New gun violence thread

[pinball]

5 minutes ago, barnwife said:

the rabbit trail.

racoon trail

[KSera]

2 hours ago, Heartstrings said:

 

I’m not sure the statistics on guns being inherently unsafe is going to be very persuasive.

 

I was asked where I got the data that having a gun in the house increases risk, thus the statistics. I’m sure most gun owners seeing the data will discount it as not applying to them (though the research showing that the increased risk of suicide is not just due to mental illness might give anyone with a teenager or young adult in the house some pause).  Also notable in the research was that a gun in the house was not found to decrease the risk of stranger homicide. 

[SKL]

I would agree that having a gun in the house increases risk of injury and death IF it is not stored properly.

I absolutely agree that both non-gun owners and responsible gun owners should focus on getting nonviolent owners of legal guns to store and handle them properly, train their kids properly, and get educated on the real risks.

Someone I know who has a gun and lives alone (rurally) wasn't keeping it very secure.  I talked to her about the risk of suicide for any young, hormonal person visiting and seeing that gun around.  She hid it in a secure location.

And this is why I advocate the kinds of gun safes that cannot open without the owner's biometrics, at least if you live with young people or people with any kind of emotional issues (anger management, depression, or whatever).  I'd rather have a gun that won't fire without the right biometrics, but they don't sell those in the US for some reason.

[KSera]

21 minutes ago, SKL said:

I would agree that having a gun in the house increases risk of injury and death IF it is not stored properly.

Absolutely unsafe storage increases the risk a lot. If you read the studies though, you’ll see that some of them controlled for storage and found the risk is still increased when guns are properly stored (I expect because people with properly stored guns can still use the gun for suicide or homicide by taking it out of storage to do so). 
 

And as you say, a lot of people don’t safely store their gun anyway, often because they think they are safer if they can quickly access their gun. And others just don’t want to “give in to tyranny” 🙄 by safely storing their weapon. 
 

Eta: I’ll move on from this point, as we agree on safe storage at least, and I think I’ve shared plenty to show where I got the data to back my assertion that a gun in the house increases risk.

Edited April 1, 2023 by KSera

[prairiewindmomma]

When Smith and Wesson announced they were developing biometric gun technology in 1999, the NRA announced a boycott against them. It was successful, and Smith and Wesson dropped the idea.

There are biometric gun safes and biometric trigger locks. 
NRA’s official position is against safes and trigger locks because, “(they) render them useless in a self defense situation” and storage should be an “individual situation”. 
 

The biometric safes I have seen take about 2-3 seconds to open. You push the “awake” button, scan your fingerprint, and it opens. Amazon sells ones that would fit a couple of handguns and several boxes of ammo for under $300. They run on long lasting batteries, and have a key backup.

[El...]

We're always talking about too many separate types of shootings at once in these discussions, IMO.  All are horrible; in all cases, there is tremendous unnecessary suffering.  Sure, we could prevent them all by melting down all the guns, but will we do that?  No. Since we know that won't happen, I think we need to break things down more carefully and move the needle more deliberately.

The statistics we most often use to explain the risks of gun injury and death in a home include both accident and murder.  I think that's unhelpful, because it makes it hard to see the many, many things we could do to help reduce the different types of tragedies. 

For example, we can probably reduce the number of what I'll call "true accidents."  I'm talking about kids finding a gun in a drawer and shooting a little friend. I wonder if an ad campaign might help move the conversation by asking people to consider, "Are you a responsible gun owner?"  It could be a picture of a little kid reaching into a bedside table drawer, and could ask things like, "Could a child find your gun? Could she get hurt?"  Really punch those parents and grandparents in the heartstrings, the same way we've made a difference in fencing around pools. 

Second, I think that if someone's gun gets used without their consent, they should be SO LIABLE. They should get sued up one side and down the other.  If they failed to meet a legal standard of securing their gun or reporting it stolen, they should lose their house in the lawsuits. 

Third, though this one is less likely right now, I think your homeowner's insurance should be able to ask if you have guns in the house, what kind/how many, and how they're secured.  That's a really long shot, but the second idea may lead to this.

I'm open to all steps in the right direction. No, this wouldn't have prevented last week. But we don't have to do nothing or let the wildest 2A screams dominate the conversation. 

I appreciate this forum for intelligent attempts at nuance.  Thanks for helping me think, all of you.

[bookbard]

15 hours ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Do you mind me asking if your family were crop based or animal based?

yep, crop based, so it would be very different if you were farming large animals, I agree. 

[Heartstrings]

11 hours ago, SKL said:

d this is why I advocate the kinds of gun safes that cannot open without the owner's biometrics 

Why biometrics instead of a pin code?  Just curious. 

[Mrs Tiggywinkle Again]

17 hours ago, prairiewindmomma said:

When Smith and Wesson announced they were developing biometric gun technology in 1999, the NRA announced a boycott against them. It was successful, and Smith and Wesson dropped the idea.

There are biometric gun safes and biometric trigger locks. 
NRA’s official position is against safes and trigger locks because, “(they) render them useless in a self defense situation” and storage should be an “individual situation”. 
 

The biometric safes I have seen take about 2-3 seconds to open. You push the “awake” button, scan your fingerprint, and it opens. Amazon sells ones that would fit a couple of handguns and several boxes of ammo for under $300. They run on long lasting batteries, and have a key backup.

My dad’s had a biometric gun safe that’s easily accessible and quick to open. He’s had it(or ones like it) for at least 20 years. I’d prefer DH used them but he isn’t a fan for whatever reason. Most of his weapons are stored elsewhere anyway, but I like biometric safes.

[Ting Tang]

I went to a competition for my child yesterday that had armed security wearing bullet proof vests at a big sports/kid venue. He was at the entrance of the part of the facility we were in, not just the front door.   How sad, but how grateful I was at the same time.  I have asked and asked about security at these kid events, such soft targets. This is the first time the kids have ever had it. I did feel safer.  

[Mrs Tiggywinkle Again]

6 hours ago, Heartstrings said:

Why biometrics instead of a pin code?  Just curious. 

PIN codes are easily guessed or found by kids.  My dad had one and at least three of his kids figured it out, which is when he got the biometric safes.

[Ting Tang]

49 minutes ago, Mrs Tiggywinkle Again said:

PIN codes are easily guessed or found by kids.  My dad had one and at least three of his kids figured it out, which is when he got the biometric safes.

Oh yeah, the kids are better with technology than we are sometimes!  Accidents can happen with anything.  I was given mace a long time ago by my mother in law.  I used to keep it in my purse.  The safety somehow disengaged.  Nothing more than that happened, but no more.  They still get mad I do not carry it, but I just feel like my child is more likely to get maced than a criminal, so I do take my chances.  I wish I didn't have to take my chances so often in this life.

Edited April 2, 2023 by Ting Tang

[Vintage81]

4 hours ago, Mrs Tiggywinkle Again said:

PIN codes are easily guessed or found by kids.  My dad had one and at least three of his kids figured it out, which is when he got the biometric safes.

I'm terrible with remembering codes...we have a few of these smaller biometric safes that house our handguns. They are so easy and they even notify you if someone has tried to access it that doesn't have their fingerprint stored. We also have a larger safe that houses DH's rifles (plus some of our important documents) and I'm always forgetting the stupid code. ☺️

[SKL]

Yeah I feel that with just a code, it's still possible that someone who shouldn't get at the gun will do so.  And it's yet another code / password to remember on top of the 999 that we already have ... and as we get older ... (speaking for myself at least) we have less ability to remember.  Knowing me, I'd probably use the same code I use for a bunch of other things, which others in my life might figure out one way or another.

Obviously a code lock is a million times better than no lock, but personally I would like to go one step further.

[Dmmetler]

5 hours ago, Ting Tang said:

I went to a competition for my child yesterday that had armed security wearing bullet proof vests at a big sports/kid venue. He was at the entrance of the part of the facility we were in, not just the front door.   How sad, but how grateful I was at the same time.  I have asked and asked about security at these kid events, such soft targets. This is the first time the kids have ever had it. I did feel safer.  

There's a big cheer competition in Nashville this weekend. There are tons of people posting pictures of their kids with the security guards, and kids "pinning" (it's a tradition to decorate clothespins and clip them on other competitors) them. I'm not sure how much security they're really providing (it's probably good they aren't super hairtrigger!). Most competitions we went to had security for crowd control, usually provided by the venue, and some had bag checks, metal detectors, or both. I never really thought about it because they're usually in venues that have thaf for concerts and other sports events, but it's sitting a little differently to see the pictures from Nashville today. 

[TechWife]

22 hours ago, El... said:

We're always talking about too many separate types of shootings at once in these discussions, IMO.  All are horrible; in all cases, there is tremendous unnecessary suffering.  Sure, we could prevent them all by melting down all the guns, but will we do that?  No. Since we know that won't happen, I think we need to break things down more carefully and move the needle more deliberately.

The statistics we most often use to explain the risks of gun injury and death in a home include both accident and murder.  I think that's unhelpful, because it makes it hard to see the many, many things we could do to help reduce the different types of tragedies. 

For example, we can probably reduce the number of what I'll call "true accidents."  I'm talking about kids finding a gun in a drawer and shooting a little friend. I wonder if an ad campaign might help move the conversation by asking people to consider, "Are you a responsible gun owner?"  It could be a picture of a little kid reaching into a bedside table drawer, and could ask things like, "Could a child find your gun? Could she get hurt?"  Really punch those parents and grandparents in the heartstrings, the same way we've made a difference in fencing around pools. 

Second, I think that if someone's gun gets used without their consent, they should be SO LIABLE. They should get sued up one side and down the other.  If they failed to meet a legal standard of securing their gun or reporting it stolen, they should lose their house in the lawsuits. 

Third, though this one is less likely right now, I think your homeowner's insurance should be able to ask if you have guns in the house, what kind/how many, and how they're secured.  That's a really long shot, but the second idea may lead to this.

I'm open to all steps in the right direction. No, this wouldn't have prevented last week. But we don't have to do nothing or let the wildest 2A screams dominate the conversation. 

I appreciate this forum for intelligent attempts at nuance.  Thanks for helping me think, all of you.

These are thoughtful answers. Instead of an ad campaign, some targeted education would be better, IMO. I don't think most people watch, listen to or read ads anymore. Even on the internet, I don't watch them, I watch the countdown, scroll or fast forward through them if I'm able.

I completely agree that gun owners should be liable for how their weapons are used. I think insurance liability insurance could accompany it, possibly as a rider on the homeowners insurance policy or an independent policy. I don't see this coming to fruition anytime soon because it's difficult to trace ownership of a gun the way that things are currently set up.

It's also necessary to make it clear that proponents of common sense regulations do realize  no solution is going to be 100% effective. The goal is to lower the risk for gun violence and to increase the survival rates for gun wounds.

 

[Rosie_0801]

1 hour ago, TechWife said:

These are thoughtful answers. Instead of an ad campaign, some targeted education would be better, IMO. I don't think most people watch, listen to or read ads anymore. Even on the internet, I don't watch them, I watch the countdown, scroll or fast forward through them if I'm able.

Television is a useful medium for cultural change. 

[ktgrok]

On 4/1/2023 at 4:35 PM, El... said:

We're always talking about too many separate types of shootings at once in these discussions, IMO.  All are horrible; in all cases, there is tremendous unnecessary suffering.  Sure, we could prevent them all by melting down all the guns, but will we do that?  No. Since we know that won't happen, I think we need to break things down more carefully and move the needle more deliberately.

The statistics we most often use to explain the risks of gun injury and death in a home include both accident and murder.  I think that's unhelpful, because it makes it hard to see the many, many things we could do to help reduce the different types of tragedies. 

For example, we can probably reduce the number of what I'll call "true accidents."  I'm talking about kids finding a gun in a drawer and shooting a little friend. I wonder if an ad campaign might help move the conversation by asking people to consider, "Are you a responsible gun owner?"  It could be a picture of a little kid reaching into a bedside table drawer, and could ask things like, "Could a child find your gun? Could she get hurt?"  Really punch those parents and grandparents in the heartstrings, the same way we've made a difference in fencing around pools. 

Second, I think that if someone's gun gets used without their consent, they should be SO LIABLE. They should get sued up one side and down the other.  If they failed to meet a legal standard of securing their gun or reporting it stolen, they should lose their house in the lawsuits. 

Third, though this one is less likely right now, I think your homeowner's insurance should be able to ask if you have guns in the house, what kind/how many, and how they're secured.  That's a really long shot, but the second idea may lead to this.

I'm open to all steps in the right direction. No, this wouldn't have prevented last week. But we don't have to do nothing or let the wildest 2A screams dominate the conversation. 

I appreciate this forum for intelligent attempts at nuance.  Thanks for helping me think, all of you.

I'm in Florida, lots of pools here. What made a difference with fences around pools was legislation and insurance requirements. Not education. The fences are not cheap, and people hate having their view obstructed, etc etc etc. But now you HAVE to have a fence with an automatic closing latch in order to get your mortgage/homeowner's insurance. It's not about good will and people being cautious, it's about making it a requirement. 

[mommyoffive]

Why do we forget after catastrophic events? (substack.com)

[Guest]

On 4/1/2023 at 3:58 PM, KSera said:

Absolutely unsafe storage increases the risk a lot. If you read the studies though, you’ll see that some of them controlled for storage and found the risk is still increased when guns are properly stored (I expect because people with properly stored guns can still use the gun for suicide or homicide by taking it out of storage to do so). 

I think this goes back to the admittedly woo idea (which I believe) that it’s the “consciousness” or “vibrational energy” of gun ownership that makes gun usage a possibility instead of a never-do. It goes back to the idea that, “When you’re a hammer, everything’s a nail.” 

[KSera]

11 hours ago, ktgrok said:

I'm in Florida, lots of pools here. What made a difference with fences around pools was legislation and insurance requirements. Not education. The fences are not cheap, and people hate having their view obstructed, etc etc etc. But now you HAVE to have a fence with an automatic closing latch in order to get your mortgage/homeowner's insurance. It's not about good will and people being cautious, it's about making it a requirement. 

100%. That’s the case with most safety things. Study after study has found mask usage for Covid was highest where it was required, not where they educated about it the most. Bike helmets, seatbelts, safe car seat usage for children, all the same way. For some reason, a lot of people are not inclined to do things that clearly reduce risk to self and others unless they are required to do so. 

3 hours ago, Quill said:

I think this goes back to the admittedly woo idea (which I believe) that it’s the “consciousness” or “vibrational energy” of gun ownership that makes gun usage a possibility instead of a never-do. It goes back to the idea that, “When you’re a hammer, everything’s a nail.” 

This is probably true as well. The number of times in local discussions of a property crime that a gun owner pipes up along the lines of, “this is why we have guns; they’re lucky I wasn’t there.” This is usually for things like someone breaking into a car, I’m not talking home invasion. 

[Pam in CT]

re focusing on what "responsible gun ownership" actually looks like

On 4/1/2023 at 4:35 PM, El... said:

...we can probably reduce the number of what I'll call "true accidents."  I'm talking about kids finding a gun in a drawer and shooting a little friend. I wonder if an ad campaign might help move the conversation by asking people to consider, "Are you a responsible gun owner?"  It could be a picture of a little kid reaching into a bedside table drawer, and could ask things like, "Could a child find your gun? Could she get hurt?"  Really punch those parents and grandparents in the heartstrings, the same way we've made a difference in fencing around pools. 

Second, I think that if someone's gun gets used without their consent, they should be SO LIABLE. They should get sued up one side and down the other.  If they failed to meet a legal standard of securing their gun or reporting it stolen, they should lose their house in the lawsuits. 

Third, though this one is less likely right now, I think your homeowner's insurance should be able to ask if you have guns in the house, what kind/how many, and how they're secured.  That's a really long shot, but the second idea may lead to this.

I'm open to all steps in the right direction. No, this wouldn't have prevented last week. But we don't have to do nothing or let the wildest 2A screams dominate the conversation. 

I appreciate this forum for intelligent attempts at nuance.  Thanks for helping me think, all of you.

At the state level (and ~6 years after Sandy Hook, so it was a different grass roots community discussion process and a separate legislative effort than the immediate-aftermath organizational and legislative processes we also went through), CT managed to pass "Ethan's Law" requiring that guns be locked in any house where a minor was present (as well as in schools), after one kid went over to another kid's house for a playdate and Ethan ended up dead.  Both my senators have been lonely but indefatigable supporters for better gun safety measures at the federal level ever since Sandy Hook; and one of them (once our Attorney General, and adept at navigating language so as to withstand judicial scrutiny) has introduced a similar bill in Congress. If you feel moved to contact your Senator to Do Something, asking them to support the S 190 bill would be a concrete ask.  (Rosa deLaura, who represents New Haven, has introduced the identical parallel bill over in the House; that's the one to name to your Representative.)

