GUNS: Both Sides Now - Mrs. Betty Bowers
https://youtu.be/zR9NHjDi4EA
All the facts needed to rebuke your average gun nut rolled into one. Damn she's good.

A mother who ran into Robb Elementary School to rescue her two children during a mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas, last week says police threatened to violate her probation for speaking about the incident to reporters.

If true, there's a turd in Tx the size of the Uvalde police department that needs flushing.

I was in a US shopping mall once, at the toilet section, and there was a guy in some sort of kimono and it looked like he was wearing a vest below it. He was acting weird as hell. At one point he started shouting and we fucking bolted.

Maybe it was just a weirdo. Maybe it was a weirdo with an assault rifle.

If I'd live in the US, I'd be in constant fear of my life most of the time. If my kids would have to go to school there, I'd be terrified for their lives to a point I'd quite literally go insane.

At school, we prepare to be shot at. This is how it feels.

free link to Washington Post article https://wapo.st/38CLRGj

fujiJuice wrote on May 31, 2022, 22:43:

RedEye9 wrote on May 31, 2022, 19:24:
19 law enforcement officers stood in a hallway outside the classroom at one point and later there was a parking lot full of LEO's, both federal and state.
But according to the far right (shouldn't it be the far wrong) all of this would have been prevented if an untrained teacher had a handgun.
It's not hard to guess how that shootout - handgun vs an AR-DeathTeen assault rifle would have turned out.

Oh it gets even better than that. They also want to lock schools down even more, so when, not if, the next shooting occurs, it will be impossible to get inside to stop it.

I mean it makes sense to me to spend all that extra money instead of gun laws.

One door is optimal in case there's a fire.
Speaking of doors, the story has changed again. A teacher didn't prop open the door. The gunman, who had more assault weapons than most police, popped it open.

And the Shitshow in Texas continues.
Uvalde police, school district no longer cooperating with Texas probe of shooting
The feds can't get here soon enough.

RedEye9 wrote on May 31, 2022, 19:24:
19 law enforcement officers stood in a hallway outside the classroom at one point and later there was a parking lot full of LEO's, both federal and state.
But according to the far right (shouldn't it be the far wrong) all of this would have been prevented if an untrained teacher had a handgun.
It's not hard to guess how that shootout - handgun vs an AR-DeathTeen assault rifle would have turned out.

Oh it gets even better than that. They also want to lock schools down even more, so when, not if, the next shooting occurs, it will be impossible to get inside to stop it.

I mean it makes sense to me to spend all that extra money instead of gun laws.

19 law enforcement officers stood in a hallway outside the classroom at one point and later there was a parking lot full of LEO's, both federal and state.
But according to the far right (shouldn't it be the far wrong) all of this would have been prevented if an untrained teacher had a handgun.
It's not hard to guess how that shootout - handgun vs an AR-DeathTeen assault rifle would have turned out.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/5/30/2100905/-Another-typical-week
This Modern World

Gosh, he's had a lot of material to work with lately.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/5/23/2099363/-Cartoon-Owned-again

This comment was edited on May 31, 2022, 11:31.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Monday announced the introduction of a bill that would place a national freeze on handgun ownership across Canada.

"What this means is that it will no longer be possible to buy, sell, transfer or import handguns anywhere in Canada," Trudeau said in a news conference.
"In other words we're capping the market," he added.

At least other countries learn from our failures. Repeal The Second

Beamer wrote on May 30, 2022, 22:12:
Did someone imply the Texas shooter has a bullet proof vest on?

Because he didn't

I don't think anyone here implied that.

Did someone imply the Texas shooter has a bullet proof vest on?

Because he didn't

ChaosEngine wrote on May 29, 2022, 23:12:
Why do people think carrying a gun will stop you getting shot? I genuinely do not get this logic.

If someone attacks me with a sword, I am going to have a much better chance of defending myself if I have my own sword.

