Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only way things are going to change are:

1. Make parents legally responsible for everything their child does with firearms. Including ALL prison time as if they pulled the trigger themselves. Let the parents prove in court that they couldn’t possibly have known or prevented it.

AND

2. Make our communities safer so normal people don’t feel like they need to have weapons in the home. I came from a country with much stronger gun laws and I never wanted weapons because I knew criminals weren’t running around outside. People commit a crime and they were locked away for a very long time, period. This isn’t the case here and so yes, I’m looking to get a firearm for the house now (plus a good safe and appropriate training obviously).

When we address both of those things, things can change. Until then, it will just continue.

The first would involve a national gun safety law requiring people to lock up their weapons safely, something which you would think should be common sense and easy to do, and which 85% of Americans support, but which Republicans fight tooth and nail. Elections have consequences!

How do you enforce a law like that? Do you have police raid people’s homes to look for compliance? It’s an unenforceable law.

Sorry but gun control won’t fix anything. Guns aren’t the problem, people and mental illness are the problem.

I’m from Chicago where Illinois has some of the most strict gun laws. We are pretty high in the ranks for gun violence.

Banning rifles won’t do anything when most gun violence and shootings are done by a pistol.

Criminals will always find a way to get guns, regardless if it’s legal. Look at all the felons committing mass shootings ( a mass shooting is 3 or more people shot) with illegal guns.

What we need to do is look into social media ties and mental illness. Why is it that gun ownership was prevalent before 2010 and we didn’t hear of any mass shootings as a normal occurrence. Social media has been on a drain on our society for years. All these mentally ill kids trying to become famous.


We can guns and we will took into the next London. They are having a huge epidemic of knifing deaths and attacks.

While we are at it, let’s ban cars too. They kill way more people and have been used by certain extremists to mow people down in mass events.

Taking the right to bear arms against a tyrannical government is not the answer. The answer is properly treating the mentally ill and doing away with social media.

Take some inspiration from Japan, where gun deaths are very low.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/08/asia/japan-gun-laws-abe-shooting-intl-hnk/index.html

Gun violence is extremely rare in Japan.

In 2018, Japan, a country of 125 million people, only reported nine deaths from firearms – compared with 39,740 that year in the United States, according to data compiled by the Sydney School of Public Health at the University of Sydney.

Nancy Snow, Japan director of the International Security Industrial Council, said the shooting would change Japan forever.

“It’s not only rare, but it’s really culturally unfathomable,” she told CNN. “The Japanese people can’t imagine having a gun culture like we have in the United States. This is a speechless moment. I really feel at a loss for words.”

According to Japanese public broadcaster NHK, citing the police, the suspect in Friday’s shooting is a local man in his 40s, who used a handmade gun.

Under Japan’s firearms laws, the only guns permitted for sale are shotguns and air rifles – handguns are outlawed. But getting them is a long and complicated process that requires effort – and lots of patience.

To qualify for a firearm license, potential buyers must attend an all-day class, pass a written test and a shooting-range test with an accuracy of at least 95%. They also must undergo a mental health evaluation and drug tests, as well as a rigorous background check – including a review of their criminal record, personal debt, involvement in organized crime and relationships with family and friends.

After obtaining a gun, the owner must register their weapon with police and provide details of where their gun and ammunition is stored, in separate, locked compartments. The gun must be inspected by the police once a year, and gun owners must retake the class and sit an exam every three years to renew their license.

The restrictions have kept the number of private gun owners in Japan extremely low.

Anonymous wrote:The only way things are going to change are:

1. Make parents legally responsible for everything their child does with firearms. Including ALL prison time as if they pulled the trigger themselves. Let the parents prove in court that they couldn’t possibly have known or prevented it.

AND

2. Make our communities safer so normal people don’t feel like they need to have weapons in the home. I came from a country with much stronger gun laws and I never wanted weapons because I knew criminals weren’t running around outside. People commit a crime and they were locked away for a very long time, period. This isn’t the case here and so yes, I’m looking to get a firearm for the house now (plus a good safe and appropriate training obviously).

When we address both of those things, things can change. Until then, it will just continue.

The first would involve a national gun safety law requiring people to lock up their weapons safely, something which you would think should be common sense and easy to do, and which 85% of Americans support, but which Republicans fight tooth and nail. Elections have consequences!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parents must be held accountable! Police investigated the kid last year for threatening to shoot up his school. Mom and dad should be in jail with him.

Yup.
“The father stated he had hunting guns in the house, but the subject did not have unsupervised access to them.”

The state must get involved. We cannot trust the word or judgement of just any parent . Do you think troubled kids ever have troubled parents ????

How come these red states think they can dictate how a woman’s womb is used. Come between her and her doctor, but not enter a household that contains firearms and a troubled kid? Therapy and weapons confiscation should have been mandated in this case.

So your solution is to lock up any troubled kid who voices a threat? Look, I'm not minimizing the importance of identifying kids who potentially pose a risk, but we can't just start locking up kids for threats. Surely there's a better way to handle it.

The FBI went to his house to interview him and the dad.

This was not simply a one-time, passing, childish threat.

Ok, so what's your solution? We lock the kid up forever? Plenty of kids make stupid decisions and threaten violence but never follow through on it. Again, I'm not minimizing the severity of the situation, but I just don't see how it's reasonable to lock up every kid who makes a threat.

If the FBI went to his house, a minimum requirement should be that household weapons be secured. If the gun came from his house, the father should be put on trial.

That requires red flag laws.

People, tell your representatives that these policies are not optional if they want your vote.

We have power, but are too damn passive in the face of child carnage.

So, we have a national impassed based on what is considered the room cause of these issues. So, the correct way to address this is to propose gun safety regulations that work within the framework of what the Republican party has identified that they think are problems.

So, red flag laws where we mandate that any mental health professional that has identified risky or dangerous behavior from an adult or child that could be deemed a safety risk should have to report it. This isn't an actionable report, but there should be a national database of individuals that have mental health issues that could be a precursor to a danger to the community. If an adult with a mental health issue within the last X time is involved in any violent offense, any guns in the house need to be removed until such time as they are cleared by a mental health professional that they are no longer a danger to the community. They should not be allowed to purchase any guns during such a probationary period.

Children who have mental health issues should be flagged by schools. They need to advise parents of mental health issues and that parents need to plan to have their child evaluated by a mental health professional within a certain amount of time. If the parents do not have their child evaluated within that time and do not have an appointment scheduled, then the child can be suspended from school pending evaluation or a scheduled appointment. Additionally, if the child has not been evaluated and cleared by a mental health professional, then any guns within the home are to be removed from the home until the child is cleared by a mental health professional that they are not a danger to the community.

This directly addresses the primary excuse that Republicans use, that we don't have a gun issue, we have a mental health issue. If the Republicans are correct, then this should see a sharp drop in the number of school shootings. Since we are having dozens of school shootings annually, this should be observable if this is correct. And Republicans need to be willing to discuss alternative actions should this not cause a noticeable drop in the number of school shootings.

It's not simple to get an appointment. If you haven't had to schedule a mental health appointment for a family member you likely have no idea.

I have. It took 2 years on a waiting list to get my child into my first choice. However, I was able to get a basic evaluation from my 3rd choice in about 6 weeks.[b] If I was in the situation where my child had warning signs at school, I would have gone to my 3rd choice for the first appointment in 6 weeks. As it was, we were not in a critical situation and so we waited and got treated at our first choice practitioner. Yes, it is not easy and it did take me 2 weeks to research and find professionals who had openings, but if you need it and you are mandated to do it, you do it.

You were very fortunate!
Imagine not having a "first choice" or "second choice." Imagine there is only ONE provider in your network that sees minors under 18 and is accepting new patients--and they don't have anything for six months.
Then what would you do?
And don't say you would pay out of pocket for someone outside your insurance company's net work--what if you truly do not have the money?

An out of network evaluation costs less than a gun and a gun safe. A person who can afford a gun, especially one like the AR-15 style guns can afford to pay for a single out-of-pocket appointment for an evaluation.

If you cannot get an appointment within the designated time, then you sacrifice the guns in your house until you can get an appointment. The guns will be returned when you get your child that appointment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parents must be held accountable! Police investigated the kid last year for threatening to shoot up his school. Mom and dad should be in jail with him.

Yup.
“The father stated he had hunting guns in the house, but the subject did not have unsupervised access to them.”

The state must get involved. We cannot trust the word or judgement of just any parent . Do you think troubled kids ever have troubled parents ????

How come these red states think they can dictate how a woman’s womb is used. Come between her and her doctor, but not enter a household that contains firearms and a troubled kid? Therapy and weapons confiscation should have been mandated in this case.

So your solution is to lock up any troubled kid who voices a threat? Look, I'm not minimizing the importance of identifying kids who potentially pose a risk, but we can't just start locking up kids for threats. Surely there's a better way to handle it.

The FBI went to his house to interview him and the dad.

This was not simply a one-time, passing, childish threat.

Ok, so what's your solution? We lock the kid up forever? Plenty of kids make stupid decisions and threaten violence but never follow through on it. Again, I'm not minimizing the severity of the situation, but I just don't see how it's reasonable to lock up every kid who makes a threat.

If the FBI went to his house, a minimum requirement should be that household weapons be secured. If the gun came from his house, the father should be put on trial.

That requires red flag laws.

People, tell your representatives that these policies are not optional if they want your vote.

We have power, but are too damn passive in the face of child carnage.

So, we have a national impassed based on what is considered the room cause of these issues. So, the correct way to address this is to propose gun safety regulations that work within the framework of what the Republican party has identified that they think are problems.

So, red flag laws where we mandate that any mental health professional that has identified risky or dangerous behavior from an adult or child that could be deemed a safety risk should have to report it. This isn't an actionable report, but there should be a national database of individuals that have mental health issues that could be a precursor to a danger to the community. If an adult with a mental health issue within the last X time is involved in any violent offense, any guns in the house need to be removed until such time as they are cleared by a mental health professional that they are no longer a danger to the community. They should not be allowed to purchase any guns during such a probationary period.

Children who have mental health issues should be flagged by schools. They need to advise parents of mental health issues and that parents need to plan to have their child evaluated by a mental health professional within a certain amount of time. If the parents do not have their child evaluated within that time and do not have an appointment scheduled, then the child can be suspended from school pending evaluation or a scheduled appointment. Additionally, if the child has not been evaluated and cleared by a mental health professional, then any guns within the home are to be removed from the home until the child is cleared by a mental health professional that they are not a danger to the community.

This directly addresses the primary excuse that Republicans use, that we don't have a gun issue, we have a mental health issue. If the Republicans are correct, then this should see a sharp drop in the number of school shootings. Since we are having dozens of school shootings annually, this should be observable if this is correct. And Republicans need to be willing to discuss alternative actions should this not cause a noticeable drop in the number of school shootings.

It's not simple to get an appointment. If you haven't had to schedule a mental health appointment for a family member you likely have no idea.

I have. It took 2 years on a waiting list to get my child into my first choice. However, I was able to get a basic evaluation from my 3rd choice in about 6 weeks.[b] If I was in the situation where my child had warning signs at school, I would have gone to my 3rd choice for the first appointment in 6 weeks. As it was, we were not in a critical situation and so we waited and got treated at our first choice practitioner. Yes, it is not easy and it did take me 2 weeks to research and find professionals who had openings, but if you need it and you are mandated to do it, you do it.

You were very fortunate!
Imagine not having a "first choice" or "second choice." Imagine there is only ONE provider in your network that sees minors under 18 and is accepting new patients--and they don't have anything for six months.
Then what would you do?
And don't say you would pay out of pocket for someone outside your insurance company's net work--what if you truly do not have the money?

