So a guy at a park loses a fist fight and then returns with a gun and starts firing at, I presume, the victor when children are present. He's a total piece of shit and his death isn't surprising...
So a guy at a park loses a fist fight and then returns with a gun and starts firing at, I presume, the victor when children are present. He's a total piece of shit and his death isn't surprising but the title makes it seem like he was targeting children when that is not the case.
So this is my first try attempt at posting something here that is a little more "right leaning" after this thread. I think we are all used to seeing the 24/7 news cycle at work when it comes to a...
A concealed carry holder stopped a gunman on Saturday in Florida who opened fire on a back-to-school event where dozens of children were present.
So this is my first try attempt at posting something here that is a little more "right leaning" after this thread. I think we are all used to seeing the 24/7 news cycle at work when it comes to a mass shooting. No matter what side of the debate you are on, I think it's also nice to see some coverage when a law abiding citizen uses a firearm to protect others instead. This event could have been the next tragedy had it not been for this legally armed citizen and Florida's gun laws.
This article is merely a statement of fact so I'm curious what makes it "right leaning" to you. Also what do you mean when you say "the debate" because that means a lot of different things to a...
This article is merely a statement of fact so I'm curious what makes it "right leaning" to you. Also what do you mean when you say "the debate" because that means a lot of different things to a lot of different people. It isn't particularly uniform.
Yeah but if you ask 10 different people what they think the gun controversy is then you might get 10 different answers. So I was wondering what the OP's thoughts are about it.
Yeah but if you ask 10 different people what they think the gun controversy is then you might get 10 different answers. So I was wondering what the OP's thoughts are about it.
Hey, sorry I was trying to keep this topic as non-adversarial as possible to welcome discussion, that was me attempting to focus on the issue of defensive shootings. I probably should have been...
Hey, sorry I was trying to keep this topic as non-adversarial as possible to welcome discussion, that was me attempting to focus on the issue of defensive shootings. I probably should have been more clear, but what I meant by debate is "gun control" in the US. As for right leaning, both the source (Daily wire) and the topic at hand (defensive shootings) are typically more conservative and "right leaning". I don't often find coverage outside of right leaning websites covering the thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of gun defense cases each year.
As for my own thoughts, I'm a pretty fervent defender of the second amendment, so to me any laws infringing on American gun owners rights are debatable. However, i'm not an absolutist and I think there is allowance for common sense controls as well. For instance, I don't find it a problem to limit the gun rights of the mentally ill or those who have committed felonies.
I think more often than not most defensive shootings aren't particularly newsworthy just like most offensive shootings aren't either. This one certainly is though, at least to me. Your comment...
I think more often than not most defensive shootings aren't particularly newsworthy just like most offensive shootings aren't either. This one certainly is though, at least to me.
Your comment about limiting (really just stripping) gun rights of felons got me thinking though. It puts a bad taste in my mouth that just because someone is a felon, they could lose even one of their constitutional rights. I don't believe that anybody under any circumstances should lose their rights but the argument that violent felons shouldn't have the right to bear arms is pretty sound. With that being said, I would really just prefer that gun rights not be something granted by the federal government (i.e. the constitution) but rather granted by the states so that no rights granted by the constitution would be able to be taken away. This is just an opinion I have, not something I think is feasible. But again, my views on our constitutional rights are that if any one of them is able to be taken away for any reason, then it shouldn't be considered a right in the first place.
We already disenfranchise convicted felons. Furthermore, we force them to disclose that they had been convicted of crimes after they've served their sentences. We do everything short of forcing...
Your comment about limiting (really just stripping) gun rights of felons got me thinking though. It puts a bad taste in my mouth that just because someone is a felon, they could lose even one of their constitutional rights.
We already disenfranchise convicted felons. Furthermore, we force them to disclose that they had been convicted of crimes after they've served their sentences. We do everything short of forcing them to carry yellow passports that must be produced on demand to identify the bearer as a conflict, and then we have the nerve to be shocked by high recidivism rates.
Oh man, I've written my fair share of papers / speeches about the need for prison reform and other ways to lower recidivism. It's a criminally overlooked issue that's only going to get worse the...
Oh man, I've written my fair share of papers / speeches about the need for prison reform and other ways to lower recidivism. It's a criminally overlooked issue that's only going to get worse the longer we sit around ignoring it. The push to legalize marijuana is certainly a big help though and I've been seeing more and more mainstream criticism about the war on drugs(minorities) but god damn are we behind when it comes to this shit.
I'm surprised nobody has tried to organize former convicts to demand better treatment and ways to rejoin society as full citizens. I suppose #MyNameIsJeanValjean would be too esoteric a hashtag?
I'm surprised nobody has tried to organize former convicts to demand better treatment and ways to rejoin society as full citizens. I suppose #MyNameIsJeanValjean would be too esoteric a hashtag?
There's just so much stigma attached to these things. I think part of the only reason that the war on drugs is starting to become more and more criticized is not because it's such a fucking...
