Massacre Again

I have mixed views on the 18 year old threshold.

You are old enough to vote. You are old enough to kill/die for your country. You are old enough to drive (& have been for a couple of years).

You are not old enough to drink (weird).

IMV, you do all the checking up front. You also have red flag laws so if something changes you can legally protect people. The 18 vs 21 thing becomes moot at that point.
I'm all for red flag laws but the data and access to it has to be better. I'm not confident our government can pull that off. I think we need to consider some sort of public/private partnership when it comes to gun safety...and yes I realize that's probably like trying to catch a unicorn at the end of a rainbow.

The vast majority are for common sense gun laws (which is just one variable we have to address) and we need to start somewhere. Will this solve the probably, absolutely not, but I believe it will help a bit. We know doing nothing doesn't work. The claim that "gun laws only affect law abiding citizens" is a BS rationalization. Most laws are more burdensome for law abiding citizens than criminals. Personally I think "hardening" schools should be our first priority.
 
I'm all for red flag laws but the data and access to it has to be better. I'm not confident our government can pull that off. I think we need to consider some sort of public/private partnership when it comes to gun safety...and yes I realize that's probably like trying to catch a unicorn at the end of a rainbow.

The vast majority are for common sense gun laws (which is just one variable we have to address) and we need to start somewhere. Will this solve the probably, absolutely not, but I believe it will help a bit. We know doing nothing doesn't work. The claim that "gun laws only affect law abiding citizens" is a BS rationalization. Most laws are more burdensome for law abiding citizens than criminals. Personally I think "hardening" schools should be our first priority.
Our government purposely prohibits collection of the data, that's how stupid this has become. There's no doubt (in my mind) that we can implement laws and policies that are supported by the vast majority of the people of this country, which in turn will reduce significantly the incidences of these mass murders, while ensuring people's 2nd amendment rights are not impacted.

Too many pols are just interested in thoughts (how much $ from NRA can I get from this) and prayers (praying this blows over quickly), than on saving lives.
 
We have laws on the books , we can make more laws , but will they be prosecuted ?

Who is going enforce these laws ? Doesn’t that mean more policing ?
 
We have laws on the books , we can make more laws , but will they be prosecuted ?

Who is going enforce these laws ? Doesn’t that mean more policing ?
I don't think there is a law on the books that has not been broken by someone at some time. Should we get rid of all those obviously ineffective laws also?
 
I don't think there is a law on the books that has not been broken by someone at some time. Should we get rid of all those obviously ineffective laws also?

YES !
Just like YOU got rid of that ineffective Toyota PU You posted about
trying to patch up YOUESELF. Unless YOU'RE still " hoarding " that
ineffective pile.
 
Researchers say being part of a set of available and long-term resources to preempt active shooters is far more important than annual active shooter drills

Mass killing events remain rare, comprising fewer than 1% of all firearms homicides and rarer than lightning strikes as a cause of death.

 
Researchers say being part of a set of available and long-term resources to preempt active shooters is far more important than annual active shooter drills

Mass killing events remain rare, comprising fewer than 1% of all firearms homicides and rarer than lightning strikes as a cause of death.


Isn't Lexipro the company that advises police officers to say "stop resisting" as soon as they turn on their bodycams?
 
Isn't Lexipro the company that advises police officers to say "stop resisting" as soon as they turn on their bodycams?
I don't know.
I do know that you usually know the answer to questions you pose.....
How do you know the officers weren't saying "stop resisting" before "they turn on their bodycams"?
 
I don't know.
I do know that you usually know the answer to questions you pose.....
How do you know the officers weren't saying "stop resisting" before "they turn on their bodycams"?

I just watched a youtube video today involving a private citizen going to a police station to get a complaint form because he felt he was racially profiled in a traffic stop. The duty sergeant tried to intimidate the citizen apparently not knowing that the citizen was using a hidden camera and apparently forgetting that the station has its own security cameras. Words were exchanged, and as the citizen was leaving the station the sergeant tackled him from behind and as he was holding the citizen down with a knee to the back and cuffing the limp citizen (who was fully aware of the camera situation) the first words out of the sergeant are "Stop resisting".

That seems to be a theme in those hidden camera videos. It looks like the police are trying to manufacture evidence because they know they have a weak case. The widespread nature of those situations makes me suspect that it is deliberately trained -- which brings up back to Lexipro's core business.
 
Folks go off the rails often...
What did y'all think of Democrat Rep. Katie Porter of California suggested in a recent MSNBC interview inflation and abortion are issues that are tied at the hip — meaning, if Americans really want to fight inflation, then they better support abortion on demand.
She explained how if there's inflation, there is a rise in the price of every commodity necessary to survive. It becomes expensive to feed and provide for the children, and to put gas in the vehicles. People should be in charge of how many members they want in the family, and how many “mouths they need to feed”.

Synopsis
On Wednesday night, Democratic Katie Porter said that women will have to abort their children due to the rising inflation. She believes that inflation has caused the prices to rise in everything and women should have the right to understand how big of a responsibility it is to start a family.


Read more at:
https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...ofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
 
I just watched a youtube video today involving a private citizen going to a police station to get a complaint form because he felt he was racially profiled in a traffic stop. The duty sergeant tried to intimidate the citizen apparently not knowing that the citizen was using a hidden camera and apparently forgetting that the station has its own security cameras. Words were exchanged, and as the citizen was leaving the station the sergeant tackled him from behind and as he was holding the citizen down with a knee to the back and cuffing the limp citizen (who was fully aware of the camera situation) the first words out of the sergeant are "Stop resisting".

That seems to be a theme in those hidden camera videos. It looks like the police are trying to manufacture evidence because they know they have a weak case. The widespread nature of those situations makes me suspect that it is deliberately trained -- which brings up back to Lexipro's core business.
Well was the man resisting?
Are there dozens of these videos? Hundreds? Thousands?
Brings me back to the causes listed under the study...did you bother to read the study or did you just simply poo-poo it because of the source?
 
Well was the man resisting?
Are there dozens of these videos? Hundreds? Thousands?
Brings me back to the causes listed under the study...did you bother to read the study or did you just simply poo-poo it because of the source?

The "limp citizen" was not resisting, and said so. The video was one of a series of "test" videos filmed in similar situations -- a private citizen going to a police substation outside of daytime business hours and asking how to file a complaint against a police officer. Only about 10% of the situations resulted in the citizen getting a department complaint form or directions about how to file a complaint online or by mail, while most of those departments had a written policy that citizens would be given a form on which they could file their complaint. Denial, intimidation, unwarranted traffic tickets (things like following the citizen to the parking lot and issuing a ticket for "improper backing"), assault, and false arrests were not uncommon.

The situation was so common that it leads me to believe that it is trained -- which brings us back to Lexipro's core business.
 
The "limp citizen" was not resisting, and said so. The video was one of a series of "test" videos filmed in similar situations -- a private citizen going to a police substation outside of daytime business hours and asking how to file a complaint against a police officer. Only about 10% of the situations resulted in the citizen getting a department complaint form or directions about how to file a complaint online or by mail, while most of those departments had a written policy that citizens would be given a form on which they could file their complaint. Denial, intimidation, unwarranted traffic tickets (things like following the citizen to the parking lot and issuing a ticket for "improper backing"), assault, and false arrests were not uncommon.

The situation was so common that it leads me to believe that it is trained -- which brings us back to Lexipro's core business.
Which brings me back to you didn't read the article...
 
Opinion | A Surprisingly Simple Way to Make Sure Good Gun Laws Get Passed
Opinion by By Richard Feldman - 7h ago

In the wake of two horrible mass shootings in as many weeks, Congress appears as if it might… might…want to do something about how the wrong people obtain guns. As usual, the urgency is coming almost exclusively from the Democratic side, but some Republicans, led by Texas Sen. John Cornyn, are actively participating in drafting potential legislation. But for Congress to actually enact bipartisan legislation, rather than simply go through the motions of another fruitless debate, lawmakers will have to focus on specific preventions not generalized gun bans.

Many on the left will likely say bans are prevention measures. But bans on certain types of weapons or ammunition aren’t practical or politically smart. There are hundreds of millions of semi-automatic firearms owned by over 100 millions Americans, including over 20 million AR-15-type rifles, the most common rifle sold in the U.S. Moreover, bans immediately alienate law-abiding gun owners whose support is crucial to Republican legislators whose support is essential to passage of any new bill.

The key is to remember that neither the “gun lobby” (which President Biden has blamed) nor the “gun grabbers” (the NRA’s boogeyman) supports arming violent predatory criminals or psychopaths. We are not fighting about the policy results because we already agree that dangerous people shouldn’t have access to weapons. To avoid the pointless trap of political demonization, our orienting question must be: “In whose hands are the guns?” Whatever laws we write should be smart enough to distinguish between law-abiding gun owners and people with criminal intent. For the latter group, which the shooters in Buffalo and Uvalde so obviously belong to, we must then ask: How did they get the weapons and how can we make it harder for those types to get them in the future?

Instead of farcical ideas like arming elementary school teachers, which isn’t any more palatable to educators than mandating psychiatric exams prior to buying guns are to firearm owners. Instead let’s examine ideas that can make us safe and are in the realm of the possible. Here are a few,

1. Under the law today, an 18-year-old cannot buy a beer or purchase a handgun until he turns 21. But he can buy a rifle, including the AR-15 style weapon used in the Uvalde massacre, within days of turning 18. We can raise the age for purchase of a long gun to the same age under federal law for purchase of a handgun – 21 years old. It would have prevented both the shooter in Uvalde and Buffalo from obtaining the guns they in fact lawfully purchased and disturbingly used.

