The General Terrorist Rampage Thread

[Jack Brickman]

He shouldn't be interviewed because he's a 17 year old kid who has a very limited understanding of the complex issues he's being paraded around to discuss.

Could say the same about our president.

 

[MediumBaller]

Could say the same about our president.

I knew that was coming from somebody

 

[Jack Brickman]

I knew that was coming from somebody

Hey, don't toss up the alley oop if you don't want me to slam it home.

 

[And1]

You just basically described a mentally unstable individual though. That person doesn't need a video game to set him over the top, nor a movie or TV show - if he's that MESSED UP, he already had it in his mind to do it.

There's plenty of very violent games and very violent movies. But they don't become the motive for a school shooting. That just comes from the sick individual.

Never said it was their "motive". I think it adds to the total equation... if you don't , then keep on with the Uber violent video games

 

[gourimoko]

No. The kid being a hypocrite there is just one example. He shouldn't be interviewed because he's a 17 year old kid who has a very limited understanding of the complex issues he's being paraded around to discuss. He uses his status as a kid and a victim to deflect any criticism of his ludicrous commentary. Good for the students for becoming politically active, and I truly mean that, but you can't take off the political activist hat and throw on the "I'm just a kid" hat real quick whenever you get criticized.

In a few months to a year tops, this kid will be an adult. He was actually there at the shooting. If he can't have an opinion on it, then frankly no one can.

 

[MediumBaller]

In a few months to a year tops, this kid will be an adult. He was actually there at the shooting. If he can't have an opinion on it, then frankly no one can.

I don't have a problem with him having an opinion. My problem is the way he responds whenever someone questions him or his opinion. I also have my questions about what's going on behind the scenes, since he seems to be the only kid from the school that we ever see on the news, but it's probably better to wait until the politics forum is opened to delve into that.

 

[pr26]

I don't have a problem with him having an opinion. My problem is the way he responds whenever someone questions him or his opinion. I also have my questions about what's going on behind the scenes, since he seems to be the only kid from the school that we ever see on the news, but it's probably better to wait until the politics forum is opened to delve into that.

Please don't tell me you buy into the crisis actor conspiracy theory BS. You are better than that.

 

[MediumBaller]

Please don't tell me you buy into the crisis actor conspiracy theory BS. You are better than that.

No, I don't think he's a crisis actor or anything like that. He's obviously a student at the school, I just wonder why he and a few other students are the only ones we really see promoted by the major networks. From what I understand David Hogg wasn't even in the same building as the shooting. There are students at the school who have different opinions on gun control, but they aren't getting much coverage at all. Instead, a kid who apparently was in a different building is getting the bulk of it.

 

[Cavatt]

I don't have a problem with him having an opinion. My problem is the way he responds whenever someone questions him or his opinion. I also have my questions about what's going on behind the scenes, since he seems to be the only kid from the school that we ever see on the news, but it's probably better to wait until the politics forum is opened to delve into that.

You know they are using the NRA's own tactics against them right?

This is the part that is so crazy to me. "These kids are paid by the left" they don't need to be paid to have this opinion. Most Americans think it is too easy to get a gun. That is a majority opinion. 90+ percent of Americans think more background checks and waiting periods are the way to go.

Thinking that Dana Loesch's opinions are pure and these kid's aren't is backwards thinking.

NRA members are a tiny tiny minority. Less than the population of IN.

You routinely think there is some kind of conspiracy instead of taking the occam's razor on this. People whose friend's die in gun attacks aren't fond of assault style weapons. It's not weird. He isn't the only one that's been on TV. Another girl from his class has passed the NRA's followers on twitter in 10 days.

This is mainstream. People are tired of the gun industry making the rules for guns the way people were tired of the Tobacco industry self-regulating. If thoughts and prayers are the best the NRA can do, they will be removed from the decision making process.

Taking a hard line stance on minimal background checks and the loosest gun laws has backfired in a big way. It worked for a long time, but even most of their membership doesn't agree on their stance.

I saw today that people were saying that they were held hostage by their local gun ranges that they have to be NRA members to use the range.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Sitting here, I can think that I would run in the building and kick some ass and save lives, but man...if I heard that machine gun echoing through the hallways, I'd probably be petrified and not able to move.

