6 dead in shooting at Christian elementary school in Nashville

[VBM]

1. So what would be an effective deterrent for school shooters?

There is no "deterring" them. They're criminally insane and they intend to die while committing their killings.

So Fergie’s point is moot

How? If anything, Dule's argument affirms my point. I'm literally saying that the death penalty won't deter them. If there is no deterring school shooters, then implementing harsher punishment is pointless.

Just because it won’t deter them, that doesn’t change the fact that they still need to be appropriately punished for their crimes.

Why is the death penalty more appropriate than life in prison?

Because they took the lives of multiple children.

[TheReckoning]

1. So what would be an effective deterrent for school shooters?

This one seems very easy. Making it almost impossible to get a gun would be a very effective deterrent for school shooters.

That’s impossible, so a non starter. You might as well say just making people think shooting up schools is bad would stop school shootings.

No, it is not impossible. Every other developed country has done it, but the United States can't. Supposedly, the "greatest" country in the world?

If that's the case, then that means the United States is a worthless country and that Americans are depraved individuals.

What other developed countries have made it near-impossible to own a gun?

And which of those countries had 400 million guns in circulation, virtually all of which were unregistered?

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

1. So what would be an effective deterrent for school shooters?

This one seems very easy. Making it almost impossible to get a gun would be a very effective deterrent for school shooters.

That’s impossible, so a non starter. You might as well say just making people think shooting up schools is bad would stop school shootings.

No, it is not impossible. Every other developed country has done it, but the United States can't. Supposedly, the "greatest" country in the world?

If that's the case, then that means the United States is a worthless country and that Americans are depraved individuals.

What other developed countries have made it near-impossible to own a gun?

And which of those countries had 400 million guns in circulation, virtually all of which were unregistered?

Japan? South Korea? UK? Australia? I could go on - gun laws are extremely strict in those countries.

The second statement is an excuse.

[DaleCooper]

If you want to deter crazy criminals, you have to lock crazy people up in asylums before they start hurting people. That's not something many people want to hear either, but I have noticed that a lot of the times when something like this happens, it becomes very very clear that the killer was obviously a crazy lunatic for a long time before they went on a killing spree. I'm certainly not advocating that every single eccentric or crazy person get thrown into a One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest hellscape, but some people really do need to be institutionalized for their own good and for the safety of others.

This.

Under America accepts how useful mass incarceration is, we won’t be able to solve our problems.

I'm not talking about mass incarceration. I'm talking about institutionalizing crazy people who obviously are not safe to be out wandering around on their own.

That’s mass incarceration. They might not be in prisons per se, but any time someone is detained against their will is incarceration.

Being held against their will in a mental institution because they're insane is much different than being held against their will because they're a criminal sentenced to prison. That's an important distinction and is not captured by the term mass incarceration.

[John Dule]

1. So what would be an effective deterrent for school shooters?

There is no "deterring" them. They're criminally insane and they intend to die while committing their killings.

So Fergie’s point is moot

How? If anything, Dule's argument affirms my point. I'm literally saying that the death penalty won't deter them. If there is no deterring school shooters, then implementing harsher punishment is pointless.

Just because it won’t deter them, that doesn’t change the fact that they still need to be appropriately punished for their crimes.

Why is the death penalty more appropriate than life in prison?

Because they took the lives of multiple children.

How would you construct an evidentiary standard that would allow for the execution of mass shooters but avoid wrongful executions with 100% accuracy?

[jojoju1998]

1. So what would be an effective deterrent for school shooters?

This one seems very easy. Making it almost impossible to get a gun would be a very effective deterrent for school shooters.

That’s impossible, so a non starter. You might as well say just making people think shooting up schools is bad would stop school shootings.

No, it is not impossible. Every other developed country has done it, but the United States can't. Supposedly, the "greatest" country in the world?

If that's the case, then that means the United States is a worthless country and that Americans are depraved individuals.

What other developed countries have made it near-impossible to own a gun?

And which of those countries had 400 million guns in circulation, virtually all of which were unregistered?

Japan? South Korea? UK? Australia? I could go on - gun laws are extremely strict in those countries.

The second statement is an excuse.

