• 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!

Uncomfortable question re mass shootings

radcen

radcen

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,576
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Should we ever get to a point where most of us feel we have the perfect mix-and-match of laws and societal attitude and medical/mental review, and we feel secure that nothing else can realistically be done to prevent mass shootings (iow, more laws would be redundant and a waste of time and resources), and another mass shooting does happen, then what?

Will there ever be a time... can there ever be a time... where we just clean up and move on, knowing we've done our best and that absolute zero incidents can never happen?

Or, does fear and human insecurities force us to always tweak even when said tweaking is pretty much useless?

The question is presented on the notion that absolute perfection in security is never possible. There's only so much that can be done. (And spare me the Ben Franklin quotes.)
 
radcen said:
Should we ever get to a point where most of us feel we have the perfect mix-and-match of laws and societal attitude and medical/mental review, and we feel secure that nothing else can realistically be done to prevent mass shootings (iow, more laws would be redundant and a waste of time and resources), and another mass shooting does happen, then what?

Will there ever be a time... can there ever be a time... where we just clean up and move on, knowing we've done our best and that absolute zero incidents can never happen?

Or, does fear and human insecurities force us to always tweak even when said tweaking is pretty much useless?

The question is presented on the notion that absolute perfection in security is never possible. There's only so much that can be done. (And spare me the Ben Franklin quotes.)
Click to expand...

It'll never happen, because society is ever-changing, bringing new problems as it fixes old ones. Whatever worked 50 years ago might not now. Whatever *didn't* work 50 years ago might now.

It's not a failing to always be re-evaluating. Reality is always changing; it needs re-evaluation.
 
radcen said:
Should we ever get to a point where most of us feel we have the perfect mix-and-match of laws and societal attitude and medical/mental review, and we feel secure that nothing else can realistically be done to prevent mass shootings (iow, more laws would be redundant and a waste of time and resources), and another mass shooting does happen, then what?

Will there ever be a time... can there ever be a time... where we just clean up and move on, knowing we've done our best and that absolute zero incidents can never happen?

Or, does fear and human insecurities force us to always tweak even when said tweaking is pretty much useless?

The question is presented on the notion that absolute perfection in security is never possible. There's only so much that can be done. (And spare me the Ben Franklin quotes.)
Click to expand...



We're already there.

The Right doesn't want to hear about gun control, and the Left doesn't seem to be interested in addressing mental issues or other root causes, so we bitch and moan for a few days and move on. Sure, some dinosaur may propose a GC bill, which then goes no where, but that's about it.


May as well. Most of Europe has pretty strict GC and some form of NHS and yet they still have a comparable toll in mass murders.
 
Truthfully, it seems we are already there. There doesn’t appear to be the pragmatism required to move forward on very much meaningful legislation, and even if there were, it’s still unlikely to matter in the grand scheme of things. Some of this stems from the fact that we might not understand this problem as well as we think.

I certainly hope this is ultimately proven wrong, though.
 
radcen said:
Should we ever get to a point where most of us feel we have the perfect mix-and-match of laws and societal attitude and medical/mental review, and we feel secure that nothing else can realistically be done to prevent mass shootings (iow, more laws would be redundant and a waste of time and resources), and another mass shooting does happen, then what?

Will there ever be a time... can there ever be a time... where we just clean up and move on, knowing we've done our best and that absolute zero incidents can never happen?

Or, does fear and human insecurities force us to always tweak even when said tweaking is pretty much useless?

The question is presented on the notion that absolute perfection in security is never possible. There's only so much that can be done. (And spare me the Ben Franklin quotes.)
Click to expand...

Folks buy news, when it is all excited, which it is, when Horror strikes. Simplistic demands for better rules are are great accompanying musak.
And we pay politicians to improve whatever is clamoring for improvement.
 
Goshin said:
We're already there.

The Right doesn't want to hear about gun control, and the Left doesn't seem to be interested in addressing mental issues or other root causes, so we bitch and moan for a few days and move on. Sure, some dinosaur may propose a GC bill, which then goes no where, but that's about it.


May as well. Most of Europe has pretty strict GC and some form of NHS and yet they still have a comparable toll in mass murders.
Click to expand...

Doesn't the left speak to mental health issues alot where guns are concerned?
 
IMO, our present system of gun laws is reasonable and reasonably effective. 100% efficacy with legislation is impossible. Legislation is notoriously ineffective in getting the intended results. The unintended consequences seem to often outweigh the supposedly beneficial results of such legislation, whether about guns or other inanimate objects. Human behavior cannot be controlled by legislation, and is often made more perverse by it.

In the case that several of these "mass shootings" are indeed staged by some very wicked persons, then the results we are seeing from gun legislation is horribly skewed and virtually meaningless.
 
radcen said:
Should we ever get to a point where most of us feel we have the perfect mix-and-match of laws and societal attitude and medical/mental review, and we feel secure that nothing else can realistically be done to prevent mass shootings (iow, more laws would be redundant and a waste of time and resources), and another mass shooting does happen, then what?

Will there ever be a time... can there ever be a time... where we just clean up and move on, knowing we've done our best and that absolute zero incidents can never happen?

Or, does fear and human insecurities force us to always tweak even when said tweaking is pretty much useless?

The question is presented on the notion that absolute perfection in security is never possible. There's only so much that can be done. (And spare me the Ben Franklin quotes.)
Click to expand...

Heres the problem. Why do those things matter? If you get rid of guns or mental health, or mass shootings? Then what about the 90% rest of violent crime, that doesnt happen with guns? Youre just addressing the symptom, not the cause.
 
year2late said:
Doesn't the left speak to mental health issues alot where guns are concerned?
Click to expand...


Not effectively. Some broad-brush efforts to ban large groups without consideration for individuality, which caused pro-gun forces to react against such efforts.
 
Goshin said:
Not effectively. Some broad-brush efforts to ban large groups without consideration for individuality, which caused pro-gun forces to react against such efforts.
Click to expand...

Mental heath issues do get brought up...but the loudest snowflakes think that means anybody with any history loses his or her guns. We need common sense dialog.
 
radcen said:
Should we ever get to a point where most of us feel we have the perfect mix-and-match of laws and societal attitude and medical/mental review, and we feel secure that nothing else can realistically be done to prevent mass shootings (iow, more laws would be redundant and a waste of time and resources), and another mass shooting does happen, then what?

Will there ever be a time... can there ever be a time... where we just clean up and move on, knowing we've done our best and that absolute zero incidents can never happen?

Or, does fear and human insecurities force us to always tweak even when said tweaking is pretty much useless?

The question is presented on the notion that absolute perfection in security is never possible. There's only so much that can be done. (And spare me the Ben Franklin quotes.)
Click to expand...

No matter what ban, limitation or Prohibition we give the gun banners, they will NEVER stop there. Not just because their bad ideas wouldn't stop mass shootings, but because their true aim is a disarmed society.

This is why we are done compromising, and by compromise I mean give them another gun control measure and get nothing we want in return. Never another inch, no truce with the shadow.
 
year2late said:
Mental heath issues do get brought up...but the loudest snowflakes think that means anybody with any history loses his or her guns. We need common sense dialog.
Click to expand...

Lots of luck with that. Been damn little common sense in government for a mighty long time.

The fact that you have known elements in Congress wanting to push an agenda of making it as hard as possible for average citizens to have guns breeds deep-seated distrust among gun owners, and not without good reason. The assumption is any power to regulate will be abused... and there's plenty of evidence that would be the case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom