And of course it is not the guns, right.....it is the easy ACCESS to guns that is the problem. And the fact that we have MORE GUNS in this country than people. DD
I don't even think it's all that complex, this type of violence is and will always be from predominantly young adult males, but millenials are so disconnected from actual social bonds (seriously, almost 30% of millenials don't have someone they're close enough too, they'd share their secrets, i dislike people and excluding my wife, have 2, but i come from generation x), the tether breaks so easily without social bonds. People want to matter, but they often grow up not really mattering to even their own father, and as they get older, they don't really matter to anyone, the outcome is a predictable statistic. The unabomber, if you're old enough to remember him, pretty much got it right unfortunately, and they're the product, his point 72 was especially prescient, as when given a choice to finally impact the integrity of the broken system itself, in Trump, but especially across the Atlantic in Brexit, the powerless jumped on it like a fat kid on cake.
And if those young males didn't have access to guns..........like the rest of the world.....how many mass murders have their been in countries where guns are hard to get or banned? DD
Speaking of "too easy access to guns"... Exclusive: El Paso suspect's mother called police concerned about gun https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/07/us/el-paso-crusius-gun-warning/index.html
trump, meeting with medical staff in El Paso, talks about his (and Beto O'Rourke's) crowd sizes... note: trump still hasn't paid the city for his event.
Jumping to conclusions. Probably he was interested in the video because he was fantasizing about committing mass murder. No particular reason to expect he was ideologically aligned, especially when other indications point in the opposite direction.
Great thread by David Priess (writer, historian, former CIA under Clinton and GWB) that looks at past Presidents and how they spoke to the nation after major tragedies... how does the current version compare? https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1159286245471805445.html
Europe gets a fair few, France has had a cpl really bad ones, and they have some of the strictest laws on the continent, adjusted for population, the rate tends to be slightly lower, but the death tolls higher because they're shooting fish in barrels and there tends to be more organisation going on (and that's excluding the whole boomy thing europe has going). It depends what the greatest risk is tbh, there'll be less indiscriminate random kids, but more high volume organised attacks (something the USA is a poor target for currently), that's aside from issues regarding liberty etc.
Bet this will shock most folks... the nra is against background checks (and pretty much any effort... well, except more thoughts and prayers)...
Comments referring to him as a white supremacist will do it, for people not emotionally equipped to realise its hyperbole to outwoke her opponents in the primary (you'd have to be gullible to think she actually believes that, but there are plenty of gullible people), and actually have some semblance of a moral compass, it would become an imperative to act, when you liken your opponents to a moralistic good vs evil argument as is the purpose of that line of attack, the outcome is the same as its always been. Name the greatest evils of the 20th century, tell me if anyone fits in under the white supremacy label, and wonder if such association could cause issues... I actually know someone who thought when Trump won the presidency, that he was going to ship her off to a death camp because she's a lesbian, yes, this is how that rhetoric can manifest As for you not seeing it, blind people don't see much, and you're so partisanly blind, anything short of an open statement of "kill them all" wouldn't count for you.
As an aside, I was reading Garry Trudeau's Trump cartoons over the years. He got every nuance right. You remember the character based on Hunter S. Thompson? Balding, sunglasses? Has a son who looks just like him? Trump comes to visit. Son answers the door, yells back into the house, "Dad, guy says his name is Donald Trump!" Voice from inside the house: "Oh, yeah? Ask him if there's anything more important than size!" Trump: "Uuuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhhh......" Kid: "He can't do it, Dad!" "Father's voice: "OK, that's him. Let him in!"
Admitted white supremacists believe Trump's actions and words are white Supremacist. Trump's own actions declare him one. Have their been incidents of anti-white supremacists murdering and killing prominent white supremacists?
Well, I would disagree with this. You know the case of Venezuela. Their government stripped their people of their guns (and gun rights), then subjected its people to horrible oppression. Same with 30s Germany. Your vote doesn't count for much if the government is the only one(s) with guns. It is citizens with guns that keeps government in check. Yes, the government is much more well armed; but if it has to pay a steep price for its actions, that helps keep it in check. As for El Paso shooter, there just isn't any really great answer. An open and free society is going to be vulnerable. You have to ask yourself: would rather be free, or secure? I know which one I choose.
George Wallace was shot... though not killed. https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/governor-george-wallace-shot
What threshold would the government need to pass for you to shoot government officials and have the moral high ground? Did the Black Panthers have the moral high ground to use firearms to fight 300+ years of government tyranny on African Americans? Your example is cute but how about an example of gun rights allowing for the toppling of an oppressive regime without foreign intervention? The whole "we can fight government tyranny with our semiautomatic rifles" shtick is nothing more than delusions of grandeur.
So, we seem to focused on different points. No, killing someone is not an appropriate response for corruption; dismissal, fines and jail time are appropriate. But if the LEOs come barging into your house, guns blazing, not only due to a mistake, but even worse, a manufactured charge, then citizens have the should right to defend themselves.
I've said it before and will say it again. Having a population with guns won't stop a govt. It ensures nothing. The govt. Can shut down power and deny people access. Guns won't fix that. The government can shut off the water. Guns won't stop that. Guns won't stop planes, tanks, drones, missiles, etc. An armed populace protects nobody from tyranny in the modern world.
