• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

Mass Shootings and Gun Debate 2018 Thread

We're not aiming for perfection, or an ideal society.

People are scared, and they want to feel protected and safe.

If they thought logically about the latest shootings, and what people truly have at their disposal, it'll be silly that there's just a three day waiting period.

I mean, I know I keep referencing these people, but how many people do a mass murder the day they buy a gun? Someone want to get me some statistics?

I don't think McVeigh blew up the federal building the day he acquired the explosives... Stack III had his plane for well more than just a day before flying it into the IRS building...

I mean why don't we just have a 10 year waiting period, for everything? All 62,709 of my posts wouldn't even be here yet!

Then we'll blame all the 50 year olds for violence, instead of teenagers.

We'll see more shootings in office buildings, instead of schools (the media will force you to watch some violence, somewhere, and it's happening whether or not you're acutely aware of it)...
 
You're not legally allowed to sell guns to someone under 18 at all. So I don't see longer waiting periods helping stop schools shootings.

But as usual, by using my brain in the gun debate whatsoever instead of just doing whatever the first thing my heart tells me to do is clearly overcomplicating things as this threads repeatedly suggested.

I'm sure longer waiting periods are great. Banning scary looking guns are even better. And getting rid of all the automatic weapons in the publics hands that are responsible for approximately none of the gun crime would fix everything.

Because the last thing America needs regarding gun control is someone throwing around useless things like facts or logic or statistics.
 
people who do little or nothing but tell other people how their suggestion is going to do nothing are ten a penny, especially when it comes to the gun discussion :\

alasdair
 
alasdairm said:
people who do little or nothing but tell other people how their suggestion is going to do nothing are ten a penny, especially when it comes to the gun discussion :\

alasdair
Click to expand...

Many suggestions to many problems really will do nothing, or worse than nothing. Especially if it's an uninformed suggestion, illogical, or both.

Speaking for myself, while I've been against lots of suggestions I feel won't work, I've also said what I think would work. A strong licensing system.

It really isn't rocket science go see why longer waiting periods wont stop teenagers from getting hold of guns when they're already not allowed to legally buy them to start with.
 
My immediate knee jerk reaction to the shooting was to speculate on whether an 18 year old should be able to buy a rifle when they cannot buy beer. But the more I learned, that the FBI received multiple tips on the shooter, that the Broward County cops were intimately familiar with the shooter and did not arrest him (or take his guns) when he assaulted his own mother.

Then I realized the system failed; the whole system of background checks is flawed since it did not/would not flag this individual. So I came to my senses and accepted that more gun control would work as well as the law against murder in a gun free zone.
 
Maybe instead of raising the age when you can buy a gun we should lower the age when you can buy alcohol.

Most countries just have it set to 18. I think is "you're kinda an adult at 18 but not quite till 21" thing is bullshit anyway.
 
A friend suggested, 18 may be too young for a gun. With 21 years....you get three years to show society what kind of individual you are, and what potential flaws you may display. An 18 y/o has no time to display this before being sold a weapon. My friend may have a point. Of course you can enlist at 17. Perhaps an exemption for military and law enforcement under 21? I'm on the fence here.
 
Morninggloryseed said:
A friend suggested, 18 may be too young for a gun. With 21 years....you get three years to show society what kind of individual you are, and what potential flaws you may display. An 18 y/o has no time to display this before being sold a weapon. My friend may have a point. Of course you can enlist at 17. Perhaps an exemption for military and law enforcement under 21? I'm on the fence here.
Click to expand...

So... An 18 year old hasn't proven themselves yet to own a gun. But they can be a cop? Wtf..

18 year Olds do all sorts of jobs where they could easily kill people by being irresponsible. Just blanket Banning anyone under 21 is stupid.

What if you're an 18 year old woman and extremely responsible and want a gun to protect yourself? No you can't have one cause the people who made the rules forgot women existed and were just imagining 18 year old male hooligans.

Bullshit.

We do this all the time. We ban things based on our imaginary version of the worst of 18 year old men while ignoring that some 18 year old men are very responsible. And that there an entire other sex that doesn't follow the stereotype at all. But no, we ban it for everyone cause in all honesty, they aren't thinking of women in the slightest when they're coming up with the excuse.

Like putting in strict new rules to get a driver's license ignoring the fact that women are being punished for a male stereotype. And it is a stereotype. Not every 18 year old male is an irresponsible hooligan. It's all bullshit.

At 18 you've had ages 15 16 and 17 to prove yourself.

What happens when you up EVERYTHING to 21 and then we will be saying "well we should make it 25 you haven't proven yourself by 21". The lines are imaginary anyway. It's all part of this social trend of increasing the age at which you're considered an adult. And speaking on behalf of all the people who didn't get to stay with their parents through their entire 20s yet still got constantly assumed to be pretty much still a child, I'm kinda sick of it.

I've been asked at age 22 what my parents think of my decisions. As if it should matter in the slightest. I don't even have 2 parents so the question is already a sore point of assumptions anyway. I'm just sick of it.

18 is the cut off accepted pretty much throughout the world. It's fine. I'm sick of people wanting to meddle with it based on assumptions with absolutely no evidence that it'll improve anything.
 
Last edited:
^^ ^^

Nah, just thinking out loud.

mgs said...

My immediate knee jerk reaction to the shooting was to speculate on whether an 18 year old should be able to buy a rifle when they cannot buy beer. But the more I learned, that the FBI received multiple tips on the shooter, that the Broward County cops were intimately familiar with the shooter and did not arrest him......So I came to my senses and accepted that more gun control would work as well as the law against murder in a gun free zone.
Click to expand...


I am on the fence, leading towards 21 (like with a handgun) but still processing. You have to be 21 around here to buy a hand gun so I really am gonna think this through more.
 
Prosecutors to seek death penalty for Parkland school shooter Nikolas Cruz

Prosecutors will seek the death penalty against Parkland school shooter Nikolas Cruz, the Broward State Attorney?s Office announced Tuesday.

At least one victim?s family said Tuesday that they felt the announcement was premature and they wished prosecutors had spoken with them before making a decision.

?I?m annoyed, I would have loved an opportunity to be heard,? said Fred Guttenberg, whose daughter Jaime, was murdered.

?I wish they would have asked the families what they wanted before they made that announcement,? he said. ?We were under the impression that, after the arraignment on Wednesday, we would have an opportunity to speak with the prosecutors before a decision was made.?

Guttenberg said he spoke with a victim?s advocate within the first week after the murders but thought he would have another opportunity to provide his input.

?At the time, I was leaning towards wanting a trial because I didn?t really know what that meant,? Guttenberg said.

Since then, he said he has learned that it could take 10 years for the case to go to trial, followed by 20 or more years of appeals: ?I?d rather he [Cruz] would go spend the rest of his life general population in a prison, whatever that means for him.?

The decision by prosecutors undermines a defense strategy that would have resolved the case without a trial ? Broward Public Defender Howard Finkelstein and the defense team has offered to have Cruz plead guilty to 17 counts of murder and 17 counts of attempted murder in exchange for a sentence of life in prison.

But the State Attorney?s Office wouldn?t take capital punishment off the table, listing seven ?aggravating factors? that a jury can use to justify ordering Cruz?s execution for the Feb. 14 shooting rampage at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.

Those factors include the ?heinous, atrocious and cruel? nature of the crime, and the ?cold, calculated and premeditated? manner in which it was carried out.

Chief Assistant Public Defender Gordon Weekes said Cruz and his defense team stands by their prior position.

?We are still ready to enter a plea of ?guilty? to several consecutive life sentences, without parole, out of respect for the victims of this tragedy,? Weekes said.
Click to expand...

Thoughts about death penalty in general?

Death penalty in this case?

On the one hand, this kid is really young, and he was obviously failed by a number of people.
OTOH, if there is one case for which the death penalty should be used...

p.s. BLers who are familiar, for whatever reason, with the Florida penal system (I'm 90% sure it's messed up in some special way), does this mean that the kid sits in jail for however long, like 10 years, until trial?
 
Last edited:
For a long time I was in favor of the death penalty. Over the past few years my opinion has changed. I still think some crimes are worthy of death as the punishment, but I don't trust the system nearly enough to support its use in practice. Way to many close calls. To my knowledge the US has never put an innocent man to death as far as anyone knows. I'd prefer it stay that way. And it won't so long as the system is this broken and continues to use it.

As for this case in particular. I agree with you I'm very uncomfortable with the idea of sentencing someone that young to death. I don't think that's appropriate in this instance. In situations like this there are usually lots of mitigating mental health issues going on.

Of course he should spend the rest of his life in jail. But no I'm not OK with them executing him. And the families of the victims should have a say too. It shouldn't be their decision but their wishes should have at least been considered.

Given how high profile the case is, no I don't expect he will go without a trial very long.
 
I didn't say theres no possibility the US has wrongfully executed someone.

I said that there are no known wrongful executions. The reasons for that don't matter. Because I didn't say that it's unlikely that any person has been wrongfully executed on the US. I said there are none on the known record to my knowledge. Now if you find one, please let me know. But I'm not arguing that it might not have already happened, just that none are known.

I know there have been close calls and I said as much in my post. But I like being able to believe that maybe we haven't already made such a horrible mistake as other countries have. And I hope that we never do. Which is why I'm talking about the official record not the possibilities.

So yea, if you find one that's a known wrongful execution let me know but to my knowledge there hasn't been one in the US yet.

Course, unless we fix the system or stop executing people, it's only a matter of time.
 
JessFR said:
I said that there are no known wrongful executions.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. The US has put people to death without a just cause.

Murder/rape convictions likely took place and led to the death penalty for people without DNA proof, as this technology was only recently implemented wide-scale.

Aside from that, the death penalty is utilized in federal cases against people smuggling large quantities of drugs; something I find reprehensible.
 
JessFR said:
For a long time I was in favor of the death penalty. Over the past few years my opinion has changed. I still think some crimes are worthy of death as the punishment, but I don't trust the system nearly enough to support its use in practice. Way to many close calls. To my knowledge the US has never put an innocent man to death as far as anyone knows. I'd prefer it stay that way. And it won't so long as the system is this broken and continues to use it.

As for this case in particular. I agree with you I'm very uncomfortable with the idea of sentencing someone that young to death. I don't think that's appropriate in this instance. In situations like this there are usually lots of mitigating mental health issues going on.

Of course he should spend the rest of his life in jail. But no I'm not OK with them executing him. And the families of the victims should have a say too. It shouldn't be their decision but their wishes should have at least been considered.

Given how high profile the case is, no I don't expect he will go without a trial very long.
Click to expand...

Gracias! I'm happy you posted on this. It's such a shame that it all ends this way. For everyone, including the shooter.
 
Captain.Heroin said:
Incorrect. The US has put people to death without a just cause.

Murder/rape convictions likely took place and led to the death penalty for people without DNA proof, as this technology was only recently implemented wide-scale.

Aside from that, the death penalty is utilized in federal cases against people smuggling large quantities of drugs; something I find reprehensible.
Click to expand...

Again, what I said was that, to my knowledge, there are no known cases of innocent people being executed in the US. If anyone has an example of that, and I do specifically mean an instance where someone was executed who has been exonerated, and not something just "kinda close" , please let me know. But the reason I care as I said before is because I'd like to believe it hasn't already happened. I agree that in truth it probably in fact has, but there's a difference between knowing and justified suspicion.
 
JessFR said:
I said that there are no known wrongful executions.
Click to expand...

and there never will be one because you cant find what you arent willing to look for or admit exists even in the face of irrefutable evidence.

"Courts do not generally entertain claims of innocence when the defendant is dead."
 
tathra said:
and there never will be one because you cant find what you arent willing to look for or admit exists even in the face of irrefutable evidence.

"Courts do not generally entertain claims of innocence when the defendant is dead."
Click to expand...

Bullshit. There are known examples for other countries. If you've got an example, actually present it. One where it's indisputable and not just plausible. Because they exist for other countries.

If there have been so many innocent people executed and this is well established. Finding a single lone example where it's cut and dry and not a maybe shouldn't be hard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top