There's just so much stigma attached to these things. I think part of the only reason that the war on drugs is starting to become more and more criticized is not because it's such a fucking catastrophe but that it's a catastrophe which is beginning to affect everybody in some way. Only when the number of convicts and issue of recidivism begins to affect everybody will any movement begin to form.
I really would like to think that the growing outcry against the War on (Some) Drugs is a matter of principle as well, but such idealism is embarrassing at my age. I'm old enough to know better. :)
I really would like to think that the growing outcry against the War on (Some) Drugs is a matter of principle as well, but such idealism is embarrassing at my age. I'm old enough to know better. :)
Also the tragedy could have been avoided if we had stricter gun laws, or better yet, no guns at all. Harder to get guns into the hand of a murderer that way. He wouldn't have been able to go home...
Also the tragedy could have been avoided if we had stricter gun laws, or better yet, no guns at all. Harder to get guns into the hand of a murderer that way. He wouldn't have been able to go home and get one. We shouldn't be happy that we were lucky enough to have a responsible gun owner there to stop the crazy man with a gun. There should only be one type of gun owner, responsible, and until that can be ensured we will have many more gun murders succeed than are stopped by lucky citizens.
I agree, and it seems obvious as someone outside of America. What's absurd to me is that there's reasonable seeming people in this thread who can't seem to wrap their head around the simple...
I agree, and it seems obvious as someone outside of America. What's absurd to me is that there's reasonable seeming people in this thread who can't seem to wrap their head around the simple solution. It just goes to show that the problem isn't just about legislating, it's cultural. It's going to take a long time to convince Americans that wanting a weapon of mass murder and claiming it as a right is absurd in the developed world.
Absolutely, I was talking more about media coverage than it actually being an issue for the left or right. If anything I think the one thing I can often find common ground with liberals on is the...
Absolutely, I was talking more about media coverage than it actually being an issue for the left or right. If anything I think the one thing I can often find common ground with liberals on is the gun debate, because many liberals own guns. Actually, I use labels too often because its easier for discussion, but I should get out of the habit. I have plenty of "liberal" issues that I consider important, even though I wouldn't call myself a liberal.
I'm not even an independent, but an almost always Democrat-voting gun owner. There are no less than ten firearms in my home right now, but that's only because I inherited my father's collection. I...
I'm not even an independent, but an almost always Democrat-voting gun owner. There are no less than ten firearms in my home right now, but that's only because I inherited my father's collection. I have three that are my own purchases. I shoot regularly, but never hunt. I carry daily, but only at my shop, because it's in the ghetto and robberies are common. Just as a bit of perspective.
idk my political position, as I think left/right is a gross simplification of complex issues. However, I despise republicans/conservatives slightly more than democrats, and a typical American...
idk my political position, as I think left/right is a gross simplification of complex issues. However, I despise republicans/conservatives slightly more than democrats, and a typical American would probably call me a leftist (my last vote went to Bernie). That being said, guns, even CCW's, shouldn't be a problem with the proper precautions in place to prevent known criminals/mentally-ill/children to have access. Which requires a massive overhaul of psychiatric help/oversight for people who aren't clearly/publically unstable.
I think a good point to make in relation to this event, is that although there was a hero with a CCW, there was also an enraged, violent person who had access to a gun as well. Very unlikely this was his first fistfight.
Here's the WFTV report and Florida Today's coverage, both of which are sources for the Daily Wire's article. I'm glad to see a "good guy with a gun" actually step up, keep their cool, and return...
I'm glad to see a "good guy with a gun" actually step up, keep their cool, and return fire against the person responsible without harming any bystanders themselves, but I can't help but think that situations like this are anomalous.
I haven't been able to find any sources for the number of crimes prevented or halted by armed citizens that I'm willing to trust, but factcheck.org has interesting articles on the US gun debate as a whole from December 2012 and March 2018.
So a guy at a park loses a fist fight and then returns with a gun and starts firing at, I presume, the victor when children are present. He's a total piece of shit and his death isn't surprising but the title makes it seem like he was targeting children when that is not the case.
Kudos to the CCW bystander.
A fist fight turned into a gun fight and dude lost twice. Definitely a misleading headline.
So this is my first try attempt at posting something here that is a little more "right leaning" after this thread. I think we are all used to seeing the 24/7 news cycle at work when it comes to a mass shooting. No matter what side of the debate you are on, I think it's also nice to see some coverage when a law abiding citizen uses a firearm to protect others instead. This event could have been the next tragedy had it not been for this legally armed citizen and Florida's gun laws.
This article is merely a statement of fact so I'm curious what makes it "right leaning" to you. Also what do you mean when you say "the debate" because that means a lot of different things to a lot of different people. It isn't particularly uniform.
"The debate" likely refers to the gun control controversy.
Yeah but if you ask 10 different people what they think the gun controversy is then you might get 10 different answers. So I was wondering what the OP's thoughts are about it.