Japan, South Korea technically bans civilian use of firearms.

Most European Countries have licenses that you have to go through, training, all of that. And you have  a good reason for having a gun; hunting or sports use.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation#Austria

[Ferguson97]

1. So what would be an effective deterrent for school shooters?

There is no "deterring" them. They're criminally insane and they intend to die while committing their killings.

So Fergie’s point is moot

How? If anything, Dule's argument affirms my point. I'm literally saying that the death penalty won't deter them. If there is no deterring school shooters, then implementing harsher punishment is pointless.

Just because it won’t deter them, that doesn’t change the fact that they still need to be appropriately punished for their crimes.

Why is the death penalty more appropriate than life in prison?

Because they took the lives of multiple children.

That's not an answer to my question, you're just describing the crime they committed.

[TheReckoning]

1. So what would be an effective deterrent for school shooters?

This one seems very easy. Making it almost impossible to get a gun would be a very effective deterrent for school shooters.

That’s impossible, so a non starter. You might as well say just making people think shooting up schools is bad would stop school shootings.

No, it is not impossible. Every other developed country has done it, but the United States can't. Supposedly, the "greatest" country in the world?

If that's the case, then that means the United States is a worthless country and that Americans are depraved individuals.

What other developed countries have made it near-impossible to own a gun?

And which of those countries had 400 million guns in circulation, virtually all of which were unregistered?

Japan? South Korea? UK? Australia? I could go on - gun laws are extremely strict in those countries.

The second statement is an excuse.

It’s not near impossible to get a gun in the UK or Australia. Millions of people in those countries own guns.

The second statement is not an excuse, it’s the reality we live in. Guns are a destructive force, I don’t deny that, but at the end of the day, our country has a lot of guns, and no government policy can change that fact.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Sincere question for conservatives here: why do you think America is the only developed country where this happens regularly? Are Americans uniquely evil/mentally ill, or is it maybe the fact that there are more guns than people in this country?

The wide availability of guns is a necessary, but not a sufficient condition for America's epidemic of violence. You don't see this in Switzerland or Czechia. American society is just deeply broken and it's only getting worse. Insane political, religious, ethnic and culture war (relevant in this case...) polarization, the breakdown of social cohesion, the opioid epidemic, and the massive differences between rich and poor all seem to be relevant factors to me.

...So then yes, Americans are fundamentally worse than non-Americans?

What a grim, pessimistic perspective to have.

That's not even what he was saying dude.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

It’s not near impossible to get a gun in the UK or Australia. Millions of people in those countries own guns.

Semantics. It's still not nearly as easy as in many states in this country.

The second statement is not an excuse, it’s the reality we live in. Guns are a destructive force, I don’t deny that, but at the end of the day, our country has a lot of guns, and no government policy can change that fact.

A nationwide gun buyback program and a nationwide semi-automatic rifle ban would work.

For all gun purchases: extensive background checks, license/permit requirements and a ban on documented mentally ill people from being able to buy guns.

All of that would reduce the amount of guns in this country AND the amount of gun violence.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Sincere question for conservatives here: why do you think America is the only developed country where this happens regularly? Are Americans uniquely evil/mentally ill, or is it maybe the fact that there are more guns than people in this country?

The wide availability of guns is a necessary, but not a sufficient condition for America's epidemic of violence. You don't see this in Switzerland or Czechia. American society is just deeply broken and it's only getting worse. Insane political, religious, ethnic and culture war (relevant in this case...) polarization, the breakdown of social cohesion, the opioid epidemic, and the massive differences between rich and poor all seem to be relevant factors to me.

...So then yes, Americans are fundamentally worse than non-Americans?

What a grim, pessimistic perspective to have.

That's not even what he was saying dude.

In fact I'd say that "if a society is pervasively toxic, and getting worse, it must be because the people in that society are inherently morally vicious" is itself grim and pessimistic, especially coming from someone left-of-center.

[VBM]

1. So what would be an effective deterrent for school shooters?

There is no "deterring" them. They're criminally insane and they intend to die while committing their killings.

So Fergie’s point is moot

How? If anything, Dule's argument affirms my point. I'm literally saying that the death penalty won't deter them. If there is no deterring school shooters, then implementing harsher punishment is pointless.

