Seems Like There's A Mass Shooting Almost Every Day!

YYYYYup - "People are not the problem....it's those damn guns!" A gun has the ability to twist a decent person's mind & make him/her a murderer! :LOL:
A psychiatrist once told his patient who was an alcoholic: "It's alcohol, and alcohol alone that has made your life a complete disaster."
The patient replied, "Oh, thank you, doctor. People keep telling me it's all my fault."
 

That's the area where my g-nephew is attending college (Arlington). I worry about him all the time. I texted him yesterday and he never answered me; so unlike him.


  • At least four people were injured in a shooting at Timberview High School in Arlington, Texas, police said.
  • The suspect, who has been identified, is still at large and considered "armed and dangerous," according to police.
  • Law enforcement officials are still conducting a search of the scene, which they said is secure.
 

Verisure said:
The US is inhumane. You've got super-wealthy and dirt poor, destitution. Do you want to know what is worse? Being told that if you are unemployed then "it's your own fault". Is it any wonder there exists so much crime in the US - guns are the best way for them to earn an income.
Click to expand...
I understand! Sad place we live. Thankfully I haven't resorted to a gun.
 
Remember the days when you only shot your spouse for their 'rude behavior'?
Then in 1966, Whitman climber the Tx Tower changing our culture forever.
"I am very upset, sooooo i will go slaughter many."
 
The mass killings are unacceptable, when they occur the brain stalls: wondering 'How can this be.
how can one do these things and why'?
The 'slaughter of the innocents,' at Sandy Hook was so Beyond the Pale, so unacceptable that the brain must find
a new way to process this information.
 
Last edited:
fuzzybuddy said:
I've come to think that we humans are way too volatile, way too unstable, and way too vindictive to own fire arms. We can't handle them. Guns put the power of life and death into totally inept hands. And anyone, who wants one, can get one. Other nations, who have banned weapons, do not wake up to bullet riddled dead bodies in their streets. Those nations don't feel the need to be armed to go to shopping. Their citizens aren't terrified of who is in tall buildings.
Click to expand...
I have many friends and family who are crazy about the second amendment. I am not one of them. We've created a society in which everyone believes that they need a weapon. Children are arming themselves and joining gangs in grade school. Every television program, movie and video game is permuted with gun violence. We encourage it, then put the perpetrators (often nearly children) in prison. Assault weapons are just the tip of the iceberg. We need to seriously reduce the availability of guns in all areas of American society or be prepared to live with the deaths
 
Tom 86 said:
I agree 100%. Here they have quit giving mental help to veterans that have PTSD. They just put them on pills. Now they are taking away the pills & telling them they are on their own. Their mind is warped so they don't know what to do.

Then we have thousands of unvaccinated people coming across our southern borders. They are bringing in Smallpox again. We quit making the vaccine for it many years ago. Now they are starting up making that again for those people.

People are out of work because of microchip shortages for cars. Go try & buy a new car, the price has jumped about $10,000.00 Same for used ones. I have a nephew that has a body shop. He use to get parts for cars the next day. Now it's 2 to 4 months out & people are screaming for their car to be fixed.

Everything is in such turmoil even with the pandemic making it worse. I heard on a local news channel this morning China has defaulted on a ten million loan. So China makes most of our parts & if they are losing money then were in deep poo poo.
Click to expand...
And on top of this the congress and president want to indebt us by another 3.5 trillion, which will further drive inflation. I remember the Jimmy Carter years too well, with prices up15% per year. It seems that congress wants to do anything their power to return to those frightening times.
 
Daytona Al said:
And on top of this the congress and president want to indebt us by another 3.5 trillion, which will further drive inflation. I remember the Jimmy Carter years too well, with prices up15% per year. It seems that congress wants to do anything their power to return to those frightening times.
Click to expand...
Inflation under Carter never exceeded 13% and was there for only one year. It did get into double digits for a three of his four years. The reasons were attributed to the mess left by the Nixon/Ford administration and the OPEC crisis. Inflation was beginning to fall as Carter left office in January 1981. Oh, the inflation rate hit almost 12% in 1974 during the Nixon/Ford years.
Forbes has some excellent articles as to how the inflation threatening the U.S. in 2021 is a completely different animal as it was in the late 70's. We are attempting to come out of a pandemic. Supply chains were decimated as, globally, manufacturing was curtailed. As the economy has accelerated in the past 8 months, people are back to work... vacationing... purchasing... and supply/demand has seen prices escalate. Grocery suppliers, etc. can't find truck drivers to deliver goods. Our daughter is the Director of Risk Management for one of the largest logistic corporations in the world. They can't move material with no one to drive trucks, load/unload trucks. The recovering economy we are seeing is a blessing and a curse. If anyone wants a job, it's out there. But, there are not enough people returning to the workplace to fill all those jobs. That is a short synopsis of today's inflation worries... not the same at all as in the 70's.
As far as the $3.5 trillion 'Build Back Better' agenda of the current administration, it will not add to the national debt. That $3.5 trillion is over a 10-year period. It's not all spend and remaining unpaid for in a single year... or single administration. A significant component of the bills is that an estimated 0.03% increase in taxes on those making over $400,000/year will pay for all costs incurred under the bill. Add to that the high paying jobs created by road/bridge construction, the safer and more efficient highways to see ag products, etc. make their way to market... the list is long whereby many lives of the 99% will be made better, financially, by the small contribution of the wealthy. They need to pay their fair share.
Sorry, we are not to get political on this forum. There was just so much in the post that veered from reality it needed corrected.
 
There is no refuge:
1983, March 1, McCarthy, Alaska killed six of the 22 residents.
No access by road (snow blocked roads in winter)a resident got to plane summoned helpšŸ˜§
Watched interview of couple trying to hide...'Here, here in a town with virtually no people.'
 
Gaer said:
Well Diva, The people who took over power debase, defile and defund the police departments. The few
Click to expand...
Gaer said:
who remain have an enormous disincentive to go into the high crime areas. So, Those with an undeveloped intellect and maturity want to test their parameters.
IMO
Click to expand...
To be clear: "defund" does not mean taking away funding from the police. It's a very unfortunate choice of words. Defunding the police is more a way of "re-arranging" the budgets so that there are specific duties for specific needs in each community and funds allocated for them as necessary. For instance responding to a fender-bender traffic accident wouldn't bring out a SWAT team...okay, that's a little extreme, but hopefully you get the point. In our county we already have a separation of many duties within our police departmet. When there's a fender-bender or someone runs a stop sign, the officer(s) responding are in vehicles that are marked "vehiclular response". There are others marked for drug enforcement, burglary, etc., and the funds are allocated accordingly.

I've probably muddied the waters more than cleared up anything!
 
Patch said:
As far as the $3.5 trillion 'Build Back Better' agenda of the current administration, it will not add to the national debt. That $3.5 trillion is over a 10-year period. It's not all spend and remaining unpaid for in a single year... or single administration. A significant component of the bills is that an estimated 0.03% increase in taxes on those making over $400,000/year will pay for all costs incurred under the bill.
Click to expand...
The fact is that you're absolutely right. It's unfortunate that people only hear what they choose to hear. It won't add a cent to the national debt, and those who make the most money will hardly notice the miniscule increase in their taxes. It would help if corporate America would pay their fair share as well.

And yeah, we should quit now before this thread does get political. It's already on the edge! Lord knows we get more than enough of that every time we turn on the TV. This forum is our safe place.
 
Last edited:
Some people allow bent media to provide them with talking points. They do no research for themselves. As a for instance, they are told the debt ceiling needs to be raised and that it is due to future spending or Build Back Better. They run with that. Yet, with just a little research, they could educate themselves that raising the debt ceiling is about past debt incurred.

'Raising or suspending the debt ceiling does not authorize new federal spending, but rather allows the Treasury to honor debts already incurred during the Trump and Biden administrations. Even if the Biden administration had passed no new spending initiatives in 2021, lawmakers would still have to raise or suspend the ceiling."

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/28/congress-must-raise-the-debt-limit-by-oct-18-yellen-warns.html

"The national debt is the total amount of outstanding borrowings by the U.S. Federal government, accumulated over our history."

https://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/blog/2021/10/06/the-debt-ceiling-an-explainer/
 
Verisure said:
There are three things destroying the US:
1). The drug industry
2). The weapons industry
3). Poverty

Only one is imported. If the two domestic ones were eliminated the import problem would dry up without lifting a finger.
Click to expand...
I think you have left out the single most important reason ie; the near total destruction of the nuclear family.
 
GeorgiaXplant said:
To be clear: "defund" does not mean taking away funding from the police. It's a very unfortunate choice of words. Defunding the police is more a way of "re-arranging" the budgets so that there are specific duties for specific needs in each community and funds allocated for them as necessary. For instance responding to a fender-bender traffic accident wouldn't bring out a SWAT team...okay, that's a little extreme, but hopefully you get the point. In our county we already have a separation of many duties within our police departmet. When there's a fender-bender or someone runs a stop sign, the officer(s) responding are in vehicles that are marked "vehiclular response". There are others marked for drug enforcement, burglary, etc., and the funds are allocated accordingly.

I've probably muddied the waters more than cleared up anything!
Click to expand...
Spot on. A major part of "defund the police" is re-organizing police departments across the nation, so that heavily armed cops are not the ones to respond to a teenager who is threatening suicide.

It makes me sick to my stomach whenever I read that another child has been shot dead by trigger happy cops.
 
1-7-73, seven fall to sniper in New Orleans
Only mass killing we have a history, timeline and motivation of killer...
Possibly more than one shooter=vague...
 
Three words I'm sick of:
1. Conversation, as in: It's time we had a national conversation about the price of raisins.
2. Community, as in: Today the one-right-legged community will speak; tomorrow the one-left-legged community will kick off the conversation of the no-legged community.
3. Research, as in: Do your research, you're as smart as anyone who completed 40 years of study.
 
GeorgiaXplant said:
To be clear: "defund" does not mean taking away funding from the police. It's a very unfortunate choice of words. Defunding the police is more a way of "re-arranging" the budgets so that there are specific duties for specific needs in each community and funds allocated for them as necessary. For instance responding to a fender-bender traffic accident wouldn't bring out a SWAT team...okay, that's a little extreme, but hopefully you get the point. In our county we already have a separation of many duties within our police departmet. When there's a fender-bender or someone runs a stop sign, the officer(s) responding are in vehicles that are marked "vehiclular response". There are others marked for drug enforcement, burglary, etc., and the funds are allocated accordingly.

I've probably muddied the waters more than cleared up anything!
Click to expand...

To some people, "defund the police" means just that. They want to take money away from police departments and shift resources to "community programs". And do it on a massive scale.

Maya Wiley is a socialist who ran for Mayor of New York. Her plan called for taking $300 million from the police department -- reducing the number of police on the street by 2,500 -- and shifting it to senior and child care programs. This in the middle of a major crime spike. Mercifully, she lost (to a former NYPD police captain!)

https://www.thecity.nyc/politics/20...nyc-childcare-senior-care-proposal-eric-adams
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top