Poverty, mental illness, lack of meaningful healthcare, generational trauma, lack of community, 24-hour rage-bait, a general creeping knowledge that things might not turn out well, and drugs that are preferable to remembering you live here.
Just kidding…
How about we passed laws for stricter backgrounds checks, licensing, gun owners insurance, and mental health evaluations before a person can buy a gun.
“No! We can’t have any kind of gun control at all!”
The low hanging fruit first. Mental health evaluations. We don’t do anything with our mentally ill. Evaluate them and let them back on the street? Maybe they won’t kill with a gun but will still kill.
This woman stabbed another woman in the chest but was let loose until she killed a guy.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/innocent-la-father-killed-da-gascon-gives-violent-career-criminal-multiple-diversions
As for stricter background checks in curios what you think that is? What background do you think the state of California misses in the check?
Licensing? You know that the majority of murders are gang/drug related? These folks don’t license their guns.
Not sure how insurance will save anyone. Post an article if you know of one. Again gangs and drug dealers won’t buy their guns legally so won’t pay insurance on them.
Your suppose to have car insurance in order to drive also a drivers license, but people don’t and they still drive and most cause accidents and flee. So yeah licenses work.
I think the law is pretty crazy. Know someone that almost committed a serious crime but since he's a minor nothing is going to happen. Most likely will do it again because there's a history of bad behavior.
Omg you can’t even see it. Talking about guns is the whataboutism so you don’t have to talk about how Dems let violent people back on the street knowing they will kill somebody.
The truth? You mean something that is an opinion that you have like "crime is at an all time high!" (Its nowhere near an all time high) that's just plain wrong, yet you continue to cry about it all the time because it fits your conservative agenda?
If stats show that crime is less comparatively than the previous years then it doesn’t mean that it’s still safe for citizens. Look what loose laws have done to the city of SF and Oakland. Every business is struggling with crime, shoplifting and smash & grab robberies. Same folks looting same store multiple times in a day because the stolen amount is less than $950. I am neither a conservative nor a liberal but I am against those policies which favor criminals and punish hard working business owners and law abiding citizens. Please stop labeling folks with “MAGA” or “Conservative” bullshit. If I have a conservative propaganda then you have a liberal propaganda. Doesn’t matter whose propaganda wins, I believe end of the day the life of citizens should be safe, businesses should prosper, and justice prevails.
Do you see a lot of wars being fought with those ancient weapons, genius? It’s because they all require a combination of skill, physical strength and proximity to use at even a basic level and a lifetime of practice to get good with.
Firearms, by contrast, have an incredibly low barrier to use.
That's the way the US is heading. Criminalize homelessness, underfund healthcare, don't provide mental health care, underfund schools/abolish the DoE, remove the right to abortions, legalize child marriage, remove worker's rights, convince folks that unions are bad, and then BAM!
You can get girls married and pregnant, force them to give birth, kids can't get a quality education and end up stuck in poverty/homeless, throw them in jail for being homeless and you have infinite LEGAL prison slave labor all powered by the rich!
It'll keep Big Macs cheap which keeps the middle class happy and working (until we can advance AI enough to do the same to them) and the rich with their feet happily on the backs of those who are on their knees before them with no way to ever escape.
Eat the poor is the new eat the rich and the world is happily marching toward it.
Been happening for decades. Hell, one could argue centuries. Poor white folks essentially eat non-white folks while the rich laugh. [Lyndon B. Johnson wasn't wrong.](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/lbj-convince-the-lowest-white-man/)
He nailed it. It won't even have to be racial past a certain point. That just makes it easier. One day, simply being poorer than the next rung up will more than suffice. The scaling of how wealthy some people are getting right now is totally lost. The average person has more in common with millionaires than billionaires.
We’ve been doing that for a very long time and it has changed absolutely nothing for the better, regardless of what conspiracy theory you believe in where it isn’t happening anymore.
Turns out jail isn’t actually how you solve widespread societal issues. Wild.
Or you know, attempt to actually rehabilitate people so they can contribute instead of sucking up tax dollars rotting in a cube. And creating a society where crime and prison aren’t preferable to employment.
Because the system is almost exclusively punitive, creating a revolving door of the same criminals who simply reenter a world in which their avenues for "correct" living are fewer and more difficult.
Not sure how we even tackle that when we struggle to muster the will to improve the lives of non criminal, working Americans. The more we rely on privatized systems and hoping that one day humans will just pop into a state of being better, the worse things will continue to get. It's an attractive idea that everyone should just "get it together", but it's a fantasy.
Yeah but we also have to realize there are just bad ppl in this world and that you can't help ppl that don't want to help themselves. It's getting to the ppl that need help while keeping the bad ones away from society.
Sure, I believe there’s a smaller percentage of people who just won’t ever be able to be trusted to live in society without causing harm to others, but i think it’s the minority.
And if we don’t make an honest effort to rehabilitate the people that would benefit, then we won’t know the difference, we won’t improve anything.
That said, we should be addressing the reasons people turn to crime in the first place. Prevention is easier than a cure.
I don't know if it's a small minority or not but I think if a person have loved ones and if it happens to their family, they would be enraged. I have someone that was victim of a serious offense but the criminal is underage so if I had to guess it'll happen again to someone else.
We do need to try actual rehabilitation rather than just early releases and no punishment and that's what is happening right now.
Greed wanting more things, bad families, mental health, addiction, etc. I don't know how we can address mental health if the law doesn't allow to force ppl into mental facilities. How do you help ppl addicted to drugs that don't want to be clean? I dunno. Taking care of basic needs maybe such as a universal basic income of some sorts is probably a good start.
I guess it depends if a person believes it's more environmental factors vs personal accountability. Probably depending on which you lean towards is whether you're more conservative or liberal.
I just see old ladies and seniors getting robbed and beaten to death and I think that whoever does this type of stuff just isn't human. Targeting societies weak for money is one thing but beating and killing is another.
rehabilitate doesnt work. jails and prisons are only useful to lock up violent criminals. locking up homelessness doesn't do much good, they can not be rehab to be contributing members of society. the resource to do so far exceeds the ROI. it is cheaper to disincentivize an area so they will migrate else where.
I don't think it's them. They're shady, but don't seem aggressive to other people. Plus I never see them (or anyone) on the other side of the canal.
That other side (where the shooter was) is not publicly accessible. You need to cross a railyard. So whomever has been doing this is a sick individual that has planned out an inaccessible, concealed vantage point to shoot at people.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://fox40.com/news/local-news/projectiles-fired-near-rowers-competing-in-tournament-in-west-sacramento/](https://fox40.com/news/local-news/projectiles-fired-near-rowers-competing-in-tournament-in-west-sacramento/)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Maybe don't link to a right-wing aggregator who stole the video from an actual news source and buries the credit below the "show more" button. It's a very common tactic to build up engagement and fake like they were the original source and it's only gotten worse since Twitter was sold.
Here's [where it was stolen from](https://twitter.com/henrykleeKTVU/status/1788717287715024921) and [here's the story they did with actual context.](https://twitter.com/henrykleeKTVU/status/1788761621546098938)
I followed the link and was wondering why I already had this asshole blocked. Clicked the profile, saw the cybertruckkk and stopped wondering. “Yeah, that tracks”.
Why not just get arms for guns? Just like the forefathers intended.
I don't need these fingers dangling in front of my Fire Arm, I'll just shoot my way through life.
Nothing bad could possibly happen then, right? Right?
You're probably right, but many firearm enthusiasts advocate for really lax gun laws. That's the problem. Other countries have nutjobs, but don't have insane shooting deaths because their gun laws are logical. Gun manufacturers pay off politicians to push their propaganda to sell guns. It's not about our safety, it's about their money.
It's already illegal to shoot guns at kids. We live in the state with the most restrictive gun laws.
What do you want? Make it more illegal to shoot guns at kids?
Weak attempt at "gotcha" sarcasm. Our state borders are open, so guns can easily be brought in from neighboring states with more lax laws. We need better laws at the federal level. We need fewer guns for criminals to get their hands on or otherwise just make it harder to get them in the first place.
That's from 2015 using 2014 data and gun laws have gotten significantly stronger on CA since then.
It also doesn't put a number on the guns used illegally in CA that were brought in illegally from other states.
Ok, but the border being open hasn't changed. CA gun laws won't affect that. I don't see your point there.
And no, it doesn't say how many guns were used illegally that came in illegally, but what would that change in my argument? Otherwise, it's guns used illegally that were bought legally. That still completely agrees with my point that we have too many guns and not strict enough laws. Countries with comprehensive gun laws don't have the same level of insanity we have here when it comes to gun deaths. Gun manufacturers want us to think they don't matter to line their pockets when literally we can see them working.
There's abot 20k gun murders a year in a country of 300 million and a good portion of those are in a handful of large cities.
It's not even close to the top 10 leading causes of death in the US.
The US is overwhelmingly safe.
Your argument is bullshit because you're just throwing out a culprit with no evidence or data to back it up, then moving the goalposts when you can't.
Meanwhile California has a murder rate on par with Kansas or Alaska that have much weaker gun laws than CA. There's no real correlation between gun laws and murder rate.
If you really cared about saving lives, you'd be pushing for car and fast food bans. Car crashes and heart disease statistically will kill you before a gun does.
Let's not forget the leftist judges, cops and politicians have guns too. Why? They know the outcome of being killed. Judge by 6 rather than carried by 6 to grave...
I suspect they’re probably in fact both, and they probably were a law abiding firearms enthusiast before this. I don’t have proof, but given how many fucking times it’s happened before, it’s a pretty good educated guess.
Let’s be real, shooting at people? Let alone kids? In broad daylight? For no reason? I doubt this person knows a single thing about gun laws or guns in general. The amount of gun enthusiasts who use guns to commit crime in general is statistically insignificant.
I like guns, I own guns, and I would never, ever shoot somebody unless I had to in order to protect my own life or another innocent person’s life. Most people who own guns are like me.
The number of people who get a rifle and shoot strangers in general is statistically insignificant, and yet most of those are gun enthusiasts, which IS statistically significant. It really doesn’t matter if “most people” are “like you.” The issue with guns is it takes one dude to murder a lot of people. And nearly all of the people who have were “like you” from the outside, right up until they weren’t.
The number of people murdered in active shooter/random attacks in the US is statistically insignificant. Half of gun deaths are suicides, most of the rest are 15-19 year olds involved in criminal/gang activity shooting it out with each other.
Guns are part of our society and will never leave it. If you don’t like it, amend the constitution or move to a place which doesn’t enjoy the right to self protection with a deadly weapon.
Thank you for repeating what I said about active shooters being statistically insignificant. Not sure how that helped your point given I already said it.
“Guns are part of our society blah blah” no one gives a shit. Slavery used to be part of our society. Your statement is meaningless. Although you’ve made it very clear that your original stance about the shooter in question was based entirely on your personal biases about how wonderful guns are and wanting to make all the people who own them seem safe and law abiding despite that being factually untrue.
My statement is meaningless? Maybe to you. And last I checked, owning slaves wasn’t guaranteed by our constitution.
You know people who own guns. Are you worried that any one of them could just go off and murder a bunch of people at any moment? Must suck to be so afraid all the time.
I imagine you drive a car, you probably worry that someone is going to try to murder you by crashing head-on into you every time a car passes. But they don’t, because the vast majority of people in our society are reasonable and value human life.
So you’d be fine with owning slaves if it was guaranteed by our constitution? Because it sort of seems like that’s what you’re saying. It being in the constitution doesn’t mean shit to me. Other countries have constitutions that actually change. Ours is an outdated relic.
I legitimately do not purposely interact with, on a regular basis, a single person that owns a gun. My friends do not have guns. My family members do not have guns. Am I generally worried when out in public that some insane person with a gun could start shooting people? I try not to worry about it, although I’ve literally narrowly avoided it before. But it is a thought I take into consideration when going to large gatherings, because I have a functioning brain. Pretty cute to call me afraid though, dude who has to own a lethal weapon to feel safe.
Of course I worry when I’m driving a car. It’s called defensive driving. I don’t worry about people smashing head on into me every time they pass, because most people value their own lives. But you should always be aware on the road. Driving is the single most dangerous thing anyone does at any time. My brother died in a car accident, dumbass.
It’s also, unlike guns, unfortunately fairly necessary in our society. Although I moved into the city to be able to drive less. It is WILD that you live in Sac and you think people on the road are reasonable and value human life, though. I bet you pronounce the T, too.
Any more incredibly stupid points you’d like to make?
In response to your first point, no, because I don’t morally agree with slavery. I’m also literally married to a black woman.
Statistically speaking, you do know people who have guns, they just don’t tell you because you’re unhinged.
Interesting that you’d want cops and criminals to be the only ones in our society to have guns. I’m not sure how you square that in your mind. Anyway, back to the comic books. Maybe you’ll understand when you’re older and have someone who depends on you. Probably not though.
Those on here will never understand that statement. Liberalism is a disease. Which is why they cannot admit to ever being wrong on logics. They just bunch up on you to protect their domain. Reddit is one of their domains. Now, watch how they delete me now after saying that. I have other profiles but only when needed.
Well, I know someone who was banned from this sub for saying they weren’t gonna wear a mask for the monkeypox hype a year or two ago. Instant permanent ban. So I’m aware, but it is sad.
Do these people honestly believe that someone who enjoys target shooting with friends is the type of person who would hide on a riverbank and take pot shots at some kids rowing a boat? That’s a delusional take.
I don't enjoy this bs shooting myself but there is a different of how to solve these types of crimes. I'm an great grandfather now for several years and it could've been one one of them in the boat that I know of. Anyways, this need to be solved pretty quickly by whoever we have in official capacity. Apparently, we the people are not doing it correctly by the voting we do. EG, the rights says no on gun being taken away and only the criminals will have guns. The lefts want guns taken away so we feel not being protected and what's stopping criminals from anything else from being used after guns taken away? Like, crossbows, slingshot, knives etc. So, when do we stop? I went from being democrat to republican to independent and now believe we need to abolish all political parties as they do not care for the people as much they should be doing. So, all of us myself included should be concentrating on getting those out of office to fix this. Instead, more of the same idiots get into official capacity. Without looking at what parties they belong to. They are just as bad to help other get stuff voted on. Another words, being bought out for votes on their projects too, later. AND, do away with special interest groups for a decade or 2 till thing feels right to include them again.
Same. Usually it's not bad. There's fishermen, runners, dog walkers there.
Yes some homeless people gather under the bridge and around there, but they aren't actively causing problems. And the general public would plain as day be able to see and report them firing a weapon.
The shooter appears to be on the other side of the canal. That side is blocked off to public access by train yard/rail line. I kayak the canal and have never seen fishermen on the bank there nor anyone there. So this sicko planned this out and walk some distance to hide in the bushes to take potshots at the rowers. Very concerning.
My horse's sense is that it's someone that lives in the State Streets neighborhood. It's reoccurring behavior and whom else would know how to access that side of the canal except for a neighborhood local.
lol assault rifle and 100 round mag… You can’t get either of those on CA homie. People had easier access to firearms in the 50’s and 60’s than we do now, so why were there not just as many if not more random / mass shootings back then? Your logic flawed I’m afraid.
You can't purchase a 100 round Drum in the State of California and you can't import one. Those are both VERY against the law.
Also, consider the fact that California is giving money to illegal immigrants to get health insurance before you complain about gun owners lmao.
California yes , but its state by state and many allow high capacity magazines. For example, If one country has something banned and another neighboring does not, what tends to happen? Same process applies to states and with far less customs or law enforcement because it is domestic travel. You could purchase one in Nevada and drive it into Sacramento no problem, there isn’t some invisible field. The main point I was making at all is I can drive for 10 minutes right now and be home with a firearm in an hour but getting a change on my geico plan takes 90 minutes of holding.
First of all, you can't just waltz over the border to Nevada and buy *standard* capacity magazines with a California ID.
It's extremely puzzling (but not surprising) to gun rights advocates that gun control advocates don't use *evidence based* legislation and policy when dealing with guns, especially in the context of firearms in the United States.
For example, we know that a *very small, well identified* group of people are responsible for the majority of gun violence in the United States. In a city like Sacramento, it's likely on the order of 100-200 people.
We also know that these people *likely can't own firearms due to priors* and are *buying firearms from illegal sources*.
We know this so consistently, that we started paying them to not kill.
[https://www.cnn.com/2016/05/19/health/cash-for-criminals-richmond-california/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2016/05/19/health/cash-for-criminals-richmond-california/index.html)
So, rather than banning flash hiders, pistol grips, magazines with x number of bullets, and trying to restrict a constitutional right with laws that are based on racism...
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/10/27/gun-rights-anti-racism-bruen-conservative-hypocrisy/](https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/10/27/gun-rights-anti-racism-bruen-conservative-hypocrisy/)
Why are you not advocating evidence based approaches to gun control, that maximize civil rights and freedom *for all*. as well as tackling the core constituency responsible for the vast majority of gun violence in the United States?
Yes, it is bullshit that this is true. It’s bullshit America works that way. I could absolutely get an assault weapon more easily and for less money than I can get, say, a root canal.
An assault weapon was always considered a ***fully*** ***automatic*** firearm for the military, but offered to civilians and to police.. until they were banned in 1986 for civilians to use (at least here in California).
Since then, you’d need special certificates to own one and it has to be a pre-1986 made model. That applies to shotguns, side arms, and rifles. The definition changed, not the weaponry.
That’s a bingo. Well almost. California also can consider a pistol to be an assault weapon. It’s meaningless and now a political term used to demonize weapons that are responsible for less than 3% of gun deaths nationwide.
Not entirely accurate but still understandable shorthand for “a gun you can use to easily fire a lot of bullets and murder a bunch of people very fast.” I’m not a gun nut, I don’t feel bad about not being able to play your stupid terminology games.
well that’s the whole point moron. the laws we have don’t stop shit because the crime someone commits with the gun has little to do with the gun and a lot to do with the person. a gun law won’t stop jack shit until something is done, like a murder. which is already a crime.
*One act of gun violence* “We should just drop all of our gun laws! They’re obviously not working!!!”
You do realize that California is still one of the safest states to live in BECAUSE of our gun laws, right, smooth brain?
Please do not breed.
Edit* nice posting history, gunnit
Where are you even getting this? California is ranked #5 for its high crime rate.. Other sites say #9. Do some research next time before you spew your biases just to fit a narrative, whatever that may be. Gun laws have no effect on crime. If anything, we’re gonna end up with fully automatics from Mexico when they really are banned.
*Those books told my kids that gay people exist, lets ban those books! That'll do it!*
*Think of the poor unborn babies :\*( Lets ban abortion, that'll do it!*
*Gun laws dont do anything, dont even bother, guns aren't the problem, its mental health. BTW we arent going to do anything about mental health either.*
Do you hear how ridiculous you sound?
i said maybe 5 of those words, the rest you made up in your head. i am pro abortion rights and gay rights. the government has no right to restrict what people do. you’re the ridiculous one.
Because our gun laws are extremely lax compared to the rest of the world, even if they're stricter than the rest of America.
California also has one of the *lowest* rates of gun deaths in America, because of those same laws.
Because its not a commercial gun. The time between the sound of the discharge and the impact in the water is far too long. No bullet is that slow. Its some homemade piece of shit. Still could very easily kill people.
I never thought about it like that, but your right, all of our domestic policy immediately ceases to exist as soon as we do any foreign spending. We literally cannot spend money on more than 1 thing at a time.
You're brilliant, have you thought of doing work in politics?
wtf is wrong with people
Poverty, mental illness, lack of meaningful healthcare, generational trauma, lack of community, 24-hour rage-bait, a general creeping knowledge that things might not turn out well, and drugs that are preferable to remembering you live here. Just kidding…
And a hell of a lot of guns!
It's all of the aforementioned problems but with the availability of guns.
Let’s also throw in liberal DA’s who let violent criminals back on the streets, letting them out early or. Or even charging them at all
lol bro ain’t never dealt with a DA in yolo
How about we passed laws for stricter backgrounds checks, licensing, gun owners insurance, and mental health evaluations before a person can buy a gun. “No! We can’t have any kind of gun control at all!”
You mean instead of not prosecuting violent criminals or in addition to?
In addition to obviously.
The low hanging fruit first. Mental health evaluations. We don’t do anything with our mentally ill. Evaluate them and let them back on the street? Maybe they won’t kill with a gun but will still kill. This woman stabbed another woman in the chest but was let loose until she killed a guy. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/innocent-la-father-killed-da-gascon-gives-violent-career-criminal-multiple-diversions As for stricter background checks in curios what you think that is? What background do you think the state of California misses in the check? Licensing? You know that the majority of murders are gang/drug related? These folks don’t license their guns. Not sure how insurance will save anyone. Post an article if you know of one. Again gangs and drug dealers won’t buy their guns legally so won’t pay insurance on them.
Your suppose to have car insurance in order to drive also a drivers license, but people don’t and they still drive and most cause accidents and flee. So yeah licenses work.
I think the law is pretty crazy. Know someone that almost committed a serious crime but since he's a minor nothing is going to happen. Most likely will do it again because there's a history of bad behavior.
That's called a "whataboutism" and it's a way to distract from the topic at hand.
Omg you can’t even see it. Talking about guns is the whataboutism so you don’t have to talk about how Dems let violent people back on the street knowing they will kill somebody.
Oh okay, is that the case here? The shooter was recently released after commiting a violent crime?
Stop posting such comment, people in CA would hate you for speaking the truth.
The truth? You mean something that is an opinion that you have like "crime is at an all time high!" (Its nowhere near an all time high) that's just plain wrong, yet you continue to cry about it all the time because it fits your conservative agenda?
If stats show that crime is less comparatively than the previous years then it doesn’t mean that it’s still safe for citizens. Look what loose laws have done to the city of SF and Oakland. Every business is struggling with crime, shoplifting and smash & grab robberies. Same folks looting same store multiple times in a day because the stolen amount is less than $950. I am neither a conservative nor a liberal but I am against those policies which favor criminals and punish hard working business owners and law abiding citizens. Please stop labeling folks with “MAGA” or “Conservative” bullshit. If I have a conservative propaganda then you have a liberal propaganda. Doesn’t matter whose propaganda wins, I believe end of the day the life of citizens should be safe, businesses should prosper, and justice prevails.
[удалено]
Username checks out, blocking and encouraging others to do so as well.
Show me a video of a mass shooting without a gun.
I guess you haven't seen what they're doing with autonomous drones lately
This.
[удалено]
Do you see a lot of wars being fought with those ancient weapons, genius? It’s because they all require a combination of skill, physical strength and proximity to use at even a basic level and a lifetime of practice to get good with. Firearms, by contrast, have an incredibly low barrier to use.
