Liar Loan
Well-known member
irvinehomeowner said:
Cal State Fullerton had a shooting.
California State University, Fullerton massacrehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_State_University,_Fullerton_massacre
Once again...nothing to be done but prayers and thoughts
- Thread starter Irvinecommuter
- Start date
NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
Cal State Fullerton had a shooting.
California State University, Fullerton massacrehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_State_University,_Fullerton_massacre
Maybe that was the difference between duty and fear.
This is exactly what I was saying...tons of press makes this seem like a bigger problem than it really is but the data does not bear out the narrative. If you want to save children's lives campaign to ban bicycles or cars or j-walking...those kill more children each year.
Data on mass shootings at school don't live up to the hysteria
How many people have been killed in school shootings in the United States since 1900? The answer is 552, at least according to a comprehensive list compiled by Wikipedia. Assuming this isn't wildly inaccurate, 4.7 people have been killed in school shootings per year in modern American history.
I frequently hear people on social media say, "Do you know how unlikely it is that you'll be killed in a terrorist attack on U.S. soil?" As long as you don't count 9/11, which killed 2,996 people, the odds that you are going to die in an Islamic terrorist attack are extremely low at six people killed per year.
But the same people who say this should recognize that the odds that your elementary, middle, high school, or university student is going to die in a school shooting are even lower.
So, yes, angry young men who shoot up schools are a serious problem. Yet, the idea that they pose the gravest clear and present danger to the safety of America is preposterous. The American public should really be directing its attention to ensuring that we live healthier lives; not worrying about the astronomical odds of being involved in a school shooting. When it comes to tragically preventable deaths, one can make a compelling case that smoking, soft drinks, refined sugars, fast food, processed food, office work, and Netflix are far more dangerous to our well-being than guns or school shooters. Our public policy should be driven by data and facts, not opinions and hysteria.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/data-on-mass-shootings-at-school-dont-live-up-to-the-hysteria
The adolescents ( better term?
) are having such a big impact because the media-owned left have deemed these fresh new faces as the driving force behind gun legislation. People are tired of seeing Chuck, Nancy, and Schiff 24/7. What I don't see are some of the 2A supporting adolescent survivors being put on the cover of Time magazine or heading rallies funded by Michael Bloomberg.
Cal State Fullerton had a shooting.
California State University, Fullerton massacrehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_State_University,_Fullerton_massacre
morekaos
Well-known member
Liar Loan
Well-known member
So yesterday they had school walkouts to protest school shootings, and yet...
Schools are safer than they were in the 90s, and school shootings are not more common than they used to be, researchers say
Schools are safer than they were in the 90s, and school shootings are not more common than they used to be, researchers say
https://news.northeastern.edu/2018/...e-safest-places-for-children-researcher-says/
Burn That Belly
New member
x
Anytime you see people using the word "epidemic" to describe something non-medical, your BS detector should be going off. The Liberal outrage over the gun violence epidemic, the Conservative outrage over the illegal alien crime epidemic, the hysteria over the drug use epidemic in schools, none of these "epidemics" have much basis in fact.
Liar Loan said:So yesterday they had school walkouts to protest school shootings, and yet...
Schools are safer than they were in the 90s, and school shootings are not more common than they used to be, researchers say
https://news.northeastern.edu/2018/...e-safest-places-for-children-researcher-says/
Why the NRA Stumbled in Gun-Crazed Florida: Francis Wilkinson
By Francis Wilkinson
(Bloomberg View) -- President Donald Trump made his
predictable retreat from conflict with the National Rifle
Association this week. He had promised to take on the gun lobby
amid loose talk of better background checks and an increase in
the age limit for purchasing firearms. But, to no one's
surprise, he quickly backed down, after a White House visit from
the NRA.
Yes, once again, the familiar cycle of gun violence and
promises of action yielded to capitulation. Yet this time
something was different. Not in Washington, but in Florida,
where last week gun-safety activists proved that they could out-
muscle the NRA not just in blue states, or on the most extreme
proposals in red states, but on central issues on the NRA?s home
court.
