Dude was just an asshole.
>Neighbors said Booth butted heads with white neighbors on his street, too.
>“He hated everybody,” said Dave Hansen, whose home is next door to Booth’s.
There was a shooting in another small town in Nebraska in the 60s I read about and that dude was also just a POS. Everybody said he was short tempered and he finally went off and shot like 6 or 7 coworkers. They all survived and he accidentally shot himself in the process. He went to prison years later for killing someone and died there.
That's pretty much it lol. Dude quit his job or got fired or something, came back all pissed at the people who worked with him, after arguing got his gun and shot a few of them.
This is where I heard about it: https://www.coloradohistoricnewspapers.org/?a=d&d=GOT19690612-01.2.13&e=-------en-20--1--img-txIN%7ctxCO%7ctxTA--------0------
Sounds like the guys were picking on him and he ended up shooting himself by accident while hitting someone with the gun. Got out of jail after a few years and moved to Alabama where he died in the 90s. His nickname was “shorty” and he loved his cats.
Sure, but 'go back where you came from' stands out as being pretty racist. And he never shot any whites, before.
He was an asshole, but also clearly a racist. It also doesn't help with the GOP spouting anti-immigrant crap. That is only going to enable asshole racists.
The false binary occurred when you implied there are exactly two choices: suicide or murder suicide.
Obviously there are more than 2 choices.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
Honestly some people think that certain others are better off dead, and that’s a reality you’re just gonna have to come to terms with because you can’t change everyone’s mind.
Ignoring the importance of mental health is still working just fine, I see.
Edit: guys I’m not saying this from a “it’s mental health, not guns, gubbermint don’t take mah guns” standpoint. Just that not prioritizing mental health as a society doesn’t help.
If we helped one it might actually help reduce the other. Until they repealed it I couldn't legally own a gun because of my mental health holds over suicide. Yes there will always be gun violence but if we can help the root cause of those who are violent due to mental health we might actually do better for the country as a whole. A chunk of the homeless in the 80s/90s only existed because they stopped having places for their mental well being and were just tossed on the streets.
Guns. Perfectly sane folks can have an irrational moment and use their easily accessible gun for its intended purpose. There’s no amount of preventative action to prevent a human being’s emotions from getting the better of them.
Under the law, the shit-ass that shot the people in the above story was within his legal rights to own the gun he used to shoot people with. Aside from being an asshole, he was just another dude. If he didn’t have a gun he’d have had to muster a considerably larger amount of nerve to try to kill those people. Instead he had access to a “problem solver.” No amount of healthcare or regulation would have prevented him from doing what he did.
You're very good at pointing out percieved problems but yet you offer zero solutions. If you think the problem is simply "guns" then maybe you're the one who is simple.
We live in a country the size of a continent with 500+ million guns, a Constitution that guarantees the right to own and carry them, 50 different states with wildly different laws within that framework, and a unique culture which precludes regulatory devices such as buybacks.
So if you were emperor of America for a day what would you do?
>You can own a gun but there are strings attached if you want to keep it.
Well yes this is already the case, even in America where that right theoretically "shall not be infringed". Felons, violent criminals, domestic abusers, drug addicts, people who are involuntary committed to mental hospitals, etc. are banned from buying or possessing guns to one degree or another.
Exactly which additional extra restrictions do you propose?
>Australia did it.
Yes in 1996 Australia changed the laws to make guns illegal and *forced* civilians to sell them back to the government? Are you suggesting that would work in the USA?
I don’t think it needs to come to that here. We just need better oversight and realistic restrictions. No more paper records and other nonsensical bullshit to help the manufacturer’s bottom line.
Firearms are fetishized and widely perceived as a way to assert dominance. There was a time when they were respected by their owners. Even the NRA went to great lengths to uphold a standard of high discipline among owners. Now it’s all, “Hey, Skeeter. Them lefties are coming to take your guns so buy as many as you can and be ready to shoot the next fucker that gives you the side eye.”
>We just need better oversight and realistic restrictions.
Like what specifically?
>Now it’s all, “Hey, Skeeter. Them lefties are coming to take your guns so buy as many as you can and be ready to shoot the next fucker that gives you the side eye.”
You're painting with an awfully broad brush.
I’m really not. There are plenty of lawful gun owners in this country that respect their firearms and the responsibility that ownership of said firearms carry. They are not the problem per se. It’s the people that think the constitution consists of a single amendment that guarantees their right to execute perceived threats with impunity.
My beef is not with a person that has taken sufficient training courses, sources their weapons responsibly, and secures their weapons their guns. Guns were not a problem when that was the status quo. Showing off your piece to scare/annoy the libs is stupid.
Absolutely not strings should not be attached to anything you love being a sheep/slave don’t enjoy having freedoms taken? I mean if the Australian goobermwnt decided to do anything there defense against it would be nothing your thinking comes from emotion let’s use logic, facts and statistics before we let our emotions and opinions choose the fate of the country
Do you enjoy your home? Your car? Those things come with strings. Don't pay taxes lose your home. License is required to operate a car on public streets. That doesn't seem to bother anyone. But threaten to regulate Bobby Rednecks firearms and they (pronoun, lol) have a hissy-fit because they think their knock-off AR-15 gives them some sort of "power" over the gubment.
lol your off by a long shot those things are not consumer products or good you pay taxes on your car because you need a license plate and your driving on roads that don’t belong to you the items your talking about have zero correlation with what type of good a firearm is the firearm itself is a tool do you pay taxes on your screwdriver? Or better go with a life saving tool since that’s what a firearm is to an extent do I pay taxes on my fire extinguisher or defibrillator? Do those tools come with strings? It’s the concept of removing freedoms that we’re giving to us by our founding fathers it doesn’t matter what it is you don’t allow a corrupt government that suppose to be supporting the idea of “the land of the free” while also taking every inch of freedom we have and charging us for it via “tax” at this point it’s not even so much firearms but simply sitting back and allowing someone to take a freedom I’ve had since the beginning? Or better yet freedoms at all??? Your so willing to allow these freedoms to be taken because you feel as if they don’t effect you but sweety I assure you the only impact from a gun regulation your gonna see is negative so drop those feelings for a second be an adult thing about what your actually saying
First of all, it’s “you’re.” Punctuation and grammar are paramount when mounting your defense.
