As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

Uvalde Shooting: 19 elementary school children dead, 2 adults

1252628303180

Posts

  • Options
    DixonDixon Screwed...possibly doomed CanadaRegistered User regular
    edited May 2022
    Hevach wrote: »
    Magell wrote: »
    Weird how it just grows exponentially when the Assault Rifle ban expired.

    Another big boom after 2016, too. Wonder what happened there.

    The Orange Orangutan

    Dixon on
  • Options
    joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    I’m sure Hevach was being rhetorical

  • Options
    ToxTox I kill threads he/himRegistered User regular
    Monwyn wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    Patrick Blanchfield, who I have posted some thoughts from earlier, re-tweeted an article and some thoughts he had had on the five-year anniversary of the Sandy Hook shooting, which were weighing on his mind because the parallels between these school shootings are inevitable when you consider the underlying systemic causes of them... and how it took years for the true horrors of the system to be known.

    (First tweet in-lined, rest of tree quoted behind spoiler tag for length)
    Today is the anniversary of Sandy Hook. I'm re-sharing this, from five years back: my close-reading of CT state reports on Adam Lanza's institutional history, which reveal how the massacre fundamentally implicates white supremacy and class inequality.
    Sandy Hook, “White-on-White Crime,” and How Privilege Kills
    I'm thinking about this now today especially while watching Andrew Sullivan somehow insist that a mass shooting can't be a product of white supremacy if the shooters themselves aren't white skinned, and just folks: the systems and norms that make them possible are ALL about race.

    The prerogative to take up an easily accessible gun and mass-liquidate human beings to vindicate your personal grievances and political ideologies is a franchise that's nominally open to anyone, yes, but also: this is a settler colonial country founded on genocide and slavery.

    The material conditions that make such acts possible, and the libidinal conditions that make it even *imaginable,* reflect that history. But even more so: the way our polity deals with all such mass killings fundamentally reflects racialized hierarchies of human disposability.

    This all may sound very abstract - but look at Sandy Hook. Read the official docs. Even *the state itself* concludes there is no way - none - the rolling-thunder trainwreck of red flags that was the Lanza household would have been imaginable if not for their being white and rich.

    And there's a broader lesson here: white supremacy *ultimately treats ppl who are considered white ALSO as disposable for the sake of preserving racial capitalism.* Lanza killed twenty children and six school employees, almost all white, in one of the richest zip codes in the US.

    You can litigate how much SH changed things. It didn't, contra the glib nihilists, do "nothing." There have been state laws, corporate policy changes, movement building, etc. But the intensity of fundamental investment in white supremacy and inequality inflects *all* of it.

    Which is all to say: mass shootings are inevitably about race, class, and gender. They're a culture specific disorder in a society for which the white male prerogative to liquidate and expropriate was and remains (pun intended) constitutional. If we can't see this, we're useless.

    Appending one last thing here, me in nplusonemag on the five year anniversary, reading yet more reports, and putting Sandy Hook alongside another nightmare that happened that year: the killing of Trayvon Martin Ghosts of 2012

    Those last reports were heavily redacted, but they contain one detail, at once explosive yet also - if you're familiar with these things - unsurprising. Four years *before* the massacre, cops were informed that Adam was going to "kill his mother and shoot children at Sandy Hook."


    "Lanza allegedly told [REDACTED] that he planned to kill his mother and children at Sandy Hook ... [REDACTED] called the NPD and told them ... and was told by NPD that Lanza's mother owned the guns and there was nothing NPD could do about it."

    You can't read documents like this and conclude "this is the system failing." Rather, this is the system *functioning precisely as designed to protect the prerogatives of those whom it is designed to protect.* Human wreckage, including their own, is part of the package. /end

    I really thought you might have the good taste to not turn a thread about dead kids into yet another opportunity to preach the socialist gospel, and yet

    Modern US police exist to serve the wealthy and protect capital and property.

    Twitter! | Dilige, et quod vis fac
  • Options
    No-QuarterNo-Quarter Nothing To Fear But Fear ItselfRegistered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    tlu6hjlxs8lk.jpg

    Where is this sourced from?

  • Options
    BogartBogart Streetwise Hercules Registered User, Moderator mod
    Don’t bring personal beef from another thread into this one, please.

