(11-06-2017 01:19 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:16 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 12:39 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 12:07 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  You are on the left. You are connected at the hip with these people.

So I guess you are in lockstep with the Westboro Baptist crew, using that logic.

the thing is that we actually disavow the WBC, cant say the same for yall and the leftist groups.

You shouldn't have to disavow anything you're not directly associated with or going an active part in. Using this whole "disavow" nonsense as some political football is f*cking stupid, pointless, and adds nothing to the discussion.

interesting point.... so the different leftists factions are too scared to speak up against each other? No wonder yall lost the election.

(11-06-2017 01:22 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It would seem that most people simply want to say, " my thoughts and prayers............." and then they can turn around and move on with their lives.

It's the same thing when you see a soldier and you say " Thank you for serving our country" It's as if it excuses us from getting involved and doing something.

Maybe we need to stop just saying stuff and do something.

That too is a problem. Shortly after this tragedy is known, you have people calling for this law and that law to be made right away. Doing something just to say that you action is no better - and at times can be worse - than giving meaningless platitudes to people to absolve ourselves of guilt...

(11-06-2017 01:27 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:22 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It would seem that most people simply want to say, " my thoughts and prayers............." and then they can turn around and move on with their lives.

It's the same thing when you see a soldier and you say " Thank you for serving our country" It's as if it excuses us from getting involved and doing something.

Maybe we need to stop just saying stuff and do something.

That too is a problem. Shortly after this tragedy is known, you have people calling for this law and that law to be made right away. Doing something just to say that you action is no better - and at times can be worse - than giving meaningless platitudes to people to absolve ourselves of guilt...

Sure, it's just that these things are happening with such frequency, saying "we need to wait for cooler heads" becomes prohibitive.

(11-06-2017 01:27 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:22 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It would seem that most people simply want to say, " my thoughts and prayers............." and then they can turn around and move on with their lives.

It's the same thing when you see a soldier and you say " Thank you for serving our country" It's as if it excuses us from getting involved and doing something.

Maybe we need to stop just saying stuff and do something.

That too is a problem. Shortly after this tragedy is known, you have people calling for this law and that law to be made right away. Doing something just to say that you action is no better - and at times can be worse - than giving meaningless platitudes to people to absolve ourselves of guilt...

Whose even talking about changing laws? I'm not. There are a million ways you can do something that has nothing to do with changing laws and I'm not talking about sending money either.

Today in my classroom, we stopped everything and had a conversation about racism and hatred and where it leads and what to do about it.

(11-06-2017 01:32 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:27 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:22 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It would seem that most people simply want to say, " my thoughts and prayers............." and then they can turn around and move on with their lives.

It's the same thing when you see a soldier and you say " Thank you for serving our country" It's as if it excuses us from getting involved and doing something.

Maybe we need to stop just saying stuff and do something.

That too is a problem. Shortly after this tragedy is known, you have people calling for this law and that law to be made right away. Doing something just to say that you action is no better - and at times can be worse - than giving meaningless platitudes to people to absolve ourselves of guilt...

Sure, it's just that these things are happening with such frequency, saying "we need to wait for cooler heads" becomes prohibitive.

Based on what I've heard in the news, this case was a failure of the system itself. He should have had multiple flags in his file preventing him from purchasing firearms. However, those flags never show up. The laws were there to help prevent this. The military, law enforcement, the service that runs the background checks, etc... someone or some group screwed up.

For this specific case, the solution is to make the system more robust so that the flags are read properly and not missed. IMHO, it's an IT problem.

(11-06-2017 01:39 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:32 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:27 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:22 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It would seem that most people simply want to say, " my thoughts and prayers............." and then they can turn around and move on with their lives.

It's the same thing when you see a soldier and you say " Thank you for serving our country" It's as if it excuses us from getting involved and doing something.

Maybe we need to stop just saying stuff and do something.

That too is a problem. Shortly after this tragedy is known, you have people calling for this law and that law to be made right away. Doing something just to say that you action is no better - and at times can be worse - than giving meaningless platitudes to people to absolve ourselves of guilt...

Sure, it's just that these things are happening with such frequency, saying "we need to wait for cooler heads" becomes prohibitive.

Based on what I've heard in the news, this case was a failure of the system itself. He should have had multiple flags in his file preventing him from purchasing firearms. However, those flags never show up. The laws were there to help prevent this. The military, law enforcement, the service that runs the background checks, etc... someone or some group screwed up.

For this specific case, the solution is to make the system more robust so that the flags are read properly and not missed. IMHO, it's an IT problem.

I'm not sure that is in fact the case. I heard on the radio this morning that he was in fact denied a license to carry.

(11-06-2017 01:40 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:39 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:32 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:27 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:22 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It would seem that most people simply want to say, " my thoughts and prayers............." and then they can turn around and move on with their lives.

It's the same thing when you see a soldier and you say " Thank you for serving our country" It's as if it excuses us from getting involved and doing something.

Maybe we need to stop just saying stuff and do something.

That too is a problem. Shortly after this tragedy is known, you have people calling for this law and that law to be made right away. Doing something just to say that you action is no better - and at times can be worse - than giving meaningless platitudes to people to absolve ourselves of guilt...

Sure, it's just that these things are happening with such frequency, saying "we need to wait for cooler heads" becomes prohibitive.

Based on what I've heard in the news, this case was a failure of the system itself. He should have had multiple flags in his file preventing him from purchasing firearms. However, those flags never show up. The laws were there to help prevent this. The military, law enforcement, the service that runs the background checks, etc... someone or some group screwed up.

For this specific case, the solution is to make the system more robust so that the flags are read properly and not missed. IMHO, it's an IT problem.

I'm not sure that is in fact the case. I heard on the radio this morning that he was in fact denied a license to carry.

Conceal carry is not the same as buying a gun.

(11-06-2017 01:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:40 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:39 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:32 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:27 PM)miko33 Wrote:  That too is a problem. Shortly after this tragedy is known, you have people calling for this law and that law to be made right away. Doing something just to say that you action is no better - and at times can be worse - than giving meaningless platitudes to people to absolve ourselves of guilt...

Sure, it's just that these things are happening with such frequency, saying "we need to wait for cooler heads" becomes prohibitive.

Based on what I've heard in the news, this case was a failure of the system itself. He should have had multiple flags in his file preventing him from purchasing firearms. However, those flags never show up. The laws were there to help prevent this. The military, law enforcement, the service that runs the background checks, etc... someone or some group screwed up.

For this specific case, the solution is to make the system more robust so that the flags are read properly and not missed. IMHO, it's an IT problem.

I'm not sure that is in fact the case. I heard on the radio this morning that he was in fact denied a license to carry.

Conceal carry is not the same as buying a gun.

No it isn't but I don't think anyone in here would say that this man should not have been allowed to own a gun right?

(11-06-2017 01:50 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:40 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:39 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:32 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Sure, it's just that these things are happening with such frequency, saying "we need to wait for cooler heads" becomes prohibitive.

Based on what I've heard in the news, this case was a failure of the system itself. He should have had multiple flags in his file preventing him from purchasing firearms. However, those flags never show up. The laws were there to help prevent this. The military, law enforcement, the service that runs the background checks, etc... someone or some group screwed up.

For this specific case, the solution is to make the system more robust so that the flags are read properly and not missed. IMHO, it's an IT problem.

I'm not sure that is in fact the case. I heard on the radio this morning that he was in fact denied a license to carry.

Conceal carry is not the same as buying a gun.

No it isn't but I don't think anyone in here would say that this man should not have been allowed to own a gun right?

I would. He should not have been allowed to own a gun because of the crime he was convicted of.

(11-06-2017 01:54 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:50 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:40 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:39 PM)miko33 Wrote:  Based on what I've heard in the news, this case was a failure of the system itself. He should have had multiple flags in his file preventing him from purchasing firearms. However, those flags never show up. The laws were there to help prevent this. The military, law enforcement, the service that runs the background checks, etc... someone or some group screwed up.

For this specific case, the solution is to make the system more robust so that the flags are read properly and not missed. IMHO, it's an IT problem.

I'm not sure that is in fact the case. I heard on the radio this morning that he was in fact denied a license to carry.

Conceal carry is not the same as buying a gun.

No it isn't but I don't think anyone in here would say that this man should not have been allowed to own a gun right?

I would. He should not have been allowed to own a gun because of the crime he was convicted of.

Wow I'm surprised?

I thought for sure gun advocates would have felt the opposite.

What crime was he convicted of?

(11-06-2017 01:55 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:54 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:50 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:40 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  I'm not sure that is in fact the case. I heard on the radio this morning that he was in fact denied a license to carry.

Conceal carry is not the same as buying a gun.

No it isn't but I don't think anyone in here would say that this man should not have been allowed to own a gun right?

I would. He should not have been allowed to own a gun because of the crime he was convicted of.

Wow I'm surprised?

I thought for sure gun advocates would have felt the opposite.

What crime was he convicted of?

why are you surprised? Oh wait, you are a troll.... thats why.

(11-06-2017 01:55 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:54 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:50 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:40 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  I'm not sure that is in fact the case. I heard on the radio this morning that he was in fact denied a license to carry.

Conceal carry is not the same as buying a gun.

No it isn't but I don't think anyone in here would say that this man should not have been allowed to own a gun right?

I would. He should not have been allowed to own a gun because of the crime he was convicted of.

Wow I'm surprised?

I thought for sure gun advocates would have felt the opposite.

What crime was he convicted of?

He was court-martialed in the Air Force for assaulting his wife and child.


And I don't know why you are surprised. The gun advocates in here have been clear from the start that we want to keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them. The only qualifier we ask for is that it do not create an undue burden, be it time/effort/financial, on law abiding citizens who wish to exercise their Constitutional right.

(11-06-2017 01:59 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:55 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:54 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:50 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  Conceal carry is not the same as buying a gun.

No it isn't but I don't think anyone in here would say that this man should not have been allowed to own a gun right?

I would. He should not have been allowed to own a gun because of the crime he was convicted of.

Wow I'm surprised?

I thought for sure gun advocates would have felt the opposite.

What crime was he convicted of?

He was court-martialed in the Air Force for assaulting his wife and child.

And I don't know why you are surprised. The gun advocates in here have been clear from the start that we want to keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them. The only qualifier we ask for is that it do not create an undue burden, be it time/effort/financial, on law abiding citizens who wish to exercise their Constitutional right.

Another argument for a national permit to purchase. Texas would have had the info on his court martial if systems were more streamlined. That would satisfy all of the requirements above as well.

(Spare me the 'it will lead to confiscation' bit. Again, unless the 2A is repealed by voters, it would not.)

(11-06-2017 01:22 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It would seem that most people simply want to say, " my thoughts and prayers............." and then they can turn around and move on with their lives.

It's the same thing when you see a soldier and you say " Thank you for serving our country" It's as if it excuses us from getting involved and doing something.

Maybe we need to stop just saying stuff and do something.

Yep, as someone said above, it's a response out of exasperation to the "thoughts and prayers" posts, like a friend I have who always shares the Onion article: "‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens" after a mass shooting.

https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-preve...1820163660

Sadly, they have to share it way more than anyone would care to see.

(11-06-2017 02:09 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:59 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:55 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:54 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:50 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  No it isn't but I don't think anyone in here would say that this man should not have been allowed to own a gun right?

I would. He should not have been allowed to own a gun because of the crime he was convicted of.

Wow I'm surprised?

I thought for sure gun advocates would have felt the opposite.

What crime was he convicted of?

He was court-martialed in the Air Force for assaulting his wife and child.

And I don't know why you are surprised. The gun advocates in here have been clear from the start that we want to keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them. The only qualifier we ask for is that it do not create an undue burden, be it time/effort/financial, on law abiding citizens who wish to exercise their Constitutional right.

Another argument for a national permit to purchase. Texas would have had the info on his court martial if systems were more streamlined. That would satisfy all of the requirements above as well.

(Spare me the 'it will lead to confiscation' bit. Again, unless the 2A is repealed by voters, it would not.)

Texas did deny him a permit. The failure was once again within the federal system.

"But let's have the federal government create a new database that identifies ALL legal gun owners!"

(11-06-2017 02:19 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:22 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It would seem that most people simply want to say, " my thoughts and prayers............." and then they can turn around and move on with their lives.

It's the same thing when you see a soldier and you say " Thank you for serving our country" It's as if it excuses us from getting involved and doing something.

Maybe we need to stop just saying stuff and do something.

Yep, as someone said above, it's a response out of exasperation to the "thoughts and prayers" posts, like a friend I have who always shares the Onion article: "‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens" after a mass shooting.

https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-preve...1820163660

Sadly, they have to share it way more than anyone would care to see.

The problem with using The Onion to make a point is you end up looking like a fool when you do so.

For example the idea that this is the "only nation where this regularly happens"

https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/compar...nd-europe/



Considering that we rank 11th in death rate per million people in mass shootings it seems your asinine point derived from an Onion article is moot.

(11-06-2017 02:25 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 02:09 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:59 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:55 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:54 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  I would. He should not have been allowed to own a gun because of the crime he was convicted of.

Wow I'm surprised?

I thought for sure gun advocates would have felt the opposite.

What crime was he convicted of?

He was court-martialed in the Air Force for assaulting his wife and child.

And I don't know why you are surprised. The gun advocates in here have been clear from the start that we want to keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them. The only qualifier we ask for is that it do not create an undue burden, be it time/effort/financial, on law abiding citizens who wish to exercise their Constitutional right.

Another argument for a national permit to purchase. Texas would have had the info on his court martial if systems were more streamlined. That would satisfy all of the requirements above as well.

(Spare me the 'it will lead to confiscation' bit. Again, unless the 2A is repealed by voters, it would not.)

Texas did deny him a permit. The failure was once again within the federal system.

"But let's have the federal government create a new database that identifies ALL legal gun owners!"

It could be argued that because there IS no federal system, that's where the failure was. Would a permit to purchase have filled the gap when he went to purchase one from wherever he got it? Entirely possible.

On another note, if they would require a nonlicensed dealer to do these checks, perhaps it could have been stopped as well. I know we don't know how he got it, but it seems like a gun show or something similar is a possibility.

(11-06-2017 02:31 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 02:19 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:22 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It would seem that most people simply want to say, " my thoughts and prayers............." and then they can turn around and move on with their lives.

It's the same thing when you see a soldier and you say " Thank you for serving our country" It's as if it excuses us from getting involved and doing something.

Maybe we need to stop just saying stuff and do something.

Yep, as someone said above, it's a response out of exasperation to the "thoughts and prayers" posts, like a friend I have who always shares the Onion article: "‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens" after a mass shooting.

https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-preve...1820163660

Sadly, they have to share it way more than anyone would care to see.

The problem with using The Onion to make a point is you end up looking like a fool when you do so.

For example the idea that this is the "only nation where this regularly happens"

https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/compar...nd-europe/



Considering that we rank 11th in death rate per million people in mass shootings it seems your asinine point derived from an Onion article is moot.

I think these statistics are misleading. Many of those countries have such small populations that their numbers are inflated.

The United States has over 300 million people so they could have a mass shooing every month and still not rank in the top ten.

(11-06-2017 02:38 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 02:31 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 02:19 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:22 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It would seem that most people simply want to say, " my thoughts and prayers............." and then they can turn around and move on with their lives.

It's the same thing when you see a soldier and you say " Thank you for serving our country" It's as if it excuses us from getting involved and doing something.

Maybe we need to stop just saying stuff and do something.

Yep, as someone said above, it's a response out of exasperation to the "thoughts and prayers" posts, like a friend I have who always shares the Onion article: "‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens" after a mass shooting.

https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-preve...1820163660

Sadly, they have to share it way more than anyone would care to see.

The problem with using The Onion to make a point is you end up looking like a fool when you do so.

For example the idea that this is the "only nation where this regularly happens"

https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/compar...nd-europe/



Considering that we rank 11th in death rate per million people in mass shootings it seems your asinine point derived from an Onion article is moot.

I think these statistics are misleading. Many of those countries have such small populations that their numbers are inflated.

The United States has over 300 million people so they could have a mass shooing every month and still not rank in the top ten.

thats why it states "per million"

(11-06-2017 02:31 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 02:19 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:22 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It would seem that most people simply want to say, " my thoughts and prayers............." and then they can turn around and move on with their lives.

It's the same thing when you see a soldier and you say " Thank you for serving our country" It's as if it excuses us from getting involved and doing something.

Maybe we need to stop just saying stuff and do something.

Yep, as someone said above, it's a response out of exasperation to the "thoughts and prayers" posts, like a friend I have who always shares the Onion article: "‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens" after a mass shooting.

https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-preve...1820163660

Sadly, they have to share it way more than anyone would care to see.

The problem with using The Onion to make a point is you end up looking like a fool when you do so.

For example the idea that this is the "only nation where this regularly happens"

https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/compar...nd-europe/


Considering that we rank 11th in death rate per million people in mass shootings it seems your asinine point derived from an Onion article is moot.

Onion = Satire. A little license is always taken with them.

Regardless, you have some very selective stats pulled. Norway had a mass shooting in 2011 that killed 80, so taking into consideration their population, skews those numbers completely out of whack.

Here are the numbers from 2000-2014, which is a more comprehensive view:



So yes; Norway has experienced more than almost any other country listed on there, but they still pale in comparison to the US.