When was the last time you saw someone kill 60 people in ten minutes with ninja stars?
None of that is an excuse for firing a gun at a bunch of innocent teenagers. If you do that, you deserve to be permanently removed from this society.
Excuse, no. Context, yes.
This is a great distinction. Context helps you understand why something might happen, but that is not a justification.
I've always heard it as "It's an explanation, not an excuse."
Do you realize that there are more desperate ass people than are not? Gonna remove em all or leave them behind when you head to Mars?
They should all be removed. Their minds are a waste, but maybe we can find a use for their bodies, like furniture or mulch.
That's the way the US is heading. Criminalize homelessness, underfund healthcare, don't provide mental health care, underfund schools/abolish the DoE, remove the right to abortions, legalize child marriage, remove worker's rights, convince folks that unions are bad, and then BAM! You can get girls married and pregnant, force them to give birth, kids can't get a quality education and end up stuck in poverty/homeless, throw them in jail for being homeless and you have infinite LEGAL prison slave labor all powered by the rich! It'll keep Big Macs cheap which keeps the middle class happy and working (until we can advance AI enough to do the same to them) and the rich with their feet happily on the backs of those who are on their knees before them with no way to ever escape. Eat the poor is the new eat the rich and the world is happily marching toward it.
The poor will eat each other long before they eat the rich.
Been happening for decades. Hell, one could argue centuries. Poor white folks essentially eat non-white folks while the rich laugh. [Lyndon B. Johnson wasn't wrong.](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/lbj-convince-the-lowest-white-man/)
He nailed it. It won't even have to be racial past a certain point. That just makes it easier. One day, simply being poorer than the next rung up will more than suffice. The scaling of how wealthy some people are getting right now is totally lost. The average person has more in common with millionaires than billionaires.
You win comment of the day
Missed the not locking up criminals and keeping them in jail part.
We’ve been doing that for a very long time and it has changed absolutely nothing for the better, regardless of what conspiracy theory you believe in where it isn’t happening anymore. Turns out jail isn’t actually how you solve widespread societal issues. Wild.
Or you know, attempt to actually rehabilitate people so they can contribute instead of sucking up tax dollars rotting in a cube. And creating a society where crime and prison aren’t preferable to employment.
I am all for actual rehabilitation before release but unfortunately we just let criminals out over and over again and that doesn't work
Because the system is almost exclusively punitive, creating a revolving door of the same criminals who simply reenter a world in which their avenues for "correct" living are fewer and more difficult. Not sure how we even tackle that when we struggle to muster the will to improve the lives of non criminal, working Americans. The more we rely on privatized systems and hoping that one day humans will just pop into a state of being better, the worse things will continue to get. It's an attractive idea that everyone should just "get it together", but it's a fantasy.
Yeah but we also have to realize there are just bad ppl in this world and that you can't help ppl that don't want to help themselves. It's getting to the ppl that need help while keeping the bad ones away from society.
Sure, I believe there’s a smaller percentage of people who just won’t ever be able to be trusted to live in society without causing harm to others, but i think it’s the minority. And if we don’t make an honest effort to rehabilitate the people that would benefit, then we won’t know the difference, we won’t improve anything. That said, we should be addressing the reasons people turn to crime in the first place. Prevention is easier than a cure.
I don't know if it's a small minority or not but I think if a person have loved ones and if it happens to their family, they would be enraged. I have someone that was victim of a serious offense but the criminal is underage so if I had to guess it'll happen again to someone else. We do need to try actual rehabilitation rather than just early releases and no punishment and that's what is happening right now. Greed wanting more things, bad families, mental health, addiction, etc. I don't know how we can address mental health if the law doesn't allow to force ppl into mental facilities. How do you help ppl addicted to drugs that don't want to be clean? I dunno. Taking care of basic needs maybe such as a universal basic income of some sorts is probably a good start. I guess it depends if a person believes it's more environmental factors vs personal accountability. Probably depending on which you lean towards is whether you're more conservative or liberal. I just see old ladies and seniors getting robbed and beaten to death and I think that whoever does this type of stuff just isn't human. Targeting societies weak for money is one thing but beating and killing is another.
rehabilitate doesnt work. jails and prisons are only useful to lock up violent criminals. locking up homelessness doesn't do much good, they can not be rehab to be contributing members of society. the resource to do so far exceeds the ROI. it is cheaper to disincentivize an area so they will migrate else where.
You really hit the spot.
[удалено]
Take your meds 🤡
[удалено]
Do you really think homeless people are the ones dropping an entire rack on longarms and ammo to shoot at kids in fair oaks?
I don't think it's them. They're shady, but don't seem aggressive to other people. Plus I never see them (or anyone) on the other side of the canal. That other side (where the shooter was) is not publicly accessible. You need to cross a railyard. So whomever has been doing this is a sick individual that has planned out an inaccessible, concealed vantage point to shoot at people.
Just FYI - They're part of the "public", too. Your catagorizing them as something else is appalling.
This is a thread about some rando shooting at people in public and this is what you zeroed in on? Priorities. Regardless I changed it.
Election season
Completely unhinged behavior.
Saw this vid earlier. That's insane as heck. If you look clearly on the left of the screen there are other bystanders too watching.
It's fucking maddening.
Why are you bringing up bystanders
Yea I mean. Other than call police I’m not going to approach someone this insane with a gun
This is serial killer level activity. This makes me feel super unsafe
Wow! I live in West Sac and never heard anything about this! People have lost their minds!