I’m impressed with what the Georgia school did right here:
— teachers had wearable panic button, pressed immediately
— classroom doors set on auto lock
— SROs and local police on site almost immediately
— SRO managed to talk the kid into surrendering immediately (many would have just shot first but apparently he at least gave him a second to put the gun down)
Without all this , it would be much worse.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The school psychs can identify these kids. Instead of dumping money into bs we need to separate these crazy kids into centers where they can get help.

This kid has a horrific home life with insane and abusive parents. That’s no excuse but the system failed him.

He should have been removed from that environment once he made those threats and involuntarily committed to a facility where he could get help. Admin, local gov, and feds knew about this kid and the home environment he had. It was a ticking time bomb.

No, they cannot-that's garbage. There are 1-2 psychologists for 2000 kids at some schools. Georgia doesn't even have a law requiring that guns be stored safely away from children and others, so there's no way to prosecute the parents for manslaughter. So all of those saying to prosecute the parents should try to explain first why the GOP is so averse to any national gun safety laws, like that people should be required to lock up their guns so kids can't reach them.

If I recall correctly, Michigan did not adopt safe storage laws until after the Oxford shooting. Those parents were tried and convicted so I don't see why this father couldn't be charged as well.

These after the fact/punishment strategies save no lives.

They may appeal to you emotionally, but we need to focus on preventing deaths, not getting vengeance.

That logic means no one should go to prison for anything. Charge the parents.

I feel badly for the survivors and esp those kids who were close to the fatalities that took place yesterday. I think the aftermath of managing PTSD and other psychological impacts is another tragedy. Of course the pain and tragedy of losing loved ones is real but those who survive and have to live with what happened..they are as much victims I think. Those poor families who have to now navigate the aftermath. I don't think that we can only look at the casualties but we must look at the survivors - all are victims of this shooting.

The only way things are going to change are:

1. Make parents legally responsible for everything their child does with firearms. Including ALL prison time as if they pulled the trigger themselves. Let the parents prove in court that they couldn’t possibly have known or prevented it.

AND

2. Make our communities safer so normal people don’t feel like they need to have weapons in the home. I came from a country with much stronger gun laws and I never wanted weapons because I knew criminals weren’t running around outside. People commit a crime and they were locked away for a very long time, period. This isn’t the case here and so yes, I’m looking to get a firearm for the house now (plus a good safe and appropriate training obviously).

When we address both of those things, things can change. Until then, it will just continue.

Can't do much about this stuff as hindsight 20/20. Before this happened, despite warnings, signs, nothing happened you know? I'm fairly certain that statistically speaking, FBI gets a lot of call ins from nutjobs and a lot of mentally unstable people are making threats in various situations. All you can do is investigate but unless there is undeniable evidence suggesting something will be happening fairly immediately, what can you actually do legally? If you give power to be able to do something in all these cases - and let's face it human beings are not infallible either way in preventing or paranoia - havoc would ensue.

I think the only answer from a practical perspective is ensure that those who own guns or anything that is capable of hurting so many esp kids in school, are unable to do so. That means if you get a permit - you get a permit after everyone in your household receives training and goes through a background check. I mean, simply guaranteeing that it's locked up from kids just isn't sufficient. Whether the parents are responsible or not, a teen can get to weapons in the house if they are really that disturbed and want to. They live in a house with multiple weapons - we just can't have these "accidents" happen to the public.

The other thing is it seems like the shooter didn't shoot up his actual classroom because it was locked. He went for the open classroom. Maybe there's a rather simple idea of figuring out how to ensure locked classrooms are the norm in all schools? Sure you can shoot yourself in I suppose but making it harder to get in is a deterrent psychologically. Buys time as well. It's not 100% solution of course but could limit casualties. It is an easier fix it seems like than a lot of other ideas floating. For anyone who needs to leave the room, it doesn't seem to be that hard an issue and most people don't bring the gun into the classroom - they have to go out to get it or it's in their locker or etc. The point is, it's not on them because it's so hard to hide a larger weapon on you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parents must be held accountable! Police investigated the kid last year for threatening to shoot up his school. Mom and dad should be in jail with him.