Just because it won’t deter them, that doesn’t change the fact that they still need to be appropriately punished for their crimes.

Why is the death penalty more appropriate than life in prison?

Because they took the lives of multiple children.

That's not an answer to my question, you're just describing the crime they committed.

Their crime warrants the highest possible punishment, which is the death penalty.

[VBM]

1. So what would be an effective deterrent for school shooters?

There is no "deterring" them. They're criminally insane and they intend to die while committing their killings.

So Fergie’s point is moot

How? If anything, Dule's argument affirms my point. I'm literally saying that the death penalty won't deter them. If there is no deterring school shooters, then implementing harsher punishment is pointless.

Just because it won’t deter them, that doesn’t change the fact that they still need to be appropriately punished for their crimes.

Why is the death penalty more appropriate than life in prison?

Because they took the lives of multiple children.

How would you construct an evidentiary standard that would allow for the execution of mass shooters but avoid wrongful executions with 100% accuracy?

Is there any case where someone was wrongly incarcerated for a school shooting?

[SteveRogers]

1. So what would be an effective deterrent for school shooters?

This one seems very easy. Making it almost impossible to get a gun would be a very effective deterrent for school shooters.

That’s impossible, so a non starter. You might as well say just making people think shooting up schools is bad would stop school shootings.

No, it is not impossible. Every other developed country has done it, but the United States can't. Supposedly, the "greatest" country in the world?

If that's the case, then that means the United States is a worthless country and that Americans are depraved individuals.

What other developed countries have made it near-impossible to own a gun?

And which of those countries had 400 million guns in circulation, virtually all of which were unregistered?

Japan? South Korea? UK? Australia? I could go on - gun laws are extremely strict in those countries.

The second statement is an excuse.

It’s not near impossible to get a gun in the UK or Australia. Millions of people in those countries own guns.

The second statement is not an excuse, it’s the reality we live in. Guns are a destructive force, I don’t deny that, but at the end of the day, our country has a lot of guns, and no government policy can change that fact.

Well that’s just objectively false. No government policy that you approve of, maybe. But there’s plenty of policies that would reduce the number of guns in circulation. Step 1: stop making new guns.

[John Dule]

1. So what would be an effective deterrent for school shooters?

There is no "deterring" them. They're criminally insane and they intend to die while committing their killings.

So Fergie’s point is moot

How? If anything, Dule's argument affirms my point. I'm literally saying that the death penalty won't deter them. If there is no deterring school shooters, then implementing harsher punishment is pointless.

Just because it won’t deter them, that doesn’t change the fact that they still need to be appropriately punished for their crimes.

Why is the death penalty more appropriate than life in prison?

Because they took the lives of multiple children.

How would you construct an evidentiary standard that would allow for the execution of mass shooters but avoid wrongful executions with 100% accuracy?

Is there any case where someone was wrongly incarcerated for a school shooting?

So you would say that the death penalty should apply only to mass shootings and nothing else?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

1. So what would be an effective deterrent for school shooters?

There is no "deterring" them. They're criminally insane and they intend to die while committing their killings.

So Fergie’s point is moot

How? If anything, Dule's argument affirms my point. I'm literally saying that the death penalty won't deter them. If there is no deterring school shooters, then implementing harsher punishment is pointless.

Just because it won’t deter them, that doesn’t change the fact that they still need to be appropriately punished for their crimes.

Why is the death penalty more appropriate than life in prison?

Because they took the lives of multiple children.

How would you construct an evidentiary standard that would allow for the execution of mass shooters but avoid wrongful executions with 100% accuracy?

Is there any case where someone was wrongly incarcerated for a school shooting?

So you would say that the death penalty should apply only to mass shootings and nothing else?

I don't hold this position myself, but "exceptionalist" views on the death penalty (only for mass shootings/child murders/crimes committed in wartime/etc.) aren't really that unusual, especially in other countries.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Well, this thread is going as placidly as I had expected...

But really, this is such a depressing nightmarish clusterf*** worst case scenario of a situation that I'm not surprised. I feel terrible for everyone even tenuously involved from the victims to their families to how this will probably help take trans rights back even further from an already bad position. Audrey Hale certainly wasn't considering the ramifications of their malicious depravity since they seemed to know this would end in their death, but the consequences left in their wake makes their actions as selfish and short-sided as their were barbaric, especially when it comes to the all too likely potential for Republican Governors and legislatures to act upon further anti-trans legislation in a retributive fashion over this. All while leaving the gun issue (you know, the common denominator no matter a perpetrator's ideology or motives) by the wayside.

This is probably the worst I've felt about American society since the Dobbs decision...I hope I am pleasantly surprised and Hale is taken as an individual acting on their own accord though. It's hard to expect that these days though, sadly.

[Vosem]

1. So what would be an effective deterrent for school shooters?

This one seems very easy. Making it almost impossible to get a gun would be a very effective deterrent for school shooters.

That’s impossible, so a non starter. You might as well say just making people think shooting up schools is bad would stop school shootings.

No, it is not impossible. Every other developed country has done it, but the United States can't. Supposedly, the "greatest" country in the world?

If that's the case, then that means the United States is a worthless country and that Americans are depraved individuals.

What other developed countries have made it near-impossible to own a gun?

And which of those countries had 400 million guns in circulation, virtually all of which were unregistered?

Japan? South Korea? UK? Australia? I could go on - gun laws are extremely strict in those countries.

The second statement is an excuse.

It’s not near impossible to get a gun in the UK or Australia. Millions of people in those countries own guns.

The second statement is not an excuse, it’s the reality we live in. Guns are a destructive force, I don’t deny that, but at the end of the day, our country has a lot of guns, and no government policy can change that fact.

Well that’s just objectively false. No government policy that you approve of, maybe. But there’s plenty of policies that would reduce the number of guns in circulation. Step 1: stop making new guns.

Should be noted that in the contemporary United States your right to print off your own guns is considered to be protected under free speech grounds.

More generally, over the last few decades government policy has focused on expanding, not restricting, access to guns, and there has been substantial success in this goal.

[John Dule]

1. So what would be an effective deterrent for school shooters?

There is no "deterring" them. They're criminally insane and they intend to die while committing their killings.

So Fergie’s point is moot

How? If anything, Dule's argument affirms my point. I'm literally saying that the death penalty won't deter them. If there is no deterring school shooters, then implementing harsher punishment is pointless.

Just because it won’t deter them, that doesn’t change the fact that they still need to be appropriately punished for their crimes.

Why is the death penalty more appropriate than life in prison?

Because they took the lives of multiple children.

How would you construct an evidentiary standard that would allow for the execution of mass shooters but avoid wrongful executions with 100% accuracy?

Is there any case where someone was wrongly incarcerated for a school shooting?

So you would say that the death penalty should apply only to mass shootings and nothing else?

I don't hold this position myself, but "exceptionalist" views on the death penalty (only for mass shootings/child murders/crimes committed in wartime/etc.) aren't really that unusual, especially in other countries.

Sure, but my next question was going to be how we define a "mass shooting." When we think of this term, we generally think of a psychopath stalking from room to room with an assault rifle gunning people down, caught on camera from multiple angles, and publishing a manifesto taking credit for the attack. I understand that there's really no credible question of guilt in such cases. But how do we parse out a statutory distinction between that and, say, a drive-by gang shooting with no surveillance footage, in which guilt is not as certain?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

1. So what would be an effective deterrent for school shooters?

There is no "deterring" them. They're criminally insane and they intend to die while committing their killings.

So Fergie’s point is moot

How? If anything, Dule's argument affirms my point. I'm literally saying that the death penalty won't deter them. If there is no deterring school shooters, then implementing harsher punishment is pointless.

Just because it won’t deter them, that doesn’t change the fact that they still need to be appropriately punished for their crimes.

Why is the death penalty more appropriate than life in prison?

Because they took the lives of multiple children.

How would you construct an evidentiary standard that would allow for the execution of mass shooters but avoid wrongful executions with 100% accuracy?

Is there any case where someone was wrongly incarcerated for a school shooting?

So you would say that the death penalty should apply only to mass shootings and nothing else?