Florida Governor Rick Scott, a previously reliable devotee
of the NRA, with an A+ rating from the group, signed legislation
raising the age to purchase all firearms from 18 to 21. In
addition, the law bans the sale and possession of bump stocks,
which enable semi-automatic rifles to mimic automatic weapons.
It imposes a three-day waiting period on most long-gun
purchases. It establishes a red-flag process to empower local
law-enforcement officials to petition a court to remove guns
from an individual showing warning signs of violence.
Not everyone from the gun-regulation side recognized the
seismic victory. Miami Beach Mayor Philip Levine, a Democratic
candidate for governor, was disappointed that the legislature
failed to pass an assault-weapons ban and universal background
checks. He said the law "falls short of the public demands set
by the majority of Floridians and the student survivors" of the
Feb. 14 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas school.
So it does, and in a rational world, Levine?s
disappointment would be justified. But gun politics is a
function of raw power, not reason. The gun regulation forces
have never lacked strong arguments. What they?ve lacked is a
large number of people willing to invest their time and energy
and votes in demanding safer regulation.
Florida, where students and activists bore down on the
Legislature and last week won very real concessions, is the most
powerful evidence that the cavalry may finally be saddling up.
The state is home to some of the most depraved, legally
sanctioned gunplay in America. A breathtaking 2012 series by the
Tampa Bay Times on the state?s Stand Your Ground law depicted
dozens of shootings in which the killer went free merely by
claiming, in full accord with the law, that he felt ?threatened?
in some way before opening fire.
?One man killed two unarmed people and walked out of jail,?
the paper reported. ?Another shot a man as he lay on the ground.
Others went free after shooting their victims in the back. In
nearly a third of the cases the Times analyzed, defendants
initiated the fight, shot an unarmed person or pursued their
victim ? and still went free.?
It was in Florida that George Zimmerman gunned down Trayvon
Martin in 2012 as the unarmed teenager was walking home.
Zimmerman, who also allegedly threatened both his wife and
girlfriend with a gun, walked free. Later, he listed for sale
the weapon he used to kill Martin, a Kel-Tec PF-9 handgun. ?I am
honored and humbled to announce the sale of an American Firearm
Icon," he wrote.
In Florida, the NRA has reigned supreme, and human life has
been commensurately devalued. The sight of Republicans in
Tallahassee turning on the gun lobby must?ve been quite a shock
at NRA headquarters, which vigorously opposed the new law and
has filed what appears to be a symbolic lawsuit against the age
limit.
The NRA has weathered many previous threats, of course. The
failure of Congress to correct even the most obvious and
egregious flaw in U.S. gun regulation, the background check
loophole, which enables pretty much anyone who wants to evade a
background check to do so, has been the high-water mark of
cynicism since even before the 2012 massacre of schoolchildren
and teachers in Newtown, Connecticut.
That federal loophole has no legal, moral, civic,
intellectual or other rationale. The NRA makes no argument in
its behalf. The loophole exists simply because the NRA demands
it.
The NRA?s success depends on such displays of political
dominance, not on the Second Amendment or legal arguments about
its purview. As its aging, white, male membership grows more
fearful in a changing nation, the group has come to view
democratic debate as a losing proposition.
"We are locked in a struggle with powerful forces in this
country who will do anything to destroy the Second Amendment,?
Richard Venola, a former editor of Guns & Ammo, told the New
York Times in 2014. ?The time for ceding some rational points is
gone."
To get through a crisis, the NRA will feign interest in
reforms. ?If we want to prevent future atrocities, we must look
for solutions that keep guns out of the hands of those who are a
danger to themselves or others, while protecting the rights of
law-abiding Americans," said Chris W. Cox, executive director of
the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action.
But the NRA resolutely opposes any action to restrict
convenient access to military-grade firepower by those who are a
danger to themselves and others. The group has previously
described red-flag laws to restrict access by such people as a
?campaign of shame against gun owners.?
While blue states continue to adopt an aggressive regime of
gun regulation, in Washington and red states neither court-
sanctioned restrictions on gun rights, nor the overwhelming
evidence that more guns and fewer restrictions lead to more
shootings, has been a match for the NRA. But in Florida last
week, activists overpowered their nemesis.
The Florida law is far from a comprehensive attack on gun
violence. But it?s a key advance in its prerequisite: a
comprehensive attack on the gun lobby.
By Francis Wilkinson
(Bloomberg View) -- President Donald Trump made his
predictable retreat from conflict with the National Rifle
Association this week. He had promised to take on the gun lobby
amid loose talk of better background checks and an increase in
the age limit for purchasing firearms. But, to no one's
surprise, he quickly backed down, after a White House visit from
the NRA.
Yes, once again, the familiar cycle of gun violence and
promises of action yielded to capitulation. Yet this time
something was different. Not in Washington, but in Florida,
where last week gun-safety activists proved that they could out-
muscle the NRA not just in blue states, or on the most extreme
proposals in red states, but on central issues on the NRA?s home
court.
Florida Governor Rick Scott, a previously reliable devotee
of the NRA, with an A+ rating from the group, signed legislation
raising the age to purchase all firearms from 18 to 21. In
addition, the law bans the sale and possession of bump stocks,
which enable semi-automatic rifles to mimic automatic weapons.
It imposes a three-day waiting period on most long-gun
purchases. It establishes a red-flag process to empower local
law-enforcement officials to petition a court to remove guns
from an individual showing warning signs of violence.
Not everyone from the gun-regulation side recognized the
seismic victory. Miami Beach Mayor Philip Levine, a Democratic
candidate for governor, was disappointed that the legislature
failed to pass an assault-weapons ban and universal background
checks. He said the law "falls short of the public demands set
by the majority of Floridians and the student survivors" of the
Feb. 14 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas school.
So it does, and in a rational world, Levine?s
disappointment would be justified. But gun politics is a
function of raw power, not reason. The gun regulation forces
have never lacked strong arguments. What they?ve lacked is a
large number of people willing to invest their time and energy
and votes in demanding safer regulation.
Florida, where students and activists bore down on the
Legislature and last week won very real concessions, is the most
powerful evidence that the cavalry may finally be saddling up.
The state is home to some of the most depraved, legally
sanctioned gunplay in America. A breathtaking 2012 series by the
Tampa Bay Times on the state?s Stand Your Ground law depicted
dozens of shootings in which the killer went free merely by
claiming, in full accord with the law, that he felt ?threatened?
in some way before opening fire.
?One man killed two unarmed people and walked out of jail,?
the paper reported. ?Another shot a man as he lay on the ground.
Others went free after shooting their victims in the back. In
nearly a third of the cases the Times analyzed, defendants
initiated the fight, shot an unarmed person or pursued their
victim ? and still went free.?
It was in Florida that George Zimmerman gunned down Trayvon
Martin in 2012 as the unarmed teenager was walking home.
Zimmerman, who also allegedly threatened both his wife and
girlfriend with a gun, walked free. Later, he listed for sale
the weapon he used to kill Martin, a Kel-Tec PF-9 handgun. ?I am
honored and humbled to announce the sale of an American Firearm
Icon," he wrote.
In Florida, the NRA has reigned supreme, and human life has
been commensurately devalued. The sight of Republicans in
Tallahassee turning on the gun lobby must?ve been quite a shock
at NRA headquarters, which vigorously opposed the new law and
has filed what appears to be a symbolic lawsuit against the age
limit.
The NRA has weathered many previous threats, of course. The
failure of Congress to correct even the most obvious and
egregious flaw in U.S. gun regulation, the background check
loophole, which enables pretty much anyone who wants to evade a
background check to do so, has been the high-water mark of
cynicism since even before the 2012 massacre of schoolchildren
and teachers in Newtown, Connecticut.
That federal loophole has no legal, moral, civic,
intellectual or other rationale. The NRA makes no argument in
its behalf. The loophole exists simply because the NRA demands
it.
The NRA?s success depends on such displays of political
dominance, not on the Second Amendment or legal arguments about
its purview. As its aging, white, male membership grows more
fearful in a changing nation, the group has come to view
democratic debate as a losing proposition.
"We are locked in a struggle with powerful forces in this
country who will do anything to destroy the Second Amendment,?
