Las Vegas Mass Casualty Attack

[awbuzz]

Big part of the problem is that "the FBI's background-check system is missing millions of records of criminal convictions, mental illness diagnoses and other flags that would keep guns out of potentially dangerous hands, a gap that contributed to the shooting deaths of 26 people in a Texas church this week.

Experts who study the data say government agencies responsible for maintaining such records have long failed to forward them into federal databases used for gun background checks - systemic breakdowns that have lingered for decades as officials decided they were too costly and time-consuming to fix."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...ck-system-missing-records-20171110-story.html

 

[awbuzz]

Here is another good chart showing gun deaths related to the number guns owned.

But hey, we don't have a problem here. We are doing just fine. More guns are the answer.

Can you take out suicides?

 

[WreckinGT]

I was right and you were wrong. The point is he never went into school and never tried to stop the shooting or help anybody. If he would have been 100 miles away, you would have been okay with that as long as it had been school property. Your argument is laughably ridiculous. I’m actually reading he wasn’t on campus property anyway, but was close by and responded to the radio call but never went in. None of that matters to the main point. I hope you never go into law enforcement.

Im not ok with anything. I never claimed anything at all other than what the Sheriff said and what you claimed was incorrect. The concept of a school and a campus isn't that difficult. You claimed the guard wasn't on campus. He was. You claimed that a random executive lady who also said he wasn't on campus was right. She wasn't. Claiming now that he wasn't at the school when he was apparently right outside the door is pretty silly also. Say it with me, he was there. Its ok to admit it. You should have just stuck with the claim that he didn't do his job. That would have worked out better for you.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Im not ok with anything. I never claimed anything at all other than what the Sheriff said and what you claimed was incorrect. The concept of a school and a campus isn't that difficult. You claimed the guard wasn't on campus. He was. You claimed that a random executive lady who also said he wasn't on campus was right. She wasn't. Claiming now that he wasn't at the school when he was apparently right outside the door is pretty silly also. Say it with me, he was there. Its ok to admit it. You should have just stuck with the claim that he didn't do his job. That would have worked out better for you.

You’re still wrong. He responded to the shooting but never went in. I was right that the Sheriff wasn’t lying. I was right that the lady’s sources were correct. I was right that something fishy was going on and there was no way he was there if he never saw the shooter or helped anybody. I accept your apology even though you don’t deserve it and still apparently have no idea what is going on. Seek help.

 

[MountainBuzzMan]

Can you take out suicides?

Here is an article from 538 about gun deaths in the US. 2/3 of all gun deaths are suicides
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/gun-deaths/.

 

[awbuzz]

Here is an article from 538 about gun deaths in the US. 2/3 of all gun deaths are suicides
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/gun-deaths/.

Thank you. I thought I'd seen around half. So 2/3's doesn't surprise me.

We have to remember that "murder" rate and death rates are different. While both examples to follow means someone is dead, shooting someone in defense of life or property is s gun death, it is not murder.

 

[UgaBlows]

 

[UgaBlows]

Do yall believe these new polls that indicate most Americans support more gun control legislation?

http://time.com/5167216/americans-gun-control-support-poll-2018/

 

[WreckinGT]

You’re still wrong. He responded to the shooting but never went in. I was right that the Sheriff wasn’t lying. I was right that the lady’s sources were correct. I was right that something fishy was going on and there was no way he was there if he never saw the shooter or helped anybody. I accept your apology even though you don’t deserve it and still apparently have no idea what is going on. Seek help.

The lady’s sources were correct? Here is what was said:

”I have been told by a couple of sources that the SRO was either called off campus responding to something happening or it could have been his day off,” she said. “They are stretched very thin.”

So which of those claims was correct? That he was called off campus or that he had the day off? The correct answer is neither. She was just as wrong as you. You shouldn’t have hitched your wagon to her.

 

[awbuzz]

Do yall believe these new polls that indicate most Americans support more gun control legislation?

http://time.com/5167216/americans-gun-control-support-poll-2018/

I believe you even more would be happier if we enforce the laws that we already had and required government agencies to report all felons and those who have been declared incompetent.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

]L

The lady’s sources were correct? Here is what was said:

So which of those claims was correct? That he was called off campus or that he had the day off? The correct answer is neither. She was just as wrong as you. You shouldn’t have hitched your wagon to her.

Not true.

Here is what probably happened. Shooting happens, dust settles. Sheriff asks cop for details. Cop gives sketchy details that don’t make sense. Sheriff continues investigation but gives initial report that the officer was there but just never saw the shooter. Word leaks to this lady that he couldn’t have been there. She is told he must have been off campus or something. They were both correct, reporting on what they knew at the time and heard.

If you read the stories, he responded to the shooting call but never goes in. He was either sleeping in the parking lot, getting a coffee around the corner, or something else. Whatever the answer is, is academic. He was not in the school and never did a thing. That you refuse to acknowledge this is sad. Seek help.

39 police visits to his house in the last year. 2 reports by the FBI. The guy was banned from campus. How many people do you think get banned from campus? 1? 3? If the cop had been at school, he likely would have recognized the guy as one who can’t be there and responded.

4 years ago the voters elected to spend a lot of money upgrading security systems. The school district still hasn’t done anything. There was no cop at the school (should have probably 3+ for a school that size). Sad.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Do yall believe these new polls that indicate most Americans support more gun control legislation?

http://time.com/5167216/americans-gun-control-support-poll-2018/

Typical human nature mixed with ignorance and media bias in coverage and reporting.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Typical human nature mixed with ignorance and media bias in coverage and reporting.

For example, imagine if the survey respondents were told that those specific gun laws they asked for response on would not have stopped this or other shootings? Imagine if the respondents had been told that the shooting was the fault of the lack of existing enforcement by law-enforcement and the lack of response by law-enforcement. Imagine if the survey respondents had been told that there is no such thing as assault weapons so an assault weapons ban would not do anything and could easily be bypassed...just like it was last time.

You’d get a different response.

 

[UgaBlows]

“The problem is that there was a good guy with a gun at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School that day. Security videos showed School Resource Deputy Scot Peterson was armed and in uniform on the school campus when the shooting started, Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel told reporters Thursday. But he stood by as the violence unfolded. “What I saw was a deputy arrive at the west side of Building 12, take up a position, and never went in,” Israel said. School Resource Officers are tasked with providing security on campus, and two other officers are facing an internal investigation for their response to the shooting. “They could have done more, they should have done more,” Israel said. When asked what the 54-year-old officer should have done, Israel responded: “Went in and addressed the killer. Killed the killer.”

Was Peterson not a “good guy” in the end? He was certainly not the right guy. We’ll surely find out more about Peterson soon, but his presence at the school during the shooting as a sanctioned “good guy with a gun” complicates the blissfully uncomplicated version of the “good guy with a gun” narrative on the right. It also shows the flaw in reflexively strapping holsters onto math teachers or volleyball coaches in America’s schools, in effect deputizing more “good guys.” How would 20 percent of America’s teachers, surely card-carrying good people by any definition, respond to similar pressures of the unthinkable? These questions of human frailty and error are nowhere to be found in the NRA’s “good guy with a gun” mythology, where the hypothetical armed hero is always batting a thousand, and for good reason. Once you allow for good people to be bad superheroes, to not save the day when everything was on the line, you start to look around for other solutions. “

https://slate.com/news-and-politics...-shooting-did-have-a-good-guy-with-a-gun.html

 

[UgaBlows]

For example, imagine if the survey respondents were told that those specific gun laws they asked for response on would not have stopped this or other shootings? Imagine if the respondents had been told that the shooting was the fault of the lack of existing enforcement by law-enforcement and the lack of response by law-enforcement. Imagine if the survey respondents had been told that there is no such thing as assault weapons so an assault weapons ban would not do anything and could easily be bypassed...just like it was last time.

