One month after Pulse: Where do we go from here

[anatta]

uesday marks one month since the shooting at Pulse nightclub took 49 lives and forever changed Orlando.
The rest of the country is already on to the next mass shooting.


The violence in Dallas last week is the latest to stun and cause so many to ask, "What on earth is happening to us?"
Racism. Mental illness. Community mistrust of police. Terrorism.

It's easy to become overwhelmed.
Or to say that these possible motivations behind the violence we are all living with today are too big and too complicated to solve.

I don't have any simple answers.
No matter what your interpretation of the Second Amendment might be, we are all losing.

No matter how you think we should deal with mental illness or how police should go about strengthening relationships with the communities they protect, we are all getting it wrong.

What could I be doing differently? We should all be asking that question.

Let me step out of my little comfort zone, as I am urging you to do, and say that I have changed my mind about the militarization of local police.

The pictures out of Ferguson, Mo., for example, a couple years ago were tough to look at. Ordinary people were protesting next to what appeared to be tanks and officers in riot gear. It seemed out of whack.

But if Orlando and Dallas have shown us anything, it's that even a large number of trained police are at risk against a single determined individual with a high-powered weapon.

Local law enforcement officers put themselves in harm's way every day in places like Florida where anybody with a credit card and a fairly clean record can amass a small arsenal.

That takes not just bravery, but practical readiness such as equipment that can hold up under rifle fire.

Now what about you? Are you thinking about anything differently?

Maybe you've suggested in the past that "good guys with guns" are the answer to the bad guys. Or that ending "gun-free zones" will help stop mass shootings.
I've never bought the notion that most average people would have the skill or presence of mind to pull off a James Bond maneuver if they spotted a bad guy.

But plenty of people do. A made-for-Hollywood script didn't play out in Orlando, though, where an off-duty police officer was at Pulse when the shooting started and other on-duty forces quickly arrived. They were unable to take down the gunman for more than three hours.

And it didn't work in Dallas, where police were the targets. Plus, at least 20 protesters in the crowd were openly carrying their own rifles across their chests as Texas law permits (no gun-free zone there) and failed to fend off the shooter.
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...lse-one-month-beth-kassab-20160711-story.html

 

[anatta]

woman is mostly an airhead -but raise a couple of points - should the cops go back to the NDAA days and get militarized?
Does open carry do anything positive?
Should we restrict the sheer amount of guns sold to an individual?

 

[Legion Troll]

Prepare to be assaulted by hoplosexuals.

 

[zappasguitar]

uesday marks one month since the shooting at Pulse nightclub took 49 lives and forever changed Orlando.
The rest of the country is already on to the next mass shooting.


The violence in Dallas last week is the latest to stun and cause so many to ask, "What on earth is happening to us?"
Racism. Mental illness. Community mistrust of police. Terrorism.

It's easy to become overwhelmed.
Or to say that these possible motivations behind the violence we are all living with today are too big and too complicated to solve.

I don't have any simple answers.
No matter what your interpretation of the Second Amendment might be, we are all losing.

No matter how you think we should deal with mental illness or how police should go about strengthening relationships with the communities they protect, we are all getting it wrong.

What could I be doing differently? We should all be asking that question.

Let me step out of my little comfort zone, as I am urging you to do, and say that I have changed my mind about the militarization of local police.

The pictures out of Ferguson, Mo., for example, a couple years ago were tough to look at. Ordinary people were protesting next to what appeared to be tanks and officers in riot gear. It seemed out of whack.

But if Orlando and Dallas have shown us anything, it's that even a large number of trained police are at risk against a single determined individual with a high-powered weapon.

Local law enforcement officers put themselves in harm's way every day in places like Florida where anybody with a credit card and a fairly clean record can amass a small arsenal.

That takes not just bravery, but practical readiness such as equipment that can hold up under rifle fire.

Now what about you? Are you thinking about anything differently?

