A weird thought about the school shooter

Muslim.

But I've already begun to wonder if some comments from old posters are just there to put down the new posters.

Kinda like what DT does on Twitter.

is not a controversial topic around here.

Why are you suggesting that its purpose is to "stir things up" as if that's a bad thing?

From older members so why shouldn't newer members get a turn at the spoon? A low post count is just that. I lurked for several years before my first post and, as you can see, still have a relatively low count since actually joining. Stirring shit is a favorite past time of several on this board.

What would be the outcome tomorrow if 100,000 black men bought AR-15's in Florida?
Would the guns still be legal by Thursday?

A few Black Panthers showed up on the statehouse steps toting shotguns, and the Republicans were tripping over themselves to pass some serious gun control in short order.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulford_Act

school with AR-15s to 'protect' the students..?

It's called systemic oppression and happens in all states.

"Now, this was in Florida and the shooter is white."

I have found out that my own allies truly have no idea how bad racism and oppression are in this country.

I just mentioned it as part of the background. But you make a good point.

I had a QUESTION. And it's been pretty well answered by the responses above.

but I believe that "I have to wonder if things had gone differently if he were black" qualifies as a question. At least most of the posters here took it that way. And they gave polite responses.

Okay, since the issue is being pushed: "Would things have gone differently, in any of the fifty states, if the shooter had been black?"

See you around DU.

You called me out on another OP and I admitted you had a point and revised my comments. But I'm not clear on your comment just now. Are you giving me a or a ?

I don't recall that, unless you have an entirely different meaning for calling out than I do.

I'm done with this discussion. If you care to respond, I'll let you have the last word.

is he was probably treated differently than a P.O.C. would have been.

Are you ok with that? Does that not suggest a racist view of Florida?

The poster asked a perfectly logical question and rather than respond to the question, people are questioning the OP's motive in asking it.

This seems to happen an awful lot on DU where some - too many - supposedly progressive people immediately begin to circle the wagons the minute the issue of race is brought up.

Nothing wrong with the question - it was valid. But why was it necessary for the poster to specifically point out that it happened in Florida and the shooter was white. What assumption is being made?

Bullshit.

BS

Take this crap to someone who's interested in jumping through your bullshit hoops. I'm not wasting any more time with you. Take it somewhere else. I see right through you.

How many suspicious neighbors or family members call in to report a potentially dangerous individual? Is it once a week, or four times a day? How many people does the FBI have available to follow up on those reports?

or is not certifiable?

There's little they can do the way the laws are now. The 2nd Amendment trumps public safety and common sense. Unless he does something blatantly illegal with his weapon we're all out of luck. Now if he waves the gun around with police present and refuses to drop it, they'll shoot him. There ought to be a few options before that happens. Trump got skewed yesterday for suggesting we avoid due process in the interest of public safety.

I wonder if she'd be my Uncle?

Nice try. Not buying. No one else should, either.

Добро пожаловать в Du

I'm totally lost with the English, not to mention the Greek. Would you please explain your comments?

And two, my Dad used to say "Aquila non capit muscas" (from your signature line) now and then. You're only the second person I've ever heard that from.

so you're suspect to me. it's "welcome to DU" in Cyrillic. if you're here in good faith, sorry. I'm quite vexed lately and it shows.

'Aquila non capit muscas' was my reaction after 9/11 when we started a war (endless it turns out) to kill one man, OBL. I learned it during a short-lived fascination with Latin.

But thank you for responding. I appreciate that.

Yes, I'm here in good faith, I'm not a troll, and I think you would realize that if you read some of my other posts. And I can't increase my post count until I've been here and posted for a while.

Now, as to my post being divisive. If that's a reference to my mentioning Florida, I've already revised the OP to delete that reference. In hindsight, it had nothing to do with my "wondering what would have happened..." Now, if being divisive refers to my wondering if things would have worked out differently if the shooter had not been white, then I have to admit I don't understand how that is divisive. Given other posts I've seen here at DU, commenting on possible racial discrimination is okay.

As a couple of posters above mentioned, things probably would have been different afterwards if the shooter had not been white. They expressed their opinions, and that's all I was looking for.

Again, thank you for responding and cluing me in.

You know what's divisive? Racism. Racism is divisive.

Refusing to discuss racism is divisive.

Attacking people for trying to talk about racism is divisive.

But asking questions about racism is what we're SUPPOSED to do.

I am not refusing to discuss racism. I am suspicious of low-count posters with divisive posts on racism.

