Which is exactly why nobody is suggesting it. *Edit* I've been looking and can't find a direct quote of anybody recommending we remove or reduce the number of emergency exits.
How serious should they be? How would the logistics work? How does the federal government get over 30 states who want gun rights, to enforce federal gun bans when the feds can't get a few states to support their Marijuana ban?
It's our generations responsibility to make sure future generations don't face these issues...doesn't matter how long it takes just like tackling global warming...it starts with us enacting more sensible laws. Pot has become legal in my lifetime...I'd have never in a thousand years thought that would ever happen....it did. Same with gun laws...it's happened in your lifetime...just not here yet.
I don't think so. I think it starts with us enacting better policies. Same as the solution to climate change.
Well, you advocated for better laws. That's not the same as better policies. We don't need to punish people to make them murder less. We don't need to punish people to make them polute less. We need to change the incentives so that people don't want to polute or kill people in the first place.
Well you have already said reducing exits and entryways is not the way to go on a different post. Got to give you credit for that.
Ted Cruz is the biggest one but I think since he got roasted for it he retracted the comment or tweet or email? Whatever it was on?
I saw him say to use 1 entrance and exit, with security. Nothing about removing emergency exits. In which case you would make using emergency exits in emergencies fine, but let kids know not to use them as exits unnecessarily. Alarm them. Now the only way in is through the single entrance. I don't see the problem... *Edit* I absolutely hate Ted Cruz, so I'd love to blast him about this if he said it.
I think one entrance is ideal. And all schools should be set up that way. But no restriction on emergency exits. That's not necessary or smart.
Gov. Abbott attributes mass shootings to mental health issues a month after cutting $211 million from mental health commission
Gun in Texas Shooting Came From Company Known for Pushing Boundaries After one of its military-style rifles was used in the Texas elementary school shooting on Tuesday, the gun manufacturer Daniel Defense published a pop-up statement on its home page sending “thoughts and prayers” to the community of Uvalde, Texas, and pledging to cooperate with the authorities. When the pop-up disappeared, a different message took center stage: a promotion, adorned with gold-encased bullets, for a sweepstakes to win $15,000 worth of guns or ammunition. The Texas shooting, which left 19 schoolchildren and two teachers dead and more than a dozen wounded, has put a national spotlight on Daniel Defense, a family-owned business in Georgia that has emerged as a trailblazer in an aggressive, boundary-pushing style of weapons marketing and sales. Some of its advertisements invoke popular video games like “Call of Duty” and feature “Star Wars” characters and Santa Claus, messages that are likely to appeal to teenagers. The company was an early adopter of a direct-to-consumer business model that aimed to make buying military gear as simple as ordering from Amazon, enticing customers with “adventure now, pay later” installment plans that make expensive weaponry more affordable. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/28/business/daniel-defense-rifle-texas-shooting-gun.html
"Kill now, pay later!" Again, it was too fucking easy for a high school dropout working part-time at Wendy's to buy that much pain & death that easily.
And the company’s founder and chief executive, Marty Daniel, has fashioned himself as a provocateur who ridicules gun control proposals and uses publicity stunts to drum up sales. Daniel Defense is at the forefront of an industry that has grown increasingly aggressive in recent years as it tries to expand beyond its aging, mostly white customer base and resists the calls for stronger regulation that seem to intensify after every mass shooting. “Daniel Defense is basically the poster child of this egregious, aggressive marketing,” said Ryan Busse, a former executive at the gun company Kimber who is now an industry critic. “Marty Daniel burst in the door, a lot louder and more brazen than other gun makers, much like Donald Trump did on the political scene.” He added, “Through this company, you are telling the story of how the gun industry has become increasingly radicalized.” Daniel Defense’s strategy seems to have been effective. Its sales have soared, in part because of its successful targeting of young customers like Salvador Ramos, the gunman in Texas. Mr. Ramos, whom the authorities killed on Tuesday, was a “Call of Duty” video game enthusiast and appears to have bought his assault rifle directly from Daniel Defense, less than a week after turning 18. ...
Assault Weapons Ban So, all AR and AK rifles stayed on the streets. None were turned in. The parts that were banned were the flash suppressor, the bayonet lug, and a telescoping stock. So they stopped including those parts and continued selling the AR15 by the hundreds of thousands, DURING THE BAN. Here is a picture of an the AR15 for sale before the assault weapons ban, over a picture of an AR15 for sale DURING the ban. Same ammo, same firing rate, same caliber. Magazine loaded, everything was the same except those cosmetic changes. There were more AR15 and AK47 rifles on the streets during the assault weapons ban than before it. What actually happened was people got pissed off about the ban and the toxic gun culture we see today was born. Then demand for these guns increased so that by 2007 sales had tripled...
