Shooting in Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas

Oh the irony of it all! :duh:
So old 45 thinks that it's not a gun issue at all but a mental health issue. And this wise pronouncement is coming from a so-called 'whirled' leader whose mental health seems to be in question according to many professionals but who still has access to nukes! :yikes:
 
Last edited:
twinsissv said:
Oh the irony of it all! :duh:
So old 45 thinks that it's not a gun issue at all but a mental health issue. And this wise pronouncement is coming from a so-called 'whirled' leader whose mental health seems to be in question according to many professionals but who still has access to nukes! :yikes:
Click to expand...
yeah right..... "in question" by the Left for their own convenience. and if i say to you "you're crazy for thinking that 45th is crazy" would my opinion be just as valid as yours?... :lol:
 
jeffisjeff said:
I agree. Stuff like this, for example, on social media is a big part of the problem:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK_jkPhrddc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGa-GoILV9Y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M48oa1ZkUBY

and

https://www.fsuniverse.net/forum/th...land-springs-texas.102226/page-3#post-5176682
Click to expand...
What this woman in the first 3 videos objects to is correct! This should be a public message on mass media. I am glad someone is speaking out finally. Left's behavior and messages are criminal and dangerous.
 
Argh. There is that semi bogus statistic again. More Americans have died as a result of gun violence than members of the military have died in all those wars. They always leave the members in the military part out.
 
snoopy said:
Argh. There is that semi bogus statistic again. More Americans have died as a result of gun violence than members of the military have died in all those wars. They always leave the members in the military part out.
Click to expand...
I don't think they were leaving that out, I think they're including deaths of Americans in war zones who were not members of the military. For example, in Iraq and Afghanistan civilians, aid-workers, journalists, members of other agencies in the government like the CIA, who are not members of the military. I also wonder how the statistics would compare if we were to just look at members of the military killed during deployments versus members of the military who have died as a result of guns while at home. I know that the suicide rate for veterans is very high.
 
AxelAnnie said:
I have a slightly different take. Look at all the violence in movies and tv. Shoot I walked into my daughter's home to babysit....this is my anti-violence, no guns daughter . Her two boys were watching Clone Wars........ever heard of it. I have never seen such mayhem and death packed into 30 minutes.

Also, the proliferation of social media has allowed people to bully, demean, etc., invisibly, without taking any responsibility for the damage their posts create. It is perfect, they can say horrid things, start awful rumors without even seeing the look on the face of the person they are hurting.
Click to expand...

Bullshit. Every other developed country has violent films, video games and social media, but none has the same incidence of mass murders as the U.S. Next.
 
They are not. I looked into it. It is members of the military only.

skatingguy said:
I don't think they were leaving that out, I think they're including deaths of Americans in war zones who were not members of the military. For example, in Iraq and Afghanistan civilians, aid-workers, journalists, members of other agencies in the government like the CIA, who are not members of the military. I also wonder how the statistics would compare if we were to just look at members of the military killed during deployments versus members of the military who have died as a result of guns while at home. I know that the suicide rate for veterans is very high.
Click to expand...
 
I think the situation is clear. Certain people have determined that the slaughter of innocents is perfectly acceptable as long as they get to keep their guns.

Habs said:
I get what you're saying. I honestly do. But, terrorism is generally classified as something that is politically motivated. This appears to be a guy who just wanted to kill people. Hence, mass shooting, not terrorism.
Click to expand...

If domestic violence is an issue, are we suggesting he did not do it to terrorise his ex-wife and her family? Are we suggesting he did not intend to inflict terror upon the people in that church?

If domestic violence is an issue, is that not in itself political? Some man who thinks he should have all the power and is making a statement by shooting people?

If a Muslim had shot up a church, for no other reasons than what had been presented about this guy, it would be called a terrorist attack. It's time to stop pussyfooting around this.

allezfred said:
Australia had a gun amnesty where the government bought back the guns. Maybe money might talk? :bribe:
Click to expand...

Yep. We just finished another amnesty a month ago too. No money involved this time, it was just a "hand over your guns, no questions asked". You took your guns into the station and they didn't ask how you got it, when, why, etc, they just took it.

BlueRidge said:
I don't think Australia faced the political/cultural factors involved with the proliferation of guns in the US.
Click to expand...

No, true. We had a leader with balls. We had an opposition leader with enough moral fortitude to realise that the lives of Australians were not political playthings. And we had a populace with a brain who went "oh my goodness all those poor innocent people dead we have to do something to stop this" and hey presto! No mass shootings for 20 years and counting.

AxelAnnie said:
I have a slightly different take. Look at all the violence in movies and tv. Shoot I walked into my daughter's home to babysit....this is my anti-violence, no guns daughter . Her two boys were watching Clone Wars........ever heard of it. I have never seen such mayhem and death packed into 30 minutes.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I've heard of Clone Wars. It's on TV here too. In the kids' slot. In the afternoon. On ABC where most of the kids' shows are. Lots of kids watch it and like it.

So as allezfred said: bullshit.
 
misskarne said:
No, true. We had a leader with balls. We had an opposition leader with enough moral fortitude to realise that the lives of Australians were not political playthings. And we had a populace with a brain who went "oh my goodness all those poor innocent people dead we have to do something to stop this" and hey presto! No mass shootings for 20 years and counting.
Click to expand...

In other words, if Americans just had brains we'd solve the problem today.

Good to know that's how you feel. Since you are so smart and care so much why don't you move the US and solve the problem for us?
 
skatesindreams said:
According to reports, the assailant wanted to kill everyone in the church.
He was an avowed atheist, with a hatred of religion.
http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2017/1...ists/victims-heroes-of-texas-church-shooting/
Click to expand...
Well he wanted kill his mother-in-law, who attended this church, but she wasn't not there. He did kill his wife's grandmother, Lula White. It seems that the motive in this shooting was related to the domestic violence case against him for abusing his wife and step-child, though it's not clear to me whether he and his wife still together. This is speculation on my part, but I wonder whether he thought if he got rid of the mother-in-law he could get back together with the wife, or prevent her from leaving.
 
Tinami Amori said:
yeah right..... "in question" by the Left for their own convenience. and if i say to you "you're crazy for thinking that 45th is crazy" would my opinion be just as valid as yours?... :lol:
Click to expand...
I've just noticed you made a similar comment to me in the previous shooting thread. I figured I might as well reply here since one active shooting thread at a time is more than enough.

Actually, your post says a lot more about yourself than it says about me. I'm not American and I don't care enough about American politics to be glued all day long to the media to get all the details. I started seeing similarities between Trump's behavior and that of someone else I've encountered in the past at some point during the race in between Republican candidates, to the point that I soon became able to predict how Trump would react to certain events. It was only close to the election last year that I googled Trump to find out if I had been the only one to notice that, and obviously I wasn't. ;)

My heart goes out to the victims and the many Americans who wish for a change in culture. But at the end of the day, Tinami Amori, I'm really glad for the healthcare and security we enjoy here, and as long as Americans don't cross the border with their guns to start killing Canadians, it is not really my problem and I'm glad it isn't as I'd be completely discouraged. There is no point for me in going to the US as a tourist since the culture at the moment isn't appealing at all to me, not to mention that the security issue is not completely a theoretical one: I have stood in the US on a street corner where someone was shot at the same time of the day 10 days later, and I know personally someone who was simply taking a trip to celebrate graduation and who was randomly stabbed in front of their hotel by someone who had serious mental issue (and the healthcare system being what it is, well...).
 
BlueRidge said:
I don't think Australia faced the political/cultural factors involved with the proliferation of guns in the US.
Click to expand...
We are closer to Switzerland in our gun culture. I think we should look to them as a model and not Australia.

misskarne said:
So as allezfred said: bullshit.
Click to expand...
What's bullshit is your insistence that every mass shooting is a terrorist attack. These words have official and accepted definition (which are not identical but overlap considerably). You don't get to make up your own definition and then flog people for refusing to use it.

It's is quite possible to address our gun problem without pretending every mass shooting is motivated by terrorism. In fact, I would argue that you can't solve a problem that you can't define so it's very important to understand each type of mass shooting so we can figure out how to solve that kind.
 
Texas church gunman escaped from mental health facility in 2012 after threatening superiors

This is still about guns, but its about how on earth someone with this guy's record could have purchased guns, or obtained them illegally if he had.

One of the efforts of "gun safety" advocates that is to say those hateful liberal gun control people, is to prevent people like this guy from obtaining guns. But its incredibly hard to do that because every time an effort is made the NRA et al runs out the "they are trying to take away your guns" lies and we're stuck where we are.

This mass shooting did not have to happen even with almost no restrictions of gun ownership in the US.
 
snoopy said:
The Air Force screwed up - they should have tagged him as ineligible to buy a gun on some NCIC list but they did not. That is where it went wrong.
Click to expand...
And, shame on them. I think, though that it went wrong in a lot of places.

The guy was, obviously mentally ill, and dangerous. He legally purchased the guns.
Texas church shooter Devin Kelley escaped from a psychiatric hospital five years before carrying out the worst mass killing in Texas history, according to a police report released on Tuesday.

The report stated that El Paso police were advised Kelley, then 21, was a danger to himself and others as he had been caught smuggling firearms onto Holloman Air Base in New Mexico and was trying to carry out death threats against military superiors.
Click to expand...

Bad guys who are dangerous and want guns are going to get guns. Period. Or Bombs, Or Cars and trucks...........You cannot stop them. They are bad guys. They are not predisposed to follow the rules.
.
It used to be that in this country we (the law abiding people) were empowered to put dangerous, mentally ill people into mental facilities where they could not get out, and not hurt others.

So, what we have now is the "rights" of a dangerous mentally ill person are being protected over the rights of law abiding citizens. The bad guys need to be off the streets. Medical professionals are restrained from alerting authorities unless they know of an imminent threat. So a person can be dangerous, psychotic, talk about killing, maiming, ets., but the professional is not allowed to contact authorities unless he says he is going to do all that on Tuesday at 10.

It is backward and crazy.
 
AxelAnnie said:
.
It used to be that in this country we (the law abiding people) were empowered to put dangerous, mentally ill people into mental facilities where they could not get out, and not hurt others.

So, what we have now is the "rights" of a dangerous mentally ill person are being protected over the rights of law abiding citizens. The bad guys need to be off the streets.
Click to expand...

Well, ma'am, where the hell exactly do you intend to put them?? You DO realize, right, that we don't have adequate mental health facilities and treatment centers (both in-patient and out) already? And that a large portion of seriously mentally ill people don't have adequate insurance? And that our country's current leader is trying to cut even those medical services due to lack of insurance and medical treatment benefits?

Do you know how many inpatient psychiatric beds the northern part of my state of Nevada has for uninsured/underinsured patients? 20. 20 beds for a population of 1 million, of all of Nevada north of Clark County. There are I think 3 or 4 other inpatient treatment centers of 20-30 beds each as well, but only for people with medical insurance (and trust me, it had better be the right insurance; unlike acute care hospitals, those facilities are allowed to decline patient admissions due to lack of insurance).

So where exactly are we going to put these mentally ill people? Please illuminate me.

Oh yeah, and it's not a weapons problem..... :rolleyes:
 
Kasey said:
Well, ma'am, where the hell exactly do you intend to put them?? You DO realize, right, that we don't have adequate mental health facilities and treatment centers (both in-patient and out) already? And that a large portion of seriously mentally ill people don't have adequate insurance? And that our country's current leader is trying to cut even those medical services due to lack of insurance and medical treatment benefits?

Do you know how many inpatient psychiatric beds the northern part of my state of Nevada has for uninsured/underinsured patients? 20. 20 beds for a population of 1 million, of all of Nevada north of Clark County. There are I think 3 or 4 other inpatient treatment centers of 20-30 beds each as well, but only for people with medical insurance (and trust me, it had better be the right insurance; unlike acute care hospitals, those facilities are allowed to decline patient admissions due to lack of insurance).

So where exactly are we going to put these mentally ill people? Please illuminate me.

Oh yeah, and it's not a weapons problem..... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

You put dangerous and insane people in the mental facilities that should have been budgeted for and built before we decided to no longer properly care for that segment of society.

It is not a health insurance issue. It is a public safety issue.

And, it is not a gun issue. Or a car issue. Or a bomb issue.
 
mikey said:
But maybe, just maybe, we could make the tiniest dent in that by trying to make guns a little less available. Like the rest of the world does. But no, we'd rather hide behind the 2nd amendment because, well, we're 'Merican...
Click to expand...

Where would you recommend we start? Who would you prohibit, and how, and why?
I would start by eliminating all Semi and Automatic long guns and ammunition. Period. Of course, there will always be a black market, but it is a start.

I would also standardize the gun purchasing background checks. You can't convince me that with all the technology we have available there cannot be ONE database that is accurately updated. Gun Shows would also have to do the checks.

All that is fine with me.

Where we differ is that I don't think the laws are going to keep a maniac who is bent on destruction from finding the tools he needs to do what he wants.
 
It's worth remembering that those who are severely and persistently mentally ill are far more likely to be victims of violence than to cause it. It's also worth remembering the horrors that people who are mentally ill or developmentally disabled faced in institutions, and that it's one of the reasons we stopped that as a society.

Which isn't to say that there aren't issues with getting mental health care - there are many, and the so called community care that was supposed to replace institutionalization never happened.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Sylvia
Major earthquake in Taiwan (and a 4.8 temblor in New Jersey)
Replies
4
Views
1K
Sylvia
Sylvia
V
Shooting on the campus of Michigan State University.
Replies
6
Views
1K
Winnipeg
W
Karen-W
US Ice Dance 2024-25 News & Updates
26 27 28
Replies
816
Views
178K
YukiNieve
YukiNieve
I
R. Kelly found guilty of all federal charges
Replies
7
Views
1K
PeterG
PeterG
I
Dustin Diamond (Saved By The Bell) has passed away
Replies
2
Views
1K
miffy
miffy
Back
Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information