Florida School Shooting, Over 20 Casualties

[hand2handking]

 

[sooperhooper]

Thoughts and prayers

http://www.ketv.com/article/authori...-campus-north-of-los-angeles/20661796?src=app

 

[tekthemaestro]

yall will question why its happening this often at some point in the future im sure. eventually you HAVE to stop thinking guns are making these kids shoot each other at an increasing rate.

 

[QU!K]

yall will question why its happening this often at some point in the future im sure. eventually you HAVE to stop thinking guns are making these kids shoot each other at an increasing rate.

It's ACCESS to the guns. When you going to learn bruh. If kids want to be angry and knuckle up that's fine.

More guns = more access.

Oh look, another shooting right on cue.

 

[fac3 tak30v312]

Put metal detectors in every single HS

 

[shogun]

I said it before, but my solution would be ban white people from buying guns. You can’t prevent kids from looking on the internet and learning how to make bombs but I doubt they can make their own guns stronger than a handgun or something that shoots a lot of rounds fast.

 

[tekthemaestro]

I said it before, but my solution would be ban white people from buying guns. You can’t prevent kids from looking on the internet and learning how to make bombs but I doubt they can make their own guns stronger than a handgun or something that shoots a lot of rounds fast.

todays shooting was a shotgun shooting birdshot pellets. had he waited a couple more months until he hit 18 it wouldve been completely legal for him to own that shotgun.

It's ACCESS to the guns. When you going to learn bruh. If kids want to be angry and knuckle up that's fine.

More guns = more access.

Oh look, another shooting right on cue.

quik no matter how many times i tell you this, you dont get it. how do more guns = more access when the EXACT SAME GUNS have been here for over 50 years? ARs didnt pop up in 2012. shotguns been around since fisticuffs. kids arent killing because theyre angry and want to fight but cant. theyre killing because they want infamy. they want to outdo the last person and get all that attention. some of em want to teach people a lesson. but none of these soft *** lil kids would even dream about throwing hands.

another flaw in your argument. if a person wants to kill, they will. surrounding a person with tools to do evil wont make them do evil. example. if im surrounded by weed or coke.... i have more access. will i suddenly become a drug addict? if u give me enough rope to hang myself with... will i? theyre in texas. im sure over half the students at that school had guns in the house at home. if every kid in the school had a gun to their left, and a gun to their right... would they all just start shooting each other? no. only the ones who wanted to kill would. having access never translates to action.

the average student in america has access to every drug imaginable, every vice you can come up with, they can go to any hood or even just run down craigslist and get any gun they want. they can go on the internet and look up any jacked up thing they wanna see. but do they all indulge in that just cuz theres "access"? NO. cuz access doesnt mean ****.

 

[gry60]

surrounding a person with tools to do evil wont make them do evil.

This is a flawed premise because you are making an assumption that doesn't make sense in the context of violence. We are already assuming that the person WANTS to commit violence. Given that, how can we minimize the consequences that will result from that person's violent action?
That is the question at the heart of the issue. This is where gun access comes into play.
Person A with violent tendencies in country with easy access to guns ---> person A more likely to use guns to commit violence.

Same person in country with more effective gun control (not just at the individual level, but also at the distribution level) -----> person is less likely to use guns to commit violence (because they will be harder to get).

Also, don't say the same could be done with knives and stuff. There is a reason infantry carries firearms and not swords: firearms are more efficient at killing.

 

[tekthemaestro]

This is a flawed premise because you are making an assumption that doesn't make sense in the context of violence. We are already assuming that the person WANTS to commit violence. Given that, how can we minimize the consequences that will result from that person's violent action?
That is the question at the heart of the issue. This is where gun access comes into play.
Person A with violent tendencies in country with easy access to guns ---> person A more likely to use guns to commit violence.

Same person in country with more effective gun control (not just at the individual level, but also at the distribution level) -----> person is less likely to use guns to commit violence (because they will be harder to get).

Also, don't say the same could be done with knives and stuff. There is a reason infantry carries firearms and not swords: firearms are more efficient at killing.

.... boy what? so in your argument, lets assume the person is bent on violence already, and thus this violent person having access to the weapons is the problem? the problem isnt the person bent on violence? WHAT? we've already dispelled this notion. I'm a law abiding citizen. Nothing in my file will prohibit me from owning firearms. Nothing. I'm not a criminal... until i get caught committing a crime. So what strict measures would keep me from buying a gun and committing a crime with it next week? The thing is, all law abiding citizens have access. So unless you've got some secret measure of telling when people will commit crimes in the future (pretty sure theres a movie or two about that) to disqualify them.... it wont work. This kid has a clean record. If he wanted to do it by the book he woulda waited a few more months till he was 18 and did the EXACT same thing and it wouldve been completely legal.

