Texas Elementary School Shooting, as many as 22 dead, including Children

[Iain]

There is literally no correlation that can be identified between severity of sentencing and any deterrent effect. Many of these shooters explicitly don't expect to survive their attacks in the first place, which makes it even less of a potential deterrent, here. Again; this would provide precisely zero meaningful change in the rate or severity of these attacks. Hell, it guarantees that any of these offenders who DON'T want to die will keep killing rather than surrendering to police.

The Parkland shooter tried to get an insanity plea by pretending he was hearing voices. Didn't work out but I wish he got what he wanted because spending a lifetime in a criminal asylum is hell, it's way worse than a lifetime in normal prison.

[Slant]

Your attitude isn't meaningfully separable from that of the people who get radicalized into this shit.

You're talking to children with one-dimensional thinking here. I mean, for all we know, he might be the mass shooter of tomorrow.

- - - Updated - - -

Why does the general public need to know the name of a mass murderer who is dead? There's zero purpose.

If nothing else so everyone around him, his family, the one or two friends the sad fuck had, know they fucked up. And let everyone of THEIR friends know they fucked up, too.

Yes, absolutely blame the parent. Don't give a shit if anyone thinks that's PC or not. Poor upbringing and even poorer education while having pretty much free access to guns... the fuck is a society based on idiocracy and violence supposed to look like? Yes, exactly like this. One mass shooting per week. That's exactly what a culture bred by violent culture and free gun access is supposed to look like.

And god forbid you tell someone to stop insulting other people somewhere, it's immediately "Hey, we're all adults here... don't be a pussy." or "It's just ironic, don't freak out!" as if that sentence even made sense. Ironic != replacement word for "funny".

No, not a pussy, but we can be civilised. Like actual adults. Not like big babies that think feeding on steroids and growing a terrorist beard is a sign of manhood.

[Shadowferal]

Guns will never be "taken away" in the US, that's simply not realistic.

Agree. Here in the Philly area where gun homicide is an uncomfortable reality, the guns confiscated are rarely ever legit, with a percentage of them being ghost guns. There was even one individual that had a couple of 3d printers set up and running.

[Glorious Leader]

I mean, it costs country, not the gun industry. And they pull the strings by financing politicians with money donations. Hence the power they have. That's the point.

People dying en masses is an externality for Smith and Wesson and a cost they do not have to bare.

[DarkAmbient]

Why does the general public need to know the name of a mass murderer who is dead? There's zero purpose.

And these people will often do this for infamy. No, that's not a reason to not publish body count, because that person's name will still be attached to a mass murder. If the name is never published, they will not go in the history books and will be forgotten. The ideal outcome.

I'm not sure you know what that word means. Nothing in our laws state that the media must report the name of a mass shooter. The name is a matter of public record, but you'd have to go down to the local PD and ask for access to that record. If you want to know their name, go do the legwork. Nobody has any obligation to tell you their name.

Accountability exists in the legal system.

Accountability is NOT the general public knowing.

Mass shooters are worthy of our hate and judgment of them, but that's exactly what they get off on. They WANT to be infamous. They WANT their name all over the news. They're nobodies who have failed in life. Usually right wingers who kept spouting "if you work hard enough you'll be rich" and when they find that system has failed them, they want to go out with a bang.

Let's not give them what they want, as it encourages more mass shootings.

Why does the public need to know the facts? Really? Listen to yourself, lol.

When I say accountability, I mean the public knowing who is accountable. With no name, there is no-one to pin the crime on. When you know who it is, you know who's accountable. And the perpetrator of a hideous crime ought to be identified, because they should not be able to do what they do under the cover of anonymity. You can't hide their names in today's world, so asking people to visit a geographical location to get the info is naive and pointless, as the info will be global the moment it's made available. There's also the Streisand effect. Try to hide it and it just makes people more curious, and it actually increases the chances of innocent people being blamed.

You don't like infamy, tough shit. It's a fact of life and infamous people have their place in the history books alongside the Marie Curies and Nelson Mandelas. Sure, the media doesn't need to go over the top with its analysing of every detail about a perpetrator's life, but withholding their identity from the public record? Unacceptable. People shouldn't argue to be less informed.

[Ivanstone]

Seriously, it isn't a mental health crisis. It's a morality and extremism and cultural violence crisis. You may as well be shouting "thoughts and prayers" by talking about mental health, here.

Not quite true. The Parkland shooter, for example, was receiving mental health care but lost treatment in the year before the shooting. I wouldn't say poor mental health care describes all shootings though.

The US is, of course, a dumpster fire for mental health care. GOP politicians like to claim fixing mental health care would help but they do fuck all to make care available.
The GOP solution appears to be maybe give them some pills, definitely let them buy a gun and then whine about religious freedom when called on their bullshit.

[Canpinter]

Can someone please tell me what the point is of giving our cops apcs and military gear if they can't even stop one 18 year old from slaughtering a school when the cops where already on scene.

[Sorshen]

Ah, with leaders like these... literally one solution again and again, the 'thoughts and prayers'.

[Deianeira]

We need to arm the good school shooters so they can take out the bad ones.

Wasnt there armed guards at the school that engaged the shooter outside? But ofcourse they failed to stop him from entry.

[jonnysensible]

Wasnt there armed guards at the school that engaged the shooter outside? But ofcourse they failed to stop him from entry.

they engaged him, he fired back. They suffered minor injuries (whatever that means) and allowed him to enter the school. Complete failure.

'Local PD waited for Border Patrol to respond.

It's very, very important to note that two cops and a "safety" officer failed to stop this kid. The response seems to have been delayed to prioritize the safety of the police.'

[Deianeira]

Why does the public need to know the facts? Really? Listen to yourself, lol.

When I say accountability, I mean the public knowing who is accountable. With no name, there is no-one to pin the crime on. When you know who it is, you know who's accountable. And the perpetrator of a hideous crime ought to be identified, because they should not be able to do what they do under the cover of anonymity. You can't hide their names in today's world, so asking people to visit a geographical location to get the info is naive and pointless, as the info will be global the moment it's made available. There's also the Streisand effect. Try to hide it and it just makes people more curious, and it actually increases the chances of innocent people being blamed.

You don't like infamy, tough shit. It's a fact of life and infamous people have their place in the history books alongside the Marie Curies and Nelson Mandelas. Sure, the media doesn't need to go over the top with its analysing of every detail about a perpetrator's life, but withholding their identity from the public record? Unacceptable. People shouldn't argue to be less informed.

But if the news dont say his name on tv, but he is tried and sentenced he IS in the public record. Seems to me you are just lazy and cant be bothered to check the public record for what the shooters name are if you are so interested.

[ParanoiD84]

Fucked up apparently the dead where all from same class too guess he barricaded himself in that room.

[Deianeira]

Ah, with leaders like these... literally one solution again and again, the 'thoughts and prayers'.

Nono but you see they are not doing the "thoughts and prayers" anymore. Now they are "horrified and Heartbroken" you see.

[zorkuus]

they engaged him, he fired back. They suffered minor injuries (whatever that means) and allowed him to enter the school. Complete failure.

'Local PD waited for Border Patrol to respond.

It's very, very important to note that two cops and a "safety" officer failed to stop this kid. The response seems to have been delayed to prioritize the safety of the police.'

If the police are afraid to heroically put their lives at risk, I wouldn't trust random citizens with guns to do it either. These wannabe Rambo's would just run, like everyone else.

[Iain]

But if the news dont say his name on tv, but he is tried and sentenced he IS in the public record. Seems to me you are just lazy and cant be bothered to check the public record for what the shooters name are if you are so interested.

Any time anyone is arrested their identity immediately becomes public record. Clearly nobody is arguing against this because it's an important part of the checks and balances in our justice system.

What people (including you) are indeed arguing against is stroking the perpetrator's ego and blasting his entire identity, which includes his name, through every news outlet. Purely because of the obvious way it satisfies a large part of why anyone would commit such a thing in the first place.

So what's been going on for the last couple of pages is a classic motte and bailey. It's easy to argue someone's name should be a public record (the motte). But that's boring, and that's not what the discussion is about. Making the proposition that their name should be everywhere is much juicier, but that comes with all the nasty implications of inspiring more shooters, much harder to defend (the bailey). So whenever the copy-cat problem arises, it's easy to retreat back to 'it should just be public record'.

It's an exhausting way to discuss this matter. Especially considering how sensitive and fresh the subject matter is.

[Slant]

If the police are afraid to heroically put their lives at risk, I wouldn't trust random citizens with guns to do it either. These wannabe Rambo's would just run, like everyone else.

You're ignoring that these wannabe Rambos are stupid fucks. A police officer is probably keenly aware of his own mortality, while the gun nuts typically follow the logic of "bad things only happen to other people".

[Specialka]

they engaged him, he fired back. They suffered minor injuries (whatever that means) and allowed him to enter the school. Complete failure.

'Local PD waited for Border Patrol to respond.

It's very, very important to note that two cops and a "safety" officer failed to stop this kid. The response seems to have been delayed to prioritize the safety of the police.'

What do you want them to do ? Charge in and get guns down because he was waiting for them ?

[Slant]

What do you want them to do ? Charge in and get guns down because he was waiting for them ?

It's literally part of their job. 3:1 ratio doesn't scream "be defensive" against a lone gunman.

[Specialka]

It's literally part of their job. 3:1 ratio doesn't scream "be defensive" against a lone gunman.

The job of the basic police Officer is not to charge at a hunkered gun man. I would say the SWAT or the equivalent is there for that.

[jonnysensible]

The job of the basic police Officer is not to charge at a hunkered gun man. I would say the SWAT or the equivalent is there for that.

he wasnt hunkered when they engaged. He had crashed his car