Archive 2017-2019 Political Thread

[Mike S]

Any meaningful legislation is going to take time to consult experts in many different fields (that's not an excuse for lack of legislation after the last several mass shootings). They can ram rod crappy legislation through, but when the next mass shooting happens, everyone is gonna look around and keep demanding more and more.

Agree, but in this soundbite/headline society they need to be more vocal. That is all I am asking right now. They are going to end up letting the minority party control the public debate.

Of course, they're going to get crucified for past inactions anyway so it may be a no win situation for them.

 

[Evan]

That's simple - because people keep watching. Never forget, the media ultimately cares about advertising dollars. As long as people continue to watch the kids protest, the news will continue to give them airtime.

It doesn't hurt that nearly everyone in the mainstream media is biased against guns and now openly attacking gun owners.

Oddly silent about abortion.

 

[Arcadia]

Immediate list of things we can do:

1. Enforce the laws we already have. The FBI failed those kids. That needs to be looked into. In the meantime, enforce the laws we have.

2. Stop allowing our most valued treasures to be sitting ducks. We need better security and protection at our schools. How can be debated...but allowing easy access to our children is insane. STOP IT. The killer wasn't supposed to be there. How did he get in? Why is security so lax in schools in this day and age? That needs to be addressed and now. If the killer happens to be a student then resistance needs to come within seconds of a kid pulling out a gun. SECONDS. If that means we need armed teachers or armed security walking the halls of every public school to ensure safety then so be it. Or maybe there's a better solution. But leaving these kids sitting ducks is not the answer. We've tried that. It hasn't worked out too well.

In short, fix the security of our schools, and enforce current laws first and foremost. Then experts need to be consulted with a more in depth analysis before a bill with any hope of actually preventing more deaths should be enacted.

 

[Matt]

Immediate list of things we can do:

1. Enforce the laws we already have. The FBI failed those kids. That needs to be looked into. In the meantime, enforce the laws we have.

2. Stop allowing our most valued treasures to be sitting ducks. We need better security and protection at our schools. How can be debated...but allowing easy access to our children is insane. STOP IT. The killer wasn't supposed to be there. How did he get in? Why is security so lax in schools in this day and age? That needs to be addressed and now. If the killer happens to be a student then resistance needs to come within seconds of a kid pulling out a gun. SECONDS. If that means we need armed teachers or armed security walking the halls of every public school to ensure safety then so be it. Or maybe there's a better solution. But leaving these kids sitting ducks is not the answer. We've tried that. It hasn't worked out too well.

In short, fix the security of our schools, and enforce current laws first and foremost. Then experts need to be consulted with a more in depth analysis before a bill with any hope of actually preventing more deaths should be enacted.

These shootings always seem to happen in public schools ? Perhaps not all but most do. Why ?

 

[Jacob]

These shootings always seem to happen in public schools ? Perhaps not all but most do. Why ?

Something like 90% of high school students being in public schools certainly plays a large part in that

 

[Evan]

Agree, but in this soundbite/headline society they need to be more vocal. That is all I am asking right now. They are going to end up letting the minority party control the public debate.

Of course, they're going to get crucified for past inactions anyway so it may be a no win situation for them.

I'm going full conspiracy theory this time. Such a reaction didn't occur after Pulse or Las Vegas. It is pretty clear to me this is all coordinated and planned. I think a lot of the ideas are generic and were planned out after previous mass shootings. The anti-gun groups were ready -- they were just waiting for the right group of victims.

If the GOP and Trump give into this emotional blackmail then I've changed my mind about how I will respond. I'll be a felon because I don't care what law they pass, I'm not going to comply. What happens when they come for the 1st Amendment? The attacks on free speech by people on both the left and the right have accelerated significantly over the past 2 years. Give them a victory over the 2nd amendment and they'll never stop.

If they wanted a rational discussion we could have had it. They've made it clear there is no middle ground and the only acceptable solution is to do exactly what they say. This will be controversial, but just as physical terrorism is used to create an outpouring of emotion to help the terrorists achieve goals they wouldn't otherwise be able to, emotional blackmail can be used in a similar way.

You cannot compromise or negotiate with people acting in bad faith or saying they accept no middle ground especially when their solution is totally illogical. An "assault weapons ban" would not help them accomplish their goals. It is a setup doomed to fail to allow for more gun control. I've already seen most of us here, and many in the GOP say we'd be very open to changing the age limit to require rifles like the AR15 among other options.

This is about allowing the loudest fringe voices to control the debate. It is what happened with Trump. A very loud and edgy 25% were able to force him onto the rest of the GOP as nominee.

It is time for the rise of a new "Silent majority" to counter today's extremism on both the left and the right. We do not believe in racism, but also reject toxic ideas like "white privilege." We respect the 2nd amendment, but are willing to REASONABLY compromise with people acting in good faith so we can reduce gun violence. The 1st amendment isn't reserved for the powerful, the majority, the nice, or those without controversial ideas. It's for everyone and covers almost everything. Tax cuts are nice, after all it is OUR money, but we don't support them unless we also cut spending. We're not going to leave our children with an intractable mess to clean up. Our climate is changing; it always has and it always will. Everyone should support conservation, clean air, and clean water. But the government cannot rule by the sword or nonsensically. The easiest way to encourage positive environmental policies is to smartly incentivize our citizens and businesses to do what's right. Save punishment and the "stick" for truly bad actors; not honest people making a mistake.

Since the current push for gun control is by people unwilling to compromise, I don't believe the GOP should compromise with them. They should develop their own solutions and ideas and present them publicly. When the other side signals they are willing to give and not just take then a real conversation can be had. But we'd be fools to give even one inch if the other side has already ruled out there being middle ground. You can't negotiate with someone who is unwilling to do so and is silencing debate with emotional cries of "you're either with us or against us." If these 16 and 17 year olds don't speak for the entire movement then those that are willing to compromise and listen should say so. Because I haven't seen anyone here say they aren't willing to listen or compromise. Lots of solutions and ideas have been offered. But if the response continues to be our way or no way then there's no choice but to say no way.

 

[Evan]

Something like 90% of high school students being in public schools certainly plays a large part in that

I think there have been some shootings at private and paroachial schools. But, as Jacob said, public schools are probably representative of 90% of students. And, private schools get to pick who is allowed to attend and can more easily kick out troubled students.

But it wouldn't hurt to look at what private schools do for security and discipline, either.

 

[Kory]

I'm going full conspiracy theory this time. Such a reaction didn't occur after Pulse or Las Vegas. It is pretty clear to me this is all coordinated and planned. I think a lot of the ideas are generic and were planned out after previous mass shootings. The anti-gun groups were ready -- they were just waiting for the right group of victims.

If the GOP and Trump give into this emotional blackmail then I've changed my mind about how I will respond. I'll be a felon because I don't care what law they pass, I'm not going to comply. What happens when they come for the 1st Amendment? The attacks on free speech by people on both the left and the right have accelerated significantly over the past 2 years. Give them a victory over the 2nd amendment and they'll never stop.

If they wanted a rational discussion we could have had it. They've made it clear there is no middle ground and the only acceptable solution is to do exactly what they say. This will be controversial, but just as physical terrorism is used to create an outpouring of emotion to help the terrorists achieve goals they wouldn't otherwise be able to, emotional blackmail can be used in a similar way.

You cannot compromise or negotiate with people acting in bad faith or saying they accept no middle ground especially when their solution is totally illogical. An "assault weapons ban" would not help them accomplish their goals. It is a setup doomed to fail to allow for more gun control. I've already seen most of us here, and many in the GOP say we'd be very open to changing the age limit to require rifles like the AR15 among other options.

This is about allowing the loudest fringe voices to control the debate. It is what happened with Trump. A very loud and edgy 25% were able to force him onto the rest of the GOP as nominee.

It is time for the rise of a new "Silent majority" to counter today's extremism on both the left and the right. We do not believe in racism, but also reject toxic ideas like "white privilege." We respect the 2nd amendment, but are willing to REASONABLY compromise with people acting in good faith so we can reduce gun violence. The 1st amendment isn't reserved for the powerful, the majority, the nice, or those without controversial ideas. It's for everyone and covers almost everything. Tax cuts are nice, after all it is OUR money, but we don't support them unless we also cut spending. We're not going to leave our children with an intractable mess to clean up. Our climate is changing; it always has and it always will. Everyone should support conservation, clean air, and clean water. But the government cannot rule by the sword or nonsensically. The easiest way to encourage positive environmental policies is to smartly incentivize our citizens and businesses to do what's right. Save punishment and the "stick" for truly bad actors; not honest people making a mistake.

Since the current push for gun control is by people unwilling to compromise, I don't believe the GOP should compromise with them. They should develop their own solutions and ideas and present them publicly. When the other side signals they are willing to give and not just take then a real conversation can be had. But we'd be fools to give even one inch if the other side has already ruled out there being middle ground. You can't negotiate with someone who is unwilling to do so and is silencing debate with emotional cries of "you're either with us or against us." If these 16 and 17 year olds don't speak for the entire movement then those that are willing to compromise and listen should say so. Because I haven't seen anyone here say they aren't willing to listen or compromise. Lots of solutions and ideas have been offered. But if the response continues to be our way or no way then there's no choice but to say no way.

Can I like this more than once? You have said everything that comes to my mind in such a coherent fashion.

 

[Evan]

/shrug. He made the same reasoned, logicial points you made. I know he is dead to you and it is duly noted. I haven't completely disowned him yet. But I am watching him.

Yes, as I said, I am definitely biased against him. I don't trust him.

 

[Evan]

CNN has definitely jumped the shark for me. Are there any trustworthy media outlets left? Fox News has been one of the worst for a long time, and MSNBC isn't even worth mentioning. Has ABC, CBS, or NBS nationally handled any of this fairly?

 

[Kory]

I think there have been some shootings at private and paroachial schools. But, as Jacob said, public schools are probably representative of 90% of students. And, private schools get to pick who is allowed to attend and can more easily kick out troubled students.

But it wouldn't hurt to look at what private schools do for security and discipline, either.

Catholic schools in NOLA still paddle (not saying that is the appropriate route), but they often work with parents and authorities, should that arise. Zero tolerance on a lot of things...bullying, drugs, etc. to name a few. We also have better mental health resources (most schools have a psycologist)...not surprising considering the tuition that is paid.

 

[Matt]

I think there have been some shootings at private and paroachial schools. But, as Jacob said, public schools are probably representative of 90% of students. And, private schools get to pick who is allowed to attend and can more easily kick out troubled students.

But it wouldn't hurt to look at what private schools do for security and discipline, either.

At the Catholic schools my children attended you had to be buzzed in. They had security cams everywhere. Just lock the damn doors.

 

[Kory]

At the Catholic schools my children attended you had to be buzzed in. They had security cams everywhere. Just lock the damn doors.

We had a police detail too. Might've been because it was NOLA too.

 

[Matt]

Here is one reason you might want an AR 15. Many more examples like this.

http://www.businessinsider.com/r-oklahoma-man-kills-three-suspected-burglars-with-ar-15-rifle-2017-3

 

[Evan]

I'll break with the idea of arming teachers unless it is a very comprehensive program limited to teachers that already had prior firearms experience. Unfortunately, there are teachers with rough backgrounds, and teachers with serious problems. We've all seen some of the incompetent or dangerous teachers out there. A very small minority to be sure, but relevant. Not 100% against it, but I think it could have significant downsides including accidental discharges and ability to secure the firearm.

Remember, we are dealing with about 20-22 homicides in schools a year. So our safety programs already function fairly well considering the number of students that attend schools. We average about 15.6 school bus deaths of school age children a year ( killed in a bus crash or student hit by a school bus). Not all of the 20-22 student homicides a year are from guns but most are.

I think a better solution is more dedicated school resource officers that are funded by federal education dollars, and are dedicated solely to school security. Limited powers of arrest. We don't need to militarize schools or increase police involvement in normal disciplinary matters. The number of allowed officers should be based on the size of the school, ability to cover the campus, entrance/exit control, etc. Some schools would need more than others. I think they should be plainclothes and carry concealed. Or, look at a hybrid mix where the school resource officer also teaches a few limited courses/after school programs so that they are given more exposure to potential student threats and aren't quite seen as "outsiders"

My concern is that local law enforcement is going to remain the first responders to any serious incident and they need to be fully aware of who has a firearm, able to tactically cooperate, etc. I think there would be a trust deficit and a lot of complications with just private security or armed teachers. By the same token, school resource officer integration can be a problem if the person is just seen as a cop.

The final thing is we have to remember that even with additional target hardening and additional armed security, we will continue to see deaths. I don't remember a lot of school resource officers before Columbine. The number of school homicides varies from year to year, but the average hasn't budged much from year to year. That's where additional ideas that Arcadia and others have proposed have a role to play. Parents with firearms have to properly secure them and have the right discussions with their children. We need to spend more on mental health care. We need mass shooter screening and firearm violence screening programs for school aged children.

We can get to a place to where mass shootings are much rarer in schools or public places than they are today. But, like we saw at the Ariana Grande concert and in Paris, bad actors also innovate. I don't think we can ever eliminate senseless violence. No country on earth has been able to do so. Mitigation and harm reduction are the true goals even if we'd love to be idealistic enough to think we will never see another school shooting.

 

[Kory]

Here is one reason you might want an AR 15. Many more examples like this.

http://www.businessinsider.com/r-oklahoma-man-kills-three-suspected-burglars-with-ar-15-rifle-2017-3

It is my top choice for a home defense firearm. The accuracy at home defense distance is worlds better than a handgun.

 

[Evan]

I feel terrible that this poor kid not only had to experience a school shooting, but also that someone lied to him that Columbine was the first school shooting.

Are we being honest with ourselves or our kids that we can ever promise that schools will be completely safe from gun violence or other forms of violence?

As the father of two young children, it breaks my heart anytime I see loss of life. Especially among children. But are we being honest when we say we are going to make it never happen again?

Forget the current debate for a moment. Let's say we all agreed to a full gun ban and we had a program that confiscated 80% of the guns out there. That's a higher number than even Australia was able to achieve, but let's assume it is true. We are already seeing the ability to 3-D print workable firearms. In less than a decade 3-D printers will be affordable. We will never be able to control the flow of information. People will be able to print fully functioning weapons in American homes by the time my children are in High School.

Why is our society so sick today? KoD raised the point that poverty, an underperforming educational system, and other factors should be considered. That's true, isn't it? Does it help that in almost all families both parents have to work now? Does social media help? Does it help get we've turned out back on God? It's not just morals, the decline of the middle class, poverty, two parent households becoming the exception rather than the norm (and both have to work anyway), or our schools. I don't pretend that the 1950's were some ideallic time. There are many positives to our new society compared to then. But what about the negative changes?

Can we hope to end violence when evil simply exists in our world? I think we also have to be realistic and honest about our societal/cultural issues and discuss how we can address those areas. More people see the Karsdashians as a template for success than the role models we used to have like say a Mother Teresa or Roberto Clemente.

How do we help our children be idealistic while also teaching them about the vagaries of the real world? I don't pretend to have the answers.

 

[Arcadia]

I'll break with the idea of arming teachers unless it is a very comprehensive program limited to teachers that already had prior firearms experience. Unfortunately, there are teachers with rough backgrounds, and teachers with serious problems. We've all seen some of the incompetent or dangerous teachers out there. A very small minority to be sure, but relevant. Not 100% against it, but I think it could have significant downsides including accidental discharges and ability to secure the firearm.

Remember, we are dealing with about 20-22 homicides in schools a year. So our safety programs already function fairly well considering the number of students that attend schools. We average about 15.6 school bus deaths of school age children a year ( killed in a bus crash or student hit by a school bus). Not all of the 20-22 student homicides a year are from guns but most are.

I think a better solution is more dedicated school resource officers that are funded by federal education dollars, and are dedicated solely to school security. Limited powers of arrest. We don't need to militarize schools or increase police involvement in normal disciplinary matters. The number of allowed officers should be based on the size of the school, ability to cover the campus, entrance/exit control, etc. Some schools would need more than others. I think they should be plainclothes and carry concealed. Or, look at a hybrid mix where the school resource officer also teaches a few limited courses/after school programs so that they are given more exposure to potential student threats and aren't quite seen as "outsiders"

My concern is that local law enforcement is going to remain the first responders to any serious incident and they need to be fully aware of who has a firearm, able to tactically cooperate, etc. I think there would be a trust deficit and a lot of complications with just private security or armed teachers. By the same token, school resource officer integration can be a problem if the person is just seen as a cop.

The final thing is we have to remember that even with additional target hardening and additional armed security, we will continue to see deaths. I don't remember a lot of school resource officers before Columbine. The number of school homicides varies from year to year, but the average hasn't budged much from year to year. That's where additional ideas that Arcadia and others have proposed have a role to play. Parents with firearms have to properly secure them and have the right discussions with their children. We need to spend more on mental health care. We need mass shooter screening and firearm violence screening programs for school aged children.

We can get to a place to where mass shootings are much rarer in schools or public places than they are today. But, like we saw at the Ariana Grande concert and in Paris, bad actors also innovate. I don't think we can ever eliminate senseless violence. No country on earth has been able to do so. Mitigation and harm reduction are the true goals even if we'd love to be idealistic enough to think we will never see another school shooting.

I'm not for arming all teachers or even most of them. A select few and those few would and should be trained on how to deal with an active shooter. Certainly not some namby-pamby sitting behind a desk who has never held a gun in their life. Their local law enforcement would be privy to who those teachers were and probably have an active role in training them...in an ideal world. And the fine details can certainly be sorted out. Your ideas are perfectly good ones. As well as more school resource officers in lieu of arming certain trained teachers. Also, make sure all doors lock and cannot be open from the outside without being buzzed in. Bottom line is there is more that can be done to beef up security so that it is more difficult for something like this to happen. That is our objective, isn't it? We certainly don't want to make it easy for them. At least make them work for it. That kid/killer should never have been able to get inside that school in the first place. When our kids were in school....you could just walk right in a side door and go anywhere you wanted to go. I imagine a lot schools are like that. That has to change. And it seems like such an easy fix. Banning one certain type of gun isn't going to do a damn thing. At least this idea has some practicality. They're choosing schools because they're easy targets. Since everyone is screaming DO SOMETHING....this is something and it actually makes sense. I mean, who would think we needed to say.... lock your doors! But apparently it has to be said.

 

[Evan]

And not just during school hours. I picked my daughter up from an afterschool event yesterday at 4pm. Lunchroom had about 75+ afterschool care kids and the gym had 25+ kids for cheerleading. I was able to waltz right in through the side door. Definitely no SROs or security around. During the day the school has the doors locked and you have to be buzzed in via the office, but it is a minor impediment, and there are loopholes to get in through a back or side door if you pay attention. Absolutely agree with your points.

 

[Mike S]

I'll break with the idea of arming teachers unless it is a very comprehensive program limited to teachers that already had prior firearms experience.

That is exactly my thought. If you are going to arm a teacher, it needs to be a teacher who already owns AND knows how to shoot(prior military or police training, hours upon hours of range time, etc.)