Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

SpecterCody t1_j6azzwb wrote

Finally some news. We were there and escaped, it was scary and confusing. I didn't hear anything but we hid in a store.

130

javi2591 t1_j6b1vjd wrote

I was there! At the Holyoke mall and we saw people running screaming

14

tobiasrfunke t1_j6b2fw0 wrote

My wife and daughter were there. Didn't hear it but got caught in the mad rush to leave. Home safe and incredibly freaked out.

188

Kitty_chan777 t1_j6b97cz wrote

I was working a shift when I heard the gun shoots. I was buffering until I saw everyone run and realized, “Oh shit!!! Those were gun shots!!!” They we’re really close btw.

11

witteefool t1_j6ba9tg wrote

Cool cool cool, I was there just a few hours prior…

−12

goPACK17 t1_j6bauii wrote

Iirc, people on this sub were insiting Holyoke is totally safe, especially the mall 🤔

−51

fadetoblack237 t1_j6bb6ph wrote

Replying to tobiasrfunke (#1,568,160)

I was at one at the South Shore Plaza a year ago almost to the day of this one. Therapy helped me a lot if they are still having trouble in a couple of weeks it's worth talking to someone. It took me months before I could go back to the mall.

33

fadetoblack237 t1_j6bbdjh wrote

I was at the South Shore Plaza during a shooting and therapy helped me get past it. This kind of thing can cause PTSD and it's worth going and talking to someone if you can.

10

wkomorow t1_j6bcve7 wrote

It is so sad when you hear about a shooting, it becomes scary when it was at a place you have been to many times. Those of you who were there, I really hope you will be OK after experiencing this trauma.

30

Hotdoganddonut t1_j6be3xl wrote

It was a shooting at the nail/hair salon by JC Penney on the lower level.

13

aja09 t1_j6bestn wrote

Hope everyone is safe :(. It’s always a shame when people have to resort to any kind of violence. Can’t we just use our words.

4

SpecterCody t1_j6bg1u1 wrote

Replying to Girasol28842 (#1,569,750)

Yep. Today I was bored and said "fuck it I'll go to the mall to walk around and get out". I had this intrusive though that there could be a shooting because they are so common now. Lo and behold it happens when we are there. I was not even surprised, just shaken after the fact finding out it was indeed a shooting.

3

kdall7 t1_j6bhxam wrote

The victim was an innocent bystander (it’s being reported that it was a manager, I believe his name is Walo but not trying to spread misinfo so please don’t take this as fact, who was trying to break up a fight between two people) at the nail salon called “A Touch of Beauty.” The downstairs location on the first floor near JCPenny. The upstairs location is my regular nail salon. My family was there in the food court when the shooting happened. They said it was chaos and everyone grabbed their kids and left to the closest exits.

61

RedPandaActual t1_j6bivyv wrote

Replying to Girasol28842 (#1,569,750)

I am, Holyoke has had a serious decline since covid, it’s not the same place it was before then. Gang activity has been on the rise as the economy tanked more and more. Glad I was finally able to move out but sad at what it’s becoming.

1

fendent t1_j6bjplv wrote

Replying to SpecterCody (#1,567,717)

Apologies if this is too presumptive of me but please be sure you get some professional help processing this. I’ve never quite got over being shot at and I hate seeing anybody thinking they are fine like I thought then one day a year later just hitting a brick wall of walking catatonia. I was a complete space case, dissociating constantly and probably avoidable if I got somebody to help pick through it with me. Be well, friend.

23

SpecterCody t1_j6bl7so wrote

Replying to fendent (#1,571,028)

Thank you for the concern. In the moment I wasn't too scared, just alarmed. Once I read the news in a restaurant confirming it was indeed a shooting, it started to sink in. Its a mix of emotions that's hard to process right now. I hope you were able to find some peace with the scary incident you went through.

11

fendent t1_j6bljkv wrote

Replying to SpecterCody (#1,571,266)

Yeah at the time I was high anxiety but not too bad. Looked over my shoulder a bit more but nothing too bad then one day I just couldn’t stop thinking about it or about bad things happening. But yeah, I think I finally have reached some peace about it after a good bit of work. Wishing you the best as well.

5

Much_Perception4478 t1_j6brf4c wrote

These stupid shootings are off the charts lately, what the fuck is going on?

16

StevieSparta t1_j6bru6n wrote

They still have a 15 year old mayor there?

−27

[deleted] t1_j6btucn wrote

Praying for the victim and the families involved as well as any witnesses. Such an awful event.

6

Justinontheinternet t1_j6bysbr wrote

Replying to NabNausicaan (#1,571,913)

Seems like someone got shot and killed with a gun, according to the article at least. If the laws prevented these deaths, like we’re told they will. Would this have still happened? 🤔

Because we’re trading a constitutional amendment for the promise that gun laws will prevent tragedies such as these. We’ve given up much of our 2a rights but they haven’t held up their end of the bargain and stopped these tragedies from happening. Which means these laws don’t work or politicians are lying.(insert shocked face here)

Hell I expect someone to get on tv within the next 48 hours and talk about creating more gun laws because of this. Despite their current gun laws not working hence here we are commenting on an article about another mall shooting.

Even the Holyoke mall doesn’t allow weapons but what they are doing in reality is disarming law abiding people while allow this shooter easy and helpless targets many of which are our friends, family and neighbors.

“No Weapons Allowed The possession of any weapon, other than by law enforcement personnel, is prohibited.”

http://www.holyokemall.com/uploads/pdf/holyoke_behavior_code.pdf

−17

BenpaiNoticedYou t1_j6c0m5x wrote

I was there with my friends when it happened. We traveled from CT for my friend's birthday at the Round One. My GF and I split from the group to check out Stateline Games. The escalator wasn't working so we had to go through JC Penney.

We were just about to exit the second floor when we heard two loud bangs. After about a second or two people started running panicked in our direction so we got outside and met back up with our group.

Crazy. Never coming back to Holyoke Mall again after this

8

-Horatio_Alger_Jr- t1_j6cacnn wrote

Replying to NabNausicaan (#1,571,913)

>The great majority of guns used for homicide in Massachusetts come from out of state, like 90%. So yes, gun laws work.

Which is highly illegal. You can not purchase or transport a handgun across state lines. It has to go through a valid FFL. This is illegal at a federal level.

−2

wkomorow t1_j6ct2y8 wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#1,571,616)

It is one thing to lose your morality, it is another to lose your humanity. You know that there were people on this thread who were there and were traumatized by this incident, and you make a flippant remark like that?

Early reporting points to an argument between 2 people who knew each other, the argument escalated when at least one of them pulled a gun and shot. An innocent by-stander was shot and killed. Would even stricter laws about firearms in public places have prevented it? Maybe, but I don't know. Currently our gun laws are aimed at reducing the number of potential mass shootings.

2

99BottlesOfBass t1_j6ctv05 wrote

Replying to Justinontheinternet (#1,573,419)

MA resident, born and raised. I like guns, I own guns, and I'm totally in support of strict/stricter gun regulation. Gun ownership as a hobby and strict regulations for public safety are not mutually exclusive, Galaxy Brain. In fact, Well Regulated is literally among the first words of that constitutional amendment you're referencing. Funny how you lot always seem to gloss over that part 🤔

4

99BottlesOfBass t1_j6cuyfz wrote

Replying to -Horatio_Alger_Jr- (#1,575,458)

I'm totally in support of stricter gun laws, but right now what you're saying simply isn't true. I have a MA LTC but not an FFL and it's perfectly legal for my to transport, or even carry on my person, my personal handgun(s) to/in other states. Not all other states; CT for example is very strict about non-residents carrying guns. Whereas NH or VT (I believe) it would be perfectly fine to go up for a range day with a buddy.

It's pretty popular for people in MA to also get a Utah gun license, because something like 35 states will recognize your right to carry a gun as long as you're licensed in both of those states. I personally don't carry my gun very often outside of going to the range so I don't have a Utah license, but when I took my LTC course the instructor made it a point to mention that was an option.

2

NabNausicaan t1_j6cvdcw wrote

Replying to Justinontheinternet (#1,573,419)

Australia had a lot of shootings. Then in the 90s they made it way harder to own a gun and did a buy-back program. Gun deaths plummeted thereafter. We could do the same here, but it'd have to be enacted nationwide. The current state-by-state laws make it way too easy to buy in one state and transport to another.

Also saying this as a gun owner, guns are very dangerous and a lot different than they were in 1783. It's common sense to restrict who can own one and which types are available.

1

mastercard003 t1_j6d7e57 wrote

Replying to -Horatio_Alger_Jr- (#1,577,376)

You know i dont disgree with you. However there has been so much gun violence in the past month, police are still abusing their power, politicans are doing minimal effort, and it’s all about money in this stupid capitalist economy. This shooting happened way too close to home. I hate that i feel scared to go in public. So i stand by my comment, america is fucking crazy.

9

-Horatio_Alger_Jr- t1_j6d9dpf wrote

Replying to 99BottlesOfBass (#1,578,613)

>I'm totally in support of stricter gun laws, but right now what you're saying simply isn't true.

What I am saying is 100% true.

>I have a MA LTC but not an FFL and it's perfectly legal for my to transport, or even carry on my person, my personal handgun(s) to/in other states. Not all other states; CT for example is very strict about non-residents carrying guns. Whereas NH or VT (I believe) it would be perfectly fine to go up for a range day with a buddy.

Yes, states that have constitutional carry or recognize MA LTC, you can possess your forearms in that state. You can CCW in a constitutional carry state.

You can not however, purchase or a handgun in another state and bring it back to your sate. You can not transfer a handgun and bring it back to your state. That is all illegal at a federal level. It must go through an FFL.

MA does not recognize any other state firearm license. A person from another state is not allow to carry a firearm in this state unless they possess a non-resident license.

The person I responded to stated that 90% of all firearm involved in a shooting came from a different state. This situation is highly regulated at the Federal level and the state level. The only way OP's statement is true is if those handguns went through a MA FFL.

If those handguns did not go through a FFL, the gun laws did not work.

1

zeropercentangel t1_j6dk11s wrote

my gym is inside the mall. thank god i was lazy and skipped yesterday

1

SpecterCody t1_j6dow1g wrote

Replying to Brampire666 (#1,582,855)

Yeah. We saw people just casually walking by towards where it happened when we were hiding at the back of Lens Crafters about 10mins after the event. There wasn't any visible security at that end of the mall. People were still trying to enter the mall as we left the back exit with the employees. It just felt very disorganized. There should have been police/security by every main entrance to alert people.

2

SpecterCody t1_j6drpd6 wrote

Replying to Brampire666 (#1,584,196)

I'm pretty sure it is never just ok for shoppers to go back into a mall after a shooting, suspect apprehended or not lol. Like do we expect the mall employees to just go back to business as usual after a traumatic event?

2

FirefoxAngel t1_j6duvit wrote

Replying to RedPandaActual (#1,580,393)

We don't know yet speaks volumes here the springfield area it was like the innocent guy that had the drive by happen on the 291 a couple years back everyone knew it was gang activities but wasn't said that till a few days after

2

4ak96 t1_j6dw0qs wrote

Quick question.

Isn’t the Holyoke Mall a gun free zone?

0

UniWheel t1_j6egyfx wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#1,580,257)

>And now seeing this just puts my fear and worry into reality.

We absolutely should not accept things like this happening.

But in terms of managing fear it's useful to keep two things in mind:

  1. Road fatalities in Massachusetts are twice as common as homicides; you're more likely to be killed on the way to the mall than once there
  2. Homicides in Massachusetts are less than half the national average

And those numbers are looking at homicides overall, which are dominated by situations where there is an existing and known (even if one-sided) conflict between the parties. A bystander being killed is shocking and horrifying, but it is also even less common - the rate of "random" homicides is really very very low in terms of the risks we face when going about our lives.

3

UniWheel t1_j6eij5j wrote

Replying to Dramatic-Purpose-103 (#1,588,103)

>This is why I don't go to the mall.

I won't deny that I felt lucky that I managed to get my twice a year desire to visit the Hampshire Mall out of my system a week previous.

But the reality is that there's more danger in driving to the mall than in being there - road fatalities in MA are twice as common as homicides, and the majority of homicide victims were (even if through no fault of their own) parties to an existing conflict - death as an uninvolved homicide victim like this is horrifying in its violence and randomness, but extremely rare in the scope of risks we face in our everyday lives.

We should absolutely not accept shootings or other homicides at any rate.

But driving carefully and defensively makes more practical difference than refusing to do ordinary things would.

6

intrcpt t1_j6epldv wrote

Replying to 4ak96 (#1,585,095)

Why don’t you walk us through your train of thought on this comment. Let’s see if we can extract its intended meaning or make some sense out of it.

2

DadagontheOlden t1_j6euibr wrote

Probably 2 teenagers with no father and only an OG on da blizzock teachin em how to huzzle nibbers

−3

Justinontheinternet t1_j6ezrg3 wrote

Replying to aaronroot (#1,572,735)

Seems like someone got shot and killed with a gun, according to the article at least. If the laws prevented these deaths, like we’re told they will. Would this have still happened? 🤔

Because we’re trading a constitutional amendment for the promise that gun laws will prevent tragedies such as these. We’ve given up much of our 2a rights but they haven’t held up their end of the bargain and stopped these tragedies from happening. Which means these laws don’t work or politicians are lying.(insert shocked face here)

Hell I expect someone to get on tv within the next 48 hours and talk about creating more gun laws because of this. Despite their current gun laws not working hence here we are commenting on an article about another mall shooting.

Even the Holyoke mall doesn’t allow weapons but what they are doing in reality is disarming law abiding people while allow this shooter easy and helpless targets many of which are our friends, family and neighbors.

“No Weapons Allowed The possession of any weapon, other than by law enforcement personnel, is prohibited.”

http://www.holyokemall.com/uploads/pdf/holyoke_behavior_code.pdf

1

FerretBusinessQueen t1_j6f240s wrote

This is so scary. I had a friend working there and they closed the gate. I worked at Holyoke in the early 00’s and I never could have imagine something like this happening. The gun violence sucks. The victim didn’t deserve this.

1

Justinontheinternet t1_j6f4vx9 wrote

Replying to 99BottlesOfBass (#1,578,389)

Let’s see if there’s any real world situations where someone who wasn’t carry, happened to be carrying due to constitutional carry. Same situation happened gunman opened fire only this time the outcome was different. A law abiding gun owner put him down because he lives in a state that doesn’t infringe on our constitutional freedoms. Don’t believe me? Here’s the link! https://www.indystar.com/story/news/crime/2022/07/18/elisjsha-dicken-identified-as-man-who-killed-greenwood-park-mall-suspsect/65375869007/

Well regulated- It means maintained. Like my balls are well regulated because I wash them everyday. Additionally curbing the 2a due to “public safety” was ruled unconstitutional vis the heller decision. So it would probably help you as a law abiding gun owner to get familiar with SCTOUS and the law of the land. MA could use this advice as well.

“ District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. It ruled that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms—unconnected with service in a militia—for traditionally lawful purposes such as self-defense within the home.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

1

Justinontheinternet t1_j6f6gbm wrote

Replying to NabNausicaan (#1,578,689)

Australia is literally the size of 25 million people where as in California there are 39 million people… see how that doesn’t compare country vs country? Just last Month buddy https://youtu.be/Izaq2XQixTA Dude when on a 6hour rampage and no one could stop him Because no one had guns.

Also this happened a hostage situation at a coffee shoop.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindt_Cafe_siege

I’m here to point out to you that if this gun ban worked these tragedies would not have happened in Australia. If the strict gun laws were more lac innocent people would have had a fighting chance. Ala https://www.indystar.com/story/news/crime/2022/07/18/elisjsha-dicken-identified-as-man-who-killed-greenwood-park-mall-suspsect/65375869007/

Just think about this the next time a talking head wants you to give up your rights for the sake of “public safety”. Think lockdowns eviction moratorium you know “safety”.

2

fadetoblack237 t1_j6f6vwj wrote

Replying to climb-high (#1,592,207)

I did talk therapy for about six months after the incident and I suppose some CBT despite my therapist not really calling it that. We talked a lot about how unlikely it was to happen again. Plus extensive dissection of my feelings on it and at like month two she encouraged me to go to the mall again. Instead of SSP I went to Natick. For the next few months I was going once a week and we talked about how it made me feel. At first I could only be there for 10 - 15 minutes but by the time I stopped going, I was fine spending the day there. I still won't go back to SSP because apparently shit happens there a lot and the memories are still to fresh but I can go to pretty much any other mall no problem now otherwise. I'm still a bit jumpy when there is shouting in stores or big bangs but overall I'm pretty much back to normal.

1

Justinontheinternet t1_j6f8lvw wrote

Replying to thedirtyfozzy84 (#1,592,491)

I’m touching sand rn #beachlife does anything move around in your brain and get you thinking hmm maybe what the government told me isn’t true? Which is why we’re discussing this in a post about a shooting that happened in mass, despite some of the toughest gun laws in America?

0

NabNausicaan t1_j6f9fen wrote

Replying to Justinontheinternet (#1,592,830)

In the first paragraph you said we can't compare the USA to Australia, then you went on to compare them in the following paragraphs.

