Several fatalities including a Police Officer….
The shooter is alive and in custody…
It is the second one in the last two weeks….
There IS a history of mass shootings in the area….
There is likely to be more ….
Dozens of emergency response vehicles lined the streets around the store Monday afternoon as police responded to what they described as an “active shooter.” Witnesses described a chaotic scene, with customers rushing to exits at the front and back of the store after shots were fired. One witness told local media that the shooter did not say anything before opening fire.
Video from a witness who was live-streaming on YouTube from the store’s parking lot showed at least two people injured and motionless on the ground outside and a third just inside the front doors….
…
A witness who spoke to the Denver Post said the gunman did not say anything — “he just came in and started shooting.”….
…
There have been as many as nine school shootings in the area since the Columbine massacre in 1999, which left 12 students and a teacher dead. Four other major shootings have occurred within 20 miles of the suburban Columbine High School, including a 2012 shooting at a movie theater in Aurora that left 12 dead.
BTW?
The city of Boulder, Colo., barred assault weapons in 2018, as a way to prevent mass shootings like the one that killed 17 at a high school in Parkland., Fla., earlier that year.
But 10 days after that ban was blocked in court, the city was rocked by its own tragedy: Ten people, including a Boulder police officer, were killed at a supermarket in the city’s south end on Monday after a gunman opened fire, law enforcement officials said….
More…
There was a “legal definition” for assault weapons when they were banned for ten years, and the ban was working. Then Bush and the Republicans in Congress refused to reauthorize it and the death rates went up.
All anyone had to do was watch yesterday’s Senate hearing to know who has the better ideas to control this epidemic.
“There is likely to be more.”
Really?I thought there would be “less.”
We Both Wish…..
The difference is that only you don’t think we should do anything about it, and you are passionate that we shouldn’t do anything.
But I’m sure ala Ted Cruz he sends his
“Thoughts and prayers.”
What is it about Colorado (and CSU at Boulder) ?
On the one spiritual or intellectual edge, Colorado has Aspen and at the other Colorado Springs, home of the USAF Academy and several enthusiastic right-wing evangelical groups.
Biden has come forward today saying we should ban assault rifles ….
I assume this is NOT. Going anywhere…
Z?
The issue does Democrats little good….
Any banning effort will not pass in the Senate…
In fact some House Democrats would join Republicans against it in the House
The NYS AG is the ONLY ONE making headway against the NRA….
Watch Biden
He will not call for taking AWAY anyones rifle…
This is factual….
No one is talking politics James.
Biden called for an assault rifle ban.
So he did call for it.
He helped pass the last one.
Having a conversation with James or any Republican on this issue is a waste of time.
As opposed to other issues in which a conversation with James is a productive use of time
Haha!
What I find amusing is that he always tries to mask his personal opinion by reference to the politics of the matter,having not the moral courage to forthrightly state his position.
Mass shooting’s ARE a horrible thing
Lawmakers NOT doing anything is just as fucked up….
That said?
The reality i go back to IS A REALITY
True Zreebs, sort of like an infrastructure conversation.
Yes it is Keith
The history on this confirms that…
And the situation IS Deadly and WILL continue no matter how much anyone dings me…
Since you’ve labeled it as “horrible.”
What do you support in answer to it?
I’m not talking about you view of the issue politically,what do you as a person support?
While it is unknown at this point if it would have made any difference in this or other cases, Congress can expand background checks for gun purchases, where there has been bipartisan support.
Other than that, what exactly do you think CAN be done by the government?
Since Republicans opposeeven discussing anything?
Nothing.
That wasn’t my question however.
I was asking what his personal views are on the subject.
I am asking your views though.
What piece of legislation do you think can effectively stop mass shootings?
If one believes the answer is the government should ban *all* gun ownership, then they should say so. The issue is that is exactly what some people want to do, but just are afraid to say so, for political reasons.
I have no problem with a person owning a gun.
I’m opposed to the private ownership of assault weapons.
I support a person having to pass a course on gun safety before being allowed to carry a gun on their person .
I support background checks and a person seeking to purchase a gun having to wait until that check is completed to make the purchase,
I support enhanced penalties for one possessing a gun during the commission of a criminal act.
As I said earlier ,and as you well know,Republicans won’t discuss any of these ,so as far as “legislation?None of it is going anywhere ,once again,as you well know.
What are your views?
In NYS u MUST get a license to carry….
That means a background check….
In NYC the discourage ‘carry’ permits..
