, not even with other people’s money.

You most certainly can. Other countries have invested in buy back programs successfully.

Other countries with different laws have implemented “take back” programs with the pretense of compensation, which would be unlikely to pass muster under the US Constitution. And even if such a program somehow magically managed to vacuum up all of the firearms it targeted (and it would not), the same people who ship tons of illicit drugs to the US would promptly result the criminal underworld.

[Anonymous]

For trans people being so rare, they sure do commit a lot of school shootings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so deeply offended by the mainstream reporting on this attacker as "she." I don't know how any woman can continue supporting this utter fallacy.

You can be offended all you want. The reality in 2025 is that she is a woman.

Accept it or be a weirdo hater. Your choice.

There is nothing weird about it. You cannot really believe it is okay for men with mental illness to shield themselves by acting out the most demeaning parodies of women and insisting we all get on board with it. The whole thing is so offensive to women that I am in utter shock and dismay everyday at how weak and maladjusted women on the left have become. I consider myself a progressive who fights for women's rights. Why don't you? Why are you okay with men prancing around acting out weird fantasies and considering themselves women just because they act frilly and feminine. Please show me one transwoman who acts like a strong, intelligent woman, respectful of all of us. You can't. And this person is simply not a woman.

You are over reacting. Most trans people are living quiet lives that affect you not one bit. You have fallen for the GOP over-hype of this issue.

I haven't fallen for anything. This is my personal feeling when I see how out of hand the issue has become. When men stage exaggerated performances of “womanhood” on social media, pretending they need tampons or reducing femininity to long hair and false eyelashes, it feels offensive. Womanhood is not something to be parodied or reduced to a costume. What troubles me most is that women on the left, afraid of appearing unempathetic or “not woke,” have fallen for these displays, rather than questioning how they diminish and caricature women’s real experiences.

Where are you even seeing this crap? Get off SM -- it's not real life. People on SM do crazy stuff to get clicks, and you are apparently rewarding them. My teens have a few friends that are trans, and they are all very nice, sweet kids who are busy taking AP classes, not doing crazy crap online. Spend more time with real people, and less time looking at exaggerated performances on social media.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an elementary school teacher, it broke my heart to see the kids being interviewed and struck me how they were not at all surprised that this happened to them. Our kids are growing up expecting to go through an active shooter situation at school.

We are breeding the next generation of domestic terrorists.

+1 How can this be the world we leave to our children?

It's only the "world" in the US. Other civilized countries don't have this issue.

I've told my kids who have dual citizenship with a European country to seriously think about moving there if they have kids. The US is a horrible place to raise children.

My friend moved to Portugal with her family, including little kids. They never ever worry about school shootings, or shootings anywhere.

If you think other civilized countries in the world don’t have this problem you are ill informed. It might not be guns in Europe but there are now frequent mass killings using vehicles and knives.

Sydney, Australia mall killings April 2024. Man uses knife to kill 6 people and injure 12.

Norway July 2011. Man sets off bomb in Oslo killing 7 then goes to an island where there was a youth camp and killed 69 people there.

Germany 6 dead, 200 injured in Dec 2024 Christmas market attack. 2016 Christmas market attack in Germany killed 12.

China 2023 man uses knife to kill 6 children in a kindergarten.

China 2024 man uses knife to
Kill 8 and injure 17.

Portugal Sept 2014. 12 year old boy wearing a bulletproof vest stabs six children ages 11-14 at his school.

Austria June 2025 school shooting. 21 year old shoots and kills 9 at a school.

2002 Germany school shooting kills 17.

Jokela Germany school shooting in 2007 kills 9.

Finland school shooting 2008 kills 10. Gunman was inspired by 2007 German killing.

May 2023 school shooting in Serbia kills 10.

Chech Republic Dec 2023 school shooting 15 dead

Swedish school shooting 2025 former student kills 10.

I don’t think it should be legal to have the type and variety of guns that are available in the US but I no longer believe in banning guns. It’s too late.

I think the internet should be massively censored instead. Online chat rooms of people discussing violence and people being able to look up details of previous school shootings should not be allowed. Media coverage of school shoutings should be censored with no details given of shooter besides sex and age. No names or photos available. This recent school shooter wrote about being inspired by Sandy Hook.

It’s a perverse cycle. Parents want their kids to have a phone in case of a school shooting but the internet on those phones are deadly.

What your argument fails to take into account here is that, while yes other countries do have large scale attacks as well, they are isolated AND FAR LESS FREQUENT than the mass shootings perpetrated in the US. To the extent that crime is easier to commit, the more frequently it will be committed. Guns are everywhere in the US, and it’s so much easier for some dude to pull the trigger a bunch of times than to grab a knife and run around in a rampage. Think about it. Think hard. Most twenty something male would-be killers are not going to get up close and personal with a knife to a bunch of school children. They’re too cowardly and it’s too personal of a crime. But a gun takes the personal out of it, and the guns are everywhere. Thus, the guns have to go. All of them.

I like how none of the gun advocates have responded to this one. It’s just really stumped them. Guns are easy, knives are not.

This particular deranged murderer made a lot of noise and managed to kill (I think) just two people. The very list of knife events you reject demonstrates how quickly the body count can rise with a committed knife attacker. Bladed weapons were responsible for industrial-strength slaughter for millennia.