Two News People Shot, Killed, On Air in Virginia

[Fragile Bird]

No one wants a drought in California, especially the farmers. But the place is full of swimming pools and the farmers keep drawing from the acquifer.
Because it's always going to rain, right?

I was just in Spokane. The north-west is on fire. No one wants the boreal forest to burn to the ground, but when I look around me on the highway I am surrounded by SUVs. Not only SUVs, but giant, monster, gas guzzling, carbon burning SUVs. But no one wants to give up their SUV because they're just one person and that isn't going to make a difference.

<shrugs>

You are what you eat. You are your decisions.

[IamMe90]

2 has nothing to do with most Americans. Are most Americans saying Yay or nay to laws regarding what #2 is talking about? 1 is debatable. Show me a poll or something.

For 1): http://www.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx

The 2014 Gallup poll on gun control opinion has a combined 52% of Americans who are either in favor of keeping gun control measures as they are now (38%) or less stringent (14%).

Unfortunately, I can't give you poll data on American opinion about the importance of funding mental health programs, it is a very specific topic and I've been unable to find anything about it. But given how little funding it seems to get, in conjunction with American attitudes toward raising taxes and the welfare state in general, it seems that, at the very least, most Americans just don't care much about funding more mental health services.

Bottom line, if people want to live in a society with very little restrictions on guns, but don't care or think about the ramifications of not increasing access to mental health services, these incidents are bound to occur.

[Swordfish]

I don't think I've ever seen a clear-cut answer to why the NRA fights tooth and nail even the slightest tightening of regulation on guns - even something as reasonable as longer background checks. This is **not** a strawman, this is fact.

From the NRA's own website, an official statement:

"NRA does NOT support universal background checks and is not working with Manchin to implement this type of legislation. NRA opposes, and will continue to oppose, universal background checks and registration schemes." https://home.nra.org/nraila/document/statement-regarding-universal-background-checks

Personally, I believe their reasoning for this is based on the "slippery slope" theory; i.e., give a little and before you know it, you have to give a lot.

 

It most likely is based on exactly that.  i don't know when it became acceptable to simply dismiss slippery slope arguments out of hand as if creating a slippery slope is not a completely effective and viable strategy for getting things done that are bound to be unpopular.  

[Swordfish]

But the fact is, these shootings are happening precisely because of the ease of purchasing guns and gun owners not being responsible. 

 

 

With all due respect, that is pretty friggin far from 'fact'.

[mormont]

[mod] Folks, please do not resort to name-calling, because we'll just delete that, and please, do not respond to or quote posts that resort to name-calling, 'cause we'll delete those too.

 

Critique arguments, discuss, debate all you like. But if you've nothing to offer but abuse, keep it to yourself. [/mod]

[TerraPrime]

Relying heavily on private cars for transportation on highways is going to result in a good number of people dying from car accidents. We choose to drive cars not because we WANT people to die in car accidents, surely. But all of us who drive and those who take rides accept that accidents with car happen and many of these accidents are fatal. We also accept that there are irresponsible drivers, like those who commit DUI.

 

Yet, we have such a blindspot about guns.

 

All I am saying is that incidents like this, and like the Aurora shooting, or Sandy Hook, or the multiple accidents involving toddlers and young children with guns - all of that is the operational cost of having firearms be an integral part of our cultural identity. It is clear that Americans are, by and large, unwilling to change that culture. So, let's at least be less teeth-gnashing when things like this happens, lest we appear even more morally hypocritical.

 

No addicts want to steal from family or get fired from their jobs or kill someone in a car accident because they're driving while high. They just wanted to chase that high, and the rest are just the outcomes of that decision. So, America, keep chasing that ammosexual high. The rest will sort itself out, one way or another.

[NestorMakhnosLovechild]

Relying heavily on private cars for transportation on highways is going to result in a good number of people dying from car accidents. We choose to drive cars not because we WANT people to die in car accidents, surely. But all of us who drive and those who take rides accept that accidents with car happen and many of these accidents are fatal. We also accept that there are irresponsible drivers, like those who commit DUI.

 

Yet, we have such a blindspot about guns.

 

All I am saying is that incidents like this, and like the Aurora shooting, or Sandy Hook, or the multiple accidents involving toddlers and young children with guns - all of that is the operational cost of having firearms be an integral part of our cultural identity. It is clear that Americans are, by and large, unwilling to change that culture. So, let's at least be less teeth-gnashing when things like this happens, lest we appear even more morally hypocritical.

 

No addicts want to steal from family or get fired from their jobs or kill someone in a car accident because they're driving while high. They just wanted to chase that high, and the rest are just the outcomes of that decision. So, America, keep chasing that ammosexual high. The rest will sort itself out, one way or another.

 

I find the comparison with substance abuse to be interesting, particularly your comparison to addicts stealing from their family or getting fired from their jobs or killing someone in a car accident because they're driving while high. Do you apply the same standard that you do for drug prohibitions to firearms prohibitions?

 

Which is to say, do you think that people really "want" a culture where drug addicts getting into car accidents and killing people because they're driving while high if they oppose the stringent criminalization of drugs that we currently have? Because it seems to me like those things happen with some regularity even though we already have a regime where there are controlled substances and stiff penalties for violating the law. 

 

Because I can't help but notice how many people here, including myself, seem to argue for the decriminalization of most, if not at all drugs, and how it doesn't seem like any of us are really secretly "for" more people driving under the influence, or stealing from their families, or getting fired from their jobs. 

[TerraPrime]

Because I can't help but notice how many people here, including myself, seem to argue for the decriminalization of most, if not at all drugs, and how it doesn't seem like any of us are really secretly "for" more people driving under the influence, or stealing from their families, or getting fired from their jobs. 

 

My support for decriminalizing drugs has always been tethered to the condition that we enact severe punishments for harms (to property and to persons) done while under the influence. Making most of the recreational drugs legal will probably increase the number of people who will try and become addicted to them. But that's probably an acceptable trade-off given the societal cost of prohibition (gang violence, incarceration for possession and distribution, etc.). So I think we need to have a safeguard in place to try to deter people from at least harming others while enjoying recreational drugs.

 

But I think this may stray too much from a discussion on gun issues.

[DireWolfSpirit]

So southgoing gnome meet northgoing gnome. http://seuss.wikia.com/wiki/The_Zax

I don't think it's defeatist of liberal Americans to not want to jump in the gun control debate. I just think it's too evenly contested between two opposing forces to change anytime soon. It may eventually, but not soon imo.

^^^
Hey did you see that? I managed to use too, two and to in one sentence!

[Pebble thats Stubby]

So southgoing gnome meet northgoing gnome. http://seuss.wikia.com/wiki/The_Zax

I don't think it's defeatist of liberal Americans to not want to jump in the gun control debate. I just think it's too evenly contested between two opposing forces to change anytime soon. It may eventually, but not soon imo.

^^^
Hey did you see that? I managed to use too and two in one sentence, with to in the preceding one!

 

fixed that for you.

[all swedes are racist]

 
fixed that for you.

Huh? Sorry to be off-topic, but am I missing something? How is that not a single sentence?

[Fragile Bird]

fixed that for you.

Er...I just think it's too evenly contested between two opposing forces to change anytime soon.

[Hayyoth]

It's interesting how these debates are framed after a high profile shooting.

 

http://liberallogic101.com/?p=31591

 

How much is the blatant racism among America’s Liberals to blame for the violent racism in America’s streets?

 

The stated motivations are discussed so differently. We live in very strfange times.

[all swedes are racist]

It's interesting how these debates are framed after a high profile shooting.
 
http://liberallogic101.com/?p=31591
 
The stated motivations are discussed so differently. We live in very strfange times.

Well, has been any indication this shooting was in any way racially motivated?

Edit: and not for nothing, but I'm fairly sure I recall quite a bit of, uh "blame" placed on the access to firearms in the church massacre as well

[Pebble thats Stubby]

Huh? Sorry to be off-topic, but am I missing something? How is that not a single sentence?

 

 

Gah,  night shift brain.   I was sure I saw a .  in the middle of that!    I even read it several times.

[Hayyoth]

Well, has been any indication this shooting was in any way racially motivated?

 

http://abcnews.go.com/US/shooting-alleged-gunman-details-grievances-suicide-notes/story?id=33336339

 

He continues, “As for Dylann Roof? You (deleted)! You want a race war (deleted)? BRING IT THEN YOU WHITE …(deleted)!!!”

 

He then goes out and shoots three white people.

 

Edit: and not for nothing, but I'm fairly sure I recall quite a bit of, uh "blame" placed on the access to firearms in the church massacre as well

 

Yeah bit is the right word. The Charleston shootings were framed almost exculsively through the prism of race.

[Fragile Bird]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/shooting-alleged-gunman-details-grievances-suicide-notes/story?id=33336339
 
Yeah bit is the right word. The Charleston shootings were framed almost exculsively through the prism of race.

Am I missing something here? Weren't the shootings in Charleston totally racially motivated? White guy went out to kill black people specifically?

[all swedes are racist]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/shooting-alleged-gunman-details-grievances-suicide-notes/story?id=33336339
 
He then goes out and shoots three white people.
 
Yeah bit is the right word. The Charleston shootings were framed almost exculsively through the prism of race.

Dunno. That outburst is certainly ugly and gross, and I'd be willing to entertain the idea he may very well have harbored a deep hatred of white people in general. But I'm not seeing much in the excerpted portions of the manifesto that suggest this killing was in fact racially motivated. Seems most of his grievances are focused on fairly specific individuals in the workplace, and their perceived behavior towards him, not so much on the basis of their being white. He even specifically calls the Charlseton massacre a "tipping point", piling in what appears to be a long running feeling of resentment and isolation.

[Shryke]

Well, has been any indication this shooting was in any way racially motivated?

 

This shooting? No. There's some claims by the guy but it seems like nothing but a smokescreen for a personal vendetta.

 

 

Yeah bit is the right word. The Charleston shootings were framed almost exculsively through the prism of race.

 

That's cause he said that's what it was about and then went to a historic black church and shot a bunch of random black people.

 

This guy meanwhile started trying to craft his own framing of the issue before the shooting even happened. And then he went and shot a bunch of coworkers he disliked. So no, his claims that it's about race are not credible.

[Malik Ambar]

Man, I'm really worried for reporters in the US. With so many shooting sprees happening across America, and the media almost always being in the line of fire for nutjobs over the most silliest issues, I can't help but worry about their safety. I mean is it too far-fetched to think so ?