There have been at least 50 school shootings in the United States so far this year, as of September 19. Thirteen were on college campuses, and 37 were on K-12 school grounds. The incidents left 24 people dead and at least 66 other victims injured, according to CNN’s analysis of events reported by the Gun Violence Archive, Education Week and Everytown for Gun Safety.
https://www.cnn.com/us/school-shootings-fast-facts-dg/index.html
Frankly, it doesn’t matter what is and what is not counted as a school shooting. If one shooting happens, and one child is murdered-
It’s one too fucking many.
More kids die getting to school, more die from drowning, more die from preventable diseases…the only reason one is to many for you in this instance is because you hate the idea of an armed populous. It’s not about the deaths, it’s about how they die.
So… wait. You’re…… defending school shootings? If not then maybe back the fuck off. I’m simply saying ONE school shooting is too fucking many.
If you disagree with this. You have a SERIOUS problem.
If you got from what I wrote that I was defending school shootings, you’re brain dead. No where in my comment have I defended it. I have pointed out multiple times that bad data leads to terrible policies/laws.
You’re doing the same shit the anti-abortion nuts do. Make stats fit your narrative. It’s why another AWB won’t do shit. It’s why UBCs won’t do shit. It’s why waiting periods won’t do shit. Because all of those things and all of this “common sense” gun legislation isn’t common sense, it’s idiotic, because it’s built on junk data.
I’m not doing ANY shit. I’m asking you to define your position more clearly. And what I’m saying is that while you two had your little slap fight, neither of you stopped for a moment to consider that you’re talking about burdens of children’s lives here.
My point?
If we only had ONE SCHOOL SHOOTING PER YEAR WITH ONE FATALITY PER YEAR ITS ONE SHOOTING AND ONE FATALITY TOO MANY.
but you go ahead and have your little squabble over what counts as a school shooting and what doesn’t. Because there will always be parents who are having to bury their children, right?
Do me a favor by doing them a kindness and have it resolved as soon as possible so they can rest at ease knowing there’s some random guy on the internet vetting the bad ones from the good ones so that the can be confident in knowing that their child did in fact- die in a proper and official school shooting.
Emotional legislation is shit legislation. Again, that’s how we got the patriot act…
Again, you only seem to give a shit if the child dies via firearm.
Again emotionally driven legislation is not good legislation. You’re applying the “think of the children logic”.
So the parents burying their child that died in a car wreck going to school doesn’t count? Again, you seem to not give a crap about how they died unless it’s via firearm.
I’m not one to exercise futility, so we’ll end this here.
So would you support banning schools?
It might save a child’s life.
What an ignorant take on the subject. I love when people prove they’re not paying attention. It saves me a LOT of time.
I thought literally any measure that might save kids lives was justified.
Or is that only the case with guns?
I don’t argue against straw men. Find someone else to annoy.
Yeah that’s what I figured
So… you knew I wouldn’t want to argue against your flimsy straw man, but you took the time to build it regardless?
Hmmm… I wonder if there’s a name for people that do that.
Just block the troll and move on. :)
This is a bad take. We can work to reduce the gun-clutching while also working on water safety, road safety and vaccines – which we did.
It’s not effective to just start naming ways people die to somehow address how a countable number die in a preventable, horrific way, via an implement whose entire sole purpose is killing.
Naming other hazards that are being addressed seems a little “whataboutist” to my eyes, and I’m sorry if that’s not your intent and you were just enjoying listing hazards.
See my other comment to soup. The issue with the data at hand is that bad/incorrect data drives bad/horrible policies. You don’t see 900+ kids a drowning, having legislation brought forward for only pools that hold 500 gallons or at 3’ deep or less. Why? Because that’s not going to actually help. So why is it that the “common sense” antigun groups want legislation that’s the equivalent to banning all pools over 500 gallons? Because the data they have and they are fed is junk data.