It is no coincidence that most of these shootings occur in certain places…
BTW?
There are SO Many gun arrests IN the NYC METRO AREA that one might not have to anytime for their arrest….
Here in S.C. Republicans were so spooked by today’s events that they rushed to report to the Legislative floor a bill to declare all guns in the state as part of the “unorganized militia,” an obscure body created by legislative act in 1881 to which all males over 17 yoa are members.
I’m considering resigning.
However, seeing as how it is,by definition, “unorganized” it is unclear to whom I could submit such a resignation.
So, if someone commits an act of mass murder with a shotgun or a pistol then you will be willing to acknowledge that while such a thing is a tragedy of course, it cannot override the right to own a gun?
How does one determine what is or what might become an “assault weapon?” Of course any sort of gun used to kill people turns into an “assault weapon.” And is this really only about assault weapons?
CG?
Did u read Jack’s last post?
CG?
‘Congress’ is NOT gonna take one gun away…
How many attempts have there been at gun checks?
Gun sales have climbed during the pandemic…
The ban on assault weapons in Colorado was BLOCKED before this….
I know people are pissed at my pessimism…
But I do this to make a fucking point…
People in this country DO have a gun culture…
Democrats get into trouble when rhey try to limit them in ANY way….
Two weeks from now , just like the Jan Capitol violence?
The think will be forgotten….
Messing with me is just wasting ur time…
I’m just keeping it real…
So, “keep it real” and say whether or not you believe Congress *should* take guns away?
I have no answer…..
Except people should stop killing orher people they do NOT KNOW….
Cut the bull shit Jack
U work the system….
There ARE a whole lot of crazy assed people out there
The is simply NO WAY to legally find them…
And Yes….
This country DOES have a Strong Gun Culture…
Do U SERIOUSLY think any law would pass that would ‘take away’ guns????
They shouldn’t kill people they know either.
I assume jack got busy. I don’t know james why you are so angry at him personally.
Saying that Congress will not ban guns is one thing. But if you had your way, do you wish they would? I think you might.
CG?
I LIKE JACK….
I always have….
He’s smart and fights fir what he believes in…
We don’t have to agree on everything even though we DO agree on a lot…
He messes with me…
It’s all good…
I have said this here for over a decade…
He makes me better….
It seems to me that we should be thinking of ways to reduce gun violence. There are lots of things we can do. I don’t really have an opinion on which measures will be the most effective. Banning Assault weapons (guns that accept detachable magazines) seems like a good place to start.
People don’t have a right to a drivers license, and I see no reason why all people (such as mentally ill) should have a right to a gun.
I have a better understanding of why some people feel they need a gun after a black friend of mine bought a gun to protect himself against conservatives. He told me that others he knows have done so for the same reason.
Banning violent video games may be useful towards that end, but it’s pretty much a non-starter since it would be an infringement on the freedom of people who do not break the law.
Nobody believes the mentally ill should have guns. Very few people are opposed to background checks.
The issue with assault weapons is that any gun after it is bought, can be modified to become an “assault weapon” and people define assault weapons simply on what they look like.
There are many others who can speak more intelligently about guns than me. So I yield to others for the best suggestions on how to reduce gun violence.
I think there is more opposition to background checks or banning mentally ill ftom owning than you suggested above.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1039301
I would be open to banning violent video games if I thought it would significantly reduce gun violence. Truthfully, I am not there yet though.
Z?
Since the pandemic gun ownership HAS risen…
Democratic President’s cause gun ownership to rise….
Jan 6 stuff cause gun ownership to rise
What don’t u get?
Schumer to push background checks bill in the Senate….
He knows he can’t the 60 votes needed for passage…
AP…
How much capacity and how big a magazine do you need for legitimate purposes?
Switchblade or gravity knives, brass knuckles and machine-guns may help you against an attacker, but that doesn’t make them legal for you to own.
… at least in most civilized states and cities
I am all for reasonable discussions about magazine size, etc, but the reality is that is not the end game.
Those most engaged on this issue want to ban *all* guns. They will not say so publicly, for obvious reasons, at this time, but that is what they want. Listen to what Beto said in the primary debates.
If someone kills a bunch of people with a shotgun or a traditional rifle or a pistol or whatever “non assault-weapon” might exit, they are not going to be content with acknowledging a distinction between weapons.
Assault rifles ARE made to kill a LOT of people…
Getting rid of them will be no easier
than getting rid of shotguns
A some single shot rifles convert to automatic with a single bolt…
The overwhelming, vast, majority of people who own “assault rifles” do not kill (or ever even shoot) one person, let alone a lot of people.
We as a society need to take any reasonable step to keep any gun away from someone who should not have one, but in general, the discussion of “assault weapons” is a smokescreen.
And yes, it does serve a political benefit for Democrats. It helps them raise a ton of money and certainly is good politics in the blue areas of the country and of course in our tribalized times, it works the same way for Republicans in the red parts of the country.
Gun violence is an area that needs to be addressed, but even talking about what can/should be done just brings accusations from ideologues about ulterior motives.
Considering how frequently you misjudge others motives, one would think you would be so carefree in making accusations.
I gave always understood assault weapons to mean a weapon that is specifically designed to kill multiple people in a short amount of time. You don’t typically need to fire off multiple rounds to kill a deer or vermin (in Romney’s case).
Just another reminder of the hopelessness of the American gun culture…
…Shooting deaths in 2020 outpaced the next-highest recent year, 2017, by more than 3,600. The rise resembles other alarming trends: Last year, the United States saw the highest one-year increase in homicides since it began keeping records, with the country’s largest cities suffering a 30 percent spike. Gunshot injuries also rose dramatically, to nearly 40,000, over 8,000 more than in 2017.
“More than 100 Americans are killed daily by gun violence,”…
More…
“gun culture” is that related to legal gun ownership or illegal gun ownership?
The rise of homicides, etc, in the country’s largest cities are very much unlikely to be done by people who legally own their guns but instead by people breaking laws already on the books, in the parts of the country, where the laws are already most restrictive and speaks to the futility of gun control, as long as we have these other profound problems in our society
GUNS CG…..
Period…
Overly simplistic, non-responsive, and irrelevant to whatever is necessary to solve the broader issues.
There is a “gun culture” in America, going back to our founding, and there are pros and cons associated with that.
The bigger problem seems to be an increasing “your human life does not matter” culture.
You are right.. The “your human life does not matter” is a problem. Banning weapons that are designed to quickly erase many human lives is good policy as Jack notes, even if they wouldn’t stop each and every killing. It sends a message that humam lives matter. And it’s part of why an assault ban is wildly popular among non Republican Americans, and even with some Republicans.
I have said in the past on the issue of gun control that I am all for anything reasonable.
But the problem is pretending it would be anything other than a “band-aid” solution for a festering wound or anything beyond talking points meant to score political points. Some smokescreens appear far too obvious.
And if the only concept is “sending” a message, then clearly we would have to ban or license all materials that could be used to make bombs as well as books and instructions on how to make bombs.
CG wouldn’t be a Republican if he didn’t try to blame crime on urban areas (I.e. minorities). Of course plenty of small towns saw an increase in violent crime too in 2020.
https://www.comicsands.com/capitol-riot-coffee-biden-trans-2651182660.html
Wherever the crime is, they are likely not being committed by legal gun owners. (I have no idea what the relevancy of the Comic Sands link is)
james post cited “largest cities” though. You are the one here who brought up minorities. To me, a human is a human, and I wish all people would look at it that way. The victims of those gun crimes are of course most likely to be minorities, and as a society we have grown numb to that carnage.
Sorry wrong link
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/reoord-spike-murders-2020/2020/12/30/1dcb057c-4ae5-11eb-839a-cf4ba7b7c48c_story.html
The culture of “If you have offended me or somehow stand in the way of my overwhelming desire to satisfy my own self-interests at all times, I have the right to kill you.. and too bad for anyone who might be caught in the crossfire” certainly knows no racial lines nor population limits.
It is a matter of values and the solutions will not come until we can determine how it has come to this for so many and what would be needed to stop it.
The Washington Post link certainly shows the danger to people that comes with “defunding the police” or de facto sidelining of police.
Well then if gun violence is not committed by legal gun owners, then maybe a partial solution is to require reporting if your gun is stolen and it should be illegal to re-sell a gun unless the person has a license to do so.
Cruz is already knocking talk about gun control joining Jack’s report on what’s going on in SC…
No surprise…
If Donald Trump were still President, we would have perhaps already seen a Tweet or heard a statement about how this killer’s parents never should have been allowed to come to America from Syria. Sadly, a lot of people would have agreed with the sentiment. He said something similar in regards to the San Bernadino terrorist attack.
Of course such a concept is as anti-Constitution, anti-freedom, and anti-American, as those who seek to ban all private gun ownership.
What about Trump ancestries?
Everybody here had family from somewhere else….
Who cares what the. “End game” is for some people. The reality is that banning guns totally in your lifetime has <1% chance of happening – and surely you know that.
Is there anyone who believes that Conservatives are now finished giving tax cuts to the wealthy? Or that the anti-abortionists are now satisfied?
I don’t know that. I do know that there are a lot of people in high office who want to ban all guns. I am not and never have been a “gun person” but this is definitely something a lot of people vote solely on.
The vast majority of people who vote solely on guns are gun owners – and that percentage will only increase if there is remote chance that banning all guns will have a chance of passage. And that is why a total ban on guns won’t happen.
I cannot think of any prominant national Democratic candidate who is advocating for a ban on all guns. And someone who advocates that won’t get the nomination – even though you think you know how Democrats think.
They aren’t saying it aloud. They are being cautious, but Beto slipped a bit in one of the debates and said something like, “hell yes, we are going to take your guns away.”
As you probably already know, He was referring to assault style weapons.
“Assault style weapons” are going to be anything a politician decides they should be.
There is no industry definition of an “assault style weapon” and he was talking about confiscating guns from people who legally own them, so obviously this was a big issue. Later in the campaign, Biden messed up and said that Beto would be in charge of his gun control efforts. Somehow, I do not think he is going to bring up Beto now this week.
It was a mandatory buy back program.
I Don’t share your fears of ulterior motives of gun violence opponents. I believe that many people just want to do whatever is ultimately necessary, and who among us knows exactly what is ultimately necessary.
Right now far more people die of accidental shootings, suicides by guns or murders by a stolen gun than are people who were killed by gun when they were committing a crime. I understand that many conservatives feel that they have a given right to put other people in danger as a result of their personal decisions, and you see this in other areas too such as conservatives refusing to wear masks. I fundamentally disagree with those values, but I am smart enough to know that I won’t be able to convince you that you are wrong.
Yes CG asked me yesterday for some of my ideas as to Guns.
I gave them to him.
Unsurprisingly,he began rejecting them ,essentially saying they likely wouldn’t prevent mass shootings like at Boulder.
Of course I understand that.
I just think they are good public policy.Will they prevent all such occurrences or all shootings?Only a fool would claim that.
Would they prevent some?Yes.Would background checks help prevent some people who shouldn’t have guns from getting them ?Yes.
I don’t care to engage in technical arguments over what at any point in time constitutes an “assault weapon.”
We know what is being talked about.
Once again I think certain gun control measures are simply good public policy.
Ditto CG’s last comment.
Jack, since the Second Amendment to the federal constitution declares a well-regulated militia [to be] necessary to the security of a free people, what is the function of South Carolina’s unorganized militia ?
[ Protecting the good white folk of the Palmetto State against Yankees, Republicans and arrogant Negroes? ]
Yeah probably.
These Right Wing kooks love all this wild eyed craziness.
I mean the “unorganized militia?”
Good God!
All this replying makes the thread impossible to read on a mobile device.
I really don’t have anything more to say on this. CG says he’s all for any gun control that he deems “reasonable”.
But while the vast majority of Americans think banning ownership of military style assault weaponry is reasonable. CG deems it not so.
So what? He’s out of the mainstream on this. And quite a bit so. His right to be there but he’s not in the middle by any stretch.
And his analogy of banning materials used to make bombs is weak. There are plenty of applicable and productive uses of nails and fertilizer. Not so for military style weapons.
I never said I oppose banning “military assault weaponry”, but that would not apply to what happened in Colorado or Georgia so where is the connection?
The issue of what is or what might become (with simple modifications) an “assault weapon” is a problem. In general, if a person is a law-abiding citizen, they should be allowed to own weapons that are called “assault weapons” by some. On the contrary, a convict or a person with a mental illness, should not be allowed to own the smallest of pistols.
And yes, people who own very large weapons, whether you agree with them or not, think there are applicable and productive uses for those weapons. They want the peace of mind to know they have more firepower than anyone who might attack them or their home or family, etc. With the rise in crime, their thinking, while sad in many ways, has to be considered understandable.
Automatic weapons or “military weapons”, etc have long been banned in the United States.
Any high profile mass shooting, regardless of the type of gun used, or how it was obtained, is going to lead to calls to ban that gun.
Well in order to have true peace of mind to protect my home I need a Tommy Gun.
Do you have a problem with that?
I mean the “end game” can go both ways.