Jump to content

Menu

Another shooting in San Antonio at a church :(


Liz CA
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm beginning to believe it's a contagion like suicide and should be treated as such in the media. 

 

I think you are right. It seems every week someone chooses to shoot people in a public place.

Mental issues are obviously involved in all of these shootings but people seemed to deal with it much differently in the past than they do now knowing whatever they do will flash across every screen - however briefly.

 

Edited by Liz CA
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to clarify, it's not in San Antonio and actually is about 30 miles SE of San Antonio.  Since we moved to San Antonio, I've noticed my parents' news (DC area) often reports things as "in San Antonio" if it happens within 30-40 miles of the city because San Antonio is a place people recognize and can more or less place on a Texas map.  Where it happened is a tiny little town of about 400 residents.  To put that into perspective, if all attendees at that church were from that little town, 1/16 of their entire population is now dead and another 1/16 are wounded.  1/8 killed or wounded in minutes.  This makes me so incredibly sad.

Edited by Butter
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's more than weekly, sadly.  It's the 308th mass shooting in the US in 2017.  That's close to one per day.

 

I can't imagine getting together with my family to go worship, and not coming home with them...as well as losing neighbors and friends.  From what I read, it's a small congregation.  Way too many deaths and injuries. 

 

 

As they say, if Newtown didn't change anything....if Vegas didn't change anything....nothing will change.  Feel so defeated by this. :(

 

 

  • Like 17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would rather know and see coverage so that the targeting of a certain group won't be hidden or censured.

 

There were many hate crimes inflicted on whites by a minirity group in our city, for example. No one knew because the media never mentioned it. It was only after foreign tourists were attacked that the rest of us found out that it's been happening for a couple of years. I don't like that kind of "not mentioning/not reporting" so I want to see everything reported.

 

It a fine line between coverage and exploitation, though.

 

So many people are radicalized by watching Youtube videos.

 

Well that falls under Sadie's "local" exemption.  Otherwise I say, Sadie, preach it, sister.  We glorify murderers the way we do things now.

 

I can't imagine.  I'm sorry for that town.   :grouphug:  :grouphug:  :grouphug:

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been following No Noteriety for some time now. There are studies that show that 30% of mass killings were inspired by previous mass killings and the news coverage surrounding them.

 

It goes against our nature, especially in this world of instant access to news that we live in. But it's damaging to present and past victims, to their families, and to people who may be susceptible to this kind of behavior much like suicide contagion.

 

https://ethics.journalism.wisc.edu/2017/10/09/stop-scrambling-for-why-and-stop-calling-them-shooters/

 

Is there any significant movement lobbying in this area?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's more than weekly, sadly. It's the 308th mass shooting in the US in 2017. That's close to one per day.

 

I can't imagine getting together with my family to go worship, and not coming home with them...as well as losing neighbors and friends. From what I read, it's a small congregation. Way too many deaths and injuries.

 

 

As they say, if Newtown didn't change anything....if Vegas didn't change anything....nothing will change. Feel so defeated by this. :(

This man was a felon. What sort of change would you recommend?

 

These poor people. They went to worship. The Sabbath is the most important of part of the week for many religious people. I can't imagine how they are feeling. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This man was a felon. What sort of change would you recommend?

 

These poor people. They went to worship. The Sabbath is the most important of part of the week for many religious people. I can't imagine how they are feeling. :(

 

Really? You can't think of one thing???

 

No more assault weapons period.

 

Gun buyback program.

 

Background checks--dishonorable discharge should at least get a ding, a second look.

 

Or take Switzerland's approach and regulate bullets.

 

We keep wringing our hands and pretending there's nothing we can do, when other countries (such as Australia) acted and changed their outcome.  