And all of this is just to dispell the legal route to commit crime. Most criminals dont go the legal route to commit crimes. So your idea that making guns harder to acquire legally will suddenly curb violent offenders from illegally killing people is stupid. Even if you attack at a distribution level, all you do is make every gun THAT much more valuable. people will go to the streets to undercut the legal more expensive route... like they already do.

Your "person is less likely to use guns to commit violence (because they will be harder to get)" ideology only works in a world where their city isnt flooded with readily available weapons already. and thats not reality. yall keep basing your arguments on how you wish our country was, instead of what it actually is. and it makes no sense.

 

[deleted]

A person surrounded by weed and coke is definitely more likely to use those substances than a person who has less access to them.

Bartenders are almost two and a half times more likely to die from alcohol related illnesses than the average person.

It's really not that hard to understand unless you are being deliberately obtuse.

 

[tekthemaestro]

A person surrounded by weed and coke is definitely more likely to use those substances than a person who has less access to them.

Bartenders are almost two and a half times more likely to die from alcohol related illnesses than the average person.

It's really not that hard to understand unless you are being deliberately obtuse.

This is incorrect. A drug user surrounded by drugs is more likely to use those substances. If you don't do coke and have no intention of doing coke... Then surrounding you with coke doesn't change anything.

If a bartender isn't a drinker then he won't start drinking just because he's surrounded by it.

It's not that it's hard to understand. It's that you guys like to remove all personal responsibility and only put it on the things around a person. As if you believe in nature over nuture. No matter what you surround a person with.... If they're not the kinda person to use whatever it is... They won't use it just because they have access to it.

 

[deleted]

I personally have an easier time believing peer-reviewed studies that are able to stand up to the scrutiny of the scientific method over anecdotal accounts

But whatever...that's irrelevant to this thread's topic anyway

 

[fluid hips]

Meh. Notice how these mass school shootings happen in affluent suburbs?

Ultimately these kids fall victim to the blatant racial policies that are entrenched in American society.

Notice how they don't hesitate to put metal detectors in inner city schools? But they lose their minds at the mere suggestion of putting metal detectors in predominantly white affluent schools because they don't want their kids to be "treated like criminals"

 

[tekthemaestro]

Meh. Notice how these mass school shootings happen in affluent suburbs?

Ultimately these kids fall victim to the blatant racial policies that are entrenched in American society.

Notice how they don't hesitate to put metal detectors in inner city schools? But they lose their minds at the mere suggestion of putting metal detectors in predominantly white affluent schools because they don't want their kids to be "treated like criminals"

the conundrum theyre avoiding running into is that the affluent white kids are the ones doing all the shootings. putting the detectors in those schools acknowledges that there is a problem with those students in those affluent schools, which theyre not willing to accept. many of those parents and teachers and leaders have spent their whole lives saying violence comes from minorities and only the minorities act like criminals. to acknowledge that 9.8 out of 10 school shootings are done by a white male challenges a lot of their beliefs.

 

[getback]

This is incorrect. A drug user surrounded by drugs is more likely to use those substances. If you don't do coke and have no intention of doing coke... Then surrounding you with coke doesn't change anything.

I disagree with this. Temptation is a real thing. Surround anyone with enough of anything and normalize it, folks will start dabbling.

 

[tekthemaestro]

I disagree with this. Temptation is a real thing. Surround anyone with enough of anything and normalize it, folks will start dabbling.

word? so if uve got a lot of xanax and opium in your neighborhood you bout to dabble in it? cuz of temptation? when molly was the in thing to do...you felt that temptation to do it? speak for yourself g. if its not in you to do something, having access to it wont make u do it. being homosexual is definitely normalized. you telling me if theres enough gay people in a room with u, your mind bout to wander? cmon fam.

all of you in this thread have access to any weapon you want, legally or illegally. so how come you guys arent suddenly inclined to start shootin **** up? ive got a glock 6 inches from my keyboard at all times. thats a lot of access. i go back to what i said earlier... ITS TEXAS. at LEAST 50% of those kids have access to a shotgun or handgun of some sort just by going into their parents room. but none of them WANT to do that. why? cuz its not in them. but. it was in this kid. so. he illegally took his parents weapons and committed the evil act he had wanted to do. he didnt know where to buy bombs at, so he looked it up and made some. we all have access to the same internet he has. how many of you looking up how to build pipe bombs?

cut it out. stop blaming everything but the person committing the act themself.

 

[I AM REGGAETON]

Parents raise your kids right please.

 

[DB Cooper]

Metal detectors won't stop these situations from happening. People don't think they'll just find another way in? It's like what do you do? Beef up security personnel and hope they don't get cold feet when ish is about to go down?

 

[deleted]

I disagree with this. Temptation is a real thing. Surround anyone with enough of anything and normalize it, folks will start dabbling.

Study: Teen exposure to drugs, alcohol affects chance of use in adulthood

 

[ninjahood]

Parents raise your kids right please.

only thing that needs to be said this entire thread.

 

[getback]

word? so if uve got a lot of xanax and opium in your neighborhood you bout to dabble in it? cuz of temptation?

If we're talking about drugs specifically, yes absolutely. If something is readily available and high usage exists, experimentation will occur. It happened during the crack epidemic and now during the opioid crisis. The individual has to be complicit yes, but easy access puts the wheels in motion quicker.

all of you in this thread have access to any weapon you want, legally or illegally. so how come you guys arent suddenly inclined to start shootin **** up? ive got a glock 6 inches from my keyboard at all times. thats a lot of access. i go back to what i said earlier... ITS TEXAS. at LEAST 50% of those kids have access to a shotgun or handgun of some sort just by going into their parents room. but none of them WANT to do that. why? cuz its not in them. but. it was in this kid. so. he illegally took his parents weapons and committed the evil act he had wanted to do.

I agree with this though. My issue is the regulations. The warning signs were there. Just like they were in Parkland. The two that perpetrated those those acts shouldn't have had access to weapons. In my opinion, parents of kids with these ideologies shouldn't even be allowed to have guns on the premises.

Could the kid have then sought out a weapon via some other illegal means? Sure. But at least it creates more hoops and might draw more attention to the kid.

"The butterfly effect is the idea that small things can have non-linear impacts on a complex system."

stop blaming everything but the person committing the act themself.

Who said I don't blame the person though?

 

[tekthemaestro]

If we're talking about drugs specifically, yes absolutely. If something is readily available and high usage exists, experimentation will occur. It happened during the crack epidemic and now during the opioid crisis. The individual has to be complicit yes, but easy access puts the wheels in motion quicker.

this is just wrong. if it was correct then everyone around it wouldve tried it. yes a LOT of black folks fell to the crack epidemic. but not all. and thats because the individual is ultimately the one who does it. if you dont agree with drug use, you wont suddenly try it because its in front of you. some men wont cheat, despite cheating being rampant in society and yams aplenty right in front of em. having access to a vice doesnt put the wheels in motion. YOU put the wheels in motion once you decide to do it or try it. Because the truth is everyone in america has ACCESS to any evil or vice you can think of, 24/7.

Some people seek out those vices, some don't. And because that is true, it CANNOT be true that being surrounded by a vice makes you wanna do it. The individual has to be susceptible to that vice, whether its drugs or violence etc etc, to take advantage of their access to it. You're essentially saying people are a product of their environment. And at the end of the day thats just an excuse, because wonderful people rise out of the worst environments. And most of these shootings are being carried out by people who come from great environments but feel like a victim or like they want to teach a lesson to people they dont like or want infamy.

This kid went out and MADE pipe bombs. He tried to pull a columbine and was killing people he didn't like. You telling me some stricter laws on gun ownership wouldve prevented him from stealing his parents (who legally owned their weapons) guns and committing the act he was writing in his journal about for weeks? youve got a better chance of his dad putting a "swiper no swiping" sign on the gun cabinet working

 

[getback]

this is just wrong. if it was correct then everyone around it wouldve tried it. yes a LOT of black folks fell to the crack epidemic. but not all.

Who said all though?

if you dont agree with drug use, you wont suddenly try it because its in front of you.

I did. Peer pressure is real.

Because the truth is everyone in america has ACCESS to any evil or vice you can think of, 24/7.

Right, but for some things you have to work harder to access, which was my point. The harder it becomes, the wider the net, or checks and balances if you will. The wider the net and the more checks and balances, the higher the likelihood of someone becoming detected. Again...the butterfly effect.

And before you reply....

I didn't remove any blame from the individual.
No one is saying everyone falls victim to temptation.

You're essentially saying people are a product of their environment. And at the end of the day thats just an excuse, because wonderful people rise out of the worst environments.

People are a product of their environment though. You ever live in the hood? There's a phenomenon called nature versus nurture. No matter which way you wanna slice it, the environment does 100% absolutely have an impact on an individual.

Saying otherwise or saying "it's just an excuse" sounds like some pull yourself up by your bootstraps B/S. It's completely dismissing psychology and sociology.

And before you reply....

I didn't remove any blame from the individual.
No one is saying everyone falls victim to temptation.

 

[Mark Antony]

I don't see how dudes can quickly come to the conclusion of what will/won't work without anything even being tried.

 

[getback]

I don't see how dudes can quickly come to the conclusion of what will/won't work without anything even being tried.

Well we've got dudes saying the environment you grow up in is just "an excuse"... so you gotta take s**t with a grain of salt around here