I don't hold this position myself, but "exceptionalist" views on the death penalty (only for mass shootings/child murders/crimes committed in wartime/etc.) aren't really that unusual, especially in other countries.

Sure, but my next question was going to be how we define a "mass shooting." When we think of this term, we generally think of a psychopath stalking from room to room with an assault rifle gunning people down, caught on camera from multiple angles, and publishing a manifesto taking credit for the attack. I understand that there's really no credible question of guilt in such cases. But how do we parse out a statutory distinction between that and, say, a drive-by gang shooting with no surveillance footage, in which guilt is not as certain?

I agree entirely, which is the second-biggest reason why I don't hold this position myself, after categorical opposition to the death penalty in general.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

1. So what would be an effective deterrent for school shooters?

This one seems very easy. Making it almost impossible to get a gun would be a very effective deterrent for school shooters.

That’s impossible, so a non starter. You might as well say just making people think shooting up schools is bad would stop school shootings.

No, it is not impossible. Every other developed country has done it, but the United States can't. Supposedly, the "greatest" country in the world?

If that's the case, then that means the United States is a worthless country and that Americans are depraved individuals.

What other developed countries have made it near-impossible to own a gun?

And which of those countries had 400 million guns in circulation, virtually all of which were unregistered?

Japan? South Korea? UK? Australia? I could go on - gun laws are extremely strict in those countries.

The second statement is an excuse.

It’s not near impossible to get a gun in the UK or Australia. Millions of people in those countries own guns.

The second statement is not an excuse, it’s the reality we live in. Guns are a destructive force, I don’t deny that, but at the end of the day, our country has a lot of guns, and no government policy can change that fact.

Well that’s just objectively false. No government policy that you approve of, maybe. But there’s plenty of policies that would reduce the number of guns in circulation. Step 1: stop making new guns.

Should be noted that in the contemporary United States your right to print off your own guns is considered to be protected under free speech grounds.

More generally, over the last few decades government policy has focused on expanding, not restricting, access to guns, and there has been substantial success in this goal.

That's great, thank you for enshrining weekly random shooting sprees into our nation for the rest of our lives. Please brag more about all the setbacks you have caused in recent history that are responsible for the current dystopia.

[VBM]

1. So what would be an effective deterrent for school shooters?

There is no "deterring" them. They're criminally insane and they intend to die while committing their killings.

So Fergie’s point is moot

How? If anything, Dule's argument affirms my point. I'm literally saying that the death penalty won't deter them. If there is no deterring school shooters, then implementing harsher punishment is pointless.

Just because it won’t deter them, that doesn’t change the fact that they still need to be appropriately punished for their crimes.

Why is the death penalty more appropriate than life in prison?

Because they took the lives of multiple children.

How would you construct an evidentiary standard that would allow for the execution of mass shooters but avoid wrongful executions with 100% accuracy?

Is there any case where someone was wrongly incarcerated for a school shooting?

So you would say that the death penalty should apply only to mass shootings and nothing else?

It should definitely apply to mass shootings. Other crimes are up for debate.

[John Dule]

It should definitely apply to mass shootings. Other crimes are up for debate.

Okay, define mass shootings. (See above.)

[Illiniwek]

I ended up on a dark corner TikTok, and the toxic and belligerent ignorance that continues to be shown regarding why guns culture in America isn’t a problem has really made me doubt whether there is any saving to be done for America. In the past there would at least be some quiet shame for some period of time. But the way these gun nuts are outright mocking people who are upset over this tragedy in total trump fashion cuts through to my soul. What a cancer we have in this society that will never allow for us to act to make things better.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

I ended up on a dark corner TikTok, and the toxic and belligerent ignorance that continues to be shown regarding why guns culture in America isn’t a problem has really made me doubt whether there is any saving to be done for America. In the past there would at least be some quiet shame for some period of time. But the way these gun nuts are outright mocking people who are upset over this tragedy in total trump fashion cuts through to my soul. What a cancer we have in this society that will never allow for us to act to make things better.

I agree. It's sickening.

I don't think that I'm staying in this country for the long term. It's such a difficult process to leave this country, though. Sigh.