There was no machine gun

There was no machine gun

There was no machine gun

 

[pr26]

No, I don't think he's a crisis actor or anything like that. He's obviously a student at the school, I just wonder why he and a few other students are the only ones we really see promoted by the major networks. From what I understand David Hogg wasn't even in the same building as the shooting. There are students at the school who have different opinions on gun control, but they aren't getting much coverage at all. Instead, a kid who apparently was in a different building is getting the bulk of it.

Gotcha, thanks for clarifying. I'll try to dig into this a little later tonight if I get time.

 

[MediumBaller]

You know they are using the NRA's own tactics against them right?

This is the part that is so crazy to me. "These kids are paid by the left" they don't need to be paid to have this opinion. Most Americans think it is too easy to get a gun. That is a majority opinion. 90+ percent of Americans think more background checks and waiting periods are the way to go.

Thinking that Dana Loesch's opinions are pure and these kid's aren't is backwards thinking.

NRA members are a tiny tiny minority. Less than the population of IN.

You routinely think there is some kind of conspiracy instead of taking the occam's razor on this. People whose friend's die in gun attacks aren't fond of assault style weapons. It's not weird. He isn't the only one that's been on TV. Another girl from his class has passed the NRA's followers on twitter in 10 days.

This is mainstream. People are tired of the gun industry making the rules for guns the way people were tired of the Tobacco industry self-regulating. If thoughts and prayers are the best the NRA can do, they will be removed from the decision making process.

Taking a hard line stance on minimal background checks and the loosest gun laws has backfired in a big way. It worked for a long time, but even most of their membership doesn't agree on their stance.

I saw today that people were saying that they were held hostage by their local gun ranges that they have to be NRA members to use the range.

I haven't formed an opinion on this yet. When I'm watching the news I try to ask myself "why are they showing me this", so that way I can avoid being affected by the station's bias as much as possible. When that kid is constantly on the news, I ask myself "why does it seem like he's one of the only survivors they ever talk to". Maybe you're right and there isn't any agenda being pushed here.

As for gun control, I don't personally oppose many of the basic gun control proposals that I've seen. I think there are steps that can be taken to improve our safety while also protecting people's 2nd amendment rights.

 

[CleveRocks]

First you say my post was too short, was "mindless" and rep-bait; and then when I reply in some detail using roughly the same number of characters as you did just now, my post is too long and it's a "wall of text."

C'mon man...



I am in no way being disingenuous.



Good, none of this is meant to be personal.



And yet, I disagree with your assertion, given the comparison about hardened facilities including government facilities with armed guards checking all those who try to enter.

So, this isn't really a question of how smart I am, but instead, why you think such a facility where obviously people cannot enter and exit with some modicum of freedom due to some sort of barrier and armed guards posted at the perimeter, is in no way comparable to a "prison?"



A position (your position), that I'm saying makes no sense. Why avoid discussing gun control, and instead talk about hardening schools? Why is gun control off-limits and why is your assertion that strict gun control supposed not stopping violence the beginning and end of such a discussion?



FWIW, this is probably your 6th ad hominem attack against me, without any attacks by me against you.

Let's just argue the facts...



No, that's not what I was referring to; I was referring to politicians looking to cut school funding for education who are now eager to spend millions and potentially billions nationwide to post armed guards at schools and harden facilities.

But we can't get smaller classrooms?



No, I'm not. Not remotely.

I'm arguing that if there is very finite amount of money, then I would rather spend that money on advancing education rather than a security program like the one you're describing.



Needless straw-man...? FWIW, I'm a 'capitalist' business-owner myself.....



I've never supported an assault weapons ban and still don't; at least not as of yet. You're misreading my point here assuming I'm making some standard liberal argument.

I have been a gun enthusiast and have owned several assault rifles. I've historically defended the Second Amendment on this forum for 9+ years.

My point is that we should, at a minimum, at least consider a general weapons ban and the merit of such a proposal. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, as I admittedly don't know any more. That's why I reject the notion that we should just shut down conversation on the topic as though it's a settled matter -- it isn't.



I never accused you of trying to capitalize on anything; I didn't even know you would be in a position to do such a thing.

But my point is that the larger question of mass shootings and gun violence remains wholly unaddressed by the solution you're point to.



Right, but you're talking to one of the few posters who isn't on any "side" here and I think my posting history shows I'm both a liberal on most issues, but very conservative when it comes to gun rights.

How is it not Ad Hominem to quote a post line by line?


