I can sympathise with a former student at a Jewish school wanting to get rid of it. Obviously not with such violent means, but those places are horrible.
As much as I despise the fat man and his tribe I can tell you did not read the news.
It's personal in nature it's an ex-student of that school a Jewish person himself.
I came over from Reddit when it went sideways hard, and was psyched for a new start with everyone else. it makes me deeply sad to see 24 upvotes on your comment, where it mentions you hate his tribe. As a Jewish person what am I to make of that? Do you hate me? Is Lemmy / Kbin really that racist? This sucks.
Article says he was driving a Dodge Ram when he was pulled over and shot. Maybe it’s because I live in California, but I don’t know any Dodge Ram drivers that didn’t vote for trump.
There is no way a 200 capacity room had one door. Surely that would be a fire code violation. The other doors are probably kind of hidden so people don't leave out them on the regular.
"Memphis Police Chief Cerelyn “CJ” Davis said, “I am proud of the vigilant and quick response of MPD officers who mitigated a potential mass shooting situation today.”"
I feel like the cops are giving themselves too much credit here. Mitigating the potential mass shooting event to me means preventing the shooter from shooting at the school... I mean good on them for catching him quickly though, that is good work and I try to give credit where it's due despite generally not appreciating cops, but mitigating the attack is not what they did there...
At least by my layman definitions. Does mitigate mean something else in cop talk?
I guess they could be saying there was potential of him going somewhere else and doing a mass shooting there, so maybe that's what they mean?
That's fair, but then in this context, how does mitigating apply?
Is it because they made it less severe somehow? Or this is just from a pure risk assessment standpoint? As in, they mitigated a potential threat to the public?
Ok, yeah I think that last one makes sense if that's what you're meaning. (I think my issue may be pedantic af but this is what it looks like when I'm intentionally trying to not be a definition stickler lol)
You are literally making the comment that you are apparently trying to lampoon. In much the same way that you apparently NEED guns to defend yourself from... guns?
You do not need free speech, freedom or religion, right to vote, etc, etc. You are guaranteed to not have them taken from you or have your access to them limited... for any reason. That's how rights work.
Not sure if this is a good idea but as a european I found this American debate to be one of the most ideological and shocking from both sides. Of course guns alone don't cause that, Swizerland and Finnland have tons of them in private hands but they have some kind of social system. It's all of your insanity, from the mental health over total poverty to fucking easy access to really fucking dangerous guns, there is no easy answer because none of this is good and all of it causes violance!
Also Switzerland and Finland have strict control over ammunition, and also have compulsary military service to instill the discipline required to handle and use guns responsibly, unlike the US where you get a discount if you have a mental disorder diagnosis (exaggeration).
Also, socialised healthcare and mental health services.
Also, lesser paranoia and fear of law enforcement.
“However, of the 86 countries where mass public shootings have been identified, the US ranks 56th per capita in its rate of attacks and 61st in mass public shooting murder rate”
Defensive gun uses outnumber illegal gun uses. I should get shot? Wait for the police to never arrive because of my neighborhood? Wait for them to shoot me because they got confused and get a medal for it?
Y’all are really good (bad) at pointing out the problem but your solution always ends up being, “send armed goons into people’s houses to make sure they got rid of their property we don’t like.”
You know how many countries have a fuck load of guns and like almost no fascist death brigades? Fucking most of them. The fact that we have 1.1 guns instead of .6 per person does not, in fact, explain gun violence when the exact same percentage of the country owns guns.
So what? Add another question to the background check "are you a Nazi?" because the "are you a terrorist?" question should already take care of that one, so it seems to be working really well.
What about how I can just gift a gun to a family member? Or maybe how no one has followed up on me since I've purchased a gun, maybe I'm a crackpot now. People change.
Responsible gun ownership is impossible to enforce, sure my shit is locked up in a safe, but no one knows that and it isn't required. No one comes around to check that it is safely secured, no one comes around to check that I haven't fallen down a QAnon conspiracy rabbit hole, no one comes around to check that I'm mentally sound and don't have any anger problems.
Ammo sales aren't tracked either, so sure I have a reasonable amount of ammo but I could have enough to cause serious problems as no one would know.
So really this comes down to two solutions right? Take away guns, or spend a fuck ton of money to regulate sales, registration, send therapists to people's homes to evaluate their mental health periodically, track ammo sales, install biometrics on guns so that only the owner can fire it and as evidence of when the gun goes off who must have shot, install trackers and sensors on gun safes to feed information back to the government to know how often a gun is safely locked away and when it's not where it is... Etc honestly.
Take your "As a Veteran..." argument and cram it. I've seen more ignorant POGs running that line to get internet credit than I care to remember. Your opinion carries no more weight than anyone else's and that most definitely includes regular civilians.