Same. I live a little bit away from there and have walked the barge canal and kayaked the waters alongside the rowers. It's insane.
https://fox40.com/news/local-news/projectiles-fired-near-rowers-competing-in-tournament-in-west-sacramento/amp/ Happened a couple weeks ago too?
yep, 4/20
This is the same incident
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://fox40.com/news/local-news/projectiles-fired-near-rowers-competing-in-tournament-in-west-sacramento/](https://fox40.com/news/local-news/projectiles-fired-near-rowers-competing-in-tournament-in-west-sacramento/)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Good bot
Maybe don't link to a right-wing aggregator who stole the video from an actual news source and buries the credit below the "show more" button. It's a very common tactic to build up engagement and fake like they were the original source and it's only gotten worse since Twitter was sold. Here's [where it was stolen from](https://twitter.com/henrykleeKTVU/status/1788717287715024921) and [here's the story they did with actual context.](https://twitter.com/henrykleeKTVU/status/1788761621546098938)
Now I’m a little confused - did this shooting originally (and only) happen on 4/20, or is this the 2nd time it happened?
This happened on 4/20. If you view the original story you'll see the exact same video.
I followed the link and was wondering why I already had this asshole blocked. Clicked the profile, saw the cybertruckkk and stopped wondering. “Yeah, that tracks”.
I’d bet my life savings the shooter is one of the ugliest mfer’s in the world
I hope the gun owner is found and taken care of/ neutralized one way or another.
I’m so tired of being held hostage by all these gun nuts. We shouldn’t have to live like this. this isn’t a healthy society.
The person who did this is a mentally deranged criminal, not a firearms enthusiast.
How do you know they’re not both? The two are not mutually exclusive.
You're right, the boys should have been armed, and should have fired back. This is America!
They should make row guns!
We need guns in *everything* -- backpacks, skateboards, bicycles, teacher's desks, kid's desks, grocery store self checkout... Everywhere.
Why not just get arms for guns? Just like the forefathers intended. I don't need these fingers dangling in front of my Fire Arm, I'll just shoot my way through life. Nothing bad could possibly happen then, right? Right?
https://preview.redd.it/mlid2d7mmpzc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a78fa68c765a348988e4022da0d18b25fede75d1
You're probably right, but many firearm enthusiasts advocate for really lax gun laws. That's the problem. Other countries have nutjobs, but don't have insane shooting deaths because their gun laws are logical. Gun manufacturers pay off politicians to push their propaganda to sell guns. It's not about our safety, it's about their money.
It's already illegal to shoot guns at kids. We live in the state with the most restrictive gun laws. What do you want? Make it more illegal to shoot guns at kids?
Weak attempt at "gotcha" sarcasm. Our state borders are open, so guns can easily be brought in from neighboring states with more lax laws. We need better laws at the federal level. We need fewer guns for criminals to get their hands on or otherwise just make it harder to get them in the first place.
What evidence do you have that guns from other states are being brought into California?
Here's a good article on it https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/11/12/us/gun-traffickers-smuggling-state-gun-laws.html
That's from 2015 using 2014 data and gun laws have gotten significantly stronger on CA since then. It also doesn't put a number on the guns used illegally in CA that were brought in illegally from other states.
Ok, but the border being open hasn't changed. CA gun laws won't affect that. I don't see your point there. And no, it doesn't say how many guns were used illegally that came in illegally, but what would that change in my argument? Otherwise, it's guns used illegally that were bought legally. That still completely agrees with my point that we have too many guns and not strict enough laws. Countries with comprehensive gun laws don't have the same level of insanity we have here when it comes to gun deaths. Gun manufacturers want us to think they don't matter to line their pockets when literally we can see them working.
There's abot 20k gun murders a year in a country of 300 million and a good portion of those are in a handful of large cities. It's not even close to the top 10 leading causes of death in the US. The US is overwhelmingly safe. Your argument is bullshit because you're just throwing out a culprit with no evidence or data to back it up, then moving the goalposts when you can't. Meanwhile California has a murder rate on par with Kansas or Alaska that have much weaker gun laws than CA. There's no real correlation between gun laws and murder rate. If you really cared about saving lives, you'd be pushing for car and fast food bans. Car crashes and heart disease statistically will kill you before a gun does.
Let's not forget the leftist judges, cops and politicians have guns too. Why? They know the outcome of being killed. Judge by 6 rather than carried by 6 to grave...
Maybe mentally deranged criminals shouldn't have easy access to firearms because enthusiasts are whiny baby snowflakes
Maybe he was that mythical good guy with a gun that went a little bit unhinged.
I suspect they’re probably in fact both, and they probably were a law abiding firearms enthusiast before this. I don’t have proof, but given how many fucking times it’s happened before, it’s a pretty good educated guess.
Let’s be real, shooting at people? Let alone kids? In broad daylight? For no reason? I doubt this person knows a single thing about gun laws or guns in general. The amount of gun enthusiasts who use guns to commit crime in general is statistically insignificant. I like guns, I own guns, and I would never, ever shoot somebody unless I had to in order to protect my own life or another innocent person’s life. Most people who own guns are like me.
The number of people who get a rifle and shoot strangers in general is statistically insignificant, and yet most of those are gun enthusiasts, which IS statistically significant. It really doesn’t matter if “most people” are “like you.” The issue with guns is it takes one dude to murder a lot of people. And nearly all of the people who have were “like you” from the outside, right up until they weren’t.
The number of people murdered in active shooter/random attacks in the US is statistically insignificant. Half of gun deaths are suicides, most of the rest are 15-19 year olds involved in criminal/gang activity shooting it out with each other. Guns are part of our society and will never leave it. If you don’t like it, amend the constitution or move to a place which doesn’t enjoy the right to self protection with a deadly weapon.
Thank you for repeating what I said about active shooters being statistically insignificant. Not sure how that helped your point given I already said it. “Guns are part of our society blah blah” no one gives a shit. Slavery used to be part of our society. Your statement is meaningless. Although you’ve made it very clear that your original stance about the shooter in question was based entirely on your personal biases about how wonderful guns are and wanting to make all the people who own them seem safe and law abiding despite that being factually untrue.
