Jump to content
IGNORED

Another Day In The Neighborhood, Another Mass Shooting


GodsKnickers

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 160
  • Created
  • Last Reply

So their religion was a factor in the shooting? I'll admit that I was hoping (that's probably not the right word to use) that these were just two Muslims who happened to decide to kill people, not people who were killing people in the name of their religion. I'm actually surprised about how little I've seen about these shooters so far compared to last week's mass shooter, but I guess it's still early.

It's depressing how little it shocks me to see stories about mass shootings now. This is just the latest one and will probably soon be eclipsed by another one, as horrible as it is to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was in hollidays and didn't watch the news, until now.

Sad day for your country! I don't know what to say... It's horrible. I've heard it's to soon to know if it's a terrorism attack or not but who cares? I mean, they killed people, human beings who were just enjoying their life. There is no reason to do that. And apparently the suspects had a little girl who is 6 months old... I wonder if they even tought about her future ..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am so sorry @destiny and @bionicmlle. I can't even imagine how it must feel to have your every day life wrecked in this way and find out that people you know have lost their lives. From this far away it seems something alien, so irreal that it was a little shock reading that you are living this hell. It's another reminder that behind the cold news and the numbers there are the lives of real people. I send you hugs and good thoughts. I'd like to do more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hell there are times I'd move to Canada tomorrow if I could and stay up there.  Today is one of those times.  

I have a spare room :content:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are Numb. The collective we. I don't think it really matters where you live it is scary.

So many lives lost, people maimed and families left with everlasting holes.

For what?

When did so many people decide that their lives were just not worth living anymore.

How are we failing as a society to reach out to people, to make the day to day grind not so overwhelming that you are willing to not only murder strangers but you are completely willing to quit living.

So odd when I personally look at the heroic battles I have seen when people fought Cancer with everything they had, just to be able to live for one more week, heck even one more day.

It is not just religion, it Is disenfranchised kids, it is angry broken men, it is zealots, it is the mentally ill, It is people that needed someone to notice them before these types of things happen.

Maybe we cant outlaw guns or have people agree on the nuances of collectively living with differing Spiritual beliefs these things are too big, maybe we can just look around us at the people in our little corners of the world and reach out, maybe we can just be that one thing in someone's life that makes life worth living.

Something has to change, and waiting for someone to legislate decency is futile. So maybe it is time for  groundswell of support and change.

I really hope that something will work, it seems no one has the answer so while we wait for the great minds to fix this, we need to start returning to a sense of inclusive society, it is time to really mean and live the saying Every Life Matters

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The victims' names have been released (warning, video starts playing automatically): http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/03/us/san-bernardino-shootings-victims/index.html Two people are still in critical condition.

• Shannon Johnson, 45, Los Angeles.

• Bennetta Bet-Badal, 46, Rialto.

• Aurora Godoy, 26, San Jacinto.

• Isaac Amanios, 60, Fontana.

• Larry Kaufman, 42, Rialto.

• Harry Bowman, 46, Upland.

• Yvette Velasco, 27, Fontana.

• Sierra Clayborn, 27, Moreno Valley.

• Robert Adams, 40, Yucaipa.

• Nicholas Thalasinos, 52, Colton.

• Tin Nguyen, 31, Santa Ana.

• Juan Espinoza, 50, Highland.

• Damian Meins, 58, Riverside.

• Michael Wetzel, 37, Lake Arrowhead.

...all lost their lives yesterday.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

May they rest in peace. And may they be the last victims of senseless violence and hatred. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a really sad story about the boyfriend of one of the victims who kept getting conflicting reports and wasn't able to find out for 22 hours what really happened to his boyfriend. http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-san-bernardino-daniel-kaufman-boyfriend-20151203-story.html I can't even imagine what an emotional rollercoaster that would be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So their religion was a factor in the shooting? I'll admit that I was hoping (that's probably not the right word to use) that these were just two Muslims who happened to decide to kill people, not people who were killing people in the name of their religion. I'm actually surprised about how little I've seen about these shooters so far compared to last week's mass shooter, but I guess it's still early.

It's depressing how little it shocks me to see stories about mass shootings now. This is just the latest one and will probably soon be eclipsed by another one, as horrible as it is to say.

The bolded: That is a sad, sad sentence.

I'm not American, so I have no idea what the answer is, but I do know our gun laws and way of doing things just wouldn't work over there. There are too many people with a totally different mindset to most Australians. I feel so much for you all, having your own countrymen waging war on other countrymen. It's got to be terrifying and heart breaking.

When the new broke yesterday, we just shook our heads in disbelief and wondered what has to change to stop the madness.

My thoughts are also with the families of the victims and may those people who lost their lives rest in peace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

   Innocent people are dying and the only thing some people care about is their precious guns.  We need to shut down the NRA and confront the members of Congress enabling domestic terrorists. Prayers and thoughts for every tragedy is getting old. Congress do your damn job

Link to comment
Share on other sites

   Innocent people are dying and the only thing some people care about is their precious guns.  We need to shut down the NRA and confront the members of Congress enabling domestic terrorists. Prayers and thoughts for every tragedy is getting old. Congress do your damn job

yes. We are numb, yet go about our jobs skillfully, decisively, carefully and professionally. Wake the FUCK UP, CONGRESS. I have to do it, you should, too. 

