• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

'Everyone sees the difference': Race, sexual orientation and Florida's responses to Parkland and Pul

MateoMtnClimber

MateoMtnClimber

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2017
Messages
11,506
Reaction score
3,207
Location
Colorado, USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
https://www.politico.com/states/flo...oridas-responses-to-parkland-and-pulse-291897

"Many lawmakers — particularly those who represent gay and minority communities — say Tallahassee’s disparate responses to the Feb. 14 massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School and the 2016 Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando aren’t coincidental, and speak to the intersection of race, privilege, sexual orientation and the priorities of the GOP-led Legislature in the nation's third-largest state."

There's a lot in this short article. Race. Affluence. Timing. Sexual orientation. Political calculations. The murder scenes.

Although it's focused on the events and responses in Florida, I think it demonstrates a position that I've been repeating for a very ling time. Mass violence has a lot of causes and a lot of effects. It's as complicated as any human behavior but more devastating. When we become distracted by the two extremes of the gun debate, we surrender the larger conversation about poverty, opportunity, mental health, family, alienation, loneliness, anonymity, the digital age, and all the other factors, even guns themselves. As it becomes clearer, again, that the federal government will do little or nothing to solve the problem of mass violence, again, it becomes obvious that grassroots movements and some corporate actions will be the only things that achieve any results. We need a leader (not necessarily political), but I just don't see one emerging.
 
I do. It's us. If enough of us want to make a change.
 
A huge difference was the crime scene - a pubic school rather than a prvate business. The pubic has every right to expect better government provided security in a public building that they, by law, must send their children to.

Would it have made any sense to raise the age for buying a long gun to age 21 or having a 3 day waiting period to buy a gun in response to the Pulse nightclub shooting? How about adding taxpayer funded security for (all?) private businesses?

EDIT: I did not reference the shooter's or the victim's race, affluence, timing, sexual orientation or political calculations. What makes these mass shootings be treated differently by the government is location alone - a public vs. private establishment. Trying to make this into a republicants hate gay folks and Muslims "story" is pure and simple partisan hackery.
 
Last edited:
ttwtt78640 said:
A huge difference was the crime scene - a pubic school rather than a prvate business. The pubic has every right to expect better government provided security in a public building that they, by law, must send their children to.

Would it have made any sense to raise the age for buying a long gun to age 21 or having a 3 day waiting period to buy a gun in response to the Pulse nightclub shooting? How about adding taxpayer funded security for (all?) private businesses?
Click to expand...

It is sad, but there is much truth in this.
 
Parrish said:
I do. It's us. If enough of us want to make a change.
Click to expand...

I see a lot of potential in the students, too, if more of them could broaden their perspectives beyond the gun issue. I appreciate your optimism and will hold onto mine.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
A huge difference was the crime scene - a pubic school rather than a prvate business. The pubic has every right to expect better government provided security in a public building that they, by law, must send their children to.

Would it have made any sense to raise the age for buying a long gun to age 21 or having a 3 day waiting period to buy a gun in response to the Pulse nightclub shooting? How about adding taxpayer funded security for (all?) private businesses?

EDIT: I did not reference the shooter's or the victim's race, affluence, timing, sexual orientation or political calculations. What makes these mass shootings be treated differently by the government is location alone - a public vs. private establishment. Trying to make this into a republicants hate gay folks and Muslims "story" is pure and simple partisan hackery.
Click to expand...

I mentioned the murder scenes as did the OP article. I didn't start this thread to have another debate about gun policy. I think I was very clear that the overemphasis on guns is a big part of why these mass killings keep happening. More onsite security might have made the Pulse massacre less deadly, but it wouldn't have prevented it. All those things you mentioned are proposals for addressing the problem, but they aren't solutions in and of themselves.
 
Parrish said:
I do. It's us. If enough of us want to make a change.
Click to expand...

MateoMtnClimber said:
Although it's focused on the events and responses in Florida, I think it demonstrates a position that I've been repeating for a very ling time. Mass violence has a lot of causes and a lot of effects. It's as complicated as any human behavior but more devastating. When we become distracted by the two extremes of the gun debate, we surrender the larger conversation about poverty, opportunity, mental health, family, alienation, loneliness, anonymity, the digital age, and all the other factors, even guns themselves. As it becomes clearer, again, that the federal government will do little or nothing to solve the problem of mass violence, again, it becomes obvious that grassroots movements and some corporate actions will be the only things that achieve any results. We need a leader (not necessarily political), but I just don't see one emerging.
Click to expand...


As long as the "change" doesn't affect the right to keep and bear arms, freedom of expression, freedom of religion, or any other freedom whether clearly guaranteed by prohibitions in the Constitution or "vaguely" protected by the Ninth Amendment...I'm with you.

IMO that change should focus on identifying and addressing causes, not tools or emotional knee-jerk responses to effects.
 
Last edited:
MateoMtnClimber said:
I see a lot of potential in the students, too, if more of them could broaden their perspectives beyond the gun issue. I appreciate your optimism and will hold onto mine.
Click to expand...

Obviously a lot went wrong in order to end up with the Floriduh mass school shooting but using a bash the republicants, highly partisan, hit peice to start, yet another, thread on it was not a great idea - comparing it to an Islamist terror attack was quite a stretch.
 
"mass violence" has brought approx 850 deaths TOTAL in 36 years. Filicide results in 450 deaths in the US a year. Violent murders in the US result in approx 9000 deaths a year. So typically, leftists want to find a way to exploit a relatively infrequent occurrence while ignoring the day to day violence in America...proving once again all that matters is 'cause'.
 
MateoMtnClimber said:
I mentioned the murder scenes as did the OP article. I didn't start this thread to have another debate about gun policy. I think I was very clear that the overemphasis on guns is a big part of why these mass killings keep happening. More onsite security might have made the Pulse massacre less deadly, but it wouldn't have prevented it. All those things you mentioned are proposals for addressing the problem, but they aren't solutions in and of themselves.
Click to expand...

Yes, the different scene was mentioned but in no way emphasized. The OP link is a partisan hit piece by a left-leaning "news" source. I'm not at all sure that there is a solution to prevent crime and it certainly predates guns. All that we can hope for is that "see something, say something" results in a better outcome in the future.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_nightclub_shooting
 
Captain Adverse said:
As long as the "change" doesn't affect the right to keep and bear arms, freedom of expression, freedom of religion, or any other freedom whether clearly guaranteed by prohibitions in the Constitution or "vaguely" protected by the Ninth Amendment...I'm with you.

IMO that change should focus on identifying and addressing causes, not tools or emotional knee-jerk responses to effects.
Click to expand...

Well then, you must be happier than a pig in slop.
 
Captain Adverse said:
As long as the "change" doesn't affect the right to keep and bear arms, freedom of expression, freedom of religion, or any other freedom whether clearly guaranteed by prohibitions in the Constitution or "vaguely" protected by the Ninth Amendment...I'm with you.

IMO that change should focus on identifying and addressing causes, not tools or emotional knee-jerk responses to effects.
Click to expand...

We're on the same page. I have a feeling that we differ on what we think our rights are, but I absolutely feel like American society refuses to even identify the true, root causes of mass violence let alone address them.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Obviously a lot went wrong in order to end up with the Floriduh mass school shooting but using a bash the republicants, highly partisan, hit peice to start, yet another, thread on it was not a great idea - comparing it to an Islamist terror attack was quite a stretch.
Click to expand...

Do you not think the numerous Republicans quoted in the piece were allowed to make their points? They made lots of points very clearly. I even find some of them compelling. I wouldn't have posted the link if I perceived it as a "hit piece". And no, I won't agree with you that an Islamist terror attack is unrelated to a high school terror attack. Ask the survivors and the victim' loved ones how differently they feel about the two incidents.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Would it have made any sense to raise the age for buying a long gun to age 21 or having a 3 day waiting period to buy a gun in response to the Pulse nightclub shooting? How about adding taxpayer funded security for (all?) private businesses?
Click to expand...

Hmmm...something seems a little fishy here. Let me first be clear: I don't think it makes any sense, even after Parkland, to raise the age to buy a rifle. But if it does make sense to do so after Parkland, why wouldn't it have made any sense to do so after the Pulse shooting?
 
VanceMack said:
"mass violence" has brought approx 850 deaths TOTAL in 36 years. Filicide results in 450 deaths in the US a year. Violent murders in the US result in approx 9000 deaths a year. So typically, leftists want to find a way to exploit a relatively infrequent occurrence while ignoring the day to day violence in America...proving once again all that matters is 'cause'.
Click to expand...

And what cause would that be? Don't generalize about "leftists". Address your response to me in the context in which I started the thread. If things that don't kill enough people to matter to you are not worth addressing, then we may as well give up medical research as well as consideration about mass violence.
 
ashurbanipal said:
Hmmm...something seems a little fishy here. Let me first be clear: I don't think it makes any sense, even after Parkland, to raise the age to buy a rifle. But if it does make sense to do so after Parkland, why wouldn't it have made any sense to do so after the Pulse shooting?
Click to expand...

The Parkland shooter was 19 and the Pulse shooter was 29 - which one was under 21?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Yes, the different scene was mentioned but in no way emphasized. The OP link is a partisan hit piece by a left-leaning "news" source. I'm not at all sure that there is a solution to prevent crime and it certainly predates guns. All that we can hope for is that "see something, say something" results in a better outcome in the future.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_nightclub_shooting
Click to expand...

What exactly about this article bothers you? I really don't see it, but I'll look again at the specific sections to which you object if I understand your context. "I'm not sure" and "hope" are the problem I'm describing. We need to have an informed, national, research-based conversation about the causes of mass violence. You've mentioned guns now more than once when I've repeatedly said that people who keep defaulting to the gun issue (on both sides) are the single biggest reason we don't have that discussion.
 