  • Options
    HakkekageHakkekage Space Whore Academy summa cum laudeRegistered User regular
    No-Quarter wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    tlu6hjlxs8lk.jpg

    Where is this sourced from?

    it's been going around twitter, from the color and style it looks like it's from the FT but I can't find that particular page from a quick google, only this one: https://www.ft.com/content/200a8746-a7db-11e7-ab55-27219df83c97

    at any rate:



    Drew McKevitt is a history professor apparently also with a book coming out called Gun Country
    The obvious answer is that the Assault Weapons Ban expired in 2004 but don't discount that 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, in which Congress freed gunmakers from any liability for their products killing people, which opened the floodgates on market "innovation"

    I'm just sayin yall the PLCAA is overlooked as an impediment to gun control efforts. it's not just a "no regulate my guns government pls" law it affirmatively protects the gun industry from private actions for recovery of the destruction they have caused by the reckless overmanufacturing and marketing of guns. Other industries have civil suit immunities like this (most famously vaccines but no one reasonably intelligent can deny the immense social utility of vaccines that overcome concerns about their safety or effectiveness) but it is particularly unjustified in the gun manufacturing industry

    3DS: 2165 - 6538 - 3417
    NNID: Hakkekage
  • Options
    KetBraKetBra Dressed Ridiculously Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    Apparently the local police not only kept families from going into the school, but also kept the federal tactical team out of the school (for nearly an hour??)
    When specially equipped federal immigration agents arrived at the elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, on Tuesday, the local police at the scene would not allow them to go after the gunman who had opened fire on students inside the school, according to two officials briefed on the situation.

    The agents from Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrived at some point between 12 p.m. and 12:10 p.m., according to the officials — far earlier than previously known. But they did not breach the adjoining classrooms of the school where the gunman had locked himself in until a little before 1 p.m. Members of the federal tactical team killed the gunman.

    Eric Wasson reports for Bloomberg
    Police in Uvalde admit they mistakenly thought there were no more children alive in the classroom to explain why they waited outside. 911 calls from kids show otherwise

    Just the most cowardly incompetent motherfuckers.

    KetBra on
    KGMvDLc.jpg?1
  • Options
    South hostSouth host I obey without question Registered User regular
    KetBra wrote: »
    Apparently the local police not only kept families from going into the school, but also kept the federal tactical team out of the school (for nearly an hour??)
    When specially equipped federal immigration agents arrived at the elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, on Tuesday, the local police at the scene would not allow them to go after the gunman who had opened fire on students inside the school, according to two officials briefed on the situation.

    The agents from Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrived at some point between 12 p.m. and 12:10 p.m., according to the officials — far earlier than previously known. But they did not breach the adjoining classrooms of the school where the gunman had locked himself in until a little before 1 p.m. Members of the federal tactical team killed the gunman.

    Eric Wasson reports for Bloomberg
    Police in Uvalde admit they mistakenly thought there were no more children alive in the classroom to explain why they waited outside. 911 calls from kids show otherwise

    Just the most cowardly incompetent motherfuckers.

    Why the fuck would they do this, even if he had already killed everyone? Were they afraid of being shown up by the feds, and then relented when they realized they’re too cowardly to do their fucking jobs?

    Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.
  • Options
    jungleroomxjungleroomx It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovels Registered User regular
    6x5f503f7buw.png

    Every single child in that classroom was alive when they got there.

  • Options
    JarsJars Registered User regular
    Forget firing these people need to be prosecuted

  • Options
    joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    edited May 2022
    Hakkekage wrote: »
    No-Quarter wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    tlu6hjlxs8lk.jpg

    Where is this sourced from?

    it's been going around twitter, from the color and style it looks like it's from the FT but I can't find that particular page from a quick google, only this one: https://www.ft.com/content/200a8746-a7db-11e7-ab55-27219df83c97

    at any rate:



    Drew McKevitt is a history professor apparently also with a book coming out called Gun Country
    The obvious answer is that the Assault Weapons Ban expired in 2004 but don't discount that 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, in which Congress freed gunmakers from any liability for their products killing people, which opened the floodgates on market "innovation"

    I'm just sayin yall the PLCAA is overlooked as an impediment to gun control efforts. it's not just a "no regulate my guns government pls" law it affirmatively protects the gun industry from private actions for recovery of the destruction they have caused by the reckless overmanufacturing and marketing of guns. Other industries have civil suit immunities like this (most famously vaccines but no one reasonably intelligent can deny the immense social utility of vaccines that overcome concerns about their safety or effectiveness) but it is particularly unjustified in the gun manufacturing industry

    They make a product that is exclusively designed to be efficient at killing people.

    An AR-15 is not a deer hunting rifle. You don't unload your mag into a flock of quail in the wee morning hours.

    It's for killing person after person as efficiently and conveniently as possible.

    6w7bsjwv7mi2.png

    React to what, exactly?

    kbvmaohz2vyk.png

    Where is the civilian purchaser of this going on "patrol"?
    A driving factor in the gun conglomerate’s marketing strategy for assault weapons is the
    aggressive promotion of the military pedigree of its products. In its advertisements and
    catalogs, as seen in the previous pages, the imagery and language used to sell
    Bushmaster assault rifles focuses on their use in offensive, anti-personnel situations
    and environments. While such ads never detail what ill-defined “justice” is to be meted
    out with these guns by their civilian owners, mass shootings like those at Sandy Hook
    and now Nashville offer one horrific answer.

