There is a trend here and it has nothing to do with the firearms.

What is the third instance?

The firearm isn't the problem.  So with that, there is only one other thing that could be the problem.

One would be hard pressed to come up with a less logical comment in so few of words, so congratulations on that.  Now back to the question:  one is a point, two is a coincidence, three is a trend.  What is the third instance?

Now back to the question:

You mean the answer you just can't bring yourself to admit as being the problem?  Why not with the REAL PROBLEM, the one you refuse to acknowledge - mental problems of the person.  

Are you expecting anyone to believe that this seed is not intended to specifically vilify the trans community?  I see that you are seriously struggling to identify how this is a “trend”.

Next we will be hearing that the majority of mass shootings are the result of trans people. It will make zero sense, but what do they care? 

Are you expecting anyone to believe that this seed is not intended to specifically vilify the trans community?

Never said it was ANY specific community.  That's all on you.

I see that you are seriously struggling to identify how this is a “trend”.

I'm struggling to get you to see the real problem.  

That's all on you.

You seeded this.  There is no trend of trans people committing mass murder, and you could have chosen from any number of actual mental health related mass murders to establish that sort of trend, but you chose this article.  

What percentage of students are trans? There have been at least  three attempts at  school shootings by trans shooters the past few years.

do you think that’s proportionate?

Are you expecting anyone to believe that this seed is not intended to specifically vilify the trans community? 

Trans people.    Riiiiiight.

He seeds an article about a nutcase planning to blow up a school instead of shoot up a school and his first post on the seed is about gun control.

So naturally it's all about trans people.

Riiiight.

You may need to change the chip on your shoulder.  You seem to have brought the wrong one.

Are you expecting anyone to believe that this seed is not intended to specifically vilify the trans community?  I see that you are seriously struggling to identify how this is a “trend”.

Don't you mean guys who are trying to mansplain what it means to be a woman?  Trans guys are trying to create the ideal woman, from a  man's point of view.

Since transgender isn't a mental health issue then what they are doing must be rationally deliberate.  Women are supposed to be like trans guys; the ideal woman from a man's point of view.  Real women are inadequate.

There is no trend of trans people committing mass murder

I never said there was.  That's all on YOU.

 and you could have chosen from any number of actual mental health related mass murders to establish that sort of trend, but you chose this article.

So you are crying because I chose the most recent event. 

[DELETED]

And yet a firearm is involved in literally EVERY shooting.

Whatever you do don't concentrate on the shooter (unless it is a right wing radical). Concentrate on the inanimate object that can't do anything w/o a person to operate it.

That is sure to fix the problem!/S

And somebody with mental problems are involved in EVERY shooting.  But lets so something stupid and focus on the inanimate object.

And somebody with mental problems are involved in EVERY shooting.

That is absolutely not true.  Sometimes people shoot people just out of anger.  Sometimes people shoot other people for financial gain, or to send a message to others, or because they're ordered to like in a war.  Sometimes it's just an accident but in every case there is a gun involved.

That is absolutely not true.

Nothing like ignoring the real problem.  You know, like you just did.

The real problem being...  trans people?   You were suggesting a trend.  I gave you a real trend.

The real problem being...  trans people?

Exactly where did I say it was trans people?  It's kind of telling that it's only the left making this claim.  Your the second one.

[✘]

C’mon man you can do better than that.

A motor vehicle is involved in every automotive crash

A knife is involved in every knifing.

Alcohol/drugs are involved in every DUI incident, etc, etc.

Guess what the common denominator is for all these things ...

And yet a firearm is involved in literally EVERY shooting.

And A knife is involved in EVERY stabbing, ANd a Car is involved in EVERY Hit and run, And a poison is involved in every poising.

I'm not sure a more ignorant post to try to make a point has every been written here.  

So Captain Obvious, do you know what the common denominator is in all the above?

Absolutely and the lying progressives will try to deny it.

They'll ignore it because it's a much bigger problem than they want to admit we all are part of.  It's easier to blame an inanimate object.

Between the school shootings, assaults on peaceful protesters and incitement of violence on the interne, seems likely that the FBI would get involved in this movement.  I guess they are too busy investigating parents who complain about the coverup of a girl being raped by a crossing dressing boy in a school bathroom to care about actual violence though. 

You forgot Jan 6th investigations. Garland already announced another 1,200 to be charged. Willing to bet the FBI was wasting all of their resources finding all of those other domestic terrorists that will be charged with "parading".

You know the FBI is just as worthless as an ashtray on a motocycle.  

The FBI has become the police force envisioned by Lavrentiy Pavlovich Beria.  Let us never forget that it was Obama and Biden that transformed the FBI as well as all agencies of government.Let us also never forget who their supporters are. They are the indoctrinated who talk of the big lie and proclaim that democrats haven't meddled in the past two national elections and recite democrat slogans about democracy dying. It was they who killed democracy in America. Just like the indoctrinated, fucked up kid in the article above.

They are the indoctrinated who talk of the big lie and proclaim that democrats haven't meddled in the past two national elections 

Question, Vic: Who won the 2020 Presidential election?

Stinkin-thinkin. That's all.

Have a good day.

We often hear that the crazy people would kill people anyway even if they didnt have guns. That sounds like something that could be true in a few cases but is most likely generally not true. 

Mass shooters often associate themselves with a certain style related to clothing they wear to the massacre, and with a social media presence that contains elements of gun obsession or "gun love". They dress in black or with camouflage trappings and pose themselves as something like swat team members on a mission. They put on bullet resistant vests like law enforcement does, even though most of them end up taking their own lives. 

This sort of behavior is related to an obsession with guns and killing, not knives or bombs. 

Yes mental illness is probably a factor in most killings but so are the guns. They seem to go together. 

That sounds like the church ladies who think if we just get rid of rock music kids won't be rebellious.

Good analogy 

This sort of behavior is related to an obsession with guns and killing, not knives or bombs.

Now you are coming around that it's not the weapon used but the person using it. 

Yes mental illness is probably a factor in most killings but so are the guns. They seem to go together.

You started off correctly then it all went sideways again.

Yes mental illness is probably a factor in most killings

And why are the mentally ill allowed to walk among us?

And why are the mentally ill allowed to walk among us?

Define "Mentally ill".

Unless they are a clear and present danger to themselves or others the government has no authority to do anything. 

In the case in the article, the individual said :

When authorities asked why Whitworth wanted to shoot up a school, Whitworth said: "No specific reason." Whitworth also admitted to being “about a third of the way from doing it (committing a mass shooting),” the affidavit states.

So, in this case, the individual was caught before he could do anything. He did not even have a gun . 

Investigators did not find any weapons in the home, but they did find a liquid that is used to clean firearms.

Sounds like law enforcement was made aware of this in time to prevent catastrophe. So just what is your problem? 

- Whitworth, 19, attended three District 20 schools for a total of nine months, over two years: Prairie Hills Elementary, Aug. 2014 – Feb. 2015, Home School Academy, Jan. 2016 – Feb. 2016 and Timberview Middle School, Aug. 2016 – Oct. 3, 2016.

I wonder why he was relocated to so many different schools in such a short time period.

Further, Whitworth had plans to shoot up a church as well as the schools. And, his sister said that he had serious anger issues ...

cbsnews

As is typically the case, the weapons are merely the tools with which a mentally ill person accomplishes the goal. Sane people don't plan and execute mass murders.

I wonder why he was relocated to so many different schools in such a short time period.

Well, you see, back in 2010 then president Barack Obama felt that suspensions and expulsions were somehow unfairly being used against black students. Remember the mind set of Obama? If more blacks that whites were being expelled, it had to be discrimination. It could never mean that more black students happened to be violent. Thus, Obama, quietly tied federal funding to his guidelines for school discipline:

"In just the first year after Obama in January 2014 issued his new discipline guidelines — which came with threats of federal investigations and defunding — schools saw more than 160,000 “physical attacks” on teachers across the country. And yet the assailants were expelled in fewer than 130,000 cases, Kirsanow said, citing the latest available federal data."

nypost

That is why people like Whitworth are tolerated.

That is why people like Whitworth are tolerated.

Prior to this incident, what, exactly, did this person do to merit a comment such as yours?

Oh, and here's a picture of one of the greatest Presidents ever:

Prior to this incident, what, exactly, did this person do to merit a comment such as yours?

The explanation of what he did is in plain English in the prior post.

Tell us why you posted his picture.

Just putting the face to the name from your post, and because I like him.

The explanation of what he did is in plain English in the prior post.

No, your explanation of what the person that the article is about is indirectly in the post. It remains to be seen if your reason is true. As of now, it exists in the realm of non-sequitur and bare assertion because nothing in your post supports your conclusion that he is somehow unfit to walk among us. The fact that he wanted to kill someone and was planning on doing so does make them criminally suspect. I asked about demonstrable actions prior to the incident.

Your making the comment "That is why people like Whitworth are tolerated," presupposes that he did in fact display some kind of behavior to merit him not walking around amongst us or "tolerated."

That is why people like Whitworth are tolerated.

Exactly. From your 2017 link:

Since President Barack Obama pressured educators to adopt a new code of conduct making it harder to suspend or expel students of color, even kids who punch out their teacher aren’t automatically kicked out of school anymore.

Previously, “If you hit a teacher, you’re gone,” said Peter Kirsanow, a black conservative on the US Commission on Civil Rights. But that’s no longer the case, he says, thanks to race-based discipline quotas sweeping the nation’s schools.

Many teachers have been sent to the hospital by students emboldened by the lax discipline rules — which remain in full force, despite the change in administration, and have now been adopted by 53 of the nation’s largest school districts, including NYC.

