• themeatbridge
    link
    219 months ago

    Could that headline have less information?

    “Sources say the shooting was related to someone wanting to hurt someone else. Bullets were possibly fired in anger. Blood may have come out of one or more wounds.”

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      229 months ago

      In the US we need to differentiate between the Taxi Driver/Columbine variety from the “why I oughtta” variety.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        49 months ago

        The bullets do not differentiate.

        The people that got hurt & even died from getting trampled as people shoved to get away from the active mass shooting event did not differentiate either.

      • Flying Squid
        link
        19 months ago

        And it’s so stupid. As if the reason for a mass shooting matters.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          59 months ago

          Don’t you think that if we are ever going to stop this kind of thing we have to address the reasons? When tiny disputes erupt in gun fire, that’s a very good reason to implement more gun control. It’s evidence that widespread gun availability does NOT actually make us safer. When it’s an unmedicated kid killing strangers or whatever, then people get to hide behind the “we don’t know why this happened, if only there was a good guy with a gun” etc.

          To the victims, yeah it probably matters little. To people reading headlines? Yeah terrorism is different than school shooting type crimes which are different from your average “this is why guns are banned at bars”.

        • @Sarmyth
          link
          -19 months ago

          It does.

          It could be terrorism when it’s in a crowded stadium. It could be gang related, which means it’s part of a larger continuous conflict. It could just be drunk idiots.

          If it were the first option that would have major ramifications for the safety of stadiums and other large functions. More rules, less attendance, etc.

          If it’s drunk idiots, we’ll arrest them, treat the victims, put another entry in the book of reasons why there shouldn’t be open carry in crowded venues, and move on.

          • Flying Squid
            link
            39 months ago

            It seems to me like both have major ramifications for the safety of large functions.

            • @Sarmyth
              link
              29 months ago

              Yeah, we just can’t get our government to care. But if it smells like terrorism, we have a track record of invading people about it. And not necessarily the people responsible.

      • themeatbridge
        link
        19 months ago

        Do we, though? Neither of them should have access to guns.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          59 months ago

          Yes but making that argument might be a bit easier if it’s shown that MORE GUNS doesn’t really equal more good guys with guns, it means more people in arguments that end up deadly.

    • @NOT_RICK
      link
      English
      39 months ago

      It rules out a politically motivated shooting which is something. Still vague but it’s more info than we had yesterday.