The US has had 57 times as many school shootings as other major industrialized nations combined

originally posted by: fomalhaut
Wow. If only ATSers would spend as much time defending kids as they do guns. The world would be a better place.

And if the kids rallying against school shootings would spend as much time standing up to bullying of their peers as much as much as stricter gun control, the world would be a better place.

originally posted by: conspiracy nut
a reply to: UnBreakable

Those are gangbangers killing gangbangers school shooters go out of their way to kill innocent human beings a better comparison would be suicide bombers and 9 times out of 10 their parents agree w their ideology, apple not falling far from the tree. I didn't mean to call out your dear fuhrer my point was that these idiots and the gangbangimg idiots are highly impressionable and 9 times out of 10 learned their ideology from an older relative (parent) or peer. It is a fair comaprison although when we ask, Where are the gangbangers parents? Where are the mass shooters parents?

So the 173 kids younger than seventeen who have been killed in Chicago shootings, some as young as eight, are all gangbangers? Not innocent? Sorry it doesn’t fit your agenda.

a reply to: UnBreakable

Majority of gangbangers are teenagers. One of the problems in Chicago is that no one does anything or says anything until an innocent little kid gets killed in the crossfire, it happens two or three times a year. The vast majority of killings in Chicago are from g********** shooting at other g**********

a reply to: UnBreakable

Here we go again with the bullying excuse give me a break man kids were getting bullied when I was a kid nobody ever came back to shoot the school up

a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

If you truly believe that gun control will stop school shootings

Where in the OP did I say gun control would stop all school shootings? Did the data show school shootings occuring in countries with stricter gun control? Yes it did.

That's not the point of the OP.

a reply to: DAVID64

Since Op won't stay and defend his point, I won't waste my time making mine.

David! David baby! Don't leave me! I promise I won't let my life get in the way of addressing you ever again! I promise! Come back to me! I've learned my lesson now!

originally posted by: conspiracy nut
a reply to: UnBreakable

Here we go again with the bullying excuse give me a break man kids were getting bullied when I was a kid nobody ever came back to shoot the school up

Whether you like it or not, that’s the reality today. When students pick on a peer who has mental problems already, and consider themselves outsiders, loners, etc. and have access to a firearm, legal or not, that’s a lethal combination. When I was in school, I knew kids who were picked on AND came from a household with accessability to guns. But they never brought them to school. Disputes were settled with fists, not bullets. When I was in school wild kids were said tobe hyperactive and outgrew it, not labeled with ADHD and automatically medicated with drugs with adverse effects like suicidal tendancies.

Today it’s a completely different world. People have changed. Violent video games, social media, over medication, etc. are to blame. Guns are just the ends to the means nowadays. Until you and others take the blinders off and realize people and culture have changed, things will only get worse.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Based on a bunch of random polls that I Googled, gun ownership percentages have been pretty steady over the last 30 years, fluctuating between 40-50% of households, many reporting that the number has been steadily falling.

Anyway, if gun ownership statistics don't move much, any change in the number of shootings of any kind cannot be blamed on the existence or ownership of guns. Obviously when statistic A is stable, and statistic B is all over the map, they are not related.

It's the people, it's the society, it's the self-entitlement that everyone in the US seems to have gotten in the last 10 years.

a reply to: UnBreakable

You could be right as I preach an anti-resistance to change but in this case I'm not so sure we should continue to baby these kids into thinking shooting anyone because of bullying is an understandable and justified offense.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Southern Guardian

So how would you, SG, handle this?

More laws? (Murder, discharging a weapon, having a weapon in school are already illegal)

More checks and balances? (See US debt)

Perhaps just straight up confiscation?

Repeal the 2nd Amendment. I'm beginning to believe that's the only solution.

We've had more kids shot in schools in 2018 than we've had active duty military shot.

Repeal the 2nd because the media has convinced you there is no other solution?

What about the first?

Considering that several of the school shootings were staged to advance a political agenda, the numbers are misleading when trying to assign cause and effect.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

If you truly believe that gun control will stop school shootings

Where in the OP did I say gun control would stop all school shootings? Did the data show school shootings occuring in countries with stricter gun control? Yes it did.

That's not the point of the OP.

My comment wasn't directed at you in particular, but rather the general consensus among the left that more gun control is needed. As if that would've prevented these shootings, or if that is the key to preventing future ones from happening -- both of which would be incredibly foolish to believe.

So what is the point of your OP when you end it with "Tell me again how guns aren't the problem?"

Okay.. guns aren't the problem.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

im astounded and relieved that they aren't using chlorine gas yet or other noxious chemicals ,evil will find a way sadly least they arent using bombs like that school teacher did in the 50s i think he leveled an entire school building

a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

My comment wasn't directed at you in particular, but rather the general consensus among the left that more gun control is needed. As if that would've prevented these shootings, or if that is the key to preventing future ones from happening -- both of which would be incredibly foolish to believe.

If you believe the general consensus of gun control advocates is that gun control will prevent future shootings then you've been spending a bit too much time in the echochamber. The consensus has always been that of more gun control equals less shootings and less frequency. Part of the issue is access to these weapons. It's a motivation for the mentally disturbed to carry out their killings. As I demonstrated the issues facing society such as mental illness, depression, anxiety, are not restricted to the United States. In fact they tend to be more frequent in some other comparable nations. The difference here, the disturbed don't have a ready and easily accessible arsenal at their finger tips to carry out these acts in other countries so instead they deal with it in otherways - for the most part they are powerless. You'll get the occasional knife stabbing or car hitting, but at a far less frequent rate, and at a fair less effective killing rate. The motivation to commit these acts are significantly lower in other countries as a result.

It's a matter of re-evaluating your perspective.

So what is the point of your OP when you end it with "Tell me again how guns aren't the problem?"

My point stands above.

a reply to: UnBreakable

www.chicagotribune.com... no but they are often targets of gang bangers in this case for informing rival gangs of an impending hit

Chicago’s youngest victim lost to gun violence this year may have been targeted by four reputed gang members who thought the boy shouted a warning to rival gangbangers, Chicago police said Friday in announcing charges in the month-old slaying. At a news conference, Superintendent Garry McCarthy lauded the help of the community in solving the slaying of 9-year-old Antonio Smith Jr., saying police had little to go on after his shooting Aug. 20 in a back yard in the Greater Grand Crossing neighborhood “The community refused to stay silent and provided us with vital information that culminated in the arrest of these three offenders,” McCarthy told reporters Friday afternoon at police headquarters. A fourth suspect was charged later.

www.nonprofitrisk.org... article on youth gangs with most being defined as being between 12-20ish

Demographic studies of gangs cited by Howell show that the typical age range for a gang is 12–24 with the average age of gang members 17–18 years old. The average age tends to be older in cities like Los Angeles and Chicago where gangs are well established and have been in existence for longer periods of time. Male gang members outnumber female gang members by a wide margin. Traditional gangs average about 180 members and specialty gangs — drug traffickers — are much smaller with only about 25 members on average. The ethnicity of gang members is 48% African-American, 43% Hispanic, 5% white, and 4% Asian. The preponderance of African-American and Hispanic representation in gang membership is not due to a predisposition to gang activities, but rather overrepresentation in those areas most conducive to gang activities. Researchers give several motivations for joining a youth gang. These reasons include: Enhanced status or prestige among friends. Increased income from drug sales and other criminal enterprises. Protection from other gangs. Social relationships giving a sense of personal identity. Coercion into joining. Researchers into gang activities recommend that youth-serving organizations be alert to signs that indicate possible gang activity. According to Ronald D. Stephens, Executive Director of the National School Safety Center at Pepperdine University, the signs include: Graffiti — Gangs use graffiti to mark their territory. When another gang disputes territory they often cross out the rival gang’s graffiti and replace it with their own. Colors, jewelry and distinctive clothing — Gangs generally establish distinctive clothing to signify affiliation with a particular gang. Unwary youths wearing similar clothing may become victims of gang rivalries. Physical confrontations and staredowns — Increasing violence may signal the presence of gangs. Beepers, pagers, and cellular telephones — Youths who carry electronic communications tools may be involved with gang drug activity. Drive-by shootings in the community — Drive-by shootings are most often the result of competition between gangs for territory. “Show-by” display of weapons — Usually a precursor to drive-by shootings. Gang members will drive by brandishing weapons to demonstrate their capacity for deadly violence. Racial conflict — There is a high correlation between racial conflict and gang membership. Many gangs are formed along racial and ethnic lines for protection and affiliation. Community history of gangs — Communities with a history of gangs are more likely to have an established gang presence with gang membership including representation from several generations. Increasing presence of informal groups calling themselves a “posse,” “crew,” or some other socially questionable name — Informal groups with seemingly benign, yet revealing, names may be the first step to becoming involved with a gang. Tattoos — Often, gang members have tattoos that symbolize their gang affiliation.

en.wikipedia.org... pretty much the OG of babby gangbangers

By most accounts, his grandmother's home was not much better than Sandifer's previous home. Sandifer, by the age of 8, quit attending school and began to roam the streets stealing cars and breaking into houses. In 1993, Sandifer and his siblings were removed from his grandmother's home and were sent to the Lawrence Hall DCFS shelter on Chicago's north side, from which Sandifer ran away and never returned. From 1993 until his death, Sandifer's whereabouts and living arrangements remain unclear, although he continued to be arrested by the authorities.[2]

he made it to 11 before being gunned down him self by a 16 and 14 year old fellow gangmembers

www.nydailynews.com... NY and not chicago but they are getting them young these days although it is still not too common for them to be THAT young

The 10-year-old terror arrested for robbing an elderly woman and trying to set a Brooklyn store on fire was well on his way to becoming one of the youngest gang members in the city, officials said. A Brooklyn Crips set is recruiting the 10-year-old, and the arson at a Deals Discount store on Clarkson Ave. in East Flatbush on Tuesday was some kind of initiation, police sources said. That's pretty much unheard of, according to NYPD Assistant Commissioner Kevin O'Connor of the Juvenile Justice Division.

www.washingtontimes.com... in Virginia they can be as young as 7 apparently

Gangs in Northern Virginia are a growing threat to residents’ safety and are recruiting children as young as 7 years old, law enforcement officials said yesterday, a day after what police sources say was the second gang-related attack in a week. Gangs, which police say are growing in size and boldness, usually commit violent crimes against other gangs, but bystanders are at risk. “When these people are shooting, they don’t care about who’s behind it and who they miss,” said Sgt. Jerry Keys, a spokesman for the Herndon police. “The general public is at risk, because you might be behind that person.”

its more likely the high death toll can be explained that most gang members dont care who they hit in the crossfire which helps to explain why some of the victims are so young even if they arent affiliated they can still become victims of gang violence

www.telegraph.co.uk... older article but even the UK has issues with children in gangs the ones in this case end up stabbing people as opposed to shooting them

"It isn't as bad as what happens in America, at least not yet. But children as young as eight are getting involved in gangs and introduced to crime. "They are being bullied by older children, and quickly coming to realise that the way to protect yourself from older thugs is to imitate them. They join gangs, they encourage each other to act tough, and they start thieving. "That's how the escalation starts. It can end with violence on the streets, even with murder." By the age of 13, the hard core have started to graduate to violent street robbery. Ebeneezer Gorazeb, 33, the treasurer of the Doddington Estate Resource Centre, knows from experience that if you are going to reform child criminals, you have to catch them between about eight and ten because, he says, "by the age of 14 or 15, it is already too late". They are already fixed on fast money and the spurious glamour of violent crime and can't be persuaded out of it. Indeed, last week the Office for Standards in Education reported that as many as 10,000 children, mostly aged 14 or 15, were missing from the state school system altogether. Some may be working but others, Ofsted admitted, were probably out committing crime. Most car-jacking is done by youngsters between the ages of 13 and 18. "They don't know what civilised standards are," says Commander Baker.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

or...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Those examples also all require much more skill to use, not to mention happen in more limited circumstances. You can't just point in a classroom in the middle of the day, pull a trigger, shoot people, and move on to the next room.

Someone who is unpracticed with a firearm will not fare very well in using it effectively either. It takes no more acumen to swing a machete in a chopping motion, or to bash someone with a brick.

The internet freely provides recipes for various weapons of death. Bombs, napalm, chlorine gas, etc, etc. All we are arguing over is the mode of murder. It seems like the discussion, on its face, misses the entire point.

originally posted by: JinMI
Repeal the 2nd because the media has convinced you there is no other solution?

What about the first?

I think the first has a problem too. I think we need to seriously reduce anonymous speech, while at the same time strengthening free speech protections.

a reply to: Aazadan

How do you enforce a ban on anonymous speech? What would be the consequences for violating such a ban? Like the anti-gun position, it makes no sense whatsoever.

it's sad seeing how many people are falling for all this school shooting misinformation, the media is playing dangerous games and starting to threaten the stability of our nation and endanger our liberties with their distortion of reality.

maybe we have problems but things are starting to head in a direction that will only worsen the problem if the anti-gun crowd get their way.