More Thoughts and prayers bullshit!

35 posts / 0 new
Last post
NameRemovedByMod's picture
More Thoughts and prayers bullshit!

Well here we go again. Another massacre by guns and the conservatives, evangelicals and just plain stupid are calling for thoughts and prayers to solve the problem.

The republicans take money from the NRA, so they will never even think of gun control which would have prevented this teen from getting an assault weapon. Nope they have the answer , it is pray for the victims and just go on as usual. Then we have the , well it is the mentally ill people as guns are not the problem. Or the video game and movie argument. All of these are diversions to keep from doing something as simple as limiting weapons and outlawing assault weapons.

It sickens me to live in a country with such vile, ignorant, self serving republicans!

Subscription Note: 

Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.

Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.

mykcob4's picture
Sorry I started a thread

Sorry I started a thread about this before I saw your post! I agree. Prayers mean nothing, do nothing! We need to BAN guns PERIOD!

NameRemovedByMod's picture
Sorry I did not see your

Sorry I did not see your thread about this or I would not have posted my own. I agree with you 100 percent!

Sushisnake's picture
It will be so hard to get the

It will be so hard to get the guns out of circulation, now, Myk and that's if Congress ever grow the balls to even try. It has to overcome the American mindset that a personal firearm equals personal freedom, first.

People can have funny ideas about their Constitutions. It's like the thing was carved in stone and is immutable. From what I know of your founding fathers they'd be doing a lot of face palming, a lot of shouting " That is NOT what we meant, AT ALL!"
Oversights in the Australian constitution meant we were still a British dependency at state level until 1986. Not many Aussies realised it, but if they had NOBODY would have defended it. Except Tony Abbott and John Howard :-)

The gun buy back here in Australia was pretty easy because we didn’t have the emotional investment in gun ownership Americans have. Mind you, I'm not saying you shouldn't try. It sickens me that I barely bat an eye at reports of yet another mass shooting in the US anymore.

LogicFTW's picture
Sad part is, everytime there

Sad part is, everytime there is another mass shooting, especially in schools, the gun manufacturing companies make bank. All the gun nuts get worried they will lose their ability to buy more guns, and go out and buy another.

This school had 2 uniformed police officers in the school at the time of the shooting. Simple fact is, an assault rifle is a very effective tool for killing a lot of people in a crowd very quickly. It does not really have any other purpose other than to effectively kill and injure a lot of people very easily. Self defense? Nope a shotgun is a far better, safer, and more effective tool. For hunting? Nope they have something called hunting rifles for that. To defend against tyranny or an invading force? Nope! one military drone could easily take out an entire garrison of assault rifle wielding resistance force without them ever being aware they were about to die. Besides, sniper rifles with accompanying training would be far more effective for a resistance force.

Give any troubled, hormone raged teenager a few hours to learn how to shoot with an assault rifle with large magazine capacity and they too can kill and injure scores of people, almost no matter how many precautions are made.

There is zero good reason for any civilian to have large capacity magazines, and there is zero good reason for citizens to be able to buy as many assault rifles as they want. One shotgun at home for those really worried about home defense, and perhaps 1 handgun for mobile protection after a vigorous concealed carry licensing program. And hunter style rifles for those that like to hunt. (long range single round accuracy over ability to fire a lot of rounds quickly into a crowd.) There is no rational reason other than expensive/wasteful "fun" for anything beyond that.

-Also, getting back on topic...
Do people really think thoughts and prayers make any difference for the victims and their friends/family? It is a cheap cop-out answer for people that can not do shit.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
In Australia there has not

In Australia there has not been a single shooting massacre since the automatic weapon and handgun ban.

In Scotland there has not been a mass shooting since the hand gun ban.

Go figure.

Cronus's picture
Ban all guns in the USA -

Ban all guns in the USA - impose a death penalty for possession - and gun violence including school shootings will still be happening 200 years from now

The violence will probably increase.

