Shooting at Florida high school

Same in Western Pennsylvania. Guns were more prevalent but people weren't so batshit crazy back then.

It's to the North West. It's a lot closer to Concord than Rock Hill.

It's not Memphis rough, but it's pretty rough for where it is. Ballentyne, Pineville, Mint Hill, Lake Wylie, etc are pretty nice.

The Amtrack is on North Tryon...and that area is getting pretty gentrified. It's near NoDa and all the trendy micro breweries and shit.

WHAT IS THE SOLUTION?

Is it confiscation? So many guns were handed down generation to generation you'll never find them all.

Do u just want a door to door search by the national guard rounding up the guns ? You scream DO SOMETHING but you don't say what that something is

Yeah, but this area of floriduh you are not going to be dealing with a lot of hunters. Fishing yes, but you would have to be more central floriduh. Around here you can barely piss outdoors without hitting someone's house. I could not imagine trying to hunt. Guns in rural areas are considered a bit differently. It is probably more handguns down here in sf with a good section of assault rifles because hunting is pretty scarce. If you are going to own a gun it is a recreational piece for the most part. You could only really use it at a range because you live so packed in.

I guess where the shooting was you would be starting to get into some clear area but where this high school is is not hunting area. The only people doing any real farming around here are places that grow landscaping plants and people who are faking it for tax breaks. There are some patches where paintball gets played, but this area is flat with little back drop. Any stray bullet is going into residential areas.

The foresight of the Framers to allow for private firearm ownership and enshrine that right in the Constitution is what has allowed the United States to exist as a sovereign nation for over 200 years. It's what allows us to have free elections and peaceful transition of power from one administration to the next. It's why we aren't subject to endless coups and government overthrows like the banana republics of Central & South America. It's why no foreign power dares to attempt an invasion of our mainland.

The existence of the 2nd amendment isn't a disease. It's been the inoculation from a host of potential disasters.

The real diseases are things that Progressives don't want to talk about. The cultural rot that has infected America over the past 50-60 years. The disintegration of the nuclear family unit. Boys growing up without fathers. A succession of generations that have grown up in broken homes. The disintegration of public education. The glorification of extreme violence in popular culture. War simulation video games where shooting someone is as easy as pressing "X" on your controller and death has meaning only until your "respawn" a couple of seconds later.

Because all those other countries with stronger gun control laws, like England, haven't existed as sovereign nations for years?

England, Australia, and Canada being known for their violent transitions of power and endless coups.

Our honkin' big Army, Navy and Air Force might have something to do with that as well.

ehhhh

the proportion of batshit crazy people to normal people hasn't really changed

there's just a shit ton more people

well Garamet it isn't so simple to spot a crazy as it is to spot a drunk for one thing. And let's say I saw my neighbor acting "crazy" as most of us would deem crazy/unbalanced/potentially dangerous. Maybe I know my neighbor owns a gun. I would call the cops, no doubt. Will the cops be able to do anything if he calms down & cooperates with the cops when they show up? Will they get a warrant to search his house? Not likely unless he has a habit of going ape-shit and actually breaking laws.
If he does break laws maybe he gets a psych eval in lockup if he's acting crazy. Will the dots eventually be connected and his guns be removed from his home?

IMO (yes I know that and a buck might buy me a cup of coffee) it would be nice if there was a streamlined system in place in which the police, doctors, teachers, mental health providers, family members, etc. could at least initiate a professional "welfare check" on possibly unstable people. I'm not talking about a witch-hunt! But would it hurt to check the people out? And if guns are removed from the home there is a paper trail/custody trail of the weapons and the whole procedure is filmed & recorded and copies are given to the suspected crazy and the crazy person's family (if applicable) and the courthouse, etc. Once the person is deemed psychologically cleared by qualified doctors the guns are returned after a lengthy monitoring period. If that person is deemed unfit to ever possess or handle guns, the guns are confiscated and the owner is paid fair market value or the guns made permanently unable to fire if the guns have sentimental/historical value.

Yes, of course that's what the anti-gun folks want. They'd like to manipulate the mental health system into declaring that interest or curiosity about firearms constitutes mental illness and that any such person represents a public safety risk.

The Left isn't really interested in solutions, because there's too much political hay to be made off these tragedies.

It's exactly like how Big Pharma is never going to develop an HIV/AIDS cure because there's too much money to be made off marketing pills to people so that they can "manage" the disease for the rest of their lives. Cure the disease, and people don't have to buy your pills for the next 50 years.

The Right has it's divisive wedge issues like gay marriage and trannies in bathrooms, and the Left has it's own wedge issues. Gun control is one of them. If you're not for "common sense" gun control (whatever that means, and don't hold your breath waiting for a leftie to define it), you're a heartless, soulless, bloodthirsty monster dancing on the graves of little children.

C'mon, this is how the Left energizes it's base, red meat for progressives.

Charlotte does not have a lot of rough areas. Maybe rock hill in town or by the college was bad, but I am talking on the Charlotte side of Dave Lyle. The rough areas would be some low end white trash trailers and back streets. It is hard for me to tell, I did not end up going towards concord mills much. We pretty much stopped at Pineville most times because Charlotte traffic was considered a PITA by everyone. To get to whitewater I normally went west at the Pineville area, so it may have been closer to concord. It wasn't like cruising around Columbia or Atlanta for that matter. I guess there were some dealers by the hotel areas, but nothing real bad. I know the amtrack area was slowly being reclaimed block by block, but it has been a couple of years since I have seen that area. Maybe it isn't so bad anymore, but that was the worst I had seen for seedy areas.

You really rose above it all, well done

No-one is ignoring that fact unless you are somehow arguing that responsible gun owners allow all the slaughtered innocents to come back to life.

Confiscation isn't going to happen. You can take that off the table. Full stop.

There are more than 200 million legally owned firearms in the United States and one in three US Citizens legally owns at least one firearm. The reason confiscation is never going to happen is because for the vast overwhelming majority of those guns, the .gov has absolutely no clue who has what. As far as any governmental agency is concerned, the only firearm I own is the Glock 27 I was given when I retired and truth be told, I don't even have it. I sold it.

That said, we can talk like rational adults about other things besides confiscation. I, for one, think it's time we started figuring out ways to discreetly secure our schools. I'm a huge fan of these. My church bought them for every classroom for our community Elementary School and all of the classrooms at the church.

LOL

LOL

LOL

LOL

That's true. Except progressives do want to talk about it, just not reset the clock to 1950 and eliminate civil rights of anyone brown or gay.

Tafkats made a good point about keeping the guns away from the boys! Many shootings (generally not the premeditated type) are because tempers are flaring/testosterone/adrenaline is pumping and the guns are an extension of their aggression. 100,000 years ago it was rocks.....50,000 years ago it was spears.....yada yada yada now we have guns.
Our hard wired primate brains still act the same when it comes to primitive, base emotions and some people (mostly men but not all) lose control and use the most powerful weapon available at the time. Granted this was most likely not the case in this Florida shooting, but it is indeed in many smaller shootings that don't make the news.

Generally you don't bother developing a "cure" for diseases that are extremely hard to get in the first place.

I'm inclined to agree with this. Even if the gov had an accurate idea who had what, I doubt they could provide enough incentives to get people to willingly sell/surrender their firearms to the gov, and if the gov attempted to confiscate without recompense, we'd have a full out uncoordinated civil unrest bordering on civil war on our hands and lots of unnecessary death; moreso than with these completely needless mass shootings and murder already.

I'm disheartened that these protective measure need even be considered. That said, that looks like a wise investment. Anything else will require either a shift in attitude on the societal and cultural level (unlikely at this point in time), or if politicians grow a set to ram through meaningful change, knowing it will cost them their careers (good) and let the courts sort it out.

I think the 2nd Amendment is outdated. I don't believe for a moment that it's going anywhere, however. And measures such as imposing a moratorium on sales would be deeply unpopular and could well be seen as massive federal overreach.

It wouldn't surprise me if it was something like that. IIRC, one of the first of these school shootings was over being rejected.

Oh, no doubt it'll be used to claim that all Trump supporters (or even just people who aren't foaming at the mouth over their hatred of him) are like this, or responsible in some way (I see that's already started in this thread). Let's not forget though, that when that guy shot up that gay dance club and claimed he had done it for ISIS, that he was a lone wolf and how dare you suggest his religion in any way influenced his actions. #NotAllMuslims. Keep in mind, I don't blame all Muslims for the actions of one, but I do find the double-standard to be obnoxious. This does seem to be a dream come true for ideologues, and his last name aside, I bet he's close enough to be counted as an evil white male.

One thing I will say about the schools around here. From what I have heard this sort of thing would be irrelevant. They have procedures to lock kids inside the classrooms and the teachers and students regularly do active shooter lockdown drills. It is drilled into the kids heads like a fire drill in floriduh today. You have a school of three thousand and an active shooter with multiple magazines who lured the classes into the halls with a fire alarm. Seventeen dead may actually be good. It sounds like this shooter could not get fully into the rooms and resorted to shooting through door Windows he broke. According to my dad they can isolate the classrooms pretty quick and this makes the shooter have to work for victims while the police respond. That seems to be the procedure that the schools take. The teachers lock the classroom doors and may even barricade them.

From what I understand of this shooting the student hit and then got off campus. He knew the procedure and shot into a couple of classrooms, but he got out of there pretty quick. That seventeen dead is what you are going to get with a first assault in confused packed school hallways. I could not see a prepared armed response that knew where the shooter was and who he was to go after him doing much better. Maybe if you were lucky catching him prepping you might stop him, but seventeen dead is really not terrible in a crowded environment with modern weapons.

He is a teen with some violent rage issues who got into guns. It could have been a few kids from my NJROTC class in high school. There were a couple of those guys who were off and we were bullied and fooling around with explosives. I would say the right needs to recognise some people are going to get riled up by the rhetoric. But this could be a left wing person with how kids get caught up in the emotions. The only reason it would be more likely to be a right wing mass shooter is simply they seem to be pitching their politics to the demographic that is most likely to be a school shooter. You could look at the other side and say a gangbanger is more likely to have a left wing political leaning, if they voted, because they tend to be more urban inner city kids. School mass shooters tend to be white males, but if you look at schoolkids getting shot you probably find more often it is gang violence in this area. Like I was saying kids die every week around these schools due to being shot. It does not make national news because a lot of it is teen gang bullshit. The gangs have specific targets and don't go assaulting the schools, but they probably will kill more kids in broward than this guy did this year alone. This is not the first time in the past year schools in my area were locked down with an active shooter on campus. Most of the time the shooter isn't killing all the kids they can. It is some gang violence or teen drama. If you are talking about terrorism the stats are very clear. In the US you are farm more likely to be killed by a right wing extremist. They are shooting places up for terrorist reasons many times more than Muslims. Poverty based crimes are more, but for terrorism right wing white guys are the ones doing it.

And on the other hand you have antifo, BAMN, and that guy shot up that baseball game full of Republicans, so it's not like the violent rhetoric is exclusive to "conservatives."

before sunset as it turns out

assuming such a plan were enacted (which I highly doubt)
Step 1: ask for voluntary surrender, you'll get more than you would think like that...sometimes someone like a grandmother turning in someone else's gun
Step 2: outlaw possession (this could be absolute or more likely tailored according to setting and situation) - that gives LEO the right to confiscate any that they find.
Step 3: they know who the big arsenal holders are (IIRC something like half of all guns belong to only 3% of gunowners) - in those cases, go get them.

Again, not advocating for this specifically just answering the question. You won't get EVERY gun but neither did the Aussies. You will get enough that dramatically fewer people die.

not to mention a couple of shallow ponds....

It really is liberating to look at Flashy's posts with all the same respect as i used to look at Teh Baba's - there's little temptation to waste time responding to something you can't even slightly take seriously.

Not even close to the number of times dude. Poverty crimes do excede terrorism, so gang violence and violence over theft are going to be much more. I will say domestic terrorists are not as bad as gangs. I will also concede the reality that with limited resources and funds the best way to save lives would be to focus more on crime and gang related violence which might include some white terrorism, but would not be focussing on white terrorism. Honestly, it is a rare outlier, but that is only because we have so much criminal violence out there. Still if you wanted to argue about it organized crime gangs do a lot of terrorism type of activities.

However if you weed out political and religious terrorism over tribalistic gang terrorism not designed to further a political or religious agenda and the business crimes you really find terrorism in America is predominantly done by white conservative Americans far more than Muslims. Muslims are not even close, and since we have homeland security dedicated to fighting terrorism in America they really should be fighting against the white nationalist movement of the right.

since 2013

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...uld-stem-the-rising-threat-of-mass-shootings/

To be fair, the people pointing out the insane number of guns in the US aren't kidding. Accounting for population differences, the buyback here got the equivalent of 14 million guns in the US.

From what I understand step one was huge in Australia. Lots of people turned in guns rather than becoming criminal. You have to outlaw gun possession for that sort of thing to work and step two becomes huge. I am not even sure you would need step three. Here is why. Step two pulls most of your problems magic guns and because you have no real easy way back in because you will be destroying the guns the guns sitting idle in some closet can sit there. At that point the people moving guns will be the criminals because the people who have them in their closet are not going to be putting them out in public where they could be confiscated. It is sort of like saying the ones staying in the closet are not the ones we are going after. You simply do not have a gun seizure unless it is involved in some contact with law enforcement for other reasons. You then give amnesty gun surrender all the time. Whenever the gun gets turned over it gets turned over.

I do not want police going through people's houses. As far as I am concerned if no one ever knows you have a gun you do not have one. You will find the dumb gun owners out themselves pretty quickly and the ones with cool heads are not going to be selling theirs or letting others use them. Then the only problem is stopping gun smuggling. If you legalize drugs and prostitution you can focus police on stopping guns from getting in the country. Then you just use the tax money from legal sales to empower the police force while letting anyone who has a gun stored know if you hold it where it is and don't play around with it we are not going to give a fuck about you.