Topic: 20 Killed in El Paso, TX Mass Shooting (Read 1009 times)

Spoken like a true Judge Dredd:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=judge+dredd

It's not the governments job to educate the populace on safe firearms use. It's the parent's job. But as i mentioned with the declining changes in society, so declines the idea of family and raising a responsible child.

Thanks for the tip! 

From where I'm posting, police brutality and even alleged extrajudicial killings done by the same, could be considered alarming it reached the United Nations. With this, my logic tells me that if a government failed, and failed terribly, to professionalize the 170,000 men in uniform, could it become successful to instill discipline to millions of armed ordinary citizens should they allow people like me to own guns? With an annual budget of almost 2 billion USD, the government failed to instill responsible gun ownership to these people. How much more does this country need to practically educate every single ordinary citizen on responsible gun ownership?


The more reason why governments should make it even more difficult for people to have access to guns perhaps? I guess responsible gun owners like you are fairly outnumbered by these adventurous youngsters whose imaginary world they mistake as the real one.

Time to arm all the citizens, and teach them how to use their weapons, so they can protect themselves without harming each other.

Has anyone stopped to consider why these mass shootings are occurring now (last decade or two), when these guns ("assault rifles") have been available to the public since at least the 1960's ?

The guns are not the problem. I have quite a few that haven't hurt anyone. The real issue is morality and the ever decreasing lack of it in today's society.

When did you ever see teenagers back-talking and mouthing off to adults and cops? Certainly didnt happen when I was growing up. Now its an everyday event.

Little shits are not put in their place anymore and are given a timeout instead of a swift kick in the ass. The internet has exposed everyone to everything. No one respects fellow man anymore.

And its not going to get better.

Don't use Google only. Search with other search engines, particularly DuckDuckGo and Entireweb. The thing to search on is "police brutality." I would be searching with a USA ISP inside the USA.

A decade ago, Google showed something like 24,000,000 hits. They are filtering what they do in their searches so that they don't get as many duplicates. Now, after there are many more Web complaints about law enforcement, they show around 34,000,000 hits, even with all the filtration.

The point is, do you want a subset of society that has multi-millions of complaints against them, to be the ones who have the guns? With all due respect, to me that sounds kinda insane.

I am not an American and it always got me curious why people in your country can easily have one. I mean, I suppose you've got enough law enforcers already to keep the neighborhood safe.

In mine, it is difficult to have one. But even so, a little more than 2 years ago, there was also a mass shooting here, killing dozens. If a country with a tight regulation on guns still has a tragic mass shooting incidence, how much more in a country where ordinary people could have them?

I am into a stricter measure of assigning guns exclusively to law enforcers.

If the NRA had any power that they were using to help the people, would have changed things so that people not only could bear arms at all times, but would bear arms at all time.

Rather, the NRA is so weak that they stumble around in the dark, barely able to maintain themselves as some kind of an organization.

About the mass shooting in united state,I believe Americans are  not happy about it,the government should take tough stand on gun control has we have recently in Australia,where assulted rifles where banned and taken from people who owns one,to me the American government are not serious about it

The problem with this is that many of the experts who do the evaluations, are pro mental medicine. And we are finding that mass shootings are being done by people who have had too much mental medicine. So, who is going to judge that what the experts are saying is the right thing?

Rather, arm all adults with people in public, so that they can protect themselves from the crazy shooters.

It seems that the only way to truly stop all this mayhem is to put forward legislation that will prevent some people from ever getting access to guns and with some people, I am talking about the mentally unstable people. Gun holders should all go through psychological evaluation before they are given the license to carry arms.

New Texas shooting, this time in Odessa / Midland (west Texas):

https://www.foxnews.com/us/west-texas-shooting-midland-odessa-suspect-dead

24 people shot, 5 dead (so far).

Sounds completely random at this point, I'm sure more details will come to light soon.

^^^ Would rather have people's bodies stop the bullets than letting the fear put into the shooter by loads of armed citizens make the shooter pull his finger off the trigger and run away.

Of course you do! Anybody else have any overbearingly obvious opinions they want to give? In 4.5 pages of comments there's about 3 original thoughts.

Best comment yet! 

"Parents Of Parkland Shooting Victim In El Paso At Time Of Mass Shooting"
 
https://archive.is/jtwB6#selection-2865.1-2865.73

FOX News Reports El Paso Shooting Before it Happens!  - https://www.brighteon.com/304cfc4e-1786-46c8-a0c5-9439f8819c35

https://beforeitsnews.com/v3/

Actually, all new guns should be installed with an app just like Siri. You can talk to the gun and have it look up stuff on the internet, put stuff on your calendar, and give you directions. It can even help you with your aim. People with soon treat their guns like their phones and never step foot outside their home without it. Also, just like Siri, it will record and transmit everything said to the proper authorities.  

Please explain to me how this would do anything to stop gun crime in any way. While you are at it please explain to me how this list will not be used as a list of people who need to be rounded up during a gun confiscation. Just slapping the blockchain on things doesn't fix problems.

We should put guns on the blockchain. Is there a company that is doing that?

How could have things gone differently if this man was armed?

http://www.stationgossip.com/2019/08/unsung-hero-took-on-el-paso-shooter.html

Fear and mass hysteria...




 

Why would anyone need an "assault rifle" (not an assault rifle): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GnbJrHcYpU


Fear and mass hysteria, just as intended.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-08-07/edge-chaos-ensues-times-square-after-crowd-mistakes-backfiring-motorcycle-mass

If I were in a crowd of 100 people, and a shooter started blasting away at us, I would want the whole crowd to have, and be active with, firearms. We could protect each other from the shooter.

The only reason why there is such a push against US guns is that gun freedom in the USA is keeping the whole world free. Governments aren't going to enslave their people when they know that their people can get guns from the USA.

When I read news headlines like this one I think that there is a lot of freedom in the US.
And I don't mean freedom of exchanging ideas etc. I mean that even not adult people can buy guns and have access to a lot of illegal activities. This is the root cause in my opinion. They need stricter regulations about that.

You DO have part of a point, you know. A slave knows a shooter might not get him. But a dead freeman doesn't know anything.

Take the guns away, and government slavery might not get very bad. I mean, it will take government a while to turn the masses into full-time slavery. Only your grand-kids, and theirs, will have to put up with it. We won't. They'll have to do what they can do in their life.

Good thing you aren't in the majority. Free people like it the way it is... freedom... including gun freedom. Fear-slaves are just stuck. Their protection comes from the free people who honor gun freedom, but they are too fearful to even recognize it.

Stay inside your mindset. We don't want your kind with us when we need to stand up against shooters, within goverment or without. We just hope that we are trustworthy to our own freedom. We absolutely know, from your own statements, that you don't even want to be trusted to be free.

One of the things that amazes us is that you are even bold enough to speak you mind. I guess it's part of Government implanted Stockholm Syndrome.

I have been on vacation during all of these shootings.  Was surprised to see TECSHARE and SPENDULUS blaming them on capitalism. 

With a possible tactical disadvantage, yes they can.

But this will not get you where you think you want to get to, not in the least.

"Semi-automatic" is a mechanism that replaces the revolving cylinder, and the long tube containing bullets.

"Assault rifle" really is a phrase that's related to appearance, not function. The primary battle rifles of WW1 and WW2 look like "hunting rifles."

AK-47s are assault rifles. Semi-automatic weapons are not. It is possible as much as defending yourself with a pointy stick is. Not optimally.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/08/owner-of-8chan-says-the-manifesto-was-not-uploaded-by-the-el-paso-walmart-shooter/

You mean normal people carrying guns like jewelry, then the US should be renamed to the United States of Armed People. The problem with the US is that it's too large and the society is too complicated and hence not easy to control. Talking about this, China is doing better under its monopoly communism party (I'm not praising China's communism). You're supporting gun purchasing but it's the root of the problem. Using guns to prevent gun assaults only makes everything become more chaotic. I'm not wise enough to propose a solution for the US but I don't think encouraging guns will improve the situation.

"New Legislation Outlawing Violent Gun-Wielding Groups Accidentally Bans Federal Government"

https://babylonbee.com/news/new-legislation-targeting-violent-gun-wielding-groups-accidentally-bans-government

Except the problem with your logic is that all you are doing is shifting the crime to being done using another device. Guns don't make people murder. It is not a legitimate metric because you were claiming a correlation between "leniency in gun laws" whatever the fuck that means with gun deaths. First of all anyone familiar with scientific method can tell you correlation does not automatically equal causation. A lot of people who happen to be criminals are shot while engaged in criminal activity, by your metric all of those people are implied victims of gun crime. Again, this includes police use, defensive use, and suicides. Are you suggesting police should be disarmed along with the general public, and that people intent on suicide will not find another way? So everyone gets their rights stripped because some people are intent to hurting themselves? Another issue with your supposed logic is you totally ignore the lives saved by defensive and legal use of firearms. Of course this doesn't fit your belief system so that doesn't count does it? Nope, chock those all up to "gun deaths", and mark guns as the problem, not the criminals.