Richard Venola, a former editor of Guns & Ammo, told the New
York Times in 2014. ?The time for ceding some rational points is
gone."
To get through a crisis, the NRA will feign interest in
reforms. ?If we want to prevent future atrocities, we must look
for solutions that keep guns out of the hands of those who are a
danger to themselves or others, while protecting the rights of
law-abiding Americans," said Chris W. Cox, executive director of
the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action.
But the NRA resolutely opposes any action to restrict
convenient access to military-grade firepower by those who are a
danger to themselves and others. The group has previously
described red-flag laws to restrict access by such people as a
?campaign of shame against gun owners.?
While blue states continue to adopt an aggressive regime of
gun regulation, in Washington and red states neither court-
sanctioned restrictions on gun rights, nor the overwhelming
evidence that more guns and fewer restrictions lead to more
shootings, has been a match for the NRA. But in Florida last
week, activists overpowered their nemesis.
The Florida law is far from a comprehensive attack on gun
violence. But it?s a key advance in its prerequisite: a
comprehensive attack on the gun lobby.
Burn That Belly
New member
x
irvinehomeowner
Well-known member
Burn That Belly said:
Maybe that was the difference between duty and fear.
"Had a very capable school resource officer that also happened to be a S.W.A.T. team member," he said at a news conference. "This is a tough guy who apparently closed in very quickly and took the right kind of action. And I think while it's still tragic, he may have saved other people's lives."
https://www.google.com/amp/abcnews....g-incident-contained-school/story?id=53871080
https://www.google.com/amp/abcnews....g-incident-contained-school/story?id=53871080
Burn That Belly said:
Burn That Belly
New member
x
morekaos
Well-known member
Burn That Belly
New member
x
morekaos
Well-known member
morekaos said:
This is exactly what I was saying...tons of press makes this seem like a bigger problem than it really is but the data does not bear out the narrative. If you want to save children's lives campaign to ban bicycles or cars or j-walking...those kill more children each year.
Data on mass shootings at school don't live up to the hysteria
How many people have been killed in school shootings in the United States since 1900? The answer is 552, at least according to a comprehensive list compiled by Wikipedia. Assuming this isn't wildly inaccurate, 4.7 people have been killed in school shootings per year in modern American history.
I frequently hear people on social media say, "Do you know how unlikely it is that you'll be killed in a terrorist attack on U.S. soil?" As long as you don't count 9/11, which killed 2,996 people, the odds that you are going to die in an Islamic terrorist attack are extremely low at six people killed per year.
But the same people who say this should recognize that the odds that your elementary, middle, high school, or university student is going to die in a school shooting are even lower.
So, yes, angry young men who shoot up schools are a serious problem. Yet, the idea that they pose the gravest clear and present danger to the safety of America is preposterous. The American public should really be directing its attention to ensuring that we live healthier lives; not worrying about the astronomical odds of being involved in a school shooting. When it comes to tragically preventable deaths, one can make a compelling case that smoking, soft drinks, refined sugars, fast food, processed food, office work, and Netflix are far more dangerous to our well-being than guns or school shooters. Our public policy should be driven by data and facts, not opinions and hysteria.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/data-on-mass-shootings-at-school-dont-live-up-to-the-hysteria
morekaos
Well-known member
Causality...cause and effect.
Donations to the NRA tripled after the Parkland shooting
They also found the number of people contributing in the seven days after the shooting increased almost 500% from the week before.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/28/us/nra-donations-spike-parkland-shooting-trnd/index.html
https://youtu.be/6HU6FkEMx7k
Donations to the NRA tripled after the Parkland shooting
They also found the number of people contributing in the seven days after the shooting increased almost 500% from the week before.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/28/us/nra-donations-spike-parkland-shooting-trnd/index.html
https://youtu.be/6HU6FkEMx7k
momopi
Well-known member
Both the school students and the NRA are just tools for the partisan divide. Student activists like David Hogg actually hold somewhat moderate positions (at least in public) on gun control, but what the alt-right wants is protesters marching on DC with signs that read "Yes we want to take your guns" and "Safety is more important than Freedom" to galvanize people. As the left is further dragged toward banning firearms and hate speech, the right naturally assumes the binary opposition stance.
