When are politicians going to stop ignoring the solution to school shootings?

[Danny_dan92]

Notice how all politicians have armed security around them at all times. Yet they’ll stand on the graves of innocent children and school faculty when one of these tragedies happen. The problem isn’t guns, the problem is lack of guns on school campuses.


How many mass shootings have happened on federal grounds. Or police stations, or any facility where people know there are armed personnel ready to respond? Oh right. Never.


School shooters think like terrorists, risk vs. reward. Schools are soft targets. Because they’re “gun free zones”

[razelove]

I'd say that one is a solution that would work in suburbs and more rural schools, mostly because the security that you need to prevent a shooting is not much at all.

For urban areas that already have a lot of crime, you're tossing stones into the fucking ocean. You'd have cries across America because of a "mass shooting" when it's a dispute over drugs or a girl between two kids with guns who are having people around them hit because they don't care about their back drop and have poor accuracy.

There are plenty of schools that are "gun free zones" metal detectors out front, cops in and out of the school, kids still shoot each other inside and outside. I don't count that as a school shooting, but just part of the vicious drug problems and lack of accountability for parents in our country.

Another thing to look at is the media's accountability in mass shootings as the massive coverage given to the shooters makes heroes out of them which inspires more people to become shooters, they become the hero of the week, which inspires another person to become a shooter, so on and so forth.

Armed guards at soft targets, eliminating drug, and domestic crime from the stats, taking the shooter's name away, like not allowing it on their tombstone even would go a far distance in reducing the crime. Anyway, the vast majority of shootings are workplace motivated by layoffs, firing, demotions, etc. Job security with more personal accountability would nip a lot of the problems in the bud. Hope is a powerful motivator.

[inhua]

the best solution would be to limit the number of school shooters.

adding extra laws or punishments won't deter a school shooter who is determined to carry out his crime. prevention of a school shooter is better than prevention of a school shooting

for starters there needs to be a cultural wide shift and attitude towards helping those who society has left behind. proper use of taxpayers money into mental health facilities. no more lies and virtue signaling. schools always claim to be anti-bullying but bullies still get away and the victims are the ones who get demonized by their peers so it's not difficult to see why the victims of bullying usually end up becoming worse monsters than their bullies in the long wrong

[Danny_dan92]

Yeah I can agree to this also, notice every school shooter has something in common. Mental illness. Cognitive decline, I think there’s many things that can be done to tackle this problem. That one being one of the main points that for whatever reason politicians refuse to address it.

I got bullied in school but my parents taught me that when people try to bring down others, it’s because they themselves aren’t content with their lives in some way. So seeing other’s miserable makes them feel better about their situation. It’s sick. But I do think that adding increased security at schools would also help immensely.

These school shooters know that schools are soft targets, like shooting fish in a barrel, no pun intended. Furthermore how many school shootings have happened at secured facilities? It’s never happened, because these mass shooters have the mindset of terrorists. Upon arriving to carry out their heinous act, there will be nobody to stop them, the only people that would stop them is law enforcement and they take several minutes at the least to show up and act. You know how many people can be killed by a shooter within minutes in a setting like a school? Many. We have many examples of this.

I’m a gun owner, and am in the military. Pushing more gun laws do not stop mass shooters, however adding more security which act as deterrents and allowing more good people to be armed will help.

[sage2021]

You should know by now that the democrats ignore everything and don't want to help any causes. If there is a problem, they ignore it and a t like there is no problem there. So when we get a Republican president again, you will see some action again to fix things.
America 🇺🇸 has turned into a shit hole since we lost a republican in the white house.

[Danny_dan92]

Yep. They continue to stand on the graves of innocent kids and school faculty as a political stance to grab good law abiding citizens guns.

Imagine pushing more and more gun laws when you have places ran by democratic leadership where gun violence takes more lives annually than a single school shooting. And the people committing those crimes are criminals, they don’t follow the law. They aren’t people grounded by morals and ethics and compassion towards others. They are narcissistic despicable individuals.

[BeMuse]

I think you're starting from the wrong point of view. You believe politicians want to create a solution to school shootings when in fact they promote the groups that carry out the school shootings and vocally encourage them to get confrontational. Then after the "confrontation" occurs with a gun, they use that grounds for a narrative that citizens need to be striped of their constitutional rights. Remember the constitution was written to limit the power of the central government. Government will always try to oppress the people if they people let them. Politicians are motivated to promote school shootings, because the tragedy creates an illusion of "justification" for their power grab.

[BeMuse]

*as grounds

[Danny_dan92]

No I’m aware, that’s why notice after every mass shooting specifically democratic politicians always talk about gun grabs and implementing more gun restrictions

[BeMuse]

If it gives you any peace of mind... Street level cabal are already being cleaned up around the globe... Their military is being dismantled... Give it a couple of more months and you might see the same sort of action happen in US cities to clean up street gangs in cities which will crush the ANTIFA web who are responsible for said school shootings... It's not too far out now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QF8mxqJAf0E

[CALIGVLA]

The solution is to look into the instigators and punish them with death penalty or a life sentence. We need to understand what makes one individual find a mentally ill kid on the internet and convince them to do a massacre... Can anyone guarantee that there's no instigator working for one of our security services, especially the FBI?

Additionally, our people needs to have their mental illness epidemics addressed.

[Danny_dan92]

I agree with you also, in fact. I’d up it. Not just do death penalty but bring back public executions. Set a grim example to anyone that is even considering doing such atrocities

[goaded]

Ironic that the original Caligula was probably mad because of lead pipes. Replacing lead water pipes would reduce crime, after a generation or so.

[ShadezMcgee]

Right up there with churches, parades, etc. Opportunity for people who wish to incite chaos and kill as many as they can will not go to a place where people have ample security and coverage for defense.

[Danny_dan92]

Exactly. Case in point in Texas there was once an incident where this dude in a trench coat came into a church and blasted two people with a shotgun before a law abiding citizen pulled out his handgun and stopped him from killing more people. If that happened in a church in California, way more people would’ve died

[ShadezMcgee]

Yeah, I heard about that one. Same with that guy who killed that dude who tried it at that mall a few months back. Granted he broke the gun free zone, law but if he didn't, more would have died.

[Danny_dan92]

Yep. Straight facts

[goaded]

I heard about that one, too. What I didn't hear was how much more ammunition the shooter had, or magazine capacity. Do you happen to know? Or did the "good guy" shoot a man who no longer posed a danger?

[ShadezMcgee]

@goaded before I go any further, don't get passive aggressive with me off the bat.

Now, are you referring to the church or mall shooting?

[goaded]

OK, if you agree not to ignore every question I ask. The church: West Freeway Church of Christ in the Fort Worth suburb of White Settlement.

[Danny_dan92]

https://youtu.be/QP2KnvsnmDs

[Danny_dan92]

Listen to the words said in this video. Did the man that prevented further loss of life take out his gun and joined him killing others? Or did he stop him

[ShadezMcgee]

@goaded oh, only if I agree to respond to your specific questions is when you will tone it back? We are already off to a bad start.

Either way, Danny just gave you the answer to that one. But I will respond to you with the mall instance to further my point.

www.google.com/.../world-us-canada-62217263.amp

[Danny_dan92]

@ShadezMcgee

No I know brother, I was responding to this goaded guy. Since he seems to not understand what took place in that church. Hinting at the idea that the gun man was killed after he ran out of bullets which definitely wasn’t true

[ShadezMcgee]

@Danny_dan92

No, I agree which I found ridiculous. In what world are you going to make sure someone like that is out of bullets and let him be taken? That is like playing cops and robbers as kids with one lying when they supposedly get shot.

Plus he commented on my post, so I figured he was talking to me.

[Danny_dan92]

He was and I was correcting him

[ShadezMcgee]

Either way, thanks for beating me to the punch with the story. I was looking up both stories to link as proof.

[Danny_dan92]

Lol no worries man

[goaded]

@ShadezMcgee No, we were off to a bad start when you accused me of being "passive aggressive".

@Danny_dan92 "The words said in this video"? Like "the citizens who were inside that church undoubtedly saved 242 other parishioners"? Undoubtably? Did the shooter also have a massive bomb? Even the worst US mass shooting "only" killed 60 people. Again: what was the bad guy's weapon, and how many rounds did he have? It usually gets reported in cases like this.

And how does that rare story stack up against the other "good guy with a gun" who shot an attacker and was then killed by police?

"John Hurley, 40, drew a handgun and shot and killed Ronald Troyke last Monday in Arvada, Colo., The Guardian reported. Troyke, 59, was reportedly on the move to kill police officers, having already shot and killed Officer Gordon Beesley.

After shooting Beesley, Troyke then armed himself with an AR-15. That’s when Hurley saw Troyke and shot and killed him. "
thehill.com/.../

[Danny_dan92]

The shooter had a shotgun. Do you know how lethal a shotgun is compared to an AR-15? Much more. That’s the thing that cracks me up when the focus is on “assault rifles” which by the way. The term assault rifles came about during WWII when the germans produced the first Assault rifle, the STG-44 which had a fully automatic option… because the germans would rush into a trench and fire that rifle like rambo. Holding the trigger down spraying anyone they saw.

No civilian can legally purchase a fully automatic rifle anymore. Even in states that have the least gun restrictions.

Trust me, I know a thing or two about firearms. My job in the military I use firearms and explosives. And I’m a gun owner.

So yeah, look at the damage caused by a single shot of 5.56, the caliber used in AR-15’s and then compare that to a single shot from a 12 gauge shotgun….

[ShadezMcgee]

@goaded yes, I did. Your exact wording came off condescending with this alone. ". Do you happen to know? Or did the "good guy" shoot a man who no longer posed a danger?" Already showing you had a specific stance coming to comment and in the way you said "good guy" implying you didn't see it as such. So yes. Passive aggressive.

Now, what really is this argument about? Is it about the guns used or the stance of how guns are a problem? Or about when an active threat is no longer a threat? Your initial comment talked about guns used, magazines and already looking at the individuals who stopped the shooters in these stories in a potentially negative light.

[goaded]

OK, what kind of shotgun? Break action, Lever action, Pump action, Semi automatic, or Fully automatic?

"No civilian can legally purchase a fully automatic rifle anymore." Yeah, they can in most states, at least, it's just a lot of paperwork.

[goaded]

@ShadezMcgee My questions are based on the observation that most descriptions of such attacks include details about how the perpetrator had multiple firearms, large capacity magazines or hundreds of rounds of ammunition. All that was missing from the reporting about this case. If you know different, I don't mind being corrected.

[goaded]

@ShadezMcgee e. g. The mall shooting: "killed three people and injured two others... had two rifles, a handgun and more than 100 rounds of bullets, said police.

He fired 24 rounds from one of the rifles before he was killed."

[ShadezMcgee]

@goaded which is why I linked the article there for your reference on specifics. Now, I probably could find one about the church shooting and post it if that is what you are looking for.

[goaded]

Yes, please.

[goaded]

You did notice the "Only four out of 61 such attacks last year ended when armed bystanders engaged the active shooter, according to an FBI report in May." bit, right?

[ShadezMcgee]

@goaded vefire we go any further, I am going to ask this again.

What is this conversation truly about? Now we seem to be shifting focus.

[goaded]

Was I not clear? What did the church shooter have? A "shotgun". What sort, and how much ammo?

[ShadezMcgee]

@goaded your trail comment asked about statistics regarding people who stepped up in an active shooter situation which is why I asked you to clarify again. I feel you wouldn't have included that if there either wasn't more relevant to say or if this was just the start to the real conversation.

Either way. I have two articles for your reference.

apnews.com/.../de8a2aebc6d95b9131a08975a5d881f9

www.google.com/.../world-us-canada-50952443.amp

[Avicenna]

No one should be naive enough to believe that politicians care one bit about ordinary people and the larger society. They're either interested in lining their pockets or imposing their ideological extremism on society.

[Danny_dan92]

Yep I agree. What angers me is they’ll stand on the graves of innocent people for political leverage. And continue to do absolutely nothing to address the issue they speak about.

I’m a gun owner, I see the problem for what it is.

Lack of mental illness awareness.

Lack of school security.

I’m tired of it. When’s the last mass shooting that has happened at a federal instillation, or secured facility? It’s never happened, it continues to happen at schools because schools are vulnerable and soft targets.

There are people that are against increasing school security because they don’t want their kids to feel like they’re inmates.

A school with increased security will look NOTHING like a prison, nor will the kids even feel like inmates or be treating as such. So tone deaf. The increase of school security will be designed to keep people out, prisons are designed to keep people out and those inside, in.

[NaultD]

The first kids with regular school shooting practice drills and shootings are just old enough to start getting elected into political office's. Gen z tend to hate the gop and that trend is growing. You can see the writing on the walls with gop parents duty to brainwashing isolating their children with thought policing and book burning. So gun control is more viable then ever.

[exitseven]

If the democrats had their way guns would be outlawed for law abiding citizens only criminals would have them.

[Danny_dan92]

Agreed

[goaded]

Weren't there something like 400 LEOs at Uvalde before a few of them got around to doing something far too late?

[Danny_dan92]

Which is why you cannot rely on law enforcement

[goaded]

No, which is why it's a bad idea to let people have guns that an overwhelming mass of trained LEOs refuse to face.

[Danny_dan92]

You have the Ukraine flag as your profile picture. Have you volunteered to go help them fight off the Russians?

[goaded]

They wouldn't want me, given my age. Your "you cannot rely on law enforcement" is a reasonable argument if you live half an hour or more away from the nearest police, but not when there are literally hundreds of them right outside the door. Why wasn't there a pile of dead or wounded LEOs in the door of the classroom? Because they were scared of the gun that was being used to massacre little children.

[Danny_dan92]

I’m in the military. Law enforcement and infantrymen should have the same mindset. Kill, or be killed.

In this instance the it was more kill or let the killer kill you and more.

Those cops were cowards. Bottom line.

I also live in a densely urban area. The average response time for law enforcement to show up is 3 minutes. A lot of people can die in 3 minutes, if there are people at the location where the shooting is taking place are armed and ready to respond that response could be within seconds or a little more than that.

[goaded]

No, they shouldn't. The police should be there to protect people, even at the risk of their lives. The problem was that they weren't willing to do that, not even when the lives were of little children. And they weren't willing to do that because of the weapon the killer had.

If your urban area wasn't awash with guns, not many people would die in 3 minutes. Americans are to guns like fish are to water. Hell, how many gun deaths were there in your city per capita over the last year?

[Degenerate]

Politicians ignore every problem

[Danny_dan92]

Yep. For political gain

[Degenerate]

You can't rely on the government to fix anything (especially in the US) lol

[OlderAndWiser]

100% correct!

[NathanDavis]

Uvalde