2. The next item that we could fix is a properly drafted gun restraining order or “Red Flag Law.” To obtain gun owner support (indeed any civil libertarian support), such a law must limit those seeking the restraining order to those who have close interactions with the respondent. They must have clear and convincing evidence that the person is an immediate danger. In an emergency situation, the order could be granted before the respondent can counter, but a full hearing must expeditiously be granted. If we adhere to due process (avoiding hearsay,for example) gun owners can’t complain that the laws infringe the rights of peaceful gun owners. Several states have enacted RFL’s with varying degrees of opposition and success. The more careful we are in drafting this law, the less likely it will become a poorly used prohibition that gun owners will decry.

3. We can pass background checks for all commercial transfers of firearms. Note that I didn’t suggest the more politically charged and counter-productive “universal” background checks. Universal background checks include transfers to family members which inevitably will be ignored, making de facto criminals of millions of children, parents and spouses. The value of background checks is verifying the safety of people you don’t know, not delaying transfers to those who sleep in the next bedroom or long-standing close friends.

4. Let’s pass legislation that gives an immediate income tax deduction for the purchase of gun safes for both home and cars. States with sales taxes can piggyback this with a sales tax exemption as well. This might sound like an unusual indulgence for gun owners, but isn’t the point to prevent guns from falling into the wrong hands? If we can achieve that with a tax carrot rather than a criminal stick, why shouldn’t we? Let’s encourage gun owners by using our tax code before we consider more mandates in our criminal code.

5. Finally, we need an organized and coordinated approach to this multifaceted problem. This should begin immediately but the benefits will take more time. WPete Gagliardi, former director of Congressional affairs at the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, has proposed a “national task force on mass shootings.” Gagliardi wrote, “To label the cause of the problem as one thing or another — mental illness or guns or both — without deliberate review by diverse entities at this point may be little more than opinions, as well-intended as they may be. Even if 100 percent correct, they are not in and of themselves sustainable solutions without a well-conceived proper plan of action.” Maturity requires using the moment to make the right decisions. If we continue following the pacifying cry to “just do something,” we will again miss the opportunity to make effectual choices.

Defined in terms of promoting safety rather than denying rights, new gun laws can be politically advantageous to both sides.

The past two years saw a huge increase in gun buying amongst Asians, Black people, Hispanics and women, constituencies the Democrats historically count upon. These voters are listening to this debate and what they hear (intentionally or otherwise) is that “they can’t be trusted with the guns they own” and that they should rely on the police for protection. (The inadequate performance by law enforcement in Uvalde makes this proposition debatable at best.) Gun laws that make it impossible for citizens to protect themselves will only help drive more voters into the arms of the GOP.

When Republicans “Just say no,” a defensive crouch that doesn’t align with the majority of public opinion, and Democrats seek to outlaw the last firearm type misused it’s no wonder Americans feel hopeless from calculated gridlock. There are answers surrounding the misuse of guns if we will address them calmly and without the annoying tribal accusations that underscore infuriating politics but preclude constructive policy accomplishments.

Good politics dictate that the people participate in the policy process. If you don’t like the process of democracy, that’s a whole different debate. We used to be pretty good at balancing interests, rights and responsibilities in the United States. In the 1980s, Mothers against Drunk Driving helped to raise the drinking age to 21. We didn’t set as a goal the prohibition of alcohol nor the suspension of the sale, ownership or use of private vehicles. We zeroed in on the problem of a deadly behavior. We ought to try that strategy again right now.

Opinion | A Surprisingly Simple Way to Make Sure Good Gun Laws Get Passed (msn.com)
 
The "limp citizen" was not resisting, and said so. The video was one of a series of "test" videos filmed in similar situations -- a private citizen going to a police substation outside of daytime business hours and asking how to file a complaint against a police officer. Only about 10% of the situations resulted in the citizen getting a department complaint form or directions about how to file a complaint online or by mail, while most of those departments had a written policy that citizens would be given a form on which they could file their complaint. Denial, intimidation, unwarranted traffic tickets (things like following the citizen to the parking lot and issuing a ticket for "improper backing"), assault, and false arrests were not uncommon.

The situation was so common that it leads me to believe that it is trained -- which brings us back to Lexipro's core business.

Here's another example of well-trained intimidation tactics --

 
Look's like the Chief of Police was also pals with Beto and Joe. He gave $5 to both of them to show support in their elections. Then we have Beto interrupting press conference and now we have Joe wanting all the good weapons illegal. He say's you can keep your 22 because if the enemy does come at you and you shoot them in the lung, the bad guys won;t die because a 22 won;t destroy the bad guy with a better gun and that is trying to take you down. These people are nuts and they will go down as the most stupid humans ever. Pick the TRUTH over the LIES.
 
Back
Top