talking to santacruzans

[juan_gandhi]

Discussing the Florida shooting, and a sudden protest near the White House, I asked, how come there was no such thing during Obama time, and expressed the hope that it was not organized by Russian trolls. The response was - "a spectacular case of projection, Vlad".

Fuck them all, I think now. Just disconnected for a while. They are not the kind of people I want to talk to now, Santacruzan hippies. Intelligentsia that always knows better.

Comments

[math_mommy]

The guy who did the shooting in Florida was mental.
Obama signed an executive order to ban selling guns to mental people.
Trump signed his own order to negate the Obama's order.
This is why this particular students went to Trump to protest.

[juan_gandhi]

Kind of yes, but kind of no.
Obama signed an order to stop selling guns to people on Social Security that need help for some reason.
Cruz was not on Social Security, was not listed anywhere as someone that needs psychiatric anything - as far as I know.

So he would not get there anyway.

Not that I'm against the laws banning mental cases from getting guns. That law has been around for about 50 years, as far as I know.

I'm afraid everything's way more complicated than what the newspapers are telling us.

[garote]

It usually is!

[math_mommy]

I'm surprised that it took so long for people to react. Now schools conduct drills for kids to hide during a gun attack. Like we are at war. Gun fans offer school guards as a solution, and how these guards are going to shoot in a building full of children? Who will pay for it? I believe that NRA should. They should put their money where their mouths are.
Besides, I do not want to spend my time arming myself and going to shooting gallery for practice. I have other things to do. I know many people who feel the same.

[uselessextras]

Don't like to arm/spend time? Then do not, and nobody will make you to do so. But, for your own and other people sake, do not demand to violate constitutional rights of other, more responsible citizens.

[sassa_nf]

I don't get it, when people bring up the constitutional rights on their own.

Laws exist to limit constitutional rights. It is down to the laws and acts to draw the line between guns as a utility and guns as a danger to the society.

So, nutcases should not have the guns. Does the constitution say so?

Then medical attestation whether the owner is a nutcase - is that done once in a lifetime? Annually? Monthly? Weekly? There are so many ways to make it more trouble to own the gun than not to.


There's a UN study on gun availability vs crime. The most important conclusion from that is that the societies in Africa, Asia and Western Europe react differently to the presence of firearms. So I only wonder whether the US is more of an Africa or a Western Europe.


(Remarkably, Asian culture is such that the crime rate does not change with the change in the number of the guns. Maybe Asia is crawling with bodhisattvas or something. I don't reckon the US has any chance to compete with them on this metric.)

[math_mommy]

So the people who has been killing kids in schools are responsible because they bothered to arm themselves? And anybody who buys a gun is automatically responsible?
If you are responsible gun owner then you have nothing to worry. The problem is the irresponsible ones.