The gun homicide rate per 100,000 residents (that's adjusted for the population difference) is over ten times greater in the United States. Looking at raw numbers, we have 330 million people and 38,390 deaths by firearm, of which 24,432 were by suicide. Australia has 26 million people, and had 229 gun deaths in 2019. Their gun deaths have continued to drop ever since the laws changed.

2

99BottlesOfBass t1_j6f9mzc wrote

Replying to Justinontheinternet (#1,592,569)

Wow. While I'm thrilled that you've mastered testicular hygiene, it's a really weird thing to flex on the internet 😆 Do you often talk about your balls with strangers?

Also, as is extremely obvious with the current SCOTUS, they're not exactly an infallible body of infinite wisdom and perfect rulings. So your argument from authority can fuck right off.

I'm aware of cases wherein a lawfully carrying person has stopped a shooter. Big deal. Doesn't mean that regulations such as requiring mental health screening and continuing education/qualification tests are unreasonable. It seems a lot of these shooters have purchased their guns legally, so it seems like a mental health/competency screening program would stop a lot of the shootings without a need for what amounts to vigilante justice.

Notice how I said "a lot of" shootings, and not "all shootings." I include this bit only because I know you're already mentally typing out "BuT iF yOu MaKe GuNs iLLeGaL OnLy CriMiNaLs WiLL gEt ThEm!!!!11!1" Again, I'm aware of this problem. Shootings exist in countries that have much stricter gun laws than the US - but on a scale of one every few years rather than one every day in the US. Ergo, gun regulation prevents most but not all shootings.

I don't know about you, but I'm getting really tired of seeing our flags flying at half mast.

1

Justinontheinternet t1_j6fcqzt wrote

Replying to NabNausicaan (#1,593,352)

You misunderstand 25 million is a much smaller number than 350 million. The sample size is not the same Which is why the population can’t be compared.

If your sentiment about Australia were true , I wouldn’t have any examples to cite, I just gave you multiple examples. Which immediately disproves your theory that a nationwide gun ban would eliminate gun violence as again. Again, I just provided examples not sure what more is needed. Oh yeah the gun laws you justify have enabled this tragedy to happen. Other more free states this is what happens when a shooter enters the mall. https://www.indystar.com/story/news/crime/2022/07/18/elisjsha-dicken-identified-as-man-who-killed-greenwood-park-mall-suspsect/65375869007/

Different law different outcomes. Seems like you prefer the shootings in which innocents are robbed of their 2a and thus killed because of it.

Would you trade away your 1st amendment so people didn’t get hurt by words anymore? Because that’s what you’re doing with your 2nd amendment. You’re likely a gun owner for the need for protection. If the government was doing a good job protecting you already (ala the laws you’re trying to justify) you wouldn’t need a gun nor would we be having this conversation as this shooting would not have happened according to your logic.

Also you have a gun in your house how is that everyone in your house isn’t dead? Especially if guns are so dangerous that you actively choose to own them?

You gotta show me these olympic level mental gymnastics I’m impressed.

1

Justinontheinternet t1_j6fewdr wrote

Replying to 99BottlesOfBass (#1,593,387)

Lmao that was genuinely funny. I use the Mr.Miyagi method wax on wax off. I appreciate you not speaking in absolutes. I’m tired of being blamed and treated like a criminal even more having my rights restricted every time some jackass decides to shoot up a mall. I’m tired of those same laws creating gun free zones in which over 77% of these shootings happen. Which create more loss of innocent life. Instead of these law abiding citizens being unable to put shooters down because of the same laws that are supposed to be “saving their lives”. I’m tired of cops being 15mins to an hour away when seconds count. I’m tired of the 911 operators who don’t know how to do their jobs. Most of all I’m tired of politicians restricting our rights in a way that directly leads to more dead innocent civilians under the guise of “the state will keep you safe with these new gun laws”.

I wrote this in another reply so this isn’t quite directed at you. But I’m curious what do you think about the quote below?

“The gun laws you justify have enabled this tragedy to happen. Other more free states this is what happens when a shooter enters the mall. https://www.indystar.com/story/news/crime/2022/07/18/elisjsha-dicken-identified-as-man-who-killed-greenwood-park-mall-suspsect/65375869007/

Different law different outcomes. Seems like you prefer the shootings in which innocents are robbed of their 2a and thus killed because of it.

Would you trade away your 1st amendment so people didn’t get hurt by words anymore? Because that’s what you’re doing with your 2nd amendment.”