Guns are not a magical device that’s protected from all forms of regulation. The right to possess a firearm comes with the gigantic caveat of regulation. It’s the primary statement of the amendment.
Freedom is a collective concept attached to the greater good. Your freedom is not guaranteed at the cost of another’s. It’s why there are provisions for even free speech which is far more important than the second amendment. The moment somebody’s freedom encroaches on another person’s we’re no longer free.
You babble a lot. You pay taxes on screwdrivers, fire extinguishers and defibrillators. Schmucks who parrot freedom and "shall not be infringed" all seem to leave out the part where firearm ownership was to facilitate a WELL REGULATED Militia, used to defend the free state. Nowhere does it imply it is a personal freedom. So preventing ownership by people those who cannot be part of a well regulated militia is in no way taking away individual liberties.
Here the thing law abiding citizens do not use guns for violence. This man was once a law abiding citizen and now no longer is. Your argument is going to be “he obtained that gun legally then used it for a crime” the thing is even if you set laws and banned guns all together I could still get one very easily off the street the generally consensus is most gun crimes happen from people who were already criminals or felons and they had obtained the firearm illegally criminals are criminals laws don’t effect them if they want a gun there gonna get it and fairly easily laws do not stop criminals law abiding citizens (yes police are citizens… well some) stop criminals guns are not the issue in anyway dude could have chased with a knife or ran them over with his car he picked his poison and ran with it. The actually issue is the individual himself now if the people he shot at had guns then he would have gotten 1-3 shots in before they stopped him themselves hense why guns are a beautiful thing and not an issue in anyway people are the issue being either ignorant, failing to do safety or training classes, emotionally unstable, etc. anything and everything can be a weapon a firearm is a tool so one last time I’ll reiterate guns are not the issue people are the issue guns protect, save and stop incidents like this from happening to this extreme
That's a strawman argument though. Law abiding citizens do use their guns for violence as indicated by this story. Also the idea that criminals can get guns is a moot point if guns aren't being manufactured, aren't in circulation, and are no longer having ammunition available. Eventually, criminals are just pointing empty guns at you.
Also the idea that a lawful gun owner ceases to be law abiding when they use their weapon of death to cause death is weak. In the heat of the moment a person can forget themselves while not forgetting about their gun.
Using alternative means to commit murder often requires more forethought and requires a more substantial execution. Guns are perfect for random acts of violence because they're quick and easy. You just pick it up and shoot whomever is in front of you until you're out of ammunition.
Also the "good guy with the gun" argument has been proven time again to be farcical. Take Uvalde for example. The last thing anybody needs is a space full of vigilantes exchanging gunfire with each other.
Calling a firearm a weapon in general is a straw man statement you close minded good sir you forget even if you don’t own a firearm a knife, car, bat, shovel, etc could all be a “weapon of death” if we’re going off of that thinking better give up the tools and car to dangerous in the hands of individuals that may have a moment… no idiotic mindset and you know it if your intelligent it doesn’t matter what is happening you still know right from wrong I can tell you now is never in a million years shoot someone out of sheer anger or sadness my objective is to never have to use my firearms on a human it would always be my last resort option in any circumstance and if you don’t have that mindset, you’re right, you should totally not own a gun, but the reality of it is, we don’t get to pick and choose for other people are emotions and feelings don’t matter what truly matters is freedom and intelligence
>No amount of healthcare or regulation would have prevented him from doing what he did.
So you think that the right to buy and possess firearms shouldn't be infringed upon? Because regulating firearms would be useless anyway?
While I’d prefer a constitutional amendment resulting in all guns be taken away, I’m realistic and believe in the 2nd amendment as it is written which is a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
In other words I think gun ownership should only be for maintaining a militia in service to protecting a free state and that it be well regulated. THAT shall not be infringed. Not “everybody” that wants a gun can have one without any oversight.”
>I think gun ownership should only be for maintaining a militia in service to protecting a free state and that it be well regulated
Well I believe that the authors of the Bill of Rights made it pretty clear that they intended for civilian gun ownership to keep the government in check but that's beside the point and I'll leave that rabbit hole to the Constitutional scholars for now.
What is your practical plan to disarm civilians in 2024 and only leave guns for a militia? What laws would you pass?
People will need to enlist in their local militia and submit to digital recording of firearms and supporting paraphernalia. If you use your firearm for purposes other than their intent or exceed reasonable ownership rules then you will be banned from your militia and will no longer be legally allowed to own guns.
Australia was able to disarm citizens in a very timely manner. As much as I would love to see that here I think the above solution is reasonable.
>People will need to enlist in their local militia
Oh wow do I have a local militia that I'm not aware of? Or are you suggesting I create one? Or what?
> digital recording of firearms and supporting paraphernalia
Like in a federal database? And what counts as "supporting paraphernalia"?
>If you use your firearm for purposes other than their intent
What is a firearm's intent? Or do you mean the governments intent for my firearm?
>or exceed reasonable ownership rules
Which rules specifically?
>Australia was able to disarm citizens in a very timely manner.
Well yeah but they don't have the right to gun ownership solidly imbedded in their constitution like we do. So they simply made it retroactively illegal to own guns. Brilliant! The dream of authoritarians everywhere.
Americans don’t have a right either. That’s not what the 2nd amendment was added for. The 2nd amendment was added to the constitution (which means it can also be removed) to ensure citizens could organize and defend themselves. It was not written so some bumpkin can threaten his neighbor.
That is an excuse. "Mental health" is not a panacea, especially when the people you want help will not voluntarily choose to get it. Some people are assholes and it would take government force (prison / involuntary mental hospital) to change.
I'm curious, what are your opinions on the SCOTUS ruling on local homelessness ordinances? Without government force, addiction and mental health are never going to be fixed.
I meant our problem as a society with not prioritizing mental health. Which is about twelve billion smaller social issues in a trench coat. I refer to the trench coat as “mental health.” One of those issues is people being oppositional dicks about getting services they’re likely to benefit from. For hundreds of various reasons.
Criminalizing homelessness is morally wrong, as far as I’m concerned. There is no benefit other than people with more privilege now having additional tools to remove people with less privilege from the former’s sphere of awareness.
Oh, wait, and to put more people in prison. Gotta get that cheap labor somehow.
It’s extra unethical and immoral when the services available to homeless folks are so underfunded and sparse. Asylums had a *shitload* of issues, but closing them helped no one who would have ended up in them if they’d remained open.
I don’t trust the government as far as I can throw it, but that means we need reform. Using our special brand of incompetence as a reason to deregulate and cut social services is primarily motivated by greed, as far as I can tell. The average person giving up and going “oh what can we do, it’s all ran by assholes” is the goal of said assholes.
Do you disagree that the US doesn’t prioritize mental health? If you agree, do you disagree that it leads to worse outcomes?
I’m not a gun nut excusing the poor widdle babby guns. We need to address both issues.
>Do you disagree that the US doesn’t prioritize mental health?
Compared to what? We spend hundreds of billions a year on mental health.
What mental health initiatives do you believe would have stopped a racist septuagenarian from shooting his neighbors? Did he even have mental health issues before this?
There are people who sink into that kind of mindset because of mental health issues. A lot of the people I was around as a kid and teen were racist. It seemed to stem from living a hard life and being convinced by other idiots that the “other” is living a better life. It’s not solely an American mindset, but we have far too much of it.
Again, I don’t think better mental health is a cure-all. But I think it can offer a path out of that kind of mindset. It’s very hard to change, grow, and accept you may have been wrong when you’re in the middle of a couple decades of misery. It’s very hard to consider that you might be the bad guy when you’re constantly feeling put-upon and victimized due to a general lack of maturity. Some people are just shit, but not all.
We spend billions on healthcare in the most inefficient ways. I’d be thrilled if we just found ways to minimize the insane profits the healthcare industry makes off especially off of taxpayer money. We could do so much more with the amount we spend now if healthcare companies and insurance companies were regulated.
Ideally in conjunction with better gun control policies because we really, really need that as well.
Maybe Americans can use the excuse that seeking care for mental health issues is taboo and carries a stigma.
Even when Japanese, Koreans, and Europeans have accessible healthcare, many continue use that excuse for their high suicide rates and any violent incidents carried out by the mentally ill.
> were not ruling out a racial motivation
> 'go home'
> 'speak English'
Funny how he "butted heads" with his white neighbors, but shot his Hispanic neighbors.
For the moment I would happily settle for not making it absurdly *easier* to buy guns all the time. MAGA world has pushed permitless carry through in a bunch of places. Most people don’t realize how little is required of would-be gun owners these days.
Guatemalans are some of the most amazing people on this planet. Every family I’ve met has been just good people.
I really hope these old, white, angry boomer men die soon. I’m getting really damn sick of them. They are the ones ruining the country not a hard working family or queer people.
But *by definition*, if you think a certain group is amazing then you *must* believe in a hierarchy of groups where some are good and others are less good. Surely you agree with that logical conclusion even though you're choosing not to name specific groups, which I understand.
Just saying something is amazing shows no comparison. (No hierarchy)
Something can be amazing without another thing not being amazing...get it?
2 things can be amazing, equally.
If 1 thing is amazing, that doesn't mean there has to be something that is not (as) amazing.
IDK how else can it be put...? 🤔
>Just saying something is amazing shows no comparison. (No hierarchy)
>Something can be amazing without another thing not being amazing...get it?
No. Logically this cannot be possible. Because you singled out a certain group. Collectivism is a brain disease and you're putting it on full display.
We get it. you have no critical thinking and only look at things from a one dimension point of view. Sorry but there is a universe and you are not the center of it.
Ah you're right, I should have said "nationality" (although that would erroneously include people of any race or culture who happen to be citizens of Guatemala which is one of many reasons why I think grouping people into categories is flawed) so that's my fault but my main point still stands: if a certain group is "amazing" then *by definition* there are other groups who are less (and/or more) amazing.
Ice cream is amazing. Pizza is amazing. Chicken Tikka Masala is amazing. Pho is amazing.
Goodfellas is amazing. No Country for Old Men is amazing. Apocalypse Now is amazing.
Led Zeppelin is Amazing. Mozart is amazing. Slayer is amazing. Dolly Parton is amazing.
East of Eden is amazing. Lord of the Rings is amazing. One Hundred Years of Solitude is amazing. Rendezvous with Rama is amazing.
Guatemalans are amazing. Americans are amazing. Nigerians are amazing. Norwegians are amazing.
All kinds of things, even with the same category or sub-category, can be amazing *by definition* without reference to any other thing.
If you put people into groups and think that certain groups are great, then by definition you think other groups are not as great. My question still stands, I'm curious to know what you think.
I have a couple dozen reddit accounts so I wouldn't put too much effort into making an ad hominem argument regarding my post history. You made a valid claim so why not defend it?
Lol what? What makes you think I'm MAGA? I voted against Trump last time and I will again this time. You're the one coming in hot with your obvious racist dogwhistling.
Lol you heard a line in a movie and now you think it's a good all-purpose rebuttal when you don't want to answer uncomfortable questions? I'm guessing you're about 14 years old in which case I'll give you a pass but you have a lot to learn, kid.
>Just because I don’t want to engage with a troll doesn’t make me 14.
Well since you still are, how about you answer my previous questions while you're at it? Which race do you think is least amazing? Why not defend your claim? What makes you think I'm associated with the MAGA movement?
Great is not a comparative term. Saying one thing is great does not mean something else is less great. Your question is pointless no matter how many Reddit accounts you have, troll.
>We are going to lose
We? Who is "we"? You got a mouse in your pocket?
>you refuse to acknowledge how horrible these people have become
And who exactly are "these people" specifically?
Republicans kicked Nixon out.
You think those still exist today?
I get that you're just hating anyone with a difference of opinion, but I'm talking about real politics here, not this insanity we have going on now. I've always been able to deal with people who are at least honest about their beliefs and not just partisan.