Yup.
“The father stated he had hunting guns in the house, but the subject did not have unsupervised access to them.”

The state must get involved. We cannot trust the word or judgement of just any parent . Do you think troubled kids ever have troubled parents ????

How come these red states think they can dictate how a woman’s womb is used. Come between her and her doctor, but not enter a household that contains firearms and a troubled kid? Therapy and weapons confiscation should have been mandated in this case.

So your solution is to lock up any troubled kid who voices a threat? Look, I'm not minimizing the importance of identifying kids who potentially pose a risk, but we can't just start locking up kids for threats. Surely there's a better way to handle it.

The FBI went to his house to interview him and the dad.

This was not simply a one-time, passing, childish threat.

Ok, so what's your solution? We lock the kid up forever? Plenty of kids make stupid decisions and threaten violence but never follow through on it. Again, I'm not minimizing the severity of the situation, but I just don't see how it's reasonable to lock up every kid who makes a threat.

If the FBI went to his house, a minimum requirement should be that household weapons be secured. If the gun came from his house, the father should be put on trial.

That requires red flag laws.

People, tell your representatives that these policies are not optional if they want your vote.

We have power, but are too damn passive in the face of child carnage.

So, we have a national impassed based on what is considered the room cause of these issues. So, the correct way to address this is to propose gun safety regulations that work within the framework of what the Republican party has identified that they think are problems.

So, red flag laws where we mandate that any mental health professional that has identified risky or dangerous behavior from an adult or child that could be deemed a safety risk should have to report it. This isn't an actionable report, but there should be a national database of individuals that have mental health issues that could be a precursor to a danger to the community. If an adult with a mental health issue within the last X time is involved in any violent offense, any guns in the house need to be removed until such time as they are cleared by a mental health professional that they are no longer a danger to the community. They should not be allowed to purchase any guns during such a probationary period.

Children who have mental health issues should be flagged by schools. They need to advise parents of mental health issues and that parents need to plan to have their child evaluated by a mental health professional within a certain amount of time. If the parents do not have their child evaluated within that time and do not have an appointment scheduled, then the child can be suspended from school pending evaluation or a scheduled appointment. Additionally, if the child has not been evaluated and cleared by a mental health professional, then any guns within the home are to be removed from the home until the child is cleared by a mental health professional that they are not a danger to the community.

This directly addresses the primary excuse that Republicans use, that we don't have a gun issue, we have a mental health issue. If the Republicans are correct, then this should see a sharp drop in the number of school shootings. Since we are having dozens of school shootings annually, this should be observable if this is correct. And Republicans need to be willing to discuss alternative actions should this not cause a noticeable drop in the number of school shootings.

It's not simple to get an appointment. If you haven't had to schedule a mental health appointment for a family member you likely have no idea.

I have. It took 2 years on a waiting list to get my child into my first choice. However, I was able to get a basic evaluation from my 3rd choice in about 6 weeks. If I was in the situation where my child had warning signs at school, I would have gone to my 3rd choice for the first appointment in 6 weeks. As it was, we were not in a critical situation and so we waited and got treated at our first choice practitioner. Yes, it is not easy and it did take me 2 weeks to research and find professionals who had openings, but if you need it and you are mandated to do it, you do it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parents must be held accountable! Police investigated the kid last year for threatening to shoot up his school. Mom and dad should be in jail with him.

Yup.
“The father stated he had hunting guns in the house, but the subject did not have unsupervised access to them.”

The state must get involved. We cannot trust the word or judgement of just any parent . Do you think troubled kids ever have troubled parents ????

How come these red states think they can dictate how a woman’s womb is used. Come between her and her doctor, but not enter a household that contains firearms and a troubled kid? Therapy and weapons confiscation should have been mandated in this case.

So your solution is to lock up any troubled kid who voices a threat? Look, I'm not minimizing the importance of identifying kids who potentially pose a risk, but we can't just start locking up kids for threats. Surely there's a better way to handle it.

The FBI went to his house to interview him and the dad.

This was not simply a one-time, passing, childish threat.