0

warlocc_ t1_j6fo3uv wrote

Replying to NabNausicaan (#1,578,689)

>The current state-by-state laws make it way too easy to buy in one state and transport to another.

To be fair, that's generally already illegal, and multiple times over depending on who's doing it.

I'm not sure if standardization of firearms laws where some states get stricter and some looser, would actually improve things or not.

Automobile laws are largely similar across the board and they're still regularly violated, too.

1

99BottlesOfBass t1_j6ft9ic wrote

Replying to Justinontheinternet (#1,594,278)

Love the false equivalency at the end there. Really, words and guns are fundamentally the exact same things, so it makes total sense. If you think about it like a Galaxy Brain.

That's a cool example of a story where someone stopped a shooter with a personal handgun because of lax gun laws. Leaving aside the fact that you completely left out any rebuttal of the idea of mental health screening (which again would mitigate the absolute number of shootings) let's take a look at another, extremely high profile case. Or two.

In Uvalde Texas (Texas is a state with extremely lax gun laws in case you weren't aware) a shooter entered a school and murdered 19 kids and two teachers. He did that despite the fact that there were armed, armored, and highly trained police there within minutes. Then, all 350+ cops (legal gun owners/carriers all) refused to enter to confront one man with a gun in the name of OfFiCeR SaFeTy. Not only that, but those same cops prevented other people, including parents of the kids being killed, from entering the school to confront the shooter with their own personal guns.

Not sure if you're old enough to remember Columbine, in April 1999 - twenty-three years before Uvalde. These two guys (who I pause to editorialize might have been caught beforehand with mental health screening) killed several students. Cops and SWAT (again, all carrying guns) surrounded the school in about fifteen minutes. Despite hearing gunshots continue for another 30 minutes after that, they also thought it was ToO DaNgEroUs aNd ScArY for them with their MP5s and body armor to confront two literal teenagers. They made no effort to enter the school for almost three hours - not even when students sheltering in a classroom taped handmade signs to the windows begging for help for their wounded, bleeding teacher (the teacher died before help arrived)

The cops sat on their tacticool gear for two hours after hearing the last of the gunshots at Columbine. Two fucking hours in their head-to-toe body armor doing fuck all. The reason they didn't hear any more gunshots during those two hours was because the shooters had killed themselves. So the punchline here is cops let people bleed to death and sit in absolutely traumatizing fear for their lives for two fucking hours because they were too scared to confront. And here I remind you that this was twenty four years ago - they haven't improved their tactics in a quarter fucking century.

So why the absolute fuck should citizens be hoping to just happen to be in the presence of someone carrying a gun who might stop the shooter, rather than counting on mental health screening? Especially because those armed citizens often shoot innocent bystanders at the scene of a shooting just because of the chaos of it all.

Don't respond to this comment unless you're going to address the idea of mental health screening. Stop talking about GuN FrEe ZoNeS being the problem because I'm definitely not advocating for that solution, and I thought I made that pretty clear in my very first response to you.

1

Funny_Drummer_9794 t1_j6gfyk3 wrote

We have mandatory one year in jail unlicensed hand gun law but no one has ever served it

3

sporky211 t1_j6gxow9 wrote

Was there at the Target about 45 minutes before it was reported, I believe i left about 20-30 minutes before it broke out.

1

Justinontheinternet t1_j6hhaj4 wrote

Replying to 99BottlesOfBass (#1,597,182)

>"Love the false equivalency at the end there. Really, words and guns are fundamentally the exact same things, so it makes total sense. If you think about it like a Galaxy Brain."

-Interesting showing your bias by comparing two constitutional amendments and you call it false equivalency lol

​

>"That's a cool example of a story where someone stopped a shooter with a personal handgun because of lax gun laws."

- Thanks that state actually follows the SCOTUS Bruen decision and allows people to carry outside of their home unlike MA.

​

>Leaving aside the fact that you completely left out any rebuttal of the idea of mental health screening (which again would mitigate the absolute number of shootings) let's take a look at another, extremely high profile case. Or two."

- Thanks for inserting your opinion here. Do you have any proof that mental health screenings will mitigate the absolute number of shootings? Or this is textbook example of false equivalence?