You literally commented earlier responding to someone else saying “they can’t argue in good faith” and you just responded “wrong.” here. Lmao this is too good
Yeah I mean if you read the world herald write up it sounds like the shooter was super racist, but didn't so much have political motivations as was just a dangerous suicidal old man with one or more mental disorders.
It's fun to point out how dangerous these people and the communities that they run are, but if possible people need to leave them for their own safety. The quicker you can get your family out of small towns and rural areas and into bluer parts of bigger cities the safer they'll be.
It's no coincidence that the only two counties to go blue in the 20 big race are also the safest two counties in the state, especially as you get into the more progressive districts within those counties.
Be safe out there.
>The quicker you can get your family out of small towns and rural areas and into bluer parts of bigger cities the safer they'll be.
Good call! I hear Chicago and St Louis are lovely
You too friend.
And yeah, it's pretty sad how the more Republican dominated an area the worse off they are in pretty much every metric.
This is why I die on the hill that we need to tie eligibility for social welfare programs to voting record. Call it "You-Get-What-You-Vote-For"
Nope. Wrong.
Just like how I get no benefit from corporate subsidies, corporate bailouts, bloated military, Medicare, Medicaid, SS, Food Stamps, WIC, Section 8, etc etc but still have to pay for it. Then these people who *choose* on principle to vote against their own interests will still have to pay their taxes, but also get no benefit.
We are just making sure that they aren't being hypocritical. It's a good thing for the soul of the nation.
Truth hurts, doesn't it? This is what they are now. This is what they have pushed and done.
Denying it won't address the issue.
Granted that seems to be your plan.
>This is what they are now. This is what they have pushed and done.
What specifically do you mean by "pushed and done"?
>Granted that seems to be your plan.
MY plan? Out of curiousity, who do you think I am and/or what group do you think I associate with?
Its getting slightly better... albeit a 1/16" at a time...
at least its not like in 1919 during the omaha race riot where there are white folk smiling for the paper as they are standing over the burnt remains of a lynched black man...
> Mass shootings in the US, defined as 4 or more gunfire victims in a single incident, were running in 2024 at one every 16 hours; in the second half of May 2024 they have occurred on average every 12 hours.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shooting
>> Booth largely kept to himself but had a history of conflict with his neighbors when he did interact with them, [the Omaha World-Herald reported.](https://omaha.com/news/state-regional/crime-courts/crete-nebraska-7-shot-in-welcoming-community-by-neighbor-who-hated-everybody/article_38f9bd04-366c-11ef-a817-139581d0dde9.html#tncms-source=login)
>> About 15 people were at the victims’ home, mostly in the yard, when Billy Booth, 74, opened fire from his house in Crete with a shotgun around 4:30 p.m. Friday, officials said.
15 people on a property of a neighbor that hates you is a recipe for disaster.
>15 people on a property of a neighbor that hates you is a recipe for disaster.
Lol what? 15 people at a property happens all over America every day without incident, regardless of neighbors. Silly to call it a "recipe for disaster".
Sounds like they were in the slain neighbor’s yard, not the shooter’s yard. Sounds like the slain neighbor had guests and the confrontational neighbor chose that moment to kill as many as he could.
About 15 people were at the victims’ home, mostly in the yard, when Billy Booth, 74, opened fire from his house in Crete with a shotgun around 4:30 p.m. Friday, officials said.
Directly from the story linked.
Yes, that’s what I said. I was just gently correcting u/jdD2d2. He/she just misread, which happens, and I didn’t want them to go away with the wrong idea.
About 15 people were at the victims’ home, mostly in the yard, when Billy Booth, 74, opened fire from his house in Crete with a shotgun around 4:30 p.m. Friday, officials said.
Directly from the story linked.
“Booth killed himself after the shootings. The victims, who are related and include four children ages 3 to 10, are expected to survive.” Good.
Dude was just an asshole. >Neighbors said Booth butted heads with white neighbors on his street, too. >“He hated everybody,” said Dave Hansen, whose home is next door to Booth’s.
There was a shooting in another small town in Nebraska in the 60s I read about and that dude was also just a POS. Everybody said he was short tempered and he finally went off and shot like 6 or 7 coworkers. They all survived and he accidentally shot himself in the process. He went to prison years later for killing someone and died there.
What’s the story?
That's pretty much it lol. Dude quit his job or got fired or something, came back all pissed at the people who worked with him, after arguing got his gun and shot a few of them. This is where I heard about it: https://www.coloradohistoricnewspapers.org/?a=d&d=GOT19690612-01.2.13&e=-------en-20--1--img-txIN%7ctxCO%7ctxTA--------0------
Sounds like the guys were picking on him and he ended up shooting himself by accident while hitting someone with the gun. Got out of jail after a few years and moved to Alabama where he died in the 90s. His nickname was “shorty” and he loved his cats.
Racists are also assholes usually
Just gives them a better reason to be mad at someone other than they just don’t like people
Dude was just a racist.
Sure, but 'go back where you came from' stands out as being pretty racist. And he never shot any whites, before. He was an asshole, but also clearly a racist. It also doesn't help with the GOP spouting anti-immigrant crap. That is only going to enable asshole racists.
Shooting a 3-year old takes something more than just being an asshole
Rest in piss bozo
Shoutout to Lemonparty
Can more of these nutjobs just do us all a favor and get to the end part faster?
Well I don't think suggesting suicide is the right move but hey, you do you.
I would take their suicide over their murder-suicide anyday.
Oops, you've made a false binary.
No, it's a true binary. I definitely would.
The false binary occurred when you implied there are exactly two choices: suicide or murder suicide. Obviously there are more than 2 choices. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
I understand what a false binary is. I was making fun of you because you're being a pedantic contrarian.
The world would be a better place is people who have it in them to do fucked up shit like shoot a gun at children would just not exist.
You've invented a false binary as if the only 2 options are : 1 shoot himself 2 shoot children There were many other options so quit your bullshit.
Did you just learn about false binaries in debate class or something?
Honestly some people think that certain others are better off dead, and that’s a reality you’re just gonna have to come to terms with because you can’t change everyone’s mind.
Ignoring the importance of mental health is still working just fine, I see. Edit: guys I’m not saying this from a “it’s mental health, not guns, gubbermint don’t take mah guns” standpoint. Just that not prioritizing mental health as a society doesn’t help.
That’s why we blame gun violence on mental health. People think it’s an unsolvable problem and therefore the perfect scapegoat.
If we helped one it might actually help reduce the other. Until they repealed it I couldn't legally own a gun because of my mental health holds over suicide. Yes there will always be gun violence but if we can help the root cause of those who are violent due to mental health we might actually do better for the country as a whole. A chunk of the homeless in the 80s/90s only existed because they stopped having places for their mental well being and were just tossed on the streets.
We're a country that likes to "Avenge Evil" rather than actually prevent crime. It's more entertaining for the masses than helping others out.
More than one thing can be true at the same time, my friend.
>That’s why we blame gun violence on mental health And what do you blame it on?
Guns. Perfectly sane folks can have an irrational moment and use their easily accessible gun for its intended purpose. There’s no amount of preventative action to prevent a human being’s emotions from getting the better of them. Under the law, the shit-ass that shot the people in the above story was within his legal rights to own the gun he used to shoot people with. Aside from being an asshole, he was just another dude. If he didn’t have a gun he’d have had to muster a considerably larger amount of nerve to try to kill those people. Instead he had access to a “problem solver.” No amount of healthcare or regulation would have prevented him from doing what he did.
You're very good at pointing out percieved problems but yet you offer zero solutions. If you think the problem is simply "guns" then maybe you're the one who is simple. We live in a country the size of a continent with 500+ million guns, a Constitution that guarantees the right to own and carry them, 50 different states with wildly different laws within that framework, and a unique culture which precludes regulatory devices such as buybacks. So if you were emperor of America for a day what would you do?
The second paragraph is the solution. You can own a gun but there are strings attached if you want to keep it. Australia did it.
>You can own a gun but there are strings attached if you want to keep it. Well yes this is already the case, even in America where that right theoretically "shall not be infringed". Felons, violent criminals, domestic abusers, drug addicts, people who are involuntary committed to mental hospitals, etc. are banned from buying or possessing guns to one degree or another. Exactly which additional extra restrictions do you propose? >Australia did it. Yes in 1996 Australia changed the laws to make guns illegal and *forced* civilians to sell them back to the government? Are you suggesting that would work in the USA?
I don’t think it needs to come to that here. We just need better oversight and realistic restrictions. No more paper records and other nonsensical bullshit to help the manufacturer’s bottom line. Firearms are fetishized and widely perceived as a way to assert dominance. There was a time when they were respected by their owners. Even the NRA went to great lengths to uphold a standard of high discipline among owners. Now it’s all, “Hey, Skeeter. Them lefties are coming to take your guns so buy as many as you can and be ready to shoot the next fucker that gives you the side eye.”
>We just need better oversight and realistic restrictions. Like what specifically? >Now it’s all, “Hey, Skeeter. Them lefties are coming to take your guns so buy as many as you can and be ready to shoot the next fucker that gives you the side eye.” You're painting with an awfully broad brush.
I’m really not. There are plenty of lawful gun owners in this country that respect their firearms and the responsibility that ownership of said firearms carry. They are not the problem per se. It’s the people that think the constitution consists of a single amendment that guarantees their right to execute perceived threats with impunity. My beef is not with a person that has taken sufficient training courses, sources their weapons responsibly, and secures their weapons their guns. Guns were not a problem when that was the status quo. Showing off your piece to scare/annoy the libs is stupid.
Absolutely not strings should not be attached to anything you love being a sheep/slave don’t enjoy having freedoms taken? I mean if the Australian goobermwnt decided to do anything there defense against it would be nothing your thinking comes from emotion let’s use logic, facts and statistics before we let our emotions and opinions choose the fate of the country
Do you enjoy your home? Your car? Those things come with strings. Don't pay taxes lose your home. License is required to operate a car on public streets. That doesn't seem to bother anyone. But threaten to regulate Bobby Rednecks firearms and they (pronoun, lol) have a hissy-fit because they think their knock-off AR-15 gives them some sort of "power" over the gubment.
lol your off by a long shot those things are not consumer products or good you pay taxes on your car because you need a license plate and your driving on roads that don’t belong to you the items your talking about have zero correlation with what type of good a firearm is the firearm itself is a tool do you pay taxes on your screwdriver? Or better go with a life saving tool since that’s what a firearm is to an extent do I pay taxes on my fire extinguisher or defibrillator? Do those tools come with strings? It’s the concept of removing freedoms that we’re giving to us by our founding fathers it doesn’t matter what it is you don’t allow a corrupt government that suppose to be supporting the idea of “the land of the free” while also taking every inch of freedom we have and charging us for it via “tax” at this point it’s not even so much firearms but simply sitting back and allowing someone to take a freedom I’ve had since the beginning? Or better yet freedoms at all??? Your so willing to allow these freedoms to be taken because you feel as if they don’t effect you but sweety I assure you the only impact from a gun regulation your gonna see is negative so drop those feelings for a second be an adult thing about what your actually saying
First of all, it’s “you’re.” Punctuation and grammar are paramount when mounting your defense. Guns are not a magical device that’s protected from all forms of regulation. The right to possess a firearm comes with the gigantic caveat of regulation. It’s the primary statement of the amendment. Freedom is a collective concept attached to the greater good. Your freedom is not guaranteed at the cost of another’s. It’s why there are provisions for even free speech which is far more important than the second amendment. The moment somebody’s freedom encroaches on another person’s we’re no longer free.
You babble a lot. You pay taxes on screwdrivers, fire extinguishers and defibrillators. Schmucks who parrot freedom and "shall not be infringed" all seem to leave out the part where firearm ownership was to facilitate a WELL REGULATED Militia, used to defend the free state. Nowhere does it imply it is a personal freedom. So preventing ownership by people those who cannot be part of a well regulated militia is in no way taking away individual liberties.
Here the thing law abiding citizens do not use guns for violence. This man was once a law abiding citizen and now no longer is. Your argument is going to be “he obtained that gun legally then used it for a crime” the thing is even if you set laws and banned guns all together I could still get one very easily off the street the generally consensus is most gun crimes happen from people who were already criminals or felons and they had obtained the firearm illegally criminals are criminals laws don’t effect them if they want a gun there gonna get it and fairly easily laws do not stop criminals law abiding citizens (yes police are citizens… well some) stop criminals guns are not the issue in anyway dude could have chased with a knife or ran them over with his car he picked his poison and ran with it. The actually issue is the individual himself now if the people he shot at had guns then he would have gotten 1-3 shots in before they stopped him themselves hense why guns are a beautiful thing and not an issue in anyway people are the issue being either ignorant, failing to do safety or training classes, emotionally unstable, etc. anything and everything can be a weapon a firearm is a tool so one last time I’ll reiterate guns are not the issue people are the issue guns protect, save and stop incidents like this from happening to this extreme
That's a strawman argument though. Law abiding citizens do use their guns for violence as indicated by this story. Also the idea that criminals can get guns is a moot point if guns aren't being manufactured, aren't in circulation, and are no longer having ammunition available. Eventually, criminals are just pointing empty guns at you. Also the idea that a lawful gun owner ceases to be law abiding when they use their weapon of death to cause death is weak. In the heat of the moment a person can forget themselves while not forgetting about their gun. Using alternative means to commit murder often requires more forethought and requires a more substantial execution. Guns are perfect for random acts of violence because they're quick and easy. You just pick it up and shoot whomever is in front of you until you're out of ammunition. Also the "good guy with the gun" argument has been proven time again to be farcical. Take Uvalde for example. The last thing anybody needs is a space full of vigilantes exchanging gunfire with each other.
Calling a firearm a weapon in general is a straw man statement you close minded good sir you forget even if you don’t own a firearm a knife, car, bat, shovel, etc could all be a “weapon of death” if we’re going off of that thinking better give up the tools and car to dangerous in the hands of individuals that may have a moment… no idiotic mindset and you know it if your intelligent it doesn’t matter what is happening you still know right from wrong I can tell you now is never in a million years shoot someone out of sheer anger or sadness my objective is to never have to use my firearms on a human it would always be my last resort option in any circumstance and if you don’t have that mindset, you’re right, you should totally not own a gun, but the reality of it is, we don’t get to pick and choose for other people are emotions and feelings don’t matter what truly matters is freedom and intelligence
>No amount of healthcare or regulation would have prevented him from doing what he did. So you think that the right to buy and possess firearms shouldn't be infringed upon? Because regulating firearms would be useless anyway?
While I’d prefer a constitutional amendment resulting in all guns be taken away, I’m realistic and believe in the 2nd amendment as it is written which is a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. In other words I think gun ownership should only be for maintaining a militia in service to protecting a free state and that it be well regulated. THAT shall not be infringed. Not “everybody” that wants a gun can have one without any oversight.”
>I think gun ownership should only be for maintaining a militia in service to protecting a free state and that it be well regulated Well I believe that the authors of the Bill of Rights made it pretty clear that they intended for civilian gun ownership to keep the government in check but that's beside the point and I'll leave that rabbit hole to the Constitutional scholars for now. What is your practical plan to disarm civilians in 2024 and only leave guns for a militia? What laws would you pass?
People will need to enlist in their local militia and submit to digital recording of firearms and supporting paraphernalia. If you use your firearm for purposes other than their intent or exceed reasonable ownership rules then you will be banned from your militia and will no longer be legally allowed to own guns. Australia was able to disarm citizens in a very timely manner. As much as I would love to see that here I think the above solution is reasonable.
>People will need to enlist in their local militia Oh wow do I have a local militia that I'm not aware of? Or are you suggesting I create one? Or what? > digital recording of firearms and supporting paraphernalia Like in a federal database? And what counts as "supporting paraphernalia"? >If you use your firearm for purposes other than their intent What is a firearm's intent? Or do you mean the governments intent for my firearm? >or exceed reasonable ownership rules Which rules specifically? >Australia was able to disarm citizens in a very timely manner. Well yeah but they don't have the right to gun ownership solidly imbedded in their constitution like we do. So they simply made it retroactively illegal to own guns. Brilliant! The dream of authoritarians everywhere.
Americans don’t have a right either. That’s not what the 2nd amendment was added for. The 2nd amendment was added to the constitution (which means it can also be removed) to ensure citizens could organize and defend themselves. It was not written so some bumpkin can threaten his neighbor.
That is an excuse. "Mental health" is not a panacea, especially when the people you want help will not voluntarily choose to get it. Some people are assholes and it would take government force (prison / involuntary mental hospital) to change. I'm curious, what are your opinions on the SCOTUS ruling on local homelessness ordinances? Without government force, addiction and mental health are never going to be fixed.
I meant our problem as a society with not prioritizing mental health. Which is about twelve billion smaller social issues in a trench coat. I refer to the trench coat as “mental health.” One of those issues is people being oppositional dicks about getting services they’re likely to benefit from. For hundreds of various reasons. Criminalizing homelessness is morally wrong, as far as I’m concerned. There is no benefit other than people with more privilege now having additional tools to remove people with less privilege from the former’s sphere of awareness. Oh, wait, and to put more people in prison. Gotta get that cheap labor somehow. It’s extra unethical and immoral when the services available to homeless folks are so underfunded and sparse. Asylums had a *shitload* of issues, but closing them helped no one who would have ended up in them if they’d remained open. I don’t trust the government as far as I can throw it, but that means we need reform. Using our special brand of incompetence as a reason to deregulate and cut social services is primarily motivated by greed, as far as I can tell. The average person giving up and going “oh what can we do, it’s all ran by assholes” is the goal of said assholes.
All the other countries without constant mass shootings must really have mental health figured out, huh?
Do you disagree that the US doesn’t prioritize mental health? If you agree, do you disagree that it leads to worse outcomes? I’m not a gun nut excusing the poor widdle babby guns. We need to address both issues.
