>

It definitely sounds like a gang shootout from the article. But I think it still qualifies as a mass shooting per the media definition.
In light of another tragedy, a gentle reminder that comments advocating death or violence will result in an instant ban i.e. comments like "Don't shoot X, instead we should shoot Y" or "Turn our guns away from X and towards Z".
^(Hope everyone's day is going well otherwise.) >

Am I reading this right?  Officers originally arrived and saw casings at the gas station, but no victims.  Later they discovered victims because they went to the hospital?  Was there no blood on the scene anywhere? >

The victims self-transported to local hospitals. Ambulances cost hella money. I can understand why folks would rather self-transport. >

This is a very American situation. Get shot, drive yourself to the ER because you can't afford the ambulance bill.
Then presumably don't pay those medical bills because they don't have insurance, and have shit in collections already anyway. >

Get shot, break a leg, pull up my insurance app and figure out which hospitals are covered. Now hopefully all the doctors at those hospitals are, just gotta find all their names and look them up. A+ best healthcare in the world. >

Politicians gave us reason to hurt our neighbor. >

That’s some psychological trauma >

People get caught up.. real shame. >

Couldn’t there be an organized effort from the people, the used to be middle class, why couldn’t we protest but in a big way. I feel like we’re all so beaten down anymore. But we could organize a peaceful protest. A gentleman’s agreement. A day where we just recognize we were a happy healthy middle class and we’re still here. No violence, no discussion of anything but everyone choosing just one day where we don’t clock into the jobs we don’t even like. Just for a cause. We can make a dent right? There’s more of us. >

The thing about peaceful protests is that the cops show up and start the violence. >

And all it takes is a few people who want violence for it to go bad. >

Yeah, those are generally the undercover cops. 
They throw a brick and leg it, which means the cops now get to beat the hippies down (liberal protestors cops hate, cops are buddy-buddy with conservative ones), and then arrest everyone after they get their bloodlust out. They give themselves a dozen new medals, talk about how they're all that's between society and chaos, jerk each other off a few times, and the protestors are quietly let go without charges 48 hours later -- and then quietly sue the city, which gets settled out of court, and the cops get another medal and jerk-off session and a higher budget.
If they can't get a brick-thrower in, the cops will just kettle a chunk of the protest up somewhere and demand the protestors "disperse". Of course the cops herded them somewhere where there literally is no where to go, so they don't disperse because they can't and then the cops tear gas them then beat them down. 
Same results, Medals, jerking off, quite releases and settlements, bigger cop budget.
Cops are the biggest fucking racket in America.
We pay those bastards fucking time and a half to beat the shit out us. >

Oh cops don't even bother with pretext anymore these days. They're flagrantly antagonistic. The guy in the uniform will start it. >

We may have a huge gun problem in this country, but at least we have a tremendous lack of access to health care, a substandard educational system, a feral two party system, and a monumental race relations problem. >

Don’t forget a collapsing ecology! >

I don't think we've begun to see the effects of this yet. 
Water shortages, yes, but until food becomes unobtainable, I don't think we'll notice. The mass extinctions are observable if you're looking for them, but they aren't on Facebook. >


I don't think we've begun to see the effects of this yet.

yes, we absolutely have. one of the craziest lies of climate change denial is the way it's always phrased in the abstract future tense. it blows my mind that this simple trick of phrasing is enough to get most americans to deny what they can see with their own eyes simply by looking out the window.
we are feeling the impacts of climate change already. there's drought in the west, crazy warm winters, insect and animal populations PLUNGING, fucked up crop yields, pandemics aplenty, and more. many of these things are already producing secondary effects. for example the warm winters in northern US are causing tick populations to explode, as their breeding season is much long. this is having tertiary effect of spreading diseases old and new (chronic wasting disease aka zombie deer) among deer. this is then having a quaternary effect that the DNR declares huge areas of deer unsafe to eat or come in contact with.
the effects of climate change are here, now. the complicit media is trying REAL HARD to keep you from acknowledging that. >

More like the dramatic apocalyptic effects haven't been seen in the west yet. The whole reason for the Syrian civil war was famine due to drought caused by climate change. >

100% correct but STILL not the point. the person i responded to was furthering the lie that we haven't seen any effects here YET. that it is STILL a problem for future generations. 
we are feeling the first effects of it here, NOW. 
i am not trying to discount what the syrians or anyone ellse in the global south, or other conflict zone, has to deal with. but the way to motivate humans is via self interest. so that means pointing out climate change at home. it doesn't have to be a game where we compare who is the most fucked up. >

Totally agree with you but it made me think…USians have had soooo many mass shootings and still don’t seem to see a problem. It’s scary to think that it will only matter once they’re starving themselves (or in their own mass shooting). >

Apples and oranges. But worth discussing. 
"Half" of America (the red part) simply tries to deny the problem. The other part (blue) sees the problem but has been fixated on prohibition as a solution because it's useful political rhetoric. 
Nobody stops to ask why detroit became a hellhole of drugs, gangs, and shootings. Was it because we didn't have enough cops? Or did they need more military toys? Was it because we hadn't yet blanketed our cities with cameras? Did we need to criminalize more drugs? Send more people to jail for longer? Were citizen rights too expansive? 
Or was it because we built an entire city around industry, and then allowed capitalist oligarchs to gut that industry for profit, leaving an entire population of people destitute? >

Or is it because drugs and guns were imported to cities as part of a plot to keep certain groups in poverty. Or maybe a combination? >

yeah, there's plenty of blame to throw around. >

Another day ending in Y. >

“I cAn’T wAiT tO sEe HoW tHeY tIe ThIs To NeW rEsTrIcTiOnS!” -Apparently a lot of halfwits in these threads who like to pretend that it’s just a coincidence how the US continuously has these issues. >

Just declare it as a national sport already. >

They already wipe out the competition in the olympics >

You’re the only country playing it seems. >

That’s never stopped them calling it a World Series though. >

Hey now, that's unfair. The World Series could be played in by the one Canadian team. >

At least we are free even if we can’t eat, get healthcare, have days off, and enjoy life. >

"There were 38 mass shootings in the United States in the first 21 days of the year, according to the Gun Violence Archive, which describes a mass shooting as four or more people shot or killed, not including the shooter."
More than a daily occurrence. What is stopping a resolution to this national tragedy? >


What is stopping a resolution to this national tragedy?

There's no profit in reducing gun violence, and politicians can't get votes if they advocate for sweeping gun legislation. >

doesn't CA already have very restrictive gun legislation? >

Problem is that even if you are a tough on guns state, if the states you boarder are not, then guns are easy to get. 
Case, Chicago is constantly trying to be tougher and tougher on guns…but Indiana is a quick little drive away. So it’s hard to “ban” assault rifles, when you can buy them in bulk 20 miles away in Gary Indiana. >

You cannot buy a handgun in Indiana as an Illinois resident, not without a federal transfer license or going through an FFL.
Anyone who is selling to IL residents in IN is committing a major federal crime. Similarly, any IN resident buying a handgun there and selling it in IL is committing a crime that comes with buku years in prison.
But its easier for police and the feds to go after weed users and low level dealers than state-to-state arms traffickers, so those laws aren't as zealously enforced as they ought to be. >



buku


The word you're looking for is beaucoup, french for a lot. >

From Urban Dictionary:

A Vietnamese word meaning "much" or "many of" deriving from the French word "beaucoup", picked up by the Vietnam War veterans and ...

So no, they are not looking for "beaucoup".  They used the correct (derrived/slang) word, "buku". >

Still, it's good to know where words are coming from and their proper form. I also learned something new today so thank you. >

How to avoid an argument with someone who's source is urban dictionary 101
Featuring r/Doomnezeu >

When people are becoming increasingly suicidal and angry, you have to question the living conditions. I’m not opposed to gun control but i dont know if that’s going to be the end of the battle here. there is plenty of destruction that can be done without a gun, and they’ll find a way if they’re angry enough.
Edit: if* >

Gun control would definitely result in fewer murders short term, but it's a bandaid on a gaping wound left by lack of social security. 
I don't literally mean the social security program, but the combined lack of income, housing, and healthcare. >

Literally every developed country in the world has figured out how to stop gun violence. There's no debate on "if it would work" the method has been proven to work over and over and over again. 
California gun laws are strict by US standards but they aren't effective, if the US adopted an effective model from another country we could end this problem >

You say that as if the only difference between the US and other developed countries is their gun laws. >

I live here in Half Moon Bay. It’s a small little seaside town, really friendly people. The cop cars whizzing past me on the road yesterday didn’t give me pause - figured I’d read about some traffic accident on Nextdoor. This incident has us all SHOOK. These people were shot in front of children. I’m from Texas originally and I would expect maybe seeing something like this there. Not here. FFS when will this end >

I was in California for 5 years and I ended up being in the vicinity of two mass shootings. One at a UPS in San Francisco, where I was at an apartment two blocks away when it happened. And one in Huntington Beach, where we had been hanging out near the shooting location earlier that same night.
While shootings may statistically be rare it becomes eye opening when you end up brushing up against the events themselves. >

I was in UC Santa Barbara during the shooting there. The dude killed people at both ends of my street while I was inside playing video games, and shot up a food market I would go to all the time. 
Then I moved to vegas and was working on the strip when the mandalay bay shooting happened and had to evacuate.   
Sometimes I still view these shootings as an outsider. I find it extremely fucked up how its been so normalized that after being in extreme close proximity to TWO of them, I can still be so indifferent. >

I feel like this should be the top comment in this whole thread. Your experience and subsequent indifference is most emblematic of the nation at large. These news stories say things like “community reeling… grief besets [relevant ethnicity] community … etc” when in reality most people just carry on like normal. >

No description of the shooters? >

One a day for three days! >

we really need a graduated system, I'm a gun nut (not even by reddit standards, i'm like... i have guns for when the prehistoric worms bust through my basement walls, type gun nut) but some of the fucking people i see at the gun range and gun store ARE ABSOLUTLEY FUCKING SHOCKING.
I was picking up an FFL transfer (which takes some time) from my local gun store and a fucking "urbanized" white dude (ciggy behind the ear, tracksuit, neck tattoos) is in there OBVIOUSLY coaching his crackwhore about what gun to ask for and what to fill out on the background form... (Because obviously he's not allowed to buy them)... thank christ the store owner finally overheard them and told them to GTFO, but i assume they just went elsewhere.
I've been into shooting sports, marksmanship and gun collecting since i'm 14 years old, was raised as a safe gun owner by a safe gun owner, no firearm in my collection has ever fired at anything other than clay discs, tasty birds, wild hogs or paper rectangles, if every gun owner in the country was just a copy of me, the gun crime rate would be zero, i'm at the point where i no longer believe gun rights should extend to huge swaths of the population, ban em all. DUIs, petty theft, white collar crime, simple assault, reckless motor vehicle operation, perjury, any military discharge other than honorable (yes including admin, i'm a 14 year military vet, i know what kinda shit admin discharges are from) fuck em all, we had rights for a long time and people didnt abuse them, highschoolers in my town used to have their shotguns in their truck window parked in the school parking lot for decades without school shootings.
everything went to shit, time for the rules to change. >

I'm appreciate that you are able to see things from multiple perspectives. Things really have changed, we are in a new world and the rules need to change to match the times. I agree, people should be excluded from gun ownership if they are not going to be safe, and we shouldn't wait for them to kill someone to figure it out. >

Problem, the systems they have in place to help prevent this keep failing. Red Flag laws for instance. The shooter at the Boulder King Soopers would have fallen under it, people didn't do their duty. >

“There is nothing we can do to stop this”, says the only country in the world where this regularly happens… >

Gun manufacturers won’t let anything happen >

And the masses fight for them because they have been conditioned to. >

I mean as a minority... Historically minorities get fucked over by the government pretty hard. So I'm definitely keeping my shit for my family's protection. >

TBH, I don't think fighting the government directly is a reasonable proposition for any minority.
HOWEVER, the government has a long history of our police protecting the wealth while leaving the underprivileged out in the cold. So to me, the idea of anyone non-wealthy being comfortable at the idea of being dependent on police to save them is laughable. >

states unfortunately don’t have some magical wall at it’s borders >

I've heard alot of the guns in NYC arrive on greyhound buses. >

There’s a whole thing called the “iron pipeline” where they’re brought in from the south.
NYC thankfully is surrounded by states with fairly strict gun laws so the lengthy journey gun smugglers have to take raises the final street price and makes them less accessible.
Compare that with Chicago where they can be in Indiana in less than an hour and illegal guns are far more common/cheap. >

I’ll add to this so no one is mistaken. 
What makes the “iron pipeline” is 


a straw purchase - which is where a person in good standing goes and buys a weapon( for someone else)bc they can pass a background check and the receiver cannot. It’s illegal. 


The person then travels across state lines to sell the gun illegally. It’s all illegal. In my case Virginia is one of the states where many of these guns originate. It is now law here that the 2nd hand buyer must have passed a background check. It’s all sorts of illegal in NY. 


These people are criminals from the word go. >

Yeah of course it’s illegal. But it’s very easy, lucrative, and hard to stop. The point is that countries with effective gun control do it nationwide so that straw purchasing isn’t a thing. >

the kind of gun control you speak of, that exists in other countries will never exist in the US because it is written into our constitution and requires and overwhelming majority to change. 
With that in mind, let’s take a step forward in our thinking, how do you prevent or discourage it?
Edit- I took out some unnecessary language in my response >

Thoughts, prayers, et cetera. Wash, rinse, repeat. >

"now it's not the time to get political" is now a permanent state. >

Almost two mass shootings per day so far this year, so it's never the right time. 
Fuck that noise. It's always time. >

Seems like clickbait. 
This is in Oakland. Shooting between multiple individuals. 
This doesn’t sound like a mass shooting but rather a shootout or a drive by.
It’s sad to see but gang violence is not the same as a mass shooting. Probably why it’s not getting the same level media coverage.
Edit: to clarify, this ‘article’ is calling it a mass shooting because it gets them clicks. Mass shootings have always been specific to one or multiple gunmen shooting at unsuspecting/unarmed people. More akin to an act of terrorism. In this situation, the parties involved were all active participants. I’m not saying it’s not a bad situation, but it’s definitely not a ‘mass shooting’ as the previous two this week. (Can’t believe I just typed that last part)