But that doesn't work with a gun. Guns are not defensive weapons. If someone attacks me with a gun, especially someone with murderous intent, the only thing a gun can do is help me kill them first. That requires me to know that the person is a legit threat and to get a clear shot at them before they shoot me. If some nutjob wanders into a school, or an office, or whatever and starts shooting, me having a gun just doesn't seem like it would help. Frankly, I'd rather have a bulletproof vest.

And honestly, if I was your dad and I lived in a place where I genuinely felt more afraid than I had been in an actual warzone, I'd probably expend my energy trying to stop the "bad guys" getting guns so easily.

An observation I have noticed between the general population and those who have been in actual combat is that the general population instinctively assumes they are inherently safe. They're typically not observant of their surroundings, who is in it, and the behavior of others around them. In contrast, those I have known who have been in combat always have their heads on a swivel. Whether it is my dad, my uncle, or peers my age. They are always doing threat assessment. So you'll often see them perform actions that are not common in the general population.

Firearms can be a defensive weapon. The average confrontation in homes occurs within 3-5 yards and the average shooter often misses their first shot and frequently their second shot (amalgamated from data from the LAPD and NYPD criminal and justifiable homicide reports 2015-2019). If we extrapolate that to offices, grocery stores, and schools which require an assailant to do a lot more traversal, your odds at successfully defending yourself increase. Are you going to go full Wyatt Earp on them? Damn, I hope not. Are you statistically more likely to survive if you are not the first contact? Yes. That's just the way the math works.

I want to be very clear that I do not want every dude and his dog armed. I wouldn't trust most people with a can opener let alone a lethal instrument. I also do not believe that a gun, in and of itself, is going to save you. I think using it as a force multiplier in combination with effective, long term training, familiarity, and rational thinking increases your chance of survival. However, without a gun, you can still increase your chance of survival by thinking rationally and remaining calm.

The problem with just saying "make guns harder to buy" is that, while on the surface, it makes sense (and on its own merit it does, don't get me wrong), it completely ignores the cultural, societal, and political reality of the United States. That cat has left the bag and had generations of descendants since then. There's too much entrenched power and money to make that change quickly or effectively. In a 100 years? Maybe. So you have to deal with the reality of today and make plans according to that, not what you wish might happen.

Change should happen, again let me be very clear about that. I wholeheartedly support more stringent gun control. However, I am also very cognizant of the situation as it exists today and I don't think it is unwise to plan for what is while still trying to change things for the better.

In the Before Times, we had 3-5 lockdowns every year on my campus between 2016-2019. Why? Gunman on campus. Not an active shooter, just someone with a gun on campus. That averages out to once a semester. That's the reality I deal with. When this would happen, I would message my wife and tell her "I'm going to be late, we're in lockdown." She immediately knew what I was referring to and her response was always "Just come home to me" then she'd damn near break my ribs when I got home because she was hugging me so tightly.

So you say "Burrito, that is severely fucked up." Yes, it is. But, again, that is the reality I faced prior to the pandemic and it is only getting worse in the general population. So, rationally, I can see why someone would choose to arm themselves even if previously they had not made the same choice.

Edit:

This is not an emotional issue for me, in general. Should anyone think I have an emotional investment in firearms or the culture within the US, I do not. I just look at the numbers and what goes on in my government. Those are incontrovertible facts and getting emotional about them doesn't change them here and now.

Quinn wrote on May 30, 2022, 02:32:
You sound a lot more reasonable than BoP in this case. Except for the gun vs bulletproof vest. If every kid in that Texas school was carrying, the psycho kid wouldn't have had a chance to inflict any real damage.
The problem with most Americans is that they don't see how fucking idiotically dystopian that sounds.

Yeah, call me crazy, but I'm not super keen on the idea that kids should need to be armed to defend themselves in school.

More blood for the Blood God.

I'm in favor of well-regulation, it's now on congress to act on it. How could anyone not understand that line of the 2nd amendment?