Maybe you've suggested in the past that "good guys with guns" are the answer to the bad guys. Or that ending "gun-free zones" will help stop mass shootings.
I've never bought the notion that most average people would have the skill or presence of mind to pull off a James Bond maneuver if they spotted a bad guy.

But plenty of people do. A made-for-Hollywood script didn't play out in Orlando, though, where an off-duty police officer was at Pulse when the shooting started and other on-duty forces quickly arrived. They were unable to take down the gunman for more than three hours.

And it didn't work in Dallas, where police were the targets. Plus, at least 20 protesters in the crowd were openly carrying their own rifles across their chests as Texas law permits (no gun-free zone there) and failed to fend off the shooter.
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...lse-one-month-beth-kassab-20160711-story.html

We go nowhere.

Terror stricken, do-nothing Righties will make sure of that.

Despite their claims to the contrary, time after time we see that more guns does NOT make us safer.

Sadly, until terror stricken gun nuts can grasp that common sense statement, we will keep repeating the same scenario over and over.

 

[cawacko]

We go nowhere.

Terror stricken, do-nothing Righties will make sure of that.

Despite their claims to the contrary, time after time we see that more guns does NOT make us safer.

Sadly, until terror stricken gun nuts can grasp that common sense statement, we will keep repeating the same scenario over and over.

More guns were in people's possession as crime dropped from the '90's until today. How do you square that with your statement?

 

[anatta]

We go nowhere...[/quote0 do we go back to the NDAA days - miliatarization of police?
If the cops had been in a Ferguson type armor -would this have happened in Dallas?

 

[zappasguitar]

More guns were in people's possession as crime dropped from the '90's until today. How do you square that with your statement?

Did more guns stop the Dallas shooter?

anatta nailed it in the OP...

There were protesters open carrying all through the protest.

There were armed cops everywhere.

Yet the cops had to deploy a remote controlled BOMB to finally stop the shooter...that's how ineffective "more guns" were in Dallas.

 

[Legion Troll]

Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings says Texas needs to revisit its gun laws that allow people to carry rifles and shotguns in public, including AR-15s.

Rawlings said armed protesters who openly carried rifles in downtown Dallas made it difficult for police to distinguish between suspects and marchers during the ambush killing of five police officers.

"This is the first time, but a very concrete time, that I think a law can hurt citizens, police and not protect them," Rawlings told the New York Times. "I think it's amazing when you think that there is a gunfight going on, and you are supposed to be able to sort who the good guys are and who the bad guys are."

Rawlings, a gun owner, said he would tighten the law to restrict where rifles and shotguns could be carried in public.

"There should be some way to say I shouldn't be bringing my shotgun to a Mavericks game or to a protest because something crazy should happen," Rawlings said. "I just want to come back to common sense."

But C.J. Grisham, president of Open Carry Texas, dismissed the idea and said it's not difficult to find the "the bad guys" in a shooting.

"It's not that difficult to tell the difference between a bad actor and a good actor," Grisham told the Dallas Morning News. "The good guys are going to obey commands, the bad guys are not."



http://www.syracuse.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/07/dallas_mayor_cny_grad_says_its_time_to_change_texas_open-carry_gun_laws.html#incart_most-commented_us-news_article

 

[Seahawk]

Did more guns stop the Dallas shooter?

anatta nailed it in the OP...

There were protesters open carrying all through the protest.

There were armed cops everywhere.

Yet the cops had to deploy a remote controlled BOMB to finally stop the shooter...that's how ineffective "more guns" were in Dallas.

More guns do not always work, especially in a sniper situation. Do you deny that guns have saved many women from assault and rapes?

 

[cawacko]

Did more guns stop the Dallas shooter?

anatta nailed it in the OP...

There were protesters open carrying all through the protest.

There were armed cops everywhere.

Yet the cops had to deploy a remote controlled BOMB to finally stop the shooter...that's how ineffective "more guns" were in Dallas.

We're never going to have no gun violence in this country. It's just not going to happen. But the statistics don't bare out your argument that more guns have equaled more gun deaths.

 

[Legion Troll]