Our state assembly is working on liability and the very-related liability insurance issues in this legislative cycle. At this moment the prospects for passage this cycle look slim. But CT was once known as The Insurance Capital of the World and there are some extremely knowlegable legal minds on the task, and I think we will get there, just probably not this year.

(And as a process matter, it's necessary for states like ours or CA or MA or etc to take on a new legal approach like liability first, so that it CAN be run up through the courts and tweaked if necessary, so by the time my Senators wrangle a bill through the much-heavier-lift federal legislative process the concept and the language has already withstood the INEVITABLE gun lobby tests and the language has been tweaked where necessary. Post Sandy Hook, advocates for better gun safety understand that that process is part of the work in states like ours.)

 

"Liability" is meaningless unless the power of the insurance market is enforcing it.

14 hours ago, ktgrok said:

I'm in Florida, lots of pools here. What made a difference with fences around pools was legislation and insurance requirements. Not education. The fences are not cheap, and people hate having their view obstructed, etc etc etc. But now you HAVE to have a fence with an automatic closing latch in order to get your mortgage/homeowner's insurance. It's not about good will and people being cautious, it's about making it a requirement. 

This.

(In the same way that whether or not you personally believe in climate change, you cannot get flood insurance (or etc) in areas where the insurance market evaluates a risk of rising tides or higher-category storms or etc.

Public education is awesome and necessary and valuable and no substitute at all for insurance premiums /penalties / decisions not to cover that direct our behavior.

 

Most gun owners genuinely consider themselves, in good faith, to be responsible gun owners. And yet as several pp have noted and linked in this thread, the leading cause of death to children, in rural areas and urban, is guns.  Mostly accidents and young-person suicide. 

No responsible gun owner is in favor of child death by accident or suicide.  This is one of the (considerable) areas of common ground.  Safe storage is a pro-life issue.

Safe storage wouldn't entirely eliminate those "tragic accidents" but it would go a long way towards reduction.  And better is better.

 

Edited April 4, 2023 by Pam in CT
typo

[Heartstrings]

Did everyone see where Florida *just* signed into law permit less carry? You no longer need a permit to just stick a gun in your pants and go out in public in Florida. This is a good example of how most states are moving towards less restrictions, not more.  
 

https://www.tampabay.com/news/florida-politics/2023/04/03/desantis-permitless-carry-gun-bill-florida-what-to-know/?outputType=amp

 

But under the new law, Floridians don’t have to undergo any training in order to carry a concealed weapon.

Bill sponsors Rep. Chuck Brannan, R-Macclenny, and Sen. Jay Collins, R-Tampa, have said they believe training is important but that it’s a personal responsibility.

[ktgrok]

39 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

Did everyone see where Florida *just* signed into law permit less carry? You no longer need a permit to just stick a gun in your pants and go out in public in Florida. This is a good example of how most states are moving towards less restrictions, not more.  
 

https://www.tampabay.com/news/florida-politics/2023/04/03/desantis-permitless-carry-gun-bill-florida-what-to-know/?outputType=amp

 

But under the new law, Floridians don’t have to undergo any training in order to carry a concealed weapon.

Bill sponsors Rep. Chuck Brannan, R-Macclenny, and Sen. Jay Collins, R-Tampa, have said they believe training is important but that it’s a personal responsibility.

Florida is getting more Florida by the day. Sigh. I know my friends of color in particular are scared by this. 

[livetoread]

My state dropped the conceal/carry license just last year. We have been an open carry with no license for awhile. I find it very disheartening.

[KSera]

1 hour ago, Heartstrings said:

Bill sponsors Rep. Chuck Brannan, R-Macclenny, and Sen. Jay Collins, R-Tampa, have said they believe training is important but that it’s a personal responsibility.

How does that work when the danger is to those surrounding? Shall we do the same for cars?

[Murphy101]

5 hours ago, Heartstrings said:

Did everyone see where Florida *just* signed into law permit less carry? You no longer need a permit to just stick a gun in your pants and go out in public in Florida. This is a good example of how most states are moving towards less restrictions, not more.  
 

https://www.tampabay.com/news/florida-politics/2023/04/03/desantis-permitless-carry-gun-bill-florida-what-to-know/?outputType=amp

 

But under the new law, Floridians don’t have to undergo any training in order to carry a concealed weapon.

Bill sponsors Rep. Chuck Brannan, R-Macclenny, and Sen. Jay Collins, R-Tampa, have said they believe training is important but that it’s a personal responsibility.

 Because it’s basicly a declaration by civilization that as a “society” we are all on our own and it’s every person for themselves.

There is no reason in a civilized stable society to be ready to kill someone every where they go.

Someone in my FB feed posted the stupidest dang thing ever about how Able was killed with a rock and so was Goliath but no one blames the rock.

You know what? I don’t blame guns either. But if we start having daily mass deaths at schools and grocery stores because people find a way to kill a person a minute with rocks? I’m darn well going to say it seems like we need a way to make that not so easy for them to do.

And I bet only a few would scream at me that I’m banning rocks about it either. Because no one is screaming that making it harder to hoard bomb materials is the same as saying legit farmers cannot use fertilizer.

Edited April 4, 2023 by Murphy101

[Ting Tang]

14 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

 

There is no reason in a civilized stable society to be ready to kill someone every where they go.

 

We've already been here for a very long time.  Some honestly do feel that this does give them a chance in an active shooter situation.  Still, I see no problem with requiring a permit or training for this right.  The scary thing, permit or not, will be someone acting prematurely or out of anticipation of something happening that is not really about to happen.  I do feel we need to harden soft targets, even more patrols around these targets might deter others?  It's sad I am calling them targets.  We have schools here that have very open campuses in our rural area with no help in sight.  My town only has a police officer on duty 1-2 days per week, and that is usually on the weekends---not during school days.  

[ktgrok]

I think every politician saying they can't or won't do anything about gun violence should resign. Why are they even there? Let someone who does think they can help protect small children give it a try. 

[prairiewindmomma]

21 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

I think every politician saying they can't or won't do anything about gun violence should resign. Why are they even there? Let someone who does think they can help protect small children give it a try. 

They are creating the world they want to live in. That should worry us all.

[Pam in CT]

re if you really believe you can't do anything, make space for someone else who maybe can

18 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

I think every politician saying they can't or won't do anything about gun violence should resign. Why are they even there? Let someone who does think they can help protect small children give it a try. 

I 100% felt this about the Uvalde police.  If uniformed officers truly figure there's nothing  they can do when they KNOW six year olds are bleeding out over a period of hours, why does the police force even exist?  Like, literally: if it's not there for THAT situation, what IS it for?

The point of leadership is to LEAD.  To find a path, even when visibility is poor, even amidst a noise and mayhem and confusion, even when the folks are scattered, even when a vocal segment of them (us) are naysaying / second guessing / howling in outrage / Monday morning quarterbacking and etc.

 

[Harriet Vane]

1 minute ago, Pam in CT said:

re if you really believe you can't do anything, make space for someone else who maybe can

I 100% felt this about the Uvalde police.  If uniformed officers truly figure there's nothing  they can do when they KNOW six year olds are bleeding out over a period of hours, why does the police force even exist?  Like, literally: if it's not there for THAT situation, what IS it for?

The point of leadership is to LEAD.  To find a path, even when visibility is poor, even amidst a noise and mayhem and confusion, even when the folks are scattered, even when a vocal segment of them (us) are naysaying / second guessing / howling in outrage / Monday morning quarterbacking and etc.

 

Quoting for truth. YES. ALL THIS.

[Heartstrings]

54 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

I think every politician saying they can't or won't do anything about gun violence should resign. Why are they even there? Let someone who does think they can help protect small children give it a try. 

They are there collecting checks from the lobbying groups that are paying them to write these bills.  Only NRA representatives were in the room when Desantis signed this bill.  Making sure they got what they paid for.  
 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna77934

With little fanfare, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed legislation Monday allowing residents to carry a concealed loaded weapon without a permit.

DeSantis signed the bill in a nonpublic event in his office with only bill sponsors, legislative leaders and gun rights advocates, including the National Rifle Association, in attendance.

 

Edited April 4, 2023 by Heartstrings
Edit to add citation

[Rosie_0801]

3 hours ago, Pam in CT said:

Safe storage is a pro-life issue.

Nice slogan for an ad campaign.

[Idalou]

17 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

They are there collecting checks from the lobbying groups that are paying them to write these bills.  Only NRA representatives were in the room when Desantis signed this bill.  Making sure they got what they paid for.  

 That's a little odd, isn't it? He usually makes quite a fanfare of his signings. 

Edited April 4, 2023 by Idalou

[KSera]

19 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

They are there collecting checks from the lobbying groups that are paying them to write these bills.  Only NRA representatives were in the room when Desantis signed this bill.  Making sure they got what they paid for.  

Campaign finance reform may be one of the ways to finally get the other reforms we need. Because the above is disgusting. But then, how do we get campaign finance reform passed? It really should be something that citizens on both sides of the aisle can agree with; shouldn’t our representatives work for us and not wealthy special interest groups and corporations?

[Heartstrings]

27 minutes ago, Idalou said:

That's a little odd, isn't it? He usually makes quite a fanfare of his signings

I assume he knows the timing makes for bad optics.  He’s still going to do it, of course.  

 

23 minutes ago, KSera said:

Campaign finance reform may be one of the ways to finally get the other reforms we need. Because the above is disgusting. But then, how do we get campaign finance reform passed? It really should be something that citizens on both sides of the aisle can agree with; shouldn’t our representatives work for us and not wealthy special interest groups and corporations?

Campaign finance reform probably requires a different balance of power on the Supreme Court.  The court created our current system with the Citizens United ruling.  

[Dmmetler]

https://apple.news/A-xpBqLQgQsiNAfTW8X3wiQ

 

I thought this was pretty good (it's an OpEd from Mother Jones on Hardening schools). I like his focus on more passive, always there protection (single entrance, bulletproof/resistant glass, and, as a teacher,I would add some things inside the building like door bars, maybe doors with key codes or pass cards between sections of the building, short range communications, and just plain having a well defined safety plan. I also suspect he's right in that things which were scary to kids 20 or so years ago, like adding metal detectors, are now so common in other settings to no longer be scary. I'm thinking about the hospital my mom was in last year, where you had to go through the metal detectors to get a badge from security, and then there was another set of metal detectors to go up to trauma, and then had to get buzzed into ICU or Extended care from the halls, but once you were in the hospital proper, you didn't see it, and I'm pretty sure none of the doctors and nurses were packing. Keep it at the doors, but keep the classrooms friendly and inviting. 

 

For that matter, we've had tornadoes lately and several people posted their tornado preparations, where they had a closet set up with cuddly blankets, squishmallows, snacks, their battery radio, etc. Somewhere their kids could go and be safe. If we had safety nooks set up as soft, secure reading corners, where at elementary levels we could do our circle times, or high school students could spread out to for independent work (with open doors, etc), or kids could take a sensory break, then when a drill came, we could go into that space, pull the door shut (and have two levels of locked doors between anyone and the kids even within the building) and it would be a lot less anxiety producing because it would be familiar. 

 

I also would like to see adding psychologists to each school (separate from guidance, who have a whole list of other things to do) based on student population. I suspect that would help more, particularly at the high school level, than armed security guards. 

 

 

[MercyA]

On 4/4/2023 at 4:10 PM, Rosie_0801 said:

Nice slogan for an ad campaign.

My parents and I hope to join a Wear Orange event in June and I plan to make a sign like this. Something like "Pro-Lifer for Gun Reform." Could also do "Gun Safety [not Control--thanks Pam!] Is Pro-Life," "Pro-Life = Safety for ALL Kids," etc. Sort of want to make it clear I *am* a pro-lifer, not just (justly) criticizing pro-lifers, KWIM? 

Sign suggestions welcome. 🙂

Edited April 6, 2023 by MercyA

[Pam in CT]

re sign suggestions

58 minutes ago, MercyA said:

My parents and I hope to join a Wear Orange event in June and I plan to make a sign like this. Something like "Pro-Lifer for Gun Reform." Could also do "Gun Control Is Pro-Life," "Pro-Life = Safety for ALL Kids," etc. Sort of want to make it clear I *am* a pro-lifer, not just (justly) criticizing pro-lifers, KWIM? 

Sign suggestions welcome. 🙂

Just generally... "gun safety" > "gun control"  . 

The three major organizations in CT focused on reducing gun violence (who each have distinct lanes; one on education in schools and community groups; one on connecting to a more-national footprint; and one laser-focused on legislation at the state level) ALL use the language of "reducing gun violence" -- with a consistent message that such reductions include accidents and suicides and DV as well as armed robberies and mass shootings -- rather than the language of "control."

Relatedly: aim for language that recognizes the common ground, that most gun owners are just as dismayed as anybody else by toddlers getting ahold of guns with predictably tragic consequences and teen suicides and etc * .