​

>"In Uvalde Texas (Texas is a state with extremely lax gun laws in case you weren't aware) a shooter entered a school and murdered 19 kids and two teachers. He did that despite the fact that there were armed, armored, and highly trained police there within minutes. Then, all 350+ cops (legal gun owners/carriers all) refused to enter to confront one man with a gun in the name of OfFiCeR SaFeTy. Not only that, but those same cops prevented other people, including parents of the kids being killed, from entering the school to confront the shooter with their own personal guns.
>
>Not sure if you're old enough to remember Columbine, in April 1999 - twenty-three years before Uvalde. These two guys (who I pause to editorialize might have been caught beforehand with mental health screening) killed several students. Cops and SWAT (again, all carrying guns) surrounded the school in about fifteen minutes. Despite hearing gunshots continue for another 30 minutes after that, they also thought it was ToO DaNgEroUs aNd ScArY for them with their MP5s and body armor to confront two literal teenagers. They made no effort to enter the school for almost three hours - not even when students sheltering in a classroom taped handmade signs to the windows begging for help for their wounded, bleeding teacher (the teacher died before help arrived)
>
>The cops sat on their tacticool gear for two hours after hearing the last of the gunshots at Columbine. Two fucking hours in their head-to-toe body armor doing fuck all. The reason they didn't hear any more gunshots during those two hours was because the shooters had killed themselves. So the punchline here is cops let people bleed to death and sit in absolutely traumatizing fear for their lives for two fucking hours because they were too scared to confront. And here I remind you that this was twenty four years ago - they haven't improved their tactics in a quarter fucking century."

-Cool story, please quote where I said this was the most optimal solution and please quote where I mentioned the police at all (beyond generally being a bit too late when shit happens which is understandable they can't be everywhere).

​

>"So why the absolute fuck should citizens be hoping to just happen to be in the presence of someone carrying a gun who might stop the shooter, rather than counting on mental health screening? Especially because those armed citizens often shoot innocent bystanders at the scene of a shooting just because of the chaos of it all."

-Because I just provided you an example of what happens when an armed citizen encounters a mass shooting in a mall. Because Mass isn't compliant with the Bruen decision, citizens in these situations as we've witnessed today, die. Whereas in the example I provided everyone lived. Civilian Competition shooters often out shoot top performing military operators and police officers and even swat members.

You're really set on mental health screening. I don't have to screen you mental health because of the stupid shit you're saying right here but you're still allowed to exercise your 1st amendment right. Why should the 2nd amendment be any different? They are both amendments.

Regarding your mental health boner, I must say I agree to an extent. I feel healthcare in America has inflated costs with pretty shitty patient care. I feel like more gun owners would go for mental health screenings just on their own but due to new red flag laws if you seek help your guns can be taken away from you and you have to go to a judge and ask for them back who can hold them for years. So if I were to satisfy your mental health requirement I would agree with you and say mental illness is rife in America and frankly there should be no stigma, rights removed, or fiscal block to seek these services.

​

>"Don't respond to this comment unless you're going to address the idea of mental health screening. Stop talking about GuN FrEe ZoNeS being the problem because I'm definitely not advocating for that solution, and I thought I made that pretty clear in my very first response to you."

I addressed it for you, hope that leaves you satisfied my man.

0

Grregson t1_j6i5w4g wrote

Damn I really thought massachusetts could hopefully be an outlier for mass shootings but damn people are just angry with one another regardless of the state. Here’s hoping the rest of New England doesn’t follow suit..

0

mastercard003 t1_j6ixbnz wrote

Replying to FirefoxAngel (#1,618,264)

You mean good things happening? I hope there are good things happening everyday! And there probably are! Like you said i dont hear about it cause its not getting covered. Im sure there is a subreddit for good news too lol This article covers a mall that is 15 minutes away from my home that ive been to hundreds of times as a teen. I cant imagine if i was a teen now and i went there and heard gun shots??? Yeah so america is fucking crazy. I still stand by my comment. I love america. It has given me so much opportunity to thrive and chase my dreams, but the fear and paranoia in the back of my mind still lingers. I dont have children, but i cant imagine what parents have to worry about with their kids. Maybe I’ll just follow that good news subreddit….

1

aaronroot t1_j6jtohv wrote

Replying to Justinontheinternet (#1,591,659)

I don't expect you're looking for a conversation but I do wonder how it is that you expect incidents/deaths that were prevented from happening due to the existence of laws be accounted for. How can you account for something that never happened?

It seems more like you're noticing that laws don't prevent all crimes. "Do laws against murder prevent murder? Well how come we still have murders?"

1