    In its 2013 “Annual How To Sell Issue,” gun industry trade magazine Shooting Sports
    Retailer makes clear that this advertising approach is merely the tip of the spear as the
    gun industry changes from one catering to hunters and sportsmen to what the magazine
    describes as the “tactical market.” As the magazine notes:

    "Hunters, quite frequently, will not be impressed by the “tactical coolness factor”
    that has drawn many shooters into the shop looking for a new gun. In fact, some
    of them will likely be put off by the military-esque attitude and marketing that is so
    common in the tactical firearms market...

    The tactical coolness factor does, on the other hand, attract a lot of first-time gun
    buyers. Many of them are younger and unfamiliar with firearms, making them
    prime candidates to be unsure of what to look for or even what they want. Unlike
    many of the hunting demographic, these potential buyers will likely be interested
    only in tactical guns, and the military-ish looks and features will be big a [sic]
    selling point with them. As always, knowing the customer and adjusting the sales
    technique is crucial."

    (...)

    Remington Outdoor Company has made a decision. It is willing to risk mass shootings
    in its quest for profit — no matter the price paid in death and injury, anguish and
    heartbreak.

    TL;DR: Gun manufacturers are specifically marketing their products towards people to whom military/tactical styles appeal, and are being careless with how they do so in the pursuit of ever-increasing profits, no matter how many deaths their actions cause. And they can do this specifically because of the PLCAA giving them a shield against liability for this.

    It would be like allowing cigarette companies to make their products look "cool" again, with a legal assurance that no matter how many people die from what they sell, they have no responsibility to educate about the risks or any legal liability for how evil their marketing is.

    joshofalltrades on
  • Options
    Metzger MeisterMetzger Meister It Gets Worse before it gets any better.Registered User regular
    Monwyn wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    Patrick Blanchfield, who I have posted some thoughts from earlier, re-tweeted an article and some thoughts he had had on the five-year anniversary of the Sandy Hook shooting, which were weighing on his mind because the parallels between these school shootings are inevitable when you consider the underlying systemic causes of them... and how it took years for the true horrors of the system to be known.

    (First tweet in-lined, rest of tree quoted behind spoiler tag for length)
    Today is the anniversary of Sandy Hook. I'm re-sharing this, from five years back: my close-reading of CT state reports on Adam Lanza's institutional history, which reveal how the massacre fundamentally implicates white supremacy and class inequality.
    Sandy Hook, “White-on-White Crime,” and How Privilege Kills
    I'm thinking about this now today especially while watching Andrew Sullivan somehow insist that a mass shooting can't be a product of white supremacy if the shooters themselves aren't white skinned, and just folks: the systems and norms that make them possible are ALL about race.

    The prerogative to take up an easily accessible gun and mass-liquidate human beings to vindicate your personal grievances and political ideologies is a franchise that's nominally open to anyone, yes, but also: this is a settler colonial country founded on genocide and slavery.

    The material conditions that make such acts possible, and the libidinal conditions that make it even *imaginable,* reflect that history. But even more so: the way our polity deals with all such mass killings fundamentally reflects racialized hierarchies of human disposability.

    This all may sound very abstract - but look at Sandy Hook. Read the official docs. Even *the state itself* concludes there is no way - none - the rolling-thunder trainwreck of red flags that was the Lanza household would have been imaginable if not for their being white and rich.

    And there's a broader lesson here: white supremacy *ultimately treats ppl who are considered white ALSO as disposable for the sake of preserving racial capitalism.* Lanza killed twenty children and six school employees, almost all white, in one of the richest zip codes in the US.

    You can litigate how much SH changed things. It didn't, contra the glib nihilists, do "nothing." There have been state laws, corporate policy changes, movement building, etc. But the intensity of fundamental investment in white supremacy and inequality inflects *all* of it.

    Which is all to say: mass shootings are inevitably about race, class, and gender. They're a culture specific disorder in a society for which the white male prerogative to liquidate and expropriate was and remains (pun intended) constitutional. If we can't see this, we're useless.

    Appending one last thing here, me in nplusonemag on the five year anniversary, reading yet more reports, and putting Sandy Hook alongside another nightmare that happened that year: the killing of Trayvon Martin Ghosts of 2012

    Those last reports were heavily redacted, but they contain one detail, at once explosive yet also - if you're familiar with these things - unsurprising. Four years *before* the massacre, cops were informed that Adam was going to "kill his mother and shoot children at Sandy Hook."


    "Lanza allegedly told [REDACTED] that he planned to kill his mother and children at Sandy Hook ... [REDACTED] called the NPD and told them ... and was told by NPD that Lanza's mother owned the guns and there was nothing NPD could do about it."

