The entire reason nothing will come out of congress is this mass shooting is very profitable. Gun sales and gun manufacturer shares are up significantly.
The people who want guns love the money they are making in the wake of 19 dead children. Bragging rights. Not 2A rights. If you have principles do not bank on 19 dead children.
The husband of a slain teacher in this just died of a heart attack in his grief.
There is a very large sick profit being made. Not one federal law will be passed as a result.
If your son or daughter gets killed next crickets for your family. Chaching chaching for the gun makers.
I’m not going to disagree with that. But I will ask a follow up question.
Peter,
it is not true. Most convicted killers in prison are mentally healthy. Angry yes. They are killers not psych patients. Psych patients do not need the stigma. Most of the mentally ill are too frighted to be violent and are instead much more likely to be victims.
The politicians who are helping the gun makers profit are also not taxing them to pay for helping the mentally ill. It is a lot like dealing from the bottom of the deck. Cheating.
I do have one suggestion for state laws in states that want control. Pass laws where is someone is killed or hurt in a gun incident the seller of the gun can be sued for the harms by any citizen.
This would be modeled after the Texas abortion act. The Supreme Court is upholding that. If the court knocked down a gun control act modeled the same way, then there would be precedent to strike down the Texas abortion act.
Law enforcement can’t stop all of these shootings. Almost all countries except the US have found a way, but the US political system has failed to protect these innocent children. Politicians have the power to reduce the number of school shootings, but refuse to act. Instead they claim it’s someone else’s responsibility. Tragic.
“In the two decades following the Columbine shooting, the U.S. has experienced 11 mass school shootings and hundreds of smaller-scale attacks that have touched every state in the union, with more than 278,000 students experiencing some form of gun violence.”
My point is that it doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. People will say we need to address mental illness instead of controlling guns. So what are they doing to address mental illness? What actions would they support?
If they’re not doing or supporting something to address mental illness, their claim of mental illness as the issue rings pretty hollow.
Personally, I believe it is at least partially true. We have an epidemic of untreated mental illness in the country. Perhaps they aren’t the majority of convicted killers. But they are the lower level offenders - drug use and dealing, thefts, things like that. And some of the mentally ill DO commit murder.
If they’re not doing or supporting something to address mental illness, their claim of mental illness as the issue rings pretty hollow.
Peter,
You will believe what you want, but it is stigma for a lot of good innocent people.
Politically it is a lie. Do not expect anything from a liar. You can measure that very easily it is a big fat zero for mental health. You do not need to wait and see.
Personally, I believe it is at least partially true. We have an epidemic of untreated mental illness in the country. Perhaps they aren’t the majority of convicted killers. But they are the lower level offenders - drug use and dealing, thefts, things like that<\i>
Missed opportunities for law enforcement to prevent shootings. https://www.fbi.gov/news/testimony/summary-and-timeline-rela… Unfortunately, as was disclosed by the FBI shortly after this terrible incident, the FBI did receive two separate tips that we now know were related to the alleged shooter, Nikolas Cruz. As the FBI Director has made clear, the FBI could have and should have done more to investigate the information it was provided prior to the shooting. While we will never know if any such investigative activity would have prevented this tragedy, we clearly should have done more.
https://www.cityandstateny.com/policy/2022/05/police-could-h… The Buffalo shooting suspect who reportedly threatened a murder-suicide less than a year before he shot 13 people, killing 10, at a Tops supermarket on Saturday may have been prohibited from acquiring the firearm he used in the massacre – if law enforcement had pursued the available protections under the state’s Red Flag Law.
According to The New York Times, citing a law enforcement source, Gendron responded to a school project about his post-graduation plans by stating he wanted to commit a murder-suicide. New York State Police confirmed they responded to the school on June 8 to investigate a “generalized threat” made by a 17-year-old student, who was then taken into custody and transported to the hospital for a mental health evaluation. The agency, which would not say whether Gendron was the student, citing privacy reasons, said in an email to City & State it did not apply for an extreme risk protection order against the student and noted the threat was general in nature and did not target the school or anyone in particular.
Perhaps these types of threats be raised to the same level the Secret Service does in pursuing general threats made in regard to the president.
I do have one suggestion for state laws in states that want control. Pass laws where is someone is killed or hurt in a gun incident the seller of the gun can be sued for the harms by any citizen.
Oh, yeah!
And let’s pass laws so that when someone is killed or hurt in a Driving Under the Influence (DUI) incident the sellers of the vehicle can be sued too.
I do have one suggestion for state laws in states that want control. Pass laws where is someone is killed or hurt in a gun incident the seller of the gun can be sued for the harms by any citizen.
Oh, yeah!
And let’s pass laws so that when someone is killed or hurt in a Driving Under the Influence (DUI) incident the sellers of the vehicle can be sued too.
Leave out the DUI part and you have a closer parallel.
My alternate suggestion would be that if you are charged with carrying a gun while committing an assault, robbery, or criminal trespass, you are held in jail until trial, period; and if convicted you’re in for mandatory 5 years without possibility of parole. If you actually use or brandish the gun while committing the crime, that’s another five years no parole. To be served consecutively with any other sentence.
You may note that this suggestion doesn’t penalize law-abiding citizens - beyond the taxes to support the prison system.