In future what I expect to see is people on the left taking the position that the US Constitution and Bill of Rights are obsolete documents drafted by slave owning white men that is no longer applicable today, and people on the right who takes great offense to such opinions. As the two parties rotate in and out of power we can expect to see further restrictions placed on 1A/2A.
For States like CA we can expect more strict licensing requirements for semi auto firearms with mandatory buy-back programs like AU, which will actually be a great boon to gun stores as people trade in their semi-auto firearms and purchase replacement manual action firearms. The government won't have to send police to confiscate from non-compliant owners, they only need to take your kids away to "protective custody" for "their own safety" until you comply.
Laws will be imposed against "hate speech", "fake news", and alike. If your opinion doesn't conform to politically tolerable limits, you may be found guilty of "condoning terrorism" and face 7 year jail sentence and fine up to $100K+. Anti-fake news laws will sentence you up to 10 years in prison for creating, distribution, or publishing "fake news" defined to include ?news, information, data and reports? that are ?wholly or partly false." (does not conform to official data).
Tolerance programs will creep toward "acceptance programs" where students are expected to embrace and not just tolerate. I'll leave this one up to your imagination. Students that don't conform will be sent to rehabilitation programs.
And as politicians, if the winds of change shift positions due to demographics or other factors, so will the parties. But they will retain opposing ideology to maintain the co-dominion.
In future what I expect to see is people on the left taking the position that the US Constitution and Bill of Rights are obsolete documents drafted by slave owning white men that is no longer applicable today, and people on the right who takes great offense to such opinions. As the two parties rotate in and out of power we can expect to see further restrictions placed on 1A/2A.
For States like CA we can expect more strict licensing requirements for semi auto firearms with mandatory buy-back programs like AU, which will actually be a great boon to gun stores as people trade in their semi-auto firearms and purchase replacement manual action firearms. The government won't have to send police to confiscate from non-compliant owners, they only need to take your kids away to "protective custody" for "their own safety" until you comply.
Laws will be imposed against "hate speech", "fake news", and alike. If your opinion doesn't conform to politically tolerable limits, you may be found guilty of "condoning terrorism" and face 7 year jail sentence and fine up to $100K+. Anti-fake news laws will sentence you up to 10 years in prison for creating, distribution, or publishing "fake news" defined to include ?news, information, data and reports? that are ?wholly or partly false." (does not conform to official data).
Tolerance programs will creep toward "acceptance programs" where students are expected to embrace and not just tolerate. I'll leave this one up to your imagination. Students that don't conform will be sent to rehabilitation programs.
And as politicians, if the winds of change shift positions due to demographics or other factors, so will the parties. But they will retain opposing ideology to maintain the co-dominion.
You guys really believe this stuff don?t you
That actually should send chills up the entire gun nutso food chain ? that kids are having such an impact ? they are actually more effective at politics than any of the brain dead pundits on cable news or the politicians
The fact that Laura ingaham has debased herself to making fun of David Hogg?s (student leader) college application rejections tells you all you need to know about how scared these people are of the kids ... yes kids
That actually should send chills up the entire gun nutso food chain ? that kids are having such an impact ? they are actually more effective at politics than any of the brain dead pundits on cable news or the politicians
The fact that Laura ingaham has debased herself to making fun of David Hogg?s (student leader) college application rejections tells you all you need to know about how scared these people are of the kids ... yes kids
fortune11 said:You guys really believe this stuff don?t you
That actually should send chills up the entire gun nutso food chain ? that kids are having such an impact ? they are actually more effective at politics than any of the brain dead pundits on cable news or the politicians
The fact that Laura ingaham has debased herself to making fun of David Hogg?s (student leader) college application rejections tells you all you need to know about how scared these people are of the kids ... yes kids
The adolescents ( better term?
) are having such a big impact because the media-owned left have deemed these fresh new faces as the driving force behind gun legislation. People are tired of seeing Chuck, Nancy, and Schiff 24/7. What I don't see are some of the 2A supporting adolescent survivors being put on the cover of Time magazine or heading rallies funded by Michael Bloomberg.