#makelovenotguns

:PLEURE:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm for better gun control to a point.  My MIL has a concealed carry, but she's also a former cop.  After someone in hubby's family got into major trouble with the drug scene and we believe tried to break into OUR house (the window in our children's room nonetheless!), I told Hubby I was taking a CC class.  A small 9 mil for protection, fine.  Certain types of rifles for hunting, ok.  But there is no way in hell a civilian should be able to buy an AR-15 or any sort of "tactical" gun for $1,900 at their local sporting goods store. There's NO reasonable explanation why your average Joe Citizen needs one with a scope and the capability of killing large numbers of people in a matter of seconds. Those types of weapons need to be exclusive to our military and that's IT.  Not to say people won't still find a way to get them illegally if they really wanted them, but it should not be as easy as a 3 day wait and a half-assed background check that you can pass even if you're on a police or government "watch" list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I heard the news, the first thing I thought, honestly, was "fuck it". I'm tired of the same old "we need to do something! ...nah, let's just wait until it happens again in like two weeks when someone else decides that for whatever reason, the solution to their problems is to mow down people with a semiautomatic rifle." Just...fuck it. This is just how it's going to be now. We're just going to let more and more innocent people die because a law that was relevant and made sense in 1787 is more sacred than human life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will admit that I know next to nothing about what it would look like to get that part of the Constitution overturned. Is that even possible? I know this is a "Worst American Ever" question, but is this something that's in the realm of possibility- however remotely- if it becomes apparent that's what the nation's citizens want?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sensible gun control should begin with all military forces of every country melting down their weapons and going back to swords. Then the 2nd amendment would truly be irrelevant to guns. The militia reference isn't about hunting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  The terrorists have won. No, not the extremist groups originating from the Middle East. The predominantly white far-right terrorists who, fueled by the rhetoric of borderline fascist politicians, spouted their sexist views constantly waiting for this very day. I still can't believe these idiots actually have time to cut funding to PP which Obama will veto, but no time spent on gun control?  We're offer our thoughts and prayers. No do something.  Let's defund Congress.  Three gun-related amendments to the Obamacare repeal bill failed in the Senate today. Each measure needed 60 votes to pass and could did not reach that threshold. One amendment addressed mental health, a second would have allowed the attorney general to stop people on the terror watch list from passing a background check, and a third would expand background checks at gun shows and in online sales. The Senate is voting on an Obamacare repeal package that includes s provision blocking federal funding for Planned Parenthood. Senate Democrats had planned to offer a gun-control amendment to the bill after the shooting at a Colorado Springs, Colo. So in other words fuck every victim of gun tragedy.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's always a lot of blaming these events on mental health, which I know people complain about but I would be okay with it if it actually led to increased funds for mental health treatment. Instead, though, I think it's just an excuse to avoid talking about guns and none of the people blaming the mentally ill actually intend to do anything about it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some very interesting points on the correlation between gun ownership and suicide, as well as comparative statistics state to state.

www.vox.com/2015/8/24/9183525/gun-violence-statistics

One statistic was that guns have killed more people in 12 years than AIDS, war and drug overdoses combined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a quick note to say that nothing in the Constitution would need to be overturned or amended and ratified in order to implement better gun control.  My tone in this is perhaps not great, though it just may be more effective than a 100% civil and polite tone when addressing this issue.  My tone is not at all directed at FF who asked about overturning the Second Amendment or any other member of FJ.  (FF - as you know, the Second would need to be dealt with to enact certain types of laws and the steps necessary are clearly outlined.  Discussion of that might make an interesting thread). 

As an example of what I am talking about, consider the First Amendment.  

From the actual First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

So, Congress can't pass laws that prohibit free exercise of religion, right?  Right - except when they can. And trust me, they can.  Now, people (general people, not directed at anyone here) can flip their shit and start yelling and screaming and stamping their feet when I say that, but it remains true and we all know it.  In fact, way, way back in time everyone knew this to be true.  So, if your religion says you must sacrifice a virgin before sundown on the summer solstice, Congress can pass a law prohibiting that.  And if your religion says you can and should have multiple wives (or husbands) at the same time, Congress can pass a law prohibiting that.  Similarly, if your religion says you must beat your baby with plumbing line, Congress can pass a law prohibiting that.  And if your religion says you must refuse service to all but white men (preferably "good Christian" ones), Congress can and will pass a law against that too.

Now, does that mean that the First Amendment is just meaningless?  Of course not.  What it means is that things are not black and white and not absolute.  Here is an early quote from SCOTUS discussing what the First Amendment meant and means and how it will be dealt with: "In the preamble of this act [. . .] religious freedom is defined; and after a recital 'that to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion, and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency, is a dangerous fallacy which at once destroys all religious liberty,' it is declared 'that it is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government for its officers to interfere [only] when [religious] principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order.' In these two sentences is found the true distinction between what properly belongs to the church and what to the State."

Of course, lots has happened since that was written in 1878 when the law banning polygamy was challenged and upheld by SCOTUS, but we all know that there is no unfettered blanket right to freely exercise your religion in whatever manner you so choose.  Constitutional Law is largely about balancing various rights and that applies to  the Second Amendment just as much as the First.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No offense taken, @Woosh...in fact that's just what I was hoping someone would say. That's kind of what I was thinking when I asked the question, so I appreciate your answer. I feel that the way it is being applied now is far too carte blanche when restrictions are very reasonable and acceptable within the precedents we've had before- as you mentioned. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish people would talk more about suicide when it comes to gun ownership. If someone is suicidal they are more likely to end up dead if they have access to a gun than if they don't. I've seen a lot of people say otherwise, claiming if you take one means away that a suicidal person will just find another way of ending their life, but that's just not true. Many studies have shown that removing access to one means of suicide (like putting a net on a bridge that gets a lot of jumpers) reduces the suicide rate overall. 

With gun suicides a lot of them are men who acted on impulse and if they hadn't had such a lethal method available it is possible, even likely that the impulse enough have subsided and they would have survived. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.