 

Of all the signs I've ever held, the one that engendered the most comments at the rally itself and was most-photographed and disseminated by the press, was one I held aloft at a March for Our Lives that was organized by the post-Marjory Douglas high school survivors:

Quote

Maybe all these kids

are God's answer

to all those Thoughts and Prayers

 

 

 

 

 

(*   Well, perhaps not QUITE as dismayed by DV that ends in dead women than some of the rest of us; that maybe is an area where there's a Gun Owner Gap in perception of harm. )

[mommyoffive]

Bullets and children. And what to do about it. (substack.com)

[SeaConquest]

Did anyone else see that 3 TN legislators are about to be removed from office for protesting gun violence?

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/06/us/tennessee-house-democrats-expulsion-shooting-gun-control.html

[Terabith]

29 minutes ago, SeaConquest said:

Did anyone else see that 3 TN legislators are about to be removed from office for protesting gun violence?

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/06/us/tennessee-house-democrats-expulsion-shooting-gun-control.html

I saw that.  I'm in Tennessee at the moment, and nobody here is talking about it.  

It's fascism.  Not even quiet fascism. 

Edited April 6, 2023 by Terabith
Misspelling that changed meaning

[Pawz4me]

15 minutes ago, Terabith said:

 

It's fascism.  Not even quite fascism. 

I think it is fascism. And authoritarianism.

And it's also utterly absurd. From what I understand if the three are expelled each district will hold a special election in thirty days or so. At which time my guess is all three will be re-elected (they can run again). And so the little silly stunt is going to cost taxpayers how much for three special elections?

And of course it's also a sideshow to divert attention away from their lack of action on the real issue.

 

Edited April 6, 2023 by Pawz4me

[Pam in CT]

re Streisand effect

20 minutes ago, Pawz4me said:

I think it is fascism. And authoritarianism.

And it's also utterly absurd. From what I understand if the three are expelled each district will hold a special election in thirty days or so. At which time my guess is all three will be re-elected (they can run again). And so the little silly stunt is going to cost taxpayers how much for three special elections?

And of course it's also a sideshow to divert attention away from their lack of action on the real issue.

 

The stunt may well backfire. It's provided a perfect platform for legislators who **have already demonstrated an ability to win elections** to talk about sensible gun safety measures for which there is **already demonstrated support** across a broad swath of voters; who can now CLEARLY PROVE how hostile and out-of-touch their fellow legislators are.  It is, obviously, up to the people of TN and the media that covers the story to elevate the **content underlying** the stunt rather than permit it to devolve into horserace infotainment.

In the long haul, fits and starts and shenanigans notwithstanding, in a roughly representative system, we get the government we deserve. TN deserves better.  But to do better the citizens has to do its part.

[Dmmetler]

3 hours ago, Terabith said:

I saw that.  I'm in Tennessee at the moment, and nobody here is talking about it.  

It's fascism.  Not even quiet fascism. 

Oh, Memphis has a lot of folks yelling, since one of them is one of ours, and was literally sworn in the day of the Covenant shooting.

[Heartstrings]

The outcome in TN of expelling the 2 black men but not the white lady speaks volumes.  
 

Im sure someone is just itching to say it’s not racism, it was actually X, Y, or Z.  Not interested.  It is what it is.  
 

 

[Sneezyone]

2 hours ago, Heartstrings said:

The outcome in TN of expelling the 2 black men but not the white lady speaks volumes.  
 

Im sure someone is just itching to say it’s not racism, it was actually X, Y, or Z.  Not interested.  It is what it is.  
 

 

They show you who they are. Even local plantation elite blogs and the Governor aren't talking about this. They're exposed, laid bare, as the racists they are. The through-line from historical whitewashing to conservative legislative hegemony is strong. TN isn't alone.

Edited April 7, 2023 by Sneezyone

[Sneezyone]

If you have NOT seen Justin Pearson's speech, you need to watch/read it in its entirety. It FILLETS the ENTIRE conservative movement...with love. He put on a clinic in rhetorical non-violence.

Edited April 7, 2023 by Sneezyone

[KidsHappen]

6 hours ago, SeaConquest said:

Did anyone else see that 3 TN legislators are about to be removed from office for protesting gun violence?

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/06/us/tennessee-house-democrats-expulsion-shooting-gun-control.html

God help my state!