Except you don't get to claim all defensive uses of firearms and intentional self harm are caused by firearm ownership. It is like saying obesity is caused by food, so we need food control laws because people might hurt themselves eating too much. People have a right to defend themselves, and that self defense by your metric gets added on to "gun deaths" when they are in fact proof of the protection gun ownership offers. Your metric is completely intellectually dishonest and deceptive.



Yes, lets look at some sources:



https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/here-are-8-stubborn-facts-gun-violence-america

https://crimeresearch.org/2017/04/number-murders-county-54-us-counties-2014-zero-murders-69-1-murder/

https://mises.org/wire/few-gun-laws-new-hampshire-safer-canada

https://crimeresearch.org/2014/03/comparing-murder-rates-across-countries/



So removing potential victims from the scene does not potentially reduce the rate at which he can take victims, effectively slowing him down? If you watched the statement video he made, you would know he did in fact draw his weapon. What other assumptions based on zero information are you making? If you read the story two days ago why is it you are pretending it never happened?


Not at all. A firearm can be used to protect life as much as it can be used to take life. You just ignore the part that protects life and in your fantasy world that never happens, and if it did fuck those people who would have otherwise been victims right? The very first sentence of your link has problems.

"The man who invented the iconic AK-47 automatic rifle wrote of his regret at creating the weapon. "

If you knew anything about firearms, you would know the AK-47 is an AUTOMATIC rifle, a type of rifle which is VERY heavily restricted and expensive to obtain in the USA. Of course you know jack shit about firearms, but are still willing to strip people's rights over your ignorant assumptions based on movies and sensationalized media. I am sure your death bed regrets of a weapon designer are all the proof you need that is was "designed to inflict mass human casualties", even though almost no one in the US owns any of these weapons.



The only thing you would add is "Fuck everyone who doesn't want their rights taken so they can be made victims, black rifles are scary and need to be banned so my irrational fears can be assuaged." You are only taking the rights of other people after all, no skin off your back. It is much easier that way isn't it?

I am not heartless. It's not like that at all.

Weapons cannot be prohibited, but legislation needs to be tightened somehow. Although, any crazy can pretend to be normal. But I feel much calmer when I have a gun.

Be that as it may, if that Walmart still had their gun counter and ammo for sale, a dozen customers could have, and would have, gone after the shooter.

And why were they taken out? Wasn't it because of pressure from the PC crowd?

Everybody are talking about it but nothing changes

This is the stuff that gun owners point to when people tell them that mass shootings are the biggest problem. Mass shootings seem like a much larger problem then they are due to the fact that they're on the news all the time -- do you want to know why they're on the news all the time --> IT'S BECAUSE THEY'RE RARE.

They're not going to put shootings in Chicago on the news, because that's not news anymore. It's common at this point.

It's not madness. It's anger at how stupid you are proving yourself to be.

When you ban the guns, ban them out of the hands of the military, as well. After all, guns are guns, right? Then we can go back to using swords and hacking each other into little bits, right?

A 250-pound bully can easily overpower, rape, mug, and kill a 90-pound teenage girl... even if she knows karate, btw. But if Girly has a gun, she has a chance... even if the bully has a gun, as well.

You really need to check the statistics of how many women are arming up these days, just for self-protection.

You've now thoroughly descended into madness. There's no point in attempting to converse with you any further.

Here's the society it works in. The Walmart society. What do I mean?

The average person goes to Walmart simply for groceries or other items. Many go for the fun of shopping. Do you know what else these people do? They get mad at Walmart Associates who make a mistake. They call the manager in. And if the manager sticks up for the associate, he better be right... because the customers stick up for each other.

Get over to Walmart. This happens all the time. The customers are sheep until they detect something going on that is not right. Then they become aggressive.

I'd much rather have a few dozen angry customers around me, helping me fight off a shooter, than sit there and cry in my blood before I died.

What in the world kind of a sissy are you? Arm the people so they have a fighting chance against a shooter.

