This conversation has provided me with an opportunity for personal introspection for which I'm grateful.

When I wrote my original comment a day or two ago I had very recently read a news article. Nothing rare - someone was shot and killed.

The shooter had a history of violence. There was talk about how if existing Red Flag laws had been followed this individual would not have had access to the firearm used in the murder.

At the time that did make sense to me - after all, if it's known this individual may be a threat to others - a specific, known threat with a history of violence towards who would eventually become the victim in this case ...

Doesn't a law preventing that individual from purchasing a firearm make sense?

That was my original line of thinking. And, in fact, I don't think it's illogical.

However, the Red Flag laws that applied weren't followed. This individual did obtain a firearm.

So does that imply this tragedy wouldn't have occurred had the laws been followed?

I don't believe so. I think, considering this individuals history of violence towards the victim the tragedy would have occurred regardless of how little effort was necessary for them to obtain an efficient weapon.

No, what needed to happen from the start should've been a proactive approach to addressing the mental health issues related to the shooter.

Preventative maintenance, so to speak.

The Red Flag Laws in place were ineffective not only because they weren't utilized (which was my original, surface level take) but because they're reactive.

Furthermore, as you've mentioned, they are far too easily open to abuse.

In this specific case Red Flag Laws could have prevented someone with a known history of violence from arming themselves against their future victim, but no one even bothered enacting them.

I am willing to bet that if the perpetrator had been a minority that these same laws would've been enforced heavily.

Is this a serious comment?

“While it may be intuitive that a 14-year-old has no legitimate purpose, it doesn’t actually mean that they’re going to harm someone. We don’t know that yet"

Better wait until they shoot up a school to be sure. Can't be too careful when it comes to lessening the firearms available to children.

Insanity.

What;s their condom situation?

I can't be reading this right, or there's an error. Because if it says what it looks like, this is unimaginably evil lunacy.

After the lawsuit they can afford to go pretty much anywhere.

> While it may be intuitive that a 14-year-old has no legitimate purpose, it doesn’t actually mean that they’re going to harm someone. We don’t know that yet

Spoken like someone who hit peak intelligence at 14 and could never look back to realize how fucking dumb they were.

This is pure political horseshit. They’re doing this to explicitly and intentionally hurt St. Louis and Kansas City.

You can't have birth control, you can't have an abortion, you can't have the morning after pill, it's the law that your kids go to underfunded, under resourced schools, where we will make sure they learn exactly enough to be heartbreakingly ignorant and ill equipped for even normal functioning in the real world, never mind a career, but will ensure they are laughably stupid everywhere outside their own zipcode; we're not going to make it possible for you to afford child care so you can go to the job that won't pay you enough to afford adequate housing or enough food for your kids, never mind sports or enrichment activities, aaaaand... not only are we taking no steps whatsoever to protect your child from being shot, we're actually going to change the law so that the odds of it happening go way, way up.

Family values!! Enjoy parenting! (Oh... hope your kid is CIS/ heteronormative, and white, without any learning disabilities are other challenges, because those are whole other, separate paragraphs of what kind of hell we'll cheerfully inflict on you all. Anyway, again, enjoy parenting!)

The greatest evidence that the Republicans know global warming is real and there is going to be no more planet in the next 20 to 30 years is how unabashedly they keep proving they don't give one shit about how stupid and amoral they look, and make America look on the world stage

I used to work in IT. I'm sure he thought he selected the "no tip" option. But someone accidentally held their finger on the "4" key and most of these systems only allow input from the customer-facing side.

[removed]

[deleted]

This why I go to Caribou…

The only thing stops a bad kid with a gun is a good kid with a gun

i think there's a contest

> The Republican-led Missouri state house on Wednesday voted against banning minors from openly carrying firearms on public land without adult supervision.

this is stupid beyond imagination.

But, books a dangerous to children. I’m pretty sick of this timeline.

[removed]

What has this world become? My roommate worked for an aerospace company and had to carry a missile into a trade show. Next to a major airport. The month after 9/11–and nobody cared a whit.

I was just thinking about this after watching old videos of my cockatoo tearing shit up. He’s a good tool user too

I’m thinking they were gonna rob the clerk lol

They're both 17 and carrying guns in hoodie pockets. So, that stupid.

Bruh they literally walked outside then said the clerk shot at them….they even had time to process everything. How stupid can you be.

Perfect