    You can't read documents like this and conclude "this is the system failing." Rather, this is the system *functioning precisely as designed to protect the prerogatives of those whom it is designed to protect.* Human wreckage, including their own, is part of the package. /end

    I really thought you might have the good taste to not turn a thread about dead kids into yet another opportunity to preach the socialist gospel, and yet

    almost like you're intellectually incapable of seeing larger systems around social issues

  • Options
    joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    Jars wrote: »
    Forget firing these people need to be prosecuted

    Yeah this is criminal negligence and it resulted in people's babies getting slaughtered

    They need to be barred from ever being a cop again and be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law

  • Options
    KetBraKetBra Dressed Ridiculously Registered User regular
    "I'd apologize [to the families of the dead children] if thought it'd help" says the cop giving this press conference. Then proceeds to not apologize.

    Jeeeeesus these fucking people

    KGMvDLc.jpg?1
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    KetBra wrote: »
    "I'd apologize [to the families of the dead children] if thought it'd help" says the cop giving this press conference. Then proceeds to not apologize.

    Jeeeeesus these fucking people

    Are you fucking kidding me with this shit? "I'd do it but it won't bring you children back and legally that could put us in a bind so fuck you enjoy no more birthdays."

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    MorganVMorganV Registered User regular
    KetBra wrote: »
    "I'd apologize [to the families of the dead children] if thought it'd help" says the cop giving this press conference. Then proceeds to not apologize.

    Jeeeeesus these fucking people

    Well, you see, apologising doesn't help THEM.

    Also, decades of "don't admit fault, ever" is ingrained at this point.

    So they're just trying to get through this while minimising risk to their jobs, and legal liability.

    Cowards during the carnage, cowards now. At least they're consistent?

  • Options
    joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    I thought the famous cop lack of empathy had hit the bottom but "Nah I'm not sorry for being a coward and letting your kids take the bullets" is pretty fucking dire

  • Options
    jungleroomxjungleroomx It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovels Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    KetBra wrote: »
    "I'd apologize [to the families of the dead children] if thought it'd help" says the cop giving this press conference. Then proceeds to not apologize.

    Jeeeeesus these fucking people

    This is obscene.

    jungleroomx on
  • Options
    MulletudeMulletude Registered User regular
    They blocked people who were ready, willing and trained to go in and end it...I don't understand...

    My son is 11 and since the moment the news broke on this particular tragedy my fear for what he could needlessly encounter in his young life has once again been renewed.

    There's no fucking end in sight to this bullshit is there

    XBL-Dug Danger WiiU-DugDanger Steam-http://steamcommunity.com/id/DugDanger/
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    God damn that reminds me of a line from Road to Perdition where someone is dismissing a death and says "I'd like to apologize" and Paul Newman angrily calls that out "You'd like to apologize? Try again."

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    KetBra wrote: »
    "I'd apologize [to the families of the dead children] if thought it'd help" says the cop giving this press conference. Then proceeds to not apologize.

    Jeeeeesus these fucking people

    There is nothing in american policing worth saving.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Options
    mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    The children in that school would have been safer if every single cop in that town had resigned the week prior. Because the only thing the local police did was ensure nobody else could intervene. Using force to do so.

    Their complete absence would only have improved things. Probably not much. But still.

    Also it’s weird I didn’t really see how gross the marketing for firearms and firearms accessories was until I got out of the Guard. Having been in the Army, then the Guard, I was around these things routinely and didn’t see anything odd at all about the idea of going down to the store and buying one (yes, it would be semi-auto, no burst, and the barrel would be an inch or two longer). I threw on a combat uniform and went out training once a month so other people being in that mindset somehow didn’t seem weird to me.

    Then I got out.

    Now when I see assholes larping as soldiers with real guns, I kinda want to puke. Doubly so when it’s jerkoffs who never even bothered to put on a real uniform. Like I knew dudes who had a full “tactical” kit and “bug out” bag who despite being fit never served a fucking day in the military, and while that didn’t raise any alarms when I was in now as a squishy civilian I’m like what the actual fuck is wrong with those people. Putting all that in the rear view once it was no longer something I was sworn to do was…pretty easy. Why is this guy that works in a cubicle and doesn’t even know what MEPS stands for pretending he’s gonna protect us from Red Dawn?

    And why are we advertising and selling him the weapons to do so?

    This country is so, so broken.

  • Options
    shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    KetBra wrote: »
    "I'd apologize [to the families of the dead children] if thought it'd help" says the cop giving this press conference. Then proceeds to not apologize.

    Jeeeeesus these fucking people

    They are in full ass-covering mode here. They know they fucked up this entire thing real bad and are desperately trying to craft a narrative that saves their asses and avoid saying anything that would implicate them in future legal action.

  • Options
    Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Registered User regular
    Starting to wonder if “cops needed time to figure out how to cover up that they killed at least one kid” is that outlandish

  • Options
    tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    6x5f503f7buw.png

    Every single child in that classroom was alive when they got there.

    I don't think this is true, and minimizes the fact that the availability of weapons to 18 year olds was the primary problem here. Accounts from the children who survived are pretty clear that the gunman killed some children and teachers immediately on entering the classroom.

    However, if they had gone in immediately it seems certain that at least some children would have been saved.

    Good police response may have prevented some deaths. The police response was a travesty, and they should be locked up.

    Good gun laws would have prevented all the deaths, and made it so "how do you respond to armed 18 year olds with assault weapons" wasn't something our cops had to worry about.

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • Options
    BogartBogart Streetwise Hercules Registered User, Moderator mod
    Monwyn wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    Patrick Blanchfield, who I have posted some thoughts from earlier, re-tweeted an article and some thoughts he had had on the five-year anniversary of the Sandy Hook shooting, which were weighing on his mind because the parallels between these school shootings are inevitable when you consider the underlying systemic causes of them... and how it took years for the true horrors of the system to be known.

    (First tweet in-lined, rest of tree quoted behind spoiler tag for length)
    Today is the anniversary of Sandy Hook. I'm re-sharing this, from five years back: my close-reading of CT state reports on Adam Lanza's institutional history, which reveal how the massacre fundamentally implicates white supremacy and class inequality.
    Sandy Hook, “White-on-White Crime,” and How Privilege Kills
    I'm thinking about this now today especially while watching Andrew Sullivan somehow insist that a mass shooting can't be a product of white supremacy if the shooters themselves aren't white skinned, and just folks: the systems and norms that make them possible are ALL about race.

    The prerogative to take up an easily accessible gun and mass-liquidate human beings to vindicate your personal grievances and political ideologies is a franchise that's nominally open to anyone, yes, but also: this is a settler colonial country founded on genocide and slavery.

    The material conditions that make such acts possible, and the libidinal conditions that make it even *imaginable,* reflect that history. But even more so: the way our polity deals with all such mass killings fundamentally reflects racialized hierarchies of human disposability.

    This all may sound very abstract - but look at Sandy Hook. Read the official docs. Even *the state itself* concludes there is no way - none - the rolling-thunder trainwreck of red flags that was the Lanza household would have been imaginable if not for their being white and rich.

    And there's a broader lesson here: white supremacy *ultimately treats ppl who are considered white ALSO as disposable for the sake of preserving racial capitalism.* Lanza killed twenty children and six school employees, almost all white, in one of the richest zip codes in the US.

    You can litigate how much SH changed things. It didn't, contra the glib nihilists, do "nothing." There have been state laws, corporate policy changes, movement building, etc. But the intensity of fundamental investment in white supremacy and inequality inflects *all* of it.

    Which is all to say: mass shootings are inevitably about race, class, and gender. They're a culture specific disorder in a society for which the white male prerogative to liquidate and expropriate was and remains (pun intended) constitutional. If we can't see this, we're useless.

    Appending one last thing here, me in nplusonemag on the five year anniversary, reading yet more reports, and putting Sandy Hook alongside another nightmare that happened that year: the killing of Trayvon Martin Ghosts of 2012

    Those last reports were heavily redacted, but they contain one detail, at once explosive yet also - if you're familiar with these things - unsurprising. Four years *before* the massacre, cops were informed that Adam was going to "kill his mother and shoot children at Sandy Hook."


    "Lanza allegedly told [REDACTED] that he planned to kill his mother and children at Sandy Hook ... [REDACTED] called the NPD and told them ... and was told by NPD that Lanza's mother owned the guns and there was nothing NPD could do about it."

    You can't read documents like this and conclude "this is the system failing." Rather, this is the system *functioning precisely as designed to protect the prerogatives of those whom it is designed to protect.* Human wreckage, including their own, is part of the package. /end

    I really thought you might have the good taste to not turn a thread about dead kids into yet another opportunity to preach the socialist gospel, and yet

    almost like you're intellectually incapable of seeing larger systems around social issues

    I said don’t do this. Knock it off.

  • Options
    ChiselphaneChiselphane Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    I'm trying to imagine being so disconnected from what I'd hope most of us consider normal and decent to think that was an ok statement to make. I literally can't do it. Like even if it was a script given to me to read to help shield myself and my department from legal action, I cant see how I'd be able to form the words in any believable way. I mean, I wouldnt have been the kind of person who'd just stand outside while children were being murdered so I wouldnt be in that position in the first place, but still. Like discovering aliens.

    Chiselphane on
  • Options
    jungleroomxjungleroomx It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovels Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    tbloxham wrote: »
    6x5f503f7buw.png

    Every single child in that classroom was alive when they got there.

    I don't think this is true, and minimizes the fact that the availability of weapons to 18 year olds was the primary problem here. Accounts from the children who survived are pretty clear that the gunman killed some children and teachers immediately on entering the classroom.

    However, if they had gone in immediately it seems certain that at least some children would have been saved.

    Good police response may have prevented some deaths. The police response was a travesty, and they should be locked up.

    Good gun laws would have prevented all the deaths, and made it so "how do you respond to armed 18 year olds with assault weapons" wasn't something our cops had to worry about.

    Dude the shooter was outside for 12 minutes firing rounds off in the air before entering the school with cops present. He went into that classroom with cops on the scene. Every single kid in that school was alive when the cops were there.

    If you're gonna water carry I really wish you would actually read about this case.

    jungleroomx on
  • Options
    matt has a problemmatt has a problem Points to 'off' Points to 'on'Registered User regular
    Magell wrote: »
    Weird how it just grows exponentially when the Assault Rifle ban expired.

    As convenient as it would be, statistics don't bear it out. Aside from the few states that enacted stricter laws banning any post-94 built AR-15 permanently, all the AWB did was increase the speed they were purchased. Companies removed a few cosmetic features to be in compliance with the ban, and people simply added them back after purchasing the gun because the only prohibition was against selling a gun with them, not possessing one. The Republican boogeyman of "They're going to take your guns" became real and they have not stopped flogging it ever since. The trend continued after the ban because prices decreased. And Obama's presidency caused an increase in purchases far more than the end of the ban did. Why wasn't there an increase in shootings during the ban then? Look at what was happening economically through the mid and late 90s. It was a massively prosperous time. The government actually managed to pass a balanced budget, and briefly had a surplus. The catastrophic income disparity we're currently being crushed under hadn't ramped up yet. Minimum wage, while not at parity with inflation, was still within the realm of a somewhat livable wage. Housing hadn't gone off the rails completely. The tech sector absolutely exploded. You could still graduate college without six figures worth of debt.

    Know what did happen just after the ban ended though? Twitter was created and Facebook became open to everyone, both in 2006. The proliferation of online extremism increased exponentially. The seeds planted with the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999 were coming to fruition with the subprime mortgage crisis that was about to wipe out trillions in middle class wealth. We'd gone from a minimum wage that was about 75-80% keeping pace with inflation to one that was closer to 50%. Education was now out of reach for more and more people. The mask came off the Right and they fully embraced eliminating the more than half of the country that doesn't support them. The fractures that had been growing finally managed to break us. Couple that with the refusal by one side and the inability of the other to do anything to keep a gun out of the hands of someone who would do this, and you have our current reality.

    nibXTE7.png
  • Options
    shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    I'm trying to imagine being so disconnected from what I'd hope most of us consider normal and decent to think that was an ok statement to make. I literally can't do it. Like even if it was a script given to me to read to help shield myself and my department from legal action, I cant see how I'd be able to form the words in any believable way. I mean, I wouldnt have been the kind of person who'd just stand outside while children were being murdered so I wouldnt be in that position in the first place, but still. Like discovering aliens.

    Just imagine you were trying to do anything to save your ass from the consequences of your own actions.

  • Options
    override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    To get in the mind of a cop you just need to see everyone else in the same way you normally see NPCs in a video game, and yourself and other cops as the only real people

  • Options
    Giggles_FunsworthGiggles_Funsworth Blight on Discourse Bay Area SprawlRegistered User regular
    edited May 2022
    Hevach wrote: »
    Shadowhope wrote: »
    While I disagree with some of the specifics, I do agree that the system is functioning exactly as intended. I think that the last decade has shown us that there is no inflection point that will change the minds of half of Americas voters. And I do think that American gun policy is driven far more by the will of Republican voters than it is by even the most bought and paid for American politicians. Things like background checks may poll well, but when the rubber hits the road you have places like Maine voting against them on the ballot. Background checks: literally less popular in practice than Hillary Clinton!

    Pittsburg and Sutherland Springs and the Charleston shootings showed that places of worship weren’t going to be the line that changed people’s minds. Neither was shooting people shopping at Wal-Mart. Vegas and Orlando made clear that body count wasn’t an issue. But that all went without saying: Sandy Hook is all the evidence we need that no blood price is too high for the Republican voters and for the non-voting Americans to change anything any time soon.

    With that said, I do sort of wonder if mass shooters targeted legislatures instead of schools if politicians might start enacting tougher laws, even if unpopular, if only out of self-interest.

    The last time we got meaningful gun control was when a "liberal" shot a Republican president. The time before that was when a bunch of black people armed themselves against white lynch mobs. Before that it was Italians, who had been made technically white in 1893 but were not the right kind of white.

    This was all before January 6 2021, though. I don't know where the line has slid to, but trying to assassinate the Vice President and Republican congressional leadership isn't it anymore.

    these are both in reference to reagan yeah?

    because he was in the capitol as governor when the panthers showed up with their rifles

    not sure if you're getting at the national firearms act or not with the second part, but if so, gun control happened as a result of white anxieties of uncontrollable black populations twice in the last century

    not even like, Last Century last century

    from this date

    EDIT: also i just looked up the dates of the AWB and the later watts riots and i'm going to go out on a limb and say that the assault weapons ban probably had more to do with that than the attempted assassination of ronald reagan almost 15 years previously

    Giggles_Funsworth on
  • Options
    jungleroomxjungleroomx It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovels Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    Here's the full timeline of the shooting


    It was 12 minutes from the first 911 call to the shooter actually entering the building. For a police department located 2 blocks away, which had police officers run in and get their kids out.

    jungleroomx on
  • Options
    Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Registered User regular
    Magell wrote: »
    Weird how it just grows exponentially when the Assault Rifle ban expired.