 

The framers of the second amendment could not fathom the type of weapons that exist today.  Also, historically the Supreme Court never said that guns could not be regulated.  Other bill of rights items are regulated.  http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2015/12/second_amendment_allows_for_gun_control.html

 

"The same is true of our freedom to exercise our religions. The court has held (in an opinion authored by Justice Antonin Scalia) that as long as a government regulation applies to everyone equally and does not target a particular religious group, many general laws that infringe on religious practices are nonetheless constitutional. Thus, if your religion involves the use of a banned hallucinogen like peyote, as was the situation in the Supreme Court case involving members of the Native American Church, your constitutionally protected right to freely exercise your religious beliefs takes a back seat to the state’s interest in uniform drug laws....

 

In fact, Justice Scalia, writing for the majority, said just the opposite. In Heller, he specifically said that “the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited.†

 
  • Like 21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Really? You can't think of one thing???

 

No more assault weapons period.

 

Gun buyback program.

 

Background checks--dishonorable discharge should at least get a ding, a second look.

 

Or take Switzerland's approach and regulate bullets.

 

We keep wringing our hands and pretending there's nothing we can do, when other countries (such as Australia) acted and changed their outcome.

 

The framers of the second amendment could not fathom the type of weapons that exist today. Also, historically the Supreme Court never said that guns could not be regulated. Other bill of rights items are regulated. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2015/12/second_amendment_allows_for_gun_control.html

 

"The same is true of our freedom to exercise our religions. The court has held (in an opinion authored by Justice Antonin Scalia) that as long as a government regulation applies to everyone equally and does not target a particular religious group, many general laws that infringe on religious practices are nonetheless constitutional. Thus, if your religion involves the use of a banned hallucinogen like peyote, as was the situation in the Supreme Court case involving members of the Native American Church, your constitutionally protected right to freely exercise your religious beliefs takes a back seat to the state’s interest in uniform drug laws....

 

In fact, Justice Scalia, writing for the majority, said just the opposite. In Heller, he specifically said that “the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited.â€

 

A dishonorable discharge DOES get a ding. This man was court martialed. He is barred from having possession of a weapon. But felons aren't often honest.

 

I'm absolutely not opposed to background checks for a weapon. But I'm not sure that would have prevented this.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s not about what specific law or regulation might have stopped some specific horrific shooting. It’s pretty much impossible to know that afterward, and yes, it is true that some people will get around those laws (something that’s not unique to gun laws). Instead, this should be about an overall change in our system. Umsami listed a lot of good ideas. Even if those laws wouldn’t stop every shooting, do we really want to continue in the path we’re on where the US has, by far, the highest rate of gun violence in developed countries? If we don’t do anything, we will continue on that path, and I am not okay with that. At all. So we can say this idea or that idea is bad or will restrict guns too much or whatever, but at some point, we’re saying this is okay. And I can’t accept that answer anymore.

Edited by Amira
  • Like 16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

THIS law may stop this potential shooting. THAT law stops that one. This is a massive problem that isn't going to be knocked out with one all-encompassing magical solution. We are past the point where we can argue, "One law cannot possibly put a dent in the violence so we may as well do nothing."

  • Like 17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People have been going to church in this country for 400+ years, and guns have been around for just as long. Church shootings are a relatively recent development. One has to look at the anti-Christian rhetoric which has pervaded our society. It's out and out hatred, and it has spead like a cancer. This is not what our culture was like when I was a child.

 

This is the problem, not the gun, and it needs to be confronted and stopped.

Pretty hard to shoot up a church if you can't get your hands on the appropriate weapon.

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does every single post have to get hijacked and turned into a gun debate? Yelling at each other on a message board saves zero lives.

 

I don't understand why this would be hijacking this post? The post is about a shooting after all. It wouldn't be relevant in a thread about spelling or banana bread recipes but how is it not relevant here? 

 

& people's minds *are* changed by words and writings every day.  

  • Like 17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People have been going to church in this country for 400+ years, and guns have been around for just as long. Church shootings are a relatively recent development. One has to look at the anti-Christian rhetoric which has pervaded our society. It's out and out hatred, and it has spead like a cancer. This is not what our culture was like when I was a child.

 

This is the problem, not the gun, and it needs to be confronted and stopped.

 

You have to be kidding. 

 

This has nothing to do with "anti-Christian rhetoric", since the vast majority of mass shootings have been of random innocent people in random public places, not churches. (The church shooting in Charleston was racially motivated). 

 

And semi-automatic weapons (and their ilk) have not been around for 400 years. 

 

It would be nice if you would not use mass deaths to try and play your own special victim card. 

Edited by Happy2BaMom
  • Like 26
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find the "we need more laws" rhetoric ridiculous. We already have laws - it was already illegal for this shooter to possess a gun as he was dishonorably discharged from the air force. With over 300 MILLION guns in the United States, we need a way to remove weapons from criminals, before imposing additional requirements on law abiding citizens. Latest reports are that it was an armed neighbor who shot and wounded the shooter. Who would your additional laws hurt - the guy already breaking the law, or the one who stopped him? I'm all for laws that will reduce criminals' access to weapons, and I would start by finding out how this shooter gained access to his weapons and find ways to prohibit a tradgedy by like this from happening in the future. But having seen the hoops that my FIL (a law abiding veteran) went through to try to purchase a gun in NY with no success, I'm not willing to give up my guns, my means of protection, until the criminals are unarmed.

 

And for the record - AR does NOT stand for Assault Rifle. It stands for Armalite, the company who originally manufactured the AR-15. The AR-15 is a semi-automatic (not automatic) weapon just like most pistols.

Edited by Jkacz
  • Like 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People have been going to church in this country for 400+ years, and guns have been around for just as long. Church shootings are a relatively recent development. One has to look at the anti-Christian rhetoric which has pervaded our society. It's out and out hatred, and it has spead like a cancer. This is not what our culture was like when I was a child.

 

This is the problem, not the gun, and it needs to be confronted and stopped.

 

If you are trying to claim that this tragedy was caused by "anti-Christian rhetoric," you need to back away from Infowars and similar nonsense (to put it politely). The shooter's wife was from this town and used to teach Sunday School at that church. Her mother still lives there, attends the church, and is friends with the pastor's family. The shooter himself listed on his LinkedIn profile that he had been a teacher's aide at Vacation Bible School in the past. He has a prior conviction for domestic violence. All the evidence so far points to an angry, unhinged guy with domestic problems and legally-obtained assault weapons.

 

Of course that doesn't stop the nut jobs from claiming he was "antifa" or a Muslim convert or that the shooting was a "false flag" "psyop" funded by Soros/Obama/Clintons to further the Deep State's agenda. PSA: don't read that shit.

  • Like 26
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find the "we need more laws" rhetoric ridiculous. We already have laws - it was already illegal for this shooter to possess a gun as he was dishonorably discharged from the air force. With over 300 MILLION guns in the United States, we need a way to remove weapons from criminals, before imposing additional requirements on law abiding citizens. Latest reports are that it was an armed neighbor who shot and wounded the shooter. Who would your additional laws hurt - the guy already breaking the law, or the one who stopped him? I'm all for laws that will reduce criminals' access to weapons, and I would start by finding out how this shooter gained access to his weapons and find ways to prohibit a trade by like this from happening in the future. But having seen the hoops that my FIL (a law abiding veteran) went through to try to purchase a gun in NY with no success, I'm not willing to give up my guns, my means of protection, until the criminals are unarmed.

 

And for the record - AR does NOT stand for Assault Rifle. It stands for Armalite, the company who originally manufactured the AR-15. The AR-15 is a semi-automatic (not automatic) weapon just like most pistols.

Some of the "we need more laws" rhetoric is aimed at removing weapons from criminals. Maybe the problem is the sheer number of weapons floating around out there as well as our attitude toward weapons. This guy has a history of domestic violence. He was thrown out of the military for beating his wife and child. I'm sure his history of violence was well known in a town this small. A few days before the shooting he blatantly posted a photo of the gun HE WASNT SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO OWN. What if he'd posted photos of drugs? I'm sure that would have garnered the attention of law enforcement, but apparently a crazy violent guy posting photos of his illegal AR-15 didn't ping anyone's radar?

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to clarify, it's not in San Antonio and actually is about 30 miles SE of San Antonio.  Since we moved to San Antonio, I've noticed my parents' news (DC area) often reports things as "in San Antonio" if it happens within 30-40 miles of the city because San Antonio is a place people recognize and can more or less place on a Texas map.  Where it happened is a tiny little town of about 400 residents.  To put that into perspective, if all attendees at that church were from that little town, 1/16 of their entire population is now dead and another 1/16 are wounded.  1/8 killed or wounded in minutes.  This makes me so incredibly sad.

I was stepping in here to clarify the location for the OP when I saw that you already had.  Yeah, heartbreakingly, a rather significant percentage of the population of this very tiny town attends that church.  With a town that small everyone in that town knows someone that died, probably all of them.  This will affect them for generations.  My heart breaks for the entire community.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of the "we need more laws" rhetoric is aimed at removing weapons from criminals. Maybe the problem is the sheer number of weapons floating around out there as well as our attitude toward weapons. This guy has a history of domestic violence. He was thrown out of the military for beating his wife and child. I'm sure his history of violence was well known in a town this small. A few days before the shooting he blatantly posted a photo of the gun HE WASNT SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO OWN. What if he'd posted photos of drugs? I'm sure that would have garnered the attention of law enforcement, but apparently a crazy violent guy posting photos of his illegal AR-15 didn't ping anyone's radar?

With this guy's history, my question is why DIDN't law enforcement arrest the crazy violent guy and confiscate the gun and any others on his premises? I would think the photo would have given them probable cause for search and arrest warrants.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People have been going to church in this country for 400+ years, and guns have been around for just as long. Church shootings are a relatively recent development. One has to look at the anti-Christian rhetoric which has pervaded our society. It's out and out hatred, and it has spead like a cancer. This is not what our culture was like when I was a child.

 

This is the problem, not the gun, and it needs to be confronted and stopped.

 

This seriously blows my mind. I just have to wonder what world those who believe we have a pervasive anti-Christian rhetoric going on live in. I don't see it. I am Christian but I also am a huge supporter of LGBT rights and I see so much anti-LGBT / pro (certain types of) Christian rhetoric that it's most definitely not the world I grew up in. 

 

The culture I grew up in, in small town Texas, wasn't awesome but it also wasn't so full of the judgement and hate I see today. And that judgement and hate that I see today isn't aimed at Christians. It would be laughable if people weren't dying. 

Edited by Joker
  • Like 17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find the "we need more laws" rhetoric ridiculous. We already have laws - it was already illegal for this shooter to possess a gun as he was dishonorably discharged from the air force. With over 300 MILLION guns in the United States, we need a way to remove weapons from criminals, before imposing additional requirements on law abiding citizens. Latest reports are that it was an armed neighbor who shot and wounded the shooter. Who would your additional laws hurt - the guy already breaking the law, or the one who stopped him? I'm all for laws that will reduce criminals' access to weapons, and I would start by finding out how this shooter gained access to his weapons and find ways to prohibit a trade by like this from happening in the future. But having seen the hoops that my FIL (a law abiding veteran) went through to try to purchase a gun in NY with no success, I'm not willing to give up my guns, my means of protection, until the criminals are unarmed.

 

According to an Air Force spokesman, he received a bad conduct discharge, not dishonorable, and the domestic violence conviction was allegedly a misdemeanor, not a felony.

 

They already know how he got the gun — he bought it in April 2016 from Academy Sports & Outdoors in San Antonio, and he checked the box saying he did not have a criminal history that would disqualify him from owning the gun. So either the store that sold him the gun didn't do their job in running a background check, or a DV conviction and a bad conduct discharge do not prevent someone from buying semi-automatic assault weapons.

 

The Vegas shooter also purchased his weapons legally. And Congress recently passed a law allowing mentally ill people on permanent disability, including schizophrenics, to buy weapons. So I guess this is just the "new normal" in the US. 

  • Like 17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to an Air Force spokesman, he received a bad conduct discharge, not dishonorable, and the domestic violence conviction was allegedly a misdemeanor, not a felony.

 

They already know how he got the gun — he bought it in April 2016 from Academy Sports & Outdoors in San Antonio, and he checked the box saying he did not have a criminal history that would disqualify him from owning the gun. So either the store that sold him the gun didn't do their job in running a background check, or a DV conviction and a bad conduct discharge do not prevent someone from buying semi-automatic assault weapons.

 

The Vegas shooter also purchased his weapons legally. And Congress recently passed a law allowing mentally ill people on permanent disability, including schizophrenics, to buy weapons. So I guess this is just the "new normal" in the US.

Here is a link to the federal background check form. https://www.atf.gov/file/61446/download

 

I would think he would have had to check yes to 11C if he was confined for 12 months and possibly yes to 11G and 11i, as well. Checking any of those boxes would have stopped the sale immediately. Store should then have submitted the background check form to the federal government which "should" have denied him from obtaining the weapon. If the store didn't submit the background check form, the person responsible should be prosecuted as an accessory to murder.

 

Then there's possibility 3 - he lied on the form and the federal background check didn't pick up on it.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In fact, Justice Scalia, writing for the majority, said just the opposite. In Heller, he specifically said that “the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited.â€

 

And for Scalia not to take the rightmost position in a debate is quite unusual, as I think we all know.

 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a link to the federal background check form. https://www.atf.gov/file/61446/download

 

I would think he would have had to check yes to 11C if he was confined for 12 months and possibly yes to 11G and 11i, as well. Checking any of those boxes would have stopped the sale immediately. Store should then have submitted the background check form to the federal government which "should" have denied him from obtaining the weapon. If the store didn't submit the background check form, the person responsible should be prosecuted as an accessory to murder.

 

Then there's possibility 3 - he lied on the form and the federal background check didn't pick up on it.

 

Well 11c and g don't really apply (it wasn't a felony and he wasn't dishonorably discharged), but theoretically he should have checked yes to 11i regarding a misdemeanor DV conviction. Apparently military convictions don't always show up in background checks, though, so it's possible the store did run a check but the conviction didn't show up. The guy worked as a security guard over the summer and was "licensed by the Texas Department of Public Safety," which one would think would require a background check, but obviously nothing showed up that prevented him from being licensed. If the store didn't run a background check at all, then I agree that whoever was responsible for that should be criminally charged. And if they did run one and the conviction didn't show up, then there is a loophole that definitely needs to be closed.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People have been going to church in this country for 400+ years, and guns have been around for just as long. Church shootings are a relatively recent development. One has to look at the anti-Christian rhetoric which has pervaded our society. It's out and out hatred, and it has spead like a cancer. This is not what our culture was like when I was a child.

 

This is the problem, not the gun, and it needs to be confronted and stopped.

Others have responded to this, but it needs to be clear that black churches have been a target of violence for a very long time. This isn’t some new anti-Christian movement, and houses of worships for other religions have been targeted too.

 

And just in case anyone tries to say that these attacks listed below didn’t usually use guns so guns aren’t the problem, let’s not forget that guns are one of the most effective ways to kill a large number of people quickly if that is the intent of the shooter. Any loss of life is terrible, but relatively few people died in these attacks. If guns had been used in most of them, the results almost certainly would have been very different.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_attacks_against_African-American_churches

 

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/23/black-church-attacks_n_7618022.html

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

These discussions seem so pointless.

 

Fact is, there are sick and/or evil people in the world

These people will try to hurt other people

The easier it is to get a gun, the more of these sick/evil people will use one

While there are many ways to kill/maim, modern guns are some of the most efficient and easily used weapons

There is always a dichotomy between freedom/personal rights on one hand and safety on the other

At this point, the ruling majority in the US apparently feels that personal rights in regards to guns trump safety

As long as that doesn't change there is nothing to be done

  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find the "we need more laws" rhetoric ridiculous. We already have laws - it was already illegal for this shooter to possess a gun as he was dishonorably discharged from the air force. With over 300 MILLION guns in the United States, we need a way to remove weapons from criminals, before imposing additional requirements on law abiding citizens. Latest reports are that it was an armed neighbor who shot and wounded the shooter. Who would your additional laws hurt - the guy already breaking the law, or the one who stopped him? I'm all for laws that will reduce criminals' access to weapons, and I would start by finding out how this shooter gained access to his weapons and find ways to prohibit a trade by like this from happening in the future. But having seen the hoops that my FIL (a law abiding veteran) went through to try to purchase a gun in NY with no success, I'm not willing to give up my guns, my means of protection, until the criminals are unarmed.

 

And for the record - AR does NOT stand for Assault Rifle. It stands for Armalite, the company who originally manufactured the AR-15. The AR-15 is a semi-automatic (not automatic) weapon just like most pistols.

 

The thing is, we're either on a trajectory of adding more guns to society, or we're not not.  Even if it meant less guns in the hands of the "good guys," standing off of this wild escalation of weaponry seems to be in the country's best interest.  And typically, gun sales rise after every mass shooting too.  Do we really want to be doing this?

 

Sure, there are lots of other aspects too, including how do we best handle mental illness.  Many things need to be addressed.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People have been going to church in this country for 400+ years, and guns have been around for just as long. Church shootings are a relatively recent development. One has to look at the anti-Christian rhetoric which has pervaded our society. It's out and out hatred, and it has spead like a cancer. This is not what our culture was like when I was a child.

 

This is the problem, not the gun, and it needs to be confronted and stopped.

 

I don't believe it's related to an anti-Christian movement either.  (I mean, there is some anti-Christian rhetoric going on, but a lot of it is sadly justified.  That's for a different thread though.)  However, I don't at all believe that's what is behind the mass shootings.  Many, many types of people from many different backgrounds are victims.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People have been going to church in this country for 400+ years, and guns have been around for just as long. Church shootings are a relatively recent development. One has to look at the anti-Christian rhetoric which has pervaded our society. It's out and out hatred, and it has spead like a cancer. This is not what our culture was like when I was a child.

 

This is the problem, not the gun, and it needs to be confronted and stopped.

 

The lack of logical, critical thinking here is stunning, particularly on a board devoted to classical education.

 

I suppose by your logic the Las Vegas shooting was because of hatred of country music, and the Newtown shooter hated young children.

 

Neither, of course, seems to be true at all.

  • Like 18
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find the "we need more laws" rhetoric ridiculous. We already have laws - it was already illegal for this shooter to possess a gun as he was dishonorably discharged from the air force. With over 300 MILLION guns in the United States, we need a way to remove weapons from criminals, before imposing additional requirements on law abiding citizens. Latest reports are that it was an armed neighbor who shot and wounded the shooter. Who would your additional laws hurt - the guy already breaking the law, or the one who stopped him? I'm all for laws that will reduce criminals' access to weapons, and I would start by finding out how this shooter gained access to his weapons and find ways to prohibit a trade by like this from happening in the future. But having seen the hoops that my FIL (a law abiding veteran) went through to try to purchase a gun in NY with no success, I'm not willing to give up my guns, my means of protection, until the criminals are unarmed.

 

And for the record - AR does NOT stand for Assault Rifle. It stands for Armalite, the company who originally manufactured the AR-15. The AR-15 is a semi-automatic (not automatic) weapon just like most pistols.

QFT

And prayers for the families of the victims, for the church, and for the little town. Let them heal.

Edited by Sandwalker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys.  Do you know how easy it is to get a gun in Texas?

 

We were there 6 weeks before a rifle was given to a kid in our troop for a high prize in scout popcorn sales.  People auction these things off at raffles and fairs.

 

Yes, there needs to be stricter gun control in Texas.  Full stop.

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QFT

And prayers for the families of the victims, for the church, and for the little town. Let them heal.

 

I did pray for the families. But honestly, if I was one of the victims (survivor, family, neighbor etc.) of this or any other mass shooting, I would be spitting mad at all the "thoughts and prayers" with nothing else happening. Sure, if EVERYONE prayed and thought healing thoughts there would be no more shootings (or most other crime) - but realistically this is just not going to happen and people have to take personal responsibility for effecting change.

  • Like 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty hard to shoot up a church if you can't get your hands on the appropriate weapon.

 

 

Well there are some 300 million guns in the US, so it's not going to be difficult to find a weapon.

 

Not every gun would be an appropriate weapon for killing 26 people and wounding as many more in under 15 minutes. For that you need something with a large magazine capacity and the ability to reload quickly. For the Las Vegas shooting, the perpetrator needed the bump stock or he wouldn't have been able to fire fast enough to hit 500 people in 10 minutes. You can't massacre this many people without military style hardware. A hunting rifle, a double barreled shotgun or a Colt 45 just can't do this. You will still have shootings but the body count will not be as horrific. At this point, I'd be happy with less horrific. Reinstating the assault weapon ban would be a big step in the right direction.

  • Like 16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did pray for the families. But honestly, if I was one of the victims (survivor, family, neighbor etc.) of this or any other mass shooting, I would be spitting mad at all the "thoughts and prayers" with nothing else happening. Sure, if EVERYONE prayed and thought healing thoughts there would be no more shootings (or most other crime) - but realistically this is just not going to happen and people have to take personal responsibility for effecting change.

 

This.

 

If prayers were the answer, there never would have been a holocaust or the genocides before and after.  We cannot sit back and decide that our only option is prayer that a deity will make it all better.  Our prayers should be for guidance in doing what is right, courage in putting it into action, foresight to see how this will affect future generations, and compassion for those who have been wronged.

 

Not a solution.  The solution has to come from us, helping ourselves.

 

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, can I ask a question? Honestly, I haven't been watching any of the coverage because it seemed focused on showing people traumatized, which I don't need right now. Was anyone in that church concealed carry? Did they have security policies? Because y'all are talking about how they could take away guns from criminals (who lie, steal, etc.), but this was Texas. I thought the idea was in Texas so many people have guns to protect themselves. Where were their guns when they needed them? 

 

Or was the whole thing just so fast? Did he walk in after the service started? I mean, something that big (an assault rifle??) isn't something you just hide. So did he come in after the service started and people were vulnerable? 

 

It just so does not add up to me. Churches KNOW they are targets right now and they have to have safety plans. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The fact that the typical talking points got dusted off while bodies were still warm on the ground is gross and oh so predictable. I’m not going to engage in this merry go round on guns yet again, but Scalia does deserve defending of his jurisprudence and the consistency behind it.

 

When don't we have warm bodies on the ground from mass shootings?

  • Like 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, can I ask a question? Honestly, I haven't been watching any of the coverage because it seemed focused on showing people traumatized, which I don't need right now. Was anyone in that church concealed carry? Did they have security policies? Because y'all are talking about how they could take away guns from criminals (who lie, steal, etc.), but this was Texas. I thought the idea was in Texas so many people have guns to protect themselves. Where were their guns when they needed them? 

 

Or was the whole thing just so fast? Did he walk in after the service started? I mean, something that big (an assault rifle??) isn't something you just hide. So did he come in after the service started and people were vulnerable? 

 

It just so does not add up to me. Churches KNOW they are targets right now and they have to have safety plans. 

 

He shot in through the windows first. He was wearing tactical body armor. A neighbor did shoot at him as he was leaving (and may have hit him) and then jumped in a pickup that happened by and those two civilians chased him as he was driving away. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need to do whatever we can to stop these mass shootings.   This is not what life should be like in America in 2017.   I think it will take more than one law or change, but we need to do it. 

Maybe some people will not like it, but would they rather have to worry and be affected by this? 

