I am in the middle of my workout so I am going to be brief but you are knocking them out of the park today gchs.

In terms of possible fixes.  I would say the laws and/or guidelines need to be followed regarding red flag laws.  After the FedEx shooting I followed that story for a while to see what happened, especially since an attempt at utilizing Indiana's red flag law, did in fact take place.  They took a gun from the would be shooter, but there was never a hearing about his competency to see whether or not he should get his gun back.  It was later revealed(if I remember correctly) that the thought process in not pushing for the hearing, it meant that the state didn't run the risk of losing their hearing and potentially have to give back a dangerous person their gun.  However in doing that, not having the hearing, it meant that the suspect was not red flagged from buying any weapons in the future,  which is exactly what he did, a relatively short time before the FedEx shooting. 

Also, one other thing that comes to mind, it's a really bad look when time and time again the FBI is said to have had subjects "on their radar" at some point prior to a shooting, but nothing was done or could be done.  It's not like we are talking a failed prosecution, this is quite literally the difference in life and death.  Seems like something needs to change on their end.  Whether it's due diligence by the FBI, current laws or guidelines that leave them with few intervention options, I'm not sure.  But it's happened a lot lately and I can't be the only person noticing this. 

3 minutes ago, sportsfan41 said:

In terms of possible fixes.  I would say the laws and/or guidelines need to be followed regarding red flag laws.  After the FedEx shooting I followed that story for a while to see what happened, especially since an attempt at utilizing Indiana's red flag law, did in fact take place.  They took a gun from the would be shooter, but there was never a hearing about his competency to see whether or not he should get his gun back.  It was later revealed(if I remember correctly) that the thought process in not pushing for the hearing, it meant that the state didn't run the risk of losing their hearing and potentially have to give back a dangerous person their gun.  However in doing that, not having the hearing, it meant that the suspect was not red flagged from buying any weapons in the future,  which is exactly what he did, a relatively short time before the FedEx shooting. 

Another systematic breakdown, imagine that.

On Red Flag laws, I am a little conflicted.  For me to support them they would have to include very serious penalties (with mandatory jail time) for anyone that abuses them. 

1 minute ago, sportsfan41 said:

Also, one other thing that comes to mind, it's a really bad look when time and time again the FBI is said to have had subjects "on their radar" at some point prior to a shooting, but nothing was done or could be done.  It's not like we are talking a failed prosecution, this is quite literally the difference in life and death.  Seems like something needs to change on their end.  Whether it's due diligence by the FBI, current laws or guidelines that leave them with few intervention options, I'm not sure.  But it's happened a lot lately and I can't be the only person noticing this. 

I have noticed the same thing but generally speaking the FBI is a disappointment to me so I am not surprised they fail here too.

I’m a little too drunk to fully articulate my thoughts on the matter.

I’m pro gun. I’ve got a glock 19 and a S&W 357 in a small safe 10 feet from me right now. 

At a minimum, a gun should be as difficult to obtain as a drivers license. If you want one, you should be able to have one. There should be a ton of hoops to jump through to qualify.

 

9 minutes ago, MBWC41 said:

I’m a little to drunk to fully articulate my thoughts on the matter.

I’m pro gun. I’ve got a glock 19 and a S&W 357 in a small safe 10 feet from me right now. 

At a minimum, a gun should be as difficult to obtain as a drivers license. If you want one, you should be able to have one. There should be a ton of hoops to jump through to qualify.

 

Get your 19 out of the safe and ready to go in case of an emergency. 

6 minutes ago, theguru said:

Get your 19 out of the safe and ready to go in case of an emergency. 

It’s always close…

6 hours ago, gchs_uk9 said:

This may seem off topic but I would recommend watching “The Social Dilemma” on Netflix. I recommend it because it shows how tech companies have effectively cornered people into their own online bubble and anything other than the person’s own views on any (every?) topic is unacceptable. I honestly think that type of thinking drives a wedge further into people (leading to these types of behaviors) all for the purpose of advertising profits. It doesn’t completely explain why this happens (it never even mentions this in the film), but those are immediate conclusions I drew from it. 

I second this recommendation. "The Social Dilemma" is a must see.

6 hours ago, theguru said:

Mass shootings are normally individual criminal acts committed by perpetrators with some level of mental illness, if anyone has a solution for that I am all ears.

What is not a solution is attempting to take firearms away from law abiding citizens. 

Virtually everyone is in favor of gun control. It is the level and type of gun control that we debate. 

14 hours ago, gchs_uk9 said:

This may seem off topic but I would recommend watching “The Social Dilemma” on Netflix. I recommend it because it shows how tech companies have effectively cornered people into their own online bubble and anything other than the person’s own views on any (every?) topic is unacceptable. I honestly think that type of thinking drives a wedge further into people (leading to these types of behaviors) all for the purpose of advertising profits. It doesn’t completely explain why this happens (it never even mentions this in the film), but those are immediate conclusions I drew from it. 

I don't have Netflix, but it sounds like I was having a similar type of discussion about this just yesterday.   Our discussion was two-fold.  One, was that everything now has become black and white (and not just in a race-relations way).  You're either fully in, or you're fully out.  You're either with me, or you're against me.  There is no middle ground.  There is no gray area.  The problem is, life is full of gray.  It's everywhere.  But, we've somehow become accustomed(conditioned?) to not see it.  The focus is always on the extremes at the far end of each spectrum, even if they represent just a small part of the whole.

The other point we discussed is how we've come to mistake the modern forms of communication for actually talking to someone.  Texts, tweets, FB postings, message boards and all the other types of electronic communications can deliver a message...but they fail miserably in other ways.  We've become emboldened by being anonymous keyboard warriors, and will "say" things that we would have never said to a person face-to-face before.  And ultimately, what's missing is the tone of the message.  I can write a message and be, in my mind, 100% clear on what I'm trying to convey.  But if four different people read it, they may take it four different ways.  Am I angry?  Am I being sarcastic?  Am I being empathetic?  Am I joking? In person, or even on the phone, you're able to "read" the verbal cues as to how the message is being delivered.  But, nobody talks (literally) to anybody anymore.  And the Covid lockdown didn't help.  We were actually encouraged to be anti-social.  And I believe that man is a very social creature.

So what happens when we have a generation of people who have no social skills, and who believe they are always right?  To me, that's not a good combination.

11 hours ago, Voice of Reason said:

Virtually everyone is in favor of gun control. It is the level and type of gun control that we debate. 

I don't disagree with you but any type of gun control has to address mental illness first before anything else and I haven't seen anything close to workable on the mental illness front.

And from the San Francisco Chronical the suspect had two semiautomatic pistols:

6 a.m. Alleged VTA gunman had two semiautomatic weapons, sheriff says: Santa Clara County Sheriff Laurie Smith said Thursday morning that Samuel James Cassidy, the alleged gunman who killed nine people at the Valley Transportation railyard in San Jose on Wednesday morning, had two semiautomatic pistols and 11 magazines of handgun ammunition. When authorities confronted Cassidy after the shooting, he killed himself, she said. Smith said “the guns were found in the area where he took his life.” She said the weapons “appear to be the type that would be legal in California,” though authorities said they were working to determine whether any modifications had been made. The sheriff added that detectives are reviewing Cassidy’s emails and texts to try to determine a motive, and that so far, Cassidy had left “no written documents found that I’m aware of.”

https://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/Mass-shooting-in-San-Jose-What-we-know-so-far-16204689.php

18 hours ago, gchs_uk9 said:

This may seem off topic but I would recommend watching “The Social Dilemma” on Netflix. I recommend it because it shows how tech companies have effectively cornered people into their own online bubble and anything other than the person’s own views on any (every?) topic is unacceptable. I honestly think that type of thinking drives a wedge further into people (leading to these types of behaviors) all for the purpose of advertising profits. It doesn’t completely explain why this happens (it never even mentions this in the film), but those are immediate conclusions I drew from it. 

 

12 hours ago, Voice of Reason said:

I second this recommendation. "The Social Dilemma" is a must see.

 

3 hours ago, CincySportsFan said:

I don't have Netflix, but it sounds like I was having a similar type of discussion about this just yesterday.   Our discussion was two-fold.  One, was that everything now has become black and white (and not just in a race-relations way).  You're either fully in, or you're fully out.  You're either with me, or you're against me.  There is no middle ground.  There is no gray area.  The problem is, life is full of gray.  It's everywhere.  But, we've somehow become accustomed(conditioned?) to not see it.  The focus is always on the extremes at the far end of each spectrum, even if they represent just a small part of the whole.

The other point we discussed is how we've come to mistake the modern forms of communication for actually talking to someone.  Texts, tweets, FB postings, message boards and all the other types of electronic communications can deliver a message...but they fail miserably in other ways.  We've become emboldened by being anonymous keyboard warriors, and will "say" things that we would have never said to a person face-to-face before.  And ultimately, what's missing is the tone of the message.  I can write a message and be, in my mind, 100% clear on what I'm trying to convey.  But if four different people read it, they may take it four different ways.  Am I angry?  Am I being sarcastic?  Am I being empathetic?  Am I joking? In person, or even on the phone, you're able to "read" the verbal cues as to how the message is being delivered.  But, nobody talks (literally) to anybody anymore.  And the Covid lockdown didn't help.  We were actually encouraged to be anti-social.  And I believe that man is a very social creature.

So what happens when we have a generation of people who have no social skills, and who believe they are always right?  To me, that's not a good combination.

I third this recommendation and I am stealing from VoR. "The Social Dilemma" is a must see.

In short the The Social Dilemma explains that Facebook (some others too but mostly Facebook) use a super computer to manipulate us all for financial gain.  This has been going on for years now and we are at a point that nearly every young adult graduating from high school has spent their preteen and teen years being manipulated by big tech.  

I can't imagine any scenario where this is a good thing.  In fact, I would say that human beings being manipulated (especially in their formative years) has to exacerbate all types of mental illness.  Coming full circle to the topic of this thread, the business model of Facebook and some other social media/big tech giants ultimately have to play some part in these mass shootings, violent/criminal behavior, and mental illness.  

15 hours ago, theguru said:

I don't disagree with you but any type of gun control has to address mental illness first before anything else and I haven't seen anything close to workable on the mental illness front.

And from the San Francisco Chronical the suspect had two semiautomatic pistols:

6 a.m. Alleged VTA gunman had two semiautomatic weapons, sheriff says: Santa Clara County Sheriff Laurie Smith said Thursday morning that Samuel James Cassidy, the alleged gunman who killed nine people at the Valley Transportation railyard in San Jose on Wednesday morning, had two semiautomatic pistols and 11 magazines of handgun ammunition. When authorities confronted Cassidy after the shooting, he killed himself, she said. Smith said “the guns were found in the area where he took his life.” She said the weapons “appear to be the type that would be legal in California,” though authorities said they were working to determine whether any modifications had been made. The sheriff added that detectives are reviewing Cassidy’s emails and texts to try to determine a motive, and that so far, Cassidy had left “no written documents found that I’m aware of.”

https://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/Mass-shooting-in-San-Jose-What-we-know-so-far-16204689.php

2 semiautomatic pistols.  Que the calls to ban assault rifles and large magazines.

14 hours ago, theguru said:

 

 

I third this recommendation and I am stealing from VoR. "The Social Dilemma" is a must see.

In short the The Social Dilemma explains that Facebook (some others too but mostly Facebook) use a super computer to manipulate us all for financial gain.  This has been going on for years now and we are at a point that nearly every young adult graduating from high school has spent their preteen and teen years being manipulated by big tech.  

I can't imagine any scenario where this is a good thing.  In fact, I would say that human beings being manipulated (especially in their formative years) has to exacerbate all types of mental illness.  Coming full circle to the topic of this thread, the business model of Facebook and some other social media/big tech giants ultimately have to play some part in these mass shootings, violent/criminal behavior, and mental illness.  

Probably needs it's own thread.  How bad is or can social media be for an anti social society?