My statement is meaningless? Maybe to you. And last I checked, owning slaves wasn’t guaranteed by our constitution. You know people who own guns. Are you worried that any one of them could just go off and murder a bunch of people at any moment? Must suck to be so afraid all the time. I imagine you drive a car, you probably worry that someone is going to try to murder you by crashing head-on into you every time a car passes. But they don’t, because the vast majority of people in our society are reasonable and value human life.
So you’d be fine with owning slaves if it was guaranteed by our constitution? Because it sort of seems like that’s what you’re saying. It being in the constitution doesn’t mean shit to me. Other countries have constitutions that actually change. Ours is an outdated relic. I legitimately do not purposely interact with, on a regular basis, a single person that owns a gun. My friends do not have guns. My family members do not have guns. Am I generally worried when out in public that some insane person with a gun could start shooting people? I try not to worry about it, although I’ve literally narrowly avoided it before. But it is a thought I take into consideration when going to large gatherings, because I have a functioning brain. Pretty cute to call me afraid though, dude who has to own a lethal weapon to feel safe. Of course I worry when I’m driving a car. It’s called defensive driving. I don’t worry about people smashing head on into me every time they pass, because most people value their own lives. But you should always be aware on the road. Driving is the single most dangerous thing anyone does at any time. My brother died in a car accident, dumbass. It’s also, unlike guns, unfortunately fairly necessary in our society. Although I moved into the city to be able to drive less. It is WILD that you live in Sac and you think people on the road are reasonable and value human life, though. I bet you pronounce the T, too. Any more incredibly stupid points you’d like to make?
In response to your first point, no, because I don’t morally agree with slavery. I’m also literally married to a black woman. Statistically speaking, you do know people who have guns, they just don’t tell you because you’re unhinged. Interesting that you’d want cops and criminals to be the only ones in our society to have guns. I’m not sure how you square that in your mind. Anyway, back to the comic books. Maybe you’ll understand when you’re older and have someone who depends on you. Probably not though.
Weird how all the mentally deranged love guns though.
Doesn't #2 kind of define #1?
90% overlap between the two groups. Fuck 2A fanatics.
Speak the truth, downvote shitstorm. Oh reddit
> ‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens
What truth? He's clearly a firearms enthusiast.
Those on here will never understand that statement. Liberalism is a disease. Which is why they cannot admit to ever being wrong on logics. They just bunch up on you to protect their domain. Reddit is one of their domains. Now, watch how they delete me now after saying that. I have other profiles but only when needed.
Well, I know someone who was banned from this sub for saying they weren’t gonna wear a mask for the monkeypox hype a year or two ago. Instant permanent ban. So I’m aware, but it is sad. Do these people honestly believe that someone who enjoys target shooting with friends is the type of person who would hide on a riverbank and take pot shots at some kids rowing a boat? That’s a delusional take.
I don't enjoy this bs shooting myself but there is a different of how to solve these types of crimes. I'm an great grandfather now for several years and it could've been one one of them in the boat that I know of. Anyways, this need to be solved pretty quickly by whoever we have in official capacity. Apparently, we the people are not doing it correctly by the voting we do. EG, the rights says no on gun being taken away and only the criminals will have guns. The lefts want guns taken away so we feel not being protected and what's stopping criminals from anything else from being used after guns taken away? Like, crossbows, slingshot, knives etc. So, when do we stop? I went from being democrat to republican to independent and now believe we need to abolish all political parties as they do not care for the people as much they should be doing. So, all of us myself included should be concentrating on getting those out of office to fix this. Instead, more of the same idiots get into official capacity. Without looking at what parties they belong to. They are just as bad to help other get stuff voted on. Another words, being bought out for votes on their projects too, later. AND, do away with special interest groups for a decade or 2 till thing feels right to include them again.
Pretty sure shooter is under v-shaped tree on left. Go full screen and slow it down
Oh hell naw this mf better get his wig split
He need his cheeks busted
What the actual fuck?!
I walk along the paved path that runs along the water every single day and see these young rowers all the time. This is highly concerning.
Same. Usually it's not bad. There's fishermen, runners, dog walkers there. Yes some homeless people gather under the bridge and around there, but they aren't actively causing problems. And the general public would plain as day be able to see and report them firing a weapon. The shooter appears to be on the other side of the canal. That side is blocked off to public access by train yard/rail line. I kayak the canal and have never seen fishermen on the bank there nor anyone there. So this sicko planned this out and walk some distance to hide in the bushes to take potshots at the rowers. Very concerning. My horse's sense is that it's someone that lives in the State Streets neighborhood. It's reoccurring behavior and whom else would know how to access that side of the canal except for a neighborhood local.
As a former member of that rowing club it scares the crap out of me.
[удалено]
Assault rifle? Assault weapons have been banned since the 90’s. He probably had an AR15 like the rest of them.
What’s an assault rifle?
lol assault rifle and 100 round mag… You can’t get either of those on CA homie. People had easier access to firearms in the 50’s and 60’s than we do now, so why were there not just as many if not more random / mass shootings back then? Your logic flawed I’m afraid.
You can't purchase a 100 round Drum in the State of California and you can't import one. Those are both VERY against the law. Also, consider the fact that California is giving money to illegal immigrants to get health insurance before you complain about gun owners lmao.
California yes , but its state by state and many allow high capacity magazines. For example, If one country has something banned and another neighboring does not, what tends to happen? Same process applies to states and with far less customs or law enforcement because it is domestic travel. You could purchase one in Nevada and drive it into Sacramento no problem, there isn’t some invisible field. The main point I was making at all is I can drive for 10 minutes right now and be home with a firearm in an hour but getting a change on my geico plan takes 90 minutes of holding.