>Do you disagree that the US doesn’t prioritize mental health? Compared to what? We spend hundreds of billions a year on mental health. What mental health initiatives do you believe would have stopped a racist septuagenarian from shooting his neighbors? Did he even have mental health issues before this?
There are people who sink into that kind of mindset because of mental health issues. A lot of the people I was around as a kid and teen were racist. It seemed to stem from living a hard life and being convinced by other idiots that the “other” is living a better life. It’s not solely an American mindset, but we have far too much of it. Again, I don’t think better mental health is a cure-all. But I think it can offer a path out of that kind of mindset. It’s very hard to change, grow, and accept you may have been wrong when you’re in the middle of a couple decades of misery. It’s very hard to consider that you might be the bad guy when you’re constantly feeling put-upon and victimized due to a general lack of maturity. Some people are just shit, but not all. We spend billions on healthcare in the most inefficient ways. I’d be thrilled if we just found ways to minimize the insane profits the healthcare industry makes off especially off of taxpayer money. We could do so much more with the amount we spend now if healthcare companies and insurance companies were regulated. Ideally in conjunction with better gun control policies because we really, really need that as well.
Maybe Americans can use the excuse that seeking care for mental health issues is taboo and carries a stigma. Even when Japanese, Koreans, and Europeans have accessible healthcare, many continue use that excuse for their high suicide rates and any violent incidents carried out by the mentally ill.
Do you disagree that it’s a factor?
> were not ruling out a racial motivation > 'go home' > 'speak English' Funny how he "butted heads" with his white neighbors, but shot his Hispanic neighbors.
Disgusting shit. It's such a shame to see that kind of violence in Nebraska. I hope the family recovers soon
For the moment I would happily settle for not making it absurdly *easier* to buy guns all the time. MAGA world has pushed permitless carry through in a bunch of places. Most people don’t realize how little is required of would-be gun owners these days.
This won't get picked up nationally. Now they want to focus on the immigrants doing the crimes. so this would go against that narrative
This is an AP article on the ABC News website. It’s literally national already.
Guatemalans are some of the most amazing people on this planet. Every family I’ve met has been just good people. I really hope these old, white, angry boomer men die soon. I’m getting really damn sick of them. They are the ones ruining the country not a hard working family or queer people.
> old, white, angry boomer men Those traits individually or only as a group?
That’s Racist, you can’t prefer a race over another…Sounds like you prefer Guatemalans over Whites. Which is the perp in reverse.
Another MAGA race bating idiot. All I said was Guatemalans are amazing people. Take it somewhere else.
But *by definition*, if you think a certain group is amazing then you *must* believe in a hierarchy of groups where some are good and others are less good. Surely you agree with that logical conclusion even though you're choosing not to name specific groups, which I understand.
Just saying something is amazing shows no comparison. (No hierarchy) Something can be amazing without another thing not being amazing...get it? 2 things can be amazing, equally. If 1 thing is amazing, that doesn't mean there has to be something that is not (as) amazing. IDK how else can it be put...? 🤔
>Just saying something is amazing shows no comparison. (No hierarchy) >Something can be amazing without another thing not being amazing...get it? No. Logically this cannot be possible. Because you singled out a certain group. Collectivism is a brain disease and you're putting it on full display.
We get it. you have no critical thinking and only look at things from a one dimension point of view. Sorry but there is a universe and you are not the center of it.
Hmm you wished old white folks would die…maybe you can’t weed?
You forgot angry and male. When’s the last time you’ve heard of a 70 year old woman shooting 7 people for no reason?
If you're going by the numbers then you've got the "men" part right. All the other attributes points need work.
>Guatemalans are some of the most amazing people on this planet. Out of curiosity, which race do you think is the least amazing?
When did being from Guatemala become a race?
Ah you're right, I should have said "nationality" (although that would erroneously include people of any race or culture who happen to be citizens of Guatemala which is one of many reasons why I think grouping people into categories is flawed) so that's my fault but my main point still stands: if a certain group is "amazing" then *by definition* there are other groups who are less (and/or more) amazing.
Ice cream is amazing. Pizza is amazing. Chicken Tikka Masala is amazing. Pho is amazing. Goodfellas is amazing. No Country for Old Men is amazing. Apocalypse Now is amazing. Led Zeppelin is Amazing. Mozart is amazing. Slayer is amazing. Dolly Parton is amazing. East of Eden is amazing. Lord of the Rings is amazing. One Hundred Years of Solitude is amazing. Rendezvous with Rama is amazing. Guatemalans are amazing. Americans are amazing. Nigerians are amazing. Norwegians are amazing. All kinds of things, even with the same category or sub-category, can be amazing *by definition* without reference to any other thing.
You can just take yourself to a different comment. Your post history speaks for itself.
If you put people into groups and think that certain groups are great, then by definition you think other groups are not as great. My question still stands, I'm curious to know what you think. I have a couple dozen reddit accounts so I wouldn't put too much effort into making an ad hominem argument regarding my post history. You made a valid claim so why not defend it?
Dude you can take your MAGA crap somewhere else.
Lol what? What makes you think I'm MAGA? I voted against Trump last time and I will again this time. You're the one coming in hot with your obvious racist dogwhistling.
Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.
Lol you heard a line in a movie and now you think it's a good all-purpose rebuttal when you don't want to answer uncomfortable questions? I'm guessing you're about 14 years old in which case I'll give you a pass but you have a lot to learn, kid.
[удалено]
>Just because I don’t want to engage with a troll doesn’t make me 14. Well since you still are, how about you answer my previous questions while you're at it? Which race do you think is least amazing? Why not defend your claim? What makes you think I'm associated with the MAGA movement?
I’m sure you wouldn’t hire old white folks at this alleged company if you hope they die?
> I have a couple dozen reddit accounts LMAO
Great is not a comparative term. Saying one thing is great does not mean something else is less great. Your question is pointless no matter how many Reddit accounts you have, troll.
One less MAGA traitor in Nebraska…
Republicans at their finest.
Or maybe just this particular guy is a piece of shit?
Stochastic terrorism at work.
The day after the debate where DJT stirred up fear around immigration and the border on national TV. Probably just a coincidence.