Ok, so what's your solution? We lock the kid up forever? Plenty of kids make stupid decisions and threaten violence but never follow through on it. Again, I'm not minimizing the severity of the situation, but I just don't see how it's reasonable to lock up every kid who makes a threat.

If the FBI went to his house, a minimum requirement should be that household weapons be secured. If the gun came from his house, the father should be put on trial.

That requires red flag laws.

People, tell your representatives that these policies are not optional if they want your vote.

We have power, but are too damn passive in the face of child carnage.

So, we have a national impassed based on what is considered the room cause of these issues. So, the correct way to address this is to propose gun safety regulations that work within the framework of what the Republican party has identified that they think are problems.

So, red flag laws where we mandate that any mental health professional that has identified risky or dangerous behavior from an adult or child that could be deemed a safety risk should have to report it. This isn't an actionable report, but there should be a national database of individuals that have mental health issues that could be a precursor to a danger to the community. If an adult with a mental health issue within the last X time is involved in any violent offense, any guns in the house need to be removed until such time as they are cleared by a mental health professional that they are no longer a danger to the community. They should not be allowed to purchase any guns during such a probationary period.

Children who have mental health issues should be flagged by schools. They need to advise parents of mental health issues and that parents need to plan to have their child evaluated by a mental health professional within a certain amount of time. If the parents do not have their child evaluated within that time and do not have an appointment scheduled, then the child can be suspended from school pending evaluation or a scheduled appointment. Additionally, if the child has not been evaluated and cleared by a mental health professional, then any guns within the home are to be removed from the home until the child is cleared by a mental health professional that they are not a danger to the community.

This directly addresses the primary excuse that Republicans use, that we don't have a gun issue, we have a mental health issue. If the Republicans are correct, then this should see a sharp drop in the number of school shootings. Since we are having dozens of school shootings annually, this should be observable if this is correct. And Republicans need to be willing to discuss alternative actions should this not cause a noticeable drop in the number of school shootings.

It's not simple to get an appointment. If you haven't had to schedule a mental health appointment for a family member you likely have no idea.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The school psychs can identify these kids. Instead of dumping money into bs we need to separate these crazy kids into centers where they can get help.

This kid has a horrific home life with insane and abusive parents. That’s no excuse but the system failed him.

He should have been removed from that environment once he made those threats and involuntarily committed to a facility where he could get help. Admin, local gov, and feds knew about this kid and the home environment he had. It was a ticking time bomb.

No, they cannot-that's garbage. There are 1-2 psychologists for 2000 kids at some schools. Georgia doesn't even have a law requiring that guns be stored safely away from children and others, so there's no way to prosecute the parents for manslaughter. So all of those saying to prosecute the parents should try to explain first why the GOP is so averse to any national gun safety laws, like that people should be required to lock up their guns so kids can't reach them.

If I recall correctly, Michigan did not adopt safe storage laws until after the Oxford shooting. Those parents were tried and convicted so I don't see why this father couldn't be charged as well.

These after the fact/punishment strategies save no lives.

They may appeal to you emotionally, but we need to focus on preventing deaths, not getting vengeance.

It's not vengeance. If parents know they're legally at risk, it could incent action on their part.

If you had even studied criminology, you would know that these “deterrence” sentences gave zero impact.

So, yeah, nice try.

I did not study criminology. So vengeance it is. Prosecute the father if the gun came from his house.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this is freedom of speech infringement but shutting down some of these nutty extremist online communities would probably help. I think this is part of the issue and addresses why this didn’t happen much in the past. It’s easier for people to find community for their messed up ideas and sink themselves into the internet. Mentally ill and chronologically online is a bad combination.

Tech companies are private entities not the government. The first amendment forbids the government from infringing on our right to free speech.

Tech companies are free to take responsibility for what is on their platforms and I would argue it’s legislation Congress should implement pronto.

But it’s a fool’s errand to have this conversation be framed by the GOP. We need a new SCOTUS to reverse Heller (and Dobbs).

Vote blue, up and down the ballot.