But a former St. Paul, Minn., science teacher, who was “beaten and choked out” by a 16-year-old black student, blames the discipline policies, which he says are “preferential towards African-American students.” The high school student allegedly came up behind the instructor, calling him a “f–king white cracker,” and put him in a stranglehold, before bashing his head into a concrete wall and pavement, causing him to suffer a concussion and brain damage.

John Ekblad, who is still dealing with short-term memory loss and hearing problems from the December 2015 attack, says school violence “is still rising out of control.”

“The district is not suspending students for fighting, theft, drugs and alcohol in an effort to show less students of color are suspended,” Ekblad said, adding that the administration has even paid principals as much as $2,500 in bonuses for low suspension rates.

The article goes on to give other examples of ignoring other violent student behaviors throughout the country.

Oh, and here's a picture of one of the greatest Presidents ever:

Only in the land of unicorns, rainbows, faeries.

In reality he is the man who destabilized the ME even more than it already was. Took some doing; but he outdid Bush Jr. Getting rid of Gaddafi in Libya; putting the US squarely in a widening proxy civil war in Syria; pulling us out and then reinserting the US back into Iraq (after the situation was Fubar); changing the rules of engagement in Afghanistan (just let Afghani civilians die- don't engage the Taliban around civilians); and conducting more extra judicial drone strikes than Bush Jr could even dream of.

Obama was correct "You didn't build that". He didn't build jack shit during his 8 years; but he tried to take credit anyways. Government funded Green tech failures abounded; slowest recovery ever from a recession; weaponizing of the IRS and FBI against political opponents; and allowing the government to spy on an opponent's political campaign.

For a libertarian you sure admire a lot of big government Democrats.

Too many crazy people on the loose

Right you are, charger. It still begs the question ... why does it seem that there are so many more crazy people now than, say, 15 to 20 years ago? Whether the weapon is a gun, knife, hatchet, baseball bat, or pushing people in front of subway trains, the number of needless deaths has greatly increased.

William Whitworth was arrested by members of the Elbert County Sheriff's Office on March 31 on suspicion of attempted first-degree murder, and other charges, the affidavit states. 

I want to focus on the larger picture here for a moment. Thank you to those who had a strong "suspicion" that something was afoot here. Nice preemptive strike to save an indefinite number of lives. . . and school property.

Now, then I don't know what this issue is becoming for trans-youth, but trans-people a word here: Knock this kind of activity off, before you destroy your own societal reputation and put trans-people support in serious jeopardy/confusion.

Are there newly 'militant' trans-people? Well, that is not helpful. Transpeople need alliances-not to be feared or given their power over to fear-mongers.

TRANSPEOPLE read the room and talk to your friends about mental health and above all stay SANE. Nip this in the bud!

Schools, especially "former" schools, by definition, no longer house those who vexxed you over the years! Leave the current students in these education institutions alone!

How about we ignore the whole "trans" nonsense and focus on a mental problem among us.  There are more than just trans people carrying out these shootings.  

We also need to quit looking at an inanimate object as the culprit.    

I will say that something mental is afoot here, after all, this. . .obsession. . . with schools and "little ones" by older youths is a (real) trend. . . . That additional youths are being drawn into school shooting is a signal of something truly unhealthy and possibly could be dubbed, "demonic." (Without the religious connotation.)

Jeremy, of course, guns are tools. As such guns do not fire themselves. That said, as a former military man and combat personnel (I think), you are fully aware that weak, underdeveloped, youths lack the skills to execute murder mayhem against their peers in hand to hand combat! So, the gun is the tool/weapon of choice to bring overwhelming force, combat force (even explosives), to bear against innocent unarmed kids.

Indeed, the proof is in the article indirectly:  "Investigators found instructions on how to build homemade bombs and a whiteboard with the floor plan to Timberview Middle School in the bedroom of a former student accused of planning a mass shooting at the Colorado Springs school, according to arrest records."

Heaven help us if these 'mental cases' get their hands on a proper bomb. Any proper bomb. Thank goodness, regulations are such that bomb-making materials when purchased send up a 'red flare' through the ATF system - I think. As you can imagine, if bomb materials were not well-controlled and youths were 'tripping' over them in their homes, the potential for damages and mass lives lost increases and speaks for itself!

Tools can be managed in our society: explosives, so far, are. What say you?

Are there newly 'militant' trans-people?

Didn't they just propose a "Revenge Rally?"

I guess the better question is who promoted and incited all of this?

The answer may be right here on one of our hate groups. You know, where are wonderful moderate members can be found.

You tried to carry so much nuanced info in that comment that it all spills out before it reaches its designation. Try again—please.

It is hard to keep clean hands in this business.

Not much clarifying information in that comment. Please, try again!

“…to another mass shooting…”

Sadly, tragically just ‘another manic Monday’. 

And pathetically, the dialogue will be just as manic with the sameness that assures the narrative remains intact, but will accomplish nothing but the continued numbing of the pain being inflicted. 

Rinse, repeat…the spin cycle will surely commence, will shortly be done, only to be regurgitated in the next hour, day, or week…

It is what it is. Just barely got the 'easter' out of our teeth!  Yes, I feel for the dead and those left to mourn them.  Another tragedy of these shootings: We don't call 'around' to the neighbors anymore/as much to ask if they have heard.

How the "h" does a 'mental' person function in a banking environment?

Nobody willing to step up and do the right thing and intervene.  It's easier to turn a blind eye and act like nothing is wrong.

“It's easier to turn a blind eye and act like nothing is wrong.”

Isn’t that the sad truth. While we debate, while we dismiss, while we diddle along in our comfort…yet another group of innocent people have had their lives shattered as they prepare to lay their loved ones to rest. 

When will we say enough is enough? Certainly not hereabouts as the carnage is deemed but collateral damage. 

When will we say enough is enough?

That's the problem.  Not enough are trying to bring the actual problem to light while many are focused on something else.

Jeremy, do not blame us. Either we are going to: re/stigmatize mental health (again) and wholesale remove people off the 'street' or we are going to eliminate mental health people's access to gun saturation. Moreover, as you can see a work-related shooting creates a new perspective on someone who is 'mental': Functionally mental.

Nowhere have I blamed a specific group.  I blame society as a whole.  We have stood by for decades keeping our mouths shut when those with mental problems are causing problems.  We have come to blame the mental illness for horrific events and still do nothing to get people the help they need.

The gun is completely irrelevant.  The gun is an inanimate object.  Just like the computer you are using to read this.  A firearm, like the computer, won't do a damn thing without somebody manipulating it to operate.  The only people that would be affected by further gun control are law abiding citizens.  Those that want to shoot up schools and other locations are going to get their firearms by any means necessary.  More "gun control" legislation is the feel good attempt at brushing the real problem under the rug.

There are tools and then there are tools. And, let's get real guns are guns. And, then there is the so-called, Mothers of all guns, plural. If you will.

Yes, guns are a tool. But, do not let anybody mislead you (I know you want in reality) - your computer is not armed with lead projectiles at this point in time. Those "projectiles" are were the rubber meets the road! And I will end any play at analogy there (it's late and I am 'rushed.')

Do something. Nothing is not good enough. (Now, we have citizens of "McConnell-land" Kentucky begging on television for help with this problem of death by guns in work places, because the 'crazies' won't volunteer to be institutionalized, and apparently they insist on using the worst/best guns they can find to take some people out of this world through helter-skelter. Up to and touching- law enforcement officers!

Society as a whole has not created these conditions. Many of us don't even use guns. Thus, in a way, we are at the 'mercy' of those who do use gun/tools. You can't/won't hang that one on me-us!

The only people that would be affected by further gun control are law abiding citizens. 

It is almost AMAZING the spin that can be put on any subject. . . until one looks critically at the statement. Here is the instance of society as a whole being affected:

We, non-gun owners, are SUFFERING DEATH/INJURY/PTSD over guns we don't have or even wish for. Of course, gun owners are being affected, if only because law enforcement officers are (potentially) shot and killed during these mass shootings and will not come home afterwards—if ever.

You are overthinking the it.  It appears that you are letting your fear of something interfere with your ability to identify the real problem.  Do you honestly think that by doing away with all the guns that killing is going to stop?  Timothy McVeigh didn't need a firearm to kill hundreds.  9/11 occurred without firearms and thousands were killed.  Darrell Brooks didn't use a firearm to kill and injure dozens. 

The tool isn't the problem.  It's the person using it.  

Timothy McVeigh didn't need a firearm to kill hundreds.  9/11 occurred without firearms and thousands were killed. 

And after both of those incidents, laws were passed to prevent both of those things from happening again.  Any point you were trying to make using those two incidents as "talking points" is moot.  

And after both of those incidents, laws were passed to prevent both of those things from happening again.

And ALL are as effective as an ashtray on a motorcycle.  The laws passed ONLY are followed by the law abiding citizern.  Not the criminal.  When are you all going to realize that?  

Any point you were trying to make using those two incidents as "talking points" is moot.  

The point is there.  Just because YOU want to ignore it is not my problem.  But feel free to disprove it.

nd ALL are as effective as an ashtray on a motorcycle.  The laws passed ONLY are followed by the law abiding citizern.  Not the criminal.  When are you all going to realize that?  

Those laws have prevented a second Timothy McVeigh and 911 as we have not had anything happen on that scale since those incidents.  As for criminals not following laws, then just get rid of all laws since they are all so ineffective.    

he point is there.  Just because YOU want to ignore it is not my problem.  But feel free to disprove it.

I have disproven your null and void so called "point" because neither of those incidents has happened again since those laws were enacted.   There has not been another bombing like Oklahoma City nor has there been another terrorist attack using air planes like on 911, nor has there been any terrorist attack on our nation on the scale of either events since 911.  The fact you can't accept that your so called "point" was disproven doesn't mean shit.  

And after both of those incidents, laws were passed to prevent both of those things from happening again.

Please provide a link that explains which specific laws were passed that will prevent commercial planes from flying into the Empire State Building or the US Capitol Building.

You cannot be serious with your question, because if you actually live in the U.S., you know that laws were passed to limit what can be brought onto airplanes (including weapons) so they cannot be hijacked, which would also prevent hijackers from flying airplanes into buildings.  If you don't know this, then I suggest you study up on 911 and the TSA.  

The point is those attacks took place without a firearm.  So tell me; how will making fire arms illegal stop the killing?

So link them.  

I never said they would, now did I.  The fact is that neither of those incidents used a fire arm, but laws enacted after each event did, in fact, stop those type of events from happening again.  However, we will never know if any laws would prevent SOME of these shootings from happening because we haven't even tried to prevent SOME of these shootings from happening, and we never will.  People dying is a consequence of our Second Amendment and will remain so.  

You seriously want me to provide links to laws that we all know that you know are already in place.  FFS, do you even remember all of the things that happened and laws that were passed after 911 (i.e., Patriot Act, the formation of the TSA and all of the rules that came with the formation of the TSA)?  Do you not know that possible bomb making materials were restricted for purchase after the Oklahoma City bombing, and quantities of those materials limited?  Why would you bring up two incidents that you apparently know nothing about the aftermath of to make a moot point?  Feigning ignorance of the laws that were passed after these two incidents is not a good look for you (or anyone for that matter).  

I never said they would, now did I.

Then why even bring them up?  By your own acknowledgement, we both know legislature won't work.  The legislation did nothing to even come close to resolving the real problem.  

The fact is that neither of those incidents used a fire arm, but laws enacted after each event did, in fact, stop those type of events from happening again. 

You do remember that after 9/11 our military was sent to Afghanistan.  They were too busy trying to kill us there instead of here at home.  Again, the only people affected by the legislation are law abiding citizens.  Not the criminal element.  Or are you niave enough to think that a criminal will cease what they are doing because there is a law in place?

You seriously want me to provide links to laws that we all know that you know are already in place

You made the claim.  Put up or shut up.  It's that simple.

FFS, do you even remember all of the things that happened and laws that were passed after 911

I remember that after 9/11 my unit was sent to Afghanistan to fight.  You know, keeping them from attacking again.  

You cannot be serious with your question, because if you actually live in the U.S., you know that laws were passed to limit what can be brought onto airplanes (including weapons) so they cannot be hijacked, which would also prevent hijackers from flying airplanes into buildings.  If you don't know this, then I suggest you study up on 911 and the TSA.

Your comment, which was clearly written as a weak attempt to demean my intelligence and question my US citizenship, indicates that you are unaware of the TSA's abominable failures since 11Sept2001.

Here's a brief tutorial for you ...

TSA Misses Guns, Bombs In Tests DECEMBER 20, 2010

judicialwatch

TSA Chief Out After Agents Fail 95 Percent of Airport Breach Tests

June 1, 2015

nbcnews

Acting TSA director reassigned after screeners failed tests to detect explosives, weapons

cnn

TSA fails most tests in latest undercover operation at US airports

November 9, 2017

abcnews.go

If you need more evidence of TSA failures, they are readily available on the Internet.

Or are you niave enough to think that a criminal will cease what they are doing because there is a law in place?

Well, by your own words, it seems you are naive enough to believe that the laws passed after Oklahoma City and 911 weren't effective, when clearly they were.  

The U.S. should just scrap all laws (and then all policing since we will not need them anymore in a lawless country) and fend for ourselves.  Let's see how many more violent incidents (I can't call them crimes because they will no longer be considered crimes) there are after that, then we will know exactly what laws we used to have actually deter those incidents (again not crimes anymore) and what laws we used to have that don't actually deter those incidents.  I think you'll find that more violent incidents will happen when people don't have the label "criminal" hanging over their heads any longer.    

a criminal will cease what they are doing because there is a law in place

Laws never stop criminals, but the anti-gun folks keep hoping that more laws will stop them. 

I'll not shut up and you can't fucking make me shut up.  It's that simple.  As for Afghanistan, you knew what you were getting into when you joined the military (I remember a former President saying that) and it had nothing to do with stopping them from fighting here.  It had to do with getting Bin Laden (revenge) and the Taliban.  In the end, the U.S. Military never stopped the Taliban, and Bin Laden got away and was never found in Afghanistan.  You may have fought there, but laws were passed here that also prevented another 911 from happening.  You know it.  We all know it.  

Your comment, which was clearly written as a weak attempt to demean my intelligence and question my US citizenship, indicates that you are unaware of the TSA's abominable failures since 11Sept2001.

There are security failures in every aspect of life in the U.S.  That doesn't mean we don't stop trying to make that security better.  As for my comment, it was just as snarky as your comment to me asking for links to laws you fucking know exist.    

Well, by your own words, it seems you are naive enough to believe that the laws passed after Oklahoma City and 911 weren't effective, when clearly they were.  

Which ones do you feel were effective?

It is almost AMAZING the spin that can be put on any subject. . . until one looks critically at the statement.

Looking critically at the statement, he is, quite obviously, correct.

Here is the instance of society as a whole being affected: We, non-gun owners, are SUFFERING DEATH/INJURY/PTSD over guns we don't have or even wish for.

The statistics simply do not support this.  CDC data says you are about 10 times as likely to die by unintentional accident than you are by gun, and over half of gun deaths are suicides. 

If you're not going to shoot yourself, you're not in a relationship with a dangerous person who owns a gun, and you're not engaged in illegal activity, you have little to fear from firearms.

Your PTSD is your issue.  The rest of the world is not going to change behavior because you're scared.

You are making too much sense for these people to handle. 

So what do you suggest we expand on 'tools' to counteract guns (which will be the next new thing to do according to capitalist principles), more and more  guns 'tools,' or clinically 'arrest' any/everyone who exhibits characteristics of depression and mild to severe insanity?

Note: I think I have more to 'offer up' on this topic, but I am still 'rushing' to get some things completed (distractions). I will engage properly real soon!

You made the claim.  Put up or shut up.  It's that simple.

Jeremy, it is bad form to ask for links to a 'universal' set of know truths. We are all witnesses to the policy/regulations/laws in the aggregate put forward by federal and state authorities publicly. Of course, none of us are privileged to private classified or official use only policies and laws on the topic. Which we can presume are in place.

New York City put a lot of measures in place for large gatherings of people on special days, holidays, and event gatherings. Oklahoma City made it so that multiple-tiered Social Security Administration and city centers locations have building security, heavy camera presences, and large stanchions and pillars strategically stationed to keep bomb trucks back a great distance.

You know, keeping them from attacking again.  

Home-grown terrorists (sympathizers) is a thing.

That is outrageous. Of course laws are a deterrent. And the reason is obvious: People don't want their liberty taken away from them. And just because some of humanity becomes the criminal elements, it does not follow that the majority of us are law-abiding citizens! Why are we such citizens? Because we are told where the lines are drawn on any subject and we navigate around, near, but not touching of becoming illegal. And when law-abiding citizens do run afoul of a specific law they hastily self-correct so as not to cause a TREND and get caught as part of the criminal 'element' in the country.

What? My comment points out that non-gun owners are being killed by gun owners and those who 'traffic' in AR-15s and you post some statistic (superfluous and distracting) making comparisons to other forms of death?

Q. How many bullets will an individual who does not own/grip/shoot a gun fire in a lifetime?

Humor me, Jack_Tx or will you take a pass and reappear down the thread?!

The Governor of Kentucky, head official of 'McConnell-land' Kentucky is suffering PTSD from the death of his friend who worked in a Louisville, Ky bank. Was the a gun owner or not - I don't know. Apparently, it does not matter too much. Why? Because 'anybody' can train on a gun (at home or at facility) and be "up" and shooting by the end of the day. Oh and in some states the latest galling thing is to let 'participants' not even bother to register for CONCEALED CARRY.

Q. How many non-gun citizens will you find CONCEAL CARRYING - count 'em for us?  Count them out-loud for us, please.

BTW, do not answer with a peripheral comment about me wanting to take away guns. I am not interested in seeing people not being able to defend themselves or kill to eat . . . but, do deal with my comments in the SPIRIT of discussion they are presented!

That is outrageous.

Totaly.

Of course laws are a deterrent. And the reason is obvious: People don't want their liberty taken away from them.

Would you commit murder if you didn't fear imprisonment?

 And when law-abiding citizens do run afoul of a specific law they hastily self-correct so as not to cause a TREND and get caught as part of the criminal 'element' in the country.

Personal experience?

Would you commit murder if you didn't fear imprisonment?

Would I be a Cain to an Able? We don't really know because from before the founding of this nation we have always had the 'safeguard' of community law to be our buttress and protection between each other. If pushed to be 'brutes' who knows what any of us, including me is capable of doing.

Incidentally, "murder" is a crime punishable by imprisonment only because of rule of law.  That is, without the law (as deterrence) there is no crime worthy of imprisonment.

 And when law-abiding citizens do run afoul of a specific law they hastily self-correct so as not to cause a TREND and get caught as part of the criminal 'element' in the country.

Personal experience?

I am going to patiently wait for you to answer this one, FIRST!

And after both of those incidents, laws were passed to prevent both of those things from happening again. 

Forgetting the FBI investigating farmers because they bought enough chemicals to create bombs (and sometimes were to remove stumps and other obstructions from their fields). Good times, good times. But they are far too busy now tracking down Jan 6th rioters and investigating parents trying to find out what their children are being taught at school board meetings to do anything like that now.

And a lot of lawsuits were born after the 9/11 laws as people who had similar names as terrorists or suspected terrorist suddenly found themselves unable to fly. Obama didn't like racial profiling; so people in wheel chairs and disabilities were subjected to intensive body searches (meanwhile Muslims were allowed through clean. Had to have them "random".) Worked so damn well that there were still attempts- luckily suicide bombers grew dumber after 9/11. All that extra security; and news media personnel were still allowed on runways and around plains w/o proper security clearance at airports. 

But don't worry; Brandon is allowing enough terrorists into the country that we can have a discussion about border security after the next terrorist attack on US soil.

Any point you were trying to make using those two incidents as "talking points" is moot.  

None of the laws you are talking about fixed the problems. They just pissed people off and created more problems than they solved. But trust the government to fix the problem by banning an inanimate object- that will fix the problem for sure this time!

Must be nice to live in that fantasy.  

I'll not shut up and you can't fucking make me shut up

And with that ANY credibility (which wasn't much to start with) is shot.  Just another liberal shooting off at the mouth getting pissed and crying because they were called out on their bullshit.

As for Afghanistan, you knew what you were getting into when you joined the military (I remember a former President saying that) and it had nothing to do with stopping them from fighting here. 

How cute, you think you know about my career.  So, tell me, who was POTUS when I enlisted?  We weren't told we were going to Afghanistan at the time of my enlistment.  

Jeremy, it is bad form to ask for links to a 'universal' set of know truths

It's also bad form to claim fiction as truth, yet here we are.

Yes, I acted very stupidly once and got a DUI.

So what do you suggest we expand on 'tools' to counteract guns

I suggest we forget about the tools and focus on the real problem - the person holding the tool.  

Boo Fucking Hoo to the people who were pissed off and were inconvenienced about such laws being enacted.  Someone is always pissed off and inconvenienced by laws being enacted.  Talk to the families of the people who died in both of those incidents and see how they were inconvenienced by the death of their loved ones.  Those laws worked as nothing like either of those incidents has happened again.  

And with that ANY credibility (which wasn't much to start with) is shot.  Just another liberal shooting off at the mouth getting pissed and crying because they were called out on their bullshit.

Says the guy with NO CREDIBILITY that can't even answer simple questions.

  How cute, you think you know about my career.  So, tell me, who was POTUS when I enlisted?  We weren't told we were going to Afghanistan at the time of my enlistment.  

I don't give a fuck about your career or who the POTUS was when you enlisted.  It doesn't matter that you weren't told you were going to go to Afghanistan at the time of your enlistment.  If you joined the military not expecting to be deployed then that's a you problem.   

Please read my comment 7.2.21 again. If/when you do, you will understand that I never mentioned law-abiding citizens.

Doesn't change the fact that it is BAD FORM to ask for answers in the general pool of knowledge and public understanding.

Well, once I was with a friend who wanted his belongings out of his lover's house and the dude would not answer the door; he called the police and we both got taken down to the station and 'booked.' I did not stop being his friend, nevertheless.

Well Jeremy we need to focus on something, because what is occuring is UNSAT.

Wow. Big "F-ing" deal. You had no logical reason to diss "anti-gun folks" based on Jeremy's comment 7.2.17 (and yet you did anyway)!  The irony (for you) is it is Jeremy who dropped in "law-abiding citizens into the train of discussion:

7.2.17   Again, the only people affected by the legislation are law abiding citizens.  Not the criminal element.  Or are you niave enough to think that a criminal will cease what they are doing because there is a law in place?

There is the 'in" into discussion-if one is needed. Overall, your comment is a distraction.

Dear Sir or Madam:

Please find another target to senselessly and needlessly attack, because I'm not interested in engaging in bizarre hyperbole. I clearly explained my comment 7.2.21 to you once, and that should suffice.

My comment points out that non-gun owners are being killed by gun owners and those who 'traffic' in AR-15s and you post some statistic (superfluous and distracting) making comparisons to other forms of death?

My comment points out that the statistics don't support your anxiety.

The Governor of Kentucky, head official of 'McConnell-land' Kentucky is suffering PTSD

Citation?

BTW, do not answer with a peripheral comment about me wanting to take away guns. I am not interested in seeing people not being able to defend themselves or kill to eat . . . but, do deal with my comments in the SPIRIT of discussion they are presented!

OK, in the spirit of the conversation, describe the law you want to see passed.  If it's not a ban, what do we do to solve this problem?

The Governor of Kentucky, head official of 'McConnell-land' Kentucky is suffering PTSD

Citation?

Wow. Jack_Tx. It is current news (topical).

In the interview with CNN, Beshear discussed his friend Tommy Elliott , a bank executive who was among the victims of Monday’s shooting. He said he wanted his friend to be remembered as a loving father and husband.

“Man, he had a great smile. His eyes lit up. Loved life. Was always into something. Trying to make the city a better place, he was just always into something,” he said.

Elliott, the bank’s senior vice president, had chaired Beshear’s 2019 inaugural committee and was a well-known figure in Kentucky Democratic politics.

“He was trying to plan for me for when I’m done being governor, which was something that I hoped we could eventually plan for together,” Beshear said. “An amazing human being, a loving dad.”

Beshear said he was the one who called Elliott’s wife to inform her that her husband had been killed.

“She deserved to know,” he said.

Beshear explained that he’d gone to Old National Bank “immediately” after learning – while in the governor’s office in Frankfort – that the mass shooting had occurred at the bank where his friend worked – and where the governor is a customer.

“I knew it would be hours before others could call her. And I thought she deserved to know, and we’re close right now to where I made that call,” he said.

“I’ve been governor during this pandemic, I’ve been governor during tornadoes and floods and -45 degree windchills and everything else. And we’ve lost a lot of people during those,” he said. “But calling your friend’s wife who is also your friend to tell her that her husband is gone is among the hardest things I’ve ever done.”

cnn

Wow. So in the spirit of answering my question you ask me, a non-gun user , to find a solution for AR-15s and other firing weapons of mass destruction and to offer it up to republicans and conservatives who won't lift a finger to try anything which has not been tried before?  UNBELIEVABLE.

That said, here is my "think out of the box" suggestion:

1.  Amend the Second Amendment to the Constitution.   It is impossible and unreasonable that the founders of the United States living in their world of current events would expect their proteges born into a world with airplanes, electronics, smart bombs, AR-15s, so on and so forth to not use the power provided in the constitution to make SUITABLE/REASONABLE changes to society as a whole. Undoubtedly, the founders would not expect us to make 27 amendments to the constitution to deal with relevant problems/dilemmas/questions/issues. . . and then sit on our hands expressing "no more" changes are worthwhile while the citizenry is being overwhelmeed and aggrieved by violent mass killings with guns.

So amend the constitutional right to own guns and stop simply relying on statutory law to do the 'heavy lifting' in the present political climate. Do it: "Once and done" for another indefinite period of change-worthy protection for the citizenry.

Wow. Jack_Tx. It is current news (topical).

And yet nothing you posted refers to PTSD.  

Wow. So in the spirit of answering my question you ask me, a non-gun user , to find a solution for AR-15s and other firing weapons of mass destruction and to offer it up to republicans and conservatives who won't lift a finger to try anything which has not been tried before?  UNBELIEVABLE.

You're the one bitching and blaming about the current state of affairs, so yeah, from one non-gun owner to another, it's a fair question.

So amend the constitutional right to own guns 

Amend it to say what?

You tell me you are the one sitting on the sidelines 'trash-talking' and nuh-uh-ing. What is your big idea besides a chilli-dog and Coke" from the concession stand?

Was that supposed to make sense?

Figure it out on your own. No hand-holding on this one.  /s

That's a "no" then.

So amend the constitutional right to own gunsand stop simply relying on statutory law to do the 'heavy lifting' in the present political climate. 

How do you want the amendment to read?  Have you sent that to your Senators and Representative?

It's a think out of the box idea: and, now you would like me to whip votes for a constitutional convention? Unbelievable! What will be your role in this adventure/process, Drinker-Wry?

Well of course, there are two ways to go, a Constitutional Convention if two-thirds of state legislatures (34 states) call for one or a single amendment drafted and ratified by by two-thirds of both sides of Congress.  

What will be your role in this adventure/process, Drinker-Wry?

I've grown weary of answering your questions when you never answer mine.

SOSDD with some conservatives and their projections and 'karen songs.'

Actually it was night not day and you obviously don’t understand what projection is but whatever.

And some conservatives obviously are about as tedious as cold coffee can be for a hot-coffee drinker! Flat and uninteresting. And snark and indirect responses to direct questions is not a proper answer to any question. This is bull-$hit you add and display here. Thus, I am about to 'short-leash' my responses to you if I reply at all.

What will be your role in this adventure/process, Drinker-Wry?

Well, your 'lips are moving'. . .when you could keep 'silent,' that's an indicator of interest/something. Surely you are not here to just get "Negative Drinker" -cred! I ask again: Where did you get the idea that I want you to do anything?

Where did you get the idea that I want you to do anything?

That was my unanswered question, not yours.

I should know better not to have a conversation with some here without a helmet on.