19 Students, 2 Teachers Killed In Shooting At Texas Elementary School

Funny, but the rest of our Western allies reduce gun violence by restricting civilian access to guns, particularly military grade firearms.
Crazy idea, huh??

You think it's cool for a disturbed 18 year old to be able to buy two AR15s, then shoot his grandmother and afterwards slaughter an elementary school, that's on you.

The only background check this kid went through is whether or not he committed a prior felony. Really thorough.
How about NOT selling AR15s and body armor to teenagers?? The solutions aren't that hard.

 

Yes I’m this instance no but almost every other school shooter made terrorist threats to the school who didn’t act and just reported to the FBI.


Why is it the sellers fault? The FBI/ government employee processing the application is responsible for the yes/ no. To answer your question tho this would be discrimination. It’s no one’s business what I spend my money on and or for what purpose. No crime has been committed.


So 18 year olds are ok to put body armor on, put a gun in their hands and send them to war? But an 18 year old adult is not allowed to purchase tools for self defense? That is discrimination. Every gun confiscation in history started out with registration. This then led to governments GROSSLY violating their citizens through police state. It idea like this that make people say no. Something does need to be done tho! We literally have over 20,000 state and federal laws in this country. So yes, very much so have gun control and it CLEARLY doesn’t work. This is why we have to approach differently. I don’t care what someone outside of our home thinks. Not like they aren’t taking BILLIONS of OUR dollars and have their own issues. If they think we’re touched then they can return our money so that we can put it towards solutions that will ACTUALLY work.


I have one and you nor anyone else can tell me no. Because it is up to me to protect myself. If every politics and government building can be protected by them so can we. 99.98% of the 100 MILLION AR’s aren’t used illegally but they’re the problem and must be banned? What logic is that? It won’t make a dent because we have 500+ million guns already on the streets. 90% of gun violence comes from stolen guns. So the only thing it’ll do is make women like me vulnerable because I’m not going to steal someone gun. It’s not a red flag that an adult is purchasing life saving tools. I have what he has plus more.


I’m apolitical so please don’t call me a conservative. 90% of Americans? That’s propaganda until there is credible polls posted. So my attitude of not wanting to get raped (happens more often then mass shootings), robbed, or killed is going to fuck things up? 3 million guns a year are used by people like us in justified uses. 40,000 people are killed (mostly gang/ drug violence), and of that less 1% are mass shooters. But me not wanting to be a victim and or have authoritarians trample our rights is the problem?


The ban of guns won’t happen because of logic and the fact that we are home to 50% of the worlds guns. Fuck around and find out. The cops did stand outside on orders and that not ok. Put one in the building and they’re forced to protect. Either way that’s an issue to and they need to be held accountable. Not me.


So you want our government to be responsible for mental health screenings, registration, be the only ones with AR’s and to discriminate? This is the same government that bombed a Philly neighborhood less than 40 years ago, enslaved an entire race, now regulating womens bodies, are not held accountable for their murders, trying to surprise our speech, will mail us for peacefully smoking a plant, drag us off our legally owned property for not paying arbitrary taxes and the list goes ONNN. But you’re right, with their track record they’ll do the morally right thing and do it correctly like they always do

 

Guns are made to accurately fire a projectile. The warfighters choose what’s best for them. So “military grade” is misleading. Our western Allie’s don’t have inalienable constitutional 2A rights. So good for them. Also how’s Australia doing in regards to their government over reach? As a woman I’m WAY more likely to be raped then caught in a shooting. Know what stops this? My guns.


No I don’t think it’s cool and it’s “not on me” that’s disgusting. I don’t think it’s cool and is why we need to maintain our un-infringed right.


18 year olds are considered adults. They get body armor and guns then sent off to war but can’t protect their lives here? That’s discrimination. If we’re not going to sell to 18 year olds then laws need to change to not observe them as adults. The solution isn’t a singular issue, it’s multifaceted. Thinking it’s a one solution problem is what’s holding us back

 

If mental health were the main cause behind mass shootings, then every country around the world would have the same number of mass shootings that we do, because every country has mentally ill people. There are mentally ill people in the UK. There are mentally ill people in Canada. There are mentally ill people in Germany. But they don't have nearly the amount of mass shootings and overall gun violence that we do in America, because they don't have anywhere near as many guns floating around as we do over here. More guns leads to more gun violence.

As far as school security goes, the school district as a whole had a very strong security program put into place after another mass shooting a few years before:

And despite all this security, 19 people still died. This country has a gun problem, and until we wrap our minds around that issue, no amount of mental health treatment or counseling by itself is going to fix the problem.

 

I'd love for a reporter to ask Gregg Abbott what his plan is to address the apparent mental health crisis in his state. Or Ted Cruz, for that matter. Because I, for one, am dying to know since they've been trotting out "mental health" as a scapegoat for years and have done absolutely nothing to improve in that time.

I'd have a lot more respect for them if they just came out and admitted that they just don't give a shit about gun violence. Even if it's gun violence against the children claim to care so much about. At the next press conference imma need Abbott to just shrug his shoulders the next time he gets asked about this topic. It'd be the most honest thing he could possibly do.

 

Obviously the number of guns in circulation play some role. But if you take that tool away the evil is still there. UK has bad knife violence similar to our gun violence. Canada and Germany has “free healthcare”. Mental health can be addressed much easier and culturally it’s more accepted and not dismissed like here.

We are home of 50% of the world guns but only 20% of the worlds gun violence. Based on your logic the number of gun violence should be synonymous with the guns we have. 500 million guns that we know of on the streets. 3 million guns a year are justified uses. In often cases a single round never being fired. 40 thousand deaths a year come from gun violence with about 1/3 of this coming from suicides, and another 1/3 coming from drug/ gang violence. This leaves about 15 thousand innocent lives lost. Of the entire 40,000, less than 1% are mass shootings. But you’re right, the guns is the root cause and this issue is a single solution problem. Gun control doesn’t work in this country. Look at NY, CA, Chiraq etc.

The district has a very strong security program? The shooter walked through the front door effortlessly. Then through other doors that were unlocked. We need measureS put into place to actively stop people.

 

They keep telling everyone what they really care about though. "Freedom" & "Rights". The freedom to be as self centered & amoral as they want to be and the right to rub it in other peoples faces if you disagree or call them out for it.

 

Between rampant knife violence and rampant gun violence, give me the knife violence every single time, without fail. The gunman at Pulse years back wouldn't have killed nearly as many people if he only had a knife, if he even managed to kill any at all. You can't stab a bunch of people from hundreds of feet away, but you can definitely shoot them. And if the gunman at Uvalde only had a knife, he would not have been able to murder 19 people before being stopped.

There's no evidence that the shooter had any kind of diagnosed mental health problems so he probably wouldn't have been flagged anyway, butwhat you said about healthcare is a reason that I am in favor of universal health care, as well as better access to mental health treatment in general. I work in a field that frequently deals with people who have mental health issues and one of, if not the biggest problem, is the lack of resources. Not enough facilities for all the patients that need to be treated. Not enough beds at existing facilities. Not enough doctors to be able to evaluate, and if necessary, treat people. Fixing all of that takes money.

The problem is that the people who claim that the issue is about mental health (not you, I'm talking about mainly politicians) will do absolutely fuck-all to make sure that mental health counseling and/or treatment is available to anyone who might need it. Oh, they'll talk about mental health and how bad it is in this country, but when it's time for them to actually discuss what they would to fix the issue? They get so quiet that you can hear the grass grow outside.

Gun control measures do work though, especially when it involves limitations on high-capacity magazines. There are actual studies to support that. From the American Public Health Association:

Now will additional gun control laws stop all gun violence? No they won't, but neither does any other law. Laws against murder don't stop every single murder from happening, and no one realistically expects them to. But it acts as a pretty good deterrent, and no state is repealing their statutes against murder because all murders in that state haven't stopped. The same goes for laws against robbery, sexual assault, burglary, aggravated assaults, and many other crimes.

But it has to be nationwide and not piecemeal on a state-by-state basis. You know why Chicago has so many guns floating around despite gun control laws on the books in Illinois? It's because Indiana, which has much less strict laws, is right next door. And since we don't have border patrol agents on the borders of every single state checking every single car that drives across, it's takes basically zero effort to get one across state lines without anyone noticing. Chicago is as close to the border of Indiana as it could without actually being on the border between the two states. One state having strict gun control measures means nothing if you can just drive half an hour to another state and then come right back. It has to be comprehensive.

Also, I did not say that it was a single issue problem so I have no idea where you got that from. We need to address not just people who have mental health problems, but the sheer amount of guns (and the restrictions on who can buy/carry them) as well.

 

That, and buckets on buckets upon buckets of NRA and gun lobby money.

 

Thing is in UK with knife violence you don’t get to legally own a knife. Might be ok with you but for us women who are often LARGELY out sized by men, I want the right to defend myself and something that gives me the best odds. He also possibly wouldn’t have killed as many if it wasn’t a gun free zone. The Uvalde shooter could’ve still killed as many 8 years potentially.


I agree, those who claim it’s mental health issues don’t have suggestions which won’t work. The other politicians who claim it’s a single issue solution and or just banning/ universal background checks don’t understand how easy it is for evil people to procure them illegally. All while being protected by the very things they say are pure evil. Also that same side completely ignores that this has anything to do with mental health (AOC today).


“High capacity magazines” is a term introduced by gun grabbing politicians. They are standard. If they are good enough for the government then they’re good enough for us.


Right, the punishment laws make sense. But to create a law claiming it’ll stop this is wrong. So let’s say we ban 30 round magazines, AR’s etc. When mass shootings continue to happen do you things those politicians are going to say “my bad it didn’t work, we’ll restore your rights”? Or will they just want to grab more while still not address active protection and address the issue. You know what stops murder, robbery, sexual assault, burglary, aggravated assaults, and many other violent crimes? People actively defending themselves with lethal means. And like regulating womens bodies, how we choose to defend our bodies is no one’s business.


That’s a false claim that Chicago is that way because of neighboring less regulated states. If that was the case then why don’t those states see the same crime? Also they are no different than the rest of the nation. Roughly 90% of gun crime stems from stolen guns. Not legal purchases from less regulated states. Also with how we’re setup, each state has a constitution.

 

The goal is to REDUCE the incidence of mass shootings. Everyone knows it's unlikely to make them never happen.
You ban AR15s and prevent gun sales to 18 year olds, that shooting at uvalde never happens.

Oh, and just because the government has it doesn't mean the general population should be able to have it too. What kind of nonsense is that??

You can't legally own a knife in the UK?? Okay.lol

 

Agreed! It's all about freedoms to do whatever they want to do, and rights so long as it doesn't interfere with their agenda,

 

Agreed! If all agreed on this mental health thing... Last time I checked they have absolutely no interest in funding this sort of thing and saying it's "socialism". No doubt that if people like Abbott had their way... Folks like you and I would be back to our ancestor's slave status and women would have fewer rights. No to go off on a tangent but an America that's increasingly brown at all levels, and have women in power at all levels scares the hell out of them. Pisses them off too,

 

We will never agree on this topic, so this is probably going to be my last (or one of my last) replies because we're going in circles.

No one is saying that women don't have the right to defend themselves, so I have no idea where that is coming from. But even if I did say that, the right to use deadly force in self-defense isn't limitless whether you're male or female, or if the person attacking you is male or female. If someone's actively trying to attack you and cause you serious bodily injury or death, you are justified in using force in most cases. If that aggressor then flees, the threat is over. You aren't then allowed to go chase that person down and kill them in case they might attack you again in the future. And you can't more force what is reasonably necessary to defend yourself in any given situation.

And we place limits on weapon usage all the time. You have the right to defend your home, but you can't put a bunch of landmines in your front yard just in case someone might step on your property and do you harm. And if you're convicted felon, you don't have the right to possess a gun at all for any reason, no matter how much you might fear for your safety. Under federal law, you don't even have to be a convicted felon to lose your right to carry a gun: if you're convicted of domestic violence, even a misdemeanor, you lose your right to carry a gun.

Every single fundamental right has limitations or exceptions to it usage. You can point to any part of the Bill of Rights, and there is going be an exception to it, whether that exception is implicit or explicit. I'm also way less concerned about "gun grabbing" politicians than I am about gun violence, but that's just me I suppose.

And claim about Chicago having so many guns come from out of state is definitely not a false narrative:

https://wgntv.com/news/wgn-investig...ars-trafficking-remains-a-perplexing-problem/

There are several other reports on gun violence in Chicago that come to the same conclusion. As you can see from above, two of the three states were guns come from are states that border Illinois, and are close to Chicago itself: Indiana to the east, and Wisconsin to the north. So yeah, out of state guns are most definitely a serious problem in Chicago. And those states don't see the same level of crime as Chicago because neither of those states has a city as big as Chicago. Chicago has it's own unique set of challenges when it comes to gun violence, as do a lot of places. Especially large cities. Making guns even easier to get will not solve that problem. After all, if more guns led to less gun violence, then Chicago would be one of the safest places in the world since there are so many guns floating around.

As for those weapons being good enough for the government then they should be good enough for us, I disagree with that. The military, unlike a lot of civilians, are trained on how to use those weapons safely. The military does background checks on people before they enlist to make sure that they even have the right to carry a gun in the first place. The same does not apply to the majority of civilians. The fact that citizens have a general right to own firearms doesn't mean that every single person who wants a gun, no matter how powerful, should be able to just walk into a store and purchase one.

That's the difference between an 18 year old who isn't in the military and hasn't had any kind of training or screening versus someone in the military who has done those things. In general though, I will never, ever have the opinion that a child (which an 18 year old is) should have access to a weapon as power as an AR-15.

 

It's exactly why I roll my eyes when they start fretting "wHaT aBoUt ChIcAgO/dEtRoiT/sT.LoUiS" or some other scary sounding area: they don't give a shit about any of those places, and they never have. Not even for a second. The only time they even think about those places is to deflect attention and criticism from themselves. They use it as a red herring, and that's it. I would love to hear even one republican politician explain, in detail, how making guns easier to get and more prevalent would end up decreasing gun violence in places where gun violence is already out of control.

And honestly, if a Republican had an actual plan or policy address mental health problems in this county and was willing to actually spend the money to tackle, I'd love to hear it. Depending on other circumstances, I might even consider voting for them. But again, for them to actually do that, they would have to actually care about the problem in the first place. It is obvious that they don't.