People don't willingly give up guns.

mykcob4's picture
Oh bullshit Cronus. You don't

Oh bullshit Cronus. You don't know what you are talking about.

LogicFTW's picture
Actually on a national level,

Actually on a national level, gun bans do work to bring down gun violence. It just does not work on a local level in gun crazed USA, Chicago can ban guns, but if people can cross a street that is now suddenly outside of chicago city lines, and buy a gun with just an ID at a traveling gun show, the gun ban ends up being greatly muted in effectiveness. Also the general availability of guns makes it very easy for people to get ahold of guns illegally.

People smuggle guns from the US into Mexico all the time because powerful mass human killing guns are so easy to get ahold of in the US. Even easier then corrupt states in Mexico where most of the police/criminal justice system can be bought off with bribes. That says a lot when people smuggle guns to Mexico because they are easier to get ahold of in the US then in Mexico.

Will agree with you gun nuts will not willingly give up their guns. And having ~350 million guns in circulation in the US makes it an awful if not impossible task. Unfortunately there is no good, fast solution to the problem of gun violence in the US. The rich will simply send their kids to private schools that screen out potentially violent students and have a secured entrance, while everyone else will just have to "chance it" with their kids, or move to a country where there kids can actually expect to go through school w/o getting shot at.

Sushisnake's picture
Is anybody seriously asking

Is anybody seriously asking you to give up ALL guns, though? I thought they were just asking you to give up assault weapons.

"People don't willingly give up guns.". Nope, but they will willingly give up assault weapons. Australian gun owners did, no worries. They kept their guns generally - nobody asked them to give up guns used for hunting or competitive shooting- but they were as keen to stop nutjobs getting hold of assault weapons as the rest of us. It gave the sport a bsd name. That's why they complied. I think they were more horrified by Port Arthur than the rest of us, to be honest, because they had far more insight into the sort of mindset it takes to fire into a crowd of innocents.

Oh, and violent crime is decreasing in the US- has been since the 90s.

Sheldon's picture
"Ban all guns in the USA -

"Ban all guns in the USA - impose a death penalty for possession - and gun violence including school shootings will still be happening 200 years from now"

I'm dubious, what are you basing this sweeping assertion on? Gun control works in most other countries after all.

"The violence will probably increase."

Based on......?

"People don't willingly give up guns."

Clearly, hence the need for legislation.

Sky Pilot's picture
Sheldon,

Sheldon,

When given a choice most people will eagerly give up their personal freedoms and liberties if they are promised safety. And then the next thing they know they are living in a police state.

Cronus's picture
You mean I don't nagree with

You mean I don't agree with you - so by default I must be wrong.

It' s got to be hard finding a hat your size.

mykcob4's picture
No Cronus you made an

No Cronus you made an assumption that banning guns would increase gun violence. That is a flat-out assumption based on ZIP!
That is why I said you don't know what you are talking about.
I have produced numbers in other threads that prove that gun death equals the number of guns as a ratio.
I am tired of the same old lies and bullshit made by pro-gun idiots. I will not entertain that bullshit any longer.
They have been saying that bullshit you spewed out since the 70s. It was a lie then and it's a lie now!
At one time they banned assault rifles in the US and guess fucking what. gun deaths went down. The ban expired and guess fucking what, gun deaths increased. So don't hand me that bumper-sticker mentality bullshit. I am not buying it.
You say banning guns will increase gun violence then FUCKING PROVE IT!

Cronus's picture
For a Marine , you sure know

For a Marine , you sure know diddly shit about guns.

Let' s start with the " at one time they banned assault rifles" drivel.

Nope.

Didn't happen.

I' m sure you are alluding to the Clinton era " ban".

It did not ban the sale of anything.

It restricted the importation of rifles made outside the USA that had certain cosmetic attributes - specifically a combination of flash hiders, bayonette lugs, pistol grips - in addition to a removable magazine that would hold more than 10 rounds. Therefore, you could buy a semi- auto rifle that still took a larger capacity magazine as long as it did not have a pistol grip, or bayonette lug.