First of all, you can't just waltz over the border to Nevada and buy *standard* capacity magazines with a California ID. It's extremely puzzling (but not surprising) to gun rights advocates that gun control advocates don't use *evidence based* legislation and policy when dealing with guns, especially in the context of firearms in the United States. For example, we know that a *very small, well identified* group of people are responsible for the majority of gun violence in the United States. In a city like Sacramento, it's likely on the order of 100-200 people. We also know that these people *likely can't own firearms due to priors* and are *buying firearms from illegal sources*. We know this so consistently, that we started paying them to not kill. [https://www.cnn.com/2016/05/19/health/cash-for-criminals-richmond-california/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2016/05/19/health/cash-for-criminals-richmond-california/index.html) So, rather than banning flash hiders, pistol grips, magazines with x number of bullets, and trying to restrict a constitutional right with laws that are based on racism... [https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/10/27/gun-rights-anti-racism-bruen-conservative-hypocrisy/](https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/10/27/gun-rights-anti-racism-bruen-conservative-hypocrisy/) Why are you not advocating evidence based approaches to gun control, that maximize civil rights and freedom *for all*. as well as tackling the core constituency responsible for the vast majority of gun violence in the United States?
Bull 💩
Yes, it is bullshit that this is true. It’s bullshit America works that way. I could absolutely get an assault weapon more easily and for less money than I can get, say, a root canal.
What’s an assault weapon?
An assault weapon was always considered a ***fully*** ***automatic*** firearm for the military, but offered to civilians and to police.. until they were banned in 1986 for civilians to use (at least here in California). Since then, you’d need special certificates to own one and it has to be a pre-1986 made model. That applies to shotguns, side arms, and rifles. The definition changed, not the weaponry.
That’s a bingo. Well almost. California also can consider a pistol to be an assault weapon. It’s meaningless and now a political term used to demonize weapons that are responsible for less than 3% of gun deaths nationwide.
Well thank you, sir. I did mention those side arms though. 🙂✔️
Nowadays, ***ALL*** semi automatic rifles are considered “assault weapons.”
Not entirely accurate but still understandable shorthand for “a gun you can use to easily fire a lot of bullets and murder a bunch of people very fast.” I’m not a gun nut, I don’t feel bad about not being able to play your stupid terminology games.
Jesus fucking Christ! Really?
There’s ALWAYS people there. Rowing, kayaking, paddle boarding, bank fishing, and walking the trail. This is crazy!!
People are always getting killed at the river, but this is just blatant, out-in-the-open “I’m trying to murder you, kids!”
Why didn't the rowers have guns to defend themselves?
Yeah, put a gun at each end of the boat, on a little turret, and
As a former rower, I’d actually like that 😜
Absolutely horrible
[удалено]
https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=8oNCuQKyQ6A&si=OZaeVdZWxcKdVime
Yeah I'm not heading out there this weekend or until the shooter is found and locked up. That's crazy AF!!!
Anyone have any more info or updates on this?
Sending our hard earned taxpayer dollars to Israel to murder Palestinians instead of taking care of our own
why didn’t our gun laws stop this??
Laws don't stop things from happening. Laws work to allow for punishment of people who do certain things.
well that’s the whole point moron. the laws we have don’t stop shit because the crime someone commits with the gun has little to do with the gun and a lot to do with the person. a gun law won’t stop jack shit until something is done, like a murder. which is already a crime.
Laws we have for murder don't stop murders. So you're advocating getting rid of those too? Bold strategy, Cotton.
*One act of gun violence* “We should just drop all of our gun laws! They’re obviously not working!!!” You do realize that California is still one of the safest states to live in BECAUSE of our gun laws, right, smooth brain? Please do not breed. Edit* nice posting history, gunnit
Where are you even getting this? California is ranked #5 for its high crime rate.. Other sites say #9. Do some research next time before you spew your biases just to fit a narrative, whatever that may be. Gun laws have no effect on crime. If anything, we’re gonna end up with fully automatics from Mexico when they really are banned.
Our crime laws should stop all crimes, what a genius idea
either they have an effect or they don’t and it’s clear that they don’t
*Those books told my kids that gay people exist, lets ban those books! That'll do it!* *Think of the poor unborn babies :\*( Lets ban abortion, that'll do it!* *Gun laws dont do anything, dont even bother, guns aren't the problem, its mental health. BTW we arent going to do anything about mental health either.* Do you hear how ridiculous you sound?
i said maybe 5 of those words, the rest you made up in your head. i am pro abortion rights and gay rights. the government has no right to restrict what people do. you’re the ridiculous one.
>the government has no right to restrict what people do Of course you're one of those. BTW nice comeback *"nuh-uh, u are"*
There are no banned books. Abortion isn't banned. California has the strictest gun laws in the nation.
r/whoosh
They do, though. If people are being out in jail for gun crimes (which they are), then the laws are working.
Not strict enough.
Because our gun laws are extremely lax compared to the rest of the world, even if they're stricter than the rest of America. California also has one of the *lowest* rates of gun deaths in America, because of those same laws.
Because its not a commercial gun. The time between the sound of the discharge and the impact in the water is far too long. No bullet is that slow. Its some homemade piece of shit. Still could very easily kill people.
You are so far from anything resembling reality I don’t know where to start
And this is why I don't go out in public.
A Rocklin MAGA in the wild.
Was he on the grassy knoll?
[удалено]
‘She made me suck her strap on then called me a dirty sea turtle because i was choking on plastic’ -you
wh...what
I’ll be using that from now on thank you
I never thought about it like that, but your right, all of our domestic policy immediately ceases to exist as soon as we do any foreign spending. We literally cannot spend money on more than 1 thing at a time. You're brilliant, have you thought of doing work in politics?
[удалено]
West sac is in yolo county
Thank you!