"What would everyone say if X was black (or white)?" is not a particularly insightful OP. I think we know the answers because racism and bias is endemic to America.

Regardless, I already apologized.

But if you don't think it's insightful enough, why not just ignore it instead of questioning the motives of the OP?

The fact that a question may make some people uncomfortable doesn't mean it's divisive - but it does suggest that it is very insightful.

I explained why I didn't ignore it. I'm sorry if that's not good enough for you, or you feel that divisive OPs from low-count posters aren't an issue in this era of trolls and sock puppets. I do.

I have seen variants of this OP countless times on DU. Its a knee-jerk hypothetical with only 1 answer, and its the same one every time. We are all aware that hypocrisy abounds in America, and conservatives are blind to their bias.

To state the contrary, i.e. "it would be treated just the same" is to invite condemnation.

This is all about so-called progressives adopting the right ring racist approach of blaming people who raise the issue of racism for being "divisive."

I don't care if someone has one post to their name. They have every right to raise a question about racism and not be accused of being "divisive." The fact that you seem more concerned about the supposed supposed "divisiveness" of a question about racism than you are about the racism being questioned speaks volumes.

But you bring up a point: low count posters bringing up divisive subjects could be perceived as trolls.

Now, bear with me for a moment. A low count poster is probably someone who is fairly new at DU. A "divisive" subject could be interpreted as a subject that people feel very strongly about one way or the other. I still haven't seen a definition of what "divisive" means here, even though I've asked more than once.

Okay, so imagine a brand-new member of a legislative body (city, county, state, or federal). He or she takes a seat and proceeds to do nothing but listen and vote for the first year; he or she introduces no new bills because he or she is new and is afraid longer-standing members will think he or she is a troll, especially if the subject can be perceived by a few as "controversial." How would that lawmaker be perceived by constituents and peers?

I'm not a lawmaker (thank heavens), but if I join a group like this, that covers a subject I feel very strongly about (a political party I support, in the nation I have chosen to live in), I will participate. And if a handful of people choose to believe I'm a troll... well, the First Amendment protects their right to do so just like it protects my right to ask questions and express my opinion.

Point being, we all start with one post and go from there. And I'll bet that members here do not go back thru years of archives to find out if a "variant" of their question has been asked or addressed previously, or if it's been judged "insightful" or not. Any given day, I see essentially the same OP subject posted several times by different posters, so I have to believe doing so is not a violation of the terms of use.

Now, can we please move on?????

Russia 1, DU 0. Look at the result of the OP rather than the unknown intent.

Some are better than others at "sowing".

DU might as well fold.

The fact that a question makes YOU uncomfortable doesn't make it divisive. And the fact that you think a question about racism is divisive AND you feel entitled to tell a person on a political message board whether they should or should not raise it says far more about you than it does about either the question or the person who asked it.

My fundamental concern at the moment is that the event of two weeks ago will most likely happen again in a mere eight to twelve more weeks.

The shooter would be dead, dead, dead!!!! The trumppets would be calling for the lynching of every AA man, woman and CHILD. This is ameriKKKa, you know. Always has been ameriKKKa and will take generations, again, to take the KKK out of America, if possible. Which I seriously doubt. America has been soiled, sullied and shit wipe stained by the POS CALLED potus, his administration, the racists in Congress who are legion and his deplorables possibly beyond any redemption.

Nothing wrong with your question. It is valid.

You can direct your responses to Grumpyduck.

I'm not sure why the OP is being attacked for asking this question or why their post count matters. Obviously, they hit a little too close to home for certain folk who think that a progressive Democratic discussion board is not the place for discussing race in America. Go figure.

Anyway, welcome to DU, Grumpyduck.

WOW!!!!!

I had no idea (what I thought was) a simple question would generate so much... ummm... discord. Then again, I haven't been at DU long enough to notice the divisiveness mentioned above. I've worked with organizations where people couldn't disagree without taking it personally, and I always thought it was a shame... not to mention being an unpleasant place to work.

But again, thank you to those of you who offered an opinion as to my "wondering about" in the OP.

The underlying issue is that law enforcement has other things to do than follow up on reports like the ones you're referring to. I doubt they have any system to log the reports so they can notice that there are lots of them on one person. It seems as though we only know of those reports from the people who originally filed them, not from the agencies that got them.

Also, the different agencies don't cooperate with each other on these things.

It goes back in the end to the all too easy availability of guns.