In what society does that work? The U.S. already has more than 1 gun per person and also the highest number of mass shootings. You have no evidence that your way works.

Regardless, I'd rather live in a place where being armed wasn't compulsory. Don't know about you.

You could. But don't. Rather, go the way that works. Arm everyone. Since most people are good, they will protect each other from the few who are bad.

This is the type of hyperbole that prevents meaningful discussion on the issue from taking place. I could go the other way and say why not just legalize murder since laws against assault don't work.

So you see? Banning something doesn't stop it. So, banning is simply wishful thinking... since it doesn't work, anyway.

Hurting each other is already banned. It's called "assault." It would seem that you're on board for banning assault rifles then, thanks for taking a step forward.

^^^ Oh come on. If we are going to ban assault rifles, let's go all the way and ban hurting each other.

Of course people who have pools are more likely to drown. Of course people who drive cars are more likely to have an automobile accident. Of course its a legitimate metric. Thats kind of the whole point: more guns = more gun deaths.


Any death caused by a gun is still a death.


Not true. If you honestly believed this, you'd provide some kind of a source. Though I'd prefer if it wasn't ZeroHedge or the NRA.


The soldier moved children out of the way. His gun had nothing to do with "slowing the shooter down." He didn't draw it, he wasn't even seen by the shooter. I first read that story 2 days ago so save your projection fantasies for another time.


Thats a ridiculous comparison. AK-47s are designed to inflict mass human casualties.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-13/ak-47-rifle-inventor-mikhail-kalashnikov-regrets-creating-weapon/5198396


This is the most well-reasoned response here so far, and really there's not much more to be said. The only thing I would add is that assault rifles should definitely be banned outright.

You forget the fact that if everyone in the store was open carrying - some of them with assault rifles - this joker would have been too scared to do what he did. Nobody would have died.

I'm from a country in which guns and weapons are strictly controlled by the government. There were many times I was disappointed on my government because they control and restrict us on so many things but seeing news or articles like this, I know that they're right at some point. Also, I feel really sorry for those people who were killed and their relatives. America is not Pakistan or some other Islamic countries, these gun massacres are tarnishing its image as a place of freedom, peace and democracy.

Now we're finding out that it was a government set-up. Soros is probably behind it to promote gun control. But there may be bigger hidden fish than he.


Five simple questions that blow apart the official fake news narrative about the El Paso...




Watch the video!

People kill people with any tools they can find not just guns and its not easy to just take up a gun and shoot other people but where this world is going now only God knows hatred is growing bigger in the heart of people against people,the kid that did this might be rejected by the society or the other but im sure he was passing through alot and he was tired of living and yet living in anger towards other people,one way or the other i hope this will be the end of people getting killed in shootouts

I always think the same when i read news like this... Give weapons to anyone and wait they don't shoot themselves is an ironic idea. I want to say i'm sorry about the news, no one deserves to die that way, but we live in a haters society, people who grow with bullying will not think twice about take a gun and kill the abusers. So, what did this kid has in his mind to pull the trigger? how muy pain he felt in the past days to decide to make a mass murder? We all think he ruins his life by doing this, but common sense tells me his life already was ruined and isn't his fault, is the society fault.

This is a complex topic and i hope it doesn't happen again, but sadly it will because the society let it happen.

Unless of course there is another dependent factor you are leaving out, such as over prescription of medication and lack of mental health treatment. McAfee raised an interesting question recently.

"Why have people become so angry, hostile and alienated that they need to murder total strangers? That's the question, people. We need to answer that first."


What about setting buildings on fire? Improvised explosives? Poison? Running people over with trucks? The fact is modern life gives everyone ample opportunity to use these tools to harm people if they choose to. The problem is not the tool they use, it is the motivation behind it. If all we are doing is taking tools away we still have homicidal people only killing people using different tools, and people less able to defend themselves. That is even assuming that gun control will keep illegal guns out of their hands at all, which is arguable since if some one is willing to murder they don't much care about violating gun laws.

If having MOAR guns made a country safer then the USA would have the least number of mass shootings.  Since the exact opposite is true the rest of the developed world decided to listen to the facts and that their citizens lives were more important that gun manufacture's profit!

I don’t think many mall security guards carry guns.

https://youtu.be/yywmSuC9wJc

This is an interview with the guy. It is widely available on many news sites.

I agree with you here. But I also think part of the problem is the ready access mentally ill people have to weapons designed to inflict mass casualties.