Another Trans attempts attack on schools

[TagliatelliMonster]

"Because you responsibly use them"

Exactly! Its a people problem.

No. It's a policy problem.

Guns are dangerous things.
But in the US, they aren't treated as such. Instead, they are treated like a commodity.
That's the root of the problem.

It's almost easier to get your hands on a gun then it is to get your hands on an alcoholic beverage as a minor.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Mass murderers are heartless monsters! Now self hating Tran people are using the technique.

Consider that trans people are far more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators. Perhaps this "self hate" could be prevented by listening to them and the medical and psychological community on how to help them.

Stigmatizing them and legislating against them for political points is likely not helping.

 

[Colt]

IMOP the violent Trans movement is entering a new faze.

Riley Gaines 'ambushed and physically hit' after Saving Women's Sports speech at San Francisco State

Riley Gaines 'ambushed and physically hit' after Saving Women's Sports speech at San Francisco State

Swimmer Riley Gaines says she was assaulted at San Francisco State University while giving a speech about women's sports during a conservative-led event on campus.

www.foxnews.com

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Kids killed by guns or bikes will never wake up tomorrow. Dead is dead. Did you have a point.

Shall we use the same logic to legalize all drugs and let minors drive cars while drunk etc?

After all, using your own logic, "dead is dead" right?
And if children are allowed to use bikes eventhough it kills some of them, why not let them drive drunk or sniff coke?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Given the prevalence of guns being purchased under false pretense by a person allowed to own one who then gives it someone not allowed, I think this should be more broad and even if it's adults the one who illegally gave it away should face some sort of criminal liability.
For this to work I believe we would need a database if gun ownership and mandatory reporting of lost or stolen firearms.

So you buy a gun legally for a couple hundred, sell it illegally for double the price and then go to the police and report it as "stolen".

 

[Colt]

Consider that trans people are far more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators. Perhaps this "self hate" could be prevented by listening to them and the medical and psychological community on how to help them.

Stigmatizing them and legislating against them for political points is likely not helping.

The Trans movement is a rapidly spreading pop fad among young people. There isn't any statistical data indicating that people are attacking them.

But fake Transvestite prostitutes have a history of being attacked when their customers discover that they aren't women.

 

[SomeRandom]

If we can determine the danger of specific cis white males then yes. What we discover with so many shooters is that warning signs were there, even reported but were ignored.

I could see strict licensing requirements for certain guns.

I wholeheartedly agree

 

[Curious George]

The distinction as I see it (and I speak for myself only) is that it is entirely preventable.
Sure you can not use bikes or have cats or whatever. If you so choose
But gun death is entirely preventable, from beginning to the end. You can completely opt to eliminate such a death from the getgo. Such a distinction makes deaths from such stats much more awful.

This doesn’t make sense. If you can eliminate “bikes or cats or whatever if you choose” then aren’t the deaths that were related to these now eliminated things also “completely eliminated “ as well? Your distinction doesn’t seem like a distinction at least not a logically sound one.

I sincerely don’t care about the second amendment. My apologies if I value a child’s life over such a thing. I know I’m so awful.
Prioritising a child’s right to live their full life over such a thing is awful I know. Pfft.
Imagine that. Caring about kids living over some yahoo’s right to own guns. I’m just so awful amirite?
But you are correct in your assessment

Either way, I actually don’t care if someone owns a thousand guns or not. If that’s their choice then so be it. They can own all the guns in the world, if that’s their choice. Good for them.
But maybe it might be a good idea to scan such owners through a system which determines whether or not they pose a risk with said guns. I don’t wish to take away their gun rights, merely assess whether or not it’s safe for the broader society to allow them said rights. If not, then they should be able to access the help necessary for their recovery. Hopefuly that can prevent little kids from ending up in graves.


The US so called “war on drugs” has long served as a cautionary tale on what not to do with drugs in society. Fun fact



My country chose to prioritise the lives of children over trigger happy lunatics.
Don’t get me wrong here, I’m sure the vast majority of gun owners in the US are all responsible and uphold gun safety laws. I’m not at all saying that Americans are irresponsible at all. They are most likely law abiding citizens who are perfect examples of gun owner laws.
But time and time and time again there are those idiots who ruin it for everyone else, afraid to say. And it’s not like the lax regulations in the US make it any harder for such examples to hurt the community.
Sorry but sometimes tighter regulation results in more safety broadly speaking.
Again I’m not at all saying that I’m against US citizens owning guns. They can own all the guns in the world as far as I’m concerned. But the US lack of regulation of said firearms has produced pile upon pile of dead children.
That’s just fact. That’s not my doing that’s theirs.
Sorry but that’s just reality.
Wish it were different, I truly do

I’m not sure you responded to much of my post at all, except you broke it up as though you were.

Not sure why you are talking about the second amendment.

You seem to be explaining your own position. I understand it, and I think it is flawed. I think I explained why. Perhaps there was something I communicated poorly or you didn’t understand.

You don’t seem like you want to take the time to reduce murder rates at all. It seems your focus is on the guns.

