Why can't we address childhood trauma AND install universal background checks and an assault weapons ban? Yesterday.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The recent shootings are horrifying.

But saying we need the government to “confiscate” all the guns will never, ever happen. It didn’t even work in tiny, island nation New Zealand. So propose actual, real life ideas, or just stop: you just make each aide more inflexible.

Ok, let’s hear YOUR solutions

Show your work. Especially the mental health part.

Listen to Marianne Williamson when she discusses childhood trauma.

oh yeah - The libs made fun of her for being loony.

huh

Talking about a broad concept is all well and good (and I actually think most Dems agree with the concept) but it is NOT a policy solution

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The recent shootings are horrifying.

But saying we need the government to “confiscate” all the guns will never, ever happen. It didn’t even work in tiny, island nation New Zealand. So propose actual, real life ideas, or just stop: you just make each aide more inflexible.

Ok, let’s hear YOUR solutions

Show your work. Especially the mental health part.

Listen to Marianne Williamson when she discusses childhood trauma.

oh yeah - The libs made fun of her for being loony.

huh

Anonymous wrote:Why are people afraid to look for the source of the rage and violence?

I imagine there are many parents who, on a subconscious level, know they're not raising their kids to be empathetic. It's easier to blame guns than it is to blame it on a parent's lack of connection with his/her kids.

lots of lazy parents out there

and competing with other parents over academics or driving your kid from one activity to another? not helpful in creating a real parent-child bond

Many on these threads made fun of Marianne Williamson, but she hit the nail on the head when she mentioned childhood trauma. That sh*t doesn't go away. sad that we think we're too smart to listen to a woman who understands the human condition

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I agree with the PP that we need to take steps to reduce childhood trauma and neglect. We can see in our own city that when children raise children, they are unable to provide a safe nurturing environment for their children. These scared hurt children, who are laughed at if they show care and concern or interest in anything, grow up and become furious and full of rage, and the cycle continues. I also believe we need to do something about guns right now. It is not either or. We need to reduce childhood trauma and control guns.

Can you quote your source? Or is this just something you hope is true so you can co tiniest to cuddle with your guns?

An elderly Ohio man is alive today because he held a thief at gunpoint in his home until the police arrived. A family in Oklahoma is alive today because a teenager had to kill a home invader to protect his mother and sister. A whole bunch of people are alive today because an elderly retired Marine with his own weapon was among the patrons when an armed robber came in. There are many many more instances like this but you seem to only want to count the dead, but not those that were saved. Any real conversation on gun control must look at both sides of the coin.

Inconvenient truth.

What kind of gun did these "good guys with a gun" have? Willing to bet it wasn't a semi-automatic rifle with a huge ammo clip.

It was the type of gun that stops someone bad. That's all that matters.

A stun gun?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I agree with the PP that we need to take steps to reduce childhood trauma and neglect. We can see in our own city that when children raise children, they are unable to provide a safe nurturing environment for their children. These scared hurt children, who are laughed at if they show care and concern or interest in anything, grow up and become furious and full of rage, and the cycle continues. I also believe we need to do something about guns right now. It is not either or. We need to reduce childhood trauma and control guns.

Can you quote your source? Or is this just something you hope is true so you can co tiniest to cuddle with your guns?

An elderly Ohio man is alive today because he held a thief at gunpoint in his home until the police arrived. A family in Oklahoma is alive today because a teenager had to kill a home invader to protect his mother and sister. A whole bunch of people are alive today because an elderly retired Marine with his own weapon was among the patrons when an armed robber came in. There are many many more instances like this but you seem to only want to count the dead, but not those that were saved. Any real conversation on gun control must look at both sides of the coin.

Inconvenient truth.

What kind of gun did these "good guys with a gun" have? Willing to bet it wasn't a semi-automatic rifle with a huge ammo clip.

It was the type of gun that stops someone bad. That's all that matters.

Why are people afraid to look for the source of the rage and violence?

Anonymous wrote:The recent shootings are horrifying.

But saying we need the government to “confiscate” all the guns will never, ever happen. It didn’t even work in tiny, island nation New Zealand. So propose actual, real life ideas, or just stop: you just make each aide more inflexible.

Ok, let’s hear YOUR solutions

Show your work. Especially the mental health part.

The recent shootings are horrifying.

But saying we need the government to “confiscate” all the guns will never, ever happen. It didn’t even work in tiny, island nation New Zealand. So propose actual, real life ideas, or just stop: you just make each aide more inflexible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yet we have people posting here day in and day out arguing that guns are not the problem! Getting out of the car and shooting people. This is not normal, this is because of the guns, nothing to do with the 2nd amendment. I am so sick of this government! There needs to be immediate ban of all weapons and a confiscation of those already in possession.

Well, there are more guns than ever in the US and the violent crime rate is about half of what it used to be. Doesn't that make you happy?