You’d get a different response.

True, you need an aggregate of many polls to find the true will of the people

 

[Deleted member 2897]

“The problem is that there was a good guy with a gun at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School that day. Security videos showed School Resource Deputy Scot Peterson was armed and in uniform on the school campus when the shooting started, Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel told reporters Thursday. But he stood by as the violence unfolded. “What I saw was a deputy arrive at the west side of Building 12, take up a position, and never went in,” Israel said. School Resource Officers are tasked with providing security on campus, and two other officers are facing an internal investigation for their response to the shooting. “They could have done more, they should have done more,” Israel said. When asked what the 54-year-old officer should have done, Israel responded: “Went in and addressed the killer. Killed the killer.”

Was Peterson not a “good guy” in the end? He was certainly not the right guy. We’ll surely find out more about Peterson soon, but his presence at the school during the shooting as a sanctioned “good guy with a gun” complicates the blissfully uncomplicated version of the “good guy with a gun” narrative on the right. It also shows the flaw in reflexively strapping holsters onto math teachers or volleyball coaches in America’s schools, in effect deputizing more “good guys.” How would 20 percent of America’s teachers, surely card-carrying good people by any definition, respond to similar pressures of the unthinkable? These questions of human frailty and error are nowhere to be found in the NRA’s “good guy with a gun” mythology, where the hypothetical armed hero is always batting a thousand, and for good reason. Once you allow for good people to be bad superheroes, to not save the day when everything was on the line, you start to look around for other solutions. “

https://slate.com/news-and-politics...-shooting-did-have-a-good-guy-with-a-gun.html

Wow, I'm sad you think this. There was not a good guy with a gun there. He wasn't at the school when he was supposed to be. When the shooting call came in, then he responded, but only in so far as taking a position...still outside of the school. He literally sat there listening to gunfire while just taking cover.

A true good guy with a gun would actually have been doing his job, being on campus in the school. Banning a student from campus can't be common, so this guy should have intimately known the 1 or 2 or however many people that have been banned. Had he been there, there is a reasonable chance he would have recognized that guy showing up. Its at least greater than zero chance. Had he actually been in the school and responded, there is a reasonable chance he could have saved lives. 1? 3? 14? I mean who knows, but its at least greater than zero chance.

A good guy with a gun is not a good guy with a gun...somewhere else.

And please stop talking about arming teachers. I mean I know people like Trump are talking about it, but that's like banning guns. Its never going to happen. A high majority of Americans are against that. I mean I get it - the school systems and law enforcement keep totally and utterly failing to do their job. But I don't think that's the answer.

The voters 4 years ago voted to spend a ton of money upgrading security systems at the school, part of which would have thwarted this attack (1 of the upgrades was a fire system lever pull delay), but the school district never did anything. Our local high school has 4,000 students to Parklands 3,000 - we have 5 on campus armed security officers and they had 1. Who wasn't even there.

I mean I get it. Its frustrating that once again the entire narrative around gun control falls apart when the facts come out and we learn it wouldn't have done anything to stop this guy, but it is what it is.

 

[UgaBlows]

Why are you putting words in my mouth brah lololololololol? That was a quote from the linked article

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Why are you putting words in my mouth brah lololololololol? That was a quote from the linked article

Oh, hahahahaha, well played.

In defense of my lack of reading comprehension, I'm assuming you feel similar to them if you posted it. But yea, well played.

 

[Whiskey_Clear]

Why are you putting words in my mouth brah lololololololol? That was a quote from the linked article

So when you use a quote to make a point those aren’t your words...ok...but weren’t those words the point you were trying to make?

You’ve spent an awful lot of time arguing the semantics of minutia rather than the broad discussion at large.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Earlier, someone was picking at folks for calling one of the shooting survivors a liar and professional protestor.

Well these sorts of real stories do not help when you have conspiracy theorists in your mix:
CNN told him to just stick to the script - and only ask the question they gave him and not his own:
Networks don't want their opinions - they want to further the network's agenda: