8 killed in Texas mall shooting
- Thread starter LaniKaiTiger
- Start date
the liberal mind. make a violent lunatic with 40+ arrests out to be an amazing person. have violent and destructive protests because someone took action and stopped him before he could break another old lady's face unprovoked.
but also celebrate completely innocent people being killed in a random, unprovoked mass shooting. in their deranged minds anything that they think supports their political stance is acceptable.
not really sure why you think it makes any point against carrying to celebrate, it just means more will.
but also celebrate completely innocent people being killed in a random, unprovoked mass shooting. in their deranged minds anything that they think supports their political stance is acceptable.
not really sure why you think it makes any point against carrying to celebrate, it just means more will.
Good to see you taking the moral high ground on this one. At least it was only 8 people murdered this time.
Liberalism only want criminals, cops and security for hollywood to have guns.
Last edited:
"I never imagined in 100 years I would be thrust into the position of being the first first responder on the site to take care of people," he shared. "The first girl I walked up to was crouched down covering her head in the bushes, so I felt for a pulse, pulled her head to the side and she had no face."
A courageous person who unfortunately had to encounter that.
A courageous person who unfortunately had to encounter that.
Ease of access to guns means more people dying to guns. What a shocking conclusion
I suspect you are a generally kind and gentle person.
No one, that I have ever seen, sane, has ever said a good thing about murders, mass or not.
Guns are no more available now than they have been for decades and decades.
Whether you want to agree with that or not, is not important
ACCESS to guns has never been the problem.
LACK of access will never be the answer.
Why?
Because it isn't possible.
You're no more rounding up (taking away) all the guns in America than you stopping rain drops from hitting the ground. That horse left the barn and jumped the fence a long, long time ago.
Laws can change behavior if they are strictly and violently enforced.
Public hangings had an effect.
The lack of mores behind the bad actions, laws can barely, minimally address.
************************************
Our society is rotting from the inside out.
The core problem is not the guns, it's the people.
All these recent insanely fast speeding incidents are not the fault of the car.
The people driving them that fast, against all know logic AND laws are the problem.
You anti-gun people certainly mean well, I believe.
We need answers on how to reverse the crumbling of our society.
.....if we can all put down our phones, social media tracking and addictive gaming long enough, maybe we could see some answers.
Some answers to help people, change people.
There are some.
America is not more getting rid of guns than they are cars.
And yet in Texas you don't even have to have a background check or get a license to own a gun. Your tone-deaf response of "there's nothing we can do" is the reason nothing can get done. Something absolutely could be done, you just represent those that don't want to.
Yes or no, we can make it more difficult for someone to acquire a gun?
What makes you so special that you shouldn't have to undergo a background check or require a permit to own one? Are they supposed to be able to just look at you and know you're not a threat to other human beings?
"For years now, after one massacre or another, I have written some version of the same article, explaining that the nation’s current gun free-for-all is not traditional but, rather, is a symptom of the takeover of our nation by a radical extremist minority. The idea that massacres are “the price of freedom,” as right-wing personality Bill O’Reilly said in 2017 after the Mandalay Bay massacre in Las Vegas, in which a gunman killed 60 people and wounded 411 others, is new, and it is about politics, not our history.
The Second Amendment to the Constitution, on which modern-day arguments for widespread gun ownership rest, is one simple sentence: “A well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” There’s not a lot to go on about what the Framers meant, although in their day, to “bear arms” meant to be part of an organized militia.
As the Tennessee Supreme Court wrote in 1840, “A man in the pursuit of deer, elk, and buffaloes might carry his rifle every day for forty years, and yet it would never be said of him that he had borne arms; much less could it be said that a private citizen bears arms because he has a dirk or pistol concealed under his clothes, or a spear in a cane.”
Today’s insistence that the Second Amendment gives individuals a broad right to own guns comes from two places.
One is the establishment of the National Rifle Association in New York in 1871, in part to improve the marksmanship skills of American citizens who might be called on to fight in another war, and in part to promote in America the British sport of elite shooting, complete with hefty cash prizes in newly organized tournaments. Just a decade after the Civil War, veterans jumped at the chance to hone their former skills. Rifle clubs sprang up across the nation.
By the 1920s, rifle shooting was a popular American sport. “Riflemen” competed in the Olympics, in colleges, and in local, state, and national tournaments organized by the NRA. Being a good marksman was a source of pride, mentioned in public biographies, like being a good golfer. In 1925, when the secretary of the NRA apparently took money from ammunition and arms manufacturers, the organization tossed him out and sued him.
NRA officers insisted on the right of citizens to own rifles and handguns but worked hard to distinguish between law-abiding citizens who should have access to guns for hunting and target shooting and protection, and criminals and mentally ill people, who should not. In 1931, amid fears of bootlegger gangs, the NRA backed federal legislation to limit concealed weapons; prevent possession by criminals, the mentally ill and children; to require all dealers to be licensed; and to require background checks before delivery. It backed the 1934 National Firearms Act, and parts of the 1968 Gun Control Act, designed to stop what seemed to be America’s hurtle toward violence in that turbulent decade.
But in the mid-1970s a faction in the NRA forced the organization away from sports and toward opposing “gun control.” It formed a political action committee (PAC) in 1975, and two years later it elected an organization president who abandoned sporting culture and focused instead on “gun rights.”
This was the second thing that led us to where we are today: leaders of the NRA embraced the politics of Movement Conservatism, the political movement that rose to combat the business regulations and social welfare programs that both Democrats and Republicans embraced after World War II.
Movement Conservatives embraced the myth of the American cowboy as a white man standing against the “socialism” of the federal government as it sought to level the economic playing field between Black Americans and their white neighbors.
Leaders like Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater personified the American cowboy, with his cowboy hat and opposition to government regulation, while television Westerns showed good guys putting down bad guys without the interference of the government.
In 1972 the Republican platform had called for gun control to restrict the sale of “cheap handguns,” but in 1975, as he geared up to challenge President Gerald R. Ford for the 1976 presidential nomination, Movement Conservative hero Ronald Reagan took a stand against gun control. In 1980, the Republican platform opposed the federal registration of firearms, and the NRA endorsed a presidential candidate—Reagan—for the first time.
When President Reagan took office, a new American era, dominated by Movement Conservatives, began. And the power of the NRA over American politics grew.
In 1981 a gunman trying to kill Reagan shot and paralyzed his press secretary, James Brady, and wounded Secret Service agent Tim McCarthy and police officer Thomas Delahanty. After the shooting, then-representative Charles Schumer (D-NY) introduced legislation that became known as the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, or the Brady Bill, to require background checks before gun purchases. Reagan, who was a member of the NRA, endorsed the bill, but the NRA spent millions of dollars to defeat it.
After the Brady Bill passed in 1993, the NRA paid for lawsuits in nine states to strike it down. Until 1959, every single legal article on the Second Amendment concluded that it was not intended to guarantee individuals the right to own a gun. But in the 1970s, legal scholars funded by the NRA had begun to argue that the Second Amendment did exactly that.
In 1997, when the Brady Bill cases came before the Supreme Court as Printz v. United States, the Supreme Court declared parts of the measure unconstitutional.
Now a player in national politics, the NRA was awash in money from gun and ammunition manufacturers. By 2000 it was one of the three most powerful lobbies in Washington. It spent more than $40 million on the 2008 election. In that year, the landmark Supreme Court decision of District of Columbia v. Heller struck down gun regulations and declared that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms.
Increasingly, NRA money backed Republican candidates. In 2012 the NRA spent $9 million in the presidential election, and in 2014 it spent $13 million. Then, in 2016, it spent over $50 million on Republican candidates, including more than $30 million on Trump’s effort to win the White House. This money was vital to Trump, since many other Republican super PACs refused to back him. The NRA spent more money on Trump than any other outside group, including the leading Trump super PAC, which spent $20.3 million.
The unfettered right to own and carry weapons has come to symbolize the Republican Party’s ideology of individual liberty. Lawmakers and activists have not been able to overcome Republican insistence on gun rights despite the mass shootings that have risen since their new emphasis on guns.
Tonight, I am, once again, posting yet another version of this article."
heathercoxrichardson.substack.com
The Second Amendment to the Constitution, on which modern-day arguments for widespread gun ownership rest, is one simple sentence: “A well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” There’s not a lot to go on about what the Framers meant, although in their day, to “bear arms” meant to be part of an organized militia.
As the Tennessee Supreme Court wrote in 1840, “A man in the pursuit of deer, elk, and buffaloes might carry his rifle every day for forty years, and yet it would never be said of him that he had borne arms; much less could it be said that a private citizen bears arms because he has a dirk or pistol concealed under his clothes, or a spear in a cane.”
Today’s insistence that the Second Amendment gives individuals a broad right to own guns comes from two places.
One is the establishment of the National Rifle Association in New York in 1871, in part to improve the marksmanship skills of American citizens who might be called on to fight in another war, and in part to promote in America the British sport of elite shooting, complete with hefty cash prizes in newly organized tournaments. Just a decade after the Civil War, veterans jumped at the chance to hone their former skills. Rifle clubs sprang up across the nation.
By the 1920s, rifle shooting was a popular American sport. “Riflemen” competed in the Olympics, in colleges, and in local, state, and national tournaments organized by the NRA. Being a good marksman was a source of pride, mentioned in public biographies, like being a good golfer. In 1925, when the secretary of the NRA apparently took money from ammunition and arms manufacturers, the organization tossed him out and sued him.
NRA officers insisted on the right of citizens to own rifles and handguns but worked hard to distinguish between law-abiding citizens who should have access to guns for hunting and target shooting and protection, and criminals and mentally ill people, who should not. In 1931, amid fears of bootlegger gangs, the NRA backed federal legislation to limit concealed weapons; prevent possession by criminals, the mentally ill and children; to require all dealers to be licensed; and to require background checks before delivery. It backed the 1934 National Firearms Act, and parts of the 1968 Gun Control Act, designed to stop what seemed to be America’s hurtle toward violence in that turbulent decade.
But in the mid-1970s a faction in the NRA forced the organization away from sports and toward opposing “gun control.” It formed a political action committee (PAC) in 1975, and two years later it elected an organization president who abandoned sporting culture and focused instead on “gun rights.”
This was the second thing that led us to where we are today: leaders of the NRA embraced the politics of Movement Conservatism, the political movement that rose to combat the business regulations and social welfare programs that both Democrats and Republicans embraced after World War II.
Movement Conservatives embraced the myth of the American cowboy as a white man standing against the “socialism” of the federal government as it sought to level the economic playing field between Black Americans and their white neighbors.
Leaders like Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater personified the American cowboy, with his cowboy hat and opposition to government regulation, while television Westerns showed good guys putting down bad guys without the interference of the government.
In 1972 the Republican platform had called for gun control to restrict the sale of “cheap handguns,” but in 1975, as he geared up to challenge President Gerald R. Ford for the 1976 presidential nomination, Movement Conservative hero Ronald Reagan took a stand against gun control. In 1980, the Republican platform opposed the federal registration of firearms, and the NRA endorsed a presidential candidate—Reagan—for the first time.
When President Reagan took office, a new American era, dominated by Movement Conservatives, began. And the power of the NRA over American politics grew.
In 1981 a gunman trying to kill Reagan shot and paralyzed his press secretary, James Brady, and wounded Secret Service agent Tim McCarthy and police officer Thomas Delahanty. After the shooting, then-representative Charles Schumer (D-NY) introduced legislation that became known as the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, or the Brady Bill, to require background checks before gun purchases. Reagan, who was a member of the NRA, endorsed the bill, but the NRA spent millions of dollars to defeat it.
After the Brady Bill passed in 1993, the NRA paid for lawsuits in nine states to strike it down. Until 1959, every single legal article on the Second Amendment concluded that it was not intended to guarantee individuals the right to own a gun. But in the 1970s, legal scholars funded by the NRA had begun to argue that the Second Amendment did exactly that.
In 1997, when the Brady Bill cases came before the Supreme Court as Printz v. United States, the Supreme Court declared parts of the measure unconstitutional.
Now a player in national politics, the NRA was awash in money from gun and ammunition manufacturers. By 2000 it was one of the three most powerful lobbies in Washington. It spent more than $40 million on the 2008 election. In that year, the landmark Supreme Court decision of District of Columbia v. Heller struck down gun regulations and declared that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms.
Increasingly, NRA money backed Republican candidates. In 2012 the NRA spent $9 million in the presidential election, and in 2014 it spent $13 million. Then, in 2016, it spent over $50 million on Republican candidates, including more than $30 million on Trump’s effort to win the White House. This money was vital to Trump, since many other Republican super PACs refused to back him. The NRA spent more money on Trump than any other outside group, including the leading Trump super PAC, which spent $20.3 million.
The unfettered right to own and carry weapons has come to symbolize the Republican Party’s ideology of individual liberty. Lawmakers and activists have not been able to overcome Republican insistence on gun rights despite the mass shootings that have risen since their new emphasis on guns.
Tonight, I am, once again, posting yet another version of this article."
May 6, 2023
For years now, after one massacre or another, I have written some version of the same article, explaining that the nation’s current gun free-for-all is not traditional but, rather, is a symptom of the takeover of our nation by a radical extremist minority. The idea that massacres are “the price...
heathercoxrichardson.substack.com
Like schools, this was in a gun-free zone. Funny how these mass shootings happen where you can’t carry.
Texas congressman says people who think 'prayers aren't cutting it' as a solution to gun violence 'don't believe in an almighty god who is absolutely in control of our lives.' 9 people died in a mass shooting in his district today.
Rep. Keith Self called for prayer in light of the mass shooting at Allen Premium Outlets — a mall near Dallas, Texas — on Saturday.
www.businessinsider.com
Clearly the solution is to have everyone carrying like Beirut in the 70s. “ Gun-free zones” are idiotic. What we need is a gun free nation. Funny how these mass shootings don’t happen elsewhere in the world to the extent they do here. Wonder why. Oh, and when they do happen, people tend to reach the conclusion, maybe we need to make it harder to get guns.
Last edited:
Well he’s got that right. Some god. Don’t worry that your daughter got her face blown off. She’s up in the sky now. Story time for children
Texas congressman says people who think 'prayers aren't cutting it' as a solution to gun violence 'don't believe in an almighty god who is absolutely in control of our lives.' 9 people died in a mass shooting in his district today.
Rep. Keith Self called for prayer in light of the mass shooting at Allen Premium Outlets — a mall near Dallas, Texas — on Saturday.
Easy answer: No.
I'm not getting into name calling, nor investing the emotion some of you do over and over and over without stopping to look at both sides. Your way is right, everything else is wrong.
Y'all do you. You always do. Probably always will.
I will not respond to this thread again, as I am not attacking you or anyone.
More laws will not stop speeding on our streets or prevent people from getting guns.
BETTER enforcement of what we have would go a long way.
Murder is against the law.
By fist, by wooden stick, by sword, by gun, by knife, by car, by bomb....
How's that working exactly?
It is also against the law to steal.
For your pleasure reading and that of your bed fellow (in thinking) @dpic73 -
I KNOW you'll read and absorb it all, because it's gospel' from NPR
***********************
For those that don't have the time to read about this very tragic and serious subject, some points:
(1) Over 80% of mass shooters at K-12 schools stole guns from family members, according to research funded by the National Institute of Justice (a program of the U.S. Justice Department)
(2a) Semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15 often make headlines when they are used to commit mass shootings in the United States. BTW – ‘AR’ does not stand for Assault Rifle. It’s the name of the company that first produced them Armalite Rifle
(2b) But handguns are most often used to commit crimes, according to ATF data.
(3a) A huge way those legally purchased firearms get into the hands of criminals is through theft, the ATF said. In five years, there were more than 1 million firearms stolen from private citizens and reported to authorities.
(4b) There's a caveat here, however. Federal law doesn't require individual gun owners to report the loss or theft of their firearm to police. And while local laws vary, it also isn't a requirement in many states to report a stolen gun, either — so the number of gun thefts could be much higher.
Pray for revival in America and the re-establishment of the family, family values and healthy activities that do not involve 'make believe' or mindless distraction on any level.
TigerIllustrated is excepted.
Last edited:
Abbott also cut ~$200mil from mental health funding within the last 2 years or something. Guy is an absolute embarrassment of a Governor and it's sad he hasn't been voted out. This state blows.
Crazy that there's no mental health issues in other countries of the world.
Must be something unique here that other countries don't have to deal with.
Wow, that graph says it all.
But bans don't work say Republicans who have banned abortion, contraception, books, drag queens, vaccines, inconvenient history, and talking about humans who are LGBTQ.
Shooter used an AR-15. What a country we live in. Little girl gets her head blown off at a mall, and it’s all hunky dory with one party. Buy more guns
There’s a whole lot of progress to be made between where we are now and nothing bad happening ever.
Let the Government, Hollywood, the news media, and the politicians give up their guns and then take them from citizens that seems fair.
Wow, I don't care if you are blue, red or whateverthe****. That is a failure of leadership right there. red shithole state.
"The shooter wore a patch that said, “RWDS,” an acronym for Right Wing Death Squad, according to people familiar with the investigation. The phrase is popular among right-wing extremists, neo-Nazis and white supremacists, they said."
www.texastribune.org
All cool though, as long as he isn't trans
Gunman in Allen mall shooting may have had right-wing extremist beliefs
The shooter wore a patch that said, “RWDS,” an acronym for Right Wing Death Squad, according to people familiar with the investigation. The phrase is popular among right-wing extremists, neo-Nazis and white supremacists, they said.
www.texastribune.org
All cool though, as long as he isn't trans
This is really the most laughable thing in all this, republicans will blame everything except guns, but also do nothing about those things.
Honestly I could respect republican voters a lot more if they just admitted they don’t really care all that much about people getting shot at long as their taxes don’t go up.
Lol, that's a good 1."The shooter wore a patch that said, “RWDS,” an acronym for Right Wing Death Squad, according to people familiar with the investigation. The phrase is popular among right-wing extremists, neo-Nazis and white supremacists, they said."
Gunman in Allen mall shooting may have had right-wing extremist beliefs
The shooter wore a patch that said, “RWDS,” an acronym for Right Wing Death Squad, according to people familiar with the investigation. The phrase is popular among right-wing extremists, neo-Nazis and white supremacists, they said.
All cool though, as long as he isn't trans
Yep, drop the “Having more guns than people makes us safer” bullshit and just come out and say, “I’m perfectly willing to let your child get their head blown off at a mall if it means I can play toy soldier.” At least be honest
I have zero problems with background checks and permits. I’ve had a background check run every time I’ve bought a gun (I think?) and also have a hunters education permit. So it would change absolutely nothing for me and I’m not sure why anyone would oppose it.
I also think we should go ahead and triple mandatory sentences for gun crimes. Stop non FFL sales. Put ARs and high capacity magazines in the same category as things like silencers, which require additional processes, waiting and fees.
None of these things infringe on my 2nd amendment rights or change my life in any way. And I own a bunch of guns. Including an AR.
This post is fair, but I'd like to challenge the premise. Most Dems aren't trying to immediately rid the streets of firearms. Nobody is proposing or will propose with any chance of success some kind of forced removal of firearms from folks..
But if we start somewhere we can slowly make weapons more difficult to find and more expensive to own. This might take 50 years from the time of whatever reforms we can make. And by reforms I mean laws that ban specific weapons/accessories etc.l
If we banned the production of a specific kind of car, or a specific accessory to a car today, in 50 years it would be incredibly difficult to find or acquire those items.
Co-signed. Though I'd go a little further on the magazines and AR style guns.
+ Required insurance though. How much does the average act of gun violence cost the state? The victim?
So your OK with abortion's babies basically getting their heads pulled off and body cut up and sold for experimental procedures.
WTAF are you talking about? This is, of course, not happening.