No. No shootings are acceptable, no guns are acceptable. Thai is stupid excuse and you know it. Until there is a ban on carry, buying, possession, I will not be happy. I want a full ban like Australia did. This is like saying, "dad used to beat me every day but he now beats me only every other day, so now I have a good childhood!"

Why don't you just go and move to Australia? It's not going to happen in your lifetime, ok. There are like 300 million guns in circulation and very few people will willingly give them up.

Maybe you should try a different strategy? Why don't you join the police force and then you can take guns off of bad guys!

And why don’t you move to some completely lawless, flailed state where you can revel in your ability to kill other humans? At some point you have to admit that this constant gun violence gives you a little reprieve from the sad boredom’ of your everyday life.

PP lives in that place - it's the United States

Apparently you don't get out much if you think that the the US is a lawless state. Don't have the guts to take guns off the street, do ya? I'm sure you are a member of some sort of group, which makes you feel like you are actually doing something LOL.

For those who think you shouldn't identify mass shooters - do you think the person who planted explosives at this parade should be identified? Or do we not deserve to know his identity either?

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/459629-suspect-in-custody-after-explosives-found-near-labor-day-parade-route

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This won’t stop gun violence but it’s a step in the right direction. When police in mid-sized city Texas are adopting this stance, things have changed.

Odessa police chief Michael Gerke declined to name the shooter. “I refuse to. I am not going to give him any notoriety.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/09/01/texass-second-mass-shooting-august-kills-least/

I think that's BS, frankly. This person committed a crime against society. We understandably want to know who he is try to make sense of this crime. Try to understand what factors DO lead to this sort of crime. I think we have a right to know his name.

How does knowing his name help you understand? We can learn how he came to commit the crime without it.

And really the HOW DID HIS HAPPEN is simply because guns are RAMPANT in our society, encouraged even.

because we can look at his social media history and see if he was a white nationalist, or see his arrest history - and all sorts of things. don’t you want to know who *does* this? obviously we need better gun laws but understanding who is doing the killing helps us understand what sorts of better gun laws we need. also i just want to know and i don’t appreciate the patronizing take that only some people are able to know the name of the killer when it’s a salient derail

Not saying the shooters name publicly (which is now public) doesn’t mean the police won’t investigate. It’s means the shooter won’t get notoriety.
Combing through is SM is not your job citizen detective.

Look, I am telling you I think this "let's not give him notoriety" thing is BS. I think it's ridiculous to think that for this one type of crime, the risk of the perpetrator becoming well known is so high that we can't be trusted to know his name. Are you going to hide the names of drunk drivers too so they don't become notorious? How about bank robbers? What's so special about this type of criminal?

Don't you feel as if you understand this crime - and the criminal - more, now that you know he was fired and recently had the police called on him? Wouldn't you want to know if he'd threatened one of the people he ended up shooting and the police didn't do anything about it? We are pattern seekers and I want to understand the pattern.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bombs and vehicles must be next....

Vehicles are heavily regulated, as are drivers, and you have to successfully make a bomb. No comparison.

Opioids are also "heavily regulated", aren't they?

Keep ignoring the actual cause of the violence and addictions.

It is a lot harder to directly kill other people than the user with opioids. Also don't see the GOP rushing to help those caught in the opioid crisis.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bombs and vehicles must be next....

Vehicles are heavily regulated, as are drivers, and you have to successfully make a bomb. No comparison.

Opioids are also "heavily regulated", aren't they?

Keep ignoring the actual cause of the violence and addictions.

You are following a slippery slope towards regulation of all thoughts and feelings. Is mind control what you want?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
"See something - Say something!"

Duh. Open your eyes, people.

Your neighbor IS your business!

I sort of agree. In theory I do, but when you deal with reality, you deal with risk. This shooter, Ator, was a nut job. As a neighbor, I'd be concerned about his actions - especially if he's shooting at animals - but certainly he'd know if you were the one who turned him in. That's a scary thought.

It's not as though you ratted out some weird on the metro b/c you knew you'd never cross paths again. But this is your neighbor.

It's tricky.

Yes. Very tricky but must be done. There are ways to make anonymous reports in most communities.

I don't disagree (and I'm responding to many responses to this particular post.) But people are fearful - anonymous or not. Let's say the dude is shooting at animals at 2 pm on a Thursday. You and two other neighbors are home, and this nut job knows your schedule. In fact, didn't he threaten a woman over trash - with a gun in his hand?

So even if these tips are anonymous, it's not that hard to narrow it down to a few people. So I see why people would be hesitant.

I've been in schools with a staff as high as 130 people. If I file a complaint against a person about X, it's not that hard to figure out it's me. I don't know what to say about this, but people mind their own business b/c they're in self-preservation mode.

sad but true