Lol you're about 6 months behind. The new phrase to demonstrate how progressive you are is "Project 2025"
The way you dipshits downplay every evil thing republicans do is why we are in this situation we are in.
Lol what? How did I downplay evil things? When did I mention a political party?
Like I said, Republican.
People like you are why Trump is going to win again. What a shame.
Not really. We are going to lose because people like you refuse to acknowledge how horrible these people have become.
>We are going to lose We? Who is "we"? You got a mouse in your pocket? >you refuse to acknowledge how horrible these people have become And who exactly are "these people" specifically?
Yeah, clearly you can't argue in good faith and aren't worth the time.
[удалено]
No. These are the "real" Republicans
Republicans kicked Nixon out. You think those still exist today? I get that you're just hating anyone with a difference of opinion, but I'm talking about real politics here, not this insanity we have going on now. I've always been able to deal with people who are at least honest about their beliefs and not just partisan.
The "insanity" we have now is *their* politics. And good for you, those people want me dead.
[удалено]
Wrong.
You literally commented earlier responding to someone else saying “they can’t argue in good faith” and you just responded “wrong.” here. Lmao this is too good
Yeah I mean if you read the world herald write up it sounds like the shooter was super racist, but didn't so much have political motivations as was just a dangerous suicidal old man with one or more mental disorders.
But but but they mentioned the race in the headline!!
So it wasn't a "lunchtime rowdy" this time?
A little from column A, a little from column B.
No, it’s the MAGAts.
You’re the exact person I’d never want to have to meet in real life
Nope
It's fun to point out how dangerous these people and the communities that they run are, but if possible people need to leave them for their own safety. The quicker you can get your family out of small towns and rural areas and into bluer parts of bigger cities the safer they'll be. It's no coincidence that the only two counties to go blue in the 20 big race are also the safest two counties in the state, especially as you get into the more progressive districts within those counties. Be safe out there.
>The quicker you can get your family out of small towns and rural areas and into bluer parts of bigger cities the safer they'll be. Good call! I hear Chicago and St Louis are lovely
You too friend. And yeah, it's pretty sad how the more Republican dominated an area the worse off they are in pretty much every metric. This is why I die on the hill that we need to tie eligibility for social welfare programs to voting record. Call it "You-Get-What-You-Vote-For"
So if someone votes against welfare, then they don't get taxed for it? Not a bad idea
Nope. Wrong. Just like how I get no benefit from corporate subsidies, corporate bailouts, bloated military, Medicare, Medicaid, SS, Food Stamps, WIC, Section 8, etc etc but still have to pay for it. Then these people who *choose* on principle to vote against their own interests will still have to pay their taxes, but also get no benefit. We are just making sure that they aren't being hypocritical. It's a good thing for the soul of the nation.
Shut up, nerd.
Using a tragedy as a podium to make a cheap political point. Progressives at their finest.
Truth hurts, doesn't it? This is what they are now. This is what they have pushed and done. Denying it won't address the issue. Granted that seems to be your plan.
>This is what they are now. This is what they have pushed and done. What specifically do you mean by "pushed and done"? >Granted that seems to be your plan. MY plan? Out of curiousity, who do you think I am and/or what group do you think I associate with?
Nobody in Nebraska will talk about the almost ingrained and accepted racism here in Nebraska. Most of the time, we just hide it better.
Its getting slightly better... albeit a 1/16" at a time... at least its not like in 1919 during the omaha race riot where there are white folk smiling for the paper as they are standing over the burnt remains of a lynched black man...
Mass shooting on record pace. Again. Mass shooting = 4 or more people shot in same incident.
Wrong. Educate yourself on the definition. A "mass shooting" is any event where there is an active shooter, regardless of the number of casualties.
> Mass shootings in the US, defined as 4 or more gunfire victims in a single incident, were running in 2024 at one every 16 hours; in the second half of May 2024 they have occurred on average every 12 hours. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shooting
>Mass shootings in the US, defined as 4 or more gunfire victims in a single incident Defined by whom?
I provided a link to a Wikipedia entry, where you can find a citation link you can follow it if you’re curious.
Oh I did! And I suggest you do the same.
Then what was the purpose of asking?
To argue. That's their stick.
The purpose of asking "defined by whom"? Because you made a claim about a definition and I'm curious to know what data you are basing that claim on.
Rest in piss you won’t be missed 🚬
>> Booth largely kept to himself but had a history of conflict with his neighbors when he did interact with them, [the Omaha World-Herald reported.](https://omaha.com/news/state-regional/crime-courts/crete-nebraska-7-shot-in-welcoming-community-by-neighbor-who-hated-everybody/article_38f9bd04-366c-11ef-a817-139581d0dde9.html#tncms-source=login) >> About 15 people were at the victims’ home, mostly in the yard, when Billy Booth, 74, opened fire from his house in Crete with a shotgun around 4:30 p.m. Friday, officials said. 15 people on a property of a neighbor that hates you is a recipe for disaster.
>15 people on a property of a neighbor that hates you is a recipe for disaster. Lol what? 15 people at a property happens all over America every day without incident, regardless of neighbors. Silly to call it a "recipe for disaster".
Sounds like they were in the slain neighbor’s yard, not the shooter’s yard. Sounds like the slain neighbor had guests and the confrontational neighbor chose that moment to kill as many as he could.
The victims were all in their own yard, not the shooters yard.
About 15 people were at the victims’ home, mostly in the yard, when Billy Booth, 74, opened fire from his house in Crete with a shotgun around 4:30 p.m. Friday, officials said. Directly from the story linked.
Yes, that’s what I said. I was just gently correcting u/jdD2d2. He/she just misread, which happens, and I didn’t want them to go away with the wrong idea.
Thanks. I guess I can't read! :)
About 15 people were at the victims’ home, mostly in the yard, when Billy Booth, 74, opened fire from his house in Crete with a shotgun around 4:30 p.m. Friday, officials said. Directly from the story linked.
So people shouldn't have a gathering on their property when it inconveniences a bigoted asshole? Get the F out of here with that shit.
Nebraskans Nebraskaing
I was told a race could only be racist towards blacks though?