Steve James wrote:The KKK is a group and the violence they carried out was certainly connected to their group identity. I think there are other examples, but they rarely work the way conservatives try and identify them.
Yes, I understand; and you're right that I used "sub group" with a particular meaning. I'd never blame "White" people for the actions of the KKK, even though the KKK claims to be acting on behalf of "White" people. That's stupid. In fact, most of my civil rights heroes are the "White" people who fought against the KKK. It'd be stupid for me to lump them with the KKK, or the nazis, etc. I don't consider all Germans guilty for Hitler's crimes, or all Japanese because of Tojo.
The "sub-group" here seems to be largely self-identifying by their beliefs and actions, whereas the "group" has beliefs and actions projected on them by others
Massad Ayoob wrote:We are told there were half a dozen off duty cops in the bar when the shooting went down, and that none were carrying guns. It would be unfair to blame them for that. Cops are universally told not to carry their off-duty guns when they might be under the influence of alcohol, and consuming alcohol is what most folks go to bars for.
The murderer shot down the unarmed security man first. He was easy to spot, and “unarmed security” is really an oxymoron in a case like this. The first armed good guy through the door, SWAT-trained hero Sergeant Ron Helus, was murdered before he could engage: the coward apparently anticipated where responding officers would enter and was probably waiting for him in ambush.
By contrast, one or more unidentifiable patrons in the crowd, had they been competently armed, would have had the advantage of surprise...
Ian C. Kuzushi wrote:Well, I'm not buying the argument that having a bar full of drunk armed people is a good idea. But, I would also push back against tao's post stating that the problem is gun owners (Steve already pointed out the fallacy there). The recent figures on PTSD and drinking by our troops is really disturbing and I wish we would tackle these problems on multiple fronts: more reasonable and evenly enforced gun laws,
If immigration laws are not enforced by some cities / states/ why would one expect gun laws pursuant to the state to
be evenly enforced among the states ...How does that work ?
proper support and safety nets for our troops, health care (including mental health) for all citizens and residents, and a halting of all wars that are not absolutely necessary (that's pretty much all of them).
Steve James wrote:The "if someone had a gun" argument works for certain situations. It doesn't work when it comes to snipers or bombers. I think there could be an armed guard and armed patrons in every bar, and it wouldn't stop anyone who was committed to killing people. The premise is really that it would be a deterrent, and that is true for those reasonable terrorists who are not planning a suicide mission. But, ok, armed bystanders could prevent more casualties.
My problem is that if the cause of the shootings is not addressed, then the only solution is to have armed guards and armed citizens everywhere there are people. There are combat veterans everywhere, many find it hard readjusting to civilian life. Many have ptsd, but few commit mass murder. The gu who committed the last shooting seems to have had problems long before his service.
And, precisely because of his service, he'd be the kind of person that most gun advocates would want to be carrying.
How do you know what "most" gun advocates want? Gun laws are state enacted by each state according to the state.
The right to bare arms is written into the constitution. What law would you or others suggest at the federal government level be passed that would affect the problem at state level should the states follow them, which given other fed laws not enforced is not a sure thing.
If everyone in the club had been armed, he could still have walked in and started shooting --since he had no intention of getting out alive.
How do you know what "most" gun advocates want?
Steve James wrote:You brought up gun laws and guns. I was talking about shooters and the problem of mass shootings.
Anybody note the pattern.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 54 guests