What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

USA Shootings (5 Viewers)

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/29/us/north-carolina-student-guns-dorm/index.html

Steber, of Boston, is one of dozens of suspects arrested over mass attack threats since mass shootings this month in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio. In the week after the shootings, the FBI got more than 38,000 tips, up from the typical 22,000 tips per week this year.

THIS IS WHAT WE NEED - but on top of this, we also need to make sure these people are helped and are of no threat to themselves or society anymore

 
Ditkaless Wonders said:
Do I agree that those who paroled him, or did not follow a Prosecutor's sentencing rec0omendation should be held as accessories to murder, no, absolutely not.  To me that is the height of absurdity.
Click to expand...
why ?

if they hadn't let him out - he'd not have killed right ?

anti-gunners want the NRA and gun manufacturers held accountable when people use guns in their violence - you disagree with that as I do, right ?

look at -fish ... he wants me, as a gun owner, held liable if someone breaks into my home and steals my guns and uses it. Is that a height of absurdity to you too ?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Another interesting dynamic of this thread. Posters rush in to announce a mass shooting, but don't give the same urgency to reports of mass shootings prevented. 

 
KarmaPolice said:
I am guessing for every one of those, we could link a story like THIS
Click to expand...
you are guessing .... how many die each year in accidental shootings?   about 500 or so right ?

and you think only 500 people every year defend themselves and homes and stop crimes with guns? lol   you cannot believe that

 
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
The brand of conservatism that is currently represented by the GOP promotes violence. 
Click to expand...
then by all means - live a passive life if that's what you choose and if/when you're ever assaults just ask nicely for the person to stop

see how that works for you.... but don't tell me how I can live my life. I'm not going to be a victim like you, sorry

 
KarmaPolice said:
I am not sure what the solution is, but I am guessing putting the extremely angry and violent in a closed area together is not going to yield very many well adjusted people ready to re-enter society in a productive, non-violent way.  

It's something I want to read more on, but haven't gotten to it.   Are there different styles of prisons in other countries that have a higher success rate?  Is a bit a function of the overcrowded prisons?   Is there a certain level of violence or type of crime that shows less ability of rehabilitation from, etc, etc..  I have a lot of questions. 
Click to expand...
that is a secondary concern to me

#1 is removing them from society and the threat they pose. Unless mentally ill, they're choosing violence, they're choosing their behavior.

tell me what % of violent people released  back into society and don't go back into prison ?

https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=6266

just a little info

The 401,288 state prisoners released in 2005 had 1,994,000 arrests during the 9-year period, an average of 5 arrests per released prisoner. Sixty percent of these arrests occurred during years 4 through 9.

An estimated 68% of released prisoners were arrested within 3 years, 79% within 6 years, and 83% within 9 years.

Eighty-two percent of prisoners arrested during the 9-year period were arrested within the first 3 years.

Almost half (47%) of prisoners who did not have an arrest within 3 years of release were arrested during years 4 through 9.

Forty-four percent of released prisoners were arrested during the first year following release, while 24% were arrested during year-9.

crazy numbers isn't it? 

 
KCitons said:
Another interesting dynamic of this thread. Posters rush in to announce a mass shooting, but don't give the same urgency to reports of mass shootings prevented. 
Click to expand...
Steber had a 9mm semi-automatic pistol and a double-barrel 12-gauge shotgun, police said.

doesn't fit their "ban AR15" agenda does it ?

 
Stealthycat said:
why ?

if they hadn't let him out - he'd not have killed right ?

Certainly not on the outside.  Whether he may have on the inside who can say, though it seems his propensity is for killing women.

anti-gunners want the NRA and gun manufacturers held accountable when people use guns in their violence - you disagree with that as I do, right ?
Click to expand...
I can come up with no palpable theory of liability as to the NRA.  As to gun manufacturers I would be genrally against such as it is a lawful product, but we do have a history of allowing liability for lawful products if deceptively marketed, and I am open to the possibility that such a case could be made.

look at -fish ... he wants me, as a gun owner, held liable if someone breaks into my home and steals my guns and uses it. Is that a height of absurdity to you too ?

It is not.  If we bring dangerous instrumentalities into our homes, even ones subject to Constitutional protections, we ought to be reasonably responsible for the danger potentially created thereby.  What is reasonable, a locked front door, a hidden weapon, a gun safe, that is open for discussion.  Me, I keep my doors locked, I do not advertise my guns by say wearing shooting range t-shirts or caps or having bumper stickers on my car touting weapons or second amendment rights, and I do lock them in a rather substantial safe, partially disassembled, with individual locks, with ammunition secured separately.  Do I do all of that to be reasonable, no, some of it I do to assuage the concerns of my wife, a matter of great importance to me.
Click to expand...

 
Stealthycat said:
you are guessing .... how many die each year in accidental shootings?   about 500 or so right ?

and you think only 500 people every year defend themselves and homes and stop crimes with guns? lol   you cannot believe that
Click to expand...
Problem is you are guessing and there are no numbers to support how many times they are used.  

Better wording would have been I am highly confident we could go one for one with links.  At best I think the numbers cancel each other out. 

 
KarmaPolice said:
Problem is you are guessing and there are no numbers to support how many times they are used.  

Better wording would have been I am highly confident we could go one for one with links.  At best I think the numbers cancel each other out. 
Click to expand...
I googled - did you ?

think ... tens of millions of home owners and people carrying daily ..... tens of thousands of assaults monthly, right ? and you don't think more than 500 crimes each year are stopped ?

you cannot be serious

please tell me that your mind understand just how much crime is stopped daily by people fighting back

 
Ditkaless Wonders said:
I 
Click to expand...
where is the reasonable responsibility for our judicial system in allowing known violent people back into society to harm others again ?

did you read the stats on how often criminals repeat ? its literally allowing foxes back into the hen house ........ and you don't seem appalled by that but think a victim of a crime (homeowner) can be held accountable sometimes for being a victim  of a crime and the acts of the criminals afterwards ?? 

unbelievable

 
Stealthycat said:
I googled - did you ?

think ... tens of millions of home owners and people carrying daily ..... tens of thousands of assaults monthly, right ? and you don't think more than 500 crimes each year are stopped ?

you cannot be serious

please tell me that your mind understand just how much crime is stopped daily by people fighting back
Click to expand...
1. Why just deaths? I would personally count all accidental gun injuries.   

2.  I wasnt denying your #s about deaths, just saying there are no concrete #s about crimes stopped to compare it to, so you are guessing.  

 
KarmaPolice said:
1. Why just deaths? I would personally count all accidental gun injuries.   

2.  I wasnt denying your #s about deaths, just saying there are no concrete #s about crimes stopped to compare it to, so you are guessing.  
Click to expand...
ok then, all the slips and falls by poolside should be considered too ?

there are no concrete numbers no - and neither are there concrete numbers on auto accidents or pool accidents or anything really - because lack of reporting

a lot isn't reported - can we agree on that ? 

what we DO know is that tens of millions have guns, use them for self defense and there are tens of thousands of crimes attempted weekly ........... to think the two don't intersect more than 500 times a year ?

c'mon 

 
Stealthycat said:
ok then, all the slips and falls by poolside should be considered too ?

there are no concrete numbers no - and neither are there concrete numbers on auto accidents or pool accidents or anything really - because lack of reporting

a lot isn't reported - can we agree on that ? 

what we DO know is that tens of millions have guns, use them for self defense and there are tens of thousands of crimes attempted weekly ........... to think the two don't intersect more than 500 times a year ?

c'mon 
Click to expand...
Is a gun the same thing as a pool?

 
Ah yes.  Let's look at the positives and negatives of a gun in the home but only look at deaths, but account for anytime a crime is supposedly stopped.  I guess an injury by gun is not a negative enough consequence of gun ownership?  Also, let's ignore the fact that the guns might be a reason that people could be breaking into the house to begin with.     Also, there's 0 way to know what crime you were preventing, and I would argue that is important.      Also, could another weapon been used to stop said crime and prevented a death or accidental firing?  Pretty sure no kid is going to accidently die by baseball bat.     