This means that the FUNCTION of these semi- auto weapons was unchanged, and only varied slightly in cosmetics.

Meaning - the " ban" did squat. Any change in the death rate with regard to weapons being sold is placebo effect - and only affecting you. To summarize - your claim is false.

You better quit writing checues your ass can't cash..

mykcob4's picture
I know plenty about "guns"

I know plenty about "guns" Cronus and you are wrong about the ban!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban
You've been reading NRA propaganda!

Cronus's picture
Stck your fingers in your

Stck your fingers in your ears and go " nyah! nyah! nyah!!!!!".

The " ban" did not stop the sale of " assault weapons" (aka scary looking rifle) - it in fact spurred the industry and put more of such weaponry into the marketplace. Prior to it' s implementation the M16 and AK-47 were pretty much the only commonly semi copies available. (Although the US M-1 Carbine was manufactured in a " civilian version in the 1960s and 70s.)

Now anyone who has the inclination can buy a semi auto version of pretty much any military platform weapon.

All the " ban" did was take increase interest and prices in the marketplace. If you don't believe it - go talk to someone who legally sells such merchandise. They will give you an education.

And I have nothing whatsoever to do with the NRA.
Never been a member.
So quit insulting me with such associations.

mykcob4's picture
@Cronus

@Cronus
You didn't READ the link I provided.
Instead, you keep pushing the NRA propaganda!
You tried to denigrate my honorable service in an attempt to discredit me. You defend the indefensible.
The fact is that NO ONE needs a gun.
Hunting is totally unnecessary and killing an animal for sport is just sick!
Assault weapons are IN-FUCKING-SANE in the hands of civilians!
There is NOTHING in the Constitution to prevent gun control or even a ban on firearms! The 2nd Amendment allows for a "well-regulated militia". It doesn't say anything about "private ownership!
You have to have a license to drive!
You can't have a crossbow, a spear, a sword, a knife over 12", a bow and arrow, a blowgun, in public for defense, only firearms!

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ Cronus

@ Cronus

The flaw in your and the other "guns are good people are bad" is that you immediately put up a straw man argument i.e. "banning guns"

As far as I can see no one is advocating "banning guns" they are advocating banning assault weapons and ancillaries. That is all. Who the fuck needs an assault rifle with multiple high capacity magazines apart from the serving active military?

Sensible people are also advocating stricter checks on those purchasing weapons, an age restriction at 21, background check and cooling off period. What the fuck is wrong with that?

Where assault weapons are banned there has not been one single multiple injury school shooting. Go figure.

Cronus's picture
Your last comment is wrong.

Your last comment is wrong. Is this intentional?

California has had a ban on any weapon with a detachable hi capacity magazine for years. They have also had mass shootings since the bans implementation.

Interestingly - the same law also banned the sale of rifles chambering the .50 Browning machine gun round - for no apparent reason. In the States history, no crime had ever been committed with such a weapon. Most probable reason - criminals apparently are lazy and don't care to lug about guns weighing over 15 kilos.

Sushisnake's picture
" California has had a ban on

" California has had a ban on any weapon with a detachable hi capacity magazine for years. They have also had mass shootings since the bans implementation."

Um...yeah...of course they have, because the US doesn't have border control at the state level.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
I was about to write that

I was about to write that Sushisnake.
Thankyou.

Thought twin.

Nyarlathotep's picture
Cronus - the same law also

Cronus - the same law also banned the sale of rifles chambering the .50 Browning machine gun round - for no apparent reason. In the States history, no crime had ever been committed with such a weapon.

I don't know where you read that, but it isn't true.

mykcob4's picture
@Nyar

@Nyar
Cronus reads NRA propaganda. They say shit like that all the time. It's just more misinformation by the extreme right!

