T&Ps , I guess that normal people have given up on telling USA#1 how crazy this is.

Confirmed T&Ps

no way to prevent this. eludes even the smartest of policy wonks.

Absolutely no way to stop mass shooting after mass shooting in America. My god.

Stop giving press to the nutbars who carry them out might be a start.

Golden State coach says it well



https://www.tsn.ca/NBA/video/when-ar...ain-fo~2449109

Press, or did you mean guns? Which do you think will have a bigger impact?

It's totally realistic to expect a media blackout in response to 20 kids being gunned down.

Are we talking idealistically or realistically?

Idealistically, sure, having zero guns in America (including police) would bring mass shootings down to near-zero.

Since that is not possible, I think not making outcast losers feel like heroes to their kindred souls when they waste their schoolmates and incentivize them to top their death count numbers would have a greater impact, but you're the shrink, so I'm open to being persuaded.

One could argue that social media is the bigger issue. When I was a kid, people got bullied at school and that was it - 3PM they had the rest of the night off. Today, it's 24/7 bullying and two-parent homes working.

Do I think there needs to be tighter gun laws? Yes, for sure.

It's sure as **** more realistic than removing 400 million guns from America.

ill just add this one time but not going on rant of any kinda about it....
but what piss me off in all of this it aint guns.
its the same hypocrite that are pro guns and cant even do a small admission about some guns should be control and yet.....let throw all woman, doctor for 10-15 years in prison and whomever else that help someone make an abortion from a cell of 2 weeks old, defending the sanctity of life at any cost with 1000% control....

wtf.

arent all those dead kids ( not cells) innocent collateral too ?
what a strange country.....
the logic in some states are like 2+2=fish.

go full freedom and no control in both cases or do the opposite , but at least make a decison that put some logic into it..

I'd say it is equally [un]realistic.

Yeah, I heard this in the car earlier - well said and very moving.

i figured when a shout out in school where 20 children of senators and the like gets killed, they might realize something and start voting about something...
but the money from the lobbies must be pretty good.

How many different entities control all of mainstream media? How many different people control the 400 million guns in America?

Equally [un]realistic?

You understand what I am saying. There is no point in speculating about the differences in probability of a world in which most guns are quickly removed from U.S. streets and a world in which the media doesn't report on mass shootings.

One has a 0.000000001% chance of occurring, and the other has a 0.000000002% chance of occurring. Assign the probabilities however you like.

They need to wake the f up in America. Shooting of children by other children should be a huge wake up call and sign that there is something massively wrong with their politics.

How can a 18 year old disturbed kid like this kid or kyle rittenhouse even get his hands on a machine gun?? That's just wrong.

How many more shootings does it take?

I mean those were elementary school children age 7-10!
In what universe can a 18 year old just buy weapons of mass destruction without proper screening and nobody caring? I mean he had obviously some lose screws which makes it more troubling the environment didn't react. That lunatic posted pictures of himself posing with the guns on social media.

Every other country does this.

His point is that, even if you banned all new gun sales, there would still be a huge number of guns on U.S. streets because of historical sales.

Canada has very high levels of civilian gun ownership by international standards. Reducing the number of guns per capita in the U.S. to the level of Canada probably would require a 30-year bipartisan commitment.

The only way to quickly and dramatically reduce the number of guns on U.S. streets would be to offer an amnesty window for gun surrender, and then impose criminal penalties for possession of many types of guns. In addition to being politically unpopular, this sort of draconian policy likely would bloat incarceration rates in a country that already has the highest per capita rate of incarceration in the world.

Guns aren't the biggest problem the United States faces. But significantly reducing the number of guns on the street might be the most intractable problem the country faces.

Could someone with a background and expertise on security help answer this question for me? I'm just curious and want to better understand. In cases like this one, often there is some security officer who is either killed, or wounded in this case, but isn't able to prevent the shooting. Would having 2 security officers at a school instead of just 1 change this fact? Or is it that the typical security officers in schools aren't trained for / in the proper condition to prevent this? I just want to know - from a security standpoint - what would it take to prevent these things from happening at a school? We're dealing with 18 year old crazies, not some career criminal masterminds - doesn't seem like it should be too hard.

Schools are large. They have multiple doors. We live in a country where everyone, including deeply troubled teenagers, has access to high-powered guns and can buy tactical gear on the internet. Sure, we could turn school into armed camps. But many parents don't want that, and it probably isn't practical from a budgeting perspective. I don't see "add extra security" as anything close to a complete solution.

Gun violence is probably the easiest problem America could solve right now. There’s a solid 2/3 majority of the public that would support and assault rifle ban, like 80% support expanded background checks, literally every other country has solved this problem but we act like it’s an inevitable force of nature that we’ll have multiple mass shootings every week.

In short... they dont. Machine guns have been illegal in this country almost 30 years and none of the publicized mass shootings have involved machine guns.


They generally involve an AR-15 or similar semiautomatic rifle. Banning semiautomatic rifles will remove a lot of guns off the street, but then the next mass shooter will load up with multiple pistols and be able to do similar damage. Most gun deaths are from a pistol anyways. And then we will want pistols banned. And then the next mass shooter will just make a homemade bomb of some kind and blow up himself and a school, and then we will have a national fertilizer ban.

Its not the tools of destruction that are the main problem, its that so many young men feel so angry and hopeless at the world that they would do this at all. There is definitely a community of these messed up people and they seem to be in a competition of who can cause the most mayhem and destruction. Guns have been core to American culture for 230 years but mass shootings like these have only been a thing for the past 30-40 years. So it seems that guns arent the main problem here.

There does seem to be an issue with the effectiveness of background checks though, so I would support some reform around that topic. Too many cases of a mass shooter being on the radar of law enforcement and still passing a bg check to buy a weapon (this is where the conspiracy theorists come in - the govt wants mass shooting so that they can take your guns). I dont know if social media is looked at in BG checks but it definitely should be.

Heck yeah, now let’s do AR-15s.