Hey, sorry I was trying to keep this topic as non-adversarial as possible to welcome discussion, that was me attempting to focus on the issue of defensive shootings. I probably should have been more clear, but what I meant by debate is "gun control" in the US. As for right leaning, both the source (Daily wire) and the topic at hand (defensive shootings) are typically more conservative and "right leaning". I don't often find coverage outside of right leaning websites covering the thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of gun defense cases each year.
As for my own thoughts, I'm a pretty fervent defender of the second amendment, so to me any laws infringing on American gun owners rights are debatable. However, i'm not an absolutist and I think there is allowance for common sense controls as well. For instance, I don't find it a problem to limit the gun rights of the mentally ill or those who have committed felonies.
I think more often than not most defensive shootings aren't particularly newsworthy just like most offensive shootings aren't either. This one certainly is though, at least to me.
Your comment about limiting (really just stripping) gun rights of felons got me thinking though. It puts a bad taste in my mouth that just because someone is a felon, they could lose even one of their constitutional rights. I don't believe that anybody under any circumstances should lose their rights but the argument that violent felons shouldn't have the right to bear arms is pretty sound. With that being said, I would really just prefer that gun rights not be something granted by the federal government (i.e. the constitution) but rather granted by the states so that no rights granted by the constitution would be able to be taken away. This is just an opinion I have, not something I think is feasible. But again, my views on our constitutional rights are that if any one of them is able to be taken away for any reason, then it shouldn't be considered a right in the first place.
We already disenfranchise convicted felons. Furthermore, we force them to disclose that they had been convicted of crimes after they've served their sentences. We do everything short of forcing them to carry yellow passports that must be produced on demand to identify the bearer as a conflict, and then we have the nerve to be shocked by high recidivism rates.
Oh man, I've written my fair share of papers / speeches about the need for prison reform and other ways to lower recidivism. It's a criminally overlooked issue that's only going to get worse the longer we sit around ignoring it. The push to legalize marijuana is certainly a big help though and I've been seeing more and more mainstream criticism about the war on drugs(minorities) but god damn are we behind when it comes to this shit.
I'm surprised nobody has tried to organize former convicts to demand better treatment and ways to rejoin society as full citizens. I suppose #MyNameIsJeanValjean would be too esoteric a hashtag?
There's just so much stigma attached to these things. I think part of the only reason that the war on drugs is starting to become more and more criticized is not because it's such a fucking catastrophe but that it's a catastrophe which is beginning to affect everybody in some way. Only when the number of convicts and issue of recidivism begins to affect everybody will any movement begin to form.
I really would like to think that the growing outcry against the War on (Some) Drugs is a matter of principle as well, but such idealism is embarrassing at my age. I'm old enough to know better. :)
Also the tragedy could have been avoided if we had stricter gun laws, or better yet, no guns at all. Harder to get guns into the hand of a murderer that way. He wouldn't have been able to go home and get one. We shouldn't be happy that we were lucky enough to have a responsible gun owner there to stop the crazy man with a gun. There should only be one type of gun owner, responsible, and until that can be ensured we will have many more gun murders succeed than are stopped by lucky citizens.
I agree, and it seems obvious as someone outside of America. What's absurd to me is that there's reasonable seeming people in this thread who can't seem to wrap their head around the simple solution. It just goes to show that the problem isn't just about legislating, it's cultural. It's going to take a long time to convince Americans that wanting a weapon of mass murder and claiming it as a right is absurd in the developed world.
Absolutely, I was talking more about media coverage than it actually being an issue for the left or right. If anything I think the one thing I can often find common ground with liberals on is the gun debate, because many liberals own guns. Actually, I use labels too often because its easier for discussion, but I should get out of the habit. I have plenty of "liberal" issues that I consider important, even though I wouldn't call myself a liberal.
I'm not even an independent, but an almost always Democrat-voting gun owner. There are no less than ten firearms in my home right now, but that's only because I inherited my father's collection. I have three that are my own purchases. I shoot regularly, but never hunt. I carry daily, but only at my shop, because it's in the ghetto and robberies are common. Just as a bit of perspective.
idk my political position, as I think left/right is a gross simplification of complex issues. However, I despise republicans/conservatives slightly more than democrats, and a typical American would probably call me a leftist (my last vote went to Bernie). That being said, guns, even CCW's, shouldn't be a problem with the proper precautions in place to prevent known criminals/mentally-ill/children to have access. Which requires a massive overhaul of psychiatric help/oversight for people who aren't clearly/publically unstable.
I think a good point to make in relation to this event, is that although there was a hero with a CCW, there was also an enraged, violent person who had access to a gun as well. Very unlikely this was his first fistfight.
Here's the WFTV report and Florida Today's coverage, both of which are sources for the Daily Wire's article.
I'm glad to see a "good guy with a gun" actually step up, keep their cool, and return fire against the person responsible without harming any bystanders themselves, but I can't help but think that situations like this are anomalous.
I haven't been able to find any sources for the number of crimes prevented or halted by armed citizens that I'm willing to trust, but factcheck.org has interesting articles on the US gun debate as a whole from December 2012 and March 2018.