Sheldon's picture
To be fair you made several

To be fair you made several sweeping assertions without even a pretence of evidence, so it's perfectly logical to reject them in the same fashion. Hitchens's razor applies.

MCDennis's picture
Thoughts and prayers. Wasn't

Thoughts and prayers. Wasn't this the cure proposed for the flu last week?

Sky Pilot's picture
If people want to reduce

If people want to reduce schools shootings they would tell their rug rats to stop bullying other kids.

"5 Dallas-area students arrested in gun or threat incidents a day after Florida school killings"
https://www.dallasnews.com/news/crime/2018/02/15/marcus-high-school-stud...

"Updated at 10:15 p.m. Thursday: Revised to include a fifth incident.

Three North Texas high school students — one each at Marcus High in Flower Mound, Plano West and South Garland — were arrested Thursday after reportedly taking guns to their campuses a day after the deadly shooting in Florida.

The Marcus High and South Garland students each face a charge of carrying a firearm in a prohibited place. The Plano West student also may face a felony charge.

The weapons were not fired, and there were no injuries at the schools.

Also Thursday, an Arlington junior high student was arrested after allegedly making threats to shoot the school, and a Weatherford teen was arrested after making vague threats on social media, police said.

Neither student had a weapon, police said."

The Florida kid had some serious problems and being abused by his associates pushed him over the edge. The thing about such events is that they should remind us that our life expectancy is uncertain and that we could bite the dust at any time in any place through no fault of our own.

The reality is that if someone wants to kill some schools kids the killer can do it at any time and at any place. Kids are probably safer overall if the shooting takes place inside the school building rather than when they are entering or leaving the school in large groups or waiting on school buses on the streets.

Sushisnake's picture
Yep. Stephen King wrote

Yep. Stephen King wrote 'Carrie' 44 years ago and we still don't get it.

CyberLN's picture
I doubt there will be any

I doubt there will be any appreciable success teaching children not to bully when they watch adults do it daily.

LogicFTW's picture
Where did you get the stuff

Where did you get the stuff about the florida kid being abused by his associates and that pushed him over the edge?

1. He is 19
2. He was banned from the school a year prior, (not 100% sure on timeline but it was at least months before the shooting occured.)
3. He was part of a known white supremacy group
4. We going to ignore that him losing his foster mother a few months prior and unwilling to live with the next closest kin capable of raising him had nothing to do with him deciding to shoot up a school? He had a fascination with guns and killing defenseless animals for years before he shot up the school.
5. It seems likely he picked Valentines day for a reason, we going to ignore any possibility of a crime motivated by unrequited love or the like?

Sure I would not be surprised if bullying the shooter may have been subject to, may have played a large role in his motivations. However I think nearly all of us got bullied at some point during our school years, and 99.99+ percent of us do not shoot up a school especially a year removed from even going to that school. There is a lot more that happened here then bullying. But yes I would love it if kids would bully less, and parents would take a more active role in assuring their kids do not bully others.

ZeffD's picture
About 28 percent of students

About 28 percent of students ages 12–18 reported being bullied at school during the school year, according to the Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2013 report, by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) and National Center for Education Statistics Institute of Education Sciences (IES). The majority of bullying still takes place at school; 1 in 3 U.S. students say they have been bullied at school, according to the DHHS. Source:
https://americanspcc.org/bullying/statistics-and-information/

In a 2015 nationally representative sample of youth in grades 9-12:2
• 7.8% reported being in a physical fight on school property in the 12 months before the survey.
• 5.6% reported that they did not go to school on one or more days in the 30 days before the survey because they felt unsafe at school or on their way to or from school.
• 4.1% reported carrying a weapon (gun, knife or club) on school property on one or more days in the 30 days before the survey.
• 6.0% reported being threatened or injured with a weapon on school property one or more times in the 12 months before the survey.
• 20.2% reported being bullied on school property and 15.5% reported being bullied electronically during the 12 months before the survey

source (PDF file in)...
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/youthviolence/schoolviolence/data...

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.