El Paso Shooting

[Stoked]

I love all the comments about how it's "simple" and "not hard". Then why do we still have mass shootings? Those kinds of comments make me lol. So naive.

It’s quite complex. Especially with over a dozen SC decisions touching on guns. It’ll most likely require a constitutional convention.

And that is a huge Pandora’s box. And any decision or compromised reached will likely be rejected by millions of people.

 

[Archie Moses]

Btw, call me crazy, but I think if a mass killer is caught alive, they should be tortured to death. I know it sounds inhumane, and it is, but I got to imagine this would persaud some of the shooters from doing (not all are suicidal.)

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

Btw, call me crazy, but I think if a mass killer is caught alive, they should be tortured to death. I know it sounds inhumane, and it is, but I got to imagine this would persaud some of the shooters from doing (not all are suicidal.)

In a mass-shooting scenario, whatever law enforcement is on site or can be scrambled, will have weapons drawn. It's pretty suicidal. I'm surprised that the shooters in El Paso weren't taken out, to be honest.

 

[Archie Moses]

Because it is against a SC decision. And not a 5-4 one. It’s already been tried and rejected as against the constitution.

Haynes v US, 7-1 against.

That's what I'm saying should change. I'm not arguing they would. I'm arguing they should if that makes sense.

 

[Archie Moses]

In a mass-shooting scenario, whatever law enforcement is on site or can be scrambled, will have weapons drawn. It's pretty suicidal. I'm surprised that the shooters in El Paso weren't taken out, to be honest.

Me too. Does anyone have info on how he was caught?

 

[fishonjazz]

I love all the comments about how it's "simple" and "not hard". Then why do we still have mass shootings? Those kinds of comments make me lol. So naive.

Cause the NRA is rich and powerful and cause people love their guns and cause politics.

No one is saying the answers are easy to put in place, just that the answer itself is easy. The plan is easy. Implementing the plan is hard. Being hard doesn't mean shouldn't try though imo

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[Zombie]

In a mass-shooting scenario, whatever law enforcement is on site or can be scrambled, will have weapons drawn. It's pretty suicidal. I'm surprised that the shooters in El Paso weren't taken out, to be honest.

It's not surprising at all, once you remember the shooter was white.

 

[Stoked]

That's what I'm saying should change. I'm not arguing they would. I'm arguing they should if that makes sense.

I understand. And the way to do that is changing the constitution. Not passing a registration law.

 

[Stoked]

It's not surprising at all, once you remember the shooter was white.

Shooter in Dayton was and he was white.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

It's not surprising at all, once you remember the shooter was white.

The kid at the Garlic Festival in California was taken out. In a scenario like that, every moment the police allow the shooter(s) to live gives the shooter an opportunity to kill someone else. Everyone is in immediate danger. It might be normal to tell an armed assailant to surrender, lay down their weapon, get on the ground, etc., but once shots are fired, I think the game changes.

I'd also like to hear how these shooters were captured.

 

[Stoked]

The kid at the Garlic Festival in California was taken out. In a scenario like that, every moment the police allow the shooter(s) to live gives the shooter an opportunity to kill someone else. Everyone is in immediate danger. It might be normal to tell an armed assailant to surrender, lay down their weapon, get on the ground, etc., but once shots are fired, I think the game changes.

I'd also like to hear how these shooters were captured.

Same. But I agree. In scenarios like that shoot first.

 

[Stoked]

Just saw that El Paso is being treated as domestic terrorism. You can drop domestic imo. But, ****ing finally!

 

[Gameface]

But why punish all video game owners? You think you can ban all video games? There’s so many out there already!

I got backups of my backups.

 

[Gameface]

So do nothing. How has that worked?

I never said do nothing. I haven't posted much detail in this thread but I have posted my ideas on jazzfanz dozens of times.

 

[Gameface]

So, following this logic, we should make fully automatic machine guns fully legal.

Nope, that's not following that logic at all.

 

[Zombie]

Because it is against a SC decision. And not a 5-4 one. It’s already been tried and rejected as against the constitution.

Haynes v US, 7-1 against.

The Haynes decision is an interesting one because it essentially makes the case that the federal registry as it existed then could lead to self incrimination of criminals who owned firearms which they legally unable to own. Thus they couldn't register them without incriminating themselves.

There's a legal argument underpinning this that as a nonlawyer I'm not sure I understand, but I'll try to explain. Basically they held that the gun registration was directed at a "highly selective group inherently suspect of criminal activity" and concerned with "an area permeated with criminal statutes" where registration might form a "link on the chain of evidence" used to convict the registrant of a crime. This was the same argument outlawing registration of communists for example.

Now, I believe there are ways around this such that a federal gun registration program be made constitutional. If you write it so it applies to the general populace, and let's say enacts a tax on all firearms purchased, the registry would act as a regulatory device to ensure compliance to that tax. In the same way that vehicle registration, or even simply filing one's taxes, doesn't fall afoul of the fifth amendment, a gun registry wouldn't either.

Here's a link the PDF which explains this, hopefully better than I did.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...Vaw2EhirpRuM9OKTjhCgf_0dw&cshid=1564949518537

 

[Zombie]

The kid at the Garlic Festival in California was taken out. In a scenario like that, every moment the police allow the shooter(s) to live gives the shooter an opportunity to kill someone else. Everyone is in immediate danger. It might be normal to tell an armed assailant to surrender, lay down their weapon, get on the ground, etc., but once shots are fired, I think the game changes.

I'd also like to hear how these shooters were captured.

I was mostly being facetious, unlike (nonsuicide) bombers mass shooters definitely don't expect to make it out alive. The same depression that leads them to take on such a disgusting world view probably leads them to suicidal thoughts, so why not take out as many of those they hate while they're at it.

I don't know if the shooter gave himself up in El Paso, or if the crowds of people surrounding the shooter made it more difficult to simply take the shooter out. I'm sure each situation is a little different in that regard.

 

[Stoked]

The Haynes decision is an interesting one because it essentially makes the case that the federal registry as it existed then could lead to self incrimination of criminals who owned firearms which they legally unable to own. Thus they couldn't register them without incriminating themselves.

There's a legal argument underpinning this that as a nonlawyer I'm not sure I understand, but I'll try to explain. Basically they held that the gun registration was directed at a "highly selective group inherently suspect of criminal activity" and concerned with "an area permeated with criminal statutes" where registration might form a "link on the chain of evidence" used to convict the registrant of a crime. This was the same argument outlawing registration of communists for example.

Now, I believe there are ways around this such that a federal gun registration program be made constitutional. If you write it so it applies to the general populace, and let's say enacts a tax on all firearms purchased, the registry would act as a regulatory device to ensure compliance to that tax. In the same way that vehicle registration, or even simply filing one's taxes, doesn't fall afoul of the fifth amendment, a gun registry wouldn't either.

Here's a link the PDF which explains this, hopefully better than I did.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2233&context=dlj&ved=2ahUKEwiBmMa9gurjAhUBuZ4KHYkuDx8QFjAPegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw2EhirpRuM9OKTjhCgf_0dw&cshid=1564949518537

I’m certainly no lawyer. And it’s entirely possible I’m misunderstanding the decision in this case.

 

[Zombie]

But why punish all video game owners? You think you can ban all video games? There’s so many out there already!

And of course, the United States is the only country with violent video games. What a ****ing stupid argument.

 

[Jazzta]

I’m all for mental background checks in order to buy any kind of firearm, if the same applies to people that attempt to hold positions of power.