Uvalde Texas Killing

[rooster]

Not to sidetrack things, but in my lock out/tag out training, Jamil would have to have his lock/tag on the equipment and verify it is in safe condition himself. You can lock it out too, but as the person working on the equipment he “must“ have his on it.

Scada systems make it so that the work performer doesn’t have a physical lock on the system. Systems can be remotely energized if someone fails to follow standard practices, safeguards ect.

 

[dvd1955]

Scada systems make it so that the work performer doesn’t have a physical lock on the system. Systems can be remotely energized if someone fails to follow standard practices, safeguards ect.

To me, that sounds similar to handing someone a gun and telling them, “it's not loaded, you don't need to check it.“ If I'm going to work on equipment, I want to have my lock keeping it from operating, just like I want to check a gun when it's handed to me.

 

[actaeon277]

Why all the talk of Sueing the gun manufacturers but none of sueing the cowards who sat outside and did nothing.

I’d argue that by stopping parents and bystanders, some of whom we now know were armed, that the state did indeed actively deprive those children of life and liberty.

The Disturbing Reason the Uvalde Police Won’t Be Held Accountable

Thanks to an old Supreme Court case, Uvalde parents will have a hard time convincing courts to hold police liable for failing to protect their kids.

www.thenation.com

Partially, cause guess who's got more money.
But, more importantly, to bankrupt the gun industry, like they previously tried to do.

 

[thompal]

Or carry a radio. I believe I heard he doesn’t even carry a radio, so he was WAAAAAYYYYY outside the loop while failing hard at leadership.

I'm not going to give him a pass for that. Does he expect us to believe that none of the cops around him mentioned the 911 calls to him?

 

[thompal]

The gov of Texas thing didn't work out for him. He's likely setting up to "save us" from Joe or Kamala or Pete.


.

The Dems sure don't have much of a bench!

 

[churchmouse]

Well said and AMEN

In this context I agree.

 

[jamil]

Not to sidetrack things, but in my lock out/tag out training, Jamil would have to have his lock/tag on the equipment and verify it is in safe condition himself. You can lock it out too, but as the person working on the equipment he “must“ have his on it.

My screen saver comes on after 20 minutes of inactivity and requires a password to unlock it. In my line of work that's my lock/tag. But I mostly work from home so it's largely irrelevant most of the time.

 

[jamil]

In the interest of fairness here is McConaughey's full quote.

McConaughey argued "responsible gun owners are fed up by the Second Amendment being abused and hijacked by some deranged individuals" and encouraged "both sides see above the political problem at hand."

I would say to him that responsible gun owners are fed up with politicians and the media abusing our 2nd Amendment rights by hijacking the aftermath of these evil acts committed by some deranged individual as an excuse to take away our rights and demonize us for something we did not do.

That is what we are fed up with Matthew.

There are no further infringements necessary. Enforce the laws that exist. It's not my fault that people can't raise decent human beings. So I should not have my rights abused just so that other people have a false sense of security. The fact that so many people CAN'T raise decent human beings is a very good reason to be an armed citizen.

 

[jamil]

Scada systems make it so that the work performer doesn’t have a physical lock on the system. Systems can be remotely energized if someone fails to follow standard practices, safeguards ect.

I would hate to have my screen saver activated remotely. That would just be creepy.

 

[KG1]

There are no further infringements necessary. Enforce the laws that exist. It's not my fault that people can't raise decent human beings. So I should not have my rights abused just so that other people have a false sense of security. The fact that so many people CAN'T raise decent human beings is a very good reason to be an armed citizen.

Right there in McConoughey's quote he recognized that the 2nd Amendment is being abused and hijacked by some deranged individuals. So should the answer be that we as responsible gun owners should have to pay the price and let them gut our rights?

They think being a responsible gun owner means that we should be willing to compromise our rights and stand aside.

Absolutely NOT. Figure out another way. Do all that you can stopping short of infringing on our rights as responsible gun owners.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Right there in McConoughey's quote he recognized that the 2nd Amendment is being abused and hijacked by some deranged individuals. So should the answer be that we as responsible gun owners should have to pay the price and let them gut our rights?

They think being a responsible gun owner means that we should be willing to compromise our rights and stand aside.

Absolutely NOT. Figure out another way. Do all that you can stopping short of infringing on our rights as responsible gun owners.

I did see something on the news this morning that said an AWB and universal background checks were off the table for now. The focus of any new legislation was going to be on mental health, "improved" background checks (perhaps better info sharing?) and increasing school security (as it should be). I don't have a link. It was on NBC early news. Hopefully it's true.

 

[drillsgt]

I did see something on the news this morning that said an AWB and universal background checks were off the table for now. The focus of any new legislation was going to be on mental health, "improved" background checks (perhaps better info sharing?) and increasing school security (as it should be). I don't have a link. It was on NBC early news. Hopefully it's true.

I'm not sure what they mean when they keep saying 'expanded background checks'?

 

[KLB]

I'm not sure what they mean when they keep saying 'expanded background checks'?

Universal

 

[DoggyDaddy]

I'm not sure what they mean when they keep saying 'expanded background checks'?

I saw it mentioned that juvenile records could be reported to NICS if they had felonies. Not sure about what else they meant.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Universal

No.

 

[KG1]

I did see something on the news this morning that said an AWB and universal background checks were off the table for now. The focus of any new legislation was going to be on mental health, "improved" background checks (perhaps better info sharing?) and increasing school security (as it should be). I don't have a link. It was on NBC early news. Hopefully it's true.

Yeah, I've been seeing that too. That's what I've been saying. Do everything you can without responsible gun owner's rights being infringed upon. We should not have to compromise our rights because we are exercising them responsibly and not abusing them like some deranged individuals have therefore, we should not have to pay the penalty. That's not how it should work.

Of course, there is no denying that it's horrible those children and teachers have fallen at the hands of an evil act and my heart aches for their souls, but I will not bow to pressure and give in to those who wish to hoist that terrible tragedy upon my shoulders.

They have no right to do that.

 

[KG1]

I saw it mentioned that juvenile records could be reported to NICS if they had felonies. Not sure about what else they meant.

This is the way I understood the new expanded NICS proposal to mean as well. Not universal just expanded to include that.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Here's a "fuller" quote from McConaughey that cover all of the policy he references. Some are non-starters, hard "no", but several are, or could be, things that most of us have been pushing for years.

Look, we heard from — we heard from so many people, all right? Families of the deceased — mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers. Texas Rangers, hunters, Border Patrol, and responsible gun owners who won’t give up their Second Amendment right to bear arms. And you know what they all said? “We want secure and safe schools, and we want gun laws that won’t make it so easy for the bad guys to get these damn guns.”

So, we know what’s on the table. We need to invest in mental healthcare. We need safer schools. We need to restrain sensationalized media coverage. We need to restore our family values. We need to restore our American values. And we need responsible gun ownership — responsible gun ownership.

We need background checks. We need to raise the minimum age to purchase an AR-15 rifle to 21. We need a waiting period for those rifles. We need red-flag laws and consequences for those who abuse them.

Mental health? Safer schools? (Tim Scott has a bill from almost 2 years ago that Schumer will not give the time of day - school and police best practices that would have covered ALL of the incompetent bunglings in Ulvalde). Media self-restrain in making these monsters "famous"? IMO, there is a gruesome part of this that these losers want their names on the "high score leaders board." And, the more intense the coverage, the more copy-cats in the immediate future.

Background checks? If he's talking the useless "universal" crap, then NOPE. If he's talking about improving the records to make sure those that have records making them prohibited are accurate, then YUP. Prosecuting more than 0.1-0.2% of the "bad guys" who lie on the 4473 and attempt to purchase at an FFL? YUP. He didn't mention straw purchasers who directly buy guns for violent felons... YUP. He also didn't mention Federal prosecution of violent felons with gun possession charges... YUP.

The rest is NOPE... BUT, we do need to identify the things that we can all agree on and put the Progressive anti-gunners on the back foot.

All (or almost all) of us here know there are some things above that WOULD make a difference in these school shootings AND general shootings (like Chicago) and that it has been the Pelosi's, Schumer's and Biden's who have blocked them.

 

[KLB]

Media self-restrain in making these monsters "famous"? IMO, there is a gruesome part of this that these losers want their names on the "high score leaders board." And, the more intense the coverage, the more copy-cats.

This is a huge part of the issue. The more media coverage has grown, the more of these we have had.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

This is a huge part of the issue. The more media coverage has grown, the more of these we have had.

Yup, our "guys and gals" should be firing back at the Jane Pauleys of the world....

"Jane, it's time for you and the news media to own up to your part in creating these monsters. Would you pledge here, today, now to supporting the 'No Notoriety' campaign to save lives?"

https://nonotoriety.com/

ETA: "Do you pledge to be RESPONSIBLE JOURNALISTS in exercising your First Amendment rights? To avoid the documented 'contagion effect'?"