    As convenient as it would be, statistics don't bear it out. Aside from the few states that enacted stricter laws banning any post-94 built AR-15 permanently, all the AWB did was increase the speed they were purchased. Companies removed a few cosmetic features to be in compliance with the ban, and people simply added them back after purchasing the gun because the only prohibition was against selling a gun with them, not possessing one. The Republican boogeyman of "They're going to take your guns" became real and they have not stopped flogging it ever since. The trend continued after the ban because prices decreased. And Obama's presidency caused an increase in purchases far more than the end of the ban did. Why wasn't there an increase in shootings during the ban then? Look at what was happening economically through the mid and late 90s. It was a massively prosperous time. The government actually managed to pass a balanced budget, and briefly had a surplus. The catastrophic income disparity we're currently being crushed under hadn't ramped up yet. Minimum wage, while not at parity with inflation, was still within the realm of a somewhat livable wage. Housing hadn't gone off the rails completely. The tech sector absolutely exploded. You could still graduate college without six figures worth of debt.

    Know what did happen just after the ban ended though? Twitter was created and Facebook became open to everyone, both in 2006. The proliferation of online extremism increased exponentially. The seeds planted with the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999 were coming to fruition with the subprime mortgage crisis that was about to wipe out trillions in middle class wealth. We'd gone from a minimum wage that was about 75-80% keeping pace with inflation to one that was closer to 50%. Education was now out of reach for more and more people. The mask came off the Right and they fully embraced eliminating the more than half of the country that doesn't support them. The fractures that had been growing finally managed to break us. Couple that with the refusal by one side and the inability of the other to do anything to keep a gun out of the hands of someone who would do this, and you have our current reality.

    Extremism is a problem everywhere, it manifests here in mass shootings and gun violence because the thing that’s unique here is how many goddamn guns and people wanting to use guns we have

    I don’t know if this refutes your “it’s not just the AWB expiration” but I don’t know if it matters

    It’s not just an assault rifle issue here (though that’s why the dots on that graph get bigger on average)

  • Options
    Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    Here's the full timeline of the shooting


    It was 12 minutes from the first 911 call to the shooter actually entering the building

    Not consistent with other reports. It has the tactical team arriving later than reported earlier this page for example.

    oh and extra fuck you

    cnn about the press conference
    @ShimonPro
    's first Q at the press conference: "You say there were 19 officers gathered in the hallway or somewhere. What efforts were made to try and break through that door? You say it was locked. What efforts were the officers making?" The awful answer: "None at that time."

  • Options
    shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Hevach wrote: »
    Shadowhope wrote: »
    While I disagree with some of the specifics, I do agree that the system is functioning exactly as intended. I think that the last decade has shown us that there is no inflection point that will change the minds of half of Americas voters. And I do think that American gun policy is driven far more by the will of Republican voters than it is by even the most bought and paid for American politicians. Things like background checks may poll well, but when the rubber hits the road you have places like Maine voting against them on the ballot. Background checks: literally less popular in practice than Hillary Clinton!

    Pittsburg and Sutherland Springs and the Charleston shootings showed that places of worship weren’t going to be the line that changed people’s minds. Neither was shooting people shopping at Wal-Mart. Vegas and Orlando made clear that body count wasn’t an issue. But that all went without saying: Sandy Hook is all the evidence we need that no blood price is too high for the Republican voters and for the non-voting Americans to change anything any time soon.

    With that said, I do sort of wonder if mass shooters targeted legislatures instead of schools if politicians might start enacting tougher laws, even if unpopular, if only out of self-interest.

    The last time we got meaningful gun control was when a "liberal" shot a Republican president. The time before that was when a bunch of black people armed themselves against white lynch mobs. Before that it was Italians, who had been made technically white in 1893 but were not the right kind of white.

    This was all before January 6 2021, though. I don't know where the line has slid to, but trying to assassinate the Vice President and Republican congressional leadership isn't it anymore.

    these are both in reference to reagan yeah?

    because he was in the capitol as governor when the panthers showed up with their rifles

    not sure if you're getting at the national firearms act or not with the second part, but if so, gun control happened as a result of white anxieties of uncontrollable black populations twice in the last century

    not even like, Last Century last century

    from this date

    EDIT: also i just looked up the dates of the AWB and the later watts riots and i'm going to go out on a limb and say that the assault weapons ban probably had more to do with that than the attempted assassination of ronald reagan almost 15 years previously

    The AWB traces it's roots back to mass shootings in the late 80s to early 90s. What is afaik the first version of what eventually made it into the final bill was introduced in 1989 after a school shooting that killed 5 kids and injured dozens of other people. It kinda floats around for a few years and then eventually Feinstein gets behind it after another mass shooting (this time I believe a workplace one) in California.

  • Options
    jungleroomxjungleroomx It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovels Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    Here's the full timeline of the shooting


    It was 12 minutes from the first 911 call to the shooter actually entering the building

    Not consistent with other reports. It has the tactical team arriving later than reported earlier this page for example.

    oh and extra fuck you

    cnn about the press conference
    @ShimonPro
    's first Q at the press conference: "You say there were 19 officers gathered in the hallway or somewhere. What efforts were made to try and break through that door? You say it was locked. What efforts were the officers making?" The awful answer: "None at that time."

    The tactical team wasn't the team that allowed the shooter to slip into the school through an unlocked door and then giving up. That's what the cops did.

    The kid didn't have body armor.
    Despite the school and the police’s best efforts, an 18-year-old high school student was able to purchase an AR-15 firearm — as soon as he became of age, in a state that does not require a license to carry — and use it to massacre 19 elementary school children and two of their teachers in Uvalde. And although the shooter had crashed his car and been “engaged by law enforcement,” before entering the school, he still made it inside.

    This entire thing is horrific

    jungleroomx on
  • Options
    zagdrobzagdrob Registered User regular
    So basically at Stoneman Douglas they had the one coward cop who froze and subsequently was made the scapegoat for the whole thing. IIRC the guy is facing criminal charges for negligence for not assaulting the shooter after being fired and (from what I've seen) having his life destroyed.

    Here we have an entire police force who froze and are desperately flailing realizing this might be one of the few times they can't just lie and bluster and obfuscate their way out of trouble. Every few hours something comes out that just manages to somehow make them look worse and worse, and their lies seem to be getting even more desperate.

    Hopefully those fuckers realize just how trapped they are and feel the fear and frustration knowing that they are hung out there and nobody is coming to help them. It sounds like they are on their own and quickly seeing the bottom of the bus on this one which is better than they deserve even if it's not even close to justice.

    These fucking cops. Motherfuckers.

  • Options
    Giggles_FunsworthGiggles_Funsworth Blight on Discourse Bay Area SprawlRegistered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Hevach wrote: »
    Shadowhope wrote: »
    While I disagree with some of the specifics, I do agree that the system is functioning exactly as intended. I think that the last decade has shown us that there is no inflection point that will change the minds of half of Americas voters. And I do think that American gun policy is driven far more by the will of Republican voters than it is by even the most bought and paid for American politicians. Things like background checks may poll well, but when the rubber hits the road you have places like Maine voting against them on the ballot. Background checks: literally less popular in practice than Hillary Clinton!

    Pittsburg and Sutherland Springs and the Charleston shootings showed that places of worship weren’t going to be the line that changed people’s minds. Neither was shooting people shopping at Wal-Mart. Vegas and Orlando made clear that body count wasn’t an issue. But that all went without saying: Sandy Hook is all the evidence we need that no blood price is too high for the Republican voters and for the non-voting Americans to change anything any time soon.

    With that said, I do sort of wonder if mass shooters targeted legislatures instead of schools if politicians might start enacting tougher laws, even if unpopular, if only out of self-interest.

    The last time we got meaningful gun control was when a "liberal" shot a Republican president. The time before that was when a bunch of black people armed themselves against white lynch mobs. Before that it was Italians, who had been made technically white in 1893 but were not the right kind of white.

    This was all before January 6 2021, though. I don't know where the line has slid to, but trying to assassinate the Vice President and Republican congressional leadership isn't it anymore.

    these are both in reference to reagan yeah?

    because he was in the capitol as governor when the panthers showed up with their rifles

    not sure if you're getting at the national firearms act or not with the second part, but if so, gun control happened as a result of white anxieties of uncontrollable black populations twice in the last century

    not even like, Last Century last century

    from this date

    EDIT: also i just looked up the dates of the AWB and the later watts riots and i'm going to go out on a limb and say that the assault weapons ban probably had more to do with that than the attempted assassination of ronald reagan almost 15 years previously

    The AWB traces it's roots back to mass shootings in the late 80s to early 90s. What is afaik the first version of what eventually made it into the final bill was introduced in 1989 after a school shooting that killed 5 kids and injured dozens of other people. It kinda floats around for a few years and then eventually Feinstein gets behind it after another mass shooting (this time I believe a workplace one) in California.

    weird how that's still 8 years after the attempted assassination of reagan and 5 years before the passage of the bill, which only happened after everybody was het up over violent super predators

    c'mon man

  • Options
    DacDac Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    Did we mention that the Onion is fucking done with this shit?
    Report: Uvalde Gunman Had Accomplices As Far As Washington, D.C.

    Dac on
    Steam: catseye543
    PSN: ShogunGunshow
    Origin: ShogunGunshow
Sign In or Register to comment.