 
Stealthycat said:
where is the reasonable responsibility for our judicial system in allowing known violent people back into society to harm others again ?

did you read the stats on how often criminals repeat ? its literally allowing foxes back into the hen house ........ and you don't seem appalled by that but think a victim of a crime (homeowner) can be held accountable sometimes for being a victim  of a crime and the acts of the criminals afterwards ?? 

unbelievable
Click to expand...
As a career prosecutor I am very aware of recidivism rates.  I did read your stats.  I would think you might give me the courtesy to presume I had since most here have taken, to your dismay, to not answering your rhetorical questions while I continue to give you that courtesy.  As to where is the responsibility of the judicial system, often it lies in the legislative system which supplies them the laws upon which they must act. They are interpretive and not necessarily policy making.  We have  supplied them a flawed system, maybe.  If those flaws are inherent I don't hold them responsible for the flaws of others, flaws correctable by others who, if they don't correct them are correctable by us, the voters.

As for me holding a victim of a crime responsible for their victimhood, that is not what I am doing.  I am holding, or am open to the possibility of holding,  the owner of a dangerous instrumentality, an attractive nuisance perhaps, responsible for their proper control of that item.

That's it for me with you on this or any other subject.  I have notice you demand answers but do not listen to them, do not give the person who answers any courtesy or respect, and in fact cannot accept even substantial agreement with your positions, it must be absolutely all or nothing even when you know you have artificially constructed a scenario which does not approximate anything remotely similar to the issue at hand.      Further discussion with you is not going to be something I care to spend time on.  I do, however, wish you well.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Stealthycat said:
then by all means - live a passive life if that's what you choose and if/when you're ever assaults just ask nicely for the person to stop

see how that works for you.... but don't tell me how I can live my life. I'm not going to be a victim like you, sorry
Click to expand...
I really don't know how the :censored:  this is supposed to be responding to the idea that some political policies lead to more violence than others.  And that one can make a small impact in violence levels by advocating against those policies and the party that pursues them and voting and hopefully convincing others to vote with them against those candidates that push such policies.

But in any case I'm sorry that you live with such fears.

 
KarmaPolice said:
the rover said:
Except for the part where his other guns and ammunition were stolen a few days earlier.   How many more crimes will be committed with his stolen guns?  Another loss for everyone.
Click to expand...
Did I miss that part? 
Click to expand...
McGown told WEWS his house had been broken into a few days earlier, when he was out of town. He said Guns, ammunition and laptops were stolen and disassembled televisions were left behind.
Click to expand...

 
Ditkaless Wonders said:
As for me holding a victim of a crime responsible for their victimhood, that is not what I am doing.  I am holding, or am open to the possibility of holding  the owner of a dangerous instrumentality, and attractive nuisance perhaps, responsible for their proper control of that item.
Click to expand...
I view a career criminal and murder a dangerous instrument ....... and when they're let back into society to continue to murder and assault and such .... I lay that blame square on the judicial system that allows them out early

I'm curious why you don't?

 
Ditkaless Wonders said:
That's it for me with you on this or any other subject.  I have notice you demand answers but do not listen to them, do not give the person who answers any courtesy or respect, and in fact cannot accept even substantial agreement with your positions, it must be absolutely all or nothing even when you know you have artificially constructed a scenario which does not approximate anything remotely similar to the issue at hand.      Further discussion with you is not going to be something I care to spend time on.  I do, however, wish you well.
Click to expand...
I have spent a great amount of time over 415 pages with facts, links, explaining how and why my views are what they are. If you don't see that ... then we just disagree at the courtesy or respect of a discussion that I give. 

I've said I am all for 21 age limit to vote and own a gun and maybe even drive. I'm for the right Red Flag laws. I'm ok with bump stock bans. I an not a far right gun nut, I see our common sense laws as being pretty, well ... common sense. More laws focusing on some of the fewest used gun in violence, impacting 10's of millions of legal law abiding owners .... that's not common sense. 

So no, its not all or nothing. You are wrong in saying that.  I'm all for things that will actually impact the core problem. Most anti-gun posters here? they don't care at all about the core problem 

 
Stealthycat said:
Most anti-gun posters here? they don't care at all about the core problem 
Click to expand...
Not true.

1.  I doubt you could name a poster in here that would say they didn't care about what you consider the core problem.  

2.  Thinking that focusing on guns should also be a part of the solution is nowhere near the same as saying that you don't care about or want to address the other issues too.  

Again, you know all this.  

 
KarmaPolice said:
Not true.

1.  I doubt you could name a poster in here that would say they didn't care about what you consider the core problem.  

2.  Thinking that focusing on guns should also be a part of the solution is nowhere near the same as saying that you don't care about or want to address the other issues too.  

Again, you know all this.  
Click to expand...
well they have a funny way of addressing the core problem then if they're seeing it - continuing to call for bans and restrictions on some of the least used guns in violent acts? 

that's not addressing the core problem

Again, you know all this

 Tell me what has been suggested to address violence by these anti-gun posters? anything? anything at all ?

 
Stealthycat said:
well they have a funny way of addressing the core problem then if they're seeing it - continuing to call for bans and restrictions on some of the least used guns in violent acts? 
Click to expand...
Most people want a multi-pronged approach of reducing the problem which includes gun control, mental health, education and other measures.

 
5700 accidental gun injuries a year i believe. Not fair to bring up the tv theft that gets prevented but not bring up little johnny getting shot in the leg. 

 
Stealthycat said:
well they have a funny way of addressing the core problem then if they're seeing it - continuing to call for bans and restrictions on some of the least used guns in violent acts? 

that's not addressing the core problem

Again, you know all this

 Tell me what has been suggested to address violence by these anti-gun posters? anything? anything at all ?
Click to expand...
The core problem has been brought up numerous times.  I don't think I've seen many people argue what some of the core problems are.  Most people seem to agree on them and that's why you don't see it getting discussed over and over.

If you can prove that most people who argue against you don't care about the core problem I would like to see your evidence.  Let's see some examples.

 
Stealthycat said:
Tell me what has been suggested to address violence by these anti-gun posters? anything? anything at all ?
Click to expand...
Implementing the Green New Deal even in a greatly reduced version will decrease violence.  Both in the areas of being "green" and the area of being a new "new deal".  Building on ObamaCare even if only by extending Medicaid to the states that have so far refused to bring the "unwanted and unneeded" substance abuse and mental health benefits to the poorest of us will reduce violence.  Stop the "war on drugs" would be a Godsend to reducing urban and increasingly suburban violence along with rethinking other "victimless crime" approaches. Making birth control freely available along with abortion options will reduce violence.  Reducing the number of guns in society will reduce violence.   Working towards a society that is more open to nudity and honest, mature view points on sexuality - including teen sex would reduce violence.  And on and on.  

Sure not all "anti-gun" posters support all of the above, and I'm guessing a few support none of the above but collectively those that are "anti-gun" tend to support policies that are inherently and have demonstrated to be "anti violence".   

 
Hawkeye21 said:
If you can prove that most people who argue against you don't care about the core problem I would like to see your evidence.  Let's see some examples.
Click to expand...
focusing on banning least used guns in violence is evidence

which anti-gun posters here has talked about committing people who are prone to violence until they're proven no threat to society? which is talking more capital punishment as ways of deterring people from being violent? which are supporting more protection for people and schools to stop dead those who want to be violent and to show that element that we're not going to be terrorized anymore ?

where are those posts? I don't remember many in 400 pages do you ? 

 
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
Implementing the Green New Deal even in a greatly reduced version will decrease violence.
Click to expand...
no it won't

they'll just use other weapons

you don't see that do you ?

Both in the areas of being "green" and the area of being a new "new deal".  Building on ObamaCare even if only by extending Medicaid to the states that have so far refused to bring the "unwanted and unneeded" substance abuse and mental health benefits to the poorest of us will reduce violence.  Stop the "war on drugs" would be a Godsend to reducing urban and increasingly suburban violence along with rethinking other "victimless crime" approaches. Making birth control freely available along with abortion options will reduce violence.  Reducing the number of guns in society will reduce violence.   Working towards a society that is more open to nudity and honest, mature view points on sexuality - including teen sex would reduce violence.  And on and on.  
Click to expand...
medical care isn't the source of violence, mental health? hasn't multiple people here posted that mentally ill are not violent?  birth control? that breeds violence? sexuality breeds violence ?

c'mon

you think legalized drugs is going to stop violence? Birth control IS available, everywhere and abortion is legal. Nudity is going to stop violence ?

education I'm all for - these social pools that breeds violence is a core problem .... that New Deal? Its gun control - I highlighted that in great detail a few pages ago

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Stealthycat said:
focusing on banning least used guns in violence is evidence

which anti-gun posters here has talked about committing people who are prone to violence until they're proven no threat to society? which is talking more capital punishment as ways of deterring people from being violent? which are supporting more protection for people and schools to stop dead those who want to be violent and to show that element that we're not going to be terrorized anymore ?

where are those posts? I don't remember many in 400 pages do you ? 
Click to expand...
That's not evidence at all.  The main reason it gets talked about so much is because it's the one thing that people strongly disagree about.  It doesn't mean they don't care about the other topics.  Topics that people agree on don't get discussed as much.

 
Hawkeye21 said:
That's not evidence at all.  The main reason it gets talked about so much is because it's the one thing that people strongly disagree about.  It doesn't mean they don't care about the other topics.  Topics that people agree on don't get discussed as much.
Click to expand...
then surely, in the Democratic debates, we're seeing our current/future leaders addressing violence and not so much guns right ?

 
because its important to stop it

I know I've said it a thousand times ... but the weapons used are not what we need to focus on especially when tens of millions of law abidiing citizens will be impacted and violent people won't be

 
Stealthycat said:
well they have a funny way of addressing the core problem then if they're seeing it - continuing to call for bans and restrictions on some of the least used guns in violent acts? 

that's not addressing the core problem

Again, you know all this

 Tell me what has been suggested to address violence by these anti-gun posters? anything? anything at all ?
Click to expand...
It also doesn't mean they are against or don't care about doing other things.  

Do you think you could name one person in here that wouldn't be for improving access to mental health, education,  looking for similarities between the shooters and identifying signs early, etc, etc, etc.. ?? 

Like the above poster said most in here are for a multi-pronged approach, which also includes addressing guns.   This is like the DUI thing - I can't think of anybody that is against cracking down on those, so there is little discussion.  I can't think of anybody that is against better mental health care, so it's not brought up in every post.  

 
Stealthycat said:
focusing on banning least used guns in violence is evidence

which anti-gun posters here has talked about committing people who are prone to violence until they're proven no threat to society? which is talking more capital punishment as ways of deterring people from being violent? which are supporting more protection for people and schools to stop dead those who want to be violent and to show that element that we're not going to be terrorized anymore ?

where are those posts? I don't remember many in 400 pages do you ? 
Click to expand...
On this you might be right - you are the only one in here wanting to turn the country into a prison state.  

There's a lot of mentions about addressing issues, just not in the  ways you want them addressed.   Completely false to say that nobody else in the thread cares about addressing these things.  

 
KarmaPolice said:
It also doesn't mean they are against or don't care about doing other things.  

Do you think you could name one person in here that wouldn't be for improving access to mental health, education,  looking for similarities between the shooters and identifying signs early, etc, etc, etc.. ?? 

Like the above poster said most in here are for a multi-pronged approach, which also includes addressing guns.   This is like the DUI thing - I can't think of anybody that is against cracking down on those, so there is little discussion.  I can't think of anybody that is against better mental health care, so it's not brought up in every post.  
Click to expand...
The difference is that there are some that want bans of certainty guns. There aren't any that want bans of certain alcohols. If most alcohol related deaths were caused by hard liquor, wouldn't that be the same as assault weapons ban?

We just dont apply the laws equally. And therefore, it's hard to take people seriously.

 
Stealthycat said:
focusing on banning least used guns in violence is evidence
Click to expand...
People focus on these kinds of guns because they have pretty much zero legitimate value to society and have caused deaths. Pointing out that people have used them to kill squirrels or birds or that people like shooting them doesn't legitimize them. It does the opposite for non gun nuts.

 
KCitons said:
The difference is that there are some that want bans of certainty guns. There aren't any that want bans of certain alcohols. If most alcohol related deaths were caused by hard liquor, wouldn't that be the same as assault weapons ban?

We just dont apply the laws equally. And therefore, it's hard to take people seriously.
Click to expand...
I think you are mixing up your stats and false equivalencies.  

 
KarmaPolice said:
I think you are mixing up your stats and false equivalencies.  
Click to expand...
Then let's make is simple. 

Which alcohol is banned? And I'm not talking about the personal manufacturing and distributing of things like moonshine. Because, I can buy moonshine.

The government just wants to make sure their tax stamp is on the bottle. 

If I used the same arguments for banning guns, to fuel a ban on all alcohol above 20 proof, do you think the general public would agree? Keep in mind, your statement was:

KarmaPolice said:
It also doesn't mean they are against or don't care about doing other things.  

Do you think you could name one person in here that wouldn't be for improving access to mental health, education,  looking for similarities between the shooters and identifying signs early, etc, etc, etc.. ?? 

Like the above poster said most in here are for a multi-pronged approach, which also includes addressing guns.   This is like the DUI thing - I can't think of anybody that is against cracking down on those, so there is little discussion.  I can't think of anybody that is against better mental health care, so it's not brought up in every post.  
Click to expand...
This is why I pointed out the difference between cracking down (which people want to do with guns) and bans. 

Two completely different approaches.

 
KarmaPolice said:
Do you think you could name one person in here that wouldn't be for improving access to mental health, education,  looking for similarities between the shooters and identifying signs early, etc, etc, etc.. ?? 
Click to expand...
those things don't seem important - what's import is banning AR15 scary looking guns, have you not seen that ?

this is an example of liberal fears ... I hope they sue the schools for tens of millions of dollars for that stupidity.

https://pagetwo.completecolorado.com/2019/08/28/loveland-school-suspends-teen-over-family-gun-outing-pics-on-social-media/

 
Wait, so now you dont want people calling in tips and looking for Red Flags? 

I like the blurb in there about how this would be a negative outcome of Red Flag laws. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
KarmaPolice said:
Wait, so now you dont want people calling in tips and looking for Red Flags? 

I like the blurb in there about how this would be a negative outcome of Red Flag laws. 
Click to expand...
Hint:   although SC claims to support red flag laws, he doesn't actually support red flag laws.   Same position as his NRA overlords.  I've presented him with multiple cases of someone with an unequivocal intent to do harm and possession of a gun, and he has not ever agreed that gun confiscation would be appropriate.   Once, he conceded that red flag laws should be applied in about a dozen cases a year nationwide.

 
Hawkeye21 said:
The core problem has been brought up numerous times.  I don't think I've seen many people argue what some of the core problems are.  Most people seem to agree on them and that's why you don't see it getting discussed over and over.

If you can prove that most people who argue against you don't care about the core problem I would like to see your evidence.  Let's see some examples.
Click to expand...
If I am being generous and giving him the benefit of the doubt, he might be taking my push back on some of these issues as me saying I don't support addressing them as a whole or don't care about them.   Ie - I am 100% for addressing mental health in this country, but it we are talking about things that would put a big dent in the #s of mass shootings, I have expressed doubt that should be the main focus for the topic of mass shootings.   Keep in mind, I think when people say mental health, that means meds and people with mental illnesses - not in a general sense like marriage counseling/anger management/coping skills, etc..   

So if somebody says that guns should be the main focus (but still one of multiple focuses), that gets twisted into the ant-gunner libs not caring about the core issue and focusing on the 1% of the problem b.s. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
At Least 181 K-12 Educators/Teachers Charged With Child Sex Crimes In First Half Of 2022 (10/1/22 9:22 PST)
Replies
36
Views
1K
tymarsas
T
GordonGekko
Did UC Berkeley Law School Enable "Jewish Free Zones" & Antisemitism With Pro Israel Speaker Bans? ( 10/2/22 11:12 PST)
Replies
10
Views
580
(HULK)
(HULK)
E
Taking Politics Out of Public Schools
Replies
37
Views
882
MAC_32
MAC_32

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 6 (members: 0, guests: 6)
Top