Too many people have a gun fetish. It's not a toy, it's a killing device. A digitized gun is not going to kill anyone, a physical one? Yes, that is guaranteed to do damage. Maybe people like customizing guns so much because it will make them forget that yes, this destroys a life.

As for criminals, we are already prepared to throw them under the jail, if they aren't killed themselves in the act.

People are still getting shot this Memorial Day Weekend, the violence is endless.

ChaosEngine wrote on May 29, 2022, 23:12:

Burrito of Peace wrote on May 28, 2022, 12:52:

Hardline Mike wrote on May 27, 2022, 06:02:
Maybe it wouldn't work in America, who knows? Maybe we Americans are just inherently bad, violent people.

The United States is an inherently violent country with a very violent culture. The founding of the nation was born in violence and bathed in blood. The United States is 246 years old. In that time, we have engaged in more conflict both domestically and globally than any other nation in their first 250 years of existence. Not even the Romans were as quick to start killing people as we are. It is so deeply engrained and steeped in us from birth that it is inescapable. We would need a profound and tidal shift in our culture to change that inherent violent streak. Given our current governance model and societal leanings, that is unlikely to happen.

Sounds like exactly the sort of people that shouldn't have easy access to guns then.

Burrito of Peace wrote on May 28, 2022, 12:52:
I had lunch with my dad yesterday and we had a conversation that is sticking in my head. I quote "I've been in active combat, I've been shot down, and I've been ill-equipped and fighting for my life against the Vietcong. I felt safer in and over the jungles of Vietnam than I now do going to the grocery store. I'm going to recert for my CCL and start carrying all the time."

That deeply disturbs me. My father is not a man prone to fear or given to hysteria. He's one of the most coldly logical people I have ever met in my life.

Why do people think carrying a gun will stop you getting shot? I genuinely do not get this logic.

If someone attacks me with a sword, I am going to have a much better chance of defending myself if I have my own sword.

But that doesn't work with a gun. Guns are not defensive weapons. If someone attacks me with a gun, especially someone with murderous intent, the only thing a gun can do is help me kill them first. That requires me to know that the person is a legit threat and to get a clear shot at them before they shoot me. If some nutjob wanders into a school, or an office, or whatever and starts shooting, me having a gun just doesn't seem like it would help. Frankly, I'd rather have a bulletproof vest.

And honestly, if I was your dad and I lived in a place where I genuinely felt more afraid than I had been in an actual warzone, I'd probably expend my energy trying to stop the "bad guys" getting guns so easily.

You sound a lot more reasonable than BoP in this case. Except for the gun vs bulletproof vest. If every kid in that Texas school was carrying, the psycho kid wouldn't have had a chance to inflict any real damage.
The problem with most Americans is that they don't see how fucking idiotically dystopian that sounds.

I get it you guys need guns in rural areas where it takes ages for police to arrive and a psychopath or cougar would have free reign to terrorize your home otherwise. But WHY assault weapons? WHY no extremely thorough background checks? This just blows my mind. What blows my mind even more is that even the blood of hundreds of children isn't enough of a blood sacrifice for political (NRA) corruption to give way to reason.

Blows. My. Fucking. Mind.

America is very, very sick.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2022/05/uvalde-texas-massacre-accomplices/

Remember the school shooter didn't act alone. He was assisted by the Texas Legislature, 50 Senators, 210 House members, the weapon manufacturer & the NRA.

"Abbott vows change after a school shooting. We’ve heard that before."
Gifted Washington Post article https://wapo.st/38uG5ql

Burrito of Peace wrote on May 28, 2022, 12:52:

Hardline Mike wrote on May 27, 2022, 06:02:
Maybe it wouldn't work in America, who knows? Maybe we Americans are just inherently bad, violent people.

