Multiple people shot at church in Sutherland Springs

It's a hobby.

This is no different than me having a hobby of loving high revving naturally aspirated motors but I'm mature enough to understand that isn't a long term sustainable hobby as that type of motor is being weened out for the benefit of society.

Gun hobbyists are probably some of the most selfish pricks I know and they will stand behind the stupid 'essential rights' argument that has no basis behind it.

Guns were important in the 18th century because population density for the vast majority of the nation at that time was ridiculously sparce. YOU were your own law enforcement. You were your own militia. It was pragmatic back then.

It OBVIOUSLY isn't pragmatic today. And no amount of one liner quotes from a man who lived 200 years ago is going to change this predicament.

Give it two decades. It's going to be harder and harder to justify their stupid hobby at the rate these mass shootings are occurring.

 

Trump: Texas Mass Shooting Not a ‘Guns Situation’

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/11/trump-texas-mass-shooting-not-a-guns-situation.html

 

Yes, yes, then the whole country can be like Chicago, with sky rocketing murder rates and gun crime. That's EXACTLY what we need and should strive for! That's the pragmatic solution...do more of what clearly doesn't work.

 

No, just yelling canned positions at no one in particular. Arguing involves listening to the other side, that's never part of this.

 

You don't get my point. The circulation of 300 million firearms has made this an issue far past a pragmatic solution. Also, most who are 'gun rights activists' are activists from the motivation of keeping their hobby rather than keeping an essential right. It's like me being a 'high revving, large displacement combustible engine rights activist'. I would be an activist out of a pure motivation to maintain my hobby.

The second amendment was the worst idea in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

That's right, a great document can have flaws.

 

What a f-ing moron, to quote his secretary of foreign affairs. Of course it is a "mental health AND guns" situation.

 

Yup, the founding fathers have no idea how guns would evolve over time. If they knew the type of guns we are using today and the type of environment we are living in today, I am sure they would have put much tougher qualifiers in the second amendment if they still have that amendment at all.

 

Doubt the US has a monopoly on deranged people.

We do have a monopoly on deranged people mass murdering with guns, over and over and over.

Maybe we need extreme vetting on people with certain # of guns, type of guns; a system of mental monitoring; a system of mental education and help; don't know...

But I do know, we should all expect this to be repeated over and over and over again. Until we do something about it. Or we don't and accept it as part of life for US. If the latter, really, just save up your "thoughts and prayer"... we allow it to happen and when it does happen again, it's a consequence of our choice.

 

And so far they've had the common sense not to eliminate vital civil rights for the illusion of safety and security. Let's hope it stays that way.

 

We have heard every single argument (good guy with a gun, blah blah blah) and it is always either fundamentally flawed, disingenuous, or proven wrong by subsequent events.

Not only does nothing ever change and more and more bodies pile up - the gun lobby doubles down to try to make it worse.

At what point do you concede that you lost the argument? It seems like the only time "Second Amendment People" concede that they may be may not be 100% correct all the time is when they literally see somebody they love torn in half with an assault rifle in front of them. God ****ing help us all.

 

Anyway, back to the actual topic of the thread, so now they claim that his in laws regularly attended that church (though they weren't there at the time) so I think we can say with relative certainty that this wasn't terrorism. It seems like it was some kind of family dispute which kind of makes sense given that he was dishonorably discharged for domestic violence.

The big issue is why his dishonorable discharge didn't show up on the background check for the purchase of the rifle. It really, really should have and it showed up on the background check when he tried to get a handgun license. Whatever was broken there really needs to get fixed.

 

Then don't worry, if you are right then eventually enough people will get hurt to where you can strip them of their rights, which of course is your goal.

 

What we need is people to take gun control seriously everyday, not when we have mass shootings.

This is what others and I try to hammer into people like you; Banning scary 'assault weapons' does nothing with the dozens of deaths that happen everyday. Additionally, they wont stop mass killings.

This is why I can respect people who just want to collect up all guns and make them illegal across the board. Their solution, albeit unpractical, will actually do something. Most of the other solutions I hear will do very little.

 

So i guess Trump is trying to say that the USA is the only western country where people with mental health issues are living, huh....

Europe has over twice as many citizens than the USA. So probably also twice as many people with mental health issues. But yet barely any mass shootings are happening...

Yeah its not a gun situation, its a mental health problem. Amazing which bullshit arguments are getting thrown around again.

 

Okay Republicans. You say it is a mental health issue. I want to see the major legislation addressing this mental health crisis asap. We're getting murdered, you have every seat of power, you need to do something -- even if it is the wrong thing -- right away because status quo is not acceptable. Where's your policy?

 

So the jingoist right wing has funneled themselves into a shitty narrative. That American exceptionalism has resulted in a significantly higher percentage of deranged mentally ill people. That premise obviously hinges on the premise that guns are not the problem at all.

 

How fun!

 

There's a pretty large culture difference between the US and Europe and that has more to do with different behavior than anything else. You set it up as if the only different variable is guns, and that's simply not true.

I'm not on board necessarily with saying this is a mental health issue in this instance because it sounds like the guy was just a violent ******* and I don't want to give him that excuse. He was legally not allowed to buy or own firearms, but the system failed even when background checks were done. It's time to find out why the background check missed a F'n dishonorable discharge.

 

I want to point out gun control is not a Republican or Democrat divide. America, both Republicans and Democrats love their guns and this is why we have such trouble passing any meaningful legislation.

Its the extremist on both sides that polarize the issue. The hard left demand changes that really do nothing and the hard right refuse to budge an inch.