My response to you was not ad Hominem, but I am sorry you took it that way. I saw it as calling you out for making twisting my message to suit your argument. Thats how I saw it. It is entirely possible you meant it differently.

So I will refrain from further personal indictment.

No one can argue access control is too expensive until there is a proposed spec. Its a false trade off to say we will spend phantom money on more classroooms and therefore more teachers, as opposed to secure access. If we were going to spend more money on teachers, we would have already done that (since it has been proposed for decades). People are motivated to make sure their kids are safe in school, more so than to improve their education, which is what the current fuss is all about. In my opinion, we will have fewer teachers and larger class rooms in the future, or no classroom at all.

So the proposed actions are what:

Ban Assault Weapons (could happen/perhaps should happen, but will it prevent more of the same? What exactly constitutes an assault weapon? Isn't any gun an Assault weapon, i mean what else do you do with it? )

Ban All Weapons (Not gonna happen, Would probably prevent violence from legally obtained guns, So Gour, I know you are going to highlight this one, but if the congress cannot even pass assault weapons ban, there is no chance in hell they pass a general weapons ban.)

Register all weapons, with serious background checks. (Dont we already do this at least in some states? )

Ban weapons from the mentally ill (Who decides what menatally ill is, and how is this information shared to whoever approves a gun sale)

Ban modifications of weapons to make them WMA (The argument for banning a bumpstock, which is probably the absolutely easiest thing to print on a 3D printer or make is a wood shop. I think automatic mod kits for AK47 are widely available over the internet. But I think these things should be banned if they are not already).

Expel mentally ill people from mainstream schools? (what is the criteria, and is there a path to recovery? )

Better availability of mental health workers for people with mental illness? (Will the Mental health professional be held liable if someone loses their shit? )

Arm Teachers? (I am unaware of anyone that has suggested mandatory arming of teachers, however are their teachers who would want a gun in class? Would anyone trust a teacher with a gun in class? )

Armed security in the schools? (This is an order of magnitude more expensive than many access control solutions and a line item in the operating budget. What good does it do if they are not visible? What good does it do if they are visible but exposed? Who wants this job? )


I have no position on gun control, other than I don't believe any realistic scenario will make any difference. I am comfortable with any amount of gun control anyone wants to implement. It will have no direct impact on me. So I am not talking past gun control, I am talking about actions we can take to fix the problem, which would likely make it to a real implementation.

Where I take offense is that some of you want to paint access control as if it is turning a school into a prison. It is not. Literally millions of people work in secure access facilities every day, and there is no resemblance to a prison at all. I cannot name one corporate headquarters that does not have access control. Not one. Prisons are designed to keep people in. Access control is designed to keep its occupants safe. This is all about risk management. You can leave whenever you want. There is nothing keeping you inside. You literally just walk out the door. If they make you sign out it is because they don't want to waste time looking for you in a disaster ( like a fire or explosion on premise), so they are just asking you to help out. The idea is to keep people out who want to do harm.

There are plenty of instances where violence occurred even in an access controlled situation. Generally this is a worker gone postal situation. but i would argue that many of these are the results of bad security management, more than a failure of the facility. If you are going to let someone go, you get the access card first thing. You have a plan to see them off the premises.

There are plenty of security professionals and there is a very organized way to go about evaluating risk, and implementing measures to address risk. Its not complicated.

 

[Cavatt]

I haven't formed an opinion on this yet. When I'm watching the news I try to ask myself "why are they showing me this", so that way I can avoid being affected by the station's bias as much as possible. When that kid is constantly on the news, I ask myself "why does it seem like he's one of the only survivors they ever talk to". Maybe you're right and there isn't any agenda being pushed here.

As for gun control, I don't personally oppose many of the basic gun control proposals that I've seen. I think there are steps that can be taken to improve our safety while also protecting people's 2nd amendment rights.

I mean those kids organized themselves, and have a very specific goal, so they aren't including every voice at their school, they are sharing the ones that want to be involved. Why doesn't the NRA represent all gun owners? They only represent the ones that want 0 regulation on guns. Same thing.

As usual it is the loudest voices that get the mic.

They chose to make the agenda this time as opposed to the politicians that usually get up there, and they got out in front of the message that the NRA and politicians used to silence the parents of the Sandy Hook victims.

 

[Hurl Bruce]

There was no machine gun

There was no machine gun

There was no machine gun

Sorry...

Powerful shooting machine that can shoot very rapidly but not automatically.