Power very frequently responds to the needs and demands of those people who most closely resemble the appearance, social class and philosophical outlook of those in power. That being said, the murder of children/teens also triggers powerful paternal and maternal instincts in people and thus more often focuses public attention and public action. Tens of thousands of Africans are kidnapped and trafficked each year but the April, 2014 kidnapping of the Chibok Girls and the most recent mass-kidnapping last week in Nigeria have had a disproportionate impact on the issue.

Appearances matter.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
MateoMtnClimber said:
What exactly about this article bothers you? I really don't see it, but I'll look again at the specific sections to which you object if I understand your context. "I'm not sure" and "hope" are the problem I'm describing. We need to have an informed, national, research-based conversation about the causes of mass violence. You've mentioned guns now more than once when I've repeatedly said that people who keep defaulting to the gun issue (on both sides) are the single biggest reason we don't have that discussion.
Click to expand...

There was zero mention of why the demorats did not react to the Pulse mass shooting - just the excuse that it happened when the legislature was out of session - when back in session what, exactly, did the demorats then propose in response to Pulse shooting? None of these "solution" measures would have affected the Pulse shooting at all. The title and the last line are intended to make it a republicants don't want to act - when the truth is that "act" means accept even more "gun control".

Two of the "solution" points were more gun control (rights restrictions) - no new gun sales to those under 21 and a 3-day delay in receiving a gun purchase. The rest was for more (future?) school security funding - but no law saying what school security standards must be met for that extra money or when.
 
Last edited:
ttwtt78640 said:
Two of the "solution" points were more gun control (rights restrictions) - no new gun sales to those under 21 and a 3-day delay in receiving a gun purchase. The rest was for more (future?) school security funding - but no law saying what security standards must be met for that extra money.
Click to expand...

This single sentence is why you're calling the entire article a Republican-bashing, highly partisan hit piece?

"Polls also show that voters, by big margins, support a three-day wait for long gun purchases, an age limit of 21 for buyers and limits on firearms purchases by people deemed too violent by the courts."

Like I've said many times, your reaction represents an oversensitivity to guns. You've completely missed the point of the article and the point of this thread.
 
Evilroddy said:
Power very frequently responds to the needs and demands of those people who most closely resemble the appearance, social class and philosophical outlook of those in power.
Click to expand...

Sure, I agree with that. It doesn't make it right. That is the meaning I took from the OP article.

That being said, the murder of children/teens also triggers powerful paternal and maternal instincts in people and thus more often focuses public attention and public action. Tens of thousands of Africans are kidnapped and trafficked each year but the April, 2014 kidnapping of the Chibok Girls and the most recent mass-kidnapping last week in Nigeria have had a disproportionate impact on the issue.

Appearances matter.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
Click to expand...

I agree with that to a lesser degree. Lots of school shootings have happened. None of them have created the reaction we have seen since Parkland.
 
MateoMtnClimber said:
This single sentence is why you're calling the entire article a Republican-bashing, highly partisan hit piece?

"Polls also show that voters, by big margins, support a three-day wait for long gun purchases, an age limit of 21 for buyers and limits on firearms purchases by people deemed too violent by the courts."

Like I've said many times, your reaction represents an oversensitivity to guns. You've completely missed the point of the article and the point of this thread.
Click to expand...

I have since edited that post. You are under sensitive to any actual definition of school security requirements which were conspicuously missing from the "solution". As long as public money gets tossed for that "stated purpose" then that is all the "accountability" that is needed. My point is that the gun restrictions were immediate, permanent and concrete - the rest was tossing money with absolutely no immediate, permanent or concrete laws stating what school security measures must be in place or by when.
 
Captain Adverse said:
As long as the "change" doesn't affect the right to keep and bear arms, freedom of expression, freedom of religion, or any other freedom whether clearly guaranteed by prohibitions in the Constitution or "vaguely" protected by the Ninth Amendment...I'm with you.

IMO that change should focus on identifying and addressing causes, not tools or emotional knee-jerk responses to effects.
Click to expand...

What would you do? In practical terms, none of that vague, 'identify and deal with mental health issues' crap, what specifically would you do? That Parkland kid, for example, what, if you were in charge, would you change to prevent that happening again?
 
MateoMtnClimber said:
Sure, I agree with that. It doesn't make it right. That is the meaning I took from the OP article.



I agree with that to a lesser degree. Lots of school shootings have happened. None of them have created the reaction we have seen since Parkland.
Click to expand...

MMC:

I think that both Columbine and Sandy Hook created a similar political climate in their moments but America was and still is just not ready yet to make the needed changes domestically. It will take more such tragedies to aggregate the societal frustration and resultant grass-roots political will needed to push reform, despite the wilful inertia of money and power, which resists change. I think more young or innocent blood will end up being spilled before the necessary statutory and political changes can begin to be seriously explored, designed, implemented and real changes can be made. I hope I'm wrong, but I fear that much more violence will be tolerated by those in power until public rage Forces power to take the metaphorical bulls by the horns and effect meaningful change at the local, state and federal levels. Money is at play here and when green mixes with red you get blackness. Then you finally, as a society, see the light and tear up the blood-soaked canvas, to start anew.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom