School shooting gun control.

short answer, don't give any dysphoric person a gun.

I watched documentary UK crimes Prime vid last night.

The first one was a woman, --all good in school etc-- who at 14 got together with boyfriend 5 years older and left home. Parents tried to keep them apart cause they didnt like the boy at all.

So girl leaves home with the boyfriend at 14 and the parents dont hear from here again for 10 years, until they see her being booked in for 14 murder spree over time with a huge!!! --short sword--. Totally psychotic individual and on hard drugs etc. She had 6' 2" boy friend who drove her around town to witness her walk over to strange men walking their dogs, and stab only men, many times.

This is out in aytime public areas and the end of her killing spree, when there car was identified. On camera getting booked in station, she is laughing and attempting to make fun of the arresting police officer. So brain all there, but empathy centers shut off, and as stated above, total psychotic killer mentality.

I could not finnish the program. My brain was very tired. No plans to watch any more of that doc. series.

And China has fewer gun killings or trans population.

the whole world will need to learn 

I want to see the day you achieve the collection of 8B people together who all think alike. That's Marxist nonsense, by the way, but whatever floats your boat.

Vance will release the Epstein files because he is not in them.

I want to see the day you achieve the collection of 8B people together who all think alike. That's Marxist nonsense, by the way, but whatever floats your boat.

If you can say President Vance with a straight face, that's fine, the whole world will laugh at you too.

Better to laugh than to cry.

What is stopping Minneapolis from passing gun control laws so that mentally ill or trans people won't be able to legally buy guns and kill your kids?

The right wing fixation over the fact that the shooter was trans is just the latest demonstration of the overt bigotry that binds this party together.

The overwhelming majority of these shooters are straight white males, yet none of these people ever thought to draw that connection. I would talk more about the hypocrisy but that's pointless, hypocrisy is only an insult when the goal is to be taken seriously, that's clearly not the case here.

Because, so I hear, and, owning guns myself, I am witness to the fact that a gun, without the assist of a human brain and a hand, is a mere unused tool a bit like a spoon. Ban the people if you want to ban something.

And yet, somehow, I suspect you wouldn't hand that gun to your toddler and let them play with it like they would a spoon. I wonder why.

I've just concluded that in a free society, their are bad behavors, and, unfortunately, successful legislating of human behavior is not possible.

So let inmates carry a gun too. After all it's the person, not the tool, that matters right? Can't control their behavior, bad people are gana be bad regardless...

Amd if you cannot say some words with straight face regardless what you think of them, it's poker time!

I suspect you wouldn't hand that gun to your toddler

Siome tools are strictly for adults and belong in a safe. I know the difference; keep wondering.

So your white wing wants to legally arm trans or dysphoric people because they hate them?

"mentally ill and trans"

Pairing these two together makes barely any sense if you ask me.

 he “was tired of being trans” and wished he “never brain-washed” himself

https://nypost.com/2025/08/28/us-news/minneapolis-school-shooter-robin-westman-confessed-he-was-tired-of-being-trans/

Clearly, this guy believed trans and mental illness was the catalyst.

Maybe it’s time to have an honest discussion about the mental heath issues affecting kids wishing to transition. Taboo among those who are wrong about most everything but nevertheless needs to be talked about.

Siome tools are strictly for adults and belong in a safe.

Why? It's not the tool, it's the person, right? Why lock up a spoon?

So your white wing wants to legally arm trans or dysphoric people because they hate them?

Yeah, that's exactly the meaningless irrelevant babble I was expecting.

The point of the spoon is that when you ban guns, might as well ban spoons, as well, because sooner or later, your penchent to ban will need to go there. I'm saying it's the wrong approach. The approach is that legislating human behavior and thinking you have solved the problem by a ban with even 30% success, is as short-sighted as you think I am. That's democracy for you. If is was easy, everyone would do it. It's the toughest government style there is, but also the best.

Limiting possession of gun will cut the rate of killing even though it won’t reduce the number in mental illness.

When a product is is being misused and that misuse is causing harm, we ban or regulate the usage of that product. That is common sense and it's the logic we apply to every product on earth... except guns. Suddenly, when we're talking about guns, the same logic no longer applies. Now we have to go with an entirely different logic that we wouldn't apply anywhere else in life.

This is not about legislating human behavior, it's about a simple recognition that when you have a dangerous individual, handing them a tool literally designed to kill people will make them more dangerous, which will result in more harm. It's simple math and statistics. There is a reason stadiums sell you a beer in a bottle but take the cap. If someone wants to throw something they still can, but you'll have far less incidents than if you left the cap on.

Bottom line; restricting gun access makes guns harder to get, which means it'll be less likely that the next aspiring harm doer will be equipped to inflict maximum damage, which will translate into less deaths. You can care about that result or not, you can argue the freedom to own a gun outweighs the lives lost, but don't sit here and pretend it doesn't matter whether someone is walking around with a gun or a spoon. It does, and if someone wished you harm you would certainly care which one they were holding.

Limiting possession of gun

Show me how. Show me credible evidence by by a credible source.

When a product is is being misused and that misuse is causing harm, we ban or regulate the usage of that product.

When product that is not intended to be a potentially lethal weapon in the first place, sure. Where products that ended up being a choking habit for very young children who would put then in their mouths, sure, you're right, but that is not a universal application. And we have discovered drugs that cause injury and death and they were taken off the market, yes. But again, there intent was not to harm of kill. A gun is, yet tree great majorotry of people who use them know to handle and use them with caution, and yet you're going to take their 2A right away for a the mismanagement of a few? Shall we delete the 4A, or 5A so that they are banned for all to use? Hell, take the 1A, too. RThat's where you're going, my friend.

Why should I reply to a post you say is offensive? Nope. Stop the petulance.

People say that school shooters often target their bullies. Why not arm and train the bullies then? Have each school have a bully militia, to keep the peace and nip any school shooters coming after them in the bud?

@ebuc #31

It's an oddity, I think people could be 'far more dangerous without guns than with guns,

But crazy people are generally too mad to plan murder rationally. . . Well, 'most of the time sane people 'aren't murdering others. In 'current America.

The oddity is that crazy people are more dangerous with guns, even though I think other means are more dangerous. The insane are less able to utilize said other means.

'Might have been less that 14 with a sword, unsure if the same person though.

Peterborough ditch murders - Wikipedia

. . .

@fauxlaw #17

"The Reagan admin shutdown all fed-controlled mental institutions"

I've heard of that before.

Personally it's another aspect that does not so convince me of the strongest sorts of gun control.

Treatment of the symptom, but not the disease, Strong Gun control.

A covering up of the real problem, and worse, by removing something I think makes America stronger.

People's concern should be making society 'worthy of power,

Not taking away all of societies power, and leaving them wretched.

Any gun laws other than a flat out nationwide ban on guns will result in more children dying.

People are going to die no matter what we do, the question is what can we do to minimize unnecessary deaths. A total gun ban is not necessary, but what I don't understand is why people are so against ideas that are just common sense like closing the gun show loop hole, banning the sale of extended magazines, etc.

You may think I'm an asshole over it, but every pro gun rights person agrees; I'm just brutally honest because that's who I am. So you can at least respect the honesty even if you hate me for it.

Hatred is silly, I'm not invested in you enough to feel that emotion. I can however recognize that you are by any reasonable criteria, an asshole. It's the most basic test of how we judge someone's virtues, or lack thereof - you care about your own selfish desires more than the well being of others. And you do so on a massive scale, outweighing many, many lives lost by your desire to maintain your hobby. That's literally how we define what makes a horrible person.

I do appreciate your honesty there but it isn't necessary, it's quite obvious that this is the core of the pro gun movement. It's why I despise it.

Might have been less that 14 with a sword, unsure if the same person though.

Peterborough ditch murders - Wikipedia

Thanks for correction. Not sure where I got the 14 from. Additional two other people she stabbed lived. One of them stabbed 5 times in chest and he crawled 100 yards before someone assisted him.

Pistols make it easier to injure more people in shorter periods of time.

Semi-automatic rifles make it easier to injure more people in shorter periods of time.

Chemical phosphates or other make it easier to injure more people in shorter periods of time.

Poisons make it easier to injury more people in shorter periods of time.

Atomic bomb makes it easier to injure more people in shorter period of time.

Hydrogen bombs making easier to injure more people in shorter amounts of time.

Humans inability to manage themselves as collective whole, ---aka unity-- that prioritizes the fundamental needs of humanity first, without destruction of the ecological environment that sustains them, makes it easier to injure more people in shorter periods of time.

Need over greed, is humanities good seed.

Spiritual sanity over ego of insanity, is the ultimate salvation on Earth.

All-for-one and one-for-all, or there is less chance of humanities longer term survival of peace on Earth with with least ecological detriment on Earth.

But again, there intent was not to harm of kill.

The intention of a product is irrelevant to this conversation. What matters is capability. We don't take a knife away from a toddler because of what it was intended for, but because we know what could result of wet didn't.

The purpose of me pointing out earlier that guns are literally designed to kill people wasn't about intention but to put an emphasis on it's capability.

yet tree great majorotry of people who use them know to handle and use them with caution, and yet you're going to take their 2A right away for a the mismanagement of a few?

That's how everything else in life works.

The overwhelming majority of coke usage results in nothing more than a tripped out experience and probably some great sex, yet we outlaw it because of the mismanagement of a few. I can sit here listing example after example all day, and I suspect you take no issues with any of it. But when it's a gun we're talking about...

Shall we delete the 4A, or 5A so that they are banned for all to use? Hell, take the 1A, too. RThat's where you're going, my friend.

Slippery slope nonsense. I find it telling when 2A advocates resort to this, it shows that they really have no arguments. It all just comes down to a conspiratorial fear of losing all your rights at the hands of those evil libs.

As I and many others have expressed, there are perfectly legitimate considerations that warrant restrictions to the second amendment, those considerations do not apply to these other amendments. If they did, that would be a seperate conversation, and nothing about entertaining one leads to the other.