 

We can't be alarmed when these things happen and then forget about them a week or month later.   My god each one is so horrible and any life lost is too much.   How can we as a nation let innocent young children be killed like at Sandy Hook or basically a battlefield happen in Las Vegas and not change things?  

 

It seems like this happens everyday now.  Enough is Enough. 

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, can I ask a question? Honestly, I haven't been watching any of the coverage because it seemed focused on showing people traumatized, which I don't need right now. Was anyone in that church concealed carry? Did they have security policies? Because y'all are talking about how they could take away guns from criminals (who lie, steal, etc.), but this was Texas. I thought the idea was in Texas so many people have guns to protect themselves. Where were their guns when they needed them? 

 

Or was the whole thing just so fast? Did he walk in after the service started? I mean, something that big (an assault rifle??) isn't something you just hide. So did he come in after the service started and people were vulnerable? 

 

It just so does not add up to me. Churches KNOW they are targets right now and they have to have safety plans. 

I understand not wanting to watch the coverage.   Hugs.

 

Yes, he walked in about half an hour after the service had started.  I am not opposed to churches having a safety plan.  What type of safety plan would you suggest?  Lots of people are packed into a relatively small space, seated in pews so maneuverability is limited.  The minister is almost certainly not going to be packing during his church sermon.  What were these church members supposed to do against a man armed with weapons that can fire multiple rounds in a very short span of time?  I am not opposed to a safety plan but I have a hard time envisioning one that would have prevented this from happening.  Maybe lessening the damage, though.  

 

As a Texan, and as the relative of a lot of people who are Texans, many of whom live in tiny Texas towns, I think I may have some insight here regarding why no one immediately shot the man while inside the church.  Why did no one apparently have a gun available inside the church?  We don't carry our guns into church.  This is Texas but that doesn't mean all of our citizens walk around armed to the teeth.  Far from it.  That church is a house of worship, not a house of war.  I don't even own a gun but I have a lot of relatives that do.  It is part of the culture and they know how to safely use them.  But they don't have semi-automatic anything.  They have shot guns or 6 shooters of some kind, mainly used on ranches/farms.  And they don't carry them into church.  Mom was talking about this yesterday.  We just don't carry a gun into a house of worship.  Anyone's house of worship.  Why would we?

 

Considering how many zillions of churches there are in the State of Texas, and how many have actually had someone come in and shoot up the congregation, the odds are STRONGLY in our favor that we are not in danger when we go to church.  Why would someone automatically assume that after NO gun violence in their church since the church was created there would suddenly be a violent attack of this nature?  There are crimes committed every day in cities across the country, including where I live.  That doesn't mean I carry a gun with me as I walk out the door, nor should I feel like I failed in some way if I choose not to carry a gun but am then involved in a violent crime involving guns.  This town had NO reason to fear that someone would come marching in and shoot them. 

 

Is there an issue with gun violence?  Yes.  Absolutely.  And it needs to somehow be addressed.  NOW.  Is one solution to arm everyone so we all go around carrying guns?  And if we choose not to carry a gun but we get shot then, well, its our fault for not being armed?  NO.  I don't see that as the solution at all.

 

I think it is a multifaceted problem and no one change will solve everything but there have been a lot of good suggestions.  Reinstating the ban on assault weapons would be one of them, IMHO.  

 

That does not mean that ANYONE should feel obligated to carry a gun into their church on the off chance that a random person will come walking in one morning and shoot everyone.  

 

But yes, I do think churches could try and institute some safety planning.  Not that it could prevent what happened but it MIGHT save a life or two if the congregation had some plan in place.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last time I checked, they didn't have much info on the guy, but I thought he had domestic violence history among other things.  They also said his family had some ties in the church.

 

Last week a somewhat prominent woman in our community was brutally murdered (throat slit) by a guy who had been reported as having violated a protection order in favor of this woman 3x.  There was a warrant out for his arrest but the cops didn't act on it.

 

This is a small part of a big pattern in this country and in the world.  We don't take domestic violence seriously and there is absolutely no good reason for that.

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...