BREAKING: Maryland school shooting

jonjo sinister

Not again.

Gun laws.

Ubbquittious

Another day, another shooting. Hopefully Trump will build a wall to isolate himself from Canada as well and cut the fibre optic cables while he's at it.

GLaDOS

http://www.thejournal.ie/school-shooting-maryland-3914068-Mar2018/?utm_source=facebook_short

A SCHOOL IN the US State of Maryland has been put on lockdown after a “tragic shooting” this morning. Great Mills High School in St. Mary’s County has said that the incident has been “contained” and that police are at the scene. “There has been a tragic shooting at Great Mills High School. The St. Mary’s County Sheriff is on the scene and the event is contained,” the school wrote on Facebook.

enricoh

U'd nearly get more reaction nowadays if you put breaking news - no school shootings for 3 days.
Sad.
At least we don't have the isis crap in Europe every week anymore.

https://twitter.com/davism0llie/status/976073352426278913?s=21

Witness thinks there is at least one dead

RobbingBandit

Reporters phishing for info, only in America

rgodard80a

Cowards ! Or in this case, a chicken maryland.

Mr. Incognito

RIP

Hopefully its not too many kids killed.

They really need to get a handle on this **** and stop selling guns to people and collect the ones they have sold.

Hitman3000

Mr. Incognito wrote:

They really need to get a handle on this **** and stop selling guns to people and collect the ones they have sold.

Won't happen, have a look at the Parkland shooting thread. See the mindset of the pro gun loons. Depressing.

rgodard80a

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

They really need to get a handle on this **** and stop selling guns to people and collect the ones they have sold.

It's in their constitution to bear arms.
However if you could absolutely lock down the supply of ammo, it might be a workaround.

Donald Trump

Wouldn't have happened if all teachers were packing Uzis

Sidebaro

Think of the mindset of these shooters. If it were banks being robbed then it would make sense for a bank robber to lay low until the heat drops, banks start to feel safe again and maybe lower security. There's been 16(?) school shootings so far this year, the shooters don't give a ****. These aren't angry people lashing out, there's no reason to it, they're starting to do it for notoriety. School shooting is becoming the new planking.

Donald Trump

rgodard80a wrote: »

It's in their constitution to bear arms.
However if you could absolutely lock down the supply of ammo, it might be a workaround.

https://www.thinglink.com/scene/617000886039740417

Hitman3000

Donald Trump wrote:

Wouldn't have happened if all teachers were packing Uzis

Sure the 9 year old that shot and killed his sister, if only the parents were responsible and gave her a gun.
As an aside teacher recently taken into custody for shooting in his classroom injuring 3 kids. Happened in Dallas.

RocketRaccoon

Is there even a point starting these threads anymore? That country is a joke when it comes to these type of things and it will never change. Sandy Hook was the opportunity for change, they didn't take it and nothing that will happen in the future will be as bad as that.

Donald Trump

What about allowing guns but banning bullets

Donald Trump

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Sure the 9 year old that shot and killed his sister, if only the parents were responsible and gave her a gun.
As an aside teacher recently taken into custody for shooting in his classroom injuring 3 kids. Happened in Dallas.

Obviously need the kids to have RPGs.

Teachers ain't gonna fuck with them then

Simples

Gravelly

Tragic that this has happened yet again.

This won't be popular, but, in relation to earlier posts on the thread, how exactly is this Trumps fault? He's the 45th president, not the first.

Also, how exactly will "gun laws" prevent this? The only way would be to remove all the guns in circulation in America, and somehow prevent any more being brought in, legally or otherwise. That would entail a very bloody civil war. The "gun laws now" crowd should look at how well the "war on drugs" is going, and the constitution doesn't guarantee the right to drugs.....

I don't know what the solution to the gun violence problem is, but I can guarantee that Trump won't solve it no matter what he does, and there is no "gun law" solution that will either. If there is a possible solution, and I'm not sure there is, it will involve changing the American psyche, and good luck with that.

Donald Trump

Gravelly wrote: »

Also, how exactly will "gun laws" prevent this? The only way would be to remove all the guns in circulation in America, and somehow prevent any more being brought in, legally or otherwise. That would entail a very bloody civil war. The "gun laws now" crowd should look at how well the "war on drugs" is going, and the constitution doesn't guarantee the right to drugs.....

The average decent person in the US isn't at any risk be killed by a drugs gang. They won't be kidnapped for ransom by a cartel either. This crap about "war on drugs failing" ignores how much worse it could be

If you can have people accept reasonable laws, it can change the culture. It can also limit the ability of the local nutcase to stock up on 20 guns.

We all have the local headcases. You know a few of them wherever you grew up. Ones you wouldn't want to have access to a gun, never mind allowed to build up a personal arsenal. In the US, the ability of that person to build up that supply is lauded and encouraged

US pro-gun nuts need to start thinking along the lines of "this is why we can't have nice things"

BettePorter

RocketRaccoon wrote: »

Sandy Hook was the opportunity for change, they didn't take it and nothing that will happen in the future will be as bad as that.

Unfortunately you'll probably be proved wrong on that prediction.

Guy:Incognito

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Sure the 9 year old that shot and killed his sister, if only the parents were responsible and gave her a gun.
As an aside teacher recently taken into custody for shooting in his classroom injuring 3 kids. Happened in Dallas.

If a 9 year old was out robbingcars here you'd say blame the parents.

No 9 year old can walk in to a gun shop and buy a gun.

Guy:Incognito

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Sure the 9 year old that shot and killed his sister, if only the parents were responsible and gave her a gun.
As an aside teacher recently taken into custody for shooting in his classroom injuring 3 kids. Happened in Dallas.

If a 9 year old was out robbing cars here you'd say blame the parents.

No 9 year old can walk in to a gun shop and buy a gun.

Hitman3000

Gravelly wrote:

Also, how exactly will "gun laws" prevent this? The only way would be to remove all the guns in circulation in America, and somehow prevent any more being brought in, legally or otherwise. That would entail a very bloody civil war. The "gun laws now" crowd should look at how well the "war on drugs" is going, and the constitution doesn't guarantee the right to drugs.....

How about less guns and grandfather the rest with no licence . Who exactly needs more than one gun? It would take time but eventually fewer guns in working condition. Increase the price of ammunition to a level where it is a serious economic disadvantage to stock pile it.

Gravelly

Donald Trump wrote: »

The average decent person in the US isn't at any risk be killed by a drugs gang. They won't be kidnapped for ransom by a cartel either. This crap about "war on drugs failing" ignores how much worse it could be

If you can have people accept reasonable laws, it can change the culture. It can also limit the ability of the local nutcase to stock up on 20 guns.

We all have the local headcases. You know a few of them wherever you grew up. Ones you wouldn't want to have access to a gun, never mind allowed to build up a personal arsenal. In the US, the ability of that person to build up that supply is lauded and encouraged

US pro-gun nuts need to start thinking along the lines of "this is why we can't have nice things"

I get the "gun nuts, can't have nice things, headcases" stuff, honestly I do. But it won't progress things one iota. There is no way, absolutely none, that any law banning guns, or access to guns, can pass in the United States. Europeans can wail and cry as much as we like, it just won't happen. There would be civil war if any politician tried, not that any would, because they know that.

So, if we leave the emotion aside, how does one address gun violence in the USA, while accepting the reality that a ban or restriction can never happen in the medium to long term?

wexie

Gravelly wrote: »

Also, how exactly will "gun laws" prevent this? The only way would be to remove all the guns in circulation in America, and somehow prevent any more being brought in, legally or otherwise. That would entail a very bloody civil war.

While I partly agree with you insofar that introducing new laws won't do anything about all the millions of guns already in circulation....

I think at this stage perhaps people need to stop looking at solutions that will start making things 'better' and start with solutions to stop things getting increasingly worse.

And that's certainly something new laws might help with.

Hitman3000

Guy:Incognito wrote:

If a 9 year old was out robbing cars here you'd say blame the parents.

I'll stick with the topic if it's ok with you. You want to engage in whataboutery off you go.

Mr.H

Ubbquittious wrote:

Another day, another shooting. Hopefully Trump will build a wall to isolate himself from Canada as well and cut the fibre optic cables while he's at it.

Nothing to do with trump to be fair.

There were more guns on the street after Obama than before! It's not a democrat versus republican argument. Unfortunately the nra contribute to both sides so will always have sway.

Gravelly

wexie wrote: »

While I partly agree with you insofar that introducing new laws won't do anything about all the millions of guns already in circulation....

I think at this stage perhaps people need to stop looking at solutions that will start making things 'better' and start with solutions to stop things getting increasingly worse.

And that's certainly something new laws might help with.

I agree with that, the question is, what new laws? No law, new or otherwise banning guns is realistic in the US, whatever we might think of that.

Snickers Man

From Fox News site


Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan tweeted Tuesday that his office is “closely monitoring the situation at Great Mills High School.”

“Maryland State Police is in touch with local law enforcement and ready to provide support. Our prayers are with students, school personnel, and first responders,” Hogan wrote.

God's really crapping out on the job as far as this issue is concerned, isn't he?

Hitman3000

"Thoughts and Prayers".

Kristopherus

No fatalities, thankfully, according to CBS News

ELM327

Perhaps this was a staged event by the anti-gun lobbyists.

Hitman3000

ELM327 wrote:

Perhaps this was a staged event by the anti-gun lobbyists.

Your tinfoil hat is on too tight.

seamus

Gravelly wrote: »

I agree with that, the question is, what new laws? No law, new or otherwise banning guns is realistic in the US, whatever we might think of that.

No, there's no way to click your fingers and put the genie back in the bottle, but there are plenty of ways to reduce gun circulation over time.

- Ban all private gun sales (if you want to sell your gun, you sell it to a dealer)

- Mandatory registration of all firearms
-- Including an obligation to report thefts/losses (and penalties if you don't)
-- Severe penalties for possessing a weapon that is not licenced to you; like 5-10 years in prison.

- Basic checks and limits on who can buy weapons and how many weapons they can own

- Random amnesties where people can register / surrender unlicenced weapons without penalty.

Guy:Incognito

Hitman3000 wrote: »

I'll stick with the topic if it's ok with you. You want to engage in whataboutery off you go.

Same as every thread. If it doesn't suit your argument......


It was you that started talking about unrelated 9 year olds btw.

Hitman3000

Guy:Incognito wrote:

Same as every thread. If it doesn't suit your email argument......

What's wrong, bad day? Looking for a row? What's an 'email argument' btw

Gravelly

seamus wrote: »

No, there's no way to click your fingers and put the genie back in the bottle, but there are plenty of ways to reduce gun circulation over time.

- Ban all private gun sales (if you want to sell your gun, you sell it to a dealer)

- Mandatory registration of all firearms
-- Including an obligation to report thefts/losses (and penalties if you don't)
-- Severe penalties for possessing a weapon that is not licenced to you; like 5-10 years in prison.

- Basic checks and limits on who can buy weapons and how many weapons they can own

- Random amnesties where people can register / surrender unlicenced weapons without penalty.

The only one of those laws which could pass without, at the least, major civil unrest in any state other than California is the last one. If you think the majority of Americans, even the mild-mannered ones, would accept the rest of those laws you don't know America.

Hitman3000

Guy:Incognito wrote:

It was you that started talking about unrelated 9 year olds btw.

See you didn't give my comment about the 9 year old context. It was a reply to a post of Donald Trump.
Nice edit btw.

Mutant z

I want to be shocked by this the frightening thing is im not.

Sidebaro

ELM327 wrote:

Perhaps this was a staged event by the anti-gun lobbyists.

I don't think they'd have to bother staging their own 'event', there's more than one a week so far this year.

seamus

Gravelly wrote: »

The only one of those laws which could pass without, at the least, major civil unrest in any state other than California is the last one. If you think the majority of Americans, even the mild-mannered ones, would accept the rest of those laws you don't know America.

No, I wouldn't claim to "know" America, but that's kind of irrelevant. They can accept the laws or they can just watch their kids die. A country can't ask for solutions to a problem and then place conditions on the acceptance of those solutions. If you want a problem fixed, you're going to have to make sacrifices.

To a certain extent I don't really care anymore. These things are tragic but inevitable when you have a country that thrives on hate, division, money and violence.
Anyone who would choose to raise a child in the United States needs their head examined.

Gravelly

seamus wrote: »

No, I wouldn't claim to "know" America, but that's kind of irrelevant. They can accept the laws or they can just watch their kids die. A country can't ask for solutions to a problem and then place conditions on the acceptance of those solutions. If you want a problem fixed, you're going to have to make sacrifices.

To a certain extent I don't really care anymore. These things are tragic but inevitable when you have a country that thrives on hate, division, money and violence.
Anyone who would choose to raise a child in the United States needs their head examined.

You should tell them that, I'm sure it'll change their minds.

fred funk }{

RocketRaccoon wrote: »

Is there even a point starting these threads anymore? That country is a joke when it comes to these type of things and it will never change. Sandy Hook was the opportunity for change, they didn't take it and nothing that will happen in the future will be as bad as that.

Spot on. It doesn't really get worse than that and they done fook all about it so they're not going to now.

RustyNut

Gravelly wrote: »

The only one of those laws which could pass without, at the least, major civil unrest in any state other than California is the last one. If you think the majority of Americans, even the mild-mannered ones, would accept the rest of those laws you don't know America.

I think that the rest of the world just needs to accept that America as a society values its guns more than its kids. All that the rest of us can do is leave them to it.

Gravelly

RustyNut wrote: »

I think that the rest of the world just needs to accept that America as a society values its guns more than its kids. All that the rest of us can do is leave them to it.

I'm not sure I'd put it like that (there's a historical connection in the American psyche between "freedom" and guns, so they would probably say something like "we value freedom more than our lives" or some such), but effectively you are correct. The rest of the world can continue to say they should do this, that, or the other, but it won't make any difference.

riffmongous

Gravelly wrote: »

The only one of those laws which could pass without, at the least, major civil unrest in any state other than California is the last one. If you think the majority of Americans, even the mild-mannered ones, would accept the rest of those laws you don't know America.

You know what, **** em, I'd rather a few gun nuts getting shot than more innocent kids.

greenspurs

RustyNut wrote: »

I think that the rest of the world just needs to accept that America as a society values its guns more than its kids. All that the rest of us can do is leave them to it.

" Hoo Rah " ....


:rolleyes: Biggest gunner survives - USA = Call of Duty- Live Version

Hitman3000

Gravelly wrote:

I'm not sure I'd put it like that (there's a historical connection in the American psyche between "freedom" and guns, so they would probably say something like "we value freedom more than our lives" or some such), but effectively you are correct. The rest of the world can continue to say they should do this, that, or the other, but it won't make any difference.

Whether you would wish to put it like that or not seems moot as it certainly appears that way. After Sandy hook there was a spike in the sales of guns similar to what was used as people thought that type of gun would be banned. 26 dead children was at the back of their minds.

Gravelly

riffmongous wrote: »

You know what, **** em, I'd rather a few gun nuts getting shot than more innocent kids.

I doubt the only ones getting shot would be the shadowy "gun nuts" who are to blame for all this.

I'd prefer that nobody gets shot, but it'll take more than gung-ho European keyboard warriors for America to get there unfortunately.

jjbrien

rgodard80a wrote: »

It's in their constitution to bear arms.
However if you could absolutely lock down the supply of ammo, it might be a workaround.

My freedoms :rolleyes:

Hitman3000

Gravelly wrote:

I'd prefer that nobody gets shot, but it'll take more than gung-ho European keyboard warriors for America to get there unfortunately.

There appears to be no appetite in America to stop the slaughter, so until next time which may already have happened. Take care.