You believe “But the US lack of regulation of said firearms has produced pile upon pile of dead children. That’s just fact.“ unfortunately this is bad logic. The lack of regulation cannot produce piles of dead children. There is no mechanism fo such a thing to occur. Perhaps what you meant to say was that the US lack of regulation of said firearms has allowed for a large firearm market in the US. This large market has lead to the greater availability in legal and illegal purchases of firearms. This greater availability has provided some individuals, intent on killing, an efficient and effective method of committing their murders. Further this greater availability has allowed some, intent on killing themselves, an effective means to do so. And lastly, this greater availability has led to increased exposure and and access of firearms for some children who in turn have hurt others or themselves with those firearms.

You want to create a but for scenario that doesn’t exist. It fails to understand or address any of the real issues that underlie the problem of homicide and suicide.

I can see you are really proud of how your country handled the mass shooting. I would not be, no more than I would be proud if we took away people’s right to have children to prevent child abuse.

I would be proud, however, if people enacted changes that addressed some of the root causes.

 

[Curious George]

The problems won't go away by themselves.

No they won’t. But is there a better way to address them than banning guns?

 

[Mock Turtle]

I would be proud, however, if people enacted changes that addressed some of the root causes.

What, like too many guns in circulation?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Mass murderers are heartless monsters! Now self hating Tran people are using the technique.

That's why they need to be licensed and regulated.

 

[Colt]

That's why they need to be licensed and regulated.

The Trans people or the guns?

 

[Twilight Hue]

The Trans people or the guns?

Well the Trans. They already are regulating guns.

Now the same exact logic for guns applies to Trans as well.

It's for the childerns safety you know.

 

[Colt]

Well the Trans. They already are regulating guns.

Now the same exact logic for guns applies to Trans as well.

It's for the childerns safety you know.

SomeRandom made the point earlier that the vast majority of mass shooters are cis white men. So?

As an aside, they now think that the Las Vagas hotel shooter, the gambler guy, well, he was mad that the casinos were cutting back on the comps for high rollers!

 

[Altfish]

We desperately need Trans control measures.

I'd suggest licensing, background checks, a mental examination, and a waiting period for anyone wanting to be Trans.

Before anyone can buy guns

 

[Twilight Hue]

SomeRandom made the point earlier that the vast majority of mass shooters are cis white men. So?

As an aside, they now think that the Las Vagas hotel shooter, the gambler guy, well, he was mad that the casinos were cutting back on the comps for high rollers!

Well it makes sense as most men have a role as being warriors throughout history, with exception of course to the rule once in a blue moon.

 

[Mock Turtle]

SomeRandom made the point earlier that the vast majority of mass shooters are cis white men. So?

As an aside, they now think that the Las Vagas hotel shooter, the gambler guy, well, he was mad that the casinos were cutting back on the comps for high rollers!

So, does that reflect on him being a 'heartless monster' or just someone inordinately angry, as so many of those who carry out their anger on innocent and unknown victims so often do - because they know it will cause others to be so hurt, especially when they can't get to the people they would like to harm. So, anger by proxy is often the issue (in my opinion), and the ability to carry out such the problem. Given it can be done by various means, and having guns in easy access just makes it so much easier for many.

 

[Colt]

So, does that reflect on him being a 'heartless monster' or just someone inordinately angry, as so many of those who carry out their anger on innocent and unknown victims so often do - because they know it will cause others to be so hurt, especially when they can't get to the people they would like to harm. So, anger by proxy is often the issue (in my opinion), and the ability to carry out such the problem. Given it can be done by various means, and having guns in easy access just makes it so much easier for many.

Psychologically speaking, we tend to try to understand people through our own experience. Crimes of passion, road rage, quick temper etc, but with premeditated violence against innocents like children, we aren't sick enough to make any sense of it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

No they won’t. But is there a better way to address them than banning guns?

I don't think so.



Note: by "banning", I don't understand that to mean a complete 100% ban on any and all types of gun ownership.
Private guns aren't illegal across the board in Belgium for example. Instead, they are just heavily regulated. Licensing is extremely strict and there are very strict rules also concerning registration, use, storage,...

The main problem is that the US treats it like a commodity with barely any regulation, and the little regulation there is, is easily bypassed.
When you have more private guns then citizens, it should be no surprise that it's as easy to obtain them illegally as it is for minors to get their hands on a beer....

What I also find to be extremely disturbing is to see citizens in the US simply carry their guns out in public.

I mean, look at this:

No, these are not army people or officers of any kind. These are just "citizens". Walking around like that.
I mean... wth...???

 

[Twilight Hue]

I don't think so.



Note: by "banning", I don't understand that to mean a complete 100% ban on any and all types of gun ownership.
Private guns aren't illegal across the board in Belgium for example. Instead, they are just heavily regulated. Licensing is extremely strict and there are very strict rules also concerning registration, use, storage,...

The main problem is that the US treats it like a commodity with barely any regulation, and the little regulation there is, is easily bypassed.
When you have more private guns then citizens, it should be no surprise that it's as easy to obtain them illegally as it is for minors to get their hands on a beer....

What I also find to be extremely disturbing is to see citizens in the US simply carry their guns out in public.

I mean, look at this:

View attachment 74512

No, these are not army people or officers of any kind. These are just "citizens". Walking around like that.
I mean... wth...???

I think its good to practice 2nd amendment rights.

It's a sight quite common in colonial days.

Of course without all the modern web gear and rigging and all that.