Santa Fe

I don’t have anything profound to say, though I would suggest that someone on Dan Patrick‘s staff try to explain to him the concept of fire codes and emergency exits. Beyond that, I’ll say again what I’ve said many times before: Nothing will change until we change who we elect. That’s not a guarantee of change, and it’s far from the end of the work to do, but it’s a necessary first step. Nothing will change until we change who we elect.

Related Posts:

This entry was posted in The great state of Texas and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Santa Fe

  1. Bill Daniels says:

    Broken home, single parent. Psychotropic drugs. Kid bullied at school.

    So yes, let’s see what we can change. First, we need to start weaning people off of welfare. We’ve made Uncle Sam the de facto, surrogate father in many households with children. Stop the welfare, and single women won’t be so eager to become single parents. A return to the nuclear family, a mommy, a daddy, and kids in one house is the absolute best way to stop these attacks.

    Then, there’s the issue of (legal) drugs. Doping up kids for everything from ADD to depression seems to be resulting in kids just blowing up all the sudden. What did we used to do with unruly or spirited kids? Strict discipline. Organized activities. Making the young kids go out and play rather than just spend Summers inside with video games.

    Finally, there’s bullying. Zero tolerance school policies inhibit kids from standing up to bullies. The way to stop bullying is to stand up to it, not to punish kids who are already tormented by their peers from doing something to defend themselves.

    You want change? Start here.

  2. Flypusher says:

    Look at Bill, as anyone could predict, tap dance around the elephant in the room. How about gun owners actually being responsible for their weapons. As Jim Wright already did a fine job of cutting through the bullshit deflections on that topic, I give everyone his words:

    http://www.stonekettle.com/2018/05/bang-bang-crazy-part-14-cowardice-of.html?m=1

    If that shooter’s parents (or whomever the legal owners are) had secured their guns, he can’t shoot up art class.

  3. Bill Daniels says:

    @Fly:

    If you mandate that parents lock up their guns so their responsible kids can’t get to them in the event of an emergency, congratulations, you just created more crime victims. If you are a parent and know your kid has a problem, then yes, you should keep guns away from those kids, however, as liberals are wont to do, you’d rather punish EVERY kid and every parent because some parents are irresponsible and some kids are psycho.

    Assuming you get a law like this passed, I want you personally to explain to under aged rape victims who might have protected themselves from attack, why their sacrifice was worth it, and explain to survivors why their loved ones had to die for your agenda. You know what they say about the road to Hell. There’s also something something about unintended consequences.

    The remedy for this kind of thing is already enshrined in the law…..civil tort law. If we prove this (probably) single parent knew their kid was an unstable fruit loop, then sue that parent or those parents for everything they have and leave them penniless and broke on the street, as a warning to other parents of screwed up kids.

  4. Jules says:

    Dan Patrick blames the parents (plural) for failing to lock up their guns (plural).

  5. Flypusher says:

    Bill, you are dodging and grasping at straws again. Anything to avoid the idea that if you want to own the power of life and death that conveniently fits in the palm of your hand, you ought to assume full responsibility for it. Your example is bunk. A liability law can be easily worded so that parents can choose to train minor children to use guns and even allowing them access to them if they judge them to be responsible enough. But the liability is on them if they judge poorly. Just like if they give them a car without training.

    What do you say to non-hypothetical school shooting victims about your refusal to demand responsible gun ownership?

  6. Bill Daniels says:

    @ Fly:

    First, I’d tell them that I am sorry for their loss and their anguish. Then, I’d ask them to do their own research to figure out why this was NOT a problem in America several decades ago, and what societal changes have occurred that may be contributing to these shootings. Hint: guns have always been a part of American culture, so that hasn’t changed. What did change?

    You can start with taking prayer out of schools. Back in the day, kids drove to school with guns in the gun racks of their pickup trucks, and nobody was shooting up schools. How did we get here, from there?

  7. Jules says:

    We can start with research into gun violence by experts, not expecting families of victims to do this research on their own as some sort of side project to grief. But NRA bought and paid for politicians will not allow this.

    Charles is right, we must change who we elect.

  8. Jules says:

    Bill, you get an F on your research paper for just making shit up.

  9. Flypusher says:

    “Hint: guns have always been a part of American culture, so that hasn’t changed. What did change?

    You can start with taking prayer out of schools. Back in the day, kids drove to school with guns in the gun racks of their pickup trucks, and nobody was shooting up schools. How did we get here, from there?”

    ===========================

    Right, because there’s never mass shootings in churches. Prayer in schools is a red herring, Bill. So are single mothers; they are nothing new. You want to preach personal responsibility in some aspects of life, but not others. Parents indeed ought to accept the work and the responsibility of raising children to be good citizens if they exercise their right to reproduce. That includes any religious education, as that is not the job of the public schools. But likewise, if they choose to exercise the right to own guns, they need to accept the responsibly of taking reasonable means to keep those guns out of the wrong hands. That elephant isn’t leaving the room, no matter how much you ignore it.

  10. Manny Barrera says:

    Frankly we should follow the method that Australia used.

    If the government can take my real property, why can’t they take personal property?

  11. Flypusher says:

    Let’s say for the sake of argument that Bill’s “society has gone to hell in a handbasket” claim IS the major cause of all this recent gun violence. Wouldn’t that make securing those guns all the MORE important, given all those Godless, jacked up on Ritalin, violent video game playing, raised by single mothers miscreants running around?

  12. Ross says:

    @Jules, most of the people we elect are totally clueless about firearms, especially the progressives, who tend to think that a pistol sitting on a table is dangerous, in and of itself. Sure, confiscating firearms might reduce the incidence of these mass shootings, but there are millions of people who don’t see why they should give up their property, simply because someone went nuts and killed people. Their view is that one person went out and did something bad, while 100+ million others didn’t.

  13. Jules says:

    Ross, I didn’t say anything about confiscating weapons.

  14. Jules says:

    Ross gets a D minus.

  15. Flypusher says:

    Ross, my take is that you treat guns the same way you treat cars- you have to train, take a test to verify that you know how to use it, get a license, and carry liability insurance. If you are responsible, the cost is minimal. If you choose to be irresponsible, and something bad happens as a result, you face the consequences. That’s a far cry from taking property from people who didn’t do anything wrong.

  16. Manny Barrera says:

    Start with taking away the guns and then maybe they can compromise on a sane middle ground. There is nothing that would prevent government taking away guns, if they can take away real property they can take personal property. They already take money. Don’t worry they will get market value for the property.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/sessions-greenlights-police-to-increase-seizures-of-cash-and-property-from-suspected-criminals/2017/07/19/3522a9ba-6c99-11e7-96ab-5f38140b38cc_story.html?utm_term=.dd942dbfc164

Comments are closed.