There were also multiple CCW holders at the Texas mall who (rightly, in my opinion) simply booked it instead of confronting the shooter.
Every one of them heard the sound and frequency of the rounds being fired and knew they were not equipped to deal with the threat.
Guns are the leading cause of death for American children. I cannot fathom any other country allowing that to be true, in favor of some of the 2A arguments. That tower is crumbling, and will come down hard on the heads of those who seem to find it acceptable that millions of children bear the burden for grown men's fantasy. I like my guns, but in no fucking scenario I can imagine would I hear gun fire, go to my vehicle, pull iron and address the situation. I would assemble whoever was with me and get the fuck out of there. I might be in it until I get my family/people out of there, but that's about it. That's what you're supposed to do, as far as I can remember every gun or mass shooting training I've ever had. Which means, the whole "good guy with a gun" argument runs counter to what you're supposed to do unless you are military in an area with ROE that you can recite, or law enforcement and you're in a jurisdiction where you are allowed to engage with force. Am I missing something? Did I skip a class that said, "oh but like...civilians with good intentions should go and intervene in violence, I'm sure there will be no issues with that at all!" I wonder what the stats will be now, since this was written in September 2022: https://www.reformaustin.org/public...-up-62-5-percent-since-permitless-carry-bill/ "Texas Mass Shootings Up 62.5 Percent Since Permitless Carry Bill"
Whenever any discussion on gun control begins, gun owners that I have seen immediately respond with who did what, and when, X years ago, and what about <completely unlikely scenario here>. The lack of good faith discussion because they're scared of slippery slopes instead of, I don't know, more of their fellow gun owners murdering innocents, says more to me than anything else about where their priorities lie. If responsible gun owners really don't want innocents being killed for the crime of trying to live their lives like all of us are, they can't keep burying their heads in the sand and pretend the rest of us don't actually care about the possibility of their children being massacred at school. I have not heard or read any story from red state Republican politician that will even entertain the idea of reducing the easy availability of guns, let alone have any constructive conversation about regulating them. If this refusal to even talk about gun control continues, you've already seen what the government has done with the rights of women's bodies just recently. What do you think is going to happen when the government sets its sights on guns? The government swings between conservatives and liberals all the time. What's to stop a Democratic supermajority from doing all the same ratfuckery to gun rights that Republicans did to abortion rights?
Anyone else notice themselves getting more specific when referring to shootings? Years ago it was "the shooter [blah blah blah]" then it was "the Florida shooter [blah blah blah]" and now I'm down to the specific Texas suburb just to make sure I'm unambiguous about which shooter.
this was my first thought. Until we do something about the mentally disturbed, you're gonna have these issues. Right now it's this white nationalist ideology that's pushing it, and guns just happen to be more popular than cars. But take the guns away? Well, you drive a missile to work every day, they're gonna start using that. Or knives. Or bombs. Every time I hear someone talk about the AR-style platform and say it's sole purpose is to kill things, I have to laugh. My 10/22 has exterminated a LOT more vermin than all of my AR-platform rifles combined. Followed closely by any one of my handguns, then my 12 gauge pump (the semi-auto is exclusively used for hunting) I mostly use the AR-style rifles for target shooting. Occasionally a coyote will get removed from the gene pool with one of them.
Is the tree that crushed Abbott’s spine in the Smithsonian, or did they burn it for failing to kill hum? What’s the next pathetic dodge going to be for the ocean of blood he’s swimming in?
Huh? Apparently, classes and training aren't needed to function the weapons and rack up a body count, these shooters are proof of that. It has to be something different, something beyond simple firearms training. Basic training might just make people more lethal. I'm for all kinds of things that will actually make a difference. Universal background checks, No P2P sales without going to an FFL for background check, waiting periods, up the age limit or require character references for anything that accepts high capacity magazines. I want to see long mandatory prison sentences, borderline unconstitutional, for careless storage resulting in injury to a child or another person by a child.
I meant the white nationalist ideology in terms of what these mass killing fucks are "doing it in the name of" and crap. The Texas mall shooter being the most recent, of many. That dude had a swastika and fucking SS symbol tatted on his arm. I also agree with you in your suggestions for restrictions. Not sure I agree with the high cap magazine thing, just to be nit picky, as it's easy enough to swap those out -- I almost always go with a 10 rd mag when I'm hunting and even target shooting, just weight purposes, only using the high cap ones when I'm sighting in. I'd also add in mandatory training hours for those who do own a firearm, as well as a mandatory reporter requirement for employers/ees of gun and ammo stores, ranges, etc. who sell to someone who has a gun but is not current on their hours (essentially you'd have to create a license to own a firearm, and then maintain those license requirements).
Hold on for just a second. What numbers/ statistics are you using for this claim? Because lately they have been making the age of "Children" 0-19 years old when talking about gun violence. When you get rid of the 18-19 year olds (most of whom were involved in illegal activities), the number drops precipitously, and then car accidents are the leading killer. Also, can we please, for the love of God, stop including suicides with "gun deaths?"
Why? If the suicide is caused by a gun, it's quite literally a gun death. It would be idiotic to not include them.
Well what do you know? There are actually some ideas here other than “Guns? Nope can’t do anything about them. Besides it’s a mental health issue. Mental health? Sorry, can’t do anything about that either”
Because it's a different type of death; it's self inflicted. Oh, and any input on the question I asked you earlier?
Why? The age range of school shooters is low. It's kids doing the huge, huge majority of school shootings. It's kids that are able to buy guns before they've had a chance to begin to heal from the trauma they experienced in school and at home, because they think that's what will take that pain and loneliness away. It is easy for an adult to swap out mags, that's why we should up the age and/or require references for people under a certain age to buy the guns that accept high cap mags.
As he mentioned crimes against others and self inflicted harm are two different discussions. This is also where "they' just find another method" argument actually holds water since our suicide rates of all methods average out to the same number as most first world nations that have far less gun ownership/suicides. There are places like Japan that have higher suicide rates but zero guns. So in the case of suicides it is not the unfettered access to guns fault but some underlying cultural or societal issues that drive it. I personally think the suicide part is a separate discussion that is the sadder as it's much more frequent and much less discussed. Since guns aren't the issue in this case the realities, causes, and issues are completely ignored because of the stigma of mental health. Another huge failing in our modern society to address mental health adequately or in any coherent fashion. I personally think red flag laws and high risk protection orders make more sense as it is a scalpel to get guns out of the hands of people in danger of themselves or others instead of the hammer of blanket gun bans. I also don't buy into the slippery slope most gun rights people fear, "Who decides whats the line? If I take prozac will they take my guns? What about my jilted ex flagging me? Liberals will just claim simply wanting an assault rifle is for mentally disturbed and flag everybody....."
It behooves gun owners to proactively come to the table with a proposal for shoring up requirements for access to guns and other reasonable measures, otherwise the floor will collapse below them and they’ll end up in court fighting all sorts to stupid laws that make zero sense. And I say that as a gun owner.
Where the "mandatory training" hits a wall is that it's goes from a "right" to a "privilege" like a driver's license.
I feel like if one can afford to spend many hundreds to many thousands on whatever firearm they want, there won’t be much sympathy for them having to pay for a class once every few years.
if you (the general you, not you specifically) were to argue that, then it would also follow that any infringement or law which gets delays or otherwise gets in the way of owning a firearm, would make it a "privilege" rather than a right. And I know that many people currently do and will argue that. However, I'm more of the "living Constitution" theory, i.e. that it was meant to be adapted to modern times and scenarios which they could not predict. Those who go by the "shall not be infringed" are strict constitutionalists.