The United States is an inherently violent country with a very violent culture. The founding of the nation was born in violence and bathed in blood. The United States is 246 years old. In that time, we have engaged in more conflict both domestically and globally than any other nation in their first 250 years of existence. Not even the Romans were as quick to start killing people as we are. It is so deeply engrained and steeped in us from birth that it is inescapable. We would need a profound and tidal shift in our culture to change that inherent violent streak. Given our current governance model and societal leanings, that is unlikely to happen.

Sounds like exactly the sort of people that shouldn't have easy access to guns then.

Burrito of Peace wrote on May 28, 2022, 12:52:
I had lunch with my dad yesterday and we had a conversation that is sticking in my head. I quote "I've been in active combat, I've been shot down, and I've been ill-equipped and fighting for my life against the Vietcong. I felt safer in and over the jungles of Vietnam than I now do going to the grocery store. I'm going to recert for my CCL and start carrying all the time."

That deeply disturbs me. My father is not a man prone to fear or given to hysteria. He's one of the most coldly logical people I have ever met in my life.

Why do people think carrying a gun will stop you getting shot? I genuinely do not get this logic.

If someone attacks me with a sword, I am going to have a much better chance of defending myself if I have my own sword.

But that doesn't work with a gun. Guns are not defensive weapons. If someone attacks me with a gun, especially someone with murderous intent, the only thing a gun can do is help me kill them first. That requires me to know that the person is a legit threat and to get a clear shot at them before they shoot me. If some nutjob wanders into a school, or an office, or whatever and starts shooting, me having a gun just doesn't seem like it would help. Frankly, I'd rather have a bulletproof vest.

And honestly, if I was your dad and I lived in a place where I genuinely felt more afraid than I had been in an actual warzone, I'd probably expend my energy trying to stop the "bad guys" getting guns so easily.

Mrs. Betty Bowers didn’t even need to make a new video, she only needed to "repost" a video from 2016, which, sadly, is still relevant. https://youtu.be/_gqwzvtUsec

RedEye9 wrote on May 26, 2022, 09:39:

VaranDragon wrote on May 26, 2022, 07:57:
I wonder how much the NRA "donated" to Jackson's campaign funds last year?

There is a difference between gun lobbyist donations and NRA.

WHICH SENATORS HAVE TAKEN THE MOST NRA MONEY? lifetime amount
Of note: The figures are much higher if you count indirect contributions, like the NRA's purchase of attack ads against opponents.

Congress members with the most contributions from gun rights groups
Lifetime contributions to members’ campaign or leadership PAC for the 117th Congress, as of May 25, 2022
Note: Not the NRA

Ted Cruz Cruz received more than $300,000 in campaign donations from gun lobbyists during his last senatorial campaign in 2018, $80,000 more than the second closest candidate.
Gun Rights: Money to Congress opensecrets.org

Lobbying by gun rights groups hit a spending record in 2021. They outspent gun control by more than 5x
Since 1998, gun rights groups have spent $190 million on lobbying, with 60% of that total being spent in the past nine years. Gun control advocates have spent just $30 million since 1998.

And from PBS
We asked every senator what action should be taken on guns. Here’s what they said
Not surprising but there's some thoughts and prayers in this bunch and we all know how well thoughts and prayers works against mass shootings.

This is the only amount I’ve been able to find so far, you have to remember he’s only been a member of the House for less than 2 years (Assumed office January 3, 2021).
His statement doesn’t come so much from gun lobby money as much as it does from ignorance, and to throw meat at the maga crowd who have long since lost sight of the truth.

“The NRA’s political action committee had more than $15 million on hand going into May, according to a Federal Election Commission filing. The PAC gave nearly $70,000 last month to Republicans running for office in the 2022 midterms.
The NRA committee gave $4,000 to GOP candidates in Texas in April. Reps. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, and Ronny Jackson, R-Texas, each received $1,000 from the NRA’s PAC. Texas congressional hopefuls Wesley Hunt and Morgan Luttrell also received the same amount.”
The National Rifle Association’s lobbying machine is still potent despite financial woes that reduced its clout