I guess people want something done without knowing what to do… As the article states, this law wouldn’t have prevented the shooting that motivated passing it.
It wasn’t just 1 shooting that motivated it, and you clearly must know that, so why are you trying to sell a false narrative? This will save lives as well. It isn’t a full solution though. This will mitigate immediate crimes of passion using guns by people who don’t currently own them. The number of people who go out and buy a gun when upset to shoot someone is non-zero. The number of people who have calmed down enough 3 days later will hopefully also be non-zero. Florida always had a longer period for such.
Waiting periods do appear to have a small but significant effect on reducing gun homicides according to the research I’ve seen, although I haven’t looked at data specifically for Maine, which is a state with a lot more guns but a lot less gun violence than the average.
(The study I looked at appears to show that background checks increase gun homicides so I don’t trust it very much, but a Rand meta-analysis also claims that that small but significant effect is real.)
My point isn’t that waiting periods are bad policy but rather that they’re an irrational response to this mass shooting. (And it is this particular mass shooting that convinced Maine to pass the law.) Gun violence that would not have been prevented by a waiting period is evidence against the efficacy of waiting periods, but here people are responding to that evidence by increasing their support for waiting periods. It’s contrary to basic logic.
Maine has no capability to alter what our military uses as ordinance. It can, in the wake of a horrifying slaughter commited with a gun, look at ways of mitigating future gun murders. That’s what it’s has done here. Not a “1 for 1” response to a specific issue they can’t affect, but an overall improvement of gun safety.
You’re right about CTE, but I still don’t see why passing this legislation in response to a mass shooting that it would not have prevented makes more sense than, for example, restricting guns in response to a murder committed with a knife. In both cases, the murder weapon is outside of the category of weapons affected by the law.
It’s an awful gallows humor joke and certainly a fireable offence in just about every workplace no matter the context. It’s certainly not worth $20 mil.
I’m not sure he was joking, though. That attitude is definitely not limited to him - there’s a pretty pervasive sentiment among cops and bootlickers that some people are worth more than others. Denver just announced they fired 3 cops for saying they were going to use migrant shelters as target practice. Yeah they were “joking” just like Auderer was “joking”, but it’s pretty clear that the underlying feeling isn’t really a joke to them.
Any use of a chemical straight into the bloodstream to make a job “easier” is wild. At the same time, cops won’t administer a person’s prescription inhaler to cover their ass on medical shit. (I know paramedics do the medical shit, but cops request the sedatives a lot of the time.)
If you wanted it for therapeutic use, you’d have to jump through hoops and spend a lot of $ just to get little bit. Meanwhile, cops can have you sedated with it at will.
I’ve never used ketamine, but if it’s anything like similar dissociatives, an unexpected trip could be very disturbing. And on top of the other abuses from police, I can imagine the whole ordeal would cause life-long trauma (if you survived in the first place).
I work on the ems side of things. A normal sized dose of ketamine is a lot less harmful than many other options. I’ve experienced seeing levels of histaria or rage in people that I wouldn’t have believed existed 20 years ago. It’s taken six of us to hold down a 110 pound woman that’s trying to claw and bite and flail. They’ll dislocate a shoulder just trying to struggle out of straps. Yes, less of us could have overpowered her, but not without physically hurting her to do it.
Bottom line is, ketamine is needed, because overall, it helps a lot more people than it hurts. I’ve never been around it being used when it wasn’t necessary or being over dosed.
All the major networks covered this live. None of them covered the Harris rally that happened right after. Some did fact checking afterward. That’s after most people stop watching.
The reporters often asked useless softball questions, like asking him to comment about his upcoming interview with Musk.
When there was a serious question, he simply didn’t answer. There was one about abortion and he said he would answer later. There was one about whether an an abortion drug should be banned. He gave a rambling response that seemed to be about something else.
Compare this to a typical Biden press conference where the reporters are rude and yell out questions and push back and tell Biden that he isn’t answering the question.
The press is afraid of Trump and complicit with his criminal behavior and complicit in the ignorance of the voters.
I agree with you but other nations is vague. If by other nations you are comparing us to other very developed nations (Ex Europe) I would counter that the US has these issues to a way more extreme degree.
If you look at the UK for example, there are areas of high poverty and access to mental health care is practically nonexistent. I wouldn’t describe the difference between the UK and the US on these issues as “way more extreme”.
Sure wish the people who wanted to make guns as easy to get as possible weren’t saying the same thing while also stamping out any initiative to address these issues and defunding any existing ones.
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.